#OR someone who hates a character will use it as a gotcha-argument to make them out to be this terrible person

[rascheln]

i can both like nancy as a character and still feel very sad for steve and how their relationship went.

and man, sometimes it still fucks me up a little, thinking about how in hindsiight s1 is about steve falling in love with nancy, while she’s falling in love with jonathan. and then it ends with her deliberately choosing the boy that made it less of a hassle to be in a relationship.

maybe it’s because i know she didn’t choose steve out of malice or an active plan to hurt his feelings. it’s just that he was more convenient. in a way, it’s also tough to know that until they meet again after their fight, it isn’t quite clear that they’re fully broken up. yet she’s already slept with jonathan by the point where steve essentially tells her it’s okay to go be with the person she actually loves, because in a way she already did that.

if we go with the events of s2, it’s - nancy gets drunk at the halloween party and tells steve ‘like we’re in love’, revealing that just like she was keeping an outward appearance of being fine, she was just pretending to be in love with him - steve runs off (looking hurt/like he’s about to cry) and jonathan finds nancy and brings her home - nancy confronts steve at basketball practice. she’s angry at him for ditching her. he’s angry at her for being unable/unwilling to tell him that she loves him, essentially confirming what she said the night before. steve gets called back to practice and storms off. -> this is where one can interpret their relationship to be over except: - steve turns up at the wheelers’ house with a bouquet of roses, rehearsing an apology. so in his head, their relationship isn’t over. - at murray’s house, he aptly summarizes that jonathan has been too insecure to make a move on nancy and steve isn’t the guy she loves, but (as said above) he’s convenient. later that night, she sleeps with jonathan. - the next time steve and nancy meet, he doesn’t know this occurred. he does essentially end their relationship by calling himself a shitty boyfriend (maybe true for when he ditched her drunk ass at the party, doubtfully true for their entire relationship) and tells her it’s okay- basically letting her know she can move on...

yeah, so. s4 comes along and he doesn’t know. he assumed in s1 she’d cheated on him and absolutely went over the top shitty asshole, so maybe he didn’t want to assume again. maybe he trusted both nancy and jonathan that they weren’t actually gonna do anything so close after a fight with an ambiguous end. whatever it is that makes him not assume the worst this time around, it also makes him try to end their relationship amicably (when it’s clear nancy still has no idea what to say.)

like, i don’t think nancy should have told steve “by the way, i kinda have been in love with jonathan all this time and i kinda uhhh already slept with him.” but at the same time, that final interaction in s2 and then s4 makes it look like steve thought it was his fault they didn’t work out?? which... yeah, it kinda hits you how him trying to reconnect may look stupid when you know all that extra context to nancy’s feelings that he never found out about. because it would probably hurt way more to know how much his feelings genuinely weren’t ever requited, instead of just thinking there was something about how he acted that made nancy not fall in love/fall out of love.

and to be clear, this is not an “i hate nancy”-post and more a “the more i think about it, the more messed up it becomes”-post. i don’t think there would have been a clean solution for them- she kinda set herself up and got herself into this mess and turned steve into collateral in the process. and it’s only by sheer luck that no one who could tell steve about it (her, jonathan and murray) has any interest in letting him know.

[rollercoasterwords]

ok here's the essay re: "realisitc?? they're literally wizards!!"

upon further reflection (25 min voicenote 2 twin, 1 conversation w 2 friends) i think i have. managed 2 organize + articulate my thoughts.

obligatory disclaimer: this literally does not matter i'm talking about hp fanfiction in 2023 this is not a serious issue beyond being like. kind of annoying. unfortunately i just enjoy writing abt stupid fandom discourse hopefully going back 2 school will cure me of the incessant need 2 write essays for fun but who knows. anyway me writing this essay is not me saying this is a huge or important issue i just like 2 talk <3

anyway! the ~discourse~ i've been noticing in the marauders fandom, which from my pov has had sort of an uptick recently (although who knows if that's objectively true--maybe i've just stumbled across more of it. from where i'm sitting, though, it seems like it's become more of a hot topic in recent months) generally goes as follows:

person a: omg ugh i hate that in [x fic] [x character] has/is/does [x flaw] :(

person b: oh well [x character] having/being/doing [x flaw] makes the story more realistic

person a: UM they're literally wizards at a magic school lol....who cares if it's realistic....

and the reason this both interests + annoys me is that i think. giving person a the benefit of the doubt + assuming they aren't being purposely obtuse (bc in that case we're just talking abt trolls), it demonstrates such a gap in understanding. bc the thing person a is fighting w that response is literally a strawman

the strawman:

saying "um they're literally wizards" is only a "gotcha" moment if it's pointing out an inconsistency in person b's thinking. it is only pointing out an inconsistency if, when person b says "it makes it more realistic," we take that to mean that person b is saying "a story is better if it more closely matches our own reality." in that case, saying "they're wizards!!!" points out an inconsistency, bc obviously characters being wizards does not match reality. gotcha!!!

the problem is that that isn't what person b is saying. so by responding "they're wizards" as if that's some sort of "gotcha" moment, person a is misinterpreting person b's argument, constructing a strawman that nobody is actually arguing, and then tearing down that strawman with a pithy little sarcastic comment that positions them as soooo much more reasonable than person b.

so what is person b actually saying?

the problem is that saying "[x character] having [x flaw] makes a story more realistic" is not an argument about the story being better, it's an explanation for why someone would write the story that way.

another disclaimer - some "person b"s in this situation might, in fact, be using "it's more realistic" to try and argue that a story being more realistic makes the story better; however, that is not a position i'm going to be defending here. i think any argument that roots itself in a so-called "objective" measure of what makes a piece of art better or worse is a non-starter, and in that case i think person b and person a are perhaps both misguided in different ways.

but what's happening from person b's pov is - person a asks "why would anyone write [x character] with [x flaw]?" person b tries to answer that question by explaining: well, it makes the story more realistic. the implication here is -- a story being more realistic is a personal preference that some people are going to prefer; people write + read stories for different reasons. this is the reason that i enjoy the story, personally. that's it!

and the thing is, "realistic" in the context of a fantasy story does not mean "matches real life exactly." in the context of fantasy, "realistic" refers, in my mind, to two things:

1. cohesive internal logic

even within a fantasy universe, there are going to be structured societies, rules, laws of natures, etc. what makes a fantasy story more realistic is not how closely it adheres to real-life structures + rules, but how closely it adheres to its own established structures + rules - its own internal logic.

for example: in my fantasy world, fairies can fly but mermaids can't. then, suddenly, without explanation, i write a scene where a mermaid can fly. this makes the story less realistic, in that it breaks from its own internal logic, and stretches the limits of readers' abilities to suspend their disbelief. like - we've already sort of "agreed" to suspend disbelief about fairies + mermaids existing, because that's just the established norm of the story, but as readers we are still looking to follow some internal logic. oftentimes, when people are complaining about fantasy stories being more or less realistic, they are referring to the story's own internal logic.

this means if someone is writing hp fanfic set in a canon universe, working in the established canon universe where certain biases + flaws exist, it makes the fic more realistic to adhere to that internal logic. obviously, a fic writer can choose to change that internal logic and say, for example, "in my story the wizarding world doesn't have homophobia, and that's an established societal norm that is part of the story's internal logic." that's fine! it's just a matter of personal choice whether that's the story that somebody wants to write or not, y'know?

2. reflection on real life

the other aspect of "realism" that i think people are referring to when they talk about a fantasy story being more or less "realistic" is the ways in which that story does reflect actual reality. like--fantasy stories don't exist in a vaccuum. many writers use fantasy stories to reflect realities from actual life; things like prejudice or oppression or war, etc. placing these real-life issues into a fantastical setting allows a new lens through which to think about them, pushing us to examine them from different angles.

for example - take k.a. applegate's animorphs series. it is, in many ways, completely unrealistic, in that it's about kids who can turn into animals fighting off an alien invasion. but k.a. applegate wrote the books to demonstrate the utter horror and devastation of war, and much of the subject matter reflects real-life wartime situations. a kid who only hears about war through the news or through action movies where there's a clear good guy and bad guy, a clear right and wrong, might find it easy to disregard the horror. but when applegate took those real-life situations and placed them into the fantastical setting of animorphs, she's providing an age-appropriate way for children to understand that no, war is not an action movie, it's a horror story.

this is why "realism" in fantasy matters to people. some writers are using fantasy not as pure escapism, but as a way to explore real-life issues through a different lens, one that may allow people to empathize with an issue in a way they normally don't. obviously, some people are just writing fantasy for fun escapism -- and that's fine! there's space for both types of stories to exist simultaneously; what doesn't make sense is assuming that just because somebody engages with media differently from you, there must be something wrong with it.

anyway. the conclusion to all this i suppose is that i think if you genuinely do not understand why someone would write a character a certain way, rather than assuming the worst or assuming there's no good reason it's generally better to like. actually ask and listen to the answer people are giving u + try to understand where they're coming from. not everyone is going to want to read the same types of stories, and somebody writing a character w certain flaws shouldn't feel like a personal attack, bc fandom is a self-curated experience where u literally don't need 2 read or write anything u don't want to. The End

[circe69]

𝐂𝐈𝐑𝐂𝐄'𝐒 𝟏𝐊 𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐂𝐈𝐀𝐋 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐍𝐓

yayyaya!! 1000 already? crazy. anyways, time to have fun! below are some characters and prompts that i'd love to offer you for requests! just send me one of each and i'll start working on it!

𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐭𝐬 -

1.) fake couple trope at a party! "are we seriously doing this?" "you were the one who wanted to wear the rings."

2.) sick trope 🤧 "you're already unbearable, it's even worse when you're high off cough medicine" "did i ever tell you how sittable your lap looks?"

3.) argument 😉 trope. HIGH tension. "learn how to shut your mouth, please" "why don't you come over and do it for me? please?"

4.) wearing their clothes after trying to clean out their closet as a favor- *starts blushing* "it's too big on you anyways." "well, we can always put it in the dryer!" "NO-"

5.) blind-kiss, you're both blindfolded at some party, and your friends are daring you to kiss. oh, also, one of you know who the other is. "come on, just do it!" "alright, alright fine, you ready stranger?" "always, stranger."

6.) drunk confessions - "this stuff tastes great, you wanna try it?" "oh su-" *sloppy kiss*

7.) power outage while you both hate each other - "ugh WHERE IS THE BREAKER?" "do I look like an electrician?" "honestly, ye-" "SHUT UP!"

8.) running in the hallway due to being late and you turn a corner and spill coffee on them - "OH SHOOT i am so sorry! this is all my fau-" *pulls you into an empty room and removes the coffee-stained shirt* "help me clean this up and i'll lie to your boss about where you were.

9.) waking up in the same bed after a party - "why are you in MY BED?" "you idiot, this is MY- oh." *steals covers to hide barely-clothed body, but turns out they're almost naked too. "Y/N, GIVE IT BACK QUICK."

10.) classic medic scenario. sure, it's used all the time but i can be creative - "it says here you're in for another doctor, but since i'm the only one available, i guess i'll preform the check-up! *the prettiest person they've ever seen walks in* *swallows loudly* "can i reschedule?" "oh come on, i don't bite!" "i wish they would."

11.) doing their hair for them, straddling their lap. "be quick with it, the meetin's in half an hour." "don't rush perfection."

12.) babysitting with them, they end up falling asleep, you and the baby draw on their face in their sleep - "wash it off now, y/n." "why can't you? you're a big boy." *literally pouting* "cause i don't know what stuff to use!"

13.) cooking with them, maybe midnight snacks - "what are you doin' out here?" "was hungry, couldn't sleep either." *sits at the counter* "make me a plate, wouldya?" "well, why don't you just make it with me?"

14.) them walking in on you taking a shower - "WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN HERE?" "chill, i was just getting my toothbrush." *silence for a few seconds* "want company?" "NO-"

15.) late night car rides, accidentally falling asleep on their shoulder. *head falls on his shoulder* "told ya you should get more sleep, you never listen" *sleepily responds* "i always listen to you."

16.) training with them and getting pinned - "gotcha" "UGH this isn't even fair, our weight isn't compatible in the slightest." *sly smirk* "maybe not, but it's still fun" *presses into you*

17.) hiding from someone in a small space with them - *hand from behind flys over your mouth* "if you talk you'll get us both killed" *you nod feverishly, trying not to notice the close proximity.

18.) going shopping with them but there's only one dressing room - "look you have to promise you'll turn around." "yeah yeah i promise" *starts undressing and sees them peeking* "HEY-" "my fingers were crossed"

19.) cooking breakfast in bed - "good morning, sleepyhead" "hmm what's that?" *showcases beautiful tray of food* "breakfast in bed!" "feed it to me."

20.) hand massages - "let me practice on you please? i just need to make sure i'm good at it." *ends massage* "well? how was it?" *takes a deep, shaky breath* "you have to promise you'll only do that for me."

21.) zipping up a dress for you - "what, is the zipper stuck or something?" "no, 'm just looking."

22.) playing out in the snow with them - *hits you in the face and you fall on the ground* "OWWW dude" *they come over and straddle you* "oh grow up big baby" *kisses all over your face, the last one being on your mouth.

23.) mornings where their clingy - "please stay" "i wanna get us coffee-" "no, stay" *burrows themselves in your neck and gives you a hickey* "HEY-" "there, now you can't go out like that. now go back to sleep."

24.) them falling asleep on your lap - "you drooled, sleepyhead." "you should be paying me for that." *gives them a kiss* "there you go."

𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 -

1.) Simon "Ghost" Riley

2.) Johnny "Soap" Mactavish

3.) John Price

4.) Kyle "Gaz" Garrick

5.) König

6.) Alejandro Vargas

7.) Philip Graves

[prettyboykatsuki]

i would like to know ur opinions on aging up discourse tho🙇🏽‍♀️

man lmfao it's pretty complicated i don't know how to articulate it. this is really long

cw for the typical discourse around this stuff, mentions of p*dophilia

in short every argument made against aging up uses the same basic logical fallacies. slippery slope, generalization, and assumption . the implication that every person who ages up fictional characters either is a danger to minors or is attracted to them in some way despite their being no empirical evidence or definitive way to conclude that about a person is, point blank, a bad faith argument.

fictional characters are not people - they're story telling devices. therefore they have no agency and cannot be effected by anything that happens to them. they're closer to a concept than a person. they're not real, they have no stake in real life - and the things we do with them are entirely made up. the argument should end there.

"but why age them up and not use *already adult character*" they are different character that accomplish different things. you wouldn't use blue to paint the sun

"im a minor and it makes me uncomfortable," i was a minor but im an adult now and i don't want to engage with any minors in this particular space which is why it's labelled 18+. most adults don't want to engage with minors over nsfw either. if someone does try to engage with or lure you with nsfw content knowing you're a minor, you are in danger and you should seek out a trusted person in your life to talk to and block said person. my job online isn't to make you comfortable and that experience is not indicative of every person online.

"why're you justifying having a crush on *canon minor character*" im in no way shape or form explicitly attracted to this character because he's a minor so there's not a crush to justify. im a person consuming a piece of media, and this character engages my interest and is drawn to be good looking. so i take him and engage with him in a way i like - that is how media consumption works. as an adult because im an adult.

even if we took sex/nsfw/romantic context out of the equation because that's normally what this argument centers on - i almost always contextualize characters in adulthood because that's the stage of life im in.

"why're you aging up a character just to sexualize them," im not. im aging them up because it develops their character in my mind and i find them more relatable. even if i did it wouldn't matter because it still means im transforming that character into an adult.

your assumption that people use this weird roundabout to justify their attraction to kids is based on the idea that actual predators and dangerous people online don't have spaces that are easily accessible and that their specific target is fandom.

"what about characters who are drawn as explicitly as children and meant to be depicted as children? is it okay then?" i find it deeply uncomfortable to age up a character who's next stage of life isn't already adulthood since it jumps through a lot of hoops. it's a boundary im unwilling to cross as it is for many others. if somoene does something i find unsavory, i block them.

at a certain point, ever single possible moral gray for this argument becomes bad faith. to break it down any further than necessary is simply a way to foster a "gotcha sicko!" moment instead of contributing intelligence to this conversation. people aren't actually looking to understand what this is or to break it down, they're just unwilling to think critically for fear of being morally ostracized by internet communities.

i hate to inform you, but having all the "right takes," will not save you from internet crucifixion. the sooner you have strong boundaries and morals in real life, the easier your life will be instead of trying to gain moral highground on random people online.

fiction indeed effects reality - but fiction isn't an inherent one to one to who someone is. fictions relationship to reality in relation to things like propaganda, and those affects all require additional context.

im in a stable relationship with a man i've been with for 5 years. he is a year older than me. i consume content about toxic relationships all day long. because what i do, what i find interesting, what i engage with are not inherent to who i am.

just like how watching a violent movie doesn't make you a violent person. just like how reading a book from a problematic writer doesn't mean you condone their actions. does everyone person who makes freud jokes agree with the things he was? you can have perceived correlations, bias is human nature but you can't decide anything definitively over something as trivial as fandom content on the internet.

morality and real life are largely based on context and awareness of the world. a man can be a murderer, but there is a stark difference between a man killing his abuser and a serial killer. your opinion of these people is formed and shaped by what context you know about them and evidence. real people have context necessary to make fully formed opinions on them and are effected by internet witch hunts.

and it is, your right, to not engage with someone based on a perceived context. but making assumptions and accusations as serious as p*dophilia is unbelievably dangerous and not rooted in anything.

when you create moral boundaries between you and someone else, assume the worst of them, you are creating a type of person to be othered. that line of thinking has been used for hundreds of years to commit acts of violence against unassuming people and it is dangerous.

"it's not that deep," it sure isn't. which is why you shouldn't fucking harass strangers you have no real context for. which is why the concept of aging up a character cannot be indicative of a persons morals and doesn't mean someone is attracted to kids.

if you want to have a talk minor safety online, there are plenty of ways to do that. there are plenty of conversations to be had about how adults and minors should engage appropriately.

but adults cultivating a space for themselves and other adults has little to do with minors. and unless you can prove, without doubt, that the person you're engaging with is bad - it's not your place to enact your perceived justice.

i would understand if there was some provable evidence in relation to fandom communities but there just isn't. the things that happen in this spaces have no effect on real minors unless minors are in the spaces they're not supposed to be in anyways.

aging up is a narrative tool, just like au's are. just like backstories are. we're all playing make believe and aging up a fictional character doesn't mean someone is a predator. end of story.

[bookofmirth]

Genuine question: if you hate the idea of Elain and Az so much why ship him with Gwyn. If you don’t hate Elain, why be so vicious toward people that think Elain and Az would be suited. It doesn’t make sense to me that people argue Az is so bad and toxic but then turn around and ship him with Gwyn. I don’t really care who Elain ends up with because she’s my favorite character and I just want her to be happy. But I don’t get the dissonance of being so against Az and Elain but so excited about Gwyn and Az when the argument against Elriel is that Az is toxic. If Az is bad fine, but why be mad at people shipping him with Elain if you ship him with Gwyn. I don’t get it??

Hello! I've answered a similar question before, but here goes. And I will answer this fully and genuinely, though this question has been used as a faux, weak "gotcha" before.

I don't really ship gwynriel. From my pinned post: "I ship elucien and emorie, and believe that jassa and gwynriel will happen in canon." I reblog gwynriel content to support artist and my friends who I know would appreciate the art. I talk about gwynriel because it's a natural part of analyzing the series, and I think it will happen in canon.

Gwyn and Elain are different people. The way that Azriel treats them is also very different. It is the way that he treats Elain (and Mor) that is at the heart of why I cannot ship e*riel.

To expand on that point, Azriel watched Elain fight with her sisters, stand up for herself for one of the first times ever, try to say "this is what I want to do", and then he undermined her when she left the room.

Azriel watched Gwyn in the aftermath of her assault, he saw her with Nesta struggling to train despite how unusual it was for her. He then helped her in that goal in several ways.

To sum up those two points, the way that Azriel treats Mor and Elain, and the way that he treats Gwyn, are night and day. Shipping gwynriel and shipping e*riel is not a matter of replacing one character with another. The dynamics are completely, black and white, night and day different.

And in that vein, when I (and many others) say that Az needs the Prythian equivalent of therapy, or he needs to come to terms with how he sees certain women, etc., that is true with certain women, but mainly the issue is Azriel. The issue is not Elain, and it's not Gwyn, nor is it Mor. It's the way that Azriel has decided to view certain women because of problems with him. Just as an alcoholic is not drunk 24-hours a day, someone who has toxic tendencies won't be that way with every single person they encounter.

It is because I like Elain that I cannot ship e*riel. He would coddle her and prevent her from challenging herself, he would watch her struggle and then wrap her up in a blanket and say "there there sweetie, go plant some flowers instead." That is the literal opposite of what Elain needs, what she is capable of, and what she is worth.

why be so vicious toward people that think Elain and Az would be suited

Now this, this genuinely confuses me. I talk a whole lot of shit about those two as a couple, yes. I've had it bottled up inside for years. But that ship is not real. They do not care what I say about them because they are not real.

I don't care what people ship, but mischaracterization annoys me on a personal level. So yeah, I talk shit about the ship, but...

When have I ever looked for blogs that disagree with me just to jump on their posts and argue?

When have I ever reblogged an anti elucien post just to be contrarian?

When do I get into comment fights?

When do I take ss of people's content to make fun of it publicly?

When do I vague people and clearly comment on something that one person specifically has said, making it easy to tell who I am talking about?

I can tell you that I don't do the things above, but people do them to me! And I can tell you that it all just happened to me just last week, so...

If an anon says something about certain shippers in an ask, when do I not spin the conversation so that we are talking mainly about the ship instead of the people? You wouldn't know this, but I delete asks that are outright rude towards e*riels. Last week someone sent me one calling them delusional, and I deleted it. Even when I do post those, I clarify it as "people who think X..." rather than "these e*riel shippers..." because I know they aren't a monolith. If someone sends me a post with a link, I delete it if I know I am going to disagree with the link that was sent. The few times I have answered those, I blacked out the link before responding so that OP wouldn't be harassed.

And even if I fail in that, even if someone sends me an ask and I get snarkier than I should, blocking me is so, so easy. I don't go on to other people's blogs, I don't comment on their posts, in fact my habit is "see something annoying, block the person". Y'all can feel free to do the same.

99% of the time, I am very, very intentional in what I post here because I know I have a significant audience. But the things I say are about the characters and the ships. If certain people can't distinguish between themselves and the characters they like, that's not my problem. That's definitely a problem they need to work through.

[general-light]

If you don't mind me asking, and feel free to ignore this if you've been asked it already, but what's your take on the argument that c!Wilbur is/was abusive? (towards c!Tommy is the take I've usually seen, but there's also been people saying he's abusive towards c!Tubbo or c!Fundy).

I've been seeing the take a lot on Twitter, usually in response to someone saying c!Dream is abusive as a sort of 'gotcha' moment. But I've never seen anyone explain why c!Wilbur isn't abusive so I'm curious to see what you have to say since you're the c!Wilbur expert in my mind.

I've talked about it once before, but I'll be "really brief" with this answer.

c!Dream methodically abused c!Tommy in exile, intentionally and repeatedly. Therefore, the act is instantly worse than any time c!Wilbur hurt him, because c!Wilbur has never set out to hurt or control another character in a similar fashion. But, let's put that aside for now.

Here's a bullet often used by those who push this point: Abuse can be unintentional. Someone might emotionally abuse someone in the misguided attempt to keep them safe. But, even then, I don't really think that what c!Wilbur did was... abuse?

He's hurt c!Tommy's feelings a few times (the President comment, the Pit, etc.). But the idea that those were abusive acts totally ignores the contexts (c!Tommy had just endangered the entire ravine, and the Pit was one big manic breakdown - and maybe the only solid example of serious hurt). One instance of hurt does not an abuser make.

Someone's feelings being hurt isn't indicative of being abused, and for the most part these scenes aren't played as abuse. You wouldn't call c!Tubbo calling c!Tommy selfish (and hurting his feelings) pre-exile emotionally abusive, and the circumstantial contexts were near identical (friend lashes out due to stress about the safety of a nation).

When it comes to roleplaying abuse, c!Tommy clearly plays the role of being a conflicted victim. His response solidifies c!Dream's actions as abusive. But, this kind of behaviour is absent from his behaviour with c!Wilbur. c!Tommy seems to see c!Wilbur as someone who was once great, and can be great again if given the chance. Which makes it hard for me to believe that they were roleplaying an abuser and his victim.

Every example used, I find, is poor at best, and taken out of context at worst.

c!Wilbur scaring c!Tommy with his deteriorating mental state (Oct 8th "Am I the Villain?" speech, Oct 17 Button Room incident) is not abuse. Mental health is scary. c!Wilbur claiming that c!Tommy will hate him for what he'll do (Nov. 16 pre-War conversation) is not abuse, it's a pre-emptive apology.

Some parts used as evidence are just not canon, and if they were, are more proof that "they're like brothers" is real. c!Wilbur and c!Tommy bickering over the diamond blocks and the accidental piston trap is not abuse, that's just normal-ass sibling behaviour.

And that's just c!Tommy. I am not sure where the c!Tubbo claim comes from - c!Schlatt abused him, why are you looking at c!Wilbur?! - and it's so nonsense I don't know how to tackle disproving it. An one off instance of c!Tubbo feeling hurt by c!Wilbur is not abuse.

As for c!Fundy. c!Wilbur was, if anything, overly protective of him. c!Wilbur was driven to depression by his position on the L'Manberg cabinet - fellas, is it abusive/neglectful to try and prevent the same thing happening to your son by not giving him a title?

After Pogtopia, c!Wilbur thought he'd been disowned. Fellas, is it abusive/neglectful to try and respect the wishes of a son who's disowned you by staying away from him?

[olderthannetfic]

"can't you see how racists in the fandom are celebrating this and using this to turn the table and invalidate all the antiracism work"

What I've seen of TOG fandom (and admittedly, it's not everything) has not been antiracism work. It has been people coming up with supposed gotchas to prove that their favorite version of a ship dynamic is more ethical.

However, many of these gotchas involve pointing to extremely racist porn tropes elsewhere and saying they apply to TOG fic. I agree that the way black actors are treated in mainstream live action US porn is racist and shameful. For me, this is more a labor issue behind the scenes than about the porn content, but I see the arguments about how the content actively spreads stereotypes, and I do think there's some basis for them given the wide reach of the content and more importantly the huge barriers to entry and the lack of other content. An African American porn star doesn't really have the option to choose a less racist workplace and less traumatic content to act in, and that's a problem.

The problem, to me, isn't people kinking on shit they know is wrong and offensive. I, a woman, like certain kinds of misogynistic porn, and I'm sure there are POC who get off on horrible things because they are horrible. The problem is when the actual porn creation involves trauma (something that becomes far more likely with live action and wages and relatively more avoidable with indie textual erotica, especially when the motivation is horniness rather than a paycheck). The problem with the end content is less about one piece of it being bad. After all, some people are consuming it with full awareness that it's playing with stereotypes. The issue is when we bathe in a sea of media that's all telling the same story and no voices are pushing back. That's the situation that reaffirms our unconscious biases and makes them worse.

At one point, I'd read most of the Joe/Nicky fic on AO3, and at that time, I really wasn't seeing textual evidence of what people were talking about. I saw a strikingly more equal interest in both characters than with many big m/m ships. I saw a mild tendency towards the usual woobie-bottom-fave stuff with Nicky, which does, yes, sometimes turn the other partner into a bit of a prop, and that hurts if they're your fave. I can certainly see how that feels like sidelining the character and how that plays into a broader pattern of devaluing nonwhite characters... but as someone who has liked a lot of characters fandom devalued this way, TOG did not strike me as a particularly notable case.

The arguing I saw was very much a standard top/bottom war and a "How dare you slightly prefer X over Y in our pairing where we all like both of them?" A lot of it was also "How dare you ignore my favorite fanon?", often very historically inaccurate and One True Way-y when, inherently, there's a lot of ambiguity to history and the target being screamed at was something of an expert. A lot of it was just hating on kink.

That callout now clarifies for me where a lot of the historical misinformation was probably springing from and makes it clear why the level of vitriol was so oddly high compared to similar fandoms.

I'm happy to look at specific evidence, anon, but vaguing about people being bad does not impress me. Many people make stupid posts one time and brilliant ones another or are cruel when they're angry but still have a point when they calm down.

If there's some pattern of bullying with the posters you dislike, you can describe it to me more fully even if they've cleverly hidden the receipts. I get why you might not have hard evidence, but there's a big gap between a detailed story with no evidence and extremely vague "they're racists" with no elaboration at all.

What it sounds like to me is that they advocated AO3-y freedom to make the fanworks one wants even if other people find them offensive.

What it sounds like to me is that they got called "racists" a lot to obfuscate that they were trying to point out someone else's racism.

If they're celebrating their bully's downfall, it's only natural.

If those specific posts have a subtext I've missed--I'm talking in the argumentation itself or in evidence being faked--then I want to know. Otherwise... dude... do you really think it's that easy to sow self doubt?

[miraculouscontent]

Man it sure is weird how you're supportive towards White Boy Felix but everything Alya does is wrong...

Okay, babe, I'll pretend you're worth an ounce of my attention to make you feel good about yourself, because clearly you need it.

Sure is weird how you say I'm "supportive" towards Felix (a character who has appeared a grand total of one time; side note, from my experience, Lila didn't get a lot of heat until her second major appearance where everyone was officially done with her) when I've not only never written for him in any capacity (whether positive or negative; I actively write for characters I enjoy) and have specifically said that I just prefer his introduction to Chloe and Lila because the episode got into why he behaves a certain way right out of the gate (instead of wasting episodes and episodes away first like they did with Chloe). It's not an excuse for his actions but it's giving backstory and explaining why he's salty with Adrien+Gabriel, meaning he has a motive.

Also weird how you leave out that I have not only criticized "White Boy" Adrien, but I have absolutely slammed that bootleg sunshine boy into the ground with how much I hate the writing around him. And before you say "oh!! but just because you criticize one white boy--" well then, the opposite could be said about me criticizing one black character, huh? Funny how that works.

Anyway, none of my current favorite canon-based Marinette ships even involve Felix. You would know that if you'd just asked me, which would've been way easier for you had you acted as if you were an innocent person who isn't trying to childishly hide behind anonymous just so you don't get any heat. You could've tried to wiggle information out of me about my current thoughts on plots/characters and then used that as a "gotcha" after you'd confirmed everything. Instead, you just look like you saw maybe one or two posts I did a year+ ago and came to whine.

Maybe next time, instead of coming to my inbox - or anyone's inbox, for that matter - to try and talk about how ""'suspicious""" something is, you actually come at me with a slew of debunks and arguments, like telling me why my evaluations of Alya are wrong instead of just saying that I think "everything Alya does" is wrong, which flat-out isn't true, as I've said before that Alya is getting worse with every season, meaning that she must've started out as some level of neutral/good with me.

This also goes to literally anyone who wants to come to someone's inbox to complain, because Alya salters get this all the time. People have every right to be upset at Alya. Some of them have been in Marinette's position, some hate that Marinette's punished while Alya isn't, and so on. Don't come in here to try to gaslight people while you wear your shades and think you're cool just because these things apparently don't affect you.

I'm certainly not saying Felix is a good person. In addition, not even talking about me specifically, but you can like an antagonist/villain without being deemed suspicious/a horrible person; it just means you like how they were portrayed.

Felix got the punch in the face that he deserved and the show actually treated his actions as wrong unlike Chat Noir (a white character, by the way, and again someone I've criticized heavily; not sure if you got the memo). He has a motive, has a backstory, has hobbies, doesn't like Adrien (that's already like +3 points in my book), tricked Gabriel and yoinked his ring like it was nothing, and he has a spine. They gave him more to work with than they gave Chloe in just one episode, so I like him as an antagonist. Never said he shouldn't have to repent for anything he's done.

[itsclydebitches]

TBH I think the whole "You didn't have an issue with this in 'insert x show here' but you have an issue with it in RWBY? What are you, sexist?" thing can easily be defused with a simple, "How did RWBY present this plot-point compared to the show I like?"

Sure, technically Cinder Fall and Darth Maul are the 'same' character, but how are the two presented in their respective shows? Cinder eats up screentime and none of it goes anywhere and gets frustrating. Maul is a relatively minor villain that had one season's worth of attention in CW and then was the villain of a few episodes throughout Rebels before getting killed off.

The only reason someone would be confused as to why people like Maul but hate Cinder is if they just read the two's respective wiki pages.

Really the whole "Your issues with RWBY are just subconscious misogyny" is just some people wanting to slap labels onto others so they can feel validated on not agreeing with their opinions.

Generally speaking, I'm wary of any take that boils down to a single sentence, "You're just [insert accusation here]." Not because such accusations are always 100% without merit—with a canon dealing with as many sensitive subjects as RWBY, combined with a fandom as large and diverse as it has become, you're bound to come across some people whose "criticism" stems primarily from bigotry—but because such dismissive summaries never tackle the problem a fan has pointed out. If one fan goes, "Ruby's plan was foolish because [reasons]" and the response to that is "You just can't handle a woman leader," then that response has failed to disprove the argument presented. The thing about "criticism" based in bigotry is that there isn't actually a sound argument attached because, you know, the only "argument" here is "I don't like people who aren't me getting screen time." So you can spot that really easily. The person who is actually misogynistic is going to be spouting a lot of rants about how awful things are... but very little evidence as to why it's awful, leaving only the fact that our characters are women as the (stupid) answer.

And yes, there is something to be said for whether, culturally, we're harder on women characters than we are men. Are we subconsciously more critical of what women do in media simply because we have such high expectations for that representation and, conversely, have become so used to such a variety of rep for men—including endlessly subpar/outright bad stories—that we're more inclined to shrug those mistakes off? That's absolutely worth discussing, yet at the same time, acknowledging that doesn't mean those criticisms no longer exist. That's where I've been with the Blake/Yang writing for a while now. I think fans are right to point out that we may be holding them to a higher standard than we demand of straight couples, but that doesn't mean the criticisms other fans have of how the ship has been written so far are without merit. Those writing mistakes still exist even if we do agree that they would have been overlooked in a straight couple—the point is they shouldn't exist in either. Both are still bad writing, no matter whether we're more receptive to one over the other. Basically, you can be critical of a queer ship without being homophobic. Indeed, in an age where we're getting more queer rep than ever before, it's usually the queer fans who are the most critical. Because we're the ones emotionally invested in it. The true homophobes of the fandom either dropped RWBY when the coding picked up, or spend their time ranting senselessly about how the ship is horrible simply because it exists, not because of how it's been depicted. Same for these supposed misogynists. As a woman, I want to see Ruby and the others written as complex human beings, which includes having them face up to the mistakes they've made. The frustration doesn't stem from me hating women protagonists, but rather the fact that they're written with so little depth lately and continually fall prey to frustrating writing decisions.

And then yeah, you take all those feelings, frustrations, expectations, and ask yourself, "Have I seen other shows that manage this better?" Considering that RWBY is a heavily anime-inspired show where all the characters are based off of known fairy tales and figures... the answer is usually a resounding, "Yes." As you say, I keep coming across accusations along the lines of, "People were fine with [insert choice here] when [other show] did it," as if that's some sort of "Gotcha!" moment proving a fan was bigoted all along, when in fact the answer is right there: Yes, we were okay with it then because that show did it better. That show had the setup, development, internal consistency, and follow through that RWBY failed to produce, which is precisely what we were criticizing in the first place.

What I also think is worth emphasizing here is how many problems RWBY has developed over the last couple of years (combining with the problems it had at the start). Because, frankly, audiences are more forgiving of certain pitfalls when the rest of the show is succeeding. I think giving a Star Wars example exemplifies that rather well. No one is going to claim that Star Wars is without its problems (omg does it have problems lol), but there's enough good there in most individual stories to (usually) keep the fans engaged. That doesn't mean that they're not going to point out those criticisms when given the chance, just that disappointment isn't the primary feeling we come away with. Obviously in a franchise this size there are always exceptions (like the latest trilogy...), but for most it's a matter my recent response to The Bad Batch, "I have one major criticism surrounding a character's arc and its impact on the rest of the cast, and we definitely need to unpack the whitewashing... but on the whole yes, it was a very enjoyable, well written show that I would recommend to others." However, for many fans now, we can't say the same of RWBY. Yang getting KO'ed by Neo in a single hit leads into only Blake reacting to her "death" which reminds viewers of the lack of sisterly development between Yang and Ruby which segues into a subpar fight which messes with Cinder's already messy characterization which leads to Ruby randomly not using her silver eye to save herself which leaves Jaune to mercy kill Penny who already died once which gives Winter the powers when she could have just gotten it from the start which results in a favorite character dying after his badly written downfall and all of it ends with Jaune following our four woman team onto the magical island... and that's just two episodes. The mistakes snowball. RWBY's writing is broken in numerous ways and that's what fans keep pointing to. Any one of these examples isn't an unforgivable sin on its own, but the combination of all of them, continuously, representing years worth of ongoing issues results in that primary feeling of, "That was disappointing."

Looking at some of the more recent posts around here, fans aren't upset that Ruby is no longer interested in weaponry because that character trait is Oh So Important and its lack ruins the whole show, they're upset because Ruby, across the series, lacks character, so the removal of one trait is more of a problem than it would be in a better written character. What are her motivations? Why doesn't she seek answers to these important questions? Why is her special ability so inconsistent? Where's her development recently? What makes Ruby Ruby outside of wielding a scythe and wanting to help everyone, a very generic character trait for a young, innocent protagonist? We used to be able to say that part of her character was that obsession and we used to hope that this would lead to more interesting developments: Will Ruby fix/update their weapons? Is her scythe dependency the reason why others need to point out how her semblance can develop? What happens if she is weaponless? Surely that will lead to more than just a headbutt... but now we've lost hope that this trait will go anywhere, considering it has all but disappeared. Complaints like these are short-hand criticism for "Ruby's character as a whole needs an overhaul," which in turn is a larger criticism of the entire cast's iffy characterization (Who is Oscar outside Ozpin? Why was Weiss' arc with her father turned into a joke and concluded without her? etc.) and that investment speaks to wanting her to be better. We want Ruby to be a better character than she currently is, like all those other shows we've seen where the women shine. Reducing that to misogyny isn't just inaccurate, but the exact opposite of what most fans are going for in their criticisms.

[sevengraces]

Hey ik I don’t post abt doctor who a lot a lot but it still matters to me v much so imma say this for god and everyone else.

I don’t want anyone trying to complain to me abt 13 being female presenting. It’s been forever since the seasons were released, true but I have just recently been able to watch her stuff. I do not want any fuckos thinking I am a safe place to be sexist but with a funny hat!

I’m not. I love 13 v much and I’ve not seen a single crticism of her that doesn’t boil down to “pretty smart girl make me angy and I hate Dw bc they hate women slightly less than they used to”

Like that isn’t a point. Or an argument. Or a gotcha. It’s literally just sexism.

I couldn’t care less what anyone’s reason is for not wanting a girl doctor cause it’s all bullshit.

If someone wants to talk abt like real actual criticisms of her character arc or the writing or stuff like that w me that’d be fine, but I’m not kidding if at any point it boils down to “I hate women” I’ll block your ass so fast.

Anyways have you guys seen 13 and her fam!! <3

(She calls them fam and they call her fam that’s so fucking cute)

[kenobihater]

Hi! I really liked the meta post about cat witchers and psychosis - it raises very good points regarding not only the fanon's seeming obsession with the psychotic label but also canon's own inaccuracy and ableism with the label of "psychopath". I never realized that "unhinged", "feral" and such are used against people witch psychosis and characters labelled/coded as psychotic. I hope it's okay to ask, but would you say that labelling any character as "unhinged" or "feral" - such as the fandom's frequent labelling of Jaskier as feral, and sometimes even Lambert - would always count as ableist or as psychosis-coding? Is that the inherent quality of those monikers even if the person doing so does not intend it/is unaware of the connotations?

And when it comes to non-psychotics writing psychotic characters - are there any "red flags" within the writing that one could look out for, either when reading a fic/story or one's own writing? (besides psychosis being tied with moral bankruptcy and violence?) I think many writers do research exclusively based on clinical texts, which while definitley useful, doesn't always help with an accurate portrayal true to people with the illness/experiencing the symptoms.

I know the post took a lot out of you so feel free to answer this later, and you don't have to answer at all if you don't feel like it! If I said something rude/ableist, I apologize. I don't have much experience when talking about psychosis so I'm not sure how to navigate that. Please correct me?

Hi, you're not being ableist at all! Even if you were you're respectful and kind, so I wouldn't mind correcting you. It's when people are rude that I get heated lol.

I'd say that in my opinion (I can't speak for all psychotic people) "feral" or "unhinged" are fine to use - it's when they're used in tandem with things like "episodes" of emotion, disjointed thinking or speech, erratic behavior, or mood swings that I think they can be problematic. Instances of those behaviors are clearly shorthand of psychosis to me, even if unintentional, and those terms should be avoided when in conjunction with blatant psychotic behavior.

When it comes to red flags, the biggest are the moral bankruptcy and violence, but another one is playing it for laughs, or making it seem "kooky" or "soo random xD". Now, it is possible to find humor in psychosis. We can do some pretty weird things. For example, one time in high-school I stayed up for three days straight absolutely obsessing over the concept of becoming a shepard. I researched sheep breeds, looked at plots of land, and watched countless sheep shearing videos. Looking back I find this hilarious because I do NOT think I could get up at like... 3 am in the spring to birth sheep, and also I'm just not cut out for that life but I was fully convinced that's what I was gonna do. I'm fine with joking about this, but if a non-psychotic person made fun of me for it, I'd feel pretty shit. So, leave finding the humor in the occasional absurdity inherent to psychosis up to people who actually experience it.

Another red flag is when people write characters, usually love interests, snapping someone out of a delusion or hallucination in a dramatic argument. Hate to break it to anyone who thinks this, but the power of love does NOT overcome the power of psychosis. Encouraging delusions isn't good either, but you shouldn't start an argument with someone in the middle of a delusion or hallucination, just support them and GENTLY, CALMY, and LOGICALLY try and steer them in the direction of reality. Support and safety is tantamount, not snapping us back to the real world with a dramatic "gotcha!" moment.

Oh. I just remembered a big red flag that makes me furious. Literal eugenics, which are morally abhorrent (hottake of the century, I know /s). I can't believe I have to type these words, but the concept of "putting someone down" because of an unspecified "madness" that is CLEARLY a shittily written version of psychosis is actual fucking eugenecist rhetoric! Fuck this. Fuck this SO hard. People never deserve death because they're psychotic and supposedly """"dangerous""""! You might say that "the fic is just depicting how shitty the treatment of the mentally ill is in universe!" but it sure as fuck didn't read that way. It read like eugenics, plain and simple. Yes, i'm referencing an actual fic I've read. Don't go looking for it to dunk on OP or whatever, but it exists and it's BAD. I was trying to be forgiving of their missteps in depicting "mad" cat witchers, but that was too far, even for my ever-patient ass.

Also, don't fall into another eugenecist trope (one I've thankfully never seen in this fandom) where a mentally ill character declares they'll never have kids. That's a deeply personal decision we have to make, but when a non-psychotic person has a psychotic person declare they're never going to pass on their illness, it reads as eugenics. I'm never having kids (not only cause I'm trans lol) because I'm bipolar, but not bc I don't want to pass on my disorder. I don't ever wanna go off my meds, something I might have to do if I had a kid to term. So yes, this is a deeply personal decision we all must consider, and it's one I don't trust a non-psychotic person to handle tactfully.

Finally, allow your character to show their full range of psychosis, not just the thematically relevant parts. I can't tell you how annoying it is to engage with media where the character just happens to stop showing symptoms of psychosis right after the climax of their always dramatic breakdown. It's old. It's tired. I don't trust non-psychotics to write recovery stories, because they usually either veer into inspiration porn, the trope of "curing" mental illness, or just use our illness as a plot device. Back to showing their full range of psychosis, decide what that means for the character. What are their symptoms? Are they delusional? Do they hallucinate? Do they have racing thoughts and/or motormouth? Are they manic? Hypomanic? Do they dissociate? Do they get overestimulated? Not every psychotic person has the same symptoms - I for example dissociate, have racing thoughts, motormouth, disjointed thoughts, hypomania, overstimulation, and ocassionally even problems with motor function, and had delusional thinking once after a medicine-induced manic episode I needed to be hospitalized for. Nothing else, though. I've never hallucinated. So, keep in mind that psychosis is a broad term for several different symptoms, some of which certain psychotic people will never experience. One size does not fit all.

I think that's everything? Thank you for asking and being respectful, I truly appreciate when non-psychotic people take the time to educate themselves and act as good allies.

(For anyone who missed it, here is the post this is a response to!)

[ouyangzizhensdad]

the dead imperialist villain was homophobic & the canonly bi protag the readers are meant to sympathize with condemns said 2d homophobia.. what do they want from media? “swiper no swiping”

The intellectual clusterfuck of someone saying “well, maybe not all fantasy worlds need to include [oppression X] and maybe it could be nice sometimes or at least some people would prefer being able to engage in full escapism without being reminded of the real world and also for some creators it just feels like an excuse to bash on [group X] in poor taste so maybe let’s not” THEN becoming, in very smart, very inquisitive minds “if fantasy world contains or depicts [oppression X] then this piece of fiction is [oppression X]”. Stupendous. And aside from the slip-and-slide logic of it all, it annoys me because like:

1) It does not even consider if the fantasy world is being used as a way to explore real sociological/historical phenomenon in the first place. ATLA explores imperialism, genocide, industrialism, etc. and included sexism from the very first scene of the show. But boy, they decide to talk about homophobia in a manner that clearly aims to mirror how colonialism impacted current day homophobia in some Asian countries, clearly within that same storytelling continuity, and suddenly that’s unacceptable and homophobic by virtue only of its presence (I can’t comment on whether it was well-handled ultimately in the work, but it’s not like the argument being made was about anything else than this one panel anyway). Again, some people should learn how not to parrot shit they saw on twitter and tumblr without considering the context of the work. That does not mean they can’t criticise the work, but that at least if that criticism remains at the end of it all they’ll be able to frame it in the context of the work they are criticising instead of just repeating a line they learned somewhere else. Media criticism/analysis is not about learning by heart a rigid list of “This is Problematic” points which you can whip out as “gotcha!” arguments.

2) Competing!Representation!Needs!!! Some people want pure escapism where nothing reminds them homophobia/heteronormativity exists? Cool. But that does not mean all works of fiction now need to cater to them, specifically. Personally, as a queer, I hate these types of stories, for three main reasons.

First because they generally the creative fails to portray that fictional world in a way that feels believable or thought-through. Often, for example, they’ll think about homophobia but not heteronormativity without considering how those things are imbricated. Generally creators show their inability to produce a fictional world that would not be shaped by homophobia/heteronormativity, so as an audience it’s hard for me to suspend my disbelief. 

Second, I’m very aware that my queerness is socially-constructed--that is, that my preference for women could be as insignificant in the scheme of my life as my preference for certain colours or food or home decoration, but that because of the world I live in, it is something very significant about how I define and understand myself, and how others see me and what I’ve experienced and will continue to experience. Not only that, but my everyday experience of queerness is (sadly) more defined by my living in a homophobic/heteronormative world than it is about liking women. It’s harder for me to connect with narratives that will not, at least, nod to this reality (which does not mean the narrative cannot be feel-good or triumphant). On top of it all, so many queer experiences do not make sense unless they happen in a world that is homophobic/heteronormative--just because you don’t want to see those being explored does not mean it isn’t important for other queer creatives and queer audiences. To reduce stories that explore homophobia as “stories for straight people” really shows a failure to grasp the perspectives of other queer people in the community. 

Third, to build onto the second point, I’m just an edgelord bitch. I don’t like being white-lied to, I don’t like having my feelings coddled, I like being told how it is, I think though-love is the way to go. I want my escapism to remain grounded enough not to have me roll my eyes going “riiiiiiiiiiight”. Where some people see aspirational escapism, I feel almost gaslighted lmao. I remember reading this super long fic where this character was super depressed and burned so many bridges because he was scared of admitting he was gay and coming out, and then he suddenly came out to everyone around him and--everyone was so supportive, at best they were just ‘sad’ he kept that a ‘secret’ from them, no one said anything out of line or questionable, his life only got easier and better, etc. The narrative was telling him; see that fear was irrational and you needed to overcome the irrationality of it. I wanted to throw my phone at the wall!!! I can take a step back and see how that narrative can be reassuring to some queer readers who have yet to come out but I hated it so fucking much!!!!! I hated how it was only willing to discuss internalised homophobia but not homophobia. And like to me it is just not realistic and it completely took away my suspension of disbelief and just made me fucking angry. 

[mozillavulpix]

super anti-komahina salt

and this is to go further beyond

I saw a komahina fan post a write-up and it just irritates me so I want to break it down:

“If you think Komaeda is batshit insane or that his character is only about his obsession with hope and you interpreted Hinata's feelings about Komaeda as just hate of course it wouldn't make sense. Except neither of these are true for their characters.”

This is the basic surface-level narrative Komahina fans argue against, and fair enough, it’s a massive generalisation. But this argument also just irritates me because it implies everyone who doesn’t ship them do so because they don’t understand the characters well enough.

“long story short Komaeda's obsesses over hope as a coping mechanism, because it's the only thing he can cling to.”

I can agree with this in a way, but in my opinion I don’t think he’s so weak that it’s impossible for him break free from that mindset (during the game) if he really wants to.

“Komaeda doesn't like Hinata because he thinks he is talented and above him, Komaeda says he loves all ultimates but it's not real love. His love for Hinata is different. In the SDR2 drama CD he mentions that he loves Hinata because he tries to understand him.”

I can agree with this. Although the Drama CD is literally just the Free Time Events, I don’t think it’s some kind of ‘gotcha’ like people think it’d be.

But also keep in mind, yes, Hajime tries to give Nagito a chance and doesn’t immediately run away screaming because scary person he can’t understand, but Hajime also doesn’t particularly act more saintly than all the other kids towards Nagito after Chapter 1. Nekomaru and Kazuichi seem to at least try to hear Nagito out before they punch him in the face. Mahiru seems like she was the first one to consider giving him breakfast. Hajime tries to stop Akane from attacking him after the Chapter 1 trial, but mostly because he’s resigned to the fact it won’t change what he did, and he then changes his mind and gets pissed off when Nagito decides to taunt him about his amnesia in response. And it’s Sonia who finally settles everyone down. So yes, Hajime tries to understand Nagito, but in the actual plot itself that’s not a special trait unique to him.

It’s only ‘unique’ if you choose to do the Free Time Events, and the Free Time Events...are basically not canon. They’re more like a what-if scenario the player chooses to view, and the dialogue was written from that perspective.

As in, maybe it’s canon that they’d interact like that if they spent time together on the island, but it’s not canon that Hajime does and wants to do that during the story. Because you can do them for everyone.

“And they reach a mutual understanding in DR3 because the two of them are more alike than Hinata would like to admit.”

Um...

Well, this is why DR2.5 is bullshit

I agree they’re similar, but I think both of them knew this from the very beginning. It’s not exactly a reason for reconciliation and forgiveness. The fact they have similarities is the exact reason why Hajime is so upset at his betrayal, and snaps back at Nagito every time he brings that up. So I don’t know if that’s really a good reason to explain why they’ve forgiven each other come DR3.

“Komaeda doesn't see himself as above untalented reserves either, because in 2-4, after realizing the truth about Hinata he says that they are the same, stepladders for hope. He was lashing out at all the students for being despair. They are similar, because they both share the same views that talent is everything.”

And then Hajime gets his character development for the rest of the game all so he can realise talent isn’t everything. So...?

“Now from Hinata's end, a lot of people seem to miss this about him, but he is someone who denies his feelings when they get inconvenient, he is called a tsundere by monokuma” 

I guess this is a diss against the surface-level people and people who are like “but the text literally says this”. But even then, the game literally shows Hajime’s inner thoughts. If he’s conflicted about things, the text generally shows that too, even if it’s with a careful inclusion of a ‘...’

So I don’t think we should take that trait as an excuse to literally ignore what the text says.

He was felt pumped when Komaeda was out of critical condition, but he thinks "why do I have to feel pumped, oh well best not to think about it"....because Hinata likes to avoid facing things that inconvenient him. Hinata finds it hard to trust Komaeda and doesn't play along with him, because he is afraid of getting caught in his pace, and not because he hates him and thinks he is better off dead.

This part literally read like a high-schooler’s english essay, and maybe this kid actually is a high-schooler, tbh. Because that is one big leap from “Hajime finds it difficult to deal with his feelings” to “since Hajime finds it difficult to deal with Nagito, it means he doesn’t hate him”.

“I don't think Komaeda is a fundametally bad person but is shaped to be what he is because of his luck cycle. In his last FTE, Hinata asks what Komaeda would do if didn't have his luck cycle, and his answer was something along the lines of " a normal life, devoid of hope and despair". And we get to that his innermost desires is to live a normal life in the OVA, and his character song zansakura zanka.”

He can also just decide to not believe in his luck cycle.

Also, in the OVA, he’s embarrassed by that inner desire and tells World Destroyer he hopes no one saw that maybe he wishes for a world without talent.

Like his desire to be a good person is so hidden that he doesn’t want people to know.

“Hinata even mentions Komaeda isn't trying to trick anyone for selfish reasons in his report card, so it's a shame to see so many people attribute all of Komaeda's actions to malice just because of what Hinata thought of him in chapter 5 because it wasn't clear what Komaeda's reasons were at that point.”

Okay, a few things to unpack here:

Just because Nagito is doing things ‘for the greater good’, doesn’t mean it’s not also selfish. Hajime isn’t going to say that because Hajime doesn’t realise that. You can’t exactly trust him with being able to articulate everything about a character’s worldview. Izuru would. He probably does in Chapter 0. (And that’s why he seems disgusted by him).

Also, there’s “maybe Hajime is a slightly unreliable narrator because he tries to avoid thinking about difficult things”, and there’s “actually, the majority of how Hajime views Chapter 5 is unreliable because he didn’t know for sure if Nagito’s plan was malicious or not, it was just his gut feeling”.

What about the video message after Chapter 5? What about having to spell out ‘KILL US ALL’? What about Chapter 0 showing how in the real world Nagito had completely lost it? It’s not like the game was trying to present Nagito as any little bit more sympathetic after the trial. If anything, every piece of new info reinforced that mindset Nagito was filled with malice, up to the ‘fake Makoto’ saying that he somewhat understood him. The fake Hope made by Junko to trick them.

If you compare Chapter 5 in 2 to Chapter 5 in V3, you can see how the positioning is different. V3 does the “the villain tries to make himself look the worst he can in the mind of the heroes when in reality his real intentions were different” a lot better. More flat-out intentionally - the protagonist kind of literally giving a monologue about how the character was morally grey and even at the end there they couldn’t say they knew their true intentions. But also it’s just not as...sinister as 2-5. No ominous chanting, no dismembered limbs, none of the characters feeling completely out of their element and terrified. I think it’s text that Nagito is supposed to be villainous in Chapter 5 and even past Chapter 5.

So...

I can at least understand where Komahina comes from, but god it annoys me

Unpacking it like this, I can see it’s not even fair to argue back a lot of it - the stuff people are saying do make sense and are arguing against kinds of people I have seen.

Besides, I’m not arguing Komahina ‘can’t be canon’.

My view is just I think Hajime deserves better than a character like Nagito, who never repented for his actions on-screen or even gave much of a hint that he wanted to repent for his actions.

And that it’s still easy to argue that Nagito is a bad person even with his trauma.

Not everyone who calls Nagito an awful person is an idiot who doesn’t know how to read text past the surface, you can still make a nuanced take with that conclusion

for god’s sake

[365daysofsasuhina]

[ 365 Days of SasuHina || Day Three Hundred Sixty-Four: What You See ] [ Uchiha Sasuke, Hyūga Hinata ] [ SasuHina, vulgarity, death, smoking ] [ Verse: Oil and Blood ] [ AO3 Link ]

Appearances can be deceiving.

For instance...Hinata had a teacher back in middle school who, for all intents and purposes, seemed a nice enough man. An active part of the community, well-liked by his students, and a staple part of the school in which he taught. He was lenient with those who needed it, and tough on those who he knew could do better.

But during her last year, when she was no longer in his class, a rather startling discovery was made.

On the run from another province, he was accused of murdering several middle school girls at his previous school. But with the help of underground cosmetic mods, he had his face changed enough to escape notice, starting a new life on the other side of the country where he could once again begin stalking students.

Thankfully he never had the chance - he was caught when a substitute for another teacher managed to recognize him despite the mods. He was arrested, and later imprisoned for his crimes.

From then on, Hinata knew better than to trust what face people put forward. What you see isn’t always true.

Which is what makes her newest...friend? so intriguing.

Since stumbling upon the half-dead man in an alleyway, Hinata has been unable to escape one Uchiha Sasuke: a member of the infamous yakuza currently overseen by his father. Having been beaten and stripped of his (rather expensive) mods, it was Hinata who, on an insomnia walk, hefted him from the refuse and took him to a doctor she knew.

And that was only the beginning of a bond that saw her kidnapped, nearly involved in a gunfight, and then marked as a target by the Uchiha group’s biggest rivals: the Senju.

Since then, it’s been Sasuke’s self-imposed mission to keep the woman safe as repayment for her kindness, and also for his failing to protect her when he first attempted to fulfill his debt to her.

Which means that outside work and her time spent at home...Hinata has been stuck with a rather interesting bodyguard.

Sasuke doesn’t hide what he is. Be it his mods, his tattoos, his smoking or his sometimes coarse language, he doesn’t shy from his title of gangster. He knows that what his family does is unlawful. Dangerous and harmful, even. But he does have at least one code of conduct: repay his debts.

Having someone like him in the presence of someone like Hinata makes a very strange pair indeed.

You see, Hinata’s father runs the largest Japan-based medical mod company. She was once heiress...before daring to call out his hypocrisy. She now lives in a tiny apartment in a rather...questionable part of town. Which is how she found Sasuke. And she works for a mod insurance claim company. Which, admittedly, she hates. But she does do her part of under-the-table dealing to help those who truly need it find underground care.

Hence her knowing the good doctor.

But it goes without saying that the pair of them going, well...anywhere together tends to draw some very confused gazes. After all, most wonder what on earth such a sweet looking young woman could ever be doing running around with someone like him.

Sure, Hinata hasn’t ever hurt anyone - in fact she herself has been the victim of violence more than once. But she does technically break the law rather often, given her redirection of insurance claims to illegal operations that go beneath the government radar. Sure, she does so for morally-just reasons...but it’s still illegal.

She wonders what people would think if they knew: that such a sweet, trustworthy, likeable face has been lying to her employer and her government for years now, costing them mountains of money with every customer or patient she reroutes into the less-than-legal channels.

Sure, it’s nothing compared to Sasuke’s repsheet, but...still, worse than most would assume just looking at her.

And the same, she feels, goes for Sasuke.

During their time together, she’s observed him as carefully as she can, not wanting to be caught snooping. It’s something she’s always been rather good at. Her eyes are pale enough that most people don’t notice them slid to their corners to watch them. Sasuke, so often, just seems so...normal. He drinks coffee with heavy cream (but no sugar - he doesn’t like bitter, but nor can he stand sweet). He’s taken to feeding the stray cats around her apartment building. She saw him completely interrupt traffic to help an elderly neighbor of hers cross to the proper street from her window on his way to see her once.

Sure, he might do bad things...but he isn’t a bad person.

After all, he’s doing what he’s doing for her out of a sense of honor. He could just flip her the bird and leave her to defend herself from the Senju, helpless. Maybe it’s wholly for himself, for upholding his code of ethics...but it doesn’t feel that shallow.

He doesn’t just stand around looking tough. He talks to her, argues with her, and even jokes with her...though his humor is bone dry. There’s been many a moment when she’s forgotten why he’s around. They bicker and banter like...friends.

...she’s almost forgotten what it’s like to have friends. High school was rather lonely, and her shuffle right into a dead-end job and a micro apartment didn’t really lend itself to making them. Sure, she and the doctor get on fairly well, but...they’ve only ever seen one another for business. Technically that’s the reason Sasuke’s around, but...it just feels...different.

...so maybe she’s not as annoyed by his playing knight as she was when it all first started.

“Now what are you doing?”

“Hm?”

Chin in a hand, Sasuke juts it slightly toward her. “You’ve been staring at your HUD for like fifteen minutes. I can’t see it, but I can tell.”

At his accusation, Hinata goes a light pink. “...uh…”

“Watching porn in public?”

“W-w-what?! No!” Her voice jumps several octaves, drawing the glances of other patrons. They’re currently seated in an outdoor section at the front of a cafe having coffee. Sasuke insisted he needed to refuel, and she never minds a cup herself.

He gives a cheeky, lazy grin, posture still lax. “Then what are you doing?”

“I’m...playing a game.”

“Oh? A game that involves staring at your HUD?”

“It’s...not the most interactive, sure. It’s more of a daily click sort of...t-thing.”

“Ah, gotcha. So you’re not really a gamer girl.”

At that, her lips purse in a pout. “Hey, I play games at home. This is just more...maintenance.”

“Sounds exciting.”

“It’s...cute. You collect cats.”

Immediately, something lightens in his expression, and his posture becomes a bit more attentive. “...oh yeah?”

She doesn’t miss all that, but suppresses a smile, not wanting to drive him off the subject. “Mhm. It’s an older game, Neko Atsume. People used to play it on their phones.”

Sasuke hums in acknowledgement...and something tells her he’s already on his HUD looking it up. She knows already how fond he is of cats. See the above mentioned strays he’s pseudo-adopted. “Sounds...boring, but cats are all right, I guess.”

“Like I said, it’s mostly a daily click sort of thing. You check to see what cats are around, w-what they’ve left you, if they took treats…”

His eyes flicker, and though she can’t see his HUD herself, she already knows what he’s looking at. “...huh.”

“Want to play?”

“I might. If I get bored enough.”

She just gently rolls her eyes.

...a week later, he approaches her with a scowl, and she actually braces herself for some kind of argument.

“What have you done?”

“I...w-what?”

“That stupid...cat game!”

She blinks.

“The whole damn syndicate is playing it now! I can’t stop checking it! We almost missed a raid because the wrong people got distracted!”

Before Hinata can stop it, a snort escapes her, both hands coming to cover her nose and mouth. Eyes go wide. “I...I’m sorry…?”

“I can’t believe this…”

“Sasuke-san, I...I didn’t mean to -?”

“I know,” he snaps, cutting her off...which she’s gotten used to. “...don’t introduce me to any more games. Got it?”

“O...okay.”

“Wasting all my goddamn time,” he mutters, lighting a cigarette and taking a frustrated drag. He gives her a halfhearted glare when she can no longer suppress her giggles. “If the Uchiha Yakuza falls it’s all gonna be your fault, I hope you know that. You and your damn cats.”

“I’m sorryyy!”

“No you’re not!”

“Yes I am!”

“Then why’re you laughing?”

She can’t reply, too caught up in her amusement.

To anyone looking on, they’d see a scowling, tattooed, heavily-modded man they’d immediately peg as a bad guy.

But Hinata knows better.

                                                             .oOo.

     More of the cyberpunk AU! Not really anything plot-drive this time: more introspection about appearance, which DOES play a fairly big role in both their characters, and their world at large. With the ability to modify your looks, you can really put any face forward - literally. While neither of them have any real appearance mods (though Sasuke does have his eye mods), they still have traits that don't match their exterior!      ...I'd...say more but it's very late. And ohhh man...just one more day to go. I hope y'all are ready for me to get super sappy on you tomorrow xD But for now, it's bedtime. Thanks for reading~

[love-takes-work]

I shouldn’t argue with people on Reddit

My clown encounter

I was talking to someone about the Camp Pining Hearts graphic novel on Reddit, and among other things, I made a joking comment about how Mr. Frowney appearing in the audience of the Camp Pining Play to watch Mr. Smiley perform might mean they’re married now. Someone in the comments had this to say to me:

Reddit clown: 

That would imply that anyone on SU cares about developing characters.

Follow the jump if you would like some bloviating about how this show fails at complex relationships, a funny conspiracy theory about how fan response directly controls which characters appear and what plots the Crew writes, and a smug conclusion that No One Can Answer This Deep Question and Therefore SU Is A Bad Show.

Reddit clown:

It’s clear that the author is trying to prop up their ship by purposefully making Amedot out to be unhealthy and problematic, even if it means derailing established personality and history. It’s pretty childish really.

“Does that imply what I think it does about Mr. Frowney and Mr. Smiley? Hey, maybe they’re married now. :)”

That would imply that anyone on SU cares about developing characters.

I addressed part of the Amedot comment and also said this:

Me:

Re character development: This graphic novel was not written by anyone who writes for the show. There's not really any constructive conversation I can have from here if your position really is "no one on SU cares about developing characters," though. This just seems like such an unnecessarily negative "lol this show sucks, edgier-than-u" comment that I don't know where it can go from here and I'm not planning to follow wherever you're trying to take this.

Reddit clown:

Well in general, the show doesn’t have a good track record for character dynamics

[link to a blog post on Tumblr which is literally a one-sentence repetition of what they just said about bad group dynamics]

And given that Frowney only appeared once, sadly there’s zero chance of him and Smiley ever getting back together. Same with Mystery Girl and Pearl.

lol ok

people who have only shown up once obviously won’t ever show again

no source needed on having a good track record, we’ll just believe it’s obvious if you can find an example of someone saying this on a Tumblr blog somewhere agreeing with your assessment

Me:

I have no personal stake in whether a rare character appears again--I'm not yearning for either of those people to return--but it's straight-up weird to say someone will never show up again because they only showed up once.

Then again, I remember how confident people were that Bismuth would never return (and how consistently they coupled their absolute certainty with sneering comments about how the voice actor was surely too expensive), so I guess it's not too surprising to me that some folks still think certain characters are guaranteed to never return. Bottom line is you never know when the throwaway mailman character in episode 3 will turn out to be a regularly returning character starting in episode 56. It just doesn't make sense to pretend such things are obvious. You do not know.

As for the continued weirdness of claiming that this group of characters has no character dynamics to speak of, I mean, it's literally one of the things I've appreciated the most all along about the show, and . . . I don't have to exaggerate or read into what I see to find it, nor am I confused about whether it's actually there. I again have no personal stake in whether you feel that way. It just strikes me as a bizarro world kind of comment. You're having a VERY different experience of this show from the one I've had.

Reddit clown:

That’s different. Bismuth was brought back thanks to fan demand. Meanwhile, these are specifically one off characters, especially considering the show’s halfway over. Not everyone can rise above a one shot character.

And can you name any notable character dynamics not attached to Steven? Compare that to say Adventure Time which had great character dynamics.

Oh god

“”””Bismuth was brought back because of fan demand””””

““““Can you name any notable character dynamics”“““

Dear lord what show is this cheese log of a person watching?

Me: 

It's really weird that you think Bismuth was brought back because fans "demanded" it. You don't know how the show works at all. 

And "then name character dynamics not attached to Steven" is a bizarre request. If you truly did not see the literal thousands of years of history between characters that enhanced who they are and how they act long before Steven was there, me trotting them out isn't going to help you believe it's there. Steven being the strict point of view character creates a situation that Adventure Time doesn't have, so it's weird to expect the show to diverge significantly from the lens it's designed to be viewed through, but believing you've presented a gotcha here is basically admitting you haven't noticed any of the relationships between the characters that Steven actually spent a ton of time discovering--whole episodes were even dedicated to relationships between characters who aren't Steven or aren't relating to Steven when they're revealing such things. It's not even subtext.

Reddit clown:

Well after fan backlash from the episodes Bismuth, they basically had no choice but to bring her back. And given how expensive the VA is, it hurt their budget. And really, what relationships? The whole thing revolves around Steven. The Gems are Steven’s moms, Connie is Steven’s love interest, the town is Steven’s friends. The only interesting dynamic is Lars hating Steven and even then he joined the Steven cult. Look how wasted Lapis and Peridot became when they escaped Steven’s clutches.

Oh 

Oh this person is one of those

““““the steven cult”“““

The objectively only interesting thing is when someone hates someone

Cartoon Network’s budget was exploded by hiring a voice actor oh god

Me:

Wow. Your obliviousness and misplaced confidence is baffling, but . . . to be honest I feel like I'm watching someone who doesn't understand they're embarrassing themselves, and it's getting uncomfortable.

I know that you don't know what's going on behind the scenes of this show, but it is really bizarre sometimes that fans believe their behavior and their outrage is changing the writing or influencing what characters they use.

You really think fans raging about things is an actual "demand" they respond to. That they "had to" bring back Bismuth because of something FANS DID. Yikes. But I guess I shouldn't be too surprised that people are still saying things like this. Some people still think the writers stole plot elements from fan theories. I don't know why some people in fandoms think they're that important or relevant. The show is not being controlled by our responses in any way. If "fan backlash" worked to bring characters back, there are many others who would have returned long ago. 

And isn't that lovely, you've got a little conspiracy theory about how paying the scads of money you imagine are required for Bismuth's voice actor have "hurt the budget" (oblivious to how many voice actors on this show have done more episodes despite being more famous/having higher net worth). You clearly have zero clue about how any of this works, and you shouldn't keep pretending you have knowledge about it, especially not while talking to people who do.

As for relationships, you're not really asking me. Like I said, if I wasted my time trotting out descriptions of relationship dynamics that you should have seen for yourself if you watched the show, there's no way that would convince you they were worthwhile, well-developed relationships if the show itself didn't. I see complex and multifaceted relationships, growth, change, conflict, and resolution, in so many relationships, like Greg and Rose figuring out what love is to them, Ruby and Sapphire growing into a healthier version of who they are together, Pearl learning to think independently of serving Rose even as she struggles with her nature, the long history of Pearl with Garnet, Amethyst with Pearl, even Greg with Amethyst (all things Steven has to discover and understand only partially as the show goes on) . . . but if you truly believe characters in this show who existed before Steven appeared 14 years ago have shown no evidence of having layered relationship dynamics that do not focus on him or depend on him, I don't know what show you're watching and I can't help you.

I don't know why you're even here since just about every bit of content you've posted here is "the thing you like sucks" and completely unsupported comments about why, sourced in nothing. It's just like . . . not even an argument, it's just a weird demonstration that you don't get what's going on so you've concluded nothing is. It's weird, and normally I've got no problem with criticism or spirited discussion, but these comments are just . . . they're empty. They're demonstrations of obliviousness or willful ignorance. It's just so, so weird to talk to someone who thinks they're laying down critical points but reads as so ignorant of what even happened in the source material or behind the scenes.

For the record, this person was going on in other threads about how Amedot is better than Lapidot “objectively” and partly because “it looks cuter,” saying the writing on the entire series is garbage, that “Steven as a character doesn’t make sense,” and that the show’s writers have no standards. Wow edgy.

Reddit clown:

I mean think about it; a famous celebrity gets more likes around the same the animation goes down hill?

And I would consider the following on the writers stealing fan content; keep in mind that Rose being Pink Diamond was a widely circulated fan theory and people were very stubborn about it. It could be that the crew felt like they needed to validate them. This lead to them to an unsatisfying and out of left field twist.

And I simply don’t see the powerful character interactions people brag about. What’s the character dynamics of the Gems? Again, the blog post I posted is the gotcha moment that no can answer.

I reiterate that the blog post referenced here is one sentence, and it says, “For a show that revolves around a group of characters, SU doesn’t have very interesting group dynamics writing (when they bother having them at all).” That is this person’s “gotcha.” That is this person’s “NO ONE CAN SATISFACTORILY ANSWER THIS” criticism.

omg I’m so confused and weirded out by this.

But

THINK ABOUT IT

A CELEBRITY “GOT LIKES” AND THEN THERE WAS A SPECIFIC TIME WHEN THE ANIMATION GOES DOWNHILL

It’s obviously because Cartoon Network was bankrupted in their ANIMATION BUDGET because they had to pay Uzo Aduba

And this was “”””forced”””” to happen by FAN BACKLASH

When we whine about wanting a character back we decimate the animation budget and make it go downhill guise

AND THIS PERSON ALSO ADMITS TO BELIEVING THE SHOW WENT IN A DIFFERENT “UNSATISFYING” DIRECTION THAN THEIR ORIGINAL INTENT BECAUSE THE CREW NEEDED TO VALIDATE STUBBORN FANS. AND THEY THOUGHT THE PINK DIAMOND REVEAL WAS “OUT OF LEFT FIELD.” YIIIIIIIIKES. 

I had to stop replying here (and should have much earlier) because like

wow, how can someone have NO ABILITY TO INTERPRET THE CONTENT OF A SHOW and then still be this smug about thinking they’ve got its mediocrity nailed? While also being so confident about thinking they know fans control the structure of the storytelling? Unnggggh 

[transrightsjimin]

i wish i could make a readmore but i cant in this post?? fck well here goes sorry

I posted 4.406 times in 2021

1501 posts created (34%)

2905 posts reblogged (66%)

For every post I created, I reblogged 1.9 posts.

I added 3.603 tags in 2021

#rambles - 1492 posts

#bts - 391 posts

#fave - 334 posts

#jimjim - 283 posts

#namjoon - 225 posts

#jungkook - 221 posts

#seokjin - 187 posts

#ot7 - 177 posts

#yoongi - 152 posts

#donations - 141 posts

Longest Tag: 140 characters

#a guy w the most anti scientific nd eugenistic policy proposal tht made everything go to shit got a scientific award for it 💀💀💀 i hate it

My Top Posts in 2021

#5

highly recommend watching this video by bbygang, which is a response to a perhaps well-intended, but less well-researched video by breadtuber cuckphilosophy, titled ‘the late capitalism of k-pop‘. though the original video is from 2017, it is still shared outside of youtube up to this day, being used as proof to support claims on ‘k-pop‘ being the worst industry and fandom of it being an inexcusable act.

bbygang’s response forms a critique to the 2017 video by explaining misinformation on the history of popular music in South Korea; criticizes the overuse of anecdotal evidence for generalized statements; addresses the loosely used, fuzzy term ‘k-pop’; and identifies the anonimized musicians in cuckphilosophy’s video, who were ironically used as backgrounds to arguments that contrast their own artistry.

also, bbygang (a team of Elliot Sang + Danae O.) made a great two-parter as response to a Vice documentary on k-pop with more pronounced sensationalized and orientalist narratives, which i might share later on.

but i found it important to share this one first, considering the first video speaks more to leftist audiences. i’ve really just. had it w these accusations of supporting exploitation of workers; people bringing up really awful tragedies or racist ideas like it’s a fun fact or a gotcha; and how attempt at rebuttals are met with further ridicule.

please just watch the video fully and reconsider your own misconceptions. thank you! ✨

54 notes • Posted 2021-04-21 16:40:16 GMT

#4

idk wtf has gotten into some army's minds to compare jungkook (and last year also yoongi) to a fascist soldier from the blatantly pro-nazi story attack on titan and even draw crossover fanart but i want it to fucking stop???? how fucking awful r u to defend that show / manga that south koreans protested years ago bc they discovered the creator is an a japanese nationalist, nd THEN COMPARE south korean men to shit from this man???? it's not even smth subtle or an obscure fact considering how the whole story is propaganda for fascism nd made jewish people a whole different species as punishment for their crimes and whatnot other antisemitic bs. no srsly im fucking disgusted by how ppl still support that show, some even claiming it's "antifascist" bc some characters point out it sucks for them to 'have' to be at war nd what other bullshit arguments.

63 notes • Posted 2021-05-13 08:16:46 GMT

#3

u hear someone yell "there is a snake in my boot" nd u turn around and it's these two guys

94 notes • Posted 2021-07-06 12:48:09 GMT

#2

less than 6 hrs? 5 hrs? to go until the ptd mv release and i honestly wanna sleep through this comeback, theres no enjoyment to it rn bc i just associate it too much w cultural appropriation nd harrassment of native army and the whole conversation being shut down. i hate this so much

anyway. i shouldve just posted on tumblr abt the dreamcatcher in the teaser before, bc at least here the cause got more support last times.

go through the tweets i shared to my thread below:

read up on it if you haven't yet, share the tweets, once again POST THE TAGS #BigHitStopUsingNativeCultures #BHStopUsingNativeCultures in your own tweets and weverse posts, cheer other people's weverse posts, and email. with the dreamcatcher in the teaser and the cowboy theme there is a LARGE chance the full MV for Permission To Dance includes even more cultural appropriation.

we need to help out Ojibwe and other Indigenous army who have been pointing out these issues and trying to get this trending and try to contact BigHit / Hybe since at least In The Soop, and are faced with a lot of anti-indigenous racism from other army in the meantime. we need to do better.

share proof of your email / use of the tag btw! (do censor out personal info of c). Thank you

122 notes • Posted 2021-07-08 23:16:25 GMT

#1

saw an older post abt a te rf army nd i couldnt find the url but saw they remade accounts, the new url is @/iamx ue y ang (without spaces)

they post a lot of transmisogynistic stuff and share gifs from larger bts accounts like gif makers. so yeah please block this person and share this, thank u!!

172 notes • Posted 2021-06-11 15:32:54 GMT

Get your Tumblr 2021 Year in Review →