#Textual Comments Support

[thydungeongal]

Okay, so I'm going to explain gleeblor by going back to the feeling that inspired my very first post on it:

I've been running this blog for quite a while and while I would never claim to be knowledgeable of the entire variety of RPGs out there I do consider myself more knowledgeable than the median RPG enthusiast. Now, a lot of people who end up commenting on my posts have very narrow experiences with RPGs as a medium, sometimes having literally only ever played D&D and maybe another game. And when communicating with my audience I often find myself in a situation like. Oh hell, this person thinks that D&D is the default RPG, the template on which all RPGs are based on, and the concept I am trying to explain simply does not make sense to them because they think D&D is the default.

So in the very first post I made about gleeblor it acted as a shorthand for "RPG fact that is self-evident to me but sounds bizarre to someone with a narrow experience with RPGs" and for the alienation I felt with my audience having to explain the fact that. Not all RPGs are D&D. Literally, I described it as feeling like I was an alien explaining a concept that made no sense to humans.

Anyway, things that have been gleeblor to people in my notes:

The idea that an RPG does not necessarily need to have Encounters (this is what started it all and. The incredulity people expressed at the idea that things could even happen in a game if it didn't have Encounters.)

The fact that there are textually queer RPGs out there besides just Thirsty Sword Lesbians

That a game supporting romance is not just a table issue but can in fact be a factor in the actual rules and structure of a game

That a game does not need to have an "adventuring party" structure of the player characters being united in going against adversity together

[bennetsbonnet]

I find it interesting that in fanon Elizabeth Bennet is widely held up as an avid bookworm when, in fact, there isn't a great deal of textual evidence to support that particular headcanon.

Perhaps it's because Mr Darcy comments on her reading at Netherfield or thanks to certain adaptations, but I frequently see her depicted as a voracious reader when we have the benefit of her view of her relationship to books from Elizabeth herself:

'“I deserve neither such praise nor such censure,” cried Elizabeth; “I am not a great reader, and I have pleasure in many things.”'

This is supported by the text as when Elizabeth reads in Chapter 8, it's only when she briefly ventures downstairs after attending to Jane for much of the day because Jane has finally fallen asleep. She picks up a book because the rest of the party are playing cards and, she suspects, gambling on the outcome:

'On entering the drawing-room she found the whole party at loo, and was immediately invited to join them; but suspecting them to be playing high she declined it, and making her sister the excuse, said she would amuse herself for the short time she could stay below, with a book.'

The fact that Elizabeth reads as almost a last resort makes Darcy's infamous 'improvement of her mind by extensive reading,' line all the funnier as it's further proof that he really doesn't know her and was only looking for superficial commonalities, rather than getting to know her on a deeper level.

There is one other time where she possibly reads, towards the end of Chapter 12, when she is briefly alone with Darcy. While he reads, there is no indication that Elizabeth does too:

'Steady to his purpose, he scarcely spoke ten words to her through the whole of Saturday, and though they were at one time left by themselves for half-an-hour, he adhered most conscientiously to his book, and would not even look at her.'

Actually, there are far more instances of Elizabeth picking up some needlework and sewing which perhaps point to that being her preferred method of passing the time...

In Chapter 10, when Caroline gives a running commentary on Mr Darcy writing a letter:

'Elizabeth took up some needlework, and was sufficiently amused in attending to what passed between Darcy and his companion.'

In Chapter 11, when Jane ventures downstairs and Bingley is fussing over her:

'Elizabeth, at work in the opposite corner, saw it all with great delight.'

In Chapter 59, after Mr Darcy returns from speaking to Mr Bennet to seek his consent:

'In a few minutes he approached the table where she was sitting with Kitty; and, while pretending to admire her work said in a whisper, “Go to your father, he wants you in the library.”'

In my opinion, I think most of us that adore Pride and Prejudice are likely bookworms ourselves and want to have something in common with a heroine we adore. It's far nicer to think of yourself as an Elizabeth Bennet than a Mary Bennet... though perhaps, unfortunately, such a sentiment is not supported by the text...

[danadiadea]

How is Snape described in the books: a relatively complete compilation

Okay, so this is my attempt at gathering what we have regarding Severus Snape's appearance based on the HP books. It's long, since rowling loved obsessively writing about Snape's looks. It's likely I've missed something, but I hope not much. I didn't dive into what he's wearing or into his self-presentation, just his physical characteristics that are present in canon – people get stupid about that topic sometimes.

Disclaimer: body positivity/neutrality to everyone, I don't support JKR's lookism just as much as all of her other bigotry. Beauty is a deeply subjective concept, no features are objectively beautiful or ugly and none of them identify us as people. The way my imagination and your imagination recreate a picture from the identical textual description might be different.

Snape's nose is constantly described as "hooked":

○"Snape approached their table, stared down his hooked nose at the roots."

○"Snape stared down his hooked nose at Colin."

○"...as Snape swept by he looked down his hooked nose at it without comment" etc.

Altogether I found Snape's nose being called hooked 10 times in the series. There are places where we're shown it's rather big, but they aren't very definitive:

1) “Mr. Moony presents his compliments to Professor Snape, and begs him to keep his abnormally large nose out of other people’s business.” – Marauders map, so basically bullies behaving like bullies;

2) "...hatred which had, if possible, intensified last year, when Harry had helped Sirius escape right under Snape’s overlarge nose" – Harry is very mad at Snape and the phrase is clearly used figuratively, not as a direct appearance description;

3)"In the very center of the group Harry saw the dark, greasy-haired head and prominent nose of his least favorite teacher at Hogwarts, Professor Snape" – "prominent" is a broader conception while referring to size, I'd say;

4) "[Tonks'] nose swelled to a beaklike protuberance like Snape’s" – again, the size is mentioned, but not through the words "big" or "large" or "long", and the form is given more empathis.

Undoubtedly it's supposed to be on the bigger side, but it does not, in fact, seem to be "abnormally" large. Making it straight should be a crime though – how can you make anything about that man straight?..

Snape's black eyes are often described glittering or sparkling, but also empty and cold:

○"They were cold and empty and made you think of dark tunnels"

○"Harry forced himself to keep looking straight into those cold eyes"

○“But why not join the feast afterward?” said Snape, his black eyes glittering in the candlelight"

○"He glanced at Snape, whose black eyes glinted, and looked quickly away."

○"He didn’t care that Snape’s face had gone rigid, the black eyes flashing dangerously."

○"Harry blinked. Snape’s eyes gleamed."

○“Don’t lie to me,” Snape hissed, his fathomless black eyes boring into Harry’s"

Snape's eyebrows aren't described in detail, we don't known if they're bushy or thin, but he does that raising one up thing:

○“Yes,” said Harry. “Who’s going to be teaching me?” Snape raised an eyebrow."

And he raises two as well:

○"Snape looked back at her, his eyebrows slightly raised"

○"Snape raised his eyebrows and his tone was sardonic as he asked, “Are you intending to let him kill you?”

Snape's skin is constantly described as sallow – about 11 times through the books. Whatever that word means. Is it like... muted and dull coloured with yellow undertones? Cool!

It's also described as pale, or white due to strong emotions:

○"An ugly flush suffused Snape’s pallid face."

○"Snape was hanging upside down in the air, his robes falling over his head to reveal skinny, pallid legs"

○"Snape’s pale face, illuminated by the flaming cabin, was suffused with hatred just as it had been before he had cursed Dumbledore."

○"As Gryffindors came spilling onto the field, he saw Snape land nearby, white-faced and tight-lipped"

○"[Snape's face] was marble white and so still that when he spoke, it was a shock to see that anyone lived behind the blank eyes."

○"Snape’s sallow skin had gone the color of sour milk." (very poetic Harry, you should try writing poetry too)

Also idk what's an ugly flush (also: Harry saw the edge of Snape’s sallow face turn a nasty brick color, the vein in his temple pulsing more rapidly; a dull flush of color mounted the sallow cheeks as he looked at Lily), have never seen one in my life, but Snape's face canonically goes full red very quickly and this is the most important part of that meta don't forget about it folks.

His skin is described as greasy twice in the saga, but both times with not much credibility:

1) "Harry could see a vein flickering horribly on Snape’s greasy temple" – temple is an area of the face in close proximity to hair and we'll get there, although aren't Snape's "hair curtains" hiding the sides of his face, including temples? Is he wearing it freaking braided or what? Overall, I'd say this is just another jab at his hair.

2)"Iwas watching him, his nose was touching the parchment,” said Sirius viciously. “There’ll be great grease marks all over it, they won’t be able to read a word" – Sirius can go fuck himself.

Harry does not comment that at any age there is acne or post-acne on Snape's face so I'd assume his skin isn't problematic or he takes care of it. He has visible veins on his temples though (also no eyebags mentioned?? a crime).

Snape's lips are described as thin:

○“Now, now, Malfoy,” said Snape, though he couldn’t suppress a thin-lipped smile"

○"A muscle twitched unpleasantly at the corner of Snape’s thin mouth every time he looked at Harry"

○"The dungeon rang with the Slytherins’ laughter, and an unpleasant smile curled Snape’s thin mouth."

Characteristics of Snape's teeth got two mentions.

○"Snape’s uneven, yellowish teeth were bared." PoA

○“Ten o’clock,” whispered Snape, with a smile that showed his yellow teeth. “Poor Gryffindor ... fourth place this year, I fear ...” HPB

(Also I've literally always hc'ed that Snape is a stress smoker, and since Voldemort came back Snape just started to destroy his enamel with fervour so it coloured up more, everyone should share my headcanons i prove them so well!!!)

Snape bares his teeth some other times ("I wouldn’t bet on that,” Harry murmured, watching Snape baring his teeth"; "It was scary: Snape’s lips were shaking, his face was white, his teeth were bared) or smiles (not pleasantly let me assure you) and most times Harry doesn't comment on it. Actually, it's hilarious how the very first time Harry saw Karkaroff he thought "his teeth were rather yellow", man, do you wanna steal Hermione parents' job? Also yellow teeth are mentioned twice for Sirius in PoA (and no one dares to not notice Gilderoy's perfect teeth, of course, he asked me to mention it). So I'd say Snape has moderately imperfect teeth like a working class kid he is, otherwise Harry would've probably commented on that as much as on Snape's hair, hence almost every time we encounter him.

(but I'm totally headcanoning high canine teeth for him, Snape deserves the privilege of having some more vampirish vibe for free)

Severus' body type and face are described as "thin":

○"He was a thin man with sallow skin, a hooked nose, and greasy, shoulder-length black hair"

○Snape was hanging upside down in the air, his robes falling over his head to reveal skinny, pallid legs"

○"even Harry, who hated Snape, was startled at the expression twisting his thin, sallow face"

○"He had forgotten the details of Snape’s appearance in the magnitude of his crimes, forgotten how his greasy black hair hung in curtains around his thin face, how his black eyes had a dead, cold look (I fucking love that quote, have you forgotten his lesser crimes which are not looking the way you enjoy, Harry, after he committed bigger ones like murder? good god)

He isn't probably looking very thin, since that description mostly applies to his face. Rather logical, I mean he wears all those big flowy robes that make him look bigger.

Also Snape is average height like about 177 cm/5'10, he's shorter than Yaxley and Sirius, taller than "tall and slim" Narcissa, so somewhere in this range.

The fact that Severus has hunched posture is mentioned twice for a kid/teen!Snape:

○"He was on platform nine and three-quarters, and Snape stood beside him, slightly hunched, next to a thin, sallow-faced, sour-looking woman who greatly resembled him"

○"Round-shouldered yet angular, he walked in a twitchy manner that recalled a spider, his oily hair swinging about his face."

I didn't find any mentions in the books that adult!Snape had hunched posture. It is possible that, like many behaviors and habits, such as the way he speaks, moves, and perhaps writes, it had been deliberately changed by Snape himself.

His fingers are thin and long:

○Snape eyed Harry, tracing his mouth with one long, thin finger as he did so.

○Snape pointed a long yellow finger at Malfoy and said, “Explain.” – yellow can be a way to call sallow skin; a result of working with potions (Snape having potions stained fingers is not book canon, which is a shame) or smoking. Them being thin is noted once, but that goes cohesively with his thinness overall.

The star of the show – Snape's hair, ofc. It gets more attention than James Potter's charachter development. The fact that it's greasy appears in the books minimum 17 times + it's called oily 2 times and dirty once when he's a 9yo kid. People who comment on that, except Harry in his head, are Sirius, Peter through the Map, Fred and George in DH ("Maybe he is, maybe he isn’t, but the fact remains he can move faster than Severus Snape confronted with shampoo when he wants to"), kinda Ron with grinning on Sirius' comment. Actually it's not described as greasy in "Spinners End" and "The Dark Lord Ascending" (so it might as well be your ordinary oily hair with a tad of drama from people who dislike Snape).

It's black – obviously, shoulder-length or "long", which I assume is just a variation for shoulder-length. It's often forming "curtains":

○"Snape went quiet, though his eyes still glinted malevolently through his curtain of greasy black hair."

○"Snape looked around at him, his face framed between curtains of greasy black hair."

○"A sliver of a man could be seen looking out at them, a man with long black hair parted in curtains around a sallow face and black eyes."

At the hilltop scene they're described as straggling:

○"Snape was wringing his hands: He looked a little mad, with his straggling black hair flying around him."

as opposed to being lank before:

○"His hair was lank and greasy and was flopping onto the table".

He had it poorly cut when he was a kid:

○“Definitely,” said Snape, and even with his poorly cut hair and his odd clothes, he struck an oddly impressive figure..."

So as an adult he supposedly cared enough to regularly cut his hair up to Harry's (fashionable) standard. It also doesn't look "dirty", like Harry calls internally his hair when Severus is 9.

Well, as someone with naturally oily hair, depression and neurodivent sensory issues, I can say that if your hair loosely hangs in "curtains" covering/framing your face, you're probably not doing that bad with it! There are a lot of headcanons about why Snape has greasy hair, but honestly, I don't understand why would he need an exuse? Having oily hair doesn't make you unhygienic, that's ridiculous, and there are no signs that Snape (noticeably) neglects his hygiene. Hair types exist, and some of them just need extra-spesial care to look "socially acceptable" or whatever, but people have the right to not bother about it. Whether his occupation and/or upbringing and/or mental health problems affected it – maybe to an extent, but excluding just genetics or physical well-being from it is kinda weird. Let different hair types live and be pretty.

Snape's mom was thin, sallow faced and sour looking, and Harry thinks Severus resembles her greatly; while Severus' hooked nose was inherited from Tobias – "a hook-nosed man was shouting at a cowering woman, while a small dark-haired boy cried in a corner". Harry also does think Eileen isn't pretty since she's described as a "skinny girl; ...she looked simultaneously cross and sullen, with heavy brows and a long, pallid face" (so evidently that's not Harry's type aside from his prejudice to Snape. Harry's admiration towards Krum hadn't made Harry think he's attractive either. Just to remind you: "Viktor Krum was thin, dark, and sallow-skinned, with a large curved nose and thick black eyebrows. He looked like an overgrown bird of prey". Literally Snape's lost cousin).

Honestly, after going through those descriptions specifically, if I remove the evaluative vocabulary and the labels of ugly/nasty/unpleasant/etc., I don't really understand what exactly I should've found ugly? Snape is just not Harry's type of preferred visual, and on top of that they quickly developed a mutual dislike. Nevertheless, no one is obliged to transfer subjective ideas of the (author) protagonist to their own perception. Writing "ugly" after a characteristic doesn't make it "ugly".

That had been a long conclusion.

My short conclusion is that Severus Snape is a babygirl and Harry has poor taste (sorry, no hard feelings).

[ckret2]

i know you're reading the book rn, but i need to know is it true that bill has a redemption arc??? and that billford is canon??? I HAVENT GOTTEN MY COPY YET BUT IM SEEING OTHER PEOPLES COMMENTS AND POSTS ABOUT IT I NEED TO KNOW😭

As of the end of the book, Bill is in the process of being forced into a redemption arc. Please understand that I say that like "the airplane is in the process of being forced into a shoebox." It's not successful thus far and might never be successful from what the book presents. But the road is offered to him.

In my opinion, Bill & Ford's relationship is being written like a (mostly one-sided) romantic relationship (from Bill toward Ford), with multiple in-text parallels between how Bill talks about romance and how Bill interacts with Ford, and I believe the romantic coding is deliberate. I have not yet read something that explicitly verifies Romantic Emotions Are Happening and I don't expect to.

Like, we're at a point where Bill crushing on Ford has less textual support than Dipper crushing on Wendy, but more textual support than Tyler Cutebiker crushing on Manly Dan, and maybe even more textual support than whatever thing Dipper & Pacifica have going on.

It's left open-ended enough that you CAN go "Bill's just platonically obsessed with Ford and platonically trying to 'seduce' him and platonically heartbroken when Ford rejects their partnership after learning what Bill's up to." That is still an option. But this is some INCREDIBLY heavy romantic subtext.

At this point, "there's no romantic feelings on anybody's part here" is no longer the most default/neutral reading of Bill & Ford; it's gotta be, like, a choice. A choice that remains valid within the canon text, but still a choice.

So not "canon" as in "the word love is brought up between them" or "they were in a relationship," but "canon" as in "I believe wholeheartedly that the writer's intent was to make us think about a (toxic) romantic relationship when reading these scenes, whether or not such a relationship ever took place." The text doesn't quite go there, but it openly invites you to go there if you want.

I firmly believed the book wouldn't be any more billfordish than the show & J3 were—just some light, probably unintentional subtext. It completely blew past my expectations.

[dandelionjack]

so we all agree that the finetimers are extremely puritanical as a culture, right? no way are these people fucking. apart from the ‘never been hugged before’ scene (space babies parallel, i’ll come back to that) and the fact that they seem initially opposed to any kind of in-person interaction, there’s not much textual evidence that points towards it, but it’s quite easy to extrapolate. an isolationist, white-supremacist colony of post-humans thousands of years into the future, genetically engineered to have blue blood (a symbol of aristocracy) running through their veins — it’s not exactly a stretch to suggest that a culture such as theirs would view sex + sexual reproduction as something uncouth, “uncivilised”, taboo, base and “primitive”.

as for babymaking? these people definitely make use of ‘parthenogenesis machines’ as seen in space babies. in fact, they’re 100% ardent supporters of eugenics and probably pre-select the most “desirable” traits for their infants to develop.

the parallels between finetime and gallifrey have been pointed out before (i’ll tag the post in the comments if anyone asks), but here’s another one. i’m quite certain that the residents of finetime, and finetime’s homeworld, create their children with looms looms i’m trying to type something else but it keeps correcting to “looms” those fetus tanks from space babies. you know. another penny in the “ruby was artificially created” theory jar, more doctor/ruby parallels, and a snazzy bit of worldbuilding

[autistichalsin]

Okay ONE more post about this, and then I'm going to try and disengage from the issue again.

I think what annoys me so much about the reactions to Halsin in the ultimatum is that the fandom is working BACKWARDS to make things fit a conclusion, rather than looking at the textual evidence to form a conclusion.

The fandom's conclusion: Halsin is racist to Drow.

Therefore: His objections to Minthara's actions are solely based on her race.

Therefore: It makes no sense that he is okay with a Lolth-sworn Tav, since he is Drow racist, which means he is just making Tav one of his Exceptions. His acceptance of Tav and willingness to judge Tav on their actions does NOT disprove that he is Drow-racist; it is, instead, an oversight in the writing of Halsin as a Drow-racist character.

But also: Halsin makes one comment early on expressing skepticism that a Drow Tav actually has reservations about killing another Drow, when Drow society is built on constant betrayal and culling of the weak. This proves that he is actually Drow-racist.

Further: It is really gross that Halsin is willing to sleep with the Drow twins. This does NOT disprove that he is Drow-racist; instead, it suggests that he will fetishize Drow while being Drow-racist.

Further: Halsin saying "Lolth's followers" does not make him not Drow-racist. Instead, it means he's discriminating against a religion, and also being very insensitive to cult victims, and he should turn the other cheek. It's actually WORSE if he hates just Lolth's followers instead of all Drow.

Further: Halsin's statements about Minthara's true nature are obviously about exclusively her race, and not her character as an individual. Therefore, his forgiveness of Kagha wasn't because he had seen her be a different and better person before her corruption by the Shadow Druids, but because she was not a Drow, and therefore, this supports that he is Drow-racist.

Therefore: Halsin's objections to Minthara are NOT based on her being a slave owner (and slavery supporter) while Halsin has trauma about being enslaved, and not about her attempt to murder everyone he knows, and not about concerns she will harm the player character (who Halsin has shown multiple times is EXTREMELY important to him), and not about fear for his own life, but solely about Minthara's race, which makes him Drow-racist.

Fandom refuses to see the inherent tautology of this, and it makes it impossible to stop the character-bashing. Instead of contradictory evidence proving Halsin isn't Drow-racist, it's either twisted to make it out like he wouldn't care about that thing if she wasn't a Drow, so he actually is MORE Drow-racist than he was before that issue was brought up, or it's written off as an "inconsistency" with a character as obviously Drow-racist as Halsin.

There is just no winning here. So fine, I give up, I guess I'm stanning a Drow-racist daddy now.

[sunshine-jesse]

Which is the worse/more obnoxious fanon: people insisting that Ashley losing interest in a potential boyfriend and having hang-ups about sex with Andrew is a sign that she’s asexual/a lesbian in denial and not just that she has issues with intimacy that she needs to confront in future chapters as was blatantly telegraphed, or people insisting that Andrew is actually a transsexual because he made a single joke about how slitting his wrists was girly of him in a bad end/they contort the text to claim that his internal anguish is all about struggling with “toxic masculinity” when Andrew has never once expressed distress over his gender and his fights with Ashley for control are not at all predicated on traditional sex roles or anything of the sort?

People thinking Ashley is a lesbian are worse because that's not supported by ANY textual evidence. Transfem Andrew, meanwhile, is hilarious, because he DOES kinda act like one of those eggs who never developed a strong attachment to gender. But he really doesn't struggle with toxic masculinity in a way that makes me feel like it's enough to base a reading on. Ashley literally struggles with being a woman more than Andrew ever struggled with being a man. Ashley struggles with Andrew being a man more than he ever did, too, and that's part of where his comment about slitting his wrists being womanly comes from.

Asexual Ashley isn't as bad because her behavior strongly (yet superficially) resembles asexuality, but it's all but stated that she acts that way solely due to her emotional hangups and it seems like she'd be a vanilla-ass straight (or Andrewsexual, at least) woman the moment she develops a healthier relationship to her own sexuality. If people wanna read her as demisexual, which is under the asexual umbrella, then that's fine. But reading her as more broadly asexual is ignoring a lot of important facets about her character.

[l393ndjean]

Hidden Venom in the Stranger Things Fandom

Since 2022, there has been a clear divide within the audience of popular netflix series, Stranger Things. The conflict is over one simple, but world-altering, question Season Four raised: Will Mike Wheeler end the show in a relationship with Will Byers? This on-going debate has led to many emotionally charged responses from the audience, and for the most part many beautiful fanworks have been created, and insightful discussions have ensued. But an undercurrent of backlash has also been spewed from the darkest parts of the fandom. This poison is ever-present in the Stranger Things fandom, and it truly makes me sick to my stomach. 

The gall in question is directed solely at part of the audience who refer to themselves as “Bylers”- the viewers in support of a relationship between Mike and Will. The perpetrators are primarily a group who dub themselves “Milevens” and claim to advocate for Mike, and his current love interest, Eleven, staying together throughout the endgame season. You might be thinking “Oh, just another case of fandom shipwars!”  You are wrong. The issue with the Stranger Things fandom is not the clash itself. The issue is with the normalization and approval of homophobia!

“Bylers” have worked tirelessly since 2016 to compile evidence in support of their argument. For nearly 10 years, we have analysed and re-analysed every scene, promotional photo and interview and managed to create over 300 slides worth of textual evidence pointing to Mike and Will’s eventual relationship. What has been the response from the opposition? Blatant homophobia.

Despite having mountains worth of evidence for the pairing on their side, “Bylers” have been called delusional, and had their arguments dismissed. That alone is frustrating, but what really makes my blood boil? The fact that the “Milevens” turn their scorn towards Will. 

Will Byers is one of two canonically queer characters in the show, and the “Milevens” make out-right disgusting comments about him, calling him names and slurs that I care not to repeat, lest I make myself nauseous. They call him a homewrecker, and selfish, for daring to have feelings for his childhood best friend. This is abhorrent behavior, which should not be rampant in a show where the main characters are “nerds”, “freaks” and “outcasts!”

I myself, as an avid member of the “Byler” community have been subjected to such name-calling and bigotry, simply for being a fan of the pairing. Many times my posts have received comments from the so-called “Mileven” defenders, calling me crazy. What is crazy about the idea that childhood friends, one of whom already has feelings for the other, may end up in a relationship? Childhood friends-to-lovers is one of the most common romantic tropes in media, especially paired with a love triangle!

The truth is that the “Milevens” (or perhaps the “Anti-bylers” as the vast majority don’t seem to genuinely like Mike and El together) are afraid. They are afraid because “Bylers” have extensive evidence, and more than double the fans. They are afraid to see a gay relationship between two main characters. They are afraid that queer people will finally be in the positive spotlight, and thus they retaliate in the tiresome old way, bigotry and othering. 

To the people against Mike and Will’s potential romantic relationship, I have but one request: Look deep inside yourselves and ask why you are watching a show about “freaks” being the heroes, if you continue to perpetuate the same behavior in the fandom which is villainised in Stranger Things itself?  The Stranger Things fandom is a beautiful place, blooming with creativity, I would hate for the community to be destroyed by outdated bigotry.

Hey guys so this was a Discursive article I wrote for English and I thought I'd share it here. I got an A so it must be halfway decent lol.

[tavina-writes]

I'm saying this here because I don't want to get too hissy on the post that has escaped containment but the responses I've been getting about classism and how "oh well MDZS society does have classism in it!" Are proving that we all cannot fucking read.

1) no one has answered any of the questions I posed because they're not answerable by the text, which was the point of the post.

2) just because a work has a thing in it does not mean 1) the work is ABOUT that thing or 2) that you can INTERROGATE IT with serious thought and receive a textually supported answer that thoughtfully comments or critiques that issue.

[j-richmond]

Tiny Table has wrapped up their Yeld game, and honestly it was great. I want to talk about it a little. To start with, you should go listen to the whole thing! They did 5 episodes, which includes a rules breakdown, a 3 part adventure and today's post mortem (above). If you're interested in Yeld or want a fun adventure to listen to, check it out! And show them some support by leaving a comments, review or checking out their Patreon!

If you don't know, Yeld is MY game. The Magical Land of Yeld is a TTRPG that I designed with my brother Nick Smith. It is a game about children who discover a magical land on the other side of a secret door, and then get trapped there when the door shuts. It is a game about growing up. Textually, its a game about exploration, team work, tactical combat and character building. Sub-textually its a game about choosing your family, facing the terror of becoming a teenager and discovering who you are (in a queer way). We've seen a lot of people play Yeld since we released the first playtest rules way back in... 2010 (so long ago). I've sat in on so many games. I've read so many recaps and reports. I've sifted through so many forum and discord posts. I've heard more than a few actual play groups take a stab at it. And, of course, I've ran the game for hundreds of people. Not everyone gets Yeld. Tiny Table gets Yeld. They get it so well. Its obvious from the first 10 minutes of the first episode that the group has a handle on playing kids (and a Dog), which is inherently fun and funny. But Yeld also requires you to take playing kids (and a Dog) seriously. Its not a bit. Its not a meme. Its a role that is as important to the setting and premise of the game as being an Elf or Dwarf in D&D (and really, maybe more so). The Tiny Table cast sinks into their role and gets the most out of it. Of course, they're entertaining performers and they put on a great show, but they also flex both the premise of the game and the rules. This adventure is a showcase for Yeld.

Genevieve (played by Holly) is the Rival (I think? I should have kept notes. She feels like a Rival). Energetic. Physical. Looking for adventure. She's a gamer, and wants to get lost in a fantasy world. She's so damn excited to explore Yeld, and recognizes it immediately for exactly what it is. She doesn't want to go home, and gets upset when her friends try to ruin her fun. Later in the Adventure she becomes a Soul Thief, and revels in her ability to launch into combat and sink her daggers into her enemies!

Dolores (played by Skyler) is the Big Sister. She radiates Big Sister energy, worried about her younger brother and much more cautious and realistic about exploring Yeld than her friend. She's not interested in Genevieve's gamer stuff, and doesn't have those video game points of comparison that her friend does. Instead, her approach to Yeld is practical, but still curious! When later her little brother is kidnapped, Dolores puts aside that practicality to try to rush to his rescue. At this point n the adventure Dolores' Brave dice had been reduced to 0, and Skyler does a fantastic job portraying this. Dolores is afraid, but not for herself. She'll throw herself against the horrible monster known as the Dollyhook in order to save her brother. Dolores chooses the Oathbreaker Job in order to protect her friends.

Princess the Dog (played by Neo) is the matronly family caretaker. She sees the kids as her charges, and its her duty to keep them safe and happy. Where the rest of the characters are kids, Princess is an adult. Princess is cautious, patient and indulgent. Her job is to take care of the kids, and she considers herself to be an integral part of the family. When Princess first passes through the door into Yeld and discovers she can talk, she's absolutely delighted! Finally, she can communicate with the kids in her care! Later, when she meets other talking animals in Yeld she's so very disappointed by their lack of care and responsibility. Princess becomes the group's White Mage, but quickly is more interested in summoning other animals than healing the kids! (BTW, all the art here is by Neo. As the person who has done every bit of official Yeld art, seeing someone else do cool Yeld illustrations is always a treat!) I think a big part of what made Tiny Table's adventure so much fun for me is how willing the entire group was to accept the premise of the game, and even revel in it! Dolores is willing to trade her prized possession, her new Jordans, as an offering to a ghost in order to gain the power to save her brother. Skyler becomes the assassin thief of her fantasies and immediately stylizes her look based on Princees Mononoke and Assassin's Creed. When finding that an entire town of children had been left without adults, princess immediately interrogates every animal in the town, demanding to know why they hadn't taken responsibility! Equally, the Tiny Table team had a very solid grasp on the rules (not always common for a first game) and were excited to use them! Dolores was eager to wade into the dangerous Water Hazards in the boss fight, confident that her high strength would allow her to much through. And when the evil ghost called the Dolly Hook tried to gain the initiative, Dolores was ready to point out that her Oathbreaker Oath made her immune to interruptions. Later, she broke that Oath to gain back some of her Core dice, restoring her bravery at the peak of the fight where it really mattered! Neo mentioned that they were worried they might have made a mistake choosing White Mage as Princess's Job, since the Dog didn't have hands to hold a spellbook! But very quickly Princess was casting spells to call Monsters into fights, and Neo described each monster through Princess' perspective. A wiggling Silverfish. A bright white furry Squirrel, eager to shake its but at enormous Howligator it was trying to distract. Holly seized on the lethality of Oathbreaker, charging into fights with a dagger in each hand. She quickly realized that Genevieve's enhanced Brave dice let her streak across the Action Board, and made her nearly impossible to interrupt. I could hear the excitement in her voice as she described how delivering a killing blow to a monster let her Bank and Action, and explained all the cool things she could do with that! Julian is the Game Master, and she brought all of it together. She had asked me to write an outline for them to use, and I put together what I think of as a basic "welcome to Yeld" adventure. Julian brought it to life, elaborating on the parts that felt important to the players and making sure each character had a distinct voice. Both figuratively and literally! Her voices for Rolo the Fairy and the incredibly creepy Dolly Hook were amazing! Julian gave her players plenty of room to explore their characters, but also kept the story going in what ended up being a very tight adventure. As the game's creator, the whole thing was a joy to listen to. I think you'll agree with me that the only real complaint is that we won't be seeing their ongoing Yeld adventures! If you're new to Yeld, I think this is a great introduction. And if you're a Yeld fan already, you'll probably agree with everything I said here. Thank you so much Julian, Neo, Skyler and Holly! I'm glad you had fun in Yeld. - J

Get the Stuff: Listen to Tiny Table's Yeld adventure here. Support Tiny Table on Patreon! Get the hardcover Yeld rule book and PDF from the Yeld site, IPR or Tabletop Bookshelf. The PDF is also available from DrivethruRPG and Itch. Support Yeld on Patreon here.

[heyyallitsbeth]

Could Estrogen Have Saved Her (and Her Series?)

The series Sword Art Online is often seen in a negative light by a large internet community. Due to issues with the anime adaptation as well as internet personalities backing hate bandwagons, the series as well as the characters are often flanderized and seen in a way that to fans of the series would seem more like parody than reality. However, there is also a large and vocal group of fans that adore the series, and within that group, a devoted sect that discusses the possibility that Kazuto “Kirito” Kirigaya is a transgender female. 

While this essay is not an attempt to claim that Kirito is infact textually transgender, various comments made on posts referencing this idea have had a similar sentiment: “If Kirito was transgender, it would have fixed the series for me”. If you look at a variety of comments and reposts on tumblr posts by niche vtuber HeyGuysItsBeth, this is a common opinion. So, would Kirito being transgender make a noticeable and positive impact on the story of Sword Art Online? 

Now there are various moments in the series that support the concept of Kirito being transfem, such as their appearance and the role they play within the Phantom Bullet arc, but the pieces are laid out immediately in the first drafts of the web novel, where Kirito is described as seeing no masculinity in their own face. But let us begin with volume 2 of the manga, in which we meet the character Silica. Silica is a young girl in the world of Sword Art Online, a loner trapped with nothing but her animal companion Pina, but upon our first meeting of her, Pina tragically is struck down by enemies saving Silica, before Kirito can help her escape from the attackers. Kirito provides Silica with new armor and promises to help her revive Pina, asking nothing in return, as in their words “[Silica] reminds them of their little sister Suguha.” Already, this adds in a lot of interesting information. Firstly, despite supposedly being a male player, Kirito already has female equipment, armor, and clothing ready to give out to Silica, with the light novel referring to them as Kirito’s “leftovers” implying that Kirito has already used them, and is passing them on. Then when it comes to the likeness of Silica and Suguha, we later discover that according to Kirito, them and Suguha used to be mistaken for twin girls, despite the fact Kirito is older and not a blood sibling to Suguha. From this, we can gather that Kirito when looking at Silica and saying she reminds them of Suguha, they are saying that Silica reminds them of themself. From Kirito’s perspective, they have just seen a loner, someone by themselves in a world foreign to them, lose the thing they hold dearest, and ready to give up on themselves before someone else comes in to save them. This is what happened only a few days prior to Kirito, as they were too a loner in this world, before being taken into a guild called the Moonlit Black Cats, and they had lost each and every one of them, including the one they held dearest, Sachi. And they were inconsolable and wanted nothing more than to fall as well, until Klein came to beg them to stay alive. Kirito had lost Sachi, their Moonlit Black Cat, and Silica had lost Pina, named for her real world cat. 

Silica and Kirito are clearly narrative parallels through this story, as they talk to eachother and bond during their journey to revive Pina. Kirito had lost their birth parents, and then felt alone and isolated again upon the discovery that they were adopted. Silica was an only child, whose parents were always busy with work, and they were left alone with just their cat. Both Silica and Kirito had no friends in the outside world, and in-game, people just wanted them for their looks and for their unique skills, not their genuine friendship. Kirito saw themself in Silica, and gave them their old armor, and did everything they could to help her revive her fallen friend, the thing Kirito was unable to do for Sachi. Silica ends up being Kirito’s hope during their trip, where they had previously been pessimistic on their relationship with Suguha, Silica is there to comfort them, and insist that Suguha must truly love and care for Kirito, and that they must care for her a lot too. Kirito insists that even though they helped Silica revive Pina, Silica helped them more, as they gave them hope, both in game and in the real world. To them, Silica is what they would be if the world was simply a bit kinder to them, which reveals the depressing core, that even in their greatest fantasy, Kirito cannot imagine their own life without tragedy.

When examining this story through the lens of a transgender Kirito seeing Silica as a version of themself, quite literally in their armor, the story goes from what many would write off as a fanservice harem-bait to one that reveals more of the inner struggles and pain of the characters, but also the hope that still exists, that they still have a future to look forward to where things do get better.

Kirito and Asuna, a ginger haired front-line fighter, eventually get married and settle in a cottage by a lake during their time stuck in Aincrad. It is there that they find and adopt a small girl named Yui, raising her as a daughter. Despite her being fully AI, they love her with all their hearts and truly become family with her. Within the Gameverse series of games, Kirito and Asuna elaborate on Yui further, noting that despite her not being their offspring, Yui notably takes a lot of the features of both Kirito and Asuna, but Asuna claims that she resembles Kirito more. And this is true, if you look at how Kirito looks with long hair in GunGale Online, as well as in real life, there is a strong resemblance there. Yui in the gameverse games also claims that Kirito is the one who cuts her hair and styles it every morning, which is a cute detail. However, it also comes with some questions. Kirito, according to themself, simply cuts their hair so that it is out of their face and not bothersome for fighting. This implies that Kirito doesn’t care for hair, so why would they know how to properly maintain it in others. Kirito’s adoptive parents were not home very frequently, as both worked heavily, and Kirito was often left with the responsibility of their younger sister, Suguha. We can infer that Kirito knows how to do hair because of taking care of Suguha’s. But Suguha also has her hair cut short, why? For kendo, as she practices it in real life as well. Given that both Kirito and Sugu practiced kendo, it could be inferred that Kirito and Sugu both used to have long hair, but upon starting kendo, they had it cut short. After all, they were near identical when they were younger. Within the light novel for the Phantom Bullet Arc, it is written that Kirito acts as if they have already had long hair, knowing how to take care of it, fight with it, and the proper ways to handle it when it is in your way. 

In this scenario, it is shown that Kirito is a loving and caring parent, helping their daughter like they used to help their sister and themself. Without taking this angle into account, many viewers may brush off Yui’s addition in SAO as mere trauma-bait, being as soon as she is introduced, she is killed. However, with the addition of Kirito’s past with long hair, and the implication that Kirito is almost living vicariously through Yui’s appearance, it adds to the story of both of them.

Speaking of Kirito’s long hair and girly features, let’s talk crossdressing. While the appearance of Kirito in GunGale Online is often seen as a trap trope, we need to further examine what exactly happens within GunGale, as well as outside of it. In GunGale Online, Kirito is presented with a rare male avatar that is incredibly feminine in nature, to the point that everyone assumes they are female. And thus, Kirito acts accordingly, pretending to be female to everyone, including flirting with men at the bar during the preshow for the Battle of Bullets. They don’t need to do this, they just do for fun. Infact, they seem to have more fun with their feminine appearance and attire, as they are more emotive, bubbly, and even have a distinct shine in their eyes that isn’t present anywhere else. But that is solely Sword Art Online II, in Sword Art Offline II, things escalate even further. Sword Art Offline II is an official mini-series in the blu ray and dvd releases of SAO II that is written by the original author, taking the form of a news / talk show discussing the events of the show. Within it, Kirito is referred to as “a cute girl named Kiriko” frequently. Very very frequently. Sinon alleges that Kirito may be secretly crossdressing in the real world, and that if they have a sister, they very well may be stealing her clothes to dress up in, a statement that Kirito is notably flustered by. Asuna also states that it seems like Kirito is enjoying themselves more as a girl than as a guy, and that she would love to dress her up in a bunch of cute clothes and “make her a proper woman”. 

By including all of this information, the appearance of GGO Kirito goes from a borderline problematic trap trope, to just an egg of a trans woman learning they are comfortable and enjoy having a female appearance, and just having a fun time with it. 

Within Sword Art Online Alicization, Kirito meets a boy named Eugeo and is struck with an unnerving revelation. Outside of the realization that Kirito may also like men, Kirito also realizes that they have been playing a role for most of their life. Kirito was forced into roleplaying a character in Sword Art Online, needing to assume the “beater” persona in order to help all other beta-testers escape the wrath of other players. They were forced into a hero role by the game’s creator, being chosen to help lead the fight against him, and be the one to ultimately face him at the game’s finale. Kirito had to play the role of hero again, saving those who were trapped in Alfheim after SAO shut down. Then, they needed to play hero again, saving people from DeathGun, while also needing to pretend to be a girl to everyone around them. But then they met Eugeo, and saw an actual hero. To Kirito, Eugeo was a hero, with a set goal of making the world better, and truly had the ambition and strength to make it reality. Kirito had been forced into strength, Eugeo was made for it. But Eugeo died in Kirito’s arms, leaving them broken. Someone so much stronger, so much better than them. They couldn’t live. How could Kirito, someone who was simply playing a role, manage to live when Eugeo couldn’t? But it was Eugeo who taught them how to be a real hero, not just a roleplay. And not just a copy of Eugeo, but a hero in their own way. Kirito took up Eugeo’s sword and helped save the Underworld, and brought peace between the realms. They had learned to stop playing a role for the world around them, and to fight as themself instead, and that is what gave them their strength.

In the end, is Kirito transgender? Well based upon the fact Sword Art Offline affirms that Kirito has a chosen female name with Kiriko, enjoys dressing as a girl, and enjoys acting like a girl, yes. But does it matter? Also yes. By examining the narratives present within Sword Art Online, the added characterization and motivations do genuinely provide more impact than just adding in representation. They add more heart and reasoning behind each small story. So yes, transition could have saved her.

[twstunes]

Take My Hand again actually we're gonna go on a walk through Night Raven College campus real quick while I lose my mind

First off look at the front gate. People have definitely brought up the birds and the keys and those ARE both very important symbols, BUT. What about the thorns sprawled across the top of the gate? And the repeat use of 4-pointed stars in the lettering gives an especially prickly quality, overall.

Also of note are the decorations on the main pillars and the very specific aesthetic choice for the shape of the wrought-iron fence—by which I mean both reflect designs found in Draconimom's appearance.

The carvings on the gate pillars feature an ankh-like shape that matches up eerily well with the central decor of Draconimom's belt, as well as two curves that mimic the main body of the belt. The three-leaf/bud-like shape above that is reflected in the lace pattern and dangling decoration of the Mirror Chamber's chandelier. The two swooping S-shapes mimic the Draconia family's iconic horns, and the little decorations on either side of the carving match with the shape of Draconimom's pauldrons.

As for the fence…it's That Shape again. Each post also bears resemblance to the upper portion of Draconimom's staff.

Considering the focus on thorned vines in relation to Diasomnia/the Draconias, the way that vines are slowly creeping up both the fenceposts and gate pillars feels relevant.

(Please recall: The coffins by which students are summoned into NRC are also referred to as "Gates.")

Next stop is the botanical garden. As I mentioned in a previous post, the building's overall shape is notably similar to the chandelier found in the Mirror Chamber. The large beams surrounding the building, with their spear-like support pillars, give the impression of the building being held in place by thorned vines.

The inside of the garden doesn't yield much in the way of analysis, unfortunately. The most stand-out feature is the crumbling structure in the subtropical zone, but that arguably could've been intentionally allowed to decay as a way of cultivating the various mosses and lichens we see growing on it.

(Please recall: at the beginning of the game, before you choose a student, Crowley has a monologue in which he appears to refer to the Dark Mirror as "a lovely and noble flower of evil.")

And now the Hall of Mirrors. This one has subtler details than the others, but still just enough for the pattern recognition part of my brain to start making noises.

Again, the outside of the hall bears a passing resemblance to the chandelier in the Mirror Chamber, though much less so than the botanical garden. More important to this analysis is the inside of the building.

Listen. Not all lace is related to overblots. But the majority of lace in Twisted Wonderland HAS appeared in relation to overblots. The presence of an unmistakably lace-y pattern on the beams under each ceiling arch feels worth pointing out. After all, as of Book 7, at least one student per dorm linked to the Hall of Mirrors has overblotted.

There are also small floral decorations on each arch: two buds in the lower corners, and a bloom at the top. Again, Crowley's "flower of evil" comment comes into play; each dorm, again, features a major antagonist who is visually and textually placed parallel to their respective member of the Great Seven (OG Disney villains).

There's also. Y'know. The horn-like design on the pillars.

(Please recall: each dorm linked to the Hall of Mirrors is, apparently, contained within a pocket dimension with somewhat strict borders.)

Okay now we're at the coliseum and I need you to bear with me for this first point. Look at the entrance. It's too ostentatious to not be important somehow, right? It's too overdone. It's the Dark Mirror's mask, kinda? Don't ask how long I've been staring at this thing

Aside from that, the coliseum has thorns lining the rim of the structure twofold. One set of thorns exists as spears jutting out along the rim, while the other set exists as the long, simple, repeating pattern on the wall just under those spikes. On the outside of the building, this pattern repeats for every floor, effectively giving a sense that the structure is "wrapped" in thorns.

There are also thorns visible in the support beams of the stage; they're especially noticeable after Malleus fixes the stage, as they're lit up a bright pink (as opposed to the gold they were prior).

Upon the stage sits an odd, crumbling structure. It's clearly made of a different type of stone than the rest of the coliseum, being a dark gray instead of subdued purple, but that's not all—the architecture doesn't match up, either. The two main columns don't resemble any others found in the coliseum, notably. The arch-and-a-half visible both distinctly feature three-pointed arches, unlike the round arches consistently found throughout the rest of the building.

The fact this structure has been allowed to remain in such a deteriorated state is also worth questioning, especially since it's obviously been modified at some point fairly recently; the LCD screen it's been fitted with seems to work like a normal electronic device w/ no magical component to it. Even if you were to argue that the structure is supposed to have a distinct aesthetic from the rest of the coliseum to better draw attention to the stage it rests on, its condition renders the argument null. I love its decrepit vibe as much as Malleus might, but very few people would see this as an acceptable "centerpiece" for such an important location. With how Crowley squawks about maintaining the school's reputation, why does this pass by without comment from him…?

At least the chains frame the stage nicely. Though, they could serve a symbolic purpose as well…

(Please recall: according to Rook, the school staff claims that the coliseum is "imbued with a special field that makes it harder for damage to spill out." We can assume that this is the truth, as no one outside of the coliseum seemed to notice Vil's overblot—just the traces of excessive magical energy leftover afterwards.)

And finally, we come to the Mirror Chamber. Keeping in mind that the Dark Mirror can teleport people (both for enrollment and in general), the most notable visual qualities of this room are as follows:

Gates (coffins, the Dark Mirror)

Plants (chandelier, rose arches, standing lamps, windowpanes)

Mirrors (the Dark Mirror)

Containment (chains, coffins, the Dark Mirror)

It is very, very interesting that the four primary structures on NRC campus with a direct relationship to the items on this list also feature aesthetic similarities to the Mirror Chamber. Also of note is that although each structure chiefly embodies one item on the list, they all incorporate aspects of the other items:

Front Gate–

Plants: As previously noted, there are vines steadily attempting to overtake the fence and pillars + thorns sprawling across the top of the sign.

Mirrors: Structural design is mirrored across the vertical axis, carvings are mirrored across both horizontal and vertical axes.

Containment: Although open in this view, the front gate as a whole embodies the concept of NRC campus as an area that is closed off to the rest of the world.

Botanical Garden–

Gates: The entire building signifies a departure from the surrounding campus into a space especially designed for the housing and growing of plants.

Mirrors: Look at that thing. You can't have a building made mostly out of tempered glass and not have it be reflective as fuck.

Containment: Aside from the appearance of being held down by thorned vines, the building does, again, exist for the purpose of containing plants.

Hall of Mirrors–

Gates: Each mirror acts as gate leading to each of the seven dorms.

Plants: Previously-detailed floral decorations.

Containment: Again, each mirror contains a dorm. This, in turn, means that this building technically contains…nearly the entire student body.

Coliseum–

Gates: It's got one right out front lmao. But yeah, like the botanical garden, the building signifies a departure from the surrounding environment.

Plants: As mentioned earlier, the entire building has the appearance of being wreathed in thorned vines + further incorporation of thorns in the stage.

Mirrors: Previously-shown Dark Mirror comparison. Also, like the front gate, the structural design is mirrored across the vertical axis.

What does this all mean? NO fuckin clue. But if we consider how the very first battle of the game seems to take place in the Mirror Chamber, at least two of these locations have been (or will be) the setting for a major overblot battle.

(I will say…it's very funny that, despite Pomefiore being the first established dorm from a lore perspective, a lot of the campus has much more Diasomnia-esque aesthetics.)

[adickaboutspoons]

Oh boy. Okay. Here we go

A totes calm and measured response to this post over here by @themetabridge. Forgiveness for the whole new post. I had too much to say to fit into what Tumblr apparently thinks is an appropriate length for a re-blog.

First? I mean. Text just means the words and actions as they are said and shown in a given piece of media being analyzed. Which is what I’m here to do with my meta – textual analysis. That’s why I insist on textual support for any argument interpreting the media in question. Naked assertions do nothing to explain how you arrived at your conclusion. Vibes aren’t good enough. Show me what IN THE TEXT made you think what you think, and I will do you the courtesy of the same. Otherwise, I don’t see how we could possibly have much to say to one another.

The fundamental breakdown we are having is that you have failed to provide a textual basis for why you think Ed is a bad person. While I respect your assertion that a person’s essential goodness is predicated on the actions that they perform, I cannot respect the corollary supposition that there are actions that are either “good” or “bad” in a vacuum, as this completely ignores circumstance and motivation. WHY someone does something is AT LEAST as important as WHAT they did.

For example - Stede killed Ned Lowe in cold blood. Does it matter that he did it because Ned “shit-talked [his] friend and damaged [his] ship,” and “fucked Calypso’s birthday”? Does it matter that Ed, the person whom Ned’s shit-talk actually impacted, told Stede not to do it? Twice? Does it matter that Ned was a subdued enemy combatant, and as such could have just as easily been gagged like Hornberry and the overtly racist Wellington, who survived imprisonment and went on to watch Ed and Stede sign the Act of Grace? Do we compare Ned to the French Captain who got flayed for his racist rhetoric, though Ned’s comment was, strictly speaking, about Ed’s class rather than his race? How far are we going to go to disentangle class and race when one absolutely informs the other?

How about a more straight-forward example; Stede set an unnamed man on fire and quipped about it like some asshole 80's action hero. Does it matter that he threatened Stede’s life? How about if, when he did so, he was twenty feet away, armed only with the bottle he had just broken over his head, and there were half-a dozen pirates between him and Stede who all thought Stede was hot shit, and so Stede was in no immediate danger? What if Stede has a long history of people making attempts on his life, and being unsure that he even deserves to live, and this is meant to show that, now that he has something to live for, he’s done with the part of his life where he lets anyone try to take that away from him?

This is what I mean when I say that the show is careful to never outright condemn the use of violence. The narrative tells us clearly that, within the context of the show, some things are more important than an unnamed or one-off character’s life – preservation of one’s own life or the lives of one’s loved ones, dignity in the face of racially-based persecution, resistance to colonial oppressors. The reasons for and direction of violence matters. Context matters.

And speaking of context, you misunderstand me when you suppose that only what literally appears before our eyes counts can be “read into the text”. I refuse to give extra-textual sources of information (such as the historical reality of sergeant recruiters and being pressed into service or the historical Golden Age of Piracy) any weight unless they can be validated by in-text support, because the show itself cares fuck-all about historical accuracy. But extrapolations about the in-show universe based on in-text support are fine.

So, considering that the very first thing we hear in the show is Frenchie’s little ditty about the violent reality of a pirate’s life, and considering Jack’s comment at brekkie about how pirating is an "ugly profession”, and considering what we see of the raids in 1x5 and 2x2, we can reasonably conclude that pirate culture is steeped in toxic masculinity where the expectation of performing violence is de rigueur. Because Ed has carved out a successful reputation as Blackbeard, and because we see the ease with which he can go from being casually conversant with Stede to “giving it some oomph” to scare the location of the treasure out of the French captain in 1x5 with the THREAT of violence, we can reasonably conclude that he can successfully perform the required violent displays of piratical society (or at least, given that we know by his bathtub confession that he has not personally killed anyone since his father, he can adopt a convincing enough posturing that no one would doubt he COULD). From his interactions with Jack and familiarity with “yardies” and “whippies”, and his ruminations about “the old days” of “drinking all day and biting the heads off turtles or making some poor bloke eat his own toes for a laugh”, and Fang’s assertion that Ed made him kill his dog, we can reasonably assume that Ed has a history with casual violence for the sake of fun and cruelty for cruelty’s sake.

However.

I think “the old days” is an important qualifier there. Season 1 Izzy may be frustrated that Ed is not performing Blackbeard sufficiently well to suit him (on that point we can agree), but even by his own deathbed confession “for YEARS I egged [him] on, even though I knew [Ed] had outgrown [the Blackbeard persona]” (emphasis mine, and pin in that for a moment). In 2x1, Fang is crying into his cake saying “I’ve never seen Blackbeard like this” - indicating that the conditions of the Kraken era are NOT the norm. The slivers of Ed we see in 1x3 before the Spanish raid are marked by him speaking calmly and rationally to Izzy (in stark contradiction to Izzy’s insistence that he’s half-mad) never even raising his voice much less using threats or any actual violence to get Izzy to do what he wants. In fact, it is Izzy who suggests a course of action involving very normative piratical violence (“Do we open fire? Or would you rather we just attack them, kill them, throw them out to the sharks, sir?”), which Ed counters with a genteel proposition - inviting (not even ordering!) Stede aboard for a face-to-face meeting. Izzy being comfortable enough to push back against orders (“Oh, Edward, can’t I just send the boys?”) even suggests that he feels no threat from Ed at all. Every indication is that by the time we meet Ed, well before he ever meets Stede, he’s already well past done with violence for violence sake.

When Ed does meet with Stede, before he’d fallen in love (Even though the are the U-Hauliest, I would argue “fascination” with a possible side of “infatuation”, but certainly not yet love), one of the early conversations they have is about the depiction of Blackbeard in Stede’s book of pirates. Ed expresses revulsion and anger that the persona that he’s worked so hard to cultivate has been twisted into a hyper-violent parody - a “Vampire Viking Clown” that’s barely even human, with a head of smoke and overladen with weapons and hardly bears any resemblance to the real man. We��re meant to understand that this is not a valid or accurate representation of who he is. Violence is a normative part of pirate life, but he has “one knife, and one gun JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE” (emphasis mine, again) - he doesn’t shirk from using the tools of violence when it’s necessary, but he is NOT excessively or wantonly violent. 

And we SEE the evidence of this because of how Stede reacts to the way Ed acts around Jack. Jack keeps Ed drunk all day, decoupling his inhibitions from his decision-making processes and, in spite of Ed explicitly saying that he’s mellowed out, Jack eggs him into the kind of hyper-violent Jackassery that is excessive even for pirate society if the nervous reactions of Stede’s crew are any indication. Of course, this is all part of Jack’s plan - to manipulate both Ed and Stede and force them apart - and the reason that it works is because the way Ed acts around Jack is NOT the way he chooses to act under his own volition, hence Stede’s frustration and disappointment.

While I agree that piratical violence is not political praxis, I would argue that, considering that every raid we have witnessed Ed participate in has been against a representative of colonial power and, more often than not, specifically the enforcing arm thereof, it’s not unfair to conclude that Ed’s reasoning goes that if piratical violence is to be done, better against someone who deserves it than not - i.e. those who perpetuate the violence of colonialism. Regarding instances of violence outside the context of raids, here’s where we take that pin out of Izzy. Izzy and Ed are locked in a cycle of abuse over the first season, wherein Izzy decides that Ed is not Blackbearding hard enough, and, because he feels entitled to controlling Ed’s actions, bullies and harasses him into capitulating  - typically in the form of performing violence. Afterwards, Izzy performs some form of deference - apologizing and/or acting as though he’s going to leave, which Ed “talks him down from” and mercifully allows him to stay. It’s why, when Ed sees Izzy packing up a dinghy (lol. With what? It’s not like he’s on his own ship or would have brought his things with him, or sacked plunder from the Revenge. Clearly he was just stalling until Ed noticed him and swooped in to do his part of the cycle) he tells Stede he “should deal with this,” as though it’s tedious, but normal occurrence. I think an important part of this cycle as the season progresses, though, is how Izzy keeps upping the stakes.

So by the time we get to the end of the season, when the last iteration of the cycle starts up again (when Ed is once more insufficiently Blackbearding by being emotionally vulnerable and open with the crew following his return to the Revenge and his stint in the pillow fort (note that Izzy is apparently FINE with Ed not being Peak Pirate, just as long as he hides it away from everyone), and Izzy once more bullies and threatens Ed) this time it is especially cruel - Izzy is a thumb in the wound, attacking Ed at his most vulnerable and saying it would be better if Ed was DEAD than “pining for his boyfriend.” This iteration now also brings with it a history of escalation (first in Izzy bringing Fang and Ivan in to force Ed's hand about killing Stede, lest he look "weakened by the love of a pet" before his crew, and therefore in danger of mutiny, and then by bringing in the British Navy to force Ed to take Izzy back - or rather, to force Izzy back into Ed's life because the terms of the agreement see Ed remanded into Izzy's custody as though he is property to be distributed at the will of the Brits) - an established pattern of the lengths to which Izzy will go to get what he wants, and so a very real threat implicit in Izzy’s warning that “Ed had better watch his step” as Izzy serves only Blackbeard. So Ed gives him what he wants. He Blackbeards it up just like Izzy insisted, and lets Izzy know in no uncertain terms that the insubordination is done. It’s not a "frat boy prank" when he cuts off Izzy’s toe and feeds it to him, or even something from which he's deriving pleasure as he might have in the old days; it’s a calculated, proportional response, done under duress and against his own inclinations, but exactly the tool required to get the message across clearly.

As to the question of why it matters if Ed is bad, first and foremost, because saying that he is bad requires you to explicitly read contrary to the text. If you’re not going to engage with the text on its own terms, I don’t see how you can do any analysis of what story it’s trying to tell. I already discussed the ways in which the narrative is specifically about how Ed is NOT bad, even when he himself thinks he is. I have also discussed how, while “violence is never the answer” may be broadly understood to be the correct way of comporting oneself in real life, the show never condemns violence across the board. The show condemns cruelty, both on an interpersonal and societal level, but positions the use of violence as an acceptable and reasonable response thereunto. It treats circumstance and motivation with nuance and weight. Living within this context, Ed’s use of violence by the time we meet him is well within the normative acceptable application thereof. Judging him by standards outside the context of the story within which he exists makes as much sense as judging the Stede from the show for being a slave owner because that’s historical fact - that’s just not applicable to who he is in THIS story.

But more importantly, it matters because Ed is a POC character. Describing him as “cruel and perverse” for utilizing violence, particularly when the violence he uses is NOT excessive or impulsive, perpetuates negative race-based stereotypes about hyper-violent men of color. Characterizing him as “bad” for his use of violence when other (white) characters, such as Stede, use violence in similar ways, or are cruel or petty, but can still be considered, on balance, “good” means that Ed is being held to a different, higher standard than those white characters, and perpetuates the frankly racist criteria of expecting POC exceptionalism for POCs to be considered for the base-line assumptions of acceptability that are afforded to their white counterparts. Saying that Stede’s love is what changed Ed’s behavior from cruelty to wholesale abandoning piratical principles is not only antithetical to what actually happens in the show, but suggests a read that POC Ed needs a good white man to show him how to behave, a real white knight to tame his savage heart. That’s some real White Man’s Burden shit there, bro. I highly recommend you put it down.

[daddyduncan69]

One of my recent posts got a few comments about media literacy being dead and Neil being an unreliable narrator so I want to clear some things up.

Firstly, media literacy isn't dead becuase it cannot die. Also, I am not a big fan of fear mongering. Humans have always sought to understand and communicate with each other about the things we create. It is a skill that can be taught and should be practiced. There is no one right way to do it. And, while I think the education system fails so many of us (something something to make us easier to control something something), I also think that there are tons of resources to help us learn without the need for an official "teacher". So, instead of pessimistically saying is it "dead" (especially on someone's textual analysis post, like... are you saying I prove it's dead becuase I don't have media literacy? are you agreeing with me and therefore proving yourself wrong? do I not count for some reason? i don't think I get it), engage in discourse about media that you love. And I mean actual discourse, not just fighting on social media about whether or not everyone should "like" your favorite character. Ask yourself "what is the effect of this rhetorical device in the text?" "is the text trying to make me like or not like this character? is it working, why or why not," (do not ask "why did the author do this?" because that is not relevant nor are you a mind reader). Take free online Literature classes from colleges that help you learn how to analyze. Invite others to do it with you. Join or start a book club. Engage in various types of media, not just YA, fantasy, fiction, etc. Consider kindly rebutting or offering a counter point to other people's interpretations, bringing actual textual evidence to back up your points. Use Google Scholar to access free scholarly articles to see academic prospectives on various medias that are not just from social media or blogs. Your local library may even have subscriptions to paid sights like JSTOR or collections of essays that would let you access articles that are otherwise behind a paywall. All of these things can help improve your own media literacy and, in turn, will help improve the media literacy of the people around you.

Secondly, the point of my other post was NOT that Neil is an unreliable narrator. I've seen a lot of people make this claim so I wanted to chime in. Unreliable narrators are marked by a few characteristics, some of which are exaggeration, detachment from reality, naivety, and deception of the reader. I don't believe Neil falls into any of these categories. I would be open to arguments that claim he does, but it would be hard to sway me because I can't find any textual evidence to support it. This is an important distinction to me because the larger claim I make in that post is that ALL narration, 1st person, 3rd person, omniscient, limited, etc is biased- all of it. It is CRUCIAL as readers to identify a narrators biases and consider the text through that lens. If you aren't practicing doing that (or only doing it when the narrator is "unreliable") you can easily fall into the trap of saying "well Neil says Kevin is a coward so he is", which is obviously an issue in the grand scheme of textual analysis. However, you can also easily fall into the trap of saying "Neil is an unreliable narrator because he is wrong about things/lies to people/has trauma so you can't trust him". I believe that Neil tells us as the reader the truth in his narration almost 100% of the time, Neil just lies to the other characters 24/7. So, as readers we should take what he says in his internal monologue at face value but question the motives behind his dialogue with other characters.

Anyway, that was a long winded, probably boring monologue about critical textual analysis. I devote maybe 16 out of my 18 waking hours to thinking about this, so thanks for hanging in there to read it all. I just care so deeply that we as a culture continue to grow these skills without shaming those who haven't had the same opportunities to learn how to do it or making the act of learning how to feel hopeless or doomed.

[fiona-fififi]

Okay, I am not trying to be mean, and I am NOT looking for anti comments or shipwar bullshit here.

I am looking to ask a genuine question.

But I will say that what is below the cut is probably going to read to some as anti Tommy/anti bucktommy, so if you are on the extreme end of either side of this shipwar, please look away.

Can someone please explain to me, based on canon evidence, what in the actual text of the show has possibly implied that Tommy was an endgame relationship for Buck?

Because I understand getting attached to ships and to minor characters, but I also try very hard to see the multiple ways a text can be interpreted. I have studied literary and pop culture analysis for over twenty years and taught it for ten. I am more than willing to try to see multiple sides and acknowledge different interpretations when they are supported by actual canon evidence, even when that evidence is minor. With buddie, for example, I do actually believe it is happening, but I am also happy to acknowledge that it might not, and there are ways that the show could turn around what we've seen and make it work for other purposes.

But also, while there are always multiple potential interpretations of a text, and therefore, no specific right answers, there ARE wrong answers, and interpretations that just are not sufficiently supported by the actual text.

And I truly, truly do not understand how so many people—many of whom are very intelligent and generally very good at textual analysis—are convinced that Buck and Tommy’s relationship was ever anything other than temporary. I am not trying to be mean here, but I keep replaying their scenes and trying to look at it from that perspective, and I genuinely cannot understand how this interpretation became popular or what it is based in in terms of canon.

I legitimately feel like I am going crazy because I actively cannot see it at all, but so many people seem so very convinced of it, and I just cannot make heads or tails of that.

[unkat]

Why is shipping discourse still a thing?

Does it bring joy to say others are stupid for not identifying precisely with a single vision?

"Ugh, [blank] about [ship] annoys me"

Understandable! Makes sense!

"Ugh, anyone who likes [ship] is blind and ruining their experience! why can't they be normal and ship [other ship]?"

Stop! Grab a snack and relax! We are all playing silly games with fictional characters! This comment is mean; one person's vision is not the only valid one, nor should it be! Our differences are beautiful!

Thinking of sending an anonymous message about why someone can't like something fictional?

Pump the brakes! Why are you doing this? Do you think this is going to change someone's mind? Are you angry about their vision? Are you angry for other reasons, for how your day has been? Think how you would feel if you were receiving this! Don't be mean! These are people who love the same media you do and could be your friend, but will be hurt if criticized out of the blue! How wonderful is it that we have shared passions!

The ship is canon/basically canon?

What about the canonicity of a ship makes it better than others? Do you ship people who never get into a relationship, never say they are in love? If not, then it isn't canon or basically canon! It is a ship you love! The place it holds in your heart makes it treasure enough, and anyone who says otherwise needs to take a nap! There is joy to be found from a ship with NO canon support; the value always comes from YOU and YOUR creation, your vision, not from canon. Do you have textual evidence? Thats great! The value still comes from your passion! And that is beautiful!

Do you not like to see the ship?

Be a hater! Block the tag and people who use it, ignore it, exclude it from your ao3 search. No need to explain why you don't want to see it! There are no reasons to endure fruitless suffering nor create it for others!

These characters are not real! But you are real! And the other people in the community are real! And how beautiful is it to be in a community with so many different talents and passions?