#YOU ARE THE BEST THING THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED TO MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

infinitelytheheartexpands · 5 years

Text

And last but certainly not least on @monotonous-minutia’s list, Act II of Le nozze di Figaro in 50 lines! Thanks!! ❤️

Countess Almaviva: My husband’s cheating on me so Love just give me some relief or let me diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiie thanks

Susanna: That creepy count was trying to make “a business proposition” to me. Some business proposition, trying to make me sleep with him. Anyway, why is he so upset about you supposedly cheating if he’s the one cheating?

Countess: Because he’s a dude. Screw the patriarchy tbh.

*Figaro enters.*

Figaro: I HAVE AN IDEA let’s get the Count to think that the Countess is having an affair (so that he’ll be distracted) and let’s dress up Cherubino as a girl because META anyway and get the Count to think he’s Susanna so we can catch him red-handed!

Susanna and Countess: despite our initial reservations which are well-founded this isn’t a bad idea tbh

*He leaves and Cherubino comes in.*

Cherubino: I LOVE THE COUNTESS AND I’M GONNA MISS HER AND OH COUNTESS YOU’RE GONNA MISS ME BY MY HAIR YOU’RE GONNA MISS ME EVERYWHERE OH YOU’RE GONNA MISS ME WHEN I’M GONE

Countess: Good song there, but can you sing the one you wrote?

Cherubino: Okaaaaaay. ‘I have a lot of weird feeeeeeeeelings...I WANNA KNOW WHAT LOVE IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS I WANT YOU TO SHOW MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE’

Susanna: Good job (just like with everything else you do)! Now, Figaro told you-

Cherubino: Everything. Here’s my commission.

Countess: welp they forgot the seal so it’s not official anyway let’s give you a makeover (and shut the door because people are only down with onstage cross-dressing in this day and age, unfortunately)!

Susanna: Chin up- no, down! Move a little this way, now that way, look straight ahead OKAY STOP BEING SO CUTE

*She leaves.*

Countess: Now, Cherubino, why do you have my ribbon?

Cherubino: Well I cut my arm and cuts heal better when they’re bandaged with pretty ladies’ ribbons. It’s a law, don’t you know?

Countess: Here, let me bandage it up. And have courage! Don’t be like all the other men. Be good and sensible-

*There is a knock on the door.*

Count Almaviva: WHY IS THE DOOR SHUT women should have no right to any sort of privacy or autonomy lol

Countess: oh no I’M JUST TRYING ON SOME CLOTHES AND SO WAS SUSANNA JUST NOW HOLD ON A SEC geez. Men.

*Cherubino hides in the closet and the Countess opens the door, letting the Count in.*

Count: What’s this paper- *a noise comes from the closet* YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE A LOVER BECAUSE JEALOUS BARITONE HUSBAND LOGIC WHO IS IT

Countess: Relax it’s just...Susanna trying on her wedding dress. Don’t go in. Looks like you’re incredibly upset. Meanwhile, I am calm, cool, and collected. Take a hint, would ya? Don’t cause such a ruckus.

Count: Very well. There’s one way to settle this. I’ll get tools and force the door. And you’re coming with me.

Countess: ugggggggggh fiiiiiiiiiiiine

*The Count and Countess leave and the Count locks the door behind him.*

Susanna: CHERUBINO OPEN UP IT’S JUST SUSANNA RELAX

Cherubino: *running over to the window* I’M GONNA JUMP not to kill myself don’t worry but I would die for her and I’m jumping out to protect her!!!!

*He jumps out the window and runs off.*

Susanna: Wow, what a fast runner! Now let’s go spice things up a bit.

*Susanna hides in the closet as the Count and Countess come back.*

Countess: FIIIIIIIIIINE THIS WAS ALL A TRICK TO TEST YOU AND CHERUBINO IS THE ONE IN THERE AND HE’S DRESSED AS A GIRL I AM INNOCENT

Count: ugggggggh not that stupid page again uggggggggggh no wonder about the intrigue set up in this note it was totally foreshadowing and you are SO GUILTY BECAUSE THAT IS OBVIOUSLY THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION TO MAKE

*The Count opens the closet door to find-*

Count and Countess: SUSANNA?!?!?!?!?! WHAT IS GOING ON HERE

Susanna: *whispering* Hey, Countess, before you ask, Cherubino is okay.

Countess and Susanna: YOU ARE A CRUEL FOOLISH MAN UNDESERVING OF PITY

*Figaro casually strolls in.*

Figaro: Hey, let’s have the wedding now!

Count: Actually, before we do, *he shows Figaro the letter* do you know who wrote this?

Figaro: I don’t and despite the fact it seems you have evidence to the contrary, I’ll go ahead and continue as if nothing has happened because why not

Susanna and the Countess: Ix-nay on-hay the-hay an-play; the-yay ig-jay is-hay up-hay.

Figaro: ...You know I don’t speak Italian. Anyway, let’s have the wedding now!

Count: Oh, ‘let’s have the wedding now’, you say? Come on out, Marcellina!

*Antonio runs in instead because apparently Marcellina has never seen any reality shows and doesn’t know that means she has to enter.*

Antonio: SOME LITTLE PERSON JUST JUMPED OUT THE WINDOW AND BROKE ONE OF MY FLOWERPOTS

Figaro: I DID IT and before you ask people look little when they jump we all know this it’s a scientific law

Antonio: WHAT ABOUT THESE PAPERS

*Figaro takes the commission.*

Figaro: Oh. Uh...Cherubino asked me to get the seal on it.

*Marcellina just now got her cue and runs in with Bartolo and Basilio.*

Marcellina: LISTEN TO US WE HAVE SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO SAY

Count: Finally! They’re here!

Figaro: You’re all big stupidheads because I can’t come up with a better insult.

Marcellina: FIGARO SIGNED A CONTRACT SAYING HE HAD TO MARRY ME AND I FULLY INTEND ON CARRYING THAT OUT

Figaro, Susanna, and the Countess: wait WHAT

Bartolo: HE SAID THAT IF HE DIDN’T REPAY HIS DEBTS HE HAD TO MARRY HER AND WELL HE HASN’T PAID UP SO HE HAS TO MARRY HER

Basilio: I CAN ATTEST TO THAT

Figaro: WELL THAT’S BECAUSE THE ECONOMY SUCKS AND WE’RE BARELY GETTING PAID AND INTEREST IS SO HIGH SCREW YOU

Count: Okay let’s look at the contract and work this out I obviously don’t have an ulterior motive

Figaro, Susanna, and the Countess: THIS IS THE WORST DAY EVER

Marcellina, Bartolo, and Basilio: THIS IS THE BEST DAY EVER

#opera #opera tag #le nozze di figaro #the marriage of figaro #Mozart #Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart #this act is so hilarious #also Countess Almaviva you’re doing amazing sweetie #also Susanna and Cherubino #monotonous-minutia

11 notes · View notes

whoslaurapalmer · 6 years

Text

penultimate. peril.

penultimate peril is my absolute favorite in the series and these episodes somehow simultaneously lived up to and didn’t even meet my expectations

-the “welcome little baby” line!!!! but isn’t that actually from the end? -OH GOD -THERE HE IS -LEMONY -AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA -no brunch. no distraught kit. no brunch. -compared to in previous eps, klaus being the pro-vfd one, now violet is! “of course we will!” UGGGG -STILL NOT DISTRAUGHT -olaf has more pressing problems in his life and better things to do than trying to prove something to the man and the woman -”e is for ernest who is evil” WHOA THERE -I THOUGHT SHE WAS JUST GONNA SAY ENEMY -EVIL -no brunch. no baby room wallpaper line. no distraught kit. -i’m sorry but i just can’t get behind bertrand being the one with glasses. bea had glasses and she hated wearing them and rarely wore them. -no “your father got that same look on his face whenever he was thinking” none of that, huh. -OH!!!! THERE WE GO!!!! THE SHORTEST MENTION OF BEING DISTRAUGHT AND PREGNANT EVER!!!!!!!!! -young!!!!! lemon!!!!!!!! -dewey saying a line that was absolutely from lemony’s letter to bea and saying it to kit is, weird. -oh so they’re. playing it like that’s ernest. like kit’s with ernest. mmmmmmmm. cause someone who hasn’t read the books wouldn’t know about dewey yet. mmmmmmm. really. i see. -WHAT IS THIS TIMELINE -WHAT THE HELL -lemon. -hey. where are their. you know. sunglasses. -oh i love the triplets walking behind the desk, that was STELLAR AND I LOVED IT -tv was made to portray the three different chapters of violet and klaus and sunny’s different adventures in the hotel. like, it’s worth it just to be able to see them play out like this cause they STILL play out like they did in the books, one at a time, and it!!!! it’s so good!!!!!! IT WAS SO GOOD -i was so disappointed to not see hal, though. i really wanted to see hal. i was actually. excited for that..... -oh so now nero has replaced geraldine. -changing so much of the......background mystery of the show and seeing it play out just made me feel like the JS mystery didn’t fit in the show now -- especially because in the books, even justice strauss doesn’t know, right????? but as revealed later on, they were all?????? working together???????? it just doesn’t sit right with me -THE WRONGS. WERE BEAUTIFUL. OH MY GOD. -that was. the best thing in the world. god it was so good. it sounded. forgive me. so right. -babs.........and jerome...................... -jerome!!!!! and charles????????? okay!!!!!! i could dig it if it wasn’t another throwaway line about vague distant background representation that we never see -same with babs and mrs bass -LARRY -I FUCKING SCREAMED WHEN LARRY SHOWED UP OH MY GOD i thought they’d just cut him right out too. -OLAF AS JACQUES I’M FUCKING DYING that was hilarious. so good. oh my god. the eyebrow. -yay. creepy olaf. is olaf. -fortunes? not finance? -mr poe just changed personality but somehow still stayed exactly the same. what the hell. -lasso reveal -- YIPPIE -YIPPIE KI YAY -yippie. ki, yay. -re: larry -- it’s more fun to hear about the absurd moments in the series, including the absurd deaths, because then they’re amusing but we don’t see them and it makes up the fabric of the story and can still be serious, but seeing larry get boiled in a giant vat of curry, like, seeing it happen, was........well..............mmmm. it took that away. seeing it made it feel more weird dark spy than weird absurd spy. i don’t know what i’m going for here. made sense when i wrote it on my phone during the ep. makes less sense now trying to type it after. -but i stand by whatever the hell i just said there -elephant!!!! i got my elephant story reference!!!!! i got it!!!!! oh my god!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it was there!!!!!! -actual justice strauss!!!! i legit thought they would cut her out. -but her presence, after watching larry and jacquelyn and jacques and olivia, has none of the meaning it had before in the book, seeing her show up out of nowhere and hearing her talk about following them. because we’ve seen other adults follow them now. -okay, look, the thing is, there’s no way lemony doesn’t know who those kids are. -also, side note, you think kit played by allison williams looks old enough to be having her fourth child, lemony?????? -i guess it depends on how you want to view the timeline, and there are people who view lemony as having worked on the series for years, and babybea finding him before the 13th book came out, because the beatrice letters was released before it, and in-universe it would take time to put all this together and take the same length of time as the real-life publishing of the books, but -at the same time there are enough hints in the story that also place lemony, by slippery slope, close to where the baudelaires are in their story. at least that’s the way i prefer to see it. so this????? i’m not having any of this -i don’t like the triumphant music when dewey talks. he should be a lot more harried than this -OH THEY’LL LEAVE VFD TO RAISE BABYBEA BUT LEAVE THE LIBRARY IN THE HANDS OF THREE SMALL CHILDREN -”is a safe life really enough” hey fuck you -where’s dewey’s soft and kind “noble enough” line. where is that. fuck you for taking that away from me. -BEATRICE STOLE IT FROM MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE -why. did you change olaf saying “what choice do i have” to “what else do i know how to do”

-OPERA -oh my god esme and kit and LEMONY AND OLAF -that typewriter.............oh my child -so. olaf’s parents or at least his father. not being presented as firestarters. -WIFE DIED IN A FIRE -I’M SORRY, WIFE DIED IN A FIRE????? -this isn’t even what the taxi driver said anyway. -god life made so much more sense when lemony was not the taxi driver and he was just a mysterious figure i hate this -walking away from lemony did break my heart but i also didn’t like any of this scene at all so. who knows what i’m feeling today, cats -olaf. in the closet. not the kids. mkay. -not to be such a book stickler but...........man...................................... -blind justice!!! -PURPLE DRESS -PURPLE HELQUIST DRESS -no.......blind.......justice?????? just????? at the end??????? -i’m actually gonna cry during the kids’ court speech oh no my babies -THEY CALL OLAF TO THE STAND????????????????????????? -i know it’s probably just because she calls everyone darling but man young!esme is just fucking in love with everyone isn’t she -straight up thought she was on a date with kit before olaf was in the scene in the first opera flashback, honestly -it completes her tea set. -i mean it’s a shallow enough reason for esme but also esme is. more than a shallow person like i don’t care for her much but i know that i think she’d have a better reason than ‘it completes my tea set’ -THEY JUST WALK OFF WITH IT. JUST LIKE THAT. -no big deal but lemony mentions somewhere in the series (slippery slope?) that it was actually kit’s idea to use the sugar bowl as a container. -”We’re all friends here” WHY WOULD KIT SNICKET EVER SAY THAT -it looks. it really looks like they framed the murder of olaf’s father. as an accident. and i don’t like that. i don’t like that at all. i hate it with every fiber of my being. -also the schism happened before that incident but whatever. -ALSO. I’VE SAID IT BEFORE. I’LL SAY IT AGAIN. NOWHERE IS IT EVER IMPLIED THAT THE DEATH OF OLAF’S PARENTS AND THE THEFT OF THE SUGAR BOWL HAPPEN ON THE SAME NIGHT AND I HATE THAT THEY PLACED THEM ON THE SAME NIGHT I HATE THAT TOO -pepper. -it was pepper. -once again. “burn down hotel” was also a moment. that needed to be slowed down. -this season is actually lacking a good deal of the lemony narration that would have slowed down certain scenes in a good way -lemony wasn’t even holding a dart. why do they think lemony killed olaf’s father??????? -okay i actually went back and rewatched that and he WAS holding a dart. -i’m not gonna get into my perception of lemony post-atwq and how he feels about murder after that, okay, i’m not, i don’t have the energy -but fuck you for having him hold a poison dart -so no break up letter. not at all. he just. says those words to her. that’s all. -and you know why that pisses me off? because it takes away the real reasons behind lemony and bea’s breakup. it takes away lemony’s cowardice and bea’s impulsiveness and the arson accusations and going on the lam and all the implied everything about it and the fact that it’s vfd and the ideals and what they’ve been forced to do and be that breaks them up and reduces it to.........this. ten seconds. that’s what their relationship is. -so no, i did not like the weird......timeline travel montage with the photographs and the background song...........the only thing i felt was ‘are you guys serious about doing this.’

#asoue spoilers #lulu talks about the sad lemon man

3 notes · View notes

bigskydreaming · 8 years

Text

@nyxelestia

So we had this very same argument more than a year ago, and it looks like neither of our viewpoints has changed so I’m not sure what good this will do, but you have a lot of influence in the TW fandom yourself, esp in corners I won’t go into, so I’m gonna try.

Please, for the love of god, stop mitigating abuse with abuse apologism arguments in defense of characters. That is what you are doing, and I will not let you pretend otherwise because you are putting textbook abuse apologism on paper, time and time again, while calling out abuse in other aspects of canon. And this dichotomy means all those who believe you and accept your POV when you point out abuse in one instance are equally inclined to believe you when you point to where Derek Hale abused various characters and say ‘not abuse, because he was a victim himself, he had good intentions, and other characters did way worse.’

All of those last three things are true. None of them actually alter his actions. None of them are mutually exclusive with abuse.

You can not look at abuse through the POV of the abuser. You can not do it. You have to look at it through the lens of the person being abused, because they are the one that needs defending, they are the one the harm was done to.

So when Derek beat the crap out of Scott in the ice rink in Season 2, does the fact that Derek was abused himself magically change the harm done to Scott? You could write essays about how Derek’s life experiences led to him making the choices that told him it was a good idea to beat up Scott in front of his newly minted pack, and a lot of what you have to write might be true and valid. But will any of that, in terms of Scott, change the reality of what Derek did there and how it would contribute to shaping his own life experiences and perception of reality? NOPE.

If I abuse a teenager, as a grown adult, I don’t get to point to my own childhood abuse and say ‘okay but its not that bad because look what happened to meeeeeeeeeeeeee.’ Yeah that shit may be terrible, but so is abusing a teenager. The one does not give you a pass for the other. The one may inform the other, but it doesn’t give you freedom to keep perpetuating the cycle and constantly passing the buck down the line. It might all be true, but explanation DOES NOT EQUAL EXCUSE.

You can point to Derek’s training with Scott, and with Isaac and with Erica and Boyd and say ‘well he had good intentions. He was trying to toughen them up, teach them to survive, and he was doing it the best way he knew how.’ Again, all of that may be true. Its all still irrelevant to the simple question of: did he use his position of greater power, knowledge and experience to harm them, while telling them it was for their own good?

The only thing that matters in determining if it was abuse is if the answer to that question is yes or no.

Every time Scott reacted to Derek’s hurting him during training in S1 with shock, anger and pain - its because he didn’t know Derek was going to do that. Asking someone more experienced than you for help isn’t giving them permission carte blanche to do whatever the hell they want to. Breaking Isaac’s arm to make a point is still breaking Isaac’s arm, no matter what the point is.

And it doesn’t matter that Derek thought he was doing it to make them stronger, better able to survive. It doesn’t even matter that the beta trio wouldn’t have even needed that ‘training’ if Derek hadn’t recruited them to begin with. It doesn’t even matter that every season post S3 showed us DEREK realizing his own earlier methods had been fucked up and even saying as much to the Alpha twins and to Liam when training and advising them.

All that matters is Scott, Erica, Isaac and Boyd looked to Derek for advice and guidance and help, and Derek delivered that to them in the form of pain and said that’s the best you’re going to get, learn to deal with it, this is your life now.

I can’t even tell you how horrifying this particular line of thought is to me given how much those exact words or a near paraphrasing of them shows up in the trial arguments of every father caught abusing his son and saying ‘it was for his own good, brat needed to be tougher, its a cruel world I’m preparing him for.’

When Derek was ‘merely’ an accessory to what Peter did to Scott in the locker room, when Derek used what he knew (or at least strongly suspected) to be a lie about a werewolf cure to manipulate Scott into helping him, when Derek scared the shit out of Scott in the parking garage and broke his phone - you can point to all of that and say, okay but every other character has done way worse.

And? Your point is?

It is never okay to distract from or explain away harm or culpability in causing harm by pointing wildly around the room and saying ‘well everyone else does it too.’

Again. Might be true. Does not change the fact that harm was still done.

Despite what I just said there, I’m going to indulge that ‘everyone on this show does just as bad’ argument for a second. Let’s bring it back around to Scott. Aka the one character I stan for more than any other.

Let’s bring it back to that scene anti-Scott people love to bring up any time Stiles or Derek or someone else is criticized for hurting other characters.

The scene I hate more than any other, where Scott throws Isaac into the wall of his house in response to learning Isaac wants to date his ex girlfriend. When an alpha reacts violently to his abuse survivor beta saying something he doesn’t want to hear.

I loathe that scene so much, because I full on do not believe that is something Scott would do, I do not believe it made sense for his character, I do not believe it fits any characterization he’s received prior or since, to have him portrayed, even for an instant as ‘an alpha reacting violently to his abuse survivor beta simply saying something he does not want to hear.’

But no matter how much I hate it, or how much I don’t think that fit Scott, you will never ever catch me saying that ‘an abuse survivor beta being thrown into a wall for saying something his alpha doesn’t want to hear’ isn’t a description of an abusive scene, that it isn’t gross and awful and should not be excused.

The reason I can still comfortably stan for Scott and refuse to see him as abusive all while still calling out the actions of characters like Stiles and Derek as abusive is I recognize that the actions of any character on this show must be evaluated on two levels. Through the lens of that character’s characterization, and through the lens of how the writers are choosing to write that character in any given moment. These are fictional characters, yes. Which means they can only say and do what the writers write for them in any particular scene, unlike in real life, where a person throwing another into a wall is solely that person’s responsibility.

But by differentiating my focus, I can do both, I can hold the scene up as something awful and something that I do not need to defend Scott for and WILL NOT, while at the same time putting the blame on the show for being so tone deaf as to write that happening while lighthearted music plays to convince us there’s nothing wrong with this, its just boys being boys.

The reason I do not blame the writing instead of Stiles or Derek when calling them abusive, is because the instances I’m basing their abuse on are frequent, showing up in multiple episodes, in recurring patterns, written by multiple writers. When Stiles lashes out violently at Scott because he holds him personally responsible for what happened to his dad in 5B, that’s not an aberration or a mischaracterization to me, because it pulls straight from the Stiles archives, it is all behavior he has demonstrated before without accountability, without remorse. When Derek trains the beta trio with shock and pain in S2 while saying its for their own good, that’s not an aberration or a mischaracterization because its consistent with what Derek has done and said and believed before, while not having yet been something he’s shown remorse or alternate ways of thinking on yet.

All of that is different from a one-time occasion where Scott behaves in a way that I do not believe fits with his prior or later characterization.

(And yes, Scott has done other harmful things to people, like using his claws on Corey in S5, but literally nobody has ever pretended this wasn’t as harmful or as dangerous as it was. Scott is called out in canon for it. Lydia gives him shit for it. Corey avoids him and mistrusts him because of it. Nobody is saying ‘oh other characters have done worse, when in fact, they actually have, considering Corey’s interactions with Theo and the Dread Doctors. But even the show regards that as irrelevant to the fact that Scott fucked up with Corey and everyone knows it, and thus its tangential to what I’m describing here.)

And let me be perfectly clear. This is not me saying that there is ANY validity to the argument that ‘if it only happens once, its not abuse’. If it happens once in real life, you should still run the hell away, lest it turn out to be a precursor to more. Because the person who hit you ‘just that one time’ is still going to be the same person tomorrow, whereas in fiction, the character who did it ‘just that one time’ is not necessarily going to be the exact same person when penned by a different writer in the next episode. When it happens in fiction, you’re justified in evaluating if it happened because that’s who the character is, or if its because that’s who the person writing him at the moment feels the character is in this moment.

So if you want to defend Derek’s actions via the angle that he is a fictional character written by humans with their own flaws and biases and blindspots, if you want to use that argument to claim that you don’t think he would have acted a certain way here, or that you don’t think it fits with everything else we know about him to have him behaving a certain way there? That’s one thing. But only if you do it while still acknowledging that what he DID do, on screen, was still abusive, and should be described as such.

If you want to defend a character who has committed harm against another, because yes, that describes just about every character on the show - find a way to do it that doesn’t mitigate the harm they actually caused, or unilaterally absolve them of it.

When I say I don’t view Scott as abusive because of that Isaac scene, and because I recognize the writers’ complicity in it, that is not me saying ‘well that’s not really abusive because Scott’s obviously a victim himself.’

You will NEVER catch me saying crap like that, because underneath those actual words is the implicit subtext:

‘Well its different when the person hurting Isaac has also been abused. Its not as bad. I’m okay with characters hurting Isaac as long as they’re characters I like more, and I can point to their own abuse as a factor.’

You will NEVER catch me saying ‘well Scott has done all kinds of good things for Isaac, he loves and protects him, he lets him stay in his house, this was only one time’ - (FROM AN IN STORY PERSPECTIVE).

Because underneath those words is the implicit subtext:

‘Well everyone fucks up and as long as someone loves and supports someone MOST of the time, when someone like that harms Isaac, its not as bad as if it were say, Jackson or one of the twins. I’m okay with characters hurting Isaac as long as those characters make it up to him at other times and Isaac KNOWS that this character didn’t really mean it and really loves him.’

And you will NEVER catch me saying ‘well every other character on the show has done just as bad, and its far from the worst thing that’s ever happened to Isaac’....

because underneath those words is the implicit subtext:

‘As long as whatever happens to Isaac isn’t as bad as the thing that happened to him before this or after this, its not that bad, he can take it, he’s been through worse. And as long as what a character does to Isaac isn’t as bad as what another character did, well, its not really abuse, its not like it was Derek throwing a glass at his head or Allison stabbing him with Chinese ring daggers or whatever, so why are we even talking about this instead of that, we should only ever focus on the WORST things to happen to a character, anything less than that doesn’t matter.’

How we view shows, how we react in fandom, is not divorced from reality and how we behave in the outside world. Its not okay to talk about things like abuse as though they’re academic and abstract and the way we view a character abusing another in fiction has nothing to do with the way we view a person abusing another in real life.

Because even with the awareness that shows operate on two levels, the actions of the characters and the writing behind those characters - when fandom’s priority when viewing a character they like abusing another character they like is to say ‘well its not that bad, other people do way worse, they really love that character and didn’t mean that’.....when they prioritize finding IN STORY excuses for the abuser’s behavior, even when they could just as readily direct their concerns at the writing instead....

How many of those same fans do you think, if confronted with an abuse victim in real life, making allegations against someone that fan likes or trusts -

How many of those same fans do you think will fall back on finding loopholes or ways to mitigate the harm or justify the actions of that person they like and trust and don’t want to believe could really be abusive?

And why do so many people feel comfortable insisting this has nothing to do with the fact that their time in fandom encouraged this behavior by teaching them it was okay and in fact normal and expected to only view abuse through the lens of the abuser, rather than that of their victim, ESPECIALLY if its the abuser they’re more predisposed to liking or have more of a prior connection or attachment to?

#abuse cw #long post #even for me #lol

37 notes · View notes