#addressing complaints and criticism

[zepskies]

I saw your reply to a comment and I don't understand why you get so defensive when someone criticizes your writing. Isn't that allowed? That's the problem with Tumblr these days. There are only small groups and anyone who doesn't belong isn't tolerated. I enjoyed reading your stories, but I also found several things that made no sense. It's a shame that criticism is simply ignored.

Ah, what a lovely message to wake up to! 😂

Hello, “anon.” I think I know who you are, but for the sake of this I’ll refer to you as anon.

I believe you’re referencing a comment someone made on If I Stay - Part 2, where they basically said, "This makes no sense and I couldn't bother to finish reading it anyway." What you're saying is it made no sense to you. And as you can see, I don't ignore criticism, I respectfully responded.

You're asking me to tolerate rudeness, anon. I've been writing for about nineteen years, since I was 10 years old. I've gone through a lot of growth as a writer since then, and I still am. I'm not a perfect writer, nor am I expecting everyone to love everything I write.

However, there is a world of difference between "constructive criticism" and "rude criticism."

Constructive criticism takes many forms, but it can look like this:

"There were things I liked about this story [name an example], but I'm sorry, this aspect I just didn't understand/didn't vibe with [insert example]."

^That kind of thing I can respect. It's about the delivery. I've had meaningful discourse with people who didn't vibe with things about my work. We talked it out like adults. However, the comment, "This makes no sense and I couldn't bother to finish reading it anyway" is not constructive. It's a rude, disrespectful complaint.

I spend several days, even weeks or months outlining, researching, drafting, and editing my stories before I post them here and on Ao3 (for free), as many writers do. Because we care about our work and a lot of us take writing seriously.

It takes someone just a few minutes to read something, and just a few seconds to write a negative comment like that.

The only way I know you've "enjoyed my stories" is if you comment and/or reblog a story. That particular person has only ever posted negative comments on my work; therefore, I can only assume they don't like my stories.

"Don't like, don't read" is a thing in fandom for a reason. Words have power, and at their worst, they can make or break a writer's will to write and share more stories (again, for free). It's a very personal thing to write and be creative, and it can be doubly scary for new writers to share them publicly.

So you can ignore this and continue leaving comments like that for writers if you want to, but I doubt it will earn you many friends in the fandom. At least, not from the writers you claim to like.

[about-faces]

Last night, I was once again struggling to actually write smut for a Harvey/Bruce/Gilda fic, when I noticed a very timely new guest comment on my Gilda fic, Bust. It was the first truly critical response I’ve gotten so far, and while that sort of thing would normally send me into a depressive tizzy, I actually found it really interesting!

So instead of actually writing the ship, as I should have been, I wanted to take this opportunity to think about just why the heck I shipped them in the first place.

Here’s how I responded, with added scans to hopefully better illustrate my point, plus some additions that occurred to me upon drafting this post:

I’m actually glad you raised this point, because I would have felt the exact same as you just a few years ago!

I’m gray-asexual, and I used to be a bit bothered by the rise of Bruce/Harvey shippers, because it was their canonical platonic FRIENDSHIP that mattered so much to me. I gradually warmed up to the shippers, because 1.) I realized I was ace and they probably weren’t, and 2.) they at least understood the importance of Bruce and Harvey’s bond, which is more than I can say for LOTS of official DC media.

Still, something bugged me about the ship, and I realized what it was: the lack of Gilda from the equation. She’s always been deeply important to me, especially her scant older appearances, and erasing her for a Bruce/Harvey ship (even one I’d come to appreciate) didn’t sit right with me.

But like you said, it’s not canon, and I’ve always been deeply invested in canon, even the stuff that’s frustrating and contradictory. So yeah, the throuple would have bugged me too.

Except! It all depends on WHICH canon you’re talking about!

So over the past 15 years, I’ve been obsessed with tracking down the entirety of the obscure, forgotten Batman newspaper comic strip from 1989-1991. I’ve posted the entire thing at @batman-daily, and I strongly encourage you to check it out. A couple years ago, I reread it and noticed something really interesting: the remarkable relationship between Bruce, Harvey, and the latter’s wife, Alice, who is Gilda in every way but name. They are all mutual friends, with Alice even going to visit Bruce alone to help/bully him to take care of himself.

It all reads like a perfect long-game setup for a love triangle, or for Harvey—having become Two-Face—to go after his loved ones in a jealous rage, like he did in Paul Dini’s “Two-Timer,” a story which notably showed that Grace had feelings for Bruce.

With that in mind, consider the final story arc of the newspaper strip, wherein Bruce acknowledges his OWN feelings for Alice and PASSIONATELY KISSES HER, all in a hilariously roundabout way to save her marriage to Harvey! It makes sense in context and is frankly hilarious.

And it works! Because Harvey isn’t jealous! The love triangle conflict you expect NEVER HAPPENS! Because they all love one another! And that love saves Harvey in the very end!

Was it explicitly a throuple? No, but nor have Bruce and Harvey ever canonically touched dicks. And yet the love between Bruce and Harvey in canon is true and real enough that shippers who want to make it sexual are perfectly allowed to do so, because it’s the love that matters. At least, for those of us who aren’t afraid to acknowledge the love between men, platonic or otherwise. And that love is rooted in canon.

So consider this: the mutual three-way-love between Bruce, Harvey, and Alice/Gilda is ALSO canon. That comic strip has been officially accepted as DC multiverse canon in the “Crisis on Infinite Earths: Absolute Edition,” which designated it as Earth-1289.

Furthermore, there’s something else you need to consider: the fact that Harvey HAS been used in love triangles against Bruce in several stories in recent decades. I already mentioned “Two-Timer,” but there’s also Nolan’s “The Dark Knight,” the animated “Gotham By Gaslight” film, and the Telltale game. In various ways, these stories serve to throw a wedge in the friendship between Bruce (the protagonist, whose story serves him) and Harvey (the guy who is going to lose it all, the woman included). I hate that shit. I hate the contrived drama that’s meant to stir up needless added conflict between two men who love each other.

And then, on the other hand, you have Mariko Tamaki’s Gilda story from “Batman: Black and White.” Tamaki depicted Harvey and Gilda being in a distant, loveless marriage, where even on their wedding day, he was constantly ignoring her in favor of work. The only person who could actually get his attention was Bruce.

At the time, this felt an awful lot like that problem I was talking about with the Bruce/Harvey shippers: raising up the gay ship while throwing the woman under the bus. In this case, for the purpose of doing an avenging girlboss take on Gilda. I hated that too, especially when Tamaki didn’t even follow through with the gay subtext in her next, miserable Two-Face comic.

You know that meme of a bride, groom, and best man all kissing one another, while the bride flips off the cameraman in the end? @whipbogard redrew the Tamaki wedding scene as that meme, right around the time I reread the comic strip. And suddenly, everything clicked into place for me.

After a lifetime of never, ever having any serious fandom ships, I fell in love with the idea of Bruce/Harvey/Gilda. Take what the comic strip did and bring it into the mainstream canon I love to spite the canon I hate.

In those great old Gilda stories, she saw through Harvey’s bullshit and knew how to reach him, however temporarily. She could do the same with Bruce. She’d be a valuable third voice for the ongoing toxic relationship between Bruce and Harvey, the one who could love them both while also getting to be frustrated with how fucking stupid and fucked-up both these men are.

Before she was reduced to a ride-or-die killer housewife in "The Long Halloween" (which, I'll grant you, has its own appeal), classic Gilda would actually stand up to Harvey and tell him to cut out his shit or else. I love the idea that she can also see right through Bruce, understanding how very alike he and Harvey are, even if they don't want to admit it.

Writing Gilda this way speaks to me as a longtime fan of both men, while also wanting to try to develop her place, as a woman stuck in the middle of their decades' worth of conflict and angst. She sees these men at their best, worst, and most pathetic/ridiculous, and while she's got the nerve to stand up for herself and call them out as needed, she still loves them nonetheless. For me, Gilda has become the voice for fans just like me, who are helpless to stop Batman and Two-Face from continuing the cycle of violent, toxic friendship, but still loving them nonetheless, and always hoping for the best.

So, at this point, let’s say I’ve at least managed to make you grudgingly accept my reasoning for the relationship. Even if that’s true, I’m gonna guess that the mention of a threesome felt like it came out of left field. I can’t argue with that. I wanted to actually write that as its own smutfic but, being ace, I struggle with that. But I really liked the idea, and as I was writing this, it just really wanted to be mentioned, so I included it.

The response has been positive (until now), which indicated to me that I had been successful in introducing Gilda as a viable third into a slice of fandom which had only shipped Bruce and Harvey. This is fanfic, after all, such things are expected, even encouraged, so I leaned into it.

Now, if I were ever (un?)fortunate enough to write for DC, officially? I doubt I’d have the nerve to go that far. But I’d still want to at least embrace the polycule-coded relationship between those three that we saw in the newspaper comic strip. I think it adds a whole new, refreshing spin on their ongoing dynamics, while being rooted in relationships that were established all the way back in 1942 by Bill Finger.

Finger’s story, at its heart, was all about how love can save a life. How love is the only way to defeat the villain. For Harvey Kent’s part, Gilda’s love was every bit as important as Batman’s unwillingness to give up on his friend. So I’m just taking it one step further within the freedom allowed me by fanfic.

Sorry for the length of the reply, but as you can see, I only came to this shit after several decades of thinking about 80+ years of official material. I hope I have at least been able to lessen your feelings of being jarred out of a story you otherwise seemed to appreciate. For my part, I hope to further develop the potential of this fucked-up polycule in future stories, and maybe—just maybe—I’ll be able to get you on board too. Hope to see you then!

(art by ofossart)

[preciousbabyangle]

going to write a paper on the stages of the phandom cycle of outrage and discourse lmao

[solasfenheral]

mfw you've only got a gut feel on this etc etc but considering comments from the devs where they've talked abt how the writing doesn't stop at the first iteration and continues through development, and how there are parts of vg's writing that FEEL like a first draft (huge chunks of the crow storyline, the beat where Taash's second outing doesn't have any set up to Taash feeling chained by their mother's expectations prior to this and thus the sheer emotion feels wildly out of left field) and how this game pivoted from an MMO to a singleplayer with three years of development time and how one of gaider's complaints in leaving bioware was that it felt like there was little consideration from management about the importance of writing TO the game. hnnnghhhhhh

[divine-victory]

A lot of people's problems with this show would be fixed if they just took two seconds to do their own analysis rather than waiting for other people to tell them what to think about every scene play by play.

"I just want them to..." They did. You just didn't take the extra 2 seconds to think critically about what the show is doing.

Y'all read the advice "show, don't tell" and then don't realize that as a piece of scripted media, it has been written to show you and not to tell you.

[thebreakfastgenie]

This is going to get me screencapped and ridiculed by leftblr but at this point I don't care.

The way people talk about Ruth Bader Ginsburg is misogynistic. This post is not about the merits of her decision to remain in her seat. I've discussed that before and I'm happy to go through it again with anyone who is genuinely interested in the complexities of that situation, but for the sake of this post, I am not arguing that it's unreasonable to believe, with the benefit of hindsight, that the country would be a in a better position today if Ginsburg had retired in 2012. The issue I want to address is how people talk about it.

People who blame Ginsburg for the current state of the Supreme Court tend to throw around words like greedy, selfish, and ambitious, echoing a familiar form of misogyny. Ambition is only bad when women demonstrate it, and women in politics are regularly punished for ambition. Even more disturbingly, people tend to blame not just Ginsburg, but the women and girls who looked up to her. I've seen the "Notorious RBG" nickname derided as a cult of personality, when the reality is that Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a trailblazer and a role model to a lot of women and girls. I've seen leftists try to hide behind valid criticisms of some of Ginsburg's positions (and it should, but doesn't, go without saying that you can see someone as a role model without believing they are correct about every issue all the time) but you barely have to scratch the surface to see that the real complaint is that they think women who admire her are cringe. I don't know if people understand how significant she was; she was only the second woman on the Supreme Court and the first, Sandra Day O'Connor, was a conservative Reagan appointee. Even so, Justice O'Connor spoke about the significance of Justice Ginsburg joining her and reality that women faced in their position being more apparent when she could see it happening to someone else. It's the same old anti-feminist story of dismissing women and their desires.

This particular case rankles me because it's underscored by the complete silence about Anthony Kennedy. Ruth Bader Ginsburg made a judgment call about her health that didn't work out--and barely; she died four months before Trump left office. Anthony Kennedy, a supposed moderate justice who claimed to not want Roe v Wade to be overturned, retired in 2018, knowing full well Trump would replace him with someone who would overturn Roe v Wade. It was Kennedy's replacement, not Ginsburg's, that doomed Roe. The decision was 6-3. If Ginsburg had lived four more months, or retired in 2012 and been replaced with an Obama appointee, the Dobbs v Jackson decision would have been 5-4 in the same direction. Anthony Kennedy was replaced with Brett Kavanaugh, a white man who sobbed crocodile tears when confronted with credible allegations of sexual assault and ultimately faced no consequences. Anthony Kennedy let all of this happen and slunk off into his cushy retirement. Where is the anger for him? He's alive! Being angrier at Ginsburg than Kennedy makes absolutely no sense. There is no logic to explain it, only misogyny.

It doesn't escape my notice that the anger at Ginsburg goes hand-in-hand with blaming women for their own suffering as a result of the Dobbs decision and with blaming Hillary Clinton for the 2016 election, while making any excuse for not voting for her or deriding her for months. It's emblematic of a political system that does not care about women and despises women trying to speak up and make our issues known.

[starcurtain]

I know I've talked a lot about Alhaitham actually being one of the funniest characters in Genshin Impact, but every time I think about him, I find something new to laugh at.

Alhaitham's character stories and personal criticisms of Kaveh largely hinge on one specific point: That Kaveh's genius intellect and artistic abilities are incongruous with his idealism. Kaveh possesses more talent than a selfless person should reasonably have, leaving him vulnerable to constantly being taken advantage of.

However, Alhaitham states these complaints about Kaveh's personality while having the exact same problem himself.

Alhaitham is literally the definition of "personality and talents do not match." Sir, you are the pot calling the kettle black.

It's a given: Alhaitham is exceedingly competent. He is intelligent, rational, and capable of being impartial when needed. Despite being a slacker as the Akademiya's scribe, during his stint as the Acting Grand Sage, the game goes out of its way to note--in several places--that Alhaitham was actually going above and beyond what was expected of him, taking the position very seriously, uncovering and fixing major issues in the Akademiya, and demonstrating a deep care for the sanctity and future of the Akademiya as a whole when Sumeru's people's will to research and learn declined after the collapse of the Akasha.

By all accounts, Alhaitham is (was) a fantastic Grand Sage. Compared to Azar, who is shown as inherently self-aggrandizing and unconcerned with Sumeru's well-being, Alhaitham genuinely did his best during his brief time as Sumeru's leader, protecting students' research, concerning himself with how to address the people's problems, and even diving in to solve mysteries that normally would have been left for the matra. As Acting Grand Sage, we're told his behavior and judgments were fair, and he addressed problems immediately and with his full effort.

In short, there is literally no one else more qualified to be Grand Sage than Alhaitham.

And yet, despite possessing every talent needed to be the leader of a nation, Alhaitham doesn't have the personality for it. He has every single trait a good leader requires... And yet he refuses to be a leader. His own talent vastly exceeds the slow-paced life his personality leads him to seek, making his particular abilities more incongruous with his values than Kaveh's--by a mile. People keep trying to promote him into positions of leadership because his talents are so obvious, and yet he does everything in his power to deny his own abilities and instead fly under the radar--and under the level of his full potential too.

Awful hypocritical for you to claim Kaveh's talents don't match his personality when yours match even less, Alhaitham...

[crossdressingdeath]

You know what the most frustrating thing about DAV criticism is at the moment? It's that I do in fact have criticisms. Quite a few, actually. It's a Bioware game, of course I have criticisms. No one I've spoken to or whose posts I've seen thinks it's perfect or above criticism. But the thing is, I—and I imagine a lot of other firmly positive blogs—know that if I share any of those criticisms, if I make posts discussing them and talk about the game's flaws, I will immediately be inundated by people using those complaints to insist that the whole game is garbage and the writing is bad and Bioware's a terrible studio who can't make good games and DAI (of all fucking games) was so much better and blah blah blah blah. I know that because it's happened every goddamn time I've made a less-than-positive post about DAV. And I don't have the energy to deal with that! The endless stream of bad faith criticism wears me down and having to constantly stop to defend a game I like when I'm trying to discuss its flaws because if I don't (and frankly half the time even if I do) people will use my posts to claim the whole game is garbage is exhausting, and fandom is supposed to be fun. So I can't discuss DAV's flaws on tumblr if I want to avoid that, and it is infuriating. I see people bitching about toxic positivity and people refusing to acknowledge the game's flaws, and I really want those people to take a second to consider: do the game's fans ignore its flaws and refuse to accept that anything about it is bad? Or have you created an environment that is so toxic that no one who likes the game wants to risk getting your attention by mentioning what's bad about it and they respond more aggressively than is warranted to even genuine critique in an attempt to ward you off? Because there will always be assholes who claim that genuine problems are Fine, Actually, Stop Being Such A Baby... but if people can't address the game's flaws in public without immediately getting dragged into five different arguments about how it is in fact ultimately a really solid game, they're not going to do it no matter how much they recognise those flaws.

[least-carpet]

yu ziyuan screams, cont.

One of the things that irritates me is when people aren't thinking about motivation when translating characters from one context to another, ESPECIALLY women. Specifically, I'm thinking about Yu Ziyuan, and how her anger about her life is so often reduced to romantic jealousy or just chalked up to her being "violent and abusive¹." Like, okay, yes, she's often angry and really mean about it. Why is she angry and what does that look like in a different time and place?

Here are some reasons for Yu Ziyuan's anger in canon that aren't just "she's jealous" (gag):

Feeling devalued and disrespected in her marriage, which is also her job.

Not wanting to parent a child she didn't agree to adopt.

Being an extremely talented and strong cultivator who is restricted by society's expectations for women / her gender role, which she resists (such as by continuing to nighthunt, being called "Madame Yu" rather than "Madame Jiang," etc.).

Wanting a secure future for both her children and wanting them to appear strong in order to access that future—which is why she's so angry about Jiang Yanli peeling lotus seeds and Jiang Cheng coming in second to Wei Wuxian. Her children are "lowering themselves" in relation to a person she doesn't consider a member of her family and who is continually a source of public shame. She feels like this might damage their prospects, all for a person she doesn't personally care about!

Feeling pressured to secure that future for her children by herself, because her husband doesn't seem to like one of them, and furthermore often doesn't seem to be acting in their best interests.

So if I was going to translate to a modern!au, that could look like:

Feeling devalued and disrespected in her marriage (still happens).

Pausing her career to have children, then returning and having to fight hard to make up ground.

Wanting a secure future for her children, pushing them aggressively to achieve (in concrete ways such as test scores and extracurriculars). Likely a source of conflict with the more hands-off Jiang Fengmian.

I do think she could get divorced, but obviously wouldn't if it had severe social, financial, and/or professional consequences—in canon, she maintains a separate household, she's addressed by a title that separates her from her husband, and she spends a lot of time away from him, but she hasn't left. Really depends on the era and milieu she's operating in. She wouldn't do it if it would damage her or her family, or unless the damage had already occurred and couldn't be mitigated.

The threat of divorce might change the dynamic between her and Jiang Fengmian, though? If it didn't, why not? Is there a specific reason they both feel like they can't leave?

Like, you don't have to do all of that for there to be conflict between her (authoritarian, concerned with society's values, high standards, definite Tiger Mom candidate) and Wei Wuxian (rebellious, mischievous, high-achieving but not particularly well-behaved), regardless of whether or not he's a part of her household. They disagree about a lot of fundamental stuff! There's always going to be friction, even without canon's complex social/household arrangements! You simply do not have to reduce her to a misogynistic caricature of a jealous wife, even if part of what made her so angry in canon is gossip about her husband's feelings for another woman. That gossip doesn't exist in a vacuum! It has a political dimension! The power of gossip is literally a theme in the book! Many of her complaints are explicitly political, especially in relation to the Wen! I'm cool, it's cool, we're good. I'll stop yelling now.

(I also think that the person most likely to be critical of Yu Ziyuan's parenting—or Jiang Fengmian's parenting, for that matter—is Jiang Yanli rather than Jiang Cheng or Wei Wuxian, especially after she's had a child, and, in all cases, any individual member of the trio is more likely to be indignant about the others' treatment rather than their own. But that could be a post of its own.)

I'm not particularly interesting in rehashing the discourse about whether or not her treatment of Wei Wuxian constitutes abuse. I think this is a good summary of how it's treated in-story. I think it's fair to still read it and think it's unacceptable, but the original construction of it in canon is relevant if you're trying to translate their relationship to a modern setting.

[elitehanitje]

Cody Rhodes Supports Body Shaming

"This is a vanity business. This weird online contingent doesn't realize how important that (physique) is. We're wrestling with our shirts off, folks, it's ok to go the gym...and you hear fans be like "You can't body-shame wrestlers" - what are you talking about? We're standing there half naked and you're paying hundreds of dollars to see us. Body shame me all you want. Currently, I know it might seem toxic and stuff, but amongst the boys and girls, everyone [is saying] who does your diet? Who’s training? There’s a whole ‘nother health-conscious' now in WWE, and I love that. We’re trying to look our best."

This is normally the part where everyone might rant about how wrong Cody is on certain points, but the fact that he admits his answer “might seem toxic and stuff” pretty much does the work.

The world of professional wrestling today is quite different from the past. Gone are the days of wrestlers who were just overly muscular; now, more fit and diverse athletes are the norm.

Someone like Adam Cole, who has been receiving a lot of body shaming lately, might not agree with what Cody Rhodes had to say. Nevertheless, Rhodes has made his stance on body shaming clear and has no regrets about what he said.

Especially when AEW haters body-shame wrestlers such as Orange Cassidy, Adam Cole, Nyla Rose, Eddie Kingston, Deonna Purazzo, Samoa Joe, Marko Stunt, Jack Perry, Zack Sabre Jr, JD Drake, Beef, Willow Nightingale, Joshi Wrestlers, NJPW Wrestlers, CMLL/Luchador wrestlers, The Young Bucks, and many more, many fans are trying to figure out whether Rhodes wants fans to attack AEW/non-WWE wrestlers or just insult wrestlers in general.

Hana Kimura committed suicide following a series of troubling tweets addressing online bullying and body shaming directed at her from "fans", she was found dead in her apartment in Tokyo on May 23, 2020. She was only 22.

Deonna Purazzo was harassed and body-shamed by many "fans" and she had to make a statement about it. Cody Rhodes' green light about allowing body-shaming wrestlers is a dangerous path toward harassment and bullying. Even a champion such as Zack Sabre Jr was being called a skinny jobber by WWE fans for winning the G1 Climax, not even knowing what his face looked like because they'd never seen him wrestle.

Marko Stunt was body-shamed during his tenure as a wrestler especially when podcaster Jim Cornette fueled his hatred toward him by telling his fans to harass the wrestler. Luchasaurus was fired from WWE when he filed a complaint against many people who bullied and body-shamed trainees and wrestlers.

Wrestler Sheamus was body-shamed a lot during his tenure especially because of his weight gain. Fans also quickly pointed out that Cody Rhodes' father, the late Dusty Rhodes was well-known to have a large body type, which is ironic that Cody allows this behavior. His half-brother, Dustin Rhodes is also an AEW wrestler who doesn't react to Cody, but tweets words of encouragement to his fans.

Some critics say Cody Rhodes is saying these things because he is playing a character, so he's becoming toxic. But this is actually a genuine interview from him, not when he was playing a character. He wants to appeal to those WWE toxic fans who like to insult AEW, Japanese wrestlers, and Luchas wrestlers.

Critics immediately have something to say about his toxic beliefs:

[harunayuuka2060]

Twst Unveil Event: The goddess of love's blessing Part 3

Yuurin: *has been called to the headmage's office*

Crowley: Yuurin, your classmates have lodged complaints about hearing voices that appear to be criticizing them.

Yuurin: ...

The voices:

'This one has an ugly voice.'

'This one looks lazy.'

'This one will surely cheat.'

'Cross them all out from the list!'

Yuurin: Yes.

Crowley: This can't go on. The morale of the students are dropping because of this.

Yuurin: Headmage, I apologize for the disturbance caused by the voices. I kindly request your patience in handling this matter.

Crowley: ...

Crowley: You're one of my best students so I will let this slide.

Crowley: Nevertheless, I will grant you until next week to address this issue.

Epel: So you have until next week to find yourself a boyfriend.

Yuurin: Yes.

Epel: Can't you just choose someone you know? Someone to pretend to be in love with you?

The voices: ATROCIOUS!

Epel: !!!

Yuurin: Yes. It's extremely unacceptable.

Epel: O-Oh... What are you going to do now?

Yuurin: ...

Yuurin: Am I allowed to recommend candidates myself?

The voices: Yes.

Yuurin: ...

Yuurin: Then...

Floyd: Damselfish?

Yuurin: Hello, Floyd-senpai.

Floyd: ...

Floyd: *smiles* You look gorgeous today~ What happened?

Yuurin: It's a long story.

Floyd: Hm... Okay~. So~ Is there something I can help you with, damselfish~?

Yuurin: I'm here to ask you a question, Floyd-senpai.

Floyd: Ask right away~.

Yuurin: ...

Yuurin: Will you be my husband?

Floyd: ...

Floyd: Sorry, damselfish. But I'm still too young for that. *smiles genuinely*

Yuurin: *smiles, satisfied with his answer*

Yuurin: Thank you for your honesty, Floyd-senpai.

Floyd: But I feel bad for rejecting you~.

Yuurin: No, I'm fine. I'll be on my way.

Floyd: Good luck finding a husband~.

Yuurin: *nods then leaves Octavinelle*

Azul: *approaches Floyd, seems to be in a rush*

Azul: Floyd, did Yuurin come here?

Floyd: Yeah. He was here a few seconds ago. Why?

Azul: Did you offer him a room to stay in?

Floyd: No?

Azul: ...

Azul: Floyd, I asked you to offer him a room.

Floyd: Eh, I forgot.

Azul: You little—

Kalim and Jamil: ...

Yuurin: *has asked Kalim the same question*

Kalim: Yuurin, you're a good guy, but um... I'm not ready for marriage yet.

Yuurin: That's fine, Kalim-senpai.

Kalim: Are you sure?

Yuurin: Yes.

Jamil: ...

Jamil: He doesn't seem offended at all. Could it be...

Jamil: He's expecting to be rejected?

Kalim: *tries to cheer up Yuurin*

Kalim: I'll find a good husband for you!

Jamil: Kalim.

Yuurin: ...

Yuurin: I appreciate your offer, Kalim-senpai. But I must do it myself.

*In the Savanaclaw dorm*

Leona: ...

Ruggie and Jack: ...

The Savanaclaw students: ...

Jack: Is she proposing to the candidates knowing that she would get rejected?

Ruggie: Yeah. That seems her strategy.

Leona: *holding the list of students who were rejected by the voices*

Leona: I'm not liking this. Her last option now is people from Diasomnia.

The Savanaclaw students: ...

Savanaclaw student A: I think the nymphs preferred someone from that dorm.

Leona, Ruggie, and Jack: ...

Leona: Why?

Savanaclaw student A: One of them told me.

Savanaclaw student A: She said that they already knew who it was.

Leona: ...

Leona: What the fu—

[breelandwalker]

Why is Wicca not a preferred way of practice? I’ve read a couple of posts, and Wicca isn’t favored.

Moral puritanism and performative outrage, plain and simple. There's nothing inherently wrong with Wicca or Wiccans. Some people in the community just aren't doing the work and seem to think that decolonizing our thinking begins and ends with screaming BOYCOTT at anything they deem even remotely reprehensible.

Let's do some of the work and dig a little deeper, shall we?

The main complaint is that Wicca started with people who had problematic worldviews and has had some growing pains and issues with racism, sexism, cultural appropriation, and bad actors in the community as it has evolved, reaching into the present day.

But here's the thing - SHOW ME A RELIGION THAT DOESN'T HAVE THESE PROBLEMS SOMEWHERE IN ITS' HISTORY OR CURRENT CULTURE. GO AHEAD, I'LL WAIT.

It's neither fair nor reasonable to judge a religion based on its' beginnings, or to dismiss the ability of a community to grow and evolve over time, or to pretend that the modern witchcraft movement doesn't owe a large part of its' existence to Wicca. Like it or not, if it weren't for Wiccans, we wouldn't have the kind of organization or recognition that we do, nor would we have had certain landmark legal cases that led to pagans being able to claim the protection of law against religious discrimination in the States.

(And because someone somewhere is going to demand the encyclopedia answer - This is not to discount the contributions of other groups, but the historical fact remains that the people responsible for the foundations of Wicca kickstarted the movement in the UK and subsequent practitioners brought it into public view in a positive light during the counterculture movements of the 1950s and 1960s. And it was Wicca that was first pagan religion in the US to be recognized and therefore included under the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. This does not change the CULTURAL AND SOCIETAL response to witchcraft or paganism, or the problems that witches and pagans still face in other places, only the presence of civil rights that were not there before. And that has, in fact, contributed to an increase in wider normalization and acceptance. We may not owe EVERYTHING to Wicca and Wiccans, but we would not be where we are as a movement or a community without them.)

Not to mention, Wicca hasn't even been around for a whole century yet and already it's being judged like it has the same kind of cultural and political clout that, oh say, Christianity does in much of the Western world. And it's no coincidence that a good number of the criticisms leveled at Wiccans are the same ones flung at Christians.

Wicca DOES have a strong influence on modern witchcraft, because Wicca and Wiccans were such a big part of the foundation of the movement. Furthermore, many of the published works viewed as standard beginner texts were written by Wiccans or heavily influenced by Wiccan ideas and concepts. Admittedly, there was a tendency for quite some time to think of Wicca and Wiccan tenets as the default for modern witchcraft, and now that we're moving away from that and discovering just how much of our thinking relies on that framework and the ideas present within it, there's backlash happening.

It's important to try and decolonize your thinking as much as possible when it comes to witchcraft. But that involves more work and more effort than just pointing fingers and broadly condemning anything remotely problematic or anything that's ever been touched or influenced by people whose moral and ethical codes don't pass muster under a modern lens. We cannot and should not expect people from 50+ years ago to toe the line when people living today can't even do so reliably.

So to wrap it all up - there's nothing wrong with Wicca and there's nothing wrong with being Wiccan. We are none of us completely unproblematic and until we address the fact that issues with racism, sexism, manipulation, cultural appropriation, and so forth exist in MANY parts of the modern witchcraft and pagan community, we don't get to tar and feather any one group. A bit of critical thinking and self-reflection, and a great deal of Knowing Our Own History, is the key to moving forward here.

Because until the people voicing these complaints most loudly can realize the head-splitting irony of condemning Wicca in one breath and celebrating the Wheel of the Year or venerating a Maiden-Mother-Crone-model goddess in the next, we're not actually getting anywhere.

Anyway, I hope this helps to answer some of your questions. For more information, I highly recommend reading Margot Adler's "Drawing Down The Moon" and Ronald Hutton's "Triumph of the Moon" for a more comprehensive overview of the history of the modern witchcraft movement. Both are written from an outside scholar's perspective and are presented as research rather than rhetoric. Part of knowing where we are and deciding where to go next is knowing where we started and where we've been, after all.

[doomdoomofdoom]

If you've been boycotting Eurovision, you may have missed out on how bad it truly was, so here are a few events in no particular order:

The opening act of the semi-finals was Eric Saade, a swedish-palestinian singer who participated in Eurovision 2011. He wore a keffiyeh, a palestinian headdress, around his arm like a wristband.

Despite not making any political statements or drawing attention to his accessory, he was reprimanded by the EBU for "compromising the non-political nature of the event".

During their semi-final performance, the Irish contestant had the word "ceasefire" in old irish runes painted on their face. They were ordered to change it for the final, as it was deemed too political.

The contestant from Israel was not allowed to mingle with the other contestants, due to supposed security risks.

During an Interview, she was asked if she felt any concerns over her participation potentially endangering the event and the people present. The host told her she did not have to answer this question. Dutch contestant 'Joost' asked "why not?"

Joost, while not openly antagonizing the Israeli contestant, has made covert critical remarks about the EBUs decision to allow Israel to participate.

On Friday, the day before the Finale, Joost was investigated by the swedish police for a supposed incident where he threatened an EBU crew member. Thursday, a female camera operator had followed him off-stage to continue filming, even though there was an agreement not to film him off-stage. After she ignored his requests to stop, he threatened her with some sort of gesture.

Joost was disqualified mere hours before the finale. He was slotted to perform just before Israel and considered a favorite and potential winner.

The show itself did not address his disqualification. The dutch entry was simply skipped with no further comment.

Israeli broadcaster KAN was confirmed to have broken EBU rules during their coverage of the Irish act in the Semifinal. The commentator spoke negatively about their act, condemning the very scary goth aesthetic, and noting their willingness to criticize Israel's actions.

Despite Irish contestant Bambie Thug lodging a complaint with the EBU, there was no penalty or other repercussion.

If you were hoping that the event itself would turn into some sort of protest, I have to disappoint you:

Despite rumors of other contestants dropping out over Joost's disqualification, all of them performed.

There was audible booing every time Israel was on-screen, including their performance, announcement of points, and every time they received points. There was equally audible cheering.

No contestant or spokesperson directly addressed the ""controversy"" (read: ongoing genocide being artwashed), although very few made covert remarks about peace, love, dignity, and equality.

The most explicit it got was the Austrian spokesperson, saying something along the lines of "It's hard to find only positive words in a time where heartlessness prevails. But we hope everyone can unite through music and show that everyone deserves to be treated equally"

No one stormed on stage or held up a palestinian flag or anything, if you were hoping for that. I certainly was.

Israel gave its 12 points (both Jury and public) to Luxembourg. The singer is half-israeli and born in Jerusalem.

Jury votes mostly ignored Israel, netting them a total of 52 points through jury votes, which put them somewhere in the middle of the scoreboard. Norway, Cyprus, and Germany awarded them 8 points each, making them the main contributors.

In contrast, Israel received 323 points from the public voting. They were second only to Croatia with 337. 15 public votings, including "rest of the world" awarded Israel their 12 points, more than any other country would receive. The only countries not to award any points to Israel in the public vote were Croatia and Ukraine.

Israel thereby placed 5th out of 25.

But hey, at least the winner (Switzerland) was nonbinary, diversity win amirite. Notably, they had to smuggle in their pride flag, since EBU guidelines only allow flags of participating countries and the rainbow flag. (This is also why palestinian flags were not allowed. It's not a new rule, but they certainly weren't going to start bending it now.)

If there's one thing to take away from this: Do not ever think the rest of the world is on your side, just because your social media is. The rest of the world has shown their allegiance, and it lies with Israel and Genocide.

Do not stop fighting for what is right.

[burst-of-iridescent]

well since i can already tell that we’re all going to be subjected to the same old tired mai & mai.ko discourse for the foreseeable future, let’s get it clear right now that the atla comics have never been, and will never be acceptable mediums of character development, and here’s why:

1. the comics are given the benefit of hindsight, which impairs organic character growth.

it’s become extremely clear over the last few years that many of the comics are made as, or include, direct responses to criticisms of the original show — especially when it comes to katara, mai, and the canon pairings. aang didn’t ask katara for consent? look, he’s checking if he can kiss her! mai doesn’t care about fire nation imperialism? here, she’s an anti fascist! iroh was a creep to june? don’t worry, here he is apologising!

many of the things the characters do or say in the comics feel unnatural because they are not written as characters, but as mouthpieces for the creators to address fandom complaints from the original show.

“but that’s good, right? they’re trying to make it better!” i mean… sure? it still doesn’t change the fact that it’s damage control, and that no matter what stories span the middle, the arcs of these characters still begin and end with avatar: the last airbender, and the legend of korra, both of which are fixed and immutable. the comics cannot retroactively fix the issues of either show, because they’ve already been defined as the goalposts of the characters’ lives, and there is no way to undo that.

it’s like if you eat a meal that isn’t to your satisfaction, and maybe the chief makes you another dish, which is all well and good — but it doesn’t fix the fact that the original meal still sucked! sometimes, accepting criticism means accepting that there’s no way to go back and fix it but to do better next time, with the next story you wish to tell.

if the legend of korra didn’t exist, and the arcs of the characters were left open after atla, then maybe there would be for the room for the comics to function as character development if not for the fact that…

2. the comics are intended for a very different audience than the show.

it’s obvious that the audience for the original show vastly outnumbers the audience for the comics, likely by thousands, if not millions. this isn’t the mcu, where the installation of any atla property is vital to understanding the next, and so on. you can skip the comics and miss nothing whatsoever (and honestly your life would be far improved by doing so).

those who read the comics are likely only the real diehard fans of the show — and the creators know this, which is why we have the whole issue of point one above. but this difference in audience matters, because it reflects the significance of the story being told, and how important it is for the audience to know it. this is why, if the characters’ development and storylines in the comics truly, genuinely mattered, it would have been in the show already.

i’m not saying that the gaang wouldn’t have continued to grow and change post-atla, but generally stories exist as closed circuits, self-contained within themselves. when you end atla, you’re meant to believe that those arcs are finished. that’s the whole reason the comics deal mostly with fun silly adventures, or with quick, temporary conflicts instead of grand, overarching narratives, because they are not truly meant to function as a continuation of the story of atla, or its characters.

(if you ask me frankly, they’re meant to be nostalgia cash grabs, but that’s neither here nor there.)

creator intention matters with the atla comics (or any atla property, in fact), because creator intention was the subject of criticism for the original show in the first place. why must we rely on the comics or the cookbook or avatar legends to tell us that katara did things with her life outside of aang? why do we need to turn to something released nearly two decades after atla to find any evidence that mai denounced the fire nation’s imperialist indoctrination, when she’s romantically involved with one of the show’s most important characters? why are these stories relegated to a medium with far less reach, far too late?

the answer is that the writers didn’t find those stories to be originally worth telling, and that is the real problem fans have been pointing out since 2008.

so, tldr:

[night-market-if]

To Writers

So, we need to have a discussion about a few things. I'm not here saying that I am the end all be all on writing advice. Far, far from it. But, I've been seeing some discussions through various sights that are bothering me, so I kind of wanted to say something to writers out there (especially younger ones) in case you have not heard it said before.

Read your classics. There is a theme of condemning them for racist language. Non inclusivity. Sexism. And the list goes on. But.... READ THEM. I don't care if they are classics such as Slaughterhouse Five, Huck Finn, Catch - 22, Lolita, Grapes of Wrath, or if they are just books that are a bit outdated in what they have to say. READ THEM. Just because something has an abhorrent theme to it, does not mean that there is not something to learn from that. This is how we gain critical thinking. By reading different perspectives. And yes, sometimes those perspectives are bad. Or, sometimes those perspectives are ones that are actually condemning the act itself, but because it is not spelled out as such, society tends to think it is uplifting such a topic. Look at what you are reading and form different opinions, thoughts and feelings about things so you can be a far more rounded writer (and person). Look at things from the opposite side. Inhabit those mindsets for a bit and try to find the roots of such thinking. Because the world is morally grey at best, and so are your characters if you want them to be believable.

If you are writing about a different world, a different race, especially one you have made up, they are most likely not going to follow the very human conventions that we have applied to our own life. And that's fine. It will upset some people, and it will take others a bit to understand. However, societies that are not based on our own, would not believably act like our own. If you wish to make a society like that, think a little outside the box and be prepared for people to be upset by this. But, again, critical thinking should be applied. At the end of the day, stories are meant to be vehicles to 'what if's'. They are not real. They are an escape. Not everyones escape looks the same.

Writing is hard, yes, but it does not have to be something we suffer through. There is a constant borage of meme's and journal entries and complaints that circulate bemoaning not being about to write. Sometimes, yeah, that's going to happen. That's okay. Walk away. You do not have to give into the despair that has oddly clouded this community. Can't write? Go read. Spend time with a friend. Watch a show. Get your chore list done so you are all set when you can write. You do not need to write every day, nor do you need to force yourself to write if you are not someone who works well with that. Learn what your own behaviors are and address those first. And if you do not fall into the category that everyone else does, you are not less of a writer.

Stop writing for everyone else. Write for your characters. I know the rhetoric has always been know your audience. Or write for you. But, unless you are in a publishing house, with an agent, and have to meet a requirement? Who cares. Create some characters, figure out who they are, and let them loose. It is far less confining, and you can create some characters that are much more dimensional than if you are set to the definitions that you or others have put on your creations.

Don't be a perfectionist. Perfectionism comes through lots of editing. That is not important until miles down the road. Get the idea out. Let it blossom. And then let it seep for a bit. Don't get hung up on something not making sense.

I really hope this helps. The community that I see forming of writers is full of indecision and doubt. Know that you are doing that to yourself. Free yourself of that burden and just see where the journey takes you.

[supertrainstationh]

DOCTORS OF DOG LAND

by A. Griffin / Super Train Station H

•••••••••••••

Once upon a time, in a country far away, lived a society of canines that walked on only two legs. They wore shirts, and also pants, and could hold things with their hands, and they ran a hospital whose science work was quite advanced. One patient they cared for, submitted by her parents, had symptoms most unusual, their cause far from apparent. When happy without fail rather than simply wag her tail, she weirded others out by doing strange things with her mouth, making expressions unacceptable, whose wrongness needn’t be mentioned, reacting to being glad by making a face that threatened - with twisted corners of the mouth, demanding bad attention. For a dog to show their teeth, threatens a bite to all who see - that a happy pup would act like that was strange, and near obscene. There were other factors too, filling the folder of her case - as stimuli of normal life caused vividly painful headaches. Senses smashed by overwhelming force, over-loads would occur, bending sight and sound, into phantasmagoric blur. She'd also stare at certain plants, then strangely say, they were pretty, so came batteries of fancy tests to diagnose her quickly. The doctors sat down grimly with her father and her mother, and explained that their dear little girl had visions plagued by "color". A study of her eyes determined over-active cones, making normal waves of light appear as strange and separate tones. Her enjoyment of these hues expunged alternative conclusions - this afflicted little girl was clearly suffering delusions. Arcs of broken light she said, bowed skyward after rain, illusions such as these signaled a misdeveloped brain. And for the chronic headaches there was nothing they could do, but they prescribed her medication so she'd see as others do. Isolated as she was she longed to be included - since strange things made her happy, it fit perfect to remove them. She called chromatic deviations wonderful, and nice to see, but disturbing thoughts like that could be suppressed with therapy. Patient complaints of her new vision, were really nothing worth a listen - professionals were sparing her the pain of seeing different. It would be cruel not to address her habit with her mouth - that teeth-exposing tick, when happy, needed wringing out. Just how to come about a cure, posed somewhat of a puzzle, until a genius doctor strapped the girl up in a muzzle. Its calibrated sensors administered electric shocks, that provided helpful feedback, each and every time she talked - and also if she regressed, by wasting time staring at flowers, there was no doubt she could be fixed, with scientific power. There was word that special glasses, might be all that it would take, to lessen certain bands of light that triggered her headaches, but that would signal "strange condition" and cause outsider suspicion - and making her look normal was the object of the mission. There were extremists out there who claimed the "color" thing was cool, though those mutts lacked PhDs and couldn't change the rules. And if some had become doctors, and spectromatic sight they had, that disqualifying trait signaled they needed to be banned. The goal was not to understand and lend a helping hand - enforcing homogeneity was normalcy's demand. Oh if struggle could be softened, without persecuting patients - but thinking so inventive, was the future's innovation. So within the narrow focus of the logic then at hand, they heeled unto textbook commands, for treatment plans in Dog Land.

If you liked this poem, you might like my work-in-progress YouTube video series Barrier Aggression, in which I provide detailed commentary on a few non-disabled disability gatekeepers who have put themselves in charge of an "autism advocacy" nonprofit.

(this isn't a criticism of science/medicine helping disabled people, its a criticism of science/medicine "treating" characteristics that are only problems in the context of them not being seen as "normal" by typical people)

•••••••••••••

MY LINKS

[🅗Twitch] [🅗Carrd] [🅗VOD Channel] [🅗 FA] [🅗Ko-fi]