#an americentric post

[breelandwalker]

Books Bans Are Bullshit

If anyone needs to have a ready-made clapback for conversations about the ethics surrounding bans on queer literature, feel free to put on your history cap and remind your opponent that the Comstock Laws, which are the basis for current arguments for banning books on the basis of "moral issues," were the brainchild of a man who hated women and books, attempted to ban the provision of anatomy textbooks to medical students, attempted to trap multiple companies which provided "obscene, lewd, or lascivious" material through mail order, opposed civil liberties so violently that it landed him in JAIL, and was made so uncomfortable by nudity that he attempted to sue a department store for the brief nudity of their mannequins during merchandise changes.

Anthony Comstock was a fucking loser and so are the jackholes still clinging to his rhetoric.

Educate yourselves, my darlings. Then go forth and eviscerate.

[paperuniverse]

Guy asked if we take American cash and I said no then as he was walking away he muttered “why does no one take it?”

We are in Canada sir 🧍‍♂️

[just-antithings]

So why do some queer content creators disagree with xenogenders? Isn’t it another term for non-binary?

tw discussion of white supremacy

Short answer 1: they're exclus

Short answer 2: they're assimilationist queers who think if we can make ourselves palatable enough to The CisHets(tm), they'll be accepting. (I cannot stress enough that these people are wrong. The CisHets(tm) want zero queer people to exist, not just "the queer people they can stomach")

Long answer: a fuckton of western queer people hold bigoted internal beliefs because of being raised at the whims of white supremacy. They have not been made to challenge their internal biases and the moment these biases are challenged, in white cis queers especially, they react negatively to the Thing Making Them Uncomfortable to make the icky feeling its giving them go away.

Because that's like, the thing, right, with bigots and ableists and racists and queerphobes and antis and radfems and terfs and exclus: their solution to being made uncomfortable by something is to try and make that thing not exist, so they don't have to feel like that. After all, they can't be subjected to gross icky feelings if there's nothing around to prompt the icky feeling. It's why some bigots say they don't care "as long as they don't have to see".

Now, obviously, the healthy way of dealing with something prompting a bad feeling inside you is to. Work through that feeling. It's entirely unreasonable to demand something or someone not exist because the existence itself or just seeing that it exists makes you uncomfortable.

But that's how these people deal with it, because under white supremacy you are taught things are always someone else's problem. I'm not fucking joking - we are taught that. It's why people who have never had their worldview or authority challenged (cishet white men) deal so spectacularly badly with suddenly encountering those things. White supremacy thrives on everything being the fault of "some other guy" - the marginalized group of choice changes based on the situation and circumstances. (Which is, to be clear, super fucked up and not something I'm making light of.)

People hate on xenogenders because they're ignorant about what xenogenders are (gender related to concept of thing other than male/female ie catgender is experiencing ur gender in a cat-like way, your gender being Cat, etc & can get highly specific) and instead of trying to get educated center themselves, their own experiences with more traditional genders and gender roles, and their misguided fears that being "too queer" will make The Cishets(tm) not accept us. (They're not gonna accept us til we make them.)

Also while supremacy teaches us its okay to put aside our morals and ethics if there is an acceptable target (applies to more traditional bigotry too like racism yes. Good church going people who would never dream of saying something like that to a "normal" person because their "morals" forbid it but morals are a hat you can take off sometimes, see?). The modern internet is New Rome and everyone participates in the blood sport at the coliseum.

And no, they're not just the same thing as nonbinary.

[360degreesasthecrowflies]

Its kind of funny how growing up surrounded by SOME US exports of pop culture but also some huge gaps of things that didn't really export to your country...

Can leave you with a totally warped understanding of where some references actually come from.

Like it took me to today to learn that Charlie Brown and the Great Pumpkin is an actual old cartoon and not a sardonic fandom parody creation based on that old art style but taking something cute and saccharine and making it weird and creepy.

I wonder how many other things I (and other non USians) might've come across without recognising it was based on a reference to something else even older or more well known than the fan byproduct...

[petr1kov]

I just wanna thank you for your post on the Mandela Effect as a South African! I get the whole effect people are trying to describe but calling it specifically that out of all the weird collective-memory incidents is weird af because that wasn’t even a global thing like the berenstain bears seems to be (I get that ‘cause my childhood memories are berenstein too) + it wasn’t even a phenomena in the region concerned + the people who coinedthat term didn’t seem to have actual exposure/connection/proximity to the events surrounding it.

No one who was actually in or near South Africa remembers him dying because the whole movement to free him was such a big deal it was truly inescapable. You’d have to live under several rocks of wilful ignorance to not know about it. There were a few Black freedom fighters, peers of his, that did die in jail or under police custody, notably Steve Biko, that were publicised during that same time period. I honestly do wonder often if American/European people just heard news of some notable Black anti-apartheid activist in Africa dying in jail and assumed it was him because they’d mashed all those guys together in their minds? Was it a news report about events in a far away country with bad information?

it’s could very well be because of their status as Black activists that got arrested; people in the western world often talk about Mandela as a MLK-esque figure who single-handedly ended apartheid and its flattens the whole history into a narrative about a messianic figure - the sheer determination of a special individual - when in reality he worked with a collective with many Black people and ANC members who did the same acts of resistance and even went to the same prison as him. He actively did try to push back against this narrow, individualistic idea of his role in history when he was alive. Many of these freedom fighters and political figures often get written out of history when the story is told internationally because of this, and their contributions to the movements (along with possibly one of their deaths) may have been subconsciously misattributed to Mandela.

So being from here, everyone I’ve talked to thinks it’s the weirdest thing it’s called the Mandela effect because it seems more like people living far off not taking in the news properly more than a true mass misremembering or… case of collective inter-dimensional travelling.

yes, exactly! this is what truly bothers me about the mandela effect being called that. regardless of whether or not people use it to mean the silly parallel dimensions theory or simply to refer to the mass misremembering of something (as most people tend to do today), which i do find kind of fun and interesting on it's own, still keeping it named after mandela is just incredibly tone-deaf.

no matter which version you look, every definition of this term is based around the fact that those supposed changes in people's memory vs reality are always small, mundane and inconsequential enough as to go unnoticed by someone not paying attention, and like. mandela dying during the apartheid in the 80s is the absolute OPPOSITE of an inconsequential or unimportant event that nobody would pay attention to for years. it's the sort of thing that would bring massive consequences to the history of an entire country, which in turn would also affect the world at large in different ways, most obviously when it comes to black liberation movements.

seeing this term get used to refer to actual silly and inconsequential things such as the berenstain bears misspelling or pikachu's tail not having a black tip is just crazy to me. it's hard not to see it as a dismissal of mandela, as if he is some sort of fictional character from a fictional country, whose impact in real life is on-par with monopoly's mascot not wearing a monocle. and i just know that nobody would so easily accept such a ridiculous conspiracy/concept getting thrown around like this if it were about an US or european president 🤷‍♀️

[leastparanoidandroid]

say what you will about america but at least our tax dollars are going towards the very respectable military industrial complex rather than some guy’s hat wearing party

[beauzos]

watching that fucking cat art discourse go down on my dash is giving me a headache

[canyousaythatagainplease]

This is a rant I have needed to say for a while.

WHY DO AMERICANS SAY THEIR STATES WHEN YOU ASK THEM WHERE THEIR FROM??

I don’t want your home address and childhood backstory I’m trying to make small talk. Americans are the only people I’ve ever met who do that?? “Where are you from?” Normal answers “Canada” “Mexico” “France”

For some reasons Americans are like

“I’m from Utah/Ohio” “but now I live in L.A” like bro plz just say USA. I don’t care about the states, I don’t know what you’re talking about. Isn’t Ohio not real??Then you ask for them to just say “I’m from America” they try and go “well Canada is *technically* north *America* call a Canadian an American just TRY IT. I can’t. It’s so weird. Why do they do that???

I get the USA is big. So is Canada, so are so many places yet none of us do that??????

[delusionalisted]

“Low Spoon” witchcraft doesn’t exist.

This is a post for all my disabled siblings. (But it applies to broke or low-income siblings as well.)

By the way, you heard me. What does exist is capitalism, consumerism and scarcity, all things that don’t belong to witchcraft. Witches in the past were mostly poor, unprivileged and unhealthy individuals with just one skill: knowledge. Yes, for today’s americentric standards they’d have been called “low-spoons practitioners”.

No fancy candles? No cauldron? Just one heavily used tarot deck?

Yes, no fancy candles Susan, you can keep those paraffin toxins to yourself.

Cauldron, Deborah? I have no money to waste for your pinterest aesthetics. We cook in this house, I can simply use a kitchen pot.

Mais oui Elizabeth, just one old tarot deck. It’s used my dear Elizabeth, you know… that’s something that happens when you actually use… tarot instead of purchasing 15 decks, then ending up using just one or two of them and leaving the other 13 to collect dust and resentment towards you.

*Sigh*

This is all to say, witchcraft doesn’t need a 9-steps process to be achieved. Calling it “low-spoons” practice just means “high spoons” practice is the norm. It is not. Most importantly, it never was. You don’t need 30 specific crystals to perform a spell, you don’t even need one most of the times.

— Addition: If you fit into the “Low Spoons” type of witch and you noticed that your spells or rituals don’t work, then let me share one of the possible reasons why they fail: you followed a “low spoons” recipe or spell preparation, consciously or unconsciously gave the title “too much power” (your subconscious registered your spell as something lesser than a proper ceremony) and any energy that you and the ingredients released just plopped like a pudding on the floor.

Branding something as “lesser” in spirituality can lead to two results: failure or high delays. Yes, the herbs you use still have, nourish and release power, but without YOUR faith, their power alone can do so much; in most cases, your subconscious skepticism rejects your desired manifestation leading to a delayed or completely failed magickal attempt.

[shadeslayer]

True to his Christian ideals, [Martin Luther King Jr.] saw the pervading nature of racism and oppression that led directly from the Christian idea of history. That we were in Southeast Asia at all derived directly from our conception of ourselves as guardians of history against all movements that would upset the balance we had achieved by military and economic power alone. King saw that there could be no solution to domestic problems without a solution to international problems. And solving international problems meant giving up on the Western interpretation of history and the role of Western nations in history.

Vine Deloria Jr. (Standing Rock Sioux), God Is Red, first published in 1973

[thegeorgiatennantblog]

So Ingrav was going nutsy cuckoo about this whole scene from Staged S03E04.

Gif courtesy @invisibleicewands

Gross right!

Usually, I don't call people out like this. Tbh this is a first and I feel odd. Disclaimer: I don't want to bully anyone. This is just my two cents on this post which is one of many that have managed to make me uncomfortable time and time again.

So I was reading this and it struck me as wrong for so many reasons but I'll list them down.

How sad and pathetic must your life be that you don't have any close platonic friendships. That you cannot understand platonic love when you see it. That you have never been hugged or held by your best friend. My heart goes out to you!

You subscribe to that weird ideology that doesn't let men be close to one another, allow emotional vulnerability or physical intimacy, etc., because 'OMG if they're doing that, they must be gay for each other'. This is such a heteronormative, Western-hegemonic, Americentric view of masculinity and leads to toxic masculinities being developed where boys feel like they can't do any of these things for fear of being labelled "gay". There are cultures in the world where male friends hold hands when walking down the street, where they kiss each other on the cheek when greeting each other, where they express their emotional vulnerabilities to each other. So please, my dears, get some perspective.

The whole "Oh look at the sexual tension in their eyes.... how he doesn't flinch or blink when sth sth.... that tiny little shudder when..." (ew I'm gonna boke; even writing this makes me sick). Like yeah mate. He's doing that when his own actual irl wife is sitting under the table recording the audio for the scene. iT's tOTaLlY nORmaL rIGht... EVerYonE doEs tHAt.... I dO iT aLl ThE TimE.

Wait how do I know that..... um

Interview: Georgia Tennant On Filming Staged Series 3 - TV (countryandtownhouse.com)

@dtmsrpfcringe any notes?

Anyway to clean out the cringe have some gorgeous shots of our queen from this very interview. BTW it's a really sweet interview. I'd recommend you guys read it. <3

[sharonisthebettercarter]

billy butcher and addiction--

felt there's a need for a good and proper analysis for this fucker (as well as i can manage, maybe throw in a bit of a rant on poor fandom etiquette, 'three laws of fandom' are an oldie but a goodie lol) so here we go i guess--

i wanna start by saying this is a full scope character deep dive (sortaish?? best i can do take it or leave it--lol i might go further in depth on specific scenes or whatnot later, i'm longwinded but i'm tryin' to condense as best i can for this, aaaaaaaaaaand long long post ahead--) that def includes elements solidly confirmed in dear becky and probably leans more on comics billy overall, but def does intertwine and interlock with show billy (as they are essentially the same, garth ennis' own words went something like 'he's a perfect billy butcher' lol)

i'll try to avoid spoilers (??) for the most part like dear becky, but there are some things that may need more context (there is quite a bit of in the show that works well enough to represent anyway but i guess we'll see how this goes, i may end up talking more about the show elements and how they parallel with comics billy anyway)

i also think it's worth mentioning that there's a lot to billy (especially in the comic) i feel fandom either ignores, dismisses or doesn't want to acknowledge, or just doesn't notice.

whether from personal bias/prejudice, desire (fitting billy into that 'alpha's alpha' toxic masculinity 'dom top' fever dream 'mold' so to speak, probably--no, definitely the *worst* way to interpret and easiest way bungle up his character, it completely misses the fact that billy has built *that* 'daddy approved' version of himself as a *facade* to *hide* his own shame and insecurity, and he is *so* much more complex than that nonsense (and genuinely uncomfortable and unhappy being that way-beyond the subtle guilt of a constant high). can we talk about the ways in which fandoms promote and perpetuate toxic masculinity--what, no time we'll be here all week?? oh, okay. jesus fucking christ that is exactly as bad if not worse than the maga chud interpretation and unironic worship of homelander--), lack of personal experience/familiarity, understanding--fuck it, even lack of education in media analysis or reading comprehension (if not both), and *especially* being pro-censorship/americentric/*stuck* with purity culture blinders (or even some part of them lingering)

all of those can def make media (and characters like billy) that isn't 'cookie cutter america-approved' fairly difficult to understand or accept (i guess??)

i've seen so much listed to hell and back in attempts to describe comics billy. 'he's a piece of shit' *YES*. 'he's just wish fulfillment for the author's hatred of superheroes' *no*??? let me not get into the complete hypocrisy of someone who writes or enjoys fanfic--the epitome of *wish fulfilment*--unironically complaining about other authors doing this and thinking it's a legit complaint. how does *anyone* read the entire story and come to *that* conclusion???

did you even bother reading the comic? no, i don't mean glossing over it with a completely closed mind while actively ignoring and dismissing everything important put in front of you and designed to make you think because the blood and guts or other is too distracting apparently, i mean *actually* reading it thoroughly and making an effort to think about what's being presented and why, waiting for the drop *instead* of jumping to judge (as is the american way)

and to some degree, i get it. i wouldn't say this comic is the easiest to digest (especially if completely unfamiliar with many of the themes presented, even the show has sparked some ass takes and interpretations) there's also plenty of common misconceptions, one in particular about garth ennis 'hating' superheroes. this is actually not true, what he hates is how the superhero *genre* has bottlenecked the comics industry and what is more likely to see success in it (and as a fellow creative, i completely understand how frustrating that would be, his main interest is actually war stories)

it's def one thing to say, 'nah, i don't vibe with the style' or 'it's not really for me/my taste but it's fine if others like it', i get that, satire and horror aren't for everyone. honest critique is fair even.

but it is a whole 'nother thing entirely to pretend your own personal tastes are *the only 'correct' creative law* and then *vehemently* oppose or hate something an artist created and denounce, harass, or fuck--dehumanize the people who enjoy it, if not the artists who work(ed) on it.

i'm sorry, this is a tangent cause it's def not limited to the hate the boys comics or ennis gets *at all*, it's especially prevalent in *literal* kids media like teen titans go where the thing in question is simply put--*NOT MADE FOR THE SHITHEADS NONSTOP COMPLAINING ABOUT IT* when they can literally, *LITERALLY* just *accept* that they weren't the *target audience* and move the fuck on with their day, happy as can be. *instead* of shitting on something *or the people who like it* to make literal *children* or other people feel bad about liking it.

it's one thing to try and educate people or have discourse and discussion, it is another entirely to *bully* them over something so *stupid* as *fiction*.

i especially have a problem with this shit when i have *several* artists tell me that they don't feel *safe* or *welcome* being themselves, liking or creating what *they* want to make in a fandom *because* of the fandom attitude and normalization of *hate* within that fandom.

i *thought* fandoms were supposed to be about *love* so what the fuck is this human tribalist false dichotomy bullshit??

and of course, that's not always the case. there is also an unbelievable level of respect that is given to fanartists and fanfiction writers, and that is *beautiful*. 'don't like, don't read'. *PERFECT*. curate your own content, complain or rant in your own spaces--you're entitled to an opinion, but *accept* that it still has a right to exist and other people still have a right to love it (and aren't wrong for that, opinions cannot be objective), *even if you don't like it*. just don't engage then, it's that simple.

now extend that level of courtesy to the people, artists and writers in the industry.

no, i'm not trying to shut down criticism of media, proper critique is how we learn and grow and understand better and in turn *create* better. yes, they can fumble the fucking bag too, especially when adapting something from a source material and--like *some* fanfic writers out there--think they can do it 'way better'.

but the people in the industry? who bend over backwards, going on strike in some cases, breaking their necks to work on and create the things that we *love* and latch onto?

they're people too. and whether the thing they make goes *exactly* how we want or not, however you feel about the money in the entertainment industry (which they see barely a dime of if those fucking strikes and constant mistreatment are any indication), they don't deserve to be treated like scabs.

that mentality of 'not my personal taste = universally bad' and 'anyone who disagrees with my opinion is wrong' is fucking gross and *extremely elitist*, just straight up announcing how pretentious, obtuse, willfully arrogant and ignorant, and *lacking in self awareness*--the number one easiest way to be the *shittiest* kind of artist/writer/critic--you are. it is *exactly* like cishet white men complaining about something being 'bad' because it's 'woke' or has anything *besides* a cishet white man for the protagonist.

*god forbid something isn't tailor made specifically for them.*

swear to gawd, i got a list of different bullshit and circle jerking i've seen all across different fandoms for different reasons. no i'm not mad at any one person in particular, just a little salty from recurring problems and gatekeeping (ghoulfucking-GHOULFUCKING OF ALL THINGS I--I CANNOT) if not straight up bullying (does it really make a bitch feel *so* much better to try and hurt other people for liking what they, and let's be honest, are not willing to give the time of day?) in fandoms. (the complete audacity of people to complain about a media being 'childish' or 'bad' because 'insert nonsensical trivial bullshit here that holds no weight because it's personal taste if not flat out wrong and not actual critique' and then turn around and throw the biggest fucking tantrums about it--let me not get into the whole sharon carter debacle jesus christ--)

same shit. different pile.

also, fuck me. i keep *forgetting* that genuinely valid critique (*not* personal taste/opinion, proper critique pertains to things like techniques used, composition, narrative consistency and plot holes, goals of the artist/writer, accomplishments of those goals, etc.) is something that needs proper education and understanding all on its own which not a whole ton of people get or even know, which just goes to show--i'm a dumbass too. (but i won't deny that plenty of 'critics' are full of shit and *know* this but use their 'personal taste' as 'critique' *anyway* because... they enjoy being complete assholes and discouraging other artists i guess.)

y'all, take a class or two in art critique and literature analysis. you'll learn all the cool lingo (to later forget if you're like me~), and maybe (hopefully) walk out with a bit more of an open mind wanting to encourage more art in the world, even if you don't personally like it. take a moment to *listen* to differing opinions in their *entirety* and you might even gain a new perspective.

*no one* should be ashamed to ask questions or admit they don't know or understand something and fuck the people that would make you feel that way. *we can and should help each other.*

but stagnant or hostile fandoms with no self awareness and perpetuated elitism circle jerks? *really* fucking shameful, regardless of the form or where they are.

ANYWHO--

ugh, fuck. okay. i think i'm done with that tangent, back on topic--

BILLY BEAN~<3

and i want to reiterate that *again*, dear becky *does* confirm pretty much everything i'm going to discuss here tho technically speaking, nothing is spoiled here as it's just reiterating what is implicit (if not stated outright) throughout the series.

as far as dear becky goes, it's a good final gut-wrenching piece to the series and i loved it, but it definitely leaned on more of 'tell' instead of 'show, don't tell' (no duh in context, but probably because the rest of the comic did the 'show'--very well imo but it still flew over peoples' heads and made them misplace their brains--i'm sorry, i've just lost so much patience for the lack of reading comprehension and media literacy, but honestly? ennis is genuinely too good at knowing how to spark a strong emotional reaction in readers. and can we talk about the dense mofos that *make* authors have to 'tell' just to confirm something that is heavily implied--what, no time? oh, fuck, fine.)

OKAY--

addiction.

what about it, and why am i mentioning it. well. because if it's not clear by now, william butcher is an addict.

and it is one of, if not the core element that drives him to do what he does.

not becky or becca. not justice.

addiction.

and i don't mean traditional substance abuse (though he admits there has been as much in his life, especially with alcohol, his drug of choice is a bit more complex and maybe not so easy to spot on the surface for those unfamiliar with addiction).

in the show, we even see him mention that he's 'done 'em all' and there's *nothing* like temp v--and it's because temp v *amplifies* his *addiction* to the highest level it could exist on.

something else to note, there's a ton of stigma and widespread (ableist) misconception surrounding addiction still (which may be part of why people may not want to recognize it in billy), but it is absolutely a clinical mental disorder and people who suffer from it should be treated as *medical patients*, not reduced to violent criminals and scumbags. (fuck you drug war and prohibition, you are the root of organized crime and you're racist as shit.) it's also possible to become addicted to *anything*. and i mean *anything*.

if you can repeat a behavior and your brain no longer cares whether or not that behavior is causing you harm because there is a *compulsive* urge for that *repetition* or a specific result from it? that is addiction. money, anger, pain, violence, self harm, attention, love...

you'd think the last one might be okay, but it's not. it's an easy way to get caught in the infinite loop of an abusive relationship, just with promise of it. no delivery necessary.

but it doesn't have to be drugs that cause addiction. hell, gambling addiction is a thing all it's own that can get *incredibly* severe.

and listen, too much of *anything* can be horrible for you. fucking coconut will give you the runs if you eat too much that shit is *not* fun pun intended--

i digress.

in billy's case? he's actually addicted to two i just listed.

violence. and self harm.

i mentioned before that what drives billy has next to nothing to do with what happened to becky or becca.

there's a common misconception that, at the end of the day, billy does have some level of good intent behind his actions, and to a degree this is true in the *complete reverse* of what people often assume, and this is proven repeatedly in both the show (with just what we have seen) and comic (where its laid out too heavily to ignore).

setting aside the fact that there's *never* a good 'rEaSoN' to commit or even attempt *genocide* (EVER. i have ZERO patience for the constant apologism of this bullshit, SWEAR TO GAWD FANDUMB--) and billy's genocidal tendencies on their own, the idea that 'he goes after homelander for becca' or 'justice' has been completely debunked.

'justice is not vengeance'

something to always keep in mind.

but... in the first season? hughie called him out on this.

butcher calls him a 'disgrace to robin's memory', and hughie--bless his little heart, responds with 'i think i'm doing this *for* her.'

it's an interesting response, because hughie is essentially saying--

'you'll *die* for this woman, but that's not what she would have wanted. i'm going to *live* for robin, and for *annie*, because *that's* what she would have wanted.'

and he's absolutely right. billy loved becca, would have died for her. but he refuses to listen and *live* for her.

the group therapist too even before hughie. she literally laid it all out, front and center in the clearest way possible, 'it's a defense mechanism', and then butcher had his little meltdown just before telling hughie about becca, everything he can, including *using* other peoples tragedies and his own *specifically* to manipulate hughie and try and make sure *starlight* can't *save* him from what butcher is trying to turn him into.

*so that hughie stays stuck on his reason to die, instead of finding one to live.*

in the second season, *becca* herself calls him out on this, multiple times.

'you put me on this pedestal but i never knew how to save you'.

'--i didn't come to you, i went to vought--.'

and that's just it, becca (and becky in the comic) is *intimately* familiar with billy's *addiction* and the underlying mental health issues he *wouldn't address*. she didn't tell him what happened even after the shock of it because she *knew* that it would just become a reason for billy to *give in* and be his worst self to a degree where she would *lose him* regardless of what she felt or asked for from him.

she felt she had to *suffer in silence* to *protect him* from *himself*, something that ends up *destroying* her.

becca wanted to *save* billy, but more importantly, she wanted *him* to *save himself* because she *believed in him*, *so much*.

'i never wanted that for you.'

she doesn't want billy to drown and suffer or cause harm in his own hatred and addictions. she *loved* him so much so, that she was willing to *drown herself* if it meant she could save *him*. she loved him *too much*.

billy's mum too, even tries to help in her own way. (she is much less aware of billy's activity in the comic, but we'll come back to her. for the show, this was likely in response to seeing the news about *stillwell*, something his dad fucking *praised* him for)

'--that he wouldn't have this hold on you--'

billy's actions are almost entirely driven by the *addiction* his father forced on him. on doing the things that would make his 'daddy' *proud*. and the thing is, he's *fully aware* of this.

he constantly *says* that *becca* is his 'reason', that she was his *cure*, but she's the *excuse*. his *new addiction* and *self medication* (also billy, you fucking cunt you *know* what you do and have no leg to stand on when it comes to self medicating--)

both in the worst of what he does and his rejection of addressing his own traumas, and she is *unwilling* in this endeavor. she never wanted this hate to consume him, she never wanted all of this death with her name as the signature, *she never wanted billy to be his father*, much less be something much worse.

he even admits as much in the third season when he hallucinates lenny who tells him his actions would 'break becca's heart'

billy responds something along the lines of 'becca's dead, it doesn't matter what she thinks'. (a line presented in the comic even more harshly, but it drives the point home perfectly.)

when he sees lenny again in his nightmare--

'i'm not that bastard--.'

'come off it billy, you always have been. cause anyone who's ever loved you, you end up gettin' 'em killed, don't ya--.'

'--the last person on god's green earth tryin' to stop you from bein' a monster, and what do you do? drag him down to your level... when he dies... and he will... then no can stop you.'

OOF OUCH OWIE--. the lenny stuff hits so damn hard but it represents *perfectly* what butcher's own *internalized beliefs* are.

mallory calls him out on it literally every season.

'--but billy! not the others!'

'it's like asking a cockroach to not be a cockroach--'

'--because it wouldn't stop with just homelander--'

'this was never about ryan or becca, it was always selfish. the hate inside that you want to let loose on the world.'

'--i was wrong... you are your father, always have been...'

and then there's billy's subsequent impulsive reaction to push ryan away, and *be his father*.

but hell, even in gen v when mallory is speaking to shetty.

and truthfully, billy was even showing *withdrawal* symptoms at the beginning of the third season.

billy himself, even *self punishes*, picking fights he knows he *won't* win as a way to counterbalance *and* satisfy his own addiction, infinite loop. vicious cycle.. (ooh i will def be coming back to the big one here--), and we see this in one *HUGE* way, and in many many smaller ways, but even in the more literal sense of going to bars, starting trouble, and laughing or smiling when he's getting beat the fuck up or *losing*.

it's even highlighted in the show, billy *seeking out violence* and conflict whether he should or not, *especially* when unnecessary. getting his own face busted up and smiling because of it is something that happens multiple times in the comic (even on accident in one instance), and is def given a place in the show. it's easy to pass off as billy simply being a masochist (which is def true lmao he does admit as much), but there's also more to it than that and it goes hand in hand with his *addiction* and--

what he thinks he deserves.

billy *hates himself* so *severely* that he actually *does not believe* that he is capable of the *good* that others, such as lenny, becca, his mum, and hughie are willing to *see* in him. he *completely* believes it when others say that 'he is his father' (internalizes it, struggles with it, and frequently acts on it).

he puts on a show. bravado, posture, and 'confidence'. and he's so good at putting on that front, that he can fool himself, even for a moment. and those that believe it will even *enable* him. and the people he feels *nothing* for? again, he maintains the front. he lives his life *masking*, *faking it*--so fucking hard. homelander could never--

and it's not even necessarily the result of toxic masculinity. don't get me wrong, he def has some issues with that lingering (y'all, if you have *say* you're an 'alpha' and posture out your sweet little ass off 24/7, you're def *not* an 'alpha' lmfao), but it's more so his own *trauma* that forces him to *cling* to that.

but when he *loves*, and he loves *deeply*, he completely rolls over and shows his belly like a kitten<3... when he was with becky, he was happy and comfortable, and all of that *ridiculousness* just melted away completely... he didn't feel any need for it because he felt *safe*, because this constant *insecurity* and feeling of being *threatened* all the damn time looming overhead had suddenly cleared up with becky there.

it's not even so much that billy doesn't feel fear. he might not traditionally (at all if his amygdala is damaged), but considering the fight or flight response, billy's *default* setting literally *is* that *fight* response. he's the way he is because he is *always* afraid and he's been conditioned for it to manifest itself as *rage*.

we see bits of his love come through in a few moments he has with people he has genuine care for. (the way he loves his mum and she instantly calms him down is genuinely so sweet.)

but it's always gonna come back down to 'daddy dearest'.

because of him, *billy is afraid of living*.

and--

his father. *is proud of him*.

billy is *just like him* or *everything he wanted to be* as a *man*, or at least is compelled to *project* this on the surface. and everything in *billy* that *is* his father, *just like him*, is *everything* that billy *hates*. so it manifests into an *intense* self loathing and spiraled addiction that magnifies the worst of what his father *forced* on him.

he *doesn't want* to be *his father*, but he feels, and fully believes that *he already is*. his self hatred is another form of *hating his father*, because *he is that man's legacy*.

so *billy* doesn't *believe* that he deserves love or goodness or care from other people (a parallel we see in homelander, presented a bit differently.) so he 'doesn't care'. makes excuses to not care (about people in general, if not just the very *prominent* antisocial tendencies), or leave, or push them away, lashing out to give *them* the excuse to leave him, because he is *afraid* and in his own mind, *unworthy*.

he's *afraid* of being loved, of *losing* that love, of *hurting* those he loves. he is *afraid* of being his own father.

but it's all he's ever known, all he's ever been *conditioned* to be. intoxicated, ever present, it's this terrible thing that destroys him but he *can't* stop. *addiction*.

and what better way to protect those he loves than to keep himself as *far* away from them as possible? than to *make* them hate him. than to do the *wrong* thing, to *disappoint* them. self sabotage. self punishment.

he can't stop himself. he deserves it.

lather, rinse, repeat.

so what does that mean for homelander, or even the reason he goes after homelander? the *real* reason.

'there must be *some* good in him because homelander 'must be' this 'ultimate evil that *must* be stopped', right?

not really. he's a symptom of a much greater evil, but he was never the root of it. if billy really wanted to solve the problems at hand and get *justice*, he'd go after *vought*, NOT homelander.

homelander is not even the real villain in *billy's* mind, in all actuality.

what homelander *is*?

temptation.

he is... the *ultimate* final high for billy. in terms of addiction to both *violence* and *self punishment*.

he doesn't actually go after homelander because he wants to 'stop him' or even kill him. not really. there are times billy starts a fight *expecting* to *lose*, *wanting* it. homelander *is* one of those times to the most intense degree that billy could find. and he even senses this when they first meet--unnecessarily, privately insulting the man because why?

because he feels *threatened*. because he feels *insecure*. because if homelander is *truly good*, even with *all that power*--

then billy has no fucking excuse--

it is, in essence, the same exact reaction that lex luthor has to superman. forcing himself to *challenge* him because of a *constant* sense of *fear*. (except lex *is* afraid of dying, so 1000% a huge coward lmao--)

but~, when he finds out homelander is *bad*?

homelander is billy's *failsafe*

to stop the person he feels is the most terrible evil of all *and* to set the world on fire in the process. a way for billy to kill two birds with one stone. compelled by his addiction to *chase* this ideation relentlessly.

homelander is to billy--his ultimate end, self punishment, a death wish, a *suicide attempt*.

and a way to *unleash his hatred onto the rest of the world*, *to make it burn*, even after his death. (this would be why despite many many MANY warnings to *not* push homelander *because of the catastrophe this will ultimately instigate and the loss of life this is bound to result in*--billy does not give a shit about the potential consequences. he welcomes them--)

if homelander were a *nuke*, billy would want to *launch* him. right now, homie is more like the *demon core*, incredibly dangerous and in some instances lethal, but not *yet* explosive.

billy *wants* the *warhead*.

it was why he got *so excited* at the *chance* of homelander offering him 'scorched earth'.

the man read billy like an open fucking book, and set the bait--

y'all, in other words, homie straight up went to billy's house and offered *crack* to the *crack addict*--fuck yeah he's gonna take that offer!

homelander never actually perceives billy as a real threat *at all* (safe to say, this is the main reason he doesn't kill him. there's a bit of personal complex combined with the deals/blackmail/request involved, but this would also be why he doesn't *hesitate* to 'kill' billy at herogasm. he genuinely gives no fucks about this poor man or his many anal complexes and daddy issues beyond the mild entertainment he gets from him and just how *easy* it is to read billy or rile him up. maybe a *dash* of novelty being found in billy's obsession with him. i'll go into the homie side of things in depth maybe someday soon lol but for now--)

and here's the thing, homelander isn't the *only* failsafe. he is simply the *ultimate failsafe*

included in all the possible bad habits billy has is pawning off his *responsibility* and personal accountability, even his *will to do good* onto others.

i mentioned before that becca (becky) was like a new addiction for him. and she was. in a sense, billy was using her to self medicate. she loved him, gave him love and made him feel good, no pain, no shame--but also no pause to think about that pain, self hatred and self doubt and actively address it. she was a way to not worry about his own *goodness* because she was an *easy* reason for him to *want* to be good.

and something important to note?

billy feels that he has *cheated* on becca/becky *since* the day she left/died. (there's a whole ass deliciously intricate story there but i'm trying to avoid the spoilers lmao. kind of a freebie hint i guess.)

lenny and hughie similarly make an effort to *hold butcher back* and reach out to him. (everyone does honestly, but not everyone is so successful with it). and butcher lets them, but *also* removes the agency of his own choice in the matter.

he doesn't just *let them* make him *good*, he doesn't believe he's capable of stopping himself on his own--but he believes in *them* because they *are* good, *truly good*.

hughie all on his own is *another kind of failsafe* and lo and behold, even calls butcher out on this by the end of the third season (theme is prevalent in the comic a lil different but again spoilers lol):

'i don't think you want to do this. i think you want me to stop you.'

*ding*ding*ding*!

nail on the head, hughie... butcher does not believe he can stop himself. so he sets up *failsafes* to do as much.

and let me just say, it is *unbelievably* shitty of him to do that, to pawn off the responsibility of his own behavior, whether good or pure evil onto other people. but i get it. and it fucking breaks my heart for him.

because *that* is addiction. it feels like mind control. aggressive compulsion. you feel ashamed, and hate yourself, and don't care if you hurt yourself or even others. but you keep *hoping*, *wishing*, *leaving a breadcrumb trail* so that *someone*, *anyone*, will come along and--

*save you. from you.*

and when you stop believing in yourself, in your own willpower to fight against this *thing* that just completely *destroys* you from the inside out... without *anyone* on your side, what else is left to do but to numb the pain?

i was able to recognize billy's addiction right off the bat because i've *been* to a lot of the places he has been. including the addiction. and he makes me so *fucking* mad because it's like seeing a version of myself *still stuck*, *still lost*, *still trapped* by my own issues and self loathing, and all of the abuse i've gone through--

and the biggest fuck up, the biggest *abuser* is me.

i can't *escape* me. *no one* can escape *themself*.

that fucker breaks my heart to pieces because *i have been there*, and i know just how fucking hard it is to *be* there, just how much harder it is to *get out* and start to *learn*--*who is it you really wanna be? who are you without this drug?*

and something he even says in the comics on a few occasions is--

'i'm not really here, i'm somewhere else watching this happen'

asserting that he *truly* believes that he has *no control* over *what* he is. (in contrast with homelander, who feels the weight of something similar but more literally in some regard, and in relation to so many other aspects in his life with the world around him.)

billy butcher *is* the *true villain* of *his own story*

of his own making.

he's not after homelander or even vought. he doesn't blame society or even his father at this point. he blames himself. and he's *given up* entirely on fighting himself. he's looking for his *overdose*.

*that's homelander*

ain't that a kick in the head...

it's part of what makes their relationship and dynamic so incredibly electric and titillating. it's got nothing to do with becca or becky.

butcher sees homelander as an easy way out. as a way to control the narrative, *maintain his own*, and *stop the bad guy* without bringing someone *good*, like *hughie*, down to his level.

he *sees* the parallels, a kindred spirit. he *knows* the potential. and he wants to be the *spark* to light all that *gasoline*.

because then it won't be his fault anymore. his *guilt*. he'll have passed on his *curse*.

likewise, he actually goes after supes in general for a similar enough reason, and it ties in with why he *doesn't* go after vought directly.

billy actually *likes* the status quo. to a degree, *needs* it, *needs vought*

because *vought* is the *creator* of his *supply*, feeding this addiction. and we hear billy say this in both the comic and show--

'with great power comes the absolute certainty that you'll turn into a right cunt.'

and billy actually believes this--about himself.

when he says it about other supes and even his intense hatred of them, it is a *projection* of his own issues and what he believes to be true for himself (that he would do the absolute worst thing imaginable given the opportunity). and in a way, going after them is in some ways a metaphor for stopping and destroying himself, hating himself, as much as it is a way to maintain his addiction.

and--

maintain the narrative he has built--that he is the true villain.

and if that's the case, well... it takes a *hero* to stop a *villain*, right?

but also--y'all remember that scene in the suicide squad where polkadot man imagines everyone as his mum? how he imagines starro as his mum?

yeah, that.

that's basically billy. every fucking supe, including starlight, and kimiko, and let's *really* not talk about what this means about him sleeping with maeve in context with his 'supe=daddy' issues, but even the person he sees in the mirror. *all of them* are *his father*.

listen, i'm not kidding. billy's daddy issues are seriously severe, so fucking bad, i--

his actions aren't for becca or becky or ryan or justice. even he *knows* that's bullshit and admits as much (which just makes fandom denying it that much more fucked). but they're not even *just because* or because he's genocidal, antisocial, or anything else. he *does* want someone to stop him. he's sane enough to recognize his actions for what they truly are *behind* the mask.

billy's actions are a volatile and violent *cry for help*, because he never learned how to *ask*, or even how to *believe in himself*.

he never truly learned that *he never had to be his father*, and he didn't *need* becky or becca, lenny or hughie to *be good*.

i actually think billy's greatest magic trick is convincing even the audience and readers that he is a *total*, complete piece of shit. and don't get me wrong, he is *def* a huge, massive, incredibly rank and ripe piece of shit--.

and y'all, i'm sorry if you believed him and got played like a damn fiddle, him and homie def throwin' in some hard balls--

but he's also still human. he also still needs just as much if, honestly? maybe even more, fucking *help* than homelander. which kind of draws back into their parallels. the tomfoolery of fandom might have you believe that billy is less complex or more put together than homelander, but their situations go hand in hand and the evidence suggests (if not confirms) something quite different.

billy's plight and even goal in some sense is *convincing the rest of his world that he is a monster*. driven by the addiction his father gave him. enabled by the world around him.

homelander's? it's actually the complete opposite. his struggle is with *his world convincing him that he is a monster*, and in turn, against his own instincts, *growing* into that role. when in reality, he never got the chance to decide for himself, it was decided *for* him a long long time ago.

'i think, therefore i am.'

'i can, therefore i must.'

however, *our actions cannot define who we are, because we can choose our actions*. good or bad are not something you inherently *are*, they are something you *choose to do*.

it paints what in turn becomes quite the brutal and tragic picture when these two forces meet. homelander and billy are both of the mindset that they *don't have a choice*.

and this bit is a bit more of a personal thought, but regarding billy's mum, she was *becky*. she was sweet, and kind, and cared for her family more than anything. *it didn't matter what she suffered, she was willing to drown if it meant saving the people she loved*.

as much as i adore how cute becca and billy were, i don't think she would have saved him.

i think the implication is that she would have either 'drowned' trying and become his mum, history repeating itself in a vicious cycle as billy spread his disease to any child they could have.

or that she would have lost her mind. and in turn *become* the person billy spread his disease to, if not another enabler for him. if not billy's choice of drug, maybe she would have taken up something else and eventually overdosed. i would even say the show implies this outcome with both becca and hughie, as the more butcher pushes--the more worn down they get.

if you put enough pressure on someone--they break.

becca was *good* for him. but billy was so, so fucking *bad* for her.

it begs the question of whether or not billy *is* right, if he really is this monster, *fated* to become his father in the worse of ways. of whether or not it's too late for him.

he's certainly not 'normal' or 'right' or 'good' or even an 'anti-hero'. at best, you could maybe call him an 'anti-villain', he is meant to be the deuterantagonist.

it def doesn't help that every time he has the *chance* to do the right thing, *someone* goes and enables him, gives him a reason to do the *wrong* thing.

fucking maeve in that last episode of the third season. but she's def not the only one, and def not the only time. (and yes, if it wasn't clear enough, being completely fucking indifferent to killing *thousands* of people to go after *one* fucking guy is in fact, the *wrong* thing to do.)

butt.

rewatching the scenes with lenny and billy's reaction, and even the final fight, showed something of a *possible* silver lining.

billy *enjoys* rejecting his father. actually pretty fucking greatly if we're being honest. generally speaking, it's when he *rejects* his father and everything that man represents that billy is at his *happiest* (lmao the epitome of an unfulfilled submissive sweetheart and bratty bossy bottom~<3<3<3)

there's a moment, where soldier boy says something along the lines of--

'--fuck you. you're weaker than he is.'

in regards to homelander. it's sort of glossed over, but this is billy's reaction to essentially being called a 'disgrace' so to speak by a toxic 'alpha male'.

y'all see that? it's a smile. lmao a smirk.

this is a moment where billy is protecting *ryan* and keeping his promise to becca. it's a moment where billy is *doing the right thing*, all on *his own* (mostly lol i'm sure there's a roundabout way to justify it in his head). and i think that's key.

it's not just a moment he's proud of himself and has a legitimate fucking reason to be proud of himself, (oh btw, we shoulda *all* been proud of billy in this moment), it's a moment he's *breaking through what his father made him* and his own *addiction*.

and he's doing it *selflessly* and--*without setting that responsibility on another person*.

so we *know* he has it in him, he always has. even becky *in the comic* kept trying to convince billy that *he is capable of good without her*. and again, we actually saw this in the second season when becca and ryan were reunited and billy *changed* his plans, *for becca*, instead of doing the selfish thing and selling ryan back to vought.

but if billy doesn't believe it himself...

i don't think billy is right about himself. but it is very *very* difficult for someone to *correct course* so to speak, once they have their *core beliefs*, lay out their own destiny and start along a *self fulfilling prophecy*, something him and homelander *both* do.

enter ryan.

and suddenly (lol probably in part due to reading dear becky lol), there was a bit of... not so much new, as *confirmed* perspective in play after that rewatch, something to *look* for and ponder in regards to *why* ryan may have been added for this story, a question in mind--

'would it be wrong of *ryan* to want to save his father?'

was it wrong of becca or becky, hughie or lenny, even his mum, to want to save billy?

how would *billy* even begin to answer such questions?

a different answer for the two would be a clear hypocritical bias (which lol i would not put past billy, but i also wouldn't be surprised if he maintained consistent thinking by answering *yes* to both)

. . .

y'all...

i still can't say i'm particularly optimistic about things turning out alright for either gent or ryan, butt~<3

garth ennis literally made the saddest, most pathetic, deliciously sweet, perfectly precious, extra emo tsun tsun baby boi ever, and put him right under our noses.

some a y'all fucking sneezing all over him, straight up sleepin' on all his *best* bits. how are we not utilizing billy butcher *properly~<3<3<3*????

;)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

[smute]

honestly the problem with booktok (and bookstagram) is not YA lit. it's not about people enjoying books that some might consider "low-brow" or whatever.

imo booktok is the culmination of several problems:

firstly, there's the homogeneity of algorithmic recommendations and the enormous influence those recommendations have on the publishing market. booktok recs tend to be of a very similar style and subject matter. they're easily digestible, easily bingeable titles that arent overly complex. booktok favors stories written by white women, often featuring characters with traumatic backstories and focusing on themes like overcoming adversity and the pursuit of romantic love. they are also usually very anglo-/americentric. none of this is necessarily bad, and none of it is by design, but it's not a coincidence either. it's the result of the constraints of short-form content on the one hand, and on the other, of an algorithm that amplifies, in broad strokes, the preferences of the core demographic of any given group of users.

secondly, it's about the commodification, not of reading, but of being Someone Who Reads Books (TM), which i think is just a particularly obvious symptom of online peer pressure and social-media-driven self-presentation. booktok doesn't encourage you to read, for example, sally rooney. it encourages the cultivation of one's own identity as someone who reads sally rooney. the problem here is not that sally rooney is a shit writer whose work has nothing of note to say. quite the opposite. sally rooney's work is relevant and interesting. in fact, it's being studied by scholars, and even if it wasn't, people can and should be allowed to enjoy some light reading, and yes, even Problematic (TM) fictional characters.

the real problem is the fact that the very nature of how booktok works actively discourages the critical discussion of the stories that it circulates. the problem is not millions of teenagers reading colleen hoover's slop (i love me some slop) – it's millions of teenagers encouraging each other to read and internalize – UNCRITICALLY – hoover's particularly romanticized depiction of abuse. tiktok's algorithm does not foster diversity of opinion. it doesn't foster diversity PERIOD. it doesn't foster slow, in-depth discussion. its only function is *make line go up* – line go up = clicks, views, engagement, money.

due to tiktok's popularity, booktok also has an enormous influence on marketing-related and (apparently, to some extent) editorial decision-making in the publishing industry. this is not just the fault of booktok, goodreads is part of the same problem. i mean, booktok has managed to turn colleen hoover's 'it ends with us' into a bestseller FIVE YEARS after it was originally published. it has also led to publishers dropping authors or DELAYING THE RELEASE of new titles after booktokers flooded the goodreads pages of unpublished books with one star reviews.

as i said, the underlying issue here is not unique to booktok. it's the same homogenization that plagues the movie industry, the tv industry, streaming services, etc. the publishing industry is just particularly vulnerable to such manipulations of public opinion. in the end, tiktok is not a social media app. it's an entertainment app and its content is focused on brevity. the biggest booktokers aren't simply avid readers. they don't post actual reviews of books they enjoyed. they're influencers who receive boxes of books from publishing houses to show off in haul videos like "have you guys heard of squarespace?" and that's it. the level of engagement with the texts themselves is like reading a blurb on the dustjacket, and unfortunately that is reflected in the selection of titles that become popular. if it can't be sold to you in 3 sentences, the algorithm will bury it.

[davekat-sucks]

i saw some draw humanstuck art today and drew meenah white, every single comment under the post was everyone saying “whitestck”, “white meenah scares me..” and someone even said “they whitewashed her..” you can’t white wash an alien with gray skin..

these are the same kind of hypocrites that when you ask them what the hell even makes meenah, the fucking alien, "black coded" they will then reveal their own racism through their very own reasoning, because they associate, for example, meenahs aggressiveness with black people, instead of associating it to the canon fact that all female trolls are aggressive and that hic was a violent genocidal conqueror of planets.

or another one ive seen, that Gamzee is "black coded" because the "coding" was he was portrayed as an, and I quote, "impossible to understand, dirty, drug-addled, ugly, stupid teen with an absent father and a religious devotion to rap/hip hop. Impossible to take seriously, until he becomes a violently abusive murderer because he got his drugs taken away"

but no, the real issue is the artist depicting the troll called sea hitler or the troll parodying ICP, two white rappers, as white... make it make fucking sense

id ask these people if they are americans and if they also believe that trolls speaking english makes them american in the first place, and if they say yes to both, then that also shows they are hypocrites again by their own logic

because, honestly and from what all of this tells me, not only some americans are racist enough to connect all these traits to a skin color, turning them into racial stereotypes, but also self-centered enough to miss that theyre doing exactly what "Americentrism" describes. judging an entire different culture, a planet of fucking ALIENS, as if its the USA, and centering everything around america and their issues as if their standards are the only valid interpretation of the story and characters.

and because all of this disgusting mindset is even encouraged by the current writer teams too, reminder that the hicu writers revealed that they made earth c to be literally just texas as an entire planet.

Pretty much. They say it is racist that Meenah is stereotyped black-coded. But if you headcanon them as anything else, it's racist still. At this point, what the fuck do these people want?! But yeah, most Westerners are self centered assholes. Why else they even go after stuff like anime/manga/video games and try to change the stuff there? Because they can't accept cultural differences that aren't United States. They can't accept some places have different moral standards than others. Technically, it was WHATPUMPKIN, not HICU, that made Earth C's flag just similar to Texas's. But it is still a point that James Roach and HICU do not want retcon or get rid of it. They want to """respect"""" the people who had worked on it. But considering the team behind it, why the fuck would you give them any benefit of the doubt?! TELL ME! James Roach and HICU were better off doing a hard ass reboot and wiped everything the previous team had made, out of existence. It is better than building on top of or dragging along the damage made within HS2/Beyond Canon. Because it just reminds people of the horrible past and the people behind it. Some may even think James Roach and HICU continuing to go along with it, means they technically still support people like Andrew Hussie and Kate Mitchell. And not just business standpoint, like they support them in beliefs and ideology.

[magical-grrrl-mavis]

I like when I see a post in another language. I rarely understand them but UT makes this site feel less americentric

[randomthefox]

That post by Nomura reminded me of one part from one russian video on cyberpunk edgerunners, with mostly the same message but more about character writing

(translation attempt by me)

"Other secondary characters are more simple by comparison, but I refuse any claims from the local "critics" that the team is bland and underdeveloped just because none of them had a dedicated hour-long episode that would "flesh them out". Honestly, I am growing more and more annoyed by this general "consensus" that the one and only way to properly develop a character in the story is to take the approach of the infamous video game killer Hideous Yojimbo. That is, stretching out the plot to include hours upon hours of exhaustive monologuing, flashbacks and dialogues about what pantaloons the characters find the most comfy and whether or not everyone in the room has a bad case of diarrhea. Screen time doesn't equal development. Likewise, just because a character doesn't do something grand or flashy in the plot or doesn't have a scene where they, alone, mow down hundreds of placeholder mobs to validate their "badass" status in the eyes of the viewer doesn't mean the character doesn't contribute anything to the plot. What's important is their role in the plot, how appropriate it is, and how well they perform it.

The root of this problem I think lies in the very americentric view of story writing and framing that viewers and "critics" adhere to (knowingly or not), where everything is seen as essentially a stage play on a big screen. The character is put front and center, and they give us all the exposition possible in exhaustively long detail. They constantly comment on their feelings, on plot events, on changes of scenery and so on. The focus is solely on the character and what they say, while everything around them (the setting, the atmosphere, etc.) is just stage props, only there to frame the general big picture.

However, the side effect of adhering to this view is that people start considering parts of said big picture that are not described in lines of spoken dialogue as an inherent negative, as something lacking by default. Hence the need to know what the character is thinking at every moment, what they feel about themselves and what's happening, what was the name of their childhood pet, and what brand of cigars they enjoy after a steamy round of bedroom tango.

And yes, this approach can and does work in a number of genres and select works. However, a truly captivating work of fiction doesn't focus on only the characters. Everything can infer information, much like how Night City itself plays a key part in all characters' lives."

Fucking based holy shit

Particularly agree with this part

>"However, the side effect of adhering to this view is that people start considering parts of said big picture that are not described in lines of spoken dialogue as an inherent negative, as something lacking by default."

This is ABSOLUTELY a problem with modern consumption of media. People think that if someone is not explicitly and directly acknowledged or discussed in character dialog, then it's "undeveloped" or "doesn't count." The simple art of a set designer putting a family photo on a characters desk goes unnoticed and unanalyzed because the character never says he has a wife or is shown with a wife ect.

People have gotten so fucking god damn dumb when it comes to media consumption. They need everything fucking spoon fed to them. And hack writers willingness to vomit What They're Supposed To Think into their open mouths is absolutely why we have shit like Ian Flynn stans hyping him up as the greatest writer of all time.