#and I know the racism in the writing and it's awful but the character without that was still awful

[violentdick]

-source: Batman (1940) #6-

Weapon of choice: "Jason killed the POS because he didn't save him when he fell over the balcony." -sips tea- "So is Dick a murderer too?"

[jesncin]

I appreciate most of your takes but don't understand how you look at a character like livewire, a character created in the middle of a 90's feminist movement and come to the conclusion she's supposed to a be a caricature of classical racist conservatism

?? huh is this an elaborate joke I'm missing out on?? Like you're roleplaying as a Shockateer? There's no tone indicators so I'm left to my own perception that you're being serious so I'll have to respond in seriousness. I'm gonna be so embarrassed if this is a joke :(((

So...just because a character is made "in the middle of the 90's" or "feminist movement" doesn't...mean they're a feminist character? Like with that logic, Tana Moon is a feminist icon I guess. Also "caricature of classical racist conservatism"? man, I kinda envy how people think the way I write her is Cartoony Evil Racism and not a toned down depiction of how personalities like Posie Parker, Matt Walsh, and Blaire White talk. I suppose I'm glad you haven't encountered anyone that awful. Good for you! 👍

Livewire meta under the cut fellas

I feel like you don't have a very holistic view of Livewire's character. Because while yes, she has been used for feminist critique in the show and comics, that's not all there is to her character. My take on Livewire is a commentary on how white womanhood intersects with parasocial internet grifts and the larger way identity gets filtered online. It's a take influenced by how she literally started out as a controversial provocative shock jock in STAS.

There's so much potential to re-imagine her hatred of Superman as a commentary on how white women feel justified in harassing marginalized men because it looks like a punch-up to misogyny. The way she uses the accident Superman caused as a way to white-woman-victimize herself and prime her audience to hate him more. You can take the spinoff comic where she only lets women speak on the air as her presenting a black and white, non-intersectional view of social progress. Kind of like how TERFs keep fantasizing about a world without men as a utopia? In CW Supergirl, Livewire plays into internalized misogyny and homophobia to jab at Supergirl. Not showing up for her fellow women if you ask me.

Because while yes, Leslie has been shown to be a character who had to deal with sexism, she's also a really compelling narrative for an imperfect victim. Just because a character deals with sexist hardship, doesn't mean it makes her a feminist ideal y'know? Leslie lashes out and weaponizes her victimhood, she uses her audience to bully others.

I think one of the flaws to the longevity of her character as a villain is because her narrow hatred of Supes makes her themes short lived. So I really want to expand it through Satoshi Kon-style deconstruction of how people juggle having multiple identities in the modern era. In the (bleh) Batgirl Burnside comic Livewire shows up in, she returns as a being of energy who doesn't remember who she was before. In STAS, it's left ambiguous whether she actually believes what she says about Superman or if it's all part of an act that "pays the bills!".

Imagine the opportunity to make it so she pieced together a sense of self from the fractured way her audience viewed her! What a great way to talk about how parasocial relationships make us think we know a person from the bombastic way they present themselves (Casually Comics thought of this brilliant take). DCSHG has been the most competent reimagining of Livewire. A perfect update of her shock jock origins into the internet era that revitalizes her attention-seeking traits into the clout-chasing grind of social media personality.

All this to say, Livewire's way more that just "sassy woman on the radio fighting against The Man!" I think making her a punk appropriating, rebellious, internet personality who uses her privilege to marginalize others for clout and money is a natural, more political progression of what DCSHG built with her character.

I don't really understand how you can look at a character whose most prominent iterations involve her bullying and targeting people (including other women) and tell me she's "feminist" unless you actually believe in Leslie's version of White Woman Girl Power. Any kind of "feminism" that touts Hating Men as a major point should be something to be critical of.

[foxwitchaine]

Which is your most hated character in Miraculous Ladybug?

I wouldn't say hate so much as strongly dislike, as it takes a lot for me to outright loathe a fictional character. More often than not, I have better things to spend my energy on than hating a fictional character.

But if I were to answer that, five take the top spot:

1.) Lila Rossi

I know. Surprising, isn't it. Well, it's all fun and games until you actually meet one in real life. And it's frustrating as hell getting those with the wool over their eyes to listen until it's too late. I have to emphasize that it wasn't originally part of the plan to redeem her in the early drafts. It was thanks to Rafe that I even considered doing a Lila redemption.

Lila had a lot of potential in the early seasons. Of course, that was before she was turned into a one-dimensional villain with little in the way of making her interesting. It says something that I got the feeling the showrunners were trying to make her hateable without actually putting in the effort while reading the Chameleon transcripts. (I had to stop reading to settle my blood pressure)

All in all, Lila is just a symptom of a bigger underlying issue regarding the show's writing. I personally think she has a very nice design, but it looks better in 2D than 3D.

2.) Gabriel Agreste

He's a severely underwhelming main villain. At the start, he had potential. But as the series drags on, it's become painfully clear that the showrunners don't actually know how to make a compelling main villain. He was surprisingly much more intimidating and better-designed in the pilot PV.

Gabriel also lacks the charisma you would find with iconic main villains such as Sephiroth from Final Fantasy VII, the rogues gallery in the first Powerpuff Girls, Batman's rogues gallery, and so on. I could make a whole post about how to write Gabriel better, but I don't feel like resurrecting a dead horse.

3.) Adrien Agreste

The poster boy for wasted potential. When Rafe and I first started watching Miraculous Ladybug, Season 2 hadn't been released yet. He was nice, if a bit bland. Could have used some flavorblasting in both design and personality (he's a fashion model, for crying out loud. Where's his fabulous wardrobe?)

And then all the red flags in Seasons 3-5 started popping up.

As it stands, he's nothing more than a plot device to humiliate poor Marinette. And a mouthpiece for the writers' very skewed morality. We weren't going to redeem him at first, but then it occurred to me a fantastic way to strike a devastating blow against Gabriel. I won't say anything more since they're spoilers.

4.) Alya Césaire

Ohhhh boy. Where do I even begin with this one? Disregarding the racism allegations towards the writers regarding her character, Alya is just an awful best friend, plain and simple. While it's true that she's a go-getter who isn't afraid to go for what she wants, that same trait has pretty much been solidified into a toxic trait courtesy of her refusal to question Lila later in the show. Even after Marinette broke down in front of her and confessed her secret identity in Gang of Secrets.

I will forever hate that episode just for how entitled everyone was about Marinette's secrets.

When Rafe and I were brainstorming who to use as our civilian antagonist to fill in for Lila, it was rather telling that Alya was among our first choices. It wasn't our intention for her to fall as hard as she did in The Wolves in the Woods, but honestly? It was inevitable.

5.) Caline Bustier

She's a non-authority figure who coddles the troublemakers in her class. I'm restraining myself at the moment because I've had teachers just like her in real life. Who look good on paper and are the sweetest people on the outside. But their inability to discipline a class regardless of behavior does a lot more damage in the long run than many would care to admit.

Bustier is a character who I could have grown to understand if the writers handled her better. The biggest brat of the school is the daughter of the city mayor. That right there is a beautiful setup for interesting conflict. We could have gotten a plot where we had a good, caring teacher trapped in a terrible situation by her superiors. Which is unfortunately something that can and does happen in real life. Instead, we got an airhead who can't for the life of her understand this simple thing called nuance.

I find it very telling the fandom prefers Mendeleiev over her.

Honorable Mentions:

Principal Damocles: Too much of a spineless noncharacter to really care about

Tom and Sabine: I try to understand the parents' side of things given parenting is far from an easy task

Bustier's class: A mixed bag here, since I don't think they're necessarily bad kids

Mayor Bourgeois: Again, another mixed bag here since he's another spineless "parent"

Zoé Lee: Too much of a blank slate to have an opinion on

Félix Fathom: What kind of a name is that?

Master Fu: He was done so dirty in his backstory

Chloé Bourgeois: Another with wasted potential

[electrificata]

here are my house observations, im in season 3

some of the shit house says to foreman is genuinely unforgivable

foreman as a character i generally like. omar epps is giving a good performance of an even-keeled-but-not-without-effort kind of guy, i do like the plotline of a guy who came to learn from an expert whos the worst guy in the world and trying to figure out how to do the same thing without being the worst guy in the world. i also think they way they keep him out of hospital love triangles is racist, foreman is not currently hot but could be with 15% more attention from the writers room.

really sexist as a general rule. i have not encountered the idea of "jailbait" this much in literal years.

hipster racism. its the 2000s. funny to talk abt this because "hipsters" were younger at this point and the character of house is, im assuming, in his mid 40s at the start of the show, but thats the general logic that seems to be on display. "well you know that he's a good guy so its ironic and funny that he's threatening to use the n word as a joke."

a) stupid logic to begin with, doing something ironically is also just doing it, b) doesnt even work on its own terms here because house is widely acknowledged to be an awful person in the context. the entire show is built around the question "how much deliberately annoying, dangerous bullshit will we endure from this dickhead to maintain access to his unique skillset"

i still dont "get" house/wilson. like i do see it, like i can see that theyre a little obsessed with each other and they have a fun mutually manipulative dynamic, and they make sense as foils (guy who's self-consciously awful and often ends up doing noble things accidentally/guy who's self-consciously noble and often deliberately does awful things). but i cannot feel myself going insane about it. if anything i like him better with cuddy

cuddy really really hot. really really really hot. cuddy.

so like yeah i see house/wilson im just not going insane about it the way i thought i might. altho tbh it took a global pandemic and a extended, byzantine renaissance of tumblrina supernatural scholarship to make me have a destiel spiral. i need infrastructure for these things.

cameron's character is such an old school token girl character. i hate how they treat her "niceness" almost as much as i hate how they treat her crush on house.

a better show (written by me) would have some more cuddy and foreman "managing" house plotlines (foreman being a protege allows focus on the legacy of house's medicine, how to replicate it, how to contain damage), probably give him some of the cuddy and wilson time. the three of them together would be good i could do that.

cuddy/foreman. hm. in the remake.

like, i do get how this happened. house is troubled in a durable, interesting way. the writing is good enough to support his layers, the way his snap-judgement psychoanalysis of everyone he meets curls back around to shine a light on his own issues. good balance of competence and patheticness. laurie is giving a masterclass in the niche field of "british comedian comes to us tv drama, grows some stubble, becomes a sex symbol." i read an old review that referred to his "sourpuss charisma" i really like that turn of phrase.

(i was also into josh on the west wing when i watched that last year, i have a type i love antagonism. no im not dating anyone right now, who wants to take me for a candlelit dinner and tell me i smell good and my voice is sexy) (you cant just compliment me, ill be bored or uncomfortable, you have to bury it in a disagreement and make it clear youre kind of mad that youre into me)

that said i think the show kind of misunderstands house's sex appeal. it feels very written-by-men. women characters throw themselves at house in a porny kind of take-me-now way. in my observations guys who are arent traditionally hot but attractive in this antagonistic, talky was dont really get that kind of treatment, but they do get the main cast wilson/cuddy/cameron "i hate this guy but im obsessed with him and i will never make a move or i will and itll go badly" kind of stuff. my phantom house reboot does have cameron and house hook up and its a really mean and destructive fwb thing with like 4 false endings. does this make sense.

right now im in the middle of the plotline where leighton meester plays a 17 yr old girl stalking house because shes so in love. like thats not the vibe. at least from what ive seen. im not omniscient.

lol it turns out she has a spore makign her hypersexual lolllll i literally have this on in the background rn ok i take some of this back.

whenever i mention to someone im watching house theyll recount to me the plot of the one episode they can remember and it always sounds insane and its never made up.

"the one with the intersex teen model who fucks her dad to manipulate him and has testicular cancer" like yeah. yeah thats real. if you talked to me 3 weeks ago thatd be the one i recounted to you.

yes house does leer at her in that episode and its treated as logical and normal for a 45 year old man.

i hate chase, he's awful but boring.

im curious how long im gonna keep watching this, i know the later seasons get kind of soapy plotwise and i dont know if thats what i want out of this

[positively--speculative]

Sorry to make this rant again, but there's more to the gothic genre than just "dark and twisted fucked up stuff." And I think the mindset that it is probably comes from being exposed to it at a time when you're not ready to consume it.

I had several friends and acquaintances in my late teens and early twenties who liked/loved Anne Rice. Only one of those friends recognized how fucked up some of her writing and approach to certain sensitive topics were. When I finally did read Interview with the Vampire and The Vampire Lestat, I found myself waiting for some sort of moment where the writing would make it clear that many situations are, in fact, unsavory and awful...but they never are. Daniel doesn't interrupt Louis about the slavery. Nothing pushes back against Lestat or Gabrielle for the incest. It just happens and the reader just has to accept it. And when you have bright-eyed teens and early twenty-somethings wanting to delve into the subject of gothic literature and vampires without having been introduced to better-written gothic stories, they just kind of accept it and pat themselves on the backs for being able to enjoy something so "mature."

I know I've mentioned Crimson Peak before, but it's amazing how it just...does such a better job at not only including disturbing things but at framing them. No, it doesn't beat the audience over the head to explain why incest and seducing multiple wealthy women into marriage to murder them for their fortunes is horrific. We see things from Edith's point of view, so we are therefore able to fall in love with Thomas just as much as she does, and we can feel her horror when she finds out the truth about him and his sister. Their incest is never romanticized. And the disturbing part is knowing that Thomas has actually fallen in love with Edith--because it shows that someone who has done such horrible things can still have the ability to fall in love with someone and hurt them. Yes, Lucille was pulling most of the strings, but he was not blameless.

Anne Rice's writing, to me, talks down to readers who are, rightfully, disturbed by these kinds of things and it seems to reward apathy. It's like she was giving gold stars to readers who can just consume gross stuff and be unphased. And I kind of wish that her writing was treated as just shock porn rather than reading that challenges her readers intellectually because they really don't do anything to challenge her fans. I'm not begrudging her the "gothic" title, but I will say her gothic books are not really good at all aside from making some interesting characters. And it was because of her interesting characters that I was actually excited when the TV adaptation was announced, but I knew as soon as it was announced Louis would be Black that Rice's fans were going to be on their shit.

I think it says a lot that the show created a better gothic story than Rice ever did, and I think a lot of white fans resent it for that, because the show is asking them to think and be challenged in a way Rice never did. Even the ones who claim to like the show resent Black fans for "bringing race into everything" when one of the show's most central themes is race and racism. Maybe it's mean to keep saying they have the media literacy of a peanut, but there's no way to talk about this adaptation *without* bringing up race. But I really don't think they get that, because they're used to racism just happening (again, Louis was a racist slave owner in the book) without being made to pause and examine it.

[jenyifer]

The Trainee Ep 2 initial reaction

Slight disclaimer I did watch the episode 1/4 3/4 because YouTube is a cruel mistress and I’m dumb lmao. But I assume if anyone has seen my watching series you’d know I don’t really offer much of intellect anyways sooooo

Let’s get on to the photo review

Quick note here Ryan is a lot more relatable believable character to me in comparison to Chef Prem? I think it’s good writing and set in these scenes with Ryan at his dad’s shop really do a lot to establish who he is as a person. We can see his family circle is hard working and maybe isn’t the best with their feelings. We still see Ryan’s family does take care of each other in important ways and understands to some extent. Also very relatable to be a recent grad with no direction or going to university without passion because you know your family needs you. Idk I like Ryan. He’s not quirky for quirky sake. He’s believably broken in predictable ways.

Ugh couples are the worst. Also performative gestures like this are so stupid now you might say it’s comedy. However I’ve enjoyed a couple office romance interns edition and it’s ways sickening. Just like highschool sweethearts that kind of sweet where they are blind or trying to make others jealous because of their own inadequacies with themselves

I’ll say this it is good for new members of staff to learn to speak their mind quickly because if they don’t contribute you are missing out on new ideas and eyes. Also Jane/Off is so handsome my brain would definitely malfunction. A person in control who knows what he wants 🥵 sexy. Also Off’s irration just scratches a good itch in my brain makes me think of Sean 😩😩

A very important bonding activity converting the non nerds to the joys of Harry Potter and other pop culture. A dance as old as time. My older coworkers try to get everyone to watch their pop culture references too. It’s really an unspoken office life normality. I really wasn’t expecting so many references though. But I still love Harry Potter because idk I see the good parts of the story and adore it. Yes yes I can now see the racism and the transphobia (the dream of Malfoy’s cronies turning into girls) also preachiness about sexism when needed. But I also see the fandom that raised me. The various queer friends I met because of my love of the boy who lived. Something I won’t have had in Mississippi. The books that always comforted me since I was 6 years old quoting the first book. the theme parks that still take my breath away when I go to visit Universal Orlando on the weekends. The queer and loving people who work there and are all too happy to make a child’s dream come true or adult look in wonder at something they have missed. (Sorry for the tangent)

Oh no it’s Gun’s arguably greatest talent crying in character. I felt like I could feel the fear and panic building in Ryan to this point which… if you aren’t crying in the first several days at your big kid job because you feel like an imposter who can’t do shit and will never be trusted? I can’t relate to you. Hell I got a new job a couple months ago. For a month I cried most days when I got home because I felt so awful about my capabilities even though I’ve worked 7 years in my field. It’s normal. Also Jane being shocked by this is hilarious you aren’t telling me he hasn’t broken someone down into tears before.

Oh no here it is folks Jane just enjoying Ryan’s energy and believing in him for no reason. Gun’s tears are very potent and can melt any wall I’m surprised Jane isn’t pulling him in for hugs.

Jane trying his best to keep Ryan without directly forcing him to stay was masterful as a boss. As a Simp it could use work but it’s a start put the ball in Ryan’s court with hope. Jane wants Ryan to grow and experience life which is good as a boss.

Awwwwwwwwww happy gunnie/ryan he’s so tired and anxious now he’s found solace in Jane’s words nothing can bring him down. He’s precious someone put him in my pocket.

[cipheramnesia]

Stung (2024) is kind of a throwback to Spielberg horror which was going off in the 80s, every director wanted to be the next Spielberg and you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a movie about a weird little kid with a charmingly dysfunctional family whose encounter with a surprisingly well realized horror element first causes them to fall apart under pressure before growing more closely knit and surviving. Plus also usually some of the most deeply uncomfortable racist stereotyping you've ever seen, like even in the 80s you'd at a minimum be like "this feels weird right now" and then they age like a forgotten tupperware in the back of the fridge. You look at em and think well this is better than I expected it, then those two minutes of wildly unnecessary racism come swinging through and you recoil, tupperware open, close it up immediately and throw the whole thing away.

Which sucks because most of the time the racism part wasn't even in a part of the movie that needed to be there - like it goes unnecessarily out of the way to add a character just to make it racist. Anyway. So Stung has got a weird little girl who loves bugs, a stepfather figure trying to be a dad, mom trying to support the family and they're all in the same apartment building every 80s sequel ever took place in. Pretty much chock full of great fun with an alien spider growing at an exponential rate, killing every human and animal it can find. Plus this absolutely hair raisingly cringeworthy black character who, through the magic of in media res gets to Black Guy Dies First twice, and it feels like everything about him was written by a predictive algorithm whose only data set was the phrase "Aw hell naw!" And he could have been fully edited out which would have been better than what we got.

The thing is, there are actually plenty of movies like this which just don't have the "Why would you even write that" racism scene. And the other thing is, as I've mentioned often, at this point everyone should know better. Everyone does know better, which means enough people were lazy or hacky enough to let that slip, you can safely not bother.

[raviolirash]

I think people overindulged in analyzing the characters to the point of them being their projections and not the characters anymore. Like, yes, they are fantastic little guys, but it's usually not that deep. Stories like theirs are pretty common among D&D players. Maybe it's because I'm new to TheFandom™ world, but I've seen takes sooooo stretched that I wonder if we did play the same game.

Yes, there are some meaningful messages about grooming, hubris, trauma, manipulation and corrupting power, and that's great, but it's not a philosophy treatise.

It's a D&D game, a BG3 one: there will be Bhaal, bad guys (squiddy, in this case) and a party of adventures that will do funny things. And that's frankly ok. I'm more surprised on how Larian gave us a great freedom on choices, not just with the dialogues, but also with ambient interaction. Or the great effort that they've put in acting every single line and writing the description of every single item.

I'm happy that people felt seen and happy playing the game, but sometimes an interaction is just an interaction, no need to try to find a hidden message or a great meaning behind it.

I agree and disagree and here is a rant.

Tldr. It's healthy to write analysis and it's good to make your brain think and David Cage should have his fingers cut off. Also the "it's not that deep" crowd is incredibly annoying.

I don't think it's particularly good to have a "consume product, get excited for next product" mentality when it comes to media and just drift through life. I'm not saying that every piece of media deserves a deep analytical philosophical treatment as some of it is just horseshit, but it can be a very fun exercise to just think about things. Even thinking about why something sucks in detail is an exercise in clearly laying out your argument, which is a valuable skill to have. It's also okay to say "Hey. This thing is objectively terrible, but I nonetheless love it without any elaboration." That's me with Cube Zero. It is an awful movie, I love it so much! I think writing unironic deep thoughts about how the plot of the movie is actually deep and it is commentary on the prison system and capitalism is incredibly stupid.

However.

I think when we resort to mindlessly consuming content without giving much thought to it with a "it ain't that deep" mindset is when good writers get burnt out and we allow hack frauds such as David Cage to fester. And that is criminal to me. Because fuck that guy. We get a video game where a robot is forced to sit in the back of the bus in an incredibly poor analogy for racism, and people enable him and say that it's good writing and he announces a new game and we are in hell! Who keeps giving him money?

That being said. There are many times when writing actually means something and it's frustrating when people dismiss it as "lol silly dnd game". Some people do over-analyze it, yes. Some people say something incredibly insane like that woman with a 7 minute video about how Wyll is a cop with NPD. What the fuck was that. But here is the thing with writing: Unless you're Steven Moffat, words and actions in a story are almost always written to actually mean something. It's written to be important and it's healthy to think about it. In TV shows, yes: sometimes the curtains are just blue because the person decorating the film set just felt like blue curtains would look neat. It is an entirely different thing when explicitly pointed out in written form or said in dialogue.

I often think of that one interview with Harlan Ellison, where he discusses Ellen in IHNMAIMS. A reader of the book didn't know that Ellen was black. Harlan being Harlan, asked them what the fuck the reader was talking about as he literally wrote the line "…her ebony skin in the snow" in the goddamn book. The reader didn't forget that line! In fact, they thought that it was some unimportant metaphor and it wasn't that deep. So he pushed extra hard for Ellen to be black in the game adaptation because people were just that fucking stupid.

[helluva-dump]

for the ship bingo thing: stolas/blitz

oh man the ultimate question of all, I wanted to save this one for last to give my full thoughts on this ship

Warning: I have a VERY unpopular opinion with this ship that you guys may not like to hear. So I suggest scroll and ignore this if your a St*litz shipper. You have been warned.

So once upon a time, I had used to be a fan of this ship at one point… Well I didn’t ship them hardcore, I shipped them as a dumb crack ship at first when they treated them more like a gag. But when the Ozzie’s episode came along, I think you can say this is when I was liking the idea of them together.

Now granted, it’s one of those toxic relationships that intrigue you due to how awful both characters are. (Much like Chucky and Tiffany from child’s play) And I like the idea of two messy people starting out as friends with benefits but slowly come to terms to want to do something serious and to try and their their shit together.

That was until the Circus episode came along…. THE FUCKING CIRCUS EPISODE 🙃🙃🙃🙃

They literally retconned things, did the childhood lovers cliche, and just woobified Stolas as a OwO baby boi who can do no wrong…. That whole episode frustrated me so much… we didn’t even get to see Stella’s pov than being a very bland kke note bitch (btw that is NOT how narcasstics work) and I was hoping he and Stella were equally messy to another like Clay and Bloberta from Moral Orel or Jessie’s parents form Big Mouth.

Dude Paimon wanting to buy Blitzo as a playmate for his son was so gross… that’s like when white aristocratic a buy child slaves as a playmate for their white children. Does Viv not realize how unitionally racist that is???? Since Stolas is white coded and Blitzo is POC coded???? This is why racism allegory never works if you don’t research history books…

But even then, THESE TWO HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON BESIDES FUCKING!

Blitzo always found Stolas interest boring and Stolas literally sees blitzo as just as sex toy and nothing more! And they failed to address what happened with the Ozzie’s episode!

Also, I feel like shipping them both together soley because they’re both messy dads with angsty goth daughters feels kind of shallow…. Hell, I think that will make shit worse for Loona and Octavia. All that’s gonna do is make them fuck constantly while they dump Octavia on Loona. And as much as I don’t like Loona, she doesn’t deserve that.

I still think Loona and Octavia can be sisters WITHOUT hooking their dads up together. Best friends that are sisters by soul are a thing you know. I have close friends I consider my sisters without our parents hooking up.

But my hatred for this ship is mainly due to Octavia and how much of a neglectful asshole Stolas is to her… HE NEGLECTED HER TWICE BECAUSE BLITZO DADDY 🤪🤪🤪

Octavia is my favorite that I personally relate to because her situation REALLY hits close home or me as I have a dad like Stolas… I’m against this ship since I worry about her mental health.

I can go on and on but these are my thoughts about Stolas x Blitzo.

Now I will say, this ship is written so bad I’ve noticed some people that do ship them then complain about how they do NOT like how Viv is writing them in season 2. I can relate with that since I felt that way for Apriltello (tmnt 2012) and Haida x Restuko (Aggrestuko) since I used to be a fan of those ships but the way the writers dragged shit out too long and executed them killed mh joy for them… I don’t think it’s really fair and I think fans deserve more authentic chemistry for their ship.

[imaginarianisms]

i've said this elsewhere by this is just a general psa that because it's nearing the end of september with the upcoming orange shirt day / truth & reconciliation (or as i like to call it, truth & accountability day because there's no reconciliation if your government keeps oppressing you lmao), it's going to be Very difficult for your indigenous friends so be there for them. in case you don't know what orange shirt day is, it's to remember survivors of residential schools in both america & in canada & those who lost their lives in this attempt to assimilate us into white european christian culture as a form of cultural genocide & i also personally attribute this to indigenous cult survivors who have been told that their spirituality & religions were demonic. there are over 1000 unmarked gravesites near residential schools all across the country & these children deserve to come home to their families. in case you didn't know, the last residential school closed in 1996. this is not the fucking ancient past. october is also a g-d awful time for us especially around spooky season & halloween when people think it's still okay to "dress up" as natives & portray us with harmful stereotypes & overall a.ntinative racism & november with thanksgiving (in canada it's in october so it's a double fuckery) & december as well. be there for your indigenous friends during these last four months of the year. also, if you are nonnative, it's not your native friends' fucking job to educate you, proofread your shit for you, or tell you whether or not something is okay to post, ESPECIALLY if you are white & you don't even bother paying them for this taxing labor. that has to be Your research, too. we are not your walking encyclopedias. if you are legitimately so shaky & uncertain in your own knowledge of native or otherwise indigenous people that you're nervous to write & publish something about your characters' experience with being native / indigenous without consulting your Token Indigenous Buddies, then maybe you shouldn't be writing a fucking native or otherwise indigenous person, because clearly you have a lot more research to do on your own time before you’ll be capable of doing this shit right so move aside & let natives write our own stories. know who's land you're on (indigenous people are on every continent). support your native friends & muns & if you're able to, financially support them as reparations. every child matters.

[mommalosthermind]

How do you block and filter fics with rampant racist micro aggression since that's never tagged properly and the writer will have a white meltdown if they're ever confronted with the fact their fic is racist?

I honestly can’t tell if this was in earnest or if it’s meant to be another Gotcha! Attempt from one of the anti-censorship posts I’ve annoyed people with, so I’m going to assume it’s the first and do my best to answer.

As a white woman, I am definitely not someone who should be speaking on racism, since the systemic issues I deal with are very very different.

Unfortunately, though, your experience with such a fic is going to mirror what I’d imagine is also your experience with most other forms of media which don’t flag that kind of behavior: bail. Back out. Don’t finish the thing that is upsetting you. Possibly, (as I’ve done with authors on issues that hit home for me) take note of who’s behind the thing so you know to avoid them in the future, as they’ve broken that trust.

This is also known as curating your space. I don’t remember if I go on that rant in the other two (three?) posts that seem to have picked up, but that’s the READER’s side of the equation. Find your garden and tend it well, keep it how you like it, because it is for you and you alone.

My job as a writer is to tag to the best of my ability so you know exactly what you’re bringing into your garden. I don’t want to spoil your flowers anymore than I want someone to trample on mine.

Hopefully, as people talk about this more, authors will be more open to tagging/ modifying and/or adding a footnote for things exactly like this.

Micro aggressions are especially difficult, since (again, pulling purely from my lived experiences) getting folk to agree on what ‘counts’ is rough. But as an author— I want to share my stories. That’s the point! If I’ve written it, then I damn well better be self-aware enough to tag it, and be willing to ADD TAGS so I’m not breaking trust with the people I’m trying to give nice things to. Hopefully that makes sense?

I’m gonna say that again since I feel it needs it: if you’re comfortable enough to write the Real World problem happening, you’re fully capable of being able to recognize why someone might like the warning. Be kind. Tags only work if you use them.

On AO3, I believe they recently made it possible to block an author entirely, so they no longer show up in the results for your searches.

I’ve run across exactly one author I’d have blocked if it was possible at the time, because he refused to add tags to a story that… really needed tags. And, going through the comments in later chapters, dozens of people have asked him to update tags. He claims that doing so will ‘ruin the story’ despite the graphic raped-to-death-then-magically-revived bit having literally nothing to do with the plot at all. Instead, it comes out of literally nowhere in an otherwise really well written tale, and was deeply deeply upsetting to the point that his response to my first chapter squee was “yeah, tell me if you still like it after chapter X”. (Unfortunately i am a very fast reader and had already gotten that far and bailed immediately. Dude if you KNOW it’s THAT upsetting to so many people ADD THE TAG.)

I’ll never read anything he’s written again, just like I refuse to read anything by JKR ( awful human) or Terry Goodkind (I can’t stand how he handles his female characters. At all.)

Obviously these two examples are not identical, but it’s the main comparison I have on hand.

This isn’t meant to sound like I’m belittling or downplaying that concern at all. But until people get better at tagging—and I really wish traditional books and other media would ALSO tag, because I’m very very tired of running into Specific Things without any fucking warning— you have to protect yourself and your happy place by putting up a fence, and booting unsavory things right back over it.

—side note: for those worried about spoiling the plot you can…skip the tags... just know you’re choosing to walk in blind. OR! And I wish i could figure it out—you can add! A hyperlink! That takes you to the footnote at the BOTTOM to add things that deserve a warning but might be spoilers! There’s even a tag for that! ‘More tags in notes!’ These are good and useful things! Use them so your readers can better curate their spaces!—

The system isn’t perfect by any means. There are a million ways to improve, and we’re trying! But please, please y’all use the damn tags because right now it’s the only system we’ve got. Take care of each other.

[transformerswoc]

ROTB and Black Women's Rep

I know there is a lot of negative talk/critique about the women in ROTB, but I wanted to just share as a black genderfluid person, how liberating at least it has been to me to see actual black women portrayed well in a live action tf movie. I understand to a lot of people, the antiblackness that was always a common staple in live actions transformers history, didn’t impact them but it impacted me. And it’s lack of black women, yet making black women (and people) caricatures at any chance they got, was also really upsetting to me. And the way women in the bay films were treated in general was bad.

Rotb was important to me as a black woman fan because for once, we got to see a whole female cast dominated by black women which is rare, if not unheard of for transformers live action media. And they were all given respectful narratives, not made into caricatures and given a chance to shine. A lot of people have made comments about how rotb’s portrayal of women was awful, or how women were failed, and I understand that perspective. I also do not think that by any means, ROTB was perfect in its portrayal of women.

What I do believe however, is that tf live action portrayals of women have come a long way since the bay films. But for people who are not black women, they may not understand nor care about the importance of for once, seeing black women and culture taken seriously on the big screen. The black female characters, in my opinion, were written well. They were given nuance, a respectful narrative and weren’t jokes, caricatures or canon fodder. Elena, the first black live action human, was a breath of fresh air away from what we were used to. She wasn’t white, shy wasn’t super skinny and she didn’t exist as a sex object or a point of romance. She was smart, she also showed us a very real example of microaggressions and racism black women need to face in the work place. Yet, that wasn’t made into a joke, and she was taken seriously by alien life forms when her white female boss ignored her.

And that’s  just something refreshing. We have a black human woman allowed to be flawed, and also allowed to have her subtle experiences of racism taken seriously without being demeaned for it, but we also see how she is integral to the plot, and how her presence was needed in order for the plot to move forward.

I wish we got more Arcee- but I love that she was humanized rather than just made into a joke or a sexual object. She was shown to be extremely intelligent, skilled, understanding, and she was a good fighter and more importantly she wasn’t a caricature. Her being a black woman didn’t dicate how the audience saw her or how she was written. She was written with so much respect and was over all and interesting character.

I could say the same about nightbird. Because not only was she a formindable villain, but she was played by a transfem afro Latina actress, one of my favorite actresses actually, who brought her to life and that was just refreshing to see. again, in media where black trans fems are usually made into cariactures or jokes, I love that nightbird was taken seriously as a villain and a black female character.

My point is that, just because there are issues with the writing of female characters, doesn’t mean you need to discount the actual importance of Black women in the show. I think a lot of people, who are not Black women, and who don’t actually think of or care about Black women’s issues, are quick to not consider how maybe looking at ROTB’s women intersectionally may add more avenues to the conversation of women’s representation. While I don’t think that the film was flawless in its portrayal of women, I think it’s a huge step up and I do think that in the future, things will get better. But for now, as a black fan and a black woman, I absolutely loved seeing and hearing women that looked and sounded like me on screen.

Now, again this doesn't mean that you can't critique the portrayal of women in ROTB, because I have a lot of issues with some portrayals, especially Airazor and even more so, I wish Arcee got more screen time. But at the same time, if you are critiquing the majority Black women, make sure you actually open your space for Black women to give their opinions on things without getting offended. Especially if you are white or non-black yourself.

As always, if you enjoy my blog, consider following my twitter and sharing this post there

[marcfrenchie]

DO YOU WANT TO READ MOON KNIGHT?

are you a show fan who's learned about how terrible the MCU did moon knight and you want to check out the comics? did you see him in a teamup book and want to know more about him? are you just looking for more comic recs? are you just interested in the character? then you're in the right place!

okay, to begin, i want to say that this is a character that has had a... varying history. there are no moon knight comics you can enjoy without extensive criticism. critisizing the things that you enjoy is good and gives you a better understanding of the work. please do not idolize any of these comics and please work to be kind to the many minorities (jewish people and systems, primarily, but classism, racism, xenophobia, and homophobia are all explored throughout MK's publishing history) that these comics represent. anyway.

MOON KNIGHT 1980 -

tws - doylist racism (racist villainous charactictures, mostly. a lot of this), ableism (outdated terminology for systemhood, occasional slurs), and sexism. extensive discussion of anti-semitism, specifically neo-nazism, in issues 37 and 38.

what happens - moon knight 1980 is a 38 issue comic book centering on the ex-mercenary and now hero moon knight. almost entirely episodic but there are occasionally multi-issue stories.

moon knight, in the day, is the millionare socialite steven grant, and, at night, the hero moon knight- moon knight also "uses" jake lockley as an informant. marc spector was the mercenary moon knight ran away from. doug moench was NOT intending to write a system at this point- steven and marcs relationship is meant to represent one mans struggle with guilt- but its really really easy to gel this with their current situation of being alters in a system and also some of the specifics of their whole thing make me fucking insane. jake is also there and i love him even if he isnt really a major part of the moral conflict

please dont read all 38 issues- attatched is a list of my personal ratings. everything later calls back to this so its best practice to read it first but its very much a slog if you arent already attatched to this character so make your own choice

nothing from 1980 to 2014 is particularly good (you can read it if you want but i havent) but knowing what happened is pretty important to understanding the later modern runs so a runthrough. throughout the 90s mk continued in the 80s status quo but in 2006 he 1. cut off bushmans (remember that guy from 1980?) face 2. was given a tendency for violence and and 3. became significantly more tense with marlene and frenchie. by 2014 they had completely fallen out. thats all we can continue with the recs now

[Image ID: A list of Moon Knight 1980 issues colored based on their quality. Issues 4, 7-11, 15, 17-20, and 28 are marked as "not good." Issue 27 is marked as "not good makes me insane though." Issues 3, 5, 6, 13, 16, 21, 34, and 35 are marked as "fun." Issues 2, 12, 14, 22 to 26, and 29 to 33, are marked as "good writing." 37 and 38 are marked as "genuinely essential." 1 and 36 are not marked. 29 is denoted as "slightly weird about his DID" and issues 6, 21, and 22, are denoted as "racist." End ID.]

WHAT HAPPENS IN BETWEEN -

MOON KNIGHT 2014 -

tws - graphic violence. do not buy the book new, warren ellis is an awful person. brief (doylist) ableism.

what happens in it - the first six issues are the warren ellis/declan shalvey run, which is what im reccomending. read the rest if you want, its mediocre but i like it

moon knight 2014 is 6 episodic issues centering on a now alone marc spector. steven and jake only show up twice, both lineless appearances in the back of panels. most of the issues are significantly more violent, dark, callbacks to old 1980 issues. most of the run is silent violence from marc but all of the stories are really good and the art is breathtaking.

MOON KNIGHT 2016 -

tws - unreality. mental hospitals. both doylist and watsonian ableism.

what happens - i am reccomending the lemire/smallwood + co run, the 15 issues before the numbers shoot up. i have not read the bemis run.

moon knight 2016 is 15 issues situated in a hallucinatory version of NYC, following moon knight as he struggles against khonshu's attempts to possess him. the thing is a lot of things in 2016 piss me off so i cant exactly sing its praises but its super important to modern moon knight so just. slog through it. highly reccomend reading after 1980 because it refrences A Lot.

MOON KNIGHT 2021 -

tws - violence, discussion of anti-semitism in issue 5.

what happens - i am reccomending the first 16 issues. the annual sort of triggered a falling off for the series and so i have not read after #16. read the later issues at your own risk

moon knight 2021 follows moon knight as he opens the midnight mission, gains multiple new side characters, and reckons with the consequences of the age of khonshu (an event in jason aarons avengers which is explained fine in 2021 so you dont have to read it). most of the series is typical action juxtaposed with MK's SHEILD-ordered therapy sessions. issues 14 and 15 are possibly the first time jake and steven have been written well since 1980. unfortunately, the annual is deeply xenophobic (villianizing the only romanian hero in marvel) and i have stopped reading the series due to this. the first 16 issues are really good though

MOON KNIGHT BLACK WHITE AND BLOOD -

tws - violence.

what happens - mkbwb is 4 issues consisting of 12 noncanon moon knight stories, as is typical for bwb series. most of them are pretty good and fun and also really pretty.

OTHER MOON KNIGHT STUFF -

- ms. marvel and moon knight

- devils reign: moon knight - tw violence, prisons

- west coast avengers 1985, issues 25-41

- hulk 1978 issues 11-20 (not #16), b stories.

- moon knight 2006 issue 3 - for frenchies coming out scene, which is good. not anything else

- heroes for hire 2011 - hes only in a few issues but im not saying which ones because i want you to read the whole thing. because its good

- defenders 1972 issues 47-51 - its Very 70s but its cute and i like it :)

- werewolf by night 32 and 33 - his first appearance!

ENDING THOUGHTS - please god listen to and make a point to be kind to systems and jewish people when you talk about MK.

[thewingedwolf]

We do agree then. Most of my timeline is filled with black women so that is what I'm most exposed to. My main gripe is that black women are always used as the rage bait in these shows. I'm truly tired of the racism and wish that new stories are created for us without the need to replace them for us to get representation. Sorry if I offended you for the 'black' comment.

sorry if i sounded suuuper annoyed lmao, i Am annoyed but at twitter not u aksksk. (also, was working children’s and there were just so many screaming kids today 😭). and that's definitely fair! i know The Interwebs in general is feeling very upset right now because of that romeo and juliet production that tom holland was in, because not only did they not really stand up for that poor actress, or turn off comments, they were just being sooo weird about her on social media. it's really nasty to just cast a black actress, especially one who is dark skinned, knowing she's going to get a shit storm of racism hurled at her and then not defend her and even actively make it worse by refusing to take basic precautions so she's not having people call her slurs in every damn post. and this show itself obviously also has a bad track record with that - not just with all the main black characters of color excluding agatha being light skinned and/or Mixed With White specifically (where's the blasian rep!!! where's the afrolatino rep!!!! why are mixed characters always mixed with white!!!!!!! also i love the sharma’s but not letting anthony and kate have their own fucking wedding OR a sex montage and then giving colin a bunch of annoying sex scenes is so!!!!!!) but also the way marina's storyline was handled was nauseating and pen never makes up to marina for doing something so egregiously awful, and on top of that poor ruby barker had a hard ass time on the set and on the internet. it sucked!!! i hope i didn't sound too mad lol, but my whole tl was either white women having a MELTDOWN over the show "ruining" michael (this is a paper thin character, there is nothing to ruin!!!) or other people (largely black women but also a lot of queer women in general) being like "sucks to suck anywayyyy hope francesca and michaela scissor on screen just to spite you personally" alkjdf and it hasn't even been 24 hours, i'm so over it 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

and yeah, that's something an author i like (i like her as a person, i don't love her romances haha) has mentioned - there are plenty of romances that are explicitly about black characters or indian characters or caribbean characters or jewish characters or whatever you fancy that take place in the regency/georgian/victorian era that could have been adapted but instead they went with julia quinn, who has explicitly talked about how she doesn't write characters of color because they ~don't get happy endings in this time period. and mind you, this is a woman who writes a duke living on every corner in london getting a love match!!! not to mention if they really just wanted to do some funky color blind/racebending, there are so many authors out there who have written longstanding romance series' with all white characters who are just better writers than julia!!! i mean, i have a lot of beef with tessa dare for what i feel is performative allyship (though i don't want to discount the way she has privately been a rock for a lot of authors of color, especially after the rwa blowup, she's still annoying to me tho haha), but she's just leaps and bounds better of a writer and also hasn't gone on record saying she would never write a black main character the way julia quinn has! it's unendingly annoying!!! courtney milan and diana quincy and beverly jenkins are right there!!!!

[captainwidowspring]

Hello again CaptainWidowSpring,

I am UsernamesSuck_44 on Ao3, and what I'd like to ask you about has pretty much nothing to do with Marvel's Civil War, but it is something that I want your opinion on, because you've proven to be an incredible analyst, so I'm moving it to here. With that said, what I'm going to talk about is a real-world thing with genuine controversy, so if you don't feel comfortable talking about it, then ignore everything I'm about to write.

Over the last 2 months we've had an incredibly in-depth and analytical discussion about Wanda Maximoff and her actions across the MCU, and I loved every bit of what we've said. But now I'd like to ask you about the... controversy surrounding the character, and Elizabeth Olsen herself. As you most likely know, in the comics Wanda is half-Romani (though she is generally drawn as lighter-skinned), and I'm told she is Jewish. The MCU version of the character is neither of these things, so some people have gotten angry at Marvel for supposedly whitewashing the character. Do you think there is any merit to that?

That's only part of what I'd like to ask about though, and this is the part I'm really concerned about. Now, there's no denying that Elizabeth Olsen is a wonderful actress, and without her we wouldn't have the amazing character that is MCU Wanda. But even aside from the whitewashing accusation, there is some controversy around Olsen herself. You may have heard about it before, but I'm gonna recap anyway: on three separate occasions Lizzie has used a certain Romani word that could be seen as a racial slur to describe Wanda. She said it twice during the promotional tour for Age of Ultron: once in an interview, which you can find on YouTube by searching "Elizabeth Olsen is racist", and once that is not on camera but is still well-documented; she appeared once on the Graham Norton Show when promoting AoU, and allegedly she said that word again, and Norton told her it was offensive. I don't know what her reaction to that was, because none of this is on camera, since it was all edited out of the episode. I think it's worth pointing out that Lizzie has never been back on Graham Norton's show in the 8 years since. The third time was on a podcast when promoting WandaVision; she used the word again to describe Wanda's Halloween costume. All three times people have gotten angry and accused her of being a racist. Here are a few examples:

https://www.mic.com/p/as-a-romani-witch-i-cant-stand-wandavision-63495123https://www.tumblr.com/earnestdesire/644224777695952896/trigger-warning-g-slurhttps://imperiuswrecked.tumblr.com/post/683507607922720768/if-you-are-still-defending-elizabeth-olsen-to-thishttps://www.tumblr.com/tonkysexist

I can't exactly say these people are wrong for feeling offended, as they certainly have a right to feel attacked. Even just asking about this feels wrong, because it could be seen as me saying "Elizabeth Olsen is racist and her character is offensive. Help me deny those facts."

So what do you think about this? Were Olsen's remarks racist? Was it done out of bigotry, or ignorance? If it was ignorance is that even a valid excuse? Does MCU Wanda represent cultural erasure? Even if this isn't as awful of a thing as I'm worrying, what would happen if she said it (or God forbid, something worse) again on a future press tour? Should I even be questioning this instead of just writing her off entirely like a lot of people have? Do I even have the authority to be talking about this? I don't want to stop loving Wanda, because I feel a very deep connection with her, but knowing that she might be rooted in bigotry and racism does put a damper on my enthusiasm.

Again, if you don't feel comfortable talking about such a sensitive topic, then feel free to just ignore this entirely.

You are not wrong for being desirous of more information about these accusations. It is quite good to not blindly accept such charges, as pondering them enables one to gain a better understanding of the situation. Anyone can be so reflective, this allows for many different perspectives on the situation. Indeed, it is quite beneficial to engage in critical thinking.

I do not think Elizabeth Olsen's comments were racist. Here is why. For one thing, it is likely that she quite simply didn't know that some people consider the g-word to be a slur; it is often seen as just another way to describe the Roma people. And the term is not exactly uncommon; there is a breed of horse called the Gypsy Vanner, for example. And while she has been told of some people's dislike of that word, she might have just forgotten due to the amount of time that has passed since then, especially if the word continued to have no negative connotations for her.

But also, she clearly was not using the word with malicious intent. She was just using the word like any other adjective. For example, some people have gotten upset that, during the interviews for Age of Ultron, when describing Wanda and Pietro's lifestyle, she used the g-word in conjunction with the word vagabond: and they have taken this to mean that Olsen views the Roma as thieves. I do not think this is the case, however. First of all, while vagabond can mean thief, it can also just mean a person who wanders from place to place, and this conceivably could be the definition she was using. And while she does at times talk about how Wanda and Pietro had to steal things, she emphasized that they did so because they had to, not because they were bad people or particularly predisposed to thievery: so in any case the g-word was in no way intended as a conveyance of negativity.

And on the Graham Norton Show, after Norton told Olsen that he found the word offensive, apparently Jeremy Renner and Mark Ruffalo, who were with her, started chanting it. Olsen did not join them, so it appears that she is perfectly willing to not say the word if it offends people.

I read an article about the subject that I thought provided a good perspective, and here are two quotes from that article:

"There is the risk, of course, that we stumble into the realm of the 'noble savage' and over-idealize the Roma or our fictionalized notions of gypsies in the process, much like people often do with Native Americans…But clearly this is not the same thing as being a 'nasty racist.' Imagining that the American Indians were all peaceful and at one with nature may be inaccurate and naïve, but it’s not in the same ballpark as thinking they’re subhuman."

"Is Stevie Nicks—who described herself in a recent NPR interview as a 'freewheeling, roller-skating witch that I am'—a racist for her song ‘Gypsy?’ Do the lyrics strike you as a slanderous assault on the Roma people? No more than Olsen’s excited discussion of her cool 'Gypsy' costume. Context matters. So does empathy. Either one without the other and we risk falling prey to the whims of outrage and offense and, yes, of being an asshole for no reason, too."

Perhaps Olsen could be be a bit more careful about using that word in the future because of how upsetting it is for some people, but at the same time it is understandable how she would not see that word as bad, especially since some Roma actually prefer that word. If she said it again and it sparked great displeasure, the best thing to do would be to explain the situation to her. I agree with Valkyrieandstrangeridingaragorn, I think there must be intention for it to be racist, attacking someone for something they genuinely did not know was disagreeable is not very helpful.

Now for Wanda. The good news is, MCU Wanda does not represent cultural erasure, and is not rooted in bigotry and racism.

As you noted, some people are upset that Wanda was not clearly shown to be Jewish or Roma. The thing about this is, there’s really no indication that she wasn’t these things either. Her religious status is not brought up at all, so it is open to interpretation. As for her ethnicity, what is made clear by the movies is that she is Sokovian, so she is Eastern European. But this does not mean she is not Roma: and as we know from the word Olsen used, such a thing was definitely a consideration for her character. And there are hints of it in places, like how Wanda dressed up as a Sokovian Fortune Teller in WandaVision, fortunetelling is a traditional Roma occupation. And in any case, the MCU does not always bring up the religious status and ethnicity of its characters. For example, Steve is Irish and a Christian: but the fact that he is Irish never came up in any of his appearances, and the only reference to his religion was the line in The Avengers when he said, “There’s only one God, ma’am, and I’m pretty sure He doesn’t dress like that,” which isn't very informative. Not focusing on a character’s cultural identity is not something new to the MCU, they are often unable to figure out how to work such a thing into their stories.

And if Steve's cultural background was not explored in any of his appearances, when he has had more screen time at this point than Wanda has, it is really not surprising that the same thing happened to Wanda. There being no mentions of Wanda being Jewish is not really surprising, as such a thing has never played a major role in any of her comic stories either. Really the only thing that connected her to Judaism was the fact that she was Magneto's daughter for a time, and he is a Jew. But that has since been retconned, and in any case, she did not meet Magneto until she was an adult. As for Wanda's race, it has been retconned several times. She and Pietro were white Europeans until 1974, and then they became Americans until 1979. It is at this point that they became the children of Magneto and Magda, which is where the Romani heritage appeared. Then around 2014, they were retconned back into being the biological children of the Maximoffs, who were white Europeans. So the European heritage is definitely there, portraying Wanda as European is not at all inaccurate. And again, Wanda's background is not something that the MCU has paid much attention to, so it is not surprising that her being Roma was never significantly acknowledged.

And there is nothing wrong with casting Olsen as Wanda; she deserves the role, being quite talented in it. And despite Wanda's race being retconned multiple times, as you noted she has generally been drawn as white or white-passing, so casting a white person to play her was a natural choice. And there are plenty of other actors who look like their characters but are not the exact same race, that is not a new phenomenon. Indeed, such a standard of representation would be difficult to maintain, and very restrictive. Olsen being cast as Wanda is not whitewashing.

Here are a few other good sources on the matter:

https://mdccanon.tumblr.com/post/693769772228345856/well-for-wandavision-i-guess-it-was-more-for-the

https://mdccanon.tumblr.com/post/694330356578516992/the-problem-with-elizabeth-olsen-and-not-chris

[elephant-in-the-pride-parade]

Thank you for your thorough reply. I mostly sent that message since I personally can see how people would be quick to call the premise of that fic problematic with regards to race. Making an Indigenous man biologically driven to be submissive towards a white woman has negative associations with “taming the savage” type tropes (1/2)

Thanks for reaching out again and meeting me where I am at on this. D/s and race do need to be tackled sensitively, I agree.

In this case from reading the fic I thought that this treatment of the men in submissive position by this particular writer was done as well as one could. The sub-assignment was equally distributed among almost all the main men on the cast (first point) so did not appear linked to race in particular. Chakotays submissiveness was also not tied to his race in text in any way (second point). The fic also gave him agency over whether to pursue a sexually submissive relationship (third point). Regarding Belanna, the fic put all the main women, not just B, in the Dom position (fourth point).

In terms of advice I've followed as a white writer and a beta on how to handle race in fics, especially in smut fics, I always hear two pieces of advice as best practices - (1) wherever possible include characters performing the kink that are white and nonwhite and give them equal treatment, and (2) avoid sexualizing/exotifying/fetishizing racial characteristics. From the three chapters that did get posted, the author was following that advice in terms of writing her D/s world. I cant judge the actual smut scenes of course, these werent ever posted, but in terms of establishing how this fictional sexual mechanic works the author seemed to be doing the best they could to portray this equally in white and non-white characters, and was not fetishizing race (again at least that I noticed).

The tags on this fic were extremely comprehensive in terms of what kinks would be tackled. this is usually a good indicator for me that this is going to be handled sensitively on the kink front. There are not enough kink fics written by people who actually do their research so I was looking forward to seeing if that would pan out in the writing itself.

Belanna is tricky because as you pointed out in your 2nd message, the angry latina point is very valid. Her klingon temper is also referenced a lot in canon and is used as a clumsy method of showing her grappling with her dual-identities and her dealing with anti-klingon sentiments. And so I think it is a struggle for writers to figure out how to write her in character in that regard without being insensitive as canon is bad at it to start. It is a valid criticism to raise but its also helpful to be able to point to some fic or other resource that either does handle the temper well or explains how not to handle it.

Given that Belanna didnt actually appear in person in the three chapters posted, I really dont have a basis for how the author would have handled her character. And I wont get to find out if she would have been sensitive about it now.

All that to say what I took issue with in terms of the negative comments the author described receiving wasnt that she had been accused of racism. it is that she'd been harassed in multiple ways, on multiple fics, even told to kys over a made up sexual mechanic and that this had hurt her enough to just... stop. To stop writing and sharing her kink. to stop writing these characters. And thats... awful. Blocking and Muting or clicking the back button were all choices this anon had. Sharing specific instances where the D/s was racially insensitive was also a choice they had. Instead it sounds like they went on anon, made extremely general accusations about racism, homophobia, and not understanding the characters, and then sent these to a writer they dont know, who doesnt know them, and told that writer the most awful hurtful think you could say. For what purpose? It just reeks of bad actor behavior.