#and I'm absolutely convinced that most of that is because there's a general disconnect in the understanding

[nxthero]

me every time I see another half-assed article titled something like “why everyone hates sakura” or “why sakura is the worst character” and it’s always the same old misogynistic talking points this fandom has thrown around since the dawn of time bc no one who says they want to talk about the problems with sakura’s character actually wants to talk about the valid criticisms that should be pointed at the way kishi handled her and every other woman in his story, they just want to dunk on a character whose only unique crime was being a teenage girl when there were numerous other characters who had the same flaws / did the same things but don’t get even a fraction of the shit that sakura gets. like people will be so quick to forgive and woobify homicidal maniacs in this show but god forbid this teenage girl has a crush on a boy, not reciprocate someone else’s feelings just because he’s the main character, and struggle with the moral quandary of potentially having to fight and kill her teammate she went through numerous traumatic experiences with in order to stop him from going on a rampage because she was pressured to believe that it was her responsibility to make that decision AT SIXTEEN YEARS OLD by the people who should have been supporting her instead, adults included.

[drhu0806]

I have... very mixed feelings about the criticisms aimed towards game devs right now regarding Baldur's Gate 3 setting a new standard for RPGs, and frankly I'm a little disappointed if only because it doesn't sound all that different from those really annoying players who obviously have absolutely no experience in game dev and what it's like but they keep talking shit like they do. Game dev is hard. I'm not a game dev, but I am in software and that's hard enough, and I can only imagine what people who make games go through. I am not going to pretend I know what their job is like.

That's not to say I completely disagree with people wanting to put BG3 on that pedestal: I absolutely want AAA studio execs to fear for their lives with the release of this game because it's going to prove so many things to them, and I do want it to set some kind of standard in some things. But I also genuinely don't think it's even possible for games to consistently reach BG3 as a standard even if they tried. So I see it less as attainable and more as something to consistently worth striving for, mainly because of just why BG3 is almost for certain going to rock our worlds, because it's a result of a perfect combination of factors that I genuinely think even AAA studios will have hard time getting:

Backing of Wizards of the Coast - this is one of the biggest ones I think, but this gives BG3 relatively lower risk when it comes to turning profits. I'm pretty sure I don't need to tell anyone that D&D is hot right now, so Larian already has a near guaranteed huge batch of consumers coming in.

Highly successful early access - this is less of a super important point since AAA studios def have the resources for QA on this level but we do need to factor in the steady cash flow and how for a part of playtesting players are paying them rather than the other way around. Also of note is that part of what made their EA so successful is because the studio has had previous EAs that proved their worth, which ties into the next point...

Proven track record - Larian is one of the most perfect companies to have taken on this role--though yeah they did get rejected before when they tried convincing WotC--mainly because they've had at least two very successful and genuinely good games in the past, and they've brought on a lot of those devs from those games to work on BG3. This is the really important point because I do want to emphasize that Larian had to build up to BG3; the two Original Sin games were good but they aren't as big. Part of why I don't think games regularly being the same caliber of the game is feasible because studios need the experience, and they absolutely cannot make games as high functioning as BG3 every single time.

You need at least both points 1 and 3 to get something like BG3 and while there are some franchises + studios that can achieve this (I def have one in mind but they THREW THEIR POTENTIAL AWAY--) I'd be very hard pressed to find this combination with any level of consistency. I'm sure we'll get games of this caliber every once in a while but I feel like so much of getting there is having games in between that may or may not be great.

I feel like there's a disconnect in the way people are expressing and interpreting these opinions. I personally think game devs--at least the reasonable ones--are saying BG3 shouldn't be the standard because they're saying it's really not possible to make games of that level of scope all the time, which I think is pretty reasonable. But maybe the way some of them are saying it, players are interpreting it as a refusal to put in the time and effort to make decent games that don't break the backs of their producers. I think BG3's general work flow is definitely something any company could achieve, and I think that's what good fans want, I just sympathize with devs in that I don't want players to hold games to such a high standard on a technical level when Larian was just about the perfect company to take on this job and you can't get that all the time.

[sobeautifullyobsessed]

For the associations thing:

Doctor Strange (obviously)

Sound of Music (I don't know why? Have you even posted anything about it before? I don't know, maybe it has to do with the very soft romances you write/rp (hopefully you understand what I mean by soft))

Brown curls and glasses (because of Beauty)

How to word this in the most coherent way possible because I'm genuinely worried I'll accidentally offend someone? I'm demiromantic and asexual. I have a very different relationship with romance and sex compared to most. I am sex-averse and have this disconnect with romance that's really hard to describe. As you might imagine, it can make fandom spaces difficult sometimes. I'm a responsible person and simply don't interact with content that I don't like. I use Tumblr because there's no algorithm so I won't see stuff just because I follow fandom blogs. So it's fine but a little isolating or overwhelming sometimes. Personally, the hardest thing for me isn't when people write smut. Generally, writers are very responsible, using the read more and tags to prevent accidental viewership. But when I see people casually talking about how sexy a character/actor is, that is much harder for me sometimes. And it's not like it's a bad thing to post about how Actor X is a hottie. I absolutely support people saying that sort of stuff. It is an irrational thing I have where I feel left out. I don't know if it's internalized aphobia I'm working through or a general anxiety of being forgotten or what, but I somehow get massive FOMO from it a lot of the time. Which is irrational and pointless, which makes it even more frustrating. Since that is generally not tagged (because there's not a major need for it to be tagged) and it's not explicit material, I actually see it. Means I end up following lots of aspec people because that's easier than dealing with FOMO and the negative self talk because of the irrationality. But occasionally I find people who are very much open about how sexually appealing characters/actors are but somehow I'm okay with it. It doesn't cause FOMO. I have no idea why. At first I thought it had to do with ratio of horny posts to other posts, ie analyzing story and character posts. Nope, even people that analyze a lot can be overwhelming. Before I knew about asexuality and aromanticism, I convinced myself I was attracted to different men and women because I felt the need to conform. I followed people who were vocal about how attractive different actors/characters are, forcing myself to look at it, convincing myself I was like that. As you can guess, that wasn't that good for my mental health. Thank heavens, I moved on from that. But I remember you being the first person I followed on my other acc that was vocal about it but somehow didn't overwhelm me. And, I don't read your smut, I may scroll past a post if I think it's going in the "this person is attractive" direction if I've had a rough day, but otherwise everything is completely fine. Again, no idea why you're different from so many other blogs in my head. Like I said, it's not like any of this is rational. But it means I have this interesting association with you in relationship to romance and sexual attractiveness that's hard to describe. Almost relieving because especially in the Doctor Strange fandom it can be hard for me sometimes (and I headcanon him as greysexual and I've never seen anyone else headcanon him as aspec. I'm apparently the lone wolf of the fandom lol). And it's weird. Like I said, no one is doing anything wrong, it's my brain being dumb and irrational for no good reason. But you've successfully got a good grade in local asexual being chill, and you should take that as a compliment. Sorry if this is weird, because it is definitely weird and hard to explain and I mean no harm. I just have a very different experience in fandom because of my orientations but I am comfortable with your blog.

TELL ME WHAT YOU ASSOCIATE WITH ME. COLORS, SONGS, AESTHETICS, PEOPLE, ANYTHING.

Darling, sorry for the delayed answer, I just wanted to be sure I understood as best I could what you were saying. I think I have it--and I absolutely DO take what you've explained as a compliment. 😊 And ofc, I wanted to reply before you went on hiatus (hope that all your health issues have checked out for your trip to go forward!). Let me comment in brief on a few things.

The Sound of Music - though you may not have seen them, I have posted about this movie as an early influence on my perception of Romance--as early as seven years old! After the first time I saw it, I kept telling people I wanted to be an Actress or a Nun (probably because Maria always looked so pretty). Only years later did I understand

that Christopher Plummer's Captain Von Trapp strongly contributed to my standard of ideal male beauty (tall, dark-haired, blue-eyed, aristocratic looking; make you think of anyone we know?😉). The scene where Maria & the Captain dance is my quintessential idea of slow-burn, pining romance, and I suppose it's softness colors my writing in most cases.

Beauty's dark hair & glasses - my face claim is Zooey Deschanel in her series The New Girl because, frankly, she's an idealized version of my real life appearance AND that character's personality embodies so much of what I wanted to build into Beauty. So I adore when anyone following me associates me with my Beauty. And lately, when I feel blue, I cheer myself up by watching the series to see the happy (and successfully romantic) adventures of a character that has become very like my alter ego.

As to your theory - YES. YES, I can see & I do believe I understand what you mean. Partly, I'm guessing you appreciate the fact that I'm a one Actor (and most of his characters) blog, rather than flitting from sexy celeb of the moment to the next. Loyalty trumps sex appeal, where the heart is truly invested. I wonder as well if my approach to characters falling in love is to have them gradually realize it's happening is appealing because there's 'no pressure' on the reader. And that the physical manifestations of their burdgeoning love are based in softness and awe and affection rather than lust and desire. It's always their hearts that guide the way--and that growing realization of 'oh, there you are! I guess I was waiting all along for YOU to come into my life.' I suppose that's soft and non-threatening and sincerely heart-based enough that makes it palatable for you. I am certainly glad for that!

Now...let me wish you a fabulous adventure in the months to come, and invite you to visit us here from time to time. I hope you will always find my blog a hospitable place to do so.🥰🥰

[trashy-corvian]

"I'm skimming over most of me lore but in general Val's current goal is to free Lucifer from his oath to the Prince." NOOOOOOO but actually??? I STAN?? SO HARD? You fuckin go Val you absolute champion

On Ao3 there's this Poly!MC series I quite like, which features Luci/Dia/Barb pretty heavily. And they are all shown to be quite consenting and into it, but post lesson 16 Dia and Luci have a spectacular falling out, during which Dia releases Lucifer from his oath.

Ever since reading about that I've wanted the longfic I am ostensibly going to write to include MC who notices this disconnect between Diavolo and Lucifer, and takes advantage of it.

I think it would just be so much better if instead of Lucifer handing you his pact at the end of s1, he gave it to you as thanks for convincing/tricking Diavolo into releasing him from his oath of service to him.

OMG your mind??

Idk about you, but for me and my mc Lucifer's oath with Diavolo would hinder all the progress in their relationship. How can you trust someone who can't even choose for himself? There will always be a possibility of some manipulation behind the scenes. Val doing it for Lucifer but also for themselves. They want a chance to build a relationship with the real unchained Morningstar.

Lucifer, being free for the first time in his life, and choosing to make a pact with MC? Mc refusing at first because they want him to be free and be his own person. And Lucifer still insisting because it's MC, he trusts them, he wants to be connected with them?

Just the ultimate trust these two can form, romantic or platonic. I need to lie down and think of... things

[a-method-in-it]

Trans(masculine) former Potterhead here! I still own the books, were a gift, a hardcover set from my mom from years ago. I even made a parody of Im a Lumberjack and I'm OK from Monty Python as I'm a Hufflepuff and I'm OK and helped found a Dumbledore's Army club at my High School I loved HP so much, I was obsessed, but now I have so many mixed emotions about the franchise I don't really know what to do.

I cannot speak for trans women, but as a queer trans person, if I see someone reading the books or watching the movies or wearing merch its like. Ok. I know I might get along with this person, they like the same stuff I (used to) like....BUT do they know how the werewolf thing is about AIDS, implying gay people are out of control monsters, and how the only villain with werewolfism specifically targets minors, implying pedophilia is a trait inherent in gay people? Do they know that when a trans woman reads the books they worry they wont be "woman enough" to keep the stairs in the girls dorm from turning into a slide, because they know that the author specifically thinks they don't deserve to sleep in the girl's dorm because of their gentials? Do they understand that JK Rowling's opinions are there, insidiously rooting into young minds? Are they reading this critically? Or do they support what JK is saying? Do they know all of these things and not care about it, dismiss it out of hand?

Does this person want me dead?

It boils down to a Feeling of Unease. Is this person safe for me to be around? There is a Very Real Danger that the person in the Ravenclaw Shirt and Golden Snitch Earrings is going to call the police on a trans woman going to the bathroom, or beat her, or even kill her, because the author of their favorite series has convinced them trans women are men in dresses and that men in women's bathrooms are dangerous. That person could also be a nice genuine nerd, queer themselves, even potentially a friend, but now I am Suspicious of that person. I am suspicious of anyone who openly enjoys it (unless they are children, kids don't know better, or if they have a tattoo, idk how old that tat is). They want to read it at home and want a discussion on new themes and how to make it better/less gross? Fine by me.

But if someone is publicaly supportting her, staying extremely active in the fandom defending the books or movies or JK herself, having and wearing merch which could direct new people (probably kids! Who will get Obsessed! And don't know better!) into buying things from her and giving her money? After all that she's done? After she literally helped create legislation against being trans?? Not cool.

The series is just simply tainted for a lot of trans folk like me. I still hold it dear foe what it did for me as a child, and I know if I read the series again I would still love it, but I would also HATE myself for enjoying it, knowing that the person who wrote this, the bit of her soul which she has given me, wants me dead. Wants my friends dead.

So I'm not really saying if you support HP publicaly people will see you as a TERF but I am also absolutely saying that people will see you as a TERF if you publicaly support the HP franchise. Death of the author is well and good when the author is dead and/or their estate doesn't get any money for new books or merch purchased, but she is alive and actively trying to kill trans folks, so literally anything that could be seen as support of her, or get others to support her even accidentally, can make trans folk uncomfortable and feel unsafe.

Hope this helped? I know I'm not the original asker, this is just my two cents.

Hi there! Thank you for posting this lengthy and very thoughtful response (and I hope you don’t mind my answering publicly -- if so, let me know and I’ll delete). There is one (admittedly very long) thing I’d like to say in response, but if you’re not looking for that, just know that I really value hearing your perspective and you can feel free to skip all of this and carry on your way. 

---

You say that you would probably enjoy the books if you reread them, but would hate yourself for doing so -- and I just want to say that what you like does not make you a bad person or act as any valid basis for deserving hate, from yourself or anyone else. 

Like, for instance, I’m a person who cannot stand horror movies and I am genuinely confused that anyone would enjoy watching terrible things happen to people for 90+ minutes. But I would never say that people who like horror movies are bad people just because they do enjoy that. The same goes for violent video games -- I don’t like them, but I don’t think the people who do are bad.

Because what media you personally enjoy has really no bearing on whether you are a good person. Being a good person is about how you treat others, whether you are kind, whether you are patient, whether you are understanding, whether you help people when you can and show up for the people in your life when they need you. It has nothing to do with whether you like a particular book or movie or videogame. 

So if you do want to reread those books because you think they would bring you joy, I hope that you do. 

Long before she became a TERF -- (and for the record, I don’t think that she was actively and consciously transphobic at the time when she was writing the books, for the simple reason that most of the people who are TERFs today weren’t at that point) -- I had already gotten used to tuning out Rowling and her fondness for Word of God pronouncements. 

Like, Dumbledore being gay actually fit into the canon very well, but others? They just felt tired and not thought-out and her whole short history of American magic was incredibly lazy. The werewolfism=AIDS thing was offensive in very real ways--and also it should be noted just does not make sense as a metaphor. Not just because AIDS will kill you and being a werewolf will not and there’s no way to bridge that fundamental disconnect -- but also because the way people talk about being a werewolf in the damn books doesn’t resemble at all the way people talk about AIDS patients in real life. Which makes me think she didn’t actually mean for it to be a metaphor when she wrote it and then years later threw it out there because it sounded good to her in the moment because she hadn’t thought it through.

By the time we got to wizards shitting on the floor because she very clearly forgot that she had already had chamber pots referenced in the text, I was long-since tapped out. 

Which is all just to say that it is beyond fair for you to use being a fan of Harry Potter as a data point in gauging your safety as a trans person -- but if we’re talking just about you enjoying the books?

Well, in that case, fuck Rowling and her weird post-canon comments that half the time don’t even make sense. If she wanted trans girls to not be allowed up the stairs to the girls’ dormitory, she should have put it in the damn text. As far as I’m concerned, trans girls and trans boys are allowed up whichever staircase matches their sense of themselves (and, I like to think, nonbinary kids get the run of the whole tower). 

In fact, as far as I’m concerned, she lost the right to have me care what she says about the Harry Potter universe when all of her comments started being unbearably lazy, asinine, and/or nonsensical. If she’d been half this uninspired and careless when writing the actual books, I would have stopped reading them. 

This has been a very long reply on that single point, but I want to end by saying that the point is, even if I accepted the premise that liking the Harry Potter books is in and of itself wrong -- and I hope I’ve made something of a case that it’s not -- it still shouldn’t be something you hate yourself over. Short of actually murdering people, I’m not sure there’s anything that’s grounds to outright hate yourself, honestly, but liking a book is definitely not on the list. 

Either way, you seem like a lovely person, one who is very thoughtful and has been very patient and generous with your time in writing all of that out. I hope that you find ways to also be a little more patient and generous with yourself -- about Harry Potter or any other topic -- because you deserve that and you do not deserve to be hated by anyone, least of all yourself. And I also hope you have a good rest of your night. 

[itsclydebitches]

(1/?) I'm curious as to your thoughts: was there a good way to write Ironwood as CRWBY intended him, 'fundamentally good person shows signs of instability and a worrying commitment to the idea that everyone should be willing to make a sacrifice as long as he is, takes this to unacceptable extremes when a great sacrifice is called for'? I've been reading all these posts that actually make it seem like a coherent character arc, and I don't consider myself a 'bootlicker' or someone who

Always happy to explain my thoughts! Though Ironwood’s situation is incredibly complicated and I’m tired as hell right now, so apologies if this attempt at working through things is more than a little messy… 

You’re right that Salem herself fundamentally changes the heart of the “well-meaning but ultimately misguided general” setup. Meaning, normally when we see a character like Ironwood, someone military-minded and driven by pragmatism, whoever it is they’re fighting against is us. It’s a war against other humans, or at least another intelligent (and sympathetic) form of life. Ironwood’s attempted archetype here relies heavily on the assumption that he’s taking things too far when there are better, more peaceful options open to him. No, general, don’t nuke all those people even though we’re at war with them because they’re still people. No, general, don’t blow up the alien ship even though you perceive them as a threat because they feel just like we do and I, the protagonist, believe that I can make peace with them. Though RWBY doesn’t have quite that same conflict—everyone agrees that Salem needs to go—it’s nevertheless worth acknowledging that his archetype is built on a history of unsympathetic characters… who are unsympathetic because they’re choosing to harm others for needless reasons. The hardened military general is an antagonist because he takes the violent route either due to greed or a lust for power. He makes sacrifices not because they are truly necessary, but because they’re easier or better for him. He believes that this violence/sacrifice is the only answer when the audience can clearly see another, better route. Think characters like Miles Quaritch from Avatar whose goal is, ultimately, to force a peaceful people out of their home/outright kill them in order to gain access to a natural resource on their world. Even if there is, broadly speaking, a “good” reason for doing this (humanity needs that resource to solve their energy crisis) there’s no confusion that his reasons are far from justified and that he’s taken things way too far. Not only because gaining resources is, you know, not a reason to kill people, but also because Jake Sully, our hero, provides him with alternative routes that he then rejects. These people are peaceful. We can negotiate with them… but Quaritch says no. 

So this is, broadly speaking, the archetype Ironwood and Team RWBY are thrust into. He’s the general supposedly taking things too far and they’re the heroes standing in his way. Problem is, RWBY’s enemy isn’t a sympathetic, potential victim. The grimm are literally mindless beasts and Salem is a classic Big Bad. She might have a tragic backstory now, but that hasn’t impacted how we read her as a threat. She isn’t another group of humans we should be making peace with. She’s not an alien race who we just have to extend a hand to. Defeating her—in a literal way—is thus far the only possible route and that undermines the archetype Rooster Teeth wants to chuck Ironwood into. He can’t be the cold-hearted military man choosing violence over peace when peace is simply not an option.

So we have a setup where every single one of Ironwood’s decisions is automatically both sane and justified because there is an immortal grimm queen trying to kill them. And she cannot be reasoned with. Extra security? No duh you want that. Suspicious of others? No shit Beacon fell precisely because it was infiltrated. Making sacrifices? What else is there to do except roll over and let Salem win? The options presented to him were “make sacrifice” or “everyone absolutely dies” so no, in this case the sacrifice is not deemed “unnecessary” and therefore something that we can criticize him for. Ironwood is not fighting a powerful but also potentially sympathetic enemy, inviting a perspective that his actions may be too severe in the face of that threat. Salem isn’t a Darth Vader who is going to turn back to the light when she sees her child. She isn’t a Sauron with a convenient Achille’s heel (as of yet anyway) thereby inviting an easy solution that doesn’t risk too many lives. The grimm are not the Klingons who, if you just take the time to know their culture, you can find common ground with. They and Salem are more akin to the Borg: a relentless, unreachable, immortal force that seeks only to destroy everything. She is RWBY’s devil and thus by default any question along the lines of, “But should Ironwood really have..?” is answered with an emphatic “Yes.” Because the only other option is total annihilation for the entire world, not just the one city you’re worried about. RWBY’s villain is such a massive, unarguable threat that the setup doesn’t allow debate in regards to what’s going “too far.” By having Team RWBY and Oscar parrot those views from other stories they just come off as sounding naive, foolish, and arrogant. Salem is not an enemy that you just need to try really hard to beat in battle. She is currently immortal. She is not someone you just need to talk down. She will annihilate you and laugh while doing it. “Unnecessary sacrifice” only exists in a world where you have a chance of taking another route with success. RWBY hasn’t provided that route yet. 

Thus, most military archetypes don’t have to face the level of threat that Ironwood does. In fact, their status as antagonists largely relies on the belief that the threat isn’t severe enough to warrant whatever horrific order they’re giving. Rooster Teeth has written a character based on tropes that do not work within the scenario they’ve set up… and a good chunk of the fandom aren’t critical enough viewers to see the disconnect. They just watch that collection of tropes and characteristics and fill in the blank based on what they know from the rest of popular culture. Like a really messed up Mad Lib. “Ah! I recognize this character! He’s a military man. He’s strict at times. He’s taking control of a situation and achieving that with an army. This is all a Bad Thing and I know that because I’ve seen it a thousand times before in a thousand different stories. The powerful military man is the antagonist and the heroes are the ones who fight for the marginalized!” And thus the viewer is encouraged to prioritize that assumed reading over the actual context of this particular story. Few are willing to admit that “Leaving marginalized people behind because otherwise we will all be slaughtered” is not the same situation as something like “Outright attacking a marginalized people because I want something from them. Or abandoning them because I just don’t care.” They see the basic, surface characteristics and think they know the answer to this story. Team RWBY = good and Ironwood = bad. 

That’s only the tip of the problem though. It’s a big problem, but literally every step of the way Rooster Teeth would need to change things if they actually wanted to give Ironwood this arc in a way that made any sense: 

They would need to change how they portray Mantle going all the way back to Volume 4 because we knew straight out of the Fall that Mantle has had a lot of problems for a very long time. That’s not all on Ironwood—it’s not possible for it all to be on Ironwood—and thus it’s neither correct nor fair to paint Mantle’s dystopian-like state as his doing, as we saw at the beginning of Volume 7. 

They would need to convince us that Ironwood is actually paranoid/being overly cautious, rather than what we actually have which is… completely logical safety measures against everything that has done them in up until now. Everything Ironwood implements is in direct response to something that killed people or felled a school. 

The story would need to give Ironwood better solutions that he then rejects. Obviously this is crucial for the leaving Mantle situation. As I’ve said numerous times before, you can’t paint Ironwood as a horrific person for following the only plan they had. “Stay to die” is not a plan. If they wanted him to read as in the wrong for leaving, Team RWBY needed to give him a good reason to stay, one that doesn’t automatically equal everyone dying, especially when Ironwood’s own solution is “save at least some.” However, this also needed to happen in regards to Amity. The fandom keeps pointing out that Ironwood took resources from Mantle, painting it as this cruel and awful thing… without acknowledging the necessity of that. Or that our heroes likewise demanded that he finish. Ruby is equally responsible for taking those resources. Again, if they want to paint Ironwood as unhinged and cruel in his decision, they need to provide him with alternatives: “Hey, general! Why don’t we just use these other resources instead?” “No. They must come from Mantle.” or “Hey, general! We’re just going to let you know that finishing Amity is fundamentally useless because you can’t defeat Salem with a giant army. Maybe stop taking resources now.” “No. I don’t believe you. I’m going to forge ahead with my own plans, ignoring this new information.” Neither of these things happened. We weren’t told that there was another way to build Amity and Ironwood wasn’t told that his plan was flawed… making his decision both necessary and justified, given what he knew. To my mind, Team RWBY is far more responsible for Mantle’s state since they encouraged that drain on the resources while knowing the use of those resources wouldn’t achieve what Ironwood assumed it would. Which, while failing to paint them as heroic, likewise undermines Ironwood’s supposed villainy. Why do we hate him for this again…. when Ruby is doing the exact same thing…? 

They would need to have established, all the way back in Volume 2 and onward, a personality that allows for him to go to certain extremes, such as shooting Oscar. I don’t have the energy to dive into this one in great detail right now, but suffice to say the fandom has decided to horrendously miss-characterize Ironwood in an effort to justify an illogical action based on what we know about him. I’ve seen the “He once said he would shoot Qrow!” so often I’m literally astounded by the reach there, but I’m also seeing a lot of “Ironwood has never shown any sympathy towards children!” Which… okay. The absence of interaction is not proof of hatred. Meaning, having watched seven volumes in which Ironwood doesn’t interact with kids only tells us we don’t know how he feels about kids, not that he obviously despises them. A lack of scenes wherein Ironwood expresses his adoration for everyone under the age of twenty is not evidence for dislike, nor more than making a claim like, “Well Ruby obviously hates pears” would be. Why would she hate pears? Because we’ve never once, ever, heard her say that she likes them. She’s never spoken positively about them. Never stood up for them! So clearly they’re her least favorite food. Sound ridiculous? Same situation here. To say nothing of the fact that we do see Ironwood interacting positively with kids, if we define “kids” as “characters significantly younger than him.” We watched him desperately protect large groups of students at Beacon. Stand up for Weiss at the party despite how much that threatened his political situation with Jacques (as seen in Volume 7). Send Yang an expensive new arm purely because he knows what it’s like to lose a limb. The narrative has gone out of its way to demonstrate how kind and compassionate Ironwood is, all of which would need to be changed—if not outright erased—to give us someone capable of shooting Oscar like that. 

The fact that the fandom chooses to ignore characterization doesn’t mean it’s not there and that characterization, at its core, fundamentally hinders the “military man goes off the deep end” archetype. Because Ironwood is nothing like his parallels in popular culture. His situation is not one that he can resolve peacefully. He was not given better options that he then rejected. He has never been a cold, manipulative, cruel person. Honestly, if they wanted to write this arc then they needed someone other than James Ironwood living in the world of RWBY. We’d need a different kind of war and a different character introduced all those volumes ago. Because as it is, the story Rooster Teeth wanted to tell simply isn’t a story fit for the Ironwood and the Remnant they created. 

[momo-de-avis]

Do you have any tips on how to start writing? I'm really bad at expressing my thoughts well so I figure if I write like, a diary or something I may get better at talking,

A diary is actually a good thing! A great thing, actually. Because it allows you to practice for yourself only. It’s one of those little writing corners where you can just be yourself, unlimited, boundless, as you wish, and no one will criticize you. If you allow your thoughts to just pour onto the paper, even if only a paragraph per day, I guarantee you will grow. It’s important for writers to keep practising, and it’s common advice to just tell WRITE EVERY DAY, which isn’t so helpful as people make it seem. Most of the time, people use this to mean like, write a story, a short story, participate in NaNoWriMo (if you’re like me and don’t like to set up goals like Nano does in fear of disappointing yourself or are just plain bad with deadlines, Nano is a terrible idea). But actually, a diary does wonders. It’s the perfect way of practising, and it goes both ways---you vent and you practice. It’s for you alone.

First of all: don’t be too demanding on yourself. Whether it’s word/page count, deadlines or quality of what you’re creating, it’s important to keep in mind that you’re just starting and, even if you aren’t, it’s a first draft. First drafts are supposed to be just that---the very first time you write down your idea. It’s supposed to be a rough diamond that will be shaped later on into whatever you want it to be. For some people, that means write it once and then rewrite it entirely (I’m those people), for others it just means it’s got a main body, and then you just work what you have. It really depends. People have different methods, so no matter how much others tell you to do this way or that way, it’s your way that matters. 

Keep exploring your possibilities so you’ll find your work method. Listen to other’s people’s advice only to the limit of your abilities. If you try out a method and you can feel it in your bones right off the bad it just doesn’t work for you, quit it. It’s no good forcing something you’re not on par with. Just scratch that altogether. Methods, discipline, plotting---that varies from person to person and I detest when others say there is a right or wrong way to do things. There isn’t.

As for plotting, there are several ways to go about it---but take this with a grain of salt. I never followed a single method until I found out there are names for this shit. What I do is called a zero draft, or the Direct Writing Process. Word vomit onto paper, in other words. I have an idea, I think about it for a while and just pour it out. I personally work very well with freewriting and improvisation. I am a pantser---that means I don’t plot, I just define my characters, my conflict, my goal, some plot points and go on instinct. Most of the times, other plot points emerge as I write. They just pop up in the process. Other people can be plotters: they plot the whole thing down to the detail. Those are more likely to use methods like the snowflake method, or the 3 Act Method (I personally hate the 3 Act method. I think it’s super limited and most stories these day’s don’t necessarily follow a 3 act structure, but a structuralized (around 5 acts, if you will) plot that has inciting incident (the thing that sets the story off), plot points (the things that push the plot forward), plot twist (NOT necessary in a story, and I hate that we’re in a day and age that’s convinced people that a story MUST have a plot twist---it really doesn’t. Sometimes being predictable is good), and a conclusion. The 3 Act thing is mostly used in cinema, from what I learned).

(Keep in mind there are other methods, these are just the ones whose names I remember)

Pick up books within the genre you’d like to explore and read a lot. Now, I know, this is that sort of shit people just love telling new writers as the number one advice, but I think what lacks is telling people ways of how to read when you’re a writer. So here is how I do it:

I mark pages that have passages that I want to go back to, underline sentences that inspired me and make mental notes of literary devices and word combos that are new and useful to me. The reason why it’s so important to read a lot when you want to write is to submerge yourself in the millions of styles out there in order to find your voice. Re-read passages that make you go ‘shit, that was really good!’ and let yourself be submerged by it. Disconnect from the world if you have to. Re-read the books that have inspired you. When you finish a book you loved, ask yourself why you loved it---take notes, even. Just write down the things you enjoyed, make little essays for yourself. It’s not just that reading a lot helps when you want to write, you gotta THINK about what you read. For youself (USE YOUR DIARY :D).

And on that account, and I am dead serious here, read bad shit. I mean it. Read the worst possible book you can find. You’re going to read a lot of advice saying ‘you shouldn’t do this when you write’, and I’ll tell you right off the bat that I HATE ‘should-and-shouldn’t-dos’ advice for writers. You’ll read that fragmented sentences and heavy thick paragraphs are a bad thing because it wears out the reader, then you pick up Donna Tartt and realize she does that A LOT. So why does she get away with it? Because she’s good at it. The advice should always be ‘do it well’, not ‘don’t do it at all’ (generally speaking, do not trust someone who tells you there are other rules to writing besides grammatical).

But the bad books? Bruh they’re a perfect guide to How Not To Do Things because, contrary to Mister White Male Pulitzer spreading advice on Literary Hub, those books actually show you why it doesn’t work. And by showing you how it doesn’t work, you get an idea of ONE WAY it shouldn’t be done. So while Donna Tartt is great at heavy, thick paragraphs, you pick up fucking Eragon and get the gist of just one way it won’t work: when it forces you to pick up a thesaurus and basically search for every other word in there.

Then, of course, practice. By practicing, I mean---do whatever the crap you want. I cannot express enough how much I want every knew writer out there to cover their ears and go BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH every time someone tries to tell them what they should and shouldn’t do, because when you’re starting, it’s REALLY IMPORTANT that you just go out of boundaries as best as you can. You learn from your mistakes. But you gotta know why they’re mistakes. No one learns a damn thing by being told ‘this is bad’. You gotta see it for yourself. You gotta feel it. You gotta experiment. Because it might just happen that one day, it won’t be bad. And that will mean you will have found a way of reverted a rule---and that in itself means you’re finding your own voice.

So keep experimenting. I’m serious. Don’t be afraid of trying out. Never wrote Sci-fi? Fuck it. Try it out even without reading a book---it’s for yourself, get into the mood and do what you please. Never tried poetry? Go ahead. Be wacky about it. Make it visual, fuck rhyming and do what you please. Want to write a thing that’s historical but haven’t researched that bit of history? Experiment all the same. Go back and forth between your reading and your writing (one thing I do a lot is put the book I’m reading down for a second to go write something because I got so inspired by what I’m reading. If that happens to you, my advice is---bruh let it out. Don’t tame it. Don’t put a lid on it. FLOURISH).

There’s one thing I like telling people: there is no such thing as a bad idea, there are only ideas that need working.

I repeat: no such thing as a bad idea.

You really wanna write something that just came up to you but you’re thinking ‘I’m afraid this is too cliché’? Fuck that. For the love of God, AVOID thinking about the word cliché at all times. Clichés aren’t bad, they’re only bad when they aren’t worked properly. And there’s a reason they exist---people like them. So, let’s swipe that away right now and focus on what’s important: you have an idea, and you want to work it. But something feels off. That just means you need to rethink some concepts, NOT that the idea itself is bad.

Keep in mind that, sometimes, a story takes time to mature. It might mean you’re too young to write it (the one I have on wattpad that’s a first draft btw, Best of Times, I had the idea at 18, but it’s very political and I was Clueless (TM), I had to wait until I matured). Be patient and kind to yourself---you need time, and with you, so does your story. Don’t force anything out, cause a lemon can only squeeze so much juice. Leave a WIP unfinished if you have to, and jump to another one to clear your head---there is absolutely no problem with that (boy do I do that).

With that in mind: Sometimes, walking away from a WIP is a good thing.

Now, as for expressing yourself: as I mentioned above, reading a lot might help. But here’s the thing. Expressing yourself doesn’t come from reading and understanding literature, it comes from yourself. Read a lot and take notes, pay attention to literary devices, ESPECIALLY pay attention to how certain writers break rules. But then, work yourself out.

See, bruh. Work your vision. Look at the world around you. You know how they say a musician is good when they develop good earing? A writer is good when they learn how to see, to see into the world around them in their own way. Listen to the people around you, enjoy the little things in life, observe life’s intervals. Actually, on this aspect let me recommend a book: Stargirl by Jerry Spinelli. It’s a YA I think, very small and it was the one book I read when I was 13 that changed my life. It’s also a life-lesson for writers on the matter of ‘how to make the cliché absolutely beautiful’ and ‘how to grab a plot that’s been overdone and make it special’. Here is a synopsis. 

So, all in all, I would say: read, experiment, see and practice. Search for your inner voice. Don’t EVER throw away an idea.

HAPPY WRITINGS, ANON