#and that was the 2000s obviously

[maester-of-spreadsheets]

We are losing so many things with DVDs and DVD players going by the wayside, but this morning I specifically wanted to have a moment of silence for those bootleg DVDs you could get from nehalix or dvd stores in Queens and Mumbai that were called stuff like “moods of Shah Rukh khan” and it would just be videos ripped from YouTube in potato quality

[elexuscal]

Danny Phantom, The Show:

geeky kid gets super powers from his parents' weird inventions! now he has to fight a rogue gallery of ghosts... but uh-oh! he still has to keep his grades up, deal with his embarrassing parents, and navigate girl troubles! rap theme song!

Danny Phantom, the Fandom, After 19 Years of Fermentation:

a child dies. but not quite. the inherent tension between life and death. the obsession of the dead for faded remnants of the living. warped green shadows on the walls of a dark laboratory. having to hide your true nature from those who should be your greatest allies. the fear of the monster you could become if you let yourself. being a ghost as a metaphor for the trans experience. a cold breath on the back of your neck in the dead of the night. rap theme song!

[starz4elena]

ʚɞ∘˚∘ও

[5hrignold]

homestars handwriting 2000 / 2005

[sanjipussyindulgence]

i know i get pissed about the yamato gender discourse/general transphobia in the one piece fandom at least once a month... but how do you read this panel and miss the point. freedom is such an important concept in the series and, as we see from the newkamas, that includes the freedom to identify as whatever gender you want. you are actively ignoring and disrespecting one piece's values when you misgender yamato, kiku, or any other character. i hate people.

[wh0-is-lily]

Rose Byrne & Heath Ledger in Las Vegas, 1999 Photography by Rupert Thorpe

[midddoriya]

2000s anime

[angelsdean]

I need people to understand how S&P (standards and practices) works in television and how much influence they have over what gets to stay IN an episode of a show and how the big time network execs are the ones holding the purse strings and making final decisions on a show's content, not the writers / showrunners / creatives involved.

So many creators have shared S&P notes over the years of the wild and nonsensical things networks wanted them to omit / change / forbid. Most famously on tumblr, I've seen it so many times, is the notes from Gravity Falls. But here's a post compiling a bunch of particularly bad ones from various networks too. Do you see the things they're asking to be changed / cut ?

Now imagine, anything you want to get into your show and actually air has to get through S&P and the network execs. A lot of creators have had to resort to underhanded methods. A lot of creators have had to relegate things to subtext and innuendo and scenes that are "open to interpretation" instead of explicit in meaning. Things have had to be coded and symbolized. And they're relying on their audience to be good readers, good at media literacy, to notice and get it. This stuff isn't the ramblings of conspiracy theorists, it's the true practices creatives have had to use to be able to tell diverse stories for ages. The Hays Code is pretty well known, it exists because of censorship. It was a way to symbolize certain things and get past censors.

Queercoding, in particular, has been used for ages in both visual media and literature do signal to queer audiences that yes, this character is one of us, but no, we can't be explicit about it because TPTB won't allow it. It's a wink-wink, nudge-nudge to those in the know. It's the deliberate use of certain queer imagery / clothing / mannerisms / phrases / references to other queer media / subtle glances and lingering touches. Things that offer plausible deniability and can be explained away or go unnoticed by straight audiences to get past those network censors. But that queer viewers WILL (hopefully) pick up on.

Because, unfortunately, still to this day, a lot of antiquated network execs don't think queer narratives are profitable. They don't think they'll appeal to general audiences, because that's what matters, whatever appeals to most of the audience demographic so they can keep watching and keep making the network more money. The networks don't care about telling good stories! Most of them are old white cishet business men, not creatives. They don't care about character arcs and what will make fans happy. They don't care about storytelling. What they care about is profit and they're basing their ideas of what's profitable on what they believe is the predominate target demographic, usually white cis heterosexual audiences.

So, imagine a show that started airing in the early 2000s. Imagine a show where the two main characters are based on two characters from a famous Beat Generation novel, where one of the characters is queer! based on a real like bisexual man! The creator is aware of this, most definitely. And sure, it's 2005, there's no way they were thinking of making that explicit about Dean in the text because it just wouldn't fly back then to have a main character be queer. But! it's made subtext. And there are nods to that queerness placed in the text. Things that are open to interpretation. Things that are drenched in metaphor (looking at you 1x06 Skin "I know I'm a freak" "maybe this thing was born human but was different...hated. Until he learned to become someone else.") Things that are blink-and-you-miss-it and left to plausible deniability (things like seemingly spending an hour in the men's bathroom, or always reacting a little vulnerable and awkward when you're clocked instead of laughing it off and making a homophobic joke abt it)

And then, years later there's a ship! It's popular and at first the writers aren't really seriously thinking about it but they'll throw the fans a bone here and there. Then, some writers do get on the destiel train and start actively writing scenes for them that are suggestive. And only a fraction of what they write actually makes it into the text. So many lines left on the cutting room floor: i love past you. i forgive you i love you. i lost cas and it damn near broke me. spread cas's ashes alone. of course i wanted you to stay. if cas were here. -- etc. Everything cut was not cut by the writers! Why would a writer write something to then sabotage their own story and cut it? No, these are things that didn't make it past the network. Somewhere a note was made maybe "too gay" or "don't feed the shippers" or simply "no destiel."

So, "no destiel." That's pretty clearly the message we got from the CW for years. "No destiel. Destiel will alienate our general audience. Two of our main characters being queer? And in a relationship? No way." So what can the pro-destiel creatives involved do, if the network is saying no? What can the writers do if most of their explicit destiel (or queer dean) lines / moments are getting cut? Relegate things to subtext. Make jokes that straight people can wave off but queer people can read into. Make costuming and set design choices that the hardcore fans who are already looking will notice while the general audience and the out-of-touch network execs won't blink and eye at (I'm looking at you Jerry and your lamps and disappearing second nightstands and your gay flamingo bar!)

And then, when the audience asks, "is destiel real? is this proof of destiel?" what can the creatives do but deny? Yes, it hurts, to be told "No no I don't know what you're talking about. There's no destiel in supernatural" a la "there is no war in Ba Sing Se" but! if the network said "no destiel!" and you and your creative team have been working to keep putting destiel in the subtext of the narrative in a way that will get past censors, you can't just go "Yes, actually, all that subtext and symbolism you're picking up, yea it's because destiel is actually in the narrative."

But, there's a BIG difference between actively putting queer themes and subtext into the narrative and then saying it's not there (but it is! and the audience sees it!) versus NOT putting any queer content into the text but SAYING it is there to entice queer fans to continue watching. The latter, is textbook queerbaiting. The former? Is not. The former is the tactics so many creatives have had to use for years, decades, centuries, to get past censorship and signal to those in the know that yea, characters like you are here, they exist in this story.

Were the spn writers perfect? No, absolutely not. And I don't think every instance of queer content was a secret signal. Some stuff, depending on the writer, might've been a period-typical gay joke. These writers are flawed. But it's no secret that there were pro-destiel writers in the writing room throughout the years, and that efforts were made to make it explicitly canon (the market research!)

So no, the writers weren't ever perfect or a homogeneous entity. But they definitely were fighting an uphill battle constantly for 15 yrs against S&P and network execs with antiquated ideas of what's profitable / appealing.

Spn even called out the networks before, on the show, using a silly example of complaints abt the lighting of the show and how dark the early seasons were. Brightening the later seasons wasn't a creative choice, but a network choice. And if the networks can complain abt and change something as trivial as the lighting of a show, they definitely are having a hand in influencing the content of the show, especially queer content.

Even in s15, (seasons fifteen!!!) Misha has said he worried Castiel's confession would not air. In 2020!!! And Jensen recorded that scene on his personal phone! Why? Sure, for the memories. But also, I do not doubt for a second that part of it was for insurance, should the scene mysteriously disappear completely. We've seen the finale script. We've seen the omitted omitted omitted scenes. We all saw how they hacked the confession scene to bits. The weird cuts and close-ups. That's not the writers doing. That's likely not even the editors (willingly). That's orders from on high. All of the fuckery we saw in s15 reeks of network interference. Writers are not trying to sabotage their own stories, believe me.

Anyways, TLDR: Networks have a lot more power than many think and they get final say in what makes it to air. And for years creative teams have had to find ways to get past network censorship if they want "banned" or "unapproved" "unprofitable" "unwanted" content to make it into the show. That means relying on techniques like symbolism, subtext, and queercoding, and then shutting up about it. Denying its there, saying it's all "open to interpretation" all while they continue to put that open to interpretation content into the show. And that's not queerbaiting, as frustrating as it might be for queer audiences to be told that what they're seeing isn't there, it's still not queerbaiting. Queerbaiting is a marketing technique to draw in queer fans by baiting them with the promise of queer content and then having no queer content in said media. But if you are picking up on queer themes / subtext / symbolism / coding that is in front of your face IN the text, that's not queerbaiting. It's there, covertly, for you, because someone higher up didn't want it to be there explicitly or at all.

[babe-heffron]

everyday i thank god that band of brothers was filmed in an era where men were allowed to look like people

[joseigamer]

Patalliro! is fascinating to me because of stuff like this. It's unapologetically gay - even within its anime which aired during primetime hours in 1982 - in a way that many later BL manga would never be, like the ones from the early 2000s which would never dare to call their characters actual homosexuals. Patalliro has actually aged quite well in this regard, there's something comforting about how campy it is.

[world-of-puppets]

I have conflicted feelings about the FNAF series in general, but seeing a movie where practical animatronic puppets are the primary focus of the film becoming not only financially successful but also well received by general audiences is pretty damn neat.

[dogmaz]

×Cassie Hack×

[dollyiia]

jenna rink

[imeminemp3]

the other one didn't have enough variety

[kitnita]

★  —  logan stankoven on what chaos!; august 15, 2024 (x)

[are you gonna brave it on your own? like, now that pavelski is gone – and I do think it is a good question from pete, of just like — just stay in that house. if he wants to go somewhere else, whatever, just stay there until he sells it or something. squatter’s rights. like, are you gonna live on your own this season?] yeah. yeah, I have my own apartment already set up, so — it’s gonna be me, uh, thomas harley and wyatt johnston all staying in the same complex, so, um, it’s nice that we’re all kind of staying near each other.

[who’s the adult in that group?] uh, I’d say harley, harley for sure. even though he’s the oldest, but, uh, yeah. he’s got an old soul.

[what’s the, uh — what’s the stars’ room like? ‘cause one of my favorite things about your group last year was, like, you have stars at basically every age level, of like, NHL experience. like, you and wyatt — awesome. guys in, like, ‘middle’ – quote-unquote middle – age. and then you’ve got the older guys like joe pavelski, tyler seguin. so what’s the dynamic in that room like between everybody at different stages in their career?] 

uh, I think it’s really good. um, I mean, all the guys respect each other, which is nice. and like you said, there’s a crop of younger guys, and some older guys who’re veterans and have been around the league for a while, so. I think everyone gets along really well, um — obviously, younger guys hang out a bit more, y’know, with their group, and older guys kinda have their group. um, everyone really respects each other and that’s the main thing. 

[you lived with joe pavelski, you and wyatt johnston did. was that incredible or do you feel bad that maybe you had too much fun and made him quit hockey?] 

(laughs) no, it was — no, it was awesome. I’m really, really thankful that pav opened up his house to myself and let me stay there, otherwise I would’ve been probably stuck in a hotel, so. um, it was nice to kinda get to know him really well, him and his family, and he had a younger son, so it was fun hanging out with him as well. 

[so, I was gonna ask about — like, what always fascinates me about when players stay with older players is, oftentimes the reason why people say this older player will be good for this younger player is ‘cause they’re parents themselves and they have kids, and what that means is — young hockey players end up staying with, like, a family. you’re not, like, just staying with joe pavelski, you’re staying with an entire family. what’s it like being around a family like that? like, I want to say it was … lee stempniak stayed with keith tkachuk and would just, like, play hockey with the kids because he’s like, ‘shit, I’m here, I like hockey, they’re running around, I’m young, I’ll do the same thing.’ what’s it like being around an actual family?]

yeah, it’s a lot of fun. um, I mean, they do — like obviously, pav and his wife did most of the cooking, but, um, me and wyatt were staying there and we try and help as much as we can could but, uh, usually, we were the ones upstairs playing mini-sticks with, uh, the younger son, nate, while they were downstairs cooking meals for us, so. um, it was a good setup, we really enjoyed it. 

[two questions — how upset were you when pavs announced he was gonna retire, and number two, are you still gonna be living with him even though he’s not on the team next year?] 

um, yeah, it’s sad to see him go, um, such a great career and — I think it was just more tough, like, after the fact, not being able to, uh, you know, get him that cup, I think … he more than anyone anyone deserves it, and, um, was such a great role model for me and wyatt, and, um, yeah. it’s obviously tough on the team, and us for sure, you know, being able to live around him, kinda get to know him pretty well. 

[you ever get yelled at? around the house?]

no, no, not at all. he’s, uh, he’s a pretty relaxed guy, so. yeah, we really enjoyed his company. 

[didn’t get grounded?] [yeah, what was the weirdest part of — because you were also, I’m sure, you’re trying to acclimate to the team, you’re trying to make a good impression on everybody. like, was there any moment where you were like, ‘shit, I don’t want to, like, make the wrong impression,’ or ‘I don’t want to do the wrong thing here.’ is it intimidating to be in that situation?] 

yeah, at first I was really shy, I didn’t really want to, uh … you know, eat too much food at the house, or, um — yeah, just certain things, like, I was pretty quiet, kept to myself. but, uh, you know, as the days went on, I kinda opened up a bit and, you know, we were chatting more and it all worked out well. but at first, you’re pretty intimidated. 

[and you’re like, ‘fuck I want this guy to think I’m cool. this guy’s an NHL legend, and this guy's a leader on this team, I want him to think that I’m coming in here and I’m a cool guy.’ but if you’re going in there busting chops, shooting your mouth off, he could be like, ‘cool. you don’t get to live here anymore.’]

yeah. yeah, exactly. 

[starz4elena]