#asshole end of story. no explanation no acknowledgement of context or perspective. nothing.

[lord-squiggletits]

Sometimes I see people call IDW Optimus an asshole (never talking about him in any other way), and then I look at their content and they stan characters who are literally worse than him in personality or in the shitty things they've done

And I go ah, so when you say "IDW Optimus is an asshole" what you really mean is "I hate it when Optimus has a personality and agency and fucks up like a human person. What I really want is for other characters to get depth and nuance while Optimus forever remains a G1 character who does nothing but inoffensively smile and make dad jokes in the background."

[itsclydebitches]

I keep seeing people calling Good Omens queer bating and a I can't help but ask why? I read the Aziraphale/Crowley relationship threw an Ace lens and they are clearly as close to married as they are probably going to get without stepping on holy ground.... and they love each other... why is it considered queer bating?

Personally, I think it's mostly young queer fans turning legitimate grievances on the wrong target. A case of getting so fed up with queerbaiting in media as a whole that they're instinctually lashing out at anything that seems to resembles it on the surface, without taking the time to consider whether this is, in fact, the thing they're mad at. Good Omens is a scapegoat, if you will. The equivalent of snapping at your partner after a long day. Your friend was an asshole, your boss was an asshole, the guy in traffic was an asshole, and then you come home to your partner who says something teasing and you take it as another asshole comment because you've just been surrounded by assholeness all day, to the point where your brain is primed to see an attack. Your partner wasn't actually an asshole, but by this point you're (understandably) too on guard to realize that. Unless someone sits you down and kindly reminds you of the difference between playful teasing and a legitimate insult - the nuance, if you will - your hackles are just gonna stay up and you'll leave the room, off to phone a different friend to tell them all about how your partner was definitely an asshole to you.

Only in this case, that "friend" is a fan on social media doing think pieces on the supposed queerbaiting of Good Omens, spreading that idea to a) people who aren't familiar with the show themselves and b) those who, like that original fan, have come to expect queerbaiting and thus aren't inclined to question the latest story with that mark leveled against it. Because on the surface Good Omens can look a lot like queerbaiting. Here are two queer coded characters who clearly love each other, but don't say "I love you," don't kiss, don't "prove" that love in a particular way. So Gaiman is just leading everyone on, right?

Well... no. This is where the nuance comes in, the thing that many fans aren't interested in grappling with (because, like it or not, media is not made up of black and white categories; queerbaited and not-queerbaited. Supernatural's finale is proof enough of that...) I won't delve into the most detailed explanation here, but suffice to say:

Gaiman has straight up said it's a love story. He's just not giving them concrete labels like "gay" or "bi" or "asexual," etc. because they are literally not human. Gaiman has subscribed to an inclusive viewpoint in an era where fans are desperate for unambiguous rep that homophobes cannot possibly deny. The freedom to prioritize any interpretation - yes, including a "just friends" interpretation - now, in 2021, feels like a cop-out. However, in this case it's an act of world building (they are an angel and a demon, not bound by human understanding of identity) meeting a genuine desire to make these characters relatable to the entire queer community, not just particular subsets. Gaiman has said they can be whatever we want because the gender, sexuality, and romantic attraction of an angel and a demon is totally up for debate! However, some fans have interpreted that as a dismissal of canonical queerness; the idea that fans can pretend they're whatever they want... but it's definitely not canon. It is though. Them being queer is 100% canon, it's just up to us to decide what kind of queer they are. This isn't Gaiman stringing audiences along, it's him opening the relationship up to all queer possibilities.

We know he's not stringing us along (queerbaiting) because up until just a few days ago season two didn't exist. Queerbaiting is a deliberate strategy to maintain an audience. A miniseries does not need to maintain its audience. You binge it in one go and you're done, no coming back next year required. The announcement for season two doesn't erase that context for season one. No one knew there would be more content and thus the idea that they would implement a strategy designed to keep viewers hooked due to the hope for a queer relationship (with no intent to follow through) is... silly.

In addition, this interpretive, queer relationship between Crowley and Aziraphale existed in the book thirty years ago. Many fans are not considering the difference between creating a totally new story in 2019 and faithfully adapting a story from 1990 in 2019. Good Omens as representation meant something very different back then and that absolutely impacts how we see its adaptation onto the small screen. To put this into perspective, Rowling made HUGE waves when she revealed that she "thought of" Dumbledore as gay in an interview... in 2007. Compare that to the intense coding 17 years before. Gaiman was - and still is - pushing boundaries.

Which includes being an established ally, particularly in his comics. Queerbaiting isn't just the act of a single work, but the way an author approaches their work. Gaiman does not (to my knowledge) have that mark against him and even if he did, he's done enough other work to offset that.

Finally, we've got other, practical issues like: how do you represent asexuality on the screen? How do you show an absence of something? Yeah, one or both of them could claim that label in the show, outright saying, "I'm asexual," but again, Gaimain isn't looking to box his mythological figures into a single identity. So if we want that rep... we have to grapple with the fact that this is one option for what it looks like.

Even if he did want to narrow the representation down to just a few identities for the show, should Gaiman really be making those major changes when he's only one half of the author team? Pratchett has, sadly, passed on and thus obviously has no say in whether his characters undergo such revisions. Even if fans hate every other argument, they should understand that, out of respect, Good Omens is going to largely remain the same story it was 30 years ago.

And those 6,000 years are just the beginning! Again, this was meant to be a miniseries of a single novel, a novel that, crucially, covered only Crowley and Aziraphale's triumph in being able to love one another freely. That's a part of their personal journey. Yeah, they've been together in one sense for 6,000 years, but that was always with hell and heaven on their backs, to say nothing of the slow-burn approach towards acknowledging that love, for Aziraphale in particular. We end the story at the start of their new relationship, one that is more free and open than it ever was before. They can be anything to one another now! The fact that we don't see that isn't a deliberate attempt on the author's part to deny us that representation, but only a result of the story ending.

So yeah, there's a lot to consider and, frankly, I don't think those fans are considering it. Which on a purely emotional level I can understand. I'm pissed about queerbaiting too and the knee-jerk desire to reject anything that doesn't meet a specific standard is understandable. But understandable doesn't mean we don't have to work against that instinct because doing otherwise is harmful in the long run. We need to consider when stories were published and what representation meant back then. We need to consider how we adapt those stories for a modern audience. We need to acknowledge that if we want the inclusivity that "queer" provides us, that includes getting characters whose identity is not strictly defined by the author as well as characters with overtly canonical labels. We need both. We likewise need to be careful about when having higher standards ends up hurting the wrong authors - who are our imperfect allies vs. those straight up unwilling to embrace our community at all? And most importantly, we have to think about how we're using the terms we've developed to discuss these issues. Queerbaiting means something specific and applying it to Good Omens not only does Good Omens a disservice, but it undermines the intended meaning of "queerbaiting," making it harder to use correctly in the future. Good Omens is not queerbaiting and trying to claim it is only hurts the community those fans are speaking up for.

[arsenicpanda]

I read your 3 takes posts, and I have some questions? Hope you don’t get mad and you can not reply if you want of course .

“And here, we take Jughead’s “She and I had a terrible break up back when I was in high school, and I never really recovered from it” as just that because, seriously, there’s no indication we should do otherwise from the text itself “

So this is the take you believe more in? That the show had Jughead saying that because he doesn’t have feelings for Betty? Along with this one, because you drop it there in the take too, what do you think about the 5x03 scene? Because that’s one BH and Jabitha fans see way different too.

And, what do you think about Betty regards all of those takes.

For the record, I don’t really get mad unless someone is being an asshole or purposefully disingenuous, and you are none of those and also I’m in Thoughts Mode, so it’s answering time.  Anyway, so, that take is specific to the overall jabitha take, the purest, most jabitha-positive take, much like the bughead version had the purest, most bughead-positive take.  But here’s my real, full take:

If I had to play the “guess what the Riverdale writers were thinking game,” I’d say that the writers decided to be wishy-washy on this line on purpose.  The weirdness of the bunker scene implies, to me, that they wanted to switch to bughead but still leave the door just a little bit open for jabitha, whether it was for later drama, endgame, or iconic bugabitha purposes.  So, they couldn’t just say “I’m not over Betty”, and instead they said “I never really recovered from [the break up],” and they clearly thought that those two things mean roughly the same thing, but the problem is that they absolutely do not.  Not being over a person means you’re still in love with them and that love has overshadowed your feelings in every other relationship you’ve had, thus interfering with it; within fiction, it’s tragically romantic.  Not being over a break up means that, regardless of your feelings for that person, it’s the break up that stuck with you and has interfered with your relationships, and that one is just horribly depressing in any context.  So, from the Doylist perspective, I think we’re supposed to assume it’s an “I’m stuck on Betty thing”, but the problem is that, for me, that does not line up with the Watsonian explanation.

You see, Jughead has been nothing but honest with Tabitha all season, just completely straightforward, and there’s no reason for him to change that behavior now; he’s already explaining the problems in the way of them dating, so what functional difference is there between the two in that regard?  It’s not like one is going to feel better than the other.  I see no indication in the scene for him to be speaking in some code, especially since his hallucination scene is specifically a replay of the conversation about the Archie kiss, aka the conversation (or lack thereof) that set the stage for their break up; this really does imply that his problem isn’t feelings for Betty but feelings about/trauma (for lack of a better word) from the break up.  Personally, I lean toward the Watsonian explanation because I am going to listen to the text before I listen to my best guess at the writers’ intentions.

But, honestly, I don’t think that conversation has anything to do with whether or not Jughead has feelings for Betty; it just relates to whether or not he is conscious of having feelings for Betty.  And in that regard, honestly, pick whatever you like.  I don’t have a specific take here based on the text because I really think it can be read equally along any point in the spectrum between “he has conscious feelings for Betty” through “he has unconscious feelings for Betty” through “he is unaware he has no feelings for Betty” all the way to “he has no feelings for Betty and he knows it.”  I’d say canon intends things to be somewhere between “he has conscious feelings for Betty” and “he has unconscious feelings for Betty”, but I think all can be argued if you really feel like it, and the take I use would vary based on the story I wanted to tell, as would my take on the extent of his feelings for Tabitha (from minor, easy-to-overcome crush to a serious crush and case of Feelings that’s only going to get worse/bigger).

As for 5x03, I assume you mean the apology confession/sex scene?  I read that as a mistake on both ends.  I think Betty is overcome with regret and guilt and also love, and she can’t really articulate her feelings--thus all the generic “I’m sorry”s--so she tries to show Jughead that she chose and still chooses him by using sex.  The problem is, this is clearly not what Jughead really wants and it’s definitely not what he needs; we see this in how he doesn’t kiss her back at first.  What Jughead wants and needs is a specific apology for the cheating-- the exact words “I’m sorry I kissed Archie” (as seen in his hallucination)--and, I would assume, an explanation, but he’s also afraid to ask for it (if I had to guess why, I’d assume he’s afraid of the answer).  Betty does, effectively, pressure him into sex, since we see he’s non-responsive at first, but it’s a very light and unintentional pressure that isn’t traumatic or anything, it just kind of is.  The problem isn’t the sex, it’s that they aren’t speaking the same language here.  And because it doesn’t work and instead leaves things awkward--Jughead’s afraid to broach the topic and needs Betty to do it, and Betty doesn’t want to push him and needs Jughead to do it--they stop communicating and things go sideways.  I fully believe that if they had talked that night instead of having sex, they’d still be together.

As for Betty in regards to these takes, I’m not sure what you mean?  Outside of the 5x03 scene, her current state of mind and her feelings are pretty irrelevant to what’s going on with Jughead.  Betty is kind of just living her life completely outside Jughead’s because, depending on your interpretation, she either has no feelings for him outside of friendship or she is entirely unaware of the feelings she still has for him or even is conscious of having feelings for Jughead but is also consciously pushing them down.  Canon is obviously going for the second or third option (my money’s on the second), but I will say that, in universe, there isn’t really a reason for any of these characters to interpret Betty’s interactions with him as displays of romantic interest; it can be entirely platonic, even if that is not the “““correct””” interpretation.  As for me, I can see arguments for all sides, and my interpretation of choice would vary depending on what I want to do with that interpretation.  Do I want to write a jabitha fic?  She just sees him as a friend.  Do I want to write a bugabitha or bughead fic?  She has feelings for him but may or may not be conscious of said feelings, again depending on the fic.  And the same applies for gif sets, never-to-be-written story ideas, and anything else.

tl;dr The Doylist and Watsonian explanations for the break up line clash, and I lean Watsonian.  That scene is entirely unrelated to Jughead’s actual feelings, which could be literally anything.  The 5x03 confession/sex scene was a series of mistakes that set the stage for bughead’s break up.  Jughead’s feelings could be interpreted any way, the same as Betty’s.  I acknowledge the likely canon reads of Jughead and Betty’s feelings, but don’t subscribe to any interpretation in particular myself, instead picking and choosing depending on my purposes.

[sillyfudgemonkeys]

Curious, who's your favorite Persona MC?

(sorry for taking so long with this too ;w;) Including spinoffs, manga, and anime (not dramaCDs cause I haven’t listened to all of them tho I should note I do like the P3P one, both male and female side, nor novels cause....they haven’t been translated....tho that’d really only apply to P1MC’s novel form aka “Jihei”). I also don’t know where to put Anime!Ren, probably after P1MC if “Ren is kind of just their” fan’s testament is anything to go by.

Hamuko/P4MC/Souji/Maya>Naoya/Tatsuya/Moive!Makoto>Spinoff!Yu/Spinoff!Makoto>P3MC/Minato/Akira>Raito!Ren/Daybreakers!P5MC>P1MC>>>>Anime Golden!Yu>>>>>>Anime!Yu>>>>>>>>P5MC

Under the cut for explanation

I should note main games (P1-5), I like all MCs except for P5MC. And Hamuko includes P3P and PQ2 tbh. Btw I think Maya and Tatsuya are equally great, at that point it’s just preference I like playing as Maya more, but I still love Tatsuya.

For the first quadrant (P2 I’ll just say Maya/Tatsuya are both well written with clear character as both silent MCs and side characters, but their MC form allows a bit of choice....not a whole lot cause they are pretty solidified characters, but their characters are great regardless): The reason I like Hamuko and P4MC is....because....they have a lot of personality and a lot of choice. Like....you can really form them any which way you want, make them consistent or contradictory, a good person or an asshole. Each dialogue voice is clear, they are also the two MCs that can effect their story the most (at least with their SLs). It’s a joy playing as them. As for Souji, I just really like the manga a lot, like he starts off pretty there but slowly he opens up and we see his past and he uses it to relate to people around him (and what little establishing perspective in the early chapters show something similar to an Adachi mindset and it’s just really nice to see that his character really DOES show how Adachi’s life could’ve turned out if he had a support system, it really does a good job just.....establishing just that parallel). Is the P4 manga perfect? Nah, nothing is, but I think it’s the better of the two Sogabe works.

For the 2nd quadrant (already talked about P2 above):  Naoya? Great, really good character, really gave him a lot of personality! P1 manga feels like it lacks in developing/completing arcs outside of Naoya and Maki, but Naoya and Maki? Great! Makoto Yuki? I really liked his character, while the movies can be a bit shaky in the middle (and I wish he was still a little more stoic in the 2nd one), I really like how he went from emotionless asshole to actually caring about his friends and his own well being!

3rd Quadrant: Spinoff Yu and Makoto, I think they are pretty solid, not super amazing (might put Makoto above Yu tbh but ehhhh I’m pretty even), but they are consistent. And when I mean spinoffs I mean where they talk not their silent forms in PQ1 (cause man they have two gears, nice and asshole....but then again PQ1 everyone is kind of an asshole for some reason 8U at least it’s consistent). Yu’s a bit of an airhead, but he feels like a capable leader and tbh feels very similar to Souji (not 100% Souji, but much closer to Souji than Anime!Yu is to Game!Yu, plus tbh Souji has some silly moments too so I can’t say he got it only from Anime!Yu).

4th Quadrant: So like I like Minato’s name more, but his manga is a bit all over the place. His personality is....hmmmm kinda just their? I mean I still believe him to be a capable leader, but he feels more just their (possibly commentary that...like....plot’s happening all around the P3MC off screen? which I’ll give some points for). That being said he does have some funny moments, and I do get a sense of “not really caring to caring about friends and his surroundings” journey from him (it’s not as apparent or drastic or interesting as Makoto Yuki but it’s there). As for Akira.....at least for the first two dungeons, I actually really like him? Like it took a bit to look past the.....expression....struggle art (it’s not great with facial expressions ok? I dunno what to call it), but after looking past it I saw something. He’s really a 100% just a giant freaking n00b. They all are! And.....I LOVE IT! I hate how P5 it feels like “oh yeah we’re so freaking cool! look at how freaking cool they are! gawd we just instantly get cool!” And like, P5 manga has it’s cool moments of course, but after the initial summoning it’s like “oh shit they actually are just winging it and they are owning the fact they don’t know what they are doing and aren’t really trying to act like they are hot shit” (cause PT aren’t hot shit but act like they are in every interpretation except for this one, and it’s endearing because of it). I mean I don’t like his name, I prefer Ren’s name, but I prefer Akira’s interpretation the most. As for P3MC, I do like him, and in all honesty I dunno if I should be putting Minato/Akira on the same level, nor P3MC/Minato on the same level. While I value P3MC, he is a bit boring to play as, mostly in part due to his SLs. He does have some funny moments, and I think while he might not be a total jokester, he def is a lot more fluid in interpretation than I feel a lot of people will allow him to be. I think he can be fairly open, maybe not as bombastic as FeMC might take it, or as extroverted as P4MC, but I don’t think he’s 100% grim dark emo boi everyone makes him out to be. But compared to FeMC/P4MC, he doesn’t have as much variety as them, on top of his lines being pretty generic (I mean he has a voice tho, but the dialogue isn’t all that crazy a lot of the times......well unless you went 100% asshole route, but you don’t want to go that route, you will screw yourself if you go that route cause of how his SLs work 8U)

5th Quadrant: Raito does a good job with Ren in both Mementos Missions and his anthology chapter in the first anthology book (tho he wasn’t called Ren or anything in that chapter I don’t think). Raito  gives him character, gives us some background regarding his issues with adults (not canon, and mostly in the anthology comic, but it’s something), and tbh it’s just all around better than the game. That being said.....he’s.....I like Raito, and I’m having fun, and I like their art, but I still just don’t.....really care about Raito!Ren.....I’m just not super into him. As for Daybreakers!P5MC, he has a bit of a different personality, a bit more of a “I don’t really care” personality....which I’d probably wouldn’t like considering how I feel about P5MC proper, but his “I don’t care” is more of a “Rip to me, cross that burning bridge when I get to it I guess. XP” than “I’m confessing to you but I’m like super checked out and don’t really look like I care” feel the P5MC game gives me. We don’t really spend a whole lot of time with him sadly, but what we do see is fun (in a similar vein to Mementos’ Missions). Him and his team are.....weird in personality tho, I mean I can’t say I hate it, but it’s not like the game or any other adaptation, and I wish we could see more of it expanded on. It’s just a weird dynamic and personality that I can’t just outright say I dislike cause it’s not really developed enough.....

6th/7th Quadrant: P1MC.....nothing really bad about him tbh, but from what I’ve played and remember from P1.....he is the most true and 100% blank slate MC out there. I think that’s the point of him tho (cause even the ending is “you come up with what happens to him”). And I can’t/don’t hate on it, but it’s not exactly super duper fun to play as him cause he doesn’t have a variety of options like FeMC/P4MC (or even P3/5MC), but he also doesn’t have a super duper defined personality like Maya/Tatsuya. I don’t hate him tho! Just.....eh I’ll stick to the manga or any other adaptation. Golden Anime!Yu.....From what I remember and seen of the anime, he was generally a good guy, uber goofy but nice. That’s....all..... I mean I can’t hate on him too much, his anime doesn’t allow him to do a lot of things cause it’s just a string of OVAs tbh.

8th/9th Quadrant: Sigh......oh.......Geez.....I really hate first anime!Yu....a lot, I mean the anime and Anime!Yu have....their good moments, they have some REALLY GOOD moments.....but they also have some REALLY BAD “this wasn’t in the game, this is totally conflicting with the game what are you doing????” Moments. The biggest is his personality, he’s an asshole. They have him choose a lot of asshole comments but instead of.....being treated as an asshole for saying it, everyone is like “Oh ok :P Lol you da best dude!” and moves on (and this is reflected in how they mishandle A LOT of the what should be serious moments in the anime, and I say should because they were serious in the game, sure characters might’ve been uncomfortable but they didn’t risk the lives of people to make jokes and such). I think he’s an asshole, I do not like him, I really hate this adaptation a lot. As for P5MC? I ranked him lower but tbh they could just be tied for all I care, the issue is I have to spend more time with this jerk than Anime!Yu (and at least Anime!Yu has a freaking voice and has some good moments). But I’ve already gone over my issues with P5MC.

I basically prioritize either freedom of a silent MC, or the quality of their personality if their personality is more solidified (both points are more aimed at the games, specifically silent MCs). And then how I like the character as a character in adaptations (aka if I think they are an asshole, and the context of that universe allows them to get away with it or they’re just really unlikeable.....then yeah I won’t like them....I bring up the extra explanation on this cause I DO like some asshole characters, but that’s usually cause they are 1) acknowledged as an asshole, and 2) there’s some other world building factor at play, maybe everyone in that world is an asshole ala MPGIS/Panty and thus equal and Stocking, or they get their just deserts for being an asshole ala Victoria in Life is Strange, still can’t explain why I’m fascinated with this jerk but I am, but Yu and P5MC don’t fit under those two exceptions and thus I do not like them), there can be other reasons I don’t like a character, it’s a case by case basis tbh. 8U

So there’s my essay, maybe it’ll change when I re-read the mangas or re-watch the animes.

Oh wait...I forgot Shin and Kazumi (PTS and P2 manga MCs)....uhhhh put them with Spinoff!Yu/Makoto, they’re solid from what I remember. Might move them later.