#but i think the ways ppl discuss the actions of characters they like as though ascribing certain descriptions tarnishes them somehow

[whatever-you-can-give-me]

maybe i'm just biased because of my specific analytical read, but every time i hear something to the tune of "xyz thing knives did to vash wasn't actually quite as bad as you think it is" my hackles go up. Maybe I'm Just Biased. but i think if you cannot emotionally confront the way that knives' entire character is based around ignoring the consent or wishes of. everyone, but especially his siblings, in a myriad of extremely loaded ways, you should probably have a think about how your knives apologism starts to sound.

[scoobydoodean]

I have 2 spn accounts, a Deancentric blog that ships Destiel and another account that unintentionally follows a lot of Samgirl blogs. So one blog follows majority Deangirl blogs and the other incidentally follows a lot of Samgirl blogs. And here's the major difference I've noticed on the different dashboards.

Deangirl dashboard: Great meta analysis. Beautiful art. Level 1 and 2 headcanons (largely based in canon). Pro-Dean. Stumble across reblogs of Deancrit. Bitter Deangirl blogging. Generally fair portrayal and discussion of the positive and negative traits and actions of Dean, Sam and Cas. Deanhater anons.

Samgirl dashboard: An entirely different pool of beautiful art. Whole lotta woobie!Sam art where Dean is his abuser. Deancrit about Dean being an abuser. Bitter Samgirl blogging about how people will find any excuse to hate Sam. "How can anyone be Samcrit he has done nothing wrong ever." Level 5 headcanons (you literally ignored canon to make that up). More about how Dean is Sam's abuser. So many posts about how awful Samcrit is. "Do Deangirls really think that Dean cries himself to sleep at night thinking that ppl thinks he doesn't know how to read." I have yet to see any actual Samcrit posts (not even links or reblogs from Sam defenders), not even after literally searching the Samcrit tag for it. The Samcrit tag is full of Samgirls crying about Samcrit and no actual Samcrit. "Samgirls are feral, but we need to be bc of the hate ppl throw Sam's way."

I literally have to block so many people on the incidentally Samgirl dashboard bc I'm not on Tumblr to randomly stumble across a post on how Dean is a toxic stalker who abused Sam by changing Amelia's number in his cellphone. Do you have any idea on why Samgirls seem to feel so attacked all the time even though I literally only ever see *them* attacking Dean?

If you dig deep enough into any fandom, you will encounter people who fetishize "helpless victimhood". Some fandoms attract more people with those particular proclivities than others. Supernatural and Sam in particular attracts people who hold those sorts of aesthetic interests because of his relationship toward accountability versus Dean's.

Dean is a character with an overactive sense of responsibility. He blames himself for the Lindbergh baby and unemployment and every child murdered by a shrtiga from 1990 to 2005 because he went to play an arcade game when he was 10. He also blames himself for things like Jessica dying and Sam not being in school. Other characters pile on this blame frequently. John blames Dean for Sam getting hurt (1.18). Ruby tells him (and Sam) that Sam is a weak baby who won't psychologically survive without Dean there to protect him (3.11). Meg alleges that Dean is "dragging Sam everywhere" (1.16). Sam rewrites reality from 1.05 to 1.21 to make Dean responsible for his burning desire for revenge. Cas and Zachariah and Gabriel blame Dean when Sam breaks the last seal because he didn't stop Sam in time. Sam blames Dean for him drinking demon blood first because Dean wasn't there to protect him and then—in a complete 180—because Dean is smothering (4.04, 5.05). Dean generally absorbs blame when it is piled at his feet because he has been blamed for things he couldn't control for most of his life and thus he feels guilty and responsible for things even when him being responsible makes no logical sense. He's never a victim of anything—everything is always on him.

Sam, on the other hand, tends to eventually deflect blame because he can't handle the gnawing bite of it for long. It reminds him too deeply of being left isolated and alone as a child and the feelings of otherness and wrongness he developed through that neglect. When his actions ultimately have consequences he didn't foresee and/or that he finds undesirable, it makes him feel ugly and unaccepted and he can't face it so he eventually finds a way to make what happened someone else's fault—usually Dean's fault. Nothing is ever on him. He's always at least a little bit of a victim and Dean always carries at least partial responsibility for his decisions (1.21, 1.08, 4.04, 5.05, 8.23, 11.01)

In other words, Sam has an under-active sense of responsibility and Dean has an overactive responsibility and that dynamic—driven by their childhood experiences—places them into a vicious cycle of blame being cast onto Dean for Sam's decisions and Dean absorbing it. Dean absorbing it reinforcing the narrative for samgirls with a victimhood fetish that Dean deserves blame and that Sam truly is a helpless baby. They never watch what actually happens on the show to see whether this narrative that Dean is responsible for everything and Sam is a helpless baby lines up with the actual events that occurred onscreen because why would they? That would ruin their enjoyment. Sam isn't interesting to them outside of his capacity to be mourned as some sort of helpless martyr. And yes—they will cry and moan about how horrible and unfair Sam's suffering is, but it isn't because they're having a bad time. They're having a great time. They love thinking about Sam that way. They wouldn't be here blogging about it day in and day out for the last 20 years if they didn't actually want to see exactly what they're seeing.

Related tags of note:

#sams motivations

#taurus sam in the flesh

#In which Sam is not a helpless little waif with his hands cast over his eyes being carried along by the tides of the immutable sea

#sam the hunter

#sams follower/leader false dichotomy

#parentification

[fanofbirdsflying]

ONLY FRIENDS and a judgemental fandom?

going into this show we knew that this was not going to be a romance. it was made very clear in both trailers that there was going to be lying, cheating and manipulating. this being in store for us was the main reason why i was looking forward to this show which is why i am having a difficult time seeing fandom be so judgemental and annoying about the characters and their actions. (i think the communication between characters sucks or is wishy washy or the things that are communicated are ignored, so ppl come of ass assholes.)

i really liked @bengiyo post about the show as a whole rn.

audience memebers slutshaming?

something i can't quite shake is how straight forward both boston and top are about their casualness when it comes to sex and audience's responses to that. as soon as we saw their casualness, i felt as though many ppl started judging them. now, boston has lied/manipulated which is an actual issue, but their choices in regards to their casualness about sex isn't. nick knew who boston was, and everything mew knew about top from his friends pointed towards a guy who doesn't fit his understanding of dream guy (at first glance). top that first night in the apartment even said he wanted sex from mew and instead of taking that for what it is, mew actually started to consider dating him (had mew been my friend i would have stopped him).

boston is intentionally messing with ray and top (and that's not cool) but people disregarding boston's privacy and his right to it when nick went through his phone and put his own nudes on there, as well as wiring boston's car to spy on him, doesn't sit right with me. it doesn't matter how casual boston is about sex, nick disrespecting his boundaries is not ok. the phone situation boston didn't really take issue with (they started hooking up afterwards) but a lot of other people would have. the wiring of the car is a whole other thing. some ppl are ignoring this though because nick is "naive" and fell for a guy who only wants sex.

something similar is happening with the boston-top situation. in my opinion top didn't look fully comfortable when things started/were happening in the shower as well as in the car (you can see the switch happening and at what point top decides to have sex with boston). and now the elevator

great post about top with good additions. written by @respectthepetty and @wen-kexing-apologist

while i am not sure if top has anxiety, i do think there is something about him and his relationship to sex that is more than just, he likes to have sex (which is totally fine). this post says sth similar.

i just feel like, many people in the audience don't really recognize or want to acknowledge how boston and top's boundaries are pushed just because they are "sluts" and i don't like that.

mew as THE VIRGIN in the story is immeadiately seen as angel who can't do wrong.

but to me there were a few moments that felt judgemental tbh. mew seems judgemental sometimes, maybe like the audience?. people have discussed things that sound interesting and i hope the show explores them, such as his deal with control as well as the question what it is that he actually wants from top. so many of the things he knew about top before they started properly talking, were all things that go against what he seems to consider ideal partner material. what is he gaining from making top change into what mew considers "good boyfriend"? why did he give top a chance? why is he continueing?

i wonder if there will be commentary on society pressuring people into losing their virginities by a certain age? it's possible that mew is fixated on it in his own way. looking back, he did invite top back to his place knowing top wanted sex and started making out with him and seemed interested, but stopped before they did it. now he uses forms of sex to control top and his actions (ep4, "no penetration").there is sth to unpack here.

top gains a new experience by being with mew. he says he's not interested in what he was doing before, so mew is a change.

comparing mew's and top's reactions to someone pushing for sth physical that they themselves don't want is interesting. mew straight up pushes the other person away and asks them what are you doing, while top hesitates even though he doesn't want it. mew knows or shows his boundaries better than top does.

people see top for his looks, money and status. sleeping with him is kinda seen as win/victory/success (ep1). it makes me wonder if part of him also sees himself only good for sex. not entirely, because there seems to be some confidence in himself and his status etc. but partially? we also know about his substance abuse which he claims he's into just to have fun with friends, yet the first time we see him use is without friends.....

if u want to be untagged please tell me. i just wanted to give credit.

[teatraps]

Would it make sense if I said that it feels like when people interpret Edgar, they’re more interested in Edgar as a concept than his actual character? Sometimes it feels like they’re fascinated with the idea of this guy who’s completely consumed by his love of art but then don’t go in depth on the actual build up to that love, his morals, his values, or his motives.

Whenever there’s an artist in idv, their art is usually an extension of a deeper desire. Phillipe uses his wax sculptures to embody his sense of justice and righteousness (it’s a flawed idea of justice, but that’s a different discussion). Vera’s perfumes are tied to her desire for acceptance and acknowledgment in the way that her perfume would’ve been the ticket to getting attention and the way that she’s now trying to use Euphoria to erase herself and become Vera which would give her acceptance. Aesop engages in the art of embalming, but it also acts as his way of trying to “preserve” people while they’re in their “best state” and spare them from life. Anne likes to make toys, but it also works as a way to show her desire for motherhood and her attempts to cling to childhood (I think, I don’t know Anne that well). The ripper uses the art of murder to subvert the minds of others and make a statement. Galatea uses her sculptures to try and obtain the physical maturity she knows she’ll never get.

All of these characters, and many more that I didn’t mention, use their art form as an extension of themselves and the art is tied to their goals. When I see ppl interpret Edgar though, it’s like his motives come second and the art comes first. People understand that Edgar is incredibly fixated on art, but why he loves art so much seems to get lost in translation a lot of times. It makes his character seem aimless because he literally only exists to paint. They don’t elaborate on why he paints or what significance it has for his overall character. If a character is going to be so centered around their obsession, then there should be a reason why they’re so obsessed, but a lot of the interpretations I see don’t go deeper on that part. That’s not to say he doesn’t have a reason, I’d argue he does and it’s stated in his deductions with the whole “life is beautiful and the brush can preserve that beauty.” People usually ditch this part of his character tho, writing it off as a part of his personality that’s just gone now because of all the bad stuff that happened to him. But then the question becomes, why does he still paint? If he really doesn’t have any hope for this world and thinks everything sucks and doesn’t even want to engage with it anymore, then what is he still picking up the brush for?

(Also this is just provably not true because the last thing he says in his deductions is “life is always odd, yet pleasant,” showing he still does like life and appreciates the beauty it holds.)

I think this is why people are chill with the idea of Edgar basically only existing to die in the narrative and don’t question his actions further. People accept the idea of Edgar sacrificing himself for his art while not asking how that helps his art in the first place. Since they don’t look deeper into Edgar’s motives outside of “he wants to create a masterpiece and he likes to paint,” they can blindly accept the idea that he just dies for his art. He doesn’t need to have a motive outside of that because his only motive in a lot of ppl’s interpretations is just painting. It feels like a bit of a cop-out because he literally has no reason to be doing all of this. Since they disregarded all of the parts of his character that involve why he started painting in the first place (being his love of life and a desire to capture its beauty) it makes it feel like he’s just messing around and waiting for someone to come along and just kill him. Since he has no real motives, values, or desires, he essentially becomes fodder for Patricia to kill. As it stands with this kind of interpretation, he can’t do much else. If he’s not fighting for anything or trying to achieve or maintain anything, all he really can do is die. And not even die with a purpose because again, this type of interpretation doesn’t elaborate on how his death helped his art at all. It comes off as some random edgy ending to a character with no defined goal. Then they explain it away with “he’s unhinged” as if that actually explains anything about his character or motives.

When he said “I don’t care about anything except art” a lot of people took that at face value. They didn’t take into account the symbolism of art in Edgar’s narrative, or the reactionary nature of that statement as a response to Edgar realizing he’s being groomed. I say this a lot, but Edgar’s art symbolizes a lot of things in his storyline. It represents his psyche, like with his paintings egging him on to kill Sarai. It represents his love of life as I stated earlier. It represents the bonds he forms with others like how he relates colors to people he cared about. He uses art metaphors a lot to explain his thoughts and how he processes events, like when he says he had a dream of Sarai guiding his hand across a canvas being one of the main first signs of Sarai grooming him. People take Edgar’s word very literally but often times when he’s talking about art, it can be extended to mean something else.

In general, it just feels like people don’t ask why enough when it comes to their Edgar analysis. Why does he paint? Why couldn’t he find inspiration in his home? Why does he think going to the manor will help him? Why did he hate the aristocracy so much? The answers to these questions are in his plot, but people don’t seem to engage with them. When Edgar says he hates the aristocracy people tend to hone in on the fact he says that they don’t understand or respect art, but going back to the whole art metaphors thing, that’s not all he’s mad about. He’s constantly talking about their greed, hypocrisy, and gossiping. He finds them shallow which shows Edgar’s values. He values people genuinely caring for one another. He doesn’t like when people make up stuff about others and ostracize people based on it. His criticisms of his father in his 3rd letter could extend to the entire aristocracy as a whole. They’re all more focused on status and wealth than the actual content of their character. But this all gets lost under the idea that he literally just didn’t like the aristocracy because they didn’t like art enough which I’m sorry but that is such a garbage and shallow reason. Especially when, again, most people cannot actually pinpoint why Edgar even likes to paint in the first place. It doesn’t do the complexity of his character justice. When Edgar says, “life is beautiful and the brush can preserve that beauty,” it gives him a motive. He’s not just painting to paint, he’s painting to make the overwhelming love and astonishment he has for life tangible. When Edgar is clocking his dad’s tea, it shows his morals. It shows that he thinks it’s wrong to use and/or neglect people for fame and status. However, all of these things are expressed through metaphor, which is when things start getting lost. His resentment of the aristocracy is said through saying they don’t respect art. Edgar’s adoration for all life has to offer is shown through his dedication to his art. Edgar’s frustration with his father is described by him as his father using his art. And even though Edgar is talking about art, it means so much more than that.

People play with the concepts of a rich kid who resents his peers but don’t look into why he does. People play with the concept of someone who’s unhealthily committed to his craft, but don’t examine why he is. People like the idea of Edgar, but they don’t seem to engage with the actual character of Edgar. They see the concepts but don’t see what the writers are saying with these concepts through Edgar and this results in having what feels like a shallow, bratty kid who has no actual motivations or goals and then dies for an unsatisfying ending to his story. It gives no closure, says nothing about his character, and feels like it was something an edgy 12 year old came up with as a “cool and controversial” finale for an underdeveloped character.

I could go even further as say this is why there’s such a big shipping scene for Edgar but very little content regarding how he interacts with others in his actual canon lore. Because this type of interpretation of Edgar is so far removed from everything and everyone else, basically living entirely in his own head until he dies, people put him in ships with basically every character to fill the perceived void of interactions Edgar has in canon. They seek to expand his character and who he could be with all these ships because it feels like he doesn’t have much of a character in canon. Now this isn’t true, but I believe it is perceived that way by the fandom. I also think this is why a lot of people who aren’t fans of him find him shallow. His general demeanor off put them (and it was supposed to, he is a character built on misdirection) and when they try to look deeper into him through what his fans say, it sounds more like a list of concepts than an actual character. This again makes him seem underdeveloped and boring to them, so they go on to call his character shallow and boring. Probably why you also see people go to the furthest extremes when characterizing him, either making him downright deplorable or overly sweet and kind. People don’t investigate the things that formed him into who he is outside of the very surface level, leading people to portray him in an almost caricature of his actual traits. He’s arrogant? Then he must be a complete jerk to everyone and have zero regard for other people. He cares deeply about his art? Then his art is quite literally number one priority, no matter who has to get hurt to achieve that. He can be a bit standoffish? Then he must go out of his way to be rude to people he views as lesser. And who does he deem lesser? Everyone apparently, because when he was talking about the way people don’t understand art, people don’t analyze what understanding art even means for Edgar. They don’t analyze what Edgar’s critiques of the aristocracy are when it came to the way they consumed art outside of this vague idea of “they just don’t get it” which is so devoid of actual meaning that people just assume that idea projects onto literally everyone. He’s mentally ill and struggles with psychosis? Then he’s an absolutely deranged and unhinged freak who can barely function (and that’s not even covering how toxic of an interpretation that is when it comes to mental illness as well as completely disregards the fact that Edgar is explicitly stated and shown to be rational and good at taking in his surroundings).

Edgar is a character that requires a lot of engagement, especially since his character is built on misdirection. The audience has to be willing to accept that the writers are misleading them about his character and try to look deeper into his words and actions to understand his true character. Unfortunately, it feels like a lot of ppl don’t want to.

[entropy-sea-system]

OK OK impromptu rant but I need to get this out there as I still feel somewhat connected to the aro community-

I have been watching the tags, I've been talking the people in my local a-spec community and I think it amazes me just how incredible the relationships put forth by aro and aces are, while the communities just don't reflect any of it.

I've stopped identifying with the aroallo label because there was no sense of community associated with it. The a-spec spaces are made for aces only and the ace stuff in them is abhorrent. I am tired of people passing it off as repulsion, while still seeing people saying "hookers" are disgusting in a-spec tags. I'm tired of people saying PDA is bad. I'm tired of people acting like aros and aces can only be clueless cinnamon rolls. I'm tired of people being so so so stuck in their own perspective of the world they act like people in romantic relationships can't be happy. So on and so forth.

The concepts we have are passionating. They're the coolest ones I've been exposed to in queer communities. However, nobody thinks about them. Nobody speak about them. All we have is endless messages about how the world is so so confusing or hatred directed at sex and romance. I get that but I wish we went even a tiny bit past that really. It's a community filled with adults that feels so immature and I honestly think there is some sort of self infantilization going on. I don't like that I don't have symbols that aren't associated with uwu smol bean dragon lover stuff. It makes me sick and is why I don't identify with it anymore but it's genuinely sad to see because technically that's still the people who will relate to me the most.

It feels like people are always desperate to understand how the norm works and how they can best align with it instead of fully experiencing their identity. And that's an understandable thing to do but the community is just that with sex and romance negativity sprinkled on top of it.

I wish they were angrier. I wish they were more introspective. I wish they thought about breaking the norms more instead of headcannoning every female character without a love interest as aroace and talking about how gross sex is. I wish I felt like I can connect with the people who are supposed to be at least partly like me.

Anyway you're cool and I hope you're doing well! Sorry to drop all of this onto you but yeah I trust you with my ranty feels about the community.

We didn't really expect this ask but thank you for sending it!!

There are a lot of issues with the aspec community, especially online, (we have no experience with irl ones yet). And what you described here explains the issues with it quite well.

I feel like most of the aspec community ends up catering to mainly aces, and to a lesser extent aros, and slightly to apls, while other atertiary is hardly discussed (and agender ppl often just lump w gender stuff instead even though its aspec). I think the community is also rather divided, personally.

We're in some discord servers w mostly other apls and aros/run by other apl aros (often also romo aro) and they tend to overall be normal about aspec identities without being negative about attractions or actions or gatekeeping aspec labels. Currently we logged off discord a bit but we have in the past been in aro spaces that had many of the issues you mention , and still come across people being that way on tumblr.

I think there is a problem where some aros think that calling romance inherently toxic is somehow "activism" and deny that romance negativity exists, then claim that they "don't have to consider every culture ever" when people state that some cultures are romance negative and do harm people for engaging in romance.

They seem to think its "punching up" and some alloaros in particular try to justify it by acting like the united states is the only country that matters and citing sex negativity as a reason for romance negativity "not existing". When aces do this about sex its harmful, but thats not supposed to be a reason to deny that being romance negative is toxic and harmful to others even if their country doesn't persecute people for engaging in romance.

I also personally see a some aros hesitant to id with ace or acespec terms that technically fit them because of how bad the ace community has been about sex and anyone who isn't ace, as well as aces and aros generally forgetting about atertiary ppl. Some of them prefer terms like lightspec or such or allospec partly because of that.

It's understandable that some people feel a disconnect from labels like aro and ace as a result of how the communities tend to be tbh. I've had moments when I didn't want to id as aro because of this, and I consider myself both aro and alloro due to my arospec orientation.

Also being tertiary repulsed and being repulsed by sex repulsion (it just happens to repulse me a lot to read about even if not stated in a sex negative way), makes it a bit hard to be around other aspecs. I feel really disgusted and triggered when other aros talk about squishes and qprs and friendships, even if I think they should be able to talk about that. Which makes it hard to be around some other aros.

I also get what you mean about people trying to align with the existing norm. I'm seeing a rise in people maligning labels they don't understand and this attitude of "the only kind of weird thats fine is the kind of weird I am", which the aspec community has certainly not been immune to either.

I feel like for some reason most aspecs I see online, especially aros, are minors? Maybe because the aromantic label only really caught on after 2005 iirc so older people less likely to have heard of it? Im not a huge fan of how aspec tends to be infantilised either. I find issues with how some of the aro symbols are very derivative of ace symbols because we are not some extension of ace we're our own community. I can also see how ppl may find it too infantilising to have symbols like frogs and griffons etc.

Also yeah what is with people doing that about characters who are women or girls and express that they don't want to get married??? Or even just don't have a love interest. I understand if aroaces want more headcanoned rep or non-aspecs I guess idk want to fill some headcanon diversity quota without actually supporting aspecs but.

Not wanting marriage or not having a love interest is not inherently equal to not wanting romance and/or sex. I feel especially that people like to assume not wanting to have children means not wanting sex (which I find pretty reductive in that its acting like thats the only reason ppl have sex, especially as a sex favorable person who doesn't want kids). And all aspecs deserve more canon rep to begin with. I think I have a gripe with ppls aspec headcanons almost always being alloace or aroace. It's like they forget other aspecs like apls, alloaros, neu aros, non sam aros, atertiary, etc. even exist!

Additionally I think its partly because romance is emphasized more for female characters that even fans decide to make their interpretations about romance/a lack there of as if its the character's only personality trait. In my opinion its just as obsessive about romance if someone thinks all there is to a character is not engaging in it. I also see people act like they're solely worried a woman/girl character is going to fall for a man/boy character they hc as aro but not often the opposite like. Just say you see romance as gendered/feminine in some way and go I guess lol.

I also feel like mainly allistic non-aspecs do this but when ppl hc an autistic character as ace or aroace it feels infantilising if theres literally no other rationale behind their headcanon. I feel desexualised at times as an autistic and thats mostly bc ppl pick up on some kind of nd thing and they assumed I'm too "innocent" to like romance or sex, or because they view us as "unable to consent"(which can be true of some people if their neurodivergence affects their ability to consent to things even as an adult, but isn't universally true.) . I think some of this perception is also rooted in eugenics (due to people equating sex with having kids and viewing disability and/or neurodivergence as a tragedy and thinking its 'bad' for disabled and/or nd ppl to have kids).

So I don't really appreciate implications that someone is ace just by virtue of being autistic. I think its also unfair to autistic aros and aces because our neurodivergence can influence our orientation, but being autistic does not mean that makes someone inherently ace and/or aro.

My physical disability is relatively mild and less talked about (chronic pain and fatigue), and I don't reveal it to most ppl(ppl who dont live with me won't know I get exhausted from non-taxing to abled ppl activities, and chronic pain is not visible at all and we can't get mobility aids due to not being independent yet) so Im not fully aware how people view my apl and aro identities in that regard.

And there is definitely an issue with aspecs trying to enforce NEW norms. They cry about how people are forced into performing romance and sex to fit in but then turn around and tell people they need to love or have friends or family or pets in order to be a good person. It's also very harmful to aspecs bc some of us are loveless or atertiary etc. in ways that aros and aces apparently hate lol. A lot of aros in particular are very platonormative.

The aro community is also rather hostile to romo aros. There are still people who exclude romo aros from the aro label or act like we have to bend over backwards and acknowledge that we are "amatonormative oppressors" for liking romance or feeling some connection to it.

I think also the meme about putting a box away on a tall shelf away from a child is relevant here. The word amatonormative is constantly misused by a lot of aros. I've seen aros call alloromantic apls "amatonormative" and act like "amatonormative" means 'person who engages in romance'.

Its not a term abt engaging in romance or liking it. It's also not an excuse to pressure people to have or like friends either. I think aros should have actual discussions about amatonormativity that aren't just US-centric and about romance(wow do aros love to ignore that monogamy, non-queer, cis, etc. are social categories deemed more valuable under amatonormative societal norms), instead of using it to describe anyone they deem as interested in romance .

On that note, a lot of them use some examples of toxic relationships as reasons to call romance toxic and almost advocate for romance to never exist(which is especially disgusting to see for me, as in my country a lot romance negative conservative rhetoric is literally worded the same way). These people almost never acknowledge that other relationships like friendship can be toxic too.

I think some of these people believe in 'morality of repugnance' in that they think if its something they personally find repulsive in some way, that means its inherently immoral, which is not conducive to having unbiased views of the world, or critical thinking. I think a lot of ppl my age and younger are especially trying to do this because Ive lost count of how many I've seen be like "ewww thats gross/weird and so its wrong/immoral", and literally spouting conservative rhetoric while thinking they're politically liberal/leftists, perhaps with different wording but yeah. (I think that one tumblr post abt ppl in that age range being 'conservative on accident', especially in the united states- though that is concerning given the way ppl from other countries tend to absorb american opinions and such too much, describes this phenomenon)

I think some aros are also still so caught up in how much of a tragedy they think their aromanticism is, and I feel bad for them but thats not all there is to being aro and its a bit weird when ppl act like it is.

I think one of the best things about being aspec for me is feeling more like I can engage in and not engage in relationships (Im only favorable to sexual partnerships w no label other than 'sexual partner', and romance only w two partners as of now, and completely averse to all tertiary/nonrose. before I fully realised my aspec identities i pressured myself to have friends and felt like I'd be obligated to be favorable to nonsexual romance if someone wanted that with me, to 'be an ally to aces', even though it repulsed me. I also felt obligated to want qprs especially after realising Im aro. Realising Im atertiary helped me stop forcing myself to want nonrose relationships.)

Anyways that was a lot of rambling but probably most of my opinions on the aro and some extent aspec community.

[ardentpoop]

It is very concerning to me that ppl in the supernatural fandom r just now (barely) starting to recognize the racism in show. Like the show is very deeply seeped in white supremacy in a way that was very obvious to me when i first watched it at 11. Like I used to be very confused when ppl talked abt Supernatural as a progressive show??? I used to joke with my friends in highschool calling it whitesupremacistnatural bcuz that it is literally the show. White supremacy is so baked into the show and its ingrained into the foundations of the fictional world that Supernatural takes place in. I really cannot take white fans of the show in particular seriously bcuz i feel like if u cannot recognize the incredibly blantant racism in Supernatural i do not really trust any analysis of the show that u make. The only reason I can think of as to why so many fans are unable to recognize the racism in the show is bcuz just abt every scifi/fantasy show from this period had similar issues to varying degrees (although i do think that Supernatural is one of the most unabashed abt it). Like once you pull back the disguise of fantasy Supernatural is just another The Birth of a Nation esque tale that romanticizes white heroes defending the "real" humans from the dark races who cant help being born evil but must be eliminated anyway. Its incredibly unsubtle to a point that often made the show difficult for me to watch especially the longer it went on and the older that i got. That being said I still watched 14 seasons of Supernatural. I love the show and talk abt it constantly bcuz (surprise surprise) it is possible to enjoy a show while still acknowledging the ways that it is deeply problematic. I dont think its a coincidence that ppl r just starting to acknowledge the racism now (nearly 4 years after it ended). I think someone could write multiple dissertations abt the racism and white supremacist undertones in Supernatural bcuz there is so much of it and it appears in so many varying ways.

I don’t have much to add to this just letting you know that I feel you!!! literally hilarious to call this show “progressive” lmaooo like sure maybe in the same way that a corporate pride tweet made by a company with notoriously unethical business practices is “progressive” <3

show created primarily by white men for other white men that ended up attracting a massive white queer audience that was all too happy to gloss over the loudest and ugliest parts of the canon: blatantly racist central concept of Good vs Evil, dean being blatantly abusive to sam for the majority of their relationship, irresponsible casting choices wrt antagonists like Gordon and Raphael and s13!Michael as well as the disposable henchmen/extras who were far too often portrayed by black and brown men and women considering the glaring shortage of black and brown “good guys” in this story, truckloads of blatantly homophobic and misogynistic jokes that were supposed to be viewed as charming, and so on.

no need to unpack any of that though! talking abt that stuff gets you labelled a hater. keep walking on eggshells around the majority of the fandom and tagging discussion of dean’s canon actions as “anti dean” and critical discussion of the show’s super unsubtle roots as “negativity”

as long as the white queer audience got their goddamn d*stiel crumbs they were satisfied lol. and fuck sam - the ONLY part of this thing that makes it worthwhile to watch all the way through as an adult bc characters like him are genuinely so so rare - bc he gets in the way of their generic white gay ship that’s built on flavorless scraps and wild conjecture. as always this website’s user base has impeccable taste and commendable analytical skills!

disclaimer: I genuinely don’t think I would personally change much abt spn textually speaking because AS IT IS it makes for a truly sickening narrative with brain-rotting layers that its creators could have never pulled off intentionally. this isn’t me saying none of the horror was intentional but that a decent chunk of it obviously wasn’t and that the Final Combination could’ve only come of the too-many-cooks-in-the-kitchen white american ignorance egotistical power-tripping (the latter on the part of, say, jensen) that resulted from this show being on the air for far longer than it should’ve been.

[bennett-mikealson]

I saw one of your mentions about Bonnie, realized I really dislike the majority of tvd fandom & why I don't bother exploring the tags outside of Bonnie centered stuff for the sole reason that she is never even discussed in detail among the majority. She's largely overlooked in these anti Delena, anti Klaroline mentions & they somehow turn it around into the same old "xyz is the real victim here". Literally saw a post were they discussed all these third tier characters like Lexi, Vicki, Rose & some other irrelevant stuff in comparison to Caroline/Elena that basically falls in line with how their plots were ignored or done terribly (even though they WEREN'T & literally had more screentime/agency than Bonnie - a main witch character who served more purpose plot wise). Its really annoying that they complain about things that are fine & don't need fixing.

They will do anything to avoid talking about anything Bonnie related other than the tired slogan "Bonnie deserved better", which always sounds like a lazy fake attempt at pretending to care. & Worse, when actual Bonnie fans discuss how to write her plots better, those said stans try to cut down any theories outside of canon & say how it's unrealistic or some other tired excuse they never give to any other characters except hers.

See that’s why I can’t stand when Stan’s say Bonnie’s a fan favorite or say she’s the most loved character bc she just started to get her hype and even then she still gets an equal amount of hate. THB looking at how ppl talk about Bonnie outside of her Stan’s to me its like looking at another version of the writers. They see her as a plot device just as much as the writers and they don’t care about her struggles nor care to understand them.

For example when Bonnie ignored Elena after her grams died everyone was all like “omg Bonnie’s such a bad friend” or would think that Bonnie was blaming Elena for Grams dying when she never said that. In the show she even told Elena that she didn’t blame her for grams death. She just wanted space from her and considering how Elena was buddy buddy with the Salvatore her distancing herself from Elena was valid. But They don’t care about how Bonnie felt seeing her friend all lovey-dovey with people who caused her pain. They say “well maybe if Bonnie didn’t beg grams to open the tomb then she wouldn’t of died” (which is not true) but if Bonnie didn’t open the tomb then the Salvatore would’ve been stuck and y’all still would’ve been hating on Bonnie.

Same thing happened when Bonnie didn’t like Damon at first. Ppl called her annoying for being rude to the Salvatore’s when Damon almost killed her and he did nothing but cause problems. But ppl wonder why Bonnie didn’t like him. Then suddenly they love her in season six when her and Damon became best friends. Then it was “oh I love this new side to Bonnie”. 🙄

Even when Bonnie didn’t deactivate the Gilbert device and Caroline became a vampire; Bonnie was distant to her and Stans acted like Bonnie’s actions were unjustified and villainized her. Even though they knew Bonnie has had nothing but negative encounters with vampires before and had suffered bc of the presence of vampires so it would make sense why she’d be guarded with Caroline. Caroline‘s mother and father reacted the same way and so did Matt when they found out she was a vampire. They say Bonnie had no right to treat Caroline rudely when she is the reason Caroline a vampire even tho Katherine is the one who killed Caroline. Yet she gets praised all the time for making Caroline a better person. They even try to use the fact that Bonnie asked Damon to give Caroline blood against her and villainize Bonnie more when her intentions in asking Damon to save Caroline were pure and Damon didn’t have to listen to her. The thing is even if Bonnie did deactivate the Gilbert device in the situation ppl still would’ve gotten hurt bc the tomb vampires were ready to attack founding family members so Bonnie still would of been hated on for not “doing her job”.

There was really no winning for Bonnie at all. They just want her to do what needed to be done to protect their faves then go in the shadows.

It even shows when some Stan’s write fanfictions. Them time travel stories of Bonnie messing up a spell and it pushes Elena or Caroline or both back in time with the Salvatore or the Mikealsons; She still a plot device to Stan’s.

These be the same Stan’s that claim Bonnie Stan’s be trying to make her the main character or that we’re trying to steal Elena and Caroline’s shine when we make suggestions on how the writers could have written Bonnie’s character better. And like you said they always make it seem like anything outside canon is unrealistic or “outside of Bonnie’s character” when in reality they’re just can’t stand the thought of Bonnie being with their favorite white men. Just like the writers. 🙄

Also, sorry for the late response. I just recently got into tumblr more than before. 😁

[seaweedbraens]

Yo it’s your local late night 6.5/10 PJOTV reviewer here to offer yet another perspective, especially after the new episode.

I think the core of the issue is that this show has two major MAJOR differences from the book, those being tone and pacing. The latter has been discussed a lot, and all i really have to add to that cesspool is that it is in fact very different and faster, leading to tighter story beats and less character development, which is the only thing i truly hate.

The tone thing hasn’t been talked about nearly as much as it should be, but i think it IS affected a ton of people’s perception of the show. The witty, dry humor of the first book that defined Percy and Annabeth as kids is kind of lacking a little? This is probably the fault of Rick attempting to write for TV and kinda struggling with humor. This makes the TV characters slightly different from the books, with Annabeth being more serious and less sarcastic, while Percy is just snarky sometimes instead of being an absolute little bitch. (This is also a lot because of the lack of narration BY Percy, where he can be a lot more humorous)

Without spoiling much, the newest episode fixes some of the issues with story and pacing elements, but still lacks in some development in terms of the subtext of the story, if that makes sense. The best part is that it reworks and redoes certain parts of the story in a way that just WORKS for TV and this specific cast.

Honestly, the only character that has 100% benefited from the change in focus with character development is Grover. The fact that the show just generally cares less about these characters somehow makes grover less of an anxious, shy companion and more of a fun, wholesome dude which i love SO MUCH!

About LMM as Hermes, i’m totally for it. LMM has pretty decent acting jobs, and the tired look he always has totally works with Hermes being canonically overworked as hell.

Another thing i do love that some people don’t is the Gabe changes. IDK how much you know, but the changing of Gabe is an unforeseen and interesting change. However, i like it because it makes Gabe a more dynamic character, and makes it possible to change who is in a negative light, rather than making him go from “abusive bitch” to “physically abusive bitch”. This all comes from someone intimately family with parental abuse and someone who loves reading fics that discuss Gabe AS a horrible abuser. Like, one of my fav PJO fics (that i did suggest to you) is an entire therapy fic about Percy dealing with that abuse and the scars of trauma. I know what i want from Gabe’s character is all i’m saying.

Finally, one last topic i wanna rant about on the internet is fucking LA Luke. They had absolutely no right to make this dude the most lovable bitch at camp. Hell, even the most anti-live action ppl out there can admit Luke got a lot more sympathetic in the show. Anyone can see they really cared about that aspect of the character. (not the weak-ass attempt at a scar tho lmao)

This entire rant and all of my (and everyone’s really) feelings can change drastically as soon as the next episode drops though, so take everything ANYONE says with a tablespoon of salt and a pile of blue food.

duly noted, and thank you for the update on your thoughts with the new episode, anon - it's so interesting to see thoughts change with every new one! i'll probably binge it all in one go at the end.

from what you've said, i think the gabe changes still bother me, but i'm all for a more likeable luke. that'll make the betrayal that much more painful. honestly, i've been toying lately with the idea of a later betrayal on luke's end, rather than at the end of book 1. i feel like we don't fully get to see how much percy trusts him and likes him in the limited time we get with them in the lightning thief. one day, maybe, i'll write a fic that really gives luke and percy the Bonding Time i think they deserve before the rug's pulled out from underneath percy's feet.

i wonder how your 6.5/10 rating will change by the end of the final ep!

[b1rdbra1ned]

Oh no I hate Fan too. Fan was not a good character in season 2 and he didn't actually face any consequences for his actions. Paintbrush was like the closest we got to Fan being criticised and people considered PB to be the one overreacting. Paintbrush is done so dirty because the fandom put their own belief about the bright lights being family even though Paintbrush never actually got along with them. They talked to tt like once, bickered with lb until the last ep they were in and then there's. Fan..

Also I think I hate fantube a little more after the theyrebasicallycanon polls put enstars against ii. Glad rinniki won they deserve the win against fantube imo.

Sorry I was tired of being critical of ii so I don't like it anymore 😔

But hiiii we haven't talked much in a while ik :(( I'm on holiday rn but feel free to talk to me if you want!

ALLLL OF THIS

Paintbrush was in every way in the right to yell at fan, he constantly bothered and nagged at them and the stuff about marshmallow was definitely the final straw

i only ever liked the whole bright lights family thing because honestly it could’ve worked imo!!! but they just never took that chance they never really developed the brights lights AT ALL most season (beside from marshmallow) the bright light felt more like the comical team (not really but can’t think of a better way to describe them) compared to the grand slams who definitely got way more focus and development

it’s shitty because i think the brights lights could’ve had potential but they were just casted aside until the last few episodes where “oh hey look development!! :] oh wait nvm they’re eliminated now <3” like ????

paintbrush definitely got the short end of the stick here. literally having what was supposed to be their episode mainly centred around tt and lb and having their feelings about marsh being completely casted aside. i wish more was done w/ marshmallow and them vs them and lb

looking back a lot of their scenes w lb just felt kinda off??? i don’t think can articulate this probably rn but paintbrush deserved better

but at the same time i wish the team got more time w/ each other in general, they have so many great opportunities to do it like in the maze episodes but again they’re kinda just cast aside as just comedy

and w/ s3 oh boy i hate what they did with paintbrush and their “arc” in the last few episodes. they quite literally and figuratively took away their edges, i miss sassy, sarcastic confident paintbrush they feel so dulled down in iii and it’s like no one in the writing team understands them at all. it’s like they didn’t even write s2 (but hey back to the point i mentions last post that show writers really ought to stop listening to fans sometimes because this is how fanon seeps in </3)

i hate how the a lot of the fans view paintbrush especially if it’s only ever in the context of lightbrush or shipping (another thing that pisses me off btw is how they’re always treated as irrational and or just plain out abusive FUCK PEOPLE WHO PORTRAY PAINTBRUSH LIKE THIS)

they’re such a great character who gets absolutely fucked over by the writing and fandom (not all of the fandom of course, i love seeing ppls takes and discussions on them but it’s just some fans who just </3)

i don’t like discouraging ships, if ppl are mature and respectful and don’t put other ppl down then that’s all great and stuff but my problem is that i really wish paintbrush was just seen as more than their ships yknow

Fan is.. the more i think about canon him the more im like yeaaa… uh no thanks…. (mainly w/ him and paintbrush and cabby)

idk if im even allowed to say they changed tt this season because.. she didn’t honestly have a lot of screentime last season compared to a whole lot of other characters, but in iii she feels off?? honestly all of them do even the new contestants later on during the season

idk if i have the words to describe why s3’s characterisation is so off and at time frustrating, their arcs too, was going to point out some characters but honestly i could make a case for nearly ALL the contestants the ones who weren’t voted out early at least

that’s the end of my ramble tho, sorry ik i talked a lot about paintbrush, i want to talk about the others too but they’re the one i still even think about. hopefully this isn’t a bit hard to read, ik im not that organised w my rambles sometimes

[destinyc1020]

Interesting podact conversation. It's similar to your bbc article on movie stars. The hosts mention some of our favs, but their opinions are a bit less rosy😭. I don't agree with the host's Tom take, but I appreciate opinions from ppl who aren't stans cause they can be objective.

What do you think?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/19/podcasts/the-great-glen-powell-debate.html

You know what? I'm actually not afraid of different opinions and viewpoints. It's only someone's opinion. It's not going to hurt me lol. 🤷🏾‍♀️ I'm open to hearing other povs.

Anyway....

Very very interesting podcast Anon lol. Soooo....basically, there aren't any movie stars lol. 😅

But everyone is definitely excited about Glen Powell. I told y'all!!! I sensed his "movie star" energy in "Top Gun: Maverick". I've been saying for weeks now that Glen is on his way to being a movie star. YOu all thought I was joking lol.

I can sense when someone is going to be huge if they keep playing their cards right.

Glen is definitely going places. Hollywood is definitely into Glen Powell. He's got promise, and he shines onscreen like the old-school movie stars of yesteryear. I kind of think their definition though of who a movie star is was kind of limited though. Not ALL movie stars are male actors who were action stars. I mean, Leo has done mostly serious movies his whole entire film career, he's not particularly action-talented, but yet, he's one of our biggest movie stars and has been for years. 🤷🏾‍♀️

So idk... I kind of agree with them on some aspects, but not others.

I did agree with them that doing an IP/comic-book film early on in the career might get you a big paycheck and a TON of fame, but I do feel that it comes back to bite you in the end because then your character is bigger than you, and it's hard to breakthrough in other non-IP films because people don't want to see you outside of those huge characters.

Anyway... Very interesting listen anon. Thanks for sharing!

I found it interesting that Timmy's name didn't even get mentioned in this podcast (from what I recall) lol. 😅 That was actually surprising. Even JE's name got mentioned lol.

[demonsfate]

canon questionare meme: #5, 6, 7, 8

canon questionnaire // accepting . . .

5. What’s the best thing about the fandom?

Uhhhh... hard one to answer 'cos I don't really engage in the fandom often lol. I think on my main blog, I follow only one (1) other Tekken blog. I guess I really like the fan content - especially the cosmetic mods for Tek8, and the fanart. Good stuff! Though, I guess I will say that the fandom peeps that follow me are also very awesome. I used to argue with a lotta ppl on the sub reddit, but the ppl here are understanding and epic. The Jin Support Club ✊

6. What’s the worst thing about the fandom?

A lot lol. I guess the worst thing is just ... the way a lotta fans criticize Jin. I swear, a lotta my arguments on Reddit was just concerning Jin's character because people either don't understand him (SO MANY were saying he "cared for nobody" prior Tek8's release) or they just bring up Tekken 6. What is so frustrating about the latter is that say, let's look at another fandom - as bad as ppl wanna say the Star Wars fandom is, they understand when a character's actions are uncharacteristic and when to reject this. Like almost the ENTIRE FANDOM can agree that Luke was written terribly out of character in The Last Jedi, and they can agree that the dude trying to redeem his father wouldn't try to kill his nephew because of "bad dreams". Hardly anybody argues about that or tries to insist on Luke being a Bad Jedi because of his actions in Last Jedi. In fact, most people still fondly look at Luke because they think of the first three movies he was in. YET, with the Tekken fandom... the fandom is just INCAPABLE of doing this and it's really weird. It's almost as if they see these characters as real lol. Like whereas the majority of Star Wars fans won't bring up Last Jedi when discussing Luke's character, the majority of the Tekken fandom WILL bring up Tekken 6 when discussing Jin's. Like you can't even fondly talk about Jin without sb saying "BUT THE WAR! ☝️🤓" Like even when you DO point out it's bad writing, they'll say "well he still did it! we can't ignore it! 😊" Maybe not entirely but... you can still acknowledge the writing goes against Jin's character, and it's something his character wouldn't have done if he remained in character with competent writers / no director meddling.

7. What’s the best thing about the canon you are writing?

Hmm... is this pertaining to Jin only, or the lore as a whole? Idk really how to answer this because I've already discussed how much I love Jin and why I love him. I'd say I found the devil gene concept extremely interesting, more interesting than the other "evil" curses fighting games do. Buuuut... the devil genes been totally whacked up by retcons, I'm not sure if I can say that either. The prob is, Tekken canon is so frickin LOOSE, it's hard to even pick a favorite thing about it haha. Like I say somethin and it's like "ooh... that's no longer canon..." Even when I talk about Jin's portrayal, it's like "ooh... yeah... but that was ruined momentarily..." Other than what I said when talking about why I started writing Jin, I dunno how to answer this one!! Maybe I'll go back to this when I come up with somethin'... I feel kinda awkward now. xD But LIKE, I love the Tekken story. But I already stated how I like the cast, why I love Jin, the game's fun. And... yeah!

8. What’s the worst thing about the canon you are writing?

The inconsistencies. Like I understand some retcons, especially if they're really needed. But like... Tekken does retcons EVERY game it seems, and then they're just... stuff that didn't need to be retconned in the first place. I've already went into great detail about how sloppy and confusing the devil gene lore is. But like here's another example - this is a minor and UNNECESSARY retcon. It was Lee who fixed up Alisa and gave her her freedom or whatever. But in her TK8 bio, it says it was Dr. B / her father...? What? Like I get that they maybe wanted Alisa to bond more with her father / creator. But like... couldn't they do that in another way? People say this is minor, but the problem is when the game is filled with many retcons - then when ppl are trying to learn about the lore, ppl are gonna get several different answers. "Lee fixed Alisa" "No it was Dr. B." See? That's just frustrating. Same with how the Tek Wiki still calls Devil Kazuya Devil Jin's "other half", even though I strongly feel that's been retconned long ago. The lore is confusing as hell with all these constant changes.

[relentless-endurance]

Hello, I love to encourage violence, please any of the following Choose Violence ask game questions you feel up to answering: 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, and 25!

'Isn't that basically all of them?' Yes! yes, it is. If there are any I didn't list that you wanted to answer, feel free to answer those too. I love drama, give me the chisme, peel it and feed it to me like squapes.

LIKE SQUAPES. fun fact: i have a squapes keychain on my lanyard. (alongside shoebill, Crow destiny 2 and (redacted) from Pandaemonium)

I will do xiv because. because.

answers them all because i have the day off, why not

the character everyone gets wrong

thats tough bc every character has those ppl that get them utterly wrong; I have particular beef though with the "emet was right and hydaelyn was evil" crowd because it just. it glosses over everything Emet did and acts like what Hydaelyn had to do was the worstest ever amen how dare she, when its like. Both of these characters did what they thought was necessary, but there is a gulf of difference between "I would let billions die to bring my world back" and "I sundered the star to avert a far worse disaster"

because i think people fail to realize. they were just going to keep sacrificing to Zodiark lol. (ALSO THERES ENDWALKER SPOILER STUFF as to why I will die on the hill defending my crystal mom)

3. screenshot or description of the worst take you've seen on tumblr

see last ask! that was a dm a person sent me lmao. at least??? they warned me???

6. which ship fans are the most annoying?

this is going to be hilarious coming from me but i'm not much a fan of most zenoswol or emetwol shippers (in spite of enjoying the former) because the discourse surrounding it all is fucking. INSANE. and there are just ways they mischaracterize both characters that drive me fucking BONKERS. So I stay in my brainworm corner with select people and I keep emet selch as a bitter ex because its honestly a lot funnier

7. what character did you begin to hate not because of canon but because how how the fandom acts about them?

Amon/Fandaniel. Specifically the clown wearing Asahi's skinsuit and the guy from crystal tower. there is just. a vibe. about it. that i do not fucking like how the fans engage with it. i can't explain it concretely it just fucking bothers me.

8. common fandom opinion that everyone is wrong about

sorrows of werlyt is not gaius' redemption it is him suffering consequences of his actions. if its anything close to redemption atonement is probably a better word for it and also the wol still fuckin hates his guts you can see the faces in the cutscenes. he calls u a fried when at best ur coworkers for that.

also i'm a stormblood enjoyer till i fuckin die. this is not a discussion i had fun thats it that the message

9. worst part of canon

the fact that ARR didn't lean more into the fact that you were the WoL from 1.0, ARR's writing in general.

also in general there is more bits in the msq where i wish we could uh. bite back a little harder instead of just being a silent protagonist.

10. worst part of fanon

oh god. theres a lot. probably the uwu soft imperialism that people get up to with certain ships (esp bc certain characters canonically and categorically do NOT give a fuck about politics at all)

12. the unpopular character that you actually like and why more people should like them

Aside from the obvious female characters I will defend until i fucking die (Lyse, Minfilia, ETC.).... Maxima! I just think he's neat. like was actually being genuine as a Populares, and saw that shit was fucked and noped out. also here, have this screen shot where my crimes gave him thot boots:

13. worst blorboficiation

answered in last ask! theres 1 ur about to meet and 1 thats pandemonium relevant but yeah. bluuuuuhhhhh your milage may very

16. you can't understand why so many people like this thing (characterization, trope, headcanon, etc)

Huh. I'm actually not super sure here besides things I've already bitched about. WAIT.

I fucking HATE when ppl have their wol who did not let go of heavensward trauma. like in that their wol didn't develop past it. especially if they're dark knights because. WHAT WAS THE POINT?

everyone handles grief differently ofc and its not a linear thing ever, but its so ?????????? to me that its like "my wol hasn't changed or let go or processed this at all".

what is the point if your character is never going to change or be affected? especially getting to shadowbringers??? thats all about grief and having a primo example of what NOT PROCESSING YOUR GRIEF does to you and can push you to?

like i'm not saying they shouldn't be affected at all, considering how much Haurchefant haunts you in the MSQ but like come on now. you've gotta move in some kind of direction.

(also smaller and pettier pet peeve: super 2edgy4me Azems. it feels so against what Azem was man, idk.)

19. you're mad/ashamed/horrified you actually kind of like...

my taste is flawless and impeccable and perfect. zenoswol may be the closest thing to an answer but like nah, its fucking funny.

20. part of canon you found tedious or boring

most of early ARR before waking sands

there is a bit after the first endwalker trial that i've sort of speedran on my subsequent runs, its not BAD, but it is a little jarring tonally the first time. i mildly appreciate it in hindsight because AFTER that endwalker cuts the brakes and is a semi rolling the down the hill at top speed emotionally, but it still like. please let me move on.

21. part of canon you think is overhyped

alexander raids. mid as fuck honestly.

22. your favorite part of canon that everyone else ignores

oagh unfortunately i am a girlie who enjoys all the popular things in canon. The best answer is probably the Four Lords trial series. Its one of my favorites but people don't seem to talk about it much

23. ship you've unwillingly come around to

I actually don't have a ship that fits this. I only like like 2 of the canon/canon ships and i've always been a fan of most of the wolships that float around

24. topic that brings up the most rancid discourse

Emet Selch. I love grandpa war crimes, he's one of my favorite characters and favorite villains ever, i have literal merch of him, but holy shit he is the reason for so much twitter discourse. which is kind of funny and on brand but also jesus christ can people please just relax and learn to mute/block people and tags aaaa

25. common fandom complaint that you're sick of hearing

i don't know if this common or i just saw it a lot given my twitter algorithm but people have so. much. beef. with people who Persephone Azems. for some reason.

the reason is apparently they're most insufferable kind of straight girl shipper/emet selch fan but like aside from an occasional encounter on a wolqotd post, the two people i know/know of who actually have an Azem named Persephone are.

an mlm whose noriety comes from... being one of the biggest G'rahawol content creators/shippers

one of my lesbian friends who chose it for not shipping related reasons

and most of the time their highest crime is. an Azem named Persephone. that ships Azemet. like any genuine complaints there might be are like. not unique to this VERY NICHE SUBSET OF FANS but apparently they're sooooo common and soooo annoying.

like maybe just block and move on bc some of the complaining i see borders on being genuinely misogynistic like. its fandom pixels. RELAX.

[i-heart-hxh]

the funny thing is that I can relate to gon on a personal level. the whole feeling guilty, taking the blame, and explode when things are too much. so to me, the way gon react after knowinh kite's death, is totally understandable. but it still makes me sad to see ppl wrongly interpret his actions and ignored his feelings. like he went though hell too during the whole arc. anyway we know that he regretted his action and he apologized to killua but his action had also caused a crack in their friendship. something that is unfortunate and I think that why the separation is needed to repair it.

but still hurt and I hate it.

and I finally get to meet alluka and I have to say that I still haven't warmed up to her. aside from being a factor in killugon separation, something about togashi introducing her in the series and we are heading to the dark continent arc? makes me wary of her. sure she's cute but well it let's just say, she isn't my fave characte.

I hope the movies are as good and I get to see my boys again. need them to heal this broken heart 😭 (2/2)

I'm glad you finished it! Thanks for coming back to give your impressions!

I agree about the way some of the fandom sees Gon and especially Gon's actions in Chimera Ant arc. It's such a shallow way to view the series and it surprises me how many people don't have compassion and understanding for what Gon went through. His feelings of guilt and his issues with self-esteem that lead up to what happened are present throughout the series--it makes a lot of sense when you go back and watch or read it again, there's so much foreshadowing and build up. I have no doubt Togashi was building in this direction all along. It's frustrating seeing people reacting to Gon's trauma without considering his age and all the reasons it makes sense for him to react the way he did. Even though we didn't see much of his perspective during Chimera Ant arc, it's clear how much pain he was in.

I do think the separation is ultimately good for them, though it certainly makes me sad, too--especially because we haven't gotten a reunion yet. 💔 (As I said in my prior meta, I have a lot of hope that we will eventually, though, assuming Togashi is able to keep working on the manga.)

I'm happy you're going to read the manga next! It's the original, after all, and there are some things that were left out or are a bit different than in the 2011 anime. Plus of course there's the next arc, even though Gon and Killua aren't present. The movies are not widely considered "good" LOL, and they're not technically canon because they weren't written by Togashi, but at least they're something you can consume to help with the post-anime heartbreak. The 1999 anime is also worth watching, though it deviates a lot more from the manga than the 2011 anime does (in some ways I like and some ways I don't like, personally). The atmosphere, art, and soundtrack are distinctive and lovely.

I like Alluka myself and I'm curious about the role she and Nanika will play going forward, but to each their own of course! You're entitled to your own opinion on her. She was a factor in the separation, sure, but Gon also wouldn't be healed without her.

My experience is that the broken heart from HxH doesn't go away if it truly resonates with you (and it sounds like it did for you!), but there are a lot of ways to cope with it--consuming the series multiple times in the different formats available, reading/writing meta and fanfics and looking at/drawing fanart, and commiserating with other people in the fandom. Hang in there, I remember how intense that feeling was at first! I'm always happy to discuss more if you have any particular topics you want to talk about!

[cogbreath]

thank u for ur reply!! i always love ur insight :) n ive read the article before LMAO now that was a classic example of his pretty privilege working cus if he didn’t look the way he did, his behaviour would’ve raised eyebrows. but no…he was viewed as a quirky silly guy by his roommate LOLZ. makes me wonder if mohammed atta would be viewed the same way if he were white passing.

anon you fascinate me im very very intrigued by the fact u already know so much abt this... keep sending asks its soo rare that i actually do get to talk to someone who already knows this much abt this. Anyhow I would reason to bet he might have been viewed more sympathetically if that were the case, however, in any case he was arguably more reserved and stoic by comparison so i think even if he was, people would be maybe a bit more suspicous with him, especially cuz fitting in seemed to come more naturally to jarrah for various reasons... atta never seemed to want to fit in more than he needed to in order to stay under the radar. I know that atta and jarrah did also butt heads abt this to some degree, i know that atta was suspicious that jarrah might even give up on the whole thing cuz of how he kept backsliding. I also think a lot of writers can "see themselves" in jarrah while they really cant with atta, he's an unfamiliar personality imo, specifically bc most writers in the anglosphere come from a secular culturally christian perspective. I think they r sympathetic to him because they start to realise that this sort of stuff really is something that "just anyone" could find themselves getting roped into thru means of being radicalised. Meanwhile I think they view atta as someone who already was quite "radical" at least in their eyes. of course, this is just my experience, but I've had many of my muslim accquantinces comment on how its actually quite a shame that atta took the path he did, because they feel he was otherwise quite promising, and might have made a good scholar or something along those lines. So thats the other side of things if you will. I think I can agree with that perspective myself. Of course its important to not get too engulfed in that mindset, because you can't forget they made the choices they did.

But yeah, there are many things about atta that Ive read about that i find to have been equally quirky and silly of behaviors, but i find myself annoyed how writers (even terry mcdermott does it in his book, perfect soldiers. which is a bit disappointing bc hes a writer who i otherwise rlly enjoy the perspective of on this) dont seem to think that way and paint it to be something as flaws or show of bad character when really, personality and behavior quirks have little to do with his actions. Yknow what i mean of course. Demonizing behaviors that have nothing explicitly to do with being a terrorist. You are really fun anon, its fun for me to get to discuss this stuff, the psychology/characteristics/behavior of those involved with the hamburg cell. its fun when i get to discuss it with more than just my super close friends. sometimes i get nervous ppl might think im trying to be a sympathizer/idolizer but i think i make it more than clear its not the case though xP. its undeniable that its a pretty understudied and underdiscussed facet of 9/11. U see it for other crimes and criminals but not really ever on this side of the fence. I feel its a case of dehumanization borne from islamophobia. Easier to get ppl to feel hate when you paint the perpetrators as faceless monsters. If u ever wanna dm me off anon u are super free to. Also, if you have anything to share that is interesting like a video or article or anything like that, feel free to send it! even if i have seen it or read it before, i would be eager to discuss my thoughts and feelings on it.

[blueiight]

I think most VC fans agree with Anne's take on Lestat though, they see him as faultless which the narrative validates cause no one ever challenges his version of events, like we are all just supposed to assume it was Louis who lied and nothing else, that's why they're all up in arms about what happened in the show cause "he would never do that". Hell even with the show some of them think he didn't deserve the murder and fully blame Claudia for causing the rift.

yea, its tricky cuz no one not the meta narrative or in universe actually challenges lestat when it comes to his response to louis’s interview, but id say characters in tvc absolutely challenge lestat’s character [his disposition, ways of thinking, actions& shit] & get on his ass heavy. so i feel like that implicitly should put his perspective in question the same as any other character’s [at least it did for me] but ur rite in that the vc fanbase esp the OGs do fall in line w rice’s own opinions. it certainly didnt help that shed get on ppl’s asses for writing fic, disagreeing with her, had a wide variety of contradictory, differing opinions on her own work& ppls interpretation of the text that didnt agree perfectly w/ however she felt at the time.. yk the whole interrogating the text from the wrong perspective essay on amazon reviews lol. yet certainly we are all bonded in discussing an adaptation of her literary canon which says sum yk. i think expecting a visual medium to perfectly adapt a book line by line is impossible if not borderline ignorance, but an excellent adaptation will show what made the source a good, veritable commentary on humanity. i dont think ppl should fly into deranged clear the searches campaigns when amc does use the merits of rice’s work & interrogates lestat’s crueler ways more than his cruel actions that was glossed over in the source [bc rice had diff intentions/views on it]. i think the nature of visual adaptations done decades after the source mean as viewers, we are already exposed to multiple threads from tvc (tvl, tva, allusions to the mayfair family, the talamasca, the whole impending vampire apocalypse which may or may not be a red herring this time, claudia’s diary, etc) that show this is not only louis’s interview, but a question on the fruit of memory itself. what is recollection to an immortal creature but a drop in the ocean? what does it mean to be immortal, if not living the same live over. and over. and over. again? anyways likeeee tbf at least anne rice had an excuse for why she was so crazy about lestat, he was her muse & based off the man she stayed with all her life. honestly if i made a trio based off me, my old work& our abortion and it blew up like this id delete my presence from everyone’s minds lol. but. them fans dont have an excuse cuz thats not what lestat means to them. ofc these books & lestat’s chara may have been pivotal in their coming of age but i also think as now adults, they should accept w the infamy of tvc & its adaptations mean varying ppl w different frames of reference will have different takes on this. yea, as kids we cant articulate an understanding of dv and intimidation tactics , but as adults u should be able to re evaluate fictional dynamics & have mature discourse w/o flashing out on ppl or going on clear the searches campaigns. i guess the existence of rl martyrs for these fictional vampires answer the question ppl had yesterday on antoinette too? lol

[jackienautism]

ive always sort of taken ashley's reaction to that whole situation to be like. in that moment, emily goes from ally to potential threat, and ashley freaks out and her thought process is basically.... "remove the threat". it is mike who escalates and picks up the gun like you said. my guess is, seeing a friend get shot is way different than the possibility of them getting shot? so like... if mike shoots emily, ashley a) sees that reality and b) knows that it wouldn't have happened without her. hence the guilt. but in the case of mike putting the gun down, the potential threat is not gone in any way and ashley didnt have to see her friend Actually get shot. so her reaction is probably from the uneasiness of the situation being unresolved, until she reads the notebook, realizes there was never any danger to her from emily, and THEN feels guilty. hopefully that makes sense? combo of whether or not ashley's unease and panic is actually resolved in the moment, as well as Actually watching emily die or just... having that almost happen.

i honestly have no idea what this is in reference to, but it all makes sense to me yeah! all i wanted was just to talk abt how its kind of fucked (atleast to me) how sam's relationship goes up after ashley reveals the truth 😭 i didnt mean for this to end in a discussion abt the like...bite / shooting scene as a whole. but i appreciate you coming into my inbox nonetheless!

but yeah i really don't blame ashley for freaking out the way she did, its just silly bc didnt jack sooooort of explain the whole situation back in the lodge? i could be TOTALLY misremembering so dont take my word for it. but its just.... he mentions cannibalism and this isnt necessarily cannibalism correct? but yeah. still. ashley is totally one to jump to conclusions before her mind can rly like....digest the situation properly so its sooo in character for her to automatically assume the worse. bc look at the whole basement scene w/ the ghost? her emotions get the best of her and makes her believe things that otherwise have a "rational" / believable explanation. so i totally don't blame her at all for acting the way she does

once again, i totally forget what this could potentially be in reference to fdkgndfg so apologies for that. did they rly like. show that ash was guilty that well though? like. OBV the guilt is gonna be there since her words and actions and whatever sort of led up to the moment of em getting shot, but after that ? does she rly show anything ????? not to say that she doesn't regret what she did and said if em actually dies, bc i jusrt KNOW that isnt true, i just think mike shows more remorse than ashley does which sucks. unless its more of a ...... silent guilt. which is probably is. ive only rly watched the scene and the aftermath once so i cant remember it too clearly sorry

AND I THINK I FINALLY KNOW WHAT THIS IS TALLKING ABT.... ITS ABT THE COMMENT SHE MAKES IF MIKE DOESNT SHOOT EMILY RIGHT? hopefully thats what it is fkgnfg but yeah that totally makes sense to me! or wait. is this just abt the potential guilt ashley feels in this scene? AAAAA IM SO SORRY I SAY A LOT OF THINGS AND I DONT WHAT THE HELL I JUST SAID!!!! if you wanna clarify things for me if i didnt answer this to your satisfaction id appreciate it dfgknfg but once again, i appreciate the discussion regardless!

once again though, i think that does make sense yeah! esp in regards to ashley's "i hope you did" comment following mike failing to shoot em. bc youre right, the uneasiness and .... anxiety of the situation is still there, so it makes sense why she wouldnt seem very ..... happy over mike not shooting em / not getting her to leave

youre right though it def all depends on what occurs, which is like. realistic. esp from a Human Being perspective. so it sucks that a lot of ppl blow the scene out of proportion and unnecessarily hate on ashley for her (rather realistic) reactions to what's shown to her. bc yeah ok if its put out there or if it ever enters her mind, of COURSE shes gonnna freak out ove rth e potential of em "turning into one of them." the only one who doesnt rly believe it at first is sam and thats due to how ..... levelheaded she is, even under times of stress. but ashley is the COMPLETE opposite of that. she''s like. ive seen others talk abt this before but. she's not grounded in reality, which is a very interesting and good way of putting it. so yeah of course her imagination is going to take her into dangerous places and shit and therefore dictate how she reacts to what happens. hopefully this makes any sense? i know i dont necessarily need to defend her actions here (since plenty of others have already done the same) but i just wanted to get my thoughts down sdfnksdf