#for unbiased but also biased reasons

[heisenbutch]

..

[snekdood]

idk who needs to hear this (vaush) but being a skilled debater and being Good With Words does not make you correct.

[ask-the-prose]

Writing Mental Health With Compassion

I've gotten a few questions regarding depicting characters with mental health challenges and conditions and I wanted to expand a little more on how to depict these characters with compassion for the real communities represented by these characters.

A little about this guide: this is, as always, coming from a place of love and respect for the writing community and the groups affected by this topic at large. I'm also not coming at this from the outside, I have certain mental illnesses that affect my daily life. With that, I'll say that my perspective may be biased, and as with all writing advice, you should think critically about what is being told to you and how.

So let's get started!

Research

I'm sure we're all tired of hearing the phrase "do your research," but unfortunately it is incredibly important advice. I have a guide that touches on how to do research here, if you need a place to get started.

When researching a mental health condition that we do not experience, we need to do so critically, and most importantly, compassionately. While your characters are not people, they are assigned traits that real people do have, and so your depiction of these traits can have an impact on people who face these conditions themselves.

I've found that reddit is a decent resource for finding threads of people talking about their personal experiences with certain illnesses. For example, bipolar disorder has several subreddits that have very open and candid discussions about bipolar, how it impacts lives, and small things that people who don't have bipolar don't tend to think about.

It's important to note that these spaces are not for you. They are spaces for people to talk about their experiences in a place without judgment or fear or stigma. These are not places for people to give out writing advice. Do NOT flood subreddits for people seeking support with questions that may make others feel like an object to be studied. It's not cool or fair to them for writers to enter their space and start asking questions when they're focused on getting support. Be courteous of the people around you.

Diagnosis

I have the belief that for most stories, a diagnosis for your characters is unnecessary. I have a few reasons for thinking this way.

Firstly, mental health diagnoses are important for treatment, but they're also a giant sign written across your medical documents that says, “I'm crazy!” Doctors may try to remain unbiased when they see mental health diagnoses, but anybody with a diagnosis can say that doctors rarely succeed. This translates to a lot of people never getting diagnoses, never seeking treatment, or refusing to talk about their diagnosis if they do have one.

Secondly, I've seen posts discuss “therapy speak” in fiction, and this is one of those instances where a diagnosis and extensive research may make you vulnerable to it. People don't tend to discuss their diagnoses freely and they certainly don't tend to attribute their behaviors as symptoms.

Finally, this puts you, the writer, into a position where you treat your characters less like people and story devices and more like a list of symptoms and behavioral quirks. First and foremost, your characters serve your story. If they don't feel like people then your characters may fall flat. When it comes to mental illness in characters, the people aspect is the most important part. Mentally ill people are people, not symptoms.

Those are my top three reasons for believing that most characters will never need a specific diagnosis. You will likely never need to depict the difference between bipolar and borderline because the story itself does not need that distinction or to reveal a diagnosis at all. I feel that having a diagnosis in mind for a character has more pitfalls than advantages.

How does treatment work?

Treating mental health conditions may appear in your story. There are a number of ways treatments affect daily life and understanding the levels of care and what those levels treat will help you depict the appropriate settings for your characters.

The levels of care range from minimally restrictive and minimal care to intensive in-patient care in a secure hospital setting.

Regular or semi-regular therapy is considered outpatient care. This is generally the least restrictive. Your characters may or may not also take medications, in which case they may also see a psychiatrist to prescribe those medications. There is a difference between therapists, psychiatrists, and psychologists. Therapists do not prescribe medications, psychiatrists prescribe medications after an evaluation, and psychologists will (sometimes) do both. (I'm US, so this may work differently depending where you are. You should always research the specific setting of your story.) Generally, a person with a mental illness or mental health condition will see both an outpatient therapist and an outpatient psychiatrist for their general continuing care.

Therapists will see their patients anywhere from once in a while as-needed to twice weekly. Psychiatrists will see new patients every few weeks until they report stabilizing results, and then they will move to maintenance check-ins every 90-ish days.

If the patient reports severe symptoms, or worsening symptoms, they will be moved up to more intensive care, also known as IOP (Intensive Outpatient Program). This is usually a group-therapy setting for between 3-7 hours per day between 3-5 days a week. The group-therapy is led by a Licensed Professional Counselor (LPC) or Licensed Professional Social Worker (LPSW). Groups are structured sessions with multiple patients teaching coping mechanisms and focusing on treatment adjustment. IOP’s tend to expect patients to see their own outpatient psychiatrist, but I've encountered programs that have their own in-house psychiatrists.

If the patient still worsens, or is otherwise needing more intensive care, they'll move up to PHP (Partial Hospitalization Program). This can look different per facility, but I've seen them to be more intensive in hours and content than IOP. They also usually have in-house psychiatrists doing diagnostic psychological evaluations. It's very possible for characters with “mild” symptoms to go long periods of time, even most of their lives, without having had a diagnosis. PHP’s tend to need a diagnosis so that they can address specific concerns and help educate the patient on their condition and how it may manifest.

Next step up is residential care. Residential care is a boarding hospital setting. Patients live in the hospital and focus entirely on treatment. Individual programs may differ in what's allowed in, how much contact the patients are allowed to have, and what the treatment focus is. Residential programs are often utilized for addiction recovery. Good residential programs will care about the basis for the addiction, such as underlying mental health issues that the patient may be self-medicating for. Your character may come away with a diagnosis, or they may not. Residential programs aren't exclusively for addictions though, and can be useful for severe behavioral concerns in teenagers or any number of other concerns a patient may have that manifest chronically but do not require intensive inpatient restriction.

Inpatient hospital stays are the highest level of care, and this tends to be what people are talking about when they tell jokes about “grippy socks.” These programs are inside the hospital and patients are highly restricted on what they can and cannot have, they cannot leave unless approved by the hospital staff (the hospital's psychiatrist tends to have the final say), and contact with the outside world is highly regulated. During the days, there are group therapy sessions and activities structured very carefully to maintain routine. Staff will regulate patient hygiene, food and sleep routines, and alone time.

Inpatient hospital programs are controversial among people with mental illness and mental health concerns. I find that they have use, but they are also not an easy or first step to take when dealing with a mental health condition. Patients are not allowed sharp objects, metal objects, shoelaces, cutlery, and pens or pencils. Visitors are not allowed to bring these items in, staff are not allowed these items either. This is for the safety of the patients. Typically, if someone is involuntarily admitted into the inpatient hospital program, it is due to an authority (the hospital staff) deeming the patient as a danger to themselves or others. Whether they came in of their own will (voluntary) or not does not matter in how the program operates. Everyone is treated the same. If someone is an active danger to themselves, then they may be on 24-hour suicide watch. They are not allowed to have any time alone. No, not even for the bathroom, or while sleeping, or during group sessions.

Inpatient Hospital Programs

This is a place of high curiosity for those who have never been admitted into inpatient care, so I'd like to explain a little more in detail how these programs work, why they're controversial, but how they can be useful in certain situations. I do have personal experience in this area, but as always, your mileage may vary.

When admitting, hospital staff are the final say. Not the police. The police hold some sway, but most often, if someone is brought in by the police, they are likely to be admitted. They are only involuntarily admitted when the situation demands: the staff have determined the person to be an imminent danger to themselves or others. This is obviously subjective, and can easily be abused. A good program with decent staff will do everything they can to convince the patient to admit voluntarily if they feel it is necessary, but ultimately if the patient declines and the staff don't feel they can make the clinical argument that admittance is necessary, the patient is free to leave. It should be noted that doctors and clinicians have to worry about possibly losing their licenses to practice. They don't want to fuck around with involuntary admittance if they don't have to, and they don't want potentially dangerous people to walk away.

Once admitted, the patient will have to remove their clothing and put on a set of hospital scrubs. These are mostly made of paper, and most often do not have pockets, but I have seen sets that do have pockets (very handy, tbh). They are not allowed to take anything into the hospital wing except disability-required devices such as glasses, hearing aids, mobility aids, etc. Most programs will require removing piercings, but not all of them, in my experience.

The nurses will also do a physical examination, where they will make note of any open wounds, major scars, tattoos, and other skin abrasions that may be relevant.

The patient will then be led to their bed, where they will receive any approved clothing items from outside, a copy of their patient rights, and a copy of the floor code of conduct and rules, a schedule, and any other administrative information necessary for the program to run efficiently and legally.

Group sessions include group-therapy, activities, coping skills, anger management, anxiety management, and for some reason, karaoke. There is a lot of coloring involved, but only with crayons. A good program will focus heavily on skills and therapeutic activities. Bad programs will phone it in and focus on karaoke and activities. Most hospitals will have a chaplain, and some will include a religious group session. I've never attended these, so I can't speak for them.

Unspoken rules are the hidden pieces of the inpatient programs that patients tend to find out during their first visit. There is no leaving the program until the doctor agrees to it. The doctor will only agree to it if they deem you ready to leave, and you are only ready to leave if you have been compliant to treatment and have seen positive results in the most dangerous symptoms (homicidal or suicidal ideations). Noncompliance can look like: refusing your prescribed medications (which you have the right to do at any time for any reason. That does not mean that there won't be consequences. This is a particularly controversial point.), refusing to attend groups (chapel is not included in this point, but that doesn't mean it's actually discounted. Another controversial point.), violent or disruptive outbursts such as yelling or throwing things, and refusing to sleep or eat at the approved and appointed times. All of this may sound like the hospital is restricting your rights beyond reason, but I've seen the use, and I've seen the abuse. Medications are sometimes necessary, and often patients seriously prefer having medication. Groups are important to a person's treatment, and refusing to go can be a sign of noncompliance or worsening symptoms. If someone is too depressed or anxious to go to group, then they're probably not ready to leave the hospital where the structure is gone and they must self-regulate their treatment. Violent or disruptive outbursts tend to be a sign of worsening symptoms in general, but even the best of us lose our tempers from time to time when put into a highly stressful situation like an inpatient hospital stay. The hospital is supposed to be a place of healing, for many it is. But for many more, it is a place of systematic abuse and restriction.

Discharge processes can be long and arduous and INCREDIBLY stressful for the patient. Oftentimes, they won't know their discharge date until the day of, or perhaps the day before. Though the date can change at any time. The discharge process requires the supervising psychiatrist to meet with the treatment team and then the patient to determine if the patient had progressed enough to be safely discharged. Discharge also requires a set outpatient plan in place, such as a therapy appointment within a week, a psychiatrist visit, or admittance into a lower level of care. This is where social workers are involved. Patients are not allowed access to cell phones or the internet. They cannot make their own appointments with their outpatient care providers without a phone number and phone access. Some floors will have phone access for this reason, others will insist the social worker arrange appointments and discharge plans. Social workers are often incredibly overworked, with several patients on their caseload.

The patient cannot be discharged until the social worker has coordinated the discharge plan to the doctor's approval. Most often, unfortunately, the patient rarely receives regular communication regarding the progress of their discharge. I've been discharged with as much as a day's notice to two hours notice.

Part 2 Coming Soon

This guide got longer than expected! Out of respect for my followers dashboard, I will be cutting it here and adding a Part 2 later on.

If you find that there are more specific questions you'd like answered, or topics you'd like covered, send an ask or reply to this post with what you'd like to see in Part 2.

– Indy

[bonefall]

Would a cleric be allowed to help their sibling conceive a litter? Like a lesbian couple wants a litter, one had a brother who can help her mate get pregnant, but he's the cleric, would him helping be viewed as a violation of his vow? Would it depend on how Thistle leaning the clan is? Assuming that the biological sire was revealed for whatever reason.

This is one of those areas that's probably illegal, but realistically speaking, what authority is going to do anything about this? The Cleric is the most dangerous part about invoking Queen's Rights, because if they're made aware of it, the CLERIC is the one who determines if that was a voiding of QR or not.

...But, if somehow it was revealed by a 4th party, yes it is generally seen as a violation of the vow. Though it will also massively depend on the political leanings of the Clan at the time, like you guessed. It's also subject to some biological unfairness; it would be treated a lot more harshly if the Cleric was gestating kittens, rather than siring them.

Interestingly enough though? I think in this situation, particularly religious Traditionalist cats are actually going to argue the hardest that it does not violate the Cleric's Vow.

See, Fire Alone cats are "extreme" politically because they usually think the systems are bad. Thistle Law cats are extreme in the other direction because they think the systems aren't harsh enough. If you were speaking to a Fire Alone supporter about this as a thought experiment, they might say something like;

"Yes, it does violate the Cleric's Vow, because that Vow is supposed to be about being unbiased against your own family. You must value something about your blood if it matters enough to lend that kind of help. But this law is stupid."

Meanwhile a Thistle Law supporter, IF they were making a rational argument, would say something more like,

"Yes it violates the Cleric's Vow, and this is exactly why the Queen's Rights should be abolished. How can we trust a Cleric to relay StarClan's messages without bias when they can hide a secret like this? They will prioritize their own kittens over the rest of the Clan."

The argument from the hypothetical religious Traditionalist, for completion's sake, might look like this;

"It is StarClan's prerogative to judge them for this, if it goes unrevealed. If a Cleric quietly provided fertility services for a yearning parent or mateship, they likely checked with StarClan in the first place."

But there's so many ways to have an opinion on the Queen's Rights that it might be better to check in with individual cats! Even within a political "leaning," cats have their own values, biases, and beliefs to take into account.

As a final note though, none of this applies to SkyClan. SkyClan just straightup does not care about the Cleric's Vow, they split off before its legal ratification during the beginning of the Ripple Era and the social taboo that preceded it died during their exile. This is Forest Four culture.

[qqueenofhades]

I just read an article on The Conversation that states: "Today, most data has Trump narrowly beating Biden in the national popular vote, albeit within the statistical margin of error." (Source for that data: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/)

In your opinion, is that true? How can that be possible after everything Trump has done? After the Insurrection? I'm terrified 😕

(For reference, the original article can be found at https://theconversation.com/five-reasons-why-trumps-republican-opponents-were-never-going-to-beat-him-223288?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%202888329325&utm_content=The%20Weekend%20Conversation%20-%202888329325+CID_fceedfd21410eb8a7b6fd6e1124d9d54&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=five%20reasons)

Short answer: no, I don't think it's true.

Long answer: no, I really don't think it's true. Here's why.

Broader context. A Republican has won the popular presidential vote only twice in the 21st century, and in the first of those occasions -- 2000 -- I use "won" very advisedly. We all know, or at least we should, about all the fuckery that went down in Florida with Bush vs. Gore and SCOTUS stepping in to stop the recount (which almost surely would have gone to Gore) and handing Florida, and thus the presidency, to George Dubya Bush by a mere 537 votes. Dubya then did win re-election and the popular vote/EC in 2004, in the throes of patriotic war fervor and the GOP's Swiftboating of John Kerry (who was a pretty terrible candidate to start with). Other than that? None. Zip. Nada. None. Even in 2016 when Trump squeaked out a win (and thus the presidency) in the Electoral College, he lost nationwide to HRC by over 3 million votes. He lost to Biden by 7 million votes nationwide last time. Also, the reason the GOP loves the antidemocratic Electoral College is that it always works in their favor, and because red states with relatively scant population are given the same power in the Senate. That's why California, with 40+ million people, gets two (Democratic) senators, and Wyoming, with 400,000 people, gets two (Republican) senators. There is just no way that red states can get the actual raw numbers to win the popular vote against heavily blue urban population centers. The only one that comes close is Texas, and while it's something of a white whale for Democrats who think fondly that it'll surely turn blue this election cycle (and then it doesn't), it's not giving all its votes popular-vote-wise to Republicans. So yeah. The numbers aren't there. Biden is about 99% certain to win the popular vote, but because this is America, the question is whether the EC will follow.

(Although, I gotta say. In the deeply unlikely event that Biden loses the popular vote but wins the Electoral College -- i.e. the exact same thing Trump did in 2016 -- the right wing would lose their fucking minds and it would be incredibly hilarious. Also, we might finally get some red states willing to sign up to the National Popular Vote Compact, which is just a few ratifications away from going into effect. As noted, the Republicans will cling onto the Electoral College with their last dying breath because it's the only thing that makes them competitive in nationwide elections. If it fucked Trump, they might finally listen to ideas about changing it.)

The media are incredibly biased, and so is Nate Silver. Silver first rose to prominence as an independent geeky Data Guy elections whiz-kid, and was relatively good at being unbiased. That is not the case anymore. He's now affiliated with the New York Times and has started echoing the smugly anti-Biden framework of both that paper and the mainstream media in general. I'm not necessarily saying his data is total bunk, but he's extremely eager to frame, narrate, and explain it in ways that artificially disadvantage Biden (in the same way the NYT itself is all in on "BUT HIS AGEEEEE," just as they were with "BUT HER EEEEEEMAILS" in 2016) And that's a problem, because:

The polls are shit. Like, really, really shit. Didn't we just go through this in 2022, where everyone howled about how All The Data pointed to a Red Wave and then were /shocked pikachu face when this was nothing more than a Red Dribble of Piss (and frankly, the best midterm election result for the ruling party since like, the 1930s?) We've also had major, real-time proof that the polls are showing a consistent pro-Trump bias of 10 or more points, which is a huge error and keeps getting corrected whenever people actually vote, but the media will never admit that, because TRUMP IS WINNING WE ARE ALL DOOMZED!! We heard about how Biden might lose New Hampshire because he wasn't even on the ballot and that would be a critical embarrassment for him. He cruised easily with 68% (all write-in votes and FAR more than any other Democratic "candidate.") Meanwhile, Trump won New Hampshire by about 15% under what the polls had predicted for him (after doing the same and barely squeaking over 50% in Iowa, one of the whitest, most rural, most Trump-loving states in the nation). The number ballparked for Biden in the NV Democratic primary was something like 75%; he got over 90% (and twice as many votes as any candidate in the Republican Primary/Caucus/Whatever That Mess Was). The number for what he was supposed to get in the SC primary was in the high 60% (driven by the media's other favorite "Black voters are abandoning Biden" canard); he absolutely crushed it at 97% statewide. When Biden is winning by whopping margins and Trump is underperforming badly, in both cases by gaps of ten percent or more, it means the polls are simply not showing us an accurate state of the race. This could be because of media bias, bad data, selective polling, inability to actually connect with voters (especially young voters, who are about as likely to eat a live scorpion as to pick up an unsolicited phone call from an unknown number). This also shows up in:

Special elections. We've heard tons of Very Smart Punditry (derogatory) about how Democrats kicking ass in pretty much every competitive election since Roe was overturned in 2022 totally means nothing for the general election. (Of course, if the situation was reversed and Republicans were cleaning up at the same rate, we would be hearing nothing except how we're all destined for Eternal Trumpocracy... wait. no... we're still only hearing this. Weird.) In the last special election in early February, Democrat Tom Suozzi won back his old U.S House seat (NY-03) by over eight points, after polls had given him at most a two- or three-point edge. (Funnily, once again a Democrat did far better than the media is determined to insist, so Politico hilariously called a thumping eight-point win "edging it out.") This represents almost a 16-point blue swing from even just 2022, when The Congressman Possibly Known as George Santos won it by 7 points. On that same night, a Democratic candidate in a Trump +26 district in deep, deep red Oklahoma only lost by 5 points, marking another massive pro-blue swing. This has been the case in every special election since Roe went down. Apparently blah blah This Won't Translate to the General Election, because the media is very smart. Even when Democrats (historically hard to motivate and muster in off-year election cycles, or you know in general) are turning up in elections that don't involve Trump to punish terrible Trumpist policies, we're supposed to think they won't be motivated to actually vote against the guy himself? And not just them, because:

Trump is a terrible candidate. Which we know, and have always known, but now it's really true. We've had up to half of Haley voters stating they will vote for Biden over Trump if that is the November matchup (which it will be). Haley, amusingly, actually outraised Trump in January, because it turns out that the Trump Crime Family's open promise to send every single donor or RNC dollar to pay El Trumpo's legal fees hasn't been a terribly effective message. We had Republicans in NY-03 telling CNN that they voted for the Democrat Suozzi because they're so fed up with the GOP clown show in the House and don't think Republicans can govern (which uh. Yeah. Welcome to reality, we all knew that ages ago too). We have had up to a third of Republican voters saying they won't vote for Trump if he's convicted of a felony before the election (and technically he already has been, but we're still hoping for the January 6 trial to go ahead). Now, yes, Republicans are a notoriously cliquey bunch and might change their minds, but for all the endless bullshit BIDEN SHOULD STEP DOWN BECAUSE DEMOCRATS ARE DISUNITED narrative the media has been pushing like their kidnapped grandmothers' lives depend on it, Democrats aren't actually disunited at all. Instead, Trump is in chaos, the GOP is in chaos, sizeable chunks of Republican voters are ready to vote for someone else and in some cases have already done so, and yet, do we hear a peep about how Trump should step down? Nah. In related news, did you hear that Biden is old?!?! Why isn't anyone writing about this?!?!

Now, I want to make it clear: Trump's chances of winning are not zero, and they are not inconsiderable. We need to face that fact and deal with it accordingly. Large chunks of the country are still willing to vote for white Christian nationalist fascism. Trump still has plenty of diehard cultists and the entire establishment Republican party in his pocket, and it's been made very clear that Putin is bringing the full force of his malevolent Russian fascist machine to bear on this election as well. Case in point: we spent four years hearing about HUNTER BIDEN HUNTER BIDEN SECRET CORRUPTION GIANT SECRET BUSINESS SCANDAL, and it turns out that the GOP's "star informant" has been actively working with Russian spies the whole time and fed them complete bullshit disinformation, which they were eager to repeat so long as it might hurt Joe Biden. (And it would hurt Ukraine, so, twofer! I cannot emphasize enough how much it was all a deliberate collaboration by some of the worst people on earth.)

In 2016, people naively assumed that Trump could never win, and so they were especially willing to throw away, spoil, or otherwise not exercise their vote, or throw purity hissy fits over HRC (likewise fed at the toxic teat of Russian disinformation). That was exactly what allowed Trump to squeak out a win in the EC and put us in the mess we are currently in. If people act in the same way in 2024 that they did in 2016, Trump's chances of winning are drastically increased. So once again, as I keep saying, it's up to us. If we all vote blue, and we get our networks to vote blue, Biden is very likely to win. If we don't, he won't, and Trump will win. It's that simple. We had better decide what we're doing. The end.

[t1oui]

reasons why i hc euphemia potter as a slytherin

honestly i'm not sure where this hc started for me (or in general) so i won't say anything about that lol, i honestly didn't think about euphemia or monty's houses for a while but once i did effie was just a slytherin. she just is. anyways onto why i think that

a lot of people hc james as a really kind loving person and often this is b/c of his parents, who are also really kind and loving

i think it would be really interesting if one of these kind, loving parents was a slytherin

i think this would also make sense not only with jegulus but also just with james befriending sirius.

if they become friends on the train, all james would know about sirius house-wise would be that all sirius's relatives were in slytherin. if james's own mother was in slytherin, he would probably befriend sirius a lot more easily than if he was super biased against slytherins.

similarly, i think james would get closer with reg much more easily if he wasn't so biased against slytherins like he (and pretty much everyone else) is canonically

a lot of people in the marauders fandom also don't like james being a bully. i think the best way to get rid of him being a bully (for the most part) and have the removal of this plotline make sense is to remove his bias towards slytherins by making effie a slytherin.

(he can still hate snape and be a dick to him sometimes, but all of this be because snape is a creep or if he hurts lily rather than because of his house. ik this isn't all of why he bullied snape, but still.)

if james is supposed to be such a loving, unbiased character, he should have someone who's taught him to be loving and unbiased!

and another jegulus point: if james grew up watching his parents, a gryffindor and a slytherin, being in love, wouldn't that make him way more likely to try and recreate their love story with regulus, a slytherin?

effie and monty were successful people, and sure monty's great, but would he have gotten there without the encouragement of an ambitious slytherin?

effie and regulus can bond over being slytherins surrounded by gryffindors (who they love, of course)

effie can also teach sirius, both herself and through james, to lose his bias against slytherins, which can later help him and regulus reconnect

ik this was a lot about james and not specifically effie, but still. effie being a slytherin lives in my brain rent free

[reddbuster]

I have a lot of thoughts about the ways I see the characters and themes of ace attorney discussed within the fanbase so I wanted to try to articulate some things that I notice in the ways the fandom analyzes and tries to apply literary criticism to these games.

Remember that a text can be viewed from multiple literary lenses. The most important to understand as a basis for everything if you're going to analyze a text is formalism, which is based strictly on what is directly shown IN the text. This means the more obvious plot, themes, settings, characters etc. For example, in terms of AA, this means the setting is either Japan or America (I love Japanifornia as much as the next guy and you could argue it's pseudo-canon, but it's not established in either version of the original text itself so it doesn't really work from the view of a formalist). And the theme of Ace Attorney, from the view of a formalist, would be something like "justice is in the pursuit of truth" and maybe a secondary, underlying theme of revenge. So formalism isn't analyzing the text through knowledge of outside factors like cultural elements, audience response, or even the creator(s) of the text itself. Formalism isn't really psychoanalyzing the characters beyond what's necessary to discuss the larger themes of the text. Formalism on its own is pretty much bound to what is directly referenced within the piece of media.

Now, formalism has it's uses, but it also has its limits. It makes an attempt to be objective and unbiased and can give us a good basis from which to make further inquiry, but ultimately, even if it was possible to be completely unbiased (it isn't) art isn't MEANT to be viewed in a vacuum. Often, the creator intends for you to keep these outside facts or cultural biases in mind when viewing media. But even aside from whatever the original intent behind it was, it's also very valid and even important & necessary in many cases to break away from the restraints of the original tone of the narrative and analyze a text from a different point of view.

What I notice a lot in fandom but especially around AA for some reason is that a lot of people will only consider a formalist reading of the text and will be completely unwilling to even consider let alone criticize anything from outside of that context. OR, quite often what people in fandom will do is they'll be willing to apply other literary lenses like psychoanalysis or even queer theory but ONLY to the characters THEY personally deem worthy (hint hint its usually men) and then get upset when people apply this theory to the characters they don't want to think about (usually mostly women)

Anyway the point of this post is there are multiple valid and legitimate readings of a text and female characters are more than just "girlboss" and "the only braincell" ok thank you bye

[olenvasynyt]

Why I don't like Vassien

People always say that Lucien blushing when he mentions Vassa is proof that he is in love with her.  He is also relaxed around her, laughs with her and listens to her with a smile on his face.

Chapter 80 of ACOWAR: Vassa still remained inside, chatting with Lucien animatedly…Lucien, surprisingly, was chuckling, his shoulders loose and his head angled while he listened.

Chapter 18 of ACOFAS: “I think he'd have been crowned king by now if it weren't for Vassa." A twitch of his lips, a spark in that russet eye.

The second quote can immediately be dismissed because the spark is not hinting at love or a mating bond like some people imply, it’s used to describe a character knowing something. Because a spark is seen in Amarantha’s eye when Rhys kisses Feyre and Rhys later explains that that is when Amarantha knew he liked Feyre.  

Chapter 42 of ACOTAR: Rhys casually released me with a flick of his tongue over my bottom lip as a crowd of High Fae appeared behind Amarantha…but something sparked in the queen’s eyes as she looked at Rhysand.  Amarantha’s whore, they’d called him.

Chapter 54 of ACOMAF: Amarantha saw that jealousy.  She saw me kissing you to hide the evidence, but she saw why.  For the first time, she saw why.  So that night after I left you, I had to…service her.

In SJMs works, a spark in a person’s eyes is a spark of recognition, not a spark of love, imo.

Lucien does like Vassa.  As a friend.  And as a leader he wants to follow.  Because with the blushing: he was blushing in ACOFAS because he was talking about another female around Elain and he didn't want her to think he has feelings for someone else.  

Feyre acknowledges how loyal he is to his mate:

Chapter 5 of ACOWAR: I asked Lucien to escort me, and he’d been more than happy to do so, given his own status as a mated male made him uninterested in any sort of female company these days.

And Lucien asks Feyre not to tell Elain about him completing the Rite with Ianthe. 

Chapter 3 of ACOWAR: “I went in his stead, and I did my duty to the court.  I went of my own free will.  And we completed the Rite.” “Please don’t tell Elain,” he said.  “When we—when we find her again,” he amended.

The dude was fucking SAed and his first thought is Elain.

Chapter 9 of ACOWAR: “I was obligated to preform the Rite,” Lucien snapped.  “That night wasn’t the product of desire, believe me.” “We had fun, you and I.” “I’m a mated male now.”

 He is "a mated male now". He is oyal to his mate, and his mate only.  

Lucien is loyal and the idea that he and Vassa are / could be a thing is dismissing that, and it also dismisses who Vassa is.  Because Lucien is not only loyal to his mate, but also to people he believes are good rulers.  

Mor and Cassian talk about  Lucien having some biases because he hangs out in the Human Lands in the band of exiles.

Chapter 4 of ACOSF: “Lucien can’t entirely be trusted anymore…Even with Elain, he’s become close with Jurian and Vassa.  He’s voluntarily living with them these days, and not just as an emissary.  As their friend.” He’s spent months helping them sort out the politics of who rules Prythian’s slice of the human lands,” Cassian said slowly, “So Lucien can’t be unbiased in reporting to us on Vassa.”

I think Lucien talks highly of Vassa, not only because he’s her friend, but because he admires her as a ruler.  If we are going to apply that logic of a person thinking highly of someone as proof they are attracted to them, then Cassian is also attracted to Rhys because he thinks and talks about him highly and he is also very biased.

And Vassa is a leader / co-member of the Band of Exiles so they are friends.  Him laughing with her and enjoying her company was something we see between him and Feyre in ACOTAR.

"But Lucien laughs so that means he loves her!" No, it means he finally has true friends, people he relates to and enjoys the company of.

Another reason why I do not like the idea of Vassien being a thing is people say that Vassien will be Lucien's HEA and he deserves to be with someone who loves him, but the huge thing here is: Vassa is human, he is Fae.  She will die centuries before him, and Lucien will be back to living alone, knowing that his mate is still out there.  How is that a happy ending?

And the solution people make is Vassa will be turned into Fae, but this is taking away some key points of Vassa's character.  

Chapter 18 of ACOFAS: I had not forgotten her plea to me that night after the last battle with Hybern.  To break the curse that kept her human by night, firebird by day.  A once-proud queen—still proud, yes, but desperate to reclaim her freedom.  Her human body.  Her kingdom.

Those last two points: human body and kingdom.

Her becoming Fae would ruin her being a human queen, especially when we think about the fact that Lucien being the heir to the Day Court will be a big part of his character.  If Vassa is turned into a Fae, would she go be with them and abandon her role as queen of the human lands?  Or would she and Lucien be separated, and she would be Fae queen of the human lands and Lucien High Lord of the Day Court?  

Vassien has absolutely no appeal for me.  And if I'm being honest, it's a ship because people want Lucien out of the way and this is the happiest story they can come up with for him, despite it going against his character, Vassa's character, and SJM's writing.

[ghostflowerhotpotch]

Let's Talk Peter B

@iwasbored777 (Since you ask to be tagged)

Okay! I was on the fence about writing this post, but after doing this response and some encouragement, I decided that fuck it, let’s do this.

While I had seen multiple things about Gwen being a bad friend, a bad person, and other things I don’t want to say because I will start ranting- Peter B for the most part, has come out scotch free.

Don’t get me wrong, I had seen some people address his issues, but it has been a few posts in a sea of him with Mayday and people shipping with Miguel. Which hey, is okay with me, but when you see you a character you love be given the short end of the stick despite the circumstances yet another character that has much less to lose has their mistakes largely been ignored and basically be woobify.

Is not just Gwen, I had also seen people take beef with Jess as a mentor yet somehow leave Peter out of that conversation. Don’t get me wrong Jess is far from perfect (which is something I discussed before,) but again, Peter is far from perfect too.

Does this has to do with Peter being a beloved main character in the first movie? Yes. Does it also has to do with misogynoir and misogyny? Oh I don’t doubt it.

I don’t hate Peter B, far from it, I think he is a great adaptation of our spidey, and while I am not the biggest spiderman fan out there, I did grew up with Peter Parker in movies and cartoons so I do have love for this characters as well as his incarnation in Sony movies.

I will do my best to remain as unbiased and neutral as possible, but not gonna lie this entire thing is annoying me enough that I will say when I am aware of my own biases, as I always try to do.

But if you think liking a character stops me from calling them on their bullshit you are wrong.

I know this post is more about how Peter is with Miles and his role as a mentor, but I decided to address some other things I had seen people talk about because there is a reason I choose "Let's talk Peter B Parker" as a title.

Believe it or not, I am fine with this. Seriously.

Peter wasn’t here when Miles arrived, and considering they did a small tour and got an empanada on the way, I think wouldn’t be odd to say he wasn’t around when Miles arrived. My theory is that he was taking care of his own stuff, and once he knew that Miles was around, went to get Mayday to present her to Miles.

I think that’s pretty normal all things consider, he loves Miles and wouldn’t had fixed things with MJ and had his daughter without her, of course he would want the two of to met.

The enthusiasm is all things consider pretty sweet, and while I don’t approve of some things he does (like giving her a web shooter while being just a few months old?) Is one of those things that are part of superhero writing that has the children technically doing things that they shouldn’t be doing for their age, so I just let it slide because if I get hung up every time I see something like this, it would not end.

I’m the only one who is actually mad about this comment?

Yes, is a joke, I get that, and Peter is trying to take as much as steam off Miles by trying to frame him on the light that he messes up, but is just who he is.

It doesn’t make me any less annoyed.

For starters, I feel like I am rereading Percy Jackson again (No I will not explain that reference.) Because despite everyone more or less knowing what’s going on (Hobie said before he didn’t know what Miguel was hiding so how much he knows is unsure,) no one has attempted to explain the situation to Miles.

This is a trope I had seen enough (including WAY too many times in the books I mentioned,) and I really resent when characters act as if the protagonist or someone else is stupid just because they are unaware of something. ESPECIALLY if the characters saying so are aware they don’t know.

They are also letting him believe is a good thing he is in HQ, but that is actually not Peter’s fault. I am mad with Gwen on this one, but also Jessica, and Hobie well, he should have known enough to be able to tell him seeing Miguel is not good news. At least Hobie tries to warn him as subtly as possible.

Sure, Peter just got here, but the fact that he is already accusing Miles of just messing up with the universe carelessly is not something that doesn’t sit well with me. Either he knows that Miles doesn’t know and is making an insulting comment, or thinks Miles is aware of the situation and just acted recklessly. The second one is the best scenario, but I feel Peter is presuming way too much for someone that just came around and should have known better than believe Miles knew all of these details while Miguel basically has a giant banner of “Not Earth-1610 Anomalies allowed.”

Also, sidetrack but what exactly does Miles do that isn’t just your typical spidey behaviour? Yes he doesn’t always have full-formed plans before acting but you can say that about EVERYONE in the room at that moment.

“He wasn’t thinking, is not like he works!” My ass.

Want my two cents about this moment? Peter has zero business telling this to Miles.

When Miles asks Gwen about her dad, she is crestfallen, she doesn’t like to believe this more than he does; but unlike anyone else in this room, Gwen cannot return to her home dimension. The best case scenario is if she isn’t there, her dad may not die; but that’s the best case scenario, and that involves again, not stepping again in her home dimension ever again. Her best bet is never to see her home, or anyone she knows including her dad, because not only she may end up in prison, her presence may lead to the death of her dad.

And who knows, it may happen regardless; he may be dead already because he is a police officer and she couldn’t be there to give a hand or save him (As she said she did in Into the Spider-verse, by the way.)

Yet at least, she is coming to this with the idea that her life is going to have to SUCK for a few years, things happening or not happening depending on where she is but none of this is pretty or fair.

Peter? As far as we know, he is done.

Considering the age range of the Spidey-characters, chances are Peter already lived the canon events he needed to live, at best they don’t know what’s next, which means he can operate as he feels is the best course of action.

Miles asked him if he would have let his uncle die, but Peter lost his uncle over twenty years ago, he had enough time to grieve, to accept the outcome, and find happiness after it. And to top it all off, HE DIDN’T HAVE THAT MORAL DILEMMA PLACED IN FRONT OF HIM BEFORE IT HAPPENED.

I find Peter’s words hollow because unlike Miles, he was never asked to not intervene in a canon event, he hasn’t needed to deal with someone from his universe dying while he let it play out.

I am not saying he didn't suffer, he did, and a lot; yet he was unaware that this would happen, is way different having someone tell you “Oh those tragedies you lived? It’s the destiny that keeps everything together, it’s rough but it is what it is,” than someone telling you “Oh you are going to live a bunch of different personal tragedies, and you need to suffer with the burden of this knowledge because is this or everyone in every universe dies.”

(How much do you guys bet someone will use this as an example of the trolley problem in a philosophy class.)

Since we are going in kind of a chronological order, let’s go to something a tad lighter both because it deserves mention, and so I can cool down before I start ranting in Spanish (which is not going to be saying pretty things about B precisely.)

Yes, Peter recognizes this is bad parenting, which is good because it certainly isn’t good; I also have trouble believing he didn’t know AT LEAST ONE spider that could stay behind and watch Mayday while he went to the chase.

However, I do think the chase was never going to be dangerous, nor Peter thought it would be. He has been Spider-man for a quarter of a century, he has been swinging around for so long is second nature to him, I bet he has taken Mayday on “strolls” which is him swinging around.

There is also another screenshot that really encapsulates that Peter didn’t realize how dire the situation is, but that’s for later.

There is also the possibility that he asked Miguel to do this as a way to distract him, but considering this is the only time he does this and is going around him being obsessed with Mayday (Which I think is a bit too much, but I blame more the writers than Peter for that.) I am inclined to believe this is not the case.

(Sigh) I promise to try to be neutral, so I need to bring this up.

What they were talking about earlier can be lumped to a bit later on, and I decided to bring this instead of talking about it when Miles and Peter saw each other (which is I didn’t bring because what I could say would be the same as this.) Because this is something really beautiful that I didn’t want to leave out.

I think that’s what angers me the most about this, because in a vacuum? I love this.

I am a sucker for found family tropes, I love the idea that Miles would grow to see people like Peter B, Noir, and so forth as a family. I love how Peter says how much Miles means to him and meeting him changed his life for the better.

Peter B loves Miles, he said that in the last movie; I can’t just erase that.

However, is exactly because of this scene, that what happens next makes me so sad.

Oh, Miles.

I didn’t mention it in the previous image nor did I took detailed screenshots for the sake of my sanity and to not turn this way too long. (Though I may do it in another moment- Ok I need to focus.)

Miles was obviously affected by what Peter said to him, it obviously means a lot because Miles also loves Peter; of all the spiders in the gang he was the one who he spent the most time initially; he wouldn’t be the Spider-man he is today without him.

And it breaks my heart how Miles says this.

Look at the angle, at his posture; Miles can’t even turn to say this to Peter’s face because it hurts so much. He looks so small in that shot, trying to emphasize how he is just a teen, how he really loves them so much, and it breaks his heart to know that they could visit him, and they didn’t.

Let’s remember what he was doing at the beginning of the movie; he was trying to study physics. He is great at it, and he was since the first movie, however, this is clearly not his passion; he loves his art and even if he didn’t know what he wanted to do yet in the first movie, you can see how much he loves what he does.

And he was willing to leave all of that aside, just to see Gwen, Peter and the others again; because as far as he knew there wasn’t any other way. Remember, he was aiming at Princeton; he would need to bleed and work hard to get there, and even after, being in this field it was not going to be a walk in the park; getting to make the dimensional travel work (At least without seeing Miguel’s technology like Hobie seemed to do;) was also going to be hard.

Miles wanted to do all of that for them, and them? They didn’t.

Now; I don’t blame Gwen in this scenario.

I had said this much in this post before, and a bunch of others too. Gwen was stuck with the Spider Society; and yet she risked losing everything, from homelessness to prison, to spend an afternoon with Miles the second she had an excuse.

What is Peter’s excuse?

He couldn't, he couldn't.

That's what he had to say for himself.

Here is the thing: I am not sure I buy it.

Gwen makes sense to me, Miguel didn't want Gwen to be involved since the beginning and obviously doesn't trust her when is about Miles; Gwen wasn't exactly wrong to fear she would get kicked out if she acted out of line.

Peter? I have my doubts.

We don't know Miguel's and Peter B's relationship (I know some shippers have some ideas, not my cup of tea but I have no problem if people like it.) However, we know that Peter B was there when Miguel's dimension collapsed, later in the movie we saw what Miguel did to Gwen for what happened (believe me, we will get there.)

Even if that was the case; Peter’s situation is much less dire than Gwen’s. Even if Peter could be kicked out of the organization for disobeying Miguel; he would still have his wife, his house, his daughter. He would had been in the same spot he was at the end of the first movie, if not better because now he would had a chance to know both him and Miles would be okay.

I am getting ahead of the post here, but I honestly don’t know how much of Canon BS Peter believes; he clearly doesn’t think Miles is bad for being an anomaly, nor his daughter (technically because Peter wasn’t supposed to meet Miles, he wouldn’t have his daughter. Is certainly a NO in the comics.) Miguel is convinced that Miles’ presence is enough to create more holes in the multiverse; Gwen obviously doesn’t share that view. Peter? I don’t know if he thinks there is actually something to lose for visiting him.

One way or another, he doesn’t really give me a reason here; who knows, maybe when Beyond comes there would be enough information for me to admit Peter did the right thing. For now? No.

Here, we have Miles telling Peter he wanted to meet them so badly, and even if Peter doesn't have a clue of how literal Miles is; you can hear it in his voice, in his posture, how he still cannot look at Peter because to that point it hurts.

And what's Peter's response to this?

(Deep breath,) Boy at moments like this I really wish I didn't think so hard about media.

It hurts me, and it angers me, because it is a pretty sweet moment, but when you think hard about it, it just becomes messy.

I could make an entire discussion about how Peter literally ignored Miles’ feelings about not being there, about how he and others (Gwen not really, the others eehhh hard to say;) didn’t try too reach him, which obviously makes him feel like they don’t care about him as he does. And Peter decide to ignored it.

But! I will try to give him the benefit that this is a tense situation, there is hundreds of spiders looking for them, and there only have so much time. I am going to believe, Peter couldn’t address that at the moment because they had other issues.

Yet even if we omit that point, do you guys realize this is literally no different that his entire spiel about Uncle Ben, right?

Because that’s what he is trying to say, “Spider-man has to suffer, but hey sometimes good things can happen anyways.” This entire conversation is about trying to make Miles follow him, do whatever Miguel is trying to do to avoid having Miles go to his dimension (or at least stop him from saving his dad,) and basically let her dad die.

Look, there is nuance to this situation; Peter isn’t saying this to manipulate Miles, he believes this. He truly believes bad things had to happen to keep the universe from falling apart; I am convinced Miguel’s second universe didn’t fall for his Canon theory, yet Peter B was there, I can’t blame the guy for drinking the kool-aid a bit more than the others.

This doesn’t change the fact that this scene has Peter ignoring Miles’ pain, and try to tell him he needs to suffer some more because “is just how the universe works!”

(Sidenote but anyone can’t help to see this and think of a random Christian telling someone after they lived a personal tragedy “Is just G-d’s plan”? Because I saw that a lot.)

Now, I guess the next question someone may be wondering is, do I believe Peter was being honest with Miles here?

...I don’t know, I really, don’t know.

I had seen this scene multiple times, and I lost count how many times when I was in the theatre, seeing this scene, and thinking “he knew” just for the next moment thinking “he didn’t know.”

If you want my two cents, the part that keeps tripping me over is how he looks at his watch, then Miles, then the watch, it makes me wonder if he is screaming that he doesn’t have his location to Miguel, or to Miles.

I don’t want to believe Peter purposefully drive Miles away so he could get trapped, when he says to Miles “I didn’t know, I promise;” I want to believe him.

The thing is, the outcome he hoped wasn’t that much different, now was it?

He wanted it to be Miles decision, yet again, he was trying to get Miles to not just abandon his morals (as well as the ones every Spider-person should have,) but also try to tell him he needs to suffer for the good of the world.

(I am having SO many flashbacks to things I read about cults, I need to continue working on that post about the Spider Society ffs.)

This is a small detail, but I gotta say; Peter do you really have nothing on your defense?

Look, feel free to believe I am playing favourites, but unlike many people who had a problem with Gwen, I don't blame her for hiding this.

No, I don't think what she did was right. Let’s not get things twisted. I definitely think Gwen shouldn’t had hide this stuff, yet she in general NEVER, had a good idea of how much to say and how much to keep with anyone she talks to; from her dad to Jess to Miles. Once again this is an aspect I can’t get mad at her because she is sixteen and traumatized with a minimal support network and irresponsible guardians.

Now Peter, what’s YOUR excuse?

Not just for not telling something to Miles earlier, I could believe he would have done it if the situation has calmed down. No, Miles asked them about it, and even a bit later says “That’s why you guys never came to see me;” (Which I think is kind of BS but let’s not get ahead of myself on this one.) The thing is that when he has the teen he mentored being manhandled by his ‘friend,’ and said thing asks them to answer him; Peter just ducks.

Like he cannot even see Miles and admit he shouldn’t have done that.

Gwen’s excuse isn’t much better but at least she is answering and you can see in her face how much she knows she fucked up.

I am going to be honest, this little detail wouldn’t bother me as much if what has happened before and what’s yet to happened didn’t exist, yet it does.

There is a difference in “Well you did a little mistake but I can let slide” vs “There are so many things wrong here that I will call you out even for the tiny ones.” Granted Peter isn’t that bad, but is a nuance I think a lot of people don’t think of.

Could Peter haven't said anything because the scene is trying to focus on Miles and Gwen for this part? Yes; it doesn't stop me from getting annoying.

Okay, Miles says this, do I believe it? Ehh not sure.

Gwen definitely not the case, if she truly thought him being an anomaly was a problem, she wouldn't have gone to see him directly.

Peter? Again, I have no idea how much of the kool-aid he has been drinking, the fact that he speaks highly of him and his daughter as good things that has happened makes me inclined to believe he doesn't.

We don't have an answer either way, right?

Not that Peter does much to help him feel better here. Yes yes trying to keep focus on certain characters I know.

(Looks at the camera like is the office.) And now THIS is the time where I wish I wasn’t aware of how writing works.

Okay, I know what the purpose of Peter is, aside of being here as a mentor, he is here kind of as a comic relief. He doesn’t have the same narrative weight as he had in the last movie, and he is here to be cute with his baby for the most part. That’s his purpose at this moment.

It-doesn’t-change-anything.

He has this recurring joke on the third act about if he is or not a good mentor, and it kind of has to do with the last movie, specially this joke, since at the end he was also talking how he taught him something he definitely didn’t do. Last movie I found it cute, here? Not so much.

I am trying not to be hard here and why I would not address the “son of a mother” moment (which I honestly really hate,) because this is not even Peter B’s fault at this point; the writers were trying very hard to have a way to make the situation a tad lighter while also having an important character be in character. I can’t say is truly out of character, but I’m not appreciating it.

Especially having him insist on being a good mentor after letting down his protege MULTIPLE TIMES.

Don't you guys love when you see a grown-ass adult go apeshit on a teen, and his friends aren't doing anything to stop him?

Sorry, yeah I understand that for narrative purposes, they have to be stuck to the ground, but after someone pointed this out a few weeks ago, I can't stop thinking of this shot so I needed to bring it out.

(BIG sidenote but, Margo is the biggest MVP here; girl met Miles once and probably has little to no context, yet she is helping him out. Queen behavior.)

Now let's talk about some bullshit.

I know this is technically not about Peter, considering this is Miguel talking to Gwen, yet I find LAUGHABLE this response.

I will give this to the spider//dad shippers, I would also be inclined to believe Miguel has a thing for Peter B if between the guy who had the "fugitive" in close quarters for a few minutes yet did not attempt to trap him, vs the teen girl who tries to help out her mentor to catch the dude (even if she didn't try too hard,) you decide the teen girl is the problem.

Is funny because really all this scene needs is Miguel saying "If it wasn't for you, he wouldn't have come here, he wouldn't had know and the Spot wouldn't have escaped," at least that much couldn't have been said for Peter B.

I think the writers were trying to make Miguel just look less and less reasonable the more we saw on screen; which is why he would go with route.

It doesn't change the fact that Mighel accusing Gwen of not capturing him is laughable.

YOU 👏 ARE 👏 A 👏 TERRIBLE 👏 MENTOR.

(This moment could be addressed individually, but they are basically the same thing and this post is DEFINITELY too long; seriously I had written fics shorter than this wtf.)

Here is my problem with this: He just decides that oh well, what can he do.

SERIOUSLY?!

Forget the "Oh but he doesn't do this the story-" for a moment; are you seriously telling me that not only this guy knows Miles is in a PRETTY fucked up situation, but also that Gwen is in her home universe where she will be homeless (because there is no way in hell Peter B doesn't know what happened to her,) and you decide to just, go brooding in your dimension?

You know is absolutely amazing how I had heard people grill Miguel and Jess for their behavior with Gwen (which I agree with for the most part,) yet I haven't seen anyone say "Isn't it a bit fucked up that Peter B should have known what would happen to Gwen if she went home and didn't decide to help her?"

Miguel is on Earth 1610 and hellbent on finding Miles, you cannot tell me if Peter B left his daughter with his wife, and then went to fetch Gwen, Miguel would have noticed. At the very least Peter could had try to check on her.

Peter B has known Gwen for longer than Jess and Miguel, even if he couldn't be a proper guardian for her because he was busy with his life, he could have been more present. He definitely could have attempted to defend her better when Miguel was screaming at her, or to look after her when she was kicked to her universe.

Jess is determined to act as if Gwen is more of an employee than a teen, but Peter B should be known better.

But is not his idea to help Miles, is Gwen's; because right now he is too focused on his life and his duty as spiderman to think of the younger generations that are hurting. Just like Miguel and Jess.

Yet not the narrative, nor the fandom, truly recognizes that.

Let’s wrap this up, you guys have no idea the amount of hours I had spend on this and I would be surprised if someone got this far.

As a small detail, Peter is seen with Mayday, and this time I DO have a problem with it.

I honestly hope Peter isn’t with Mayday in Beyond, I will pretend Peter doesn’t have Mayday during the events on Beyond in my fics for as long as I can; because this is the moment where I feel the joke is being pushed too far.

They don’t know what would happen next, they don’t know in what type of situation they are in, they know whatever universe ended was one with no spiderman so it has to be dangerous; yet he brings the baby because that’s his recurring theme for this movie.

And truly, that’s really the problem with his character here: He was given a small role to do with very limited things to do.

I am not saying this is bad writing; I may not like Peter’s decisions in this movie, and I am really hoping beyond gives a big ass cup of “Adults need to start protecting the younger generations instead of insist they need to toughen up” to all of them. Because more than his role, I am annoyed that neither the movie nor the fandom is addressing the failings of Peter B.

He is not a bad character, I don’t even think he is a bad character in this movie. I like him, and even if writing all of this down made realize I am more bitter about it than I would had liked; I just don’t think is fair.

I want Peter to be better, as a mentor, as a father; and I am really hoping the next movie shows him grow that way too. I do believe the writers can pull it off.

Now, the fandom addressing that?...That I have MUCH less confidence. But not gonna lie this post was made mostly to get this out of my chest rather than expect a reaction out of it.

If anyone made this far, first of, wow; I know some people were interesting in reading this, but even I think I went for a while I put a lot of things that are small details but you guys now me, it wouldn’t be me if I didn’t do that.

Be thankful I don’t talk about micro-expressions in frames or this would truly would had ended up as a novelette.

Second, thank you for reading! Give a like and your opinion if you want; because I am pretty sure this post is doing to have fewer notes.

[orange-orchard-system]

Continuing this little vent-fest of mine, I really hate how people will just... absorb whatever misinformation they hear about DID. Like, sure, I get it, you want to believe the person who has the stigmatized disorder when they talk about it. But sometimes people with the disorder are just fucking wrong, too. Sometimes we also need to unlearn our biases, incorrect assumptions, and ideas that sound right but actually aren't. We're not a perfectly unbiased group. We're not granted omnipresence about every presentation and facet of our disorder.

And it frustrates me so much because it's always framed as though the people correcting the misinformation are evil, ableist bigots. As if we're the problem and not trying to handle a situation before it gets out of hand and people get hurt. They'll always absorb the misinformation because the person spreading it has DID but anyone fucking correcting it is "clocked" as a faker lying for unspecified malicious reasons. Omfg. Grow the fuck up and admit that you just uncritically absorbed the first thing you heard about whatever aspect of the disorder we're talking about this time. Grow the fuck up and accept that DID is complex and involves a lot of phenomena that might sound far-fetched at first. Especially when it comes to the complex ways we might be traumatized and show the effects of our trauma, are you kidding me. You are not immune to misinformation. You are not immune to exclusionism. You are not immune to hurting people in the name of protecting them.

I did eventually end up reaching out to the person who reblogged that post calling a specific subset of systems, as well as a specific form of abuse, a conspiracy theory. No word back as of yet. But I'm going to try to let it go and focus on my own projects for right now, because that is a ball of yarn I am not going to untangle overnight, but I can at least start sharpening the scissors for someone else to cut through it one day. Confrontation is not my strong suit, and I'm tired of being treated like shit for trying to correct misinformation about the disorder I work to destigmatize. Best to focus my efforts elsewhere.

If you've dealt with this kind of thing, seen this kind of post where people will spread the most obviously incorrect shit because they don't want to accept all the complexities and unusualities of DID, my heart goes out to you. It sucks. But I refuse to believe that it's going to be this way forever. No matter how fruitless it may seem, we are making headway in awareness, understanding, and acceptance. Some asshats who want to stick their head in the sand and only accept the most simplified, sanitized version of this messy and varied disorder are not going to stop us from making a place in the world for ourselves.

Keep your head high and your mind open. We're gonna make it through this shit.

[lesbiandatekaname]

The "Rusty Quill Article" from the perspective of a journalism student.

So there has been a lot of stuff going around about an article made by someone that lays out some possible/probable/whatever misconduct. And there are some ways that people have been discussing it that I want to weigh in.

My Credentials: I'm in my senior year as a Journalism and Media Production major (I won't say which university because this is the internet). I've taken a lot of courses about journalism, including its ethics and writing conventions.

The Writer

"Who's Afraid of Alex J. Newall?" was written by Newt Schottelkotte on Medium and edited by Tal Minear and Wil Williams. The article extensively details possible misconduct

Possible bias: Upon publishing the article, Schottelkotte made no note of being the Director of Marketing at the podcast network Fables & Folly. When this was pointed out online, Schottelkotte added an editor's note to the bottom of the article that reads

Newt Schottelkotte is currently the Marketing Director for Fable & Folly Network, but has worked as an independent creator and journalist for longer. This information was not disclosed; a disclosure has been added.

So what gives? That's pretty biased, right? Surely F&F stands to gain a lot if Rusty Quill were to shut down or lose public favor, and the author hid that fact. I, however, would take that with a heavy grain of salt. As noted Schottelkotte has worked independently in podcasting since 2016 and got their position at F&F this year. Furthermore, they've actually worked for a lot of podcast networks, also available in that link, and the emphasis on F&F made by some people may be a bit overzealous. Yes, F&F could stand to gain from RQ experiencing troubles (though more of the nebulous way that a lot of podcast networks would), but Schottelkotte overall is an independent contractor and that's probably the reason they didn't mention it in the article originally. Minear and Williams are unaffiliated with F&F.

Something else about journalistic bias: No article is ever truly unbiased. There is no way for it to be. There are some cases where bias is so blatant that the person shouldn't be put on the story, but most of the time the best people are able to do is manage their bias.

The Purpose

Some people have disparaged the article for trying to "cancel" RQ. To this I would merely like to point out that the article is not addressed to podcast consumers, but to podcast creators.

They do address the possible consumers later towards the end, where they attempt to dissuade people from harassing former/current employees and projects

In the final section, they do ask readers to think about supporting The Magnus Protocol Kickstarter with the clear bent of "Supporting the Kickstarter could mean that you're supporting abusive industry practices." There is clearly some biased language here, and a call to action such as this could definitely be considered "iffy" journalism, so take that as you will.

The Sources

Oooooooooh the sources. Schottelkotte's article uses a few external sources, and then a number of anonymous sources that are ex-employees of RQ or people who were offered a position there. All interviewees are anonymous, and people have raised some eyebrows at this.

In journalism you are generally supposed to avoid confidential sources. They cause an obvious verification issue. If people don't know who your sources are, how do they know that you're not just making everything up?

That being said. The audio drama podcast industry is rather small. RQ itself is somewhat of a household name, and is even more of a juggernaut in a place like Britain. I can absolutely understand why these people would feel nervous about speaking publicly for fear of being blacklisted due to being considered "hard to work with" or "disloyal" or fear of backlash from RQ themselves. Take these sources with a grain of salt, but also understand that there are reasonable grounds for these sources being confidential.

Conclusion

I encourage people to go read the article, hence why I linked it at the beginning. Something that I would ask for people who point out the issues with sources is to demand accountability from RQ. Demand that they respond (As Schottelkotte asked them to do at least once, possibly several times. It's a bit unclear in the article). Look at the facts that we do know and ask yourself that even if they don't directly verify claims do they at least line up with them? Journalism is meant to inform, but there can also be more beyond a dichotomy "this article is can be trusted" vs. "this article cannot be trusted." Use this as an opportunity to ask questions.

[hyunsvngs]

Okay friend. Here's the deal with Woojin from an adult stay who is realistic and (actually) unbiased in the situation. Stays constantly give him shit and tell him to apologize and now that he did, it still isn't good enough.

Short version: Woojin leaving when he did absolutely was shitty and he needed to take accountability for the additional stress added to skz during that time. He's taken accountability a couple of times and it's not enough for aggressive stays who for some reason beg for apologies all the time.

Long version:

Lots of stays use the "he was the oldest in the group" line all because he said he was young and immature and wasn't homie like 20/21? That is young and it is immature. He chose to think of himself first in this situation. It may have been the best decision. If he continued on when his heart wasnt in the right place, his performance likely would have tanked skz success.

Stays are also saying it's too late for him to come out with an apology when he originally did so about a year after leaving. If you don't want him to apologize, stop bringing up his fucking name in association with skz.

Stays claim he's doing this just for his comeback... he's had several releases and did well considering he's practically blacklisted in 4th gen.

Finally, stays love to use the fact that was caught following news about skz. Duh. He was in the group and trained with these guys during formative years. Do we really think he wouldn't care about them? We also don't know what kind of relationship they have because literally no one says anything. And they don't have to because it's not our business.

I get the need to feel like you have to defend your favs- I really do. I'm a skz ult and the whole woojin situation fucking sucked... for them. We have no idea what has happened behind closed doors since then. They may have made up or they may not have. It's not our business. It is likely that he wasn't allowed to speak up for however long die to contractual issues.

Bottom line: 1. Stop asking idols for shit that won't appease you anyway. If you didn't want an apology, you should have stayed out his comment section. 2. Stop taking things personally because you are all just fans who have no idea what's going on.

It probably sounds like I am biased toward Woojin. Believe me when I say I'm not. I am taking the side of stray kids and Woo over the side of stays who literally bully the fuck out of someone who did what was best for him in that moment. Yes it was selfish and it sucks that the boys had to endure that but support the boys without mentioning or tearing down Woojin.

thanks to everyone who sent me asks abt this btw, i’m replying to this one bc i feel like it’s thorough lol

i get what ur saying completely. woojin was still young when he left skz, and i can understand putting yourself first.

however, i can’t have any sympathy for someone who is time and time again using the success of his ex-group to promote himself. i understand following skz news, that’s not the issue here - it’s the fact that woojin seems to be using almost clickbait titles in his videos about the boys to get attention. skz were hurt when woojin left, and this was not just career wise but personally too. i don’t have any sympathy for him and i can’t understand him using skz for clout lol

[dozyrogue]

TUBBO LITERALLY TOLD SUNNY TO CALM DOWN ON THAT, AND THE FANDOM MADE IT "canon" THAT FRED WAS A STEPPARENT. TUBBO LITERALLY PUT A HARD STOP ON THAT. AAAAAAAAHHHHHHH

exactly. sunny calling fred a step-parent was about the same as calling bad her accountant. it was just make-believe. she's allowed that fantasy because they're just a little girl who wants a bigger family but that doesn't make it real and if anything it made tubbo more cautious about the whole thing.

#....i would like to apologize im not yelling at u im yelling at all of twitter actually

this but also shading the inconsistent standards of the wiki. i know they're fan volunteers but everything on there gets treated like canon even when it's clear the author has included a bunch of personal biases. we need more media literacy in this fandom.

Like at the time sunny was suffering badly she felt like her brothers and sister where leaving her behind. She felt like they didnt care about her. She heard ramon excitedly talk about how happy pac makes him and how now his family is bigger because of him. And she wanted that!! She wanted a bigger family, yeah she lovers her pa but she jsut wanted a bigger family

So yeah its totally understandable why she said that shes literally a baby. And tubbo would always put sunny first if it was up to him i think he wouldve kept sunny and fred far away from eachother if they ended up dating simply because he didnt want to lose her. But yeah its another reason why he was being super cautious

The fandom ABSOLUTELY needs more media literacy. Like i remember when the wiki for fred changed to "sunnys stepfather" and blacked out lol. Ended up on the moon no clue why.

I think it also has little to do with the fact people will make tubbo the butt of the joke, in my opinion at least. Like no one would be mad if we get some things wrong cuz hea just a silly lil guy.

Like its hard to get a unbiased fan to help with things like that but a dude can dream.

[sacredtime]

Draft clean out [1/28]

Hear me out: I feel like despite being mates to the Shaw packs alpha and beta angel and babe are pretty unbiased to most members of the pack.

Like yeah, they’ll form their own opinions on members ofc but won’t be inherently biased towards anyone because of the influence their respective shifter holds towards people (With exception to Christian. It was on sight the minute they could put a face to the name)

Like when Darlin first started coming back to the pack I feel like these two would be the first ones to offer genuine kindness and be positive towards them. This naturally sketches Darlin out. With all they’ve done and been through, why are these people treating them this nicely for no reason?

Pretty sketchy if you ask Darlin.

So of course Darlin acts aloof and distant from them because who knows why they’re actually being nice to them and want to get to know them? Surely David and Asher told their mates all about them and how terrible of a person and pack member Angel and Babe must think bad of Darlin.

So it’s weird when Darlin is forced invited to David and Angel’s place for coffee and they see Angel and Babe there.

Needless to say it’s awkward at first. Despite not being shifters they’re surprisingly intimidating together and puts Darlin on edge.

It gets them on the defensive when the two start to asking questions but when it devolves into cheesy, typical questions to get to know them which is far from any interrogation Darlin thought they’d be getting. Darling also able to let their guard down more as Angel ensures David’s not in the house or aware of their coffee meet up although they do still remain guarded

This ends still pretty awkward but the three end up slightly closer than before and the two get to see a slightly different side to Darlin than what they heard and get more insight into them.

David did eventually find out and while he was upset with Angel for inviting a shifter with homocidal maniac vampire blood bound and trailing them into his house and putting their life and Babe’s life more at risk he could tell they had good intentions and begrudgingly let it slide, although he stayed in the house from then on just incase.

[queenelsa567]

I saw the wildest take on ACOTAR tumblr today.

That we shouldn’t be doing literary analysis on “faerie smut.” We shouldn’t be using our knowledge about literature (whether that’s from high school or an English degree) to analyze SJM’s books.

It was just so wild to me for several reasons which I will outline below:

1. Literary analysis is not simply reserved for "high-brow" literature. Literary analysis is something that can be performed on all types of writing, although typically reserved for fictional writing or poetry. News flash: despite SJM's quality of writing, her books are still able to be analyzed. Literary analysis can be defined as the process by which aspects of a piece of writing are analyzed to determine a meaning in the text. It is not a super intense process and most people do it automatically while reading. However, there are certain analysis techniques such as motifs, symbols, and foreshadowing that require a bit more mental investment.

When we reduce books, poems, and other writings to the phrase "it's not that deep," we undermine important aspects of the writing. Perhaps the author didn't mean for it to be that deep. As a writer myself, I know that sometimes that best writing happens by accident. But the point is, the author's personal opinions, biases, and attitudes influence their writing. It is that deep, because no author can be completely unbiased. I will discuss this more later.

2. Although SJM incorporates smut into her books, they are, primarily, romantasy. Romantasy is a genre that combines aspects of romance and fantasy, typically a romance novel that takes place in a fantasy world. SJM's books are not erotica. Erotica is a genre of literature intended to arouse sexual desire and typically contains lots of smut. As SJM's books are not completely smut, and fall into the genre of romantasy, they lend themselves to being analyzed as there are other aspects to them besides sex scenes.

You can analyze a romance book, even if it contains sex scenes. You can analyze fantasy books, even if they contain sex scenes. Why should you not be able to analyze a romantasy book that contains sex scenes? Even erotica can be analyzed (although I won't get into that here). This ties into my previous point. Literary analysis is not reserved for "high-brow" literature.

3. Any time you use "evidence" to support a theory you are making, you are performing literary analysis. This goes for shipping theories and other theories. Any time you say 'I think these two people are going to end up together for this reason,' you are performing literary analysis. (Hate to break it to you, lol.)

Example 1 - Light motifs being used for Elain. Elain is often described as being around and desiring light. You could interpret this as her being a foil for Azriel and that's why they should end up together. Or, you could interpret it as Elain will end up with the Heir to the Day Court, Lucien.

Example 2 - The theory that Amren could be related to the Asteri. Amren talks about how she came through a portal long ago and she has these mystical, angelic powers. Amren also was imprisoned for a while on an island that we learn in CC3 was a stronghold of Theia in a time when they were resisting the Asteri. This has led people to believe that Amren could be related to or created by the Asteri.

Neither of these things were/are outright stated in the text, but they can be inferred from textual evidence presented. This collection of evidence being collated and interpreted is a form of LITERARY ANALYSIS. (Shock. Horror.) There are many other examples, but I will not make you read that much. Therefore, SJM's works can be analyzed.

4. SJM's experiences inform her writing. SJM has outright stated that she modeled Nesta's experience after her journey with depression and mental health issues. SJM has also stated that she modeled aspects of Rhysand on her own husband. These are aspects that we know are informed by SJM's experiences, but it goes without saying that there are other aspects of her life that inform her writing that she hasn't publicly spoken about. That is, in fact, how idea generation and writing works. (Mind. Blown.)

I would also like to state that SJM's zionism informs her writing as well, especially in the ACOTAR and CC series'. I won't get into it here because there is a lot to be said and this post is already extremely long, but if you look for it, you will see it. In spades.

Donate to Palestine. Do good things for your community. Help others.

Importantly, analyze the books you're reading. Use critical thinking skills. Anyone who gets defensive about someone using their degree in English literature to analyze a book (regardless of what the book is) is simply offended that the analysis was well done and they couldn't have done it themselves because they don't have the rad skills to do so. Stay in English class kids. It's way more important than you think.

[houseofborgia]

okay i know you've mentioned/answered this a million times but i would love to get your top recommendations for borgias published books and content.

i haven't really ventured into those selections but i really want to take the leap into that realm and buy/borrow some books and read them..!

(also i'm curious if you read many fanfictions for the borgias, and if so do you have any good recs?)

💞

hi <33! no worries at all! i love being asked questions about everything related to the borgias, as i get very enthusiastic about them. now, let's start with my favorite borgias biographies:

maria bellonci's 'lucrezia borgia' because i'm very obsessed with accuracy and avoiding cliché biased narratives. it's such a solid read really! it also portrays lucrezia in a way that i've always believed she was—a completely misunderstood woman who is a pawn in the power and ambition games of her father and brother. but deep down, she's just a silly, pretty poetry lover who's guilty by association. this book also debunks cesare's supposed "jealousy" towards juan as the shows how much he loves him (based on the letters to each other) and that rodrigo has always loved his children equally, which is a cherry on top lol.

emma lucas's 'lucrezia borgia.' while it's not entirely accurate because it satisfies my beloved (but not accurate) 'lucrezia is a femme fatale and not saintly' narrative (which i love, by the way), i'm fascinated by how it unexpectedly delves deep into her family, especially rodrigo, cesare, and juan. it also provides great anecdotes about the characters so there's that. despite having negative reviews, the biography is actually very well-written and highly entertaining! fuck the gossip!

christopher hibbert's 'the borgias and their enemies.' for some reason, i keep forgetting to recommend this book to my friends. i tend to get easily investedwith any borgia book that focuses on the pope and his children, providing narratives without forcing you to choose what to believe. the author obviously conducted extensive research before publishing it because when reading a biography (not historical fiction), i prefer to avoid biased perspectives that can be heavily misleading. i also appreciate the fact that machiavelli (and other important figures) plays an important role in this biography because i'm always excited about him.

ferdinand gregorovius' 'lucretia borgia according to original documents and correspondence of her day'. it's also a very unbiased excellent piece of history that is full of validated source. and i just adore how the author is pro-lucrezia as well.

samantha morris' 'cesare and lucrezia: brother and sister of history's most vilified family' is also well documented and well researched! while cesare was given more depth than lucrezia, still, lucrezia's character in this biography is more colorful. obviously the most popular narrative for the borgia family is them being incestuous, corrupt and violent, a family to be feared, but the author suggests otherwise as she sets out to prove this is not the full story and she does make a good argument! as she detailed how they've been portrayed by mainstream media as well as detailing what happened to their descendants.

sarah bradford's 'lucrezia borgia.' okay, so this one isn't a favorite of mine, but i'd recommend it to you or anyone who's a huge fan of ceslu. it's written like a love story biography exclusively about them. while i like how she wrote about ceslu, i heavily dislike how she wrote about juan and rodrigo and how she portrayed them based on narratives from the family's enemies. the author also manipulated a letter about the envoy boccaccio, which is supposed to praise both brothers. but instead, the author just one-upped him with cesare by dunking on him, which i personally find lame and intensely inaccurate since juan borgia was pretty much loved by his wife, his family, and his friends based on the retrieved documents and letters. that being said, i do enjoy the ceslu parts, of course, and i believe any fan of showtime's 'the borgias' who ships ceslu would enjoy this book and its fluent writing and can easily ignore the negatively inaccurate narratives about the other members of the family.

that's all for the biography books! now let's start with historical fiction:

sarah dunant's 'blood and beauty'. one thing about me is that i'm never gonna stop praising this book because it is absolutely my favorite historical fiction book about this extraordinary family! again, i get so invested in any book when the author does extensive research. also, if you're looking for a book about this family that reads like an episode of showtime's 'the borgias,' then this book is your go-to! full of interesting dynamics, and yes, cesare is as cruel and megalomaniacal as history and machiavelli portrayed him, lucrezia as a victim of her father and brother's political ambitions game, and juan as the flawed kid who was eventually sunk deep when he got dragged into his father's ambitions game. while the book doesn't provide a deeper exploration of the characters' psyche, it's more focused on the story by making it very engaging and sheds light on their complex relationships and their rise to power. and every character is highly sympathetic as the author brilliantly humanizes them. in short, it is emotionally intriguing and a must-read for the borgias enjoyers.

mario puzo's 'the family'. you know, i wasn't even surprised a bit that this book's writing and story being groundbreaking because after all, it is written by the author of 'the godfather'. the family is such a compelling book, such tender writing when it comes to lucrezia and cesare. the story becomes intriguing the more you read. i also loved puzo's portrayal of rodrigo as this family man who deeply loves his children yet he uses them as pawns (which is also similar to jeremy irons' portrayal). while i gotta criticize that the characters have no depth and his version of lucrezia as this damsel angel for her father and brother is, uhhh… quite boring. i like her when she's multilayered lol. i also think the way he tried to present cesare and give him the "from zero to hero" trope in order to make him relatable is also lame because cesare's success as a historical figure is because he was calculating and wicked, and definitely not a bitter loser. i mean, i could absolutely ignore the bitterness part, but at least françois arnaud's cesare added so many layers and swag in the characters, therefore you could ignore it. but i can overlook all that when there's an engaging story and great writing, no matter what the characterizations are like. so overall, it's impressive and entertaining, and you will definitely enjoy it.

regarding fanfiction; i'm sorry but i never read any because i feel quite satisfied by all 'the borgias' show canon that we have and all these historical books. i wish i could help with recommending fics :/

thank you very much for the question, and i hope this post answers it. have a great day 💕🫶