#like consider that you have your own issues and/or biases in regards to people you like and want to hang out with

[lord-radish]

imagine thinking that trans men are inherently bad or evil or predatory on the basis of gendered privilege and societal power structures. cringe

[mueritos]

As someone who’s been through multiple therapists and psychs, you’re super not wrong about these people bringing their biases to the table. I’m lucky enough that I

1. Was an older teenager

2. Had friends who had had decent mental health help already

3. Already kinda suspected the shapes of what was “wrong with me” and

4. Had an innate sense of “no that seems like bullshit” before I went in with these people.

The first therapist I ever saw met me as a 17 year old alt girl, and when I tried to talk to her about thinking I had anxiety issues she cut me off before I was done explaining and told me I was self diagnosing, that was causing my problem, and we wouldn’t “entertain THAT” any further.

The second therapist I ever saw met me as a 18 year old trans guy, pre-everything, during the pandemic. She listened, but she had no experience with the trans community and I had to teach her everything about anything I wanted to talk about with regards to that. She was nice, but she couldn’t help me. She didn’t know how.

The third therapist I ever saw met me as a 21 year old young man. She figured I had everything sorted out already. I didn’t. She never tried to change her mind or delve deeper. At this point I couldn’t afford to waste my time, so I asked to be recommended to a psych and she said sure. After that we didn’t talk.

The first psych I went to was very kind, and absolutely did not do his due diligence. I came in with a shiny recommendation from a therapist (that he didn’t verify), so he all but handed me the medication with no explanation and I only ever spoke to him over the phone after that. It was a low barrier to entry but the medication wasn’t right and I didn’t know I had other options. He made it seem like I didn’t.

The psych I’m seeing now put me on a medication that reacted poorly with my inhaler because she didn’t cross check if they would be any drug interactions. I came back and asked for a different medication. She was going to put me on a different one, and then I asked her to check if there were any interactions with this one. Turns out there were severe ones. I ended up going with a different medication, it seems to be working. It would probably work better with help from a therapist, but I don’t have the time or money for that right now. And quite frankly I’m tired of trying to convince people to help me when I have to explain what I think is wrong with me for them to listen. Only for them to decide that I’ve already figured it all out and they don’t need to try.

So uh. Yeah. Lots and lots of stories from me and my friends about clinicians of all age and experience ranges that go from horror stories to just disappointing and unhelpful. Some of these people had been practicing for 20-30 years and they STILL weren’t any better at empathy or not being horribly biased.

first of all holy shit it really fucking sucks you had to go through all of these terrible experiences while accessing care you deserve and need. i'm not surprised these terrible interactions happened, and I can't even be disappointed considering the bar of standards is in hell. The "better" experiences a lot of folks have with clinicians align with your second therapist. They are clinicians who just genuinely have no worldview outside of their own, but are receptive to new information...they just have no drive to learn how to apply new frameworks of ways of thinking to expand their worldview and guide their clients. The worst is literal malpractice, ableism, and violence against clients.

a lot of people who go into the mental health field don't actually have the skills related to active listening, empathy, or curiosity based out of humanity. I say this to a lot of people in the social work program, but social work is the same pipeline as mean girls who go into nursing--it's just full of the girls who were not smart enough to go into nursing that decide to go into social work. Same breed of mean girl seeking power over others, just different contexts of public service.

the only hope i have is in the new generations of mental health clinicians who are BIPOC/queer, anti-carceral, disabled themselves, and who are mentally ill as well. I feel more solidarity with my neurodivergent peers in my program who can barely finish an assignment on time than I do with the white women who have never experience hardship in their lives. Not to say neither of these people can't experience easy or hard times in their lives but man....seeing the roadblocks in some of these people's worldviews, empathy, or conceptualizations of other people's struggles is fucked up.

the mental health field is just another medicalized, over-policed, and racist institution that wants to shove people back into the workforce ASAP. we are in hell!! but just know there ARE people and groups and orgs out there that are dedicated to radical work and will name all the hypocrisy, pain, and oppression that exists in working in this field.

thank you tho for sharing your experience and input. I can only hope that your experiences moving forward are positive and liberating for you <3

[pbscore]

This is probably gonna be a bit of a ‘controversial’ take for the reactionary folks on tumblr.com but frankly, I think this needs to be talked about more:

I’m genuinely tired of seeing both cis women and transmascs/trans men/nonbinary people squabbling over dumbass terminology regarding reproductive issues and again, seeing the whole damn forest for the trees. This whole situation can easily be solved by calling this a violation of human rights, instead of insisting it’s a ‘woman’s issue’ only or a ‘trans man/nonbinary issue’.

Like, I hate to make it sound like I’m dismissing people’s concerns but this kind of narrow ass thinking is only going to continue to distract us from getting our asses in gear to work towards a similar cause.

There’s already so much transphobia in cis feminist spaces AND misogyny in trans men/transmasc spaces that I literally hate being around any of y’all 😂 and that’s genuinely sad considering the reality that any of us with the ability to get pregnant will be effected by all anti-choice laws. It makes no sense to be arguing over terminology when the best and most realistic way to go about handling these issues would be to cite them for what they are: human rights issues. Women are human beings. Trans people are human beings. The right to any kind of bodily autonomy is inherently a human rights issue because it will effect human beings, y’all.

I understand why it’s important to break down specific social issues that may only effect a specific group of people (ex: talks about anti-blackness and how it effects black people should always be spearheaded by black people) and I agree that having that nuance and intersectional thinking will always be important. However, the issue of reproductive rights is expansive and effects millions of folks, in various communities, all capable of getting pregnant and in need of absolute autonomy over their own bodies.

That’s what this issue is about. So, I would highly suggest checking your own biases and the way you talk about this issue, as well as the people who are literally in the same boat as you before you claim which terminology is ‘better’ or ‘more inclusive’. Because frankly, it doesn’t make a difference to a bunch of anti-choice people in powerful positions. They don’t give a shit about our terminology and who’s getting effected by what.

They only care about controlling other human beings as they see fit and the moment we can realize that this is literally a grave human rights violation, while seeing each other as actual people first before our genders, that’s when tangible structural change can happen and be permanent.

Reproductive rights are human rights. The right to a safe abortion is a human right. The right to make your own decisions, be them medical or not, about your own body is a human right. Stop losing sight of that just because something isn’t ‘worded’ in a way that makes you 100% comfy. This isn’t a time to get tripped up over words, it’s a time to reinstate your autonomy as a human being and start working together to make shit happen.

NOTE: TERFs/transphobes/misogynists/anti-choice creeps will all be blocked on sight.

[aemiron-main]

I think a lot of the issues people have with your Henry theories is that you so strongly believe in them (which is great! We all should believe in our own theories otherwise what’s the point lol) but then you and the other theorists so firmly believe that it’s canon and that everything you say is 100% truth and every single detail you’ve discovered is all gonna come out in s5 and anyone who either a) doesn’t believe in these theories or b) doesn’t understand/doesn’t see it is so stupid bc to you it’s like duh it’s obvious! And you’ve ‘cracked the code!’ or whatever and that comes across as rude and snobby to some and I think that’s where you lose a lot of people instead of gaining people to believe in your ideas too.

Sorry if this sounds really rude! I’m just trying to throw an outside perspective on it lmao.

Anon, I get what you're saying but here's the thing. I don't fully believe that. I don't fully believe that everything I say is gospel. I have repeatedly, publicly, retracted posts and said "I WAS WRONG!!!" when I notice something that isn't accurate. I am already WELL aware that some things aren't going to be in S5 and that I'm wrong about some things. But the stuff I feel strongly that I'm right about, I'm passionate about! Maybe I'd be less "rude" about it/veer less into "it's 100% right" territory if I didn't have people constantly telling me that it's 100% wrong even when it comes down to things that are literally confirmed by ST production. I also don't think that people who don't understand are stupid, so let's please be very clear about that. What I think is stupid is when people criticize posts without even TRYING to read them or ask for clarification. I think not even making an ATTEMPT to understand is stupid. I think that assuming that you know better than the ST production team themselves & what they've said about their work because you went to ~film school~ is stupid. The stuff that I think is obvious is when I've taken the time to lay things out repeatedly for certain people, and not just things that are up for interpretation but things that are STONE COLD FACT from the mouths of ST production themselves about their costuming and VFX work and people still act like their personal opinion overrides those facts.

I don't think people are dumb for not seeing things- I think they're dumb for not even being willing to try and look because they've already made their own biased judgements. I DO think people are stupid for posting about how Henry's inherently evil and how anyone who believes otherwise is crazy/stupid, especially when theyre unwilling to even consider the other side of things.

I absolutely agree that everyone should believe in their theories too- and I think that people should also be open to changing their beliefs when presented with new evidence. But for the majority of my stuff, I have yet to be presented with compelling evidence contradicting it that doesnt just boil down to "oh it's a production error".

And me being EXCITED about things isn't me trying to be snobby. I've literally posted about "cracking this code" or whatever and then retracted the post 5 minutes later because I found evidence that contradicted it. Most of the time I'm just being dramatic in that regard. And I also word my posts like essays with a thesis statement- so even when I'm not actually 100% sure if something's going to be canon, I word it as if it is because I'm trying to make the point about how it would be canon/again, writing it like a persuasive essay.

But when I'm not just being dramatic, I'm usually responding to a ton of vagueposts or unposted anons about how I'm a dipshit pedophile apologist and how everything in this show is a production error, and THAT is when the frustration comes into play. I AM very passionate when I believe I'm right about something and that I have the evidence to back it up, No need to apologize! I appreciate the perspective but I also don't see a need to censor myself & my excitement because people might think it's rude. Personally, I think the constant vagueposting and throwing the word pedophile around simply for analyzing a tv show is pretty rude. I hope this clears things up. I spent a long time on here watering down my posts with "well i might be wrong BUT" and I'm not doing that anymore because I'd hope that people would use their brains and understand that I'm just Some Guy and my posts are just My Analysis Based On The Evidence We Have. People don't have to listen to me. I don't care if they do. What frustrates me/when I do care is when it comes down to people dragging me for things I'm not even saying (such as acting like I'm saying that even if Henry did all those things, It's Totally Fine and Okay). I think EVERYONE should post their opinions firmly and strongly, and still be willing to change their opinions. I post my opinions firmly because I'm not afraid of being wrong- if I was afraid of being wrong I'd preface every post with "oh this might be wrong however-". But I'm not afraid of being wrong. I just move onto the next thing/next piece of evidence when I am. Sorry for being passionate about a subject I guess???? No yknow what I'm not sorry!!!!

[dichromaticdyke]

skwisgaar feminism word salad response anon on another tangent again !! (is 💉 taken for an anon sign off? didn’t see so in ur beloved anon tag but i’ll be usin’ that for ease of communication on both ends)

regarding the shows take on gender: i definitely agree in the sense that it has a lot to say about gender, as well as the take of “deliberate critique of misogyny” vs “the show kinda also sucked with women” co-existing statements!!! i think in this case it just makes the internalized misogynistic fandom space behavior so much… worse in that sense, though? yes, the show did suck with women and their focuses, but with the show’s critique of celebrity + metal culture thus lending dethklok to view women of objects… it just feels like when the fandom discounts women in the show just as easily, it’s falling into the same trap dethklok does and i would argue that gets into the whole other issue of glorifying dethklok despite the fact they’re portrayed (initially, anyway) in a sort of always sunny in philadelphia “don’t be like this” way. which then turns the fans into a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts but that is a WHOLE other tangent-

either way, it’s disheartening to watch at times.

as for depth of the show vs sometimes it’s not that deep, even for how the fans react:

1. i adore ur analyses please continue having these fits of divine madness

2. i agree sometimes it’s not that deep! sometimes fans just want to watch two guys kiss! and that’s okay!

and i definitely agree that people don’t leave their implicit biases at the door when entering fandom (and i am forever grateful you do not leave your gender studies degree at the door either; truthfully, i would not feel so open critiquing the fandom with any other creator, as your perspective is inherently unique due to a variety of factors)

but i guess my whole perspective is… yeah, it feels a lot like there’s a portion of the fandom that doesn’t work on their inherent internalized misogyny, even on tumblr, which goes back to your post regarding skwisgaar finding all women beautiful and how his willingness to sleep with fat and elderly women has become a joke to many. of course, it also gets into fatphobia, lookism, and ageism, which honestly the ageism confuses me considering most folks are also thirsting after literal middle aged cartoon men but i suppose in their minds it’s different because they’re men and “not geriatric” or something.

in the latter case: cowards, all of them, as there is an inherent beauty to aging (and skwisgaar would agree)

-💉

(also im sorry for word vomiting in your inbox AGAIN there’s so many thoughts and not enough words but like ily and everything you do for the fandom. ur brain is galaxy level always)

ehehe don't apologize dear! i'm honored and proud that i've created a space where people do feel comfortable to talk to me about feminism and lesbianism despite the overwhelming focus on men within this community (again, understandable given the context of the show, but it doesn't make it any less exhausting sometimes).

i don't really have much to say in addition to this, you hit so many points i agree with! i remember some mtl creators talking about how if you can't meaningfully recognize where the show is satirizing oppressive thoughts and behaviors and instead reinforce those behaviors through your own actions, then you're not mature enough to be engaging with the show, and that's pretty much my stance on it! again, as we've mentioned, there will always be people who don't unpack all their internalized biases, and it's very easy to let those slip through even in good faith, but that's basically the viewpoint i have.

dethklok can be genuinely awful people sometimes, and we're not meant to agree with them on everything, and we have to remember that. as much as they've become massive comfort characters to me, i would guillotine all five of them irl.

[juneviews]

Hello! Idk how to approach this bc it's a sensitive issue. But I have a question. If you dont want to answer I understand. warning upsetting and sensitive subject ig. 

Was there ever a follow up on the ''drake is a potential transphobe'' issue? Bc i learned it from your blog, and the last thing i know abt is that he made a sorry a$$ excuse of an 'apology'. I just got rmded abt it when you rbed your 'my tee' gifset (damn that show was a rollercoaster of ‘wtfs’ lol). 

And since the actor ''O**.Pa***'', I want to be cautious about these issues (bc it came out of nowhere and slapped me in the face and I’ve been disgusted with him(O.Pa) ever since). 

I am asking you bc I dont know Thai ppl on here, and I learnt it(the drake situation) with you. I also know there is something culturally that could potentially also apply. That in country n1 (here Thailand) smthng happens is different from country n2 or 3 or 4. (like I rmbr abt the thing with cis actors who talked abt trans actors and everything). I agree abt the fact that we, I, come from NOT the same culture and we, I, have to take it into account.

 But in this case I'm REALLY not sure it’s about a ‘’different culture’’ situation. Bc you know, it was very transphobic and also yah andr** tat*... So ig I want to be sure abt the media/ppl I'm involving myself with. 

If you answer this thank you, and even if not.

hi! I've addressed the drake issue when a follower sent me his apology, which I personally thought was good bc he took accountibility & did say he respects everyone. the one thing missing was an explanation though, which is annoying bc it's what misses from most thai actors controversies. but personally, I did think he was being genuine & not a transphobe, though I am definitely biased since drake is one of my favorite thai actors. I've talked multiple times about the cultural differences between "ladyboys" (katoey) & trans people: though now most "ladyboys" now identify as trans women bc they've learned about the western term for it, they were historically considered as a sort of third gender in thailand. that means it is more globally accepted to say things about them in thailand that would be seen as insensitive in the west, and thai trans women themselves have grown accustomed to mocking their own transness to be successful in the thai entertainment industry. this means that the "____ is transphobic" controversies only ever regard international fans, while thai fans don't even bat an eye. it's not my place to say what's wrong or right in those situations, but that's why I feel hesitant to condemn ANY thai person as transphobic when the cultures are so different & sensitivities so opposed. trans rights are under attack everywhere in the west, meanwhile "ladyboys" have existed openly (somewhat safely, I'm sure there's attacks & discrimination on them, but I couldn't find any data about it) for literal centuries in thailand.

NOW THOUGH, I find it quite staggering that you can kind of put most of these thai actors in the same box. drake laedeke for liking (or reposting? I forgot sorry) an anti-trans video, for which he apologized, joss wayar for following andrew tate, who he unfollowed once the backlash against tate peaked, ohm pawat for being a homophobic bully (which some have argued that it's been disproven in my comments but I don't really believe it, it's giving delusional ride or die fan), and lastly foei patchara who reblogged anti-lgbtq far right content & (to my knowledge) never apologized or backed down. all four of these men present themselves as very straight, they all work out & have stereotypically very masculine & attractive bodies, and all of them are successful. I'm not surprised that men who watch fitness content would end up on hustle culture videos, leading to alpha male videos & eventually far right content which is currently obsessing about lgbtq+ people. and I'm not saying this to justify them or whatever, but I think it says a lot about masculinity & the echochambers created around this hypermasculine content which led to these actors clearly doing something wrong.

in the end, I'll say what I always say: everyone can choose to remain fans of actors that have done something wrong, or unfollow them, ignore them, hate them, etc. I do think things need to be taken with nuance, and for me I look at repeated behavior & lack of accountability to try to guess an actor's true nature. I say GUESS because none of us will ever truly know them. maybe there's an actor that has never publicly done anything remotely problematic, yet thinks the most awful things in his head. so yeah, it's up to each individual's judgment to decide what to do with those actors & what they've done wrong, but I do think we have to take cultural differences into account bc the world does not revolve around the west.

xxx

[relastelvanni]

This might sound like a dumb question, but when you were gaining weight and ended up with your diagnosis, what was your diet like? Was being overweight enough of an issue on its own to cause it? Or was it more related to a high sugar diet for example? The type of gain (i’ve seen things where if your weight is centred on a beer gut its more risky than an overall stocky body for example)?

I guess I’m reevaluating my own lifestyle because i at least assumed that when people talk about risk of diabetes as you gain weight, it was just a thing doctors say to scare you and its more of a concern when you actually start hitting the much larger numbers. I’m not as big as you were (not sure what your weight was but visually at least) but i’ll admit i have a sweet tooth and my diet is very sugar and fat heavy, with the weight creeping up over time. I guess hearing your story has frightened me a bit and i should be more thoughtful about my diet instead of being in denial that i’ll be fine if i just don’t go over 20 stone 😅

Not a dumb question at all and I’m always happy to help others with advice and tips from my story. I hope you find this helpful!

Regarding my own diagnosis numerous factors were at play. I had gained a lot of weight in a short period of time between 2020 and 2021 - around 40 lbs (I was 265 at max for reference). And I was on a very carb / sugar heavy diet because I enjoyed it and like you had a sweet tooth. But I also have a family history of diabetes and a mum with Type 1, so I was always predisposed and at risk of getting diabetes. But I naively probably thought as well that it wouldn’t happen to me and wasn’t as vigilant as I could have been and by the time I realised it was too late. That’s my own fault and responsibility though. The other factor was that it was 2021 when we were in lockdown for long periods of time, and I wasn’t active enough. When you eat carbs / sugar, doing activity afterwards helps to burn off any excess. I wasn’t doing the activity and therefore my body had to cope with too much glucose and the pancreas couldn’t cope. Other things to consider is different ethnicities seem more predisposed as well to getting it, so something to be mindful of.

Doctors are a wee bit biased still against overweight people regardless of their overall health, but don’t dismiss them entirely. However, when I had my first checkup that confirmed I was no longer diabetic and was now 210lbs - I had reversed my diabetes, cured my heartburn, my heart rate was down to 60 beats per minute, and yet the doctor still said I had to lose another 20kg for no other reason than my BMI was still high, even though I was healthy. So doctors can still get hung up on BMI, but you know yourself how healthy you are, that’s what I’ll say here.

Finally, if you’re concerned, get yourself a blood glucose kit - I really wish I had done this sooner. I appreciate it’s more expensive in the States (not sure where you are though). Here in Scotland it’s a wee bit expensive, but good nonetheless for checking every other week. What you do is when you wake up, before you eat or drink anything, do a blood glucose check for your “fasting sugars”. This will be a good indicator of whether or not you are healthy, pre-diabetic, or in a diabetic range. That way if you start to enter the pre-diabetic stage, you can take steps to reduce your carb / sugar intake for a bit to get yourself to a more normal level (if that’s what you choose to do). If you are diabetic, then that’s okay too, nothing to panic about surprisingly - you can manage it, and it is possible to reverse type 2 like me. I’d say watch out for the symptoms. If you are hyperglycaemic (high blood sugar) then a big give away symptom is feeling you need to pee a lot and a constant thirst despite this - I only had that symptom one night, but doesn’t matter, that was a sign.

I hope this helps a wee bit Anon. If you have any more questions, please let me know. I tried to cover everything as I remembered it. If in doubt, test yourself regularly and be informed about your health. x

[maythegnome]

Just finished the main storyline of Bayonetta Origins and I have to say I really liked it!

Here is a biased review - because I am an easy person to please - from someone who hasn't played any of the other Bayo games. (I'll try not to spoil it lol)

Apparently people are mostly having issues regarding lore implications(??) and stuff but since I'm not a lore person and have only ever vaguely seen the other Bayo games, I'm in my own happy bubble.

Art style was adorable (as suspected), Lukaon's thing @ the end made me cry (I am too empathetic for my own good), and I really loved the unique play style with the use of dual character control (it actually made me think instead of just kinda just running head on into things)

-The wisps were adorable

-I loved Cheshire and Cereza's developing friendship

-The way Cereza styled her hair at the end made me go 'oh, I see what you did there 👀'

-THE MUSIC!!!

-Cereza's mum! 💕

I was expecting the story to be longer though, especially considering the cost of the game. I also wish Cereza and Lukaon could've become friends (curse my bleeding heart). The map was slightly annoying to navigate but I guess it made exploring a unique challenge and you also had to just trust the camera movement in some segments.

Gonna start finishing the game off soon too (the extra costumes are cute as well)

Overall great game! 10/10 :D

Edit:

OH MY GOD I JUST REALISED SOMETHING SNKDSXM

(spoilers under cut)

This is just brainrot at this point and is probably obvious to everyone else but like I just realised that at the end of the game, Morgana says that she sent countless other witches into the forest and they died (and we aren't rlly told what happened to them after that)

BUT whenever Cereza dies she turns into a crystal looking thing

What do you find countless things of in the forest? Crystal things that hold people (the moon pearl things)

At first I was like "lol why are these girls trapped in there and why does freeing then only give you a moon pearl or whatever"

YOURE BASICALLY FREEING THE SOULS OF THE GIRLS WHO MORGANA ALREADY SENT TO THEIR DEATHS MORGANA WHY ARE YOU LIKE THIS-

[catcze]

Re: the thing you posted about sumeru and the skin colours.

I have to say as someone who’s south asian and has lived in the middle east + south asia, its not entirely correct. Sumeru has more of an Arabian vibe and that entire Middle East area does not have many people who are dark skinned, heck most of the people in my country (South Asia) literally have light skin. Many (people from one of our provinces) have white skin and blue/green type eyes. It depends on which parts they’re from. In the Middle east its the same, many Arabs are light skin toned and there are a few who have darker skin- but mostly those from the North African regions.

This was to kinda clear out the entire Middle East/ South Asia = Dark skin for people. I don’t think Genshin would try to add more dark skinned characters tbh because the game caters to chinese audiences which usually prefer light skin tones. As a person from the region Sumeru is supposed to be based off on, I really don’t care if they add the variations of the skin or not- and that means that if they do, then good! But i’m not biased in the sense that I don’t want them to. Its important for them to try and incorporate the culture in the Lore because of how rich it is because that would be so interesting!

We can’t expect much from a game that basically caters more to their own audience rather than others, but for others who do expect something, I think they should try to make an effort and the entire forest= light skin, desert= tan skin thing is intriguing and it is a possibility, so if they would do it then good, but once again, we can’t expect much from such a game.

I'm sorry if I said something that gave off vibes as generalizing all Middle East and South Asia as dark skinned, and i do thank you for sharing your own observations. I'm assuming that this comes from what I said regarding the one image about all the leaked characters lined up, and how all of them except Dehya were light-skinned. 

My criticism of the lineup of new characters isn't based on the expectation that we would be getting only dark-skinned characters, but on the fact that instead of, say, choosing characters who have skin tones that vary according to the region (and possibly giving them culturally-accurate outfits based on said region, instead of just throwing a lot of cultures into the blender and producing several orientalist designs) and helping to balance out the scales by giving representation to pocs who have darker-toned skin, which people have been asking for since the very start of the game, and have gone mostly ignored, they instead chose to not diversify their characters and give the majority of their characters just the one skin tone, with only a few darker-skinned characters here and there. 

Honestly, the main problem with the Sumeru designs as a whole isnt that people were expecting all the characters to be dark skinned–– like you said, there are always gonna be variations in features when talking about race, which is true basically anywhere you go. The issue stems from the poor representation in the game. If you lined up all the current characters we have, you'd see that there is a similar trend with Kaeya and Xinyan being the only poc characters out of all of them. This has always been a problem in genshin, and it's just that the Sumeru designs were merely the straw that broke the camel's back, considering all the expectation that had been riding on it to redeem the diversity issues. Some desi persons have also spoken up about how they aren’t satisfied with the Sumeru designs, which can be found here, for whoever may be interested X X

Criticizing these issues with diversity this strongly is something necessary, considering that they have plans to take inspiration from countries with people of color in the future— particularly with Natlan. And it would be wise to give them feedback and criticism sooner rather than later, before they can mess up another country’s culture. 

It's unfortunate that like what you said hyv doesn't seem to be listening to the people outside of its chinese audience, but I can't say I'm surprised about it, unfortunately. I agree that we shouldn't get our hopes up for them to re-design the characters, as much as many of us are asking, and as much as the variation in cultures and features would have (imo) made a lot of the characters less controversial + would have been interesting in terms of lore and character design.

[starfruit-baby]

Detroit Become Human is such a flawed game. I just got done playing it, and in some parts it was downright triggering. But I really like your blog, and a lot of the fandom, that see through the "pacifism is the answer to oppression" bullshit the game tries to shove down our throats, and have good takes in general about the characters and the storyline. Maybe you could offer your two cents? It still makes me wonder if it's right of me to engage in the fandom, even like this. I'm not black, or jewish, which were the two groups most attacked by this game's depiction and appropriation of thsir struggles. I don't feel I have the right to "reclaim" this game (is that the word?), even if I have subversive takes to it.

honestly anon, im very flattered and honored to be asked this, but i have to say i dont have any solid answers much less right answers about this :( i knew DBH has oodles of problems since release, ive been heavily criticising it myself since then, but for some unknown reason ive gotten pretty hyperfixated on it (i only played it because i got it for free, i can at least say id never hand my money over to the original creators), and i can only say my view on this (and most media of this genre), and its that i think it can be a constructive thing to criticise media from whatever background you have (?). i consider myself a huge hater because almost every media i like ill do exactly this, ill enjoy stories and aspects of it but basically go through a looking glass to each "social issue problem" (idk what to call it, sorry) i can spot to keep myself updated i guess? i dont always discuss it to not be the party pooper though

i came to tumblr also because it seems to be the most open to this, talking about the bad not just of the story but the choices made along bringing this game to life. for DBH in particular my thoughts are that there are a lot of good points it either accidentally made or just about missed the opportunity to do in regards of technology with capitalism, humanity's desensitization to abuse towards human-like things, and sometimes i try analysing why the horrible parts even exist or what makes them horrible if that makes sense? for example i may be wrong, but the North x Josh rivalry sort of came off to me as pitting two oppressed groups against each other as almost a test of your own morals, would you as the player rather side with a sexually traumatised 'angry' white woman or a violently abused 'calm' black man? when this is a mechanic that doesnt make sense, with the fucked up mind of the producers behind this, it wouldnt really be a big shock if it was the case. i also think its incredibly ableist in its methods, the old disabled man keeps yearning for his death and musing about humans being far inferior for their "fragile existence", and the game visibly intends for you to believe him "wise" for this, while i think it not only shows their ableist beliefs, it isnt necessarily an unbelievable character? a bitter, once abled bodied healthy and wealthy man suddenly deprived of some of his "liberty" would clearly become nihilistic once hes got just one of his priviledges stripped from him, imo

i also am appreciative of recreational work, if im being frank! derivative works are something i personally really really enjoy, since im pretty bad at inventing things from scratch? and ive seen fix its from people that basically take some of the monstrosities in the game and either recontextualise them or reframe them way better

in conclusion, im too biased to give you a good answer, so my middle of the road answer is always "enjoy things but with a critical mind and avoid giving money as much as possible" :/

[onewomancitadel]

WOW. Incredible response. I havent read your fic yet but now I am seriously considering it. I walked into this blog thinking Jaune/Cinder was just some weird crack ship. I believed all the typical stuff I see you mention like "she 2 evul theres no way!" lol but as I continued reading I slowly started to realize that this ship made sense. A LOT of sense. Im still trying to overcome my "you cant date a villain" programming but your posts are peeling back the layers of my biases. Again, thank you.

(Context).

This is a lovely message, thank you! I'm very glad you enjoyed my response. Most of all, whether or not you agree with what I say here, I just hope you enjoy figuring things out on your own and come to your own conclusions.

The reason why I take issue with that idea of 'you can't date a villain' er, programming, as you say, is because I think it's an idea taken for granted that doesn't appreciate what an individual story be trying to say... and I think trying to unpack some of our assumptions about the way stories should work is interesting. I am a big fan of R/WBY, for instance, and I wonder what it is about my background that makes me different from others who really don't like, say - let's get polemic here - Penny or Ironwood's character arcs.

So, I think that if you come to your own conclusions and draw your own boundaries about what you're comfortable with in fiction and you still don't like villains, redemption arcs, or - anything, really - you are more than allowed to do that, and you certainly don't need my permission to do so to begin with.

On the other hand, I really appreciate you taking the time to read my blog and respectfully interact with me, even if we're not necessarily working on the same wavelength (or might be working towards that? lol), and I was (and am) more than happy to elaborate on my ideas - particularly when sometimes things that are obvious to me are not necessarily obvious to you. I can point you to posts that might be helpful (if I can find them) and tags, or I am happy to expand as well... I am actually very happy to interact with people, and getting a good anon is really fun to respond to.

The question of Jaune/Cinder as a rarepair as opposed to a crackship is something we've discussed before, and I've had an anon before say very recently to me that they believed the same thing:

Oh yeah, we have had the crackship vs. rarepair debate before (and somewhere back September last year I responded to an ask by redhoodhungergames about Knightfall as a rarepair but I can't find it), and the linguistic evolution of conflating rarepair with crackship meanwhile crackships nevertheless take on fandom precedence due to panfandom baggage (e.g. searching to insert the same archetypes irrespective of canon context and pairing them together even if wholesale inventing most of the characterisation).

So, that's rather interesting... once you see and don't just look...

Nyeheheheh.

Personally I feel on this level Jaune/Cinder works as a successful twist, which whether or not it's in everybody's personal favour, has strong motivation in favour for it. (Or, let's say that Knightfall being controversial might be a reason in favour for it).

Regarding my fic, you are welcome to read it ('it' being my longfic, but there are others on my profile... you may not want to get to those first though lol) but do spare me if you don't enjoy it. (; There's no pressure though, and really I just wanted to emphasise that I don't think of myself as a professional meta writer, and also that I genuinely struggled to intellectually articulate 'why' they ought to love each other... it's something very emotional to me.

Also, from what I've been told and the vibe I get from my readers, my fic doesn't exactly follow the form of other R/WBY fics, and that can be a good or a bad thing depending on individual taste. I'm not trying to make it sound more than it is, just if you have certain expectations, it might be affronting. I'm not trying to sound pretentious or anything or make it sound like more than it is, but why I'm wary about recommending my work at all is because a) it's intensely personal and b) I don't read other R/WBY fic and come from a literary background and really emphasise the mythic/fairytale/literary elements of R/WBY. So, what you see here about the way I talk about R/WBY canon definitely influences my writing.

I am definitely happy to expand on any more topics, I did link you the Knightfall masterpost and I can talk about other R/WBY ships if that would help.

Now, on a more specific point about Cinder being too evil: that's the really interesting part because Knightfall is linked to Cinder's redemption arc. So to understand Knightfall you need a coherent theory of redemption and redemption in R/WBY. I don't read this romance as happening independently of her redemption arc, so anything I say under my Cindemption tag is equally applicable to how one needs to view Knightfall. I enjoy the idea that Cinder's meant to be the Fall Maiden (redeeming our perspective of the power - as more than just a powerlevel - through her perspective), and Jaune's meant to finally help (and fall in love with) this Fall Maiden... just not the one you thought. It's bittersweet, but it ends on a hopeful note.

Knightfall is the thematic lynchpin to everything I think is valuable and interesting and at the heart of R/WBY, from Ozlem to the Maiden power to how the heroes will prevail and what it means to be heroic... it's one part of the picture, for sure, it's not the Jaune and Cinder Show, but I think that's part of what makes the ship really beautiful, the fact it's this essential connection against an epic backdrop.

I can never predict if something goes wrong in the story, but I do feel satisfied that things I thought were going to happen have happened in the show based on the way I intuited them... so they do have some sense of coherent storytelling and foreshadowing. The reason I bring up Penny and Ironwood is because I felt those story points were self-evident and flagged very effectively, and thematically justified... cue me logging onto Tumblr and seeing otherwise lol. So, I feel like I have some understanding of the show and why it does things the way it does, and that's why I feel taking other Jaune or Cinder ships for granted is terribly dangerous, because I've seen other things taken for granted - like Penny becoming a new main character and joining the cast and having Friendship Hijinks - that ended in a lot of intense personal pain for people. Similarly to them, though, I would never want to lead anybody astray (not that they did, but I am talking about some stuff that is very emotionally... touching, let's say), and so that's why I think coming to your own conclusion is necessary. And more fun. (:

It is very interesting to receive this ask because yes, I've had a few people say as much as you're saying, and what I'm personally wondering is how the show seeks to accomplish this (this potential change of opinion). As a Cinder fan for a long time, it's been interesting to see more sympathy for her after V8, for instance. I would say now is as good a time as any to be a Cinder fan, which is really saying something for how bad it used to be lol.

As I said, Knightfall would be a crazy twist (so would Cindemption for those who don't see it coming) and it would recontextualise their characters together... and to me I think really justify both of them lol. So there's a lot wrapped up in it that's really interesting.

Thanks again for your lovely ask and hope you have a good day. Thank you for your genuine interest and being so considerate! <3 <3

[filthyriddle]

An issue with banning 'X taboo' in fiction

Warning: Brief Mentions of topics such as Rape, Incest, Paedophilia, in the context of them being used in fictional narratives

I often see, Antis complain about AO3 tags or just the topic/s in general when it comes to fanfiction, though this also gets applied to original fiction too.

Antis will call for topics such as Rape, Incest and Paedophilia to be banned, even made entirely illegal, to be made in fictional media. They often fall on the guise of that it's "gross", "fetisishing" and "encouraging" these immoral acts.

Yet none of them realise what banning this would actually entail and why it would be a major issue if it was banned, ESPECIALLY for victims of these abuses.

This is a long one.

Antis explain that the only instances that 'should' be allowed, are narratives that don't 'fetishise/sexualise' the act, don't show the abuser in a positive light and the narrative, plus author, condemns the action. Yet Antis can never agree on what counts as what, because it is so subjective and they constantly move goal posts. The only ones they would agree one somewhat, are very clear cut and simple narratives.

You know the ones, "evil guy clearly evil and does bad things, gets punished by good guy, victim is small and weak, gets help from good guys" That whole concept, anything more complex than this? Well, you're accused by antis for whatever bullshit they can think of. Doesn't matter if you write your own experiences within this narrative, if it doesn't match their simplistic view of abuser and victim, you're now deemed an 'icky proship freak'

Anyway, the one thing Antis fail to realise, that it is impossible to follow these 'rules' in regards to banning something in a fictional narrative.

Now, I'll approach this with like, laws in mind, but this concept can be applied to websites such as AO3. Just on a smaller scale.

Let's say that, since Antis are the 'normal' ones, the law agrees to ban Taboo acts in fiction, unless they follow a set of rules.

Who sets these rules?

well, it won't be the general public that's for sure, it'll be people in power. We don't know if any of them will be victims of these abuses either, or seek out advice from victims. considering current government opinions in what 'should' be progressive countries, queerness in kid's fiction is paedophilic grooming.

How do we define 'Sexualising', 'Fetishising', 'Normalising'?

These are subjective words, everyone has a different perception on what counts as what. Some may argue that even just describing the act in a non-explicit way is sexualising. Others may say that if the Victim tries to downplay the act and justify the abuse, something that is common with victims, it is normalising the act. This also ties in the previous one, these same people will define these terms. Authors also write differently, which, can be misinterpreted and in general, interpreted in many ways. This is why Literature classes exist and why we are taught to analyse fiction in school. It's basic media analysis.

How do we monitor fiction mentioning these topics?

Now that we have the rules laid out, how will these be monitored? Will there be a team to read through every single piece of literature with a checklist to determine if the fiction is okay or not? That'll take a LOT of time and that team will have their own biases, so surely an AI will be developed to do this automatically yes? That's quite expensive and you'll need to ensure that the AI doesn't flag fiction that would actually be okay to be published. Every author writes differently remember, so how would the AI be told to consider different writing styles?

Society's opinions change overtime, how will this come into play?

This is on a large scale, but we all know that society's opinions evolve overtime regarding topics, this evolution can be really progressive or very regressive. How much will this affect this ban? Someone may join this fiction monitoring team and express how a 20 yrold dating a 25 yrold is paedophilia, how childhood friends that grew up together is essentially incest. Will the rules be altered to consider this?

There's probably more aspects to consider about how this law would be considered and played out to how the antis wish it to be. But here's the reality.

It won't ever work like that.

Look at previous bans of topics, fuck, Queerness in fiction is a very basic example that is still being argued to this day.

Do you know how this would play out? there won't be a checklist, there won't be a monitoring team to ensure that the narrative is okay, there won't be an AI to do it. Why? Because it's impossible.

Instead, there will be a total ban. You wouldn't be able to mention it explicitly and good luck finding ways to give an implication that can be easily picked up and not misinterpreted in any way.

"But surely this is a good thing? No one will write icky freak shit"

Yeah no, this ban doesn't just remove narratives that may portray the act in explicit detail, which you consider to be 'sexualisation'. This ban would remove ANY and ALL mentions of these acts.

Do you know who that includes?

Victims.

Say goodbye to any character who could be representation of victims of these abuses. Say goodbye to narratives that tell the author's story of their own experiences with these abuses. All of that will be banned because it would require mentioning the taboo topic, which is banned in this scenario.

Thank you Antis, thank you for caring about us so much that you call for a ban which will essentially remove all representation of our experiences and media we would find comfort in because we can relate to the victim in that narrative.

Oh an by the way, there are published books made for children who are victims of SA, these books help these kids learn that they're not alone, help them understand what happened to them and that what happened to them wasn't okay. Yeah well, the ban will remove that too.

But wait! There's more!

It likely won't just stop there, ohhh no, this ban could very much inspire people to make a similar ban for other forms of violence. The gaming industry already deals with these moral panics on the daily, especially when a violent game gets popular or a mass shooter is discovered to have liked playing these games.

There's likely more I could add here but I've already said a lot, I've studied media for years now and I advocate for media literacy, critical consumption and media analysis a LOT.

Those who call for this ban just show to me how much they lack media literacy and how these things would actually work in the real world.

It's okay to not like certain ways an author may portray a certain abuse, but don't call for a ban for it simply because it doesn't match your standards.

Complex narratives are allowed to exist, just because the narrative isn't holding your hand, doesn't mean it 'glorifies' (or whatever buzzword) the act, like you think it does.

So the next time you think about wanting AO3 to ban a certain tag, which, btw, the tag is there for it to be excluded in filtered searches so you can easily avoid it. Take a second to think about how this ban would play out and be realistic about it.

I've seen multiple antis 'explain' what these buzzwords mean and each time I see it? Not only does it contradict the others I see, but it calls for authors to essentially tell the public about their private life (bcos if ur an author who isn't publicly a victim of abuse and write about abuse, that's fetisisihing), AND it restricts narratives to bare bone basics, to something that would be repetitive, unchallenging for more mature readers and just, not representative of different spectrums of victims that exist.

I can certainly say for myself that If I wrote my experiences of abuse in fiction, Antis would deem it 'buzzword, icky proship content'

TLDR: If there was a form of Ban of taboo topics in fiction, it will involve banning any mention of the taboo act, outright, as it's impossible to follow very subjective rules that antis propose. This outright ban removes representation of victims in media.

If the ban even DID follow the subjective rules, complex narratives will be banned which removes representation of victims whose experiences are more complex.

This ban can be weaponised to attack Minority representation in fiction, for example, Bigots see queerness in children's media as paedophilic grooming. This ban can also move onto other forms of violence and immoral acts.

Basically, it's nonsensical and would do more harm than good.

You're burning a whole forest down, because you set fire to an individual tree for not meeting your standards.

[gender-critical-analytical]

3 questions !

1) what was your breaking point? What made you run to terf tumblr?

2) how long were you researching radfem ideas before you were like okay this is it Im here now

3) favorite stuffed animal you have? :3

ooh okay!

I didn't really have a full breaking point tbh. I had a lot of small/medium ones, including a male friend beginning to identify as a trans woman after I rejected him (at the time, I thought I was a lesbian) and a tif friend repeatedly disrespecting both my boundaries and the boundaries of a mutual gay friend. I had heard the term 'terf' before but had no real idea what it meant aside from 'transphobic', and though I couldn't tell you what post it was now, I accidentally stumbled upon a radfem post regarding something to do with abortion and found the notes full of hate from trans people and their allies because of op's beliefs. Wound up looking through radfem tags, found a mix of posts I agreed with wholeheartedly and "if you agree with terfs, kill yourself" posts. Kept reading from there, found multiple lists of other beliefs that I hadn't even considered (such as opposition to pornography and prostitution) and found that I also agreed on those points. Being surrounded by trans people in my friend group (by surrounded, I mostly mean outnumbered. I knew one trans girl (who has since desisted) and six trans boys, in a very small high school). I had more tif friends claiming they were gay men than I had regular female friends. The change in thought was swift, but I had no arguments that made sense, and the women on radblr were much more rational and logical than anyone trying to make a point against them. I made my blog, and kept my change of thinking quiet, but I fucked up anyway and was disowned from the group lol

2. I spent about two months on my blog before I stopped debating just deleting it and pretending I never made it in the first place. I have a tendency to get super absorbed in phases, and I was worried that maybe I was being blindsided somehow, and that I shouldn't stick with the ideology too soon, in case tras were right and I was being sucked into a 'transphobic cult'. I would log on for a fifteen minutes or so every day and would read, then I'd try and think of a way to counter-argue what I'd read. The problem with finding arguments with the ideology within myself was that radfems and gender-crits actually provided statistics and evidence to support their claims, I was very used to being told 'google is free', and looking back, google is incredibly biased towards trans people, considering that I had done a research paper on LGBT rights for my English class recently at the time, and had difficulty finding information on LGB suicide stats, but none whatsoever finding guilt trippy articles on trans suicide, and what I could personally do myself to keep trans kids from killing themselves. I wound up deciding that damn near everything I was agreeing with was common sense that I had just been told was wrong, and the guilt I was feeling wasn't because I was necessarily a bad person, but because I was putting my own concerns back into the front of my mind, and moving men's issues to the side. After the two month mark, I was here to stay.

3. Ooh that's a hard one! Probably my valentines bulldog squishmallow, but I love my old teddy bear too, and I recently made a stuffed dino at build-a-bear with my bestie, and I love that one too! :)

[littlelemontarte]

He did the bare minimum of passing a ball to his own player against the bottom team in the table “power” ok ok we are rewarding the bare minimum. How long until he is back taking cocaine and being extremely arrogant like last time? The reasons we let him leave in the first place. He can stay gone.

i'm assuming this is about jadon. this will be the only ask i'll answer regarding this - you are entitled to your own opinion but i have no desire to further discuss this because my opinion is a different one.

- first of all, i am not a fan how you casually threw in "how long till he's back taking cocaine". who cares if another adult is consuming a drug (and it's a big if, considering i couldn't find a single source supporting that claim)? i am not a better person because i'm not taking cocaine. it is also not on me to judge another person's coping mechanism (this is once again NOT related to jadon, i am NOT indicating that he ever consumed cocaine or that he used it to self medicate/as a coping mechanism. this is a generalized statement regarding drug use/drug addiction to kind of illustrate my stance on this).

- you are of course correct that it is his job/the bare minimum to help the team score goals as a forward. however, the team's offense has been severly lacking this season so far and has often been played in a very uninspired way. in my biased opinion, edin putting in jadon helped revive it yesterday and helped to secure a win. we were at a bit of a tipping point yesterday, before the 2:0, darmstadt wasn't harmless and could've scored the equaliser. and that could've opened up the match completely and we could've lost. instead, jadon made a good pass and we scored the 2:0 and went on to score the 3:0.

- no one on this website who follows/supports bvb has to engage with my blog. but if one does, i'm quite sure they noticed that i'm a fan of what i like to call "football romantic". i like the story behind this goal, that jadon assisted marco, because these two seem to have a special bond and seem to share a friendship. yes, it is their job to do this. but i can still be happy about it and i can still consider it one of the stories that "only football manages to write".

- no one of us knows how these people are behind closed doors. we get small glimpses in carefully staged behind the scenes videos, during interviews that are sometimes more, sometimes less authentic, on the pitch and on social media (which is often heavily curated). i don't claim to know these people. i, however, did not get the impression that jadon at an issue with being arrogant at dortmund. everyone at the club (including the staff) seemed to be overjoyed to have him back (and especially aki never had an issue with airing out if he had an attitude problem with someone in the past. we haven't heard such comments about jadon). yes, there have been instances with him being late to training (and he got a punishment for that every time, which he accepted without talking back, as far as i remember), and i admittedly only loosely followed his time at manchester united. but i don't think arrogance was why he left us in the first place.

- we had a lot of questionable transfers in the past, especially regarding the financial aspect. i do believe, only looking at it from a business point of view, that this isn't an irresponsible transfer. a loan is often cheaper than simply buying someone. jadon has a lot of talent and players like that aren't particularly cheap nowadays. there's no guarantee that this will work but if it doesn't, we didn't lose a lot of money with getting him for the second half of the season. of course it's only a short term solution but the market isn't exactly overflowing with players within our budget.

i hope this made some sense. i don't want further discussions regarding this in my inbox but i wanted to express my point of view.

[vtori73]

Need to make comics... horror comics.

Honestly, for awhile I may have not been willing to admit it but I think I was sort of avoiding trying to come up with a full fledged horror comic and I think I did this because i have higher expectations for what I make in regards to horror. I'm a big horror junkie, sure there are some classics I haven't seen still but I've watched, read & played plenty of horror, it's one of my fav genres.

I do also avoid doing things in general (art related) because I don't want to mess up/high expectations & also executive dysfunction but even more so with horror. I want my comics to be scary, to dig at you, I worried I wouldn't be able to do that because even though I LOVE horror I also... don't really get scared by it often. Video games tend to get to me more but I'm not making a video game, I'm making a comic.

I sort of recently (a few months ago), decided to read a bunch of Junji itos work because while I was aware of him and his stuff I never really read much past a volume or two (not because of disinterest i just have a horrible attention span/memory). I wanted to read more, specifically comics, since it was something I was interested in doing but was a bit afraid to tackle. I read probably all of tomie, some short stories (still haven't read some of his more famous ones, need to find those) & some of that one about fish gaining legs and going on land (don't remember the name) & I also read the Drifting Classroom, I was reminded of it when I remembered my dad owned a copy & seeing it once when I was a young teen (I think I read it too). I also have looked for various webtoons/indie/web comics to read. And while its good research I think what really made me feel more open to making horror/freeing my mind to come up with ideas for horror was finally figuring out how I can use that sentiment I hear a lot of from people who make horror and that is to create from what scares you, to use it, pretty much the "create from what you know" thought process. And look, this was already something I knew AND was applying to my other stories I have created (in my head mostly, but still) but I was having hard time warping my head around this concept FOR horror. Sure I have fears but as adult most of mine are more dull, mundane, common, or a fueled by my anxiety, so I never really felt any of this could make a good story or more specifically I never thought I could make it into a good story and would make something either "preachy" or boring (or WORSE... both). And yeah sure I fear normal things that most normal people do but I don't want to make those into horror stories, honestly those kind of horror stories bore me a bit but mostly it's because they've been done and I don't really want to redo something that has been done over & over and over again but also because those types are hard for me genuinely get scared by like the ones that go off of the whole "stranger danger" philosophy because in reality it's so rare your going to be hurt let alone murdered by strangers & more likely will be someone you know to some extent.

Also considering I'm also very critical of the genre (look, this isn't a sole problem with horror BUT we can't deny horror has some very big issues regarding how it depicts disability, poc, & trans people but also with how it depicts woman & queer people). I also didn't just want to make any old horror story, I want to avoid demonizing anyone marginalized which I feel isn't going to be too to hard, like yes, I still have biases and stuff I may not notice that might creep into my work that I need to be aware of & to look out for BUT... the reason I decided to say it wouldn't be too big of an issue for me to try avoiding is because these marginalized groups don't scare me. I have a general fear of new people but that's my social anxiety. I wouldn't make it a focus because I've done/am doing the work to undo anything that our society has tried to tell me I should fear, distrust, or hate.

So, what I fear, I never thought I personally could translate it into a good horror. I could never wrap my head around making my fears in to something that wasn't completely obvious, but I think I kind of get how to now. Like, I still think I could be less obvious with some of my ideas BUT there is always time to work on that, I have time to improve my craft. I just need to be less afraid to creat and finish my work and just make it all the way through.

[jojaqualityheadcanons]

SDV's 1.5 update contains content that plays into racist, colonialist, and imperialist myths and beliefs.

Disclaimer: I loved SDV (which is a given, considering I have an SDV sideblog lol?), and I'm not writing this post to get people to boycott the game or stop liking it or whatever. I just want people to understand why this content is harmful, how it might be affecting your biases and beliefs, and think of how they can engage with this media without exacerbating the harm that it does. I'm Filipino, and I don't speak for all POC or all brown people, but I felt deeply hurt and betrayed by the content update. Please keep that in mind before you interact with this post. Explanation under the cut because of 1.5 spoilers (obviously) and because this got long.

(I will block people who clown on this post. Keep your opinions to yourself unless you also have firsthand experience with the issues I describe.)

Background

I was already wary of the 1.5 content update because of how the previews featured ~tropical~ and ~exotic~ stuff, but I decided to give it a shot because maybe I was being too hasty with my judgment.

I wasn't. I made a new save to play with the 1.5 content update, and at first, I was having a great time! The new special orders made gameplay more exciting and varied! I could finally get rid of the nursery from my house without mods! The remixed junimo bundles made me change my usual game strategy. And then, I finally unlocked Ginger Island.

It seemed cool at first, but I had a sinking feeling growing in the pit of my stomach as I kept playing. It got to the point that I started nursing a stomach ache and lots of anger that took me days to shake off. I know SDV has never been a shining example of racial/ethnic diversity and sensitivity (I mean... there's a reason why mods like Diverse Stardew Valley and a bunch of other diversity mods exist lol). But while the lack of diversity in the pre-1.5 content is more of a missed opportunity, the 1.5 content is just... actively harmful and hurtful, imo. Here's a breakdown of the issues with the setting and the characters:

The Setting

Ginger Island, along with the Fern Islands in general, is a tropical island that is clearly based on islands in the Pacific. Its features include fertile soil and an abundance of natural, foragable resources. And for some unknown reason, it has no native human population.

Many islands in the world are uninhabited by humans, and there's always a good reason why. The island's environment may be too hostile, it could be too small to sustain human life, it could be sacred or otherwise culturally unacceptable to live there, or some disaster may have occurred to wipe out the local population or cause them to flee. Some uninhabited islands are nature reserves or privately owned. The point is that if an island is habitable, people are bound to call it home.

Writing Ginger Island as an uninhabited "tropical paradise" feels like a copout. It's as if the game is saying, "don't worry, you're not colonizing this land because no one really lives here! You're not stealing this land or anything because it's up for grabs and is just waiting for the right person to come along to develop it and turn it into a resort for other people who don't live here!" But that claim rings hollow when there are so many signs of civilization there, such as literal computers and ancient structures. And the canon reason for the existence of these things is that dwarves, non-human creatures, lived there once. I just think it's ridiculous and harmful that the game completely ignores and erases the existence of the people who lived and still live in the places that Ginger Island is based on and goes even further to use non-human creatures as stand-ins. I don’t think I have to explain why this isn’t good, considering that people of color have been compared to animals and treated like animals to dehumanize us and justify our oppression for ages.

To really hammer in my point about whitewashing and erasure, all the human labor on the island is done by a flock of parrots that you pay with golden walnuts (i. e., resources that you get for free from the island they live on). There's even an anthropomorphized bird who's a shopkeep! I get that creating a whole cast of human NPCs to fill a town would have been way too much work for a content update, but CA didn't need to use a bunch of animals as stand-ins for non-white human characters. There’s a troubling trend of creators prioritizing animal characters over characters of color, and CA plays right into it. He seriously chose to create more anthro characters instead of adding characters of color to the game in a setting that in real life has populations that are primarily made up of brown people. The game includes brown people's land and cultures, but it draws the line at brown people themselves.

The erasure of brown people and the portrayal of our lands as wild and untamed have been used to sanitize the narrative of colonialism for centuries. Pretending that our lands were wild tropical paradises that were ripe for the taking is pretending that colonizing forces didn't use violent, dehumanizing means to subjugate or wipe out countless peoples and cultures in order to make these lands available. Ginger Island's erasure of brown people just perpetuates this colonialist myth, and the context in which it does so disgusts me: the farmer, who already runs a successful farm that was inherited from their grandfather, goes off to a tropical island they have no personal connection to and uses its natural resources to expand their business further. They also open up a resort on the island for the enjoyment of other privileged people from their homeland, and going there is treated as a luxury. This is a classic colonizer narrative, and I cannot believe the game forces players to colonize an island in order to win.

The Characters

I'm honestly amazed that the amount of feedback about the lack of diversity in SDV didn't prompt CA to create characters of color. I'm amazed that he chose the setting he did and still didn't bother to create any characters of color. The fact that all three of the new human characters who live on this tropical island are white makes me go a little apeshit, to be honest! I hate all three of them for a variety of reasons, so I'll go over them one by one:

Birdie

My reasons for not liking Birdie are primarily related to misogyny (lady spent literal decades in isolation on this island moping over her dead husband?) and ageism (if you tell her to live her own life, she tells you that she's too old to???). Sooo they're not really related to the rest of my discussion here, and I won't get into them further. Moving on!

Professor Snail

White historians, archaeologists, and paleontologists have been stealing and plundering artifacts, relics, and fossils from colonized lands for centuries. These white scientists would send their “discoveries” back to their homelands with little regard for the people they stole from. I’ll acknowledge that Professor Snail doesn’t bring the bones and fossils off the island, so his character isn’t as awful as it could be, but he still canonically has this line:

I really just don’t understand why it was necessary to make this character white when making him a character of color could have easily prevented the uncomfortable real-world implications of a white man coming to a foreign land to plunder fossils without asking anybody for permission. If he he’d been created as someone who traced his ancestry to Ginger Island and wanted to study the island’s biological history, his character could have been so sympathetic and even admirable to me! But his character as it is just makes me think of this meme:

Here are some links for further reading about colonialism in paleontology and other social sciences: 1, 2, 3, 4.

Leo

I had a hard time figuring out how to write about this character because the way CA wrote him is arguably one of the most racist parts of SDV. So many aspects of his character left me speechless and appalled because I cannot believe people are still writing shit like this in the 2020s.

I’ll start off with his storyline: this white child gets stranded on an island and is raised by animals. When the farmer meets him, he speaks in broken English to show how “wild” he is:

As the farmer continues to interact with him, he begins to speak more “proper” English:

Wow... he’s becoming more “civilized” because of the farmer’s influence!

As his story progresses, he reveals that he’s lonely because he doesn’t fit in among the other birds. Eventually, he leaves behind his non-human family and assimilates into a primarily white, Western-coded society because that’s supposedly where he belongs.

This whole storyline is made possible by the problems with the setting that I mentioned earlier. Leo wouldn’t feel so lonely and out of place if there were people on the island. He wouldn’t be depicted as wild and animal-like if he had an adoptive family made up of humans instead of parrots. But because CA chose not to have native human characters on this island, Leo can only be around other people if he leaves his home and family behind. As a result, Leo’s story has very uncomfortable parallels with how colonizers have historically separated indigenous children from their families and cultures and forced them to assimilate into the dominant colonizer culture because they considered indigenous cultures to be savage and barbaric (1) (2).

Leo’s whole narrative unintentionally implies that a good life in a good community can only be had in civilized white Western societies. I’m honestly having trouble with further explaining why Leo’s whole character makes me feel so gross, so just read up on the White Man’s Burden, The Jungle Book and other works by Rudyard Kipling (1) (2) (3) (4) (5, PDF download link), and even Tarzan (1) (2).

Leo’s character is also used to further whitewash non-white cultures: 

Poi is a Polynesian dish. Mango sticky rice, which is also a recipe that Leo teaches you in-game, is a Thai dish. In the letter, Leo says that the dish is from his home and enjoyed by his non-human family. Considering that he probably learned these recipes on Ginger Island, and that the only “people” who could have taught him this recipe are literal animals, including these recipes in the game in this way just reinforces the equation of brown people to animals. I’m not Polynesian or Thai, but I know that if CA had included a Filipino recipe in the game and not only had it taught to players by a white character, but also passed off as something from the white character’s culture, I’d be angry. I’ll repeat myself: The game features brown people's food and cultures, but it draws the line at brown people themselves.

I don’t think there’s any way to tweak or edit Leo’s character to fix the issues I described. No matter how we change things, he’s still an orphan raised by animals coded as indigenous people, and he assimilates into the dominant white Western culture. The only way to address these issues is to completely redo his character and even the setting of Ginger Island. Here are some options that I’ve thought of:

Leo is related to someone in the Valley and stays with them for part of the year.

Leo lives with his human family and community on Ginger Island.

Leo’s parents are specifically from Stardew Valley/Pelican Town and he wants to visit in order to reconnect with his heritage.

This list isn’t comprehensive, but it does show that there are so many alternatives to having yet another Mowgli story in Stardew Valley.

Conclusion

I don’t think that CA had bad intentions when he made this content, but the fact is that he did create this content. I’m not calling him a bad person. However, he does have a lot of racist, imperialist, and colonialist biases that he has yet to unlearn. Considering the setting and subject matter of the new 1.5 content, he really should have hired some sensitivity readers to avoid creating harmful content. The man’s sold over ten million copies of his game, and he certainly has the resources to put together a sensitivity team.

I can’t look at Stardew Valley the same way I did before 1.5, but I’m not going to condemn the game as a whole. I might play the game again someday, but I absolutely won’t be going back to Ginger Island. If you’ve enjoyed the Ginger Island content, then good for you! Please just keep all that I’ve written here in mind and accept that that content hurts some people like me.

If you’re a content creator, I urge you to get sensitivity readers if you’re featuring  cultures that you’re not a part of to avoid making the same mistakes that I’ve discussed here. Creating from a place of understanding and respect can only make your work better and more accessible to a wider audience, especially to the people whose culture you’re borrowing.