#like they’re just fundamentally different people and it shows esp in this issue

[audhd-nightwing]

THINKING. ABOUT THIS.

i love babs but… she’s definitely the daughter of a cop.

[danothan]

im hoping i didnt misread your tone reading the tags and you do want to hear violyn shippers out but if u were /gen the reason that they appeal to me so much is the fact they are very different in every single way down to how they were raised but at the same time they are very similar with their motivations and goals in life they both want to help people and do good and while they certainly have quite a few hurdles to jump over they work together well and clearly trust each other very much despite their contrasts and differences and how they do have to jump a few hurdles to have a strong bond and might not click instantly but that doesn't mean the potential isn't there. also yeah youre right im a basic bitch and like tropes when ur a lesbian you gotta settle sometimes when it comes to rep. anyway hope u enjoyed the rant because it was a struggle to not make this longer

yes i was being genuine! i like getting other ppl’s perspectives, esp if it’s on smth i don’t understand. warning tho, i get pretty negative and definitely wordy underneath the cut

i think “potential” is the keyword here. i get the whole oil vs water metaphor in concept, but the execution leaves more to be desired. like you said, they’re fundamentally opposed in their upbringings and values. i mean after all, the first scene in arcane is the destruction caused by enforcers, ending on a shot of young vi glaring at them as she’s being carried away from her dead parents. that’s the kind of thing that sets the tone for the rest of the show, so it makes me wonder why we never feel the weight of that trauma after act 1. you’d think being wrongfully imprisoned for 6-7 years would make vi’s resentment grow even MORE, but i feel like she’s just toned down from her younger self if anything. before, she’d have a shouting match with vander over his betrayal of making deals with enforcers. couple episodes later, she’s teaming up with an enforcer herself? what changed?

i feel like they don’t have many shared goals either, esp not anything to bond over. so far all they really have in common is that they want to find jinx (for very different reasons) and they want to stop silco, which isn’t very romantic common ground lol. i’m not even sure i’d agree that they have the same motivation to help people bc vi is completely out of touch with the current political state of zaun and pretty much only has tunnel vision for finding her sister. and while caitlyn definitely wants to help people, she isn’t willing to listen to vi or ekko’s criticisms bc she gets too defensive over the idea that she might be part of a corrupt system. they’re barely ever on the same page

you say they clearly trust each other despite their differences, but i don’t think they should given this history. OR, if they did, it should be like my bookclub partner said and have vi fall headfirst into the relationship. and if this were to be the case, it would have to lean into vi’s emotional immaturity + lack of experience and give caitlyn growth + more awareness of their situation. but neither of these options happen, so caitvi toes the line without being able to commit to either side. it makes their relationship feel inconsistent and trivial to me

my bookclub partner and my sibling also brought up separate but enlightening points on the portrayal of their dynamic. f0r mentioned how they would be generic and frustrating to watch if the main conflict of their relationship was internalized homophobia, so it was a good writing choice to not include homophobia/sexism as a part of their society, and i agree with this. it’s an overdone trope used in place of actual substance, fantasy bigotry being a 1-to-1 with the real world just feels lazy. then my sibling noted that even though they technically don’t use this particular trope, their dynamic still carries the same story beats. their struggles and resistance towards each other feels subjective instead of being based on core themes of the story, like it’s a personal issue or a difference in personality and not the fact that they represent opposing sides of a class war?? this is why i don’t get what the big deal is over their break up. it felt like forced tension bc i wasn’t all that convinced they were in love after a few days, not to mention the breakup didn’t even last, so narratively i don’t see the point of having them separate if they were immediately going to get back together

again, if you’re going to use the oil vs water metaphor, lean into their differences. it shouldn’t be brought up when drama calls for it (“what, you don’t have parents?”), it should be the foundation of all of their interactions. i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again, jayvik represent the oil vs water metaphor better with the way external forces play into the difference in their values and create a divide between them despite their history and compatibility. hell, i feel more of that zaunite vs piltovan conflict between cait and jinx bc at least jinx’s trauma is written into their interactions

it almost feels like they’re having fun on their secret mission until vi remembers she’s supposed to hate cait. it’s the whole forbidden lovers trope that doesn’t actually feel forbidden bc there are no consequences for them being together. everything is just inferred because, well, they’re supposed to be opposites! so of course they’re on-and-off! but drawing conclusions from character fun facts is not the same as seeing those elements being purposefully utilized. this is what i mean when i say shippers have to rely on speculation. ultimately, caitvi is an underdeveloped on-and-off relationship that doesn’t commit to being either enemies OR lovers. it just feels like a messy high school love story in the middle of more interesting politics, found/unfound family, xenophobia/classism, magic, drugs, and terrorism

it’s a shame you say you have to settle, especially in a show like arcane where they don’t pull their punches for heavy and nuanced subjects. i feel like they set the bar too high to settle for a basic shipping trope. the other relationships in this show are intrinsic to and enhanced by the plot, and vice versa: you know they love each other but external forces play into their personal values and dynamics. caitvi deserves the same complexity and chemistry given to these other relationships

and for the record, i like both characters individually. i can see myself enjoying their relationship as it gets more developed. i think they have a lot of good moments in the show. but as of right now, based on canon only, caitvi is the weakest part of arcane’s writing

[elftwink]

i do think there’s lots of critiques to be made about which pieces of media get attention and to what degree but sometimes people on here are like “why is nobody on tumblr talking about xyz” and the reason is that the media in question is well-written, self contained, complete, and has very little loose ends, all of which combine together to actively resist fandomization. movies usually don’t have fandoms like shows do because in a tv show you get all this extra space to open plots and explore characters with a decent chance some stuff won’t get resolved for years or maybe ever, allowing fans to step in and speculate (and the same for any version of stand alone vs serial media). character driven stuff has more of a fandom because most types of fanwork are character focused. ongoing media has more of a fandom than stuff that’s finished because part of the appeal of fandom is speculating about future events; a huge chunk of fans leave after a finale even if the fandom persists. stuff that’s full of plot holes and bullshit that goes nowhere have HUGE fandoms not despite but because of that bullshit; it makes people want to explore the potential avenues that are dropped and imagine what the canon would be like if all this stuff actually mattered or if xyz happened instead of abc. fandom thrives on open-endedness, on unresolved tension, on unanswered questions, on ongoing stories. that’s not to say there aren’t exceptions (people will start a ‘fandom’ for anything under the sun) but in terms of popularity and longevity there’s a very clear pattern in what does and doesn’t get fandomized and it feels so obvious to me that it throws me off when someone seems to have not picked up on it. to the point where i assume they don’t personally frequent any fan spaces because that’s the only way you wouldn’t pick up on it!

and since fandom is the primary way people interact with media on tumblr dot com... kinda goes without saying no one is talking about it without a fandom. there’s tons of stuff i absolutely adore but have no interest in talking about on here because all i would say is “you should watch it” because there’s nothing else TO say after that. if something speaks for itself i’m not making my whole blog about it. i have to be able to add something for it to be worthwhile.

[closing note disclaimer that this is not about people who are rightfully pointing out that media with marginalized protagonists, esp protagonists of colour, often are ignored or sidelined by fandom with bullshit excuses. many of the media brought up in those discussions are very obviously also conducive to fandom in the way i’m talking about here, mostly commonly that they’re ongoing shows with interesting characters. also many of them do have fandoms, it’s just that the fandom is actively hostile to both the characters in the media and other marginalized fans, which is a huge issue but not what i’m talking about. this is more about when people bring up a decent stand alone movie and are shocked people stopped talking about it 2 weeks after its release. that’s like, a fundamental misunderstanding of the point of fandom rather than a valid and demonstrable critique of bias and bigotry in fan spaces. please do not leave this post with the takeaway fandom formation and fan behaviour never has anything to do with the bigotry and biases of fans (it does, often); i just like talking about the different factors that create fandoms.]

[omoi-no-hoka]

What have you found you need to be very careful with when translating narrative texts? When I write in different languages there are of course different nuances and ways to express thoughts, but I wondered if there was anything that showed up often in your line of work, esp since for me at least thinking in Jap takes viewing things in a very different light.

Hi! Thank you for your ask!

This is a very interesting topic. I’m a self-taught translator, in that I have no formal training. I was just hired because I could do both English and Japanese haha. So my opinions perhaps aren’t as informed or correct as someone who has actually received formal translation training/certification.

I often have to translate rather difficult business negotiations or explanations about issues that arise, and what I most commonly struggle with is not so much a difficulty with nuance, but with the fundamental sociolinguistic differences in relaying information in Japanese and English.

Japanese communication in general is much more vague than English. At the sentence level, we see subjects or objects or tenses omitted. At the topic level, we can see what an English-speaker would deem “essential information” omitted, such as the start date of an event, or the cause of an event, etc. 

The sentence-level omissions are just the way Japanese works and I can’t explain that. But the topic-level ones... This is just my personal opinion not backed by research, but I believe that in Japanese culture, there is a certain safety in vagaries. You can’t be held accountable for not meeting a deadline if you do not state an ETA, for example. The person hearing this vague explanation will no doubt have questions, but will often be hesitant to ask them because they understand the safety of vagaries as well, and also do not want to come across as rude by questioning them. There is a trust in both parties that they are acting in good faith.

So let’s go through a hypothetical scenario that can happen at my job and see it in action.

👆 mfw i am having a good day and it’s 5:59 and I’m thinking I get to home on time for once but then everything catches fire and they all go 「Omoi-no-hoka様、とても申し訳ないですが、、、」(Sidenote: Everyone just calls me Omoi-no-hoka-san, but when they know they’re asking a big favor I’m not gonna like, they put -sama on in an attempt to appease the beast lmao.)

Let’s say that an issue suddenly arises. No one can access any of the Microsoft Suite apps so no one can get any work done. This is a major issue that must be relayed to our client immediately. 

Here’s the example Japanese I’ll receive that I need to translate into English. Sorry if my Japanese isn’t perfect. 

クライアント様、

お世話になっております。田中でございます。

早速ですが、ただいま弊社のO365が急にアクセスできなくなりまして、それによっていくつかの営業に直接関連するタスクができかねる状況になっております。

迅速にこちらの問題を解決するように努力しております。

進捗がある次第またご連絡差し上げます。

取り急ぎでございますが、よろしくお願いいたします。

Now here would be my direct translation of this email:

Client-san, (most clients working with Japanese people know about -san but not about -sama, so I change it to -san.)

Hello. This is Tanaka. 

I am sorry to report that we have lost access to our Office suite suddenly and this is preventing us from completing various tasks that directly impact operations. 

We are working as quickly as possible to resolve this issue.

We will inform you when we have updates.

Kind regards,

If our American client were to read an incident report that vague, they would immediately fire back 30 different questions. When did the issue start? What tasks can you not complete? How are operations being impacted? What is being done to resolve the issue? Has the cause been determined? What is the estimated time until restoration? Who is to blame for this?

Therefore, when I receive a translation request like the Japanese above, I will go back to the person who wrote it and tell them that they need to provide additional information. We need to anticipate the client’s questions and give them what they need to know from the first report. 

The problem isn’t that the Japanese person is bad at explaining things; it’s just that the conventions of Japanese and English communication are different. 

Different Nuances Regarding Requests/Imperatives

There are also some sentence conventions, particularly with making requests, that have very different nuances in English and Japanese.

Japanese is sort of famous for being roundabout to the point of being unclear, whereas English is very straight to the point.

However, surprisingly, it is the exact opposite when asking someone to do something.

In Japanese, it is common to say “Please  ____.” or “We ask that you please _____.”

However, this is rather direct to an English-speaker’s ear. The more polite English becomes, the less of an imperative it becomes and the more of a request it becomes. “Would you please  ____?” or “Would you be so kind as to ____?” We phrase these “imperatives” as questions.

For this reason, many times I will take the “Please ___” I see in Japanese and change it into the above question-style imperative. This is something I often give feedback on to my coworkers who use Google translate when they don’t want to bother me because it does make quite a difference in nuance.

[scripttorture]

would corporal punishment, esp when excessive and mainly meant to humiliate, different from torture (sorry i'm not very clear on definition of torture)? would the effects on the victim be different? also, is resistance usually the effect of torture? is it possible to get demoralized as a victim of torture? or would it be something like a case-by-case scenario, dpending on the person?

There are a lot of quite complex issues being raised here so I’m a little unsure where to start.

 Perhaps the best place is with this: corporal punishment is harmful and what is judged ‘excessive’ is… often decided in a way which does not reflect the extent of that harm but instead focuses on how ‘bad’ an outsider thinks the abuse looks.

 But corporal punishment is not necessarily torture because the definition of torture does not actually cover what the abuse is. Torture is a legally defined sub-set of abuse. For something to be torture it needs to meet the following criteria:

Causes pain or distress

The attacker is aware it causes pain or distress

The attacker is a government employee or works for a group that controls territory

The attack happens while the attacker is at work (ie in an official capacity)

The attack has one of the following motives: to punish, intimidate, force a confession or attempt to obtain information

 Corporal punishment automatically meets several of these criteria but it may not meet one of the most important ones: who is the abuser and who do they work for.

 A teacher in a government run school hitting their pupils is a torturer. The same teacher hitting their children at home is an abuser.

 Some countries count large organised criminal gangs as groups capable of torture. Some do not and prosecute these crimes as assault instead.

 So whether corporal punishment in your story is technically torture really depends on how you’ve constructed the world and who the abusers are.

 In terms of the victim, no the effects are not different.

 Depending on the scenario you’re picturing there may be a difference in degree: there’s a difference between a child who is hit once by their teacher and one who is subjected to a consistent campaign of abuse over several years.

 In a torture scenario we are generally talking about the latter; regular violent attacks over a prolonged period of time.

 But there are studies that show even ‘mild’ corporal punishment of children (ie smacking) has lasting negative consequences. There’s a short New Scientist article here that discusses the research. Children who are smacked are more likely to have mental health problems, low self esteem, depression and alcohol addiction in adulthood. They are also more likely to misbehave.

 Based on that data I feel quite confident saying that whatever the scale of abuse corporal punishment is harmful and does not help anyone.

 As for the effects of torture- I think it depends on what you mean by ‘resistant’ and ‘demoralised’.

 When I say ‘torture encourages resistance’ what I mean is a rather specific ‘torture makes survivors strongly oppose their torturers and any groups they associate with their torturers.’

 Not everyone uses the word ‘resistant’ in that way. A lot of people associate the word with violent action and not all torture survivors oppose torturers in violent ways.

 Torture produces a refusal to cooperate. It creates opposition.

 But that opposition can look very different in different people and it can combine with the long term symptoms torture survivors to… discourage overt action.

 For example a survivor may refuse to participate in an escape attempt, even though they’ll be tortured if they stay. That isn’t because they want to stay or because they’ve ‘lost their will’. It’s because they know what the chances of success are, and they are usually very very low.

 Some people in that situation will choose to take the risk. Others will choose not to. I don’t think, based on what survivors say, this is because they’ve chosen to ‘obey’ their abusers. It’s because they’re waiting for the best possible chance.

 Sometimes that chance never comes. Sometimes people don’t act. Because the price always seems to high, the chance of success too slim.

 Sometimes they don’t act because they see the way the world treats survivors and they think they’re more likely to die if they succeed. Unfortunately that assessment is often correct.

 What I’m driving at here is that I don’t think it’s fair to treat ‘resistant’ and ‘demoralised’ as if they’re opposite ends of a scale here. Survivors can be extremely demoralised and still act. They can also hold on tight to hope and not act, because they’re waiting for a better chance.

 On a basic level, I’d say that yes torture survivors can be ‘demoralised’ as a result of torture.

 Because a common long term symptom is depression.

 But it’s important to put that statement in it’s proper context.

 Torture does not and can not change a survivor’s strongly held beliefs.

 Torturers have no control over, or way to predict which symptoms a victim will develop.

 A survivor can suffer from severe depression, even be suicidal, as a result of torture and still oppose torturers. Sometimes they can do it extremely effectively.

 All of this comes together to mean that torturers do not have any sort of long term control over survivors. Survivors can be depressed but not all of them are. And it’s wrong to treat depression-related demoralisation as an unwavering emotion.

 Torture survivors experience the same range of emotion as everyone else. They are not ‘stuck’ on one emotion, be it depression or rage.

 Fundamentally they are people. They are varied. They change with time.

 Pain and suffering do not take away our humanity. People do not ‘break’. We’re just not built that way.

 And that means that the reality of torture survivors is more complex, more messy, more human then the fictional tropes we generally see.

Availableon Wordpress.

Disclaimer

[imbellarosa]

LOL when I make the dumb mistake of sending opinions to other blogs for a change..B you have spoilt me (all of us really) with how you always go above and beyond to be sweet, kind, thoughtful, tactful, respectful and ALWAYS willing to hear and accept varying opinions. I forget how literally only like 2.5% of ppl on here are that mature. I love when people just cannot accept that they do make mistakes, they're human, inherently flawed yk? This is EXACTLY why I stay far far away from discourse re

+ their friends & families. Ppl think that just bc they are who they are, everyone they surround themselves must also be stellar individuals & blindly defend them?? But tonight idk something in me kinda snapped I guess. I get that we see so little of their real lives & dynamics w their friends but sometimes what we see is enough yk? And giving the excuse that we only see like <5% of their lives is just that, an excuse. Bc at the end of the day, we always take what we get, esp in regards to their

+ own relationship, and draw from it what we will. Sometimes you don't need all the evidence in the world to just know (case in point, hl's relationship). And my intuition has never once failed me. Truth is (to play Devil's advocate which I OBV DON'T actually think lol), H might not be all TPWK, he might be selfish and arrogant and rude. All celebs are actors putting on a show, a facade for us. So yeah, when I see them inviting certain ppl in their lives & I think they could do better, I will

+ think, yeah, I know better. Not bc I see myself as superior, but bc I know I am a great judge of character. I can see into the depths & recesses of people even they don't realise are existent. ANYWAY long story short, this is a token of appreciation for you B. I adore you more than you'll ever know. This just reminded me of why I steer clear of that kinda discourse & why I should just stop trying to find other decent ppl on here who actually are sweet & caring & OPEN TO DIFF VIEWS like YOU.

hahahahaha anon did you get into it with someone??? I TOLD you that you were gonna get yourself in trouble djlkfjlkadjlfj. Honestly, though, I was wondering where you were yesterday! I was like, ‘huh, guess they found another blog to rant at :((”. But I think that one of the things that makes me willing to engage with a lot of different ideas is how NEW I am, honestly! There are fandoms where I’m like ‘I’ve been here for AGES, I know what’s going on!’, but this is not one of them hahaha. I do have A LOT of opinions, and a lot that I don’t share bc I don’t want to get into a fight with people over why I don’t like xyz person or song, and I DEFINITELY don’t want to get into it over kids, you know?

But as for them being real people? Uh, Harry IS stubborn and arrogant and rude sometimes, and really really jealous! You know how I know that? He told me! (I mean, not literally, right? But that’s what To Be So Lonely *is*). He DOES get blinded by his surroundings sometimes (Falling), and he DOES lose his way (Sweet Creature), and that’s FINE. That’s HUMAN! He’s also being massively irresponsible by interacting with fans when he’s meant to be in quarantine, and I don’t like it. I don’t like how people haven’t been wearing masks, and I’m not overly fond of the ‘traveling around the world’ thing they’ve got going on, and I do think that he sometimes sticks his foot in his mouth when he’s talking about political and social issues. And that’s OKAY! Let me tell you why: because I think that, fundamentally, he’s TRYING to be kind. Is he always? No! Definitely not! No one is ALWAYS the kindest version of themselves, no matter how hard we try, because kindness is, uh, SUPER HARD. But, in my eyes, the attempt and the work is worth so much, and because I don’t need him to be this ONE THING, I don’t hate him when he isn’t. I just need him to be trying to do good, and I need him to be open to criticism (mine included!) when he falls short. That’s the standard I hold myself to, so that’s the standard I hold everyone else to! 

As for their families, I mean. That is what it is, right? We don’t always choose our families, but we try to love them, regardless of when THEY fall short because they’re human, too, right? (CAVIAT: This does not apply to abusive families - a family doesn’t start and end in shared blood.) I’ll be real with you, though, anon: my intuition has failed me before. Less now, but ESP when I was 16-18? My intuition failed me LOADS, and I have pretty great intuition, normally. But I made friends with people who’s views were different than mine, who called me names, who were very cold to the fact that I was Latina (racist - they were racist) and I thought ‘that’s okay, that’s what growing up means, is to be friends with people different than you because you may need them down the line’. And you know what? I was SUPER wrong. AND, we’ve seen them cut people out when they’ve proven to be shitty people (case in point: J*rdan Green), but sometimes we work with people we disagree with/don’t like and it’s ESP hard to tell with them what’s work and what isn’t (ESP their California contacts). Just something I consider when I’m frustrated with the LA crowd. 

BUT ALSO! thank you for being so sweet to me omg??? like i love you anon, and i love seeing your messages in my inbox! 

[flying-elliska]

You said it feels cool to have a specific identity but isn't that exactly why we are seen as the special snowflake generation? Not to mention wasn't the whole point to be free from stereotypes and dress however we want, love whoever we want etc? And yet there's now so many identities, labels, flags which create an implicit pressure to define yourself so you'll be included. Idk I think your french friends are right,it still feels like we're pushing people into boxes; they're just woke boxes now.

Hey anon ! Thank you for this very interesting question. I hope you’re ok with getting a mini-essay as a response (that’s kind of my brand now lmao)

So first of all, if you don’t feel like you personally need labels, you are totally valid. And so are my friends. I think you have to find out what you’re most comfortable with. It’s true that labels can be used to exclude, esp in the LGBTQ+ communities. I think we focus our activism a little bit too much on words and online stuff and media representation nowadays, as opposed to practical political action, and that’s an issue. And we focus too much on people not having the correct, latest approved terminology and labels as a way to show you’re a good person, as opposed to what people are actually doing and their lived experiences, and who is authorized to use what label and those debates often just exasperate me to the highest point. It’s like, don’t you have anything better to do ? It becomes very clique-ish, school courtyard drama at times. There should always be a place for questioning, fluidity, no labels, a place for discovery and uncertainty, shifting identifications, multiple labels at once, words changing, and questioning what place they take in our lives.

But, on the whole, I still like my labels, and I’m going to try and explain why. 

Labels are words right ? They have the benefits and drawbacks of words. A rose under any other name would still smell as sweet, of course. But we are a fundamentally social species, and words are a way to create bridges between people, between our experiences. It signals that you are not alone ; it’s a way to make visible things that are usually invalidated, ostracized or just plain erased by the mainstream and the status quo. The development of a vocabulary for the queer community was what made their political struggle and pride possible ; before it was “the love that dare not speak it name”, all euphemisms and shame. It honors, too, the struggle of those who came before us ; it places us in the continuity of a history ; it says we have been here before, it gives us memory and context. Of course words are going to betray us, because they can never retranscribe the fullness, complexity and confusion of lived experience. But they’re a conversation starter ; they bring people together ; they create spaces of freedom. 

I’m going to give you a personal example : a few years ago I fell in love with a girl for the first time ; after that I seriously started thinking of myself as bisexual. There had always been a thing there but because I had been mostly attracted to boys before, I’d swept it under the rug. But finding the ‘bisexual’ label made me realize - no this is a thing, this is valid, and it made me look back at all those instances in the past of having weirdly intense feelings for some of my girl friends, of being obsessed with certain actresses, etc…that back then I didn’t understand, I just thought I was weird…and I always thought that bisexuality was something that something Hollywood starlets did for attention. But finding a community behind that word that was seeking to reclaim it from the stereotypes and being proud about what it meant, it was so healing.

 After that I immersed myself more in my local LGBTQ+ community ; and in particular I volunteered for the European Bisexual Convention - that one in particular was incredible because it felt so…liberating. In the general LGBTQ community, people expect you to be gay until you say otherwise. In the student association I was in, it was cool, but it was also…very normative in a way. Lots of stereotypes about how we were expected to be, what we were expected to like, behave like. So for Eurobicon, to have all of that lifted, it was amazing. And it was also so much more inclusive - of disabled, neuroatypical, transgender ppl, different body types and ethnicities, like you could feel that they had made an effort. I also met several nonbinary ppl for the first time of my life and I was like…oh wow there’s something here that feels very important and real. We shared experiences that we did not have a space before, that were specifically bisexual and that tend to go unheard in general queer spaces because they’re not part of the dominant narrative : the daily hesitations, the lack of visibility, the much higher rates of staying closeted, feeling like you are not really part of the community, but also the really cool aspects too - there was this incredible energy of fluidity too of thinking, here is a space where everyone can potentially be into everyone, there aren’t as many barriers as we usually have to think about. And there was this one party and we were all dancing and flirting in a very sweet kind of way, people of different ages and body types, gender presentations and configurations I hadn’t thought about before, a girl in a wheelchair swirling around and being treated like a queen, guys in corsets and cool butches and just some beautiful people - and there was this euphoria in the room, of recognition and kinship, and it felt so…normal, not freakish like I had been led to believe it would be. Nobody was putting on airs or trying hard or whatever, they were just being themselves. And I was like, wow, this is something I need more of in my life. And this freedom was made possible by people coming together under a certain label, recognizing that certain people have specific needs and experiences. Especially after growing up in environments that never tell you that those things are possible, finding the right label can be like coming home. 

I have other labels for myself I am less public about because I don’t want to deal with the social aspect of it, or I’m like this is none of anybody’s business, or I want to give myself the time to figure it out on my own. But they’re tools for self-knowledge, they allow me to think about things, to conceptualize, to research (and lol I’m a nerd so…). And to be less hard on myself sometimes, and to stand up for myself in a ‘I know who I am and it’s okay’ kind of way. Because society tends to pathologize, ostracize or demonize the things it doesn’t understand, and labels can protect you against that. 

In an ideal society maybe we wouldn’t need labels - to have a right to exist or survive, and that’s definitely a goal, but I think we would still make some, because that’s who we are as a species, we need to classify certain things in order to think about them. The problem is when those boxes become cages instead of like, beautiful pots to grow seeds in, like art or poetry. And of course deconstructing the boxes we don’t want remain important. But I don’t think we can ever be box-less, it just to me doesn’t compute. 

I just wanna come back to the ‘special snowflake generation’ thing. If you don’t want labels, like I said, that’s fine. But I hate hate hate that term, and I don’t want to define myself in reaction to it. To me it’s used by a) bigots who just hate the fact that natural human diversity is becoming more recognized and discussed, and want to put us back in the artificial, stifling boxes that dynamics of power, patriarchy and imperialism have made us believe were normal when they really weren’t. And b) older people who are uncomfortable with increased levels of emotional intelligence and lability among younger generations. It’s a thing I’ve noticed over and over again ; people used to talk so much less. When they had feelings in general, or experiences out of the norm, they were taught that stuffing them down and sitting on them and repressing the shit out of them, was the noble/normal/grown up thing to do. So they did and they suffered in silence. And maybe some of them now feel bitter, or at least bewildered, by younger generations refusing to do so and inventing and or reclaiming all those new ways of talking about their experiences out in the open. And so they’re like ‘it’s too much ! you’re spoiled !’ because they want to believe that their sacrifices had a point. They don’t want to realize they could have done things differently all along. It’s very sad. But I don’t think it should be a barrier to us using them like…just as we shouldn’t refrain from using washing machines because our grandmothers suffered to wash everything in a bucket…There’s nothing entitled about wanting a better life than previous generations… And to me, having more words and more space to express myself will never be a bad thing. 

[jcmorgenstern]

I finally watched 3x19 and I'm sorry but this was the dealbreaker for me. I tried to be openminded about the show twinning Clary to Jonathan but this episode just highlighted why that was a shit decision and 3x20 looks so anticlimactic I want to cry. Magnus had no agency in his storyline. Maia's storyline revolved around her shitperson ex. The heavenly fire was embarrassingly stupid (but blacksmith Izzy was hot af). Dark Clary and Jonathan are fucking flops. I'm out, friend.

I’m so sorry you feel that way, nonnie. If it makes you feel any better, I think everyone kind of feels like they’re clutching at scraps. And like, I feel for the individual writers because tbh they’re all like…one-shot writers under a lot of stress and pressure and are doing their best, but…the season really didn’t come together for me either, mostly for the reasons you’ve said. I don’t know what kind of constraints todd and darren were under, so I understand it’s possible a lot of stuff was going on behind the scenes we didn’t know about, but I’m kind of disappointed with how they chose to organize the season.

I have to admit, I never liked the clary/jonathan bond from the get-go, (honestly i was morose for weeks and bitched about it so much my coworkers at the lab were like SHUT THE FUCK UPPPP about your stupid tv show) mostly because it tripped off so many consent issues for me. like, tbqh, if I wanted to see a man feel entitled to a woman literally all I have to do is go outside. so if they were going to do it, I expected some MAJOR rennovations but…they really didn’t, so far. I like what Kat and Luke brought to it but….the seb/jace bond was already on Thin Fucking Ice as far as “fundamental consent issues” go, but like in canon he doesn’t really have THAT much interest in Jace (esp sexually) so like….you can dance around it in fic. but the way they’ve chosen to romanticize jonathan’s obsession and entitlement to his…sister… is….really just not very enjoyable?

And like yall. you know I enjoy a good bit of sebclace/morgencest but like….not like this, where it kind of feels the writers kiiiiind of don’t give a shit about consent at all, or didn’t really make an attempt to work it through (or really even think about it lol). This is doubled when you look at the Maia/Jordan plotline where like….ok if this was a beautifully written slice of life character study (10 episodes per season, 1.5 hours each) I could see them delving into the realism of Maia kind of getting back with Jordan only to realize he’s bad news. but like. the show is not beautifully written, they don’t have the time or space to delve into a complex issue in a meaningful way, so really it just comes across as romanticizing a shitty/abusive ex. Which…again. Not ideal.

The club scenes were fun but honestly (and yall know how little I say this), it really nailed home how fucking good the first half of COLS really was in terms of,,,,intrigue and this fun romp through Europe with these dark undertones and honestly the show felt a bit cartoonish? Like take it from someone who writes a lot of bad fanfiction….it felt like bad fanfiction. bad fanfiction with HUGE and glaring consent issues lolololololololololol

and like I’ve talked about both these things with @neenwolf a lot and…what she said and I agree with wholly is that…even if they have maia curb stomp Jordan (they won’t, he’s going to die tragically so she can suffer more), they still made her ENTIRE storyline about ….dudes, specially her shitty ex so like….no? They marketed this as “maia gets the pack and becomes alpha and shows people who’s boss” but that….never happens at all and it’s. a little embittering. (Very. embittering). and like she’s got the Good Thoughts so Nina if you wanna add more pls do

Honestly tho…re:3x20. if there’s anything I’ve learned about this show is that they SUCK at cutting trailers so like…idk. I’m expecting a little more than the trailer, but at the end of the day…3a’s finale feel VERY flat for me so I’m expecting more of the same. We know Jonathan does a villainous face-heel turn so ……it’s gonna be junk, from my point of view, and like all the other threads I enjoy are kind of shit rn so like…..can we not???

And I’ve been thinking about Magnus more and….I think my big problem there was that he wasn’t really working through his issues or even grappling with what had happened to him, he was just….kind of used as a shipping prop. and I get why it happened–they wanted to replicate the success of 2x18, but didn’t realize this is…a very different scenario and that people actually cared about what’s happening with magnus (sleeping for 15 hours? coping with alcohol? breaking down in front of alec and feeling ashamed of it? feeling so unwhole without his magic he’s willing to die to get it back?) separate from just ~m@l3c drama~ like what the narrative requires there is not shippy montages but actual character work looking at Magnus’ struggles, and at Magnus himself. and so overall it just left me with this bitter feeling that a) magnus losing his magic, his only independent plot since 1902, was all just to further the ship and b) that anyone actually thinks we WANT m@l3c drama in the year of our lord 2019. (seriously can there be just ONE chill couple in this show for ONCE).

everything about heavenly fire IS embarrassingly stupid (how the sword starts flaming right when she picks it up?? ghslkfjhghghhghghhghgghgg) but yeah blacksmith izzy was….Very Good. (I’m so proud of my honorary Iron Sister!!!) I was kind of concerned she’s smelting with liquid metal with bare skin but a) i know jack shit about the finer details of forging and b) honestly that’s probably the least of izzy’s worries writing-wise so whatever.

anyway we can go on but rest assured nonnie it’s……..Not just you who’s like “wtf lol” it’s kind of all of us at this point.

[janiedean]

I agree with all you've said in the last post but why can't Asian actors play a character of a different Asian nationality? Wouldn't be the same thing as British actors playing American characters? Or French actors playing Italian characters? The cast of Call me by your name was mostly French even though the story was set in Italy. There's nothing wrong in prioritising talent over nationality, it' won't make the film any less authentical

I should have specified it: when the character is THAT NATIONALITY, it would be good to stick to that, if it says generally asians or whatever who cares.

what I mean is: when there was that entire mess with scarjo and gho/st in the shell everyone was going like HERE ARE ALTERNATIVES and listing mostly lucy liu and a few other chinese/taiwanese actresses, too bad that from my understanding gh/ost in the shell is the kind of product where the fact that the ppl in it are ***japanese*** is fundamental to the plot bc it’s rooted in japan’s post-wwii issues and makes a point of being specific to that culture, so like... saying that scarjo was inaccurate is okay, but for a *japanese person* ie ppl coming from where the franchise comes from, scarjo is the exact level of inaccurate as lucy liu, bc LL is not japanese and therefore still not an accurate casting. like, if a character is written to be *chinese* or *japanese* in a story specifically dealing with chinese or japanese ppl in china or japan I think it’d be preferable to cast actors from those nationalities if you’re doing it for being accurate. or at least, not saying that you want accurate casting for representation needs and then propose people that aren’t... accurate casting for representation needs. like, idk for gh/ost in the shell if your point is SCARJO IS NOT JAPANESE then your possible alternative should be rinko kukuchi, not lucy liu. 

now: ofc I don’t mean ALL roles I mean if for rose in sw they wanted an asian actress of no specific nationality then kelly tran was as good a choice as rinko kukuchi and if it’s not a specific thing then whatever, but what I mean is that I’m kind of suspicious of the trend of going like ANYONE AS LONG AS THEY LOOK ASIAN as if every place in asia was the same for roles that are specifically coded to one nation if you grasp my meaning.

about italian actors: I have no issues with french ppl playing italians, esp. when italians are directing, but I have ISSUES with italian-americans playing italian caricature/stereotypes and ppl assuming that italian-american = ITALIAN. like one of the reasons why all of italian tumblr was over the moon over netflix marco polo was that they used italian actors for marco and niccolò polo ie two italian historical figures rather than going with american actors and we couldn’t fucking believe we had italians playing ITALIAN HISTORICAL FIGURES in an american production. (and tbh marco polo was excellent also on the asian front because it had asian actors [or of asian descent] from all nationalities cast excellently) like, that shit never happens (and ofc they canceled it because no one else was watching it sigh). in theory of course there’s nothing wrong and I don’t mind idk alain delon playing italian ppl in old italian movies, but it’s nice to see italian historical figures played by italians, same as I suppose it’d be nice for the chinese to have a chinese actress play mulan rather than from any other nationality. I probably wasn’t too clear on that but that is what I meant.

like, ofc what you said is fine, but I’d like it if when we cast ***specific*** roles of a ***specific*** nationality if the people chosen were from that background. like, the kid from cmbyn is fictional so he could have been a french or spanish actor for all I care, marco polo was italian so I was delighted to have an italian.

SPOILERS: before you ask me SO WHAT ABOUT I MEDICI AND RICHARD MADDEN:

that show is made/produced by italian people who want to market it on the outside so it was conceived to be sold on the english market

and I saw a q&a with the producers who were very honest on the fact that they looked for famous lead actors to sell outside italy and that then they auditioned but had to turn down italian actors who had a crap english accent because it had to be bilingual and since this country is shit when teaching english to people I can 100% understand the reasoning

but it’s still a show made by italians and produced by italians which is also way better than 99% of foreign shows about italy where no one is played by italians period so I’ll give them a pass esp. when they actually DO cast a lot of italian actors in it and they’re actually the majority/film HERE so people in those areas have extra work and they actually get to be extras, so in that case I’ll give them a pass.

but like, you can’t go around saying that it’s offensive to cast scarjo as the ghostintheshell protagonist and then go like BUT LET’S HAVE ANYONE BECAUSE JAPAN = ALL OF ASIA. like, if I was watching a movie about dunno vietnamese immigrants in the US in the seventies I should hope they’d pick vietnamese actors for it, if you get my drift. if you’re doing a comedy about dunno kids in college and you want one of them to be asian and you imagined them being japanese but then the chinese one wins the audition then who cares, it’s not the same level.

then ofc everyone can cast who they want, but it’s not like if scarjo isn’t fine for a specific japanese role then anyone else asian is fine just because they’re asian. or if they are then your argument doesn’t hold up too much when you apply it to other movies.

(ps: there has been discourse about brits playing americans in the past actually X°D)

[88y53]

MCU X-Men Wish List

Since it's all but an absolute certainty that Marvel is getting back the X-Men and Fantastic Four (I'll get to them another time), I decided to share a little list of things I hope they do with their newly acquired IP. Please note that these are what I specifically want/would think is interesting, so don't take this as any kind of objective stance on the issue. 

1) Make it a TV show 

 We've seen some good X-Men movies, but we've seen a lot of bad X-Men movie. I personally think that the mutants of Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters are better suited to a more episodic format. Take inspiration from the Chris Claremont era and put the "opera" back into the soap opera. Dig deep into the characters, really explore what makes them tick, get into the really nitty-gritty aspects of their world. I've never watch a perfect X-Men movie because there is way too much story to tell to fit in a two and a half hour film. We're in the platinum age of television, and I'd love to see the X-Men get the Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, or even Daredevil treatment. 

2) Make it realistic 

I'm not saying "Nolenize" it, but make it scientific and logical. I love when creators go the extra mile to scientifically justify superpower (like using quantum tunneling to explain Kitty Pryde's phasing), and make the discrimination of the mutants realistic for once. Time and time again we've beaten over the head with the "humans are prejudiced" trope to the point where it's just boarders on parody. Like the time when Iceman saves an old woman from being crushed by a falling Sentinel, only to get a glass beer bottle smashed against his head for his effort. 

3) Make it 21st Century 

You could get social media involved with a something similar to #BlackLivesMatter; maybe #Genodiversity could be the next big trend on Tumblr, or maybe people on Twitter could be complaining about SJWs petitioning for more mutant exposure in popular media. Maybe the Cyclops organizes the X-Men brand as a symbol of mutant rights like the LGBT flag. Who wouldn't love to see a mutant pride parade? John Oliver or Stephan Colbert could invite Professor Xavier or Dr. McCoy onto their shows and discuss Human-Mutant co-existence. Maybe misinformation could spread about vaccines causing mutations, or fallout from all the atomic bomb testing in the fifties. Just look at the mutant worldbuilding tag on here for inspiration. 

4) Be scientifically accurate for once 

I'm sick of hearing that mutants are the "next stage in human evolution". THAT'S NOT HOW EVOLUTION WORKS! If mutants were so fundamentally different from humans, they wouldn't be able to interbreed. Recent studies have shown that Europeans and Asians have a small percentage of Neanderthal ancestry in their DNA (Africans don't because Neanderthals didn't exist in Africa), which suggests that they were absorbed into the H. Sapiens population rather than dying off through genocide or competition. I'd treat the mutation as just that -- a mutation, no different than autism. You can still have the "next stage in evolution" rhetoric, but have it come from Magneto or Mister Sinister. And maybe mutation doesn't always give you laser beams or metal claws, maybe a percentage of mutant fetus develop in-utero tumors that lead to still-births, or extreme human vestigiality or atavism. That would explain the Morlocks and create tension among different mutants -- the ones who had the privilege of being born with "invisible mutation". 

5) Make the characters true to the comics 

Make Cyclops the official Captain America of the team (and don't make him a stoic asshole), bring Wolverine back to the ugly five-foot tank he was supposed to be (I'm thinking a short Spike from Buffy), make Storm a pacifist, give back Iceman's hothead, make Nightcrawler a wisecracker whose crying on the inside (and use his fingering faith a personal journey) make Jean the empathetic peacemaker rather then the obligatory center of a love-triangle, and keep Mystique's sociopathy (we're talking about a woman who would gladly abandon her baby in the woods to escape an angry mob). 

6) Stop with the gay metaphor 

Mutation should be a catch-all metaphor for just about any kind of discrimination or social ostracism; sexual orientation, ethnicity, cultural heritage, creed, economic status, ect. Just settling on homosexuality is a bit unimaginative. Basically, I want the X-Men to be about building a legitimate sub-culture and societal niche, and the struggle to be accepted. 

7) Change Prof. X 

Professor X's goals never made any sense to me; he wants to establish human/mutant relations, but he just seems to fight for an established status quo and spouts homo-superior nonsense. Why not make his school publicly a haven for mutants? Get human teachers? Enroll human students? Debunk paranoid propaganda about "homo superiors" and talk about how mutants are basically identical to baseline humans (save for some randomization in Junk DNA). Be an actual Martin Luthor King Jr. Nothing gets accomplished hiding in your Westchester mansion and letting the ignorant masses hate you. 

8) Change Magneto 

Have him be the proponent of mutant superiority. I'm not saying "make him a nazi", but make him a kind of knight Templar meets Che Guevara: a controversial figure to some, and a charismatic revolutionary to others. A man who fanatically wants to protect his mutant brethren by any means necessary. I'm kind of torn on the holocaust survivor origin because while it's an integral part of his character, it's just not possible anymore. No amount of diet or exercise could possibly justify the longevity of a man pushing triple digits. The point is he has to hate humans for legitimate reasons, so why not make him a Jewish immigrant that endured the iron boot heel of the Soviet Union? During the Cold War, the Russians spent considerable time and money researching pseudoscientific powers like ESP, and you can bet your ass they would've investigated people like little Erik Lensher. So, there you go, a sound reason for why he'd hate humans and think they're out to get mutants, and allowing him to be still (relatively) young (granted, pushing 60, but better than mid-90's).

9) Make Kitty Pryde the main protagonist 

Follow the Claremont era and start with the addition of Shadowcat to the Giant-Size X-Men -- Cyclops, Jean Grey, Storm, Colossus, Nightcrawler, and Wolverine. 

10) Keep Wolverine in the back 

Everybody knows that Wolverine is the coolest X-Man. WE GET IT! Give someone else the spotlight for once! *Cough* Cyclops *Cough*. 

11) Keep it fun but make it dramatic 

Marvel has pretty much patented "fun and drama" so I don't think they'll struggle here. 

12) Get Comicbookgirl19 as a creative consultant 

This one is a no-brainer. CBG19 knows her shit, and especially knows her X-Men shit. If you want a true-to-source material adaptation of the Merry Mutants of Marvel, get her on the phone. 

 So, that's it. I really can't think of anything more to say. If you think I forgot something or wish to add your own spin, feel free.

[janiedean]

Leftist kds are going to vote far left because they think communism and anarchy are going to change the world (of course, look at the CCCP *rolls eyes*), so the far majority of people, including the ones in charge (because let's be serious, everybody in power is attracted by the right, find me ONE powerful leftist guy who isn't a politician) are going to vote right or far right. If it's just right, status quo, their whines won't change anything to the world order. If it's very far-right (cont)

Very tough years ahead with a lit of hurting for minorities, but yeah more reasons to be the oppressed victims, extreme feminists happy! (And they are sitting so high on their horses they won't even see they are partly responsible because of their constant antagonism of the EnemyTM), and then, people realizes they fucked up and vote right again (maybe a shy center left, but nothing much). Honestly I can't think of a scenario where the far left wins

k guys let’s calm down a moment and let’s break this down

leftist kids in the US cannot vote for the far left because there is no far left, like bernie passes for a socialist and he’s the most leftist they have rn and for me he’s like... center-left? sort of? maybe? for me he’s like... fulfilling the bare requirements to deserve me voting for them and the fact that in the US he’s seen as almost communist says all

no one here votes for the far left because they’re a bunch of idiots who think communism is still alive when in the west it has been dead since the berlin wall fell down and at least the kids are young, those people are not, and the problem isn’t kids voting far left, is kids not voting or protest voting which gives the far right influence and extra votes because then the right wingers think that OMG THE HORRIBLE LIBERALS WILL TAKE CONTROL OF THE WORLD BLAH BLAH BLAH and the reasonable left can’t understand it needs to try and take back its voter base rather than trying to gain votes on the right

as far as I’m concerned in the US no one is leftist, rich or not, because the democrats are like, center-right to me, but like dunno warren buffett wants to pay taxes *shrug* if you consider the democrats leftists then 90% of the establishment is leftist. the problem is that a) that’s not left, b) the US have absolutely no history of like... STRIKING AND MARCHING WITHOUT GIVING TWO FUCKS ABOUT WHERE CELEBRITIES VOTE for various reasons, but that’s like... staple left stuff. when the women0s marches happened I honestly was baffled at how people seemed to give a fuck about what celebrities were there and who wasn’t - here I barely even know who famous people vote for and it’s utterly irrelevant. like the entire US political system lacks stuff that has been fundamental in the shape of leftist movements in europe - strikes, unions, marching and so on - thanks to maccartism and the whole part where IF IT’S SOCIALIST OR COMMUNIST IT’S *BAD* attitude which.... as I said before, communism as a political system isn’t viable or doable anywhere, but a lot of marxist ideas which then went into socialism blah blah blah are perfectly viable and they’re not BAD (ie: UNIONS, MARCHES, STRIKING, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, PUBLIC HEALTHCARE PAID WITH TAXES AND SO ON) but if people don’t know the difference....

the problem with people sitting high on their horses is that a lot of this so-called tumblr-leftist activism (blergh) is inherently very classist, doesn’t take the money problem into account at all if not when it comes to discussing the wage gap which fine, fair point, but can y’all please consider not getting in debt for paying for your education or hospital care if you need it because that would solve a lot of issues, never mind the concept that being in debt is fine and you can spend more money than you actually have, and none of those activists that I see are willing to actually look at the root of the problems nor to offer solutions that are long-term, nor to understand that oppression and discrimination comes for everyone in different ways (racism, classism, sexism, ableism and so on are not exclusive and can be intersectional, and they can hit everyone, and classism esp. in the US is a major issue but do I see anyone actually caring? nah), which turns into not even asking yourself why would a poor uneducated white person living in a trailer vote for trump when trump goes against their interests and they don’t even know it and so on.

and none of those ppl would actually want communism irl anyway if they had a clue of how it can’t work as a political system, nor they could ever be ideologically bc the entire point of communism as an ideology was breaking down class barriers and make everyone equal, which... is lost on tumblr tbh

also because ppl on here seem to think north korea is actually communist in anything but name lmao in their dreams

the thing is: the far left has the same business winning as the far right especially these days - the far right is more likely to win because it appeals to the worst instincts in people and sadly there’s more to go around than we’d like, but the problem is that we’re stuck with right wingers that are living off reagan and thatcher who destroyed their own countries and we’re seeing it twenty years later, pseudo-leftists who are actually right wingers (ie: TONY BLAIR BLERGH) and with *sane* lefts that can’t possibly win if they don’t straighten their shit out, protest votes that eventually only are useful for the right to win and that this ridiculous pseudo-left tumblr activism just makes leftists look terrible or like spoiled idiots who can’t pass on their good points when they’re good because they go overboard (see: cultural appropriation, because if you’re talking about like actual sacred native american artifacts being stolen/used as fashion accessory it’s a problem, but if you conflate them with shit like IT’S APPROPRIATION IF YOU’RE WEARING KIMONOS no one is ever gonna take you seriously)

tldr: people need to understand that you can’t do activism with buzzwords and feeling offended and finding everything problematic. if you can’t do that, then don’t do activism and watch tv shows, it’s better for everyone, and people also need to understand that being leftist doesn’t mean labeling everything problematic and not looking for discourse or dialogue nor assuming that the problem is cishet white dudes in power, and they actually should realize that classism is a problem and that you have to fight for everyone’s equal rights, not just yourse

and then maybe people won’t vote right wing anymore. or NOT SO MUCH.