not sure why people don't seem to understand that shiv being the victim of misogyny and vitriol from all the men in her life can and does coexist with the fact that she is not a feminist liberal hero fighting to save democracy. why is it that we never afford her any nuance? she's either the only good person on the show and deserves to kill every man in a ten foot radius (twitter) or a uniquely evil cruel sociopath with no heart fueled entirely by spite (reddit). is it not just so much more interesting for her to be a fascism aiding and abetting character like the rest of them who also views herself as more progressive in spite of everything else about her and who undergoes horrific treatment at the hands of the men around her yet has no interest in undoing the system that allows them to do so, only in ruling it herself? shiv is not any better than the others nor is she any worse than them. there's no Evil Olympics here guys, nor should there be. snook said it herself in the after credits sequence -- shiv was just lucky that her interests aligned with her sympathies. who knows what she would've done had mencken been her best personal option? yes she cares infinitely more about politics than roman, yes she is still very much interested in maintaining the capitalist, fascist structure and even strengthening it, so long as it ends with her on top (which either way would be a win for liberal causes bc Woman). fascism isn't one-size-fits-all. it's not just mencken and trump. it's also mattson. it's also logan. it's also roman and shiv and kendall. that's... kind of one of the main points of succession? but even so, that does not negate the fact that as a woman it is so hard to watch some of the scenes with her and tom/roman/kendall -- of course that misogyny will resonate with female viewers, as it should!!! but that resonance needs to coexist with a deeper understanding of her character -- if you want to root for a bad bitch fighting against misogyny go watch, i don't know, captain marvel or whatever. what makes shiv interesting is that she's so so so much more than that -- she is the product, victim, and perpetrator of misogyny and fascism, two concepts so heavily intertwined they're virtually inextricable from each other. tl;dr it's one thing to be like my god someone give shiv a gun and it's another entirely to say, entirely seriously, that shiv is the Good Liberal Feminist One and the rest are all evil. like i absolutely adore shiv but i would honest to god find her so fucking boring if she were actually the person these tweets make her out to be i'm sorry
4K notes
·
View notes
Prompt 268
Fright Knight sighs, running a clawed hand through his hair in an attempt to stop the flames from flickering into being. It had been far too long since he had taken a human-ish form. His human-ish form. Ugh. He didn’t exactly care for his human form after so long as a ghost, but needs must he supposed.
Especially with the whole, we’re going to punch a backdoor into the literal daycare part of the Infinite Realms and be surprised when literal toddlers go exploring.
Well, at least it got him off of guard duty for a bit, which was relieving. Not that he didn’t love the darkness, but it got boring in the shadow of his sword for literal centuries with nothing else happening. He was a warrior for Realm’s sake! Borderline an Ancient in both power and age! He wasn’t meant to stay so still for so long.
So while ghostling wrangling wasn’t exactly in his area of expertise, he could definitely gather them back up to the Realms. And deal with the curs who had decided to attack literal babies.
The Daycare area was already understaffed due to just how large it was, and the one in charge of this section had practically sobbed to the Council (In another world they would have been put on hold for a century in line for their concerns, and then more once a Sarcophagus was opened, but they had told the other ghosts in distress, causing others to let them go up in said line) how they were almost certain they had felt at least one core form Outside the realms thanks to the breach.
Which had understandably put everyone at an uproar.
So here he was slipping between shadows to do reconnaissance and take stock of if any Ghostlings had left the city. And gently scruffing those he comes across in exasperation because what are you doing, ghostling? Look at the mess, what would your caretaker say?
264 notes
·
View notes
There are many interpretations of the. Miguel and Gabriella and Miguel situation ans ALL OF THEM ARE GREAT but like...have my 2 cents...just hear me out...
Miguel in canon is an asshole in a major way largely because of his abusive upbringing, getting Eldest Daughtered from a young age trying to take care of his younger brother and protect him from George's violence and Conchata's...indifference/contempt? And he starts getting better once he becomes Spiderman, or at least starts thinking more about the consequences of his actions, and what the people in his life mean to him (shit still goes bad because his comics are insane)
If dad!Miguel never became Spiderman...it's honestly pretty likely he doesn't have that bit of growth and honestly, wouldn't have been a great dad. Not abusive, but I can imagine him being kind of absent and kinda emotionally neglectful, seeing how Miguels everywhere are prone to distancing themselves. Miguel also can't keep a relationship, either by breaking up or Spiderman Branded Widowing, so Gabriella wouldn't have had a consistent mother figure.
Alright, so, Gabriella, here, is being raised by a dad with so much baggage and the belief that its better to just keep her away from it (ei, keep her away from him), no real mom/mom is always changing because of Miguel's turbulent love life, maybe her uncle (depending on. Stuff) and maybe her grandma (depending heavily on Stuff). This is a fragile environment that does love her, but ultimately the adults in her life have too much shit going on themselves to effectively tend to her and her needs, especially as she becomes a tween
But our Miguel.
Our Miguel has every reason to love her wholly and unapologetically. Because he has done some very questionable things to have this child, and he treasures every goddamn second. This is a privilege he has comprised his morals for, and he isn't taking it for granted like Gabriella's actual father.
Meanwhile, Gabriella's dad fucking vanishes one night and the guy who shows up looking close enough to fool adults, he's everything she wanted from her dad. He doesn't raise his voice, doesn't get curt. He doesn't have a new girlfriend every other month. He doesn't have this tense, confused look in his eye whenever he looks at her. The guilt is still there, but it's something else. Its not her dad not knowing how to be better. She doesn't know what it is, but has suspicions.
Her papa looks at her like he's finally figured out how to feel about her, like she's finally stopped being another responsibility or chore to tend to. This one loves her even when she needs help with homework, even when she gets in trouble at school, evening when puberty hormones make her temperamental.
Gabriella doesn't know what happened to the first one, and she never finds out. She just knows that there's something...wrong, with the man she calls Papa now, but he loves her the way she always wanted...so it's fine, right?
Miguel, for his part, sees himself teeter towards their parents. Sees himself have the thing he wants so badly, would do anything for, and skirt the line their parents crossed, their whole lives. And then, that other man with his face dies. Maybe someone else, maybe Miguel really did kill himself.
Either way.
A child gets a parent who loves them, a parent gets a child who they can love freely.
So, it's fine, right?
213 notes
·
View notes
legitimately insane how to some people, "we should wipe out this ethnic group that we've violently constrained to a ghetto because they're just genetically more violent and dangerous" is a reasonable and justifiable statement but it's Nazi Rhetoric to say something like, "it's bad that Israeli civilians are being killed but acknowledging that as tragic includes acknowledging that the almost daily state-sanctioned murder of civilians by the Israeli government is also tragic and unacceptable"
btw guys speaking of Nazi shit - can we check in, alongside what's been done to Palestinians in the last 75 years, what's the Israeli government's take on the Azerbaijani government's newest round of ethnic cleansing of Armenians? oh are the Israeli government's actions maybe not determined by Jewish identity, but by a commitment to colonial supremacy which puts them on the same page as other violently genocidal states like Azerbaijan, the US, and the UK? god can you Even Imagine?
(framing speaking against Israeli war crimes as inherently antisemitic requires understanding the Israeli state as representing all Jewish people, when it doesn't even represent all Israelis.
framing Israeli war crimes as synonymous with Jewish identity is pretty fucked up if we're being honest. I don't think that controlling water and power and movement for a captive population and shooting children dead for throwing stones is an inherent value of Judaism, any more than I think the torture carried out at Guantanamo Bay is an inherent value of Christianity - in both cases they're atrocities carried out by a far right genocidal government using religious identity as a shield.
Calling statements like "Israel is committing genocide against the people it's displaced" inherently antisemitic is doing more to further the idea that all Jewish people are associated with Israel than saying "the Israeli government is doing war crimes," which is a statement of fact about a country that exists and does war crimes. Is criticism of Israel as a nation often used as cover for antisemitism? Absolutely. Does that mean the Israeli government isn't doing literal war crimes repeatedly, on record, while talking publicly about scrubbing an ethnic group off the map? Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh well in the last 48 hours they've definitely cut off water and power to almost 600,000 civilians and allegedly used white phosphorus against civilians so in an extremely factual and unambiguous way yeah man those are Literal War Crimes whoever does them.)
62 notes
·
View notes
so me and Sam FINALLY watched the last season of Capaldi's Who
and tell me how, after literally over a decade and for perhaps the first time in his fucking career, Steven Moffat wrote a not just tolerable but really actually good two-parter and fully stuck the landing. like the editing and pacing were still a bit off but the storyline was original, fun, interesting and emotionally invested, and most importantly, rather than ending on a damp fart or the most furious autofellatio in history, the final part didn't fumble it and ended in a way that felt emotionally satisfying and like it made sense for the characters. like the last time he successfully wrapped up a multiparter in a way that didn't feel cheap and hollowly disappointing to me was literally The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances, and a) that was in 2005 and b) tbh The Doctor Dances is about a tenth as compelling and memorable as The Empty Child.
so after 12 years of either hackery or great ideas that fall apart in the second act, Steven Moffat writes what I would genuinely consider to be a memorable Good Doctor Who serial. it ends with bittersweet pathos, a solid closer for all the main characters, and sends Moffat's showrunning career out on a genuine high despite failing ratings and budget cuts (and the fact Doctor Who hasn't been consistently good since about 2009). good job Steve. with grudging respect I admit you pulled it out of the bag on this one.
wait what's this there's one more episode left? and it stars Mark Gatiss? and you literally spend the whole episode inexplicably just shitting all over the legacy of Doctor Who by inventing a version of the First Doctor that bears literally no resemblance to the character that William Hartnell actually played, just so you can spend the whole episode saying misogynistic things to run yourself off to how much more Totally Feminist your version was than the version you made up in your head of what Doctor Who was like in the 60s? and it added literally nothing to the season except to take all the wind out of the sails of the actually good finale you already wrote?
even when he writes a good episode this fucker still finds ways to disappoint me.
19 notes
·
View notes