#not that there aren’t other fans obviously but that is a Large demographic and it always has been to some extent

[cryptic-queer-cryptid]

look. not to get sappy on main but like.

call it cringe call it silly call it whatever you want but do you know what it felt like to be a depressed teenager and hear the doctor say “do you know, in 900 years of time and space, i’ve never met anyone who wasn’t important before”?

cause let me tell you, hearing that… there are whole years of my life that i barely remember because of my depression. chunks of my time on earth that i’ll probably never get back. but i do remember watching that damn special because it meant something to me, even in that fog.

[georgia-stanway]

Your Hatters tags on the archive post were so cool! There’s definitely a project for someone to use the National Media Museum photo archives to write more people that aren’t white cis men back into English football history

Yes!! Particularly if it could be done in combination with oral history. Honestly i find the social history of football absolutely fascinating. I'm going to yell about it below the read more because honestly i just think it's so important that when football is being increasingly controlled by money which is concentrated in a small number of clubs that people remember the importance of community and communities to football (and that those communities has always included women and minorities)

My grandad is very much more invested in social side of football than the sport itself so most of his stories have very little to do with actual football and are far more focused on people. He talks about the rover's player who lived up the road or his dad having the sports paper sent down from Wigan and sending them info on a Yeovil player they were interested in. Even when they are a bit more football focused it's his dad's adventures in getting tickets to the famous Yeovil vs Sunderland match in 1949 and the back up goalie who was forced to play and barely played again. I feel so much closer to my grandad since getting into football because we have something to talk about and bond over and it's really really lovely.

And then you have the geographic (and subsequently demographic) aspect. I've never been more aware of my locality since getting into football: my family's migrational history (both that 3/4 of my grandparents aren't English and the only familial connection with football i have is through my English grandfather but also movement within England), the difference in culture between the west country and the rest of England (i.e the preference for rugby over football which kind of reflects the relationship between wales and the west country and the greater presence of like celtic culture in the area even if it's not actually linked) and just being from my side of Bristol because the rivalry here is geographic. Nicknames are often reflective of local culture, industry and history (Bristol rovers are the pirates for example but we're also known as the gas because our old stadium was right by a gasworks and the smell carried into the stadium.) I'd be fascinated to know why there are comparatively so many west country clubs called the robins, whether it's a coincidence or what.

But you've also got things like Spurs' Jewish connection. i think it would be quite difficult to detangle spurs from a (particularly social) history of the Jewish community in North London and of course vice versa you can't talk about the history of spurs without talking about the Jewish community in north london. I'm sure football would feature very heavily in the history of many other communities as well, I think Arsenal have had a large Black following for example. Just the fact that football is a working class sport and even today the majority of footballers come from a working class background. Then you also have, particularly across europe, political and class aspects in rivalries like Barça v real madrid and celtic v rangers. Even things like Manchester vs Liverpool has it's own history that goes beyond yet very much includes football.

It's one of the reasons i hate trophy logic and debates on whose a big club and man city has no history because while it's obviously a competitive sport and there is a conversation to be had about money and sportswashing, a club doesn't have to be big or traditionally successful to have history and value and importance and yes success. And i don't think that community and big clubs are incompatible and while I would encourage all football fans to engage with their local clubs, i think the whole support your local thing is overly simplistic to say the least (particularly when employed by prem fans) and doesn't actually address the issue people want it to which is that particularly big clubs are pricing out fans both local and not

If you could gather people's stories and memories of football you can create such a rich tapestry of football culture and history but even just having proof that people who have had their own history and relationship with football erased and banished allows space for these things to be discussed and acknowledged

[onecornerface]

Against against Dream

Dream and his crowd (GeorgeNotFound, Sapnap, TommyInnit, Tubbo, WilburSoot, Quackity, etc.) take so much flack, largely for very weak reasons. They make some mildly-to-moderately problematic jokes, they occasionally have some minor scandal that crops up on Twitter, and their fanbases of teenagers are really annoying and obsessive. They’re always trending on Twitter for silly reasons. Dream and a few others have also sometimes soft-pedaled some of the problems among their “stans,” which is certainly criticizeable.

But overall, really, the popular condemnation is very unfair and unreasonable.

(There are two main strands of condemnation of Dream et al. One strand is by critical fans. Much of this is also out-of-proportion and driven by a misguided pseudo-activist quest to complain about as many “problematic” things as possible-- but it at least tends to be reasonably informed and sympathetic. Here I am mainly criticizing the other strand of condemnation, i.e. the dismissive condemnation by non-fans.)

One thing to note is that Dream and company make generally good content-- by the standards that are appropriate to apply to that sort of thing (e.g. clever gimmicky Minecraft videos). Some of his crowd, like TommyInnit, have undeniably very funny personalities and are very talented. You’d have to be seriously biased to deny this.

And I think you’ve got to look at this comparatively.

More significantly, if you compare Dream and company to like 80% of other internet celebrities who are popular among the same demographic of teenagers, there is kind of a stark contrast. Maybe like 80% of other internet celebrities of similar size are shittier people, who are involved in worse scandals, who are worse influences on young people, who make much more problematic jokes, who have worse (albeit perhaps somehow lower-profile) fanbases, etc.

Tons of mega-popular people such as PewDiePie, Logan and Jake Paul, etc., are a lot worse than Dream et al. If teenagers weren’t watching Dream et al, they’d mostly be watching worse content-creators instead, not better ones.

In short, even if you think Dream et al are bad by absolute standards, nevertheless they are good by the appropriate comparative standards of evaluation. The critics need a sense of perspective.

Most of the “scandals” are very minor, albeit with a few exceptions; and these exceptions are also minor by the comparative standards of internet celebrities (not to mention non-internet celebrities, who also seem to be mostly shitty people and also worse). Some of the criticisms are legitimate, but most are not very damning.

Here’s an issue (one of many) which seems representative of a lot of the hostility: Some people have a problem with the fact that many people in the Dream crowd are okay with their fans shipping them. I simply do not take this objection seriously. If someone is okay with their fans engaging in real-person shipping (fanart, fanfic, etc.), then that’s the end of the matter-- there’s no objection. Many people object to this practice on ostensibly moral grounds, but really it’s pretty blatantly based on the most superficial and sheer aesthetic cringing. I don’t respect this sort of hostile reaction-- it’s obviously unreasonable. There can be a real problem when fans ship people who aren’t okay with it, or ship minors-- but most non-fans do not give adequate credit to the fact that the fans are mostly respectful enough not to do this. And it’s unreasonable to lump these distinct issues together (i.e. real-person shipping per se vs. certain bad kinds of real-person shipping).

One of the few scandals I took seriously was the allegation that Dream cheated at speedrunning, which I researched a lot in 2021. Dream handled this allegation very badly (as has been widely admitted, including by him, since then), and a lot of his fanbase was in denial about the evidence. This is largely because they didn’t understand the math. I was convinced Dream cheated, because the mathematical evidence was overwhelming that his ingame drop rates could not be legitimate. I was long upset at the fact that he must have been lying continually, including by making pseudo-mathematical defenses of himself. Then, when Dream finally admitted to cheating “by accident,” this sounded for all the world like total bullshit, and I didn’t believe it. However, to my shock, Karl Jobst finally did the definitive analysis, more thorough than anyone else by far, which showed that it was highly plausible that Dream indeed cheated by accident.

[dreamsmp-megaritz]

Against Against Dream

Dream and his crowd (GeorgeNotFound, Sapnap, TommyInnit, Tubbo, WilburSoot, Quackity, etc.) take so much flack, largely for very weak reasons. They make some mildly-to-moderately problematic jokes, they occasionally have some minor scandal that crops up on Twitter, and their fanbases of teenagers are really annoying and obsessive. They’re always trending on Twitter for silly reasons. Dream and a few others have also sometimes soft-pedaled some of the problems among their “stans,” which is certainly criticizeable.

But overall, really, the popular condemnation is very unfair and unreasonable.

(There are two main strands of condemnation of Dream et al. One strand is by critical fans. Much of this is also out-of-proportion and driven by a misguided pseudo-activist quest to complain about as many “problematic” things as possible-- but it at least tends to be reasonably informed and sympathetic. Here I am mainly criticizing the other strand of condemnation, i.e. the dismissive condemnation by non-fans.)

One thing to note is that Dream and company make generally good content-- by the standards that are appropriate to apply to that sort of thing (e.g. clever gimmicky Minecraft videos). Some of his crowd, like TommyInnit, have undeniably very funny personalities and are very talented. You’d have to be seriously biased to deny this.

And I think you’ve got to look at this comparatively.

More significantly, if you compare Dream and company to like 80% of other internet celebrities who are popular among the same demographic of teenagers, there is kind of a stark contrast. Maybe like 80% of other internet celebrities of similar size are shittier people, who are involved in worse scandals, who are worse influences on young people, who make much more problematic jokes, who have worse (albeit perhaps somehow lower-profile) fanbases, etc.

Tons of mega-popular people such as PewDiePie, Logan and Jake Paul, etc., are a lot worse than Dream et al. If teenagers weren’t watching Dream et al, they’d mostly be watching worse content-creators instead, not better ones.

In short, even if you think Dream et al are bad by absolute standards, nevertheless they are good by the appropriate comparative standards of evaluation. The critics need a sense of perspective.

Most of the “scandals” are very minor, albeit with a few exceptions; and these exceptions are also minor by the comparative standards of internet celebrities (not to mention non-internet celebrities, who also seem to be mostly shitty people and also worse). Some of the criticisms are legitimate, but most are not very damning.

Here’s an issue (one of many) which seems representative of a lot of the hostility: Some people have a problem with the fact that many people in the Dream crowd are okay with their fans shipping them. I simply do not take this objection seriously. If someone is okay with their fans engaging in real-person shipping (fanart, fanfic, etc.), then that’s the end of the matter-- there’s no objection. Many people object to this practice on ostensibly moral grounds, but really it’s pretty blatantly based on the most superficial and sheer aesthetic cringing. I don’t respect this sort of hostile reaction-- it’s obviously unreasonable. There can be a real problem when fans ship people who aren’t okay with it, or ship minors-- but most non-fans do not give adequate credit to the fact that the fans are mostly respectful enough not to do this. And it’s unreasonable to lump these distinct issues together (i.e. real-person shipping per se vs. certain bad kinds of real-person shipping).

One of the few scandals I took seriously was the allegation that Dream cheated at speedrunning, which I researched a lot in 2021. Dream handled this allegation very badly (as has been widely admitted, including by him, since then), and a lot of his fanbase was in denial about the evidence. This is largely because they didn’t understand the math. I was convinced Dream cheated, because the mathematical evidence was overwhelming that his ingame drop rates could not be legitimate. I was long upset at the fact that he must have been lying continually, including by making pseudo-mathematical defenses of himself. Then, when Dream finally admitted to cheating “by accident,” this sounded for all the world like total bullshit, and I didn’t believe it. However, to my shock, Karl Jobst finally did the definitive analysis, more thorough than anyone else by far, which showed that it was highly plausible that Dream indeed cheated by accident.

[olderthannetfic]

Ah, I do see your points, anon. I'm not going to post all your asks publicly because if you really feel that unsafe, it's probably best not to have a bigass chunk of your text for people to analyze and try to guess your identity from. I think one of the best points you made is about how close to home it hits when the non-fave is not only your fave but is similar to you in some way like demographic. You're not wrong for having those emotions. I do wonder if they make it hard to see how some other people feel similarly embattled on other axes.

TBH, I think one of the big problems here is that the large aggregate patterns you're talking about are racist, but most individual fics and fans are not really the problem. It's hard to know how to talk about this or who to tell to "fix" it when we're looking at free, hobbyist art.

A lot of people's tastes are certainly formed by shitty society, but once they're formed, they don't change fast if at all. Asking someone to rewrite their libido is a big ask, yet tumblr does it all the time as though it's as simple as snapping your fingers.

This leaves me with the sense that a lot of tumblr is... like... the political lesbians of porn fic or something: desire is not real, only choosing based on logic and politics. Or maybe people are so asexual that they just don't understand the lizard brain's "YES!" at some porn things and complete indifference to others?

I don't think it's great if great swaths of people feel like bottom!Nicky is super hot and top!Nicky fundamentally isn't, but I also don't think they can necessarily just turn it off like flipping a switch.

(If someone reading this doesn't like their current tastes and wants to attempt to alter them, I do think it's possible. What you should do is line up a large slate of media that prominently features characters of the ethnicity or whatever that you don't find hot/interesting. These should be leads whose emotional development drives the plot and is supposed to be central to the audience's enjoyment of the media. Watch/read/etc. this media all the time. All. The. Time. Try out many pieces because you won't like every character or every show, and we're looking for genuine enjoyment, not the fandom equivalent of a pity fuck. Spend enough time on this, and your unconscious sense of who's hot and interesting will eventually shift somewhat. This is a project you should expect to take a few years.)

But I digress.

The one tweet thing is a very toxic pattern. If TOG fandom is doing that, guys, please try to be more conscious of holding the actors of color to a higher standard (or the women or whomever). I know this often comes from a place of paying more attention to our own and wanting to set a good standard, but the effect is that minorities can't fuck up ever while white dudes get infinite passes.

Okay, on to the fic thing... Gotta say, my instant reaction to that description is "Ooh!"--as it would be for the same scenario with the characters reversed. (Ships who start out trying to kill each other are my favorite! x1000 if they're resurrecting style immortals and they literally do.) I can see how it would feel like slamming into a brick wall if you aren't kinky in just the right way and you didn't know it was coming though.

Part of why I react so strongly to a lot of discourse that runs along these lines is that I am a naturally extremely kinky person. It's not so much about what I do (which as a deeply lazy person in a long distance relationship is essentially nothing), but it's absolutely how I'm wired.

And I can tell you that my quotidian experience in fandom is sharing something I don't even realize is a big deal only to have someone I like, respect, and trust react in horror and tell me that it's triggering and awful and should not be allowed in fandom spaces because it makes "people" unsafe. It's such an instant, kneejerk reaction they don't even realize I was sharing it because it spoke to the very core of me. Lesson learned, friend. Lesson learned.

That sounds a bit off topic, I know, but bear with me: The point of that anecdote is that it's pretty common for me to get people trying to raise my awareness of things I have already thought deeply about while denying my essential humanity and not even realizing. As a kinky person who likes to make my fave the top (and generally a conflicted sadist), this constant request to explain and justify is exhausting.

I doubt most of the top!Joe fans have this precise problem simply because people who make their fave the top are much less common in fandom than people who make their fave the bottom, but I see a similar pattern with fans who are just fundamentally wired for rape fantasies (one of the most common fantasies that exists) vs. fans who just don't get rape fantasies at all. Or substitute your BDSM/kinky/messed up fantasy trope of choice. Covertly radical feminist attitudes towards kink and power are on the rise in fandom, and as a naturally kinky person, boy do I notice it!

I know that it feels like crucial activism to share these insights about why the ratio of top!Joe is hurtful, and the pain you feel is real. But it's also the case that it's a big ask to want people to listen. (Not me. Obviously, I routinely choose to engage with discourse. I mean overall.) The reason for that is that you're only seeing a fraction of what they do or who they are, and you don't know how many previous people they've listened to how many previous times. It's a very different situation from someone whose job is making some major TV series or movie or something. That person does, in my opinion, owe you some amount of listening.

Now, I'm not saying no top Joe fan was ever a jerk. I'll bet they were. There's a tendency to be rude and to publicly air your schadenfreude when you feel like everyone has been yelling at you. What I am saying is that a lot of the problem here boils down to conflicting needs, and that means there isn't a good solution. It's a situation where people are genuinely hurt, but I don't necessarily agree that other people have harmed them.

I like that you did an actual count of the explicit fics, btw. It's good to look at the real numbers. I see too little of that in these situations. My off the cuff reaction is that 2/3 to 1/3 is not a bad ratio at all compared to many fandoms, but yeah, it definitely shows a strong trend, and that can be painful. (I have a fandom where I think there's maybe like 1 bottom so-and-so fic in the entire zine era fandom. One. It's pretty extreme.)

I guess my thinking here overall is: What is the practical solution? What are we hoping to gain? What is reasonable to ask of people?

And it can't be "Well, if they would just listen..." That's just a sneaky way of saying "If you haven't done it my way, it's because you haven't listened to me yet."

So the question I would ask of people is this:

What does a non-racist fic where Joe tops look like?

What does a non-racist sex pollen, dubcon, or even noncon fic where Joe tops look like?

And if you say the latter is impossible... well... sadists exist everywhere in the world. So do doms. So do people who prefer to top in a purely physical sense. People with rape fantasies where they're the rapist exist (people who are not actually rapists, I mean). None of this is restricted to any one group. We can't categorically say fic like that about Joe is coming from a place of racism without denying the fundamental humanity of kinky MENA people who'd want to make Joe like themselves or like their ideal partner. (Yes, I agree this won't be the majority of fic writers writing top!Joe, but this is a place to start for figuring out what the better version would look like.)

IDK, maybe you're that kinkster yourself, but your asks gave me the vibe that you don't really get the drive towards those darker kinds of fics and what might be motivating it besides stereotypes and shittiness.

If we can answer these kinds of questions, we can better critique the way people write what they write without telling them all of their taste is bad and they should just stop writing. Even if we think the latter is true, it isn't going to get us anywhere. Figuring out how to make Joe more multidimensional in the fic they already want to write or finding very specific wording that should be avoided might actually work.

Beyond that, the actions I think are productive would be running prompt fests, exchanges, or other events for bottom!Joe or for top!Joe where he's the main character and the fics are required to be from his POV. Themed collections and recs lists are great. (I've seen a bit of this going around in TOG fandom in the past, and that's an excellent approach! Keep it up!) Positive actions tend to work better here. Make more of what you want. Promote what you want to see.

I don't mean this in some fluffy magical thinking way: you aren't going to change that ratio radically just by the power of positivity. But I've seen this kind of thing play out in many, many fandoms, and going after the people who write what you don't like, even in a well-intentioned effort to educate and even in a polite, kind way doesn't do much. A few people feel guilty. A few feel defensive. A lot ignore you. The overall fic doesn't change. It's not a good use of your limited time and energy.

I'm off to look up that fic to see what I think of it in practice, but I'm going to post this before tumblr manages to eat it.

[idreamtofmanderleyagain]

Five years ago, the women on this site who treated me like trash over loving Labyrinth and shipping Jareth/Sarah were almost always obliviously consuming Radfem propaganda, or were out and out Radfems/Terfs themselves.

They were the types of people who casually threw the word “pedophile” around against grown women who shipped an adult Sarah with Jareth, aka literally one of the most popular ships for women in fandom for 30 years.

Pretty much invariably, these women had serious sex-negative anxieties, which included a severe paranoia about any and all kink and fetish, and porn in general. I saw a lot of shocking, fear-mongering propaganda surrounding sexual expression. Pretty much invariably, their method of approach involved immediate personal shock-value attacks on anyone they perceived to be “bad.”

Today, you can look at the way some people react to other popular so-called “problematic” ships and recognize the same toxic, fear-mongering rhetoric coming from women who consider themselves regular, trans-inclusive feminists. Sometimes it even manifests in the words of very well-meaning people (including myself here), who feel the need to talk about specific issues that pertain to their own experiences of trauma and oppression.

The people who shit on Labyrinth often seem to not really be able to comprehend that the Goblin King, like the film itself, is canonically a representation of a teen girl’s psyche, a soup of fears and anxieties and desires and dreams. He’s not a literal human adult preying on a literal child, and to read the film that way seriously undermines the entire point of the film. 

When I (and people of many fandoms) say “This is fiction, calm down,” I’m not just saying it’s not real so it cant hurt you and you can’t criticize me. I’m trying to call attention to what fiction actually is - artistic representations of feelings and experiences. The Goblin King is Sarah’s fiction. Therefore, he can be anything she or any woman who identifies with her wants him to be, including her lover when she’s grown and ready for such a thing.

I once took an alarming dive into Beetlejuice fandom to see what content was there (the cartoon was a favorite when I was little). Chillingly, what you’ll find is an extremely wounded fanbase, with a sharp divide between the older women who had long been shipping BJ/Lydia because of their love for the cartoon series (and whom were previously the vast majority of the Beetlejuice fandom), and a massive amount of young people riding the wave of the musical fad who had decided that the entire old school Beetlejuice fandom was populated by literal pedophiles. 

I saw death threats. Suicide baiting. Constant, constant toxic discourse. It did not matter how the BJ/Lydia fandom dealt with any particular issues that would exist in their ship, in fact I’m certain that the people abusing them cared very little to even consider if they were trying to handle it at all. The only thing that mattered was that they were disgusting subhuman scum asking for abuse. If you have at any time reblogged recent Beetlejuice fan art or content from fans of the musical, you have more than likely been engaging positively with the content of someone participating in toxic fandom behavior.

Nobody is really sticking up for them, either, as far as I saw. It’s really hard to imagine how painful it must be to have such a large group of people explode into into your relatively private fandom space to tell you that you are evil, vile, and deserve constant abuse, and also you are no longer allowed into the fandom space to engage in it’s content. But I think there’s something very alarming indeed about this happening specifically to the BJ fandom, and I’ll explain why. 

The pop-culture characterization of Beetlejuice, which is heavily influenced by the cartoon series to be clear, has always in my mind been a vaguely ageless being who matches with the psychological maturity of whatever age Lydia is supposed to be. He’s more or less like an imaginary friend, a manifestation of Lydia’s psyche. In fact, I would argue that i think most of us who grew up with the cartoon or it’s subsequent merchandizing before the musical ever existed probably internalized the idea as BJ and Lydia as this ageless, salt-and-pepper-shaker couple beloved by the goth community, similar to Gomez and Morticia. In each version of canon he may be a creepy ghost in the literal sense, but any adult who is capable of identifying literary tropes (even just subconciously) would read cartoon!BJ as an artistic representation of a socially awkward outcast girl’s inner world. Lydia’s darker dispositions and interests, which alienate her from most others, are freely accepted and embraced by her spooky magical friend. BJ/Lydia in the cartoon were depicted as best friends, but to my memory there was always an underlying sense that they had secret feelings for each other, which I identified easily even as a small child. In fact, their dynamic and behavior perfectly reflected the psychological development of the show’s target demographic. They are best friends who get into adventures and learning experiences together, who have delicate feelings for each other but lack any true adult romantic/sexual understanding to acknowledge those feelings, let alone pursue them.

Though I haven’t seen the Musical yet, I’ve read the wiki and I would argue that it embodies this exact same concept even more so for it’s own version of the characters, in that Beetlejuice specifically exists to help Lydia process her mother’s death.

This is not a complicated thing to recognize and comprehend whatsoever. In fact, it looks downright blatant. It’s also a clear indicator of what BJ/Lydia means to the women who have long loved it. It was a story about a spooky wierd girl being loved and accepted and understood for who she was, and it gave them a sense of solidarity. It makes perfect sense why those women would stick with those characters, and create a safe little space for themselves to and imagine their beloved characters growing and having adult lives and experiencing adult drama, in just the same ways that the women of the Labyrinth fandom do. That’s all these women were doing. And now, they can’t do it without facing intense verbal violence. That safe space is poisoned now.

Having grown up with the cartoon as one of my favorites and been around goth subculture stuff for decades, I was actually shocked and squicked at the original Beetlejuice film’s narrative once I actually saw it, because it was extremely divorced from what these two characters had evolved into for goth subculture and what they meant to me. It’s not telling the same story, and is in fact about the Maitland's specifically. In pretty much exactly the same way two different versions of Little Red Riding Hood can be extremely different from each other, the film is a different animal. While I imagine that the film version has been at the heart of a lot of this confused fear-mongering around all other versions of the characters, I would no more judge different adaptations of these characters any more than I would condemn a version of Little Red in which Red and the Wolf are best friends or lovers just because the very first iteration of LRRH was about protecting yourself from predators.

I would even argue that the people who have engaged in Anti-shipper behavior over BJ/Lydia are in intense denial over the fact that BJ being interested in Lydia, either as blatant predatory behavior a la the film or on a peer level as in the cartoon (and musical?) is an inextricable part of canon. Beetlejuice was always attracted to Lydia, and it was not always cute or amusing. Beetlejuice was not always a beloved buddy character, an in fact was originally written as a gross scumbag. That’s just what he was. Even people engaging with him now by writing OC girlfriends for him (as stand-ins for the salt-and-pepper-shaker space Lydia used to take up, because obviously that was part of the core fun of the characters), or just loving him as a character, are erasing parts of his character’s history in order to do so. They are actively refusing to be held responsible for being fans of new version of him despite the fact that he engaged in overt predatory behavior in the original film. In fact, I would venture to say that they are actively erasing the fact that Musical Beetliejuice tried to marry a teenager and as far as I’m aware, seemed to like the idea (because he’s probably a fucking figment of her imagination but go off I guess). The only reason they can have a version of this character who could be perceived as “buddy” material is because...the cartoon had an impact on our pop cultural perception of what the character and his dynamic with Lydia is. 

We can have a version of the Big Bad Wolf who’s a creepy monster. We can have a version who’s sweet and lovable. We can have a version that lives in the middle. We can have a version who’s a hybrid between Red and the Wolf (a la Ruby in OUAT). All of these things can exist in the same world, and can even be loved for different reasons by the same people.

I’ve been using Beetlejuice as an example here because it’s kind of perfect for my overall point regarding the toxic ideologies in fandom right now across many different spaces, including ones for progressive and queer media, and how much so many people don’t recognize how deeply they’ve been radicalized into literalist and sex-negative radfem rhetoric, to the point where we aren’t allowed to have difficult, messy explorations of imperfect, flawed humans, and that art is never going to be 100% pure and without flaw in it’s ability to convey what it wants to convey.

This includes the rhetoric I’ve seen across the board, from She-Ra to A:TLA to Star Wars to Lovecraft Country. We don’t talk about the inherent malleable, subjective, or charmingly imperfect nature of fiction any more. Transformation and reclamation are myths in this space. Everything is in rigid categories. It is seemingly very difficult for some of these people to engage with anything that is not able to be clearly labeled as one thing or another (see the inherent transphobic and biphobic elements of the most intense rhetoric). They destroy anything they cannot filter through their ideology. When women act in a way that breaks from their narrative of womanhood (like...not having a vagina), then those women must be condemned instead of understood. Anything that challenges them or makes them uncomfortable is a mortal sin. There is an extraordinary level of both hypocrisy and repressive denial that is underlying the behavior I’m seeing now. Much like toxic Christian conservatism, these people often are discovered engaging in the same behaviors and interests that they condemn behind closed doors (or just out of sheer cognitive dissonance). As an example, one of the people who talked shit to me about Labyrinth was a huge fan of Kill La Kill, which to my knowledge was an anime about a teenage girl in like, superpowered lingere (hence why I stayed the fuck away from that shit myself). Indeed, they even allow themselves plenty of leeway for behavior far worse than they condemn others for, and create support systems for the worst of their own abusers. 

Quite frankly, I’m tired. Instead of talking about theoretical problematic shit, we need to start talking about quantifiable harm. Because as far as I can tell, the most real, immediate, and quantifiable harm done because of anybody’s favorite ships or pieces of media seems to consistently be the kind that’s done to the people who experience verbal violence and abuse and manipulation and suicide baiting and death threats from the people who have a problem.

[obvslybatgrl]

I get you want more late teen audience centered content but fluffy silly things don't just belong to children. They obviously used these characters because it had universal appeal. Think like a disney movie of cartoons that adults enjoy like Amphibia or Owl House. Its obvious they used the characters because they have universal appeal while something like gotham academy only has kids. An its in the main canon because they want people to buy trade comics and have these types of stories in trade.

The answer to your ask is in your ask.

DC has an issue when deciding what demographic they want a book to appeal to. As I said, they don’t believe that adults can be silly. I do. There should be more adult content where the characters are silly and not just sex or “edgy” jokes. (There is nothing wrong with that type of humour, there just needs to be more variety in adult media.)

DC attempts to have a universal appeal with a lot of their recent books. (Note I am only reading 5 or 6 of their books right now, all of which are Batman related titles. However based on the pages from other books that come up on my dash, this is true there as well.) While it’s fine for some characters and some writers are good at writing for such a large audience, the Batgirls writers so far have not been able to accomplish this. This is not at all like Amphibia or The Owl House. Those are not existing properties with existing characters. (And bringing up these shows and movies do not support your point. Those are all works created for children and advertised towards children so that children will them. They just happen to have a large young adult/adult fanbase. The audience they are trying to reach remains 8-12.) The Batgirls are existing characters, each with their own histories and each with their own fanbases. The writers knew this going in and I believe that because there was no doubt existing fans would read this book, they chose to hone in on that new and young audience. They kept this book in main canon because that way existing readers are certain to keep reading.

This is why I brought up Gotham Academy. Since DC doesn’t know how to appeal to young audiences without having a young protagonist, they should use characters that are already young instead of deaging the Batgirls. Again. Gotham Academy also has an adult fanbase. You just don’t see them a lot because Gotham Academy hasn’t had any content since, I think 2018. That’s almost 5 years ago. On top of that, there’s mot much to discuss about their books because there was nothing wrong with them, or groundbreaking, and there was minimal romance, the three things that keep people talking about old books.

But yeah. I hope one day DC and other entertainment companies realize that child protagonists aren’t necessary to appeal to a child audience. Everything in my original review still stands.

[lonestarbabe]

OMG the power that anon has talking about lone star pulling a game of thrones. That would be so much better and I know even tho it would mean Rob would leave the show, the ratings would go up. Because casual viewers, fans, and even reviewers of the show hate Owen taking up screen time now so they would finally be happy. That plot is something I wouldn’t mind seeing honesty but I know TK would be so devastated and sad and I don’t wanna see him sad but imagine the growth we could see in him 🥺 from heartbreak, to anger and lashing out, to learning to cope and accepting it (maybe going to a grief support group and talks with Nancy and Judd who have both lost people they cared about). Super sad but interesting to think about. And I could see how a plot like that could trickle down and affect every other character (aside from TK- Marjan, Paul, Mateo to be specific). The lone star writers aren’t creative enough to think of something like this and also they’re too far up Rob Lowe’s ass lmao but if he ever did decide to leave they might be able to create a storyline similar to this. Not as good because we seem to have better plot ideas than them but it would still be interesting if this were to ever happen

Truly. Anon had a galaxy brain moment right there. I’m not convinced the ratings would go up if Rob Lowe left the show because while the storyline is no doubt stupid, I still think a large chunk of the older demographic probably likes Rob Lowe and don’t want him gone; rather, they want better plots for him. Still, if the show utilized its other characters, it wouldn’t be so dependent on the Rob Lowe influence. It’s hard for people to become attached to characters that are barely there lol! I would be sad for TK if something happened to Owen because that would probably bring up a lot of complex feeling and issues. Plus, the whole crew would have to deal with that grief after an already rough time. My problem with the lone star writers is that I definitely think they are competent writers BUT they obviously aren’t applying their skills and I would guess that they are not at all diverse so of course the writing is going to be awful. Like it just makes it worse to me that these people could do better but they just decide no to haha.

[everything-laito]

Why Diabolik Lovers is more effective not being an H-game

I haven’t really seen anybody talk about this topic, so I’m just gonna rant about it I guess! If anyone has anything to add upon this, I’d love to hear whatever you have to say! (feel free to either just reblog your comments, dm me or just drop something in my inbox!)

So, before I begin, I’m just gonna assume people reading this have either played the game, seen lets plays, or just know a general premise of what the games include. I’m more familiar with Laito’s routes (although now that I find more translations of other routes I will play the routes I have yet to play), so that’s what I’ll be referencing for specific examples.

So, Large Rant under the cut!

First of all, if you didn’t know what an H-game is, it really means “hentai game.” Most H-games that I have seen are either mods (H-DOOM; oh god) or DLCs. Nekopara and Hunipop (I believe) both are not R18 initially, but you can get the R18 DLC or uncensored versions with some extra mola. These are the games that I can think from the top of my head. I know there are H-games that also are otome games; aka similar to Dialover’s demographic. So it’s not the gendered demographic that makes an H-game, it’s either the age (18+) or interest in sexual content.

The Dialovers demographic is a bit wonky though. Technically the first game is 15+ (which I don’t know HOW; shit’s fucked up in that game) and the rest of the games (VC and LP aside) are all 17+ last time I checked. Dialovers doesn’t have any explicit sex scenes in there, as we all know, and when stuff like that happens, it’s implied. The people of the Dialovers demographic would theoretically be 17+ who like dark and twisted stories/“romances.” Sure there’s a good handful of people who are younger than that, and hell, I started Dialovers when I was a freshman in high school (which I should not have been that young but we’re here now af;dljkf). 

Anyways, considering the demographic would be a more mature audience, there wouldn’t be much of a difference if R18 scenes were added to Dialovers.... or would there be?

Diabolik Lovers is more than just a fanservice game. Not saying that its not, but that’s not its entire purpose. Otome games have fanservice, I’m not denying that. But it’s also a game that also tells a story; like most video games do anyway. The lore of Dialovers runs deep, and man is it DEEP when you do your digging. In Laito’s case, MAN,,,,, is his character complex. If Rejet just wanted to make a simple R18 otome game with dark undertones, they could’ve made it a lot less complex than it is already. I really treat Dialovers as a mystery, and a dark “romance” (obviously). I like how the “good” endings aren’t always “good,” and the means to reach the “good” endings are by pretty dark means. 

So, what difference does it make to make it an H-game?  It would make all the difference. 

Some people I know like Dialovers for just the mysteriousness and complexity of the game, and not just for the sadomasochism etc etc. Most fans seem to be a mix of both, from what I’ve observed. If R18 content was added, it would be more fanservice based than narrative and character based. I’d say that Dialovers is a great mix of fanservice and deep narrative. There’s always that joke with ecchi anime with “yeah I only watch it for the plot,” given that most ecchi (and complete fanservice based games) just have a basic, simple plot and character development. 

We only have one canon R18 content in this series, and thats the Blood & LoveSweat, but that’s not nearly as graphic as other R18 drama cds. Even that cd has heavy implications. It just leaves it up to your imagination. I personally think that’s not only a good narrative tool, but a great game tactic too. Since everyone’s internal experience is different when it comes to the games (and cds etc), it adds to the mysteriousness aura of the game in general. For example, we never knew what kind of torture device Laito was holding in his early chapters of his Dark route (I think it was Dark 02?) until his manga came out (and now we know,,,, it’s something called an ‘oral pear’. Yikes.).

Adding R18 CGs would make Dialovers more about the fanservice and less about the characters and their development and story. That’s why I believe it’s better to leave those scenes up to the imagination (also not to mention most implied sex scenes in the games are uh,,,, nonconsensual, so that also might be a yikes to put in a canon CG? I’m not sure if there’s other games that have that or not. If so, feel free to correct me). These types of scenes would direct the focus of the narrative and beautifully paced and pretty rewarding character development (my man Laito has come a long way!). The closest to an R18 CG we’ve seen has been the end of Laito’s More Blood route, with him and Yui having consensual sex (yay!), but it’s just kind of the events afterwards. But that’s actually important to Laito’s exposition and development throughout More Blood. 

Anyways if you made it here, thanks for reading this absolute crazy rant. If you have anything to add, feel free! Ciao!

-Corn

[rockets-capris]

Some black youtubers I like you can support

So I’m not a very big blog. Obviously. But I figured what little influence I have I can use to direct people in this time to some underrated black creators I like since I spend all my time watching YouTube and feel free to add as always. Also this was originally supposed to be in order of sub count but that didn’t work out at all.

1. Jarvis Johnson.

Probably one of the most popular creators on this list with over 1 million subscribers but extremely funny and if you haven’t heard of him and you like comedic Cody Ko-esque commentary videos, go give him a sub. He’s reacted to many of the same channels Danny Gonzalez and Drew Gooden have such as Troom Troom and 5 Minute Crafts. He’s also a software engineer which is pretty badass.

2. Lana Summer.

Does mainly fashion and hair related videos but is very chill and easy to listen to. Sometimes I like to put on her videos while I’m doing things even though I 100% have straight hair and she does mostly curly hair tutorials. But she’s covered a large umbrella of beauty topics in her videos and if you’re the least bit feminine it’s highly possible she’s covered at least one topic that’ll be useful to you. She’s very pretty (lowkey crushing on her) and lovely and I enjoy her channel a lot.

3. The Curly Guy.

A highly underrated channel that does content similar to Lana’s but for guys! He’s a guy with long, curly hair and talks about how to take care of it. I am always here for nontoxic male positivity and getting more guys involved in taking care of their appearance. It’s very sweet to watch. He’s also reviewed bad hair products which we all like to watch bad reviews of things on YouTube, right, and once pierced his ears at home. So. Idk about you but that sounds great to me.

4. Jolie K.

We’ve got some black queer representation in here! She’s a queer woman who makes videos about queer women. She hasn’t uploaded in a minute but I think she’s still worth supporting. She’s done some cool story times about being gay as well as some beauty stuff.

5. Honest.

Honest is a drama channel run by a black guy who talks about drama between music artists and sometimes youtubers. He’s not only a black person in the drama side of YouTube but he’s a black man in the drama side of YouTube two demographics that feel excluded from that world. If you do like drama videos like Teaspill, it’s cool to support a POC in that world. I can’t say I agree with everything he says but that’s drama channels for you.

6. Ranting Minority.

This guy’s super new and super underrated! He makes spicy political content, is extremely eloquent and chill, which makes him good to listen to, and is a leftist. If you can’t stop watching left-tubers like I can’t, I would totally recommend this guy. He makes videos on racial and societal issues from a liberal and anti conservative perspective. He has less than a thousand subscribers, so I’d highly advise giving him a sub.

7. MacDoesIt

So this guy is also one of the more popular on here. Basically if you watch any LGBTQ+ content on YouTube at all he pops up. He’s like the Strange Æons of the mlm community in that respect. He’s super funny, does reaction videos, does some very comedic red carpet fashion reviews, just if you haven’t subbed to MacDoesIt, what are you doing?

8. Kat Blaque.

Kat Blaque has been under fire for certain opinions before, but all in all she’s a good leftist, political youtuber who is also a black trans woman. She does videos on LGBT+ issues, racial issues, lots of other things, and is a smart, beautiful lady. Basically you can’t be a political youtuber without being controversial so, decide for yourself if you wanna support her, I personally do. Also I am not a trans woman but I know trans women who have said she helped them figure out certain things, so that’s good.

9. Rickey Thompson

A black gay comedian who does story times and random funny videos. I also think he’s an ex viner. I’m only a comedic fan of this one but I do know he’s very handsome and I came from his LGBT+ story times. Just someone you might wanna check out. He’s kind of like Mac in some ways just like. Much chiller.

10. WiseJae

I love how this is a mix of semi popular youtubers and super obscure youtubers I like for very specific reasons. WiseJae is a very small youtuber with a little over a thousand subs last time I checked but she does videos about jobcorps and trade school and has recently started making videos about college. So basically. A cool guide for how to get your life started if you’re a young, low income adult or late teen. She’s also got a very pretty accent, soothing voice and . . . is just so fucking beautiful . . . so. So gorgeous. So like. If you’re like. 18. And you’ve been thinking about a place like jobcorps but don’t know how to start. I would say her channel would be the first place I’d go for information.

11. NotYourMommasHistory

I actually love historical fashion. And this black woman named Cheyney is a historical reenactor with a focus on African and African-American history, and often overlooked part of history and fashion history in general. She’s done stuff like historical head wraps and similar as well as talked about serious issues like sexual harassment. Most recently she did a video on white people misrepresenting Martin Luther King Jr. Basically if you like channels like Rachel Maksy, Bernadette Banner, or our meme mom Karolina Żebrowska, you’ll probably like her. Or maybe you’re just curious about African history. That’s cool too.

12. Rebranding Autism.

Black autistic rep! Jen is a black autistic woman who talks about autism, the struggles she’s faced and she was literally sent to the notoriously abusive Judge Rotenberg center and talked about the atrocities committed there. She’s amazing and has also made vlogs about her life, made advice videos on mental health that are relatable for many people not just people with autism specifically, tho certainly those too. She also makes music.

13. Tater Tatiana

Small youtuber who is in the anti Onision community. She reviewed Onision’s shitty books. She writes, does drama videos and does beauty videos as well. She read Onision fanfiction on her channel, Lilee Jean tried to take down her channel and she bounced back. I highly recommend the channel, I love Tatiana and I’ve loved watching her channel grow these last few years.

So, that’s my list, will definitely add more later, I hope this didn’t come off as pandering or me thinking black people are charity cases, which they aren’t, this is simply me, a white girl, trying to share some black creators I enjoy instead of just spouting my opinions on tumblr, since I come from a privileged place.

[the-desolated-quill]

Why Spider-Man Leaving The MCU Is The Best News I’ve Heard In Ages - Quill’s Scribbles

Oh frabjous day! Callooh! Callay! Did you hear the news? I’d be surprised if you didn’t. EVERYONE has heard the news by now. A couple of days ago it was reported that the deal between Marvel and Sony that allowed the two studios to share custody for the rights of Spider-Man has fallen through. Spider-Man is no longer going to be part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Speaking as someone who is not only a big Spider-Man fan, but also a very vocal critic of the current state of Marvel and Disney’s cynical and convoluted ‘shared universe’, this caused quite a reaction when I first heard the news. I’m as happy as a man who just found out his high school crush likes him back on the same day he won the lottery. Happy, but not surprised. In fact I’m more surprised that other people were surprised by the news. The deal Marvel and Sony managed to strike was almost unheard of. Two rival movie studios in mutual cooperation. Never thought I’d see the day. But if you thought this was going to be the new norm, then I’m afraid you don’t understand this industry. I knew, or at least suspected, that once Sony had a hit on their hands, they’d cut ties with Marvel and Disney. It was only a matter of time. Now that Spider-Man: Far From Home has made over a billion dollars at the box office and now they have found success with their own non-MCU films, Venom and Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse, the simple fact of the matter is they don’t need Marvel or Disney anymore. So they’ve flown the coop. Yes it’s possible they could renegotiate the deal, but given how unlikely the prospect of the initial deal was in the first place, I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you. It’s more likely they’re going to take their ball and go home. Sony’s Universe Of Marvel Characters (despite its incredibly clunky name) is now going to be firmly built upon and expanded, and I for one could not be more excited.

Of course not everyone shares my excitement. Disney, for one thing, aren’t happy. Nor are the cast. Jeremy Renner has made his views clear, begging Sony to give the rights to Spidey back. (Perhaps he should focus more on his own character Hawkeye, considering what a mess he’s become). Die hard MCU fans aren’t pleased neither. Same goes for ‘celebrity’ fans like Kevin Smith, a filmmaker who preferred to be called a comic book expert on the Venom Blu-Ray bonus features presumably because he hasn’t actually been relevant as a filmmaker since the 90s. (it’s worth reading his thoughts just for a laugh. He honestly thinks Disney aren’t greedy, corporate bastards. ROFL). And of course the so-called ‘professional’ critics, who for years have deluded themselves into thinking the MCU is actually good, have been writing their own little think pieces about what all this means. Can Spider-Man possibly survive without Iron Man and pals to prop him up? To which the answer is obviously yes. Sony had the rights to Spidey for fourteen years before the Marvel deal. They made five Spider-Man movies, four of which were massive box office successes. They also released Venom and Spider-Verse last year. Both hugely successful and the latter even won an Oscar, which is one more Oscar than Marvel Studios have ever won (sorry Black Panther. You were robbed).Can Spider-Man survive outside the MCU? Gee I don’t know. I guess somehow Sony will find the strength to soldier on without them.

Although, that being said, there’s not as many journalists siding with Disney as I thought there would be. There are quite a few articles explaining how this split could help Spidey in the long run, which is both absolutely true and refreshing to see. Hopefully this is a sign that we’re finally turning a corner and critics are starting to use their brains again. Like how everyone worshipped the ground Steven Moffat walked on until Sherlock Series 4 where everyone realised that he’s actually shit and has always been shit. 

Spider-Man leaving the MCU is the best thing you could do for the character at this stage. The way he’s been treated since joining the Marvel clusterfuck has been nothing short of appalling. I’ve made it no secret how much I detest this version of Spider-Man and some might dismiss what I’m about to say out of hand, perhaps claiming I’m biased because I’ve said numerous times that I love The Amazing Spider-Man films starring Andrew Garfield. Two films I will go to my grave defending because they were bloody good movies. People were just butt hurt because it wasn’t Spider-Man 4. Never mind the fact that the original Sam Raimi films were never that good to begin with (seriously, have any of you actually watched Spider-Man 2 recently? Trust me. It’s not as good as you remember it). No, I promise you that if MCU Spidey existed in a vacuum, I would still hate him just as much for the simple reason that he has absolutely nothing in common with the source material. Under the watchful, Orwellian eye of Marvel, they took Spider-Man, a character most famous for being a working class everyman, and turned him into the most spoilt and privileged little bum-balloon I’ve ever seen.

Spider-Man: Homecoming was a terrible movie. Plain and simple. A cynically produced, written by committee, pile of wank that gets so much of Spidey’s character and story completely wrong, it’s almost impressive. No longer a teenager/young adult struggling to balance his superhero life, his school work, his career and his social life, instead we got a groomed Mary Sue who doesn’t have to fight for anything because everything is basically handed to him on a silver platter courtesy of Iron Man. We never see him struggle. He’s not relatable. He never has to face consequences for his actions. He misses God knows how many classes and debate group meetings and yet he never gets punished for it. Sure he gets sent to detention a couple of times, but we see him leave whenever he bloody wants to. It’s just boring. If there’s no struggle, where’s the tension? And the less said about the villain, the better. Taking an eccentric antagonist like the Vulture and turning him into the stereotypical blue collar dad trying to provide for his family has got to be one of the most uninspired and blatantly lazy bits of characterisation I think I’ve ever seen. And that’s not to mention the supporting cast. Aunt May is youthed for no reason other than to make sexist jokes at her expense with every man that comes within her general vicinity staring at her with their tongues hanging out and eyes as large as saucepans. Minor villains like Shocker and the Tinkerer have their characters reduced to unfunny comedy sidekicks. And then there’s Peter Parker’s gang of racial stereotypes. We have Peter’s best friend, the fat and nerdy Ned who has no real personality other than being fat and nerdy (and is without a doubt the most annoying character in the damn film). Flash has been racebent so now he’s the stereotypical arrogant Asian prick. Michelle has no character other than being the same sassy black teenager who don’t give a shit, a caricature so old now it’s practically been fossilised. And then there’s the love interest Liz, a character so bland and one dimensional that I had to look her name up. Oh and lets not forget that the majority of this Spider-Man’s story was nicked from Miles Morales because people are only going to empathise with his story if it revolves around a white kid, am I right?

You know, I get so frustrated whenever people slag off the Amazing Spider-Man movies and claim that these new movies are better because... well... WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?! I’m sorry, but I was much more invested with Peter and Gwen than I ever was with Peter and... what’s her face? Or Peter and Michelle (who I categorically refuse to call MJ because she’s not MJ, is she? They just used the initials to pander to gullible fans. They didn’t have the guts to just make Mary Jane Watson black, did they? Of course not! We don’t want to alienate the casual racists, do we? They’re our main demographic after all). The reason why Peter and Gwen worked is because they’re well-written, three dimensional characters with great chemistry and whom we actually spend a significant amount of time getting to know. So when Gwen dies at the end of The Amazing Spider-Man 2, it becomes a heart wrenching moment because we’ve grown invested in this character and this relationship. If Michelle were to die in a future movie, I honestly wouldn’t bat a fucking eyelid. Even Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst had more chemistry than those two, and that relationship was a total shambles from start to finish.

It also helps that Peter and Gwen felt like real people. I loved the scene in the first movie where Peter awkwardly asks her out because it reminded me so much of how I asked my first girlfriend out. And that’s why I love the Amazing Spider-Man movies. Because out of all the Spidey films we’ve had over the past 17 years, the Amazing ones are the only ones in my opinion that manage to capture the humanity of the character. As fantastical as the world is, the characters, their relationships and their dilemmas are grounded firmly in reality. Homecoming on the other hand is just embarrassing. Despite casting teenage actors, none of the teenagers actually act like teenagers. They act like five year olds. It’s painfully obvious that the filmmakers are trying to pander to young kids and they clearly don’t know how to write them. Again, this is where the Amazing movies stands head and shoulders above the others. They’re not treated like kids or teenagers. They’re treated like people. Real people. Same goes for the villains. (Yes, even Electro, despite wonky execution).

But the main criticism people have with MCU Spidey is that these films aren’t actually about Spidey. They’re really about the MCU mascot Iron Man.

Now to be clear, I don’t necessarily have a problem with the idea of Iron Man being a surrogate father figure to Spidey. It could work. Captain America: Civil War, despite the clunky and contrived way in which Spidey was introduced to the MCU (oh you just happened to know about a masked vigilante we haven’t seen or heard of until now Tony? Okay. What about Daredevil and Luke Cage?... What do you mean they’re not in the movie?), did a good job of setting up the dynamic. Namely that Tony doesn’t actually care about Peter or his well being, merely using him for his own ends. Unless Americans have some kind of ‘Bring Your Child To A Warzone Day’  I don’t know about. 

Despite its flaws, Civil War was good because it gave us an unsettling look at the characters we’ve been watching for years. We see Captain America consumed by his own naivety and idealism to the point where he can no longer see the bigger picture and we see Iron Man go from being an industrial capitalist to an authoritarian fascist. Homecoming could have followed up on that. Have Spidey realise that Tony doesn’t have his best interests at heart, reject him as a father figure and grow into his own man. Instead the movie seems to go out of its way to undo all the interesting things Civil War brought to the table. Of course Tony cares about Peter! Oh and his relationship problems with Pepper Potts have been magically fixed off screen and now they’re getting married! Relax people, it’s okay! Nothing morally complicated going on here! We apologise for assuming you’re actually intelligent and promise never to make you think about anything ever again!

Not only is this quite insulting to the audience, it also negatively impacts Spidey’s arc. Turns out the movie isn’t about Spider-Man becoming his own man. It’s about him proving he can be an Avenger. He’s constantly in the shadow of Iron Man and, more to the point, we’re supposed to be happy that he’s in the shadow of Iron Man.

Again, this is where the Amazing Spider-Man gets it right. The first movie is very much about father figures. Uncle Ben, Curt Connors and Gwen’s dad all play a role in Peter’s growth and development over the course of the film. He’s able to take all the lessons and advice he gets from the three and use them to become his own man. As director Marc Webb so eloquently put it, ‘it’s a story about a kid who grows up looking for his father and finds himself.’ Compare that to the current iteration of Spidey where Uncle Ben doesn’t even appear to exist in this continuity because he’s been completely supplanted by Iron Dad. Remind me again why people think the Amazing movies are shit?

The latest film, Spider-Man: Far From Home, is no better. Same problems as before only this time Mysterio gets MCU’d to death. Instead of the pathetic loser trying desperately to receive recognition for his talents, we basically get a rehash of the plot from Iron Man 3, which in turn was a rehash of the plot from The Incredibles. Mysterio is basically trying to supplant Iron Man because he got screwed over when he used to work for Stark, and it’s up to everyone’s favourite wall-crawler to stop him because there’s only room in this universe for one Iron Boy. Even when Iron Man is dead, he’s still front and centre of the fucking narrative. Here’s a bright idea. How about we make a Spider-Man film that’s actually, you know, about Spider-Man? (Oh yeah, spoiler alert, Iron Man dies in Avengers: Endgame. Not that it’s really spoiling anything because Endgame is a big piece of shit).

Here’s the thing. Everyone is blaming Sony for the deal breaking down, and okay, I’m not going to pretend that Sony aren’t cynical. As much as I love The Amazing Spider-Man movies, I’m well aware the only reason they exist is because Sony desperately wanted to keep the rights. They spent a stupid amount of money on The Amazing Spider-Man 2 to the point where it needed to make a billion dollars at the box office in order to make a decent profit (a feat only achieved at that time by Batman with The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises) and they crammed loads of characters and plot points into an already overstuffed movie in order to rush out their own shared universe to compete with Marvel. When that didn’t work, they went crawling to Marvel and Disney in the hopes that the MCU could bail them out of the shit. I get it. There’s plenty to criticise. But for the likes of Kevin Smith and other idiots to only blame Sony and defend Marvel is really quite galling to me because Marvel and Disney are just as cynical, if not more so.

Does anyone here actually know what the deal was? Basically the agreement was that Kevin Feige would get lead producer credit for any solo Spider-Man films and Marvel and Disney would get five percent of the cut. Meanwhile Spider-Man would be allowed to appear in any MCU film. Also, because Sony still hold the rights to the character, they get the final say on any creative decision regarding Spider-Man. Or at least that’s the theory anyway. In reality that wasn’t the case. Reportedly Marvel and Disney were so anal about keeping the plot of Avengers: Endgame a secret that they didn’t tell the screenwriters of Spider-Man: Far From Home what happens in the bloody film. And considering that the film follows directly on from Endgame, that’s quite a problem. Sony may have creative control over Spider-Man, but Marvel and Disney can still call the shots, deliberately sabotaging Sony in order to boost hype for their own films. Also Sony are actually worse off in this deal because Marvel and Disney are the ones making all the money. Spider-Man has appeared in three MCU films. Captain America: Civil War, Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame. All three of these films made Marvel and Disney over a billion dollars at the box office. Sony meanwhile have only made two Spidey movies, Homecoming and Far From Home, only one of which has made over a billion and both of which Marvel and Disney get five percent of the profit. Now that Sony have finally got their billion dollar Spider-Man movie, Marvel and Disney had the cheek to propose that Sony share fifty percent of the profits with them. Because it’s not enough for Marvel and Disney to be making shit tons of money off their own films. No. They also want as much money as they can get out of films made by other studios that are only tangentially related to their’s. God forbid a movie studio should be allowed to keep all the profits from their movie.

So yeah, I’m glad Sony have split and are free to make their own movies again. Because Disney have got such a strangle hold on the entire industry that I’m always happy to see any studio or IP slip through their fingers. And I’m not the only one who thinks this. Do you know who else agrees with me? Stan Lee’s own daughter.

In an interview with TMZ, Joan Lee slammed Disney for their lack of compassion when her father passed away:

“When my father died, no one from Marvel or Disney reached out to me. From day one, they have commoditised my father’s work and never shown him or his legacy any respect or decency. In the end, no one could have treated my father worse than Marvel and Disney’s executives.”

She then went on to support Sony’s decision to break the deal with Marvel, saying ‘whether it’s Sony or someone else’s, the continued evolution of Stan’s characters and his legacy deserves multiple points of view.’

And do you know what? She’s right. She’s absolutely right.

While people were celebrating when Disney bought 20th Century Fox because the X-Men and Fantastic Four were finally going to be part of their precious shared universe, I was watching in absolute horror because nobody was actually talking about the ramifications of this. Disney serves as a cautionary tale of what happens when capitalism goes unchecked. Seeing this mega-corporation consume and absorb other major studios like some Lovecraftian monster is both frightening and heartbreaking for me because the industry is going to be so much lesser for it. Less studios means less movies are going to be produced. It also means less variety in the entertainment we consume. Marvel and Disney have already done their utmost to homogenise and dumb down every MCU film to the point where most of them all feel the same, look the same and have nothing unique or creative about them whatsoever. And now we’re on the cusp of seeing that potentially happening to my most favourite superhero in the whole wide world:

Thanks to the Disney buyout, plans for X-Force and Deadpool 3 have been placed on indefinite hold with people reckoning we won’t see the Merc with the Mouth again until Phase 5 (Christ, give me strength) of the MCU so that Marvel and Disney can work out exactly how to fit him into their shared universe. Naturally the R rated nature of the character makes him difficult to integrate into the PG-13 MCU. Some have suggested toning down the character. Even David Leitch, the director of Deadpool 2, said they could make a PG-13 version of the character, which just feels like such a massive betrayal. After literally years of Ryan Reynolds, director Tim Miller, screenwriters Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, and the fans fighting tooth and claw to get an R rated Deadpool movie green-lit, it sickens me whenever I see people discussing how a PG-13 Deadpool wouldn’t be so bad and that they just want to see him pop up in an Avengers movie.

Here’s a suggestion. If you can’t make someone like Deadpool fit into the MCU, STOP TRYING TO FUCKING DO IT! Let him be his own separate thing! I’ve got no problem with that! But no. Everything has to be connected to this idiotic shared universe, but here’s the thing, I really don’t fucking care. I couldn’t give two shits if Deadpool and Captain America were to meet in a movie. I just want to see X-Force and Deadpool 3. I just want some good fucking movies. Is that really too much to ask?

The MCU, and by extension Disney, are slowly ruining the industry with this shared universe crap and I’m getting so bloody sick of this. Not only does the premise have absolutely nothing new to offer at this point, it’s also ruining the quality of standalone movies. Instead of telling compelling stories with likeable characters, they’re just adverts for more movies to come with nothing unique to offer. Oooooh, can the Avengers stop Thanos and unkill everyone who we know aren’t really dead because they all have fucking sequels planned? Tune in next week to confirm what you already bloody know! I don’t give a fuck what you’ve got planned for me down the road in ten or fifteen movies time. Right now I’m stuck here at a service station and I’ve got no fucking sandwiches.

Off the top of my head, the only MCU films I can think of that I’ve watched in recent memory and I’ve actually enjoyed are Captain America: Civil War and Black Panther. And do you know why? Because they actually have something to say. They’re not focused on teasing the next bullshit spinoff movie. Black Panther in particular has little to no connection with the rest of the MCU. It works as its own standalone piece and has its own unique voice, commenting on how black people are viewed in society. Civil War takes elements from previous films and goes in an entirely new direction with them, exploring the faults in our beloved Avengers and questioning their role as superheroes. It offers something beyond a tease for the next film. It poses thought provoking questions about the characters and forces us to confront some harsh truths about them. But in an environment like the MCU, where everything is pre-planned by committee, there’s no room for creativity or expression, which means the few good movies get stifled. It’s impossible to continue the themes of Civil War because Homecoming exists to contradict everything. Black Panther is an amazing and impactful movie, but its impact is lessened thanks to Infinity War where we see the Wakandans reduced to little more than cannon fodder so that the real heroes can fight the baddie.

It’s frustrating to see people blindly accept and support the poisonous business model of Marvel and Disney because it’s not normal, it’s not benefiting the industry at large and it’s not even financially viable in the long term. Marvel Studios’ success revolves around one franchise. What happens when the shared universe/comic book movie bubble bursts and people eventually stop watching these films? (and it will happen because it always happens. That’s how trends work). They’re going to be up shit street, aren’t they? At least Warner Bros have Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings to fall back on. Their future isn’t entirely dependant on the success of the DCEU (thank God, some might say).

Also it’s worth noting that studios are slowly starting to move away from the shared universe format. Before the buyout, 20th Century Fox were taking risks with smaller budget, standalone movies like Deadpool and Logan. After the disaster that was Justice League, Warner Bros and DC have recently started focusing more on standalone movies to great success. Aquaman and Shazam, while still part of the DCEU, work as their own independent films. We’ve also got Joker being released in a couple of months time, which I think everyone should be paying really close attention to, because if Joker is critically and commercially successful, it could very well serve as the death knell for the concept of a shared universe. Definitive proof that you don’t need twenty movies and interconnecting stories with massive budgets to be successful. All you need is a very good idea.

Even Sony have finally learnt their lesson. They��ve taken a risk with Into The Spider-Verse and received an Academy Award for their trouble. As for Sony’s Universe Of Marvel Characters, they’re already off to a strong start with Venom. And mercifully they’re not making the same mistakes they did with the Amazing Spider-Man 2 or Ghostbusters. They’re not spending ridiculous amounts of money with unrealistic expectations of success and they’re no longer putting the cart way before the horse. They’re focusing on making a good movie first and worrying about potential expansion later. Venom may not be a masterpiece, but it’s a hell of a lot more entertaining and fulfilling than the majority of MCU films because it tells a complete story with a beginning, middle and end and it has well developed characters that we actually like and grow attached to. And if worst comes to the worst and Sony’s next film, Morbius, doesn’t do well, then they have Venom 2 to fall back on. And if that doesn’t work, they’ll still have Spider-Verse. They are no longer putting all their eggs in one basket and that’s good. That’s the smart thing to do.

Can you imagine something like Venom in the MCU? Of course not! Because Venom has its own unique tone and vision. That’s why it was so successful with audiences. Its mix of dark comedy and campy sci-fi horror made it stand out from the crowd. Marvel and Disney want us to believe that there’s only one way to make a superhero movie, when that’s simply not true. And now that Spider-Man is free to find his own unique voice again, hopefully people will begin to see just how creatively limiting and damaging the MCU truly is.

[arcticdementor]

My take on modern Star Trek compared to the old:

Star Trek very much embodied what liberal American white males of the 1980s and 1990s thought the future would (or should) look like: secular, sexually liberated, humanistic, meritocratic, equitable, and technological – a man’s world, basically. In this world, religion plays practically no role in public life. Problems are solved with diplomacy instead of violence. Money doesn’t exist, so there is no capitalism, greed, or want. People spend their lives bettering humanity and doing other such noble things like negotiating peace with aliens or exploring the universe in one of Starfleet’s advanced starships, each equipped with a plethora of miraculous technologies. In their leisure time, the crews of these starships visit a holographic room, the holodeck, which can conjure any fantasy into a photorealistic facsimile of the real thing.

Probably the only place in the Western world where this mentality can still be found is California’s Silicon Valley. As in the fictional world of Star Trek, men do most of the work; they advance through meritocracy; and there is something akin to a fraternal culture, irrespective of the prevailing progressive ideology. Silicon Valley is also still largely free of the odious diversity requirements imposed on the rest of society.

…

The high point of the franchise, The Next Generation, featured a mostly white liberal cast and various things white liberals liked at the time – sex appeal, food, pseudointellectualism (although handled capably by talented male writers), cutting edge tech, meritocracy, optimism, exploration, and the white man’s moralism.

Starfleet, the Federation’s military and scientific branch, was a rigorous meritocracy, just as Silicon Valley is today. Members were admitted only through a combination of senior officer recommendations, high scholastic achievement, and phenomenally high standardized test scores. Character was also paramount. Crew evaluations feature prominently in several episodes of TNG, and it was made clear to underperforming members that the starship Enterprise cuts a standard above the rest; perform or hit the road.

In the diverse world of Star Trek, the white writers imagined meritocracy would ensure whites like themselves would still have a position at the top of society (just as in Hollywood then and Silicon Valley now) despite soon becoming a minority in real life America. You’ll notice progressive humans are at the center of the Federation in Star Trek despite being a small minority in that fictional universe as well. That’s by design, conscious or not.

…

In the TNG episode The Drumhead, Picard faces down a witch hunting admiral — a woman, no less. The plot revolves around an incident that occurred on the starship Enterprise. Sabotage is suspected, and the situation is tense. The initial evidence points to a low ranking crewman who is later discovered to be of mixed race, one-quarter of the Federation’s most feared enemy. This all but convicts him in the eyes of the admiral’s tribunal. The admiral mercilessly presses her case, threatening to destroy anyone who gets in her way. She’s meant to be a caricature of conservative jingoists of the era – always scared of the Russians, racist against minorities, emotional. In Hollywood’s view of history, those were the people behind the McCarthy hearings, which this episode obviously pulls from.

…

Toward the end of the episode, Captain Picard confronts his antagonist and gives a fine speech about principle, temperament, and morality in the process. The admiral is defeated when a fellow admiral, a black male character, stands up and walks out in disgust at her actions.

This is one of the reasons why fans liked the character of Jean-Luc Picard: he was a decent, honorable man despite not being perfect himself. He had a code he lived by, and he led by example. Men like that sort of thing. Star Trek Picard, in contrast, portrays him as a bumbling moron who is always wrong and continually berated by female underlings. His view of the world is portrayed as naive or just wrong, requiring strong SJW women to take it to the enemy themselves, often employing violence – including rank murder and sadistic violence.

In another episode of TNG, white male commander Riker stands up to his white male superior — an admiral — who wishes to break the terms of a peace treaty to gain a military edge over a mortal enemy. Riker prevents him from doing so and exposes the dastardly plot. Moral of the story: principle trumps Machiavellianism.

Star Trek was very much a pre-Millennial liberal morality play whereby inspired characters (mostly white) would often stand up to authority figures (mostly white) in order to promote a general moral code — a greater authority — among fellow whites.

Consider some of the following things about Star Trek: The Next Generation and ask yourself if any of this would be allowed on television today without controversy.

…

The diverse new cast of Discovery and Picard mostly excludes white males. The only principle white men who did not appear in make-up during Discovery’s first season were either villains or openly gay. The show’s lead is a black woman who’s the best at everything, acts bizarrely hostile towards the crew and later berates the male commanding officer, captain Pike – introduced in season 2. There’s also an assortment of other female archetypes more typically seen in network television crime dramas – the dorky female comic relief, the bestest ever leader, the tech guru.

Star Trek: Picard’s white male actors, aside from TNG cameos, are mostly villains when they appear at all. Picard himself is a senile old man who contributes essentially nothing to the show. He is used as the butt of criticism from the cast. It’s clear the writers are using him as a canvas to paint their grievances with the real world. Picard — white male America — stands in the new boss’s empowered way. He lives in luxury as minority characters live in poverty. The (white) institutions he represents are all corrupt and racist. To rectify this injustice, the diverse cast must defy Star Trek convention – up to and including committing acts of cold-blooded murder (even villains don’t deserve that).

The new shows also – bizarrely — feature a dearth of straight black male actors. TNG had two; Voyager had one; DS9 had several, including a masculine male captain. The feminists who write this newer junk must feel threatened by their masculinity, a common phenomenon in modern Hollywood movies, comic books, and in network television: black men are usually removed (Star Trek), made gay (Marvel’s New Warriors), or turned into female servants (Samuel L. Jackson in Captain Marvel – a pet to Brie Larson). So, they’ve almost entirely been excised as primary leads in the new shows. The mostly unaccomplished female writers of Discovery even reported the more accomplished (read: threatening) black male writer, Walter Mosley, to Human Resources for uttering a racial epithet (in context with writing about racism), causing him to quit the show in disgust.

Author Walter Mosley Quits ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ After Using N-Word in Writers Room

Discovery and Picard are both written by a crowd that obviously hates the demographic they are writing for, so they pepper many of the episodes with things they know that demographic will take as insults – female characters insulting male characters, underhanded jokes about masculinity or mansplaining, obnoxious female leads, incompetent white male characters who need female instruction, excessive melodrama, denigration of lore. It’s patently obvious. They aren’t even being subtle about it.

…

Fundamentally, these new shows struggle because they are written by people wholly unlike the target audience, so they are not able to appeal to them (the same is true of other ruined male franchises like Star Wars – but I’ll save that for another time). These new shows aren’t for the old audience. The new — diverse — show runners have made that clear. Star Trek now serves as a vehicle for airing out racial and gender grievances against the perceived white male audience. It’s akin to planting your tribe’s flag on another tribe’s territory. The aggrieved gets a rush from being able to rub their enemy’s face in their loss. It’s intentional.

…

Regardless, the primary audience for a show like this is heterosexual men, disproportionately white … And when minority male characters appear, they’re not supposed to be losers upstaged by their sassy, disrespectful and arrogant female subordinates. In Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, the black male captain put his hothead female executive officer in her place more than once. In the new Treks, men are continually insulted, often for no good reason, by female crew members.

What do men like in Star Trek?

Men like technology. So, the writers of Picard introduced a magic wand to the newest iteration.

…

Men like adventure, not melodrama. So, obviously the female writers feature an inordinate number of episodes of characters crying.

…

Most of the adventure element prominent in previous shows is absent or poorly constructed in the newer ones … or ripped off from other properties, including video games. Paramount was being sued a while back for copyright infringement.

…

Men also like ship design, which was a major component of the old shows. They provided countless hours of free fan promotion across message boards and websites, they were cool locations for new episodes, and they inspired fan movies. So, obviously that had to be sidelined in the new shows. The ships, once iconic and profitable selling toy items, are now generic CGI models – totally uninspired trash hastily put together as an afterthought. The new shows can’t sell the merchandise, so the retailers have refused to license much of it.

Another thing men like? Group service – following rules, meritocracy, sacrifice for the tribe, defending territory (even the non-violent philosophical variety), that kind of thing. Well, that’s almost totally absent in Discovery and Picard. The once-honorable and meritocratic military-like Federation is portrayed as corrupt and unequal; the black female lead of Picard berates Jean-Luc in one episode for living “in his fine chateau” while she lived in poverty – again, a totally antithetical concept to the old shows.

…

The whole Federation is a dystopia with criminals and drugs and injustice all about.

Various Federation admirals in the new movies and television shows are belligerent, short-sighted, and rude; one is an outright war criminal. TNG featured at least two episodes with corrupt Federation admirals, but our show’s male heroes put them in their place by the end of the episode. Even the female captain Kathryn Janeway did this once in Voyager. Not true of these newer shows, though. Admirals berate the male characters, then go away – never to be redeemed or brought to justice.

Many of the characters in the new shows act entirely unprofessional towards each other. They are sometimes even cruel or sadistic. The female captain of one Discoveryshort Trek allowed a bumbling white male crewman (whom the female writers mocked the entire episode) to die horribly and then simply shrugged it off when asked about it, “he was an idiot” (implication: he deserved to die because he was annoying her).

…

The biggest supporters of these new incarnations, not surprisingly, are the show’s American writers – along with a few “critics”. These people lack any loyalty to a higher cause (other than themselves), are nihilistic, are sadistic, enjoy berating “the other” (men, whites, themselves even), and have practically no respect for anything they aren’t personally invested with. In other words, they are thoroughly Americanized losers.

There would be a college thesis in that observation if we lived in a better timeline. In this one, the world where the bad guys won, you are stuck reading it in a random internet comment.

I think that observation explains much of what is wrong with modern culture: the past, in many ways, was better than the present and probably will end up being better than the near future. That’s intolerable to a lot of political extremists, the very people who put us in this position in the first place. So, the past has to be destroyed; it serves as a foil to the current reigning madness. “Let the past die, kill it if you have to.” That’s why pop culture had to be denigrated. That’s why Star Trek is trash nowadays.

When conquering armies of the ancient world subdued an enemy, they often defaced the conquered tribe’s symbols – destroyed the statues, burned the temples, desecrated anything sacred; both Muslim and Christian conquerors were famous for this. Same thing here. The new regime is burning the cultural bridges so you can’t go back to the better world left behind, the one not ruled by them.

…

Although, in fairness to the ladies, it’s mostly men like Alex Kurtzman who have ruined the new shows. The guy once stated in an interview that he has a problem writing male characters. Hollywood: let’s hire that guy for Star Trek!

[wickymicky]

i think i just had a galaxy brain moment

boy groups are often a little more boxed in by genre than girl groups, it seems, and i think i figured out why.... i think it’s sexism. not against boys lol, i’m not a meninist haha... it’s cause like, i think boy group songs are written for straight women, whereas girl group songs are written for straight men and women. and obviously, us lgbt people sneak up in there and like everything, of course. but a lot of the time, straight men are like “above pop music” haha, which is ridiculous, but anyway girl groups have to factor in appealing to a female audience too. so girl groups can be marketed as cute to appeal to straight dudes who like that and young girls who like cute stuff, or they can be tough and girlcrush in order to appeal to straight dudes who prefer that as well as women who want music from women that makes them feel powerful and stuff. 

and like, since a lot of straight girls listen to girl groups, that opens the door for executives to approve concepts for ggs that aren’t based on love or selling how attractive the members are a little easier. if companies see that a large percentage of girl group fans arent people who are in it cause theyre attracted to the idols, they can appeal to that demographic in other ways, through music and other concepts. and also, of course, that inadvertently often makes them appealing to lgbt people lmao, like dreamcatcher for instance, but that’s something for another post haha. 

boy groups are expanding though and honestly, as much as i hate to admit it haha, maybe bts did “pave the way” on this front lol... i mean like, conceptual and interesting boy groups have existed the whole time but bts proved that kpop can “break through” and stuff, so boy groups arent exclusively marketed to straight preteen girls like a stereotypical western “boy band” would be, you know? 

one thing ive noticed is that the boy group songs that i tend to like the most and think are the most fun and full of personality.... are usually written and produced by one or several of the members themselves. it’s almost as if when members write songs that they enjoy and are artistically invested in, it creates a better song.... hmmm lmao. girl groups arent afforded that opportunity as often, but i think just the general aim of girl groups is for really fun, personality-full music, so it generally appeals to me more anyway. 

[elizabethrobertajones]

(part 1) this is random but something im curious about is do you think the next few years will see a radical shift in more lead lgbt couples in shows? i feel like when supernatural started it was all about subtext/queerbating between characters we would never see canon (maybe), the last few years have seen an update in more side lgbt characters/couples and while not a lot, more main lgbt characters then we had before. I don't know if tumblr/twitter fandom translates to general audience...

Yeah, I mean, the only way is up. I feel lucky that I managed to encounter a fair amount of queer content in my formative years, whether targeted programming on TV, or taking the route of not really differentiating the perceived cultural value of independent media like webcomics and webnovels etc from the mass media as I was young enough to naturally grow up on the internet as the internet itself was growing up and web 2.0 was pretty much taking off alongside my use of the internet. And that I had liberal parents who didn’t regulate our internet, and lived in a community where culturally I didn’t really fear being discovered casually accessing all this like in particularly this terrifying seeming evangelical christian community in America.

Which really makes me feel like A: everyone should feel that comfortable in themselves via the media as I did as a mass accessible thing or B: that the world at large should be soaked in as much representation and more that I encountered as a curious teen because at the very least it did me no harm and at best helped handhold me through an awful lot. 

And then brings us to the problem that the world isn’t actually like that and for a lot of people their media is restricted one way or another, from everything such as the era of social media weirdly making us much LESS broadly travelled on the internet as I was back in the day (SO many bookmarks - I had like 100 that I would check either daily or on their weekly update schedule, with enough habit that I had pretty much memorised it all without using an RSS feed or just following everyone’s twitter and waiting for update announcements, never mind the vast pit of things which I occasionally checked to see if their sporadic but very worth it updates had occurred somewhere in the last month/year) to the vastly overwhelming amount of media accessible to us. It seems almost to flood the market and creates this panic about watching the worthiest shows and campaigning for them and raising awareness and the FOMO and how things slip by and zomg you have to watch this that and the other, when even just making this list on Netflix now contains more hours of TV than a human lifetime and also one liable to disappear from the service at some point or another without warning. 

And then on top of that you have the absolute cultural monoliths that if you’re not going to have a cohesive culture - which now includes the entire population of the world because of our connectivity on the internet and mass-joining of services - based around smaller shows and stuff, then at the very least everyone is going to watch anything under the main Disney umbrella, other superhero flicks, animated things, and all the really big studio franchises and remakes, as well as a few TV monoliths which manage to get enough people talking to make it seem like “everyone” (again - these days it seems like that’s presumed to be the entire western world plus everywhere else these things air) are watching, like Game of Thrones or whatever… THESE properties are the inescapable ones and on that basis they’re the things we have to lean on the most for representation and then again barely get any, when it comes to gender and sexuality, due to them shooting for such worldwide markets that they can’t imply gay people exist to censors in places such as China. And it exposes the cultural awfulness inherent just in getting a white female character in the lead role of some things, or the absolute garbage fire lurking underneath that if you dare have a black stormtrooper or make one of your female ghostbusters black when you’re already ruining the childhoods of so many how dare… 

In those respects, having side characters who aren’t even major well-known superheroes or jedis or ghostbusters or whatever also be gay (because even well-known lesbian Kate McKinnon didn’t manage to get her ghostbuster to be canonically gay even if we All Knew) would be absolutely groundbreaking, even if it was, like, a role that could be snipped out for the Chinese market or something. And that’s probably exactly what would happen, and cue ensuing riot from whichever fandom, along with everyone rightly pointing out that even for us who got to watch it it was still a tiny side character… I mean Disney is still at the stage of what they did with Beauty and the Beast’s ~canonical gay character~ 

So yeah… that’s thrown back to TV and smaller movies to lead the way and because the generations showing most likely the real global percentages but actually just the young western world stats on queerness in any form (like… 25% instead of 1% or whatever and that’s STILL probably too low) are still teens to young adults. The previous gayest generation above them are still just arriving in power and settling in, and the excellent changes we already have from the generation before that is what we are seeing now... But given THEIR cultural context, even their best can still seem to younger eyes, moderate and not generally placing queer characters in lead roles except in niche or indie or otherwise “acceptable” places to take those risks. I think change is always coming and culturally each generation being more open and accepting that the last is really making changes and so on, hopefully things WILL change rapidly and what was the common state of affairs in the sort of indie media I consumed as a teen will be the mainstream soon because a lot of those creators 10 years later are kicking off… 

All that said, TV in the mainstream is still controlled by Mark Pedowitz types exercising their power over the Bobos who have their Wayward Sisters pitches with the clearly labelled main character for the main teen demographic being queer. The culture is very much that we’re now pretty open and can happily have queer characters, but the main characters are still largely held separate. A good example is Riverdale, which is on the CW, a newer show with writers such as Britta Lundin, who is young, queer, and wrote a novel blatantly based on being a Destiel shipper and fan interacting with the cast and crew in fandom spaces, and whose first solo episode of Riverdale featured a looooot of the gay stuff (yay). 

But while she’s a story editor and writer for the show and can use it as a platform for writing stories for its audience using a whole range of canonically queer characters, the show still keeps all 4 of its mains at a strict remove from this. Cheryl can come out as a lesbian in the second season after a lil ho yay in the first but no clearly marked storyline about her identity, but even though Betty and Veronica kissed in the first episode it was blatant fan service (for Cheryl in-story, lol) and mostly just set the tone that they are the sort of seemingly straight girls kissing for attention while having strong romantic or physical attraction to guys. In the second season the kiss comes up again in joking that Jughead and Archie are the only ones of the main 4 who haven’t kissed, Archie gets one planted on him by a dude as a “judas kiss” moment of betrayal in season 3 and he and Jug are teased that they were expected to get together because they were close but in the same sort of homophobic undercurrent tones as early Destiel snarking from side characters, seemingly less about their relationship and more to unsettle them with implications… I mean it was a complicated moment but in the long run it didn’t seem entirely pleasant to me, especially given the overall emotional state they were in and later plot etc etc. (My mum is 1000% invested in Riverdale now as a former Archie Comics reader as a kid so this is now my life too as I was in the room when my brother callously exposed her to it, hi :P) 

Anyway that’s just one case study but aside from SPN it’s probably the most mainstream teen demographic thing I watch… Other examples would be things like B99 which had Rosa come out as bi and that’s awesome, and made us all cry a lot, but Jake, the clear main character even in a very strong and well-treated ensemble, has a great deal of bi subtext, there’s no way given Andy Samberg’s apparent habit of ad-libbing MORE progressive jokes that he’d ever be intentionally harming people if that’s how his brain works (you know, like other people quick-fire offensive stuff from their mouth working faster than brain sense of humour :P). But at the same time for all Jake’s quipping about crushes and such and the fact the show clearly knows how to be sensitive to bisexuality with Stephanie Beatriz being a strong advocate, just because Jake’s the main character and adorably married to Amy. In NO WAY can that be threatened because they’re SO GOOD, so there’s STILL uncertainty that this will pay off in the same special episode “I love my wife but I am bi” kinda way that seems obvious that could just be said. We all carry on without it affecting anything because obviously Jake’s found his soulmate so we don’t mess with that but they should know it’s important to clarify it… Even with B99′s track record, I’m nervous solely because Jake’s the main character and main characters tend not to get self-exploratory arcs about latent queerness and ESPECIALLY not if they’re happily married. If ANY show was going to do it right and trailblaze in this exact era it would be them, but… gyah :P 

Anyway I guess the conclusion right now is that the more mainstream you are the more uncertain it feels, but we are right at that cliff edge, especially with shows putting in SOME of the work. If B99 doesn’t get us there (or the Good Place where they’ll happily confirm Eleanor is bi in interviews but I believe she hasn’t said it outright on the show despite clearly showing attraction to female characters, again, the denials we know so well in SPN fandom reflect a wider audience view of dismissing this stuff as jokes and not reflective of character feeling and identification without a Special Episode dedicated to confirming it >.>) then we’re very clearly on the cusp of SOME mainstream or massively well-known show doing it at least once in a meaningful way that has an Ellen-style cultural impact on TV writing. 

Let’s make it a goal for 2019 or 2020, and hope that a NEW show with a canonically queer main from the start is pitched and becomes a mainstream hit in the next 5… Still got a ways to go before Disney level mainstream but again there IS work going pushing the envelope, especially if we get a movie of a franchise such as idk Further Legends of Korra, or Steven Universe or something else that’s massively pushed the envelope with sexuality or gender for their main character on the small screen in the experimental petri dish they’ve had there for children’s TV. Something that would force Disney to blink about a lesbian princess or Star Wars to let Finn and Poe kiss or Marvel to let Steve and Bucky hold hands or something in order to remain relevant.

Once the Big Cultural Monoliths get in on it, I expect culture as a whole to first of all react quickly on the small screen, but honestly I’ve been waiting for them to snap pretty much my whole life since adolescence and they’re taking such wee tiny baby steps, and some factors are enormous geopolitical awfulness, that the story as a whole is unpredictable and we can only really hope that things don’t slow down. 

(Where this affects SPN is just impossible to say right now, given its almost unique position in this mess due to longevity vs fandom vs almost entirely new generation of writers’ room) 

[holywomandrowninginpleasure]

Taking One’s Lumps

Traditionally, leaving one’s home and life of crime behind would be done on impulse – under cover of night. Otherwise, one should expect a decision made under duress and through a hail of bullets, at least, that’s what storytellers would have you believe. But plants don’t really have much in the way of tradition, and Bisca isn’t exactly a fan of the night. More importantly, if there were to be any oncoming storm of bullets, Bisca would be slithering through the eye as it passes through the city. Thankfully, things didn’t come to that.

Like any self-respecting snake, Bisca went right up to Harsek and told him, in effect, she wanted to betray him. In actuality, she said “This town’s been doing me no favors (and while it’s been fun) I’ve gotta get out of here.” In Thieves’ Cant, the closest equivalent would be “I need to take a vacation,” which could mean -

“I’m in trouble and need to go into hiding.”

“I’m a liability to you and need to be killed.”

Both.

Similarly, to a snake, this was both an announcement and invitation of backstabbing. “I’m planning on doing this on such-and-such day, so if you would like to get back at me for doing it in advance, please do so in a timely manner,” is the gist of it. It might seem weird to announce when one is going to impede the other for personal gain, but it is tradition amongst most groups of snakes. That is to say, it is a tradition amongst most groups of snakes that last that long. If snakes did not do such a thing, there would be no snake dens, instead, one snake standing upon a pile of corpses – high and mighty, readily struck down. Those groups who follow this tradition, such as the Shadow Adders, report much higher levels of trust, even when one is planning on throwing the other under the bus.

This is because betrayal without notice is such an inefficient system – often times the victim loses much more than the perpetrator stands to gain, and that’s assuming it works. Announcing it makes it possible to both negotiate and retaliate. But, again, retaliation is often costly. This led to a cultural shift – from large scale knife in the back betrayal, to multiple smaller scale betrayals worth about a couple trade a piece; disincentivizing retaliation and leading to a majority of snakes just ‘taking their lumps.’ Occasionally, one would ‘take back their lumps’ by putting in a request for betraying the other right back to them, which disincentivized repeat offenses, lest a blood feud risk ostracizing both from the group. The current social norm is a twisted concept of betrayal, where a knife in one’s back has been replaced with an invitation to negotiate. Do nothing if you are fine with the terms, negotiate to try and see if there’s an outcome where both parties win, and retaliate if neither party can be satisfied. Obviously none of this applied when one was doing something heinous, like selling one (or many) out to the law – but the general cultural shift meant doing something like that was much less common – especially since the retaliation for it would come in the form of many snakes, not just one.

Much like Shadow Adders themselves, this system seems to be built on parts that are completely at odds with one another – a system that Bisca never really understood. The root of Bisca’s issue is that the system relies on presumption of betrayal, one common to snakes but uncommon to her. How do you teach someone to betray loved ones, when you yourself are the only reference? The answer is that you can’t, the only thing that can teach that is desire itself. Desire to leave this town, to be free of this concrete cage and everything that it stands for, a desire threatening to become stronger than the bonds holding you down. It’s a desire that the Shadow Adders knew well enough, they all suffered from it, unable to sever themselves from the fear they couldn’t make it outside this hellhole.

“We can barely make it in this town as is!” Harsek slams his beer on the bar counter. Drinks at the Toxic Bee were always a bad time at a good price, especially when one has to report to their higher ups.

“We can make it just fine without her.” Slaak wasn’t drinking tonight, but she orders another one for Harsek. “The insurance she provides isn’t worth her weight in bullets, and she doesn’t look trustworthy enough to find someone to sell us out to, not without damning herself.” Harsek starts downing his fourth drink, not wanting to respond. “But this isn’t about us, this isn’t even about her, this is about you, Harsek.”

“It’s about the Shado-” Slaak shuts Harsek up real quickly by splashing Harsek’s fifth drink in his face.

“I’ve made my decision regarding the sanctity of the group. The girl can leave when she wants, and the treasury has enough to spare for a modest going-away party – chalk it up to improving morale. But if you came to me for advice on how to cope with one’s hatchling leaving the nest, you’ve come to the wrong woman, Harsek.”

“A-Aye boss.” With the dishrag provided by the barkeep, Harsek dries off his face. With the water provided by the barkeep, Harsek stares into his reflection. Well, at least, he tries to – it is the worse tap.

“Take it from me, if she keeps doing jobs in that sate of mind, it’ll just be bad for her health – mentally and physically, much less a liability You can’t keep here here, quit your bargaining and just take your lumps -  I’m sure she’s already made peace with hers.” Slaak puts a handful of bills and coins onto the bar, turning to leave. “If you’re really worried about her, you’ll be here to say goodbye.”

 Normally, the Toxic Bee was completely empty in the middle of the day. Today, however, it is full of snakes – most of which were still recovering from a late night. The band plays a song about a flower growing through the concrete, climbing through the cracks in the city’s tallest skyscraper until the building fell apart – the flower left on top. A song rife with colorful metaphors, it arguably sounds terrible, but the target demographic eats it up. Bisca, for once in her life, shows up unarmed.

The snakes cheer. Everyone has something to say to her, even those she never really knew, or those she never even met. Congratulations and blessings thrown out like bullets, Bisca has to do the arduous task of determining whether to answer with sarcasm or genuine appreciation on a snake-by-snake basis. Everyone’s drinking – including, for once, Bisca.

“Wait, I thought you said we came to this place because the beer was good?” Bisca says, and the regulars laugh. The Barkeep, sighing, brings out a cake. Drowned with bright red icing and a knife sticking out of it, Bisca can’t help but laugh, the and the regulars at this point are roaring. The wall flower, of course, yells for them all to shut up. Of course, no one does. Everyone there’s too caught up in the moment, including, for once, Harsek.

“Mornin’, kid.” Snakes aren’t exactly known for touching moments. Not even when under the sway of alcohol. “Havin’ fun?” Bisca, however, is a great grappler, and about two Harseks tall to boot. As Bisca would say, I’ll spare you the sap. The festivities continue into the night; resulting in two broken tables, a 35% gratuity, one count of strangulation by flower, and countless tearful farewells.

[joyofcrime-elinorhigh]

Teen Titans Go! REVIEW: (Part 2)

 Hello everybody, my name is JoyofCrimeArt and welcome to part two of my Teen Titans Go! retrospective! Or should I say my Teen Titans.....................................................................................................................No....retrospective.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzKJ4HX4Fuk

Get it? because the show isn't that good! Okay, remember to click that bell icon and turn on notifications to-  So in case your just joining in, this is part two of my Teen Titans Go! retrospective/review. If you haven't seen part one than I highly recommend that you check it out before going forward. To sum up the point I made in my last part...I didn't like this show that much.  WHAT?! A CARTOON CRITIC ONLINE WHO DOESN'T LIKE TEEN TITANS GO?! WHAT A NEW AN UNIQUE TAKE-  But for THIS part we are mostly going to step away from the show itself, and focus on the more meta aspect of the show. So really this part isn't even a review of Teen Titans Go! and more of "A review of elements that are tangentially related to Teen Titans Go! and the conversation around it." But since that title won't fit in the Deviantart title box and it's not "clickbait-y" enough, we're going with this instead.  So I just want to re-emphasize that, for the most part, none of the things I clique here are actually the fault of the shows crew or creators or anything. But I think it's still important to discuss these points because, as I stated last time, I think the conversation around the show is far more interesting than the show itself. So let's dive in.  We'll start with the elephant in the room. Let's talk about the shows handling of critics. This is one of the most notorious elements of the series. Now, I'm just going to say this...I kinda get where the creators are coming from. For real. While there are MANY legit reasons to dislike the show, (Around 4,000 words worth according to my last review alone.) However, out the gate, Teen Titans Go! got hate from ALL cylinders. Young Justice fans bitter about there show being "replaced." Old school Teen Titans fan upset this wasn't season six. People who just wanted action shows. And I'm not going to be high and mighty, as I said last time, I was one of these people. (However, I never made long curse filled rants on Youtube or called for the creators to be shot or anything crazy like that.)  Some people say that reboots are "lazy and easy" because you get a built in audience with zero effort. But I believe the total opposite. Making a reboot sounds like a nightmare. People are much more unforgiving when it's an i.p they love and often times will hate you for the littlest things and won't give you a chance. Just look up how many Powerpuff Girl 2016 rants there were BEFORE any footage of the show was even released. People who are in these positions have it rough, and deserve more appreciation. I can't imagine the amount of hate the two show runners must get on a daily basis, which is probably why they don't seem to have social media accounts.    HOWEVER this is where we get into what I think is one of the biggest problems in society today, and that's strawmaning. And I feel like I shouldn't have to say this, but here I go. And this can apply for anything. JUST BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE WITH AN OPINION ARE ASSHOLES DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYBODY WITH SAID OPINION ARE ASSHOLES!  I'm not going to act like there aren't people out there who take Teen Titans Go! WAY to frickin' seriously. That's just factually wrong. But not EVERYONE who has issues with the show are loud obnoxious neck beards who are mad that there "childhood was ruined." And that's how the show and some of the more hostile defenders of the show try to paint "all the haters." Some people just have legit criticisms that they want to get out into the world. When most people write a review of Teen Titans Go!, I don't think there doing so expecting the creators to see it and change the show for them. (I know some do, but again, don't mix the rude jerks in with the rest of us.) They're doing it because they feel passionately, and want to share there opinions with others. Or because they see wasted potential. There's a difference between criticism and hating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4Ai4G6ccfA

 And the thing is...and this is something that I think I'm in the minority opinion on, but I don't think you HAVE to listen to every piece of criticism you get. I've noticed this trend as of late, where people expect that if they criticize something, the author or creator is obligated to change it. And if they don't then there just "not taking the criticism." But that's not how it works though.  For example, if someone where to tell me "You're reviews are too long." I would definitely take that into consideration, and I would appreciate the input. However, I like overly long analytical reviews, and that's what I'm going to keep doing because that's the type of reviews I wanna make. I might try to shorten them a LITTLE bit, but I would never just start writing few hundred word reviews, cause that's not the art I wanna create.   In the same vain, if Teen Titans Go! doesn't wanna except any of there criticism, that's fine. If the show wants to just go about doing it's own thing, more power to it. But when it does these criticism tackling episodes it's breaking the first rule of the internet. Never let people know when something bothers you. And yeah, I think if a TV show goes out of it's way to tell the critics "you suck" than the critics have the right to say it back. And I know you could say that the show has the right because they started that. But I don't know, there's just some part of me that believes that as the content creator, you have a responsibility to be the bigger person. If that makes sense?  This show basically is "Dab On The Haters: The Animated Series." Really, all the criticism tackling episodes can be summed up like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnd6WLi3TWk

 And the thing is, Teen Titans Go! really doesn't need to defend itself so hard. Because the show is a huge hit! It's clearly super popular with a large group of kids and adults alike. Why be so fixated on pleasing the people who you know your not going to please, when you can focus on the people who love you just the way you are? You don't see shows like Powerpuff Girls or Ben 10 reboots attacking the "haters" like this, and those shows don't even have the added advantage of being that popular.  As it stands, Teen Titans Go! is a show that reeks of insecurity. And as much as I shit on the show last time, it shouldn't be. Clearly the show is doing something right if it lasted this long. Teen Titans Go! the show that taught me how NOT to handle criticism. And honestly, I thank the show for this. I'm a sensitive guy, and I can be very harsh on myself. Without Teen Titans Go! acting as an example of what NOT to do, I could see myself becoming that kinda guy, who mask his insecurities with a faux ego.

Hey...did you see the way I just casually used the word "faux." Oh, I'm great and anyone who think otherwise is dumb...  However, I will give Teen Titans Go! this. I do think that when the humor goes "meta" it's when the shows comedy is at it's best. Because the people behind this show clearly know what this show is. They know it's reputation and it's status among other works of superhero fiction. Plus, as I said, the conversation around the show is far more interesting than the show itself. So when the show tacking these more interesting aspects the episodes tend to be more interesting as well. It's rare to find a show as self-aware of it's own status, and they take advantage of every opportunity that this presents.  I just wish it could do so without insulting me is all.  But do I even have the right to be criticizing this show though? I mean it's for kids, and kids clearly like it. Who right do I, a fully grown adult, have to stop kids from enjoying what they like. Why do I have to stand here and push my radical pro-Steven Universe agenda?!  That has been an argument I have been seeing a lot lately. And honestly, there are some aspects I actually do agree with. If you are reviewing a show with the hope of convincing someone to hate something that they previously liked, just because you hate the show, than in my personal opinion you are reviewing the show for the wrong reason. If you like Teen Titans Go! and somehow made it this far in the review, I want to be clear, you have the right to like whatever you want to like. Whenever I do a negative review of something, it's never with the intent of trying to stop someone from enjoying something they like. I just want to express why I don't like it.    As for the kid show argument, in some instances I agree with that argument too. Kids and adults are different. They have different taste and different things that they relate to. And shows are, from a business standpoint, targeted at a specific age demographics. I don't know why it's okay to call a show an "adult cartoon." but if you call a show a "kids show" it's deemed as an insult to the medium. Why is it wrong to say that I enjoy things aimed at kids? But getting back to the point, adults and kids look for different things in a show. Like, a kid obviously wouldn't be able to relate to the theme's presented in Bojack Horseman, and an adult would likely be board to tears by something like Peppa Pig.  However, the difference here is that Teen Titans Go! airs on Cartoon Network. And thus, it should be held to the same standard as other Cartoon Network shows are held to, since all CN shows are pretty much aimed at the same general age range. Not only that, but the show is rated TV-PG! i.e.) The same rating as Adventure Time, Steven Universe, Regular Show, and Over the Garden Wall. Technically speaking, kids aren't even suppose to watch this show without an adult. So I think it's fair to say that this show SHOULD be made with kids and adults in mind.  If this show was truly intended only for kids, and adults shouldn't watch it, than why are there so many 80's references and scenes that feel very...um....

Totally Spies...If you know what I mean.  Basically, my point here is that it is, in my opinion, completely reasonable to cirque this show. And it's weird because the whole "It's for kids" and "Don't like, don't watch." arguments are usually seen as a joke argument. (even though I personally feel like both arguments do apply in certain situations.) But with this show, I see people using these arguments a lot. And to each there own, I'm not going to stand her and say your argument is "invalid." But I think it is odd that this show seems to be the only show where these arguments is deemed "acceptable."  Also, if you watch Cartoon Networks live feed on a regular basis, it's hard to follow the "Don't like, don't watch." rule because the show is on so frickin' much!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyxX3ix2jp8

What makes this ad worse is how much this kid looks like Logan Paul...  Cartoon Network spams this show. And while I'm sure that this show would still very much be hated regardless of the scheduling, I think the scheduling is a major factor in how this show manged to stay a relevant topic of conversation in the cartoon community for over five years at this point. Humans, in case you haven't realized this by now, are very stubborn and spiteful creature by nature. If you shove something down someone's throat, or in this case tell that that it's there new favorite show, there bound to have an adverse reaction. Regardless of the actually quality of the product. Also, the show wasn't even "new" when that ad campaign started!  However, I do want to point out that it isn't Teen Titans Go's! fault that it's being spammed so much. It's Cartoon Networks scheduling departments. Traditional television is dying, and channels need to air what gives them ratings. Cartoon Network has always been in last place rating wise, when compared to there rivals Nickelodeon and Disney. They need to air what gives them ratings. And Teen Titans Go! is that. I get it.  However, and keep in mind I'm not an expert on any of this and have no idea what I'm really talking about, I feel like eventually this will come back to bite them. EVENTUALLY Teen Titans Go! is going to end. Even if it's after we're all long dead and buried, the show will die. It's already been running for five years, which is an eternity in kid cartoon time. And when this show does end, CN is going to need something else to keep people coming back. Because as of now, this show and Gumball (which is ending soon.) are the channels only main draws with the ratings. CN, as of it stands now, needs this show. And when this show does end, they'll need some kind of back up series if they hope to survive in this modern, cord cutting climate. This cash cow can't be milked forever.  R-right? P-Please God, tell me it can't last forever!

...Again with the Totally Spies.  But while I'm on the topic of Teen Titans Go! success, I have to ask the question of why? Why do kids gravitate more towards this show, in particular? Because as I stated in the last part, the idea taking an establish i.p and making a more comedic slice of life reboot may have been fresh back in 2013, but now of days we are over saturated with shows just like that. Show's like Powerpuff Girls 2016, Ben 10, and to a lesser extent Justice League Action and Be Cool Scooby-Doo are all more comedic versions of there respected brands, but none of those shows are nearly as successful. (And this isn't me saying those shows are bad because they follow TTG's mold. It's all about execution and I'm trying to make a point.) What does Teen Titans Go! have that these other shows don't?  The way I see it, the reason why Teen Titans Go! is popular while those other "Teen Titans Go-esq shows" (Even the really good ones like Justice League Action.) aren't has to do with intent and execution. Those other shows only chose to become more comedic because it was deemed "more marketable." And while I'm sure that was a factor in why Teen Titans Go! was pitched as a comedy, I feel the difference is how the shows chose to treat itself. Those other shows are made to be safe and marketable. They want fans new and old to like the show, so people will be more likely to buy the merch, which in turn will fund more seasons. Teen Titans Go! on the other hand, doesn't care about playing it "safe." It'll do whatever crazy and messed up things it wants to. The show revels in it's inaccuracy to the original.  A marketing team and a bunch of executives think Teen Titans Go! is successful because it's a comedy based on a beloved brand. But the reason I think it's popular is because it doesn't give a fu*k! To people who like this show, that's why they like it. And that's why the show is so interesting to talk about.  Also there a lot of elements in Teen Titans Go! appeals to kids. It's full wish fulfillment. Who doesn't want all the power and none of the responsibility. Who doesn't want to not have to worry about school or work, and just sit on a couch eating food all day. The show is loud, crazy, and colorful. It appeals to kids, and some adults, on a base level. It appeals to our more lazy and selfish aspects of our personalities that we all have, but chose to keep buried inside out of fear of social consequence. And while all that may sound harsh, I really don't mean that as an insult. There's nothing wrong with a show appealing to those aspects of our subconscious, because it can allow us to express those feelings without acting upon them. It's the same reason why people like characters like Bender from Futurama, or Rick from Rick and Morty. Teen Titans Go! is that for kids, and there's nothing wrong with that. Especially in a time where so many other kids shows are so nice and non-cynical. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  So, to wrap everything up, Teen Titans Go! might just be one of the most fascinating and influential shows of the 2010's? But do I recommend it? Well, despite EVERYTHING I ranted about in part one, from the lackluster comedy, horrendous writing, lazy reusing of voice acting and animation, and the lack of basic understanding when it comes to telling a story...I surprisingly actually do highly recommend it. 

 Listen, just hear me out here. While this show in all technical aspects is a frickin' train wreck. But sometimes, you just want to watch a train wreck unfold. It's fascinating to see just what this show is going to do next. What crazy, half backed decision it'll do. And honestly, it's hard not to admire how much the show just goes for it, even if "it" isn't something that you should go for. The show has this element of "watch-ability" even if I know the show itself isn't technically "good." It's a show worth watching, if for no other reason than to have an opinion on it. I think it's pretty obvious who will love this show, who will hate this show, and who will ironically love it. Maybe it's just Stockholm syndrome, but I will be genuinely sad when this show does come to an end.  But I want to end on this note. If you hate this show with a fire-y passion, feel free to do so. You have the right to like or not like whatever you want. Don't be afraid of giving your opinion just because your worried that people will think that your a "hater" or that it's "cringy to still be talking about Teen Titans Go! in 2018." Value your thoughts and share them with the masses. Just don't be a jerk about it. Don't assume that "everyone who likes Teen Titans Go! are mindless sheeple." or complain that this show "ruined your childhood." Because forcing your opinion down other peoples throats will get you nowhere. And remember that no show last forever. In ten years from now this show will most likely be forgotten about. Think about how many people HATED Johnny Test just a few years ago, and complained about how much CN spammed that show. When was the last time anyone talked about that show? Meanwhile the original Teen Titans, a show that originally aired fifteen years ago, is still getting prime time reruns on Cartoon Network as recently as early 2018. And honestly, without Teen Titans Go!, there's a good chance that the interest in the original Teen Titans wouldn't have risen to the point where it is today. So you should thank TTG for that.  And to the people who defend Teen Titans Go!, I get it. It can be rough loving something when EVERYBODY online hates it. I went threw a similar thing when the Powerpuff Girls reboot came out. It sucks feeling like you're in the minority opinion, but remember that just because something is hated online, that doesn't translate to actually results. There's a reason this show is on it's fifth seasons and got a theatrical film. And if you love this show, if it really is your new favorite show, enjoy that fact that a show you love is as popular and influential as it is. But don't be a jerk about your opinion either. Don't belittle people for feeling passionately about a series and remember that not EVERY person who hates the show isn't some kinda "hater." Never assume that the worse people in a group represents the whole group. And never let other people force you to hate something you love. You're taste make you the individual you are, and never forget that.  I want to end this review with a line from Teen Titans Go! A line that I believe the show sadly forgot about, but is a message that I think is very important. Especially given the current climate of the cartoon community.

 This applies to all sides.  Hopefully this review was able to add something new to the table.  What do you think of Teen Titans Go? Leave any thoughts you may have in the comments down bellow. I love love to hear all opinions from both sides of the aisle, and start some conversations. Maybe help people gain some new perspectives. Also what did you think of the format of this review? Would you like more deep dive retrospects in the future? Please fav, follow, and comment if you liked this review and have a great day.

https://www.deviantart.com/joyofcrimeart/journal/Teen-Titans-Go-REVIEW-Part-2-755898579 DA Link