so was that legitimately fake outrage at Watcher being "greedy capitalists" that people are now gonna go watch the try guys who are doing the exact same thing?? where's the outrage at their wealth and how they spend their money? why does Keith get people just watching him eat at expensive restaurants, but it's terrible seeing Steven go to expensive restaurants to eat food? it's got nothing to do with "the try guys did it better!!!" it's the fact that you got so outraged because of how much the economy is in shambles and people can barely afford food, let alone another streaming service, and now suddenly it's a great thing seeing the try guys be able to improve their situation with one!! I thought the whole point was that we didn't need another one!! what is it???
it's just obvious that they've both done similar things, but people are taking more issue with the creators of colour for daring to grow and move forward. EVEN AFTER THEY ALTERED THINGS AND GENUINELY APOLOGISED even whilst being fucking eviscerated online. and instead of being helped and understood by their white friends, they get fucking shaded by their friends with a sofa joke and "not to name names" bullshit
what is it with people of colour being left in the dirt by their white friends and/or costars???
180 notes
·
View notes
i've been thinking about izzy never owning up to his role in edward's downward spiral the past couple days, and just now was rewatching the first episode of season two and-
it's worse.
it's not just that he doesn't own up to it - he actively denies it.
during the 'atmosphere on this ship is poisoned' convo, at some point, izzy reaches his breaking point, and snaps- and then he says: "the atmosphere on this ship is fucked. everyone knows why. your feelings for stede fucking bonnet."
your feelings for stede fucking bonnet.
except we know it's not true.
it's not the feelings that are the problem - ed wanted to process these feelings, was on his way to doing so, thanks to lucius' and the rest of the crew's support. how well would it have worked, we can't know for certain - but i'm pretty damn sure it would have gone much better than how it did with izzy's 'intervention'.
honestly ed shooting him in the leg is a pretty toned reaction to izzy absolving himself by pushing all the blame onto ed and his feelings.
ed's feelings aren't the problem.
the problem is the unhealthy way to cope with them that he was forced into, as well as being forced to assume a persona that he so desperately wanted to leave behind.
and then? we're supposed to just believe that izzy suddenly does a 180 degree turn, that he is suddenly completely fine with and accepting of ed being ed, of ed's relationship with stede?
no.
i don't know who the character who does these things is. but it certainly isn't izzy hands.
31 notes
·
View notes