#stop infantilizing neurodivergent people who are naive to the bad in the world

[stormcloudsandshadows]

Having so many thoughts about papyrus and how the fandom at large doesn’t get him. If you even care

[ganymedesclock]

These are questions I've had for some while and it's hard to find someone who'll answer with grace. This mostly relates to disabilities (mental or physical) in fiction.

1) What makes a portrayal of a disability that's harming the character in question ableist?

2) Is there a way to write a disabled villain in a way that isn't ableist?

In the circles I've been in, the common conceptions are you can't use a character's disability as a plot point or showcase it being a hindrance in some manner. heaven forbid you make your villain disabled in some capacity, that's a freaking death sentence to a creative's image. I understand historically villains were the only characters given disabilities, but (and this is my personal experience) I've not seen as many disabled villains nowadays, heck, I see more disabled heroes in media nowadays.

Sorry if this comes off as abrasive, I'd really like to be informed for future media consumption and my own creative endeavors.

Okay so the first thing I'm going to say is that while it IS a good idea to talk to disabled people and get their feedback, disabled people are not a monolith and they aren't going to all have the same take on how this goes.

My personal take is biased in favor that I'm a neurodivergent person (ADHD and autism) who has no real experience with physical disabilities, so I won't speak for physically disabled people- heck, I won't even speak for every neurotype. Like I say, people aren't a monolith.

For myself and my own writing of disabled characters, here's a couple of concepts I stick by:

Research is your friend

Think about broad conventions of ableism

Be mindful of cast composition

1. Research is your friend

Yeah this is the thing everybody says, so here's the main bases I try to cover:

What's the story on this character's disability?

Less in terms of 'tragic angst' and more, what kind of condition this is- because a congenital amputee (that is to say, someone who was born without a limb) will have a different relationship to said limb absence than someone who lost their limb years ago to someone who lost their limb yesterday. How did people in their life respond to it, and how did they respond to it? These responses are not "natural" and will not be the same to every person with every worldview. This can also be a great environment to do worldbuilding in! Think about the movie (and the tv series) How To Train Your Dragon. The vikings in that setting don't have access to modern medicine, and they're, well, literally fighting dragons and other vikings. The instance of disability is high, and the medical terminology to talk about said disabilities is fairly lackluster- but in a context where you need every man you possibly can to avoid the winter, the mindset is going to be not necessarily very correct, but egalitarian. You live in a village of twenty people and know a guy who took a nasty blow to the head and hasn't quite been the same ever since? "Traumatic Brain Injury" is probably not going to be on your lips, but you're also probably going to just make whatever peace you need to and figure out how to accommodate Old Byron for his occasional inability to find the right word, stammers and trembles. In this example, there are several relevant pieces of information- what the character's disability is (aphasia), how they got it (brain injury), and the culture and climate around it (every man has to work, and we can't make more men or throw them away very easily, so, how can we make sure this person can work even if we don't know what's wrong with them)

And that dovetails into:

What's the real history, and modern understandings, of this?

This is where "knowing the story" helps a lot. To keep positing our hypothetical viking with a brain injury, I can look into brain injuries, what affects their extent and prognosis, and maybe even beliefs about this from the time period and setting I'm thinking of (because people have had brains, and brain injuries, the entire time!) Sure, if the setting is fantastical, I have wiggle room, but looking at inspirations might give me a guide post.

Having a name for your disorder also lets you look for posts made by specific people who live with the condition talking about their lives. This is super, super important for conditions stereotyped as really scary, like schizophrenia or narcissistic personality disorder. Even if you already know "schizophrenic people are real and normal" it's still a good thing to wake yourself up and connect with others.

2. Think about broad conventions of ableism

It CAN seem very daunting or intimidating to stay ahead of every single possible condition that could affect someone's body and mind and the specific stereotypes to avoid- there's a lot under the vast umbrella of human experience and we're learning more all the time! A good hallmark is, ableism has a few broad tendencies, and when you see those tendencies rear their head, in your own thinking or in accounts you read by others, it's good to put your skeptical glasses on and look closer. Here's a few that I tend to watch out for:

Failing the “heartwarming dog” test

This was a piece of sage wisdom that passed my eyeballs, became accepted as sage wisdom, and my brain magnificently failed to recall where I saw it. Basically, if you could replace your disabled character with a lovable pet who might need a procedure to save them, and it wouldn’t change the plot, that’s something to look into.

Disability activists speak often about infantilization, and this is a big thing of what they mean- a lot of casual ableism considers disabled people as basically belonging to, or being a burden onto, the able-bodied and neurotypical. This doesn’t necessarily even need to have an able neurotypical in the picture- a personal experience I had that was extremely hurtful was at a point in high school, I decided to do some research on autism for a school project. As an autistic teenager looking up resources online, I was very upset to realize that every single resource I accessed at the time presumed it was talking to a neurotypical parent about their helpless autistic child. I was looking for resources to myself, yet made to feel like I was the subject in a conversation.

Likewise, many wheelchair users have relayed the experience of, when they, in their chair, are in an environment accompanied by someone else who isn’t using a chair, strangers would speak to the standing person exclusively, avoiding addressing the chair user. 

It’s important to always remind yourself that at no point do disabled people stop being people. Yes, even people who have facial deformities; yes, even people who need help using the bathroom; yes, even people who drool; yes, even people whose conditions impact their ability to communicate, yes, even people with cognitive disabilities. They are people, they deserve dignity, and they are not “a child trapped in a 27-year-old body”- a disabled adult is still an adult. All of the “trying to learn the right rules” in the world won’t save you if you keep an underlying fear of non-normative bodies and minds.

This also has a modest overlap between disability and sexuality in particular. I am an autistic grayromantic ace. Absolutely none of my choices or inclinations about sex are because I’m too naive or innocent or childlike to comprehend the notion- disabled people have as diverse a relationship with sexuality as any other. That underlying fear- as mentioned before- can prevent many people from imagining that, say, a wheelchair user might enjoy sex and have experience with it. Make sure all of your disabled characters have full internal worlds.

Poor sickly little Tiffany and the Red Right Hand

A big part of fictional ableism is that it separates the disabled into two categories. Anybody who’s used TVTropes would recognize the latter term I used here. But to keep it brief:

Poor, sickly little Tiffany is cute. Vulnerable. How her disability affects her life is that it constantly creates a pall of suffering that she lives beneath. After all, having a non-normative mind or body must be an endless cavalcade of suffering and tragedy, right? People who are disabled clearly spend their every waking moment affected by, and upset, that they aren’t normal!

The answer is... No, actually. Cut the sad violin; even people who have chronic pain who are literally experiencing pain a lot more than the rest of us are still fully capable of living complex lives and being happy. If nothing else, it would be literally boring to feel nothing but awful, and people with major depression or other problems still, also, have complicated experiences. And yes, some of it’s not great. You don’t have to present every disability as disingenuously a joy to have. But make a point that they own these things. It is a very different feeling to have a concerned father looking through the window at his angel-faced daughter rocking sadly in her wheelchair while she stares longingly out the window, compared to a character waking up at midnight because they have to go do something and frustratedly hauling their body out of their bed into their chair to get going.

Poor Sickly Little Tiffany (PSLT, if you will) virtually always are young, and they virtually always are bound to the problems listed under ‘failing the heartwarming dog’ test. Yes, disabled kids exist, but the point I’m making here is that in the duality of the most widely accepted disabled characters, PSLT embodies the nadir of the Victim, who is so pure, so saintly, so gracious, that it can only be a cruel quirk of fate that she’s suffering. After all, it’s not as if disabled people have the same dignity that any neurotypical and able-bodied person has, where they can be an asshole and still expect other people to not seriously attack their quality of life- it’s a “service” for the neurotypical and able-bodied to “humor” them.

(this is a bad way to think. Either human lives matter or they don’t. There is no “wretched half-experience” here- if you wouldn’t bodily grab and yank around a person standing on their own feet, you have no business grabbing another person’s wheelchair)

On the opposite end- and relevant to your question- is the Red Right Hand. The Red Right Hand does not have PSLT’s innocence or “purity”- is the opposite extreme. The Red Right Hand is virtually always visually deformed, and framed as threatening for their visual deformity. To pick on a movie I like a fair amount, think about how in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, the title character is described- “Strong. Fast. Had a metal arm.” That’s a subtle example, but, think about how that metal arm is menacing. Sure, it’s a high tech weapon in a superhero genre- but who has the metal arm? The Winter Soldier, who is, while a tormented figure that ultimately becomes more heroic- scary. Aggressive. Out for blood.

The man who walks at midnight with a Red Right Hand is a signal to us that his character is foul because of the twisting of his body. A good person, we are led to believe, would not be so- or a good person would be ashamed of their deformity and work to hide it. The Red Right Hand is not merely “an evil disabled person”- they are a disabled person whose disability is depicted as symptomatic of their evil, twisted nature, and when you pair this trope with PSLT, it sends a message: “stay in your place, disabled people. Be sad, be consumable, and let us push you around and decide what to do with you. If you get uppity, if you have ideas, if you stand up to us, then the thing that made you a helpless little victim will suddenly make you a horrible monster, and justify us handling you with inhumanity.”

As someone who is a BIG fan of eldritch horror and many forms of unsettling “wrongness” it is extremely important to watch out for the Red Right Hand. Be careful how you talk about Villainous Disability- there is no connection between disability and morality. People will be good, bad, or simply just people entirely separate from their status of ability or disability. It’s just as ableist to depict every disabled person as an innocent good soul as it is to exclusively deal in grim and ghastly monsters.

Don’t justify disabilities and don’t destroy them.

Superpowers are cool. Characters can and IMO should have superpowers, as long as you’re writing a genre when they’re there.

BUT.

It’s important to remember that there is no justification for disabilities, because they don’t need one. Disability is simply a feature characters have. You do not need to go “they’re blind, BUT they can see the future”

This is admittedly shaky, and people can argue either way; the Blind Seer is a very pronounced mythological figure and an interesting philosophical point about what truly matters in the world. There’s a reason it exists as a conceit. But if every blind character is blind in a way that completely negates that disability or makes it meaningless- this sucks. People have been blind since the dawn of time. And people will always accommodate their disabilities in different ways. Even if the technology exists to fix some forms of blindness, there are people who will have “fixable” blindness and refuse to treat it. There will be individuals born blind who have no meaningful desire to modify this. And there are some people whose condition will be inoperable even if it “shouldn’t” be.

You don’t need to make your disabled characters excessively cool, or give them a means by which the audience can totally forget they’re disabled. Again, this is a place where strong worldbuilding is your buddy- a handwave of “x technology fixed all disabilities”, in my opinion, will never come off good. If, instead, however, you throw out a careless detail that the cool girl the main character is chatting up in a cyberpunk bar has an obvious spinal modification, and feature other characters with prosthetics and without- I will like your work a lot, actually. Even if you’re handing out a fictional “cure”- show the seams. Make it have drawbacks and pros and cons. A great example of this is in the series Full Metal Alchemist- the main character has two prosthetic limbs, and not only do these limbs come with problems, some mundane (he has phantom limb pains, and has to deal with outgrowing his prostheses or damaging them in combat) some more fantastical (these artificial limbs are connected to his nerves to function fluidly- which means that they get surgically installed with no anesthesia and hurt like fuck plugging in- and they require master engineering to stay in shape). We explicitly see a scene of the experts responsible for said limbs talking to a man who uses an ordinary prosthetic leg, despite the advantages of an automail limb, because these drawbacks are daunting to him and he is happier with a simple prosthetic leg.

Even in mundane accommodations you didn’t make up- no two wheelchair users use their chair the exact same way, and there’s a huge diversity of chairs. Someone might be legally blind but still navigate confidently on their own; they might use a guide dog, or they might use a cane. They might even change their needs from situation to situation!

Disability accommodations are part of life

This ties in heavily to the previous point, but seriously! Don’t just look up one model of cane and superimpose it with no modifications onto your character- think about what their lifestyle is, and what kind of person they are!

Also medication is not the devil. Yes, medical abuse is real and tragic and the medication is not magic fairy dust that solves all problems either. But also, it’s straight ableism to act like anybody needing pills for any reason is a scary edgy plot twist. 

(and addiction is a disease. Please be careful, and moreover be compassionate, if you’re writing a character who’s an addict)

3. Be mindful of cast composition

This, to me, is a big tip about disability writing and it’s also super easy to implement!

Just make sure your cast has a lot of meaningful disabled characters in it!

Have you done all the work you can to try and dodge the Red Right Hand but you’re still worried your disabled villain is a bad look? They sure won’t look like a commentary on disability if three other people in the cast are disabled and don’t have the same outlook or role! Worried that you’re PSLT-ing your main character’s disabled child? Maybe the disability is hereditary and they got it from the main character!

The more disabled characters you have, the more it will challenge you to think about what their individual relationship is with the world and the less you’ll rely on hackneyed tropes. At least, ideally.

-

Ultimately, there’s no perfect silver bullet of diversity writing that will prevent a work from EVER being ableist, but I hope this helped, at least!

[allisondraste]

Let’s Talk About Cole

Hi! It’s me again with another segment of “Allison Can’t Stop Analyzing Dragon Age Characters.”  This time, I am going to be talking about fan favorite Cole.  I think it’s relatively universal for people to like Cole and to enjoy his character.  People like to draw him, write about him, and just talk about our Fade Friend all the time. It’s great! 

However, the nuance of Cole is a little harder to understand, and as with most characters, he often gets reduced down to basic qualities and then those basic qualities are changed ever so slightly that the character starts to not even feel the same anymore.  I love Cole, and I have done some research about him in order to write a handful of scenes involving him, so I am just here to share some of the things that helped me out while I was learning about what makes him tick!

Step 1. If you have not read Asunder, I cannot more highly recommend it.  It has so much information about Cole’s back story.  Also, if you haven’t read Asunder and you don’t want spoilers for Asunder, you should probably go read it and then come back to my post later.

Step 2.  The Cole section of this post right here is literally magic.  The whole post is magic, but since this is a Cole meta, I’m specifically referring to the Cole piece.

Step 3.  Things about Cole that are essential to understanding him:

Cole is Neurodivergent ( and no, it’s not up for debate)

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the term, “Neurodivergent” is simply a word that describes a person whose mind works and processes information in a way that is considered different from an average joe neurotypical person.  Often times neurodivergent is used to describe autism, ADHD, and other conditions that affect neurological development.

Because Cole is a spirit, he processes the world around him differently from non-spirit characters in the Dragon Age Universe.  He perceives different things and understands things differently from how other characters might.  Cole also has some misunderstandings and misperceptions about human social norms and boundaries, that he becomes more acquainted with over time.  It is important to note that this development happens *regardless* of the path chosen for him with regard to Varric V. Solas (I am not a fan of this particular part of his character arc, but I am going to go into that later). The fact that Cole is neurodivergent means that someone who is neurotypical is likely going to have a hard time understanding him and may perceive him as “childish,” “naive,” or “helpless.”  They might also have difficulty understanding his speech patterns and especially recreating them if they seek to write him!

Neurodiversity is so important, and Cole is excellent representation, so it’s equally important that we strive to do our research and make sure that we are not removing that representation or presenting neurodiversity in a way that its harmful to others.  Different is different, not bad, and certainly not less.

Cole is Not a Child

I mentioned above that there is a tendency to interpret Cole’s neurodiversity as childishness or naivete, and even when it is unintentional, it is an ableistic view point that can be harmful to entire communities of people.  There is a pattern (not just in DA fandom, but also in DA fandom) whereby neurodiverse folks are often viewed as children.  They’re infantilized and treated as if they are helpless and/or cannot make good decisions on their own. Cole suffers from this as does Merrill (sometimes Sera, too).  

For Cole, this situation is not helped by the fact that the game portrays him as helpless and in need of a “father” figure to help him choose his path.  Hence we see Solas and Varric arguing on whether Cole should increase is affinity for spirtdom or for humanity.  I understand that everyone has their own opinion for what the “better” path for Cole is, and I’m not here to argue that; however, I do think that his arc would have had so much more meaning and been so much less invalidating for neurodivergent people if Cole had the autonomy to make his own decisions. In Asunder, we see Cole being very independent and making his own choices, figuring out who and what he is.  At the very end, his very last line in the entire book is, “I’m not helpless anymore.”  I don’t think that sounds like a character who cannot make his own decisions.

Fun fact: Cole is designed to be approximately 20 years old, which is the exact same age that Alistair was in Dragon Age: Origins.  (While Alistair is also the victim of infantilization… it still puts things into perspective a little bit). In order to avoid the “kid”/child dilemma, it is best to conceptualize some of the things in Cole commonly interpreted as childlike or immature as “newness.”  In Inquisition, Cole has only been in the mortal realm for a few years, and he has only been cognizant of the fact that he is not a human, but a spirit of Compassion for even less time.  Rather than treating him as a “baby” it is best to treat him as someone who is just learning a new culture, a new world.  

Cole is a Spirit of Compassion, Not a Spirit of Matchmaking and/or Meddling in your Personal Affairs.

A trend I see often is Cole as matchmaker, or Cole as interested in every detail of everyone’s sex life or Cole being a filterless vent for whatever the people near him are thinking.  It’s easy to assume that about him, as he does comment on a few relationships (Cullenmance, Solavellan, and Bullmance) in particular; however, there is an interesting tidbit of how Cole’s thought reading works located in his banter with Dorian.

Dorian: That little trick, Cole, when you dip into someone's mind and take a drink?

Dorian: Do you choose what you're looking for, or is it random?

Cole: It has to be hurt, or a way to help the hurt. That's what calls me.

Cole: Rilienus, skin tan like fine whiskey, cheekbones shaded, lips curl when he smiles.

Cole: He would have said yes.

Dorian: I'll... thank you not to do that again, please.

Essentially, Cole can only tap into thoughts that are 1.) Painful or 2.) Can help lessen the pain in some way, shape, or form. So, when he accesses thoughts about an LI or something else very personal, he does so to HELP.  It is not random.  It is not filterless.  It is a very pragmatic way to be compassionate. When I was thinking of ways to explain this, the first thing that came to mind was the work that I do as a mental health professional.  We are actual practitioners of compassion.  It is our job to listen to our clients and help them to solve the problems that are causing them to suffer.  We ask a lot of deep questions and probe about a lot of personal things, but it is very targeted.  We do not ask intimate questions just out of curiosity or just for the heck of it.  It is geared toward the issue at hand.  That is exactly what Cole does.  

Unless prodding your OC about the details of their sex life is going to make them feel better, he will not bother.

Cole is Not an Innocent, Precious, Little Cinnamon Roll

First of all, that goes along with the infantilization of his character, so it’s just a really ill-considered choice of language to describe him.  Second of all, it is simply not true.  

I understand that for people who have not read Asunder or played the Champions of the Just questline (and especially people who have done neither)  there is very little information about him to judge his character on, and what we do see is a person whose only mission, his sole purpose, is to help the hurt. That does seem very wholesome.

In Asunder, we see a much different side of him.  Believing himself to be Cole, a young mage who died of starvation after being forgotten by Templars, Compassion roams about the White Spire in a confused and lonely daze, unaware that he is actually a very powerful spirit.  He is called the Ghost of the White Spire, a legend that is terrifying to those that inhabit the tower.  Why?  Because he murders mages.

If you are thinking “oh, he probably killed them because he felt them suffering and he thought it was the only way to end their misery,” you are thinking exactly as I did, and you would be wrong.  While he did target individuals who were despairing, it was not altruistic.  He killed them because it felt good when they died, because that was the only time anyone could see him.  The way the book describes it, it was almost an “addiction” or a physiological need for him to kill.  He was distressed by his actions, but was not able to stop without Rhys’ help.

Over the course of the book, Cole learns more about his past and figures out what he is.  He also, through the help of his relationship with Rhys and Evangeline, comes to understand that he does not have to murder people to be seen and remembered.  When he is sent to the Fade using the Litany of Adralla, it all finally clicks and he returns to haunt Lord Seeker Lucius, for all the pain and suffering he caused his friends and loved ones. It is such a brilliant character arc and I so wish that we got to see more of it in the game.

Cole is a Person the Entire Time (Human vs. Spirit/Varric vs. Solas be damned)

Regardless of your opinion of Solas, one thing he gets right is in arguing that Cole is already a whole and complete person when he joins the Inquisition.  He actually argues for the personhood of all spirits in general, and I think that any reasonable person can look at the spirits (and demons) with whom we have interacted so far and, putting aside feelings about Solas, draw the same conclusions.

Let’s take a look at all of the Spirits/Demons we have had actual interactions with thus far:

Valor

Justice

Compassion

Command

Wisdom

Choice

Desire

Pride

Sloth

Rage

Fear

Envy

While some of these interactions were minimal, each of these entities show qualities that one would associate with personhood.  Qualities such as motivation, goals, higher order thought processes, emotions, etc.  When we meet Justice in DA:A, he is a thinking, feeling being who longs to right wrongs and comes to care for mortals a great deal.  He comes to this conclusion on his own after interacting with his companions in the events of the game. Choice, or Imshael, who we see in The Masked Empire, and in DAI,  has such an identity of his own that he does not like to be referred to as a demon. I could go on.  These are not mindless, thoughtless creatures, and so viewing them as people just makes sense. This is part of the reason I do not like the Solas vs. Varric questline (aside from the fact that Cole should be able to choose or not choose as he wishes).  Cole is already a person, and Varric’s line of thought is not “making him more human,” it is only serving to make him “less compassionate,” and that’s all.  He becomes more selfish which is why he is able to have more of his own personal goals (it’s not because he did not have them before; rather, it is because they were drowned out by everyone else’s).  

This is not to say that I think Cole should have to forgive his abuser.  He shouldn’t. Not unless he wants to, and that choice should be his to make, not Varric’s, not Solas’, and not the Inquisitor’s.  I have an opinion as to which path is better, but I’m not going to discuss that here because it will detract from the actual point which is that the language of “human” versus “not human” is just bad and here’s why.

It implies that forgiveness is not a human quality.

It implies that in order to be considered a person, one has to “think” and “do” as everyone else does.  

Because of Cole’s romantic/sexual interest in Maryden when Varric’s path is chosen, it implies that lack of romantic/sexual attraction is not “human,” which is aphobic.

Because of his Maryden interest in the “human” path, and because he has “become more human” in his thought processes, it implies that neurodivergent people cannot or are not interested in relationships, which is ableist.

TL;DR: I’m not a fan of that questline. Your mileage may vary.

Finally, and Probably the Reason You Sat Through the Rest of It: Cole’s Speech Pattern!

Cole’s speech is really difficult to capture in a way that is both enough and not too much.  It is not as simple as just seeing how much alliteration can fit into a chapter.  Sure, Cole uses a lot of alliteration, and it is incredibly fun to play with while writing him; however, his communication is not as simple as that.  If you check out the link I shared in Step 2, it will take you to a Character Files reference where there is some information about Cole’s speech pattern that is much more in depth than I am going to go so definitely check it out. When I am writing Cole, I categorize his speech into three different types:

Synesthesia

-  the alliteration, the purpley flowery descriptions, the metaphors, the in the moment, no regard for grammar, run on sentence speech he is known for.  This comprises most of his dialogue.

Direct thought reading

- when he is actually quoting characters’ thoughts or stating their feelings out right.  He might speak as them or he might speak as himself observing them.

Cole’s own thoughts

- Yes, he has them, and he has a lot of them.  Many of these show up as his interpretations of and suggestions for others regarding their hurt.  However, he also shows a lot of agency of thought.  He wants to know if Dorian thinks he’s handsome, he talks about wanting there to be more rabbits in stories because Bunny was Cole’s sister’s name and it reminds him of her.  Cole expresses a lot of his own thoughts and feelings if you just take time to listen.

Writing Cole effectively involves a good balance of all three types and I recommend just playing around with it!

To Sum It All Up

Cole is amazing, but he’s also often misunderstood and mischaracterized, and Allison has a lot of feelings about it that you could spare yourself from reading if you do Steps 1 and 2 and skip the middleman. The end!