#that's not also Legitimately Important To My One Real Life I Get and therefore on some level stressfuk

[abhorsenkatiel]

Just finished watching the new Adventure Time: Fionna and Cake and I really want to say how much I appreciated the way they handled the Simon and Betty relationship.

I legitimately cringed when they when went into depth about the beginning of their relationship. It was established back at the end of the original series that Betty had made a big sacrifice by giving up her expedition in order to stay with Simon, but now we also learn that she was a student and he was an established professor who she deeply admired when they met. The love between them was genuine, but there was also a very clear power imbalance. I cringed because I believed this would just go unacknowledged, as it does in so many stories, as if the authors are not even aware that such a power dynamic would have an impact on a relationship regardless of how real the love is. Or worse, that such (gendered) power imbalances are a natural thing to be expected in romantic relationships and are therefore not worth commenting on.

But then we get to episode 9, literally titled "Casper and Nova" after the hit-you-over-the-head-with-a-hammer obvious metaphor, and it becomes clear that it was absolutely the writers' intention to highlight and critique the power dynamic of Simon and Betty's relationship. Betty had already realized her part in the tragedy back in the original series, that she had given up her own life too readily and that she regretted it. But now we finally get acknowledgment of Simon's part, that he was irresponsible with Betty's love and devotion. That he didn't see how much he was taking and took for granted how much she was giving up. His tragedy is not that he passively lost Betty to some outside force, but that he made active choices which eroded her autonomy and didn't notice until it was too late. That their relationship, despite being genuinely and passionately loving, was unbalanced from the start, and he used that to his advantage and her detriment even if it was unintentional.

The gendered dynamic of this story is important too. I've met so many women throughout my life, even some who are my age now, who when you ask them about their lives come to a point where they shrug and say some variation of, "and then I met the man who I altered the course of my life for" and that's the end of their story. I remember hearing those stories when I was a child and something about the expression those women made or their phrasing, or their tone of voice gave me a visceral negative reaction. Some of them were openly bitter about it, and told me to never make sacrifices for a man, but even the ones who weren't bitter, who seemed to be happy in genuinely loving relationships, would still give some sense of longing or regret when it came to that part, like they were still thinking about what their life could have been.

It's a common story for women. Even now it's still an expectation that we give up everything for love. It's romantic sure, but I appreciate that we have a story that really makes you look at the tragic side of it as well.

[matan4il]

To @heres-the-marvel-tea, darling Chrissy! How are you?

I got your ask, and you're absolutely right, the Six Day War was a defensive one. I'll try to help as much as I can in explaining why.

I'll apologize for how long it took me to reply, real life has been kicking my ass, leaving me with very little free time, and in what I had, I had trouble finding resources in English that don't leave important factors out. BUT then I found an incredible timeline of events, which gives a really good idea of the lead up to the war, in addition to giving links and resources for each event. So I'll give a short overview of the main factors, point out important dates on the timeline, add a few links here and there, then add the timeline link at the end. The timeline is also easily searchable with the "search page" function (Ctrl+F on a computer). Please tell me if together, my overview and the timeline cover what you need, if not, I'll do my best to help with whatever's still missing!

Here's an overview of the war's causes:

Egypt blockading the Straits of Tiran, cutting off Israel's fuel supply from Iran (which Israel was friendly with before the Islamist regime took over). This act endangered the lives of all Israelis, and therefore was considered a "casus belli," a cause for war (Israel officially stating this since 1957 can be found on the timeline under May 19, and The Times pointing out this info can be found under May 23). This act in and of itself, which was decided on and announced on May 22, 1967 and enacted on May 23, was enough to conclusively define the war as defensive on Israel's part. In terms of the rules of war, there was no need for anything else.

Even before that, Egypt broke the terms of the ceasefire achieved at the end of the Sinai War in 1956, inserting Egyptian military forces into the Sinai Peninsula (on Israel's border with Egypt), and demanding that the UN supervising force leave the Sinai. Both of these moves were a violation of the ceasefire, AND were needed if Egypt wanted to attack, indicating to Israel their aggressive intents. Egypt's forces entered Sinai on May 16, and the UN force (UNEF) was told to leave on May 18.

An Egyptian plan to strike Israel first was meant to be launched on May 27, but Egypt had to cancel it, when it became evident to the Egyptian president that Israel found out about this intended military strike (found on the timeline under May 27. Israel got the intel about the attack at almost the last minute, on May 25, and worked urgently to make sure the Egyptians would learn that their plan had been exposed).

Egypt worked to forge a multi-army Arab alliance, through a series of agreements (such as the mutual defence agreement with Syria, signed on Nov 4, 1966, I'm linking this one 'coz I believe it's not covered on the timeline, and the one Egypt signed with Jordan, found on the timeline under May 30), which basically aligned the Egyptian, Syrian and Jordanian armies, as well as auxiliary forces from Iraq and Saudi Arabia. This was another indication of the Arab aggressive intentions to start a war against Israel.

Iraqi and Saudi soldiers entered Jordan (found on the timeline under May 27), and together, these forces were situated just right to attack Israel in the area where the country is narrowest (14 kilometers wide, roughly 7.5 miles), cutting it into two, and separating Israel's forces, supplies and command, which is a huge strategic threat.

The aggressions from Syria against the Israeli population were intensifying. One aspect of the friction revolved around "The Water War": in 1955, in a US brokered deal, Israel was granted 40% of the Jordan River's water, but despite the Arabs getting 60%, they refused to ratify the accord, because it would have meant recognizing the legitimate existence of Israel. In Jun 1964, Israel started the National water Carrier project, using water from the Jordan River for agriculture in the Negev Desert, which the Arab League had determined was a threat to the entire Arab nation. Accordingly, Syria first tried shooting at Israeli patrols protecting the project, which led to Israeli counter strikes. So instead, Syria tried diverting away from Israel the water flowing from Syrian territory into the Jordan River, endangering Israel's water supply. Another aspect was (as you said) Syria firing at Israeli civilians, especially in territories that Israel agreed to keep de-militarized after the Independence War. That wasn't supposed to stop civilians working the land there, but Syria decided otherwise, targeting Israeli farmers working in these areas, and fishing in the Sea of Galilee. This led to repeated clashes, including the unprecedented downing of 6 (!) Mig 21 fighter jets (back then, THE terrifying Soviet threat, given to Arab armies) by Israel on Apr 7, 1967.

These threats forced Israel to recruit its reservists (found on the timeline undere May 17, 19 and most importantly, May 23), paralyzing Israeli economy, as all of these people weren't working. In other words, it's not just that it's not sensible for Israel to sit and wait for the Arabs to strike first, it was also financially unsustainable. Israel needed to address the military threat to its people, and it needed to do so as soon as possible, to avoid the collapse of Israel's economy, and the harm that would cause to the country's population.

Lastly, The Israeli Prime Minister at the time, Levi Eshkol, tried to solve the issue of the blockade through diplomatic means. He sent Israel's Foreign Minister, Abba Eban, on May 24 to Paris, London and Washington, to ask for the world's help in solving without war the issues of the UNEF's removal from Sinai, the introduction of Egyptian army forces there, and the blockade, but Israel got none. Regular Israelis realized Egypt, Syria and their allies were headed for war, and people were petrified over what would happen if the first military strike would land when, where and how this coalition of Arab countries chose (you have to remember that Israel wasn't considered a military power until after the Six Day War, so the question of how would one small country do, if taken by surprise on multiple fronts, was justifiably terrifying. People talked about the destruction of the country, a second Holocaust. For me personally, I think nothing got me to realize just how existential the fear was, as hearing about it from Holocaust survivors, such as painter and child survivor Samuel Bak). So, Israel had no choice left, it had to land a preemptive strike.

HonestReporting's Annotated Timeline of the Six Day War

I really hope this helps! Let me know? Sending so much love! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[nataliescatorccio]

hotd really should have shown us more of rhaenyra's relationships with laenor, laena, and harwin. laenor and laena were her cousins, she's known them all her life! and she loved harwin so much she chose to have his children! all of them deserve to be more than footnotes in this story. i'm so sad.

exactly exactly exactly!!! i'm honestly incredibly disappointed in their treatment of laenor, laena and harwin in general but especially in relation to rhaenyra. up until this point i thought the show had actually given us more than the book (since it's a third party account) but this was one thing i felt like i saw more of on the page. i know there's a lot of talk about it not being plot relevant and therefore they wanted to skip over these bits to skip to the meaty bit, but i personally believe that these characters and relationship are extremely important to the set up of what is to happen.

laenor and laena are extremely important in showing the bond between the targaryen blood and how it strengthened with their unions (both rhaenyra and laenor and daemon and laenor respectively). which will play a big role later if you've heard anything of the blacks! to rhaenyra, they are particularly important because they are a support system for her at a time when she feels incredibly isolated. they are her confidants, she trusts them, and having them there is so vital in understanding how backed into a corner she will come to feel when they are no longer there. as someone who is a big supporter of female friendships i am particularly bitter about laena and rhaenyra, because rhaenyra deserved to have someone she could think of as a bff after losing alicent long ago. and i think there could have been a real emotional pull there if rhaenyra had finally allowed herself to get close to someone again only to lose them once more. really, losing laena last episode could have had so much of an emotional pull had the audience actually had a chance to see her as an established character.

and then harwin? harwin and rhaenyra are so key to what happens when you consider the spin that the show took, which is that alicent knows rhaenyra's children are not quite legitimate and that is fuelling her to push her own children as the rightful heirs. so to see why rhaenyra did it, both as a source of comfort for herself but also maybe the need to produce an heir so she could strengthen her own claim(?) i feel actually would have been really valuable to the storyline. harwin was supposed to be her fiercest protector, always by her side, an ever looming presence of strength and support for her, and we got to see so little of that. seeing how they were drawn together and how it gave rhaenyra the strength to continue to live in king's landing where she constantly felt uncomfortable and undermined would have been amaizng for her own storyline as queen. then again with the twist the show took in alicent being responsible for harwin's death, i would argue it makes harwin's role in the story even more important. because he is the first unnecessary tragedy in what is to come. he is that first step alicent has made to becoming a murderer, and that ultimately is very cruicial in her own arc. if the show had taken a second to establish harwin (and subsequently his relationship with rhaenyra) it would have made the audience care and this could have been one of those shocking twists game of thrones was so known for (at least for non-book readers).

apologies as i have completely rambled here, but i've been thinking a lot about this and it was nice to have a moment to vent my own feelings on the subject! in a tldr summary: they really did deserve to have their stories told and could have had so much more to give had the show given them time.

[darklinaforever]

So, little post like that, but I too for a time liked the prospect that Daemon had Laenor killed or that they were actually in cahoots with Rhaenyra over it. (the idea is very, very attractive) But after thinking about it, it seemed so flawed to me, precisely because it was all about using Quarl? It's like the dumbest premeditated assassination in the world, in my opinion. And since Daemon is known to be able to think of real professional assassins, the idea of Quarl still doesn't make sense to me. Especially if what's at stake is as important as having a legitimate child with the woman you love. (and still would have to be sure that Daemyra had conceived before Laenor's death or that they had learned that a baby was on the way before her death, which we cannot be sure of) That Quarl managed to disappear is not evidence to me that Daemon and Rhaenyra are honestly involved. In fact, I imagine Daemyra are smart beings, and relying on Quarl instead of a professional wouldn't be smart.

I mean, it's not a little to complicated one's life that to hire a rejected squire instead of a real assassin to do a clean job ? Honestly, am I the only one who thinks that? That Daemon and Rhaenyra are innocent in this mess of Laenor's death and that's just fine?

Rhaenys and Corlys don't seem to have suspected Daemon or Rhaenyra in the case of their son's death, and I doubt they are foolish people. If Rhaenyra isn't involved in Laenor's death, I refuse to believe that she would be dumb/love-blind enough to be fooled by Daemon if he was guilty, as Rhaenyra seemed to know Daemon very well. Besides that, I don't think Rhaenyra would seek to harm the official father of her children. There is nothing to suggest that she would have any resentment towards Laenor which would push her to have him killed.

Even though their lives weren't perfect and they lived apart and almost only saw each other at official events, well, they both had an amicable agreement about it to just afford that. And again, Laenor remained the official father of her children, and Rhaenyra loved her children. I therefore doubt that she murdered the one her children considered a father, even if they were young. Not to mention that she was Laena's best friend... Hello friendship if she would have participated in the death of her brother.

The idea that Daemon is responsible for Laenor's death is based solely on the words of Mushroom, the guy who literally makes everything sexual or biting. As well as sure of the fan guesses that Daemyra would have learned about Rhaenyra's pregnancy before all that and planned to get rid of Laenor as a result. Except that they could very well have learned about the pregnancy after Laenor's death, or even get together after Laenor's death too, since we don't know the exact date of her death. In view of the birth of Aegon III, Rhaenyra must have gotten pregnant at least the 3rd month of the year 120, and Laenor could very well have died barely 2 months after Laena for what we know. One cannot use Rhaenyra's pregnancy with certainty to support the idea of ​​murder by Daemon or Daemyra.

And again, if they were aware, basing this murder literally having their child at stake on someone who is not a professional assassin is completely flawed, reckless and stupid. It remains the case even if the goal was just to be able to marry together, because again, why complicate life with someone who is not a professional assassin?

Also, have to talk about Laenor's death in detail. It is said that he and Quarl argued in public and ended up pulling out their guns and crossing swords as a result. Which led to Laenor's death and Quarl's escape. What does that mean ? That Daemon or Daemyra asked Quarl to cause a scene of this magnitude to make it look like an accident due to a quarrel? But what about the risk of Quarl getting arrested after that? Because yes, he could definitely have been arrested, risking interrogation and it wouldn't have been good for anyone. See even, what do we do about the risk that Laenor beats Quarl outright during their confrontation? It's all too far-fetched to seem premeditated. I'm okay with Quarl needing the money and Daemon paying for it, but frankly it's laughable at this point. Are you telling me that Daemon or Daemyra and Quarl concocted such a lame plan? And that Quarl would have agreed on the pretext that he needed the money too much without offering an alternative that didn't actively risk his buttocks? That, or the plan was totally different and Quarl screwed it up. But again, that would assume that Daemon or Daemyra wasn't smart enough to just think of professional assassin(s).

I hear that there are always risks in having someone killed, whether it's for those who hire the assassin, or even the assassin in question. But even if it means having someone killed, you might as well ask people who are used to this field! And even if it means being committed to a murder, you might as well have the best chance of getting out of it to get your reward. Procedures and jobs at risk, of course, but with certain assurances all the same in passing! Again, if Daemon or Daemyra relied on Quarl for the job of killing Laenor, well they were bloody stupid. And sorry, but I see Daemon or Daemyra as intelligent beings, which prevents me from believing that they could be responsible for Laenor's death.

In fact, if Laenor had died any other way, I could totally see them as culprits, and that might be cool, but the way Laenor died, sorry, but it sure looks like a well-timed accident to me.

Also, this idea that Daemon can have Laenor killed is a bit like assuming that he is a sinister asshole, including for his family members. Which goes a little against the essence of the character, being precisely his loyalty and his love for his family as the only redeeming qualities…

Laenor was from Daemon's family.

It was first one of his cousins. Then, the brother of Laena, his former and second wife whom he had loved enormously. His daughters' uncle accordingly. Also the son of Corlys and his cousin Rhaenys with whom he lived for years, in addition to having already partly grown up with Rhaenys. Rhaenyra's cousin/husband/ and official father of the latter's children.

Laenor, contrary the version in the series, was also probably involved in Daemon's life when he married Laena, as I doubt this one had never received any visits from his brother or did so to him either. To think he had Laenor killed is a bit of a blow to Daemon's supposed love for his family.

At least in my opinion.

Also, for those who would say that taking Quarl as the assassin would make sense because Daemon does not want to be accused, and that by having Laenor killed by Quarl people would identify the crime as something passionate, based about jealousy and not an act possibly committed by Daemon… Well, it still doesn't work. Quite simply, because once again, it's complicating life for nothing. There are thousands of other ways to stage a murder and make it look like an accident without taking the risks that would have been taken by hiring Quarl (risks I've already mentioned before), and which hadn't more precisely once again no experience in there, namely the crime. I'm going to repeat myself, but: What if it was Laenor who had won the confrontation? Just for that risk, that "people would think Quarl did it because he was jealous of Laenor, casting Daemon out as the culprit" excuse doesn't work. When you want to kill someone, you don't take the risk that the person might survive, that's the whole point. Even with this reasoning of trying to cover the tracks, it does not work, precisely because there would be other smarter and less risky ways of covering the tracks in question. Again, it's way too wobbly and unnecessarily risky and complicated as an assassination plan. That, or again, the plan was different and Quarl screwed it up. But once again, everything would rest on the fact that Daemon had unnecessarily complicated his life. Again, the very basis of hiring Quarl (just to avoid getting accused) seems unnecessarily complicated. If Daemon intended to have Laenor murdered in order to marry Rhaenyra, well he would have been charged anyway. So why risk having Laenor killed in such a flawed way, just to avoid being accused? Especially when the accusation will be inevitable.

No really, the idea that Daemon or Daemyra had Laenor killed through Quarl doesn't and never will make sense to me.

[questionsonislam]

I ask from this point of view: I sometimes love my child very much (sincerely) but after that, I think whether I loved him extremely. Is it possible that Allah will not be pleased with it?

Love of Allah comes before everything. It is important in what sense and why you love something. It is a deed of worship to love something for Allah as a boon of Allah. From this point of view, it is necessary to regard our children, who are entrusted to us, as His grace and grant and to work legitimately in order to make them gain their worldly life and otherworldly life.

There are thousands of reasons why Allah gives love of children to all parents. It is a deed of worship to fulfill this love.

For instance, it is different to love a letter that one has received due to its paper and nice handwriting than to love it because it is something entrusted to him by the sender; similarly, it is different to love children based on one’s intention. It is nice to love them as boons of Allah. The criterion for loving them for Allah is to raise and educate them in the way that Allah wants.

Love of the Prophet comes after love of Allah. To love the Prophet means to love Allah. To love scholars, people of taqwa and benefactors is like that. For, one loves the beloved of the beloved too. The Messenger of the Beloved One is also loved. The one who loves the beloved is also loved. The real beloved one here is Allah. There is nobody except Him that deserves real love. We can explain it with an example:

The first thing one loves is his soul. To love one’s own soul means to want to continue living and not to like elimination. This characteristic is inborn in man. In fact, this feeling, which exists in man, necessitates loving Allah. For, one who knows himself and his Lord understands that the continuation and perfection of his life is based on Allah, not himself. It is Allah who created him out of nothing and who makes him live. For, among the beings, it is only Allah that exists as a necessity of His being and that does not need anything to exist. Everything except Him exists based on His power and creation. A person who knows it like that loves and has to love the one that created him and gave him everything he has. His love of his Lord originates from knowing Him.

Love is the fruit of knowledge. If there is no knowledge, there is no love. One loves his parents. Why does he love them? For, they are the reason for his creation. Besides, they raised and educated him. Therefore, one loves his parents. However, the one who creates man is Allah. It is He who makes parents a reason for his creation. It is also He who gives parents love of their children. He gives this love even to animals. The Prophet (pbuh) states the following:

"Allah divided mercy into one hundred parts. He retained with Him ninety-nine parts, and sent down to earth one part. Through this one part, creatures deal with one another with compassion so much so that an animal lifts its hoof over its young lest it should hurt it."

The Prophet (pbuh) loved children very much. He would take them on his lap, pat them and kiss them with compassion.

The Prophet kissed his grandsons, Hz. Hasan and Hz. Husayn too. When a man saw him kissing them, he said,

"I have ten children; I have not kissed any of them."The Prophet said,

«He who shows no mercy, will receive no mercy.» (Muslim, Fadail, 65; Tirmidhi, Birr wa Sila, 12)

When the Prophet (pbuh) performed a prayer, his beloved grandsons, Hasan and Husayn would climb up his shoulders. He would tolerate this act of children even when he performed a prayer; he would not prevent their games.

When he sat somewhere, he would get up when his daughter, Fatima, came, kiss her on the forehead and make her sit in his place. He loved not only his children and grandchildren but also other children; he would talk to them and loved them; he would give them things that they liked. He even loved the children of non-Muslims.

The Prophet were interested in children very much. Once, he organized a race among children. He stood at the place where the race would end. He loved the children who came to him by running and gave them gifts. (Ahmad b. Hanbal, Musnad, I/214)

The Prophet (pbuh) gave the following advice related to children:

«Fear Allah and treat your children fairly.» (Jamius-Saghir; Bukhari, Hiba, 8/26)

«Allah wants you to treat your children equally when you kiss them.» (ibid)

[talaricula]

@agnost replied to your post “Also yes I did tell my wife they should watch...”:

hwhfjfjjfkfkkfk when you love something you love it HARD

​asskfllghh no i am PERFECTLY NORMAL

[ukrfeminism]

Maya Forstater, who took a claim for belief discrimination against her former employer, the Center for Global Development, has been vindicated by a ruling that she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.

This follows a ruling at an Employment Tribunal in June 2021 when Ms Forstater successfully established a binding legal precedent that gender-critical beliefs were in principle protected by the Equality Act.

Following that appeal, her case continued at the Employment Tribunal, to determine whether she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.

The Tribunal unanimously found that, as acts of unlawful discrimination on the basis of Ms Forstater’s beliefs, CGD: 1. Did not offer her an employment contract; 2. Did not renew her visiting fellowship; and 3. Removed her from its website.

Among the findings in the judgment are that Ms Forstater’s tweets and comments, which formed the basis of CGD’s treatment of her, were statements of her protected gender-critical beliefs. The negative consequences which flowed from them were therefore unlawfully discriminatory.

The statements that Maya Forstater made in this regard included: - “A man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material reality”. - Describing Pips Bunce, a male who identified as a woman for part of the week, as a “part time cross dresser”. - Drawing an analogy between self-identifying transwomen and Rachel Dolezal. - That “the places that women and girls get assaulted and harassed are ‘normal life’”; in the context of a discussion of whether recognising transwomen as female potentially posed a risk to women and girls. This was not, as CGD’s counsel had argued, “catastrophising” but was instead “an unobjectionable observation in the course of the debate … [which was] not an objectively unreasonable observation to make”. - That describing self-identification as a woman as “a feeling in their head” was not to equate self-identification with mental illness and “did little more than assert Ms Forstater’s gender critical belief”. The Tribunal also recognised that Ms Forstater had been entitled to criticise those holding an opposite view to her, and had done so legitimately. The Tribunal found in particular that the mere fact that offence may be taken to a particular statement was not sufficient to render it incapable of legal protection. This included describing opposing views as “stupid, dangerous or unfair” and the statement that allowing male-bodied individuals access to women-only spaces gave rise to “an increase in risks, threats and discomfort” to women. Forstater, a public policy researcher, who co-founded human rights organisation Sex Matters a year ago, welcomed the verdict.

“My case matters for everyone who believes in the importance of truth and free speech. “We are all free to believe whatever we wish. What we are not free to do is compel others to believe the same thing, to silence those who disagree with us or to force others to deny reality. “Human beings cannot change sex. It is not hateful to say that; in fact it is important in order to treat everyone fairly and safely. It shouldn’t take courage to say this, and no one should lose their job for doing so. “I am pleased that the Tribunal has allowed me to put on record what happened to me at the Center for Global Development. The tribunal has found that I was a victim of discrimination because I stated that biological sex is real and important, a view shared by the vast majority of people in this country. I hope employers will take note of the judgment. “I would like to thank my family, who have gone through this with me over the past three years, and my legal team: barristers Ben Cooper QC and Anya Palmer, and my solicitor Peter Daly. Above all I want to thank the thousands of women and men who sent me their support, and in particular JK Rowling for standing by me in the darkest of days. “To hear that my case has helped other people to speak up against unfair and discriminatory practices at work makes the hardship of the last three years easier to bear. All those who are fighting similar battles — and there are many such people now — have my solidarity and support. “I also want to thank all the brilliant organisations fighting to protect sex-based rights. They will make the world a safer, fairer place for women and girls. They are stepping into the democratic space that well-funded organisations like CGD have vacated through cowardice. “CGD’s unfair treatment of me, and prejudice against people who believe that sex is real, changed my life. If the organisation hadn’t ended my employment, I would never have co-founded Sex Matters. I would never have had the opportunity to be part of the amazing movement in the UK to re-assert the importance of sex-based rights. We have had enough of being sidelined in language, law, policy and public spaces. This judgment is further evidence that the tide is turning.”

[wolfboywarmachines]

im kinda back in my twilight phase and how little smeyer goes into her actually really interesting themes or makes lets say interesting choices with them annoys the HELL outta me. she brings up aging, damnation, abortion, trauma/ptsd, and redemption and just never elaborates! or if she does its not to a satisfying degree!

 bella is desperate to become a vampire and obsesses over not wanting to be older than edward and we’re told that its also because her grandmother has alzheimer's (this was never mentioned in the movies) but god we could have gotten more than just that. its a complex topic that a lot of people struggle with and having more of her outward feelings reflect that would have been amazing. 

carlisle was literally the son of a pastor and his religious upbringing was obviously integral to his feelings about being a vampire. edward doesn’t want bella to be a vampire because he doesn’t want to damn her. its mentioned that vampires go to hell but also don’t have souls? its confusing which 1- if you’re gonna make a point of adding this in, make it clear, 2- she had soooo many mormon beliefs in her book and she didn’t get this one thing right??? and 3- carlisle not only supported bella in becoming a vampire but changed many people himself. this was a directly selfish act in both regards and confuses me a lot. maybe its been a hot minute since i read the books but given how badly he tried to kill himself when he became a vampire due to his religious upbringing and ‘hunts’, you really think he’d stop after edward huh? or that it would be more important to him at the very least. i don’t know. i genuinely love carlisle as a character, he’s one of my favorites, but smeyer made some odd choices regarding him and vampire damnation. 

i know abortion is a hot button topic right now, but even back when she wrote the twilight saga smeyer had a choice comments on abortion, especially the ‘fetus vs baby’ conversation that's brought up often. i’ll get more into this with the trauma/ptsd bit, but mormons are a patriarchal bunch and abortion is only allowed if the mother’s life is threatened. they also have a deep emphasis on family, and bella sacrificing herself for renesmee and coming back as a vampire was her ‘rebirth’ into her perfect form with eternal life and the perfect family. but i digress. obviously here bella’s life is in danger, and smeyer herself has said (outside the books i might add) that her not aborting was her choice and therefore a feminist act. i....do not know what to say about that as i am pro choice, but calling it a feminist act is a stretch. there is often talk of abortion in breaking dawn but the complete lack of any argument or discussion about it past bella’s choice and ‘fetus vs baby’ bothers me. this is really subjective of course but for me personally, i think this should have been a deeper discussion. 

onto trauma. most of the trauma of this series is laid squarely on the women of this series. bella is scarred from james’s attack on her and edward leaving, rosalie was gangraped and had a normal life ripped away from her, esme tried to kill herself after the loss of her child, emily was attacked and scarred, and alice was driven out by her family and community into an asylum where she was forgotten received so much electroshock therapy that she developed amnesia. you could also argue that carlisle was traumatized by the act of becoming a vampire and jasper was in an incredibly abusive relationship as a newborn, but even these are glossed over. bella’s depression is only used as a narrative force for new moon, emily is used to antagonize us to sam, and esme and alice are completely forgotten in favor of reasonable or bubbly characters instead of complex characters with real nuance. rosalie is used for conflict and is the only one that feels legitimate and character driven, but even her behavior changes when renesmee is born because she gets the baby she always wanted. i wish that smeyer thought about the implications of all of the major women in the series being traumatized and their subsequent reactions or character development. 

lastly, we have probably the most controversial of my opinions. redemption is such a tricky way to use this because of how smeyer tried to use it, especially in jasper’s case. a confederate backstory was ROUGH to just randomly throw in. its pretty much explicitly stated that jasper deeply regrets that chapter of his life and being with alice and the coven made him better and gave him a new start.  its also stated that he went north, but that doesn’t forgive his racist past. while i tend to believe that he was truly a reformed being, the fact that this was a plot point (and a major one given that side characters were offered little character development) meant that smeyer had to fully rely on alice and the coven for his redemption. also, smeyer has a genuine problem with racist ideas and plot points in her books besides jasper so again, while i believe he’s different, her intentions with the character and his story despite his trauma with maria should be looked at critically. edward believes he’s damned not only for being a vampire but for murdering people, and never believes he’ll have any redemption. carlisle became a doctor out of a genuine care and love for people, but i also believe he did it as a way to redeem himself for his past, especially the human part. this is of course a little speculation because i don’t believe smeyer gave any elaboration for it. she really did everyone here so dirty. i think emmett is the only one who emerged unscathed from this. 

anyway massive rant over. i feel the need to say that a good chunk of this is my opinion and hey i could be wrong. i also feel the need to say that i do enjoy twilight a lot but it was poorly written at times for multiple reasons. so yes i am critical but also. its a stupid little vampire series you’re still allowed to like it. stan charlie. 

[yasmindifference]

if ur still doing the title meme, "suffer with my ghost." make me cry plz

Okay anon, from the title+request for tears, I assume you were hoping for some character death here. Unfortunately that's not the way I roll, so instead I offer a different kind of angst:

A scenario where Jason is working with the Bats on...let's say friendlyish terms. They're a long way from BFF and he is very quick to shoot down any kind of indication from Bruce or Dick that they consider him family, but they're cooperating for the sake of Gotham.

Only thing is, Tim doesn't seem willing to play.

He never speaks out against Jason working with them. He even seems to indirectly support it; he'll turn up some piece of intel that might be relevant and mention that someone should pass it on to Red Hood, or he'll reference Jason having something covered when they're splitting up work, or whatever. But despite these regular shows of trust(?), Tim will not actually work with Jason himself.

Oh, he's subtle about it. There's always a really good reason he speaks up and assigns himself somewhere far away from Jason whenever Batman's passing out team-up assignments. It's not like he says or even hints that he's unwilling to partner up with Jason.

It's just that they're a bunch of frickin detectives, so yeah, everyone picks up what he's carefully not laying down. Tim is not willing to play nice.

And, okay. Jason has an attitude problem, they've all experienced it. And yes, he's crossed a lot of lines in the past. But he's working with them now, he's playing nice, and Tim's refusal to meet in the middle is hindering their effectiveness and also risking their alliance, because it's not like Jason's missed that Tim is very carefully avoiding him.

So Bruce starts trying to put his foot down and force Tim to partner with Jason, because this is never gonna get settled if Tim keeps weaseling his way out of even being in the same room as Jason. Unfortunately, Tim is a world-class weasel-er and keeps managing to slip off to other, totally legitimate and very important work before Bruce can get a word in. Tim's tricky that way.

It gets to the point that Bruce and Dick are honestly annoyed by Tim's unwillingness to cooperate. Working with people you don't like is honestly just part of life and Tim is being downright childish; it's extremely frustrating.

So the next time there's a team-up, no one gives Tim a chance to speak. Dick physically covers his mouth while Bruce jumps right into saying "Tim, you'll be partnered with Jason" before even telling anyone what the plan they're teaming up to enact is. He's counting on Tim, who's thus far been very subtle about avoiding Jason, being unwilling to make a scene with Jason right there.

....But he's counting incorrectly, because when Dick lets Tim go, Tim flat-out refuses. It's not happening.

Jason's offended by this frankly rude rejection, and says so. Bruce is annoyed at Tim's disobedience, and snaps at him. And Dick is at his wits' end with everyone in this clusterfuck of a family, so he brings up the 'childish' argument.

Tim waits until they're done, then very coldly points out that the issue du jour is that Scarecrow is out of Arkham. Scarecrow. AKA the guy who frequently exposes people to chemicals that make them hallucinate their worst fears. It's therefore tactically unsound for Tim to work with Jason, because he won't be able to tell the difference between Jason and any potential hallucinations.

The implication there is that Jason is one of Tim's worst fears. To a degree that he expects to see him when exposed to fear toxin.

Everyone is horrified, Jason most of all. They're also shocked, and Tim is openly disdainful about this.

Jason, as he reminds them, has tried to kill him more than once. Jason openly hates him. Jason regularly insults him using the same terminology he applied before the murder attempts. Jason has all the height, weight, and training advantages. Tim has never beaten Jason in a real fight.

Of course Tim is terrified of Jason. He'd be a moron not to be.

His piece said, Tim slips away to go fight Scarecrow not at the side of a man he's likely to hallucinate under the effects of fear toxin. It takes Bruce and Dick quite a while to follow.

Jason doesn't go out that night. He's a little busy hating himself.

[snifflesthemouse]

This morning, I read an article titled “I went undercover in the sinister world of Meghan Markle hate accounts" posted to Refinery 29. The title gives the impression of a journalist disguising one’s self as a “Meghan Markle hater” for the sake of getting to the bottom of something. However, the content of the article is nothing like its title.

Before I go further, let me stress the importance of perspective. My post isn’t an attack on the article’s author. I’ve never even heard of the author before now, and I’ve no right or reason to attack a perfect stranger because I vehemently disagree with the content of their work. Making assumptions about someone solely on what they write is lazy and sloppy in my opinion. I may be lazy and sloppy, but a hypocrite I try not to be. Therefore, go forward remembering my issues are with content, not creator.

The article starts out explaining the origins of the term “Megxit”. It continues with other hashtags, conspiracy theories, and so on. The article even mentions various media platforms “attacking" the Duchess, as well as crude posts witnessed by the author.

Then the name dropping begins. First with Murky Meg, then Sue Blackhurst, then According2Taz, then Skippyv20 on Tumblr, then Yankee Wally. Eventually, names of Royal Rota journalists are dropped. Then people like Angela Levin and Omid Scobie get mentioned, with interviews from the latter. Instead of an undercover sting, we get a “Who’s Who" of Megxit, a few anonymous Sussex Squad quotations, and Omid trying his best to be fair.

What this article accomplishes is very little when it comes to objectivity. The title is a misconception, and the content essentially paints targets on the backs of the people the author carelessly considers “Meghan Markle Haters". The article reduces anyone who disagrees with Meghan’s behavior as racist, misogynist, conspiracy theorist nutters. So, not only is the content of the article sloppy and lazy, it also lacks originality. We’ve all heard this sad song-and-dance number a million times.

I guess at face value, it becomes very easy, effortless really, for outsiders looking in to reduce an entire group of people with similar views to the basic stereotypes as old as time. It takes very little thought, consideration, or critical analysis, to assume things because they seem to correlate. But correlation is not causation. Just because some people opposing of Meghan Markle’s behavior happen to be racist doesn’t mean every single opposing person is also racist. Again, lazy and sloppy.

Just like assuming every single Meghan Markle fan is also vegan, anti-monarchy, feminist, woke warriors is downright sloppy and lazy. This author has personally interacted with and found common ground with Sussex Squad people many times. Some even became social media friends. They believe what they do, and I believe what I do. We do not agree with most things regarding Harry and Meghan, but we do agree to disagree and be civil.

So, contrary to the article, not all people “hate" Meghan Markle just because they detest her behavior. It’s important to remember extremes exist for all spectrums. Every topic, especially those politicized or made popular by media platforms, have extremes. There is no denying the fact that there are people who hate Meghan Markle because of her ethnicity. Those extremists who hate Meghan for her ethnicity ironically do not discriminate, though. If they hate her for her ethnicity, they hate ALL people of that same ethnicity.

On the flip side of this coin, is the other extreme. The face is the same on each side because the face represents extremism. There is no denying the fact that there are extremists who see anyone opposing Meghan as racists. Extremists who, by default, view every issue in the world through the lens of racism. While racism is a serious problem that deserves no place in society, assuming racism is the root cause of every conflict is also lazy and sloppy. And the same could be said that these extremists do not discriminate, either. If they see race as the only issue for why people “hate" Meghan Markle, they see race as the only issue for most everything.

The problem with both extremes is when everything and everyone is reduced to racial identity, racism only continues to exist. A racist using skin color as a disqualifier perpetuates racism. Assuming racism is the only reason behind disdain for someone only perpetuates racism. Focusing on race or racism allows no room for content of character.

Especially when people defend Meghan Markle being the victim of racism with a racist rule. When opposing critics say “I didn’t even know she was Black" or suggest her physical features, her Hollywood CV, or past involvement with Black causes were nonexistent before she became a duchess or stepped down from being a working royal, the extremists on the other side often resort to the One Drop Rule.

Which means their defense for calling Meghan Markle “haters" racists, even though they might have never knew she was mixed race, is a form of racism. The One Drop Rule was borne from the Reconstruction Era post-Civil War. The “rule" essentially said anyone who appeared to have Black features were considered Black.

The One Drop Rule was the precursor and eventual backbone to Jim Crow Laws of the South. It was used to oppress and segregate Americans based on physical appearance. Considering most people who never heard of Meghan before Harry came along were ignorant to her mixed heritage, it seems grossly negligent to assume race is the real issue. How can one be racist toward Meghan when they didn’t know she was mixed race? This author wasn’t aware of Meghan’s ethnicity prior to it being pointed out (by her and Harry. Repeatedly.), mainly because this author didn’t care.

Like so many, when I first saw Meghan and Harry together for the engagement interview, I was more excited about a fellow American joining the Royal Family. After learning she was biracial, well it was even better. It represented change and progress. Does that mean I saw the Royal Family as racists beforehand? No. It means I saw them as exactly the opposite. Had they been racist, she’d not be a duchess. Her being American and divorced was more a shock to me than being mixed.

The point of all this is there are extremists on every spectrum. For a journalist to say they went undercover, when in fact they did not, to expose the true motives behind Meghan Markle “haters", only to find they did very little to really understand the other side was disappointing. Not surprising, just disappointing. This could’ve been an excellent opportunity for someone to take the reigns and make bridges between two very passionate factions. Instead it became nothing more than a hit piece.

The article fails to acknowledge the possibility – no, the probability – that most people who object to Meghan Markle do so because of how she behaves. The article only considers one possibility behind this “hate". And by calling the objections “hate", the article in turn defines all criticisms as hate speech. Again, unoriginal, sloppy, and lazy.

So here we have it, yet another article grouping and stereotyping anyone who disapproves of Meghan and Harry as racist haters. Yet again, another article name dropping people “deemed racist haters", essentially painting even bigger targets on the backs of those people. Like they didn’t already have enough hate mail. Yet again, another sloppy, lazy, article that never digs below the surface to understand why instead of assuming it.

This isn’t new, it’s just another slop drop from the sensationalism machine that has replaced fair, legitimate journalism. It would be different if there weren’t so many questions surrounding the births. It would be different if Meghan Markle actually lived by the example she so vehemently preaches. It would be different if Meghan Markle would make amends with her own family before telling the world how they should treat people. It would be different if Meghan Markle were a strong woman instead of claiming to be one.

But it’s not different. She hasn’t spoken to her father since two days before her wedding three years ago. She denies the family connections that existed before her fame. She ghosts people once they are no longer of benefit. She preaches equality and universal service while using her title every chance given. She and her husband criticize the “family she never had" while naming their second child after that family’s Matriarch. All of those are behaviors that incite strong emotional responses. Behaviors. And behavior has no racial identity.

A final note… hypocrisy is the main reason people have issues with anything. When one group of people tells another group to stop attacking a public figure, while using assumptions as their crusade call, it’s hypocrisy. One cannot say “if you can’t take the heat, then shut up!” to another without being a hypocrite. When that happens, don’t be surprised when the same exact thing is said back. If Meghan or her fans can’t take the criticism, they shouldn’t participate in it. We all have the right to choose. Just like if I couldn’t handle the criticism, I’d not be writing this.

Life is not fair. The world is a dark, cruel place. When we expect the world to bend to the will of a few, we are setting ourselves above the majority. A strong woman would know this. A strong woman fighting for others would also know that the only person responsible for how one feels is one’s self. External feedback isn’t responsible for internal turmoil. Internal feedback is. That is all.

REFERENCE:

Amoako, A. (2021 June 11). I went undercover in the sinister world of Meghan Markle hate accounts. Refinery29. Retrieved from: https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/2021/06/10518195/megxit-meghan-markle-anti-fandom

[ahhhsami]

I really like what you said the other day in response to someone who mistakenly thought Asami was white. I do have some comments on another part of her identity you mentioned in that response. Hear me out, but I don't think that it is fair to say Asami is not a lesbian. She could be. She could also be bi or pan.

Lots of lesbians date men before coming out. This is due to compulsory heterosexuality or comphet which basically means societal pressures makes women feel compelled to be attracted to men. Yes, the society in Avatar is different. However, in Turf Wars it is explained that homophobia does exist in this world, so it would make sense that people would be closetted or take longer to figure things out. In the comic, Asami is also nervous to tell Korra's parents about their relationship because of this homophobia. Kya even explains that the fire nation is the most homophobic of the nations. The fire nation helped form Republic City and Asami is ethnically fire nation. Therefore, this influence would definitely be present in her life which could make her feel compelled to date men.

I'm not saying that Korra or Asami are definitely lesbians, but they could be. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's never explicitly stated if they are lesbians or bisexuals in Avatar or any real world official media. Therefore, they could be either of them. If a lesbian sees some of themselves in the characters and projects their identity a little bit, there is nothing wrong with that. If a bisexual sees some of themselves in the characters and projects their identity a little bit, there is nothing wrong with that. I don't think it's erasure to say that they could be either, but it is erasure to say they can't be one of them.

I'm a transgender lesbian. I strongly identity with most of Korra's traits. We have very similar, flaws and strengths. She feels like the only person I have ever identified with in media. One of the many ways I relate to Korra is her roamances. One time I dated one of my best friends, a straight man. At first I was head over heels and extremely excited. I saw a future with us. After several months I kept saying stuff like, "This part of our relationship would be better if I was with a woman," and stuff like that. Just like Korra in season 2, I started getting angry at him very easily, sometimes over nothing. We love board games, but couldn't finish one without someone getting pissy. I eventually realized that I couldn't do this anymore and I told him I made a mistake and that I'm not attracted to men. We are still very good friends and if I could be attracted to men, he would be the perfect boyfriend for me. Sometimes I think Korra is a lesbian like me. Sometimes, I think she's bi and just Makko wasn't a good fit. Either way is a perfectly fine way to think about it. No matter what, she is a badass sapphic and I'm glad we can all be inspired by her in some way.

Hey first off, I want to thank you for sending this and being really awesome about the way you've approached this. You don't always see it on tumblr, so it's much appreciated!

There's a lot you've said, so instead of responding completely line for line, I'm just going to write my complete opinion about this and hopefully it makes sense.

Bryke had made two official statements after the airing of the show, none that overtly say that they are bisexual, but it is heavily implied, especially in Bryan's statement which is the first post linked (x)(x). As quoted by Bryan, "Despite what you might have heard, bisexual people are real!"

Comphet is a legitimate issue in the world today, but I personally never got that feeling from Korra or Asami (through the series or comics). I believed that their relationships with Mako were genuine and it just didn't work out (all of them being the issue, not just Mako, lol). But again, that is my own personal viewpoint.

Erasure is the thing that I want to tackle most and hopefully I can do that cohesively and in an understandable way. The idea of labeling and identities on a personal standpoint is fluid and is on a spectrum. As a person, you don't need to label yourself or you can label yourself if you'd like, you can be as you are and that's okay. Personally, I identify as Queer because Bisexual does fit me, but just not completely in the way I'd like it to. Pan doesn't fit quite right, neither does Lesbian. So, thus I label myself as Queer leaning towards Bisexual tendencies.

But this idea and concept of labeling is very different when it comes to media and it's not focused on a real life person and their experiences. Labeling in media is important and that is because of positive representation in society. Often times, bisexual characters are portrayed in negative ways, so when there is positive portrayal and representation, this is important to the nth degree. Korra and Asami also weren't just side characters, they were main characters. So to have a clearly positive portrayal of bisexual characters on a mainstream show, that was huge. On top of this, this was a children's show, so to be a little kid or even someone older, finally seeing someone that is like you would be a significant moment in your life. This is honestly another reason why I love Korrasami so much, because of my own struggles with identity.

This all can be countered with the idea that they're lesbians and wouldn't that be good representation too? Yes, it would be, but it also wouldn't be as significant when taking into account all of TV/Film media.

If we breakdown and take in all of the positive representation of Lesbians vs Bisexuals, it would be more significant for them to be bisexual in a time where there was little to no good bisexual representation. In 2013 '64.7 percent of inclusive films included gay male characters. 23.5 percent included lesbian characters, and 17.7 percent contained bisexual characters.' Presently, on cable TV 34% of regular and recurring LGBTQ characters were lesbian and 18% of regular and recurring LGBTQ characters were bisexual. On streaming, lesbian representation makes up 28% and bisexual representation makes up 19%. These numbers don't even break down if it's positive representation either! So again, although real life sexuality is fluid or can be on a spectrum, media labeling is more rigid and representative of a specific area. Making it extremely significant and influential when there is a character labeled a specific way, bisexual in this case.

To this day, people still deny that bisexual people exist. Often times the debate is whether a person is gay or straight, but nothing more. So erasure is a big deal and claiming that Korra or Asami are lesbians can be detrimental in ways that people may not have thought of at first. People can obviously identify with a character and feel attachment to them, but there is no reason to not feel that attachment if their sexual orientation may differ from your own.

[bookofmirth]

I saw your recent response to an anon where you mentioned the drama that occurred the other day based around bookprofessor’s post. Obviously you don’t have to respond to this or publish it if you do not wish but I just wanted to bring up that while it is important to focus on the real life issues at hand, the OP was hypocritical in her post which is why people were getting upset. She was preaching against ableism while simultaneously flaunting her IQ and degree which is a form of ableism. She was speaking out against racism while ending her post using the racial slur “cracker” when talking about the possibly Caucasian Twitter elriels.

Obviously she had some important points but it was completely overshadowed by her participation in the hate speech and prejudice that she was speaking out against.

This does not in any way justify the nasty messages she received but on the same hand, I do not blame anyone that called her out for her hypocrisy. I hope you can understand why her post was so negatively received and how flawed it was. My hope is that one day everyone can just ignore the negativity, report those who are being racist/prejudiced in any way, and block those who are just being loud and who you don’t wish to see content from. But unfortunately I do not see that happening any time soon.

There are a few things I want to address in this because I think it's a good moment for the fandom to step back and reflect on how we treat one another, how we react to such issues, and how we behave moving forward.

First off, thanks for explaining your point of view without being antagonistic. I do think that everyone's emotional reactions to the post were valid. I do NOT think their responses, in terms of words and actions, were valid. Now before I move forward, I want to clarify that when I use the word "you", I am referring to anyone who may have had the response I am describing - not you personally, anon. Also please don’t freak out about how long this is, as a majority of it is a response to the fandom in general, not you in particular.

What was - and wasn’t - said in the original post

In this post, there were completely valid criticisms of the way that people in this fandom behave, and it wasn’t “generalizing” a certain group, it was literal, actual proof of things that had been said, by multiple people. I’m not going to get too into what Alyssa argued because her critiques of those tweets was flawless. The original post had very valid criticisms of what was happening on Twitter. Alyssa exposed the actually racist, homophobic, and imperialistic underpinnings of those tweets.

However, a lot of people are stuck on the bits before and after those critiques. @bookprofessor apologized for different aspects of her post in a few different asks. There were perhaps better ways that some of those things could have been phrased, some things that could have been left out. And she apologized. People can accept that apology or not but we can’t act like it didn’t happen. Like she didn’t reflect and learn to do better.

However, the people she was calling out have not done the same thing, and if anything, comments that focus more on Alyssa’s tone than why she wrote the post in the first place lets those people off the hook.

On cracker - Using the word "cracker" is not racist in the same way that using racial slurs against POC is. Is it prejudiced? Yes. But you cannot say that it is the same thing when that is demonstrably untrue, given centuries of oppressive history. No one has been oppressed for being white. Those are not the same. Reverse racism is not a thing because a white person punching down on POC is NOT AT ALL the same thing as a POC punching up at white people. The actions look the same, but the impact is so unequal it’s not even funny.

Racism is a systemic, institutionalized problem. It is not defined by individual actions, though those actions can either support or challenge racism. When someone calls a white person a cracker, there isn’t centuries of oppression giving power to and reinforcing that statement. That is not a “gotcha” moment.

Saying “I have x IQ” or “I have X degrees” is not ableist. I’m sorry to whoever told you it was ableist (again, not you specifically anon but people who had read the “aw shucks guys” vagueblogs about it), but it’s not. Those are facts. I have no idea what my IQ is, but I have five degrees from institutions of higher education. Me saying that is in no way ableist. 

Often, people mention those things to be elitist, yes. Sometimes, they can be used to say “hey I know more about this than you”. They can be used in a way that tries to make themselves feel superior. I suspect that this is the impression that a lot of people got of the post. However, there is a fine line between saying “hey that’s elitist” and professing anti intellectualism. Which is perhaps a side issue so I’ll let that go for now.

Another reason that people mention their degrees or qualifications is to establish their background knowledge and credibility. If I were to say “hey y’all I have two MA degrees” (which is true) I am not being ableist! It is a fact! It is factual! And I worked my ass off for those, I will be in student loan debt until I die for those, I have every right to mention them if I want to, and often I do so in order to establish my credibility, to explain the position I am coming from. And my prior knowledge of these topics is relevant when we are talking about literature since that’s what my degrees were on - literature and linguistics. That is why Alyssa mentioned her background, though she did pair it with comments about other people, for which she has apologized.

My final point about this is that I 1000% understand feeling insecure or less than because of educational attainment. I dropped out of high school. I had a complex about that for a long, long time. But I also know that if I took offense at someone else saying they had a PhD, then that offense is about me, not them. Someone else’s inferiority complex is not reason for people to pretend to be less than they are.

If those two comments are what overshadowed the bigger, more important issue for a lot of the readers of that post, then y’all allowed them to overshadow those more important issues. I am 99% sure that someone right now is reading this and thinking “but Leslie, it was the way that she said it!” Boy have I got some news for you!

How we react

This next section is not specific to this ask; instead, it is a discussion of how the fandom responded. If it were only one person who had said “but her tone” then I wouldn’t need to make this point. The fact that multiple people are exhibiting the behavior explained below is what makes this a cultural problem within the acotar fandom.

The main argument I saw on the post itself, and indeed any time I see people bring up how nasty Twitter can be, is that “it was a joke” and “that’s how stan Twitter works”.

No.

Those responses were quite useful for this post, though! So buckle up everyone, because I am going to talk about gaslighting, racism, respectability politics, and tone policing. While I understand that some people might have taken personal offense to what was said, there is a much bigger issue at stake that has nothing to do with individual feelings, and everything to do with ensuring that POC stay silenced and white supremacy is upheld. 

Back to the “but it’s a joke” thing. Thanks for gaslighting! Great example of that, person I’m not going to tag! Gaslighting is when you make someone question their experiences, when you try to make them think “wait, did I really feel that way? Is my feeling about that valid? Do I need to re-evaluate my response to this?? Am I blowing this out of proportion???” And saying “it’s just a joke” is a perfect way to do that. Did I say something accidentally sexist? It’s just a joke, nbd! Now you’re the problem, because you didn’t understand my joke and laugh!!! 

Saying “it’s a joke” or “oh they are old/young/ignorant, they will learn” is not a good response to... anything. It takes the responsibility off the people who are doing the harm, and putting it onto the people who were hurt. And in this case, anyone who read those tweets and found them harmful (which should be everyone?) is completely valid. You aren’t lesser for being angry or emotional or for seeing a problem where other people saw a joke. The people who see those things as acceptable jokes are the ones in the wrong.

This is a tactic that is used against women all the time. Any time a woman is sexually harassed at work or online, for example, and she gets upset about it, and someone chimes in with “oh they weren’t serious, can’t you take a joke?” So you can imagine what this is like for women of color.

It is a very, very common tactic for people of color to be silenced via tone policing and respectability politics. Tone policing and respectability politics are very closely related, especially in this context. The idea is that if Alyssa had just written that post in just the right way, it would have been more palatable to white people, and therefore okay to write. The idea that if she had tried to be “understanding” or “see it from their perspective” or understand that it’s “just a joke” are all ways to silence and de-legitimize any accurate, valid criticisms that were made of those tweets. It effectively re-routes the conversation away from the real issues, and to the person trying to bring them up. It’s essentially an ad hominem attack in disguise. 

We see respectability politics in media when people of color who act or dress or speak like white people are afforded more respect. Or any time that a person of color is pulled over and people say, “well if they had just done what the police officer asked...” There is a pervasive idea that if people just “act” properly, aka if you act white, then the police won’t feel antagonized and try to kill arrest you. If we are nice enough, meek enough, smile enough, etc. then we will be accepted.

When we tone police, we refuse to allow marginalized people the right to be angry. We say that "hey, we can only have this discussion if you leave emotion, which you rightfully feel, at the door, and we can only continue this discussion if you behave in a way that makes me feel comfortable." But guess what? It isn’t about you! These discussions are often highly uncomfortable. There is no nice way to tell someone they are being racist. And yet somehow, that is the ever-moving goalpost. It seems reasonable, right? “Just be civil, be nice, don’t insult each other!” And there is that. But those criteria change constantly, to the point where anyone (white) at any time can say “WHOA WHOA THIS IS MAKE ME UNCOMFORTABLE???” Then we find ourselves at zero, and suddenly the focus of attention has shifted away from the actual problem.

Before we go further, I want to say this: people have a right to be angry. They do not need to make their anger palatable or tasteful for the consumption of others (read: white people). 

We saw this last summer, and I’m not sure how the message didn’t get across. But people are rightfully angry about racism. They are angry about the murder of people of color by police, they are angry about lack of quality education, or clean water, of centuries of oppression that have led to this very moment when all of that ceases to matter because a white woman’s feelings got hurt one time. 

And that is what pisses me off so much. There is no way in this world that we could criticize tweets like those that everyone would agree with, and that everyone would “approve” of, that would be “nice” enough and yet still be impactful and make the authors of those tweets understand the gravity of what they have done. 

The least we can do is allow one another to express our anger, our outrage, because it’s highly likely that those people know exactly what the fuck they are doing, and they do not fucking care. By criticizing a woman of color for the way in which she chose to engage with this topic, we are avoiding the issue and letting the people in those tweets off the hook. 

There were many responses to that post that were positive, that agreed with Alyssa. There are a ton of people who disagree with those tweets, who find them disgusting, who understand exactly how and why they are problematic. That should be what we are talking about. Getting to the core of the argument, on that post or any about racism or other problematic behavior in fandom, requires getting past our own egos. It requires us to be able to step back, say “hm this thing is frustrating but there is a bigger picture here”. It’s not easy, and I recognize that. 

The fact that it is a common tactic though? To say “hey this hurt me personally and so I’m going to ignore any valid points you made?” That feeds directly into centuries of white supremacy because it, once again, silences POC and makes them try to play a losing game. And they will always lose, because no matter how hard they try to play the white game, the goalposts are constantly shifting. So you know what? Fuck the game, and fuck respectability politics, and fuck tone policing and “uwu be nice guys” because when it comes to things like racism and sexism, I don’t expect the people who deserve to be criticized to be nice. In fact, trying to be nice only serves to fuck POC over in the end.

Indeed, in response to that post, certain blogs have taken the opportunity to position themselves as “the nice ones” or “the ones who would never” or “uwu let’s be nice guys” while completely ignoring the fact that a woman of color was attacked for calling out racism. And yes - that was the point of her post. People getting hung up on mentions of her degree are (intentionally or not, it doesn’t matter) completely obfuscating the fact that that is not what her post was about, which was to call out disgusting behavior. idk how many words the post actually was, but essentially, people are focusing on 5% of it to the detriment of the 95% that was actually really important shit. These types of vagueblog posts about the issue fall into exactly what I am talking about - these are people who have decided to look at this issue, see how Alyssa (and anyone else who dares speak up) has approached it, and intentionally try to act like they are “better” because they can be “rational” and “kind”. Newsflash, if you don’t have something to be angry about, then being “nice” about racism isn’t that much of a flex. If it didn’t bother you, then congratulations. That doesn’t make you better than people it did bother. You just got lucky this time, and decided to use that to your advantage to look like the good guy.

I am not saying that all calls for peace are doing this. Obviously it’s what we all want. This is the worst I have seen this fandom in the 4+ years I’ve been here. But we cannot have that by ignoring the real problems and pretending that if we are all just nice to each other, then we will solve racism and sexism and all bullying in the fandom will stop. 

So combining all of this - the gaslighting, the tone policing, and what do you get? You get a fandom that refuses to actually engage critically with its own problems and take accountability for them. You get a fandom that decides that it’s easier to be distracted by this one mean comment over here than it is to engage in the fact that you know what, the culture in this fandom has actually turned incredibly disgusting and a lot of people are just okay with it. You’ve got a fandom that is using the tools of white supremacy to avoid the discussions that should actually be taking place. Maybe people don’t realize that that’s what they are doing. But if someone still thinks that after reading this post, then godspeed my friend, I hope you enjoy Twitter.

Okay so my last thing I want to say is that I didn’t come to all of this knowledge fresh from the womb. I do a lot of work, in my personal life and my professional life, to be better. So here is a list of books that I have found particularly helpful:

How to Be An Antiracist by Ibram X. Kendi

Stamped From the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America also by Ibram X. Kendi

White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism by Robin DiAngelo (side note, I was kinda meh about this one but the chapter “White Women’s Tears” is particularly helpful)

So You Want to Talk About Race by Ijeoma Oluo

Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment by Patricia Hill Collins

I’m not going to talk specifically about Alyssa’s post anymore, but if anyone wants to continue talking about these broader issues going on in the fandom, I am game. (I really should be grading papers though, so it might take a bit.)

[mistressemmedi]

Måneskin: "Different from whom?"

Greetings from Miley Cyrus - phenomenal numbers.

The streams of Zitti e Buoni are growing by the second, and ahead of Muse, on the top of the English charts, twelfth in the Spotify Global Chart. We almost tripled followers after Rotterdam (from 1.4 to 3.3 million, ed). Contagious and universal madness: T-shirts and merchandise sold out in 10 minutes. Like records, tickets for a tour that adds dates and expands on maps. They are even looking for us in festivals where the Rolling Stones have played. - Thomas

After the whole cocaine scandal that was started against us from France, which was later denied by my drug test, in Spain there people have been making murals with my face saying "No drugs". Some tweets made us laugh: «Congratulations, Italy! I have never been so sure that four people have fucked each other ". Miley Cyrus started following us. "You are great". “You are more” . - Damiano

From rags to riches - what a story

It was only 2016, and we were playing in restaurants, on the streets, in via del Corso (famous street in Rome). Damiano without a microphone, Thomas's guitar with broken strings, Ethan drummed on a cajón. At the occupations of the high schools in Rome (Kennedy, Virgilio, Mamiani) we had our first gigs and half an hour of fame, between those who criticized us and those who said "these guys are so cool". One of the rare times in which they offered to pay us to play - 50 euros each - we offered that money to those after us, in exchange for the chance to play during their time slow, as we knew there would have been a bigger crowd. We already understood then how it worked. That visibility was worth more than the money. We still think so ». - Victoria

The intimacy of rock - Choice of a genre

Music allows is this miracle which allows one to talk about very personal and private topics, even difficult and delicate ones. They are and remain deeply yours, but at the same time they become a confession that reaches a wider audience, and in this passage which is like a delivery, they also find their place in you, their elaboration. They are overcome, they are accepted. One moment it feels aggressive, one moment later a (soft) ballad. It's very cathartic. - Damiano

Against panic - The stage as therapy

I have suffered a lot from anxiety and panic attacks, it is a problem that I have worked on thanks to a course of psychotherapy, to my friends and family. Playing has helped me not to let myself be paralyzed by my fears, not to be limited in my private and professional life. I have learned to accept, to live with this side of me. I don't hide it. I no longer feel ashamed. - Victoria

This belief that only crazy people go to the psychologist is widespread ignorance. Nobody is born learned. And it is often difficult to understand why we are here, let alone the derivation and direction of our desires. It is a long and legitimate journey towards one's clarity. - Damiano

Essere fuori di testa – Ma diversi da loro (Be out of your mind - But different from them)

Already feeling a strong passion for something that is not a 'regular' profession but an artistic language, it puts you on a level where you're an anomaly, and while you're neither superior nor inferior to others, it places you in the condition of what breaks the mold but you're also being at a loss, leaving it to you to be bold and to take risks, hoping that they will pay off and land you somewhere. "What good is it if you don't stand out on your own?". You want to give it an aesthetic to your artistic dream, but to others it boils down to " You dress differently! You must be gay! ”, I'm 22 now and it makes me laugh, but at 17 it had an effect on me too. - Damiano

The beauty of being unique - Of believing in that and defending it

After all, we are all different not because we want to be alternative but because really no one is the same. Justice is being judged on what you do and not what you are. Justice is equality, respect, beauty. - Ethan

Fluid sexuality - Pride is freedom

We appreciate heels on men, we kiss each other, we have an open, extended mind, and we are proud of it. The horizons become vast, beyond the oppression of conservative families. With information on the web, knowledge is enriched and with it the possibility that minorities will be fewer and fewer, because majorities will be fewer and fewer. This will lower the volume to insults and bullying. If social networks can reach a village of 50 souls to reveal to someone, who is afraid of the darkness, that someone has felt that same fear.. There is no longer the need to give it a name, to define that "something" to fear, to brand it with labels that only limit you. Definitions have always had this effect on me. Gender should not even be considered in a person's judgment. Let alone orientation ". - Victoria

Sexism - A culture to be dismantled

Emma (Italian singer) dropped the bomb:" When I went to Eurovision, they insulted me over a pair of shorts. Damiano - half naked and in heels - was never criticized ". The judgment against women is constant, ferocious, and demeaning (if I have a lot of sex I'm cool but Vic a whore, where I show myself strong I'm a leader she is domineering and pain in the ass, who is successful because only because of her looks [and not the hard work she puts in]). As a male I am privileged, the harassment I suffer is not comparable to that experienced by a woman, the comments on my aesthetics are focused only on my aesthetics and do not insinuate anything about my professionalism and my competence, while women are victims of this kind of thinking in a systemic way. But I did find myself in a situation, out of nowhere, with someone who, pulling close to her for a selfie, started licking my face ... "What do you want, did you ask me?" Consent exists, and it is a must ». - Damiano

To grow as a person - The only rule to follow

For me, to conform is the total opposite of educating oneself, and the asphyxiation of one's expression (of freedom). Fortunately, I did not suffer heavy bullying, to the point where I felt I needed to change to adapt to how others saw me. But the matrix of who I am and the aggression that marks me is the same. If I'm a kid who dances and loves dolls, then allow me the freedom to do so. I used to be a kid who wanted long hair and played with Barbies. My friends, as a teenager, looked my long hair and teased me: "You have to find yourself a girl with a short hair to make up for it". My grandparents took the dolls away from me and said: “Stop it, they're not for you” ». - Ethan

“I was six and I already could not tolerate the distinctions between masculine and feminine. I've always had strong ideas about how I wanted to be. I refused things typically defined as feminine as a child, and they made fun of me for skating, for playing soccer, for not wearing skirts, for giving myself the chance to be as I wanted to be. I suffered a little, as I was bullied, but I had courage to stay true to myself, and today thanks to that courage I know that I could have been much more hurt, or I would have risked leaving the most important decision to others: the one about being just me". - Victoria

Love - music and girlfriends

I've been married to music for the past 20 years. I cannot wait to celebrate our golden wedding anniversary. - Ethan

Everyone goes through their own experiences, sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad, but it's never other people's business." - Thomas

When, for the first time, I developed feelings and attraction for a girl it was a bit disorienting because I had never had the courage to go beyond the limitations I had imposed on myself. For society, being heterosexual is the norm and therefore often one automatically pegs himself in that way, giving up the freedom to experience many different shades and facets of love. Once I got over the initial insecurity of having to question one's own certainties, I lived my sexuality in a very natural and free way, as it should be for everyone. - Victoria

I had paparazzi under my house morning and night. So, after four years of relationship, I finally revealed her name. I still have the paparazzi under my house morning and night, but at least I don't have to hide anything anymore. - Damiano

The value of the group - Protecting each other

But the real relationship, the real family, is between us. Our band. We believed in it from the first day, even before calling ourselves Måneskin (moonlight in Danish), even before Ethan drew a giant moon, on the poster for our first concert. We share everything, even the pain of the tragedy of Seid Visin, who committed suicide at 20 because he was a victim of racism. Being a group is what we should all do together: stay united and not retreat in the slightest in the face of abuses generated by a distorted vision of someone "being different|. - Thomas

Non ho l’età – like Gigliola (It references Gigliola Cinquetti who won both Sanremo and Eurovision with her song "Non ho l’età" which translates to Not old enough)

Before us, the only one to win Sanremo and Eurovision together was Gigliola Cinquetti (in 1964). Is there is something for which I feel I am not yet old enough for? No, honestly no. Maybe for kids. I'll be honest, I'm not enough to be a dad. - Damiano

Reached the sky - What fears still remain

We are more than in the dream, we have conquered the dream. To fly high this high, there is the risk is to fall and get hurt, but we will try not to end up like Icarus, who burns his wings with the sun. Everything is in our hands. And this - somewhat presumptuously - reassures us rather than frighten us ". - Damiano

(ORIGINAL INTERVIEW IN ITALIAN)

[Please note that I have changed some words or structure sentence, trying to make it so that the interview made more sense lol - I skipped the first two paragraphs, which was basically the interviewer gushing over how pretty the band is lmao (relatable).

Any mistakes in the translation are sorely mine, nothing was proofread, so apologies in advance]

[nattikay]

yeah so YouTube randomly decided to recommend me some Beastars analysis videos and it inspired me to get off my chest some thoughts I’ve been holding on to since finishing the manga a few months ago. So uh if you haven’t watched/read Beastars (and there will be brief manga mentions so maybe vaguely spoilery for anime-only folks) go ahead and keep scrolling cuz this probably won’t make sense lol

anyways, here’s my hot take:

I think carnivores should be allowed to eat meat.

Like, they shouldn’t be allowed to murder, obviously. Predation is still bad, the livestock rings are still bad, the body-parts-hyperdrugs thing is still bad, and yeah those should all remain hecka illegal.

But barring those awful cases, the majority of the meat from the back-alley market is supposedly (secretly) donated by hospitals and funeral homes--in other words, from animals who have already died of natural causes. And I think carnivores should be allowed to eat the meat of animals who have already died so long as they’re not being intentionally killed for the purpose of consumption.

The reason for this is carnivores kinda biologically need meat to thrive. We’ve all seen those "owners trying to force their cats/dogs to be vegan” posts. Doesn’t end well. Sure, you could argue that the animals in Beastars have evolved past that need and their hunting instincts are merely residual--but if this is true I think could only be partly so, given Jack talking about how over the years carnivore bodies have been “shrinking” because they can’t eat meat. See also Gouhin telling Legoshi that there’s only so far training can take his strength as a wolf without adding a bit of meat to his diet.

Basically, the carnivore population is, to some degree, being legally malnourished and uh...yeah, it’s really no wonder that the back-alley market is such a big thing that almost every carnivore uses at some point in their life.

Unless their society can craft an adequate fake meat that actually fulfills all the nutritional needs of a carnivore (which is more than just protein--I know for example that taurine is an important thing with dog and especially cat foods, and vegan humans usually need B12 supplements so probably some of that as well, etc.), which they clearly haven’t given that these issues still persist--yeah, I think they should be able to eat real meat.

You could also argue that it’s not right to eat an herbivore even after they’ve died of other causes because they were a sapient being that may not have wanted their body eaten without their permission, and sure, that’s fair. So think of it like organ donation. Have a form a living herbivore can fill out, if they are comfortable with it, that says “yes, when I die you may use my meat”. There ya go. If it was a known and open thing how vital meat is to carnivore health, there’d probably be plenty enough donors while those who are genuinely uncomfy with the idea can easily opt out.

And with carnivore’s nutritional needs being better met and openly accepted, they won’t have to repress that side of themselves quite so much and therefore there’ll be less of an issue with said side bursting out via predation incidents. Heck, throw some more places like B-Strike in there too, and give carnivores a way to use their hunting instincts in a non-lethal way--kinda like the way you let your cat chase a feather wand to give it the thrill of a hunt without actually killing any small animals. Their hunting instincts are being satisfied in a safe way, and their nutritional needs are being met ethically--predation should drop a fair bit (won’t disappear completely because of course there will always be criminals, nothing you can do about that unfortunately, but should still drop) and everyone'd be healthier.

This is why I wasn’t super crazy about the back alley market getting demolished at the end of the manga, because while yes there was some nasty stuff going on back there that needed to be cracked down on, destroying the market...doesn’t really solve the root of the problem (that being that carnivores in this society are essentially malnourished/their hunting instincts are not being safely satisfied). If anything, it just delays it a bit and I wouldn’t be surprised if a few years down the road the market just starts coming back up again.

I mean, maybe it won’t be as bad because I guess they’re allowed to eat fish now?? idk that part was really glossed over so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  (yyyeahh the ending was...a bit of a mess...let’s just say it’ll be one of the few cases where I won’t mind if the anime makes some changes lol)

And honestly this was the issue I had with the second half of the series. If Legoshi doesn’t want to eat meat, that’s fine, and if he personally wants work crazy hard to completely purge himself of his hunting instincts and become as strong as he can without meat, cool goal man...but he needs to get off his high horse and stop trying to force that on everyone else. It was even hard to root for him a few times because I just...didn’t really agree with him lol. Carnivores (well, most of them) usually resort to going to the back-alley market not because they’re inherently corrupt, but because they have a legitimate nutritional deficiency that needs to be addressed, whether they consciously realize it or not.

Legoshi is a good character and all but dood ya gotta chill

aaaand yeah carnivores should be legally allowed to eat meat

so uh yeah there’s my (unpopular?) Beastars opinion, hope you enjoyed ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  

[aliceinteyvat]

Genshin Impact Idol AU ideas

So we all know the groups Veechu made with 4nemo, DCKZ, L/yue and, TVT DREAM however, I thought it was a crime the actual idol Barbara wasn’t in a group so, I made my own! I do not have the skills to draw this so, I will be including concept photos by actual groups(older and newer as well as the time in those examples i think suits them just for an example bts run era - dope era for a boy group) for the general vibe. Click on their names for a link to the kpop wiki about them. I also won’t include Lumine because many fans have made their own headcanons for that I like.

Feel free to use the ideas I added to this in fanworks just please credit me for the idea of the groups I made myself if you do. All will be under the read more so mobile users don’t break their fingers trying to scroll past. Wiki links are included for each real world inspiration. If looking for a specific character use ctrl+f on PC to search for them to make your life easier.

Note: their stories can be changed if you would like to make it different for your art/writing/whatever. I just think a bit of drama makes them feel more real. None of the stories are 100% based on any real group even their inspirations aren’t direct copies. As new characters are released/shown in stories I will be adding onto existing groups I made up or, making new ones so if you like my ideas save this and come back to it.

                             7evelUp! [pronounced Level Up!]

A rookie girl group created from the top seven trainees(voted by judges & public vote) in a survival show that quickly gained international fame from their debut single and, performance. No one doubts their talents however, some question how legitimate the voting/ranking was in the show.  No one blames the girls themselves for this and, there is no real evidence to prove this. All of the members believe the show to be real due to their own experiences too although, a few of them due to their low self-esteem believe other trainees would’ve been better suited in the group even if they are thankful for the support. It will take a while for all of them to adjust and, have it all feel real. Will they rise to super stardom or, crack under the immense pressure?

- Members

Amber (leader, main dancer) 3rd place(got the leader position because she is the one who brought every team she was in together to usually win the challenges showing her leadership skills not from ranking)

Barbara (main vocalist,maknae,center) 1st place

Noelle (lead dancer,visual) 6th place

Sucrose (lead vocalist) 7th place

Xiangling (lead dancer, lead rapper)  5th place

Yanfei (main rapper,oldest) 2nd place

Yoimiya (lead rapper, vocalist) 4th place

- Real World Inspirations

Weeekly(Tag Me era - 7Days Tension era)

Girls’ Generation(Into the New World era-Gee era)

TWICE(Like Ooh Aah era - Heart Shaker era)

                                                                                                         SYZYGY

An unconventional girl group with a unique sound. Despite their enormous amount of talent/skill , they haven’t been as successful as their small company had hoped. However, they continue to invest everything they can into this group much to the displeasure of the other idols under the company. Will their burning hot passion find success with the masses or, will they disband early leaving their company in complete ruin?

- Members

Hu Tao (leader, main rapper, vocalist)

Fischl (lead vocalist, lead rapper, maknae)

Mona (lead dancer, vocalist, visual)

Rosaria (main dancer, vocalist, rapper, oldest)

Xinyan (main vocalist, dancer,center)

- Real World Inspirations

Dreamcatcher (Chase Me era - Odd Eye era)

1NB (Stalker era - Once again, Winter era)

                                    1MP@CT [prounced Impact]

A previously underrated boy group that seemingly appeared out of thin air on the #1 spots of all major top music charts. Most attribute their overnight success to their newest song going viral on social media but, some who work within their company secretly wonder if it has anything to do with the CEO’s private life and, the new anonymous investors. Regardless, they have made a name for themselves. They have a work ethic like no other and, will do whatever necessary to rise to the top. Even though fans are starting to worry their agency is pushing them too far. Will they become legendary performers the kind that future generations remember by name or, will their boss’ dirty little secrets make them guilty by association to the press when/if the time comes?

- Members     

Baizhu (leader, lead vocalist, lead dancer)

Dainsleif (main rapper, lead dancer, maknae)

Scaramouche (main dancer, lead rapper, oldest, center)

Albedo (main vocalist,visual)

- Real World Inspirations

Big Bang (Fantastic Baby era - Bang Bang Bang era)

ATEEZ (Wonderland era - Fireworks era)

B.A.P (Badman era - Hands Up era)

                                                    DoDoCo

A junior girl group for kids/tweens made(and managed) by Alice to promote her daughter Klee and, have her gain experience for her dream of being a real idol. Although they perform, act, model and, release music similar older groups they still are children so, their concepts are always wholesome feel-good things to appeal to kid’s even younger their age or, younger. They also don’t have the same restrictions or, work hours due to their age. This group is very popular with Elementary schoolers and, sometimes even their families but, can be annoying to anyone older due to how cheesy it all is.

(Note: I don’t personally agree with kids being idols irl especially some I’ve seen that look like older teen/adult idols it’s scary. However, since it is a thing that exists and, this is a fictional head canon let’s pretend this is a world where none of them get hurt and can live pretty normal lives during & after their time as idols if they choose to do so. I just didn’t want to leave a playable character/important story character out of the AU entirely. Also, Sayu would be here but since she’s not officially released yet and, we don’t know any story about her I think it’s best for her to join later.)

- Members

Klee (leader, main dancer, vocalist, maknae,center)

Diona (main rapper, dancer)

Qiqi (vocalist, oldest)

Yaoyao (main vocalist, rapper)

- Real World Inspirations

RE:KIDS ANGEL (Ocean era) note: also their only era so far it seems but, apparently RE:KIDS is a larger thing with many other kids kpop groups so I assume others would have a similar concept.

CutieL (Debut era - Jungle Journey era)

                                                Dandelion

A girl group that has stayed at the top for the past 7 years known for their elegant concepts although, they have had other concepts in the past(sexy, cute, etc.). Not only is Dandelion super famous but, each member has their own solo careers just as successful. Outside of the group Jean is known for her solo albums and, charity work. Lisa is known for her modelling career and, secretly is a successful author under a pen name. Eula is known for her many wins on dancing contest shows and, the many important roles she plays in dramas. Since this year marks the dreaded 7 year curse fans worry they might disband or, go on a permanent hiatus. Before this year they seemed inseparable to fans but, something happened during their last tour. Jean and, Lisa who were known to be best friends suddenly won’t even sit next to each other. Eula who was usually more reserved during interviews is having to do most of the work since they’re just awkwardly sitting on the opposite sides of her. Eula has never been the best at public speaking and, her blunt responses are causing antis to go on huge smear campaigns on social media. Jean who previously wanted to renew her contract is thinking about starting her own company. Lisa who previously wanted to renew her contract now wants to leave and, join a modelling agency. Eula still wants to renew her contract but, she doesn’t want to be solo yet. She is trying her hardest to get the group back together but, her harsh personality is only making the problem worse she feels. Will they stay together or, will they split? And if they stay together, will it be the same Dandelion fans fell in love with or, are some bridges burned forever?

- Members

Jean (leader, main vocalist, center, dancer)

Lisa (main rapper, visual, sub vocalist, oldest)

Eula (main dancer, vocalist, maknae)

- Real World Inspirations

IZ*ONE (Violeta era - Panorama era)

GFRIEND (Sunrise era - Mago era)

TWICE (Fancy era - Alcohol Free era)

Solo Idols

- Ayaka

From a wealthy Inazuman family Kamisato Ayaka (known as Ayaka) shocked the entire nation when she decided to stop pursuing traditional dance(which she had earned many honors and, was famous for since she was a small child) and, instead go overseas to become an idol. Due to her connections it wasn’t long after becoming a trainee that she was put on the same survival show that formed 7evelUp!. However, her good luck ran out when after filming she got into an accident in her company’s car on the way to her company’s trainee dorms. Thankfully, no one was seriously injured but, she sustained an injury to her ankle that made her unable to perform for the rest of the show and, therefore was disqualified. She was a fan favorite and, everyone was heartbroken that she couldn’t compete. Due to her popularity, her company decided that if she could prove she was able to work after being healed they would let her have a solo debut. She far surpassed their expectations being even better than she was before, resulting in her debuting the same time 7evelUp! did. She doesn’t have any negative feelings towards those girls but, she views them as her rivals. She is quickly gaining popularity for her insane talent in singing, dancing, acting, modelling and, song-writing. She is known to the media as “The Idol Princess” for her family’s wealth, her talent and, her graceful demeanor. Don’t put her into a box though, she can pull off any concept with ease. The question is though, will her company allow her the freedom to express herself to the fullest?

- Real World Inspirations

Note: I am not saying she would be super similar to these artist’s work but, I am saying she has the range and, the potential to reach this level of fame. Since I can’t pinpoint a single solo artist that has what I think she would do I’ll put the ones I think have the insane talent and fame I think she would have as well as a similar feeling although it will take a while for her to get to their level

- IU

- Taeyeon

That was all of the Genshin Impact characters that I know enough about currently to feel comfortable making headcanons for them! Let me know what you think and if you make fanfic of or fanart of these ideas please credit me for these specifically and veechu for the idea of the idol au in general! Feel free to spread this post around if you want to or repost it too with credit. I also would love it if you tagged me if it’s on here or would be kind enough to send me a link to your work/work you find of it.

[work-of-waking-up]

In Defense of the Psychopath

Alright, wanna venture into my crazy ass brain? I’m going to start by saying one thing that will set the tone for everything else that follows: Villanelle is not a psychopath in the way that we currently understand them. Why am I even bothering to write about a fictional character, you ask? Because representation is important. Media portrayal of various mental and behavioral health topics (including ones that people might not think need to be discussed) is important and this show has a big audience. I also just want to contribute to the conversations that are taking place because I am seeing A LOT of them and the reason for that I believe boils down to the fact that Jodie makes Villanelle so relatable and people want to know what that means and looks like for them. Even those who felt they could relate to Sandra’s Eve, or the relationship between the two, maybe questioned what that meant the further they went down the path with them. “It’s probably a bad thing I relate to a psychopath, right? But she can’t be a psychopath because she cries and she feels things! Psychopaths don’t cry, which means she isn’t realistic so therefore it’s okay that I relate to her! Right? Or are my assumptions about psychopaths and people with antisocial personality disorder wrong? I relate to Eve but look what she is underneath it all...so does that mean I relate to that part of her too?” Not only is villanelles character relatable, but people see the freedom inherent within her, the freedom that Eve sees, and they realize that, at least on some level, they want it too. The show has (unintentionally I think) created a massive dialogue which is super cool and you can tell everyone involved on the show is aware of that now, I mean they have a consulting psychiatrist so I think that speaks for itself. This is less of a commentary on the character herself and whether or not she is a genuine psychopath, and more so a commentary on the conversations she has inspired and why... For the record, this is literally just my opinion sprinkled with a few facts, nothing else.

So, the term psychopath gets thrown around in the show, more so in the beginning, MI6 explicitly labels Villanelle this way, even going so far as to use her in a presentation about psychopaths, although I think that was more so to gauge Eve’s response than anything else. The reality of Villanelle, which we come to learn, is that nobody has been able to get close enough to really know the truth. Anna and Konstantin both got close but we never hear either of them use that word (Konstantin says it once but he clearly doesn’t mean it, it was more of an attempted manipulation tactic). They make it clear that she has, and can, and WILL cause damage, but that’s as far as they go. Eve is getting close and she tells Villanelle when they first meet that she knows Villanelle is a psychopath but it’s obvious from Eve's behavior and things she says later on that she truly doesn’t believe Villanelle is what everyone says she is. It’s easier to label her as a psychopath because that alienates and isolates her and her behavior completely. She is an outlier with behavioral anomalies and therefore it isn’t necessary to look any closer. For MI6 and others (not talking about the shows creators) to label Villanelle as a psychopath is easy, it’s lazy, it’s reductive, it serves a single purpose... a means to an end. They (anyone other than Eve basically) simply do not care about Villanelle’s truth. But as an audience we are lucky enough to see more of her with each episode. The psychopath label begins to fade and Oksana is what’s left. We know based on what she has said that she is aware that people think she is a psychopath, a monster, a person built to kill. It’s not always easy to decide that who you are is different from who you’ve always been told you are, especially given her history. Villanelle hasn’t told us yet if she thinks (or knows) that she is a psychopath, but it’s clear towards the end of last season that she no longer wants to be the person that they (meaning the twelve, Dasha, Konstantin, etc.) created. We see moments where she clearly has no remorse and clearly enjoys what she does, but then we have little moments sprinkled in between where she very obviously struggles, even if its short lived. And those moments are important. We have the moment where she struggles with the choice to shoot Konstantin, saying he is a good person, she thinks. This comes shortly after a conversation she had where Irina tells Villanelle she thinks she is a good person because she is sad, so we know she is thinking about it, we know the awareness is there, and it becomes more and more there as times goes on. I like to think of it in terms of having moments that are pure Villanelle (ie the way she killed Inga in the Russian prison), and then we have moments that are Oksana, vulnerable and emotional. Villanelle is a creation and a mask whereas oksana is the truth. Those moments are starting to really mean something. I'm not even going to start with her trip to find her family, that’s its own thing, but it's a Really Big Thing.

So. Villanelle is not a psychopath in the way that we currently understand and perceive them. Yes, she displays psychopathic traits, and yes, she absolutely has antisocial personality disorder. I read an article where the psychiatric consultant for the show (makes it pretty obvious how hard they worked to make Villanelle as realistic as possible) said that the Villanelle in Luke Jenning’s books scored a 32 on Hare’s psychiatric checklist, but I like to think (and I think a lot of people would agree) that number is a bit high, at least for Jodie’s Villanelle, maybe not even hitting 30 at all (close though, let’s be real lol). The max score is 40 which would be a fully blown primary psychopath. For reference, Ted Bundy scored 39. This checklist is flawed though, mostly created and based off the prison population. Which is why it isn’t used as a proper diagnostic tool. 32 is apparently extraordinarily high for a female (think Aileen Wuornos), which brings me to my next point which is that because it’s hard to measure a lot of the classic traits objectively, there is not a ton of solid data surrounding psychopathy, and even less of it is on female psychopaths. Like most things in life, psychopathy exists on a spectrum, there are levels and layers. It’s not black and white, there’s no definitive test (psychopathy isn’t even in the DSM-5 because as I said earlier it’s extremely hard to measure objectively) and it's important to distinguish between someone who exhibits psychopathic traits and someone who is actually an identifiable psychopath. Chances are high that someone you know displays at least one characteristic shared with psychopaths and this doesn’t make them one.

I think what’s important about this is that mental disorders (mental illness/personality disorders/etc.) of any kind are much more nuanced than a lot of people tend to think they are. That they exist less in black and white and more in shades of grey. Jodie Comer is absolutely remarkable for showcasing that through portraying the different layers of Villanelle. Her performance is a literal gift. We cannot keep thinking and acting like we know everything about how a person thinks, feels, and behaves based strictly and entirely on one label. The thing that has stuck out to me the most, the reason I decided to even write this bullshit babble, is that one of the most searched topics about the show is whether or not it’s realistic that Villanelle cries, and honestly how sad is that? That makes me sad for V. Is it more realistic for her to develop connections and cognitive empathy if she was made into a psychopath vs if she was born that way? Is there a legitimate difference between the two? And how do we even decide which one is applicable for someone? It’s important to add that antisocial personality disorder is not the same thing as psychopathy or sociopathy. You can have aspd and not be a psychopath. Research has shown that about only a third of those diagnosed with aspd would meet criteria to be considered a psychopath. Society is not doing a great job at getting people to understand this. But to be fair, understanding personality disorders specifically has been somewhat problematic, a lot of diagnostic confusion and overlap between disorders. A LOT of work needs to be done. But as far as portrayals go, society has strictly chosen to go the route of giving us psychopathic characters and having them be inherently violent, incapable of remorse, feelings, or change. Poverty of all emotions. Subhuman. They are made out to be so abnormal and unrelatable to the point where the character of Villanelle has sparked so much debate and fascination simply because she exists in a way that actually IS relatable...and layered and beautiful and thrilling. We thought she would be the bad guy and yet we root for her at every turn, we cry for her, we want good things for her! We see her darkness and without question or hesitation we forgive it. She makes us question what we’ve previously been shown. Questioning whether or not it’s realistic that she acts the way she does is less important than questioning our own personal assumptions and beliefs and where those come from. I think that’s awesome. Villanelle is truly a gift. She is hands down one of the most well written fictional characters, which is saying a lot considering when you put something, or someone, in a box it doesn’t leave tons of room for expansion. and I honestly don’t even really need to say this, but.. Jodie Comer.