#what with the whole 'gay people should suffer for all the homophobes in the world they're just confused and scared :) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

antebunny · 8 months

Text

So there's a subgenre of fics in the Harry Potter fandom wherein a person conceived while one of their parents is under the influence of a love potion will become aroace at birth. The origin, afaik, are two insidiously awful decisions of JKR combining: 1) she reinvented date rape drugs/roofies aka love potions, without realizing it I guess, and 2) she said that Voldemort was asexual, because she's never seen a marginalized identity she didn't spit on.

Since Merope Gaunt (Voldemort's mother) used a love potion on Tom Riddle Sr. (Voldemort's dad) I guess people got the idea that what if love potions caused asexuality? And asexuality + aromanticism, of course, meant evil. Here's an excerpt from one of those fics in which Bill Weasley explains being aro/ace to Hermione:

[Image ID]

"No. I just dated because that was what you did. I never really felt anything for them. A few kisses, plenty of hand-holding. I made out in a few broom closets, and had one very uncomfortable make-out session up the top of the Astronomy Tower that I eventually ended by pretending I heard Filch coming past on a patrol. I even tried making out with a guy once in case that was it–nothing. I never told mum about that, of course. Good wizards don't shame their families like that."

"There's nothing wrong with being gay, you know."

He shrugged. "It doesn't apply to me anyway. I'm not gay. I wasn't anything, and I was trying to accept that and be content with it. It was good enough. Until I met Fleur." His eyes lit up with joy as he spoke about her.

[Second Image ID]

"Look, the point is with her allure from being part-Veela, I love her. Like I can never love anyone else. I don't want to lose that. You don't understand what it's like to go through life feeling nothing for anyone else. I've dated people I said I cared for, but I wouldn't have died for them. Well, out of logical choice I might risk my life, but not from love. But I would die for Fleur. Do you understand? She makes me a better person. I would do anything to make her happy. I'm not alone in the world anymore."

She nodded slowly. "I see." It wasn't so much him manipulating Fleur, as him permitting her to manipulate him. Into feeling. "I didn't realise it could be that bad." She still thought he should confess, but it didn't sound like he was hurting Fleur–he really did love her.

[End Image ID]

I read this fic years ago, and at the time I genuinely had not thought about my sexuality at all. I would've never called myself aro or ace. Still, reading this felt like being repeatedly punched in the face. I kept on waiting for Hermione to say something similar to what she said after Bill made a homophobic comment. After all, she went out of her way the first time, didn't she. Instead, what I got was essentially:

Bill: I don't usually feel romantic or sexual attraction. So there's something wrong with me.

Hermione: Yeah lmao. But there's nothing wrong with being gay!

I've been (reading) on Ao3 since 2016, and in all that time I've seen plenty of subtle racism, sexism, etc. But I've never seen anything as plainly stated as this. To this day I have yet to hear any aro/ace people describe the experience of being aro/ace in any of the following ways: "How could I forgive myself if we brought a child into the world to suffer the emptiness I lived with my whole existence[?]" /"You should be unable to love." / "You don't understand what it's like to go through life feeling nothing for anyone else."

I could not understand why Bill described it as "emptiness" or "feeling nothing." I still cannot find a single aro/ace person who would describe themselves as empty. The most I have ever heard is: "I wish I was normal" (meaning I wish I fit in, I wish to be accepted by other people). Historically, many aro/ace people married and had kids, conforming to societal norms, and I am sure many believed there was something wrong with them or hoped to grow out of it. I was one of them. On a very personal note, I suspect that my father is too. I am certain that he's never heard the terms asexual or aromantic in his life. But if you think I'll ever discuss his sexuality with him, you're out of your damn mind.

Now, I know it's really easy to find this fic from these quotes. I chose to include them anyways because I think it's important to show how blatant it was. My Tumblr blog isn't exactly a platform, but for the five people reading this: please, please do not go after the author. I truly believe that they had no ill-intent. In the comments of this fic, a few people bring up variations of "it sounds like Bill is just aro/ace" and the author is consistently understanding. Here are some of the author's comment on that fic:

[Image ID]

I very much understand what you're saying. It's a tricky thing for me to address, however. For the core idea I'm playing with is basically the evilness of "love potions". And part of that is exploring JKR's idea that Voldemort, being unable to love due to his mother using a love potion on his father, was a *monster* because of that. Perhaps that doesn't come across very clearly (there's a little bit more of it in the prequel), that it's one of the assumptions I'm trying to undermine. ("Love potions are funny/romantic", "Voldemort is a monster because he could not love", "Harry's power was that he could love - he's not a monster like Voldemort", "There's nothing wrong with selling love potions to teens/adults because it's not 'real' love".)

I feel like I'm already poking at the inherent problem of framing "people who cannot love" as "monsters/psychopaths" by showing Bill and Harry's struggles with self acceptance, and Bill finding a way to love (though do note he'd been making peace with the idea he wasn't attracted to anyone, prior to meeting Fleur). I really don't like the canonical take on love-redeems/love-is-the-best-power/the-loveless-are-monsters, so I'm messing with it a bit. Exploring other people than Voldemort, ones we admire, who are also dealing with being unable to love. Does that make sense? Now, that doesn't mean I'm doing a perfect job at it, but I'm trying my best to explore that theme around the edges of my Dramione story.

[End Image ID]

The author's intention was to show how other characters, made aro/ace via love potion like Voldemort, were not evil or sociopaths. I don't know why all the characters were so aro/acephobic, but sometimes fics get away from you and you don't address everything you wanted to. I don't know why the aro/ace characters had so much internalized shame and hatred when the term bachelor has been in use for centuries, but we fanfic authors love writing self-esteem issues and I would be a hypocrite to say otherwise. I don't know why the author never tagged acephobia or internalized acephobia, but no one HAS to tag anything.

I don't know if the author ended up writing that fic where Harry comes to accept his aro/asexuality. It's totally understable if they didn't; I have failed to write many fics that I really did want to write. Sometimes it's just like that. I really, truly believe that the author had the best of intentions and is not aro/acephobic, just severely misled on what that experience is like.

My beef is not with this author. I used their words to highlight a reoccurring and popular sentiment that I hate. My real beef is that this fic is popular. This is an entire subgenre of Harry Potter fics. I actually decided to write this post because some random person on the internet said, a few days ago, something along the lines of: "Remember when JKR invented a date rape drug that turned people into sociopaths? Yeah…" (And also because I was up until 3 am last night writing a dumb trash angst one-shot about it).

I'd wager that the vast, vast majority of people who write or read those fics don't feel the same way. But the condescension is baked into the very premise of that trope. "Oh poor you, it must be so hard, so lonely going through life without ever loving another person. You must feel so empty inside."

It's actually people who say similar things that make me feel isolated. Most of the time I feel free, like I've cracked this secret code, like I'm able to see things clearly that people so hung up over sex and romance can't. Other times I feel so left out I wish I was "normal." Mostly, being aro/ace is lonely, annoying, exhausting, and liberating.

It wasn't until last year that a friend told me that some people actually do have trouble speaking to someone they've never met before, just because they find that someone attractive. I thought that only happened in stories. But I don't want to get nervous meeting new people based on their looks, I don't want to treat people differently based on how much I want to have sex with them. I wish my friends in high school had never pressured me to come out as bisexual. I wish all the other similarly liberal, queer communities I've found since didn't insist on associating sex and dating with emotional comfort. I wish I could magically stop my parents from expecting me to ever get married and have kids.

But I can't.

Anyways, that's it for today. I'm not sure what the point of writing this was. I really don't want anyone to get hurt or attacked because of it. This is not a callout, or a hate brigade, or any sort of call-to-action. I don't want people to get up-in-arms about this. I'm just tired. I suppose I just wanted to put my feelings out there, and well, this is my Tumblr.

#asexuality #aromantism #aroace #acearo #aphobia #acephobia #asexual #aromantic #harry potter #harry potter fandom #harry potter fanfiction

38 notes · View notes

queerprayers · 2 years

Note

Hello there! I've recently come to the realization that I may be panromantic asexual and was wondering how you learned to accept yourself as God made you? I grew up in a time where the whole "conversion therapy is bad, God will convert you straightness instead!😃" rhetoric was a thing, and I constantly have that in the back of my head. I want to be free, to love, to know that God didn't make a mistake with me and that I'm not lying to myself. I know you don't have all the answers, but thank you for taking the time to read this. I'm praying for nothing but the best for you.

Hi, beloved! Thank you for your prayers. I'm so proud of you for learning more about yourself and being willing to start this journey! Getting that rhetoric out of the back of your head is a hard one. It's hard to free yourself from what you've been taught. Here's some of my journey, and some thoughts!

I had a similar rhetoric taught to me—"Yes, abusive tactics were wrong, and we shouldn't treat queer people badly, and it's not their fault, but they need to not act on their thoughts, they need to not identify with their emotions, and they need to pray more. And even if God doesn't take away their attractions, he'll give them the strength to suffer through heterosexual marriages, which is what we should all strive for!" The thing about realizing you're queer is it doesn't take those beliefs/instincts away. This is why there are a large number of homophobic gay people, and also why there's an even larger number of people like us, who know what we believe, but sometimes can't get rid of the stuff we used to/were taught to believe.

I started questioning my identity around age 13. And the one thing I decided on was that I couldn't be gay. I just couldn't be. I knew what gay people were, and I didn't hate them, but I knew what my parents said about them (that they were confused/sinful/sick), and I wasn't them. And I have a very clear memory of a journal page from middle school—I'm sure it's still around somewhere. It was titled "What I Would Do If I Was Gay." Now looking back this is hilarious, and not really something one writes if they're straight. But being the organized human being I was, I had a plan. I don't remember all the bullet points, but I know one of them went something like, "Decide on a man that I wouldn't mind marrying. Be nice to him." Again, hilarious, very straight I promise. But I was following what I had been taught. The last bullet point was, if all else fails, to die, because that's the only future I could imagine for myself if I couldn't live the way my parents wanted me to. You internalize this stuff, and imagining a future in which you're free is the hardest thing in the world sometimes.

I am here to say—and I'll say it over and over again to as many people as I can—that there is a future. We have so much beautiful time. So much of the pain I've been through involved a failure of imagination—I couldn't imagine a future for myself, so I assumed it didn't exist. There's such a lack of trust there, both in myself and in God. The first step (besides admitting to myself that yes, I was some flavor of queer) was trusting. That I couldn't see a world in which I was okay with myself, but that there was one. And I would get there someday.

The beginning was surrounding myself with people and communities that were affirming. I couldn't leave my home—partially because I was a kid, and partially because I didn't want to (I still haven't)—but I had the internet. If you dig deep enough on my personal Tumblr (please don't, I'm begging you), I was calling myself a straight ally—I've been on here a long time. Tumblr was the first place where I really saw queer people just… being normal? I didn't know any out people in my life, and so my ideas of queer people were stories and ideas and news articles. But I remember the first time I saw someone just, casually mention being gay, and it blew my mind. Because they were normal, and they weren't afraid. And if they could be, I could be. A Google search led me to Queer Theology, which is still a beloved resource of mine. And slowly, the people I followed and the friends I made and the websites I visited… they were queer. And suddenly it wasn't a bad word, it was just… how some people were. And I hated myself and my identity viciously, but I never hated them.

That was one thing I held onto. My friends started coming out to me (yeah, we all ended up queer), and I responded with joy and love. I didn't have that for myself, not yet, but knowing I had it at all kept me going. The thing that helped me love myself the most in life is paying attention to how I treated others. Love your neighbor as yourself. (Confession: sometimes I'm thinking a bad thing. And I imagine that someone on this very blog put the bad thing in my inbox. And I know what I would do: I would validate their feelings, and maybe find some ways to feel better, or give them some things to read, and remind them they're loved, and pray for them. Why am I different? Why do I uniquely deserve to be alone? And I do those things, for me.) Sometimes you have to ask, if a friend was going through this, what would I say to them? And that's what you should say to yourself. I'm willing to bet you are free and loving and supportive of other queer people. Not that you're perfect, etc. etc., but that you are a good friend. You've been lovely to me! Maybe not now, but someday, you will be able to give that to yourself.

Another question I ask myself: When have I been a better, more loving Christian—when I was repressed and self-hating, or after I accepted my identity? And the answer, in every way, is the second. Self-hatred is just another form of self-centering. I don't say this to blame or guilt anyone, but it is a truth I had to process. I used to worry every day about every single thought I was having, and call myself the worst person alive, and sit around hating myself, and worrying about my future. Now obviously this was partially because I'm severely mentally ill, and also because of the homophobia I had been taught, and I don't blame my past self. But the reality is that I was so consumed by myself that I wasn't really… being a person. And if I had kept going like that, if I was right now forcing myself into heterosexual relationships and curbing my self-expression and despising my love and terrified of the Bible, I would be a selfish, lonely person. And I wouldn't be much of a Christian. But right now? Loving and celebrating myself, seeking fulfilling relationships, finding joy in God? I am a better person, a better Christian, for being affirming. Whenever I get a thought, an instinctual, intrusive thought from the past, telling me to go back there, to that place, I remind myself that God asks me to be loving and faithful, and this is where I am loving and faithful. And in the future, hopefully I will grow into more love and faith than I can even imagine right now. But I can't go back. Wherever you are right now, know that you could use your energy to center yourself, to repress and erase yourself, or you could use it to love. To let yourself exist, and live a life. Be a person. And no God I would worship would prefer the former.

Re: mistakes: Something I learned from exploring queer Christianity is that our religion is made so much better by queer people. The art, theology, and joy that queer people bring to Christianity is not a mistake, it is a purposeful diversifying of the human experience that God welcomes. "Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." There are no mistakes. There is evil to defeat, and there is suffering to overcome, and there is the fulfillment of God's law through love. We're fulfilling the law, right now, by having this conversation—we both approached it with love.

Re: lying to ourselves: Usually when we worry about this, we're worried that we're wrong. That we'll feel differently tomorrow, and this is proof that we were lying. But that's not what lying is. There aren't very many permanent senses of self. It is generally harmful to consider queerness a phase, and it's not the lens through which we should view people's identity, but the reality is that we don't know everything all at once, and there are phases of emotion/experience. There are times when I question my gender identity, and times when I feel completely comfortable as the gender I was born with. I'm not lying to myself during either of those times, and those experiences are not less real because they don't last forever. You have recently come to a realization regarding who you might be; you've found words that might describe you. Unless you are purposely sending me lies (this would be a very strange thing to lie about), you are communicating to me an honest experience and interpretation. It may be that since you sent this ask (a regrettably long time ago), you interpret your experiences differently, or feel differently about sex/attraction, or any number of things. This doesn't mean you've lied—it means you're a person. God created you with the ability to grow and change, and this is a good and holy thing. Whatever words feel right to you at this moment, whatever experiences you're having, you're here now, and that is the truth. Tomorrow is a new day, with new space for truth. Not knowing everything isn't lying, and being wrong isn't lying, and changing isn't lying, and not seeing the whole picture isn't lying. It's just existing.

I've said a lot. I think I've said what I wanted to say. In summary: it takes time, and changing your environment, and constant self-reminding re: your values; and lacking imagination isn't the same thing as lacking a future; and wanting to be free is the only way you get to freedom; and you already have love, you just have to nurture it; and you're not faking or lying or a mistake, you're a person. I learned to accept myself by accepting others, and remembering I'm just as worthy of love as they are, and by validating my truth even as it changed, and by remembering that being queer (or rather, loving and living out my queerness) has made me a better person and Christian.

What gets you to self-acceptance might be radically different, but I pray it's just as life-changing, and I know it'll be worth it. Peace be with you.

<3 Johanna

#asks

60 notes · View notes

be-the-glenn-to-my-maggie · 1 year

Note

I just need to rant okay. As a kid who has grown up hearing pretty much everyone complain about the government this and our horrible society that I’m honestly just… done all around. No Grandma Agnus, I don’t care about how you think lgbtq+ people are all going to a hell I don’t even believe in but you know what, cousin Cadence? I also don’t care about how all homophobic people are the true evil ones. No, I don’t care that trans people exist but guess what? I also don’t care that there are people who think differently because people are entitled to their own fucking opinions so long as they aren’t actively harming others (if you don’t like them don’t interact with them more than you have to on both sides, it’s not a hard concept).

Yes I understand that racism has played a huge role in our country but I’m pretty sure that’s not why they got your order wrong at Wendy’s Uncle Jason. Yes I understand that women have had it tough in the past but guess what, last I checked we’re doing a hell of a lot better and no men are not stupid or evil for fuck’s sake and yes they do have problems of their own even though they’re not women

No, I don’t think that all rich people are evil or owe us something (and that’s coming from someone who used to live in a tiny little trailer and only got a small packet of gum for Christmas once) but I also don’t think that workers are over-exaggerating some of their horrible conditions such as payment. No, I don’t care what pronouns you use Finley but guess what when you come at me for “assuming your gender” or whatever twice in the same day despite the fact that it changes literally every hour then that’s where we start to have problems. No, I don’t care that you believe in god but fun fact I am a heavy believer in the separation of church and state and will you look at that, it seems like church and state are getting a bit too chummy up in this house when you claim that all women who get abortions are murderers who are gonna go to hell and abortion should be criminalized for the sake of their souls Auntie Susana.

On top of that I become old enough to vote and stuff soon but honestly I don’t really want to. All I’ve seen my whole life are a bunch of adults going at each other’s throats like rabies-infested dogs and for what? So that they can try to get an extra bit of rope in ya’ll’s tug-of-war? And then older people come at people my age who don’t want to be involved in the shitshow? It almost makes me want to laugh my ass off because that’s like polluting a well and then pleading for the townsfolk to drink that nasty water.

Sorry for my harsh words. I just had a lot of frustrations and really needed to say something anywhere. Know that none of this was directed at you or anyone with strong opinions in a malicious way, I’m honestly just so tired. It feels like everyone everywhere is fighting and for what? No one listens to anyone anymore. I do fully intend to vote when I’m old enough, I’m just done with everyone shouting at me from all sides.

I am very confused as to why this rant was brought to me, because I literally am one of the people you're complaining about.

When I saw this ask, I had to stop looking at this website for like three days. It's a very privileged take, honestly. I don't blame people for getting tired of hearing about politics and world issues all the time, it is exhausting. But as someone who's frequently called exhausting, well, I'm fucking sorry if hearing about the people suffering around you is bothering you. That is a privilege. You can feel that way, but recognize you feeling that way is a luxury.

Your (I'm assuming) metaphorical Grandma hating gay people isn't the same as your metaphorical cousin calling homophobes evil. As I said to my mom yesterday in a very similar conversation, your grandma has the luxury of leaving that conversation any time. So do you. I, as well as other gay people, do not have that luxury. Getting annoyed or tired about any debate on basic human rights I understand, but equally at both sides is bizarre to me. It's like getting mad at a random person in 1912 and the Titanic passengers equally for continuing to talk about the Titanic. One of these groups hAS TO BE TALKING ABOUT THE TITANIC RIGHT NOW. You're not on the Titanic, so you can shut your newspaper and get annoyed it's all you hear about. THE TITANIC PASSENGERS CANT! One side is there because it's literally them being talked about. The other is there because they have too much free time and are demons.

I understand why you feel like people are fighting all the time. They are. But politics are not very black and white. In America it's really just the right and the farther right. But individuals are fighting because things need to be fought for, simply enough. Silence is complicity, and your first two paragraphs are just that.

@antigirlb0ss look at this shit

#sorry buddy i don't know why you brought this drivel to me #but i am not the one #i eSPECIALLY am not the one for not wanting to vote convos #although i understand feeling ike ur vote is useless #it's not smaller state elections are very important #but gtfo about racism and sexism dude #they still play major major roles in our society and it's absolutely valid for someone to complain about them?#also rich people are not evil but billionares are #theres a distinct difference #and also “workers are exaggerating some of their horrible conditions” hOW DOES THE BOOT TASTE MY GUY DOES IT TASTE GOOD? jesus christ #capital owners don't need you LARPing as a shoeshiner for them they are actually fine just on their own #both sides-ing every issue you brought up here literally makes you the problem #trump: there are good people on both sides #<- that's you #melissa's asks #melissa bullshit #i get more and more radicalized (become more reasonable) every day

8 notes · View notes

menalez · 7 months

Note

About the pressures on gay people to be het acting and how we react to them…….. I think one thing people have to accept is 1) yeah it affects people … it affects people DIFFERENTLY. Five different gay girls growing up in the same town in the same family with the same religion taught to them will have 5 different experiences with it. Some people are more people pleasing. Others are rebellious but deeply taken in by the idea of gods and devils judging them and tormenting them forever. And so on. I grew up being taught to be scared of hell and mostly just low key rejected it from the start. My sister is also now an atheist but is still terrified. Still has nightmares. Still catches herself subconsciously adjusting her thoughts and behavior to “avoid hell”.

2) yeah admitting that and saying it aloud DOES make at least some bi or het people further self-delude for whatever reason that they are gay despite not being gay, which yeah does continue to have some negative effects when they speak over us, but let’s be real hear it’s just one more half-out cig butt getting dropped on the ground in the middle of an already raging wildfire of homophobia… we got other problems

3) AND it doesn’t make it less true — some people really do experience pressures great and small to be or try or pretend to be het. And some act that out while others don’t. And it doesn’t make someone not gay to have been in a situation like that. It’s a cold day in hell where I want someone who went through that to suffer even 1 second more …. And for what??? so I can scrabble to try to keep political fake gays and other fake gays from overrunning? When that is more to do with their own psych and less to do with what we do or say? Nah. We should fully and openly talk about pressures to try het sex and try to become/pretend to be het. AND be very clear that it doesn’t confabulate whole feelings of desire for the other sex. Not just like desire to be het or desire to be desired or whatever. And we can be clear too that sometimes bi people for personal reasons lose the passion for one sex or the other. But still have the capacity for it and are bi.

A lot of this confusion crap to me is 1) homophobia— being grossed out or freaked out by genuine same sex only attraction so people keep trying to erase that including by faking gay to change the socially accepted meaning of it to include the other sex 2) people not getting the range of bisexuality or how affected people are by their own experiences and politics. Like yeah it’s possible to lose attraction to men functionally from being around them and seeing their shit. You’re still bi or het though. Just with a zeroed out libido for men from life experience.

If anon wants to stop the madness around this she should talk about all that not worry about, cast doubt on and bother lesbians from traumatic backgrounds who experienced trying to force themselves to be into men.

totally agree, i keep saying people will go thru similar situations but have different reactions for many reasons such as personality. it just falls in deaf ears bc i feel like some ppl just get some kind of pleasure or joy out of framing gay ppl as liars for having frankly traumatic experiences of trying to be het in a homophobic world. so i feel like no matter how much any of us explain and talk about this phenomena, some ppl will only hear what they want.

there’s indeed OSA ppl pretending to be gay and explaining away their experiences with the opposite sex, and i get being wary bc of that. i’ve been in such situations where i wasn’t certain ppl were actually gay but who does it actually help to harass every person who has for any reason ever had any experience with the opposite sex, gay ppl included, and to harass them & call them liars & make it seem like their story can’t possibly be plausible? it hasn’t helped gay ppl from what i’ve seen. doesn’t help us form communities, sense of togetherness, give us protections, or anything else.. and it probably pushed some gay ppl back into the closet. i’ve seen so many lesbians harassed off of these platforms over it too.

when there’s ppl openly claiming to be gay while talking about being into the opposite sex, im not going to be wasting my time harassing traumatised gay ppl about how it doesn’t make sense to me that they forced themselves thru a heterosexual experience in hopes that it’d change their sexuality.

#like it’s dumb to me. in every situation we can see that different ppl react differently but apparently if it’s gay ppl we can’t? 😭 we are #unique individuals too. we simply share the same sexuality

2 notes · View notes

artisticmenace · 1 year

Text

PROSHIPPERS DNI I FUCKING HATE YOU!!!!

Other DNIs below.

im approachable and you should talk to me. cue hypnosis.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hello, dear friends and accociates. Welcome to the normal info section.

hiii. I'm tabs. I'm suuuper gay(asexual panromantic). I'm also an artist. Any scorn or prejudice will be promptly ignored. Criticism will be looked over as long as its constructive.

Status:

dude i AM the stress ball

About me:

I have a bunch of OCs, and I'm writing so many (unfinished)books... Yeah, that's right. I like to suffer and die creatively TWICE!! I can not be helped. I'm just goofy like that sometimes. I hate most non canon ships for fandoms im in, but I'll probably just go "ew" and leave you alone(depends on the ship, really). I haven't been tested for autism or ADHD but enough things line up, so I'm like 80% sure. The 20% is self-doubt. I like to dress fancy, and my general look is deep woods cottagecore that has recently drank from the lake of maximalism. You won't see pictures of me, probably, because my room is NOT clean. Sometimes, I vent on here, but that's because I am the only demographic this blog needs. I love you, too, but your feelings are only being considered a little bit. I use tone tags every now and then if I feel I would be misunderstood. On that note, I am more likely to ignore or ask for clarification if you say something rancid or silly than get on your ass about it.

Those Days:

I'm gonna be making a comic called Those Days about a small town old gay couple, Scott and Rodney, telling their life's story. They've been friends since their sophomore year in high school, and they've seen a lot. Scott was a punk, to say the least.

For the actual comic, you'll need to thosedayscomic, the blog I made for the comic.

^^ I'm currently working on the first issue. I do have lots of art of them though.

Tags for my comic:

those days, those days comic. also any character names first and last.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Current Fixations:

Camp Here and There (Waiting for S2)

Welcome to Night Vale (all caught up)

The Magnus Archives (help)

The Magnus Protocol (screaming)

Good Omens (SYD ASYDIC IM GOING TO GUILLOTINE YOU)

Gravity Falls (fan for a while and now ive read through the book of bill. cryifn)

What's Currently Crippling:

good omens is going to kill me. i will never be able to think of anything else what the hell

Also:

I love interaction! I will always discuss my interests, and l o r e when asked. In other words, PLEASE TALK TO ME !!!

If you want to use my art for your pfp go ahead, just credit me.

Don't repost my art. Please and thankies.

i use ibispaintx btw and i watch the ads for my brushes

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Art Requests/Asks: Open!!

Art Trades: Open!!

DMs: Open(as long as you arent a creep or an asshole obviously)

(cant do commissions because the world hates me but dont be shy to trade me. not particular on what i get back as long as i made someone happy. cause it feels amazing to see something i did made someone happy)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

DNI LIST because I'm a little hater:

proshippers (what the fuck. what the actual fuck. fictional or not.)

active members of the hazbin/helluva fandom(if i am reminded of that shitshow when you interact with my page UTAFSHBDBDBDJNSJAGAHAOSHHAGA)

racists, sexists, homophobes, transphobes, etc

pro-israel.

18+ blogs (a whole minor)

those problematic "sexualities" (ex. super straight, MAP, zoosexual)(also RCTA what the fuck)

people who fake disabilities/mental illness

people who actively misuse words that describe mental illnesses even though they are well informed about that sort of thing

those fucking people who ruin pretty houses and antique furniture and old clothing. fuck you.

people who write smut about canonically sex repulsed asexual characters(jonathan sims) and just people who decide they dgaf about anything like that. bi-erasure, aro-erasure. anything erasure. i hope youre having a terrible day.

sydelijah shippers get out.

(this one is unserious) people who dont deadname twitter

PRO HOA YOU DONT EVEN BELONG ON TUMBLR FUCK YOU I HOPE MY FUTURE SOMEWHAT UNATTAINABLE MAXIMALIST HOME PISSES ON YOUR BABY

people who are mean to me. i havent had any yet but just in case. if you disagree with my take, thats ok bc you arent the demographic for my blog. I AM!!!! /silly srs

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's my sick tags:

artisticmenace - anything that is a post by me

menaceartisticity - art and art related things

themenaceuseswords- text posts. i say shit sometimes.

themenacerants - my new tag for when i lose my shit

menaceencouragement - words of solace and encouragement from me

menacepoetry - poetry/songs yeah. probably sad stuff cause im miserable sometimes

menacescrawling - writing. oh buddy boy.

menacemusicality - im a choir kid what do you want from me

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thank you, I love you.

going to collect these things because why not

credits, top to bottom:

butterscotch-goat

cowboyinternist (2)

#intro and info #introductory post #artisticmenace #themenaceuseswords #menacepoetry #menacearticity #menaceencouragement #themenacerants #menacescrawling #menacemusicality

16 notes · View notes

kimyoonmiauthor · 1 year

Text

Literary theorists being AHs to women and PoCs

‘cause if I have to suffer, then you should also know how much of an AH these people are, so you can examine if their theories are even worth believing or if you SHOULD pay attention to their blind spots instead of saying it’s irrelevant to literary discussion. Personally, I think the fact they are unwilling to mention PoCs, particularly Black people and willing to actively dump on women is very relevant to current academic discourse. You can’t ignore Kant’s views on women, and see that the majority of the people who won in the end were people who showed hatred towards women.

Robert Scholes being an AH, Page 26-page 28 (Hilarious, but also homophobic and misogynistic) For context, EM Forster is gay, which makes this really homophobic.

Picture credit: https://www.brownalumnimagazine.com/articles/2017-03-03/memories-of-bob-scholes

‘Cause you see folks, the only decent writers in the world are men, cishet men. (notice the sharp sarcasm here).

E.M. Forster on Gertrude Stein (From Aspects of a Novel, a series of lectures he gave)

Credit: Getty Images https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/licensed-image?q=tbn:ANd9GcSjNW-FA-n5bkXFk2MFmMGMcBy1SJtQj185hrMceQN_8rK2L-6f2cu7Ct-PooBt8M6Mt7ffTDt5SPHpj00

https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/70492/pg70492-images.html

Granted, a Modernist (and gay himself, openly so at the time he gave this lecture), but still, the dumping on Gertrude Stein seems to be a tradition that extends to other people afterwards (Rowe did it sideways, Lajos Egri, directly). Seriously? Dump on the lesbian Jew trying to encourage ways to describe TRAUMA. OMG, we shouldn’t talk about trauma.

But I disagree heartily--we have entire story structures devoted to dreams that play with sense of time and reality *because* of Gertrude Stein. I mean, how could you conceivably get Inception without Gertrude Stein’s theories of how to move language and time? Besides that, you have Dream Diaries (Japanese), Dream Record (First Chinese then Korean--not imported into Japan because there was a war), and then the whole of Dream Time from Aboriginals which predate her. Non-linear storytelling has and can work--but you need thematic plotting to be stronger and tone plotting to really be tight (pacing helps, but isn’t as critical as the other two). Thank the Modernists for the European white version. I mean, Magic realism, anyone???

If you want to find ways to break linear time and describe trauma itself, and the feeling of missing time--Modernists are your best bet to find techniques to get you there. (Kinda Post Modernists, though I resent the focus on readers a lot--I heartily disagree, BTW, that Structuralists and Post Modernists are the same thing... as argued in this paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B0080430767039516.

Post Modernists tried to find further ways to break the rules and structure by bending to the reader.

Structuralists tried to impose a bunch of rules and binary. Like say, the panopticon and prison system/School system. There’s rigidity everywhere with Structuralists and Eurocentricism.) Or as the Raw and Cooked put it, a binary of acceptable and unacceptable, when some cultures don’t work off the Bible. So I think this paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B0080430767039516

is more likely.

John Gardner, The Art of Fiction for Young Writers, published 1983

Picture credit: https://blog.bookstellyouwhy.com/john-gardner-and-the-art-of-fiction

No one is surprised that its all men mentioned, right?

But what makes ignoramuses bad writers is not just their inexperience in fair argument. All great writing is in a sense imitation of great writing. Writing a novel, however innovative that novel may be, the writer struggles to achieve one specific large effect, what can only be called the effect we are used to getting from good novels. However weird the technique, whatever the novel’s mode, we say when we have finished it, “Now that is a novel!” We say it of Anna Karenina and of Under the Volcano, also of the mysteriously constructed Moby-Dick. If we say it of Samuel Beckett’s Watt or Malone Dies, of Italo Calvino’s The Baron in the Trees, or Kobo Abe’s The Ruined Map, we say it because, for all their surface oddity, those novels produce the familiar effect. It rarely happens, if it happens at all, that a writer can achieve effects much larger than the effects achieved in books he has read and admired. Human beings, like chimpanzees, can do very little without models. One may learn to love Shakespeare by reading him on one’s own—the ignoramus is unlikely to have done even this—but there is no substitute for being taken by the hand and guided line by line through Othello, Hamlet, or King Lear. This is the work of the university Shakespeare course, and even if the teacher is a person of limited intelligence and sensitivity, one can find in universities the critical books and articles most likely to be helpful, the books that have held up, and the best of the new books. Outside the university’s selective process, one hardly knows which way to turn. One ends up with some crank book on how Shakespeare was really an atheist, or a Communist, or a pen-name used by Francis Bacon. Outside the university it seems practically impossible to come to an understanding of Homer or Vergil, Chaucer or Dante, any of the great masters who, properly understood, provide the highest models yet achieved by our civilization. Whatever his genius, the writer unfamiliar with the highest effects possible is virtually doomed to search out lesser effects.

Gardner, John (2010-05-20T23:58:59.000). The Art of Fiction . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

OMG, give this guy a prize, he managed to mention a Japanese man Kobo Abe. /s https://literariness.org/2019/04/15/analysis-of-kobo-abes-novels/ But then fails to mention the names of the authors of some of the novels he’s talking about (I’m literally begging Writer’s Digest, Knopf, etc to force these people to give better citations)

The closest he gets to noting a Black person is noting American Jazz on the page where Chapter 2 starts, and then fails to mention Jazz musicians. No, I’m serious. What makes a person an AH? The inability to mention a single work in 1983 by a female author?

Though the fact is not always obvious at a glance when we look at works of art very close to us in time, the artist’s primary unit of thought—his primary conscious or unconscious basis for selecting and organizing the details of his work—is genre. This is perhaps most obvious in the case of music. A composer writes an opera, a symphony, a concerto, a tone poem, a suite of country dances, a song cycle, a set of variations, or a stream-of-consciousness piece (a modern psychological adaptation of the tone poem). Whatever genre he chooses, and to some extent depending on which genre he chooses, he writes within, or slightly varies, traditional structures—sonata form, fugal structure, ABCBA melodic structure, and so forth; or he may create, on what he believes to be some firm basis, a new structure. He may cross genres, introducing country dances into a symphony or, say, constructing a string quartet on the principle of theme and variations. If he’s looking for novelty (seldom for any more noble reason), he may try to borrow structure from some other art, using film, theatrical movement, or something else. When new forms arise, as they do from time to time, they rise out of one of two processes, genre-crossing or the elevation of popular culture. Thus Ravel, Gershwin, Stravinsky, and many others blend classical tradition and American jazz—in this case simultaneously crossing genres and elevating the popular. Occasionally in music as in the other arts, elevating popular culture must be extended to mean recycling trash. Electronic music began in the observation that the beeps and boings that come out of radios, computers, and the like might sound a little like music if structure were imposed—rhythm and something like melody. Anything, in fact—as the Dadaists, Spike Jones, and John Cage pointed out—might be turned into something like music: the scream of a truck-tire, the noise of a windowshade, the bleating of a sheep.

Gardner, John (2010-05-20T23:58:59.000). The Art of Fiction . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Iunno, is it glaring to you? It’s glaring to me. Avoid talking about Black people challenge. I can name at least a few off the top of my head. Dizzy Gillespie? Billie Holiday? Ella Fitzgerald? And then he mentions white people before then? I’m groaning.

And that’s the thing, particularly about Black authors/Black people, they are either not mentioned by name, but their work is--WTF, or totally skipped, probably because the whole of Black literature goes against these white men’s structuralism, and postulations. On one hand, I’m glad they left them alone, but on the other, the saying this is the only way, while glaringly missing the obvious really is sickening.

As for dumping on women--well... should we go back to Aristotle being an ass and starting the whole anti-choice campaigns because somehow Aristotle is Jesus, even though Jesus didn’t say anything about Ensoulment at conception? And then indoctrinated white women trying to rescue Aristotle from taking the axe because all of his scientific ideas were wrong? (Just axe him--he was popular with the Victorians for a reason--he was a misogynistic asshole and that reinforced their worldview very well.) (And if you think I don’t have references for the anti-choice statement... oh wait for it... I so have it)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensoulment Wikipedia, but I found scholarly articles too--not sure you want to be buried with that. Aristotle is not Jesus. !@#$ And Aristotle thought women got their soul later than men, because, as I said, royal asshole, to the point I want to do a whole long rant about how much of an irrelevant ah he was.

#fuck misogyny #misogyny in academia #anti-blackness in academia #story structure and misogyny #structuralists #em forster #robert scholes #John gardner #aristotle is a misogynistic ah

3 notes · View notes

oumakokichi · 4 years

Note

What are the differences between the original and localization?

Hmm, that’s a very simple question with a pretty lengthy answer! I did answer some similar questions in the past, but that was a long time ago, much closer to when the localization was first released. There are probably a lot of people whose main experience with the game has only been with the localization, and who don’t really know or remember those differences anymore.

For that reason, I’m going to go into kind of a “masterlist” of things that were changed in the localization in this post. This will be very long, but I really want to explain the whole story behind the localization and its differences from the original to people who might only be hearing about this for the first time. I’m going to cover full spoilers for the game obviously, so be careful when reading!

Also, please feel free to share this post around, as I think it contains a lot of information that might be interesting to people who’ve only experienced the localization!

Before I really get into it though, I want to stipulate that the differences I’m covering in this post are mostly going to be things that I believe could’ve been handled or translated better, not every single line that was changed verbatim in the game. This is because a localization’s purpose is incredibly different from a literal translation.

Where a literal translation seeks to keep as much of the original authorial intent as possible and has the leeway to explain various Japanese terms and cultural specifics to the readers in footnotes or a glossary, a localization is usually much more targeted towards a specific target audience, usually one more unfamiliar with Japanese culture or terminology. As a result, some things in a localization are occasionally changed to make them more understandable to a western audience.

So, for example, I’m not going to fault the localization for changing Monosuke’s extremely heavy Kansai accent in Japanese to a New York accent in the English dub. It’s much easier for western players to immediately grasp that, “hey, this guy has a very specific regional accent that the other characters don’t,” and it works really well as a rough equivalent. Similarly, localization changes like changing a line here or there about the sport of sumo to be about the Jets and the Patriots also helps get the point across to players quickly and easily without having to explain an unfamiliar sport to western players in-depth before they can get the joke.

That being said… there were some liberties taken with ndrv3’s translation which I don’t believe fulfill the point of a localization, and which changed certain deliveries or even perceptions about the characters in a way that I just don’t agree with.

Let me explain first how the localization team actually worked, to people who might be unfamiliar with the process. Ndrv3 had four separate translators working on the localization. When NISA first announced that the game was being localized, these four translators introduced themselves on reddit in an AMA, where they also mentioned that they were by and large dividing up the 16 main characters between themselves, with each translator specifically assigned to four characters.

Having more translators working on a game might sound like a good idea in theory, but it’s often not. The more translators assigned to a game, the harder it is to provide a consistent translation. Translation is messy work: often there are multiple ways to translate the same sentence, or even the same word between two different languages. If a translation has multiple translators, that means they need to be communicating constantly with one another and referencing each other’s work all the time in order to avoid mistranslations: it’s difficult work, but not impossible.

However… this didn’t happen with ndrv3’s translation team. It’s pretty clear they did not reference each other’s work or communicate very well, and the translation suffers for it. I’m not just guessing here, either; it’s a fact that various parts of the game have lines completely ruined by not looking at the context, or words translated two different ways almost back-to-back. I’ll provide specific examples of this later.

Many of the translators also picked which characters they wanted to translate on the basis of which were their favorites—which, again, isn’t a bad thing in and of itself, but which does raise the risk of letting character bias influence your work. No work is inherently without bias; all translators have to look at their own biases and still attempt to translate fairly regardless. But because translators were assigned four characters each, this meant that while they might be really enthusiastic about translating for one character in particular, they were less enthusiastic for others. These biases do reflect in the work, and I will provide further examples as I make my list.

This system of delegation also leaves more questions than it answers. It becomes impossible to tell who translated certain parts of the game, particularly in areas where the narrator is unclear. For example, did Saihara’s translator translate Ouma’s motive video, as Saihara is the one watching it in chapter 6? Or did Ouma’s translator do it, since it’s his motive video? Who translated the parts we see at the beginning of certain chapters, where characters from the outside world make occasional comments? It’s really unclear, and I’m not even sure if the translators divvied up these parts amongst themselves or if only one person was supposed to handle them.

To put it simply, there were quite a lot of complications and worrying factors about the way the translation was divided by the team, and the communication (or lack thereof) between said translators. It’s impossible to really discuss the main problems that ndrv3’s localization has without making it clear why those problems happened, and I hope I’ve explained it well here.

With that out of the way, I’m finally going to cover the biggest differences between the original game and the localization, and why many of these changes were such a problem.

1.) Gonta’s Entire Character

To this day, I still feel like this is probably the most egregious change of the entire localization. Gonta does not talk like a caveman in Japanese. He does not even have a particularly limited vocabularly. He talks like a fairly normal, very polite high school boy, and the only stipulation is that he’s not very familiar with electronics or technology due to his backstory of “growing up in the woods away from humans.”

Gonta does refer to himself in the third-person in Japanese, but I need to stress this: this is a perfectly normal thing to do in Japanese. Many people do it all the time, and it has no bearing on a person’s intelligence or ability to speak. In fact, both Tenko and Angie also refer to themselves in the third-person in the Japanese version of the game, yet mysteriously use first-person pronouns in the localization.

I wouldn’t be so opposed to this change if it weren’t for the fact that Gonta’s entire character arc revolves around being so much smarter than people (even himself!) give him credit for. He constantly downplays his own abilities and contributions to the group despite being fairly knowledgeable, not only about entomology but also about nature and astronomy. He has a fairly good understanding of spatial reasoning and is one of the first people to guess how Toujou’s trick with the rope and tire worked in chapter 2.

Chapter 4 of ndrv3 is so incredibly painful because it makes it clear that while Gonta was, absolutely, manipulated by Ouma into picking up the flashback light, he nonetheless made the decision to kill Miu of his own accord. He was even willing to try and kill everyone else by misleading them in the trial, because he thought it was more merciful than letting them see the outside world for themselves. These were choices that he made, confirmed when we see Gonta’s AI at the end of the trial speak for himself and acknowledge that yes, he really did think the outside world was worth killing people over.

Gonta is supposed to be somewhat naïve and trusting, not stupid. He believes himself to be an idiot, and other characters often talk down to him or don’t take him seriously, but at the end of the day he’s a human being just like the rest of them, and far, far smarter and more capable of making his own decisions than anyone thought him capable of.

Translating all of his speech to “caveman” or “Tarzan speech” really downplays his ability to make decisions for himself, and I think it’s a big part of why I’ve seen considerably more western fans insist that he didn’t know what he was doing than Japanese fans. I love Gonta quite a lot, but I can’t get over the localization essentially changing his character to make him seem more stupid, instead of translating what was actually there in order to more accurately reflect his character.

2.) Added Some Slurs, Removed Others

It’s time to address the elephant in the room for people who don’t know: Momota is considerably homophobic and transphobic in the original Japanese version of the game. In chapter 2, he uses the word “okama” to refer to Korekiyo in an extremely derogatory fashion. This word has a history of both homophobic and transphobic sentiment in Japan, as it’s often used against flamboyant gay men and trans women, who are sadly and unfortunately conflated as being “the same thing” most of the time. To put it simply, the word has the equivalent of the weight of the t-slur and the f-slur in English rolled into one.

This isn’t the only instance of Momota being homophobic, sadly. In the salmon mode version of the game, should you choose the “let’s undress” option in the gym while with Momota, he has yet another line where he says, “You don’t swing that way, do you!?” to Saihara, using his most terrified and disgusted-looking sprite. This suggests to me that, yes, the homophobia was a deliberate choice in the Japanese version of the game, as Momota consistently reacts this way to even the idea of another guy showing romantic interest in him.

The English version more or less kept the salmon mode comment, but removed the use of the slur in chapter 2 entirely. Which I have… mixed feelings about. On the one hand, I am an LGBT person myself. I don’t want to read slurs if I can help it. On the other hand, I really don’t think the slur was removed out of consideration to the LGBT community so much as Momota’s translator really wanted to downplay any lines that could make his character come across in a more negative light.

This is backed up by the fact that both Miu and Ouma’s translators added slurs to the game that weren’t present in the original Japanese. Where Miu only ever refers to Gonta as “baka” (idiot) or occasionally, “ahou” (a slightly ruder word that still more or less equates to “moron”), her translator decided to add multiple instances of her using the r-slur to refer to Gonta specifically, and on one occasion, even the word “Mongoloid,” a deeply offensive and outdated term. Ouma’s translator similarly took lines where he was already speaking harshly of Miu and added multiple instances of words like “bitch” or “whore.”

To me, this suggests that the translators were completely free to choose how harsh or how likable they wanted their characters to come across. Momota’s translator omitting just the slur could maybe pass for a nice gesture, so people don’t have to read it and be uncomfortable—except, that’s not the only thing that was omitted. Instances of Momota being blatantly misogynistic or rude were also toned down to the point of covering up most of his flaws entirely. His use of “memeshii” against Hoshi (a word which means “cowardly” in Japanese with specifically feminine connotations, like the word “sissy” in English) is simply changed to “weak,” and when he calls Saihara’s trauma “kudaranai” (literally “worthless” or “bullshit”), this is changed to “trivial” in the localization.

Momota’s translator even went so far as to omit a line entirely from the chapter 2 trial, which I touched on in an earlier post. In the original version of the game, Ouma asks Momota dumbfounded if he’s really stupid enough to trust Maki without any proof and if he plans on risking everyone else’s lives in the trial if he turns out to be wrong. And Momota replies saying yes, absolutely, he’s totally willing to bet everyone’s lives on nothing more than a hunch because he thinks he’s going to be right no matter what.

This is a character flaw. It’s a huge, running theme with Momota’s character, and it’s brought up again in chapter 4 deliberately when Momota really does almost kill everyone in the trial because he refuses to believe that Ouma isn’t the culprit. But the localization simply omits it, leaving Momota to seem considerably less hard-headed and reckless in the English version of the game. If anyone wants proof that this line exists, it is still very much there in the Japanese dialogue, but it has no translation whatsoever. This goes beyond “translation decisions I don’t agree with”; omitting an entire line for a character simply because you want other people to like them more is just bad translation, period.

3.) Angie’s Religion

In the original Japanese version of the game, neither Angie’s god nor her religion have any specific names. She refers to her god simply as “god” in the general sense, and clearly changes aspects of their persona and appearance based on who she’s trying to convince to join her cult. Everything about her is pretty clearly fictionalized, from her island to the religious practices her cult does.

Kodaka’s writing with regard to Angie is already a huge mess. It feeds into a lot of harmful stereotypes about “crazy, exotic brown women” and “bloodthirsty savages,” but at the very least it never correlated with a specific religion or location in the original version of the game.

This all changed when Angie’s translator, for whatever reason, decided to make Angie be Polynesian specifically and appropriate from the real religion of real indigenous peoples native to Polynesia. That’s right: Atua is a real god that has very real significance to tons of indigenous peoples.

In my opinion, this decision was incredibly disrespectful. It spreads incredible misinformation about a god that is still very much a part of tons of real-life people’s religion, and associates it with cults? Blood rituals? Human sacrifices? It’s a terrible localization decision that wasn’t necessary whatsoever and to be quite frank, it’s racist and insensitive.

As I said, the original game never exactly had the peak of “good writing decisions” when it came to Angie; there are still harmful stereotypes with her character, and she deserved to be written so much better. But associating her with a real group of indigenous people and equating a real god to some fictional deity that’s mostly treated as either a scary cult-ish boogeyman or the punchline to a joke is just… bad.

4.) Ouma’s Motive Video

Some of the decisions taken with Ouma’s translation are… interesting, to say the least. In many ways, he feels like a completely different character between the two versions of the game. This is due not only to the translation, but also the voice direction and casting.

A lot of his lines are tweaked or changed entirely to make his character seem much louder, less serious, and less sincere than the original version of the game. Obviously, Ouma lies, a lot. That’s sort of the whole point of is character. But what I mean is that even lines in the original version of the game, where it was clear he was being truthful via softer delivery, trailing off the end of his sentences, and seeming overall hesitant about whether to divulge certain information or not are literally changed in the localization to him pretty much yelling at the top of his lungs, complete with tons of exclamation points on lines that originally ended with a question mark or ellipses.

Tonally, he just feels very different as a character. The “sowwy” speak, lines like “oopsie poopsie, I’m such a ditz!”—all of these things are taken to such ridiculous extremes that it feels a little hard to take him seriously. Even in the post-trial for chapter 4 when Ouma starts playing the villain after Gonta’s death, a moment which should have been completely serious and intense, the mood is kind of completely killed when the line is changed from him calling everyone a bunch of idiots to him calling everyone…. “stupidheads.” These changes don’t really seem thematically appropriate to me, but overall, they’re not damning.

What is damning, however, is the fact that Ouma’s motive video is completely mistranslated and provides a very poor picture of what his motivations and ideals were like. I still remember being shocked when I played the localization for the first time and discovered that they completely omitted a line stating that Ouma and DICE have a very specific taboo against murder.

Literally, this is one of the very first lines in the entire video. The Japanese version of the game makes it explicitly clear that DICE were forbidden to kill people, and that abiding by this rule was extremely important to them. By contrast, the localization simply makes a nod about him doing “petty nonviolent crimes and pranks,” without ever once mentioning anything at all about rules or taboos.

This feels especially egregious in the localization considering Saihara later uses Ouma’s motive video as evidence in the chapter 6 trial and states there that Ouma and DICE “had a rule against killing people,” despite the game… never actually telling you that. It not only skews the perception of Ouma’s character at a crucial moment, it also just straight-up lies to localization players and expects them to make leaps in logic without actually providing the facts. So it winds up sort of feeling like Saihara is just pulling these assumptions out of his ass more than anything else.

I actually still have my original translation of Ouma’s motive video here, if anyone would like to compare. Again, translation is a tricky line of work, and obviously not all translators are going to agree with one another. But I consider omitting lines entirely to be one of the worst things you can do in a translation, particularly in a mystery game where people are expected to solve said mysteries based on the information and facts provided to them.

5.) Inconsistencies and Lack of Context

As I mentioned earlier, there are many instances of lines being completely mistranslated, or translated two different ways by multiple translators, or addressed to the wrong character. This is, as I stated, due to the way the translation work was divided by four separate people who appear to have not communicated with each other or cross-referenced each other’s work.

One of the clearest examples of this that I can think of off the top of my head is in chapter 3, where Ouma mentions “doing a little research” on the Caged Child ritual, and Maki in the very next line repeats him by saying… “study?”

On their own, removed from any context, these would both potentially be correct translations. However, it’s very clear that the translators just didn’t care to look at the context, or communicate with each other and share their work. The fact that characters aren’t even quoting each other properly in lines that are back-to-back is a pretty big oversight, and something that should have been accounted for knowing that four separate people were going to be translating various different characters.

This lack of context causes other, even more hilarious and blatantly wrong mistranslations. At the start of the chapter 3 trial, there is a line where Momota mentions that he couldn’t perform a thorough investigation on his own “because Monokuma disrupted him.” In the original, Ouma responds and tells Momota that he’s just using Monokuma as an excuse to cover for his own flaws. However, what we actually got in the localization was… this.

I don’t even have words for how badly this line was butchered (though I could make several hilarious jokes about Monokuma “over-compensating”). Presumably, this happened because Ouma’s translator saw Ouma’s line without any of the lines before it or the context of what Momota was saying, had no clue who Ouma was actually supposed to be talking to, and just ad-libbed it however they could, even though it literally makes no sense and doesn’t even fit into the conversation.

There are other similar instances of this, too. For example, did you know that the scene after Saihara faints in chapter 2, just before he wakes up in Gonta’s lab, is actually supposed to have Ouma talking to him? The narrator is unnamed, but there are several lines just before Saihara wakes up where Ouma tells him “come on, you can’t die on me yet!” and keeps prodding him and poking him to wake up. This is never explicitly told to you from the text… but it becomes pretty obvious when you look at the context and see that a huge CG of Ouma looking over Saihara as he starts to wake up is the very next part of the scene.

In the localization, however, Saihara’s translator pretty clearly had no idea what was happening or who was supposed to be talking to him, because they translated those lines as Saihara talking to himself, even though the manner of speech and phrasing is clearly supposed to be Ouma instead.

I could go on and on listing other examples: Tsumugi makes a joke in the original about Miu being able to dish out dirty jokes but not being very good at hearing them herself, but it’s changed in the localization to Tsumugi saying “I’m not so good with that kind of stuff,” and a line where Momota protests against Maki choking Ouma because she’ll kill him if she keeps going is instead changed to him saying “you’ll get killed if you don’t stop!” In my opinion, the fact that this is a consistent problem throughout the whole game shows that the translators weren’t really communicating or working together at any point, and that it wasn’t simply a one-time mistake here or there.

6.) Edited CGs and Plot Points

I have made an entirely separate post about this in the past, but at this point I don’t think anyone actually knows anymore: the localization actually edited in-game CGs and made some of them completely different from the Japanese version of the game. I’m not accusing them of “censorship” or anything like that, I mean quite literally that they altered and edited specific CGs to try and fix certain problems with them and only ended up making them worse in the process.

In chapter 5, Momota gets shot in the arm by Maki’s crossbow when trying to defend Ouma, and Ouma gets shot in the back shortly afterward when attempting to make a run for the Exisals. These injuries are relevant to how they died, but they’re not actually very visible in the CGs of Ouma and Momota shown later in the chapter 5 trial.

There are a whole bunch of inconsistencies with the CGs in chapter 5 in general: Momota gives Ouma his jacket to lie on under the press, but is magically still wearing it when he emerges from the Exisal himself at the end of the trial (I like to think he snuck back into the dorms Solid Snake style to get a new one from his room before joining the trial), the cap to the antidote is still on the bottle when Ouma pretends to drink it in front of Maki and Momota, etc. None of these things really deter from the plot though, and so I would say they’re fairly unimportant.

However, for some reason, NISA decided that “fixing” at least some of the CGs in the chapter 5 trial was necessary. They did this by adding bloodstains to Momota’s arm while he’s under the press, to better show his injury from the crossbow…. and in doing so, for some completely inexplicable reason, they changed the entire position of his arm. Here’s what I mean for comparison:

This is how Momota’s arm looked in the original CG from chapter 5, shown when the camcorder is provided as evidence that it’s “Ouma” under the press.

And this is how the localization edited it to look. I can understand and even sympathize with adding the bloodstains, but… changing the entire arm itself? Moving it to be sticking out from under the press? To put it nicely, this change doesn’t make any sense and actually makes it harder to understand Ouma and Momota’s plan.

The whole trick behind their plan was that nothing was supposed to stick out from under the press, other than Momota’s jacket. They waited until the instant when the press completely covered every part of Momota’s body, arms and all, and then performed the switch to mislead people. But the edited version of the CG in the localization just has Momota’s arm sticking completely out, hanging over the side, meaning it would’ve been impossible for the press to hide every part of it and the whole switch feels… well, stupid and impossibly easy to see through in the localized version.

Again, this shows a total disregard for presenting the facts as they actually appear and actually makes things more difficult for English players of the game, because they’re not being given accurate information. I really don’t understand why these changes were necessary, or why the bloodstains couldn’t have just been added without moving Momota’s entire arm.

7.) In Conclusion

This has gotten extremely long (nearly 10 pages), so I want to wrap things up. I want to specify that my intention with this masterlist isn’t to insult or badmouth the translators who worked on this game. I’m sure they worked very hard, and I have no idea what time or budget constraints they were facing as they did so.

Being a translator is not easy, and typically translators are not very well-paid or recognized for their work. I have the utmost respect for other translators, and I know perfectly well just how difficult and taxing it can be.

I am making this list because these are simply changes which were very different from the original version of the game, and which I believe could have been handled better. Personally, I disagree with many of the choices the localization made, but that does not mean that they didn’t do a fantastic job in other places. I absolutely love whichever translator was responsible for coming up with catchphrases and nicknames throughout the game: little localization decisions like “cospox,” “flashback light,” “Insect Meet n’ Greet,” and “cosplaycat criminal” were all strokes of genius that I highly admire.

I only want to stress that the Japanese version of the game is very different. Making changes to the way a character is presented or portrayed means influencing how people are going to react to said character. Skewing the information and facts presented in trials in the game means changing people’s experience of the game, and giving them less facts to go off of. Equating fictional gods to real-life ones can cause real harm and influence perception of real indigenous peoples. These are all facts that need to be accounted for before deciding whether a certain change is necessary or not, in my opinion.

If you’ve read this far, thank you! Again, feel free to share this post around if you’d like, since this is probably the most comprehensively I’ve ever covered this topic.

#danganronpa #new danganronpa v3 #dangan ronpa #ndrv3 spoilers //#ask #anonymous #this isn't meta but it's IS a comprehensive masterlist of translation comparisons #so i think it's okay to post in the tag #okay to reblog

675 notes · View notes

crossdreamers · 4 years

Text

What the TV series “It’s a Sin” tells us about the tactics of anti-trans activists today

Over at Twitter Owen Jones reflects on the way the history of bigotry is repeating. The new British TV series It’s a Sin reminds him of how the tactics once used against gay and lesbian people is now used against trans and nonbinary folks.

Owen Peter Jones is a British newspaper columnist, commentator, journalist and political activist.

It's a Sin is a British television drama serial written and created by Russell T Davies. It is about the queer community in the 1980′s London.

Owen writes:

One of the most important themes in 'It's A Sin' was about gay/bi people and shame - caused by growing up in a society that saw gay/bi people as would-be sexual predators, violators of biological reality, threats to children, immoral, deviants, and generally undesirable.

While HIV rates remain significantly higher among gay and bisexual men, treatments now allow those with HIV to live healthy lives. Alcohol and drug abuse as a response to shame and trauma caused by homophobia is today a bigger problem in Western nations.

It's important to make this point because the evidence suggests that mental distress is even more acute amongst trans people, who are today the most marginalised and oppressed part of the LGBTQ+ world.

Anti-trans activists use the same arguments as the homophobes

Today, anti-trans activists play the exact same songs about trans people: that they are would-be sexual predators, violators of biological reality, threats to children, immoral, deviants, and generally undesirable.

Some of those anti-trans activists responded viscerally to being called out for enjoying It's A Sin. They are furious at being compared to the monsters who victimised gay people, even as they obsessively target trans people in the same papers that obsessively targeted gay people.

Some of them point to their past association with pro-gay struggles, or in some cases simply that they have been to gay bars before, as though any of this gives them a lifetime freedom pass to say whatever they like about other minorities.

But as It's A Sin shows, a society which made gay people feel unwelcome - as burdens at best and as menaces at worst - inflicts terrible damage on gay people. The same is being done to trans people.

However those who, in some cases, spend a genuinely huge amount of their lives talking about trans people as would-be predators or threats to children justify it to themselves, they are inflicting the same injuries on trans people as It's A Sin underlined is done to gay people.

The quadrupling of transphobic hate crimes, the 48% of trans people who fear using public toilets, the trans people discriminated against at work, the quarter who've suffered homelessness, all of this is erased from the "conversation", such as it is.

Even the focus on contexts which don't affect 99.9% of trans people - but which are used to attack all of them - namely prisons and sports deliberately excludes questions like 'Why are there no trans Olympic medallists?' or 'How do we stop trans prisoners being assaulted?'

Inflicting the same damage

The hounders of trans people may hate It's A Sin being used to hand them a mirror. But the anti-trans faction, who operate strikingly like a cult, are not only singing the same tunes - they are inflicting the exact same damage on trans people as gay people have long suffered.

oh and I've set this so only people who follow me can reply because, although anti-trans activists have made a conscious decision to relentlessly and obsessively target me, and I can live with that, I don't want trans people to have to sift through their bile.

“Gender critical” parents who are harming their kids

Some other thoughts.

One of the most powerful themes towards the end of It's A Sin is Ritchie's mother being confronted by Jill for the damage she inflicted on her gay son, suggesting that the shame she instilled in him helped drive behaviour that led to his infection with HIV.

"Actually it is your fault, Mrs Tozer," says Jill. "All of this is your fault." Jill adds: "The wards are full of men who think they deserve it."

She was right. So many of the gay and bisexual men who died often lonely deaths in hospital wards were traumatised by their parents.

Today, most gay people have gay friends who have mental trauma which often leads to alcohol and drug abuse with absolutely catastrophic consequences. Many, all too many, have had friends who've died from suicide. The culprits? Society in general but often parents in particular.

It's A Sin showcased the LGBTQ family, of other LGBTQ friends filling a vacuum left by the absence of a loving family. A big role of that 'family' is to pick up the pieces because of the damage inflicted by parents on their children.

When parents refuse to properly accept their LGBTQ children for who they are, they insert ticking time bombs in many of them. That bomb may detonate in their 20s, their 30s, their 40s, who knows, maybe in their 50s or 60s. But in many of them, it will detonate.

This is why there is a genuine horror watching self-described "gender critical" parents ranting about trans people on the internet. Because I can't help but think, oh god, what if they have trans children. What damage will be inflicted upon them.

In some cases, the bigotry of anti-trans activists - often radicalised by newspaper columnists, online rabbit holes, and somewhat perversely, Mumsnet - will collide with reality. Read this about an ex-'gender critical' activist and their trans nephew.

But in other cases, transphobic parents will stick determinedly to their guns and inflict the same damage on their trans children as homophobic parents have always inflicted on their gay children. We should be clear: homophobia and transphobia are forms of child abuse.

Hiding behind the argument of protecting their children

Both traditional homophobes and contemporary transphobes claimed they were protecting the welfare of children. As anti-gay campaigner Anita Bryant declared: "As a mother, I know that homosexuals cannot biologically reproduce children; therefore, they must recruit our children".

Today's anti-trans activists use the language of 'safeguarding' and often suggest that parents know what's best for their children. This is clearly not always the case. Lots of children need to be protected from their parents. That includes many LGBTQ children.

So when this Times journalist attacked Mermaids, a charity supporting young trans people, for including an 'exit button', suggesting it was 'a major safeguarding breach'. Many LGBTQ children don't have supportive parents and need to hide their identity away from them.

Anti-trans rhetoric echoes anti-gay arguments

Anti-gay rights campaigners long focused on the danger posed by predatory gay men to vulnerable children, and pointed to scandals in, for example, the Scouts and the Catholic Church as evidence. Today, anti-trans activists similarly extrapolate extreme cases to make their case.

In the 1980s, it was claimed an all-powerful gay lobby was putting political correctness ahead of people's well-being. The same language is used about the objectively marginalised trans minority today. The second screenshot is from this weekend's Times newspaper.

That's why so many gay people stand up for trans people. Trans people, of course, are in our shared LGBTQ spaces, and their experiences do differ in important ways - but we see them going through the exact same things we've gone through.

It is, frankly, grotesque that gay people who for very obvious reasons stand with their trans siblings are then vilified as misogynists, or have obvious homophobic tropes about wanting to endanger children's safety thrown at them.

It's also perverse that many of the same people publicly cooing over It's A Sin are the same people trying to hound the LGBTQ allies of trans people out of the media (they can't really do this to trans people because there are very few trans people in the media).

LGB people attacking trans people

As for the LGB people who participate in the hounding of trans people. There have long been examples of oppressed groups who participate in oppression, often against themselves: women against the Equal Rights Amendment and feminism, right-wing black Republicans, and so on.

These anti-trans LGB activists are not only completely unrepresentative of LGBTQ people: many queer bars and spaces bar people who express their bigoted opinions for very obvious reasons: to ensure they're safe spaces for the whole LGBTQ rainbow.

Watching straight people try and foment a civil war within the LGBTQ world by platforming these completely marginal bigoted zealots is actually completely and utterly grotesque.

Finally (!) in the 1980s, almost the whole media was anti-gay, and public opinion was overwhelmingly anti-gay. Today, almost the whole media is anti-trans, but while transphobia is rampant, anti-trans sentiment is not as widespread as anti-gay sentiment back then. There's hope!

But it takes huge courage to speak out in support of trans people in Britain in 2021. One day, there will be TV programmes about the onslaught against trans people. Those who victimised trans people today will be portrayed in them. They'll go down in history as hate figures.

Sadly, it's too late to save all too many LGBTQ people who had ticking time bombs inserted into them both by society and by their homophobic and transphobic parents. They detonated. But we can save others from that fate. So speak up.

Read the whole thread with other comments here!

Read also Michael Cashman: Loss and anger raged in me after watching It’s a Sin – the stigma we faced in the 1980s is now being directed at trans people

Photo of Owen Jones: Antonio Olmos/The Observer

youtube

#trans #transgender #lgbt #lgbtqa #transphobia #homophobia #terf #terfs #gender critical #lgb alliance

251 notes · View notes

kirain · 5 years

Text

Hazbin Hotel and VivziePop Drama

I've been hearing/seeing a lot of drama concerning Hazbin Hotel and it's creator VivziePop, and while I don't know her personally or really care what people think, I do hate slander and the spread of misinformation. Truly nothing in this world upsets me more than when people believe rumours while making no effort to fact check, and that's exactly what's happening right now. That said, I wanted to try and clear up some of the rumours going around about Vivzie and the show, because I think some of them are absolutely outrageous and need to be addressed.

1. Vivzie hired an abuser onto the show.

Now, I’m not here to burn anyone at the stake, especially since I don’t know anything about Chris Niosi (the alleged abuser), who I believe openly admitted to the allegations? Regardless, this is a moot point. He’s not credited anywhere at the end of the episode. So either he was booted before production wrapped up or he had nothing to do with the show in the first place.

2. Vivzie supports bestiality.

Admittedly I thought this one might be true, since she draws so many anthropomorphic animals. In the very least, I figured she was probably a furry, but I haven't seen any evidence supporting this accusation either. Near as I can tell, this rumour started for two reasons. One, because of her famous Zoophobia comic, which revolves around a therapist named Cameron who gets assigned to work with human-like animals. Ironically, poor Cameron suffers from crippling zoophobia, which makes for some pretty decent comedy. I didn't read the whole comic because, quite frankly, it’s not my cup of tea and I just don’t have the time. But from what I saw there are no examples of bestiality anywhere in its contents.

Two, this message, which blew up all over social media:

To me, this just proves that people are more interested in virtue signalling than checking to see if their claims are actually true. Everything about this message is 100% false, which I’ll touch on in my next point.

3. Vivzie is a pedophile and she’s drawn child porn.

This is hands down the worst allegation and holy shit, I really wish people would stop using it to defame someone when they don't have any proof. This is a life-ruining accusation and you're disgusting if you believe it based solely on hearsay. This rumour began to spread when Vivzie allegedly shipped the two underage characters in the above photo and drew them NSFW-style. At the time, one character was 19 while the other was 14, and the relationship was a very illegal student-teacher relationship.

This is WRONG! The characters were not 14 and 19, they were actually 18 and 19, the legal age of consent! Additionally, the relationship wasn't student-teacher. One character is a student and the other is Alumni (a student teacher). This one pisses me off the most because it’s obvious the person who sent that message didn’t even bother to conduct any research. They said, “He’s a teacher, she’s a child.” Both characters are MALE!

Since then, Vivzie has apologised for any NSFW art she drew in the past and stated that it's not a reflection of her art today, and I'm inclined to believe her. Almost every artist has drawn NSFW content at some point in their career, and hers wasn't even distasteful. Other than this one example, there is no evidence anywhere that suggests she’s drawn “child porn”. In fact, she’s never even drawn explicit NSFW.

Please stop spreading this rumour. It’s dangerous and completely incorrect.

4. Vivzie said the "N" word!

No, she didn’t. It was a fabricated tweet. That is all.

5. Vivzie is copyright striking every video that criticises her!

No she isn't. YouTube’s DMCA is automatically striking people who are using full clips without permission. Vivzie has gone public several times, telling people exactly how to avoid getting a copy strike from the algorithm, which is something she absolutely does not have to do. At this point, she doesn't owe you anything. In my opinion, she should just sit back and watch these channels burn.

6. Vivzie copies and traces other artists’ work.

This is another one I’ve seen going around, but I looked into it as thoroughly as I could and failed to find any concrete evidence to support the allegations. As of right now, there are only two examples of Vivzie “copying” or “tracing” other artists’ work, and both of them can be explained. The first is a gif she made with a character from her Zoophobia comic, which looked a lot like the girl from ME!ME!ME!:

Damn, that’s pretty incriminating. She obviously stole-- oh, wait. This gif was part of a ME!ME!ME! MEP (multi editor’s project) and Vivzie didn’t take full credit, despite the fact that it’s not even a direct trace. It’s supposed to look like the original, which she fully cited. The second example comes from a short dance sequence from her Timber video, which seems to have been inspired by several Disney movies. As Vivzie herself stated, that was an homage to the original animations. Lots of artists and shows do this, including the beloved Stephen Universe series.

Regardless, this doesn’t count as stealing character designs or plagiarising someone’s work. It’s meant to be respectful, an admiration of other projects. Other than these two instances, however, there is no evidence of her tracing or stealing other people’s art. From what I’ve discovered, all other designs she’s been accused of “stealing” are characters she bought and paid for. They’re quite literally HER characters.

7. Vivzie supports problematic creators.

I’m getting really tired of guilt by association. Vivzie follows and enjoys some controversial figures, but who cares? We can argue all day about whether or not the accusations against them are true, but it ultimately has nothing to do with the show or Vivzie as a person. I do the exact same thing, to be honest-- follow and listen to people on all sides so I can learn, understand, and form my own opinions. The fact that some people think this is bad, to me, is absolutely mesmerising. Vivzie doesn’t control what the people she follows post, and if they do something overly questionable she publicly criticises and denounces it.

From Vivzie:

Now that that’s been dealt with, I’d like to address some complaints/claims about the actual show.

8. Vaggie is an angry Latina stereotype and a lesbian stereotype. Vivzie is appropriating Hispanic culture and misrepresenting the gay for profit.

First off, I see a lot of people passing around yet more misinformation regarding Vivzie's race. So many people seem to think she's white? Well, I'm here to tell you they're wrong. Very incorrect. Vivzie is in fact Latina, and Vaggie is meant to mirror some of her own personality traits.

Second, who is Vaggie mad at? Context matters, and if we take a look at the episode, we see that Vaggie is literally only mad at two specific people: Angel Dust and Alastor. Why? Well, for starters, it's her girlfriend's dream to run a rehab hotel for sinners, and Angel Dust nearly demolishes that dream single-handedly. Vaggie has every right to be over-the-top vitriolic. Then there's Alastor, a known sadist, narcissist, and murderer who loves trapping people in his nefarious schemes. He invites himself in, effectively takes over the hotel, and pushes both her and Charlie aside. At one point he even sexually assaults her by slapping her butt during his musical number. So yeah, I think her seething ire is totally justified. Keep in mind, however, that when she's around Charlie she's calm, collected, and happy. I wouldn't call that a stereotype.

Thirdly, the lesbian stereotypes. I keep hearing this argument but I really don't see it. Both Vaggie and Charlie have so much personality and trust for each other. Maybe I'm wrong, but the stereotype I know always totes a more butch, tomboyish woman with a ditsy, innocent, naive woman. Charlie is optimistic, but she isn't stupid. She refuses to shake Alastor’s hand because she knows he’s likely trying to screw her over. She’s also not entirely innocent herself and uses words like “fuck” and “shit”. I also wouldn’t call Vaggie butch or tomboyish. She has a cute, girly presentation, complete with a pink ribbon in her hair, lace stockings, and a dress. She's protective of her girlfriend, as I think we all are with our partners, and there's nothing wrong with that. They're flawed characters, as every character is meant to be. This isn't a problem.

9. The show is racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, blah, blah, blah.

I’m amazed this is even an argument. The show is supposed to be a dark comedy that takes place in HELL. You know, the place the worst of the worst end up after they die? What were you expecting? Everyone gets a shot or two fired at them, but that doesn't make them bad characters nor does it make the show itself horrible. Take, for example, Katie Killjoy, the news reporter so many people are up in arms about. She says she doesn’t “touch the gays” because she has “standards”. Well, here’s a newsflash of my own: we’re not supposed to like her! She’s an antagonist. Not to mention ten seconds later Charlie insults her and isn’t the least bit slighted by her pretentious attitude. The characters are strong and don’t take shit from anyone, because to some degree they’re all terrible people who can throw down when it’s called for.

Obviously if you don’t like the show or think it’s offensive, I’m probably not going to change your mind. That’s perfectly fine. You’re entitled to your opinions and you don’t have to watch the show. Just stop lying and stop trying to take it away from everybody else. Stop attacking Vivzie and spreading misinformation without checking the facts. I realise a lot of people probably aren’t trying to be vindictive and only want to do something good, but just remember this: the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

#hazbin hotel #vivziepop #vivzie #alastor #angel dust #vaggie #charlie #timber #stephen universe #drama #radio demon

14K notes · View notes

august-persona · 3 years

Text

More Witch Week Epiphanies (I'm losing track at this point)

Some time ago, I wanted to write a little essay (I feel weird calling it an "essay," makes this sound scholarly and not at all like the ramblings of a hyper fixated 15-year-old, but that's what it is) on the queer-coding in Witch Week. I got very busy and sort of forgot about it. Recently, I've been thinking about it more, and realizing just how much mental health plays into the themes of Witch Week as well as homophobia.

In the world of Witch Week, you cannot tell a witch just by looking at them. Witchcraft is not tied to any ethnicity, sex, religion, etc. Anyone could be a witch and you'd have no idea unless they told you. Of course, some people seem to be more obviously a witch than others. Everyone assumes Nan is a witch (and they are right), but even then they really have no way to be sure. There's also the way that witch history is banned, stifled, twisted to fit a certain narrative. The book asserts that this is all very wrong. Witches cannot help being born witches. It's simply not healthy for a society with so many witches - a society where witchcraft is intrinsic to so many people's lives - to persecute that witchcraft so harshly.

Now replace the words "witch" and "witchcraft" in that paragraph with "gay, queer, lgbtq+."

The themes of Witch Week are very relatable to the lgbtq+ community. You cannot tell that someone is gay or otherwise just by looking at them. There are people who are assumed to be queer based on how they act or look (and you might be right), but there's no way to be sure. Anyone of any ethnicity, sex, religion, etc., could be lgbtq+.

Lgbtq+ history, similarly to the history of witches in this story, has also been frequently banned, stifled, twisted to fit a certain narrative by society at large.

Homophobia is harmful. It hurts everyone living within a society where these bigoted mindsets are the norm, even straight and cisgender people.

Now, onto the topic of mental illness. It was no new revelation to me that many - if not all the kids - at Larwood House have, or at the very least exhibit some symptoms of, various mental disorders. The book even says at the beginning that Larwood House is a school for witch orphans and children with "other problems." Nan is schooled at Larwood House because she is a witch orphan; Charles is schooled at Larwood House because his parents sent him there, presumably due to his "other problems." The book was a bit vague on this. It mentions Charles becoming standoffish after his encounter with the second witch, and his parents being concerned that he was a bad influence on his siblings, but there are certainly more elements at play.

Along with being queer-coded (more on that some other time) there are many instances in the book where Charles is obviously in a dissociated state. Charles often references this 'other part' of himself, which splits away from him when he is distressed. Sometimes Charles floats away while the other part of himself does the talking and walking and such; in other instances Charles is present but aware that a split has occured.

Charles clearly has a personality disorder, one which is probably the result of his traumatic childhood experiences and further exacerbated by Larwood House's awful environment. He has no good friends, and his emotional needs often go unchecked by teachers and peers alike. Charles often wonders how no one ever seems to notice when he 'splits.'

You cannot tell that someone is mentally ill, or neurodivergent (some mental disorders aren't so harmful to one's life that they are ill) just by looking at them. Anyone of any ethnicity, sex, religion, etc., could have a mental disorder. Of course, some people seem more likely to have a mental disorder than others based on the symptoms they exhibit, but even then you may not know for sure what exactly is going on.

The only time anyone realizes something is up with Charles, is when he self-harms in view of the boys in his dorm. Even then they only conclude that Charles must be pretty stupid to do such a thing to himself, and think not much more than that.

Then there's the ways in which mental disorders have been demonized (and more recently romanticized, but that's a whole other beast) and twisted to fit narratives in mainstream culture which are often harmful to people with those disorders - should the concept of mental disorders and neuro divergence even be addressed in the first place - in order to cater to a neurotypical audience and a society which would often like to promote the idea that people with trauma and mental turmoil should simply choose to be unaffected by these sufferings, and should the "mentally ill" ever display symptoms or behavior deemed to be inconvenient due to their disorders, it is a moral failing on their part and not a failing of their caregivers and authority to provide them with help.

Or, that the mentally ill simply need to be locked up because they are no use to society; or even done away with entirely because how could they be any more than inconvenient, and quite possibly dangerous.

In cases of people whose disorders are not harmful to themselves or others, there is often an idea that their unusual behavior must be 'fixed' (got rid of entirely) to prevent inconvenience.

These are attitudes often applied to lgbtq+ folks as well. That queerness is a moral failing, or that queer people need to be locked up, or that their queerness must be 'cured.' If not considered a sin, homosexuality was considered a mental illness for a very long time. 'Homosexuals' were thought to be dangerous, and best kept locked away or done away with. Then there's the "trans women are actually just predatory men" storyline that's been unfortunately popular lately.

Parents are still kicking lgbtq+ kids out onto the street, telling their own children they're going to hell. Lgbtq+ kids are still being sent to conversion camps in some places. Lgbtq+ people are still bullied, killed, arrested, executed, around the world.

Mental disorders and neuro divergence is a present aspect of many queer people's lives. And no, not because homosexuality = derangement - but because some people with mental disorders just so happen to also be queer; or due to the fact that queer people tend to be more susceptible to trauma, end up developing mental disorders more frequently.

What's interesting about Witch Week is that Charles' disorder is not linked to him inherently being a witch, but to how his witch-phobic society traumatized him and led him to develop his disorder.

That's pretty neat. Consider the sheer quantity of media which depicts queer and queer-coded characters as being deranged. Even when the narrative does not outrightly state "gay = psycho," the connection is still made in the viewer's mind, overtly or subconsciously. And rarely is the distinction made that the Evil Psycho Gay ended up mentally ill not because of the fact they're gay, but because of the way their homophobic culture traumatized them.

Then there's Witch Week, a book featuring a subtle but excellent portrayal of a child living with an unaddressed personality disorder in the character of Charles; a character who also happens to be queer-coded; a character who is not the antagonist, but one of the protagonists; in a book which makes it altogether very clear that it is not the fact that any of these characters are inherently witches (witchcraft = lgbtq+) that they lash out in ways that are harmful to themselves or others, but that these harmful behaviors are perpetuated by the bigoted society they live in.

#diana wynne jones #dwj #chrestomanci #witch week #witch week epiphanies #lgbtq #mental health #the chronicles of chrestomanci

63 notes · View notes

jade-it-queen · 3 years

Text

Jade. The fate of female character in Mortal Kombat

It’s been a while since I posted anything on my blog cause I’ve been busy with my life and rapid changes in it. During this time, I’ve watched the new 2021 Mortal Kombat movie as well as the new animation Battle of the realms and also rewatched the Story Mode of MK11 a few times. As you probably can tell, I have a lot to say.

JADE. MILEENA. KITANA. SONYA.

Skip this if you don’t want to read my very important (and long as sh*t) rant about female characters in MK.

DISCLAIMER. This thing is going to sound extremely feminist and women-supremacist or whatever. By saying things that I’m going to say, I by no means think that male characters should be weak or lacking. If anything, it would be nice to have some godforsaken EQUALITY. I’ll explain further later.

Part One: Mortal Kombat (2021)

There’s no Jade in this movie.

The end. That should be the sole reason I dislike it.

However, it might be better this way since the Nitara and Mileena portrayals in this movie are... questionable to say the least. Okay, y’all been robbed. If MY JADE would be brought into this movie to BE THERE for like 4 minutes of screen time only to get absolutely brutal FATALITY I. would. be. pissed.

More than I already am and that means something.

Sure, there’s a possibility that she’s going to be present in some of the upcoming movies because this one is definitely not the only one they’re going to make. But do I want that? Yes. And no.

Mortal Kombat movies (and Mortal Kombat in general) have a problem with women portrayal in general. The target audience for them are MEN, potentially heterosexual men, who want nothing more than bloody gorey fighting scenes with occasional sex scene here and there. To achieve that, they need a female lead, an attractive, kinda kick-assish but not too much, to not overshadow the absolutely badass men characters. Girls tend to be “independent” (because God forbid they’d want to express interest in the male leads before the time is right), sarcastic, laid back and sometimes even bitchy. Because, you see, they are fighters. And they are Sonya Blade. They need NO MAN. They just need plot armor, bigger than America itself. And if they’re not Sonya Blade, they are... non existent. They are there, but they are never really there. Here, let me walk on screen for a couple seconds. Let me sit beside Very Important Male Character (aka Shang Tsung) for a couple of seconds, looking absolutely gorgeous. Let me have a fight scene in which I make choices so f*cking stupid there’s no potential explanation to it. I exist in this movie to make people that love me (this character) to come into theatres in hopes to see some good action and interesting plot.

Now, I wasn’t born yesterday, I know how the world works. It’S bEeN LiKe ThAt FoReVeR, gEt OvEr here iT. Yeah, it’s been like that forever and the result is a mediocre movie that pleases neither the casual viewer, nor the actual Mortal Kombat fan. I don’t know, there might be guys who just saw Kung Lao’s fatality on Nitara, thought to themselves “Neat” and went on with their lives. But I exited the cinema with a sour taste in my mouth, feeling like I’ve watched one of the “fighting genre” films based on video games that had nothing worth remembering. Well, besides Kano. He was my favourite part of this movie and I normally can’t stand the guy :’D

Would it really help if they changed the way the women were portrayed? I mean - is that the ACTUAL problem of the movie? No, women being the eye candy and barely something else (if they’re not Sonya Blade) are not the only problem it suffers from. It’s that MK has been going the same route, retelling the same goddamn story for the millionth time. It’s always THE SAME. The only thing changing is who’s gonna get brutally killed. But - of course - out of the “disposable” character pool. It’s never Sonya (because you need our female lead or else there would be no female characters in the story), who ya know could be killed by Mileena but magically WASN’T. Because Mileena FOR SOME REASON was like: Ya know what? Naaah. Even though Sonya’s from Earthrealm and is actively trying to stop you. If anything, kill her because she annoys you. BUT NAH. It’s never Liu Kang because he’s the Chosen One. But killing Kung Lao is fine, he can die so Liu can awaken or smth. It’s not the main character because how else can you portray THE MAGIC OF LOVE AND FRIENDSHIP? Ya, that’s what I thought, don’t even think about it.

You have an amazing universe, filled to the brim with SO. MUCH. POTENTIAL. Let go of the same boring plot line and show us Kombat from another perspective. Change something. F*ck, go all feminist route and make a story center around Mileena dominating the world. Try with different versions of the same story, making it center around different character each time.

SURE, YOU’LL PROBABLY LOSE SOME VIEWERS BUT TIMES ARE CHANGING, AND MOST OF US ARE TIRED TO PAY FOR THE SAME STORY OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

Part Two: Mortal Kombat Legends: Battle of the Realms

Jesus f*cking Christ.

To say this film was rushed is an understatement. While I was watching it, I was like: TF? Everything happens all at once, we have Kuai Liang-Scorpion story line, we have Outworld’s attack, the tournament, not to mention the final fight that should be whole another movie. I felt like no story line was properly laid out, some of the characters died before I got to even know them and the battles were... disappointing. I believe they needed to push this movie out so they squished in everything they had and just went with it.

But, again, this movie just repeats the same things as its live action version. Let me lay it down for you:

Kung Lao dies (because yes)

Sonya Blade lives (because yes)

Jade is just there (more of it later)

disposable characters are disposed of

Liu Kang is badass and always wins

You watch it and feel like you’ve already seen it before. Sure, gore is fine, human Raiden is precious and need to be protected at all costs and adrenaline is pumping (I guess).

BUT NOW.

You know what’s coming.

JADE.

My f*cking piece of sunshine, the gorgeous goddess of beauty and kombat, the woman who owns my heart.

She’s there for like not even a minute.

Words can’t describe how f*cking PISSED I am by this portrayal. These motherfrickers put her in EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE SNIPPET OF THIS MOVIE. HER BATTLE WAS IN THE TRAILER, ONE OF THE SNEAK PEEKS WAS A SCENE OF HER AND KITANA.

TURNS OUT EVERYTHING I SAW BEFORE THE MOVIE WAS RELEASED... WAS EVERYTHING I WAS ABOUT TO SEE OF HER!!!!

THEY MADE ME HYPED UP FOR NOTHING!!!!!!

I know I’m not the only one riding this trolley. Li Mei was there just to be killed. Kung Lao had a f*cking single dialogue line and then BAM, fatality, buh-bye. But I was watching everything of this movie, being so enormously happy that I will finally see Jade in the movies, FINALLY! Only for her to be present in a single scene, get her ass kicked by Liu Kang (what’s new) and then she’s never seen again, even when the whole f*cking world is breaking apart.

Again. She’s just there. Ladies and gentlemen, one of the best Shao Kahn’s assassins, gets her ass kicked in fourty seconds. They NEVER let her speak ffs. She just spews some general villanous sh*t and proceeds to step on Johnny. Then, she just goes Observer mode as Kitana “betrays” Shao Kahn, gets tied to the column and then the world is ending.

WHERE THE F*CK IS SHE?!

If you hype me up for her every chance you get, at least GIVE ME what you’re advertising. This is a scam. This is criminal offense. And homophobic. She is more than a revealing outfit and Liu Kang’s punching bag. I’m SO. F*CKING. TIRED. OF THIS. SH*T.

Kitana. The rebellious princess of Outworld... turned damsel in distress in this movie. Her role is so effing bad it hurts me to my core. You see her as a general being so badass and independent... oh right, we need Liu Kang to save her because he needs to maintain his hero look. And we need two kissing scenes. How do we get there? Oh, right, let him save her, because you know - that’s what makes wahmen kiss you.

ARE YOU NUTS?!

The movie started just fine, with Kitana being in charge with her right hand, Jade. Then, obviously, they water her down and soon she is a princess in a tower (in this case, princess on a column) that needs her buffy sexy man to save her. Oh, and she can’t resist him - you know, every normal girl’s reaction to getting untied is to kiss a guy you’ve known for like a few hours but seen before and you’ve talked like three dialogue lines in total. Sure.

Kitana just gets the unfortunate role of a female main character. She’s Liu’s love interest and that makes her take the role of a strong (but surface level, only) woman who still needs her hero to free her. Classic damsel in distress story, with Kitana being the princess, Liu being the Prince charming and Shao Kahn as the dragon (lul). Of course, they try to cover this up by making Kitana a general, letting her win a few fights but it won’t matter in the end. Some say that women want to believe in fairy tales but the more I see fighting games’ lore, the more I say it’s the men who want to believe them.

Is it necessarily bad? No. But it’s boring as fuk.

I would like to ask the directors to stop being so afraid of upsetting the target audience. Target audience can change and sometimes it comes out better than originally planned. My Little Pony was designed as a child’s cartoon but it was the creepy men who made it reach the top. Morally? Questionable at best. But business is booming, right? And that’s what they care for, right?

All I’m trying to say is these days women and gays are the future.

Thank you for today, more to come. I’m going to rant about the Story Mode.

#Mortal Kombat #mk jade #kitana #nitara #mileena #battle of the realms #female #commentary #article #mortal kombat movie

28 notes · View notes

theshedding · 3 years

Text

Lil Nas X: Country Music, Christianity & Reclaiming HELL

I don’t typically bother myself to follow what Lil Nas X is doing from day to day, or even month to month but I do know that his “Old Town Road” hit became one of the biggest selling/streamed records in Country Music Business history (by a Black Country & Queer artist). “Black” is key because for 75+ years Country music has unsuspiciously evolved into a solidly White-identified genre (despite mixed and Indian & Black roots). Regrettably, Country music is also widely known for anti-black, misogynoir, reliably homophobic (Trans isn’t really a conversation yet), Christian and Hard Right sentiments on the political spectrum. Some other day I will venture into more; there is a whole analysis dying to be done on this exclusive practice in the music industry with its implications on ‘access’ to equity and opportunity for both Black/POC’s and Whites artists/songwriters alike. More commentary on this rigid homogeneous field is needed and how it prohibits certain talent(s) for the sake of perpetuating homogeneity (e.g. “social determinants” of diversity & viable artistic careers). I’ll refrain from discussing that fully here, though suffice it to say that for those reasons X’s “Old Town Road” was monumental and vindicating.

As for Lil Nas X, I’m not particularly a big fan of his music; but I see him, what he’s doing, his impact on music + culture and I celebrate him using these moments to affirm his Black, Queer self, and lifting up others. Believe it or not, even in the 2020′s, being “out” in the music business is still a costly choice. As an artist it remains much easier to just “play straight”. And despite appearances, the business (particularly Country) has been dragged kicking and screaming into developing, promoting and advancing openly-affirming LGBTQ 🏳️‍🌈 artists in the board room or on-stage. Though things are ‘better’ we have not yet arrived at a place of equity or opportunity for queer artists; for the road of music biz history is littered with stunted careers, bodies and limitations on artists who had no option but to follow conventional ways, fail or never be heard of in the first place. With few exceptions, record labels, radio and press/media have successfully used fear, intimidation, innuendo and coercion to dilute, downplay or erase any hint of queer identity from its performers. This was true even for obvious talents like Little Richard.

(Note: I’m particularly speaking of artists in this regard, not so much the hairstylists, make-up artists, PA’s, etc.)

_____

Which is why...in regard to Lil Nas X, whether you like, hate or love his music, the young brother is a trailblazer. His very existence protests (at least) decades of inequity, oppression and erasure. X aptly critiques a Neo-Christian Fascist Heteropatriarchy; not just in American society but throughout the Music Business and with Black people. That is no small deal. His unapologetic outness holds a mirror up to Christianity at-large, as an institution, theology and practice. The problem is they just don’t like what they see in that mirror.

In actuality, “Call Me By Your Name”, Lil Nas X’s new video, is a twist on classic mythology and religious memes that are less reprehensible or vulgar than the Biblical narratives most of us grew up on vís-a-vís indoctrinating smiles of Sunday school teachers and family prior to the “age of reason”. Think about the narratives blithely describing Satan’s friendly wager with God regarding Job (42:1-6); the horrific “prophecies” in St. John’s Book of Revelation (i.e. skies will rain fire, angels will spit swords, mankind will be forced to retreat into caves for shelter, and we will be harassed by at least three terrifying dragons and beasts. Angels will sound seven trumpets of warning, and later on, seven plagues will be dumped on the world), or Jesus’s own clarifying words of violent intent in Matthew (re: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.” 10:34). Whether literal or metaphor, these age old stories pale in comparison to a three minute allegorical rap video. Conservatives: say what you will, I’m pretty confident X doesn’t take himself as seriously as “The true and living God” from the book of Job.

A little known fact as it is, people have debunked the story and evolution of Satan and already offered compelling research showing [he] is more of a literary device than an actual entity or “spirit” (Spoiler: In the Bible, Satan does not take shape as an actual “bad” person until the New Testament). In fact, modern Christianity’s impression of the “Devil” is shaped by conflating Hellenized mythology with a literary tradition rooted in Dante’s Inferno and accompanying spooks and superstitions going back thousands of years. Whether Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, Scientologist, Atheist or Agnostic, we’ve spent a lifetime with these predominant icons and clichés. (Resource: Prof. Bart D. Erhman, “Heaven & Hell”).

So Here’s THE PROBLEM: The current level of fear and outrage is:

(1) Unjust, imposing and irrational.

(2) Disproportionate when taken into account a lifetime of harmful Christian propaganda, anti-gay preaching and political advocacy.

(3) Historically inaccurate concerning the existence of “Hell” and who should be scared of going there.

Think I’m overreacting?

Examples:

Institutionalized Homophobia (rhetoric + policy)

Anti-Gay Ministers In Life And Death: Bishop Eddie Long And Rev. Bernice King

Black, gay and Christian, Marylanders struggle with Conflicts

Harlem pastor: 'Obama has released the homo demons on the black man'

Joel Olsteen: Homosexuality is “Not God’s Best”

Bishop Brandon Porter: Gays “Perverted & Lost...The Church of God in Christ Convocation appears like a ‘coming out party’ for members of the gay community.”

Kim Burrell: “That perverted homosexual spirit is a spirit of delusion & confusion and has deceived many men & women, and it has caused a strain on the body of Christ”

Falwell Suggests Gays to Blame for 9-11 Attacks

Pope Francis Blames The Devil For Sexual Abuse By Catholic Church

Pope Francis: Gay People Not Welcome in Clergy

Pope Francis Blames The Devil For Sexual Abuse By Catholic Church

The Pope and Gay People: Nothing’s Changed

The Catholic church silently lobbied against a suicide prevention hotline in the US because it included LGBT resources

Mormon church prohibits Children of LGBT parents to be baptized

Catholic Charity Ends Adoptions Rather Than Place Kid With Same-Sex Couple

I Was a Religious Zealot That Hurt People-Coming Out as Gay: A Former Conversion Therapy Leader Is Apologizing to the LGBTQ Community

The above short list chronicles a consistent, literal, demonization of LGBTQ people, contempt for their gender presentation, objectification of their bodies/sexuality and a coordinated pollution of media and culture over the last 50+ years by clergy since integration and Civil Rights legislation. Basically terrorism. Popes, Bishops, Pastors, Evangelists, Politicians, Television hosts, US Presidents, Camp Leaders, Teachers, Singers & Entertainers, Coaches, Athletes and Christians of all types all around the world have confused and confounded these issues, suppressed dissent, and confidently lied about LGBT people-including fellow Queer Christians with impunity for generations (i.e. “thou shall not bear false witness against they neighbor” Ex. 23:1-3). Christian majority viewpoints about “laws” and “nature” have run the table in discussions about LGBTQ people in society-so much that we collectively must first consider their religious views in all discussions and the specter of Christian approval -at best or Christian condescension -at worst. That is Christian (and straight) privilege. People are tired of this undue deference to religious opinions.

That is what is so deliciously bothersome about Lil Nas X being loud, proud and “in your face” about his sexuality. If for just a moment, he not only disrupts the American hetero-patriarchy but specifically the Black hetero-patriarchy, the so-called “Black Church Industrial Complex”, Neo-Christian Fascism and a mostly uneducated (and/or miseducated) public concerning Ancient Near East and European history, superstitions-and (by extension) White Supremacy. To round up: people are losing their minds because the victim decided to speak out against his victimizer.

Additionally, on some level I believe people are mad at him being just twenty years old, out and FREE as a self-assured, affirming & affirmed QUEER Black male entertainer with money and fame in the PRIME of his life. We’ve never, or rarely, seen that before in a Black man in the music business and popular culture. But that’s just too bad for them. With my own eyes I’ve watched straight people, friends, Christians, enjoy their sexuality from their elementary youth to adolescence, up and through college and later marriages, often times independently of their spouses (repeatedly). Meanwhile Queer/Gay/SGL/LGBTQ people are expected to put their lives on hold while the ‘blessed’ straight people run around exploring premarital/post-marital/extra-marital sex, love and affection, unbound & un-convicted by their “sin” or God...only to proudly rebrand themselves later in life as a good, moral “wholesome Christian” via the ‘sacred’ institution of marriage with no questions asked.

Inequality defined.

For Lil Nas X, everything about the society we've created for him in the last 100+ years (re: links above) has explicitly been designed for his life not to be his own. According to these and other Christians (see above), his identity is essentially supposed to be an endless rat fuck of internal confusion, suicide-ideation, depression, long-suffering, faux masculinity, heterosexism, groveling towards heaven, respectability politics, failed prayer and supplication to a heteronormative earthly and celestial hierarchy unbothered in affording LGBT people like him a healthy, sane human development. It’s almost as if the Conservative establishment (Black included) needs Lil Nas X to be like others before him: “private”, mysteriously single, suicidal, suspiciously straight or worse, dead of HIV/AIDS ...anything but driving down the street enjoying his youth as a Black Queer artist and man. So they mad about that?

Well those days are over.

-Rogiérs is a writer, international recording artist, performer and indie label manager with 25+ years in the music industry. He also directs Black Nonbelievers of DC, a non-profit org affiliated with the AHA supporting Black skeptics, Atheists, Agnostics & Humanists. He holds a B.A. in Music Business & Mgmt and a M.A. in Global Entertainment & Music Business from Berklee College of Music and Berklee Valencia, Spain. www.FibbyMusic.net Twitter/IG: @Rogiers1

91 notes · View notes