#when you know the majority of the people out there are either racist or too stupid to develop critical thinking skills

[chipped-chimera]

Fuck this cesspit country. I want to go home.

[sharp-rosee]

A lot of "radfems" continually peddle the idea that Middle Eastern men are more misogynistic than white, "Western" men and either do not realize or purposefully do not mention that this rhetoric was started by the far right to popularize white supremacy/Neo Naziism and is a dogwhistle to "The Great Replacement" theory.

They start off at first framing their worry with immigrants by spinning a story of how Middle Eastern men are coming into Europe and raising the incidents of rape to an extremely high degree. They show false statistics and reports that have been faked to further convince you of this new rape epidemic.

After watching crazy exposes of these supposed incidents you continue to "research" more and more into this phenomenon, why nobody is acknowledging it, etc. and after they radicalize you into hating these men specifically, they introduce escalating ideas of racism to you until the idea of the "great replacement" is acceptable to you - and that we shouldn't accept immigrants and refugees because rapists are coming through the border to Rape our Women and Convert them to Islam (and to get rid of white people) and we hate the Men, not women! (Ignore that a majority of refugees are women and children; ignore that immigration is a lengthy process, and "Illegal immigrants" are just refugees, those who have been on the waiting lists for years, or those who are technically considered "illegal" because they didn't renew their visas; ignore that the sources we provided are made up, ignore that we only ever talk about black and brown people, we can't have white people going extinct- being replaced!)

How do I know about this and the things they say? I was introduced to a big part of alt right propaganda by Lauren Southern, which led me down what online leftists called the "alt-right pipeline." I wasn't looking for this, I was introduced after watching more and more misogynistic content. It happened slowly, and before long, I knew of the theory. I knew of the Evil Jews destroying the Earth. I awaited the Boogaloo. Overall, though, I didn't care much for these theories - I just wanted to indulge in my self hatred, and yet bigotry was instilled in every misogynistic content they produced. Every word and line they said implanted the seed of what they were really fighting for. And although I enjoyed letting my mental illness fester by watching this content, I couldn't ignore the racism/homophobia/etc. and, in a way, I suppose that made me realize that misogyny was illogical just like any other bigotry, too.

I was going to link to Lauren Southern's video popularizing this term further and how she uses the rhetoric above, however, she's since deleted it. Another Youtuber has called her out in this video here, which clips some of her original video:

More examples of her peddling the Rapist Immigrant rhetoric:

Seeing the same propaganda pop up in the space I've learned to love myself in is terrifying. Seeing the beginnings of what became an awful ideology I found myself in whenever I festered in my own mentally ill thoughts is terrifying.

This is a racist talking point you are promoting. It is false. It has been disproven time and time again and yet here you are, still believing in it.

And to any radfems still questioning that this is propaganda, I urge you ask yourselves:

What sources gave you this information?

Why is it only this specific group of men?

If reports of rape are rare compared to actual incidents of rape, and if the concept of "false accusations" are always brought up whenever any incidents of rape do get reported/do occur, why is it only in this specific instance that rape is being called out at all?

If the sources that gave you this information truly cared about women, why do they never report similar "spikes" when referring to immigrants/refugees in other countries or just in other countries in general?

If you can believe it is all men, then why do you assume that one culture is worse when there are similar or even higher misogyny rates in every single country on planet Earth?

If you still cannot introspect on your racism and the origins of the ideas you are peddling, whether ignorant to it before, you are not a radical feminist, let alone a feminist at all. You are a white supremacist. You are not welcome here, and never will be.

And above all else, you are actively harming and making it unsafe for black and brown people, especially black and brown women, to be here on Tumblr and make it unsafe for them to exist at all.

[underratedgrapeju1ce]

ok crash course on that Fucking Goose bc some of these fan takes are killing me

-GIOVANNI IS NOT ACTUALLY RACIST.

CANNOT BELIEVE I HAVE TO SAY THIS. he often judges peoples ability based on their species, pipsqueak for example, and uses it to fuel his own ego. "headcanoning" him as ACTUALLY RACIST is Weird. mostly because it has no bearing on the story or its themes AT ALL. giovannis mindset is more equivalent to internalized ableism, given the issues he has with his own wings (and even then, the stuff with his wings isnt outright said, so its even more likely hes just an asshole)

-IT IS LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR THAT GOOSE TO BE IN A HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP**

**unless he goes through MAJOR character development.

As much fun as it is making fun of how mean he is, giovanni is genuinely like. a horrendous person. he firmly believes no one except him is right, even when hes called out, constantly bullies the PEOPLE HE LIVES WITH, and just generally thinks hes above everyone else. is there a reason for this? yeah probably, im sure we'll get his backstory eventually, but no matter what it is its NOT AN EXCUSE

when i discuss shipping with him in any regard it is either NOT INTENDED TO BE ROMANTICIZED, or its after hes had a genuine change of heart. usually via the Horrors.

-HE IS NOT A SWEETHEART HIDING BENEATH A COLD EXTERIOR.

i know, i want to make cute fanart as much as the next guy but good lord i cannot stress enough that he does not have a secret soft side. he is genuinely miserable. he wants bucky and walter to be miserable. the only person he values in his life is olive and she HATES HIM. STUMBLER DOESNT LIKE HIM. how bad do you have to fuck up for STUMBLER O HARE NOT TO LIKE YOU BRUH. i know its a harsh truth, but not every character has a heart of gold under the thorns

i am not here to take away anyones fun or stop ppl from making fanon content. i AM here to make sure the genuine complexities in these characters arent undermined. have fun, be self indulgent, but dont ignore or erase what these characters have going on. too much love and thought was put into them to do that <3

[blueiight]

can i ask your thoughts on the fandom’s heavy focus on louis as an object of desire? it sometimes feels to me like people are more interested in other characters reacting to louis than they are in louis himself. i know the “helen of troy” stuff is a joke but it genuinely seems like he’s often rendered oddly passive in his desirability, like we’re looking at him through the eyes of the other characters even though it’s his story (to be clear: in the fandom, not the actual show). or am i being uncharitable? either way, you always have interesting things to say about fandom reception.

i think the focus of louis as an object of desire arose largely in response to a lot of racially-charged nonsense about show louis, namely, where a loud minority of fans tried to deny the abuse and horror of season 1 and frame louis as the primary antagonist/abuser of his own story. which in of itself had the potential to go somewhere, especially considering the feminized role louis occupies in parts of season 1. unfortunately its spiraled off into its own dead end at this point to where now people, a year and a half removed from the release of s1, can box louis's character arc into this tale of getting all the hot boys to look her way. when this is a horror and tragedy series. romance is part of that, but is a piece of the full picture. classic romance is very much horror tbh but thats just me

if we're discussing the show strictly, majority of louis's relationships are antagonistic. even with his lovers, they love him as much as they seek to control him. 'his love is a small box that he keeps you in', trailer louis saying 'i knew who i was without those pieces [of myself?]' . so on and so forth. the first three episodes of season 1 are about louis's struggle to maintain a link with his mortal community, in the midst of increasing racist tensions against the city leaders, all as he struggles to come to terms with his existence as a vampire and how his relationship to lestat fits in relation to all these pieces of himself. doubly so, there is also the nature of the second interview in present time, and the sort of antagonism between daniel + louis as louis eventually pushes daniel into burning the old tape. the latter half of season 1, episodes 4-7 is squarely about the triad of lestat, louis, and claudia, how lestat increasingly tightens his hold over them both, claudia breaking them free of it, and louis's response to such. doubly so, daniel becomes more hostile the less he knows, and the more louis's composed 'master of his instincts' personage collapses to show the broken man thats underneath. armand comes in at the end bc the interview has reached a breaking point once more [as it did in the 1970s]. i know, im looking too hard into the meme, but so much of where louis errs, where his memory falters, where history is completely revised, has to do with the question of claudia. even book interview foundationally was about this grief, though not nearly with the level of depth+ gravity the show has added to the story.

where focusing on louis as an 'object of desire' most impedes analysis has to do with claudia as well, bc if u see louis as that solely, then what is claudia to u if not a 'child interfering in [louis's] romantic affairs'? why are people already seeking to write claudia off as a wayward child unduly 'taking out her anger on louis', when it was louis at the end of season 1 who strangled her against the wall and refused to let her burn lestat? when its louis in the trailer thats throwing claudia's words from season 1 back at her, evading her questions in the cafe? when claudia is having to dress as a baby doll and advertise with a sandwich board for a theater + a coven-master that all want her dead?

i think this is by nature of the fact that iwtv is canonly gay and isnt afraid of showing that, and modern fandom is mainly interested in romance. claudia's relationship to louis is secondary, if not tertiary, to all 'camps' of this tiny tiny fandom bc she is clearly established in s1 as not being a viable romantic option for louis, despite claudia's perspective and her story taking up the second half of the first season, and will continue to be important in the second season. the 'helen of troy' fixation on his desirability in relation to romantically viable vampires [or even men] seems to be another means by which fans can ignore this part of the story, just as the mutual abuse nonsense about louis being clarence thomas the third self hating black man who stole lestat's lunchables and is 'just as bad as the rest' drowned out and continues to drown out any other conversation for the past year and a half. it is very difficult to have conversations on this character precisely bc of this state of fandom, where many people seek to crack the whip over a fictional character for not being mother teresa and having a complex response to trauma, then instead of discussing that, some seek to fixate on the fact that mother teresa can be sexy, actually. when thats not the point. why is modern louis so full of grief and all but suicidal in dubai, if not for the fact that claudia is permanently dead, he still lives, he regrets something, and wants to find the truth under it all? the jokes are cute and all, but lets put our thinking caps on.

[lineli225]

Tomura's Kill count in Canon

I'm done with people calling Tomura a "sadistic genocidal mass murder who killed millions" BECAUSE HE ISN'T.

So, i finally decided to prove it my self.

So today I'll be listing EVERY person Tomura killed! With his reasons too.

1- His father, his first intentional kill and one of the few he felt a thrill or pleasure, justified since he abused him.

3- The two thugs, he killed them under AFO's pressure, and if you pay attention, he was wheezing during it the same way he did during his panic attacks.

Time skip to the present:

USJ had no kills (despite his attempts), Stain's arc had no kills either (except some papers and a binocular, RIP). No kills even during Kamino, as he seemed to not even want to kill Bakugou.

Tomura's first kill, chronologically, in the entire series, is ironically, only on the 4th season, and 11th story arc (Shie Hassaikai Arc)

4 kills so far, one of Overhaul's man, this kill was literally self defense (and revenge)

5- The cop driving the police car, guarding the ambulance Ovehaul was in (we don't know if he died or just lost his hand though, it might not have even been intentional considering he aimed to the steering wheel)

Then we have the Overhaul arm snatching scene, the only moment Tomura is shown as actually sadistic so far.

Totally owned though, Overhaul shouldn't have threatened him, killed and injured his friends

Then, we move to the MVA arc, where the real kill count starts

First, we have a unknown number of kills, when the league visits Creature Rejection Clan, there was around 20 visible members, assuming the kills where shared equally though the League, we can say Tomura killed around 5 or 6 of these guys.

Which he did with no Sadistic glee, actually, so far, he either kills with no emotions, or seems bothered by it (Also, racists, so owned 💅)

Anyways, around 10 kills by now.

2 kills, then i could count 32 people, so 44 kills.

Considering Deika had 110,000 Meta Liberation members, and that good part of these people had died by GigantoMachia, Twice, Dabi and others.

We don't know though, how many where killed by Tomura's decay wave.

In the end Hawks had reported around 9,946 MLA members dead

I don't know if the kill wave should be counted though- since they weren't direct intentional kills

So by far Tomura has killed around 7,000 people, but none of them where innocent people (except that cop rip) People left alive:

Now we move to the Paranormal Liberation War Arc

First kill being X-less, then once again a unknown number of both heroes and villains killed by the decay wave, let's count the visible/shown deaths.

Crust, these 2 guys, some of the list- around 15 kills by Tomura

Since the city was evacuated, no one died besides a few heroes.

Tomura didn't kill anyone else during his fight against Endeavor and Izuku, so now we move on, with a kill count of around 61 visible kills and hmm.. 8,000 off screen?

I won't count any kill during the Tartarus scape since these where clearly by All for One

So we move to Stars and Stripes! Since here Tomura and AFO's personality where already half way, i'll count thise ones too. So more 2 kills here

Then the final arc begins, but despite the absolute mess the fight against Tomura in the UA cage was- it had no deaths besides Bakugou.

FINAL COUNT:

On screen kills by Tomura: 61 kills

Kills counting ShigAFO: around 64

Kills counting off-screen deaths: around 1,000 to 9,000

Bonus: Nine lol

Ngl, owned too

Now you're probably thinking: uhh- that's still a lot of people.

But the thing is, he killed much less than it looks like, literally all kills where out of self defense or necessity, very few in the list where innocent people, the vast majority are villains, and he never killed for pleasure or in a act of sadism.

Actually, he had very good reasons to kill each one of them.

Yes yes, he did attempt to kill much more, but he didn't.. Even if he did kill "millions" because of Deika- he's still not the monster he is portrayed by some.

Like come on, if you had an entire city trying to kill you, you wouldn't try to defend your self in your way to rescue a friend? If someone threatened you and had brutally killed your friend and taken another's arm, you wouldn't feel joy in vengeance?

Anyways, Tomura is innocent

"The reason why he killed them or how he felt doesn't change the fact he killed them!"

If so same for Gran Torino's "killing is a form of saving" ass!

Like come on, look at him!

Anyways, my job here is done 😌

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

AITA for wear what appears to be a durag? 🦤

I (16M) am white. I’m also autistic, and due to sensory issues, sometimes (once every month or so) I have trouble washing my hair every day or two. My hair gets greasy fast, and usually by the third day it won’t hold its shape and is generally gross.

I hate the feeling of greasy hair, and it looks so ugly by that point that I basically feel like garbage whenever I try to leave the house. My sister (14F) has these bandana headbands, which look a tied up bandana when worn with long hair. She’s also autistic and knows what I’m going through, so she’ll let me borrow one some mornings when I have to go run errands so i don’t have to think about my hair until that night, when i go wash it.

here’s where the problem lies- When I wear one, my hair, which is too short for a bandana, will poke out and look strange in the back. But if i put a hoodie over the headband, it looks like I’m wearing a durag. I go to a majority poc school and I do my best to educate myself on how to be anti-racist, and I know cultural appropriation for hairstyles is a big problem and something that white people should definitely not do, and I don’t want to culturally appropriate either. It’s not an actual durag, but unless I took my hoodie off you would not be able to tell the difference.

AITA for wearing them anyway? And also, be aware that I’m not looking for debates on whether or not hair appropriation exists, nor am I looking for comments on my hygiene. Thank y’all, have a good day.

What are these acronyms?

[valenschmidt]

Thanks for answering my ask! Yes, that's very true, Ryan has been consistently hated/viewed with suspicion and skepticism for years, so the majority of buddie fandom (who are Oliver stans) wouldn't want to ship him with Oliver. I distinctly remember one particular post (in Ryan's tag) a year or two ago that was like, "ugh if buddie goes canon i feel sorry for oliver having to kiss that man" 🙄

Lol yes I guess we have to thank bt shippers and their OTT vitriol for turning the tide somewhat. It's been nice to see a recent influx of vocal Eddie/Ryan fans join the fandom. So refreshing and entertaining.

Yes also I remember the super cute bts vids that popped up during/toward the end of s6, and some people tagging positively about Ryan (albeit begrudgingly!). But definitely a lot more people were on edge about rpf compared to now.

Ooooh so about Oliver being single, that's what I thought too! But someone else I sent an ask(?) to a while ago said that he didn't actually say anything concrete in his insta live, and that he is still with his gf 🤔 does anyone have any further confirmation either way? I'd love to know!

"this happens quite a lot when ships are about to go canon. People start projecting the ship onto the actors, especially when chemistry is REALLY huge " - this is a really interesting phenomenon you've pointed out!

No provblem anon! I love receiving asks!!

YES!!! I completely understand why people were really mad back then, especially black people and I also understand if there are still black people who haven't quite forgiven him and it's totally valid, because what he did was not ok (even if he never said that word he was still trying to justify his then wife's actions and that should have been a big no no) the problem is that people let it get a tad too far and spreading things that were NOT true to new fans in the recent years out of anger, making him seen like a terrible person who is a racist and hates black people when that is not true... Aisha and Angela were really mad back then but they both clearly have forgiven him (since Angela invited him to his anniversary party and Aisha to his wedding) and he has never done anything remotely similar again so I think he truly changed and has become better so I really believe people have started to see that and the bt being awful to him probably was a changing point to most of the fandom (not all because some still hate him) but well you can't change someone's views on people changing...

Also yes anon! A lot were completely against it calling it awful and whatnot and now are the biggest ryliver shippers (and getting viral over it when less than 6 months ago they would cancel you) and taking everything as ryliver signs but whatever I just hope they don't take things too far

To the Oliver thing... I watched that interview live and I'm 100% sure he said he's single but I can't for the life of me find a clip of the interview (if anyone finds it please send it to me!!!) But I remember that he said he was single and then kind of shaded his ex (lol) so yeah

As for the last thing... yup not many notice but it happens quite a lot. Just like how actors tend to fall in love with eachother (which doesn't happen all the time but it happens) in fandom it also happens that they believe they fall in love. Take heartstopper for example... Kit and Joe plan Nick and Charlie who are very in love but in reality they're just very good friends but people insist on shipping them or the Bridgerton actors that play Colin and Penelope as well... people project the feelings of their characters into their real life personalities because of the chemistry the actors have together. It's hard to comprehend the idea of acting so close to someone and play lovers and have so much chemistry but not falling in love

Wow now that was quite a lot 🤣

Sorry anon I got carried away

[coldresolve]

are you a torture apologist, or are you just dumb

... said with all the due diligence this subject warrants, etc etc. i’ve written posts about this before, it’s fallen on deaf ears, people either aggressively ignore it, or they go out of their way to take me in bad faith, and when the latter doesn’t work, they fall back on ye olde reliable: tone policing. but we’ve had that conversation too, haven’t we? it’s my culturally determined value of blunt honesty versus your culturally determined value of politeness. i express my opinions in a way that’s admittedly harsh and hyperbolic, and in so doing, my intention is to treat you like someone who is mature enough to distinguish my point from its delivery, and emotionally well-adjusted enough to deal with whatever the fuck some rando on the internet has to say about what you wrote. i also do it because its more fun this way. are we still cool? ffs lol

the thing is, right, it’s fucking easy not to write torture apologia. very straight-forward and simple, in my humble little opinion. you learn what the usual arguments are, and then you try to avoid accidentally making them – a bit like how, when you learn that white supremacy is a thing, you typically then go on to try and not write some wildly racist shit. same principle.

and i genuinely don’t understand why people are so opposed to this, specifically. they don’t know they’re doing it, which is fine, but then when you try to let them know they’re doing it, on the off-chance they even acknowledge that you said anything, they’ll hit you with an “its just for entertainment,” or “it’s not that deep.” so you tell them they sure seem to spend an awful lot of time weaving torture apologia into their vapid, shallow entertainment. and they don’t like that, jesus. but what else are you supposed to say?

i figure i just havent bullied people hard enough about it, honestly. and by bullied i mean pointing out the mindless use of torture apologia as plot points in the slop everybody writes. i would happily tell all of this directly to the writers of 24’s jack bauer, but those guys aren’t here, so.

you probably won’t be surprised to learn that the majority of the myths surrounding torture are rooted in facistic, reactionary thinking. might makes right is big among people who endorse corporal punishment; the ends justify the means is in play when governments try to excuse the use of t-, ahem, enhanced interrogation tactics. allegedly.

and among a much, much longer laundry list of bullshit i’ve seen spewed – oh, not by shady governments, but by you:

torture as an interrogation method yields reliable information

some forms of torture are more sophisticated than others

torture makes people obedient

torture used as a punishment deters unwanted behavior in others

brainwashing is a thing that is possible (usually through torture)

it’s not torture unless it leaves a physical mark on the body

see to me, it’s fucking easy to rework that scene in your story where torture results in the perpetrator gaining trustworthy intel. fucking easy to reconsider that arc where a character gets rewired by torture into passive obedience. fucking easy, when writing a story, to not accidentally send the message that torture is a tool that works. but hey, allow me to really dig my teeth in.

you drumming up your torturer as “skilled” in the “art” of torture feeds real nicely into the myth that torture works as an interrogation method, here under the condition that you should at least do it properly. is that what you believe? or do just believe that there’s an extra special way to cause extreme physical or emotional destress in a person which, for vague unspecified reasons, superceeds all the other, more amateurish ways one could go about it? the former would make you an direct torture apologist – the latter, a fucking twat. ask yourself why “some torture methods are more sophisticated than others” is an idea that needs to be perpetuated. who benefits from that idea? who would feel really validated by that idea? which government on this green earth of ours, hypothetically speaking, could use this idea as a way to paint their own acts of torture as more cultured or civilized than, say, hypothetically speaking, the torture used by those other nations where the brown people live? allegedly.

alternatively, your little good boy slave fantasy seems to imply that being subjected to torture will make a person obedient. is that what you believe? is it true that might makes right? say, wouldn’t state-sanctioned corporal punishment be justified as a tool to make people obey the law, then? no? okay, hear me out then, cause this is really out there, but. could the idea that violence is a tool that makes people more compliant with the demands of their aggressors, possibly maybe perhaps, be something you only find it acceptable to greenlight as the result decades of war propaganda? naaaaah. fiction isn’t reality, and it means nothing, and victims of torture are weak and malleable and broken, and also what they say can’t be trusted cause they have no real fucking agency anyway. fuck me.

“but elias,” i hear you say, “how am i supposed to write an interesting story that features torture in a way that’s in accordance with scientific consensus on its effectiveness and/or consequences? realism and compelling storytelling are diametrically opposed to one another!”

here’s my take: you just straight up lack creativity. cope and seethe.

if you’re interested in writing about torture, read up on what it is, instead of assuming everything you’ve been told by military-sponsored action movies is true and valid. we’re talking about some pretty extreme facets of human behavior and psychology here, but ones that none the less exist in reality. the bare minimun is to not buy in to the myths and propaganda surrounding it. the next step is to write what it can look like in reality. the big boy galaxy brain move is to write torture in a way that challenges the status quo on how we culturally view torture, and how all these false myths affect victims and perpetrators alike. you just have to fucking think about it.

torture for information doesn’t work – but your perpetrator might be convinced that it does. so instead of going the easy route and proving them right – explore how they're wrong. show torture failing. show your perpetrator’s desperation as they gain nothing. they conceptualize their actions as the lesser of two evils, but whoops, there is no second evil. hows that for a change?

is there such a thing as “torture lite?” does it make any real difference whether it leaves a physical mark behind or not? where do we draw the line between interrogation and torture? is that question not interesting enough for you?

is complying with demands under threat of torture the same as genuine obedience? maybe your victim is forced to pretend in certain ways, through feelings of absolute powerlessness. their survival is pitted against the guilt that comes from following the demands of their perpetrator/s. the sense that they’re betraying themselves, the hatred they feel against their aggressor for making them obey, which is otherwise completely uncharacteristic of them. they’re never reduced to a blank slate, there’s always an internal conflict. what if they reach a point where they have nothing left to lose? real torture makes people more defiant. human beings are amazing at adapting to impossible situations. how is that not a wicked fucking cool thing to explore?

brainwashing isn’t real, but your victim’s loved ones believe that it might be. this means that their attempts to talk about their complex feelings toward the more humane sides of their torturer, or recount moments of a strenuous mutual understanding, are met with vehement denial from the people who are supposed to facilitate their recovery. “don’t talk about him like that, he hurt you.” and a desperation to get people to understand that it’s just not that simple. they’re not just saying it because they’ve been brainwashed – people just aren’t black and white, torturers included. the way they feel compelled by the pressure of their loved ones to just… keep quiet about that aspect of their trauma.

here's a fun fact: not only is torture absolutely useless at everything it sets out to do, but rates of PTSD are equally high among victims and perpetrators. the latter is something called participation-induced post-traumatic stress, or perpetrator trauma. you see it in murderers, too. nobody talks about that. and i get it, it’s a touchy subject, we wouldn’t want to portray torture as something human beings do. but, and here’s my counter-argument: maybe reality is just messy and complicated. and maybe exploring that messy complicated reality in fiction can serve as something interesting and worthwhile. emotionally cathartic. no?

if you read up on torture in psychological studies, regarding the psychology of both victims and perpetrators – and possibly also read some sociological studies about how governments have used a lot of the myths i’ve mentioned about torture to excuse their own actions (allegedly) – you start to get an idea for just how comprehensibly it fucks with people, and how effective that propaganda machine has been. real life torture is not rare. torture will continue to not be rare as long as people believe in the idea that it is useful. so maybe it’s a good idea to approach the subject with a little bit of thought beforehand, you know? we could approach fictional depictions of torture with the same amount due diligence we take with the topic of rape or child abuse, instead of, you know, literally affirming all the myths that justify its use and then brushing off criticism like mine in that aggressively uncritical fiction-isnt-reality,-depiction-isn’t-endorsement,-zero-further-introspection way.

or whatever. maybe im just a big meanie, i must be fun at parties, etc

[jaskierx]

Every time I see some Taika slander on this app, I block. And I don’t even care about him because I have no clue how he is in real life, but I have enough of the bullshit. Taika is a Zionist? Block. Taika’s fault for whatever-pick-anything? Block. Taika is an evil man? Block. Taika doesn’t do enough to promote ofmd? Block. Taika did this and that in his private life? One, how the fuck would you know, random person who lives in Germany? Keep your nose out of his goddamn business. Second. BLOCK. Let’s celebrate Taika’s shows ending one after the other? You guessed it. Block. Someone literally said Taika’s ancestors are rolling in their grave in shame. Bloooocccckkkkk.

I have no words, this is vile. And this public character assassination has gone on for way too long, from medias and randos on the internet alike.

Those people who gloat and say the most horrendous things need to get off their moral high horse, clean in front of their doorstep and go outside to touch some grass. I don’t know why they’re so spiteful but they need to heal their soul. They’re keyboard activists that are looking for trends to be mad about so they can pretend to care and be morally superior. And then they can harass others. They don’t care and they can’t fool me and they can fuck off. Blockity block block block.

God… I got heated real quick. Sorry about that. But for real, I hope he stays the hell away from social media.

yeah i've blocked literally dozens of people in the last 30ish hours and the vast majority are people who have never watched ofmd who decided to go into the tag and post about how happy they are that the 'racist tv show' that's 'run by zionists' is cancelled and 'the zionists' are now 'unemployed'. or people who are casual fans of ofmd who were like 'meh s2 was bad and you could tell taika was bored of it'

it's just so fucking stupid. i hate this whole mentality that people are either 100% perfect and morally pure or they're evil and every bad thing that happens to them should be celebrated. i hate that people are so desperate to blame taika when the show wouldn't fucking exist without him. i hate that people are so confidently stating shit like 'david should've known taika couldn't commit for 3 seasons' like fuck that parasocial ass shit you don't know any of these people! imagine if it was the other way around and the cast started posting shit on twitter like 'lol lyse jaskierx should lose her job bc i can tell she's bored of spreadsheets'. it's ridiculous

[littledesertfox]

intro, I guess?

hii! I figured I should make a post like this even though I have a feeling it will be like super messy xD

I've had an interest in history, specifically World War II basically since I was a kid. It was only recently though that I found out that there's a community for it! I've always had a thing with expressing my interests in ways that may seem slightly odd to other people, so it feels nice to see that there are others who seem to experience this in similar ways :3

I want to make it very clear that I am NOT a nazi or rightwing in any way, and I don't want actual (neo-)nazis to interact with my blog, get the fuck out! Similarly, I don't want racists, lgbtq-phobes, ableists, religious extremists, pedos & zoos or people of similarly disgusting kind to interact! I'm literally queer and neurodivergent (undiagnosed/suspected bc getting a therapy place is hard :/), this is not a place for you!

+++

I've been a fan of the Downfall parodies on youtube when I was younger and recently relapsed into this fixation😭 I don't know if this fandom even really exists at this point since it seems that many creators have left in the meantime, but I'd love to talk about it, maybe I'll even get to write fanfics at some point. Also a short disclaimer that when I talk about historical figures that play a major role in the Downfall parody universe (such as Fegelein, Krebs, Burgdorf etc), it will usually be about their parody selves, not the real people! I'll try to clarify that individually if needed though.

I've also started lurking a little in the reichblr tag with a feeling that I'd describe as "indimidated fascination". Currently I'm mostly interested in some members of the Wehrmacht, but other historical figures that I had or have an interest in might come up as well. Overall any stuff that I post will probably go more into the lighthearted and humorous direction, but I'd love to bring in some more educational stuff as well.

My inbox is always open if you want to gush or ramble about your favourite historical figures or Downfall characters (both from the parodies and the movie itself) and such! Please talk to me about our shared faves😭🫶

+++

I get crushes on fictional characters and sometimes historical figures too, but that doesn't mean I support, condone or defend their worldviews or actions in any way (this applies especially to real people of course)! These "crushes" usually stem from a place of fascination with who they were behind their public appearance, I want to know more about them as a private person, like their hobbies, favourite food and other mundane things like that. Often it's also simply that I feel physically attracted to their appearance because I think they're handsome, either that or they give me massive gender envy (or both lmao). I don't really control on who I fixate like that, it just happens, but I hope that this will be a place for me to express those feelings in some way and find like-minded people. Though I also want to point out that not all my fixations are automatically also crushes! Usually I will mention whether they are or not, or you'll probably notice based on what kind of posts I make about them lol.

Current main historical fixations:

Erwin Rommel (I can't help it I just think he's cute ._.)

Fritz Bayerlein (he's the dude in my pfp lol, there's barely info about him but idk I just think he's kinda interesting😭 also yes he was actually bi)

Current main Downfall fixations:

Hans Krebs & Wilhelm Burgdorf (the otp ever)

Wilhelm Mohnke (ngl Downfall!Mohnke is kinda fine❤️‍🔥 ... idk maybe I'm just finding the actor hot though😭)

+++

If I encounter things that make me uncomfortable I follow common fandom courtesy and block tags or blogs accordingly. This is nothing personal, I'm just curating my own online space. I don't want to see any harassment here, neither towards myself nor to others!

Anyway I guess that's it for now? Idk if this is any good as an intro post but for now it'll have to do I guess😂 I'm generally not really sure yet in which direction to go with this blog (should it be more Downfall or reichblr focused? is there a lot of overlap between the fandoms? do they even get along? help😭). I also don't know how active I'll be in general, I'm also constantly jumping between thoughts like "yee this is gonna be fun" and "dafuq am I doing here I should feel ashamed about myself" but I hope to meet people who share my interests :3

[sapphic-agent]

As a POC I could not handle any longer the way they excused Lea's actions on the Glee subreddit. I left permanently because of it. It angered me the day someone on the sub said that Lea apologised. Lea did not apologise. More than enough times, I've seen Lea be defended on that sub and people get upvoted for it and I couldn't stand it any longer.

The tipping point for me was that people started to say that Santana fans can't keep their feelings about Naya separate but at the same time they're known strong Rachel fans and Rachel defenders and have shown support to Lea multiples all the while being overly-critical about Santana. It was just brewing into hypocritical territory for me.

As a teen, Naya helped me in ways that's hard to explain. Her passing affected me deeply. To see that a few people, going off of the multiple upvotes, were agreeing with comments made accusing Santana fans of mixing their feelings about Naya with Santana in an unhealthy manner was hurtful. Lea fans also double down on putting Rachel on a pedstal to not talk about Lea's past actions on the glee sub but it's not spoken about.

So grateful that you spoke up about this major issue when it comes to Lea on the Glee sub. Your willingness to speak up about the issues on the Glee sub makes me feel less alone.

Omg thank you! That's so nice of you to say. I really do try to steer away from real people on this blog because I want to be primarily media-based. But the Glee sub makes me so fucking mad. They're the definition of performative activism and double standards. Supporting and/or forgiving Lea is just shitty, no matter how many times they try to justify it.

Naya- and Heather- helped me a lot too. They brought to life one of the healthiest, most important sapphic couple of the 2010s (my username was inspired by them lol, that's why they were my old pfp). They made me feel okay to be myself and comfortable in my sexuality. Her passing affected me for a long time too, it was like I couldn't process it.

I know exactly what you're talking about, when people would accuse Santana fans of conflating Santana because of Naya's passing. Like, right after it happened. It was really an awful thing to say because a woman was dead. Her life and memory were more important than their favorite character getting shit. They're vile.

If anyone can't separate the actor from the character it's Finn fans. Cory was a great guy- people always said him and Dianna were the nicest of the cast- and he also passed while the show was still running. A lot of Finn's "likability" came from Cory's charisma and comedic timing. If Cory was still alive I really don't think as many people would defend Finn.

(Tbh, I think Cory himself would shit on Finn. His mom once said that Santana slapping Finn was his favorite scene)

I also feel like people (including other POCs) don't actually understand why Lea was (is?) racist. Racism isn't just "I hate minorities and don't think they deserve rights." It's way more complicated than that. Lea might not have been throwing the n-word around (though, she was derogatory at least towards Samantha with that "shit in her wig" comment), but she absolutely viewed her being white as being superior to her WOC coworkers.

It's a pretty common thing for Black girls. Hell, I even experienced it from girls I called my friends. They're so "down✊🏾" but will be quick to remind you how more cultured and better than you they are.

If you haven't been taught about or experienced these things, you won't know that. But attempting to shut down WOC who have experienced it is shitty. Lea fans trip over themselves to defend someone who went out of her way to bully a younger Black coworker just because she could.

(Also, she was outwardly transphobic. Not letting anyone forget that either. If she was so willing to be transphobic, what makes you think she wasn't racist?)

Lea fans have no excuse. I liked and looked up to JKR too, but the people she hurt (and continues to hurt) are more important than how much I admired her or how much I enjoyed Harry Potter. I was disgusted by her and had no issues condemning her. Lea fans are hypocritical, self-righteous performative activists

[tartrazeen]

I feel like some folks don't understand what'll happen if Tumblr runs out of money.

I think that's why so many are doing the whole "we have to donate right now or else they can't make the changes we've been asking for" thing.

As a business major...

... allow me to enlighten you on exactly what'll happen if Tumblr fails to generate "enough" revenue.

Here it is!

They sell the site.

That's it.

You may remember this as being "the thing that happened the last time." Which last time, since there have been many? Exactly. Pick any of those blips in the rear-view mirror.

The site doesn't disappear or get deleted. Per capitalism, it fundamentally can't be. Automatic put money into this site, and they will not be leaving without getting money out of it one way or another: by monetizing us through Tumblr Live and tracking and no icons and letting terfs and racists roam free, or by trying to recover their loss if that never works at a turning a profit and they give up 'cause we're too high-maintenance.

This is normal Business. We're fine. Staff is pushing this so hard because they aren't fine, but if they go (i.e. "run out of money"), we get a new stepdaddy.

⁽⁠⁽⁠◝⁠(⁠ ⁠•⁠௰⁠•⁠ ⁠)⁠◜⁠⁾⁠⁾

And they will sell us long before we ever get to a 'boo-hoo delete the site' point because we live in a society under capitalism. You don't delete money. You sell it off to the next greedy corp. as a last resort so you get anything back on your failed investment.

Here - have some more details about that if you want:

Along with selling the site, someone else buys the site. This is the more important and yet even funnier/easier/more empowering-to-users half of the equation.

When someone sells something, it's to recoup a loss or realize a gain on their side - but either way, it's because there's something that's still valuable within the asset. Part of the sales pitch to new buyers is to therefore say, "Hey, look how profitable this website could be if you were able to tap into it the right way! Uh, why couldn't we do that? Uhhhhhhhhhhh."

The answer to that question relies heavily on why the site's being sold. If it's - as it's currently heading - along the lines of "Users are so delighted to give us money that they'll basically buy whatever you throw at them, but we're not in the business of doing infinite growth, so we're selling this to someone else who can manage that part and we'll start again with a different website." That's the best-case scenario for sellers and buyers. It's their win/win. It's them saying "I would keep making money but I don't have the infrastructure to get it all, so we're selling it to someone who can."

The answer that Yahoo got when they first bought it was some hilarious bullshit like, "Oh, uh, yeah, they're gonna be the .pdf of the future. Don't wanna miss that." Which is hilarious because it was more or less tricking Yahoo into buying a bucket of goblins. That was a win/lose on Yahoo's side, 'cause they fell for it and the old sellers got to escape with their losses cut and some money in their pocket. Same for when Verizon got it, although Yahoo was probably more honest in saying, "We didn't know this site had bees in it." Enough of a win for Yahoo to sell it, a lose on Verizon's side because they didn't know wtf to do with those bees either.

Automatic came in like, "Omg. Bees in a website. With money. We can monetize this. We can get rid of the bees. We'll take that off your hands for you, Verizon!"

And Verizon was like, "oh thank god, give us any cash you can spare"

And Automatic paid that assuming they would figure out how to finally crack through Tumblr's lack of profitability to get our sweet sweet money honey. They're forcing through Tumblr Live, for example, because if it works, they'll eventually find the optimal equation between "lose the unprofitable users" and "make maximum money." It's the same reason EA is in the business of microtransactions and doesn't give a damn about people complain until enough people reject it to actually hurt their bottom line.

If Automatic fails to do that?

They're just another Yahoo and Verizon. They sell it to the next sucker they can trick into thinking the site's a money-maker "in the right hands lmaooooo". They give up, essentially, but there's more money to be had in passing it on while the site still actively has users than it is to destroy the site entirely - because then you can't sell it for as much.

So feel free to dig in your heels and resist every single change! Send all your feedback! One-star the app! Delight in staff saying, "You're just making it harder for us!"

Yeah, good! Making staff's life harder is actually the goal. The harder we are to monetize in XYZ way, the more they have to decide if it's worth a new approach or cutting their losses. The less money they get, the more they have to either revert back to less profitable but tolerated options, or the closer they get to selling the site that's been publicly documented to hate XYZ tactics.

The worse reception these changes get, the closer the users get to an outright revolt, the more other companies go, "Eeee. You can't trick us into thinking they can be monetized." And that pushes Automatic towards one of two options:

Unload their "bad asset" onto someone else ASAP, with as positive of a spin on Tumblr's profitability as they can create

Keep the asset but accept that XYZ feature or tactic isn't getting them the cash they want, so try something else.

It's that simple. They're difficult for users to corner Automatic, of course, because Automatic bought this site with "The users are gonna try to boycott lol" rainy day funds and a lot of optimism that they could 'break' the userbase. But that's a corporate spirit that erodes once they really aren't making the money they thought they would.

Who knows? With enough documented resistance, the next owners might go in ready to embrace the existing Tumblr culture, especially if they can be convinced of how unique it is. You have nothing to lose with Automatic because they aren't interested in that. Quit panicking, this is all normal, and it's quite literally just a waiting game.

Continue to panic publicly, though! That does help. :) No - seriously, that affects Tumblr's external marketability and monetization potential, which further pushes Automatic into one of those two "sell or submit" options lmaoooo

[shizucheese]

So you know how there are some people who like to attack/ vilify those who don't like Lae'zel and they try to paint it as a sexism thing or claim it's "because she's not conventionally attractive" or w/e and then bring up Astarion and Shadowheart "because they're racist too" in the same breath? I think I had a bit of an epiphany on this that needs to be shared. Putting content warnings here as well as in the tags just to make sure we're thoroughly covered: references to trama, physical and verbal abuse, SA, toxic family dynamics, religious trauma, and religious zealotry ahead. Also note that this doesn't just apply to people whose favorite character is Astarion and/ or Shadowheart, I'm just focusing on them since they're the ones people complaining about people not liking Lae'zel always bring up.

Okay, now with all that out of the way... I think the people who complain about people not liking Lae'zel but liking Astarion and Shadowheart and fixating on the whole "but they're racist too" argument miss some pretty major points regarding why a lot of people like Astarion and Shadowheart and how the way Lae'zel treats you in Act 1 is a major factor. A lot of people like Astarion and Shadowheart because on some level, they relate to them. Maybe they came from a household where one or more adult was abusive (physically or verbally), narcissistic, overbearing and/ or controlling. Or maybe it was a friend or romantic partner, or more than one, who used them and abused them and treated them like dirt. Or maybe they're an SA survivor. Or maybe they have religious trauma, and maybe that religious trauma is exacerbated by the fact that they have people in their lives who refuse to change their views, or even double down on them, even when shown evidence that contradicts their beliefs. Or maybe it's some combination of these.

Even the reasons why Astarion doesn't like the Gur and Shadowheart doesn't like Githyanki is steeped in trauma: it was a group of Gur beating Astarion nearly to death that lead to him being tricked by Cazador into becoming his spawn (and if he hadn't been turned into a vampire, he would have died), and Shadowheart makes multiple references to the fact that she saw githaynki cut down her comrades during her mission with some serious brutality.

A lot of these people who identify with Astarion and Shadowheart because of their own past traumas have promised themselves that they're never going to let anyone teat them that way, speak to them that way, try to control them, act like they own them, etc. etc. ever again. I know that's what happened to me. Now let's look at how Lae'zel treats you in Act 1, shall we? She's verbally abusive. When you try to talk to her, she simply replies to you with "Speak" as if you're some kind of dog. When she first propositions you for sex, she's still at her most abusive towards you, but because you fight good, she wants to lick your skin, taste your sweat, and "take what's hers." Even once the entire party knows--because we literally all see it in action with our own eyeballs--that the only thing preventing us from becoming either brain washed slaves to the Absolute or just straight up becoming mind flayers is the Astral Prism, she still keeps trying to take it and return it to the githyanki, even going so far as to try and kill Shadowheart for it. Even when her loyalty to her culture nearly gets her killed in the Zaithisk, and you tell her the true nature of it, she refuses to accept the reality and tries to blame the doctor, who she accuses of being a traitor, rather than accept that no, actually, it was working exactly as intended. It takes Voss showing up at our camp after everything else that had happened, and telling her the truth about Orpheus--something we had already been told about and found books covering before that point--to get her to even consider the fact that um actually maybe Vlaakith is evil (something that coming face to face with her and her nearly killing us didn't even convince her of).

All of these things I've described about Lae'zel in Act 1 are things that can be incredibly triggering to someone who has experienced any of the traumatic experiences I described above that has resulted in people identifying with and latching onto Astarion and Shadowheart. And like....does Lae'zel get better in Acts 2 and 3? Sure. But by that point, the damage has been done. And like in real life, Lae'zel isn't owed anything just because by Act 2 she's clearing the bear minimum of not being straight up abusive to your character. People aren't required to stop ranking her as their least favorite character, or straight up not liking her, after the way she treats you for the first third of the game. Especially not when that "first third" can easily be the part of the game you spend the most time in, with you spending dozens of hours in that part of the game, which also means they're spending the most time with Lae'zel before her character improves at all. Like I'm not saying that the ven diagram between "people who relate to Astarion and Shadowheart because of trauma" and "people who don't like Lae'zel" is a perfect circle, but the overlap is probably a way rounder oval shape than people who are too busy insisting that if she were a handsome man she would totally be popular appreciate. Before I wrap this up, I want to touch on that last part because I think it's important to address. I've seen people make that claim, but would Lae'zel really be more popular if she were a guy? I haven't seen a single person who makes this claim say they would like Lae'zel more if she were a guy. What I have seen is multiple people say in response that they would actually like her less if she had been a guy, which is honestly also how I feel.

Maybe this is something worth exploring in a separate post someday, but I would actually argue that the only reason Lae'zel works as a party member at all is because she's a woman. Flip her gender and she becomes an abusive man who treats you like you're beneath him and who says he wants to taste your skin and your sweat and claim ownership of your body as the first "nice" thing he ever says to you. As a woman who already has to deal with the general sexism of our society (including lawmakers trying to take ownership of our bodies and make medical decisions for us instead of leaving it between us and our doctors), especially a woman with multiple male-dominated hobbies, that's something I would find incredibly triggering--(even more so than I already found Lae'zel's sex proposition, which already made me super uncomfortable and had me thinking "wow imagine if a guy said this"). That's not "edgy and mysterious;" a man who treats you poorly but still thinks he's entitled to you/ your body, would be the poster boy for toxic masculinity, and I can promise you that more people would have taken issue with a character like that than they do with Lae'zel as she is.

Especially people with trauma like what I described at the beginning of this..

[amporella]

Those posts floating around about how all the boys are equally as bad as Cartman (and thus the hatred of Cartman is driven by fatphobia) are really undeserving of a response because of how much of a reach they are, but I'm going to give one anyway:

To compare Cartman to the other boys is foolish for many reasons, but the largest one is that it utterly misses the point of the actual show, and of the characters. Naturally, as a fandom, we try and see the characters as more than they're intended to be, and in some cases, that's a totally reasonable perspective - take a character like Craig, for example, where his characterization is limited solely by the fact that we see very little of him. For all we know, his inner life could be rich; in fact, it's likely that it is. It makes logical sense to want to explore that more deeply.

Cartman's characterization is also limited, but not because his screen time is lacking; he very well could be the character we've seen the absolute MOST of throughout the series. Instead, it's limited because Cartman is not an actual character. He's one huge extended joke, and the fact that we don't see his good qualities isn't because we don't have time to; it's because he literally doesn't have any.

Cartman exists for shock value, and that's it. He exists to be an iconic example of what's wrong with the world; he's antisemitic, racist, and a raging misogynist. Even the scenes where he appears to have a 'soft spot' for something aren't actually representative of his character; when he appears to try and save cats in Major Boobage, it's all part of a joke about Anne Frank. In Post-Covid, when he appears to develop a family of his own and convert, it's part of a scheme to take down Kyle. Every single action of his throughout the series is either a joke, or part of the build up to a joke at some minority group's expense - usually Jewish people.

His actions - his attempted genocides, attempted murders, antisemitic comments - can be taken at face value because of those traits. When Matt and Trey have Cartman make an antisemitic comment, they don't intend for you to think of it as another tally mark of the Bad Things these characters do; they intend for it to be viewed as a legitimately evil act coming from an irredeemable character, which is balanced out by zero positive qualities.

Have the other boys done bad things too? Sure! Kyle did blow up Canada. But is that actually intended to be seen in the same light? Kyle's act of blowing up Canada isn't meant to be seen realistically; it's metaphorical, and it's supposed to be read as absurd. Cartman, on the other hand, is supposed to be taken literally. Reading into him as a character as someone who is secretly pure of heart, or even just on the same moral level as the other characters, shows a massive lack of media literacy. Furthermore, when Kyle blows up Canada, it's significant because it's out of the norm for him. We don't bat an eye anymore at Cartman's behavior because that is literally the point of his character. It's only when he doesn't do anything along those lines that his behavior comes off as uncharacteristic.

So no, Matt and Trey don't intend for Kyle to be 'just as bad' as Cartman. Kyle is a legitimate character, while Cartman is a political statement at best condemning nazis and a joke at worst. The fact that we're even discussing comparing a Jewish character's few and far in between harmful mistakes to a nazi's (whose ONLY REAL CHARACTER TRAIT IS TO BE A NAZI) intentional attempts at genocide is baffling to me. You are absolutely grasping at straws if you think Kyle (and the other boys) being as bad as Cartman is what Matt and Trey were going for.

This is literally the most basic concept of the show.

[worflesbian]

right okay i dont know exactly how persistent an issue this is bc i almost never go into the tags on this website, but even ive noticed this happening so i feel like that’s justification to make a post about it. the whitewashing of julian bashir as an established Thing not just in the fandom but in official merch has been discussed before, but recently i’ve noticed the inverse happening with martok and b’elanna, a white character and a lighter latina character who people seem to often draw darker than they are in canon. and there’s like. a Lot going on there to unpack.

so this video goes into some detail about the racism baked into the origins and design of the klingons in tos, it’s very informative about the anti-asian stereotypes especially in a 60s context but i feel like it doesnt really cover the way that antiblackness becomes a more significant factor in the next gen era so like. if you didn’t know, the majority of the klingon characters in the next gen-ds9-voyager era are either played by actors with dark skin or Very frequently by white actors in heavy dark makeup. if you look up the actors of grilka, alexander, kehleyr, and sirella for example you’ll see what im talking about like the difference is Stark and these are some of the main recurring klingons across both shows. hopefully i do not need to explain why packing white actors in brown makeup to play members of a species characterised as violent, warlike and animalistic is racist. i say hopefully bc who knows with this website. anyway i’d recommend this video for a wider context on the legacy of blackface in tv!

martok is a rare example of a klingon played by a white actor who, as far as i can tell, does not have his skin significantly darkened. so to see him frequently being drawn with darker skin is uh Slightly Concerning given everything in the previous paragraph! ive even seen art where he’s drawn darker than julian in the same post which... anyway im not trying to blanket condemn reinterpreting the design of alien characters in fanart, but i am asking white fans like myself in particular to think critically as to why, out of all the white characters and aliens on ds9, martok is the one you want to do that with.

because b’elanna is not a white character i think its a slightly different situation, but at the same time she does have lighter skin and i have seen fanart of her drawn much much darker and once again, im not condeming it especially in works ive seen which explore the relationship bewteen her latina and klingon identities, but its something white fans need to handle carefully. in the voyager episode Faces where she gets split into a human and klingon version of her (dont have time to unpack all that) you can see the difference in undertones between human b’elanna and klingon b’elanna (also included a pic of regular b’elanna for reference). the brown makeup is obvious here too and if you can see why it might be racist to attribute a person’s rage and violent impulses to a part of themself that is then personified as darker skinned/more brown, then you might also see some of the wider problems going on here and can understand that this is something that demands a lot of thought and consideration.

i’d like to reiterate that this is a very complex and nuanced issue, especially considering the intersection of fictional race within the setting and the racial biases operating behind the scenes/metatextually, and i’d love to discuss it more (and to cite better sources than youtube videos when i have the time). but for now i’d just like to say yeah just ask yourself what the implications might be to drawing these characters in particular darker than they are in canon, especially if theyre the only characters you do that for, or you’re intentionally contrasting them with other characters (e.g. b/7 fanart) or yk. drawing a white character darker than a character of colour like ive seen people do with julian and martok.

[ganondoodle]

i am so extremely confused on how you can acknowledge belly dancing not needing to be sexual yet. still insist that nintendo is sexualizing young gerudo with the attire. the makeup, heels and how impractical it is to wear the shit they wear in the desert i understand. im not defending those design mistakes. but??? jfc.

oh. so, assuming you are the same anon as before, you WERE asking in bad faith then, or are intentionally missunderstanding what im saying, got it, and now you are trying to twist my words around to fit your little narrative about me being the problem and not mega corporation uwu nintendo with a history of racism (to which this issue is extremely attached to)

so, since you apparently didnt understand what i said, and didnt watch the video i attached either, bc that goes into detail of everything as well, im gonna spell it out once more, and i will even EMPHASIZE words like THIS, so its easier to understand, just for you <3

i did NOT say that the 'belly dance' outfit doesnt NEED to be sexual, i SAID it is/was not sexual IN ITS ORIGIN, BUT was TURNED INTO what boils down to nothing else but a sexy strippers outfit by western people and has been used as NOTHING BUT sexual for decades in the vast majority of media of all kind-

which MEANS, that although in ORIGIN it might not have been sexual, the unfortunate PROBLEM is that through its extreme popularization as such you now have to assume IT IS sexual, bc that is pretty much ALWAYS the intent, people dont even know it as anything but a sexual thing

and before you can even say the "well maybe they didnt intent it a such" blah blah, this is NOT SOLELY about the outfit itself being the only problem here, its the whole package, even if they DID have good intentions or did it subconsciously (which, mind you, should also tell you just how much this kind of picture of middle eastern people has been spread, how common it is to see them like this that its what most people actually think they are like) it nevertheless sends a certain message, and again, ITS THE WHOLE FUCKING PACKAGE, everything, from outfit, to design elements, to dialog, to lore, to even camera angles, you cannot view it as a seperate thing bc it is, inherently, not able to be seperated from everything, its as if you took an incredibly racist caricature, zoomed in and said "LOOK they used a realistic kind of skin tone, its totally not racist!!"

you also called these design decisions "mistakes", but they are not, in fact mistakes, a mistake is when you notice after posting a drawing that you forgot to color in a strand of hair, however, ALL of these design and writing decisions are deliberate, they had to sit down, in a giant team of people, to come up with it, then proceed to design and write it, approve it, make it, and ship it, and saw no problem with it, which is a problem

now, im not saying nintendo personally is telling you "its ok to fuck kids", but things have meanings, and if you are making something, ESPECIALLY using something that isnt of your own culture, you should think about things, and what meanings a thing can have attached to, they are a giant corporation, not a single, very uninformed at best- or very racist at worst, human being, they have the means to do research, but they did not do it or think its fine, maybe even good, which deserves to be called out

i am a big, and longtime, zelda fan, but beign a fan of something doesnt mean you cannot criticise it, or aknowledge that its in many ways flawed, part of being a fan is being able to recognize things that are bad and demand better

if you send me another ask spouting bullshit or purposefully missunderstanding what im saying im gonna punt you into the filthy barrel of blocked porn bots, bc i dont have anon messages enabled to receive shit like this but to allow people who might be too shy to send normal asks to talk to me.

jfc.