#which gender will you choose?

[legend-of-laurel]

after a single episode of blue eye samurai I’ve decided that whatever mizu’s gender is we need to put it on a shelf where cis people can’t access it

[boyfridged]

i’ve been thinking a lot about what is so unique and appealing about 80s robin jay’s moral standing that got completely lost in plot later on. and i think a huge part of it is that in a genre so focused on crime-fighting, his motivations and approach don’t focus on the category of crime at all. in fact, he doesn’t seem to believe in any moral dogma; and it’s not motivated by nihilism, but rather his open-heartedness and relational ethical outlook.

we first meet (post-crisis) jay when he is stealing. when confronted about his actions by bruce he’s confident that he didn’t do anything wrong – he’s not apologetic, he doesn’t seem to think that he has morally failed on any account. later on, when confronted by batman again, jay says that he’s no “crook.” at this point, the reader might assume that jay has no concept of wrong-doing, or that stealing is just not one of the deeds that he considers wrong-doing. yet, later on we see jay so intent on stopping ma gunn and her students, refusing to be implicit in their actions. there are, of course, lots of reasons for which we can assume he was against stealing in this specific instance (an authority figure being involved, the target, the motivations, the school itself being an abusive environment etc.), but what we gather is that jay has an extremely strong sense of justice and is committed to moral duty. that's all typical for characters in superhero comics, isn't it? however, what remains distinctive is that this moral duty is not dictated by any dogma – he trusts his moral instincts. this attitude – his distrust toward power structures, confidence in his moral compass, and situational approach, is something that is maintained throughout his robin run. it is also evident in how he evaluates other people – we never see him condemning his parents, for example, and that includes willis, who was a petty criminal. i think from there arises the potential for a rift between bruce and jay that could be, have jay lived, far more utilised in batman comics than it was within his short robin run.

after all, while bruce’s approach is often called a ‘philosophy of love and care,’ he doesn’t ascribe to the ethics of care [eoc] (as defined in modern scholarship btw) in the same way that jay does. ethics of care ‘deny that morality consists in obedience to a universal law’ and focus on the ideals of caring for other people and non-institutionalized justice. bruce, while obviously caring, is still bound by his belief in the legal system and deontological norms. he is benevolent, but he is also ultimately morally committed to the idea of a legal system and thus frames criminals as failing to meet these moral (legal-adjacent) standards (even when he recognizes it is a result of their circumstances). in other words, he might think that a criminal is a good person despite leading a life of crime. meanwhile, for jay there is no despite; jay doesn't think that engaging in crime says anything about a person's moral personality at all. morality, for him, is more of an emotional practice, grounded in empathy and the question of what he can do for people ‘here and now.’ he doesn’t ascribe to maxims nor utilitarian calculations. for jay, in morality, there’s no place for impartiality that bruce believes in; moral decisions are embedded within a net of interpersonal relationships and social structures that cannot be generalised like the law or even a “moral code” does it. it’s all about responsiveness. 

to sum up, jay's moral compass is relative and passionate in a way that doesn't fit batman's philosophy. this is mostly because bruce wants to avoid the sort of arbitrariness that seems to guide eoc. also, both for vigilantism, and jay, eoc poses a challenge in the sense that it doesn't create a certain 'intellectualised' distance from both the victims and the perpetrators; there's no proximity in the judgment; it's emotional.

all of this is of course hardly relevant post-2004. there might be minimal space for accommodating some of it within the canon progression (for example, the fact that eoc typically emphasises the responsibility that comes with pre-existing familial relationships and allows for prioritizing them, as well as the flexibility regarding moral deliberations), but the utilitarian framework and the question of stopping the crime vs controlling the underworld is not something that can be easily reconciled with jay’s previous lack of interest in labeling crime. 

[strawbs-screaming]

looking through my old messages is so traumatizing i want to go back in time and kick myself in the stomach like what possessed you...

[kirnet]

hmm i wonder what yall's opinion of this is but i'm not entirely sure of how i feel when it comes to gender selected/ gender variable ROs in IF games? like on one hand these games are very much geared towards wish fulfillment and personal fun (a good thing!) so choosing makes that easier, and it also makes it so that more underrepresented dynamics (like an all female RO cast for a lesbian character) are able to be played out, which are all very good.

but on the other hand i feel like it takes the teeth out of some of the character decisions? Adam and Nate wayhavenchronicles being a knight and sailor respectively is all well and fun, but Ava and Nat?? that's crazy. a woman knight and a woman sailor?? there's such an interesting story and implied history that would inform their personalities. Like yes, A is the same character no matter what, but a lot of character information is lost in that changeover (information that was probably unintentional but, yk). A butch knight who lives through 900 years of western history has a very different reasoning for being the way she is than a noble blond man lol.

like both are valid approaches to take, both serve their functions, and in certain settings the gender difference is not going to be an issue, but when it does have a real world historical basis it tends to take me out of it a bit lol. idk!

[corfisers]

you see, talking about transgender reading of yashiro inevitably leads to talking about his bisexulity, which is another thing that you could kind of hand wave and people generally prefer not to aknowledge

[feldsparite]

If Zenkichi was part of the LGBT community where do you think he be?

hiii anon sorry this is like. super late. i was gonna draw a comic for a response but alas. i am too busy, and now i appear homophobic....

anyway he's solidly bisexual to meeeee. and more importantly, he doesn't know it. doesn't even know what the hell bisexuality is until he's 43 and wondering why sakamoto jokes about liking boys when he'd been very obviously checking out the girls on the beach

[dallonwrites]

I'm reading Real Life by Brandon Taylor right now (love btw) and it's basically showing me in real time what I've thought about prose for a while as someone who mainly learnt from writing "flowery prose"

Brandon is really good at having this smooth, precise prose that I think really works with the type of book Real Life is ("slow" plot, only covers a few days and really sinks its teeth into small moments about relationships across those few days). But I think he's also really good at knowing when to go deeper with the prose and when to keep it simple. Like there's this part that sticks out to me because there's a line that literally is like "the grass is very green and very straight" and all I can think about is how in a lot of writing advice I've encountered about prose and descriptive writing, that would be used as what not to do. That you should use something more "interesting" than something like "very green". But in this scene it worked really well for me because it fit! IMO it suited the rhythm of the scene, the vibe, what the focus was on, the narrator's character voice. The scene already had a lot of atmosphere, emotion, conflict, urgency etc. and this line still effectively added to it in a way that was quick and simple that suited the rhythm/beats. It's not just that Brandon chose not to be descriptive then, it's that what he chose to do what JUST AS if not MORE effective for the moment!

And like I LOVE playing and experimenting with language and prose I think it's so fun. I think a lot of the advice about prose and descriptive writing, things like show don't tell and advice about adjectives/adverbs and using "too simple" words, words like "very", are great introductory tools to intentionally think about exploring your prose deeper. But like all writing advice they will not apply to every writing situation. These advice and craft ideas are important but what's imo more important is understanding when and how to use them to best benefit a moment. Knowing when prose will benefit from being more intricate and descriptive and when something simple and bare will not only do the job but do it more effectively. And it doesn't just vary from writer to writer or from story to story, but scene to scene imo! Brandon has some beautiful descriptive lines in this novel that to me are not inherently "better" than the very green line just because they are more complex, both do what they need to do and are effective in their own moments

And this is all stuff I already felt. I have projects that benefit from really saturated, dense prose and others that benefit from really sparse prose. But seeing an author who I admire a lot use these "simple" descriptions and not just use them, but use them well, because he has thought about what moments will benefit from simplicity and what won't, was really reassuring. Writers trust yourselves!! You know your prose, your voice, your book, and you are allowed to do what others may consider "breaking" the rules if it feels like the right move for your writing

[thebananwithaplan]

(( Banana out here trying to rewrite his own history with his sense of humor.))

[imaginariumgeographica]

I feel like ive had every possible experience with mandatory title fields for conferences this year and my conclusion remains: stop requiring titles for ppl

[ishouldsleepbut]

so i just found out about this thing called gender apathy. the term was coined in 2015 and it's when you don't care what gender people perceive you as. you're indifferent to gender and how it applies to you. and yeah, that's pretty much me :)

[biracy]

Cannot find my older post about it (tbh I didn't try very hard) but honestly I am so tired of people trying to pretend like there's any sort of consistency to "cis women getting a nose job is evil and NOT feminist. However all transsexual surgery is Holy Holy Holy". It's truly not surprising how often people end up reblogging from like, actual tradcaths about "modern women ruining their natural feminine beauty" or whatever. I've said this all before so I don't wanna repeat myself but obviously this does not mean "you cannot critique what drives people (cis or trans) to get 'plastic surgery'" or "women's choices exist in a vacuum" (although I would roll back some of the extreme performative hatred for women who make The Bad Not Feminist Choices), but it DOES mean "stop pretending like there's any sort of actual distinction between Cis Plastic Surgery (bad) and Trans 'Gender-Affirming' Surgery (good) that does not fully rely on the medicalization of being transgender" and it ALSO means "stop pretending to care about bodily autonomy when what you really mean is 'people can do things with their bodies I think are cool and good, but not things that I don't like. Those things should literally be banned, that's how we will save women'"

[mysteriouslybluepirate]

Heartbeat(1997)-Watching Con O'Neill's old stuff cause it's fun. Day #? REX HAWKINS!

Heartbeat S07-Ep.16 The Queen’s Message

Should you watch this? 

It’s fun, you don’t need context for the series, and its a full story. Fun for what it is. Con in this is wet and pathetic. It’s 50 minutes, and another one-off thing. Not as fun as Pie in the Sky, still a good time. 

As always, thanks to my mutual Con lovers! If you haven't watched it, skip this, as always! I hope everyone has a great week!

@dianetastesmetal @gydima @ivegotnonameidea @treesofgreen @vicsuragi

That was his milk! Fucking rude.

How about we never borrow money ever again! Why is it so easy to get in debt with the mob? Maybe it's my small-town roots showing, but damn.

Also, I’m jealous, why does Con's characters get choked out so often? That and the gun thing!

Are we allowed to hate the cops in this one, 'cause I already do

This had to have been made in the 90s

THIS IS THE DOCTOR ONE!!!!! The one where Con is in that white coat?

How are half the people in this looking like its still the 60s, love interest’s hair is interesting

Help Calude! He’s just an old guy, Jesus lady. 

The most homeless-looking man with a homeless-looking dog. 

G-man(half-life) Con Look

Who embroiders a Doctor’s jacket like that, it looks a mechanics smock 

This is Cons character from ‘Vengeance is Mine’s backstory.

Con is named Rex Hawkings yeah?

HE’S A MECHANIC!?! Oh, he’s a handyman. 

WHEN DOES THIS SHOW TAKE PLACE? Color TV’s? Weren’t they common in the 90s?

OH GOOD! HE’S NOT HOMELESS

That's a lil gremlin dog

Okay, the poor guy broke his antique, Rex sings in a choir and has a few ladies after him, then got shoved down the steps. A cop is suspicious of his motives

Weird hat lady totally influenced someone to push Rex.

Oh, Nevil did it with ladies' help, cool

THE CHIN STRAPS ON BOBBY HELMETS AHHHH

'LOL BAXTER'. Oh to be named Lol. That is a bard DND name begging to be stolen.

Her eyelashes bug me a bit, and I have no clue why.

Lol is waiting at Rex’s shop, great, lets have the mom be a witness.

“You finger me, you tell the cops?” EXCUSE ME? Is that what Lol just said?

The amount Con is able to spit in every role he’s in shocks me.

Calling the cops won't do shit babe, he's being strangled right now.

Oh Good, another Con character who knows to be careful with what you say to the cops

I feel for the homeless-looking guy, he’s just not given any slack. 

Shit, well, damn. Rex is kinda fucked. 

Oh good, you need to swindle a shit ton of people to make the money back. Lovely situation you got going on there Rex. 

He’s not too careful about not being seen near Rex in public, is Lol. 

The fact they kept a dog quiet that long in the back of a car is shocking. Also, clown car. That was like 12 guys.

HHALKJSDAHS Looney Tunes run into a door trick

Haaahakjlja Fucking love him, smashes the antique, great

Well, at least Rex got to sing at the thing at least. To an audience of fifteen or so people.  

HAAAAAAAAhahaha they replaced his part with a child!!!! 

I thought the Queen's Speech was also done through the radio, that’s the whole thing. Let the public hear it. 

You know, I want this same setup, but Con’s character is like, way more of a dangerous criminal. Not an incidental criminal, but has to keep up these two lives

Con’s panicking is very funning

It is obvious that he just wants protection

“Will that do?” *SMASHES PHONE.* He’s dumb and way too scared to survive prison. 

 LOL IS IN LOCKED IN THE SAME JAIL CELL AS RALPH!!!!!

That feels illegal. In so many ways. 

Oh look, they’re vibin. 

Scared Con is always kind of fun. 

God I don’t know most Christmas carols, huh. 

Whelp, Rex is imprisoned with the same guy who was threatening his life, and everything else is back to normal.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overall, not bad. I watched this one with the brother, so my commentary was a bit more sparse this time. We made a ton of ‘Vengeance is Mine’ x ‘This show’ jokes, which was very fun. I swear, he remembers that movie better than I do which was funny. My favorite joke being that guns magically respawn around Con's characters, and he just needs to find a kit. Go out and get rid of Lol.

This is one of the few characters where Con got to be scared as shit without any way to fight back. It’s funny that the whole plot revolves around Rex being kind of a piece of shit, and the cops don’t care. It doesn't really work for me.

Seriously, he rented out broken TVs. Which is scummy, yeah, but not the worst thing, and it’s not like he did it on purpose! You know how many broken LED TVs get returned every holiday season? It’s kinda normal for a ton of them to be shit. I guess he’s also kinda a dick for getting that one guy kicked out of the church choir, but it wasn’t that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. Idk, I was a bit more sympathetic to Rex than I was supposed to be? But that’s kinda common for these shows with Con being a guest star. Especially when he’s as pathetic as Rex is. 

I have no idea what this whole show is about. If the cops are the main focus or not. I liked the poor guy, he was generally fun. Everyone else just felt vaguely off putting. Might just be the dated lingo, this came out in 1997’ so… 

CON: 8/10. Really fun. Wet, pathetic, and this is one of his earlier roles, like 1 or 2 years after Pie in the Sky and Soldier Soldier. Cool for him to morally be a wrong and not an actual threat to anybody. His singing was great, and he gave a solid performance. Scared little rat man.

It’s dated, and it feels like it’s from its time. Generally, I don’t like town gossip stories and that is what this is. I wonder how this all ties into the rest of the show, but I have no want to go find out. Not bad though. 

(I also used my Con drinking game for this, and was well-hydrated!)

Solid 7-8/10. Great time!

[zanathan-aisling]

(dungeon meshi spoilers) to be honest though monsterfuckers have soured the falin reveal for me in general

[quietwingsinthesky]

soery for the ignorance but what's tma tme ?

no, it’s alright, no need to apologize for asking questions.

to break it down, tma/tme are acronyms for ‘transmisogyny affected/transmisogyny exempt’. they were coined, i must assume, with good intentions as a way to talk about how transphobia affects trans woman/transfems versus everyone else. which, yeah, obviously, how you’re perceived and gendered flavors the kind of violence you are subject to. the problem is that the terms have been used to enforce a new false binary, one in which anyone ‘tma’ experiences a more violent and traumatizing form of transphobia and anyone ‘tme’ just. doesn’t experience that, i guess. this is demonstrably false.

i mentioned intersexism in the post i assume you’re referring to because a lot of the time, what people mean when they say ‘tma/tme’ is ‘person who is amab/person who is afab’. the creation of any sex binary erases that intersex people exist, sweeps the shit they go through under the rug. and enforcing these categories in this way also leads to people’s lived experiences being denied or downplayed, because it turns out that transphobes don’t actually care what a doctor said about your genitals at birth or how you identify now when they attack you, they care about how they’re gendering you right now and how they perceive you as a threat. (there’s this idea that if someone ‘tme’ experiences transmisogynistic violence, that they’re just collateral damage of violence that was actually meant for anyone ‘tma’. that’s, frankly, dehumanizing as hell. it does not stop being transmisogyny directed at you just because you don’t fit a category someone else put on you.)

transmisogyny is real. transandrophobia is real. we are all hurt by transphobia, and having language to discuss the nuances of it is a damn good thing. trying to insist that our experiences all exist in opposition to each other, that for some of us to suffer means that others must be doing great, isn’t helpful. and strict binaries of any kind are only going to hurt people.

hopefully that helped. not exactly in my best essay writing mode. but that’s the basics of it and why i dislike its usage.

[grimark]

not that anybody asked but i do think terms like "cis+" or "cisn't", which i've seen thrown around in relation to the prev post, are a bit unnecessary. to me, it just seems like excessively atomising a fairly common experience, which is the desire to not be subject to the more uncomfortable and restrictive aspects of socially constructed gender roles. and sure, it might never even occur to a lot of cis people to do this kind of introspective analysis of their gender identities, and they might therefore be lacking some of the additional perspective of someone who has, but i don't think we necessarily need need a special new category for it. when you get down to it, "cis person who has previously questioned their gender" and "cis person who has never felt the need to question their gender" are both still cis, which in theory is a value-neutral description and a perfectly fine thing to be.

[milfbro]

it's actually so funny that they're putting warnings in the stories now

also they have way more gay and gender options these days. Choices app is going woke