serious
After seeing alot of things on twitter about Lovejoy coming back, blah blah blah etc... Etc...
What's come to my attention is that what Wilbur soot has done (NOT JUST TO SHELBY BUT OTHER ALSO) has messed up the sense of what consent actually is.
It's sounds simple. Saying yes or no. But things and topics like this aren't linear.
You should not, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, let a celebrity lead your way of life and/or manipulate what you believe to be right and wrong.
You do not have to "pick sides" you do not have to defend a (probably) millionaire because they've fucked up, and you certainly should not change your outlook on life because of what a celebrity has done or said and because you still want to be fans of them.
First things first
Consent can be both given, and taken WHENEVER.
Not no "but they said yes before" or anything like that. You can say no afterwards. No discussions. It shouldn't be an argument or a heated debate for you to say no.
If you don't like a certain type of food, are you gonna force yourself or get your partner to force you to eat it? No.
If you don't like something, should you force yourself to like it just because you said yes 20 minutes ago? No.
You can say no. Whenever.
I don't care, if you're male, female, non-binary or anywhere else on the gender spectrum, YOU CAN SAY NO.
Second.
You can communicate that you didn't like something, even after it happen.
No questions asked.
If you didn't like it, and you came to that realisation after, it shouldn't take a fucking rocket scientist to be like "Hey my S.O, I didn't like this. Can you not do it again?"
Communication in a relationship is important. Extremely important. And it shouldn't be taken lightly.
If you don't like a restaurant after eating there, then you shouldn't have to go back, right? You can say no to going again.
This may seem small and probably meaningless, but imagine taking this scenario and applying it to something you love, something you do, something that you want to do.
Is it fair that you should tolerate something you dislike because of another person needs/wants? Absolutely not.
It doesn't matter if they say please with 50,000 cherries ontop, with a "but my friend said" or a "but X let me do it all the time".
No, believe it or not, means fucking no.
Third.
If someone repeats a behavioural pattern over the course of multiple months/years inwhich that you've know them, and it hurts you or you dislike like it, and they KEEP DOING IT even after you asked them not too, then they're not worth it.
You do not have to tolerate someone else's pity-party, designed to guilt you into staying because of "reasons"
"they're getting better"
"they're getting help and all the things they need"
"they didn't mean it"
"I'm used to it"
"they didn't mean to hurt me"
"I promise they're getting support"
Yeah and how about you?
Your own mental health, emotional health and physical health should not come at the expense of others.
It may seem selfish to some, I do agree, but do not set yourself back for others to move forwards.
Sometimes it's better to be alone.
Partners should love and support each other and if they do shit like this then that isn't support. That's a 80-20 % relationship and it's not right.
I can really only comment on the Wilbur Soot drama because I'm a fan of mcyt people. But what he's done, justified or not, has genuinely messed with 16yr-20yr+ old sense of reality and what they believe consent is.
It's shocking. Please. Please. Please. Do not let a celebrity drama change anything in your life that you hold dear to you or that benefits you.
8 notes
·
View notes
having thoughts about my friend julio in the miracle job, who we know best as the guy with the gun in his waistband. <3
like, okay, the "even gangsters recognise the sanctity of catholic priests" thing is…… problematic. just nodding towards that because I think it needs to be nodded towards.
but I love how little ego julio brings to the scene once the secret (that one of his people took a side job without telling him, a job he emphatically disapproves of) is out there. hardison shoves the guilty party to reveal his injury and eliot glances to julio to see if he means trouble, but julio's attention is just entirely fixed on the guy. he politely asks for the gun back and uses it to get the answers that hardison and eliot need.
it's transactional, practical. respectful of eliot as someone who's shown he's not to be messed with, who's on julio's turf, but who's behaving with respect and restraint himself - eliot's there for entirely reasonable answers on one specific issue, uses violence only in reaction to and in proportion with the threats against him, and frankly de-escalates the situation pretty damn well by grabbing the gun in julio's jeans and knocking out the next guy who threatens him. (seriously, for violence-type criminals, it was practically diplomatic.)
and it's clear that julio's underling Broke The Rules. like, I'd have preferred we had this encounter with a different underlying message than "priests are inherently good and respecting them is the obvious choice," because oof. (this show is kinda about acknowledging when people in power all too often abuse that power, after all. that and seeking justice.)
but it's an interesting little unquestioned-by-the-narrative-or-the-characters nod to honour among thieves.
and this fairly formal, mutually respectful, almost ritualised encounter ends with "gentlemen, I'll leave you to your internal affairs" which:
very cool, nice job eliot
possibly discreetly requests that julio not start in on any punitive actions until eliot and hardison are away, so they're not privy to that specific crime (the last we see of julio he's crouching and pointing the gun at the guy very close, and eliot gets them out of there pretty quickly, so there could be some implications there, and it's a very understated moral messiness if so)
gets eliot a little nod from julio like "thanks for bringing this to my attention, I appreciate your civility here, not ceding my authority though" (and eliot doesn't ask him to.)
it's a great little interaction. it's a (sigh, mostly) great little scene.
137 notes
·
View notes