#(I'm not familiar with the specifics but I'm aware there's a lot more nuance in the minutiae of the differences | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

storm-driver · 27 minutes

Text

hi, i have feelings about cartoon nostalgia and the audience perception of them 20 years on

this is gonna read hyper-specific, but bear with me

i refuse to credit butch hartman for the way danny phantom came out during it's first two seasons, at least outside of the initial pitch and the idea of the protagonist having white hair. i know the majority of enthusiasts for this show are more than aware of hartman's antics at this point. these anctics, i won't get into. other people are far more suited to explain that stuff vs me, a random guy on the internet. but there's very specific topics that i don't often see get brought up in detail, like the production and staff behind this show.

i'll get into it below the cut so as not to clutter your dashboard. but if you're not familiar with the actual production history of danny phantom, this might be interesting to read.

it's common knowledge these days that stephen silver is the one who developed the design for danny based on hartman's original rough sketches. the similarity between each drawing is apparent, but you can see clear as day which design was gonna be more apt for animation and overall audience allure back in 2003.

he also did character designs for hartman's other poster child, Fairly Oddparents. the trend is similar, though far from a huge concern. character design overhauls happen all the time in media production. designs might be too complicated for animation, so they get stripped down. or maybe things aren't complex enough and more nuance needs to be added. that's normal stuff, and i am not dunking on hartman for not nailing danny's design right out the gate. i'm pointing this out in case you've ever looked at butch hartman's recent work and wondered "how are these done by the same artist?"

the answer is they weren't. hartman had to adapt to stephen silver's conceptual designs in order to work on the storyboards. take from that what you will.

onto the actual writing.

butch barely wrote a single episode for this show's first two seasons.

steve marmel helped write at least 28 episodes of the original two seasons, with writers like sib ventress and marty isenberg bringing a good amount of episodes to the table, as well.

butch hartman is credited primarily for directing and storyboarding this show. the episode pitch and writing was by other people almost entirely. the ONLY episodes in the first two seasons that hartman is credited with having written are mystery meat, one of a kind and splitting images. and he's credited with co-writing these episodes alongside steve marmel and mark banker. ie, he did not write these episodes on his own. and allegedly, butch hartman had a tendency to be credited as a writer for an episode, even if he only wrote a few lines of dialogue. again, take from that what you will.

past that in season 3, he wrote infinite realms, torrent of terror, forever phantom, urban jungle, and ofc, phantom planet. which a lot of people know, these episodes in particular weren't the most enjoyable, nor was the overall direction of them very good.

a director's job is to make sure that the overall tone, feel, and message of the show is being kept consistent with intent. that means meeting with producers, who are the ones managing the, y'know, producing part of the whole project. it may sound like the director is the one heading the project if it's their job to keep things in check. which, i will not deny, hartman must've put in a good deal of work to make the show come out as well as it did.

but pile that with some of the off things per episode. the mean-spirited way that characters tend to be taught lessons, the voice direction getting a drastic change in season 3 (you can hear it explicitly with david kaufman suddenly going for higher pitches instead of the usual one he's done so far). there's really only one consistent motif in the entire show's OST. which isn't a bash against the music producer. it's a concern that the director of the show never asked him to change things up, and ONLY stuck to this one motif.

to briefly touch on the mean-spirited thing. there's multiple instances in the show where danny or someone else is seen fighting back against whatever has given them trouble, or they're taking matters into their own hands to ensure they won't be hurt ahead of time. and repeatedly, the show likes to kick these characters back down for trying to stand up. it's a trend in all of butch hartman's shows, and it's treated more like comedy than anything else. it's up to audience perception on how to view it. but for me personally, it starts to feel like an overused gag and turns into something more malevolent after seeing it overused almost every single episode.

okay besides that, i actually wanna look at specific examples of episodes that steve marmel wrote for. again, this is the guy who's more or less responsible for the show's serialization.

the complete list of episodes is as follows:

Mystery Meat, Parental Bonding, One of a Kind, Attack of the Killer Garage Sale, Splitting Images, What You Want, Bitter Reunions, Prisoners of Love, My Brother's Keeper, Shades of Gray, Fanning the Flames, Teacher of the Year, Fright Night, 13(Thirteen), Public Enemies, Memory Blank, Reign Storm, The Ultimate Enemy, The Fright Before Christmas, Secret Weapons, Flirting with Disaster, Micro Management , Kindred Spirits, and Reality Trip.

multiple episodes listed here are from the first season, which a lot of people consider the show's best. and of the handful listed for season 2, he wrote all of the hour-long specials.

i would be here for hours talking about how steve marmel tackles all of these characters and concepts significantly better than hartman does in season 3. but that's a topic best praised elsewhere. point is, if you watched any of these episodes and thought to yourself "wow, that was actually kinda clever," steve marmel is more or less the guy responsible.

butch hartman was in charge of direction, but that does not give him exclusive credit for every single line of dialogue or plot beat. there could be a LOT we just don't know because people on production staff don't want to comment. but the writing consistency taking a dive off the board by season 3, which is the same season that steve marmel departed from the project due to conflicting direction in the story? you might deduce that butch hartman was not the prized writer and artist behind this otherwise beloved cartoon.

to dredge up an easier-to-tackle target, season 3.

my criticisms are 18-year old echoes at this point, you've heard them all. from otherwise pointless episodes that don't develop the characters or world, to completely out-of-touch writing (looking at you, phantom planet) that juxtaposes the characters with everything we've been told about them so far. it became a slog of a season that didn't have any build-up to it's finale. the occasional gem of an episode like frightmare helped in some aspects. or the promise for something later with d-stabilized. but it all gets swept under the rug thanks to a rushed finale with poor build-up, bad writing direction for the characters, and most importantly, an unlasting effect on the viewer. (or a negative lasting effect, which is arguably worse)

for a season that knew it was on its last leg before inevitably needing to give up, there's seldom few episodes dedicated to advancing an overall narrative, and thus give a slimmer of hope for a satisfying conclusion. instead, the show goes all in with villain-of-the-week stories, and even the returning villains are hardly taken seriously or given more to do besides just being there.

of course, we know the reason steve marmel had left the project was because hartman wanted the show not to taken a more story-focused drive. it almost starts to feel like spite that kept the show so horribly grounded, letting it become stagnant before eventually being forgettable.

all this is in service of letting people know, it really wasn't butch hartman that made the show, not alone. death of the author and all that nonsense aside, he pitched the concept. and it takes a lot of love and dedication to make a concept something you can physically see and adore. don't let him swath in all the credit. recognize the others who made the work you can still enjoy.

#stormy weather #danny phantom #hey guess what i found in my drafts!!!#this is an INCREDIBLY old post #this is dating back to like almost 2016!!!#anyways i rewrote most of it because the og was a lil rough lol #but all of these feelings remain the same to this day #it's kinda wack #a younger me knew what he was feeling #and an older me knows how to say it

3 notes · View notes

jasper-pagan-witch · 1 year

Note

thank you so much! ok, apologies if some of these questions seem basic - again, i've tried to understand as much as i can by searching online. SO, a few that come to mind are: i guess different frequencies are used for ham radio communication vs. broadcast. lots of sources emphasize that there's a big difference between ham radio and broadcast. is there no overlap between the two, like, technically or socially? i know you're not supposed to use amateur radio for commercial purposes, so a lot of the radio events, broadcasts, activities, etc that i'm familiar with from listening to commercial radio probably aren't options.

another question: what are nets like?

on a slightly different note: if a person is listening in on an amateur radio conversation, but not speaking, can others on that frequency tell they're listening? how?

Aaalright, I had to take a break because of painful headaches and also meetings with my ARES group (ARES stands for Amateur Radio Emergency Service, for those of y'all who aren't aware).

Please notice: I came into amateur radio through ARES, so my personal experiences with amateur radio are colored through that lens.

Also, I apologize for this whole ass essay.

Ham Radio VS Broadcast

Technically: There is no difference. In an unlocked radio (which is becoming a rare hot ticket item), you can literally go from listening to FM radio to scooting over a few numbers and talking to Brazil or Portugal.

Legally: We're not supposed to do that because the FCC says not to, and the FCC is not a government entity to take lightly. Even the Joker would fear the FCC. We have to behave ourselves. We're not even allowed to swear on the air waves :(

Socially: Possibly the biggest divide BECAUSE of the legal part. With the exception of people who work for professional radio stations who also happen to have amateur radio licenses, there's no overlap between us.

Amateur Radio Nets

Counterquestion: What sort of net are we talking about? A roundtable or ragchew? A weekly ARES net? An emergency net? Considering how niche emergency service-based amateur radio is, I'm going to assume you mean a roundtable, but feel free to come back for the other two that I know more about.

There are two ways to run a roundtable or ragchew net:

Everyone who's involved will check in at the beginning of the net, and the net control operator will direct it around the circle in order.

Everyone will check in at one point during the net and give their input. They will not be revisited unless they purposefully check back in, which is usually done by transmitting and saying the word "recheck".

During any and all nets, anyone actively participating MUST transmit their callsign and identify themselves every ten minutes from when they first check in. The exception is during emergency nets, but we won't get into that just yet. Typically, all you have to do is give your callsign across the radio again.

If you have questions about callsigns specifically, feel free to ask about those, because there's some nuance~ there that most people miss.

Lurkers

Unless they have actively checked in on a net, you cannot tell who's listening on the radio. We always assume that someone is listening, and that that someone will turn and report us to the FCC immediately if we mess something up.

So we won't be treating radio transmissions as some secret alternative to phone calls or text messages. Sorry to all would-be amateur radio spies out there.

Hopefully this answered some of your questions! Feel free to ask any more as needed!

~Jasper

#so sorry that this took a few days #answered #sunflowerbutch #amateur radio

7 notes · View notes

olderthannetfic · 3 years

Note

I'm a Chinese, nationally and racially. Racial projection seems to be a common practice in western fandom, doesn't it? I find it a bit... weird to witness the drama ignited upon shipping individuals with different races, or the tendency to separate characters into different "colors" even though the world setting doesn't divide races like that. Such practice isn't a thing here. Mind explaining a bit on this phenomenon?

Sure, I can try. But of course, fish aren’t very good at explaining the water they swim in.

Americans aren’t good at detecting our own Americanness, and a lot of what you’re seeing is very much culturally American rather than Western in general. (In much of Europe, “race” is a concept used by racists, or so I’m told, unlike in the US where it’s seen more neutrally.) Majority group members (i.e. me, a white girl) aren’t usually the savviest about minority issues, but I’ll give it a shot.

The big picture is that most US race stuff boils down to our attempts to justify and maintain slavery and that dynamic being applied, awkwardly, to everyone else too, even years after we abolished slavery.

There’s a concept called the “one drop rule” where a person is “black” if they have even one drop of black blood.

We used to outlaw “interracial” marriage until quite recently. (That meant marriage between black people and white people with Asians and Hispanic people and others wedged in awkwardly.) Here’s the Wikipedia article on this, which contains the following map showing when we legalized interracial marriage. The red states are 1967.

That’s within living memory for a ton of people! Yellow is 1948 to 1967. This is just not very long ago at all. (Hell, we only fully banned slavery in 1865, which is also just not that long ago when it comes to human culture.)

Why did we have this bananas-crazy set of laws and this idiotic notion that one remote ancestor defines who you are? It boils down to slavery requiring a constant reaffirming that black people are all the same (and subhuman) while white people are all this completely separate category. The minute you start intermarrying, all of that breaks down. This was particularly important in our history because our system of slavery involved the kids of slaves being slaves and nobody really buying their way out. Globally, historically, there are other systems of slavery where there was more mobility or where enslaved people were debtors with a similar background to owners, and thus the people in power were less threatened by ambiguity in identity.

Post-slavery, this shit hung around because it was in the interests of the people in power to maintain a similar status quo where black people are fundamentally Other.

A lot of our obsession with who counts as what is simply a legacy of our racist past that produced our racist present.

The other big factor in American concepts of identity is that we see ourselves as a nation of immigrants (ignoring our indigenous peoples, as usual). A lot of people’s families arrived here relatively recently, and we often don’t have good records of exactly where they were from, even aside from enslaved people who obviously wouldn’t have those records. Plenty of people still identify with a general nationality (”Italian-American” and such), but the nuance the family might once have had (specific region of Italy, specific hometown) is often lost. Yeah, I know every place has immigrants, and lots of people don’t have good records, but the US is one of those countries where families have on average moved around a lot more and a lot more recently than some, and it affects our concepts of identity. I think some of the willingness to buy into the idea of “races” rather than “ethnicities” has to do with this flattening of identity.

New immigrant groups were often seen as Other and lesser, but over time, the ones who could manage it got added to our concept of “whiteness”, which gave them access to those same social and economic privileges.

Skin color is a big part of this. In a system that is founded on there being two categories, white owners and black slaves, skin color is obviously going to be about that rather than being more of a class marker like it is in a lot of the world.

But it’s not all about skin color since we have plenty of Europeans with somewhat darker skin who are seen as generically white here, while very pale Asians are not. I’m not super familiar with all of the history of anti-Asian racism in the US, but I think this persistent Otherness probably boils down to Western powers trying to justify colonial activities in Asia plus a bunch of religious bullshit about predominantly Christian nations vs. ones that are predominantly Buddhist or some other religion.

In fact, a lot of racist archetypes in English can be traced back to England’s earliest colonial efforts in Ireland. Justifying colonizing Those People because they’re subhuman and/or ignorant and in need of paternalistic rulers or religious conversion is at the bottom of a lot of racist notions. Ironic that we now see Irish people as clearly “white”.

There are a lot of racist porn tropes and racist cultural baggage here around the idea of black people being animalistic. Racist white people think black men want to rape/steal white women from white men. Black women get seen as hypersexual and aggressive. If this sounds like white people projecting in order to justify murder and rape... well, it is.

Similar tropes get applied to a lot of groups, often including Hispanic and Middle Eastern people, though East Asians come in more for creepy fantasies about endlessly submissive and promiscuous women. This nonsense already existed, but it was certainly not helped by WWII servicemen from here and their experiences in Asia. Again, it’s a projection to justify shitty behavior as what the party with less power was “asking for”.

In porn and even romance novels, this tends to turn up as a white character the audience is supposed to identify with paired with an exotic, mysterious Other or an animalistic sexy rapist Other.

A lot of fandoms are based on US media, so all of our racist bullshit does apply to the casting and writing of those, whether or not the fic is by Americans or replicating our racist porn tropes.

(Obviously, things get pretty hilarious and infuriating once Americans get into c-dramas and try to apply the exact same ideas unchanged to mainstream media about the majority group made by a huge and powerful country.)

Politically, within the US, white people have had most of the power most of the time. We also make up a big chunk of the population. (This is starting to change in some areas, which has assholes scared shitless.) This means that other groups tend to band together to accomplish shared political goals. They’re minorities here, so they get lumped together.

A lot of Americans become used to seeing the world in terms of “white people” who are powerful oppressors and “people of color” who are oppressed minorities. They’re trying to be progressive and help people with less power, and that’s good, but it obviously becomes awkward when it’s over-applied to looking at, say, China.

Now... fandom...

I find that fandom, in general, has a bad habit of holding things to double standards: queer things must be Good Representation™ even when they’re not being produced for that purpose. Same for ethnic minorities or any other minority. US-influenced parts of fandom (which includes a lot of English-speaking fandom) tend to not be very good at accepting that things are just fantasy. This has gotten worse in recent years.

As fandom has gotten more mainstream here, general media criticism about better representation (both in terms of number of characters and in terms of how they’re portrayed) has turned into fanfic criticism (not enough fics about ship X, too many about ship Y, problematic tropes that should not be applied to ship X, etc.). I find this extremely misguided considering the smaller reach of fandom but, more importantly, the lack of barriers to entry. If you think my AO3 fic sucks, you can make an account and post other fic that will be just as findable. You don’t need money or industry connections or to pass any particular hurdle to get your work out there too.

People also (understandably) tend to be hypersensitive to anything that looks like a racist porn trope. My feeling is that many of these are general porn tropes and people are reaching. There are specific tropes where black guys are given a huge dick as part of showing that they’re animalistic and hypersexual, but big dicks are really common in porn in general. The latter doesn’t automatically mean you’re doing the former unless there are other elements present. A/B/O or dubcon doesn’t mean it’s this racist trope either, not unless certain cliched elements are present. OTOH, it’s not hard for a/b/o tropes to feel close to “animalistic guy is rapey”, so I can see why it often bothers people.

A huge, huge, huge proportion of wank is “all rape fantasies are bad” crap too, which muddies the waters. I think a lot of people use “it’s racist” as an easy way to force others to agree with their incorrect claims that dubcon, noncon, a/b/o, etc. are fundamentally bad. Many fans, especially white fans, feel like they don’t know enough to refute claims of racism, so they cave to such arguments even when they’re transparently disingenuous.

Not everyone here thinks this way. I know plenty of people offline, particularly a lot of nonwhite people, who think fandom discourse is idiotic and that the people “protecting” people or characters of color are far more racist than the people writing “bad” fic or shipping the wrong thing.

But in general, I’d say that the stuff above is why a lot of us see the world as white people in power vs. everyone else as oppressed victims, interracial relationships as fraught, and porn about them as suspect. Basically, it’s people trying to be more progressive and aware but sometimes causing more harm than good when those attempts go awry.

#Anonymous

167 notes · View notes

a-womans-rhetoric · 3 years

Text

Natalie Wynn's "J.K. Rowling" and Disruptive use of Women's Rhetorical Tropes: A Defiant Reply to Transmisogyny

ContraPoints, surrounded by an opulent, candle-lit set and adorned in witch's garb, leisurely pours champagne into her glass — she's ready to breach the internet's hottest topic of January, 2021: her childhood idol being outed as a transphobe (link here). The video itself being over an hour and a half long, I would be hard-pressed to claim that I could ever hope to cover its entirety, comprehensively, in a single post. So to save-face, I'll be dedicating this space only to breaking down her most frequently used rhetorical tropes, one by one.

Irreverence

"Joanne, I wanna talk to you, Joanne! [Fans herself with a rainbow paper fan with the word "BIOLOGICAL" written across it] What is it about Joannes? I can't catch a break from these people" (00:23-00:29, emphasis added).

Wynn's introductory lines immediately open a dialogue with J.K. Rowling — however, this invitation of discourse is defiantly "irreverent" (reminiscent of Nomy Lamm's punk-feminist style in "It’s a Big Fat Revolution” (1995)). Contrapoints, herself a transgender woman, is aware that her very existence is considered in opposition to the TERF-ideology that Rowling subscribes to. Thus, she's rather playful — even openly disrespectful — with her diction: calling the British author by her first name in a mocking-tone and flaunting her own trans identity to the camera (in a way that would likely offend the fragile sensibilities of a transphobe). Her personal tone (with ample use of the pronoun "I") servers a duplicitous purpose: a simultaneous message of "sit down and listen" and a fair degree of "I don't care if you can't accept me."

"So, now that 2020 is finally over, I think we can let the record conclusively show that it was a year whomst is bad. And on top of everything else going on, truly the last thing we needed was the author of Harry Potter coming forward to announce there's two things she can't stand: bigotry, and the transgenders. (00:31 - 00:50, emphasis added).

Finally broaching the subject at hand directly, Wynn employs kairos alongside her irreverence. Kairos, or the rhetorical use of an "opportune moment," holds incredible weight in the first month after 2020: the year in which the whole world fell into a stasis. Characterizing Rowling's transphobia as a collective "the last thing we needed," is also rather dismissive — she unites herself with her audience with the pronoun "we" and invites us all to groan at the exasperating nature of Rowling's bigotry.

Claiming the Right to Speak / Personal Experience

"This is a painful topic for me all around because, as a transgender woman, I am honestly really hurt by a lot of the things Joanne has said in the last year. But I also know what it's like to be the target of a Twitter mob" (01:36-01:47).

As she begins to touch on the topic, Natalie Wynn claims the right to speak on the issue of Rowling's transphobia — a type of bigotry that directly effects her. However, Wynn also situates herself partially with Rowling in her acknowledgement that receiving Twitter backlash is a terrifying experience (an experience, she argues, that the human brain is not prepared to handle the scale of, 01:49-02:39). In treating her subject with such dignity — and adding her own deeply personal account— ContraPoints creates a credible ethos in the beginning of her video essay. The audience is inclined to listen to someone who has been directly effected by the subject of Rowling's controversy (transphobia) and someone who is, rather compassionately, willing to empathize with those who would wish her harm. Although the generally sassy, glamorous, and irreverent tone of the video still appears soon after (see: the above image), her opening up for this somber moment garners a fair degree pathos in the viewer — we, as human beings, are inclined to sympathize with people who are open about being hurt.

Metis (Embodied Rhetoric)

[The following ContraPoints quote is addressing the above J.K. Rowling tweet, content warning for transmisogyny] "Transphobes love to play this game where they pretend that trans people just don't understand basic biology, that's our problem! As if I didn't start taking female hormones because I'm acutely aware that my body is not the same as a cis woman's body, that sex is real. "[Fictional TERF character] You will never be a woman, Nathan. Every cell in your body is male and has a Y chromosome." Really? That's crazy. How you'd you learn so much about science? You know I don't really feel the need to have a second X chromosome, I get by with only one, I make it work. I actually like the Y chromosome, I think it's a little more dainty, you know, it's little softer, a little more petite. The X chromosome has a lot of extra appendages, and don't you think? I don't need anymore of those, thanks. No trans person thinks it's possible to change chromosomal sex and to pretend otherwise is to argue in bad faith" (08:47-09:34).

If you can excuse my gargantuan quote, I hope you'll agree that the dialogue ContraPoints builds here was just too good to cut short. Within this excerpt, we see Wynn's use of irreverance and personal experience blended seamlessly together. For this YouTuber, the personal is perpetually political — especially when her own identity is constantly taken as an ideological stance. She uses her own expertise in trans issues to pick apart just how disingenuous Rowling's assertions are — even accusing her of "argue[ing] in bad faith" with her reductive claims (later, taking specific issue with how Rowling treats trans-ness as a costume). But, here, she also directly invokes another rhetorical trope: that of metis, or embodied rhetoric. Natalie Wynn specifically references her transgender body as a sort of counterpoint to the condescending "sex is real" claims by TERFs. She cites her intrinsic desire to pursue hormonal therapy as evidence that she — and other trans people like her — are all "acutely aware" that there are chromosomal differences between themselves and cis women. With this salient statement, she then follows with some humor: which, again, utilizes her trans body in her rhetoric. Her characterization of the Y chromosome as "more petite" and playful declaration of not needing "extra appendages" lightens up the often dark tone that arguing for trans rights and liberation can take. The clever points she makes are by no means weakened by her humor — if anything, the audience is more willing to listen to someone who can "joke about themselves" (so to speak) while still arguing an incredibly important message.

Naming and Defining Issues

"When I see Joanne tweeting about how trans people think sex isn't real and they're erasing same-sex attraction and they're silencing women, alarm bells are ringing because I recognize these as familiar transphobic talking points, specifically TERF talking points. "TERF" means trans exclusionary radical feminism. God are we still talking about this? I promise this is the last time. So TERFism is a hate movement that disguises transphobia as feminism. ... The fundamental problem with TERFs is not that they're mean. It's that they're politically reactionary, they want to reverse the progress of trans liberation." (14:05-16:02)

In her definition of TERF rhetoric, Natalie Wynn outlines some dog-whistles that are obvious to her, as a trans woman. She calmly explains to the viewer that, oftentimes in the present-day, rhetorics of exclusion are thoroughly disguised; TERFs, specifically, hide their rampant transphobia as a form of feminism. However, she further clarifies that the specific "danger" that TERFs pose is not from their cruelty — it's from their fervent dedication to strip away trans rights through political means. By specifying this danger, Natalie Wynn shifts the conversation away from empty discussion of offensiveness/terminology, to issues which directly affect the lives of trans people every day.

[This portion addresses the picture above] Also an act of naming and defining, ContraPoints makes a distinction between "Direct" and "Indirect Bigotry." She argues that many people envision bigotry as a festering, public, frothing-at-the-mouth hatred — a phenomenon she dubs "the Westboro Baptist Church theory of bigotry" (20:06). In bringing attention to the human tendency to think of people as exclusively practicing "direct bigotry" — envisioning them as a sort of delusional "other" — she then forces the audience to contemplate the relative omni-presence of the more covert (and possibly alluring) "indirect bigotry." This definition, crucially, requires introspection. By allowing ourselves to think of bigots not exclusively as "Westboros," we're made to adopt a much more nuanced view of subjects (most) generally prefer to keep black-and-white. Natalie Wynn uses her J.K. Rowling case study to complicate this 2D view of "The Bigot," inviting others to more carefully examine how politically reactionary views develop.

Phew, this was probably the longest post I've ever typed up on tumblr! Hopefully, I succeeded in demystifying (or at least adding clarity to) some of the specific tropes ContraPoints uses (that are common to women's rhetorics as a whole). Thanks for reading if you stuck around this long, and my ask box is always open!

#contrapoints #tw transphobia #tw transmysoginy

22 notes · View notes

yelenaisace · 2 years

Note

for the ask game! #62 <3

OOH thank you for asking babe! <3 This is such an interesting question and I'd probably ramble so much HAHHAHA SORRY IF IT BECOMES LONG AF

(Answers are below because I don't want to spam people's dashboards!)

1. The first character that comes to mind immediately is Jo March, specifically the Jo March version from the Little Women (2019) movie. I've read the book when I was really young but I honestly don't remember anything from that nor do I think I would've picked up nuances in it that the now-adult me would if I were to read the book today. But yeah, the whole time when I was watching the movie, I just felt she was my literal twin soul and I've never felt more connected to a character than I do with her

2. Lexi Howard from Euphoria LOL. She reminds me a lot of myself with the way she is very observant but sees things in a detached sort of manner as though it is happening to someone else. Plus, I too love to take charge of things that I'm involved in just cause I think I lowkey have control issues and so if I'm in charge, I can control things to make sure that things go well

3. Stephanie Brown from the DC Universe. I think I have a very similar sense of humour (half sarcasm, half just being real af w people just to keep people on their toes SDFGHJKL) as hers and I too would love to bully Bruce Wayne every chance I got HAHAHHA. Not because I hate him, I LOVE him, but something about stoic characters who like to clench their jaws and can come across as very stoic just makes me want to "bully" them! Not in a mean-spirited way, but just to see their reaction LOL. The same way I would love to "bully" Steve yknow HAHAHAH CAUSE CMON, if I were to ever meet someone like that in real life, I would want to pry them open like a can of tuna. Actually, she kinda reminds me of Kate Bishop so, yeah you can take that as a reference if you're more familiar with her!

4. Maybe Alex from Modern Family? Just cause I am the nerd of the family, and I feel like an outsider in my family at times just cause of how different I am as compared to them!

5. Tony! I think I just relate a lot to that persistent feeling of having to atone. I've made mistakes and done or said stuff that hurt the people around me. I am self-aware enough to know it and have enough pussy to admit it. I wished I handled stuff better back then or said or done things differently if I wasn't so reactive/emotional. I can get pretty ... mean to say the least when I feel like I've been hurt and I wish I could say sorry to them. I wasn't in a good place back then, but I don't think it's a great reason enough for me to be the way I was. They're not in my life anymore and I wouldn't want to bring up the past either when (I hope) they've clearly moved on and seem happy now!

6. My friend suggested MJ from the MCU just cause she thinks I'm pretty sarcastic and call people out all the time LOL, which yeah I do! I think I'm also pretty loyal to my loved ones and always try to support them in whatever they do. However, I'm definitely more open with my emotions than her :) and definitely talk a whole way more DFGHJKL.

7. The same friend suggested Lilly Moscovitz from the Princess Diaries Book Series because she's pretty confrontational and protective? That's what my friend says, I've never read the series myself so idk if this is accurate!

So yeah, I'd say personally I relate to 1-5 A LOT, whereas 6-7 is other people's perception of me though I'm not really sure how accurate 7 is :)

#asks

3 notes · View notes

ill-be-istj-if-no-one-else-is · 3 years

Note

Peace! It's nice to meet you, fellow mbti person! I'm so glad to have stumbled upon an ISTJ who is into typology! I have a request. I typed Elsa from Frozen in a post (I'll tag you) and I argued that she is not an ISTJ. I wanted to know what you thought, particularly if I made any mistakes in understanding the ISTJ personality type. Thank you so much in advance! I hope it's not too much of a bother. I'm an INTP btw.

Hi,

I want to start out with the following: for anyone reading, do not make a habit of having me analyze your posts about fictional characters. I am happy to help you type yourself, or answer questions about MBTI. However, in case it was not clear from the fact that I have only typed fictional characters in response to direct questions, that my answers have typically been very brief, and that I’ve repeatedly directed people to blogs that specifically focus on character typing, I’m not really interested. I should note: I had fun because I love picking up my metaphorical red pen and writing “wrong” over every other sentence, but it did also take me like an hour and a half and it’s over 3 pages long, and I don’t have time to do that regularly.

With all that said, the post had sufficient issues with both basic logical argument structure (I would very strongly recommend you revisit that INTP typing of yourself and look at something with high Fe instead) as well as understanding of MBTI that, because you asked directly, I will go through said issues. I want to make it very clear: this is going to be harsh. For both that and for the length I’m putting it below a read-more such that if you were looking for a brief thumbs up or down and not for extensive criticism, you are welcome to ignore it, block me, or whatever is best for you.

Basic argument structure: you open repeatedly with the most subjective arguments - that she gives off Fi and Ni vibes and you don’t see the Si in her. This will convince no one but yourself.

This argument is also mostly focused on “other people think this, but I don’t” which I find is only useful in a process of elimination argument. We’ll get to the final typing eventually but it is generally stronger to argue in favor of what you believe and then address potential disagreement rather than the reverse; by the time you get to ISFP I��ve read so many incorrect assumptions and subjective asides that I’ve long since stopped valuing the analysis of the work.

Issues with the ISTJ argument

(note: I have, and continue to type Elsa as an ISTJ so this will be the longest section in that I’m both pointing out flaws and arguing in favor of ISTJ; the rest will be solely focused on MBTI misconceptions or logical fallacy).

While it’s true people often mistake trauma for Si, this argument seems to equate trauma with being stuck in the past (people can just be stuck in the past without trauma for whatever other reason - it’s not healthy but it does not necessarily indicate literal trauma). There is also a false opposition here: It’s absolutely valid to argue that Elsa is traumatized, but that does not preclude her having Si, merely removes one argument in favor of Si.

You define Si (gathering concrete details to understand what to expect) but don’t actually argue why Elsa doesn’t do this. I’d argue, in opposition to the statement later in this paragraph, that she does. She is aware from the past that her abilities can harm her sister. She is aware from her past that when she avoided Anna, Anna was safe. She hasn’t been happy with the “conceal don’t feel” line, but it has achieved her goals and her expectation is that she’ll hurt someone if she stops following it.

If you’re referring to an Si-Fi loop (wallowing in self-pity), it doesn’t use Te since that’s how loops work. You don’t explicitly say this is in the context of looping although you introduce looping in the second sentence, but if you are referring to a loop this is incorrect. It’s true that ISTJs are often likely to use Si (preference for familiar/existing structures) and an Fi understanding of morality to direct their energies when they wish to change something (ie, they will change things through existing channels) but the focus on speaking out about injustice here is much more in line with enneagram 1 - a very common enneatype for ISTJs and an enneatype that’s rare for any non-TJ types, but not the enneatype I’d give Elsa nor an inherent ISTJ trait itself.

The part about self-discipline is mixed - a lot of ISTJs are very disciplined in certain areas (particularly professional/familial) but can neglect the self (not getting enough exercise/not eating well, not addressing burnout or more emotional issues) and I’d argue again, Elsa shows this: she’s not addressing the fact that she’s lonely and miserable, but she’s highly disciplined with regards to concealing her abilities and avoiding Anna even though it’s the very thing making her lonely and miserable.

I don’t necessarily think Let It Go is indicative of an Ne grip, but one can make changes outside of a grip, so this isn’t a useful argument, as it argues why an Ne grip is wrong, not why ISTJ is wrong - I would merely argue she’s not gripping at that time. Which is a general issue here: the argument you provide in this paragraph isn’t arguing against ISTJ, it’s arguing against other people’s arguments for ISTJ, which is an important distinction.

The final paragraph of the ISTJ section has numerous issues: ISTJs are not rebellious. They are not as resistant to change as stereotypes indicate, but even a healthier version of ISTJ Elsa would be unlikely to rebel and rather try to understand her parents’ argument, research other options, or look for a way to gain control over her powers while still working within the normal hierarchy. I addressed self-discipline (I should add: I don’t think a child/young woman having difficulty controlling magical powers with no training is an argument against self-discipline; my argument for self-discipline is that she stays in her room and away from her sister despite clearly hating it). It is also, to be blunt, mind-boggling that you (correctly) argue that trauma responses are not inherently Si but then refer to obsessive-compulsive behaviors as Si when that’s also a medical disorder completely divorced from the MBTI framework. Finally, her continuing to follow an order from her parents after they die is first, quite literally the definition of self-discipline (she’s the queen; no one else is going to discipline her for it, after all) and second, entirely in line with Si (this is what she has always done and it’s not great but it works) and is, arguably, if not medically obsessive-compulsive, an obsessive need to follow a compulsion. To be clear: this isn’t healthy ISTJ behavior, but since you’ve acknowledged grips and loops here I think an unhealthy interpretation of the type is very much on the table. You say her behavior is more in line with F types; it’s not and you don’t explain why.

If I may it seems as though, much in line with the argument here being against other arguments but ultimately not debunking the typing, your arguments against MBTI stereotypes focus on what’s incorrect but they tend to merely swing the pendulum to the opposite side (eg, that ISTJs are likely to rebel, in opposition to the stereotype that they’d mindlessly follow orders) rather than find the more nuanced middle ground of how people of a type or with a certain function behave.

Issues with the INFJ and INFP sections:

Ne users can and frequently do go out into the world; simply because Ne can be engaged without external physical stimulation doesn’t mean it never is. I’m also not really a fan of reading being classified as a strictly introverted pursuit; that’s falling into a pretty significant stereotype trap. Going out and exploring is a thing anyone can do but if anything I’d either associate that more strongly with high sensing (either Si or Se) or with extroversion.

My biggest issue here is the implication that searching for a meaning for existence or a purpose is in itself an indicator of Ni. This is just the human condition. If you’re going to argue that Si users are driven to rebel against injustice I don’t see how you can miss that that might in turn be driven by a belief that this is their purpose. Perhaps Si-Ne users aren’t as invested in having a single purpose, but wondering why you are on this earth and what it is you are here to do is just being a person, and to be blunter than I have been, I am struggling to understand how there has been so much effort made earlier to push away from stereotypes to the point of overcompensation in the opposite direction and then when it comes to the idea that only Ni users have a desire for meaning in life you just accept it without question.

Issues with the ISFP section:

At this point I’ve probably covered most of them though I’d like to point out that I don’t think there was an argument ever made explicitly for introversion; while the structure of the earlier arguments and focus on debunking was, as stated, flawed, I would at least round it out by eliminating ESFP as an option.

The argument here rests heavily on Let it Go, which is interesting because most of the terrible arguments for Elsa being an intuitive also rested squarely on that same brief if admittedly pivotal section of a full movie; in attempting to differentiate itself from those arguments it has in fact replicated the most significant flaws. Anyway, I’ve addressed that I don’t personally think Let it Go being indicative of a grip is how I’d argue for ISTJ, so that becomes invalid; I’ve tried to focus more on issues with logic MBTI than the contents of the movie but I’d add that “she was happy” is open to interpretation and her emotional state was probably fairly complicated. Relieved, sure, but she’s still ultimately isolated. (Also while mentally singing Let it Go, I realized that here’s that rebellion you were asking for in the ISTJ section).

You also outright say that when Elsa tries to reassert control it’s through Te. Yeah. That’s what a high Te user does. An ISTJ in a grip would indeed use Ne, but in quite literally any other circumstance (looping or just existing as an ISTJ not in a grip or loop) would reassert control via Te, so again, your argument does not sufficiently eliminate that Elsa is an ISTJ, just that she’s not a gripping ISTJ, which I’d agree with.

“She acts out when she is stressed and makes bad decisions” is also the human condition (and why I’ve frequently on my blog argued very strongly against typing via stress behaviors, because in the end most people...act out and make bad decisions when stressed), so this isn’t useful as an argument for anything.

In conclusion: multiple misconceptions about Ni and Si; no argument that I could find presented for high Fi, just Fi in general; inconsistency regarding whether or not Elsa rebels, and an overall reliance not on making a new argument but on arguing why other arguments were wrong. Given the title of the post you asked me to analyze I have to (admittedly this is extremely cynical of me) wonder if there was an underlying goal to come up with a typing that was different from commonly accepted arguments, rather than to simply type for its own sake.

#mbti #character typing #istj #seireinocookies

19 notes · View notes

words-writ-in-starlight · 3 years

Note

I'm thinking of reading Kencyrath, but I'm not sure whether i'll like it. What do you like about the series? Who would you recommend it for?

OKAY SO, first, the people I would recommend it to:

Anyone who read or watched more than half a book/four episodes of Game of Thrones--the Kencyrath has a similar list of trigger warnings, but commits much harder to the fantasy angle, and in my opinion deals more directly with the ethical problems raised by those trigger warnings

People who like those posts picking apart the minutiae of how high fantasy worlds work--the Kencyrath is one of the only series I’m familiar with that answers the question of “okay great you have a warrior race, so how does that actually work” with “it kind of doesn’t, everyone is starving half the time because we’re all warriors and our land can barely grow food, so if our mercenaries don’t get paid, we don’t eat”

People who like a mix of “low fantasy” moral questions (the first book is kind of like...hm, Lies of Locke Lamora?) with classic “high fantasy” political machinations and battles of good vs evil and such--the Kencyrath HAVE a grand sweeping destiny more or less on their doorstep, but they’ve sort of fallen down on the job about it

People who like books that deal with trauma recovery--Jame, the main character, spends most of her time trying to drag herself (and, ideally, her brother, cousin, and entire race) out of the cycle of abuse that they’ve all lived through, and every character has, to some extent, a trauma that shapes their actions one way or another

People who don’t mind a big cast as long as there are a couple main characters to focus on--the Kencyrath ends up being a pretty expansive cast, with a lot of schemes running at any given time, but it always revolves around Jame and her twin brother Tori

People who like complex societal worldbuilding and Loyalty Stuff--the Kendar/Highborn dynamic (warrior class/ruling class) is so wonderfully messed up and I love how seriously the books take both the advantages and massive pitfalls of that kind of society

People who listened to TAZ Balance and thought that the Hunger was really cool and terrifying and wanted a whole book series about the sequence where the world is fighting it

Anyone who ever read a standard high fantasy book with a Rambunctious Young Lady as the lead and went “this is fine, but if you’re going to spend 250 pages telling me that this girl is wild and uncontrollable, I would like to see her go completely feral, please”--Jame’s brain plays Yakety Sax 24/7 and you can TELL, so if you ever wanted a book where the Unladylike Lead Character goes genuinely apeshit, but also learns how to make friends and respect the value of traditionally feminine work even if it’s not for her

People I would recommend NOT read the Kencyrath:

Anyone who knows they are triggered by written discussion of assault, abuse, sexism, coercion, torture, flashbacks, racism, murder, or basically any other major trigger warning--I personally think the books deal with things pretty well, and they’re never grimdark, but they deal with a lot of incredibly heavy material, including child abuse, sexual assault, coercion, and torture. If you know you have a major trigger that really messes you up when you read about it, please exercise caution and feel free to contact me for more details. Also, if you have a specific trigger and want a different book recommendation, I have them on tap.

Anyone who struggles to read or connect with “problematic” characters--pretty much every character in this series will EVENTUALLY do something you don’t like, including Jame. The books go very hard on “who you are is defined by how you handle making an irreparable mistake,” so be prepared for that. If this is your hard stop but everything else is fine, I would recommend the Imperial Radch series by Ann Leckie (spaceships and war crimes and found family), or something by Robin McKinley (mostly fantasy), especially the Damar books or Sunshine!

Anyone for whom incest between twins is a hard stop--the primary romantic relationship is Jame/Tori, and while I would consider it easily the healthiest relationship in the series, that’s the ship and you should be aware of it. If this is your hard stop but everything else is fine, I would recommend the Captive Prince series by CS Pacat (political scheming and romance) or the Winternight trilogy by Katherine Arden (fairy tale fantasy)!

The stuff I like about the series:

Jame. I love that she’s allowed to be completely unhinged. I love that she faces consequences for her actions. I love her determination to slit reality open and lay it all out like a scientist in her search for the truth. I love her willingness to face unpleasant realities, and I love the times when she can’t bear them and has to figure out how to deal. I love every second she spends trying to figure out how honor works, and whether it’s even possible for a Highborn to be honorable, and how she can save her people without sacrificing who she is. I love to watch people pick a fight with her and immediately learn the error of her ways.

Tori. I know I pick on him a lot, and he deserves to be picked on, but Tori is really one of my favorite characters. He struggles a lot more than Jame to move past their father’s abuse, and he makes a lot of genuinely harmful choices in the depths of that struggle, but I love watching the times where he wins. It makes me frustrated beyond words when he caves to what he was taught, but I’m always elated when he can push past that and reveal the deeply loyal, sincerely honorable, incredibly good person that he became in spite of their father. He’s a good leader, despite everyone’s best efforts, and I love to see him fight for his people. Love to see him consider HIMSELF one of “his people” someday.

Kindrie. I won’t say too much about him, except that I didn’t actually like him that much when I first read the books, for basically the exact reasons Jame didn’t like him much at first--he’s someone doing trauma recovery in the exact opposite way that I was comfortable with. But god I love him so much, he is doing his best and his best is so much better than anyone would expect, from his past. Truly the best boy in the Kencyrath, wise beyond his years and just insane enough to get into the disasters where he’s most needed.

The Kendar. Instead of making this post 4k with individual bullet points about every Kendar I love, here is a brief litany. I love Marc because he’s the only stable person in the Kencyrath. I love Brier because she’s doing her best and it would be okay if everyone (including her) admitted that she doesn’t always know what that actually means. I love Burr and Rue because their rabid determination to turn Tori and Jame (Confirmed Feral Cats) into real nobility will never NOT be funny to me. I love Sheth Sharp-tongue because he’s the only person with his shit so together that not even Jame can ruffle him. I love the Randir Kendar who didn’t move, at the start of Bound in Blood. The Kendar are the most nuanced take on the concept of an eternally loyal warrior caste I’ve ever seen and I love them.

The Villains. I believe I have established that I love a nuanced villain. The Master is a pretty straight up and down villain figure, the voice of the darkness, John Hunger or Saruman or whatever else you might like to compare him to, but no one else is that simple. I love the Dreamweaver, who didn’t know what she was doing and paid for it anyway. I love Tyrandis, who knew what he was doing and did it and spent his eternity trying to fix it without breaking a single rule. I do NOT love Caldane, but he’s a kind of viscerally real, slimy evil that is exceptionally well executed. Likewise, I would like Rawneth to die, painfully, in short order, but godDAMN watching her chessboard unfold over the course of the books is hypnotic. The villains in this are GOOD, folks, and I like them.

I really need to wrap this up, so my last pick for what I like is Overpowered Characters. I complain a lot about media that panics over powerful characters, and responds by taking that power away, or having unstable worldbuilding that means the character is weak when the narrative demands it. The Kencyrath doesn’t do that. Jame is bonkers powerful from day one, and pretty much maintains that level through the series. Instead of focusing on characters building their power, like leveling in DnD, the Kencyrath focuses on the question of using power. Jame’s power in the first book is terrifying not just because she’s insanely strong, but because she has no idea how to use it. Likewise, Tori is determined pretty quickly to be at the same level that she is, but he’s in such deep denial that he’s as likely to kill himself as do anything useful. It’s just very SATISFYING, okay, to have a series actually do interesting things with OP characters. Sure, in a weird way Jame seems less like a magical nuke in book 8 than in book 1, but it’s because she’s not just throwing power around like someone playing darts blindfolded. And watching her figure out how to harness her power into something useful is so gratifying.

#kencyrath #chronicles of the kencyrath #book rec #my a+ number one alternative book rec if you don't think you want to read the kencyrath because of jame/tori is the captive prince #also i know those other book recs seem arbitrary but they're NOT okay i've thought about this #ANYWAY #A N Y W A Y #i hope this was enlightening anon #i'm sorry it got so long but i would need to know a little more about you personally to be more specific #if you have specific concerns please feel free to hit me up #anyway i'm listening to tam lin by tricky pixie and thinking big thoughts about some kencyrath aus after writing this #i need to get back into the me trilogy so i can actually write some stuff for the mass effectyrath au #or maybe go through the books and find a place to spin off that buddy cop jame & archiem arranged marriage fic #OH or to shove a lotus eater plot in there #what are some other good settings...hm actually i'd love to do a hanahaki au of gates of tagmeth #Let Torisen Be Aggressively Confronted With The Reality Of His Feelings 2021 #(i should try and figure out what i was doing with this three pages of soulmate su actually)#(i have no idea what past me was doing)#(but 'you get a mark for your soulmate and also for every lord you're bound to' kinda slaps as a concept)#a queue we will keep and our honor someday avenge #ALSO MY QUEUE TAG IS FROM THE KENCYRATH #Anonymous #asked and answered

35 notes · View notes

nonbinarypastels · 6 years

Note

Hey, I saw your post about thinking critically of things, especially on tumblr and I agree with you. Though I was wondering about what u view personally as black and white mentality and how to avoid/think past it. I'm trying to be more critical of myself and my own views but I think I need some more opinions on how to do that. Thank you!!

Black and white thinking basically means having an all or nothing/always or never mindset. It's an inability to see any nuance, middleground or grey-area in a given situation: people are either good or bad, everything is absolutely right or absolutely wrong, you're either with me or against me, I'm worthless or I'm wonderful, etc etc etc.

This kind of thinking is almost always not something people choose to do or are even aware that they're doing a lot of the time and it doesn't inherently make someone a bad person. I have BPD and I deal with black and white thinking and viewing things (and people, situations, myself) in absolutes on a literal daily basis, sometimes not even aware that I'm doing it until my brain does the equivalent of slamming on the breaks at something I'm thinking/feeling and I realize that I'm doing it. While this isn't a way that people tend to choose to think, that doesn't mean that it's impossible to overcome---maybe not necessarily to stop it entirely but to be aware of it and learn how to cope with it and not let it impact your words/actions/opinions and sense of self-esteem or how you view others.

The most common treatment for people with BPD (among other conditions) is something called DBT (dialectical behavioral therapy) which is basically a form of therapy that focuses on analyzing your thoughts, emotions and actions and figuring out why you feel what you feel, think what you think, and do what you do and coming to terms with the reality of all of that while learning to express yourself and socialize with others in a healthy way. Even if you don't have BPD or any mental illness it can be super helpful to look into DBT anyway because I think it's pretty much the best resource there is for learning to think critically (and just, be a more well-adjusted person in general tbh)

@transgenderteensurvivalguide has a page of DBT resources here that are worth looking through and if you check with your local library you can probably find a DBT workbook there (or you can find one online to download somewhere too).

Some more resources about this and on thinking critically you might want to look through are:

Breaking Out of Black and White Thinking

Borderline Personality Disorder: What Is Black and White Thinking (specifically about bpd but gives a lot of insight to black and white thinking in general)

Cognitive Distorition: How Does Black and White Thinking Hurt Us?

Critical Thinking | SkillsYouNeed

Guide to Logical Fallacies (familiarizing yourself with different logical fallacies is one of the most important steps to thinking critically, as it can help you recognize when your arguments and arguments others are making are bad)

I also have a #critical thinking tag that might have some helpful posts in it

(Also one last thing---I feel that I should note that while black and white thinking is a symptom of several mental illnesses and neurodivergencies, it is in no way a trait exclusive to mentally ill/neurodivergent people; neurotypicals can and do engage in black and white thinking as well)

#asks #replies #critical thinking #last ask i'm answering tonight btw i'll clear the rest of my inbox this weekend #Anonymous

18 notes · View notes