#I love the complete lack of gender stereotyping | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

barb-l · 5 months

Note

Isn't a writer question but was curious; How does wenclair different from other ships you've enjoyed?

Is it solely due to having been a lifelong Wednesday Addams fan, or is it specifically the Netflix's Addams world that you find intriguing?

I ask mainly because I recall you once saying that your wenclair comics--specifically the Next Gen Au I believe--are written and made with a lot of intention in regards to dialog and the discussions had between characters.

Is this due to a greater insight into the characters or simply a mark of growth in writing comprehension?

I like to think I put as much thought in all ships I've been hyperfixated on tbh. Wenclair isn't even the one I've been obsessed with the longest. So far it's actually Trimberly, for which and I was hyperfixated with for like 3 years.

But yeah ok I get ur point lol The intensity this time feels different, I suppose.

I think it's a mix of both being a long time Wednesday Addams fan and how cute of a ship Wenclair is both in concept and the canon execution of their dynamics.

As some of you are aware, I've been a fan of The Addams for a while now. All incarnations of them are great in their own way, but one of the many reasons why the animated 2019 movie is my favorite is because it didn't give Wednesday a bland ass male love interest. I don't think the B/W series did it(because Wed was like six in that) but the 90's movies, musical, and netflix series for some reason found it necessary to give Wednesday male love interests so painfully boring and i hate it. This isn't even about making Wednesday attracted to boys. I personally headcanon her bi, as the ol' stereotype that all grumpy/angsty female characters must be lesbian isn't my cup of tea, and also because I like to think all Addamses just don't give a shit about gender when it comes to romance. I woulda been fine with her getting a boyfriend so long as they're not boring af and goddddd canon incarnations still haven't delivered. Joel was sweet but he was too much of a wimp, not even Gomez is that pathetic. Lucas' thing with Wednesday was just portrayed in such an icky way in the musical that I couldn't finish watching by the time their sexually charged duet came on, and don't even get me started on the boys Netflix gave her. I expected better of Gough and Millar...(unless the blandness was on purpose like it was with Lana Lang--)

Anyways, because of all said canon love interests, I've been desperate for Wednesday to have a love interest that is both not painfully het or boring for once. Crossover shipping with Lydia Deetz from Beetlejuice the Musical was fun but was ultimately a very niche fandom. I could only draw and write for an audience of twenty or so people for so long. Parker from the animated movie would've been great, but the cop out with her mom dating Fester just made it too weird for me to be fully on board with the ship.

So when Enid Sinclair was introduced as a character I was absolutely ecstatic. On paper alone she already seemed great. She has a very distinct appearance (even if her "design" was inspired by Harlequin and it shows) that goes so well when she stands next to Wednesday, whether it's in the actual show, fan arts, or even in official merch. Her being Wednesday's complete opposite in so many ways makes her being paired with Wednesday so dang interesting too.

And I don't just mean aesthetic or personality wise. I'm talking about how one of Wednesday's struggle stems from having too much smothering love from her family as someone who gets overwhelmed too easily, and Enid's loneliness and insecurity coming from her own family's lack of love and attention where it matters most. Or how Wednesday's just girl who, deep inside worries about being an actual cruel monster like the very bigots she hates, while Enid is a supposed beast who resents herself for only being a scared little girl. Even the fact that Wednesday is an older sister to a soft-hearted younger brother while Enid is the youngest daughter to a bunch of rough-housing older brothers feels very on purpose.

Everything about Enid feels deliberate. Like she IS supposed to be paired with Wednesday, platonically or romantically. She's the best person to stand beside Wednesday as a character because they have enough differences and similarities to have interesting conflicts but also significant character growths sparked by each other. She's not bland or boring like the canon love interests because even without her attachment to Wednesday, Enid is still such a compelling character. The mere fact that she's as popular as she is despite an eight-episode series being her debut in a franchise that's been iconic to generations is already pretty amazing, and only a character as impressive deserves to smooch somebody as iconic as Wednesday Addams.

And their on screen chemistry is just *chef's kiss*

#asks #wenclair #wednesday netflix #the way i wax poetic about this show you think it's a masterpiece #lmfaooo #god istg if wenclair were on purpose it'd be the best love story ever #but alas

80 notes · View notes

wonderbutch · 2 years

Text

Cassie Sandsmark’s Relationship With Femininity

ok so i want to dive more into cassie sandsmarks character and her relationships.

throughout her comic appearances, gender, femininity, sexuality and lack thereof is very prominent in cassie sandsmarks character. Its shown as soon as she appears. shes 14, short haired and wears baggy clothes and overall gives off the stereotypical tomboy vibe which continues on and off throughout her young justice appearances, but she also battles deeply with what she really wants.

she also clearly shows multiple times that she wants, or thinks she wants boys, specifically superboy (kon-el) to like her, going as far as to join young justice to see him (although i have more thoughts on this which ill get to later)

she also shows jealousy towards cissie because of kons attention to her.

HOWEVER i have reason to believe that this is born of compulsive heterosexuality and a misguided attempt at displaying her need for attention and validation (often from guys because, again, comphet).

for example, here it mentions that cassie cant stop thinking about cissie “doing something romantic” with superboy.

which, i may be reaching here, but if she was truly romantically interested in kon, wouldn’t she mention him first rather than cissie? also, she mentions shes not thrilled that boys are looking at her, even though she thought thats what she used to want.

later on she becomes best friends with cissie, almost instantly after seeing her stick up for others, going as far as to literally fall asleep holding her hand. you cant tell me thats not at least a little gay.

as shown before multiple times, cassie strives for companionship and attention, its not a bad thing, in fact it further shows that cassie is kindhearted and loves those around her deeply, even if they don’t necessarily feel the same or treat her well (for example, the boys are constantly underestimating her in the early issues, especially kon who goes as far to be outwardly shocked when she takes a risk and turns out to be right)

(this isnt hate against kon, theyre all learning and figuring stuff out)

but after cissie leaves the team, which cassie doesn’t take very well, her “attraction” to kon seems to fade away, she also seems to be slightly more aware of the fact that kon doesn’t exactly take her completely seriously.

after young justice: sins of youth, cassie sheds the wig and the shorts and swaps to jeans and a leather jacket which is more “masculine”. she also refers to her old outfit, which could be seen as symbolic of her comphet, as her “what was i thinking phase”

despite seeming more sure of herself, shes still battling with who she is and how she wants to be, she gets angrier and moodier, which is touched on in issue 22

she doesn’t know what she wants, and it scares her. shes 14-15 and a superhero and people have expectations for her, she has expectations for herself too, which she often projects onto other people (which ill mention later when i get to her in teen titans) shes only sure of a few things: she wants to be a hero, she wants her best friend back, she wants to be taken seriously. between those three things though? she has no idea.

around her, everything is breaking down. cissie is struggling with her mother and cassie (for the most part) had a healthy upbringing and doesn’t know how to relate and help cissie with that. despite this, she still has unrealistic expectations of cissie. she doesn’t understand why she doesn’t want to be a hero because cassie has always wanted that, and wants cissie to want that too.

so, we get to issue 35 where everything comes to a head with cissie.

she refuses to listen to cissie even though time and time again shes told. after cissie proves a point, cassie finally starts to understand (although she still pushes it a few times in the next issue)

and then after going through a war and having tim and bart leave, and tim come back, and suddenly shes running for leader and confesses to “kon” that she loved him, or thought she loved him, and then she is leader and shes handling a full on invasion of zandia.

so needless to say, cassie doesn’t really have time to think about herself and her identity. at this point her hair has grown significantly, and she’s no longer acting entirely like herself.

so this all happens, greta betrays everyone (deserved) and then suddenly shes human and then donna dies which cassie takes very hard.

a pattern ive noticed is that the more disconnected from herself that she gets, and the more angrier, she changes her appearance to be more feminine, like she’s in denial or at least trying to hide behind femininity so she doesn’t have to admit her own emotions to herself.

as she starts a somewhat vague relationship with conner, she never really refers to him as her boyfriend, often using the word friend instead, despite conner referring to her as his girlfriend.

she also starts to project this idea of femininity and repression, specifically onto raven. when raven expresses considerable discomfort at wearing a dress, cassie counters this with a “you said you wanted to expand your wardrobe”, like she wants raven to be what she’s trying to be. feminine, happy and without fault.

later, she mentions her previous appearance, ambitions, and seems to have a sense of hatred for her previous self, despite in all accounts she was quite happy and open during that period in her life.

to me, cassie’s femininity is a way to hide her true self. its the way she can feel better and not as confused, and try to be someone shes not by just denying the way she really feels.

in conclusion cassie is a butch lesbian thank u for reading this makes absolutely no sense but idc bc the cassie brainrot is real and has taken hold

#cassie sandsmark #character analysis #does this make sense #wonder girl #dc comics #lesbian cassie sandsmark #queer cassie sandsmark #young justice 1998 #young justice #teen titans #teen titans 2003 #teen titans v3 #quinn shut the fuck up challenge #cissiecassie

698 notes · View notes

pjo-gaysofgreeks · 5 months

Text

I wrote this silly little thing for a graded final and I figured I’d share…

Allied Authordom: Rowling vs. Riordan

By Serena Martinez

Allyship does not demand perfection, but rather desire to grow. We are all unlearning internalized -phobias and -isms which have been normalized in society. The key to true allyship is recognizing you have the capacity to cause harm, do the work to be better, and consciously avoid hurting someone that way again.

Given the upcoming television adaptations of both J.K. Rowling and Rick Riordan’s popular series, I am going to use them as a case study example. The hoards of Millennials and Gen Zers that grew up with either or both series are now young adults with the ability to think critically and set their own moral principles. I am not sure I know someone in my age range who hasn’t at least watched a Harry Potter movie and most of my friends are eagerly following the new release of the Percy Jackson Series (December 20th!!!). As much as I wish people would turn towards new POC authors who are trailblazing their own paths of authordom, I know many are still tied to the nostalgia of the past.

When first published, neither series included diversity up to today’s standards. Both trios were completely composed of white cisgender people: a male protagonist, a male best friend and sidekick, and a female friend and potential love interest. Although Riordan intentionally made Percy neurodivergent to depict the experiences of his real life son and Rowling crafted the entire series to support species equality, the core representation remained the same. That doesn’t even include Rowling’s problematic stereotyping of the werewolves and goblins who were based on people with HIV/AIDS and Jewish communities respectively. Riordan and Rowling’s subsequent elaboration (or lack thereof) on their respective universes showcases the difference between them as authors and allies.

Rowling has essentially never budged from her original position on representation in her series. To her, making Hermione Black in the theatrical adaptation of the series and retroactively admitting Dumbledore is gay was enough to show she is a proper liberal ally. Many would deem this too little too late, especially given the stereotypes used to describe people of color in the series like Kingsley Shacklebolt and Cho Chang. Rowling showcases prime examples of tokenization without ever addressing such simplistic character depth over two decades after the series’ publication.

Then, of course, there is the significant harm caused by Rowling’s unapologetic transphobia. She has only doubled down since her first transphobic tweet in 2020 by publishing a book about a cisgender man dressing as a woman to murder people (emboldening the false and harmful narrative of the trans predator), donating to anti-trans companies and legislatures, and claiming that continued support of the Harry Potter Universe is proof that people are in support of her transphobia views.

I think Rowling could have come out of this unscathed had she admitted her books were a product of her time and apologized for her wrongdoing to the trans community. Instead, she has only chosen to dig her heels into hatred. Suffice it to say Rowling is the bad example of allyship amongst these two authors.

Riordan, on the other hand, heard readers’ criticism of his predominantly white and straight series and returned with a sequel including complex characters not defined by their racial, gendered, and sexual diversity. Riordan’s central characters in subsequent series were Latini, Creole, Chinese, Native American, Muslim, bisexual, and genderfluid. His newest book that follows a gay couple from the original Percy Jackson universe is co-authored with a queer writer because Riordan did not want to attempt to portray an experience so distinct from his own. When Leah Jeffries who plays Annabeth Chase in the new TV series experienced racism from fans online, Riordan published a statement calling out the behavior. Since interviews have started he has continued to ensure she is supported. Rick Riordan is certainly imperfect but has continued to use his privileged platform to uplift voices rather than misrepresent or silence them.

While Rowling uses Twitter to corral an army of transphobes that dox anyone who looks gender non conforming in their profile picture, Riordan uses his platforms to vocally confront hatred. The same year Rowling mocked gender inclusive language for people who menstruate, Riordan was staunchly calling out transphobes criticizing genderfluidity in his series.

It is not enough to just magically make characters different identities because doing so erases the complexity of each experience and makes representation a farce.

Onto the question everyone has been waiting for: what does this mean for the T.V. series?

This is not just about allyship. This is about how Rowling continues to harm trans communities during a time where they are already experiencing heightened levels of violence.

Do NOT watch the HBO Harry Potter series or anything where Rowling gets streams and thus money! Illegally stream it. Watch the old movies on DVDs you already own. But every view pads her wallet and her ego, emboldening her to fund and support transphobia globally.

Reread the Percy Jackson series in preparation for the much awaited television show. Delve into Harry Potter fanfiction which doesn’t line the pockets of the Author Who Shall Not Be Named. Try new series from queer authors of color who deserve to be platformed far more than Rowling ever did.

#fuck jkr #percy jackson #percy pjo #allyship #trans ally #rick riordan #jk rowling #article #opinion

33 notes · View notes

snowysobsessions · 3 months

Text

"Do I Have A Crush?" Quizzes as an Aromantic

In a previous post I had mentioned that I love taking "do I have a crush?" quizzes as an Aromantic. What I didn't share in that post was all of my findings from taking basically every quiz on that topic I could find. This is gonna be a bit of a long one, but I hope it will be an enlightening one!

Being an aro and taking these quizzes is pretty interesting. Because I do get plushes, which for me share some qualities with crushes, but are a completely different experience as a whole. For lack of a better equivalent, I have used my plushes while taking these quizzes. This will become relevant later on.

Anyway, here are my findings:

1. The target demographic for these quizzes is teenage girls. Well, the majority of online quizzes are intended for teenage girls. But these ones are especially designed for teenage girls. It's often painfully obvious by the way they are written, the answers available, and the scenarios provided. About crushes specifically though, this makes sense. Most people have their first crush during their teenage years. So the next logical step is to be curious about these new feelings and take an online quiz to figure out what's going on. Why only girls, though? Hard to say. It could be because they assume boys generally feel more confident in their romantic interest and thus would have no need for such a thing. Worth noting it was very hard to find a TRULY gender inclusive quiz. There's tons of wlm and wlw, but almost nothing for mlw or mlm. And if you're nonbinary or your crush is nonbinary, good fucking luck. The vast majority of them rely on some sort of gender stereotype. So many of these are clearly written from the perspective that you are a cishet woman interested in a cishet man. In multiple quizzes I have actually found typos where instead of using they/them, they accidentally use he/him in one question, almost like it had been up for a few years, then someone edited it later and missed one. A freudian slip if I ever saw one.

2. Practically all of them assume you are currently attending high school I understand that this is the time when most people get their first crush... but there are people who only crush on celebrities and fictional characters until they are an adult. This is not an extremely uncommon occurrence. So as you can imagine, there are a lot of questions that ask about how you interact with this person at school. Usually the addition of "or at work" feels like an afterthought. Some quizzes I've come across don't even consider that an adult might be taking the quiz. Like the question just openly states that you are at school.

3. They frequently assume that your crush is NOT someone in your friend group. This is probably the most interesting one to me personally. Because I myself cannot get a plush on someone until I've known them as a friend for at least three months. And I know plenty of non-aro people that need to get to know someone as a friend before developing romantic feelings. It's just... such an oddly specific assumption, y'know? They don't even consider that maybe this person is already in your friend group (unless you are talking specifically "do I have a crush on my best friend" quizzes). They just doesn't consider that the way you feel about someone can change over time. It's love at first sight or you will never feel that way about that person, I guess. (I think this is more teenager shenanigans. Because "am I about to enter a relationship with an abusive guy" doesn't appear to be the concern. Just that both or either friend group might not approve...?)

4. They generally assume your crush is a stranger or someone you do not know very well. Related to the previous one, this one is kind of weird to me. I understand the concept of love at first sight, but these are "do I have a crush" quizzes, not "is this love at first sight" quizzes. Almost every quiz I took had a least one question that assumed you had fallen in love with someone you have never spoken to. And often for answers on other questions instead of including an "I'm on the fence for how I feel about this person" option in the answers, which would be pretty logical to include, they have an option that says "N/A because I don't actually know them." However, the "do I have a crush on my best friend" quizzes are an exception to this. Instead they often assume you are spending every single free moment of time you have with this person.

5. If you have a crush on your best friend, you have either terribly misinterpreted you feelings and theirs, or they will never feel the same way about you. Um, yeah... I guess some people just can't tell the difference between romantic attraction and just being really good friends. But an important note: I think in some cases there's definitely outside pressure saying that two people "should" be in a romantic relationship simply because they are close platonically. Making those people question how they feel. Hence the existence of these quizzes. I can definitely feel that pressure while taking them.

6. They assume that your friends are all a certain type of person and your relationship with them is very specific. So here's the common assumptions I found across most quizzes:

Your friends are the type of people that are very invested in the love lives of everyone in that friend group. (And also outside of your friend group...)

Your friends are the type of people that will tease you about your romantic interests instead of being supportive.

You talk frequently about your love interests, love life, or lack there of with your friends. (Before you say "What? Everyone does that!" Not everyone does that.)

You are the only person questioning your feelings, everyone else is certain you have a crush.

Thankfully a teenage friend has informed me that this is 100% a teenager behaviour that happens all the time. Although I have seen cases where women under the age of 25 can also do this. I would go into detail about each of those but I think how these are not good assumptions to make is pretty self explanatory. You don't know me, you don't know what my friends are like, stop saying your experiences are universal. I will say blindly trusting the quiz taker's friends is not as reliable of a choice as it sounds. Sometimes people will just call any fond feelings for someone, platonic or not, a crush. And they sometimes will insist that person has a crush even if they say that they do not have a crush and simply want to be friends. And after awhile it can get to your head and feel like the only opinion that matters.

7. They assume this person is someone who you know/you regularly see in real life. In every quiz I took they asked at least one question that I could not answer because the plush I was using for all of these is someone I only know online. Specifically, it was some variant of "how often do you stare at them?" I understand this is a defining part of having a crush for most people, but I was rarely even given the option to say that this person and I are not regularly in the same room. Okay, let's say a teen girl gets a crush on a boy on from another school during like a sports game. She cannot answer this particular question truthfully either because imagining how often you'd stare at someone you met once if you were regularly in the same room with accuracy is not easy.

8. They assume you have the biggest crush, as anything less could lead to negative results from the quiz. Because I do not experience the same feelings, sometimes answering these questions truthfully is very difficult because my options are usually like this:

Q. If your crush asked you to hang out, how would you react?

OMG YES YES YES!!!

Well, we hang out all the time (as friends) so this is just a normal Tuesday for us.

I haven't even introduced myself to this person so they literally cannot ask me to hang out.

I'd make an excuse to not go.

And none of this is even close to how I feel about my plush. Or even about my friends. I cannot answer this question with 100% honesty. Legitimately, I've felt like I've gotten "you don't have a crush" results for the simple reason that I am not head over heals for my plush. Often it was either "every thought in my mind is of them" or "they're alright, I guess." But you can see how only the first option, with the most intense feelings, suggests that you have a crush. The other three options are either completely neutral feelings or suggest dislike. And since that's what people are taking this quiz to figure out, almost everyone is going to pick the first option. It might as well be just "would you hang out with your crush if they asked you, yes or no?"

So these quizzes are built on the assumption that you do, in fact, have a crush. You just want those feelings validated.

"Okay that's great Snowy, but what results did you get from these quizzes as an aromantic?"

Well, I didn't write down exact numbers since there were so many quizzes I took over about an eight month period. Some of them I took multiple times months apart and got different results. But I'd say about 60% said I had a crush, or was likely to have a crush. And 40% said I did not, or it wasn't likely to be a crush.

The funny part?

When I took some of those I didn't have a plush on anyone at the time. I was just using how I felt platonically about a close friend as the "crush." And while this did sway the results, it was not by much. Turning it more into a 50/50 chance.

No plush, no sexual attraction, they are JUST my friend. And yet, the results screen tells me I am deeply in love with them about half of the time.

When I said they assume you do have a crush, I really meant it.

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

Finally, I have actually made my own "do I have a crush" quiz that hopefully avoids doing everything I just talked about. No assumptions about the person you may have feelings for, no assumptions about your friends, no assumptions about you, who you are, or why you are taking it in the first place.

It's password locked since I'd like to get results strictly from people who find this post on Tumblr (for now). So type in this word when prompted:

conformity

Thank you for reading all the way to the end. I spent a long time with all the research and writing so it means a lot to me. 💖

#long post #aromantic #crush #romance #quiz #quizzes #uquiz #do i have a crush?

20 notes · View notes

bloomdigital · 2 months

Text

🧐 GLAAD's first annual gaming report confirms what we already know, it's time to level up LGBTQ gaming experiences.

According to GLAAD's new gaming report, despite 17% of gamers identifying as LGBTQ, only 2% of games on the market contain LGBTQ content. *slams laptop shut*

Here's some additional findings:

LGBTQ players, especially those under 35, are drawn to games for self-expression, experimentation, and escape.

The survey indicates that 72% of LGBTQ players feel better about themselves when characters of their gender identity or sexual orientation are portrayed well.

More than 40% of LGBTQ players use video games to cope with a lack of acceptance in the real world.

Transgender content faces the most resistance among respondents, with 63% more likely to buy a game with a bisexual, gay, or lesbian protagonist compared to 46% for a transgender main character.

At Bloom, we believe that the stories we share say a lot about who we are; as individuals, and as a society. As we’ve seen all around the world, the stories we tell are a battleground for freedom, whether that’s freedom to figure out your identity, learn about the lives of others, or to create a kinder and more loving world.

We made it this far on our own, but now we are reaching out to our community to get us to the finish line.

Back us on Kicksarter and help us complete a new season of LongStory, a carefully crafted LGBTQIA dating sim.

#longstorygame #datingsim #lgbtq #indiegames #visualnovel #cozy games #kickstarter project we love #sheher #they them #hehim

12 notes · View notes

talisidekick · 3 months

Note

Do you really and genuinely believe that nazis and feminists agree and have the same ideology

I'm not sure where you got this from, but I've never expressed that idea. Ever.

Feminists, the real ones, not the ones that brand themselves as "Gender Critical" or "TERF", believe that a womans' body, her biology, does not define her capabilities and position in society. There is nothing a man can do that a woman can't. Any restrictions placed on women by society about what they can and can't do are arbitrary and constructed. There are biological differences between all sexes, but none of these differences are the grounds or basis to build a social or class structure upon. A woman does not need to be married to a man to be successful.

Nazi's, like my great grandfather, believed in "Kinder, Küche, Kirche", which were the three responsibilities of women: Children, Kitchen, Church. This firmly put most women, save those the fascist regime couldn't easily or effectively replace, at home and out of the work force. It defined women broadly by their biology as child bearers and wives of straight men. This same regime also defined women by their biology, and tied their societal their capabilities to it not only to hold power over women but also to deny queer women, even transgender women, equal status or standing. This later helped form the many reasons for the pink triangle and the rounding up of queer individuals as the regime had criminalized what it deemed was 'sexual deviancy'.

If we take a look at the "Gender Critical" and "TERF" groups who like to try and associate themselves with feminism, their very reasoning for denying transgender women and transgender men their identity is based on the same ideals held by the Nazi regime. That a womans body, her biology, DOES define her as a woman. Furthermore those same two groups will additionally not only point out biology, but behaviours that aren't "traditionally feminine" as reasons why transgender women aren't women. Things like being loud, being gaudy, being outspoken, and even strongly opinionated and emotionally passionate, or dominant. As if to say women are supposed to be quiet, modest, reserved, and submissive. Yet when a transgender woman abides by these supposedly "traditionally feminine" behaviours, she's ridiculed for being stereotypical. Which is the same tactics used by oppressive governments and oppressive political movements, like the Nazi Party, to be contradictory to their own rhetoric for the expressed purpose of simply pressing down on those they don't see as equal.

So the short, is no. Feminism is in direct opposition to Nazi ideology.

However, "Gender Critical" and "TERF" groups that like to try and co-opt feminism to try and lend themselves an air of legitimacy (a similar tactic used by Nazis via the appropriation of symbolism and ideals, ie, Nazi's were grossly Capitalistic but painted themselves as Socialist) despite being closer to the ideals of the fascist Nazi regime. After all, why do you think Nazi's showed up in support of the "Gender Critical" and "TERF" rally held by Posie Parker in Melbourn Australia in 2023? Their ideals are remarkably similar if not identical in a lot of areas. Nazi's just take that rhetoric a half-step further and use it to justify the removal of rights from all women, not just transgender.

Glad we could have this talk. I love that we're still trying to paint me as some kind of conspiracy theorist or something. I've spent my whole life learning my families fucked up and aweful history of violence, abuse, and genocide with the expressed purpose of doing my best to make sure no one else becomes a victim of their bigotry and hatred. If you want a more modern example of what the hatred behind genocide looks like, go take a look at what the Israeli government is saying about Palestinians to justify bombing hospitals and murdering children. That is bigotry at it's climax. Mass extermination with a complete lack of empathy for the individual. And if the United States of America keeps going they way it is, you'll get to see the genocide against transgender people reach it's bloody stage too.

Feminism is an Egalitarian movement. Naziism, "Gender Critical" and "TERF" ideology, and Zionism is exclusionism.

#talisidekick #talisidekick things #transgender #trans #2slgbtqia+#lgbtqia+#lgbtq+#lgbt+#talisidekicks asks

10 notes · View notes

andrew-nobody · 4 months

Note

Hello! I dunno if I'm gonna word this right so bear wit me please. But I'm curious.

I heard from a lot of systems that when there's a fictive they're WAAAYYY different than they were in the source.

What's that feel like? I mean... how do I explain? Like, you're suddenly... alive? Sorry if that's offensive, I unno a good word for what happens. Manifest?

And then you're seeing all this stuff about you but they're also kinna NOT about you personally?

Is that super overwhelming? How do you deal with that?

I hope that makes sense. I'm so bad at explaining and wording stuff.

Great question. Not offended, glad you asked. Just the way you’re asking gives me the impression that you get it.

It’s incredibly overwhelming! That’s a big reason I made this blog. Before the blog, I kind of walked into the Motel (the innerworld) with no sense of where I fit into it, let alone the world-at-large. But here, answering questions and stuff, it gives me direction, a purpose. A way to connect to my source, and all the people who love that source. And I want to contribute to that, because I feel like a part of it.

I am sort of suddenly alive. I suddenly exist. And the rules are different. Reality is different. I still have all of my memories from the game. That was all I knew before I “walked in.” Hell, I have memories that aren’t even in the game, but they’re blurry and hard to define until I explore them - kind of like that ask about if I’d ever want a pet.

More under cut….

I don’t want to say that I’m “WAYYY” different than my source. I’m kind of like an alternate reality version of that Andrew, I guess. Like, yeah… I fucking killed people and even ate them and also I didn’t do that because that happened in a game.

Would I kill someone now? Well, no, my circumstances are completely different for one thing. Also I don’t want to perpetuate a stereotype of an “evil alter” that can switch in and commit acts of violence. But when I put myself back in the headspace of my source and the exaggerated experience of fiction, I can still feel it. And when it comes to the play of an ask blog, why not do a little murder? Or whatever. Who’s it hurting?

When it comes to seeing people talking about a me that is not me, there’s definitely cognitive dissonance there. I just have to try to separate their experience and interpretation of the me that is a publicly-consumable character versus the me that is me.

For example, a lot of people are really into transgender/“genderbent”/femdrew/Andrea—whatever you want to call her. Seeing those interpretations give me some gender dysphoria, probably because the host of my system is trans masculine. But none of those interpretations are about me. So it’s simple, I just keep scrolling. I move along. Trans Andrew is just as valid as I am. And I know every version of me is important to the person that version is stemming from, and it says more about them than it does about me.

As for suddenly being in a system full of people I don’t know. It kind of sucks! Everyone here can read my mind?! I’m not used to that kind of lack of privacy, and I used to live with Ashley so that’s saying something! And I’m not the only fictive here, either. (There are fucking Teen Titans here? Lmfao??) And that’s difficult because, you know, we don’t all get along.

Anyway that was a LOT longer than I meant it to be. Kind of a whole vent post! Hope you don’t mind, Anon.

If you see this, feel free to shoot me a DM? I’m happy to talk more about this in detail (though I guess I already have…). Hope to hear from you.

Thanks so much.

#fictive #plural system #plurality #introject #osdd system #osdd #answered asks #anon

11 notes · View notes

brainrot-yumm · 5 months

Text

Damn it really is one of those times huh. Mantra time (enby addition)

I don't need to be masculine to be nonbinary. I don't need to be feminine to be nonbinary. Being feminine or masculine doesn't make me not nonbinary. Presenting as cis-passing still means I'm nonbinary. Presenting as stealth cis-passing still means I'm nonbinary. Nonbinary is trans. Gender is a fluctuating spectrum. Fluctuating dysphoria doesn't make me a faker. A lack of dysphoria doesn't make me a faker. Agony isn't required to still be unhappy and yearn for change. Enjoying gender-coded things doesn't make me a faker. Not wanting to completely transition doesn't make me a faker. Enjoying nonbinary stereotypes doesn't make me an embarrassment to the trans community Being nonbinary doesn't make me an embarrassment to the trans community. My life is not something to be ashamed of.

We are but small creatures on a dying planet. In the grand scheme of things, no one's gonna care that I don't fit into the two binaries just like how no one's gonna care about the people who do. I love you. We're valid. Let's try to be okay enough to keep going.

#nonbinary #enby #agender #pep talk #needed this for myself a lot

18 notes · View notes

neikikardartv · 6 months

Text

Buffy Still Slays with its use of Supernatural

Buffy The Vampire Slayer is a cult classic TV series that aired from 1997-2003 with 7 seasons. The show follows the titular vampire slayer Buffy after she is chosen to be the slayer by fate “to battle against vampires, demons and other forces of darkness”, as the theme song goes. After becoming the Slayer she relocates from LA to Sunnydale California, which is located on a “Hellmouth” (meaning demons are attracted to the area). For her highschool is Hell literally. Buffy has to fight both literal and figurative demons alongside her friends who are affectionately referred to as the Scooby Gang. The format of the show is mainly ‘monster of the week’ style with each season having an overarching ‘Big Bad’ villain plotline. The cult following of Buffy has actually garnered lots of academic attention and scholarly articles, being referred to as “Buffy studies”.

Unlike how the article described Penny Dreadful I don’t believe that Buffy is anti-feminist in its subtext. I believe that Buffy instead uses the supernatural and gothic tropes to portray the complexity of the adolescent girl experience and coming of age.

What concepts of Gothic doubling function to define the natural from the supernatural?

Buffy as a series has many Gothic elements with its themes and supernatural settings and even pastiche characters. Buffy herself is a modern Gothic heroine, while she is still virtuous she also possesses physical and mental strength. Many Gothic doubles are featured in the show as supernatural beings most notably being the vampires that terrorize Sunnydale. In the show vampires are the epitome of one’s shadow self, they are all “id”, once someone turns they become a cruel sadistic version of themselves with no soul or humanity. There is usually a very clear line between the natural and supernatural with vampires as there are countless scenes of Buffy staking each vampire she sees in her slayer duties that protect the town. The show uses visual effects to completely “other” the faces of vampires when they are attacking humans and vampires aren’t meant to be humanized at all.

youtube

(Buffy slaying stop around 30s)

There is one notable exception to that rule in the early seasons that comes in Buffy’s first love interest Angel. Angel is unique in that he is a 200 something year old vampire that has been cursed with having a soul. This makes him feel remorse for all the evil acts he committed prior to the curse. When Buffy first meets Angel she is appalled to find out that he is a vampire and immediately wants to stake him. Once he proves himself to be “a good vampire” he and Buffy form a relationship and he attacks other vampires alongside her.

Angel is a very interesting character in that his gothic double is a part of his vampire form as well, he has an alter ego that comes out when he is soulless that goes by “Angelus”. Angelus first comes out in a pivotal scene after Buffy loses her virginity to him, next thing we know he’s become that guy who changes into an asshole after sex. This scene happens the morning after they had sex (he was gone when she woke up).

youtube

(skip 40s in).

As you can see Angel’s gothic double Angelus is a stereotypical asshole. Prior to this he was a loving and protective boyfriend, afterwards he becomes one of the seasons “Big Bads” who terrorizes Buffy’s friends and family and tries to destroy the world. In his Angelus soulless form Angel is back to being ‘othered’ and Buffy ends up having to kill him in the finale (he does come back as Angel again, spoiler). Through this dichotomy the divide between supernatural and natural becomes clearly defined, the Angel/Angelus gothic double shows that it actually is a lack of humanity that truly separates the supernatural from the natural.

In what ways is gender performativity tied to the supernatural?

Gender performativity is tied to the supernatural in that character’s Gothic doubles often represent extreme stereotypes of masculine and feminine gender performativity. The doubles can sometimes even be manifestations of someone’s desire to ‘perform gender’ which is amplified by the supernatural. One such instance of this occurs in Season 3 episode 4 titled, “Beauty and the Beasts” . In this episode another Jekyll/Hyde like scenario occurs in what seems to be a normal highschool boy named Pete, who is responsible for a string of gruesome murders. Pete is dating another student Debbie and it is revealed that he has been taking a potion that transforms him into a monster. As seen in this clip.

youtube

(1:00m in)

As you can see here it is pretty on the nose with the abusive boyfriend turning into an actual monster metaphor. In the clip it is revealed that Peter made the monster potion to, “Be the man [Debbie] wanted”. Pete has created a potion that forces him to perform gender and it leads him to become a monster double of himself. By having supernatural entities be extreme representations of gender performativity Buffy is able to demonstrate how gender stereotypes can be harmful.

How does the series use the supernatural to liberate characters from oppressive normalcy?

Buffy’s supernatural strength and fighting abilities that come with being the “chosen one” as a slayer, liberate her from oppressive normalcy. Prior to being a slayer Buffy was a popular cheerleader at her old school. After she is granted her slayer duties she struggles with not leading a normal life anymore.

This struggle between accepting being a slayer and wanting to just be normal is Buffy’s main internal conflict in the earlier seasons. While, at first she doesn't find abilities liberating she soon is able to accept her fate and enjoys her power in slaying and saving others.

Another character that is liberated from oppressive normalcy through the supernatural, is Buffy’s best friend Willow. Willow starts out in the series as a shy, studious girl. While she continues to be studious she begins to use her brains to also learn witchcraft. This escalates when Willow goes to college and joins a Wicca group on campus. While expanding her powers with the group she also meets another Wicca named Tara who becomes her love interest; leading her to realize she’s a lesbian (prior to this she had a boyfriend). Willow’s journey with growing her witch powers also aligns with her self discovery and coming out, liberating her from oppressive heteronormativity.

In what ways do Gothic doubles allow characters to transgress scripted gender that society imposes on them?

Early on in her witchcraft abilities, in the episode Doppelgangland, Willow casts a spell that accidentally puts her Vampire doppelganger from another universe into their world. This scene occurs before that happens.

youtube

(2:00-3:00 min).

As you can see Willow is upset with how she is characterized by others. The article states that,“the double can be liberating for women (Saxey 2010), as it can allow them to transgress the traditional gender boundaries imposed on them by society”. Willow’s vampire double is the opposite of her and her desire to be less like herself ends up backfiring when her double terrorizes Sunnydale.

Clip from after she is captured.

youtube

(2:20-3:20).

“That’s me as a vampire? I’m so evil..and skanky.. and I think i’m kinda gay…”

As shown, Willow’s gothic double transgresses Willow’s gender script of being sweet, innocent, and wearing fuzzy pink sweaters. Her doppelganger has dominatrix tendencies and is much more confident and sexual. Interestingly, the first hint of Willow being gay is with her double, showing that her double has been able to transgress the heteronormative gender script as well. As Angel’s, “Well actually...” suggests Willow’s gothic double is a representation of her most buried desires.

How are characters rewarded or punished for subverting their expected character traits?

Willow’s want to subvert her “old reliable” self ends up with her being punished as her plan backfires. Her extreme gothic double ends up being killed immediately via stake after she is returned to her original dimension (Interestingly, Willow didn’t want them to kill her double and instead casts a spell to return her). At the end of the episode we see that her gothic double actually helped her achieve her goal of not being forced to do her athlete classmate’s homework, as he is now intimidated by her. Her gothic double is punished for her gender digressions but her assertiveness ends up benefiting Willow by not letting her be ‘walked over’ anymore.

Buffy’s subversion of her expected feminine character traits are rewarded by her heroism. Her supernatural strength keeps her and her loved ones from being killed and also allows her to easily attack her unsuspecting creepy male classmates, who are always taken aback by her strength. This leads many of her male peers to refer to her as a “freak’ and someone to avoid, despite her looks and wit. However, this doesn’t phase Buffy as she enjoys the freedom that comes with her ability to protect herself.

Questions

Do you think that mythologizing the issues that come with ‘coming of age’, in the form of having the supernatural represent teenage woes, make these concepts more universal and accessible to young viewers?

Why do you think the show made Buffy’s two main love interests (Angel and then former nemesis Spike) vampires, even though her whole thing is that she’s ‘the slayer’?

Do you think that Buffy continuing to ‘other’ and slay vampires even while dating one is ethical? When they could also be potentially redeemed?

How do you think the face altering visual effects contribute to the ‘othering’ of vampires in the show?

@theuncannyprofessoro

Some Articles I read:

#oxyspeculativetv

11 notes · View notes

burningvelvet · 4 months

Note

I love your posts about Mary Shelly, I'm currently studying Frankenstein in school and reading The Last Man.

A bit off topic, but in the spirit of awful takes about old authors, I saw a post on here about Oscar Wilde, saying something along the lines of "Lmao dont sue someone for saying you commited sodomy when you did commit sodomy" and went on to say in the tags that they think Oscar Wilde was a "mean theatre gay". Okay I'm sorry I'm just petty but not only does this person not understand how incredible homophobic 1800s Britain was but they also seem to not know what homophobia is like. In general. I think that stereotypes and tiktok are the bane of my existence

Thank you! And I completely agree. I hate the way anti-intellectualism proliferates online, and I fear for people my age and younger than me.

Every day I think that the majority of our ideological, cultural, and social problems could be solved by a better and more accurate understanding of – and appreciation for – history (not just global history, but personal, ancestral, local, evolutionary – all of it). But that requires the ability to accept the complexities and nuances of the world, and to humbly admit to your own lack of knowledge, and to seriously question your values, morals, and beliefs, and to tackle all of the Unsavory Stuff of Life. Most people don't have the strength to do any of this because it's complex and confusing and uncomfortable.

I'm not a historian, but I am a huge fan of all things history, and every day I try to implement historical context and knowledge in every aspect of life. Like all people willing to admit it, I still struggle in my own self-education process, and with the various cognitive dissonances and implicit biases I've discovered in myself thereby. I understand many things are subjective, and everyone is tinged by their own biases built by their individual experiences.

With Wilde, he's an incredibly fascinating thinker and cultural icon, especially in LGBT+ history, and yet he's still so divisive even among progressive types for various reasons. He doesn't fully live up to 21st century Western standards of morality or ethics. As an economically privileged white man in the 1800s, of course he was raised to hold some prejudiced opinions when it came to race, religion, gender, etc. - yet, overall, he also was still far ahead of his time in these and many other regards compared to everyone else back then. He's contradictive, and knew it, and wasn't afraid to show it. He can't be easily defined, and people don't like that. But he's still an important historical figure and always will be, and I don't think he or his works should be burned. It's not reasonable to hold historical figures to modern standards or stereotypes. Context is key.

Also: if you didn't know, a lot of The Last Man was semi-autobiographical! A lot of interesting things have been written about this aspect of it.

#oscar wilde #history #historical figures #classic literature #classic writers #ask #asks #literature #english literature #opinions #me #my writing #my essays #wilde #romanticism #dark academia #cancel culture

11 notes · View notes

in-g-major · 3 months

Note

Hi! I was just dropping by to say I really liked your post about Ty Lee's wasted potential. I agree with all your points in there, and also, I wanted to mention that Ty Lee was arguably the second most dangerous member of Azula's Trio after Azula herself. She's the most skilled one. Aside from her knowledge on martial arts and gymnastics, she is charming and, at first glance, she doesn't seem dangerous, which is a great strategic advantage. Even Azula could have used all that at some point to move her plans forward, (i.e. have Ty Lee do the talking and acting when they posed as Kyoshi Warriors since, you know, she's also the most knowledgeable on the Earth Kingdom out of the three girls) but I can't tell if the writers didn't explore all this due to lack of time, because she was a side character, or because they too saw her as stuck in the role of a happygolucky, pink-loving, Mean Girls-clique type of character.

P.S.: Don't pay attention to the haters 💖

Thank you for the wonderful feedback! It's much appreciated. Ty Lee was definitely underestimated by everyone except Katara, who realized how scary she could be after their first encounter in Omashu. With Azula, her ego is most connected with her ability to manipulate others. Acknowledging that Ty Lee might have an edge over her in charm and personability would disturb her sense of self too much. But you're absolutely right that Ty Lee was an even more valuable asset than Azula realized, and not nearly as easy to control as she thought. I think Ty Lee being the "girly" member of Azula's power trio is the main reason she was ultimately given the least attention. It was something that started to go really wrong with the franchise during Book 3, where gender stereotypes began dictating how female characters were written. That wasn't completely absent from Book 1 and Book 2, but it was balanced out far better. Of course, most of the focus Mai got in Book 3 was centered around her relationship with a guy as opposed to her relationship with her platonic girlfriends, so Mai and Ty Lee were both done dirty in different ways. Azula fared better (until the comics), but there was more that could have been done with her too. It's interesting. I thought I would be focusing more on Zuko, Katara, and Iroh when I rejoined Tumblr, but the Fire Nation gals have been the main focus of my posts so far. I think they're all neat, it's just an unexpected direction. Now I'm even more excited about their role in my own ATLA fics.

#ty lee #mai #azula #anti maiko #g major answers

8 notes · View notes

hadeantaiga · 1 year

Text

A radfem argument that I would like to spend some time discussing is the idea that trans people "reinforce gender roles/stereotypes", or that we "reinforce gender" itself, and therefore we are reinforcing the patriarchy.o it to "prove" she was a "real woman".

To act like trans people, who come in a huge variety of presentations, genders, and sexes, are "reinforcing the gender binary / gender stereotypes / the patriarchy" shows a complete lack of understanding of who trans people are and what being trans is. It simplifies the trans experience to something binary and conforming, when many trans people exist outside the gender binary entirely and do not conform to any gender expectations whatsoever. From the trans side of things, it seems crazy anyone would ever accuse us of these things. We see every day how we are breaking out of the gender binary and defying gendered stereotypes.

But through the discussions I’ve had on here, I can see where some people get this idea from. For example, trans people often talk about the experiences we had that opened our eyes to the fact that we were trans. If one simplifies the trans experience down to moments like this with no further context, it can look like we are reinforcing the gender binary.

"I first thought I might’ve been trans when I tried on men's clothes for the first time and felt euphoria".

From a narrow point of view, this looks like the trans man is saying "wearing men's clothes makes you a man, and women cannot like wearing men's clothes". That is obviously not what trans people are saying. Trans folks are saying, "this incident was part of what made me aware I was transgender, but it is not the whole picture, and my gender is far more complex than my clothing preference”.

Being trans is not just about clothing or aesthetics, just how being butch is not just about clothing. Being butch means so much more to me than just my clothes, and that goes for all butches. I have seen butches describe butchness as a sort of gender identity all on its own. Some feel it is woman-adjacent; some butches are fully cis; some are butch and trans. It's a blurry label, and that's part of why I love it. Some butches go on T, too – and I’m one of them.

Another claim I'll see is folks trying to say that "trans people only transition because they think they can't do XYZ as a man/woman, so they must switch their gender to participate".

This is absolute nonsense, and if you talked to a trans person for longer than two seconds you'd realize this. Like in my case, I did my most macho thing (joining the Navy) while I was still a woman. I'm not on T because I want to do masculine things; I did them already! Me taking T after getting out of the Navy sort of throws that whole argument out the window.

---

I know binary trans people who completely pass and conform to gendered stereotypes are highly visible in media. And if that's your only exposure to trans people, then I get why you might think trans people as a whole "uphold gender stereotypes". But that is a tiny minority of who we are.

And furthermore, there's the fact that some of those trans people were forced to conform to gender roles to be classified as trans to access the care they needed. Many trans elders talk about how, if they’d had the language we have today, and the choices we have today, they would not have gone for a binary transition. So, to use these folks against the trans community is incredibly harmful.

Gender non-conformance and transness go hand-in-hand. Many of us are GNC. You need to listen to us, beyond the quips and the short quotable sentences that you can twist to make us look like we’re upholding gender roles, because when you actually listen and see who we are and what we do, you’ll realize we are actively breaking down gender roles every single day. We are active participants in feminism's fight against gender stereotypes!

We are gender liberators.

#trans #transgender #transgender 101 #anti radfem #anti terf #intersectional feminism #gender liberation

51 notes · View notes

everythingisblue-if · 11 months

Note

Honestly, i love inclusivity like any other person. But for people just starting writing or even if they are experienced writers, it shouldn't be such an uproar if there is more of a certain gender or etc. I mean, i know there is a troll going around commenting that on like every IF page, but like i have read and seen many IFs where it was only male ros, fem ros nonbinary, etc.. i mean, unless the author is perpetuating stereotypes or is uninformed, the author should be able to write whatever they want. If ya dont like the type of ros in the game, write ya own. I think there is a lack of slice of life in the IF community, but I aint hating on the authors, im gathering knowledge and wrting my own.

👏🏾 I completely agree with this statement. And I wish you the best with making your own interactive fiction. I know how hard and draining it is, and you can’t please everyone. So, write what you want and do what you want in the sake of your creative mind and no one else’s.

Mwah 💋👑

#everything is blue #if #ask #interactive fiction

21 notes · View notes

vintage-bentley · 4 months

Note

Is it bad that I kind of resent the implication from "femme-presenting A/C" fans that if Aziraphale and Crowley did (for some reason) decide to become women one day instead that they would become 1) feminine instead of GNC, and 2) suddenly interested in women/become lesbian out of nowhere?

Whenever I see "femme Aziraphale/Crowley" they're always big boobed and hipped, hyper-feminine clothing, fully dolled up, lipstick lesbians. I've never seen them drawn with normal figures (feat. Tennant's lack of tit and hip for example), never in the same outfits they normally wear, never bare-haired and hairy, and middle-aged women. Also despite Aziraphale being obviously attracted to only men, they always make fem!Aziraphale a lesbian 🥲 like if someone wrote a fic that was completely genderbent (where they had been lesbian women from day one, none of the gender fuckery) I'd probably read it but I just can't even invision our Aziraphale being attracted to women, even if he did suddenly decide to change his gender.

Oh I feel the same way!

It doesn’t surprise me that a fandom so obsessed with gender stereotypes seems to also be obsessed with drawing women like pinup models….but it’s certainly disappointing. Nobody can convince me that A/C would believe in gendered expectations and that if they were women, they’d be hyper feminine. Those ladies are hairy and barefaced. They are NOT falling for misogynistic beauty standards. And Female Crowley is skinny and flat and Female Aziraphale is chubby with a tummy. They are not Jessica Rabbit lookalikes. And they’d also wear comfortable clothing. Not…whatever the fuck people are drawing them in.

If I could be assured that every singe ineffable wives depiction was the AU where they’ve been lesbians from day 1, I’d love it. But because I know that most people doing it are of the mindset that A/C magically changed into lesbians just because, I don’t like ineffable wives for the most part. Especially because of how uncomfortably hyper feminine they tend to be.

The whole sexuality changing thing comes from the fandom’s obsession with “fluid sexuality” and their idea that bisexuality is the only moral sexuality. For obvious reasons I just can’t get behind it. To me, A/C are either always gay men from day 1, or always lesbians from day 1.

Anyway. Day 12345 of desperately wishing the fandom would stop worshipping gender stereotypes

#asks #anon

4 notes · View notes

pseudonymous-peregrin · 9 months

Text

The TOA Fandom + Diversity (please read & reblog! it’s important that this post circulates)

I’m not going to sugarcoat: this fandom is fucking horrible about the arcane order (and people who don’t conform to the stinky gender binary in general)

the toa wiki has a category for ‘wielders of excalibur’ (an exclusive title of which literally only two people have ever held) but no non-binary/agender one, which is #1, a real identity, and #2, careless to not have, considering the arcane order.

I literally started a post about adding one awhile back, or at least removing the ‘male’ and ‘female’ tags on their pages, and I was told that without confirmation I couldn’t do it, that they used certain pronouns, and a bunch of other things that would’ve been completely valid if I hadn’t given them proof of every single thing I said.

but that’s not my point here— i can feel sorry for myself all I want, but my point still stands. the admin had almost terrifyingly close-minded beliefs for someone so active on the internet; non-binary people have to use they/them pronouns, gay people can’t be transphobic, and many other harmful things.

I’ve seen this sort of purposeful ignorance way more than I should be in this fandom, and not just directed towards us non-conforming queers.

The input of Indigenous, Jewish, Asian, and many other kinds of peoples have been pushed aside in favour of a lack of responsibility and reconciliation. @sundown-draws has made many, many posts detailing the issues of representation in the Tales of Arcadia series, as have I. Others have added on to their posts with their own perspectives and issues, which I genuinely find to be such a beautiful show of unity between otherwise disconnected people.

However, it seems that these posts on their own don’t spread much beyond people who are involved with them— which is fine. algorithms (or people, in this case) can be finicky, and that can’t be blamed for the lack of awareness here.

The white, non-queer people who are the root of the problem can be, though.

We have interacted with people who are perpetuating stereotypes and communicated with them that they are doing so. We receive no answer.

This is not unwilling, innocent ignorance.

This is bigotry. This is an unwillingness to listen or to admit that you are wrong. This is a conscious choice to ignore marginalized people who are trying to tell you what is acceptable and what is not.

please, don’t take this as an insult, or as me trying to be a jerk. I am begging you, genuinely begging, to please be aware of what you are saying, and if you get something wrong, listen. do your research, listen to the people around you.

and if you mess up, don’t get all blamey and think you’re a bad person! because i guarantee you, you aren’t. no one is perfect, and it isn’t realistic to try.

just walk through life with an open heart, an open mind, and a loving soul, and I promise that you’ll experience things in a whole new point of view that you could never imagine <3

(this isn’t just for fandom! all of this can and should be applied irl :D)

#sorry for the long post but i’ve been stewing on this for a very long time #and it’s incredibly important #tales of arcadia #3below #wizards: tales of arcadia #the arcane order #rise of the titans #bellroc keeper of the flame #nari of the eternal forest #skrael of the north wind #queer #indigenous #transgender #non-binary #agender

9 notes · View notes