#a difference of opinion and I can critically read content

[johannestevans]

Addressing Common Arguments Against “Consuming Harmful Content”

Challenging purity culture in online spaces and their fears of “problematic media”.

Read this piece on Medium. / / Leave a tip.

Photo by Ethan Will via Pexels.

Constant and continuous arguments endure on social media about the dreaded and frightening spectre of problematic media — from television shows that supposedly “glorify” unhealthy relationships or “sexualise” and “excuse” abusive relationships; to erotica, adult books, and 18+ fanfiction that supposedly teach teenagers bad life lessons and impact their ethics; to anime and manga that surely must be the cause of child abuse the world over. 

I wrote an in-depth essay about the intellectual flaws in these reactionary assumptions, delving into their roots in lacking media literacy and rising anti-sex attitudes here: 

The above essay discusses at length many of the fears and anxieties that lead to this reactionary thinking, but does not challenge or explore the echo chambers that can arise in online spaces, particularly in aggressive environments such as Twitter/X, and for young or isolated individuals who are particularly vulnerable to peer pressure and fears of ostracisation if they admit to the “wrong” opinions.

Many of these arguments are used by “anti-shippers” within fandom and online spaces, the term commonly shortened as “antis” — if you’re unfamiliar with the term, these are people who define themselves as opposing one or more specific ships, fandoms, tropes, or kinks, often due to what they perceive to be their “problematic” or inherently “harmful” elements when engaged with or portrayed in various forms of media and art. Because of the virulent and highly aggressive nature of these online communities, these people — many of them young or isolated, often marginalised and disenfranchised from in-person, supportive environments — can become radicalised, and can experience great fear and anxiety at the premise of others holding different opinions or perspectives from the ones these online communities have impressed upon them should be held immutably by all.

In this piece I’m going to be addressing common arguments and assumptions seen on social media one by one — it is not really intended to convert the above, often radicalised individuals, but to provide support and guidance in understanding why their perspectives can be flawed, and how to engage with and deconstruct those arguments. 

It is also intended to provide support and structure to begin to engage with and potentially challenge or affirm your own beliefs and ideas about fiction, art, and other forms of media, and the extent of the impact it can have on you or others — this piece is me addressing these arguments with my own perspective, but I would encourage people to disagree with and critique my rebuttals!

The goal here is always more critical thought, analysis, and understanding, and that doesn’t come from automatically following another person’s line of thought or argument just because it’s well-poised or you particularly respect or like them — no matter who that person or people may be. 

--

“Depicting [a theme] in media is the same as glorifying it!”

Let’s first engage with what people might be discussing when they panic about “harmful content” and “problematic” ships or pieces of fiction.

They might worry about people reading or watching works that discuss or depict anything from violence, incest, sexual assault, age gaps, BDSM, kinky sex, child sexual abuse, trauma recovery, rape, rape recovery, drug use, bestiality, to abusive relationships or anything else, will encourage people to think positively about those acts, those traumas, and those experiences. 

You might look at the list of things I just wrote there and go, “Um, there are big differences between some of those things and the others!”

And yet the same consideration still applies. 

Just because a theme or idea is present in a work, or is depicted in it implicitly or explicitly, doesn’t mean it’s being “glorified” and portrayed as overwhelmingly positive — and even if a theme or aspect is being glorified, this does not mean we shall simply unthinkingly absorb that perspective.

Reading a story that contains something doesn’t mean I’ll automatically think that thing is good or bad, regardless of how it’s portrayed in fiction — the media and art we engage with doesn’t wholly change and adjust our own ethics and morals as soon as we’ve interacted with it. 

We might play a videogame and disagree with the way some themes are presented, have criticisms of them, whilst enjoying and appreciating others; we might read a piece of erotica and find some parts about it very hot, but find others disturbing and a little uncomfortable; we might watch a TV show and just think it’s in very poor taste, despite theoretically being up for the premise. 

Engaging with media does not turn off and on switches in our brains that make us completely “pro” or completely “anti” one premise or other. 

People are more complicated than that. 

We have complex and layered feelings about every argument and perspective there is, every experience there is, because human beings are social animals, and we experience very few things through an uncomplicated, binary lens. 

For me personally, I often seek out works that cover the same traumas and harms I’ve experienced — why? Because seeking out those themes helps me process and better understand what has happened to me, and how I’ve felt about it, how I’ve responded. 

“I don’t have a problem with people writing about certain harmful topics to show them as bad, but some people sexualise or fetishise them!”

I’m sure you’re right. 

Some people might write about rape to work out a complex trauma recovery narrative — others might write about rape in a work as kink. An author might well write with both goals in mind in the same work. 

A traumatic event doesn’t become less traumatic because it sexually aroused us or brought us physical pleasure — in fact, those feelings can add to the impact of a trauma and the inner conflict we experience in the aftermath. 

Some people undercut victims of sexual abuse by saying they “enjoyed” it, pointing out that they orgasmed or showed signs of arousal as signs they “secretly” wanted it, and these feelings can contribute heavily to shame and fear as a victim. 

Sexual arousal is a bodily response. It is not consent, and it’s not an excuse for assault or abuse. Moreover, some people might feel arousal or pleasure but not be fit to consent — for example, if someone is underage, or if someone is drugged or insensible with drink. 

These people cannot give knowledgeable consent, but abusers might still say after an assault that they “enjoyed” it. 

This is purity culture at work — anti-sex attitudes use people’s “enjoyment” of something to undercut their autonomy and right to consent, by implying they “deserve” that abuse — abuse is abuse whether it’s sexualised or not. 

But the thing is, the obverse applies. 

Just as someone’s mixed feelings or sensations of pleasure during a sexual assault does not mean they consented to the assault, or because someone’s feelings of happiness and love for their abuser does not mean they deserved the abusive treatment they experienced from them, a person writing sexually or erotically about a topic, or engaging with art and narratives about that topic, does not mean they actually want that thing to happen in real life, to real people, or to themselves. 

Fiction is not real life. 

We watch a horror film, and it doesn’t mean we want serial killers or demons to run amok, killing teenagers or possessing their victims — similarly, just because we engage with porn or erotica that sexualises certain topics doesn’t mean we’re pro- or in favour of those topics for real people. 

Rape fantasies are incredibly common, despite being highly stigmatised, and just because someone fantasises about this sort of control fantasy does not mean they actually want to abuse someone or be abused. 

“It’s harmful to depict abusive or immoral characters as sexy or desirable.”

If you have never experienced abuse, manipulation, or otherwise poor treatment from someone you thought was attractive, charming, or admirable, if you’ve never been groomed by someone with whom you were enamoured, I’m very glad. 

I’m happy for you, honestly. 

But many of us have. 

People want to believe that all abusers are evil, are ugly, are obvious from a distance, are blatant from the out. People want to believe they can “tell” someone is abusive just from a glance, and write them off — and that anyone who would or might spend time with that person is therefore “asking for it”, or “letting themselves” be abused. 

In actual fact, many abusers aren’t. 

Many abusers are beautiful and charming — some of them draw you in, slowly bring you closer and closer until it’s very difficult to untangle yourself from your need and craving for their approval. They ruin lives, ruin psyches, and they cause unspeakable damage to their victims. 

And yes, victims often feel conflicted in the aftermath of their abuse.

Many of us hero worship or greatly respect our abusers, love them very deeply, crave their good opinion, because we are carefully groomed and manipulated, over time, into relying on their praise and their attention. For victims isolated from other sources of care and support, and especially for young children and teenagers, it can be very difficult to recognise what is happening and has happened to us. 

Even after we know and understand exactly what has happened to us, and also internalised that it was wrong, we can still feel conflicted. 

We are not retroactively deserving of our abuse because we crave our abusers’ good opinion, or their love, still. This instinct does not excuse or justify the abuse we’ve experienced. Victims of abuse are still victims of abuse even if we go back to our abusers, even if we “accept” or attempt to justify our abuse to others, if we try to excuse it, if we don’t ask for help. 

Abuse is never the victim’s fault, no matter how imperfect we are as victims. 

“Writing queer characters as abusive is bad representation!”

If we exclusively write queer characters who are perfect and unimpeachable, we’re not letting ourselves write queer characters who are fully human, with all the flaws and complexities humanity comes with. 

Queer people are not less deserving of this complex representation than cishet people are — and in any case, the purpose of art and media is not exclusively to provide good representation, or to show good moral examples for others.

We create to express ourselves, to reflect the world, to critique it, laugh at it, commiserate over it, to feel our feelings, to connect and communicate with others through shared stories. 

If we only let ourselves do things that might be seen as “good rep”, we rob ourselves of the ability to express ourselves as completely as we might wish to. 

“If you write abusive queer characters, you’re just contributing to homophobia and bigotry in art and media!”

Queer people writing queer stories with queer villains is not the same as cishet people including queer people or queer-coded characters just to be villains. The power dynamic is completely different. 

Queer writers’ writing of queer villainy is often inspired by their own experiences, including of bigotry, and the harm they might do reflects harm by society, the ways harms might be felt more keenly by their victims. 

Writing queer villains as villainous because their queerness makes them (or is used as a shorthand for them being) predatory, cruel, or callous, is homophobic and is often shitty, whether people intend that or not. 

But just having queer villains, having queer characters do bad or abusive things, or just have flaws? 

That’s as much a part of queer humanity as having queer heroes and having queer characters do good and helpful things.

Why would you read about rape when you could read consensual non-consent?

[Consensual non-consent being a kink wherein partners agree to roleplay a non-consensual situation.]

Rape in fiction is a form of consensual non-consent. 

The fictional characters, who are not real and do not have real feelings, are not consenting, but the reader choosing to read is. 

In the same way that two people playing a CNC roleplay game in the bedroom might be a safe and fun way of experiencing or re-experiencing the fear and trauma of assault with an escape clause (a safeword), a reader can do the same — they can stop reading. 

If a television show, film, or videogame becomes upsetting, again, one can stop watching, stop playing. It is a person’s own responsibility to set safe boundaries for themselves and protect their own mental health. 

“Why would someone write about trauma and abuse when they could write fluff?”

Why would someone watch a horror movie when they could watch a romcom? Why would someone eat cheese when chocolate is an option?

People do not have to choose one or the other — many people like both horror films and romcoms, cheese and chocolate, and reading about both horrible shit and positive things. 

“You mentioned that people might engage with media about dark topics to work through their feelings from their own abuse. How do I know if someone’s actually been abused?”

Why do you think it’s your right to ask that? 

Why are you prioritising your personal comfort and curiosity over that person’s privacy? If your instinct is to try to license who is and isn’t allowed to engage with a piece of art or media, why? 

You are never entitled to the details of someone else’s abuse. Your validation is not important enough to potentially trade for someone’s private traumas and experiences. 

“If you write or create about certain topics as a survivor, you’re just perpetuating abuse and you are as bad as your abuser!”

Creating works of art or fiction about people who are not real experiencing fictional harm that is also not real, is not in any way equivalent to real people doing real harm to others. 

If your support of abuse survivors hinges on how palatable their reaction to their abuse is, and you believe that some abuse survivors “deserve” their abuse for depicting their abuse in art and fiction, you’re not actually supporting survivors. 

If you believe that all abuse survivors do or should act the same way, or respond the same way, to their abuses, you are mistaken. 

If you are effectively angry at someone for not looking enough like a victim, for being “impure”, and therefore the same as their abuser, that is a form of victim blaming. 

Do you hold artists who create media about non-sexual trauma or violence to a different standard than those who write about sexual trauma or violence? 

Why? What is the difference to you?

If someone writing about sexual abuse in media is equivalent to real life abuse, is a fictional murder?

“People shouldn’t write or engage with media about traumatic things, they should just go to therapy!”

Therapy is not a moral machine where bad people with bad thoughts go in and good people with good thoughts go in. 

Good therapy and counselling provides us with the tools to manage our own mental health, our own emotional and psychological needs, heal from our traumas, and so forth. 

Many therapists will actually recommend safe re-exposure to frightening or upsetting topics, and also encourage self-expression on the subject of one’s most impactful experiences, which might include creating art and media to explore and discuss their feelings. 

With that said, therapy is as flawed as any other tools for emotional catharsis and healing — therapy and mental healthcare can be very expensive or inaccessible because of one’s working schedule; some therapists and mental health professionals are abusive or bigoted; some people may not be in the right place for MH care or therapy at this time, et cetera. 

Therapy isn’t a catch-all for anything you disapprove of in someone else, and it’s also not a punishment to force someone to repent for their sins. 

“It’s okay to write a story to cope, but you shouldn’t publish it in case it upsets others!”

So long as the work has appropriate content warnings and/or is published or screened in an appropriate space, it is not inherently harmful. In fact, reading narratives and engaging with those narratives can be valuable for us. 

Engaging with media that bears similarity to our own lives, reflects our own experiences, written by other people who we know understand the complicated emotions of survivors — whilst still condemning the actions of abusers or not — can be extremely validating and offer a lot of assurance. 

This is especially useful in regards to media that shows victims having a codependent relationship with or still loving their abusers, or where their abusers are shown as sympathetic, whilst the narrative still shows the toxicity and pain caused by the relationship. 

Moreover, there can be a sense of reclamation and security in exploring stories about similar harm as we’ve experienced whilst knowing we are now in a place of safety and are free from those past experiences, or that other survivors have escaped and we can too. 

“If children read this work or watch this show or play this game, they might think that the things depicted in it are okay!”

Is the work rated G or PG? 

Is it shown on a children’s TV channel, or appear in a section that is marked for children? Is it put on a children’s website, where the primary audience is children? 

In short, is the work aimed at kids?

If no, then it’s not for kids. 

Particularly if a work is marked for adult audiences only, if it’s labelled erotica, if it’s marked M or E or NC-17, if it says it’s for adults or asks people to check a box agreeing that they’re an adult, then the work in question is most definitely not for children. 

Everything in the world doesn’t have to be child-safe just because children exist.

It is the responsibility of parents and guardians to appropriately supervise their children’s online use, and to teach children and teenagers internet safety, some of which includes setting appropriate boundaries for themselves and not seeking out content that might distress them, or to know what to do if they stumble across content that does distress them — namely, to speak with a trusted adult about their feelings and what they can do to manage them and look after themselves, and be looked after.

It’s not the responsibility of random other adults in the world not to make horror movies or watch porn or play adult videogames or anything else, just because a child could potentially learn of their existence. 

“But someone else engaging with that work might think the things depicted in it are okay!”

You’re right, they might do. 

They might also engage with the work and think things depicted in it are bad. Fiction does not exclusively exist for our moral education. 

“It makes me feel uncomfortable or unsafe that people are writing about [a topic] with a tone or in a manner that seems wrong to me!”

Yes, many of us feel uncomfortable with some topics being depicted in fiction, and might find them viscerally disgusting or triggering, consider them to be in poor taste, badly considered, or similar. 

This is normal and okay. 

It’s perfectly natural to have limits on what one can handle in fiction, or to find your ethical considerations don’t match up with the things other people make. 

But it’s our job, as responsible adults who look after our own mental health and consider our own boundaries, to avoid that content. 

You cannot control what other people think about, feel about certain topics, or how they portray them in fiction. You cannot control other people. 

You can only control your environment, your boundaries, and the works you choose to engage with. 

You can limit your time on social media, mute tags or keywords, block particular users or sites, or simply look away or leave the room / close the tab. 

“What about rampant problematic works on Ao3!?”

Works on Ao3 are not a real issue. 

They are not representation. Fanworks and original works on Ao3 are not the mainstream. They are being read exclusively by members of various internet subcultures who read fanfiction in those specific fandoms, after reading the tags. 

This doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t discuss certain tropes and norms in various fandoms — we might address our own biases around race, sexuality, religion, disability, and other characteristics, and how these biases and bigotries can come across in people’s approaches to fandom, the characters and ships they concentrate on, their headcanons, et cetera. 

The same can be said of people’s original creations. 

Ao3 has a robust tagging system, and allows people to mute and block tags they might be upset or triggered by — and in the event one clicks on an explicit work, a window will come up asking people to consent explicitly to moving through to read the work. 

It is people’s own responsibility to set their own limits as to what they can handle in reading fiction — and not to obsess over what other people might or might not be reading, which we cannot control, and is also none of our business. 

“What about loli and shotacon? Isn’t that the same as child pornography?”

“Child pornography” is generally not in use as a term — many people who have been victimised find that terms like “child porn” and CP grate, because “pornography” is work made with willing, adult participants. 

Videos and images produced of children are instead referred to either as CSAM — child sexual abuse materials — or CSEM — child sexual exploitation materials. CSEM is evil because it involves the unspeakable and agonising victimisation of a real life child or children, being abused and manipulated by adults around them, and worse than that initial victimisation, the recording their abuse is another victimisation in itself.

With every share of a piece of this material, that child or children are victimised another time, made vulnerable to more people, and the creation of this material can create more market desire, meaning that other abusers will encourage further abuse and recording of these children’s victimisation, or for the recording abusers to seek out other children to abuse. 

Victims of this sort of exploitation live in terror of the pictures or videos of their worst moments being shared to those they know, of being found by their loved ones, shared to workplaces, disseminated in any community they try to live in and be happy with — it is difficult enough to recover from one’s own abuse without the spectre of it constantly hanging over one’s head. 

People’s cartoons or art of fictional children is not equivalent to CSEM, because there are no real children depicted in it. 

It’s understandable to find these works disgusting or upsetting, triggering, unsettling — but to say that underage art or fiction is the same as or counts as CSEM is patently untrue. As a victim of CSA, it is galling to be told that choices my abuser made to harm and exploit me are equivalent to an abuser choosing to draw or read a comic about a victim that doesn’t actually exist. 

Some final questions to ask yourself: 

None of the above rebuttals are intended to imply people shouldn’t critique or criticise different media or their depictions. 

As well as the initial essay I linked, I actually wrote a big guide on how to approach close reading of text, and I’m working on another about analysing television and film.

In my opinion, it’s really important to be aware of different tropes and themes that you feel are harmful in fiction and art — racist tropes, sexist ones, homophobic ones, and all the rest.

It’s worth considering how works are harmful, and what you actually want to be done about it. 

I personally have criticisms of various tropes in media — I have particular dislike, for example, for the ways in which teacher/student relationships in TV shows and films are portrayed as “forbidden love”, with issue of their positions of power being depicted as one of bureaucracy or technical rules rather than a real power imbalance — I don’t care for the “sexy schoolgirl” trope, and the “barely legal” porn genre unsettles me.

All of the above three tropes often coincide with people’s thinking of teenage girls, especially those in school uniforms, as sex objects, and portraying school uniforms themselves as sexual or deserving of this sort of sexual attention. 

Not all depictions are the same — some works subvert the sexy schoolgirl trope by having those schoolgirls be secret monsters than punish abusers, and some works exist that critique teacher/student dynamics. 

It’s also important to note audience and outreach — a work that’s put on mainstream television channels or put in movie theatres by huge studios have a very different range of impact than an indie published novella, or one person’s fanfic on Ao3. 

Note where you’re holding individual or small studio creators — especially those who are in some way marginalised and are already facing adversity in their work — to higher account than large studios, or fixating on imagined harm their work could potentially cause. 

Is a work harmful, or is it just uncomfortable? Is it harmful, or is it just personally triggering to you? 

Can the work you’re concerned about do as much harm as you’re envisaging? Is it actually reaching the individuals you are worried might be vulnerable to harm as a result of it? Does the work intend to do that harm or hold those harmful views, and are the authors or creators working to address or apologise for that harm?

Is the work discussing, critiquing, or exploring the emotional impact of the dark themes within it? Does it have warnings or disclaimers before the work begins?

If you’re worried about a work “normalising” or “glorifying” a troubling subject — does the work actually do that? What is your evidence for this, having engaged with the text? Is that thing discussed in the text, argued, explored in-depth, or merely mentioned? Do characters show inner conflict and interpersonal conflict over it? Is it actually portrayed as good or normal? Is your concern the characters’ perspectives within the text, or the authors or creators’ opinions? 

Does the work carry ideas that are bigoted or feel like it includes apologism for some shitty ideas or ideology? Is the work a piece of propaganda, or function as propaganda? Do you feel the work is being advertised or pushed to an inappropriate audience for its subject matter?

If you do consider the work to be either likely to be personally distressing or upsetting to you, or potentially harmful because of its troubling or bigoted or just shitty ideas, how do you want to respond? 

If it’s the former, you should set your own boundaries — you should use your mute and block functions, you should avoid the work, you should seek out things that will comfort you, and perhaps discuss the distressing topics with someone you trust, whether that’s a friend or partner, a loved one, or a counsellor or therapist. 

If it’s the latter, you should absolutely deconstruct the piece in question and analyse the ways in which it’s shitty or harmful, or read essays by those who’ve done that work. You can maybe warn your friends about it, or if it’s a work of political concern — if the harm is being done because the work provides financial support to a hate group or a bigoted public persona, for example, you might perform a boycott, or involve yourself in acts of protest in response to the work or its creators. 

If it’s important enough to you and your beliefs that you feel urged to do those things, perhaps you should — if all you feel urged to do is to harass or shout at people online, though, it might be better for your own mental health to take a step back and do something more positive for yourself. 

Sometimes, a piece of work or media will be shitty, and shitty people will love it, and that will kinda suck — God knows I’ll see work that’s really transphobic or homophobic or antisemitic, and it’ll upset me that people I otherwise love and respect seem to be enjoying it so much. 

I can talk to my friends and my family about it, and I’ll do that — and I can mute and block the topic, and critique it in the right circles, or write essays if I’m really inspired to, responding to the work and what I feel its impact is…

But if my instinct becomes to just snipe at people for enjoying it when they really don’t know what the problem is, or have a go at them when they’re doing so unthinkingly, that’s not really helpful to them or to myself. It’s not addressing the harm I feel is being done, and nor is it really constructive. 

I’m an adult, after all — as I’ve said a few times already, it’s our own responsibility to set our own boundaries and consider what we’re doing to safeguard ourselves, and if in setting those boundaries and personal safeguarding limits, whether they’re in line with our own ethics and morality. 

We cannot control other people and their feelings, or the works they create, but we can take care of ourselves, including breaking ourselves out of obsessive moral spirals or anxieties about other people’s thoughts — and personally, I think that’s actually a very revolutionary thing to do given that we exist in a world that constantly tries to encourage (and monetise) that sort of aimless outrage. 

#musings #proship #antiship #purity culture #purity wank

[youremyheaven]

Random Astrology Observations

Moon in the 1h is often talked about like 🥺🥺wears their heart on their sleeve🥹🥹uwu softie way but tbh Moon in 1h can make someone incredibly manipulative, they know just what to say and when to say it and know how to work their audience, this is perhaps why this placement is found in the charts of soooo many successful actors. ex: Leonardo DiCaprio, Audrey Hepburn, Henry Cavill, Charlie Chaplin, Priyanka Chopra, Antonio Banderas, Brendan Fraser, Benicio Del Toro, Jared Padelecki, Val Kilmer, Adrien Brody etc

I think this is a very manipulative placement, again manipulation is not in and of itself a bad thing, its what we use it for that matters. Some people completely lack the ability to manipulate at all (they don't have Moon influence)

2. Debilitated placements point to unconventional intelligence & wisdom in that area. I feel like they've cracked the code . They struggle a lot but when they triumph it's magic

3. I've mentioned this in other posts but many notorious sex offenders have Venus influence. Actions of this sort, as well as criticizing others' beauty, not taking care of yourself/surroundings, being shabby or disorderly in general are all things that harm your Venus. Abusing someone is the quickest way to ruin your Venus, you start corroding and that ugliness begins to manifest on the outside.

Ex: Harvey Weinstein looks like a cartoonish villain

4. As I explore the astrology content put out by others across different platforms, I've seen how the nature of the take themselves are so specific and unique to the person making them. Claire Nakti has a tendency imo to focus heavily on romance, sex and women's sexual behaviour and what sort of men they attract.

Going through her website, it's obvious that she's deeply immersed in occult & esoteric philosophy (all of which ties together with vedic astrology, philosophy, Buddhism etc because I truly believe that spiritual truths are universal and different schools of thought/religion/culture/mythology express these same truths in their own way with a LOT of recurring patterns) and Carl Jung as well.

It's studying Jung that helped me understand that what we see or draw from something is a reflection of who we are. As a beginner to vedic astrology, I initially believed Claire's one dimensional portrayal to be the all encompassing truth of a nakshatra until I started doing my own reading and research.

The things I talk about or the patterns I find are a reflection of me and I get a lot of asks about why I don't do xyz nak and honestly it's not as simple as doing research for an essay for uni, you kind of have to have a gnosis or innate knowing of its themes, something to base your search off of. And different naks call to me at different points. I come across content that describes certain naks in lights i could've never imagined which is to say that gnosis or inner knowing is an important aspect of studying anything esoteric, it kind of has to be revealed to you and what you see, what you can discern is a reflection of you.

5. you have to have a strong Rahu to discern patterns and similarities because Rahu is maya/illusion and a well-placed Rahu will allow you to see through those patterns/illusions. it will be very hard for someone without a strong Rahu to find similarities or common tropes, patterns, themes etc. Seeing through the veil or fog is Rahuvian.

6. Claire Nakti made a video about Venusian men where she said they were the ideal type of man and tbh that just confirmed my suspicion that she's Moon dominant because I think Moon dominant people are attracted to Venusians but in my humble opinion both Venusian men and Moon dominant men are some of the most batshit crazy people (manipulative and controlling at the least, psychopathic at worst) basically men who have a lot of Yin tend to be psychotic

7. I've noticed that Revati people tend to speak in a very verbose way. Nigella Lawson, Revati Moon is a really good example. Obviously other placements will also impact speech

8. Moon dominant people hate it when others share sob stories. They're the type to have the least amount of empathy for others and will either react in a neutral way or like they don't understand why you're saying this stuff at all. They're bored by other people's mundane problems and make it known as well. Not people you want to open up to.

My former friend was this way, I once cried in front of her and she showed zero emotion and didn't even try to comfort me lol

9. The way others treat us is the way we treat others. ik this is a basic take but karma is cause and effect. if you're dismissive of others feelings, other people will be dismissive of yours. what you do is what will be done unto you. Its so crazy to see how people who've been treated like shit by their friends will turn around and treat other people like shit. this is sooo basic but genuinely dont do anything to others that you dont want done to you.

#astrology notes #astrology observations #vedic astro notes #nakshatras #astrology #sidereal astrology #astro notes #astro observations #vedic astrology #astroblr

[anneapocalypse]

On Cullen's Earnestness

In my current playthrough of Dragon Age: Inquisition, this one early war table quest caught my eye that I think offers a good bit of insight into Cullen’s character.

In “Truth or Dare: The Imperial Court,” Vivienne alerts Josephine to a letter she’s received from an acquaintance, purporting to “warn” Vivienne of the suspect company she has taken up in joining the Inquisition. The letter reads thus:

My dearest Vivienne,

You cannot have heard the shocking allegations against the Inquisition, or surely you would never have been seen with them. Allow me, as a friend, to open your eyes. People are saying that Divine Justinia is, indeed, alive, but that the Inquisition—her closest advisors and most trusted servants—have orchestrated all this chaos on her orders. That it was Seeker Pentaghast and Sister Nightingale who sabotaged the Conclave in order to eliminate the opposition within the Chantry, and cut off the heads of the mage rebellion and templars in a single stroke. To save your own reputation, you must escape this acquaintance immediately.

With deepest concern, Vicomtesse Elodie de Morreau

In the context of the Game, we may understand that this Vicomtesse, while she may call Vivienne a friend, likely has no great concern for her reputation.

The Inquisition is the horse on which Vivienne is betting in order to better her own position (which is considerably shakier than she lets on, but that’s another post); Vicomtesse Elodie is simply making a different bet. If Vivienne heeds her warnings, and the Inquisition never achieves public favor, then Elodie’s advice was correct and Vivienne is indebted to her. If Vivienne heeds her warnings and the Inquisition does gain public acclaim, then Elodie has disrupted Vivienne’s opportunity for advancement, and she also wins. And if Vivienne does not heed her advice and the Inquisition remains a pariah, Elodie gets to watch Vivienne go down with it, smugly saying “I told you so.” Only if the Inquisition thrives and Vivienne with it does Elodie lose this bet—and Vivienne is clearly interested in seeing that outcome, and helping it come about.

The important thing is that the specifics of the accusations against the Inquisition are absolutely irrelevant here. This conspiracy theory about Justinia being secretly alive and the Left and Right Hand doing a sabotage to secure Chantry power—it’s all nonsense, and I doubt the Vicomtesse truly believes it. More critically, she likely does not care whether it is true. Repeating this rumor is just a means to a desired outcome.

If you’ve ever argued with a conspiracy theorist who seemed to simply change their position every time you backed them into a rhetorical corner, you may have realized that facts are largely ineffective at combating this sort of thing.

And of the three advisors, Cullen is the only one to get hung up on the content of the rumor, rather than its source and its purpose. Josephine and Leliana, seasoned players of the Game, both recognize this stupid rumor for what it is. Both of them ignore the substance of it and instead focus on its purpose: turning public opinion against the Inquisition. Josephine proposes to combat it by seeking noble favor elsewhere and leaving it to those allies to do the work of actually arguing against the rumors. Leliana is more interested in finding out with whom the rumor originated.

Leliana also makes the particularly savvy observation that if they were to combat the rumor by attempting to prove Justinia’s death, they would simply be providing their opponents more ammunition to use against them later. Leliana recognizes that “The Divine is alive, and you’re hiding her!” isn’t an earnest accusation, it’s bait. And if you take the bait, if you say, “Actually the Divine did die; here’s her remains to prove it,” then your enemies can say, “Aha! And how do you know she’s dead? It’s because you people killed her!” Or, best case scenario is they just bait you into wasting a lot of your time proving the accusation false, which is exactly what happens if you let Cullen take the bait.

Again, you might have had a similar experience if you’ve ever tried to “debate” a person whose strategy is making outrageous claims, letting you waste a lot of time earnestly debunking them, and then ignoring all your arguments and simply making another, equally outrageous claim.

In Cullen’s case, what happens is poor Knight-Captain Rylen is tasked with leading a field trip of Orlesian nobles through the grisly ruins of the Temple of Sacred Ashes, while asking them to please not touch the red lyrium, and no, you cannot take a charred corpse home as a souvenir, please milord I must ask you not to touch the red lyrium. I’m sure that was an excellent use of everyone’s time and resources.

But it’s easy to understand why Cullen responds this way! It’s a very instinctual and human response! “Well, you’ve just said a thing that is very obviously untrue. I’ll prove to you that it’s untrue! And this will solve the problem of you being wrong, and then we can all move forward together. Right?”

It’s an eminently reasonable response, so long as you assume that the other party is being reasonable and engaging with you in good faith.

Cullen assumes they are. Josephine and Leliana know they’re not. (Vivienne also knew this; hence her handing the letter over to Josephine to deal with instead of bothering to reply herself.)

And you can probably see how Cullen’s earnestness, his desire to believe that other people are also operating earnestly and in good faith, could lead him down some dangerous paths.

Knight-Commander Meredith was also a conspiracy theorist. The difference is that her conspiracy theories were about people she had near-absolute power over, with terrible consequences. And working under the authority of someone he wanted to believe in, someone he absolutely would have taken as entirely earnest (because in many ways she was earnest, at least in her belief that magic was dangerous and must be controlled), it would have been easy for Cullen to assume she must be acting in good faith, even when his misgivings arose. “She needs a spine of iron to survive her position,” he says to Hawke. And like anyone arguing in bad faith, Meredith could move the goalposts when it suited her. No signs of blood magic discovered? That only proves how well they’re hiding it. The tower must be searched top to bottom. The First Enchanter objects? He must be one of them. Dissent among her own templar ranks? Must be the blood magic controlling their minds. As Dan Olson puts it in his video In Search of a Flat Earth, conspiracy theories make facts subservient to outcomes, which is why the "facts" can easily be rearranged and discarded at will—all that matters is the actions those facts justify.

Of course Meredith’s beliefs were, again, quite different—more dangerous, and far more earnestly held than this silly Orlesian rumor about the Inquisition. She was also under the influence of red lyrium at the height of her paranoia. But conspiracy theories often feed on paranoia, and Meredith’s beliefs were still ultimately beliefs that could be bent to justify the outcome she (and her superior, Grand Cleric Elthina) desired: mages must be controlled, whatever the cost.

Cullen has managed to extricate himself from Meredith’s mindset. But he hasn’t yet learned, I think, that conspiracy theories and irrational beliefs can’t be overcome simply by reason. That’s also very understandable for someone in his position. When you’re in the process of overcoming some very wrong beliefs yourself, things you earnestly believed, it’s very natural to want to believe that everyone else is just as earnest and can be persuaded; in fact, you have a personal stake in believing that, because if other people can be redeemed, that means there’s hope for you.

Do I think this justifies the things Cullen was complicit in during his time as a templar, or any misguided opinions he may voice during his time with the Inquisition? No, that’s not why I’m saying all this. But I think it’s an interesting aspect of his character and one worth exploring. Cullen is often characterized as the blunt instrument advisor, his answer to most war table questions being “send troops”; in Josie’s words “the hammer for whom every problem looks like a nail.” But I think some of his offered solutions do offer compelling insights into his character, and this one certainly does—as well as an interesting example of how this approach to the world and other people can go wrong.

#cullen rutherford #dragon age inquisition #dragon age meta #blunders of thedas #leliana #josephine montilyet

[andy-wm]

3D by JK (feat. JH) - my take.

Ok, unpopular opinion maybe, and I might get my ass beaten for this (not in a good way 🤣)

Feel free to disagree RESPECTFULLY.

Disclaimer: If anyone comes at me with that cancel bullshit I will block you, because we all get to have an opinion.

If my post enrages you, scroll past until you can be civil, then come back and talk. Or block me. I dont mind.

And don't tell me that because I don't love this song I have to hand in my ARMY card... I'm not going to.

🙂💜🙂

I'll start by saying I love JK so, so much. Adore him. Will always support him.

But for me, 3D is a misstep.

My feeling is Hybe should have reconsidered releasing it as it is.

JK's lyrics are fun and sexy. The innuendo is on point. The melody is great and the chorus has excellent sing-along value. Even though I'm not a huge pop music fan, I like the vibe.

The MV dancers are awesome, and I got a kick out of the fire hydrant metaphor.

And in that jacket with nothing under it, JK looks hot enough to melt asphalt.

However....

Including Jack Harlow's rap IMO is a mistake. It sucks, frankly. Not in a good way.

It not only misses the mark on the tone of the rest of the song but his lyrics are really just offensive. Misogynistic. And racial refrences are just... not cricket. It's 2023 not 1995, regardless of what his hairstyle tells you.

His lyrics sound like an incel bragging about their sex life when all they've ever done is watch porn. From his words, I doubt he knows how to please any person but himself.

His message is gross, but its still just... generic. Like he went to urban dictionary for spicy language and then googled how to treat women like shit. There's nothing original about what he's saying. He's not even being gross in an intersting way. It's gross AND boring.

(Jack, if you're reading this, sorry my guy you gotta do better.)

I've been army since 2018 and this is the first BTS song I have tried to find merit in and given up.

I honestly tried to be into it and i just... can't. It doesn't sit well with me.

This is a new experience for me because even when BTS release something i don't immediately love, i still stream and watch and let it sink in, or I work on figuring out what I am missing and why it's ACTUALLY good even if i can't grasp it.

This... it's just... not good, in my opinion.

I have to clarify here...

It isn't about explicit content, i am totally down for that. If anyone read my post on Seven, they will know my response to that song. In a nutshell, I believe all adults who want to, should happily and shamelessly be doing ALL the horizontal tango. Every type, every day, in every way. With anyone and everyone they fancy as long as all parties are informed and consenting adults who are equally enjoying the experience.

Yes. I am all about getting down.

That doesn't mean treating your partners like a body count or using and abusing them with no consideration. That's not cool.

**PSA: please be safe and use protection. Get tested regularly if you have multiple partners. Don't do anything you don't feel good about and dont stay with partners who harm or manipulate you 💜**

Now, back to the smut.

Some criticisms i saw of Seven were about how dirty it was. A few people were upset because JK said fuck, and because he sang about how and when he liked to fuck. But more criticism was levelled at Letto. Why?

It seemed like it was because she's a woman, singing about sex.

Letto totally owns her sexuality and she knows what she wants. I snorted with delight at how deliciously filthy her lyrics were. Some very clever wordplay made her verse so visceral, and pretty shocking to the pearl-clutchers, without her ever saying anything directly. I really enjoyed it.

She was telling us straight up how good she is in bed. Good for her. She totally rocks. And she wasn't disrespecting anyone. She didn't need to do that to make herself cool AF.

The difference between Letto's rap and jack harlow's is that jack sounds like he's just looking at the women he's singing about as a hole to stick his dick in. Women have fought for long enough for equality and respect. They don't need this bullshit. You can sing about getting down, and you can be absolutely filthy and nasty and wild, and you can do it without degrading your partners.

I did read a theory about this song being social commentary on toxic masculinity. You can find it here and you can read it below:

Its not bad as a theory. At least it wouldn't be if Namjoon or Yoongi or Hobi - or Jungkook himself - had written the song. If that were the situation we'd see some inkling of self awareness in the rap, and maybe a hint of character development. But there's none.

Sorry ARMY, this is not the class of lyricism we have come to expect.

If jack is trying to make a social statement^*, or play a character, he is not succeeding in showing any growth or humanity at all. He's really just that stereotype.

In the last few lines, after he offers to fly his victim from Korea to Kentucky, he says "and you ain’t gotta guarantee me nothing I just wanna see if I get lucky."

How considerate...

All I see is zero care factor about the actual person he's trying to get with. Which is quite different from JK's lyrics, which show awareness that he's interacting with a conscious, living human being, not a piece of furniture.

jack follows with "I just wanna meet you in the physical and see if you would touch me"

Ugh. Not with a ten foot pole, douchebag.

And how about, in his first verse "All my ABGs get cute for me"

Good god, really? Is he seriously saying this?

So its a no for me.

The ONLY saving grace is that there's an alternative version which is pretty fun. It's almost as if Hybe knew we would hate the version with jack harlow. Wow, such insight!

Now, i know that's not the only reason they made an alternative. They needed a clean version for US radio play (let's be real, what possible other purpose can this song serve? *°)

But they could have censored jack's... actually they couldn't. The rap verses can't be salvaged. They genuinely have no merit, the only hope for the song is totally removing them.

What does that tell you?

ARMY will no doubt still chart the main track but personally, I would feel morally compromised if i supported that version. So I'll stick to the alternative and hope for better things to come.

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

^* Stylecaster doesnt think so either. I visited their website to check thr lyrics. They said, of D3, "Meanwhile, Jack Harlow brings the cool with his two verses as he raps about all the women he could pull"

Uh, really? I hope that's intended to be ironic.

*° The MV had only 4.5million views after 12 hours. And we know what brilliant strategists Hybe employs. I am travelling in Korea right now. There was no promo visible here. And it was no accident that it was released at lunchtime on Chuseok - the biggest famiily holiday of the year - when relatively few people in Korea would be available to engage with it. THEY KNEW IT WAS A STINKER.

#jeon jungguk #jungkook #bts jungguk #bts jungkook #jungkook 3d #hybe entertainment #bighit

[charcubed]

Disneyland's Rogers: The Musical, propaganda that turns Steve Rogers into more myth than man, and revisionist history (possibly) to a purpose

Any of my thoughts in this post could just be me reading too far into things. I'm very aware of that, and please know that this post exists just because this sort of thing is fun for me! This is a thought exercise where we propose "What if we live in a world where the MCU is actually doing a cool and interesting thing as a longcon?" If you have anger at Marvel, that's valid and relatable, but please don't get angry at me or imply I'm an MCU stan who doesn't think critically about the mouse. Thanks!

Breaking news: I'm back on my bullshit!

A quick personal recap: I infamously hated Avengers: Endgame for a long list of reasons (and I even rewrote the movie). One of those reasons is that I've always taken issue with Steve's ending. But in the years since then, and as the MCU's phase 4 has evolved, my frustration at Steve's "ending" has turned into an ongoing and legitimate theory that the MCU could be slowly leading into a loosely adapted Secret Empire plot line. I know we've all been joking about Steve being trapped or about an imposter Steve since 2019, but uhhh, it's kind of not a joke to me anymore? It feels weirdly plausible at this point and so I enjoy discussing the potential.

You can find a full elaboration on that here, where I wrote out my "Steve was snatched by HYDRA" theory in 2021.

In that post, one of the things I mentioned at the time was Rogers: The Musical being in the Hawkeye trailer.

[The musical's] very existence is an example of how in-universe the stories of the lives of the heroes are being commodified, especially (in terms of how they’re framing it) for Steve’s. The heroes are no longer seen as people, if they ever were. They are, as Kate Bishop says to Clint in a recently released clip, more about “branding.” Sam Wilson will be redefining the shield moving forward in a Cap context, but simultaneously, the world is still enamored by Steve Rogers as a symbol in his own right. And that is ripe for manipulation as a Trojan horse to control public opinion… whether in the context of things like this by themselves (is the musical portraying Steve accurately, or is it painting an inaccurate picture of him the world accepts as fact?) or in future (is this propaganda that makes the public see Steve a certain way and continue to love him, to set up a fake or brainwashed Steve coming on the scene later?).

Now a form of the musical exists in full, at Disneyland and all over Youtube. Considering some of its baffling content – which I will break down below – this perspective seems even more strongly worth considering.

I have two main reasons for why I'm defending examining this musical so closely:

1. It is (arguably) an in-universe piece of media that has bearing on the MCU canon. It isn't like any other typical Disneyland attraction; its very existence is meta and it was in canon first. Obviously it's seen in Hawkeye, but there are also posters for it in several different phase 4 properties. It's lurking in the background indefinitely. So what can this musical tell us about what the wider public within the MCU is being told about the life story of Steve Rogers?

2. This Secret Empire graphic – which is animated in the center of the stage of a prolonged period of time – feels like a literal sign to pay attention.

Granted, this is obviously still ancillary material. 99% of the MCU audience will never see this musical, whether in person or on YouTube. But just because it isn't a vital piece doesn't mean it's automatically an entirely irrelevant piece.

They've given me an inch with that sign and I'm taking a mile.

So if you're interested, please join me on this journey :)

For the record, let me just say that I salute the creative team behind this show. It's pretty fun and the songs are catchy, the sets and costuming are cool, and the cast is overall very talented.

It's also fucking maddening. LMAO.

Why? Firstly, because of the seemingly deliberate ahistorical inaccuracies. We all know Ant-Man is wrongly shown in the Battle of New York, which originally "came from [the Hawkeye showrunner] and Marvel, as something to further aggravate Hawkeye as he watched the show, and also as a comment on how movies and articles and people always get something wrong." It seems like they expanded those meta nods, but most inaccuracies are now in service of glorifying Steve and Peggy's "love story." Yes, romance objectively makes for good theater; but again, I feel that this is worth examining considering the full context.

And secondly, Steve's ending is framed as an offer presented to him, convincing him it's the happy ending he deserves because he's tired. In my mind, these two big elements go together, and I'll walk you through the details of what happens in the musical before I tie the thought threads back around into some theorizing.

For your reference, here's a list of the main songs and story beats:

• "U-S-Opening Night" - the Starkettes (who are basically a Greek chorus) frame the show's story, and then it turns into an ensemble that loosely takes place at the Stark Expo. • "I Want You" – Steve's "I want" song about trying to enlist in the army. • "Star-Spangled Man With A Plan" – Steve performing on the USO tour obviously, and then there's a reprise with an added voiceover that (very briefly) covers the Howling Commandos' rescue + the war via comic book imagery. • "What You Missed" – Fury and the Starkettes tell Steve some pop culture things he missed while he was frozen, + they tell him about the Avengers. Then Fury goes down a list of other hero characters, including the Guardians? Doctor Strange? Wanda?? It plays loose and fast with time, because many non-2012 characters are bafflingly mentioned in this nonlinear Avengers list – including the Winter Soldier (???). • "Save the City" – this is the song seen in Hawkeye, with the civilians + the Avengers all involved, but it's slightly different here and expanded to also reference other battles. • "End of the Line" – Old Steve presents main Steve with the time stone as an opportunity for his happy ending, and they reflect on things together. (Yes, this is insane.) • "Just One Dance" – Steve and Peggy reunite and sing about their love. • And then there's basically a reprise of "Save the City," with the Starkettes and the whole cast closing the finale out.

Right out of the gate, let's address this: the main reason you're going to see some fans pissed about this musical is not only that Steve and Peggy's ~epic romance~ is made a pillar of the story... but also that Bucky's importance/involvement in Steve's life is minimized as much as possible.

And they took Bucky-related elements from canon and made them center more around Peggy instead.

• For some weird reason, Peggy is in the Stark Expo scene. When a soldier is hitting on the Starkettes ("hey sweetheart, I wanna dance!"), Steve tells the soldier to show the ladies some respect. The soldier grabs Steve and throws him down, and then Peggy swoops in to yell "Pick on someone your own size!" and punches the guy before walking away. So she's given Bucky's TFA line verbatim, and she is given the role he had of saving Steve from bullies. There is blatantly no reason they couldn't have had Bucky still serve that function and be truer to "history," because he briefly enters this scene in uniform less than a minute later to announce he's shipping out to the 107th – and then he spins off with a date on his arm. (We don't see Bucky on stage again until the full cast comes out for the finale!)

• After the Star-Spangled Man show, Peggy rushes in to talk to Steve. Steve is excited about his USO performance (???) but she urgently tells him to listen as she says that the 107th has been captured. Peggy apparently knows it's Bucky's division, and she knows Steve is going to go, so she tells him that she's already arranged transport for him. This is a subtle twist from the truth of how it went down in TFA, in which Steve recognized 107 as the number of Bucky's division, and his dogged determination inspired Peggy to relent and help his rescue mission. Here, Peggy is given a stronger role in the Cap origin story. And before Steve rushes off, Peggy sings a short untitled ballad hoping for their dance, so Steve pauses before he leaves to ask her to go on a date with her when he returns. • The most egregious Bucky-to-Peggy change of all is the song "End of the Line," in which the infamous Steve and Bucky line/promise (that broke Bucky's brainwashing...) is re-contextualized to be about ???? Peggy waiting for Steve in the past??? Old Man Steve and regular Steve sing it together. But we'll go back to that in a minute.

Again, I get it, yeah? It's for theater. Whatever. But in reality, the obvious logical truth is that Peggy is centered (to the point of taking elements from Bucky's story, and in turn Bucky is downplayed) because they needed to convince the audience that Steve going back in time to be with her makes sense. Steve's time travel ending had to be justified, so the Peggy and Steve "love story" had to be a pillar in this with everything else being given lesser weight.

And the inherent selfishness of him doing something as big as going back in time also had to be justified... which is why they do their best to convince you Steve fought so much he deserved it.

Let me elaborate on that by describing the lead-up to the "End of the Line" song.

So, right before "End of the Line" is "Save the City" – which includes Steve belting "I can do this all day!" repeatedly, of course. It's the 2012 Battle of New York as the Avengers come together to win.

As they begin to disperse, the song then transitions to a voiceover alert mentioning Sokovia being under attack by artificial intelligence (a.k.a. Age of Ultron). The Avengers group rushes back to center stage to say "Save the city! Help us win!" together for battle again.

And then things get fucking weird.

Because the next voiceover threat is "Washington DC. Attack: the Winter Soldier." This is not accurate to the order of events! The Winter Soldier events were before Age of Ultron; the public of the MCU would also know this.

And suddenly on stage Steve is now in the center while everyone else gestures to him. Instead of singing with him, they're telling him "Save the city! Help us win!"

Then, another voiceover: "Wakanda, under attack" (Infinity War) and again, Steve is centered while everyone else points to him. The ensemble says, "Save the city, help us win! Save us all from the state we're in! Got to hear you, got to hear you, got to hear you say..." as Steve is buckling to his knees under their pointing. And as the lights go down to one spotlight on him and everyone else leaves, he says "I can do this all day" one last time, but now it's subdued.

The implication is that Steve has been fighting and fighting, people leave him or he loses them, and he's tired.

And then fucking Old Man Steve arrives.

He says "On your left," because yes, they gave him Sam Wilson's line. BATSHIT.

So now there's two Steves on stage! There has been no mention of Thanos or infinity stones or anything up to this point! (I can only assume that's because in the MCU universe no one would want to be reminded of the trauma of "the Blip" – though it's pretty wild that they're allowed to know about magical time travel?)

Steve is baffled by Old Man Steve's arrival. I, too, was baffled by Old Man Steve's arrival.

As Steve questions how this is possible, Old Man Steve shows him the time stone from his pocket – and only the time stone – which Steve recognizes.

OLD MAN: "You've got to remember where you've been to know where you're going." STEVE: "Where am I going?" OLD MAN: "A date with destiny." STEVE: “Destiny. So we’re the hero till the end?” OLD MAN: “That’s the thing about endings, Steven. They can be rewritten.”

Lmao???????

Steve starts singing about how he hopes this means they "win" and calls himself a "tired hero."

STEVE: "But sometimes I wonder, who will save the savior? Can we really do this all day? So here I am, now and also then. Just a man, looking back at where he's been." OLD MAN: "The road is rough but wounds are healed by a thing called time. You can't forget what's waiting at the end of the line."

Me, watching this: the fact that he says this out of the blue makes absolutely no sense.

There's a bit more singing, including "end of the line" repetition, and then Old Man Steve pulls out the time stone to essentially show visions of... I don't fucking know. Past, present, and future?

That's pre-serum Steve, Steve with Mjolnir, and Sam Wilson as the new Cap. This is the only reference to Sam in the whole thing.

More singing, and then: Peggy's silhouette.

OLD MAN: "Can't forget who's waiting..." STEVE: "I can't forget who's waiting..." BOTH: "Don't forget who's waiting..." STEVE: "At the end of the line."

At this point I'm like, what in the hell?

Did Old Man Steve just brainwash normal Steve into thinking "end of the line" is now about Peggy? Because uhhhh, sorry, that's what it feels like!

Then Steve uses the stone to go back in time, reunites with Peggy, etc. etc. finale.

It's truly some crazy shit.

[drags hands down face]

Look... there's a lot to unpack here, and there's a lot that gets me about it. I know this is dramatized for the stage! I KNOW! But the fact that Old Man Steve shows up to convince Steve he should go back in time makes me want to gnaw on furniture.

Another person essentially uses the lure of a life with Peggy to tempt Steve into doing this, dramatized or not. That is how it's framed.

It's a hell of a way to frame it, and it makes Steve's ending stand in even starker contrast to so many other things in phase 4. Desperately trying to go backwards when you shouldn't or to bring back a lost lover is an evil temptation, and it results in a trap or negative cosmic consequences for basically all of the other characters in the MCU.

• In Shang-Chi, Wenwu is tempted by the Soul Eaters beyond the Dark Gate. They use the voice of his deceased wife to convince him to set them free. • In "What If" episode 4, Doctor Strange becomes evil in a desperate bid to save Christine and he destroys his universe. Along the way, he tries to tempt/trap the good Strange who's fighting him by using visions of Christine, but good Strange knows she isn't real. • Wanda's grief and desire to bring back Vision leads to – well, you know. • In No Way Home, Peter trying to undo things is what causes the multiverse problems.

And the fact that they frame it as Steve being tired, so basically the argument is he deserves that time travel ending (just like MCU fans who defend Endgame say in real life)... Well.

There's no way to make it hold up, especially because in "What If" they explicitly subverted that and had Captain Carter not go back in time despite how she felt she'd "earned" it.

Lastly, in this musical as Steve decides to pursue time travel as his course of action, he basically has the meaning or memory of "end of the line" rewritten for him. I refuse to not think that is some nefarious shit. Yes, it's not out of the realm of possibility that it's just some general Disney erasing Steve and Bucky nonsense.

But... this is on another level to me. I do think that it's a blatant choice that they had to be aware even general MCU fans would call bullshit on. Everyone knows it's inaccurate. "End of the line" is embedded in pop culture consciousness as being connected to Bucky. It just is! Surely that means it's not a stretch to theorize it could be deliberate meta commentary.

How, in the MCU world, would the in-universe playwrights even know the phrase "end of the line"? How the fuck would it be accidentally applied to Steve and Peggy? Not to sound like a crazy person, but who the fuck was rooting around in Steve and/or Bucky's personal business or their brains in order to obtain that knowledge and then remix it, and why? Neither of them would flippantly mention it in the public eye or interviews ever. So where did its inclusion come from?

And in the finale ensemble, this is Bucky's line when he comes out on stage and salutes + points to Steve: "Don't forget who's waiting..." And Old Man Steve completes it with "...at the end of the line."

What on God's green earth am I meant to do with THAT?

Smh.

The vibes are fucked, folks.

The MCU public wouldn't know enough to say the vibes are fucked. The MCU public wouldn't know the origin of "end of the line" as a phrase. But us? The ones who know the "true story" via the movies? We can call bullshit.

Whether the creative team behind this musical did every aspect of this consciously or not, in my opinion the fact that they had to tweak canon "history" to A) make Peggy's involvement in Steve's life more central and B) emphasize Steve as a tired hero all works as commentary on and almost a condemnation of Endgame's frustrating ending. In a way, it's also what Endgame did with the compass and 1973 moment with Peggy as well.

Steve's ending had to be convincing.

It's theater.

And so, maybe the same is true for the in-narrative perspective of this musical in the context of the MCU world. What purpose would it serve to tell the MCU public a feel-good narrative about how all Steve Rogers wanted was to no longer be a tragic man out of time and get to make a life with his best girl? To frame it as being about how he fought so hard for years and so he earned a happy ending? To minimize and nearly erase Bucky's importance in his life?

Who would want to do that sort of propaganda, and why?

The MCU civilians are given this happy explanation and maybe don't widely question it. Who cares about the details or logistics if it makes a good story, I guess. It's a stretch, but maybe they mostly applaud it. Maybe they're happy for "America's favorite son" (not unlike people who uncritically liked Endgame). In a way, it's even a rehabilitation of his image (after the Accords) like putting the shield on the Statue of Liberty. And maybe they'd even be ready and waiting to applaud if Steve ever made a dramatically selfless and de-aged return to the spotlight or a position of authority.

But mostly, the public is being conditioned to not know or to forget that anyone else like Bucky Barnes or Sam Wilson would possibly know Steve Rogers the person well enough in the modern day to call bullshit on any of this – or on his hypothetical miraculous future return.

So. Sure, it's probably nothing.

But what if it's not?

-------

UPDATE: @faeriecap added to this post with some incredible information and further behind-the-scenes context about the MCU/Marvel stuff at Disney parks! Check it out here :)

#rogers the musical #rogers: the musical #steve rogers #captain america #captain america meta #marvel meta #imposter steve #anti-endgame #peggy carter #stevebucky #mcu #marvel #stucky #anti-endgame steve #char writes things #me: is anyone else going to write about this being propaganda? no? fine I'll do it myself #I should not be posting it after midnight but I don't want to be tempted to fucking look at it again tomorrow. be gone you monster

[charms-cat]

Thoughts on TBOSAS

Disclaimers:

my memory isn’t the greatest + it’s been a couple weeks since I watched the movie + I only skimmed the book after watching

I don’t have the book on hand so I can’t fact-check this (my criticism is based on what I remember – feel free to correct me)

Buckle up bcs I’ve got an overthinking brain and a lot of opinions.

Coryo = Good, Other Students = Bad

They only had less than 3 hours for a movie that had enough content to be split into two (imagine if they’d cut it right when Coryo finds out he’s assigned to be a Peacekeeper). So I understand why they couldn’t flesh out every detail of Coryo’s relationships.

But lack of time doesn’t really explain why they couldn’t give the students some nuance. Obviously, we have the dehumanising comments/actions from Livia, Arachne, Felix, and Festus; a horrifying truth that hasn’t learned to disguise itself under ‘generous’ sponsors and ‘faith’ in a specific tribute winning. But why did they change the scenes of Clemensia and (more importantly) Lysistrata?

If you’ve read the books, you’ll know that Lysistrata is one of the kindest students. As far as we know, she didn’t suffer the same poverty as the Snows did and she doesn’t feel the same sense of kinship as Sejanus does with the kids from the districts. Still, she treats Jessup kindly. She brings him medicine when he tells her he’s in pain; she gets mad when Coryo’s angle for Lucy Gray’s image (that Lucy Gray’s more Capitol than District) meant that her angle for Jessup’s image (showcasing the District 12 tributes as a pair) would be jeopardised and thus his sponsors might be less; when she sees Jessup suffering from rabies, she offers to end his suffering by sending the water bottles; her final word about him, when it wouldn’t have given her any advantage to speak kindly about him and the Capitol had (until recently) been on high alert for ‘rogue tributes’, was to tell everyone that Jessup protected her when the arena exploded, even threw himself over her to protect her.

In the movie, she had one ‘prominent’ scene: Jessup’s attack. Maybe they were trying to showcase Coryo’s future ruthlessness by having him demand Lysistrata send the water bottles rather than use his own sponsors. But in the book, Coryo tries to send his own sponsor gifts before Lysistrata stops him and offers to send hers instead. In the original scene, Coryo’s care/affection for Lucy Gray is made obvious by how he’s willing to give up their hard-won sponsorships just to make sure that he can save Lucy Gray from Jessup; Lysistrata’s practicality also shows itself by how she willingly mercy-kills Jessup after seeing him going rabid on screen. He’s her tribute so she used the gifts that they won together.

It would’ve taken the same amount of time (or an extra minute) to keep her mercy kill and her final words on Jessup. Instead, we have Coryo’s demand + Lysistrata’s few seconds of hesitation to follow his words, despite them having an even better view of Jessup’s increasingly rabid behaviour.

Now, let’s talk Clemensia. She’s not particularly kind. Tbf in the book, she wasn’t around too long before she got bit by Gaul’s snakes. The next time she (properly) reappears, she’s cruel in how she withholds helping Reaper until he’s actually done something to ‘earn’ supplies. In the movie, she straight up disappears after getting bit (either that or the effects of the snake venom weren’t as horribly memorable as they were described to be in the book; if she really did disappear, then it also lessens the suspense of “what will happen to Lucy Gray?” later on since we don’t know the full extent of the venom’s effects). But the thing that cements my idea that “Oh, they’re trying to make Coryo look good compared to other students” is that they changed the circumstances that got her bit.

There are three key differences to her and Coryo’s meeting with Gaul:

1: when Gaul asks who came up with the ideas on the assignment, book!Clemensia claims that they both worked on it, but Coryo went by himself to drop it off; movie!Clemensia claims all the ideas for herself.

The decision to make Clemensia a selfish credit-stealer already deteriorates her likability to the audience, especially since Coryo (aka the person she’s stealing credit from) is our protagonist and, at this point in time, has ‘done’ nothing wrong. Hell, since the movie audience doesn’t know his less-than-flattering thoughts about Arachne, they only see that he was the one to rush to help her when she got stabbed. Clemensia, on the other hand, admonished him for seeming indifferent to Arachne’s death (when he told her that he had actually finished the assignment) but then goes on to claim credit for said assignment that she didn’t actually work on at all. Then the movie made it worse by changing Gaul’s dialogue from the book, namely:

2: Gaul asks/allows Coryo to fetch the paper first and

3: Gaul doesn’t explain the snake’s sense of smell until Clemensia has already put her hand in the tank (I’m 99% sure of this scene because I distinctly remember going “TAKE YOUR HAND OUT NOW, CLEMMIE” right as I read the lines).

Imo by making Gaul explain that “they won’t attack you if they’re familiar with your scent” before either Clemensia or Coryo could put their hands in the tank, it both lessens the suspense and makes it seem as if Clemensia is a very prideful person that would rather risk injury than admit wrongdoing. Which brings me to my next point ⬇

Gaul’s Depravity

There are three things I remember being weird about movie!Gaul

1: the aforementioned explanation about the snakes. The fact is that Gaul asking/allowing Coryo to take the paper first was her trying to lure Coryo and Clemensia into a false sense of security. If you don’t believe she was 100% baiting them, just remember that she doesn’t explain that the snakes might bite unfamiliar persons until it’s already too late for Clemensia to take her hand out. And when Clemensia does get bit, Gaul’s assistants rush in to inject the antivenom immediately, like they’re used to doing it. Gaul dismisses Coryo’s concerns by stating that it’s simply part of research. Then (just to drive in her callousness), Gaul dismisses him from her lab by saying it’s teatime. Coryo himself thinks Clemensia’s condition is a harsh punishment for such a simple lie.

2: she stitches up Coryo. I might’ve just simply forgotten about this, but I don’t remember a scene in the book where she personally stitches him up. After all, Gaul was willing to risk Coryo’s death in the arena (when he’s rescuing Sejanus) just to teach him the lesson that even he, with his good name and good education, would revert to predatory instincts to keep himself alive.

3: “rainbow of destruction” broadcast. Movie!Gaul indirectly warned the districts that there would be retaliation for the death of an Academy student. Granted, no one (except Coryo and Clemensia) would catch on to what “rainbow of destruction” meant, but she still warned them. When the snakes were released into the arena, people would know why they were released, why they were introducing a sudden new obstacle. Book!Gaul didn’t do that. iirc the Capitol didn’t even want the districts to know that they succeeded in dealing a blow to the Capitol (killing one of their top students/son of a prominent figure). Book!Gaul, as far as the general public knows, released the snakes for seemingly no reason than to make the Games harder. Book!Gaul didn’t even warn Coryo properly; she said there would be retaliation, but she never indicated that she would be specifically using those snakes. Coryo chanced upon the snake tank during the transfer; had he missed seeing the tank after hearing those words, he might not have made the connection that would eventually save Lucy Gray.

Positive point for the broadcast: they kept her cruel classism. They cut from the scene of the tributes killing each other to the broadcast where her opening statement was, “An important life was taken today”. I could’ve strangled her right then and there.

Modern Hunger Games

I’m sure other people have put it more eloquently than I have, but the 10th Hunger Games resembles the more modern (e.g., 74th) Hunger Games too closely. Imo the resemblance kinda strips away the initial point that the Games (without all the fanciful performance surrounding it) is a cruel and brutal punishment to force kids who don’t want to kill each other to have to kill each other to go home (does this sentence make sense?).

1: Communicuffs. In the book, the mentors used a glorified watch but, in the movies, they used TVs. You might think this is a minor thing and maybe I am overthinking it, but imo the use of a big screen makes the Academy mentors resemble the Gamemakers in the 74th/75th Games, who used big holographic screens.

2: Bloodbath. Now, I definitely remember that the 10th Games had no bloodbath. iirc Reaper was the only one ready to fight, but he took too long to get ready/get a weapon and, by the time he was geared up, everyone else had disappeared into the corridors of the colosseum. When no tributes appeared after a while, Reaper disappeared into hiding too. So, the focus was on Marcus who’d been crucified. The first death was Lamina mercy-killing Marcus.

If anything, changing the start of the Games into an actual bloodbath destroys the thesis that these kids don’t actually want to kill each other. Yes, they want to go home but that doesn’t mean they’re eager to get their hands bloody to do it. If anything, the bloodbath proves Gaul right that people are inherently predators who would do anything to survive; that compassion can be easily discarded in the face of survival. That’s the antithesis of what the Hunger Games are meant to be. Because we see time and again that compassion can exist among competitors for survival – Katniss singing to Rue, Thresh sparing Katniss in turn, Cato rushing to save Clove, Haymitch staying with Maysilee, Jessup protecting Lucy Gray, Reaper making a makeshift morgue for the dead tributes.

A bloodbath is only understandable in something like the 74th Games. Since, as far as anyone knew, the Games were here to stay. So Career districts trained their children, non-Careers grasped onto whatever knowledge they could take advantage of (Katniss’s hunting, Rue’s climbing/tracker jackers, Peeta’s camo, etc.) There were possibilities for sponsors if you were promising and a guarantee of a life of luxury if you won. So, what better time to cut down the number of competitors than when no one has supplies? Compared to the lack of…motivation during the first Games. You’d have the same type of trauma, but nothing to “soften the blow” like securing a better life for your loved ones after you win.

3: Cameras. What was with all those camera angles??? I understand having camera angles for the movie audience, but why did the Capitol audience see the same thing? One of the problems of the Games was that it wasn’t interesting to watch. The Capitol wasn’t chomping at the bit to watch an arena of nothing, for tributes they didn’t actually care about. That’s why betting was introduced, to motivate the Capitol to watch out for the tribute they were betting on, if only to confirm that said tribute was still alive.

Being able to know everything in real time undercuts the suspense of certain scenes – why was Lucy Gray running from Jessup? Why did Wovey(?) suddenly die after drinking from a water bottle? Why did Coral betray Tanner(?) In the book, we learn all this in time with Coryo. When Jessup attacks, Coryo quickly connects the aversion to water (I think Jessup swatted away the bottle Coryo was trying to send to Lucy Gray) + the bite Jessup felt on his neck + the rat poison needed around the zoo to conclude that Jessup had rabies. He had to come up with a strategy on the spot vs. when he already had an inkling by watching Jessup’s aversion to water and sudden aggressiveness to Lucy Gray in the barricaded room. As for Wovey(?), Coryo figured that the bottle was laced with rat poison vs. when we saw Lucy Gray dump in the poison. As for Coral’s betrayal, we never find out why in the book vs. when we see them having an argument in the movie (this one’s more minor, but the thing about “knowing ‘everything’ that goes on with the tributes” plays too much into the modern Games perspective; personally, her sudden betrayal made it more shocking compared to when their movie!argument already starts hinting to future betrayal).

4: Gaul’s Snake Mutts. I hate the decision to make the snakes gigantic (or normal snake size idk). The book!snakes were about as long as a ruler and were so thin that a single normal-sized tank could hold hundreds of them. They were meant for Gaul to play around with in the lab. Gaul herself didn’t intend to use her snakes in the Games.

But the reason why I really hate the gigantism of the snakes is that it dramatizes the Games in the same way as the sudden appearance of the dog mutts in the 74th. The shocking burst of the tank feels a little too close to how the Gamemakers added in mutts to up the ‘excitement’ vs. book!snakes that never burst out; they simply slithered their way out their opened tank and began surging towards all the unfamiliar smells.

Extra negative point for trying to convince us that a tiny handkerchief maintained its smell long enough to travel throughout the entire tank; this without even considering that Coryo inserted the handkerchief from the bottom. What, were the snakes passing the handkerchief up?

Infallible Coryo

Again, might be overthinking on my part, but I feel like the movie made it seem like Coryo was more strategic than quick-thinking. One of the things that made me like him was that he was intelligent in the way that he could come up with solutions on the spot. So it’s a bit disappointing that they replaced that trait, especially since it comes at the cost of Lucy Gray’s own intelligence/agency (I’ll explain this in the next point).1

1: Coryo checks out the arena the night before the Games. Again, might be misremembering but I don’t think he ever did this. Or if he even had the time since I think a lot of the Academy kids were hospitalised after the bombing and then the Games took place right after.

2: Coryo collects the rat poison vs. Lucy Gray collects it herself.1

3: one thing about Katniss’s Games that made it more realistic imo is that part of her survival relied on luck. If her dad hadn’t taught her how to hunt, she might’ve not even found water during those first days in the arena; if Cinna hadn’t chosen to be a stylist in her year and Peeta hadn’t made her look desirable, then she might’ve had less sponsors than she did. So, I don’t like that they changed how Coryo found out about the snake mutts.

As said in my previous point: book!Coryo chanced upon the tank transfer. If Gaul hadn’t called him for a meeting; if the scientists hadn’t left him alone with the tank; if he’d taken out the handkerchief beforehand – had any of his circumstances changed, Lucy Gray might’ve died from the snakes too.

But thanks to movie!Gaul’s broadcast, movie!Coryo knew/had strong suspicion of exactly what was about to happen. He knew where to go, he had an excuse to see Gaul (ig you could say the lucky part is that Gaul didn’t turn him away/direct him to the hospital instead), he knew he needed the handkerchief; all he had to do was execute his plan. If they wanted Coryo to look smart, I’d say it was more impressive that he could connect the tank transfer to Gaul’s retaliation almost immediately after seeing the tank.

Lucy Gray = Good, Other Tributes = Bad, Coryo = Worse

1: when I say other tributes, I mostly mean two instances –

Jessup’s abandonment. Like I said in my first point, Lysistrata said that book!Jessup protected her during the bombing vs. movie!Jessup attempting to run away/escape. Between Jessup’s constant protection of Lucy Gray and that Lysistrata had no reason to lie (especially about a specific action), I 100% believe that Jessup really did his utmost to protect Lysistrata at the time. It feels like a slap to the face that, in their attempt of making Lucy Gray look good, they took away one of Jessup’s kindest, self-sacrificial actions. It almost feels like they’re making him a bit classist himself since he doesn’t hesitate to protect a District kid, but they changed the scene where he protected a Capitol kid. Point is: they did my boy, Jessup, dirty bcs he (at the very least) wouldn’t abandon Lucy Gray while escaping!

Coral’s alliance. istg Coral’s alliance starting the bloodbath and hunting down Lucy Gray and Jessup was mimicking the scene of Cato’s alliance murdering in the bloodbath and hunting down Katniss. Especially since they also had a scene where one of them (I’m so sorry idk his name, but it was the kid that said he was scared to go through the door flap/Cato) tried to chase after them by going through the door/climbing the tree.

Idk if they were trying to ‘foreshadow’ District 4 eventually becoming a Career district, but no. They could be ruthless (forcing Lamina to choose who to fight), but they weren’t the same kind of ruthless hunters as the Careers in the 74th. (Going to repeat my point that these changes only prove Gaul’s point that we’re all inherent predators.) The worst part is that their bloodthirsty alliance is contrasted to Lucy Gray’s kind camaraderie with Jessup (her worriedly searching for him and dragging him away from the fight asap). Both Coral’s alliance and Lucy Gray should’ve been at the same ‘starting point’ – kids who resorted to killing, not ones who were so eager to get home that they start murdering as soon as they get their hands on a weapon.

2: Coryo does the thinking for Lucy Gray. Gonna elaborate on my two previous points…

Coryo checks out the arena. This one bothers me so much bcs can they really not give Lucy Gray something as basic as knowing how and where to hide? Why is it Coryo that has to tell her exactly where she can hide and how to get there? + for some reason, they added an underground bunker? Imo they could’ve had even more suspense if they kept the fact that there was no bloodbath and all the tributes were hiding in the stands/corridors. It also would’ve been the perfect scene to showcase Lucy Gray’s smarts by making it so that she had to figure out how to avoid/hide from multiple tributes in a confined, unfamiliar space.

Coryo collects the rat poison. This one bothers me a lot too bcs, even though Coryo gave the compact specifically to hold the poison, Lucy Gray is the one who decides to bring it into the arena. I feel like making movie!Coryo collect the poison instead of her takes away her agency how she wants to survive the Games. Book!Coryo doesn’t see her in the zoo so he can only hope that she’ll risk cheating by bringing in the poison; it could’ve been easy for Lucy Gray to lie and say that nobody took the bait or that she didn’t bring in enough poison since he had no proof whether she did or didn’t have poison during the Games. The fact that movie!Coryo pleads(?) with her to take the compact, knowing that it’s carrying poison, makes it feel more like he’s forcing her to take a risk rather than letting her choose. If the compact had ended up being empty, then they could’ve bs something like he wanted her to have a memento of him during the Games instead of it being an instrument in cheating.

3: Lucy Gray’s calculated kills. One of the things that makes Lucy Gray nuanced is that she does bad things of her own volition. She’s trying to survive the Games so it’s not as if it’s a despicable thing for her to be cunning. But movie!Lucy Gray’s too good to even be that, as proven by how she kills. Book!Lucy Gray kills Wovey, Treech, and Reaper; movie!Lucy Gray kills Dill and Treech (there’s supposed to be a third, but I don’t remember who).

Book!Lucy Gray was deliberate. She knows she isn’t as fast or strong as some of the others so she preps to take out the other tributes through other means –

Wovey: iirc Lucy Gray poisoned a bottle and then just dropped it in the corridor to make it seem like it was a lost bottle. iirc she says something along the lines of “Poor Wovey. I was aiming for Coral, not her”. Intended victim or not, she baited a thirsty tribute into drinking what seems like their only source of water.

Treech: he swings a weapon at her while she’s trying to retreat. In self-defence, Lucy Gray reveals that she kept one of the snakes and releases it on Treech. I’m highlighting the fact that she kept it bcs Lucy Gray keeps it despite seeing the frenzied assault the snakes launched on all the other tributes. (idk if this is before or after Treech, but she also counts the corpses so she must’ve seen the effects of the venom). Either way, she kept it with the intention of quite possibly using it.

Reaper: iirc she admits to poisoning the puddle Reaper was drinking from. Then, she makes the poisoned Reaper use the last of his energy to chase her. Coryo himself says that she was trying to “run him to death”. Unlike the previous two killings, Lucy Gray knew exactly who she intended to kill and what she’d need to do to achieve it. He wasn’t drinking from a bottle so she found out which puddle he was drinking from; he was protective of his morgue so she made him chase her by running off with the flag.

Movie!Lucy Gray still did things intentionally, but it felt more hasty than calculated. She killed Dill the same way she killed Wovey, but it felt less like deception (making her victim think that she dropped a perfectly good bottle) and more like force (every other bottle is empty so there’s really no choice). Not really much to comment on Treech’s death since it’s quite similar, just that her ‘last resort’ is different.

I get that they were pressed for time so they had to hasten the end of the Games, but it feels like such a pity to lose Lucy Gray’s cunning in the process.

Mentors

Quick aside here, but why did they make it so that the Academy kids didn’t know that they were going to be mentors? They already knew that they were going to be assigned a tribute. iirc Coryo was worried since he wanted a ‘good’ tribute and, when all the ‘good ones’ were gone, he hoped that Dean Highbottom forgot him instead of assigning him a tribute from District 12. It seems unnecessary, but maybe I’m missing something.

EDIT: got some thoughts on this movie change

Translating Thoughts to Expressions

I understand that a lot of Coryo’s more rancid opinions remain as thoughts. Esp since he’s constantly trying to look not-poor and so that he can gain any advantage he can get. So he doesn’t say anything about Sejanus (Strabo Plinth could give him money), Ma (she gives him good, free food), Arachne (he has tact), Gaul (have you met the woman?). But there is one thing that stands out to me; a good chance to show the movie-only audience that he’s actually putting up an act: Sejanus calling him Coryo.

I think it’s more obvious in the book, but only Tigris and his childhood friends ever call him Coryo. It’s a nickname reserved for people he’s close to. So, the fact that Sejanus says it so casually takes away the momentum of the moment where Sejanus feels like they’ve grown close enough for him to use it. Book!Sejanus says it in a moment of apology – “I’m sorry. Coryo, I’m sorry” – bcs Coryo had to save him from the arena and, not only was Sejanus’s action fruitless, Coryo ended up killing Bobbin and being hunted by the other tributes. Movie!Sejanus says it when Coryo finds him in the arena. I can’t remember the line, but it’s when he was trying to explain why he was there. He just blurts it out in the middle of the sentence like he’d always been calling him Coryo.

Anyway, the reason why I say this is an opportunity to show Coryo’s true feelings is bcs this is one of the few times where Coryo has the possibility and ‘safety’ to slip up. When book!Sejanus calls him Coryo, he’s emotionally overwhelmed and physically exhausted. He’s horrified by his murder of Bobbin, anxious about the tributes chasing him and Sejanus, frustrated/angry that the Peacekeepers didn’t help them until the last minute on top of his annoyance at Ma turning up at their house, disdain for Sejanus (Coryo being his only friend meant that Ma turned up at his house specifically), and his initial worry/fear of going into the arena. Sejanus assuming he could use Coryo’s nickname would be the cherry on top of an already hellish night. And when I say ‘safety’, I mean that Coryo’s expression could’ve easily been hidden from Sejanus by making it so that the shadows of the colosseum shrouded him.

Over-explanation

This might be my most overthinking one, but I feel like the movie treats the audience like they’re a bit stupid? Like they’re explicitly explaining rather than just letting us make inferences. There’re three changes I can think of for this.

1: Snake mutts. I won’t explain this scene again, but movie!Gaul specifies that the snakes would recognise the “sweat on your palm”. She’d already explained that the snakes wouldn’t attack familiar smells, like the ones that they’d been around all morning. This explanation + knowing the tank had been lined with their papers was (imo) enough info to clue in that “the snakes won’t attack bcs they’ve been smelling the papers”. The extra tidbit just feels like they’re not sure we’ll understand how lining the tank = snakes not attacking.

2: “rainbow of destruction”. Not explaining this scene again either, but the broadcast did make it seem very in-your-face about what was gonna happen. It doesn’t help that Gaul emphasises that distinct phrase.

3: Jabberjays. So, jabberjays singing like normal birds to blend in, but turn silent when they're recording. And while Coryo uses this knowledge of how jabberjays work, the scene falls flat a bit. Bcs book!Sejanus doesn't know how the jabberjays work. Coryo cleverly turns on the recording function and then gets rid of him quickly after he gets the info bcs he knows it'd be sus if Sejanus figures out that "hey, why was this bird silent the whole time but suddenly starts singing?" But, in the movie, they repeat the fact that the bird falling silent means it was recording bcs Coryo replays the recording. (Maybe I’m misremembering this)

Still, Sejanus dies without knowing Coryo was the traitor. Or he should, but they reveal the recording again right before they hang him. Just in case we couldn’t figure out why he was being executed ig 🙄

Well, that’s the end of my vent. If you’ve read this far, thank you fro reading, but also feel free to correct me if you think/know I’m wrong about something.

#the ballad of songbirds and snakes #thg meta #the hunger games #hunger games #ballad of songbirds and snakes #coriolanus snow #lucy gray baird #volumnia gaul #lysistrata vickers #clemensia dovecote #jessup diggs #tbosas coral #tbosas spoilers #reaper ash #the ballad of songbirds and snakes spoilers

[somnambulic-thing]

I want to talk about something in regards to Flight of Icarus.

disclaimer: I fully read the book, slept two nights over it and enjoyed it a lot. There is a possibility of finding content on my blog from now on that contains lore from the story. My Eddie characterisations won't change much in their essence though since I pretty much head cannoned him like he's pictured in the book the whole time.

Okay. Let's go. No detailed spoilers ahead. Feeling jealous in the light of the romantic arch in the book or the mentiones of Eddie's experiences with intimacy is okay.

It's not a great experience I bet, but you're not being a bad or silly person simply for feeling that way. Many of us have built a deep emotional connection to this fictional character for all kinds of reasons. While I personally don't think that the fact that the book is coming from the creators of ST makes a difference to canon, I do understand that for some people the book has a different weight than fanfic. And that is ok too.

So right now, many people can't help but feel heartache or jealousy over the story. Emotions are not rational. And I am deeply sorry that some of you feel bad about something that used to be your escape and save space. That sucks.

However, we all have control over how we act upon those feelings. And being hateful or mean towards others (including the author) ain't it. No exceptions. I don't care for your personal reasons why you feel that way, I'm not your therapist, that is your business to deal with, but lashing out about your personal, very subjective feelings is just not the way to deal with them.

Slipping up can happen to everybody, and that is human, but there is a line when a slip-up stops being that. And accept the fact that nobody owes you to listen to your opinion. Accept that people might find your opinion a reason to stop interacting with you, even if you voice it in a civil way.

Find a friend who gets it and let out all of those feelings in a closed safe-space with curse words and shit. Get it out, cleanse yourself from that pressure. That's cool. Writing a fix-it fic that will get your emotions out? Ask an author who is comfortable with that to write something like that? Cool. Journal. Skip rocks. Work out. Angry clean your house. Throw darts at a copy of the book. Get creative without getting other real people into the crossfire. And then, maybe step away for a few days to let the dust settle and then come back and see how it feels. Oftentimes it's just like poking at a wasp's nest to keep leaning into those feelings and the pain and get all heated up again and again.

Give yourself some time. Be kind to yourself. But also be kind to others!!!

I believe with my whole being that kindness is the best fucking thing we as a fandom can practice right now. And nuance. Always nuance.

That book isn't a bad thing just because it makes you feel uncomfortable or because it didn't fulfil your wishes or expectations. You have the right to have your opinion but opinions do not exist in a vacuum.

Opinions can be hurtful and harmful.

They are not neutral - that's the whole point - so giving it a few moments of thought on how and where to voice them is imperative. Or if it's even necessary to voice them at all. It's ok to fuck up but own that and say sorry. Be kind.

Criticism of the book is valid, not liking the thing is valid, it's not about that. (Fucking hell I love discourse and meta and analysis.) It's about being mindful and responsible for what energy you put out into the world and how you treat real human beings. When in doubt, step back, give it time to cool. Making posts in the heat of anger is rarely a good decision.

We're all here to have a good time. Why do we keep tearing each other down about something we all claim to love?

It's not worth it.

#flight of icarus #somna talks

[writingforatwistedworld]

Self-aware au

I do not take any responsibility for you reading this no matter which age group you are from!

WARNINGS: Yandere themes, religion, obsession, violence, war (if you look really closely)

Jade Leech/Malleus Draconia-Voicelines about you, the Overseer

Cheering to yourself you looked at the screen, confirming that you just purchased the new voicelines that you were only able to purchase during this event. To say that this event was stressful was an understatement. Heck, even the app seemed like it wanted to prevent you from earning all the materials and exchanging them for the lines of text, the App crashing and freezing whenever there was the slightest inconvenience. It was also very different from what you were used to in this game. Usually it was always light content and a few sprinkles of Angst for entertainment but this time it was like someone took the game and decided to turn it into something that could only be described with “nightmare fuel if real”. With the usual content creators of the game being unusually quiet, if not to say absolutely silent, about it there were no guides to look up, no one seemingly caring to explore the new lore presented. Tapping the screen you finally accessed the voicelines, curious about what they had to say about the individual which was at the center of said event, the Overseer

What is your impression of the Overseer?

A kind yet cunning individual. The sea which wouldn't have been in awe of someone without any reason... Well, I can't deny that I myself am also very curious about them. Goodness, I even dare to say that I feel something akin to jealousy towards the two eels of the sea witch. Why that is? Well, even though these two were following her order they were at the end of the day still following the endless wisdom of the Overseer and whatever their genius plan was. Hah... what I would do to be in their position...

The view of your homeland, what is your opinion on that?

“Thankfully I can say that I am rather satisfied with how we view the Overseer. If we were to have mostly a religious view of them I doubt we would be able to have such a critical view like they do. A thing that is also quite known about them is their free mind. Whereas others were bound by traditions and morale they were able to think beyond those boundaries. It's said that exactly this made the sea witch create her garden. Alovely hobby, wouldn't you agree?”

What would you do if you were ever to meet them?

“I would immediately try to prove my worth to them. I am aware that this might sound rather off-putting to some but I can assure you that I am doing this purely out of admiration which they earned. Everything about them practically screams to be a good leader and schemes. There is nothing more I wish for than to help them with their contracts just as I do right now with Azul. But if there were some kind of annoyance trying to get between them and me... Hmmm... I am not sure if I were able to hold myself together....”

What is your impression of the Overseer?

“Oh, that is a question I did not expect... All I can say is that there is no being higher than them. Even the God of death, the Underworld bowed before them. From what I know the Fairy of Thorns always looked up to them during the war, orienting herself on their might like a sailor would on the stars. It is quite unbelievable but when we take into consideration that they are a God then this is much easier to understand. Sadly, there has not been any sign of them ever planning to descend or anything akin to that. My Grandmother even told me that even my own Grandchildren are not guaranteed of ever meeting them. What a pity...”

The view of your homeland, what is your opinion on that?

“Thankfully I am able to say that I am very proud of it. Many other places see the Overseer at least as a person of high importance, which is not even close to what they deserve, but we know that they are in truth the ruler above all, a God. Simply saying that their actions make them deserve respect is blasphemy. After all, a God is the owner of a world and they are our God. That alone tells us that they do not need to earn respect. They simply deserve it by existing. If anyone would ever dare to talk back go to them the Valley would gladly grind the opposing power to dust. There is nothing in this world more holy than them. Child of man, now that we are already on the subject, if you ever were to visit my home, would you like to attend a church mass with me? They always have something to themselves that makes you feel closer to them.”

What would you do if you ever met them?

“Child of man, as ironic as it may sound, but I am nothing more than a dutiful servant waiting for their masters call. To hope that I were ever to meet them is something I am unable to imagine even in my deepest dreams. But if it were to happen? Hmm... I can not say for certain but I think I would try to be as normal as possible to them. I myself am feared for my power so it might be somewhat soothing if they were to be viewed with eyes that express warm respect rather than fear. But I would never be able to forget that we all are nothing but small threats in their endless woven web. They have a plan, fate as some call it, for us all. We all can just be happy to feel their presence even the slightest bit in our lives.”

#yandere twisted wonderland #yandere twst #yandere twisted wonderland x reader #yandere twst x reader #self aware au #twisted wonderland x reader #twisted wonderland #twisted wonderland malleus #twisted wonderland jade #twst malleus #twst #twst jade #twst malleus x reader #twst jade x reader #yandere jade x reader #yandere jade leech #jade x reader #yandere jade #jade leech #yandere malleus x reader #yandere malleus draconia #malleus x reader #malleus draconia #yandere malleus #malleus headcanons #jade headcanons #tw: yandere #tw: religion #tw: obsession #tw: violence

[gougarfem]

i don't know how to make this post, or if anyone really still follows me (tumblr has a new algorithm so i'm pretty sure you have to be active for posts to show up, i'm mad about it). i haven't been active on here in a long time, because. i wish there was a prettier way to say this but i had to make the decision to retransition. i've had severe dysphoria ever since i can remember, and was diagnosed with GID as a child; it's persisted and only gotten worse over time. i've been in therapy ever since my diagnosis with a variety of providers, most of them not particularly trans-inclusive, who did not try to push transition on me and instead helped me unpack my trauma and my feelings around my body (i've spoken about my experiences with GIDS in previous posts, that's a whole different story). detransition and therapy did not do for me what it's done for other dysphoric women, and i reached a point where i had to consider whether it was worth living miserably for the sake of being true to my biological sex or whether i should take the easy road and try to pass as male to wider society. i took the easy road, and i'm not proud of it, but life is short and my choices feel so limited despite everything i've done to work through this.

i still hold true to my radfem beliefs, even though i'm going through a process that seems to contradict them. i feel like i've betrayed this community, and i so badly wanted to be living proof for younger dysphoric girls that it does get better, that you don't need to pretend you're a man, but for some unknown reason the only way i feel okay is by doing that very thing. if you followed me for my detransition content, i'm so sorry, and i'm more than happy to answer questions about my decision, dysphoria/transsexualism in general, and what it means to try to survive in a society that shows few signs of change for women. i really hope people here are open to discussion, because this is the most lovely, supportive and critical environment i've found online, and i truly enjoy hearing your views and opinions.

take care and have a wonderful day <3 thank you for reading

#lav.txt #detransition #transition #terfs do touch #radfems do touch #radfems do interact #radblr #dysphoria

[sgiandubh]

You really have an interesting blog and I really enjoy the cultural tidbits you weave in. I have to say though that the constant focus on Mordor is a bit much. I get that certain topics require to reference them, but it feels at times that you are just a Mordor monitoring/call-out blog. Maybe that's your goal and I just had different expectations, then I apologize for "criticizing" your content. Maybe it just feels so overwhelming to me, because we used to mostly ignore the other side. Anyway, I hope you don't hold a grudge for this feedback. I will keep an eye out for your cultural remarks.

Dear Culture Anon,

Telling me you read this blog for the 'cultural tidbits' is like me telling you I am watching OL for the Scottish landscapes: a sweet, silly lie.

I shall be, as always, brutally honest with you. My prerogative, since this is my page and everything that happens here does so on my own terms, and nobody else's.

This is your opinion, Anon and I have to respect it, which does not mean I have to abide to it. You are not the first one 'gently suggesting'. Others, including in this shipper community, have been way more virulent, publicly and privately questioning my identity, my gender, my nationality, my integrity, my career. From 'not new', to 'PR plant', to 'fraud', to ' where do you live, this is not enough to be clean' (in comments) to 'I know people ', to 'toxic content', to 'lunatic', to 'nutcase', to 'idiot', to 'impostor', to 'liar', to 'bitch', to 'manipulator', to '[insert name/handle of past/present shipper luminary here]'... I have heard just about it ALL.

Did I feel insulted? Yes. Did I feel disgusted? Yes. Did I feel overwhelmed and sick with it all? Yes. But you know what, Subtle Anon?

I NEVER FELT AFRAID.

Because I never lied to anybody about anything. Because you cannot force me, bind me, pay me, buy me. When I was wrong, I immediately corrected. I tried to remain polite and civilized to anyone in this shipper community, even when people ended up by lying about me in public. I shall still be polite and civilized to these same people: my morality, my profession and my beliefs prompt me to do so. But I am not deaf, nor dumb and certainly not a saint: judge you, I will. In my own privacy. You do exactly the same as far as I am concerned, for sure. So, we're even.

When I started to blog in here, my first feeling was this was an intimidated community. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe you do not need anyone to tell you that you are read and loved and respected. Maybe you're fine with being constantly called out and insulted and seeing your beliefs ridiculed by bullies without a face. But you know what? I am not even sorry to try and change the state of play, as long as I am speaking just in my own name and taking the whole brunt of asinine insults everyday on my own behalf only.

So I am afraid this blog is not rising up to your expectations, Anon. It is a written by a person (me) with very strong opinions, who simply refuses to turn the other cheek to bullies. And also by a person who sincerely thinks that her life experience can bring a bit of clarity in some difficult to grasp, complicated situations, where it is easier to manipulate for shits, giggles and clicks. Finally, by a person who simply loves to share her favorite music, favorite paintings, favorite places on Earth with people who became quick friends - the 'cultural tidbits' you are looking for, Anon.

So, if this is too much for you, Anon, by all means, do not read me anymore. I am sure you will find other blogs in here, where you will feel more comfortable. This is, after all, a formidably intelligent and compassionate community and this, Anon, is my jam.

I will understand you, Anon and I also think I will survive this loss.

Let's say farewell with one of my favorite Baroque motets, Anon. Nulla in mundo pax sincera means that we should not expect any honest peace in this troubled world, of which this fandom is but a pale reflection. As much as I discount Vivaldi, thanks to his abuse by all the elevator companies of this world, this is one of his finest:

#Anon #fandom

[emmathemandelaresident]

The Illymation and Think Before You Sleep drama:

What exactly is criticism and what is the difference between criticism and bullying?

If you guys haven’t heard the latest internet drama, apparently Illymation decided to straight up false flag TBYS’s vid for “bullying” her…

AND SHE DIDN’T EVEN WATCH THE FUCKING VID.

Which is kinda stupid and pathetic all together.

So to answer the first question, according to Google’s dictionary of what Criticism is:

“The expression of disapproval of someone or something based on perceived faults or mistakes.”

Essentially, it is the term used to describe the calling out of mistakes people make (saying people what NOT to do basically).

For example-Critcism towards a fanfiction:

“I like this chapter but it has a few problems you gotta work on. First, the way the paragraphs are layered is not perfect and it is hard to read. There are also some grammar issues and the way it goes from past tense to present tense.”

THAT is criticism.

Criticism is honestly pretty much scary and upsetting, but criticism is here JUST to improve you and your work, not to emotionally hurt you at ALL. It is here to remind you what NOT to do. It isn’t scary at all once you use it to help you out on yourself and your work.

Now to answer the second question…

What is the actual difference between criticism and bullying?

Criticism is ADVISE for you and your work to improve and change and NOT make the same mistakes in the future!!

Bullying on the other hand is verbal and physical abuse from another person that may be or may not be related to you.

Example of bullying:

“You’re worthless!”

“You’re very fat like a pig!”

“The way you just do those things are so stupid!”

These are INSULTS. Not criticism.

So now you all know what exactly criticism is and what is the difference between it and bullying. It may be hard to know it, but it ISN’T really hard!

People gotta understand about it. They gotta expect some opinions and judgements from others who are LIKELY gonna give criticism. And they should UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CRITICISM AND BULLYING!!!!!!

Especially Illymation!!

Just the audacity of saying that TBYS’s video is straight up hurting her mentally and thinking it is bullying is pathetic.

ESPECIALLY WHEN SHE IS A GROWN ASS WOMAN.

She gotta grow up…

So as far as you all know..

CRITICISM IS NOT BULLYING!!!

Please just don’t be like Illymation (a man child who apparently can’t tell the difference between criticism and bullying).

Criticism is an important thing to have. Don’t abandon it and don’t take advantage of it. Use it for your own benefit. Again, it may be scary, but it isn’t once you look into it and use it as it can improve you and change your work/content.

Kay that’s all! Byyyyyeeeeeee~ :DD

#my blogs! #illymation #think before you sleep #criticism #criticism vs bullying #funny how illymation is a grown woman and she does this #how pathetic is that #internet drama

[johannwolfgangvongoethe]

Some Personal Thoughts on Disability in Enstars

disclaimer: disability is a very broad term that covers many different experiences. i will be talking about physical disabilities since i feel most comfortable doing so/have experience with them. obviously that ignores a Huge part of what disability and chronical illness is and can be. but i think it is beyond my capabilities to talk about experiences i don't know much about.

alt caption: i think ritsu is a good character and im trying to explain to myself why

this is sort of a long post, sorry.

content warnings: i talk about ableism and touch on related topics such as dehumanization and objectification and such below. individual parts of this post have their own cw's.

Enstars Writing, Beloathed

to get this out of the way; it is bad sometimes. this is discussed very often. it doesnt depend on the authors either, in my opinion, some writers will hit you with something really troublesome only to (seemingly accidentally) invent human emotion and compassion in a different story. i dont want to repeat what others have said eloquently but there is a fair amount of imperialist worldviews, xenophobia, just racism really, transphobia, ableism, and copaganda to be found in enstars. this isnt about x character being x thing, but about how it is very noticable when the author of a story holds these worldviews and they bleed into their stories.

so that is not the greatest foundation if youre looking for well-written disabilities. but i wouldnt be reading enstars if i didnt think it genuinely is really really good sometimes. in my opinion, the way disabilities are portrayed is a mixed bag overall but there are some extremely worthwhile bits that touched me quite a lot.

What I personally understand as Well-Written Disability

the way disabled people suffer often goes unnoticed, and disabled people dont have a platform to talk about oppression. a lot of life-changing issues can go unnoticed to those unnaffected by them, even if they are in broad daylight: underfounded or entirely lacking healthcare, the way many healthcare systems are marketbased and ethics are prone to suffer bc of this (even under 'welfare' capitalism), a lack of equal marriage, the inaccessibility of the most basic and necessary facilities, financing care and the dependency on family/loved ones (both a logistical and psychological problem), the huge stigma against disabled people, etc, etc, you get me....

we need to write about people who need care, to keep them in mind at all times. disabled people are not a minority in a mathematical sense but in a hierarchical sense. it is naive to think of them as "a substancial percentage" of populations. as we age, we inevitably all enter the stage of needing care at some point. SO to an extend, i want to claim its a topic that affects every single person. yet disabled people are rarely a central topic anywhere. it is not enough to acknowledge them, we need to plan and think with them in mind. and Write with them in mind, i guess.

SO when i see fiction grapple the topic, i am usually really happy, even if the portrayal isnt ideal. (critical, maybe, but generally speaking very happy) pointing out "badly" written disabled characters is obviously not as easy as calling someone out for uncritically saying "i think eugenics are a good idea!!!" through fiction. people with that sort of facist mindset exist of course but ableism does not end there.

if i were to single out things i see often: i think the most disappointing thing a story can do is to - mention a disability without it ever having an impact on people in the story (-> the disability is basically nonexistent, has no impact or relevance, outside of a theoretical mention) OR - uncritically use a disabled character as a mere plot devise, without granting them the ability to speak (-> dehumanization, a lack of understanding that disabled people are, well, People. they do shit.)

and then of course there is fetishization, both in a literal sense and in an inspiration porn sense and the problem of turning disability into a caricature for jokes (either to other disabled people for their behaviour/body or to create a sense of satisfying superiority by laughing at them) but i feel like those problems explain themselves.

to apply these to very basic examples: i think often something like a robotic sci-fi prosthetic is not a good way to represent a disability because it fails to represent what people go through irl and provides a "magic fix" without repercussions. here is a really good post about it. about the plot device issue... i think it is similar to what people often criticise as "manpain". a disabled person will never appear or speak, they are demoted to being the reason an able-bodied character acts a certain way, like a lifeless accessory. this doesnt always have to be bad, esp if its just a sideplot! but it can get tiring if the audience never gets to learn about other aspects of the unseen character in question and we are only introduced to their suffering.

all of this to talk about gacha idol boys. it is how it is. anyway, this is roughly my mental state when i tackle enstars.

disclaimer 2: i am really just a kogaP. this influences which characters i encounter when reading. there are tons of stories i just never looked at and there is SO MUCh lore i just dont know about. please lemme know if you have additions to stuff i say/understand a character better/have related story recommendations! tl;dr the sakuma bit will be long.

disclaimer 3: i genuinely adore every single character mentioned below and am always excited to learn smth new about them. if i criticize writing, that has nothing to do with that character or their fans. it is about the writers.

the most obvious example. Eichi (content warning for brief mentions of self harm and suicidal ideation)

everything eichi does, he does with the knowledge he will most likely die young. that is a truly dramatic setup.

but before i get back to that thought. it always felt to me like eichis illness(/es) lack a certain sense of conciseness? i do not think you need to put a name and diagnosis on it for it to be relatable and real to readers, tbh!! though to achieve believability, there needs to be a good amount of consistency. what i can recall off the top of my head is the following:

he breaks down/straight up blacks out frequently due to weakness and dizzyness

measures were taken to secure his safety in those situations (the infamous Eichi-kun Gauge as seen in Element)

his stamina is seriously low

he coughs a lot

we saw him cough up blood (Daydream)

he relies on long hospital stays because his health needs to be monitored and/or supported this closely

he stays inside a lot (hinting towards problems with his immune system?)

being healthy enough to eat unhealthy food is a big deal to him, so there are dietary restrictions/it was necessary to precisely control what he eats

his grandfather, who died recently, is considered an outlier for how long he lived (so it IS hereditary)

which..... could be a lot of things...? or, more likely: a culmination of many things at once. if you have headcanons on eichis health, please lemme know!

but in addition to eichis terminal illness, there is a second quality to him that seperates him from most disabled people: he is extremely wealthy. and his wealth is fundamentally important to stories. usually illness and poverty go hand in hand, since incame is tied to the ability to work, which worsens an already bad situation. no matter how limited eichis actions are because of his body, the possibilties offered by his wealth make him a central figure in every overarching plot. in addition to this, his family is well aware of his consitution and he is a patriarchal leading figure to them, the head to their coporate hierachy. eichi is free of the things that usually rid the chronically ill of their safety and power: society (he is an idol and popular) and money (he is the richest boy in japan). if youd ask me, i think that while being chronically ill is of course physically taxing, the worse problem is the economic state it puts you in. eichi simply overcomes this? yes, he is terminally ill, his situation is terrifying. but he has an extraordinary amount of control while he lives. more than a poor yet able-bodied person may have.

his unique circumstances enable him to be incredibly active. this is so fun to read about in my opinion. its a fascinating setup to me. without casting any sort of moral judgement on his actions and the antagonistic role he plays; he is, excuse me for my phrasing here, a disabled power fantasy. (at least to me)

this is a double-edged sword to him. because of who he is as a person (ambitious, cunning, ruthless, diligent)

he lives in relative safety but his strong ambition and financial ability to fulfill his dreams tempt him to go past his limits. because his remaining lifetime is uncertain, the need to preserve the body he is given seems uneconomical (a mindset his upbringing and education as an heir to his family would have enforced imo) he is bound to break down sooner or later anyway. i think he begins to see himself and his body as a tool to achieve his goals and neglects spending time on anything BUT working towards them. so the moment he runs out of goals (like at the end of Element), his reason to "remain" becomes futile.

it really struck with me how he appears in Blackbird - emaciated, pathetic, purposefully neglected because he chose to be neglected and weak in an act of self harm bc denying medical attention (something that couldnt have happened otherwise) wataru has to remind him that no one died and the obvious connection to make is that the eccentrics are physically unharmed and starting over, that they should not be a source of guilt to eichi. but i think this is just as much about eichi himself. he might have expected to die since he left the hospital and overexhausted himself at school and as an idol. he didnt die though. it was a real possibility and seemed likely but he didnt. the neglect and indirect self harm here point out, to me, that he saw the "role" he gave himself as fulfilled at that point and waited to die.

eichi stands over economic or social factors that could ostracize and dehumanize him but funnily enough he manages to do so himself by treating his body as a tool and his happiness as an option that got overshadowed by a need to succeed.

this vulnerability makes him, despite how vague the descriptions of his illness are and despite how unrelatable his wealth is, a very satisfying character imo. it is engaging to me. certain limits are removed for him but he created new ones, specifically because he did not see himself as something worth sustaining once he becomes useless. imo, eichi applied the idea that a lifes worth can be measured in its ability to function in an industry to himself. and spiralled over it, entirely inverting his uncanny amount of bodily autonomy. it is clear how the situation he is in worsens his mental health like that. and how his mental health in turn worsens his physical health. it is inseperable.

i cant really get into !! era eichi because i genuinely just dont... know enough. the fine tradition of having a weekly H-Day stands out, though. after all, eichi has new bigger ambitions and is, once again, inviting his own ruin through overexhaustion. so his friends (the new addition of having friends is essential) had to forcefully make him stop for at least one day a week. that is pretty big. i think.

this is true for many marginalized existences so it of course applies to disabled people: if neither your surroundings nor yourself permit you to feel human and therefore assign your person an inherent worth and lovability... sometimes you need a friend to do so!!! social circles are the best support structure for your health.

The Sakuma Family

(i will get into ritsu and rei seperately later on. there are just a few concepts i want to get out of the way that apply to both of them.)

so... to get a little theoretical; the concept of "disability" relies on the concept of a "normative" human existence. "disability" is an otherness and can therefore easily be seen as a "monstrocity" in the eyes of ignorant people, something that instils fear. (there is a reason why a lot of horror exploits disabled bodies as a source of terror and uses mental hospitals as settings) from an able-bodied point of view it seems "desirable" to be a "normative human", yet the disabled person knows that is not a possibility and knows their worth and place as a human in human spaces. at least ideally. able-bodied people sometimes lack this understanding. there is nothing to be desired about an able body or fixed about a disabled body, beyond what medical care can do for ones quality of life.

if you have read operetta, this is all very familiar;

operetta, chapter 17 and, well, here we are. vampires. a very basic truth about the sakuma family that i hate to see denied is that they are human. there is nothing supernatural about them. they are just disabled. or, to turn the idea around, if one was to assign them vampiristic traits and such... is vampirism not a disability and should be taken seriously as such? if you consider the limits a vampire has while coordinating through their life, is that not... strangely just a disabled experience? (MINUS THE KILLING PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY but much modern fiction is sympathetic towards vampires instead and does not display them as violent)

anyway, to hear it from the horses mouth (the horse is rei):

operetta, chapter 19 the sakuma family is a curious case. their condition is hereditary though the severity varies from person to person. it comes up in many stories but for the most part i am thinking about operetta, resurrection sunday, and devils right now. how did this all start? what made an entire family turn to live as vampires, with blood ceremonies and all that? what bizarre kind of generational trauma is this?

(and, while it does not play a role as important as it did for eichi, they are rich. this is important to mention. many normal experiences just dont apply to them because wealth makes them immune. ... how did the sakumas become this influential anyway.)

for an unspecified but long time, an entire family managed to mentally entirely seperate themselves from the rest of humanity because of their chronical illness. personally, i have no doubt this is the result of a world that othered them first. whether the main motivator at play here is a defensiveness towards a society that cannot understand you or an internal need to turn hardships into an identity that can be carried with pride. it takes a considerable amount of emotional strength and planning for the "hey we are human actually" declaration in operetta to occur.

they are, weirdly, what people mean when they talk about a "toxic anti-recovery mindset". (an expression i struggle with because this sort of rhetoric is often used to discriminate against disabled people who speak up for themselves or ask for accomodations. but that aside) it is an amount of pride that leads to internal self destruction.

of course, as is the case with every single character i write about in this post, a lot of it has to do with aesthetics and being chuuni to sell gacha cards. so we know the reason behind the reason. but it makes for some bizarre in-universe implications.

but in any case, the fact that their identity as false vampires is something they have always carried, that modern society sees as "mystical and sexy" has a hilarious side effect: their disability becomes marketable under the guise of vampirism. it is hard to recover from that.

so again, we have a double-edged sword: to present ones medical condition as a "persona" declares it as a performative act, something that is done to bring joy to an audience. personal detriment is not considered here, since it stops being a part of ones being and starts to become "work". the time and place of ones symptoms has to overlap with the time and place of ones performances. or people will hate you for your uncontrollable illness. however, rei and ritsu are both also able to carry their condition with a sort of playfulness. it is almost something like the act of "reclaiming" when they purposefully choose to larp a little for fun. usually, when a scene mentions their disability in the context of comic relief, they have control over the situation that unfolds and even initiate it and invite others to laugh alongside them. this can be a slippery slope to getting harrassed of course.... but i am rather baffled by the amount of dominance they have in social interactions. so it just reads as a healthy amount of dark humour to me.

this, and the consistent writing of their symptoms, and the ability to easily compare it to real existing illnesses, easly make them my favourite instance of written disabled people in the series. their illness has an impact on their behaviour and it is detrimental! and they are both very human in the way they attempt to cope. there is a certain realism to it. idek.

many people seem to headcanon them with myalgic encephalomyelitis, which is a really good explanation, and i personally want to suggest narcolepsy. the point being, there is room to accurately assign them a realistic relatable and understandable condition, even if nothing is ever named in canon. and of course they are mentioned to have an iron deficiency.

bear with this slightly "out there" theory for a moment: have you or a friend ever tried to get a compensation for your disadvantage at school or uni? it can be really hard to do, if it is possible at all, even if it is something very simple (more time, a slightly different enviroment, the ability to drink or sit, etc) yumenosaki is a school for performance arts, mainly idols. bold statement: it might genuinely be easier to get/explain an accommondation for your "idol quirk" (something that would be actively fostered), than for your disability. not that yumenosaki is very strict or asks for a lot anyway, its just something that has been on my mind.

here is another funny thing i have been thinking about: both of them crave juice, soda, and fruit - sugary yet fresh stuff. i feel like this is not uncommon for people who suffer from excessive tiredness and fatigue, the body subconsciously wishes for some sugar intake to "wake up".

Inventing a Guy to Cope. Rei

funny title aside... he... did that... ? rei is a curious example of how different mostly unrelated traumas can overlap. he had no childhood, thanks to his family that considered him "mature" at a very young age and his early status as a child star. and his bad health is a miserable addition to this. it is quite scary to image how pressured to do right he felt growing up and how that resulted in the fragmented distanced way he views himself; reinventable, and ultimately unknowable. (to others AND himself)

despite his bad health he has always been working and performing "well". he was praised for his remarkable talents but rarely had the chance to stop and patch himself up. whether this was a result of a pushy enviroment or his personality as a people pleaser who cannot show weakness and imperfection is hard to tell. maybe both.

the state he is in in Crossroad is fascinating to me. he all but directly lists the criteria of depression to keito when he attempts to explain his sorrows. he is restless, rowdy, mentions later on that he enrolled in yumenosaki against his familys wishes. he is very much searching for joy and his own identity in the middle of a health emergency. this has to do with the way he was raised, only knowing how to exist for and serve others, how he was made to sell a made-up version of himself, but i also believe it has to do with the fact he has started to exclude himself from his familys traditions and values. he started to cast away the uncertain "monstrosity" existence of his family (as well as the false idolhood others assigned him) and instead embraces humanity as a chronically ill person.

crossroad, i forgor which chapters

this of course marks a starting point of change that later results in him making up the wagahai pronouns persona - something he specifically created with the intention of looking vulnerable and weak. because he yearned to do less, to recover from years of exhaustion.

in a way, i want to say both, the ore pronouns persona and the wagahai pronouns persona, are attempts to cope with expectations he cannot handle physically or mentally. one relies on masking, on appearing stronger than he actually is and therefore invulnerable, and the other relies on exaggerating his weakness, in an attempt to finally let others recognize it. i think as a disabled person, both are performances one has to learn in order to "function" in everyday life, while remaining safe from serious harm (doing badly at ones job or classes, angering others that hold power over your life). since ones circumstances are often hard to grasp for someone who does not share the same illness, there is no choice but to simplify and exaggerate until symptoms become tangible concepts or to just brave through it, at the cost of ones health and future time.

rei in particular, for better or for worse, is incredibly capable when he needs to be and unfortunately that means others will often not take his health seriously because they saw him function just fine the other day. this is a general problem but an obvious offender in that regard is koga, who comments on reis fatigue constantly and loves to create a bit of a high expectations toxic work enviroment (and, to be fair, rei terrorizes him too. kogas hostility towards rei is sometimes ableist but not really rooted in ableism. after all koga is highly aware how performative the wagahai persona can be and is a huge motivational and inspirational factor in reis life. its a whole complex)

!! era holds some positive changes. his mental need to please other people remains a persistent source of trouble for him (and others) but he seems to really let his body recover and lives a more nocturnal life. both kuro and kaoru mention that he looks more healthy (in succession match???? i think??) since he finally stopped enforcing a normal day/night cycle on his body just to comply with social norms. you can indeed be very human even if you break human-made rules.

(additional comment: "becoming human" is of course a theme for each of the eccentrics and not uniquely tied to disability, it very much has to do with the objectification one goes through as a public figure. but this is a post about disability and it really fits in well. so here we go)

Literally Just a Realistic Teenager. Ritsu

ritsu, while not really being among my favourite characters, is my favourite instance of a disabled character in enstars. partly because of his writing and partly because my personal experiences overlap with his so much it sometimes is painful - but always extremely satisfying. just had to get that out.

ritsu is perhaps the most visibly ill. he blacks out and sleeps where he stands, everywhere, without control and often requires other peoples (well, mostly maos) assistance in order to remain safe when this happens. he also repeated a year of school, specifically because of his disability.

he is painfully aware of this. that he looks ill, that he behaves ill, that he is an underachiever compared to others of the same age, even to people younger than him.

ritsu developed unique behaviours to deal with this: he is very dependent and clingy and often asks others to do things for him, unapologetically. that does not mean asking for help doesnt hurt his pride, just that it is the most viable strategy for everyday survival that he ended up with. other than that, he clings more to the vampire identity than rei does. either to defy his older brother or, and this is important imo, because it is the one safety net he has to fall back on that makes him feel "normal" and like he is a regular being. albeit not human. no matter how much others might blame him for his shortcomings or how much he is a failure in the eyes of society, he is very regular for a "vampire". under the logic developed by his family, he is just a child, and the world at large is to blame. it is an easier truth to accept than facing systematic injustice and prejudice in a human world.

the stories i mentioned in another part above aside, i really love what ensemble band does for him; ritsu gets extremely irritated with mao in the prologue, seemingly out of nowhere. his character is allowed to express this sort of anger and to take it out on others, even if it is unjust and misguided. it is not pretty and it isnt good behaviour but it is a very heartfelt emotion to me.

its obvious that he cannot compete with others and that this will always been seen as his personal fault instead of a circumstance he cannot influence. and more than that: no one appreciates the real efforts he makes. for instance, getting himself out of bed in time for classes is difficult for regular teenagers and straight up hellish for ritsu. but he manages to do so a lot later on. instead of acknowledging that this is a real accomplishment on his part and possibly really exhausting and bad for his comfort in the long run, this is seen as doing the bare minimum.

while it is not correct, the malice ritsu sometimes treats others with comes from an comprehensible place. able-bodied ignorance can appear as purposeful slights made by those more privileged than him.

yet he learns to conform. his friends are important to him. knights success is important to him. (thought mental health probably played a role here too and made things even harder prior to his third year of high school) and yet;

seven bridge, chapter 24, but its really just an example i had at hand

the remarks stay the same. his peers still cannot help but brand him as "just lazy", even if they are kind and understanding otherwise and habour no ill intent. so i would like to ask: how long can he keep this up? how hard is this on him?

i dont think i need to explain just how common and hurtful it is to be accused of "laziness". probably the single most irritating comment someone with fatigue will hear every single day.

however, on the flipside, ritsu has perhaps the most people who care for him in comparison with other characters, though they sometimes complain (communication is hard, care is hard, everyone in enstars is very young and i cannot bring myself to see those comments as malice. its a mixture of ignorance and ones own burdens) there is mao, obviously. tsumugi is a very funny example. knights, of course, in particular naru. (at least based on my humble knights readings)

quite interesting how he just decided mao is his caretaker, now and in the future. i shared a few of my thoughts on caretaking here. this is.... a huge responsibility to just put on someones shoulders, to say the least. he shouldnt be doing this but i think it speaks for itself that this is a problem that is on his mind. ITS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT TOPIC TO BRING UP, especially since, the younger you are, the harder it is to get insurance to pay for your care. yes, he is often just teasing mao, but ritsu is looking for ways to get through life. by learning to be as independent as possible, whenever possible. though often you really just find yourself at the mercy of friends and family.

Inter-Sibling Violence

apologies, i will be done with the sakumas soon. i didnt know how to fit this in at the start.

the relationship between rei and ritsu, as people with the same disability who experiences different symptoms and challenges, is worth thinking about. infighting within people of the same disability is very common since experiences can be so different, there are no universal truths or opinions. with different lifestyles come different expectations for what is "normal" and sometimes pressure and social norms can cause someone to shift blame onto others who have no achieved the same things in life.

rei and ritsu are said to have been very close as small children and likely depended on each other a lot. i can see how reis fostering nature and ritsus needy nature developed alongside each other and enforced each other.

time and time again, rei says that he is a "less severe" case, that ritsu has it worse. he jets around the world because he feels forced to do so, when ritsu just wanted emotional support from him to begin with. ritsu stayed alone at home, sheltered and likely caged by their families convictions. but! i want to suggest the following: as much as it hurt him, it was important for reis health to be away from his family, too. i dont think staying there would have been good for him. his absence and the experiences he made away from home were an important catalyst for the positive family development we see in operetta.

of course, rei means well. he cares. he is trying to have a positive impact. yet from ritsus point of view, all of this must feel terribly condescending, especially with how much rei babies him. there is just one year between them. this is barely anything when it comes to sibling inferiority complexes the brain can make up. rei, who is successful and famous and beloved and, most importantly, proclaims to have it "easier than him", is trying to find a cure for him. from ritsus point of view this must be unbearable. their lives are so different when they basically started at the very same point of origin.

more than that, rei shoulders the sketchy blood rituals himself, out of love of course, but if one was more jaded, one could assume he doesnt think ritsu would be able to stomach the responsibility.

you will always compare yourself to your siblings in unhealthy ways but ritsu is just doing this on hard mode, i fear.

HHHRAGAHHHH GHHH ghgghrhgh. Niki

nikis writing is... driving me up a wall sometimes, to say the least. dont get me wrong, i love him. to an extend i understand that his single-mindedness and shallowless has purpose to it. in fact, i adore these character traits. he really seems to be behind four mental barriers at all times, unable to let deeper thoughts touch him, lest they make him succumb to despair. (yet nikis specific flavour of menhera cannot quite shine since... well, he has to stand next to himeru all the time)

the descriptions we get of nikis illness are nonsensical, at least to my knowledge. you could imagine he has something like hyperthyroidism. this never really gets explored though. at some point ENGstars mentions he has "gastroptosis or whatever" (the "or whatever" is part of his dialogue - niki really doesnt give a fuck), which makes no sense at all. weirdly enough, it would even be strangely in character if this was just a misconception.

so, can anyone take niki to a doctor? has this happened and i just wasnt there for it? there is no excuse why no one is considering medical care when it comes to him. except that he often is the butt monkey of jokes the writers want to make and has to stay available for it. more than that; his parents just left him alone like this? as a child? did he get an allowance at least? this cannot be legal, right? i wait for the day this comes up as a topic but i fear it is in vain. (please tell me if it actually did. i dont follow niki that closely) this is an unbelievable thing to do to a healthy child, yet alone one with a severe illness. we are basically looking at denial of assistance.

so many things surrounding nikis story are designed to make him as miserable as possible. i cannot help but feel that he exists purely as comic relief, for funny bickering, and superficial drama. i dont really like that at all, his misery just gets exploited.

EVEN SO... his self-image is actually really fascinating. as rinne likes to point out again and again, niki has no self-worth. he works two jobs, one of which he hates, he constantly gets into dangerous situations, and he will do anything just for some crumbs, and quickly forgets when others treat him badly. and of course, the worst bit:

es!! main story, please dont make me go find it

to some degree, he just accepts this as something he deserves. there is no consideration for his own quality of life, somewhere along the lines it seems like he got conviced just surviving is all he gets. he internalized self-degredation to a dangerous degree and i never see anyone mention this mental affliction specifically as a comorbidity of his disability. to me, there is without a doubt a relation here. sure, maybe he would still fight with this otherwise, just because he had to witness his fathers fall from grace as a child and knows there is a stigma attached to his name now. but i think you can tell it is more than that, from the way he is ashamed to beg (even in a life or death scenario, as seen in hot limit), as if his condition was his own fault.

this circles back to the point i made earlier for eichi; how much nikis life is worth, is measured in his economical value.

of the characters i have spoken of so far, nikis is financially the most accurate to real life. there is no safety net for him, no convenient family wealth.

(at this point it feels important to mention that somehow rinne manages to be the only person entirely aware of the danger and desires to change nikis mindset, YET he is a huge strain on nikis health. i dont know how those two function.)

Just a Lamb. Tatsumi

tatsumis specific trauma is a unique one: while most other characters struggle with conditions they were born with or developed as they grew up, tatsumis injury is the result of strain and violence. those are two different pairs of shoes, though the outcome may be similar. whether it is worse to be born into circumstances you cannot escape or to have to live with having something thrust upon you unfairly is up to personal judgement. pain is not really quantifiable. its just important to keep in mind, i think. under the circumstances tatsumi grew up in, he has his own burdens. it is very easy in many ways to compare and contrast him with eichi. of course this applies to how they used their bodies too: as an expandable resource. they had ideals for their school life (and beyond) that just seemed far more important and they both ended up in hospital because of this. (+ we know tatsumis surroundings were purposefully manipulated to destroy him)

and, of course, tatsumi got attacked later on. he never really talks about it directly but his legs seem to talk for him, in ways.

the story does not quite make it clear whether his occasional weakness and pain are the result of old injuries or entirely psychosomantic, and i dont think there is a real need to know, as a reader. in fact, in a certain light, i think it can be considered good that we dont know for certain: it would be relevant for tatsumi himself, sure, since it would influence which kinds of treatments and help he can seek out. however, i think the ambiguity may foster a certain level of sympathy in readers.

often psychosomatic problems are not taken seriously enough in real life: they cannot be proven physically and they dont fit into the neat little boxes that the ICD wants you to believe exist, so they cannot be defined on paper or easily explained to doctors or insurance providers.

to foster empathy with his situation requires his character to be lovable and for the narrative to treat him with care as well. which is thankfully the case. alkaloid are dear with him and, despite the fact he cannot perform in his work enviroment all the time, he is very respected for his other skills. he is a well-rounded person.

all that aside. it is absolutely worth to mention tatsumi pre-injury, too. he came up with a form of small-scale universal income among a semi-union at school. without getting too much into all that. (obbligato really seems like required lecture in the realm of enstars stories) the entire concept strives for social equality and is extremely anti-discrimination. it fundamentally goes against the idea that someone needs to "deserve" care, and is the opposite of the mindset i described with eichi and niki above. he never had to make first-hand experiences with disability to be extremely compassionate. this seems really rare among people in real life, even those who preach altruism.

While we are Here. K.... Kaname

as mentioned, i spoke a little about kaname before. so i wont get into the complex of caregiving.

it is extremely satisfying we got to meet kaname, if only for one event story. he does not have to remain a faceless motivation behind himeru and tatsumis lives, he thankfully became humanized.

the entire conflict around kaname at the moment is a matter of bodily autonomy. how much of your person can be in anothers hand, ethically? there is no excuse for the theft of his (idol) identity through himeru but the damage is done now. ideally, you dont want any part of yourself to depend on others but the disabled reality is that this is very often impossible. especially for kaname. there simply is no one else who could be responsible for him right now and, to be fair, at least when it comes to medical care, himeru seems to behave very responsibly.

repeating what has been said in the other post but i am worried for kanames seemingly inevitable reintroduction to the story. he has been in a comatose state for a year. if he wakes (since this is fiction, it is possible to exchange 'if' for 'when', realistically it really would be an 'if' though) he would most likely be confronted with permanent neurological and physical damage and years of rehabilitation. at least logically. (not to mention the psychological shock) would this be written with compassion and a sense of realism? it makes for a compelling source of conflict and emotional hardships that could be extremely worthwhile to explore. i just cant entirely bring myself to trust the writers with this one but i would love to be convinced otherwise.

that is, of course, if they dont somehow just skip rehabilitation entirely and declare it a miracle healing.....

imo, the in-game discourse between characters is just as important as his future development. i just really hope autonomy and recovery will be large topics.

He doesnt go here, but. Adonis

so bringing him up just really feels necessary within the context of this post because of his interests. one of adonis hobbies is sign language and accessibility.

this is, i think, maybe the best thing they ever did with his "protector" persona. it just fits so well, it is a direct conversion of ideals to actions. knowing undead songs have been translated for a deaf audience in canon is extremely wholesome and uplifting, even if it is entirely inconsequential for the story and just something that gets mentioned.

(now that sandstorm is out on engstars, you can check that out too for further mentions of this! if i could wish for one thing, it would be for the stories to acknowledge that there are tons of independent sign languages and i would love to know which one adonis and rei speak... you ever think about how adonis speaks like four languages fluently. at least.)

nightless city live, chapter 3

everyone in undead loved that and supported the vision. to see koga, who is usually against anything but musical performances and wishes to express art freely, praise the idea really puts deaf identity and accessibility in a great light. it is a very positively radical forwardthinking idea.

so, i just wanted to mention that. adonis is treated horribly by the narrative a lot, it entirely fails to grasp his identity and is insensitive towards foreign cultures, but i would die for him i think.

finishing thoughts

like mentioned, please absolutely let me know if you have different related ideas or recommendations. or corrections, or worries over something i wrote!!! learning and improving is always great. i am sorry i could not get into so many other characters, the ones i wrote about are those that i feel confident enough to comment on. in the future i would love to meet maguro!! i just havent really read any mama stories at all :'''3

i feel like i barely said anything at all and barely engaged with text enough since i didnt get into any character specifically. i would love to write another post about ritsu or rei or both. a draft for it has been sitting around for ages (as did the draft for this post, lol) but i hope someone will find an interesting thought in here somewhere.

all in all, enstars is actually... surprisingly nice to read for the disability in there??? even if it is disappointing in handling many other things. of course, the writings not always ideal (i read hidden beast just the other day and the ableism in there took years off my life) but often its really nice. nothing hits quite like seeing real emotions and experiences through some metaphorical stylized anime lense, you feel.

anyway thank you for listening. i am actually for real done now.

#enstars #ensemble stars #enstarsposting #did i overreact and write too much..... ah... nay......

[burst-of-iridescent]

i’ve gone back and forth a lot on whether to respond to this because the last thing i want is more discourse, but since you seem absolutely determined to put me on some sort of trial, anon, i might as well get my two cents in.

so let's talk.

one, i have said over and over again that i am more than willing to talk to anyone i may have unwittingly hurt or offended, if they came to me directly and off-anon. despite the fact that you surely knew that, since you evidently stalk my blog, you did not do so. instead, you continued to yell at me and accuse me of racism anonymously, rather than actually engaging with me. what this tells me right off the bat is you're not interested in a productive conversation. you're interested in harassing me.

two, i've talked to indigenous zutara shippers. i'm friends with indigenous zutara shippers. i've read what many native and indigenous shippers in this fandom have to say. i know shippers who like the fire lady katara trope, shippers who are indifferent, shippers who dislike it. what makes your opinion any more important than any of theirs? and conversely, what makes their opinion any more important than yours? no singular person can ever claim to speak for their entire community, because people of colour aren't one monolithic entity.

as a desi girl, katara's relationship with aang makes me uncomfortable because it is characterized by patterns of imbalanced emotional labour and misogyny that i frequently see within my own community. and it is my prerogative to dislike the ship because of that, just as it is for any other woc. but it is not my prerogative to say that no one else is allowed to ship kat.aang, or is racist or misogynistic just for shipping kat.aang (and indeed i know women of colour who do ship kat.aang! because our cultural background doesn't mean that we're automatically going to have the same experiences and perspectives, and that's valid).

so am i really supposed to listen to indigenous voices, anon, or am i simply supposed to listen to those that agree with you?

three, i won't deny that the fire lady katara trope can be racist. i've seen it executed in ways that make me profoundly uncomfortable, and which i will never support. but more often than not in zutara fandom and content, "fire lady" is simply the name chosen for the fire lord's female consort, one that denotes katara as zuko's equal and a powerful world leader in her own right with her own title. if the trope is executed problematically, that fault lies with the person who wrote it and their own ignorance/malice/racism - not with the trope itself.

personally, as someone whose people were colonized by the british, and whose home was subjected to japanese imperialism, i completely understand why it can feel extremely empowering and wish fulfilling to have woc in positions of power within the systems that oppressed them. if i saw a desi girl on the throne of england, you can bet i'd be the first to celebrate.

but of course that's just my opinion, so if any indigenous or native shippers have thoughts on the trope, i would love to hear what you have to say, and discuss further.

four, despite your alleged care for katara and indigenous women, anon, you have never once engaged with my criticisms of the show for its depiction of kat.aang: a relationship where katara's partner is visibly disgusted at her cultural food, acts disrespectfully towards her cultural artifacts, attempts to dissuade her from finding justice for her mother (a victim of imperialist aggression), and tries to impose his own cultural/religious beliefs upon her without considering that she a) has no obligation to follow those beliefs and b) her own culture's beliefs are vastly different. all of which, by the way, he is never shown to apologize for or learn from. add to that the fact that 2/3 of katara's children show absolutely no connection to her culture and, in fact, seem to heavily prioritize their father's instead - to the extent that all of her grandchildren seem solely air nomad instead of paying respect to both sides of their heritage - and a very troubling picture is painted.

keep in mind that this isn't some fanon trope or problematic fic created by a small subset of shippers within the fandom on an internet space meant primarily for adults; it's a canonical depiction of a romantic relationship with a woc on a show written by two white men and broadcasted to an audience of millions, targeted primarily at young, impressionable children. what are the messages being sent here, and to whom, about interracial relationships featuring indigenous women, and the role said women are expected to fulfil within those relationships?

but instead of criticizing the white creators who did that, you chose to take out your anger on me, a fellow poc descended from colonized peoples, because... i'm an easier target? because i'm accessible, and they're not? because maybe, just maybe, this isn't actually about indigenous people at all?

five, being a shipper (or an anti) isn't the same as being an activist. it just isn't. people can read and write and enjoy things in fiction that they would never support in real life (though ofc sometimes people just suck and that bleeds through into what they consume and create - but my point is that you absolutely cannot decide by their taste in fiction alone whether they are bigoted or not) because if our fictional takes translated to real life, most of us would probably be mass murderers by now. the only thing you can really judge anyone on is what they say and do and how they treat others in real life.

and you made that abundantly clear with this ask you sent me after i reblogged posts spreading awareness of the fires in hawai'i and sharing links to donate:

so just to clarify here, you would prefer that i don't use my platform to try and help actual indigenous people, people who have lost their homes and families, who are actually suffering, who actually require assistance and money and resources... because you don't like my headcanon for a fictional indigenous-coded person?

(yeah, i'm sure you'll understand why i'm skeptical about this entire crusade being in any way about the welfare of indigenous people.)

ultimately, i know none of this is going to change your mind. if you ever intended to genuinely speak out for indigenous issues, or make me see what i was doing wrong, you would have messaged me personally and stood by what you had to say. but that was never your real aim, and you know that as well as i do, so i'm certain i'll see you in my inbox again tomorrow talking about my racism or lack of accountability or whatever else you can find to disparage me.

i wish you the best. have a good day.

#the discourse #again #anti kataang

[fansplaining]

Do you have any advice, guides, or opinions on how write a good rec list?

WELL! This is Elizabeth, and as the longtime co-curator of "The Rec Center" newsletter (with @hellotailor) I do have *a lot* of thoughts about rec lists. 😊 I'm delighted you asked, because as I'm sure both Flourish & I have mentioned on the podcast, rec-list-making is way less prominent now than it has been in previous fandom eras, and I think that's a shame. Reccing can be a great critical tool, and rec lists make a fanwork space richer—not least because they can move readers beyond the mostly quantitative metrics of the AO3.

I'll put the rest of this under the cut:

So obviously there are different kinds of rec lists, including by category/trope, favorites about a character or a ship or fandom, etc. To me, a true ~authored~ rec list is one in which the writer(s) deliberately put together a batch of fics to make some kind of argument about the works/the ship/the fandom/the source material.

Most of the lists we run in the newsletter are not like this, because we're pulling 5-7 works from our guest submissions bank—and since we don't (realistically, can't!) read the stories that are sent in, I have no idea if those 5-7 compliment each other in any real way. (When I put together one of these lists, I aim for balance: not all M/M, not all white characters, not all Western source material, etc.) (Yes, unsurprisingly, those are overrepresented in our submissions bank.)

But an authored rec list treats the rec list itself like a fanwork: you can tap into connective tissue that runs throughout the fics you choose, and you can put stories side-by-side that illuminate something when read together. You can approach this from two different directions: working from a broader pool of fics you like and pulling out a coherent batch, or starting with a theme, an argument, that connective tissue, and seeing what fits.

When I first got into my current fandom, I kept a google doc with fic titles, links, brief descriptors, and general thematic vibes etc., for future reccing use. (Obviously you can do this with AO3 bookmarks, but I use those differently, so this was a separate endeavor.) These were set up to transfer to "The Rec Center" easily, e.g.:

“Celestial Navigation” by kaydeefalls. 9K words, rated Teen. Canon-era: C & E go to NYC to try to recruit several mutants. Delicate balance sort of story with a soft revelation. No tropes.

When I actually go to rec something, I reread it—mostly because I want to get the content warnings right, but also because reading it to rec is more like reading for work: you wind up looking at the text with a different eye, always lowkey thinking about how you'll make your argument about it in writing. I haven't actually recced the fic above in the newsletter, but here's another X-Men fic I did rec at one point:

“Come Together” verse by blarfkey. 60K words across 4 stories, rated Teen.  Backstory: When Peter gets arrested for breaking Erik out of the Pentagon, Erik returns the favor and breaks Peter out in turn—and takes him to live with Charles. Beautifully awkward father-son bonding coupled with bitter, stubborn exes pining: *chef’s kiss*. The verse spans five years, with really believable character growth, which is really saying something, based on the emotionally-stunted starting point for all parties involved. Rec: Peter is the POV character here, so a+++, and the close third-person narration plays with the spaces between what he feels and what he says while capturing his voice beautifully. This means 50% dragging people and 50% feeling like an idiot, which is a total joy. A lot of X-Men stuff, canonically or...fanonically...sorry...is about found family, and I mean, this one is about finding your literal blood relations, but it’s also about building a true family, and I think the author gives that enough space to really sell it.  Content warnings: Canon-typical violence, torture, ableism, the unenlightened thoughts about women’s bodies that preoccupy heterosexual teenage boys 

That rec is from a whole list I did with @morgan-leigh a few (five???wtf lol) years ago, which I think is a good example of an authored rec list: Morgan and I had overlapping tastes and similar interpretations of the characters, so all the fics here feel like they're talking to each other in some way, and making an argument about who these characters are (in Morgan's beautiful words, many of these stories "capture the exquisite and venal dickishness of both our heroes" lol).

Obviously rec lists don't have to be super formal—we created this reccing format a long time ago to keep things standardized—and I certainly don't think recs need to sound like literary criticism (not that the examples above sound like literary criticism lol...you know what I mean). Some of my favorite rec lists are pure vibes and (performatively? in a good way) emotional, and that's great. If you're a fic author, you know what a delight those comments are to receive. And like someone's AO3 bookmarks, the all-vibes rec list is an opportunity to see if you, too, feel like the selected fics smack you in the face or whatever violent expression of appreciation people are using. They often don't give you a ton of information, but if you and the reccer have similar taste, you know you can trust their picks.

But! I would make the case for reccing as a chance to talk about fic in a way that you really wouldn't in a comment to the author or in a performatively emotional tag: critically, not in the "this is bad" definition of "criticism," but, like, in the lit-crit way. Why does this work—and how does it work? As with all literary criticism, "work" is totally contextual; a good rec list sets up that context, and gives you just enough information to want to click through and see for yourself.

All that being said, you don't need to overthink it—and I say this partly because I'd really love to see more rec lists floating around! The AO3 often primes people to sort in a top-down way, and though there are tons of great fics with lots of kudos, as the meme goes,

Rec lists let you include things that aren't super popular, that hit niche characterization or plot notes, that really worked for you specifically for whatever reason. They're pure human curation—not just recs, but an arrangement of those recs that creates a whole new work in the process. And that's something I really love about fandom! We don't want algorithmic 'if this, then that' for-you pages; we're interested in doing the actual work of reading, thinking about, and sharing what we like with others, and that's wonderful.

#asks #fanfiction #reccing #rec lists #the rec center

[grimaider]

The Coffin of Elfen and Leyley: Incest and Questionable Consent in 2000s Media.

WARNING: This blog post mentions numerous sensitive subjects such as incest, questionable consent, murder, cannibalism, sexually explicit material, and real-life criminal cases. If any of the following is bothersome, I would highly suggest scrolling past this post. Thank you.

ANOTHER WARNING: This post contains spoilers for Elfen Lied and The Coffin of Andy and Leyley. If you wish to avoid spoilers, I would highly suggest clicking off this post and come back once you have finished both. Thank you.

Hello (again), it's grim.

I wanted to discuss an interesting phenomenon that I've taken note of over the past couple of years that seems to always cause internet controversy: The rise of taboo subjects found in modern media.

Now, I want to clarify that I hold very libertarian beliefs when it comes to media. If you can think it, it can be written, regardless of how inappropriate the content is. However, I also believe that there should be consequences to such writings depending on the substance.

The two topics I'll be talking about today are The Coffin of Andy and Leyley and Elfen Lied. These are both pieces of media that I have consumed in the past 2 years, and have noticed a trend between taboo subjects and how their respective authors and/or fanbases have used their taboo nature to repurpose characters and relationships for inappropriate media.

While I believe these pieces of media can be criticized in any manner due to their taboo nature, I would argue in defense of their conception since there is no exact promotion of the taboo nature represented throughout the mentioned medias. I believe this is important to state, for I solely disagree with the creation of media that promotes a taboo and/or illegal act rather than just the representation of such acts.

Images of The Coffin of Andy and Leyley (left) and Elfen Lied (right)

To make this analysis and opinionated piece easier to read, I will be going through my opinions and personal experiences with both of these medias separately. To do this, I will be separating taboo into two subsections:

Illegal Taboo

Questionable Taboo

While I would argue that there is probably some grey area between the two of these, I am simply dividing the taboos into two separate categories because my stance on illegal and questionable taboo slightly changes. Furthermore, the taboos in TCOAAL and Elfen Lied are very different. I believe it would be unfair to compare incest and questionable consent content. Both are taboo, both have been countlessly debated for and against, but incest has stable, concrete laws set against it (at least in the United States) while the other doesn't.

Let's get into the analysis.

Illegal Taboo (The Coffin of Andy and Leyley)

Screenshot from the love/incest route of The Coffin of Andy and Leyley

Oh boy, where do I start. I wasn't entirely sure what I was getting myself into when I first stumbled upon this game. I saw the art style of the game in a YouTube video where the uploader had referred to the siblings as "lovers," which gave me the impression that the main characters of the game were not blood relatives. By the time I had seen the controversy plastered all over Twitter and Reddit about the TCOAAL's "questionable" content, I had already bought the game, which put me in a tough dilemma: Do I immediately refund the game or do I give it a chance?

I bet you can guess which one I picked.

Me being the curious individual that I am, I decided to keep the game. I had a million thoughts rush through my mind about the decision I had just made. What if the game actually has illegal content? People must be exaggerating the situation. I'm sure that the incest claims are probably just false. If it does have a plot that revolves around such content, maybe its just a small tidbit of the game. No biggie. These thoughts did not stop, and I wasn't sure what to do next.

One of the only screenshots from Episode 2 of TCOAAL that isn't horrendous

For a month or so, I avoided the game like the plague. I held off on installing it, I avoided it on Twitter, Reddit, and Instagram as best as I could (for both spoilers and online biases), and I refused to talk about the game with anyone that I knew. I planned to play the game, but I wanted all the controversy to die off first so I could play it without too much backlash. Unfortunately in this world, outrage has become the people's first emotion to anything, so even if your reasoning for such an action is rational and fair, you might still be attacked for simply touching new media without an initial bias.

When I finally got around to playing the game, I was genuinely pleased. Episode 1 has nothing over-the-top, and the incest that people were talking about was yet to be seen. So I didn't think anything of it. I scrolled through my social media and just continued assuming that people were hating on TCOAAL simply for being a new trend.

Then Episode 2 came around.

I'm going to keep this short and sweet: There is incestuous acts and behaviors littered throughout the game, and people online were certainly right.

Below, I have a handful of screenshots that I took showcasing the romantic and sexual tension and acts between the two siblings. There's a bit of it.

(I'm not kidding, all of these are in the game)

Now, I will give TCOAAL fans this, the vast majority (9 of the 10 images) of the incestuous content above is NOT easy to come across. There are very specific routes that you must past through in Episode 2 to come across these screenshots. So it's not as "obvious" as people online made it out to be. In fact, it took me roughly 3 hours of additional gameplay to reach all the different endings for Episode 2, so it certainly is time consuming.

For the sake of time and my sanity, I will NOT be showing how to reach these scenarios. I will only say that you will know if you stumble across the lover/incest route because the NARRATOR THEMSELF warns you NOT to continue down the route.

While I don't think that the incestuous undertones of the story should be the entire definition of the series, I can understand why people dislike it. What is so genius about giving Leyley a romantic and sexual interest in Andrew is that it does one simple thing that the creator wanted to hit home: It makes people uncomfortable. It simply does what every other piece of horror/thriller media tries to do, and it does it well. I don't see it as any more or less uncomfortable as the barbwire scene from Saw I, and the fact that the creator could pull that off just by making Leyley an incestuous, manipulative creep is stunning.

Furthermore, TCOAAL acts as an interesting question for psychology: Does social deprivation, abandonment, isolation, hopelessness, and manipulation play a role in one's moral compass? We see that Andrew's behavior towards Leyley dramatically changes throughout Episode 2 depending on whether you choose to trust and sympathize with Leyley. In addition to a change in behavior, we also see that (most notably the incest route) Andrew accepts his nickname "Andy" again, which he hates due to its connection with a murder that he committed with his sister in Episode 1 (not going into too much detail). It is also noted that Andrew's ex-girlfriend Julia had trouble with Leyley's dominating presence in Andrew's life, which would lead her to stop communicating with him. His degree of whether he cares or not changes based on his sympathy towards Leyley, highlighting how relationships in Andrew's life highly changes based on how much he lets Leyley abuse his existence.

Backstory that showcases Andrew's love interest that abandons him in Episode 1

In short, TCOAAL has many more layers than the internet made it out to be, but the incestuous routes and behaviors between Andrew and Leyley can be seen as concerning. I'll come back to this shortly.

Questionable Taboo (Elfen Lied)

Famous cover art for Elfen Lied showcasing Lucy in the nude.

Now, I watched Elfen Lied in 2022, so I'm just putting it out here that it has been a while since I have watched the anime. Furthermore, I have not read the manga, so my observations are SOLELY off the anime adaptation of Elfen Lied.

Just like TCOAAL, I do NOT think that the story of Elfen Lied is overly terrible. While I do think that TCOAAL has a more sound story line, I do think that Elfen Lied did an okay job at showcasing the selfishness and cruelty of humanity. However, there has always been a part of the show that doesn't sit right with me and many other viewers, and that is Kouta's (the main male protagonist) relationships with Yuka and Lucy.

Throughout the entirety of the show, Kouta partakes in relationships that are considered extremely taboo, especially in the western world. For one, he marries and supposedly procreates with his cousin Yuka at the end of the anime and manga, which is gross and highly disturbing to me, and I am certainly not the only one who feels that way. Almost any search through r/elfenlied would show the outrage and confusion that many people hold towards such a decision. Below are just a couple of what can be found about Kouta and Yuka's relationship (which is also ironically incestuous):

However, one thing that I do not see talked about a ton is Kouta's HIGHLY INAPPROPRIATE relationship with Lucy. While Lucy is not human and is considered to be a Diclonius (some sort of humanoid), some of the scenes and plot points feel as if the author wanted to bank off of questionable consent. Many scenes throughout the anime highlight that Lucy is "sexually curious," which makes perfect sense in theory, but is implemented horribly into the anime. Scenes like Kouta observing Lucy's private parts and random butt shots of Lucy just make the entire show uncomfortable, and I would even argue it normalizes taking advantage of the mentally immature for sexual purposes, which could be considered sexual abuse and/or rape (especially since Elfen Lied is a fan service ecchi).

I understand that mangakas and Japanese culture call for the normalization of nudity, but Elfen Lied fails horribly at making a good case. Elfen Lied could have looked over to other medias such as Ghost in the Shell and Imouto Sae Ireba Ii do a much better job at implementing casual and artistic nudity in their shows while still offering tidbits of fan service to the horny. But, I digress.

Nudity is showcased in both Imouto Sae Ireba Ii and Ghost in the Shell and don't face the same criticism as Elfen Lied

Regardless of how I feel about the previously mentioned, I will give the mangaka of Elfen Lied this: They did a great job making the viewers uncomfortable. I would even argue that Lynn Okamoto did a better job making me feel so unbelievably uncomfortable compared to The Coffin of Andy and Leyley, and it's been two years since I last saw Elfen Lied, so props to Okamoto!

My Personal Take on Taboos in Media

(Now that I scroll through images of The Coffin of Andy and Leyley and Elfen Lied, there really are a ton of similarities...)

In short, I do not think that these taboos make The Coffin of Andy and Leyley and Elfen Lied "bad." Distasteful? Sure. Gross? Most definitely. But, my concern for these medias stems from the fact that modern media has failed to hit home the ideas that these might be inappropriate taboos to normalize in modern internet culture. Simply going through tags such as "gravecest" and "coffincest" on Tumblr showcases the questionably deranged behaviors hardcore TCOAAL fans have towards the story's incest plot.

I was fairly surprised to find out the Elfen Lied has not been overly sexualized over the years. While I am thankful for that, I do believe that Okamoto was wrong for writing up a manga and anime that focused on a humanoid character solely for the purpose of being sexually taken advantage of. She could've done a much better job at handling the fan service without making Elfen Lied look like a promotion for sexual and mental abuse.

I believe all that really matters and what can be taken away from this analysis is that taboo subjects can be used in media as long as the intent and the targeted audience work together. For instance, I believe that The Coffin of Andy and Leyley's questionable use of incest as a story principle is okay since the author does not call for the promotion of incest in the story nor does the entire story revolve around the incestuous behaviors of the two main characters. BUT, rule 34 content of the game that showcases such explicit, incestuous acts between the siblings should be criticized since R34 content is solely made for pornographic purposes with no substance to the story's canon. I am also okay with Okamoto's usage of incest and questionable consent in Elfen Lied since it plays into the storyline and theme of the anime, but the fan service showcased in the show should be criticized since it was easily used as a lazy way to throw borderline pornography into the anime, therefore ruining the point of "artistic" and "normalized" nudity.

In short: I don't think using taboos in media should be illegal unless the media in question is a direct reflection of a real-life scenario (like the 2019 Shadman incident), but public criticism is certainly understandable on a case-by-case basis.

Thanks for reading, I am extremely tired.

grim.

#tcoaal #andrew graves #elfen lied #the coffin of andy and leyley #leyley graves #lucy #fanbase #fandumb #opinion #discussion #media criticism #media #media commentary #media analysis #internet #the internet #controversy #controversial #coffincest #gravecest #siblings #rant #2000s #modern media #media critique #analysis #criticism #morality #ethics #society

[kitkatopinions]

Quick note, I don't know the person who made these tweets or what the "THIS is what they do" is referencing, I'm only using this as a jumping off point to talk about what seems to be a pretty regular repeated opinion among people who hate rwby criticism and rwde posters.

First things first, it needs to be clarified that the "don't call it a rewrite or a fix-it fic, only call it a fan AU" is in my opinion very ridiculous and also fundamentally misunderstands the differences between AUs, rewrites, and fix-it fics.

Fix-it fic: These fics are made in an attempt to fix something the writer did not like in the original project. They write things in a way they think is better than the original, or they write a thing that they didn't do in the original but the fic writer thinks is better than what was in the official content. There are pretty high expectations on fix-it fics for good reason, as the writer obviously is setting out to fix things. So for instance if somebody makes a rwby fix-it fic, I kind of expect them to do things like improve queer rep in rwby or improve world building in rwby and so on.

Rewrite: The writer is fundamentally changing things from the original, but a rewrite is not automatically a fix-it fic because people aren't always trying to fix anything. A fix-it is always a rewrite, but a rewrite isn't always a fix-it. Because in a rewrite, the writer could just be doing things that they think are interesting concepts, for fun, and not out of a desire to improve the official content. There are still expectations on rewrites to follow at least some element of story with format and all that, but there's less pressure to *be better than the original* because that's not automatically a part of writing a rewrite.

AU: A term for 'alternate universe,' this just means that the fic is not going to follow canon, there might be alterations as big as all the characters going to a regular high school in our world in modern times, to an AU where Pyrrha lives instead of Jaune. All fix-its and rewrites are technically 'alternate universes,' but AUs are even more relaxed and for fun than rewrites. So they're even less bound by any sort of expectations. There doesn't have to be any sort of formatting or anything for just an AU. If someone writes a romance based AU where Yang gets partnered up with Pyrrha and the two of them start a relationship, there doesn't need to be any fall of beacon, quest for the Relics, Salem doesn't even need to ever come up...

Not properly tagging a fix-it fic as a fix-it fic because some RWBY fans get angry whenever someone they don't know dares to think they can improve on the story of a bunch of other people they don't know... Doesn't actually do anything helpful. The fact that people have this 'you have to show only the upmost respect to the RWBY writers!' Why? Especially when Miles Luna specifically has a history of misogyny, biphobia, and said the n word as a twenty six year old. Why should I or anyone else be required to 'respect' a man who slutshamed the character of Tifa Lockhart by derogatorily calling her a prostitute because of what she was wearing and then lied about it when he got called out? It's a ridiculous expectation that really reads as massive insecurity on the side of anti-rwde posters.

So before even getting into the pieces of advice in the messages here, I just want to say that most of them do not matter in a rewrite or an AU. "This is my AU where Roman lived after the Fall of Beacon" is not immoral or wrong in any way. "This is my RWBY rewrite where I explore the ships I like rather than only the canon ships" like bro, who the hell does that hurt? So on and so forth. AUs and rewrites are just fans exploring fun ideas they like, it doesn't mean they actually wish the thing they're writing actually happened. For instance, I have plans for a fix-it RWBY fic where I try to mostly stick to the choices made in the original content and just do it in a better way (because I don't feel obligated to consider Miles "video games for your girlfriend" Luna better than me and stay in my demure place where I couldn't possibly improve upon a hot mess of a thrown together show.) But I also wrote a long fun non-published AU fic with my sister where we did this whole redeeming Torchwick, Mercury, Emerald, and Neo thing. AUs and rewrites should not be held to strict rules everyone needs to follow about who they are and aren't allowed to like or redeem. That's just killing creativity in fandom spaces.

But, now to get into these rules in practice of writing an actual fix-it fic (which again should actually be called a fix-it fic,) because a lot of these suggestions are actually good ideas... But A. Not all of them are, and B. I would bet good money that even the ones that are phrased well are used to baselessly attack people who aren't even doing the thing, and C. The actual original content of RWBY itself goes against these rules, but the same people that would pick apart a fanfic actively get angry when people dare criticize rwby.

So let's get into it.

Try to focus on the female protagonists

This is great advice for fix-it fics, and something that often puts me off of fix-it fics I've seen when they don't do this. 'Fix-it fics' that make men the protagonists or spend a lot more time focused on the men in RWBY than the women in rwby, it carries the implication that the person writing the fix-it fics thinks the there should be less focus on the women in rwby. However, this will also result in some anti-rwde posters who will see fix-it fics that do put a lot of focus on the female protagonists and have them be the protagonists and expand on their character and role but then also do things like have a chapter focused on fleshing out the character of Oscar and the anti-rwde poster will flip their lid about it. Also, this

Do not have a straight white male shame them for their actions

I'm assuming this part is focused on characters like Ironwood (arguably not white considering he was based in appearance of his Asian voice actor,) Ozpin (because despite the fact that most of the Oz reincarnations aren't white, Ozpin was,) Qrow (granted, very white, but is also one of the most coded as queer main characters,) and probably Adam. However, this ignores a couple of things, which is that if people are keeping to canon characters, Qrow, Ozpin, and Ironwood have all at times been mentors in canon - and also Ooblek and Port. It is generally a good idea to be careful when you DO write the main RWBY characters to mess up and get scolded especially if they're being scolded by white men, but the idea that you can't make the canonical mentors ever tell the RWBY girls they might be wrong is a strange one. Also it's worth noting that if you try to make RWBY more diverse by making some of these 'straight white males' into queer men or people of color, people are probably just gonna be more angry at you and still forbid you from ever having them say anything against the main girls. Also it's worth noting that RWBY canonically specifically had a scene where the white old man Peter Port who sexualized Yang got to tell off Weiss for being spoiled and entitled. So like... Maybe that should be criticized.

Do not make a cis white male have more of a role than them.

This is basically the exact same thing as the first point, which we'll see again. This list of suggestions has a couple different repeats.

No straightwashing

Another actually good suggestion, for the exact same reason as point one. Yang and Blake should stay queer, it's a very good idea to keep Jaune's sisters in mind (and maybe increase their role,) and May Marigold should of course stay a trans woman (and maybe get her role increased too!) However, it's worth noting that a lot of people consider it 'straightwashing' to have the bisexual Blake or the 'has expressed attraction towards men in like episode three' Yang ever be in relationships with men, and that's not straightwashing. It's biphobia to call a wlm bi ship straightwashing.

And NO fanservice

Now, look, "fanservice" to me has certain connotations of objectifying women, so I one hundred percent get this suggestion and think people should be very careful to make very sure they're not drifting into objectifying in their fix-it fics. However, I know how this fandom can get in regards to even young women so much as writing the now currently nineteen year olds to make out, so just to clarify. Even if it might feel like it sometimes, not everything romantic or sexual regarding the rwby main protagonists is inherently objectifying. Again btw, I want to clarify I'm not defending any specific current fix-it fic, just reflecting.

Don't make evil men "morally gray"

And we've come to the 'this is definitely about Ironwood and Adam and possibly Ozpin" thing. Here's the thing: There are problems with how the RWBY writers handled all three of these characters, and it's not immoral for anyone to make a 'fix-it fic' where they explore any of these characters as not evil especially considering that RWBY is meant to be a hopeful story, so making less characters plain straight evil is a perfectly reasonable thing. It's also worth noting that the actual show of RWBY made Hazel get redeemed as if he wasn't evil and treated him as at least partially in the right, while not having him truly apologize for the heinous actions he's done.

Also keep bumbleby canon

For fix it fics, this is a good recommendation because you can fix any problems you have with bumbleby. But also it's fine to not think bumbleby specifically should've been canon (though it's something I think could've actually been done well,) and going with something else. So long as you do include good other queer representation in your fix-it, not going with bumbleby shouldn't be viewed as an automatically horrible thing. You can make a fix-it fic where you put Yang with Weiss and Blake with Ilia or something. It's very silly to act like Blake and Yang being together should be a necessity. Again, there should one hundred percent be other queer main characters in your fix-it fic if you decide not to go with bumbleby.

Don't have Jaune or Adam date anyone in Team RWBY

...This is also something I think is a generally good idea tbh, and I don't have much else to say about it. In fact, adding a romance element to Adam and Blake's relationship actively hurt the show imo. Having Jaune date a member of Team RWBY can be done, but generally speaking I do feel like people should just avoid that, especially if the character is Weiss. But again I should point out that in the actual show of RWBY, they've made Weiss openly attracted to Jaune in season 9 while they had aged Jaune up a good twenty years, so... Yeah.

Ruby is to be idealistic, and it shouldn't be a character flaw

This is an interesting one, because I mostly believe in this. Ruby's being idealistic is something about her character I actually enjoy, and I also think that in a good show her beliefs would be challenged, and she would come out of it stronger, still with her hopefulness and her ideals but also willing to be smarter and more careful. And in a good show, there would be good characters who might have a different outlook that isn't villainized. So while I don't think that Ruby's idealism should be treated like a flaw, I do think her beliefs should be challenged and not treated as the only good and moral thing (and something tells me the people that complain about fix-it fics might consider that the same thing as 'treating it like a flaw.')

Yang is not a party girl, not an alcoholic, and not a slacker

So, the alcoholic thing is so specific that it makes me think this was specifically directed at one fix-it fic. But as for the other two. On the note of 'Yang is not a slacker' I would argue that in the early episodes, she wasn't actually shown to care about her studies much, but that the early episodes kind of rush through 'team RWBY finding their footing,' so in rewrites giving Yang an early character flaw of being a slacker... What's the issue with that? I'm genuinely confused with that one. Is it not in her early character of being an energized, fun loving girl? I don't get it. Now for the party girl thing... I'm also confused about that, because - and correct me if I'm wrong - didn't Monty Oum make 'party girl' like part of Yang's early characterization? When he was concepting her? And there was a whole thing in volume 2 where Yang and Weiss are planning a party and she's like bringing in loudspeakers and wants a fog machine, should we not think that means that she likes to party? Her whole first appearance in the Yellow trailer was specifically set in a club to get across the vibes they wanted for Yang. Yang goes to a club in volume 7 and is specifically talking about dancing at the club and the loud music at the club. Also my sister found this for me from the back of a V1 DVD.

They literally call Yang a party girl themselves! Do people just think there's something immoral about clubs and party girls and therefore don't want Yang to be one? Because that doesn't sound good, it sounds judgmental.

Jaune is a side character

This is advice that is very much not in line with canon. Jaune is at the very least a deuteragonist in canon and is often very much so treated as a main character, sometimes out stripping some of the main girls in terms of lines or screentime in a volume. I do think that fix-it fics ought to either reduce his role or increase the roles of the main characters, again to give more focus to the title characters in Team RWBY. However, it's just ridiculous to me to complain about Jaune's prominence in RWBY fix-it fics because I'm just like... Look at the main show! Complain about how much importance is put on Jaune in the show!

Adam Taurus is irredeemably evil So is Torchwick

I am certain that this is about one specific fix-it fic that some anti-rwdes make it part of their core rwby beliefs to hate, because most people only actually put Torchwick in the same category as characters like Adam and Ironwood in the 'you're not allowed to like and/or redeem them' category when they're talking about one specific fix-it fic. XD But just because other people do not like these two doesn't mean it's ILLEGAL to like and/or redeem them! In my opinion, there is no such thing as a person who is completely irredeemable! And in a hopeful show, wanting to redeem villains - especially villains who have been horrifically branded in racist acts - is not a bad thing??? This is your reminder that these are not real people who actually did bad things in real life, they're fictional characters, they're tools to be used to tell stories. This is basically just the "don't make evil men 'morally gray'" thing again but like, extra specific. Yes, Adam and Torchwick in the canon of RWBY are horrible evil people. But they're fictional people, you shouldn't villainize people for wanting them to be better and writing them to be better in a fix-it fic of a show that's meant to be fundamentally about hope. There's nothing hopeful about 'some people are irredeemable,' but 'even bad people can change and get better' is a really hopeful sentiment.

Once again, none of these expectations should exist for just 'rewrites and AUs' and are only applicable to actual fix-it fics, and some of them are just so pointless. It's literally just enforced fandom rules, and fandom rules kill creativity imo, there shouldn't be characters that people are forbidden from redeeming or just shouldn't ever make morally gray, or ships that are absolutely required that must be done. Even in fix-it fics! One person shouldn't expect everyone else in the fandom to fit with what they or what the writers want. Yes, there are things that I think should generally be done in fix-it fics like focusing on the main girls and keeping to the general outline of what happens in the canon series, but some people act like fix-it fics should really just unquestioningly copy paste the original work and call it good, and that's ridiculous.

Two more things to note:

Sometimes when people are trying to make a fix-it project, it can snowball into more of a rewrite. If they decide to start inserting characters just because they like it, or branch off into random tangents just because they find it interesting, or so on. So even in fix-it fics I think there should be allowances made and people need to understand that not every single thing in even a fix-it fic is something that the writers sincerely think should've happened in the actual canon of RWBY. I can't tell you the amount of times my sister and I have sat down to make a fanfic (we never publish btw) that was supposed to be 'a fix it for volume six onwards' or 'a fix it of volume seven' or something and wound up completely spiraling into a separate thing, and then we wind up being like 'okay but we really should write an actual fix-it sometime.' If you're publishing while you write, or posting your fix-it online as you go, you can't just be like 'guess this sorta became more of a rewrite than a fix it lol' if your fic is already titled as a fix-it. So I'm just saying, it's worth it to expand a little understanding that sometimes people making fan projects for their own enjoyment aren't always going to be hypervigilant to not let a little bit of personal bias and personal enjoyment leak into their choices.

Next thing to note: We should be holding RWBY to a much higher standard than any fan project. RWBY is a product that people are trying to sell us that's making an actual company money, it's the actual product itself, with a team of writers and their job is quite literally to make the story of RWBY good. Fics and fan projects are things people do as a hobby, that they're not getting paid for and therefore aren't selling to anyone. It's wild to me that some people will let RWBY the actual show get away with anything and actively try to stop people from criticizing it and then go around reading fanfictions nobody made them read so they can insult the people that make them over every little perceived injustice. If you're going to get angry at a fanfiction writer for including a little too much Uncle Qrow in their fix-it fic, please ask yourself why Jaune is such a prominent character in RWBY the actual show and why it doesn't bother you then. If you're going to get angry that a fix-it fic writer has Ozpin criticize the main girl protagonists, please go back and rewatch Jaune as a forty-something year old scream in Ruby's face that she's responsible for all bad things while she's crying, and get just as angry at the show writers as you would get at a fan if they did the same thing in their fic.

Anyway, this post was super duper long, but.... I'm done with it now.

#rwde #On fix-its and rewrites and AUs #like guys seriously please leave fanfic writers alone #they're just trying to have some fun most of the time #I paused my baffy watching to write this post #for like several hours