#all conflicts must have a clear ‘victim’ and ‘abuser’ and there can be no nuance to this whatsoever | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

fallout-lou-begas · 4 years

Text

Regarding @yesjejunus:

(mentions of rape, abuse, and trauma herein)

I have never made an effort to hide it on my blog before, but I want to make it clear that yesjejunus is my friend and I care about them. If you ask me, it should be extremely transparent to all onlookers that the attack against them this week is motivated by more of a personal grudge and obsessive vendetta than any actual concern for the "well-being" of anyone "endangered" by them, evidenced further by the poaching of personal information gleaned from defunct social media profiles for no actionable reason other than intimidation, the willfully outlandish misinterpretations of inside jokes between friends, and the mutilation of the definition of "grooming" and the excessive outright fabrications required to distort their friendship with some adults who happen to be younger than themself into allegations of predation on minors. Yejejunus has not ever actually done anything remotely justifying this punitive severity to any other human being, and if you have your own grievances about their art, then no one is holding, and no one has ever held, a gun to your head to force you to like them, or like their art or seek it out. The sheer volume of harassment that they have received for scarcely more than fanfiction and fanart that people can avoid on their own terms through proper tag filtering or blocking is frankly unjustifiable.

If you are upset by a work of art that you encounter in fandom or otherwise then it is not an interpersonal conflict between you and the artist. The artist has not harmed you, the artist doesn't even know you. Artists may have a responsibility to utilize tags and warnings appropriately on broad or big-tent platforms, and yesjejunus fulfilled this responsibility thoroughly, but ultimately an individual is responsible for their own artistic consumption and for avoiding the art that they want to avoid themself. If there is something that you are entirely incapable of seeing even a hint of without lapsing into some kind of retraumatization, and an artist tags art containing this thing appropriately, then the onus is on you to have it filtered out and the failure is on you if you have not. Assuming that every individual artist must be held "accountable" for whether their art could possibly upset someone or not, and assuming that any given individual is helplessly incapable of avoiding art that makes them upset, is a destructive perspective that flattens the ability of artists to create that which means a lot to them personally, lest their own experiences discomfort some hypothetical audience, and regardless of whether it may provide catharsis or revelation for another.

Additionally, to assume that any and all depiction of abuse of any kind is inherently an endorsement, or a "glamorization" or "fetishization," is to forget that discomfort can often be the point of a work of art, as it is in the case of horror. To be abused, or even to simply exist in an unhealthy relationship, is also to often endure complex, contradictory feelings in which hate and love and fear and dependence and violence and affection and misery and happiness exist hand-in-hand and even simultaneously. To treat portrayals of these kinds of relationships that embrace this uncomfortable nuance as "glorifying" them simply because it's not monochrome in a black-and-white morality play is both naive and insensitive. I also find the coercion of artists into disclosing their various traumas in order to "justify" their creation of their art, as if their trauma must be approved as sufficient by a committee, reprehensible; however I also do not believe that someone must inherently possess some form of trauma to depict it in art compassionately and meaningfully.

I also think that the mammoth amount of cognitive dissonance required to make this the hill that one dies on when the subject at hand is fanfiction and fanart of an 18+, rated-M video game series in which horrible and traumatic scenarios such as rape, slavery, domestic abuse, mass death, and graphic violence are depicted in abundance, and in certain ways with even less sensitivity or tact than the fanwork, shouldn't be lost on anyone, especially since you are far less able to excise these aspects from the source material than you are able to curate your participation in a fandom.

I want to reiterate that your opinions on yesjejunus, or me, or any user on tumblr or any artist on the planet are yours and yours alone to have. Who you follow, who you unfollow, who you block, and who you filter is purely your prerogative and you are encouraged to use any and all choices, tools, and mechanics at your disposal to avoid anyone that you wish, especially if it's for your own well-being. I wish that more people would utilize these options instead of cultivating a climate of fear and paranoia regarding who one “associates” with, and I do despise the term “associates” because it both reads far too much into a random reblog or reply, and reads far too little into a genuine friendship of mutual trust and care. Still, I am severely disappointed that I have to explain that the line is drawn at hounding an artist obsessively for years with flagrant disregard for their own trauma, blaming that artist for one's own complete failure to stop seeking out that which upsets them personally, and talking over or distorting the experiences and trauma of other people to suit one's own vindictive narrative, and this line has been crossed far, far beyond where it lays.

If you're offended or upset by this post then I beseech you to at the very least follow my advice in the previous paragraph and see yourself out, and may we only ever interact again at your deliberate discretion. If you refuse to do that and would rather call for my public quartering while using literally none of the myriad options at your disposal to remove me from your online experience at no charge, then go fuck yourself, and you may dislike my opinions but you can't un-laugh at my excellent shitposts.

Ed.: I would like to reblog this one more time add an addendum in order to bring attention to an update from yesjejunus themself about their side of the situation this week. They explain why they create the art that they do, as a method of coping with and processing their own trauma. It’s okay if you could not possibly imagine yourself coping with your own trauma, should you have it, in the same way. To label the creation of such art for such purposes as something inherently impermissible or ineffective is not only gravely insensitive but factually indefensible, and I must reiterate my own point that if how they do control their own trauma upsets or risks (re)traumatizing you, then why not ensure that you never see it by using the free and comprehensive blocking and filtering options available to you on this website instead of death marching someone who’s already deeply victimized? The word again is control. To control these traumas through fiction and art is an incredibly empowering, restorative thing, and to label this practice as nothing but harmful to others is to ignore the complex and multifacted ways in which trauma takes shape, or can be shaped.

#yesjejunus #discourse

282 notes · View notes

blackasteriia · 4 years

Text

A List of Reasons Why I Hate the ‘Sea Salt Family’

AKA It’s Sunday Tuesday and I’m back at it again at Krispie-Kremes

(Abuse tw; violence tw; salt tw; suicide tw)

I have mentioned, in passing, my problems with the prevalence of the Sea Salt Family in fandom and my problems with it. I’ve never written a comprehensive post on it before. It’s Sunday though, I have the salt, so let’s do it.

The Sea Salt Family is roughly presented, but not explicitly laid-out, in canon. At the end of KH3, Xion, Roxas, Lea, and Isa are shown sharing ice cream on the clock tower together. Since the introduction of Xion and Roxas’ character, ‘sharing ice cream’ has been a declarative statement of friendship and camaraderie. It was the origin of their friendship. Thus, the inclusion of Isa is a signal of his admittance into the reformed friend group. The intention of this scene was to show the reconciliation and unification of these characters. To cement this, it seems that Nomura has bundled Roxas, Xion, Lea, Isa, and the Twilight Trio, into a shared plot. They are mentioned in Re:Mind, by Riku, as searching for Sora through Roxas and Xion’s memories.

Common fandom interpretation takes this one step farther. The assumption is that Lea and Isa have adopted Xion and Roxas. This puts Lea and Isa in a parental role over the kids. Often times, this is done in a shipping context for Lea and Isa. Sometimes Lea and Isa have a good relationship, with two lovingly adopted children. Other times Xion and Roxas become contention points for the main ship-- Isa’s punishment for being a jerk is taking care of the kids.

Fandom does take into account that the canon scene itself in KH3 is flawed. Lets overview Lea and Isa’s relationship, with both of the kids.

Roxas spent the majority of 358/2 Days oblivious to the machinations going on around him. However, he identified a rift between Axel and Xion that developed in the midpoint of the year. He recognized that Axel had done something to estrange her and by the end of the game, blamed him for it. He was also angry at him for attacking Xion the first time. When Xion ran away for the second time, Roxas confronted Axel and forced the truth. Axel had been lying about Xion --sometimes intentionally to assuage Roxas’ concerns-- and then attempted to justify his actions to Roxas.The revelations of Axel’s lies --and outright manipulation, diverting Roxas from finding the truth-- causes Roxas to leave the Organization. Axel later attacks Roxas (twice) when Xemnas orders him to do so. At this point, Axel makes no attempt to find an alternate solution. Axel is enraged at Roxas for leaving and even forgetting him (which is a weird thing for an adult man to feel about a child, I might add). He is mocking of Roxas’ confusion in the data Twilight Town. Axel then attacks Roxas with the implicit intention to kill Roxas. Thus, we see that Axel’s relationship to Roxas is manipulative and built on lies, instead of trust. Axel also shows little regard for Roxas’ autonomy (”You’re coming with me, conscious or not.”). Roxas knows that Axel will lie to him. Roxas knows that Axel will assault him. If Roxas enters the post-KH3 relationship with no reservations then he is an oblivious moron.

When it comes to Xion I do not give Axel the benefit of the doubt. Axel is introduced to Xion, by Roxas. At the beginning of their friendship he does not see her face. He becomes aware that she is a replica but decides to give her a fair shake, due to his experience with Repliku. Eventually, he does see her face. They seem to get along for the first part of the game. However, when Xion goes to Castle Oblivion to learn the truth about herself-- Axel moves to block her. He gaslights her (’there’s nothing to see here’) and grabs her to stop her (a violation of her physical autonomy btw). She goes on into the castle and Axel does not mention the incident to Roxas (a lack of transparency and honesty in relationships). Xion is missing for almost a month. She returns, speaks with Roxas (who also grabs her and violates her physical autonomy smh), and is then attacked by Axel. Axel kidnaps Xion and returns her to the Organization against her will. Xion did not want to return to the Organization. Roxas requests that she return with him and she moves away from him. Before Axel attacked her she was going to leave. (Later, Nomura attempts to feebly justify Axel’s behavior by saying Xion is glad he did this. We’ll call that Xion attempting to assuage Roxas’ worries). Xion later goes to Axel for advice about what to do. Axel implies that she’s ‘stealing more than her share’ from Roxas. We are, as a reminder, talking about Xion killing herself here. Later, Axel lets her leave, and then still follows Xemnas’ order to attack her and kidnap her again. I do not believe there is any love loss between Axel and Xion. He betrayed her, gaslit her, attacked and assaulted her, kidnapped her (twice), and showed a cruel disregard for her autonomy. There is no reason for her to trust, or even like him. Their ‘friendship’ ended around day 255 in Castle Oblivion, and any attempt for Nomura to convince you otherwise is deliberate attempt to write over the real trauma that Axel caused her.

Saïx and Roxas have few interactions. However, I read Roxas and Xion as child soldiers. They are slaves, they are working for no payment. Saïx is the man in charge of them. He hands out the missions. We are shown that Saïx primary concern is their efficiency in collecting hearts. Roxas and Saïx interactions include Saïx telling him what his mission is, and how to prepare. Saïx, however, outright pits Roxas and Xion against each other. Even at one point, attempting to have them murder each other. (If you read the manga, and want to consider it for analysis, Saïx even attacks Roxas). Their relationship is cold, hostile, and interlaced with the knowledge of Saïx obvious emotional abuse of Xion. No reason for Roxas to trust, or even like, Saïx.

Take everything above about Saïx and double it for Xion. The profesional and cold demeanor of Saïx is stripped away to reveal an openly hostile, cruel personality. Saïx insults and degrades Xion (”You were a mistake we never should have made”.) Xion refers to him with fear and wariness, often fearing his retribution for failures. He misgenders her and disregards her personhood. He does this out of a self-stated jealousy. He sees Axel growing close to the kids and then lashes out at the easy targets. Saïx outright abuses Xion, and the threat of harm is as effective as the actual action of doing harm. Saïx wanted Xion dead, and as best as I can tell, she knew it. I have no reason to believe that his opinion of her would change from 358 to KH3. It does not make sense that Saïx after KH2 would attempt to ‘save’ Xion. He doesn’t remember her and he wouldn’t remember her all the way until the Keyblade Graveyard. Vexen’s notes would not include Xion’s personality or any of her relationships, she was, at best, two weeks old when he left for Castle Oblivion. Saïx is not shown interacting with Xion in any manner in KH3. In fact, the ‘Xion’ introduced in the Keyblade Graveyard is not Xion. Xion is in Sora’s heart. So, not only is their relationship confusing in KH3, it’s also not meaningful. Vexen mentioned Saïx wished to ‘atone’ but we never hear Saïx true intentions from the horse’s mouth. Or, if he just did it to make nice with Lea. He still refers to the kids as ‘Lea’s friends.’There is no established development between Xion and Saïx proper. Xion would have no reason to believe that Isa no longer wants to kill her, and Isa would have no reason to no longer want to kill Xion.

Despite all of this, Nomura wants us to believe that all of these characters are reconciled. The text offers little to believe that this is the case. There is not a single scene where any of Isa and Lea’s past behavior is addressed, or an apology made. Nomura’s reading of his own text fails to recognize the abuse and trauma that he wrote Xion and Roxas’ experiencing. He has a fundamental lack of understanding of the consequences and psychology of his own characters. Furthermore, he believes that the friendship they built in the Organization stands on its own. Even though Axel: gaslit, assaulted, kidnapped, and manipulated both. For example, Nomura reads his threat to Xion (”No matter what, I’ll always bring you back.” = ”I will always return your to your abusers, regardless of your wishes, even if I have to assault you to do so.”) as a promise and declaration of friendship. Why else would Xion tell Roxas that Axel kidnapping her is a good thing? Nomura believes that the Organization -- even though we’re talking about the group of people who abused, enslaved, and murdered them-- is good for Xion and Roxas. Why else would the ‘symbol of their friendship’ be the Recusant Symbol in Re: Mind? Thus, their friendship with Axel is good for them. Why else is it romanticized in KH3? Therefore, there is no reason to confront or discuss previous acts of abuse, manipulation, gaslighting, or assault.

The story of 358/2 Days is not a story of two children shaking free of the shackles of their abusers and oppressors as they grow into their own, independent, unique personalities. It is a story of two children who are abused and manipulated by the adults in their lives. Who are then murdered and discarded as soon as they hold no use for the plot. Xion’s entire character is written with the intention to motivate Roxas to leave the Organization. That is why 358/2 Days was created as a game. That is why her character was introduced. The systematic stripping of her autonomy and personhood is present in the text itself, and the meta-text. She is fridged, and then that death is milked for man pain of Roxas and Axel. Nomura’s own sexism created and destroyed her character. So, much to the point that when fan consensus demanded she be brought back: he gave her no lines and no personality. He couldn’t even muster the spine to give her an original moveset for her Re:Mind data fight-- she’s just a copy of Roxas. That’s all she is to him and that is all she will ever be to him.

And the fandom seems, for the most part, to be in concurrence with Nomura. We have asked Xion and Roxas to be in a healthy relationship with the two adults who have overtly abused them. The problem is not the writing of the Sea Salt Family. That trope, on its own, is fine. The true problem is the fandom’s failure to address the abuse in the Kingdom Hearts story.

Saïx actions, as poignant as they may or may not be in the rescue of Xion and Roxas, do not absolve him. Saïx used his position of authority and power over them to cause them tangible harm. Emotional abuse hurts as much as physical abuse and the effects are long lasting. Especially, when we know that Xion and Roxas were completely subject to Saïx. As far as Xion was aware, if she disobeyed or failed him-- her life was forfeit. What Saïx did in KH3 was take the first step of reconciliation. He fixed his most obvious mistake which included being complicit in the murder of children. Good for him. Now, he has to make tangible changes in his behavior. He must make apologies that shows he understands what and how he was wrong. This apology should be voluntary and not forced by Lea, or whittled out of him by the kids. He must take responsibility for his actions and preform further restitution. He can’t shove blame on the kids, he can’t say ‘Xemnas made me do it.’ No, Saïx caused them harm, and he has to be responsible. Anything less is in an incomplete, false apology that does not match the severity of his actions. And even if he executes a perfect apology, guess what?

Xion and Roxas do not have to feel grateful to Saïx. They do not have to forgive him. They do not owe him anything. He was their abuser. If they do not feel ready to forgive, they don’t have to. Furthermore, forgiveness and healing is a process. One and done will not realistically fix the level of trauma that these children have experienced. I have seen the expressed attitude that of course Xion and Roxas would forgive Isa. They’re good kids! To which I ask, would bad kids not forgive their abuser? Xion and Roxas would still be good kids, even if they don’t forgive the man who abused them. That’s not how this works. They are the victims here, they have been done harm, and they deserve the space to heal. If they do not want Isa in that space, then that is their right. Maybe, Roxas and Xion decide to forgive Isa, maybe it takes time, maybe they never do. It depends on how they work through their pain and trauma. Of course, repeat all this with Lea. Because as much as the fandom likes to give him a free pass for his ‘good intentions.’ Those ‘good intentions’ still hurt Roxas and Xion. You could say his actions are justified given his circumstances. That does not change their impact. Xion and Roxas know --based on Axel’s own behavior-- that he will throw them under the bus if it’s convenient. They have not met Lea. They do not know him. They have no reason to trust him. It is Lea who must do the work to fix that. Not Xion, not Roxas, it is Lea who has to prove himself trustworthy again.

It’s alright to draw Xion, Roxas, Isa, and Lea having ice cream together, or living a happy life. However, it is also necessary to address the problems. How does Xion feel living with Isa, who misgendered and emotionally abused her? Does Roxas feel at all threatened by Lea, knowing that he once attacked him? How did Lea and Isa work to address their mistakes, and reconcile with the kids? How are they addressing the real trauma that Xion and Roxas have experienced, especially the stuff at their own hands? Most depictions of ‘The Sea Salt Family’ skip past all the hard work and jump to the fun part. We’re shown Lea ‘forgiving’ Isa, when it is not Lea’s place to do so. We’re shown Lea bringing Isa, Roxas, and Xion, into his home, with little regard for how this may affect the kids. I feel as though in most depictions, Xion and Roxas are accessories to Isa and Lea’s romantic relationship. Another point of conflict or a source of fluff. This ignores the autonomy of Xion and Roxas, it ignores their struggles and character. Worse yet, it echoes Nomura’s own erasure of their trauma. Don’t write Lea and Isa adopting Xion and Roxas if you’re not prepared to talk about everything that comes with it.

Also consider that Xion and Roxas are extremely vulnerable. They have between them, total, two whole years of experience. They have never gone to school. They have never had friends outside of the Organization. (The Data Twilight Trio are not their actual ‘friends’ and Nomura makes no sense, I’ll die on that hill). I cannot state how easy it would be for Lea or Isa to continue a pattern of abuse with them. You say, Lea and Isa would never do that! To which I say, they have done that, and we have little canon proof that they wouldn’t do that.

Are you catching my problem here?

Do you see why having Roxas and Xion get a happily ever after with their two abusers is not a good idea? Because Nomura did not write a true redemption arc for either Isa or Lea, we do not see any fundamental changes in their character. Axel has been showing willing to commit cold blooded murder. Can you show me how he is now prepared to take care of two extremely vulnerable, traumatized, and abused children? Maybe, in your own writing you don’t think Lea is prepared to take care fo the kids. Okay, that’s fine, there’s some nuance-- but do you still write him taking care of them? Why do you think that is the best situation for Xion and Roxas? Because they have nowhere else to go. How is that acceptable? Knowing that the two children who have been abused have so few resources available to them that they have no choice but to stay with their abusers? Maybe, as a fandom, we need to stop caring so much about Isa and Lea’s feelings, and start caring about their victims.

I don’t want my reader to leave this essay and think, ‘I can’t write Sea Salt Family.’

You can write Sea Salt Family, but you have to order some nuance.

Think about the best Redemption Arc in living memory: Zuko. Zuko was shown kidnapping and attacking Katara in Season 1. Yet, I am perfectly fine with Zutara as a ship, why?

1. Katara is shown capable of standing-up to Zuko, defending herself, and challenging him. In Siege of the North Part 1, she is shown equal to, if not superior to, him in skill and power. Katara can kick Zuko’s ass and he knows it. By the end of Season 1, there is no longer a power imbalance between them. Abuse requires a power imbalance and Katara and Zuko are shown standing on equal footing.

2. Zuko and Katara then have a change in their relationship. Zuko has his change of heart in Ba Sing Se. In the crystal catacombs he shows empathy to Katara that she responds to. He even takes this point to issue his first apology. However, he betrays this budding trust by following Azula in attacking Aang.

3. Zuko reconciles with Katara and builds a friendship with her. This includes Zuko apologizing for his past actions. But also doing what he can to fix his mistakes. He works to understand and listen to her anger and pain. He helps her find the man who killed her mother, on her request. He allows her to take the space and time she needed to address her trauma. Not just what he did to her, but what the fire nation did to her. He shows a clear change of behavior and remorse for his past actions. Katara and Zuko, by the end of the series are friends who trust each other. I can believe it because of the intentional work and time the show put into the relationship.

Now look at the above. You tell me where Isa and Lea did all that in canon? Think about point 1, Katara and Zuko are pretty much the same age, as two years of difference between adolescents is not a significant age gap. Xion and Roxas, are literal toddlers, and Lea and Isa are in their late-twenties. There is a natural power imbalance between these characters caused by age and experience. Which means it’s even more on Lea and Isa to take responsibility. Furthermore, what about point 1 or 2? Xion barely has any lines in KH 3. We do not hear her story, we do not hear her experience, and we do not hear her accepting the apology Lea did not make. Canon is flawed in its execution of the Sea Salt Family. Fandom has a real chance to step-in where Nomura failed and succeeded. Yet, over a year since KH3′s release, I have seen few attempts to do so.

Abuse in relationships can be addressed. Abusers can take responsibility, apologize, and make amends for their actions. I do believe that Xion and Roxas can forgive Lea and Isa, if and only if, Lea and Isa earn that forgiveness. I believe that in theory the Sea Salt Family could be a wonderful example of found family, forgiveness, love, and healing in media. However, in practice, most examples of it fall short. The challenge there-in, is to write and portray the nuance, complexity, and triumph of a real relationship. Not a superfluous, weak, or shallow one, that looks pretty and is heartwarming, but instead a deep story, that is deserving of the characters it attempts to represents.

#✰*✦ This is the idiot speaking ⎧OOC⎫#✰*✦More than a mannequin on the strings⎧Headcanon⎫#salt tw #abuse tw #violence tw #xion #lea #isa #roxas #yeah i'll tag character names i'm not a coward

24 notes · View notes

serenagaywaterford · 5 years

Note

It’s fucking crazy how in a show meant to wake the general populace up, people really do seem to hate majority of the female characters. Note it’s only the complex ones, because god forbid Margret Atwood wrote them as shades of grey and not as definitively “evil” or “good”.

I’ve been in quite a few shitty fandoms in my day but I’m not certain I’ve been in one quite as overwhelmingly tone deaf as The Handmaid’s Tale fandom. I have never seen so much hypocrisy and virtue signalling and fake wokeness in a singular fandom with source material (in terms of the original novel and S1/2 at least) that directly opposes those things. Like I was in GoT fandom for a while and holy shit the misogyny there. So, I know what it looks like. But the thing about that hellplace was that there was still a fairly recognisable and approachable faction that loudly and actively spoke out about the sheer number of issues with GoT (racism, misogyny, etc.) I feel like those people gave up on the show about mid-run, and GoT was left with a bunch of idiots and “libfems” by the end.

The thing about THT is that it appears to be 95% idiots and fake-woke “feminists” I put it in quotes cos they are NOT feminists. They just like to identify as that cos it’s trendy. They have no idea what feminism is if they centre Nick in the THT narrative, or refuse to engage with any female character other than June or Emily in any rational way and instead wish rape, violence, torture, death, and/or intense suffering on any female character (or apparently actor who plays said character!) they personally dislike because they don’t have the braincells to understand what Atwood specifically was trying to do.)

When THT becomes all about a MALE and his precious fweelings, and his uwu luv stowwy wiv Jwune and all they focus on is how “cool” June is for bullying other Handmaids into suicide, and how “awesome” she is for being 1000% selfish and self-absorbed and not caring at all about all the other women (esp. poor women of colour) she tramples on to get what she wants, that is NOT GOOD. This is a character who purposely and actively manipulated a domestic abuse victim to go back to her abusive, violent, cheater, rapist husband for June’s own ends. (And surprise, surprise that blew up in her face and people really take June’s side 100% on that cos “Serena deserves Fred” aka “Serena deserves to be beaten, raped, and abused by her husband because she’s a bad woman who has done bad things herself”. When you are saying a woman, no matter who they are, deserves to be beaten and raped and imprisoned in that situation, you are not a feminist because that isn’t justice for Serena’s crimes. That is torture.) Nothing June did in S3 was heroic. She is almost no better than the woman she hates at this point. I see very little difference between June and Serena anymore, and yet… YET fans think the sun shines out of June’s ass and Serena should be raped to death (aka “Wouldn’t it be soooo cool if Serena became a Handmaid?! Omg so cool! She deserves it! Hurr durr I am FEMINIST!!!!”).

O.o

There is zero nuance in THT fandom. It’s fine to dislike female characters. It’s fine to be critical of them. It’s fine to like male characters (I guess…). But centring men in a woman’s story and then parroting Gilead’s ideals unironically while calling yourself woke? It’s terrifying.

June is so gross in S3, and when she isn’t being awful, she’s written as some child-crazed, hysterical woman. The writers’ full sexism and internalized (or externalized lol) misogyny on clear display. And the fans just LAP IT UP with no critical thought. No complaint. Like, “Yes, this is what a woman should be!” nevermind the entire purpose of the commentary in the novel (and S1) was that women are MORE than just hysterical, overly emotional baby-machines or housekeepers. Women are not mere resources to be harvested like cattle. Women have more personality than just “ME WANT BABBY!!!” Women are resourceful and complex and not all good, not all bad. Women are conflicted and conflicting. Meanwhile, now the show presents women almost identically to how Serena Joy wrote about them, and how Gilead has identified them, and the fans are like “Yeah! This is fine! I don’t see any problems with this at all!”

And if you dare say, “Um, guys, that’s a pretty bad take. Do you understand what you’re actually saying?” you get called a “rape apologist!!! HURRRR!!!! WHAT ABUT 2x10!!!!!” And it literally doesn’t matter what you challenge these fans about, whether it’s Nick, the themes of THT, Serena, June, etc. They see you are a fan of Serena and suddenly the discourse deteriorates completely to “Nazi!!!! you’re a rapist nazi sympathizer!!!!!!!!!”

So, there’s no point in talking to any of them. Yeah, cos I’m the one saying women I don’t like deserve to be raped and beaten until they die as slaves in an oppressive fascist regime. (That’s actually you guys, jsyk.) My favourite was being compared to an MRA. Like, do you people even read what you write?

I’m not the one talking non-stop about how great Mr. Soggy Pancake Man is and how we must protect this precious bean in a story about massive female oppression uwu. “BUT WHAT ABOUT NICK?!?! MOST IMPORTANT CHARACTER!!!” I hate men, lol. I can’t count the number of times I’ve literally said, “I don’t give a shit about ANY of the men in THT. I only care about women and you people are misogynistic pigs for the way you talk about women.” yet I’m a Men’s Rights Activist?

What I hear when I go into the tags:

“All women are awful harpies and stupid or boring except this specific one cos we want her to bone the Cute Boy we’re obsessed with and she’s just basically a self-insert for our own lonely fantasies and we need to only hear about the Cute Boy, not these annoying women. If a woman character interferes or challenges my heterosexual fantasy OTP in any way, that woman must suffer and die, and I’ll laugh and cheer as that happens, especially if she’s beaten by her husband or loses her mind/commits suicide! They deserve it! Also, who really cares about all those other women’s stories elsewhere in the world. BORING! My white saviour self-insert main female character can do no wrong because I am perfect! I’ll even go out of my way and actively search out people who aren’t doing anything to me, aren’t talking to me at all and just keeping to themselves, and send online threats, hate, and insults to anybody who doesn’t agree with me about how great Mr. Stale Bread is and they’re Nazis for not agreeing with me.”

And I’M the MRA? I’m the crazy one?

No self-awareness at all. No nuance. No critical thinking skills. And a HELL of a lot of projection that they don’t even seem to know they’re making. There are grown ass women (like 40 YEAR OLDS!) who worship Nick Bland’s ugly dick, online bullying literal minors who don’t subscribe to the Serena-Hate groupthink. It’s a cesspool. THT fandom fucking SUCKS. I’m gonna guess it’s these same morons who wished that Yvonne would lose her baby cos you hate SERENA. Like, if you don’t think this is disgusting, I don’t know how else to get it through to you that something is VERY WRONG with the vast majority of online THT fandom.

99% of this fandom doesn’t seem to give a fuck what Atwood was trying to say in her novel, or what the show intentionally set out to do challenge and prove. Anyway, anon. I feel ya. I hate this fandom which is why I never check the tags anymore, never go on Twitter, unfollowed the Insta, don’t go on FB, and stick with my very wonderful small group of non-crazies who also appreciate the complex, difficult character of Serena here – and block everyone else I can because I just don’t have time for that kind of constant drama and aggravation from ignorant people.

Wow. Okay. Sorry. Rant over.

#the handmaid's tale #tunglr dot hell #Anonymous

15 notes · View notes

folkpages · 5 years

Text

Review: Lady Midnight

Clare, C (2016). Lady Midnight. Margaret McElderry Books.

4/5 stars

‘We are more than the single actions we undertake, whether they be good or evil.’

Synopsis: The Shadowhunters of Los Angeles star in the first novel in Cassandra Clare's newest series, The Dark Artifices, a sequel to the internationally bestselling Mortal Instruments series.

It's been five years since the events of City of Heavenly Fire that brought the Shadowhunters to the brink of oblivion. Emma Carstairs is no longer a child in mourning, but a young woman bent on discovering what killed her parents and avenging her losses. Together with her parabatai Julian Blackthorn, Emma must learn to trust her head and her heart as she investigates a demonic plot that stretches across Los Angeles, from the Sunset Strip to the enchanted sea that pounds the beaches of Santa Monica. If only her heart didn't lead her in treacherous directions… Making things even more complicated, Julian's brother Mark-who was captured by the faeries five years ago-has been returned as a bargaining chip. The faeries are desperate to find out who is murdering their kind-and they need the Shadowhunters' help to do it. But time works differently in faerie, so Mark has barely aged and doesn't recognize his family. Can he ever truly return to them? Will the faeries really allow it? Glitz, glamours, and Shadowhunters abound in this heartrending opening to Cassandra Clare's Dark Artifices series. (x)

Lady Midnight was honestly one of my favourite books in quite a while. Clare has written beautiful imagery, relatable characters, fascinating plots and intriguing moral queries. The humour was on point (I still catch myself giggling occasionally at pizza) and while I had my doubts at her ability to pull off a murder mystery, she has done a wonderful job and I had no idea who the murderer was until it was revealed.

(SPOILERS AHEAD)

Plot: Emma Carstairs’ parents were ritualistically murdered 5 years ago, and new murder victims have been found having been murdered the same way. As it so happens some of the victims have been faeries, which Emma shouldn’t care about due to the Cold Peace, a treaty of non-interaction between the faeries and shadowhunters after the event of the Dark War. However, Emma’s parabatai’s brother was stolen by faeries 5 years ago and the faerie’s promise to return him for two weeks if they solve the murders and allow Mark (said brother) to choose if he’d like to remain with the humans or faeries following that. Adding to all this some side plots including the classic forbidden romance between Emma and her parabatai Julian, Mark and Emma’s new friend Cristina plus his longstanding thing with Faerie Prince Kieran plus a mysterious tutor, a mysterious old friend/love interest of Cristina’s and a mentally ill guardian, this book is packed full of action!

Pro: The murder mystery was absolutely fantastic. The murders tied in wonderfully with the beautiful worldbuilding Clare includes in this novel, and I honestly did not see many of the plot twists coming. I could not for the life of me work out who the murderer was (I thought it was Johnny Rook for a while) and who it was and what their motivation was blew me away!

Con: I did not like the main male-lead Julian and I did not like the main romance between him and Emma. I personally found Julian to be rather creepy in his ‘love’ for Emma which came off rather stalker-like to me. I also didn’t like the resentment he seemed to hold for being the care-giver of his family, but I’m pretty sure that’s just because it was super relatable to me personally. He was well-written, and his motivations were solid, I just didn’t like his treatment of Emma and thus their relationship which is why my rating of this book is 4 stars rather than 5.

Pro: Representation. Clare gives us LGBTQ+ rep with wonderful bisexual Mark Blackthorn and boyfriend Kieran as well as (I’m assuming as its never explicitly labelled) autistic Ty Blackthorn who is utterly darling and daring; a tech geek and brilliant knife combatant. I can’t comment too much on Ty as I’m not autistic but he was wonderfully written with his autism being prevalent in all his scenes but never the focus of it (unless we are hearing from Julian’s POV).

Emma Carstairs: I personally really enjoyed Emma’s character. For all she was the strong female character with a sword, she wasn’t just a ‘strong female character with a sword’ trope. She was a very emotional character and wasn’t afraid to let people know how she was feeling; her motivations were clear and understandable and her relationships with the other characters were incredibly nuanced and strong. However, towards the end of the book I feel she became a little weaker; she didn’t tell Julian the truth about the parabatai curse and was very insensitive (manipulative? I’m not sure which word is quite correct but assume it’s a bad one) to Mark with her request at the end even if he did agree to it. Overall, I really liked her but kind of wanted to shake her at the end.

Julian Blackthorn: I’ve already talked about Julian in the Con, but to rehash: I don’t like him but he was well-written.

Mark Blackthorn: First off, I just want to say that I am so glad for more bisexual representation thank you Cassandra Clare! Mark Blackthorn has honestly made my top characters of all-time list and here’s why: Mark is a half-faerie half-shadowhunter boy who was stolen by faeries to join the Wild Hunt during the events of The Mortal Instruments wherein he was used and abused and fell in love with exiled faerie Prince Kieran. In Lady Midnight he is bartered as a prize to get the Blackthorn’s and Emma to investigate murders and he goes through so much in the space of the two-week period this novel is set. He acts as a moral support for Cristina who he grows to care about deeply, he works with and against Julian and Emma as he needs to and bonds with his younger siblings all while struggling with his identity as a faerie and a shadowhunter and navigating his relationship with Kieran. Mark is an absolute gem; as capricious as a faerie but still truly kind and honourable and vulnerable and I just love him so much!

Cristina Mendoza Rosales: Cristina is a strong character and a wonderful person! Cristina is new to the LA Institute and Emma’s new best friend and honestly such a joy. Beautiful bilingual badass, Cristina is at once moral support to both Emma and Mark, helping Emma through her anger and grief at her parent’s death on top of her feelings for Julian, she helps Mark adjust to shadowhunter life while also being set up as a potential love interest. She also is crucial to the murder plot and has so much to add beyond being a love interest and she is honestly wonderful to read about.

Blackthorn Kids: There are so many of them I’m gonna loop them all in together. Ty and Livvy are brilliant characters with their own distinct motivations and conflicts. Dru, while not being all that important in the book, had her own unique personality and strengths. Tavvy, the baby of the group, was utterly darling and so important to the plot which I honestly did not see coming? Kudos to Clare for creating side characters that I enjoy!

Overall: I adored this book and I will definitely be picking up the sequel. I’d recommend giving it a try even if you weren’t a big fan of The Mortal Instruments as its quite a step away. The characters are solid, the plot is intriguing and honestly the writing is absolutely beautiful. I’ll leave you with 4/5 stars and this gem:

“This cat is looking at me with judgement.”

“He’s not,” said Jules. “That’s just his face.”

“You look at me the same way,” Mark said, glancing at Julian. “Judgy face.”

Lady Midnight is the first in Cassandra Clare’s The Dark Artifices trilogy. The second and third books Lord of Shadows and Queen of Air and Darkness are available now.

6 notes · View notes

science-fiction-is-real · 7 years

Text

The Search, its problems, and how to fix it. Part 5, Azula

I’ve written extensively about “The Search” ATLA comics, how they’ve disappointed me, and how I would have done them differently

I’ve written about Ursa, Ozai, Zuko, and explained my idea for a rewrite.

But I haven’t talked about Azula yet.

This one will be brief compared to my others, because I feel my issues with Azula can be more quickly explained.

So here it is, Azula, her problems, and some ways we could fix them.

If you thought the way Gene and Bryke handled Ursa and Ozai was bad, just wait till you see what they did to their daughter. Poor Azula has been pushed through a meet grinder. Parts of her are still recognizable. She's quick with a quip and handy in a fire fight to the point where its fun to watch, but that's about it.

The difference between comics Azula and show Azula is subtle but important. Show Azula went mad because her independent streak was confronted with the fact she needs and wants other people's love. Comics Azula seems to be going through a different inner conflict, one that is defined by her mother, and Azula being convinced her mother is plotting against her. The problem lies in the fact these two inner conflicts are not the same, and are in fact mutually exclusive.

Show Azula's defining character trait is her independence. Show Azula travels the world without adult supervision, pretty much single-handedly winning the war in Book 2. Not only is she practically independent, but her identity is independent too. Although Azula is fighting for her father, she never once name drops him the way Zuko constantly does. Azula only wants victory for herself and her own ego.

Azula's independence is important. Her independence makes her appear extraordinarily competent, and thus intimidating and effective as a villain. It also means everybody watching the show at home kind of wants to be her. I would dare say it is her main appeal for the very large following Azula has among ATLA fans.

Azula sees herself as an independent person, to a fault. She doesn't believe she needs other people in her life to love or support her. But then she realizes she actually does. She realizes she feels hurt when people leave her, when her father refuses to take her with him on Operation Phoenix King, when Mai and Ty Lee switch sides, when she sees her mother (the first person who left her) in the mirror. But she refuses to accept that as the reason for her pain, creating an inner conflict that drives her mad.

So the question is, why would Comics Azula suddenly have an apparently different source of her madness? Comics Azula is defined by another person, her mother, which doesn't make sense because the entire point of Azula's character is that she isn't defined by other people at all, or at least she tries very very hard not to be. Comics Azula mysteriously seems to forget about the other people who hurt her and focus only on her mother, when in the show it is indicated Mai and Ty Lee were much bigger triggers for her. Comics Azula also doesn't seem to be struggling with the loneliness vs independence conflict, but instead is suffering from shear hatred that comes from a belief others are out to get her. It doesn't make any sense.

I understand why they want to make Azula hate her mother, because the comic focuses on Ursa, so Azula's madness must also naturally focus on Ursa. However, that hatred needs to be...rephrased if you will to have it make any sense.

It would perhaps have been a better idea to talk more to drop Azula's out of the blue paranoia about her mother plotting against her, and talk more about Azula's resentment for her mother's rejection. It would have made more sense to see Azula resisting the idea she had any feelings toward her mother at all, to see Azula stubbornly hold on to her self image of independence, instead of having Azula admit she hates her mother.

There are, in fact, many ways the Search could have continued to explore Azula's independence vs loneliness conflict. We could have had Azula struggle with the fact her mental illness leaves her unable to care for herself as she once was, and now she has to rely on others to keep her safe, especially in how that safety means restricted freedoms. We could have had Azula struggle with weather she wants to find her mother at all, struggle to come to terms with the fact she is angry at her mother for leaving, as part of her madness came from her unwillingness to admit her own true feelings. We could have Azula struggle to admit she had lost to her brother, have her staunchly declare she hates her brother when in reality she is lonely and wants to have a relationship with him as she does with her other family members. Remember, a big theme in the search is “identity.” Azula's desire to be independent was part of her identity, as well as her desire for the crown. We could have dug deep in there.

But instead we gave us an uncreative stereotype of what Gene and Bryke think a murderous lunatic looks like. Which brings me to point number two about Azula. The way Azula's mental illness is portrayed is God Awful.

I think I made a post years ago about how Azula isn't technically mentally ill, that she has in fact “gone mad.” The difference is that mental illness is a medical condition, and “going mad” is a specific literary trope where a tragic character is punished for refusing to acknowledge their fatal flaw. One is a brain illness, the other a spiritual illness. Some tragic characters die, some are banished and blinded, some go mad. Read Shakespeare. I'm not complaining that Azula's illness is unrealistic. I mean, it isn't realistic to the point we can diagnose her with something specific like Schizophrenia or BPD. Her symptoms are pure stereotypes. But because Azula is literature sick and not brain sick, I, as a mentally ill writer, am willing to forgive that. Would it have been NICE to have a realistic and nuanced discussion about the challenges of mental illness? Yes, but a different topic for a different comic.

But still, at the end of the day, it bothers the fuck out of me that neither the writers nor the other characters show Azula an ounce of compassion. Not once does another character aknowledge the fact her behavior is coming from paranoid delusions and hallucinations instead of from being evil. They don't ever ask her what she is seeing, point out that she appears to be seeing things, or try to calm her down. Not once does Zuko express any concern over Azula's safety. They certainly talk of restraining her or leaving her at home for other people's safety. But even when Azula takes a nose dive off Apa, no one bothers to point out she might be a danger to herself.

In fact, toward the end, Zuko “realizes he's been naive” and asks the Gaang to attack Azula. Because he, and supposedly the reader, have concluded at that point Azula is truly evil and undeserving of compassion even though everything she had done during the course of the comics could be explained by her diminished capacity for reason.

It was made perfectly clear at the end of the show that we were supposed to feel sorry for Azula, not just hate her. We were supposed to conclude at the end of the show that Azula had probably had as rough a childhood as Zuko, probably had also been the victim of abuse by Ozai, probably also was mourning Ursa's loss. But that message of compassion which the show was so keen to teach its young audience is suddenly thrown out the window when Zuko concludes “he's been naive.”

Excuse me while I scream and destroy some household items.

#Azula #princess azula #atla #atla comics #the search #avatar #avatar last airbender #meta #analysis

117 notes · View notes

vsbylc · 7 years

Text

Back Against the Wall: Effective Immigration Lawyering Under the Trump Administration

By Soulmaz Taghavi

On January 25, 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States,” accompanied by a dramatic expansion of immigration enforcement. On February 20, 2017, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary John Kelly issued a memorandum outlining an implementation plan for President Trump’s Executive Order. Secretary Kelly’s memorandum leads with an immediate rescinding, to the extent of a conflict, of all existing directives, memoranda or field guidance governing apprehension, detention, and removal of undocumented aliens.

The 2017 DHS memorandum effectively nullifies a 2014 DHS memorandum issued by the Obama Administration that provided clear, focused, and logical enforcement priorities. The 2014 DHS memorandum directed the agency to devote its time, resources, and energy to violent criminal aliens who posed a threat to public security. Aliens with minor infractions were considered to be a low priority.

In the ever-changing world of immigration law, the 2014 memo made it easy to distinguish whom ICE agents would pursue, as well as when and how they would do so. If you are a habitual offender or have a felony conviction, certain misdemeanors, or even a DUI conviction, you should expect to be pursued, and you have a lot to overcome. In contrast, if you have no criminal convictions and demonstrate positive qualities (also known as favorable “equities”) such as paying taxes, having stable employment, having a continuous physical presence in the community, or being a contributing community member, you should expect your unlawful presence to be “tolerated” until or unless a criminal conviction or a serious immigration violation occurs.

However, the Trump administration’s new Executive Order changes everything. Now, there are essentially no tiered priorities, creating a veritable “free for all” for ICE agents. Undocumented immigrants, no matter how sympathetic, law abiding, and honorable, are subject to inhuman apprehension, detention, and possible removal, with little regard to his or her due process rights or any humanitarian concerns (e.g. young, underprivileged, or physically/mentally ill U.S. citizen children, spouse or parents). This has resulted in complete chaos for practitioners and wide-spread fear and anxiety for noncitizens.

Example of the New Executive Order at Work

It was a cool March morning, after the morning docket ended in Chesterfield Juvenile and Domestic Court, which is located in a county hugging the south of Richmond in Central Virginia. Mr. Guerrero, an undocumented immigrant, exits the court with a deep sigh of relief and gratitude as his charge of assault and battery against a household member was nolle prosequi (i.e. abandonment by a plaintiff or prosecutor of all or part of a suit or action).

While attempting to leave the courtroom to return home to his wife and U.S. citizen children, Mr. Guerrero was confronted by two large, heavily armed men donning military fatigue t-shirts and bulky black bullet proof vests with ICE logos. ICE stands for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The exchange between these ICE agents and Mr. Guerrero was overwhelming, unexpected, and confusing. The Judge, from inside the courtroom, noticed an unusual commotion and asked the Bailiff to handle the disruption. Mr. Guerrero was served with a “warrant for alien arrest” and a “notice to appear,” which is a charging document placing him into removal proceedings in the Arlington Immigration Court.

Broadening Removal Authority and Resurrecting Flawed and Questionable Initiatives

The Trump Administration’s 2017 executive order uses exceptionally broad language, which includes prioritizing and detaining those who have been charged or convicted, or both, with minor infractions like jaywalking or driving without a license, anyone who was once charged with a criminal offense but has since been acquitted of all charges, and all undocumented individuals under the presumption that they committed the chargeable offense of “improper entry,” a civil offense.

The Administration also expanded the authority of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) under section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, allowing CBP to enter agreements with local police authorizing them to arrest “potentially removable noncitizens” while in the field. This was a policy the Obama Administration discontinued because of diminished due-process rights and the encouragement of racial profiling by law enforcement. Further, the once discontinued Secure Communities initiative was resurrected. Service Communities is a program requiring local law enforcement to share information about individuals in its custody with DHS and authorizes DHS to issue detainers to local jails and correctional facilities for holding an individual beyond the scheduled release date so ICE can take custody.

This program was terminated in 2014 because of the controversy and litigation surrounding constitutional violations where noncitizens have been subjected to indefinite detention, and saw the rise of police-community fear and distrust, as well as racial profiling. The executive order gives rise to many other stark changes, including establishing a Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE) Office, the hiring of additional ICE officers and agents, new “expedited removal” processes that avoid due-process considerations, and the collecting and reporting of data about alien apprehensions and releases.

Ethical Considerations

If you thought immigration law was as vast and nuanced as tax law before, you are now in for a surprise. In 2017, the threat of apprehension, detention, bond, defensive and affirmative relief, and removal proceedings are common place. Counseling clients gives rise to a myriad of ethical considerations. Further, these considerations extend beyond the mere practice of immigration law. For example, if you practice family law or criminal defense, you must consider the numerous factors that can irreparably harm an individual, his or her family, his or her business, or his or her community. In the 2010 Supreme Court case, Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010), the Court held that criminal-defense attorneys are required under the Sixth and Fourteenth amendments to advise noncitizen clients of the immigration consequences of a plea deal. In 2015, the Supreme Court of Virginia issued a decision in Zemene v. Clarke, 289 Va. 303 (2015), that articulated a broad view of defense attorneys’ obligations under Padilla to their immigrant clients in Virginia.

Let’s do a refresher: Padilla requires defense counsel to advise a noncitizen defendant of immigration consequences of a guilty plea, and, absent such advice, a noncitizen may raise an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel (IAC) claim to vacate a noncitizen’s criminal conviction that has triggered negative immigration consequences. Therefore, defense counsel has a duty to inquire into immigration status and to investigate and advise a noncitizen client regarding the immigration consequences of a criminal conviction. Which, not to mention, a “conviction” under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), is much broader than it is defined in a criminal setting. Further, Padilla requires affirmative, competent advice rather than mere affirmative misadvise. A defense lawyer’s silence regarding immigration consequences of a guilty plea consists of IAC, even when deportation consequences of a plea are unclear or uncertain. The Padilla court also stated that informed consideration of immigration consequences should not be an issue solely for the defense, but also one for the prosecution. A prosecutor’s meaningful consideration of the immigration consequences at stake in the plea negotiation process is important “to reach agreements that better satisfy the interests of both parties . . . in order to craft a conviction and sentence that reduce the likelihood of deportation” to help ensure the finality of convictions and mitigate or avoid draconian immigration penalties.

Immigration Practitioner on Speed Dial

Practitioners, even those who do no specialize in immigration law, confront immigration issues, whether in a divorce case representing an abused spouse or in an employment case representing an employer who hired a student lacking work authorization. As such, it is important to have a basic understanding of key issues and their ethical implications. If you want to learn more, join your local chapter of American Immigration Lawyers Associations (AILA) and, at the very least, meet and network with immigration practitioners who you can count on for guidance or to take over when you cannot competently move forward.

Soulmaz Taghavi is 2014 graduate of North Carolina Central University School of Law and Co-Founder of the Novo Taghavi law firm located in Richmond, Virginia where she practices immigration law, criminal and traffic defense, and family law.

0 notes