#anti maiko | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

iamfitzwilliamdarcy · 1 month

Text

anyway, i'm sure this has been discussed ad nauseam at this point but I'll say it again -- the show gives us two scenes of zuko expressing very legitimate worries about facing a father-figure after messing up

The Book 3 opener, with Mai on the boat, where Zuko worries about seeing his father after 3 years and how he's changed/his home has changed

Zuko anxious about facing Iroh again and discusses this with Katara

The conversations go like this:

Mai: Aren't you cold? Zuko: I've got a lot on my mind. It's been so long, over three years since I was home. I wonder what's changed. I wonder how I've changed. Mai: [Yawns.] I just asked if you were cold, I didn't ask for your whole life story. [Zuko frowns at her sarcastic response. Mai giggles and holds his face in her hands.] Stop worrying.

(in interest of fairness, I will include that the transcript i got from atla wiki says this: The two kiss. Mai exits, and Zuko stays there with an expression of relief on his face. We return to the ship where Team Avatar is on -- however, the show just actually shows a close up of his eyes)

and

Cut back to Zuko, who becomes worried and ashamed before walking toward the tent. Cut to Zuko from behind as he approaches the tent before stopping. Close-up of Zuko. Side-view as he sits down. Katara walks up to him. Katara Are you okay? Zuko [Frontal view.] No, I'm not okay. My uncle hates me, I know it. [Katara sits down next to him.] He loved and supported me in every way he could, and I still turned against him. How can I even face him? Katara [Close-up side-view of Zuko.] Zuko, you're sorry for what you did, right? Zuko: More sorry than I've been about anything in my entire life. Katara: Then he'll forgive you. He will.

I just think there's a very clear contrast here of dismissive vs supportive. I get what the writers were trying to do- Mai even smiles a little when she makes her joke-- but it just doesn't land for me because I think Zuko's concerns are valid and ought to be treated seriously here-- who wouldn't be worried after 3 years away???? And And Zuko doesn't even disclose his real worries to Mai (he does to Azula though!-- about seeing his dad without having actually recaptured the Avatar! which I think is interesting)

And he's very upfront with Katara in the later scene, which is a very pivotal one for him-- his courage to make amends and apologize to one of the most important people in his life. And Katara doesn't try to lighten the mood or tell him to stop worrying -- she treats his concerns as valid and walks him through it-- he's sorry, so Iroh will forgive him (it probably helps that she has also forgiven him for what he did in Ba Sing Se, she knows what that means)

#zutara #atla #i'll tag this as #anti maiko #to keep y'all all of my back lol even though i don't think it's so much anti maiko as it is....#just looking at these two scenes in contrast? the writing at least

467 notes · View notes

burst-of-iridescent · 4 months

Text

ana's meta masterlist

Pro-Zutara:

the official zutara dissertation: part 1 | part 2

zuko, aang and taking lightning for katara

zutara and romantic coding

"you rise with the moon, i rise with the sun" is a zutara line

zutara and thematic significance

zutara vs jetara

zutara parallels in the awakening

zutara's narrative culmination

zutara in the crossroads of destiny:

azula vs katara

love as resistance in the catacombs

zutara in the southern raiders:

the true source of katara's anger at zuko

katara bloodbending before zuko

the narrative relevance of zutara

zutara and bloodbending

zutara's narrative symmetry

why zuko had to betray katara in ba sing se

Anti Anti-Zutara:

the official zutara dissertation (p.3)

"zutara would face too much opposition from their countries"

"zuko and katara are a colonizer/colonized ship"

"zuko and katara would fight all the time”

"platonic zutara is better than romantic zutara"

"fire lady katara is racist"

“zuko would’ve taken lightning for anyone”

“katara is too traumatized by the fire nation”

ATLA Ship Criticism:

the official zutara dissertation: part 4 | part 5 | part 6

why mai.ko was never intended to be canon

mailee is a better ship than mai.ko

how kat.aang could've been fixed

kat.aang's lack of trust in the southern raiders

emotional labour in kat.aang

kat.aang’s narrative imbalance

comparing katara and aang's parenting

why the fortuneteller does not foreshadow kat.aang

ATLA/LOK:

azula/katara parallels

katara's choice in the crossroads of destiny

was zuko's betrayal in-character?

zuko's comments in the southern raiders

zuko's comments in the southern raiders (pt. 2)

zuko is not a “bad boy”

sokka didn't feel inferior to katara

did mai fear azula?

comparing mai and toph

sexism in the water tribes

thoughts on the atla comics

gratuitous violence in the legend of korra

The Hunger Games:

zutara and everlark parallels

zutara and everlark parallels (pt. 2)

gale's arc in the hunger games trilogy

the myth of humanity's inherent evil

the ending of lucy gray

Squid Game:

individualism under capitalism

the ethics of billionaires

#zutara #anti kataang #anti maiko #zutara meta #been intending to do this forever but i'm on this hellsite so much that going through my archives took an eternity lmao #anyway here's a collection of patented ana rambles

525 notes · View notes

sneezypeasy · 1 month

Text

Why I Deliberately Avoided the "Colonizer" Argument in my Zutara Thesis - and Why I'll Continue to Avoid it Forever

This is a question that occasionally comes up under my Zutara video essay, because somehow in 2 hours worth of content I still didn't manage to address everything (lol.) But this argument specifically is one I made a point of avoiding entirely, and there are some slightly complicated reasons behind that. I figure I'll write them all out here.

From a surface-level perspective, Zuko's whole arc, his raison d'etre, is to be a de-colonizer. Zuko's redemption arc is kinda all about being a de-colonizer, and his redemption arc is probably like the most talked about plot point of ATLA, so from a basic media literacy standpoint, the whole argument is unsound in the first place, and on that basis alone I find it childish to even entertain as an argument worth engaging with, to be honest.

(At least one person in my comments pointed out that if any ship's "political implications" are problematic in some way, it really ought to be Maiko, as Mai herself is never shown or suggested to be a strong candidate for being a de-colonizing co-ruler alongside Zuko. If anything her attitudes towards lording over servants/underlings would make her… a less than suitable choice for this role, but I digress.)

But the reason I avoided rebutting this particular argument in my video goes deeper than that. From what I've observed of fandom discourse, I find that the colonizer argument is usually an attempt to smear the ship as "problematic" - i.e., this ship is an immoral dynamic, which would make it problematic to depict as canon (and by extension, if you ship it regardless, you're probably problematic yourself.)

And here is where I end up taking a stand that differentiates me from the more authoritarian sectors of fandom.

I'm not here to be the fandom morality police. When it comes to lit crit, I'm really just here to talk about good vs. bad writing. (And when I say "good", I mean structurally sound, thematically cohesive, etc; works that are well-written - I don't mean works that are morally virtuous. More on this in a minute.) So the whole colonizer angle isn't something I'm interested in discussing, for the same reason that I actually avoided discussing Katara "mothering" Aang or the "problematic" aspects of the Kataang ship (such as how he kissed her twice without her consent). My whole entire sections on "Kataang bad" or "Maiko bad" in my 2 hour video was specifically, "how are they written in a way that did a disservice to the story", and "how making them false leads would have created valuable meaning". I deliberately avoided making an argument that consisted purely of, "here's how Kataang/Maiko toxic and Zutara wholesome, hence Zutara superiority, the end".

Why am I not willing to be the fandom morality police? Two reasons:

I don't really have a refined take on these subjects anyway. Unless a piece of literature or art happens to touch on a particular issue that resonates with me personally, the moral value of art is something that doesn't usually spark my interest, so I rarely have much to say on it to begin with. On the whole "colonizer ship" subject specifically, other people who have more passion and knowledge than me on the topic can (and have) put their arguments into words far better than I ever could. I'm more than happy to defer to their take(s), because honestly, they can do these subjects justice in a way I can't. Passing the mic over to someone else is the most responsible thing I can do here, lol. But more importantly:

I reject the conflation of literary merit with moral virtue. It is my opinion that a good story well-told is not always, and does not have to be, a story free from moral vices/questionable themes. In my opinion, there are good problematic stories and bad "pure" stories and literally everything in between. To go one step further, I believe that there are ways that a romance can come off "icky", and then there are ways that it might actually be bad for the story, and meming/shitposting aside, the fact that these two things don't always neatly align is not only a truth I recognise about art but also one of those truths that makes art incredibly interesting to me! So on the one hand, I don't think it is either fair or accurate to conflate literary "goodness" with moral "goodness". On a more serious note, I not only find this type of conflation unfair/inaccurate, I also find it potentially dangerous - and this is why I am really critical of this mindset beyond just disagreeing with it factually. What I see is that people who espouse this rhetoric tend to encourage (or even personally engage in) wilful blindness one way or the other, because ultimately, viewing art through these lens ends up boxing all art into either "morally permissible" or "morally impermissible" categories, and shames anyone enjoying art in the "morally impermissible" box. Unfortunately, I see a lot of people responding to this by A) making excuses for art that they guiltily love despite its problematic elements and/or B) denying the value of any art that they are unable to defend as free from moral wickedness.

Now, I'm not saying that media shouldn't be critiqued on its moral virtue. I actually think morally critiquing art has its place, and assuming it's being done in good faith, it absolutely should be done, and probably even more often than it is now.

Because here's the truth: Sometimes, a story can be really good. Sometimes, you can have a genuinely amazing story with well developed characters and powerful themes that resonate deeply with anyone who reads it. Sometimes, a story can be all of these things - and still be problematic.*

(Or, sometimes a story can be all of those things, and still be written by a problematic author.)

That's why I say, when people conflate moral art with good art, they become blind to the possibility that the art they like being potentially immoral (or vice versa). If only "bad art" is immoral, how can the art that tells the story hitting all the right beats and with perfect rhythm and emotional depth, be ever problematic?

(And how can the art I love, be ever problematic?)

This is why I reject the idea that literary merit = moral virtue (or vice versa) - because I do care about holding art accountable. Even the art that is "good art". Actually, especially the art that is "good art". Especially the art that is well loved and respected and appreciated. The failure to distinguish literary critique from moral critique bothers me on a personal level because I think that conflating the two results in the detriment of both - the latter being the most concerning to me, actually.

So while I respect the inherent value of moral criticism, I'm really not a fan of any argument that presents moral criticism as equivalent to literary criticism, and I will call that out when I see it. And from what I've observed, a lot of the "but Zutara is a colonizer ship" tries to do exactly that, which is why I find it a dishonest and frankly harmful media analysis framework to begin with.

But even when it is done in good faith, moral criticism of art is also just something I personally am neither interested nor good at talking about, and I prefer to talk about the things that I am interested and good at talking about.

(And some people are genuinely good at tackling the moral side of things! I mean, I for one really enjoyed Lindsay Ellis's take on Rent contextualising it within the broader political landscape at the time to show how it's not the progressive queer story it might otherwise appear to be. Moral critique has value, and has its place, and there are definitely circumstances where it can lead to societal progress. Just because I'm not personally interested in addressing it doesn't mean nobody else can do it let alone that nobody else should do it, but also, just because it can and should be done, doesn't mean that it's the only "one true way" to approach lit crit by anyone ever. You know, sometimes... two things… can be true… at once?)

Anyway, if anyone reading this far has recognised that this is basically a variant of the proship vs. antiship debate, you're right, it is. And on that note, I'm just going to leave some links here. I've said about as much as I'm willing/able to say on this subject, but in case anyone is interested in delving deeper into the philosophy behind my convictions, including why I believe leftist authoritarian rhetoric is harmful, and why the whole "but it would be problematic in real life" is an anti-ship argument that doesn't always hold up to scrutiny, I highly recommend these posts/threads:

In general this blog is pretty solid; I agree with almost all of their takes - though they focus more specifically on fanfic/fanart than mainstream media, and I think quite a lot of their arguments are at least somewhat appropriate to extrapolate to mainstream media as well.

I also strongly recommend Bob Altemeyer's book "The Authoritarians" which the author, a verified giga chad, actually made free to download as a pdf, here. His work focuses primarily on right-wing authoritarians, but a lot of his research and conclusions are, you guessed it, applicable to left-wing authoritarians also.

And if you're an anti yourself, welp, you won't find support from me here. This is not an anti-ship safe space, sorrynotsorry 👆

In conclusion, honestly any "but Zutara is problematic" argument is one I'm likely to consider unsound to begin with, let alone the "Zutara is a colonizer ship" argument - but even if it wasn't, it's not something I'm interested in discussing, even if I recognise there are contexts where these discussions have value. I resent the idea that just because I have refined opinions on one aspect of a discussion means I must have (and be willing to preach) refined opinions on all aspects of said discussion. (I don't mean to sound reproachful here - actually the vast majority of the comments I get on my video/tumblr are really sweet and respectful, but I do get a handful of silly comments here and there and I'm at the point where I do feel like this is something worth saying.) Anyway, I'm quite happy to defer to other analysts who have the passion and knowledge to give complicated topics the justice they deserve. All I request is that care is taken not to conflate literary criticism with moral criticism to the detriment of both - and I think it's important to acknowledge when that is indeed happening. And respectfully, don't expect me to give my own take on the matter when other people are already willing and able to put their thoughts into words so much better than me. Peace ✌

*P.S. This works for real life too, by the way. There are people out there who are genuinely not only charming and likeable, but also generous, charitable and warm to the vast majority of the people they know. They may also be amazing at their work, and if they have a job that involves saving lives like firefighting or surgery or w.e, they may even be the reason dozens of people are still alive today. They may honestly do a lot of things you'd have to concede are "good" deeds.

They may be all of these things, and still be someone's abuser. 🙃

Two things can be true at once. It's important never to forget that.

#zutara discourse #the colonizer argument #anti anti zutara #text post #long post #anti maiko #anti mai #tagging just in case #anti purity culture #this is not an anti-ship safe space

257 notes · View notes

opalsiren · 21 days

Text

man the atla finale is still sooooo bittersweet to me. zuko taking a bolt of lightning for katara, she takes down azula and heals him through tears. sokka and suki and toph taking down the airship fleet. aang defeating firelord ozai through conveniently-placed rock chiropractory and a hastily thrown together final twist. sokka and katara being reunited with their dad. ty lee joining the kyoshi warriors. mai and zuko getting back together, for some reason. zuko becomes firelord. toph is also there, but the question of her relationship with her parents continuing remains unanswered. zuko going to confront his father about his mother's whereabouts. iroh opening a tea shop in the city he besieged for a year instead of advising his beloved nephew in his new role as firelord. the final scene is a twelve-year-old tongue kissing a fourteen-year-old, for some reason. truly the epic highs and lows of the atla finale cannot be overstated

#tagging as #anti kataang #just in case #.txt #atla #avatar the last airbender #anti maiko #zutara

327 notes · View notes

rifari2037 · 19 days

Text

7. What’s your favourite Zutara moment from the show?

I love all Zutara moments, because it shows development in every season. But, I would never forget how June being Zutara shipper in every appearances. This is my random thought! Very random thought!

June looked closely when Zuko showed Katara's necklace. Since she was from earth kingdom, she probably didn't know it was a betrothal necklace. But, very clear the necklace belong to a girl.

But, she was a bounty hunter, she worked for anyone who paid her, they could be from anywhere . So, there was possibility she learn about other nation cultural like betrothal necklace from Northern Water Tribe.

A prince using a (betrothal) necklace to looking a girl? (Maybe he made it for her, but she run away?) Well, the conclusion was, "What happened? Your girlfriend run off on you?"

And Zuko didn't deny it.

June was right, the necklace belong to a girl. A beautiful girl! “So this is your girlfriend. No wonder she left, she's way too pretty for you.”

And again, Zuko didn't deny it!

June didn't know what happened after that, but the Prince Pouty came again to her and now TOGETHER with the girl. Not only that, June saw Katara wore her necklace.

What sense situation except, "I see you worked things out with your girlfriend."

This time they denied it!

But, what a reaction if there was nothing between them?

Zuko never give a f*ck before every time June teased her with Katara, why he suddenly so shy and denied it? And Katara made the same reaction as she denied her relationship with Jet! Something fishy!!

And in the very same night after someone assumed that they were together, they slept like this! Remember, Aang was missing that time, no one knows where he was or was he okay. But, look at the little smile on Katara's face! I wonder, what were they talking about before they say good night?

#zutara #pro katara #atla zutara #zuko x katara #zuko and katara #anti anti zutara #antikataang #anti maiko #zutara forever

217 notes · View notes

theweeklydiscourse · 2 months

Text

It’s just interesting to observe the differences in how people treat Zukka vs how they treat Zutara. Because I searched Zutara on TikTok to look for some edits and the comments were filled to the brim with people saying “But Katara belonged with Aang 🥺” or “How can you ship Zuko with her after Mai said such a romantic line?” Or perhaps the most insufferable of all “Maturing is realizing that Zuko would’ve thrown himself in from of lightning for ANYONE” as if that’s some revolutionary reading of the text. It’s so irritating how this kind of behaviour is…accepted by the fandom.

But you don’t get that with Zukka, instead you see people gushing over how sweet they are together, hailing it as a wholesome and unproblematic ship, praising artworks of it with positivity and appreciation. It’s difficult to find much negativity under Zukka posts, you won’t see people saying “But Sokka belongs with Suki 🥺” or boldly going on a tangent about how another ship is SO much better. I saw one person praise Zukka as the most unproblematic ATLA ship because of how little conflict there was about it, that you wouldn’t see the same hostility among that fandom as you might with Zutara.

But there’s a reason for that which has less to do with Zutara shippers themselves, and more to do with the harassment and hostility they face on all sides of the fandom. Fans will go out of their way to antagonize Zutara shippers, they’ll feel brazen enough to leave backhanded or outright hostile comments under Zutara posts and art, they’ll interject their shipping opinions in spaces where nobody asked and condescend Zutara shippers by framing them as shallow or delusional for shipping it.

I think Zukka is admittedly cute, and they definitely have their haters, but the difference between it and Zutara is astounding. It’s incredibly frustrating to watch this phenomenon play out, especially when these shippers carry themselves with a kind of false moral superiority that can only be found in shipping discourse.

#especially ESPECIALLY when Zutara is constantly being hit with the old *colonizer x colonized* accusations #But somehow Zukka manages to avoid that same criticism despite Sokka being from the same tribe as Katara #Frustrating as a poc zutara shipper to constantly be accused of being a white person romanticizing a supposedly *colonizer romance* dynamic #katara #Zuko #pro zutara #atla discourse #atla fandom #atla fandom salt #atla fandom critical #shipping discourse #enemies to lovers #anti Zukka #anti maiko #avatar the last airbender

229 notes · View notes

keishara-korianthil · 3 months

Text

Multifandom Ships #2

Am I the only one that hates when in a show/movie they make a straight couple just because it's straight instead of making a LGBT couple that definitely has more chemistry?

241 notes · View notes

the-badger-mole · 2 months

Text

I knew the new show was going to bring the worst people to the Zutara tag. I know the other tags are less interesting, but there are clearly at least one or two people who want to talk about it. Go find each other and stop perpetuating the shipping drama you're constantly whining about. In case you're confused about how, notice how I'm not tagging your ship here.

#atla #zutara #anti kataang #anti zukka #anti maiko #i am #team ship and let ship #but keep that mess over there

176 notes · View notes

geegers22 · 3 months

Text

I’ve seen lots of conversation on here about Zutara shippers opinions on aang and mai and i thought I’d give my point of view.

I want to start by saying that I think there should be more of a distinction between disliking a character because they are a bad person and disliking a character because they are written badly. With that being said, I can confidently say that, with the material of the main ATLA show, I dislike Aang and Mai because they are badly written characters. Meaning, if their arcs were properly finished, I would have no problems with them. This brings me to another topic of how I don’t really ‘hate’ characters who are bad people if they’re well written but that’s a conversation for another post.

I need to point out that I didn’t start disliking Aang and Mai until they had their arcs undermined when Kataang and Maiko became canon. With the arcs they were going on, they had so much potential to be really interesting and I enjoyed their personalities.

When it comes to Aang, I had no problem with him as a character until season 3 part 2 when I started to realize that his world view (which is flawed based solely on the fact that he is young and there is no way he’s going to have a nuanced pov) was not going to be challenged. Aang should have had to give up katara. Aang should not have just had everything handed to him with the lion turtle and the pointy rock.

Then there’s the southern raiders which I would argue, if Aang’s arc had been completed, would not illicit as many conversations and arguments about it as it currently has. Because his actions in that episode make sense (Sokkas don’t really but again-that’s another story) because he’s a kid. This episode should have been a big decider of his change in worldview. The problem is that the creators decided his flaws didn’t exist and that he was perfect. (At 12 years old?!?!?)

Then there’s Mai. She’s a much smaller character but that doesn’t mean she deserves less of an arc. Mai is a character whose personality I love! (I’m all for gloomy depressed women!) There’s two ways Mai’s character could have developed, and I think both options are great, the problem is that Bryke decided to go in neither direction.

On the one hand, Mai could have been a representation of unlearning the propaganda she was taught in the fire nation throughout her whole life. I think this direction would make Maiko more believable, although I still don’t think they are a good couple because their personalities create a toxic dynamic and Mai’s story with Zuko is meant to represent that toxicity.

The second option would be to have her views not change, like we see in the show, and have her not get back together with Zuko. This is the more interesting path in my opinion because it’s more realistic. I don’t think the problem with Mai’s arc lies with her personal views of the fire nation, more so with her relationship with Zuko. As we have it in the show, Mai’s views don’t change. Therefor, it doesn’t make sense for her character or for Zuko’s for them to get back together like nothing ever happened.

When it comes down to it. Both Aang and Mai had their arcs sabotaged because the creators rejected Zutara. Even without Zuko and Katara getting together these were the wrong decisions. Both characters had potential to be well written, but in the end, the creators chose the path didn’t allow that to happen because they just couldn’t kill their darling. (Kataang)

Sorry for rambling, this is kind of just my take on the whole “Zutara shippers hate Aang and Mai” take.

#is this a meta?#atla #avatar the last airbender #anti aang #anti Mai #anti kataang #anti maiko #anti bryke #zutara #ayo fuck bryke all my homies hate bryke #atla critical #aang critical #Mai critical

183 notes · View notes

yourhighness6 · 14 days

Text

Me, screaming into the void: I DON'T HATE MAI I JUST FEEL LIKE SHE NEEDED MORE DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE OF ZUKO AND HER ARC SHOULDN'T REVOLVE AROUND HER LOVE INTEREST

Also me, still screaming into the void: I DON'T HATE AANG I JUST QUESTION WHETHER HIS ROMANTIC INTEREST IN KATARA BRINGS OUT THE BEST SIDES OF HIM AND FEEL AS THOUGH HE AND HIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT ABOVE NECESSARY CRITICISM

#why do antis think I hate either of them the moment I question their development and the writing choices bryke made for them #they're good characters I just want them to live up to their full potential #a lot of their actions in season 3 especially revolving around romance were counter intuitive to their arcs made them come off as jerks #it got to the point of character assassination istg #anti maiko #anti kataang #mai #aang #criticism is not hate #aang critical #anti bryke #this doesn't have anything to do with zutara but tagging for exposure #zutara

543 notes · View notes

starlight-bread-blog · 8 months

Text

Zuko and Katara Aren't Toxic to Each Other

I keep hearing this take that's biasically just different variations of this:

Zuko and Katara would bring out the worst in each other. They would be fighting constantly, and their similar tendency to anger will escalate these situations. They'd both grow miserable and bitter.

I don't like this argument for a number of reasons, but I'll adress just one: I feel as though these takes miss how Zuko and Katara have been shown to respond to each other's anger in canon.

For most of the story, they're enemies. Prince of the Fire Nation and the Avatar's friend & teacher. They fight because they're on opposite sides of a war. They do have an arc before they reconcile, there are fights from The Crossroads of Destiny to The Southern Raiders. But in my opinion they don't point at toxicity. They show how Zuko actually reacts to Katara's rage. And it simply doesn't escalate even before they become friends. So let's take a look at a few of said arguments:

The Crossroads of Destiny

At this point they are pure enemies. Katara didn't see Zuko's journy in the Earth Kingdom and they don't know anything about each other.

Zuko and Katara are in the crystal catacombs and Katara starts yelling & preaching at Zuko for all he did do them. At first Zuko just takes it all, just listens to her. But he hit his breaking point.

Zuko (calmly): You don't know what you're talking about.

Katara then rightfully gets angry. And opens up about how the Fire Nation hurt her personally – they took away her mother. Instantly, Zuko isn't angry anymore.

Zuko: I'm sorry.

He immediatly understands and offers comfort. And even, connect with his enemy.

Zuko: That's something we have in common.

Katara: I'm sorry I yelled at you before.

Now the argument is over. They were enemies just a second ago, but Zuko was able to put it aside, realize that Katara was well within her rights to get angry, see her pain and connect with her. So much so, that he tells her about his destiny, about how he feels he's free. And Katara offers to heal his scar to help him too. She too understood his pain, calmed down instantly and helpped.

The Western Air Temple

Zuko has redeemed himself, but not in Katara's eyes. She still suspects him after he betrayed her. She confronts him.

Zuko doesn't get angry if defensive, he knows why she's yelling and lets it happen. He understands her and knows his place.

Then, she threatens him with death. And what did Zuko do?

Nothing. It's not his place. He has gained the emotional maturiny needed to do nothing. To take her rage, knowing it's deserved.

The Southern Raiders

At this point Zuko is completely redeemed, he saved the Gaang just this day and proved he's trust worthy on multiple occasions. But that's still not enough for Katara. She makes a mean spirited comment about him not deserving any credit and leaves. Zuko follows her.

Thus the hostility begins. Zuko asks Katara why can't she trust him? He's proven himself, everyone already trusts him. It's a fair question, and fair frustration. Katara didn't provide substantial reasons to why she still doesn't trusts him yet. She just reminded him she was the first to trust him.

Zuko: What can I do to make it up to you?

He calmed down and tried to help, even when he had every right to be upset. In her next line, it became clear that she was projecting her grief onto him. Zuko realized this, what did he do? What did he do after finding out that Katara's rage at him isn't even about anything he personally did? What did he do after finding out that her rage is unfair and rooted in projection?

Says nothing & goes to her brother to help her solve her trauma. Regardless of it was healthy or not, Zuko was trying to help – not get angry at her.

All of these arguments happen before they even become friends. After they did, they are nothing but wholesome.

This argument that they'd bring out the worst in each other has no basis in canon.

"But it doesn't need to be prominent in canon! They didn't disagree yet, and we don't know what it'd look like".

They did once: Zuko agreed to an Agni Kai with Azula. He invited Katara just so he wouldn't have to do this. Katara finds it unreasonable. But she hears him out and trusts his judgement.

Yes, it does need to be backed up by canon. If it doesn't need to, you can pick any two traits of any two characters and think of how they could be miserable. It doesn't matter that that's not how they are, because it's a hypothetical. It doesn't need to be backed up in canon. Now I'm suggesting that Zukka would be toxic because Sokka's sillyness would clash with Zuko's anger. Sokka would joke around and Zuko would be irrutated & ask him to take it seriously. But it's stupid. I just picked two traits and went wild with it. Same goes for Zutara. They don't act like this, so it's irrelevant.

In conclusion: When Zuko and Katara were "fighting constantly" they were on opposite sides of a war. The first time they talked, it naturally starts as an argument, but turns into a beautiful moment where they both understand each other. When Zuko joins the Gaang, he waits pationetly to Katara's forgiveness, takes all her anger without being at all hostile, does everything he can to prove himself, stays calm even when it's unfair and helps her resolve her trauma. After they reconcile Zuko and Katara don't have a hinch of toxicity. They don't bring out the worst in each other.

723 notes · View notes