#being critical of media means you HAVE to take a character's gender and race and other factors into consideration while

[wheresurboytonighthelookslikeenj]

never got the hype around defending ur problematic male favs everyone loves them anyways. problematic women on the other hand? fighting in the fucking trenches (loving them so hard when other fans and the writers don't)

#being critical of media means you HAVE to take a character's gender and race and other factors into consideration while #acknowledging a character's flaws you HAVE to. #even characters who do reprehensible things. #even those who hurt ur favs. #and like. have you ever tried loving women. have you ever fucking tried that. #sorry to be like this but those posts that are positive about loving men and theres nothing wrong with loving men. thats cool. #but do you know that you can love women too. Are You Fucking Aware #guess what fandom i have in mind i dare you i bet you wont guess

[cfs-melkire]

FFXIV: WoL, OC, and Roleplay

Since there were some questions and confusion in tags, I figured that an educational/informative post like this might be helpful for some folks, so I'm going to break a few things down for those who might be unfamiliar.

Namely, we're going to get into what "Warrior of Light" means to different people, what "OC" means in the FFXIV context, and what "roleplay" means to different people (and why those distinctions exist).

Since this is going to be a long post, click the "Read Below" for more under the cut!

Warriors of Light

"Warrior of Light," in general, refers to the main protagonist of the critically acclaimed hit MMORPG, Final Fantasy XIV. Lore fanatics will know that this title once saw more widespread use in-setting (to refer to the Twelvesblades but also to historical heroes in general), but put that aside for now. WoL - Warrior of Light for short, in handy acronym format - is the main character, the hero, the person you play as. You even see the XIV devs (Yoshi P & everyone at CBU3) refer to the players themselves this way, as Warriors of Light.

FFXIV takes a different approach from other MMORPGs by making the story centered around a specific individual: you, as the WoL. This shift really kicks into gear towards the end of A Realm Reborn (2.0), as prior to that, you were just one of many adventurers in the realm of Eorzea (unless you were a 1.0/1.x player; again, set that aside for now). But starting with Operation Archon, your character starts taking center stage in terms of global affairs. By the time you're into Heavensward content, the story of the Scions is, fundamentally, your story: the Warrior of Light's story.

This creates an interesting situation in which players have a shared experience with different takes on how the main character did, should have, and or would have act, acted, react, or reacted. Part of that has to do with our differing selections on race and gender for our characters. Part of that has to do with us projecting our own thoughts and feelings onto the WoL, in effect playing the game as our own self-insert of sorts! Observant newcomers may have noticed that the game progressively gives you more and more dialogue options the further along you get; we had very few of them in ARR and HW compared to later expansions! That has been a good change, and it's really helped players to see how a story could take different twists and turns depending on what kind of person would be at the helm of making those decisions as the main character.

As a result, we've seen a lot of prompts crop up on social media - on Twitter, here on tumblr, even on Reddit - about how people's characters differ from one another. How would YOUR Warrior of Light react, what would THEY have done, but also: what was their childhood like? What do they do for fun? Who do they get along with best? So on and so forth, all sorts of questions. Anyone who's ever been in fandom for any length of time knows that these kinds of questions, these sorts of hypotheticals, are very fun to explore. We've been doing this since we were kids! "Oh but what if this happened instead in my favorite film/show/story?" It's our imagination at work, and it feels great to turn something over in our heads like that.

On Twitter, mainly, these prompts came to be referred to as "WoL prompts" and were often tagged something like "wolqotd" (Question of the Day). But as folks have been fleeing Twitter in droves lately thanks to a certain billionaire manchild being grossly incompetent and generally unsafe, there's been a lot of cross-pollination between social media platforms. Since tumblr has had a historically different approach to FFXIV prompts and our FFXIV friends from Twitter seem to have developed a blindspot, I posted a well-intentioned blurb about how, and I paraphrase, "not all OCs are WoLs."

There was some mild confusion on that point, which brings us to this post. I'm gonna help clear that up right now.

Original Characters

Most of us have probably seen, at least once on the internet, some form of the phrase "OC do not steal" (often humorously misspelled as the meme "OC donut steel"). An OC - short for "original character" - is a common concept in fandom. In fandom specifically, it generally refers to any character that a fan has created for their own use, whether that use be for artistic expression, drawing doodles, writing short stories (read: fanfiction), etc. The character is original, meaning they're not part of the established setting or lore as produced and put out into the world by the makers of the show/series/novel/game/what-have-you, and the character is unique, meaning the character itself (their personality, their history, etc.) is specific to that fan and they're not just Pidgey #2761 caught on Route 1 in the years since 1998 by one out of millions of kids with no other discernible traits, features, or background details.

In the FFXIV context, OC refers to any original character made or created by a fan or player. Often (but not always) this takes the form of their playable avatar, the character they sign into the game with and play as. But there's a context, a MMORPG-specific context, in which "OC" means something more specific to folks in the FFXIV community. The best way I can explain that other meaning is to walk you through the thought process, but in short, a FFXIV OC is a character who is NOT the main character you play through the events of the game as, but rather a character who inhabits the setting and has their own life full of adventures & misadventures, with their own story to tell.

The thought process goes a little something like this: I'm really having fun with FFXIV, but I'm getting real bored of my character. Maybe I'll fantasia them. You know what, I'm tired of seeing what my Warrior of Light gets up to. I'm more curious about what the average person deals with. There's all these monsters out there beyond the city limits! How does anyone get anything done? Maybe they need, like, caravan guards. Yeah, that's cool... but what about Lalafell? They're so small compared to other people, but they get by fine. Hmmm, let me go back to the character selection screen and fantasia into a Lalafell. I'll make something really cool and cute looking. Now, where would they be from? I see a lot of them in Ul'dah, a few in Limsa... you know what, I don't see a lot of them in Gridania or the Shroud. It'd be really interesting to learn how a Lalafell ended up living there. Yeah, let's do that! Fantasia's done, now to find them some day-to-day clothes to wear. I wonder, if they're a caravan guard, where'd they pick up their fighting skills? Are they an archer or a mage? Did their family help them get into a guild? Hmmm.

On and on it goes, in this very manner, with all sorts of characters and stories. This is a FFXIV OC, and even though the player will be progressing through this game with their new Lalafell, they're not really viewing this character (or whatever race they might choose, e.g. Roegadyn or Elezen) as the Warrior of Light. Sure, they'll play to see what the Warrior of Light experiences, but there's a distinction in the player's mind: this is Toro Tororo, of Gridania, they sometimes sign up as a guard to make money but on most days they help out their family at the botanists' guild. They've never once seen or fought a primal.

This is, fundamentally, an MMORPG OC, just specific to FFXIV. This is very much the exact line of thinking that gave us Dungeons & Dragons and other tabletop RPGs! Someone was playing war games, said to themselves, "I really don't care about Napoleon or whichever general I am as I move these armies around, I really want to more about THIS soldier here, this guy, what's THEIR story?" and pointed at a single figurine of an infantryman standing alongside identically uniformed troops (thank you to Dave Arneson and his players). The full story is a bit more complicated than that, but the process itself is central to a lot of our own musings about tales and stories that we then spin out into our own creations.

But who plays FFXIV like this? Who goes through all of that effort to NOT be in the shoes of the WoL, and why?

In short: roleplayers.

Roleplay

Let's get the giggling out of the way. You've probably seen ERP referenced - short for "erotic roleplay" - and that has a long history that spiraled out of playing pretend in the bedroom & early internet chatrooms. But no matter what big streamers or people on Aether datacenter might tell you (I'm looking at you, Gilgamesh), that's not what most people mean when they talk about roleplay. ERP is only a very small facet of roleplay in general, the same way the horror-thriller genre is only one genre among many genres of film.

Roleplay is, fundamentally, writing in a collaborative setting where one or more writers act out the parts of one or more characters and make decisions for them.

You've seen this a lot, and have probably roleplayed without realizing it. Constructing a castle made out of Legos and having the knights fight each other, or setting up Barbie and Ken at the pool for a relaxing day and some barbeque, is roleplaying. You and a friend grabbing notebooks and writing out stories or drawing comics about your favorite characters from a popular series is roleplaying. Sitting around a table and playing Dungeons & Dragons is roleplaying, even if you're not doing character voices like the folks on Critical Role. Exchanging prompts about your WoL on social media is roleplaying.

Roleplaying within the actual game of Final Fantasy XIV is an extension of the above! Some folks really like to use the tools that MMORPGs gives them - character models, emotes, a chat box - to visually play out stories about all sorts of characters. FFXIV is particularly well-suited to this due to some crazy quality-of-life features, like target tracking (not only your character's head but their eyes move to follow whoever you target), multiple idle poses, an enormous range of emotes, being able to sit or lay down on furniture, etc. So when Felicia signs in on Toro Tororo, exits Gridania, and mounts up on their chocobo to head down to Bentbranch Meadows to meet her fellow player, Diego, who's on Heuloix Durendaire in order for Toro to sign up for the latest caravan down to Highbridge in Thanalan... that's roleplay!

There's such a breadth of stories to explore in any fictional setting, and FFXIV is no exception in that regard. It's often easier to make an OC who isn't saddled with the WoL's baggage in order to explore stories like this. Maybe someone wants to roleplay an Allagan who just woke up after being on stasis for 3,000 years. Or maybe someone else wants to play a Roegadyn pirate out on the open seas, and they put into port in places like Limsa and Kugane. Maybe Rockfist and Deathstaff want to host a fighting tournament to figure out who's the baddest of the bunch, or maybe the hardworkin' Miqo'te fellow wants to head into the Goblet for the evening to find a nice restaurant for a good meal and a nice drink, and maybe avoid being pressed for conversation by anyone other than the wait staff and that bartender who used to be their childhood friend.

Roleplayers make OCs to explore settings via collaborative writing, and often times those OCs aren't WoLs.

And sometimes they are!

And sometimes people roleplay via prompts or over Discord/messaging rather than in-game!

All valid. All good.

I could go on ad nauseum, but that just about covers it. If there are questions, please ask. In comments, in tags, via Asks, etc. I'll try to answer... or point folks to people who can provide better answers than I can.

Thanks for reading!

#ffxiv #ffxiv oc #rp #ffxiv rp #roleplaying #oc #wol #collaborative writing #having fun

[tyrantisterror]

Twitter (or “X”, I guess) is currently losing its mind over a media analysis video that implies King Kong might have some racially charged (or even racist) themes. Thoughts?

I actually talked about this recently here: https://tyrantisterror.tumblr.com/post/730214779314176000/kaiju-twitter-is-currently-in-a-tizzy-because

But I also think King Kong (1933) has a somewhat undeserved sterling reputation in general. Even critics who have otherwise been quick to be hypercritical and dismissive of monster movies talk about King Kong as if it's a "perfect" movie, because historically King Kong has always been considered a classic. And, like, historically speaking, yes, King Kong will always be an important and groundbreaking film. It's a landmark moment in special effects.

But if you take the special effects out of it... you're not really left with much to rave about. The acting in King Kong ranges from passable to outright bad (and racist when you consider the islanders and Charlie the inexplicable Chinese Stereotype cook who exists for... comic relief? I guess?), the characters themselves are thin, the dialogue can be very good but also outright atrocious, and the camerawork (again, outside of special effects) is nothing to rave about. King Kong has a reputation for perfection that's solely hinged on cool special effects and a shitload of nostalgia. It does not have the depth to its storytelling of, say, Godzilla (1954), which had to claw and fight over decades to be reappraised by critics for its many virtues. All King Kong has is groundbreaking special effects.

And those special effects are really good, don't get me wrong. You feel for that monkey before the movie ends, and the wonder and terror of Skull Island's ecosystem of monsters is rightfully iconic. But if you dig past that - and you have to if you want to analyze the movie, because most of it is surface level stuff - you're not left with much to analyze, and what there is to analyze are a bunch of racist tropes that were old and timeworn by the time King Kong was made, and much more so now. Evil black savages who want to sacrifice a white woman because of her enchanting Aryan beauty, a giant ape who's horny for said white woman because of said enchanting Aryan beauty, heroic white men risking everything as they plunder an evil, backwards island of degenerate relics from the past that were best left forgotten, Charlie the Chinese Cook who is exactly as grating a racial stereotype of Chinese people as you'd expect from the 1930's - yeah, all of these tropes have racist roots, and whether or not the racism was intended by the creators doesn't really matter, because they certainly did nothing to try and mitigate it or divorce the tropes from those racist roots. It's a racist movie, an undeniably racist movie, which isn't something that should surprise people because it's from the 19fucking30's.

And that doesn't mean we have to condemn King Kong, and that watching it makes you a problematic Nazi MAGA chud, or that we're not allowed to praise what's good about it (i.e. the special effects). It just means that, maybe, after 90 years of completely untempered praise from all corners of the film world, maybe it's time to admit that King Kong, while still a classic, is not a perfect movie. That it has some flaws. And maybe we can start by admitting the really obvious flaw of it being a movie from the 1930's that reflects the 1930's attitudes about race which were, you know, not great, and then from there we could maybe talk about how it reflects 1930's attitudes about gender (also not great), and then to how the acting in it is mostly bad, and then to how the scriptwriting is... let's say uneven, and then maybe admit that really we just like the monster bits and the rest is kind of forgettable at best, and that Godzilla is a far superior movie in all respects.

But I think what's likely to happen is people will viciously defend the movie without thinking about it critically for a moment, because nuance and honest self reflection is for chumps.

[dtkqer]

wait why ranboo (idk much abt him)

ESSAY WARNING AHEAD do not fucking repost this shit anywhere holy fuck i will kill you!!!!!!! respect my boundaries :((

ok my thought process was somewhere along the lines of

rboo (kid wanting to blow up as a mcyter during summer 2020) getting attention through making fan content of dream smp (also trying to write themself into the lore) -> dream (kid who blew up as an mcyter before the pandemic hit, getting even more insane numbers) sees himself in rboo, adds him to the dream smp

-> path 1: parasocial stan delusion - ran is both viewer and cc, relatable to viewers in a down to earth way while gaining an insane amount of success very very fast -> heightened scrutiny to not fuck things up because his audience is full of normal people who care about social justice on paper (part of dreams influence in having a gender and race diverse (somewhat) audience) -> growing importance of boundaries (tm) -> fandom becomes insanely blue haired liberal and jumps on every mistake, demanding quick and GOOD apologies for both inane and serious shit -> fandom becomes volatile and creates disproportionate responses to everything -> they (rboo) become spineless -> this attitude and spinelessness leaks over to the whole of mcyt since most of dsmp shared an audience at that point -> feedback loop we see today (sidebar: growing media illiteracy combined with volatile reactions extend to lore shit on all ends and was absolutely compounded by their joining -> "sanctity" of the lore -> michael -> dsmp audiences split over the parasocial belief that character = content creator's thoughts beliefs and actions in real life instead of. acting)

-> path 2: control and queerness - branch off from blue haired liberal -> viewers have good intentions in wanting more rep in the cc space (queer and women, not so much race) -> marginalized communities cant afford to make mistakes as much as white men in the space -> disproportionate amount of criticism for both white men and marginalized ccs -> viewers attempting to take control of ccs due to ran blurring the line between viewer and cc during lockdown/most viewers' formative social years being taken from them -> not much education about queerness in the first place -> queerbaiting discourse and queer being a symbol of goodness -> people seemed to want dream to be straight and evil and ran to be gay/queer and good -> double standards when dream and ran come out because of dream's perceived power, status, and past growing up in conservative florida he had already been addressing, but ran gets a warm welcome because of bending to the audience more than dream has and past not holding as many mistakes meaning they could claim queer as an identity -> selective biphobia because if dream is queer hes a bad queer so everything he does is evil

-> return to main thread - brighton bastards formed, beeduo date and break up, everyone becomes bitter boots after lockdown ends and dream abandons his adopted bastard child he came to love that george originally gave birth to -> october and drexodus -> quackity resentment somewhere in there behind the scenes, dtkq breakup -> former audience split over lore comes back into -> qsmp shit -> dream and by extension dteam/munchy is evil except badboyhalo who supports dream but is still on qsmp because hes a lore andy -> schisms from the past continue to grow, new schism of q's side vs dream's side appears (secret third challenger of brighton floptopia) -> people air out their dirty laundry and snide comments -> november and december -> relative peace -> march-> karl gets hit by a car -> present day -> dnf sextape

i may be wrong for quite a bit of this but this is how i saw it . again this is a tumblr exclusive if you repost this anywhere even iwth my url cropped i will fucking kill you.

[meikuree]

FINALLY someone who didn't 100% love BES. I did enjoy some of it but I lean on the "disliked it on the whole" side and it's been so weird seeing everyone praise it to high heavens. I take it that you enjoyed it more than I did (I did not like a lot of the 3D visuals, unfortunately, so the visuals don't really redeem it for me), but I'd love to see some balanced takes from you anyway <3

anon, you're in good company! honestly i've been baffled by the blandly, one-note positive reception to this (30% of my grief has to do with BES's base story, and 70% has to do with uncritical fannish responses), because... to be uncharitable... I have some big problems with its construction. feel free to come off anon and kvetch in my DMs if you want, I'll probably share your sentiments. sorry for how long i've taken to answer this!

to be fair the show does some things right and I think its achievements/innovations in art style and animation are to be lauded; I'm not going to speak over that when I'm not an expert on animation or media theory, but it's a bad sign when praise about any media amounts to "well, it looks pretty" or hinges so heavily on its aesthetics. to be extremely clear this doesn't fully apply to BES, because it does have deft character work, compelling characters, and some impressive cinematic instantiation/inhabitation with its attention to setting and detail -- i was pleasantly surprised by the inclusion of deets like yaki-ire etc etc. -- but even on its purported selling points of japanese historicity and nuanced narratives about race, sexuality, gender, revenge, etc. I think it fails. it has glaring blindspots.

tldr: BES suffers from some (white) american/french narratorial sensibilities that kneecap the full potential of its story

or: BES pinged as an insufferably american and/or ahistorical rendition of its japanese building-blocks to me in some ways

it's probably just a case of misaimed audiences, and This Show Not Being For Me, but I've been baffled by:

how seamlessly some scenes around sex work and brothels and eroticism in this show slide in with orientalist tropes about japan being the Weird Sex and Kinky country despite the japanese-american creator at its helm, who's also spoken out against tropes like that -- until a buddy gave some context that those undertones seem to have been inspired by bande dessinées (french comics) with not-unsimilar tropes that may have been transplanted carelessly into BES by the studio

and this is what I mean by 'american/french' sensibilities -- I don't mean american/french in the most skin-deep representational sense, as in the studio that made it is an american-french one or whatever, as 'representation' is too often conceived on tumblr to be limited to, but on the deeper epistemological level of its worldview, frameworks of sexuality/race, and the cultural terrain it's working off or conversing with. BES includes storylines/arcs/even mawkish dialogue far more reminiscent of those in american cartoons. which is not an issue except of one of taste, but fannish responses holding it up as a groundbreaking commentary on race are orbiting a different universe imo

more egregiously it sustains overtones of that american favourite about the grand, Super Existential! Super Inevitable! and intrinsic clash of Cultures and Civilisations with a big C (a highly discredited idea in critical academic circles now, thankfully, no thanks to samuel p. huntington)

I almost wish the show had maintained a greater separation from IRL analogues or just invented a fresh fantasy universe because why set it in edo-era japan if you're not going to engage with the sociocultural norms, or narratorial traditions of that era

see: literary genres around jitsuroku (revenge narratives), how revenge would have been treated as a tool of sociocultural legitimisation then, the apparent forgettance of the entire history of nanban trade and the fact that japan as a geographical entity was not technically ethnically homogeneous, or only homogeneous from a hegemonic pov, given the existence of the ainu, the kingdom of ryukyu, and northern communities of hokkaido although tbf japan's borders probably didn't include them

i was hoping for an internal critique of or just more nuance about the 'japan = ethnically homogenous' narrative in the show and was more disappointed as it went on -- imo it's a narrative often most stridently parroted by the japanese government for nation-building interests and by others to avoid interrogations of the actual complexity of striations, divisions, etc in japan e.g. with burakumin (lower-'caste'* peoples)

* note: caste is an imperfect and not fully accurate descriptor

a significant part of my ire is reserved for the handling of 'whiteness' in this show although it's mostly hand-wringing over the complexity of intended audiences in this show, which might not be fair to blame on the creators; yes, whiteness is foreign and Other and bad, but what about the material and historical precursors that gave rise to that Otherness in the first place, where are they?; and look! whiteness is demonised; but the cartoon's being released in the USA and europe. it's certainly true that japan is institutionally hostile to foreigners and xenophobic, kudos for depicting the politics of that, but BES's american audiences mean i'm ambivalent about its in-universe premise that what is in fact an oft-fetishised trait in mixed race children (blue eyes) is bad (and the show's aesthetics don't support it; mizu's eyes are portrayed in the most beautiful way possible even though she's diagetically meant to be hideous and monstrous)

#blue eye samurai #long post #bes critical - #meikuree answers

[rantrambles]

Ever get so upset you make a Tumblr account to vent?

I haven’t even listened to The Penumbra Podcast yet but it’s on my list because it’s insanely popular and the cosplays I’ve seen are hot as hell (A+ to all the cosplayers I’ve seen you’ve done great work). Now, with the recent news surrounding the podcast, I’ll wait till it’s done if I ever do get into it. I’m Asian and part of the LGBT community but I’m not nonbinary so I can’t say much about the trans represention in the art but I wanted to add my two cents on the matter as a person of color and someone examining the situation from the outside. Also, before I get deeply into it, I’m not the only person of color with opinions on this matter so if people have their own frustrations and criticism with the racism in The Penumbra Podcast and/or the new artist they hired, definitely listen to them too. These are my own personal opinions, and I’m sure other people will disagree and that’s fine. We’re all going to have different views on this so bear that in mind. Also, feel free to correct me or add anything if I’ve missed some information. Here’s a great breakdown of the whole situation for those that don’t know what happened. Finally, I was very hesitant to post this, but I felt it was important because I make a statement at the end on how race should be presented in a podcast format so if you are interested in making a podcast and want to have a diverse range of characters, please skip to the end to read those thoughts.

I’ll start off by saying, I’m not even that upset with the new artist that The Penumbra Podcast hired. I know that statement alone is controversial but I don't personally know them, and I’m not going to judge who they are as a person by a few pieces of art they’ve made. They are the least of the problems that I have here. Since the announcement and the backlash, I’ve been scrolling through the artist’s Instagram account and I can tell why people find the designs offensive, but I’m also comparing the designs to the artist’s other work, and I honestly believe that’s just their style. They’ve exaggerated the features of just about every character they’ve made, regardless of race or gender. From what I’ve seen the sharp angles and overly round curves in the anatomy that make some of the character’s features more jarring are how they prefer to draw. I’m sure they’re capable of drawing more realistic proportions but for the most part they’re art aims to call attention, be bold, and create distinguished features. Not inherently a bad thing on its own.

And yeah I’d understand the issue if this were a scenario where the artist heard how these characters acted in the podcast and thought “hey, obviously this character is a black woman because they are super strong and therefore must have big muscles, no other woman could look like that” or “hey, this character has to be Asian because they act super seductive sometimes better draw them as such.” But from my understanding the race was already decided by previous official artists and a general description of the characters were already generated by the audience, similar to how The Magnus Archives leaned towards drawing scrawny Jon with black, greying hair and dark skin. The new artists couldn’t really change those features even if those features aren’t described in canon because a depiction that strayed too far from popular fandom interpretation would make the character’s unrecognizable to the fanbase. 

I think the reason this became such a big issue for most people is because the new Penumbra artist used their exaggerated art style when making these characters and people of color and nonbinary folks already see themselves drawn as these exaggerated caricatures all the time (with those images being used to further discriminate against them). I’m sure the artist didn’t mean for their art to be offensive, but that of course doesn’t change how it was received. 

According to some, the poses and expressions the artists chose did not fully represent the characters entirely and only served to further perpetuate harmful stereotypes, and I’ll have to take their word for it because I still haven’t listened to the podcast so I have no idea how the characters act. But again much of the criticism is based on the one line-up and doing a deeper dive into the artist’s work I managed to find artwork that was much less offensive. Here some art where Vespa is depicted in a non-violent pose and one where Vespa is in a threatening pose but not an overly violent one. Here is Peter drawn in a non-seductive pose. Hopefully, the artist truly does keep the criticisms in mind as they work on the new official art. I’m just not the type of person that wants to get the pitchforks out and cause this particular person to lose a job they seemed really excited about over their old character line-up, especially when that person is also part of a marginalized group.

Again, that’s just my opinion on that particular artist. Those who are offended by their art are still valid in how they feel, and the artist should absolutely take their criticism to heart to better how they represent the characters.

What I’m more upset about is that I think The Penumbra Podcast should never have released official art for their characters in the first place and that’s their mistake that they refuse to own up about. They have made it clear that the story was never meant to portray characters of colors, a fact emphasized by the fact they hired mostly white actors from the start. They only started releasing art of the characters to get a profit. And the thing is they know what they did was wrong. All I had to do was search Penumbra Podcast racism and there is a note on their website saying that they archived some old official art.

“We have discontinued all Penumbra merchandise that uses the original character designs, and in the meantime, any profits on the sales of that merchandise will go to the For The Gworls project. We also realize that the depiction of these characters as POC, while not appropriate for us to use in our marketing and merchandise, has nonetheless become personally meaningful to many POC listeners. For that reason, and because we do not wish to distance ourselves from our mistake, we are keeping these images on our website for archival purposes. Though we do want to make it clear that many of the main/featured voice actors are white and that we did not write the characters to represent any specific POC experience, you are, as always, free to imagine these characters in any way that you like.”

I went to their shop and they still sell posters and pins with the character’s faces on them, but they are donating it to a good cause so hopefully that stays the same. However, I still find it a little uncomfortable that they are still selling character merch and have plans to continue selling character merch. They have no right to dissuade the fans that already found representation in the characters, but they also have no right to profit off the representation that was built, regardless if they made the story. 

Let’s compare this to another piece of popular media. I love Avatar the Last Airbender and, I liked the ATLA voice actors just fine but there should have been more people of color doing voice acting behind the screen too. The voice actors for that show were mainly white too, however, the creators knew that they would be making poc characters. That’s what makes the difference. Did they still choose to go with mostly white voice actors? Yes. Could they have done better and pay more people of color? Also yes. But I’m not as furious at them because they did their research on the cultures they were basing the ATLA world off of and intentionally gave us a show where Asians could see characters that looked like them represented on the screen. The Penumbra Podcast did not do any of that. Again, they openly admitted that it was never their intention to make the character’s people of color when they made the podcast so that goes to show no research was made to properly represent specific cultures. The color of the character’s skin in their official designs therefore became more of aesthetic choice rather than representation, and it wasn’t even their aesthetic choice to begin with!

Race isn’t a color you can just throw onto the character because you feel like it. So I want this to be a lesson to anyone that wants to make a podcast: if you want to include poc characters please do some research into the cultures you plan to represent the way you would with any other form of media. Just because the audience can’t see the characters and just because it’s harder to smoothly introduce the character’s appearance doesn’t mean you’re allowed to be lazy on how you present the characters. Do research before you start writing the first episode and take the time to hire poc actors. Hiring poc actors is actually the least that can be done to show representation. Also, since the audience cannot visually see the race of the characters on a podcast and it can’t typically be described the way you would in a book, you’ll have to be creative. It’s not my job to say how, but my suggestions would be, before the fans come up with their own image of the character, you need to establish race in the first few episodes or release character profiles on a website so that the fans know you canonically intended the characters to be of a certain race even if you aren’t able to mention it in the actual podcast. If you are unwilling to do any of these then the best route is to avoid stating race at all and allow the audience to build their own representation into your form of media. However, once this happens, you are not allowed to profit off popular fan interpretations. You lose all rights to create official art or images of the characters. You cannot use “we have a diverse cast of characters” when you market your story. It doesn’t matter whether you created the content or not, you did not create the representation for those minority groups.

It’s one thing for fans to build their own inclusivity into a form of art like a podcast, but it’s another thing for the creators who never worked to make the representation happen to take advantage of the representation that the listeners built for themselves. Thank you for attending my TedTalk.

#the penumbra podcast #podcast #race #the magnus archives #diversity in podcasts #diversity #tpp #tpp fanart

[anarmel]

six of crows gang my beloved

what is fanart without me complaining about a thing i like

as a person who read SoC duology a long time ago, my SoC only related thoughts

-did they make Jesper gay and not bi?do not support that decision. that scene in a stable was kinda unnecessary (but i’m not a big fan of those kinda scenes in general) and felt like they just wanted something gay in this season and sort of a nod that they didn’t forget Jesper’s attraction to men but in process of that forgot that he’s bi. i think he should’ve had flirtatious interactions with everyone(he flirty).especially that we know that his main love interest is a man and his light crush on Kaz he should’ve flirted with a woman in this season. and i know that bi people are not obligated to date several people of all gender spectrum to know or like affirm that they’re bi but that’s in real life and SaB is a piece of media that communicates through visuals and limited dialogue and not a book where you have access to mention it in characters thoughts soo....yeah....not invisible bi representation where?and Nina is taken with her romance with Matthias already

-Nina(my beloved) and Matthias...yeah that’s the start of their story

-i liked “more soft” Kaz he felt less like an archetype of a character that he is(a traumatised bad boy who doesn’t care for anything or anyone but will eventually be “fixed” by love for a girl). book version of him works because we have his inner thoughts and machinations if he was on screen like he was in a book it just wouldn’t work as well he needs to emote and show a little bit of feelings that he experiences to work in a given medium and to not be a brick character on screen

-and Inej, my girl, my beloved . i don’t think she would sass tante Heleen while still being under a contract. i don’t understand why they took out her having panic attacks near the menagerie, and she refused Jesper’s backup(girlboss of her to do that but not being alone in that place is beneficial for mental stability !buddy system!). maybe because she is in that situation where she is still under indenture and she didn’t feel real relief and still is to take her first breath as a free person so she doesn’t feel constant fear of being robed of her freedom by the same place again? idk maaan...maybe i’m wrong but that’s jus how i feel. she is the strongest character in the series but that doesn’t mean she should be “strong” in every situation she is still a human who was treated so terribly by so many people and the menagerie represents it. ooof. in a book her strengths and weaknesses were established so well. i appreciated her fangirling for Alina though and that they didn’t brake her character in that way.her beliefs are still intact and she is apprehensive about kidnapping a saint. nice. love her

as a viewer of Shadow and Bone content without a book base but with basic knowledge of the universe and characters:

-(speaking as a slavic person in predominantly slavic society) didn’t like Zoya’s racist comment towards Alina like at all. like she is asian herself different part bur still. and i felt like her problem with Alina wasn’t race related then why throw that in? if my rival was poc i wouldn’t throw a slur at them and go a racist rout because that will not who i am(and i’m not that lazy at insulting/j) and it’s not even a part of my problem with them, i would go for something more personal and connected to the root of the problem to be a full bitter bitch. like Zoya feels useless and like she’s being replaced (right?) she could’ve commented how useless Alina is, how she can’t be strong by herself without help of darkling to reflect her own insecurities on Alina? why drag race into that problem? why? i know they had asian writers working on the script and in my opinion they did a good job at war era racist propaganda and how it ostracised Alina in society but making Zoya on a personal level a racist was kinda dumb. she’s a bitch but not a bigot

-i’m afraid of saying my thoughts on darkling/alina/mal situation because that part of the fandom really scares me. and that was not really my interest in this show

-not enough Genya(i really like her character)

as a person who was born in russia and will die in russia(not by choice) my russia related thoughts:

(i know that it’s only inspired and not based on imperial russia but i wanna nitpick and bitch about things)

-for imperial russia not lavish enough(yeah budget and stuff but it’s true) those bitches only knew how to burn gold on luxuries and wars

-Alina’s last name is Starkov. so in russian usually last names that end in -ov/-ova -ev/-eva are gendered her version is “male”. i don’t care for gendered stuff but in russian every word is that way. as a gender abolitionist i don’t care as a russian speaker kinda not right but eh. i(nb) go by my -ova last name because it flows with my name better like Alina Starkova i kinda like how it has an A at the beginning and on the end. Alina Starkov is still a cool name because fuck grammatically correct things

-i don’t understand why they decided to call uniforms kefta and not kaftan, kefta sounds more like kofta(casual shirt) and kaftan is a real thing and a nicer word in my opinion(and isn’t kefta a dish? but then again we have a dish named “herring under a fur coat”)

-do not understand the name of an episode “otkazat’sya” it means “to refuse” as in like a verb, kinda weird, “otkaz”(refusal) would suit more as a name because it’s a noun and less confusing and a cooler looking word. it just doesn’t work in russian and was kinda jarring to see it. and didn’t they call a food taster an “otkazat’sya” like huh??? he would be just a low ranked “pridvornyy”(courtier) or a “sluga”(servant) or if you want a fancier word it would be “mundschenk”(world of german origin used in imperial russia under Peter the First) but they were only for vine and drink tasting

-there is like three words in russian and pronunciation is funny. o to pronounce ц like ц and not like ts. there is no need to be soft

-and it’s so funny that magic users called Grisha it’s just a slavic name Grigori in short form. imagine a world where magic users are all called like Josh in all seriousness

-(did they have at least one russian speaking person to consult on language usage or pronunciations?they merged two books together couldn’t they change some words to more correct ones?)

-so mad that they killed of my main man Ivan he was THE russian representation of that show. such a single minded serious bitch. i connected to him so much (i love me some unimportant background characters) and that goth bitch(darkling) lives on. i only can be satisfied if one of those shadow monsters is Ivan(i only jest...unless?....)

general:

-found family is top tier, love triangles are in hell(not fun kind) but that’s my general hiccup with this franchise (it has so much potential but choses to focus heavily on romance, like romance is good and great and all that but friendship is magic)

-in conclusion i really liked the story as a separate being and it’s one of the better book to screen adaptations i’ve seen but it’s not without flaws

-i’m always critical of things that i love. it’s my passion to scrutinise and see flaws. i am but a miserable being

🖤only my personal opinions and feelings,hope you enjoyed my art despite my tirades🖤

#grishaverse #six of crows #shadow and bone #soc fanart #art #my art #souring my art with my thoughts #blue eyed white boys on top( #why wylan has blue eyes leigh why not brown-amber #brown eyes are so much better #aaaaa

[devilsskettle]

oh man i have a Lot of thoughts about the autopsy of jane doe, both positive and critical For Sure, i'd be SO excited to see your analysis of it! definitely keeping an eye out for that 👀

thanks! i'm working on something article-like to talk about the film and i don't know what i want to do with it yet lol but if i don't post it on here i'll definitely link it. it's mainly a discussion of gender in possession/occult films in the same way that carol clover describes in men, women, and chainsaws - that there are dual plot lines in occult films, usually gendered masculine and feminine respectively, where the "main" feminine plot (the actual possession) is actually a way to explore the "real" masculine plot (the emotional conflict of the "man in crisis" protagonist). typically the man in crisis is too masculine, or "closed" emotionally, where the woman is too "open," which is why she acts as the vehicle for the supernatural occurrence as well as the core emotions of the film. the man has to learn how to become more open (though if he becomes too open, like father karras in the exorcist, he has to die by the end - he has to find a happy medium, where he doesn't actually transgress gender expectations too much. clover calls this state the "new masculine," and we might apply the term "toxic masculinity" to the "closed" emotional state). part of the "opening up" feature of the story is that it allows men to be highly emotionally expressive in situations where they otherwise might not be allowed to, which is cathartic for the assumed primary audience of these films (young men). another feature of the genre is white science vs black magic (once you exhaust the scientific "rational" explanations, you have to accept that something magic is happening). the autopsy of jane doe does this even more than the films she discusses when she published the book in 1992 (the exorcist, poltergeist, christine, etc) because the supernaturally influenced young woman who becomes this kind of vehicle is more of an object than a character. she doesn't have a single line of dialogue or even blink for the entire runtime of the movie. the camerawork often pans to her as if to show her reactions to the events of the movie, which seems kind of pointless because it's the same reaction the whole time (none) but it allows the viewer to project anything they want onto her - from personal suffering to cunning and spite. 

compare again to the exorcist: is the story actually about regan mcneil? no. but do we care about her? sure (clover says no, but i think we at least feel for her situation lol). and do we get an idea of what she's like as a person? yes. even though her pain and her body are used narratively as a framework for karras' emotional/religious crisis, we at least see her as a person. both she and her mother are expendable to the "real" plot but they're very active in their roles in the "main" plot - our "jane doe" isn't afforded even that level of agency or identity. so. is that inherently sexist? well, no - if there were other women in the film who were part of the "real" plot, i would say that the presence of women with agency and identity demonstrate enough regard for the personhood of women to make the gender of the subject of the autopsy irrelevant. but there are none. of the three important women in the film, we have 1) an almost corpse, 2) an absent (dead) mother, and 3) a one dimensional girlfriend who is killed off for a man's character development/cathartic expression of emotions. all three are just platforms for the men in crisis of this narrative. 

and, to my surprise, much of the reception to the film is to embrace it as a feminist story because the witch is misconstrued as a badass, powerful, Strong Female Character girl boss type for getting revenge on the men who wronged her, with absolutely no consideration given to what the movie actually ends up saying about women. and the director has said that he embraces this interpretation, but never intended it. so like. of course you're going to embrace the interpretation that gives you critical acclaim and the moral high ground. but it's so fucking clear that it was never his intention to say anything about feminism, or women in general, or gender at all. so i find it very frustrating that people read the film that way because it's just. objectively wrong.

there's also things i want to say about this idea that clover talks about in a different chapter of the book when she discusses the country/city divide in a lot of horror (especially rape-revenge films) in which the writer intends the audience to identify with the city characters and be against the country characters (think of, like, house of 1000 corpses - there's pretty explicit socioeconomic regional tension between the evil country residents and the travelers from the city) but first, they have to address the real harm that the City (as a whole) has inflicted upon the Country (usually in the forms of environmental and economic destruction) so in order to justify the antagonization the country people are characterized by, their "retaliation" for these wrongs has to be so extreme and misdirected that we identify with the city people by default (if country men feel victimized by the City and react by attacking a city woman who isn't complicit in the crimes of the City in any of the violent, heinous ways horror movies employ, of course we won't sympathize with them). why am i bringing this up? well, clover says this idea is actually borrowed from the western genre, where native americans are the Villains even as white settlers commit genocide - so they characterize them as extremely savage and violent in order to justify violence against them (in fiction and in real life). the idea is to address the suffering of the Other and delegitimize it through extreme negative characterization (often, with both the people from the country and native americans, through negative stereotyping as well as their actions). so i think that shows how this idea is transferred between different genres and whatever group of people the writers want the viewers to be against, and in this movie it’s happening on the axis of gender instead of race, region, or class. obviously the victims of the salem witch trials suffered extreme injustice and physical violence (especially in the film as victim of the ritual the body clearly underwent) BUT by retaliating for the wrongs done to her, apparently (according to the main characters) at random, she's characterized as monstrous and dangerous and spiteful. her revenge is unjustified because it’s not targeted at the people who actually committed violence against her. they say that the ritual created the very thing it was trying to destroy - i.e. an evil witch. she becomes the thing we're supposed to be afraid of, not someone we’re supposed to sympathize with. she’s othered by this framework, not supported by it, so even if she’s afforded some power through her posthumous magical abilities, we the viewer are not supposed to root for her. if the viewer does sympathize with her, it’s in spite of the writing, not because of it. the main characters who we are intended to identify with feel only shallow sympathy for her, if any - even when they realize they’ve been cutting open a living person, they express shock and revulsion, but not regret. in fact, they go back and scalp her and take out her brain. after realizing that she’s alive! we’re intended to see this as an acceptable retaliation against the witch, not an act of extreme cruelty or at the very least a stupid idea lol. 

(also - i hate how much of a buzzword salem is in movies like this lol, nothing about her injuries or the story they “read” on her is even remotely similar to what happened in salem, except for the time period. i know they don’t explicitly say oh yeah, she was definitely from salem, but her injuries really aren’t characteristic of american executions of witches at all so i wish they hadn’t muddied the water by trying to point to an actual historical event. especially since i think the connotation of “witch” and the victims of witch trials has taken on a modern projection of feminism that doesn’t really make sense under any scrutiny. anyway)

not to mention the ending: what was the writer intending the audience to get from the ending? that the cycle of violence continues, and the witch’s revenge will move on and repeat the same violence in the next place, wherever she ends up. we’re supposed to feel bad for whoever her next victims will be. but what about her? i think the movie figures her maybe as triumphant, but she’s going to keep being passed around from morgue to morgue, and she’s going to be vivisected again and again, with no way to communicate her pain or her story. the framework of the story doesn’t allow for this ending to be tragic for her, though - clearly the tragedy lies with the father and son, finally having opened up to one another, unfortunately too late, and dying early, unjust deaths at the hands of this unknowable malignant entity. it doesn’t do justice to her (or the girlfriend, who seems to be nothing but collateral damage in all of this - in the ending sequence, when the police finds the carnage, it only shows them finding the bodies of the men. the girlfriend is as irrelevant to the conclusion as she is to the rest of the plot). 

but does this mean the autopsy of jane doe is a “bad” movie? i guess it depends on your perspective. ultimately, it’s one of those questions that i find myself asking when faced with certain kinds of stories that inevitably crop up often in our media: how much can we excuse a story for upholding regressive social norms (even unintentionally) before we have to discount the whole work? i don’t think the autopsy of jane doe warrants complete rejection for being “problematic” but i think the critical acclaim based on the idea that it’s a feminist film should be rejected. i still consider it a very interesting concept with strong acting and a lot of visual appeal, and it’s a very good piece of atmospheric horror. it’s does get a bit boring at certain points, but the core of the film is solid. it’s also not trying to be sexist, arguably it’s not overtly sexist at all, it’s just very very androcentric at the expense of its female characters, and i’m genuinely shocked that anyone would call it feminist. so sure, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water, but let’s also be critical about how it’s using women as the stage for men’s emotional conflict 

also re: my description of this little project as “a film isn’t feminist just because there’s a woman’s name in the title” - i actually don’t want to skim over the fact that “jane doe” isn’t a real name. of the three women in the film, only one has a real name; the other two are referred to by names given to them by men. i’ll conclude on this note because i want to emphasize the lack of even very basic ways of recognizing individual identity afforded to women in this film. so yeah! the end! thanks for your consideration if you read this far! 

#the autopsy of jane doe #men women and chainsaws #horror #also to be clear i'm not saying that the exorcist is somehow more feminist because. it's not. i'm just using it as a frame of reference #you'd think a film from 2016 would escape the ways gender is constructed in one from 1973 but that's not really the case #i actually rewatched the end of the movie to make sure that what i said about the girlfriend's body not being found at the end was accurate #and yeah! it is! the intended audience-identified character shifts to the sheriff who - that's right! - is also a man #the camerawork is: shot of the dead son / shot of the sheriff looking sad / shot of the dead father / shot of the sheriff looking sad / #shot of jane doe / shot of the sheriff looking upset angry and suspicious #which is how we're supposed to feel about the conclusion for each character #the girlfriend is notably absent in this sequence #anyway! this is less about me condemning this movie as sexist and more about looking at how women in occult horror #continue to be relegated to secondary plot lines at best or to set dressing for the primary plot line at worst #and what that says about identification of viewers with certain characters and why writers have written the story that way #i think the reception of the film as Feminist might actually point to a shift in identification - but to still be able to enjoy the movie #while identifying with a female character you need to change the narrative that's actually presented to you #hence the rampant impulse to misinterpret the intention of the filmmakers #we do want it to be feminist! the audience doesn't identify with the 'default' anymore automatically #i think that's actually a pretty positive development at least in viewership - if only filmmakers would catch up lol #oh and i only very briefly touched on this here but the white science vs black magic theme is pretty clearly reflected in this film also

[toxicsamruby]

1/2 i think the thing that makes it harder to engage with race in supernatural (at least for me, idk abt white fans) is that at the end of the day, the actors are white. the characters are white. the writers are white. there's no such thing as race-coding the way there is with gender or queerness. like, we talk about how supernatural accidentally gave us some (poor, but doesn't-matter-bc-it's-still-fun) queer rep and we can take that and deconstruct it and project/investigate the inherent

2/2 queerness that main(!) characters have and we can even speculate about [GUNSHOT] and we get something out of it! something good and fun! but engaging with race on supernatural.. like, what is there to get? examining the way poc are treated is just traumatic (again, at least for me), and thinking about people using it as tumblr brain food when it's actually emblematic of white supremacy narratives being upheld and /real/ actors of color constantly being sidelined just. does not sit right with me

i understand what ur coming from and i absolutely didnt mean to say that anybody especially not white fans should take the racism in supernatural lightly or use it as “brain food.” its absolutely a serious matter! but race is present in the text from premise to execution to audience and the fact is that valid readings of the text MUST include a reading of race, white supremacy, and eugenics. no, its not a fun topic to think about, and it’s one that maybe people are scared to address bc they’re worried abt being canceled or whatever, but the fact is that when you engage w deeply racist media such as supernatural you cant in good conscience say Well it bothers me to examine the presence of race in this story so i’m going to focus on analyzing aspects of the text that are more fun for me.

this DOES NOT MEAN that anybody (ESPECIALLY not white people) should take racism lightly. it doesn’t mean they should turn it into an abstract intellectual exercise. it definitely doesn’t mean that white people should feel that they have the same expertise in deconstructing characters and narratives of color as they do in deconstructing female or lgbt characters and narratives. what it DOES mean is that race MUST play a part in how you read the text. people who claim to engage with supernatural on a deeper level (and by that i mean people who regularly read/post meta or talk about “the secret good supernatural in our heads”) MUST ALSO engage with racism. it isn’t enough to say Yeah supernatural is racist but i’m still going to enjoy and consume and create transformative fan content that replicates the racism embedded in supernatural. christianity as the underpinning law of the supernatural universe, monsters as inherently Other and in need of extermination, the consistent sidelining and villainizing of characters of color, these are all things that people need to start interrogating, and interrogation of these things HAS to become a part of mainstream fan culture in the same way interrogation of, for example, dean’s relationship to masculinity and femininity/castiel’s relationship with gayness and authority and free will/sam’s relationship with monstrosity as a function of lgbt coding has become a part of mainstream fan culture.

because the fact is that That is what engaging critically with a racist text MEANS. it doesn’t mean acknowledging that it’s racist as lip service and then moving on. if race is not an active and ongoing part in fan discussion and analysis of the show, then fans are not engaging critically, they are just consuming and excusing a racist text. either you’re actively discussing and pushing against racism in supernatural, or you’re accepting it. and honestly if, for whatever reason, you aren’t comfortable with interrogating the element of race in supernatural and integrating it into your analysis of the show, you really should just not engage with supernatural.

#im concluding with the general you not pointed at the asker specifically #and this answer is a general answer bc this is something that ive been meaning to articulate and post #it's not aggressive towards you the asker at all im actually really glad you sent this because i HAVE noticed the response ur talking abt #as in white people saying things like yeah race in supernatural is a critical perspective on it that we can joke abt and take lightly just #like gender and sexuality perspectives #so thank you for asking #asks #this is okay to rb btw i actually want people to rb this

[smolstarthief]

Persona 5/Persona 5 Strikers: Pro-Police or Anti-Police?

Hoo boy... So this honestly has been a LONG time coming on my end because I have seen so much of that debate on social media (Twitter namely) and I can see the points of BOTH sides but there have been moments where it just got out of hand... Especially whenever people tried to put in a more grey/nuanced take only to be slammed and taken out of context. Even repeatedly mentioning the interrogation at the beginning of P5 which, I will admit has gotten tiresome. At least for me, I do still feel for Joker and I wished the game acknowledged his trauma more but there's a thing called, "beating a dead horse" and this is one along with "Haru says ACAB" in Strikers (which was done THREE TIMES in the same arc and it got annoying fast, like shut up already! We get it!). So, let's dive in a little bit:

MAJOR SPOILERS UNDER THE CUT!!!

Persona 5/Persona 5 Royal

Now let me just say I know! Police in Japan are just as bad if not worse than the West and I STILL hate the idea of Makoto wanting to become a cop for such naive reasons (especially with what happened to Sae, her own sister!)... But there are at least some of form of nuances sometimes and by that I mean, I can see what they were trying to do? I do agree that P5/P5S backpedaled SEVERELY by deciding to sweep issues under the rug after addressing them and not continuing from such. In fact I feel like it could have been a hell of a lot better. But P5 did something different compared to previous games and addresses the issues DIRECTLY right at the beginning of said game! It was tense and horrifying, but needed. Of course... They then sweep it under the rug and act like nothing traumatic happened to our protag which is NOT a good look at all and I'm still pissed off about it. In the main game's case, it's portrayed as more black and white with only a SMALL amount of nuance like that cop that was trying to help Futaba when she went out by herself and got lost (which people ignore entirely by the way). So I CAN see where people got the "anti-police" message from... But that's only the tip of the iceberg as it's ACTUALLY more about Systematic Corruption, not exactly or JUST police corruption. Namely in politics with Shido and the Conspiracy (which is apparently still somewhat around in Strikers until Owada's downfall) controlling everything all the way to law enforcement. The force had been basically under his payroll (including the corrupt SIU Director before his death) whether by force or not (mostly not in this case though). Now honestly, the police depicted there are undoubtedly rotten to the core save for a VERY SMALL handful (the cop that was trying to help Futaba which, again, gets ignored by several). Look at the interrogators who ruthlessly beat and drug a minor without any second thought or remorse for example. But again, the black and white narrative the game kept unwittingly doing ended up being to its detriment in a way. I'm not defending those assholes AT ALL! They deserved every punishment given to them! But for a game that goes on about grey morality... It doesn't quite deliver on that. Still though, it does emphasize that it's more of the fault of the whole corrupt system, not just one part of it. There needs to be change and reform which is what our MCs were trying to do in a way (more like inspiring change but still). In the end, it's all about the following:

Corruption and abuse of power.

Again the police depicted in this game were incompetent at best, corrupt at worse with very few silver linings. But it's not just them but rather the one person responsible for the whole mess. Who had them under his payroll? Who controlled them and by extension all of Tokyo? Who was willing to dispose of anyone who "outlives their usefulness" or is perceived as a threat to what he wants (including his own family)?

SHIDO AND BY EXTENSION THE CONSPIRACY

Bottom line: They are definitely a problem but it's not just them.

"But, Joker and his trauma?"

I definitely understand that and still do. I fully believe he has and still has trauma with the police. Easy! But... I do feel like people go too far with it sometimes. It's hard to explain but there have been moments where people either use it as a justification/argument against someone trying to provide a more nuanced view of things or... Dare I say, depict him like a "uwu soft traumatized boi." Like I said, it's hard to explain on my end so feel free to ignore it. Everyone deals with trauma differently so there is STRONG chance that I'm overanalyzing it. I just remember moments where I just feel a little, I guess annoyed? I'm not sure exactly but final thing: I understand what he went through and I can't imagine how long it would take to recover but I hope he DOES overcome it.

"Sae? Akechi?"

Yep, even though their jobs are different, they are by and large members of law enforcement no matter how you spin it. Both were broken in a way. Akechi is pretty easy to explain with how Shido negatively impacted his life but not much about Sae, who dealt with sexism/misogyny at her workplace along with the trauma of her father's (also a cop) death. She no doubt had some idealism only to be hit with the fact that she's gonna have to use underhanded/downright illegal tactics to get by and even rise up the ranks. She, therefore ended up (well, nearly) corrupted herself before coming to her senses. That's honestly one of the BIGGEST REASONS why I felt like Makoto joining the force to become a police commissioner isn't a good, even a downright naïve, idea. I honestly would have been somewhat fine with it if it weren't for that fact among other things. Regardless of her willpower, it will go south fast.

Now... Onto Strikers!

Persona 5 Strikers

Since the game came out and I started playing it, I still feel like the system is still beyond saving, especially when attempting to do it from the inside. But I don't mind the added nuances that P5 didn't do much of. It's still continuing the critiques, just shows more of what does happen within said system and even has an ACTUAL officer (Zenkichi) say, "Yeah, my job sucks, everyone's corrupt, there are much better ways to do things and make a change but not this. I'm only staying because I have a daughter to take care of and it's all I know. I'm no different from them." Was it all handled well? I wouldn't say "yes" (Joker's trauma is BARELY addressed at all of course) but a little better than what P5's narrative did which only addressed the issues but not exactly follow up on them. Now to be fair... In the system, regardless of where you live, any one within it who remotely tries to do something or speak against it either lose their jobs or even go "missing" irl. Those have happened and it's more proof that yeah, it's rotten to the core. There's no denying it but regardless, that's NOT what the game is about at all. At least that's what I feel about it as it's only PART of the narrative. I think Zenkichi puts it best here:

Speaking of Zenkichi... Oh boy... Now I definitely understand some of the criticisms with him but honestly, he was the best written (PT) character I've ever encountered! He was honestly the perfect representation of those that genuinely want to help and do good, only to be held back by an extremely harsh reality. It was already hinted at with Sae but here? It 100 percent confirms just how harsh and even cutthroat it can be if it could break someone's idealism so badly. Even Kaburagi of all people thinks the same thing Zenkichi said:

Then there's his past and it's a tragic one! But let's look more at the decisions he ended up making:

While it was no doubt done to protect his daughter, he ended making a selfish decision along with a selfless one (which was brilliant!) with not only allowing the cover up of his wife's death and denying justice for her, but also ruining an innocent person and their family's lives.

It's horrible, but also... There's a grey area/nuance as with the rest of his character. It was both understandable, but also wrong as he, as Akane's Shadow puts it:

He sacrificed his values, his morals, all for the sake of having a peace of mind. Speaking of Akane, she's also an interesting case in a way that she more or less perfectly represents the more "black and white" views on justice in general. Namely the more toxic/biased kind. Her reasons are also understandable but she was also acting selfishly by only focusing on how SHE was effected by Aoi's death and not even considering those that were also grieving her death and/or that people grieve/handle grief differently than her. But back on topic.

Her own views and beliefs that law enforcement basically SHOULD be dismantled (mostly out of said childish bias and black & white views) and it's framed as WRONG and it's very much correct on that. Chaos and order are two sides of the same coin, one can't exist without the other. When I say ACAB, I'm calling for reform, defund, have the corrupt held accountable for EVERYTHING and even face jail time for their crimes! Defund the police, have the ones that arrest, harm, and even murder out of bias (race, gender, etc.), lose their badges/jobs and locked up, make improvements! It's saying that there IS still corruption out there and there's no denying it. But fully eliminating the law in general will just lead to more problems. Now granted, she's young and clearly doesn't fully understand why those views are ultimately wrong but still... It was a very interesting subject to tackle and I feel like they handled it well.

Now back to Zenkichi, he was at first in denial about his decisions ultimately being the wrong ones too and even tries to justify it. Of course, his Shadow said otherwise and that was when he finally admitted that he really did act no different from the criminals he despised. But it also doesn't mean he can't redeem himself and that's what ultimately leads to his new resolve:

That right there along with everything else! There's the nuance! And ultimately despite some hiccups, Strikers handled the grey morality and nuance beautifully! Especially regarding law enforcement! Dare I say, even better than the base game! It continues the critiques with no problem but also showing different sides and areas of it! There is good and evil, but what about in-between? What about the more greyer area? It still says that there IS corruption, sometimes even beyond saving but... Sometimes a small silver lining is hidden somewhere.

Now, the ultimate question:

Is P5 & P5S (namely the latter) Pro-Police or Anti-Police?

Personally, my answer is this: Neither.

Why? What theme do they both have in common?

JUSTICE

Someone puts it best on Twitter that the games are more pro-justice and I fully agree!

P5/P5S gives the idea about following your OWN justice, your OWN moral code and rules, paving your OWN path and not let others dictate it! That's what the MCs ultimately start to learn in both games. Therefore it's pro-justice. Again, do I agree that the system is beyond saving? Yeah. Do I at least acknowledge and understand what the narratives are trying to say and nuances regardless even if I don't agree with some writing decisions (ex: Makoto wanting to become a commissioner despite everything)? Also yes. But at the same time, don't judge a book by its cover for other people (not just law enforcement and politics mind you). Especially some that genuinely DO want to help at best. That there is nuance and greyness, just have to look closely. Some of the MCs are still TERRIBLY written and executed (even annoying) but the message was still somewhat there.

Final Thoughts

Now I fully understand how you all feel of course! I still believe in ACAB and even I agree that maybe I'm one to talk and have a lot more to learn about the world... This is just my own attempt at putting my own two cents in. If you disagree, that's fine! This is just what I've felt should be at least talked about more often. And I tried to phrase it as best as I can without coming off as insensitive or ignorant and if I did, I sincerely apologize for that! I'm not trying to say, come off as a "bootlicker" or any of the sort. I'm just trying show discuss more of the grey areas and nuances that are, more often than not, constantly overlooked. How one interprets both games is ultimately up to them. You, the player. And this is my own interpretation. Simple as that. I hope you all have a good day/afternoon/evening!

#starchild rambles #analysis #persona 5 #persona 5 royal #persona 5 strikers #p5 #p5r #p5s #p5s spoilers #p5r spoilers #p5 spoilers #long post

[hopeless-eccentric]

Oh boy. I’ve been having a lot of thoughts about the omegaverse lately as a conceptual thing. What a landmine of a trope. Thanks to a pal of mine for getting me up to date on the politics of this stuff. You know who you are <3.

I think we’d all live in a happier world if writers and readers alike paid a little more mind to when the assignment of a certain character to a certain role crosses a line from harmless fun to genuinely representing a group of people in a negative or fetishizing light, especially in regards to race, sexuality, and gender/gender expression. As much as some LGBTQ+ people have reclaimed this trope in certain ways, it is still absolutely capable of harming people if not handled correctly.

It’s complicated to get into because plenty of people view the omegaverse as a space to explore gender expression, societal pressures, and other topics. A lot of LGBTQ+ people have defiantly built their own corner of the trope to examine, criticize, and subvert the pieces of the universe, which can be especially empowering for those involved. 

The operating word in that sentence is “defiantly.” The trope itself is still so inseparable from its association with harmful gender roles, fetishism of trans people, homophobia, and numerous other issues that its reclamation and examination is still seen as revolutionary. That means your better intentions can often not matter if you’re not being careful with how you apply the trope to the source material, particularly in regards to marginalized groups.

Without a deft hand and genuine examination of the intersecting identities of the characters, the application of the omegaverse to canon can come off as tone deaf at best and genuinely malicious at worst. 

For example, if a certain character’s identities are associated with negative and/or sexualized stereotypes of weakness, passivity, or femininity*, it’s probably best not to make said character an omega without genuinely picking apart these intersecting identities in the text of the fic. 

The presence or lack of homophobia, transphobia, racism, etc in the canon universe does not matter. Every person both creates and consumes media from the lens of the real world, so any piece of work has the potential to emulate real world stereotypes and cause real world harm as a result.

I’d encourage my fellow writers to take their time and be conscious of what could unintentionally read as negative stereotyping or fetishism. I’d encourage my fellow readers to actively avoid work that does not take these precautions. I genuinely believe a lot of harmful work and its platforming comes from places of ignorance, so I hope this may have been enlightening for some of you.

I don’t have the time to get into all the nuances of this particular trope. There are a few too many to count, which is why I will never write it. I think it’s better to leave some leaves unturned than to portrays certain groups in hurtful and/or negative lights or normalize harmful stereotypes/fetishization to an impressionable audience who may look up to me. 

That being said, be careful, be considerate, and most importantly, keep an open mind.

*See note at the end of the tags

#s/o to my beloved friend who will go unnamed on this post but brought this up #like we were talking about the amount of care it would take to make something for tpp #and yeah i had thoughts #and i also have a blog so you have to hear them #also dont come at me with if theres no smut it's not fetishism arguments #the trope started as a sm*t trope come the hell on #this genuinely started as a conversation over a picnic #if you wanna know what a picnic with anne hopelesseccentric is like #also im hoping i dont have to elaborate why it's not ok to dehumanize marginalized people #as for the note im referring to male-gaze style femininity i.e. one is weaker lacks ability lacks agency #one is usually dehumanized and reduced into a role of caretaker or sex object and the passivity often plays into this #this isn't like. bashing women. femininity is beautiful and inspiring and empowering for a lot of people and that's not what im criticizing #anyway long story short im never writing one for penumbra #tpp

[c-is-for-circinate]

So here’s the thing:  I really, honestly do not get the appeal in Widojest.  I don’t entirely see the appeal in Caleb Widogast.  And I’m okay with that; I have other faves who I pay more attention to; I get to do that, because my show is 3-5 hours long every goddamn week that it airs and there is plenty of time for literally everyone.  And I do not have to be a Caleb stan to understand at a really fundamental level that, hey, even if he isn’t important to me?  He is very clearly very important to a lot of actual real-live people.

There will always, always be stories that aren’t for you.  Maybe they just don’t speak to you at all.  Maybe they hit buttons in your brain that remind you of real hurts.  It’s always going to happen.  In a perfect world, with perfect representation where there are stories for you everywhere, there will still be stories that aren’t.

And it hurts, I know it does, when you feel like the story you want for you doesn’t exist anywhere, but here’s one more story that isn’t it.  It hurts when there’s a story that you thought was for you and then it turns out not to care about you at all.  There should be more stories for all of us, especially the stories that feel like they’re not getting told.

That is a real, valid pain.  We all clear on that?

Good.  Because this next part is also absolutely true:

The story that is not for you is very important to someone else.  And particularly in fandom spaces, there is a very good chance that the someone else in question has experienced marginalization on the basis of gender, sexuality, race, disability, mental illness, or general trauma.

The story that is not for you has worth.

People who find worth in stories that are not for you--even if your story is underrepresented and their story really has been told one hundred billion times before, even then--ARE NOT INHERENTLY BAD PEOPLE for finding worth in those stories.

There’s this extra dimension to this particular ship war, where I think a lot of Beaujester shippers are so angry not because of what’s actually happened, but because of what years of pattern recognition has taught them (taught us?) must inevitably be coming next.  When a leading man in a fantasy series, on an arc of learning to better himself and maybe even value or forgive himself, repeatedly expresses unrequited love for a girl who he believes is too good for him, the narrative will give her to him in the end.  This is a pattern and it’s real and its existence hurts, outside of Widojest, just in general in the world.

And on one hand: that has not happened yet with Widojest, and there is a very good chance, for a million reasons, that it won’t!  And on the other hand: even if it did happen, that would not be an excuse for violent or abusive behavior, or to dismiss the worth that story might have to other people!  And on the third hand: yes, I totally see why it feels like that’s the trope being invoked here, and why that is scary, and why it hurts!

We know about Caleb’s feelings in this one specific way and we don’t know about Jester’s.  In theory that means that Jester’s feelings could be ANYTHING, and this could go ANYWHERE, and of course Caleb and Liam would respect Jester and Laura’s ‘no’, and there is plenty of agency all around and that’s great.  In practice, it can feel like another reminder of that old trope, where the male lead character’s emotions are given to the audience like something important, and the female lead character’s feelings are generally passed off as vague platonic affection until the final romantic reveal, and we have to extrapolate what was going through her head the whole time.

We know that Critical Role cares about representation and queer visibility, and without a network to fight, they get to make the show as gay as they want.  In theory this means that we can trust them to give us the rep we’re craving.  In practice, we worry, because in an ad-libbed show where you don’t have to plan ahead or deliberately fight for representation, it’s easy to accidentally slip into old familiar patterns and biases without even noticing they’re there.

We know that Laura’s agency and Jester’s agency matter here, that of course it’s not just about Caleb, and in theory that should make ANY romantic ending better and good and right and fine, but in practice--well, what does it mean, when you’ve got agency over a story, and use it to choose to tell what feels like the same old story all over again?

And right, let me say it again: none of this has happened yet.  QUITE LIKELY NONE OF IT EVER WILL.  We don’t know!!!  Not even the players know!!!

Which, maybe that’s the scariest thing of all.  When I’m watching a scripted show, I usually know what to expect out of the formula.  I know when a show is going to be queerbaity and then quit gay chicken at the last second.  I expect it.  I can feel out how trustworthy the showrunners are in a few episodes, and while sometimes there’s a long slow decline or a short sharp surprise, after 20-30 years of media engagement, I know what I’m going to get.

I suspect that CR feels like it should be more “trustworthy,” to many Beaujester shippers, in terms of providing the kind of story they’re craving--but it’s so hard to know for sure.  It’s so hard to know whether to brace for disappointment, or be resigned, or ragequit and be done with it, or most terrifyingly at all, to be hopeful.

It’s hard.  I do get that it’s hard.

And it’s really easy, isn’t it, to go on twitter and tumblr and into the comments sections on critrole.com and fuck knows where else, I’m assuming there’s a Discord somewhere that I’m not cool enough to know about, and be furious.  To be mean.  To blame the fear of not getting the story that will mean something to me, again, on anyone else.  To make fucking death threats, I don’t even know why that seems acceptable or easy to anyone, but it’s just words typed on a keyboard, so yeah, I guess it’s easy.

Do not fucking do that!  Don’t do it!  Whether you identify with everything I’ve said here or you have a completely different reason to be full of rage and fury, don’t do the furious threats thing!  Just don’t!  That, also, is easy!!!  And doing absolutely nothing is at least as effective as being violently angry at strangers on the internet, so it has that going for it as well.

There are a lot of feelings to be had here, and I’m sure not going to sum them all up or solve the problem of representation in fiction in one tumblr post, but maybe we can change this discussion a little.  Maybe we can redirect.

I started this post by saying that I’m not the world’s biggest Caleb fan.  I don’t mind him, but his story doesn’t particularly speak to me.  I don’t love the amount of space he takes up in the ongoing fandom discussion.  I particularly don’t love that every single time he comes up, the volume of discussion doubles because of people vociferously objecting to every single thing about him.

So I find the parts of the story that are for me.  I let the people who want to have Caleb discussions have their Caleb discussions, because they are enjoying a thing they like and I’m glad for him, and then I host a discussion about Beau or Fjord or Caduceus or whoever, because I WANT TO HAVE FUN TOO.  I am watching this show because it is full to the brim with things I like and have thoughts about.  There is SO MUCH OF THAT TO GO AROUND.

#critical role #fuck it I'm maintagging this #beaujester #discourse #go hog wild in the reblogs y'all #as always abusive asks/replies get ignored #genuine asks/replies get answered as the executive function allows #which is to say probably not but I'll give it a go

[turneverybodyintopuppets]

Hi. The following is my attempt to systematically hash out the “Mr. Infodump” controversy in the TS fandom. It’s primarily for my benefit, but I’m posting it on the off chance it helps someone else who’s just as confused/dismayed as I was. I’m not attempting to argue for blind absolution (”Thomas is an angel who can do no wrong!”) or cancellation (“He’s no better than the likes of J.K. Rowling!”), just to present as intellectually honest an assessment as I can make of what happened and the degree to which the TS team is responsible.

Laconic: Thomas Sanders, a content creator on youtube, posted a skit in which a character calls an aspie-coded character “Mr. Infodump”. Several fans have expressed hurt and anger over the use of a trait associated with neurodivergence as an insult.

My own initial impression: I’m on the autism spectrum myself, and personally, “Mr. Infodump” didn’t register as offensive to me; in fact, as a huge Logan kinnie, I liked that a neurodiverse trait I see in myself was being explicitly linked to my favorite character. That said, there are many in the community who feel deeply hurt and betrayed, and it would be a) irresponsible and b) close-minded to handwave their concerns. Thus:

[Abridged version: Bolded]

Context for use of the word:

Line from Roman: “I was going for regal sophistication [in last commercial pitch], but Mr. Infodump over here [*gestures to Logan*] wasn’t cooperating.” Defensive tone, alluding to the fact that Logan’s commercial pitch included excessive product information that would leave buyers disengaged.

History: Roman regularly invents nicknames for fellow sides and employs them in a manner that can range from fond teasing to a juvenile way of insulting the side he’s presently bickering with.

Names previously directed at Logan include “Calculator watch,” “Egghead,” and “No-Funsen Honeydew… Doo.” They generally play off of Logan’s tendency toward being uptight, stereotypically nerdy, and eager to furnish the group with information in the capacity of a teacher.

In this particular instance, I doubt anyone would say the word’s use was “malicious,” but it wasn’t “affectionate” either. Roman is visibly preoccupied and defensive in the scene, throwing out a nickname offhand.

Power Dynamic: There is no imbalance of power between Logan and Roman that would indicate anything resembling a bully-victim relationship. Logan responds to the word in the same manner he does Roman’s other antics and displays no particularly hurt reaction.

In-Universe Response: No character corrects or condemns Roman’s use of the term. This may, however, be because Logan is the first to respond, armed with his own complaints about the others’ commercials.

Meta-Level Implications: The audience is not encouraged to agree with Roman’s sentiment that infodumping is a negative trait anymore than they are his other commentary on Logan via nicknames like “Egghead,” because Logan’s role in the story consistently proves it wrong; all that infodumping saved an unconscious Roman from his murder-happy brother, for one, and the audience knows it. Given the posturing and defensiveness that accompany Roman’s delivery of the line, it’s clear the creators were communicating that he was in the wrong to say it. That, and Logan will almost certainly reinforce this by verbally decimating someone in the next episode, as per usual.

I think that last point is key. People will accuse others of infodumping in a negative way IRL—I know I’ve been called far worse for failing to mask—and to pretend that such things don’t exist in fiction is misrepresenting reality. Instead, creators can and should include minority characters (race, sexuality, gender, neuroatypicality, etc.) *confronting* discrimination, dealing with it complexly, and showing both the misguided character and the audience how wrong they are. Logan resonates with me—and other aspies, I think—largely because of how he clearly struggles in dealing with the other sides’ occasional criticism of his eccentricities, but he ultimately remains committed to his identity and ideals. If the TS crew continues to write a show that reinforces the fact that his neurodivergent qualities are what make him strong—and god knows there's not much media that does this well—, they’re doing something incredibly important for us.

The issue here, then, wasn’t the show promoting ableism as a message, because its handling of the conversation here doesn’t. Rather, it was the use of a term that many consider inherently ableist as an insult. So:

“Infodump” the word:

I find this fascinating, actually—Science is discovered. Math is discovered**. Language? Language is unequivocally invented. We’ve create these words with combinations of mouth-sounds, and we’ve assigned them meaning.

But the thing is, people have different backgrounds and experiences that define both who they are and the nuances of the meaning they tie to those mouth-sounds

Basic example of varied mental prototypes: I live in the northeast USA, so when I hear the word “bird,” the first thing that pops into my head is a bluejay or robin. If you ask my friend who’s studying in Brazil, though, he’d likely think of a macaw or toucan. 

For me, “spring” = my mom’s pink zinnia garden and “chocolate” = a square of hershey melting against gooey marshmallow. This idea of memories and experience informing word-meaning mapping, of course, extends to a) more nuanced concepts and b) a more subconscious level of understanding. Poetry in particular, I think, tends to play with this to invoke the sensory experiences it does... I could infodump about translated poetry but that’s a whoooollleee other thing and I’m getting off track.

But essentially, an individual’s experience of any given word, to a degree, is subjective. Our dictionary definitions are merely approximations of a collective understanding of that mouthsound-to-meaning mapping, and we have to update those definitions as language evolves (remember when “Google” couldn’t be used as a verb?)

So, what happens if I look up “infodumping”? TVTropes tells me it’s a “type of exposition that’s particularly long and wordy”. UrbanDictionary says its “used to deposit large amounts (usually entire articles) of information in online forums without summarizing or paraphrasing the information.” I reach the resources that explain it in the context of autism and ADHD over halfway down the Google results. The word “infodumping” has quite a few circulating meanings, and the one associated with neurodivergence isn’t as visible as we’d like it to be.

From what I understand, Thomas Sanders and co. merely knew “infodumping” as the practice of talking at length about a subject, like closing a rant with a friendly “aw, sorry for infodumping on ya” and such. This was exactly how Logan opens his commercial, so they stuck it in as a—frankly, kinda feeble—nickname á la the creative genius behind “Mr. Smarty... Pants”. They had no knowledge of the term’s gravity to the autism and ADHD community, because they haven’t been exposed to settings that use that definition.

So, where does that leave us on accountability? If they’re ultimately not producing ableist content, do Thomas Sanders and his team have the responsibility to be aware of how an insult featuring this particular word might be inherently triggering to a community?

Many accounts show that the inclusion of the term caused real emotional harm and as content creators—particularly ones with a relatively young fanbase—the TS team should have taken more precautions. A more diverse staff/writing room may have caught this, given how egregious some fanders found the error. Furthermore, why shouldn’t it fall on neurotypical people in general to “educate themselves” on these issues, as in the cases of other minority groups?

That said, however, can any creative team be reasonably expected to know of any-and-all potentially triggering content? I’ve avoided speaking of Thomas Sanders’ personal character to maintain some impartiality, but a long history of promoting representation and careful content warnings does suggest a genuine commitment to self-correcting. Accepting the well-intentioned criticism of fanders—many of whom are so broken up by this precisely because of the amount of faith they place in the TS team—and taking active steps to change is ultimately the best course of action, and I, for one, will be sticking around to see the results.

#sanders sides #logan sanders #neurodiverse character #infodumping about infodumping #wow ive really peaked huh #ts logan #ts critical #ts criticism #ts discourse #sanders sides discourse

[illegiblewords]

On FFXIV and the Devs

Listen, I know I’ve been mostly blogging FFXIV for the past couple years--but technically speaking this is my general blog. Some of my followers rn are from Final Fantasy XIV specifically, others are from well before that. I’m very lucky to have friends from lots of places so this is kind of talking to both for a sec.

Some of my past fandoms I think legitimately wound up traumatizing me a bit. Not everyone in them of course, but like. What [INSERT UNSPECIFIED FANDOM] ended up becoming? I started seeing people commit and endorse violent crimes against others over fiction. It became controversial to say you sincerely loved a character as an individual, shaped by all the life experiences they’d had. Wanting to see more of an individual character’s story for who they were and not just what they’d suffered was something I saw people get harassed over. And I’ve seen creators for that fandom behave in ways that were anywhere from lazy to apathetic to downright hateful. There was no joy or love for the characters themselves--only a desire to control and manipulate readers in other aspects of their lives. Final Fantasy XIV fans, overall, love the developers. For the first iteration of this game (so 1.0) it almost got canceled entirely because the way it was presented didn’t work. The devs created a storyline that amounted to a near apocalypse, and when they took things offline to revise/reboot the game? They presented it as the heroes falling to that near-apocalypse.

When 2.0/A Realm Reborn (the current starting point for the game) got brought back--that was a huge show of faith. Everything was revamped in a huge way, and the developers have continued to pay close attention to fan experiences in order to innovate and create new ways to improve quality. The fact that the game HAS achieved huge success at this point is after having overcome tremendous challenges across its lifetime. One of the biggest obstacles that players cited, the length of the first story arc, was even addressed when the devs came back to cut and streamline non-essential elements to eliminate drag. And, as I’m obligated to say as a FFXIV fan, there is a free trial now that goes not only through the entirety of A Realm Reborn but Heavensward too--with Heavensward being the first expansion and considered to be the point where things start getting really good and spicy.

But it goes beyond that too. See, when this past expansion (Shadowbringers) came out, the developers had been given an ultimatum by higher ups. The next race added to the game would be the last. The developers wanted to add a more bestial race option in the Hrothgar, but knew that players were DYING to get tall-and-pretty bunny people with Viera. They worked their asses off against the clock to make sure they had playable options for both Hrothgar and Viera, despite them having very limited hair options, initially no helms that would display, and gender locks. By this, I mean you could only play a female Viera and male Hrothgar. FFXIV hasn’t had gender locked races since 1.0 if I remember right. People got angry, especially given the races didn’t seem finished. But 1) a bunch of developers took extra, unpaid time to add as many helm options as they could before the game released so that players wouldn’t be left with nothing. They did this specifically out of their own creative passion, desire for a quality game, and love for fans. I cannot stress enough how huge this is. They put in SO MUCH EXTRA WORK just because they care. 2) The developers spent the time before next expansion ADDING MALE VIERA SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE FANS WANTED IT SO BADLY. They used the extra time and resources to unlock that option! I wouldn’t be surprised at all if we find they’ve fleshed out the options/polished up existing character design for Viera and Hrothgar as well. We have additionally been promised, in no uncertain terms, that female Hrothgar are coming too. They aren’t being released with the male Viera because this time the devs wanted to be able to make everything as polished as they can for release. They basically used the ultimatum they had before as a way to get their foot in the door as it was closing. They are now able to add to Viera and Hrothgar BOTH, when they’d previously been told they wouldn’t be allowed any further additions. This was, again, a passion move. Natsuko Ishikawa, meanwhile, got to helm the writing for Shadowbringers. It was her first time being a main force in the main scenario plotline. She previously wrote bits for regional plots, as well as the very popular storylines for Dark Knights and Alchemists. She received a standing ovation from fans when she faced them post-Shadowbringers release, and the positive reception reduced her to tears of gratitude. The developers make jokes, and do interviews with fans, and directly answer fan questions with thought and care and playfulness. They are truly humble people who love what they do and are respectful to their audience. Players have had critiques for the game, as folks will have critiques for all media. When the developers learn of critiques, by and large there is always a sense that they listen, consider, and do what they can to improve to the best of their ability and within reason. It’s not indiscriminate and they don’t always know about everything (there are a lot of fans and not all criticism is legitimate) but again. The respect and good intent are absolutely there. I am unbelievably grateful for this game and for the team behind it. It’s restored a lot of faith in people and in creators. The story and its characters are powerfully done. It has a tremendous amount of heart and as a game, it’s a joy to play. I’d strongly encourage people to try it out if you haven’t already. It’s just not something I take for granted, and I think it’s important to remember how fortunate FFXIV and its base are.

#final fantasy xiv #final fantasy 14 #shadowbringers #ffxiv #ff14

[fandomshatelgbtqpeople]

On Loki (or I take too long to get to the point but I promise it’s a good one)

So, I saw someone on my dash claiming that people shipping Loki/Sylvie were invalidating genderfluid people and that anyone who disagreed with them or continued to ship it was “ignoring the voices of genderfluid people.”

Let me get this out of the way, I really don’t give a shit whether you’re okay with Loki/Sylvie. Literally could not care less. And while some of the points I’m going to go over while dismantling this person’s argument overlap with the reasons I personally don’t have a problem with it, that is not what this post is about. We will not be having an argument about whether “selfcest” is okay on this blog. I do not care whether or not you’re into that.

But, as another genderfluid person, their argument made no sense and the fact that they were lambasting anyone who pointed that out as being fluidphobic pissed me off, so I’m going to use it as an example of something I’ve been wanting to talk about for a while. And to be clear, people can feel how they feel personally and I’m not saying anyone should go tell this person that how they personally feel is wrong, but feelings are often irrational and if they’re going to claim that something is invalidating to genderfluid people as a whole, there needs to be some logic there.

On Loki and genderfluidity

Making the point I want to make requires me to explain the thought processes a non-genderfluid person could use to dissect this argument.

This person’s argument was that shipping Loki and Sylvie invalidated genderfluid people because it reinforces the stereotype that a genderfluid people become a different person when their gender changes. Here’s why that doesn’t make sense to me:

There’s actually no evidence right now that Loki and Sylvie even are different versions of the same person.

Even if they are different versions of the same person, they’re two distinct characters as opposed to “our” Loki as a man and “our” Loki as a woman.

As far as I’m aware, that is not actually even a widespread stereotype about genderfluid people. This was literally the first time I’d ever heard of that idea.

Starting with #1, we don’t know enough about Sylvie or any of the other Lokis’ origins to know whether they have any kind of genetic relationship. For all we know, the Odinsons adopted a completely different kid in each of these universes. The different ages and races of the variants suggest something like this (unless they all turn out to be a shapeshifted Tom Hiddleston, in which case we’ll have other, more important things to talk about). My point here is that we just don’t have enough information to know whether they’re different spins on the same person or completely different people altogether. Sylvie also might not even end up being a Loki. There’s all kind of people in Marvel pretending to be other people. All I’m saying is that you have to make a lot of assumptions to get to “they are different versions of the same person” in the first place. A non-genderfluid person is just as capable of recognizing that as a genderfluid person is.

To address #2, we’ll accept for a moment that all the different Lokis are different versions of the same person. Even if that’s true, the characters are not one person who’s gender fluctuates or changes like a gender fluid person’s does. They’re two separate characters with different genders, one of whom has been confirmed as genderfluid. If we accept that treating these characters like two different people invalidates genderfluid people--which again, I strongly disagree with--then it’s not shipping them together that’s invalidating. It’s the fact that they interact at all. Romantic relationships are not the only kind of relationships that require multiple participants. This would also imply that any story where parents from one universe adopt a son and the same parents from a different universe adopt a daughter would invalidate genderfluid people if the narrative acknowledges them as different people.

Finally, a character being two versions of the same person has never stopped fandom from shipping them regardless of gender (see: the Onceler, the Doctor, mirror-verse Star Trek characters), so trying to make this into something that’s only happening because they’re different genders is kind of ridiculous, and once you lose that, you lose the connection to genderfluidity. Again, you don’t have to be genderfluid to recognize that there’s a difference between two characters with different genders and one genderfluid person.

#3 is the only point that I’ll acknowledge is easier to understand if you’re genderfluid. Genderfluid people are just more likely to know what the stereotypes are. That said, if you’ve been involved in conversations about queerness in media for years and someone is telling you a character reinforces a stereotype you’ve never heard of before, run a google search! See if you can find anyone other than this one person discussing it! To double-check myself, I ran a search on genderfluid stereotypes and didn’t find any mention of the idea that a genderfluid person becomes a different person when their gender changes.

Now, it’s entirely possible that someone in the OP’s life does have that misconception. That doesn’t mean it’s a widespread negative stereotype that media or fandom have a responsibility to avoid. The Half of It probably reinforces somebody’s mom’s idea that lesbians can only be friends with boys, but that doesn’t actually mean there’s anything wrong with it. It’s impossible to avoid every potential misconception, especially since we have no way of knowing what all of them are. The OP may very well legitimately feel invalidated by the whole thing, but that doesn’t make it invalidating to the group at large (and it also doesn’t make it objectively wrong).

So what’s my actual point?

You know all those posts starting to go around about how “listening to marginalized voices” doesn’t actually mean “take everything every marginalized person you come across says as the gospel truth,” how that’s actually dehumanizing and forces marginalized people to do all the work for you, and at some point you actually have to use your own critical thinking skills to decide what you believe in? Every time I look through the notes of those posts, there’s tons of people going “I don’t know how tho” or “I’m afraid to be wrong.”

This is a simple example of why it’s important (another example is all the people who were mislead into attacking artists over various lesbian flag designs in 2018-19), and hopefully this post is an okay explanation of how to get started.

Start with what you know. These are the points we started with here. You may recognize some of them from other common bad arguments floating around:

This argument is premised on an issue I’ve never heard of despite being in a position to know about it. -> “I’ve been in and out of nonbinary spaces and helping run a blog about queer representation in media for years and I’ve never heard of anyone thinking genderfluid people become a different person when their gender changes. I did some research and it doesn’t look like anyone else has heard of it either.”

This concept doesn’t mean what this person is saying it means. -> “The OP is saying a ship between two different characters is fluidphobic because they have different genders. That doesn’t make sense.”

This person is relying on assumptions without evidence that they’re accurate. -> “This argument relies on Sylvie being (1) a Loki, and (2) a different version of ‘our’ Loki. Either of these things could easily not be true.”

This position is internally inconsistent. -> “How does shipping two characters imply that you think of them as different people in a way that, for example, referring to them as brother and sister doesn’t?”

This position conflicts with information you know to be true independently. -> “The OP is claiming that shipping two characters means you think of them as different people but I’ve personally witnessed multiple popular fandoms spring up around shipping a character with themselves,” and “This argument relies on a widespread willingness to accept that a person can have multiple personalities, but people with DID (at least in the US) actually struggle with a widespread perception among both laypeople and psychologists that multiple personalities don’t exist.”

Following this logic to its natural conclusion leads you to a position that’s ridiculous -> “If treating Loki and Sylvie like two distinct people is fluidphobic, that means any story where a family adopts a son in one universe and a daughter in the other is fluidphobic unless they’re treated by the narrative and fandom like the same person” and “If treating genetically identical people of different genders as distinct people is fluidphobic, wouldn’t that also make Orphan Black fluidphobic for treating the clone who was a trans man like a distinct character, since he’s not the same gender as the others?”

This person is making proclamations about how other people think and feel without evidence. -> “The OP is assuming everyone who ships Loki/Sylvie must be taking the position that they’re distinct people because OP personally would never ship anyone with themselves.”

This person is generalizing how they feel about something to how everyone feels. -> “OP leapt to the conclusion that shipping Loki/Sylvie invalidates genderfluid people in general because it hits on their own insecurities as a genderfluid person.”

This person is throwing accusations and ad hominem attacks instead of engaging with legitimate counterpoints. -> “Multiple people pointed out that the OP was relying on several assumptions that might be wrong. Instead of responding to this point, the OP called them ‘weirdos’ and accused them of ‘speaking over genderfluid people.’” (This is not the same thing as making a post and then not engaging with the notes at all. That’s a legitimate choice.)

There is a motive to mislead the reader. -> “The point OP is making isn’t actually about genderfluid people and is in fact, ‘You’re a bad person for shipping Loki/Sylvie.’ Not liking the ship seems like a clear ulterior motive to make this argument, and I’ve definitely seen fandoms weaponize representation issues during ship wars before.”

That’s a lot of flags! All of these are reasons you should be skeptical of an argument and seek out other points of view or other people with the same point of view who are willing to address these concerns, but the last two are major red flags that, combined with any yellow flags, signal the person you’re listening to is not speaking in good faith and is not a good source of information. 

Listening to marginalized voices means making an effort to seek out the perspectives of marginalized people on issues that affect them and taking those perspectives into account in shaping your own opinion. It does not mean taking every post made by anyone who is (or says they are--people lie on the internet) x identity as the gospel truth and never doing any thinking of your own. Hopefully these tips will help all of you prevent yourselves from getting dragged into and used as a mouthpiece for positions that make no sense after a few minutes of thought.

Edit: Apparently Loki is canonically genderfluid now?? Anyway, I think I got all the references to him not being genderfluid removed. Sylvie may or may not be but we’re not getting into that here.

#ableism mention #critical thinking #long post #mod k #loki

[stargazetheseries]

OPEN CASTING CALL FOR STARGAZE: “THE PILOT” EPISODE & TRAILER VISIT: https://stargazetheseries.com/casting-call/ FOR DETAILS OR READ BELOW: A Borken Creative Production Sept 27, 2021 STARGAZE is a queer campy sci-fi adventure short-form adventure series intended for OTT. Executive Producers: Jill Golick, Carrie Cutforth Director: Regan Latimer Writer: Carrie Cutforth Union: ACTRA TORONTO (NEW MEDIA) Shoot: The pilot will begin shooting for 5 to 6 days between October 25-Nov 17th, 2021 Location: Toronto STORYLINE: A disparate group of rookie oddballs join an elite squad commissioned to save the Queerverse (from itself) only to discover the STARGAZE program is a sham make-work initiative to keep the crew from rocking the boat by sending them out on a fool’s quest (led by two elder queer chaperones who despise each other). Think: A 2SLGBTQIA+ The Facts Of Life meets The Breakfast Club in space! *BIPOC STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO APPLY **MUST BE 18+ TO SUBMIT EVEN IF CHARACTER IS LISTED AS YOUNGER THE STARTGAZE RECRUITS: SAF RON (she/her): Character is 20, cisgender woman, lesbian, open to all ethnicities; some physical comedy required. LEAD. Mad as hell and not going to take it anymore, Saf joins STARGAZE with high expectations. If the adults won’t save the day, she will… and finally get the credit she deserves! But can this lone wolf learn to connect with others, stop being a control freak, relax her unreasonably high expectations of others (and herself), and step into the leadership role for which she is destined? First, she’ll have to stop seeing anyone getting in her way as a mustache-twirling villain, learn to see her crewmates’ value, accept help, and open herself up vulnerably. Gets apoplectic when mad; Has a knack for creating very convoluted protest chants that no one can follow. WHIT SPRINKLES (he/him): Character is 19, cisgender man, gay, open to all ethnicities. Must be able to walk elegantly in high heels. LEAD. A social media influencer famous for his snarky and bitter ’reads,’ charismatic Whit has developed a parasocial relationship with his stans. Living life performing in the spotlight from a very young age, Whit has no idea who he really is, what his real interests are, or his beliefs outside of what his analytics tell him: “My fans are gonna love this!” Only joining STARGAZE under pressure from his stans, his inability to forge true intimate connections is exacerbated by his relationship with his mother/manager Mumsy Sprinkles, a talentless hack/narcissistic stage mother living her dreams through her kid. If Whit was a meme he would be: ‘Bitch, I dun give a fuck!’ But he does, indeed, give a fuck. ESSA T. HATCH (they/them): Character is 18, non-binary or agender, asexual, demiromantic, neurodivergent, open to all ethnicities. LEAD. Adorkable Essa is an introvert who doesn’t really ‘get’ people. The explorer among the crew with an engineering mind and a love of mapping places and spaces, they know every nook and cranny of the ship and are usually the first to forge ahead (i.e. wander off) on every expedition. Essa mostly wants to be left alone to their own devices because they actually prefer their own company (neurotypicals can be so exhausting!). This normally wouldn’t be such a problem except Essa was pressured to join STARGAZE to make friends and widen their social net out of parental concern (‘We won’t be around forever, Essa!’). Loves to knit, make Venn diagrams of relationships; speaks in emojis when emotionally drained. LEW D’SHUS (he/him): Character is 21, transgender man or transmasculine, pansexual, open to all ethnicities. LEAD. When babelicious Lew looks at you with his rapt attention and dreamy eyes, you feel like the only person in the ‘verse until his short attention span snaps away and he forgets you’re there. “Good vibes, only!” Lew will gladly give you your Tarot card reading, but not before taking the negative cards out first. With his strict ‘the universe is love, we are love,’ mantra, Lew never wants anyone to feel bad even when they are deadass wrong! His philosophy of

appeasement can cause conflict amongst the crew and his inability to take sides in crucial moments will often put them in danger. No, we cannot just hug everything out, Lew! CHRYSTRAH SNU (she/her): Character is 17 (must be 18+ to apply), cis-gender woman, identifies as ‘queer’ but just figuring it all out. LEAD. Chrystrah is a fresh-off-the-belt queer who has arrived with big expectations: ‘I’m here, I’m queer! Direct me to my spot on the rainbow carpet!’ The trauma of her homophobic upbringing has left Chrystrah without any real sense of self; her identity loosely held together like a fragile cracked egg. Any criticism, no matter how gentle, feels like an attack, causing Chrystrah to act abrasive, territorial, and defensive. She is always overcompensating in big bombastic ways because she feels so inadequate for not knowing the right words, behaviours, and codes. She is jealous of Saf (some might say obsessed) who does seem to get it all right. Fiercely loyal, Chrystrah is the first to run headlong into danger to save someone. She has a steep learning curve ahead. THE ELDER QUEER CHAPERONES: BAE TORGA (she/her): Character is late 30’s-early 40’s, cisgender woman, bisexual, bipolar, open to all ethnicities. PRINCIPAL. A war hero (or war criminal depending on who you ask), Bae sees STARGAZE as an opportunity to redeem herself in the eyes of former mentor and friend Oracle Cain. She is someone who struggles with self-loathing and self-doubt even though she’s spent her adulthood righting her past wrongs and reining in her bipolar disorder, which contributed to her past rash and reckless mistakes. Possessing a tough, gruff demeanor, Bae is outwardly sardonic but really a bleeding heart who holds back out of fear that any demonstration of affection and empathy will be seen as a commitment. ORACLE CAIN (she/her): Character is middle-aged or older, transgender woman, ambulatory wheelchair user or wheelchair user, open to all ethnicities. *Note, as this is sci-fi, younger than middle age may apply. PRINCIPAL. A founding figure of the Queerverse, Oracle has done her service, done her duty, and now she’s done. She wants a peaceful existence to guard her limited energy and manage her physical pain. Instead, she’s pulled out of retirement to command a ship full of bickering youths. She also has to contend with spoiled brat and former colleague Bae reminding her of the past that Oracle is trying hard to forget. But duty is duty and it’s not like complaining ever got her anywhere. Talking to Oracle can feel like playing a chess game where the aloof commander is always five steps ahead: you never quite know where you stand with her. ADDITIONAL CHARACTERS ELP WHIPP (they/them or xe/xem): Character is middle-aged or older, gender-fluid, open to all ethnicities. Leader of the coalition of non-profit planets (each with its own conflicting Gay Agenda) that rule the Queerverse, Elp Whipp is a career bureaucrat/bean-counter who often gets caught in the trappings of their own political web — meaning much of nothing ever gets accomplished and progress is never made. Elp will appear throughout the series in that ‘Dean of the school’ role, occasionally showing up to demand overdue reports, warn the crew that their funding is at risk, and generally throw a wrench in the works. CARDIGAN JACK (she/her): Character is 30s, cis-woman, lesbian, open to all ethnicities. Cardigan Jack is a ‘pussy-hat’ wearing neo-liberalist feminist with a pirate vibe. She is the ‘Live, Laugh, Love’ of TERFs, and Saf Ron’s nemesis. TO SUBMIT: Borken Creative is committed to diverse and inclusive casting. For every role, please submit qualified performers without regard to disability, race, age, colour, sexual orientation or gender identity, or any other basis prohibited by law, unless otherwise specifically indicated, subject to legitimate casting directives. DEADLINE: Oct 8, 2021 EMAIL: [email protected]. SUBJECT LINE: Character(s) Role, Performer’s First and Last Name, pronouns. BODY OF EMAIL: Please provide contact info including phone number.

Please confirm you are 18 or over in the body of email if applying for a Stargaze recruit character. Submit headshot and resume as attachments to [email protected]. Resume should be in a scannable text file format (such as .doc, .pdf, .txt). First round selects will be invited to submit either a video clip audition or zoom audition invite. Only successful candidates will be contacted.

See less

#lgbtq #lbtqia #lgbtqplus #queer sci fi #casting call #auditions