I was wondering if you had thoughts about how Ice and Mav's politics don't fully align with their actions? There was a post where you said Ice's politics are more socially liberal than Mav's but Mav is also the one who goes out to La Jolla to hit on guys before Ice, and later again when he's broken up with Ice, but Ice only goes out with women out of fear for his honor or whatever. Same with their respective thoughts on feminism, with Mav's mild respect for Charlie (telling Ice not all women fit the stereotype) but later Ice is the one who sends Juno to Mav's Top Gun class without telling him she's a woman and Ice has a respectful friendship with Juno. I think you said Ice is vaguely on the ace-aro spectrum (demi-homoromantic) which is a sort of fascinating irony that he doesn't have the words for it whereas Mav is the one with the theories about Ice's sexuality. Though with their hypocrisies and inconsistencies this all just feeds into their characterizations of the fact that they keep divorcing their actions from their spoken words from their identities.
okay going to take this point by point
1. yes i have addressed their politics in relation to their actions before, so maybe read this post and this post before you read this one, just to see where my other thoughts line up
2. gay republicans and conservatives do exist (at the very least certainly republicans and conservatives who have gay sex in secret)
3. before maverick is a political actor he is a human being, and the characterization that we are primarily given for him is that he is impulsive and reckless and doesn’t think through his actions. As ive written about many times before—from a story construction standpoint, his thoughtlessness is his number one most important character trait. He is both thoughtlessly dangerous (his hero’s “fatal flaw;” he can’t stop himself from making bad decisions) and thoughtlessly brilliant (the navy’s best and most daring and heroic pilot). He does what he wants without thinking about it; and he makes excuses and hollow promises whenever that plan doesn’t work out (“I know better than that. It will never ever happen again;” [it happens again] “I’m not gonna let you down. I promise.” [goose dies shortly thereafter]). His thoughtless impulsiveness overrides everything else. Maybe the act of having gay sex (to address your “he gets fucked in La Jolla before ice” point) is politically subversive, but for Maverick’s thoughtless character that we are shown in Top Gun, the most subversive possible thing would be to LABEL the gay sex and think through the consequences of it. To call a spade a spade and call himself gay or bi or queer or whatever. That would be the most subversive (and with mav, entirely unbelievable imo) possible thing. That takes conscious effort of thought, something maverick is near-incapable of doing. As long as he can get away with it without thinking about it, he’s politically in the clear, with regards to his character & character arc. If that makes sense. “Don’t think. Just do.” That’s literally his motto lmfao. He represents thoughtless action as an archetype; his politics come secondary to his desires
4. Their “respective thoughts on feminism” are divided into two camps: 1. “Professional as required by the law” and 2. “Sex pest mode.” They’re naval officers in the 1980s. Whether republican or democrat, that’s kind of par for the course. How men treat women can be a performance to other men. Any respect i made them show towards women had broader, more metatextual “need to move the conversation/story from A to B” reasoning behind it. See the first post I linked for much more on that.
5. i never said ice was on the ace/aro spectrum, or if i did i DEFINITELY meant it sarcastically. That could not be further from what i believe. This isn’t something I’ve ever discussed on this blog before, but a MASSIVE part of the philosophical discussion I’ve been trying to moderate within this project over the last year is the question— “do labels even work with characters under these very specific and extraordinarily extreme conditions and societal pressures?” It’s a question I took from my time studying early American history—the contexts of certain environments, and I would definitely count the elite officer ranks of the navy in the 90s and 2000s as one of these certain environments, simply Are Not Conducive to the easier (path of least resistance maybe) ways we civilians handle sexuality and friendship and trauma. There are so many variables and external and internal pressures within an environment like the upper ranks of career navy officers that sexual orientation labels lose all nuance and accuracy. I don’t think Ice (as i have written him) is gay. I don’t think he’s straight. I don’t think he’s bi. I think he’s an unlabelable product of too many variables for labels to have any effect on how he is perceived. Which, in our society built around labels and categories, is admittedly difficult to wrestle with. But doesn’t make it any less worth wrestling with.
6. Yes, ice and mav’s hypocrisy is the linchpin of the entire story.
They’re both trying to have their cake (“honor” and moral superiority based on the harmful traditional subjective morals arbitrated by elite navy officership) and eat it too (a fulfilling relationship with the love of their lives). & the point is that they cant. they have to settle for one.
53 notes
·
View notes
Hey I hope this is okay to ask. I saw that you sent the Sandman Big Ban a ask about the faq. Are you satisfied with their reply? I don't know if this is really common and if I should participate
Hey nonnie, that's entirely fine to ask yes!
Short answer: no, I'm not.
Long answer, giving a few reasons with none of my snark being aimed at you personally:
This is how it's done. No, this is absolutely not standard practise - I can name you at least 5 bangs off the top of my head that do not, in fact, do this. Including content restrictions is very much a choice that the mods are making, whether it also is their private opinion or not. None of those other bangs have problems matching, which brings me to:
No PWP: first of all, their word count requirement is incredibly low at 6k, and claiming that authors would struggle to hit that with "porn only"? That's, I'm sorry, ridiculous, not to mention condescending as hell - authors are perfectly capable estimating whether they can hit goals or not with whatever plot (or lack thereof) they are writing.
Artists/betas won't want to claim, or need to know what they get into: First of all, there is a huge bunch of amazing nsfw art and artists in this fandom who, I'd assume, would be happy to make nsfw/dark art. Second of all: have authors provide content notes/warnings for the claiming process, problem solved.
We're not banning dark/nsfw content, just any glorification of it: Right. And who decides what's glorifying? Do they vet this during sign ups? Claiming? Might I end up submitting a fic and get it pulled? Do I have to provide personal information about my trauma to be "allowed" to write dark content in a certain kind of way? This is a slippery slope at best. It is also massively hypocritical because, you'll notice, there are no such restrictions when it comes to violence or murder etc. It gives big ole "I can excuse the eye-eating serial killer, but I'll draw the line at porn" vibes which is a staple of anti culture.
On the above point, it is also worth noting that the entire argument is moot to begin with because even if it is "glorifying" or "romanticizing" it literally does not matter. It's fiction. It's not real. Tag your shit, give warnings during the claiming process, and it's fine. Everything else is cuddling up to censorship, there is no middle ground to be had here. (Which is arguably very ironic considering both the source material and the source material author's stance on such things. Yes I'm salty as fuck about this. Anyway).
All this is to make the event "more accessible." This is, frankly, absolute goddamn bullshit. If people warn properly for their content, and if in the context of a discord server for the fest you have designated spaces to talk about nsfw and/or dark content, people are perfectly capable of curating their experience, what they engage with or not. Conversely, banning content, considering yourself as mods an authority on what is and isn't glorification, is not only condescending as hell, it also makes your fest, in fact, less accessible for anyone who a) wants to write such content, or b) simply is not a fan of censorship vibes in their fandom spaces.
So long story short, I'm the opposite of satisfied and will absolutely not participate. People are, of course, welcome to run their events however they want. I am, of course, perfectly in my rights to run my own big bang without all this nonsense, which is something I am considering doing because I love big bangs, and hate the thought of relinquishing the fest format to something so inaccessible. 😉
144 notes
·
View notes
How many children does Fenwrel have? Does she have any grandchildren? Do fae have the same or similar family dynamics as humans do?
Also did Fenwrel ever forgive Augus for killing her mother? What was his reason for doing it in the first place?
And would you ever write about Fenwrel topping Augus? Or is that something he wouldn't allow to happen?
Hi anon,
How many children does Fenwrel have?
This is answered explicitly in The Court of Five Thrones, I highly recommend you read it!
Does she have any grandchildren?
Probably!
Do fae have the same or similar family dynamics as humans do?
You might want to read The Court of Five Thrones, and The Ice Plague to get a sense of different family dynamics in the fae realm! :) There are hundreds of different species of fae, and thousands of different family dynamics. COFT looks at Fenwrel's and Gulvi's family dynamics, and The Ice Plague looks at family dynamics for Eran, Mosk, Olphix, Davix, Augus, Ash, and many more, as well as found family dynamics.
Also did Fenwrel ever forgive Augus for killing her mother?
While this isn't answered explicitly, I feel very strongly that you will know the answer to this if you read The Court of Five Thrones, and focus on the way she relates to him and treats him. A person that hasn't forgiven someone often behaves very differently.
What was his reason for doing it in the first place?
You might want to read Game Theory!
And would you ever write about Fenwrel topping Augus?
Nope!
Or is that something he wouldn't allow to happen?
It's something I don't want to do, but also Fenwrel has a partner already by the end of COFT, and they both have talked about why they wouldn't do this in that story, so you might want to read it, or read it more closely :)
10 notes
·
View notes
The money lost can not make a diference to Taylor Swift, but it sure as hell makes a diference for the stores...
Btw Taylor was not the person who sued, the guy that owns the wharehouse was the one that pressed charges and aparently the guy who got arrested had previous problems with stuff like these, so it's probably not just this robery...
ah, okay, thank you for the info! I also did not mean to insinuate that Taylor Personally Put That Guy In Prison because I already assumed her/her team most likely were not the one to press charges. And also an interesting fact about the previous robberies. Still, I was put off by the way people treated this as a 'she does not play!' moment or whatever. The average social media user likely also didn't know about the previous robberies, and so the reaction IS to the mere info that he received 8 months for stealing 10 vinyls, and to celebrate that feels a lil odd.
5 notes
·
View notes