#i have pretty good media literacy

[catharusustulatus]

Possible plot points for Stranger Things have been bouncing around my head like the DVD logo screensaver, so here's some of what I think is going to happen in season 5. Cue the bingo cards!

Multiple time jumps; one between S4 and S5, one mid-season

Max wakes up with a connection to Vecna and/or the Upside Down

The gang has a tactical montage set in Hopper's cabin

Sinkholes open up all over Hawkins, one swallows Family Video

Mrs. Wheeler gets involved in the action somehow

Jancy breaks up, Stancy is either endgame or Steve dies

Dustin has nightmares about Eddie the way Max did about Billy

Steve and Dustin brotherly moment post-nightmare/panic attack

Eddie comes back but not as Kas, more like Billy did in S4 if at all

Robin and Vickie flirt, maybe even kiss, Vickie leaves for safety

Murray dies, either sacrificing himself or killed by gov agents

Suzie assists the gang against gov agents using Cerebro

Big fight/shootout with evil government guys is B plot

Argyle is the comic relief until he has a heroic scene

Dustin forms a plan to use time travel in Upside Down for final fight

Will comes out to Jonathan and Joyce and is accepted

Will comes out to Mike, is supported but rejected romantically

Will's feelings for Mike and possible rejection will awaken powers

Will is trained by El and/or 008 to use his powers

Badass moment of Steve w/ the nail bat set to music goes viral

Steve dies in penultimate episode or act 2 of the finale in a final sacrifice for Nancy/Robin/Dustin/everyone

Final fight against Vecna is over 2/3 through finale

Emotional high school graduation scene post final fight

Lumax, Mileven, and Jopper endgame

Finale montage to emotional 80's song ties up lose ends

Jopper wedding is final scene

Heroes cover by Peter Gabriel is used at least once

#this isn't what i want to happen per se #but it's def what i think will happen #do i want stancy? no #do i want steve to die? no #but i bet they will both happen #some of these i feel like the duffers are telegraphing #and some i just feel like #i have pretty good media literacy #anyway i hope that what really happens is #steve's trauma is addressed #we see jancy break up amicably and nancy works on herself and goes off to college #stobin moves to chicago together #erica sinclair takes over hellfire #stranger things #stranger things season 5 #stranger things headcanon #had to write this down so id stop obsessing over it #who knows what will happen but i feel like 2 ish years until then #i have to get these obsessions out of my head #so i can work! #god bless the duffers but also they will rue the day #if you catch my drift #i think joseph quinn will come back but idk if it will be as kas #would be dope but let's see

[annabelle--cane]

say it with me everybody: personal health is completely immaterial to morality, including mental health. leading a mentally unhealthy lifestyle (or what you perceive as a mentally unhealthy lifestyle) does not a bad person make. no one has to socialize, exercise, have healthy coping mechanisms, or lead (what you perceive as) a fulfilling life with fulfilling hobbies in the same way that no one has to go to the doctor to get a broken bone reset. both of those types of management of personal health are likely to be beneficial to the individual, but they are in no way moral requirements or debts owed to society. they do not actually say anything about a person's principles, personality, or actions towards others. additionally, people know themselves and their own situations better than you do. maybe a person judges that the physical and financial toll of going to the doctor outweigh the benefit of getting their bone reset, maybe a person just does not have the capacity to develop healthy coping mechanisms at this point in their life, and yes, maybe a person feels like they are totally fulfilled by "media based" hobbies alone and would feel no difference in their life if they picked up a loom. just like. let people be sick without accusing them of being representative of the lazy, degenerated state of modern society.

#marina marvels at life #there's a way people on here have been talking about ai/tiktok/movies/anti intellectualism/media hobbies/self care that all jives together #that just. really icks me out. #sometimes it comes through pretty transparently with people claiming that you must have regular sex to be a healthy/good person #or conversely that people are more sex crazed now than they've ever been and it's destroying literacy or whatever #or that cheating at school is scandalously immoral and only 'soft brained' bad people would do it #or that collectivism means you have to dress the right way and feel the right way and talk the right way #because your actions affect Others and you might upset someone or give off bad messages if you wear a crop top or are too sad #but a lot of the time it's just this strange plausibly-deniable tone I keep encountering that crept up some time in like 2021 I think #like. am I going crazy here or has anyone else been feeling this?

[hewsos-from-lesbos]

so I’ve seen this thing recently where people will say ‘if you don’t like (x piece of media) I’m convinced you just weren’t paying attention’. And, like, maybe I need to stop looking at people’s opinions on the Thirteenth’s era of Doctor Who, but no. One can notice the symbolism and still find that other elements of it strike them as worse enough to overshadow it. Just because something has deep symbolic visual details or uses leitmotifs well doesn’t mean anyone is required to like it. And this goes for all media, not just my blorbo show.

#media #symbolism #leitmotif #details #media literacy #doctor who #thirteenth doctor #chibnall era #whittaker era #people can have different opinions to you without being misogynistic idiots #I don’t dislike it because she’s a woman #I dislike it because a lot of the writing wasn’t great #but I still think it’s pretty good just not my favourite

[lupuslikethewolf]

i would like to put this out there: the only opinion i have of HoTD/GoT/ASoIaF characters that has little-to-no nuance and cannot be changed or affected by upcoming seasons is that i am anti-viserys i targaryen (among others), and anti-targaryen superiority. however, i also Do Not Trust House Hightower (and the faith in general - plus a general distaste/distrust of the maesters) nor do i particularly 'support' (read: consider them as Somewhat Less Shitty then) any of the seven kingdoms apart from Dorne and The North, mostly.

On the other hand, House Targaryen at full power would absolutely have turned the tides against The Others, and it would have been a very good idea to have them in a powerful position come the time of Aegon's Prophecy.

(personally, i think a good compromise would have been House Targaryen making their own allyships with other kingdoms and preparing to face the war alongside them. Or even just being willing to step down or redistribute power post-long night. But- their ego and superiority complex would never.)

Forgive me, Targaryen Loyalists, for not always letting colonising, egotistical slavers leave the best taste in my mouth.

but this is also all still fiction, and as a fanfic reader and writer, i can and will change canon in my head to fit a better mould when i want to indulge.

Because if they do one thing right, they create some very attractive very queer very cool very dragon-riding very interesting characters and dynamics.

and look. listen. i am but a simply fantasy nerd behind all the media literacy. i see dragon riders. i like dragons. shit happens. my political and logical beliefs are sometimes overpowered by the cool funky queer dragon-rider people okay.

i will not always support them. i will not always indulge them. i will not always apologise for them. in fact, sometimes i will happily bash their heads together and steal their dragons.

i will always, however, happily watch them from the sidelines.

#hotd #asoiaf #game of thrones #anti targaryen #technically #media literacy #targaryen critical #anti old valyria #i have two different moods when it comes to These People: #omg pretty attractive dragon people they are so queer so cool mhm mhm i like #and #cant fucking stand them why do none of them think critically or even fucking think at all did they sacrifice common sense for good looks

[kraviolis]

as i get older and continue to exist online i cant help but question why so many adults got into arguments with me over fandom bullshit when i was a teenager, and yet i also completely understand why they did.

#teenagers are so dumb godbless. and i dont mean intellectually. they can be pretty smart but all of them have -20 wisdom #i had to delete tiktok to prevent myself from continuing to argue with 14 year olds in the comments #bcus as an adult i really shouldnt but theyre so. GAH #here's the argument that was the final straw for me: #child: *the wildest and stupidest interpretation of a fictional media ive ever seen* #me: actually *explains the actual story and intention of the creator* #child: where does it say that #me: it doesnt say it explicitly but if you just look at the subtext and use media literacy its incredibly obvious #child: What Episode Does It Say That #it was that point i checked their profile and saw that theyre 14 and immediately deleted the app #how can i in good faith gonna argue about subtext with someone who probably hasnt even read of mice and men. or fucking romeo and juliet #im not gonna let myself stoop so low. im fucking 21 years old #but oh my god. the way that they talk down at you as if they arent currently in a developmental stage thats basically the sequel to toddler #infuriating. #and i was just as bad as a teenager i know for a fact i was because i was deep in the tumblr discourse trenches as a 14 y/o #i made the worst decisions as a 14 y/o #and i cant even just sit back and try to explain to a teen why i cant take them seriously bcus theyre just gonna get mad #and i cant even blame them bcus its not their fault!!! theyre literally just going through their terrible twos again!!! #oh my god. im so sorry to all the people who had to deal with me when i was a teenager #krav talks

[anothermonikan]

hate that the character I dislike most in G5 is the one I have the strongest headcanons about. Talking about Hitch Trailblazer yeah

Look I don't like this pony, I have not forgotten he's supposed to be 'The Cop' of the group, I am happy they've been leaning on it less because some of the earlier MYM and TYT episodes are borderline unwatchable because they lean so much into 'oh he's a GOOD cop :)) He loves following rules and keeping ponies safe!' and it's just a little bit disappointing after everything that the G5 movie was supposed to be about that they just let Hitch go back to being a cop and not only that but then they put so much emphasis on how "good" of a cop he is in the show up until like. Sparky's introduction. He's kind of just the dragon dad character now, I can't remember the last time him being sheriff was even mentioned in TYT, I would complain about how inconsistent that makes his character but I honestly would just prefer if they didn't lean on the good cop thing ever again so I won't

BUT. Not ignoring that but it's irrelevant to what this post is really about, um. Hitch has to have some sort of blood relation with Fluttershy right?? Like okay here is my evidence:

Appearance wise, Fluttershy's family has a pretty consistent thing with the colours yellow and green

Like I know none of them have green manes specifically but colour throughout family in MLP is weird. This is probably my most flimsy piece of evidence BUT I think it's interesting when in conjunction with these two other things:

Hitch can talk to animals and

2. I don't really understand what they're going for with the whole cutiemark magic thing in G5 but like. All of the mane cast ponies have different elements that align with their cutiemarks or something and you know what Hitch's is? Kindness. And it's the only one that has a G4 counterpart with an Element of Harmony

I only really started putting this together in my head after the second season 2 episode of TYT when they say their cutiemark magic things out loud and I was like. huh Kindness. like Fluttershy. and then the piece started to fall together in my head and I was like. Oh! Okay! I really hope that's intentional!

#sorry that I can't talk about Hitch without like a whole paragraph explaining that I don't like him and why. #thus alienating like the entire target audience for this probably. I have little hater disease. yeah it is terminal thanks for asking #It could be worse I used to not be able to even stand him being in an episode because of how badly they leaned into the cop thing #I can tolerate him now that he's just. The one with the dragon. most of the time #If this turns out to be intentional and is confirmed I'm gonna get a good grade in media literacy. #which is normal to want and possible to achieve #asdhsdhhsdf #I'm pretty sure that's not actually what media literacy means so I actually get a point deducted for that one #I just cannot think of the word I mean...nap time for me now ehe #MLP #MLP ANG #MLP G5 #MLP TYT #MLP MYM #Android.txt

[thenerdywriter]

"it was awkward to see colin flirt and behave like a rake" "he gave me the ick" yes ! that is the fucking point!! congratulations! you have the media literacy skills of a fucking monkey because my 4-year old niece could understand it better than you do.

we are supposed to find colin cringey and annoying and get the ick because that is not who he is. he is not anthony, or simon, or even benedict. colin (apart from gregory) is the sweetest of all bridgerton brothers (i'm going by book canon) and his most identifiable character trait is the fact that he values an emotional connection above everything. he runs away to the continent because he wants to feel that emotional connection. he has meaningless sex in brothels because that is the example he has seen growing up, that is the norm. he tries so hard to fit into the norm. he goes out drinking, adopts an entirely new personality, learns flirtations because that is how he thinks he will fit in. he's got armour on, as violet said. he puts everyone's needs above his own, he stops rambling on and boring his family with details of his trip because he knows no one cares. he doesn't talk to anthony or benedict about his heartaches because he knows they still, somewhere in their heart of hearts, view him as the annoying younger brother. he's so devastated by his closest friend not responding to him that he adopts a new personality in the hopes that it might mask the hurt better. he runs after penelope in episode one because he is so attuned to her emotions that he knows she's hurting, and tries to comfort her even when she's spiraling and lashes out. he must have been hurt by her words in the "good night mr bridgerton" scene but he puts it aside to genuinely apologise to her when literally no one else in that family would do that. colin, instead of brooding over his own feelings, goes and corners penelope in her family's garden and apologises to her, disregarding his own hurt at being cruelly dismissed by his close friend.

penelope asking colin to kiss her is not a mark of how "pathetic" she is. she has written and shamed herself in a manner that is almost entirely unsalvageable. she is at her lowest point, and then portia comes in and reminds her of how undesirable she is, and she sinks even lower. she asks colin to kiss her because she sees it as a final act, after which she can quietly wave goodbye to her dreams of ever getting married and leaving her mother's home. colin kisses her because he is also keenly aware of how she's feeling. he knows how hurt she is, he wants to do anything to alleviate that. be it cracking a joke, or kissing her. he is gentle, because he wants it to be something she can dream of when she's by herself. penelope, at this moment, has no hope for herself, and their kiss is an act of letting go for her. no, it's not a pity kiss, no he did not like her after her glow up, he has always loved her. him being struck dumb is a reaction to her physical transformation, nothing more. he does not flirt with her in that ballroom scene, he only approaches her when she's in distress. he's not flirting with her. i can assure you penelope could wear the frumpiest most neon yellow gown of all time and colin would still go "<333 my pen" for her.

colin jumps to catch the balloon's ropes because he sees that penelope is in danger, he does not give a shit about anyone else lmao. he feels temporary relief when he sees eloise run to safety, but the moment he sees penelope in immediate danger, he rushes to take action. afterwards, when he sees that she's being comforted by debling (all my homies hate debling, even if he is aro/ace coded i do NOT claim him) he does not approach her. it would be easy for him to do so, but he does not, because he respects her boundaries. colin bridgerton is the only man in the ton who respects women (the featherington sons-in-laws are too pretty to have a thought) he calls out fife and his friends for treating women like objects and calls them cavalier. the only way he would have been more explicit about his demisexuality was if he tap danced on the club table (entertaining thought, luke newton please)

colin also rapidly takes action, something which no one in the show has done so far. simon would have died instead of accepting his feelings for daphne, daphne would have been content with a loveless marriage forever instead of asking for help. kate would have pushed edwina down the aisle and gone off to india instead of confronting her own feelings, and anthony would have married edwina if she hadn't been brave enough for the three of them to run from the altar and ruin herself. penelope stood on the sidelines for years and loved him quietly because she had no hope of him loving her back. colin, the moment he is assured of his feelings, runs to penelope, almost kisses her in the middle of a ballroom. when he hears that debling is about to propose, he goes to the ball, just to dissuade penelope one more time. he cuts into their dance because he's desperate. when he runs after her carriage, he asks her if she has been proposed to, because he would not have touched her otherwise. he confesses his feelings to her only when he knows that she hasn't gotten engaged to debling, and when she says "but we are friends" he moves away. nothing more. he would have let her go, if she did not return his feelings.

idk whether i should be flattered or offended at people misunderstanding this season because on one hand it is offensive, but on the other hand, it means only smart people get polin. seriously. your minds have been rotted by insta-love and enemies to lovers that you can't even appreciate the innate beauty of friends to lovers. being friends with someone and then holding all those feelings for them. the trepidation of possible rejection. the fulfillment of being loved by the person who knows you the best of them all. the privilege of loving someone whose feelings you know better than your own. love is gentle and kind and yes it is a violent, uprooting force but above all, love does not hurt anyone. it does not hurt you. i could love someone quietly for years and it wouldn't bother me if their feelings were requited or not because my feelings are none of their business and i consider it a privilege to love and be loved by them, even if it is not in the way i would want it to be. polin are privileged in the highest sense. they know each other better than anyone else, they know how to love each other better than anyone else. to think they are rushed or they dont deserve each other is a disservice to both of them. they would be miserable with anyone else.

in other matters, if i see one more person talking smack about luke or nicola behind the safety of their screens i will personally get a bazooka.

#bridgerton #polin #bridgerton season 3 #colin bridgerton #penelope featherington #colin x penelope #colin my beautiful boy i will avenge you from these dumb people #penelope my sweet girl you are a dumbass but i am rooting for you and the love of your life #also anyone else see that complex female characters on this show are much better written when there's a woman running it? #hmmmm jess brownell you have my respect...for now #long rant but uhhh i am writing a fanfic where i erase the mistakes of cvd (the ghastly man) #the only good thing you did was the casting and i doubt you had a hand in it at ALL #luke newton and nicola coughlan the ACTORS that you are

[vexwerewolf]

I’m suddenly getting swathes of Lancer hate across my feed… Has something happened in the fandom? “Union is ______ how could they paint them as even remotely good. They allow _____, and I hate the devs they are ______. The whole thing is just 40k with communist veneer”.

Like am I taking crazy pills…? I thought that all of the problems were literally like right there on the tin “we are a utopia in progress! We will obtain it by any means possible even if it means being everything we say we are not/fighting against. As the player you decide what is right. How much will you ignore for someone else’s idea of utopia?” Like doesn’t it mean all the tools to actually change are there and that is the HOPE aspect of all of this?

(Sorry if this in incoherent grammar is a weak point and I pulled something in my back simply standing up. Now I am sad and crook backed in spasmodic pain)

This isn't an argument I feel super enthusiastic about stepping into, because it gets the most annoying sort of people in your mentions eager to maliciously misrepresent what you say.

However, yeah, there are some pretty terrible readings of Union floating around. I'd invoke "media literacy" because think that a lot of this comes from people not really holistically engaging with the fictional future history of Lancer, but also from a sort of dogmatic purism that requires future societies to be flawless, else they're irredeemable.

It is important to note that ThirdComm is the direct descendant of two highly imperfect societies. FirstComm was formed as a response to the Three Great Traumas of discovering the Massif Vaults (and thus that they were the inheritors of a fallen world), the wars over the Massif Vaults, and the discovery of the lost colonies, all of which collectively showed humanity how close it had come to total extinction.

FirstComm decided that it had a responsibility to ensure that humanity never risked extinction again. It manifested this by trying to colonize every habitable planet it could find, pumping out ship after ship to seed the cosmos with as much human life as it possibly could. This led to problems when it encountered civilizations like the Karrakin Federation and the Aun, who had been carrying humanity's torch just fine by themselves, thank you very much.

SecComm was an Anthrochauvinist fascist state. The book defines it thusly:

We can see a lot of Anthrochauvinist historical romanticism in the mech naming schemes of Harrison Armory, SSC and IPS-N - the fact that Harrison Armory names its mechs after great military leaders of pre-Fall Earth history, IPS-N does the same with naval figures, and SSC uses the names of Earth animals. Even the GMS Everest is named for a mountain on Earth. It's very Cradle-centric.

Anthrochauvinism was, to be clear, largely just an excuse for colonialism and hegemony. Atrocities could easily be justified under by stating that whoever they're being committed against were a threat to the Continuance of Humanity - a term that SecComm got to define.

It's also at this point that we have to zoom in from broad sociopolitical points to address one very specific piece of history: the New Prosperity Agreement. This was signed to prevent the outbreak of a Second Union-Karrakin War, and mandated that the Karrakin Houses would maintain privileged levels of autonomy within Union, and that they would be granted colonial rights to the entire Dawnline Shore. This agreement, struck in 3007u, basically defines much of the current political situation today.

ThirdComm was a final and inevitable reaction to the atrocities, abuses and excesses of SecComm. The unspeakable horrors of Hercynia were the spark, but I need to stress how little Hercynia actually mattered in the larger Revolution - at the start of NRfaW, it's explicitly stated that almost nobody in the galaxy even knows where it is, let alone what happened there. The Revolution was a generalized response to SecComm's tyranny, with no single rallying cry.

The Revolution might also have failed entirely, but for a critical error by Harrison Armory: pissing off the Karrakin Trade Baronies. After getting kicked off Cradle, the Anthrochauvinist Party organised a fleet at Ras Shamra to try and retake Cradle. Simultaneously, however, they were attempting to secure protectorate agreements to steal worlds in the Dawnline Shore out from under the KTB. Putting these two together and making five, the KTB assumed that the fleet was pointed at Karrakis, and started the First Interest War.

The First Interest War initially favoured the KTB. They smashed the fleet above Ras Shamra and simultaneously conquered the moon of Creighton in the Dawnline Shore. However, they underestimated just how ruthless Harrison I was - he "retook" Creighton by relativistic bombardment, and then conquered four of the 12 worlds of the Dawnline Shore with mechanised chassis, a technology the KTB had not adopted and had no counter for.

To prevent further loss of life, Union was eventually forced to broker a peace agreement that saw Harrison I handing himself over to Union justice in return for Harrison Armory's continued sovereignty, and the KTB joining Union as a full member state.

So, with that historical context out of the way, let me get to the second part of this absurd essay I'm writing.

Third Committee Union isn't a civilization that arose from whole cloth. It's shaped by five thousand years of Union history, six thousand years of post-Fall history, and six thousand years of pre-Fall history before that. It is, ultimately, an extremely well-thought-out and well-worldbuilt fictional polity, in that all of its imperfections come from traceable root causes in its history.

Why does ThirdComm permit the abuses of the KTB? Because to stop them, it would likely have to go to war, and such a war would butcher billions. Worse, to do so, it would probably have to ally with Harrison Armory and make horrific concessions.

Why does ThirdComm permit the expansionism and cryptochauvinism of the Armory? Because to stop them, it would likely have to go to war, and such a war would butcher billions. Worse, to do so, it would probably have to ally with the KTB and make horrific concessions.

Nobody in CentComm likes that Harrison Armory are empire-building expansionists. Nobody in CentComm likes that the KTB has a hereditary nobility and enforces blockades against planets that rebel against it. The problem is that ThirdComm is, in historical terms, still relatively new. They've been around five hundred years, and compared to the 1600 years that SecComm was around and the 2800 years FirstComm existed for, that's not very much.

ThirdComm is attempting to decouple itself from the Cradle-first politics of its predecessor, and to amend the many, many atrocities committed in the name of Humanity. It is not easy to do any of these things. SecComm was defined almost entirely by the fact that if it didn't like what you were doing, it would send in the military as a first response. Every time ThirdComm chooses to do the same, its legitimacy erodes, because the mission of ThirdComm is to prove that diverse, vibrant and compassionate human civilization can exist without devolving into war and bloodshed. ThirdComm always tries diplomacy as a first response because if it doesn't, millions of people could die.

#lancer #lancer rpg #lancerrpg #lancer-rpg #union #lancer lore #lore #fictional history

[rayes-rain]

One thing I don't get in anti-kataang discourse is when people say that the plot point of them getting together at the end came out of nowhere because katara only treated aang like her brother/child. I'm sorry, I must have hallucinated katara's realization of aang as a potential future husband in the fortune teller, her being flustered about kissing him in the cave of two lovers, the looks they share in the headband and their dance, the multiple cheek kisses she gives him of her own accord throughout the series, the blushing, the way she holds him, the way she leans into the kiss he gives her on the day of black sun.

You get my point. I think too often people equate characters' onscreen chemistry, which is pretty subjective, to actual plot set-up. The romance between aang and katara was well set-up from episode 1 by the writers, but some viewers do not think they have good chemistry and so are surprised by the fact that she chooses him in the end instead of their fave.

Your mileage my vary on aang and katara's romantic chemistry, but you really can't deny that the set-ups were there. Something something the death of media literacy.

#i'm not taaging this zvtara or anything i don't actually want major discourse over this #atla #avatar the last airbender #kataang #aang #katara

[rickybaby]

We keep talking about media literacy, but it's actually something very difficult to put into practice in this very overcrowded F1 media ecosystem, especially for new fans. I thought it would be a good idea to put together a list of reliable sources to hopefully make this year's silly season easier to navigate.

Publications

Auto Motor und Sport (more commonly known as AMuS) - the German publication is arguably considered as the most reliable source for F1 news. Most other publications will very often quote AMuS as source.

Speedcafe.com - Australia's foremost motorsport website. Mat Coch, their F1 editor, has access to Daniel's management and was one of the first people to seek clarification from Daniel's team when the rumour that he would be replaced by Miami first cropped up.

Other reliable publications: Autosport, Motorsport, PlanetF1 (caution to be advised with PlanetF1 because very often, it just quotes sources like AMuS or tends to have a lot of clickbait articles), BBC F1.

Journalists

Chris Medland - Chris is a freelance journalist with permanent FIA accreditation. He usually writes for RACER.COM. In my opinion, he is the most reliable from the whole cohort of journalists on twitter. He may not always be the one to break a story, but if he tweets out about a rumour or story, this is pretty much confirmation that the rumour or story is true.

Nate Saunders - Nate writes for ESPN F1 and is generally considered to be the Ricciardo camp mouthpiece. However, this does not necessarily mean he is, at all times, privy to insider information from Daniel's camp. Look out for him quoting 'sources close to ...'

Thomas Maher - Thomas writes for PlanetF1 and while PlanetF1 is not the most reliable of publications, I think Thomas is a good source to follow on twitter as he is pretty good at reaching out to his sources in the paddock when it comes to seeking clarification on a rumour.

Erik Van Haren - the Dutch journalist writes for the Telegraaf. He has the reputation of being close to the Max & Jos Verstappen camp and was the first one to break the Christian Horner SH story. Therefore, anything he writes about Max or Red Bull can be more or less be relied upon.

Albert Fabrega - he is a longstanding reporter with great technical expertise and is considered as the go-to source for the Spanish/ Spanish-speaking drivers, especially Alonso. Though, caution to be exercised after the whole 'I cannot believe what I have just been told' thing he pulled last year.

Lawrence Barretto - Lawrence is a presenter for F1. He is one of my favourites in the paddock and from time to time, he will have some insider information when it comes to Daniel. He was the first one to report on Daniel's best lap at the Silverstone being good enough for the front row.

F1 Pundits

There is a whole host of characters who act as commentators or guests across a variety of international broadcasts over a race weekend (or some of them just hang around the paddock). Think Martin Brundle, Crofty, Karun Chandhok, Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve, David Coulthard, Eddie Jordan, Ralf Schumacher ...

Their opinions are invariably given a lot of weight by virtue of most of them being former drivers or World Champions, but fact remains that many of them have no insight into what's actually happening within a team. However, that being said, a few of them still have close relationships with some of the teams, for e.g., David Coulthard with Red Bull or Mika Hakkinen with McLaren and whatever they say about these teams could potentially be relied upon.

Caution ⚠️

Joe Saward - Joe is rather notoriously known for his Green Notebook column on his blog. The column is supposedly meant to provide titillating insider information about F1, but it more often ends up being a regurgitation of the rumours that have been floating around that week. He has more misses than hits when it comes to rumours and anything he says needs to be taken with a generous dose of skepticism.

Will Buxton - if you see Will tweet something out, please lock your phone and walk away. This is not to say Will doesn't know what's happening in the sport - after all, he was the first one to give any indication of the Lewis to Ferrari story, but he is too committed to playing the game of shit-stirrer for engagement. The unfortunate thing is, we're all too human and we all invariably for his game and we end up going into a downward spiral of 'what does he mean???' when he tweets something out...

#i should also point out how certain of these so-called commentators are highly biased #re danica and villeneuve #there is also the whole italian media side who usually reports on ferrari related news which im not aware about #please feel free to correct anything in the post or add any other useful information #i'd say happy silly season but ricnation has perpetually been in silly season since 2022 #daniel ricciardo #information

[rewrite-canon]

im going crazy with how people are starting to agree with snow that sejanus was really stupid and deserved what was coming to him. reading the books first should be a pre requisite to the movie idcccc if that takes away the wider audience, the wider audience all have smooth brains anyway.

“why was he colluding with rebels when he could’ve just thought about it pragmatically 🙄” i’m in your fucking walls. sejanus was never dumb, snow just kept pushing that perception of him through the book to deflect the fact that sejanus was an actual good person. snow thought himself the personification of good and benevolence, which was why everything he did had to have some half-assed excuse as to why he was justified in doing it. it was why he was actually tweaking in the woods when lucy gray left him, because he wanted to rid himself of her but he didn’t have an actual reason so he convinced himself of the most random scenario ever to justify trying to shoot at her. so we can establish that snow was an evil broke boy who clearly wasn’t good— then sejanus was a direct confrontation of snow’s own shortcomings towards that (i don’t think i have to detail how sejanus was genuine, it was obvious). coriolanus and sejanus are like the direct opposite characters of each other, and snow knew and took pride in this to an extent. which is why snow couldn’t admit that sejanus was good to himself, thus sejanus was deemed ‘stupid’ to protect his own deluded self actualisation (but this also includes other aspects like how the war made the plinths rich and the snows poor, leading to resentment and jealousy from snow).

“but that still didn’t mean he wasn’t doing dumb things throughout the book” was it really that dumb? a rebellion will always include some level of risk but i don’t hear anyone calling heavensbee stupid because it actually worked out for him. plus sejanus is district, so if we use our common sense of who he is as a character and emotional intelligence of his situation, it’s pretty easy to see why he would get in touch with rebels. he’s literally always yearned for the districts, he never once cared about his money or safety, which isn’t stupid, it’s sad. this was his way of dealing with the guilt of profiting from his people’s suffering— again, not stupid. you could argue he was reckless, especially when he went into the arena, but most people who simply cast him as a ‘dumb character’ ignore how troubled he is and fall into the very filtered lens of snow who was just concentrating on his stupidity.

sejanus’ growing radical actions had nothing to do with stupidity and everything to do with feeling helpless and like nothing was changing. he tried minor/low-risk things such as attempting to change the perception of the districts in the capitol, advocating against the hunger games etc etc. of course it didn’t work, so his options grew limited to more radical courses of action. its a natural line of thought— activists literally do it in real life when they feel as if their cause isn’t getting enough attention (eg. setting themselves on fire). sejanus is a desperate character who is so selfless in light of snow’s constant self-preservation. snow will always put himself first and be paranoid that he will be betrayed like he’s betrayed others, so he never understands sejanus’ disposition to help and trust people, so he labels him dumb. omg. like. sejanus is so not-stupid i’m actually gonna start freaking out!! this is defamatory leave my boo alone!! plz go read a book and work on media literacy i am begging!!!

#maybe the stupidity was the friends we made along the way….. #i saw someone say that since the book was in third person then it wasn’t told from snow’s pov so it was reliable 💀💀 #like are we stupid now??? #this was supposed to be a short post but now im ranting and tweaking out #sejanus haters catch these handz leave this boy alone #he is literally the best!!! i hate yall sm 😭😭 #some of yall have the WORST takes about tbosas ever. #dont even get me started on the ‘lucy gray was manipulating and using snow the whole time’ bcuz i will freak out worse #sejanus plinth defender 4EVAAAAA #sejanus plinth #coriolanus snow #snowjanus #lucy gray baird #tbosas #the ballad of songbirds and snakes #thg #the hunger games #rewriting

[autisticandroids]

i've been seeing ai takes that i actually agree with and have been saying for months get notes so i want to throw my hat into the ring.

so i think there are two main distinct problems with "ai," which exist kind of in opposition to each other. the first happens when ai is good at what it's supposed to do, and the second happens when it's bad at it.

the first is well-exemplified by ai visual art. now, there are a lot of arguments about the quality of ai visual art, about how it's soulless, or cliche, or whatever, and to those i say: do you think ai art is going to be replacing monet and picasso? do you think those pieces are going in museums? no. they are going to be replacing soulless dreck like corporate logos, the sprites for low-rent edugames, and book covers with that stupid cartoon art style made in canva. the kind of art that everyone thinks of as soulless and worthless anyway. the kind of art that keeps people with art degrees actually employed.

this is a problem of automation. while ai art certainly has its flaws and failings, the main issue with it is that it's good enough to replace crap art that no one does by choice. which is a problem of capitalism. in a society where people don't have to sell their labor to survive, machines performing labor more efficiently so humans don't have to is a boon! this is i think more obviously true for, like, manufacturing than for art - nobody wants to be the guy putting eyelets in shoes all day, and everybody needs shoes, whereas a lot of people want to draw their whole lives, and nobody needs visual art (not the way they need shoes) - but i think that it's still true that in a perfect world, ai art would be a net boon, because giving people without the skill to actually draw the ability to visualize the things they see inside their head is... good? wider access to beauty and the ability to create it is good? it's not necessary, it's not vital, but it is cool. the issue is that we live in a society where that also takes food out of people's mouths.

but the second problem is the much scarier one, imo, and it's what happens when ai is bad. in the current discourse, that's exemplified by chatgpt and other large language models. as much hand-wringing as there has been about chatgpt replacing writers, it's much worse at imitating human-written text than, say, midjourney is at imitating human-made art. it can imitate style well, which means that it can successfully replace text that has no meaningful semantic content - cover letters, online ads, clickbait articles, the kind of stuff that says nothing and exists to exist. but because it can't evaluate what's true, or even keep straight what it said thirty seconds ago, it can't meaningfully replace a human writer. it will honestly probably never be able to unless they change how they train it, because the way LLMs work is so antithetical to how language and writing actually works.

the issue is that people think it can. which means they use it to do stuff it's not equipped for. at best, what you end up with is a lot of very poorly written children's books selling on amazon for $3. this is a shitty scam, but is mostly harmless. the behind the bastards episode on this has a pretty solid description of what that looks like right now, although they also do a lot of pretty pointless fearmongering about the death of art and the death of media literacy and saving the children. (incidentally, the "comics" described demonstrate the ways in which ai art has the same weaknesses as ai text - both are incapable of consistency or narrative. it's just that visual art doesn't necessarily need those things to be useful as art, and text (often) does). like, overall, the existence of these kids book scams are bad? but they're a gnat bite.

to find the worst case scenario of LLM misuse, you don't even have to leave the amazon kindle section. you don't even have to stop looking at scam books. all you have to do is change from looking at kids books to foraging guides. i'm not exaggerating when i say that in terms of texts whose factuality has direct consequences, foraging guides are up there with building safety regulations. if a foraging guide has incorrect information in it, people who use that foraging guide will die. that's all there is to it. there is no antidote to amanita phalloides poisoning, only supportive care, and even if you survive, you will need a liver transplant.

the problem here is that sometimes it's important for text to be factually accurate. openart isn't marketed as photographic software, and even though people do use it to lie, they have also been using photoshop to do that for decades, and before that it was scissors and paintbrushes. chatgpt and its ilk are sometimes marketed as fact-finding software, search engine assistants and writing assistants. and this is dangerous. because while people have been lying intentionally for decades, the level of misinformation potentially provided by chatgpt is unprecedented. and then there are people like the foraging book scammers who aren't lying on purpose, but rather not caring about the truth content of their output. obviously this happens in real life - the kids book scam i mentioned earlier is just an update of a non-ai scam involving ghostwriters - but it's much easier to pull off, and unlike lying for personal gain, which will always happen no matter how difficult it is, lying out of laziness is motivated by, well, the ease of the lie.* if it takes fifteen minutes and a chatgpt account to pump out fake foraging books for a quick buck, people will do it.

*also part of this is how easy it is to make things look like high effort professional content - people who are lying out of laziness often do it in ways that are obviously identifiable, and LLMs might make it easier to pass basic professionalism scans.

and honestly i don't think LLMs are the biggest problem that machine learning/ai creates here. while the ai foraging books are, well, really, really bad, most of the problem content generated by chatgpt is more on the level of scam children's books. the entire time that the internet has been shitting itself about ai art and LLM's i've been pulling my hair out about the kinds of priorities people have, because corporations have been using ai to sort the resumes of job applicants for years, and it turns out the ai is racist. there are all sorts of ways machine learning algorithms have been integrated into daily life over the past decade: predictive policing, self-driving cars, and even the youtube algorithm. and all of these are much more dangerous (in most cases) than chatgpt. it makes me insane that just because ai art and LLMs happen to touch on things that most internet users are familiar with the working of, people are freaking out about it because it's the death of art or whatever, when they should have been freaking out about the robot telling the cops to kick people's faces in.

(not to mention the environmental impact of all this crap.)

#ai art #ai #chatgpt

[arson-09]

Tamlin is actually such an underrated character in acotar. Because of feyres very biased narrative she forces readers to ignore the complexity of his character and man. its sad

Tamlin is a character who is genuinely GOOD at his core. He changed so much of the spring court for good, eliminating slavery within the spring lands and mortals having more protection. Hes a morally good character that made a few mistakes and is boiled down to just those mistakes. Locking feyre in the house and the magical/emotional blow up, which are both pretty decent fuck ups (i dont think siding with hybern fully counts as he was a double agent all along and tamlin was decently justified in thinking feyre was being kept against her will. lets be fr here) and even after he’s extremely fucked over by the nightcourt, his lands and court burned to shit, he still saves rhysand. Saves rhysand and tells feyre to be happy, even when he has every reason to NOT do that!

Hes a character that clearly holds himself to a higher standard. throughout acotar he puts lucien and feyres safety above his own, even sending feyre away when she was the only one who could save him. Even though what he did to her wasnt great its not completely irredeemable, rhysand did much worse things to feyre and other people but hes living his best life while Tamlin seems to find himself unworthy of being a person (acosf wheres hes been in beast form for roughly over two years) hes a perfectionist who now doesnt even think he deserves anyone because he accidentally hurt the people he loves most.

Sjm accidentally created a beautifully rich and morally righteous character who is so extremely fucked by the narrative. Which doesnt even work half the time as sjm cant seemingly commit to making him a full villain (seemingly by accident again she gave him quite a reasonable explanation to everything he did ‘wrong’ but still chooses to make him a punching bag)

If Tamlin was genuinely a morally evil character he wouldnt have NEARLY the amount of fans as he does. Hes a character that requires the minimum amount of media literacy and comprehension to understand and i LOVE him.

#acotar #a court of thorns and roses #tamlin #pro tamlin #sarah j maas #rhysand #sjm #anti rhysand #feyre #sjm critical #and most tamlin haters are so shallow #calling him tampon (which has so many misogynistic issues) is not the serve the girlies think it is #GOD hes so complex and its so good #i usually like the morally gray characters but this series writes them so poorly i go back around to loving the hero esq characters #tamlin has a certain ‘hero’ complex to him where he expects himself to save everyone and that its his duty #he said himself that hes only good for fighting and killing. he sees himself as subhuman or subfae whatever #and that level of self loathing/belief that others mean more than him makes him infinitely better than rhys or feyre #feyre and rhys are characters who are so full of themselves #obnoxious and hypocritical #i like feyre in the first book and basically dislike her in the rest of the series because she becomes so hypocritical and self obsessed #its 3am idk if this makes sense i just love tam :(

[olderthannetfic]

I always see people who have never been antis, talking about/questioning how some antis even ARE antis when you look at their taste in media - ie the ever famous joke of "Hannigram is #problematique" "but it's a show where he eats people" or whatever.

I thought I'd weigh in as someone who could, hypothetically, be called an ex-anti (which, thankfully, nothing ever really came out of it - it was just very 2014 keyboardwarrior-esque behavior of me being a chronically online young adult who would share posts in a group chat making fun of certain shippers, or reblog posts about how 50shades is The Most Problematic Media Ever to exist -- basically I was an anti with anti-lines of thoughts, but i never, like, a ran a Shipping Discourse Blog or whatever)

For me, personally, it was a few different things. I can now see how it's incredibly hypocritical that teenaged me shipped Light/L, while still thinking that Dramione was Bad And Abusive. It ultimately boiled down to a) being pretentious, and b) just not understanding media or what proshippers REALLY believed, with a side of c) not realizing that nuance exists. like i was pretty late to join tumblr, I think I immigrated here during PEAK "yourfaveisproblematic" era which definitely did have an impact on my opinions and my tastes.

to elaborate, a.) being pretentious. i mean this one just kinda goes without saying. "I engage in media in a way more intellectual way than you do, don't you know that? You're a filthy and disgusting person who writes Snape/Hermione because you're an actually disgusting pedophile IRL who would probably date your own student that you're abusing if you could. Meanwhile, I'm a very smart, good, and pure person. When I read Uncle Vernon/Harry, I'm doing it in a G-d honoring whump way that clearly condemns abuse, incest, and rape. Unlike YOU who only writes harmful stuff as a way to get people off :/"

(as an aside, i think this line of thinking will ALWAYS be present in fandom and popculture in some way, sadly. ie the recent trend of people hating on booktok bc the books are 'trashy' and how these porn addicts should read real classic literature instead.)

as for b.), not understanding media - i cannot emphasize enough that i was GENUINELY stupid and disconnected enough to think that proshippers REALLY WERE pro-All Of The Degenerate Dead Doves That They Wrote.

why did i feel this way? why did i understand that Lolita clearly isnt pro-pedophilia, but for some reason i thought that someone shipping weecest was? well, first of all, i think that fanfiction is (generally) seen as Less Serious than classic literature, and fandom is a fun place, so i guess i somehow thought that every fanfic/fanartist who wrote Problematic Things, especially Problematic Things that they portrayed as Sexy, really DID enjoy the thought of that Actually Happening To Real People.

and i think THIS is the bulk of why antis ARE antis. i'm not calling them all stupid - i do think BEING an anti is stupid, but at the same time, there are people who are truly smart and good-intended people who just have some really off color opinions about, like, homestuck ships or whatever. Lawlight is okay because notebooks that kill people don't exist so it's IMPOSSIBLE for the Harmful Aspects of Light/L to be romanticized! but schoolyard prejudiced bullies DO exist and are a REAL problem so Drarry is BAD (*truly completely unaware of the fact that there's 'realistic' aspects of the Light/L dynamic and 'unrealistic' aspects of Drarry - such as, for example, Hogwarts arguably being even MORE of a fantasy setting than DN is.*) I know that media literacy is the hot buzzword of the year to throw around in 2024, but, like, i really did not have media literacy.

as for c.), not realizing nuance exists - ok "nuance" might not be the best word here, but i dont know how else to describe it. like, each time ive typed the word "problematic" out in this ask, i've done so in a very tongue in cheek/ironic/retroactive way, but, like, those posts about how Everything Is Problematic, Including Your Fave ARE true. and i didn't like the fact that my favorite media or favorite person might've Made A Mistake! i need to Talk About Its Issues Because I'm So Betrayed That My Dear Sweet Comfort Media Would Do This To Me. I Need To Prove I Clearly Condemn It.

like, i legit morally could not justify reblogging a twilight post without adding in the tags '#this is my guilty pleasure it sucks that the books were so racist though' or whatever. Most people were lucky enough to avoid that line of thinking, but there was an actual group of people who felt a genuine need to virtue signal all the time, partly bc, hey, they WERE passionate about talking abt #issues in media, but also bc of a subconscious fear of If You Reblog A Singular Piece Of Hetalia Fanart, You're Literally A Nazi And Will Get A Callout Post Written About You.

and during all of this i was at the tail end of my high school experience (yes i know im younger than most of your audience, ha). i was going through A Lot emotionally, going through a lot of life changes, and lived in a very . . . interesting household/place where i couldn't do ACTUAL good in the world that i was passionate about. so to make up for the fact that i was genuinely in no place to do legit activism, clearly i had to save the gay community by arguing about johnlock queerbaiting or whatever.

^ and honestly i do think that is the position of most antis. theyre isolated and cant seem to do Enough in the Real Scary World so they have to resort to talking about how bad of a person someone is for "shipping abuse", bc theyre not in a situation where they could, for example, ACTUALLY fight the good fight to end abuse or raise awareness for it.

There was way more to it and way more that I could say, if I wanted to, but this post is long enough as it is and probably doesn't make much sense.

I feel bad for antis, honestly, or at least the ones who are antis in the way I used to be.

--

Oh yes, passionate young fools who think they can at least fix the internet if not their lives make up most of the cannon fodder. Some of the ringleaders are just mini dictators and wannabe cult leaders, but most anti-leaning types are just traumatized or clueless, even a lot of the ones who do serious damage and don't just mock shit in private with their friends.

[angelsdean]

I need people to understand how S&P (standards and practices) works in television and how much influence they have over what gets to stay IN an episode of a show and how the big time network execs are the ones holding the purse strings and making final decisions on a show's content, not the writers / showrunners / creatives involved.

So many creators have shared S&P notes over the years of the wild and nonsensical things networks wanted them to omit / change / forbid. Most famously on tumblr, I've seen it so many times, is the notes from Gravity Falls. But here's a post compiling a bunch of particularly bad ones from various networks too. Do you see the things they're asking to be changed / cut ?

Now imagine, anything you want to get into your show and actually air has to get through S&P and the network execs. A lot of creators have had to resort to underhanded methods. A lot of creators have had to relegate things to subtext and innuendo and scenes that are "open to interpretation" instead of explicit in meaning. Things have had to be coded and symbolized. And they're relying on their audience to be good readers, good at media literacy, to notice and get it. This stuff isn't the ramblings of conspiracy theorists, it's the true practices creatives have had to use to be able to tell diverse stories for ages. The Hays Code is pretty well known, it exists because of censorship. It was a way to symbolize certain things and get past censors.

Queercoding, in particular, has been used for ages in both visual media and literature do signal to queer audiences that yes, this character is one of us, but no, we can't be explicit about it because TPTB won't allow it. It's a wink-wink, nudge-nudge to those in the know. It's the deliberate use of certain queer imagery / clothing / mannerisms / phrases / references to other queer media / subtle glances and lingering touches. Things that offer plausible deniability and can be explained away or go unnoticed by straight audiences to get past those network censors. But that queer viewers WILL (hopefully) pick up on.

Because, unfortunately, still to this day, a lot of antiquated network execs don't think queer narratives are profitable. They don't think they'll appeal to general audiences, because that's what matters, whatever appeals to most of the audience demographic so they can keep watching and keep making the network more money. The networks don't care about telling good stories! Most of them are old white cishet business men, not creatives. They don't care about character arcs and what will make fans happy. They don't care about storytelling. What they care about is profit and they're basing their ideas of what's profitable on what they believe is the predominate target demographic, usually white cis heterosexual audiences.

So, imagine a show that started airing in the early 2000s. Imagine a show where the two main characters are based on two characters from a famous Beat Generation novel, where one of the characters is queer! based on a real like bisexual man! The creator is aware of this, most definitely. And sure, it's 2005, there's no way they were thinking of making that explicit about Dean in the text because it just wouldn't fly back then to have a main character be queer. But! it's made subtext. And there are nods to that queerness placed in the text. Things that are open to interpretation. Things that are drenched in metaphor (looking at you 1x06 Skin "I know I'm a freak" "maybe this thing was born human but was different...hated. Until he learned to become someone else.") Things that are blink-and-you-miss-it and left to plausible deniability (things like seemingly spending an hour in the men's bathroom, or always reacting a little vulnerable and awkward when you're clocked instead of laughing it off and making a homophobic joke abt it)

And then, years later there's a ship! It's popular and at first the writers aren't really seriously thinking about it but they'll throw the fans a bone here and there. Then, some writers do get on the destiel train and start actively writing scenes for them that are suggestive. And only a fraction of what they write actually makes it into the text. So many lines left on the cutting room floor: i love past you. i forgive you i love you. i lost cas and it damn near broke me. spread cas's ashes alone. of course i wanted you to stay. if cas were here. -- etc. Everything cut was not cut by the writers! Why would a writer write something to then sabotage their own story and cut it? No, these are things that didn't make it past the network. Somewhere a note was made maybe "too gay" or "don't feed the shippers" or simply "no destiel."

So, "no destiel." That's pretty clearly the message we got from the CW for years. "No destiel. Destiel will alienate our general audience. Two of our main characters being queer? And in a relationship? No way." So what can the pro-destiel creatives involved do, if the network is saying no? What can the writers do if most of their explicit destiel (or queer dean) lines / moments are getting cut? Relegate things to subtext. Make jokes that straight people can wave off but queer people can read into. Make costuming and set design choices that the hardcore fans who are already looking will notice while the general audience and the out-of-touch network execs won't blink and eye at (I'm looking at you Jerry and your lamps and disappearing second nightstands and your gay flamingo bar!)

And then, when the audience asks, "is destiel real? is this proof of destiel?" what can the creatives do but deny? Yes, it hurts, to be told "No no I don't know what you're talking about. There's no destiel in supernatural" a la "there is no war in Ba Sing Se" but! if the network said "no destiel!" and you and your creative team have been working to keep putting destiel in the subtext of the narrative in a way that will get past censors, you can't just go "Yes, actually, all that subtext and symbolism you're picking up, yea it's because destiel is actually in the narrative."

But, there's a BIG difference between actively putting queer themes and subtext into the narrative and then saying it's not there (but it is! and the audience sees it!) versus NOT putting any queer content into the text but SAYING it is there to entice queer fans to continue watching. The latter, is textbook queerbaiting. The former? Is not. The former is the tactics so many creatives have had to use for years, decades, centuries, to get past censorship and signal to those in the know that yea, characters like you are here, they exist in this story.

Were the spn writers perfect? No, absolutely not. And I don't think every instance of queer content was a secret signal. Some stuff, depending on the writer, might've been a period-typical gay joke. These writers are flawed. But it's no secret that there were pro-destiel writers in the writing room throughout the years, and that efforts were made to make it explicitly canon (the market research!)

So no, the writers weren't ever perfect or a homogeneous entity. But they definitely were fighting an uphill battle constantly for 15 yrs against S&P and network execs with antiquated ideas of what's profitable / appealing.

Spn even called out the networks before, on the show, using a silly example of complaints abt the lighting of the show and how dark the early seasons were. Brightening the later seasons wasn't a creative choice, but a network choice. And if the networks can complain abt and change something as trivial as the lighting of a show, they definitely are having a hand in influencing the content of the show, especially queer content.

Even in s15, (seasons fifteen!!!) Misha has said he worried Castiel's confession would not air. In 2020!!! And Jensen recorded that scene on his personal phone! Why? Sure, for the memories. But also, I do not doubt for a second that part of it was for insurance, should the scene mysteriously disappear completely. We've seen the finale script. We've seen the omitted omitted omitted scenes. We all saw how they hacked the confession scene to bits. The weird cuts and close-ups. That's not the writers doing. That's likely not even the editors (willingly). That's orders from on high. All of the fuckery we saw in s15 reeks of network interference. Writers are not trying to sabotage their own stories, believe me.

Anyways, TLDR: Networks have a lot more power than many think and they get final say in what makes it to air. And for years creative teams have had to find ways to get past network censorship if they want "banned" or "unapproved" "unprofitable" "unwanted" content to make it into the show. That means relying on techniques like symbolism, subtext, and queercoding, and then shutting up about it. Denying its there, saying it's all "open to interpretation" all while they continue to put that open to interpretation content into the show. And that's not queerbaiting, as frustrating as it might be for queer audiences to be told that what they're seeing isn't there, it's still not queerbaiting. Queerbaiting is a marketing technique to draw in queer fans by baiting them with the promise of queer content and then having no queer content in said media. But if you are picking up on queer themes / subtext / symbolism / coding that is in front of your face IN the text, that's not queerbaiting. It's there, covertly, for you, because someone higher up didn't want it to be there explicitly or at all.

#long post #LONG-ass post #but it needed to be said! #i'm sorry if you think every creative involved with spn was a braindead asshole but the thing is. #even the most mediocre of writers understands a thing or two abt symbolism and writers working in TV are plagued by S&P #countless writers have talked abt the S&P bullshit and having to tweak and edit down their work to get past censors #it's a reality of writing for television #and the people who understand all this and understand the context of making TV in the early 2000s (to present tbh!) aren't 'delusional' #i'm sorry but it's naive to think that queer stories and queer characters are free to be told even nowadays. it's still a constant battle #times have changed but unfortunately not as much as you'd think #the confession !!!!! the confession still struggled to air and what we got was so obviously hacked down to bits!!!!!! #how can anyone think getting destiel content into the show was ever easy? #how can anyone think the pro-destiel writers weren't constantly having to be careful and underhanded in their writing? #there's a reason queercoding and subtext exist and it's this!!! it's censorship from TPTB #anyways. people much older than me have been talking abt this for ages. younger fans who are used to more open queer rep need to understand #it hasn't always been that easy and even nowadays SO many networks are still not willing to take a risk on queer stories #so creators do what they can #vic.txt

[themousefromfantasyland]

The True Themes and Messages of Disney's Wish

Not gonna lie, I feel like the script for Wish is very underdeveloped, which is one of my main negative points about the movie. But is media literacy so bad that people keep missing the obvious points that the movie is literally hitting you in the head over and over again?

Magnifico is not a villain because he doesn't grant everyone's wish. He is a villain because in true Kingdom Hearts fashion, the wishes people give him are literally pieces of their hearts, their biggest and most important dreams and desires, and he uses magic to make everyone forget these huge parts of themselves, leading to severe mental anguish and complicency.

Magnifico is a villain because the wish granting process makes people unable to achieve their own dreams, and makes them extremely dependent on Magnifico for everything. It strips people of any sense of agency.

Magnifico's main motivation is that he must have absolute control over people's lives. That he must be the only source of comfort and hope people can have. That anything else is threat to his power.

The Kingdom of Rosas appear to be happy, but that happiness is shown to be just skin deep. People are unhappy and unfulfilled and only appear happy because of false hope and blind obedience.

Simon is the biggest example of this. Asha's friends are meant to be a homage to the Seven Dwarfs, and he's meant to be the Sleepy of the group. But different from the others, his narcolepsy doesn't appear to be his natural personality, especially since his wish is to be a freaking warrior.

By the way his friends talk, it's obvious the narcolepsy is a relatively new thing that is making them uncomfortable. And it's obvious it's a direct consequence of already have given up his wish to Magnifico.

Simon is the most depression coded Disney character since Eeyore, and it's obvious it's because this huge chunk of his personality was extracted out of him and erased of his mind.

"But people gave their wishes to Magnifico freely", yeah, but just like in a cult, they only did that because they didn't know the consequences, of the downsides, about how much control they were allowing Magnifico to have over their lives.

"But Rosas appear fine." Yeah, Rosas looks pretty idilic, until people start making questions. It only took people making simple questions about Magnifico's system for him to unleash dark magic to beat them into submission.

In the end, he has absolutely control even about his people's dreams. And once he realizes he can use these dreams to be more powerful, to have even more control over them, he absolutely does that.

The people of Rosas traded agency for a false hope, all in name of blind faith on a charismatic leader.

I swear to you, my parents are rabid conservatives and I saw how much trust they put on our own Trump-like figure. The conversation Asha had with Sabino, her grandfather, is the same I had with my parents. Sabino blindly trusts Magnifico so much, he prefers believing his wish is dangerous, that he did something wrong. He drank the kool-aid.

Magnifico's a mixture between politician and religious leader. Even if he built Rosas with good intentions, by the end, making so many people dependent on him corrupted him to his core.

Asha's side is not about granting everyone's wish, is about giving people the choice. To restore their agency. That they do not need to allow charismatic leaders to have absolute control over their lives.

After Magnifico's defeat, Amaya sets people with similar goal and objectives together, so they themselves can achieve their dreams, instead of having to rely sorely on authority figures.

This itself is a great message that I wish more people talked about.

#disney #wish 2023 #disney wish #asha #king magnifico