ARCHAEOLOGIST DREAM FIC my favorite i cannot wait tell the audience about it pls pls pls
but also, for me, i have to know...what is in "literally shut up"
hiii emmy em love of my life em!!
(someone else asked about the archaeologist dream fic HALLELUJAH so i'll give my obnoxious drawn-out dramatic pitch for it there, but think everyone should know it would not exist as an idea without you!!!! it would simply be buried (ha! archaeology pun!) in my subconscious forever. you gave me purpose.)
okay 'literally shut up' is ... hahahaha. god. goodddd.
it is essentially this:
remus is a poolboy. sirius is a wealthy, stressed-out owner of an incredibly filthy pool. is it destiny or...is it maybe just the ripped-off plot of a cliche 90s porn film? who's to say!!!
i feel as if the title of this wip should be obvious by this point, but if not it is Past Me telling (quite rudely) Current/Future/All-Versions-Of Me to literallyyyyy shutttttt UPPPPP.
think i'm prob still gonna write it though :// how embarrassing for me!
12 notes
·
View notes
so i was going to make a post about how people need to learn what a comparison actually is, but when i looked up the definition and dug more into what exactly a comparison is, i realise that i actually needed to learn
because what i realise is that most people get it wrong, on both sides
A lot of people, myself included, conflate comparison into meaning "between these two(or more) things, one is worse/better"
Either through accusation or defending. Meaning one party accuses someone of saying A is worse than B through comparison, and the other defending saying that its not a comparison but finding similarities.
Both are actually technically right. Because the definition of comparison is to find similarities and/or differences only. It is not about figuring out which is worse or better
Which this is probably obvious for some ppl but ive seen it in the vegan community in defending and in the anti vegan or non vegan community for accusations
It all depends on intent and how something is said
theres a big difference between saying "There are similarities between A and B" and "A and B are the samr" or "A is just as bad as B"
Especially when it comes to social issues of oppression.
Because all oppression is comparable, but that doesnt mean its all the same or one is worse.
Even when there is a comparison that shows which oppression is more prevalent, its not about it being "worse", which is so vague. Its about understanding history, understanding society and how it works, and many other things
Basically, when someone compares animal agriculture to slavery or the holocaust by saying "its no different" "its the same" "AnAg is worse" etc, that is a hard comparison and is wrong, and those hard or even casual (finding similarities) comparisons should be kept for those who have history with the holocaust and slavery.
But it is NOT the same to draw comparisons, as in highlighting similarities, between oppressions, even if that applies to animals
I understand the kneejerk reaction due to the history of marginalized people being equated or compared to animals.
But you HAVE to use your comprehension skills.
There are vegans, actual vegans who go by the Vegan Society definition, who make hard comparisons and they are wrong and bad.
But when someone is talking about the harmful mindset of viewing someone who is a sentient being as lesser, and how in history and even in fictional stories how that leads to oppression like...its just not the same
No oppression is comparable in every way. Because each oppression is different.
trans oppression is different within the trans community depending on race or gender or looks or weight or abledness or even attractiveness. but there is still a common mindset which connects the trans community. And trans oppression is different from gay oppression but theres still a similar oppressive mindset that makes up the whole Queer community
and you can draw those comparisons, find those similar mindsets in all oppression
and you cant draw a line because someone is different from you, be them human or non human
and that is all these comparisons are. they ARE comparisons, id like to call them soft comparisons to differentiate them from hard comparisons like mentioned before
but there is nothing wrong with having a conversation about the oppressive mindset that affects everyone who is human and non human animals.
Learn to take a breath before replying, and figure out which kind of comparison youre dealing with. and when in doubt? just ask.
3 notes
·
View notes
"I know JK Rowing is a terrible person but her books are so good-"
You sure about that?
I mean, just for a start, have you taken a good look at her fantasy creatures lately? A whole bunch of them are straight-up based on malicious and dehumanizing stereotypes about actual people.
Remember the werewolves? And being a werewolf was made into a kind of metaphor for having AIDS?
And you know how AIDS was first associated with gay men? And how conservatives back in the day were claiming gay men were preying on children in order to convert them to gayness?
Remember how Fenrir Greyback preyed on children in particular? Yeah, she put that subtext in there. She was an adult in the 90's. She knew damn well what she was doing.
Remember the house elves? Remember how most of them loved to serve and needed to have a home and a master or else they just wouldn't know what to do with themselves?
Did you know that's literally what slavers in the American South said about the Black people they kept enslaved? Go look up the happy slave myth.
Do I even need to get into the goblins and the antisemitic tropes they're based on? No, folkloric goblins were not gold-hoarding bankers waiting for their chance to stab humanity in the back.
"But the characters are so good!"
Are you kidding me?
Most of her characters are pretty one-dimensional, including Harry. Her idea of making a morally complicated character is giving a tragic past to a bully. Numerous characters are little more than stereotypes. (Looking at Fleur right now.) Literally anybody, including you, can easily make dozens of characters just as good, if not better. (It doesn't exactly take a lot of character designing skill to go, "hey, actually, having a sad backstory doesn't make it okay to bully children" or "hey, maybe I should not base a character on the first stereotype that pops into my head.")
"But the rest of the worldbuilding!"
Sorry, but her worldbuilding is just as basic as her characters. Magical castles and secret passages are stock tropes. Magical people who keep their true nature secret from humanity is the premise of pretty much every White Wolf TTRPG. Most of her fantasy creatures are just common European fairy tale and folklore creatures with shitty stereotypes projected onto them.
I'm not saying "basic worldbuilding bad." I'm saying, you could do just as good, if not better, with minimal effort.
Also there's her magical bioessentialism, where only Harry's abusive blood relatives could provide him with supernatural protection from Voldemort. Rowling thus effectively declared that non-biological family isn't quite real family, and that abusive biofamily can give you some essential thing that a loving, supportive family that isn't related to you just can't.
The Hogwarts houses are one of the most insidious elements of her worldbuilding. The idea of being sorted gives you a little dopamine hit because wow now you have a li'l niche where you belong!
But the actual function of the houses and sorting system and the House Cup is teaching children to see each other as rivals, and ensure that the most toxic views of the upper class get passed on to every new batch of kids sorted into Slytherin.
Hogwarts effectively prepares children for a dystopia where magic serves to distract its citizens from how nightmarishly awful it is. Economic inequality is so bad that people like Arthur and Molly Weasley can barely afford to put their kids through school, casual sadism is just an accepted norm in everyday society, and non-humans are second class citizens. Rowling sorta acts like she thinks this is a bad thing with certain lines she gave to Dumbledore, but in the end, her special boy protagonist becomes an auror; IE, a defender of the status quo. So.
If you've never seen it, Lily Simpson's video goes into even more detail on how the worldbuilding of Harry Potter is actually incredibly fucked up, and how it betrays small-minded attitudes on Rowling's part. There's no separating the art from this artist, because Rowling's rotten values pour out of nearly every page.
Yes, there are many things in Harry Potter that evoke feelings and inspire people, but there's absolutely nothing in it that this series has a monopoly on. You can find those same experiences in much, much better media.
8K notes
·
View notes