Tumgik
#like morally horrible not 'infringement'
pocima · 1 month
Text
K-pop fandom related rant, feel free to keep scrolling (keep reading if you’re nosy 🥸)
Tumblr media
A lot of international K-pop fans are complete and total hypocrites. They have this moral superiority complex against incel K-nets who dunk on idols for dating and living their love lives and wanna advocate for idols being seen as real human beings with their own emotions and thoughts, but when an actual dating rumor pops up related to an idol they’ve formed a deep parasocial relationship with, what kind of “jokes” do we see? “Nooooo my fave is dating someone, I’m gonna jump off a cliff!”, “Wdym they aren’t xyz sexuality, they’re for abc group of people, we’ve got let down 😔”, “What happened to that post where they were clingy to this groupmate of theirs, we got tricked 😭”. They may be haha funny for the first, like, 5 minutes, but not only do they often escalate to being extremely strange and dehumanizing, we need to question the roots of these jokes altogether. Call me unfunny, miserable, a cupcake, a blind defender, tell me to unclench and laugh a little or whatever, but first of all, if you played along with fanservice enough to feel even the slightest bit of disappointment that it’s not reality, what can I say except you’re probably birdbrained enough to hop in a sketchy stranger’s car for an expired lollipop like a 5 year-old? Secondly and more importantly, of course this doesn’t apply if the rumors are also tied to someone disgusting and the idol in question is horrible for dating them (the reactions will be different as well), imagine being so invested in this obviously fake and “ironic” fantasy to the point where your warped perception of them turns so stale you’re deprived from the ability to act normal about the new couple and wishing them well, let alone bearing happiness for them and the fact that they’re cherished and appreciated by someone in real life. K-pop fandoms have always been doomed in that aspect, both Korean and overseas, but you could distinguish between the normal fans and the truly delusional crowd, because due to internet humor being debatably cornier in the past, these comments looked freakish right at first sight. With the current jokes, irony and self-deprecation, the lines between “satire” and reality have become more blurred than ever, and you need to possess a level of reading comprehension and critical thinking to raise an eyebrow at these responses. K-poppies worldwide possess neither! They’ll only consider calling out the comments infringing personal life if they’re laid out caveman style like “my idol dating bad, making fans sad bad, idol no date no club no different gender friend, idol only love fans and make fans happy”. No sense of nuance or depth, no appreciation for these ARTISTS’ artistry and work, only a desire to project their lack of a social circle onto singing and dancing pretty dolls thousands of miles, or rather a screen away. I get it, they couldn’t give a monkey’s about the music, about the talent, about the performances no matter how much they pathetically pretend to. The hell depth of the barrel is checking yourself for your behavior and comments, and either admitting you’re severely unwell and not much different than the K-nets you get a high out of criticizing or fixing that attitude and getting a damn life. It’s clown behavior for us international K-pop fans to yap about the select group of emotionally unstable Korean fans when we’re faced with the exact same problem within our own side of the fandom! Trash vs garbage, coleslaw vs potato salad, Wish vs AliExpress. Get real. 
I can’t believe I’m staying in this hellhole even though I’m very distant from fandoms, for long years every other day has presented me with signals to leave for once and for all, but unfortunately I’m too invested in my faves’ future music projects so I don’t see myself quitting soon.
5 notes · View notes
ultimatelife · 1 year
Text
But also gentleman shadow who wordlessly opens doors for old ladies and little girls. Holding a hand out for ladies to cross a treacherous paths, and being there to catch them when they almost fall. Helping people, you know.
I can see him volunteering at a hospice, helping the elderly. I think he'd connect with them the most. They get it.
Like he's so sweet? But can be morally ambiguous and straight up scary at the flip of a switch. Especially when innocent bystanders or friends are in danger of any kind. Like, the duality of man right there. The desire to help and be selfless but also need to cause pain and chaos/death for those who infringe on the life of others. His methods are trangressive but it's what he does best and he knows he does it well. He won't negate the fact he has committed horrible things to keep them safe.
2 notes · View notes
realhankmccoy · 2 years
Text
Also accurate about Obi-Wan (I am an INFP by just a tad... my J is 49% and I had to work to shift it from J to P over the course of a decade, I believe):
It depends on whether you’re looking for a Myers-Briggs personality designation (in that case, INFJ), or an analysis summary of his personality.
In a nutshell, Obi-Wan is very much an introvert. He is a quiet man, very studious, and kind and compassionate. He is a good listener, a master negotiator, and excellent at compromise, providing that said compromise does not infringe on his ideals or sense of morality. He is very loyal, but betrayal by those close to him (of which there are few, as he is introverted and thus, has a few close friends rather than many) cuts straight through to the heart (“You were my brother, Anakin. I loved you!”).
He is an idealist, but also a realist. He knows that the galaxy has a LOT of facets to it that range from irritating to downright horrible, and he fights for what is right to the best of his ability, always striving to abide by the Jedi Code (though emotionally, he fails several times due to his capacity to love others, such as Satine Kryze of Mandalore (the only woman he ever truly loves, though she never asked him to stay and thus, he remained in the Jedi Order and never married her), Anakin Skywalker (his brother by all but blood and best friend), and Padme Naberrie (close friend, kind of like a sister in law in a way)). He can harbor a blind spot for those he loves (such as overlooking the relationship between Anakin and Padme for their sake, even though he knows they’re at least dating. I doubt he knows they’re married though).
He cares very deeply, but he strives to not let emotions control his actions, as is the Jedi way. He strongly believes in democracy and will fight for the Republic’s future, BUT he is a peaceful man, and tries to seek first a peaceful resolution (he’s been known to win battles on negotiation alone without firing a single shot). He would rather not fight or kill unless he has no other choice, but he is not a complete pacifist, and will fight to defend himself or others, or defend the Republic if the Jedi Council asks him to.
He is, however, not above disagreeing with the Council if he feels that they are not honoring the Jedi code, as is the case when they ask Anakin to spy on the Chancellor (he tries desperately to get them not to do it, but is overruled). He will go out of his way to protect other Jedi as well, especially Anakin as the man is his son, brother and best friend all rolled into one (metaphorically speaking), but he’s also very smart and wise and won’t jeopardize the masses if it came down to it.
He is a very wise and patient man as well (again, except in Anakin’s case when he was his Master. Boy howdy does he get frustrated at Anakin sometimes! But given Anakin’s arrogance he does show remarkable restraint, IMHO lol).
He is an excellent lightsaber duelist, but his chosen mastery (THE master of Soresu), is also indicative of his personality. It is a form dedicated solely to defense, and requires enormous amounts of focus and PATIENCE. It is not an aggressive form at all, and that is characteristic of Obi-Wan, since he is a man who desires peace over conflict. He also actively uses the Jedi Mind Trick on a regular basis to avoid conflict as well. He does not like it at ALL, but will enter into conflict if he must.
He is gentle as well, and though not overly experienced with children, he was capable of taking care of the newborn Luke until he delivered him to Beru and Owen Lars. He shows compassion to others he encounters, as well as kindness- both traits he exemplifies. However, especially in his padawan years, he sometimes becomes too focused on the Council’s mandates and not enough on what’s going on around him (which Qui-Gon admonishes him for). He gets better at this in his later years.
He can be stubborn and hot-headed as well, as is evident when it comes to Anakin’s training- but he eventually learns to control his emotions (though, again, he does feel them very deeply, but he can push them down so as to maintain the necessary focus and concentration of a Jedi).
He also views himself as powerless, rather than powerful, and subservient to the Force and its will. Rarely does he do anything with the Force that is not the will of the Force itself. He allows himself to be a conduit for its will and its power, and in doing so he overcomes his own handicap in it (as he’s not as powerful in the Force as many other users, having a much lower midichlorian count).
Jedi Master. Member of the Jedi Council. General of the Grand Army of the Republic. Accomplished pilot who hates flying. THE Master of Soresu. One of the greatest Jedi of his time.
He feels like he’s none of these things. Inside, he still feels like he’s a padawan. This is characteristic of Obi-Wan that he has absolutely no clue that he is one of the greatest Jedi of his time. His humility is admirable, to say the least. Greatness was never his ambition- he seeks only to do what is asked of him to the best of his ability, whether it be from the Council or the Force directly.
And he absolutely HATES attention and politicians, and actively tries to avoid both ;) He’s the kind of guy who will give you the shirt off his back if you needed it, while simultaneously is a very dangerous warrior.
Yes, he does have his faults. Sometimes his temper can get the better of him (Anakin in particular knows how to push his buttons), sometimes his love for others can blind him, sometimes he “stretches” the truth in order to avoid bringing pain to another person (like when he told Luke that Darth Vader killed Anakin), and sometimes he can manipulate others so that things that need to be done get done (like manipulating Luke so that Luke will be angry at and ultimately kill his father, rather than hate Ben/Obi-Wan for killing him by OW hiding the truth about Vader from Luke during the New Hope Death Star fight and deliberately letting Luke see Vader “striking him down”, rather than simply telling him he became one with the Force).
But overall, Obi-Wan is a good example of what it means to be a decent person, and exemplifies what it means to be a Jedi. Despite the hell the guy went through in his life- losing everyone he’d ever loved, watching his own pupil and the clones he’d fought with for years destroy the only “family” (Jedi) he’d ever had, seeing the Republic he was loyal to be crushed and destroyed by the Empire, seeing the only woman he’d ever loved be impaled before his eyes by his greatest enemy (Maul) and being unable to stop it, seeing his mentor and father-figure cut down and again, being unable to stop it, seeing his best friend/brother/son become Darth Vader and being forced to fight and maim him, seeing everything DV did after being unable to render the killing blow on Mustafar (and knowing that all those lives destroyed by DV were on his conscience as a result), seeing his clones die in battle over the course of three years, realizing that he’d been the one to find the clones in the first place that would destroy everything he loved, realizing that Palpatine (whom he’d been suspicious of for years with his influence over Anakin) was a Sith Lord right under his nose the entire time (and having been TOLD THIS by Dooku and didn’t believe it), being unable to save Padme, seeing Anakin his pupil slaughter younglings in the Temple (on the holorecorder afterward), going from respected Jedi Master to outlaw in hours to reclusive hermit on Tatooine, seeing Owen refuse to let him complete his task to watch over Luke, witnessing Darth Vader destroy Alderaan…
HE NEVER ONCE TURNED TO THE DARK SIDE.
This humble, patient, compassionate, loving, kind man was the ULTIMATE JEDI, and he didn’t even realize it.
1 note · View note
1800queeragenda · 2 years
Text
Me: Hey mom! Florida passed this Don’t Say Gay Bill that backfired horribly! Listen to this simplified tiktok about it!
My Mom: Why are they infringing on parents rights?
Me: ...T...the parents were the ones that wanted this bill to pass...I think?
My Mom: Oh, well, but children have easily malleable minds, so you have to be careful talking to them about sensitive topics.
Me: ...Y-yeah, that’s a given with more sensitive topics, but queer people aren’t a sensitive topic. It’s actually really easy to explain gender and orientations to children. I could have explained it easily to my cousin this one time I was getting my hair cut in my grandmas house, and I told the hair stylist I was genderqueer, but my grandma told me to not talk about it. I don’t believe grandma was being intentionally harmful (to me specifically), but as an older person, she had more dated world views. This type of thing is an example of queerphobia: marginalized identities are scrapped under the table as something shameful while the terms “man” and “woman” are glorified and enforced onto children.
My Mom: Well, I don’t know what your cousin has gone through, but I’m sure grandma has, and besides, your cousin's parents are religious.
Me: ...This...isn’t about what my cousin has gone through? What someone has gone through in the past, and whatever god they worship, it does not constitute for people to be queerphobic? Queerphobia, sexism, racism, etc is bad, plain and simple. Please think about the implications that your words might say before you say them.
My Mom: I’m just defending my mom here! If you talk bad about my mom, I’m going to fight back!
Me: ...I...I never talked bad about grandma, I literally stated that I’m sure she meant no harm in that scenario. I don’t group your mom in with other queerphobic people. We are not talking about grandma anymore, we are talking about queerphobic people in general, as well as racist, sexist, etc people, which are bad things to be. You should not be defending these people.
My Mom: I’m not defending these people! When have I been defending these people? I haven’t even really said anything, you’re the one who started this conversation! Stop putting words in my mouth! Why are you accusing me of being queerphobic? I’ve been a maid of honor at a gay wedding!
Me: ...You have actually said a lot of things with very few words. Like I have previously stated, please think about the words you want to say, and what they may imply, before you go out and say them. Also, just because you may have queer friends, does not mean that you yourself are not exempt from feeling prejudice against queer people. The fact that we are having this conversation at all shows that you have queerphobic tendencies.
My Mom: Can we please stop arguing! You do this every time!
Me: I have been trying my best to calmly get you to realize the error of your own ways, but you mistake basic morality and human rights as “an opinion” and accuse me of controlling peoples thoughts and forcing you to walk on eggshells. Once again, queerphobia, racism, sexism, etc, is bad, plain and simple. There is no excuse for it. It should not be hard to treat people with respect. I never wanted this to be an argument, but you were the one that may have turned it into one by trying to play the middle-man once again, which you cannot do every single time.
My Mom: Have you taken your medication yet? You should take your medication.
Me:
Me: Get out of my fucking room.
5 notes · View notes
rougekithes · 8 months
Text
I just learned about a twitter post from a really really old TV show on a governmental TV station during pride month. Can't stop being mad at people again.
Sorry not sorry for the long post. I'd put it under a cut usually but I don't feel like doing it for something like that.
Tumblr media
"How beautiful/nice, that you exist."
For context, "Die Maus" (The Mouse) is a child friendly educational thing, that is running for GOD knows how long, every sunday at like 12pm.
And as expected, the homo- and transphobes came in swarms, because said TV station is legally bound to political objectivity.
So now people claim how this isn't politically objective and how the entire Queer-Community is sexualising young children with things like these.
But like first of all, human rights are not a political opinion. It's literally the first two articles of our constituion.
Article 1 [Human dignity – Human rights] (1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority. (2) The German people therefore acknowledge inviolable and inalienable human rights as the basis of every community, of peace and of justice in the world.
Article 2 [Personal freedoms] (1) Every person shall have the right to free development of their personality insofar as they do not violate the rights of others or offend against the constitutional order or the moral law.
We're not asking to be allowed to have massive orgies in malls and therefore infringe on your personal freedom by forcing you to watch, we're asking to be treated with respect and have the same oppotrunities as the heteronormative society.
And the other part is;
Tumblr media
Translation: "Have you noticed/learned what this flag means? Do you think this is appropriate? This is sexualisation of young children with the goal of normalising pedophilia. Congratulations, you went broke."
Dear Sylwie, no one is trying to normalise pedophilia. Being a pedo doesn't make you gay and being gay doesn't make you a pedo. None of us thinks pedophilia should be treated the same way as homosexuality. Studies have shown, that there's more male pedophiles than female ones, but it is unclear which sex the primary victim of pedophiles is. However, the general trend says that girls are more often the victim of sexual violence. I mention this, because a lot of sexual violence against children is not perpetuated by pedos but instead people who simply seek the easist victim, which unfortunately, are children. So while I'd usually say correlation =/= causation, I can't even say there's a correlation here. Which you know, makes sense. Being a horrible human being has nothing to do with your sexual orientation. Being a horrible person is not exclusive to one gender/sex/race/religion or whatever. Regarding the "sexualisation of children"....
Tumblr media
Translation: "We can't begin to sexualise children early enough. Thanks Mouse!"
Teaching children about gay and trans people is not fucking sexualising children. Please, someone teach conservatives on twitter what sexualising children means. Please, please teach them that when they say "they sexualise our children" they're claiming we somehow see children as sexually desirable people, objectifying them if you will. Literally not a single person who wants to teach children "Some men love other men and some women love other women" or "Some boys really don't like being boys and choose to grow up as a girl" or even just "some boys want to wear dresses and some girls like to play with "boy's toys" " is sexualising a child. No one attributes children with sexuality. I'm gonna make a huge assumption here, but I highly doubt that people who are pro "teach kids about queer things" are asking "teach children how two adult men have anal sex and how docking works.".
I'd argue teaching kids more than that or more than the bees and the birds is probably a great start too, just so you know, children can learn about and set boundaries and can actually properly express themselves in case something inappropriate happened to them. - But that's a whole different topic and doesn't really have to do with LGBTQI+ spaces.
Fun fact; Die Maus has always been a queer icon. It never had a gender and was shown in very feminine dresses as well as masculine swimming trunks and similar things when the situation called for it. <3
0 notes
starkid256 · 8 months
Text
saying it rn:
men can be lesbians. women can be gay. nonbinary people can use binary terms or present binary. lesbians hating men is horrible. you are allowed to be cishetallo. if you cant seperate the creation from the creator or think that liking something with a problematic creator is bad then you are very fucking dumb.
main goal on what im trying to say is: stop being so protective over yourself and your beliefs so much so that you genuinely think someone doing something you think infringes on your self image is a horrible person. just let people be. stop fucking excluding people unless they have done morally fucked up shit. the world is not black and white!!!
0 notes
disir-ex-machina · 3 years
Text
"adult language is not allowed on mask products"
...alright, that's actually an interesting quicksave someone put more than 5 seconds of thought into; interesting, although not the... variant we're currently testing, I'm afraid. may have to try getting past that one later
anyway, if anyone is curious, I spent the last hour or so doing this (link removed so I can still experiment if this gets big). If you look at tags/titles on two of them, I was obviously trying to get around a rule despite the actual content being in violation, and with the other 4 I'm attempting to attract attention to content that's well within parameters but shares the same name as said popular IP.
So far, all designs are still up and I ordered at least a sticker of everything but the big Laufeyjarson one FOR SCIENCE (something something myself to myself but also I was curious to see if I could get away with making a profit out of any of this in theory; I say in theory because if anyone else weirdly feels moved to get something during this test; it's going to mutual aid or back to you if I know you, altho considering the cut RB gets out of this no matter what... "science" is probably only worth it once unless you really want a memento of me (us?) fucking around. I mean I clearly used MemeGenerator for a few of those).
Anyway, while I don't want to draw any conclusions at this stage in the game, it is interesting to me that the actual myth ones (which I tagged very obviously) did blink in and out of existence for a while on the main page whereas both of the ones where I'm quite obviously playing the keyword/tag system did not. We'll see how this plays out, I just have... experience and a feeling about how this is going down, and it probably involves RB just going "WELP FLAG THE NAME OUR JOB HERE IS DONE" as happened last summer and... probably a million times before and actually it's probably happening right now, but I suppose whatever results if any occur (as they may actually be trying to have humans review shit now that there's an uproar), I'll have this stuck on one of my vinyl cases
Tumblr media
disclaimer for nuance: I don't like the owners of that version any more than you do (probably less); I'm just suggesting you be angry with more people, actually
6 notes · View notes
dadbodgintoki · 2 years
Text
gintama fic recs (gen+ edition)
hello again this is a follow up to my previous post re: gintama fic recs bc i realized i’d have to split them all up. i love gintama fic and there’s SO MUCH good gen fic out there. these will be split by vibe/genre bc sometimes you want fluffy yorozuya and sometimes you want to have ur heart ripped out by the concept of trauma on repeat. i also want to say, with these ones especially - a LOT of these authors have written SEVERAL incredible gintama fics. in order to not overload, i chose max two per person, but please please check out the authors on this list bc i promise they have good stuff that isn’t here! 
(shoka sonjuku focused and/or joui4 fic will be coming in a separate post)
for when you want to read a really good gintama arc  
Volcanolanche by naye @listening-to-thunder​. Rated G. 
This is a story of a snowy treasure hunt going horribly awry, because of course it does — didn't anyone watch the Ketsuno Ana Weather Special: Nature Will F**k Your S**t Up? It could also be a story about the dangers of greed, but everyone ends up too busy saving their rivals and not giving up on their friends to really care about that.
Pandemonium by @xparrot​. Rated T. 
The Yorozuya trio gets an unexpected reward. They really should've checked their daily horoscope before accepting: Beware of old women bearing gifts, don't count your lizards before they're hatched, and be careful when life seems too good to be true, because it might be a sign that everything is soon going to go very, very badly.
for when you want shenanigans with the gang and/or heartwarming fuzzies
anime is a zero-sum game by suitablyskippy. Rated G. 
“Once upon a time, only my stoicism was humorously inappropriate,” says Katsura. The Leader rolls over to sprawl upside down on her park bench and regards him blandly, littlest finger up her nose. “Do you remember that, Leader? Do you remember the days when only my deadly serious nature could provide a hearty chuckle or two?” “Get over it, uh-huh,” advises Kagura, and flicks a dollop of snot onto the immaculate blue of his kimono. Her advice is as wise as ever, but Katsura cannot bring himself to take it. (There’s only so much shameless copyright infringement a samurai can take before he reaches his limit. Thanks to Kyuubei, Katsura has reached that limit.)
similarly, they who love well by @pearthery. Rated G. Technically has background ginzura and kyutae, but it’s mostly not focused on them. 
Katsura breathes in again. "But I never thought that you—you—would think the same. Hah! How ironic it is that when I have reconciled that we are just two different, yet similar approaches to a tried and true character archetype—each explored in thoughtful, personal directions—that you would step forward and expose yourself as thinking, oh, as thinking you are above me! Do you suppose yourself at a moral high ground, Kyuubei-dono? Do you?" "Ah," says Gintoki idly. "You've done it now, Kyuubei-kun." [Rather than attract it, sometimes like would like to repel like.]
all phrased as tactfully as possible by suitablyskippy. Rated G. 
"I do have a wife, and I’ve always loved her, and if I’m honest with myself I still love her even now, so I thought – or I didn’t think, I just assumed, I always assumed... that I could only love her. That I could only love people like her.” Hasegawa draws in a deep breath. This is it; this is the moment. His voice won’t shake. He won’t let it. He says, “But I’ve realised I can also... love people who aren’t wom—” “We did invite Kyuubei-san, didn’t we?” Shinpachi asks the room fretfully. “I mean, I know we did. Of course we did. But do you think there’s any chance the invitation could have gone missing?" (At the very first meeting of Edo's brand new Gay/Straight Alliance, Hasegawa does his best to come clean.)
Good Intentions May Pave the Way to Hell, but Stupidity Glues Them There by athena_crikey. Rated G. 
The Yorozuya investigate a missing person's case in the Jyouishishi. It could be worse, right up until the point that it couldn't.
A little something to warm the heart by Liatheus. Rated G. 
Gintoki and Katsura have a conversation about ramen, among other things. Missing scene; ep 332; Homeless arc
Series: That One AU Where Oboro Works at a Convenience Store by @shirokokuro. Starting with Inconvenienced. Rated G.
Oboro works at a convenience store. That would be fine if the person in the check-out weren't his kid brother.
Whoever Said That Being Ill Is One of the Great Pleasures of Life Has Clearly Never Had the Flu and Also Should Go To Hell by magnificentbirb. Rated G.  
In which Okita thinks he's dying and Hijikata just wants a goddamn smoke.
Look After Your Trees As You Would Your Children by corvidity. Rated G. 
In which Shinpachi finds a tree, and nothing could be simpler.
angst & hurt/comfort (of the mild and not-mild variety)
Beginnings and Endings Exist Only in the Mind by corvidity. Rated G.  
After the war ends, Gintoki learns how to let his children grow up.
The Older You Get, the More You Speak in An Annoyingly Roundabout Way by @sakvnosuke​. Rated G. 
He does not know how to tell the boy this: that he sees a specter within this hollowed out home. A white-and-blue-and-brown ghost roaming this ashy barren land. He does not know how to tell him of how much he aches from the familiarity of it all. Kotarou does not know if he's welcomed to grip at Shinpachi's shoulders and tell him: I wish you didn't have to bear this cross too. 
sapotroph by @pearthery​. Rated G. 
At the end of the Joui war, the Shiroyasha sinks into obscurity, into the shadows. Shinpachi navigates the aftermath.
They also serve who only stand and wait by naye @listening-to-thunder​. Rated T. 
Zura is captured. Gintoki finds him. Then events unfold that turn what should have been a simple rescue mission into something far more harrowing.
and the night it is aching by  @mrosenkov. Rated G. 
There is only one person Kagura knows well in this world, and she sees, as clear as the moon, that something is not right.
Rinse & Repeat by @unidentifiedpie. Rated G. 
The dead shouldn’t come back to life, not as different damn people, don’t they understand how much it hurts? (Or: Gintoki and Shouyou; the forming and breaking of trust.)
41 notes · View notes
sukumen · 3 years
Note
sorry if this is a loaded question, ofc you don’t need to answer! what’s your take on the argument that dark content is harmful to reality, and that it romanticises traumas? personally i like reading some dc, but when i see posts about how it’s harmful to both survivors and readers (smth to do with psychologically normalising it) it kinda makes me feel guilty, like i’m doing something wrong? when i know i can distinguish between fiction and reality?
hey! so i’m going to keep this under a read more to avoid upsetting anyone - also because this is literally - and i mean, literally - an essay LMAO. i had a lot to say!
any anon hate will be deleted and blocked, but you’re free to engage me off anon (and kindly on anon) if you want to! anon, you’re also free to come chat with me in dms if you want to speak more freely about this :) 
warning for rape mentions, murder / mass murder mentions, dub / noncon mentions.
so, i want to preface this by saying that i don’t think that anyone is obligated to like or be comfortable with dark content. it truly is your prerogative not to be interested in it and you are valid if it makes you feel uncomfortable. so nothing i’m saying here is to convince people that anyone should like it or is wrong for not liking it.
but i don’t agree with the argument that people should be shamed for liking or writing it, that it romanticizes trauma, etc. i understand why people feel that way 100%, but i don’t agree.
sometimes, it feels arbitrary. “dark content” has become a pseudonym for dub/non-con fic, but is the the only type of dark content there is? dark stories can include murder, horror, gore, etc. yet, despite us knowing that murder (for example) is a crime and morally wrong, most people don’t bat an eye when a chara in a fic does it and is still protrayed as attractive or is the reader’s lover. we go crazy for mafia aus where characters kill and show power --- we love those characters, those scenes where they kill and go take their lover all covered in blood. i mean, even in the jjk fandom, one of the most popular characters is a cursed spirit whose first words in the series are about massacring women and children. and we love him. more than that, we love the gory, arguably dark world he comes from - we hypothesize about these characters, we sympathize with them, and we lust over them.
so it’s hard to reconcile that with telling fans who write dub/noncon that they are impacting people’s sense of reality. we’re all experiencing this series together - if written fan fiction is what desensitizes morality, what about the images from the anime and manga? would we make the same argument for banning it? would we say that the people who like sukuna are romanticizing mass violence or that gege is normalizing it for us psychologically by making the character who does it hot and engaging or showing/referencing it so much in the manga?
i just don’t think we would. i think we all understand that those things are wrong and like him knowing that, and can readily say he’s a villain or that the things we’re seeing is wrong. so, i don’t think there’s a black-and-white argument that seeing x in media will make you think y is a-okay or make you more comfortable with it in real life.
i do get that there’s a difference here: a big part of this argument is the sexual aspect of non/dubcon - it’s hard to feel like it’s not normalizing rape when people find a scenario like that hot (whereas no one is like...lewding a mass murder scene, haha). but i think that, at the end of the day, brains do what brains do and people just have dark fantasies. like it’s really as simple as that. rape fantasies in particular are common and talked about by psychologists all the time and i have never been able to find a common thread of them condemning people having them or even writing about them. what they DO talk about is the fact that consent is actually key to the fantasy - that the person fantasizing is the person controlling the situation, that the fantasy, despite being “dub/noncon”, is inherently exactly what they want because THEY are creating the situation, and that, in the end, it’s the absence of actual danger that makes it. ultimately: there is a difference between real life rape and an imagined fantasy or roleplay. so much so that it might not even be fair to call them “rape” fantasies at all.
“It’s crucial to recognize that real-life rape is anything but erotic for a woman. Being at the mercy of someone who’s so outrageously violating your will, holding you down, threatening you with bodily harm (or even death), and physically forcing himself upon you induces arousal all right. But not that of sexuality, but of utterly petrifying anxiety and panic. Contrast this to most imagined rape scenes, which are so electrifying precisely because they’re expressly designed by their female creator to stimulate the illusion of danger—which can, in fact, be positively arousing.”
>  from this article.
to me, this is ultimately what dub/noncon fic is. people writing out those fantasies for people who share those fantasies to process those fantasies.
you can make the argument that that it’s harmful to survivors, but that has its own issues when doctors have reported that some survivors have rape fantasies or find comfort in acting out those rape fantasies (and writing, in my opinion, is a form of acting that out). like are they not valid victims because they are contextualizing their trauma into something that they can control and can process on their own terms? i think the issue there is that the argument uses survivors as a monolith to make an argument on their behalf; but every individual survivor is valid in what they think about this because no two survivors process what happened to them in the same way.
i myself am a survivor and have no real issue with dark content (obviously). i don’t read it often and only write it now because of sukuna; but when i do read it, i draw the line at certain things because i personally cannot stomach it. but would i demand that person delete it from existence because of that? no, i wouldn’t. because again, at the end of the day, that’s the entire basis of the fantasy. i control what i’m fantasizing about, and if something that i do not want to happen to “me” as the reader occurs, i do not read it. i don’t consent to that experience or that fantasy, so i stay away. but at the same time, that other person’s fantasy isn’t mine to control or infringe on and it doesn’t make me a better person than them for not sharing the fantasy.
SO ALL OF THIS TO SAAAY: i don’t think you should feel bad for enjoying dark content. i don’t think the argument about whether or not you’ll know how wrong it is in real life anymore really applies because you could make the claim that any type of fiction runs the risk of distorting people’s perception of reality and making them desensitized to something. and i don’t think that’s what people’s struggle with this is. 
what it boils down to, to me, is that people can’t understand why anyone would find dub/noncon arousing, and think that they condone rape because of it. which, again, is understandable. rape is a horrible fucking thing to experience - it isn’t sexy, it isn’t hot, it isn’t arousing and it’s hard to see any nuance when you see “noncon” and “wow this was so hot” in one post. but based on the way psychologists talk about “rape” fantasies, i think the two things (the fantasy and the real life act of violence) can typically be distinct for people, even survivors, and it just comes down to whether or not it’s a fantasy you share. if you don’t, completely your right! block the tags, block the writers, do whatever you have to do to protect your peace and your limits! but the discourse about it always seems to go into the realm of shame or arguments about someone’s moral compass, which i think is unfair. 
hopefully this helps and wasn't an annoying thing to read! like i said, don’t mind talking about it more if need be!
110 notes · View notes
autolenaphilia · 3 years
Text
Mafia: City of Lost Heaven
Tumblr media
The original Mafia from 2002 by Illusion Softworks is a weird and fascinating game. It is a third-person shooter somewhat in the vein of the GTA series.
It is set in the 1930s and is about a Mafia family, the Salieris in the fictional city of Lost Heaven. It focuses on the rise of player character Tommy Angelo in the Salieri organization. It is a standard gangster movie plotline, with the Godfather and director Martin Scorcese being referenced often. The character wants the money crime can give him and is successful as a mafioso, but he experiences conflict between the horrible things he must do and his conscience. This contradiction eventually destroys him and the story becomes a tragedy.
This cinematic gangster tragedy is an unusually ambitious story for an action video game at the time, and it isn’t entirely unsuccessful in those. Mainly it is because the 1930s gangster film atmosphere is so fully realized, more than the actual writing. The writing isn’t terrible, Tommy’s story is a coherent tragedy, but it does not quite reach the high level of its gangster movie inspirations.
And it has many of the problems of the genre, except even more so. The game depicts the mafia in quite glorifiying ways. The mafiosos in these guys wear nice suits and fedoras, drive nice cars and get to have cool gunfights with Tommy guns. And yet the story tries to have it the other way too, with the mafia depicted as ruthless violent people and crime leading to a tragic end. Tommy is himself frequently appalled at the things the family wants him to do and ultimately he ends up badly because of his mafioso life. The contradiction is obvious. It is the same trap the gangster films that inspired this game fall into. Gangster films want to show this cool escapist fantasy of gangsters because it is fun, yet both storytelling logic and any moral analysis demands crime leads to tragedy.
The story also has the problem of this opposition between “good” gangsters and “bad” gangsters that doesn’t make much sense. The plot driving the story for basically 4/5 of the game and especially the middle levels is this rivalry between the Salieri and Morello families that eventually becomes an outright war. And in order to have a more easily graspable “heroes and villains” situation, the narrative is clear that the Morellos are the worse mobster family. Don Morello kills people for bumping into his car and tortures people to death. He is presented as a vile and repellent villain from the first. It is the Morello mobsters which you kill for most of the game, and you kill a lot of them, and this somewhat over-the-top villainization is meant to justify that.
And Salieri doesn’t do these kinds of things, he doesn’t deal in drugs either and fights common thugs who mug and sexually assualt women. He is the “good” kind of gangster. Even his collecting of protection money is presented as actually providing some form of protection. It is an implausible idea to say the least, and the game is certainly aware of it. What drives the plot inthe last four levels of the game is that Don Salieri is becoming morally worse after his final victory over Morello, getting more greedy for money and power. Butthe game depicts him as committing ruthless murders even before that point. This inherent evil of the mafia is what drives the actual main storyline: the tragedy of Tommy.
This Salieri vs. Morello plot feels hollow, the game’s attempts to subvert it doesn’t work because it doesn’t feel credible to begin with. The over-the-top villainy of Morello and Salieri’s softer actionsfeel like sentimental nonsense from the very start. “This gangster is good, he protects people from common muggers OwO, but this gangster is bad, he tortures people >:(“. Salieri’s slide into further villainy after Morello’s defeat doesn’t feel credible either. For a subversion like that to work it must have some plausibility to start with, some emotional resonance with the audience, and it just doesn’t.
It makes the game feel like it buys into the glamorization of crime that is often present in the genre more than most actual gangster films do.
Speaking of that, I should mention the sexism of this game. Most gangster films certainly depict a male-dominated culture. In that, the genre reflects the real-life mafia, which is extremely male-dominated and misogynist, and it is arguable how much those films endorse that sexism as opposed to merely depicting it.
And I would argue Mafiafalls into endorsing it, at least in its storytelling. There are only tworeal female characters, and each only appears in one level each. Sarah is an especially outstanding example, for she becomesTommy’s wife. The level in which she appears Tommy rescues her from a sexual assault by some muggers and they have sex and fall in love. This is said to lead to their marriage, and I do literally mean “said” because we never see her again after that level. Tommy mentions her occasionally and his marriage to Sarah and their daughter is by his own admission his most important motivation.
And that is the purpose of women in the story of Mafia: to provide motivation for their husbands. Two other gangsters are similarly driven by their wifes and children to break with the Salieri family’s obligations, in explicit parallels to Tommy’s situation. And it is not just sexist writing, it is ineffective writing too. Tommy’s marriage is meant to be very important to him as a character, and it is problem in the actual story it is never shown. We never get to see Tommy’s and Sarah’s supposedly idyllic family life, only hear Tommy talk about how it is the most important thing for him, which weakens any emotional empathy we might feel with him.
The level with Sarah at least features a bunch of dialogue between Tommy and Sarah and it is nice I suppose, but it is not enough. Sarah is also depicted as a bit of a bimbo or at least extremely naive, as she doesn’t seem to be aware the Salieri’s are well a mafia family, which seems unrealistic considering how closely connected she is with them. (She grew up as the daughter of the bartender in the Salieri’s Bar and works there, a location in which they literally shoot rival gangsters in at one point).
The writer of Mafia, Daniel Vavra would many years later become a gamergater, probably the most prominent developer to sympathize with the movement. And while it is of course a disappointment, it is not entirely unexpected. He was by far not the worst misogynist in video games or anything,
but just looking at Mafia, it is not strange at all that Vavra as a game writer would feel threatened of the very idea of feminist analysis of video games.
I talked about the story far more than I wanted to when I started writing this, and it is actually not the most interesting thing about this game, it is actually the city of Lost Heaven itself, the attempts at realism in the gameplayand the cars.
Tumblr media
The city of Lost Heaven is one of the more fully realized cities in video games, and it is clear a lot of effort and thought was put into its design. Even the map of the city which you use to navigate it showed a lot of effort. It has (printed)creases, stains and pen markings drawn on it just like a real map would. The original box(that I owned) came with an actual physical copy of the map, which was very fun to have,although bringing up the map in-game by pressing tab was certainly the more practical option.
It is perhaps not a huge world compared to modern open-world games, but it was huge for 2002 and it is varied in a semi-realistic way. Lost Heaven is divided into various distinct areas just like a real city would. There is an industrial area, a working class housing area (“Hoboken”), a detached housing area for the upper middle class on the outskirts (Oakwood), an area with mansions for the rich (Oak Hill), ethnic ghettos like Chinatown or Little Italy. The basic idea seems to have been is to recreate an American city from the period in miniature.
And the areas have been given a lot of effort to make them appear more tangible. The building models and textures are different of course, but you can also detect a difference in the pedestrians. People in working clothes walk around in the industrial area and the working class area of Hoboken, whereas you can primarily see the nice looking suits and dresses in the richer areas of of town. It clearly took great effort to program and it contributes greatly to the mood. Even the cars seem to vary slightly, with the older and cheaper cars more abundant in the poorer districts, but the difference I think is lesser compared to the pedestrians.
The care with which Lost Heaven was constructed creates this compelling atmosphere. It feels like you are driving around in a 1930s American city. The aesthetics and atmosphere make the gangster story work better than it otherwise would. Lost Heaven simply feels more real than most video game cities do. And this is despite the dated graphics.The textures might oftenbe very grainy, shop signs especially are a blurry mess, but even they were made with some effort.
Let’s talk about the cars too, because they encapsulate this game in both aesthetics and gameplay. The cars are all based on real cars of the period, even if the names are all changed to avoid any claims of trademark infringement. Fords are called “Bolts” and Chrysler Airflows are called “Ulver Airstream” for example. If you know anything about older cars, you can however easily recognize many of them them under the changed names. an early game car is unmistakeably a Ford model T for example. Also some cars are far more common than they should be, like the concept car Pierce Silver Arrow of which only five were built is a common rich man’s car in the game under the name “Silver Fletcher”.
The cars driven by the NPCs are used to show the passage of time in the game, which goes from 1930 to 1938. As the years go by in story, older cars get more uncommon (but don’t disappear entirely) and new models are introduced. Your access to cars in gameplay also improves as you progress in the story. You go from slow, fragile cars like the aforementioned T-ford to fast, powerful and sturdy cars. The effort put into the cars from the research to the NPC programming is another thing that helps create the compelling mood of Mafiaand the city of Lost Heaven.
The cars are a good example of how the game often prioritizes atmosphere and verisimilitude over fun and accessible gameplay. The driving in this game is not a side-thing like it would be in most action games and cars in this game handle fairly realistically for this type of game. It is still arcadey, but far less arcadey than you would expect from a non-driving simulator. And most importantly, cars are period accurate in that they are both slower and more clunky to handle than modern cars.
Damage to the car also has more consequences than you might expect. A crash might damage the engine causing the car to go slower, a bullet rupturing a tyre makes the car far more difficult to handle, a shot to the gas tank will cause the fuel to leak out(fuel is never really a problem in the primary story mode, but it is there as a game mechanic and can be relevant in the free ride mode). The early-game cars are more fragile and vulnerable to crashes and the like, but none (outside a special car in the game’s free ride mode which not available in the regular story) are immune to these problems.
So this game prioritizes realism over player enjoyment, practically the only obvious concession to the player is that you always have automatic gearchanges available, but you can also choose to change gears manually if you want to. It is frankly oftenfrustrating, even the best cars in this game can be difficult to handle.
Car chases in this game are brutally difficult because of this, and the game’s most infamous level is the fifth one where you have to compete in a car race, driving a fairly period-accurate racing car. It has perhaps the best speed and acceleration of all the car’s in this game, but handles terribly. It is perhaps the most difficult level in the game, and even the developers seem to have realized how unfair it is. You could cheat in the original box copy version of the game which I played as a kid and the GOG version has an easy mode for the race.
A lot of the game is actually about this car hierarchy mentioned before. Typically at the beginning of each level you are given a new car by the Salieri’s mechanic Ralphy, and it is usually better than the car he gave you last level (he also teaches you how to steal it, which isn’t that useful in the story mode, but gives you that ability in other game modes). At the end of most levels, you are also given the opportunity to do an optional side-mission for another mechanic, Lucas. If you succeed, Lucas teaches you how to steal a really capable car. Typically the car you can get from Lucas will be better than the ones Ralphy will give you for the next 2 levels at least.
So the clunky car mechanics both give period verisimilitude and a sense of progression throughout the game.
And it does certainly add to the atmosphere and sense of realism. Mafia’s cars feel more real than most video game cars, but they are also oftenfrustrating to use in gameplay.
But Mafia priortizing its verisimilitude over player enjoyment doesn’t stop there. In each level you are given an objective, typically somewhere else in the city than where you start (which is usually Salieri’s bar). And you have to drive from the starting point to where the actual level starts. After the level is over, you have to drive all the way back.
You can’t just speed your way through the city either, because Lost Heaven’s cops will notice you breaking the speed limit or running a red light and fine you. The fine doesn’t actually cost you anything in the story mode, but it takes up time and negates any time you won by speeding. You can run away but the cop cars will follow and try to arrest you (which is a game-over), and if you try to kill them they will shoot back. The police will usually radio in for back-up too, so you will have to evade or kill the cops (including the back-up) to escape, both of which are fairly difficult.
So the best idea is to keep to the speed limit of 40 mph and don’t run any red lights. You can toggle a speed limiter with the F5 button which caps your car’s speed at 40 miles. It adds to the realism the developers are going for, but in order to play the actual level you have to have this bit of tedium with the drive both before and after. It is basicallya commute except with a varying destination.
The developers was probably aware of the tedium on some level. During the first half of the second level you get to play Tommy during his pre-gangster life as a taxi driver. It is literally just driving from point A to B under a time limit, and the customer will get cranky if you crash the car, and getting a speeding ticket is game-over here of course. The customer dialogue is often rude and theydoesn’t even thank you for most of the time. It is super-tedious and clearly intended to get the player to understand why Tommy became a gangster, since this boring dead-end job is his alternative. The problem of course is that a lot of his life as a gangster consists of driving from point a to point b in a similar fashion.
The game’s obsession with verisimilitude also extends beyond the driving to the action. Without being entirely realistic, Tommy is on the flimsier side of shooter game protagonists and can’t take a lot of bullets before dying. It is like in Max Payne, where a point-blank shotgun blast can practically kill the player character in one hit. You can find healing in first aid boxes boxes, but they are rare. Reloading before your magazine is empty also means you lose any bullets left in the magazine.
And unlike Max Payne, there are no quicksaves or manual saves whatsoever. Saves are done automatically at certain checkpoints and you have to re-start at those if you die. This save system makes this game extremely difficult, since you have to sometimes practice entire segments in order to progress. It is a lot of having to memorize where an enemy mobster pops out so you can shoot him before he shoots you.
The combat is certainly well-made and sometimes quite fun. There are like the cars some weak weapons, but overall weapons feel powerful and the environments and set-pieces are often enjoyable. But the action like the rest of the game is frustratingly difficult.
And that is the game, pretty much. You have a tedious drive to have a big spectacular shoot-out that is frustratingly difficult and you have another drive back. Sometimes there is a car chase, but that’s it. There is a stealth level that tries to change up the formula where you break into a villa, but the game is not really built for stealth so it is frustrating and very much not fun. Then there is the side-missions from Lucas on your drive back, usually a timed fetch-quest of some kind. They do add variety and have some interesting story ideas but can be frustrating in their own right.
There is also the free ride game mode, where you get to explore Lost Heaven freely and do whatever you want, although there is not that much to do, except get into car chases/fire fights with cops or random gangsters you can aggro if you want. The oddest game mode is “free ride extreme”, where you get to do various bizarre quests to unlock equally bizarre cars. It is a weird mode, especially for this game, as you have this usually serious aiming-for-realism game letting its hair down and going for outright comedic surrealism.You get to chase down a super-fast npc named Speedy Gonzales, that sort of thing. The mission certainly have surreal imagination to their credit, even if they can be as frustrating as the rest of this game.
So is Mafia a good game? It is hard to say. A lot of my fond memories of this game comes from playing an already old by that point box copy as a teen when I didn’t have access toor had played many other games, so nostalgia plays into my fondness for this game.
Replaying it now, the game’s faults are more apparent. When it comes to story, the game certainly stood out back then, and the tragedy of Tommy Angelo the unwise still broadly works, but its re-telling of gangster movies has not aged that well. Gameplay-wise the game is difficult in a way that feels frustrating rather than fun, and there is a lot of tedious driving from point A to B. Some of the action set-pieces are exciting, but the high difficulty and limited save system essentially means replaying large chunks of them almost to the point of memorization.
There are many other games like the GTA series that have a similar mix of third-person action with driving which have more easily enjoyable gameplay. Mafia seems to care more about making its world believable than any kind of player enjoyment.
And it is probably its world, the city of Lost Heaven that still fascinates about this game. A lot of work and love went into Lost Heaven, and it shows. Lost Heaven is an atmospheric and memorable place. Mafia makes a lot of strange gameplay choices just to make Lost Heaven seem more real, choices that not many other games would have made for good reason, because thatlevel of realism is not that fun.
The result is that this is a game where you play a badass 1930s gangster not just during daring shootouts in mobster wars, but also during his slow drive to and from hisgangster work, and youhas to follow the traffic laws so he isn’t ticketed. It is 1930s Gangster simulator 2002, or an approximation there of.
Mafiaisn’t alwaysa fun game, there is a long stretchesof frustration and tedium here, but it is frequently interesting and a clear labour of love, atmospheric, weirdand fascinating.
3 notes · View notes
thatnerdemryn · 3 years
Note
Can I ask for two?? Because I absolutely can’t pick between Clizzy Victorian and Malec Knife fic !!!!
Literally anything for you, Zia 🥺
The Clizzy Victorian is legitimately a paragraph of something I sent to someone on discord like a million years ago:
Tumblr media
The Malec Knife Fic is the prequel to On A Knife Edge that like everyone asked me for alskfjfklakak
Basic summary: Alec and Magnus work for competing crime organizations and they utilize each other’s skills with for the sake of their illegals activities but also fall into bed with each other at every possible moment. Enter a third organization (the Circle) that is trying to infringe on both of their territories. Something horrible happens to someone in Magnus’ org and he battles between revenge, what is right, and his feelings for Alec.
Basically, they fuck a lot and there’s lots of crime and moral dilemmas and this fic (if it’s ever written) will be at LEAST 80k and explicit with a capital E.
Here’s a snippet of the first chapter:
Tumblr media
11 notes · View notes
padawanlost · 4 years
Note
Palpatine WAS infringing on democracy. He’d sent governors to every system with their own troops. The senators had no power to rein him in because he had so many emergency powers already. The Republic had already become the Empire in every way but in name and the senators who signed that petition, who were later arrested, and the Jedi were the only ones not blinded by Palpatine’s act. Palpatine was the law and the final say on everything so nothing was legitimate unless he wanted it to be
Yeah, Palpatine was infringing on democracy but that’s not something they characters knew at the time. AFTER Palpatine got his emergency powers they thought he was there do save them. Palpatine was respected and the characters – until he revealed himself to Anakin – had no idea he was a sith Lord.  
But somehow Palpatine was changing that. Not by being a bully or imposing his will. Quite the opposite: he was constantly resisting the Senate’s eagerness for him to assume more and more executive powers. He resisted, the Senate insisted, so reluctantly Palpatine agreed. And every time he acquiesced to its requests, he turned once more to the Jedi for advice. It was hardly an ideal situation. The Jedi Council was not just another branch of the executive office. But how, in good conscience, could it refuse to aid a man who so humbly petitioned for their assistance? A man who championed them in the Senate at every opportunity? Who had worked tirelessly for peace since assuming the highest political office in the galaxy and was now faced with the daunting, terrifying task of keeping their vast Republic intact? How could the Jedi Council turn its back on such a man? Clearly, it couldn’t. Clearly, in the face of these extraordinary times, the Jedi must set aside their traditions and come to the aid of the man a galaxy looked to as its savior. [Karen Miller. Star Wars: The Clone Wars: Wild Space]
He’d sent governors to every system with their own troops.
Political appointments suck but they are very real part of politics and usually they are not illegal (unless we are talking about personal appointments like family members). Yeah, what he did was shady AF but, technically speaking, it wasn’t illegal.That’s why the senators first intentions was to ASK Palpatine not to abuse that power.
Besides, that had nothing to do with the reason the Jedi wanted Palpatine removed. The talks of treason started after someone told an amendment would pass putting the Jedi under the direct authority of the Chancellor. We never learn who had source was but it’s not unreasonable to assume Palpatine leaked that information in an attempt to goad the Council into action.
“This report—from where does it come?” “The Jedi still have friends in the Senate,” Mace Windu replied in his grim monotone, “for now.” “When presented this amendment is, passed it will be?” Mace nodded. “My source expects passage by acclamation. Overwhelming passage. Perhaps as early as this afternoon.” “The Chancellor’s goal in this—unclear to me it is,” Yoda said slowly. “Though nominally in command of the Council, the Senate may place him, the Jedi he cannot control. Moral, our authority has always been; much more than merely legal. Simply follow orders, Jedi do not!” “I don’t think he intends to control the Jedi,” Mace said. “By placing the Jedi Council under the control of the Office of the Supreme Chancellor, this amendment will give him the constitutional authority to disband the Order itself.” “Surely you cannot believe this is his intention.” “His intention?” Mace said darkly. “Perhaps not. But his intentions are irrelevant; all that matters now is the intent of the Sith Lord who has our government in his grip. And the Jedi Order may be all that stands between him and galactic domination. What do you think he will do?” “Authority to disband the Jedi, the Senate would never grant.” “The Senate will vote to grant exactly that. This afternoon.” [Matthew Stover. Revenge of the Sith]
Let’s keep in mind the Jedi Order was already part of the government (Judicial Branch) and under direct control of the Senate. their political involvement with the Republic was nothing new, their fear was to be disbanded (something at that point Palpatine made no public indication of wanting). All they had a this point was conjectures.
The senators had no power to rein him in because he had so many emergency powers already.
The senators gave him that power and as mentioned above, everyone was rather fine with it until their own power were directed influenced by them. and even them, they only *feared* Palpatine might dissolve the Republic. They had no real evidence. There was no investigation, only meeting about their suspicions.
The Republic had already become the Empire in every way but in name and the senators who signed that petition, who were later arrested, and the Jedi were the only ones not blinded by Palpatine’s act.
That’s not what happened, at all. We only heard about the arrests *after* the Empire was declared. After most Jedi are long dead. And, judging by the fact Bail Organa – one of the leaders of the opposition – had no idea about them we can assume they were fairly recent events. To imply those two events – political arrests and the jedi talking of treason – are somehow connected is very misleading.
So this is how liberty dies, she was saying to herself. With cheering, and applause. “We can’t let this happen!” Bail lurched to his feet. “I have to get to my pod—we can still enter a motion—” “No.” Her hand seized his arm with astonishing strength, and for the first time since he’d arrived, she looked straight into his eyes. “No, Bail, you can’t enter a motion. You can’t. Fang Zar has already been arrested, and Tundra Dowmeia, and it won’t be long until the entire Delegation of the Two Thousand are declared enemies of the state. You stayed off that list for good reason; don’t add your name by what you do today.” “But I can’t just stand by and watch—“[Matthew Stover. Revenge of the Sith]
Palpatine was the law and the final say on everything so nothing was legitimate unless he wanted it to be
Again, the characters did not know about Palpatine’s true intentions. And legitimate doesn’t necessarily mean legal. That’s why the right way to do remove Palpatine from office - considering you don’t know he’s a sith lord hell-bent on destroying everything and everyone – would’ve been to gain political allies and public support.
When a president is corrupt, the first option should always be the legal methods and those usually only work when there’s massive political and public involvement. The Senators tried that route and failed. The Council tried the unlawful method and it backfired horribly.
I’m not defending Palpatine I’m just considering the characters actions through the eyes of the actual characters. The truth is the characters didn’t have 1/10 of the knowledge we have and we have to take that in consideration when dissecting their actions.
34 notes · View notes
kentmwz-blog · 3 years
Text
Why I am not a liberal
12/26/2015
“In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression—everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way—everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want—which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants—everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear—which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor—anywhere in the world.”
– Franklin D. Roosevelt
Madame de Stäel once said, “In Frace, freedom is classical and tyranny is modern.” Nowadays, speaking of freedom, most people would think of “civil liberty” and “political freedom”, and so many “public rights”. But in the feudal era of medieval Europe, political freedom meant private property rights, and, civil liberty and political freedom were the two sides of a coin: private rights dominated so there was no such thing as an independent “public right”. The so-called “freedom”, originated from consequences of evolution – traditions such as property, contract, inheritance, and family. Inside privileged organizations which had been formed spontaneously like feudal nobility, urban and rural communities, and commercial guilds, people were free. Thus, the freedom of the communities ensured the decentralization of power into local institutions. As a result, ‘state’ was reduced to the level of an external form.
This old order was not out of human design, but a result of the spontaneous evolution of civilization. At that time, “freedom” was a historic practice, but not an ideology from theory innovations. In such an order, freedom was but one significant feature and was not this order per se. To maintain such an order, responsibilities must be undertaken and duties must be fulfilled. Those who only enjoy the euphoria of absolute power and interest would never achieve it. It is precisely this spontaneous order that gave birth to an ideology named liberalism. However, ideology is not reality and liberalism is not liberty. The liberty of the liberal era was not brought by liberals, but ruined by such intellectuals who loved talking about ‘-ism’, and had a fetish about Enlightenment and equal rights. The advocacy of Enlightened despotism by the founding fathers of liberalism, i.e. Physiocrats, was one of the most ironic examples of them.
In modern times, many liberals are fond of talking about ‘left liberalism’ and ‘right liberalism’, but the dichotomy of left vs. right came from France, which facilitates the disintegration of community and creates divergence and chaos. Before the bloody French Revolution, different political parties had not had differences as large as today. Under such a discourse system of left and right, many metaphysical ideologies which are neither verifiable nor falsifiable preceded practical interests, which resulted in the dominance of intellectuals who are good at constructive rationalism, undermining the restrictions traditions impose upon power. Paul Johnson once said, “In a French-style pseudodemocracy, intellectuals have considerable influence, at both government and street levels. In a true democracy, intellectuals are no more powerful than their arguments.”
In the theory innovations of such intellectuals who are obsessed by the idea of Enlightening – although it is nothing but cheap sedition and expensive indoctrination – the masses, the following pseudoconcepts are popularized: social democracy, social market, social contract, social justice, social freedom and even – socialism. “Society”, as an imaginary entity which had been nonexistent in the feudal Europe, was created and inserted between state and individuals, to replace the localized old forms of community. The collectivist tendency, I am afraid, is not difficult to see: to love the diversity of moral standards and the behavior under the guidance of them, but to hate the diversity of the consequences of human actions – especially the diversity of incomes, the whole “society” became the aquarium and zoo of the chattering class! Among them, social freedom and “social liberalism”, I am afraid, are the most fashionable Zeitgeist. They love equal right but hate equal duty: happiness precedes responsibility, and euphoria precedes wisdom. In this manner, their view on power is also quite interesting: they enjoy the authority and euphoria of being a leader, but refuse to fulfill corresponding duties, and, moral melodramas are more paramount than practical concerns for them. Even when they are proven wrong by hard evidence, they will try to evade with verbal virtuosity and even to wield power to mute dissidents. It seems to them, the title “the leader of the free world” brings them more euphoria than freedom per se. The fact that the difference between social liberals and liberal socialists is almost as trivial as that between social democrats and democratic socialists, I am afraid, is no coincidence.
Freedom, in their narrative, changed its meaning long ago. From “equality before the law” to “equal opportunity”, to “equal outcome”, eventually to “equal beginning, path and outcome” in “left liberalism”, no matter how much they claimed to be disciples of “liberalism”, their behavior has been undermining the foundation of liberty – private property. Of course, among the many branches of socialism, the tyrannical machinery of Leninism is dystopian and repulsive. But returning to the fascist model of big corporations, big unions and big government, i.e. the alleged “social democracy” is actually “the end of history” which liberals should applaud? On one hand, the real private property rights are infringed upon by such “modern” constructs like fractional reserve banking. On the other hand, imaginary “rights” – such as basic income and intellectual property right – are created to make way for the expansion of bureaucracy. What a wonderful “end of history”!
Among liberals, many not only believe the source of morality is relative but also believe the consequence of following it is also relative, or more directly, neglect such consequences: you can find liberals “helping” sodomites and libertines complain about the insufficient “social” investment on the control and prevention of venereal diseases making the loss of “artists” and “philosophers”, or “helping” dopehead liberals complain about the insufficient “social” investment on dental problems making them losing teeth, and of course, destigmatizing such “disadvantaged” and “marginalized” “communities”! “Spontaneous” becomes “to rid the minds of the younger generations of the prejudice of the older generations”, and “order” becomes “chaos”. A “society” full of alcoholism, drug abuse, promiscuity and sodomy is probably the stable and ordered utopia in the eyes of such liberals?
Furthermore, all those who promote “freedom from religions” criticize and mock western churches and religions with a near-revolution attitude, and even do not hesitate to fabricate outright lies to serve their own “liberal” political agenda, except that an immediate consequence of it, is to facilitate ordinary citizens’ conversion to Islamism and communism. The critical thinking of skepticism becomes uncritical negativism for these “liberals”. However, they follow atheism “religulously” – and maybe Mother Gaia believed by green supremacists (the so-called “environmentalists”)? Freedom is a crucial characteristic of European feudal traditions, and religion is the carrier of such beneficial traditions which was formed spontaneously in the process of civilization evolution, albeit it may be a collection of pure ideals in the beginning. The belief that being irreligious is a tautology of being antitheist, I am afraid, is the kind of stereotype that all those who claim to be skeptic must strongly oppose. Although the omniscient and omnipotent “God” is neither verifiable nor falsifiable, yet if following certain religious doctrines – namely, certain traditional moral standards – results in happiness, I am afraid, for “the not-so-well-educated masses that do not have time, capacity or interest in ‘deep thinking’” (by the way, it is the most favored preoccupations of the self-anointed intellectual liberals), to be religious is not necessarily such a horrible thing as many “liberals” suggest. By contrast, history tells us, it was exactly some of those liberal zealots who believed in the abstract ideological concept of freedom made way for the volcano eruption of the revolutions of Islamism and communism to destroy the thin crust we call “civilization”. If one genuinely respects the scientific attitude, then he should check his own ideology with corresponding historic consequences, instead of neglecting and even distorting facts. Unfortunately, so many “liberals” like discarding the wisdom enduring the ruthless tests of time and disposing of valuable traditions but keep on trying new ideas without checking the consequences. Even when someone points out the problem, they never admit it but always stubbornly force “society” – that is, other people – to pay for their reckless “change” guided by their own “free will”. They utilize eloquence to gain favor from the masses and to oppress others’ individual independent dissent. In such attempts of “improving” freedom, they invite the bloody rebirth of war and tyranny, like they did in late 19th and early 20th centuries. How come the abstract “liberalism” became so enchanting? It is nothing else than the delusion that man could get rid of the constraints reality imposes upon us. For those who want to fly without wings, seemingly, the disappearance of gravity is an attractive idea. However, without gravity, one can indeed fly, but the atmosphere will disappear too, so the atmospheric pressure will become zero, the blood in his veins and arteries will boil…perhaps death is the only consequence.
Nowadays, there are many Wilsonians deemed “neoconsevatives” who also praise “freedom” and “free world”. Self-determination sounds indeed like the necessary conclusion of “national freedom” – a kind of “collective freedom”: relying on the Roman Republic of our times, i.e. USA, to export spontaneous order (“freedom”), using collective security to ensure the independence of the weak nation-states which were created from the thin air, defeating the evil totalitarian empires, and morphing the free world. So what about reality? In the Golden Time of Wilsonianism, Europe was filled with bloody conflicts and violence. WWI was caused by the rise of liberal nationalism originated from France, and WWII and the Cold War were caused by the tragic death of the Habsburg Empire. Even the ongoing substitutions of population and religion in Europe, is also the natural bust of the soap bubbles called nation-states which lack the immunity to resist alien cultures. In the decolonized Third World, there is hardly any Golden Time of nation-states: it is full of all kinds of totalitarian despots. The medicine we call “Wilsonianism”, for them, is just like using Penicillin to treat patients troubled by mood disorders but actually allergic to Penicillin. In fact, there are no “successful” and “unsuccessful” nation-states, but only nation-states that are already bankrupt or are on the way of bankruptcy. The so-called “democratic and secular nation-state with universal suffrage”, is not a new era of history or “the end of history”, but the last radiance of the setting sun of civilization. Relying on Rome to export the order of freedom is no different from transporting ice-cream in a desert: most of it is evaporated on the way. At large, this kind of “liberalism” is actually reducing the degree of freedom, just like redistributing wealth is reducing wealth.
Why am I not a liberal? (Hayek once wrote an article, “Why I am not a conservative”) Because I admire the luxuriant giant tree with the name of civilization, including its roots. So many liberals are so obsessed by the sweet fruits of the tree that they totally ignore the other parts, and even do not hesitate to damage the roots for more fruits. Ironically, they often consider themselves to be THE roots, albeit in fact they are nothing but a bunch of parasites.
1 note · View note
sui-senka · 4 years
Note
hey so since you're reblog gong a lot of posts about them (her? idk), who's lily?
Ohhh yeah you must be talking about lily orchard. She’s a youtuber that’s been around since 2009 and mainly focuses on commentary and analysis of children’s media - cartoons like MLP etc.
She gained notoriety with her 2 hour video on Steven Universe (and how it’s absolute garbage according to her) and her massive 1 hr 30 min video on legend of Korra - that’s how I discovered her - and I actually kind of liked her from these videos - then I checked her tag here on tumblr (and the lily peet tag) and discovered an actual goldmine of information on her that was really polarising.
It was either people worshipping the ground she walked on; or people calling her out for being a horrible and toxic person and for committing morally reprehensible acts. It really intrigued me at first to see how someone could be so polarising.These acts that people spoke of (quite a few being former friends with lily having legit evidence) are so reprehensible that it kinda infringes on like Onision levels of awfulness.
After finding out that information on her and discovering how her communication style in her videos and with her fans came off as toxic, abusive and uncomfortable - I couldn’t support her no longer - considering that people who became her fans and became affiliated with her start to act in horrific ways.
Then I realised that this woman is actually gaining subs - despite her criticism and thinking being debunked fairly easily with minimal to no effort + responding to legitimate criticism with lack of maturity + her long track record of lying, hypocrisy and plagiarism - and I realised that a ton of people were making the worst type of person become famous, and I wanted no part in that.
So by reblogging content concerning Lily and her actions I hope I’m helping people see what kind of person she truly is.
7 notes · View notes
terrifyingstories1 · 4 years
Text
elena is self absorbed. she’s also kind and caring and compassionate and someone who would die for the people she loves – and none of this detracts or imposes upon that fact. wildly enough, she’s a multi faceted and layered person with a variety of different complex traits, some of which contradict themselves and both strengthen and weaken her.  
elena is obsessed with herself; more specifically, she’s obsessed with defining and dichotomizing and compartmentalizing and reinventing herself. and not necessarily in a malicious or even particularly self-serving way either  (for ex. it’s different from how katherine is Obsessed with herself / more specifically obsessed with her survival and comes from and manifests itself in different ways), though it can definitely infringe on her ability to be a Good Friend and support her friends in the way that they need and lead her to over-identifying with people and projecting upon them even (especially after the accident, i.e  elena feels she is a monster who killed her parents, which ultimately draws her to stefan, another monster also responsible for death. she feels more comfortable and more herself – less like a fraud – in the dark with the monsters; this feels like where she belongs, rather than in the light with human kind who she is struggling to connect to). 
she’s obsessed with the framing of her relationship with stefan, obsessed with how it reads (everything about how she frames stefan being this person that ~brought her back to life~ and this love story and him as her savior reeks of fanfic and i just.. love it. her head space is so fascinating to me). she’s obsessed with Gloomy Graveyard Girl and acutely aware of how she’s gone from Popular Fun Cool Girl to Sad Girl in the eyes of her peers and slowly taking back the reigns of her life and trying with all her might to resurrect Queen Bee and Cheerleader and Social Girl Elena before deciding that rather than cling to who she was, she can reinvent herself as someone new.  
and she does this time and time again. she does it with every loss,  every heartbreak (new year, new me), and is giddy about the opportunity to do it again in college with caroline and bonnie.
you can also see it in the instances she questions herself and her issues with katherine. it’s there when she asks caroline what kind of person having feelings for damon would make her  (what kind of person would that make me? not how that would affect her life, or stefan or damon’s lives, or most important of all CAROLINE’s life as someone who has been raped and abused by him, but how being a person who feels an attraction or anything more for damon would change who she is. she still cares about that other stuff, but this is the first place her mind goes. this new thing she feels will impact The Elena Who Loves Stefan And Only Stefan And Would Never Be Attracted To His Brother Like Katherine, The Elena That Is Supposed To Be The Anti Katherine, and it takes a minute to process.)  
it’s there in season two when she’s crying and talking about how everything is because of her, too, just in a different way: elena’s not new to having blood on her hands (she’s still convinced that she killed her parents)  but taking control of this horrible awful painful thing is the only way she knows how to cope with it,  and thus she immediately decides that this is her responsibility, for a variety of reasons, but also because elena gets trapped in her head all the time, and for a single moment she’s allowed to grieve that not only are all of her friends are in danger, but that she is the reason for this and may be the reason that they all die.
it manifests itself in her relationships, too. she has damon compel jeremy because she can’t bear to see him in pain again after watching him mourn the parents that she killed, she needs to see bonnie after damon turns bonnie’s mom into a vampire because bonnie’s always been there for her and she needs to be there for bonnie. it’s not malicious. it’s not because she doesn’t love them or value them or want the best for them. elena doesn’t even realize it. elena knows that it’s all about her her her – as in everyone is always trying to save HER  (and that’s another thing. elena doesn’t feel gratitude when the people she loves try to die for her – she feels resentment: because how dare they? how dare they try to leave her? how dare they not let her have this? how dare people keep dying how dare she keep being left all alone? that’s more about her abandonment issues, or at least stems from them, but still)  and often at the expense of her friends’ lives and well being, and she hates that – but this sort of self-absorption goes right over her head.  it’s also really apparent in her romantic relationships and often leads to jealousy and possessiveness and even a sense of entitlement.
as elena becomes more and more detached from the moral superiority and self righteousness she exhibits in the earlier seasons, this idea of Being Good is more about I Want To Be Someone Who Is A Good Monster than anything else. elena gilbert … is not a good person??? she cares about the people she loves and that’s about … where it ends, at least in the later seasons. she cares about caring about people who aren’t those people, cares about Being Someone who Cares About Humans .. and sure,  does she care about the people she finds herself connecting and empathizing with? sure. but even that is limited, and connected to herself and her own issues and at best is …. I’m Going To Care About This Person Outside Of My Immediate Friend Group Because They Are Of Use And/Or Resemble Me Or Someone That Is Of Actual Importance To Me more often than not.
elena is capable of love and selflessness but also selfishness and being extremely self absorbed whether consciously or not. some of this is just a natural response of all of the trauma she’s experienced, and some of it is just her. a lot of elena being In Her Head and Obsessed is a way of coping and dealing. it’s actually a very.. natural response to mental illness, which can make you wrapped up in yourself and your issues even if you don’t mean to be and hinder you from realizing it. and not always in a bad way. elena's depression and ptsd do contribute to this, but i also want to make it clear that a lot of that is just Who Elena Is and who Elena Was Pre-series. and that though elena dichotomizes herself and compartmentalizes her multitude of selves, it's kind of important to avoid doing that as an objective viewer if you want to have a real understanding of who she is. 
3 notes · View notes
revoevokukil · 5 years
Text
On the character writing of  Captain Marvel’s antagonists
How is Captain Marvel’s villain game?
The MCU’s story of how Carol Danvers comes to realise what gives her the capacity to do heroic things is rooted in an intimate tale of self-discovery, knowing oneself, and embracing oneself as one is. It is not a classic story of confrontation between good and evil and therefore the classic hero’s journey formula does not apply. Carol is exactly the same personality at the end of the film as she is at the beginning of the film, with the crucial difference that by the end, she is in a position to control and honestly evaluate her own life narrative – she has regained solid ground under her feet without which no one can pass moral judgments or make decisions that affect the lives of other people.
Carol’s origin story is not about punching someone into remorse and submission, but about finding herself (almost literally) – which means that the antagonists of the film are the friends she makes along the way. The opposing force is a deeply personal one and climbs into the protagonist’s soul rather than threatens their life. That makes Yon-Rogg not as one-dimensional as people seem to think. He’s more of a foil than an outright antagonist to Carol on a personal level, but it’s hard to say whether he is overall meant to be represented as a misguided Kree patriot or a hammy villain because the former gets too vague a development and the latter just does not work – war is war, they’re all dirty, and Supreme Intelligence takes the cake here. Since Yon-Rogg’s motivations are strongly informed by his role as the poster boy of the Kree military, the Kree-Skrull plotline actually should be elaborated upon if they wanted to convey him as “the guilty party” in both storylines that push the story forward.
I’ve tried to identify with the villains of the film in order to write the following; consider that it is not a pleasant exercise but an intriguing one nonetheless.
Storylines
There are two storylines that intersect in the film and push the plot onwards: Carol’s unfolding quest to make sense of her past, and the Kree-Skrull war. The twist in Carol’s personal storyline results in a change up in regard to how to view the Kree-Skrull war, but it’s not ground-breakingly illuminating, since the war between these races is never sufficiently elaborated upon and it is not the main emotional centre of the film – how Carol feels about the Kree and her mentor is! Therefore, the antagonists’ character development unfolds in layers.
Consider for a minute, the Kree ideology. Collectivist, imperialist, hyper-militaristic, superior in technology and culture. Roman Empire seems like an appropriate comparison. They see themselves as the rightful rulers by conquest who have a duty to maintain order, safety, and stability within their empire. Realpolitiks of empires. Hyper-militaristic inclinations translate onto the individual level as well where the collective interest is set before one’s individual interests. And it translates into Yon-Rogg’s motivations and outlook very clearly, though with some interesting exceptions that add to his character writing.
·         He is a devout warrior, unshakably loyal to the Kree’s cause and their claims of superiority.
Yet     he is not fond of the scorched earth tactics of the overly zealous     Accusers.
He     avoids entangling civilians in the Kree-Skrull conflict to the very last     second (he also avoids shooting Carol outright in their very first     meeting).
He     genuinely cares about his soldiers’ lives, and they trust him a lot in     return, even when he is misleading other high-ranking officers in the Kree     army (Ronan).
He     prioritises the good of all Kree above all else (instead of, notably, personal power).
He     genuinely believes in what he is trying to teach Vers (emotions should not     rule your good judgment in a conflict situation; the Kree’s enlightened     rule is for the better for all); it is not only part of     their cover-up scheme.
He     views the Skrulls’ means of fighting as dishonourable because of their     penchant for subterfuge rather than direct combat. In another context that     would be called being “honourable” in combat.
So, as a Kree, an authoritarian space fascist, he is pretty reasonable and a more rounded than your standard evil for evil’s sake goon.
What to make of him in relation to Carol?
It’s twisted from its very beginning, since Yon-Rogg effectively saves Carol’s life by stealing it from her. He hesitates to kill Carol outright by the lake. Then, ironically, saves her life by abducting her as she verges between life and death. And then, metaphorically, the Kree kill Carol Danvers anyway. Only to “bring her back to life” through the blood transfusion from Yon-Rogg and through the presumed genetic meddling to make it stick (her entire blood supply and blood reproduction has to get replaced). A “rebirth” with no memory of past life, but with cosmic powers and superior physiology to contain it. It’s as messy as they come.
That bit of writing also establishes how unnervingly intimate a bond they share (something that comes to underlie a sense of possessiveness and ownership on his part, and confirms that this is not healthy). To see Carol succeed strokes Yon-Rogg’s ego – he made the right call as a soldier, he is part of the origins of her powers, and he is a good teacher. It also makes you think, was it (stupid) curiosity, principles, or admiration that stopped him from shooting Carol? She had almost brought him down in a plane fight, after all. And while he acts under orders from SI, I doubt Yon-Rogg protests its wisdom too much – it is highly likely the Kree see themselves as genuinely benevolent for saving this human and giving her so much by making her one of them (see their sense of superiority, again). If anything, I would expect an AI (not Yon-Rogg) not to want to risk leaving Carol alive and liable to turn against them.
It is said in interviews that Yon-Rogg both appreciates and is irritated by Carol’s “humanity” and quirks. He also seems to me as perfectly aware that what he is doing is wrong on a personal level. Over six years, he and Carol grow close – he is her crutch in Kree culture, Carol trusts him a lot (coming to him after her nightmares) and looks up to him/wants to prove herself to him, and there is even some implicit flirtation between them at the beginning of the film (“it’s me you see, isn’t it?”). That level of friendship entails some empathy. He may be ruthless, but he is not a psychopath (or is only a psychopath to the extent all devout patriotic soldiers are). For despite all that happens to Carol, she is not aware of any of it, and she ends up liking her life with the Kree by the time the film starts. She has military background, she likes to prove herself and be good at things, and the Kree never treat her badly (minus the grand deception part, ofc). From Yon-Rogg’s perspective then, as long as the lie is not found out, it is not objectively a bad life, is it? He has a soft spot for his favourite student (their relationship has been described as “tender” among other things). He has faith in her (“She’s stronger than you think!”), is (over-)protective of her, but wants to genuinely see her succeed - albeit on the Kree’s terms and not her own. He is trying to do his best as a mentor to a soldier and as a soldier to his people, and sincerely believes it will make everything easier for Carol, but because of the manner in which Carol has come to be his pupil, all of what is happening here can only become one huge poisoned chalice. However, you can see how someone like him can justify lying to a person for 6 years - longer still, had Carol not happened to crash on C53.
The truth of the matter is, of course, that Carol due to her amnesia does not have a choice regarding the narrative into which she is thrust, and that is the inherent evil that she overcomes in the film – taking back control over her life’s narrative and thus also gaining the necessary faith in oneself that comes with knowing oneself. The Kree have given her plenty, making up a big part of her (literally), but by infringing on her right to self-determination most horribly in the process. “The best version she could be” can ever only be pushed upon her in this state, like it happens so often in overly controlling families and partnerships.
Consider seriously that while Yon-Rogg’s advice to “control emotions and not let them cloud your judgment” may echo the belittling gender dynamics of our world, it is only an analogy – the Kree are not putting Carol in this situation in the film because she is a woman (they’re arguably rather progressive about their gender and sexual politics by the looks of it). It is not inherently a wrong or bad advice to drill into a soldier, and that is what Carol is – a soldier. However, as it happens, autobiographical long term memory triggers most strongly based on emotions, so suppressing them also counteracts the possibility that Carol might regain her memories. The Kree may well not even know what Carol could do if she was more in touch with herself and her powers – their foremost concern is winning “her heart and mind” so that she doesn’t turn against them. Again, they are personal, psychological villains. So, by tying her more strongly to Kree culture and ways, as well as training her according to that dictum, Yon-Rogg’s hitting two birds with one stone, really. I do not doubt that his orders from SI were, and his mind is set on, ensuring her loyalty by any means necessary. However, in comparison to, for instance, Bucky, the Kree do not literally constantly torture and brainwash her to turn her into a vegetable. It’s a “golden cage” type situation from the perspective of these “benevolent” aliens.
In that sense, the ‘enemy’ of the film is not so much the meme of a “debate me guy” or your ordinary our world chauvinist, or patriarchy (they are analogies, but not inherent to the conflict of the film), but the insidious disregard the Kree show toward individuals and their right to self-determination. As a culture, that is not their thing. And as other cultures are seen as lesser than them, they see their ways as backwards. Arguably that disregard underlies and precedes gendered readings because it applies universally (would they have done anything differently if Carol had been a man? I don’t think so) (also, it underlies the war ideology behind subjugating other races). And war justifies everything, of course, which is the second strongest ‘evil’ motif in the film. That’s pretty good, layered writing, in truth.
Both ‘evils’ are represented in Yon-Rogg’s and Supreme Intelligence’s characterisations, but only the latter remains abstract enough to be the literal representation of it whereas Yon-Rogg is still written with some “humanity” for the lack of a better word. He is very much conveyed as a product of his society, but not even a one-dimensional caricature of that. Sure, we do not get any insight into his inner thoughts, but not once did the details I have written out here give me the impression that Carol is as upset as she is because of betrayal by a lump of evil with no moving parts inside. I can appreciate that in an antagonistic force, because it adds to the hero’s internal confusion if their starting out premise is “friends with my enemy”. There is extreme pragmatism more than there is cruelty in the villain’s intentions. But cruelty follows anyway, because freedom and predetermination cannot not be in conflict, and very rarely does cruelty not follow when ends justify the means quite as brutally as in the case of sacrificing someone’s freedoms for another’s greater cause.
For Yon-Rogg that is not an issue, though he himself is as deprived of freedom under this ideology as Carol is. But Carol’s moral system hails from a different place.
I can relate to it and find it interesting, and not at all one-dimensional. Best of all, it is possible to build upon it.
203 notes · View notes