one of the things that i think we should pay attention to, socially, about the disney v. desantis thing is that it is really highlighting the importance of remembering nuance.
in a purely neutral sense, if you engage in something problematic, that does not mean you are necessarily agreeing with what makes it problematic. and i am worried that we have become... so afraid of any form of nuance.
disney isn't my friend, they're a corporate monopoly that bastardized copyright laws for their own benefit, ruin the environment, and abuse their workers (... and many other things). this isn't a hypothetical for me - i grew up in florida. i also worked for the actual Walt Disney World; like, in the parks. i am keenly aware of the ways they hurt people, because they hurt me. i fully believe that part of the reason florida is so conservative is because it's been an "open secret" for years now that disney lobbies the government to keep minimum wage down, and i know they worked hard to keep the parks unmasked and open during the worst parts of Covid. they purposefully keep their employees in poverty. they are in part responsible for the way the floridian government works.
desantis is still, by a margin that is frankly daunting, way worse. the alternative here isn't just "republicans win", it's actual fascism.
in a case like this, where the alternative is to allow actual fascism into united states legislation - where, if desantis wins, there are huge and legal ramifications - it's tempting to minimize the harm disney is also doing, because... well, it's not fascism. but disney isn't the good guy, either, which means republicans are having a field day asking activists oh, so you think their treatment of their employees is okay?
we have been trained there is a right answer. you're right! you're in the good group, and you're winning at having an opinion.
except i have the Internet Prophecy that in 2-3 months, even left-wing people will be ripping apart activists for having "taken disney's side". aren't i an anti-capitalist? aren't i pro-union? aren't i one of the good ones? removed from context and nuance (that in this particular situation i am forced to side with disney, until an other option reveals itself), my act of being like "i hope they have goofy rip his throat out onstage, shaking his lifeless body like a dog toy" - how quickly does that seem like i actually do support disney?
and what about you! at home, reading this. are you experiencing the Thought Crime of... actually liking some of the things disney has made? your memories of days at the parks, or of good movies, or of your favorite show growing up. maybe you are also evil, if you ever enjoyed anything, ever, at all.
to some degree, the binary idealization/vilification of individual motive and meaning already exists in the desantis case. i have seen people saying not to go to the disney pride events because they're cash grabs (they are). i've seen people saying you have to go because they're a way to protest. there isn't a lot of internet understanding of nuance. instead it's just "good show of support" or "evil bootlicking."
this binary understanding is how you can become radicalized. when we fear nuance and disorder, we're allowing ourselves the safety of assuming that the world must exist in binary - good or bad, problematic or "not" problematic. and unfortunately, bigots want you to see the world in this binary ideal. they want you to get mad at me because "disney is taking a risk for our community but you won't sing their praises" and they want me to get mad at you for not respecting the legit personal trauma that disney forced me through.
in a grander scheme outside of disney: what happens is a horrific splintering within activist groups. we bicker with each other about minimal-harm minimal-impact ideologies, like which depiction of bisexuality is the most-true. we gratuitously analyze the personal lives of activists for any sign they might be "problematic". we get spooked because someone was in a dog collar at pride. we wring our hands about setting an empty shopping mall on fire. we tell each other what words we may identify ourselves by. we get fuckin steven universe disk horse when in reality it is a waste of our collective time.
the bigots want you to spend all your time focusing on how pristine and pretty you and your interests are. they want us at each other's throats instead of hand in hand. they want to say see? nothing is ever fucking good enough for these people.
and they want their followers to think in binary as well - a binary that's much easier to follow. see, in our spaces, we attack each other over "proper" behavior. but in bigoted groups? they attack outwards. they have someone they hate, and it is us. they hate you, specifically, and you are why they have problems - not the other people in their group. and that's a part of how they fucking keep winning.
some of the things that are beloved to you have a backbone in something terrible. the music industry is a wasteland. the publishing industry is a bastion of white supremacy. video games run off of unpaid labor and abuse.
the point of activism was always to bring to light that abuse and try to stop it from happening, not to condemn those who engage in the content that comes from those industries. "there is no ethical consumption under late capitalism" also applies to media. your childhood (and maybe current!) love of the little mermaid isn't something you should now flinch from, worried you'll be a "disney adult". wanting the music industry to change for the better does not require that you reject all popular music until that change occurs. you can acknowledge the harm something might cause - and celebrate the love that it has brought into your life.
we must detach an acknowledgment of nuance from a sense of shame and disgust. we must. punishing individual people for their harmless passions is not doing good work. encouraging more thoughtful, empathetic consumption does not mean people should feel ashamed of their basic human capacities and desires. it should never have even been about the individual when the corporation is so obviously the actual evil. this sense that we must live in shame and dread of our personal nuances - it just makes people bitter and hopeless. do you have any idea how scared i am to post this? to just acknowledge the idea of nuance? that i might like something nuanced, and engage in it joyfully? and, at the same time, that i'm brutally aware of the harm that they're doing?
"so what do i do?" ... well, often there isn't a right answer. i mean in this case, i hope mickey chops off ron's head and then does a little giggle. but truth be told, often our opinions on nuanced subjects will differ. you might be able to engage in things that i can't because the nuance doesn't sit right with me. i might think taylor swift is a great performer and a lot of fun, and you might be like "raquel, the jet fuel emissions". we are both correct; neither of us have any actual sway in this. and i think it's important to remember that - the actual scope of individual responsibility. like, i also love going to the parks. Thunder Mountain is so fun. you (just a person) are not responsible for the harm that Disney (the billion dollar corporation) caused me. i don't know. i think it's possible to both enjoy your memories and interrogate the current state of their employment policies.
there is no right way to interrogate or engage with nuance - i just hope you embrace it readily.
5K notes
·
View notes
What about an AU where Manual replaces Aizawa as the 1-A homeroom teacher?
Oh boy we can fit SO MUCH projection into this one
1- Manual only applied to UA because he was applying a bunch of hero schools, and he didn't think he'd get UA but why not try, at worst it's extra interview practice before he really tries at Ketsubutsu. And then he got only got a job at UA and no other school, somehow. And he can't technically complain because UA pays the best and it's a job he signed up for, but how???
2. He also didn't apply as a homeroom teacher, but they offered it to him anyway and he uh doesn't really say no. He figured he could change positions after a few years already if he wanted to, and planned on it, but then realized he liked this position much better and so kept it instead
3. Actually you know what sure all the projection. His third year he ended up being freshman homeroom team lead, which he's pretty sure isn't supposed to happen- Vlad had more experience but said he wanted a break this year from it and no one else applied so....
4. His third year is also when he gets our beloved class 1A! They do not get expulsion threats, and go to orientation. Then Manual tells them they have an essay due at the end of the week, about why they want to be heroes and what their current plan is, to be completed before any combat training. Several students pitch a fit about writing when they want to learn how to fight, but Manual points out that as part of their training, they'll have to do a lot of unpleasant things. Will they put effort into the record keeping they need to learn as pros if they aren't willing to write a paper? Will they be able to communicate in team exercises if they can't even put what they want as a hero into words? How patient can they be for slow moving cases? The class can see his point even if it's not exciting.
The second day of school, two students hand him papers. Bakugou asks if he can start fight training sooner now since he did the whole dumb essay. Midoriya asks him to look over the first draft if he doesn't mind, because he just had a lot of ideas where to take it and wants it to be really good.
By the start of homeroom the second day, these two are no longer sitting in desks right by each other.
5. On the fourth day of school, while Manual has his class looking over their costumes and getting peer feedback, he realizes that Vlad usually would be sending bragging pictures of his class in rescue training right about now, to see if Manual could get his kids to beat them next week when they went to USJ. He sends a message. It doesn't go through.
He thinks "huh, that's weird" right before robot sentry alarms go off about vines erupting from USJ's roof and throwing students out frantically. Manual grabs the closest non combat adult in the hall to watch his class and runs to help figure out what's going on.
83 notes
·
View notes
Current Events in Silm fandom rlly reinforce my feeling that, despite claiming an ethos of acceptance/tolerance of anything that doesn't hurt ppl, a lot of ppl in the section of Silm fandom I frequent do follow a set of socially-agreed-upon mores about what concepts are "not acceptable" to discuss or propose (or the ways in which certain topics must be discussed to be acceptable), that you all seem to have agreed on despite the things those mores restrict not being harmful to anyone.
And when someone does say smth that violates those mores, the response is disproportionate to the amount of harm done (which is typically none, imo). I know it's tempting to say "but we just want people to be comfortable and safe", but treating ppl badly for the sin of sharing thoughts you dislike is NOT the same as preventing people from doing things that are harmful. The former is much more of a harmful behavior than the sharing of the thoughts that sets it off. Fannish etiquette, people: you shouldn’t act like someone’s meta makes them morally suspect just because you disagree with it; save the “this is morally bad” for things that are ACTUALLY harmful. We're all stuck on this website together & if you want to have any sort of community, you need to ACT like you're in a community, and that means letting other people say things you dislike. Block them if you need to! I block people all the time because i know it's better for me AND for them if we can both blog in peace.
I am not particularly comfortable with the young-queer-on-tumblr silm fandom rn due to this tendency to rebuke things that are uncomfortable rather than harmful. Maybe that's fine with you. But if your goal is to make all fans feel comfortable and accepted, you need to actually do that. If your goal is to make people who share your unwritten rules comfortable in your space, you need to admit that, and write those rules down, and curate your space so it follows them.
Edited 8:10am PST to clarify the specifics of the behavior I find concerning.
21 notes
·
View notes
for a webbed site that claims to love rehabilitative justice tumblr sure has a love of vengeance huh. somehow we’ve created a digital atmosphere where literal murder is less bad than (checks notes) not emerging from the womb with a perfectly calibrated moral compass and the Correct Political Opinions
I’ve seen people on here say that, not only can people Not Change, but that people who try to change are a) lying b) manipulative and c) undeserving of the chance to change. besties…becoming a better person isn’t about whether or not you deserve to become a better person, it’s not even about becoming 100% perfect, it’s about doing damage control after you realize you fucked up. like yeah people you’ve hurt aren’t obligated to like you/forgive you/interact with you, but tumblrites seem to think that anyone who’s ever made a serious mistake should be exiled from society and/or guillotined. we’ve gone from reasonable and correct takes about how people change (ex. “it’s not my responsibility to teach you”— yes! of course it shouldn’t be up to underprivileged random people on the internet to educate the uninformed!) to utterly deranged ones (ex. “nobody with privilege will ever realize that they’re doing harm and the ones who claim to be in the process of learning are just virtue signaling and should be punished for it”— a take I’ve seen applied to men learning about feminism, cishets becoming allies, white people learning about antiracism, relatives of shooters who go on to advocate for gun control, etc)
you do realize that people can genuinely change for the better, right? I’ve seen my parents un-transphobia themselves firsthand, going from thinking that my sibling came out “for attention” to wholeheartedly believing in trans rights. my grandma’s father was every kind of asshole imaginable and she grew up indoctrinated, but as an adult she broke away from him and has spent the rest of her life working on unlearning stuff. my cousin grew up in the rural south and parroted his rural southern dad’s opinions until he was thirteen and started actually thinking for himself, at which point he did a total 180 and is now studying history with a focus on the evolution of the rights of the underprivileged
so when I see people on here say that people shouldn’t change because they don’t deserve to change it rubs me the wrong way. cause at that point it sounds like you’d rather have that person stay harmful so you can stay mad at them, instead of letting them change and gaining yourself an ally. again, you don’t need to interact with them, but. at this point it kind of feels like you care more about hating The Oppressors than about protecting The Oppressed.
16 notes
·
View notes
Twissy wasn’t a redemptive story, it never was, it was a tragedy the whole time. Missy was not redeemed, Missy wasn’t trying to make up for past wrongs, she was trying to be the doctor’s friend again. The doctor who was, the whole time, saying that being rewarded for goodness voids the action. So if missy is trying to be good for him, to be his friend, then it doesn’t count because of his rules.
The story was a tragedy the whole time, it wasn’t a redemption arc because Missy’s trying to be his friend, being a better person is a consequence of that, it is not the active motivation in her arc. She even tells him, quite bitingly, that her idea of goodness is very much contrary to his, which tells us that in following his lead she is genuinely not trying to be a good person, merely his friend.
The doctor did in fact shoot himself in the foot here with his arrogant and short-sighted views on virtue, true, but nothing can ruin Missy’s redemption because she never once got redeemed and even she’d agree with me on that one, imo.
216 notes
·
View notes
i still don’t understand the claim that robin didn’t ramble around vickie because she likes her and wanted to listen to her and/or likes her enough that she feels comfortable around her. for one thing, if A. was the case, why is that not what happened at the rally? and if B. was the case, how come she still had a slight tendency to ramble around nancy even after spending more time with her than she ever did vickie?
like... this is only the second time she’s been around vickie? (third if you really want to count the scene where vickie’s sucking face with her boyfriend, but i’d call that reaching.) am i really supposed to believe robin is completely chill and comfortable with her crush that quickly? because i don’t.
and the argument about robin not doing it because she wants to listen feels really... disrespectful? rude? (i don’t know the adjective i’m looking for) with regards to real people who have a tendency to ramble, either due to having a crush or because they’re autistic etc. because rambling isn’t always something you can control? like, it just happens lol, and sometimes you don’t even realize you’re doing it until someone stops you.
so to be like, “oh, robin didn’t ramble because she cares and wanted to listen,” almost sounds like, “oh, if you ramble, that means you don’t care and don’t want to listen.” at least, to me, anyway. also she literally still rambles around steve lmao, and i think you’ll be hard-pressed to convince most people that robin doesn’t care about him.
anyway, all this to say that i personally got the vibe that she realized vickie isn’t the one for her and/or isn’t the person she thought she was, as is often the case when people get to know their crushes. seeing her snogging her boyfriend put things into perspective for robin, and listening to her at the charity drive (or w/e) kind of solidified for her that, okay, vickie’s nice, but it turns out she isn’t actually what i’m looking for.
87 notes
·
View notes