nidmightcookies - Tumblr blog

nidmightcookies · 7 months ago

Text

Heyo, @nidmightcookies! This is my response to your reply on Atticus' post over here -- I didn't want to take away from the message of that post or the additions from other POC.

Sidenote: I'm extremely white and have no credentials that make me qualified to talk about race (I'm just a person who reads and tries to listen), and my takes are probably going to show that. That's another reason I didn't want to clutter up the original post with my reply.

In response to this

“Why is it racist to depict Ed as uncontrollably violent? Because he's not actually depicted that way in the show.”

you talk about Ed baiting the crew to murder him and committing other violent acts. The original point is stating that Ed is not depicted as uncontrollably violent in the show, not claiming that he perpetrated no violence full stop. Yes, Ed does violence. No, he is not uncontrollably violent.

What Ed does is purposeful, not uncontrollable. He doesn’t push Lucius off the ship after he gives up all hope because he’s a violent guy who just does stuff like that, and the mutiny situation in S2E2… as allthinky said in a response, “that’s Ed at the end of his rope,” not him being uncontrollably violent. He’d been working towards suicide ever since he started baiting Low. As a backup plan, he’s been working the crew hard, disregarding their well-being, and being an overall awful boss in an attempt to incite a mutiny.

Yes, he was “a serious, immediate threat to his crew” by the time he was out of other ideas to make someone take him out. Ed commits acts of violence -- I don’t think I’ve seen anyone claim he doesn’t -- but he always does so with some amount of reason (not necessarily good reasons) and control.

“Upon reflection, my biggest issue may be with the people who argue that Ed's never been shown to be violent, or that any time he has resorted to violence, he's absolved of blame by the fact that someone was mean to him first. Which... I don't think I've seen you make either of those arguments at any point in the past.”

I’m really glad that you mentioned that OP hadn’t made either of those arguments (that you know of), that was genuinely very cool. As for the rest of it, I don’t believe I’ve seen anyone say that Ed is “never shown to be violent” or that he can always be “absolved of the blame” unless you want to remove all of the nuance from common talking points.

He is never shown to be more violent than the average pirate and, due to his deep-seated trauma relating to his own capacity for violence, he’s actually on the less violent end of the pirate spectrum. He can’t be absolved of all blame for his actions because he’s a grown man who makes his own choices (and saying otherwise robs him of his agency). What I’ve seen said is that Ed’s actions are informed by things like trauma, abuse, and racism. His actions make sense. They’re not spontaneous violence committed because Ed flies into rages and homicidal spirals out of the blue.

“Not saying we shouldn't consider it [that is, are we “assigning more weight to Ed's violent actions than those of other characters or assuming he's worse than he actually is”], but I mean. If a white character on the show had cut off his employee's toes and fed them to him, shot him in the leg, ordered his death, held a gun on his other subordinates, marooned some/tossed one overboard, threatened to drown the ones that remained... because he was pushed into it, with the same combination of abusive childhood/hostile work environment... would he be equally deserving of that consideration? Would it be an overreaction to call him dangerous?”

Probably, but if everything was the same except Ed Is White Now, his baggage and his relationship with Izzy wouldn’t be exactly the same. Ed's race isn’t inconsequential. We can't really remove race from the story and end up with the same character, y'know?

Also: I do think it’s inappropriate to turn this question back on POC. I don’t think that POC are obligated to reconsider biases against a white character.

“Izzy is crew”

Ed’s relationship to Izzy is not comparable to his relationship with the crew. The crew have done nothing wrong and haven’t behaved antagonistically towards Ed. Izzy and Ed have a complicated, toxic, and difficult relationship (regardless of where you stand on whether or not Izzy’s abusive), therefore any harm caused to Izzy has to be considered differently than harm caused to the rest of the crew.

“Even if we say that he doesn't count, Ed still pushed Lucius off the ship.”

Yes, Ed did do that, but I think that Atticus is talking about Ed’s S2 actions in that point, not what happened in S1. Most (I think all?) meta I’ve read does consider Ed pushing Lucius off the ship an act of violence that Lucius himself did nothing to provoke.

This might be controversial, but I’d put Ed pushing Lucius overboard on par with, like, a particularly unjust firing in a workplace that isn’t a pirate vessel. When we watch OFMD, we have to adjust our physical violence meters to account for the fact that we’re dealing with an environment that’s full of physical violence.

“Also, emotional abuse directed at the rest of the crew is still abuse”

I don't consider Ed emotionally abusive. He works the crew hard. He’s a terrible boss who doesn’t give his employees vacation days or paid time off and then throws them a sad pizza party. That sucks, it’s not okay, and his final death spiral in S2E2 is terrible and he never should have involved the crew in that.

Abuse is a pattern of behavior that’s meant to control people. Not all harm is abuse. When I say that Ed isn't abusive, I'm not saying that he didn't hurt people.

“So... I was raised by a physically and psychologically abusive parent. I get that Ed's been hurt, is still hurting, and why. The "why" doesn't matter for the question of "did he or didn't he", though. It may or may not be his fault, he may or may not have done it because he felt unsafe. The point is, his actions did hurt people.”

Same, friend, and I'm sorry you went through that. (That’s actually one of the reasons I’ve always been wary of Izzy. What he says and does in S1 is too familiar to me, sometimes to a point where I can’t watch certain scenes.) I don’t think anyone’s saying that Ed isn’t hurting anyone, or that all of his actions can be attributed to abuse. If that’s not what you’re getting at here, apologies for misunderstanding.

“His boss that he was trying to control was brown. Was that a factor in his power play though, or was it because Taika wound up being cast as Blackbeard? Any other (white) actor in the role, would Izzy be as bad for trying to control him? Would the scripts have gone a different way?”

Here’s the thing. In the show we have, Blackbeard is played by a Maori/Jewish man, and this fundamentally alters the character. There are things in the show -- whole episodes, if you want to look at S1E5 and the fancy party guests who treat Ed like exotic entertainment and not a peer -- that wouldn’t be the same if Ed was white.

And yeah, Ed being brown changes the dynamic between Ed and Izzy. It would still be bad if a white guy was trying to control another white guy, but it wouldn’t be bad on the same level. Same goes if they were both brown. A white man trying to control the behavior of an indigenous man is worse.

“Izzy got permanently disfigured, crippled, and dead, while Ed came out largely unscathed in a physical sense, due to Muppet logic. Not to say one is more deserving than the other, but for a bunch of fans, there's probably a sense of Izzy getting the short end of the stick, to consider.”

That’s fine if some people feel like Izzy got the short end of the stick. It’s fine that some people feel like Izzy’s arc was kinder to him than it should have been. It’s okay to feel whatever! We connect emotionally to different characters and that biases our opinions and meta. That’s not a crime. We just need to be aware of our biases and why they exist.

The thing with OFMD is that Ed is a main character with more background and a story that, at every turn, asks you to sympathize with him. We’re given a look into Ed’s psyche. We understand at least some of his trauma and hurt and why he acts the way he does. Izzy has virtually no backstory and we’re never offered a glimpse into his mind; we don’t know why he’s like that. You can totally like a secondary character (or even an antagonist!) with no real canonical background or mental groundwork. It’s fun to ask why characters do what they do when canon doesn’t offer us any answers, and who doesn’t love a mystery box?

But with OFMD, it can raise eyebrows when people say their main concern is the suffering of a white man who behaves antagonistically towards a brown man, especially when that brown character is a well-developed lead who also suffers (and suffers at the hands of aforementioned white character). It’s not inherently racist for someone to care more about Izzy than Ed, but it’s also not unreasonable to ask that someone to think about the possibility that subconscious racism could be factoring into their point of view.

“I don't think it's fair discussion to have a rule saying ‘even though you didn't directly call out the brown man, your argument is still racist’... even if it's true in many cases, it effectively means that no criticism of the character can ever be considered valid. If someone wants to argue ‘removing your employee's toes and feeding them to him is abusive behavior’, they can't, because of the unspoken skin colors involved? I don't know what the solution to this is.”

No one is saying that all criticism of a character of color is racist or invalid. As allthinky said in response, we’re saying that “those critiques have to be based on real evidence, and placed in a careful context, so that their actions can be understood as human, and not just the brutality of some brute.”

Criticize, but criticize with evidence and with awareness of the context of the criticized behavior.

With the Izzy example, you have to consider the context of their relationship and Izzy’s actions throughout S1. Izzy isn’t just an employee: he’s a trusted second-in-command who has been insulting, controlling, and disloyal; he endangered not just Stede but also Ed and the rest of the crew; he told Ed that he was better off dead than acting as he was, and that Izzy's loyalty belongs to the violent worksona that Ed wants to shed. Is Ed being abusive when he’s reacting in response to abuse from his abuser?

“[T]he show has layers (like an onion). Sometimes the meaning is not entirely surface-level, and everyone has a different level of comprehension. Sometimes obvious things to us aren't obvious to other fans/vice-versa. There's a whole 'nother discussion of media literacy to be had.”

I think that Atticus said it best here: “This is not a subtle show. That's not to say it's a simple one [...]. It's amazingly layered and emotional responses by characters are often extremely complex. However, when the show is trying to tell you something, it's not subtle and it never tries to hide it.”

There are a lot of things in OFMD that are subjective and open to interpretation, and those things are fun to discuss even when we have different takes. There are also a lot of things that are very clear. When people try to subvert the messages and ideas that OFMD is conveying loudly and openly, other fans get suspicious and wonder if the folks doing the subverting have an agenda, a bias, or just misunderstand what the show is saying.

I hope that reply was sufficient!

52 notes · View notes

nidmightcookies · 7 months ago

Text

Also trying for brief here. Finger broke. Wasted time typing a reply to someone that was so not worth it (Now I'm denying the very existence of racism because I didn't use the right tag on my posts!).

For what it's worth, I'm sorry that you're catching flak.

Thank you.

Re: Hornigold, that's totally speculation on my part!

But still really cool! I like the little headcanony details like that.

We're all going to piss other people off and be pissed off ourselves. I guess we do the best we can and block where we have to?

Yeah, probably.

OFMD is hated by Tumblr at large

Tumblr is... such a weird place.

I think the vast majority of the fandom is pretty cool. Heck, I was afraid I'd start something by replying to you initially, but you've been great!

Thanks, and I agree! I haven't had that much interaction, really, but up until very recently it's all been lovely. I have really enjoyed talking with you, too. :)

Heyo, @nidmightcookies! This is my response to your reply on Atticus' post over here -- I didn't want to take away from the message of that post or the additions from other POC.

In response to this

“Why is it racist to depict Ed as uncontrollably violent? Because he's not actually depicted that way in the show.”

Also: I do think it’s inappropriate to turn this question back on POC. I don’t think that POC are obligated to reconsider biases against a white character.

“Izzy is crew”

“Even if we say that he doesn't count, Ed still pushed Lucius off the ship.”

“Also, emotional abuse directed at the rest of the crew is still abuse”

Abuse is a pattern of behavior that’s meant to control people. Not all harm is abuse. When I say that Ed isn't abusive, I'm not saying that he didn't hurt people.

Criticize, but criticize with evidence and with awareness of the context of the criticized behavior.

I hope that reply was sufficient!

#ofmd #fandom discourse

52 notes · View notes

nidmightcookies · 7 months ago

Text

Compiling replies to both your posts, to save space. Also broke my finger, so I'm gonna try keeping this short (typing is clunky).

But the argument was, I thought, about whether Ed *was* a violent person, and whether he *was* a threat to the crew.

Not my argument. I don't recall thinking at any point that Ed was inherently violent, but I did point out a few times that he did violence, and i think that led me down a weird rabbit hole of trying to get people to accept that fact, rather than accuse me of saying what I hadn't intended to say.

So your insistence that the crew were harmed in the context of this argument is the kind of nitpicking that white folk like me have historically performed when we don't care enough about the actual and crucial point

That was not my intention. I just grew very tired of seeing so many people insist something did/didn't happen, to the point that people were literally claiming that something we all watched in the show, never occurred.

That's the big thing. So going on about "hey, from the crew's perspective..." (and I've given you that point several times over) is not a relevant point.

It was relevant to the point that I was trying to make, and it only got repeated so many times because people continued to insist it didn't happen.

You seem often to be saying that Ed's violence has something to do with his traumatic background.

It... does? "I'm the Kraken". He didn't create the persona in a void.

But that's not it at all. Ed's hurt gets turned inward.

How does this factor into Father Teach being strangled or Lucius being pushed off the ship? I get the thing about turning pain inward, but eventually it comes out when you reach your limit.

I started to include Izzy's toes above, but I agree with your comment on strategic violence, there.

You haven't accepted that there's a whole contingent of fandom that sees Ed as a man with anger issues, full of uncontrollable violence.

I have. I have addressed this.

It's all done strategically. It's not even about being sympathetic to Ed, it's, can you actually see the evidence of who he is?

I don't quite understand what you mean here?

As for skipping over parts of the conversation, for the most part I do that when I feel I've said all I can say on the subject, perhaps multiple times. I'm sorry if I didn't give an answer that you were waiting for.

There's a great rant in the recent izzycanyonhours by someone who says they are a screenwriter (who knows?) that really lays out the difference between how Ed and Izzy are portrayed on screen, and how they've been interpreted.

I read it after you pointed it out, thanks! There's more to unpack there than I can type out, but... The anon says "you can't control audience reactions" and spends a long time lamenting their ability to do that very thing. Per their description, OFMD is the perfect show (they did every scene the way anon would have), but they can't reconcile the difference in the audience reaction. Interesting thing to ponder over, what happens after you release a work out into the wild.

This is CRUCIAL because Ed is a BIPOC character and people keep reading him wrong.

If "reading him wrong" means he's not actually an uncontrollable monster, I completely agreee. If it means nothing he does can be considered violent, I can't get behind that argument (not sure if you were saying that, but it is a take I've seen)

Finally, you keep removing the "fandom racism" tag even though several fans of color (and white ones) have made really good cases that they see racism in what is going on in fandom. Do you think you have the life experience or theoretical expertise to decide it's not happening? With due respect, and as a fellow white person (one who's been studying white supremacy for a couple of decades), no single white person has the acumen to decide that racism isn't happening when a bunch of BIPOC say it is.

What? So. Neglecting to type in a "racism" tag in favor of a general "discourse" one (which I thought was the one we were supposed to use for, you know, discourse)... means that I'm saying racism doesn't exist?

Are you fucking kidding me? I KEEP removing the tag? (I removed nothing, you add tags when you make a post) This is such an important thing for you, has been going on so long, and you couldn't fucking ASK me about it at any point? You just added another tick mark to the "racist" column?

This is what I mean about reading shit into the things people write (or in this case, don't write). You cannot make things up and expect people to accept your version... especially when the other person has no freaking clue what is going on in your head. Conversation has to go both ways, to work.

That said, this took a long time to type with my finger (shoulda read the whole post before I started my reply), so I'll post it, and then I think might be done here. We are never going to agree on anything, if you're just going to make up shit to fault me for.

Hmm so it's been *checks watch* 5 days since I posted on the recent Izzy topic, and rather than respond to any points or questions I made, people involved have just blocked me. (Edit: with the obvious exception of the person noted below.)

So it's not discourse they want, really, it's just "I'm right and you're wrong", like I figured. I was hoping to be proven wrong.

@allthinky I don't know if you got my message on the actual post, but I saw where you replied to me a couple times. I'm not able to view the actual messages you left. If you were wanting a reply from me on anything, you can contact me here. If not... nevermind then.

#ofmd #fandom discourse #fandom racism #look i added the tag #like I would've ages ago #if anyone had asked me to

34 notes · View notes

nidmightcookies · 7 months ago

Text

Thus, he was not a serious, immediate threat to his crew.

From their perspective, he was. I was always talking about the fact that they thought he was going to kill them all. Even if I didn't make that clear initially (and I'm sorry for that, I fucked up, it was very late at night), I know that I said it better in one of the many replies since then. I never intended to change my argument, and I honestly think I've been quite consistent with where I stand on the topic.

Your subsequent rant about how defenses of Izzy get critiqued as "somehow about race" even though nobody mentions race until the "Ed stans" mention it reflects a really poor understanding of how racism works.

Valid. In my defense, the process apparently went something like: a) someone posts something subtly racist under the radar, b) someone else posts "stop making everything about skin color", and c) I totally missed the connection, and only saw the second half. It's been explained to me where I fucked up there.

I'll wait.

Uh... unnecessary hostility aside...

I never said Ed didn't deserve the benefit of the doubt (I literally keep repeating it's not about his very justified traumatic motivation), nor do I consider him not a human being (just, what?) or below Izzy in importance. It's not an either/or situation. They both can be hurt, and they both can do the hurting, and that's literally. What. Happened. On. The. Show.

I don't know how to say it plainer.

I honestly do not know what you're asking me for with your "I'll wait" here, because it seems like you're demanding I explain arguments I never made. If you'd like to try again to address something from the actual points I've made, I'd be willing to take a shot at responding to that.

So it's not discourse they want, really, it's just "I'm right and you're wrong", like I figured. I was hoping to be proven wrong.

#ofmd #fandom discourse

34 notes · View notes

nidmightcookies · 7 months ago

Text

I'm definitely not trying to tell you that any of your posts are the problem!

I didn't think so from your wording, I just wanted to check that we were on the same page!

I promise I wouldn't take time to type at you if I thought you were trolling.

Appreciated! I didn't really think you were pointing fingers at me. Your wording was polite and nonspecific enough, I just wanted to check if you were trying to gently tell me what an asshole I am. I'm a tad sensitive to passive aggression (not that you were! it's totally a me-side issue).

I'm a big fan of earnest discussion, and I think that it's worthwhile even if we're ultimately going to disagree.

I agree (even if we disagree, lol).

When people -- especially fans of color, especially indigenous fans -- see others characterize Ed as exceptionally violent or quick to anger or unsympathetic or abusive, they're immediately on the defensive.

I don't, and never did, think that Ed was uncontrollably violent, quick to violence, inherently dangerous, or any of that. I acknowledge that he was pushed to his limit until he couldn't take it anymore. I simply can't accept that he was never violent or never hurt the crew, because we saw it happen in the show. That's the whole of the argument I was making in the beginning.

I get where fans of color don't want to wade through racist shit once more, but all I can do is repeat, that's not what I was saying... I do, however, see where I made a terrible decision, responding where I did. It was a combination of poor timing (I'd just been irritated by someone else's post) and I've always admired PCCP's argument/writing style, so I thought I'd try talking it through there, since he was writing on the subject/potentially in response to the bitchy post I'd just made.

So here we are... I keep making the same argument, explanation, and apology, and I don't believe it's getting us anywhere. Someone just literally asked me if I understood the definition of "uncontrollable", which... yeah, I do, that's why I said Ed wasn't uncontrollable, way back in one of the first post.

Can't help but begin to wonder if people are really reading what I wrote, or just went: hey, the latest racist idiot said something, better go prove them wrong.

For example, I don't think that there's a widespread, genuine belief that Izzy is intended to act as a Christ figure and an AIDS metaphor,

I got nothing. I can't even imagine where to begin the mental process that would lead someone to that conclusion.

bad faith interpretations of dissenting ideas, but that’s been an issue everywhere forever.

I do feel the bad faith thing is a large part of my particular situation here. The thing that set me off down this discourse journey was a post by someone who just screamed troll in the way they constantly posted about how tired they were of having to correct people on how much Izzy sucks all the time, intermingled with unsolicited "PSA: Izzy is shit." I made a bitchy post about that person, PCCP came along with his post, and...

I know, I shouldn't have taken the bait in the first place.

Valid! I wouldn’t agree with anyone who says that Ed doesn’t endanger or harm the crew. Those are definitely things he does.

Thank you. That's all I wanted to get across.

I generally limit my blocking to people with takes so bad that they make me mad or, in a few instances, people who might get mad if a post of mine lands on their dash. Some of us are better off as strangers.

Very true. I've advocated for blocking people in the past, in the name of peace, but I recently went through and unblocked a bunch that I couldn't recall being particularly annoyed with. Shouldn't have tempted fate.

We don’t know what’s up with Hornigold, but the sailcloth he wears in Ed’s subconscious makes me think he was mutinied as well.

Interesting! Can I ask why? I've always thought it was a neat character detail, but I didn't catch the mutiny angle. Like, he got stranded with only the bit of sail to wear?

Since we (me and the people I usually talk to) consider Izzy separately given his very different relationship with Ed, “the crew” is a shorthand for “all of the named characters on the Kraken ship who aren’t Izzy.”

I guess we've reached the point where we have to agree to disagree, because I just can't accept the exclusion of the ship's first mate from the rest of the crew. He might be on a different level from "just the crew", but he's still crew. *shrug*

I’m also not going to be at my best if I feel like someone is, in trying to defend Izzy, invalidating my own lived experiences. It sucks!

It really does, and I'm sorry if I contributed to that.. I feel like that's a little part of what made me so crazy (also I'm just pedantic) about the posts I'd see claiming Ed never hurt anyone, even though we all watched it happen. After a certain point, it felt like fandom gaslighting, for lack of a better term. There was this underlying threat of "if you don't accept my version, you're the problem". I've lived through that IRL, it wasn't even that big a deal overall, that person is no longer in my life now... but I'm still pissed about it, lol.

I really, really don’t want to hurt you by defending Ed here if there’s a chance that I’d be dismissing something you’ve gone through.

I appreciate that, and I also don't want to do that. So then, how do we do this fandom thing? Do the sides just never interact, or can we find a common ground that isn't riddled with landmines? I don't know how to proceed...

Someone on here once said that Izzy’s S2 arc is an abuse victim’s fantasy: an abuser is motivated to change for the better and ultimately admits to being in the wrong.

I recall seeing the term referenced, but I got the impression that it went the other way: the abuser got what what coming to him, and the victim lived happily ever after. I prefer the interpretation you gave!

But I have seen several instances of people saying that Izzy is a pitiable, sympathetic victim of abuse and characterizing Ed as a violent, abusive monster all in the same post -- enough to consider this a thing that people do say.

Too much to hope that's some of that bad actor posting at work? No... no, I've been in fandom spaces for ...officially decades now (god I'm old). I know there are just as many people who really have the blind spots, as there are trolls wanting to stir up shit. Hell, maybe more.

It’s not just liking Izzy more (totally fine) or not liking Ed (also fine); it’s an unwillingness to view Ed as a complex character with trauma and motives and emotional complexity.

And, as many have pointed out, it's not even hard to see Ed's motivation and trauma. It's not subtext, it's something explicitly shown in canon.

It’s placing all of the blame on the big, scary, violent indigenous man.

I wonder... I want to think that we're all equally drawn to a show for good reasons, I want to give people the benefit of the doubt. I've known enough blatantly racist/homophobic twats that wouldn't even give this show the time of day. I guess I'm unaccustomed to the more subtle variety.

(I’m not trying to insinuate that you’re saying any of that or would agree with it, btw!)

I didn't think so this time! :) I'm enjoying the conversation, thanks for indulging me.

Heyo, @nidmightcookies! This is my response to your reply on Atticus' post over here -- I didn't want to take away from the message of that post or the additions from other POC.

In response to this

“Why is it racist to depict Ed as uncontrollably violent? Because he's not actually depicted that way in the show.”

Also: I do think it’s inappropriate to turn this question back on POC. I don’t think that POC are obligated to reconsider biases against a white character.

“Izzy is crew”

“Even if we say that he doesn't count, Ed still pushed Lucius off the ship.”

“Also, emotional abuse directed at the rest of the crew is still abuse”

Abuse is a pattern of behavior that’s meant to control people. Not all harm is abuse. When I say that Ed isn't abusive, I'm not saying that he didn't hurt people.

Criticize, but criticize with evidence and with awareness of the context of the criticized behavior.

I hope that reply was sufficient!

#ofmd #fandom discourse

52 notes · View notes

nidmightcookies · 7 months ago

Text

he was NOT on his way to sinking the boat.

That's debatable, he may well have been waiting for someone to stop him, but either way that information was not shared with everyone else on the boat ( for obvious reasons). From their POV, their lives were in danger, and he was a threat to them.

Also, this kind of behavior, while it certainly is harmful and traumatizing, is not what we would normally call violence, right?

The threat of violence counts, just the same. In that moment, they have no way of knowing what's happening in his mind. But they can see whaat he's done/trying to do to the ship. Whatever you want to call it, at the time, they can only assume Ed is an immediate threat to their lives.

he wasn't hitting people, or stabbing them.

I mean, I saw someone point out somewhere in recent discussion, he did order Jim and Archie to fight to the death. He didn't lay a hand on either of them, but "do it or I'll kill you all" is also a threat of violence. Just because he didn't draw blood, he still hurt them. The crew was traumatized by his actions.

It's just... WE know (us, the ones watching the show) all of Ed's background and trauma and pain, and that he normally wouldn't hurt a fly, but in the OFMD universe, he doesn't let them in on the fuckery, because they wouldn't play along and kill him, would they? So he acts the part and terrorizes them. The small handful of crew on the deck, in the storm with him, are the only people who aren't in on the scheme, and they're afraid for their lives. That's abuse, even if he doesn't personally, literally, physically harm them in the end.

I cannot be the only person who thinks this way?

So that makes him really not very violent at all. It feels like you are moving the goal posts? Yes, piracy is violent. Yes, we know that Ed has the capacity to engage in interpersonal violence.

...how am I moving the goalposts? I've been making the same argument from the beginning: Regardless of his motivation, Ed still used violence against the crew. People don't want to acknowledge the fact. Why's that on me?

He's not uncontrollably violent. (Check it out? that usually means that one can't control one's own impulses, as well as can't be controlled by others.)

I am aware of the definition of the word, and I have already stated somewhere in one of these threads that I agree, he was not uncontrollably violent.

It's a fucking tragedy, and to focus on the crew's undeniable pain and trauma without considering that fucking Blackbeard has decided to get his former friends and crew to kill him? Feels like it's downplaying what he was doing there.

Undeniable? Then why do I keep reading about how his actions hurt no one but himself?

I haven't overlooked Ed's trauma in all this. I just haven't mentioned it in every argument because it simply isn't the point I'm trying to make. If that somehow gave the impression that I don't care about his side, I apologize for not stressing it more frequently. I thought we had all agreed on that fact here and again, I wasn't talking about why it happened, only what happened. Most of this debate has been me trying to get various people to acknowledge the mere fact that Ed did things that hurt people. I didn't mean at any point to imply that he was a bad person for it.

And "Yes, but" seems to deny the depths of love and despair that this Indigenous character experienced.

Already apologized for my bad wording there.

So it's not discourse they want, really, it's just "I'm right and you're wrong", like I figured. I was hoping to be proven wrong.

#ofmd #fandom discourse

34 notes · View notes

nidmightcookies · 7 months ago

Text

Yeah, I addressed this is another reply to someone, but I'll apologize again for going off on a tangent without making it more clear. I did agree with PCCP, that Ed was not uncontrollably violent, but the fact remains that he was a danger/did harm to his crew (which I've seen other people argue against). The thoughts all got smushed together. Sorry. :(

I’m really glad that you mentioned that OP hadn’t made either of those arguments (that you know of), that was genuinely very cool.

I truly was/am trying for honest discussion. A lot of shitty arguments about the characters and their motivations have been made on Tumblr, but I've always liked PCCP's more grounded arguments. So it was only fair to point it out.

As for the rest of it, I don’t believe I’ve seen anyone say that Ed is “never shown to be violent” or that he can always be “absolved of the blame” unless you want to remove all of the nuance from common talking points.

Sadly, I have seen those arguments, hmm, sometime in the last month I'd guess? I don't recall who made them, just noticed them uttered in the daily anti-Izzy rants I scrolled past. I haven't seen them in a few days. Maybe those people blocked me as well.

I mean, back to my question: how many other pirate captains did we see get literally beaten to death by their own crew, in order to stop the violence? I'm not saying Ed was violent without reason, or that he deserved what he got, or anything. He got abuse heaped upon him, and he reacted. It's not the why I was trying to point out, just the fact that it happened.

His actions make sense. They’re not spontaneous violence committed because Ed flies into rages and homicidal spirals out of the blue.

Agreed. But those actions, while perhaps not his fault, had consequences that other people (even people who had done him no harm) had to suffer through. Back to those "absolved of all blame" posts mentioned upthread. It was frustrating to see that argument come up. I won't miss it, if it's gone now.

Ed's race isn’t inconsequential. We can't really remove race from the story and end up with the same character, y'know?

True, though my question here was more directed at PCCP's comment on the subject of racism being used to paint Ed as uncontrollably violent. I wondered what would be different in a situation where everything was the same, but that couldn't be a factor.

Also: I do think it’s inappropriate to turn this question back on POC. I don’t think that POC are obligated to reconsider biases against a white character.

No one's obligated to do anything. I thought the post was meant for debate as is was posted to the general public and labeled "discourse". I had questions, so I asked them.

Ed’s relationship to Izzy is not comparable to his relationship with the crew. The crew have done nothing wrong and haven’t behaved antagonistically towards Ed.

I feel like that's irrelevant. My statement was in response to "Ed never hurt the crew, only Izzy", which I felt was ridiculous, because Izzy is still crew, even if he's bad crew.

Yes, Ed did do that, but I think that Atticus is talking about Ed’s S2 actions in that point, not what happened in S1.

Yeah, valid. I didn't get that on my first read.

When we watch OFMD, we have to adjust our physical violence meters to account for the fact that we’re dealing with an environment that’s full of physical violence.

See, I feel like that leads us back to the "most violent pirate discussion" though...

I don't consider Ed emotionally abusive.

Heh, now here's where I was the one talking about just the Kraken stuff! I was thinking of Ed pointing the gun at everyone, "do you think this is a toxic envionment?", Fang crying... up until they're all facing dying in a shipwreck. Plus, killing Ed was pretty traumatic for them also.

Someone really needs to open up Ye Olde Pyrate Therapy. Maybe Spanish Jackie's new side gig.

Same, friend, and I'm sorry you went through that.

Same to you. :(

(That’s actually one of the reasons I’ve always been wary of Izzy. What he says and does in S1 is too familiar to me, sometimes to a point where I can’t watch certain scenes.)

Hadn't thought of it that way, I guess. I can see how that would make it hard to warm up to the character.

For me, Izzy's redeemable because he actually has a redemption arc, and tries to make amends in a few ways. The abusive people I've known personally never felt the need to change, so it feels kind of hopeful to see that in the fantasy realm of OFMD. I'll admit, Izzy is a prick in the beginning...and the middle... but when he has to change, I dunno, I like the idea that he could come back from where he was.

There are things in the show -- whole episodes, if you want to look at S1E5 and the fancy party guests who treat Ed like exotic entertainment and not a peer

Yep. Each time *cough*too many times*cough* I did a rewatch I'd notice another condescending look or snide remark or whatever. It's brilliantly scripted/acted/directed. But yeah, it is the show we have. My questions around this point in the post were mainly in the "what-if" realm.

And yeah, Ed being brown changes the dynamic between Ed and Izzy.

The reason I singled out this point in the original post was that "Izzy tried to control Ed" was used as an example underneath the heading "are all Izzy fans racist"... TBH I don't remember exactly where I was going with this, but it struck me as a sort of loaded question type argument, and I wondered how it would go if the difference in race was removed

Agreed. The only problem being when the one side says the other side isn't allowed to feel whatever. (This applies to every side)

But with OFMD, it can raise eyebrows when people say their main concern is the suffering of a white man who behaves antagonistically towards a brown man

Honest question: Has anyone actually said that? (Some of my problem here is I'm somehow missing most of the arguments that trigger these "ugh the Izzy fans are at it again" posts) Or is that just something that people are reading into it, every time somebody says Izzy's their favorite character? I don't think that being a bigger fan of Izzy than you are of Ed, actually equals "the white man's pain is greater". Some people just root for the asshole characters?

and that Izzy's loyalty belongs to the violent worksona that Ed wants to shed.

I just want to take a moment to delight in the word "worksona", which is perfect. Okay, moving on.

Is Ed being abusive when he’s reacting in response to abuse from his abuser?

In retaliation for abuse directed at him, no. When he later directs the abuse at subordinates who hadn't previously hurt him, yes. (I know that wasn't part of your argument)

There are also a lot of things that are very clear. When people try to subvert the messages and ideas that OFMD is conveying loudly and openly, other fans get suspicious and wonder if the folks doing the subverting have an agenda, a bias, or just misunderstand what the show is saying.

We're back to the "I haven't even seen these posts" again, which is why I'm so damn confused. Seriously, is it stuff bleeding over from Twitter or somewhere, 'cause I'm not really on any other platform.

Or are you trying to tell me that my posting was the problem? In which case... I can only wave at the word "discourse" one final time, and promise I'm not trolling here.

I did enjoy reading/responding to your reply. Thanks for taking the time!

Heyo, @nidmightcookies! This is my response to your reply on Atticus' post over here -- I didn't want to take away from the message of that post or the additions from other POC.

In response to this

“Why is it racist to depict Ed as uncontrollably violent? Because he's not actually depicted that way in the show.”

Also: I do think it’s inappropriate to turn this question back on POC. I don’t think that POC are obligated to reconsider biases against a white character.

“Izzy is crew”

“Even if we say that he doesn't count, Ed still pushed Lucius off the ship.”

“Also, emotional abuse directed at the rest of the crew is still abuse”

Abuse is a pattern of behavior that’s meant to control people. Not all harm is abuse. When I say that Ed isn't abusive, I'm not saying that he didn't hurt people.

Criticize, but criticize with evidence and with awareness of the context of the criticized behavior.

I hope that reply was sufficient!

#ofmd #fandom discourse

52 notes · View notes