#<- no bias or subjectivity whatsoever

[girlactionfigure]

INTRODUCTION

Recently, two Australian nurses made headlines for claiming, on video, that they would kill -- and have killed -- Israeli patients. They’ve since been suspended and placed under investigation. Unfortunately, a coalition of Muslim groups from Sydney -- the nurses are Muslim -- have come out in support of the nurses. 

While medical professionals are meant to uphold ethical standards, the truth is that antisemitism in medicine is nothing new. For decades, both Jewish doctors and patients have been subjected to antisemitism from medical professionals. In the United States, for example, prospective Jewish medical professionals were subject to restrictive antisemitic med school quotas until the 1960s. 

A December 2024 study found that about 40% of Jewish American medical professionals have been subjected to antisemitism in their work or study environments; 26.4% of them have even felt threats to their safety. Only 1.9% of anti-bias trainings included any content whatsoever on antisemitism. 

Jewish patients and medical professionals in other countries, such as Australia and the United Kingdom, have reported similar discrimination.

NAZI EUGENICS AND RACIAL ANTISEMITISM

“Scientific racism” (also known as “biological racism”) is a pseudoscientific form of racism that claims there is scientific evidence to justify racial discrimination or the belief that some races are inferior or superior to others. Scientific racism reached its peak and “legitimacy” between 1870 and the end of World War II. The Nazis applied the theories of scientific racism to antisemitism, which in turn was one of the main factors that fueled the Holocaust.

The Nazis believed that it was your “Jewish blood” that determined your Jewishness. In the Nazi hierarchy of race, Jews were placed at the very bottom. The Nazis justified the Jewish genocide with the belief that they had to eradicate the defective “Jewish racial traits.”

It was doctors in Nazi Germany that legitimized the theories of scientific racism and the Nazi persecution of Jews. Doctors in Nazi Germany played a major role in creating and implementing Nazi policies, thus becoming complicit in Nazi crimes against humanity.

NAZI MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS

The Nazis as many as 30 sadistic different non-consensual medical experiments on Jewish concentration camp prisoners. Some of these experiments included cutting off the limbs of prisoners in an attempt to transplant them onto other prisoners, submerging people in subzero temperatures and then attempting to resuscitate them by raping them, serving prisoners seawater instead of drinkable water, defleshing living Jewish prisoners, exposing fresh wounds to mustard gas, and more. The Nazis particularly enjoyed experimenting on twins.

THE RED CROSS AND THE NAZIS

Following Hitler’s rise to power in 1933, the Red Cross chose to “conform” to the new regime, rather than oppose it. In fact, an SS general, Ernst-Robert Grawitz, became the head of the German Red Cross in 1933. Grawitz was closely involved in the plans to murder disabled people and in Nazi medical experimentation. The German Red Cross thus essentially became a Nazi medical unit, rather than a humanitarian organization. When pressed about it, the German Red Cross claimed that, by allying themselves with the Nazi regime, they’d have access to concentration camps, which would ensure that the inmates would be “treated better.” 

In the 1990s, the Red Cross finally officially admitted that they’d long had previous knowledge of the Nazis’ plans for the total extermination of Jews.

As early as 1933, the Red Cross received desperate pleas from prisoners in Dachau concentration camp, begging for intervention. By 1942, the Red Cross had full knowledge of the Germans’ atrocities. In early 1945, the president of the Red Cross wrote, “Concerning the Jewish problem in Germany, we are in close and continual contact with the German authorities.” The use of the phrase “Jewish problem,” of course, is indicative of the attitude of the Red Cross, considering the very same phrase was used in the Nazis’ “final solution to the Jewish problem” (in other words, the Nazi plan for the total genocide of the Jewish People).

A representative of the Red Cross who’d visited several of the camps falsely claimed that other than segregation, “no other discrimination was made against [Jewish POWs].”

By 1943, word of German atrocities toward the Jewish people had spread throughout the world. Following the deportation of ~500 Danish Jews to Theresienstadt, the Danish authorities pressured the International Red Cross to visit the camp/ghetto to check on its conditions.

The Nazis saw this visit as an opportunity to spread their propaganda. Nearly 8000 Jews were immediately sent to Auschwitz to counteract reports of overcrowding in Theresienstadt. In Auschwitz, these Jews were placed in a “special unit” in the event that the Red Cross chose to visit them.

The camp/ghetto was “cleaned up.” For example, buildings were painted and a football field was staged. “Cultural activities” were promoted to create the illusion that the Jewish prisoners were thriving. The Red Cross officials were taken on a tour of a pre-planned route and interviewed prisoners who’d been trained on what to say. Unsurprisingly, the Red Cross left Theresienstadt with a glowing report.

The Red Cross helped thousands of high-level Nazi officials escape justice after the Holocaust. They alone issued around 120,000 travel documents, many to Nazis. They also issued 25,000 new identity documents. It was due to the actions of the Red Cross that high-level war criminals such as Adolf Eichmann and Josef Mengele were able to escape.

DR. MARCEL PETIOT

After the Nazis occupied Paris in June of 1940, Parisian Jews grew desperate to escape. A series of smuggling routes out of France and into Switzerland and Spain began popping up. Dr. Petiot then chose to pose as a member of the French Resistance and claimed to operate a network to help Jews flee France.

Dr. Petiot's so-called "network" was pricy. Those wishing to escape had to pay him the equivalent of $10,000 today.

Petiot would then bring the Jewish refugees to a "safe house" at 21 Rue Le Sueur in Paris, where he would give them the necessary vaccinations for the journey. In reality, he was injecting them with cyanide. They'd die quickly, after which he'd dismember their bodies and dissolve them in quicklime or burn the remains in a furnace.

He would often approach Jews with no family and offer to help them, knowing that no one would come looking for them if they went missing.

It's estimated that he murdered 60-200 people, mostly Jews.

In 1944, his neighbors discovered an odd smell and alerted the police. By then, he had already fled his apartment. When the police showed up, they found body parts everywhere. Several months later, he was arrested at the Paris Metro Station.

After the war, Petiot claimed that the bodies belonged to Nazi collaborators, but the personal belongings of the victims were found in his home, debunking his story. Nevertheless, at his trial, he continued to portray himself as a hero fighting the Nazi occupation. The jury did not buy it, and he was sentenced to death by guillotine. He was executed in 1946.

THE DOCTORS PLOT

The Doctors’ Plot was an antisemitic campaign that took place under the Stalin regime in the Soviet Union. Between 1951-1953, Stalin alleged that Jewish doctors in the Soviet Union had conspired to assassinate Soviet leaders. Jewish doctors were dismissed from their jobs, arrested, and tortured. A massive propaganda campaign warning of the dangers of “Zionism” was enacted throughout the Soviet state. People with Jewish last names were condemned. 

The first allegation in the Doctors’ Plot was made against a Jewish doctor named Yakov Etinger in 1951. According to the MGB, the precursor to the KGB, Etinger had committed malpractice in treating two Communist party leaders. Etinger was imprisoned and died from torture and harsh conditions. 

In 1952, a letter written by a Russian cardiologist in 1948 was recovered. The letter attested that a Communist party leader had suffered a heart attack, but Kremlin doctors had misdiagnosed it and covered up their mistake. Though none of the Kremlin doctors involved in the cover up were Jewish, the Soviet regime added Jewish doctors to the list to portray the cover up as a “Zionist conspiracy.” 

Initially, there were 37 arrests. Under extreme pressure and torture, the Jewish doctors admitted to the alleged plot. But after Stalin’s unexpected death, the Soviet regime admitted no evidence for such a plot existed. The allegations against the Jewish doctors had been entirely fabricated.

THE HOSTAGES

Since the October 7 massacre, a long list of now-released Israeli hostages have testified that they were held captive in hospitals. Israel has also since found dead hostages on Gaza hospital grounds. Former hostage Sharon Aloni Cunio, for example, has said that the nurses and doctors were aware that they were being held captive there; in fact, she said, the nurses “went along with it.” Fawzia Amin Saydo, a Yazidi woman who was captured by ISIS in Iraq at age 11 and sold as a sex slave to a Hamas member in Gaza, has since also testified that Hamas uses hospitals as military bases. As early as 2006, PBS even aired a documentary showing Hamas operating out of Al-Shifa Hospital.

Mia Shem, a former Israeli hostage, was operated on by a veterinarian while in the Gaza Strip. She has since needed extensive surgeries to regain function of her arm.

CCTV footage from Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza shows Hamas dragging hostages through the halls, in plain view of doctors, nurses, and patients.

For a full bibliography of my sources, please head over to my Instagram and  Patreon. 

rootsmetals

tbh at this point I could make a post about antisemitism in just about every industry…

[funniestjokesinfilmtournament]

WELCOME TO THE FUNNIEST JOKES IN FILM TOURNAMENT!

Decided to make a tournament poll blog because everyone seems to be doing it uh I hope I'm doing this right

Basically what it says on the tin, let us, the great minds of Tumblr, decide once and for all the objectively greatest joke ever put into the art form of cinema. I am sure our decision will be universally agreed upon with no controversy whatsoever.

I am your host, S! (He/Him, don't mind They/Them either though) I will be your referee throughout this tournament as we encounter twists and turns, upsets, and close finishes galore!

(I hope at least, that's good for engagement)

THE RULES

Submit a film joke in the ask box

Include the films name, year of release, and a thorough explanation of the joke itself and why it is hysterical. A quip, some physical comedy, a running gag, anything goes as long as it's funny! If said joke involves significant spoilers it should be prefaced with a warning. Also while films in any language can be submitted do please write the submission itself in English. Also also please attach images or gifs if possible relating to the joke, it will save me a lot of time later. While I will be somewhat lenient, I reserve the right to delete any submission that does not meet the above requirements.

Tell your friends if they'd be interested so we can get a good number of votes!

Vote for each one you think is the funniest!

BANNED FILMS

Anything released after December 31st, 2019: to avoid recency bias

All the Potterverse films: because JK Rowling is a scumbag and trans rights

Films that have dated views on certain subjects like Casablanca are allowed but genuinely malicious films like Birth of A Nation are not; I will mostly exercise my own discretion here but may put some cases up to a poll

Please don't be the reason I add any more here

I'll start when I feel I have enough submissions

One more thing: be nice. Hyperbole can be funny but actually hateful comments will not be tolerated.

Have Fun!

[greenbergsays]

Idk how to explain it like coherently but one of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of Tommy dating buck is that he just seems.. Mean? I'm watching the season 8 Halloween episode and especially when it comes to bucks little quirks and everything, he just seems so dismissive. Even Eddie feels a little extra rude in this ep but in general when it comes to bucks whole "curses are real and I'm being haunted" thing, he's more.. Endeared? Is that the word? Like Eddie doesn't really believe in it all, but when buck gets wound up, he seems to have a nice balance of finding buck kinda cute and keeping him from spinning out too bad over it, but Tommy just seems cruel about it, like he thinks buck is stupid? Idk am I reading into this too much? I'm a lil out of it tbf fjdlxsl

It's funny, because I just saw a tweet yesterday talking about this scene and in it, OP said, "Eddie is laughing at the idea of a curse, Tommy is laughing at Buck," and I've been mulling it over ever since.

On the surface, you might say, There's literally no evidence for that interpretation, you just think that because you hate the guy, and you would be correct on both accounts.

I don't like Tommy as a person because least of all, Tommy is canonically unkind, to say nothing of his worse qualities and in the scene itself, there is no evidence whatsoever for that interpretation, so it would be easy to dismiss it as character bias.

But I think to a large extent, OP was on the right track, and I think the evidence for it comes from each character's prior interactions with Buck.

Because historically, Eddie has always been dismissive of the idea that jinxes or curses are real, no matter who it is. He's teased the whole team about it in at least two different episodes based around those subjects.

But that teasing, however pointed, has always come from a place of camaraderie, love, and respect. These are His People. They've been through so much shit together, so he's allowed to make fun of them when they're being silly, just like they make fun of him.

And yeah, you're right in that Eddie often finds himself soft-domming Buck calming Buck down when he gets wound up. He knows how to talk to Buck in a way that eases the spiral.

So it's easy to look at that scene and explain Eddie's behavior away as, "Buck's spiraling out hard and Eddie is being extra nonchalant so that it can calm him down."

Because Buck actually does take a lot of his cues from Eddie, whether he realizes it or not.

Tommy's behavior feels different because he's a character with limited screen time, but with that limited screen time, we've been shown that he is always dismissive or belittling of other people's feelings.

Chimney's feelings in his Begins episode, Hen's feelings in her Begins episode, and every single interaction he has with Buck.

During the interaction with Eddie and Marisol, Tommy makes a very pointed comment about a closet, all but trying to out Buck right there in the middle of the restaurant.

Then, without so much as a conversation about what happened, he's tells Buck, "You're not ready," and leaves him behind. He decides Buck's feelings for him.

When Bobby is hurt, Buck tries to open up and be vulnerable with him, and Tommy's only response is the innuendo-ladened, "I hope you have Daddy issues."

Et cetera, et cetera.

Tommy has been crafted to be a character that cares primarily about his own wants, needs, and feelings with little to no regard about those things when it comes to other people.

The only time we see him emotionally vulnerable is when he's breaking up with Buck and we've never once seen someone be emotionally vulnerable with him where that vulnerability was met with understanding and kindness. He's downright cruel when it's Chimney and Hen and he's dismissive when it's Buck.

He takes himself too seriously and doesn't entertain or join in with the sillier antics of the 118 crew because he doesn't want to be seen as childish. There's a lot of insecurity in Tommy, even at his big age, and it shows in his treatment of others.

It genuinely makes me wonder why a man like Tommy would even date a man like Buck, because Buck is a wonderful guy, but he is also a silly little goose. He has big emotions and many spirals and a lot of anxiety that doesn't really get talked about, but most of all, he's still a big kid at heart. He still finds joy in the sillier things in life, like dressing up for a bachelor party, and he wants a partner that finds joy in it, too.

Tommy is not that man. He's never been that man, he won't ever be that man, and he very obviously finds those traits undesirable in other people. Their incompatibility should've been apparent early on to him in particular.

So, yeah, when you examine each of their characters, take their two histories with Buck into account, and then look at that scene in the hospital, it's a lot easier to swallow Eddie's reaction than it is to swallow Tommy's.

We know even before that scene that Eddie loves Buck. He's shown it throughout their entire friendship. He's shown up for Buck emotionally, he's talked Buck off more than one ledge, he meets Buck where he's at, silly costumes and all. He and Buck have been emotionally vulnerable with each other more than once.

In many ways, you could say Eddie has earned the right to laugh.

Tommy hasn't done any of those things, though, and he's shown more than once that he doesn't really care about Buck's comfort or his feelings.

That's why his laughter feels mean.

[extra-venomous-tentacula]

Oh, hey, quick question for the classroom. Might be silly.

So, Dumbledore made Lupin a Prefect to keep the other Marauders in check.

Which means he was very well aware of the bullying issue (how could he not be, really?).

He has also been shown to pick/not pick Prefects based on more than mere academic achievement and rule-abiding on their part, but also for more subjective reasons (such as Ron becoming a prefect as a confidence boost for the kid with five older, successful siblings, Lupin as a buffer for his friends, etc).

Now, my question is: why didn't he make Snape a Prefect, too?

It would be the logical, practical course to follow. If one is actually intentioned to put an end to the issue at hand, that is.

It would be a teachable moment for Snape, too, if you will. Being given just a little of power and confidence could've made all the difference to a kid who had no control of his circumstances whatsoever.

(And I don't want to hear "yeah but he would've taken points off unfairly, based on bias"... Draco was a Prefect, too, and did exactly that. Ron ignored the twin's antics. Points don't matter in the grand scheme of things).

Just my two cents, could honestly be wrong.

[manuellarts]

thank you for fueling my artist duo obsession bias, much appreciated.

in terms of romantic partners, what kind of person would compliment them? i personally had the thought that someone more mature and non-judgmental would fit deidara (seeing as he had a meltdown over someone not even bothering to address his art with any emotion and giving off a judgmental vibe), and someone more patient and open/honest in communication would fit sasori, but everyone has their headcanons for a reason, lol.

in terms of something like friends, what kind of person do you think could be considered more than an acquaintance to them? sasori seems like the type to not really have the space for that, and deidara is sociable but he doesn't seem to talk much about himself outside of art (a bit cautious and guarded, as one would expect of a ninja), so it seems he doesn't trust all that easily either.

Of course ! And thank you for giving me the opportunity to yap about them ahhaha 😭

I absolutely agree with you ! Deidara would need someone more mature, calm, level-headed, and that definitely doesn't blow up as fast as he does. Otherwise, not only are they in for catastrophes, but I don't see deidara even feeling anything deep towards someone who might be similar to him in terms of personality and behavior. Dei is definitely very sensitive and his sense of self distorted, heavily relying on his artist self to define who he is. A romantic partner would need to be someone mature and steady enough to also help dei find out who he really is beneath all of this, allow him to feel safe enough to show his vulnerabilities.

As for sasori, I also agree in that regard. He would definitely need someone who is clear with their communication. Not necessarily calm and mature as Sasori, but calm enough so he doesn't lose patience. Seeing that Sasori heavily suffered from Chiyo's lies, and tested her for the truth several times but never got it, he wouldn't withstand a single lie. A romantic partner would need to be truthful and communicate at all times, even if he wouldn't respect this himself. It would probably take some time for him to be as open. Like I said before, this is all opening vulnerabilities that he might not be willing to risk.

As for friends, I agree. I don't think Sasori even feels the need to have friends whatsoever. I'd describe him as a hermit, just doing his own thing and not even feeling the need to socialize. If anything, it would drain him.

Meanwhile, I see Deidara having lots of acquaintances, but the main condition for someone to be seen as a friend, is for his art to be accepted and understood. Once that is done, BOOM. Friend acquired. I think he'd need people to mirror his energy. Vibe on the same frequency as him. But just as you said, most of the time it'd be very surface level. I don't see him being able to trust much, if at all. I see his heart as very fragile, as his clay statues. Easy to break, prone to explode at any moment. His heart is well guarded and he avoids any topic that may reveal too much about him. He avoids speaking about himself and skillfully diverts the attention to someone else if the subject seems too invasive. He gives the impression that people know a lot about him, and that he only talks about himself, while in reality, no one really knows much about him. A very paradoxical thing, because he'd constantly be around people, but never speak anything too substantial about himself. Nothing that could reveal a deeper side to him.

[thegreatyin]

Elaborate on your beef with Typhon

it is Extremely Petty and Extremely Personal

tldr, it's a combination of a bunch of factors:

i do not enjoy what ive seen of her kit and think it's actively boring. we do not need a 27th bosskiller. we peaked with ebenholz. we can be more creative than that. why does she need to deal so much damage and track things across the map. who let her do that

i do not enjoy her design, like, from a personal standpoint. this is just extremely messy and cluttered and bad and does not feel at all like an arknights character. this feels like if you described how ak characters dressed to a blind man and told him to go off designing one. why are her thighs out. why does she have a giant incomprehensible bow. why do her horns look like headbands instead of actual horns which exist in this world completely normally and without issue. she's just a visual mess and i cannot tell apart any part of her aside from blurring together in my mind as visual garbage. she feels like she's trying too hard to appeal to a crowd i am very much neither a part of nor member of

especially extremely pettily: i do not like lm7's arknights stuff in general. they're clearly very talented and this isn't meant to be a jab at them as a person but i really don't think they make any of their operators work. they all have the exact same moe blushing squinted face and it's both extremely jarring and extremely hard to take seriously. why is ceobe giving me bedroom eyes when she's basically an escaped looney toons character. i, personally, Do Not Enjoy It and it's an entirely subjective opinion that stops me from liking typhon even more than i already kinda didn't

arguably equally as petty, i don't like that she's basically the star of is4 in the same vein as phantom and mizuki are for their own modes? there's tons of already existing characters you could make a sami arc around. mallagan is literally right there. why do we have to get a new purple girl just for this when there's tons of operators with stories just waiting to be expanded on. im expecting some kind of explanation for this in her event when it hits global but for now it's just really bothersome to me

finally, most petty of all: her skin fucking sucks im sorry

this is mid as hell. worse than mid. this just sucks. this is the exact same visual noise i feel when i look at her base art but in full force. it's bad and very samey palette-wise when you compare it to her og form and i don't like it and i already don't like typhon so that bias certainly doesn't help. i don't like a perfectly good opportunity for mallagan to get some much-needed love with an l2d upset by some big breasted purple girl who released like yesterday comparative to is4 going live

TLDR; i think typhon is badly designed and boring and i do not like her or her weirdly emphasized tits and moe eyes. that's not to say either are strictly bad, they just do not appeal to me whatsoever and i will be skipping her banner unless her event story COMPLETELY wows me with her lore

[araneitela]

While I've had a four (five?) year old clung to my leg all afternoon, my brain had been stuck on three things tied to Kafka, of which I'll share two over here.

Her name. The more I think about and hear Kafka's name pronounced, the more I fall utterly and madly in love with it. I'm absolutely enamored with how Daman (especially, ship-bias aside) pronounces it, but also Cheryl herself, and Melissa (Silver Wolf), along with the emphasis that Adin (Sam) puts to it. There's something about it that commands such attention, but it also somehow possesses something so inherently feminine, even if the name has no roots as a name for a woman whatsoever. It's still almost exclusively used as a surname in eastern Europe, and in the excessively rare context that it's used as a first name, it's for a man. And yet, I can't shake the feminine rarity of it. It drives me crazy, actually.

Feral, I don't know how to title this. The absolute intense difference, and contrast between a woman that reaches up and wraps her arms around a man's neck when she's kissed. And the inherent intimacy of the kind of woman who never does so at all, and instead, will grasp at the front of a shirt, or of the lapel of a jacket. And it's not to pull down, or to keep him down by force, but as an additional way to connect, for him to feel the intensity of her reaction. It's about being enveloped, it's about being crowded in, and entirely and thoroughly subjecting yourself to it, allowing it to drown and overwhelm you in its entirety.

[mesaprotector]

Under the cut: most overrrated and underrated anime of each year since 2017 for me (subjective!), with explanations. You can send me hate but be nice about it.

I'm only including stuff I've watched at least a cour (12 episodes) of. And also, some stuff like Dororo, even if I didn't personally enjoy it, I can see why people would, so it isn't on this list.

Starting with overrated.

2017: Dragon Maid

I guess the appeal of this is gay undertones with adult characters in an era when that was still pretty uncommon. And I do like some parts of it, including the ending. But I just cannot look past the weirdness of the Kanna/Riko ship and especially whatever is going on with Lucoa/Shouta, and the show overuses many of its worse gags. Even as someone who has developed a decent tolerance for "weird anime fanservice" this went too far for me.

2018: Violet Evergarden

This is a more mild case. It's a very pretty anime I don't dislike, but the story is kind of all over the place and the lasting acclaim it's gotten surprises me. There's just one episode that's top-tier (you know which one); besides that, the show doesn't know what direction it wants to take or what message it wants to have, and Violet herself is nowhere near entertaining enough to make it work.

2019: Shield Hero

This take is so lukewarm it's like someone forgot they put it in the microwave. But yeah—it starts off decent for exactly four episodes then does nothing whatsoever of interest for the rest of its runtime. I feel vaguely sad every time I hear about it getting a new season.

2020: Jujutsu Kaisen

It's a shounen, so I don't really expect more than well-animated fights out of it, and it has occasional good writing. The characters are not as interesting as I wish they were, something made clearer by my friend making me watch part of Naruto soon after the first season aired.

2021: Komi-san

This is not how social anxiety works. It does not just render you a mute who is somehow the most popular girl in your class regardless. I mean, sure, if you're watching this just to laugh it's kind of funny, but nobody should pretend this has any social message.

2022: Bocchi the Rock

Oh boy. I liked this, actually—it's a slightly above average CGDCT (Cute Girls Doing Cute Things) show with one-dimensional characters, a predictable plot to the extent that there is one, and only a single saving grace—highly imaginative animation for approximately 2 minutes out of every episode. I finished it, re-emerged into the world of online anime discussion, and found that people were calling this an all-time classic. I think no other show's acclaim has confused me as much as what happened with Bocchi; at one point Anilist had it at #4 all time, which is absurd even after considering the recency bias. There are similar shows that do far more interesting things with their casts— A Place Further than the Universe, The Demon Girl Next Door, K-On. I guess since I don't relate to Bocchi I just don't get it. I'll admit, at least, that she's written much more realistically than Komi is.

2023: Heavenly Delusion

This show started out extremely well, but but just like Dragon Maid above, it's a rare case where the fanservice is so jarring it seriously bothered me. The show has one episode in a completely different animation style for no real reason, just because they pulled in a guest director. The ending is miserable to watch and unlike plenty of tragic shows there doesn't seem to be a point to it, or any level of narrative coherence. I would refuse money to watch a second season of this.

2024: Apothecary Diaries

This is another mild case, similar to Violet Evergarden—it's quite good, I just don't think it's as smart as people believe it is—and Maomao's character feels a bit too pander-y even with how good Aoi Yuuki's voice acting is.

———

Now underrated.

2017: Shoukoku no Altair

I guess this entire post is "overrated: shows with great animation" vs. "underrated: shows with poor animation". But I feel a shounen with an interesting world (based on historic Turkey), actually smart writing of military tactics, and great character moments shouldn't suddenly go ignored just because it ran out of animation budget near the end.

2018: Akanesasu Shoujo

I post endlessly about this show. It's a very dumb and yet very wise show with the most emotionally beautiful final episode in the history of the medium. Cowboys. Baked fish cakes. Amazon Prime. Arranged marriage. Watch it please I'm begging you.

2019: Granbelm

As far as I can tell the only reason people dislike this 2D (!) mecha show is the cutesy designs for the mechas. It's a show that handwaves a lot of its plot elements, so it wouldn't appeal to someone who wants logical analysis of their stories, but it's emotionally smart without being cliché, and the sound design is fantastic. I scarcely notice sound design—only this and Chihayafuru do it so well to make a real difference for me.

2020: Id:Invaded

This show is reasonably well-liked and not that obscure, but it's still better than its reputation. If I had any doubts before that I Kenjirou Tsuda was actually a fantastic voice actor instead of just having a great voice, they were gone after watching this.

2021: Pretty Boy Detective Club

Slow-paced dialogue-driven shows almost always feel underappreciated by the anime community, with Monogatari the lone exception. This is by the same author as Monogatari, visually beautiful, and every bit as well-written—and yet MAL has it at a 7.08. My best guess as to why is that the primarily straight male Monogatari fandom was annoyed by the mild fanservice of the boys in this show (it's in the name, isn't it?), and nobody else bothered to watch it. It's much less ambitious than Monogatari is and much easier to get into.

2022: Requiem of the Rose King

If "an anime reimagining of Shakespeare's Richard III with dysphoria as a major theme" is a premise that appeals to you, and you can tolerate some animation budget struggles, watch this; if it doesn't, don't.

2023: Revenger

Maybe people rated this poorly because they saw "Gen Urobuchi" in the title and expected it to be as good as Psycho-Pass and Madoka (it isn't). It's still a really good series about assassins and crime syndicates in a medium-sized Japanese town, with uh—broken-down churches? Hot guys? Trade negotiations? The animation isn't even at fault here so I have no idea why it didn't take off more.

2024: Sakuna of Rice and Ruin

There are a lot of shows this year I feel were underappreciated, but this is one of the easiest to recommend—it's simple and pretty, with good character development and a really good setting, and plenty of rice farming. It is a touch kid-oriented, maybe, which shows in the lack of complexity of its character conflicts, but I don't fault that.

[rebuke-me]

broadway bmc critiques

this is a list of all my critiques of broadway bmc, in no particular order. this is not a post meant to hate those who are fans of Broadway bmc, because preference is subjective. I did my best to keep personal bias out of it, but some aspects are inextricable. please keep discussions civil. if you think critique will make you upset, I encourage you to skip this post.

- the writing is significantly watered down for the audience. while the original show was not a masterpiece of writing by any means, it only occasionally talks down to the audience. part of my interest in the original show was the open-ended characters. however, in the Broadway version, subtext is made into text, and that really hurts the show. most of the characters in tr had presumed depth, whereas bw wrote sync up: a song telling everyone exactly what was wrong with every character, rather than having the viewers observe it for themselves through dialogue and actions. tr already laid that foundation, it already had the character development. fans had already been analyzing the characters for years, and everyone pretty much got what they meant. bw felt, to me, like it was holding my hand through it and explaining to me every aspect of the characters.

- the writing of the new songs especially is. incredibly contrived. I've listened to the songs as I can bear (I do not like some of the voices in the songs, so I will admit to not listening to all of the songs, but I did make an attempt.) and the writing is significantly worse. while the tr songs weren't masterpieces, by any means, they were at least catchy and fun. the appeal of the bmc music is the earworm of it all, the way that it's fun and memorable. the bw versions new songs have not stuck in my head whatsoever, unlike the previous songs. loser geek whatever is another case of telling the audience rather than showing it: fans of tr already knew Jeremy was upset about being an outcast. we understood that. his decision at the end of upgrade was understandable to audiences, although usually not agreed with. an entire song with the writers literally physically telling the audience how he is feeling, in simple rhyme and a melody that doesn't stick out, wasn't necessary. a new song was intriguing, and could have fleshed out plot holes of the original show, but instead just tried shoving another square peg into a hole we had already been made aware of.

- fan pandering. this is an aspect of every media that has a large internet fan base, especially in the past ten years. while some aspects of the show may have been in the plans all along, the Broadway version feels like they were too engrossed in the fan culture. im a big proponent for creators being divorced from their fans, and the Broadway version is why. the addition of more moments implying a romantic connection between rich and michael at the end, with no discussion of character development, felt shoehorned in for the fans. Michael as a whole shifted closer to the fanon interpretation of him, rather than remaining the character from the original show, becoming more soft spoken and awkward.

- failure to add in diversity in a respectful way. (to preface this, I am a white person. if I say anything out of line in this section, I am more than willing to admit that, and would love to hear from the perspective of poc bmc fans, especially black fans.) a main critique of tr bmc in my opinion is the way it handled a lot of heavy topics, including diversity and the like. bw bmc made strides towards giving roles to non-white actors, which is always a good thing. however, the characters chosen for the diversity were made more stereotypical for being made into poc. jenna rolan became more of a stereotype of a talkative, phone obsessed black woman. Jenna is the less egregious example of this, as she has more depth. however, jake being black makes his character traits of being the child of money launderers, being violent towards others, being unhoused and physically harmed in the fire, not knowing how to "speak properly" at times and being a "player" seem more racially motivated. of course, none of these aspects of a character are bad, per se, but all combined into a character that is now black feels stereotypical.

- failure to fix some issues with tr. I am always willing to critique my own interests. while I have a preference towards tr, and a fixation on it, I will admit it has issues. notably, these include telling rather than showing (an issue that only got worse in bw), the treatment of female characters, and a variety of other issues. female characters in bw still have the same issues, as a whole. brooke is still the stereotypical blonde ditz. she does get a bit of development, but an opportunity for her to stand up for herself could have been needed in bw. christine is still little more than the love interest, and still ends up with the main character at the end, despite being meant to be a feminist, complete with patch on her jacket. the female characters rarely talk to each other about anything other than a man, or gossip, usually about men. none of them form solid friendships with no romantic ties with almost any of the male characters, either. the show costumes the characters in apparel that preaches feminism and writes a message about equality and being yourself, yet bars most character development from the female characters. this could have been rectified in bw, considering an entire song was added and scenes were rewritten, but was not.

I have other issues with the show, but those are more personal critiques with preferences, rather than in depth analysis of why I think the show is not as beloved by the fan base as a whole. those aren't going to be added here, because a lot of them don't lend any credence to my arguments, they're just personal opinions on character choices and actors.

if anything I've said in this post is incorrect, please let me know. I admit I'm not very well versed in the Broadway show, since I very much dislike it, so if any details are incorrect, I'd love to hear your thoughts.

also like. don't be a dick in the replies and tags please, that'd be nice. civil conversation and debate is okay, but attacking people for their interests is not.

[cupidzz-illness]

Hello ! Im vale, or tommy, i dont mind whatever you call me, but this is irrelevant right now. I assume that some of the users of this app would know the situation between wilbur and shelby. Before i say anything i’d just like to say, your opinion is yours and im in no place whatsoever to judge, but my opinion is based off of facts and proof instead of personal bias.

TW: Domestic abuse, mention of the word Sexual abuse and child abuse, if your uncomfortable with these subjects, please scroll !! (Im also rather new to tumblr, so idk if dms are possible here !)

[noneedtofearorhope]

Do u got any tips on learning like, legit history? I feel like I know very little about real history vs history taught to me in school. Is it worth trying to learn communist history in any big capacity?

i think most of the history we learn thru school is 'legit'. most of the bias i think comes thru what gets picked and what doesn't. idk, it's been a very long time since i was in school, so maybe it's worse now. but i feel like there are some subjects that touch on nationalist ideas and it should be obvious to take what they say with a grain of salt, to question if it's the whole story. or i guess if you come across any narratives that have a 'happily ever after' sorta vibe, uh, maybe there is some bullshit. but yeah i think even when they are feeding you nationalist bullshit it's generally still got some factual basis going on, they're just trying to twist it to make it look certain ways.

i think it's worth learning history in whatever capacity you can. but some people just aren't into it and that's fine. so don't feel you have to to qualify as a 'real communist' or w/e. i do think there can be too much focus on a sort of Team Red/Team Black sorta interest in history that happens a bit too frequently in communist circles.

as for like, how to approach it, wiki dives are a good place to start. the anarchist library has sections for various periods of history. im sure libcom has plenty of texts involving history. crimethinc does a bit of history once in a while. probably is gonna help to know a second language if you wanna get really deep in the weeds, as a lot of stuff related to the beautiful idea has happened outside the anglosphere, and no translations exist for a lot of works. can help set off a positive feedback loop, where your interest in history helps fuel your desire to learn the new language, and learning the new language helps you discover new parts of history that reignite the spark.

idk, with any luck this helps you whatsoever. good luck

[mysticallion]

A large problem with the post-modern rejection of all things spiritual is that it tosses the baby out with the bath water. While Science (meaning the sort of collective understanding derived from the various scientific disciplines) has properly schooled the more primitive, superstitious and irrational aspects common to most ancestral religions out of the post-modern intellectual understanding of the nature of reality, in the process it has, unfortunately, also rejected the deeper psychological functions of mythology and symbolic significance, and the complimentary bodies of wisdom and knowledge derived from the internal approaches to the exploration of reality, such as the various meditation traditions.

While the clarity of Science and its accompanying technological advances have clearly added so much to our daily life, from a more general and philosophical perspective it has also unfortunately evolved into scientism—or the collective perspective and insistence that science is the only valid way of exploring, understanding, and therefore of being in relation to, reality. The point being stressed here is that this scientism is a philosophy, a belief system, a conceptual construct added on top of the basic insights and observations of science, and that this doctrine has also led to a sort of nihilistic aridity and existential dread among its many proselytizers and adherents.

This is to say, with scientism, our modern perspective has become increasingly one of objective dominance and psychological sterility, so suspicious of “subjective bias” that it essentially rejects most if not all of the interior aspects of direct, individualized (but collectively similar) experience. In so doing, complex systems of understanding, relationships and various forms of subliminal communication such as symbols and myths, so essential to actually living a dynamic and creative and fulfilling existence, have been systematically deconstructed into their basic forms and functions and histories. Meaning and purpose have thus been equated with, and therefore reduced to, mere opinion. Perhaps worst of all, this stark and lopsided perspective of philosophical and psychological objectification, this lack of giving proper value to the interior world, to subjective experience and to intuitive understanding, has resulted in widespread narcism, alienation, tribalism, and a general lack of empathy. Though manifested in many different forms, it nonetheless points to a sort of collective fear response to the emptiness and indifference that lies behind such a philosophical perspective.

For humanity to continue to evolve, not just technologically but also morally and humanistic, scientism—not science!—must be rejected as the unreasonably biased and lopsided approach it is. The interior world must once again take equal footing with the exterior in the sense of its importance. This does not mean we need to return to more primitive forms of thinking; rather, it must be understood that all experience, be it objective or subjective, individual or collective, “spiritual” or scientific—all of it is mind-made and (mostly) conceptually constructed, and therefore to subordinate or eliminate the human, interior, subjective side of investigation and direct experience makes no sense whatsoever. Understanding should not be a partial. It is all Reality.

[putrefacion]

NOTE:ㅤㅤThe following outline certain points on Lute’s experience within the simulation in her default lore [ THE THIRD BRIDE ] — as always, this is subject to change as new headcanons emerge or threads develop, but this remains the foundation for my blog's portrayal,

• The simulated Eden was intentionally engineered to exceed the original; optimized for visual vibrancy, environmental harmony & aesthetic perfection. This design choice was to maximize comfort & minimize the likelihood of behavioral deviation or sin,

• Adam’s memories were utilized as a foundational base to structure Eden’s geography, event sequencing & emotional atmosphere. While Lute’s responses were autonomously generated, the environmental stimuli she engaged with were largely derived from his recollections; as a result, her behavioral patterns developed within the framework were generously shaped by his preferences, projections & unresolved trauma,

• Lute is not a genetic or cognitive replica of the original Eve; she does not carry her genetic material, memories, nor did she inherit her soul. The simulation was its own Genesis framework; while aesthetically parallel in certain aspects, the overall structure & outcomes of her scenario were fundamentally distinct,

• The timeline spanned 930 years; whether perceived as real or subjectively compressed, Lute experienced the full duration — mirroring the exact lifespan of the real Adam in Genesis,

• A persistent sense of divine observation was present throughout the simulation; naturally, she assumed it was God which brought her comfort. Only later did she learn it was the Seraphim watching; this discovery significantly impacted her perception of authority figures & contributes to her current interactions with Sera & Emily,

• Her Adam was a clone of the original in terms of physical appearance, with few cosmetic alterations; most notably was his blonde hair, which served as an inversion of the real Adam/Lilith & was implemented by the Seraphim for visual contrast. Though, Lute insists there were additional differences [ eye color & behavioral warmth ] However, these are cognitive distortions — memory projections shaped by psychological bias, & functioning as a protective mechanism to prevent emotional distress [ & a possible psychotic episode ]

• Lute was made to believe she was the first & only woman. Lilith was absent from the simulation & this 'version' of Genesis; Lute was not provided with any data or contextual awareness of her existence whatsoever until well after the simulation. However, intermittent episodes of unprovoked dread were noticed & recorded; a persistent, untraceable sensation suggestive of an unseen presence, though no identifiable source was present

• Her children resembled the real ones only faintly; their names & personalities were close enough, but the stories diverged. For example, Cain & Abel coexisted well enough into adulthood, & their conflict stemmed from growing resentment tied to territory & inheritance; Abel’s murder was premeditated rather than a sudden act of jealousy

• During Exterminations in Hell, she sometimes experiences déjà vu-like glitches — sensory echoes from the simulation; sights, smells, or phrases surface that don’t belong to her current reality, but were foundational in the Eden she was built to believe in. These may cause her to paralyze for a few moments, though she’s learned how to manage herself by this point,

SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE SIMULATION WERE PHRASES; BEHAVIORAL CHECKPOINTS USED TO MONITOR & EVALUATE HER COGNITIVE & EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT

• “Bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh,”ㅤ/ㅤtriggered emotional bonding protocol — used early in the simulation during the Adam-introduction phase,

• “Where are you?”ㅤ/ㅤafter her ‘sin’ & being cast out of the garden, this phrase triggered guilt calibration [ echoing Genesis 3:9 ]

• “The serpent is crafty,”ㅤ/ㅤthis triggered fear or environmental distortion; designed to manipulate her surroundings into subtle temptation or unease,

• “You will surely not die,”ㅤ/ㅤa corrupted line used during the moment of temptation, designed to test her interpretive reasoning & obedience under stress,

• “Your longing will be for your husband,”ㅤ/ㅤsubliminal repetition during dream cycles; not spoken aloud but encoded during rest phases to reinforce the dependence she was designed with. This ultimately backfired, however; once removed from the simulation, Lute remained overly dependent — a trait that still lingers. Now with Adam gone, that dependence has nowhere to anchor & she will begin to fracture,

[jadesabbat]

Hey you: not knowing that thing just means you never learned/memorized it; it's not in any way whatsoever a marker for your intelligence. Same for if you forgot it. Memory retention in a vacuum just isn't a useful metric for brain function (yes degradation can be a useful sign that something is wrong, but that ain't the subject here)

Y'know what in fact, there are *no* brain functions that taken on their own act as markers for your intelligence. None. Maybe if we took a gestalt of dozens and dozens of them we could get some kinda conclusion, but in a world so happy to jump right to biased and outright bigoted models, allowing yourself and others to have poor/inhibited mental functions without conclusions or judgement is an excellent step to combating that same bias in yourself

[universeofchirai]

a hunt for hunger

so I've been watching haikyu and also been more concentrated on studying cause I've been liking it rn. I mean I'm just reading naive set theory rn and it's the one thing that makes me very infuriated and also very satisfied and happy consequently, and nothing quite beats the satisfaction of being able to conquer the concepts of a difficult chapter for example. Yesterday, even tho I couldn't really meet my initial expectations, I fought for 3.5 hours in one stretch and completed a section clearly, and damn it felt so good. To be able to just complete without being fazed by any distractions whatsoever, it's really fucking cool.

so I've been wanting to assess what I really crave for rn.

I've always thought that it's fine if you lose in smth if you try your best, all that matters is trying your best - put it another way, I've always taken the low risk low reward route for a more stable way up till here at the position I am rn. But not just haikyu but recently, I've been thinking of high risk high reward scenarios.

Let me explain. When you're aiming for something yourself, and you compete with yourself, and add to that the mindset of "it's all fine as long as you give it your best; losing is an option" - that's low risk, and low reward, and by this I mean you can probably achieve smth if you try well and hard enough, but it's still nothing in front of the kind of satisfaction, reward, relief, pride and so on that you'd get had you competed with someone else that is much better than you, maybe seeming even unreachable; if you believe that there is no option to lose, "YOU. MUST. WIN.", there's no going back or looking back whatsoever; this puts you in a more focused mindset where you give more than your best, you do beyond your 100%, stretch the limits, but this comes with a high risk - when you're so hellbent on something, the consequence of losing, while it's smth you won't ever think of according to the mindset, practically the consequence can be very shuddering, depressing, to extents that it could break people.

HOWEVER, that IMMENSE INTENSE PRIDE, JOY, SATISFACTION, POWER that you feel if you PULL THIS OFF, now THAT is absolutely UNPARALLELED.

ok I am actually kinda really excited for this. I've never done this before but this seems very fucking exciting.

let's try to stay rational tho - I have a bias for the kind of feelings to expect rn but it's not so simple, as in I'm having haikyu at the back of my mind, and w the same approach, the kinds of feelings would differ from success in either due to the sharp contrast among the situations themselves. In sports, these feelings are very immediate, and very exaggerated even sometimes. But in my field, academia, it isn't exactly that way. And there's also the bigger picture. What I really want to do. Well that shouldn't come in the way but it's smth I should keep in mind.

But the truth remains, I do have a hunger for praise, recognition, respect. I do have a hunger for knowing a lot about my subject, and a hunger of being able to perform very well. A hunger for winning in competition that I'd suppressed really deep within myself in fear of it being self-destructive (it very well can be).

Now here's the thing, I had been grasping for a platform up until I got into my college, now I have a very good platform to stand on and also to relish about. I've proven that I can stably make it here and be alright here. I've grown to a point that I can't be broken down easily at all, heck it'd take a real lot to break me down, if ever. I've grown rather strong in my journey here. And yes that's a bold claim I am willing to make, I have that trust in myself.

So now is really a good time to try out something new, try something out of my character even (at least seemingly), try out something kinda insane for me. I think it's a good time indeed to really put myself in the competition. I'm good enough to thrive on the losses so I'll destroy the way back, there is no looking back, I WANT to feel that JOY, SATISFACTION, PRIDE, RELIEF, TENSION, PRESSURE. I am UP FOR THE CHALLENGE goddamnit. Count me in.

I've always imagined my focus to be a circle of sorts and a combination of a cool blue and white - representing peace. I imagine my focus before any tense situations to help myself remain calm but concentrated and focused. Chirai. To be specific. I named it chirai, it's not just my focus imagination, it goes much deeper, but it stands for everything that is me. Anyway, it's time to add a second element to Chirai. An element of red and orange. A bright to blood red adrenaline representing and a radioactive hyperactive terror inducing alarming emergency yellow-orange to the combination. A terrifying state that I love to be in actually, I have a knack for being extremely at edge, I like that, it drives me and sometimes it's been my driving force for situations that require a lot of willpower and fearlessness. I close my eyes and imagine blood red filling my eyes, the yellow-orange frantically shaking to indicate an emergency state; a state of terror, not for me, but for others. An adrenaline filled recklessness of forgetting everything and driving on your primal desires. A terrifying energy of a bloodthirsty monster of sorts. Now that's the kinda focus I'd want to imagine for competition.

Now chirai peace is still going to be there cause recklessness yields naught, but I'm really excited about trying this new combination. I've seriously never tried this. insane no? maybe I was worried if I should put myself through it, valid. I want to now tho. ok. we'll figure out the other stuff as we go on the way.

And oh boy I'm gonna do it. It all starts from a bold proclamation that you swear on your life and existence, everything about you to fulfill, to complete.

For the time being, while I don't have a very distinct picture of what very particularly I want, I have a few things -

achieve a gpa of 9.5+ this sem.

finish reading my stock of extra books that I've collected.

I realise that this feels and looks kinda stupid. heck it's like smth the booky nerdy freaks would decide to try, a class of ppl I rather despise personally for having nothing going on in their life. For that very reason, I shall add another point. This ought to make things really interesting -

have fun.

now I have no clue how this is gonna pan out but FUCK IT I'm in. Chirai, element of pure rage focus added.

[shrimpmandan]

The idea that people are just sponges to whatever media they consume has been disproven time and time again, though I do think OP has a point to some degree. I think what matters is analyzing intent.

Something like 50 Shades of Gray was not meant to be a realistic depiction of BDSM. It was not meant to be educational whatsoever. It was meant to be a smutty, erotic fantasy at a time where BDSM wasn't in the public conscience as much as it is now. That book (and movie) ended up spreading a lot of misinfo and giving people some pretty warped understandings of kink and consent because they had no frame of reference in real life to compare the fiction to.

Same with JAWS. A lot of people had a blind fear and hatred of sharks due to ignorance. They feared what they didn't understand. JAWS was made to capitalize on that fear, and what resulted was people viewing their fear of sharks as being validated and thus, justified. However, JAWS was also not made to be an educational film.

The thing both of these examples have in common is the fact that they were not made with the intent to educate. These were both topics that people were already ignorant to, and as such, had no means of cross-referencing myth from fact. This did result in a lot of real-world harm, but to say that the blame is solely on the IPs and their creators, and not a culmination of several different factors (ignorance, stigma, a lack of media literacy, not bothering to do research or look further into a topic), is disingenuous.

This is also just not something you can apply to major social taboos. Things such as murder, pedophilia, incest, rape, kidnapping, and all other manner of things that are generally agreed upon to be immoral or illegal are taboos that are VERY deeply ingrained in us from a young age. We (assuming we were raised in an environment that discouraged such things) are conditioned from near birth to understand that these things are bad, and that you shouldn't do them. We have a frame of real world experience to cross-reference. This is why people-- or at least, mostly healthy people-- don't get the idea in their heads that "murder is okay" from watching a fictionalized depiction of murder. And again, to pin the blame solely on the media would be disingenuous, as other factors related to how the child was actually raised and what kind of environment they grew up in is much, MUCH more impactful on their moral compass later in life.

When it comes to things such as representation and the explorations of serious topics, once again, intent is a key factor. If a show or movie is trying to depict rape in a serious manner, and it fails, then it is completely valid to criticize it. It failed to do what it set out to do. If a show or movie makes a rape joke, even if you find it incredibly distasteful, you can't criticize it from the same angle than if they were trying to depict it seriously. The critique would be on how it fails as a joke, or how it reflects a real-world bias (such as rape victims often not being believed and treated as mockery), as opposed to how it fails to depict rape accurately.

Fiction often reflects reality. Fiction can be used as a tool to reinforce biases. Propaganda cartoons, especially racist ones, are easy to point to for this. But the fiction did not create these thoughts and biases. Fascism and racism were not invented by media. They are concepts invented by people, and then they spread their ideology through fear, or prey on people's existing distrust of certain groups (ethnic, government bodies, sexual degenerates/minorities). In these instances, the fiction reinforces the bigotry. It doesn't create it. Someone who knows that bigotry is wrong will not look at something bigoted and believe it on the spot. Propaganda relies on you already having existing doubts about your own safety, or how much faith you have in your country. These are all things instilled by the real world. Not by cartoons, and not by movies.

It's a nuanced subject. You cannot apply blanket statements of "fiction does / doesn't affect reality" and expect it to always apply. Fiction sometimes affects reality. Other times, it doesn't. And if your response to the former phenomenon is a kneejerk one, an insistence that media is a corrupting force that needs to be censored and regulated in order to keep people pure of mind, that is something you need to seriously introspect on considering it was a common fascist talking point and tactic.

In my opinion, the issue always falls on people lacking real-world education on subjects. 50 Shades of Gray would not have the same impact it did if more people were educated about and comfortable talking about BDSM. JAWS wouldn't have had the same impact had more people been open-minded and compassionate towards unfamiliar creatures. Racist propaganda wouldn't have been so effective had people not already held fear and patriotism-induced superiority complexes towards peoples they didn't understand. Blaming these issues on fiction is not only intellectually lazy, it's outright dangerous, because it makes people even more comfortable in not having to think for themselves. Fiction only affects you as much as you let it. People choose to let it affect them because they can't be fucking assed to do any kind of research, or learn compassion and empathy towards people they don't understand. That is a wider societal and cultural issue that should be addressed. Dumbing fiction down further won't fix this issue; it'll only create more complicity in being unchallenged and unthinking.

listen. fiction may be fiction, but fiction is created by real, actual people and it has real, actual implications and consequences. fiction does not exist in a bubble of “it doesn’t really matter”, it has never existed in a bubble of “it doesn’t really matter”, and people being critical of fictional works for how they present real, actual things that really, actually happen is important.

“IT’S JUST FICTION” is not a fucking defense. it is not a good excuse. it has never been a good excuse. it will never be a good excuse. creations by real, actual people have real, actual implications in our real, actual world, and if people are critical of some work of fiction, there’s usually a pretty solid reason for that.