#“straight people are the majority and therefore more deserving”

[sarahlancashire]

there's a thing that happens, when a same-sex relationship (especially if it's an f/f relationship/ involves a female character who has only been involved with men before) is introduced into mainstream media, where a certain type of straight person will go to facebook or similar and complain about it, and then other straight people will join in, and say things like "but apparently our opinions don't matter because we're heterosexual" and i just. FUCKING HATE IT.

we are not saying your opinions don't matter!! we are saying you're wrong, and you're being offensive, and now you have the audacity to mock us for calling you out!!

straight people can find validation and representation in nearly all media that have ever existed, and some of them are still not fucking satisfied.

[dynamightmite]

you seem optimistic so you think we’re still getting shigaraki back? :( i’m really sad the way hori has handled the izuku tenko plotline as of right now like i just can’t wrap my head around this

I mean, I definitely think it's a possibility. We still don't know exactly what happened to overhaul/decay, and how it may be used in the future. We saw Tenko and Deku touch fists; theoretically there could have been some kind of exchange there, or he could be existing as a vestige in some way.

Then again, (and this is going to piss a lot of people off :')) I kind of... get where Horikoshi is going with it?

BEFORE YOU START BOOING!

I think a lot of the discomfort and hurt from fans comes from the perception that Izuku failed to save Tenko. That, by allowing him to die, the narrative is in fact saying he didn't deserve to be save--that Horikoshi himself doesn't believe Tenko truly deserved it. I have also seen a lot of talk about how it doesn't fit in with the ongoing, overarching themes of the narrative, and (while I'm not saying these people are wrong) I would like to push back on that a little, because I think there is precedence in the story as to why Tenko's death holds up, despite it being terrible.

The culmination of Tenko's arc broaches a crossroad of two major concepts in the story: heroes, and saving, and what both of those ideas mean. And, I think, in Tenko's death, we get and answer to both, and more importantly, an answer to his overall purpose.

What does it mean to save? In BNHA, the concept is a little vague. I've often people ascribe the "total victory" mindset as one of protection, as preventing any tragedy or harm. Through that lens, Tenko's death therefore is an automatic failure--a nonstarter. HE's dead, so he wasn't saved. The end. However, while "saving" might seem like a simple, straight forward concept, I would like to dig a little deeper, because I think what Horikoshi's doing is much more interesting.

Saving (Deku's definition of it, anyway) is a lot closer to freeing than it is to protecting. Which sounds weird, but I'll do my best to explain. I think the two best examples of this particular nuance to his definition are actually in two characters people tend to forget he saved: Shoto and Gentle Criminal.

Because he did save both of them. Not in the really obvious, black-and-white way he saved Eri, no, but he did save them. And both times were... painful, to say the least.

When Deku went after Shoto during the sport's festival, it wasn't, like, nice. He dug his little nerd fingers in where it hurt the worst and dragged out Shoto's biggest fears and insecurities, and then he said GET OVER THEM. Stop letting them control you. Stop letting your father control you. You're your own person, and you get to make your own choices.

He didn't punch Endeavor. He didn't even take pity on Shoto, or say he was sorry. But you know what he did do? Deku cut the leash. AND he damn near killed Shoto (and himself) making sure that Shoto understood that he was free. He gave Shoto back something that he'd been missing, something he was afraid to look in the face; something that Deku picked up, brushed off, and said, "please stop throwing this away, it's important. You're important".

And it works, goddamit.

Gentle is both different and similar. In a similar vein, the way Deku saves Gentle is sort of... not obvious. But I think if you look here:

Gentle isn't a bad person. He's ambitious and a little lax about the law, but he never set out to hurt anybody. But we see over the course of his arc how he gets so tangled up in his own pain and his desperation to be seen that he forgets his own ideals, his own morals. In the face of becoming someone, he loses sight of what matters most to him: just like Deku, Gentle wants to be a hero.

Which, in the end, he is. And Deku's the one who pushes him there.

But what about Tenko? What about the crying child inside him? Why wasn't he saved?

When people talk about child Tenko, they often seem to see him as a symbol of the person that Deku's trying to save. But I think that, just maybe, that's wrong. I think maybe, actually, Deku is trying to save Tenko from that child.

Child Tenko is, in many ways, a symbol of nothing but AFO's power. That is a child stripped of his name, of his original quirk, of his family, of his sense of self. That is a puppet controlled by AFO, without any autonomy of its own. That child is a wound that Tenko cannot escape for as long as AFO still holds any power over him.

That's why this chapter All Might said that maybe Deku did save Tenko, if he no longer saw the child version of him in the vestige realm. Deku did save him. Because Tenko isn't a child anymore, and he isn't AFO's puppet; he's a free man, for the first time in his life.

A free man who chooses to be a hero.

Heroes get talked about a lot in BNHA (duh), but what is the defining quality of a true hero? Someone who wins? Sure. Someone who saves? Yeah, of course. But the actual test of what differentiates a hero from everybody else is their willingness to sacrifice. To give up everything for the greater good. Even if it hurts. Sometimes especially if it hurts. I mean, this has come up a lot through the manga. Deku running in to attack the sludge villain, Mirio giving up his quirk, Eraserhead throwing himself in front of his students, Edgeshot shortening his lifespan to save Bakugo, All Might standing quirkless in front of the greatest evil of his time-- literally the constant refrain from the narrative has been that being willing to sacrifice it all is what makes a hero a hero.

Tenko's final wish from last chapter is gut wrenching, but: he wanted to be a hero for the Villains. The rest of the world can rot for all he cares, but his friends, those disenfranchised, hurt people that everyone else gave up on? Those people who have never been saved, those people who have never been protected... he wants to be their hero. In the face of danger, of certain doom, he is a free man, and he has a choice.

So he makes a sacrifice. His final act is to become a hero. For them.

Cue the sobbing tears.

Additionally, I think it's relevant to point out here how strongly the narrative has advocated for victimhood to be divorced from being a perpetual self-identity. It really emphasizes the power of choosing to rise above your situation and pain to help other people, while also suggesting that your pain does not excuse you from hurting people. You can be a victim and you can be a perpetrator; they are not mutually exclusive. And because of this, after Deku saves Tenko, he does not owe him. He saved Tenko, but he could not keep him alive, and... I don't think that it's about Tenko deserving or not deserving to die. It's just that Tenko had reached a point of no return where his only choices were to die a slave or die free and he broke his shackles. But he was always going to die. Doomed by the narrative, both literally and figuratively. We can argue all day as to what degree of responsibility he holds for his actions as a highly abused, traumatized, often shell of a person. But the point is that at every junction of the story, Tenko (and the story around him) escalated until he was trapped. There wasn't a way out, and it's heartbreaking, and maybe that's the point.

I'm not saying it's fair. I'm certainly not saying you have to like it. But... I don't know. I don't feel like this is some completely out of pocket, off-the-rails end that destroyed all its characters. And who knows! Maybe Tenko will be brought back later. Maybe the epilogue will get progressively worse and I'll hate it. Maybe I'll finally get some sleep and regret writing this at all. I have no idea. Really. But we're all in this together, so these are my thoughts right now :)

[stillarandom-radfem]

This post is going to cause controversy here on radblr. I already know that, and I'm ready for it. But there is something that I've just got to get off my chest, here. It's been bugging me for a long time now, but for the longest time, I couldn't quite find the words to describe my feelings.

Here's the thing. It's not that female separatists are wrong, necessarily, with regard to their arguments about male violence. OSA women like myself are at a greater risk of interpersonal violence from men, intimate partner violence does make up the majority of domestic violence statistics, men are the most likely people to rape or murder us, and yes, living without men therefore probably would improve straight and bisexual women's lifespan/overall quality of life in most cases. BUT. The way many female separatists (who are most often lesbians) go about presenting their arguments is not only unnecessarily rude to women who have done nothing to deliberately harm them (and, when it includes such colorful monikers as "dick worshipper" and "cock rider" in it, reasonably comes off as an attack), but it includes many of the same tactics that homophobes use against LGB people to make their point. I'm sure that homophobes doing that stuff to you is hurtful, but I'm also at least 99% sure that heterosexual women who are radfems (or rad-adjacent, if you prefer) aren't the ones leveling those attacks, and don't therefore deserve to be responded to with such ferocity. Two wrongs do not, in this case, make a right. And it needs to stop.

For example, you ask?

Acting like heterosexual relationships must be purely sexual, with no actual love involved whatsoever.

I see LGB people complaining about homophobes doing this to them all the time. "You think our relationships inherently obscene or kinky because you can't picture us actually being in love; all you can think of is the sexual part! You think a sizable chunk of the population is incapable of love or human connection, and that is dehumanizing!" Yes, I have no doubt in my mind that it is. But then look at what you do when you try to call out heterosexual/bisexual women for being with men, and you are doing exactly the same thing to us. You talk about OSA relationships, and the first and, often, only thing you ever bring up is the sexual aspect of them. The word "love" almost never comes up. It's like it doesn't even occur to you that OSA women might actually fall in love with or have very deep romantic feelings for their male partners, not unlike you, as a lesbian, may have or have had towards any girlfriends you have ever dated, any women you have ever crushed on, or, if you're lucky, your wife. Now, do OSA women have sex with our boyfriends or husbands, if we have them? Of course we do! Have you ever had sex with your wife or girlfriend? Or, if you're single, would you, if you had one? Of course you would, and you know it! Does that negate your feelings for her, somehow? No? Your relationships are not purely sexual just because there is sex involved? Then why would you assume that sex being involved would make heterosexual relationships suddenly be only sexual? Also, news flash: vibrators exist. So do dildos. Or women (including het women) could just use their fingers or a pillow. There are many ways for a woman of any orientation to get off without a man if getting off is all that she's after. If she is choosing to be in an actual serious relationship with a man, it's most likely because she's in love with him. You are trying to convince her that there is something more important for her to consider, in spite of her feelings. So, perhaps instead of insinuating that she is some kind of sex-obsessed slut who is screwing over her entire sex deliberately for the sake of a few orgasms, you can start start there, instead.

Acting like other people's sexual orientations can be changed (not yours, of course, just, you know, everyone else's).

I see homophobes acting this way towards LGB people all the time, claiming that the sex(es) you are attracted to is a choice somehow, shaming you for preferring the "wrong" one (or the "wrong" one at the moment, if you're bi). Which, personally, has always struck me as kinda weird, because they never seem to apply the same logic to themselves. They never stop to suggest whether their own orientation is a choice or not. I guess it's pretty obvious why they won't, because then it comes down to two possibilities: if they are with strictly the opposite sex by choice, then it's very probable that they are actually bisexual, and behave as they do towards gay people due to internalized homophobia, whereas, if their strict opposite sex attraction is not a choice, then they have just admitted that their own orientation is innate, so why would they assume everyone else's not to be? It makes no sense. And incels will take it a step further, yelling slurs at lesbians for only wanting to have sex with other women instead of them. It's all pretty fucked up and illogical, and just for the record, I think you all deserve much better. Of course your sexuality isn't a choice. And yet... I mean, I can't even begin to count how many lesbian separatist blog posts I have read full of women acting as if heterosexuality is a choice. "Ew, moids are ugly, dicks are gross, what's wrong with you, why would you choose that?!" Newsflash, gyns: we didn't. That's just our sexual orientation, and we didn't choose it any more than you chose yours. We may still choose to be celibate in spite of our orientation, or, if we're bi, we might still decide to only date other women. But we will still always have the capacity to be physically attracted to/fall in love with men, and for those of us who are straight, we can only experience that with men exclusively. That's just the way it is. We can't control that; it's innate. Some of you, upon grappling with this fact, immediately jump straight to the incel way of doing things and begin slinging the aforementioned colorful monikers (ahem, sexualized anti-woman slurs aforementioned in this blog post) for only being attracted to men instead of you. It actually smacks of sexual harassment, and then you wonder why so many straight women stop following/won't follow you. Or, leap right into calling us lesbophobes because we don't want to take sexual harassment like that from anybody, man or woman alike. Call me crazy, but the last time I checked, a "lesbophobic woman" was a woman who hates lesbians for only being attracted to other woman, not a woman who simply refuses to date/sleep with you. What, you have a right to bodily autonomy, but straight/bisexual women don't?! And yeah, I know, I know. "Stop comparing us to incels! Lesbians aren't predatory!" Well, true, most of you are not. The vast, overwhelming majority of you are completely fine and normal. But I always give the side eye to any notion of an entire group of people (any people) being all perfect, pristine angels carte blanche (a scant few people in every large enough group are going to be creeps), and if a scant few of you don't want to be compared to incels... Well, then maybe you should stop behaving like them. Because, when you explicitly resort to their same tactics, even I get the ick off of a few of you, and I'm probably the least homophobic straight person I know. 🤨🤨🤨

They call you "c*rpet m*ncher", "qu**r", "f*g", "d*ke", etc., over your orientation. You then call women (who probably didn't even call you that!) "dick worshipper", "cock rider", etc., over ours.

Enough said. Do I even need to point out (again) that these are almost all just a bunch of sexualized, anti-woman slurs? Do you really think that this is going to bring women over to your side, as opposed to just driving them away? And do you actually think that your female separatist movement is going to have any kind of major societal effect if you would rather drive women away from it, rather than bringing them in? It won't have any impact that way; it will only die out. And, look, I don't think that homophobes should be treating you like that, either. They most definitely should not. I have no doubt that them slinging those slurs at you constantly over your sexual orientation (which you can't control) is extremely hurtful and probably even scary for you. You deserve so much better than that. But, again, last time I checked "lesbophobe" means someone who hates you for only being attracted to other women, not a woman who refuses to date/sleep with you, and, from what I can tell, radfems appear to be, by and large, very pro-gay. Even when we, ourselves, are not. So, it seems very unlikely to me that we're the ones calling you names like that (unless you can show me receipts or something, in which case, go ahead). Until that happens, it occurs to me that people of all sexual orientations are pointing fingers, accusing each other of being sex-obsessed perverts, and calling each other names because, idk, maybe the drama is more interesting to some people than minding their own business? Or they literally can't wrap their minds around being attracted to that sex, so they attack anyone who is? Idk, it all seems very juvenile, and I should think there would be better ways to tell someone that some aspect of their lifestyle is unhelpful to the movement and/or mentally unhealthy to them than merely resorting to often sexualized mudslinging attacks. Honestly, no matter what your views on female separatism or sexual orientation are, can we all just agree to a ceasefire on the relentless mudslinging on all sides?? Please??? This is middle school shit, and it's really getting annoying. Everyone. On both sides. You're like a pack of schoolyard bullies. Stop it.

Again, I'm not saying that female separatists' arguments against dating/sleeping with/marrying and/or having kids with men are entirely wrong. Male violence is a problem for a lot of women, and refusing to be in relationships with them probably would reduce it greatly. But acknowledging heterosexual and bisexual women as being capable of romantic love towards whichever sex(es) we are capable of experiencing attraction to, acknowledging all sexual orientations as something innate that can not be changed and not a choice, and refusing to resort to juvenile mudslinging attacks will not take away from those facts in any way. So, I guess I just don't see what the reasoning is for so many female separatists to refuse to even consider them?

[strong-with-the-sarcasm]

Revenant!Jazz ideas:

Continuing from this DPxDC prompt of mine, I’ve had some more thoughts about Jasmine Fenton and Revenants, especially where it concerns DC lore and Jason Todd in particular.

———————-

In my original post, @starlightcat04 asked whether or not Jazz’s eyes would glow toxic green too. I propose that, no, they wouldn’t.

While it’s a common head canon that Ectoplasm is heavily influenced by emotions, Jazz’s Ecto-contamination is bone deep and pure, unlike Jason’s. So no, I don’t believe her eyes would glow green.

They turn from the teal she had in life to a smoldering green that reflects light just like a feline, with a heavily damaged sclera that is perceived as black in low lighting, with ash grey veins spreading from her eye sockets down to her jaw like tears.

Her once bright hair turns from a lively orange-ish red to the color of cooling embers.

That which caused her death, a punctured artery is half-way healed by the time Jazz reanimates in the crematorium, so not only is she supposed to be dead still, she also has to be very careful with her movements otherwise she could very well bleed out again before she is fully healed.

What else changes with Revenant!Jazz?

In exchange for a higher mental processing and the high damage absorption of Revenants, Jazz loses most (almost all) of her memories of her life. What she does remember is thankfully not her death, but rather Danny’s, his death scream and ghostly wail overlap in her mind, at times causing severe headaches and nausea.

(According to his wiki page, Jason spent a year in a coma and as an amnesiac vagrant, therefore it’s not entirely without precedent that Jazz wouldn’t keep hers.)

Her Ecto-contamination has to factor in a lot though.

Jason was revived by Superboy-Prime’s Reality Shattering Punch. Jazz was reanimated by her own willpower, aided by Ecto to allow her body to heal and regress the stages of rigor mortis.

———//:///////———-

What does Jazz need to accomplish as a Revenant?

In the original prompt I wrote that Jazz returned to keep Danny safe- broad enough for a prompt, but what exactly does “safe” for a halfa entail?

Let’s list the major threats to Danny’s health, beginning with the obvious: the Ghost Investigation Ward and The Fenton Parents.

The Fentons are capable of tracking Phantom by his Ecto-signature, creating and having created weaponry specifically designed to target the ghost in question, to which they pass that tech on to the GIW.

If Danny remains in Gotham, the ambient Ecto will scramble the tech over enough of a distance, but if Danny were in a line up of three people right next to a GIW agent he’d be clocked almost immediately.

So, the Fentons and the GIW have to go. How does this happen?

The greatest irony I could possibly inflict on these anti-ghosters- becoming ghosts themselves. I won’t go into detail about what my brain jumped to when I thought about that outcome, but let’s just say it was pretty dark.

(And karmically well-deserved.)

#3 on the list depends on where Danny is when Jazz is finished with numbers 1 & 2 on her list.

If Danny is is Gotham and staying there for the long haul, then I believe this girl would take one look at Batman’s rogue gallery and nope them so hard everyone in Gotham gets the sense of their world about to be rocked, but the ones she gunning for the most?

(Joker, Bane, Manbat, Firefly, Madhatter, Riddler…)

They get the sensation that someone just walked over their non-existent graves.

(I got a little gleeful demented imagining Jazz just straight up ripping Manbat’s wings clean off, burning Firefly alive and throwing a detoxed Bane into a crowd of vengeful Gothamites.)

(Jazz learns that Joker killed a young hero with a crowbar and a bomb. She’s fully onboard with turnabout being fair play when it comes to that Pennywise reject.)

(I can’t even begin to list every rogue Jazz cuts down, it she doesn’t kill all of them, just most of their number.)

(Gotham celebrates for weeks.)

(I’m not sure whether or not Jazz kills the four mentioned previously in a couple of nights, one night or over a a few months, but it doesn’t take as long as one might think.)

/://:///////:::/::::///////

What’s next for Revenant!Jazz?

I’m still writing The Regent series, so I doubt I’ll come back to this for a while, but I’ll still be posting ideas and whatnot about Revenant!Jazz. There’s still plenty to explore here, and I have a pretty angst/bittersweet ending for Jazz in mind I want to talk about later.

If you have any ideas to add, please feel free to comment! If anyone does write this, please let me know so I can read it!

[safety-pin-punk]

Hey Key,

It feels appropriate to ask you whether I can vent this but I figure tumblr anon communication is a bit slow.

So I was on my way back to my college town on Easter Monday

An acquaintance (not friend) of mine visited family in the same city so we decided to take a train together

Frame of reference: I’m 25NB, she’s 20FTM (she prefers her feminine given name and she/her since she isn’t actively transitioning yet)

We are both physically disabled and mentally ill

Being the queer neurodivergent I am, I went !!! at her and immediately started talking because hey, commonalities!

Half an hour in we moved on from physical disability to talking about the mental stuff and I mention I’m self-do autistic. And she goes “Nah. You can’t be.” And I go “Huh?” “You’re too talkative! You’re ADHD, yes, but you are too social and talkative to be autistic.”

Like… gee, man, maybe because we have met a few times and immediately clocked you as queer and neurodivergent? You think that might be why I’m comfortable talking rapid-fire?

“Nah, we don’t know each other that well, so that can’t be it.”

Right… and then she told me she doesn’t “want to endorse self-dx” because she thinks she might be hypochondriac and therefor any and all self-dx or preemptive diagnose “might make things worse because I think it’s worse than it is”

Like, yes, I understand and she explained she does experience psychosomatic symptoms in response to being stressed/ burnt out. I don’t deny psychosomatic responses. I believe that.

But also she straight-up refuses to look up anything that might help her?? When we were talking about physical disability (we both have chronic pain) I immediately pulled out my phone to send some coping ressources and self-help stuff

And she went “no, I never look at [coping] things, I worry if I read that, I will just convince myself that I’m worse than I actually am.”

Which, okay, reasonable boundary…

I told her about how I started using a walking cane, on my own, decided for myself that it helps. And also how most of my splints/ bandages are self-bought and self-administered because no doctor acknowledged my chronic pain so far.

And she goes “I sometimes have days where I have to drag my leg. I’m like-paraplegic when my psychosomatic symptoms get to their worst. But I would never use a cane! I don’t want to stand out, you know? I don’t want to catch attention.”

And I’m sitting there screaming internally like “You are entitled to be seen! You deserve accommodations! You just said some days you could use a wheelchair!! What the FUCK?!”

Yeah… and the longer our talk goes on, the more I read between the lines that she believes “if I do everything right, it will mostly go away”

Like, she forced herself to stick to “fibro-diet” to combat her rheuma and fibro, which is great on the surface. And then she tells me she forces herself out of bed and forces herself to cook, even if she doesn’t feel like eating, but she just pushes through because “the anti/inflammation diet can help with rheumatism”

And just– …my internal screaming continued.

I don’t want to dislike her! I recognise she’s young(er) and she’s naive and blue-eyed. While I’m just a cynic who’s been depressed for the majority of my life and I stopped giving a fuck about “not standing out” because my neurodivergent ass is too autistic and too ADHD to interact with people without standing out

Like, I’m ““high-functioning”” but at the same time I’m the kind of autistic who never had the chance to fit in. I have always been and will always be “the standoffish weird kid”.

But I just feel bad for her and at the same time I know I don’t want to become friends with someone who’s this blue-eyed “it will all be good if I just do the right thing”

I’m frustrated with her as an acquaintance and I just know if she tries to become my friend I have to give her sooooo many lectures

Among all these other things about how she is allowed to be non-binary and how she doesn’t need HRT to be trans and how she doesn’t have to cower in fear of changes HRT would do to her body because even if she’s binary FTM nobody’s forcing her to go on testo.

Just… so much frustration after this one 3h train ride :/

Fully agree, tumblr anon communication is very slow. Especially on my blog. I go through moods where I answer a bunch of things at once and then dont for a while. (sorry) Long post under cut

First of all, I am so sorry about your friend invalidating your self-dx autism. Personally I'm all for self-dx, anyone whose dealt with doctors long enough knows how hard, how many hoops you have to jump through, and the amount of time and money required to get diagnosed with ANYTHING. I've definitely dealt with my fair share of non-medical professionals telling me both "You dont have this thing I have" but also "You definitely have this thing I dont have".

I see why you are frustrated by someone seemingly not wanting to help themselves. But it seems like she is trying, she just has never been exposed to the right resources to help her. Its kinda like. I went to a SUPER christian university, and there was this gay guy, wonderful dude. His view of his own queerness though? I had only read about people like him online until I met him. He was a pastors son, his whole life he grew up knowing that being gay was wrong and bad. He never had access to the resources he needed to learn how to love that part of himself. Not his own fault at all, but by the time he got to college, there was no changing his views. He now goes around preaching to other kids about his experiences being gay and how he represses it because God. He absolutely broke my heart.

My point it, your friend is young and naieve. She probably has never had access to the resources and information you have. Her experiences have probably been *wildly* different from yours. You can't force a 'fuck it' attitude onto someone like that. You just kinda have to wait and hope they grow into it on their own. Theres nothing wrong with not wanting to be friends with someone like that though. You are responsible for currating your own social experiences. I completely understand your frustration with the whole situation though.

[fayesdiary]

actually now that you've finished AM and re: Paired Endings, did you get the paired endings you wanted? I remember when I went in blind and didn't know how the hidden support points system worked in regards to paired endings, I ended up with exactly no paired endings I was expecting or hoping to get, and a few people I knew playing the game at the same time as me ran into the same "wait, how does this work" conundrum bc we all went and got everyone to A or A+ supports with everyone else and therefore had a roulette wheel of paired endings.

also just in general, how did you enjoy AM?

I barely knew paired endings were a thing so I wasn't aiming for any one in particular (although I'm upset by the Felix/Ingrid one. I'm sorry Ingrid, you deserved better).

That said, having paired endings almost hidden from the player if you don't know (I'm guessing it's a selection of the A/A+ support pairs, but if you have multiple it selects one based on which has the highest support points) is... really weird. Why not just have S supports at that point and give the player the active choice of which paired ending they want?

As for Azure Moon itself, I quite enjoyed it! Dimitri's journey is the good shit, his relationship with Edelgard is just tragic and overall it's a really nice personal narrative.

But for the larger narrative, well... I have questions. And they are not the good kind.

Let's start with the smaller things first - Sothis.

Why is she even in the game?

I'm saying this as a huge fan of her- I adore her, I think she's so much fun. That said, if she's barely going to have screentime in White Clouds and is completely absent in Part 2, why even pretend she's going to be a primary character if she barely features in it?

I enjoyed Ch9 and 10 with her because she finally had her time to shine, taking initiative, coaxing Byleth into investigating a bit more and being a little gremlin when she convinces them to eavesdrop on Rhea. She finally has the presence she should have always had, but then she merges with Byleth and... that's it.

Poor Rhea is in an even worse situation in Azure Moon, being completely absent in Part 2. They tell you she has been secretly been imprisoned in Enbarr all this time but they never tell you why (my guess is it has something to do with Edelgard's monster form?), and then when you beat the game... Nothing.

Just a small line telling you she has retired and moved to Zanado.

The poor woman feels like a complete afterthought in this route.

Speaking of things feeling like an afterthought in Azure Moon, the Dark Snakes (the personal name I'm going with for Those who slither in the dark because I hate that name so goddamn much).

In White Clouds? Hyped up as a major antagonist.

In Azure Moon Part 2? Nowhere to be seen properly.

You only get Cornelia and Volkhard who have been very blatantly replaced with members of the cult, and yet no one seems to notice.

Dimitri will say straight to your face Cordelia's whole demeanor changed around a decade prior but never think "hmm, this sounds familiar", despite him mentioning Kronya a few chapters prior.

They appear in the final chapter but only as an extra boss you can stomp to get rid of a bunch of soldiers, and again - barely acknowledged. The rest of them flee when you kill their leader so the Snakes are still around scheming, but this is never addressed in Azure Moon, not even in the endings.

And I am not accepting "it will be explained in the other routes" as an excuse, because if you're going to treat every route as its own game, then the narrative of every single route has to stand on its own.

As it stands, the Snakes in AM only exist to make Edelgard look better by comparison in White Clouds and are almost completely ignored in Part 2.

And speaking of Edelgard - we need to talk about the whole deal with Fòdlan's unification.

This game is... weirdly fascinated with the idea. I can understand why Edelgard views it as an ideal - of course the future Emperor of an Empire would have an imperialist mindset.

The problem is that several other characters and the narrative itself portrays it a good thing, when if you think of it for a few minutes... It's not. The mere existence of the Kingdom and Alliance as well as two of the major wars in Fòdlan being for their indipendence proves that.

And look - Fòdlan has many, many problems. Rampant racism and xenophobia, class inequality exacerbated by Crests, you name it. But it being united under a single banner, especially if by force, does nothing to solve any of the issues and arguably makes them worse.

Hell, as fucked as the status quo at the start of the game is, at least there was a clear harmony between the four powers, and Fòdlan had been at a state of relative peace for almost a millennia until Edie did her, um, thing.

Shamir has a line where she mentions Fòdlan will probably split again eventually, and she's right - it's increasingly clear that Fòdlan being governed by a single power does not work.

Also I know I barely know Claude at this point especially because he's deliberately written as hard to read but I'm sorry- him just giving the Alliance to Dimitri is bullshit. Both because of what it represents, both because I don't buy it at all he would just do this (especially with Verdant Wind existing), and especially because you really want me to believe every single noble would be ok with rejoining under the Kingdom they declared indipendence from two centuries ago?

So the narrative ends up saying "oh it's not that Edie's ideals of a unified Fòdlan are fundamentally wrong- no, it's her methods and the fact that she wants to destroy the Church". And the cynical side me is thinking that in the large scale of things, the main difference between the routes is choosing which war criminal gets to govern the whole continent.

So while overall I enjoyed Azure Moon, I can't help but notice so many warning signs for things to come.

[myimaginarywonderland]

No, I am actually going to be that person:

Stop trying to talk down on fucking Anti tags.

I am so tired of you all being like "Drivers deserve no hate, they are human too blah blah". Guess what. Humans fuck up. They get called out for it like they should so they can learn. Sugarcoating especially won't help in a fandom that is already centered around the most privileged fucking people imaginable (majority being cis, straight white men)

Humans also have people that like and dislike them. Do you not think that these tags were created for a purpose? Most of us saw that we didn't like a driver and just like most of you guys want to connect to people who do, we want to connect to people who don't.

Stop trying to argue that you fandom experience gets ruined by anti tags when fans have specifically created those tags so they wouldn't ruin your experience.

I am not excusing deaths threats or threats of violence in anyway but that is not what 95% of anti posts are about. Threats of any kind aren't okay but that is not the case in most posts, hell the majority do not have that.

You create your fandom experience. There are so many kinds of subfandoms that yes are aften found connected to the main fandom. So if you want to avoid one of those fandoms, block tags that are related to it. All of us who interact in and with anti tags are specifically doing that to make your fandom experience easier and more comfortable. We know how hard it can be to navigate a fandom so we are trying our best to make clear where not to go yet you all keep insisting that it is still horrible etc.

This is a sports fandom. People dislike teams, players in every fucking kind of sport. People have preference in every kind of sport. Therefore the same will happen in F1 only instead of players it will be drivers.

Nowadays we have the incredible privilege of being able to choose what fandom spaces to enter, how we want to create those experiences.

Yes, there are still people who do not know fandom etiquette but that really is a very small minority.

I also find it funny that only when your favourite white boy is suddenly under criticism are you all complaining about hate meanwhile drivers like Max and Lance where cyberbullied since they entered the sport as teens, Lewis still has to face racism from within the motorsport community, ...

Again: Anti tags do not mean death threats or violence should ever be allowed there. Those have no place anywhere.

But Anti tags are not made to threaten drivers. Anti tags are a result of people personal negative opinions on drivers that they want to share with others just like the normal tags are a result of people's personal positive feelings that they want to share with others. Both of these people deserve their place in fandoms, on completely opposite ends as to not disturb one another.

[toraawa]

*bouncing up & down* HERE!

☯︎☮︎♦️☆⬜ (both of em ofc)

thanks my dudette!

Yuri

☯ - likes/dislikes headcanon

He likes people who don't treat him like some untouchable animal. If he's not actively wanting to card you and you confront him confidently, he'll be less bothered to talk to you. On the other hand, he despises hypocrites. Yuri can find amusement in a liar floundering to avoid the truth or keep a facade, but being a hypocrite is the easiest way to earn his disfavor.

☮︎ - friendship headcanon

When he was much younger, he thought just existing and doing fun things together was all it took to be friends. Now, he believes there is no such thing as friendship — only a transactional, "we'll keep each other around and fake smile as long as it's beneficial" sort of relationship. This changes post canon after a while, though it's still very hard to earn his trust.

♦️ - quirks/hobbies headcanon

Since he's only known Academia all his life and has no family or friends, one of his hobbies is listening to other students talk about the outside world. He's particularly interested in family dynamics and love between people. In the rare instances his usual sneer is absent as he walks through the halls, it spooks the shit out of anyone that meets his gaze from how intently he watches people. In truth, Yuri's just listening and gets absorbed by what they say (so he can better get under people's skin, or so he says). He also relays the interesting stuff he hears to his plants.

☆ - happy headcanon

When he's genuinely happy, feeling real joy and not the empty thrill he's drunk on, his eyes light up and his face gets so soft that no one would believe he's out there hurting people by the thousands. Of course, it's a sight that no one has ever seen — except Leo when he first made Yuri his protegee. Seeing it made him feel disturbed and, for a second, conflicted. But the more Yuri embraced Zarc's influence, the more his faces of genuine happiness and sadistic glee became indistinguishable. Post canon, it takes a lot of work and trust to get him to express genuine happiness again.

■ - Bedroom/house/living quarters headcanon

Wherever Yuri's living, be it his place at Academia or a house, it is impeccably clean. He's a huge stickler about clutter and dirt, and he'll take the time out of his day to clean everything himself. Of course, there's potted plants everywhere Yuri can fit them while also making sure its aesthetically pleasing. He especially likes his room to be dark and full of plants, like a lair in a jungle.

Serena

☯ - likes/dislikes headcanon

She likes learning about how to be more socially aware, and therefore likes people who are very patient. She thinks people who stay understanding and resist getting frustrated is a sign that they are genuinely kind. On the flip side, one thing Serena hates more than anything is liars. Even if it's something she doesn't want to hear, tell it to her straight. Hiding the truth is the easiest way to make her lose trust and respect for you.

☮︎ - friendship headcanon

Seeing her friends happy and content is a major source of happiness for her. She's a very selfless friend, constantly taking the time to make sure they're okay and putting their needs and wants before her own. She does notice that no one ever does the same for her... but Serena tries not to let it bother her. Having friends who are willing to keep her around after believing in Academia's ways is more than what she deserves, or so she believes.

♦️ - quirks/hobbies headcanon

Serena has a lot of pent up curiosity, so one of her hobbies is trying out mundane things she's read or heard about. For example, if she sees a baby in a stroller, she'll try making silly faces to see if it'll actually laugh. If she finds a stray cat or dog, she'll mimic the sounds people do to beckon it closer. It embarrasses her quite a lot when others laugh at her, so she appreciates it when people just let her try new things in peace.

☆ - happy headcanon

Expressing happiness is something that she has had to work on a lot, since Academia has trained her that such emotions are unnecessary. But when she does, people often comment on how cute her smile is. Even so, Serena still feels herself holding back sometimes. A part of her feels vestiges of guilt for experiencing happiness, and she's also self-conscious about how others will judge her since she's known for being serious and no-nonsense.

■ - Bedroom/house/living quarters headcanon

Out of sheer habit, Serena's living spaces tend to be pretty barren. Her room in Academia was comfortable but very plain, and she wants to be as little trouble as possible if she's staying with someone else. If she ever got her own place, the most important aspect would be having tall windows that let her see the night sky. She also needs a night light in her bedroom due to fear of the dark (which she will never admit). Overall, she prefers someplace spacious, clean, and open enough so she doesn't feel constricted again.

[constantvariations]

V9C10

Here it is, folks. Season finale of the worst RWBY season to ever be made. Yee to the haw

Post Ep: nowhere near as offensive as what I was expecting but holy exposition dump Batman

Noticing this one is 26 minutes long as opposed to last ep’s 16. Thank fuck, I was genuinely worried the finale was going to be bite sized

I swear on every god ever made that if I hear that damn question again I Will Find People

Having this flashback right after the numerous cliffhangers of the last episode is really strange. Unless this is something Ruby is seeing after touching the axe, then this should not be front and center

Is Summer’s hair even long enough to pull off that rose knot? As the y/n protagonist always throwing their hair in a messy bun, I’m no expert on hairstyles, but every time I’ve seen a hair design like that, it’s always been with hair down to the shoulder blades at least

What the hell is that line “I always prefer discretion”? It sounds so unnatural coming from these people and that awkward chuckle afterword cringed my spine into a pretzel. This couple with a child and possible marriage feel like awkward dates at the prom

Why are the mouth animations for smiles this season so damn weird? I wouldn’t be surprised if the animators forgot what a smile looks like considering their circumstances Also does Raven look off to anyone else? I can’t put my finger on it but it’s not quite the same as her V5 model Also also, this makes it really fucking stupid that Yang’s original purpose to finding Raven was to get information on Summer and IT WAS NEVER FOLLOWED THROUGH

OKAY Ruby was seeing it! Thank fuck they got SOMETHING right

Someone put some damn captions on this bitch. I should not be hearing the kits messing with the recycling more than the dialogue

Ruby hasn’t been violent when upset since Weiss and the tree in V1 iirc. Strange trait to bring back now, but aight Also, how the fuck do you get “give up” from “maybe you ain’t the only bitch with this problem.” That’s some Reed Richards stretching right there

Aaaaaaaand back to fucking Jaune. It amuses me that characters who ire me intensely get “fucking” added to their name like an honorific

Alyx’s hair straight up looks like the dusters I use to clean fiber out of the machines at work

Blake straight up did nothing for the solid ten seconds Nyeo attacked her lmaooo

Hey, look! Team attacks! When the fuck did those get strategized?

Listen, I genuinely feel bad for Neo here. I don’t care about the bullshit of last episode; no one deserves to have their body violated like that

Holy fuck that is a visual monstrosity my eyes are fucking burning

“Your time is running out” bitch the caterpillar got a whole day or two, why does Ruby get like. 2 hours max?

God can they stop with the bees we get it theyre canon stop the fucking bees I’m developing a goddamn allergy at this point

Hey, Weiss ain’t the first one to have her aura broken for once!

Feels stupid cheap to have Ruby choose herself because of a thing her mom said while she was asleep a decade ago instead of Ruby actually going through options and debating until she realizes that she can’t/doesn’t want to be anyone else Like. Nothing really happened to make her switch from suicidal to accepting? She saw a flashback, had a vague conversation with the blacksmith, and looked at some weapons. Where is the development? Why is she suddenly okay with being Ruby Rose again when five minutes ago she drank the tea? The biggest thing so far is the flashback, but that’s stupid. Her mother’s impact should NOT be that great considering she a) hasn’t been around for the majority of Ruby’s life, therefore the only tie between them is blood relations and b) was JUST revealed to have left the family willingly for secret reasons

The music is dope though. Red Like Roses has always been one of my favorites

The “We Love Ruby! <3″ lines delivered one by one is so damn awkward. Is this an after school special? Weren’t these the exact kinds of lines that Weiss said LAST EPISODE were unhelpful to Ruby due to the pressure they inadvertently put on her?

Once again, I am asking what the fuck the Neojabbers are since her semblance is MIRROR ILLUSIONS not PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION. Like, glad that even the heroes are horrified by someone being eaten alive, but it still doesn’t make any sense Also what’s going to happen to Wonderland without Curious as its monitor or whatever? How are the folks who can’t reach the tree without help going to ascend? Is this a good thing or is it going to send Wonderland into an unbalanced nightmare?

“[Neo] will find herself.” Uh huh. Sure MKEK. That’s the reason Neo’s staying in Wonderland instead of charging after Cinder with the force of a thousand suns. Y’all really dragged my dead gay son into this mess for this horseshit

“I like to think we did at least a little good.” Exactly when did you guys help anybody? All I can think of is that stupid cheese root from the first episode

If Little follows them into Remnant I’m throwing RT into the ocean. Especially if they don’t let Juniper come along. That dude is the only mf in this season that didn’t get fucked over

Is this one-by-one dialogue about another character’s traits going to be a thing? I’m already sick of it

Somewhat. That’s the new name. Why couldn’t they go with the standard Socks or Blue or Kai or insert other silly common nb name here. Do you know how difficult it’s going to be making that sound natural?

I genuinely am uncomfortable at this reunion. Ruby’s incredibly emotional but Somewhat is just kinda there. Reminds me way too much of meeting someone who knew me as a kid and get way too intimate because of that (it happened a lot since my grams raised like. half the town back in the day) Did they really just throw this in to throw it in? What’s the point of this deeply creepy scene other than answering the question of “what happened to Little?”

Nooo bring Juniper with you!!! They’re the only good character!!!

Hold hands and jump at the same time. Reach the ground at different times. Aight

So the gods were originally Afterans? “The tree’s earliest blossoms.” That raises so many fucking questions: how did Remnant come to be if it’s an entirely separate dimension(?) from Wonderland? What connects the two? Are the entities in the relics Afterans as well? If so, are they in the relics willingly? Were they created by the brothers or the tree? Does this make the tree the source of all life as they know it? What powers the tree? If Wonderland goes to shit, will that affect Remnant and any other playgrounds the brothers or other gods might have made?

These mfs really using Mr Monty’s words to justify their shitty god tier writing?

Why did the brothers build modern human houses for the animal creatures instead of creature specific housing (a dam for beavers, a nest for birds, etc)? This seems to be early stages of life so I don’t think you need to delve straight into Craftsman architecture

The jabber origin is so dumb. These idiot brothers tried to design a lawnmower and made Jason Voorhees Also, that doesn’t even make sense. Wonderland is a self contained ecosystem where all energy essentially gets recycled. The jabber disrupts that by permanently ending whoever it gets its chompers on. This would make more sense if we saw new life coming in, but so far it seems like all the tree creations happened back in the day and everything now is a brother creation. Since we’ve yet to see any evidence of their return, this means that there is a finite amount of life in Wonderland, meaning that the jabber, given enough time, could end all life within because it has no other purpose and no counterbalancing force Though, since Neo killed(?) the jabber, does this mean there is no force working for or against the living in Wonderland? Seriously, what the fuck is going to happen here?

“True balance requires only love and the patience to see things through to the end.” Tell me you’re begging for a v10 greenlight without telling me you’re begging for a v10 greenlight That’s not even remotely true because balance, especially among the sentient, requires EFFORT and COOPERATION. Or did y’all already forget your “trust in love” season got people murdered?

LITTLE DIDN’T EVEN FUCKING DO ANYTHING JFC THEY WERE SEXY LAMPING THE WHOLE SEASON

Jaune is young again. Many shocking. Much wow

“When you are needed most.” It better be in that fucking desert y’all dumped two whole ass cities in with only like. 4 trained warriors against a horde of grimm in a sandstorm

Nope! That would’ve been too straining on the budget much of a downer to end on. Still shot of Sepia - I mean, Vacuo and that’s it! Show’s over, folks!

I can’t discern a single word but I like the ending song lol

THESE MFS REALLY ADVERTISING THE JL CROSSOVER AFTER THE EP OHMYGODDDDDDDDD

[britishsass]

Death Game Stories: Part 1

Going into depth on one of the story types I enjoy a bit too much tonight! So therefore: This is my explanation of different types of stories including the "death game" trope.

There are four big parts of the death game, in my opinion. These are: PARTICIPANTS, GAMEPLAY, RESPONSE, and GAMEMASTERS. Usually, Gameplay and Response have some big links, but still, I'll go into them in order.

In this post, I will talk about the first aspect: PARTICIPANTS and how they got into the death game!

[Image ID: A picture of the characters in the game Your Turn to Die, labeled as "Your Turn to Die / Death Game By Majority. End ID]

[Spoiler warnings: Your Turn to Die, Death Bell, Zero Escape: 999]

Usually, the people dragged into the game tend to have something in common. What is it? This will usually set part of the tone for your story.

1. The people have done some sort of act that landed them here.

This one is a frequent answer in stories that focus on trust and betrayal, but that's not always the case. For a few examples:

Your Turn To Die (video game): The people have made wishes.

Zodiac Trial (video game): They are connected in some way to a man's death.

Death Bell (I only know the movie, but it might have other formats): A girl was killed and someone here is to blame.

Saw (movies): Various crimes.

Judge (I only know the movie, but I know it has other formats): They have committed crimes outright.

Zero Escape 999 (video game): They are connected to a prior game.

Gantz (manga): They died.

Deadman Wonderland (manga): They committed crimes.

This option can be used in two different ways as well: Either they know the connection (As in Artificial Selection (a game that only has a demo right now), where the participants are immediately told that they are guilty of crimes) or they do not (as in Your Turn to Die, where the answer as to how they are connected is a reveal in Chapter 2.)

This one also will frequently have a lot of importance to the story as a whole.

2. The people are in need of money.

This one is a frequent answer for making your characters easily relatable. For a few examples:

Squid Game (tv show)

Incite Mill (manga)

Would You Rather (movie)

Kaiji: Ultimate Survivor (manga)

The Liar Game (manga)

Life is Money (manga)

It's a very easy answer, but there is something you have to think of: What lengths will these people go to in order to have the money they need? Why are they doing all of this for money? There are some where the characters are trapped in this situation by owing more debt for losing games (Kaiji, Liar Game) and others where they could leave at any time (Squid Game). Some games in this category will also leave the players trapped in the location until the end-- either by threatening them (Would You Rather) or by just leaving the doors locked (Incite Mill).

3. "Sucks To Be You, I Guess"

This option is often used with random groups of people thrown into a thing together, or by just tossing a group overall into it. For a few examples:

Battle Royale (manga): School class

Danganronpa (video game series): School class

As the Gods Will (manga): Schools

Alice in Borderland (manga): I'm pretty sure it's everyone, but don't hold me to that.

King's Game (manga): School class

Zero Escape: Zero Time Dilemma (video game): Group of people in a bunker experiment.

Zero Escape: Virtue's Last Reward (video game): I don't know why they're selected, and I've completed the game.

Circle (movie): Straight up everyone in the whole world.

It's a good answer for having a group of friends thrown into something-- Or, as you can tell, a school class. This is also the most sympathetic option-- They did nothing at all to deserve this. They just were there.

Even so, these are not hard and fast rules. I can name more stories that aren't in these categories, for instance-- this is just an examination. For a few examples that fall outside these categories:

Btoooom!: Those who are good at a video game.

Magical Girl Raising Project: Magical girls made by playing a game.

Future Diary: People who were given diaries by a god.

Hunger Games: Tributes are chosen from 12 districts and can volunteer.

Truth or Dare: People who are randomly dragged in by another guy.

Choose or Die: People can play a video game if they want to.

Ready or Not: One very specific lady who just wanted to get married.

The group of people who are involved in a death game often is an extremely important aspect of the game itself-- they are, after all, the main characters.

For Part 2: Gameplay, please click here! For Part 3: Response, please click here!

[aaronstveit]

swifties in my phone can we please have an honest conversation for a second before you decide you want me dead.

okay first i'll admit i should have said "threaten to sue" rather than "sue." that was my bad, i'll give you that. but it is very frustrating to me that a lot of y'all went directly to "OP IS A TAYLOR SWIFT HATER SPREADING LIES ABOUT HER" instead of simply contending with the fact that what she's doing is wrong.

i am not "spreading an anti-taylor swift agenda" (whatever the fuck that is even supposed to mean) nor am i "looking for a reason to hate her." i have been a swiftie for 2008. i was in the trenches defending her summer of 2016 receiving death threats for days. i am a swiftie. i do not have an "anti taylor swift agenda," i have an anti climate terrorism agenda.

it is so fucking frustrating how so many of you go straight to blind denial over the basic concept that taylor swift is a human being and therefore has flaws. i am very sorry to be the person to tell you this but she is not perfect. neither are you. neither am i. but the major difference here is that this flaw of hers has an impact on millions of people.

taking a 28-mile flight is ridiculous. full stop. it is wasteful and unethical, no matter who is on the plane. if this was any other celebrity, you all would be tripping over yourselves to condemn them so you could have the moral high ground. but because this is a celebrity that you worship like a god, you have to prove that it is actually the moral choice for her to do things like this.

a lot of people want to talk about safety measures and stalking concerns. yes, i think she truly faces more danger from stalkers than most of us will ever know. but the fact of the matter is that the entire world should not be footing the bill for her safety. it is her responsibility to find an alternative to flying her private jet everywhere. it may be less convenient for her, but she has an ethical responsibility to not kill the planet.

the student who posts her jet information is also not responsible for stalkers. he posts all info with a 24 hour delay, and again, this information is available to the public. i promise you that people who want to use plane tracking info to stalk her are going to the source to find the information in real time. and as this post points out, a very simple alternative would be for her to sell her jet and charter flights instead. that way, her name wouldn't be on the tracking information and stalkers wouldn't be able to track her. she is actively choosing not to do that.

i really really need you all to realize that by defending her (or any other celebrity) from any and all deserved criticism, you are not being a "good fan." you are, at the end of the day, defending a billionaire who is actively harming the environment. because stan culture has become about what "looks good" rather than what actually is good. this is not like 2016 when people turned against her because she was defending herself against two people who recorded a phone call with her, edited the footage, and then released it with the express intentions of getting her "canceled." i am not commenting snake emojis on her posts. i am simply saying that she is in the wrong and that there should be accountability for that. my original post didn't leave room for nuance because it wasn't intended to escape enclosure and, quite frankly, there is little nuance in carbon emissions. but a lot of y'all seem to think i'm here for some #taylorswiftisoverparty and that could not be further from the truth.

i'm tired of everyone holding her hand and babying her. she is a grown woman. she is intelligent. she knows exactly what she is doing and what it means for the rest of the world. she makes her own decisions. and honestly, i'm tired of holding y'all's hands and babying you because you refuse to acknowledge that your queen is in the wrong. it's very frustrating to watch over and over again as people abandon their principles the moment it becomes inconvenient for them. just save everyone the time and admit you have no principles.

ladies is it a #girlboss move to kill the planet so you can go to your boyfriend’s football games and then sue the college student who posts the public data about you killing the planet for “harassment”

[molsno]

"Respectability politics" refers to attempts by marginalized groups to garner acceptance by convincing the dominant majority that they too are "normal" and therefore worthy of respect. We saw this happen with the gay rights movement over the last half century, as activists and organizations worked to shift the public discourse away from the "disreputable" topic of sexuality, and toward more "respectable" issues, such as marriage, adoption, and military service. This respectability strategy is perhaps best captured in the popular slogan "We're just like you, except for our sexual orientation." Notably, this slogan does not call for straight people to accept queerness per se, nor does it claim that all queer people deserve to be treated with respect. Rather, it implies that there are "respectable" people and "disreputable" ones, and that the "we" in "we're just like you" deserve to be in the former category.

Of course, in a society where many people are deemed "disreputable" because of their race, class, disability, or other traits, these appeals failed many multiply marginalized queer people. Furthermore, queer subpopulations who were viewed as particularly "disreputable" at the time - such as bisexual and transgender people - were often explicitly excluded from the movement over concerns that we might "hold back" the progress of gay and lesbian people. In other words, respectability politics always leaves behind the most marginalized, as well as the most sexualized, segments of any minority group.

- Julia Serano, Sexed Up: How Society Sexualizes Us, and How We Can Fight Back

[ihavenocluedude]

Major Conveniences ~ part 1

Klitz (The Girl Next Door) x female!reader

Link to reading it on Ao3   Link to my masterlist  

Masterlist for Major Conveniences

A/N - I’ve been in a Paul Dano phase this last like week, I’ve watched so many of his movies and like everything. So... I needed to get this out and I’ve been seeing (through reading them myself) that fanfiction has sort of popped up for like all of his characters... so here’s my contribution :) Idk how many parts this will be completely. But it is SO self-indulgent so... we’ll see!

Word Count for this part - 1026 

~ ~ ~

Klitz didn't know what he had expected out of college but it wasn't that it'd all be so easy.

Sure the actual education was challenging, it wasn't like it all was a walk on roses. But he was a smart kid after all. He was mainly surprised that everything else felt so easy. Although with the confidence boost he had gotten from what happened during and especially after his prom... He had felt set for college.

He was still the nerdy geek who definitely spent more time studying and watching tv than going off to some party. But he tried to indulge in it sometimes, get to some party, get tipsy and enjoy it. Something he hadn't felt like he could do all throughout high school.

He found himself a group of friends early on, ones who wouldn't judge him for wanting to stay in his dorm and study or chill out instead of going to a party. But also the kind to force him out of his dorm when needed. It wasn't some weird thing being a nerd at Yale, in fact, it almost felt like the norm in a lot of his classes.

He became friends with a guy named Jake on his first day and since then they'd pretty much started their little group. Not at all as tightly-knit as The Tripod but still good. His roommate wasn't all that great but Jake's was so therefore the group added on its third member. And after that it snowballed; new people coming in from classes, parties and the new people's roommates often popped in as well. It had felt as if he had gotten a group of friends before he even actually started college.

You yourself had found Klitz in one of your shared classes and almost immediately gotten attached to the guy. He was clever, funny and got a bit flustered whenever you got closer to him. What was not to enjoy? You had pretty much on your own made the decision that the two of you were going to study together. And you were decided about it.

Klitz had been worried that you were just using him for better grades but it felt pretty obvious that it actually wasn't like that after a while. After all, if you spend an entire study session just talking about your lives then how would that benefit your grade?

The fact that his new college life felt easier than anything had in high school wasn't that strange. And he figured that he deserved something to be easy for once.

But he started wondering if he was just in a coma having a very nice dream once you kissed him for the first time.

College had been easy enough, he had more friends than ever, he could almost be counted as popular among his peers and now the girl he had been crushing on was kissing him.

"W-What was that for?" He asked you once you parted from him, still just a small distance away from each other on his dorm bed but at least far enough that he could think straight.

"What do you think, Klitz? Why would someone kiss another person, huh?" You teased with a grin on your face. Your cheeks flushed as you reached one of your hands up to swipe his overgrown bangs to the side, wanting to see his eyes clearly.

Though when slightly more uncovered you could mostly just see the way he was flickering his eyes a little all over the room, from down to the bed back up to you, to the wall behind you, back to you and so on.

But flustered Klitz was the best kind of Klitz.

"I-I... I don't know."

"Well... Are you okay with me kissing you? Do you want to kiss me?" Even with trying to keep up the casual and cocky tone you had given him earlier you were concerned that maybe him kissing you back hadn't been more than just an automatic response.

Klitz could look so innocent sometimes and in some ways he still was. Sure he had gotten some experience with April, a woman with a lot of experience who's literally on televisions and computers all over the nation, now even in schools because of the video. But he hadn't actually even dated anyone.

But he wanted to, and he wanted to date you. So he nodded and leaned in again.

He called Matt and Eli later that night once you had left his dorm room, he wanted to yell into the phone in celebration but tried to play it cool. After all, Matt had gotten this sort of dating and more experience with Danielle and Eli had... well let's be honest he had gotten laid quite a few times just because of his newfound fame within becoming a director.

"So she kissed you?"

"Yeah, we kissed."

"Yeah yeah, but she kissed you. She made the first move. Haven't we been talking about this girl for weeks now?"

"Well yes, but-"

"But what, Klitzy?"

"Well she just did it first and I- I didn't want to creep her out, dude," Klitz argued back at Eli. Eli was often filled with pretty nonsensical questions, why did things have to happen in a specific way or time? Wasn't there just a right moment for something like this? And was it actually something wrong that you had been the one to do it?

These were the moments where Matt usually just sat there quietly, probably smirking at the sound of his two friends bickering.

"Have you asked her out yet?"

"I... no."

"Klitz!" Eli exclaimed in his usual tone that automatically registered as 'you dumbass' in all of their heads.

"So what did you say?" Matt entered the conversation again, his investigatory tone there as always. As if he was a journalist at some big press meeting and there to ask the big question.

"I just said I'd see her tomorrow."

The unassuming and rather casual tone of Klitz's voice did not match the next two responses from Matt and Eli. A "Jesus Christ, Klitz." from Matt and another "KLITZ!" from Eli.

[irithnova]

1) I find it upsetting that plum (and others in the reblogs with similar opinions) had to put that many disclaimers in their post in order to avoid mass hate because of the sheer amount of backlash I faced

2) I find it insane that the topic of racebending needs to be talked about in an almost academic level for people to realise that being critical of racebending isn't a personal attack on poc creators

3) "You deserved the backlash because your tone was harsh" refer to point 2. Also I have a right to have an opinion on the subject matter as a poc who has non white/western ocs and pretty much exclusively posts about non white/western characters just like how everyone else in the fandom is allowed to have an opinion on it and no amount of tone policing or victim blaming excuses the amount of racist anons I got and anons who continued to misconstrue what I was saying despite me clarifying myself in my reblogs that I was not trying to attack poc or stifle their creative choices, my OG post was a broader criticism of racebending content.

4) What I find shocking is the fact that I got pretty vicious backlash from other poc over a fucking one liner "people would rather racebend" and then for my subsequent reblogs which were were seen as an attempt as policing other minorities when I was literally... Giving my perspective on why I don't like racebending. As soon as someone has an opinion you don't like, it's now policing?

5) Jumping off from point (4) but POC are often vilified for lesser offenses compared to white people and I'm sorry but this is the perfect example. How come I know of around 15 white hetalians who do and say some pretty egregious shit (like posting fucking borderline Nazi uniform fanart) yet where is their inbox flooded with the absolute worst messages? Where are the shady posts about them? When's the last time you guys sat around in a pissed off circle-jerk about half of the shit they do?

Circling back to the point of white vs mixed vs poc Alfred (because a vast majority of my hate was from poc Alfred fans). I've literally seen bigger, white hetalia accounts share why they personally see Alfred as white and they did not receive an OUNCE of the vitriol that I received for my like. 2/3 sentence paragraph saying basically "forgive me for not liking poc Alfred personally as a Filipino because of the history."

I'm not saying you have to agree with me at all because surprise, dictating poc was never my intention. But the reactions are very telling. Do you not see how insane that is.

Funny how my detractors are accusing me of of trying to control their creative choices and dictate them, yet they're attempting to dictate me by straight up saying I'm basically/functionally white, therefore I'm not allowed to have an opinion on... Poc Alfred.

I said this in a previous post but if I wanted to dictate you all. I would have posted in relevant tags (like #aphamerica) so potential racebending fans were more likely see it. I would have gone after posts where characters are racebent or call people out by name. I would have sent butthurt asks/anons to racebending fans.

This was literally my first ever post regarding my personal opinions on racebending.

I think it's. funny. To say the least seeing some of the types of people saying that my behaviour is unacceptable considering I know full well of their conduct in private (some of these people I know for a fact have been complicit in racism) I am not taking any criticism from the likes of these people and the people nodding their heads in agreement with them.

I am also not taking any shit/bullying from white Americans when it comes to my personal discomfort with poc Alfred as a Filipino woman. For obvious reasons.

One last thing. I'll just put the screenshot of the post here

+ Some of you need to grasp the distinction between personal opinion and an attempt at dictation. Someone shouldn't need to repeat "personally" or any variant of that excessively to avoid dictator accusations.

RACEBENDING NATIONAL PERSONIFICATIONS: A TREATISE

DISCLAIMERS:

I AM NOT WHITE, I AM A POC. I am not writing this because I’m a butthurt white person who gets pissy when someone makes my white faves nonwhite and thus unrelatable to me for ‘some’ reason.

I AM NOT PERSONALLY ATTACKING ANY INDIVIDUALS WHO RACEBEND OR IMAGINE THEIR NATIONS TO HAVE A DIFFERENT ETHNICITY THAN WHAT THEY DO IN CANON; ON A SIMILAR NOTE, DO NOT ATTACK SUCH INDIVIDUALS FOR ME. This is a discussion of general fandom trends and a larger phenomenon, the issue I am talking about cannot be solved on an individual to individual basis.

I AM NOT TRYING TO STOP FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE FROM RECLAIMING THEIR NATIONS. As I am not First Nations myself, I would not wish to deny what these individuals emotionally and mentally reap from reclaiming their nations.

I AM NOT THE “POC AREN’T ALLOWED TO HAVE FUN AND SEE THEMSELVES IN THEIR FAVES” POLICE; I AM NOT YOUR MOM, DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. Again, this is a discussion of fandom trends and a larger phenomenon. I think it’s almost always worth examining why we do the things we do and the reasons behind a trend.

I AM NOT AGAINST RACEBENDING IN GENERAL. This is specifically an essay on racebending in nationverse Hetalia and other personified nations fandoms.

PREFACE

As stated before in my disclaimers, this essay is not intended to be a condemnation of individuals who participate in racebending. Rather, I intend to make a macro-critique of wider structures and patterns. For this reason, this essay is not accusing anyone engaging in racebending of holding any specific belief. I cannot stress enough how much I do not know you, the hypothetical reader who engages in racebending. 

Again, my intent is to critique wider structures and patterns.

This essay is a conversation I would like to have with other POC and other marginalized groups, especially POC based in white, Western countries. Thus, I ask people not included in the above groups to refrain from weighing in on this.

ALTERNATIVE GOOGLE DOC LINK HERE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Difference in Reception for Racebent versus Non-Racebent Characters

The Inherent Politicism of Personifying Nations

The State of POC Representation in Hetalia

The Assumption of Interchangeability in POC Experience

The Myth of Multiculturalism

“It’s Just Fandom, Why Are You Trying to Control POC Who Just Want to Have Fun and Want to Represent Themselves?"

Conclusion

The Difference in Reception for Racebent versus Non-Racebent Characters

I will start this essay off with an acknowledgement of my station in the Hetalia fandom and how it uniquely equips me to talk about this topic – I am very fortunate to enjoy a follower base that primarily follows me for non-Western characters, whether they be canonical or my own original characters. As someone who mostly posts non-Western characters, I can confirm that there is a wider disparity in reception between drawings of my white characters and non-white characters. The following example is not from myself, but from the artist miyuecakes who similarly focuses on predominantly non-white, non-Western countries. You can see there is a drastic gap in the amount of notes that post focused on five nations considered to be non-Western versus a drawing of Female America.

Stating this fact of the fandom is fairly noncontroversial. I would also assert that the following statement is equally true, however given recent reception, is far more controversial: “There are far more instances of racebent canonically white/Western characters, which receive far more traction than their non-racebent counterparts, whether canonical or not.”

I want to make clear what my statement is not saying:

Racebending is only done by white people seeking to score clout and diversity points without having to care about canon non-white characters. In fact, the vast majority of racebending in the fandom is done by POC looking for representation; given the amount of white canon nations compared to any other nation, POC who engage in racebending see it as a way of “evening” the disproportionate overrepresentation of white countries.

POC who engage in racebending are doing so to score clout and diversity points with a white audience. Refer to my above point.

Racebent canonically white characters are met with no controversy or racist/bigoted vitriol. It is fairly well known that there have been multiple harassment campaigns, particularly on Twitter, against artists and editors who’ve engaged in racebending even outside of the Hetalia fandom: see the Black Anya edit, Thumin’s artwork and resulting hate. POC being visibly POC in online spaces will always garner backlash.

On a similar note, I am not including POC cosplayers cosplaying white or light-skinned characters in my definition of racebending. Being angered by POC who cosplay characters of a different complexion is blatantly racist; anyone who is angered by this has nothing of value to add and not worth arguing with.

I am a bitter artist who is mad that I don’t receive enough notes on my posts with non-racebent characters compared to posts about racebent white characters. As stated earlier, I am grateful for the audience I’ve cultivated who specifically follow me for non-racebent non-Western content; I am also more than aware that my content is not what people who seek out racebent content are looking for, and have no interest in changing either my content or their tastes. The last thing I would wish to do is to label POC creators who engage in racebending as “the enemy” and POC creators who don’t as “my side.”

With that out of the way, I bring up this observation because I think it’s worth asking ourselves, POC specifically, the following questions: Why? Why is there this discrepancy in frequency and reception between these kinds of characters and content? Why do people racebend in lieu of focusing on existing POC and creating their own non-white characters?

The easy answer most would give is because white characters are over-represented and given more screen time and attention in the canon, so people, especially POC, will become attached to them and create variations of them that hit closer to home for them; this is especially the case if you are a POC who has had experiences living as a minority in a Western country. Some POC may also use racebending as a way to subvert national myths that have historically excluded people of color for a variety of racist, imperialist reasons. I know I used to subscribe towards a depiction of non-white passing America and Canada for this very reason.

In the rest of this essay I would like to examine and critique the practice of racebending national anthropomorphisms traditionally and typically depicted as white in the context of Hetalia and by extension other media involving similar premises. This essay argues that while racebending may be harmless for most other anime, Hetalia – by virtue of its content centering real life nations – carries political implications that are not necessarily appropriate.

I stress again that I can’t stop you or what anybody in the Hetalia fandom does. I do not have that kind of power nor the will to do such a thing. All I ask is for you to listen to the following with an open mind, and if there’s only one thing you take away from this, I hope it’s to realize that POC in particular have valid reasons to dislike racebent depictions of white nations; holding such a stance does not make them anti-POC representation and somehow no longer POC and instead, a member of the white oppressor class.

The Inherent Politicism of Personifying Nations

Firstly, I repeat that a series about personified nations is deeply political and every creative choice carries political and socio-cultural ramifications, whether intentional or not and made by the creator or the fan. Even if you mostly interact with Hetalia in a depoliticized context, others may not, and given that nationverse Hetalia is about personified nations, this is perfectly reasonable. 

Let us look into the canon material of Hetalia- It is shown that nations on average have close ties to their governments, viewing them as their bosses and carrying out actions for them. We are shown that there are nations who go against the orders of their governments, such as Germany; this does not mean all nations follow in that pattern, however, and there are many who are in lockstep with their governments and their actions.

Therefore, for individuals whose ethnic groups and nations have suffered great harm from oppressor nation-states (Philippines v. United States, Indonesia v. Netherlands, India v. England), it is not irrational for them to be unsettled by their oppressor being racebent- especially when said oppressor nation-state is depicted as being the same ethnicity as the very group(s) they marginalized. This is uncomfortable for multiple reasons: 

There is an implication that a member of a marginalized group possibly chose to take part in atrocities and misdeeds that the said marginalized group historically not the major perpetrator behind. In more egregious cases, a member of a marginalized group willingly chose to commit atrocities and misdeeds on a large scale against their own group.

The oppressor state personification was forced by their government to commit these grievous acts of harm against members of other marginalized groups/their own marginalized groups; thus, the personification of the nation-state, the people, has little to no culpability as an oppressor, and is instead made into a fellow victim of their own government. 

This deflects blame from the embodiment of the state of being an oppressor. The suggestion here is that the state is somehow completely separate yet intertwined with the government – it was simply the government who perpetrated the crimes… the people were just unwillingly complicit. This can come across as an erasure/rosewashing of the very purposeful policies used to harm and disadvantage colonized/oppressed groups.

This can also erase the fact that in many cases, the people gave the government’s actions their tacit approval whether it was through whole-hearted enthusiasm or apathy towards the suffering of others. 

In the case that the racebent nation’s minority ethnicity was historically involved in such acts, this involves highly sensitive conversations about minorities’ complicity in crimes and assimilation into the white/majority order (e.g. Chinese and East Asian settlers in Hawaii after America’s illegal annexation, Korean collaborators with the Japanese annexation of Korea, African American soldiers in the Philippines); these are extremely touchy subjects that should be had within the relevant ethnic groups, and should not be appropriated by outsiders, particularly white people, especially for fandom purposes.

(I will discuss insiders racebending nation-states to their ethnic group that have suffered mistreatment and oppressed by said nation-states in “The Myth of Multiculturalism.”)

Additionally, racebending may end up justifying those very same crimes, especially in the case of settler colonialism. For example, during French rule of Algeria, the French government began a program of confiscating Algerian land from indigenous Algerians and giving them to French and European settlers. Over the course of two centuries, more and more land was taken away from indigenous Algerians, forcing them to move to the margins of society, where they were barred from accessing employment, higher education, and the other societal amenities. 

Many would be able to identify how personifying Algeria as a white, French individual would be erasing indigenous Algerians and implying that the French settlers represent all of Algeria. However, conversely, making France an Algerian man is also playing into colonial French propaganda. The French viewed Algeria as part of France and the French homeland itself, unique even among other French African colonies, and made plans to make Algeria a full-fledged French province, or department. To make the national personification of France Algerian then, is to suggest that this belief was and is correct, that the Algerians are a part of the colonial core of France, even if the intention is to represent the modern day Algerian diaspora in France.

IMPORTANT: I will expand on the politics of representing diaspora populations in the section “The Myth of Multiculturalism.”

Given all of these reasons for why POC may justifiably react negatively to a racebent white nation personification, some may argue against these with:

“Why is it that when the nation is white, they never have to deal with any of these heavy discussions of imperialism, bigotry, oppression, etc, but when they’re racebent they suddenly have to? Why are they suddenly politicized when they’re racebent?”

My response to that is that they were politicized, even when they were white because the act of personifying a nation is inherently political; to ignore a white nation’s history of oppression is a politically charged move in of itself. Are we really depoliticizing POC when we racebend a white nation and try to maintain that same ‘depoliticization’ and omission of historical oppression but this time for a POC face? To racebend a white nation is to refuse to contend with the contradiction of transforming an oppressor class to the very group they marginalize - making racebending an inherently political act. It is not necessarily that whiteness is unpolitical but rather that an active refusal to deal with this contradiction makes the political implications much more obvious.

Additionally, this rebuttal raises another question- Were we to completely forget about a character’s background as the personification of an oppressor state and the political weight of that, would that truly solve the problem of POC being politicized? I don’t think so- In the current world we live in, POC are always political. But exclusively racebending oppressor states makes no attempt to depoliticize non-Western POC states, creating a divide between POC that get to be “depoliticized” and POC who don’t based on their proximity to the West.

The State of POC Representation in Hetalia

Some would argue with the points of my last paragraph saying that I am not including POC who both engage in racebending but also create non-Western POC OCs; if equal attention is given to both, there would be no division between racebent Western POC who get to be humanized and non-Western POC who don’t, right?

To answer this we must acknowledge wider trends in racebending in Hetalia. Consider the following: When somebody has a North African! Romano, how many other North African nations (canon or non-canon) do they show appreciation for? Create content for? Expound the same amount of mental and creative energy for? Furthermore: If they do have another North African nation(s) they create content for, are they allowed to exist as their own separate beings, and not purely exist to be North African! Romano’s tie to North Africa?

Chances are, Romano is reduced to being the token brown character in a largely white cast and isn’t allowed to ever exist without whiteness surrounding him. This is a very diaspora experience, but I find it unfortunate that in a piece of media that enables us to explore any number of cultures and experiences over all of time and history, we (and I’m including myself as another POC who grew up in a primarily white environment) are unable to imagine ourselves outside of this setting and celebrate ourselves without having to exist against a white mainstream. Stories about white engulfment are allowed to exist and should be told, but why is this so common? Why do these stories disproportionately outnumber POC stories where whiteness is minute or absent?

As my audience is intended to be mostly POC, I will not elaborate on the following scenario too much, but I will ask us to scrutinize the ethics of it. What about cases where white individuals racebend some of their white favorite characters and position them as POC representation in lieu of actually focusing on POC, non-Western nations, canon or not? Does this not have implications about what kinds of POC and diversity are considered more palatable and appealing?

Furthermore, when another North African nation does exist alongside racebent Romano, their character and depiction is almost always heavily dependent on their relationship to Romano, a Western nation. This still perpetuates the same inequality I was talking about earlier where POC nations are humanized based on their proximity to the West, whether because they personify a Western nation or happen to have a relationship with a Western nation.

We should not just be talking about having “more” non-white representation, but also the quality of it. It is completely understandable why some POC may not be satisfied with the representation most racebent content provides, even beyond the reasons outlined previously; this type of representation excludes POC who do not have a relationship to the West, and is still largely focused on the West. 

IMPORTANT: I am not saying that contact with or influence from the West makes POC somehow “less POC” or that stories from Western-based diaspora are a “diluted” form of representation. I will expand on this in the section “The Myth of Multiculturalism.”

“Well if it’s not good enough for those POC, then they should just mind their business and make their own representation! There’s plenty of non-racebent content out there!”

Many POC do exactly that- creating their own representation without racebending. However, as established earlier, racebent white characters receive far more attention and feedback compared to canonical non-white characters, despite the fact that both depictions fulfill the purpose of “representation.” This can be especially disheartening in a fandom that already heavily tokenizes canon POC nations, whether it’s India being presented as the “nanny”/surrogate parent in Commonwealth group art or Seychelles as the “adopted child of color” in FACES family. To POC content creators, it feels insulting that the wider fandom, rather than developing POC canon characters (or taking advantage of the source material’s potential by making OCs) and viewing them as representation, the fandom chooses to racebend Western nations and celebrates them instead.

I want to make clear again what I am not saying with that statement:

POC who engage in racebending are doing so to score clout and diversity points with a white audience. Again, it’s a fact that the vast majority of racebending is done by POC looking to create their own representation.

POC who engage in racebending should all go stan Seychelles and Cuba instead. This is an extremely individualist solution to what is a wider phenomenon. I do not blame POC based in Western countries for feeling disconnected to the few POC nations we have in canon.

Racebent POC content is more popular than content of non-racebent white characters.

What I am describing here is how an audience (the Hetalia fandom) receives two creations, both made by POC in the pursuit of creating more representation, and the difference in reception. The difference, it seems, is that the wider fandom deems certain kinds of POC representation more appealing, and thus, certain kinds of POC worth focusing on.

The Assumption of Interchangeability in POC Experience

Earlier, I mentioned that one of the possible reasons for POC to engage in racebending is the desire to see an iteration of their favorite character that is closer to their own reality and lived experience. Therefore, some may choose to racebend a white character to embody a marginalized minority in the country instead so they can share more experiences with the formerly white characters. 

Here, I will not be dealing with the practice of POC racebending their own country to their own ethnicity, which is the focus of the next section. Instead, I will be delving into the practice of POC racebending another nation to embody a minority (one which they do not belong to) for the purposes of ‘putting themselves in their interpretations.’ I argue that to do this requires assuming a certain level of interchangeability between POC experiences.

First and foremost, POC are not a monolith- we lead drastically different lives depending on our ethnic backgrounds, where we live, our socioeconomic class, our political and racial context, and etc. Therefore, we cannot presume that our experiences of marginalization mean we’ll always succeed in properly representing other minority groups elsewhere; in fact, the goal of projecting our own life experiences onto them means that there will be an obstacle to properly representing these minority groups.

Take the following example: Imagine a Chinese-Malaysian individual greatly enjoys the character of Spain. Wishing to better relate to him, the individual racebends him to be also Chinese. However, a great deal of historical, cultural determinants and nuances separate the experiences of Chinese people in Spain and Chinese people in Malaysia. There are similarities, yes, but this Chinese Malaysian cannot hope to properly represent the Chinese population in Spain if their primary goal remains self-projection. Now imagine that our Chinese-Malaysian individual wished to racebend England to be Indian; an even wider gap separates the experiences and history of Chinese people in Malaysia and Indian people in England, making it even less likely that our individual will succeed in representing the experiences of Indian people in England.

Another point to consider is that attempts at racebending certain national personifications to represent minorities in the country end up erasing representation for the majority population of the country. For example, there has been a historical Japanese community in Peru that dates back to the 1800s and made a large impact on Peruvian culture. However, it would still be inappropriate to make a Peru OC that is mostly Japanese in race, because besides just being not representative of the 99.9% of non-Japanese Peruvians, it would also be taking representation from Peruvian mestizo and indigenous peoples, who make up over 80% of Peru’s population.

This isn’t even taking into consideration cases where nations are racebent to personify ethnic groups that do not have a numerically significant or historically significant population.

“So what if it’s inaccurate? I just want to self-project onto my favorite character!”

If that’s your response, then I encourage you to read the section “It’s Just Fandom, Why Are You Trying to Control POC Who Just Want to Have Fun and Want to Represent Themselves?” where I address assertions of "fandom is not activism" and similar points.

For now, I will ask you to consider the feelings of those very minorities you are ostensibly representing, even if your primary intention is to project your own experiences onto a character. Chances are, they also suffer from little to no representation that depicts them in inaccurate and unflattering ways.

Hetalia is a media property supposedly centered around exploring and learning about other cultures, but so often fails to accurately and sensitively depict many cultures and nations. Should we not show them the grace that canon Hetalia fails to provide?

The Myth of Multiculturalism

Multiculturalism is typically defined as a celebration of a nation’s ethnic diversity. This is generally considered to be a good and progressive value to have, but a closer and more critical look at multiculturalism in practice suggests that not even a value directed at xenophobia is immune to in-group out-group biases. When enacted by the state, multiculturalism is less an acceptance of diversity as it currently exists (especially in regards to non-indigenous ethnicities) and more an assimilation of these “foreign cultures” into the dominant national one.

For example, Singapore has built much of its national identity as a “multicultural” society. This is shown through government policies in language and education, where the languages of the 3 ethnic groups (Chinese, Tamil Indians, Malays) are all officialized and the government promotes education for ethnic minorities in their mother tongues. However, the label of “multicultural” hides the reality of power inequality between the various ethnic groups. Minorities face pressure to display literacy in the language and culture of the Chinese majority for greater societal acceptance and inclusion. In fact, the assertion that Singapore is a multicultural society that treats its ethnic groups all equally, is often used as a cudgel to shut down any allegations that Singapore fails to live up to this national identity. As my audience is intended to be predominantly POC, especially those living as minorities in Western nations, members of my audience are of course familiar with insistences of “But Canada/United States/etc is a melting pot society! Racism isn’t a serious issue, POC can’t be treated poorly in those countries.”

By racebending a national personification to be part of a marginalized population, this is making a political statement by asserting that the marginalized population is in fact a part of that nation, and has always been, despite historical exclusion. The act of racebending is an overly idealistic and uncritical agreement with multiculturalism, without considering how the value actually applies in practice. It rosewashes the reality and existence of cultural imperialism enacted on immigrant/outsider groups. 

Racebending can therefore accidentally act as multicultural propaganda, especially when the invokement of multiculturalism is used to stamp out valid critiques of othering and racialization by ethnic minorities. (E.g. “Singapore can’t have problems with racism against Malays! Singapore himself is Malay!”)

IMPORTANT: If you want to argue that nation personifications are not inherently representative of their government, refer to the section, “The Inherent Politicism of Personifying Nations.”

“Well, POC based in Western countries will naturally feel more connected to their Western countries than their homelands, often because of those policies intended to break their connections to their homelands. Why can’t they racebend to reclaim? To feel connected to their Western countries in contrast to their realities of ostracization and othering?”

I have already discussed why other POC (those affected by a white regime’s actions) would be uncomfortable with the implications of tying a POC/marginalized group with said white regime’s misdeeds in the section “The Inherent Politicism of Personifying Nations” so I will not discuss it here beyond mentioning it.

Firstly, I must acknowledge that this argument is fundamentally an emotional one. I do not want to deny what POC in Western countries emotionally derive from racebending the nation-state, even as a fellow POC based in a Western country. Instead, I will approach this argument from another angle.

I ask the following: When trying to represent our experiences as diaspora and minorities, why is personifying a diaspora/minority community not a popular option? The act of choosing to personify a community is inherently political, and we can use it to empower ourselves as diaspora or minorities. For example, by personifying diaspora communities, we can acknowledge that diaspora experiences are different enough from those in the ‘homeland’ to warrant another personification, and also avoid accidentally justifying colonial possession of those ‘homeland’ states. 

Additionally, by personifying diaspora/minority communities, we can 1) better reflect our unique day-to-day experiences of being racialized and separated from the mainstream, 2) avoid many of the earlier uncomfortable implications of minority collaboration in majority perpetrated acts and condoning colonialism, and 3) stress our independence and autonomy despite the efforts of the state and majority population to take that away.

To put it another way, why are there so many stories of minorities striving towards being included, or from another angle, subsumed, into the white nation-state despite its frequent rejection of them? Again, what does it say that these narratives of “inclusion into a historically white nation-state” disproportionately outnumber POC narratives where whiteness is minute or absent?

IMPORTANT: I am not singling you, the hypothetical POC diaspora individual who engages in racebending, out. I am asking about wider patterns of representation in media.

“But by personifying diaspora and minority communities separately from the personification of the nation-state, isn’t that basically saying that minorities will never be seen as part of the nation-state? That we will never be included when people think of our nation state?”

I believe this response takes too narrow a perspective on what multiculturalism is and “being part of a nation-state means,” and thus views having separate personifications as ‘justifying’ or ‘promoting’ our exclusion from the nation-state when it may not be the case.

Look at it from this way- Is it not also problematic to have only one avatar for, say, America, and thus imply that there is one true way of being “American?” Having multiple American personifications, in contrast, is a more true depiction of the realities of being American, and more true to the values of multiculturalism; it instead suggests that there are many ways to be American, that we don’t have to be subsumed into the mainstream to be considered “American.”

“Isn’t that functionally the same as different interpretations of the same nation-state coexisting? Why can’t fans just all have a different Alfred/America specific to their own experience who are all equally considered American?”

Once more: I am not trying to stop anyone from doing anything. That’s not within my power to do so. I agree with this statement that largely, having multiple American personifications and multiple America/Alfred fulfills the same purpose of showing that to be American means something different to everyone. However, the reason I advocated for the former approach is because it achieves the same goal with a lot less uncomfortable questions and unique benefits (minority autonomy), as detailed above.

“It’s Just Fandom, Why Are You Trying to Control POC Who Just Want to Have Fun and Want to Represent Themselves?”

First off, I am presenting this essay as a conversation with other POC because I want to make it explicitly known that my position here is not that of a white person seeking to silence POC and lecture them about what is and is not good for them. Secondly, it's because I want to talk about racebending as it currently exists in the Hetalia fandom, something mostly done by POC who wish to represent themselves and create the diversity missing in the source material. I believe pointing out that white people who are uncomfortable with POC characters or only racebend for self-centered reasons likely have a racial bias is obvious, especially to other POC, and wish to progress the conversation beyond this. This is why my discussion on racebending is moving beyond white bias.

As part of centering this as a discussion among POC, I am also assuming good faith from my interlocutors, that their desires for representation and diversity are sincere, and that I don’t look down on them. I hope then, that this assumption of good faith can be afforded to me as well- that my interlocutors believe me when I say that the last thing I want to do is control POC, as a fellow POC.

Having gotten all of that out of the way, let's address some rebuttals to the arguments I've made thus far.

"Who are you to decide what kind of representation resonates with POC?"

You're right. I can't decide what kind of representation resonates with POC. Again, I am not intent on controlling POC, and again, I recognize that many of the arguments in favor of racebending white nations come from an emotional place; I can’t control how POC feel, even if I wanted to do that.

However, it's precisely because of this that I've made my arguments based on  factors other than emotional ones, such as the political implications and questioning the inclusivity racebending provides us with. POC joy and happiness is crucial in the face of a system that seeks to crush and suppress us. But from one POC to another, it's not much of a discussion if your response to my points is simply, "Well, it makes me feel represented and happy, and that's what matters most." If we argued based on that, we could go all day. Am I not a POC myself? Do the feelings and happiness of POC who are uncomfortable with racebending not matter? For that matter, who are you to tell the people whose families and people have been historically affected by white imperialist states to stop disliking racebent versions of those imperialist states?

For white people, it is easy for them to shut down racebending, because they don't understand the experience of never seeing yourself in any form of media. I have asked white/non-marginalized people to refrain from this discussion for that very reason. But in exchange for that, we should be able to discuss the ramifications of racebending national personifications, and look deeper at the arguments for and against racebending.

"You're taking this too seriously. People giving more attention to racebent versions of Western countries versus non-racebent POC countries doesn't say anything deeper about someone's political beliefs. People just like the silly anime about personified countries, and that silly anime happens to give more attention to the canonically white countries."

To a certain extent, I get this rebuttal. We cannot solve racism or the privileging of the global north by reblogging Hetalia fanart of Seychelles and Cameroon. Everything I have described here is symptomatic of much, much larger issues that affect billions. But it's symptomatic: fandom is not immune to the ills of wider society. We do not shed our innate biases and prejudices when we enter supposedly apolitical spaces like fandom. In a series about personified nations, our prejudices and biases are naturally magnified because the source material’s nature is deeply political, dealing with history and personified nations and states.

Again I ask: What does it mean that the POC representation made by POCs is so often limited to racebending canonically white characters, in the context of the world order we live in where proximity to the West automatically confers certain privileges?

IMPORTANT: Refer to the section “The Myth of Multiculturalism” if you respond to this with “Are you saying depictions of Western-influenced POC experiences are a lesser form of representation?”

If that fails to convince you, and you still believe the inequality in reception between racebent and non-racebent nations doesn’t say anything deeper, I respond with the following- Isn’t it still worth it to try and show the same support and energy to the non-racebent, non-Western countries and their creators, regardless of whether that content speaks to you or not?

One last time, I’ll clarify what I’m not saying with that:

Stop liking America and Russia and England. I repeat, I cannot control what POC like or feel or do, and I repeat, what characters you personally like is a very individualistic view on a wider, systemic issue.

In the section “The State of POC Representation in Hetalia,” I discussed how disproportionately giving to racebent countries versus non-racebent non-Western countries is not an intersectional form of POC representation, and fails to address the underrepresentation of non-Western countries and cultures given the global colonial hierarchy. My above statement is therefore saying that if we POC want to achieve a more intersectional form of solidarity and representation, to create a fandom that’s more non-Western friendly, to generally support all types of POC creators, we should not neglect certain kinds of POC content just because it doesn’t personally resonate with us.

You don’t have to. Fandom is not activism. For many, fandom is an escape from the grim realities of the outside world. But in a media property all about exploring other countries’ cultures and histories, can we not strive for the spirit of the source material, and be a little more open-minded in exploring other countries and other forms of POC representation? Even in this miniscule way?

CONCLUSION

I would like to conclude this essay on the matter of irithnova, and the recent controversy she’s been embroiled in for stating many of the points I have made. Yes, our tones were different. But no amount of harsh tone warrants the outrage and rather racist backlash her post received. irithnova has been one of the most active voices in the Hetalia fandom speaking out against racism, from the exclusion of POC in j-ellyfish’s character polls to myrddin’s behavior. However, as soon as she, a Filipino, expresses personal discomfort with certain depictions of a nation that’s caused great harm to her people, other POC were the first to get mad at her for seeing the political implications of a POC personified America, to the point of trying to deny her reality as a feminized and racialized member of the diaspora living in a colonial European country and calling her functionally white.

POC solidarity doesn’t mean we have to all agree with each other, or even like every other POC. But I want to note the irony here of people committing the very act they accused irithnova of doing- telling her, a Filipino, that she wasn’t allowed to criticize racebent depictions of America, thereby trying to control POC.

If your response to this is “Well, sure irithnova didn’t deserve the harassment, but she was still wrong to criticize racebending because it wasn’t her place!” I would like to remind you of the following points:

Scroll up to the top and read this essay again. Regardless of tone used, there are valid reasons for POC to dislike and criticize depictions of racebent countries.

irithnova, as a Filipino living in the West and has Filipino relatives in the USA, is intimately aware of the nature of American imperialism and racism against POC. The United States promised to help the Philippines achieve independence but instead robbed it of its sovereignty, putting down resistance to its takeover and instituting American rule because they viewed Filipinos as “lesser” and incapable of governing themselves because of their race. If it isn’t irithnova’s place to feel uncomfortable (and thus criticize) racebent America, then whose is it?

Finally, I want to emphasize one more thing- First Nations/Indigenous individuals have a unique relationship to the colonial settler states that occupy their land. Like I’ve said so many times, I cannot tell any POC how to feel or what to do, and even more so in this case because I myself am not First Nations/Indigenous; I’ve only provided arguments about the pitfalls of racebending and the merits of other forms of representation. But just as how I cannot tell you what to feel or do, nobody can stop other POC feeling put off by a racebent America.

At the end of the day, despite the who-knows-how-many paragraphs I’ve spent articulating the reasons against racebending canonically white nations, I cannot stop anyone from racebending nations if they wish to. But I do hope readers come away with a better understanding of the flaws of racebending, and the benefits of looking away from the Western mainstream and looking elsewhere to represent our experiences as diaspora and minorities. If you’re someone who engages in racebending, but still chose to read this 6K word long essay on the Hetalia fandom, I can’t express my gratitude enough for hearing me out. Honestly, anybody who read through this entire post deserves an award- Thanks for reading 💖

[gatheringbones]

[“Respectability politics” refers to attempts by marginalized groups to garner acceptance by convincing the dominant majority that they too are “normal” and therefore worthy of respect. We saw this happen with the mainstream gay rights movement over the last half century, as activists and organizations worked to shift the public discourse away from the “disreputable” topic of sexuality, and toward more “respectable” issues, such as marriage, adoption, and military service. This respectability strategy is perhaps best captured in the popular slogan “We’re just like you, except for our sexual orientation.”

Notably, this slogan does not call for straight people to accept queerness per se, nor does it claim that all queer people deserve to be treated with respect. Rather, it implies that there are “respectable” people and “disreputable” ones, and that the “we” in “we’re just like you” deserve to be in the former category.

Of course, in a society where many people are deemed “disreputable” because of their race, class, disability, or other traits, these appeals to respectability failed many multiply marginalized queer people. Furthermore, queer subpopulations who were viewed as particularly “disreputable” at the time—such as bisexual and transgender people—were often explicitly excluded from the movement over concerns that we might “hold back” the progress of gay and lesbian people. In other words, respectability politics always leaves behind the most marginalized, as well as the most sexualized, segments of any minority group. For these reasons, many contemporary queer activists are opposed to recycling this strategy.

“Contagiousness politics” is a term of my own making, and it refers to attempts to placate the dominant majority’s fears that they might become “infected” or “contaminated” by a particular marginalized group. For LGBTQIA+ people, such fears have typically centered on the assumption that straight people can be “turned queer” via interacting with us. Perhaps the most effective contagiousness-politics slogan of the gay rights movement was “we’re born that way.” There have been extensive debates about this slogan, with some queer people expressing concerns that “born that way” suggests that we must suffer from some kind of “birth defect.” Others are concerned that the phrase implies that no one would willingly choose to be queer, and/or that it erases some individuals’ experiences with shifts in identity or gender/sexual fluidity. While I agree that the slogan fails to capture many intricacies regarding how queer people come to be, I believe its effectiveness lies largely in its ability to allay straight people’s fears of contagiousness. After all, if people are “born queer,” then that means that straight people can’t “catch” it from us.

There is another gay rights–era message that has received considerably less attention but seems to have served a similar purpose. Namely, lesbians and gay men would often assure straight people that they were not sexually interested in them. They would point out that gay men are attracted to other gay men, and lesbians to other lesbians, and they meet one another in queer-specific settings, such as gay bars or m4m/f4f dating sites. These messages seemed designed to convince straight people that they need not “panic” about being “seduced” by a queer person.

While the notion that queer and straight people inhabit entirely separate dating pools may hold true for exclusively lesbian and gay people, it doesn’t necessarily apply to other gender and sexual minorities. Bisexuals are attracted to people across multiple genders, trans and intersex people vary in our sexual orientations, and so on. In fact, this “separate dating pools” message insinuates that it would be a bad thing if a queer person were to take an interest in a straight person, or vice versa. Such flawed messaging helped to create the apparent paradox that we now find ourselves in, where the straight majority openly accepts people who are in same-sex relationships, while simultaneously harboring fears of “sexual deception” and being “contaminated” by queerness themselves.”]

julia serano, from sexed up: how society sexualizes us, and how we can fight back, 2022

[whitelilynh]

Unpopular opinion: Team Guy had the MOST protagonic vibes of them all.

Seriously, they would have been a much better main cast.

Lee has major MC vibes, he is one that truly stands up for hard work, it's not favoured by any external circunstances (the opposite, actually) and has real moral values (he doesn't justify bad actions if made by people he likes, unlike Naruto). Also, they involve a relationship of TRUE rivalry inside the team, being Neji a real, healthy rival and not a straight out antagonist/enemy.

Going on with Neji, he has a compelling and complex background story that credits his behaviour/mentality even if he was wrong on his interpretation of his clan and what destiny is, AND he is able to acknowledge his mistake and grow from it, which makes him a mature person and not just a boy making tantrums each time he's proven wrong. In fact, Neji is low-key wanting to be proven wrong, which means he partially might be aware of his misinterpretations, but is so fixated on the ideas he created as a copying mechanism since he was 4 YO he can't let go, until helped by others and mainly, told the truth for once in his life (he was just such a greatly constructed character in OG)... AND the resolution of his background story doesn't significantly changes his dynamics with his team and his rival because those are healthy, well constructed bonds and he is a proper individual on his own, not attached to someone else to validate himself. Besides, Neji is a TRUE genious, who made even someone as Kakashi (who was a prodigy himself, student of 4° hokage = genius and teammate of Itachi and probably Shisui = both geniouses) question how is that someone as incredible as Neji even exists (this is canon from his fight with Hinata, but was conveniently forgotten after that in order to nerf Neji so he wouldn't outshine Naruto and Sasuke... Kakashi also states Sasuke is no close to rival Neji's genious).

And we have Tenten who is, for once, not disminished by an obsessive infatuation with anyone, but an independent kunoichi that works hard and has goals of her own, she ambitions to be a legendary kunoichi all for herself, not to impress anyone. Also, she is not biased towards any of her teammates and doesn't relies on them (and this is a major point in this team, not any one of them rely on the others, but actually work TOGETHER).

This is a team were no inner pairing is needed, may be even would be damaging, because they are perfect as teammates, so they can leave the romance triangles and so on, they would find that with someone outside themselves.

And on top, we have a sensei that actually involves in his students training and growth, in every sense and unbiased. I know, he is closer to Lee, but that is out of Lee being naturally more emotional and therefore more fond of him, also Lee respects him the most and is constantly searching for his guidance because he is committed to his goals. It comes from Lee, not from Guy neglecting the other two.

This is a true healthy team that deserves their own reboot of the series, having them front enemies and interacting with other teams without the unnecessary drama and plot armour all the time. (And I mean, a reboot of a serious series. Their spin off is great, but is comedy, so I feel I doesn't makes them justice. And they deserve some justice).