#C!wilbur critical

[stellocchia]

Does anyone remember that time cWilbur tried to weaponize the pit against cQuackity in the custody battle stream and he said something along the lines of "Don't trust someone who would have fought you in the pit" to cTommy?

Because I do.

That was fucked up.

Like, straight-up, not only incredibly manipulative, but also fucked up on a fundamental level. Wilbur is the one who dug up the pit all the way back in Pogtopia. He's the one who came up with the idea of Tommy and Techno fighting in there. He's the one who pushed Tommy and Techno in. He's the one who kept goading them on.

The only person who thought it was appropriate to get Tommy beaten to a pulp because he dared being angry at the guy who executed his best friend on the orders of a dictator is Wilbur. No one else thought of it. No one else orchestrated it. Even Mr. Techno "The only universal language is Violence" Blade was hesitant. Not Wilbur though! Motherfucker cheered throughout!

And then, after the brutality and cruelty of that situation, he had the GALL to try and use his own actions to discredit someone else. Because the way he phrased it cannot be spun around into a self-deprecating "you can't trust me" moment, there was none of that. He was straight-up just being a dickhead.

And then people wonder why Tommy didn't trust him after he came back to life and treated him like a ticking time bomb. Maybe Wilbur shouldn't have gaslit, girlbossed, and gatekept so close to the sun constantly!

[call-me-apple]

It still boggles my mind that OG L'Manburg era c!Wilbur wasn't widely regarded as a villain he is such a fucking slimy asshole it's incredible like the man plans to "use the TommyInnits of the world" to build himself an industry and calls Tubbo "clay to be molded" in the very first stream he decided to be a danger to society from the get-go.

[cdroloisms]

On the note of c!Dream and the Revolution and L’manburg in particular, I actually wanted to touch on another argument that I see sometimes that I’ve been thinking about lately re. L’manburg’s legitimacy. Because among some groups that are more L’manburg-positive, one take that I feel is decently common is the idea that L’manburg couldn’t be a government because it was only four, five, six people, that the size of the group meant that it was functionally incapable of the power attributed to it. In this, the assertion tends to be that because L’manburg is small, the power it holds is meaningless; it doesn’t have the power and provisions backing it that a regular “government” has, so L’manburg is fundamentally no different from a group of friends that believe in the same thing and therefore work together. The argument, here, seems to be that because the power of L’manburg as a government is manufactured, the power doesn’t actually exist in any meaningful way. 

And the thing about L’manburg to me is that, well, the power being manufactured is...the point? Like. The whole point is that L’manburg doesn’t actually have jack shit to base itself off of, the whole point is that L’manburg is founded on a lie and writes itself into being treated as a legitimate entity through scapegoating other people in a story. That’s the reason why the mythos exists! The mythos needs to exist because it’s the foundation of L’manburg’s existence. Why does L’manburg exist? Because they were ~fighting against oppression~. Why does c!Wilbur have the power to do X, Y, and Z? Because if you’re opposing him you’re on the side of traitors and tyrants and enemies and get out of his fucking country. Just because L’manburg’s existing as a nation and government and what have you is illogical doesn’t prevent it from being treated as a legitimate country and government etc, because in the end people treated it as legitimate and therefore it had real power not only over its own land, but later on over how the entire server operated--see everyone being swept up in the elections, Manberg vs. Pogtopia, etc. 

(What’s especially funny to me about this take is that in a lot of ways, it really reminds me of c!Dream’s opinion of L’manburg during the Revolution. Because while c!Dream definitely saw L’manburg as a threat in terms of the people who were declaring war against him, in terms of the...actual ideology? The whole government thing, “we’re going to be a separate server”? It’s pretty clear that c!Dream thinks that all of that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. He calls L’manburg a “delusional small part” of the server because from his perspective, what the fuck do you MEAN you’re a government now? What do you mean you’re a separate country--scratch that, what do you mean you’re a separate SERVER? Game rules? Whitelist? What the fuck?? You’re a group of people threatening violence because you have a grudge against me, not revolutionaries fighting a nonexistent oppressive rulership like holy shit I’ve NEVER EVEN MET YOU BEFORE? c!Dream approaches L’manburg’s shit as illegitimate and ridiculous and nonsensical from the get go, because yeah, I mean--they’re literally just a small group of people, not the government they claim to be or that they claim they want to form, or whatever. But things...don’t stay that way.) 

Like the whole point is that in the end, it doesn’t matter that c!Wilbur shouldn’t have been able to stick a flag in a piece of land, declare it as his own, make all these arbitrary rules about who could or couldn’t go inside and what they had to do and declare himself leader over these people and leverage joining his little club to keep them from opposing him and use all of that to threaten conflict against a guy he literally never even met before. Because...he did! And with the mythos established, no one challenged that. L’manburg’s policies and power and legitimacy and leadership and what the leader could and couldn’t do were all based in literally nothing and that didn’t matter because people acted like it was a real thing, so it became real. c!Dream fighting against L’manburg and discrediting its legitimacy at the beginning is part of what gives L’manburg legitimacy because the revolution ends up being used as the foundational story that made L’manburg a Real Thing. The elections and c!Quackity challenging c!Wilbur by running against him when the elections were originally rigged ends up reinforcing L’manburg’s legitimacy as the elections become a Real Thing and the leader of L’manburg as established by the elections are a Real Thing, etc. As long as people buy into L’manburg, as long as it’s TREATED as a real entity, then it remains real because that’s what people believe (which is part of why doomsday and L’manburg like, dying required the people within it to become disillusioned w/ the country so they didn’t feel inclined to rebuild it again.) 

People treated L’manburg as a real entity with real power, which gave it real power over people. Nothing should’ve been in place that allowed c!Wilbur to declare a rigged election, or c!Schlatt to execute the Red Festival, or c!Tubbo to create an extrajudicial army that put c!Phil under house arrest and would extend its influence outside of its own land to kidnap c!Techno’s pet and execute him. The reality of the consequences of L’manburg do not depend on whether or not it should’ve logistically had the power to back up what it was trying to do but whether or not people actually treated it like it did, and they did. Just because L’manburg shouldn’t have been capable of acting like a government doesn’t mean that people didn’t treat it as a government the entire time--from its conception to its death, L’manburg was given a lot of power and influence comparable to that of a government because of what was granted to it that allowed the leader of the faction to do a lot of things without challenge or argument “for the country” both to people within the country’s borders and outside of it, and this very real power and influence wasn’t challenged or disturbed because people believed that it had a right to exist. 

YES L’manburg was manufactured! YES that power didn’t make any sense! YES the legitimacy that L’manburg had as a government entity was basically a fucking crapshoot based on jack shit, and yes it had real power anyway. At the end of the day L’manburg was always treated w/ a level of power and legitimacy beyond just being a Group Of People, and therefore that power and legitimacy became real. L’manburg was a government because people treated it as one. L’manburg was powerful and legitimate and free and independent because that’s what the story said, and everyone believed the story, and that’s what’s important moreso than the logic of whether or not it had enough people to actually “be” a government in the first place.

[feralsylph]

Lmanburg could have been the best narrative on what it's like to lose a family member to cult mentality and surviving a cult. We could have had cult leader c!wilbur. We could have had c!tommy struggle with the fact that his brother wants to hurt people and puppet people to soothe his own ego. We could have had it all. L'mancult could have been something, we could have had jonestown 2.0.

.

.

.

Also, as a historian, I can tell you that Lmanburg is not a Hamilton AU, it's British colonialism.

[imsosocold]

DSMP but you’re a reluctant traitor to Manburg

[cquackity]

people are always drawing art of c!wilbur and then calling him their oc named willard or willy or wally or some stupid shit. and then they main tag it in the c!wilbur tag. that's not your oc where's waldo you've changed literally nothing about him except giving him a worse name. i am fr not calling him all that

[feralsylph]

This fandom has sanctified c!Wilbur to the point of insanity. Never at any point did I view him as a good person, because he isnt. c!Wilbur an ass to all of his followers and hes just plain manipulative to everyone.

Okay genq why are people so obsessed with specifically using the term victim/abuser/abuse in relation to c!Tommy and c!Dream? I have never seen it in any other media. Nobody calls Voldemort or any other long-term rival an abuser- though many examples that could be given definitely are. It’s such specific terminology that it feels almost reductive (?) in terms of the actual extent of the storyline, to reduce every interaction to a situation of abuse and self protection because even though there’s a level of truth to it, it becomes such a key component that it overshadows other key components. It reduces two complex characters down to those things- abuser and victim- which may be true but they are not exclusively that.

I observe this too and its like, i dont know, it's just really weird. At some point within a STORY and talking abt narrative analysis youve got to set asidr stuff like this to acknowledge the actual literary archetypes present nobody gaf if this person is an abuser most people identify asshole characters as "this guys an asshole" without trying to police that characters actions under the guise of "sending a good message" ... like its the 1930s 😭

[barzfrommarz]

RIP ladyddanger you were never afraid to say the truth

[cloffmoff]

been working on this for a little bit and thought ‘tumblr would like it!’ so here you guys go, happy birthday c!tommy the favorite character ever <33 im nowhere near an animator lol, just some guy with inspiration and flipaclip

[w3ndytheraccoon]

C!Tommy is my favourite character, however, that doesn’t mean he gets a pass.

In simple word, C!Tommy is a narcissist, or atleast show alot of narcissistic traits. Self importance ? Check. Entitled to some degree ? Check. Arrogant ? Check. Jealous easily ? Check. Rarely believe something is his fault ? Check.

( Obviously, just because someone has some of these traits, that doesn’t mean that they’re a narcissist or a bad person, it depends on the context )

Now, I guess you can say that since Tommy is canonically 16, being a narcissist is expected, because most 16 years old is a self - centred asshole. But like I said many times, just because it’s justified, that doesn’t mean it’s okay.

Tommy has show signs of a narcissist ( Arrogant, entitled ) ever since he joined, and as the lore progresses, he starts to show more. It even gets worse when he got mad because he can’t fathom the fact Tubbo has a life out of him. He threatened to kill Michael for fuck’s sake ( I still love reading about them bonding tho ) !

And the whole “ Me and Tubbo vs Dream “ always gets on my nerves. Yes, Tommy has been hurt by Dream but he’s not the only one. What about Sapnap and Geogre who have to watch their close friend spiral ? What about Puffy who lost her fucking son and felt responsible for how he turn out ? What about Ranboo ? What about Niki and Jack and Fundy who lost their home when he blew up L’ manberg ? What about Vikkstar & Lazarbeam ? Dream has hurt almost everyone, not just Tommy, yet he believes he’s the only one.

Not to mentioned, he claims Tubbo is his bestfriend, yet hesitate when he’s asked to choose between him and the discs. Tommy has been an asshole to Tubbo and Tubbo has also been an asshole to Tommy times to times ( I will cover this more for when Tubbo’s post comes ). C!ClingyDuo is a shitshow (and when you include Ranboo and make it C!BenchTrio, it gets even worse ), they’re both bad for eachother. Sure, there are times where they act like actual, healthy friends, but half the times, their “ friendship “ is held together by shared trauma.

While Tubbo is treated like something comparable to the fucking discs, Ranboo is seen as an obstacle half the times. Yeah, Tommy covered for him when they burnt Geogre’s house, but that’s it. After that, whenever Tommy is with Ranboo, he’s just a tad bit more hostile and he always show jealousy when Ranboo and Tubbo are together. Like C!ClingyDuo, C!AlliumDuo is also toxic as hell and is barely being held together by the fact they have a mutual friend ( Tubbo ).

Don’t even get me start on Jack. I joined the fandom relatively late ( Post Prison Arc ), when the fandom’s opinions start shifting, and Tommy became a baby who can’t do anything wrong, so Jack’s death was pretty much brush over. It doesn’t help that I learn the lore solely through fan content, and as I said, opinions start shifting and Jack’s death got no acknowledgement. I didn’t even know why he was so mad at Tommy until a few weeks ago when I read a fanfic ( On Temporizing by LuckyMagicBelle ). No one in the fandom and the lore acknowledge it except Jack and maybe Niki, not even Tommy himself.

And that’s not even talking about all the casual crimes he commit, which I will not be getting into, because I’m pretty sure everyone have commit atleast 3 casually crimes at this point.

( Putting this just incase. Like in the one I made about Dream, just because Tommy is an asshole sometimes, that doesn’t mean the shit that happened to him is okay. And how he turns out is realistic imo, because I know that if I went through what he did, I’ll come out worse. But still, a flaw is flaw, and this is a call out post. He is child and someone should’ve show him how to be better, not let him continue to be like this )

Conclusion : C!Tommy is an actual war criminal that is in no way, shape or form innocent, yet most the fandom ignore that because they woobified him. He’s an asshole sometimes and it’s fine to be paranoid after the shit he went through but he needs to understand that Dream isn’t always out to get him. Also, C!BenchTrio needs to split up, have some therapy and spent some times for themselves before they’re ready to be friends again.

I still love him and will defend him with my dying breath though.

Edit : Y’all, I just saw a post that said C!tommy is a accurate portrayal of an abused victim, and now I can’t tell which of my points are actually him being an ass and which one is me being insensitive / overreacting and not realising that he’s intended to be written that way to be accurate. Please tell me because I do not want to offend anyone-

[its-target-official]

i am trying to read sbi fics.

and of fucking course people are discontinuing their fics because of the whole wilbur situation. which i understand.

but some of these people do not unDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHARACTER AND CONTENT CREATOR.

if you say "i'm not writing a story with an abuser in it," you are just fundamentally wrong. because while CONTENT CREATOR wilbur soot did, apparently, abuse someone, CHARACTER wilbur did not. (well, mostly.)

now if you are writing something about the real life people, yes, this makes sense.

god.

i do not want to hear anything about the situation and/or your opinions.

[nocinovae]

I have many feelings on the situation around abuse and power dynamics and assault that are coming to light at the moment. For the most part I feel that other peoples rage and statements are worded better. Though I had some thoughts and as someone who enjoyed psychoanalyzing fictional characters I have some realizations about c!Wilbur that I think some people will appreciate. Other than that Support and Listen to Victim. Don’t Put Streamers on Pedestals.

I hate how much I and so many people loved c!Wilbur for being a morally flawed traumatized mentally ill character.

The type of villain to enjoy in media but in a “I like them as a bad person. They fill the role they were written for very well.”

We took them as a “this is a bad person to enjoy through media” character. He showed the experience of how trauma and mental illness can effect relationship and morals.

I felt like I could take him as a caricature, an exaggerated form of many of my own insecurities and dark parts of myself.

BUT NO All c!Wilbur was was a self insert character of the writer’s desire for control and power over the people around him. Same with any of his other “characters” that we all thought were meant to be satire dark comedy of disgusting men in the world.

And he let us all believe this. It’s ironic the way he literally had his self insert pity oc kill himself after not having his apology accepted for all the harm he caused. How he was so distraught with having to actually work for redeeming himself more than just his words that his actions that he thought would resolved that was killing himself for a second time.

All the nuance and grey area I loved saw in c!Wilbur has been destroyed with the truth we all now see in William Gold. And that goes for so all of his artwork.

At least with this new lense on the artist we can take another view of his art and see deeper into the truth of What a Disgusting Piece of Shit this man is.

[hiraethade]

Man, I need to stay off Twitter.

[blockofhoney]

y'know i haven't actually drawn c!wilbur doing guir whole mimic thing which. I Really Should Do At Some Point

[barzfrommarz]

BOOOOO GET OFF THE STAGE 🍅🍅🍅🍅🍅🍅🍅

second pic was the post right under the first screenshot. How can you be this slow why the fuck do you think he switched up on c!dream???

[transmutationisms]

could you talk more on eds and biopolitics?

sure, so this is broad strokes and it's also worth reiterating that the energy deficit characteristic of EDs can have a lot of different causes besides intentional food restriction—food insecurity is a huge and underrecognised factor here but there are many others. so when i talk about intentional restriction and the desire to be thin / lose weight, i'm not suggesting these are universal characteristics or causes of EDs.

anyway though, in the context of discussing these things, and particularly the relationship between 'diet culture' and EDs, a perennial frustration to me is that i often hear people fall back on the idea that the desire to be thin comes about as a result of the beauty standards perpetuated in mass media, fashion adverts, &c, without any subsequent interrogation of why it is that beauty itself is now so heavily dependent on thinness. after all, plenty of people have pointed out this is not a universal; beauty varies in different times and places, what is described or depicted as beautiful in historical records doesn't necessarily have much overlap with today's hegemonic standards, and so forth.

so when historicising this phenomenon it becomes very clear that the euro/anglo standard of thinness as beauty is, one, part of the ideological apparatus justifying colonialism thru the creation of race and white supremacy. sabrina strings and da'shaun harrison have written on this. two, the thin ideal is also inextricably tied up in medical discourses defining the ideal body as one that is economically productive, with the promise being that if the populace can be transformed into 'healthy',*** useful, hardworking citizens, the state benefits. control of bodyweight is therefore certainly a means of demonstrating one's supposed self-control, moral discipline, &c, but it is also a demand expressed in medical terms: these two discourses merge and overlap, and are both part of the capitalist state's transformation of its citizenry into a biological resource that can be controlled, managed, and exploited to bourgeois ends (profit): hence, biopolitics.

(***the story of how 'health' itself comes to be so dependent on thinness is obviously a critical piece of all this but this post is long as shit already so suffice it to say that this conflation is also not obvious, necessary, universal, &c &c)

medico-political discourses in the 19th century tended to talk about the dangers of both over- and under-weight more than what we hear now; similarly, if you think about something like wilbur atwater's calorie-value charts, these were explicitly intended to guide labourers to the most calorie-dense foods, because to atwater the central danger to be avoided was starvation among the workforce. these days in wealthy countries like the us, you are much more likely to hear about weight management in the context of demands to reduce; this is of course following moves like the WHO declaring an 'obesity epidemic' in 1997, and the rise in the usa of more explicitly nationalist, militaristic weight-loss rhetoric in the post-9/11 era.

however, my position is that these demands for thinness, and the beauty standard that follows and justifies them, are not a departure from earlier 19th- and 20th-century scientific nutrition advice, just an evolution that, for a multitude of reasons (politics, medical professional interests, insurance company practices, &c) has simply come to focus more on the ostensible economic and national threat posed by fatness. the underlying logic bears the biopolitical throughline: the state has, or ought to have, an interest in enforcing the health of its population, and as part of this demands that you the individual surveil and alter your weight according to the scientific guidelines du jour.

this is fertile ground for the development of what, in extreme form, we regard as ED pathology. first, because even the most purely 'health'-motivated individual engaging in the required degree of bodily monitoring and caloric restriction is liable to respond to energy deficit in ways that can become diagnosably distressing. second, because the morals of 'health' are never far from standards of beauty; thinness is sold in overtly profitable ways (the diet and weight-loss industries) and furthermore, our idea of beauty is often a kind of post hoc justification for the thinness already being demanded by state and medical authorities. which is really just to say, beauty is part of the ideological superstructure both resulting from and invoked as a justification for the material conditions of capitalist biopolitics. again this is very broad strokes, but imo it is a much more useful framework to understand EDs than simply presenting them as a result of desiring thinness because it is glorified in The Media, because... reasons (essentially the rené girard model, lol).