#I am done discoursing with folk over this

[botanical-babes]

hey jumblr, we gotta talk about some things.

in no particular order

we HAVE to stop calling events and people "barbaric" or "barbarians." It has a long and dirty history of being a slur (meaning primitive, uneducated, savage, etc) against Imazighen, Turks, Arabs, Native Americans, -- ancient Greeks used it as a word to denote "everyone Non-Greek that's acceptable to put into chattel slavery." It's a word we should not have in our vocabularies, and we can use so many other words to describe heinous, atrocious, unforgivable events, and people who have done terrible things. We need to remember that everyone we are talking about is human and dehumanization leads to evil outcomes.

the whole "you wouldn't treat XYZ other racialized group like this!" rhetoric discourages solidarity with other groups, and is flat-out wrong. I'm a mixed Rom and I can tell you we get about the same treatment. We should handshake and join arms, not bicker and waste time arguing over who gets better scraps. It might actually really help build bridges if we connected Jewish oppression to others, because it IS connected. Let's throw "you wouldnt treat XYZ other group" in the recycling bin and turn it into some better rhetoric + solidarity discourse. It hurts because nobody has allowed us any space to heal our trauma. That makes sense. It's ok. We can still build bridges instead of isolating further, and hopefully those bridges will lead us closer to healing as a People.

I'm seeing a concerning number of Jews in my life falling for more conservative sources and information, giving in to their trauma response and unwittingly believing + sourcing information that reinforces their biases, but comes from unreliable or bigoted sources. It's normal. It's understandable. It's also Not Okay. Please double-check the biases and financers of sources that talk about the Israel/Gaza war, or campus antisemitism, or how marginalized people believe this or that thing based on this study (and double check the study if it's worth the time) because you might find a lot of snakes in the grass trying to take advantage of Jewish pain and trauma for their own causes.

I am NOT saying Jewish people uniquely do these things, not even a little. It's just that I'm part of this community, and have noticed this in a number of Jewish spaces, and wanted to comment.

This is NOT an invitation to harass Jewish people, discourse about the war in Gaza, or otherwise act in ways that would upset and "dunk on" some specific group or idea. If you're here to hunt for (((zionists))) then I'll just block you if you interact.

I'm writing this disclaimer for any non-Jews who may see this and think they have a voice in the matter -- u do not -- Unless you're a jew of color or non-jew person of color who wants to talk about POC solidarity w/ Jews, that's ok. Even if it comes with messy feelings. Just keep it productive, and as compassionate as you can manage.

I just wanted to call out some trends I'm seeing that aren't HUGE issues by any means, but I see them often enough that I wanted to mention it and get it going in the minds of other folks.

Thanks for listening. All love and respect. <3 Am yisrael chai.

[stolitzsings]

This is a sort of response to a post I've seen floating around, drawing parallels between the chains in Blitz’s trip that bind him to Stolas and the chains that bind Husk, Angel, and Fizz to Alastor, Valentino, and Mammon respectively. I'm not commenting on that post directly bc I avoid Discourse (tm) at all costs for the sake of my health, and I don’t want to get drawn into an unproductive argument that will mess with my anxiety for a week. I'm not trying to start a fight, just get my thoughts out on why I feel that comparison is inaccurate, and hopefully provide some helpful context and nuance.

So! Let's start with a few disclaimers! First of all, I'm not going to debate the moral purity of any of these characters. I just don't think it's an interesting or valuable critique. On a related note, I am not trying to excuse any of their behavior. I'm happy to admit that my favorite characters in this show have hurt people and are sometimes total assholes. Stolas treated Blitz very poorly at the beginning of their relationship, frequently pushed or even ignored boundaries, and was just kind of a dick about things. My objection to a direct comparison between Stolas and the other characters mentioned above isn't because I think Stolas hasn't done anything wrong; I just think that saying they're similar without further clarification or commentary ignores the nuance of the situation.

Read on below the cut, it's gonna be another long one folks!

Let's start by examining the "agreements" forged by Val, Mammon, and Alastor. I think it's important to note that, in their cases, the person they got to sign their contract could have been anyone. Husk and Angel could have been any sinners, Fizz could have been any imp. They aren't interested in them as people; they were only using them to gain more power for themselves. The only thing that matters to them is, "What can you do for me?" Angel and Fizz quite clearly become cogs in the machine of Val and Mammon's businesses, and Alastor only thinks of Husk as a tool to be leveraged in specific situations to further his own mysterious goals. Each of them has demonstrated to their subjugates that they own them, body and soul. They have signed legally and spiritually binding contracts that essentially surrender their autonomy to a more powerful demon.

Stolas and Blitz’s agreement is... not that. In the most literal sense, they don’t appear to have made any sort of binding deal. They just made a verbal agreement, which I sincerely doubt has anywhere near the force of a signed soul contract. Additionally, Stolas did not ask for and does not seem to want that sort of total control over Blitz. He very clearly does not view this as any sort of power exchange (which may actually be part of the issue, since it leaves him blind to Blitz’s discomfort with their class difference), he sees it as "favors for favors." While this agreement is inherently unbalanced due to Stolas's status, it's worth noting that they’re both putting something on the line here. The other three risk practically nothing (if the person bound to them fails they can always get a new one), but Stolas IS taking on a real risk by letting Blitz access the living world illegally using his book. Again, that doesn't make his actions right, and probably helped him to justify them, but it does set their relationship apart from the others.

In my opinion, some of Stolas's greatest flaws are his thoughtlessness and his ability to justify his own actions to himself. This manifests in the fact that he clearly doesn't see the ways in which their relationship is hurting Blitz. He convinced himself that this was just an equal exchange, and a continuation of the dynamic Blitz established in their first encounter as adults: "I fuck you, and you give me the book". As he becomes more aware of his feelings for Blitz, though (stay tuned for a deeper analysis of this progression later), he also begins to realize that Blitz isn't happy with this relationship. And this, as @masonshmason pointed out, is the central fact that separates Stolas and Blitz from the other relationships. Stolas did not realize- or chose to ignore- how he was hurting Blitz. Once he came to terms with it, though, he understood that he had to make things right. He specifically says this in "Just Look My Way"; "I will try to make amends/ For making you means to an end". None of the others could say this, because in their case, that was the POINT. Angel, Fizz, and Husk were ALWAYS a means to an end, intentionally trapped for that purpose.

We also need to talk about the CONTEXT of the scenes in which the chain imagery appears. For both Angel and Husk, the chain is at least semi-literal, a physical (and perhaps supernatural) manifestation of the way their souls are bound to an overlord. In "Two Minutes Notice," Fizz purposely CHOOSES to represent his relationship to Mammon as chains around his wrists. However, Blitz's scene is part of a drug trip after being forcibly dosed with hallucinogens. It does not exist in any literal sense, nor is it a representation of Blitz’s conscious, literal thoughts. What it DOES do is showcase Blitz’s deepest fears and his greatest flaws through symbolism and metaphor. Blitz is not literally afraid of being forced to wear a clown costume; he is afraid he'll never escape his past traumas or Fizz's shadow. THIS is the context in which Blitz sees himself being chained by Stolas: a bad trip all about his fear of intimacy and vulnerability.

Stolas appears in this trip as someone elevated high above him, something he's climbing towards, reaching for, even though it means being chained to him. It's directly preceded by his ex girlfriend and his former best friend berating him for how he pushes people away even though he hates being alone. Then Stolas directly asks him, "Are you afraid to love people, Blitzy?" Furthermore, the WAY in which he is framed is alluring, slightly hazy, golden and tempting. It couldn’t be further from the ugly, slime-covered past he's fleeing. It's a new start, a chance for something better that seems too good to be true. This trip is all about Blitz’s inability to be vulnerable with another person. The chain around his neck is a representation of the fact that, by getting closer to Stolas, he's giving Stolas the power to hurt him emotionally.

And man, there's a part of him that wants to give Stolas that power. At this critical moment, he's not baring his teeth in defiance or anger. He's blushing, just slightly, and he looks... nervous. Blitz's instinct, when things get too real, is to cut and run. Hurt them before they can hurt you. Abandon them before they have the chance to leave you. It’s how he tanked his relationship with Verosika. This is a manifestation of what might happen if he stays. This is the sort of trouble he can't fight his way out of.

This is the emotional climax of the scene. There are so many ways they could have gone with this if they wanted to represent Blitz being chained and trapped by his agreement with Stolas. If that was the fear--if that was the POINT--they could have had the chains wrap around him until he couldn't move, or glow white hot and burn into his skin, or a million other more direct metaphors. But the chains aren't the thing that hurts him. It's the feathers: the thing that's left behind after Stolas abandons him, sing-songing "you're going to die alone" right alongside two other people who he loved and who now want nothing to do with him.

Finally, let's look at Blitz’s reaction to this scene. It's a moment of revelation for him, in which he realizes he's pushing everyone away and starts to make an effort to change. It's why he's a bit more open with Moxxie in the next scene. The trip sequence ALSO inspires him to get closer to Stolas, indicating that the trip didn’t make him realize "I'm trapped and I need to get out of this" in the same way Fizz did. Rather, he realizes that he doesn't want Stolas to leave him like everyone else, and he wants to start feeling out what it would be like to deepen the connection between them. As I've mentioned in other posts, their kiss at the end of "truth seekers" represents a level of intimacy that we haven't seen before; it's teasing, affectionate, shows Blitz’s interest in making Stolas happy, and takes place in front of M&M, who have repeatedly teased him about their relationship before.

In summary, while the image of chains may have been invoked in all four of these relationships, they don’t necessarily mean the same thing across the board. Blitz and Stolas's relationship differs substantially from the others in its dynamic, and the context of their scene also sets it apart. It's important to look into the details and the nuance of their relationship to interpret what's going on under layers of trauma and unreliable narration.

[lambouillet]

𓃔 Fiore - they/them - 18 - aro nb Lesbian 𓃔 I draw and I (hope) to make mods sometimes! I follow and interact from @fiomeras

🖍️ gallery - ✏️ Doodles

LAMBS OF GOD ( AU/Fangame Mockup/Worldbuilding )

NEVER WONDER ( "Deserter" Story )

📭Asks are always welcomed! I like to take my time crafting a response though so I may not respond as quick as others. Sorry!

⚠️ DISCLAIMER/BYF: unfortunately I cannot realistically tag all of my posts with trigger warnings but the ones that'll appear frequently are: blood, decapitation, gore, child death, animal death and nonsexual nudity; drawn or written, everything under the sun.

I have a very spiritual, folk catholic, faith healer background so I may come to talk about that at times! It's a main turning gear for all of my work that I hope to exemplify and sympathise.

Pr0sh1p/T3rfs DNI. And anyone neutral to it.

Extra FAQ under the read more ↓ Profile illustration by my friend MTSODIE

FAQ:

Asks & dms

📫 ASKBOX RULES

As mentioned above, all is welcomed, HOWEVER, I'd appreciate if you extend some of your courtesy to me and do not send me anything that's along the lines of being sexually charged. Suggestive jokes are fine, I am an adult! but that does not warrant that i'll be over the moon with descriptive asks about wanting to fuck my guys nasty. Alright? mind yourself.

Don't send me personal discourse. If you have a problem with another user It should be dealt with privately. In no way am I ever going to be in a position where I can give you an answer for this. Remember, I am just a random guy, on the web!

related but slightly unrelated, I will block people freely, whether you've done the above or not, that's just how I like to curate what I see and I do it very often. Please don't take it personally.

Otherwise, everything else is free reign (unless i say so) go nuts, insane even.

📨DMS

Anyone can dm! askbox rules still apply. Cant guarantee that I'll reply back if the conversation starts with just a "Hi" or "How are you" though. I'd really only prefer you message me if theres something to tell or I've done something to elicit you to do so.

ART RELATED

🎁Can I make Fanart/Fanfics of your au/ocs?

Yes! Ofcourse! Only thing I'll ask of you is for you to tag me in them so i can see it... These will always guarantee a smile on my face.

🎭can I use your art as a pfp/post it to Pinterest?

I'd rather you not use my art for anything unless you've had my permission or its art I made for you! Definitely don't post it around other places without my knowledge. I don't have any other active socials besides here and probably bluesky under Fiomeras ( that i ought to post more on, weh )

🎨🖌️Program and brushes

I use Clip studio paint for most of my art and Aseprite every once in a while.

my traditional brush info you can find on my main pinned.

Digitally I change what I use very sporadically so I cant really give you a proper concise answer but my frequent ones are:

Shockgrunge Marker and Pencil

Kasuy MK sploon

Tacodemuerte Mrsplotchy

Scribbly Dark

Jarijari

Bathylychnops Brushes

Intoxicate set

Thats all for now, will update when necessary! Muahhh

Curiousity rewards the brave! Take this ugly thing. As a gift

"Whats with the wording" i like doing bits

[necronatural]

Project Moon Discourse Part Whatever: Statement 2

Project Moon's company twitter has released a statement on their perspective.

In summary, the Youth Union who has been rallying a lot of people has been protesting about Vellmori's "unfair dismissal" (firing over previous statements). Project Moon points out that they have not fired her yet, and the YU do not have concrete proof of what happened (AKA why you have to say "alleged" when commenting on crimes yet to be tried). Youth Union discusses the private circumstances and apologizes for repeating accusations as fact.

Kim Jihoon posits here that this was a political conspiracy by the Youth Union to boost their position (they were a very very small group before all this), which the Project Moon User Association must a part of. He posts the draft the Youth Union drew up if PM complied, without the union rep's permission as evidence. OK man.

...By the way, he also sent an official legal notice to the Project Moon User Association with that same info.

The PMUA says hey man! We do talk to the Youth Union, but we're actually a completely different group who has not declared jackshit as fact and have been conscientious in our speech. Fuck you! And posted the letter (legal threat) PM sent publicly along with their reply. (Jihoon references this in the statement above).

Read here. The letter is the pdf at the top of the doc.

It's through this response that we learn that the reason the Youth Union was cowed was because Vellmori resigned.

The PMUA notes: hey, isn't it extremely fucking suspicious that you publicly stated that due to breaking company rules with years old tweets (this isn't legal btw) and Vellmori's most recent statement was that you told her that she's getting her papers in a week (legal but asshole shit btw)? And yet when you're catching heat about the ludicrously illegal unjust firing, you reveal you've been hiding her resignation? Unrelated, why did you post an unfinished draft statement predicated on a round table that never occurred? Why are you threatening us for libel we never posted?

AKA they fucking ate him for dinner.

Kim Jihoon is being cooked alive over his notes app malding & pointed translated repost of his original statement. Everyone and their dog can see his sole deflection only really applies to the Youth Union, who fucked up publicly a while ago, while the PMUA is spotless in their conduct. The fact they have not done anything but ask the Youth Union for info - which they used responsibly thus far - renders literally every complaint Kim Jihoon is making totally worthless. And they made sure he fucking knew it. Meanwhile, the folks who originally kicked off harassment and boycotts (DCInside) remains uncommented on, enraging people even further.

By the way, you may be wondering why Kim Jihoon is suddenly so frenzied in his attacks. The thing is, PMUA just successfully met their fundraising goal! And wouldn't you know it, the money they raised is for applying to file a class action lawsuit over PM's mismanagement.

Stay tuned for more on Crossy News Network. I am too nosy to possibly stop reporting on this

[genericpuff]

What the actual fuck are they thinking-

Okay, the caption might seem overblown but... this is not good.

The main LO subreddit has been closed for weeks now. It closed due to the API protests but considering the options in the community poll were to either "stay open indefinitely" or "stay closed until the decision is reversed", there's a tinfoil hat theory going around that the single mod that overlooks that place saw the API protests as an "easy way out", especially considering how hands-off those mods are. By the time the main sub decided to take part in the protests (after the height of the protests were over) it had already been stated by u/spez that they were not going to reverse the decision. Essentially, the LO subreddit is done.

Do you know what's been happening since it closed? Activity in ULO has been skyrocketing, but we've also been seeing a lot more discourse from people who have been forced to stomach the ULO content after having their main community shuttered.

Listen, I've got a lot of issues with the main sub and the things they've done over the past year. There are definitely some really shitty folks in there who have ruined things for those who are just casual readers by just being way too protective of this comic. But that doesn't mean the main sub shouldn't exist. The main sub, as dead as it was by the time it closed, was still an option for people who didn't want blind praise or relentless criticism/shitposting. Though there were people who tried to gatekeep the shit out of the main sub (attempting to make it a "positive vibes only" space) the main sub was never explicitly designed for only praise, and by the time it closed, it was seeing a lot more balance between praise and criticism (to no one's surprise, because criticism has become a lot more mainstream in the LO fandom, simply due to the comic's undeniably tanking). All that said, it made for a nice middle ground. Even I enjoyed going in there and reading people's takes on new episodes every week, whether or not I agreed with them. ULO was not designed to be the only route for discussion concerning LO, it's very specifically run for one specific purpose and that purpose will not line up with those who are now without a space.

Without the main sub, there are people with nowhere to go. Some people casually grin and bear it through ULO, others have gone to /r/LowSodiumLoreOlympus, but considering how dead that sub is also, it's clear the popular opinion is swaying more towards criticism. I can't imagine what it's like to be a community refugee right now.

So what does that leave for those who don't want to use ULO? The Facebook groups, and the Discord. The Facebook groups are probably the most accessible communities - not everyone uses reddit, not everyone knows how to use Discord, but everyone uses Facebook.

So the fact that the Facebook groups aren't going on a small break, but are going on their own 4 month hiatus?

Not only does this further reduce the options for fandom interaction, but this is terrible for the comic. Hiatuses like this can kill long-term retention, and fandom communities are often the best way to keep that retention on some form of life support.

Think of it this way - if I didn't have the ULO community, I probably would have dropped off LO ages ago, cut my losses, moved on. But it's the fact that I have a community to keep in touch with and have fun with that keeps me on this series. This goes the other way as well, into the casual and praise communities - while I'm sure many will still eagerly return in October, for those who are more casual readers, Lore Olympus will essentially be out of sight, out of mind. And that is NOT something you want to happen to a comic that is already losing traction.

I genuinely do not know what Rachel is thinking closing these groups. And yes, I am pointing to Rachel on this decision because she literally runs the official LO Facebook groups. LO going on a mid-season hiatus over the summer when HALF OF HER DEMOGRAPHIC IS HOME FROM SCHOOL is already such a huge risk that will likely kill her numbers; but to go and cut off her official groups from being able to stay connected and talking about the comic during the hiatus, on a platform OCCUPIED BY THE OTHER HALF OF HER DEMOGRAPHIC, LITERALLY ADULT WOMEN ?? What is that supposed to achieve? If she wants to give her mods a break, sure, okay, do that for a few weeks, but four months? Is she so allergic to fans being able to theorize or "figure her out" (because god knows Rachel doesn't like being predictable) or, god forbid, is she worried about giving them too much "freedom" to reflect and discuss the comic during this time without the weekly dopamine distraction hits that they actually stop and realize how shitty the comic is right now?

All I can say is, as much as we're theorizing that LO is going to be getting a 4th season, I really do hope this midseason hiatus is its last. Whatever life this comic has left is being choked out by Rachel and Webtoons' own hands.

And when it does go out, it better go out with a bang. That's the least it can do for itself and its community at this point.

[fansplaining]

IWTV is the best show on TV. In today’s media environment, it is singular to be able to enjoy a show without the toxicity of the large fandoms. I have found that a majority of the show’s fans are hardcore Anne Rice fans making conversations about the show far more interesting. I am concerned of how this will change once S1 premiers on Netflix. The show deserves a larger audience and it will get it after it premiers on Netflix, but I hope the show runners remain true to the source material and continue on the path they have laid. Looking forward to future IWTV episodes.

Hello! Apologies for the delay in answering this, which I believe was in response to this article I wrote about the show and its audiences. With the official announcement this week that the AMC slate of shows are coming to Netflix on August 19th—

(also: lol Netflix, thank u)

—I was reminded to come back to it!

I totally agree with you re: the show itself, of course—but I also think you've curated your feeds very well haha. I've been observing many corners of the fandom throughout s2, partly because I was reporting on the fan/creator stuff, partly because I'm in the fandom, too. Fandoms are multifarious, and I'm not trying to paint with an overly broad brush—I've seen a ton of creativity and plenty of smart analysis etc. But I have also seen *so* much toxicity and *so* many willfully bad readings over the past few weeks, it's been shocking. Twitter in particular seems to have a literal Discourse of the Day and I don't understand how this is going to be sustainable over the year+ until s3 (lord help us all when s3 arrives lol).

There's a running joke—made so many times I'm not even thinking of a specific post—that people fear ~the Netflix masses~ will bring Bad Takes, but it seems highly likely a casual viewer will go, "Wow! Entertaining!" and move on with their lives, whereas existing fans of this show are already rocket-launching The Worst Takes at each other like clockwork (and even at random viewers who love the show but aren't a part of fandom conversations—because they don't like a person's phrasing, or the picture they chose for a post, etc etc etc).

As far as the idea that Rolin Jones or AMC will waver from their plans, I absolutely don't see that happening. AMC has long licensed their shows to large-audience platforms (Netflix in particular), but they're not making TV *for* those platforms. Jones and (IWTV EP) Mark Johnson have been pretty explicit about how they only could have made this show at AMC. I also found these post-finale comments from Jones very interesting:

I’m confident that we made the best vampire show we could make. I’m proud of the adaptation. There’s the element of second windows, how these things are going to be disseminated going forward. There does seem to be a lot of legwork done by fans. I look at 98 percent on Rotten Tomatoes, and part of me is like, Ugh, that’s way too high. If the intention here is to make something that will haunt you and that will work 15, 20 years from now, did we piss off enough people?

There was another interview I cannot find now about how a larger viewing audience in those "second windows" means more chances for the people who really connect to the show to find it. I've loved seeing that this season, even—people who hadn't checked it out for whatever reason and have now been changed by it. When I wrote that article, fans were kind of cycling in an information vacuum, with minimal signals from AMC/the creators that the metrics for success weren't a pure numbers game. But in the final press run, they hit that message hard—they are in it for the long run, they want to make the best show they can, and they understand this is a sustained partnership with fans. I think they're going to continue taking the biggest creative swings they can, and I can't wait to see what's next.

(BTW, IWTV folks: I pulled @flourish away from their baby for 90 minutes and despite their combined total of perhaps 10 hours of sleep over the past 4 weeks lol we managed to finally record a season 2 special episode. It should be out for patrons early next week!)

[thecountesstribe]

HOTD 2X5 THOUGHTS.

I knew after coming off an action packed episode, the pace would've slowed down and I'm not mad at it.

BAELA AND JACE WERE THE MVP'S OF THIS EPISODE. THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!!! AFTER THE DROUGHT THAT THEY HAD IN SEASON 1 AND THE BEGINNING OF SEASON 2, WE'RE FINALLY BEING FED.

The Targtowers parading around Meleys head this episode has got to be one of the dumbest shit besides putting bbq Aegon on the throne they've ever done. Yes let's galavant the one thing that keeps us in power and the realm in order for a petty show of arrogance. That makes sense. The small folk immediately being “nah this ain't it” is so funny and a sign of all the things to come for them. They're idiots! Meleys wasn't no traitor you bums, you were. Get all the greens off my screen.

Aegon's suffering, I used to pray for times like this. It's highly unlikely Sunfyre is dead. Alicent and Crybaby Cole aren't together anymore..... Fuckin yes. I told you guys Alicent is delusional as hell, she really thought the same council that she helped usurped Rhaenyra's birthright because she's a WOMAN, would've let her, a woman rule them? Criston, Larys and Aemond not backing her had to taste like gravel going down. It's deserved. She had the opportunity to do the right thing and she forfeited it again and again and again. Fuck Almond today, tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, the next day after that and the day after forevermore. If I was him I would take Haelena's words as an ill omen.

I felt for Corlys man. Like he pisses me off don't get me wrong but that's still my guy and he's lost a lot. Rhaenys was Corlys practical to his idealistic delusional. That man never listened to his wife until it was too late. Him trying to name Baela his heir, when Rhaenys wanted Rhaena to be his heir at first, can't do that now anyway, Rhaena's not around right now and Baela absolutely refusing and gagging tf outta him in the same breath , I cheered. Baela is upholding her grandmother's last wishes. No more but “BaElA hAD MoRe ClaIm to Driftmark” discourse, she's “FIRE AND BLOOD!”, Driftmark should be passed to “SALT AND SEA”. She said it herself. Now a certain demographic could stop equating her being a poc to her Velaryon roots. She every bit a Targaryen. Don't start with the Rhaena discourse either because she's the same as well. The only reason Rhaenys wanted her to have Driftmark is because it would've gone to Rhaena either way had she married Lucerys and Corlys had no intention to claim those boys atp in time. Corlys is trying to honor Rhaenys wishes, I could respect that but do it in the way she wanted it in her final moments Corlys. He's still my guy though.

I am sick of this Harrenhal plot. That scene with Daemon and his mom....... Just why? He never even met his mother either. I am so sorry Mama Alyssa. Even for the incest in the Targaryen lineage, did the writers have to take it that far? That shit was egregious. The only good part was seeing Laena again. Answer the question though Daemon. “Are you taking care of her girls?!” Get Daemon out of there now. Alys has that man gone off his rockers. I'm over it. I love how Simon is sick of Daemon's shenanigans though, he's real asf for that 🤣😭. Caraxes sighting 🥺. I miss my chaos noodle boy.

Rhaenyra comforting Baela. We won. Look she mightn't have had the best relationship with the girls in the show and it's not developed on screen properly, thanks for that HBO, but she does love and care for them. Her telling Baela about her Grandma (I still refuse to believe Rhaenys is gone💔😭) and we got an explanation for why Rhaena didn't try to claim a dragon on Dragonstone (she almost died and Rhaenyra wouldn't allow her to do it again), that was for me. In the books those girls were close to her and Rhaena was her “Realm's delight” namesake, I'll never forgive them for taking that and the team black family dynamics away from me. We got a Luke mention 😭. Her and Jace working out their issues and she knowing he snuck away to be a diplomat, more of that please. She's finally acknowledging her strengths and weaknesses and starting to move and think like a leader. I love it here.

Jace finally got a chance to do more than just mew, tweak and brood. I understand why Rhaenyra wasn't sending him out, that boy is out for blood, as he should be and he's inherently going to be reckless if he did go out to scout instead of Baela. Just listen to him last episode and tell me if he sounded like he had a clear head on his shoulders. I wish we saw more than that shot of Vermax and him actually riding his dragon but a win is a win. Him subtly threatening the Freys with Vermax, he's a diplomat alright. His mother needs “bent knees” and that is exactly what he got her. Proud of him. Baela going about her duties and whacking the men that are being annoying as she goes. Proud of them. Diplomat husband and battle wife is just *chef's kiss*. I'll say it again I absolutely adore his relationship with Baela. It's so healthy and I don't get into fandoms to “ship” but I love them your honor. Their soft way of speaking to one another, even when they're disagreeing. Him confiding in her about how humiliating it is that he thinks he's being coddled because of his standing as prince and her getting to go out and scout and fight but her still understanding and trusting him on his secret mission (that's what it was, he snuck out to go treat with the Freys), him being considerate of her at all times, “Rhaenys is dead and Baela can't face the burden alone” yeah I love them. Plus she has him trained 😩🤣. One look, then she grabbed him and he stopped immediately in his tracks and he backed up and started paying attention. Whew. The greatest King and Queen that could've come out of the 7 realms.

We had a Rhaena sighting. Look I love Jeyne but I'll need her to watch her tone with Rhaena please and thank you. Rhaena you're not powerless love. She's been through enough, I just need everybody to get out of her way and give her everything that she wants, it's what she deserves. I didn't like how she found out about Rhaenys though💔. I think they're really scrapping Nettles though 🙃. Wtf Sara and Ryan. I'll not get into that, it's literally grinding my gears though.

Next week we'll see Silverwing and Vermithor!!! I'm excited. Until then guys.

[pynkhues]

Am I the only person alive who would find it (darkly) hilarious if Armand did erase the rest of the 70s interview memory at Louis’ request? I think we can all agree Armand has taken a lot of liberties with the truth and he’s a pretty seasoned manipulator but I’m just so amused with the idea that that was one of the only times he was telling the truth (mostly because of how hard Daniel was rolling his eyes over it and because of how insane it sounds.) it’s got that same energy as that one co-worker who’s always causing trouble who you finally call out, only to find this was the one time they weren’t responsible.

On a similar note, because of how Louis is portrayed (ie with a spotty or unreliable memory at times) and how Armand is portrayed (lying, sometimes directly and sometimes by omission) how do you think about the bits of story we get from the two of them re authenticity? I see lots of takes that just…sweep anything complex or unsavory under the proverbial ‘blame Armand’ rug or the ‘Louis’ brain is Swiss-cheese’ blanket as opposed to examining each action and element of the story through the lens of where each character is coming from in that moment. (For example, I’ve seen plenty of folks question if Louis’ memories of lestat can be trusted at all or if it’s all just Armand’s tinkering to make him look bad and just…it’s a tv show. From a practical standpoint they literally cannot rip up everything they’ve shown you. Rehashing memories can only be done some of the time or the audience gets frustrated. And from a story perspective, can’t we take Louis at his word at least some of the time until shown otherwise?)

(Side note and ironic given my ask but I wish we had half as much discourse about Louis as a capitalist and his understanding of the commodification of experiential human things such as art as we do about whether all his memories are unreliable re his romantic relationships. Thank you so much for including the gallery scene in your fic.)

Hahah, I don't think you'd be alone in finding it darkly hilarious if Louis had asked Armand to take the memory away. Hell, the ambiguity of that scene works because it's believable that Louis would ask - Louis really pendulums between heavy handed repression and unrestrained self-indulgence, and it seems like a dam burst for him that night when it came to Lestat. His name had been unuttered in their home for 23 years! And given Armand can read his mind and could clearly sense thoughts of Lestat in Paris, I imagine he's not been deliberately not thought about too. And suddenly a night with Daniel and it's all he can say! All he can think about! The pressure he's placed on the box he keeps Lestat in has loosened just enough to let it all come out!

To know Armand tried to contact Lestat, to feel his own weakness, to know Lestat might know not just his mental state but his crumbling resolve in terms of the promise he made him in Magnus' tower - - it's not hard to see him asking for Armand's help in repressing it all again.

And in terms of their authenticity in the telling of their stories - - I think it varies! I think Armand definitely and deliberately finds the truth malleable, but that doesn't mean I think he lies about everything. Like you said, he tends to prefer to omit than outright lie - like omitting Gabrielle in his recounting of 1800s Paris or the truth about San Francisco, or, I'm sure we'll discover in s3, Lestat being in Paris in the 40s.

I actually don't think he would've tampered with Louis' memories of Lestat at all though - I don't think he would've needed to. Louis is a really punishing character and Lestat's a volatile one, I don't think it would be all that hard for Louis to focus on Lestat's worse behaviour, or to allow his memory to re-write certain events with the most bad faith interpretations of Lestat's actions, thoughts or words as a means to keep him at an emotional distance. Memories aren't facts, even when we want them to be, and I think for Louis they're as malleable when he needs them to be as the truth is for Armand.

The result is that they enable each other's untruths, I think, which goes to the facade of their relationship. Louis can try and mould his memories into something that justifies his choices, and Armand can mould the truth in a way that makes their love story something more than it is, but that doesn't mean that it's entirely lies or entirely inauthentic. It's a version of a story that they've enabled in one another to perform a happiness neither of them feels, but neither knows an alternative to because Louis' grief struck, traumatised and clinically depressed and Armand has been groomed by a monster, has undealt with trauma of his own and an incapacity to be alone.

So yeah, I think a lot of it is true, it's just not a whole truth.

[punkitt-is-here]

woagh hey for anyone concerned that i condone incest or pedophilia or anything like that lemme clarify: god no and I think you're kind of weird and uncomfortable if that is something you make. it weirds me out. when people ask me if I'm All For That, that is an extremely loaded way to ask me those questions and most of the time I'm gonna tell you to buzz off because I just got done with a bunch of people shitting on me for not being some sort of gender lawyer and the way those kinds of questions in my inbox are phrased often reads as ways to trap me to justify dogpiling on me. Yes, I think it's weird and makes me uncomfortable, no, I don't promote any of that, please will folks stop messaging me about it. I was only snippy in my responses because people ask those questions in extremely hostile ways and the last thing I need is more people mad at me while my boyfriend is staying over. In my experience the way those questions were worded are usually used as gotchas or traps and I am obviously not a huge fan of those as someone who just got a ton of death threats this week for saying I didn't care how someone identified (re: bi lesbians) so forgive me for not wanting to get involved in anything as extremely volatile as shipping discourse. I'm gonna go out to a gay bar with my boyfriend now and once again if you send me weird accusatory asks about the whole thing I'm blocking you. Don't involve me at all with stupid pro/anti shit because it is something I Do Not Care About and Never Want To.

[omegawizardposting]

I think a lot of discourse around the word queer would disappear if queer people simply stopped calling people queer without permission.

Most folks don't care that you call yourself queer. We're all for it, in fact. Reclamation is great. I've reclaimed tranny, faggot, fruit, fairy. I vibe heavy with those words, so there's no reason for me to oppose your reclamation of queer.

I'm just tired of being called a slur I haven't reclaimed and a word I don't personally identify with. Like, that shit is exhausting. It is exhausting for me to have to say, every single time, "I don't vibe with that word, can you please not call me it?" Over and over and over again. Oftentimes to the same people who cannot seem to commit to memory that one of the people in their social circle doesn't want to be called queer. They will remember everything else about my identity flawlessly except that I'm not queer.

I want to be able to move through life without people assuming I'm queer. I want asking what labels I use to be normalized. I want it to be as natural to other people as asking my name and pronouns.

"What labels do you prefer?" "Gay and trans." "How do you feel about queer?" "It's not for me." Easy. Simple. Quick. Courteous. Compassionate.

I already do this whenever I meet a new LGBTQIA/queer person. It is appreciated every single time. Just about everyone I've done this with has commented on my politeness. I am not even a particularly polite person, I'm actually infamously quite blunt and a bit much for most folks, but this shit's a hit. It instantly lets the person I'm talking to know that I care about both their personal identity and their comfort.

If you wouldn't assume any other part of my identity, why are you assuming I'm queer?

[vidreview]

VIDREV: "Plagiarism and You(Tube)" by Hbomberguy.

[originally posted december 7th 2023]

i didn't initially plan to do a full VIDREV for this one. it's a long video that speaks plenty for itself, revealing a veritable cottage industry of video essayists who've found great success in brazenly stealing the works of marginalized creators. it's an infuriating watch, especially as someone who has put a lot of work over a lot of years into getting better as an essayist. at a moment when the gormless profit-chasing business degree havers of the world are pretty unambiguously winning in every avenue imaginable, it's gratifying to see someone like Hbomberguy use his significant platform to at least make a dent in that trend. i had a few gripes, sure, but i didn't figure they were worth the trouble. of course now it's been out for a few days, the video already has over 6.8 million views, and people are still talking about it on every single social media website of note. watching that discourse evolve from afar has sharpened some of the round edges on my aforementioned gripes, and given me reason to think that maybe weighing in isn't a totally fruitless endeavor. and besides, what's the point of having a video essay review blog if you're not gonna review what is arguably the video essay of the moment? ahhh, there's a Faustian bargain if ever i heard one.

in this post, i'm going to be critical of Hbomberguy's "Plagiarism and You(Tube)" on a few fronts of debatable importance. but first, i want to make it clear that i am genuinely grateful to Hbomb for putting so much time and effort into this investigation. plagiarism is a serious accusation that requires commensurate evidence, and Harris's got that covered in spades. the case is made so much harder to deny by the frequent juxtaposition of a plagiarist's voice-over with the original plagiarized text on screen reacting to minor trail-covering alterations. these sections occupy the bulk of this video's near 4 hour runtime, and while i have some issues with that length, i understand that the deluge of evidence is precisely to make sure that none of the plagiarists in question can continue dodging accusations the way they have done previously. in this process, Hbomb lays out a consistent playbook utilized by all manner of plagiarists, and (hypothetically) gives viewers the tools and awareness they need to better spot plagiarism in the future. this matters because, as he rightly points out, youtube isn't a fun little hobby site for posting silly cat videos anymore, there's real money to be made on the platform and virtually no oversight to protect creators with ethics and integrity (i wanted to pull a direct quote here but alas, you can't ctrl+f a video). it's an open question as to how or whether we can fix this problem, but we don't get to that conversation until we acknowledge that plagiarism is a legitimate, widespread, materially harmful phenomenon online. none of what i have to say in this review is meant to minimize its broad success in calling attention to a very real problem!

that said…

in the days since its release, i've seen a lot of back and forth over what this video is about. on one side you have folks calling for the blood of James Somerton and others mentioned in the essay, saying "fuck these people specifically." yet on another side, many insist that you're missing the point if all you see is more drama for the drama mill. "this is a systemic problem" they say, "that's what the video is about." i'm inclined to agree more with the latter than the former, as Hbomb does consistently circle back to talking about the unpaid victims of plagiarism, ending the video by explicitly highlighting underrated queer creators and even saying outright that he doesn't want the end result to be limited in scope to just retribution against these specific plagiarists.

and yet, when i see a meme like this one:

i can't help but think… is that what the video is about? is someone who just sees the drama missing the point? yes, certainly, Hbomb says as much, but how much does he actually say it compared to everything else? what's the proportion of (to be overly reductive) "drama content" to "systemic criticism"? because it seems to me that anyone who only/mostly gets "wow fuck these people in particular" out of this video has done nothing less than take the video in aggregate. the bulk of its runtime is spent detailing very specific acts of plagiarism, and while yes, as i said above, this abundance serves a very real purpose, it shouldn't go unacknowledged that the tone of these sections is often one of ridicule and mockery. i don't mean that as a criticism in and of itself, to be clear. you can draw a line from here directly backwards through all his "Measured Response" videos, dude cut his teeth on knocking overconfident hacks down a peg, a bit of ridicule and mockery is to be expected. but that does ultimately mean that Hbomb spends most of the video saying "fuck these people in particular," in a tone of voice he honed through many other videos devoted to saying "fuck this guy in particular", only occasionally stopping to add that "plagiarism is popular and insidious and even creators you trust might be doing it" before moving onto the next scornworthy particular guy. so it kind of doesn't matter that one is "the point" and the other is "missing the point" because he's genuinely saying both things, and he's saying one of them significantly more often than the other. you can't tell me the dunks aren't at least part of the point, and if they're part of it then they can and will be misconstrued by some as the whole point. the entertainment and spectacle of knocking these plagiarists down a peg is an indulgence that, while certainly earned, does exist in concrete tension with the systemic arguments that are meant to take priority. now, some of this does come down to how internet culture has shifted in the last decade to facilitate a much more aggressive style of engagement overall, which Harris cannot control no matter how often he says "don't harass the plagiarists." there isn't really a perfectly right way to go about this, and under the circumstances i do think he did far better than others might have done in his stead.

but even still, i think this misapprehension is made worse by the essay's conclusion, which in my opinion largely fails to tie the whole thing together into the systemic argument that supposedly is "the point" some viewers are missing. Harris commendably points out how the so-called AI revolution is at its core an act of automated civilization-scale plagiarism, and that future instances of plagiarism may be harder to catch precisely because of this technology. frankly i wish that perspective had taken up a solid 10% of the runtime rather than a couple paragraphs at the very end, seeing as on balance it's the far bigger and more likely threat to the livelihoods of people watching than old-school direct plagiarism, but that's me. what really bugged me was the brevity with which he discussed possible solutions to the problem. he rightly points out that youtube implementing a plagiarism reporting system would just be another tool for bad faith actors to silence marginalized creators on the platform, and then… he kinda gives up? he shrugs his shoulders and says, well, for now, just talking about plagiarism and spreading awareness of it is enough. for as well-intentioned and, generally speaking, true as that is, it bugs me as an essayist because i believe that a big part of the job is or ought to be expanding the audience's ability to imagine what's possible even if you aren't 100% sure about the answers yourself.

these are all very much "how i would have written it differently" criticisms, so they aren't particularly worth much, but i do feel it's odd that he doesn't even broach the subject of federal regulation, platform control, unionization efforts, or even just good old-fashioned consumer activism. virtually every website that the creative economy hangs on is a venture-capital backed corporate venture, and their ad-driven models for profiteering at a moment when wages are stagnant and layoffs are happening everywhere is, like, the reason this is such a problem. to address plagiarism as a systemic issue, we need to understand the systemic enablers of it as a behavior. if creators weren't getting such a small slice of the revenue pie, if we had more control over the platform and what rises to the top, if the companies that owned these platforms were beholden to federal regulations, if the government increased arts funding and gave out grants to independent creators that involved third-party quality checks, if online video creators had any manner of collective labor power, if the cost of living was lower by way of public healthcare, free education, mass public transit, and affordable housing, then this would be a drastically different conversation. these are not non-sequitors! this is as much an economic problem as it is a cultural one, so any proposed solution that stops at changing the culture is necessarily incomplete and doomed to fail.

look, i don't expect Hbomb to have the answers. nobody has the answers. but i think it's a bit short-sighted to leave so many possibilities unsaid when the one concrete possibility discussed is immediately (correctly) written off as a bad idea. it leads to a conclusion that feels iffy, a bit defeated, lost at sea, and that's an infectious mood. if the first step to solving plagiarism as a systemic problem is to encourage talking about it openly, i think it's equally important to at the very least gesture in the direction of the many possible avenues for a systemic solution, no matter how impossible or ridiculous they might seem in the current political climate. in point of fact, i think it's of utmost importance to include these possibilities precisely because they seem impossible, otherwise we will forever be trapped in a world of insufficient half measures, meekly reifying the conservative austerity of the liberal order because it's easier and safer than taking a wild shot in the dark.

again, i want to stress that this is a deeply subjective criticism. i'm an ornery Marxist, of course i have these kinds of gripes. and it's easy to get lost in criticizing what isn't there, which as an exercise generally tells you more about the critic than the object being criticized. so, to close out, i'm gonna shake my fist a little at something that is there.

there's a moment at about one hour thirty-five minutes in where Harris turns on some colored lights to get that patented blue-purple Bisexual Lighting, and then he says this:

This is a whole style of video now, and by "style" I mean one person did it first and then a bunch of boring people ripped her off. Stealing from lots of places is inspiration, but stealing from one place is plagiarism… unless you call it The BreadTube Style, and then it's fine. I don't even know what a BreadTube is, I just woke up one day and was told that I was in it, and that people hated me for being in it. I don't even know what it is!

i understand where this jab is coming from-- the whole BreadTube scene was a melodramatic nightmare, on account of being an audience-invented genre which that audience (and later creators who emerged from that audience) often inaccurately treated as a coherent movement. i understand the frustration expressed by a lot of creators in that first generation of left-ish essayists (Hbomb, Lindsay Ellis, Dan Olson, Contrapoints etc) with the atmosphere of that moment, and certainly don't begrudge them a desire to distance themselves from it and ridicule its shortcomings.

but this brief little jokey aside left a bad taste in my mouth. the creator he's talking about being "ripped off" here is obviously Contrapoints, who brought a colorful theatricality to her early work that elevated it above being something she shot for cheap in her apartment. this went hand in hand with her Socratic style of essaying, giving her characters a strange and vibrant world to occupy. i don't want to say she "did it first" because, let's be real, Natalie Wynn did not invent the idea of using dramatic lighting on the internet. but she was certainly the first person i saw on youtube doing it in video essays, and yeah, a lot of people followed her example including me!

but that's not the same thing as plagiarism, is it? this whole video is an extensive exploration of what genuinely counts as plagiarism: taking someone else's words and pretending that they're yours. style is almost never part of that conversation across the whole 4 hours, except where it involves use of prepackaged assets like transitions and stock footage, which Hbomb deliberately notes is fine and normal except when people act like they're the ones who invented it (this particularly comes up in the Legal Eagle section). by the terms of this joke, Abby Thorne of PhilosophyTube falls under the category of "boring people" who were "ripping off" Contrapoints even moreso than those who just lit videos like her, because she even does the Socratic-style dialogues! but somehow i don't think Harris would call that plagiarism. if the concern re: bisexual lighting in BreadTube is attribution, all i can say is that Natalie Wynn is one of the single most discussed and cited creators in the whole field. virtually everyone i can think of who "ripped her off" back in the day openly acknowledged being inspired by her at every possible opportunity. of course that's just my own biased recollection of the history, so who knows, maybe there are people out there acting like they did it first. but unlike most of the other victims of plagiarism provided in this video, Natalie Wynn is not wallowing in obscurity. her work is IMMENSELY successful, to the point where she's arguably the closest thing to a household name you can get from this space.

now, i'm sensitive to a joke like this because i always felt like if anything Natalie got too much credit for "inventing" the so-called "BreadTube style". her use of colored lights was striking and unique, yes, but it was also rudimentary and not particularly complicated. i worked in film lighting for enough years to see this "style" as equivalent to late 1910's era silent films blindly grasping at the bare fundamentals of montage that have become the backbone of all cinema. it's good, but it ain't Citizen Kane. i really hoped people would take Natalie's baseline not as a concrete template, but as a challenge to get even more ambitious and filmic with their lighting setups! instead things have stagnated, and we've kinda circled back around to a very slightly more colorful version of the standard pre-Contrapoints look. this is by no means to play down the work that Natalie did, because i know from my own years making video essays that it is NOT easy or simple to set up even rudimentary lighting that looks good. but come on man, have some perspective. she's a philosopher, not an electrician!

what's worse is that later on in the video, Hbomb talks about how many creators were inspired by AVGN to do twists on his formula, and why this was a good thing. near the end, when he's very rightly shouting out many underrated queer essayists, he spends a good chunk of time celebrating the spirit of remix that is so unique to the internet, insisting that there's a real tangible difference between plagiarism and inspiration. this is good! i agree with him! which is why it's so bizarre that there's this one aside that equates using bisexual lighting to plagiarism! it's a disarmingly hypocritical moment in an otherwise relatively on-point video, and its presence kind of weakens the rest of the essay for me (especially if you're sensitive to how near this comes to being all-out drama youtube, as clearly even Hbomb is by his own admission in the video).

the last i'll say is that i find it frustrating when a creator in Hbomb's position tries to act like BreadTube wasn't A Thing. no, it wasn't A Thing the way quite a lot of people thought it was (including many who called themselves BreadTubers). but these creators were often collaborating with each other to make guest appearances, read quotes, etc. certainly they mentioned each other often enough, which couldn't help solidifying in the audience's mind that there was indeed A Thing happening that involved multiple people with similar creative & political goals, regardless of whether or not that was the creators' intent. it wasn't formal, and it certainly wasn't A Movement (the lack of an articulated ideological spine is a BIG part of why things went sour the way they did), but they were happy enough to play along before Drama blew the whole endeavor to smithereens. and notably, successive generations of creators (like Sophie From Mars, Jack Saint, Lily Alexandre, CJ the X, and yes, also me again) saw the BreadTube genre as a place where interesting things were happening, where the kinds of things they/we wanted to create were encouraged and supported vociferously. it's no coincidence that a LOT of up-and-coming trans creators doing very BreadTube-y things got a huge boost from guesting on Hbomb's DK64 Nightmare Stream in 2019 (including me again, haha, oops), because there was A Thing happening even if most people were wrong about what, exactly, it was. none of this is to say that Hbomb should call himself a BreadTuber-- god no, i hope no one does that ever again, i'm embarrassed that i did back in the day! but this history does exist. mostly i just think this joke would've been better left on the cutting room floor.

okay, i think that's enough criticism for one day. one thought i had coming out of this is that i wish more video essays would publish concurrently with a written version on a dedicated website. not just a transcript but an article-format version. i wonder sometimes about the difficulty of indexing video essays, of getting their contents into a historical record that can be printed out and put into a library. but anyway, all my gripes aside, it's a good video and you should go watch it! preferably in chunks over a day or two!

[sapphire-weapon]

What's your take on Leon being misogynistic in RE4R? I've seen quite a few folks really heavily insisting that he's very much misogynistic in the remake, and, like... Idk, I want to hear a second opinion from someone who's analysis and takes on the story are very much measured. I mean, yeah, in the original RE4? Very much a byproduct of the time. Even I thought it was funny when I played it back in the day, and now I cringe, lol

But, in the remake? This whole take is basically based off of your own observations of how jaded and petty he is with Ada, without any real logical explanation behind it. And also him being way more soft and forgiving to Krauser, who has done arguably way worse things than Ada. Is that misogyny??? I'm a cis woman myself, but I am very much confused on this take. Like, I just really want to hear a second opinion on this. And I'm not one to say that Leon is some perfect flawless guy btw, the man's an idiot and pretty stuck up, and I love him for that. I'm just genuinely unsure how seriously I should consider this way of interpreting his new dynamic with Ada.

lmao so funny story about that

I actually tried to have a conversation with the person who started that discourse and was blocked and labeled "uncool" for my take. So uh. That's here if you wanna read it.

And wow people really want to compare Krauser and Ada? Okay. Let's compare Krauser and Ada.

Krauser is a man who...

+ was Leon's dedicated trainer and mentor for four years

+ built Leon up from his absolute lowest point

+ believed in Leon when Leon didn't even believe in himself

+ was always there no matter how badly Leon failed

Ada is some chick that Leon knew for a maximum of six hours and betrayed him in the end.

Who deserves more of the benefit of the doubt, in Leon's eyes? Who deserves more compassion, more patience, more emotional effort?

Leon isn't an omniscient member of the audience. He's a character in a story with a limited perspective. He's not comparing Krauser's atrocities with Ada's actions. He's looking at a man who he trusted, believed in, and loved and a woman who screwed him over on the worst night of his life.

People in this fandom are so unserious I swear to god.

[creationsabyss]

My thoughts on the Aventurine drama

I've been inactive for a while, I was (still am) busy in real life but coming back online to post and seeing discourse about a newly crowned favorite character is disheartening. Even more so, that people are harassing other writers over a drama I feel is overblown.

I have thoughts regarding it but I'm unsure if my opinion would be appreciated. But if you'd like to peacefully talk it out with me, I'd be happy to lend an ear. I'd like to hear both sides, as meager as my opinion may be.

Oh boy, here we go.

Aventurine is a character, a fictional being born to entertain the players. He is not real. He can not be offended by what you create of him. There is no point getting upset on the behalf of a character and prioritizing fiction over a person who does actually exist.

If we do want to condemn slavery fics, why not also cancel slave reader fics? Or ones that include things such as dead dove (including yanderes in general) fics because those topics are equally terrible to condone and write about from that point of view. Or how about other characters that have similar topics in their lore. Should those also be canceled too?

*There are also folks who make problematic pieces to help cope with their own trauma. Does that mean they should be canceled too? (On that note: making a piece that holds problematic content does not always mean the person condones it in real life. Fiction is fiction for a reason.)

In the end, I think everyone can have their own opinions, but I would like to say that your opinions do not justify terrible actions. Just because you disagree with something does not justify you bullying someone into deleting one of their works, whether it is art or writing or anything else, I do not think that is justifiable. Harassing someone or calling people to harass them is not right either.

*If you did disagree with it, why not message the author about it instead of making accusatory posts? Even when done with good intentions, all it does is cause harm when it's practically inviting people to go harass someone over a fanfiction. A very mild fanfiction at that.

If you disagree with a piece, cool. That's your opinion. Just don't interact with it then. Block that creator or that tag or whatever it is that led you there. Or if you're curious, ask that creator.

Also, to reiterate, in my opinion, fiction is still just fiction. Especially when it's a fanfiction about a fictional character. Yes, his canon lore exists, but people can use that basis in fanfiction, something that will inherently warp canon because we are not the original writers and can not capture him in the exact way he was created. In case that doesn't make sense: Fanfiction does not have to comply with the original lore. Also since some of you seem to be forgetting: fiction does not mirror real life.

If you are truly that concerned over sensitive topics like that, directing that energy towards projects that involve such topics in real life would be much better than attacking people on the internet.

[going-to-ikea-for-the-fries]

I need some clarification here, because I'm getting conflicting information with what I've been taught is "fandom protocol" (I'm an elder, so maybe I'm out of the loop a bit.) I was under the impression that if you disagree with someone, block and move on with life. Don't engage, don't mob, just block and move on with life. I see you reblogging posts from folks who have admitted that that's what they did - followed basic fandom protocol.

Are you now saying that those that reblogged that screenshot post are responsible for sending the message that "it's okay to mob the OP with death threats" by doing so? Aren't most of these blogs 18+ that are admittedly only responsible for their own actions? Are we now to wait 24 hours to ensure there's not a dialogue that needs to happen? Obviously fact-checking should be done, but things slip through, especially when it's from a source we perceive as a vetted source.

You're starting to hold folks accountable for crimes which they confess they did not commit. One offered a sincere, public apology taking responsibility for their actions, an acknowledgement of the harm they caused, and a commitment to doing better in the future along with removing the offending post after your call out. Isn't that what a good apology is?

I think you've moved the goalposts on this, and it's no longer about spreading awareness of Gaz-erasure (whether intentional or not) and the inappropriate screen-grab rage-bait of a post. I am very concerned for Myka - they never should have been put in this place. But I think your emotions are swelling out past those that deserve it.

(BTW, I did send the same ask to CrashTestBunny, but I'd like your thoughts too - especially on block-and-move-on and being responsible for follower's actions as an 18+ blog.)

I did see this in bunny's blog and did ponder on what you asked and here's my two cents on it:

(this is so long)

When you're on the internet and posting things publicly, you're not isolated, you're not alone.

Your blog, even if you make sure to never reblog/interact with it or use tags and therefore think you're keeping it anonymous, you're really not.

You're never immune from being found, from being criticised for the things you say, and you are certainly not anonymous.

I start by saying that to say that there will ALWAYS be people ready to criticise others for the things they say/post or the way they act.

So even if the "fandom etiquette" dictates that you should block and move on with your life, that's not to say everyone will.

And in this case, what happened with @/codslut had nothing to do with being unable to block and move on. That only works for posts you see in your dash and don't like, because we all are responsible for curating our algorithm and choosing what we interact with.

With @/codslut, she became a victim of public scorn over a misunderstanding and misinterpretation like a game of broken telephone.

And the person that screenshotted her post and shared it with their followers knew exactly what they were doing by doing so which was publicly posting about it and creating discourse among their followers.

I want to believe they thought they were an island/isolated, but I know (and we all know) they knew they weren't. Turns out they have a history of influencing their followers (by accident or on purpose, doesn't matter) into ganging up on other creators.

And with blogs as big as the screenshotter's, with as big of a following and that much of an activity, and, of course, the reblogging that came from other big blogs with massive followings as well...

It's no wonder it all spun out of control and became unmanageable.

And, as usual, the internet will do what the internet will do, and bad apples will find their way into controversial posts (like the Gaz erasure) and then go bully people because they think they can.

And in this situation... blocking and moving on doesn't work. It simply doesn't.

@/codslut didn't have the choice to block and move on with her day. Not after what was basically a scorn campaign that sent dozens of people her way.

These blogs, big ones, have a responsibility, not to police their follower's actions (as if a parent) but to hold themselves accountable because they did throw wood into the fire by reblogging it and putting it in more people's dashboards.

They can't just wash their hands of all responsibility, because they did have a hand in it. Even if they didn't mean to.

TL;DR: 1- "Block and Move On" only works on the dash, not when people are harrassing you in your blog/inbox; 2- You're not responsible for your followers' actions, but you are responsible for the fact you instigated their actions by poking the beast.

[jackobbit]

I don’t usually speak openly about problems within fandom. I keep to myself, occasionally throw a thought or two out, maybe reblog a beware post if things get downright dastardly, but this?

I don’t know why, but I feel compelled to throw my own two cents in.

I wasn’t originally going to write this, because I always feel like anything I could have said had already been done faster and more intelligently by someone else. But I don’t mind saying the same point again just to hammer it home this time around;

Death threats are not criticism.

Harassment is not criticism.

People going out of their way to say the most foul, insulting things possible about someone else’s writing is not criticism.

And if you think that any of those things are acceptable methods of ‘communication’ with another person then you are dead wrong and you need to rethink why you think it’s acceptable.

Not only is TSAMS/LAES free content, but it’s also ran by a small number of individuals. It’s not a corporation. It’s a group of folks on YouTube making silly fictional stories.

And yet? I have never had the misfortune of being within a fandom more openly negative than this very fandom.

The anonymous confessions, the harassment incidents, the endless discourse, and worst of all the awful behavior directed to our own fellow human beings.

I cannot emphasize this enough, it is not acceptable to do the shit that has been done to Kat. She did not deserve an ounce of what she has been dealt and I am ashamed that people within this fandom thought it fit to send her an endless god damn spew of vitriol potent enough to make the poor thing quit writing altogether.

Some of you people need to learn what actual criticism is, learn to remember that people are on the other side of a screen, that not everything revolves around you and your takes, and for the love of all that is good learn how to separate yourself and your being from internet discourse and stories and arcs and posting enough to realize that what you’re doing is parasocial unhealthy and weird.

Pick up a book!! Take a walk!! Look at the clouds!! Yes our stories and fiction are important to us- it’s important to me too- but it will never be so serious that you should throw around threats and insults over your optional entertainment!!

[1000punks]

okay, so i think i've cracked the code

on why the girls, gays and theys all really like BG3

the short answer is the subversion of toxic gender stereotypes and the more or less relateable themes that each character has come up in game, or are implied, long answer under the cut

lots of people have been posting about individual (main and supporting) character motivations, yes but i haven't really seen any analyses based on gender and/or romance situations quite yet (please feel free to point me to them, i love discourse) as well, i am well aware that the romanceable characters are scare quotes "player-sexual" for the most part, but some elements of the gendered experience may feel more relateable to certain groups of players than others. i'm going to refrain as much as i can from making moral judgements (in terms of motivations and alignments) because all of these characters are morally complex. let's take it on a case by case basis, starting with the women in the game (minthara isn't included since i haven't done a playthrough with her as a companion yet :'D): Karlach

Karlach seems like this huge butch imo, but from what i can see she has to battle with the touch starved-ness. i guess you could make the argument here that that feeds into a stereotype about stone butches, but i think it presents a very relatable (and honest) representation of how a LOT of queer folks, especially queer non-men, deal with being touch starved. i think one thing that potentially a lot of queer women and femme-identifying folks can relate to is the fear of being "imposing" in wlw relationships. for example, i would say the fear of coming off as "creepy" or "dangerous." and inversely, the feeling of relief when you're assured that that isn't the case. the other thing that comes up, i think, with Karlach is that there's this stigma surrounding masculine women. for one, she towers over everyone else, and she's a barbarian. on the surface level, that can be extremely intimidating, obviously. but playing through her romance, understanding that she is capable of and honestly, exudes tenderness -- and the majority of which being without touching/sexuality, is just... it's really important y'all okay? Shadowheart

my personal favourite thing about Shadowheart and her storyline is that even if she appears very feminine, there is no part of the game that i can see (thus far) that has railroaded her into that stereotype. not even with the armour choices. in my file, the armour i've picked for her "end-game" level 12 armour is the shar justiciar armour she gets in the gauntlet. it's not stereotypically feminine at all. historically in video games, armour that covers everything on a woman's body (i will bring this up re: Lae'zel as well) is uhh.. really fuckin hard to find.

the other thing is while she may be very femme-coded, she doesn't necessarily use "stereotypical" seduction methods in her romance scenes. her first one is sharing wine with you and kissing, that's pretty much it, right? and if you call her beautiful, instead of acting coy, she says "i know." and thanks you for noticing. she doesn't need someone to simper over her and tell her that. she's also never shy about telling you exactly what she wants, whether in a romantic or platonic situation. picasso, i like it. Lae'zel

jesus, what can i start with here? this woman is an extremely skilled fighter, wears heavy armour, wields a fucking greatsword that's bigger than she is, all while being like, 5 feet tall. her first romance scene shows me that she is interested in sex but is primarily concerned with her own pleasure (this can be read in a positive or negative way of course: positive being she is getting hers, and negative being not concerned with her partner's pleasure). not only that but she is not interested in having kids at all, based on in-game dialogue. and like i mentioned with shadowheart, her armour (most of the gith armour options you can put her in, i would guess) are full sets of armour - minus the admittedly a little weird lack of butt coverage on most of the gith plate and half-plate that i've seen her in. uhh, yeah- wow. in a romance, it seems like she fits the "shrew" stereotype, but i argue that for lae'zel, it's more about respecting Tav than it is about swooning over them (and knowing that they're passionate). if she doesn't respect Tav, there's no way she's going to share a bed with them, never mind anything else. that to me, shows a woman who has self-respect, which isn't often something shown so strongly in a video game/media in general especially when it's written by men (which is fucking unfortunate!! i hate it!!) i think this is beaten over our heads as players most blatantly when she challenges you to a fucking duel in act 2 and then if Tav wins she boinks them right in the middle of camp. Jaheira

Jaheira is old enough to have adult children, for one. i know she's an elf, and there's some in-game dialogue that alludes to her having extended her lifespan, etc. but for argument's sake, let's say she's middle aged - she is in friggin' top physical condition. and while during the events of bg3 she is a widow, you think that's gonna stop her from meeting her goals? not only that, but her adventures didn't suddenly stop when she became a mother. there's not much of a romance element to her storyline, but she's definitely biffing off a lot of stereotypes about older women and mothers here.

the men - most of my arguments here are going to come back to the utter lack of hypermasculinity/toxic masculinity:

Wyll

he talks about dancing with you in his first romance scene, not seducing you - in fact, he shares a really chaste kiss and then is like "but now isn't the time to jump into bed, actually." he friggin blushes, because thinking about a romance with you gets him all giddy. the man dances for you. then he goddamn proposes to you like a proper gentleman. he is concerned with family. he's concerned with Karlach's well-being. he's concerned with other people's emotions, and is extremely considerate of them. he's pacted with Mizora, not some unseen super masc devil. Mizora the friggin danger femme. lastly, and i think this is really important: Wyll, regardless of a high-fantasy setting, is a black man. i am well aware that eschewing the many stereotypes of hypermasculinity in regards to black men specifically, cannot be undone with one video game, but i think it does a lot. it could do more, of course - but i feel that Larian made a wholehearted attempt with this specifically.

Minsc

the man is large and very visually "stereotypically masculine," yes, but all of his actions are either influenced by Jaheira or Boo. case closed, your honor. i'm joking. but really, Minsc respects and admires Jaheira intensely as a comrade. and what she thinks seems to matter more to him than his own motivations. that's what made it so easy for the Bhaalist assassins to manipulate him - they just had one person pose as Jaheira. boom.

Halsin

another very visually "stereotypically masculine" man, yes- but i have three things: he's open to polyamory that is represented in the game more or less in a healthy way he's very concerned with consent, both in a monogamous romance or a polyamorous one - this includes the bear scene, he does ask about it before like, barrelling into it (and no i'm not poking that bear any more than i have to in this post) uhh, have you heard him talk to/about Tav? my my. not only that but this man is quite literally built like a bear, yet he is a druid, literally about all things nature. you could make the argument that this subverts the nature/culture; emotion/reason debate as it relates to gendered roles.

Gale

okay so, not only has it been confirmed/alluded to by in-game dialogue that Gale does the cooking for the camp- (specifically by Wyll if i recall correctly), he's also just a fairly forthcoming person with his feelings and insecurities. i know a lot of people have deemed that a bit annoying, but i do think there is some value in it. for example, he is a little self-deprecating about being a bad kisser, but it's his way (especially if you read him as autistic) of saying "hey, i'm insecure about this and i usually spend a lot of time alone in a mother fucking tower in waterdeep." i.e. i don't exactly know how to do this. he's an honest, giving, and kind man, and is just as likely to show you as he is to tell you how his heart and mind function. he wants you to understand him. he's also very idealistic- that of course can be a double edged sword, but i think he comes by it honestly as well. given his background with Mystra. i shouldn't even need to mention it but the way the "with you i forget my goddess" and the "you would really prefer me as i am?" lines wrench my heart- like, okay that's very romantic but he's also (imo) accepting that he, a human man, cannot be perfect. that to me is like anti-toxic masculinity in the sense of accepting that a real relationship is where two people are equals and that it's founded in mutual respect and adoration. not unrequited love and service (especially service).

Astarion

get at me if you want, but this man is in touch with his feminine side. i would personally call him high femme, but that's a little besides the point, he sews, appreciates fashion, yada yada. the next part about him i want to discuss as delicately as possible- he's very forthcoming (once he feels relatively safe and in control of the situation at hand) with his experiences as an ab-se/SA survivor. most men do not have the space to do this, nor are they actively encouraged to share their experiences. and with that, depending on dialogue choices, he wants to cease all intimate contact and go at his own pace. not expecting men to be sexual is kind of big on its own, but given his background, i think it's especially important in his storyline. furthermore, in the spawn!romance stream, he is very explicit about moving forward with Tav as equals.

Raphael

you.. y'all. you already know what i'm going to say regarding the dialogue with Haarlep. i don't really know if i have anything to add besides reiterating that men do not have to be these perfect, virile sexual machines.

Extra Stuff

the emphasis on consent: whether it's in a romance dialogue or if it's the game warning you "you're about to do xyz, are you sure?!"

specifically consent in the romance dialogues though: there are usually 3-4 chances for you as the player to be like "actually, i don't want to do that"

queer couples (npc + npc or pc + companion) are just.. normal. once you get to the lower city you'll hear a ton of ambient dialogue where it will be like "my husband blah blah blah" and you look and it's a gnome and his dragonborn husband standing in the street

uhh, hi larian jumping on the character creator with gender neutral and gender-mixed/mixable options, way to make the player base feel seen. hearing my Tav (Festé) be referred to as "they" in dialogue without issue (especially glaring grammatical ones like i've seen in other games) was really big for me, personally.

openly trans npcs. the defense rests, your honor. okay but imagine my surprise when i hear abigail fucking thorn in a completely missable dialogue scene, where she (the character) talks openly about the fact that she is a fucking trans woman. like.