#I can’t emphasize that enough. trans women are women and I love you

[obikinetic]

If anyone is interested in seeing the rest of this year’s Inktober posts, I’ve linked them all here! :)

Inktober 2023 Masterpost

Just linking them all together here since a few posts were made on my other account!

Day 1: Dream - HP

Day 2: Spiders - SW

Day 3: Path - HP

Day 4: Dodge - HP

Day 5: Map - HP

Day 6: Golden - SW

Day 7: Drip - BG3

Day 8: Toad - HP

Day 9: Bounce - HP

Day 10: Fortune - HP

Day 11: Wander - HP

Day 12: Spicy - BG3

Day 13: Rise - BG3

Day 14: Castle - HP

Day 15: Dagger - HP

Day 16,17: Angel, Demon - Good Omens

Day 18: Saddle - HP

Day 19: Plump - SW

Day 20: Frost - HP

Day 21: Chains - HP

Day 22: Scratchy - SW

Day 23: Celestial - HP

Day 24: Shallow - HP

Day 25: Dangerous - OFMD

Day 26: Remove - HP

Day 27: Beast - HP

Day 28: Sparkle - HP

Day 29: Massive - HP

Day 30: Rush - SW

Day 31: Fire - HP

[textingaboutprometheus]

I live in PA in a very working class area, full of latinos, black and white people with no college education. It’s considered middle of the road politically and my city voted for Obama twice, then Trump, Biden, and Trump again. I was very involved in this election, talking to people everyday, trying to elect Kamala. I’m here to say that racism, sexism, Gaza, authoritarianism, hate of democrats, none of this caused these results. These issues exist and it feeds his base but doesn’t really bring new people in. And his base, no matter how culty and vocal they are, was not enough to elect him.

Kamala lost for 3 major reasons and very likely, any other Democrat would lave lost as well. IMO, she lost due to inflation, immigrants and cultural issues, in this order. I’m going to talk here about people who voted for Trump and are are NOT maga, are not part of his cult, are not what we, on the left, imagine how all Trump voters are. These are not my views, but what I heard days and days and days when talking to people of all races, men and women, young and old in my area.

To start, yes, Trump is a convicted felon, a rapist, he’s racist, corrupt and everything else. People should take this in consideration before everything else but I can’t emphasize enough how low ALL politicians are seen in our country. And I mean LOOOOWWWW. For many people, with very few exceptions (Obama is still seen as a very decent man here), all politicians are like Trump, did exactly the same things and were just not exposed yet because they are part of the establishment.

People don’t care other countries also have inflation because of Covid, they only see the high prices in their grocery stores and, right or wrong, blame the president in power at that time. Kamala as a VP was seen as an incumbent who didn’t fix this problem before, and imo, was not able to really show what/how she would act different now. She should’ve separated herself from Biden way more but obviously didn’t or couldn’t do that.

Immigrants are seen as a VERY SERIOUS problem outside Twitter and Democrat spaces. Yes, there are lots of racism (Trump’s base), but for everybody else, is just seeing more people competing with Americans, taking their jobs by accepting lower salaries. In my area for example, construction jobs were mainly done by black Americans not so long ago (in my lifetime) and now is almost 100% immigrants. This impacts men more than women because these jobs are done primarily by men so that may explain Trump’s huge gains with men of color all over the country.

Cultural issues are so difficult to talk about. The reality is that America is not that progressive. Gay marriage was a big deal to a lot of people (and let me say here that minorities are MORE conservative than whites regardng this) but it was eventually accepted by most. But the leap from 2 men (or women) in love should have the right to get married to the very progressive issues of today, is too much I guess. There’s too much in volved in the vc trans and DEI debates to talk about here, andi mim not all bad from conservatives by the way, but cultural issues are one of the most significant differences between the left/ vci Democrats and everybody else. Even left leaning people in my city, people who are not racist, not sexist, not conservative, pro choice, pro gay rights, believe/know they live in a very different word from what we see from DNC people in person, watch on TV and read online.

Another point before I stop. Abortion access concerned a lot of women here, but many of them didn’t believe it would change nationally or thought it was fair for each state to have a vote to decide it. Also, not every pro-choice woman in America agrees with the DNC stance on abortion, so maybe a more nuanced view would help? I don’t know, I heard very crass things from DNC operatives about abortion that would make a lot of people run (like how abortions are not a big deal, they are not babies anyway, etc). Even if you think exactly like that, talking about it in a more respectful way would go a long way (latinos for example are very anti abortion and hearing “it’s just a bunch of cells” really pisses people off).

I’m deeply disappointed with the election today, I read this was the worst Democrat results in 40 years and I believe it. My area went from center left purple to deep red and I live here, I know this was NOT about Trump.

I can’t sleep and feel completely defeated.

I'm a white American with a low income.job. I make less than $25k a year. I don't have the qualifications to do anything else because I never really learned any skills.

And I know for a fact that Republicans are worse the economy than Democrats. Everything you said is accurate but awful.

I don't see immigration as a problem personal. Immigration is good for the economy. I'm devastated.

[st-just]

So re this post, I’ve discovered I actually have opinions on the whole ‘debating someone with bad opinions is basically signing up for their next rally’ thing. So, some jumbled thoughts.

-The whole idea that the correct move is to just block and avoid any arguments of the other side without reading them because if you did you’d end up converted seems like the caricature a movement comes up with to explain why other people disagree with them. (It is, in fact, something I remember liberal types attributing to Bush supporters when I was a kid). It seems like just an admission of defeat about the strength of your own ideas to actually believe it for yourself.

-More concretely, I honestly think a refusal to even slightly engage with the ideas of the other side leaves you naive/vulnerable to basically any change in presentation or decent marketing campaign. See: all the terf shit that does massive numbers among theoretically trans-positive people on here because the OP doesn’t explicitly say ‘I hate trans women’.

-Beyond that, like - I really can’t emphasize enough how much alt right types love being able to strike the post of ‘Forbidden Knowledge that the Globalist Elite tries to suppress because they know they don’t have any arguments against it!” Maybe don’t play right into that?

-And really, all this just gives way too much credit to far right ideology. Like, I read Schmidt and Junger in school for a class on fascist theory and I promise that both of them are way more eloquent and intelligent than any alt right guy on twitter, and I still managed to not be a nazi! It’s not that hard, if you’ve actually thought about your beliefs and commitments and why you have them!

-Not there’s any moral obligation to spend hours debating with assholes online, obviously. More often than not you really shouldn’t. But, like, that’s because it’s exhausting and unpleasant and I dearly hope most people have better ways to spend their free time, not because the tweets of some guy with a white marble statue as an avatar are actually an eldritch tome that’s going to burn out your soul and turn you into a nazi.

[vaspider]

“There are No Trans Women Named Iphigenia: A Brief Pamphlet Regarding Claims by White Cisgender Rich Gay Men that Queers Against Pete is Homophobic. - by Han Koehle

The issue is not that Pete isn't queer enough.

Pete isn't queer at all. Listen to him. He doesn't self-describe as queer, he doesn't politically position as queer. When other people call him queer he responds that he is a gay man. And that, specifically, is his identity and his political positionality.

Queer and gay do not mean the same thing. Queer, as an umbrella term, refers not just to a range of genders and sexualities but to a specific political project that has to do with reclaiming and dismantling heterosexism and cissexism. Gay people can be queer, but gay people don't have to be queer, and a lot of gay people have very specifically separated themself from queerness (as Pete does, explicitly) because the thing that they want and fight for is to fit into the majority. Pete's sexual and romantic desire, his identity, and his marriage are completely legitimate. Nobody who says "he isn't queer enough" (although as far as I can tell that's a bit of a strawman anyway, because all critiques from queer folks are assumed to be "not queer enough" even if they literally never critique him that way) means that he isn't flamboyant enough, which seems to be how cishet people and assimilationist rich white gay men read this term.

There have been decades of struggle between people who can and wish to expand the dominant group just enough for their own families to slip into them, and people who want to structurally dismantle the power dynamic that debases them. There is nothing wrong with a person being gay and living a white picket fence lifestyle with their 2.5 kids and a dog. That isn't the issue. The issue is whether that person thinks this is the only respectable way to live, and whether they are willing to point at people who could not or would not live that way and say "I belong here because I'm not like THEM."

And that is ultimately what the critique is. It's saying "he wants relatively powerful gay people to be allowed to live in hetero society and he is willing to sell out poor, BBIPOC, trans, and otherwise misfit and downtrodden members of our community to do it." That isn't self-hate, it's self-respect. He's not allowed to use me as a bargaining chip for his own betterment, and then claim to be my ally.

He is really, really gay. Properly gay. Uncontested. And so were the gay men who wrote in the 70s that they, unlike the "street f*ggots," belong in polite society. None of these folks are part of the queer movement because the queer movement is specifically, intentionally the politics of saying "no, I'm with the street f*ggots" whether you identify as one or not. [I am only editing this word for Facebook. I can say it without flinching. I can say it with only love.] Queer says no, you cannot insult me by lumping me in with the most marginalized and scandalous among us. I am unabashedly for their quality of life and not just my own.

When people say I am queer and not for this man, they're not saying he should camp it up a bit, he should Seem Gayer, he should be femme or they/them or kinky or nonmonogamous or urban. They're saying that being out as gay or desiring and loving other men does not carry a specific political project. He is not, by virtue of his marriage, automatically interested in the wellbeing of Black trans sex workers and we, the queer political movement, will not make or tolerate the deal he wants to make because he does not value or understand or identify with the most vulnerable among us. And indeed, he cannot even imagine them. When he contrasted his experiences with an imagined Other in the LGBTQ+ umbrella, he contrasted himself with a "Black gay woman." He knows that he is white and a man, but I suspect that he can't see street level from up so high.

There are no queer candidates (to my knowledge) and one gay one. For many of us whose material positionality is even vaguely similar to Pete (myself included, though we are different in many, many ways), it is thrilling to see that it is possible to exist so publicly in ways that it wasn't even recently. And yet, his insistence that he is not like me tells me a lot about how he sees me, how he values me. I have no reason to think that his genuine love for his husband makes him a particularly good representative for my interests, and I resent the implication that I owe him support even if I believe he will act in ways I find immoral.

I am not denying the symbolic resonance and meaning of even a longshot out gay candidate. Even an assimilationist gay candidate. But at the end of the day, I'm going to support the person that I think will be safest for children in Iran who giggle as they run barefoot around the house and unhoused trans women who eat when they date. I want to support the person who will feed more people and bomb less. If he cannot hold the name for my kind of person in his mouth, cannot bear being mistaken for me, why should I trust him to care for me? And I'm not anywhere *close* to the bottom of this hierarchy.

I want a trans dyke for president.“

Emphases added by me.

[imshatteredbutnotbroken]

The wonderful world of Desiree Nguyen: A character analysis

This is a season three, episode 14-18 character analysis of everyone’s favourite MacGyver protector, Desiree “Desi” Nguyen. (Or, A.K.A, my attempt at sounding much more intelligent than I am.) If people want to read more, I’ll cover the rest of the seasons.

Now, I won’t always sound unbiased in my feelings towards Desiree, but I am going to really try my best to be. And, like I said, I am attempting to sound much more intelligent than I am, so if I miss anything or sound incredibly stupid, feel free to correct me.

There are spoilers, so if you haven’t seen season three, I recommend skipping this analysis.

It’s important to note that this is not a commentary on Levy Tran herself, and that it’s only about her character (EXTREME EMPHASIS ON CHARACTER).

There is also a Tl;dr at the end of each episode summary starting from episode 15.

Let’s begin.

Desiree (hereby known as Desi) was first mentioned by (actual) fan favourite, Jack Dalton, in season 3 episode 14, Father+ Bride + Betrayal. He first mentioned her in a conversation with Mac during the wedding:

Jack: “Matty let me handpick my replacement to watch your back.  I think you’re really gonna like her. Or, kill her. One of the two.”

Mac: “That’s oddly specific. Should I be worried?”

Jack: “No, man. You’ll meet her soon enough. And, trust me, there’s nobody I’d trust more than this woman to watch your back. She is really good. Well, other than me, obviously.”  

Now, there’s not much to go on, but we do get some hints. She’s tough, she’s a badass, and Jack likes and trusts her. So, Desi’s initial set up isn’t so bad. We love Jack, and if Desi comes at Jack’s recommendation, we know she can be trusted to watch everyone’s backs. Like I said, we’re off to a good start.  

It’s also important to note: Jack specifically says “there’s nobody I’d trust more than this woman to watch your back.” Does this really happen only a season later? Honestly? It’s debatable. But, we’ll get there when we get there.

Season three, episode 15:  K9 + Smugglers + New Recruit

Desi is initially introduced — through Mac — as advertised: a tough badass who will take her job as the team’s protector seriously. While she admits to Mac that she will hate her job as their bodyguard, she is doing it because she owes Jack. What she owes him exactly, we’re still not sure. It could be anything from repaying Jack for a chocolate bar to repaying a debt to him after Jack saved someone’s life. Who the hell knows?

In the war room, at her second meeting with Mac, Riley, Bozer, Leanna (remember her?! Why couldn’t you leave well enough alone, T.V. show?!), and Matty, Desi reemphasizes that their safety is her top priority. Like I said, Desi (in her initial intro) is a tough badass who takes her job seriously.

On the mission, Cody, (our story of the week’s gun sniffing dog) immediately finds two guns on Desi’s person. She really is like Jack in that respect! But, we soon find out she doesn’t like them (she’s really not like Jack that way!), telling Mac she only carries it because she has to, will only pull a gun when necessary, and that she’d “rather put bad guys in an interrogation room than the morgue.” Another special exception that allows her to pull a gun is against “anyone who hurts animals.”

While Mac and Riley notice Desi isn’t the warmest, Riley acknowledges that Desi is well-accomplished. She was one of the first women to graduate from Ranger school, was part of a special ops team made up of SAS, Delta, and the CIA, and, apparently, “has more awards than Michael Phelps.” So, Desi is no slouch. She also impresses everyone even more when she parkours up several shipping containers to get a better view for the op they’re on. Desi proves herself again during a fight scene by single-handedly taking out several guys with guns (and gets shot in the process, her bulletproof vest stopping every bullet). Let’s add bravery to the list of qualities Desi has shown in just over 10 minutes.

Later, she talks to Riley, who emphasizes their group’s need for Desi to be reliable (and this is interesting because Desi’s reliability is questioned in episode 21 this season). Riley found out Desi went AWOL while she was in Afghanistan, and Riley wants to know why. As Desi explains, one of the Afghani civilians she was working with was kidnapped, and she went to find him. Which Desi successfully did. As she tells the story, Desi becomes emotional, showing that she does have a heart and a vulnerable side, and you can tell she is speaking sincerely. Desi is also adamant that she would to do it again. This is an interesting contrast to her behaviour during the Codex storyline, but we’ll get there.

Desi doesn’t much like Mac’s fly by the seat of his pants behaviour because she was trained to always have plan and she can’t work spontaneously. We also learn Desi is knowledgeable about some sort of technology having to with RFID chips that I can’t personally understand, and that she went to the University of Michigan.

At the end of the episode, Desi makes an appearance at Mac’s house, saying Jack made her promise to go. She leaves as quickly as came though, not wanting to get too close to everyone…in case she has to bury them. Which, I understand, but morbid, jeez. It’s also kind of odd when you think about it because Desi is the group’s protector and is responsible for their safety. But, on the other hand, she can’t fix every situation, and there may be a time when one of them gets killed on a mission. So, while I understand Desi’s hesitation, I am not entirely a fan of it. And, this behaviour is even odder considering Desi goes on to date Mac at the end of the season. I guess Mac really did break down her walls (and that’s something I didn’t notice until writing this).

Overall, we’ve learned a lot about Desi. She’s tough, yet cold, smart, athletic, reliable (supposedly), likes a plan, and hates guns and animal abusers. Seeing her introduced this way (and introduced well) is interesting because I know future storylines and have seen how much Desi has changed as a character. She was always somewhat cold, but she initially had an adamance, confidence, and determination to do what is right. Knowing how the Codex storyline in particular goes down, the way Desi changes is interesting, to say the least.

Tl;dr: As Desi is introduced, the audience learns that she takes her job as the team’s bodyguard seriously, and owes Jack for some (still unknown) reason, and that’s really why Desi is there. We also learn she hates guns and animal abusers, is brave, athletic, reliable (supposedly), and well-accomplished. She also doesn’t want to get too close to the rest of the team in case she has to bury them, so she leaves the Phoenix’s group hangout session as quickly as she joined.

Season three, episode 16: Lidar + Rogues + Duty

At the beginning of this episode, Desi is ‘familiarizing’ herself with the lab and ‘helping’ Bozer with Sparky (really, she’s flipping through a magazine and complaining about the music Bozer is playing while he works). She says she’s lending moral support, though, so, whatever works, I guess. Anyway, Bozer asks for her help with running diagnostic tests on Sparky, and Desi agrees. But, her help is a riddle that sends the robot on an endless loop for the rest of the episode. I do like her shit disturber behaviour, though, so I’ll give Desi that.

For the main operation, Desi and Mac are on a recovery mission in Azerbaijan to bring back one of Mac’s friend’s bodies. His friend, Robert Reese, was on a covert flying mission when his plane crashed, and Mac and Desi are the only ones who can get the body.

While looking for the wreckage, Desi notices that Mac is distracted. She asks him what’s going on, and he explains why he’s distracted. And, knowing that Mac feels responsible for what happened to Reese, Desi asks Mac to tell her about his friend. After Mac does, she gets angry with him and tells Mac to compartmentalize, seemingly a turn around from being caring like she was in the previous episode. But, I understand where she’s coming from because Desi and Mac have to stay focused, or else, like she says, “Matty will be sending a team to recover us.” Fair, because if Mac lets his emotions get the best of him — while he and Desi are in a country they’re not supposed to be in — he could get into a situation he can’t get out of.  

Later, we learn that Desi speaks Turkish (what can’t this girl do?!) as some of the Azerbaijani military arrive at the wreckage site. After escaping and driving away, Desi notices a parachute in the trees, indicating it’s possible Reese isn’t dead. Mac is hopeful that his friend is alive, while Desi is more logical, saying, “there are a lot of reasons why the Azerbaijani military would grab a dead U.S. pilot.” They spot footprints of U.S. Army issued boots, so their mission goes from recovery to search and rescue.

Mac and Desi are led to a small town after hearing about sightings of an injured man wearing a flight suit. There, they figure out which building Reese is hiding in. Mac and Desi find him alive but with a broken clavicle. And, while Mac provides Reese with first aid, Desi becomes all business. But, in her defence, they’re in danger, so it’s not weird Desi reacts this way.

After escaping and another mission change (this time to stopping rogue CIA agents and recovering chemical weapons), Mac improvises a plan that goes awry and has Desi and Reese held at gunpoint by the agents. Desi has to stall while Mac tries to save them and, as she talks, she uses the info Mac told her about Reese, proving Desi listened to Mac. So, while we thought Desi was being callous, she actually showed that she sincerely cared about what Mac had to say.

Later, Desi meets with Bozer to make up for sending Sparky into an endless loop. Maybe she truly feels bad, or maybe she’s doing it selfishly because she’s new. Either way, it’s hard to tell because we’re not in Desi’s head. But, I’ll give it to her because I really think Desi knows she messed up and she wants to fix it. She tells Bozer the answer to the riddle and Sparky is able to break the loop.

We are still learning about Desi, but we get so much info in the small details. My favourite part about her this episode was her shit disturbing. We also learn she speaks Turkish, prefers to be all business when she’s on a mission, and pays attention to what’s going on around her. Desi is actually quite deep in this season, and she shows that she cares about people and robots alike.

Tl;dr: At the beginning of the episode, Desi is ‘helping’ Bozer while he works on Sparky the robot. She sends Sparky on an endless loop after telling him a riddle he can’t figure out, annoying Bozer.

Desi and Mac have the main operation, which was initially a body recovery mission for one of Mac’s friends, Robert Reese. She gets Mac to open up about Reese, and then immediately tells him to compartmentalize so they can get through the mission alive.

They find Reese alive, and their mission changes to stopping rogue CIA agents and recovering chemical weapons. At the chemical weapons site, Desi and Reese are held up at gunpoint by the agents, and Desi is forced to stall while Mac saves them. She uses the story Mac told her about Reese earlier in the episode, proving she paid attention to what Mac said.

At the end of the episode, Desi goes to Bozer to help fix Sparky. She tells him the answer to the riddle, getting Sparky out of his loop, and showing Desi cares about those around her.

Season three, episode 17: Seeds + Permafrost + Feather

This episode opens with Mac and Desi in bed together. But, it’s not what you think. It’s for a mission and part of Mac’s plan to escape from the people chasing them. Desi is annoyed by the plan (because she had to get undressed) and she argues with Mac. He tries to convince her it was their best option — until the bad guys return and hold Desi and Mac up at gunpoint. I can see why she would be annoyed with Mac, but is fighting during a mission necessary? Somehow, they escape, and we can move on.

Mac, Riley, and Desi have to travel to the international seed vault in Greenland because an employee is missing. Since Mac’s dad, James (also known as Oversight), was involved in the vault’s development and planning, he’s the person to call when something goes wrong. But, James has other business, so the mission falls to Mac, Riley, and Desi.

In the vault, thanks to a comment Desi made about the employee disappearing into the mountain (causing Mac to do his Mac thing), the trio discovers an access tunnel someone dug to get into the (extremely secure) vault. And, whoever dug that tunnel killed Karl, the missing employee, in the process. There is also a possibility of seeds being stolen.  

So, Mac, Riley, and Desi use Karl’s cell phone, which he had on him, to figure out the path he took and identify which seeds may have been stolen. Mac and Desi, who plays the murderer, recreate the fight, and they’re having a ball doing it. They fight, and Desi gives Mac all she’s got. She’s not subtle or gentle, but she gets the job done. Soon, they figure out which box (one of North Korea’s) the thief rifled through, and which seeds were taken (a rare form of a pea plant).

Desi explores the access tunnel and finds a room that is scattered in schematics, seed reports, and drilling equipment. From there, Mac figures out that the pea seeds are an ingredient in making a toxin, and that the seeds can be weaponized and used to create as much of the toxin as desired. Riley discovers their thief has been making monthly payments to a flower shop in Brussels, so a plane ride it is for Mac, Riley, and Desi.

On the plane, Mac calls Bozer so Mac can find out what’s going on with James. But, after hanging up, Mac slams his phone down and Desi comments on his annoyance and asks Mac about it. He says it’s the mission, but Desi isn’t buying it. When Riley mentions it’s about Mac’s dad, Desi says that Oversight seemed distracted. And, while she admits it’s not her business to know what’s going with Mac’s dad, Desi tells Mac it is his business.

The three of them go on a chase that takes them from a cemetery in Brussels to a park in the Czech Republic. The man they are running after, named Jules, wants revenge on a crime boss named Passer for killing Jules’ wife and child after Jules testified in court. At the park, Riley and Desi fight Passer’s men while Mac starts to talk Jules (who is holding Passer up at gunpoint) down. Eventually, Jules relents, and he is arrested. Mac, Riley, and Desi recover the stolen seeds and avoid an international incident with North Korea.

Desi has more of a background role in this episode because the episode focuses on Mac and his dad. But, her fighting skills, knowledge (she helped explain the seed vault to Riley and the audience), and empathy shine through. This is particularly true when she encourages Mac to figure out what is going on with his dad. This side of Desi is nice to see because while she’s tough, she is sincere in her efforts to help others.

Tl;dr: Desi is in the background this episode, but, she displays her intelligence, empathy, and fighting skills. She also encourages Mac to figure out what is going on with his dad, saying that it’s not her business to know what is going on with her boss, but it is Mac’s.

Season three, episode 18: Murdoc + Helman + Hit

This episode opens with Nicolas Helman’s return. And he gets to work immediately by murdering an FBI interrogator in a karaoke bar. How this happened, Mac, Riley, Matty, Bozer, and Oversight aren’t sure because the last time they saw him, Helman was dead — or, so they thought — because Matty had his coffin exhumed and it was empty. Since the Phoenix is responsible for Helman, they have to figure out his next move so they can capture him.

Mac, Bozer, and Desi are with Oversight this episode. Their mission? To speak with our favourite psychopath Murdoc who is still at the Phoenix Black Site. Desi gets the Helman story explained to her, but it doesn’t seem like she entirely believes how serious dealing with Murdoc is because she asks Mac, “What kind of monster are you keeping down here? Indominus Rex? King Kong? That kid from The Omen? These questions also reveal another detail about Desi that could easily be overlooked: She likes horror and monster movies. Anyway, upon meeting Murdoc, Desi seems to get it because she has a face similar to McKayla Maroney’s unimpressed face plastered on (and, really, who can blame her?). But, Mac, Bozer, Desi, and Oversight need Murdoc’s help, so they press on.

There’s a quick scene with Bozer and Desi observing Mac and Oversight questioning Murdoc. Desi acknowledges they weren’t kidding about Murdoc and notes that James is just as much of an enigma because he’s still exerting himself, despite the toll doing so takes. Bozer thinks Desi is talking about the effects having cancer has on Oversight himself, but Desi immediately corrects Bozer and says “I meant on Mac.” So, again, there’s that compassion for others Desi has displayed since her introduction.

After getting more information from Murdoc about Helman’s possible whereabouts (because Helman has killed again), Mac, Desi, and Oversight jump into action to find Helman. They, and a Phoenix tac team, storm an apartment building with Desi leading the way with a gun. They leave Bozer behind with Murdoc (which, rude). Anyway, the team starts going up to the apartment, but before they can really make their way, James starts having trouble physically. Mac, worried about his father, tells him he doesn’t need to go upstairs, but Oversight insists. Desi encourages Mac to be open and honest with his dad, but Mac says Oversight is fine. Desi tells Mac not saying anything to his father shouldn’t be an emotional decision because lives hang in the balance. She also says she’s worried about Mac, and tells him to not get distracted. This attitude harkens back to episode 16 when Desi was worried about Mac’s emotions getting in the way of their mission. So, I understand where she’s coming from and why she’s concerned.

Skipping ahead, Mac, Desi, and James go on a road trip because Riley and Matty discovered Helman had the transportation route for an FBI transport truck moving someone who is supposed to testify in a trial against his former employees. While waiting for the FBI truck, they see another (unknown) vehicle approaching. Concerned it may be Helman and that it could have explosives in it, Mac, Desi, and Oversight have to stop the vehicle. James tries to take matters into his own hands by borrowing a tac team member’s rife, but he’s having trouble steadying himself, and Desi notices. Oversight is eventually able to get his bearings and shoots out the van’s tires. While they stop the vehicle, it turns out to be a distraction so Helman could get into the Phoenix Black Site. Desi figures out that the FBI murders and attack on the transport truck were all a ruse so Helman could kill Murdoc.  

Later, they realize Murdoc’s entire plan was a jailbreak so Mac and Oversight go on a car chase to capture Murdoc while Desi flies in a helicopter overhead (side note, I’m not really sure why Desi is there because it doesn’t seem like she needs to be. She doesn’t do anything in this scene other than fly overhead and worry about Mac). James and Mac do their thing and figure out a way to stop Murdoc’s truck. But, with Desi’s words in the back of his mind (probably), Mac tells his dad he shouldn’t be the one to stop the truck. Oversight agrees, and Mac does his thing. You can see as he tries to overtake the truck, everyone (including Desi) is concerned. Eventually succeeding in stopping and capturing Murdoc, there’s a shot shown of Desi’s relief.

At the end of the episode, Desi says she suggested security upgrades for the black site so no one can escape or attack the site again. This reflects her security knowledge because the Phoenix trusted her enough to give her the task. Again, Desi isn’t so useless and demonstrates her intelligence.  

Throughout the episode, Desi shows she cares about other people, especially since she’s worried about the effect Oversight’s need to keep going has on Mac. She also encourages Mac to be honest with his father. And this is a thread that is shown throughout these episodes. Which leads to the following questions: What happened to that particular characteristic? Where did Desi’s empathy and compassion go?  

Tl;dr: Desi’s character development takes somewhat of a backseat this episode because it mostly focuses on Mac and Oversight (again). Still, throughout their mission, Desi encourages Mac to be open and honest with his father and tell Oversight his concerns. This, again, demonstrates her empathy and her concerns for others. Mac is eventually able (probably with Desi’s words in the back of his mind) to be honest with Oversight and take over in order to do the physical labour required on the mission.

Lastly, Desi suggests security upgrades for the Phoenix Black Site that held Murdoc so that no one can break in or out again. This demonstrates her intelligence, and leads to the following question: What happened to her intelligence and compassion and empathy for others?

We learn so much about Desi in just four episodes. From her bravery and boldness, to enjoyment of monster and horror movies, she isn’t so one-note. The biggest thread is her compassion and concern for others. She wants to help people and ensure they’re safe, and Desi is adamant and determined about it. She continually displays this characteristic, especially when it comes to Mac and ensuring his feelings don’t get the best of him while they’re on a mission.

During season three, Desi is written well! She’s introduced to us based on the trust a fan favourite has with the audience and she never deviates from that. She also displays many characteristics that actually make her interesting. She’s smart, athletic, brave, and bold. So, I have to ask (again): WHAT HAPPENED?! Where did go so wrong and why?

If you want more of my character analysis, let me know! I procrastinated way too long on this, so if it seems like episode 18 is disjointed from the rest, I apologize. I had fun with this, and I feel like I like and understand Desi a little more (at least for season three).

[ursie]

Why do you keep calling Shatterstar gnc? He’s always been masculine? Just because he’s Bi doesn’t mean he has to be effeminate you know

Ok so I’ve gone back and fourth on how seriously I was gonna answer this so I’m sorry this took a bit to answer anyway here we go : I’m sorry if this makes no sense I’m tired

First off it’s important to remember in media what’s considered masculine and what’s not so while a lot of Star may be considered either or what’s important to remember is when him being a warrior, fighter/ect is being emphasized that’s them playing up traditional masculine characteristics and his presentation or softer moments is them playing up “feminine” characteristics (obv this is stupid but it’s also undeniably how people write characters 99% of the time)

Second off there is textual evidence he is at least viewed as gnc in universe in X Force-many comments were made about his makeup, hair (also I remember the pigtails) and general demeanor. Was it done in a ala homophobia way? Absolutely is it still canon? Yes (also so much worse now that it’s retroactively canonically homophobic as he’s literally Bi and definitely had a known thing w Julio at the time-so..way to teach him micro aggressions guys)

Now post x force in xfi he is drawn and written as far more traditionally masc, in appearance and presentation- even his body type seemed to change-as in x force he was described as acrobatic and fast, avoiding hits when he could in xfi he’s made into a brick house that just. Tanks hits-far more direct-even his fighting is made out to be more traditionally masculine

Now this could be broken down to character development (which we did not see and it’s important to note I can’t stress how ooc xfi Star is) but really it just reads as more homophobia as not only is Star aware enough of homophobia and gender roles to adapt to a more accepted persona (because the x force taught him homophobia) but also the writers at the time when he was canonically Bi went out of their way to adapt his character to both fit and avoid different stereotypes-he’s allowed to be a walking slutty Bi stereotype (which is literally so ooc) but can no longer be gnc-he’s allowed to be slutty and hit on women despite his relationship w Julio but he’s not allowed to present as anything less than “macho” in summary Star was just made palatable in all of the worst ways to straight audiences-they stereotypes they love were forced and the ones that make them uncomfortable were dropped

Later on we’re back to getting glimpses of less than traditionally “masc” only a warrior Star w him cooking for Julio and buying him a sweater in new mutants (which are not actually feminine traits but are presented as feminine/gay traits in media even lampshaded by what’s his name asking of his boyfriend bought his sweater to Julio (which he did-also another micro aggression marvel forces me to witness))

(There was that super racist x force run I didn’t read that came out around here-Star was back to being a super warrior macho macho man idk it was bad and the art was racist ignore it )

The slightly less masc Star is dropped in the Shatterstar solo where his character is p much completely retconned but also another more traditionally masc Star is pushed again w the crux of his problems w Julio being “they don’t fight enough”, the emphasizing of him still being a warrior despite how the crux of his character was trying to define himself out of that role assigned to him, there are definitely homophobic connotations to what’s her name (yes he’s Bi him having an ex who’s a girl isn’t the issue it’s the entire plot that is), and even weirder connotations with the use of his slave name/dead name as his go to name-he has only ever referred to himself as Shatterstar-that’s his name-other people either call him Shatterstar or Star-giving him a “traditionally masculine” name is certainly. A choice. There are a lot of problematic elements to the solo to unpack but the rest don’t really have to w the homophobia and forced gender roles Star seems to consistently face

Then in (new) xfi he’s gone something happened he’s on Mojoworld again he has long hair again (king) but his outfit is a wrestling one and his “masculinity” is once again emphasized with his being forced into being a warrior again just to like. Be on the island being tasked w immediately fighting Terry (I actually liked this scene but there were some choices about to consider especially about how the rest of the mutants still seem to view him)-and now we’re here where we’re right back to where we started w long hair, just left Mojoworld, definitely a warrior you can’t forget it Star. Only this time his identity isn’t up for interpretation or debate.

So long story short while Star may not be consistently gnc it was noticeable enough that once he was openly Bi they immediately started pushing for a more masculine Star and you can see the difference in characters as xforce Star and xfi Star might as well be different people. Stars ambiguous gender non conformity was enough that Marvel seems set on “fixing it” and writers are constantly walking a line in making sure he’s “not like those other gays” despite the fact that apparently he used to be. There is def canon evidence for a more gnc/less traditionally masc Star. No one is saying (but me) that he should be a Femme Bi dude they’re just saying they see him as gnc and like. Yeah he was🤷‍♀️

Also narratively him being Trans makes wayyy more sense also his people are machine made why do they even have different sexes or genders let alone follow the earths idea of it like he’s an alien., why would he care about the our perception of the sexes or gender- main point is he should be Nb and intersex but that’s another conversation

Anyway Star gnc king

Also yes just because he’s Bi doesn’t make him effeminate-he’s effeminate-not because of his sexuality - it is not his gender presentation despite how much it undoubtedly influenced it. People aren’t calling Star gnc because he’s Bi they’re calling him gnc because he used to look like this

[veganthranduil]

Saw that you’re doing LHOD AU for Trans Terror Week👀 i read the book recently and couldn’t help but thinking about Francis and James as Genly and Estraven. Their interactions in Terror Camp Clear just reinforced my thoughts tbh. Anyways, I’m so excited for your story and would love to hear your headcanons!!

A journey across the ice is something that can be so personal!!

I’m so sorry anon... I read your message last night and then fell asleep, happily thinking about gender and nationalism, so these may not be the headcanons you expected, but... it is what it is.

The Left Hand of Darkness and The Terror are both stories about gender and nationalism where gender is central, but a binary construction of gender is almost wholly absent.

TLHOD, obviously, has no gender binary because most times, the residents of winter have no biological sex, either, and what kind of sex characteristics they will have any given month is entirely up to chance. Genly may have a gender as we understand it, but as he is the only man in the entire story, we can’t really speak of a gender binary either, which brings me to The Terror.

The Terror is a story in a world where gender and sex differences are expressed in binary terms, but with characters that are (presumably) all men. I would argue that the only woman we meet in the first episodes (Silna) isn’t even seen as a woman by a majority of the characters, because she doesn’t fit what a woman should be in their eyes (white, in need of saving). You can see it definitely in the interrogation scene, where Crozier is ready to punish her draconically by denying her the protection of the ships (in a society where women are constructed as in need of saving by men). The closest anyone comes to seeing her as a woman is, I think (ironically) Goodsir. Maybe it’s because he’s so desperately trying to re-enact Empire all the time.

Interestingly enough, Sophia is who I always come back to when I have to explain Elshtain’s women as ‘beautiful souls’ that men go to war for (the whole ‘Miss Cracroft who rejected you’ conversation is so funny when you’ve just spent a semester of feminist IR deconstructing how women are talked about in nationalist rhetoric. Fitzjames’s reaction is the only appropriate one). Obviously, The Terror is not in the business of reinforcing such narratives, and as such, you can—in the same episode—see both Sophia and Lady Jane doing the saving (albeit not very successfully, but at least with more success than the men!).

Why does this fascinate me so? Because gender is at the heart of how we understand nationalism. The nationalist project is tied up with the gender binary, from women being consigned to the house, to the construction of women as something in need of protection, to the gendering of entire nations (like, say, Britannia?). The nationalist project is a project of hegemonic masculinity that emphasizes values like self-reliance, bravery, rationality—attributes we would, stereotypically, consider masculine.

TLHOD, however, shows societies with budding nationalisms that have no gender binary at their heart! Le Guin brings in shiftgretor, or status, as a concept, but even that only produces weak nationalisms because it’s a division of society that’s forever shifting, not stable. In the other land we visit, you have not shiftgretor but the bureaucratic Einheitsstaat. In that, it’s the polar (heh) opposite of The Terror, which thrives off hierarchies and their deconstruction.

The nationalism in TLHOD may be weak, but what Genly asks of the people of Gethen is essentially the development of a nationalist consciousness (in the words of Smith, a sense of common destiny) just long enough to overcome the territorial limitations of such a concept and join the Ekumen in recognition of the shared humanity of all peoples. And it’s the hardest thing to ask of people with no fixed concept of difference, because there is a demonstrable, fixed difference between them and Genly’s people.

That, of course, brings me back to Smith, and his question about supranationalism: Can we truly supersede nationalism with a global (universal) culture, or is insistence on universal norms and values simply a new form of Empire?

And the last point I would make—encounters between Self and Other, because again, The Terror and TLHOD are polar (heh) opposites: In The Terror, about 130 white men (the Other) encounter two locals, whereas in TLHOD the Emissary (the Other) is singular. What does that mean? Who knows; I don’t. I just work here. 

[piccolina-mina]

That Wentworth show you reblig sometimes. It's Netflix? Could I ask how diverse it is? How gay is it? Is there people of colour?

Yup. Wentworth (or Wentworth Redemption) is an Aussie show on Netflix that takes place at a women's prison. It just aired its 8th season (and they dropped the latest season on Netflix already).

Diversity, it's fairly diverse.

It's predominantly white, but they do have characters of color and they have improved on that as the seasons progressed.

The main character of color for all eight seasons so far is Will Jackson. The actor is Samoan.

In the early seasons, there was also an inmate, Doreen. She's Aboriginal. She was one of the warmest, and sweetest characters out of the brood.

But outside of those two, there weren't any main characters of color. And they had a couple of recurring background characters who were Asian, mostly of Chinese descent, I believe, but my apologies if I'm wrong on that.

In later seasons there are two main characters, both Aboriginal. And they have dominant storylines. Rita and Ruby.

And the last season there is a Black British character who is prominent.

You also see more racial diversity in the background but outside of an Asian gang of inmates who cause trouble on occasion, they have limited or no speaking roles.

Is it gay? Well, nonny. It is a women's prison after all. If you want Sapphic goodness? They got you.

They have lesbians for days. I'm pretty sure within the first five minutes you get your first sexy scene with Queen of the Wentworth Lesbians, Franky Doyle.

And the beautiful thing about her arc is we actually see her go from a casual bang kind of girl to someone who falls in love, and it's one of the most notable relationships in the series.

But man, we have good lesbians, we have bad lesbians. We have complicated and flawed lesbians. We have disaster bi's.

I only emphasize it like that because there IS disturbing things or potentially questionable depictions like promiscuity that may seem stereotypical on one end, and there are sexually abusive, sadistic, flat out rapists on the other end.

I feel like with a diverse group of complex queer characters it balances out more, if that makes sense. There are multiple queer characters. Mostly women. And two male guards. Although, unlike the women, who range from flawed or complicated to just flat out "bad," both men are honestly pretty damn crappy, IMO.

If you haven't noticed, all of Wentworth's characters are hella gray and the show doesn't really subscribe to the good/bad dichotomy in a traditional way. Some of the most loathsome characters ended up being my faves down the road and such. If you watch, you'll understand what I mean.

But yes, many canon queer characters (main and recurring), and it's explored. Actually, to get an idea of how they handle their queer characters, it's only now that I'm typing this that I realize how many queer characters there actually are. Enough where you just don't even think about it. So yeah, nonny. U suppose it is hella gay AF. 🤣.

But yeah, stories including a character sort of realizing that they are queer but minus the clichéd identity crisis angst, which is pretty refreshing, I think anyway.

Actually, the majority of romantic relationships on this series have been queer ones.

There is also a lot of gay subtext. Like soooooo much subtext it almost feels like just text. If you do choose to watch it, you'll figure out what I'm talking about. And it's delicious tbh. If you appreciate the concept of enemies to lovers and twisted love based on electric chemistry that probably shouldn't even be there and is twisted AF, you'll love one of the most popular ships.

But there are homophobic slurs and language used. There is sexual assault. There is mentions of homophobia etc. I imagine many things that could be potentially triggering.

Personally, while canon never confirmed it, there's one character who felt strongly Ace. But that's just my own personal thing. That's another thing about the show. There are so many complex characters and the subtle intricacies of them leaves ample room for interpretation.

Um, there are two confirmed trans characters with significant arcs and narrative importance. One trans female in the middle of the series and one trans male in the latest season.

HOWEVER. Maxine, the female trans character was played by a cis-man. So there's that. But I'm not exaggerating when I say she's easily one of the best characters of the series. She's one of my absolute favorite characters of the series.

But Reb, the trans male character that came later is played by a non-binary actor, so that is certainly progress from before.

And both characters deal with a lot of transphobia. Again, because this show spreads the wealth, if you will, putting all of their characters through the ringer and addressing so many issues, it's not a matter of only piling on disenfranchised characters for kicks, you know?

There are conversion therapy scenes that come up, so if that's triggering, just a heads-up.

There is also body diversity. There are plus-sized characters. But the most prominent one does fall into so many of the usual tropes, the lovable lug, the bully and muscle, etc. I've heard it critiqued.

There is age diversity. There are older characters as well as younger ones. It's not all about a bunch of young, pretty people in there 20s and 30s.

And these older women are still strong and sexual and powerful etc,.

It may sound weird or whatever, but it's also refreshing that most of the characters look just normal, you know? None of that super glammed up stuff. They look like everyday people, and I love that.

Offhand, I can't recall disabled characters. Actually there is one character who has a brain aneurysm and suffers from seizures.

There are also characters who battle PTSD, someone with severe OCD, um, dementia, Depression, and anxiety, a lot of addiction. These are all Canon and confirmed.

It also toys with the potentiality of Aspergers, Sociopathy/Psychopathy, and other little things like that with characters.

Ummm, obviously there are a lot of women. They do have some male characters but whether they're behind the bars or in front of them, it's mostly women.

And there isn't much going for religion or anything like that. I don't recall anything distinctly religious at all, so nothing to say from that angle.

I'm rambling, probably? I just bingewatched the entire series within the past couple of months, so I'm no expert. But I hope that answered your question or gave you an idea of what the diversity looks like or whatever.

[itsclydebitches]

You know what I think is funny, fandom loves to throw "the animation and writing teams don't work together" as a reason we can't read into different things happening onscreen (Which regardless, that's really stupid, since acting/animation/intonation of the lines/etc can impact the way the story is perceived). But they're also the same ones talking about how the animation is showing the little love things between Blake and Yang and other small tells we see that shows the team hasn't changed much.

This is a problem with all analysis and something that everyone is inclined to do (simply because we all have our opinions and we all want to be right lol). At its most basic, it’s pointing to certain events in a story as proof of an argument while simultaneously ignoring other events that disprove it. We see this all the time when people discuss characters they like/don’t like: you’ll either get a list of all the good qualities or a list of all the bad, with the “analysis” refusing to engage with that other list. Once you move past that roadblock - once you train yourself to consider everything in the text, even when it’s frustrating - you get more complex readings. The stuff that says, “Yes, on the surface it looks like this character has all these bad qualities too but we need to take context into account as well. Like the fact that when they did this Bad Thing someone was blackmailing them into it whereas they did this Good Thing of their own accord.” Or, “Yes, this character has a mix of Good and Bad qualities so maybe we should be acknowledging a more nuanced reading of their morality rather than insisting ‘They’re the devil’ or ‘uwu they’re a baby who did no wrong’” The purpose of analysis is for the text to drive your argument, not for your argument to drive the reading of the text. When something doesn’t fit well you need to take that into account and re-evaluate your thesis. You don’t ignore/twist that wrinkle in an effort to maintain the argument you first started out with. Which is why you analyze the text first and come up with the thesis second. 

Now yes, apply all this to the animation issues. We cannot simultaneously say, “Aspects of the animation prove that Blake/Yang is becoming a thing” as well as, “It doesn’t matter if we saw Clover wink at Qrow. That’s meaningless.” Authorial intent does have some bearing on how we read this, in that we’ve gotten confirmation that some animation choices - like Oscar running down the hall before punching Neo - were mistakes, but in order for that to fully drive our reading of the show as a whole we’d need confirmation regarding every single piece of animation. Did you mean for Ren to look sad in that scene? Were Blake and Weiss supposed to exchange that glance? Is it a mistake that this character rolled their eyes or was that, unlike some other things, intentional? Unless we get a comprehensive list of every animation choice - which we will literally never have for obvious reasons - analysis must function under near absolutes: either the animation has meaning or it doesn’t. Pick one and stick to it (though preferably pick the former because, as you say, of course our visuals impact the reading of the show. They were always supposed to!) You cannot say that the animation choice is full of meaning when Ren and Nora cast loving glances because you adore them as a ship, but then claim that the animation choice to have Yang, Weiss, and Blake draw their weapons on Qrow is meaningless because you don’t like the idea of the girls doing something awful and having to grapple with that. Anything else is just the behavior of the first paragraph, emphasizing the things you like because they support the arguments you also like, while failing to either a) acknowledge these other aspects at all or b) explain how they don’t actually undermine your argument like they appear to at first glance. That’s why I acknowledge the ramifications of Ironwood shooting Oscar. It doesn’t matter how much I hate it, it exists in the text and needs to be taken into account (work a). It’s likewise why I explain in detail why arguments about the Ace Ops losing aren’t persuasive. They initially look persuasive, but poke at them a bit and you’ll see all the holes (work b). 

For the record, this stuff is really hard. There’s a reason why we take classes in analysis. There’s a reason why you study for 6+ years before you’re considered good enough to start publishing papers. These trends - particularly ignoring parts of the text or trying desperately to twist them into something that fits your original argument, rather than revising the argument to fit the evidence - are all mistakes that everyone makes when they first start analyzing things. I did! And those mistakes will seem very persuasive to others who don’t practice analysis enough to recognize when they - or others - are repeating those trends. Which is how you end up with posts arguing non-persuasive or even nonsensical things but are praised extensively. You have to learn how to spot those mistakes and learning how to avoid them is even harder. It’s not just a skill but a kind of mental fortitude. In order to produce persuasive and compelling analysis you have to be willing to potentially chuck your argument in the bin at any given moment. It’s a lot like science that way. Oh, something just disproved our theory? That sucks but we can’t ignore this new evidence just because we spent years chasing something else. We can’t allow personal desires to overcome facts. (Though that’s not to say the chase was wasted. The mere act of working through “wrong” arguments is an important part of hitting on the “right” ones.) 

For the record, this kind of difficulty with critical thought/rhetoric is the same reason why dangerous bigotry like “Getting vaccines will give your child autism” or “Accepting trans people will lead to women getting attacked in bathrooms” take off. Those are both arguments, but the people consuming them often don’t know how to work through the evidence provided to decide if that argument is persuasive - or even know to look for evidence at all. They stop after reading the statement, taking it as an automatic fact, just like a newbie writer in their Freshman high school course may write out a thesis and think that’s it. What do you mean I have to prove it? What do you mean my proof is subjective, unsubstantiated, and is ignoring other pieces of evidence? It’s not proof at all? Oh... It gets particularly difficult when you chuck in the sheer complexities of most political situations and add in a dash of learning that the mere existence of some evidence (“evidence”) doesn’t automatically outweigh all the rest. A perfect example being: 

Don’t be that woman. But all that takes time to learn and it requires the ability to admit you were wrong. Sometimes about small things (“Oh yeah, I forgot that happened!”) as well as about incredibly massive things (“Shit. I’ve been basing my identity around this inaccurate concept and using it to hurt many, many people...”) Both of which are needed to create compassionate human beings who, by default, are not born knowing All The Things Ever. Thus, this is why analyzing “stupid��� shows like RWBY isn’t the useless activity that many would prefer to paint it as. If you can learn how to critically engage with what people say about your favorite show, you’re developing the same skills needed to critically engage with, say, what the president is currently tweeting about...

ANYWAY, that’s a bit more of a deep dive than the ask probably meant to produce. But here we are :D

[kob131]

https://itsclydebitches.tumblr.com/post/618318137188876288/1-one-of-the-biggest-draws-of-rwby-to-me-was-its

One of the biggest draws of RWBY to me was its reputation. “Excellent plot and great LGBT rep.” As you’ve discussed there’s issues with the former. I now doubt the latter. I don’t have a stake in LGBT rep personally but I really wanted to cheer on a show that provided that. But this volume touched on IronQrow and Fair Game - without actually delivering. The Bees might be a slow burn, but it’s been seven years for those watching from the beginning and they haven’t kissed.

“Touched on” AKA “I decided to take platonic gestures of affection as romantic now the creators have to do as I say or else”. There was nothing explictedly romantic.

“Fiona/Robyn interaction” What interaction?

“Nora is literally wearing the flag” No she has a similar color scheme, that does NOT translate to ‘wearing the flag.’

“Penny has a great trans story” No, you just see an interpretation. Penny was not built to be trans and should not be used as such.

“She’s a fascinating character to have in the background-” She’s a background character. Her being LGBT does not give the character the right to become a major player.

“Illa has her own issues” Let me guess. “Psycho Lesbian” right?

This whole bullshit of the main cast needing an LGBT character is a perfect example of demands of the show. First it was just a background character then it was a minor character then it was a supporting character now it’s a major character. All while you try to act like you never get what you want.

“It comes off as-” No, you want to see it that way. ‘It comes off as-’ is just a way of shifting the blame.

I don’t think you’re wrong and this is all precisely what I’ve messily attempted to point out for a while. It’s 2020 and it’s no longer enough to simply stand by the statement, “We have LGBTQIA characters.” Because “have characters” can mean anything. Characters who speak two lines. Characters who are written out of the plot. Characters who only exist in side stories. Characters who were never an integral part of this tale to begin with. At this point I feel like it’s easy to emphasize RWBY’s seemingly impressive numbers - Ilia! Coco! Saphron! Terra! May! Scarlet! Blake! Yang! Omg that’s so many!! - and ignore the context of each character. Ilia is gone. Coco is gone and her queer identity only exists outside of the web series. Saphron is gone. Terra is gone. May’s identity only exists in a tweet. Scarlet is gone. Blake and Yang aren’t canon, no matter how obvious the intentions might seem. None of that reads as particularly good when you’ve got a cast of ten main characters last volume - not including Winter, Ironwood, and Penny - and conveniently none of them are confirmed as queer. So far (and “so far” is all we have to work from) queerness has been regulated to minor characters, background characters, and characters who were never meant to stick around. That might be “good” by other shows’ standards, but not for a show that hangs its hat on that supposedly excellent rep. I might not like that most shows don’t include queer characters, but I have more respect for a show that straight up doesn’t engage with that than I do a show like RWBY that’s constantly talking it up in tweets, cons, etc. with the expectation of praise and then delivers something remarkably subpar. 

Yeah, thing is-

That ‘hat’ was given by the fucking fandom. It was never given by the actual creators and makers of the show. It’s not their responsibility to give you something tat other people promised.

And no, two voice actors having a gay ship does not promise you anything beyond jackshit.

Given that Scarlet is the only “canon” (I use that term incredibly loosely) queer man in this list, we have that additional problem of how the show’s writing intersects with the desire for m/m rep. In many ways RWBY was meant to be a “strong female character” show, but they’ve taken that in such an extreme direction that at this point we barely have any characters to get that rep from and what few we do are having their relationships with other men obliterated. Everyone currently hates Ozpin, most notably Qrow. Qrow helped get Clover killed. Qrow now hates Ironwood. Oscar is a kid. Who else is left to provide that rep? Jaune and Ren? Both have relationships with women and, to be frank, I can’t see RT choosing to write one of them as bi, pan, demi, or ace. It could happen! But I doubt it. 

And Ozpin is kind of shown to be sympathetic. Qrow’s most popular gay ship isn’t even with Ironwood or Clover, it’s Taiyang. So? puberty. 

And to be frank- You fuckers have made it perfectly clear a penis cannot exist on screen for too long or else the writers (read: Miles Luna) get pipe bombs in the mail. Anyone defending Ironwood is called a bootlicker, people demand Ozpin be treated as the bad guy over Salem, fucking all the hate around Jaune- You guys set the standard. It’s YOUR fault.

RWBY has queer rep, but it’s incredibly flimsy, insubstantial queer rep. Worse, every time we get a hint of something more substantial it’s snatched away. It’s not RT’s fault that the fandom blew up with the trans Nora theory, but they are responsible for not thinking through the implications of her new outfit and failing to provide a backstory that was promised. It’s not RT’s fault that the fandom fell in love with Qrow/Clover, but they are responsible for their animators making their relationship deliberately flirty and various members egging the fandom on through social media. RT is indeed allowed to write a slow-burn queer relationship, but they’re still responsible for prioritizing that during a time when there are no other queer characters to engage with, during a time period where fans are still terrified of queer baiting. And if the response to that is, “But there’s May too” then we need to acknowledge how making a background character with two lines in an otherwise MASSIVE cast the only trans character, and the currently only confirmed queer character on screen, feels like receiving insulting crumbs at an overstuffed buffet. 

By ‘snatched away’ you mean’ give me my yaoi or else’ right?

‘It’s not RT’s fault-’ That’s it. When you started saying that, you should have ENDED it there.

The Nora thing shouldn’t have implications: it’s got all the colors she usually has on her ever since Volume 4. It’s just matching character desisgn. The Qrow/Clover thing was not flirty, it was just bonding. 

And really, you guys don’t even deserve the ‘crumps’ you get. You constantly push back your standards to demand more and more. You stick an obligation for rep on a show that never advertised it aside A SINGLE character. You throw fits if the LGBT character HAS a character (Illa) then throw fits when they don’t (May). And frankly, I’m certain most of you aren’t even LGBT: you’re just fetshists or activists.

You want to make it fucking impossible to give you food? Fine, starve then. It’s what you deserve.

[roseshell]

Hard lines, distinct moments or details that make one thing clearly not another, don’t exist in nature. For example, we all know the difference between a “baby,” “child,” “teenager,” “adult,” and “elder,” but we also know there is no one day where a child suddenly wakes up and declares, “whelp, I’m a teenager now.” Any distinguishing factors is human made, such as ceremony (rights of passage, Bar Mitzvah, Quinceaneras, etc.) or age (one definition of teenager is “anyone whose age ends in “teen,” but any teenager can tell you there’s a distinct difference between 13 and 19 year olds). 

At what centimeter does a forest become a grassland? At what second does day become night, or spring become summer? Can you map out, precisely, what you consider to be your home, your territory? Things that are natural are fluid.

I think there can be beauty in distinctions. Coming of Age ceremonies are beautiful, and can give children/young adults a true sense of belonging and connection with their communities. I love how the word “sunrise” contains all of the sunrises you’ve ever experienced, in all their different colors and circumstances. But we must never forget that these distinctions are real only in our minds, and don’t exist in the reality outside ourselves.

I’m trans, so of course this matters to me a great deal. For many people, there are only two genders, determined at birth, and there is nothing you can do about it. The thing is, people who argue this are wrong not because of morals or politics, but because of science. Not only do intersex people exist, but even determining definitively who is a man and who is a woman is surprisingly difficult: just ask the Olympics. There have been guidelines for determining who competes in men’s sports and who compete’s in women’s sports for decades, but they’ve changed constantly, and in no case have they found a way to definitively prove one gender from another. Women who don’t have XX chromosomes exist; women who have extremely high testosterone exist. If anyone was going to find out the key ingredient that divides men from women, the Olympics would be the first to know, and yet all these decades later and they still have no idea. Also, I can’t emphasize enough that intersex people exist.

The truth is, we don’t actually believe that genes, chemicals, or genitalia matter in determining gender, and yes I’m including anyone who argues otherwise. Because when you meet a stranger and they dress in your society’s idea of “women’s” attire, and have a “woman’s” haircut or a “woman’s” name, and has a “woman’s” body or facial shape, you’re not going to ask her to show you her genitalia or take a blood test before you call her a woman. Gender is natural, as are genes and chemicals and genitalia, so they are inherently fluid. So as trans people and non-binary people disrupt our ideas of gender, remember that we are not disrupting nature, but your societal understanding of gender.

You can’t point to a natural hard line that isn’t there. Just like how a Coming of Age ceremony welcomes a maybe child, maybe teenager into the world of the adults, we as humans are free to create artificial lines on fluid things. So If I Tell You I Am A Man Because I Said So, that is me pointing to my artificial line, and your artificial line is no more based on reality than mine.

[handweavers]

hi kiran! i am a trans dude and my girlfriend is a lesbian. and we've been having some issues in our relationship. i feel very uncomfortable that she refers to herself as a lesbian in public foruns since all our friends know we are dating. i don't think she will change how she refers to herself. and i don't think is fair for me to expect her to drop it bc of me lol. i love her very much but this really hurts me. we sort of broke up yesterday, and i am still afraid i did the wrong thing :-(

oh no im so sorry :( i can't say i've been in the same situation but i have been in a situation where someone i loved very dearly disrespected me and misgendered me repeatedly and said awful things about me re:being trans and had to stop seeing her for my own health so i understand where you might be coming from. you don't stop loving them because they hurt you but it's untenable to continue the way it was because it damaged you and there's no real way to mend that.

i believe that you did the right thing. this situation indicates a larger problem because if she's unwilling to consider your feelings in this matter, a very vital one, what else is she willing to disregard? how else is she willing to mistreat you when it comes down to it? if she values her identity over treating you with respect and dignity that isn't a relationship that will work out because it will always come at a cost to you, and requires disrespecting you on a fundamental level in order for it to work. you don't deserve that. she's clearly better off dating women and you're better off dating people who see you and love you as you are, not as an exception or as they wish you to be.

any relationship that requires you to disregard fundamental parts of yourself to make the other person happy or validate them, to make those parts small and pretend like they don't matter when they do, they matter a lot, isn't a healthy relationship. this is applicable to anything but especially when it comes to being trans. if your partner is willing to misgender you publically, repeatedly, deliberately, that isn't a partner who respects you or loves you the way you deserve to be loved. they might love parts of you, but not the whole, and you deserve to be with someone who loves you entirely, who respects you wholly. it is incredibly painful, but you deserve better. you deserve better than that. you did the right thing for yourself.

i'll also say that if she sees you, a trans man, as part of the lesbian dating pool makes me wonder what her views on trans women are and if she also reduces them to their agab. this whole situation is just upsetting and i can't emphasize enough how much i think you made the right decision here.

best of luck ❤️

[intersex-ionality]

so i was probably born perisex, but have transitioned into a decidedly altersex body (vaginectomy + no nipples on flat chest + super low natural hormone levels), which i usually describe as being physically my gender + physically non-binary. this has caused some healthcare access issues, but is not really an intersex experience. i’m trying to figure out if saying “have” or “USED to have perisex privilege” makes more sense? i still do in ways for sure, like the health records stuff... thoughts?

As a general rule of thumb, privilege is so conditional that moving away from visible normalcy strips you of it. You might still have some of the internalized beliefs that privilege granted you, but I struggle to see how someone looking at you, seeing your body disagrees with their idea of the sex binary, and then making your life more difficult (whether actively or passively) could ever constitute being seen or treated as “normal” by an oppressive structure.

I can’t decide these things for you, only you can. But it sounds to me like the past tense is much more accurate here.

And, this kind of circumstance is exactly why terms like parasex (anyone who is intersex or has otherwise become alienated from perisex privilege) were created.

Life isn’t binary. Being perisex privilege isn’t binary either.

I wish I had a more eloquent response for you, but–and I cannot emphasize this enough–I’m really on the fence about the entire concept of “perisex privilege” being applied to trans people at all.

I’m not sure it works that way. Very few people actually think of trans bodies as having “normal” sex characteristics. It’s literally the reason why trans people, trans women and transfems in particular, but all trans people to a degree, have such a high risk of murder/violence from their sexual partners compared to cis people.

I’m trying to pin down my exact feelings on the matter, and explain them coherently, and that essay is drafted, but man. Man I am treading into some dangerous territory by making claims such as, “intersex and trans people were historically considered members of the same social group with unique sub-identities (fucked up over gender roles), similarly to how gay, bi and ace people are considered members of the same social group with unique sub-identities (fucked up over relationship standards). Maybe that was a good thing, actually, and we should re-acknowledge the amount of intense overlap happening here?”

Neither trans nor intersex queer theorists love that kind of thing, tbqh. But I can’t shake it, you know?

[likeadaisy]

“The Guinevere Deception” by Kiersten White I Book Review

Synopsis:

“Princess Guinevere has come to Camelot to wed a stranger: the charismatic King Arthur. With magic clawing at the kingdom's borders, the great wizard Merlin conjured a solution--send in Guinevere to be Arthur's wife . . . and his protector from those who want to see the young king's idyllic city fail. The catch? Guinevere's real name--and her true identity--is a secret. She is a changeling, a girl who has given up everything to protect Camelot. To keep Arthur safe, Guinevere must navigate a court in which the old--including Arthur's own family--demand things continue as they have been, and the new--those drawn by the dream of Camelot--fight for a better way to live. And always, in the green hearts of forests and the black depths of lakes, magic lies in wait to reclaim the land. Deadly jousts, duplicitous knights, and forbidden romances are nothing compared to the greatest threat of all: the girl with the long black hair, riding on horseback through the dark woods toward Arthur. Because when your whole existence is a lie, how can you trust even yourself? *THE FIRST BOOK IN THE CAMELOT RISING TRILOGY*”

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/43568394-the-guinevere-deception

My (non-spoiler-y) Thoughts:

I found Guinevere a ‘meh’ main character. She was a little bland, with not much personality beyond focusing on her task of keeping Arthur safe. However, I did like that she had a clear and satisfying character arc. She starts off determined and resilient, knowing her purpose, but then her self-confidence wavers as the book goes on, being torn between two worlds: magic & Camelot and as the book ends she has decided where she stands. Despite this, I felt more interested in the other characters. I like the way Arthur was portrayed because he felt more lively and had more depth and development as a character than Guinevere. It was constantly emphasized how young he was for a king. His boyishness was highlighted by his enthusiasm and playful nature. I also wished that we had gotten to know Merlin and Lancelot more. Throughout the book Merlin is described as a being that blurs the line between magic and man, good and evil and I thought he would have been such an interesting character to introduce to the story. I think it was a shame to build up his legend and not make use of it. As for Lancelot, I can’t say much without spoiling something. All I can say is that I wish we had been properly introduced to Lancelot earlier in the book and that we had gotten more time to explore this character. 

I did like the way Kiersten White told the story. The world building showed that she did her research into the original legend and I like her interpretation of it. It is quite similar to the tale we all know. She just fleshes it out more and adds some more detail and twists to the side characters. I do not know if there was a ‘Dark Queen’ in the original legend, but there is one here, that gives this book a distinct YA feel by serving as the dark mysterious villain. Although this is a story we already know well, I like how I was still pleasantly surprised by Kiersten White’s embellishments.

The book starts off slow as Guinevere eases herself into this new life. There is no action I felt like the middle part of the plot meandered, no one seemed to know what they were doing and nothing was moving the plot forward. The novel does end vaguely, to set up the next novel, but I struggled with the fact that there were some loose ends that had been somewhat abandoned. 

Of course, the romance is based on a cliché premise. A girl is married to a guy, for some reason or other, and feelings start to grow. However, I found the romance to be lacking. Not that I needed it in this story, but I thought it a little frustrating for there to even be a hint of a romance between Arthur and Guinevere when they didn’t spend much time together. Not to mention, the love triangle with Mordred, but more on that in the spoiler section of this review. 

My favorite part of the book is the portrayal of sisterhood, women supporting women and just the overall vibe of strong women in this book. At many points during the story Guinevere reaches out to other women and builds strong relationships with them. From her maid, Brangien to her friend Dindrane, I like that instead of feuding and competing with the other women, Guinevere formed strong bonds with other women. I think that this should be seen in more books. Guinevere herself is weak but she is surrounded by strong and well-rounded women and I really appreciated that Kiersten White made an effort to add this to the story. I also appreciate that she tried to include some LGBT characters as there is a lesbian couple and she hints at a trans character as well. I also like that because of the premise of Guinevere coming to protect Arthur, this book also represents the saying that ‘behind every successful man, is a woman’. The idea that the success and stability of Arthur’s reign was dependent on the protection of a woman gives me a sense of pride and makes me smile, because why not? 

My review: 3.75 ☆

WARNING!!! SPOILERS AHEAD

Okay, if you are reading this, read at your own peril. 

First of all, THAT PLOT TWIST AT THE END THOUGH. I was SHOOK.

 I knew some sort of betrayal from Mordred was coming but I like that White added something more to it. I was waiting for the Dark Queen to appear and I was not disappointed. I was also ecstatic to find out that Lancelot was really a girl. It strengthened the whole vibe of having strong women in this book. Though, I am disappointed that she was hinted to be trans, that she was not comfortable in women’s clothing. Why can’t a a skilled female warrior like conventionally ‘feminine’ things? It felt like two steps forwards and one step back, but at least we are moving forward. 

Moving on, I think that the love triangle between Guinevere, Mordred and Arthur reminds me a bit of Mare, Cal and Maven’s in Red Queen. Maven and Mordred seem quite similar because of their betrayal and their twisted beliefs. Arthur and Cal are the noble, moral guys who take care of the girl. Lastly, Guinevere and Mare both choose the good guy. This similarity in combination with the fact that Guinevere and Arthur did not spend enough time to care so much for each other made me dislike the romance aspect of this book. Though, I am glad that the romance did not take too much of the plot. 

As for the loose threads I mentioned earlier, what happened to Rhoslyn and what she was doing in Camelot? Wasn’t she gathering forces to bring magic back to Camelot or..? That sub-plot was just forgotten. What was with the rocks? Who else in Camelot was working with Rhoslyn? What about Isolde? Was there any more importance to her in this plot other than the inclusion of an LGBT couple?And the dragon? Will it have importance later on the novel? What of Guinevere’s memory loss? Or her history? Who exactly is she? Or the Lady of the Lake? What about her and Merlin? What does she want. So many questions, and yet so many months before the next book comes. Though, I have a sneaking suspicion that Guinevere is the Lady of the Lake’s daughter. Her memory must have been blocked and that is what is keeping her from the water. 

Anyway, this review has gotten too long. I hope you guys enjoyed this review and that you are staying safe and healthy in your own homes! 

[artclusters]

just a trans essay i wrote in a dark time of my life i guess.

You are an Arab trans man in your twenties. You meet a young trans boy. He is pre-puberty. He still has relative freedom to express himself in terms of clothing and behavior, chalked up as “child’s phase”, and is confused yet oddly optimistic (or in denial) about the future. He keeps his feelings a secret, yet he has not yet learned to hate himself. He has not yet been battered by reality. Like you at his age, he does not have a map or an image for people like him in the near or far future. He is asking, waiting for you to help him, to tell him anything. He dreads becoming like his older sister, though he does not fully understand what that makes him. What should he do from here onward? When can he begin to live as himself? When can he feel safe?

You would have to tell him that there is no healthcare for youth like him here – not now, not later, not ever. You will not be able to take puberty blockers, or even meet someone who listens to you and understand. You will have to endure puberty for years, watch your body helplessly change day by day to something you don’t recognize. Into something that will make you utterly miserable. Everybody around you will change as well, treating you in relation to what you have and don’t have, what is visible and what is not. You will desperately try to regain a sense of control over your body. You might starve yourself in a stupid attempt to reduce the form of your curves, to curb their invasion. You might cut yourself, as a way to punish your body for not listening to your needs. Sometimes, you will be impressed by the terrible ways in which you can damage yourself. Your old clothes will stop fitting, and instead all you can see is a bulging, foreign chest and protruding hips. You will stretch them and tear them out in frustration. You will be embarrassed even by your own shadow. This is all but a prelude to the bleeding, the one that will brand you the most feminine of women, a symbol of no going back. Everybody will celebrate your dreaded fertility and supposed officiation into womanhood, while you think of wanting to die. You will have to learn to accommodate a bodily function that is all but useless to you. You will have to announce it to your family every month to explain why you’re not praying (with a suffocating izdal no less) or fasting or holding a Quran, because you are declared impure by their God. Maybe you will be forced to wear a hijab, to further keep you confined in your assigned gender boundary and emphasize the so-called inherent sexuality and sinfulness of bodies labelled as “female”, or maybe you will be one of the lucky ones who maintains little autonomy over your own appearance. Your growth will accelerate. You will be reprimanded for hunching your back, for not walking up straight, a futile attempt from you to conceal your hideous chest. You will put off wearing a bra, as if wearing one would be an admission and resignation of your chest’s existence and permanence. Your skin feels like sandpaper, only you can't peel it off. Your movements are robotic, running on the wrong batteries.Your parents will buy you feminine deodorant and underwear and you will hate them, yet you can’t request alternatives and you don’t have your own money yet. You will wear several layers of clothing in 40 degrees heat and refuse anything that shows even a hint of your bodily form. Your parents call you a picky nuisance for your clothing choices, and for any discomfort or gender-crossing behavior that you dare exhibit. Your parents won’t love you anymore. Your family won't love you anymore.

You will suddenly lose the ability to create or maintain friendships and relationships. You will not only be estranged yourself, but from everyone else as well. You will experience an astounding loss of intimacy; the word “connection” will no longer make sense to you – just an absurd notion. Dissonance and disconnection is where you will reside. You are in hell. You love girls, but you also hate them. They remind you too much of yourself. You don't want to be reminded. You don't want to exist. Boys your age are changing, changing into something beautiful, something beyond your reach. You love boys, but you also hate them. Being around them is enough to burn you. You don’t understand why you’re so in love with them, where to draw the line between consuming envy and invalidating attraction. Thin mustaches, cracking voices, excessive acne, awkward boners, terrible smells, visible veins, shoulders broadening, arms thickening, faces sharpening, apples forming, hair sprouting, patchy beards, low pitches, growing stronger, taller, leaner, flatter – you want it all. You want it all. You dream of it every day – it doesn’t matter if you’re awake or asleep. It is all you think about. You dream of running away. You dream of starting over. You dream of dying. Your grades drop. You don't play sports. You don't run. You don't laugh. You don't talk. You bargain with God. You plead with God. You beg to God. You cry to God. You still believe in him, until you can’t.

You will hear yourself being called a cursed imitator, a perverse deviant, a sign of judgement day, a harbinger of doom, a freak, too many things to name them all – even from people who claim to love and care about you. You are but a lonely child in the center of a relentless behemoth, a behemoth so daunting you can’t discern its beginning, middle or end, armored by immovable notions of what is true that poison every aspect of your life. Thus, you will come to understand it as a fact of life, drilled into the very essence of your being - hating yourself will be the only thing that you know, the only thing that you feel. You are unable to find the freeing word – that one word for who you are - underneath all this hate. You feel like a metal detector surrounded by nothing but plastic. You try to look. You are stumbling. Maybe you find it, or you find something pointing to it - but you lose it, no, you forsake it. You feel ashamed. You try to bury it, choke it, kill it - anything! You pretend you didn’t see. You pretend that nothing clicked. You stop looking…you don’t stop looking.

Perhaps the worst of all, is that through all of this, you will have to find the strength to keep going, and to stay sane. It is a demand that is too big to ask, I know. If you somehow manage not to be crushed under this ceaseless agony, that constant weight plaguing you with an indescribable heaviness, you will still have to spend the rest of your life unlearning and re-educating yourself and those around you, in a tremendous effort of healing, only to have the scabs on your wounds inevitably torn apart every day of your life.

In a kind world, you would not have to endure all of this- maybe even any of this. I am sorry. I wish I can tell you that it will get better, but I do not know. Even if it does get better, at what cost? The formative years of your youth (maybe even your adulthood) will be long gone, drenched in a relentless blur of depression, violence, and unfulfilled desires. Pathetic desires which mostly consisted of simply being able to wear a t-shirt - without feeling anything. Maybe you will learn to make peace with that, maybe it will always haunt you; sometimes you will feel so sorry for yourself it’s hard to breathe...just a gasping husk formed of everlasting regrets and longings and sorrow. You don't even know if you will ever be fit for a genuine human relationship anymore. It has taken too much out of you; you don't know if you lost more that you've gained, maybe you'll never know. How much of who you are now - who you were - is even here? Did anything matter? Does anything matter?

I can offer you a kindling of hope, perhaps you will be able to meet people like yourself, within our community, that share your despair and help keep you afloat amidst a society that will not spare you. People with whom you can experience fleeting, yet powerful moments of joy, respite and understanding, until you ultimately must leave this space and continue to take part in your facade over, and over, and over again. Well…until you don’t.

[spidersmiceandeverythingnice]

Gonna write my scatterbrained Spicy Hot Takes on Agartha before the news is stale and I delete this annoying and boring chapter from my mental landscape, so bear with me:

I think Agartha’s main issue was just straight up poor writing. The Japanese direct translations being as downright offensive as they were is one thing - but overall, the chapter is just one plot contrivance after another. It tries so, so hard to go for a certain tone but can’t seem to stick to any one thing or idea. Disregarding themes about sexuality probably would have been the very best way to go about this chapter, since I think the most interesting part was the theme about storytelling and in-authenticity - we all know that That Line was annoying af in a game like FGO, but it CAN work in a series like Fate as a whole. I had a helluva long day at work so allow me to explain in the least scatter-brained way I can manage right now:

Here’s what I’m thinking: Scheherazade, whose name I guarantee I will spell wrong/differently every time I write it even though I’ve been able to pronounce it properly since I was thirteen (I was in a speaking competition and told some of the Thousand and One Nights using her framework as the opening monologue, long story short ANYWAY -) is traumatized by her ordeal with the king. This is a really good and interesting thing to explore! Fitting it in with the theme of storytelling - Scheherazade is deeply afraid of dying and will do whatever it takes to live, so she makes a fantasy world and fills it with legends, and feeds their energy to a Holy Grail. With this, and the power of a Demon God at her side, she plans to reveal magic to the human world in the most destructive fashion possible, allowing the fantastic to become ordinary, and destroying the Throne of Heroes itself in the process. Fate is a series were stories have power - but Scheherazade survived basically by telling the most fantastical, interesting tales she could and never finishing them. She always would pause in the middle, and say, “That’s all for tonight.” I think this is the kind of thing we can run with in terms of setting.

Dahut is the weirdest example because it’s the one story in the chapter that I know next to nothing about. At one point it’s mentioned that Dahut is impossible to summon as a Servant, and so Drake was “forced” into the role of the Pirate Princess. Ys is probably the weakest part of the chapter for that, but I did like the idea of her being “Drake Alter,” where Drake vibrantly pursues her goals and desires but takes nothing for granted; Dahut gives into her every whim and takes absolutely everything for granted. The conflict between “Drake” and “Dahut” should have been emphasized more instead of having the player/Da Vinci dismiss her as “Oh, it’s not Drake, except when she conveniently comes back to delivery us the MacGuffins Ex Machina in the eleventh hour.” Dahut has little connection to Drake - it’s not her story, but a role she was forced into because Scheherazade was building a very specific kind of world. Therefore it is inauthentic. Perhaps that’s all it needs to be in this context. 

This can also work with the Amazons. Scheherazade never told stories of the Amazons, but she has access to basically all stories in the world through her Noble Phantasm - she learns that they are a society of warrior women who live without men, and so decides that they will be a society which oppresses men due to her fear/bitterness towards men after the ordeal she suffered through. The “oppressing men” plotline was honestly dumb all around but using the Amazons as a mechanism to explore Scheherazade's trauma would’ve been more interesting than just having them be the Big Bad before the Big Bad Columbus Reveal: Scheherazade doesn’t like fighting, but wishes that she had been strong enough to protect herself. Because she views herself as a coward and her ordeal with the king has complicated her view of sexuality - “I’m better suited to a bedchamber than a battlefield” - she uses the Amazons of Agartha as a mechanism to cope. 

This brings us to Wu, whose design I’m still not happy about even though I think the in-story justification is somewhat fair. (Let Helena and Wu be gray-haired grannies together or so help me!) Wu was absolutely an authoritarian ruler who did, in fact, invade and conquer several nations and institute a terrifying network of secret police. In her later life, she was given to decadence - but her tenure on the throne showed her to be a highly competent administrator. Notably, she ruled over an era of religious tension and balanced matters quite well, and though she was accused of undoing meritocracy to put her supporters into power, many of the men she appointed held positions in government long after she’d died because they were actually good at their jobs. Wu has been heavily mythologized over the years - later Tang emperors and Neo-Confucian scholars wrote her off (Wu founded her own dynasty under her own name, so they kind of had to legitimize it somehow), she became associated the nine-tailed fox spirit thanks to a few popular novels and poems, etc., etc., etc. The crazy thing is that Wu actually left very few records of herself behind, apart from some poems. Even the inscription on her tomb is blank! People can say whatever they want about her - it’s extremely difficult to know the full truth of the matter without any objective observers in the field (and without Wu’s own words to give context/another story), especially if you don’t read any Chinese. 

BTW - the first thing I learned history class is that when you’re dealing with primary sources, you must always remember that translators have agendas. Every word is a deliberate choice, and it changes the meaning from the original text. When dealing with historical documents, this is not always a good thing. 

Scheherazade reads some, but not all of these stories, and integrates Wu into her world as the sadist empress with an iron grip on her decadent mythical city. 

Do you see what I’m getting at here? It’s a lot, but I’m not done. Now we have to deal with Columbus - there’s “In Defense of Columbus” video is floating around in the Agartha tag, but I haven’t watched it in full and haven’t done like, any intensive research on Columbus in particular, so I’m going to apologize right now for any historical inaccuracies/misconceptions that I’m about to write. The point I want to make here mainly is that Columbus, like Wu, has been heavily, heavily mythologized for both good and evil at various points. The thing about Columbus that is also interesting is that the authenticity of his journals is or was apparently a subject of debate. The man who published most of them actually happened to be Bartolomew de las Casas - one of the founders/first vocal supporters of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. The reason de la Casas supported this is because he believed that using African labor would be an improvement over enslaving the native populations of the New World. Soon after, he had a change of heart and devoted the rest of his life to fighting against slavery in all forms. De la Casas went on to be named a saint, and was possibly the first person in history to propose the idea of universal human rights - which is how I had heard of him until literally just this afternoon; I had no idea he’d ever supported the slave trade until I was looking up basic info about Columbus’s writings so I could write this long-ass post. History is full of complicated people. 

But as I mentioned in Wu’s bit, it’s very important to note that in many ways, Columbus is literally just whatever people decide he is. Like, he never even set foot in any land that would become the United States, and yet he’s a huge symbol here! Along these lines, his amnesia would fit the theme of inauthentic storytelling, choosing what to read and what to believe in. Columbus regaining his memories was an understated moment, which is actually fucking fantastic because it could be used to really emphasize the choice that is being made here. He’s a Heroic Spirit who can choose to be whatever he wants. He can choose to be the simple hero-explorer that schoolchildren sing about, or he can choose to be the Big Bad, the first and perhaps most infamous conquistador. And he chooses to be the bad guy. That is so fuckin’ fantastic, y’all! I honest to God love that not only did FGO portray Columbus as a villain of history but that the bad reputation is something he chooses to maintain! I can write a list of Servants who were less than stellar people and got a makeover for Fate. Nero is probably one of the worst examples but like - Ozymandias absolutely owned slaves in his life as a pharaoh. Hercules and Medea murdered their own children. Asterios literally ate humans as the Minotaur. Gilles de Rais exists as a playable character. Jack the Ripper is your daughter. Hell, Nobunaga burned temples with the monks still inside - but she feels bad about it now! Enough digressing but I a hundred percent get why Japanese fans found Columbus “refreshing” at his introduction. He owns his cruelty, his desire to exploit others - he challenges the narrative that everyone is redeemable because he doesn’t even want to be redeemed, he just wants to get rich and famous, and he doesn’t give a shit who he steps over in the process! Like, Columbus said, “I’m just doing what comes naturally,” at one point when he still had amnesia, so when he got his memory back and turned on the player, I really would’ve liked for him to say is something like, “You’ve already decided that I’m the bad guy, right? You know my story, and I’m nothing if not a man of my word.”

These kinds of questions/debates could have been used to emphasize the themes of Agartha. Legends are what people decide they are. People make choices and history decides whether they were good or evil or important retroactively. Can you know what someone is like by reading a translation of their poetry? Can you judge a king’s reign by the words of their successors or their rivals? Does the context of a story matter? This all could have been super interesting to explore!

Like I said, the main theme of Agartha being “inauthentic storytelling” could have been hella, hella good considering that this is a world created by Scheherazade’s fears and trauma feeding into her escapist desires. But Minase’s incompetence as a writer made everything so hamfisted and awkward that everything just suffered under his desire to insert his fetishes at every moment. It was so obvious that he didn’t read any material for old Fate characters - like Astolfo you poor sweet thing, you deserved so much better! - and even the new characters that he clearly did research on, like Columbus, fell flat because he couldn’t figure out what he was trying to say beyond mildly-to-extra offensive sex jokes.