#I encourage more asks even if we disagree... the only discourse I want on my blog

[trans-yllz]

all of us talking about when we think wei wuxian fell in love

[angelinthefire]

Not only is Cas + Dean + honey unfluffy, it can be downright angsty. I think that Dean, like fandom, could latch onto this one known interest Cas has, and while he'd hate being reminded of Honey Cas he'd totally try to "bribe" Cas with bee-related gifts. Dean is always interested in things that make Cas more reachable, touchable, and human. Cas, who may not even remember what happened when he was dealing with Sam's Hell memories, could easily think Dean is just taking him to a beeswax candle store because Dean likes doing human things together. It would be deliciously hurtful and unsustainable--maybe one day Dean thinks Cas is watching a bee (in fact, Cas is thinking about Dean's eye crinkles) and freaks out and after the yelling and stomping is over, they start to figure things out, but it takes a while.

I don't want to tell you not to have fun with this concept if you want.

But if you're asking for my opinion I'm going to give it, because, again, I want to keep the anti-bee discourse going. And I have to say that I disagree with you.

A large part of my objection to the bee trope is not just that it's bad characterization for Cas, but that it's also incredibly out of character for Dean to play a part in it.

Like it's not just a question of being reminded of how Cas was at that time. I think the end of s7 was such a negative experience that Dean would outright reject conceptualizing honey-Cas as a component part of Cas at all.

I could go on about "Nobody cares that you're broken, Cas, now clean up your mess". There's layers to that line (including guilt and projection on Dean's part, but also just plain anger and frustration) but this is not the post to get into that. Right now, I'm just raising it because that is the sentiment people unintentionally call back to every time they use the bee trope. That is how Dean felt about honey-Cas. So no, I don't think it's at all believable that Dean would do anything that invokes Cas' behaviour from those episodes.

(And yes, there was the "I'd rather have you" speech and Dean starting to be willing to take Cas as he is. But almost immediately after that, Dean and Cas get sucked into Purgatory and separated, so Dean never has to follow through. When he meets Cas again, Cas is "better" and Dean gets to make a clean break with honey-Cas and leave it in the past. Which he does.)

I agree that Dean is interested in bringing Cas down-to-earth, but whenever he does, it's on his terms. Dean shows Cas his own favourite movies, he makes him a mix-tape of his own favourite songs, he invites him to hang out at diners that he likes, he encourages behaviour (like flirting with waitresses) that Dean considers fundamental to his own specific experience. For Dean, making Cas human means making him relatable to his own life. It's something that I really enjoy because on the one hand, there's a kind of narrowness to it, Dean doesn't really have a curiosity about the kind of semi-human that Cas could become on his own terms. On the other hand, it's Dean sharing pieces of himself with Cas. It's Dean making Cas more his own, in a way. (also, as we know from the mix-tape, Dean is not generally in the habit of giving gifts to Cas. The mix-tape is an exception.)

That all being said, I would be glad if I started seeing the bee trope being used as a source of angst instead of as some fluffy thing. (but I'd be even happier if it was excised from the fandom entirely)

[blood-and-poetry]

I dont at all think you intended it this way (and you don't at all need to publicly respond to this ask), but the post you recently reblogged from midnightssea contains a lot of gateway-TERF ideology (setting up men as inherently/naturally/biologically oppressors and women as a inherently/naturally/biologically oppressed class; drawing false equivalences; presenting this argument in hard absolutes with language like, "if you believe this, you're not really a feminist"). Often--not always! But often--this kind of mild, measured, not obviously TERF-y feminist discourse is used as a reasonable gateway to attract smart, compassionate, thoughtful people to agree with some base tenets of this ideology and ultimately encourage sympathy to more radical claims. Again, I'm not saying any of this to publicly call you out! That post just contains a few dog whistles and I want to make sure that you can hear them.

I’ve been scrolling through my blog for minutes to figure out which damn post you mean only to figure out that I reblogged that on my main @librinaut and not here. I feel kinda pressured to answer this, which is stupid in itself but I will post this to my feel-good blog even though I don’t like discourse here. This is meant in the kindest way possible, I am just not very good at not sounding passive aggressive. First of all, because it seems to be so important on tumblr to check every OP we reblog from lol, as you can see when you click on the original post, midnightssea specifially dislikes transphobia and tagged that post accordingly. Secondly, I have been following her for quite some time and she knows exactly what she is talking about when she is addressing feminist issues. I have a background in sociology and I have read my very fair share of theory so I might be in an ok position to judge that. I am not naive, I am educated in this matter and I know exactly what I am talking about or agreeing to. Nothing what she says has a hidden meaning and everything she says is correct. Now that’s out of the way: I think it’s incredibly heart breaking how basic feminist theory gets called a “dog whistle” or a “gateway” as if we are talking about a dangerous ideology here. Again, I am educated in those things and I hate how on tumblr or twitter terms like that are thrown around without any background or meaning. You seem to already have an issue with what OP directly said. Direct meaning isn’t a dogwhistle. I can guarantee you that OP dislikes transphobes, so there isn’t even a hidden meaning behind what you already disagree with. If neo-nazis (people who actually use dogwhistles especially in real life public settings) were using dogwhistles like that a lot of people in law enforcement etc would have much easier jobs. So no, dog whistles don’t work like that. In fact I have yet to see an actual dog whistle when tumblr calls one out. What OP talked about is basic knowledge, proven by statistics and historic records over and over again. If facts in regards to feminism are “problematic” then we are heading for some wild times the next decades. I also don’t quite grasp how what she wrote has anything to do with trans people. I heavily dislike how we are using terms such as “transphobia” “dog whistle” etc to describe the most basic grounds of feminism. Also painting it as if trans people are somehow all inherently opposed to feminism or the fight against patriachal structures. Which in turn at least my trans friends would find quite insulting. This is such a great example of how tumblr shoots itself in the seemingly progressive foot. In the sense of “Hitler was a vegetarian, let’s cancel animal activism” we are cancelling truly progressive, useful terminology and facts because some people who are deemed problematic are also using them alongside things we don’t like. Ultimately damaging progress in the name of owning whoever we want to own. I’m seeing this in a lot of instances, not just with this example. This is not meant in a mean or condescending way but seriously, without a personal moral compass all of us are in danger of falling for blind ideology and hollow buzzwords. I love when people disagree with me because it makes me question my own opinion and gives me an opportunity to expand or change it. But just talking about how something is problematic because it uses certain words isn’t an opinion I can argue against or expand my own knowledge with. It’s like a cardboard cut out of an opinion and I know I will only argue against buzzwords instead of against true arguments. If you are interested in discourse or theory or want to know where I come from: I base my current socipolitical ideological framework roughly around Engels “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State”, which gives a great overview of material thinking in regards to class analysis even though I am not agreeing with him on everything. But it’s more about HOW to think and not WHAT to think. It gives some good food for thought regarding feminist class analysis in a capitalist framework though. For data and statistics I recommend “invisible women” by Caroline Criado-Perez and the Women’s Atlas (there are new ones every few year I think?). It’s mainly just numbers and you can form your own opinion based on that. A lot of times there are pdfs of these books floating around somewhere. And lastly: This and my main blog focus on feminist issues and just... on women and my attraction to women. Under “mp” on this blog (blood-and-poetry) you can find some of my posts about TV shows and characters that will paint a pretty clear picture on what my personal views are. If you feel uncomfortable with that (which is fair. I have some strong opinions) you can of course unfollow me. Again not meant in an “ugh go away stupid anon” way but in a “maybe we just don’t have anything valuable to contribute to each others life” way. Despite all of this I am thankful for your kind tone and your honest concern! In turn, I am showing some friendly concern and I hope you can read it as such. Take care anon

[wild-at-mind]

If you want to know how seriously I am affected by the idea of 'contamination' of good leftists by the prospect of listening to people who disagree with you on some things, or even just having in your life people who kind of suck in some ways, here is an anecdote. So I've been trying to get involved with the local socialist group again after I dropped out after a similar attempt last year, the reason I dropped out being that I could feel the purity element creeping in. A lot of discussion turned into 'Tories are like this and have these characteristcs and also are all evil'....this coming a couple of years after a general election where a number of stalwart Labour voting constituencies went Tory for the first time, for a variety of complex reasons. And yet this seemed to have not permeated the discourse at all. Should it not have??? Personally I think it absolutely should have and I want to be around people who can talk about things in more detail than 'Tories bad, the end!' I'm glad some people find this cathartic but I don't. So I left.

I started attending meetings again this September and things seemed to be going well. We are in a different place in this country and now everyone is predicting strongly that the government will change at the next general election. No one thought much of Keir Starmer but in a constructive way, there wasn't any 'electoral politics is the greatest evil and we must all completely disengage, shun any who still believe in it and possibly become conspiracy theories' type stuff. That's not really the socialists whose meetings I was attending's vibe anyway- their ultimate aim is to put Socialist Party members into government positions but they recognise this is a long way off goal. They focus on talking to people and seeing where they are coming from, rather than talking at them and condemning them, which I agree is kind of the only way to bring enough people around to a cause like this. Once of my favourite leftist bloggers on here who sadly left ages ago once said 'leftism is supposed to be about meeting people where they are'. In one of the discussions at the socialist meetings one member who does a lot of engagement with the public said (paraphrasing): 'you have to approach people humbly, accepting that you don't know everything and open to their point of view even if you disagree'. The message I got was that not everyone can or will value your cause, especially in a very Conservative-voting town like mine, but trying to emphasise your solidarity with people however you can is better than writing everyone off as shitty Tories who could never change (and then having a conspiracy spiral). I was finding the meetings a positive experience but the last meeting wasn't so good and I haven't been back since. There was a speaker who kind of did the thing my dad does where you just monologue about how terrible the world is from a leftist perspective. Just when I thought we were focusing more on solidarity despite difference and looking for the positives socialism can bring in a practical manner. I felt really bad for this one meeting attendee who was attending for the first time. This guy asked the speaker a question and the speaker just took off going on about the same stuff for another 10 minutes. He didn't answer the question at all. It was annoying and also I couldn't help but think the guy who asked the question wouldn't feel encouraged to come again, you know?

Then also one attendee who I vaguely knew from last year revealed that she had been trying to find support gigs for her band but had cancelled one because the person they had been going to support was 'a bad person'. At first I thought maybe this meant they had fascist views or something (gig from a different band got cancelled in one of the live music venues here for that reason and the venue had to apologise profusely for not doing due diligence, as they should). But the attendee didnt elaborate in any way and I realised oh maybe this person is just kind of shitty....like really you would cancel a gig for that? I'm not being like 'haha good luck trying to be in the music industry and living by that principle', I'm objecting to the idea that you yourself are implicated if you play support for a shitty person. That's not an idea I want any part in and while it sounds like a small thing, I deliberately avoid being around people who think like this because it rubs off on me very easily and I spent years unlearning that shit.

I haven't been back for a month, there's a meeting tonight but I'm not going because I don't want to hear rants about the war from these people. At their best they can be great but at their worst they just rant and browbeat at people who they know already agree with what they are saying like my fucking dad. What is to be gained from this??? And I'm thinking I might give some feedback to the organiser on the problems I'm having with this but how on earth could I possibly explain?? :(

[fearoftheminotaur]

So a trend I've been seeing, and not quite aligning with in transmisogyny discourse, namely discourse over the B*rbie movie ending on here (which, non-transfems should be fucking off from), and twitter discourse on body hair, is a sort of choice to differentiate instead of to show solidarity, in circumstances where I actually see solidarity being the better choice.

Because the point where solidarity stops being the correct option is when something is not speaking in favor of your interests, and I think that in both of these cases the transmisogyny present actually presented ample opportunity for favorable outcomes. In fact I think a lot of transmisogynistic discourse is doing the same thing to us, claiming differentiation and appropriation when we call out problems that affect more than just ourselves.

To zone in on the Twitter example, there were some posts about how women shaving our body hair is an unhealthy beauty standard. And while this sparked the general "it's my choice/I am not shaming you I'm just saying we live in a society/well I think she should be shamed" back and forth, there was also some that honed in on the way that shaving can be a part of transfems' survival, and how trans women's hair is scrutinized in a way that non-transfems' is not; and that piqued my interest because I truly did not see a contradiction between critique of our society's attitude towards body hair, and the fact that I'm going to keep shaving.

I guess what I'm driving at here is that if body hair discourse is being promulgated by people who don't include trans women in their beauty standards, I think that hypocrisy is a great jumping off point to talk about how this stuff affects us, and that the main alternative we have is continuing the propagation of this beauty standard that hurts us. I'd rather have a hypocritical enemy than a consistent one.

And it's not just about stigmatizing vs encouraging transition/assimilation, because with the post I saw about the MargRob movie it's the opposite. This is kind of a spoiler, but a certain movie ends with a female character who earlier stated she did not have a vagina, going to a gyno. In context this did stem from a cis-centric view of feminism, however it was also compatible with the experiences of many transfems. I think in a time where healthcare for trans people is so under attack, it feels a little misplaced to attack the idea that someone would be happy about having stereotypical feminine anatomy - some women have penises, and the ones who want to change that shouldn't be told "be happy with what you have".

Yes, when a lot of people say the word "woman", they aren't thinking of us, and maybe they don't even include us: but we are women whether people see us that way or not, and that means that not everything they say will exclude us and that is an opportunity to prove we are who we say we are. We shouldn't have to, but we are being asked to, day after day.

Obviously, the pink movie is a giant hit that probably most transfems who watched it liked, and body hair discourse basically did what it needed to do; I just think there's an interesting trend in discourse arguments that I disagree with - something about this pseudo-separatist point of view that isn't gelling with me.

And I think it's the same thing that fuels charity streams being taken down because the people and content weren't 100% unproblematic, even if the recipients were clearly worthwhile; or a hashtag for a killed trans teenager being called in bad taste because the girl was white - things that kinda feel like they are derailing positive change.

I don't care about civility and respectability. I don't care about compromise. I care about being able to identify the best action in the long run, and I think that focusing on the ways that we are different only matters when someone is trying to make your life worse. Otherwise the instinct becomes to punish wrongdoers, even if that means hurting yourself in the process.

An instinct to say "you don't include me, so I'm going to be the scorpion to your frog". Maybe that has validity in the long term, at least for one or two of the examples I gave above; maybe cracks in an "inclusive" movement fester into something far worse, like often happens to certain pundits and YouTube channels shifting to the right.

But in the short term I just look at conversations that separatism (from any group) derails and think, "this could have helped us all".

[chaos0pikachu]

who said y'all can't live, laugh, like whatever you like? I'm really glad you don't see the same snaps I'm seeing all the time non-stop like god damn ask fans of playboyy how it was when the show was airing and we couldn't go into the tag without rancid take after rancid take about the show being like "watching zoo animals" or speaking over actual sex workers lmao hell I can barely look in any Mame related show tag without ppl still discoursing about tharntype or calling Mame a bigot or clogging up the tag with their "trash watches"

If you only watch a couple shows a year you probably don't see the same things I see or that I see my fandom buddies going through on the daily so like, maybe there's a wider context you're missing here cause I'm talking about a wider general fandom behavior not a singular incident or singular show

I got no problem with people hating, my ass can't stand most BL Classics like UWMA, Lovely Writer, 1000 Stars or most gmmtv shows but my ass is also not kicking in the door of the tag and breaking down why I think those shows suck - and trust I could, easily, on a technical film making level I could break those shows into pieces but I won't b/c why would I go into someone's house and tell them their food sucks?

I can keep that shit on my blog and out of the tag if I wanna talk about how X popular BL actor is actually peak overrated and also micro expressions aren't real b/c I'm not really looking to bring ppl who like The Heart Killers down let them have their fun? why is my "critique" so important it MUST be seen by fans?

the 4mins tag was a mess for like 2 weeks post finale with ppl just complaining and saying the show was Bad Actually if ppl are "allowed" to post all that in the tag why can't others be like "yeah actually I disagree and y'all are kinda annoying about this"? What's the difference here? Why are ppl allowed to post "critique" but others can't post critique of said critique? either the tag is a free-for-all or there's an expected fandom etiquette

y'all are absolutely allowed - who the fuck am I to tell you otherwise? I'm a stranger on the internet lol - to say "great and tyme's relationship is under development" my response to that would be "gucci, why don't you write or prompt a fic to fix that?" cause that's what fandom has always been about since like, zines during the star trek era and I miss it

Honestly back in the day there used to be more fighting b/c if it was in the tag it was open season to respond to - which I think is valid, you post something publicly in a searchable tag ppl are gonna roll up to it I knew what I was doing - but this caused a ton of in fighting so fandoms started making separate tags to curb the fighting. That's why there were things like "su critical" or "anti sterek" tags so ppl who wanted to talk positively about The Thing could and people who wanted to talk negatively about The Thing could without having to deal with each other on a large scale.

anyway my fandom experience isn't ruined, I like pancakes but I don't hate waffles it ain't that serious I just see less creation period in the larger BL fandom - or even the support of creation why don't ppl reshare ppl's fanarts or fanfic? my ass can't draw for shit but I constantly reblog fanart and talk with folks even random folks encouraging them to write or draw - and more ppl trying to gatekeep and girlboss various fandoms. Again, this is a larger issue I see within the general BL fandom along with other more recent fandoms

my thing about the current bl discourse of "all bls suck (except the ones I like)" is instead of whining in the tag for weeks on end every episode ppl could be like, writing fic to fix the shit they don't like.

you think great and tyme's relationship was under developed? gucci, write the canon divergence fic that gives them the development you wanted to see. you think We Are wasn't queer~ enough or didn't do found family well enough? aces, write the fic that puts more emphasis on queer found family. you think kidnap isn't dark enough or whatever? fantastic, write the dark mafia fic that goes there

like what, y'all thought supernatural has a billion fics because the show is GOOD? b/c fans were SATISFIED? what do y'all think ao3 is FOR? go wild, be the change you want to see in the world, let the freak flag fly, throw canon against the wall like an egg on mischief night

[halliescomut]

I posted 446 times in 2022

That's 446 more posts than 2021!

101 posts created (23%)

345 posts reblogged (77%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@fuckyeahmagerights

@la-fourmi

@vegussy

@elphabaforpresidentofgallifrey

@yoonmoonbii

I tagged 315 of my posts in 2022

Only 29% of my posts had no tags

#kinnporsche - 82 posts

#kinnporsche the series - 56 posts

#love in the air - 36 posts

#jeff satur - 30 posts

#kim theerapanyakul - 20 posts

#apo nattawin - 19 posts

#love in the air the series - 15 posts

#prapai x sky - 15 posts

#bible wichapas - 15 posts

#mile phakphum - 15 posts

Longest Tag: 116 characters

#no tags because even though i'm posting this on beyonce's internet of my own free will i dont want anyone to find it

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

See the full post

81 notes - Posted September 26, 2022

#4

So I had a thought about Love in the Air. I saw a comment stating that it doesn't really seem to have a driving plot so far, and I don't disagree. Based on the first four episodes there's no driving plot for the series, it's kind of just a small snapshot of these characters falling in love. But scrolling TT the other day I caught a video discussing how booktok discusses books, and the jargon used there, that's fairly specific to that group. You'll see similarities with fanfiction communities, we're all still reading, but there's a recognized language that directly associates with fanfiction, but generally not other written work. But circling back to my point, one of her points made was that when discussing books with other readers you might describe a book as character driven or plot driven. I think Love in the Air falls into the character driven category.

There's no overarching plot/conflict, it's the characters driving the story, and even four episodes in we've seen growth with Rain. For all his teasing Payu knows that Rain isn't dumb, just immature. He wouldn't have gotten into the faculty he's in without a good deal of talent, intelligence, and hard work. And when Rain messes up, Payu comforts but doesn't coddle him. He lets him know that he knows he's capable and he expects him to put in the effort. He also quietly encourages him, after seeing that confidence is something Rain struggles with. I'm hopeful that we'll see more growth as the season goes on.

I can't speak to Sky's romance yet, as that apparently doesn't gear up for a few more episodes, but I do think if they kind of continue in this vein of these characters that are different, but still well-matched growing together (which is what's needed for a long-term relationship, you either grow together or grow apart) then I'll feel the show is success.

I love a deep, meaningful show, but I also love a fluffier show. All media has value, and one of the things I enjoy about many BL dramas is that they give representation without a regular focus on the trauma that the community deals with. There's certainly some work to be done on making the entertainment industry and companies producing BL dramas into a healthier place, particularly for the stars, and I do wish more of the actors were openly out (if they are part of the queer community) but I know there's safety concerns there. Anyways...I'm interested in your thoughts around this, though we'll certainly need the whole season before we can reach true conclusions.

104 notes - Posted September 14, 2022

#3

@lutawolf I couldn't get it out of my head. :D And I needed something good after the absolute clusterfuck this weekend with book two 'spoilers' and author bullshit. I swear I hope BOC knows better than to let any of that shit happen in season 2.

114 notes - Posted October 31, 2022

#2

Okay...so I've seen some discourse around the interwebs of people angry at Rain for giving Prapai the keys to Sky's apartment and asking him to take care of him, including saying the Rain is a terrible friend for crossing Sky's boundaries like this. And I feel like people are being a little harsh. Rain can occasionally be a bit of a dummy, yes, but he is a kind and protective person. I feel like there's this assumption that the only contact or interaction that Rain and Prapai have ever had is what we've seen onscreen, and really that's unlikely. If Prapai and Payu are best friends, Rain would have a lot more interaction than what we've seen. Rain also knows that Payu trusts Prapai. Rain is basing his trust partially on Payu's opinion and friendship with Prapai. He also knows that Prapai likes Sky, the same way that Payu likes Rain, so for him he can't see Prapai treating or caring for Sky any different from what he has experienced in the care of Payu. Even with the trust he's placing in Prapai he clearly impresses on him "I'm trusting you with my best friend, do not break that trust", before giving him the keys.

I'm not going to argue that he's not crossing boundaries, but those boundaries are an assumption made by the audience. Sky has never even hinted to Rain about his past trauma, the fact the Rain didn't even know his ex was a man shows that. Sky being closed off even from Rain is the reason he doesn't know. Sky being even moderately open, just giving Rain the most base level, and saying "I'm not in a place to deal with Prapai ever" would likely have been all it took. Rain would have figured something else out.

But I don't think Rain is a bad friend, he's just naive, and he's also not given a lot of opportunity to show what type of friend he is because of their dynamic, Sky being more mature and Rain being a little more wild/immature.

219 notes - Posted October 17, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

I'm rewatching Love in the Air, because of course I am, and we all know that so far Sky is the underrated king of this show. His reactions are gif gold.

I'm on episode two and Sky crossing himself in a prayer for Rain as he drags Payu off is just the cutest, sweetest, and funniest thing. He's just like "I'm praying for you buddy, I really think you might have bitten of more than you can handle with that one, but god speed my friend."

Just look at this precious bean. I'm loving Payu/Rain, but I'm excited to see Prapai and Sky get more screen time.

241 notes - Posted September 26, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

Oh my god that longest tag...that post is, well I can't say not fit for the internet, I've been here a long time, and it's no where near what you can encounter in the wilds of the interwebs, but it's probably one of the most *embarrassed face* things I've ever posted. Also, hilarious that I have 100% more posts than last year. I didn't post at all, because I sort of fell of the tumblr train for a while.

Anyway, I am at least proud of all of these posts, and I also adore all of the blogs in my top reblogs.

[guiltysecretpasttime]

Untitled Linzin fanfic

(Yet again?)

This came to me while staying at home one day (one day of many, mind you). Am I okay with starting another multi-chapter Linzin story? Maybe. Will I push through with it? Absolutely. Should this be taken seriously? No, please don’t. Am I abandoning my other work? Of course not.

Don’t take this plot seriously since it’s just something that I felt like I want to write down and share. But… let’s see. Consider this a crackfic /trope centric fic eh haha. Consider this my contribution to this teeny tiny space in the fandom.

Please leave a comment or a reply as to what you think about this. I’m gauging this to be like 3 to 4 chapters long only though.

I think this will keep as untitled for now – until I figure out the right title. And summary / overview.

---

Untitled

Overview

Legend of Korra fanfic – Linzin endgame AU

1 of 3 (or 4?) chapters (or more, if I decide to post them in chunks) – I really haven’t thought this out (shrugs and looks around shiftily)

Pre-canon AU (prior to Book 1)

--

The airbender gently slid the door closed, careful not to disturb any of its sleeping occupants. He knew he was late but as with everything – his children always came first.

He looked up at the moon, peeking from behind gray clouds. The rain did not let up at all during the day.

It was a pity. It was, after all, the first time that his children found themselves on an Ember Island vacation. It was to celebrate Jinora’s birthday – at least that was what the press release was.

He hurried across the courtyard, ignoring the squelching sounds that his sandals made on the mud and puddles.  Passing no one on his way, Tenzin finally reached the right hall.

He quickly dried himself before entering what everyone knew as the Fire Lord’s family hall, which was precisely why they selected it. He crept into the dimly lit hall, shadows were wavering across the pillars and the walls. Nonetheless, the pretense of a nightcap among the grownups was well executed with the spread on the long table.

He sat down immediately beside his mother, who inclined her head in acknowledgment.

Fire Lord Izumi cleared her throat and the soft buzzing of conversation silenced.

“Now that we’re complete – let’s get right to it.”

The airbender’s eyes wandered across the room, to everyone sitting at the long table of the Fire Lord.

Everyone who was anyone to his late father was present. Everyone alive, that is. The lack of guards or security personnel was nothing new in this situation though – in a room of bending masters, it was almost foolish to expect guards to be standing in attention, alert for any disturbance.

“As we know the Red Lotus is back at its game.” Lord Zuko now presided the meeting and went straight to the heart of the clandestine gathering. “There has been reliable intelligence that they are gaining traction on the ground and there are rumors of freeing their known members.”

To their credit, no one in the room gasped or expressed their incredulity of such a claim.

Bumi began to share all the pertinent information from the report (Tenzin idly thought that being a commander suited his brother’s temperament). It was alarming to hear of pockets of violent incidents across the nations and the United Republic that can be traced back to the Red Lotus.

Chief Tonraq took the action to inform his brother Unalaq to strengthen the guards at the North as one of the prisoners were being held there.

Katara said that the White Lotus has already been informed of the case and she had personally requested to have the number of Zaheer’s guards increased. Bumi spoke of fortifying the defenses in all the other security prisons.

“Well, if everything is secured, why even call for us?” The gruff voice of Toph Beifong finally joined the foray.

Suyin fidgeted from Toph’s side, clearly uncomfortable with the discourse.

Truth be told, he did wonder at Suyin’s presence.

When Lord Zuko issued the invitation to Ember Island, he was surprised at the arrival of the Zaofu Beifong family, knowing that they have been estranged from some time. He thought that maybe it was just in keeping up with the ruse of a family reunion. Nonetheless, here they are now and Su was found to be in their midst. She was the youngest child of their generation and had been, more often than not, shielded by her mother when it came to serious and bordering dangerous matters. It had always been the eldest Beifong daughter who shouldered the brunt of the situation.

But then again, no one called attention to the empty seat at the other side of Toph Beifong tonight. Tenzin was sure it was not allotted for Baatar (who had stayed behind to see to the bedtime of the children).

Despite her stature, Toph still managed to command the room. “The Avatar is currently far from Republic City and I don’t think her parents will be taking her on a trip to Zaofu anytime soon. I don’t see the need for us,” Her emphasis heavily implying her family. “To even be here.”

All of a sudden, Tenzin realized the former Fire Lord looked all of his age as he drew in a breath. “While that may be true, Toph, the Red Lotus is looking for a gateway to the spirit world. They think true power and equality will only be brought about by uniting our world with the spirit world. Or barring that, a way to force the Avatar’s hand.”

“But she’s a child!” The Avatar’s father choked out.

“We are well aware that never stopped them.” There was a slight pause in remembrance on what had happened the first time the Red Lotus attacked the Avatar’s family. There had been losses.

Kya spoke up, trying to figure out what that could mean. “If the prisons are heavily guarded and all the leaders of the nations have their own security detail, what else are they looking to? What is in Republic City? What are they targeting?”

“The airbenders.”

All heads turned to a figure who had been leaning in the shadows of one of the pillars. Tenzin wondered how he could have missed her.

Lin Beifong pushed herself off the pillar and grudgingly took a seat beside her mother. “Is it the airbenders then, Lord Zuko?”

All of a sudden, Tenzin realized Lord Zuko looked all of his age as he nodded solemnly. “They knew they need to lure the Avatar or in its place, use a master airbender to their bidding.”

Said master airbender’s eyes flashed. “I would never -!”

“They could use Jinora as leverage.” Understanding was visible on Bumi’s face. “Everyone knows Jinora can already airbend.”

“That’s sick.” Su managed to murmur, sinking further into her seat. “Using kids in their nefarious plans…”

“They’re not known for their mercy, sweetheart.” Bumi shrugged, years of being in the military hardening him some.

“We can add more protection for the children.” Katara threw a concerned glance at her youngest child.

Toph scowled. “So, what are you suggesting? Aside from the White Lotus, Republic City police would need to pull funds to provide bodyguards at Air Temple Island? Mind you – it would be hard to get this funding for a civilian.”

“I’m sure the White Lotus would be enough.” Fire Lord Izumi attempted to mediate what was rapidly about to become a heated discussion.

“Maybe not,” Tonraq disagreed, already shaking his head.  “If we pull in resources across the nations for the high security prisons and the sentries for Korra, I don’t think we would have any to spare for Air Temple Island at this period. Recruiting and training more could jeopardize the quality of the White Lotus.”

As the people around him continued to toss around arguments and recommendations, Tenzin could feel everything closing in.

When his wife passed a little over a year ago due to a stomach bug that had gone untreated for so long, Tenzin had stepped down from his role as part of the city council and instead turned to raising his two daughters and rebuilding the Air Nation (or what was left of it). The transition of public figure to private citizen was a welcome balm to him and his young family. His mother and sister had stayed on the island for a couple of weeks during Pema’s illness and subsequent passing, but they did have lives to go back to in the South Pole.

Tenzin thought he managed okay – training acolytes, tending to his daughters’ needs, documenting what was available of the Air Nomad culture… His visits to Republic City were now less frequent compared to his council days. He had developed a routine and he thought they were coping well.

But now, with the tenuous peace that he finally thought he attained was now at the risk of crumbling, he was at a loss on what to do. It had been a while since he felt like this – back when his father passed, and even then there was someone he had with him to support him.

“We need to send them away then.” Iroh’s voice drew Tenzin’s attention back to the discussion. “They’ll be sitting ducks at the island.”

Toph snorted and Izumi glared at the blind woman’s reaction to her son. “Yeah? Then what – they join the Fire Lady’s entourage? Or maybe head on to the tundra with the Avatar? The Red Lotus would probably be grateful that you placed all their targets in one area.”

Izumi countered. “That would solve the issue of spread out resources – if we concentrate them in a location, that may work.”

“On the other hand, what sort of excuse would you give for Master Airbender here to be away from his temples that long?” Lin asked with a tone so casual, you would have thought they were discussing the weather. “It would not do for the Red Lotus to know that we are unto them so soon when we have yet to strategize how to take them down.”

Tenzin found himself silently agreeing. Lin always was the pragmatic one.

Zuko stroked his beard in thought. “We could have them over – extended vacation maybe? Or we go around on vacation to the temples? That way we can use the Fire Nation’s security detail.”

“That would be a negative.” Iroh reddened as he realized he just spoke against his grandfather. At his encouraging nod, the younger firebender continued. “That would be a logistical nightmare. Too many variables to consider.”

Bumi suddenly perked up. “That’s it!” The shaggy-haired man stood up with a snap. “Variables – and what you all said.” He waved a hand across the table. “They can join the Fire Lady’s entourage -.”

“What!” The collective disbelief echoed in the hall.

He raised his hand in supplication. “Hear me out -what if he joins the Fire Nation Royal family as actual family? Surely questions won’t be raised.” Seeing that no one was getting his point, he decided to say it plainly. “I’m saying what if Tenzin marries Izumi?” There was a lot of disagreements to his pronouncement and so he raised his voice. “That way, it won’t be odd if he stayed there or if they become under protection of the Kyoshi Warriors.”

If Lin was the pragmatic one, Bumi always was the wild one.

And practically everyone had a say on that.

“That would never pass, Bumi.” Lin.

“You can’t pull the wool over the eyes of the public with that. What more the Red Lotus?” Kya.

“Sorry but I don’t think Master Tenzin here is my daughter’s type.” Zuko.

“Dad. Well, aside from that, the optics for that kind of union would not bode well for international peace.” Izumi.

“I don’t need a stepdad.” A beat. “Siblings would be welcome though.” Iroh.

“I agree with Izumi -this may come across as the Air Nation siding with the Fire Nation.” Tonraq.

“I doubt the Earth Queen will remain quiet too.” Su.

“Meh. I say just toss Junior here and his spawn to some remote resort (or here even) and just say he went on a vacation.” Toph.

A snort. “Now that won’t fly – Tenzin never goes on vacation.” Bumi.

“Bumi, it’s not nice to make fun of your brother’s troubles.” Katara.

Tenzin simply shook his head at his brother, who still did not look deterred at all even as the conversation around continued to dissect and put down his ludicrous suggestion.

The older man was frowning, walking around the table while partaking on the board of dried meat, fruits and cheese laid out for them.

From the other end of the table, Lin tossed grape into her mouth while Su said something that sounded like “manners!”.

At that moment, Tenzin made the mistake of catching his brother’s eye. He did not trust the gleam in Bumi's eyes.

“I got it!” Bumi once more got hold of everyone’s attention. “True, Izumi as a bride  might be to farfetched, but there are merits to the Tenzin gets married deal. No questions will be asked if he spends time with family, out of the public eye, you know – a regular honeymoon. As to the lovely bride, why not someone he has had history with – that would make the whirlwind romance and wedding more plausible, won’t it?”

Tenzin’s heart sank at who his brother was implying. 

Oh no. Surely he didn’t mean…

“Why not marry Lin Beifong?”

---

Note: Why not indeed? 🤔 where am I going with this? You shall find out real soon. Lemme know whatchuthink.

[leikeliscomet]

Idk what I'm supposed to get out of this honestly.

"( I AM NOT SAYING YOU ARE DOING THIS, but this is why I am just removing all those posts from my thread as its creating a dangerous situation, again not blaming you as we all can see what you are doing is good and healthy!)" You literally said I called you racist in ur of reply so... okay? If what I'm doing is so good and healthy it didn't feel like you felt that way but I digress. You said you woke up tired fair enough but like that's not my problem. I wrote my post around midnight without attacking people.

"I said Black NOT POC, you said "poc ace" anyway" - Poc is something I was trained into saying due to my university societies, my training from them and numerous communities within my area asking us to use this, so if using or saying "Poc ace" is upsetting you then I am sorry, I will next time ask, it was just out of reflex." Black and POC are not interchangeable terms. In this context antiblackness is a form of oppression that affects Black people and rap is stigmatised because it is a genre made by Black artists, even when non-Black artists make rap music. There's a long history of non-Black artists being praised for making rap and other Black genres of music whilst the Black artists in the same genre are shunned so 'POC' doesn't make sense in this conversation. Its a specific form of oppression and specific type of media being stigmatised. Can only speak for me and my community but most Black people just call themselves Black so I don't see why I should ask permission to be addressed the way we are perceived and called by default?

"I am sorry we argued and yes we both agree and disagree on two major things, however, I will still share stuff which promotes a world which every community lives in harmony including the black + poc communities. However, Like I said I will 100% support someone who says they don't like x music due to y as long as y is not direct or indirect racisim, the op did not mean.

If you wanna keep discussing it I am 100% for it as like I said, from my pov and others I have asked outside of tumblr I do see that anyone can decide on the music they enjoy for any reason unless it is inherently racist and I will continue to push support for everyone such as your post had really good points in your culture which I wanted to spread to my other friends and feed!"

... I mean okay? Again what am i supposed to gain out of this? aroacesafespace literally lied about what I said on their HUGE platform and encouraged their followers to joke about some mad tumblr user that hates getting reblogged which completely strawmans my whole post. Their followers aren't gonna check for context and why would they? Its easier to take a big account's word for it instead of unpacking antiblackness bc that's too hard and who cares right? Similarly you reblogged my post claiming I did a bunch of shit I didn't. Will your followers and moots actually go and read what I've actually said and what other Black aces have been saying or will they assume I'm the bogeyman attacking aces that don't like rap bc its giving the second one.

Its funny because no one thought about this for Black aspecs. No one asked how we felt in this conversation. No one considered the Black people, ace and non-ace, who've been hurt, attacked and harassed on here not just from this discourse but in general. No one gave a fuck. I have to give you three grace and understanding and empathy but it's 100% okay to lie about what I said, make fun of me and blame me for the actions of randoms on the internet. Right.

"we think its just bystanders sending shit in the anonymous ask ways to poke the fire and make both sides attack each other even more. Hopefully that makes sense?"

What happens if some of those anons are Black? What happens the next time someone makes a post like I did talking about the community's racism? Again several users on here have called out the racism. They weren't anons. They didn't send death threats. They weren't randoms poking their nose in they were people IN the community and... we still got treated like shit. Have you considered maybe people went on anon bc they didn't wanna risk getting attacked and getting the response I got on main? I wouldn't blame them. Listen, this harmony you want so bad is not happening until antiblackness is addressed and its no one's job to sugarcoat it for you. You have to be the one willing to unpack this and you have to be willing to go outside your comfort zone. You have to be willing to listen to Black aces that don't agree with you. Until then, I don't wanna be in community with ppl like u lot.

Nope you don't get to reblog my post as a way to defect from your antiblack dog whistles @aroacesafeplaceforall @jayce-is-confused @threadednovelist especially as the most if not all Black aces I put in that post have extensively spoken about the racism within the community as well that's just... nah. Ik this is gonna get branded as starting drama, dividing the community, blah blah blah but idc. I acc feel like there's no point explaining bc others tried and its clear most of the (white) community on here doesn't gaf but in my Black ace opinion here goes: moral panics about rap and hip hop and Black culture & art in general being hypersexual, violent and lesser has been happening for centuries and tumblr continued it bc of the Kendrick v Drake beef, where a bunch of users who don't consume rap are leading convos on a genre they know nothing about. Contributing to that antiblackness by reaffirming that rap is inherently violent and hypersexual, that it's bad specifically it includes violence and sex and that bc ur ace the stigma is deserved is racist. It is antiblack. It is also antiblack to paint people that call out antiblackness as aggressors, "cancel culture" or making shit up.

If you're really about it you can reblog my og post about racism in the ace community or read up on stuff those Black ace activists like Yasmin Benoit, The Gentle Ace etc have actually said, unpack your biases and apologise to Black (not POC) acespecs for being wildly dismissive. Maybe even to the non-Black aces that tried to explain this to you too. Or don't. The ball's in your court.

[with-my-murder-flute]

Hi everybody, thanks for the asks letting me know I made the top of @yusuftiddies’ list of Homophobes in TOG Fandom, you can stop sending them now.

So.

I can make mistakes and fuck up and own that. I am serious about listening to marginalized people. But... in this case, while @yusufstiddies generally describes factual events that happened and factual posts that exist, I have to say that I can’t actually apologize for the things I’m called out for because I don’t think they’re homophobic. The things he criticizes me for are things that come from a lot of personal experience as a queer bisexual cis woman, as well as a lot of reflection, research, and study. I believe in them really strongly and stand by them.

I’m really sorry if this makes TOG fandom too hostile, because it is not my intention to make this place so unpleasant that anyone feels driven out. I understand if my stance means people no longer want to follow me/read my stuff/participate in projects I’m involved with (though I’d rather hand off the Research Hub to someone else than see it go down with me). I’m posting this so people can know where they stand before they decide whether to keep interacting with my blog, or “deplatform” me as @yusufstiddies recommends.

I would recommend, for anyone who doesn’t want to see my posts, using Tumblr’s new post content filtering feature. If you type a username (like star-anise or with-my-murder-flute) into it, Tumblr will hide all posts featuring that specific string of characters, and therefore any post or reblog of mine.

To address the accusations against me:

I am an anti-anti: Yes. I’ve reblogged posts of mine about this before. I care passionately about preventing child abuse, but I think there are better ways to prevent child abuse in fandom (like concrete harassment policies so predatory behaviour can be reported and stopped early, and education about digital consent and healthy relationships) than attacking people who write “bad ships,” not least because the first people it hurts are abuse survivors trying to work through their trauma, and because the research says you cannot actually tell who’s a sexual predator based on what they write about.  Fiction affects reality, but not on a 1:1 basis. My mainblog, @star-anise, has a really extensive archive of my writing on the subject.

I said cishet men aren’t more privileged than gay men: Kinda. What I actually did was question whether Every Single Cishet Man benefits from more privilege than Every Single Gay Man. If a man is cishet but gets beaten up because people perceive him as gay, he’s not exactly feeling the warm toasty glow of heterosexual privilege in that moment. Oppression is complicated and there are times when someone’s lack of privilege on one axis is way less important than someone else’s lack of privilege on another axis.

The post above also includes me reblogging someone else’s addition about how straight men can be included in the queer movement: I’m queer. @yusufstiddies has made it very clear that he isn’t comfortable with the word “queer” and doesn’t like it. Therefore I think it’s understandable that he might not understand that the queer community sees ourselves as a coalition of people dedicated to dismantling the structures of sex and gender that oppress us, not a demographic of people whose gender identities or sexual orientations can be neatly mapped. However, I would say that doesn’t make queer theory inherently homophobic.

There are also some related points @yusufstiddies didn’t level at me specifically, but I would like to address:

The constant focus on the unsafeness of cishet people:

I’m not cishet. I’m a bisexual woman who’s dated women. Sixth-light is a queer woman married to a woman. This is not an issue of non-LGBTQ+ people blundering their way into something they don’t experience the daily consequences of. This is an issue of people from WITHIN the LGBTQ+ community who sincerely disagree with @yusufstiddies about the pressures we experience and how best to deal with them. I think that even if @yusufstiddies were to filter his fiction input to only LGBT-written work about LGBT experiences, or even only trans-written work about trans people, he would still find a lot of things he finds upsetting or transphobic, because sexual and gender identities are really diverse and not everything will suit one person.

The contention that saying “’Queer is a slur’ is TERF propaganda” is transmisogyny because it dilutes the definition of “TERF”:

People who point out the phrase is TERF propaganda are not calling every person who says it a TERF, and we are not trying to argue that telling a queer person that queer is a slur is inherently equal to the kind of damage a TERF does when she attacks a trans woman out of transphobia. Queer people being able to use the word “queer” does not have the same importance as trans women being able to live, work, and survive in public. Rather, we are literally saying, “This is a thing TERFs say when they take a break from attacking trans women and try to recruit new members to their group, so it’s in our best interests to not give it too wide a currency.”

Some people have experienced the word “queer” used as a hateful word hurled against them and don’t want to hear it ever again. I get that. It happens. Where I grew up, “gay” was a synonym for “shitty” and it took me a lot of years out of high school before the word “gay” wouldn’t shoot my blood pressure through the roof.  I actually do understand that and think that’s valid (and again, support using post content filtering for that word).

One of the things I do at @star-anise is argue with young people who are headed into full-on transmisogynistic TERF territory, and work at reeling them back and deradicalizing them. I use a tag called “weedwhacking” so my followers can filter out the sometimes lengthy back-and-forths we get going.

Something I’ve learned, interacting with so many TERFs and proto-TERFs, is that one way they frequently get recruited into harassing trans people was through discourse around the word “queer”. For one, it encouraged them to want to distance themselves from any perception of LGBT people as “weird” or “not normal”, which led to seeing trans people as “weird” and “not normal” and therefore not good members of the “gay pride” community. For two, repeating “queer is a slur” predictably causes a lot of queer people to react in a defensive manner, so by teaching young or new people to say it, TERFs can set them up to feel alienated from the larger LGBTQ+ community and more open to TERF propaganda.

The next issue isn’t mentioned in the original callout post, but I think it’s key to this entire issue:

@yusufstiddies has made several posts about what cishet people should and shouldn’t write. For example, cishets shouldn’t write Nicky experiencing internalized homophobia.  Another is a detailed post of things cishets shouldn’t write about trans people, including which sexual positions only trans people are allowed to write. I would imagine that part of his frustration with fandom has been the lack of traction those posts have gotten. I know I very deliberately didn’t reblog them.

That isn’t because I don’t agree that the things he complains about are rarely handled well by cishet authors. I agree that there’s a lot of bad fic out there that contributes to negative stereotypes against LGBTQ+ people and is basically a microaggression to read.

I have two very deeply-seated reasons for my position:

LGBTQ+ identities are different from many other political identities because most people are not born identifiably LGBTQ+. It’s something we have to figure out about ourselves. And one really important way that we do that is using the safety of fiction to explore what an experience would be like, sometimes years before we ever admit that we fit the identity we’ve written about. So banning cishet authors from writing something is really likely to harm closeted and questioning LGBTQ+ people. It will lengthen the amount of time questioning people take before finding the identity that really fits them, and force closeted people to be even more closeted. 

There’s a lot of undeniably shitty stuff in fandom. However, I fundamentally believe that trying to target the people creating it and forcing them to stop doesn’t work very well, and has the serious byproduct of killing the creativity and enthusiasm of the rest of fandom and resulting in less of the actual thing you like being produced. I think that it is infinitely more productive to focus on improving the ratio of good stuff in fandom than trying to snuff out every bad thing.

Like I said: I understand if this means former followers, mutuals, or friends no longer want to interact with me. I’ll be saddened, but I’ve obviously chosen this path and can deal with the consequences. 

I wish this could have worked out differently.

[its-bound-to-get-loud]

Speculating about sexuality

It’s time to get a little controversial on this blog. Or at least talk about a controversial subject. I’ve recently seen some fandom discourse about this subject from multiple sources. A lot of people have the opinion that discussing a celebrity’s sexuality is a bad thing, something you shouldn’t do. I strongly disagree.

Full disclosure, I’m a Larrie. I’m a 1D fan who believes Harry and Louis are a couple. I’m also a 5SOS fan. Now I know many 5SOS fans seem to be wary of Larries in particular. I know some people have taken it too far sometimes. But also, it’s hard to compare Larry/1D to 5SOS in many ways, because Larry and 1D themselves have done a lot of things to encourage fans looking into things they normally might not. It feels to me as if 5SOS fans saw the things that happened in the 1D fandom, turned around and decided to do the exact opposite. This is a good thing in some ways, but it also leaves no room for critical thinking.

Now back to 5SOS. I’ve had a few conversations about this topic and what it comes down to is this. 5SOS are famous, they live a life that’s (partially) being seen by the public and the media. Now this will sound cold, but it’s a fact: 5SOS are a product. When we interact with them on social media, we interact with a product. In the end they want to keep selling their music to us. In order to do so, engaging with fans is part of their job. It doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy it, it doesn’t mean they’re not genuine. If you work in a supermarket part of your job may be stocking shelves. You have to do it because it’s your job, but that doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy it as well.

Part of the product that is 5SOS is their relationships. We see their girlfriends plastered over their social media, they mention them in interviews, etc. That’s not something they HAVE to do generally speaking. If we are to assume that (for argument’s sake) all 3 current 5SOS relationships are genuine, then they don’t have to show us their girlfriends if they don’t want to. This means they either choose to do so, because that’s what they want, or these girlfriends are being presented to us for a reason (PR, bearding, etc.). Which of these it is, is for you to decide. Both options make them become part of the product. We are allowed to question that product, since we are the ones consuming it. If the person in question has made comments that can be regarded as them hinting at not being straight they open the door even further. You cannot tell someone to come over and then slam the door in their face because they get too close.

If 5SOS want to they can keep their relationships private. Their social media profiles are not the same as ours. They are a representation of the product they are. A representation of their image. That’s why celebrities often have private profiles as well, where they can share private things that they don’t want to share with the public.

The 5SOS girlfriends themselves are a product as well. They all have careers that involve being in the public eye, they are just as well selling us a version of themselves. 2 public people dating does not mean we automatically HAVE to see that they are dating. Celebrities can keep things a secret or low-key if they want to. In fact, I’d dare to argue they have more tools to do so than you and I.  

You can look at it like this, if I’m buying a laptop I’m doing research online, I’ll check out reviews. I’ll ask questions at the store. I question the product before I buy it. That’s not that different from what we do as fans. Before we buy their music we question if this is a product we want to buy. Most of the time that’s an unconscious decision we make. Sometimes a product can becomes unsatisfactory after a while and we choose to move on from it. I know it sounds cold, but it’s not that different with celebrities. If 5SOS keep showing me their public girlfriends on their public social media, I get to question that. If I come to the conclusion that I think that what they are telling me is false. I get to discuss that. Being a fan does not equal always taking things at face value.

There’s also a double standard in this fandom. Some people are more than willing to yell about how problematic and toxic the girlfriends are in their opinion. Which means they are allowed to poke into (what they think is) a real relationship between 2 people. When Luke says Teeth is about Sierra, they question his words and don’t hesitate to say their relationship is toxic. But when it comes to sexuality suddenly that’s a no go. I am absolutely not a fan of the way some of the way girlfriends behave. As long as this happens in a fandom environment I am also fine with talking about that. But if you disapprove of one thing and then do something similar, maybe it’s time you start practicing what you preach or leave people to have their own opinions.

This doesn’t mean you should tell the guys directly that you think their relationship is not real or that you think they are not straight. You don’t harass their friends, their crew, and their family about this. Discussing a celebrity’s sexuality/relationship should stay limited to fandom spaces. With social media it’s a lot easier for celebrities to see what we say about them. Therefor I always suggest being mindful of what you say (they may be a product, but they are still people). Personally it’s why I enjoy Tumblr, because most celebrities don’t go on here and (most of the time) we can safely discuss things that are more difficult to discuss in a place like Twitter. I will say, just because we are questioning a product, it doesn’t mean we get to be rude in the process. You generally don’t go to the store and start yelling at the salesperson if you don’t agree with what they tell you.

People seem to think it’s disrespectful to say someone is gay. Why? Is there anything wrong with being gay? Absolutely not. We live in a society that’s very heteronormative, being straight is seen as the “default” sexuality. It should not be. If you’re going to argue that it’s disrespectful to say someone is gay, then please also don’t assume they are straight. You can have personal thoughts, sure. I have personal thoughts on the specific sexuality of the guys in 5SOS as well. But I keep in mind that my personal thoughts aren’t a fact. I could be wrong. So unless someone has specifically stated their sexuality it’s best to not assume anything and keep an open mind.

Then finally I want to briefly touch on a topic that goes hand in hand with what I’ve talked about: shipping. Some people have a problem with shipping when it comes to real people. For some people shipping is just enjoying the idea of 2 people together even if you think they aren’t. While other people truly believe in that relationship. There’s nothing wrong with any of that as long as it doesn’t become invasive. It all comes back to what I’ve said before. We are consuming a product. The relationships between the 5SOS guys are a huge part of that product. The chemistry between them is part of why we love them. I’m not saying they are pretending to like each other. I fully believe their chemistry is genuine, but it does help sell the product. It also means that sometimes the guys/their team plays into that chemistry to sell the product.

They guys should not have a problem with fans shipping them together, because it’s not up to them to decide that. They sell us their relationships, so we get to form opinions about that. If we stay in our own fandom space and do not become invasive by showing them or people around them fandom content (fics, headcanons, manips, etc.). Then they should not come into our spaces and invade stuff we enjoy in that space. I get super uncomfortable whenever I see celebrities reading fanfiction or being read fanfiction. Fanfiction about them is not for them. It’s made for fans to enjoy and they should stay away from that. I want to encourage you to go and read this answer* about shipping real people. Because sometimes other people’s words say it better than my own words ever could.

With that we have reached the end of this post. As usual I am always open to discuss this in an adult manner. If you feel like you have anything to add to this discussion, feel free to send me an ask/dm. Or reply to this post. If you like/agree with what I write I would love it if you reblogged this post. That’s the only way more people can see it. My blog is small, so reblogs are very much needed to keep the discussion going. Don’t think of coming in my inbox and yelling at me how everything I said is wrong and bad and awful, because it is only going to get you blocked. If you don’t agree, that’s fine, but I’m not going to tolerate any hate.

Finally, just because you are allowed to speculate and question whatever 5SOS or any other celebrity/influencer tells you, doesn’t mean you have to. If that’s not your cup of tea, then that is more than fine. The reason I wrote this post is because we need to stop making people who think critically about the things they are being told, feel guilty about what they do.

* Please note that the author of this post does not have anything to do with what has been written in this post. If you have a problem with anything in this post, please direct it to me and not them.

[fictionkinfessions]

Some people have been slandering me on other blog(s?) very recently. I would like to explain my side of the situation regarding this. [Thank you to anonymous person who DMed me about this.]

edited 12/2: I mistakenly assumed the 'second server admin' was someone involved with creating or moderating the server. I apologize for making assumptions, and have corrected 'second server admin' to 'second person on behalf of the server' also abbreviated as ‘second person’.

The original server admin was not involved in the slander or misleading ask messages to other blog(s?). I apologize for stating they were. They were not involved with such messages or posts.

I also forgot the first server admin did respond after my refusal. I did purposefully ended the conversation early in order to avoid engaging in system discourse as a singlet. I realize now that I should have been more communicative and clearer on my part. I am sorry I was not, and will take care to do so in the future.

I also want to clarify w/r/t to taking a neutral stance isn’t the best answer to system discourse, and it is taking a side on the conversation whether I intend to as a singlet or not. My intention is to minimize harm caused on my part as a singlet navigating through intracommunity discussions.

Lastly, the concern of lesbophobia has no relation to this server or server admin. I am largely unaware of the origins of these accusations and apologize for mistakenly assigning them to the server admin and server. I’m aware lesbians can be lesbophobic. For the sake of post length and relevance, I omitted this.

note: I'm using they / them because there’s two people involved, and I don't know their respective pronouns. This is not purposeful misgendering. There is a summary on the bottom, but I appreciate anyone who reads this.

This is what happened.

Yesterday, 11/30. someone asked for a server promo for an interest check they sent in. On their server promo post they stated 'no endo systems, no tulpas'.

This blog doesn't promo blogs or servers that prohibit any type of system from joining or interacting with the person's blog or server.

note: this is long and is below the read more. 

I informed the person about this rule. They said nothing in response. [correction: they did respond. I purposefully ended the conversation abruptly to avoid engaging in system discourse as a singlet.]

A second person on behalf of the server, came into this blog's DMs requesting a promo, saying they changed their mind about restricting endogenic systems and tulpas from joining them.

I declined to promo their blog again, having private concerns that they were being dishonest about their intentions. This is because their message came within 30 minutes of my response to the original server admin.

If they really hadn't changed their minds, then I would be sending people into a harmful situation. [My response to the second person was, as quoted here, "No, thank you! Good luck with your server!"]

The person immediately became upset and stated that as a singlet I was gatekeeping their server by refusing to engage with them in any form. I explained this rule was a public guideline on this blog's page, it's not a secret requirement, and that I cannot engage in encouraging system discourse since it's not my community.

I am a singlet. People have in the past been rightfully vocal about not giving a platform on this blog to anyone gatekeeping specific types of systems. I understand and respect that this is an intracommunity discussion, and I will not disseminate such content as it's not my place to.

I responded to their message point by point, expounding on what I meant with the promo rules and so forth. I ended my message trying to disengage with the person in a positive manner and go to bed.

This person responded, claiming I was making jokes about needing to be paid to joke about systemcourse.  I have a copy of our entire conversation and can verify I never said anything like that.

My last reply to that was to state I was disengaging in case it wasn't clear from the prior message, because communication is tricky over the internet.

I felt it was clear from the conversation that I could offer no further help for them. I felt there was nothing left to explain, that they would continue to put words in my mouth, and they only wanted to berate me. I had no further contact with them as I went to bed.

As for the dishonesty and rumors those two have tried to spread about me:

I have not invalidated any type of system in private dms or publicly anywhere. I have never said a type of system was the only correct one, or more legitimate than others. I have never tried to inform anyone about systems as if I knew more than them. [correction: I have and I will apologize for it summarily in another post.]

I have not told anyone to not make servers or promo posts for their servers.

Not promoting a server isn't lesbophobia.

I have never said anything lesbophobic or discussed anything about lgbt identities to anyone regarding system discourse, their system, or anything like that.

I'm a transmisogyny exempt nonbinary lesbian. I have never been purposefully lesbophobic to anyone publicly or privately. I don't even make or reblog ironic homophobia jokes. I might live in the closet for the rest of my life aside from being freely lesbian in online spaces. I'm excruciatingly aware how terrible lesbophobia is and would never wish it on anyone.

The blog rule of not promoting servers who exclude types of systems is for all systems. Endo-, trauma-, quoi-, and so on. Tbh this goes for soulbonds as well because hey, there's an overlap of them and the system community.

My refraining from participating in intracommunity discussions is not ableism. My refusal to reblog promos for anything at all, for any reason is not oppression or ableism. [correction: it’s not a perfect resolution on my part to attempt neutrality. My aim is to prevent excessive harm or distress on a blog meant for the alterhuman community. Me remaining silent on system discourse is taking a side or stance,whether I intend to or not.]

I'm aware this blog has a large audience and I'd rather be careful about what I show to 5,000 people. The purpose of promos is to share that which would help the alterhuman community at large. To promote anything that divides sections of the overlapping communities would go against that. I can’t see how this is unreasonable.

I know this blog posts some sketchy and out there confessions. That is generally the purpose of a confession blog. [Within reason, ofc. No death threats, etc] I feel that vent / heavy themed posts limited to a single blockable blog is not the same as promoting servers where 'Us vs Them' mentalities are grown and encouraged.

If you disagree with me trying to maintain a neutral stance regarding system discourse, ok. I'm not here to change minds or take sides. I don't have the right to a voice in this specific conversation. I only want to make it clear what happened between me and two other people, and why they are saying hurtful things about me.

In summary:

Two different people asked me to promote their discord server that banned endogenic systems and tulpas from joining. As per the Promo Guidelines page, we do not promote those servers. I am a singlet and engaging in system discourse is not acceptable. [correction: one server admin asked me to promote their server. I declined. A second person on behalf of the server tried again to request a server promo.]

One of the server admins had a conversation with me. I explained the rule regarding banning types of Systems. The server admin took it poorly, stating my refusal to join in intracommunity discourse as a singlet was ableism on my part. [Correction: the second person may not have been an server admin, but acting on behalf of the server]

The two server admins are now slandering me on other blog(s?), saying I'm ableist, taking sides on system discourse despite being a singlet, and being lesbophobic. [Correction: it was only the second person, not the server admin.]

I've done none of those things. I have a copy of the conversations to prove it. I don’t want to post it without their consent, unless I really must to prove I wasn’t behaving inappropriately.

I am a transmisogyny exempt nonbinary lesbian who can only be publicly open about my identity online. I am in the closet in real life to my entire family. I know how torturous lesbophobia is and would never be lesbophobic to anyone.

[In fact, the topic of lgbt+ identities never came up in that conversation. I'm confused where that came from.]

If you read any of this, thank you. I really hope I haven’t behaved poorly regarding this. I would like to apologize if I have. I genuinely don’t think I have been unreasonable in this situation.

Connie / Mod Party Cat!

ps, if you know their blog urls, please do not harass them. Also, please don’t harass anyone in their kin community. Don’t be goofy like that, thank you.

pps I’m ok with people linking or reblogging this if someone is confused about what new terrible thing has happened on fictionkinfessions. It’s not required but hey, it’s out there, for eternal record on the internets. Hello world.

pps sorry for putting it in the community tags, but it is relevant insofar as clarifying rumors and dishonesty.

[mayfriend-archive]

Totally understand if you're not up for it and fully recognize the ronald mcdonald dom/sub anon vibes which is an AMAZING post btw but like...now i'm curious, what the hell did Lord of the Flies anon DO that got him blocked for the discourse? like...i just can't wrap my head around high school lit being...uh...that inflammatory i guess?

Okay so, I'll start by saying I've had a new anon from apparently the same anon saying they are NOT the person I blocked, just a rando making the same points, but I'll answer your question anyway just to set out why this person in particular got blocked, out of the several thousand who reblogged/commented on that very successful addition to the LoTF post I made.

First off, I added the 'real life Lord of the Flies' story because I thought it was a good story. I had read about it only a couple days beforehand in Humankind and, after reading out the entire chapter to my parents who weren't very interested, I was excited that there was not only a post where it would be relevant to post, but that I wouldn't be hijacking it, as it was already rejecting the widespread interpretation taught in many schools, that humanity is inherently savage.

When making the addition, I a) did not think it would get more than a couple reblogs, because the post was already at 50k notes and I figured anyone that might be interested would already have seen it, and b) I did not know the very specific context that prompted William Golding to write the book; all I knew was that he had been a teacher at a public school (basically, the poshest schools in the country - think Eton, Harrow, very 'old money' places that pump out Conservative politicians by the bucket-load 🤢) who hated his job and the boys he taught (which, valid), and new information I'd been given in Humankind - that Golding had said to his wife one day, "Wouldn't it be a good idea to write a story about some boys on an island, showing how they would really behave?" - which had no mention of The Coral Island by R. M. Ballantyne, which I have since learned was the text that Golding loathed enough to write an entire novel in refutation of - and included what I considered a very telling letter from Golding to his publisher, in which Golding wrote of his belief that 'even if we start with a clean slate, our nature compels us to make a muck of it.' Another Golding quote that I believe portrays his belief in humanity's 'innate savagery' is that "man produces evil as a bee produces honey."

Obviously, the author of a book putting forward the case for humanity's inherent goodness was going to oppose Golding's hypothesis; Bregman not only noted Golding's literary accomplishments and beliefs, but his personal life.

When I began delving into the author's life, I learned what an unhappy individual he'd been. An alcoholic. Prone to depression. A man who, as a teacher, once divided his pupils into gangs and encouraged them to attack each other. "I have always understood the Nazis," Golding confessed, "because I am of that sort by nature." (Humankind by Rutger Bregman, p. 24-25)

I have bolded the part about him as a teacher, because it is incredibly relevant to the original post that I commented on, which begins with a comic of a teacher locking her class in to see them 'recreate' Lord of the Flies, something which the follow up comments before mine staunchly reject as both misunderstanding the point of the book, and the fact that it took the kids in Lord of the Flies a significant amount of time without adult supervision to go 'savage'. This misreading of the text is widespread enough that when Golding won the Nobel Prize for Lord of the Flies, the Swedish Nobel committee wrote that his book 'illuminate[s] the human condition in the world of today'. Whether or not they misread it is beyond my expertise - they do at least mention the factors of the outside world neglected by many when analysing the book, but still seem to believe it says something about human nature as a whole rather than just, to quote thedarkbutbeige 'British kids being rat bastards' - but Golding quite happily took his Nobel prize on this basis. Which, in fairness, I would too. It's a fucking Nobel prize.

It was with this knowledge, and this knowledge alone, that I stated in my now very, very widely read comment that Golding 'wrote the book to be a dick', in response to the tags of the person I reblogged from. As I said, I now know that Golding did not write the book (solely) because he hated the kids he taught, but as a response to The Coral Island and the general idea that clearly the British were inherently civilsed, whilst the people they colonised and enslaved were inherently savage. So. That's the background.

The anon - or rather, the person I thought was anon - was the sole exception out of dozens of replies, who instead of telling me about The Coral Island politely decided it was time to go ALL CAPS and regurgitate points already made by thespaceshipoftheseus, and implied that the only reason that the real life Tongan castaways didn't go all Lord of the Flies was because they weren't British. Not because they weren't surrounded by violence like the boys in Lord of the Flies, or there wasn't a World War ongoing, or that they weren't the upper, upper, upper crust of a class-obsessed society like Britain - but because they weren't British. A complete inversion of the concept that Golding was trying to get across - now, instead of all of humanity being equally prone to savagery in the right conditions, it was solely nationality that determined it. As in, the British were inherently savage, but nobody else was.

I, trying for humour, made the terrible mistake of replying to them.

I won't lie, I was absolutely blown away that this was real life. What I think they were trying to do was be that Cool Tumblr Person who, after somebody's been shitty on a post, goes to their blog and sees something Damning in their about/description. In an ideal world, I imagine I'd have gone nuts or done something Unforgiveable. In what I can only call the rant that followed, they stated several times that I needed to go back to high school to get some 'proper literary analysis' skills and that the story of the Tongan castaways was completely unrelated to the point at hand which. I mean, I disagree, considering that I made the addition, but I couldn't get my head around how commenting on a post that was already rejecting the thesis that the 'point' of Lord of the Flies was that humanity was inherently savage and was, in fact, about how kids - British or otherwise - learn how to function from the adults around them, and that traumatised, terrified children aren't going to create a mini-Utopia, and put forward a real life example of how without the key additions of an ongoing world war, a colonial Empire and the subsequent mindset of thinking you are 'inherently civilised' and therefore can't do anything wrong, actually, people just want to take care of each other.

A friend has since asked me why I even have 'england' in my description. To be honest, it's a timezone thing - I talk to a lot of people online who don't share my timezone, and it generally makes me feel like if I don't reply immediately because it's 3am, they have the tools to see that I'm not in their timezone and not just ignoring them. I did consider changing it to 'british' or 'uk' after it was... 'used against me', I guess, simply because I didn't want to deal with it, but you know what. No. Not gonna do that. I am from England, and I have never hid that fact. I have a tag called 'uk politics', during Eurovision I refer to the UK's act as 'us' (even if I really, really don't want to. Because James Newman slaughtered that song and it was downright embarrassing), I regularly post stuff in my personal tag about where I live (and mostly complain about this piece of shit government). If people really think my nationality makes every point I make null and void, then they don't have to follow me or interact with my posts; tumblr is big, and I am one medium-small blog very easily passed over.

I did reply to them, trying to explain the above, but their next response really just doubled down. Because I used the word British instead of English - foolishly because the posts above mine focused on Britishness, and also because although Golding was English and taught English kids, the pro-Imperialism author of The Coral Island, R. M. Bannatyne was actually Scottish so, ding ding ding, falls into the 'British' category - they then decided that I was somehow trying to pretend I wasn't English and made all the same points, before ending with this doozy:

At this point, I knew there was nothing to be gained from replying, because if we're whipping out conditions like they're pokemon cards then there's no actual conversation anymore, and I'm not going to start mudslinging like an identity politician. They made up their mind, and I figured there could be no harm in letting them think that they 'won' by blocking them instead of replying.

Until the ask. INNATE ENGLISH SAVAGERY did, I'll admit, make me think it was them, back again. I even thought up a really good response approximately 12 hours after I replied, I was that sure. Until the second message came in, and said they were just someone who came from the post and made the same point by chance. So the saga draws to a close... for now.

It may have been them, it may not have been - the anon feature makes it impossible to be sure, but as the second message I got said, we're in a heatwave. It's too hot to argue. And I've just written a goddamn essay about a book I dislike anyway.

My pasty English ass is going to go melt. If there's Disk Horse, do not tell me. I am Done™

[freedom-in-the-dark]

James Flint Is Gay: A Meta Post

[slides into the Black Sails fandom late with Starbucks]

Hey! What’s up! Here’s a post no one asked for but I wrote mostly for me. Before we get into it, I’ve got some big notices to put on the top here.

DISCLAIMER: If you interpret James as bi, and you prefer that, I am not trying to say you can’t do that or to convince you otherwise! 

You do you! If you’re not cool with seeing him as gay, please do us both a favor and keep scrolling past this post! I’m mildly aware that this fandom has a history of rough discourse surrounding this topic, but I cannot emphasize enough that I am new here, and this post is not an attack. Please do me the courtesy of not attacking me or blocking me or whatnot because I’m not trying to start drama lol. And for what it’s worth, I myself am bi (well, bi ace), so I’d like to think I’m being objective.

This post exists simply because I like to write meta out with my arguments / evidence lined up in a row; it gets things out of my head and onto a screen, and I find it satisfying. And if I’m doing it anyway, I might as well share.

So if you see James as gay, or have an open mind to that interpretation… please allow me to take you on this adventure under the cut. I’m sure it’s obvious, but this contains spoilers? Lol.

Here we go!

Compulsory Heterosexuality vs “Bi Erasure”

Firstly… to address some stuff I’ve seen in my limited Black Sails fandom travels right out of the gate: I’ve seen people imply that interpreting James as gay is “bi erasure,” or they ask “Why are you erasing that James was attracted to Miranda and had an affair with her?”

But to that I say: it’s far more complicated than that.

Gay people can have sexual relationships with people of the opposite sex, especially until / or before they identify as gay. This is how so many gay people can be married to the opposite sex and have biological kids, and then later realize their truth and come out to themselves and their families. Having those experiences or even some variation of actionable attraction to people of other sexes in the past doesn’t negate their ability to later identify as gay, once they stop burying those parts of themselves and/or experience something that “brings that part of them into the light.”

This is why the phrase compulsory heterosexuality exists. The phrase was originally coined by Adrienne Rich in a 1980 essay titled “Compulsory Heterosexuality and the Lesbian Experience.” So yes, let me make this clear: this term originated in reference to lesbians and feminist theory, and then the idea was later expanded upon to include discussions of gay men by other academics in the early 2000s. I’m not gonna dive too deeply into it here, but in essence–as the name implies–this is the idea that patriarchal and heteronormative societies are viewed as the default, so individuals are assumed (by themselves and otherwise) to be heterosexual until “proven” otherwise. Through these standards that are seen as “normal,” people are also taught from a young age–whether explicitly or subconsciously through society–that anything that deviates from those ~straight norms~ leads to negative consequences. And so, society encourages people to avoid sexual exploration, because having experiences with someone of the same sex is what can often bring their gay identity into focus.

In the case of Black Sails, this is all very much emphasized at the forefront because it’s a historical drama. Aside from racism/slavery, patriarchy and heteronormativity are what the characters are actively going to war against.

So, the point in me defining all of this? No one—or at least, not me—is saying that James didn’t have a sexual relationship with Miranda. That’s not in question. But that doesn’t necessarily make him bi, and it doesn’t mean the narrative isn’t structured in various ways that indicate otherwise.

Just keep this in the back of your brain, because I’m going to circle back around to it.

Anne, Flint, & Gay Rage

In the wise words of an old pirate captain: “Fruit, fruit. Tits, tits.” This show thrives on parallels, and gives us lines / scenes that apply to more than one character; it’s partially why the themes are so consistent, and if you ignore that, you can miss a lot of the nuance. Our resident angry gay gingers are one of the paralleled sets of characters.

This is not a meta about Anne… but talking about parts of Anne’s story can help to highlight some things about James’ story.

I tweeted this once: “Flint and Anne’s sexualities paralleled to show struggles with compulsive heterosexuality, fighting for the sake of fighting, bringing parts of themselves into the light, wrestling with being told they’re monsters and their distorted senses of self, etc.” and really, now I’m just here to elaborate.

-----

The word “monster” is a recurring theme in this show. It’s tied mostly to Flint and how he is told he is monstrous for loving a man, fears being “the villain” or “monster” in everyone’s stories, and eventually embraces that monstrous portrayal in service of his goals–even as the violence is slowly devastating to him. But the other character the word “monster” is used in reference to? Anne.

A quote by Max:

“Idelle, how would you feel if the one man you thought would never betray you did? If he purchased for himself a future through that betrayal? If you were told by a world full of men that that betrayal confirmed for them that they were right to see you as a monster to be shunned? She's not mad. She is adrift.”

In some ways, this quote is also the story of what has happened to James in his life, over and over. (Not to say this is what Jack intended to do to Anne, but the parallels inherent in Max’s line itself cannot be denied.) 

James is repeatedly betrayed by those he trusts: Admiral Hennessey; Peter Ashe; Hal Gates. All of them try to get him to conform to heteronormative society–including Gates, because even if he didn’t know it, that’s what he was doing by trying to get James to take a pardon. That’s why James reacts with such instinctual panic and kills him; the idea of being forced to apologize to and assimilate back into heteronormative society puts him at a breaking point. (It can even be argued that Miranda “betrays” James in this way too by trying to get him to take a pardon and go to Boston–which is where his “and they called me a monster” speech comes in–and that also contributed to how James later panics and kills Gates for trying to force him to do the same. Miranda tried in a well-meaning way to get James to move on, because she isn’t fully understanding what James wrestles with; but I’ll go back to that.)

Again, these parallels are deliberate. Anne and Flint are the two main gay characters who wrestle with their supposed “monstrosity” in the eyes of everyone else, because they don’t fit in. They are “othered.” It’s not simply about their violence; for these characters, it’s about what their violence is in service of achieving, which is tied to their sexuality.

Anne is seen as a “monster” for slaughtering the men who abused Max, who is not only a fellow woman but also a fellow lesbian, in a way that Anne is undeniably drawn to even before she lets herself acknowledge the feeling. We as viewers are meant to see this and understand this, and we do. Anne is ostracized for violence that was motivated by her sexuality, which is partially why Max tells her that she understands her violence and will protect her–because Max is not only also a woman in a patriarchal society, but she is gay too.

Flint is seen as a “monster” first and foremost by England, for his sexuality… and then, later, by everyone else for the actions he takes because of his sexuality. Again: the violence he commits cannot be divorced from his sexuality because it is the reason for it. It’s what informs it.

I tweeted about this once too, but in many ways Anne and Flint’s kindred displays of brutality and anger and “fighting for the sake of fighting” (a quote by Miranda which applies to them both) are informed by their desire/need for gay tenderness. The world has too often denied them that tenderness and their expressions of their sexualities, or demonized them for wanting it, and their violence is the result. 

Here’s a quote from Deborah Tolman with regards to how compulsory heterosexuality affects men, which she calls “hegemonic masculinity”:

"These norms demand that men deny most emotions, save for anger; be hard at all times and in all ways; engage in objectification of women and sex itself; and participate in the continuum of violence against women."

The anger and hardness is a huge part of the personas both Flint and Anne have to put on for survival. I include Anne in this because she uniquely lives her life in a “male” role to survive the male-dominated world of piracy, and she’s clearly not immune from these unspoken masculine guidelines: she refers to Max as “the whore” half the time as a defense mechanism. Flint and Anne lash out, they’re hard and angry and violent for the sake of their personas, and it’s all because... inside, they just want to be soft and gay with who they love.

Anne, Flint, & Compulsory Heterosexuality (Not Bi Erasure)

In Black Sails, we are shown the story of a gay person who has a consistent sexual relationship with someone of the opposite sex, but is running from internal truths about themselves in some ways in the process. That person is Anne.

Struggling with compulsory heterosexuality is explicitly Anne Bonny’s prime storyline in the show and that is not up for debate (and I’ve rarely seen people disagree); but I argue that it is also part of James’ storyline, and he is paralleled significantly with Anne to make that clear. It’s just overall more subtle because it’s not the prime focus of James’ story the way it is for Anne, because James’ realizations happened largely in the past and we’re seeing the aftermath of it. The parallels are there, and I’ll be breaking some of them down.

----

From episode one, we are told that Anne has a sexual relationship with Jack…. But later on, she tells Jack that she “can’t be [his] wife,” even though they’ll be partners forever. Why? What changed? The answer is that she’s been with Max and realized that she’s gay. It doesn’t mean Anne didn’t have sex with a man in the past and even enjoy it on some level, but it does mean that she knows now that she was using that sex partially to distract from things about herself that she was doing her best to ignore.

Multiple lines by Max (to Anne) tell us this:

3x03: “When you and I began you did not choose me. Something that lives inside you beyond choice made it so.”

2x01: “But perhaps there is something else underlying it. Something hiding in a place not even you can see. Perhaps… we would do well to bring it into the light.”

Before I continue, let me remind you of something: when writers decide to show viewers something on screen, that is done with intent, especially in a show like Black Sails where not a single moment is wasted. Remember this. What they show us, and what they don’t show us, are both deliberate choices.

So what are we shown about Anne’s sexual relationship with Jack? We get exactly one scene of her having sex with him. We are shown Anne riding Jack in a way where neither party was particularly enthused. Does this mean they definitely never had sex in the past that they both enjoyed on some level? No. But they showed us this one scene on purpose: to emphasize the stark difference when Anne has enjoyable sex with Max, an experience that forever changes her.

So what are we shown about James’ sexual relationship with Miranda? We get exactly one scene of him having sex with her. It is the most depressing sex scene of all time, James is just lying there to try to be helpful for her to chase her own pleasure, and he doesn’t even touch her. Does this mean they never had sex in the past that they both enjoyed, especially back during their affair in London? No. But we are never shown any of that. We never see them have sex in London before James’ relationship with Thomas; we never see them having good sex with each other after it all goes to hell. And that is a deliberate choice.

Why? Because all of the above info about Anne and her compulsory heterosexuality journey also applies to James McGraw, and his relationships with Miranda and Thomas.

“They paint the world full of shadows... and then tell their children to stay close to the light. Their light. Their reasons, their judgments. Because in the darkness, there be dragons. But it isn't true. We can prove that it isn't true. In the dark, there is discovery, there is possibility, there is freedom in the dark once someone has illuminated it.”

The realizations James came to about his sexuality (just like Anne did) inform much of his tangled story with the Hamiltons, and much of the tragedy of Miranda and James’ situation after the loss of Thomas. We are shown the way James and Miranda are no longer perfectly aligned after that loss, and grief is undeniably a part of it… but it goes beyond that. It’s more complicated than that. 

That sad sex scene is not solely about grief; remember, that scene takes place ten years after they lose Thomas. It takes place during a time where Miranda is already thinking about and will soon actively try to tell James that they need to move on, without understanding why the loss of Thomas affects him in a profoundly different way than it affects her. I am not minimizing her loss or her grief whatsoever; but it is undeniably more complicated for James, and it’s why he can’t move on.

In episode 1x07:

James: “Have you no memory of how we got here? What they took from us?”

Miranda: “What does it matter now? What does it matter? What does it matter what happened then if we have no life now?”

James is, of course, appalled by this. I’ll talk about why momentarily.

The next time James is in Nassau (2x03), he goes to see Miranda and tries to apologize that night, but she’s otherwise engaged. So he stands outside of her window looking in, surrounded by darkness, while she’s playing the clavichord with children in the light. It is symbolically the domestic version of a heterosexual ideal. He is “othered” by the camera angles / framing, and the dark / light aspects. James is relegated to being an outsider literally because as Flint he’s a pirate, but metaphorically because he’s gay; the reason we as viewers are given that scene is to underscore that he feels he has no place in that display.

Ultimately, James is misaligned with Miranda after the loss of Thomas (shown in both the sad sex scene and arguments) in a way that goes beyond grief. The implication is that things cannot ever be the same for him again since the loss of “his truest love” and the truths he learned about himself.

If James and Miranda were simply at odds with one another because of grief, it would be far less of a “tragedy” in some ways. But James cannot heal the way Miranda slowly finds the way to over ten years, because Thomas signifies things for James that Miranda cannot relate to. In London, when Thomas is taken from them, Miranda even yells to James, “He is my husband!” Her grief and rage are shown as equal to James at the start and have extreme validity; the two of them are partners in the plan to kill Alfred Hamilton for revenge; but then she is able to somewhat move on, whereas James is not.

Why? Because, for James, Thomas was not just his (truest) love; Thomas was the awakening of his fullest self as a gay man.

In the same way that Anne can’t be Jack’s “wife” after she’s been with Max and realizes she’s gay, James cannot content himself with fulfilling the role of Miranda’s “husband” after he’s been with Thomas and realizes he’s gay. Neither of these facts minimize Anne’s love and devotion to Jack, or James’ love and devotion to Miranda; they are undeniably two sets of partners. But Anne and James are forever altered by their experiences with same sex lovers, and the truths about themselves that were brought into the light as a result.

----

Another part of the tragedy of James and Miranda is what happens right when we see Miranda grasp the significance of all of the above. Whether or not she grasped it before in the past, we are shown it only once on screen, and that’s in Charlestown. 

Peter Ashe says this in 2x09:

“You will tell them about the affair with Thomas. You will tell them how it ended. You will explain to them what it drove you to do. You will reveal everything. And when you do, Captain Flint will be unmasked, the monster slain. And in his place will stand before all the world a flawed man, a man that England can relate to and offer its forgiveness.”

This is James’ worst nightmare; we know as such from what he told Miranda back in 1x07, and from when he killed Gates. And yet, here and now in 2x09, he is exhausted from pushing back against heteronormative society, all he wants is to retire the mantle of Flint born of gay rage, and he actually contemplates playing by their rules and giving into their judgements of his sexuality... until Miranda comes to his defense.

In season 1, Miranda didn’t seem to fully understand James’ thoughts on this, but here–in combination with her realizations about Peter Ashe’s betrayals–she finally does. And she’s not having it.

“What forgiveness are you entitled to while you stand back in the shadows pushing James out in front of the world to be laid bear for the sake of the truth? Tell me, sir, when does the truth about your sins come to light?”

And the moment she is yelling in rage on behalf of James, and their combined loss, and how Peter would dare to force James to experience shame about his sexuality again–she is instantly shot for it. A woman who’s yelling on behalf of a gay man? In a patriarchal heteronormative society? It has no place. England makes that clear.

It all further underlines James’ sense of “otherness”... and now he decides to embrace it, even at his own emotional detriment. He will no longer try to fit in or reason with them; he will no longer accept their halfway measures of pardons. He can’t, because in the eyes of England, all that he is as a gay man is abhorrent.

2x10: “Everyone is a monster to someone. Since you are so convinced that I am yours, I will be it.”

3x05, to the Maroon Queen: “...England takes whatever, whenever, however it wants. Lives. Loves. Labor. Spirits. Homes. It has taken them from me. I imagine that it has taken it from you.”

The Way James Views Miranda

And here is where I simply give you more food for thought–or further “evidence” of James being gay, if you will.

All of Flint’s lines about how he views Miranda are worded very, very deliberately.

Here’s a minor one, from 1x05:

“So you can probably guess it isn't as much fun to tell stories about how your captain makes a home with a nice Puritan woman who shares his love of books.”

There is nothing overtly romantic or sexual about this. It’s said in a one-on-one conversation with Billy, where Flint neither has to make the relationship sound like something it isn’t nor refuse to give any info whatsoever. So he goes with what is the seemingly-mild truth.

But 3x01, convincing the men to forego pardons:

“But what price surrender? To beg forgiveness from a thing that took my woman from me? My friend?”

“My woman” is what Flint says for the benefit of the men… these men who are part of the heteronormative world they all live in, and still value sexual relationships with women above all else. It’s about hegemonic masculinity, remember? (“Objectification of women and sex itself.”) He’s doing his best to speak their language. 

But “my friend” is a secondary line that was not needed for the purposes of this speech, but James could not keep himself from adding it in a quieter tone–because that’s who Miranda was to him. His friend. Not his woman, which drips sexism and sexual undertones. Not his wife. Not even his “love,” which he could’ve used if he wanted to be ambiguous and sneak a Thomas reference in; he said “my woman” to appeal to the men, and then he added “my friend” because in the face of her memory he couldn’t help it.

And lastly, in 3x03, we begin to hear from “ghost Miranda.” 

But what is ghost Miranda? She’s a voice from James’ traumatized mind. Everything she says to him is about truths he already knows and/or things he is hiding from himself. So what “she” says here is a voice from James’ mind; it’s about how James sees her, and subtly elaborates on his sexuality in the process.

“When I first met you, you were so... Unformed. And then I spoke and bade you cast aside your shame, and Captain Flint was born into the world... the part of you that always existed yet never were you willing to allow into the light of day. I was mistress to you when you needed love. I was wife to you when you needed understanding. But first and before all... I was mother. I have known you like no other. So I love you like no other. I will guide you through it, but at its end is where you must leave me. At its end is where you will find the peace that eludes you, and at its end lies the answer you refuse to see.”

This does not diminish Miranda’s importance to James in the least! In fact, it emphasizes it, and it is all part of why he is so ruined over her! But it is also, in the oddest way, an elaboration upon how he isn’t bi: Miranda was his partner in many things, including shared grief and revenge and some semblance of life for ten long years; and she was also was instrumental to his formation of himself as a person (“mother”), and his acceptance of himself as a gay man (“love” and “understanding”). This is how he sees her. Mistress and wife were roles she filled in his life, but above all, she contributed to the birth of Captain Flint–the personification of James’ gay rage.

Of course, the “answer” that ghost Miranda (the depths of James’ brain) alludes to here as well as her later words of “you are not alone” are all about James needing to recognize that Silver is a newfound partner and love for him… but that’s a whole other meta entirely.

Closing Thoughts

Look, did I consult a couple of specific scenes and look up transcripts to put quotes in this? Yes. But have I still only seen the show in its entirety once? Also yes. My point in mentioning this is that, if I did a full rewatch, there might even be more evidence I haven’t mentioned here. This isn’t meant to be comprehensive, but I do feel that it... certainly conveys the gist of the mood.

You may still agree to disagree if you prefer to see James Flint as bi; I’m not here to fight you on it and what queer characters mean to you personally. 

But for me, when surveying all available evidence, the narrative screams that he’s gay. In that sense, my thoughts on this matter are similar to my thoughts on the ending; sure, you can interpret it one way if you look at certain details, but if you take in all the evidence and the big picture as a whole… there’s a specific conclusion to be drawn.

Last thing I’ll say is this: Steinberg himself has said that Flint is gay, which I found out way after watching the show and forming this interpretation. And like... not that if I wanted to hardcore argue he was bi I wouldn’t disregard Steinberg’s words, because in my experience the narrative speaking for itself is always more important than than creators’ words, but... in this instance (as in all Black Sails instances I’ve come across), his words just underscore what the well-crafted narrative is already telling us, because the creators wrote this show with intent. They knew what they were doing.

And thus, I will quote him (from these GIFs) below.

“When we were trying to build the story, we wanted whatever this thing was that made [Flint] feel alienated to be so deeply tied into who he was that there was no way he was every going to dismiss this thing that happened to him. We wanted to make sure we understood what the reality was in England in terms of how homosexuality was perceived. In some ways it was more tolerated, in some ways it was significantly less tolerated. I think in terms of Flint being gay, it’s about the fact that it is a tool that is used politically when convenient to make somebody be a monster… and it isn’t even really about the relationship.”

(If you buy the series on iTunes, you get an “inside” look at every episode, including this one from 2x05.)

EDIT: I had no idea Toby Stephens basically confirmed my thoughts that James' relationship with Thomas was his actualization as a gay man, so excuse me as I lose my mind for a moment:

“I think his relationship to Thomas Hamilton, the initial friendship and then becoming lovers is sort of like the realization of himself. I think he became himself with Thomas Hamilton. His potential was unleashed with Hamilton.”

And just for fun, since I’m here anyway, here’s a piece of a Steinberg quote about Anne from the Fathoms Deep podcast.

“In terms of Rackham and Bonny, I think that was another thing that I assumed for a long time could never go away. That they were essentially, you know, that they were married. You know not legally, but they were functionally married. And then this story happened in Season 2 with Bonny, that I think with like with a gun to my head of things that I’m proud of with the show, probably at the top is this story of this woman coming out and understanding that she’s gay. . . And so when we got to a point where it was like, I think she’s gay? Like I don’t think this is something we want to be wishy-washy about. It required getting over that hump with Rackham of, ‘Well like what am I going to do with this relationship? I don’t want to split them up?’ And I think it became something way more interesting.”

Thanks for coming to my TED talk. I love James Flint and his gay rage, I love you if you read all of this, and I love my friend @sunbardy who dealt with me yelling about this in DMs and then proofread the doc.

Hit me up on Twitter @gaypiracy if you want, where I do most of my Black Sails related yelling. And shitposting. Because I contain multitudes.

Know No Shame, my friends.

[illfoandillfie]

ok sorry but how many people do yall think rog has ever slept with cos i’m guessing four figures no lie

okay, i don’t normally respond to messages like this because, frankly, i dont really feel like its my place to speculate on roger’s sex life. Theres a difference between writing a fiction story with a character named after and inspired by him and discussing his actual personal life which i have no real knowledge about. What he gets up to in his free time is between him and the women he does it with. but i didn’t really feel able to ignore this one. please don’t take this as me telling you off or shutting you down or anything like that. If you want to speculate about roger’s body count thats up to you, go nuts with it. and i love when you guys message me and I don’t want to discourage you from feeling like you can talk to me or just send me your random thoughts or whatever about any subject. But I feel like I need to address why I disagree with this sentiment. Also so I can ask ya’ll to please stop asking me questions like this. 

So firstly, just to get this out of the way. 1000 is a lot. even 100 is a lot. I think if rog had slept with 1000+ people he’d have a least a few illegitimate kids and probably would have been checked into rehab for sex addiction (not to mention STIs and such because lbr people in the 70s specifically probs werent the most careful especially if drugs were involved). I mean even if we were going to say Rog got lucky with a different woman after every show we wouldn’t reach 1000. According to google, Queen played around 700 shows in their entire career. If we add shows played by The Cross thats only another 67 odd shows (according to wikipedia). 

now, i think there are 3 things that contribute to this idea of roger as especially promiscuous. 1. His attitude/demeanour/general way he sells himself. 2. the generally held conceptions about rock stars and rock star behaviour. and 3. what i’m going to call fandom dumbassery (but i mean that with a lot of love) 

So lets start with the man himself. Roger Taylor is loud and opinionated and not particularly humble. He knows he’s talented and attractive though for at least some time he was a little self-conscious about how feminine he looked. He’s always up for a laugh, likes to party and has admitted to enjoying his drink and his women. He’s had kids with two different women, who’s relationships “overlapped”, and is currently married to a third. At least that’s the perception we can gleam from his interviews, behind the scenes videos, and other public appearances. 

It’s easy to see how that image leads to accusations of being a womaniser and a cheater and basically a bit of a slut lmao. But here’s the thing. I think Roger, in part, markets himself that way. The thing is, if you look at his solo songs and the relationships he currently has with his kids and their mothers, and things other people have said about him/his relationships over the years, I think it’s fair to say he also has a bit of a romantic streak maybe? idk if thats the best way of describing it...he’s self confessed to not being a fan of marriage and the like but he’s not opposed to writing and singing love songs and seems to believe in ~love~ as a concept/power. He certainly cares deeply for those closest to him. Whether or not that translates to an agreement with monogamy I can’t say for certain. It’s hard to draw conclusions here because a lot of what we know of his personal life was fed to us through magazines and news paper gossip column articles and they were never looking for the truth, they were looking for scandal and sensationalism. 

For instance the whole thing with the overlapping relationships. I think most people who have read anything about roger and dom and debbie realise that it’s not as cut and dry as “he was cheating with debbie and left dom for her” even though that was the story being sold by the press at the time. The reality (or at least the version closer to reality since obviously no one outside of them and whoever they were closest with knows all the nitty gritty details) is that rog and dom had already split when they got married. it was a marriage of convenience to make sure her and the kids would be looked after financially etc even after he’d moved out. So while it looked to the public like he married one chick and 30 odd days later was spotted with another, there really wasn’t anything untoward happening.  I’m not saying he never had casual hookups or one night stands and i’m not saying he never cheated, but I do think some of it’s been exaggerated, whether by him to encourage the rock star perception or by newspaper/magazine articles.

Now, obviously, we have stories of rog, particularly in the late 60s and into the 70s, being with multiple women. There’s that bit in the Interview with a Queen “Groupie” (which is a fantastic read and i defs recommend checking it out if you havent already) where she talks about roger being a chick magnet and says that, at the time, it was pretty common to sleep about. But, she also says she didnt notice him doing it more or less than anyone else and seemed to mostly be with Jo (his girlfriend at the time). This is the same Jo that got a mention in the Queen in 3D book (”i think we all had the feeling that these two were together for life, but it was not to be”). Conversely, we have that quote (which i cannot find rn but i’ll link it when i do) about roger sometimes having one girl upstairs while another waited in the garage for them to be finished. I think it was about Rog in the mid-late 60s in Truro but whatever. Obviously he wasn’t anywhere near celibate and it’s likely was sleeping with people outside of his relationship(s). But one has to assume that as he got older those kinds of antics stopped happening, at least as frequently.

There is one potential story that I remember reading somewhere along the way about Roger cheating on Debbie while she was pregnant. But, take that with a grain of salt because I can’t find the article again and also I think it was from like The Sun or something equally as rubbish. The press was notoriously always printing mean shit about the boys and that might have been another thing they published to create scandal. Even so, if we assume it’s legit that is still only 1 story. Not to throw him under the bus but Brian is the one with multiple confirmed affairs, who literally wrote songs about it all. So why is Roger the one with sleazy reputation? 

This is where my second and third points come in. There is a pervasive idea about what it means to be a rock star. The whole trashing hotel rooms, sleeping with groupies, passing out drunk every night thing. And I’m sure that Queen was like that to an extent. I think it’s pretty common knowledge that all of them got up to shit on the road. Between innuendo laden interviews and songs, videos and accounts of their parties, stories CT has put online, and other stories like the one of Roger bringing out lines of coke as dessert when he was having dinner with motley crue. They definitely embraced the rock and roll lifestyle. And I think with Roger’s personality being what it is, it’s easy to link him to those traditional rock star tropes and say it was all true all the time. I also think Roger has done nothing to counter those beliefs. He’s been open about how he wanted to be a rock star since the minute he picked up a guitar, he’s labelled himself as a great lay in magazines, he’s joked about girls pulling their tits out over dinner in interviews (though he said he didnt take her home), he’s written songs like One Night Stand and Dirty Mind and Airheads which explicitly mention his preference for women and alcohol. I think it’s fair to say he’s kind of encouraged that view of himself. Whether it was just a side effect of being part of such a well known band and having such a boisterous demeanour/personality, or whether it was intentional as a version of promotion i don’t know. maybe a mix of them? I mean I’m sure it didn’t hurt sales and stuff. it’s the whole guys want to be him, girls want to be with him thing, right? Maybe that’s just me being cynical though lmao. 

Anyway, the fandom brain has taken all of that and compressed it into memes and jokes about rog being the band slut. Which i’m not complaining about, lord knows i’ve made the same jokes and reblogged the same posts and used those tropes in my fics. They’re funny and lend themselves to interesting fic concepts. Plus, i think roger is the sort of person who would probably laugh about most of it. But it’s an idea that keeps feeding into itself through fandom, perpetuating what is probably a misguided view of his personal life.

Again, I am sure he’s had his fair share of fun and I’m not trying to make out that he was always perfect or whatever, but I don’t think he’s been with as many women as the popular discourse would imply and I certainly don’t think he’s in the 4 digit numbers. 

[tog-resources-archive]

Hello fellow fan who has been here since the beginning! I come from the “other side” I suppose, in that I do think the top/bottom discourse is worth talking about. It has to do with the elephant in the room which I haven’t seen anyone touch on – self-identified top!joe fans (in contrast to simply fans who enjoy or prefer content where joe tops). I remember the original top/bottom discourse coming out of a more general conversation about trends in fic (1)

Thank you fan!anon for sending me such a long, detailed message! Never apologize for writing me an essay since I always seem to be writing essays for other people in return lol. Also sorry it took a while to get to! This required a bit of preparation. You’ve given me a lot to respond to. I’m going to be putting the entirety of the ask under the cut and the tl;dr because this one is very, verrrryyyy long. 

Tl;dr- fan!anon talks about the history of top/bottom discourse in TOG and the issues of racism in our fandom. My response: my own feelings on the history of the top/bottom discourse in TOG and the current state of it. General issues I’ve observed in this fandom and the current discourse. Also, we shouldn’t ignore fandom racism, but I don’t think we should be looking at it through the lens of top/bottom, AND I think we should be focusing on misogyny, homophobia, etc. in addition to racism. Not ignore one for the other. 

Bottom line though, don’t harrass people, block people if you need to, focus on what you love, support fan creation and let’s try to be a better fandom. 

Okay, time to dig in!

Hello fellow fan who has been here since the beginning! I come from the “other side” I suppose, in that I do think the top/bottom discourse is worth talking about. It has to do with the elephant in the room which I haven’t seen anyone touch on – self-identified top!joe fans (in contrast to simply fans who enjoy or prefer content where joe tops). I remember the original top/bottom discourse coming out of a more general conversation about trends in fic (1) wherein Joe was more violent, less empathetic, often not religious, more aggressive in sexual scenarios, and also most often topping. People asked the fandom in general to simply consider, if that is how they perceive Joe, to reflect for themselves about implicit biases that could be colouring that interpretation. The self-identified top!joes used that conversation as a starting point to argue that the above interpretation of Joe, (2) and writing/drawing Nicky as smaller, almost twink-like, demure, more feminine (or writing fic where he was de-aged) was justified by canon (if you recall the multi-day argument about the approximately 1 inch height difference between Marwan and Luca) and connecting those ideas to top!joe just “making more sense” to them. In the hands of a good writer (of which we are blessed to have many in this fandom!), which character tops in an explicit fic is of no consequence to me. (3) But the concept of top!joe has, in my mind, become so closely tied with those fans who, a) interpret these characters and actions in a way that seems influenced by racial stereotypes and tropes and b) use that characterization as “justification” for top!joe. All this when I thought we all agreed that position preference has nothing to do with personality? (4) If someone sees Joe as a very masculine, aggressive, dom-type character (which is a bit of a one-note characterization to start, but I digress), that shouldn’t be related to him being a “top”, correct? Yet that is the interpretation and connection that the top!joes themselves make. So that’s why to me, the top/bottom framework continues to have some value, eve though in an ideal world it wouldn’t: (5) because some fans connect what should be a neutral sexual position preference to an interpretation of Joe’s character, an interpretation which I think doesn’t do him justice. I understand if you don’t want to publish this but I’m hesitant to talk off anon due to how heated this whole conversation is. I also don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings or make them feel bad about how they are participating in the fandom, but I do think self-reflection in terms of how we engage is valuable. (6) And just to fully reiterate in case it wasn’t clear, my above points are specifically referring to who I think of as “top!joe only” fans as opposed to fans who enjoy or prefer content in which joe tops – only the former of which I am wary of. Anyways, sorry for this long message, and I hope I've been able to explain my reasoning. If we continue to disagree, thanks for reading this anyways and continuing the dialogue. Thank you also for promoting femslash events and content! (7)

So....I did say in a previous post that I’m not a big fan of hearsay, and I’m sorry but… that’s kind of what you’ve given me. A lot of “this is what Top!Joe Only people have said” and “this is what the rest of the fandom has said back.” I have to ask, who are these “Top!Joe Only” people that are on the other side of this fandom war? Who are the people representing the “rest of the fandom”?  The only names I could really come up with myself are the Top!Joe Server mods as top!Joe only fans, and they haven’t exactly been active recently. Not to mention the Top!Joe server mod @karanoidandroid was the focus of the Art Theft and Bullying debacle a while back (here) which even if you disagree with her… that’s not the way you treat people. Full stop. 

But anyway, to break this down, you’ve said that top!joe only fans wanted to interpret Joe in a way that was “more violent, less empathetic, less religious, more sexually aggressive, and topping (most of the time)” and that Nicky is “smaller, more twink-like, more demure and feminine” and that the hardcore top!joe stans are using this interpretation as a reasoning for liking top!joe explicit fics (and for underage fic?)

Er, honestly, I’ll have to disregard the “less religious” comment in this one. Lucyclairedelune has talked about it very eloquently here. As for the rest, let’s say these opinions were expressed on tumblr in July, just when the fandom was getting started. However, after personally going through all the Explicit July fics, I gotta say, the overwhelming majority of writers are focused on romantic Malta sex vacations lol. 

From my personal observations (I started reading fic on ao3 in August), I’ve seen some stories that cater to very… specific tastes (mostly kinkmeme fics so I’m not going to touch that) and some that have…. been written in poor taste perhaps. But, honestly, the majority of fics (aka G, T, M rated) that I’ve seen? I would say that they were written with care and concern for the character’s portrayal. 

Now, some fans (usually older fans) are very focused on “your kink is not my kink” and other fans feel this is an inappropriate way to view “racist, homophobic, islamophobic, etc” fics. And I agree with that. If people are using kink to excuse racism, homophobia, islamophobia, transphobia, antisemitism, misogyny, etc, in fics: Fuck that. But I think there’s a lot of misunderstanding flying around when people react to ‘ykinmk”. This fandom likes to assume the worst of their fellow fans imo, and I honestly don’t think that when a person defends kink that they’re trying to defend racism. They’re trying to defend their kink community which, historically, has been attacked and misunderstood by the purity police. Look into the Livejournal, ffnet, and even the Tumblr purges if you don’t believe me. 

For the record, I don’t know anyone on tumblr personally. We’re all effectively strangers talking to each other on the internet, so I’m not going to make assumptions about people from stories they’ve posted on AO3 or the kinkmeme. If you want to talk about the issues those fics represent, that’s cool, but don’t harass people whose life stories you don’t know (and don’t vagueblog about them). (This is just a general statement, not saying this about you anon! I feel really strongly about this.)

Now you say, “some fans connect what should be a neutral sexual position preference to an interpretation of Joe’s character” and I hate to say it, but there are ALWAYS going to be some people who have awful opinions. Ones that are either truly terrible, or kind of in poor taste, or maybe you just don’t vibe with them. Personally, I don’t have enough time in the day to address every weird thing that a person spews on the internet. I won’t judge if you want to take them on, but, personally, I haven’t seen any recent militant top!joe only posts that are calling for racist portrayals. I see people referring to past conversations, for sure, but again, I can’t do anything with hearsay. 

And honestly, we keep bringing up the top/bottom discourse of early TOG fandom, and we’re just not the same fandom we were then. SO MANY people have left the fandom in that time-- a lot of big name (or simply well known) fans and a lot of MENA fans. Regardless of what “side” you’re on in this, we all lose by focusing on the positions, by dividing everyone by “top” or “bottom” or “switch” fans, and by bringing up what people said in July, or August, or September.  It’s exhausting, especially because I think a lot of people have done exactly what you said. Many authors HAVE self-reflected, they’ve thought about trends, the implications, and are contributing/interacting with the fandom as best as they can. Do I think we should stop focusing on self-reflection? That we should stop being careful about writing potentially damaging portrayals of our favorite characters? NO. Let’s keep at it! Let’s encourage others to do the same… but not with top/bottom discourse.

Let it be known that I don’t think racism is a topic we should disregard to focus on other things. Honestly, I would be happy if people gave some of the energy they have for “top/bottom” discourse to talk about the portrayal of Nile Freeman or Lykon or Copley or Quynh… the other POC representation in TOG that usually gets ignored. You may interpret this as me going “but what about??” and that’s fair. I just think that we talk about Joe ALL THE TIME in this fandom. There is an avalanche of conversation and content for this man (who I love, don’t get me wrong) and it just feels really disingenuous (to me) to talk ad nauseum about racist portrayals of Joe, but then to ignore Nile Freeman and wlw fics when Nile is the rare Black Female Action Protagonist and Andy/Quynh is an extremely rare interracial canon lesbian couple. And I’ve been trying to use my blog here to bring attention to this, think of me what you will because of that. (Again just a general statement anon! Not directed to you XD)

And from what I’ve seen in this fandom (and many others to be fair) is that we care about racism SO MUCH…but only when talking about how a man has sex.  It speaks of a lack of intersectional understanding of these topics, disregarding the misogyny that IS ALSO inherent in fandom, and disregarding the homophobia of overfocusing on the top/bottom dynamics. BUT I’m not asking you to ignore racism; all I’m asking is for you to focus on the other issues too. 

Bottom line though… the discourse is not what it once was.  A lot of people, on whatever side, have left the fandom, or have taken a break, or are vocally tired of “top/bottom” discourse. Personally, I think we should talk about racism… but not through the lens of explicit mlm fic sex positions. Let’s talk more about race, gender, sex and sexual orientation, but not in a way that divides the fandom, in a way that makes people sick of being here, in a way that kills our content creator’s passion. Honestly, I think it can be done! But only if we work toward that goal together. 

I would like to focus on encouraging events in our community, such as the ongoing Old Guard Big Bang 2021 event and the upcoming Femslash Fortnight Spring Solstice Edition event. If anyone is organizing other events, let me know and I’ll hype you up! But as for the rest, I’m tired, you’re tired, we’re all tired. Let’s try and work harder to be a kinder, more inclusive fandom in the future, for everyone’s sake.