#I just don't think there's as blatant a double standard as perceived

[rebelfire]

I'm probably not seeing the same Carol hate discourse as you, so obviously I'm not defending anyone nor do I want to suggest it's all deserved. (Like I said, Anthony did her dirty.) But I don't think the Carol/Glenn comparison is fair to judge whether fans are picking on a character for being a woman. 😕

Carol is a successful business person with a stay at home spouse.

Glenn is a single parent who just lost his job.

We see Carol for a short few minutes here and there, and her biggest moment is her first appearance when she's angry at Darryl.

Glenn, by nature of being a player character, is in every episode so we get a sense of his true flaws and get to see the positive side of him. We also never really see him blow-up to the extent that Carol did.

We also see Glenn *punished* through the course of the show. (I think most of us would even argue that his punishment was excessive for his 'crime'.)

We don't really see Carol have to deal with the bad karma she's due and, honestly, I know if I overheard a friend have a phone call like Darryl, I'd be right there calling their spouse a jerk if they'd let me. (I'd also be asking how often that happens and if that's the worst of it because the fact that she did that in front of her friend is alarming.)

I support women being allowed to be wrong and fucking up just like men are permitted to do, but I also support people getting called out on toxic behavior. ❤️

Maybe I'm misremembering but I don't think Carol Wilson was ever mean? Like, sure she got angry at Darryl when he called her and said he lost Grant, but that is imo a pretty reasonable reaction! And it isn't mean for her to want a divorce that's just how it goes sometimes. I think yall maybe just don't like women

[oddmawd]

Hello! I just wanted some clarification as to why earning some income off of fanfiction is this horrible unethical act.

Do fanarts and zines also apply under this copyright infringement and if so, why are those works allowed to make some profits but not fanfiction? To me it seems like a double standard, especially because I seriously doubt anyone making either fanart or fanfic are claiming that the characters and story are their own original works. Blatant plagiarism and profiting from it is one thing but receiving some income because someone really likes a fan work is another.

I understand that in extreme cases, authors can sue, like you mentioned Anne Rice but in most cases, the authors tend to be chill with fanworks? They know it encourages engagement and hell, some of those big scary publishing companies that you seem to be wary of actually scout fan artists and writers to bring on board for their next projects.

And it's not brought up often in these arguments but Anne Rice herself became lenient towards fanfics of her original work in the last couple years before her death, even apologizing for her behavior then.

So while I understand the concern for lawsuits, I just don't see how writers and artists are "late stage capitalist dicks" for earning an income off fanworks that are clearly stated and implied to be the original works of the author and not their own.

typically i'm a "never assume malice where ignorance can serve as an explanation" kinda person, but YEESH, it's hard not to perceive hostility in this one boys, here's why:

1) i never called writers and artists "late stage capitalist dicks," and putting that phrase in quotes to make it seem like i did tells me you're not here for productive communication...that intentional misquote showcases either a blatant attempt at weaponizing intellectual dishonesty OR a lack of reading comprehension on your part, one i doubt i can correct through anonymous tumblr asks

2) "why are fanzines allowed but fanfics are not?" presupposes what you think my position on the matter must be, but i haven't expressed my opinion on fanzines, let alone voiced a double standard in favor of them...this is (once again) a blatant attempt at putting words in my mouth and/or a complete misread, intentional or otherwise, of what i actually stated...and in fact i said in a comment that fanart ALSO exists in a legal gray area, so you didn't do your research very thoroughly if those are the words you're trying to put in my mouth (solid attempt tho, 6/10)

3) i ALSO didn't call anything unethical, as you claimed in your comically hyperbolic opening line...i called selling fanwork illegal. morality and legality are not the same thing, so whether your mistake regarding the differences between legality and morality is the product of ignorance or malice, the fact remains that it's yet another blatant misread of what i said, good job there buddy, you're batting a thousand

i could dig further into the bad-faith rhetoric oozing from that ask (the sheer hyperbole and melodrama of it + the litany of loaded questions are an immediate sign it wasn't sent in good faith), but i think i've made my point LMAOOOOOO...but to sum up, i have very little interest in engaging with you when you're talking in SUCH bad faith and with such an antagonistic tone...you're misrepresenting SO MUCH so blatantly and with such confidence, it gives me zero confidence in your desire to actually learn or explore these very interesting issues...you just wanna argue and twist my words, and i'm not gonna enable that bad behavior by giving you more to twist

but look bruh, i get it: you're feeling insecure and defensive over a comment about being careful about monetizing your fanwork, and you took a post about the concept of capitalism and its impact on the arts so personally you confused comments made about capitalism itself for comments about you as a person...but this hostility is NOT a commensurate reaction to what i said and i'm shocked you think otherwise, and if you want to have this conversation, we can...but only once you learn to argue respectfully

TL;DR: i doubt your ability to engage in good faith so i'm not going to respond earnestly, as it'll be a waste of my time...reread my posts after you've had time to release this defensive energy...engage with what i said, not with what you THINK i said...have a nice night and best of luck to you

[slightlyrebelliouswriter23]

Hey! I wanted to know why Taryn's character gets a lot of hate even tho she was trying to survive in faerie just as Jude did. Except her way of survival was more traditionally feminine and demure.

this has honestly been my point since like... forever lmao. if you've been on my blog for any length of time, you'll know i'm a pretty big Taryn apologist. i speak more about it in this post. but essentially, it's exactly what you said. and i have more to say.

[DISCLAIMER: this post is tagged as pro-Taryn Duarte. any comments or asks i receive expressing the reason why You Hate Taryn are entirely unsolicited and will be deleted on sight. if you don't like my opinion you can block the pro-Taryn Duarte tag, and scroll away.]

I. Me, harping on about Madoc deserving more of the fandom's scorn, part 300

it will always boggle my mind how this fandom allows Madoc every grace of "the complex character/relationship" but we don't afford Taryn even remotely the same attempt at understanding. even when Madoc committed infinitely more betrayals, infinitely more attrocities, than Taryn ever committed–or indeed has had time to commit given her extremely young age (compared to Madoc's centuries of life).

that's not to say i don't love Madoc. i think he's a great villain and his character, particularly his relationship with his children, is very complex. but why can't this be the same way we treat Taryn?

regardless of this blatant double-standard, people still hate her, and i think it has a lot to do with (as you said) the way Taryn handles her traumatic life events.

II. Trauma Responses and How They Are Received

[FOR LEGAL REASONS, THIS POST IS DISCUSSING HOW THE TRAUMA RESPONSES ARE PERCEIVED STRICTLY IN TERMS OF CHARACTERS, NOT IRL PEOPLE/SITUATIONS!]

i've discussed this on here before, but the Duarte sisters exhibit three out of the four recognised trauma responses in the way they cope with their parents' death/being taken to Faerie:

Jude- fight

Vivi- flight

Taryn- fawn

i think we can all agree that, in terms of what an audience wants to see from characters, Jude's fight response is the most palatable of the three. not only because she is the main character (and thus, everything is from her perspective/justified in her eyes), but also because it is what i believe most of us would want to be able to do ourselves in the face of adversity and hardship.

it's the most commendable. it is probably also the hardest to maintain (as is made apparent by the series as a whole). which is why the other two sisters employ alternative modes of survival.

as discussed in this post, Vivi survives by escaping. whenever and however she can. i'm not sure how everyone feels about this one. until recently, i had no idea people even had strong opinions about Vivi.

but i do know that the flight response could be considered a bit cowardly, even if it's effective. if there's anything to be respected about it, though, it's that the person knows in no uncertain terms that they are not cut out for facing the trauma head-on. and they are the first one to admit it.

the fawn response, however, is a kind of camouflage. it's doing everything in your power to be perceived a certain way, to fit in, to please people.

the thing i think people dislike about the fawn response, is that (if you twist the perspective enough) it could be viewed as dishonest. deceptive or manipulative. perhaps even spineless, depending on the situation.

and indeed, these are all phrases i've seen thrown around in close proximity to Taryn's name.

throughout the book, Taryn plays nice in order to get people to like her. she does whatever the fae tell her to do, even at the expense of her own or her sister's humiliation. and instead of making her own place at court, she announces that she will "fall in love" to earn her seat. meaning that she will rely on one of the fae (likely someone with station) to give her the privilege of staying at court, through means of marriage or children.

it's a more passive route to survival than Jude's. but that route isn't any less valid. it's just less masculine.

III. Active vs. Passive (and how it leads to misguided sensationalism)

society has taught us not to see passivity as a mode of operation, and unfortunately, this makes for overtly sensationalised (and therefore inaccurate) interpretations of character.

if the only actions a character takes are deceptive ones, we conclude they are intentionally deceiving people. if the character doesn't act at all, they are apathetic people. no matter the character's own motives. if they do not act the way we wish them to act, they must be in direct opposition to what we want.

take Taryn, for example. if her modus operandi is to camouflage, or passively fit in, we don't recognise this as an action. rather, we look at what she does do.

in order to achieve her goal, Taryn must actively betray her sister (multiple times), lie to her (multiple times), and kill her husband in cold blood (an attribute, if you ask me, but whatever). through these actions, we, as the audience, realise Taryn is not nice. but she portrays herself this way so she can get what she wants. as all good writing does, we are made to feel deceived right along with Jude.

but even though Jude herself forgives Taryn eventually, we still dislike her. because she is not our sister. she is not the main character. she doesn't mean much to us. we don't regard her as a nuanced person–she becomes, to many, this two-dimensional "enemy" or "other".

and if you aren't thinking critically about the text, and instead take the story personally, then yeah. you're going to hate Taryn at the end of it all.

people have a way of interpreting actions as the sole basis of character, while disregarding motive or intention. i don't think this wise. it's reductive at best, disingenuous at worst.

actions are a product of our nature and the conditions of our environment. Taryn is in just as much peril as Jude is in Faerie. the only reason you, dear reader, might not like Taryn is because she didn't act how you wanted her to act, and because she didn't act how you wanted her to act, she ended up hurting someone you care about (Jude).

this well-meaning loyalty unfortunately doesn't do much for an accomplished understanding of the text. which i get it. some of us are just here for fun and that's fine. but if you take the time to hate a character with as much passion as people seem to hate Taryn, you have time to think at least a little bit critically about the text.

—Em 🖤🗡

more theories & analysis

[bigskydreaming]

Why does nobody talk about Tim being sexist in Robin and literally kicking Steph in the stomach in Red Robin? I see so many Ohh but this One thing a poc Robin did that majes them the Worst of the Worst but for him it's silence? I really don't like the fandom's biases, it's very blatantly elitist and racist, willful ignorance isn't easy to hide.

Yeah, I mean, tbh the reason I don’t mention stuff like that is just like....at the end of the day, ALL the issues that are ever raised about these characters essentially just come from writer bias.....they’re inserted into the narrative or a characterization by canon writers who just flat out don’t even realize that what they’re depicting is gross fucking behavior. So its like, never there because it HAS to be, y’know? These characters don’t HAVE to be portrayed these ways. And that’s pretty much WHY I focus so much on the fandom side of things - because none of us have any influence on canon writers and where or when they insert these things into the narrative or fail to recognize the problem....but when it comes to fandom, there is really no excuse for why that stuff can’t be pointed out and acknowledged for the problem that it is.

And for my part, like, I’m just so focused on pointing out where the fandom narrative has become extremely skewed in regards to Dick because....it really is just all the double standards and hypocrisy that bug me, you know? I honestly do not need Dick to be everyone’s favorite character, or hailed as the best Robin, or anything, I just like....want people to stop writing him as this petty resentful asshole just because they think oh we need to give him flaws to make him more real when like, I honestly can not for the life of me think of another character I ever hear people saying “we need to GIVE him flaws to make him more real” y’know? 

The guy has existed for 80 years, he’s got enough material to be REAL, you’re not giving him flaws or overemphasizing his flaws because he’s just two dimensional without them, like, there’s just no material to write him as a well-rounded character without that....you’re just doing it because you WANT to. Like, that’s all it comes down to, its that simple, but so many people just flat out refuse to own that.....and IMO, it so often is BECAUSE of how quickly we tend to default to using comparisons as our basis for judging how ‘good’ or not a character is, if that makes sense?

So like, for me, I don’t focus on talking about Tim’s flaws or Jason’s flaws beyond the obvious references like “it drives me batshit how people can view Jason TRYING TO KILL TIM as something Tim more easily can forgive than like....Dick giving the mantle he himself created to Damian in an effort to....keep Bruce’s last son from running back to Murderville, Population Him.”

And that’s purely because.....they’re just not my focus characters, and I don’t really feel a need to go into them in depth the same way I do with Dick, and like....at the end of the day.....pointing out things they do that are worse, don’t actually do anything to improve Dick’s standing, you know? Like, to me, it shouldn’t be about oh Dick is a good character because he’s a better person than Tim, see, he’s never done anything like THAT (cites this or this or that)....that’s just not that productive to me, and more importantly, its one of those there but for the grace of God things, you know? With every character who hasn’t ever done something another character has, its usually just....honestly a matter of luck that they never got saddled with a writer who thought “oh this character doing this horrible thing to that one is a brilliant idea, lol,” quoth a dumbfuck who wouldn’t know good characterization if it kicked him in the face.

Again like, I’ll make a big deal about blatant double standards, like....I rant endlessly about making Dick punch Jason or Tim in fic or having Jason or Tim or Bruce punch Dick in fics without it being seen as a big deal, because.....Dick’s been punched in canon by all those characters without it being seen as a big deal and never done the same in return, so that’s a HUGE, glaring double standard where its like “why do so many of you think its cool to paint the one guy who actually RECEIVES this kind of treatment like...flipped entirely around to be the perpetrator”....like, that I’ll never stop being pissed about because its like....a direct one to one comparison, y’know? Its two almost parallel examples of mostly the same situation, so its pretty clear cut when people are regarding one as ‘nothing to be upset about’ and the other as ‘we must write him doing this all the time and never fail to crucify him for it in the comments as though like, this is just who he is.”

And with things like times Bruce has been abusive in canon, I don’t overlook or ignore those and focus on them a lot because like....they happened, I’m not focused on them as a way to make Bruce look bad, I’m focused on them because they HAPPENED, period, and I want to explore that for personal reasons that relate to why I project onto Dick Grayson so much.

But beyond that, when it reaches the point of like.....’people shouldn’t claim Dick is terrible for doing stuff like this, when Tim is over HERE doing stuff like THIS”......that’s when I kinda bow out and circle back around to focusing on more direct comparisons, you know? Because those just feel more productive. At the end of the day ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are pretty subjective (I mean, obviously not talking about the difference between hey this character is genocidal and this character is not), and given how interpretative comics are in general, and how many writers most characters go through....like, ultimately there’s just no real ‘ground’ to be gained by arguing that certain characters are ‘just as bad’ or ‘even worse’ than others, IMO. If that makes sense?

So since I’m not really just...trying to yell just for the sake of yelling and I really do want at least some people to kinda....hopefully end up more aware of stuff like “hey yeah, it IS weird that we’re always talking about Dick’s temper tantrums when its usually everyone AROUND him that’s breaking shit when they’re mad”....aka, that thing where the EXACT SPECIFIC thing held against Dick is actually way more commonly perpetrated by characters nobody blinks twice at for doing that stuff......like, that’s kinda where I start and stop my focus. Specific, done in one examples that are directly comparable to an equivalent thing in another characters’ narratives or trends in how they’re perceived or treated by fandom.

The wider net, while I don’t fault others for being annoyed that fandom so completely glosses over pretty sizable displays of poor behavior in certain other characters, like.....its just not for me, personally.