#again: not woobifying or excusing child abuse

[fuckedupwizard]

no offense, op, but i've been trying to put into words why i don't think this is a good take and it boils down to, basically, it's an oversimplification of what trauma is and what it does to you, in other words this kind of reads like "why do people with PTSD not just act normal? they're not even in that situation anymore."

when you've been that affected (by slavery, abuse, perceived betrayal) your brain is not going to allow you to just 'choose to be happy', ESPECIALLY if this happened during your formative years (in shen jiu's case, he 'got out' at 15 and joined cqms at 16), the stages in which trauma has the most significant affect on a person and the way they think. you need someone else's help to get you out of it. unfortunately, therapy doesn't exist in pidw, and yqy can try his hardest but he has his own issues too which prevent him from saying what sj really needs to hear, and it is true that his own behaviour pushes other people away. you really can't just think your way out of the effect severe trauma has on your brain, though - it takes help and support. it changes your entire way of thinking. yes of course he Could have been nice and made lots of friends, the choice was open to him, but by that point his formative years had already been marked by dehumanization, significant abuse, and (as far as he knew) abandonment and the knowledge that nobody in the world actually cared about him. so like… is it any wonder he didn't? (not a justification for abusing binghe but just, like, very understandable reasoning behind why he was a big ball of iron spikes and rage and misery). it doesn't mean the peak lords or his fellow disciples were wrong for not trying to befriend him because they weren't obliged to be nice to someone who wasn't nice to them. but i find it difficult to blame shen jiu for this given what he went through. like, do you think it would be possible for him, someone who suffered unimaginably and believes himself to be completely alone and incapable of being loved, to just shrug it all off?

i'm not woobifying him, either - as mentioned above this doesn't excuse him perpetuating the cycle of abuse, but it's a normal level of nuance to have and i think regardless of your views on shen jiu, he deserves it as a canonical victim of the aforementioned slavery, abuse, etc. we should hold all characters by these standards. bingge, too, wasn't able to just "become happy" no matter how much power or how many loving wives he had. making bingmei literally took sy transmigrating and providing love and catharsis during his most vulnerable and formative years. it's not that the brain is broken after a certain point but that you're gonna need someone's help not to fall into a deep pit or, if you did, to try climbing out. this is also the entire thesis of tgcf in regards to xie lian and jun wu lol (traumatised person is not going to be able to improve their own life or have healthy relationships with others with no help from anyone else at all - not counting yue qingyuan because while i know he loves shen jiu and tried his best, he couldn't understand that he accidentally contributed to this by allowing shen jiu to believe he never tried to go back for him - and he ASKED! he tried to get yqy to tell him! yqy is just too hindered by his own trauma to do so, which isn't his fault, either - just the tragedy of the narrative).

tl;dr: shen jiu's "chance" was not really a chance at all.

this might just be a tiktok issue but every time i see someone say “shen jiu deserved a chance at happiness!” i explode. he had many. his entire life he could’ve made different decisions, he could’ve just not abused lbh, or spoken to yqy, but he never did. that’s his whole thing. he’s even aware of it, it’s like his WHOLE final speech in the extras. he would NEVER EVER take a chance at being better/happy, he’s far too comfortable in his own misery, he has absolutely no idea what to do without it. and he doesn’t want to find out either. THATS THE WHOLE POINT. it’s what makes him such a good character, because he’s realistic in his principles. he doesn’t just hate the antagonist, he hates literally fucking everything and everyone, especially himself. makes me scream idk lmao

[zvtara-was-never-canon]

I saw this post. Thoughts?

“i love azula but i hate how her stans absolve her of the bullying she put zuko through, even going as far as saying that zuko was the abusive one. in the show, the only glimpses we get of what azula and zuko's relationship pre-banishment are through flashbacks in zuko alone. in these flashbacks, it's clear that ozai pitted against each other and that azula often taunted zuko for being the black sheep of the family. idk how anyone could watch those flashbacks and be like "yeah zuko definitely abused azula". i understand being sympathetic towards azula's struggles with mental health and suffering from golden child syndrome, but that doesn't excuse how she treated her friends or her brother at all. acting like it is very dangerous because in real life, it is common for people to justify their awful behavior by talking about their difficult childhood, mental health struggles, etc. and it's perfectly fine to like characters who are awful people. my favorite arcane character is jinx and although i often make jokes like "hehe jinx did nothing wrong, those pilties had it coming", i acknowledge that many of her actions are unjustifiable, but i still like her because i find her to be a sympathetic character because it's obvious that she has self-esteem issues and suffers from psychosis, bpd, and schizophrenia.

difficult childhood, mental health struggles, etc. and it's perfectly fine to like characters who are awful people. my favorite arcane character is jinx and although i often make jokes like "hehe jinx did nothing wrong, those pilties had it coming", i acknowledge that many of her actions are unjustifiable, but i still like her because i find her to be a sympathetic character because it's obvious that she has self-esteem issues and suffers from psychosis, bpd, and schizophrenia. the same can apply to azula, she's a manipulative character who lacks empathy, but she also suffers from golden child syndrome and mental health issues, both statements can co-exist.”

The tags said: #again i love azula but her stans are insufferable #why are we woobifying a colonizing war criminal? #"she only proposed genocide because she seeks approval from her father and is mentally ill" DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF #azula critical #i guess???

1 - If we're talking only about the original show, then yeah, "Zuko abused Azula" is an absurd statement. His biggest "crime" in canon was not really caring about being her older brother - which is understandable considering all the trauma he was struggling to process and the way Ozai made them fight for his approval, making it nearly impossible for Zuko to trust his sister.

If we're taking the Yang comics into consideration, then I'm sorry to say that "Zuko abused Azula" becomes completely true. He locks her up in an asylum that is only making her worse by abusing her (unnecessary restraining and beatings, which his friends also engage in), takes her on a dangerous mission knowing nothing about her condition, and threatens to throw her off a cliff when it all inevitably backfires on him.

Now, is all of that EXTREMELY out of character for Zuko? Yes, but people keep insisting I take those bullshit comics as canon just 'cause Bryke approved of them (and because it constantly says "Azula bad"), even though they're literally just a result of a former DC comics writer not understanding that not every villain is the joker, and I'm not gonna stop reminding them that said comics RUINED the story and thus NOBODY should take it as canon. I'm a petty bitch.

2 - I wouldn't say that Azula's mental health struggles and desperate need for Ozai's validation are the ONLY reasons why she was cool with imperialism and genocide. That was 90% a result of literal indoctrination that the entire nation has been under for an entire century. Mind you, that doesn't absolve her (or anyone) of responsibility either, but it is dishonest to ignore these factors and go "she was just bad". Much like her brother, Azula needs both a brutal reality check of "You're the bad guy, sweety, get your shit together and stop being awful" and for the people around her to understand "This a traumatized, brainwashed TEENAGER we're dealing with here."

You can hold somebody accountable for their actions without dismissing their reasoning for doing what they did. The entire fandom does it by acknowledging how being abused by Ozai sent Zuko on a downwards spiral in which he was constantly hurting himself and others, WHY is it suddenly impossible to do that when it's Azula's turn? Why is "she's just evil" the only acceptable explanation for all that she did when that directly contradicts canon?

[kiittywiings]

while people are still on the topic of bad ships - I would like to bring up one that makes me severely uncomfortable. This might be a hot take and upset some shippers but this is just my own opinion.

I think Doomi is a bad ship. I kind of always did - and I always found it to be kind of creepy - but now I can talk about why I feel that way without 50 thousand people tearing me apart.

first of all - it kiiiiiinda feels like a abuser x victim dynamic. well….in a sense. more “abuse compliant” X victim. seriously - for as much as he “loves” Uni - I do not remember a single instance where he has tried to step in and help when things got too difficult for Uni to bear. I personally think that he is PART of the issue if anything - insulting Uni in the earlier volumes and just standing by and watching Uni get hurt. Seriously ? you are literally Unis NURSE you should KNOW about all of this already. ngl - he probably does ( which makes this worse ) because if he does - he knows exactly how Cuddles is torturing Uni and just. Does nothing about it. Stays quiet and watches. That does not sound like something you would do if someone you loved was getting hurt in such horrific ways.

I am not going to use the “he is scared of cuddles” excuse here because that is literally the only excuse EVER being used in sparklecare even though. Cuddles is just a normal guy ?? He has no superpowers ?? And he has a LOT of people who hate him. realistically - If he really wanted to - Doom and a few others could easily try to overpower him ( and therefore making the comic more interesting ) but nope ! I guess not. hell - if he really loved Uni that much - he could have told her and the gang™️ about any weak points that Cuddles might have - if he knows any. We have seen him in cuddles office before so at least those two are FAMILIAR enough to know some things about each other.

even away from Uni - I seriously hate how the comic itself forgets that Doom is a literal serial murderer and woobifies him. he has killed a COUNTLESS number of people. For no reason. At all. Kittycorn shipping him together with the character who is so CLEARLY against the murder of innocent people is so….wrong ?? if she really wanted a redemption arc for him she could of…idk….maybe had him fight to protect Uni and friends ?? or idk - die trying to save Uni instead of killing off Hemera ? But nope - we all know Doom is the darling child. Please someone actually just punish Doom for his crimes adding onto that - I hate how Doom gets. No repercussions at all once he is out of the hospital ( other than that stupid heart pin thing ) because he has again KILLED A COUNTLESS AMOUNT OF PEOPLE FOR NO REASON AT ALL. he seriously has NO ACTUAL REAL REASON as to why he killed a bunch of innocent people. I HATE how all he gets is a slap on the wrist and a “we will be notified if you ever want to genuinely harm someone again.” What about the people he killed ? Or the people he hurt ? Idc if he feels bad or “never wanted to” because he still did - he should still get the punishment. What about the patients that could have been killed in the fire that he Started ? Everyone before that ? That feels like a massive slap in the face and a mockery to the families of those that he killed and the victims themselves. again - I feel like if he really felt horrible and cared about the others - if he really did love Uni - he should have served time in prison with everyone else. But nope ! He walks away free as if he never had blood on his hands to begin with and gets to date the “uwu cinnamon roll” of the series even though he did. Literally nothing of substance at all to help Uni. Ok

anyways that was my rant take from this what you will 👍

[teamfreewill2pointo]

I'm not picking at you, but I strongly disagree with how you and some other parasocial fans try to depict Jensen's childhood. He has said that he had a great childhood, playing outside all of the time, playing sports, surrounded by his brother and sister and extended family. He has listed his Dad as his hero in many articles. He was allowed to purchase a car prior to turning 16, which many parents would have never allowed, so independence was encouraged. Yes his family was religious, so what? Yes his mother made him eat his vegetables, 99% of Mom's did back in the 80"s, not child abuse. The punishment by the belt grosses me out, but again, in Texas, in the 80"s that was the standard. Jensen mentions spankings in school, which was also the standard then. This man grew up in a family that he is very proud of, as he has said multiple times. Don't demean his childhood because it doesn't fit into your personal box of what a perfect childhood should be. I suspect that Jared's was actually quite similar. They both seem to be well adjusted, happy men who have personally grown with the times. Their parents did OK. Respect.

It's weird that you disagree with me, when I basically said this.

As I said before, I'm from a very similar culture, and my dad was very similar to Jensen's dad, although my dad wasn't as homophobic as Jensen's dad. I am very familiar with how Christian conservatives are raised, because it's how I was raised.

You can think you had a great childhood, love your father, feel loved by your father, and acknowledge that your father had traits of toxic masculinity that had to be unlearned in adulthood.

You can have a wonderful relationship with your parents, and love them, and feel loved by them, but still think that it was wrong for them to beat you with instruments.

You can think your dad was a great dad, but still think that when someone passes out after being knocked in the head, they should be checked out by a doctor.

There are still spankings in schools! People still spank their kids! Jensen and I do not, because we have learned how to be better than our parents. I don't get why so many of y'all are so eager to defend beating children.

Jensen and I have unlearned a lot of the toxic masculinity with which we have been raised. We have learned to be more progressive than our conservative Christian parents. This doesn't mean that we don't love them or feel loved by them. You can love somebody and still think that they screwed up.

It's not black and white. I feel like some of you take this approach to characters and people. You can criticize characters and people without painting them as villains. I can say Alan Ackles should not have beaten any of his children, and that's not making him a villain, or trying to woobify Jensen, especially since Jensen doesn't see it that way!

I think it's so weird how a lot of you are trying to justify or excuse Alan Ackles's behavior. I was beaten by my parents. It wasn't okay. I look back at my childhood fondly and miss my dad every single day. I still love my parents and I feel loved by my parents, just like Jensen.

So why are you coming in here, and accusing me of demeaning his childhood? Why are you making the assumption that I think he should have had a perfect childhood? Why are you defending beating kids?

The reason that all of this matters is because J2 were put in conditions that were physically and emotionally punishing. They had father figures on set who used to yell and throw things and engage in behavior that is abusive, just like hitting people.

Because they grew up in an environment that was abusive, they did not speak up or speak out when put in many of these circumstances because they had no idea how things could be different. That's just how the industry was run. You were put in a room that was set on fire. You were put in a room with a ton of bees and treated as if you were a pansy for not wanting to be in that room. You were made to crawl on glass and cut yourself.

You would wake up at 245am to get on a phone call to air live on the East Coast, then at 4am, do Midwest promotions, etc, going through 4 timezones. Then you would go to set and work 18 hour daysn outside in the rain at night.

[And if you couldn't handle such a punishing schedule and started to have an emotional breakdown because of it, you were yelled at and basically forced to go to work.]

The thing is, to not acknowledge all of what they went through, is to deny what amazing people they are. Jared could have absorbed all of that as just normal and part of the industry, the way that so many other show runners do, but he deliberately set out to create a set culture that is not abusive. Jensen could be one of the many parents who spanks their kids.

They strove to be better. If you ignore or minimize the abuse that they went through, you're not acknowledging how much strength it takes to go down a different path.

[bigskydreaming]

In hindsight, I think I'm also just massively over this idea that Buck's just an oversized kid. Not only is it used to unnecessarily woobify him and excuse him from times he SHOULD be held accountable, it ignores that this is the Traumatized People Reacting Badly To Their Trauma show and bubbles him into this weird space where his insecurities, abandonment issues and the like are treated like proof he still has growing up to do rather than just how Grown Up Trauma manifests for him. So he's constantly regressed even after whole season long arcs about him maturing AGAIN and while yeah progress isn't always linear, there should be SOME forward momentum. Instead, he gets emotional about Eddie leaving and we're back at "you're acting like my second child and making everything about you" as though Eddie's some bastion of maturity.

Like. Bobby's Mr. "Accidentally killed a hundred people and really just wanna die to make it better, but God's taking forever to let me kick the bucket and I'm trying to be so brave/Midwestern/Catholic about how much I resent that." Hen looked around and saw she was the only well-adjusted member of her team and went mmmm, dont love that and tossed a grenade at her love life. Eddie's going through Patrick Swayze's filmography one cosplay at a time; we got Roadhouse in Season Three, an inverted Ghost homage last season, what will he think of next. Athena has absolutely abused her authority before and it will happen again. Maddie projected on a woman so strongly she went full Prue Halliwell and showed up in her house to save her from her demons, except turned out she's not Prue Halliwell and that's not how that works. Chimney never met an emotionally vulnerable moment that didn't have him thinking "I can make this worse."

These people are not okay hfaklshfklhfklafhlka.

And that's fine! That's the show! The annoying thing about Buck though is how often the show acts like his trauma is somehow of a different TYPE. Like he's permanently stuck in stunted childhood trauma purgatory despite it being the focal point of every season. Instead of just letting him be a big boy with proportionate Big Boy Trauma that BECAUSE progress and recovery are non-linear, frequently manifests as a resurgence of childhood issues or coping mechanisms. This doesn't make him any less adult or inherently any more immature than any of the others, its just. This is what Being Kinda Fucked Up looks like on him.

But when the show repeatedly hammers home this idea that Buck is some kind of junior partner to the rest, it enables the kind of imbalance that LEADS to his constant woobification. Like I'm all for Bobby and Buck's surrogate father/son dynamic, but Bobby does not have all the answers and it'd be okay if sometimes the show lets him be wrong in his dynamic with Buck, the way he is with other characters at times. Buck CAN be immature as hell, and often is, but almost never in regards to his dynamic with Eddie and Christopher, so its very odd to have him talked about like he's someone Eddie has to be responsible for, esp when it ignores that aside from one specific argument, Buck's been more responsible than Eddie for the past season.

And yeah, this whole train of thought (going back to the first post) all started for me with the 'kinda leaning too much into the age gap' thing because there was a heavily paternalistic vibe to Tommy ending their relationship earlier in the season, but its like.

I think part of the issue with Buck's character is that a lot of the things that a lot of his fans WANT for him and his character can't happen without letting go of a lot of the 'permanent younger brother/partner' perceptions of him that have a lot of times been used to his benefit to make him less accountable/more easily forgiven, so it creates this kinda trap where eventually, something has to give.

So I've been following 911 more regularly lately and gotta say, I think they lean into the Tommy/Buck age gap a little too much. Like when it has them acting like these characters are from entirely different generations, its a problem IMO, because its warping the shape of Buck's coming out narrative.

Standard disclaimers that this is all just my personal opinion, interpretation, I am not the boss of anyone and I'm rooting my stance in my personal experiences as a bi man not to declare My Authority over bisexuality and everyone's lived experiences, but just as my personal frame of reference and start point for engaging with this. I am not saying every bi person's experience is like this or Buck's MUST be like this, I am saying I Am Dissatisfied and Here Is Why. Okay. That out of the way....

My specific gripe is that I feel 911 is a bit too confident that because they (I assume) have LGBTQ+ writers on staff, they are above being weird about bisexuality, but they've had the characters say and do some things regarding Buck's coming out that aren't Ideal and in general it just feeds into my impression that they haven't put much or any thought into the fact that repression for a bi man can and often does look different than repression for a gay man.

Even more specifically, I'm pissed off about how there's no examination of Josh's speech to Buck about growing up in a post-Glee world.

Because here's the thing about their ages: I literally looked Buck's up after I watched that episode recently, because I was sitting there thinking wait, how old IS he supposed to be? Because I thought he was in his mid-thirties. And he is. Apparently Buck was born in 1991. I'm forty now myself. Buck's like six years younger than me. I'm supposedly comparable to what Tommy's experiences growing up would be. And I'm bemused as hell that the show keeps acting like Buck's formative years were that far removed.

Ignoring the "lol, okay" bit about treating Murphy's other show as the One True Watershed Moment for the social acceptance of the LGBTQ+ community, Buck would've been eighteen when Glee STARTED. I promise anyone who wasn't around at the time that people did not all sit down and start ushering in a queer golden era when Season One dropped. Buck didn't even go to college, he was off on his near-decade road trip, he was twenty-four when gay marriage was legalized, like....

This guy did not grow up in a world that was ALREADY shaped by the things they keep talking about making it easier for him than Tommy. His formative years did not happen that far behind Tommy's. He was already out the other side of the toxic wasteland that high school locker rooms and internet boards were for closeted and repressed teenagers in the first decade of this century BEFORE all this stuff happened.

GROWING UP IN THE KIND OF HOMOPHOBIC SOCIETY THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT HAPPENED TO HIM TOO.

Its almost like. Its kinda WHY he's a grown man in his 30s only now coming out?

It shaped him just as much as it shaped Tommy. It just shaped them DIFFERENTLY.

Look, acknowledging that there is room in the spectrum of human sexualities and experiences for peoples' sexualities to adapt and change in various ways or degrees throughout their life, the show seems to be trying to have it two different ways when it comes to Buck's sexuality. On the one hand, they weirdly keep acting like Buck's attraction to men was just sorta simmering on the back-burner, waiting to hatch until here and now and he's "lucky" that his bisexuality waited until times were nice and progressive to finish baking, so he didn't have to go through the stuff Tommy and Josh did. On the other hand, every actual line from Buck used to describe himself or his sexuality screams "this man has been bi all along and just didn't realize it until now" which.....that's literally repression? The show is saying he was repressed, that he was so deeply closeted even he didn't realize he was bisexual until last season.

He didn't luck out and only become bi when it was nice and safe to do so, he was always bi and just hid it from himself UNTIL it was safe enough for him to feel secure pulling that awareness back out and examining it as a possibility for himself.

He flat out says "I mean I've always admired a hot guy's ass but that's normal right" - like that is a literal admission that he's been aware of the appeal of the same gender, he just talked himself into rating this No Big Deal.

But at the same time, we're talking about the Undisputed Reigning Champ of Oversharing. The King of Look How Good I'm Allying, Am I Doing It Right, Someone Plz Tell Me I'm Doing It Right. The master of seeing a conversational boundary and leapfrogging over it like he's treating hopscotch like an Olympic fucking sport.

Yeah people have commented on the possibility he's been flirting with guys for years (further indicative of yes, this man has been bi all along), but where in all of that was Buck chiming in with "oh yeah, that guy's hot" in the name of making sure everyone knew just how cool he was with people being gay and how not a big deal and normal it was for him, A Straight Guy, to affirm when other guys look good, if he ACTUALLY believed it was normal?

Its because he didn't, IMO. On some level, Buck was aware he found men appealing. And on a deeper, more internalized level, he was aware that no matter what he CONSCIOUSLY said to himself to reassure himself that he was absolutely a Straight Dude and this meant nothing, it was NOT in fact "normal" to check out a hot guy's ass and his admission of that WOULD result in people asking him some questions he was not prepared to answer or acknowledge yet.

That's repression. That's being in the closet. That's him actively being shaped by a PRE-GLEE world, same as Tommy, just in different ways.

Like let's be real for a second. As much as people have had to say about the person Tommy used to be, what Buck's coming out narrative could really use is a look back at the guy HE used to be. And NOT just in the banal, non-offensive "I used to sleep around, I didn't know what I wanted, but now I do" kind of way, but in the acknowledgment that Season One Buck was kinda not great. He wasn't AWFUL, mind you, but like. I say this with fondness for the character he's BECOME, but if I weren't aware that Season One was intended as a Not Ideal starting point that he started out at TO maximize his growth, like on a surface level, Season One Buck's behavior was off-putting and can and did result in people (perfectly reasonably) being like yeah this guy does not appeal to me. He was an overcompensating dudebro douchebag. He was out there checking off every single possible box on the Make Sure Everyone Knows How Straight I Am to-do list like it was his second job.

And I don't say that with judgment, I say that with "if we're going to scrutinize how the homophobic society Tommy grew up in shaped him, why aren't we doing that with Buck too instead of pretending like he somehow magically skipped being affected by all that and just stumbled into being freshly bisexual on the other side of all that mess."

I can't speak for anyone other than myself or my own experiences, so I have no ability to personally relate to what Tommy's experiences in the closet were or how he viewed or came to first acknowledge or admit his own sexuality to himself. But I can say as a bi guy, the thing about MY awareness of my attraction to the opposite gender when I was a teenager....is that since it overlapped with my awareness of my attraction to the same gender, I hyper-focused on the former and dialed into it in an effort to convince myself that it was proof that obviously I was straight and couldn't be gay, because if I was gay I wouldn't be attracted to women. Duh. Basic math.

And that's what Buck's coming out narrative is missing for me, both in canon and fanworks. Its not about whether he had it as hard as Tommy or if his coming out is easier or anything like that, its literally just....he was there all along too. Homophobia and biphobia were impacting him this entire time. Him not acknowledging this until now is not proof that he somehow skated by or they just missed him....him not acknowledging this until now is BECAUSE they DIDN'T miss him. They buried him so deep in his own closet, HE wasn't even willing to face it until he reached a point in his life where he felt safe and secure enough in himself and his support network to examine this part of him once someone - Tommy - gave him enough of a reason TO take notice again of the kinds of feelings and attractions he'd long since taught himself to ignore and not rate as worth a second thought on account of "it meant nothing" and "everyone does it" and "it doesn't actually mean or say anything about ME."

And I mean, given who Buck is and how he grew up, its not exactly shocking that a kid desperate for parental love and approval that he couldn't seem to get no matter how he behaved or what he did to try and "earn" it.....upon realizing that he was experiencing attraction that according to his surrounding society marked him as 'other' and 'deviant' and 'not normal' and all kinds of things that make it even MORE unlikely to "earn" parental or friendly or societal love and approval.....of fucking COURSE he was gonna run in the opposite direction of that awareness and slam the door shut behind him as he did. Clinging all the more tightly to any and all awareness of attraction he could point to as 'proof' to himself that he'd been mistaken to think he was anything other than straight.

So yeah. That's what's pissing me off about how the show's treated Buck's coming out. There's been zero examination of the fact that like. How and when he grew up absolutely left a mark on him, same as any queer person in their thirties....it just left a different kind of mark that's not interchangeable with the experiences of the other characters on the show. This new side of himself he's exploring didn't just HAPPEN to reveal itself seven seasons in, it didn't reveal itself until then because he'd been repressing it until then. That matters. That repression is as vital to his understanding of himself and the person he was and the person he grew up to be as his awareness and acceptance of himself as an out bisexual man is here and now.

Admittedly, this post was brought to you by happening across one too many fics that have Buck look back and clock his past crushes on people in high school and his twenties as actual crushes, but in an "LOL thats so funny that I didn't get that, how dumb am I" kinda way instead of the aching, painful way that many gay or bi/pan individuals can attest to looking back at earlier crushes and thinking what could've been if society hadn't conditioned us to either not be aware of what we were feeling or too afraid to face it or act on it at the time. And yeah, that's a personal hang-up, but like.

I just am really uncomfortable with how much the show and parts of fandom keep leaning into the Himbo Buck interpretation to play up 'lol cant believe I missed this until now' angle instead of examining that hey, none of this happens in a vacuum. Buck is in his mid-thirties and there are REASONS he 'missed' it until now. And again, with acknowledgment that everyone's experiences and formative influences are different, you can't just completely discount the possibility that those reasons include "growing up in a homophobic society" and "not feeling safe or secure enough in his surroundings, support network or sense of self to openly acknowledge and explore this aspect of himself until now."

[upyourarsenals]

archiving @undryne

WARNINGS Mentions of trauma, nazis, rape, child abuse, animal abuse, apologia of Junko Furuta's killers (do NOT look up the case if you don't know already), downplaying trauma, insulting survivors

The worst example of pro-para discourse so far, this user has been defending rapists in the name of "rehabilitation", spreading misinformation and further staining the proship label. This user has over a thousand followers.

More under the cut. Please be sure you can stomach the content below. Do not harass this user, don't give them further attention. Do not allow people like this in proship/profic spaces.

Acting as if they're doing group therapy by coddling criminals

Spreading misinformation about criminals offending again. The rates are actually much higher

a whole thread putting down survivors, calling them braindead, wishing for rapists to live freely no matter how many times they have offended

pitying rapists who are shunned by society for their crimes (boohoo)

claiming that sex offenders won't reoffend if they aren't triggered to do it (what?)

using and comparing LGBT people being targeted to defend offending paraphiles

severely downplaying rape trauma

defending Junko Furuta's killers and claiming they didn't reoffend, spreading misinformation. They absolutely did reoffend, despite being given protection by the police over their identity in fear of lynchings. They also came from a rich background. There is no excuse to what they did and continue doing.

None of them became productive members of society.

general obsession with defending and woobifying rapists as victims

defending child dolls, which are often based on REAL CHILDREN. there's no ethical way to produce and use these dolls.

bonus: following and RT the creator of the zoosadist symbol and the rapesexual flag, of course

Do not let these people fester online.

EDIT: additions, they have also sent unsolicited nsfw

Heartwarming! All the people you hate are fighting

But seriously, what kind of response is this? Let people hurl abuse at you and just stand there doing nothing?

apologizing and downplaying war crimes

more downplaying and asking to "just move on"

[sokkastyles]

There’s some really bad takes in the tags I saw others point out too on twitter that Zuko is a woobified asshole and narcissistic guy who doesn’t have any empathy like in the beach and only kinda cares ab things similar to his own pain and he’s selfish and wangle was always way more empathetic and understanding especially of Katara and that he is actually a colonizer full of toxic violence & he isn’t a soft person & thats all “made up fanon Zuko” not real Zuko. What are your thoughts?

I have no idea what is going on in the tags but that's...quite a lot, lol.

Let's take this one by one, though.

First of all, I've posted about my thoughts on "woobified asshole" with regards to Zuko before, but I hate the way "woobie" is thrown around as an insult in fandom in general. A woobie is a character that people sympathize with because they suffer. The original concept of a woobie is a character that you want to see comforted, and the term comes from a word for a security blanket. Usually accusations of woobification get thrown around at popular characters who are usually male and usually attractive, and also usually morally complicated in some way, with the implication that the woobified characters is undeserving of such sympathy or that fans only sympathize with them because they are attractive and girls are stupid. I can't think of any reason why it's a problem that a character is woobified that doesn't boil down to misogyny or virtue signaling, and often a combination of both. Otherwise what exactly is the problem here? That people sympathize with Zuko? That they want to see him comforted? He's an abused sixteen year old. The last time I got into discourse about people "woobifying" Zuko, someone literally tried to claim that he shouldn't be treated like a child. Like, excuse me, but Zuko IS a child. One of the most cathartic moments in the series is when the kid literally breaks down in his uncle's arms and people really want to go around sneering about "woobification"? Shut up.

If it's the morality issue, even if Zuko were the worst person in the world I still wouldn't think it was a problem for people to woobify him, but as it is, he has a whole entire redemption arc where he ends the series dedicating the rest of his life to restoring peace to the world. If there's ever a character who deserves a pat on the back, I'd say Zuko is.

narcissistic guy who doesn’t have any empathy like in the beach and only kinda cares ab things similar to his own pain and he’s selfish

I could list everything that Zuko has ever done to disprove this, but I don't actually need to, and such generalizations don't deserve to be taken that seriously anyway. But I do want to remind people that Zuko's establishing character backstory was that he got banished for trying to defend an entire division of soldiers that he had never met nor would ever meet, because it was the right thing to do, because he did not want to see people killed for no reason, and because, as the crown prince, he felt personally responsible to try and use the power he had to help them, as opposed to the powerful adults around him who wanted to use their power for selfish reasons. Zuko stood up to those adults - one of whom was his own terrifying, abusive father - at great cost to himself and his own power and comfort when he didn't need to at all.

After that, Zuko could have completely shut himself off from the rest of the world and only cared about himself, and indeed, he spends a good three years trying to do just that. He does behave selfishly, he grandstands, he throws tantrums, but he also still has that impulse towards empathy and goodness, which he gradually learns to embrace again. His character arc is a triumph of goodness, and anyone who claims to be a voice for morality who is trying to diminish this fact...really isn't making the moral statement they think they are making. What truly good person would rather have more villains in the world than redeemed ones?

As for "The Beach," it is amazing to me that people try to bring up Zuko having an existential crisis and not being a good boyfriend as something to hold against him since the reason he acts like that is because he DOES have empathy and he just can't take being in this shallow world anymore with these people who understand nothing of what he's come to learn in the past three years.

Like, god, Zuko, why don't you pay more attention to your imperialistic girlfriend and making sure she has snacks at a beach party instead of like, worrying about war and poor people, hm??? Or your uncle in prison, or the next time your father might decide to physically harm you. What an asshole. /s

and wangle was always way more empathetic and understanding especially of Katara

I know you mean Aang, but I'm kinda giggling at "wangle," the unsung hero of the story.

way more empathetic and understanding especially of Katara

Oh, you mean like this?

Zuko: She needs this, Aang. This is about getting closure and justice.

Aang: I don't think so. I think it's about getting revenge.

Katara: [Angrily.] Fine, maybe it is! Maybe that's what I need! Maybe that's what he deserves!

Aang: Katara, you sound like Jet.

Which one had more empathy for Katara's pain here, again? Maybe we should ask Katara.

Katara looking at Aang:

Katara looking at Zuko:

I know I'm nitpicking one scene but like, if you really want to play the comparison game, this is a good place to do it, since this episode contrasts Katara's relationship with the two. Otherwise, Katara and Zuko were enemies for much of the series so like, arguing that Aang "had more empathy for her" is kind of pointless and reeks of Nice Guy-ism. You don't get empathy points just for being her friend longer.

he is actually a colonizer full of toxic violence & he isn’t a soft person & thats all “made up fanon Zuko” not real Zuko

I didn't know that the ATLA fandom was so powerful that they were able to manifest a whole two books of this three book series themselves.

I mean, look how this fanon content of Zuko calling out his father and walking away from colonization and imperialism and toxic violence almost looks like the real thing:

And you're right, Zuko being soft was just totally made up by some very dedicated fan artists and fic writers who somehow got their content to air on nickelodeon when Avatar: the Last Airbender vs His Evil Nemesis Colonizer Zuko Who Is Dastardly Trying to Steal His Forever Girl was supposed to be airing.

It's disgusting, really.

[o-wyrmlight]

hello there, i wanna say sorry abt this ask bc normally i really don’t like writing negative asks, but i wanted to know what you thought abt this. there’s a relatively well known user who makes a lot of dark choco and dark cacao content who regularly mocks and berates dark choco while making excuses for dark cacao. obviously this user can think and say whatever they want abt fictional characters, but what really got to me and made me have to avoid their content is how far they go about it, saying things like “if dark choco hates his situation so much he should just leave CoD and go better himself” or calling him a spoiled brat for not considering dark cacao’s trauma more when he was a child, or comparing his trauma to dark cacao’s and minimizing it, saying he doesn’t have a right to be as broken as he is currently. fiction aside its just so beyond victim blamey and gross. they accuse anyone pretty much sympathizes with dark choco of “woobifying” him, as if his fans don’t just, want him to escape his abuse and be happy lol. what makes it worse is that they’re an adult too, i just can’t believe that they confidently put him down all the time like this, even going as far as to imply he was a bad child

Note: I am going to be discussing abuse in a fair amount of detail.

I wonder if this person has ever heard of the Cycle of Abuse. In order, it goes like this:

Rising tensions lead to an explosion. An explosion leads to placation. Placation leads to calmness.

To take Dark Choco's situation as a literal example, let's look at it during the Cookies of Darkness. Dark Choco is confronted by Pomegranate about his loyalty to the Cookies of Darkness. Dark Choco tries to placate her by saying (and trying to convince himself) that he does. Explosion happens when Pomegranate forces him to relive a traumatic memory that breaks his mental and emotional psyche down. Fearing it'll happen afain afterwards--and perhaps almost believing it himself--Dark Choco stares with more conviction that he is loyal.

Enter the honeymoon/calmness phase, which is the phase that makes the abused question whether or not they're overreacting in terms of how they see their situation. It's calm now, they've reconciled and everything seems to be fine. Everything seems to be okay. So surely they're just being... Paranoid. But eventually the rising tensions begin again, and the victim knows what's coming and is willing to do anything in their power to stop it.

I believe that this logic can cleanly define why Dark Choco is staying with the Cookies of Darkness. It's a horrible place that he surrounds himself with, but as far as he knows, it's also the only place that has accepted him with open arms. He feels like it's the last place that he has the option to go to, so he essentially feels trapped into putting up with whatever emotional and psychological abuse they're putting him through. And that's not even touching on what the sword might be putting him through on a daily basis. I'm sure it's a cause of absolute mental fatigue that makes it hard to think clearly.

It really isn't as simple as just 'leaving' the Cookies of Darkness. For better or for worse, the Cookies of Darkness have become his home, the only place he can rely on to be there for him. He doesn't have anywhere else to go, and when Gingerbrave and co offer a place among them, he's already managed to convince himself once again that it's 'not so bad'.

As an aside, we don't actually know what kind of trauma Dark Cacao really went through as a child, so we can't draw any comparisons from that either. This isn't to minimize the trauma that Dark Cacao himself has probably gone through, but it's just. A fact.

Dark Cacao and Dark Choco are just as valid characters as each other. It isn't fair to compare these two with the purpose of demeaning them. What is it about Dark Choco that makes him worse? Is it the fact that he fell victim to a cursed sword? That he nearly killed his father? That he's half-convinced himself that his dream of being a hero is an impossible flight of fancy? That he probably thought for the longest time that he killed his father--his caretaker, his trainer, his idol, whom he wanted to be like--and it tore him to bits and pieces?

People deal with trauma and abuse in different ways. Not everybody is made different. I know that I usually tend to try to avoid the situation when I feel the tensions start to rise up, and Dark Choco himself probably tries to face it head-on and declare it invalid. Or maybe he tries to simply placate the situation in the hopes that it won't spiral into an explosion. Hell if I know.

It's just... So victim blamey. Think about it in real life. If you're a teenager who lives in an abusive household, where the fuck are you supposed to go? You have food. A roof over your head. A warm place to sleep. Where else are you going to find that, when to leave means you will probably be brought right back to them if you're found? Yeesh.

TL;DR: "If Dark Choco hates his situation so much he should leave CoD and better himself" yeah and homeless people should stop being homeless and just buy a house. Glorious insight.

Edit: Sorry for any misspellings or whatever. I wrote this on my phone.

[dreamsclock]

As a C!Dream apologist, I hate when people say we defend his actions in the exile arc or think that L'manburg was the problem all along. WE ANALIZE HIS CHARACTER. THAT'S ALL WE DO.

there’s a weird thing in this fandom where a lot of people boil favourite characters down to agreeing and validating everything they say and everything they do - as if every single character hasn’t done something that can’t be excused or justified.

and i think it comes down to a lot of the fandom’s view on morality - the weird demonisation of the ‘villains’ of the smp, from straight up despising c!dream and his apologists/fans to the vilifcation of c!enderwalk to the way so many split up “l’manbur” from “vilbur” and “revivebur” like they’re not all the same person and treat them entirely differently - a lot of the fandom’s moral compass is pretty black and white, which is unfortunate, because it means they view characters in the same way. characters like c!tommy and c!tubbo tend to be woobified, and all their actions excused away, while characters like c!techno and c!dream are vilified to hell and back without a chance to be forgiven or redeemed for their actions.

it’s unfortunate, because cc!wilbur has made it explicitly clear ALL the characters are incredibly morally grey - and we see this time and time again in the series! but a portion of the fandom - a big portion of the fandom - tend to try and excuse or justify their favourite characters’s actions and words (c!tommy killing c!jack, c!wilbur’s treatment of c!tubbo / c!tommy, c!quackity in ,, everything he’s ever done LMAO /hj), while c!dream / c!doomsday trio apologists, i’ve noticed, tend to view their favourites more critically, acknowledging the bad and good they’ve done, and often view the other characters in the same light.

this isn’t to say “c!doomsday trio apologists = smart, everyone else = dumb” LMAO, because i’ve seen some takes like this FROM doomsday trio apologists about c!tommy and co, which i also don’t agree with. overall, i think it’s important to remember all the characters are flawed and all apologists have different views / opinions on things. some will try to justify every single one of their fave’s actions, some will openly criticise and condemn their fave’s actions but still be apologists for them. every apologist is different - and the open condemnation of c!dream apologists for being “abuse apologists” is exhausting.

it’s honestly why i’ve stopped going on twitter and analysing c!dream so much: i got tired of having to write a disclaimer i didn’t support his actions or child abuse :’) the double standards in this fandom are exhausting and overwhelming and i’m very glad i’ve found this little corner of tumblr where i don’t need to do that ! :D

[rjalker]

The ONLY reason Gabriel is abusing Adrien is because the writers want Adrien to have a Tragic Backstory™ to excuse all of his shitty fucking behavior and misogyny.

They don’t actually fucking want to write a story about abuse, or deal with abuse in anyway.

They’re literally trying to fucking make us sympathize with Gabriel, the abusive fucking father who’s also a gods damned supervillain.

They don’t want to fucking actually deal with the fact that Adrien is being abused, they don’t want to use this as a way to teach children what abuse looks like or how it’s not okay, it’s literally just there to get people to forgive anything Adrien does wrong, because the writers think he can do no wrong.

Adrien is being abused, and Adrien is abusing Marientte.

These two things don’t cancel eachother out, and Adrien being abused is not WHY he is abusing Marinette. And if you fucking argue that Adrien being abused means he has no choice but to abuse MArinette, you need to shut the fuck up for the rest of time and NEVER speak to ANY victim of abuse EVER AGAIN.

Being abused does not make you a bad person. It does not make you abuse other people.

My mom was abused by her mom.

It does not mean she has no choice but to abuse me.

My step-dad was not abused by his parents.

And guess what? He still chose, every single day, for years, to abuse me and my siblings, while doting on his own children.

Being abused does not make you abusive.

Being abused does not make you a bad person.

Being abused does not excuse you abusing others.

Adrien is not being abused because the writers want to actually deal with the damage abuse causes. They don’t want to make sure kids know what abuse looks like, and some ways you can try to deal with it.

They are never going to write an episode where someone calls whatever the fuck the French equivalent of child protective services is.

They’re never going to write an episode where Adrien gets rescued from Gabriel.

They’re never going to write an episode where Adrien gets to talk to a therapist and deal with the shit he’s been put through.

Adrien isn’t being abused because the writers care about Adrien and care about the fact that he’s being abused.

He’s being abused because the writers want him to have a get out of jail free card already baked into his dead-mom-manpain tragic backstory.

The writers do not care about Adrien Agreste. The writers do not care about victims of abuse. The writers would rather woobify an abuser than condemn him for the abuse he subjects his victims to.

If you care about Adrien Agreste, or you care about victims of abuse? You better be fucking completely pissed off at the writers and the way they portray the way Gabriel abuses him, and you better be doubly pissed off at the way they have Adrien abuse Marinette.

To date, there has not been a single child-antagonist in this show that is not being abused by their parents.

Lila is being abused. Chloe is being abused. Fuck, even XY is being abused, and he’s only in like two fucking episodes!

Being abused does not make you a bad person. 

But these writers sure as shit want you to think it does, and if that doesn’t piss you off, you need to rethink the way you think about abuse.

I encourage people to reblog!

[anton-the-cock]

I’m not going to change your views but it does feel a bit dismissive when you say it wasn’t that bad because he had rich parents who neglected him but hey they got a maid for him and he probably wasn’t outcasted or bullied so hey it’s not that bad right 🤷‍♀️! I don’t know he definitely didn’t have the worse out of the villains but I don’t know it felt a bit dismissive is all. Although we need to all remember these are fictional characters so have no idea why the other anon needed to get so aggressive! Also the person in the notes I don’t know how to say it but uh the whole the Todoroki’s had a rich father they didn’t have to work a day in their life take is not a good look. Just because someone has parents with money it doesn’t derail the fact that neglect can cause trauma.

Anyways for the real reason I sent this, you wonder why Dabi is so insane. Well take into account the neglect alongside the fact that he burnt to near death up on that hill alone at the age of what 13? That’s got to be extra traumatising, especially for a child that was already not mentally ok. We also don’t know what his circumstances were like after that fire, like was he homeless? Or picked up by someone nefarious? Kind of like AFO(not him exactly but someone nasty) who maybe fed on his brewing anger and hate instead of positive healing. I’m sure we will find out at some point? I don’t think it was just what happened in the Todoroki household or the fire that broke his mind? There had to be other factors after the fire after his “death”!

[[WARNING!!! I love Dabi as a character but I am not a woobifier so if you are too much into him don't read!!!! No complaints taken, y'all will be blocked for being rude I am too old to deal with people unable to interact with me in good faith (anon it's not for you, you are good and I can't understand your point of view I am just not as good as a person and too old for that shit)]]

I don't think I will change my mind either but I feel like the belief that every trauma is equally bad is just... Simply wrong. Like, we can legit compare this stuff and how badly it affects our brain, what do y'all think psychologists research 🤷‍♀️ Like, your therapist won't tell you this because it's not their job to make you understand you not the centre of the Earth (and it won't help because it is a legit trauma response that is very valid but is annoying you're fucking 25 yo). And to say that, neglectful parenthood is probably the worst parenthood style, as far as I know XD I wrote coursework about this (neglectful bitches are having a lot of need to make us the biggest victims (the bitches is me))... It also feels really American to me? Like, are we going to pretend people who got to live in a nice house and were neglect somehow got it as bad as people living in poverty or warzones? Hello? Imagine telling some orphan "I know you have no parents but actually, my trauma of my father not spending enough time with me is just as severe as yours". Bruh couldn't be me sorry... Like, even taking into account the fact that we can have weaker or stronger nervous systems or be more prone to depressive episodes *looks in the mirror and cries* I simply wouldn't find the guts to say my trauma is as severe as idk people who had physically abusive parents or no parents at all or who were disowned for being gay

And like **again** I am not saying that neglect is not traumatic I WAS NEGLECTED THIS IS TRAUMATIZING AS FUCK. I just am living in a country at war and with lots of discrimination problems and I like... Can't say I am the biggest victim. Sorry I can't though there were times when I was a lot more bitchy especially before being in therapy so I understand where you are coming from and I know what I am saying won't resonate with everyone (it's ok go on your own healing journey I believe in you) but this doesn't mean it is garbage and won't help me or someone else... I've already talked once about it but as a person, I am very easily irritated and envious and really not your local Jesus and partially my trauma turned me like this so being more humble about my sufferings helps me not be a complete bitch (believe me or not but people with traumas and mental illnesses are often insufferable *looks in the mirror* not me though I am perfect... BUT IT IS OK TO BE INSUFFERABLE OK??? like, bitch, that's normal. That's normal to stink when you are depressed it's ok to be a bitch when you are hurting. Forgive yourself because I forgive you (when you are not being an abusive asshole but if you apologize and explain yourself I will forgive that too)

The reason why I talk about the fact he is rich is that I've got a disease called leftism and I am a person of several marginalized identities and since this fandom LOVES looking at characters like real humans, I looked at Dabi this way. And if Dabi was a real human, I wouldn't sympathize with him one bit. I would fucking hate him for being the biggest entitled asshole who commits crimes for the reason his Daddy didn't give him attention. Bitch, my Dad didn't give me attention either! But somehow I don't kill people! And I don't even have money!!!! But like... I am not denying that neglectful parents are not a problem. It is. But he is overreacting, bro. He needs to humble down and recognize the fact he is a fucking idiot (he is). He has inherently so much more resources to recover and heal himself than I had... Yes, I am just being jealous at this point but honestly. Making an entire country suffer for you is not a good thing and y'all need to stop using trauma and mental illness as an excuse for people. No! Being abusive to people because of neglect is not valid, is overreacting and you had no reason to do that. I am dismissing your trauma because you are exaggerating it to make me sympathize with your asshole behaviour. I won't judge people with different sets of standards as I judge myself

I bet it would be dismissive and bad if I said it in conversation with someone who is currently struggling with mental health and is not a murderer. But guess what! I don't talk with humans and my friends the same way I talk on my Tumblr about fictional characters 🤷‍♀️ Not to mention I don't have rich friends akabsksbxm

I think with Dabi there's this whole thing where we saw him at 14 (poor baby boy) and 24 (a grown-ass boy) and... Like, I am so sorry for 14 years old Touya not receiving the help he needs (bruh so relatable) but I am not gonna act like 24 years old bitch can't get his ass to a psychiatrist (extremely unrelatable and infuriating). We shouldn't apply the same standards to kids and adults. We can talk all day long about how society is bad and how our parents ruined us but at some points, you gotta take your life into your own hands and do something and be an adult. And it's fucking hard when you're born with a shitty brain that was fucked up by your parents even more in a society where no one gives a fuck but I sincerely don't know another way to live. You will feel bad and want to die but you either keep on recovering or keep on getting worse and at this point getting worse is Dabi's *choice* That's how I live, that's my framework and I am, of course, extremely fortunate in a lot of ways but I just don't know how are you supposed to survive without the notion that grown people are responsible for themselves and their mental health. We can't act like adults are babies

But as a character, Dabi is fucking hot ngl. Like, do I sometimes want to murder my entire family, make them suffer AND commit terrorist attacks? We all do. Dabi is the dark fantasy of us neglectful bitches craving some attention. Gotta kill the president and tell everyone that my Dad sucks. Imagine the entire country hearing your Dad sucks? That's the juice, that's the dream. Trauma makes you vicious. I get the sentiment. Imagine all those fuckers who made you feel like shit pissing their pants and crying? Imagine your Mom being afraid of you the way you used to be afraid of her? People do have the desire for some violent justice but like... Think of bullied kids committing school shootings. But instead of a kid, it's a grown man who graduated school and who also have a rich father

Ok too much about irl stuff and philosophy shit. I know my way of talking is kinda brute so just know the way I treat people is different from that I treat fictional characters, in particular, I don't call real-life humans submissive and breedable... And stuff...

Damn Dabi is kinda good to project your hatred of your parents in bruh, I should write a fanfic about that (would be cathartic)

To the plotline, I am also very interested in what the hell happened with him after burning because... How the hell he wasn't found? I kind of DON'T want him to be groomed at this point because I feel like it won't be as cool as him just more naturally evolving into what he became. Like, surely, he is an asshole but consider this: as a villain, he is morally obligated to be an asshole

I feel like someone hiding him and Touya overstating the gruesomeness of his living conditions to the dude so he feels *bad* for him and hides him and feels sympathy and Touya gets attention but also begins to reassure himself in the fact his Dad needs to be punished... Idk it's a lot of mystery but I feel like more suffering won't deliver the point the way I want it... I mean it CAN be handled this way and initially I thought a lot about Dabi being brainwashed a bit or having his memories altered so it seems worse to him or even him being groomed or lied too but nowadays I am not into it. I mean I believe in Horikoshi and that he will handle him well 🛐

I talk a lot so I will summarize

If we judge him as a real human

14 yo Touya - DID NOTHING WRONG IN HIS LIFE PROTECT HIM

24 yo Dabi - go fuck yourself bitch you older than me and act like a child and kill people, I couldn't care less about your trauma rich boy

If you want me to talk as his psychologist

Yeah, it is painful and sad, I understand him so much and surely, his trauma is valid as is his hatred but probably revenge won't bring him what he wants. And what he wants is love and attention. But he gotta make choices that will lead to his healing. He needs to *want* to heal. And we will step by step go to the healing because it is possible. He is loved and he is enough. AND YOU ALL MOTHERFUCKERS WILL HEAL I BELIEVE IN YOU BESTIES

Also his therapist (behind his back)

You won't believe it but my client is the most infantile attention whore I've ever met

But if we talk about him as a character... Very delicious soup

If you talk with your friends

Please, if your friends are being abusive to you or someone else don't even LET them say how their trauma made them this way. No. Nothing allows you to be an abuser. Call them out and stop them and make them talk to the therapist. Like, surely, there are extreme situations like severe mental illnesses or extreme neglect where we should be more forgiving but babying adults won't do you any good and won't make them recover

Yeah, I guess this is what I forgot to say. When I say "it wasn't that bad" what I mean is that I would be more forgiving to people who had it worse. It's more of a personal measure where I can tolerate stuff from people who had particular traumas or from those who suffered greatly (it's not my place to be a bitch here). I can forgive 14 years old or a poor person for stealing stuff but not the 25-year-old man who got no need for money and is not a kleptomaniac. I would be more forgiving to Shigaraki than to Dabi because Shigaraki was groomed a whole lot. Same for Toga, who is not even an adult or Twice who is a poor orphan. But that doesn't mean I would forgive them completely. All of them are shitty people. It's just that they had fewer resources and possibilities to not be what they became while Dabi had more but he acts like he is extremely hurt and the biggest victim which is like... There will be people like this in your life, please, don't make friends with them, they WILL abuse you

I talked a lot damn. It's adhd I can't shut up

[vanityloves]

🎫 here's a gush pass! feel free to gush about whichever f/o you want, however much you want, then send this ask to 3 other selfshippers!

oh man, thank you jsjsj ive gotten a few of these but ive been too anxious to actually go off ab my f/o but, lets fucking gooooo!

can i talk ab the actual animation of the source material is that allowed?

they gave us this but we ended up with

WHICH LISTEN- I enjoy n love regardless. I just find the contrasts in phases fascinating and funny. I loved his appearance in phases 1 and 2; what a fucking iconic character design. The animation is so endearing and amazing- the thicker lines, the fluidity, the range. Like the first gif that shows the vibrations of the vehicle in his shoulders/shirt? The simplistic art style was nice and even if hes Hard On The Eyes, I'm like 🥴 ok ugly ❤.

Not like the newer mvs are any less quality content - its nice to see the use of thick and thinner lines and there's definitely a different feel to it - more child friendly or easy going? Idk how to explain it. Murdoc as a character is still very, Not Child Friendly, and Im always like :cursed emoji: when someone says that their 14 year old watches their videos like help, his dick is out in at least 3 dif vids (censored ofc but man).

They definitely lost me after the 4th phase though and many people argue that the band/music lost its meaning, which i can honestly agree with (esp when they didnt name officially name 4, 5 and 6. Im p sure ppl refer to 4 as We Are Still Humanz).

I was never an avid/active fan of keeping up with the characters and didnt really think they had any story anyways, i was like "feel good inc is sexy. melancholy hill's a banger" so honestly, finding out that these apes actually have lore was fun.

Murdoc being the given this tragic backstory made my eyes Zoom, and ofc I was like "oh youre funny looking and sad. I want you ♡." In a weird way, I take a lot of comfort that 'we both have shit parents' and 'no one really thought we'd amount to anything'. to be fair, i haven't accomplished anything yet, and even if hes a bunch of pixels who i know doesnt really exist, its kind of motivating bc he never gave up? A literal quote from him being "If there’s a dream in your heart, never let anyone tell you you’ve got no talent. Get out there, embarrass yourself, and prove to the world you’ve got no talent." With how many failures hes faced he never stopped trying to prove himself worthy of attention and fame and love, which is ambitious and kind of intimidating with how much confidnece he has.

Hes a complete bastard of a man and not even close to being a good person. He's definitely complicated but can be boiled down to "just an abusive asshole", which, hey, fair. I hate the way he treats 2D, its so toxic and terrible. Honestly, its inexcusable and he needs to apologize, grow and learn a LOT and god knows he needs therapy.

I think the most tragic thing ab his character is that he basically ended up like his father and to some extent, he acknowledges it. His bad habits and behaviors stem from abuse and neglect which doesnt excuse his actions but, "man hands on misery to man." I feel like theres a haunting part to his whole life - we don't know much about his mother and brother but from assuming things, I know they weren't innocent, clean, or soft spoken, let alone, kind. I think he has a "It runs in the family" mentality and gives into it bc there's no use in running from something so deeply engraved within him.

But as a man of contradiction, hes shown to care, despite "hating everything, including himself". To be short, his father was a failure and a man thats never worked for his own money, so he contradicts that and escapes that part of 'failure running in the family' by forming Gorillaz. I do think theres something way more ab his character in that regard. I think theres a lot that he needs to work on but he's escaped a part of that mindset, and his 'Plastic Beach'. I wonder what theyre gonna do with valley of the pagans thing.

I guess as a band, theyre not gonna show a lot of "behind the scenes" stuff like that. We wont know if he ever gets help, or apologizes, or even feels sorry - its up to us to decide which is a safe game to play on Their Behalf.

People are upset that hes actually cleaned up a bit and is shown to be nicer bc they miss having that disgusting, cruel man which again, I understand. He has always been the antagonist to the entire band. But as someone that likes to see people happier n mellow (or, boring) rather than doing shit and compensating for their depression, its nice to see that type of development (or downgrade, depending on how you see it).

This could be Their (read: jamie and damon) way of being lazy by making him 'mellow out w/ age' or whatever it is. It definitely seems to woobify his character and intentions but well, His Main Goal, Was To Blow Up. And Act Like He Dont Know Nobodaaayyy argargarg and guess what? He's already made it- he's successful, he's rich, he's famous, he's adored. Now what? Maybe this is just his way of taking it easy from here on out - who knows.

Gorillaz definitely took a turn after all the brand deals so it lost its meaning (since one of the phases had a 'fuck capitalism' message) and with that, Murdoc is no longer allowed to be the stank bitch hes was always meant to be, no more obvious sex and drugs, for the new gen 🥴 ironically a lot of songs 'today' are always complained ab being ab sex, drugs, and whatever, but they def needed to step on the breaks when Money/Companies got involved. So here we have The Wigglez 😌💕

ANYWAYS, I LOVE HIM LOTS, HAVING MANY THOUGHTS

[shadowmaat]

Blame Game

I think one of the biggest grievances I have with woobifying sexy white male villains is that the fans who do it strip those characters of all responsibility for their actions. It isn’t [Villain]’s fault he slaughtered all those people, he was being mind controlled! He was manipulated into it! He was scared! He felt abandoned by the people who were supposed to love him! The excuses go on and on, but at the core of it the issue with woobified villains is, in part, an issue that’s also part of modern America: moderately attractive white men/teens aren’t responsible for their crimes. 

Rape? The girl shouldn’t have been drunk, shouldn’t have been dressed like that, shouldn’t have led him on, etc.

Mass shooting? He was bullied, he was “mentally ill,” he was upset at being turned down by that girl he asked out. It was video games that made him do it. 

Murder? Well, if he was a cop then it was the victim’s fault for acting threatening, running away, being black, not doing what he was told. If it’s a regular person, then again, he’s probably just “mentally ill” or didn’t understand the consequences of his actions, or maybe he was just holding the gun and didn’t know it was loaded and it just went off by accident.

Hell, in some cases you don’t even need to be remotely attractive in order to have your crimes dismissed. Just look at T.rump. ;)

I see a lot of people get righteously angry when shit like that gets reported on the news, but then some of those same people (mostly women and girls) will turn around and use those same kind of excuses for their white male faves, along with genre-specific excuses like mind control or “evil twins” or whatever.

There’s nothing wrong with loving villains- hell, I love a few of them myself- but refusing to acknowledge that they ARE villains, especially when you get to the point of twisting reality like a pretzel and then pretending that your interpretation is the one TRUE canon, that’s... a lot less good. Have all the AUs you want, but admit that they’re AUs. And also maybe try to recognize that excuses like “child abuse” and “mental illness” are NEVER valid reasons for committing atrocities. Not in the real world and not in fiction.

For the record, I 100% believe that if T.rump had been an actual comic book villain instead of a real world figure he would have legions of fangirls headcanoning him as sexy and attractive and totally not guilty. Poor woobiekins is just a victim of jealousy and a campaign of misinformation!

[jilyandbambi]

sybilius replied to your post “I just spent 2 hours reading all of Sharp Objects from cover to cover...”

i never read the book but their relationship in the show is absolutely perfect

In the book, Amma comes off as more sociopathic (I say, as someone without a background in psychology). Her and Amma’s first meeting and first official introduction is much frostier than in the miniseries, and overall her character comes off as a lot more cold-hearted and malicious. Yes, even given the reveal. Even her interactions with Camille read, to me, as less “damaged child with a warped sense of boundaries attempting to forge a bond with the big sister she’s always been curious about,” and more “Genderswapped, Southern-Gothic Ramsay Bolton who’s found a new toy.” It’s less needling Camille in an attempt to get to know her because she’s actually curious and more teasing Camille purely out of maliciousness and jealousy. 

Even Amma’s attempt to make amends with Camille following the scene at the dress shop plays out differently in the show vs. the book, emphasizing why I (a non-psychologist) would say book!Amma as someone exhibiting signs of Antisocial Personality Disorder. In the book, Amma makes peace with Camille by offering her a joint (drugs, something Amma enjoys + takes comfort in), whereas in the miniseries, Amma makes up for the shopping trip by giving Camille a long-sleeved dress (apology rooted in something that will make Camille happy + feel comfortable). 

I point to the differences in these two scenes to say that show!Amma, from the moment of her and Camille’s proper introduction, exhibits a keen desire to know Camille, the person, to forge a bond with her, to become important to her, to be saved by her (”Take me to St. Louis with you”//”Please stay”//”You could practice on me.”//running away during the Calhoun Day play so that Camille--and Camille, specifically, will come and find her//) 

(Side note, it’s my strong opinion, as--and I cannot stress this enough--a non-psychologist that show!Amma isn’t actually a psychopath or a sociopath or has any shades of whatever Adora’s illness is; rather, I think Amma is suffering from a severe case of C-PTSD, as is Camille, and Amma’s crimes (like Camille’s cutting) are a way of reliving/playing out the years-long trauma inflicted on her by Adora--NOT THAT THIS IS AN EXCUSE OR ME WOOBIFYING HER, just character analysis-->but this is another post. Anywho, I bring this up because looking for a “rescuer”-->someone to take you away from the abuse (Amma) or save you from the pain/trauma of reliving it (Camille) is one of the key symptoms of C-PTSD. I think Amma definitely does this with Camille and I think Camille does this again and again, with Jackie (which is part of the reason she’s so betrayed at Jackie’s revelation), with Curry, with Alice (who reminds Camille of the sister who was her ‘anchor’ during the time of the abuse), and finally, with Amma. It’s complicated, and I don’t want this side note to become a post unto itself. Moving on!) 

All this is why I hands down prefer Amma’s characterization and her and Camille’s relationship by extension in the miniseries as opposed to the way it’s presented in the novel. The changes to the character and to the development of the relationship enriches both, taking Camille and Amma from two irreparably  people trying to use the other to, at times, fill a void (Camille) and take apart and discard (Amma) the way the do in the books; to two abuse victims who grow to love one another quite deeply and see in one another the chance to heal and find the safety and unconditional love they’ve always sought. 

The latter, in my opinion, makes the ending of Amma and Camille’s story that much more of a gut-punch. However flawed and unhealthily, show!Amma genuinely loved Camille, wanted to know her, wanted to be a family with her, and Camille wanted the same, just as ardently, which is why it hurts so mcfricken badly when their happy ending gets snatched away from both of them once the truth is revealed. It’s also why, I don’t think, we needed the novel’s epilogue included in the miniseries. 

In the novel, Amma never asks for Camille to take her in (unless I’m missing some scenes). It happens, eventually, but it kind of goes sour from the start. Amma isn’t happy with Camille and Camille takes Amma out of obligation and is just as miserable. There’s no sense of closure, of catharsis, of YES, this is what they deserve that then gets ripped away when the truth comes out. In the book, Camille and Amma aren’t each other’s happy endings, Camille’s happy ending is going to live with the family of choice she’s found with Curry and Eileen. I think they cut this part out of the miniseries because the journey we went on with these characters in this retelling is different. Being together with Amma in St. Louis was what show!Camille wanted and now that she’s lost it, the horror sets in not just because of the twist, but also because the viewer knows there won’t be any coming back from this for Camille (Amma, I think, knows this, too, which is why her “Don’t tell Mama” at the end, to me, sounds regretful, for what both she and Camille are going to lose. In the book, she’s described as smug). 

Paradoxically, though, the changes the miniseries made leave me hopeful for Amma, pre-reveal, I mean. If she, after 13 years of abuse and gaslighting was still able to desire and form any semblance of a genuine connection and emotional attachment suggests to me that show!Amma, at least, wasn’t always a lost cause and could have been saved from herself had Jackie stayed on the wagon or Camille come home sooner. Book!Amma, on the other hand, reads as having always been a little mini-Adora, which makes this iteration much less interesting to me, tbh. 

[the-desolated-quill]

We Need To Talk About James Gunn - Quill’s Scribbles

This could prove to be the most controversial Scribble I’ve ever written on this blog, and the sad thing is it really shouldn’t be, in my opinion.

First off, a couple of disclaimers because I know some people are going to accuse me of ‘bias’. I’ve never been very fond of James Gunn as a filmmaker, it’s true. I thought the first Guardians Of The Galaxy movie was okay at best and I absolutely hated the sequel, but I confess that’s less to do with any inherent flaws in the films themselves and more to do with the fact that I just don’t like Gunn’s style of humour. Oh don’t get me wrong. There are still legitimate problems, which I’ll go into later when they become relevant, but I’m big enough to admit that my dislike for his brand of comedy and storytelling is merely due to my own subjective tastes (the same is true of Taika Waititi and Thor: Ragnarok).

Okay. So. Let’s talk about James Gunn.

As I’m sure most of you know, in July 2018, an alt-right conspiracy theorist called Mike Cernovich unearthed tweets made by Gunn between 2008 and 2012 where he made offensive jokes and remarks about sensitive topics such as rape, child abuse and paedophilia. While James Gunn did apologise and vowed to ‘do better,’ Disney, fearing the public backlash, fired Gunn as director of Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 and dismissed him from any role in producing and expanding Marvel’s planned ‘Cosmic Universe.’ The result was the public backlash Disney were trying to avoid in the first place. They received a lot of criticism from various entertainers and filmmakers, as well as many media outlets such as Collider and The Independent, the cast of Guardians wrote a letter urging Disney to reconsider their decision with Dave Bautista in particular being very vocal in his criticism, and there was a massive outcry from fans who petitioned for Gunn to be rehired. Guy Lodge, writing for The Guardian, asked the question ‘Was James Gunn the first undeserving victim of Hollywood’s new zero tolerance policy?’ Now I’d argue the answer to that question is a definitive no, but apparently, and surprisingly, that’s not a very popular opinion among liberals. So I’d very much like to challenge them as we explore James Gunn’s moral character and ask ourselves why he’s being defended so passionately.

Before we go any further, I think it would be a good idea for me to show you some of the tweets that we’re talking about, just to remind everyone what we’re dealing with here.

Now I hope we can all agree that this is objectively disgusting. Only an amoral, depraved and utterly moronic individual would find offensive tweets like these even remotely funny. But I should make it clear that, by James Gunn’s own admission, these tweets represent who he was rather than who he is. In his apology, he described himself as a ‘provocateur’ during the early days of his career, making shocking statements for the purposes of ‘satire.’ But it’s okay because he’s a better person who has grown and matured fully and will never do this again. Fair enough, you’d think. He admitted what he did was wrong and apologised profusely. That was a very honourable and decent thing to do.

Except we’ve seen this song and dance before.

In 2012, roundabout when Marvel announced they were making a Guardians Of The Galaxy movie with James Gunn directing, an old blog post of Gunn’s resurfaced entitled ‘The 50 Superheroes You Most Want To Have Sex With.’ The original post has since been deleted, but cached versions still exist here and there around the internet if you know where to look. Here are a few quotes from said blog:

[on natasha romanoff, the highest ~debut] “considering she’s fucked half the guys in the marvel universe, that’s quite a feat”

[on batwoman] “i’m hoping for a dc-marvel crossover so that tony stark can turn her; she could also have sex with nightwing and still be a lesbian”

”Many of the people who voted for the Flash were gay men. I have no idea why this is. But I do know if I was going to get fucked in the butt I too would want it to be by someone who would get it over with quick.”

Needless to say, this was quite offensive and causing bad PR, so James Gunn issued an apology:

“A couple of years ago I wrote a blog that was meant to be satirical and funny. In rereading it over the past day I don’t think it’s funny. The attempted humor in the blog does not represent my actual feelings. However, I can see where statements were poorly worded and offensive to many. I’m sorry and regret making them at all.

People who are familiar with me as evidenced by my Facebook page and other mediums know that I’m an outspoken proponent for the rights of the gay and lesbian community, women and anyone who feels disenfranchised, and it kills me that some other outsider like myself, despite his or her gender or sexuality, might feel hurt or attacked by something I said. We’re all in the same camp, and I want to do my best to make this world a better place for all of us. I’m learning all the time. I promise to be more careful with my words in the future. And I will do my best to be funnier as well. Much love to all – James”

Sound familiar?

Now of course it’s unfair to judge the man based on past actions that he himself apologised for. What matters is the present. Whether or not he has demonstrated to a reasonable standard that his work has grown and matured and that his offensive idiocy is a thing of the past. So let’s look at the Guardians Of The Galaxy movies.

While the first movie received critical acclaim, a few people (particularly fans of the source material) complained about how Gamora was treated. The so called ‘most powerful woman in the galaxy’ was reduced to a love interest, an occasional damsel in distress and there were a few odd occasions where she was objectified and degraded based on her sexual history. The most prominent example of which is when Drax describes her as ‘a green whore.’ The context being that he was ignorant of how offensive he was being despite trying to compliment her and call her a friend, and this was played for laughs in the movie. The second movie has more examples. Gamora’s role still paled in comparison to the role she played in the comics, and a new female character called Mantis was introduced whose power level from the comics was also significantly reduced for the movie and whose character was effectively reduced to be a punchline/punching bag. There’s also a scene involving Drax where he frequently describes her as ugly, saying that "when you're ugly and someone loves you, you know they love you for who you are. Beautiful people never know who to trust." Again this is played for laughs. Except I’d argue that an adult man constantly fixating on a woman’s appearance isn’t even remotely funny. 

Another disturbing aspect of the Guardians 2 was the way it seemed to romanticise and excuse abusive relationships. Obviously there’s Drax and Mantis, but the biggest example is Star Lord and Yondu. The first movie did a reasonably good job establishing what drew Star Lord and Gamora together. They were both trying to escape from abusive father figures. The second film does a complete U-turn, calling Yondu Star Lord’s ‘David Hasselhoff’ and giving him a gratuitous and overly sentimental funeral as though he were a noble hero. While I’m sure the death of Yondu would emotionally impact Star Lord to a certain extent (he did raise the kid after all), to say that he’s like ‘David Hasselhoff’ because he’s a better dad than Ego the Living Planet was seems like a very low bar to clear. By that logic, Hitler was a good person because he didn’t kill as many people as Stalin did. It’s tone deaf, lacking in nuance and just a little bit insulting.

Bearing all this in mind, has James Gunn grown and matured since the period between 2008 and 2012? That’s for you to judge. I’d personally argue he hasn’t. Sure he’s no longer as extreme or provocative as he once was, but that’s not necessarily proof that he’s matured. Rather he’s just gotten better at hiding his immaturity. And in my own subjective opinion, based on his work, I think Disney made the right decision in sacking him. Now let me be clear, I don’t think Disney sacked him in order to take a moral stand as a lot of the problematic elements in the Guardians films have carried over into other MCU films. Gamora is still treated like shit in Avengers: Infinity War, and Thanos, who, like Yondu, was clearly established in the first Guardians movie as an abusive father figure, has been woobified and turned into a kind of sympathetic anti villain who actually cared about his daughter and only killed her because he had no other choice (as opposed to, you know, because he is a maniacal despot who’s a few Oompa Loompas short of a chocolate factory). The reason Gunn was fired was because of bad PR. Disney had dealt with this shit before in 2012 and they weren’t prepared to deal with it again, so they dropped the baggage, as it were. It’s a very common occurrence in Hollywood. Which is what makes the public backlash against this decision so puzzling to me.

I can understand being upset that the director of your favourite franchise has been fired, but can we try to get some perspective here? What happened to Gunn is nothing unique. This kind of thing happens all the time. A filmmaker does something controversial or has been revealed to have done something controversial in the past, the studio sacks them in an attempt to save face and everyone gets on with their lives. The situation with James Gunn is no different. The only reason I can see why people are so passionately against this is because of how these tweets were unearthed in the first place. Because the discoverer of the tweets, Mike Cernovich, is a member of the alt-right, the liberal community seem predisposed to dismiss this out of hand, which I think is incredibly dangerous. Okay, yes, Cernovich is a Nazi and almost certainly didn’t do this out of the goodness of his heart, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. It doesn’t change the fact that the tweets still exist and that they’re still incredibly offensive. And all the things I’ve heard people say in defence of James Gunn sound very similar to things the right would say about the likes of Brett Cavanaugh and Donald Trump. ‘It was x number of years ago.’ ‘It’s not relevant to who he is now.’ ‘He’s changed.’ ‘You can’t judge someone based on their past mistakes.’ I mean... come on guys! Either everyone should be held to the same standard or nobody should be held to standards at all. You can’t just change tact just because the person in question has the same political ideals as you. What are we saying? It’s okay for liberals to hold conservatives accountable for past actions and behaviour, but the right can’t do it to the left because apparently it’s not as funny when they do it? It’s classic ‘them and us’ mentality and it’s got to stop.

So, why am I bringing all this up, you may be asking? This happened over six months ago Quill. Aren’t you a little late to the party? Well a couple of days ago, it was announced that Warner Bros and DC Films had hired James Gunn to write and direct a sequel to Suicide Squad.

Well... sequel isn’t quite the right word. Apparently it’s more along the lines of a reimagining. Titled ‘The Suicide Squad’, the film is going to follow a whole new cast of characters and effectively start from scratch. No doubt this is part of WB and DC’s attempts to salvage the DC Extended Universe after the critical and financial disaster that was Justice League, as well as a response to people’s criticisms of the previous Suicide Squad film.

Writer/director David Ayer’s version of Suicide Squad was... let’s be charitable and call it problematic. Many people criticised the film for being misogynistic, borderline racist due to the one dimensional characterisation, and particular outrage was directed toward Ayer’s attempts to romanticise the relationship between the Joker and Harley Quinn. So it’s quite ironic that WB and DC are relying on James Gunn - James Gunn?!?! - to fix Suicide Squad when similar criticisms have been made toward the Guardians Of The Galaxy movies. That’s like hiring Harvey Weinstein to investigate sexual harassment claims.

And do you know what the funny thing is? We’ve been in this exact same situation before. In February 2017, news media started to report that WB and DC were eyeing Mel Gibson, the Oscar nominated director of Hawksaw Ridge and professional arsehole, to direct Suicide Squad 2. I even wrote a Scribble on it then. I heavily criticised WB and DC for caring more about snagging an Oscar nominated director to bolster their failing franchise than about holding certain ethical standards of decency within the industry. Oh, sure, Gibson has said many sexist, homophobic and antisemitic comments for years and has never at any point showed any hint of remorse for the amount of offence he’s caused, but he just made a good movie about Spider-Man fighting in World War II, so it all balances out, doesn’t it? We’re good, right? We’re cool. Gibson’s cool now. Yeah?

And now here we are seeing this play out again. James Gunn, a man who has said some incredibly offensive things over the years, is being hired by WB and DC to helm a new Suicide Squad movie and conveniently ignoring all the problematic shit surrounding him because he’s the guy that made those sci-fi films about the talking raccoon. People love those films. Let’s get him on board.

I’m getting so sick to death of actors and filmmakers getting away with shit and avoiding the consequences of their actions. James Gunn and his offensive tweets, Mel Gibson and his shitty behaviour, Kevin Hart and his temper tantrum when he was expected to apologise for being a homophobic prick. And the few times there are consequences for said actions, people of influence within the industry end up undermining it. WB and DC hiring James Gunn so soon after he was sacked by Disney, and Ellen fucking Degeneres ringing the Academy and persuading them to let Kevin Hart host the Oscars. Thankfully, and to his genuine credit, Hart turned it down, but seriously, what the actual fuck Ellen?! You’re LGBT, aren’t you? Why are you giving him a free pass? Do you have short term memory loss like the fish you voice in Finding fucking Nemo? Jesus Christ!

Finally, to people saying that Disney treated James Gunn too harshly for the tweets, may I remind you that when ‘The 50 Superheroes You Most Want To Have Sex With’ resurfaced in 2012, Disney still kept him on! He still got to write and direct two Marvel movies before finally getting the sack. And he was in talks to lead production in all future ‘Cosmic’ Marvel movies going forward before the resurfaced tweets made that impossible. Too harshly? I think he got off extremely lightly, frankly. I think he’s grotesquely lucky he’s still got a job at all. Let alone a job where he continues to direct tentpole blockbusters. For someone who was treated ‘too harshly’, he’s sure done alright for himself, hasn’t he? He’s not Oliver Twist begging movie studios to give him a film, cap in hand, ‘please sir, may I have some more?’ His position hasn’t changed one iota. That’s what we should be pissed off at. Not that he’s being unfairly punished. That he’s not being punished enough roughly seven years after the fact.

So what should we take away from all this? That we need to hold everyone accountable for their past actions and behaviour, regardless of whether they share our political beliefs or whether they were involved in films we actually like, and that the industry needs to do a better job of upholding the consequences of said actions. And regardless of whether you thought Disney were right to sack James Gunn, it cannot be denied that WB and DC handing the keys of another profitable franchise over to him so soon after this controversy is an incredibly irresponsible thing to do.

[awesome-bamon]

Reylo fandom is worst than the TVD fandom.... (Long post)

Thoughts have come into my mind about how the Reylo fandom is worse than the TVD fandom.  And now I’m going to explain why and write out my thoughts.

First let me make this clear that all of the ships on TVD whether they’re canon or just fanon, are toxic and have their abusive elements/factors to them.  Every single male character on the show that the women characters are shipped with have a history of being violent, abusive, murderous and have their fair share of heinous, violent crimes against  other people.  

And they all have shown violence towards those they are shipped with or have has scenes where they have abused, physically hurt or even attempted to kill the women that they are shipped with.  One could say that they have committed  violent, heinous acts on the same level as Kylo Ren has.

And I’ll also make it clear that the TVD fandom is similar to the Reylo fandom or any other fandom with an abusive, violent, problematic male character (who has a history of murdering or abusing people).  In the way that the TVD fandom makes excuses for their fave problematic, white male character.  In how they woobify him, come up with metas and long explanations to absolve and exonerate their faves malicious actions and crimes.  Especially with the violent/abusive acts committed towards the woman that they ship him with.

How they all insist and say that their fave can just be changed through the love of woman, how all it takes is the woman that they ship him with coming along to “fix” him and to heal him, making him decide to never do another violent/abusive act for the rest of his life.  And that if the woman character would only accept him, embrace him and forgive him for all he has done wrong that he’ll just change into a better man.

That her love for him or his love for her can magically heal him (without any type of effort to actually change as an individual or taking it upon himself to change, instead of relying on the love/acceptance of a woman.) (The Abduction as romance video really made a good point in how the entertainment industry sells how all it takes is for the right woman to come along for a man with a history of being awful to be able to magically change his ways overnight). In reality it would take self reflection/self work.  So, the idea of a woman loving/accepting a man into being good or that it is her job to babysit him, parent him, and coddle to him to make sure he behaves him and doesn’t go out and do something awful is an idea that needs to be gotten rid of in society all together.

So, this pattern of justifying a problematic male fave’s actions and not being willing to hold him fully accountable for it is something that happens across all fandoms and not just the Reylo fandom.

More than once a Reylo Stan has brought up me being a fan of Damon Salvatore saying “Well, you ship Bamon.”  As a counter point to my views against Kylo Ren.

Yes,  Damon has done many horrible, selfish things.  He has done over his fair share of  cold blooded murders and heinous actions.  He has shown violence towards women.  And as I said every ship on TVD has is toxic and has it’s abusive factors.  Including Bamon.  Which I admit and make no excuses for.

Not saying that fans should be forbidden to Stan for male villains or problematic male characters.  Just that they acknowledge their fave for what he is and not attempt to woobify him or coming up with metas to absolve him of his violence/abuse.  And not try to turn his ships into something that is healthy when it is not.

Again you could say or believe that Damon’s heinous actions are equal to Kylo’s and that he isn’t any better than Kylo Ren in relation to that. Yet, Damon has usually been mentioned as a counter point to me making posts against Kylo/Reylo.

Like they’re trying to say that I an a hypocrite or have double standards. But, what they either miss or over look is how the Reylo fandom is still bigger hypocrites when they try to deflect to me shipping Bamon.

Which brings me around to the point of my topic.  Most of the TVD “rival” ships have one problematic male character with a history of violence, going up against another problematic male character with a history of violence.  So, in the ship wars of the TVD fandom you would see.  “Well, your fave’s murders, abuse, awful acts were worse than my fave’s murders, abuse,awful acts.  Therefore he is the better love interest for *fill in blank*  TVD female character.”

Outside of the ship/fan wars.  I’ll admit that when someone has a  problem with Damon, they had perfectly valid/righteous reasons to call out his history of violence and murders.  And are correct in pointing out his abuse/ harmful actions against women.

Still the TVD fandom is one problematic white male fave against another problematic white male fave, who have both murdered and abused.  So, it can be truly said about how all of the ships are toxic and no ship is truly healthy.  And that no male character on TVD is really morally superior over the other.

Now, I say that the Reylo fandom is worse because unlike the case of TVD, with Finnrey  vs Reylo.  You have one side with a problematic, violent white male character. With a history of violence and a history of murdering people.  Who has hurt/harm/nearly killed the woman that he is shipped with.

Then the other side with the black male character.  Who suffered through being kidnapped and forced to be raised into a cold blooded killer.  Yet, still choose to break apart from the, refusing to murder and instead fleeing so that  he could join the light and fight on the good side against those which kidnapped  him, stole his child hood and tried to get him to do their ill will.

And since he escaped the side of evil.  He has done nothing but risk his life/well being to become a hero to defeat the evil side.  Plus met this woman who fighting for the resistance, therefore joining her and wanting to fight by her side.  He grew to care for this woman.  Showing her nothing but love, appreciation and respect.  Do all that he could do for her well being.  Cared deeply about keeping her safe and away from harm.  Risked himself when she was in harms way.  And has a true heart of good and the desire/will to do right.

But, despite this black male character’s pure heart of gold and his caring and appreciation for the heroine of the story.  You still see Stans of the problematic white male villain go out of their way to demonize the black male character.  Trying to find reasons for why everything that he has done is some how wrong, malicious or secretly filled with malice.  Or somehow bad and “villain like” in some form. 

Especially in his scenes/actions with the heroine.  As they try to break down scenes to convince people in the fandom how his actions/words towards her are somehow “toxic”, “unhealthy”, “mean”, “abusive”, “Stalker like” or somehow “disrespectful of her agency.”

While at the same time justifying their problematic white male fave. Who actually did  the things they accuse the black male hero character of doing towards the woman.  While they come up with novel metas to absolve and exonerate their fave, making long explanations to woobify him for why he really isn’t truly at fault or to be blamed for his decisions. How he really couldn’t help but to be the way that he is because of his abusive child hood, rough life, his manpain, or his mental illness. (Again this type of thing you see across all fandoms).  And how he is just an misunderstood soul at heart. 

Those who mention Damon to try to deflect, just highlights the hypocrisy and the double standards of the Reylo fandom all the more.  Because they have to go outside of the Star Wars fandom to point out another problematic, white male character like their own.

Yet, if we keep the discussion within the Star Wars fandom and it’s ship wars.  Then we’re talking about Finn vs Kylo.  Those in the TVD fandom have valid reasons to point out Damon’s history of shitty behaviors (whether or not everyone agrees with the same ship).  

But, with Finn there are ZERO reasons to demonize his actions.  Because NOTHING he does has been any where near on the same level as the awful things problematic white male faves have done.  NOTHING Finn has done towards Rey is unhealthy, toxic, or abusive.  While Kylo’s actions with her are all of that.

The only  people who take Finn and attempt to twist his actions in the movie, into something bad, awful, and “villain like”, are Kylo Ren Stans.   The only ones who try to demonize, criminalize Finn’s scenes with  Rey are Reylo Stans.  Who have an agenda to demonize Finn because they want to uplift, praise and crown Kylo Ren as being the better man/love interest.  In their attempt to paint Finn as the truly unhealthy man in Rey’s life and Kylo Ren as the truly loving one who has her best interest at heart, they reach so far that their arms can stretch  out and touch the moon.

So, desperate to absolve the white man that they will work extra hard and are hell bent all trying to paint the black male character as someone who is really bad, mean, or disrespectful towards the heroine character.

Before someone wants to come at be with the deflection of “Well, you stan for Damon.”  Then I hope that the Reylo Stan has called out their fellow Stans when they see them attempting to demonize/criminalize Finn.  They can’t be pointing out how any other fandom Stans for a problematic, white male fave.  If they themselves are hell bent on or are okay with their fandom demonizing Finn who decided to fight for the good side and who has truly cared for, love, respected and appreciated Rey.

So, that is how the Reylo fandom in a certain way is worse than the TVD fandom.