#also I think the source material needs to care about women or have at least one well written female character or else it’s just annoying

[apotelesmaa]

Personally wrt characters from any form of media unless two men have an extremely odd and insane relationship that would only be more crazy/funny by making it romantic I don’t see the appeal of shipping them but two female characters could breathe in the same vicinity and I’ll be like ohhh this is so yuri. Also stop calling two random men yuri. The two male characters need to have the same unhealthy devotion and codependency a female friendship that changes their life forever (normally for the worse) if they even want to come close to being awarded an honorary yuri badge. & idk if that should even be permitted because some of y’all are just insulting wlw with what you call yuri.

[shaunashipman]

i am genuinely a bit scared for my fellow bucktommies because with all the love eyes for bucktommy and tommy, i am not sure if people don't happily-ever-after too close to the sun with their expectations about how the bucktommy relationship will continue. 911 is still very much a drama show that will create drama out of thin air if it has to, oftentimes in ways that feel very dumb and will make the characters look very bad. we have seen in the past that resolutions are usually very lackluster, or sometimes even off screen. i personally really look forward to see buck and tommy, but i hope we all remember that buck AND tommy will fuck up at some point, and maybe even fuck up Bad. please be careful out there with how high you set your expectations, my fellow bucktommies, and don't forget that buck and tommy will have conflict again, with the others or with each other, sooner or later! (i hope it will be compelling and nuanced and interesting conflict that fuels their development, at the very least 🤞 but i also know that i am watching 911 so...)

so nonny, this isn't really directed at you, but i'm gonna use your ask as a springboard cause i'm seeing this sentiment pop up a lot

people need to stop conflating fanon actions with desires for canon

by this i mean, 99% of what i post about bucktommy, are things i never expect to happen in canon, and some of it quite honestly i would not want to happen in canon. i obviously can't speak for everyone, but most of the people i interact with are well aware that the characters on screen are not really the characters we're playing with in our sandbox.

and that's okay. that's how fandom is supposed to work. fandom is separate from the source material. we didn't used to need to post disclaimers about how no, we don't actually think this is going to happen. no, we don't actually think their relationship is going to be sunshine and roses. ppl in fiction act stupid cause sometimes the writer needs stupid to move the plot where they want. I, as a fan, can choose whether to incorporate said stupidity into my existing fanon, whether to analyze it to see how it could fit with my existing fanon, or whether to toss it out, baby and all.

part of the reason fandoms start is because we find the source material lacking. so honestly, when buck or tommy, or any characters, inevitably acts like a dick in a way that seems counter to their previous characterization, it's just more fodder for fandom, a new facet of their character that we then get to analyze and decide why they're doing it. well behaved women rarely make history and well behaved characters rarely make fandoms

so, just so it's clear, at least from me, unless I specifically state that this is what I think will happen in canon, everything I post about bucktommy, and basically all of my fandoms, is not even wishful thinking, it's just me playing with my dolls.

[queenvhagar]

Dare I say casual fans of HOTD and GOT who think HOTD is actually good and profound know nothing of the ASOIAF books including Fire and Blood and are not aware of the immense step down in quality that is early seasons GOT to the versions of ASOIAF HBO has been putting on our screens since about 2016.

The only way you can be consistently intellectualizing and praising the oversimplified and frankly misogynist and racist writing of HOTD season 2 is if you know nothing of how characters behave in this universe and how their stories are presented to us in the source material.

Had this show attempted a faithful or at least nuanced and complex retelling of this dynastic civil war, with cognizance of the sociopolitical realities of this world and how they would realistically played out, this might have had the potential to be a good adaptation.

As it stands, the show turned a story with gray characters and complex motivations, a commentary about monarchy and war, into an oversimplified and oversanitized good vs evil morality tale where the women are removed of any original agency to instead act as passive, observant mouthpieces for 2017 feminism who aren't allowed to be angry for themselves and the men are the violent warmongers who drive the plot.

Adding in some fanfiction tropes and presenting this all through millions and millions of dollars of production quality is then all that is needed for the casual viewer to applaud what is so heavily presented to them on a platter, what the writers think is the ultimate takeaway of the whole story: misogyny is bad and war is justified if it's against misogynists (but also no "good" woman would ever do anything to make a war happen on purpose) 🙄

Either they're ignorant of the source material and that ignorance allows for bliss in watching the show, or they just don't care that the story has been so severely downgraded for TV and are happy to enjoy a lower quality show as long as it uses elements of the property that they recognize and like (blonde people ride dragons).

[evidence-based-activism]

I understand if you don’t want to answer this, but I am genuinely asking. Can a woman with a DSD and a Y chromosome give birth? Are they still a woman if they have a Y chromosome?

I don’t think so for either but people are claiming otherwise and I’d like the facts

Hi! I understand the confusion!

I recommend this (heavily sourced) Intersex Genetics Masterpost [1].

---

To answer your question "can a woman with a DSD and a Y chromosome give birth?":

In general, most individuals with a DSD with a Y-chromosome (e.g., CAIS, 5ARD, etc.) cannot give birth at all because they do not have a uterus. There are two (sort of) exceptions:

Swyer Syndrome / 46, XY Complete Gonadal Dysgenesis:

This DSD only affects biologically male individuals, due to a genetic mutation disrupting Wolffian structure (male sex organ) development, these individuals instead develop female external and (some) female internal sex organs (i.e., because the female sex development is essentially the default pathway).

They usually develop a uterus but they do not develop functional gonads (ovaries or testes). As such, they do not have any eggs or sperm and are infertile.

However, there have been some individuals with Swyer syndrome who have carried and given birth to a child, using donor eggs and fairly extensive medical fertility interventions (i.e., beyond the standard IVF interventions). However, this is considered very rare [2] and it involves the use of donor eggs. (There are ethical, feminist considerations about the surrogacy/fertility industry, but that's a topic for another post).

XX/XY Mosaicism:

This DSD occurs when "a fraternal twin absorbs its twin zygote at some point in pregnancy, adding the twin’s DNA to different locations in its body, sometimes mixing the DNA sometimes not".

The individual's sex depends on the genetic material in the gonadal tissue (e.g., the tissue that develops into ovaries or testes) an individual with XX gonadal genetics will develop as female, even if the majority of the rest of the body's cells are XY. (For anyone with a bit of genetics experience, this should make sense: even in an XX female you have X-inactivation so that (mostly at least) only one X chromosome is active in each cell.) In other words, the tissue that determines what sexual development process to start (Wolffian or Mullerian) is what determines the phenotype sex of the individual.

As a result of this, you can find an extremely rare case (as in, I can find no other cases) of an individual with predominately XY genetic material (i.e., outside the gonads) can develop a female phenotype, get pregnant, and give birth to children.

Both of these DSD are extremely rare. In each case they are still "of" a specific sex. In other words, if they did not have the genetic mutation resulting in their DSD they would have developed the ability to produce only one type of gamete (either eggs or sperm). As such, they are still either male or female, just with a DSD that results in a substantial phenotypic difference.

---

To answer your question "are they still a woman if they have a Y chromosome?":

If we go by a strict definition: only individuals who are "of the sex" that produces the larger gamete (whether or not they actually do so) are female and only adult female humans are women.

However, there are some biologically male individuals (e.g., people with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome or Swyer Syndrome) who develop an near-normal externally female phenotype (although they are infertile). These individuals will not know they are not biologically female, and may not ever know (e.g., if they don't have access to medical care capable of diagnosing them). Unfortunately, they will also have (potentially extensive) medical problems.

Personally, my belief is that if someone would be recognized and treated like a woman prior to the advent of modern medical technology, they should be considered a woman now. (And the same for men.) Obviously, they need to work with a doctor to manage their health issues, but these are private medical matters that will have little to no impact on how they experience the world (e.g., how they are perceived and treated). In other words, some biologically male individuals have a DSD that results in the assumption of a female sex from birth; these people will experience the world in similar or identical ways to a infertile (possibly disabled) woman.

As a note, there is also an argument for anyone who is either observed or assigned female at birth to be considered a woman. I understand the argument here, and it would be a useful short hand. Unfortunately, however, I don't think this would adequately consider the nuances of all DSDs, as there are some that result in an individual who was AFAB later (i.e., during puberty) developing a near-normal male phenotype. While this individual's childhood (and possibly adult) experiences are very different than a healthy male, they will not be perceived and treated as women following puberty.

Ultimately, these conditions are extremely rare. The estimate for any true DSD (i.e., either a mismatch between genotype and phenotype or ambiguous primary sex organs) is about 0.018% [4, 5]. (See [4] for a scientific article and [5] for a blog post discussing this data). This means that more than 99.98% of babies are recognizably and correctly identified as either male or female at birth. It would also suggest there are currently less than 1.5 million intersex individuals in the entire world.

References under the cut:

The Intersex Genetics Masterpost. Everything You Could Ever Want to Know | by 21ohdef | Medium. 30 June 2024, https://web.archive.org/web/20240630160344/https://medium.com/@21ohdef/the-intersex-masterpost-bb5a6250e6d6.

Taneja J, Ogutu D, Ah-Moye M. Rare successful pregnancy in a patient with Swyer Syndrome. Case Rep Womens Health. 2016 Oct 18;12:1-2. doi: 10.1016/j.crwh.2016.10.001. PMID: 29629300; PMCID: PMC5885995.

Dumic M, Lin-Su K, Leibel NI, Ciglar S, Vinci G, Lasan R, Nimkarn S, Wilson JD, McElreavey K, New MI. Report of fertility in a woman with a predominantly 46,XY karyotype in a family with multiple disorders of sexual development. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Jan;93(1):182-9. doi: 10.1210/jc.2007-2155. Epub 2007 Nov 13. Erratum in: J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Mar;93(3):1083. PMID: 18000096; PMCID: PMC2190741.

Sax, L. (2002). How common is intersex? A response to Anne Fausto-Sterling. Journal of Sex Research, 39(3), 174–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552139

Wright, C. (2020). Intersex Is Not as Common as Red Hair. Reality’s Last Stand. https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/intersex-is-not-as-common-as-red

[fbfh]

Tate Langdon dating hcs

wc: 1.4k

warnings/content: discussions of yandere behavior and how tate differs from that, general obsessive/codependant tendancies bc it's tate, optional creative arts!reader

pairing: Tate x gn reader (no pronouns/gendered descriptions)

a/n: tate is a babyboy who needs to be kissed on his forehead right fucking now yes I know what he did I'm not taking criticism on this. also I just posted this by accident and had to completely delete and reformat it so if you saw that no you didn't

EDIT: I finished coven and realized I used a gif of Kyle and Zoe instead of Tate and Violet which has now been fixed. I cannot keep these blonde boys straight.

Okay so I don’t even want call this a yandere fic bc this is just about Tate in the source material so I don’t want to label him a full out yandere

But like

He kind of is

The other reason I don’t necessarily want to give him the yandere label is bc most of the time (from what I’ve read at least) yanderes usually don’t have their darling’s best interest at heart/can be okay with them being hurt or in danger

That shit would NEVER fly with Tate

I wrote a whole drabble about this but I know a lot of people have said Tate would kill you so you can be in the house with him forever

Yandere!Tate, yes

Regular Tate?? Hell no!!

There’s an element of selflessness that Tate possesses that gives him an important distinction from the yandere archetype

Because a lot of times yanderes want their darlings all for themselves

They want to be their darling’s only one, which can manifest in very selfish motivations

But Tate?????

Tate cares about your feelings more than his

And he’s proved this by acting selflessly for your benefit over and over 

Even when there is literally zero chance for him to get anything out of it

He doesn’t care

Because his motivations regarding you are genuinely selfless 

You are his priority, point blank period

Because Tate is…. Very dedicated

The thing with him is that when he latches onto you 

He’s on for eternity

Not just for life bc he’s kind of an immortal ghost

He’ll be with you until you decide you don’t want him there anymore

And even then

He’s still going to love you just as much as he does now forever

Like he’s really not one to halfass anything

Especially how he feels about someone

Because he usually either doesn’t give a fuck about them or cares too much

He cares too much about pleasing all the women in the house

He cares too much about trying to make Nora happy, gain her approval and praise

And then there’s you

He either doesn’t give a fuck about someone, cares too much, or in your case, might end up deeply obsessed with and dogmatically devoted to you

Which he is

Honestly all it took was a few days before his heart was in your hands

You probably didn’t even realize for a while just how into you he is

But by the time he’s openly confessing his love for you

By the time he’s telling you that he would never let anyone or anything hurt you

That he cares about your feelings more than his

That he’s never felt this way about someone before

You have a pretty good idea of where he’s at

He doesn’t hide his feelings from you after that, he doesn’t think he could if he tried

Tate is hopelessly devoted to you

There’s no other way to describe it

We know he’s clingy

We know he’s affectionate

We know he’s a switchy bottom with raging mommy issues

We’ve established that

And you could tell all of that since you met him

But when he really lays his heart at your feet

When he really finds himself fully committed to you

That’s when all that in theory becomes in practice

When days go by and he’s glued to your side the whole time

Even just lingering nearby while you’re brushing your teeth or making food 

That’s when you realize that he really really just likes being your lapdog 

He loves it

He loves when you give him casual affection, he loves when you rest your hand on his back or brush hair out of his eyes

And he fucking loves when you use him as a reward or break from other tasks you have to do

Every time your little study timer goes off, you drop what you’re doing and run right over to pull him in for a kiss

He’s already thrown his arms around you

You just make out for like ten minutes until you have to start studying again

If it’s not for something super important he absolutely will try to distract you by kissing your neck and squeezing your waist

If it is super important or a subject you struggle in, he’ll help you study

He doesn’t want to stop kissing you, but he will

Because he knows how important this is to you

So he’ll pull away and start reading you flashcards 

And like

He’ll be happy to do it

He won’t complain or be upset

He won’t have anything else he’d rather be doing

Tate Langdon took “if he wanted to he would” and fucking ran with it

Oh my god

And god help you if you do anything artistic or creative

Because as soon as he finds out that you’re an artist or a writer or an actor or musician or singer or dancer or sewist

Or literally anything else

It will once again alter his brain chemistry

The second you start showing him your art or writing or songs

It fucking changes him

Like

The weight and significance of the renaissance and every major artistic movement and cultural moment ever influenced by the arts is now residing in you

That’s how he feels

He takes one look at what you do and he gets it

He never really cared until now

But jesus fucking christ everything you do needs to be in a museum

Sometimes you see him just staring at your art or rereading your writing and poetry or flipping through your sketchbooks

Watching videos of you in musicals or plays or dance recitals 

Because when he sees the world the way you do

Whatever medium that might be through

Everything makes sense

He understands it, and he feels understood

He feels like you’re talking to him through your art

He feels a sense of peace, tranquility

If you think he couldn’t put you up on an even higher pedestal

Surprise

Not only are you the greatest person in the world

But you’re also an artistic genius 

There’s this deep sense of like

Privilege he feels to see everything you’re creating right now 

Even just your diary entries, the way you shape words, the flow of your stream of consciousness is so beautiful

He watches you so much more closely now, seeing the way you dance in your everyday movements

The way you channel and portray characters so flawlessly when you’re telling him about your day and the drama that happened at school

He could spend days looking through the boxes and albums of photos you’ve taken

He probably has

Because there’s no way to be closer to you than taking in these organic, raw forms of passion and self expression

He can’t get enough of it

Tate is dedicated to you

Not only as your boyfriend

But as your number one fan

Even if you’re not as creative

He still believes you have the best taste of anyone he’s ever met hands down

The books you like, the shows and movies you watch together

Even your music taste

Tate hasn’t liked a single song that’s been released after 1994

Until you handed him a pair of headphones and said you think he’ll like this

You sat him down and listened to the entirety of the black parade by my chemical romance

The whole album

And it changed his whole worldview 

Yet again, one move and you’ve altered his brain chemistry 

Even with other stuff he wouldn’t normally like

He likes it because you like it

He’ll watch Love Island and 90 Day Fiance with you for hours and love every minute of it

He loves feeling close to you, he loves that you want to share things you enjoy with him

He especially loves after a while when you’re starting to get kind of sleepy 

Because you look so soft and adorable like that

But also because he knows he can put his head in your lap and you’ll play with  his hair

You’ll run your fingers through his soft hair and scratch his back

And he feels so close to you

Which is all he ever wants

It’s always going to be you you you

And right now, he has exactly what he wants

[kuuderekun]

PureMail OVAs

PureMail is a 2 episode Hentail OVA from 2001 that is an adaptation of a 2000 Bishoujo Game Visual Novel made by Overflow the same studio that made School Days and its “sequels”.

It is also in the same universe, the character named Miki Sawagana is the older sister of Taisuke Sawagana.  That’s the familial connection that is made obvious by surname, but I'll get to the matter of Overflow Universe world building later.

First, what do I think of this OVA as a stand alone work of art?

The thing about Erotic Art that wants to be more than just Porn is that I want it to be more than just a Good Story with good fappable Sex scenes, they need to inform each other, to be firmly integrated.  There are lots of mainstream movies where it’s part of the Plot that sex happens, but it doesn’t need to happen fully on screen.  In Erotic Art it has to be more than just that Sex happens but the specifics of the Sex have to matter, some of the character development has to be tied to how they do or do not enjoy it.

And it’s that test which PureMail fails.  I find the story and characters very interesting and I found at least some of the H scenes very Fappable.  But those H Scenes also feel like they’re interrupting the story rather than enhancing it.  There are times when the conversion happening after the sex directly picks up where they left off before, but because it’s separated by the 5 minutes mindless screwing the viewer loses the train of the conversation.

I’ve watched two versions of PureMail.  I watched its English Dub unedited and uncensored on a Hentail website I won’t name here. And I watched an English Subbed version on YouTube that has the explicit parts edited out.  And it demonstrates my above criticism that the edited version actually felt like it had better pacing.  It removed vestigial organs while in ideal erotic art removing the sex scenes would be removing the heart and soul.

Unfortunately that edited version is no longer on YouTube, I neglected to download it and I don’t remember the name of the Channel, so it looks like it's probably now Lost Media that only I care about.

School Days and some of its “sequels” are known for not being presented how most Visual Novels usually are but being basically interactive Anime.  PureMail as far as I can tell wasn’t like that, it was a more normal Visual Novel.  I bring that subject up here because it means the actual source material for the Days series can be compared to PureMail’s adaptation at being an Erotic Anime.  Now I currently have not seen all the Erotic content that School Days HQ and Shiny Days have to offer, but I’ve seen some that definitely do succeed where the PureMail OVAs failed.  Even if it would be hard to argue anything is specifically absolutely necessary; they still convey things about the characters which those so easy to edit out PureMail scenes did not.

As the title of PureMail implies it involves some characters communicating via Email, so it’s perhaps one of the earliest Hentail to feature the Internet as a plot point.

One thing that I feel vindicates my vocal interpretation that Otome raped Makoto in episode 9 of the School Days Anime is that that Women Raping men is a theme in these prior overflow Overflow works.  The MC of Large PonPon was abused by at least 2 older women.  And in PureMail at least in the OVA version Kei is Blackmailed and Raped by Yumi Matou, and it’s framed as traumatizing not comedic or harmless.

So yeah there is good material here, if that edited version were the official version I’d probably give it a higher rating.  But I also imagine like many VNs adapted with so little runtime the storytelling was also hurt by being condensed and trying to make everything fit one timeline.

Now let’s return to world building.  The Overflow Universe Family Tree is a bit of a Meme to those of us who know it exists.  But in a way PureMail’s connections to all that shows how perhaps not well thought out it actually is.  Again I like most English speakers have no first hand information about these games, I’m mostly trying to draw conclusions from the overflow Fandom Wiki (I wish I didn't have to use Fandom but no one’s cloned this content on an alternative Wiki network.)

These PureMail OVAs are technically the only onscreen Anime appearance of Tomaru Sawagoe. In the games his onscreen appearances are in the Radish Trilogy, only they have character designs for him, and even the first of them came out after these OVAs.  Going off the OVAs Kei’s father isn’t mentioned by name and there isn’t even any hint at that father not being who he gets the surname Ogata from.  The OVAs felt they needed to actually animate a flashback and in it the character design of Kei’s father is a generic White Trash Wife Beater type who seems to be “Lower Class”.  Tomaru in the Radish games has a more distinct and flamboyant style and is very wealthy owning the titular restaurant chain and a hospital.

Basically Kei’s father being identified with the villain of the Radish series seems like a Retcon.

Online discussion of all these Overflow games focus on how they relate to School Days because only it ever became truly infamous in the general Anime community, especially in the Anglosphere.  So Tomaru Sawagoe is defined first and foremost as Makoto Itou’s father and all the games set before School Days are talked about as if they are prequels to School Days even though they were all made before School Days.

Snow Radish Vacation was made as a prequel, but to Large PonPon, Overflow’s first game.  The Inou and Sawagoe surnames originated there and then become the focus of Snow Radish Vacation; no surnames you recognize from the core cast of School Days are in either of those games.

Large PonPon, PureMail and School Days all seem like they are set in the then present of when they were made (9199, 2000 and 2005) like the average Visual Novel.  It’s only the Radish Vacation games that have to be Period Pieces for the Timeline to make sense.  But I have no way of knowing how good they are at feeling like Period Pieces.

Summer Radish Vacation was a sequel to Snow Radish Vacation, but Summer Radish Vacation 2 is in some ways more of a spin off then a sequel.  School Days I think was originally made without how it connects to the other games being all that set in stone originally.  In fact I’ve learned there was originally a family tree chart published by Overflow which made Sekai and Setsuna children of Tomaru rather than of Shun.

Summer Days' relationship to School Days is more of a completely alternate timeline rather than a Sequel or a Prequel.  But thanks to Shun’s role it’s actually more of a direct sequel to Summer Radish Vacation then Summer Radish Vacation 2 is.

Point is, the core world building starts with Large PonPon then goes through the Radish Games to end with the Days series.  PureMail and other Overflow games mentioned on the genealogy are largely afterthoughts.  The genealogy makes Ayumu the father of multiple PureMail characters and I really doubt the game was originally written with that in mind.

[hufflepuffinstorybrooke]

Please Don’t Hate Me

I need to start by stating that I really liked the Red, White, and Royal Blue movie. The cast and crew were amazing and this was a sorely necessary movie in the queer community as far as representation goes. I am also really bad at separating a movie from its source material. So this is just an opinion on some representation, both feminine and queer, that I wish had been in the movie.

First, with the female representation. Most obviously, the fact that June was written out, Princess Catherine was absent, and Queen Mary was switched to King James III.

Even while Alex is the main character, June is the heart of the Claremont-Diaz family. Alex and Ellen are too wrapped up in caring for the nation that they can sometimes forget that they need looking after themselves.

Combine this with keeping Ellen married to Oscar (she and Oscar are too similar, but Leo took care of her) and taking away some of her more nurturing characteristics (good thing bad thing), Alex’s family seems less supportive in the movie than the book.

This is similar to the problem I have with removing Princess Catherine. Henry has Bea’s support, but with the watered down Bea, that’s almost an empty corner. Princess Catherine is what forces the Queen to support Henry and Alex, and that is the first time Henry has felt a parent’s love since his father died. It’s just so important to his story, but I can understand why it was cut.

But why did they have to water Bea down so much? I don’t need the Powder Princess scandal, but if Bea is Henry’s only support, show that she is strong enough to back him for real. Throw her in a leather jacket, send her out to a party with the group, and show an electric guitar in the corner of the music room. It didn’t have to be anything big, but give her back her fire!

Then there’s Queen Mary, which I don’t really mind the switch since it gave us Stephen Fry as King James and the prime minister was a woman. I just felt like it lost some of the symbolism of the female heads of the nations and their opposite viewpoints on FirstPrince and tradition.

Lastly, there’s Nora. I liked her, I really did, but I wish they had mentioned that she went to MIT, even just Alex calling her MIT like he does in the book. There are places of higher learning, particularly in STEM, that kept women out for far too long. It would have been a great boost to show a woman being a graduate of the most well known technical institute in the country.

The only woman I was completely satisfied with was Zahra, they kept her as tough as nails!

Before I start on queer representation, remember that I do realize how important this movie is as a mainstream representation of queer love. However:

By taking out June, they took away the June/Nora/Pez relationship. I personally think that June and Nora were in a relationship and Pez just joined in while he’s in town. But still, a polyamorous secondary relationship in a rom com would have been nice.

That also takes away Nora’s bisexuality, which is just bi erasure! (And I know Alex says he’s bi, but that scene when Zahra calls him and Henry homosexuals bothers me! It erases Alex’s bisexuality!)

Rafael Luna was a huge impact on Alex, and showing an openly gay senator would have been amazing.

I am glad that, since they only kept one secret service agent, that they kept Amy. However, I do miss Cash and his pansexual jean jacket!

Moving on to Amy, I don’t mind that they didn’t mention that she is trans, especially since she is played by a trans actress and that was only brought up in Alex’s thoughts in the book. I do wish she had brought up her wife. There was such a good window of opportunity when she and Alex are talking about her dog. “You know my wife and I named our dog Jonathan.”

The addition of Miguel Ramos brings in the “gays are evil and vindictive” stereotype. Especially considering he was the only other openly queer person in the movie

On a lighter, headcanon note, I see Bea as at least ace, if not aroace, which sucks that it wasn’t included, but it makes sense since it’s not canon. Also, Princess Catherine cuffs her jeans, so she’s obviously bi lol

Again, the book is perfection, and I love the movie in its own right too. These are just some things that were missed or added that I wish changed in the movie!

[jeannereames]

Just saw the cat publication and it came to my attention that Polyxena/ Myrtatle/Olympia/ Stratonike and Hephaistion had similar personalities I need to know more!

I should be more forthright. This is my reading of them, for the novels, as we don’t know a lot about the real Hephaistion, personality-wise.

In Dancing with the Lion: Becoming, part of why Alexandros latches onto Hephaistion so quickly owes to the fact he feels vaguely familiar. I don’t mean that in a creepy way, and specify as much because Oliver Stone has said, in interviews, that he cast Rosario Dawson as Roxana because she resembled Angelina Jolie in certain respects, and he wanted the Oedipal Thing.

I manifestly do NOT, nor do I think it applicable (see this post for an explanation of why).

Even so, we are drawn to people who remind us of those we love (and understand).

My Hephaistion and Myrtalē are both FIERCE in their devotion to those they love. They’re also intense and so, a bit scary. And they both have a jealous bone. Also like Hephaistion, Myrtalē as I envision her got on very well with and cares deeply about her siblings. I think readers can pick up a sense of that between the sisters at least, when Myrtalē is exiled in Epiros in DwtL: Rise.

I also see Myrtalē and Hephaistion as having similar styles of psychological manipulation (of those they perceive to be enemies). That was what I had a little fun with in the short story, “Two Scorpions.” Myrtalē/Olympias goes after him because she sees him as a threat to Alexandros. He tries to fight back, but is essentially dealing with an older, more experienced version of himself. So, we see her drop him to the (virtual) mat a few times. In the end, he “kinda” wins, but only because he walks out before she can get in a retort. LOL The confrontation is written in his POV, but I hope it’s still evident she is (overall) getting the better of him.

In “Two Scorpions,” both act out of love for Alexandros, and what they perceive as the best for him. Myrtalē/Olympias isn’t jealous of nor “hates” Hephaistion. She tells him, quite bluntly, that she didn’t really have much of an opinion about him until he made himself Alexandros’s lover. And she explains why (she perceives) that to be dangerous. She’s brutal, but she’s completely transparent—and knows how to use that honesty to undermine her opponent, just as she has a knack for guessing her opponent’s weak spots. Hephaistion often employs the same tactics. And both pair that with an apparently unflappable façade. But she’s better at it than he is. 😉 Because she’s almost fifteen years older than he is.

Too often, Olympias in literature is portrayed as irrational, vindictive, and jealous. But that’s an ancient Greek male projection of what drives “meddling” women who get above themselves by trying to “do” politics. How dare they?!

I hope that explains why I, at least, see the two as quite similar, at least in the novels. Again, we don’t know enough about the real Hephaistion to say what he was like, although I did build my fictional character on what seemed to me a feasible extrapolation from the source material.

[alpaca-clouds]

These takes just annoy me

See, there was this one tweet of twitter that got pushed into my timeline today. Asking:

What is the biggest misconception people have about your favorite character

And boy, there were actually quite a few really bad Castlevania takes in there.

This was, however, the worst of them all.

Because, like... it is very obvious, that the person has not seen the series past episode 2. Because Trevor Belmont in the series is not "edgy nihilistic". Nor is... anyone else in the series for that matter.

I think about everyone, who adores the series, will agree, that the main reason folks like the characters, is, how warm they are. They are warm, they are caring for each other. Trevor especially is basically selfless. I mean, the man sacrifices himself for his friends in the end (or at least tries to do so).

Yeah, sure, he is also a sarcastic bitch. But the man is traumatized af, given the entire "lost his entire family" bit. Duh.

I also find the bit with "Ellis did not do research" always so weird. Like, let's be frank. Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse is not what we call a "plot heavy" game. Over all playthroughs there is about, what? 20 lines of text in there?

If you wanted to make an accurate adaption of that game, it would basically be a 90 minute movie that is just constant action from beginning to end.

By which I don't mean, the game is bad. I enjoyed my playthroughs (though not as much as of the later Castlevania titles that came out after Rondo). But... If you tried to make that game into a faithful adaption it would be pretty bland, because at the time the game got released storytelling just tended to not be a focus of most games.

And sure, they also added Curse of Darkness in there, and here is my hottake: Yeah, Curse of Darkness is a pretty bad game. To be frank, I do consider all the 3D Castlevania games pretty darn bad. Because, yeah, those games are actually the super edgy ones, that somehow really do not manage to tell one story without refrigerating at least one, at times several women -.-

So, yeah, no. Bad take. Horrible take, tbh. The characters of Netflix's Castlevania are actually pretty warm and caring for each other. They are well rounded.

And, see, here is the thing: Two things can be true. Warren Ellis is a fucking creep. And he is a pretty competent writer.

Also, hot take: No, you do not need to have consumed the source material to make a good adaption of it. I honestly recently found - especially in Comic Book adaptions - that adaptions tend to be better, if they don't stick too closely to their source material. Because, well... different media has just different requirements, when it comes to storytelling. Which is why adaptions, that stick too closely to the source material, often do not work as movies or TV shows.

[niaking]

Bebop Thoughtz, part five

If you don't want Cowboy Bebop spoilers, stick with part one.

I just finished rewatching the cartoon. I thought I'd make a list of things the anime does better, and things the live-action version does better.

Things the anime does better:

humor - The humor of the anime version largely comes from visual gags like people having animals on their heads. (They go back to this well three times, and it works every time.) The humor in the live-action version mostly comes from Spike's dry wit and Faye's use of oddly childish obscenity, which largely fell flat for me.

characters - The characters of the cartoon manage to be charming, at least at times, despite their obvious flaws. For example, Faye reveals herself to be pretty amoral (stealing from Spike and Jet, lying/breaking promises to Ed), and yet her tragic backstory makes her compelling and somewhat sympathetic in my view.

racism/sexism/homophobia/transphobia - The caricatures of Native Americans, Black people, and Latinos in the anime are wildly racist. I personally think the episode Mushroom Samba takes the cake for racism, but Heavy Metal Queen is a close second. Jet and Spike are constantly talking trash about women. (Spike also hates children and dogs. This is our hero!) The homophobia and transphobia mostly comes out in Gren's two-episode story arc, which I'll get into later.

fatalism - The ending of the series is BLEAK. [Major spoilers coming] Ed and Ein leave the crew, possibly to reunite with Ed's dad who can't seem to remember her name, gender, or the fact that he left her in an orphanage. Faye leaves in search of her childhood home, finds it destroyed, and returns to the Bebop. Spike basically commits suicide by storming the HQ of his enemies, after watching the alleged love of his life die. I say alleged because their love story is not developed at all in the anime.

Things the live action does better:

make sense - The episodes of the live-action show all have fairly linear, easy-to-follow storylines, whereas some of the anime episodes feel more like fever dreams.

provide an overarching plot that tied the episodes together - Some of the anime episodes feels like the creators came up with an idea for a villain, and based the whole episode around that, rather than trying to build a coherent narrative. I like how, in the live-action version, Spike and Vicious' relationship is the through-line, and each development brings us closer to their final confrontation. Knowing that we are always moving forward, to the resolution of the overall conflict, gives you something to hold on and a reason to pay attention.

family dynamics - Though I found the live-action versions of the characters charmless, we like them because they are willing to risk their lives for each other. Each has lost a family. Spike is an orphan. Faye was frozen, lost her memory, and the closest thing she has to a family is a woman who scammed her into believing she was Faye's mom. Jet is divorced or separated from his wife, and his daughter, who he has minimal contact with, now calls one Jet's cop ex-buddies "daddy." The members of the Bebop represent a chosen family, and even though they are often not honest or kind with each other, they always seem to show up for each other when most needed. What the live action lacks in charming characters, it makes up for in heartwarming vibes.

develop the backstory for Spike and Vicious' relationship - Episode 9 is one of my favorite eps, and it's one of the ones that strays the most from the source material. This ep is pure backstory and it gives us a reason to care about Spike, Vicious, Julia and their weird love triangle, which was barely perceptible in the anime. It also tries to humanize Vicious by giving him an abusive father, but... I'm not sure that justifies his impulsiveness or bloodlust.

bigger roles for Ana/Annie and Gren - These are extremely minor characters in the original who get much better developed in the live action. In the anime, Annie owns a... porn store? Liquor store? Corner store? Unclear. Her and Spike clearly have an affinity for each other, but we only really see her once before she gets murdered. In the live-action version, Ana is a powerful Black disabled woman: a jazz club owner, a spy of sorts, a liaison between rival parties within The Syndicate. In the original, Gren is a man who grew breasts due to a hormone imbalance. In the live action, Gren is trans femme without breasts, and also Ana's right hand in running the club and keeping the troublemakers at bay. Ana and Gren were my favorite characters, and least to have to least-compromised moral compasses of all the characters. I loved Tamara Tunie as Ana. She and Spike have a cute flirtation going, but I never understood, in either version, why this character was so loyal to Spike.

surprise betrayal - One of the major plot points of the live-action version is Vicious' scheme to overthrow the Elders. In the anime, the scenes of the actual betrayal are pretty confusing, and involve, I believe, an exploding bird? In the live-action version, Vicious overthrows the Elders in a surprise twist that really got me, so I don't want to spoil it for you.

give women agency - In the anime, no one really cares what Julia wants. She's just "the girl," a prize to be won by either the "hero" or the villain. In the live-action version, she claims her power in a way that I, as a viewer, did not at all see coming. She's a much more well-developed character: smart and manipulative.

The humor of the original and and charm of its characters carried it a long way. Perhaps remakes are destined to disappoint, but this one did some cool things with casting, storylines, and of course, fight scenes. The fact that John Cho was almost 50 when he filmed them makes it all the more impressive.

[lemonhemlock]

It is never said in the text that Alys pointed out every member of house Strong to Aemond and to be fair, I don't think he needs her to do it although, who knows, he could've used her to do just that on purpose. I'm sure there are other servants unrelated to them who could do it as well. We simply don't know anything about her relationship with her trueborn family, however all the insane stans have already decided that it must have been really, really bad since she's a bastard, with some suggesting that the Strongs were actively abusing her thus making Aemond the prince charming who came in and "saved" her from her evil bad family. Basically the damsel in distress trope, I guess? Sure, it's very possible they were on bad terms but why they insist it's canon when the source material doesn't confirm it either way? Obviously, they are doing this to whitewash the ship and make it less toxic. I personally find this angle - with her taking an active part in her family's massacre - quite distasteful and I admit I would probably not find her a good person if she does that in the show. I get that she may have been treated badly by the Strongs (the adult ones), but all of them? I doubt it. Some of the Strongs killed by Aemond were young boys (the illustration in The Rise Of The Dragon definitely shows a young boy about to be executed) who were presumably innocent, children Alys herself most likely nursed? Am I really supposed she hated them as well or that she didn't care at all about them being executed? Strong bastards were killed as well, so why am I supposed to believe she didn't care either about them? Surely she must have had some empathy for them since I find it hard to believe that she was discriminated against and abused by her family for her bastardy status yet the other Strong bastards weren't.

So I went to check my sources and, you're right, it's never spelled in the text that Alys pointed out her kin, so I must have misremembered that, because she is never described as particularly bothered by the swift and bloody end of her family either, even though she may even have nursed some of those children herself or at least performed some child care for them, like you mentioned. I don't know how we're supposed to feel about this, even if, say, the Strongs mistreated her, because the complete annihilation of their line is also very much disproportionate to their supposed crime. Also considering that they were innocent of the accusation Aemond pinned on them. Even if they were guilty, like you said, surely the children could not have been considered complicit? The more I think about it, the ickier it gets.

So, while, yes, Alys being actively involved in their downfall is yet to be decisively proven, the reason I'm inclined to give credence to this line of thought is the fact that it seems kind of unbelievable to fall in love with the man who killed your entire family, no matter how much of a wet-cat god-fearing women-respecting momma's boy he proves to be later? And even if you were on bad terms with said family. It's a very extreme thing. You can hardly notch this up to some Pride & Prejudice type of misunderstanding.

So, if we accept that Alys empathized with her brutally murdered relatives, we kind of have to exclude her catching feelings for him later? Or, if she does get to a point of emotion, it surely must be closer to a Stockholm Syndrome type of situation? Which is an entirely different can of worms, like the dynamic changes to Aemond being the abuser or the one in charge, if you prefer. Take into consideration that this entire relationship escalates very quickly. The Dance barely lasts three (?) years, Aemond and Alys know each for less than a year tops (did someone make a timeline for these events yet? I'm iffy on the actual dates). In any case, they're not engaged in some lifelong reconciliation, rehabilitation and therapy sessions here for their supposedly mutually-consensual relationship to become less dicey on Alys' side.

[jp-hunsecker]

The only thing worse than a modernized adaptation of a Shakespeare play that retains the original dialogue, is a parody of a Shakespeare play that preserves the original temporal/geographical setting but makes the characters say things like “it’s time to make this city great again,” and features a diegetic soundtrack with covers of Roxette, Celine Dion, and Eric Carmen.

Dr. Johnson considered puns to be the lowest form of humor (and he had Shakes in particular in mind), but intentional anachronisms are by far much lower. Also, memo to the filmmakers: the Trump administration ended almost two years ago, and Romeo and Juliet premiered in 1597, so maybe choose targets that are a little more timely next time?

To be fair, Romeo was indeed dumb enough to fall for not one but two Capulet women in the play as written by the Bard; how the makers of this movie, however, could know that defies explanation, since they clearly don’t know or don care about their source material.

In Romeo and Juliet, the character of Rosaline is never seen or heard — a wise choice, assuming she was anything like she’s portrayed in this film. Moreover, she didn’t feel for Romeo the same way he felt for her. Here, though, Romeo’s infatuation is the excuse for the sort of amorous quadrangle that we have already seen a million times before.

It’s like they were going for a Taming of the Shrew sort of thing (they even allude to it), but suddenly remembered that someone had already done that long before and a lot better in 10 Things I Hate About You (which had Heath Ledger in it, a stark contrast to the low-rent Heath Ledger lookalike who plays Romeo in Rosaline).

One of the reasons 10 Things is superior to this drivel is that it never intended to take an apple and turn it into an orange; that is to say, it adapted a comedy into a comedy. It’s not fucking rocket science. With Rosaline, on the other hand, it’s like they thought the original ending was too depressing and just went from there, dumbing the material down from the bottom up.

Again, if the filmmakers had more than a passing knowledge of Shakespeare, they would realize that there’s no need to ‘lighten’ his work. The man wrote 17 comedies, so it’s safe to say he had a healthy sense of humor; so healthy, indeed, that he found room for it even in his tragedies. You see, Shakespeare was no hack; he knew tension must be relieved, and therefore included comic characters even in his more serious stuff; for example, the gravedigger in Hamlet, the porter in Macbeth, and yes, Mercutio in Romeo and Juliet.

Now, I’m not saying they should have made Rosaline a comedy revolving around Mercutio instead (expanding a minor Shakespearean character is generally a bad idea; Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, anybody?); I am saying, though, that they should have never made a comedy at all — although, if you think about it, whatever this movie is, a comedy it’s not.

Consider this: Rosaline’s miseducation of Juliet includes having her read from an “erotic book.” Juliet claims “they don’t teach you that in finishing school” (we have no idea what she’s referring too because the film has zero imagination). Rosaline replies “wait till you get to page 74.” Page 74? What about page 69? It would still be crass, but at least it wouldn’t be random. You know you’re in deep shit when your movie makes the audience yearn for the comedic sensibility of Robin Hood: Men in Tights.

Rosaline movie review & film summary (2022) | Roger Ebert The comedy in "Rosaline" is largely due how it thrusts Shakespeare's dialogue into modernity. However, the absurdity of…www.rogerebert.com

“The comedy in “Rosaline” is largely due how it thrusts Shakespeare’s dialogue into modernity.”

What it really does is thrust modern dialogue into Shakespeare (well, as modern as lines like “make [blank] great again” can be two years into the Biden era).

“It gets old quickly when it’s the only laughable effort inserted into the script.”

Actually, the entire script is laughable, which doesn’t mean by any stretch of the imagination that it is funny.

“However, it cuts right through all the formalities of traditional Shakespeare that might not appeal to certain audiences, so it has that going for it.”

That is to say, it has been dumbed down to pander to the lowest common denominator.

Rosaline Review - IGN Intentionallyanachronistic approaches to period pieces are having a bit of a moment in 2022, what with Persuasion …www.ign.com

“The script is an inventive romp through Shakespeare’s Romeo & Juliet.”

What’s inventive about going back to the same well that has already been sucked dry a long time ago by countless filmmakers and movies before this one?

Rosaline review - Kaitlyn Dever shines in comedic spin on Romeo & Juliet imply by invoking the name Juliet, Hulu's Rosaline, a comic retelling of Shakespeare from the perspective of Juliet's…www.theguardian.com

“Rosaline … understands what makes a good adaptation: a sense of humor at least on par with if not exceeding the original …”

Sure, because Romeo and Juliet was such a laugh riot to begin with.

Rosaline movie review: Slight and overfamiliar Romeo and Juliet remix Kaitlyn Dever is Romeo's jilted ex GF in Rosaline, a sweet but slight new comedy. To Eliza Janssen, the contemporary…www.flicks.co.uk

“ … at this point, tales of rebellious, independent princesses are the standard, not its subversion. The anachronistic feminism of Rosaline doesn’t just ring false — it can barely be heard at this point, over the riot grrl din of past remixed Shakespeare heroines in 10 Things I Hate About You and She’s The Man.”

“ … Rosaline’s obvious love interest Dario (Oscar Isaac-lookalike Sean Teale) is your garden variety YA eye candy.”

Not to mention the Heath Ledger lookalike who plays Romeo.

Rosaline Review: Kaitlyn Dever Is A Winning Lead In Flawed Revisionist Tale Retellings of Shakespeare's plays are as classic as the famed playwright himself. Whether they be a faithful adaptation…screenrant.com

“Retellings of Shakespeare’s plays are as classic as the famed playwright himself … it feels there is virtually no shortage to what filmmakers can do with those iconic stories.”

Watching this movie, you’d swear they’ve officially run out of ideas.

“ … there is initially something jarring about Dever’s Rosaline …”

If by “initially” you mean “all the way until the closing credits,” then I agree 100%.

“While Dever and Teale have genuine sparks, their courtship is a storyline that isn’t entirely necessary.”

Then again, the whole movie is unnecessary.

Rosaline Review: A Hilarious Retelling of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet Spoiler Warning is a smart and refreshing modern twist on an iconic Shakespeare tale. The film is a unique and easily…movieweb.com

“Rosaline … makes the story of Romeo and Juliet so much more fun.”

That’s like saying a Passion Play could use more fart jokes.

“Rosaline is funny, dramatic, and relatable that uses 21st-century language and personalities while borrowing elements from the fictionalized story.”

That you personally need to be talked down to as if you were a small child or a Labrador doesn’t make the movie “relatable.”

“Rosaline places the most forgotten Shakespeare characters up front and center.”

Based on the evidence of this film, they should have stayed forgotten.

Rosaline offers an audacious alternative to Romeo And Juliet If the name Rosaline rings a bell, it's because she's the mentioned-but-never-seen girlfriend Romeo was dating right…www.avclub.com

“Adapting screenwriters Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber have made shrewd, intelligent changes from Rebecca Serle’s book When You Were Mine, on which the film is based, changing the setting and time period from modern day Southern California to Renaissance era Italy. This shift not only provides the proper basis for many of the jokes and comedic hijinks, it smartly disposes of modern trappings, adding a timelessness to the picture and justifying stoner Steve the Courier’s (­­­Nico Hiraga) blessed existence.”

First of all, the only thing for which that shift provides a basis is lazy anachronistic gags, and second, were idiot potheads that common in Renaissance Italy? Because otherwise I don’t see how that character’s existence could ever be justified.

“Maine and her cadre of craftspeople gift her follow-up to Yes, God, Yes … ”

From the truly unique Yes, God, Yes to a movie based on a book based on a play. Talk about diminishing returns.

Rosaline Movie Review: A Fresh Take on a Classic Story Rosaline is a hilariously fun twist on a classic story. Things change where you least expect them to, making this an…mamasgeeky.com

“Everyone knows the story of Romeo of Juliet, but they don’t know this version of it.”

If only there was a way to unknow it.

“There was no need to propel this into modern times and we are thankful they did not go that route.”

Aren’t you forgetting a little something? If 95% of the dialogue can be said to be a little, that is. Oh, but you haven’t forgotten, have you?

“We are also very happy that we didn’t have to listen to the actors speak in Shakespearean for ninety minutes.”

I’ll bet you are.

Rosaline review: Kaitlyn Dever elevates new Hulu comedy | Digital Trends Director Karen Maine's new comedy, , works overtime to find a new perspective in one of the most well-known stories of…www.digitaltrends.com

“Anyone who’s ever caught themselves rolling their eyes at the film’s iconic pair of young lovers will, in particular, likely delight in the ways Rosaline both plays up and pokes holes at their short-lived love story. (That’s especially true of an unexpected homage to The Graduate that Maine, Neustadter, and Weber throw out at exactly the right moment.)”

About that. The movie imagines that Romeo and Juliet would be rather dull together if left to their own devices, but it’s the filmmakers who are giving them a quote-unquote happy ending that no one ever asked for, so whose story is really the one with holes in it?

'Rosaline' Review: Kaitlyn Dever Grounds Fanciful Spin on 'Romeo and Juliet' Before Romeo fell for Juliet, he lusted after her cousin, Rosaline. He exalted her beauty to his friends ("The…www.hollywoodreporter.com

“Directed by Karen Maine, Rosaline recasts the story of its eponymous character as a digestible coming-of-age narrative.”

If by “digestible” you mean that it’s destined to become a turd whose place is in the crapper, you’re absolutely right.

Rosaline Rosaline reimagines Romeo and Juliet's story, offering redemptive thoughts on love as well as problems families should…www.pluggedin.com

“God’s name is abused 13 times, and Christ’s name is abused once.”

That, however, is nothing compared to how Shakespeare’s good name is abused.

ROSALINE: 3 STARS. "a high school story of romance and empowerment in a corset." "Rosaline," a new romantic comedy based on "Romeo and Juliet," alters the dynamics of William Shakespeare's play by…richardcrouse.ca

““Rosaline” is no “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.” Tom Stoppard’s absurdist, existential tragicomic “Hamlet” riff examines the mystery of life.”

But it is absurd in the sense that its very existence is a mystery (in other words, why did they have to go and make this fucking piece of shit movie?).

REVIEW: Rosaline Turns a Shakespeare Classic Into a Forgettable Rom-Com The works of William Shakespeare have remained popular and relevant for more than 400 years, but it seems unlikely that…www.cbr.com

“ … the period setting amounts to little more than dress-up, especially given the modernized dialogue and references.”

“ … it undercuts the impact of the source material — and not in a fun or subversive way. Rosaline turns one of the great works of world literature into an unremarkable teen movie.”

'Rosaline' provides snarky, modern take on 'Romeo and Juliet' If you are looking for another remake of the Shakespeare classic "Romeo and Juliet" fully equipped with Early Modern…www.oswegonian.com

“ … a cast of characters that range in age, race and sexuality is increasingly demanded by audiences, rightfully so.”

Every time I read something like the above I’m reminded of Fran Leibowitz, who once claimed, and I’m paraphrasing here, that art isn’t, or at least it shouldn’t be, a democracy, but rather an intellectual aristocracy. And rightfully so.

Romeo and Juliet Riff Rosaline Has Star-Crossed Intentions and Execution Between 10 Things I Hate About You, the Twelfth Night-inspired She's the Man and 2013's quirky zombie comedy Warm…www.pastemagazine.com

“[Rosaline is] a misguided work that highlights the insincerities that have emerged in Hollywood’s recent charge towards “inclusion” and “diversity.””

[onetrackminded]

Upon watching HBomberguy's newest video on plagiarism, I realized I've never had a creative thought of my own.

I'm probably being dramatic, but looking back on my previous endeavors on social media, I see now how easily other's content and ideas can be flagrantly appropriated without anyone raising an eyebrow.

My partner, a year or so ago, convinced me to get a TikTok account. I eventually caved and did, but found the act of doomscrolling only worked to ruin my day. So I started creating content for a time.

I wouldn't say I had a -following- really. The height of my account hovered around 15,000 followers which, on TikTok, isn't many. The reels that comprise the user's experience take up very little time, therefore you need to follow a significant amount of creators in order to customize your "For You" page.

On my account I talked about psychology and neurodiversity, which are big interests of mine. I was shocked at how well received my videos were and thought people must enjoy what I had to say. I don't think I realized the gravity of the situation. When people listen to you, you are beholden to the truth, otherwise you do harm.

Most of the videos I created were opinions, and strongly-held ones at that. Sometimes I'd read an article and discuss it's contents without knowing the source material the article actually used. Another video I made discussed a historical figure. In that video in particular, I took the same facts about said figure from a YouTube channel without citing them.

In my mind, I was creating a synthesis of information I found interesting or useful or cool. I didn't care to take things as seriously as I should've because I never expected to have any audience at all, let alone one that would trust in my videos.

Thankfully, I quit making videos regularly. The amount of time and effort it took up, especially with how buggy the app is and how technologically illiterate I am, wasn't worth it. The entire platform, along with the community, stopped appealing to me. I deleted my account just a little bit ago.

HBomb's video was excellent. It made me realize the importance of what influencers do, and how unprepared I was to try and take that responsibility on for myself. Even with this blog, I struggle to see a point in discussing anything outside of my own, direct experiences. I'm not educated enough to truly synthesize studies and regurgitate them with my own analysis. I barely graduated the 12th grade.

One of the YouTubers HBomb discussed at length in his video is a man by the name of James Somerton. I've been a fan of James' for a bit now and always got excited for his videos. I wouldn't call myself a die hard fan, but certainly a regular viewer.

As it turns out, almost all of his videos are nakedly plagiarized from smaller, more obscure queer creators. HBomb also did a compelling section on James Somerton's seeming misogyny, as it's the only original thing you hear in any of his videos.

Obviously it's unfortunate and upsetting that James plagiarized so many underappreciated queer creators, but I was more interested in his misogyny for a variety of reasons. For one, I remember watching many of the videos HBomb cited and my reaction to them.

In James' video on Jeffery Dahmer, he discussed how white women fetishize murderers, especially when they're gay. If they didn't kill women, it's easily to separate yourself from the victims and dehumanize them as a result--or so the argument goes. HBomb points out how even James himself mentions how Ted Bundy was similarly fetishized despite killing women, unintentionally undermining his own point.

There are other examples of his misogyny. For example, James in one of his videos discusses how women often use gay men; objectify them via the "gay best friend" stereotype. Sure, the gay best friend stereotype certainly deserves criticism, but the way in which he evokes WOMEN as a the sole enablers of this harm is concerning to say the least.

I don't think it's a coincidence that I often fall for creators and YouTubers who harbor biases against people such as me. That's not to say I'm a woman (James has also misgendered afab enbies), but I'm certainly perceived as one.

It seems as though the pattern I trend towards is one of self debasement. I repeat trauma everywhere I go. I don't blame myself for liking James' videos--many people did and still do. I suppose I just marvel at how my thought processes work to uphold my trauma-ridden core belief that I'm not shit.

I remember watching James' videos and feeling weird about his comments on women. I enjoy true crime (in a self-aware kind of way, I'd like to think) and become interested in the psychology of serial killers. That aspect of me likely would have been seen by him and many others in his community as being close enough to fetishization.

I also remember watching the video where James discusses women who have gay best friends. My gay best friend, we'll call him Rick, was a manipulative person who took advantage of me in many ways. I knew that by the time I saw James' video, yet I remember beating myself up for engaging in a stereotype (despite the fact I was innocently trying to be a good friend to a fellow queer person).

It's all very confusing. The leg work of figuring out what is true and not true is a daunting one. I fall for cons every single time it seems. I believe I have vulnerabilities that make it easy for manipulative people to exploit. As much as I would love to believe my social isolation tactics and "vetting" system has fixed my issue of abuse blindness, I'm starting to realize how false that is. We are all subject to misinformation and trickery. We are all also capable of espousing manipulation and trickery, even when we don't realize it.

[taiblogcomics]

Amy Gets the Cold Shoulder

Hey there, multiple Dorito flavours. By now you've probably at least skimmed the TVTropes page for "Little Women", and thus understand roughly as much as I do. That said, let's get into issue 2 here~

Here's the cover:

These are appropriately simple covers, given that these are pretty simple stories. They're not gonna make a lot of the extreme sort of stuff that makes the great comic covers. Barring that completely awful cover of Avengers Arena #3, this might be the simplest cover we've ever reviewed here. Nothing to complain about, but nothing to write home about either, I guess~

We open again on the March house, still blanketed in snow. The girls are upstairs, going over their personal newspaper again. At the end here is a list of requests. Meg (Twilight Sparkle) is requested to stop reading so long that she's late for breakfast every day. Jo (Rainbow Dash) is asked to stop flying so fast in town, submission deadline or no. Beth (Fluttershy) is to return a particular handkerchief, borrowed a very specific amount of time ago. And Amy (Rarity), please stop adding bows to things that do not need them! Frankly, other than the handkerchief, this could be canon~

However, Jo proposes some new business. She wants to invite a new member into their club, which both Meg and Amy raise vehement objections. Amy in particular objects on the grounds that it's a private club, and telling more people is kind of the opposite of private. Beth is hesitantly supportive, though, to which Jo is grateful. Besides, they're objecting when she hasn't even told them who it is. It's Laurie (Applejack), the girl next door. Meg continues to object, since she doesn't think it'll improve Jo's own attitude towards the meetings, but it's too late. Laurie's already here, hidden under a sheet.

Now it's some time later, and the rest of them have clearly forgiven Jo and also agreed to let Laurie stay in their club. She's given them a rather fancy mailbox in thanks. While Jo is discussing how she's the first to use it by sending her newest manuscript (she tried giving Rainbow Dash, her self-insert OC, a partner named Applejack, but it didn't feel right to her), Beth wanders off and meets an old lady (Granny Smith) with a bunny, while Amy and Meg argue over the proper use of magic. Amy makes a big deal about how the basket she's carrying is no big deal, and that's not suspicious~

Discord drops in now, since he figures we're due a fourth-wall break and he wants to highlight some dramatic irony. This leads into a flashback, and for some reason this is presented as a Watchmen parody, right down to the nine-panel format. It's weird. Amy really wants that emerald-finding spell, and Meg won't teach it to her (she asks to be taught, but Meg looks down and whispers "No"). So with the help of her cat Opal, she uses a smiley-face pin to pry into a drawer and find where the spell is written down. And her lunch basket is full of emeralds she's found with the spell she stole.

The sisters all separate and go about their respective days. When they meet at home, they compare. Beth clearly had the best day, helping Mrs. Laurence with the animals. Jo really dislikes caring for Aunt March (Discord), since she won't let Jo read what she wants to read. And Meg got in another fight with Trixie (Trixie), feeling she's become the very thing she scolded Amy for. And speaking of, Amy comes in to complain that Discord is going too far in punishing her for bringing the emeralds, and she can't possibly keep up with the source material. Despite the liberties they've been taking, none are amused by this further breaking of the fourth wall.

Besides, they don't have time for dramatics, they have to go to a play! Only Meg and Jo are invited again, which makes me wonder what grants them such special privilege. Amy is pretty annoyed, especially since she remembers there being an extra ticket in the original novel. But wasn't she just the one complaining about adhering too close to the source material~? Oh sure, throw that in her face! With that, the two eldest March sisters accompany Laurie to the play, which is a Daring Do production. I guess that's why Jo isn't reluctant to go this time~

At the play, Laurie mentions to Jo that she read some of the pages she was sending in the mail. Like, were they loose pages? Why weren't they in an envelope? But the point is, she noticed Jo cut the Applejack character. Jo protests that Daring Do doesn't have a sidekick, and Laurie's retort is that Rainbow Dash ain't Daring Do. Jo's still put out, though, she wants to write stuff like this, and she indicates the play. Laurie points out that this stuff is already written. Jo finds this intimidating, but Laurie instead encourages her to use that fear to write something new. Of course, this long discussion interrupts the play and disturbs the patrons (all of whom are Discord).

Meg and Jo return home, having had a decent night besides that last bit I said. Shame Amy couldn't come! While Meg recounts the play to Beth, Jo looks for the manuscript she was working on before they left. It's not where she left it, so she asks Amy if she moved it. After first ignoring the question, Amy confesses she did move it. To someplace nice and warm. And we cut over to a view of the fireplace, where the last page of Jo's writing disappears into ashes. The other sisters are shocked, and Jo is furious, actually violently lunging at Amy.

After a brief Street Fighter parody, Marmee (Pinkie Pie) comes in and offers them some advice that whatever they're fighting over can't be as bad as they think in the long run. The advice is word-for-word from the novel, essentially about forgiving each other before you let it darken your tomorrow. Jo, however, isn't willing to let that go yet, and does darken her tomorrows when she won't forgive Amy. She keeps trying, and Jo keeps blowing her off--right up until the time she tries to cross the frozen lake too quickly and the ice breaks beneath Amy.

Thankfully, Amy is pulled back up and rescued. While she's recovering from being nearly frozen, Jo dotes on her, noting she must be getting better, as the latest sweater she made wasn't even that bad. Amy admits she gets frustrated how much attention Jo gets over her manuscripts, compared to the little notice anyone gives her crafts. Jo replies that at least Amy has the guts to try something new, she's just spinning her wheels trying to re-create the same things in her writing over and over. Amy hands over a handmade journal of sorts for Jo to write in, to make up for what she burned. And the comic closes out with their relationship repaired.

Another simple addition to a simple story, with likeable characters and decent lessons. No real complaints, though I’m still baffled by that Watchmen reference. Like, you have to assume the Venn diagram of Watchmen fans, MLP fans, and Little Women fans is a really small demographic, so who is it for?? It just seems very strange to include.

[enfanttxrriblx]

Part 1: Introspection May 2023

Have you ever wondered what happened to the sad and mythical protagonist of your favourite cutting edge teenage drama when they grow up?  Well, we crave madness. We now suffer in silence. And we long for the feeling of loosing control. Now that we’re all grown up life doesn’t allow us to blame our parents or the crappy school systems for our mental deficencies anymore. It’s a trap. Suddenly we’re becoming so good at working on ourselves so that we even trick ourselves into believing we’re happy. However, we will never be cured and we’ll always revisit the place of insanity until the day that we’re able to let go of whatever is driving us crazy. At my age, it’s either improving or finally saying your good-byes to life. There is no in between. And that hurts the most. Not being able to chose a life in dreadfulness, but being forced to become better.

Madness is freedom. Acting out, doing drugs, hurting yourself… it’s all very fulfilling ways of testing your limits. It brings the illusion of living above all rules. It’s limitlessness. When you’re young and beautiful people want to take care of you. The prettier and crazier you are, the more people get obsessed with you. A feeling that is almost as intoxicating as the substances we used to pretend to be addicted to. You’re the star of the night. An icon only known to just a few. When you get older, the glamour turns into pitifulness and then suddenly to disgust. 

When you’re young people feel sorry for you as you’re charming yourself through life. Suddenly you turn 25 or 26, and people start to laugh at you. “Look at her, she just tries to fuck her way up top.” A behaviour that used to be idolised as a teen queen. When you hit the magical mark of 25 you loose all innocence of your childlike dolly face. You’re a woman now. And women are not allowed to be sad. We’re supposed to mother society and fix everything and everyone that we used to break for fun. 

So now, we just want to escape the cycle of madness. We need to heal, find love to not feel responsible to fix our society anymore and let go of all pressure. It’s just so tiring. I just wanted to die an icon as soon as I’d turn 27 but unfortunately I didn’t do anything remarkable until now. So my death would probably remain unnoticed by time and life. 

As for now, I won’t leave a footprint in this world, I know I have to accept all conventional expectations and work. Study, work, be disciplined. Be the best and also be feminine. Be sexy, be wifey material, be as strong as men, and so on. I actually feel just like the girly from “Gone Girl”. 

I used to associate myself with Tracy from Thirteen. Suddenly, I wake up just a few years after and I can understand Mme Bovary more than I ever would've wanted to. I hate it. My problems have become average. I used to be the special sad girl, so creative and talented. Making the good hearts around me slaves to wanting to help me reach my potential. I loved the attention. Now, no one cares about me when I don’t actually do anything valuable. 

Partying everyday is irresponsible now. It actually even became boring. And I think too much of myself to start doing harder drugs like meth or heroine. So what’s in it even anymore? I’ve died all the ego deaths and had all the disclosures one could think of. Found the source of life on acid like a million times. Tried and abused all the psychedelics, so they don’t allow me to feel the vibrant colours anymore. 

Life feels so black and white now. The last thing that could’ve brought me the rush was love, or at least that feeling of high that I associated with love. The failures of relationships that got me physically and emotionally abused kind of ruined that feeling of high too now. 

Now, I have to rely on my last resort to give my life a certain meaningfulness now. I feel obliged to take care of serious matters now. What’s even more shocking is that I actually started to car4e about politics and discussions around capitalism in a serious way. As a teenager, you become performative and idealistic. Today I can understand more of their complexities. I can have rational discussions about this shit. I care about this shit. Am I shit? Am I a shitty boring person now? Am I like everyone else? Isn’t it actually a good feeling to be part of society? What do I want now that I am not destined to die a tormented young soul anymore… 

Something in me wants to fall in love and start a family. Not sure if it’s just my hormones.. But recently I’ve started to be very comfortable with the thought of creating. Not only life but also knowledge. Put my thoughts and theories out there. Nevertheless, I am convinced that no one will be actually interested in what I have to say. But then again so many people loved “catcher in the Rye”. I thought that novel sucked. I hated to writing style. So maybe someone would love to listen to me? 

I love being the centre of attention but without people looking at me. It’s such an annoying urge. Wanting to be seen but not noticed. This even sounds so wanna be deep. Sorry about that. 

The point of life I’m locked up in doesn’t feel good. Either, I would love to be myself in 5 years from now or go back to 2013. This current feeling of in betweenness however does not feel intense enough, and I live for intensity. 

[star-anise]

I'm up around 3am, thinking about incels and tradwives. (Note: If these are movements you're a fan of, or if you just want to fight with me generally, I will block you if you annoy me, and even if you behave there's a $20 fee if you expect me to actually reply to you in any way.)

This got started because of Khadija Mbowe's and F.D Signifier's videos about Black patriarchy, which has led me to pick up bell hooks' 2004 book The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love.

The thing that hooks says that really knocked my socks off in a "how dare you notice that" way is that a lot of people, men and women alike, are angry not just because of the male violence they've experienced, but because of the lack of male love they've experienced.

Which like, part of being human means that being seen and cared about is pretty viscerally equated with survival in our brains. We want it, we need it, we suffer when it isn't there. To be seen and genuinely loved by the people in our lives matters, so we are always affected when there's someone important to us who doesn't seem to see us, to love us, to care about our wellbeing, or to be proud of our accomplishments. It matters to be disregarded, rejected, or shamed by someone we want to love us.

But no power in the world can compel another person to give a shit about you—a truth most of us spend our lives frantically suppressing because being unloved is terrifying, so we work at being better, more attractive, smarter, more accomplished, more charming, sexier, or to be brutally honest, more lovable. But when we do experience a lack of love, a lot of us take that anger and decide to opt for second best. If we can't be loved, we can at least be powerful. Power can take a lot of forms, but because the lack of male love often goes hand-in-hand with violence, people who face it generally want, at the very least, to not be hurt anymore.

But there's another element in play. Patriarchal gender roles divide behaviours and skills in a very particular way: Boys and men are expected to use power to dominate, and girls and women are supposed to use emotions to tend and nurture. Anyone who fails to perform those roles gets harshly punished. Terrence Real talks about how this leaves men with very limited knowledge of their own emotional needs or how to communicate them to other people, and Paul Kivel talks about how boys are taught that this is women's work—that if they are masculine enough, they will attract a woman who will make sure that they feel loved and cared about. How a great deal of men's anger towards women is the feeling that women are witholding this essential service, or failing to fully handle men's emotions (which is pretty damn common, since humans aren't telepaths so it's basically impossible to reach inside someone's head and change their emotions for them).

So hooks notes that women are just as likely to uphold patriarchal gender roles as men, and one element of that is women's anger when men are emotionally vulnerable. Men who confess to their partners that they feel lost and ashamed and unworthy of love are doing exactly what women keep saying we want men to do, but the reaction many women have is a kind of incredulous frustration—"You want me to handle all this? Fuck no, I'm busy!"

Part of that reaction is that in patriarchal gender roles, it is a woman's literal job to completely soothe and manage her male partner's emotions—to diligently praise him, make him feel more accomplished, and to reassure him of her ongoing love and admiration in all things. And that is a lot of work that is quite likely not to succeed because it's really hard to talk someone out of a self-hating funk. (There's also an element of just plain sexism. Even without the implied demand for help, some women just think men's vulnerability is pathetic or laughable.)

The feminist response to this that hooks, Real, and Kivel advocate for is to spread the load a little more evenly; to work to reduce the violence with which gender roles are policed, to allow men to be soft and emotional, but in the process, give them the emotional skills to handle the shame and dread we all feel sometimes about not being lovable or or worthy, and empower them to form many different emotionally fulfilling relationships.

So the thing about incels is, they tend to be obsessed with finding a woman who will make them feel worthy, sexy, accomplished, admirable, and dominant, like a "real man". The prospect of getting a woman is the single potential oasis of love and support in an incredibly bleak desert landscape in which a romantic partnership is the only possible source men are permitted to seek love and care from. A man who hasn't gotten a girl is a pathetic loser whose life is meaningless.

What that entire worldview takes for granted is how the desert became a desert in the first place. How boys learn to fear the violence and rejection that comes from stepping out of their gender role by being emotionally vulnerable or by emotionally nurturing somebody else; how emotional knowledge and expression are punished by a system that says men should always seek to dominate. The desire for a female partner rests on a bedrock of learned fear and contempt for the idea that men can or even should have the kind of emotionally close and supportive friendships among themselves that women tend to have with each other.

Incels are the fucking allegory of the long spoons in action. They gather in huge numbers to discuss their pain, frustration, and disappointment about their difficulty attaining a relationship that provides emotional fulfillment, but it's impossible for them to try to seek or offer that kind of relationship with the many many people right there also looking for love, because violating the gender rules means inviting violence and ostracism. Affection and mutual esteem between men is super gay and doesn't count, especially when it's provided because of a mutual vulnerability instead of admiration for achievement. So it's incredibly hard for incels to in any way break out of the mental cage that says the way to be loved is to be as masculine, as stoic and unemotional and successful and admirable and dominant as possible. And because being dominant tends to require people to be better than, incels spend a lot of time criticizing each other for failing to be masculine enough, and therefore not worthy of love.

Meanwhile... tradwives.

If you're into men, the dream of being truly loved by a man who will take care of you and make your life materially better is fucking amazing stuff. That's just... that's just The Dream, okay? The romance industry's extreme popularity decade after decade will tell you what bell hooks also notes: Women who are into men want to be loved by men SO MUCH.

So it really seems to me that the basic appeal of being a tradwife is managing to be submissive enough to get the men they love to genuinely show up and fully commit to loving them. If conflict in relationships happen because men feel threatened in their masculinity or not fully loved by their wives, then gosh darnit, these women will plaster themselves over the cracks to make sure there are absolutely no problems. That will earn them a relationship where they are truly loved and appreciated.

(It's a trap. I hate to say it, but we're not a telepathic species, and you will never manage to be good enough to actually change what someone else feels. No matter how hard you submit, your husband will still feel moments of doubt and fear and inadequacy, because he's human and we're built like that. It's the cross we have to bear as a species. And it does not go well at all if both of you are used, in those moments, for blaming you for whatever you "did" to "make" him feel that way.)