#also ill make them all latino at some point | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

kurtmustdie · 1 year ago

Text

God finally I finished the 1992 Spider-Man 2099 comics—

SPOILER WARNING BTW IM JUST SPITTING OUT MY THOUGHTS RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW GET OUT IF YOU DONT WANT THE COMICS SPOILED FOR YOU PLEASE AND THANK YOU

Overall, writing wise I liked it. Most of it, at least. I wasn’t a huge fan of the art style at some points but that’s just personal preference, I guess. I know how much work and how little time goes into comics so that is just a tiny thing to me. Biggest complaint about the art style was how the women were drawn. Uh…. Yeah, it was the 90s. I’m not shocked we’ve barely grown and it’s 2023. Side note but this comic really did predict some modern stuff didn’t it /hj

The downsides…. Oh boy. I don’t like how most of the female characters were relegated to the damsel in destress or…. Miguel lover. Ig??

Conchata was sort of out of the ordinary with that and that’s why I liked her (Xina too, both of their personalities stuck out to me and I liked them. Xina sort of reminded me of Red from TLOTFK National Anthem for some reason) but I mean… she was the main characters mom. Kinda makes sense that she’d go against the grain

That and the representation of Mexican culture.. my god did I hate it. As a Latino, specifically as someone who is Mexican, I was not a fan of how Day of the Dead was portrayed specifically. It isn’t just Mexican Halloween. But in the comic… yeah that’s what I got from it and I think if a kid who didn’t really know what that is might end up being ill informed but just— they should have done more research. That’s all I’ll say.

I can give them a little leeway and say “oh it was the 90s”. So I will. It was the 90s. What am I gonna expect from a comic book in the 90s. This was actually pretty progressive for the time so why am I complaining 💀

Oddly enough though, I did enjoy the representation of suicidal tendencies and ideation from Miguel. You don’t see that a lot. At least not in the way this was depicted and from what I’ve seen. It was relatable. Every time he got into a near death situation he still fought through it and didn’t give up. Which like, yeah, I wouldn’t want to be killed by some guy with wings or drown because fish man or something, but as he spirals I feel like it was depicted well. He knew that he couldn’t take his own life because not only did he have a job to do (save the city, work at alchemax) but also he found that other people did end up caring about him. At some points that didn’t matter to him, sometimes it did. It’s a fucking roller coaster, realistically.

With the scene right after the reveal of Tyler stone, Miguel’s really awful boss who groomed him into his position at alchemax, being Miguel’s father. We see a shot of either Miguel attempting or thinking of killing himself. Personally I interpreted it as an attempt. Felt like it was a spur in the moment kind of thing, which is realistic, as far as I know. Reading his dialogue and thoughts just felt real. It felt like someone was maybe directly talking to me about their thoughts or that i was reading someone’s journal. There was no filter. Miguel has no filter. I fucking love him for that.

Everyone in the story was just kind of an asshole in some way. There was no morally good or morally evil. I’d say everyone in some way was morally grey.

Miguel is kind of a dick, but he cares about the people around him even though he may not properly show it (whether or not that’s because of trauma or, in my personal interpretation, him being possibly autistic is up to you. I think it’s a little bit of both). He feels guilt when he hurts people, when he kills others, on accident mind you, but he does. He shuts down. He trails off. He’s not evil or malicious, he’s just very very emotionally damaged. Which by all means isn’t an excuse for how he treats some of the people in his life throughout the comics but they serve as a good explanation.

Dana generally seemed to… kind of care? She did sleep around and was bouncing between literally all 3 of the OHaras (Miguel her fiance, Gabriel her brother-in-law, and Tyler her father-in-law), but she also treated them more like trophies than anything. We didn’t see a lot of her backstory or motivations because she really just… was only there when the plot needed to mention “oh by the way Miguel’s fiance cheats on him”. I wish we got to see more of her, tbh. I wanted to see her line of thinking (maybe I will once I eventually reread but rn my brain feels like it’s about to explode and I need to eat something before it does. T minus 8 minutes /ref)

Gabriel. Just Gabriel. I do not have the right words to unpack him. Holy fuck.

Xina was a bit of a hothead, ig? She bounced off of Miguel’s character pretty well because she directly went against him. Not like she was a villain at any point but she did end up being at odds with him at some point, so.. she does, however, still care about other people and just like Miguel she feels so much regret about the past. I’d argue everyone in this story just kind of sits in a puddle of “oh god this unending agony”. I’m happy she seemed to be blazing her own trail at the end of the comic. Cool of her. Very cool.

Tyler…. Yeah I didn’t like him and technically speaking he is a villain, but he wasn’t entirely evil apparently, he liked Dana. Even though i don’t believe him. He’s a greedy shit who basically only values his role in a billion dollar company so uh.. fuck him. He’s not cool. I wouldn’t say he’s morally grey but if we take his word at face value he can feel love. I guess. But I don’t think he does. Nuh uh, Tyler Stone, Nuh uh.

Lyla was great. I love her. She’s funny, witty, her timing is great, she’s fucking insane sometimes but yknow what that’s fine. I saw a post describing her as “the weird fairy that haunts Miguel” (paraphrasing) and I cannot help but see her that way from now on. Especially movie Lyla. Because she’s just FUNNY in both and she’s so much fun I wish there was more of her in the comic and I WISH WE HAD MORE OF THAYT RANDOM PUNK VARIANT OF HER WHAT THE FUCK WAS THAT—

Overall, I found the comics charming regardless of my few critiques. It was written well to reflect that not everyone is picture perfect, everyone is just a bit cynical, and relationships are rocky sometimes. Especially if trauma and literal actual grooming is involved. Also I smiled and cheered a little bit when Tyler stone died and when alchemax fucking exploded.

That was great

(Sorry if this was a little incoherent like I mentioned before my brain hurts and I’d probably have to reread over and over to get my full analysis, this is just my final thoughts after my first full read through)

Will I read the other Spider-Man 2099 comics?

#atsv #across the spiderverse #miguel o'hara #comic miguel #spider man 2099 #spiderverse #miguel spiderman #i want to consume goldfish hhggrgrjrkwiflal

18 notes · View notes

aplpaca · 1 year ago

Note

Hey hi howdy hi if you have like a list of queer fantasy books you liked would it be alright if you shared them? i’m so low on spoons but would love to read some happy stuff if you’ve got any recs, all good if not! was just curious!

OK so I've got a couple things, but depending on what you mean by "happy", some might count and some might not, so I'm gonna group them by like "Happy/Feelgood" for the really sweet stuff vs "I wouldn't say they're "Feelgood' kind of warm-fuzzy, or at least they aren't entirely that, but they're def Hopeful at their core". (i tend to lean more towards things that have Angst even if the core is hopeful. i could list a lot more in the Mixed But Hopeful section, but i tried to stick to ones that felt more 'energetic' in tone, if that makes sense)

Feelgood

House in the Cerulean Sea by TJ Klune. Lonely man gets assigned to assess the "safety" of a boarding house for kids with supernatural powers and learns to enjoy life along the way.

Cemetery Boys by Aiden Thomas. Trans latino boy performs a magic ritual to prove himself to his family and ends up having to help a ghost move to the afterlife. This one is YA, so might not be your thing but I thought it was really cute and fun. Does include some elements of transphobia, but the overall tone of the story is cute and heartfelt, and the transphobia bits are resolved positively. Lots of emphasis on self acceptance and family.

Legends and Lattes by Travis Baldree. Orc woman retires from fighting and opens a coffeeshop. This one didn't particularly do it for me, but I know a lot of people like it so you might also.

Hopeful at their Core

Witchmark by CL Polk. Mage who works as a doctor meets a mysterious man and ends up investigating a murder while trying to help his patients suffering from a mysterious illness. Deals with abusive family backgrounds but is overall pretty lighthearted/energetic.

Winter's Orbit by Everina Maxwell. Arranged marriage in an intergalactic empire gets complicated when half of the pair's previous relationships and potential criminal activity come to light. Feels pretty fanfic-y (i say as someone who doesnt really read fanfic, so take with a grain of salt) in a fun way. Deals with past relationship abuse, but isnt graphic and is overall pretty lighthearted and fun

The Last Sun by KD Edwards. Disgraced Atlantean noble and his life companion/best friend/bodyguard get hired to search for a missing person, only to get entangled with a legendary monster connected to the fall of said noble's court 15 years prior. YMMV with this one cause it deals with a lot of heavy stuff like abuse and sexual assault and gets pretty dark at points, but at the same time the series is really funny, the banter is so good, and it has some of the best and most fun found family dynamics going on in like anything I've read or watched. Like those 2012 avengers fanfics where all the characters live in the same house and do shenanigans except its actually canon and also they can say the fuck word.

True Love Bites by Joy Demorra. Disabled werewolf captain takes a job on an island and grows close to a vampire nobleman. Things get complicated when a mysterious woman shows up with news that the world's magical wells are dying. There's an explicit version and a fade to black version depending on which youd prefer. Explicit version has a red cover and the fade to black has a blue cover (I personally read the blue cover version). I want to gnaw on the characters (esp vlad) like a dog with a cocaine chew toy

#books #book rec #sorry this took like all day to answer i was at work and then i was getting groceries and formatting is easier on desktop than mobile

10 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 1 year ago

Text

SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (AP) — When in-person school resumed after pandemic closures, Rousmery Negrón and her 11-year-old son both noticed a change: School seemed less welcoming.

Parents were no longer allowed in the building without appointments, she said, and punishments were more severe. Everyone seemed less tolerant, more angry. Negrón's son told her he overheard a teacher mocking his learning disabilities, calling him an ugly name.

Her son didn’t want to go to school anymore. And she didn’t feel he was safe there.

He would end up missing more than five months of sixth grade.

Across the country, students have been absent at record rates since schools reopened during the pandemic. More than a quarter of students missed at least 10% of the 2021-22 school year, making them chronically absent, according to the most recent data available. Before the pandemic, only 15% of students missed that much school.

All told, an estimated 6.5 million additional students became chronically absent, according to the data, which was compiled by Stanford University education professor Thomas Dee in partnership with The Associated Press. Taken together, the data from 40 states and Washington, D.C., provides the most comprehensive accounting of absenteeism nationwide. Absences were more prevalent among Latino, Black and low-income students, according to Dee’s analysis.

The absences come on top of time students missed during school closures and pandemic disruptions. They cost crucial classroom time as schools work to recover from massive learning setbacks.

Absent students miss out not only on instruction but also on all the other things schools provide — meals, counseling, socialization. In the end, students who are chronically absent — missing 18 or more days a year, in most places — are at higher risk of not learning to read and eventually dropping out.

“The long-term consequences of disengaging from school are devastating. And the pandemic has absolutely made things worse and for more students,” said Hedy Chang, executive director of Attendance Works, a nonprofit addressing chronic absenteeism.

In seven states, the rate of chronically absent kids doubled for the 2021-22 school year, from 2018-19, before the pandemic. Absences worsened in every state with available data — notably, the analysis found growth in chronic absenteeism did not correlate strongly with state COVID rates.

Kids are staying home for myriad reasons — finances, housing instability, illness, transportation issues, school staffing shortages, anxiety, depression, bullying and generally feeling unwelcome at school.

And the effects of online learning linger: School relationships have frayed, and after months at home, many parents and students don't see the point of regular attendance.

“For almost two years, we told families that school can look different and that schoolwork could be accomplished in times outside of the traditional 8-to-3 day. Families got used to that,” said Elmer Roldan, of Communities in Schools of Los Angeles, which helps schools follow up with absent students.

When classrooms closed in March 2020, Negrón in some ways felt relieved her two sons were home in Springfield. Since the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, Negrón, who grew up in Puerto Rico, had become convinced mainland American schools were dangerous.

A year after in-person instruction resumed, she said, staff placed her son in a class for students with disabilities, citing hyperactive and distracted behavior. He felt unwelcome and unsafe. Now, it seemed to Negrón, there was danger inside school, too.

“He needs to learn,” said Negrón, a single mom who works as a cook at another school. “He’s very intelligent. But I’m not going to waste my time, my money on uniforms, for him to go to a school where he’s just going to fail.”

For people who've long studied chronic absenteeism, the post-COVID era feels different. Some of the things that prevent students from getting to school are consistent — illness, economic distress — but “something has changed,” said Todd Langager, who helps San Diego County schools address absenteeism. He sees students who already felt unseen, or without a caring adult at school, feel further disconnected.

Alaska led in absenteeism, with 48.6% of students missing significant amounts of school. Alaska Native students’ rate was higher, 56.5%.

Those students face poverty and a lack of mental health services, as well as a school calendar that isn’t aligned to traditional hunting and fishing activities, said Heather Powell, a teacher and Alaska Native. Many students are raised by grandparents who remember the government forcing Native children into boarding schools.

“Our families aren’t valuing education because it isn’t something that’s ever valued us,” Powell said.

In New York, Marisa Kosek said son James lost the relationships fostered at his school — and with them, his desire to attend class altogether. James, 12, has autism and struggled first with online learning and then with a hybrid model. During absences, he'd see his teachers in the neighborhood. They encouraged him to return, and he did.

But when he moved to middle school in another neighborhood, he didn’t know anyone. He lost interest and missed more than 100 days of sixth grade. The next year, his mom pushed for him to repeat the grade — and he missed all but five days.

His mother, a high school teacher, enlisted help: relatives, therapists, New York’s crisis unit. But James just wanted to stay home. He's anxious because he knows he's behind, and he's lost his stamina.

“Being around people all day in school and trying to act ‘normal’ is tiring,” said Kosek. She's more hopeful now that James has been accepted to a private residential school that specializes in students with autism.

Some students had chronic absences because of medical and staffing issues. Juan Ballina, 17, has epilepsy; a trained staff member must be nearby to administer medication in case of a seizure. But post-COVID-19, many school nurses retired or sought better pay in hospitals, exacerbating a nationwide shortage.

Last year, Juan's nurse was on medical leave. His school couldn’t find a substitute. He missed more than 90 days at his Chula Vista, California, high school.

“I was lonely,” Ballina said. “I missed my friends.”

Last month, school started again. So far, Juan's been there, with his nurse. But his mom, Carmen Ballina, said the effects of his absence persist: “He used to read a lot more. I don’t think he’s motivated anymore.”

Another lasting effect from the pandemic: Educators and experts say some parents and students have been conditioned to stay home at the slightest sign of sickness.

Renee Slater's daughter rarely missed school before the pandemic. But last school year, the straight-A middle schooler insisted on staying home 20 days, saying she just didn't feel well.

“As they get older, you can’t physically pick them up into the car — you can only take away privileges, and that doesn’t always work,” said Slater, who teaches in the rural California district her daughter attends. “She doesn’t dislike school, it’s just a change in mindset."

Most states have yet to release attendance data from 2022-23, the most recent school year. Based on the few that have shared figures, it seems the chronic-absence trend may have long legs. In Connecticut and Massachusetts, chronic absenteeism remained double its pre-pandemic rate.

In Negrón’s hometown of Springfield, 39% of students were chronically absent last school year, an improvement from 50% the year before. Rates are higher for students with disabilities.

While Negrón's son was out of school, she said, she tried to stay on top of his learning. She picked up a weekly folder of worksheets and homework; he couldn’t finish because he didn’t know the material.

“He was struggling so much, and the situation was putting him in a down mood," Negrón said.

Last year, she filed a complaint asking officials to give her son compensatory services and pay for him to attend a private special education school. The judge sided with the district.

Now, she’s eyeing the new year with dread. Her son doesn’t want to return. Negrón said she'll consider it only if the district grants her request for him to study in a mainstream classroom with a personal aide. The district told AP it can't comment on individual student cases due to privacy considerations.

Negrón wishes she could homeschool her sons, but she has to work and fears they'd suffer from isolation.

“If I had another option, I wouldn’t send them to school,” she said.

#nunyas news

11 notes · View notes

bidokja · 1 year ago

Note

my honest opinion of kdj’s face is that he COULD be pretty under the censorship, if the reader prefers to think of him as such - but he could also NOT be pretty. because we’re the readers, so if a reader wants to think of him as such then who are we to say otherwise? who are we to say how others choose to interpret this character to their liking? it’s what readers like to do, oftentimes; kdj canonically took a few descriptors of yjh’s handsomeness and then expanded it the same way.

but what he does and doesn’t look like isn’t really the point in the novel itself, is the thing. the point is that kdj is loveable regardless of what features he has under there, regardless of whether his face follows a ‘conventional’ attractiveness as judged by societal standards, if it plainly blends into the background, and so on and so forth. it doesn’t matter either way. what matters is if you come to love him or not - and with that comes the meaning.

prettiness in itself is - pretty subjective, in the end? what someone will think is plain or ugly is easy on the eyes for someone else. i refer to the novel wicked upon which the musical was based on - glinda watched elphaba as she sat by the window on a stormy day, and suddenly realized that there WAS something beautiful in her after all.

this goes into extremely personal territory, but it does have relevance too (you can stop here if you’d like! personal boundaries and such, y’know); people like to say that age makes people ugly (but that they can still be loveable despite this), but after the death of one of my older relatives (may they rest in peace) i was looking at pictures of them and realized that’s a lie. the way their emotions shaped around her aged features were far and away the most beautiful thing i’ve ever seen.

any feature is beautiful once you’ve come to love them enough, is the thing. that’s the special part about the people you love. i guess it’s a huge part of why i honestly don’t mind at all when i see people saying they prefer kdj pretty or plain, because for me at least, prettiness is subjective. and how kdj may or may not look was actively taken out of the equation, so society’s standards of attractiveness doesn’t really matter for him specifically, either. or standards of anything. censorship must have really let him breathe easier after his identity got blasted on the news as a kid, huh?

let me know if i feel pushy at all throughout any of this? it’s a thought that’s been drilled into my head for a while now since i do see people who can be assholes about it, so i’m a bit worried some of that is seeping through. let me know what you think, otherwise!

I appreciate the ask! I really like discussing meta, so no worries you aren't a bother. As for a response, I agree with lots of this, and feel other parts are besides the point, and regardless feel some is like. Not redundant, per se, but basically just restating what I already said in my post about this. That isn't a bad thing! It just means we have similar views, and I didn't have room to really communicate all that in a post that was already long. Thankfully I'm not the one driving for the first leg of this 8 hour drive so I've got time to make another long post.

So firstly, I agree with the vast majority of this. As I said, the few features they describe him with are simply stereotypically attractive. They're subjectively attractive based on societal standards. As a Latino and chronically ill person, I'm intimately familiar with how arbitrary (and racist, and ageist, and misogynist, and ableist, etc, but thats a discussion for another time) beauty standards are. And I think it's important that that's acknowledged, which is why I called his descriptors simply stereotypically attractive rather than saying it as an objective fact.

Personally, I also still think that any focus on his actual appearance - by characters OR fans - is beside the point (which is something we can agree on!). I mainly made that post to express this viewpoint of mine, as an individual who's read ORV. Of course anyone's free to interpret him how they want, I'm not gonna act like I can stop that. But that also means I'm free to say I think his exact appearance is far far far less important than what his appearance represents. To me, the only quintessential part of his appearance is that he's some guy. That's what feels right to me, both thematically and as someone who loves Kim Dokja. I'm just as allowed to say that as someone is allowed to draw him "pretty" and I'm just as allowed to feel no personal connection with vastly different interpretations of his character as someone is allowed to say he's "ugly."

I'm not condemning any one viewpoint regardless of how much I agree with them, but that doesn't mean I've got to like them all. Same goes for anyone reading my interpretations! It's genuinely fine. We're all different and all take and give something different to this shared space (the I Love ORV space) we are in.

That being said, what I DO hope for is that people read my post and start questioning their own inherent biases about what consitutes "handsome" and "pretty" and "ugly" in their minds (cause I'm also not really on the side of people who call him ugly either). What features are you assigning to those labels? Is there a pattern at play here in the fandom at large? Is pretty always pale and is ugly always darker? Is handsome always fit and is ugly always unhealthy? I hope people ask themselves these things and come up with their own answers.

That's one of the most important subtleties of the post that I think I would've expanded on if I'd had more time.

#inbox #beso babbles #orv

12 notes · View notes

anti-katsuki-lounge · 2 years ago

Note

marunalu recently noted in their blog post that the reality that MHA will never be allowed to have a gay MC, major LGBT+ characters(only allusions and minor characters that don't take much action) or make any non-straight pairing for the characters due to Japanese laws, culture and tradition that will take decades before its even allowed in Shounen(9-13). So it's actually sad that non-Japanese shippers who obsess with shipping to the point that its their own character that they issue death threats and harassments to other people who might treat it like a hobby or don't care about it at all. They even harass and authors and VAs who do the work as a job and might disenchant them from finishing anything.

Yes, it does suck that the Japanese government and older people don't support LGBT+ rights like the West, but it takes decades for some Western countries to stop treating being gay like a mental illness and even more to allow gay marriage. And we're still dealing with the fact that the older folks in government that really shouldn't be leading anymore don't truly want to support LGBT+ rights.

Shipping should be a hobby with a fantasy element. You can do whatever you what with it but it shouldn't affect other people. It's likely that shipping is corrupted by the fact that people might use it to cope with the realities of relationships and dating that it becomes the identity. Honestly it's sad as many places have bad or no mental help services that allows people to acknowledge the situation and coping with it better. They're so entitled that they rather unintentionally destroy everything and wonder what happened to it when its remains are gutter instead of using it as a fantasy that shouldn't affect reality.

Just for background: I am a Bisexual Hispanic/Latino.

Do I think representation is important? Yes. However no one should harass someone to include it, for several reasons. Storytelling wise, you can tell if someone’s including a character that is a minority because they want to tell a story surrounding said character or that they included such a character just to win Twitter points. The former produces some of the most well written characters, offering insight into the lives of minority communities and their struggles while also allowing a character to thrive as an individual. Movies/shows/characters like Coco, Enchanto, The Owl House, Blue Beetle (Jamie Reyes), Persona 4, Moon Knight, and Black Panther showcase this. The latter, well, is more of a token than an actual character, done to say “hey, look, we included diversity. Now give me your money”! To me this feels disingenuous and scummy since to me it comes off as a means of making money rather than caring about diversity in it of itself.

More importantly, there’s the personal reasons why someone might not have much diversity. Like you’ve mentioned, due to the Japanese Government, LGBTQ+ centric stories can be difficult to write depending on the genre. It’s no fault of the author, so people shouldn’t bully and harass them because of this. Some authors might not feel comfortable writing about the struggles of a community they’re not a part of and don’t have experience with, and that’s fine too. At the end of the day, people shouldn’t be harassed due to not including diversity. Now if things like whitewashing minority characters happens and/or the like happens, then it’s completely understandable to get pissed. Same thing with someone simply being a bigot.

In conclusion, diversity is great and a very important thing to have, but no one should be harassed if they don’t include diversity. Society also looks different in Japan than it does in the west.

7 notes · View notes

thatdebaterguy · 8 months ago

Text

And this is to do with race.. how? Israelis and Palestinians literally descend from the same people, the Canaanites, from the same region of earth, and have shared cultures in the past. Palestinians became Muslim, Israelis became Jews. In fact, Judaism is so old that the original Canaanites were a majority Jewish already, until the Arab invaders colonised the land, and many local Canaanites adopted the Islamic faith and passed it down to the modern Palestinians. The point is they share a lot in common, the main thing being, neither of them are actually 'white' they both have middle eastern heritage, Palestinians lean more Arab, Israelis lean more European only because they were expelled from the region thousands of years ago. But they're not European white, American white, they're just Israelis.

Also, what are you even talking about? White rule, white beauty, what? Where? If you mean America, where this guy lit himself on fire in a stupid and clearly psychologically unstable act of hate, then what are you smoking? America has diversity quotas, affirmative action, reparations, black-favouring pay in many companies, Microsoft literally published how their minority employees make more. There are so many mixed race couples in America, Latinos are expected to become 1/3 of all Americans by 2050, they've had a black president, black vice president, many black popular politicians, my personal favourite republican candidate is Hindu and has Indian heritage, despite Indians being an even smaller minority in America, it's literally one of the most equal countries, and there are 0 laws in America that make life harder for black people and easier for white people. Just because a mentally ill white guy died screaming about people of a different skin colour, doesn't make it about race. Gandhi died for the freedom of the British Raj, home to Burmese, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Indians, Punjabis, Tamils, Gujaratis, people with vastly different beliefs, but he's a martyr for standing up for freedom. Skin colour has never been to do with this war, and frankly it spreads racism if you start bringing race into it. This is all to do with history and politics. It's about the meaning of the action, not the race, unless the meaning is literally associated with race. But no, this was a hate filled man who'd spoken about killing all Jews to 'free Palestine' who ended his own life because of his own sick mental state. Not a martyr. If he cared so much, he'd start a fundraiser or a charity, not kill himself. That was for attention. To try give himself some meaning in his final seconds. And it's depressing to see the meaning of his death be so vastly oversimplified. Don't martyrize mental illness for a mislead reason or a cause only believed due to misinformation. Let people gather the facts, form opinions, and do what they think is best for all people in this war on both sides. It's common sense.

#aaron bushnell #israel #palestine #politics #current events #gaza #hamas

29K notes · View notes

sunshinexlollipops · 3 years ago

Note

You do realise that Kyle Rittenhouse is Hispanic and shot white dudes right? One was a mentally ill pedophile who anally sodomized five young boys and was released from a mental hospital that same day, the other was a serial wife beater and the other was a felon who tried to kill his own family. All of which were trying to blow up two gas stations and burn down businesses own by brown people, Kyle did his community a great service, what you should be worried about is that you have these absolute garbage people causing trouble in the name of BLM.

hey anon, I think you're considered one of my first hate inbox messages. lemme be frank with your ass for the occasion. 🎉

(also, unless I need to correct something, like a typo or something akin to that, I won't be replying to any shitty notes on this bc I don't care lmao. this will also be the only ask I am to answer as well.)

Kyle Rittenhouse is white. in fact, here's a report from Snopes stating that the Kenosha police department the night of the shootings, as well as a previous unrelated court case, listed Kyle as Caucasian.

only ONE case lists him as Hispanic, which is where you're stating he's POC from. 🤦‍♀️

also, ironic you're trying to tell me he's POC because you think opinions should change just because you're telling me he's "Hispanic?" are you serious?

"Yeah guys, we actually let the Golden State Killer go... Turns out he was 10% Latino."

oh, and if you're saying that calling Kyle a white supremacist while being "Hispanic" is what I'm fucking up on lemme just show ya this--

Kyle is holding up the white supremacy symbol. so yes. go on and tell me that he needs to be viewed as "Hispanic" instead of a racist POS.

secondly, you know I made my comparison between Kyle and the George Floyd situation, bc the right said George deserved to be killed by police bc he was a "druggy" and he "had a fake $20"

it always funny that victims of white men with guns have mile long rap sheet that you say earned them a casket under 6ft of soil

why is it that the right ONLY sees crime when it's tied to the names of people that a self-appointed antagonist like Kyle have killed?

and if you want to talk about what the people he shot have done, here is another article by Snopes that fact checks the victim's own, previous court records.

some of your claims are disturbingly wrong. some are outright false. some take a little away from the truth. and there are so many claims for this and that and honestly, I'm surprised you didn't say one ate babies at this point.

what you can't argue is that KYLE HAD NO WAY OF KNOWING ANYONE'S CRIMINAL HISTORY WHEN FIRING AT THEM.

meaning: these people are complete strangers, and I'm rather positive that criminal history was not being discussed that night between them.

yet you give kudos to Kyle for murdering them, saying he's a hero for taking them out, when he had a just as equal 50/50 chance to shoot someone without any criminal history at all.

tell me, would you still consider him a hero if those people had no criminal histories?

or do you even take into consideration that Kyle has his own previous criminal history as well, no matter the severity?

or does it still only matter when you want to justify his actions?

I'm not saying the people don't have pasts or that I condone certain actions taken. but Kyle decided he was personally responsible for making the decision of whether they got to have a future or not, and you cannot argue which choice he made for them.

also, Kyle's victims being white doesn't change that he 1) made a white supremacist symbol, and 2) he showed up to a BLM protest to counter it and shot and killed 2 people. he's part of the fucking problem.

how is it that the right always sees this as someone taking justice into their own hands, when it's literally just individuals like Kyle inciting violence to try and feel like Rambo with an anti-vaccine swag-rock soundtrack?

Kyle is not a hero. he's a guy who decided to take matters, and a gun, into his own hands. he left his house with the intent to shoot people on his own merit.

the point of these protests is that individuals like Kyle MAKE THESE CHOICES and are allowed to by the system, whether they are a cop, or a little fucker from Illinois with a gun and desire to protect a fucking CVS.

Walmarts can be repaired. items can be restocked. cities can be rebuilt.

the lives of those lost can never be replaced. the wrong from their loss will never be right.

and the system? it remains to be reformed.

you don't want to mention how police purposefully escalated protests. how they wrongfully attacked uninvolved BYSTANDERS and people in their own buildings while going after protesters. how police planted officers as instigators, and damaged their own vehicles while staging pallets of bricks in cities.

police paralyzed and even cost some people their eyes with rubber bullets.

police even use tear gas, which the US has banned for military use because it violates international law.

yet, it's perfectly okay to use on BLM protesters who are peacefully organizing, right?

but, anon, if you REALLY want to talk about violence, it's the constant, racist violence that black people/POC undergo just for fucking existing around pieces of shit like Kyle Rittenhouse.

black kids like Trayvon Martin are killed for holding items like Skittles. black women like Sasha Johnson are shot at parties for being community activists. black men like Ahmaud Arbrey are wrongfully murdered for just jogging in public.

cops jail, injure, and murder even more. Breonna Taylor. Kenneth Walker. Jacob Blake. in fact, here's a current site of victim names BLM has collected, alongside what they were doing when they were targeted by police and harmed.

there is no peace in protest when there is no peace in just coexisting for black people.

in fact, African Americans had to fight the bloodiest war in American history to not be slaves, did they not?

and again, they had to fight in the 60's because everything from voting rights to water fountains were barred and segregated for them.

and now, you want to say that I need to worry about peace because of looters and damaged storefronts?

you also think that BLM protesters want to damage black-owned businesses? are you serious? do you hear yourself?

but in general, do you not think that the BLM movement wants to peacefully protest?

or do you just assume they want the same violence you say earns them a death sentence?

never in the history of America have black people/POC been granted the option to earn equality through only peace.

this is because the system and those who benefit from it don't WANT equality, they want explotation and imbalance because it gives them priveledge and power.

all POC have been forced by these people to fight tooth and nail for what centuries of racists refused to give. from the civil war to keep slaves, to near genocide of Native Americans for their land, this country was created and reliant upon the oppression and murder of those who aren't white.

for today's African Americans, they are tired of being mistreated. they are tired of being ignored. they are tired of being screwed over. but more than anything, they are tired of being fucking murdered.

so, when you ask for peace, maybe you should look at the system that allows such inequality and inhumane tragedies to happen. about the duality of justice, the hypocrisy of laws, double standards among society, and this country's long-standing inability to equalize any POC individual to one who is Caucasian.

because Kyle didn't defend himself. he didn't defend businesses. he didn't defend police. he didn't defend Kenosha.

he defended what always was: the only thing that has kept white people in such power in the first place.

and you wanna know something? there's a reason you chose this anon feature.

because despite whatever conspiracy theory that's currently caught your fancy, and the horse ivermectin I'm sure you're shoving up your ass right now, you don't want anyone to know you're openly defending it too. 💕

#luffy posts #Luffy asks #anon #anon ask #my first anon hate i guess lol #blm #kyle rittenhouse #black lives matter #george floyd

109 notes · View notes

ironwoodprotectionsquad · 3 years ago

Note

One thing I think is weird about how Ironwood was treated by the show and the writers is that Miles Luna wrote the chorus trilogy in red vs blue and there he gave Locus a redemption arc.

I view Ironwood and Locus to be very similar characters, both are stoic, veteran coded characters with severe PTSD who do horrible things because their brains have been warped by their trauma and the people around them just don't care about them outside of being something to use.

The difference isn't just that Locus got a redemption arc and Ironwood didn't though, the difference is that Locus's crimes were worse. He actively aided in a planet wide genocide for years. And it was so widespread that EVERYONE was wearing armor unless they were dead and a single battle in a city would be enough to wipe the people of Chorus out completely.

Ironwood's crimes are... He killed two people, one off screen, one on screen. And he... Didn't succeed in dropping a bomb on poor people, but him wanting to was enough to make him completely irredeemable.

And I'm saying this as someone who genuinely likes Locus, he's really compelling to me. I like seeing a man who once held strong moral convictions be warped into a monster by war and military mentality but after committing one of the worst crimes imaginable, eventually sees that what he's doing is wrong and actively helps out the good guys.

But it's still problematic that Miles Luna has a history of writing PTSD survivors as being violent sociopaths who do terrible things, and Locus didn't have extensive prosthetics and worse crimes, while Ironwood's crimes were comparatively tame (Caboose, the most innocent and popular character in red vs blue has a higher on screen kill count than Ironwood to the point that it's a running joke) and he does have extensive prosthetics.

It just leaves a really bad taste in my mouth I guess. (It's also worth noting that Locus's real name is Samuel Ortez and he is Afro Latino while James Ironwood is physically coded as being half Chinese... That's two people of color doing horrible things because of their disabilities hot damn)

RWBY is the first and last RT show I've watched so I don't know much about their other shows so I can’t really speak to much into what they’ve done before. But despite the fact that this character got a redemption arc, for both characters it sounds like their terrible acts are being played off as being because of a mental illness which is extremely harmful and ableist. More and more we are seeing arcs where people suffering from PTSD either turn evil because of said PTSD or die for the “greater good” so the “whole” people can live on happily ever after and its played off as a good thing or that it was their choice and it should be respected. But...that does not make it any less ableist.

Them being both non white makes it all the worse. So often these characters suffering from PTSD also just oh so conveniently are not white. So on top of the extreme ableism we are also dealing with extreme racism.

But back to the point, we take these characters, these complex and unique characters and the fans grow attached to them because how could we not relate to these characters because so many of us have been through some sort of trauma or hard times so we connect with characters that have been through stuff to. We connect and relate to these characters but then have to watch them die or turn into an unrecognizable monster because of their trauma or their disability aids or both. Over and over again we see this shit play out and it looks like CRWBY does this regularly. They should know by now that using mental illness’s or disability aids as a short hand for making someone evil is wrong and I don’t understand why fans defend this shit or pretend its okay.

#rwde #James Ironwood #Pro James Ironwood #Ironwood Protection Squad #Pro Ironwood #General Dadmiral #General Ironwood #Dadmiral ironwood

26 notes · View notes

esmedelacroix · 1 year ago

Text

DUDE! So many people need to read and understand this before even thinking about writing Miguel as a character. I usually write my personal adaptation of Miguel in modern AU, but I notice that when most people write him, they tend to write him as some horny, stereotypical Latino, short-tempered guy. When that is not who he is at all.

Anger and Short-Temper:

When I read short-tempered Miguel O'Hara fics I feel like exploding. No part of my body thinks that Miguel would ever shout in a relaxed work environment the way certain people write it out to be.

I can't ever imagine Miguel yelling the way some people make him yell. For example: You mess up the copies of notes from the board meeting. Sweat dribbles down your forehead as you inform Miguel of your mistake. "YOU DUMB FUCKING BITCH" Miguel shouts as he shoves papers off his desk. Okay so that was a little exaggerated but you get my point yeah?

I feel like people tend to write Miguel as this big bad eviil, angry man because that is the only part of him that they saw in the movie. Miguel was not so much angry with Miles as much as he was frustrated with the circumstances. Miguel sees himself in Miles and he sees history repeating itself. He knows the excruciating sorrow anyone would feel after destroying an entire universe of people for one single loved one. As said in the movie to wear the mask is to sacrifice and that is something Miles does not completely understand yet.

Not to mention when Miguel is tweakin' when he tries to get Miles out of the go-home machine it had been quite some time since he had taken his last dose of rapture. He was also experiencing many emotions all at once. If you would take a closer look at his character, you would find that he's actually a pretty funny guy. His humour takes a more sarcastic approach but I feel like that's what makes it so laughable.

Miguel as a Romantic Partner:

Ya'll, this is where I explode and breathe fire all over anyone who writes Miguel as the stereotypical Latino lover boy who has no personality outside of sex. Some of y'all write Miguel like he's the female lead of a Colleen Hoover book. Trust me, that's not a good thing at all. What I'm saying is that the only thing some people see him as is an object of sex.

I'm not shaming anyone at all. I'm a whore too but cmon now. When the most interacted with fanfiction tags surrounding Miguel is smut, and there is no balance to that, it weirds me out.

There is nothing wrong with smut that's not the problem. The problem is that people diminish him and his personality to just sex when he is so much more than that.

[TW: grape, assault, grooming: Off-topic and unimportant, y'all NEED to write warnings for the noncon pervy!miguel fics that y'all write. That shit is so traumatizing to read and you never know if a victim of these scenarios you are writing is reading it. I really don't want to shame anyone but disguising up grape as dubcon is actually so bad like please stop. Especially the OBGYN or physical exam ones like oh that's not. I was personally groomed by my physician when I was young. It's not fun to see that people fantasize about this, it's a mental illness to desire things like that. You should not be ashamed but you should seek help, I used to have the same issue as a result of my trauma but you can recover, I did.]

Many people tend to write Miguel as their own manifestation of a Hispanic lover. People write great characters but it's not Miguel...

Not every story needs to lead to sex with Miguel he is such a complex character. I wish people would play around with his character and explore the possibilities of the mental hardship that results from his past traumas.

Most of the writers on here write so well. I look up to them. They use the best syntax and rhetoric, I'm not even sure if they know that they are using them at all. I would love it if they would use their amazing talents to write an accurate or less fetishized version of Miguel. I don't write well myself and I'm always learning but I wish we would better analyze characters.

Also, y'all took the fact that he likes empanadas and RAN WITH It. My god, it's not the only food on the planet please get creative. I have no place criticizing writing, mine isn't even that good, but god damn. I see this with so many other fandoms, they hear one thing and they just run with it. Give the empanadas a rest.

Like please give Miguel a personality outside of being Latino and Hispanic.

Shoutout to some writers whose work I love <3: @sillysillygoofygoose@eyelessfaces@vintagexherry@fangsp1der-2099@ghost-with-a-teacup@oharaslover

^ i missed a bunch but there's def more

We talk about how mischaracterized Hobie is - which he is - but I honestly think someone else is characterized REALLY weirdly by fandom

Miguel O'Hara and Misrepresentation of His Rage: a.k.a Miguel has Ken Energy you fools

[this is a breakdown where I examine Miguel's trauma, his relationship with Miles, his role in The Society, and his personality]

I talk a lot of shit about the Hobie tag, but the over-saturation of smut in the Miguel tag is at critical mass.

And like Latino-fetishization aside, I feel like he's not written as a human.

He's written so flat.

I swear ya'll be writing him as the angriest, coldest, most anti-social man on earth. Ya'll be having him rude and avoidant with no friends whatsoever or a romantic soft latin lover and NO IN BETWEEN

which is so funny cause like... I feel like Miguel is Just A Guy

I know they're easy to overlook but I think about moments like these all the time

But I ALWAYS see him written him as friendless, and cold, or constantly irritated and angry but like - I feel like most of the time Miguel is just some dude. Like in a Good Way.

And he's fine with that.

Miguel runs a Society Full of Spider-people, and they're working for him voluntarily. Peter Parkers wouldn't work for someone they didn't think was genuinely, good-likeable, and level-headed.

He compliments Lego-Spider-Man. When Hobie was there he wasn't pissed he was just like 'not in the mood rn ngl'

and Hobie didn't take the piss outta him - because I feel like him and Hobie have a mutal understanding/relaxed relationship. All throughout the movie Hobie isn't talking bad about Miguel in specific - he never says anything about Miguel being annoying or evil - he's always taking about The Society Miguel has made.

Even Hobie - who will openly talk bad about the PM, doesn't really feel the need to diss Miguel's character in specific. Which I find very interesting.

I think this, along with a couple other things shows that the way we view Miguel in fandom is not really how he is, like..when he's not going buckwild insane.

Miguel and His Role as Canon

I could see Miguel taking his role as boss very seriously - the same way he took being a father.

Miguel has assumed the role of 'leader' over these Spider-people. In his eyes, it's his job to lead these people through their canon events to the other side, for the safety of the universe, and for them to become the people fate says they're supposed to be.

Because he made the mistake of 'going against fate'. A lot of the time we say that Miguel's justification is 'because I suffered, you must too'. But in his eyes, it's more like 'I tried to run from who I was supposed to be and it blew up in my face. Please don't make the same mistake - it's not worth it.'

Quiet literally 'Do what you're supposed to do, and things won't fall apart around you.'

And I think that really says a lot about how he feels about his own choices, and his own daughter.

Miguel broke canon to be with his daughter, and because of that, she - and billions of others, died. And Miguel feels directly responsible for that. In his eyes, he killed his daughter and murdered billions of people.

And although he loves his daughter - he sees it as not worth it. He sees taking her father's place as a mistake.

To Miguel, canon events and the pain they cause are much more 'worth it' and 'tolerable', than the pain and guilt of killing an entire universe.

Because with canon events, there is no fault. It's not your fault you couldn't catch Gwen Stacy. It's not that you're not fast enough, it's that it's suppose to happen. It's not your fault.

But in Miguel's case - it was his fault. It wasn't suppose to happen.

That's why Miles sets him off in a way others don't and can't. Because he wasn't supposed to happen.

When things are under control, Miguel is fine. When things aren't, Miguel isn't.

Miguel needs order. He needs canon. Not because he likes it, but because he feels beaten into submission by it. He feels safe in the idea that canon events happen even if you do everything right, because he still feels the guilt of having done something 'wrong'.

That's why he sees letting people die in canon events as 'the right thing'.

It's the trolley problem.

A trolley is hurtling at someone you love, on the other track there are 5 people. Do you let the one you love die, or do you hit the switch and save them - and take the blame for killing five people?

What's the right thing to do? Save your captain father and letting a universe die? Or letting your father die, but the universe will for sure live.

Miguel has already made his choice, even if he didn't know it at the time. By becoming a father, Miguel hit the switch. And he chose his daughter at the expense of a universe. And he regrets that decision. He feels guilt, like he's to blame.

When canon events happen, there's no one to blame. When anomalies happen, there is.

Miles and Miguel

Miles and Miguel have an interesting and unique dynamic with each other, one that I haven't seen anyone mention yet.

When I look at Miles and Miguel, especially in this scene:

I kinda see Miguel and a past version of himself. Miguel trying to stop what he sees - as someone about to make the same mistake he did.

When Miguel met his daughter, he didn't know about it's threat to the multiverse. And although it might be described as the best time in Miguel's life, he regrets it. If he would go back, he would have rather let his daughter live. Fatherless, but at least she would have lived.

Miguel didn't know. But Miles does. And that's what makes Miguel so furious.

Miles is going to go against canon, be with his dad, and threaten the multiverse. And Miguel believes that if Miles does this, billions of people and beings across a universe will die. 100% totality rate, 100% assured.

Miles is in the same position as Miguel once was. Miles has the same choice. To choose the one he loves over canon.

The only difference is Miles knows. He has a chance.

Miguel believes that Miles can spare himself the pain, and the guilt of murdering billions - if he just listened to him.

Miguel is the only Spider-person who has ever killed a Spider-verse. And he doesn't want that for Miles.

Miles being an anomaly was one thing. He was ready to calmly talk about that. But when Miguel sees him going down the same road as he once did, making the same choice even though Miguel is telling him not to - it makes it snap.

Because if Miguel could go back, knowing what he knows - if Miguel could only be in Miles' place - he wouldn't. Like Rio said - Miguel would kill to be in his place.

He sees Miguel like how Rio describes herself, oddly enough. Rio says she'd kill to be in Miles place, and she doesn't understand his 'irresponsible' behavior. But unbeknownst to her - his 'irresponsible' behavior is more heroic than she can understand.

Miguel is just the same. He sees Miles' choice as irresponsible, that he's making all the wrong choices even though people are throwing opportunity at him.

Miles is the only other Spider-person to risk what Miguel risked. And, genuinely believing everyone will die because of this - he's furious at Miles, the same way he's still furious at himself. He loved his daughter, and he knows Miles loves it dad. But having been on the other side of it all, he sees it as not worth it.

Miguel wants to be the only Spider-man who is the way he is. He doesn't want to Miles to do what he did, become what he is. Because he knows theres no coming back from that.

If Miguel could go back and shake himself and scream in his face to leave Gabriella alone, to just leave her dimension alone, he would. But he can't.

So he does it to Miles.

Miguel as a Boss

I don't think Miguel is an outright mean or abrasive person. I feel like outside of Miles, he's fairly calm, albeit a bit stressed. I could see him being really organized and good at time management -

And I can see Miguel being good with people. I don't think he's the kinda boss that'd be like 'Oh, you had a canon event last night? Your girlfriend fell off a building? Yeah, we get that a lot, get over it.'

And if anything - I think he'd want to help the Spider-people when it comes to processing canon events.

Miguel believes that canon events are necessary, not just to the multiverse, but to the development of who Spider-people are 'supposed' to be. So I think he'd set up support systems around HQ to help them process it, and he'd at least be a bit understanding.

I could absolutely see Miguel as the type to ask a teammate "Are you alright?" after something intense, or telling them to sit out. I could see him giving generous leave for Spiders who are going through stuff.

By Jess's response, it seems as if he leaves most of that to her, but I feel like the fact he stops to tell Gwen "Don't worry, kid." shows that he's use to comforting people, or prioritizes putting people at ease.

I mean, what Spider-man doesn't?

Miguel does seem to get along with people (aside from Miles and Gwen when he's scolding her), and it seems like people do like Miguel.

Miguel's Personality

Tbh - I don't think he's nearly as angry as fandom makes him out to be.

He was raising a child. I imagine that for the most part, he's pretty patient.

Like if you call him a name, he's not gonna get pissed. I feel like he's more likely to be like "Haha. Very funny." Or just pinch his nose bridge and be like "You done?"

I mean I know with all the gnashing and clawing and yelling and going apeshit, it can be easy to imagine Miguel as JUST that.

But I also like to imagine that most of the time, he's just like that normal boss as Target.

And a lot of his day is spent doing boring mundane things.

He's not always standing there brooding over videos of him and his dead daughter. He only does that when he's psyching himself up to yell at Miles.

Outside of that, he probably has a lot more things to do, realistically speaking. Organizing missions, checking status reports, looking over intake forms of anomalies, okaying and vetoing different protocols. Approving new technology, taking complaints from members, dealing with Hobie (an extra job in its own right), fixing things MayDay breaks, etc, etc.

And he's completely fine with that. Maybe he even finds calmness in it. When there's order, and routine, and everyone is working together and there's no kinks in the hose per say, he can operate.

Like yeah he's a little irritated and looks like he only slept 4 hours - but he's here and he's going to work with his team and employees, make sure things run smoothly, and make sure everyone gets home safe.

He's gonna try and make the society a nice place to be and make sure people on the team (like Lego) feel appreciated and odd-one-outs like Hobie get to hang and do what they want without much kickback.

The other Spider-people - like Pavi - wouldn't have joined otherwise.

If Pavi had showed up and Miguel was all stern and cold and rude, he probably would've been like 'no thanks my friend'

Miguel knew Peter B. before he lost Gabriella. So he had to become friends with Peter some way. He was putting up with Peter and his humor by choice, and in return Peter must have found Miguel cool enough to hang out with.

I think it's because Miguel is good with people, a lot of different types of people.

He's pretty down to earth, even if he is a work-aholic. He can be fun to chill or hang out with, even if he's a bit of a tight-ass.

Sure his humor may be dry, and his personality tame, but he's just him.

But I can see him as being a guy who you see at the gym routinely and never say hi to but you just nod at each other in silent respect while doing your workouts sometime.

Or the dude at your job you only see at the coffee machine - you know he does other stuff, but you never run into him anywhere else.

Or the dude who'll stop on the street when you ask for the time and lift one earphone before telling you it, then walking away without another word.

DO YOU GET WHAT I MEAN DO YOU GET THAT VIBE Like just Dude He's like a dad but not like a 'Dad vibe' with like sneakers or anything but like 'Dad who comes to PTA meeting but doesn't talk to anybody and quietly leaves when it's over'.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND PLEASE TELL ME IF YOU UNDERSTAND THIS VIBE It's giving Ken.

Anyways stop avoiding Miguel's Kenergy.

#atsv miguel #miguel o'hara #miguel fanfic #across the spiderverse #astv miguel #astv x reader #miguel o hara #miguel imagine

2K notes · View notes

wolfstar-in-color · 3 years ago

Text

July Colorful Column: Remus is a Crip, and We Can Write Him Better.

There is one thing that can get me to close a fic so voraciously I don’t even make sure I’m not closing other essential tabs in the process. It doesn’t matter how much I’m loving the fic, how well written I think it is, or how desperately I want to know how it ends. Once I read this sentence, I am done.

It’s written in a variety of different ways, but it always goes something like this: “You don’t want me,” Remus said, “I am too sick/broken/poor/old/[insert chosen self-demeaning adjective here].”

You’re familiar with the trope. The trope is canonical. And if you’ve been around the wolfstar fandom for longer than a few minutes, you’ve read the trope. Maybe you love the trope! Maybe you’ve written the trope! Maybe you’re about to stop reading this column, because the trope rings true to you and you feel a little attacked!

Now, let’s get one thing out of the way right now: I am not saying the trope is wrong. I am not saying it’s bad. I am not saying we should stop writing it. We all have things we don’t like to see in our chosen fics. Maybe you can’t stand Leather Jacket Motorbike Sirius? Maybe you think Elbow Patch Remus is overdone? Or maybe your pet peeves are based in something a little deeper - maybe you think Poor Latino Remus is an irresponsible depiction, or that PWPs are too reductive? Whatever it is, we all have our things.

Let me tell you about my thing. When I first became very ill several years ago, there were various low points in which I felt I had become inherently unlovable. This is, more or less, a normal reaction. When your body stops doing things it used to be able to do - or starts doing things you were quite alright without, thank you very much - it changes the way you relate to your body. You don’t want to hear my whole disability history, so yada yada yada, most people eventually come to accept their limitations. It’s a very painful existence, one in which you constantly tell yourself your disability has transformed you into a burdensome, unworthy member of society, and if nothing else, it’s not terribly sustainable. Being disabled takes grit! It takes power! It takes a truly absurd amount of medical self-advocacy! Hating yourself? Thinking yourself unworthy of love? No one has time for that.

Of course, I’m being hyperbolic. Plenty of disabled people struggle with these feelings many years into their disabilities, and never really get over them. But here’s the thing. We experience those stories ALL THE TIME. Remember Rain Man? Or Million Dollar Baby? Or that one with the actress from Game of Thrones and that British actor who seemed like he was going to have a promising career but then didn't? Those are all stories about sad, bitter disabled people and their sad, bitter lives, two out of three of which end in the character completing suicide because they simply couldn’t imagine having to live as a disabled person. (I mean, come on media, I get that we're less likely to enjoy a leisurely Saturday hike, but our parking is SUBLIME.) When was the last time you engaged with media that depicted a happy disabled person? A complex disabled person? A disabled person who has sex? No really, these aren’t hypothetical questions, can you please drop a rec in the notes?? Because I am desperate.

There are lots of problems with this trope, and they’ve been discussed ad nauseam by people with PhDs. I’m not actually interested in talking about how this trope leads to a more prevalent societal idea that disabled people are unworthy of love, or contributes to the kind of political thought processes that keep disabled people purposefully disenfranchised. I’m just a bitch on Tumblr, and I have a bone to pick: the thing I really hate about the trope? It’s boring. I’m bored. You know how, like, halfway through Grey’s Anatomy you realized they were just recycling the same plot points over and over again and there was just no WAY anyone working at a hospital prone to THAT MANY disasters would stay on staff? It's like that. I love a recycled trope as much as the next person (There Was Only One Bed, anyone?). But I need. Something. Else.

Remus is disabled. BOLD claim. WILD speculation. Except, not really. You simply - no matter how you flip it, slice it, puree it, or deconstruct it - cannot tell me Remus Lupin is not disabled. Most of us, by this point, are probably familiar with the way that One Canonical Author intended One Dashing Werewolf to be “a metaphor for those illnesses that carry stigma, like HIV and AIDS” [I’m sorry to link you to an outside source quoting She Who Must Not Be Named, but we’re professionals here]. Which is... a thing. It’s been discussed. And, listen, there’s no denying that this parallel is a problematic interpretation of people who have HIV/AIDS and all such similar “those illnesses” (though I’ll admit that I, too, am perennially apt to turn into a raging beast liable to harm anything that crosses my path, but that’s more linked to the at-least-once-monthly recollection that One Day At A Time got cancelled). Critiques aside, Remus Lupin is a character who - due to a condition that affects him physically, mentally, emotionally, and intellectually - is repeatedly marginalized, oppressed, denied political and social power, and ostracized due to unfounded fear that he is infectious to others. Does that sound familiar?

We’re not going to argue about whether or not “Remus is canonically disabled as fuck” is a fair reading. And the reason we’re not going to argue about whether or not it’s a fair reading is because I haven’t read canon in 10-plus years and you will win the argument. Canon is only marginally relevant here. The icon of this blog is brown, curly haired Remus Lupin kissing his trans boyfriend, Sirius Black. We are obviously not too terribly invested in canon. The wolfstar fandom is now a community with over 25,000 AO3 fics, entire careers launched from drawing or writing or cosplaying this non-canonical pairing. We love to play around here with storylines and universes and races and genders and sexualities and all kinds of things, but most of the time? Remus is still disabled. He’s disabled as a werewolf in canon-compliant works, he’s disabled in the AUs where he was injured or abused or kidnapped or harmed as a child, he’s disabled in the stories that read him as chronically ill or bipolar or traumatized or blind or Deaf. I’d go so far as to say that he is one of very few characters in the Wide Wonderful World of media who is, in as close to his essence as one can be, always disabled. And that means? Don’t shoot the messenger... but we could stand to be a tiny bit more responsible with how we portray him.

Disabled people are complicated. As much as I’d like to pretend we are always level-headed, confident, and ready to assert our inherent worth, we are still just humans. We have bad days. We doubt our worth. We sometimes go out with guys who complain about our steroid-induced weight gain (it was a long time ago, Tumblr, okay??). But, we also have joy and fun and good days and sex and happiness and families and so many other things.

Remus is a disabled character, and as such, it’s only fair that he’d have those unworthy moments. But - I propose - Remus is also a crip. What is a crip? A crip - like a queer - is someone who eschews the limited boundaries placed on their bodies, who rejects a hierarchy of oppression in favor of an intersectional analysis of lived experience, who isn’t interested in being the tragic figure responsible for helping people with dominant identities realize how good they have it. Crips interpret their disabilities however they want, rethinking bodies and medicine and pleasure and pain and even time itself. Crips are political, community-minded, and in search of liberation.

Remus is a character who struggles with his disability, sure. But he’s also a character who leverages his physical condition to attempt to shift communities towards his political leanings, advocates for the rights of those who share his physical condition, and has super hot sex with his wrongfully convicted boyfriend ultimately goes on to build community and family. Having a condition that quite literally cripples you, over which you have no control, and through which you are often read as a social pariah? That’s disability. But using said condition as a means through which to build advocacy and community? Now that’s some crip shit.

Personally, I love disabled!Remus Lupin. But I love crip!Remus Lupin even more. I’d love to see more of a Remus who owns his disability, who covets what makes him unique, and who never ever again tells a potential romantic partner they are too good for him because of his disability. This trope - unlike There Was Only One Bed! - sometimes actually hurts to read. Where’s Remus who thinks a potential romantic partner isn’t good enough for him? Where’s Remus who insists his partners learn more about his condition in order to treat him properly? Where’s sexy wheelchair user Remus? Where’s Remus who uses his werewolf transformations as an excuse to travel the world? Where’s crip Remus??

We don’t have to put “you don’t want me” Remus entirely to bed. It is but one of many repeated tropes that are - in the words of The Hot Priest from Fleabag - morally a bit dubious. And let’s face it - we don’t always come to fandom for its moral superiority (as much as we sometimes like to think we do).

This is not a condemnation - it is an invitation. Able-bodied folks are all but an injury, illness, or couple decades away from being disabled. And when you get here, I sincerely hope you don’t waste your time on “you don’t want me”ing back and forth with the people you love. I’m inviting you to come to the crip side now. We have snacks, and without all the “you don’t want me” talk, we get to the juicy parts much faster.

Colorfully,

Mod Theo

#wolfstar #disability in fandom #disabled remus #crip remus #please write me some crip remus #I beg of you #fandom meta

111 notes · View notes

antoine-roquentin · 4 years ago

Photo

best result for the gop among asian people since 2008, latinx people since 2004, and black people since reagan got 14%, tying bob dole’s 12% in 1996. weirdly, people are reading blame into these charts when it’s clear that some sober-minded analysis should be done as to why the supposedly more racist candidate doubled his vote among black women. when you remember that biden wrote the 1994 crime bill and that racists like richard spencer, curtis yarvin, rahm emanuel, madeleine albright, bill kristol, max boot, jeffrey goldberg, bret stephens, george will, rick wilson, eliot cohen, stanley mcchrystal, william mcraven, miles taylor, tony blair, rick snyder, david cameron, moe davis, joe lieberman, and others felt comfortable enough to endorse and vote for him, people responsible for untold numbers of deaths, then it starts to make a bit more sense.

this all brings to mind a new york times article from september:

The results are sobering. We began by asking eligible voters how “convincing” they found a dog-whistle message lifted from Republican talking points. Among other elements, the message condemned “illegal immigration from places overrun with drugs and criminal gangs” and called for “fully funding the police, so our communities are not threatened by people who refuse to follow our laws.”

Almost three out of five white respondents judged the message convincing. More surprising, exactly the same percentage of African-Americans agreed, as did an even higher percentage of Latinos.

These numbers do not translate directly into support for the Republican Party; too many other factors are at play. Nevertheless, the results tell us something important: a majority across the groups we surveyed did not repudiate Trump-style rhetoric as obviously racist and divisive, but instead agreed with it.

Hispanics, of course, are no more monolithic than any other group, and internal differences influenced how individuals reacted. The single biggest factor was how respondents thought about Hispanic racial identity. More than whether the individual was Mexican-American or from Cuba, young or old, male or female, from Texas, Florida or California, how the person perceived the racial identity of Latinos as a group shaped his or her receptivity to a message stoking racial division.

Progressives commonly categorize Latinos as people of color, no doubt partly because progressive Latinos see the group that way and encourage others to do so as well. Certainly, we both once took that perspective for granted. Yet in our survey, only one in four Hispanics saw the group as people of color.

In contrast, the majority rejected this designation. They preferred to see Hispanics as a group integrating into the American mainstream, one not overly bound by racial constraints but instead able to get ahead through hard work.

The minority of Latinos who saw the group as people of color were more liberal in their views regarding government and the economy, and strongly preferred Democratic messages to the dog-whistle message. For the majority of Latinos, however, the standard Democratic frames tied or lost to the racial fear message. In other words, Mr. Trump’s competitiveness among Latinos is real.

But our research also suggests good news. There’s a winning message Mr. Biden and his party can deliver that resonates with most Hispanics no matter how they conceptualize the group’s racial identity.

The key is to link racism and class conflict. The pivot we recommend was also the most convincing message we tested among whites and African-Americans.

Democrats should call for Americans to unite against the strategic racism of powerful elites who stoke division and then run the country for their own benefit. This is not to deny the reality of pervasive societal racism. But it does direct attention away from whites in general and toward the powerful elites who benefit from divide-and-conquer politics.

This is the race-class approach that one of us helped pioneer. It fuses issues of racial division and class inequality, and by doing so shifts the basic “us versus them” story — the staple of most political messaging — away from “whites versus people of color” to “us all against the powerful elites pushing division.”

Here’s what this looks like:

We had come so far, but now Covid-19 threatens our families — for instance with health risks, record unemployment and losing the businesses we worked hard to build. To overcome these challenges, we need to pull together no matter our race or ethnicity. But instead of uniting us, certain politicians make divisions worse, insulting and blaming different groups. When they divide us, they can more easily rig our government and the economy for their wealthy campaign donors. When we come together by rejecting racism against anyone, we can elect new leaders who support proven solutions that help all working families.

This message was more convincing than the dog-whistle message among Hispanics no matter how they saw the group’s racial identity. It also beat the dog-whistle message among African-Americans and whites.

To understand why this works, it helps to compare it to the standard Democratic responses to Mr. Trump’s messages stoking racial fear.

One standard reaction is to directly challenge Mr. Trump as a bigot while also condemning structural racism. We tested a message like this. It said, in part,

Certain politicians promote xenophobia, racism and division. And it’s not just their words. It’s their policies, too. We see it in how they rip families apart at the border. And in how the police profile, imprison and kill Black people.

Compared with the dog-whistle fear message, this “call out racism” message lost among whites, perhaps unsurprisingly. It also lost among those Latinos who did not perceive themselves as people of color.

Denouncing racism against Latinos seems like an obvious strategy to those of us who see ourselves as people of color and are outraged by Mr. Trump’s denigrating language and his administration’s violence toward Latin-American immigrants. Yet this approach ignores the fact that our racial self-conception is not shared by a majority of Hispanics, who seem to balk at understanding themselves as people of color under racist attack.

The other standard Democratic response to dog whistling is to sidestep racial issues as much as possible. Let’s call this the “colorblind” approach, which we also tested. Our version partly said,

We live in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, but Covid-19 illnesses and deaths are worse here than almost anywhere else. We must elect new leaders who have a plan and are ready to build this country back, better.

This approach seeks to build a coalition by emphasizing shared concerns, for instance around health care or the economy, while avoiding divisive conversations about racism. But it is dog-whistle racism that cleaved the white working and middle classes from the Democratic Party in the first place, and failing to counter that strategy directly leaves its potency intact. In our research, the colorblind message basically tied the racial fear message among whites as well as the majority of Hispanics.

In contrast, Democrats can build common cause across economic classes and racial groups with a race-class approach.

We tested seven race-class messages woven around different issues, including immigration reform and criminal justice. Among whites — often seen as more likely to be comfortable with messages that avoid challenging racism — all seven race-class messages beat the colorblind narrative. Indeed, five beat or tied the dog-whistle message, something the colorblind message failed to accomplish.

Framing racism as a class weapon also proved effective at nurturing support for racial justice reforms. The race-class approach urges people to view the real threat in their lives as emanating from powerful elites stoking division, not from supposedly dangerous minorities.

485 notes · View notes

harpersplay · 3 years ago

Note

Genuine non-troll white woman here - you wrote "So I already knew that Good Girls was a white feminism phantasmagoria...But, jesus fucking christ, y'all are just showing your true colours lately. The way you talk about a MOC in relation to a white woman is disgusting." Not asking you to call out specific people or posts or start any kind of flame war but what would be a general example of what you are talking about? I follow a good chunk of people and I'm not seeing this maybe b/c I'm not following the same people, maybe out of willful blindness, maybe I'm not recognizing it - again, b/c of ignorance, etc. Just trying to understand what you mean - and not do it obviously, if I am doing it.

I apologise for taking a longish time to answer this. Honestly, I wasn't sure I wanted to get into it. Anyway, I'd first like to say that this is all my opinion. What bothers me might not bother someone else. BIPOC are not a monolith. Even subsections aren't. Not all Mexican trans men are a monolith. Neither are all Japanese lesbians. You get the idea. And that's not even including people like Ben Carson or Caitlyn Jenner—people who support and work for policies that actively harm the marginalised group of which they are a part. Secondly, I know this isn't your intention, but asking POC to tell you what is ok to do and what is not is a slippery slope to "my [blank] friend said this was ok." Finally, the fandom is quite small so it is pretty hard to give general examples. I don't know if it's more trouble to quote specific posts or not, because some will think it is about them anyway. Anything I'm going to mention I've seen on Tumblr, Instagram, Reddit and/or Twitter. But there are definitely popular Tumblr blogs that all push the same narrative. Oh, and one last thing, I haven't seen any of what I'm referring to from people I follow.

Ok, let's go. For a very long time, mainly WOC have pointed out the racial problems within the show and the extremely dismissive attitude about those problems from mainly white women. And while these same women have written thousands (even tens of thousands) or words about Beth (it's always Beth) and her struggles and the amazingness of such a complex female character (ymmv), they brush aside commentary about racism as either nitpicking, not understanding the show is about the 3 women (tell that to all the white men with fleshed-out storylines), or misogyny. The last is especially hostile because they are often talking over Black women and misogynoir is a very real fucking thing that couples the fun of being hated for being a woman with the delight of good old-fashioned racism. They espouse the idea that people having a problem with Beth are all covert & overt misogynists. But talk out the other side of their mouths that they can't possibly be racist even when they support racism in the show or ignore concerns brought up by fans of colour. And that is just the absolute height of hypocrisy. Because by the former they acknowledge that people in a marginalised group (women) can still be anti- that group (a phenomenon with which I agree). But in the latter, suddenly they don't understand that concept.

Specific to the post you are responding to, fans that purport to like Brio write about the relationship in ways that reveal how much of their enjoyment comes from Rio being inferior to Beth. It's all about what he can do for her, how he acts against his best interests for her, how he literally denies himself sexual pleasure for her. Those are all meant to show how in love he is with her. But the show never bothers to tell us why. And, no, this is not because the show is so deep. Other romantic relationships they have scenes that are explicit about the characters' feelings. But Rio, after being shot, after being betrayed, after being mocked, is just so in love with Beth....because. (MYSTERIOUS!) And the Beth stans are more than fine with this because they think everyone should be as obsessed with Beth as they are. But it's bad storytelling. And, in this particular case, it gets into very dicey racist tropes. A white women treating her Latino lover like an afterthought is not the same as a white women treating her white lover like an afterthought. It just isn't. And if some of these fans are as smart as they pretend to be, they know that. They just don't care. Much like the showrunners.

There was so much talk defending the drawn-out Boland marriage because why can't we understand how hard it is for Beth—who is, at various times, claimed to be emotionally abused by Dean or staying with him because it is safe and comfortable—and we don't appreciate how difficult it is for her (I may be one of the few divorced people talking about this show on Tumblr, so this has always made me laugh). Yet there was nothing but glee when Rio flipped on his brousin (who was written as both abusive and safe) for Beth. Where was the empathy for Rio and how hard it was for him? Especially because, unlike Beth, he didn't even have one parent? Hadn't the Beth stans used her very tragical history™️ to explain away her every shitty act? idk, not having any parents and going to jail (as a minor?) and being betrayed by your family seems pretty tragic. But I didn't see them all of a sudden excusing Rio's bad behaviour. Because, feminism or something?

What about Beth's feelings? Last season she spent trying to have him killed. This season she spent looking annoyed by him. Throughout both she talked down to him in a specific white woman way that every BIPOC has experienced, even if some of them are cool with it. There were multiple opportunites for Beth to talk about her feelings with Ruby and/or Annie, but the writers made the deliberate choice to always make it about sex (and god, the immature way they had these three grown women talk was fucking obnoxious). She spent the last 2 seasons also wanting him out of her life to the point that a majority of her actions in S4 were motivated by getting to Nevada with her husband and kids. Beth doesn't care about Rio but Rio needs to put Beth above everything because he's just so in love like he's never been before (which is blatant Marcus & Rhea erasure). And anyone who doesn't think Beth would have just as happily been sitting on that bench plotting how to "run the city" (hahahahaha!) with Nick if the situation worked out differently hasn't been paying attention.

So, what do we have? A white woman who is constantly excused (by the loudest portion of the fandom) for all her ill treatment to her Black BFF & her Black husband, her Asian coworker, her Latina "friend," and Rio (among others) because her life is hard and who is not required to even be nice to her supposed "endgame". And a MOC who is expected to accept being treated poorly by the white woman because he loves her.

And, a last thing, this attitude grossly crossed over into talk about real people when the fans—who self-righteously claimed to be above anon sources or talking about the actors—latched on to the narrative and enjoyed blaming the MOC actor for the cancellation of the show, even dragging his insignificant (in terms of influence) Black wife into it. All while conveniently ignoring that the creator/showrunner is a white woman. The star & producer is a white woman. The people making the decisions at NBCU & Netflix were white women. All white women with so much more power than the Latino actor.

Shit, did I answer your question? I know this is a lot. But I could honestly make mulitple posts on each issue I touched on here. Basically, white people ain't slick, be they content creators or fans. We see how & what y'all talk about. We see that Rio not having a last name is not a big deal to you and we know why that is. So we're fucking tired. And we're over a show that had so much potential crapping all over their POC characters to prop up a white woman. And we're repulsed by the white women in the fandom who use their tears to seem oppressed and who toss around the word misogynist because POC dare call a Karen a Karen.

#nbc good girls #good girls nbc #racism in the text #racism in fandom #fragile whiteness #white feminism #what fandom chooses to talk about #and what it chooses to ignore #anon asks

31 notes · View notes

firebuug · 3 years ago

Text

i have been thinking a little bit. and to me. if i saw someone who isnt hispanic make a colombian character id go bananas because omg lol Thats Me. however the moment they make them a big flirt or have them sleep around a lot i am clicking off of their profile because HOLY SHIT the stereotype is played to death.

however. say you are a non-hispanic person who has a flirty oc who may or may not sleep around a lot. this has been their biggest trait for a long time and you don't want to have to completely rewrite them or rid them of their personality. that's fine. i think the problem with characters like this is a lot of the time them being flirty is their Only Big Personality trait. they can have other personality traits but usually they dont feel as fleshed out or played as hard as being flirty. they feel like a one dimensional character born from a stereotype.

here is my ramble about how to fix this while keeping the flirty trait bc its just Stuck. its fine. also yes i am colombian but my word isnt like Gods Blessing and it certainly doesnt speak for every latino person in the world ESPECIALLY ppl who were born and raised in latin america. so feel free to state ur thoughts and add on or retcon points i made here. sure. i wanna learn too cuz in the end i still suffer from gringo disease . 😔

how do you fix this! sure, you can retcon that trait and rewrite them, or you can change them to be non latino, but ill be really sad about it especially if theyre colombian. well. look at their other traits. list them out like so. if it looks like this (with bolded being biggest traits), it isnt looking too good. doesnt automatically label you A Horrible Awful Racist Who Will Never Improve but it isnt a great character

flirty, romantic

sleeps around a lot

friendly

loves their friends and is mean to people who hurt them

easily angered

see. its kinda flat and boring. this is basic character creation, but it steps over into iffy territory once its producing cardboard stereotypes. instead, try exploring other aspects of their personality. give them more big traits you can latch onto and play off of, more "gimmicks" i guess. give them something they love passionate, and something they hate with a passion. if you want, even delve into why theyre so flirty and why they sleep around. maybe its an unhealthy coping mechanism. maybe they think its fun. maybe they do it for work. sex isnt a dirty thing. maybe they flirt a lot bc it makes them feel better about themselves, maybe they flirt bc they get crushes easily, maybe its their way of being nice. whatevs! here is a trait list for a latino oc that would not instantly be a red flag of "uh oh stereotype" to me if written by a non latino person:

really loves horror movies, a bit of an adrenaline seeker

cat lover, used 2 volunteer at shelters

flirty, tends to be very good with words and persuading people

values their friends (and rivals) a lot, forms bonds with anyone who's been w them for a long time and will defend them w passion

can get really defensive over the things they care about and [specific insecurity]

really, really fucking hates toads and will go on an hour rant about why

in this one flirty is still a big character trait, but theres other big ones that feel just as developed with thought placed behind them, so it kinda balances it out.

also, kind of unrelated BUT if you want to add more cultural traits to them but dont know much about the culture, go for it. make them have a comfort food their parents used to make a lot when they were sick like a kind of sancoho or changua or an arepa with some coffee and cheese. maybe they love or hate cumbia bc their mom played it all the time when she did chores. maybe they can only speak shitty spanish bc they never got taught. maybe they never had a quinceañera because the thought of dancing in front of everyone embarrassed them and regret it when theyre older so they have a big one with their friends to make up for it. idc. go crazy. if you're scared or uncertain just ask your latino friends or hit it to the google. not every latino experience is the same. a person from mexico is not going to have the same childhood as someone from colombia. but chances are, if your friends are latino and want to see more characters like them, they're down to help the best they can. hell, even go watch a movie set in the country or whatever and read the reviews from actual latino people to see what they liked that they got right and what they got really wrong.

also if u need help and u dont have any latino friends u can ask me. i was a colombian raised by a completely colombian family but unfortunately i was raised to be as american as possible to fit in so i wont know Everything and still have a lot of learning to do myself. i would kill to see a character in media who has the same identity crisis i do of being colombian raised in america. lemme help u do it. Love you now go write those sexy sexy people

#hopefully this makes sense. it doesnt have to bc its just me thinking abt how to solve this. yaya bye!#also! you dont have to only have One token latino. like you Can; i wont think you have malintent but like #*pleading hands* more colombian ocs for me to accept as found family plz /hj #txt #rambles #bascially. accidentally writing a stereotype doesnt make u a bad person. taking initiative and making them less of a stereotype is good #the only thing that seals u as a bad person after that is arguing w actual latinos who bring it up and saying ur in the right and cant be #wrong. that is what makes u a disappointment and also blocked LOL

11 notes · View notes

onionjulius · 5 years ago

Link

Sean Illing: The issue here is something you call “political hobbyism,” an approach to politics that has become dominant. Explain what that is.

Eitan Hersh: Political hobbyist is a catchall term for the person who spends a lot of time consuming news or signing online petitions or engaging online with people about this or that issue. They mistake this for actual politics, but it’s not because it doesn’t contribute to power-building.

Sean Illing: Why not?

Eitan Hersh: When you’re a hobbyist, you’re learning the wrong information and practicing the wrong skills. You are typically learning about big national news items, and oftentimes it’s just drama. So a hobbyist might learn all the details of the Mueller report and feel that’s important to know and will spend hours and hours on it.

But then if you asked him how he could get involved on some issues of importance in his local community or in his state, or where the pressure points are in his community to influence government, he has no idea. He’s just caught up in the national news cycle and he’s not actually improving anything.

The hobbyist is also learning the wrong political skills. Online politics is all about provocation and signaling outrage. But changing people’s minds, turning your vote into many votes, requires empathy and face-to-face engagement. Not only are you not doing this online or when watching cable news, you’re learning exactly the wrong skill set.

Sean Illing: Why are white, college-educated liberals most likely to engage in political hobbyism?

Eitan Hersh: There are a few reasons. College-educated white people are likely to be in a social setting where they feel it’s a civic duty to participate in politics and to stay informed. They might find learning political facts to be intellectually gratifying. At the same time, the status quo for white, college-educated Americans is pretty good. They have good jobs. They aren’t being conscripted into military service like past generations.

So as much as they might lament polarization or despise this or that politician, they aren’t willing to roll up their sleeves and build political power. It’s only if you don’t need more power than you already have that you could possibly conceive of politics as an at-home leisure activity.

No one is spending more time learning facts and consuming news than college-educated white men. But research on real engagement — volunteering for groups and campaigns — shows it’s overwhelmingly women and disproportionately blacks and Latinos who are doing the real work of politics. Comfort with the status quo among college-educated whites, especially men, seems like the most likely explanation.

As to why this is more of a liberal problem than a conservative one, right now the white college-educated population is much more Democratic than Republican. Of course, there’s plenty of hobbyism on both sides, but right now this group tends to lean Democratic.

…

Sean Illing: What do political hobbyists get out of this kind of superficial engagement with politics? Emotional satisfaction? Is it about signaling who we are to other people?

Eitan Hersh: It’s a shortcut to engagement. You get to feel connected to a sense of community and a sense of mission without doing any heavy lifting, which is partly why online engagement is emotion-driven. If you feel angry at something from your couch, you feel somehow connected to it, even if you haven’t done anything.

Sean Illing: You’re preaching boots-on-the-ground activism and face-to-face interaction, especially with people on the other side. What do you say to people who are cynical about the possibilities of persuasion, who feel like the chasm is so deep that it’s no longer possible to engage with political opponents?

Eitan Hersh: I guess I would say that they’re wrong. Most of the people you engage with in real life are not at all like the caricatures in your head or online. Most of the people you’ll encounter in your neighborhood or in a community group aren’t raving Alex Jones followers. In reality, most people simply aren’t that invested and don’t have deeply held positions, and they’re open to persuasion if you’re open to being kind to them.

…

Sean Illing: The right seems to understand power better than the left, or perhaps there’s something about the nature of conservatism that lends itself to the sort of politics you’re advocating.

Eitan Hersh: I think you’re onto something there. A bottom-up approach to political change that focuses on the local stuff or the local institutions, like churches or gun clubs, is just more common on the right. We used to think more about grassroots organizing focused on unions, for example, but unions have collapsed while churches have gotten disproportionately Republican.

Again, some of the key demographics of the left, like college-educated white people, don’t attend any religious services at the same rate of people on the right, and so there’s less community engagement. And some of the paramount issues for the left, like race or climate change, feel like non-local problems, and that itself is a deterrent.

…

Sean Illing: What’s your advice for people who want to get involved and help build political power?

Eitan Hersh: I think they get started by building a cell of friends to do it with them locally, and they should be thinking about how they can dedicate at least one night a week to this, or a certain number of hours. The mindset is not “How can I influence the next election?” The mindset has to be “I’m entitled to my own vote, but how many more can I influence?”

I profile lots of people in the book who are taking this kind of approach and accomplishing amazing things. They’re showing that if you can get 100 or 200 or 1,000 people to share your values and to cast a ballot or show up to an advocacy meeting, you really can make a huge difference.

#u.s. politics #u.s. election 2020 #political hobbyism #long post #500

2K notes · View notes