#also people 'legitimately' asking why they should care about a genocide and making fun of people protesting and caring

[bakingmoomins]

building scientists without any ethical thought, no moral compass and zero political conscience is a huge failure on 'higher' education

[reasoncourt]

if anyone is wondering why i care about taylor swift discourse it’s genuinely just because i think people lose their point in their hate for her. and they lose perspective.

like she’s actually not the most evil woman in the world. she gives her workers insurance (bare minimum) and good bonuses (she’s mega rich so also bare minimum) and she buys carbon credits (bare minimum but also opens an interesting convo - i.e. how much should we value carbon credits?). she doesn’t use her voice enough imo but she also doesn’t speak out of turn (i.e. she doesn’t pretend to be well-versed and authoritative on topics she has no knowledge in (arguably she should educate herself on certain topics but tbh i’m inclined to view it as a positive that she doesn’t introduce global political issues beyond “trump bad” to her crazy af fan base… like she could do more but i also don’t have much faith in her politics cause she’s so so so out of touch so i prefer the silence)).

an important note here is that i do think she’s absolutely fucked for not condemning the genocide of palestinian people (especially when she’s supposedly close friends with the hadids who are outspoken on the issue and would greatly benefit from her public support (obv she shouldn’t just speak out bc it affects her personal friends but the fact that she isn’t speaking out when she has personal friends is honestly bizarre to me)).

but she's not unique for any of this. she does more than most of her peers and also way less than she should. that's all i see.

and yet ultimately it’s like - people side with kanye when he put a naked wax figure of her in his music video without her consent when she was 25. that situation was obviously misogynistic but people hate her so they largely glossed over it and decided she deserved it for "lying"about a phone call she didn't lie about. people also seem to think it’s funny that football bros are making ai porn of her (arguing she “deserves” it) despite that line of thinking obviously being detrimental to all women and especially those who are so much more vulnerable than her. people got angry at her for donating $250,000 to help with kesha’s legal fees in her case against ‘Dr. Luke’ because they considered it a publicity stunt even though taylor swift wasn’t the one to make that donation public. people called her performative for taking a man to court for sexually assaulting her and only asking for $1. and obviously they would’ve criticised her for asking for more.

the thing that really aggravates me is that there is so so so so so much to criticise her for. but it’s so so so so so obvious that a lot of people just hate her and don’t actually have any legit problem with the things they say they have a problem with. their favs could do the exact same thing and they won’t find any issue with it. cause they just really hate taylor swift and won’t step back a bit in order to just critically think about what their principles are and how those principles apply to this situation with taylor swift and whether they’re actually consistent with those principles and will apply them to someone other than taylor swift.

there are such valid points and important discussions i see being completely missed because the complaint is about Taylor swift and people seem to be incapable of thinking beyond the fact that they just, first and foremost, hate her

and let it be said that this is not a taylor swift defence post. i could not give a single shit about her specifically. i do find her music fun and nostalgic but i also think it deserves more criticism than it gets (but that’s not what this post is about). it’s just that she’s one of the most talked about people in pop culture and i feel like legitimate and productive discourse is rlly hindered by people’s disproportionate focus on her

[anthonybialy]

Take Sides Elsewhere

Bias in action is the core output of one industry that should grind to a halt.  Prosperity would increase.  Blatantly lying about the worst sort of conduct is how reporters dedicate themselves to truth.  Guardians of information tacitly align with Jew-hating lunatics whose response to marauders beheading any members of one particular religion they could find is to call for Israel not to exist.  You may notice a pattern.

Blather about occupation gets more than equal time.  The legitimately aggrieved party is not targeting civilians, unlike the demons they target.  If you want to know what Israel will be accused of doing, check what Hamas is actually doing.

Don’t start a war.  They’re bad for items and people.  And those assaulted might return the favor.  Righteousness is the key difference for anyone confused about cheering.  The best advice for avoiding civilian casualties is to not annihilate civilians.  Report that.

Somehow, the press gets more shameless.  New stories ask if Israel does enough for safety without noting where they’re aiming.  Oh, and very responsible broadcasters also leave out why the nation that lost numerous citizens for the crime of attending a music festival is responding in the first place.

The news is the place for fantasies.  Imaginary sob stories about who could be harmed if the prey fights back are the most shameful way to shame.  Copy and paste a paragraph noting collateral damage has been a component of every single conflict ever, including righteous ones.

Nuking Nagasaki for fun is our darkest moment.  Woke maniacs who don’t understand cause and effect think Harry Truman was just one of countless American presidents who should’ve been arrested for war crimes.  Disregarders or active cheerers of diabolical mayhem claim they resisted during the Fourth Reich that was the Trump administration.  Meanwhile, honorary Axis members would’ve condemned D-Day as an unnecessary escalation even if they enjoyed making others ration.

Taping asterisks to terror onslaughts is not the best way to achieve objectivity.  Liberal hacks who claim some stories only have one side mean pretending civilization is rendering Earth uninhabitable.  Attacking Charlie Hebdo got worse in the worst possible way when excusers of murdering artists accused them of putting of hate speech in their doodles.  Similarly, blaming cartoonists in Texas because of the religious figure they chose to draw was no way to defend the West, which was the point.  And asking why terrorists would hate America so much that they’d use planes as missiles was the all-time example that’s merely the most notorious moment of lame massacre justification leftists wish you’d forget.

The media applies the same tendencies to every situation.  Consistency by applying a formula does not necessarily equal super results.  Lying about Israel being an oppressive genocide colonizer is even worse than excuses for inflation.  Blatancy is so obvious that it looks planted, which means finally discovering the profession’s core mission.

The media is careful to avoid noting which religion has a terror problem.  It’s not the one with a functioning republic in the worst neighborhood.  Fighting back against barbarians doesn’t count.

Terror allies marching in support of their favorite team is shockingly normal.  Every Arafat-inspired rampager currently wreaking havoc on city streets and campuses just like their heroes would claim to oppose Nazis, by which they mean Ron DeSantis.

Praise for those demanding destruction is limited to liberalism’s pet causes.  Hamas Fan Club meetings might seem rather strident in their demands for that one Jewish entity to no longer be.  But Israel’s been mean about removing those trying to exterminate it, so there’s your balance.

Covering gatherings is about what’s not shown.  Hiding gets trickier with social media, which shows not only what correspondents refuse to cover but how the job can be done in the free time of people with worthwhile careers.  Very disinterested observers noted Black Lives Matter conflagrations were mostly peaceful aside from the flaming cities.  You may not be surprised to realize secret and open PLO admirers think America is a racist hellhole.

The same professional protesters uncannily also claim the country where they live sits on occupied land.  They never vacate, of course.  To very fair reporters on the scene, the important part is that nobody demands a flat tax.

The middle ground isn’t worth sharing with people who want you dead.  Treating the two-state solution as some sort of presumed necessary compromise only seems fair if you’re not checking if one Super Bowl participant slaughtered babies.  No super important anchors seem willing to inquire why the actually tolerant country should have to cede some of the land that’s either always been its property or that it won in previous wars from intruders to an invented group that elected Hamas.

It’s sort of a bad sign when it takes lying about a cause to make it appealing.  That’s coincidentally the only shot Joe Biden has at holding the title of president into his late 80s.  There’s totally not an invading army of uninvited American guests just because it seems to be happening, and if there were they would only be here to take advantage of job opportunities created by a booming economy and not the generosity of Democratic politicians with funds seized from productive people with valid paperwork.  Everything’s terrific despite what you notice, which is practice for acting like terror victim Israel is the terrorist.

The media shares truth about themselves by lying regarding everything else.  It’s easy for journalists to do their jobs, which is the field’s appeal.  Participants major in the easy college choice so they don’t have to spend full shifts doing math.  Their dedication to inserting their own deluded views means they’d selflessly rather spend extra hours making up tales of how they’re true than cover reality and head to Applebee’s for dollar margaritas a few hours early.  The only thing more mortifying than pretending a war on civilization has two valid factions is siding with pillagers.

[glitxhwayventeen]

We Might Be Dead By Tomorrow

Minghao: Chapter 1 (Sirens)

Characters: Minghao x female reader

Genre/Warnings: multi-member au (different scenarios), werewolf au, fantasy, smut, angst, fluff, potential blood mentions, genocide, runaways, domestic violence, child abuse, blood mentions, death mentions, gang activity mentions, lots of dick jokes, suggestive content, tiny drug mention if you squint, violence. Any others will be put as warnings when future chapters are thought up/written.

Author’s Note: I recommend listening to Sirens by Cher Lloyd. It’s a strange choice I know. It doesn’t necessarily go with this chapter. But i think it’s actually a pretty good song, so I used it for a loose inspiration for Minghao’s opening Chapter.

Please remember that all of these chapters and the content within them are a work of fiction! They’re just for fun/entertainment!

Bold= Dialogue Italics= Thoughts

Slight 🥀 but mostly ☁️

We Might Be Dead By Tomorrow Master List

Chapter 1: Sirens

These last few days have been some of the best days of Minghao’s life. Not to say he’s had a bad one, he actually considered himself quite fortunate in that aspect compared to his brothers. Most of his pack didn’t even know what Minghao had done before he joined them. They just figured it wasn’t anything good. He had this… bad boy aura about him that they couldn’t quite place. So no one really ever wanted to fuck with him, not that he was complaining. I mean don’t get me wrong, he could do some SERIOUS damage to an opponent, he just didn’t want to have to. He was done with and over all the fighting. He fought his whole life. Now, he was tired. Boy, was he tired. He got so tired sometimes that it felt like his bones were scraping each other and if he didn’t lay down in the middle of whatever he was doing, they’d crack and break apart from his body. He’d never tell his brothers that though, he didn’t like them worrying about him. He wasn’t helpless, he was quite capable of taking care of himself and others. He just never had to because he had the Alphas looking out for the pack all the time. It wasn’t his problem to watch out for anyone and he liked it that way.

That is, until he met you. Before you, he saw the world for all its horrors and terrors. With you around, he saw all its beauty and grace. He never thought that imprinting would be like this. He felt almost high when you were around. No one ever really explained it all in depth to him. He didn’t realize that just someone saying your name would make his heart jump out of his chest. He took one look at you and he realized you were all he cared about. Sure he loved his brothers, but he knew if push came to shove they could protect themselves. Apart of him knew that of course you could too, but for the first time, he actually WANTED to take care of someone.

He always needed to be sure you were okay. He’d ask how you slept, if you ate, how you were feeling, if you were happy. It frazzled his brothers, he’d never done that with them. It was strange seeing such a loving side of him. They knew he loved them because they were his brothers, but they absolutely KNEW he loved you because you were his mate. But seeing him worry himself sick over your well-being was… different to say the least. They were actually pretty sure you had replaced him with an identical looking version of himself when they weren’t looking because, again, he just wasn’t even acting like the Minghao they knew.

You didn’t mind of course. You actually loved that he cared for you so much. You were so tired of having to take care of yourself for all this time. You didn’t think you were very good at it and, quite frankly, it was exhausting. You had been on the run for centuries before you met the pack. It was lonely and if there was anything in this world that you actually hated, it was being all alone. You came from a tribe where the bigger the family, the better. You missed it. So when you realized Minghao had imprinted on you, you couldn’t have been more happy. Because now, not only did you get a mate who loved you more than life itself, but you got his crazy pack brothers too. You figured he loved you anyway, he hadn’t actually said the words to you yet, still, you could just… feel it. You could even feel that his brothers loved you. They reminded you a lot of your original brothers. They were loud and rambunctious, and they’d do anything to protect you because you were their brothers mate. It was perfect.

As you both lay asleep in your now shared bed, you cuddled on top of his toned chest like always, you heard a loud, almost in human, scream from outside. It made you jump almost a foot in the air, and had you falling in the floor. You had let your instincts and guard down quite a bit since you came to live with them a few weeks ago because you felt safe. So the terrible noise from outside scared you a great deal. Minghao was quick to act of course, rushing to scoop you in his arms and quietly rocking you to calm you down.

“Shh. It’s okay baby it’s gone now. Don’t worry. It’s okay, I’ve got you.” He spoke softly as he stroked your hair gently, still rocking you in place.

“I- I know I just wasn’t expecting it. Who the hell screams like that this early in the morning?” You questions, both of you knowing it was more rhetorical than anything.

“More like who screams like that in general.” Minghao said, half joking and half concerned, though he was trying his best to hide it from you.

He had come to realize any sounds out of the ordinary could set you off into a panic attack. He didn’t like seeing you scared, and he didn’t like your heart rate spiking for anyone or anything other than himself.

“I just hope it’s over now-” you start, but just as you were about to finish your sentence, another loud screech forced you to jump from Minghao’s arms and hide under the bed.

He knew he couldn’t help it, it was now part of your instinct to hide in the darkest place possible from danger as you were out alone in the woods for decades and it was the way you kept yourself alive. Still, he couldn’t help the small whine that came from within his chest as he saw you hiding. He hated the fear in your eyes, it made him feel so helpless. He tried to coax you out from under his bed by trying to tell you it was just a passing noise. But, once again, the noise came back. Except this time, you actually managed to hear it without the sleepiness or your mating pull clouding it. Oh no! You quickly go out from under the bed and grabbed onto Minghao.

“Hao, where are the other boys??” You asked quickly, the fear in your eyes seeming to amplify.

“Probably asleep, like we should be so let’s-” he tried, still wanting to attempt to get more hours.

“No Hao! We need to find them. We need to find ALL OF THEM right now!” You all but yell as you quickly grabbed a pair of shorts, slipped them on, and threw open your bedroom door.

“(Y/N)! What the hell?? They’re all sleeping come on let’s go back to bed” Minghao whined, clearly not understanding the gravity of the situation.

You ignored him as you opened the door closest to your bedroom, you were greeted with Chan sitting on the edge of his bed, you could tell he was also woken up by the loud scream. Good, he’s safe. Now the others.

You then opened the door across the hall from your room. In it, you found Seungcheol yawning putting on pants in order to try and investigate the strange noise. You then pushed open Joshua and Jeonghan’s rooms, in them, you found both boys to be just as shocked from your actions as Minghao was. But nevertheless they were safe so you didn’t care how crazy you looked. After them, you dashed to Jun and Soonyoung’s shared room, letting out a quick relieved sigh seeing them both already standing close to their door.

You kept doing this until you had finished your rounds of Jihoon’s, Seokmin’s, Seungkwan’s, Wonwoo’s, and Hansol’s rooms respectively. You were so beyond happy that all the boys were okay that you almost cried real tears, they were already brimming at your waterlines.

“(Y/N), we all heard the noise. But it just sounded like someone yelling. We’re all fine. You worry too much.” Seungcheol assured you, giving you a small pat on the head to show gratitude for your care for them.

“No Seungcheol. You don’t understand. That wasn’t just any random villager screaming. That was something more vile than you could even imagine. And it prays on men, specifically horny-” you stopped yourself mid-sentence. “Wait.” You paused. “WHERE’S MINGYU??” you said, realizing very quickly that one of the wolves you were thinking of while saying your piece was unaccounted for.

You dashed to his room and busted the door open. And sure enough, his big ass form was there laying in bed, sleeping like a baby. Thank God.

“Alright. Somebody’s been hanging around Jun’s paranoid ass too long.” Hansol joked your way, earning a chuckle from a few others as well.

“Hey!” Junhui tried to defend himself.

“No you guys don’t get it. That scream, that was a siren’s victory call. I was legitimately worried for your lives.” You protested, Minghao coming up behind you to wrap his arms around your waist.

“A siren? What’s that?” Chan asked as all the boys looked to you for elaboration.

Boy, you sometimes forgot how young and inexperienced with the supernatural they were. They were far better with people than you were that’s for sure, but when it came down to other magical beings, it was like you were speaking a different language. And you only really ever did that with the foreign wolves as you knew both English and Chinese.

“A siren’s one of the most deadly creatures you can find. They look like regular people, most of the time, they’re absolutely beautiful. That’s what makes them so scary, they look like angels. But they’re pure evil, they lure people to their deaths late at night, mostly men. Mostly horny men. They use them for sex, to procreate. Then they kill them in brutal, horrible ways. Afterwards, they let out that God awful scream. That’s why I got so worried with you guys, I thought that…” you trailed off, shrugging your shoulders slightly.

“That what? One of us got our dick wet and our head chopped off?” Joshua laughed out, clearly amused that you considered them all horny men.

“Well yeah, kind of. You can’t blame me. I know what most of you go to the village for late at night. When I realized what the scream was, I just had to make sure you were right. I didn’t want to wake up the next morning to have to go out and find a fucking body.” You huffed as Minghao gave you a small peck on your shoulder to try and ease your tension.

“Well, thank you for caring for our safety. But we’re big boys. We can take care of ourselves. Well most of us…” Soonyoung assured you, standing more proud than he should’ve as he looked at Jeonghan.

“Yeah… that’s kind of what I’m worried about…” you let the joke pass your lips, trying your best not to laugh.

The other boys went into a roar of laughter as Jeonghan tried his best to hide his own amusement behind a fake angry face. The laughter seemed to be just enough noise to wake the life of the party up finally.

“Hey guys” Mingyu yawned. “What’s gonna on? Why are we laughing?”

“Well (Y/N) seems to think we’re gonna get our dicks chopped off.” Jeonghan responded to Mingyu, earning another quick chuckle and a slap from Jihoon.

“Oh well… that’s nice… any particular reason it’s me and you or is everyone else invited to the dick chopping party too?” Mingyu spoke again, trying his best to hide his obvious confusion with a joke.

“No man. It’s mostly you two.” Laughed Seungkwan. “You’re the ones who always seem to need to bury your dicks in something, not us”

You snort as you turn yourself to bury your face into Minghao’s chest, now wanting to go back to sleep knowing everyone’s alright.

“Alright alright you horny kids. All jokes aside.” Joshua spoke up. “(Y/N) how serious is this siren threat?”

“Well I’ve seen one siren take out half a town before. So pretty serious I’d gather. I dont know where all this dick chopping came into the conversation, but I’d say everyone needs to stay inside once it gets dark out until further notice, just to be safe” you mumble out from Minghao’s chest.

“Okay guys. You heard the all knowing wolf lady” Seungcheol said, earning a playful glare from you. “No more going out at night. Not for a while. No exceptions. All dicks must remain in tact” he declared.

“Aw man” Mingyu pouted, he was disappointed but also understood that the pack’s safety came before his hormones.

You let out a small giggle as Minghao lightly laughed as he placed a little kiss on the top of your head.

“No that’s enough excitement for one night. Everyone back to bed. We’ll talk more in the morning.” Joshua decided, ushering everyone back into their rooms.

Once your bedroom door was closed, Minghao picked you up mumbled an “I’m exhausted” before he placed you on the bed, the bags formed under his eyes showing you just how tired he must be. He joined you moments later and hovered himself over you.

“Do you really think the guys will stay inside because of the siren?” He questions while moving a lock of your hair behind your ear. You clasp your hands behind the back of his neck and place with his hair.

“Hmm. Don’t know. I guess we’ll see. If someone wakes up without a dick, we’ll know they didn’t listen” you said with a cheeky ass smile, much to the delight of your loving mate.

“Got it, no dick means they’re the siren’s bitch” he said aloud causing you to chuckle at his thought process.

“I promise I’ll still wake up with mine though” he added, earning a sweet smile from you. God, what did he do to deserve such a cute little mate?

“Good. I’d be real disappointed if you woke up with it gone.” You playfully pout, stroking his cheek during your sentence to further add to your point.

“Well you know how I hate to disappoint love” he said, a hint of mischief in his eyes as he pecked your lips with a bit more passion than you thought he would’ve used this early in the morning.

“I thought you were tired?” You questioned as best you could while he was trailing his kisses down to your neck, nipping at the sensitive skin gently.

“I was.” He mumbled into the crevice of your neck. “But I realized just how hard it is to resist your cute self. So now I’m thinking of some… other things we haven’t quite gotten to just yet” he answered with a playful smirk, making his intention completely obvious to you. Boy, this morning was already off to a fun start.

Another Author’s Note: I know what you guys are thinking, you’re thinking I meant succubus. But I meant Siren. There’s many different versions of both and I just happened to use the Siren version where they sing the men to lure them to their deaths on land. On another note, I finished three chapters in one day. I’m a bit proud not even gonna lie. I hope you guys liked this one. Minghao’s next chapter will be smut as I want to get their first time together out of the way as soon as possible. I don’t really know why. It just feels right you know?

(Updated 7/27)

[scripttorture]

I'm not sure if this question has been asked before, but what would be usually the reason why people would torture someone? Not to justify (torture is unjustifiable in any situation) but I really needed a driving force for a villain why they would w/o sounding ridiculous or implausible, and any reason I come up with falls kind of flat (... Which I suppose is expected, since that's how the reasonings behind tortures are in rl I guess)

I can help you out here. And I want you to know that from a writing stand point this does make perfect sense. Motivation, however shallow, is important for capturing a character.

 Yes a lot of the motivations in reality are flat, shallow and outright stupid. And it can be a careful balancing act, showing those motivations making them understandable without straying into justifying them. It can also be hard to make an interesting character with flat motivations.

 I think I’ll start off with talking about motivations/‘reasons’ in reality and then talk a little about when and whether we should break from reality when we write about torturers.

 Remember that there isn’t a lot of research on torturers. So I’m working from the little bit of research I can access, interviews with torturers and anecdotal reports. It isn’t perfect, but this is (so far as I can tell) the best information we have at the time of writing.

 Understanding why torture occurs means understanding that it is structural violence.

 I do take questions on abuse, I personally don’t see much point in sticking to the strict legal definition of torture when I’m trying to help authors do a decent job portraying trauma survivors. But sometimes the definition matters. And torture is essentially defined as abuse by government employees*, by public servants in positions of authority.

 Over and over again the reasons torturers give for their crimes come back to flaws in the organisations they were part of. Consistently, across cultures and time periods, they describe understaffed, high pressure environments with no training, little supervision and the instruction to produce results or else.

 This combines with cultural messages that violence ‘works’ and existing sub-cultures of torturers within organisations to perpetuate abuse.

 It’s also worth mentioning that for most torturers they’re coming into an organisation where there are already established sub-groups of torturers. The group dynamics do seem to play a role in all this. Though it’s difficult to say how much when we’re entirely going from what torturers say and they are… demonstrably inaccurate when it comes to talking about torture.

 Having said that; torturers do seem to encourage each other to more and more acts of violence. They treat it almost competitively. They will also, sometimes, approach new recruits and bring them into the torturer sub-group, pressuring them to participate.

 I’m unsure how much of a role the social factor plays in torturers starting to torture, but it definite seems to keep them torturing when they say they’d rather stop. There are a couple of reasons why.

 First of all there’s a sort of implicit threat; refusing to torture is seen as a threat to the torturer sub-culture. And these are people who have already shown a capacity for violence. There have been cases of torturers attacking other members of the same organisation for their opposition to, or refusal to, torture.

 There’s also a social aspect; once involved with the torturer sub-culture the individual tends to become more and more cut off from the rest of the organisation. The group of torturers becomes more or less their entire social circle.

 We’re social animals. So leaving, rejecting the entire social group, is a big deal. It’s hard for us to do.

 The toxic sub-culture torturers form encourages them to root part of their identity in their capacity for violence and how ‘good at it’ the other members of their group think they are. They tend to tie ideas of toughness, dependability, achievement and (often) masculinity to torture. They frame themselves as especially manly, strong and ‘willing to do the tough jobs no one else has the guts to’.

 It’s complete nonsense but it’s what they do.

 And it means that facing up to the fact torture is pointless feels like an attack on their self worth. A lot of them choose to double down rather then face that reality.

 This isn’t a definitive list of relevant factors. It’s my assessment of the ones that always seem to show up. There are usually other factors that feed into particular situations. Rejali’s Three Systems is a worth a read on that front.

 Ideas about social hierarchy and transgression are common features. So things like ‘anyone who does That Terrible Thing deserves to be tortured’ or ‘no one Like That would be in this part of town for an innocent reason’.

 All of this means that motivation can be tricky to write, because the real motivations are often not the sort of thing we’re taught are ‘interesting’.

 Real, honest motivations are often things like:

‘I think those people deserve it’

‘I was told to’

‘Everyone else was doing it’

‘I couldn’t think of anything else to do’

‘I got angry and took it out on someone else’

‘I thought it would work and no one ever taught me another way’

 That’s not a definitive list but you get the idea. And probably get the point about these sorts of shallow motivations being narratively unsatisfying.

 So let’s step back from the reality and tackle the writing problem at the heart of this: how do we make this interesting?

 There are a couple of different approaches.

 The first approach I see is to accept that the motivation and the villain are shallow and shift the interest away from the villain.

 Villains don’t need to be interesting. And they don’t need to be the focus.

 If your story is structured in a way which primarily makes the villain a looming threat and focuses on the heroes, their journey, their relationships then adding detail or depth to the villain is unnecessary.

 The Lord of the Rings trilogy does this with several of its major villains. The Shape of Water does it for the main villain. Zelda: Breath of the Wild (yes I bought a switch during lock down, and it’s my first Zelda game I am not sorry) does it with Ganon.

 Another approach is to accept the motivation is shallow and shift the focus away from the villain’s motivation.

 Villains do not need to have a grand philosophy or deep motivation or underlying pain in order to be a good read. They don’t need to be an intellectual threat to the heroes in order to be a legitimate threat.

 For instance Joker in Batman: The Animated Series, I’d argue one of the best takes on the character ever. But if you go back and watch the episodes he isn’t deep. His motivation almost always boils down to pettiness, greed and a vindictive streak a mile wide. It is incredibly shallow.

 But he’s fun to watch, because he’s unpredictable and funny. He’s also a legitimate threat to the heroes because he’s so incredibly destructive. More then any other villain his crimes are aimed at effecting large numbers of people. That sets the stakes high without any motivation or philosophy coming into it.

 The focus is on what he does each time he shows up, not why.

 Persona 5 pulls off a similar trick. Every single one of its villains has a shallow motivation. But each of them also has power over one of the heroes or another innocent person. They don’t need a deeper or more interesting motivation in order to make life miserable for the heroes. And every caper hinges on the heroes trying to stop that worst outcome.

 As much as Fullmetal Alchemist is a deep story which touches on many complex topics, neither version (the original manga or the 2003 anime with it’s very different plot) had a particularly complex villain at the end of the story. In both cases the ultimate leader of the ‘bad guys’ just wanted more power. And didn’t care how many lives they destroyed to get it.

 Not all stories need a Killmonger.

 It’s always worth taking the time to consider what your story needs, rather then what’s fashionable in fiction at the moment. On a personal note some of my favourite stories have been either entirely focused on the heroes or had explicitly shallow villains.

 The reality is that most of the time motivations for large scale atrocities are shallow and unsatisfying. Giving fictional villains deeper or more complex motives can work, but it can also mean twisting the narrative up to make it look like the villain (and hence their actions) are more reasonable then they are.

 Killmonger’s twisted vision of what would make Wakanda ‘better’ works in Black Panther, just as White Wolf’s similar motivation did in the comics a decade or so earlier. They work because they’re directly competing with the hero’s vision of what would make the world better. And because ultimately it’s about showing why T’Challa’s way is better then the villain he’s facing off against.

 But I can think of other stories where giving the villain a ‘deeper’ reasoning just served to make them look reasonable. While they were arguing for torture and genocide.

 And… I just think we’ve got enough of that in real life.

 At the end of the day your villain should be serving a role within the story you’re creating. Motivation is one of many ways that we try to make sure they serve that function effectively and entertainingly.

 But, despite what some people would have you believe, it ain’t the be all and end all of whether a villain or story is entertaining. Personality, plots, aesthetic and sometimes how satisfying it feels to see their day ruined, all feed in to how well a villain works.

 The threat they represent in the story isn’t dependant on whether their motivation is deep or nuanced or rational. It’s about their ability to follow through and sometimes the horrific nature of the desire itself.

 So I guess a lot of my advice here is to consider what your villain actually needs to do in the story. Then take a step back and consider whether deeper motivation adds anything to that.

 Be aware that the more complex motivations and drives you add the further you’re getting from a realistic torturer. Which is not inherently apologia, or inherently a bad writing idea, but consider what any deviation from reality implies.

 I hope that helps. :)

Available on Wordpress.

Disclaimer

*The international definition can include groups that control territory, ie an occupying force. In some countries the definition is slightly wider and encompasses some international criminal gangs.

[catie-does-things]

I loved your deconstruction of the Ember Island Players -episode. Could you be persuaded to write down your thoughts about the Southern Raiders too?

Well, since you asked.

(The Ember Island Players meta)

There’s a lot to say about The Southern Raiders and much of it has been said, but I’m going to focus on five major questions:

Is Aang’s response to Katara’s anger appropriate?

Is Zuko’s response appropriate? Is he being self-serving?

Is Aang’s philosophy about forgiveness correct? Should Katara forgive her mother’s killer?

Does this episode show Zutara in a positive or a negative light?

What were the writers trying to do with this episode?

Fair warning, I’m obviously Team Zutara, but I’m not going to be uncritical of Zuko, Katara, or this episode as a whole. I actually have some very mixed feelings about it, as you’ll see.

Also, this is hella long. So, get comfortable.

This is a serious episode. Look how serious we are.

1. Is Aang’s response to Katara’s anger appropriate?

When Katara and Zuko first tell Aang they plan to find the man who killed her mother, Aang’s immediate reaction is skeptical and dismissive, asking Katara what she thinks that will accomplish. This is point one against Aang - even if there’s reason to doubt that this mission is a good idea, that’s a bad way to open the conversation. And naturally, Katara doesn’t take it well, saying in disgust that she knew Aang wouldn’t understand.

Aang protests that he does understand, and I know a lot of people take issue with his comparison to losing Appa, which I do think is not really comparable to Katara’s trauma from her mother’s death. But to be fair, he does also mention the genocide of the Air Nomads. It’s weird that Aang even puts these two things on the same level, though, and kind of does come across as naïve - as I’ve talked about before, I think a certain level of age-appropriate naïveté is a definite part of Aang’s character, and the show runs into trouble when it fails to challenge him on this.

This is another example of that failure. A bit later, when the scene cuts to night time, Aang uses forgiving Katara for trying to sneak away with Appa as another example, cheerily asking if that gives Katara any ideas. This is a real cringe moment for me, as Aang is lumping all offenses, great and small, together as if they should be equally easy to forgive. That’s not to say that they should not all be forgiven. But forgiving the murder of a loved one is inevitably going to be much harder than forgiving the minor deceit of a friend, and Aang’s flippant attitude shows no regard for the distinction.

Pictured: The wrong attitude for this conversation.

Going back to the first part of this scene, after accusing Katara of seeking revenge, which she doesn’t deny, Aang says that she sounds like Jet. This comparison really is unfair, as Katara points out - seeking retribution against a killer might be wrong, but it’s nowhere near the same as attacking innocent people. Again, Aang is making sweeping moral generalizations that, even if they’re founded on correct principles, fail to recognize the realities that make these kind of moral questions difficult. I think it would be very hard to argue that Yon Rha does not deserve any kind of punishment for killing Kya, the real question is what that punishment should be and whether Katara should be the one to mete it out.

Aang is twelve. This is a children’s show. Fine. But the writers wanted to go there, and it’s a disservice to the gravity of the subject matter they chose to address if we’re really meant to take the twelve-year-old’s fumbling attempts at moral guidance at face value.

And unfortunatley, we are. After Zuko and Katara leave, Sokka declares that Aang is “pretty wise for a kid”, which to me is…the exact opposite of what we just saw. Aang means well and is even right in some important ways, but the only arguments he has to back up his own “wisdom” are unhelpful comparisons and platitudes. He’s about exactly as inept at this as I would expect a child of his age to be, but the writers are trying to tell me he’s wise beyond his years? Not buying it.

Some points in his favor: Aang does eventually come around and recognize Katara needs to confront her mother’s killer, though it is a weird and unexplained 180 after the scene cuts from day to night. And his advice that she should “let [her] anger out, and then let it go” is sound. It’s weird that Zuko makes fun of him for this, because it’s much better presented than a lot of his previous advice, and also…something Zuko has kind of already done. But we’ll get to that later.

Overall, I’d say Aang’s response to Katara’s pain and anger is not great. His heart’s in the right place, but his inability to provide strong arguments for his philosophy and his apparent expectation that Katara should easily forgive her mother’s killer prove he’s not actually mature enough to give moral guidance in a helpful way in such a difficult situation, in spite of what we’re told.

It’s hard to be a kid when the writers keep treating you like you’re more mature than you actually are.

2. Is Zuko’s response appropriate? Is he being self-serving?

For starters, we need to distinguish that Zuko is not trying to provide an alternative moral guidance to that offered by Aang. He’s not trying to be a moral guide at all, so that puts a lot of what he says and does in a different context.

What is Zuko trying to do? He’s trying to make up for his betrayal in Ba Sing Se. 

The beginning of the episode sets up that Katara is the last holdout on accepting Zuko as part of the group, and Zuko is bothered by this. (Though it is interesting that each of them saves the other’s life during the escape from the Western Air Temple, also hinting at how these two characters are mutually supportive of each other, antagonistic or not.) Because of this, some people have said Zuko pushes Katara to take revenge for selfish reasons, because he thinks it will make her accept him.

Well, Zuko doesn’t actually push Katara to do anything, so much as give her the opportunity. All he says to her is that he knows how to find the man who killed her mother, making no suggestion as to what she should do in that scenario. And when Aang challenges them, he says that Katara needs to find this man in order to get “closure and justice.” Where could Zuko have gotten the idea that confronting the person responsible for your childhood trauma is necessary for closure and justice?

Probably by doing it himself.

Zuko confronting Ozai is likely our best indication of how he’s imagining Katara confronting her mother’s killer is going to go. Zuko doesn’t try to punish Ozai, because he believes it’s the Avatar’s destiny to take down the Fire Lord. Instead, he essentially takes this as his opportunity to let his anger out so he can move past it…you know, that suggestion Aang made that I said it was weird for Zuko to scoff at? This is why. If he’s imagining Katara confronting her mother’s killer will go something like him confronting his father, which I think we have to assume is the case, then he and Aang would be more or less suggesting the same thing.

But Kya’s killer, like Ozai, also deserves punishment, and whose destiny is that? If this is the Avatar’s responsibility as well, Aang doesn’t seem to be jumping at the chance to do it - not once does he offer to accompany Katara on her quest. Legally, perhaps it’s the Fire Lord’s job to punish war criminals in his own armed forces - but Ozai’s obviously not going to do that, and who if anyone will succeed him is up in the air at this point. This is a classic setup for a revenge or vigilante plot - the proper authorities, the designated arbiters of justice are either unwilling or unable to act, so individuals who normally would not have the right to punish wrongdoers are the only ones who can.

Is seeking retribution in these circumstances morally perilous nonetheless? Absolutely. But to the extent that Zuko’s offer to confront her mother’s killer does move Katara to violence in this episode, it’s a principled rather than arbitrary use of violence. And the offer itself comes from a personal experience of how necessary the confrontation can be.

Which brings us back to earlier in the episode, and the reason Zuko is doing all of this in the first place. 

This is my favorite screencap of course I was going to find a reason to use it.

When Katara lays down her very legitimate grievance against Zuko, namely that she was the first person in their group to trust him, and that he betrayed that trust, Zuko is not dismissive of her anger, nor does he offer excuses. He just asks, “What can I do to make it up to you?” Zuko of all people understands the need to make amends for his own misdeeds. Katara of course only offers sarcastic, impossible suggestions (reconquer Ba Sing Se, bring her mother back), and here it would be very easy for Zuko to write her off and just accept that she’s always going to hate him. But, as he tells Sokka in the following scene, he doesn’t know why, but he does care what Katara thinks of him. We know why, though.

It’s because of his sense of honor. I hope I don’t need to explain to anyone how we know that Zuko has a deep-seated drive to the right thing, even if he’s sometimes confused about what the right thing is. But in this case, his instincts are good: he personally wronged Katara by his actions in Ba Sing Se in a way he didn’t hurt anyone else in the group, so he needs to do something equally personal to expiate his guilt against her in a way he didn’t need to for anyone else in the group.

And what he tries to offer her - the closure she’s never gotten over her mother’s death - really is the perfect thing. Their initial connection was forged because of their shared pain over losing their mothers, and as Zuko insightfully tells Sokka, Katara has connected her anger over that loss to her anger at him. This is not just some random favor he thinks he can do to get back in her good graces. It’s a specific redress of her actual grievance against him. It’s not selfish of him to want to give her that. It’s right.

But, there are some points against Zuko as well. He’s a little too quick to dismiss Aang’s advice, and a little mean about how he does it - though as I’ve said, in a way that I don’t think is quite in character. More gravely, during the actual confrontation with Yon Rha, Zuko is almost entirely hands-off, letting Katara do whatever she wants - apparently up to and including kill him. Again, Zuko is not trying to be Katara’s moral guide here, but that in itself is open to criticism. If killing Yon Rha really is crossing a line, then Zuko would be remiss in not trying to stop her.

The best light you can read this in is that Zuko trusts Katara not to cross that line - and he certainly shows no sign of surprise or disappointment when she does spare him. But I think this is reading a bit more into the text than is actually there. You could also take it as Zuko leaving the decision of whether Yon Rha deserved to die up to Katara, but again, this is a morally lax stance that is hardly above criticism.

So is Zuko’s response to Katara’s anger appropriate? Yes and no. His response to her anger at him absolutely is, demonstrating a healthy sense of compunction and a laudable desire to give due redress of grievances. How he responds to her anger at her mother’s killer is less childishly judgmental than Aang, but in a way that arguably runs to the opposite extreme of showing too little concern for the morality of her actions - which is itself odd, given Zuko’s established strong sense of morality and unwillingness to stand by and do nothing when someone else does something wrong.

“What can I do to make it up to you?” vs. “Guru Goody Goody”: Zuko’s moral compass is kind of a mixed bag in this episode tbh

3. Is Aang’s philosophy about forgiveness correct? Should Katara forgive her mother’s killer?

Obviously opinions will vary about this, but I can certainly give you mine.

Putting aside questions of Air Nomad philosophy vs. Water Tribe vs. Fire Nation - these are, after all, fictional cultures made up by modern American writers in a show for a modern American audience - forgiveness is generally valued by most people, though as C.S. Lewis puts it, “everyone says forgiveness is a lovely idea, until they have something to forgive”. Forgiveness is hard, especially when the offense is great and there is no easy way for the offender to make things right - as in Zuko’s case - or the offender has no interest in doing so - as is the case with Yon Rha. But Aang is right that forgiveness is necessary for healing, and I would say for other reasons as well. I’ll refrain from a full-blown treatise on forgiveness here, but I quoted Lewis, and if you have any idea what he wrote on the subject…yeah. That.

Katara says in the first argument with Aang that forgiving her mother’s killer is impossible. And as much as the episode’s final scene tries to present the resolution that Aang was right all along, Katara still definitively declares that she will never forgive him (though she does forgive Zuko). So even though Zuko says Aang was right about what Katara needed, Katara certainly doesn’t seem to think it’s that simple.

Pictured: Not someone who has accepted Aang’s philosophy.

I’ll be very honest. I hate this line. I wish she had said something like “I don’t know if I’ll ever forgive him”, which would allow her to still have that residual anger to work through like the writers apparently wanted, acknowledging that forgiving Yon Rha can’t be as easy as Aang made it out to be, while still leaving the door open that she might get there someday. True forgiveness might be too much to expect of her at this point, but her rejection of it as impossible should at least be tempered, especially if, as Zuko’s dialogue in this scene and Sokka’s in the earlier scene imply, we’re meant to learn from this episode that Aang is right.

In spite of how poorly argued Aang’s position is, I do agree with his basic thesis about the importance of forgiveness, and I’m disappointed how many people seem to be ready to dismiss it outright in order to give Zuko the moral high ground in this episode. I don’t think that’s even necessary to defend Zutara as a ship, which brings us to our next point.

4. Does this episode show Zutara in a positive or a negative light?

“Come on, kids! ‘Zutara’ never would have lasted! It was just dark and intriguing.” - Bryan Konietzco

For those who buy into this claim that Zutara was too dark to be a functional romantic relationship, The Southern Raiders is usually the primary episode cited as proof. And it’s not a lighthearted episode. The creators described it as “probably one of the most intense episodes of the series”. It deals with unusually heavy subject matter for a half-hour timeslot cartoon for kids, and sees Katara struggling with some very dark feelings. But confronting darkness does not necessarily make a character, storyline, or ship dark.

Some argue that this episode shows Zuko bringing out the worst in Katara, and there is some truth in that, inasmuch as the effects of his betrayal in Ba Sing Se are still being felt. But Zuko is also making the effort to help her move past that, as well as her childhood trauma. In the course of their “field trip”, we see them working together effectively as a team, and in an understated but crucial scene, we see Katara open up to Zuko about that pain, unprompted, and Zuko once again offer her comfort - which no other character is ever shown to do.

“Your mother was a brave woman.” / “I know.”

Consolation is a different thing from moral guidance, but just as necessary. And where Aang’s attempts at the latter come across as inept, Zuko seems to know exactly the right thing to say to comfort Katara at that point. Katara’s memory of her mother’s death, even though she doesn’t have all the details at this point, makes it pretty clear that Kya died protecting her, which again highlights the similarities between Zuko and Katara - he also lost his mother because she was trying to protect him. I think it’s a pretty safe assumption that their repeatedly paralleled backgrounds are the reason these two characters seem to get each other so instinctively, and here we have another excellent example of that right in the middle of the episode that supposedly shows what a bad influence they are on each other.

And then of course it ends like this:

So dark. Very intrigue. Much dysfunction. Wow.

Are all of Zuko and Katara’s actions in this episode beyond reproach? No. Why do they have to be? What’s wrong with two characters confronting a difficult situation and making some questionable choices but ultimately both growing from the experience? That doesn’t prove that a theoretical romantic relationship between them would be doomed to failure. It actually provides a pretty good foundation for a healthy relationship that they can work through these things together. I mentioned earlier the reciprocal saves in the escape from the air temple, and I still maintain that’s emblematic of a larger pattern of Zuko and Katara mutually enriching each other’s character arcs.

Which is another important point to make here: this episode is not the be all end all of Zutara. We see so many more interactions between them, from the unexpected connection they make in Ba Sing Se to Katara’s friendly teasing in The Ember Island Players. And then there’s the four episode finale.

Bringing this back from the last meta for a victory lap.

So I would say that the portrayal of Zutara in this episode, in the context of the rest of their relationship in the show, is overwhelmingly positive. They’re not perfect, individually or together, but they’re a far cry from grimdark dysfunction. Furthermore, some of the morally questionable aspects of their actions in this episode are even narratively questionable as well, which brings me at last to my final point.

5. What were the writers trying to do with this episode?

I’ve already talked about how I find the effort to portray Aang as a wise moral guide unconvincing, how I think Zuko’s nastiest dismissal of him makes little sense given Zuko’s own prior experience, and how Katara’s ultimate refusal to forgive Yon Rha doesn’t fit with the episode’s apparently intended moral. But other scenes, like the air temple escape sequence, the clifftop argument between Zuko and Katara, and most of the “field trip”, are fantastically written. So what’s going on here?

Well, there’s always the Team Ehasz Conspiracy Theory.

It’s speculation time again!

For those unfamiliar, “Team Ehasz” consists of husband and wife writing duo Aaron Ehasz, the head writer for the series and writer of several episodes, and Elizabeth Welch Ehasz, who also wrote several episodes, including The Southern Raiders. Various iterations of the conspiracy theory range from giving them credit for many of the show’s most successful narrative choices to asserting that they had an entire alternative vision for the show that frequently clashed with Bryke’s, including that they supported the idea of Zutara. There’s little to no evidence for any of this, but it’s…vaguely plausible based on what we do know for certain was the work of Team Ehasz, and that’s all that’s necessary for it to pass into Zutara fandom urban legend.

One wrinkle of this theory - which if anyone does have verifiable sources on I’d love to see - is the rumor that Bryke were supposedly unhappy with the original draft of The Southern Raiders because they felt it was “too shippy”, and insisted the episode be revised accordingly. If it were true that there was a creative clash behind the scenes, that would explain a lot of the episode’s inconsistencies. 

Perhaps the unsuccessful attempt to show Aang as a wise moral authority was a Bryke addition. Maybe Zuko’s uncharacteristic mean comments were meant to make him less sympathetic, lest anyone ship him with Katara. We’ll probably never know for sure, but whatever happened in the writers’ room, the end result is an episode with a lot of great scenes and important character development that nonetheless fails to land a coherent message. Aang is wise beyond his years for giving shallow and immature arguments for his philosophy of forgiveness, but in the end Zuko and Katara learn he was right all along, except Katara doesn’t actually forgive the person Aang wanted her to forgive and never will. Um. Okay.

At least we got badass ninja!Zutara out of it.

Bonus Point: The Writing Fail Train Doesn’t End There!

The episode ends with Zuko asking Aang a very important question: If violence is truly never the answer, as Aang claims, then what is he going to do about a little problem named Ozai? We cut to credits and never see Aang’s immediate response to the question, but of course this is an issue in the finale, with the potential consequences of Aang’s refusal to kill Ozai famously made a non-issue thanks to an eleventh hour power-up granted to him by a deus ex machina.

Maybe if a magical lion turtle showed up to resolve my moral dilemmas for me, I’d be as naïve a pacifist as Aang, too.

[janiedean]

I understand and take your points about racism in Europe being different and the word "race" sounding like something straight from a nazi textbook, what I don't understand is your angry reaction to the fact that modern racism comes from Europe. Instead of taking the point that racial thoughts that have influenced the US come from there, you derail the point and act like it's not even legitimate to point that out. 1/

2/ I'm not a fan of this "white people are responsible for every problem in the world" or "all Europeans are racist shit lords" but I also don't like this "we don't need to acknowledge this because we already know it" attitude about the origins of racial thinking. I've talked to many European privately and their reaction is usually that of shock when they realize the extent to which the ideas of some of their enlightenment thinkers have helped destroyed the lives of countless people here. Now one of the few bloggers I know who is critical of these issues is thinking of quitting Tumblr, hell I'm also thinking of quitting Tumblr. It just seems nobody listens to anyone and everybody screams.

... guys, I mean it honestly and I swear I’m not trying to make fun of you or being an asshole, but... can someone explain me when and were I had an angry reaction to people saying racism comes from Europe? When? I don’t know what you’re reading, the one angry reaction I had that started this shitstorm was to having asks in the inbox using **race** as a discriminant when talking about italian or european asks, I asked if you could please refrain from using that specific word in asks because it creeps me the hell out and because I can’t even use it as a discriminant in current modern discourse on the topic and instead of ‘ah okay point taken’ I get ‘but in the English language/in some places it’s used’, at which I admittedly got fed up because like, okay, I get it, but I don’t want it on my blog if I can avoid it because it creeps me out.

I never denied racial theory as we know it comes from Europe, I never said that we didn’t have responsibility and I just - I never did anything you said I did? Okay, I didn’t mention it, but since here it’s shared cultural background that everyone more or less studied and since the premise is ‘we dropped it after WWII after seeing where that thinking brought us ie TO A FUCKING GENOCIDE’, it’s... implied in the entire discourse that I acknowledge it was a thing. No one thinks we didn’t invent it. That’s why we don’t use it anymore. Honestly, where the hell did I deny it? I mean, I always thought it was implied and then I got someone asking me why I denied it (???) because I didn’t mention it (??) but if for me it’s a given that doesn’t need to be explained then I don’t do it, also because the question didn’t ask to bring it up specifically. If someone asked me ‘what’s your opinion of racial theory having originated in Europe’ I’d have had a wholly different reply, but if the question is ‘why are you so against the use of the word’... like, I honestly can’t read your mind and guess that you also want to talk about racial theory having originated in Europe. Idk if it was brought up on someone else’s blog but... like... it’s as if we’re talking about current race relations in the US discussing just current times and you tell me ‘BUT YOU DIDN’T MENTION THAT SLAVERY EXISTED AND THAT’S WHY AFRICAN-AMERICANS ARE AFRICAN-AMERICANS’ and like no shit sherlock we all know it was a thing, do you need to bring it up every time you have that discussion or it’s an implied shared knowledge? Yeah, that.

Also, never mind that if you look at scientific racism you’ll find out that racial theory was a thing way before the enlightenment (btw the greeks thought that everyone who didn’t speak greek was a ***barbarian***, from a word that means ***stuttering***, and was automatically a lesser person than them I mean we’re not talking about stuff that was invented in the 18th century) but anyway, idk who you’re talking to on here and not everyone knows that shit in depth (but then again do most Americans know about the shit their government does that destroys the lives of people outside the US and of the shit their government has done in the centuries? Spoilers: nah, I mean it’s not just us...) but like, three things:

eight people on ten on this website are americans and like it or not the discourse is monopolized

according to american discriminatory categories, if you don’t talk about race you’re a racist. except that here using that word outside of dog breeds or human races singles you as a racist. people say it, most replies are ‘omg you’re so racist you keep on ignoring the problem’, so basically according to a bunch of americans on here in order to not be racist I should do a thing that in my worldview and in my culture background makes me a racist. you see the problem? 

add to it that a lot of people, surprise surprise, are not on tumblr to have discourse and if they get called racist when they’re trying not to be they won’t have the patience to actually look into it or try to understand both sides, because they can’t care enough for it, and honestly I can’t even blame them because it’s fucking exhausting to explain it all the time and get ignored nine times on ten

anyway I absolutely agree that some of us could use more critical thinking when it comes to racial theory and studying it more in-depth, but you also need to fucking ask them because a lot of us will take it for granted same as you take for granted that slavery happened or the trail of tears happened and you can’t expect us to read your mind over the internet.

personally I’d like all of tumblr to chill, drop politics for six months, purge itself and come back to it with a clear head and less screaming but I know it’s as likely as trump suddenly deciding socialism is the way to a better future.

and anyway I’m not saying it’s not legitimate to point out european intellectuals helped shape scientific racism, I’m saying that if you ask me about topic A and you don’t specify you also want me to talk about topic A1 which is tied to A but I’m taking for granted then I won’t know about that, and if you mean what I said about it making no sense in current times context... listen, thing is: since WWII was over no one has used the word race to discuss discrimination. We dropped it. It’s done for. It’s a slur like the n-word over on your side of the pond. Any discrimination that has happened since then has not had the scientific racism background behind it (save for maybe irish vs british because english language speakers kept the american meaning of it as a thing they were taught had legitimacy, and anyway the irish as another race thing has been dropped now thankfully). I can’t honestly reply to you if you ask me about ‘race relations in Europe’ or ‘but does the Italian xenophobic party think that EE people aren’t white’, because those are US american terms that here make no fucking sense and the fact that european thinkers helped shape scientific racism is an entire other topic/question/hot potato entirely. At most we can say that since we saw what came out of scientific racism we did away with it, but... that’s acknowledging it was a thing, which is what you’re saying we’re not doing, and I honestly don’t get what it is y’all are fishing for here or what you understood of the entire discourse. but like can you stop putting words in my mouth, because that wasn’t what I was even talking about.

and I mean, sorry if I sound like an asshole now, but this entire mess has happened because I asked people to not use that term when asking me questions that aren’t tied to US racism because it makes me uncomfortable on a molecular level and I get nazi laws flashbacks every time I see it attached to black or jewish *shudders* and then you all started... idk, assuming I was denying it was a thing in Europe before WWII or whatever. Like, you realize the reaching it takes to get there? I mean, I already am not here for politics in theory but I don’t mind discussing them, is it too much if I ask you to please refrain from using the one term that makes me really fucking uncomfortable to even write down (I cringed every time race left my keyboard ff I’m cringing now) without dragging me into drama and accusing me of shit I wasn’t even thinking about in the slightest?

[evilelitest2]

So lets talk about Autism for a moment

Rare personal post for a moment.  Now I don’t tend to talk about my personal life on tumblr very much, because it is my personal life and it is tumblr.  But yes, I am autistic, and no, I don’t talk about it very much, and yes, I do have something to say about it for once.  

A little while ago, a chap known as @leepacey had a post where they had a list of characters who they believed were Autistic.  Most were characters who I didn’t know or I agreed with, but some on the list were characters like Zuko from Avatar, Flynn from The Force Awakens, Elphaba from Wicked, Hermione from Harry Potter, and Lilo from Lilo and Stich.  All of whom are characters who I don’t think are autistic, just socially awkward.  In fact I really think there is a problem with the way autism is understood in popular media where anybody who is uncomfortable socially is labelled autistic. This makes talking about the condition on its own terms rather difficult.  And I said as much. But then @leepacey here PMed me this: "hi are you autistic? also did u read that screenshotted post at the top of my post before running your mouth? also why do you not want autistic people to have happiness” and then this: “also before you respond saying anything, please know: i don't care about literally anything you could say to me unless it's an apology for interacting with my post.” I said that yes, I was autistic and they responded with this:

“i get it, you're pathetic and miserable so you want all other autistics to be too”

Later on they made more than a few mean remarks about my dyslexia

Oh did I forget to mention? I am dyslexic, which should come as absolutely no surprise at all to anybody who follows me. Anyways.

I was surprised to find that I felt legitimately. Long time followers know that I don’t get hurt very often by internet drama, but there is something uniquely upsetting when somebody who claims to represent my interests spits in my face.  Having your experience invalidated is never fun, and so you can consider this post the closest I get to an emotional outburst on the internet. But since it’s me, I want to re-frame this whole thing in terms of politics because...of course I do.  

So....couple of problems here.  The blog is decently popular and far more importantly, seems to be about autistic rights.  It is claiming to represent autisic people, but has this really nebulous way of using a legitimate issue as a cudgel. And I see this behavior with a lot of people in a lot of different movements.

And no, this isn’t a “SJW are terrible” post because I’m pretty sure I’m an SJW, if that term means “somebody who acknowledges that social inequality exists.” One of the difficulties of social justice is that it is very difficult to talk critically about it without inviting alt right GamerGate reactionary trump voting assholes to leap in and declare the entire notion of social justice fundamentally wrong. So let me just say: Anita Sarkeesian is not a conman.

There is no White Genocide.

Autism isn’t abnormal.

But I can’t help but notice people use issues as way to abuse power, and so here is a helpful list of tips of how to identify those who co-opt causes for their own benefit. ‘Cause you find these people in every movement, and they are always toxic.

Since I am as always, horrible with technology, I still haven’t figured out how to screenshot personal chats, so I am posting the transcripts at the bottom here for those who want to see the details. A few things that keep happening:

1) There’s no possibility of reasonable, non-bigoted disagreement.

My original post was ‘I don’t think these characters are autistic because X” That was about the sum of it.  Now, maybe I was wrong, maybe I am completely and utterly wrong, but this person didn’t really allow for there to be any way I could disagree with their conclusions without being somebody who wants to make autistic people miserable.  I have to have an ulterior motive, I need to be motivated by something other than “I disagree with the actual content here,” because then they would have to respond to my arguments. It’s not as if addressing my arguments here was particularly difficult or upsetting--the only thing at issue is whether a fictional character is autistic or not. 

And It’s not as if I wasn’t open to being wrong. For example, upon reflection, Lilo being autistic actually does make a good deal of sense, @chaotic-good-milk-hotel made a good argument for why it makes sense to read Lilo as autistic.  We can talk, disagree, have a conversation about this without anybody having an ulterior motive or ill intention because you know...its just people’s head cannons.

2) They immediately go for the throat.  

Again, this is a conversation about somebody’s headcanon that Zuko from Avatar is Autistic.  This is the definition of a conversation that doesn’t need to get mean spirited in the least.  But right off the bat I am hit by “also why do you not want autistic people to have happiness.” Because there is a certain type of person who really conflates any disagreement with the worse levels of disagreement.  At the risk of going armchair psychology, I imagine that they want me to be the type of person who thinks Autism Speaks is legitimate, so they can feel more justified by lashing out at me cause you know....anger is addictive.  

3) Massive hypocrisy:

Am I the only one who notices that they are like “I fight against ableism” but continued to mock my spelling after I told them I was dyslexic?  Cause it isn’t really about the issue, the issue is just a way to put somebody else down.  

4) Strawmaning

Here is my original response.  Nowhere in this did I say I wanted to hurt autistics, nowhere did I support Autism Speaks, nowhere did I say that I wanted there to be less autistic representation, yet I am evidently dismissing the entire notion of autistic people being acceptable.  Again: “i get it, you're pathetic and miserable so you want all other autistics to be too” 

5) Conflating what is good for you with what is good for the larger movement.

This is the big one I really want to talk about. The rest are more personal gripes, but this is the biggest danger you find in communities for the marginalized: people who take their own personalities and make them into the supposed personality of the community. Throughout the chat leepacey continues to refer to any disagreement with themselves as a disagreement with the movement as a whole.  So if you think “That character is not autistic” by extension you are saying “I think that autistics have no value whatsoever”. In essence “I speak for the autistics, if you speak against me, you speak against autistics.” Hmm, that sounds familiar. Speak. Autism. Autism. Speak. No, it’s not coming to me.

And you can find this kind of really dangerous attitude all the time in marginalized communities, because when you are legitimately oppressed by society, it is really really easy to rationalize all your behavior as just a response to oppression.  When you do good work fighting against obviously evil people, it is easy to see anybody who opposes you as part of that same evil.  And that’s how you end up attacking members of the group you’re supposed to be fighting for.

Criticism does not equal persecution.  There is real legitimate persecution out there, you don’t need to elevate normal criticism to the level of oppression. And once you get into the realm of reading all criticism as persecution, then your movement has begun to attack itself.  

This is the reason I rarely talk about my autism: because this is not the first time something like this has happened to me. The autism “community” which always winds up hurting me more than it ever helps. This person claims to represent autistic people, but they sure as hell didn’t represent me.

Happy April Everyone. 

Chat logs are below, if any of you know how I can screenshot them and post them to confirm them as legit, please let me know because I don’t really like asking people just to take me for my word.

Today at 6:22 PMleepacey sent a photoset ✨ happy autism acceptance mo...hi are you autistic? also did u read that screenshotted post at the top of my post before running your mouth? also why do you not want autistic people to have happiness

leepacey: also before you respond saying anything, please know: i don't care about literally anything you could say to me unless it's an apology for interacting with my post

dicecast: I love this "Are you autistic""Before you answer, I am just going to go run on a a ton of preemptive defensive assumptions"But the answer is yes and you're post is just...wrong

leepacey: i get it, you're pathetic and miserable so you want all other autistics to be toohow dare other autistic people make positivity posts

dicecast: or.....ori disagree with the content of you're post  like it is entirely possible that I don't think those characters are autistic without wishing hatred on autistic

leepacey: so just don't reblog it? magical i know

dicecast:atustics*

leepaceyso keep your garbage off my post

dicecast: I didn't want to not reblog it

leepacey*atustics 😂😂😂

dicecast: I thhink people mistake social discomfort with autism

leepacey: nice okay

dicecast: which I think marginalizes autism more.  i'm dylexic dude but kudos for like immediately going for the throat

that level of defensiveness and hyperbolic ad hominem really is a testament to how much you care about people 

because you know...it isn't remotely possible I might....disagree with those characters

being labeled as autistic

leepacey: i am autistic and am getting a masters in nonfiction creative writing, writing about myself and my autism. it's literally my life's work, writing about autism positivity as a way of helping the mental health of other autistic people and educating allistics about the traits of autism. but yeah; i'm spreading misinformation about autistic traits because god forbid people don't see us all as nonverval five year olds

dicecast: I wasn't aware that assuming i hate autistic people is spreading the message positively

Also, and this might be a bit difficult so I"ll go slowely but it is possible that I don't want autistics to be depicted as only non verbal 5 years olds

AND...

wait for it

I still disagree with some of you're choices on the list

leepacey: this post is made to help the mental health of autistic people. it's not meant as a definitive guide to autistic traits. i went through tags finding the most popular autistic headcanons, and compiled them on one post, because the beginning of april can be a very negative and triggering time for people because of autism speaks.

dicecast: like those don't contracit each other

leepaceyshut up for five seconds god you talk too much

dicecast: oh no....i write fast, how bloody terrible

now i actually agree that april can be triggering time for autistics and I hate autism speaks because they are awful

leepacey: yeah, hence the existence of my *positivity* post

dicecast: but again....i disagreed with you're choice of character

I don't think some of those characters autistic...and you're solution is to basically say i'm a self loathing autistic person....

leepacey: and you're still under the assumption anyone cares ?

dicecast: because I disagreed with you're choicesleepaceyokaydicecastwell I clearly got under you're skin...again, this is a major overreaction

because disagreeing with you

you specifically

isn't hating autistic peple

unless you are the autism pope I suppose

leepacey: my post has like 11k notes of autistic people saying how much this post means to them, and then a couple people like you (usually allistics) being like no!!! these characters aren't autistic!!!!! wah wah!!!! like how dare a post make autistic people happy, right? you're the one who decides if headcanons are okay or not

dicecast: The fact that you can't distinguish between "I don't think these characters are autistic" and "I don't think autistic people should be happy" says a lot more about you than 11k responses

cause you know...I didn't say autistic shouldn't be happy

Now we can have a reasonable conversation about if Zuko is autistic or notread into various scenes and talk about autistic representation

leepacey: that's the thing i keep trying to repeat to you: the post exists to make autistic people happy. you think that i'm so wrong to say these characters are autistic, as if it's some crime to humanity that i say "hey maybe prince zuko is autistic :D" like that's some crime against humanity

dicecast: Disagreeing with you is a crime against humanity?

leepacey: sarcasm, sweetheartnice reading skillzi'm done hear. go back to reddit, troll  {and then they blocked me} -------

Note: I think it is pretty obvious that they thought I wasn’t autistic and were totally prepped to go into a whole “You aren’t autistic you can’t speak” spiel and then just got all huffy and ran off when they realized they didn’t actually have that particular gun in their arsenal.

And I want this duly noted...they messaged me. I didn’t go to them. Opening up with “Fuck you and I don’t care what you have to say” and then blocking me. Classy. 

[Post edited by randomshoes, who is very angry because someone was very very nasty to her friend and he’s upset and she can’t do anything about it other than pick for typos. What you say to people matters.]

[dicecast]

Lets Talk about Autism

Rare personal post for a moment.  Now I don’t tend to talk about my personal life on tumblr very much, because it is my personal life and it is tumblr.  But yes, I am autistic, and no, I don’t talk about it very much, and yes, I do have something to say about it for once.  

A little while ago, a chap known as @leepacey had a post where they had a list of characters who they believed were Autistic.  Most were characters who I didn’t know or I agreed with, but some on the list were characters like Zuko from Avatar, Flynn from The Force Awakens, Elphaba from Wicked, Hermione from Harry Potter, and Lilo from Lilo and Stich.  All of whom are characters who I don’t think are autistic, just socially awkward.  In fact I really think there is a problem with the way autism is understood in popular media where anybody who is uncomfortable socially is labelled autistic. This makes talking about the condition on its own terms rather difficult.  And I said as much. But then @leepacey here PMed me this: "hi are you autistic? also did u read that screenshotted post at the top of my post before running your mouth? also why do you not want autistic people to have happiness” and then this: “also before you respond saying anything, please know: i don't care about literally anything you could say to me unless it's an apology for interacting with my post.” I said that yes, I was autistic and they responded with this:

“i get it, you're pathetic and miserable so you want all other autistics to be too”

Later on they made more than a few mean remarks about my dyslexia

Oh did I forget to mention? I am dyslexic, which should come as absolutely no surprise at all to anybody who follows me. Anyways.

I was surprised to find that I felt legitimately. Long time followers know that I don’t get hurt very often by internet drama, but there is something uniquely upsetting when somebody who claims to represent my interests spits in my face.  Having your experience invalidated is never fun, and so you can consider this post the closest I get to an emotional outburst on the internet. But since it’s me, I want to re-frame this whole thing in terms of politics because...of course I do.  

So....couple of problems here.  The blog is decently popular and far more importantly, seems to be about autistic rights.  It is claiming to represent autisic people, but has this really nebulous way of using a legitimate issue as a cudgel. And I see this behavior with a lot of people in a lot of different movements.

And no, this isn’t a “SJW are terrible” post because I’m pretty sure I’m an SJW, if that term means “somebody who acknowledges that social inequality exists.” One of the difficulties of social justice is that it is very difficult to talk critically about it without inviting alt right GamerGate reactionary trump voting assholes to leap in and declare the entire notion of social justice fundamentally wrong. So let me just say: Anita Sarkeesian is not a conman.

There is no White Genocide.

Autism isn’t abnormal.

But I can’t help but notice people use issues as way to abuse power, and so here is a helpful list of tips of how to identify those who co-opt causes for their own benefit. ‘Cause you find these people in every movement, and they are always toxic.

Since I am as always, horrible with technology, I still haven’t figured out how to screenshot personal chats, so I am posting the transcripts at the bottom here for those who want to see the details. A few things that keep happening:

1) There’s no possibility of reasonable, non-bigoted disagreement.

My original post was ‘I don’t think these characters are autistic because X” That was about the sum of it.  Now, maybe I was wrong, maybe I am completely and utterly wrong, but this person didn’t really allow for there to be any way I could disagree with their conclusions without being somebody who wants to make autistic people miserable.  I have to have an ulterior motive, I need to be motivated by something other than “I disagree with the actual content here,” because then they would have to respond to my arguments. It’s not as if addressing my arguments here was particularly difficult or upsetting--the only thing at issue is whether a fictional character is autistic or not.

And It’s not as if I wasn’t open to being wrong. For example, upon reflection, Lilo being autistic actually does make a good deal of sense, @chaotic-good-milk-hotel made a good argument for why it makes sense to read Lilo as autistic.  We can talk, disagree, have a conversation about this without anybody having an ulterior motive or ill intention because you know...its just people’s head cannons.

2) They immediately go for the throat.  

Again, this is a conversation about somebody’s headcanon that Zuko from Avatar is Autistic.  This is the definition of a conversation that doesn’t need to get mean spirited in the least.  But right off the bat I am hit by “also why do you not want autistic people to have happiness.” Because there is a certain type of person who really conflates any disagreement with the worse levels of disagreement.  At the risk of going armchair psychology, I imagine that they want me to be the type of person who thinks Autism Speaks is legitimate, so they can feel more justified by lashing out at me cause you know....anger is addictive.  

3) Massive hypocrisy:

Am I the only one who notices that they are like “I fight against ableism” but continued to mock my spelling after I told them I was dyslexic?  Cause it isn’t really about the issue, the issue is just a way to put somebody else down.  

4) Strawmaning

Here is my original response.  Nowhere in this did I say I wanted to hurt autistics, nowhere did I support Autism Speaks, nowhere did I say that I wanted there to be less autistic representation, yet I am evidently dismissing the entire notion of autistic people being acceptable.  Again: “i get it, you're pathetic and miserable so you want all other autistics to be too”

5) Conflating what is good for you with what is good for the larger movement.

This is the big one I really want to talk about. The rest are more personal gripes, but this is the biggest danger you find in communities for the marginalized: people who take their own personalities and make them into the supposed personality of the community. Throughout the chat leepacey continues to refer to any disagreement with themselves as a disagreement with the movement as a whole.  So if you think “That character is not autistic” by extension you are saying “I think that autistics have no value whatsoever”. In essence “I speak for the autistics, if you speak against me, you speak against autistics.” Hmm, that sounds familiar. Speak. Autism. Autism. Speak. No, it’s not coming to me.

And you can find this kind of really dangerous attitude all the time in marginalized communities, because when you are legitimately oppressed by society, it is really really easy to rationalize all your behavior as just a response to oppression.  When you do good work fighting against obviously evil people, it is easy to see anybody who opposes you as part of that same evil.  And that’s how you end up attacking members of the group you’re supposed to be fighting for.

Criticism does not equal persecution.  There is real legitimate persecution out there, you don’t need to elevate normal criticism to the level of oppression. And once you get into the realm of reading all criticism as persecution, then your movement has begun to attack itself.  

This is the reason I rarely talk about my autism: because this is not the first time something like this has happened to me. The autism “community” which always winds up hurting me more than it ever helps. This person claims to represent autistic people, but they sure as hell didn’t represent me.

Happy April Everyone.

Chat logs are below, if any of you know how I can screenshot them and post them to confirm them as legit, please let me know because I don’t really like asking people just to take me for my word.

Today at 6:22 PMleepacey sent a photoset ✨ happy autism acceptance mo...hi are you autistic? also did u read that screenshotted post at the top of my post before running your mouth? also why do you not want autistic people to have happiness

leepacey: also before you respond saying anything, please know: i don't care about literally anything you could say to me unless it's an apology for interacting with my post

dicecast: I love this "Are you autistic""Before you answer, I am just going to go run on a a ton of preemptive defensive assumptions"But the answer is yes and you're post is just...wrong

leepacey: i get it, you're pathetic and miserable so you want all other autistics to be toohow dare other autistic people make positivity posts

dicecast: or.....ori disagree with the content of you're post  like it is entirely possible that I don't think those characters are autistic without wishing hatred on autistic

leepacey: so just don't reblog it? magical i know

dicecast:atustics*

leepaceyso keep your garbage off my post

dicecast: I didn't want to not reblog it

leepacey*atustics 😂😂😂

dicecast: I thhink people mistake social discomfort with autism

leepacey: nice okay

dicecast: which I think marginalizes autism more.  i'm dylexic dude but kudos for like immediately going for the throat

that level of defensiveness and hyperbolic ad hominem really is a testament to how much you care about people

because you know...it isn't remotely possible I might....disagree with those characters

being labeled as autistic

leepacey: i am autistic and am getting a masters in nonfiction creative writing, writing about myself and my autism. it's literally my life's work, writing about autism positivity as a way of helping the mental health of other autistic people and educating allistics about the traits of autism. but yeah; i'm spreading misinformation about autistic traits because god forbid people don't see us all as nonverval five year olds

dicecast: I wasn't aware that assuming i hate autistic people is spreading the message positively

Also, and this might be a bit difficult so I"ll go slowely but it is possible that I don't want autistics to be depicted as only non verbal 5 years olds

AND...

wait for it

I still disagree with some of you're choices on the list

leepacey: this post is made to help the mental health of autistic people. it's not meant as a definitive guide to autistic traits. i went through tags finding the most popular autistic headcanons, and compiled them on one post, because the beginning of april can be a very negative and triggering time for people because of autism speaks.

dicecast: like those don't contracit each other

leepaceyshut up for five seconds god you talk too much

dicecast: oh no....i write fast, how bloody terrible

now i actually agree that april can be triggering time for autistics and I hate autism speaks because they are awful

leepacey: yeah, hence the existence of my *positivity* post

dicecast: but again....i disagreed with you're choice of character

I don't think some of those characters autistic...and you're solution is to basically say i'm a self loathing autistic person....

leepacey: and you're still under the assumption anyone cares ?

dicecast: because I disagreed with you're choicesleepaceyokaydicecastwell I clearly got under you're skin...again, this is a major overreaction

because disagreeing with you

you specifically

isn't hating autistic peple

unless you are the autism pope I suppose

leepacey: my post has like 11k notes of autistic people saying how much this post means to them, and then a couple people like you (usually allistics) being like no!!! these characters aren't autistic!!!!! wah wah!!!! like how dare a post make autistic people happy, right? you're the one who decides if headcanons are okay or not

dicecast: The fact that you can't distinguish between "I don't think these characters are autistic" and "I don't think autistic people should be happy" says a lot more about you than 11k responses

cause you know...I didn't say autistic shouldn't be happy

Now we can have a reasonable conversation about if Zuko is autistic or notread into various scenes and talk about autistic representation

leepacey: that's the thing i keep trying to repeat to you: the post exists to make autistic people happy. you think that i'm so wrong to say these characters are autistic, as if it's some crime to humanity that i say "hey maybe prince zuko is autistic :D" like that's some crime against humanity

dicecast: Disagreeing with you is a crime against humanity?

leepacey: sarcasm, sweetheartnice reading skillzi'm done hear. go back to reddit, troll {and then they blocked me} -------

Note: I think it is pretty obvious that they thought I wasn’t autistic and were totally prepped to go into a whole “You aren’t autistic you can’t speak” spiel and then just got all huffy and ran off when they realized they didn’t actually have that particular gun in their arsenal.

And I want this duly noted...they messaged me. I didn’t go to them. Opening up with “Fuck you and I don’t care what you have to say” and then blocking me. Classy.

[Post edited by randomshoes, who is very angry because someone was very very nasty to her friend and he’s upset and she can’t do anything about it other than pick for typos. What you say to people matters.]