#and I don't want to shit on anyone's enjoyment of media that would be stupid

[oldtvandcomics]

I really would like to say something about Loki Season 2, write some analysis, whatever, but... The whole thing is just making me feel TIRED.

Guys. You can do better than this. I promise, you can do better than this. In terms of general storytelling, but especially where queer representation is concerned. Why did you even think that there would be queer rep in the first place?! For fuck's sake.

[lurkingshan]

BL/QL Ask game : The Ugly, the Bad and the Worst

Tagged by @clara-maybe-ontheroad to start some trouble. There are a lot of these, so I'm mostly going to do quick hits and maybe expand on a few that really get me going.

The categories are:

Worst soundtrack / weirdest song choice in a BL

It would be easier to list the BL soundtracks that are not horrible (offense intended).

Most cringe-inducing line (cute)/Most cringe-inducing line (actually bad)

I'm so bad at remembering specific lines of dialogue unless I think they're beautiful/heart-wrenching, so I got nothing.

Most stupid decision made by a character

In a BL?? Baby, I do not have all day.

Worst plot line

Hmmm I'm gonna give in to recency bias and say faking amnesia to get your fiancé to love you again after you iced him out and denied him sex for four years because of your tiger attack-related PTSD (no I am not making that up, never change actually Naughty Babe).

The most problematic show you've watched

Problematic is in the eye of the beholder, so honestly who can say.

A show people love but you find bad

LOLOLOL. There are. So many. Probably the one with the wildest fandom fervor :: Shan personal enjoyment ratio is KinnPorsche.

A show people find bad but you will defend

Theory of Love and y'all stay wrong about this. It is easily one of the best early Thai bls and the writing, character development, and narrative structure are all excellent, but people hate slutty characters so they can't deal with it.

A show that is just objectively bad but you enjoyed it/were horny/because of that one character

Why r u? What can I say, I'm a Fighter/Tutor girlie.

A bad show that you kept watching because you were intrigued/fascinated

Hmmm I usually just drop it if I'm truly not having fun. I guess you could count me finishing Minato's Laundromat 2 despite knowing any hope for it was over at the end of episode 9. I just needed to see how mad I was going to be in the end (pretty damn mad).

A bad show that you would still recommend

There is too much BL nowadays to be trifling with the bad shit.

The character that ruined a show the most/most awful character that you hated

PLERN PLENG (Together With Me). cc: @bengiyo the co-president of the Plern Pleng antis.

Most awful character that you loved

Boston, a beautiful chaos demon (Only Friends).

A character that wasn't awful but that you just don't like

Anyone played by Podd or Jimmy (it's their faces I can't stand them sorry to those men).

A hero that should have been a villain

This is an interesting one! I’m not sure this counts, but I’ll just say I did not love the way The Untamed white washed Wei Wuxian and removed his culpability for all his worst choices (I recognize this was largely due to censorship). I much prefer the more morally complex and deeply flawed version of him we got in MDZS.

A morally bad character you're into/you're not into and you wish people would stop being into

I don't believe in holding fictional characters to real life moral standards. Bad behavior makes for good stories.

The show that disappointed you the most

Let me take this opportunity to drag Plus & Minus again, a show that had all the right ingredients to be a top tier friends to lovers narrative and absolutely blew it to do some beyond clichéd noble idiocy and breakup bs that violated character and undercut the relationship to such a degree that I can never rewatch or enjoy anything about it again.

The Worst Show of Them All Because of Your Own Reasons

Hmm I do not have one. It's rare for me to not be able to find something of value in any media I consume.

Tagging @chickenstrangers @sorry-bonebag @kayatoasted @blmpff @twig-tea in case you want to play!

[hoghtastic]

I was told that some Stans allegedly think J reads this blog and some of her posts are intended to troll us. Apparently Stans find it enjoyable, because to them the fans who don’t like her are just jealous and haters anyway. And therefore J parading Alex, teasing and hinting isn’t that concerning but rather funny when we're angry or annoyed. OK.

First, let's assume she actually reads this blog and responds to criticism by posting his apartment and „unofficially“ officially says she moved in for example, like she did while he was in Paris. That would be a huge red flag for me. J has no reason to actively seek out and troll critical voices from the fandom in general. Her Instagram comments are positive. As far as I know, there were only 3-4 instances of fans writing something critical under her maaaaaany maaaany posts this year. And one fan asked her about the art she copied, that’s not critique or hate but just the truth exposed. Only three people or so from the 2.2m fans he had (mostly female) who criticized her publicly on IG, that’s almost nothing. It’s a very very mild reaction. Three people from the 2.2m fans are 0,000136%. (Even if it would be more it wouldn’t be a lot) And if anyone wants to talk about her DMs.

I personally don't care what happens in J's private messages. Firstly, she can set it up so that she doesn't see messages from people she doesn’t know personally and she doesn't have to read anything from followers she doesn't know personally anyway. Secondly, J could tell us anything, we ourselves can't look at her messages. So I don’t care. I care about what I can see and her public comments are all positive for her. I recall Stans excusing her „you snooze you…“ stunt with her responding to hate. Made no sense to me too. A : show me the shit storm she got that justified a revenge and B: what type of revenge is it to demonstrate your „power“ over the fans by demonstrating that she is in charge of Alex content? What type of character would do that?

Ok now we come to the fact that she wants to troll us with her stories. No, people, that sounds so stupid, I can't process it. Why should she? She has everything she wanted, right? She has a dream relationship with a man that is out of her league (my opinion) and her career is suddenly going places. If trolling us brings her joy, although she has a good life, she's a bad person period. And if I imagine that Stans celebrate that behavior, I find it disappointing too. For me, J's behavior is already pathological. She takes advantage of his fandom and Alex, takes over everything he has in high speed and triumphantly parades each step on social media but in a sneaky not too obvious way. But if I really believed that she posts certain things on social media specifically to make us angry or sad, I‘d additionally consider her evil. At the end of the day, we all love Alex, some more, others less. I can't speak for everyone, but for me, I think J will do him a lot of harm (in the grand scheme of things). That's why I'm not happy about them, but rather worried. And the Stans celebrating her trolling us would be weak of them in my opinion. 🤷🏼‍♀️.

Finally, I have to say I don't think she's reading this blog anyway. How would she know this blog? Most fans don’t even know about it.

I believe she is posting what she is posting because she's simply craving the attention she gets from the new followers and because they're all there because of Alex, she clings to him and his things like Gollum to his ring. As we could see, she had to claim his apartment publicly as her apartment because he was giving attention to his fans after a long time. She saw it on IG and she wasn’t involved. It bothered her. And one story wasn’t enough to show who’s boss but several stories in a row topped by a post reminding his fans that she was in Paris with him a year ago. I believe all the other pictures were just a pretense. I don’t think she came to this blog and saw some anonymous comments and therefore confirmed their living situation.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this, anon, in a very well put manner. 😊 I absolutely agree with everything, especially that I also don't believe Johanne knows of or is reading the blog, and even if she was, to be bothered by and actively trolling a bunch of anonymous people on the internet would be kind of childish and I dare say plain sad, even for her. She's a public figure, she's put herself in a position that made some people dislike her, and she has to accept the fact that not everyone will adore her. No one is 100% liked by everyone and that's life. Which leads me to question, why are the stans bothered by this so much? Why do they automatically assume that those who don't like her are hateful and jealous? People are allowed to have an opinion, whether it's positive or negative, and shouldn't be afraid to share it or bullied for it. And that's exactly why this blog was created for, to grant everyone a safe, neutral space to voice their opinions. It was never meant to be a "hate blog" about Johanne, as some stans may see it, but the fact that most comments here are negative, in comparison to Instagram, where there's mostly praise, leads me to believe that people don't feel free to share them there, because everyone who dares disagree with them is automatically attacked and deemed a "hater", "not a true supporter", etc... Which is something I don't agree with. And the fact that the stans still stalk this blog and allegedly come up with such theories (that Johanne reads the blog and responds to criticism in a trolling manner), even finding them enjoyable and an adequate response, is in my opinion laughable to say the least. Why do they take personally what some anonymous people think about a person they support, but doesn't even know them? Why do they want everyone to love Johanne as much as they do? It was never that serious and personally, I couldn't care less that they love her so much. People are free to like or dislike whoever they want, so why don't they do the same? It reminds me of that saying about people with and without tattoos — "the only difference is that people with tattoos don't care if you don't have them".

But at the end of the day, Johanne is living her best life and we're all just a bunch of people commenting and gossiping for the fun of it. No one is going to hell for having a negative opinion, and no one will become her best friend or win a medal for adoring her and fighting every stranger online who doesn't like her. 🤷‍♀️ So yes, I'm an apologist for "live and let live" as long as we're all being respectful to one another, and can't really understand why the stans are always so serious about such matters.

[abyssalcreator21]

Pandemic Thoughts # 157

Today has been the start of wellness week. It means academic break for students and the time for relaxation. Yet, for myself, I'd still think of our thesis from time to time but then, we are just encouraged to rest for this week. Well, yesterday also, I was reprimanded again by our thesis adviser about my shared posts and she was very angry. Pissed to be exact. I know in myself I tend to juggle my life now with social media, studies, and my social life. Compared to my dilemmas right now, Ma'am Anj also have her own share of hustles. I really do hate also being reprimanded to be honest, it is like one of my toxic traits. Somehow I know that what I post on my social media bears responsibility and also because I set it to public. I haven't been mindful that much of the impact I have with other people because I am just secluded that, well, it is my account, I can post whatever I want. Yet, because of the constant reprimanding, maybe I haven't valued the aspect of being a communicator. Base on my posts lately and for the whole duration of my social media life, I have been in a constant state of just letting myself get haha reacts or any reacts just to make my day enjoyable. And somehow I get disappointed also when I don't have a strong engagement with my posts. Ma'am Anj is right when it comes to me not thinking before I click, I just share random memes, thoughts, and any kind of shit. And I don't think maybe others would be annoyed about it or not. I just tend to recluse myself in the idea that this is my social media accounts, so I can do whatever I want. But yet, base on the several reprimands I got from this year, I have been irresponsible enough of how I acted in social media. Well, I have really gone overboard most of the time the way I chat or my postings. Somehow, the image I portray as a TCM student wasn't really abided with the contents I have with my news feed. It seems I have been toxic and addicted to my social media self being just the person who doesn't give a fuck of the repercussions of my actions. I really do think a lot of people do talk shit about me. And there are also people who like my contents especially when I am writing my pandemic thoughts. But yes, social media really transformed me into this douche who just share anything after a couple of minutes and there are online friends of mine that really calls out of the actions I made. It really bothers me though. These little things about being called out of my actions. The way I handle criticisms and reprimands is not yet mature. Truly, I am 23 years old right now but then, I felt like I am still a kid who act as if I know how the world works. With the habits I have, how easily I can be distracted, I'm still a working on progress with myself. But then, this is life either way. It depends if I take in a professional way or I just take it personally. It has always been my call and anyone's call to be responsible with the emotions, decisions, and actions I/they make in their lives. At least, Ma'am Anj just really wants for me to be better that's why she is angry and pissed. Suddenly remembered also how stubborn I am with my mom when I was a child in how Ma'am Anj is also calling out of my actions.

I really did realize right now that I am jeopardizing the relationship we have with our adviser. Giving her this kind of stress is not good for her health since she also deals with her stress not to be overboard because of her heart condition. Given the fact that I am a communication student. It was just stupid and imbecile for my part to not always think first before I share something. Maybe the best way for me right now to practice being responsible to my social media accounts is to share less and just have other things to focus on. Just like what Ma'am Anj reminds me and all of us, be sensitive and learn to respect. Yet fucktard me didn't adhere to the statement. What a piece of shit am I.

[m0th-punk]

This is something that's been on my mind for a long time. Long ramble under the cut

TL;DR: Grazer-razor has some of the worst black and white mentality I've ever seen and I can tell he has never critically examined his biases a day in his life.

Because I'm a terrible little gremlin who can't leave well enough alone, I've been reading these posts

Ignoring the absolute stupidity of these statements (I'm pretty sure the lack of rainbow logos is because in many middle eastern countries, homosexuality is a crime and these companies just want to make money. But I'mnot going into the nuances and implications of rainbow capitalism today.), something stood out to me.

Does Grazer... genuinely think nobody has ever criticized the Muslim faith? That we all ignore the homophobia present within the religion just because they're a minority? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've seen even some of the most staunch leftists criticize things like their horrible treatment of homosexuality or the rampant sexism often sanctioned by radicals. Even other Muslims, especially women and lgbt+ Muslims, have been critical of these things.

It wouldn't shock me if Grazer believedthat anyone who supports Muslims believes they can do no wrong. After all, he thinks any criticism of Christianity is hatred, and dismisses any harmful things Christians do as not being "real" Christianity in a classic case of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Note how he didn't even respond to the first asks comments, just accused them of being me (because obviously any time someone sees his blog it's all my fault /s)

So it seems like in Grazer's mind, there are only two options when it comes to religion: Uncritically praise and defend everything a religion does no matter how heinous it is and justify it because it's done in a God's name, or condemn anyone who practices it as hateful terrorists. Because he doesn't see people doing the former for Christians, he automatically assumes that they're doing the latter, and vice versa for Muslims.

Also note how he gets mad when muslim faith is "respected" (again, homosexuality is criminalized in many of these areas) but then demands a secular children's show cater to his religion for the sake of his precious childhood.

(Also, can we just talk about the absolute fucking cruelty in this answer? There are people out there that had their childhoods ruined by abuse, illness, losing loved ones, homelessness, poverty, bullying, near-death experiences, having their countries torn apart by war, a shitty foster care system, teen pregnancies, and so many other things that can absolutely destroy a life.  Grazer's was ruined by…  *checks notes* a cartoon character supporting gay rights and a drag queen singing a cutesy children's song.  So yeah, if that's the worst part of his childhood he's pretty damn lucky, and the fact that he has the gall to still complain absolutely makes him selfish and ignorant. It's disrespectful, plain and simple, and if he were truly a good Christian he'd have some compassion.)

Okay, so Grazer has some weird "rules for me but not for thee" shit when it comes to religion. This isn't news. Where am I going with this?

Well, turns out he has this opinion about more than just religion. Know how I know this? His response to ESRB ratings and trigger warnings.

So it seems like Grazer sees the ESRB as some sort of moral compass, in a way. Something being rated E or E10 means it's pure and good and wholly unproblematic, while anything higher means it's evil and disgusting and he can't even look at it.

This is further confirmed by this post, where he flat-out states he sees the ESRB as deeming what things are and are not morally acceptable.

Now Grazer, I'm gonna explain this as best as I can, because it seems like you don't quite understand this. Read very carefully.

This is not the purpose of the ESRB rating system.

I repeat, this is NOT the purpose of the ESRB rating system.

The ESRB does not decide on what is and is not morally correct. It simply says "This game contains these topics, and as such is most suitable for people in this age group.". That's it. It's a guideline, not a rule.

Let's take cartoon violence, for instance. It's a very common warning the ESRB puts on games. Almost every game from Mario to Sonic to Crash Bandicoot and even Monster Tale has this warning. These games are all rated E for everyone. Does this mean those games are promoting violence to children, or claiming things like Bowser kidnapping Peach or Pinstripe trying to gun down Crash are perfectly okay and morally correct? Of course not. It's simply saying that these games contain mild, non-graphic violence, but most children should be able to handle seeing it.

On the other side of the coin, let's take a look at the warnings for nudity and sexual themes. Most games that contain these topics are rated T at the lowest and AO at the highest. This obviously isn't saying that nudity and sex are inherently bad or evil. All it's saying is that these topics are best handled by adults (And, regardless of morality, it is illegal to distribute sexual content to minors unless it's meant to be educational, like a health class textbook).

A few extra points:

. Games can be rated different things in different countries. Different countries have different regulations. Do you know why the blood in Danganronpa is pink? It's because in Japan, games with excessive amounts of blood and gore are given a Z rating (Japan's equivalent to an AO rating). They got around this by making the blood pink, securing the game its desired M rating. Meanwhile here in America, Mortal Kombat is allowed to show as many graphic, brutal deaths as it wants and still receive an M rating.

. ESRB ratings are not legally enforceable. I was so convinced as a 16 year old that the employees at gamestop would try to card me or something when I was picking up a copy of Bayonetta, and I was surprised when they simply rang me up in two seconds, no questions asked. It doesn't happen. For fuck's sake, one of the first games I ever played, at the tender age of four, was Soul Edge. A T rated game. The only instance ESRB ratings are legally enforced is in the case of AO ratings, as these games often contain incredibly graphic violenceor sexual content. If this outrage is coming from the idea that certain ratings will keep younger people from playing these games from a legal standpoint, don't worry. A nine year old is not gonna get arrested for playing Among Us. Just don't buy them GTA San Andreas or Leisure Suit Larry and everything will be fine.

. No two consumers are exactly alike. While one 13 year old may be perfectly fine with the jumpscares in Amnesia, another may be too scared to even go near the piano in Super Mario 64. That doesn't mean either of these games is rated incorrectly. The ESRB is there, once again, as a recommendation for the average consumer, and doesn't take individual experience into account. An individual experience is not their responsibility. It's also on parents (or you yourself!) To decide what the consumer can or can't handle.

"But Haley," I hear you say, "What if this piece of media DOES contain something morally bad?"

Well it's simple. You are allowed to like things AND still criticize the bad parts of it.

Hold on now, I'm not telling you that it's perfectly alright to enjoy things like Birth of a Nation or anything like that! Contrary to popular belief, there are some pieces of media that are truly too steeped in hatred and morally reprehensible things to be supported, even through a critical lense. The only merit things like that have is to serve as a warning: This is a terrible thing made for terrible reasons, and we should not allow it to happen again.

But outside of those rare circumstances, it's not so cut and dry.

Let's take a piece of media i actually enjoy, for instance, so you know I'm not a hypocrite: Persona 5.

Persona 5 is easily one of my favorite games in the Persona series. It does a lot of interesting stuff, the artstyle and soundtrack are (in my opinion) the best in the series, and overall it's very enjoyable for me.

But, like anything, it's not perfect. I'm incredibly uncomfortable with the hypocrisy the game has in regards to the sexualization of teenagers. While Kamoshida is rightfully condemned for his sexualization of teenage girls and Ann's persona awakening comes from rejecting this objectification, the game and story undermine it by not only putting Ann in a sexually revealing outfit, but also making light of Ryuji's sexual harassment by adult men (Allegedly Persona 5 Royal tries to fix this by making the men drag enthusiasts who think Ryuji would look good in drag and giving them more sympathetic personalities, but it's still really weird and hypocritical of the game to do this.). The teenage protagonist is also allowed the option to date adult women, including his teacher, and the game rarely if ever touches on the problems with this.

The game's homophobia also left a bad taste in my mouth. Aside from the aforementioned men who sexually harass Ryuji, the only other canon LGBT+ character is a bar owner who is either a drag queen or a trans woman (or both?). Sure, she's portrayed as being kind and protective of the protagonist, but there isn't much room to interact with her or learn more about her. On top of that, not only can the protagonist not romantically pursue his male friends (A feature that even the SECOND persona game had), he's not even allowed to give them gifts or platonically show affection towards them without the dialogue mocking him. The game that allows a teenage boy to date his teacher won't allow him to simply give his male friends a present.

And yet, despite those criticisms, I do still enjoy the game. I don't consider the game irredeemable garbage based on those poorly handled topics alone. And I also understand that for some people, those topics make them so uncomfortable that they don't want to play the game at all, and I completely respect that.

Criticizing the things you enjoy is not only normal, it's oftentimes healthy. Being able to step back and say "I like this thing, but I don't like the bad things it's done. This thing would be better if these issues were fixed." Sure, sometimes some people tend to complain a bit too much about the media they supposedly enjoy, but for the most part being able to acknowledge the bad with the good is a good skill to have.

Oh, wait, all of this means nothing because Grazer thinks that critically enjoying things is nothing more than an excuse to consume media he doesn't personally agree with. Okay then.

So if he can't even realize something as simple as "it's okay to criticize some parts of media that you otherwise enjoy", how can he be expected to look critically at a religion that he's been raised in and around all his life?

Soooo yeah, Grazer has some serious problems with black and white thinking that he refuses to acknowledge, further worsened by the fact that he's practically been brainwashed into believing that Christianity is the ultimate moral compass that everyone should follow. I understand that this tends to be an issue for neurodivergent people, but it's not an excuse for the actions he does that are related to these things (sending death threats to the ESRB, antagonizing others, etc.