#and that is your prerogative enjoy it in whatever context you want

[smile-files]

this might be a hot take... but if you care about disavowing media made by bad people out of fear of looking like a bad person yourself more than you care about actually doing good things... you might have your priorities (and your morals) screwed up a bit :/

(see my tags for more of my thoughts on this topic! please try to avoid making make bad-faith assumptions about what i mean!)

[ringsreforged]

Natalie's *deep* Haladriel thoughts - BEWARE

Pau - When you read this later, let me know if you want me to move it to my personal account, yeah? If it even still exists...

I’m not really sure what this post is going to end up being. A defence of the show and the separation? In part! A critique of the show based off leak spoilers and my own gut feeling? For sure! A desperate ramble in an attempt to get my head in order? Absolutely!

I will say before we dive in that I’m absolutely a Haladriel shipper, but the way I ship isn’t always in line with fandom. I ship what I see as part of the narrative because it’s the narrative, and everything else is a bonus. I make this distinction because I think this is why I’m so okay with a lack of scenes when some others are not, and I don’t want to come across preachy. I don't think I'm in any way superior for this by the way. In fact, I wish I could be more *normal*!!!!

If you came to this show for Haladriel alone, and simply want to see them share scenes week to week – that’s your prerogative. I’m not trying to say you shouldn’t feel that way. What I might try to say is that I don’t think that makes the shows bad or suggests that the writers have baited with this relationship. I think that’s ultimately what I find frustrating…

But anyway, let’s get into whatever this is. A reflection on expectations, a five-season arc, and those STUPID spoiler leaks…

AND THERE WILL BE SPOILERS. STAY AWAY. HISS.

Alright, so this post is mostly brought to you by a sinking feeling I have that the leak spoilers are real. Because everything in that episode 7 promo matches up.

STOP READING if you don’t want to know the spoilers. And honestly? STOP READING IF YOU THINK YOU WANT TO KNOW because living with this knowledge has truly made this season less enjoyable for me (credit to it, then, because I still think it’s incredible). IF I’M MAKING YOU PANIC, STILL STOP READING because there very much is a world where these spoilers aren’t that bad in context…but I prefer to keep my expectations low…

Have you gone???

HAVE YOU GONE?????

SPOILER TALK

Okay.

So, the leak spoilers say that there is no kiss between Sauron and Galadriel (which, honestly, I have no great issue with – more to come on that later). Instead, the kiss is ELROND AND GALADRIEL, and I absolutely do take issue with this.

I can only hope and PRAY that it works in context, but I can’t get my head around it. And yet, the promo…it’s all falling into place. Elrond will be sent to discuss terms with the orcs before the battle. He’ll see Galadriel in chains, and he’ll ask for a moment to say goodbye. Adar will allow it because he’s a gent like that. This is where we get the chin touch with the thumb everyone speculated over and then…HE LEANS IN AND KISSES HER TO PUT A NEEDLE IN HER MOUTH? SO SHE CAN RELEASE HERSELF LATER??

To clarify, most of this is my spec, but THE KISS TO PASS HER A NEEDLE IS A REAL LEAKED SPOILER THAT NO LONGER SEEMS FAKE.

It's just…so convoluted and weird??? Does he store needles in his mouth like a squirrel? Why couldn’t he have slipped the needle into her hand??? WHY ARE YOU PUTTING ELROND’S LIPS ON GALADRIEL’S?

And look, maybe this spoiler IS still fake! But the details were so specific, and everything about the context seems to be accurate, so that feels like it would be a bonkers coincidence to me. Maybe when we actually see it play out, it will be fine.

But that does bring me back to the Haladriel of it all, just briefly. With my whole heart, I do not need them to kiss. After season 1, I didn’t think it would be possible, and I’m okay with that. But if you’re willing to let ELROND’S lips touch her, then MY GOD, you could have let Haladriel have ONE kiss where she’s trying to distract him or some shit. OOF.

My only relief is that it happens next week, so we can hopefully get it out of our systems and enjoy the finale.

That said, if these leaks are true then that also means the finale leaks are true. Now, I actually never wanted to see any of these spoilers (hence me making it VERY CLEAR what this post is about, because I wouldn’t inflict this stress on anyone unwillingly), so once I got the Elrond kiss details, I tried to get away without seeing much else. But there was some information on the big Haladriel scene.

I’m actually not going to detail it here, because – overall – I think we’ll still super enjoy it (just…lower those kiss expectations) AND because I don’t think all of it was spoiled. At the end of the day, there will be plenty to unpack, they’ll be back on our screens, it will be meaty, it will be layered. I’m really looking forward to it, in general.

My one fear is that it’s a season 1 finale repeat. And again, that won’t necessarily be bad per se, but it will feel a little bit underwhelming. Now, I’m not somebody that wants a true corruption arc for Galadriel. Normally, I love that shit, but not in this IP and not with this character. I want to see her explore her darkness, I want to see her face it and accept it, and I certainly want to see her be tempted…but I don’t expect or believe we'll ever actually get the whole ‘dark queen of Mordor’ vibe. Prisoner? Maybe. But not an actual dark queen.

That said…surely this scene doesn’t play out the EXACT same way as season 1? Sauron shows her a vision, she’s tempted, but ultimately resists and tells him she’ll never be at his side. I just don’t get why we’d repeat that, when there are so many other options that still keep Gal on the side of light.

I keep coming back to Galadriel’s line to Elrond in episode 4 – when it comes down to it, he has to choose to defeat Sauron and sacrifice her. I feel like if I hadn’t seen the leaks, then I would be 1000% expecting this to be the outcome. Especially with how Elrond’s theme comes in at the end of The Last Temptation track. He comes upon the confrontation but chooses to do the thing that will harm Sauron in the long run, rather than the thing that will save Galadriel.

I hope so badly for this, but I do worry that it will go the other way. What if it parallels Gandalfanger’s destiny/friend choice, and Elrond chooses her because THAT is how light wins or some shit? Not that this will be a bad scene by any stretch – I love their relationship and want to see their FRIENDSHIP (grrrr) reforged…but, again, the S1 finale! Sauron left her in the water, and Elrond was there to save her.

There’s also Galadriel’s conversation with Adar in the most recent episode – you succumbed, I resisted – but I guess this could go either way? He succumbed, so she resists. She insists she’s able to resist, so she succumbs. URGH. MY HEAD.

There MUST be a difference. SURELY??? Like, this season has been so well written…I just can’t comprehend the copy and paste.

Again, this isn’t anything close to a deal breaker for me. I firmly believe the showrunners when they say this relationship will remain the core of the show, but…hmmm. Okay, on that note…

DAMAGE CONTROL – MOVING ONTO THE DEFENCE OF THE SHOW

So, this is where I want to get into some stuff that I just…don’t agree with that I’ve seen being thrown at the show by shippers. And I’ll reiterate here that I’m truly not telling anybody what to feel. You can hate the show for its choices and feel how you feel. You can express yourself in your social media spaces, and if anybody doesn’t like it they can mute/block/unfollow. This chunk isn’t really aimed at you guys.

This is more for other people like me, because I’m cursed to be somebody that generally wants to just…enjoy things for what they are, while also being susceptible to the mood of others. I want to scroll tags and have a good time, rather than see negativity because it lowers my mood (this isn’t just ship related by the way, I really love this show overall…it’s just this tag that has been impacting my mood most this season). Regardless of the nonsense that might be in episode 7, and even if the finale scene is a repeat of S1, I’m still going to want to focus on enjoying what we get, enjoying the narrative being told etc. So, for those of you that have a little sinking feeling in your gut after the first half of this post, hopefully this second half will help.

This isn’t a ‘typical’ ship. This is a true ENEMIES ARE ENEMIES dynamic where the bad boy is ultimately going to be (is already) pure evil, and where our heroine is the embodiment of light. There are certain things that we just have to accept when it comes to loving this dynamic as part of the show – there will never be another season like season 1. Nor should there be?

Do I wish for s3 to have them in close proximity for at least a few episodes? Of course! Do I think it’s possible with or without finale spoilers? Absolutely (given how quickly characters travel from place to place on this show, they could end the season at opposite ends of Middle Earth and this would still be on the cards…). I’m also anticipating Season 4 as a good time for them to be in full MIND PALACE mode – where the rings are all ringing, but Galadriel hasn’t yet worked out how to shut him out yet. By season 5, there might just be one final scene before the final battle. But, again, I really do think there needs to be a little bit of acceptance of that. Or, at least, expectation of it.

Something I really want to push back against is this idea that Haladriel was baited or teased, but the writers don’t actually care for it. Honestly, that’s nonsense to me on a couple of levels.

First of all, almost EVERY dynamic this season has been reduced to a handful of scenes here and there. The most consistent relationships have probably been Annatar and Celebrimbor, and Durin+Durin+Disa (off the top of my head). Elrond and Durin (probably the other most popular dynamic of S1) have been apart all season, Elrond and Galadriel have too. Isildur popped up to say hello and we might not see him again.

When you actually stop and look at this season…Sauron and Galadriel had to be separated. She could not be anywhere near him while he’s working Celebrimbor, and there’s no world in which they were ever going to change that narrative. And yet, the Sauron and Galadriel dynamic has been consistent across the season. With Galadriel predominantly (and depending on how the finale goes, I may have thoughts on this), but it has also been easier with her because people have talked with her openly about Sauron. It’s been harder on his side, but the fact that Mirdania seems to have been cast to look like Galadriel honestly – right now – feels like it was done with the express purpose of giving Sauron a Galadriel reference.

Again, I’m not saying you have to like the lack of scenes, but it’s not bad writing to respect the overarching narrative of an ensemble show. Galadriel’s season has been all about him, and we’ve had countless insights to make that clear – building up to their final confrontation. If Sauron was running around mentioning Galadriel every five seconds with Celebrimbor or with the dwarves, it would be horrendously out of character.

This next comment is…somewhat dependent on the finale…but as somebody that loves Elendil and Miriel, everything in Numenor has been somewhat crammed in. I would firmly argue that the Galadriel/Sauron dynamic across this season has been treated with care and reverence, all building to a climax designed as the high point of the season. Will we be 100% satisfied? Who can say! But it IS what the season is building to.

I think this brings me around to a particular gripe I have, and maybe the people that believe this came to the show after S1 had fully aired or something…but there’s this idea floating around that the showrunners don’t like this dynamic and are just giving it crumbs to bait people into watching. This makes me want to scream.

These showrunners literally took a few lines about Galadriel being tempted by Sauron and PITCHED THE ENTIRE SHOW OFF OF THAT. The Tolkien estate wasn’t only pitched by Amazon BUT CHOSE THIS PITCH OVER ANYTHING ELSE. Season 1 was written pretty much like a prologue centred around GALADRIEL AND SAURON HAVING A PERSONAL CONNECTION WITH ROMANTIC UNDERTONES…and guess what?

They wrote all that…they filmed ALL THAT…before knowing anything about the audience reaction! That was ALL the showrunners, the writers, the directors, the actors. They ARE the narrative. They are not bait.

Does that mean the fundamentals of their dynamic will always please you, individually? No, of course not. Some people want outright romance, some people want soft Sauron, some people want Dark Galadriel. Will they kiss? I doubt it. Do I wish they would? Sure! Will they be separated again next season? Probably! Will I also wish that they could at least be stuck together for a run of episodes again? Absolutely!

But the idea that any of this is bait, or unimportant to the show drives me a little bit bonkers.

I guess my personal feeling of frustration comes from the fact that I feel so lucky they are exploring this show from the perspective of this dynamic, regardless of specific details/scenes. I’d bet my house (I don’t own a house) that every other pitch hinged on Elendil or Isildur as the protagonists of the show. Now, I love those dudes, but just IMAGINE? The fact that we’re on this path at all is still WILD to me.

ANYWAY, this is what happens when Paulina goes on holiday and I have nobody to ramble too. Sorry for the explosion, but I’ve been dreading the stupid kiss spoiler since I stumbled on it after EPISODE BLOODY 3 and so I needed to vent somewhere.

TL;DR: You are welcome to feel the way you feel, and if you hate everything you go right ahead, but maybe this makes sense to somebody. IDK. IDK.

[theangryjikooker]

this might get me cancelled but after seeing the preview clip for the next AYS episode, i'm just curious why tae always wants to be included in whatever it is that jikook have. i'm a jikooker but after watching today's episodes and listening to jikook's conversation in the car it's clear they're probably nothing more than just really close friends, but it still gets me curious why taehyung acts the way he does with them (third wheeling and all). the only rational explanation i can think of is that jikook are immensely popular as a duo and tae just wants to be included in some of the hype they get? idk. he can't join the hype they get as musicians but as entertainers in "ship culture" context he can make use of that. because if it's one thing that is clear to me about taehyung's personality is that he enjoys him some attention (and i don't mean this as an inherently bad trait) but it does get annoying to me as a jikooker when i just want to enjoy content of my biases but i can't do it without taehyung making it some type of group project

Gotta be honest with you—I don’t like how you’re framing TH as some kind of tritagonist. I’m seeing this setup of TH by Jkkrs, and it’s the major narrative that’s been rubbing me the wrong way.

To me, anyone who does this have deluded themselves into thinking this is a him vs. them scenario, which is one of shippers’ own making. You sound resigned to the idea that Jkk are nothing more than close friends, but at the same time you say TH is “third wheeling,” as if Jkk wouldn’t be happy to have him along on their adventure. Jkk, and least of all JM, aren’t selfish people.

I know someone’s going to smugly point out that in the teaser JK says that TH “insisted” on joining them, but I would strongly caution people to zip it without watching the full episode(s). Too many Jkkrs have shot themselves in the foot for running their mouths before the series aired; the way teasers were edited were ultimately misleading, and now no one’s talking about some of their actual dialogue.

Why can’t this be framed as TH taking a side quest to join his buddies? TH is not the villain; the fans who are creating an imaginary conflict are—a conflict which, by the way, hinges on the idea that Jkk are romantically linked or closer in comparison.

Saying Jkk is immensely popular is sort of comical because so is Tkk, and vastly more on the Int’l side.

I, for one, am excited to see VMK in Jeju. I’m reserving my feelings for when the actual episode(s) is/are released because I don’t know if he’s there for the whole trip or not. It’ll also be an opportunity to see what the VMK dynamic actually looks like when they’re all in this “off” mode, and to see the differences between Vmin, Tkk, and Jkk. As far as the teaser goes, already TH seems incredibly chill and, unsurprisingly, matches JM’s childish whimsy.

If Jkk is all you want to see, and you’re put off by the fact that the Jeju stop isn’t just about them, it’s your prerogative to feel that way. But also imagine telling Jkk to their faces that you don’t like it when TH hangs out with them. Jkkrs always talk about how Tkk would set antis on fire to keep JM warm—well, I 100% feel it goes all three ways.

Miss me with that subtle anti sentiment.

[extasiswings]

and just like that my buzz is dead. aisha live spoils that in the finale there's a scene of them in a truck and buck talking about his exciting yet somewhat boring date he went on. It never fails, right before the season starts something comes out to kill the buzz.

Okay, tough love time (for you and every other negative nervous nellie in my inbox since the end of S4): if a random, entirely out of context bts comment or line in an interview or anything else is enough to stress you out and kill your excitement/desire to watch the show? You shouldn't watch. If you need to know in advance that everything for a particular ship or storyline or whatever is going to work out the way you want it to in order to enjoy a season or a show, because it's not enjoyable for you to have to wait for context and be patient and trust that everything will make sense once the whole thing comes together? The you should wait until until the end of the season (or maybe even the show) and binge the whole thing so that you have all the answers before you start. If a show no longer sparks joy, you can say thank you for what you've gotten out of it previously and move on to something else that does. It's really that simple.

You know what my first thought was upon hearing that bit of the live? That Buck is inventing a story about a fake date because he and Eddie are together and aren't ready to share that, but the firefam knows that he's dating someone and isn't letting it go. That it's a misdirect for the other characters in the scene, but the audience will know the truth because of preceding scenes and/or episodes. (Also, at some point Buddie canon may have to deal with the fact that they very possibly might not be allowed to work together if they're dating, there are any number of reasons why even after getting together they might not want all their friends (including their boss) to know).

But let's roll with it. Do I think it's likely from what we know so far about this season that Buck actually is going on random dates with random people? No, not at all. But fine, let's say it's 100% true and take it at face value that he is. Would that change my opinion and read on the trajectory of Buck and Eddie's romantic arcs (i.e. Buddie canon)? No! Not even a little bit!

If I'm wrong at the end of the day, then I'm wrong, whatever. But right now? When so many of the beats of this season and previous ones are right out of the slow burn endgame ship playbook and heteronormativity blinders are the only thing keeping people from accepting that? I am choosing to be happy and excited and optimistic and am having a GREAT grand old time. If you have zero faith in the writers and can't trust what they're putting on screen, in canon, for you to see with your own eyes, and if that lack of trust is making you miserable, then that's your prerogative. But it certainly isn't mine.

Tldr; your misery is a choice, anon. And while it's certainly a choice you're entitled to, I would respectfully request that you keep it out of my inbox.

[al-dente-icecream]

made a griddlehark playlist last year when i first got tlt brainworms and since nona's release cam and pal are living Rent Free so they also got the special little music list treatment . i also spent way too long making the covers look good bc i am nothing if not commited to a spotify aesthetic for some reason . anyway . enjoy !

[transmeds]

My apologies, another person in your replies said “Anon you realize that exact logic is and HAS been used to justify the deliberate misgendering of trans people, right” and I thought it was you. Anyhow, there is no reason to get so nasty, I’m just asking you to explain your thoughts on this since you frequently post in the tags with your opinions. Being a “boy” or a “girl” is a social role, not necessarily a gender. So, yeah, it’s possible to take on a different gender role than the one associated with your gender. Since roles are often conflated with gender, they tend to be used interchangeably. People who are PNC often use “wrong” pronouns to express their complicated relationship with gender identity. Aside from this, some people use certain pronouns for themselves because they simply enjoy them, which is their own prerogative. So, then, you’re against being PNC because 1) it’s too complicated for you personally to process and that is somehow deserving of your vitriol and 2) you feel that English grammar and syntax rules are more important than respecting people’s referential language? How is challenging language any different than challenging gender stereotypes, as one would do being GNC? Do you prioritize your comfort over the dignity of other transgender people, or do you seriously think that language is sacred? Words are created all the time and definitions change with their usage. It sounds that rather than even attempt to accommodate your brethren, you would prefer to latch on to the anti-PNC position so you have some excuse to not challenge your notions of “gendered” language. As a person with an auditory processing disorder myself that impacts my life greatly, that is not an excuse for you not to better yourself, even if it is difficult for you. Other people do not deserve your anger for simply existing with pronouns that challenging the status quo. If you *definitively and actively know* a person’s pronouns are contrary to their appearance or identity and you refuse to even try to refer to them properly, that is not an issue with processing, but with conflating pronouns with gender identity at the best and willfully choosing to disrespect them at the worst. That can’t be explained away by saying you have a processing disorder. Do not attempt to paint being PNC as ableist because you are unwilling to challenge your deep-seeded, actively obsolescent beliefs. Having a processing disorder makes people rely on context. If you are communicating with or about someone whose pronouns you know, PNC or otherwise, you have been provided the context. You are choosing to either ignore it for your own comfort and a lack of desire to improve yourself or because you think language is more important than people. If I’m wrong, prove it.

i didnt mean to get nasty i just dnt have a good concept of whats too mean n stuff.

i love that you consistently add more to what i am saying and look to deep into it to paint me as a bad person but i will get to that later. its hard to pay attention to one thing at a time but i will try 2 go in order.

being a boy or girl isnt a social role,, its just being a girl or boy?? like a kid female n kid male like. thats not a role thts a fucking.. way to describe someones gender when theyre a kid?? like i cannot even understand why i have to say that. wtf do u think being a girl/boy is?? its a way to describe someones gender, like pronouns. not a role or gender expression.

im not against it because its too complicated or that i want to disrespect ppls pronouns or something like that you want to put into my mouth. challenging a language is different than challenging gender rules because language was made with a purpose and one that still matters today. gender roles never served a solid purpose, them getting removed doesn't matter at all.

this is really pointless because youre going to keep refusing to recognize that language is important and that pronouns aren't something that you just use to make yourself happy, they are a tool in language that serve two singular purposes. to replace a name. and to describe the person in a gendered way. getting rid of gender should just mean getting rid of pronouns all together because they are pointless without any description of the person that they are being used for. because then you cant fucking tell who they're talking about at all. this is why robots struggle with pronouns :)

its funny to me that you add "appearance" to "identity" as if 1. they match. 2. that i at all ever said they have to watch appearance. if you didnt know im NOT PASSING. 3. as if appearance matters <3

this isnt about me wanting to be rude or not challenge gender roles or anything, im a very gnc man myself. this is about the fact that pronouns only real purpose is to tell you what gender someone is, not if they're masculine or feminine or just like the sound of them. this is why getting called "she/her" makes the majority trans men dysphoric, but why wearing dresses or having traditionally feminine roles won't make the majority of them dysphoric.

you clearly aren't listening to what im saying so i dont see why you insist on replying and putting things in my mouth from finding excuses like "someone else said it" to whatever youre going to make for trying to say i just dont like people who r pnc and am using processing an an excuse, instead of an example of why its important this time.

language isnt more important than people, but people can not exist as is without a way of communicating. trying to tear down communication because you dont like its rules just make what it is to be human harder to be. i cannot be myself to anyone else if there is no words to describe who i am in a strictly male or unrelated sense. there's a difference verison of you to every person you know, and you can't make it remotely accurate without the words to express it.

[prince-of-elsinore]

Maybe I'm about to stir the pot but whatever here goes: idk why some (obviously not all) Sam stans get so defensive about the insinuation that Dean might be female-coded in some ways (well, actually I do but I don't wanna get into that 😂), but it got me thinking about what it is that some fans see in Dean, and for some female or gnc fans, what it is in Dean that we relate to. (Just for the record, none of this has any bearing on how female-coded Sam is--it's so not a competition lol. I think Sam can be considered very female-coded. Also, for the record--although this really ought to be self-evident--I don't equate female-coding with feminization, woobification, or even softness necessarily, nor innate relatability/sympathy.) Anyway, it led to some Dean meta thoughts:

First, I think a big part of it has to do with emotional labor, particularly within the John-Dean-Sam dynamic. We know that from a young age, Dean was aware of what his father did and was performing emotional labor in caring for his father when he was tired after a hunt (like the "It's okay, Dad" anecdote), or drinking too hard--and being practically the only such emotional support John had/would allow himself. Also, having your sibling's life placed in your hands, being repeatedly told it is your responsibility, is certainly emotional labor. And being in a household with two strong clashing personalities, being forced into the peacekeeper role (as we see echoes of in s1), is emotional labor.

Another obvious aspect (though for some reason an especially contentious one in fandom it seems?) relates to Dean's domesticity and role as a nurturer. I really don't care to argue here about how domestic and nurturing Dean is or isn't, because I think for purposes of this post, it's actually sort of irrelevant. The point isn't that Dean was the best homemaker ever; what's much more interesting to consider is how, in the absence of a female presence, typically "feminine" tasks fell to Dean, whether he was willing or not. Dean says it plain as can be in 12.22 Who We Are: "I had to be... more than just a brother. I had to be a father and I had to be a mother, to keep him safe. And that wasn't fair. And I couldn't do it." Of course he couldn't, because he was just a kid only four years older than Sam. But that doesn't mean that the burden of expectation, that that role was his to fill, wasn't there.

Related to the last point is how Dean suppressed personal desires for the sake of family, which is so often expected of women. It's an extension of the caretaker role; anything he may have wanted must come second to his duty to family. The shapeshifter in 1.06 Skin has access to Dean's thoughts and says: "You got to go to college. He had to stay home. I mean, I had to stay home. With Dad. You don’t think I had dreams of my own? But Dad needed me." In fact, you could easily argue that the only desire Dean ever really allows himself to have or express is family. Opinions on Lebanon may vary, but I don't think it's at all out of character that Dean's greatest wish was for his family to be all together.

I also think that Dean's brand of vulnerability is something that some female fans would find relatable. I don't want to sound gender-essentialist about it and I don't think I would call this female-coding, because it's not necessarily a universal female experience (not that anything that could be considered female-coding needs to be universal--that would be impossible), but I can say that it's probably the primary characteristic that drew me to Dean. Dean's insecurity is rooted in his fear of his emotional needs being too great. He is insecure about how much he needs his family, and worries that that need is not reciprocated (whether it is or not isn't the point--this is about Dean's perception). In season 1, it's his feeling that John and Sam care more about killing the demon than they care about him. For many more seasons, it's his fear that Sam will leave him. He's terrified of being needy, of his emotions and his love being too much. I would venture a guess that within family structures, this is a trait most commonly associated with mothers/wives.

I'm sure there are some more points that could be made (something about performative gender that I'm too brain-tired to write out atm?) but these are what occur to me off the top of my head. I don't think it should be surprising to anybody that both male leads of a show with a large female fanbase have aspects of their characters that could easily be considered female-coded, nor that different fans identify more with one or the other (which may or may not have to do with their individual brands of female-coding. In many cases, I think it does.) Personally, I also think that both Sam and Dean fans sometimes exaggerate these traits to the point of being OOC--and I think that's their prerogative, enjoying fandom as they wish to, though it can be frustrating when it seems like that fan version of the character is conflated with the canon character. But it is silly to think that only one brother can be female-coded or relatable--and for that matter, it's silly to equate female-coding with sympathy points. For some people, female-coding may make a male character more relatable, but female-coding and relatability or sympathy are not directly correlated. In fact, some discussions around female-coding are a little off-putting to me for the implication that any sort of relatable trait in a male character must be be female-coded, or that possessing/showing emotions at all is innately feminine. To me, it's just interesting to observe narrative and characterization trends in a cultural context. But that's a more complex discussion for another time!

[dreamhot]

the fact that there was a tweet with well over 4k calling him out for selling pride merch and calling him cishet pisses me off idk why ppl who have absolutely no context or presence in the fandom constantly want to commentate

because that's what's in vogue right now! it's like this super twisted version of hype aversion in which people who aren't into mcyt/dsmp (or maybe just dream, for whatever reason) decide to make their distaste as loud as possible instead of ... oh, i don't know, moving on and focusing on things that DO make them happy. people have this bizarre obsession with revelling in things they don't even enjoy ... and for what? the clout? it strikes me as performative and bizarre

it's the 'in' thing to dunk on dream because he's. what, popular? and people want to see him get torn down? like if you don't like the guy, that's your prerogative, but going out of your way to be as vocally angry at everything he does as you possibly can seems like ... a very strange way to spend your time. like have these people considered getting a hobby or whatever

or, possibly, have they thought about expressing this anger/energy toward people who might actually deserve it, as opposed to the guy who's very openly supportive and an all around decent dude ???

but nahh it's the Thing to go after dream, like he's the punching bag for drama-mongering clout chasers, so that's what they do. it's ... sad, really

[tonyglowheart]

@imaginaryelle replied to your post:*me sipping tea* (x)

I would really enjoy seeing more of your thoughts on this, if you ever want to share them.

:’) a lot of my thoughts are salty rants and I’m TGCF on main right now so uhhh not at the moment but if you wanna hmu on like a chat thing of some sort I probably will eventually rant about my dislike of The MXTX Antis and the Problematic Culture people and the purity culture wank :’)

actually you know what, since I’m a parody of myself and I’m like always mood of "and another thing,” I’m just going to. go for it ig

so my biggest thing, is with the MXTX antis/MDZS wank/MXTX wank. is like....god it FRUSTRATES me so fckn much lmfao in so many ways and on so many levels.  like listen. I’m not saying there isn’t stuff to critique in MDZS. But there’s people who are first off: critiquing the writing quality, when I’m like “there’s like a 90% chance you’re reading the EN translation, and probably from ExR, and honestly I know it’s not fandom etiquette to critique fan content bc we’re all doing this for free out of passion, BUT I do, in fact, have some major issues with ExR’s translation quality, and also I lowkey feel like they have a strong traditional yaoi bias and sometimes it leaks through in how they handle certain things.” Big mood of this twitter thread about how when you’re reading in TL you can’t be criticizing the writing bc you’re already reading it filtered and like. you gotta consider things like the TL’s own personal biases or takes, etc. Which I feel like some people don’t in their critique, or at least they don’t take the time to acknowledge it and instead start spinning off into more and more impassioned reactions to perceived slights or faults.

The other thing is like. I admit when I first read MDZS - which I did while simultaneously watching bc I was kind of using CQL as a vehicle to get into MDZS, I had the HARDEST time trying to read ExR’s translation when I was going into it cold many many many moods ago rip - I was also squicked out by the explicit scenes shown. It did remind me a lot of traditional yaoi tropes, and I wasn’t into it. HOWEVER I was also a psych major, and I want to point out that the T/N’s do read to me as having a strong yaoi bias, and also before ExR redid their site they had large “SERVING YAOI AND BL” banners on EVERY page lol. And I think that also primes people to see things a certain way. (I just. am :/ about ExR also bc like... their whole vibe as a “yaoi scanlator” and also I. can’t be sure the TL wasn’t 17 when they were tl’ing it lmfao,,  and they did the whole rant - which fine they apologized for, but I think sort of reflects on a general attitude still w/ the team - about how some other TL had bad quality or something, but their existing TL has a lot of clunky English phrasing and actually a lot of editing issues, too, I was creating myself a back-up copy from their site and like google docs was already catching a bunch of typos and tense issues and such :’) and that’s beyond clunky EN translation phrasing. I just am like. they have a patreon lol, so I can’t say ExR is doing it wholly not-for-profit/dollars, and also like... it’s not like they’re licensed? I get that within scanlation circles, there’s an etiquette of “first come first serve,” but with translation, I think fans are only served with more translations? but I also care about the original work lol, I mean I get the vanity of “I want MINE to be the AUTHORITATIVE tl” bc I feel that mood too, but also I’m like. fam you didn’t bid for a license lmao.)

But yeah like. My petty gripes with ExR aside lmfao, I think when you look at WangXian, the whole “it’s yaoi tropes” gets really strawman. Like from a Watsonian perspective, I mean like... both WWX and LWJ really ARE useless virgins, lol, WWX’s first kiss was stolen by LWJ and his whole idea of sex comes from porn; LWJ is GusuLan and like. yeah. Who is teaching them about lube? certainly not porn. (but this also gets into the whole. like people saying explicit material is “problematic” because it doesn’t show “realistic” sex and I’m like. fam it’s smut, not a sex manual.) And like... they’re both kinky and WWX has a pregnancy kink, and like... good for them I guess?

From a more Doylist perspective..... I think for me, I’m like. well why not? gay media doesn’t have to be uwu to be “Valid,” and like, the people who start attacking mxtx personally because of the way she chose to write WangXian, or saying she’s homophobic because of WangXian or she doesn’t have the range... I already Know they didn’t read TGCF or SV lol. (and yeah SV is more “problematic” but I also think it’s VERY genre aware and both satirizes and also plays with and subverts some of the typical genre “problematic” things. not everything, but like. again the whole idea that non-mainstream media needs to be held to a higher standard to not be cancelled? I don’t hold by that). [But more on the Doylist thing: it’s dumb to me that people react like it’s a moral failing of non-straight works if they don’t fit EXACTLY their personal idea of what a thing should be. And this comes up EVERY time there’s some new thing. hell it’s not even just lgbt-related stuff; Hamilton, Crazy Rich Asians, etc all had nitpicking. Which again, isn’t invalid! but also like. :/ because we DON’T have enough representation right now to pick, and my take is always: the solution is to get to the point where we can pick and choose and can afford to have bad media just like the straights/whites do :’)]

The thing about WWX and LWJ is neither of them, as they’re written in canon, fit within “traditional yaoi” seme/uke stereotypes. The kiss I see people rail against as “dubcon” and also their sex scenes but I’m like. yeah I think it’s fine to say it’s not your cup of tea but to say that that makes them traditional yaoi rapey tropes I’m like. Fam that’s not it lol. LWJ is shown as being SO incredibly responsive and attentive to WWX’s wishes and desires. I mean that’s examples of his passion exploding out, but we consistently see LWJ being respectful of WWX’s wishes and autonomy even when it like. fucks him/them over :’) like when WWX was so hell-bent on hurtling down the mo’dao route :’)

plus also WWX literally fantasizes about them retiring as farmers and he’s the one out working the fields and LWJ is staying at home weaving lol, like c’mon, ya wanna talk gender roles, let’s talk about this.

the other thing is the whole mxtx anti stuff about “she’s homophobic” and “she’s a filthy fujo” and I think there’s issues that people aren’t considering, which I don’t know as much about but I feel like it informs my consideration of mxtx - such as like... not everyone’s internet is as wide open as, like, the West. I don’t know so much about Chinese censorship other than it exists, but I’m like. I think this would affect people’s access to resources which would inform them about how things work/where people are with LGBT thought? It reminds me of when young tumblr kids trash talk older queer people for using terms they see as “problematic” now, and I’m like “you really gotta pause a moment of (1) have some empathy (2) consider the person’s individual personal and cultural context.” MDZS wasn’t made for a Western audience in mind lol, it’s not going to reflect Western values! And China has a different history with its LGBT progression and it’s m/m media, which I don’t know enough about to comment specifically, but I think it’s incredibly disingenuous to judge it based on Western standards. A lot of people probably don’t realize they are! in that it doesn’t even occur to them, which is why they feel so free with their judgment! But also I’m like. lowkey THAT’s a problem for me bc of like. cultural imperialism lmfao. and also reflective of EN-language imperialism, when people are judging EN tl’s they’re seeing on face value without realizing or considering that they’re...reading... a translation... and that translations are NOT in fact direct one-for-one and that there’s a LOT of considerations that go into both translating and reading a translation of a work.

I think the points antis pull up against MXTX is like... stuff she’s said before in interviews - and I don’t know from when, but I imagine years ago at this point - where she was asked about shipping the other characters in MDZS, and she said something I think about how to her, she wants to write in a way that “preserves realism” or maybe she believes in (I only read a TL of it, so I hold the exact phrasing with a grain of salt), and for her, not everyone is gay so she doesn’t write all of her named characters gay. and I’m like. whatever that’s her prerogative as the author. And I think there’s also something that I don’t know if it’s an official “rules”/”guidelines” she wrote bc again I’ve only seen secondhand/thirdhand sources, but it’s something mxtx-antis also quote, where she said to not break up the main couples and also don’t “reverse” them. but again when we’re getting into the shou/gong dynamics, that’s where I don’t feel comfortable commenting because I don’t know enough about the sociopolitical implications of these terms and how they interact within that fandom/community subset. But I do think people need to be taking the stuff they read - ESPECIALLY if they’re only reading it in EN - with a grain of salt. or like a big ol pinch of it. 

edit: I know more about this now lmao and I know exactly which question people use piecemeal of vilify her. Here’s a recent-ish translation someone did. Read it through - the WHOLE thing, and think about the wider context.

But also in general I just don’t think anyone is valid when we start getting into ad hominems lol. Especially when I feel like they’re not really taking a moment to consider what wider contexts and influences might be at play and instead are playing Tumblr telephone with outrage and virtue signalling

sidebar: I also fucking HATE CQL purists lmfao. I don’t feel like I’ve seen or encountered anyone saying CQL fans are less valid than novel fans except in the sense of CQL fans getting defensive about their dislike of the novel - which, whatever, people have opinions - or decision not to read the novel and saying anyone saying they HAVE to read the novel is gatekeeping - which I hold to less but mostly bc I think it’s a fundamental misunderstanding of fan language, some of us say you HAVE to read it not in a neckbeard way but in a I’m so desperately passionate and I want more people to know about this way, kind of like how the “I hate you” in fan language GENERALLY means “I love it so much and I can’t stand it”? - but I HAVE seen people say the novel “ruined” wangxian, or CQL people who seem to be like... purity-wanking, like idk if you were around but god after Infinity War and the number. of fckn ironstranges. posting in the tags. about “love how healthy our ship is” and I’m like. this is still anti culture/purity wank but the other side of the coin 8). I encounter sometimes this lowkey attitude of CQL (or other adaptations) “redeeming” MDZS from the author, and I’m like. y’all are wack lmfao. There’s people wiht MDZS or even TGCF main, and they hate mxtx? and they say shit like “mdzs was only good on accident”? and I’m like. can you just leave lmfao. if you hate her then why are you here. (bc they’ve mental gymnastics this into a virtue ethics thing about “o the work is good and therefore morally fine but the parts I don’t like are because mxtx is morally bad and unworthy and tainted it, and CQL with its Purity has Redeemed it” but I’m like. this is because of censorship lmao. The team did a FANTASTIC job working the character dynamics and story, but like it also is directly because of censorship.)  

like I... have more thoughts than this lmfao bc ofc I do, but anyway, here’s... some of them lol

[cuethetommo]

But you do have blogs that hate Louis on your dash. And wave it off if it's pointed out. As you just proved. What you don't have? Any blogs that the Larrie hit squad identified as "radical" Louies, no matter how ridiculous their "sins" were. Amazing you eradicated all Louies but regularly reblog nasty anti-Louis blogs. That's your prerogative, but don't pretend it's happenstance. Why do so many Harries have a Louis URL? It's perverse.

There’s actually a lot I’m confused about in this ask. There can be an OP on my dash that I don’t follow (as was the case with the one that was pointed out). It is also possible to reblog things from people I don’t follow if they’re suggested by tumblr.

I don’t believe I claimed that the folks on my dash are there by happenstance and if I did, I misspoke. I’ve said regularly that I curate my dash very specifically. I have plenty of folks that I talk to that people have labeled “rad louies” but I do not like that term nor have I ever used it. However, I don’t follow many. Because I am recklessly optimistic (which I have never denied) and prefer a dash that is also optimistic of center.

I completely understand people who want what they’d consider a more balanced dash. More power to you. And there are plenty of people who don’t follow me because I’m not for them. And that’s fine.

But I will push back on the notion that somehow there’s only one way to be a Louis fan around here. That if I’m happy for Harry content, I can’t be an actual Louis fan. If I reblog from someone that I’m 2013, before i joined the fandom, said something bad about Louis but now just posts cute pictures, then I’m not a Louis fan. If I mention Larry in the context of Louis I’m not a Louis fan. If I’m not complaining every second of every day then I’m not a Louis fan. (And I am in no way saying this is how ALL Louies feel, but rather a small but vocal minority).

Here’s where I stand (and you can decide what works for you): Louis is amazing. He is beyond talented and I am excited for what is coming. I am optimistic about Arista from what we saw of TOU. And the piece I’m most interested in was the coordinated and cutting edge digital strategy that we didn’t get to see fully play out. I believe he’s had untold personal tragedy and that cannot be minimized. I enjoy every bit of content we get from him and will be right there when the Loupocalypse begins and we have to get tickets to his tour.

I came to this fandom a Larrie first. I’m not ashamed of that and my feelings haven’t changed. I adore Harry as well and as a queer woman who figured that out because of One Direction, I’ll always be excited at a waving rainbow flag. I’m not here for any bullshit pitting of them against one another. Or blaming Harry for whatever is going on with Louis musically.

If any of that is a problem, feel free to unfollow me. For you, anon, I’d just recommend not hate reading me. Or are you upset because you’ve deemed me “not a Louis fan” and I have a Louis URL? Is that the issue?

[traincat]

While talking about mcu spider-man I said that I didn’t like how they infantilized him and named a few other changes I disliked (I wasn’t bashing him just saying I was dissatisfied), she said, “but that’s how he was in the comics.” I didn’t want to come off like a jerk by correcting her and it wasn’t that important so I just moved on lol. Do you talk about comics irl and, if so, how do you generally respond to people who have firm opinions about comics they haven’t read without being shitty.

I’ve had the Homecoming discussion a little irl. It’s a very different dynamic talking about it one on one, in a lot of ways more uncomfortable than talking about it online, even if the conversation is civil on both sides. Usually when I’m talking about comics with people irl they’re people who also know me online, too, so we’re generally aware of each other’s opinions in that regard.

Here’s the thing: it’s very hard to convince someone who has firm opinions about something they haven’t read if they’re not receptive to the idea that they might be wrong, which can, you know, be generally hard for us as humans. Short of tying your friend to a chair and showing her a slideshow of all your favorite Peter Parker moments (not recommended, legally), it can be very difficult. It sounds like you want to get your point across as politely and non-confrontationally as possible; is it possible for you to recommend or loan her some comics you particularly like, or that you think are a good example of 616 Peter’s personality? I personally recommend Kraven’s Last Hunt: it’s atmospheric and intense, the Peter voice is great, and it’s a very self-contained story. The Death of Jean DeWolff is also good – it’s a murder mystery, and if your friend likes Daredevil, he plays an important part in it, so that could be an extra hook. If your friend is open to reading some comics, then afterwards you can sit down and be like “I like x and y about Peter in the comics, and I felt it was lacking from the MCU,” etc, and then your friend might have a better idea of what you’re talking about. Alternatively, if your friend doesn’t want to read comics, if you can politely but firmly say, “But I have read the comics, and I disagree with that statement,” that’s an option too. 

I’ve said this before, but is very, very easy to feel like you know all about Spider-Man comics before you read them. This is true of a lot of comics, but especially Spider-Man. I mean, we’re inundated with his image. A lot of people generally feel like they know him without reading the comics, because he’s Spider-Man! He’s a cultural icon! Yadda yadda Uncle Ben, yadda yadda he’s young, yadda yadda jokes. Your friend has repeatedly been told this is what Peter’s like, and, besides the fact that you’re her friend and she should value your input and opinion, she has little reason to believe otherwise, because like I mentioned in a different post, there are a lot of people out there – popular people, whose opinions are widely circulated – who speak about Spider-Man with a lot of authority while simultaneously making it clear to anybody who has read Spider-Man that they either don’t know what they’re talking about or are being willfully ignorant of the facts for whatever reason. It’s why it’s very important to me personally that I cite comics by issue number and that I provide as much context as I can, usually in the form of panels. I don’t know your friend, but I know the trend of infantilizing Spider-Man in fandom, and in her defense it is very widespread, very concrete, and very easy to fall into. Ten years ago it wasn’t nearly as bad and I still fell into it before I started reading Spider-Man. (I’m not saying you have to read everything, or even anything, to talk about a character in a fannish space, but if you’re going to label yourself an expert on the comics specifically and present yourself as an authority, you should like, probably know that he was married for decades, or that there is a cloth version of the black suit, or when Venom debuted, just to name some examples I’ve seen.)

I’m going to give two examples of how people ignore context and how that leads to the infantilization of Peter due to a genuine lack of familiarity, using two different sets of panels I’ve seen used in actual posts promoting the idea that this is what Peter is really like in the comics. They might be useful if you try and talk to your friend about it again; I’ve tried to break down the way information gets twisted around, and how we can avoid it. More under the cut, because it got long.

1) Ignoring context:

Amazing Spider-Man v3 (2014) #2. So in this scene, which takes place shortly after Peter has gotten his body back from Doc Ock’s bodysnatching extravaganza in Superior Spider-Man, he shows up at the Avengers tower with cookies, saying he brought some for everyone. The implication then, if you look at these panels on their lonesome, which is how I recently saw them presented in a tweet I may or may not have quotetweeted with the truth, is that he baked cookies for the Avengers. The tweet attached to these panels was about how the MCU’s version of Peter is clearly just like the comics, because he does stuff like this. What a nice boy. (I don’t remember anyone baking anything in Homecoming, sidenote.)

Let’s tackle the first half of that problem, if you actually read the issue, which is that he did not bake the cookies.

Anna Maria Marconi, who was deceived by Doc Ock into thinking she was in a relationship with the real Peter Parker, baked the cookies. She thinks better when she’s cooking. (As for the fact that Peter ended up bringing the cookies – aside from the fact that I don’t think Slott in the best Spider-Man writer in the world, to say the least, this is a man who was a high school teacher, and a well-liked one. He knows enough about bringing some for the whole class.)

Now, let’s tackle the second part, which is that almost immediately after Peter shows up with the cookies Anna Maria made, he finds out that Captain America kept (government secret) information pertaining to one of his closest friends from him. So he hits him in the face.

Which is pretty standard operating procedure for Mr. Machismo Issues. The tweet I saw, which had a not insignificant amount of retweets and likes, did not give context. It did not say that Anna Maria baked the cookies, and not Peter. It did not mention that in the same scene, Peter punches Captain America in the face over information that, honestly, Steve was not at liberty to discuss with him, being that it involved classified government information, and that Peter felt entitled to because it involved someone Peter loves dearly. It didn’t even give an issue number so that people who were intrigued by the content, however irresponsibly I would suggest it was presented, could go and look up the issue for their own enjoyment. It posted a series of panels out of context and said, “and that’s why the MCU’s version of Peter is just like the one in the comics.” And that’s a problem.

“You know you’re not wearing the armor right now, right?” vs “I’m nothing without this suit.” (Amazing Spider-Man #522) If you prefer one character over the other, that’s your prerogative, and I mean that sincerely. But MCU Spider-Man and 616 Spider-Man are very different characters. It’s understandable that people who want content for one might not enjoy content built around the other, and that goes in both directions.

By denying context, it is very easy to build the narrative that you want. It’s something I’m very aware of when I post panels and meta. And maybe the person who posted that tweet only had those panels – maybe someone gave that to them, without context, or they simply saw it posted elsewhere on its own, and they were drawing conclusions based on the evidence they were given. But that in itself is a problem, too: when people are denied context, they form it however they can.

2) Jumping to conclusions:

Amazing Spider-Man v2 #52. Oh boy, this scene. This scene is easy to misinterpret, because unlike the example I gave above, it needs a lot more context than just two other pages. I saw a general Spider-Man blog post this once, which would not have been my call, but hey, everyone gets to post what they want, and that’s why this website looks like it does. (badumpsh) Understandably, because Peter is portrayed as uncomfortable by this sexy stewardess’ advances, and because the common perception of Spider-Man is as a young teenager, someone replied, “Smart boy! He’s only 16.” That person was commenting with the best of intentions, based around the knowledge they possessed at the time, and complicated by the fact that this period of Amazing Spider-Man uses lower case letters, a lettering trait commonly used in the Ultimate universe, where Peter in fact is 15. So if you’re not familiar with the comic, the scene becomes that this woman is acting predatory towards an underaged boy. This is why I personally would not have posted it by itself, because it is very easy to misread the situation.

What’s actually going on here is that Peter, who is in his mid-to-late 20s, who has been married to Mary Jane for years, who had a child with her (that child died), is uncomfortable with this woman’s advances for two reasons: one, she is being paid to make those advances. Peter is at this time in canon working for a mob boss and being paid quite handsomely to defend him from a radioactive zombie hulk monster, and doing so under the logic that he would defend the man anyway so he might as well get paid for it. (He would later use the money for charitable causes.) The mob boss is flying Peter out on his private plane, and he is essentially pimping this woman out to him as a bonus perk. It’s understandable why Peter would turn her down firmly. The second reason is that, after a long separation, he has only just gotten back together with Mary Jane, and he’s trying to behave as best as he can because he wants to stay together with Mary Jane. The joke is predicated on the reader’s knowledge of that, along with their understanding that in comics Peter Parker is, how shall we say, an avid appreciator of the female form.

(Spectacular Spider-Man #162)

(Amazing Spider-Man #606)

(Amazing Spider-Man #357)

(Spider-Man Unlimited #21)

(Spectacular Spider-Man Annual #5)

(Amazing Spider-Man #519)

(Peter Parker v2 #19)

Yes, that’s a tasteful full length nude poster of his wife he’s got there in his room. But the point is, if you don’t read comics, you have no way of knowing this. You only know what people who are widely recirculated say about Spider-Man, and many of the widely circulated opinions are from people who don’t read comics. And that’s frustrating to me, and I don’t know what to do about it other than talk about it, and talk about the comics, and make the issue numbers and information as accessible to people as I can, because I love this character, and I love how weird and complicated and individual and angry and loving he is, and I want to see him represented more. Because the infantilization of Spider-Man didn’t start with the MCU. Fandom is more visible than it’s ever been, and fandom created this characterization first. I saw it years before Marvel Studios acquired the rights back. The MCU only capitalized on what they saw people claiming Spider-Man should be all along. But it’s not who Peter is in the comics when he is written his best, which is responsible, mature, incredibly complicated, frequently serious, and extremely individual. 

I hope you can have a good conversation with your friend about it, anon.

[dudeinpyjamas]

Can we just stop all this Pewdiepie talk? Recently I have seen more an more shit “calling him out” and I’m so done with it. In the initial stages I was quite interested in the Nazi claims and actually checked the videos in question. 

Now anyone who has actually done that instead of brainlessly parroting the medias propaganda pieces can tell you the guy isn’t a nazi. He isn’t a racist. He doesn’t hate women. Sure he made some unfortunate comments like the infamous “nigga” comment but shit happens to everybody and he apologized. Keep in mind he isn’t american. That shit is just another insult to him. The nazi video was even worse because it was so grossly taken out of context I almost got cancer from reading that shit

I am more concerned about the journalism going on in the background. You would think they have legitimate grounds to call him a nazi they would not need to resort to such blatant context fuckery.

His target audience is probably 10 years younger than me so I can’t say I enjoy watching his videos but if you are seriously calling him a racist I suggest double checking everything the media says and applying some critical perspective based thinking. After the third nontroversy I tuned out and am at the point where I just assume the article is bs without even checking it.

If you still find him racist good for you, it’s your prerogative to think whatever you want but even then I recommend stop giving him exposure. That would be your best plan of action in that case

Aside from that this is just an abuse of the terrible DMCA takedown system. It’s just saying “we don’t like this guy in particular so we are taking down his videos”. I haven’t seen the videos in question but from the sound of it they are planning to remove the video without even checking what he is saying in those. If the videos in question don’t have any harmful content in them just leave them up ffs.

PewDiePie will keep being racist until every decent company has cut any sort of ties with him

[sadstew]

I don’t like to post rants on here, especially not about controversial issues, but a new issue that has sprung up that just feels like the perfect opportunity for me to discuss something I’ve been thinking about recently. 

(I do want to add the disclaimer that this is less of me trying to argue a point about Pewdiepie and more of me using this whole story as a vehicle to discuss my thoughts on the media). 

I’m not going to lie, I used to watch Pewdiepie’s videos way back when he started, and after a year or so, I’d begun to think he was becoming cringy, disingenuine, and just generally not that funny for my personal taste. I think many people felt the same way. Somehow in the past year I stumbled upon his channel again and tried out a few of his videos- whether it be for nostalgia or just boredom. Surprisingly, I found that his new brand of dry humor was something I could actually enjoy from time to time. However, that wasn’t what caught my attention- it was the way he spoke so honestly about the media (particularly in it’s portrayal of mainstream internet entertainers). As someone who thinks the media is a wholly corrupt system, it was incredibly refreshing to see a big name like him speak out against it so openly. 

Now for the huge controversy- the fiverr video, and claims of Felix being an antisemite. I saw that video when it first came out, and I saw that he hoped to show the ridiculousness of a website like this- one where people will do just about anything for a small amount of cash. Did I think the joke went too far? Sure. Are people allowed to be offended? Absolutely! There are plenty of comedians that push uncomfortable subjects and make me uncomfortable, however, I’m not going to attempt to silence them for it. Many times these jokes do seem bigoted on a surface level, but when put into context and thought about, they’re often making a commentary about something else entirely (the films Borat and Bruno are great examples of this). As I said before, I have no issue with people hating him for this, however, when people are so uninformed that the only thing they know of the controversy is what they saw on some article title, then I can’t possibly stand behind them. The main thing I’d like to note is how terrifying it is that a media source like the Wall Street Journal would use a screenshot of Felix pointing as factual evidence that he’s a Nazi-supporter. Every single ‘fact’ that they used were taken completely out of context, and for the many people who hate him and don’t watch his videos, are quick to just assume that there is no context. But why would the media do this? They’re scared- they’re scared of mainstream internet personalities because they’re the one’s getting a majority of the attention. Youtube is one of the largest platforms for entertainment, and with it’s growing popularity, the rest of the media knows they need to start getting more views (hence, more money). And how do they do this? By manipulating you. They know that by posting something which will stir controversy, they will get far more views than if they post actual relevant news. After all, who wouldn’t be stirred up by  “Disney Severs Ties With YouTube Star PewDiePie After Anti-Semitic Posts!” (S/N: I would also like the point out the cleverly misleading usage of the word ‘posts’) 

As I said, love him or hate him, it makes no difference to me. I’m personally indifferent (though I do respect him for speaking out against the media while knowing full well it would cause something like this to happen).  And I know that making a post like this will likely garner some sort of hate towards me (if anyone even reads this)- considering how strongly people feel about this subject. But rather than sending me anonymous messages to call me a horrible person, or whatever it may be, just consider my reasoning behind this: I want the media to be honest with you. I want the media to focus on stories that actually matter, and not just manipulate you for views and money. I want you to be angry that they use you for their own greed- not that some YouTuber made an offensive joke. Don’t we have much bigger problems? Just as I said for him, feel free to hate me, call me a ‘bigot supporter’, or anything like that- that’s your own prerogative, but please, be as open-minded as you claim, and at least hear out arguments on all sides.

[the-nysh]

Asghkfd I knoow everyone is tired of this topic by now especially you but I just read what I think is all your posts about the Shed In the Woods Arc it really made deappreciate how the anime skimmed details I mean yeah last two eps were animated great but I really didn't catch any of what you pointed out until I read the manga and I actually agree with your be grateful for what you get philosophy but now there's millions of people who at this point haven't even experienced the same story

I am being extremely rambly and grammatically incorrect rn but I recently stopped reading LNs because they often had bad animes which cut and changed so much I couldn’t even talk about them with anime onlys bc we had experienced different stories at that point. I switched to manga anime to avoid that and I’ve only watched three (I’m slow) so far I just wanted to talk abt OPM not holding up even if you like all it’s versions because I really like reading your thoughts okay I’m done             

Oh anon. :’3 You’ve gone through and read everything, omg I’m glad you enjoy and get something out of reading my thoughts/content!

I can understand what you’re saying about LN adaptations though, with them often getting cut and rearranged, so in comparison I’m glad many current adaptations based on mangas are usually quite faithful nowadays. Back in the mid/late 00s the trend was for either completely diverging anime-original endings (way different from the source material), or longass filler arcs just to pad things out until the manga caught up with more material to adapt. So whew, I’m glad it seems the more recent manga adaptations aren’t quite done like that anymore, including opm. So in that sense, I’m glad the anime’s version of the story we’re getting is still relatively the same. While yes, things have to be cut/condensed to fit the anime format (even s1 isn’t exempt from doing this), that’s the general rule of thumb for most animes anyway. It’s also why I usually prefer mangas in general, to both read at my own pace and get the most (usually, better) content out of it at once.

Concerning fans experiencing different parts of the story, that kinda comes with the territory of having it exist in 3 ways (anime, manga, webcomic), with each one progressing at different parts of the same timeline. Some fans may only choose to view one, and not know anything about the rest (which remains their prerogative). So yeah it can get hard to discuss spoilery/canon things when not everyone has the full picture yet (incomplete both story wise and character wise). But the other charm with that comes from seeing how their perceptions gradually change as more gets revealed to them in the format of their choosing. I think it’s fun to stay up to date with all 3, to catch similar things that ONE might put in them concurrently (which in the manga’s case, becomes even more context/foreshadowing for stuff that’ll be covered later in the webcomic). Plus with the manga expanding and adding more content compared to the webcomic, it makes the manga experience fresh and unknown even to webcomic readers.

The anime showing us even a condensed version of the manga makes the story accessible to more viewers, so in that sense YES I still certainly hope a s3 eventually gets made. As there’s many lingering parts of the story (especially the immediate followup after the EC fight) that I still really want to see animated/voiced. While yes, I would prefer to see it done in the highest quality it deserves, if the studio does not change, then hopefully we can get at least a more experienced director and better sound director (passionate animator jumpaoki still deserves to come back no matter what). So with that said, I’m still looking forward to whatever comes (including possible bluray changes), because the worst option would be if a s3 never gets made at all. :’)

[sailorrrvenus]

Defending ‘Needles in the Sewer’ and Photographing the Disadvantaged

One of my images has been subjected to criticism and scrutiny in a way that none of my other work ever has. The photograph in question is of a scene in London, Chinatown; a man reaches into a sewer while shouting about how someone threw his needles down there.

I waited a moment or two before I decided to make a photograph, shot two frames, and then continued my walk. At the time I took it I knew there would be a strong response to the photograph, both artistically and philosophically/ethically.

However, it will always be the prerogative of the photographer to decide on their own personal ethics and to apply those to their work. I will always photograph things that catch my attention, and leave it to the audience for whether or not it “works” for them. This should never stop me from creating in the first place — no one needs “permission” to make an image, but similarly, everyone in the audience has the choice to enjoy or disregard whatever they want.

The main issues people brought up about this image were consent and exploitation.

I will usually disagree quite strongly with anyone who argues that consent is necessary for street photography in public. The law in the UK and many other countries defends photographers and photojournalists when it comes to candid photography in public spaces. Often “permission” will destroy the integrity of a true photojournalistic-scene.

The only time I ask for permission for photographs is when I’m shooting portraiture one-on-one, when it is necessary, and this shows in my work. As a member of the public (especially in London, one of the most heavily CCTV monitored cities in the world) I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect privacy.

Exploitation is a slightly trickier problem to deal with because there is definitely some profit to be had from this image, even if only from exposure. I was conscious when taking the image to wait until a moment his face was obscured; so at least his specific identity is not what I am profiting from, and rather the scene in general.

I also think that the image depicts quite a relatable form of suffering, an addict in a first world city. This is no more exploitative than war photography, or images of starvation and disease. If anything this is closer to home for much of my audience, and because of this has more emotional pressure.

I think that because photography is an “art” form there is a conflation between photojournalism as storytelling, and art as an aesthetic to enjoy. The question of whether or not you can or should enjoy photojournalism is a difficult one, but I think that for me the answer is that the artistic elements of any image can be appreciated, but that the story being told is what deserves a second thought; whether through enjoyment, or catharsis, or any other considered emotional response.

When it comes to street photography, at some point or another, a photographer will draw mental lines which mark out the boundaries of their ethics. This has a strong connection to the photographer’s agenda – whether they are using street photography to practice their craft, to enjoy a hobby, or to build a portfolio to move into other areas of photography, such as lifestyle or portraiture. I think that photographers who are uncertain about where they draw their lines are unsure of their agenda. With some introspection, this can be overcome, and I think the photographer’s work will be stronger as a result of this direction.

I know that my own motives and agenda are not nefarious, so I have no issues with photographing people less fortunate than myself. I don’t feel the need to “justify” or reinforce these ideas to myself, but I enjoy sharing my perspective on these topics as it may help other photographers to make up their own minds.

I don’t take photographs to make people look bad. I don’t distort faces with wide lenses, or highlight physical features people may not be comfortable with. I don’t go out of my way to search for people in a scene who may offer a sympathy or shock factor. I simply find images to make wherever I end up, and sometimes that means men in suits, and other times men in sewers.

I respect all of my subjects, regardless of context. I shoot discreetly, without harassing or bothering people. If someone asks me to leave or to stop then I will. If they ask me to delete images I will stand up for myself if they exist, and if not I will explain that and leave the situation.

I am not faking scenes to say that something happened when it did not. I can only document the reality of a moment; things that are a part of my life, life in London, and life in general. To not photograph these things when they are in front of me would be much worse, and can end up skewing people’s perceptions of an issue in the other direction.

My responsibility (and maybe yours?) as a photographer is to avoid self-censorship. I can always choose to publish an image or not, but only if that image exists in the first place. If I take an image then I should have the presence of mind to understand what I saw in that scene, and what purpose I want to apply to that image. If I had not taken an image at this time would that be a form of erasing and ignoring this issue? I would rather face discussion and debate about my work than to talk as if these issues are distant and abstract.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I’d like to direct some of the attention from this topic and image to the website Addaction. It’s a UK-based organization providing aid and outreach to at-risk addicts. Please consider having a look at their website and possibly making a donation, or maybe going out of your way to produce an image that may also draw attention to this topic.

About the author: Simon King is a London based photographer and photojournalist, currently working on a number of long-term documentary and street photography projects. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. You can follow his work on Instagram and you can read more of his thoughts on photography day-to-day over on his personal blog. Simon also teaches a short course in Street Photography at UAL, which can be read about here. The first half of this article is an excerpt from King’s personal blog.

source https://petapixel.com/2018/12/29/defending-needles-in-the-sewer-and-photographing-the-disadvantaged/

[silent-calling]

“People aren’t raising their animals the same way as me so I tell them they’re a bad and lazy owner uwu!!!!” You’re disgusting. It’s their prerogative and you really don’t have a say in the matter, do you? Yet you’re still trying to which, yes, does make you VERY self righteous. Breeding dogs to fight is harmful to the environment, yes, but if someone is comfortable letting their dog fight another in the neighborhood then that’s their choice and you don’t get to make it for them even though you clearly want to because you obviously have a god complex and think you know better. Until there’s a law that bans dog fighting you’re just gonna have to deal, aren’t you.

That's how you sound, applied to dog fighting. Literally copy/paste and changed a couple key words. You do not have the moral high ground here, and on the matter of personal liberty, your rights end where mine begin. To put it succinctly, "you have the right to wave your arms in whatever direction you damn well feel, until you hit me in the face".

By allowing your animal to roam freely, and actively kill other animals, including but not limited to pest animals such as rats and small lizards, as well as other people's pets/livestock, such as rabbits and birds, you have "hit me in the face" in the context of the above phrase. Your willful negligence has caused damage or destruction to another's personal property, and therefore are liable for the damages incurred.

Additionally, there are in fact laws against allowing your cat to roam free. Example in Springfield, Illinois.

Further, as @keyhollow has repeatedly stated, there is no benefit to the outdoors a cat cannot enjoy inside. But don't take my word for it, nor the word of a biologist, here's the word of two PhD animal behaviorists on the matter.

If your shitty neighbors let their cats run loose

Why not trap the cat? Free cat. Or take it to a shelter. Or remove a pest as you see fit if you care about the environment or it’s bothering your plants/animals/feeders. Outside cats shouldn’t be a thing, and it’s the best thing for you, the cat, and the environment to fix that.