#another controversial additon

[yanderefairyangel]

How much of a pass can we give writers for writing one thing that wasn't intended to be something different (usually controversial) but it was interpreted that way by the audience/fandom?

Normally as much as needed, but in this era the answer is sadly none.

But I feel like most people don't even realize some of the things they say are problematic and not just because of the questionable morality of accusing someone to villify a mental disorder without actual proof nor actually listening to their real intentions but also because of the effect it has on the writing.

Not trying to bring this back but when the Fell twins were confirmed romance and thus leading people to try to prove they are siblings to Alear (because of course, that's the normal response to that ) they don't even realize that Alear being siblings with the Fell twins has ACTUAL bearing on the plot and would have consequence on the continuity of the text. However, independantly of their S support with Alear, it's kind of obvious IS wasn't intending to do anything too big with them : their plot relevance last the Fell Xenologue and that's it. The writing for their relationship with Alear and how they don't affect much the plot in general and their design or how the writers purposefully made them not siblings to their Alear in canon so that it would determine their relationship with our Alear, regardless of Sombron. And the thematic of the pair of sibling within our cast and how they foil each other. So their S support isn't really the cause of this narrative but more a result of this narrative which is that IS didn't knew what to do with them and made them romance to call it a day...(regardless this decision will result in IS denying the siblings allegations, as they always do).

In the case of Veyle and Seadall, you'd have to ask yourself what DID and ED brings to their writing seeing how 1/In Seadall's case, the diet thing just exist and isn't deeply explained 2/ In Veyle's case, it kind goes against her own character arc of finding herself and becoming whom she wants to be since the brainwash is likely a metaphor (used literaly here) for the psychological damage a parent inflict upon his children when he is being violent against them... I mainly say this based on Rafal and additonally her brainwash doesn't exist just to explain why "evul" but to create a parallel with Alear and their past self... to put it short those allegations are all bothersome in the sense that they show that they don't understand the writing and blame the writers that never intended that to happen in the first place.

In one case it makes Seadall looks like a lazy attempt to tackle a heavy topic when... it was clearly not the goal and in another it would make Veyle's narrative convoluted leading to a contradiction between what the story is showing and telling and whatever those people though the writers had in mind

The difference between the two and idk Bernadetta is that Bernie explicitely tell us herself that her "waky attics" are actually PTSD comming from the parental abuse that her father made her go through so there you can say that the handling of her trauma is badly done in 3H because of how the writing contractids herself

This doesn't exist in Veyle and Seadall's case because Seadall's situation is never treated as seriously and Veyle is never used to make slapstick jokes.

What's worse is when the fandom doesn't even realize that it really is just an intepretation on their part and get mads at other for trying to explain that to them while unfairly accusing the writers of something they never though someone would imagine

(note : me talking about the Fell twins/Alear situation as an example is not an invitation in flodding my ask box with arguments to whether or not they are close relatives)

[eiainano]

update: he only doubled down on this point after receiving valid criticism .

[image ID: the first image is of a post by 9edits on tumblr. there is a screenshot of an ask from anonymous, reading "ah so you're ableist. neat. good to know for the future." after the screenshot is a response from 9edits, where it says "by the way if you send me asks like this accusing me of being something but not having a reasoning or explanation i'm going to make fun of you sorry. if you're going to say something like this about me then please provide some sort of evidence or explanation or try to be a bit nicer? it would be easier to side with you if you were a little bit friendlier, but hey, that's just my opinion." spelling errors in the post have been fixed for readability. the second image is of another post by 9edits, which is a reblog in response to the first image. he writes, "adding onto this, if you think i did something incorrect or offensive please message me in private and i will change it. i'm not a professional, so not everything i do is going to be 100% correct. please tell me if i do something wrong because i am learning by the way. i'm literally a kid, i'm going to mess up, i'm going to do things wrong." end ID.]

in this screenshot, he uses being a minor as an excuse as well , despite a good deal of the IRLs and DAs it is speaking about also being minors . being a child is not an excuse for being uninformed , nor is it an excuse for fakeclaiming and insulting other minors . didn't provide any proof yet to the contrary , so here is a rentry debunking the paper it linked . nat is also mutuals with a number of IRLs and DAs and has not been open about these views before so he is fakeclaiming beings who he knows actively interact with him . additonally, it is receiving support from its mutuals for this behavior , most notably @/stellxron (edit blog @/starburstedits)

[image ID: the first image is of an ask to 9edits from stellxron, reading "I still can't believe you were called an ableist for not encouraging something that could be considered toxic or problematic." 9edits replies, "LMFAO me too, i'm glad people agree with me, i was worried i was wrong. thank you mutual. now i'm going outside (sunglasses emoji). the second image is of a series of comments from stellxron. the first one reads "i might be called an ableist (even though i'm autistic and bipolar LOL) for believing that otherkins who don't do this for fun also fall into delusional attachment (mainly therians, they are kind of a controversy since they believe they are animals in a human body and that can certainly be used as an excuse for zoophiles.) like, kin for fun is plausible (you're a lot like a character and everything in terms of backstory and/or personality)". this comment is cut off, and is continued in the comment below by the same user, reading "but when you seriously kin and believe you're another person or a fictional character or some animal in another body, it's already a delusional attachment." end ID]

in this comment , mintaka uses her own disabilities as an excuse , even though neither of those are psychosis , the disability that is being discussed here . she also has compared a panic attack and paranoia to delusional attachments in the comments of another post . additionally , she implies that all or most therians are zoophiles , something which is ableist even if she has disabilities . a large deal of therians are autistics who have always felt more connected to animals , and even as an autistic herself , it is still ableist to imply that they are "zoophiles."

originally was not planning to make a big deal out of this , but this is a pretty bad situation . please , if possible , reblog this post and block the users mentioned or send asks about why this behavior is harmful . thank you .

hey , reluctant to post this to main but this felt important so wanted to share - tumblr user @/9edits , who is popular in the editing community , recently responded to an ask about why he wouldnt do irl requests with a very biased and flawed , as well as blatantly fakeclaiming , paper that supposedly "debunked irls" .

[image ID: an ask sent to 9edits by Anonymous that reads "can I ask why you don't do IRL requests? I'm not meaning to sound pushy or anything (if I do?), I'm just curious." the response from 9edits reads, "here you go", linking this document. below, in smaller text, he continues "in the document there is reality checking. if you're uncomfy with that feel free to tune out". end ID]

this feels like an important issue / something to know if you are interacting with him , so just wanted to spread awareness . feel free to reblog or do as you wish , no pressure or anything .

[juniperhillpatient]

to be honest 90% of my personality is defending fictional teenagers with questionable morals that make a lot of sense when you examine the context of their life & trauma but the internet loves to hate

[hushpuppy5-blog]

My gripe with Euphoria. Part 2:

The Lifestyle of Lexi

I may do some of these characters separately as opposed to in pairs. I may pair character who share similar plot elements or affect each other's storylines in a major way. In some cases, I might even give them a seperate page for further analysis if necessary. While Lexi connects to both Cassie and Rue's characters, I feel like specifically addressing how she was written.

Unfortunately, I might show my favoritism here because Lexi is one of the more humanely drawn character that I found myself relating to. She is the younger sister of Cassie and is comparitively more introverted. She has a contrasting choice of attire as well, dressing more conservatively in a prim, bookish style that.

Lexi Howard, played by Maude Apatow

Character outfits notably play a large role in this show, specifically in its eye-catching presentation as well as a reflection of the characters. Maddy, Kat, Cassie, and even Jules are shown to be more chic in their style and very willing to show some skin. These characters are presented as the hyper-feminine and hyper-sexua) characters of the show. They've been presented naked and sometimes afraid when facing certain sexual encounters. Lexi is one of the few characters who gets to keep her top on and not have sex, lust or really any other risky obstacles define her character, but that comes at a cost in this show. That cost was, of course, her screen time. She did not make up overarching storylines like Rue's love for Jules and her addiciton to drugs. She was also not anyone's main attraction until season 2 when Fezco (the local drug dealer) started taking interest in her. My concern was also that this male lead is indeed a drug dealer. That is not me rejecting any of his good intentions toward her. Funny enough, despite his job, he is probably as nice as the male characters get in this show. Still, he has a dangerous occupation that has been shown to lead to trouble. This is the bad boy-good girl plot that seems to flourish in the media. Like most good girls, her story is only seen as interesting to work with when she becomes a troubled male character's point of interest. Her additonal screen time ultimately amounts to a rushed plot. I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy her theater production in which she presents a detailed rendition of her life alongside the other characters. In the 2nd season's finale episodes, Lexi also appears to be facing an evolution in her clothing style that reflects these speedy changes. Her outfits become bold, taking on darker colors and more exuberant flourish.

Her outfits were still just a minor thing about her. The psychology of the character was given in brief flashes and short quips, but I had something to work with. Her relationship with Cassie was far more my concern. It took me a minute and even stumped me when I found out later in the series that Cassie was the eldest. She embodies all of the aspects of a stereotypical younger sibling, which we often see presented as bratty, self-centered, spoiled, etc. It is a part of the controversial "birth order theory", which takes a look at how birth order determines a child's capabilities. These qualities tend to stem from the youngest children not having room to be resourceful, probably having an older sibling to fall back on. There was plenty going on in the Howard household for the girls to develop that kind of reliance on one another, although Levinson did not attempt to give them that much screen time. Still, we get a glimpse that a younger Lexi is the more resourceful one to whom Cassie often released her woes. We see their realtionship reach a breaking point in the seadon 2 finale when Lexi's play very much shine's a light on Cassie as a person. In theory, this goes back to the the turbulent lifestyle both girls had to live. Their father had a drug addiction, which we learn later how that impacts their reactions to themselves as well as to characters like Rue. Cassie seems to take the fore-front, or more active approach in their father's slow decent into addiction. She is ready to love him regardless, openly supporting him even though is not specifically sure of what has occurred to him. Lexi is more reserved and noticeably more analytical of her father. We don't get to hear much of how she feels about this, specifically in the aftermath. It seems to have affected Cassie quite blatantly as we see her break down in the last episode, and in front of a live audience nonetheless. It was heartbreaking to watch their cold views of eachother be brought to light. Lexi saw Cassie as broken, but she also saw her sister as someone she hardly knew. This decision of her sister's ditziness and sexual nature sheds some light on Lexi's thought process, but we hardly see her reflect on this in moments that span longer than a minute. We also see Cassie's feelings emerge as well, where she states that Lexi is so "uninteresting" that she has to chronicle everyone's life just to add some spice to her own. Here, the narrative presents some interesting conflict between the two, but they don't get that time together. We are instead shown Lexi running away as Cassie is left to be chased and beaten by Maddie Perez. We are later shown that Lexi does rise again, ready to finish her pretty successful (and expensive looking show). Still, it did not feel like an enjoyable conclusion for either of these characters. Although the show is setting itself up for a third season, I doubt that any more time needs to be waisted as Sam Levinson continues to not flesh out the supposedly less interesting characters. It's clear why Rue remains front and center, but why are other characters given such shallow archs (and possibly unnecessary falls)?

Fezco (Angus Cloud) and Lexi (Maude Apatow) sitting together

Returning to the dynamic between Lexi and Fez is made even more odd when her father's story lingers in the background. Sure, Gez has the laid-back nature that matches her own, but he sells drugs. Plain and simple. Her father used them. This does not seem to give much in terms of morality for her characts. She may question his actions here or there, but it does not seem to affect her as directly as it should. Her attraction to him should be more of a struggle. Honestly l, we could even factor in Rue as an addition to this struggle. Rue and her were close for a long time, and she had to sit and watch as her friend fell into the same path as her father. She has been seen even helping Rue cheat her away out of a positive drug test, marking how strongly she feels about Rue as a friend. We see how this conflicts her to a certain point, but not enough time is given for this reflection to be effective. It is fairly obvious that Fez is the one selling Rue more drugs to fuel this addiction, but Lexi is not allowed to think about that. This would get in the way of the artificial plot that the writers constructed for her in order to push her into the limelight. Her need to start this play and simultaneously run it is also a leap in her character that leaves me with more questions than answers. We see her play review the lives of the show's main characters in an almost sympathetic way, but her narration hardly explains away her conflicting actions alongside her hasty development in confidence. This development presents itself, consequently, as force to drive the plot rather than a natural progression.