#because oh. that's another group of queer people just existing.

[sirenium]

golden tags, OP.

Anyway. Bi and Mspec Lesbians aren't a hotly "debated" topic or even new to queer culture, it's just the newest thing that bullies who REALLY want to be homophobic and even racist use to justify harassing gay people they don't like.

It's the thinnest possible veneer of progressive language wrapped around TERF and reactionary rhetoric so that they can feel righteous for forming an angry mob against vulnerable targets. If you're gullible enough to fall for the newest wave of bigotry within the queer community, and turn on your allies because they're "confusing" or "invading your spaces," the SAME way they turned on bi/pan labels, trans people, xenogenders, neopronouns, and aroace people before this, then get lost.

[exopelagic]

i said i wouldn’t do it this time but it’s 3am and mods asleep. boy

[colorisbyshe]

obviously, most it is just blatant homophobia (specifically lesbophobia) and biphobia (including corrective rape fetishes), but I do think at least some of the "lesbians and gay men can want to have sex with each other and SHOULD have sex with each other to prove they're ~real queers :3" is from people who have only read posts about very specific situations and think it's... like... wildly applicable because posts are their only connection to the lgbt community, so they just think "posts = everyone"

specifically those posts that are about being at event and a butch lesbian hits on a twink (or vise versa!) thinking the twink is another lesbian (and the twink thinking the lesbian is another gay man). not getting the "joke" in that post is that when they realized... oh, this person isn't the gender i'm into... they stopped hitting on each other? and laughed about it

the point of those stories isn't "wow, gays and lesbians could be sucking and fucking to show we aren't constrained by gender" which is insane and bigoted but rather "isn't it funny how gender presentation works and how just finding out someone's gender can completely wipe out your attraction to them?"

similarly, they'll see stories about how lesbians and gay men in the past might have gotten married or even had children together and think "SEEEE THAT COULD BE US IF WE WERE REAL QUEERS" without at all giving a single thought about how that lavender marriages or "lesbians using gay men as sperm donors" were actually about protecting each other from homophobia in a society where straight marriage is expected from people. or maybe using the only methods possible to have kids in a society that is violently exclusive towards single women and gay people (and many other marginalized groups) seeking out reproductive assistance or adoption.

this wasn't about desire or even about sex. this was about survival and working in loopholes.

like... stop just consuming posts. start talking to real people. having a conversation with even like... one lesbian who actually leaves their house will tell you that "having sex with men is more progressive actually" is a violent sentiment. like rape level violence. death level violence, in some cases.

this should be a very easy concept to grasp and yet "bisexual lesbianism" and "us real progressives know all women want to fuck men" is still being said without people being beheaded so... chop chop people

this posts only exists because i'm aware sometimes young people parrot shit without thinking but if you are older and still saying shit like this... the beheading is coming for you final destination style. just an fyi.

[olderthannetfic]

https://olderthannetfic.tumblr.com/post/765977731702931456/

Wonder where you got it from that I'm deciding who's queer or not. This is about queer people doing exactly what you're accusing me of doing, so at least you kinda got the sentiment. Which is good enough.

It's about the pattern between overbearing allies telling actually affected people who is or isn't a victim, and queer people themselves recreating the exact mentality as these allies who're deciding who is and isn't queer enough, and especially excluding certain queer groups. So example -A cishet ally says a certain queerphobia doesn't exist because they've not observed it. -A queer person telling other queer people that they don't experienced queerphobia, because they themselves haven't experienced or observed it. Completely ignoring their lived experience doesn't apply to everyone.

The "real" example would be a bi youtuber who made this long rant about biphobia not existing, and it's just homophobia. She herself being non-monosexual, and living in an incredibly liberally progressive Western country and especially city. She always mentions she herself is straight passing, and has straight privilege, and applies that to every bisexual regardless of presentation. Even when it's not connected to that in the slightest. She basically got into a fight with another youtuber who's also bi and called her out on her bullshit. The thing was that youtuber no1 has decided that ALL bisexuals can't experience biphobia, and have straight passing privilege.

If you look at her through the lens of "Overbearing striaght ally who doesn't accept anything but their own reality, while ignoring affected and victimized voices." It's a match, like they themselves remove themselves from queer reality and only see what they want to see and the good sides.

--

Oh god, I cringe every time certain youtubers share their dumbass takes on their own bisexuality. I don't think the analogy of straight ally is the right framework here though. It's more an unfortunate product of the biphobia they're conditioned not to see.

[transmascposi]

I feel really isolated because I hardly see any trans masculine positivity posts,,,, The only posts I see,, that are even shared by my own friends,,, are those that are complaining about trans mascs and how we're evil, ugly, and ruining the trans community,,,, I don't know what I did wrong besides simply exist as a trans masculine person,,, I still face misogyny and now I'm facing transphobia from my own friends,,, I even had to block somebody who said 'I have never found trans males to be sexually attractive' and instead of people telling them that's transphobic everyone was agreeing with them,,, I don't know where to turn anymore because everyone hates trans men so badly,,,, plus it's interesting that ppl will say how much they hate trans men but then fetishize our bodies,,,

I feel you. It's so lonely and difficult sometimes. It can feel like the whole world hates you. But I promise it's not like that. There's a lot of people who love us, really.

I'm sorry this is happening to you. You didn't do anything wrong. And even if you did, it wouldn't justify this treatment. You are valid and amazing and you bring so much beauty to the world and to the queer community. I had to cut off a few internet friends who hated on trans men and I don't regret it one bit. If they hate trans masculine people, I suggest cutting these people off. They are not good friends to you.

My advice is to try to spend less time online. The hate is much more concentrated here, and it's much more openly vicious. We certainly do have bad things happening to us in real life, but from my experience at least, the hate online is on another level. There are encounters that we can't really prevent in real life, but you can control the majority of your interactions online. I suggest avoiding the hate as much as you can, even if it means not spending time on your favorite platform. It can seem like I'm stating the obvious and I probably am, but at the same time, when I struggled a lot with online hate on trans mascs, I would keep spending time in trans masc spaces on tumblr that are full of this hate. I think we have the tendency to dwell in the hate, for whatever reason. To reblog it to argue with it, to keep repeating the same points to people who don't care about the truth, to try to counter the lie that trans mascs have it easy by witnessing the hate as a getcha. I'm not saying that you do this necessarily, but I definitely did it.

My second advice is to go out and meet people who understand and support you. A wonderful way to do that is activism. If you can, join your local trans activist group! You don't have to have inspiring speeches on big podiums and argue with people. You can help with small practical tasks — those people are very much needed and appreciated! Or you can find your local queer events and go there. It can be intimidating at first, especially if you go alone, but there's always someone a little bit lost at these events. People get it. Again, it definitely can be very difficult, but try to talk to some trans people there. Or anyone, really. You will find out that there's a lot of people who support and get us. And people who might not fully understand yet, but they want to try and they want to help. Even these imperfect encounters will warm your heart enough to forget a little about all the hate, even just for a moment. And being in activist circles and hearing people say your exact thoughts out loud — oh man it's SO satisfying. These people don't even have to be your friends. I'm trying to be an activist and there are people who I have fun with and who give me a sense of community — yet I don't meet them outside of activism stuff because I know we aren't a good match to be friends. And yet, their existence in my life brings me a lot of warmth. Building community is the key, really.

I wish you the best of luck and strength and I hope you will feel better soon.

[waitmyturtles]

THE MORNING AFTER: ONLY FRIENDS, EPISODE 8 ("TAKE A LOOK AT YOURSELF IN THE MIRROR AND CRY") EDITION

Oh my gosh, I am shaking my head and just laughing. I have no idea where to start writing this, but it's gonna be damn fun to pick this episode apart.

Because of the clues that Jojo Tichakorn (below) and Ninew Pinya dropped before and during the episode's airing yesterday, my mind was totally on Freddie and Queen. I captured the tweet below and couldn't help but think of lyrics.

And the episode was titled "Save Me"!

Before I go on, I have a little personal note. During my watch of MAME's TharnType, I talked a bit about the bigotry against the queer community that I grew up with in my Indian family. During my childhood, Freddie Mercury was -- everything. He was everything to me. A part-Indian man who blasted past any obstacles that could have held him back to become a superstar, while leveraging unbelievable talent. My dad often wanted to snap my Queen CDs in half to keep Freddie out of our house. Up until I went to college, when a new world of music awaited me, Queen was MY BAND. I'll never forget watching his memorial concert on television in 1992, watching Axl Rose destroy "We Will Rock You," and subsequently watching Axl host a Queen documentary on MTV that got repeated for years and years. This shit was formative to my childhood, and I'm gonna guess, to Jojo's and Ninew's childhoods as well. We be old bags in here.

I'll get back to Freddie in a few minutes. but besides all of the Queen themes (quick note: the dude that Sand was about to make out with was wearing the same costume that Ninew caught in his IG stories, as Freddie sang "Love of My Life"), oh my fucking god, did this episode ever touch upon ephemerality, highs and lows, change, and a resistance to change that people have unto others.

Top and Cheum -- especially Top -- were clutching their pearrrrrllllsss at Mew's changes.

Top and Cheum notice that Mew's trying on a new suit. And Mew admits it! He says to Ray in the bookstore -- after the most BRILLIANT call-out to a BL trope if I ever saw one, the CRACKING of the romantic memories montage, which, omg, are we EVER seeing in Dangerous Romance, like three times a bleeping episode, LMAO -- "I'm bored with myself."

I love -- I hate it, but I love that this episode calls it out -- I love that Top and Cheum are calling this behavior out as if it were a bad thing.

Is it?

.... is it not okay for university students to take a bump of coke if they're curious about it? Barack Obama did it -- and Obama admitted it, AND wrote about it, AND became president, twice. Judge him, I dare ya.

On another side, Nick susses out Boston, and wants to check in with him. Boston wants Nick to go bye-bye. Nick tries a guilt pull. And Boston ain't having it.

Fuck. (Side note, Boston was my man this episode.)

I'm shaking my head in wonder for Mew and Boston to be addressing Top, Cheum, and Nick in this way. We've established (here and here, cc @ranchthoughts and others) that the kind of toxicity that this OF group of friends exhibits is just -- common, and pedestrian, and awful to think about existing, but in part, it's so awful for us to be thinking about it, because actually, it's ever-present in our lives, and so many of us survive dealing with other people on a daily basis by using means by which to ignore or avoid that toxicity, like our addictions to our phones, or addictions to other vices, like sex and drugs -- which takes us right back to Only Friends.

The dynamic I saw happening in this episode was like vultures (the friends) circling their prey (their friends), but instead of the friends eating their friends -- what some of the friends are doing is trying to correct the behavior of their other friends. Top and Cheum want Mew to... go back to being the old Mew, maybe. Nick wants Boston to know -- morally, I think you're a bad person. And Boston says, I paraphrase, "see. if. I. fucking. care." and literally creates the NeoTitle ship before our eyes, lmao, all while walking silently and ignoringly away from Nick.

Top, to Mew, says, "Are you sure?" Are you sure you want to be like this now, Mew? Cheum shares with Top her concern about Mew's changes, and literally teams up with Top to bring Top back to Mew to, what, straighten Mew out?

Last time I checked, Mew's a big boy. Mew's made his decisions to be with Ray, to drink with Ray, to snort coke with Ray. Are those behaviors questionable? Sure. Are they normal behaviors for a university student who is bored with himself, and wants to try something new? 100%.

I have written before, in my review of Theory of Love, that while behavioral change can oftentimes be massively difficult, there's another side to change that needs to be considered. When one person changes -- there are many others within that person's sphere that do not want that specific person TO change. If one individual changes, within a worldview of a group -- that changes a group dynamic. People like Top and Cheum are unsettled that Mew and Ray are dating, and that Mew's getting wasted and high. Are they rightfully concerned for Mew's health? For sure. But what about Mew's agency and happiness? Are the friends understanding that this is actually Mew's choice to do these things, regardless of how the friends judge his specific actions?

The fact that Top and Cheum are questioning Mew's agency, to me, is a ROOT, a FOUNDATION of the awful toxicity of this friend group, BESIDES the general drunkenness of the group, and Ray's particularly contradictory and dangerous behavior. THERE IS NO TRUST IN THIS GROUP.

Top and Cheum do not TRUST Mew -- an adult young man!!!! -- to make his own decisions. Cheum doesn't trust Boston with her little bro (oh, woops on that, big sis). Almost no one trusts Ray, although I'm not sure about Mew on that. Boston doesn't trust Nick. The list goes on.

Without trust, without a foundation of love and respect, without an acknowledgement that individuals within a group have agency to live their lives independently -- what you get in a group dynamic is UTTER mush, just a bucket of vomit like what we're seeing here in Only Friends. I am OBSESSED that Jojo and team are picking this apart SURGICALLY, and asking US to question OUR, the viewers', judgement of all of this. These friends are contradictory as fuck. Boston was SO right to ask Nick: "who are you to judge?" Nick acted as filthily as Boston in violating Boston's privacy and rights -- TWICE, bros, TWICE.

And Top.... @lurkingshan said it the best yesterday when she made sure the girlies knew that what Top was doing TO (NOT FOR, TO) Mew at the end of the episode was not consensual. Welp. Tie up Mew's agency with a bow and throw it out into the fucking dumpster, Top.

I haven't touched as much on the Sand/Ray dynamic in this post, but of characters that are acting at least consistently to their... what, their moral judgements or ethical structures, at least Sand, Ray, and Boston remain consistent in my eyes. Anyone who was surprised at Ray's behavior in this episode -- it was bad and icky, and the episode laid it on thick, but I found his behavior to be expectedly toxic.

This was a two-steps-forward-and-one-step-back episode for Sand, as I see it, as he stepped in to try to keep Ray from going to jail (and how interesting was it that it was Top who ended up sealing that deal). One other note about Sand: the show HAS to be making fun of First's inability to sing, right? That guitar practice in 2/4, oof. And to have Sand dress up as Freddie, one of the most magnificent singers in rock -- ironic. We know that Sand doesn't aspire to be a singer; he just wants to go to festivals, and... that's the right decision, my dude.

Anyway. To bring this back to Freddie and Queen. Talk about shapeshifting. In his 20s in the 1970s, Freddie Mercury started out with long hair and flowing, robe-y costumes. As the 1980s progressed, he took on an identity of a mustachioed, slightly muscular man -- very, very closeted, but clearly gay to anyone who caught the signal.

The dude that Sand was about to make out with at the party? He made a reference to Mary Austin, Freddie's longtime companion and best friend. They were lovers for a short period, before Freddie came out to her. And they remained friends all of the rest of his life. While Freddie died with a longtime lover by his side in Jim Hutton, Mary was always present and devoted to Freddie. Mary's presence often caused consternation with Freddie's lovers, especially after his death, what with inheritance controversies. But no one ever questioned Mary's loyalty, and her commitment to keeping Freddie's identity secret and safe.

Freddie and Mary's friendship was in part a protective arrangement for his life in the closet. He only revealed he had AIDS the day before he died. But Freddie claimed the friendship, claimed agency to it, and wanted it in his life. The friendship was steady, and never wavering.

Quite the opposite of the devotions, or lack thereof, in this group. These young folks are demonstrating NORMAL resistance to watching each other change. But while that resistance is normal... it doesn't make it all the less toxic. I'm afraid that as of right now, I read that all of these friends want to sell each other out for the sake of their own selfish desires, and for the benefit of their own worldviews alone.

HAPPY SUNDAY, Ephemerality Squad, if we can be happy after this demonstration of toxicity, ha! @slayerkitty @ranchthoughts @chickenstrangers @lurkingshan @twig-tea @distant-screaming @clara-maybe-ontheroad @neuroticbookworm @elizabethsebestianhedgehog @thatgirl4815

[catholic-character-tournament]

Round 1 - Side B

Propaganda below ⬇️

Johnathan

Catholicism doesn’t really exist in the game but it also kind of does. Basically, Johnathan didn’t know that God existed until one day all the angels started coming down from heaven to have a war with the demons from hell. And then Johnathan made a pledge to go serve god and heaven and kill all humans living on earth because they were like “unfit” or “unclean” or something. So then Johnathan’s friend Walter goes to hang out with satan and then they become enemies :( But he’s basically catholic even if he doesn’t directly call himself that so i’m gonna say yes.

Johnathan literally fuses himself with god to become merkabach. He is unhinged. At the start of the game i thought he was cool because he didn’t want me to kill my best friend like WALTER did. And unlike WALTER, johnathan didn’t fuck up the boss fight with the minotaur. But then johnathan became really really bourgeoise or bougie idk whatever idk how to spell it. And then johnathan was like “FUCK POOR PEOPLE” and i was like no girl nooooo. But johnathan wanted to fuse himself with god and wipe all humans off the face of the earth because heaven thought they were impure. So he was trying to invoke the angels of destruction so badly and i was like johnathan you can’t do that son, and so i had to beat his ass. And then by extension i had to also beat god’s ass. And then i don’t really remember what happens but johnathan was essentially the most catholic guy in existence considering i don’t know anybody else who was chill enough with god to do steven universe fusion with him.

ok so like in smt theres alignments . chaos neutral and law. jonathan is the local lawboy and this means hes like the one who rather follow the rules already established and reject radical changes. but anyways hes also shown to be some sort of follower of god in this world and also of the like. local religion or whatever in mikado (where everyone is from) and hes very devoted to the cause and to keep things peaceful as they are now instead of trying to change shit up like walter (the chaosboy)

if he wants to commit genocide who am i to say no

has one fight with friend and decides to become an angel about it and nuke tokyo off the map

Fuses with literal biblical angels to become another angel that then wants to genocide anyone deemed ungodly/unclean by the biblical higher powers (which includes the entire population of Tokyo. And people who read manga).

Dude he is absolutely insane. He's my poor little meow meow. The party got high and he rolled around on the floor and meowed because he thought he was a cat. He is also so insanely gay. Like stupidly queer coded . that just makes the catholic guilt hit harder tbh

Gay boy who dies in every timeline

Paul

he's like if renfield from dracula was cool youth pastor.

He's also a priest, who essentially becomes a vampire due to an "angel" and tries to convert the entire town. He also runs an Alcoholics Anonymous group. I love him

Listen you've probably gotten this guy idk how many times but JUST IN CASE, I submitted him. He's a priest who fell in love and had a lesbian daughter. He becomes a vampire after his money-laundering fundie simp sent him to the Holy Land. He's so torn up over his lover having dementia and God allowing so much overwhelming death that he decides he's going to try to Cure Death Forever but oh boy is it a slippery slope and the man is surrounded by enablers.

so i binged watch the chosen (it's a drama series but it's the bible) and I needed to balance or else Id be insane so I watched midnight mass. It was good. Fuck this rat -- op

[azaharinflames]

tbh two things bother me the most about 'eddie HAS to be gay!!! it'd explain everything!!!' that BoBs do.

the first is just the fact that it feels like waaaay too many people are willing to excuse stuff like misogyny if someone's gay. i get that its probably rooted in this 'well, at least he's not dating/marrying women!' but like... gay men still have women in their lives? some of the fucking abhorrent shit that some of them say is still misogyny and needs to be called out. but also fucking double standards because 'eddie being gay would explain his shitty behavior because repression' oh, like how tommy said and did shitty things because he was closeted? that he fully acknowledged were shitty things later on and that he wasn't proud of the person he was then? things the show implies were forgiven by the people he hurt enough to invite him out for drinks after work? like ok BoBs i see you

the second is like. okay, say eddie IS gay. why would that bring chris home right now? eddie's a single dad, there's struggles that will come with that (esp when he's a literal firefighter... like... that man works long ass hours and we know this), and the idea of finding love again in general can fit into that. but, idk, with eddie there's two things that really need to come first and its chris AND his own wellbeing. get that man into some grief counseling or some sort of support group for widows or something. regardless of his sexuality, he needs to address his issues first and repair his relationship with his son before he can think about introducing someone else into their lives. imo the best person for canon eddie would be a single mom who can both understand what he's gone through but also call him on his shit when need be, but that's just me!! man needs to deal with his issues, period. him being gay and kissing buck wouldn't bring chris home, it'd probably just piss him off more and make him think his dad still doesn't care about him (and probably make him hate, imo, buck for not telling eddie to get his shit together and be the dad that chris wants him to be).

idk i just think its a dumb fucking take to be like 'but if he's not gay then he's just another misogynistic straight man!' like... yeah? those do exist? and this is pretty much the forgiveness and redemption show, eddie's flaws can be overcome if the writers care enough to do it. (and also, like i said... he'd just be a misogynistic gay man if he was gay lmao like misogyny does not disappear just because u aren't straight?? lowkey feels like proof that some of them have never actually spoken to queer men at all to know that they're still diverse in personality lmao).

Hi, Nonnie! Sorry for taking so long to answer, this past month has been something lmao

Yeah, gotta say - that is my biggest issue with it. Being gay never gives you a pass on being misogynistic, and it wouldn't give Eddie one, either. Justifying his misogynistic tendencies and passing them as: oh he just doesn't know how to behave with women, he's gay, is an extremely harmful rhetoric. And one way too many people adopt. No one gets a pass on this, and even if Eddie were to be gay, he wouldn't either. Instead, he would have to acknowledge his bad behaviour and work on it. But it doesn't seem like even the show acknowledges this misogynistic tendencies, so I highly doubt it'll ever be addressed.

and to your second point: yes. yes yes yes yes yes. Even if he were gay, dating Buck would solve 0 of his problems. What Eddie has to do is work on himself for real, because the bs we saw in 806 was not it. He hasn't worked on his grief over losing Shannon, and he hasn't done work with Chris other than considering moving to Texas... not to mention, in canon Eddie is a shitty (romantic) partner. This we know for a fact! And being with Buck wouldn't fix that; if anything (in my opinion) it would make things worse, not better. And yeah, most likely Christ would hate it, because to him it would mean losing Buck too, at some point.

Overall, nonnie, I heavily agree with everything you said! Sadly, Bobs are the most hypocritical and dense creatures I've ever encountered, so even if presented with this, they won't care.

Anyway. My inbox is open for ranting, venting, giving opinions, or confessions!

Take care <3

[markantonys]

I keep seeing comments (mostly from show onlies cause they don't know what's coming) regarding the Randlayne scene "oh God not another love interest like enough already." he has a lot of love in his heart! Leave him alone! Plus he deserves to have nice relationships now that he's out of that abusive relationship with Lanfear. I just have a bad feeling that people are gonna be really shitty about the polycule

yes, rand has so much love in his heart! he's not being greedy or trying to two-time anyone or to get 3 for the price of one, he is just Full Of Love! and he does deserve happy relationships after lanfear. BUT it isn't all about him, because elayne also deserves happy relationships with people who see her for who she is as a person, after spending her whole life lonely and surrounded by people who only see her title or want to use her for her position! aviendha deserves happy relationships where she can always have her heart shaded and where she can express vulnerability without fear of feeling shamed! min....................exists. djkfjg okay this is showverse, so show!min deserves happy relationships with people who care about her as a person and don't just want to use her for her viewings!

now, with that out of the way.............of course people are going to be shitty about the polycule. the majority of readers are already shitty about it and i won't be at all surprised if many show-onlys go the same way (though i'm sure rafe & co are well aware of how ~controversial~ a romance it could be and will do all they can to make it as ~palatable~ to a general audience as possible)

it feels like readers are split into 3 categories on the subject:

people (lbr, straight men) who fetishize the polycule for their own male power fantasies, but think that aviendha and especially elayne are too Annoying and too independent to be Good Girlfriends and that min is the only one who "deserves" rand since she "doesn't have any plot obligations to get in the way of being his girlfriend" (yes, that is a real sentence i once saw someone on reddit say with their whole chest lmao). i suspect this was the majority back in the day, but thankfully nowadays it's mostly a minority on reddit. these people want the show to have rand get to fuck elayne and aviendha, but only have an actual relationship with min.

people who think that one man having 3 girlfriends is inherently Misogynistic and Cringe, regardless of how consensual it is, how happy the people involved are with the arrangement, and how much agency the 3 women have within the relationship to set their own terms and call shots. this is the majority nowadays. these people want the show to split the polycule into two monogamous pairings, rand/min and elayne/aviendha.

a small fraction of people who genuinely enjoy the books' attempt at portraying a poly relationship and think it is a pretty good attempt for something written within the constraints of early 2000s mainstream fiction, even if it isn't perfect. these people want the show to keep the meat of the book polycule but just make some updates for the times, such as making textual the subtextual romance between elayne & aviendha and making min feel like she actually likes the poly aspect rather than that she's just putting up with it because she wants rand.

i think that the show-desires of group #3 are most likely to be met, but the beliefs of group #2 are the most prevalent, and so it's inevitable that people are going to be assholes about the show's version and start on that same shit of claiming that rand having 3 girlfriends could not possibly be anything other than Misogynistic & Cringe, while completely ignoring all the context that makes it, in fact, an equitable, consensual, happy, healthy, and pretty damn queer relationship. the Self-Described-As-Woke Internet Fandom Crowd is all over alanna's F/M/M throuple but as soon as it's F/F/M with rand/elayne/avi, they'll be crying Straight Male Fantasy. that's just how it is, unfortunately! some people just judge based on surface-level ~optics~ and refuse to take actual context into account.

speaking of surface-level optics, people will also be mad about rand getting more love interests what with egwene and all of that, so i'm thinking the show needs to a) have egwene and gawyn meet early in season 3, b) give them the most adorable and romantic meet-cute of all time, and c) make gawyn as babygirl and as lovable as possible so that everyone immediately jumps onboard the idea of him being egwene's new love interest and then won't mind as much if rand gets with aviendha later in the season. yes, this is all a purely objective proposal here, not at all me trying to cater to my own wishes djkfjgh

thinking of timeline, i'd bet they do the randgwene breakup quite promptly in 3x01, specifically because they need to start getting the audience adjusted to the idea of them not ending up together and there's no real sense in beating around the bush about it - the longer they postpone the breakup, the worse the audience reception of their subsequent romances will be, and i doubt rafe & co want that. i think the breakup will be entirely mutual, and amicable enough that egwene would give avirand her blessing later in the season and it would feel genuine (tho we may see some rand-egwene tension lingering since their relationship starts to grow mistrustful around this point in the books).

during 3x01 we might get some seeds planted for randlayne and possibly avilayne, but i wouldn't expect anything more than Vibes at this early stage. then, fingers crossed for a gawene meeting in caemlyn in 3x02ish to reassure everyone that rand won't be the only one getting new love interests! and then avirand will be the slowburn of the season, and they'd probably only juuuuust get together by the end, by which time hopefully people will be onboard with it - they should have a lot of good development time throughout the season to really build up to it and get the audience invested, and enemies/irritants-to-lovers is such a popular trope!

pair that with discussions of aiel polyamory and more randlayne & avilayne hints, and we're ready for elayne to join later; i definitely don't expect randlayne to happen before avirand, because i'm not sure there'd be a way to do that without it feeling rushed and audiences potentially feeling that egwene's toes are being stepped on. shuffling the order a bit to go for the avirand slowburn first and then add elayne afterwards just makes a lot of sense with the deepening of randgwene compared to the books. rand can't be getting into another relationship immediately after THIS version of the breakup (and particularly not with egwene's bestie), so it'd work better to have his first post-breakup relationship be the slowburn that takes most of the season to come to fruition. and they can reshuffle stuff to allow elayne a season 4/late s3 reunion with rand & avi, so that she can get involved at that time rather than at the beginning of s3.

(now, with rand/selene, obviously that relationship felt rushed & out of nowhere to the audience since they got together offscreen, and so people were very quick to complain about it, particularly for egwene's sake. but for this relationship, that's kind of the point. we're meant to see that the relationship means a lot to rand, yes, but we the audience aren't really meant to feel particularly invested in it ourselves, even when we think she's just a nice innkeeper. we ARE meant to feel a bit indignant on egwene's behalf, i think, because one of the central tenets of this season was that you can't and shouldn't do things alone, so we are meant to see that rand going solo has hurt his loved ones as well as himself. but with rand's actual endgame romances, totally different ballgame - rafe & co want us to truly enjoy, support, and feel invested in those, and so they'll be handled much differently than rand/selene, and hopefully will likewise result in different audience reactions.)

[dangerliesbeforeyou]

oh man ok i need to gush about moonlight chicken for a second lol

i adored how this show didnt shy away from the messiness of real life and relationships! like u hav a single gay working class man desperately trying to make ends meet and struggling with the guilt of his past lover having died tragically whilst bringing up his nephew who wants to be taken seriously and finally fly the nest to live his own life whilst at the same time navigating his crush on a lonely deaf boy who just wants to be understood and respected. and then you have a man stuck in relationship limbo where he's unable to let go of his past love but also yearning to move on and free them both from the pain they cause each other... and that's not even to mention the side characters who deal with the loss of parents, unfaithful partners, unplanned pregnancies, trying to be a better mother to your son, etc...

no one was a villain, instead you had a group of people who needed to grow and learn in a very natural way, and that's just so refreshing to see! honestly one of my fav parts of the story is that rather than inventing some arbitrary dramatic reason for wen and alan to break up, it just happened because their love had fizzled out, a thing that happens all the time in real relationships! and even though their love had died, it was still obvious that they cared deeply for one another which made both of them trying to move on so much more painful...

so much of this show was about the cycles of emotional abuse that can develop when you're stuck in the past... jim is unable to see a happy future for himself because he blames himself for beam's death, and he let's that anger and resentment inform how he treats li ming. wen is ignoring the messiness of his relationship with alan in favour of pursuing jim, but knows deep down that neither will be able to truly move on unless he deals with the situation. even heart's parents are stuck unable to relate to or be willing to understand their deaf son as they continue to isolate him from the outside world, thinking that it will protect him but all it does is make him even more lonely!

idk i just loved how the show focused so much on living in the moment. that the past is fixed and the future is uncertain, but there will always be now where you can always find some glimmer of joy and optimism.

and then there's ofc the queer element of the show where we get to see how internalised and external homophobia exist as perimeters to queer people being able to truly be themselves. one of the most heart wrenching scenes is at beam's funeral where his parents come up to jim and effectively tell him that because he and beam weren't married, he has no legal rights to any of the things they had worked so hard for together! and this is something you hear time and time again, both historically and now, where queer couples in countries that dont recognise gay marriage or even civil partnerships are denied so much (particularly when one of them dies) because their relationship is deemed illegitimate by law.

jim as a character has internalised this so much that when he finds out his nephew is gay, he lashes out (in one of the funniest scenes ever, mind you lol... literally the whole 'why are you gay, isn't being poor enough of a challenge!?' thing is gonna stick in my mind forever i love it sm lol) because he knows first hand how hard it is to be a queer man in a society that still doesnt fully accept you! (and it rly showed the disparity between him, a working class man, and wen, someone from a middle class/wealthy background when it comes to queerness that i don't think gets discussed as much... cos the fact of the matter is that for a long time queerness /was/ effectively reserved for wealthy people, as working class people wouldnt have had as much of a choice in how they could live their lives, so jim's reticence when it comes to accepting li ming's (and his own) queerness is directly tied to how being poor doesnt always allow you the luxury of simply 'being yourself'...)

and i think it was especially interesting that this show didnt present homophobia in individualistic terms. we don't get a character calling them slurs or saying that they're wrong for being gay, instead we get systemic and societal prejudices showing up in insidious ways, which feels so much more realistic! (like even jam, who is presented as having outdated and homophobic opinions, isnt presented as some evil villain. she's just a product of a homophobic society that teaches people being gay is a sad way of living, and she has to unlearn that as both her brother and son prove her wrong!)

i honestly could (and probably will) go on but yeh... this show man... this show

[mask131]

You know how there is a tendency by the USA industries to copy famous British shows? The Office. Ghosts. Skins. Being Human. Shameless. Queer as Folk. Men Behaving Badly. All these shows have a UK vs US version. And everybody keeps talking about the differences and comparisons. It is such a well-known and documented phenomenon that Wikipedia has a FRIGGIN' LIST of American shows based on English ones (here it is if you want to check it out). They even tried to do an American Absolutely Fabulous! Can you believe that? There is an unpicked pilot out there for an American "AbFab" show! Crazy...

There is however a very similar phenomenon nobody talks about (probably because it does not involve English-speaking media, hence why people are less interested in this).

Turns out there is quite a handful of American movies "based" (cough cough) on French movies! Ranging from straight-up remakes to rip-offs "inspired by".

Recently, as I was looking at a video dissecting some American comedies that failed at the box-office, I discovered this movie:

"Dinner for Schmucks". Released in 2010. Just by looking at the movie's title and poster I already knew what it was about and could tell you all about it. No, not because I watched it - but because this is actually an American copy of one of the most famous French comedies of the 90s: "Le dîner de cons"

Jay Roach, "Dinner for Schmucks" director, denied any claim that his movie was a remake of the French one. He said it was merely "inspired" by Le dîner de cons. But it is pretty HEAVILY influenced if you ask me.

You must understand that Le dîner de cons is still to this day considered one of the great classics of French comedy. It was a movie adaptation of a theater play of the same name. The same guy did the theater play and the movie (Francis Veber), and the same guy played the titular "Schmuck" in both media: Jacques Villeret. Jacques Villeret whose role in Le dîner de cons stays his most memorable and iconic character to date. To tell you how big this movie was, when it was released in France it was the second most-watched movie of the year, right behind... Titanic.

So when you compare that to this American movie. An American movie that bombed and was deemed a failure. And when you take into account the fact none of the fans of the American movie seem to even know the existence of the French one, despite this being a movie EVERYBODY in France knows at least by name... Argh.

Now... this discovery did surprise me, but it did not surprise me THAT much. Because I was aware of something similar that had happened before.

I am a big fan of another great classic of French comedy. Le Père Noël est une ordure (Santa Claus is an asshole).

This 1982 movie (again, based on a previous theater play and reusing most of the same actors as on the stage version) is still considered to this day a classic in many ways. A classic of dark French comedy ; a classic of Christmas movies in France ; and one of the master-pieces of the comedy group Le Splendid, right behind their movies Les Bronzés. Just like with Un dîner de cons, most French people can recognize its visuals or quote you a line, even if they didn't actually see the movie. [If you ask me... I am much more of a fan of the stage play. The movie is the most famous of the two, but I saw the theater play first, and the two pieces differ mostly with their endings. The movie's ending is dark but happy/optimistic ; while the play's ending is hilarious grim and devastating. But that's mostly a question of tastes.]

Anyway, since I was a fan I bought the official companion book about the movie, and that's in there that I discovered the existence of 1994's Mixed Nuts.

An American comedy movie that was a re... Oh sorry, just like for "Dinner for Schmucks", the people behind this movie refused to say it was a "remake". They said it was merely "based on" the French movie. And just like "Dinner for Schmucks", it was a big failure.

I distinctively remember how the person who wrote for the French companion book was not kind AT ALL on this American movie. Notably they pointed out that one of the reason it failed in the USA, and nobody wanted to see it in France, was because it took this dark comedy about suicide and couple abuse and murder (it is still hilarious fun, trust me), and tried to turn it into a "politically correct" optimistic, all-family comedy a la "typical American comedy". Except the core story was designed to be about the dark side of Christmas, the hypocrisy of society (and of Christmas), and just a bunch of not-nice, not-good people getting stuck together on one Christmas night filled with blood, sex and despair (again, it is actually VERY FUN, I assure you). Something that was deemed not "palatable" enough for American audiences.

These two cases being brought up, I got curious and I went on Wikipedia to check if there were other American movies "inspired by", "remaking" or just "blatantly ripping-off" French movies. And I was NOT disappointed!

There's too many to list, but I will leave the most jarring, shocking or flabbergasting cases (at last for me, a French person) under the cut. I mean, I knew about the US vs UK tv shows battles, and I knew about the American remakes of J-Horror (The Grudge, The Ring), but I never thought they'd have done something similar with French cinema!

And you know what the worst thing is? Most of these American remakes were failures, right? And the French movies were much more successful and famous than them... Yet, most American people know only about their American movies, which failed, and don't know one piece of info about the French movies, despite them still being showed and talked to this day. This is honestly such a jarring cultural gap. [And also a confirmation that American movie industry would rather remake dozens and dozens of foreign movies rather than bother releasing them dubbed or subtitled. Crazy.] Hopefully things are changing a bit because today, due to how the Internet exists, the original French pieces are talked about much more. People know better the original Taxi movie or the Les Intouchables movie than their American remake... Still though...

Anyway here is the list of these cinematic crimes underneath the cut

2000's Under Suspicion. Created out of the classic French thriller Garde à vue, a greatly awarded movie that gathered two legends of French cinema, Lino Ventura and Michel Serrault (and which is Serrault's darkest role ever).

2017's The Upside. Created out of 2011's Intouchables, an international success of a comedy that notably turned small-career actor Omar Sy into one of the huge names of French cinema.

2004's Taxi. A failed remake attempting to cash on 1998's Taxi, the movie that started the immensely famous Taxi movie franchise.

1998's Pure Luck. Not many people know this movie is based on 1981's La Chèvre, one of the famous comedies of actor Pierre Richard. (And there's the... other guy. Better not talk of him for a while Xp)

2015's Martyrs. A remake of what is considered one of the most famous (and disturbing) French horror movies of the 2000s: 2008's Martyrs, one of the big names of the "New French Extremism". (Well it is Franco-Canadian... But still)

1991's Oscar. A remake of 1967's Oscar, one of the great comedies of the 60s featuring the comedy legend Louis de Funès.

1996's The Birdcage. Created out of 1978's La Cage aux Folles, the most iconic role of Michel Serrault (in the comedy genre) and a very influential piece of fiction when it comes to depictions of gay couples and drag queens in French cinema.

1988's And God Created Woman. An American remake of 1956's Et Dieu... créa la femme, aka the movie that turned Brigitte Bardot into an international star.

2021's CODA. An American remake of 2014's La Famille Bélier. I think it was the first big movie of Louane, and it was notoriously talked about for having a big representation of people with earing problems since it is about a talented singer born into a family of deaf people. (And it is not a comedy, it is a drama movie).

By all of the hells, even Some Like it Hot! Yes even Some Like it Hot was inspired by a French movie: 1935's Fanfare d'amour!

If you want to see more, just look at the Wikipedia category for "American remakes of French movies".

[earhartsease]

we found ourselves this morning revisiting and acknowledging the trauma involved in transitioning whilst in a buddhist cult

we'd been a part of that cult for 29 years (and ordained for 13 years) when we came out and said "hey we're a trans woman" (this was a year before we realised we're agender and sort of nominally female)

and this cult is very all about women and men doing stuff separately (and also very much men are better than women at Being Spiritual, and very gender essentialist as it turns out)

so yeah we were in the "men's wing" and came out and pretty much overnight most of the men we thought were our friends just went "lalala you don't exist any more to us" and we obviously stopped attending men's stuff

and meanwhile, though some of the women were instantly supportive (notably mostly the queer ones), they said "oh but because you were ordained as a man, you're not welcome on any of our women's events and retreats until after you've depenised" (a decision which was incidentally illegal in the UK, but we were too vulnerable in early transition to challenge that very much)

and then we got depenised and were technically welcome at women's events and retreats - but the first event we showed up for, whilst many cis women made a point of welcoming us, we were in a discussion group with one person who got angry when we talked about gender maybe not being "absolutely real", and another person who said they were scared around us - that second person we asked to have supper with and found out about their abuse history (and shared ours) and we became friends after that

but then we kept hearing about other women saying they didn't want us around, and it made it more and more difficult to feel welcome

and then we started an online gender diverse group within the cult with a couple of friends (and within a month there were 300 people in it, and it eventually got to a thousand) - and we started to advocate for ungendered activities, and an ungendered path to ordination alongside the existing setup for women and men, and stuff like that - and people got really nasty - and in the end we just said fuck this and left

but tbh the worst part for us was being in what we thought was a community whose ideals were based around unconditional love, and then being basically left out in the snow for four years of our transition, not welcome in any part of it (except being immediately welcome on queer women's retreats, for which we were really grateful)

the whole thing was such a huge betrayal of the buddhist ideals that were the reason we were drawn there in the first place, and the only upside of that is it made us realise we were in a cult and fuck off out of it six years ago, after 30 years of commitment to it

and we realise many trans people go through this shit in normal life too, with their own family or communities, but there's something specific about the experience of religious betrayal - when people who have been talking to you for decades about unconditional love turn out to value their own comfort (and the presumed comfort of others) over your welcome or inclusion or even belief in your actual existence (many people admitted they didn't believe in nonbinary people being a real thing) - that is really damaging

so yeah, we're writing this to say "we survived, bitches" to them, and to say thank you to the few people in there who tried to support us and our cause and have remained friends - and also to send our love out to all of you who've been through anything similar or are still going through that or worse (we know there is worse)

[realthoughtsreal]

An ace finds an ace

This Monday, for the first time in my life, I met another ace.

At 22, in a small country, I had long accepted I’d never meet another ace here, nevermind people who respected it or even understood the meaning of the word.

I had gotten some kind of vibe from them, I knew we’d get along great, and I could tell they were queer somehow, but I didn’t really imagine them to be ace, you know? Because it’s always easier to picture someone as bi, pan, or gay, than it is to picture them as ace.

Do you know how few of us there are, compared to other sexualities? So few that meeting in the wild is a miracle.

I found out when we were chatting after class, they’re one of my classmates. A group of us were talking about some ‘hearmeout’ trend on Tiktok about attractive characters and we asked each other the ones we’d choose. My turn came and I shrugged awkwardly, saying “No idea. I’m, well, ace so. Yeah.”

To my great pleasure and surprise, the others didn’t bat an eye or ask me what ace was, they just asked “Oh, just ace or aro too?” Their gazes didn’t changed a bit, they were still just as kind and friendly.

I was shocked and sorta just mumbled “Well yeah? Sort of both? I mean I know I can feel romantic attraction for someone, but it has happened less than 3 times in my life. So. Yeah.”

“Oh I see.”

And then this classmate, that I had thought from the first day was cool as hell goes “Oh me too actually.”

And dudes. My guys. When I tell you my jaw didn’t drop but I immediately froze and got teary eyed. My eyes got all shiny and a wide, genuine smile spread over my cheeks. My chest quivered and suddenly I feared I’d start to cry. I got choked up and barely replied.

To think I’d finally meet another ace, a classmate at that, and one who I really get along with?!

I didn’t realize how desperate I was for connection and understanding from someone in the same position as me until that moment. We got talking and I kept choking up over my words, because we had the same experiences and issues in high school because of our aceness.

My heart was absolutely shaken, but I felt warm all over. Comfort like none other I had known before; the comfort of being known and understood.

This extremely cool person was like me.

I barely held back tears, but couldn’t push down my instinctual smiles and bright attitude after that.

I’ve kept the happy mood all week, and every time we see each other, we now chat and greet each other naturally. There’s a connection and mutual understanding between us, now that we know we are both ace, and we’re the first ace we’ve met to one another.

Aceness can be tough. It is tough. And isolating. But it being isolating from the rest of society and its way of life, doesn’t mean we have to be lonely.

We can find and choose friends and family to fill our lives. As ace/aro people, our lives will always look different from allos, but that’s okay.

I feel like this year, I’ve been learning to come to terms with that. I’m learning how to be a happy ace in this society. I have friends I hang out and talk with, I have family members who see me and accept me, have never made me feel like I need to explain my existence/come out, I go to class and have fun, I enjoy going to cafes, I can be happy for others without envy for their life styles.

We’re people too. Not abnormal freaks.

Maybe not everyone will respect us. Maybe not everyone will like us as people. Maybe some will always thinks of us as sick.

But you, ace person reading this, must know you are not sick. You are not a freak, and you are not alone. We’re out there. You just have to reach out.

And to the allo person reading this; inform yourself. Remember to treat everyone with kindness and patient understanding. Asexuality is not a sickness, that’s a common misconception. If you encounter an ace person in the wild, just treat them as you would everyone else: with kindness. Do not question their existence. They’ve had enough of that. Respect aroace people, do not force them into situations theymre uncomfortable with.

[sarrinight]

UH are we allowed to ask you questions? Cause I have questions on. The Sillies. (Kinjo and Yuki) Like what are your thoughts on their ship? I see you draw Kinjo with DRA Yuki and the real Yuki and I want to know what you actually think about them.. feel free to go off about it but if not you can just delete this hdshhsd

oh yes of course!!! and i do wanna talk about it, gosh i really haven't elaborated my piece about them yet since this is an art blog n i felt a little annoying when i blow up a tag, THANK YOU!! !!!

I also don't see many people talk about post-sdra2 either. this take, im gonna be minty fresh

kinjomae analysis

DRA Yuki

Canon-speaking, Kinjomae was deliberately called back to in both games. Tsurugi fills the role of the queer survivor in dra the way that Yoruko blatantly does in sdra2 (and the protagonist dies) except, it's less obvious as a main couple because of the way linuj writes, and it also doesn't fit the way some people see stereotyped mlm characters.

Kinjo's entire life is a trauma that is so oriented on staying alone, being alone in his suffering and his profession. He particularly killed the men closest to him, (Teruya, Kouhei, threatening Utsuro, and even his father) and seeing those people die around him leaves him numb. I feel like the Yuki of the first game is another unhealthy contributor to the sad cycle of his life, but ALSO remains to be his biggest savior. Kinjo and Akane are the only characters of DRA to have both 5 free-times, their bond has always been THAT highlight level of important.

DRA Yuki tears into this unhealthy string of Tsurugi's life by literally preventing the one time he felt alone the most. In Yuki's perspective, Tsurugi is such a strong figure but still trusting himself to lean on him, it solidifies both of them and forces them to develop their situations even when Utsuro rips through the Yuki facade. They were partners in crime unknowing that one of them was a criminal, omg, they were the dear rabbit, the along came a spider, the jane and john doe,,,

Tsurugi mentions he can't trust anybody but Yuki, Tsurugi gives Yuki a pass at trying to murder him despite his rigid moral. (not without a punch or two, but impressive.) and when Yuki is on the outsides he is the connected peacekeeper to Kinjo VS. Everyone Else. They are there to hold eachother's hands so they can still reconnect onto the border of the group. Like, the way Yuki shouts main character philosophy in chapter 4 at him while he's fighting everyone else brutally at the dinner table, and once again in chapter 6.

(Teruya, then fulfils this goal of reparation with Rei after they leave the killing game, but not on the mental stability side.) Tsurugi is seemingly independant and incredibly uncontrollable due to his detachment, and yet Yuki is able to have a significant part of influence over his life; as well as the deceased Kisaragi pre-killing game.

Yuki IS and will always be the exception to him and no matter how hard he tries to escape it, it follows him till the remainder of his character arc. In the same way, Tsurugi was the kickstarter to Utsuro's new mindset too. It's the "You can't pull the trigger cause you love me", cause that's what Utsuro-Yuki is to Tsurugi. Utsuro may be the most vile villain in the world to somebody who even considered assisted self defense to be a crime on first thought, and then he STILL proceeded to not take that final shot. He didn't hesitate blowing Mikado up, who arguably wasn't the first source of despair.

anyways i think dra yuki-utsuro/tsurugi are integral, important, and good to know your hizstory

he wants me i want him, we went out, then we (YukiUtsuro) DIED!! /ref

Yuki

Tsurugi would move on to be the worst man to cope in the existence of the franchise, and probably hardly ever move on after the death of DRA Yuki. If Yuki was truly dead he'd have two funerals for his two guypals, and spit on Utsuro's grave pretending not to like him. Plus that bad ending where Tsurugi just wakes up in the middle of the night in cold sweat shows what would sort of happen, he thinks about them too much. However,

Yuki was still a concept of a person who existed in the world. He's not gone, he's just someone in a different form, and still is inside the memory of Kinjo's mind that remains deteriorating. He's like, the same dude but he's in the clutches of EVIL!! and he hates evil. (Kinjo seems to catch onto Mikado's plans early on and then it only amplifies in his duty to stop Utsuro and find Yuki.)

Tsurugi's defeatist attitude to fail saving Teruya and Yuki was very much a falsetto because of the Omake 2 and I truly believe Rei was right that this was their agreed purpose.

The real Yuki has none of these shared moments that Tsurugi can look back on together, but if it was just the memories he wouldn't have acted so patronizing to Utsuro. He's affectionately looking back on the person that Utsuro was, which was just Yuki Maeda. Did Homura Akemi decide to go back in time for 10 years just so Madoka could share moments with her?? Absolutely not, and the same goes for Tsurugi Kinjo, who ran an entire organization which later adopted the name of the goal. As Mikado joked, it's "the love of your life" but it's in the most unconventional messy, dictatorial, and murderous way.

Kinjomae absolutely drives the narrative forward on Yuki's side of the story even if it's significantly relegated mostly to the end. Imagine your entire existence leaning on a few people you can't even remember, but they remember you? One dude sacrifices a guy, one girl sacrifices her body. With Tsurugi's final decrees of (semi) unconditional care for you, you finish the trial with this one-sided trauma bond and a promise to keep the survivors safe. Sora takes on all the karmic debt of Divine Luck, and peace returns in an ending that isn't really elaborated on.

ur now a fugitive awesome trans guyboss with superpowers, and you're just absolutely bawling out of your mind at this point. some blue haired dude in a wheelchair is going to die if you don't help him out with your sora-luck.

nobody talks about this enough but this is THE PERFECT set-up for a postgame friendship to develop, not only are they both survivors, this is the genuine Yuki who isn't hiding apart of an Utsuro disguise. He's alive but now in the body of someone Kinjo despised,,, he hates Akane, he refuses to acknowledge her. he loves yuki. But Yuki remembers her fondly and has to take care of the body, but he probably hates himself. not to mention the INTENSE guilt you would get from feeling anything in it or the dysphoria of even wearing/not wearing the clothes she is??? sdra2 so evil?? soruko died so kinjomae could slowburn.

There's nothing Yuki can do now but go on his quest to potentially get along with this man who is homo-erotically trauma bonded to him and got a whole-ass person killed in the process of ending Utsuro and finding the true Maeda., He also has to go atone to Yoruko and the rest of the gang. as you can see i like kinjomae i think they are a foundational element in the story of dra.

unrelated thinking

their suits are completely black and white i find that silly they match

my partner and i did a voiceover of their final freetime one time cause we were feeling quirky.

[hilacopter]

I've been trying to put into words this frustration of mine for a while, and I think I've finally got it figured out:

So! Israel is built on genocide! And that's certainly not a good thing. You can try to argue about whether or not Jewish people are indigenous to the land (though I won't get into that whole argument here), but there's no denying the fact this country was built on blood. Lives were lost and people were banished. Therefore, us Israelis are deemed colonizers for living here. Is it false? No, not necessarily. Is colonialism okay or justifiable? Of course not! However, the way people have used this as an excuse to dehumanise us Israelis is absolutely disgusting.

Western leftists have this mindset that we should either be sent "back to where we came from" (and by that they mean countries we have never been to in our lives and just so happen to have ancestral ties to), or that we should be eradicated. Because it's easy to see these groups of people you don't know as simply blank NPCs, or a hivemind. I've had an online friend of mine tell me that there's this level of dissociation when you aren't the one going through it, and that a lot of times it takes having someone you know suffer that fate to go "oh shit, REAL PEOPLE are going through that", and I think the problem stems from the fact so many of the people who insist on being involved in this conflict don't actually have Israeli (or Palestinian, for that matter) friends to tell them what it's like to be living through this nightmare. We're faceless and nameless, which leads to dehumanisation and demonization.

It is a universal fact that no human is the same, everyone's life is valuable and unique. Everyone has something to bring to the table, and something like the country you were born in is inconsequential to how good or bad of a person you are. Unless, of course, you're an Israeli. That means you're nothing more than a filthy colonizer. That means you're a part of an evil hivemind being led by an evil government (yes, Israel's government is horrible WHICH IS WHY WE'VE BEEN PROTESTING AGAINST IT FOR MONTHS NOW). That means you've done wrong merely by existing.

I'm certainly going to offend some people with this comparison, but in my opinion telling an Israeli to simply deport is not much unlike telling a queer person to go to conversion therapy. It's obviously not the same thing, but just like you aren't able to get rid of someone's gender or sexuality, you aren't able to get rid of someone's heritage. Simply sending us away won't magically make everything better, believe it or not (I won't get into it in this post, but know that there will be no Palestinian utopia under Hamas rule, as Hamas actively harms the people of Palestine too). We won't just forget about Israel and keep living like nothing happened. We have lives here. We have friends and family we'd be separated from. Most of us won't simply be able to adjust to a new country we don't even know the language of. And if you think the solution is to kill us all... I don't even know what to say to you at this point. Is being attached to the place you were born in truly such a horrible crime? You can argue we deserve it for being colonizers, but it's not like we chose to be born here. Which leads to my next point:

The global left is used to everything wrong being a mindset. Homophobes, racists, sexists; all of those are not something people are born as, rather something they've been lead to believe. Something that can be fixed by teaching them better and having them unlearn their ways. So when faced with the fact that being an Israeli isn't something which can be reversed, leftists don't know how to process it. They cope by seeing us as something inherently evil and violent. Something inherently unworthy of living. Something that automatically deserves whatever bad things happen to it. Something less than human. Something that must be erased, one way or another. It doesn't matter that we're people with feelings and minds, we're all just filthy colonizers! Get rid of us pesky Israelis and everything will be better! Just burn it all down!

It's human nature to want to get rid of something you don't like. Whether it's a bug in your kitchen, a shitty friend, a mindset you don't like, whatever. It's when "something I don't like" translates to millions of people that you start to get under my skin. It's when you celebrate a brutal massacre and root for a terrorist organisation that I deem you a disgusting human being.

Like it or not, new life has been created here. And no matter how many chant "death to colonizers", you won't be getting rid of it. You won't be getting rid of us.

Because we, as human beings, don't deserve to be gotten rid of.

[alpaca-clouds]

Fantasy and Racism

For those who have not heard about it yet: There is a very racist and queerphobic game mod for Baldur's Gate 3. A mod that basically removes all queerness from the game as well as modding all non-white characters white. All obviously under the excuse of "but that is realistic because medieval fantasy world". Which is bullshit. I talked about it before. But it is bullshit and we all know it.

It is one of the reasons I so rarely engage with a lot of high fantasy media. Because so much of it - especially of course the big franchises - kinda succumbs to this idea of a very white, very straight, very cis medieval period, in which disabled kids probably are also like killed by the time of their birth or get "fixed" with magic.

Of course there is diverse high fantasy out there. But definitely the "norm" for the genre is something else. Now, of course there are works that still work in themes about this (The Witcher most of all), but yeah... A lot of high fantasy media LOVES TO HIDE behind the "oh, but that would be wrong historically!" excuse.

And as someone who is a history nerd, I never stop to get super angry about this. The middle ages were actually fucking queer and there were a lot of people who lived openly queer. We know about medieval trans folks, too - and given the fact that we know about less than 1% who lived during those 1000 years - there were a ton more.

We also know that there were people from Africa, the Arab world and Asia living in medieval Europe. Some of them have come there with the Romans, others have come there for research and trade. (The first European person in Japan, was a Roman, by the way.)

Meanwhile most of fantasy is very unrealistic when it comes to things like how society works or how HISTORY ITSELF works. Like, so much of medieval Europe was directly influenced by how Roman society, Christianity and the indigenous cultures of Europe interacted. But guess what? Most fantasy worlds do not have something like Rome in their background, do not have an institution like the Catholic Church, and also do not have any indigenouity. Your average fantasy world was born with folks having medieval technology and over the next 2000 years are very unlikely to develop past medieval technology. Which is very, very unrealistic. But guess what the folks who whine about gays in their medieval fantasy do not complain about?

And that is of course without going into the most obvious stuff: There were no elves in medieval Europe. There were no dwarves, no halflings, no gnomes, no orcs, no goblins, no dragons, no magic, no... Do I need to go on? And there was also not a big group of people running around raiding some old graves and ruins (which were also trapped with all sorts of magic and what not). And indeed there were no gods that threatened to END THE FUCKING WORLD at least once per decade.

Heck, speaking about Baldur's Gate 3 itself, I am more frustrated that there are not more non-white persons around. Like, the only east Asian character I have interacted with was Cazador as far as I remember, and that... is not really great representation, you know? Like, I would have liked to have another non-white companion at least.

Especially as... Well, Faerûn/Toril is not the real world. So, for fuck's sake. The folks within that world can crossover as much as the IP holders want them to.

I mean, fuck. You know what exists within Faerûn? CHOCOLATE! Something that not only was not available in medieval Europe because the beans grew in the Americas, but something that in the form we associate with it was not invented until the 19th century!

Just, yeah. Fuck people who complain about "historical accuracy", because something is diverse and includes rep. Just fuck them.