#big fan of critically reading and analyzing the media does not mean you can’t have fun

[arson-09]

What if i learned how to make tiktoks and instagram reels purely to spread the pro tamlin agenda?? like i dont need another activity BUT-

[oookaline]

A response to this tweet:

https://twitter.com/LETMEVOL6/status/1318301718610923520?s=19

"ok. i’m bout to ask a question to the larries. yalls whole argument is that simon and modest are homophobic right? please explain to me how Harry got away with being such a strong advocate for the LGBTQ+ community while being in One Direction? Why was harry the only one dropping hints on his sexuality. if they were so dead set on pushing this heterosexual narrative onto the boys then how did Harry get away with the things that he did? harry was dropping hints at his attraction to males. no, not with over analyzed song lyrics. i mean dead ass saying it. I genuinely want to know because Harry‘s been out of the closet for years now .y’all claim that Louis is closete. Harry managed to get out of the “evil clutches of Simon Cowell“ what stopping Louis and doing the same? unless this whole Larry theory was a lie and y’all were bored like, can someone please tell me why that happened? if Harry is allowed to be so open about his sexuality what stopping louis? if Harry got away from Simon would stopping in Louis they all have the same opportunity Harry may be the richest member but Louis can’t be that far back so tell me how did Harry manage to get away and be so open about his attraction of males and louis didn’t? i genuinely don’t get that."

Harry has been refering to his partner as gender neutral since forever, its not something he dropped hints on.

Not only that you have to also consider the narratives management pushed upon each of them aswell: Ima try to do a brief summary on H and Lou only, as this is reffered to Larries.

Louis: Perfect Boyfriend, a stable girlfriend throughout the years, influencer pretty girlfriend, no background on her so no backlash, constant papwalks on them and the occasional 'theyre toguether' tweets. Literally what it would be normalized as a happy relationship.

Harry: Fuck Boy, dated a lot of people, womaniser, headlines every week linking him to a new person, kendall, Taylor, Caroline etc, all big names yet all stunts, papwalks, 18 months of dating or interaction then never talked about again, the boy to wisk you away to a magical night then leave you the next morning.

Now taking these both you can see they are very different narratives, thus enabling them for two very distinctive ways to hinting at their sexuality with us.

Louis due to stunt reasons had to make his love songs (or his songs overall) seem like they hint at a specific girl, eleanor. Building up on the narrative they've had over the years. So while he can't directly call out his 'perfect woman' in gender neutral pronouns like Harry does, he CAN on the other hand choose what he specifies her as: a good chef, long brown hair paired with a british accent.

Very specific things that very obviously link to Harry while making press and hets think its towards Eleanor.

That one interview which didn't air where Louis said he had a boyfriend...

But this is just verbal. Lyric whise Louis has been more open and smart then anyone I've ever listened to-

The lyrics directly paralleling gay relationship, the struggles, the fear of not being able to be with them... Everything that a Heterosexual reletionship would NEVER experience. A few examples:

→Alive - One Direction (Louis) MM

"My mama told me I should go and get some therapy"

"I asked the doctor, "can you find out what is wrong with me? I don't know why I wanna be with every girl I meet"

"I can't control it"

"She said, "hey, it's alright Does it make you feel alive?"

"We got to live before we get older. Do what we like, we got nothing to lose. Shake off the weight of the world from your shoulders. Oh, we got nothing to prove"

"Went to a party just after the doctor talked to me, I met a girl, I took her in up to the balcony, I whispered something in her ear that I just can't repeat, She said, "okay" but she was worried what her friends will think"

This whole song is about questioning you sexuality and realizing you like the same sex.

Read over the lyrics and change:

girl - boy

she/her - he/him

and you'll see what I mean

→End Of The Day (Louis and Liam) MITAM

"Love can be frightening for sure"

"All I know at the end of the day is you want what you want and you say what you say, And you'll follow your heart even though it'll break, Sometimes"

"All I know at the end of the day is love who you love, There ain't no other way, If there's something I've learnt from a million mistakes, You're the one that I want at the end of the day"

"The priest thinks it's the devil, My mum thinks it's the flu, But girl it's only you"

"When the sun goes I know that you and me and everything will be alright, And when the city's sleeping, you and I can stay awake and keep on dreaming"

this whole song (apart from that one "girl") is just a huge gay awakening. If you keep the girl its a wlw anthem then.

some more exaples from scattered songs:

"There's a moment when you finally realize, There's no way you can change the rolling tide" -Ready To Run

"There will always be the kind that criticize, But I know, yes I know we'll be alright" -Ready To Run

"Told myself I kind of liked her, But there was something missing in her eyes" -Home

"I was stumbling, looking in the dark , With an empty heart, But you say you feel the same"-Home

"Still high with a little feeling, I see the smile as it starts to creep in, It was there, I saw it in your eyes" -Home

"But I know you're only hiding, And I just wanna see you" -Through The Dark

"And I can see your head is held in shame, But I just wanna see you smile again" -Through The Dark

"And I will hold you closer, Hope your heart is strong enough" -Through the dark

"People say we shouldn't be together, We're too young to know about forever" -TDKAU

"They don't know about the things we do, They don't know about the "I love yous"-TDKAU

these are just some out of the many Louis wrote. You can see where I'm going with it now.

and im not even going to touch i to all the shading Louis did with his clothes, tattoos, actions etc...

Now, Harry 'got away' with those actions because of various reasons, but I wouldn't say that he got away, I'd call it more of a "You stop me from doing this we will get backlash for possible homophobia and then y'all lose money so suck it up fuckers we're going on a rainbow ride" which is true; Yes, Harry did always refer to his ideal partner in gender neutral forms, but during the rainbow direction project was when he really amped it up so he could always go with the casual "I'm just supporting my fans, there's no harm in that" when confronted about it, which includes him waving the flags around and all the other stuff.

But it also seems you all are forgetting about how along with all the Queer!Harry we got, we also got more and more headlines of Wom!Harry, more stunts and etc: 5 different official relationships (not counting Kendal twice, which would make 6) between late 2014-early 2016 ALSO NOT COUNTING RUMOURED GIRLFRIENDS which then would make the list go so much higher, Harry couldn't before and still can't hang out with WOMEN or else there will be rumours of them dating.

And this doesn't happen with Men :/ He can hang put with multiple men, and there probably will be barelly one and a half articles written about it -only by small outlets- which in comparison to when he is seen hanging our with a 'mysterious woman' we'll get hundreds of articles about it in a span of an hour.

So what I'm trying to say is that sadly he can still call his ideal partner a he and be seen kissing a guy that the media probably will focus on the chick on the background and write an article like "Harry Styles seen out with friends in LA and he seemed extra cozy with mysterious blonde".

But again, the same with Louis, he hints at us about his sexuality so much, be it us the only one who properly listens to him.

With his songs and the flags and the pins and everything.

Here's some of his lyrics from the Oned era:

"We were meant to be but a twist of fate, Made it so you had to walk away" -Happily

"I don't care what people say when we're together"-Happily

"I can't even think straight but I can tell, You were just with her"-JABOYL

"And nothing's ever easy, That's what they say"-JABOYL

"Pay attention, I hope that you listen 'cause I let my guard down, Right now I'm completely defenseless"-If I Could Fly

"I've got scars even though they can't always be seen, And pain gets hard, but now you're here and I don't feel a thing"-If I Could Fly

"One day you'll come into my world and say it all, You say we'll be together even when you're lost"-Something Great

"I want you here with me, Like how I pictured it, So I don't have to keep imagining"-Something Great

"The script was written and I could not change a thing, I want to rip it all to shreds and start again"-Something Great

"You're all I want, So much it's hurting"-Something Great

So yeah, its sad that you just alienated that one thing without having context nor looking at the bigger picture. If I missed anything please tell me. :]

sorry for the long post

(copied from my answer on twitter)

[ramblingguy54]

Okay, Here’s How I Feel

Originally this was gonna be a response to @sophfandoms53‘s post, but I felt it got too lengthy and didn’t want to hijack that post with what I had to say about everything going on currently, apparently. So, here’s my two cents on the drama. Okay, I’ll be honest, I haven’t seen much toxic drama so far in this community recently, due to my own dumb luck I guess, but that doesn’t mean it’s far from real, obviously. People who are suffering through this kind of crap have my serious condolences, for being given an unfair amount of flak just because they have a different perspective on characters or potential romantic relationships in this series about a big family of talking anthropomorphic ducks.

Like, I can’t preach this enough. This advice not only applies to the DuckTales fandom, but anyone’s unique takes on anything in general with anything within the entertainment media industry of films/tv.

No one’s opinions are 100% wrong or right. That’s the beauty of subjectivity toward fiction.

Not only does this apply to the Delpad shippers, but any people who have been going back and forth about Louie/Della’s chemistry being questionably handled in Season 2′s last episodes. We can debate all day until we’re blue in the God damn face, but no take is a “wrong” one here. I may strongly disagree with those who called Della mean spirited or unfair to Louie in Glomtales, trying to label it as “abuse” or “emotional isolation” when there are plenty of things in that episode, which I feel easily shoot down that argument, but I’m not gonna try to manipulate those into feeling differently about what they saw in these last several episodes. If you think Della was out of line here, fine. Preach to the heavens for all I care. It’s your own voice and I’m sure there are plenty of those out there, who feel the same as you do, too. Be proud of what you stand for, just please don’t shoot others down in the process of what you believe is “correct”.

You can use all your reasoning in the world to create, what you think is a strong perspective for yourself on something, regarding DuckTales character writing or story driven themes, but here’s the punchline.

Anyone out there trying to use words like “objectively speaking”, won’t cover up your own bias towards what you perceive as a correct or incorrect takes on this series.

This like a BIG pet peeve I have when people try to analyze stuff in their favorite shows or movies. You can try to be as unbiased or professional, as you can be with viewing stuff, but the reality of it is we each have our own biases that we can’t cover up, no matter how hard we try to. We’ve all got our own emotional experiences in life that have given us our own unique/defined perspectives on stuff. Whether you’re a professional critic trying to make a living off these said views or simply a passionate fan expressing their beliefs, you can’t hide that.

Which is completely fine, but please for the love of God don’t try to cover it up. That kind of stuff irks me beyond belief, even if people don’t intend to give off that impression with their reviews, using that phrase of objectivity and are just saying it because it’s a force of habit others have gotten, where they don’t realize the implications of what they’re actually saying that could rub others the wrong way.

It’s fine to have your own biases, but letting it blind you from others different two cents is where things need to stop. There’s healthy biases and unhealthy ones.

DuckTales strong themes of family are what brings people together in this community. Don’t let your own damn pride cloud your judgement. Lead by example, like Louie did in his Season 2 arc, by humbling yourselves when seeing a different take you might not agree with at all. If a freaking kid can do that, why can’t any of y’all, too, who are being toxic? 

Here’s a strong piece of advice to cap this post off. You know what I refer to mentally a lot of the time for a mature discussion about my differing opinions with someone else? Anton Ego’s amazing speech from Ratatouille about the meaning/weight of opinions on anything in general. It’s one of the most beautiful mature scene’s I look back on fondly, as an adult in my mid-twenties to this very day, surrounding the topic of an individuals opinions and the faith put into them, too. It can do wonders for me whenever I get into a civil debate with someone. Hell, I’ll probably do an analytical post of my own on that brilliant scene sometime soon. Ratatouille is an excellent Pixar film that deserves a lot of praise for what it managed to accomplish with its themes and messages.

Anyways with those last statements outta the way, thanks for taking the time to read all this and please have a nice day everyone.

[thatyanderecritic]

Wadanohara and the Great Blue Ocean

Title: Wadanohara and the Great Blue Ocean

Media: RPG game, Made by Deep Sea Prisoner 

Yandere(s): Sal and Fukami

Yandere Scale: Sal- 2/5 Fukami- 1/5

Criticism written by: Kai 

Editor: Julie

The Review:

Hey there everyone! Kai here back with another review. I’m sure most people expected us to just read the wiki for the game and call it a day (we are that lazy after all). But surprise surprise, I actually played this game awhile back… when it was first translated actually! But anyways, I’m getting ahead of myself here. Let’s get into the review.

WGBO (I’m not going to type out the entire title) is about the sea witch, Wadanohara returning back to her home ocean after living abroad to attend a witch school (or something). She left home after some sort of trauma that occurred between her and her original familiar… a shark named Samekichi. Wada lost her memory of this, of course. Everyone tells her Samekichi is bad but Wada thinks otherwise (#ProtagonistInstinicts). Upon Wada’s return, every greets her but uh oh! The sea kingdom is under attack by the bunny people (idk what their Japanese name is). Sent out on a quest to strengthen the sea’s borders, Wada and her familiars went out to fight back the rabbits and power up the magic orb barrier things. Everything seems to end happily but a demon-rabbit broke the orbs and all the rabbits invaded the sea kingdom. When all hope seems lost, turns out the reason why the rabbits were invading was because the rabbit princess and the fish princess had a misunderstanding. They made up (bffs for life) but the question remains on, “who did this?” Spoilers up ahead: Turns out it was the Red Sea who orchestrated these events. The Blue sea kingdom and the Red sea kingdom are mortal enemies, with red being evil. Wada’s father basically gave up his life to protect these waters and put up the barriers. A side character, Syakesan, disguised himself as a ditzy and harmless shark when actuality he was Sal, the Ambassador of the Red Sea. In the final clash with him, Sal had the key to locking away the Red Sea for good. In the end, turns out this story was a story Wada was telling us, the players, as she waited for Samekichi’s return (meta-story telling).

That was a really hefty summary of the game but there’s lots of side stories, characters, easter eggs, and three alternative endings for a person to explore. I highly recommend playing the game. Wadanohara is probably one of my favorite indie rpg games out there. Characters are fun, the art style is cute, and Wadanohara really isn’t a bad protagonist. I only advise that you should know that it is an rpg game. So lots of fighting, boss battles, and gathering items. If you just want to play it for the story, you’re better off just watching a let’s play. You don’t have to grind too much, since it was made so that you can still beat bosses even if you skip all encounters (bosses drop enough exp each battle for the next boss). But it’s still advisable to fight all encounters so you have an easier time for end bosses. Anyways! Enough about the game, I’m sure everyone is more concerned about the yanderes!

I’m pretty sure everyone knows about Sal. That white haired dream-boat of a villain 😍. Highkey, the man is hot. But was he that great of a yandere? Not… exactly. When I first saw Sal, my monkey brain flipped on and went “White haired man. Twisted love. Covered in blood. HOT.” But when you really analyze him, he gets several points taken away. For one, Sal doesn’t exactly mind killing Wada for his own goals. Yes, you can say he loves her and he tries to get her on his own side for normal ending 1. But when push comes to shove, he doesn’t hesitate to shank a bitch, if you know what I mean. He also loves her because Samekichi loves her. There’s a sort of inferiority complex between Sal and Samekichi. Sal basically wants to have Samekichi’s life and Wada is one of those things. I guess this is an up to interpretation sort of thing but I have to take a point off for shaky foundation in Sal’s love for Wada. But a really big point to note is that Sal doesn’t really hold any regard for Wada’s well being. He’s willing to straight up hurt, kill, and rape her for his own goals. Yes, in normal ending 1, Sal rapes Wada and mind breaks her into joining the red sea. As we all know, shit like this is a big no-no for our blog. The reason why Sal is barely hanging on is because he does show some remorse (“some”) for doing this for Wada and would prefer not to. Plus, here on ThatYandereCritic we’re a bit… loose about rape in yandere stories. Yes we don’t like it and prefer it not in the story but objectively, it something that happens. Another point to take away from Sal is that we don’t really know anything about him. Sal’s plot and twisted love for Wada was revealed in the end but we don’t know much about his backstory or why he likes Wada. Yes, I’m pretty sure Deep Sea Prisoner made some comments about this but truth be told, I can’t tell which is fan theories and what is canon. Hell some of these headcanons are in Japanese. Even more, Deep Sea Prisoner seem like the JK Rowling of Japanese RPG games and just spout out random “facts” about their story that they never really mentioned in the actual story. Well, that’s my opinion. But because of that, I’m looking at the information strictly from the game… that being said, there’s practically nothing about Sal in the game. TL;DR- Sal is a good character for yandere aesthetic since he’s not a clickbait yandere but don’t legitimately expect an actual yandere-yandere by our definition. (Homie is still hot as fuck tho).

I’m sure some people are eyeing Fukami. Fukami is one of Wada’s familiar… an octopus. Throughout the game, Fukami strongly hints that he loves Wada and highkey is jealous of Samekichi. Fukami is pretty aggressive towards Samekichi.He threatened to kill Samekichi and actually got close to it after one boss battle scene with Samekichi. As for why he isn’t a perfect or high rate yandere, it has to do with the fact that he really… doesn’t do anything? I mean yes, he does all that shit above but it plays off as more comedic and when push comes to shove, he relents and give Wada to Samekichi. I mean we can probably say he’s a “good yandere” but we don’t really see enough of his thought process to know what he’s going through. He doesn’t really act on his love and he’s only really aggressive towards Samekichi because he thought Samekichi did something really bad towards Wada. There’s also a bad ending with Fukami where he actually kills Wada and the other familiars which is kinda sketched, ya know? Finally, we don’t really know much about Fukami, just like all the other characters. Fukami is just a pretty weak yandere all around and barely holds a candle standing next to Sal. But this is just a “fun to know” sort of thing.

Anyways, highkey recommend playing the game. But only if you’re not sensitive to gory situations and sexual assault. The ending where Sal rapes Wada is an ending you can’t skip. You have to watch normal ending 1 and 2 before getting the true ending. It’s nothing graphic but something to be aware of if you plan to play the game. Anyways! Enjoy.

Overall Score: 8/10

[kingofthewilderwest]

I totally get what you're saying about fandom and canon (or at least I think I do) and that what's really important is a love of the material, and I agree to that respect, but personally, reading the words "canon doesn't matter" kind of rustles my jimmies, because for some people (like me) and in some spaces, canon is extremely important. 1/?

People will find importance in canon for whatever reasons that are individual to them, and I think it’s important to consider that. There are also spaces where discussion of canon IS important, like when it comes to issues of representation. I think you’ve read my post about the phrase “there is no heterosexual explanation for this” and my rebuttal of “not every emotionally intimate relationship between two characters of the same gender is inherently gay” in response to people claiming that 2/

certain same gender pairings are “obviously” “gay for each other”, when there’s nothing in the canon that points to anything beyond an emotionally intimate relationship. One of the people who commented on it made a really good point that while it’s fine to ship something regardless of canon, it’s a different thing entirely to claim that something IS canon when there’s no evidence for it, or evidence that’s up to too much interpretation, because claiming that such a relationship IS canon 3/?

when in fact it’s barely hinted at and interpretable at best, it means that it’s much more difficult to call for better representation, when someone who is against representation can go “see? look at all the people who say [interpretable pairing] is canon. they don’t need anything more explicit!” 4/?

I think that there ARE spaces in fandom where that’s an important discussion to have. So I disagree with you that canon doesn’t matter, because there are places for it, and for individual people, it’s very important. But I agree entirely that there shouldn’t be arguments in fandom about what is or is not canon that basically involves gatekeeping “canon” or being mean to others because of what they think is or is not canon. 5/?

In a perfect world, people would be willing to agree to disagree about what is or is not canon and accept that other people have different opinions of how far canon goes. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, so I definitely agree that it’s bad for people to assert that their view of canon is the “correct” view, and - if I may be so audacious as to assume intent - is really the point you’re trying to make. 6/? (I think?)

I think that not caring about canon has its place in certain fandom contexts, but not all of them. It’s kind of like it’s a different analytical framework, one that’s useful sometimes but not other times. 7/? 

And certainly, I think canon has importance in places that exist at the boundaries of fandom, like when canon is considered in historical studies or in literature reviews. Though that’s also getting into discussions of where fandom ends and other disciplines begin, so it’s probably a moot point, and probably depends on someone’s perspective and intent. 9/? (or 8?)

I’m gonna stop myself here from going into literary theory/criticism/whatever about when and where canon matters, but I think I’ve made my point that while I agree with the sentiment of what you’re saying, I disagree with the statement that “canon doesn’t matter” in fandom. Because I think it does, but just not in every context. 10/10 (or whatever number)

From this.

As always, you’ve got a wealth of thoughtful and well-worded discussion here. You’re a brilliant human being, and one of the reasons I love talking to you is because of your deep analytical perspectives. I think another reason I jive with you as a friend is because we tend to hold similar perspectives. It’s fun, because we both entertain creative or emotional discussions extrapolated from source materials, and we both acknowledge what canon objectively contains. 

I apologize: I thought I’d been more clear with the context of what I was criticizing regarding fandom’s relationship with canon. I think I also banked on followers knowing I’m a logically centered individual who cares deeply about facts and not just heart. I suppose not, and I’m sorry if I were misleading. My mistake! How you disagree with my phrase “canon doesn’t matter” is not what I was intending to suggest and it’s not the values I have regarding canon. That one sentence wasn’t meant to stand on its own that much. We do in truth consider canon’s importance the same way!

My critique intended to be about the discussion of “What are the canon materials?” rather than “What information is in the canon?” As I read it, your response goes through both, and where you say you disagreed is mostly when you looked at the latter (but I was intentionally honing in only on the former). Maybe it’s a good idea for us to separate these concepts rather than conflate it into a large debate of “what is canon?” from too broad an angle.

My critique was about how fans police others’ engagement for things like Watsonian interpretations, headcanons, speculative meta, and fanfiction writing. If people want to analyze Edward Elric’s personality only from FMAB, or if they want to include minor tie-ins (ex: Prince of the Dawn, Sacred Star of Milos, omake, etc.), either perspective provides interesting analytical angles. They’re both valid ways of handling the character’s personality.

Especially since I experience the “What is canon materials?” conversation with the HTTYD fandom, I tend to see the debate centered on continuity and OOC/IC interactions. Also, at times, how “big” a material is - like video games being “less authoritative” than the films. These conversations are more about how people do or don’t emotionally reject RTTE for their personal headcanon/discussion space. These are people who acknowledge the show’s implications rather than deny RTTE’s existence or the implications of the content. It’s exactly because people engage and examine its contents, that some people might like to talk about Hiccup through RTTE lenses, and others will never entertain such speculations. 

(You know this stuff, I’m sure, but I’m spelling it all out to be clear, and for other readers to follow.)

What I’m saying is that in angles like these, what is or is not canon doesn’t matter, because we have the right to recreationally interact with Hiccup through some of the officially licensed materials, or through all of them. We have the right to completely ignore ALL canon and imagine him as something else, too!

That discussion that I focused on is about what people accept as “the most official materials” versus “unofficial materials.” Your focus for the majority of your message looks to me like a nuanced angle on something else - the other “spaces,” “places,” “frameworks” you bring up. That’s about whether or not people acknowledge what’s inside those materials. It’s about whether or not people are able to acknowledge that things happen in official materials, or are able to correctly discern objective versus subjective information within that media. That’s not something I was covering in that conversation because it wasn’t contextually relevant, but yes, you’re absolutely right that these distinctions are important!

The viral post you mentioned is one I’ll never forget from you, because I agree with it 100%. It’s the same frustration I hold, so it was so enthralling to see it put to words. It’s poor thinking for fans to subjectively interpret canon materials and try to push it as The One Truth… when it is not objectively what the source material contains. Feel free to tie things together how you want for funsies, that doesn’t make it what the source ACTUALLY says.

This is why I mentioned, at the start of my discussion, that I get uncomfortable when people dismiss officially licensed materials as “fanfiction” or “not real.” These exist whether we like them to or not. The reason it’s important to distinguish fandom from canon is because canon is what feeds us, and is what provides authority for what the franchise is. Whether or not you like the materials or engage with them for things like headcanoning, they’re there, and you have to be able to acknowledge: these materials exist. The companies gave them to us.

Because a product exists, you can’t say “bye” to the consequences of its existence. You have to know it exists, and what it does/doesn’t contain. It’s poor thinking for individuals to extrapolate materials from canon that were objectively not intended by the creators, but fans still try to push it as “the true story.” What the source material objectively contains cannot be replaced by emotional wants or denials. That’s where things like representation or romance come into play, as you mentioned: it’s (usually) fine to relate to and interpret the characters as you want, so long as you can separate that from the objective reality of the source material. You have to be able to acknowledge what the source material contains.

I want to make it very clear:

There’s an enormous difference between emotionally deciding which canonical materials you engage with for your creative frameworking…

…versus denying the existence of what officially licensed products contain, or insisting that your subjective interpretation is objectively true. 

For the former: canon doesn’t matter. That’s my discussion of the previous post. Policing fans by telling them one source is canon and one isn’t… when it’s all licensed materials… is forcing people to engage with canon a certain way. We all have the right to engage with all licensed materials to the depth we want. If I want to accept RTTE and analyze Hiccup from RTTE to GOTNF to THW… let me enjoy that! Don’t tell me to quit analyzing RTTE!Hiccup because it doesn’t feel like he’s IC to you (and ergo, outside of your own mental “canon”). It’s fiiiiine! I can write analyses about RTTE!Hiccup!

For something like the “what is canon materials?” discussion you mentioned as far as academic documentation of a body of works, that is a REALLY interesting discussion, but yeah, as you pointed out, a little outside the boundaries of this current conversation. But I’d love to talk to you sometime about it!!!

For the latter: you better be able to know what the licensed materials actually contain. You shouldn’t deny something exists. Whether or not you call it “canon,” you should be able to acknowledge it’s an official product and not something a fan put on AO3. You should be able to objectively understand what’s in officially released products. If the books have problematic elements, if a show lacks explicit queer representation, if there’s a racial stereotype that’s handled poorly, that’s a truth that you can’t imagine your way out of! You can reinterpret characters for fun in your fandom discussions, but you can’t deny the reality of what the creators produced. Ignoring the truth of these issues, or making your interpretations “reality” you force on others… is dangerous illogical thought that has severe consequences for how you interact with the world and its issues.

As you say, there’s value in all these discussions. We’ve known each other a long time, so I know you know I’m a logic-oriented individual, someone who isn’t going to say “everything is okay!” and let subjectivity fly over objective information in source materials. When I say “canon doesn’t matter,” it’s not about subjectively letting our feelings erase what is objectively presented on screen / on paper. When I say “canon doesn’t matter,” it’s about whether or not someone wants to talk about tie-ins, or only select portions of officially released products. But when I say “canon doesn’t matter,” it is also with the assumption people are smart enough to distinguish subjective interpretation from objective observation, the angle which you brought up with the nuanced discussion we’ve seen. Thanks for speaking with such finesse again on why we can’t lets fans’ desires get in the way of what they call “truth.”

I love to both discuss things from a creative speculative angle and let my imagination wander or reinterpret characters… or discuss materials from a Doylist acknowledgement of how something gets sociologically presented. Hell, I hold such a huge value to official products and canon materials that I engage with almost no fandom content (fanfictions, comics, etc.). So yeah! I also believe that canon is very, very important, and is something to be talked about! 

I think it’s important to understand the impacts that official materials have, and I get frustrated when people pretend something DreamWorks or Disney officially sanctioned is “fanfiction.” I think it’s important for fans to discuss back and forth about what they think objectively happened when there’s a lack of clarity. For the romance thing, again, as you said, it’s a good discussion to have of “what is WITHIN canon?” when looking at whether or not it’s obviously queer, or if you’re reading into it. 

I also love to create synthesized interpretations for what characters are like and I get frustrated when people try to police me on what I can/can’t include into my canon analyses. 

I just have no patience for laypersons who debate “what is canon MATERIAL?” when looking at whether or not a video game should be considered “okay” to synthesize with a movie, and gatekeeping in the sense of what fans can include in our creative engagements. Whether or not X is “as canon” as Y doesn’t matter at the end of the day if you disagree with [insert username here]. It’s your recreation. It’s still a franchise product. Know it exists, know the objective materials, and move on. Do with it as you will and let your friends do with it as they will. 

[tonya-the-chicken]

Ok, someone (@gucciasswitch ) dared me to do whole list and who am I to resist

1. What was your first OTP? 

Probably Royai. FullMetal Alchemist was my first anime I watched on TV and I immediately fell in love with relationships between Riza and Roy. I used to fantasize about them all the time. I still do love them.

Also I remember I wanted Zuko to end up with Katara

2. What is your current OTP?

Definitely EnjiRei. I think about them and their family all the time. That's just what I do when I ship - I maladaptive daydream. What I like about them is ice and fire aesthetics is how fucked up everything is but Rei still somehow can forgive him or at least try to? He somehow remember her favourite things? I want to know more about them. Like, how exactly Enji found her? What happened to Touya?

I also like BakuCamie, ShinTsuyu, ZenNezu, still Royai, Huwumi, Natsuo x his girlfriend, maybe MomoIida, Jeankasa, Sabigiuy, Levihan, Miritama, Levifar

3. Do you have any OT3/OT+ ships? What are your favorites?

Mmmmmm, probably no. Though, I once saw OchaTodoDeku and it looks wholesome

4. What is/are your favorite trope(s)?

Tropes, tropes... I like what is called "unsexy erotica" by some author on ao3. Like, when characters are processing their feelings and it's the end it's not really sexy though it still somehow amazes me. It's not really a trope though, I saw only one fanfic with that.

I love redemption arcs made well, bad people turning good and having the love no one ever gave them before (duh)

5. What is/are your least favorite trope(s)?

Definitely soulmates au, it makes me cringe somehow. Or is it not a trope? Whatever

6. Do you have a certain kind of ship you’re more attracted to?

I often ship canon ships. Also for whatever reason I enjoy different-sex couples more often. Also if I see a person with fire powers I'll connect the dots them with someone with water/ice, it's just math... Jk... Unless

7. Are most of your ships “pure” or “problematic”?

Actually, they are mostly pure. But also I ship EnjiRei and someone gonna send me anon hate for this, ehhh

8. Who is the most shippable person you can think of?

Objectively it will be the main character of any series cause they have the most interactions. For me personally it's Enji cause I love him right now and I like to explore his relationship with everyone, like, I can occasionally ship him with Hawks, All Might, Burnin', Rei and some OCs

9. Are there any fandoms you don’t have any ships for?

The ones I am not in, duh. Actually, I am not really active shipper... In one punch man I don't ship anyone? But it's not like I am really in fandom khkhkh

10. Do characters have to have canon interactions for you to ship them?

Yeah, if it's not ship with OC (obviously). There can be exceptions like hetalia cause characters are basically countries

11. What makes a great ship in your own opinion?

Logic and some shared life philosophy/goal/struggles. Or just deep feeling and will to understand one another. Dunno

12. What drives you away from a ship?

If I don't understand why, basically. Also any mentor x student relationships are very big no-no for me. I don't like this power dynamic when one person is doomed to see another as they are above them. And also incest is nah

13. Is there anything you ship but refuse to interact with the community for?

Probably EnjiRei? I am kinda scared cause I don't want people to treat me badly based on that, ya know? Actually, I am trying to be more open about it cause fuck society, I am tired of your shit

14. Has a fanbase ever made you ship or not ship something? Why?

I stopped shipping eruri cause I got very fed up with fans being nasty, I guess. Like, they always tried to prove that it is canon and I just got tried and switched to levihan?.. Also I probably started to ship huwumi because of fanbase. I just never thought of the ship. But the most important deed is that fanbase brought me Dabi is Touya theory. Thank you, strangers on youtube

15. Do you like/participate in ship wars? Why or why not?

Define "ship war"? I sometimes enjoy observing people arguing but mostly I am annoyed when someone shit on character or ship. So sometimes I guess I can write something like "bitch can you stop" but usually I try to stay out of it. I guess I am pro-shiping and anti anti most of the time

16. Are there any ships you just can’t/don’t understand? What are they?

Ereri, Dekumight, RoyEd... Do you see the pattern? I highly dislike mentor x student ships. Also incest ships are no-no even if everyone is an adult for a simple reason - I actually have brothers and this shit creeps me out

17. Are there any popular ships that you just don’t like? What are they?

Ereri. It's the only banned tag I have (edit: not anymore, I am trying to ban enji antis). Also probably RoyEd but FMA fandom is not really active or I am not really into it

18. What is your favorite unpopular ship?

EnjiRei........

19. Do you prefer fluff, angst, or smut for your ships? 

It depends. I mostly don't like smut just for smut but if there's some feelings and processing of them, ya know... Angst goes well with everything though I recently found out I kinda dislike seeing violence and suffering in fanart... I actually like comedy more than pure fluff, I am kinda Mr Nighteye and believe in power of humor

20. Do you prefer bigger fanbases or smaller ones?

Bigger ones cause bigger fanbase = more content to CONSUME

21. Have you ever received hate for a ship you liked? 

The most close thing to hate I received was this: https://tonya-the-chicken.tumblr.com/post/189156146100/you-ship-enjirei-and-call-urself-a-feminist

Nothing more probably...

22. Do you have any ships that you ship, but would never want to see as canon?

I think no. I am quite ok with any of my ships becoming canon

23. Have you ever had a ship become canon, but you didn’t like how it was portrayed?

Nah... Though it still can happen since many of my fandoms have actively running mangas/animes

24. What is your favorite canon ship?

Define "canon ship"? Probably Royai

25. What are your favorite ships from a dead fandom?

Sweden x Ukraine from Hetalia. I used to ship ot hard XD I had a whole blog dedicated to it! I just don't know dead fandoms, ok

26. What are your favorite shipping scenes?

Nothing in particular but when a characters does something stupid/risk his life to save/help their love interest. Like, when Zenitsu wet to spiders forest to save Nezuko... Or when Jean saved Mikasa from titan.

27. What are your views on reader x canon ships?

You do you, I guess, but my opinion is NO

28. What is your best shipping advice?

Have fun yourself and don't ruin it for others. You are free to block anyone and anything, it doesn't make you a bad person. And also try to think critically about views shared on social networks, like, not everything in true.

I'll also add here about media affecting reality: aS A fuTuRE PSyChoLoGisT I can say that YES, THEY DO AFFECT EACH OTHER. But often Internet can't get all the nuances and ends up censoring everything. In university we had an assignment where we analyzed modern media. And TV news collected around 30 media risks meaning that materials can affect (usually child's) brain in negative way. What now, are we supposed to not show violence and war? "Destroy everything that can traumatize a child" is a bad solution because of many reasons. Kids are not supposed to read 18+ content, kids are not supposed to spend time on Internet without parental control, kids are not supposed to watch a lot of stuff without an adult's presence. But they do and it's not fault of people who create 18+ / "problematic" content.

29. Do you like OCs (Original Characters)?

Yes, I do, if it's not self-insert OC, you know? I have some myself but usually not for shipping

30. What are some of your favorite shipping blogs?

What is shipping blog?.. Ok, I guess that people who post about ship or what??? Eh...

I'll recommend you to just look up blogs I follow, whatever, I'm tired

[caden]

i feel we should examine the whole idea of “do spoilers matter” or not at a deeper level then ‘people who complain about spoilers are annoying so spoiler warnings are stupid’. like the idea that a lot of you guys seem to have of “if having the plot spoiled ruins the movie for you then the plot wasnt any good anyways” seems sort of... not fully wrong but also underdeveloped to me. like, there are tons and tons and tons of stories that are widely considered to be amazing and have clear artistic merit that you absolutely wouldn’t want spoiled. Like, you wouldnt want to know darth vader was lukes father. you wouldnt want to know bruce willis was a ghost the whole time. For drama to be effective you need tension, and a very very efficient way of keeping the audience engaged is by putting them in a mindset where they’re unsure of what will happen next, or by revealing a game-changing plot twist, or by suddenly putting a character into an unexpected position. It seems totally disingenuous to me to be like ‘well it shouldnt matter to the audience whether or not they get to be surprised by what happens in the film they’re watching’. You can’t honestly believe that to be true. Being able to be surprised by a story is like one of the fundamental draws of good storytelling and probably has been for all of human history. Imagine how much worse US or Get Out or any Shakespeare play would be if you knew exactly where the plot would go before you saw it. I know there’s some research that suggests people actually enjoy stuff more if they already know what will happen but you can cast a lot of doubt on that data-- i think that it indicates more that people are more likely to appreciate a good plot once they understand it more thoroughly, hence why you might like a great movie more the second time you watch it. That doesnt mean there isnt value in the first time, it’s just a different way of viewing it.

All that said, the stuff with people not wanting spoilers for endgame has different wrinkles to it. (dont worry im not about to spoil anything). It can’t all be chalked up to ‘people care super deeply about the characters and plot and the writing is always so unpredictable and engaging that they dont want to know a single thing before going in’. Ive spent a lot of time recently thinking about the way infinity war and endgame are constructed, and they’re made in such a way that REALLY facilitates them being ‘spoiled’. because they’re written around moments. The plot isn’t so much a naturally moving thing with motivations and momentum of its own as much as a connective tissue between various cool things happening. Like, whoa, spider-man just met the guardians of the galaxy. oh sick, theyre in wakanda. holy shit, half of them died. Endgame goes REAAAAAALLY hard on this style of writing. And as a method of milking emotion from the audience, it really really works. Assuming the moments themselves are all effective, you’re guaranteeing constant engagement because every three minutes another epic thing is gonna happen. And I think when people fault marvel fans for being obsessed with spoiler warnings, this style of filmmaking is really what they’re trying to critique. because there’s a suggestion that if your movie is just jumping from crazy twist to shocking death to funny reference to epic fight, you’re losing the thing that should actually be the connective tissue of a film-- its themes, character arcs, ideas, setting... etc. And while I personally don’t think those things are mutually exclusive, (bc i do believe that infinity war and endgame genuinely have themes they try to discuss), i would also agree with the argument that reliance on shocking moments over actual ideas is bad writing. But as I mentioned earlier, a filmmaker like Jordan Peele whose works are generally agreed to be very good also uses this writing style-- his plots escalate via twists and turns and are expertly constructed to keep the audience wondering what’ll happen next, and he does a really great job with it. 

Now, i DEFINITELY think there’s an argument for ‘disney intentionally plays up the spoiler warning angle in a way that’s ultimately toxic to the filmmaking process’. Like I don’t believe that the “tom holland doesnt get to read the script” stuff is true, I 100% think it’s all a publicity stunt-- but they shouldnt be setting a precedent that makes people think doing something like that to a lead actor is acceptable. It’s not how films should be made, and the only reason I’m sure its all fake is because I have enough filmmaking experience to know itd literally be impossible to efficiently shoot a big-budget film under those conditions. Of course all the buzz about endgame spoilers is HUGELY beneficial to their marketing teams, so obviously they’re gonna go hard as hell on enforcing that narrative. Like they 100% WANT everyone to both be spoiling the movie and getting anxious about having the movie spoiled, because its all free advertising for them. But in terms of ‘big movie studios having greedy practices that harmfully affect the artistic process and make their films worse’, its incredibly low on the list of bad stuff that studios do imo. 

So, like, if you’re gonna critique all the various aspects of that, I think you should A) put your efforts towards exposing all the spoiler panic through the lens of how it affects the way that films are produced and consumed, or B) put your efforts towards analyzing the media itself, watch the film and ask ‘is this film more engaging and well-made because of its reliance on moments that can be spoiled? If no, why is that not working? If yes, is that engagement coming at a cost or is it justified? Essentially, I’d like to feel that the criticism was either coming from a social angle or an artistic one. And if that were the case I think i’d have less of an issue with it. Just saying “people are dumb for caring about spoilers” is silly. Maybe it’s dumb, but that’s not the point. People will consume media however they want to and if they want to care about spoilers then they have a right to care. You guys aren’t wrong if you think marvel shit is stupid and badly made, because art is subjective and no opinion on it is wrong. But other people also aren’t wrong for liking and caring about it, and being like ‘we should spoil it for them to teach them a lesson” is gross and totally unproductive. I know 99% of it is jokes but you gotta remember that some people have spent a very long time being very excited to see this movie and doing something that wrecks that for them is just mean and inconsiderate. It’s not about whether them feeling that way is stupid or not, because yeah, it’s stupid to be that invested in superhero movies. It’s about it not being cool to intentionally hurt someone just because you can. And the reason i don’t have a lot of tolerance for it is because I feel like saying “caring about spoilers is stupid” is a kneejerk, surface level attempt at media criticism and we can do better. I obviously care pretty deeply about the way we consume and criticize pop culture and i think it’s in everyone’s benefit to have more productive discourse about this stuff. No ill will towards my friends who are saying the things that i’m ragging on, i obviously don’t think it’s coming from a malicious place or anything-- this is just my read on the situation. Was gonna post this like two days ago but then decided someone would prob message me a spoiler because of it lol

[bloojayoolie]

A Dream, Bad, and Bruh: ACTUALLY, IT'S A HEY, LOOK, GREG HAS A PURSE! E. EMBROIDERED BOOKBAG. Hehehehe, Frank Griffin here! I am here to explain this funny may-may I found while browsing through the site "r/Loded Diper", place where fellow may-may experts like me share their best funny jokes about Diary of a by Wimpy Kid, a cartoon novel written hohe other than Jeff Kinney. Now, what do have here? If youre familiar with the book, youll recognize that there is Greg Heffley the middle, the protagonist of Diary of a Wimpy Kid. In the original image, Greg stitched a purse, but called it an embroidered handbag" so he won't lose his dignity. However, it doesn't work and he gets called a girl for it. this image Now that the background has been cleared up, let's look It has been posted by u/ThatSippyChicken the 18th 2019 oh may (by UTC time). This means it's very recent, compared to the even funnier Minion memes I share with my grandkids. Greg is surrounded by two unknown teenagers. The short-haired kid the left is pointinga finger having a speech bubble over him (This implies he's saying something.). to the right (probably at Greg) and The text on the speech bubble says "HEY, LOOK, GREG HAS A", and then "EMBROIDERED BOOKBAG" below, but distorted. Greg reacts with saying "ACTUALLY, ITS ONLY A PURSE!" followed by blank space ow. The last kid with acne has a nearly empty speech bubble, only saying "E". Diary of a Wimpy Kid artstyle. Oh, Greg is holding the purse I talked about previously in the image!If you look closely, you at the end. Everything is drawn in the typical thing I forgot to mention: ohe can even see that the word "Grea" is stitched on it- IS Okay, the description of the image is over. Now, let's get the analysing part. I examined every part of the image and compared it with other maymays from around the same time and site. But then, I couldn't believe what I found out! This maymay on r/LodedDiper falls under the category of modern internet memes. You may have heard of the word from your kids, maybe grandkids, and that's because it's a Millennial (yes, the Avocado eveh toast generation. / Generation Z movement. The concept of Memes itself is too complex, Ill explain it on a seperate page, but, to be short, Memes are funny internet maymays that require Some sort of insider knowdlege to be understandable. Memes are very special of humour, because, unlike other funny maymays, the humour of Memes ih terms always based on either relatability or absurdity. This can be shown is this image too: The incosistency of logic and font size makes the oh absurdity of this maymay visible. The "E" has a very complex background, but it can be said that it's referencing another modern Meme. This absurd humour combined with what used to be a page from a normal cartoon hovel is what makes this maymay funny. When I realized this, I had to LOLWHMWADCC (Laughing Out Loud While Hitting Manny With A Diet Coke Condom)! explain why I chose exactly this maymay symbolizes the change in youth humour. At last, I need to for explanation. That's because it new generation doesn't laugh though they based on either relatability or absurdity. While this change The at Minioh maymays anymore (even very funny., they laugh at modern memes that are dre to more complex humour can be considered a cultural step forwards, it can also be unhealthy for the kids. For example, Memes about depression and suicide, which are very popular, can make someone relating to it even depressed (The argument of these being a coping technique falls Alat here, that has been disproven). But, good or not, it's definetily more an important change in Internet, even the entirety of western culture. This Meme symbolizes the new age of humour, Meme humour. Besthany. And now, I finally explained to you what Memes are, Frank Griffin PS: If read this on r/LodedDiper, go check out the subreddit you r/ExplainItPeter! And the other way around, of course. PPS: is br ald Hehehehehehe, someone's here! No, it's not Frank Griffin (Right now he's busy explaining a Minion meme), it's not Sans Undertale (Off fighting Lugi), it's me: Peter Heffley! Who am I, you may ask? Well, I am the colleague and best buddy of the world famous Frank Griffin. Ah, now that I'm mentioning him, all the memories are flooding back. Whenever there was a cringe nae nae meme, a darn millennial or even a bruh moment, we stuck together. And after decades of friendship he eventually offered me a dream come true: A job in the Meme Explaining Laboratory! So, now I'm here explaining a few memes here and there (Frank does the over- whelming majority of them, though) and, more importantly, critically analysing his very own explanations, because nothing is perfect! (Except for stepping on a crunchy leaf.) Unlike him, I will use Arial instead of the official Wimpy Kid font, simply because this is more readable. Otherwise, my critique is pretty much the same. So, get ready for some high IQ text reading, because we're going to enter the Meme world once again! Alright, we finally got through the long introduction I now have several ways to begin the main part, but I'm honestly not sure where to. I could start with citing his first line, analysing his formatting or referenzing the pipe strip video. But I will do none of these things. Instead, I will dig straight to the core of his explanations, and praise or critique anything in the process. Ergo, I'll start with the nature of his text itself. It's, compared to the usual Internet posts, very text-heavy. However this isn't a big surprise since both of us know how much Frank can dive into a subject. He puts a photo of himself in the top left corner below the image he's analyzing, and his text is written solely in the "WimpyKid" font, which already is my first problem. It may have been suitable if it was used in a short paragraph or two, but using it in an entire explanation is a major design flaw. However, this is not the only problem I have with Frank's text, (Don't take it personally, bucko) which brings me to analyzing the content of his explanation, and his ultimate message near the bottom end. Okay, I'll be honest. I don't like the message. His main part of the analysis may have been on the better side, in comparision to his other posts, but this time Frank really shot himself in his cock and balls this time. Saying that "Meme humour is overtaking regular humour" is overly dramatizising and simply putting in a wrong light what is really going on inside the meme creation scene. Frank, I'm sorry to tell it to ya, but a near-sudden cultural shift in humour is not going to happen, pal. What is really happening is that younger kids like to distance themselves from older generations as much as possible, may it be via clothing, music politics or, in this case, humour. Most teenagers eventually just grow out of their phase of shutting themselves off of older people. That eventually happens either when they marry, or when they enter their 30's. I am not saying that a and progressing culture is bad, however it's a lie to say those teens will keep their culture with them as they grow old. Just take hippies, as am example Some of you may remember them promoting peace and other values, and generally having a very liberal mindset. Now, who were those hippies? This answer may be a suprise to you, but those hippies were (mostly) boomers. Yup, the same generation that is nowadays known for being notoriously authoritarian and close-minded. People can change. And those who laugh about their memes now will probably change too, once they reach a certain age. The only thing in favor of Frank's argument is the existence of the Internet. Although that argument isn't that much of a punch when considering the very likely possibility that another game changing form of media will probably pop up within the next few decades. Memes will simply not prevail, or they will be warped beyond recognition (Not as in becoming more abstract and surreal (which is also a very widely spread belief about Memes)), by having different unwritten rules for Memes. If a time traveler from 2011 saw a changing modern meme page from today, they wouldn't think those memes would be funny or should even be called memes. What we call memes now, will be forgotten in the future. To cut it short, memes will not have a major effect on culture, nor will they even be remembered in 20+ years. One more thing. Frank stated that Greg Heffley was saying "Actually, it's only a purse!" in the Meme he explained. That is incorrect, though. Greg says "Actually, it's a purse!" without the "only". I think it's highly unprofessional that he tries to deeply analyze a meme and then doesn't even quote the text correctly. It makes me feel like Frank is just doing this for the fame and money by focussing on dramaticising viewpoints instead of being scientifically accurate. This is probably the true reason Bethany left him and took the kids. Not because she "loved Chad more instead of a nice man like me", as Frank said, but because she can't stand him becoming increasingly narcissistic and delusional about his fame anymore. It's actually sickening me how he is cutting of more and more of his friends and family and doesn't even care for fans either. I know I will probably be fired by Frank for publishing this, but the problem is only turning bigger and bigger with no sight of him changing his ways. Frank should honestly take a break from his job and go visit his kids again. After all, he never bothered to see them once Bethany "took them away" from him. He can visit his children anytime he wants to, but he rather likes to work on another money milking machine again (which is ironically the reason the kids chose Bethany.) Alright, it's time to end this text. Looking back at it, it seems like it's 1/3 explanation, 1/3 critique and 1/3 open letter. I planned this to just be an extension of Frank's analysis and another lie about how we are getting along just fine, but now it turned into a half-agressive rant about him. But I just had to vent my frustations about my buddy. I know he hasa heart somewhere down below his thick skull, but for now it's simply how I and everyone else close to him perceive Frank. Hopefully he'll try to change. Peter Heffley PS: Frank, if you are reading this, please don't fire me for writing this. Try to reflect instead. PPS: Haha PP lol PPPS: I just went to r/Expla memes made me LOLWHMWADCCAEFP nltPeter, and all of the (Laughing Out Loud While Hitting Manny With A Diet Coke Condom And Eating Frank's Penis) out loud! Go visit that subreddit! Thanks for the explanation, Peter Heffley!

[migleefulmoments]

"Why do you think it is OK to be so vile and vicious?" (1) LOLOLOL, you have got to be kidding me. Pot, meet big fucking kettle. (2) Most (not all) of those comments are neither vile nor vicious; they're simply hard to hear, as the truth often is. We believe you believe your theories are true, AJW. Unfortunately, you believing (and wishing and hoping) something is true doesn't make it true. For EVERY argument you make, I could make an equally strong counter that C hates D. Doesn't make it true!

2nd Anonymous said: Is this supposed to be her feel sorry for me post because she literally hates on strangers all day every day. “ajw720*tumblr*com/post/182606038445/in-my-time-here-i-have-been-called it’s very hard to feel sympathy for her when she bullies a woman she doesn’t know because she interferes with her fantasy.

3rd Anonymous said: AJW's on her poor widdle victim's martyr cross again. Anyone got any violins? She's the victimiest victim to ever victim, you know! All I'm imagining is a giant middle-aged baby in a diaper spitting her paci out and throwing a tantrum that big meanies are calling her names. You're right, sounds a lot like Trump.

She can’t even see how vile and vicious she is to Mia or to anons...or to Darren.  She hates his beloved bar-which is by itself very disturbing. Add her attacks on his fiancee, his friends -Starkid in particular but others as well. Also his team Ricky, and Michael, his brother- Chuck and even Darren himself when he Isn’t acting gay enough. She can’t see that she doesn’t like real Darren-that so much of what he does she bitches about and blames on his team as a way to excuse the behavior she doesn’t like as “not his fault”. She hates the bar that he loves.  The bar that is so quintessentially Darren. 

It is impossible for her to hear the truth. She has refused many times- today we just got a complication, the greatest hits of the last 3 years.  She never sees herself in anyone’s critique .  

Since she has no self-reflection, Let’s do it for her:

1.homophobic-funny, because she replied to my ask and called me homophobic once. 

2. misogynistic; I have discussed this many times and she is absolutely a misogynist. If you hate a woman you don’t know at all-a complete stranger- and you hate her because you attribute negative stereotypical female behaviors to her, that is misogyny. 

3.  xenophobic; she probably had an anon who speaks English as a Second Language and she attacked her for grammar or word mistakes.  She probably deserved this label. 

4. a fucking cunt; I hate the word cunt.  But more importantly, I have realized that it NEVER helps to attack her with anything even close to a vicious attack because she gets very self-righteous in her anger.  She lashes out in anger. Not only will she will just attack back, it feeds that self-righteous anger.  So kill her with kindness and intellectual arguments.    

5. an alcoholic cunt; Again I hate that word. If the only photos you post are of your wine glasses AND you call Mia an alcoholic every chance you get, you are probably going to get some pushback with this label. 

6. I have been told to go fuck myself; I hope people aren’t telling her to go fuck herself.  It just feeds her self-righteousness. Attack her with smart, intelligent facts and be nice.  

7. gay fetishist; If you obsess about the genitals of two men who are NOT  in a relationship, you believe Darren acts “Daisy” and you believe all kinds of outdated stereotypes about gay men- like they are scared of boobies- you are fetishizing gay men.  

8. slut; This seems uncalled for.  It’s rude and she never talks about sex so don’t call her a slut.  

9. told to see a therapist; Well....when you believe a richly-detailed fantasy that 1. isn’t any of your business 2. there is literally NO evidence the men are a couple or ever have been aka you have and continue to make it all up  3. both men have denied your fantasy 5. one of the men is straight  6. both men are in long-term relationships with other people  7. you believe you love one of the men 8. you believe you are a better fan than anyone else and 9. you think that you are “collecting receipts” for Darren because you don’t have an NDA- and by “receipts” you mean social media posts -seeing a therapist is a good idea.    

10.  been questioned on having friends as no one would ever want to be friends with someone like me; that’s mean. But when you never present as a very angry, cruel person in every post you make, someone is going to say this. 

11. old hag; This is just mean... but to a  20 year old, I suppose 44 seems old.   

12. essentially told that I brainwash people; you do. If you create a “fact” that is entirely made up in your head (for example “Darren and Chris are married”) and you keep repeating it until your fandom believes and repeats it, that is brainwashing.

13. a liar; When you make up stories (see #12) and portray them as facts, you are a liar.  

14. a fraud (apparently I am not a lawyer, English is my second language, and I did not go to an ivy league school); Maybe you should analyze what you DO that makes other people believe you aren’t a lawyer, English speaking or went to an Ivy League school? I’ll give you some hints: proofread your posts,  don’t posts something like this  “ajw720 Why do frspetate to read put blogs?” and then leave it on your blog. As for not being a lawyer: stop misrepresenting POAs, contracts, NDAs, “facts”, contracts, the rights and responsibilities of a manager, contracts, breaching, morality clauses...those are good places to start.   

15.  ignorant; about?

16.  delusional, delusional fuck, and delusional idiot; When you fabricate stories about 4 complete strangers, proclaim to know more than their friends and families and write posts about exactly what they are thinking, you're delusional.

17.  Devoid of knowledge on how contracts and morality clauses work; All this is 100% true...or maybe you understand them, but you lie about Darren’s contracts and morality clause to fit your trope. 

18.  middle age frau; Again, to a 20 year old, 44 seems ancient.  

19.  Creepy; If you believe you know everything about a complete stranger, you're creepy. If you don’t understand boundaries between a celebrity and a fan who is a complete stranger, you're creepy. Systematically claiming that EVERY SINGLE THING that Darren says about himself is a lie and YOU know the truth is creepy.

20.  Living in a Fictional World; Yep, 100%. CC is NOT real- it is FICTION- and you are the head writer. 

21.  A Truther; Let’s define truther “a person who doubts the generally accepted account of an event, believing that an official conspiracy exists to conceal the true explanation; a conspiracy theorist” Literally exactly what CCers do and are proud of.  They constantly proclaim that they are too smart to fall for the PR narrative and THEY have alternative facts. How can she deny this? A little self awareness is always a good thing.  

22.  I’ve been disparaged for calling D a victim of abuse; You should be- Darren has never so much as hinted that he is abused. It’s all made up in YOUR head.  When you claim someone is abused ONLY because it fits YOUR narrative, you are belittling real the experiences of real victims.  You are belittling the horror they go through and doing so simply because you think it adds to your fantasy.  

23.  A cult leader; As the leader of the CC truthers, I’d say you are a cult leader but let’s again look at the definition.  The 3rd definition of Cult on Google “is a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing."a cult of personality surrounding the leaders" synonyms:obsession with, fixation on, mania for, passion for” That describes the CC fandom and you are the self-appointed leader.  

24.  I have been told that I hate D; When you criticize  real Darren for everything he does that doesn’t fit your vision of who he is, when you label him a jerk, college frat bro, and no-homo dude AND blame those behaviors on “his team”, that means you don’t actually like Darren. You LOVE CC Darren, a man who doesn’t exist outside of your head but the real Darren is problematic.  

25. I have been told that D&C would be embarrassed by me; Both men have asked you to stop, both men have told and continue to tell their truth and you continue to discount everything they say because it doesn’t prove CC is real. The “truth” that you fabricate about both men’s lives does not look anything like the lives they are leading-the lives everyone can see-except you. Embarrassed by the CCers stalking their friends’ accounts and then telling them they are wrong about Mia, or Chris & Darren, or just writing CrissColfer a million times. Embarrassed that you guys go in to their comment sections and attack fans who tell you to stop- even if YOU specifically don’t do it- and I know at least ONE of the main CCers does-the words that are used are literally the words that you use- it’s your fantasy.  I think they would be more angry than embarrassed.

26.  Cancer of the Fandom I got nothing for this one.

I have talked about her lack of self awareness before but this is a textbook example of how she can’t take any criticism- it is all immediate rejected.  Yesterday’s YOU WILL RESPECT ME rant is another example of the lack of awareness. I mean, the ”truther” accusation is absolutely SPOT ON and yet she can’t see it.  

I don’t write this blog to belittle or make fun of her or the CCers.  I certainly don’t to change her believes because she won’t change- she is in too far, she thrives on the attention she get....but mostly, she can’t see what she is doing. She can’t see that she is so deep into a fantasy that has been entirely fabricated and since Glee ended, fabricated mostly by her.  She can’t see that her lies are getting all caught up in one another now that she has to explain why Chris and Darren have no connection and Mia and Darren are everywhere together as a couple. She has to keep fabricating excuses for why Darren continues to say he is straight and that he loves Mia. She can’t see that it’s very obvious to the rest of us to see that Chris and Darren have no relationship and Darren and Mia are building a life together. This post proves how much she can’t see outside of her own fantasy. 

I write this blog because I couldn’t stand that CC lies were being pumped out every day and they existed unchecked. They started claiming their fantasies were facts...period.  I couldn’t stand anons asking-begging CCers for proof and they were told “it’s a fact” trust me, don’t question it.  The only info anyone could find -if they did go looking- were CC lies. I needed there to be a place where the truth sits.

If I was interested in simply making fun of them, I wouldn’t spend so much time finding facts- photos, videos, old posts to prove they are misconstruing the truth. 

Sometimes my anons get a little snarky- maybe we can tone that down a little so we don’t give her ammunition for her pity party.  

[actualaster]

Fiction and reality have a complex relationship.

However, some person on the internet shipping something that is "unwholesome" does not have anywhere near the same kind of impact as something mainstream and as such honestly? isn't really an issue. Especially as most people who ship "problematic" ships are fully aware of it and aren't promoting it in real life but are exploring an alternate what-if scenario because fiction is a safe space to explore darker ideas. Like writing a murder mystery doesn't mean you approve of murder. Same idea.

If people properly tag more upsetting themes in their work, they are doing nothing wrong even if they're shipping something "bad". Honestly tagging is more a courtesy thananything, they still aren't doing anything wrong if they just create and share it.

Ship and let ship--and if somebody is depicting a ship in a way you feel is harmful, block them. don't like seeing a specific ship because you can't think of a valid reason anyone would ship it (not that you get to be the deciding authority on that)? Block people who ship it, blacklist the ship, filter out the ship when looking for fic on AO3.

But some person exploring a twisted dynamic on the internet isn't normalizing terrible things in the way that, say, literally any big mainstream thing could potentially do. Even if thousands of people are exploring it, there is no way it could be considered impactful enough on global society at large to claim its normalizing anything.

It's not up to shippers to limit their ships to what any person says is an okay ship (especially as if you try hard enough you can twist the dynamics of literally any ship so its unhealthy). It's up to people who consume fan content to use the tools at their disposal to avoid what upsets or triggers them.

And to use basic critical thinking to understand that not every depiction that isn't labeled all over with "this is bad" is actually condoning something. Also to analyze media they consume to filter out the messages they find harmful, because just reading a thing doesn't suddenly mean you will agree with it.

So sure, point out problem dynamics in ships and discuss the implications of that sort of relationship. That's part of critical analysis of the media you consume!

But don't attack people who ship it or assume the shippers think its the most perfect healthy thing because I can guarantee you they're aware that it isn't 99% of the time.

So, ship and let ship because if you refuse to use the tools available to you to avoid content that you don't want to see then you are the problem, not the shippers.

Take responsibility for your own fandom experience and stop demanding everybody else take responsibility for you. We aren't your parents. It isn't our job to protect you from every single thing, especially not at cost to ourselves.

And if you aren't able to do that, then maybe you aren't old enough to be allowed online without adult supervision.

[aroworlds]

Hey super big question , I feel like we’re about to be slaughtered this December because Grindlewald is Aro Gay And I’m worried that jk is going to completely dehumanize him with Jonny Depp and that she chose Jonny because of his ability to play dehumanizing characters and the writing and his portrayal combined is going to be horrific for us and I can’t stop stressing about it , and asshole allos had to bring up Grindlewald is Nazi metaphor and then I just read the wiki on Hitler, he was ace fml

I said on the weekend that we should be allowed to connect to characters who are not good representation and express that connection, and that’s absolutely true. This said, it is also true that our connection does not mean other people cannot discuss the problems with that character and story. I can express a connection with Clariel; other people have the right to discuss how her position as series antagonist situates her as another loveless villain and her message is, consequently, damaging. Both approaches are important.

To deny people space to talk about the problems, parallels and metaphors in a work or character because of our connection is as silencing as their denying us space to speak of our connection. There are specific spaces where it isn’t appropriate to discuss some feelings in that space (a fanblog where folks gush about Clariel isn’t the best space to argue that she’s dreadful aro-ace rep) and this should be respected. On your own blog, you can certainly put up boundaries on the conversations you prefer not to see. But in broader, general community spaces, the risk is that people will have differing viewpoints and that many of these viewpoints can be hard for us to take, especially if our connection to a character or work is deep and intense.

As an autistic, it can be difficult to see people have a differing opinion about a special interest. It bothers me if they don’t like something I like; it bothers me even more if they like something I consider terrible! It feels like a personal judgement, and it’s hard not to get extremely defensive in response. When it’s tangled up in questions of representation, erasure, marginalisation and identity, it becomes even more complicated, and my connection to my special interest is such that seeing differing attitudes and evaluations of it that hurt me provoke depression, defiance or anger. Those feelings don’t make for easy conversation about it with other people.

One thing I’ve found as an answer, at least in the realm of a work I connect to being dismissed, is analyzing works myself. Yes, I like it, but what does it mean? What’s the context of this character? What are the themes and how do they relate to real life? How might these themes cause harm to others? What does the context of this character say about identity? What lead them to develop this viewpoint? Is it one I should keep? This allows me to continue to engage with a special interest topic while having desensitised myself to viewpoints that aren’t mine, because part of how I now connect to it is thinking about it from lots of different angles. But this took me years to develop and you may not be yet in a position to approach things this way. It also doesn’t work for attitudes and evaluations of a work based in out-and-out hatred or bigotry; you need to be prepared to dismiss them without being overwhelmed by them, and that’s also an ability that takes time and self-awareness to gain.

I do recommend exploring the idea that a special interest doesn’t need to be perfect to have value to meand that a special interest doesn’t need to be perceived the same way by others to have value to me. Your connection to a work is about you and you alone. That connection is not diminished or erased by someone else’s opinion, someone else’s actions or someone else’s response. This applies for disagreement about character arc or idealised representation, and it applies to erasure and antagonism.

I know nothing about Hitler being ace, but so what if he is? Seriously, so what? There’s plenty of lesbian TERFs. There’s heaps of binary trans truscum causing harm to non-binary people. What of Milo Yiannopoulos? Does that mean all lesbians, all binary trans people and all gay men are irredeemable? Of course not! Being of a marginalised identity does not preclude one from being harmful, dangerous, cruel, malicious or damaging. There are aromantic people out there who are dangerous to me. That doesn’t make them less aromantic or less dangerous. It just means all kinds of people can be aromantic, including those I think morally reprehensible.

Anyone who declares all gay men dangerous because of Milo Yiannopoulosis a heterosexist bigot, and the same applies here. You cannot spend your life worrying that an awful person is gay/ace/aro/trans/autistic (etc) and what that means or if people will use that against you. If you do, you’ll never be able to breathe. The only person you’re harming with this worry is you, and you deserve better than that.

If other people use someone’s existence to dismiss your community, as has happened so many times in antagonistic conversations over the last couple of years, handle it like you handle anyone else hateful. Block them. Report vile hate speech to Tumblr. Move on to more constructive creations and conversations.

The majority of fictional and creative media is at least unthinkingly amatonormative, ableist and cissexist. I rarely get to pick up a book that respects me as a trans, autistic aro, and I have to acknowledge this risk of being hurt every time I start something new. This isn’t right or fair, but it is our reality. This movie is going to be no different on that regard, no different to the rest of the media that hurts us. The difference here is that I think this is a property you care about, one that you deeply connect to--and that’s perfectly right and normal! But that connection makes it harder to see that this is the same thing the a-spec community has been enduring for years and years. We’ve weathered everything that’s come before and we’ll weather this, too. You’ll weather this, just as you weathered every other instance of erasure and antagonism in a fictional work.

You can’t change what track the film takes or how people respond to it. You can’t control other people’s coding. You can’t control other people’s hatred, dismissal and erasure. Worrying does nothing to change the situation; it only causes you unneeded distress. Rowling has supported Depp’s casting despite wide condemnation, so what else can you do? You either see the film anyway, knowing the risks, or you don’t--and not seeing it is a valid and reasonable option, one absolutely worth considering.

Under the cut, I talk about therapy and self-care for handling anxiety:

Given your distress, I do feel it a requirement to say that I think you should look into psychology and therapy services for your anxiety. This ask goes a little beyond the scope of what I can reasonably and ethically offer in validation and support. As someone with severe anxiety myself, I swear to you that worrying about something like this, a situation you cannot change yourself, is a problem that is causing you unneeded distress and harm. I don’t know where you live or what your options are, but there are blogs that detail support options. I genuinely believe that you need professional support here and encourage you to consider this in whatever options available to you.

(If you are already in therapy or treatment, I take this post as an indication that your current approaches are not best supporting you and it may be worthwhile to discuss this with your care providers.)

I’ll finish by saying that you can handle the situation, if you feel that you cannot bear the finished film and conversations about it at all. Blacklist tags relating to content you don’t wish to see. Unfollow people who post content you don’t wish to see, especially if it’s most of their content or they don’t tag. Don’t go searching tags. Follow blogs you trust. Quietly block anyone who annoys you. You don’t need to engage in arguments on something you disagree with; you can block users and, if you really need to get something off your chest, make new posts about it on your own blog, in your own space. Turn off anon asks if you think you might be harassed for your opinions; restrict private messages to only blogs you follow.

I’d strongly advise not engaging in discourse and arguments with people who disagree with you. Block, make new posts on your blog if you must talk, reblog folks who are making points that resonate with you. You don’t have to convince the world of what you know or how wrong they are. You don’t have to engage in activism here. Just block and move on. Getting yourself caught up in arguments with people who aren’t disposed to hearing you will only cause more stress and harm to you. Some people can constantly engage in discourse without losing themselves in anger and aggression, but I’m not one of them, and I suspect you’re like me in this regard. Our activism is healthiest for us when directed into community building and validation, not fighting those who won’t listen.

Likewise, you can prepare for any self-care you need should the above fail. Have go-to media like books, films and music you need to distract yourself. Have a list of activities you enjoy that you know that calm you and work through them. If you have a friend or two you can trust to talk with you or distract you, contact them. If this is in your ability, go outside, go for a walk, go to the shops--away from your computer or phone. Watch a YouTube craft video and attempt to follow it. Play games. Write unrelated fanfiction. Keep a list of Calming Things You Can Do by your desk and on your phone, and work to develop a habit of reaching for that list when even slightly overwhelmed or stressed. Again, this is an area where a mental health professional will help you in identifying and using the interests and tools you already have to cope, particularly in working with your own interests and needs, so if you can’t put this into action on your own, this is another sign that you need a psychologist or therapist on Team You.

It’d be irresponsible of me not to suggest that you, and any other aro-spec who feels this way, seek professional support. That you’re turning towards me says you’re not currently getting what it is you need elsewhere, offline and off. That’s not a criticism on you: you deserve to be supported. It’s in no way a crime to want someone to help shore you up in the face of dismissal, erasure, antagonism and hate; it’s in no way a crime to want support from a fellow community member in the face of the antagonism we are so often dealt.

But right now, I do believe–again, as a person with severe anxiety myself–that you’re in need of professional support to cope with the things you’re finding difficult, much more support than I am ethically able to provide. I know first-hand that finding good mental health care is far from easy for many of us, but if anything is available to you, I hope you’ll consider seeking it out.

[weirdmovienerd-blog]

Blade Runner 2049

Blade Runner 2049 is everything a sequel should be. You’ve probably read and/or heard that in every review of this movie. That’s because it’s true. It expands on the themes of the previous film, while also introducing new ones. It finds the perfect balance of referencing the original film without relying on nostalgia, something a lot of sequels fail to do. The ability to make a sequel that works as a standalone movie, but also ties in the first film in smart, sophisticated ways, is as rare as it is challenging. But Denis Villeneuve and his team were more than up to the task, as they continued to build upon the futuristic world Ridley Scott created in 1982.

Blade Runner 2049 spends its 163 minute runtime examining the questions, “What does it mean to be human?”, “What does it mean to have humanity?”, and “What does it mean to have a soul?”

Officer K, the protagonist of the film (played by Ryan Gosling), spends the movie trying to answer these questions as he searches for the offspring of a replicant. During his journey, he begins to discover his own humanity, undergoing a transformation from a completely obedient, ruthless hunter of replicants to a sympathetic, renegade blade runner trying to protect them. K comes to believe that he is the lost child of Deckard and Rachel that he’s been searching for. During the search, his programmed memories lead him to find a toy from his childhood. This brings K to believe his memories aren’t manufactured. It is this belief that the memories are real, that he is real, that he has a soul, which facilitates K’s metamorphosis throughout the film.

Joi, K’s holographic companion (played by Ana de Armas), is another factor in K’s character development. Despite not being capable of change herself, she encourages K to find the truth about his past and become the best, most evolved, complete version of himself. She shows legitimate concern when K is in danger. And even goes as far as hiring a replicant prostitute so she can simulate intimacy with him. Joi is completely dedicated to K. However, when he sees an advertisement for her, he realizes that all the idiosyncrasies he believed were unique about Joi were nothing more than programming. This is the moment that causes K to fully change and he decides to save Deckard.

Blade Runner 2049 also has great villains. Niander Wallace (played by Jared Leto), has taken over for Tyrell as the “manufacturer” of replicants. Unlike his predecessor, who was very interested in the replicants, Wallace is only concerned with expansion and exploration. It’s his inability to focus on the fine details, only seeing the big picture, that is his greatest flaw. This is never more evident than the scene where Wallace presents Deckard with a new model of Rachel. Nearly identical, but Deckard rejects her because the eyes are the wrong color. Green eyes, a small detail that Wallace didn’t pay attention to, and it derailed his plan.

Luv (played by Sylvia Hoeks), a replicant and Niander Wallace’s second in command. She considers herself to be Wallace’s greatest achievement, and is terrified of failing him. The first time Luv demonstrates any semblance of fear is the scene where K wrecks the vehicle transporting Deckard. Her concern is not for her own safety, but because she doesn’t want to disappoint Wallace.

Niander Wallace and Luv are great antagonists because they are villains with real motivations. They aren’t simply “evil for the sake of evil”. They truly believe in what they’re doing. They are brilliant but flawed.

The cast is rounded out by the likes of Robin Wright, Dave Bautista, Mackenzie Davis, and Lennie James; all of who deliver fantastic performances.

Blade Runner 2049 is smartly written, well acted, and brilliantly directed. (How did Denis Villeneuve not get a Best Director nomination?) But my favorite part of the movie is the cinematography. This film is gorgeous. One of the most visually stunning pieces of cinema I’ve seen, maybe ever. If Roger Deakins doesn’t get the Oscar for Best Cinematography, I don’t know what the Academy is thinking.

And the sound design of Blade Runner 2049 is incredible. I know some people might think of that as trivial, but it’s not. The sound editing/mixing, along with the score, help give the film its futuristic vibe. You hear it and believe that’s what 2049 would sound like.

My favorite scene in the film is the ending, where Deckard goes to meet his daughter for the first time, while a wounded K sits outside in the snow, succumbing to his injuries. There are a couple different ways to interpret this scene. The first (which I can’t claim to have discovered on my own) is the ironic duality of K and Dr. Ana Stelline, Deckard’s daughter. K, the replicant, sits outside watching real snow fall. Stelline, the human, watches a hologram of snow in her sterilized room. The juxtaposition of their circumstances further analyzes the themes of the movie. K, the artificial being, experiences the real world. Simultaneously, Stelline, the real human being, is confined to her quarters, is limited to the experiences her holograms provide. This scene adds another layer to the already complex question, “What does it mean to be human?”

Another way to look at this scene (and how I interpreted it) is as a reference to Rutger Hauer’s final scene in the original Blade Runner. In that scene, Hauer dies after delivering his iconic “Tears in Rain” monologue. If you haven’t heard it, the speech is about the extraordinary experiences he’s had, and how all those moments will be lost with him. It is about his desire to preserve his life, which would preserve his memories. Therefore, preserving his humanity. In Blade Runner 2049, K is searching for his humanity. And by the end of the film, I think he’s found it. The connection these two scenes have is precipitation. I think the snow in K’s scene represents individuality, the humanity he’s been searching for, his soul. As opposed to the rain in Hauer’s scene that represents what is lost, the snow in K’s scene symbolizes what has been found.

I have no major criticisms of this movie. It’s excellent. I do, however, have a word of advice for anyone that decides to watch this movie.

This is not an action movie. Sure, it has a big budget and some spectacular visuals. But this isn’t an action blockbuster with a ton of fight scenes and shootouts and chases and explosions. Sure, it has some of those things. But if you’re expecting a big action set piece every 20 minutes, you will be disappointed. This is a long, thoughtful, ponderous science fiction movie that examines the definition of humanity. If that sounds like something you’d enjoy, then I highly recommend this movie. If not, Blade Runner 2049 probably isn’t for you.

I am not a professional film critic. I haven’t been to film school. I’m just a movie fan with social media. So the brilliance of Blade Runner 2049 is lost on me to some degree. There’s probably a lot of great things about this movie I haven’t picked up on. References and symbolism and themes that went over my head.

But as a fan, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Overall, I thought it was exceptionally well made. This is the type of movie I would like to see studios make more of. Smart, cerebral, big budget science fiction movies. This film was amazing, and one of my favorite movies released in 2017.

Rating: 5 Star Scale = 5 Stars, 1-10 Scale = 10/10

[dialogue-with-varyu]

SUPERNATURAL THE ANIMATION: A Dissection of Dean’s Failed Characterization & Design (PART 1 - The Technicals)

I have a lot on my chest about the anime that I couldn’t really get into in both of my last posts since the topic of what makes the anime series so cringe-worthy is a very intricate one, making the explanation of it all become a SERIES OF ESSAYS. So please read my previous installments before getting into this one because I will be referencing those a lot:

SUPERNATURAL THE ANIMATION: A THESIS OVERVIEW ON JAPANESE ANIME PRODUCTION & CHARACTER DESIGN

SUPERNATURAL THE ANIMATION: THE IMPORTANCE COLOR DESIGN BRINGS TO VISUAL TONE

But anyway, let’s talk about Dean. I’m gonna talk about Dean.

I will talk about Dean because Sam was portrayed pretty okay in the anime and it’s really Dean’s characterization that strikes a chord with a lot of fans of the original Supernatural series. (However I will consider a separate Sam essay to those in favor of it.)

But I haven’t really seen a lot of people put into words about makes them feel the way they do. So what’s the problem with Dean?

Refresher:

While I understand this distinction, I think that we can all agree that the overall interpretation of Dean suck balls and I’d like to argue that:

rather than misinterpreting Dean’s character, the writers were more focused on one of Dean’s major facades and ran with it.

But I’m getting ahead of myself.

First, I’d like to address the elephant in the room: Why an anime series?

Why did Supernatural garner enough attention to GET an anime series? What is so special about Supernatural AND anime that a large group of creatives and investors were willing to marry the two?

Honestly, that question is big enough for another essay on it’s own. But the bottom line is:

Anime is watched for the melodrama.

Nuance and subtitles are more akin to live action film since the culture around the different intricacies of a story have larger factors that contribute to it. (i.e, it doesn’t matter what’s written because an actor may just ad-lib it, Murphey’s Law, etc.) 

So basically, when you have an animated show what you see is what you get by convention. There really is no use arguing over what is canon and what is not because, unlike an actor, decisions and change of mind can’t be attributed in the moment when it comes to character performance. People are more likely to question the mindset of a decision behind a scene when it’s animated more often than leaving it to the death of the author.

But it’s because of this that anime often has namely traits of exaggeration: screaming characters crying about their passion in the heat of battle, long ass internal monologues, “-dere” archetypes, the works.

Which means that anime characters are usually walking talking hyperbolic symbols. (Whether or not you enjoy this is usually the deciding factor between anime fans and those who are not.)

And this ties directly into Dean. 

Because Dean in the anime series is an exaggeration of himself from the original show.

Rather, an exaggeration of one specific facade:

The facade Dean pulls up in season one episode 1. The fake Dean that tends to overcompensate his insecurities with bravado.

WHY this scene in particular is one that actually makes sense. 

Mostly because this scene IS a if not THE root scene that cemented Dean Winchester’s starting point launching endless possibilities of character traits to be explored for seasons to come. It’s a highly impacted scene that’s very memorable, both in it’s first impressions and as a point of reference for his development. 

I infer that the writers of the anime series saw this and built upon their own impressions of it. Namely, they saw this facade and thought this was the True Dean Winchester. (Which, to those who have watched past season 2, know is very far from the truth.)

So how did they write Dean Winchester?

Dean Winchester is perceived to be like a generic anime bad boy

(I say “perceived” since by all means the Supernatural anime is a reinterpretation with very deliberate changes.)

What I’m talking about are those “thug” type bullies in every school centered anime show.

And while I make the claim that the writers may have built off of the scene from the pilot in painting a picture of Dean’s character in their heads, I’m also led to believe that this decision to have Dean come off as a “thug” is less of a conscious choice...

...and more of a conventional one.

Because nothing fits Fake Bravado Dean like Generic Anime Thug Dude when it comes to a script laden with anime-like tropes.

(To make a more compelling dissection of the writer’s true interpretation of Dean SPECIFICALLY would require me to rewatch and analyze ALL of the anime’s original standalone episodes.

...for the sake of brevity and the fact that I don’t want to rewatch any of the anime’s episodes in it’s entirety because I can’t stand even 5 seconds of this animated drivel I Am Not Going to Do That unless a lot of people ask about it or if people just wanna see me suffer.)

But okay, it’s sort of weird to gauge the errors of Dean’s characterization when this anime series nearly follows the original show’s 1st and 2nd season’s storylines verbatim. 

Now that I think about it, it’s even weirder to be so allergic to an interpretation of a character when the source material is being 99.9% faithfully adapted--especially with the same lines and set up. So what gives?

What makes anime Dean’s characterization so off from the original to a drastic degree?

The “mischaracterization” is greatly tied into Dean’s character design and the way he emotes--which affects him greatly on the narrative of the anime series as a whole.

I already criticized the character designs in the lack of coherence in color design as well as execution narratively, but the latter still stands to be a huge major problem since it does just that. 

Affect the narrative. 

Which means it also affects the characters and the themes.

Which ties back again to Dean being perceived as an anime thug. 

And I know this because Dean makes the same goddamn faces as an anime thug.

(In this case I’ll be referencing Space Dandy since I can’t find generic anime examples of side characters that embody this profile despite this stereotype and it’s mannerisms invading vast amounts of shows. However anyone who has seen enough anime will know what I’m talking about. And again, the “look” given by the artistic nuances/techniques of the character design of the anime series is not very original.)

You know what, as an aside I’m just going to throw in the fact that Space Dandy’s “look” is very similar to to the spn anime down to the BL shadows in which Dandy is compared with Redline

And that Jessica is totally generically designed

Anyway, this extends further than Dean’s facial expressions alone. 

It extends to his wardrobe which totally starts to unhinge Dean’s persona. oddly enough. 

So here’s a round of nit-picking

Why in god’s name is Dean wearing sunglasses indoors? He already went through an entire spiel about ineffectiveness at night

and it’s not like having it indoors makes it any less ridiculous. And yes, he does wear them again in later seasons both unironically and ironically

But these cues of character insight (that people have written far better meta for) is in the context of later seasons and I highly doubt the anime production team could’ve predicted any of this so I’m just going to have a giant ????? over this.

Back to this awful screenshot again. 

But seriously, anyone shirtless in the snow deserves to die of hypothermia. 

Dean is the last person to feel comfortable with minimal clothing due to years of sexual harassment/assault from CREATURES more often than not

Even more so whenever Dean is naked, it’s used more for vulnerability over titillation:

I hate this stupid screenshot. 

It is awful, why? Because anime characters rarely stray from their trope mannerisms unless the story calls for it, or the animators dedicate some time to create impressive sakuga for novelty’s sake. If Dean has body language like this now, that mean’s he’s likely going to exhibit it again no matter what the context is in terms of story or character.

Leading to this abomination. 

I know what you are doing. I get it. I KNOW. 

I KNOW YOU’RE DRAWING DEAN THIS WAY BECAUSE APPARENTLY TO YOU DEAN IS AN ANIME THUG WHICH MEANS ANIME THUGS EXHIBIT THIS KIND OF UNCARING BODY LANGUAGE BUT NEED WE FORGET THAT DEAN LOVES HIS CAR MORE THAN LIFE ITSELF

HAVING HIS SHOES AGAINST THE SEAT OR ANYWHERE NEAR THE LEATHER IS THE SAME AS DEFECATING ON IT. ARE YOU SERIOUS RN??? THAT’S LIKE THE ONE THING DEAN WINCHESTER IS ALL ABOUT AND IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD NOT BE FORGOTTEN ESPECIALLY WHEN IT CAME TO DEVELOPMENTS OF DEMON!DEAN 

This...this shit I can’t forgive. This is so absent-minded it physically hurts me. I can’t be the only one bothered by this.

Addendum: I don’t even really care if that’s NOT the impala (in this episode of the anime Sam and Dean were thrown into the backseat of a police car.) I still don’t think Dean would EVER exhibit this sort of body language in any car. 

It also still doesn’t excuse the lack of variety in Dean’s emoting and body language as a whole. You could do so much storytelling in his body language (since Jensen Ackles is a master at that) but they instead chose to stick with a template of a character and never strayed from it.

But...I digress.

Incidentally of all places Yuri!! On Ice has closer character designs of Sam and Dean that for some virulent reason exists (Also incidentally, if you so much as breathe the title of YOI you will be immediately blocked I am not joking around. Don’t test me.)

As does Yami Shibai

So it’s not like a competent/more modern design tailored to anime is impossible. 

It is very possible. So if you have your defense that the character designs of the spn anime are inherently horrible BECAUSE it’s supposed to “look anime” you’re probably just suffering from media illiteracy.

However, again, I made claim that the “style” of the Supernatural anime character designs are not what make it fail. 

It’s the execution of nuances that killed it--both visually and narratively. And I still stand by that.

To form examples, that means more design redraws!!!

However, the redraws this time around will have it’s own separate post since the inner working of what can make or break a design will be discussed and demonstrated there.

SEE YOU IN PART 2!!!

[reallifeblogthings-blog]

COMM 3P18 Blog #3

Welcome to my last and final blog… at least for this class. I like to think the best for last, because these topics had me thinking about what is really going on on social media, and why? How digitization and convergence shape new media, as well as what is important to the audience in terms of both enjoyment and experience.

While reading The Influences of Sports Viewing Conditions on Enjoyment from Watching Televised Sports I could relate to multiple aspects of the perception of presence. In the article, perception of presence was defined as “the phenomenon in which an individual develops a sense of being physically present at a remote location through interaction with media”, as someone who watches a lot of mediated sports, I am able to relate to that feeling of being involved in such a way (Kim, Pg.392). Specifically, I related to immersion which is “the degree to which an individual feels involved in a particular experience and is caught up in the presentation of the media” (Kim, Pg.392). I believe that immersion can be anywhere, watching a sports game at any time. I also believe that immersion can happen at a real-life event due to the way a game is presented with media. For example, each year my friend Cassidy and I would buy each other birthday presents, as most would. During the summer I bought her Bluejays tickets because she loves baseball, and in November she bought be Raptors tickets because I love basketball. Neither of us liked the other sport, but of course, we went together to each event because we knew, either way, we would have a good time together. After reading about immersion, I couldn't help but think back to the time we went to both games, specifically the Raptors game. Screens everywhere, big flashing lights, loud announcers, all part of the experience of going to an event live. I found myself becoming more rowdy then I would watch the weekly games in my living room, and I believe this was due to all the media that was used throughout the game to create a greater audience experience. Now only was I becoming a true rowdy fan, my friend Cassidy was just as into it as I was. Thinking back to that memory, I always thought it was so strange she had so much fun cheering for a team she doesn't even follow. Although, I then thought about the atmosphere and the media that creates such a particular experience almost forcing one to become a fan. The big bright lights, large screens making you feel closer to the court than you truly are, and the loud voices of announcers heard across the stadium. These tools of media presented an experience for Cassidy that would draw her in to become a fan. I believe her immersion, was at a high degree, creating a fun experience she wasn't expecting from a basketball game.

During class and seminar, I had quite the throwback to my elementary and early high school years. I remember being so “in love” with celebrities, trying to always see what they were up to and follow their every move. I started to think about the continuum of a fandom and realized I’ve reached each level. I truly believe most people have, as Sullivan explains “We are all fans of something in today’s media-saturated environment, which makes the cultural and sociological study of fandom all the more important for understanding media audiences” (Sullivan, pg.195). Firstly a consumer, simply put as one who consumes the media content. This could be done by watching a sports event, reading tweets, or maybe watching a movie. Specifically, I believe I am only a consumer when it comes to movies. Unlike others, I never had much of an obsession when it comes to Harry Potter, or like the example of the super fan in class Star Trek. Therefore, since I've still seen them I could classify just as a consumer. Secondly, I also believe I am an enthusiast. For example, when I go to concerts, specifically this summer at All American Rejects, I went to watch them perform. Not only this I ended up buying one or their merchandise t-shirts, even so, but I would also call myself anything more than an enthusiast because I never find myself following their every move, not even following them on twitter... I don’t think they would be very funny. To be a fan is to be a fan of one's content, following them, cheering for them. Currently, I wouldn't consider myself a fan of anyone, but in high school, I was a big fan .. yep I’m gonna say it (DONT JUDGE ME) Justin Bieber. Now I wasn’t crazy, but I definitely kept up to date with his life, would watch live performances, and follow him on all social media. Lastly, the producer, the least favorite person out of the four. I was a producer when I was MUCH younger and was obsessed One Direction (double whammy ... I know). My friends and I all had fan accounts on Twitter, which was strictly to tweet about them, and only them. I definitely would have considered my group of friends super fans, there was a point where One Direction was truly the only thing we talked about. Thus, showing even though I’m not so proud of it, in my life and I think more people than who really know it, have hit each stage of the continuum of a fandom after all “the category of ‘fan’ has dramatically expanded as a result of the even smaller niche media products and platforms available today” (Sullivan, pg.195). 

After reading about Rebecca Black’s ‘It’s Friday’ video that went viral a few years ago. I truly couldn't help but laugh, mainly because I remember when that video first went viral and circulated around the school, it seemed as though every single person knew about it. Yet, I always wondered why such a terrible video and song became so popular? Even as the texts stated critics hated it as well… Although as Sullivan stated “unknown artists can create their own cultural materials and circulate them to millions of people at a time via the web, effectively bypassing the institutional gatekeepers in the traditional media” (Sullivan, pg. 214). I found this extremely interesting because it’s true… It’s so simple nowadays to make a terrible music video or post a wild photo that critics and most of the public would utterly hate, yet it would go viral! I believe due to the user-generated content such as twitter, facebook, and youtube, it becomes so simple to widespread information at such a fast pace. On the other hand, I also believe the reason it's much easier for content to go viral is partly due to the participatory culture that youtube brings to its viewers. Youtube allows users to talk to one another about the videos, to comment on each others posts, and even respond to them. Just looking at figure 9.1 on page 221 in Sullivan, youtube’s content is 50% user-generated. For an example of my own, I constantly find myself time and time again watching videos that have little to no meaning for self. Why’s this? Well scrolling through Twitter, something has gone viral, scrolling through Facebook, videos shared over and over again. I can’t stop myself from clicking to see what the fuss is all about, and that’s exactly why I end up on Youtube in the first place. But, what makes me stay is being able to look at what others think, seeing what they comment, how many views it gets, and even related videos that pop up with it. If these factors were not part of youtube, there is absolutely no chance it would have been successful as it is. Which is also the reason Instagram and Twitter have become increasingly popular as well.

During the reading Framing News in 140 Characters, I was really intrigued by the basis of the frames from both generic and issue-specific frames. Generic frames meaning they “are broad and structural themes and are limited to conflict, human interest, economic impact, responsibility and morality” (Wasike, pg.9). Issue-specific frames meaning they “are flexible and vary depending on the content being analyzed and they change based on the topic under study and the prevailing context” (Wasike, pg. 9). I mostly found it interesting when the author spoke about studies not specifically using the framing theory, but still found that it does exist in its findings. It truly made me think about what was circulating on twitter now, what news was at the top of the feed due to importance. Currently, the California fires had been circulating, not only on the news but it was literally all over my twitter! I thought for a second that this was odd but it certainly brought me in to read more about it. As I was reading I saw celebrity house after celebrity house after celebrity house, and no wonder, most celebrity issues are the ones that circulate most on twitter. It then made a lot more sense. The generic frames used in the theory that were favored were conflict, human interest, technology, and economic consequence. Why does this matter?… well, what sparks more human interest than a celebrity who is in distress over their house being burnt down?  It circulated twitter so much because it was someone who was famous, who tweeted photos and it thus, sparked human interest rather than some random person who would have tweeted about it. At the end after all who would want to read about someone who is really suffering and truly lost everything and probably has no place to go? Or even dying animals losing their homes? NO, what’s important is the celebrities who have hundreds of fans waiting for something ever so tragic to happen to them, so they can then tweet back and let them know the support they are giving.

Chapter 9, had a lot of important aspects of how new media shapes and differs every time something changes. Yet, I believe the more important topics that were talked about were the convergence of such media technologies and the digitization of all media. As said in class, we as an audience have a massive power when it comes to media now, just as the magazine Time also knew when putting the person of the year as ‘us’. Not only this But audiences have gained so much power that we overwhelm the producers. Considering we have such niche markets, there is so many smaller groups that ask for so much at the same time, and how could anyone keep up with that? I found it interesting that quite a few YouTubers are one by one taking time away from posting videos for subscribers due to being overwhelmed. So I got to thinking during class (weird, I know), but, when Jenn asked “are you happy? Does digital technology make you feel good? And who has the power?”  I really questioned a lot of media technologies that I use. What uses do I get from them? Are they keeping me entertained... Well yes, of course. But, am I happy with how I’m spending my time, watching things I don't even want to watch, not really. But in the end, I do believe that the audience holds the power, they have shut down corporations, and even taken away the middleman. 

But that’s enough deep thoughts about audience studies for now. Thanks for tuning in :)

-Kim Parker

[flauntpage]

Eagles Film Study: “Nah Bro, Jalen Mills Sux”

By now you know that Jalen Mills is the fall guy for the entirety of the Philadelphia Eagles’ defensive struggles.

And when you try to analyze his performances in a fair way or even just approach any Mills-related hot take with a shred of critical thinking or non-bias, you get the following response:

“Nah bro, Jalen Mills sux.”

This isn’t to say I’m a Jalen Mills apologist, because I’m not. He hasn’t been very good this season.

But nobody on this defense is lighting the world on fire, which I think most Eagles fans are smart enough to recognize. Jim Schwartz hasn’t been drawing up the best schemes or using his personnel in the best possible way. You’ve got Rodney McLeod on the shelf with a rookie cornerback playing safety for the first time his career. Tim Jernigan and Vinny Curry and Patrick Robinson and Beau Allen appeared to be bigger losses than we thought.

Still, we generally channel all of our distrust into one singular focus, which is Jalen Mills, and I can’t say it’s undeserved. When you get beat for a 68-yard completion, it looks bad. It looks worse than Ronald Darby missing a tackle and allowing a three-yard gain to become an eight-yard gain. A pass interference penalty on a 30-yard attempt looks worse than a 15-yard roughing the passer flag.

I’ve always kind of leaned on that assertion when evaluating Mills, the idea that his mistakes are often MORE DAMAGING than the mistakes of others. It doesn’t mean he’s necessarily committing a HIGHER VOLUME of mistakes, but they stick out in a way that is much more noticeable than, say, when a defensive end fails to seal the corner or when an outside linebacker blitzes and simply doesn’t reach the quarterback.

All of that said, I figured the best way to approach this video study on a short week would be to lay out literally every single play where Mills was targeted or made a tackle in the Minnesota loss, with the goal of adding context to his performance instead of just saying:

“Nah bro, Jalen Mills sux.”

Play 1

This was an seven yard gain on 2nd and 5 during the Vikings’ opening drive.

The Eagles are in a form of cover 3 here with a single high safety, and both Mills and Darby are 10 yards off their receivers as Kirk Cousins throws a really nice flat pass to allow Stefon Diggs to pick up a first down with a burst forward in space.

You also see Avonte Maddox creeping up there in what looks like a free safety blitz.

This is pretty typical for a cover 3 look, with Mills, Darby, and the high safety each responsible for one third of the field. Only one corner is going to get safety help over the top if they get beat.

Play 2

This was on the same drive, a little pre-snap motion and a swing pass to try to get Diggs into space again.

Mills and Sidney Jones both do a pretty good job here of holding their ground as Malcolm Jenkins narrows the angle, but Diggs has the speed to turn this into a five yard gain.

Nothing really to take away from this one. Mills has always been a pretty good tackler in these kinds of situations.

Play 3

Final play of the Vikings’ opening drive.

Good pass break up here by Mills, but there’s a bit of a stumble by Roc Thomas that allows him to step in and bat the ball down.

Thing is, Mills is only 3-4 yards off Thomas at the line of scrimmage, playing the first down line on a 3rd and short. He gets his hands up and makes Thomas at least a little bit uncomfortable here.

One issue with Mills is that he rarely does anything disruptive at the line because he’s always playing soft coverage. I don’t know if that’s by design or what, but when you watch his film, he’s so much better in red zone and short yardage situations because the field shrinks and, well, he can’t get beat over the top. That leads me to believe that Mills has the skill set and physical tools to be a slot corner, yet he’s always giving cushion when the offense has room to work downfield.

If you drafted Sidney Jones to play on the outside, maybe… play him on the outside?

Play 4

I don’t have the all-22 film here because it’s only Tuesday (sorry), so I can’t see the safety, but it looks like another single-high scheme. Presumably the safety is focused on the strong side of the field with Adam Thielen, Diggs, and Kyle Rudolph.

So the Vikings just hit Laquon Treadwall on a short hitch and Mills closes the gap quickly to make the tackle. This preceded the Michael Bennett penalty, which then resulted in Kirk Cousins hitting Thielen in the corner for the touchdown (Darby was in coverage on that play).

Play 5

Here’s the big 68-yard gain.

Again they’re playing single-high safety with Avonte Maddox over the top. The Eagles blitz Nigel Bradham and Malcolm Jenkins and Cousins quickly gets rid of the ball to hit Thielen, who is 1v1 with Mills.

Honestly, it’s a really nice throw. Fletcher Cox is collapsing the pocket and Cousins knows he’s going to take a hit, but puts that ball right where it needs to be. Latavius Murray also lays a nice block on Jenkins to protect Cousins’ blind side.

So give Minnesota credit for executing here.

Mills, for whatever reason, is again 10 yards off his guy at the line of scrimmage. Darby and Jones are two yards off and they make contact with their receivers in an effort to be disruptive.

Photo evidence as the play develops:

No gap, no gap, and a really big gap.

Cousins literally has less than three seconds to get rid of this ball, and two of his guys have defenders up their butts while Mills is still way off Thielen. He doesn’t get totally waxed by the double move, but he’s still not close enough to make a play on the ball, Maddox misses a tackle, and Mills has to recover to save a touchdown.

Just ugly stuff all around. I really do not know why Mills is playing with a 10 yard cushion while two other corners are five yards off the line. I’d be interested in hearing him or Jim Schwartz explain whether this is scheme related or just incorrect positioning and/or technique.

Play 6

Remember how I said earlier that Mills was pretty good in short yardage and red zone situations? That’s been his strength this year, and he followed up the Thielen play by batting down the Vikings’ 2nd and goal pass on the same drive.

Pretty good rush by Brandon Graham on this play. Treadwell thinks Mills interferes with him, but that looks like pretty good timing to me.

Play 7

Not a big fan of the play call, but they went right at Mills again on 3rd and goal and tried to pick Sidney Jones. The pass is way too shallow, almost like an Andy Reid play call from back in the day.

Still, nice job by Jalen to read that, close the gap, and make a play on the ball. He had three of the Eagles’ four pass break-ups in this game.

Of course, this was the play where he got in Thielen’s face afterward then had to be directed off the field by Fletcher Cox, and rightfully so,

Again, it’s optics here. It doesn’t LOOK GOOD when you give up a 68 yard pass, make up for it in the red zone with a pair of PBUs, then begin jawing with the guy who originally roasted you. Jalen doesn’t do himself any favors with the fan base and media when he does that stuff, which adds to the negative feelings already incubating inside Philly brains.

But I think the overwhelming thing here is that he certainly is doing some good things out there. He’s been pretty solid on plays where he can be physical in goal line and short yardage situations. It makes me wonder why he isn’t up on the line or being disruptive early in routes, especially since he seems to become energized by contact and conflict. I also don’t think Jim Schwartz has been very inspirational in the way he deploys these guys, and the fact that you have a rookie corner playing safety is at least disconcerting, if not straight-up ridiculous.

People might read this and think I’m some Jalen Mills devotee, but the honest truth is that I’m just trying to look at the situation fairly instead of blurting out “nah bro, Jalen Mills sux.”

The post Eagles Film Study: “Nah Bro, Jalen Mills Sux” appeared first on Crossing Broad.

Eagles Film Study: “Nah Bro, Jalen Mills Sux” published first on https://footballhighlightseurope.tumblr.com/

[a-breton]

Why You May Want to Rethink Data, Privacy, and Content

Did you follow the #PlaneBae saga as it jumped from social media channels to national news item? If so, you saw the turn it took from lighthearted love story to a much darker reminder of the unexpected ways our digital footprints affect our (and others’) lives.

Unwanted social media exposure is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to digital privacy concerns. With health insurers peeking at our online activities and AI algorithms analyzing online behaviors to assign everything from article preferences to loan or job suitability to prison sentences, protecting personal data is something everyone should be concerned with.

This concern should also extend to the work we do as content marketers. Changing privacy laws in Europe and, now, the U.S. have given us compliance-driven motivation to be more vigilant and transparent in our handling of consumer data. (See the privacy law recently passed in California.) But it’s the trusted relationships we hope to build with our audiences that give us even more compelling reasons to care about those who willingly share their personal lives with our brands.

Here’s a look at some recent articles that have the CMI team (and, likely, other content marketers) pondering big questions about what data we can collect and what practices and processes we should follow to create trustworthy content experiences for our audiences.

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: How to Protect Customer Data — and Your Company

Should digital privacy encompass more than just data?

Read: The Woman in the #PlaneBae Saga Breaks Her Silence

Social media fans may recall the recent viral story in which an airline passenger claimed a simple act of switching seats led to a love connection between strangers. All indications seem to be that @roseybeeme (who reportedly gained 60,000 followers as a result of her posts) tweeted ongoing observations of the new seatmates with the best of intentions. (It has since been deleted.) But the woman being watched, dubbed #PrettyPlaneGirl by social media and who didn’t know about the tweets until after the fact, didn’t see the posts as a positive. She released a statement that referred to the incident as “a digital-age cautionary tale about privacy, identity, ethics, and consent.” 

Consider: That seemingly innocuous public post you uploaded could be someone else’s private nightmare. The #PlaneBae saga played out without a brand’s intervention. But it’s not hard to imagine how easy it would be for an employee to post something similar on your brand’s behalf without considering the possible consequences. Before you (or your extended team) share someone else’s story in your brand’s content, exercise simple common sense – and common courtesy. Make sure your brand follows sound ethical practices by securing the appropriate permission. And don’t forget to verify that your take on the story is accurate.

You don’t want a brand employee to tweet a saga like #PlaneBae, says @joderama. Click To Tweet

What constitutes a valuable data exchange?

Read: Health Insurers Are Vacuuming Up Details About You

Your brand may be upfront about its intentions for using the audience data it collects through content, but that doesn’t mean situations can’t or won’t change. It also doesn’t guarantee that third-party partners or others with the power to mine that data will be equally transparent, responsible, or altruistic.

The possible uses of lifestyle data outlined in the article by ProPublica author Marshall Allen should raise some eyebrows. These examples show how health insurance companies, which partner with data brokers, can use tools to create predictive models based in part on an audience’s interactions with content (click on an ad for women’s plus-size clothing, for example, and you could be considered at risk for depression). And those lifestyle data models could be used, the piece suggests, to base the cost of someone’s health insurance policy on potentially incorrect or incomplete data collected without their knowledge.

Consider: Some things will always remain outside of your business’s control and the evolution of artificial intelligence and machine learning technology is chief among them. But it’s a good time to start asking: At what point does the digital industry’s increasing reliance on aggregated consumer data cross the line between delivering personalized value and exerting undue influence over their personal lives? And, following on that, are you adequately equipped to walk that line responsibly, interpret it accurately, and assure your audiences you won’t exploit the information they entrust to you?

When does aggregated consumer data cross line b/n personalized value & undue influence @joderama Click To Tweet

It’s a question that Robert Rose touches on in his recent discussion on whether GDPR is a gift in disguise for marketers. In his post, he raises the critical distinction between data scraped unwittingly for generating, nurturing, and converting leads, and the more valuable “emotional” data voluntarily supplied by customers and content consumers. But regardless of where your data comes from – or your ultimate intentions for it – his assertion that marketers need to become a “trusted source of interesting things” and his advice on instituting the role of “audience data shepherd” into your content teams still ring true.

Ethical ideas vs. ethical practices

Read: Doing Good Data Science

Speaking of ethical considerations, this thought-provoking discussion (the first in an ongoing series on the subject) reminds us that marketers aren’t the only players with a stake in the consumer data debate. Data scientists are tasked not only with developing the algorithms marketers use to gather and analyze customer insights, but also with determining the most effective and ethical ways to apply and evaluate their impact on performance.

Though focused on data science, the article explores data usage from several angles directly relevant to content strategy, including:

How to approach user experience design so that the need to preserve consumer privacy doesn’t render AI applications useless

How the concept of “informed consent” can take on a different meaning at points in a user’s journey

What kinds of organizational changes it might take to balance our industry’s drive to “move fast” and “break things” with the ability to minimize the impact on those things we are likely to break

Consider: As the article’s authors wisely suggest, if you put ethical practices in place, you need to empower your teams to figure out what that really means ­– for your brands, your audiences, and for the content you create to serve them both. Critical components include cultivating an organizational culture that can support experimentation and implementing strategic processes built for agility and iteration. By systematically creating boundaries around your content efforts and committing to continual (if incremental) improvement, you make it easier for your teams to adapt when confronted by big changes like algorithm shifts, legislative trends, or emerging technologies.

Empower your team to figure out what your brand ethics mean for your audience and content, says @joderama. Click To Tweet

The content conclusion

Let’s face facts: Data breaches will likely continue; people will make ill-informed decisions about what to share online; the collective definition of “private information” may evolve; and corporate leadership or those in political power can’t be counted on to prioritize the interests of the average digital denizen over the potential to turn a profit.

Though content marketers may not have much control over many of the changes looming on the digital data horizon, you can do your part to engage with your audiences in thoughtful, responsible, and conscientious ways; own up when mistakes are made; and build trust consistently by keeping their needs top of mind.

Talk about the latest headlines affecting content marketers Sept. 4-7 in Cleveland, Ohio. Register today for Content Marketing World and use the code BLOG100 to save $100. 

Cover image by Joseph Kalinowski/Content Marketing Institute

from http://bit.ly/2KC961a