#clearly this is only a problem if you're a bad person like me who prioritizes results over how people feel in situations where we're graded

[stillfruit]

the most difficult part about group projects is not doing everything yourself

[sunfoxfic]

about the “recognizing stereotypes is actually what’s racist” thing NO BC THAT TAKE HAS BEEN SO AGGRAVATING TO ME FOR SO LONG.

without going into the eight page long essay about how passionately i feel about this, all i have to say is how important it is to recognize stereotypes in media in order to accurately understand what’s wrong with them and criticize the media we consume in our everyday lives.

if you just Watch Media without recognizing the problems the stereotypes represent, you just end up internalizing them. to better describe what i mean, its just like the problem with anime and misogyny. you see it happen again and again and again and again, and eventually your brain (since it learns from patterns and familiarity) starts to expect that women and feminine-presenting people are in those roles and Only those roles.

go into it with a mindset of “oh these stereotypes are okay, i cant think about it or else im the bad one” and suddenly theyre just like the people on tiktok who just throw around buzz words without any critical thought behind it.

okay thats all, thank u for coming to my summarized ted talk

Anon, you're so valid. It was such a bizarre take and unlike anything I've personally run into before. It's like?? It almost treats coding as though it's a retroactive association with *insert group here* rather than an intentional insinuation. Coding in and of itself is a neutral thing - plenty of coding is used for good, plenty of coding is used for bad. Sometimes it's really hard to tell the difference between subtext and coding, too (and subtext is also in and of itself neutral).

When you frame coding, and in particular racist sorts of coding, as a retroactive association, it turns it into a no-win situation - the person who points out the coding is the one creating the association, and therefore is the one who is bigoted.

In my eyes, when you're calling out bigoted stereotypes via coding, the "best" outcome is for the creator to have been thoughtlessly replicating bigoted media. We'll never know if she-who-shall-not-be-named was doing it intentionally or unintentionally at first (it being anything you can think of, there are more than a few examples) but clearly her reaction to being called out is to dig her heels in the ground, so considering the "best" outcome is kinda moot in this particular case.

But yeah, you're really spot on with the thing about stereotypes. Because even if you can recognize that the stereotype is wrong while simultaneously keeping your mouth shut about it in fear of someone thinking you're the one who's doing the coding, you're the one who's bigoted - even if you can manage that, you're letting these ideas perpetuate to someone who doesn't know.

My politics recently have shifted to the ideology that "what works > what is ideal." I'm not interested in debating whether the person who knew it was wrong and said nothing is more innocent than the person who wasn't educated on the matter and adopted the ideas without critical skills to challenge them. I'm not interested in debating whether the latter was a victim, whether the former is part of the problem. Ideals are great when applied inwardly but nothing trumps results when trying to change the world - and it is true, great is the enemy of good.

In an ideal world, everyone could just agree to stop this sort of bigoted coding in works and then we don't have to worry about whether it's retroactive or not. We don't live in an ideal world. The actual way that it works is that, regardless of innocence and morality, change depends on Person 1 calling shit out so Person 2 doesn't fall into it. Is that sort of act an act of social justice, or just what a good citizen does? Should people get credit for it?

Man, fuck if I know. People in three hundred years won't be studying me in their textbooks either way because I don't want them to, but where we are now, people are dying and the climate is changing, so I really prioritize making a world where they have trees to make into textbooks and a history that's written not only by the victors, but the good guys.

[themomsandthecity]

Julia Fox Is a Mom of a 2-Year-Old, and Her Apartment Proves It

Julia Fox believes in "maximum transparency." So despite her fear of being roasted in the comments, she decided to do a tour of her messy, kid-centric apartment on her TikTok. As a mom to 2-year-old Valentino, Fox wanted to normalize her space in all its chaotic glory - something she hopes most parents can relate to. "Maybe someone can watch this and think, 'OK, so maybe I'm not doing so bad,'" she says in the video. Fox starts the tour in her "bedroom," which is actually the apartment's living room. "I put my bed in the living room so I could turn my bedroom into a little playroom for Valentino," she says while sweeping the camera over the toys on the floor and a random clothing rack she says she "really [needs] to get rid of." (#Relatable.) She then shows off her "nostalgia mirror" that's decorated with photos of Valentino as a newborn next to mementos of loved ones who have passed. The mirror hangs over her "grow station" (two small pots filled with soil). Despite being labeled with small signs for "mint" and "basil," she confirms that "nothing is growing because we don't know what we're doing." From there, Fox takes us down a long hallway, passing a variety of items needed to transport her toddler around NYC, including a tricycle, strollers, and an array of little shoes. She makes sure to point out Valentino's daycare schedule, written in marker on a whiteboard near the front door. Then there's a quick stop to peek at her "little" bathroom with leftover toys in the tub. "It's very tiny, but it does what it's supposed to do," she says. Entering the kitchen, we see Valentino's adorable mini kitchen facing the real deal. The countertops are covered with gadgets like a brand-new cotton-candy maker and various shoe boxes. She adds a disclaimer for viewers, "Don't judge me! I know it's really messy," though all we can think about is the luxury of access to fresh cotton candy. But the crown jewel of the 31-year-old's apartment is her son's bedroom. "I put the most effort into this room," she says, showing off the lofted bed and built-in bookshelves. "I really wanted him to have a cute room." However, Fox admits he doesn't spend any of his time there. "He only wants to be in Mama's room," she says. "He sleeps in bed with me. Yeah, we're cosleepers, sue me. I don't care." This isn't the first time Fox has shared her honest experience of motherhood. In September 2022, she opened up about the rude awakening that came with postpartum depression. "I think it's just such a reality check when you finally have a kid and you're like, 'Holy f*ck, this has just drastically made my entire life worse," she shared on TikTok. "This is not at all the fairy tale that I was f*cking promised. But how do we say that out loud?" While Fox clearly loves her son, she acknowledges the importance of maintaining transparency among parents. @juliafox Come with me on a very underwhelming apartment tour! also to clarify I have only ONE mouse and he’s cute 🥰 ♬ original sound - Julia fox Many TikTokers appreciated the authentic nature of the tour. "[You're] a mother that obviously prioritizes your child & it is a beautiful apartment," one user commented. "Love you are showing that success looks different for every person." Another replied, "Love how much of your space is dedicated to your son." And comedian Hannah Berner dubbed Fox "a relatable icon." The "Uncut Gems" star admits they have a "small mouse problem" but adds, "I appreciate that they come out at night while we're sleeping to clean up the crumbs that my son drops on the floor." She has no plans to evict the mice anytime soon. https://www.popsugar.com/family/julia-fox-shows-her-apartment-with-2-year-old-son-49071842?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=tumblr

[separatist-apologist]

I feel you so hard on these bad book recommendations… you know that picture of Keanu reeves smoking a cigarette and he just looks so fucking done? That’s me. I freelance edit for work and I edit fanfiction and manuscripts alike… I would say 85% of the fanfiction I edit and read personally (ESPECIALLY YOURS) is more profound, well written, and flows better than the majority of popular book tok recs. The manuscripts I’ve edited have all been so wonderful. I am so genuinely lost at how books like Zodiac Academy and King of Battle and Blood get so much hype and recognition. I respect that it is a lot of work and takes courage to share stories but come on man. I feel fried to a crisp! I am one more bad book away from hypnotizing myself into forgetting how to read. It’s cathartic to see a fellow hater in the midst.

First of all, an editor you say? I might need to hit you up in a month or two and find out your rates.

Secondly, I think my issue isn't that people like the books. It's the toxic, near weaponized positivity of "We can't say anything bad/everything is a 4 star review" instead of "this book was dogshit BUT i liked it anyway" which is more honest. Especially lately, I've been seeing a lot of push back of like, telling people you don't like books/they're bad prevents people from reading them and like, YES THATS THE POINT OF A REVIEW. A review is NOT FOR THE AUTHOR, I don't care about the authors livelihood/income and the expectation shouldn't be that I have to prioritize their desire to write books over being allowed to say "This book should have been edited", ESPECIALLY when it comes to indie authors.

ESPECIALLY when it comes to indie authors, like given how inexpensive and almost easy it is to write and upload to KU, people should be demanding quality over quantity and they're not. Instead they're asking readers to just say "this was not for me but other people might like it" and that's an assumption. I've read books based on 1 star reviews before, and I've read books that people don't like as a group, but like, falsifying reviews in order to keep authors from having hurt feelings or not having a lucrative career is just...its not it for me.

I genuinely think some of these books are so disrespectful to the people who DO like them. Where is your care? Where is your passion? Churning out books that aren't edited (SCARLETT ST CLAIR) and then going back to edit if they sell well is horseshit. Not paying for an editor at all and then publishing a book riddled with problems only to then turn around and say "you shouldn't be so negative, I'm an indie author" is horseshit. Writing a book so egregiously racist/sexist/homophobic that it's harmful because you didn't want to find sensitivity readers (or worse, rewrite the issues they found) is horseshit (especially given how many people do this accidentally).

I think about my own job and like, probably most of our jobs where we can't just drop garbage into the world and say, "well this is my dream" okay so what? You wrote a genuinely shitty book at bare minimum, I should be allowed to say so. It's written badly. Your plot is poorly developed. So I'm a hater who can't be nice, and I'll never be nice about it.

And like, to finish this rant, my director always tells me, "[insert person]'s opinion of you is none of your business." And that has been so freeing to me, as someone who craves the approval of people around me and never wants anyone to be mad. Not everyone is going to like you. Authors should learn this and grow up about reviews. It's not personal- I'm not saying you're a bad person. I'm saying you clearly took very little care with your book and it shows.

[my-mt-heart]

I am curious as to why some people really believe Norman Reedus can do no wrong, even though his own negligence? He doesn't strike me as a malicious type, but he is in Hollywood. He knows as an older man, really only known for this show, he has to play his cards a certain way in order to stay relevant/stay in the game. It's clear he prioritizes himself, which isn't a bad thing, but acting the way he has is shows me he is shallow and only afraid of those in power. If someone else comes on board who loves Caryl and gives them their own show, Norman Reedus will take to Twitter and Instagram with pictures of him and Melissa, Daryl and Carol, etc. I am sad that one of my favorite characters of all time is played by someone so immature, self involved, and weak-willed. Regardless of who he has to answer to, I doubt someone is really telling him to treat Melissa McBride as if she doesn't exist by playing dumb. I am sad that the people who make it big and have money are so corrupt inside. Melissa McBride clearly doesn't want to be a household name. She just loves Carol and Daryl. But she isn't willing to give up her life for Hollywood. Norman has no problem playing it up to the camera, just to portray how great everything is in his life. It annoys me to no end.

But I just wanted to say that in case anyone else looks at this the way I do. I don't hate Norman Reedus but I would be lying if I said I liked him right now, too. I am not asking you to gossip, but I was curious as to your own feelings on his behavior? I have read that your focus are more on the people behind the scenes who call the shots and I totally agree with that. But people see Norman, not really any of the executive department.

I realize I'm probably opening up a can of worms again here, but you brought up a couple of things I want to address and *hopefully* it'll clear up any confusion people still seem to have about where I stand. Or it won't and I'll wake up to a dozen anons who want to take my head off. Anyhow, yes, you're right that people only see Norman and in the age of SM, it is especially easy to assume everything he says or does is of his own volition. The reality is there's a team of people behind him. I'm not just talking about AMC, I'm talking about publicists, agents, etc. who are there to help him navigate what he says or does that could affect his livelihood because guess what? It affects their livelihood too. Hence the break narrative. Hence whatever else we've heard (or didn't hear) in interviews that I think we can all safely agree were not the best way to go.

It sounds like I'm saying actors shouldn't be held accountable for their actions, doesn't it? Well, no. That's absolutely not what I'm saying. The knee-jerk (?) reaction to (the well-meaning) fans on Twitter is not lost on me, in fact it really bothers me to see the dynamic become so contentious to the point of alienation. I have suspicions of where it all might be coming from, but it isn't my place to publicly psycho-analyze someone I don't know, so I won't. It also doesn't sit well with me to launch a personal attack on another human being pretty much ever, but especially without any hard proof of what did or didn't happen.

What I guess I'm getting at is consciously choosing to focus my efforts where I think it counts the most and understanding the power dynamics at play is a far cry from idol worship or naivety.

[bigskydreaming]

Hey, any comic recs to ensure that I get Dick Grayson character right? Other batfam included, if you're willing. I'm trying to make sure I don't write a character completely ooc, because that drives me up the WALL when I read that. However, since I dubbed you the #1 Dick Grayson person, I thought I'd ask you to make sure I do him justice rather than a smear campaign or something lol! Thanks! ALSO TELL ME YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THE TITANS SHOW! That's all xD

LOL thanks I appreciate it, but while I’m good for the rants, for actual comics recs I would go to the likes of @northoftheroad, @hood-ex, and @nightwingmyboi because they’re a lot better than I am at knowing where to find specific stuff and comprehensive reading lists! I tend to jump all over the place in terms of my go-to comics for Dick.....I’m always on about Robin: Year One but I’m like eh Nightwing: Year One is pretty trash tbh. I prefer pre-Flashpoint continuity overall but I did enjoy some of the early Nightwing Rebirth stuff and before that the pre-Forever Evil New 52 stuff had some good beats. But for the most part, my favorite Dick Grayson tends to be him as a member of teams like the Titans....he shines most in ensembles, I think, because his strengths ultimately are that like...he gets people, he knows how people work, and he knows how to get the most out of the people he’s with, how to make people gel and get in sync and become more than just the sum of their parts.

(Speaking of nightwingmyboi, haven’t seen them posting in awhile, anyone know what they’re up to? Hope everything’s okay!)

Which brings me to the problems with the Titans show. There’s a lot I like about it - Anna Diop and Ryan Potter in particular - and a lot I was never gonna like about it - I’m heavy on the Ugh why must Dick Grayson be a cop ever why is that a thing make it stop. And so while I don’t think Brenton Thwaites does like, a bad job with the role or anything, there was always kinda a ceiling on how attached to or invested in his take on the character I was ever gonna reach.

But Season 2. Oof. Let’s talk about Season 2, and how so many of the problems with it are identical to the problems that surround Dick in the comics, but also aren’t limited to just his character or DC and just as equally show up in all kinds of media. Like, I could have (and probably did) offer an identical rant about the role of Scott McCall in TW’s S5.

The problem is one I’ve kinda taken to calling in my head “The Ensemble Lone Wolf Effect.”

This is when writers have a character they nominally want to be part of an ensemble....but that they repeatedly go back to the well of “this character should however spend most of their time on their own, or are more natural on their own, or just wants to be on their own, or also sometimes they just deserve to be on their own cuz they suck for Reasons we decline to specify.”

But its that thing of wanting it both ways....believing a character honestly NEEDS to be a loner or off on their own for the sake of their story, but also still wanting to utilize them as part of an ensemble, not willing to actually MAKE them a solo character, and so it kinda creates this never-ending feedback loop wherein they pay lip service to the character being part of an ensemble, but that’s never really on display, which creates a lot of unnecessary conflict among characters that’s to NONE of their benefits.

(And honestly in the comics, you could apply this to pretty much all the Batfam at times...not just Dick. They do it with Bruce ALL the time, they’re doing it with Damian right now, did it with Tim with Red Robin, Jason most of the time he’s not with the Outlaws and Cass most of the time she’s not with Babs or Steph or the Outsiders. As well as Babs herself at times).

Basically what I’m talking about here is like....so much of the drama in S2....and specifically the parts that most every fan I saw had issues with....came about not organically, because it made sense for the characters to behave that way, but solely in order to launch a specific plot, that the writers clearly wanted for S2:

And that was Dick Grayson off on his own, at his lowest, facing his demons on a solo journey of self-discovery the writers clearly deemed necessary before he could find himself as Nightwing and rise to his most heroic self.

Now the thing is....this isn’t inherently a bad plot or a problem. The problem lies in how they went about it.

Because rather than looking at the overall story and saying okay, that’s what we want to do with Dick Grayson, that’s what we want for HIS story, now how do we get that and where do we take it from there, rather than looking at that as just a STARTING point, and engineering a plot that grows OUT of that.....

The writers just started out by viewing that as an ENDPOINT, and reverse engineered a way to get Dick TO that point first and foremost....at the expense of so many characters who then basically turned on him and held him solely responsible for the things many of them also had a hand in....purely to get him off on his own and isolated.

But that was never necessary!

Because Dick’s character contains multitudes when it comes to guilt and self-blame, everyone knows that. He never needed anyone else to blame him for what happened to Joey because he blamed himself. So the second they conceived of the plot “Slade wants revenge for something Dick at least blames himself for”.....they had all the ingredients needed for Dick to decide proactively that the best way to protect everyone was to put distance between him and them, that he should try and hunt down Slade on his own, solve this between just the two of them.

And that should have been the STARTING point, for that narrative journey of self-exploration, not that journey resulting as an ENDPOINT in and of itself from Dick being FORCED into a kind of isolation by the others all blaming him.

Because now see what ripple effects result:

Now, the other characters are just as able to focus on their own individual storylines as they were in the show, with the additional concern of wanting to ACTUALLY find Dick and figure out what’s going on with him or tell him they still want to help....without this in any way needing to distract them from their own storylines, practically speaking, or cut into Dick’s narrative alone-time, because as part of the equation you ALSO have Slade, who has his own wants and agendas, not to mention tactics. And Slade’s perfectly capable of and willing to work with others, or utilize the long game, or engage in a game of cat and mouse as a distraction...there are numerous ways that you could engineer a plot FROM these motivations that allows him to keep the rest of the Titans distracted and even targeted individually, without allowing them to group back up with Dick or Dick to even know that they’re in danger and that his attempts to avoid that backfired.

You want the characters isolated and divided? The PLOT can do that for you. You don’t need the characters to do that to themselves.

IMO, most if not all stories are meant to advance characters, first and foremost. Take Characters A-Z and leave them different from how you found them. Move them to a different position in their lives as much as anything else, from where they began. The goal is character DEVELOPMENT.

What this means, in my book, is that the plot should serve the characters, NOT the other way around. The plot should grow FROM the characters and what they would or would not do....the characters should never have to be forced to FIT INTO a plot.

That’s backwards.

There shouldn’t be any need to reverse engineer a certain starting point, characterwise.

Just like....start the plot, plotwise....and from the moment you first introduce a single plot element, prioritize how would the characters react and BUILD from there.

The only engineering you should need to do is how to get to an eventual END point....which is still all about the forward momentum, not backing your way into anything.

Its one thing to have an endgoal for your plot, a point in character or narrative development that you want characters to reach. But its all about perspective. About keeping that what you’re working towards rather than something that you like, have to reach before you can even really BEGIN.

Which is what Titans S2 did. The real GOAL of the season in terms of Dick’s storyline, was his solo journey of self-discovery. But there’s a million different ways they could have LAUNCHED that journey, without it having to be the forced and contrived outcome of events and character decisions that literally only existed to initiate a journey that never required a forced initiation.

And so all this narrative energy gets utterly wasted and expended on stuff that it just flat out doesn’t need to be spent on in the first place....instead of just putting that same energy to use building forward-facing storylines for ALL the characters, that don’t require contrived spats of disharmony when the goal of such moments isn’t even the disharmony but rather just that they’re kept apart, the end RESULT of the disharmony.

Imagine what S2 could have built if instead of wasting time, characterization and energy on getting to a point they could have simply started from if they’d simply looked at it that way and chosen to just....start. If they’d applied all that to building across the board, everyone’s story in service to their own character first and foremost, no tangled feedback loops making characters regress or cycle through the same behavior or narrative positionings over and over again in order to not get in each other’s way or cross paths at a time when the show didn’t want them to cross paths....because rather than make all these characters work at cross purposes, they’re all on the same page, they still want the same things....you’re simply engineering from their own natural characterizations and organic decisions and reactions, ways the PLOT can be utilized as a TOOL, to keep them moving forward in their own respective chapters, WITHOUT their characters having to be bent out of their natural shapes or forced into niches that don’t really suit them, just to keep them, PREVENT them, from more naturally or organically making a choice or action that would ‘get in the way’ of the plot.

Bottom line......the plot is supposed to be there to advance the characters, because the characters are what we come to stories for. The characters are who we invest in, relate to, ROOT for.

The characters aren’t there to advance the plot. We’re not here to yell yeah, I really hope the writers do whatever it takes with characters, no matter how backwards or unnatural it seems, just to get that sweet sweet and oh so specific ending we want that is in no way dependent on how invested or not we ACTUALLY are in the characters by the time it arrives, in order for it to actually be effective or not!

Lol. Y’know?

So yeah, that’s my biggest gripe with Titans so far. I’m still eager to see what happens between Kory and her sister, and although I’m not thrilled it seems to be becoming Batfam Straight Outta Gotham rather than like, Titans: The Show, I admit I am curious about what take they’ll go with for Babs. As I still pretty vividly recall that weird as hell Birds of Prey show the CW or UPN or WB or whatever it was at the time did for one season, where Babs was honestly not terribly adapted despite the show otherwise bearing like, zero in common with any existing DC property or character (do not even get me STARTED on their takes on Dinah and Helena, no, blehrrible, those were bad, those were like super bad)....anyway, I’m kinda curious even if it wouldn’t have been my choice for what direction the show should take. Not that I have a specific one in mind, just, yeah. And I also kinda would not hate if we got a new Roy Harper now, to replace the not!Roy of Arrow, because I don’t know him, no seriously, who is that, its not Roy Harper.

[rabbitsparklez]

✨sorry Im kinda late if you're still doing the ask thingy. anyway, what are some of your UNPOPULAR opinions?

No, it’s fine! I’m happy to get asks whenever :)

First of all, I’d like to apologize for the delay. It took me like 3 days to answer this because I added a lot. This was a LOT more elaborate than you asked for so uh...... enjoy?

I have a lot of conflicted opinions that I wouldn’t exactly call “unpopular”, but I also have several that I would. There is negativity in this post, and if you’d rather not read it, then please don’t.

Please do not comment or message me about these if you disagree. This is my blog, and if you generally disagree with my than I don’t know what you are doing here.

Thank you for the ask!

1. I kinda... almost.... hated “Buddy”.

 Yes, it’s a really catchy song and a great blend of Zach and James’ voices, but it also serves as a reminder that the writers prioritized Cassandra’s importance over Eugene’s. I’m already not a fan of it when people use strong and mature characters in overly silly scenarios, but it makes my stomach churn to think that they would actually dare to ridicule Eugene to such a far extent in order to give Cassandra the spotlight, when her entire arc was written poorly despite all their costly efforts to give it to her. I know that Eugene didn’t intentionally fall under the influence of those flowers and he certainly would’ve done something had he been there when Rapunzel discovered the Moon Incantation, but honestly that just bothers me even more because Eugene had so much potential and they wasted it.

2. (I don’t know what’s gonna come of this) I don’t hate King Frederick. I’m very disappointed in him, but I don’t hate him. Everyone hates him because of his failure to handle a threat to the kingdom, and his rashness and dishonestly toward his daughter, and I both agree to a lot of it, but I don’t hate him.

I have no excuses for the fact that he lied about having the black rocks under control because he didn’t know what to do about them. As the king, it is his responsibility to consider what is best for his kingdom, and by lying about a major threat, he only caused the problem to get worse. The reason the black rocks came in the first place, however, is because he took the Sundrop to heal his dying wife and unborn child. I know it wasn’t the most prudent decision, and he did a horrible job cleaning up the mess he made afterwards, but he was desperate to save his family, and chances are likely that he didn’t have time to consider every aspect and consequence that taking the Sundrop would cause.

Regarding his actions towards Rapunzel, I hate the fact that he would dare consider locking his own daughter in her room to protect her from something that he’s not making any effort to fix. Treating people immorally harshly while saying it’s for their own good is toxic, and I want to make it clear that I am the last person to defend abusers, but I highly doubt that Frederick gingerly considered every aspect of locking his daughter in her room and how it would affect her. Rapunzel was kidnapped as a baby, and that gives two reasons why Frederick is so protective of her: the fact that he is her father and the pain and trauma in itself. Everyone takes trauma differently, depending on the person and the weight of the situation. I hate it when people who are clearly smart and strong enough to understand the situation use their traumas as an excuse to justify their actions, but some people are so devastated by their traumas that they completely lose themselves. Again, he logically wouldn’t have thought about every single thing he was doing and the trouble it would cause. He lost his baby girl. I’ve heard many times that losing a child is the worst pain imaginable, and you could only understand that pain if you experienced it. Perhaps he even felt responsible for the fact that his daughter was kidnapped because he thought that he wasn’t as protective as he should’ve been, and the idea of “making things right again” and protecting her was drilled so deeply into his mind. In addition to the pain that he went through and how that affected his judgments, Frederick had no parental experience whatsoever. All parents have to figure out who their children are and how they should handle situations. Doing this involves trial and error, tears and pain. As seen in the episode “You’re Kidding Me”, Rapunzel and Eugene both thought they knew how to treat children but both of them made errors due to the cooperation and sensitivity of the kids they were looking after - this applies to every parent and every child. Frederick was completely ad-libbed into parenthood, and his trauma from losing his child did not mix well with Rapunzel’s spirit of adventure and independence.

As a king, Frederick failed in his responsibility to do what is best for the kingdom, and I agree that he wasn’t justified for the actions he took (or didn’t take), and he was a jerk for lying about it; but as a father, I feel more sympathy for him because in his eyes, he was doing the right thing, even though we know that he wasn’t. People are so quick to justify Varian for his actions following his traumas, when he’s admittedly intelligent enough to understand them; but people are so quick to demonize Frederick for his actions following his traumas, when he’s clearly not intelligent enough to understand them. I don’t think that’s fair in the minimal sense and it still irks me how biased a lot of people were in this situation.

3. I’m not sure how “popular” or “unpopular” this one is considered, but I hated both Stalyan and Brock Thunderstrike. It takes a lot for me to actually hate a character, but considering how much they wronged Eugene, I can’t ever see them in a positive perspective.

Aside from almost killing Lance, Stalyan abused Eugene. When he was only 16, she tried to marry him so that he could be her partner in crime, and judging by the way she talked to him in BTCW, it’s likely that she manipulated him and constantly belittled his choices. (which is another reason I hate how they did that with the Cass arc, because he should be entitled to such a valid opinion). She called him by his fake last name and tried to pull him back into the past, showing that she gave no importance to his persona and development as a character. When he refuses to marry her, her dad poisons his best friend and forces Eugene to either let his best friend from childhood die, or leave his girlfriend - his closest companion who filled in his missing parts and helped him to know that he mattered. Afterwards, she brushed it of with “that was my dad’s idea, but bad guys have a flair for drama”, in the least sympathetic tone imaginable. She then locked him and his dying friend in prison until the wedding, and tried to convince him that he wasn’t good enough for the woman he loved. The writers could’ve used her as a way to understand Eugene’s insecurities and pain a little bit better, but they freaking REDEEMED her. She just went with Rapunzel on a little road trip where she decided “y’know what, you can have my ex boyfriend and I’ll move on! Tell him I said hi!”. We didn’t get a proper address that Stalyan likely had a role in damaging Eugene’s sense of importance and trust, but even worse, we didn’t get an apology. I can’t believe that they made Rapunzel deal with someone else’s abusive relationship, where she hardly understood what was actually going on. Stalyan never said another word to Eugene or apologized to him or Lance for what she had done to both of them. She married a guy that looks exactly like him in the end too! Instead of looking for someone new, she chose a guy who looks exactly like her ex, showing that she cared more about his looks than his inner self.

Speaking of her new boyfriend, I hated Brock Thunderstrike. Let’s just pretend that Eugene hasn’t already been sidelined and ridiculed for Cass, and make an almost exact copy of him, only without his flaws and development! Let’s make him look exactly like him, make him repeat every iconic action and line that he made in the movie in a flawless way, and make him steal his entire former identity!  - THAT WAS SO STUPID! I can’t believe they actually did that! Eugene is one of the most meticulously created, personified, and multifaceted characters that Disney has ever created, but not only did they push him in the mud to give Cassandra space, but they created this idiot Mary Sue copy of him with no personification otherwise! In the end, just like Stalyan, he decided with no redeeming deeds or apologies that he would make a new person of himself.

They really make a good match, and that’s not a compliment.

4. I love Lance as a person, but not as a character - If that makes any sense.

I love that wholesome boy a lot, but I don’t like the way he was used in the show. I think that even he pitched in to the factors that flattened Eugene as a character in the show. First of all, it takes away some of the meaning of love and it’s necessity to Eugene’s life. We always thought that Eugene was a lonely, rejected child who needed love more than he realized, but it turns out he did, in fact, have a buddy who wasn’t just his partner in crime for years, but a close, brotherly figure. That contradicts the significance of Eugene’s childhood and life as an orphan. Secondly, Lance was often used as an object to distract Eugene and drag him into the stupid and nonsensical scenarios that prevented him from interfering with Rapunzel and Cassandra’s overly prioritized involvement to the plot of the episode. Don’t get me wrong. I love Lance and have nothing against him, but his role as a character could’ve been used in better ways.

5. Adira should have either had a larger or smaller role in the show.

When we were introduced to Adira in Season 2, she was the fairy godmother  that always came when the squad was in distress. She could do everything: she is superhumanly strong and agile, can cook, can effortlessly cut down trees, can survive in the wilderness, knows everything, and is practically perfect. But considering her knowledge of the Sundrop and Moonstone and her past with the Dark Kingdom, I was disappointed that we couldn’t explore more of her character and personality. In Season 3, she just kind of vanished. Considering her amazing abilities, we could’ve explored her character and learned of her weaknesses and backstory in season 3, but we didn’t. She played a lot of parts in Season 2 but almost none in Season 3. I thought Adira was sort of a Mary Sue. She’s perfect on the outside, but we have little knowledge of the inside. To make her a better character, she could’ve either been brought into the light in Season 3, or not given as much attention in Season 2. Either way, she’s an unbalanced character. I like her, but she’s hollow.

6. I like Shorty. 

He’s kind of pointless and it made me roll my eyes when he unintentionally saved the day when other characters *cough* Eugene *cough* could’ve done so, but he also made me laugh a lot. He’s an idiot but fairly harmless otherwise. Also, unlike a lot of things in the show, he’s in character. In the movie, it wasn’t out of character for Shorty to pop up in weird places or save the day without really knowing it (he was one of the ones who helped Eugene break out of prison). The Snuggly Duckling was a major point in the movie and we didn’t see a lot it in the show. While Shorty’s tagging along didn’t contribute anything to society, it kept the Snuggly Duckling present in the show.

7. As much as I love him, I’m not attracted to Eugene.

I think he’s handsome and charming, but I ship him with Rapunzel too much to be in love with him :). I would give anything to have a platonic friend like him, but maybe not a husband.

To be frank, I’m a little creeped out by people who seem to “fall romantically in love” with characters, because they sometimes........well let’s just say that they portray them in a way that makes me incredibly uncomfortable - if you know what I mean. This applies to all characters, but especially to the ones that I like.

8. Varian’s role was too invasive. You’re probably surprised at this, because a lot of fans seem to think that he didn’t get enough of a role and wasn’t put to his full potential. I agree that he is a very elaborate character with a lot of potential, but he was never intended to be a main character, and he shouldn’t have been given a larger perspective and more angst factors than the actual main characters.

After his villain arc, fans started hating Rapunzel because they had sympathy for Varian and accused her of not treating him well, which I hated. It is true that he was in a situation worth having pity on him for, but they expressed a lot more emotional impact from his perspective than from anyone else’s, thus fans only considered his feelings. Rapunzel was going through an extremely difficult time at that moment, too, but it was shown in a less dramatic and sympathyzable way. She almost lost her parents and the man she loved in a snowstorm, while for the first time when she had to make prudent decisions as a leader, the kingdom was in a state of distress. After the storm, her father continued to lie to her, and the reason she never helped him was because he convinced her that Old Corona was under control. All she wanted to do was stabilize herself in a calm state of mind, which was ok, because she didn’t realize that there was more trouble. Even so, she could hardly do so because she was still stressed and traumatized. If these things from her perspective were more clearly presented to the audience, there would’ve been less of a war in the fandom and there probably would’ve been sympathy from both sides. But they wanted to show things from Varian’s point of view, which was valid until he went feral. {He stated in the episode before the finale that he understood that Rapunzel “did what she had to”, and he is clearly intelligent enough to pull things together, but everyone used trauma as an excuse. If he could connive that entire plot where he would kidnap the queen, use a dummy of him, extract the Sundrop’s power, etc. then he clearly was in a sane enough state of mind to put things together, but he didn’t. In Season 3, he admitted that the reason he became a villain was because he had taken his anger too far, after realizing that he was wrong. }

Considering that Rapunzel is the main character and the writers expect us to feel sympathy for her, they should’ve at least made the situation less dramatic from Varian’s point of view. Chris Sonnenburg himself was annoyed with fans who sympathized more for Varian and watched the show for him instead of Rapunzel - but in a way it was his fault for the way he portrayed the situation. I agree with him in the sense that I was annoyed with Varian fans taking over the fandom and demonizing Rapunzel, but it was the crew’s own choice to make Varian such a likable character to so many people.

Although his redemption arc was handled well in my opinion, it was more focused on and important to the show than that of the Father of Tangled Redemption Arc’s - Eugene’s. His redemption arc is the backbone to the entire franchise, but the series didn’t take him seriously, so even though his redemption subtly fell in place in Season 1 especially, I was disappointed that he didn’t have a nice serious episode where his redeemed self shined in the light, while Varian, a secondary character, did. Although not to such an extent, Varian’s role, similar to Cassandra’s was prioritized in the show above the main characters’ and that bothers me.

9. I’d say this one is more under-acknowledged than unpopular, but Cassandra’s existence contradicted Rapunzel’s development rather than bringing out her characteristic “compassion”

Even after all of the horrible things Cassandra did to Rapunzel, to Eugene, and to the kingdom of Corona after deciding to turn evil, she was redeemed. Anyone would’ve stopped pitying her and left her behind, but Rapunzel still cared for her and let her be her friend again. Why? Because the writers tried so hard to convey the message that Rapunzel has compassion for everyone and anything that comes in her path.

It is true and in her character for Rapunzel to be compassionate and humane. The movie conveyed the message that Rapunzel, even after spending so many years unloved and mistreated, loves and has sympathy for everyone. She sees the good in everyone and everything, thus she is capable of redeeming those who have strayed. This characteristic of hers is what caused Eugene to leave behind his past self and find a new life. She didn’t fix him; she opened his soul and brought out the good person who had been hiding inside him for the longest time. The same thing happened to the thugs, other former thieves, and many others. Rapunzel’s compassion and love for others brings the best out of the unlikeliest of people. The way Glen Keane described it, Rapunzel is the representation of humanity.

However, Mother Gothel is the representation of everything that is an obstacle to Rapunzel and her freedom. She gaslight and objectified her by passively claiming that she loved her, and used her as an object to satisfy her own vanity. She never let her express her energetic and adventurous self by locking her inside, and when Rapunzel rebelled, she locked her in chains and took her to the dungeon. Rapunzel’s development can only grow if she is not stifled by chains and abuse, therefore she should avoid Mother Gothel at all costs. But who is this person who, three years later, Rapunzel tries to redeem? The very daughter of Mother Gothel, who is more like a reincarnation of her to be frank. She brought back what Rapunzel was supposed to leave behind. She condescended over her and shamed her for her underdeveloped tendencies before she even betrayed her. She constantly wanted more from her instead of accepting her who she was. She blamed her for her problems and victimized herself. Rapunzel is supposed to be past these things so that she can grow to be a strong and independent woman. Using Cassandra as a permanent villain who Rapunzel would fight against would define her as a developed woman who has moved on from her traumatic past - but it wasn’t like that. Rapunzel pined onto Cassandra despite everything she put her through. The writers tried to use this situation as a way to bring out Rapunzel’s compassion, but it contradicted her self independence and strength.

Rapunzel and Cassandra’s relationship was a toxic one, and it shouldn’t have been portrayed as a good thing at any time in the show, because of it’s disintegration of Rapunzel’s development. Rapunzel is both compassionate and resilient, but because of how poorly the writers handled this, they contradicted both of her character tendencies. It looked more like schizophrenia to be honest: One day Rapunzel resents Cassandra for her actions and fights her with a powerful incantation to keep her away from Eugene; the next day, she sings a song mourning their friendship and expressing how much she wanted her to come back.The way a character’s personality traits are presented is very important. Imagine that you’re at a restaurant where every item uses the same ingredients, but is arranged and composed in a different way. A burger on a bun with lettuce, tomatoes, cheese and ketchup would be delicious and appealing; however, a hamburger and cheese smoothie with chunks of lettuce and tomatoes floating in it and ketchup drizzled on top would be nauseating and a horrible idea (sorry for the ridiculous comparison but hopefully it gets the point across). Even though the two items have the same composition, one of them works and the other doesn’t. Rapunzel is both compassionate and resilient, but the writers made a contradicting mess out of these two tendencies because they made them clash.

10.. It annoys me when people think Eugene overreacts to things. He’s neither whiny nor childish. He’s a realistic person in a crazy world, who can’t help but be upset about certain things.

Let’s face it, he’s been through a lot, and all things considered, he’s very tolerant and resilient. He’s the most realistic character in terms of skepticism and trust issues, and that’s something I’ve always loved about him. In situations where nobody’s in danger and things are fairly normal, he tends to “overreact” to minor things, but in dangerous and serious situations, he is the first person to stand up and help people. If he was a shrimpy, whiny wimp who can’t handle things, he wouldn’t have willingly died to save someone, led a rescue squad to save the king and queen in a dangerous situation, decided to live with his former abuser to save someone who was dying, or willingly accepted his role as a captain and lead the safety of the kingdom.

If you were abandoned by your father and ended up as a poor orphan who became a criminal to fend for yourself, it’s only human to not immediately feel inclined to accept him into your life, especially considering his apparently whimsical and unconcerned personality. By the end of the episode, he himself realized that his father kept in touch with him and by the end of the show, came to understand his motive for abandoning him. Nobody forced him to see the good in his father. He realized it by his own effort. When his father gave him a gift at the end, he was the first to hug him, showing that he had come to accept him willingly.

If for generations, your family has dedicated and lost their lives to destroying a dangerous object that has caused a lot of deaths and destruction, and you break your trust with your girlfriend to protect her from it; then when you finally allow her to take it when her jealousy-driven handmaiden takes it with every intention to kill her - of course you are going to resent that woman and be upset that your girlfriend still cares about bringing her back, (especially considering you weren’t keen on her in the first place). Even though Cass didn’t deserve it, he still patiently put up with and respected Rapunzel’s opinion of her despite obviously still disliking her. That doesn’t show that he was happy about it, but that he patiently tolerated situations that he didn’t agree with.

Imagine that the only comfort and security that you had for 15 years was your fake reputation as a different character, despite knowing it wasn’t a good one, and you find it difficult to let him go because you still can’t help but wish you were as established and “successful” as he was. Then some cocky twerp that looks exactly like you comes along, dresses exactly like you and uses the same name as you did, and repeated everything that you were proud to accomplish but only better, and is liked by your friends better than you ever were. Despite the fact that your former identity wasn’t a good one, it was the only thing you had and the only thing you could find pride and joy in because you had a low self esteem about your actual self. I can certainly say that if I met someone like Brock Thunderstrike but a copy of me instead of him, I wouldn’t be happy at all. But in the end, although he obviously resented and was jealous of him, Eugene disinterestedly told him that he saw potential in him, and allowed him to find his own identity.

Eugene is one of the most realistic characters that I’ve ever seen, but he lives in unusual circumstances that he’s not used to. There’s nothing wrong with the fact that he can’t immediately see something, because all’s well that ends well - and in the end, he always makes a just decision.

{There was one more that I wanted to post but I thought it would be too conflicting so I didn’t.}

If you agree with some of these but not others, that’s fine! After all, these are unpopular opinions and I’d be lucky if anyone agreed with them.

Again, thanks for the ask!