#conflating one shitty opinion with a person's whole being is also not good

[bardicious]

Not gonna reply to it on the post I saw, but y'all gotta stop saying shit like "people are being weird on both sides". Stop thinking in terms of "sides", some people are just crazy, and it doesn't matter what their stated opinions or interests are, they're shitty people who do shitty things.

Basically, don't pick "sides", make up your own damn mind on how you treat people and what you find important. You will never be actually part of a "side". Any one of those people could turn on you for a simple disagreement and you'll be labeled as "other" in a flash.

[genericpuff]

have you watched pyrrhic_victoria's newest video of them critiquing lore olympus? they're currently being called out for invalidating persephone's sexual assault & doubling down on what they've said.

Ohhh boy, I have lol and it's pretty much what I was vague-posting about the last couple days `(*>﹏<*)′

TW: sexual assault, insinuations of victim-blaming, community drama, lil' bit of trauma dumping

So now that I feel sorta okayish talking about this, Pyrrhic & Victoria put out a new LO video recently with a take that wasn't so hot. I won't go into too many details but it was one that essentially attempted to invalidate the existence of SA in Lore Olympus. Which, let me just say, is a really bold but shit take to have because while we can criticize LO as much as we like, it should never, EVER be an excuse to invalidate what we all know was very obviously SA, whether or not P&V recognize it as such themselves.

It's been a bit conflicting for me because while I obviously disagree with their takes, they're in the ULO community and I interact with them on a regular basis. I've hosted them on my streams, I respect them as creators. But that whole schpeel... really didn't stick with me.

I feel like a lot of where this take (and the responses to it) is coming from is personal/subjective, but there's also a general argument between the ULO community and the main LO community when trying to discuss LO because often times, people will supplant their own experiences to defend shitty writing. A very good recent example is Demeter's character assassination - a lot of people defend the poor writing and mischaracterization as "well I had an abusive mom so this is good storytelling!" when it's like... that's neither here nor there. You can have experiences with shitty parents or SA (as I do!) but still separate those experiences from the media you're consuming and recognize when the media isn't being written well. I'm an SA victim myself and while I do NOT think Persephone's SA plot is being depicted well, especially when it comes to Persephone's internal headspace, that doesn't mean I'm justified in saying Persephone wasn't SA'd. That's a completely different line to cross and one that absolutely should not be crossed. Hence why I mentioned above that P&V seem to be conflating RS' shitty writing with the real life experiences of those reading it as their reasoning to criticize the writing itself, not much different from how we complain about the stans using their own experiences to defend shitty writing. It's two sides of the same coin - just because you've experienced the things that happen to the characters in a fictional piece of work doesn't mean that piece of work is actually well written; just because you're criticizing a piece of work for being poorly written doesn't mean you're allowed to invalidate the experiences of the people relating to that work.

All that said, from here on out, I won't be continuing to engage or affiliate with their content. They've explained to me in-depth how they feel about both the situation and the opinion itself and it still seems to just be something that we're gonna have to disagree on because they're failing to give RS even an ounce of credit for that scene. It doesn't matter how shit her writing is or how they think the SA "doesn't make sense" in the context of the story, we all know that scene was SA, even if it wasn't what Rachel originally intended to write, she chose to embrace it through the Eros/Persephone conversation and it's been SA ever since. It's not something that I'm going to debate here, ever. RS mishandling the subplot after the fact doesn't invalidate the nature of that scene whatsoever. And I say that fully as an SA victim myself, the "kind" of SA that often gets invalidated the way they tried to invalidate it - coercive, intimidated, pressured.

I won't blame P&V for being so aggressive with their takes, y'all know I'm pretty loud and outspoken myself. But they took it a step too far in their recent video and I'm not gonna entertain it any further. It's often said on their channel that they're "just two dummies with dumb opinions", but that doesn't mean their opinions don't have the power to hurt others or send toxic messages that are fully capable of being absorbed by and spread by their own audience. That's the responsibility one has to acknowledge when hosting any kind of platform with an audience of any size, and it's one that I take very seriously, both in what I consume and in what I create.

I've definitely been getting that "maybe don't be such a snowflake" vibe off everything going on and I hate to see it. I genuinely want to see them learn and grow from this because I do care about them beyond just their Youtube rants, but so far it's not really looking like that's gonna be the case, at least not for a long while, best case scenario.

People fuck up. We're all human, and part of being human means making mistakes. But what defines our character is how we bounce back from those mistakes. How we hopefully learn and keep an open-mind to learn from others and strive to do better. I really hope they can take a bit to step back, actually listen to what people are saying, and do better. I don't want to see them encase themselves in the same kind of echo chamber they criticize Rachel for. But ultimately, I can't control what they do going forward, so I have to just focus on what I can control - and that's choosing not to engage with their content any further.

[dragynkeep]

So my post about my frustration over people being uneducated about zoos when I just wanted to watch videos about gorillas got me some lovely anons, and I decided to make this a post so I can answer them all together in one complete post rather than numerous asks.

Obviously these are all anons cause no one nowadays can put their face to their opinions like a grown up but whatever, the point is anon, you are conflating your own personal views with reality around zoos.

I didn’t know Calgary Zoo, turns out it’s in Canada and I’m in the UK, so I researched it thinking that there might have been controversy or it’s not a good zoo similar to some backyard zoos here in the UK. No, the only controversy I could find was someone accidentily leaving a knife in the Westland Gorilla enclosure.

In 2009.

Here’s a picture I found of the snow leopard enclosure.

Anon, this looks reasonably sized. Not only that, but I’ve seen plenty of ledges, trees, and places for enrichment so that the snow leopards don’t get bored. Plus, plenty of room so the two that I’ve seen living there can run and play with each other. This looks like a bog standard enclosure. 

Now for the spaces to hide, the size of a small living room is perfectly normal. You know why? Because that’s where they sleep. That’s where they go to relax and get away from the people, which zoos implement so that the animals aren’t constantly watched and have somewhere to feel safe and secure. That’s like crying that your bedroom isn’t the size of your whole house. That’s not what it’s there for. 

Because good zoos ultimately work to giving the best living conditions that they can to their animals. 

Also, shitty coolers? So you’re complaining about the leopards being given something to cool down, why do you think it’s shitty? Zoos often give common household things to their animals that we would also see, like boxes, coolers, ice lollies, anything that can be enriching, because that’s all you need. The leopards aren’t gonna care.

As for the shaving thing, you don’t shave snow leopards the same way you don’t shave your double coated dog. This just shows your ignorance, because you know WHY you typically don’t shave the animals? Because their coat helps in thermoregulation, because shaving their coat actually fucks it up and risks the animal actually getting sunburnt.

Can you really? Tell me, what’s the behavioural signs of stress in leopards? What’s the signs of them falling ill, or struggling with heat stroke like you’re suggesting?

Because humans who don’t go into zoology and animal behaviour are notorious for misreading animal behaviours. Prime example? Monkeys.

This cat is dead omg. Oh wait, it’s just relaxing. 

I agree. Fuck unethical zoos, which is what I was saying, but you’re conflating unethical zoos with all zoos, which isn’t the case. This is not the 19th century, zoos are no longer tiny prison cells with animals in for people to gawk at. 

But this last ask shows that you’re not interested in animal welfare or advoacting for higher standards so we avoid backytard zoos, you’re only interested in flaunting your anti humanity boner and acting like we’re scum, when this kind of extinctintion thinking is very fucking racist. Because before colonisation and industrialisation, many native groups lived with the nature around them. 

Because we needed it to thrive so we could thrive, and we understood how to live in it. Humanity isn’t an evil thing, we are capable of very beautiful things and we should be working towards building a life where we can work with nature. Get over your edgy mindset, you’re a grown ass person ffs.

And yes, I have seen zoos that haven’t done what they should’ve, and animals suffering because of it. But that’s why we advocate for stricter standards, and support the zoos that are doing it right, that are putting in so much effort for conservation and education. Because without those zoos, plenty of species would be dead. They would be dead.

Keep that in mind. Hate unethical zoos, fight for higher standards, support the zoos that are doing it right. Educate yourself and get out of my inbox, you ignorant tool.

[crossdressingdeath]

Well, if we're doing this (JC, Anders, Cullen...), then we're doing this. What's your opinion on Solas? Take the question as you will: his romance with Lavellan, his past, his plans, his—whatever you're interested in talking about.

...When you put it like that it kind of feels like my sole purpose on this site is to disagree with the loudest opinions of every fandom I'm in, huh.

I like Solas, he's great as a character. The sass, the fashion sense, the voice acting, all very good. His personal quest feels real and important (which should be an easy bar to clear but not all of them manage it), his positions make sense for his character... He gets hit hard by Inquisition's "You're not allowed to argue with your companions or encourage them to grow as people except in very specific circumstances and otherwise you can either tell them what they want to hear or insult them in a way that has nothing to do with what your character would actually be having an issue with" nonsense, but that's not really his fault as a character; it's more visible with him in places (at least if you're playing Lavellan), but it's an issue all of the Inquisition cast has at some point. I can't speak to his romance because I... still haven't done it (one day I will romance someone who isn't Bull or Dorian. One day), but as for the rest...

Honestly my biggest issue with Solas isn't actually an issue with him, because the whole "oh yeah the Dalish gods were all totally evil and the Dalish are stupid for believing in them" bullshit is tied so heavily to him that I can't help but conflate them. (God I hate that plot point, I'd actually be fine with Bioware retconning it to at least "only some of them were slavers" at a minimum, also can they at least be less blatant about the whole "Oh only the Christianity allegory isn't confirmed fake, awful or both and that totally doesn't have any real-world meaning", honestly at this point I'm just embarrassed they're being so obvious about it.) Other than that... yeah, I like Solas's past and plans, it makes sense from a story and character perspective and makes for a nice setup for the next game. The whole survivor's guilt thing, his desire to bring back the past, the fact that the story hasn't immediately condemned you and in fact gives you the option to say you're going to save him from himself (Bioware do not turn this into "he's evil and crazy shut up", if you do that again I swear-)... It's good! And honestly after the "Everything's morally grey if you want it to be, even a conflict between abusers, rapists and murderers and people who don't want to be abused, raped and murdered, here have this really obvious evil darkspawn slaver guy to take your mind off of the complete bullshit we're calling moral complexity while we tell you which parts of the grey morality you're supposed to side with" thing Inquisition had going for it it's refreshing to have actual grey morality again.

Also I'm still mad that Lavellan can't be like "You. You're my dad now" at any point, why don't you love me Solas, why do you love Cole and not me. But anyway, ignore my brief tangent about Bioware's shitty, shitty choices... Yeah, Solas is a good character, it's nice to have a character who has genuinely grey morals, his goal makes sense, I'm glad they've set up the possibility of an ending for him that involves talking him down or helping him find a less dangerous solution instead of just killing him, and my main issues with him are issues that he shares with the entire cast because the writing in Inquisition... wasn't great. I'm... cautiously optimistic about his role in DA4, although also very worried because he does share some elements of his character with Anders and we all know how that ended. Also I'm realizing it's been way too long since I played Inquisition, because I'm sure I used to have more detailed opinions on Solas.

[ace-trainer-risu]

omg i would like to know the hated author...

OH thank you for asking I was. of course secretly deeply hoping someone would ask so I would have an excuse to go off. 

The author [dramatic pause] is VE Schwab!

Now I will pause (again) to say that I just spent like two hours writing a six page long essay on exactly why I dislike her as an author (I don’t know anything about her as a person so no feelings there) but then when I reread it I started to feel worried that it might hurt someone’s feelings who really likes her as an author, so this is a slightly redacted version.

But basically there are three things I hold against her.

For context, I’ve only actually read one book by her, A Darker Shade of Magic. But it’s not just that I didn’t like it. It’s that it left me angry. I read it a year ago and I still get furious when I think about it. It is, in my opinion, a profoundly toxic and hateful book. 

While at the same time also being a very boring and bland book.

So that’s point one) I just don’t get the hype. I read ADSM b/c I saw it recommended everywhere, but I really don’t get why? It’s not very well-written. Purely on a technical level her writing isn’t bad, but it’s not good either, its very...okay. The world building was really disappointing (it’s about four alternate worlds but they’re all almost. exactly the same. which was super disappointing. and also she seems to be under the illusion that london is like the most important place in the world?) The characters are bare minimum sketches, they basically feel like she came up with an initial concept and then never went any further. The characters aren’t particularly likeable or compelling, either, except for one character who...I felt like you weren’t actually supposed to like, lol. The pacing was actively bad. The plot doesn’t really start till around halfway through the book. I actually started ASDM twice and gave up on it the first time b/c it was boring. when I tried again the second time, I thought I had only read maybe the first quarter of it on the first try b/c I couldn’t remember anything happening, but it turned out I had actually read about half, its just that nothing happens in the first half. 

to be fair, I have read reviews of a different book she wrote which specifically praised the writing, so maybe she just did a shitty job on this book and she writes better in her other work?

point two) if you only pay attention to the text of the story, it’s fine! again, its not particularly compelling but its fine. but if you pay any attention to the subtext, its...really misogynistic and queerphobic. its incredibly pervasive through the whole text. 

for one thing, the female protagonist is introduced and is immediately like “Oh. I hate all other women.” (No one asked!) which is not necessarily bad in and of itself, except that...not only is her sexism never called out or contradicted, its actually actively supported by the text. there’s only one other important female character, and she’s Evil(TM), and also gets killed. the very few other female side characters are either someone’s mom or are portrayed as being extremely shallow and vapid and silly. they act exactly how the female protag despises women for acting. so...I don’t think its intentional but you’re left with this weird impression that the female protag is completely justified in her internalized misogyny b/c apparently all other women ARE bad. also, the female protag likes wearing boy’s clothes, which is great, but there’s this weird vibe that girls who don’t wear boy’s clothes are like, dumb and bad and sexist. I think the author is trying to critique repressive female clothing in the past (female character is from regency era england) but she does it really badly and instead accidentally(?) implies that girls who wear skirts are like. dumb sluts. a very weirdly sexist take. like it literally feels like this book hates women and specifically hates them for wearing “women’s” clothes.  *also not the point but it’s really funny that of all the time periods to critique for restrictive clothes, she picked regency england. ah yes, the torturous constraints of...empire waisted dresses and minimal or no corsets. dastardly! 

for another thing, the queer rep is just...so so bad. there’s one explicitly multisexual person (bi or pan isn’t specified but something along those lines) who gets tricked by a manipulative man older than himself heavily implied to be gay (bad) and gets horribly injured and almost dies (bad) basically just so the straight male protag can have angst (bad!). 

the manipulative guy implied to be gay is in turn being magically controlled by...a different! manipulative older man (bad) and is strongly implied to be sexually abused by that man (bad) and the straight main character literally never tries to help him in any way (bad) and ultimately kills(ish) him (bad) but it’s revealed that he basically chose to die (bad) because it was like, the only way he could ever escape his suffering (very bad!!) and the main character then! uses! his dying body! in a spell! to save his own fucking life! and basically disposes of his still alive! body into hell like he’s garbage (so bad I’m literally still fuming of it over a year later)

and then there’s the guy who is manipulating that guy, who is an older man heavily implied to serially abuse and assault teenage boys and young men (bad!!). he also dies too which is fine and good in and of itself...*

except for the fact that of our three queer-adjacent characters, two die and one is horribly injured and almost dies. two are abused and one is an abuser. two are used as angst-fodder for straight characters and one is literally sacrificed, coldly and selfishly and without his consent, to save a straight character’s life. they’re all closely associated with injury and death and trauma and abuse and it’s suggested that death is the only escape. 

subtextually speaking, this book hates queer men and punishes them for existing. 

*note: I want to specifically say that “enjoying abusing teen boys” does not automatically make a person gay or queer. that’s not what being gay/queer means. HOWEVER, there is a long and ugly history of gay men being portrayed as predators who deliberately prey on and abuse younger men, and this character plays directly into that stereotype, and that is why I included him. not b/c he’s positive queer rep but exactly because he isn’t

thirdly) about a year ago there was a bit of buzz about ve schwab writing a book with a canon asexual character...except I looked into it and a) it’s not actually canon at all; the book only says he’s disinterested in sex, which is by NO MEANS the same and it’s shitty to conflate the two when there’s a vast spectrum of asexual experiences (to be clear, it would be one thing if the text said he was asexual AND disinterested in sex. to say he’s disinterested in sex and that equals asexuality is a whole other thing, and is wrong), and schwab then confirmed on her twitter that he’s meant to be asexual. That’s not the same its not the same and we all know its not the same. b) this character is in fact a villain, which is frustrating when asexuality is FREQUENTLY and harmfully associated with people being heartless and unfeeling and evil and like, literal serial killers; to be fair, as I understand it the majority (all?) of the characters in these books are villains, so that’s less bad, but to be fair again, apparently this specific character is also portrayed as being, like “a sociopath” which is ableist AND goes back to all the stuff I said above. and c) what really annoys me is that in her tweets at the time she was very smug about this and fully patted herself on the back. she did half-assed, unresearched “rep” which wasn’t even actually canon and then acted like she was doing ace ppl a favor. excuse me, I didn’t actually ask to be represented by you. 

SO YEAH that’s not the...medium and short of it. the long and short is reserved for a Cursed(TM) google doc filled with my rage. but the tl;dr is that I think she’s an overhyped writer who wrote a profoundly misogynistic, homophobic book and trumps herself up over rep she didn’t actually do a good job of providing. and I would definitely never read another one of her books. The End!

[aelinbitch-archive]

unpopular opinion: i don’t like rowan/rowaelin. i’m not here to convince u to unstan lol ppl are allowed to like/dislike things w/o feeling bad about it omg but i hate that some rowan stans are so insensitive when it comes to those who don’t like him! they’re so thirsty for him that they condemn anyone who doesn’t stan him & then excuse his problematic/lowkey triggering actions bc he’s hot and it’s gross. AGAIN not saying ppl can’t like rowan it’s ok lol but it’s more about some stan’s behavior

That’s totally fair my angel. I dislike the vibe that some people are locked out of the fandom for not being a cheerleader for every aspect of the series, and I hope that my followers/mutuals know that if they dislike stuff I like, or like stuff I dislike, expressing their opinions regarding that won’t ever cause me to cut them off (unless it’s like, some truly gross shit, which disliking rowaelin isn’t). 

Also I have to say, even tho I do like rowaelin, I understand where you’re coming from about people excusing his actions because he’s hot. I’ve toooooootally seen that. And I’ll just be 100% honest - no shade to anyone, but some of the rowaelin content on this website disturbs me a little bit, in terms what’s considered hot/romantic/acceptable when writing or depicting them in art. I’ve seen some weird stuff defended as hot or even just “not that bad.” Which isn’t necessarily a problem with canon, but your ask was more about stans anyway, so yeah. 

A while ago I actually wrote rowaelin meta in response to some other peeps (which was more about Aelin in relation to Rowaelin and how she’s included or not included in discussions of the ship, but it has some thoughts relevant to this ask) so I’m gonna just copy and paste what I wrote below and feel free to read if u want. (It’s like very overdramatic and fiery lmao but anyway). 

I agree with a lot of this, but (at risk of derailing ms aelinapologist’s amazing post) I do have a few things to say, which are

1. OP took two whole paragraphs at the beginning of her post to say that the point wasn’t to discourse about rowaelin being abuse or not abuse, it was to talk about how the conversations centering around said abuse consistently display a disturbing lack of empathy for the character who should be the main concern of the debate. So I just find it a bit funny/odd that the replies (including a portion of the one I’m about to make, I admit that) have been like “Yeah great post! And now to discourse about Rowaelin-” but I digress.

2. I have consistently loved reading about Rowan and Aelin and they’re one of my favorite fictional couples. So nothing I’m about to say is intended to be like “GOTCHA they suck and you suck for liking them!!!” Because I like them as well. A lot. And in addition, nothing about this reblog is intended to be shady or confrontational in any way shape or form. I just think this is a great and very needed discussion I’d like to contribute to, so here goes.

3. Even if we look at HoF alone and ignore how things play out later: yes, they are both mean to one another, yes, they are both in a dark place and end up having a mutually positive effect on one another (so I definitely agree that, at least for HoF alone, it’s not a “douchey guy changes for the heroine story”) but. There IS still a power imbalance. I don’t think it’s entirely accurate to say “they were both bad The End” without also bringing up the fact that Rowan is 300 years old and Aelin is 18, and that Rowan is training Aelin and is in a position that gives him a massive amount of control over her, and that he is stronger and more powerful than her physically, magically, and socially (he is a prince and legendary warrior, she is a AWOL teenage princess currently working as a scullery maid).

Maybe I’m reading into it too much, but I really just don’t think that Aelin, a 17 y/o girl going through an unimaginably shitty time, being like “fuck you!!” to this 300 y/o jerk who doesn’t know shit about her is on the same level as aforementioned 300 y/o jerk hitting her, biting her, and telling her she would have been of more use to the world if she’d died when she was eight.

And in addition to that, we see that his behavior effects her a lot more than it effects him. When he verbally tears her down, we see her experience genuine and devastating despair and shame, whereas everything she does and says to him, no matter how snarky or outright cruel, is not having that same effect on him. People always seem to think they’re giving Aelin credit for being a Strong Woman™ by saying “she’s tough! she can handle it!” when in reality… we have evidence for the fact that she kinda can’t handle it. That the way he treats her in the beginning is slowly wearing her down and sending her deeper into a depressive state. And I don’t understand how it somehow reflects poorly on Aelin (or is even misogynist) to acknowledge this. Women, especially literal teenage girls, should not be measured by their tolerance for mistreatment.

All I really wish is that somewhere along the line we’d gotten a genuine apology from Rowan for this besides a throwaway line in KoA about regretting their “brawling.” And again, none of this is to say “see!! it IS abuse!!” it’s just to suggest that, even as an enemies to friends to lovers story, the “enemies” part was not exactly on a level playing field.

4. But with that being said, I could probably forgive the imbalance in their early relationship, mostly because their later relationship, as both friends and lovers, is so amazing and supportive in pretty much every way. And the great thing about enemies to FRIENDS to lovers, like you said, is that 1) none of the assholery occurred during any kind of romantic or sexual relationship or a transition into one, so it was sort of “fair and square” in that way, and 2) they had the opportunity form a solid, platonic foundation of trust and caring before they crossed into the lover territory.

Aaaaaaaaaand then Sarah did a retcon job on HoF which negated… pretty much all of that. I can totally be down with “good old fashioned mutual hatred thaws into caring which grows into love” but once we start hearing shit like “‘Sometimes, you’d be sleeping beside me at Mistward, and it’d take all my concentration not to lean over and bite them. Bite you all over’” and “‘That was the first time I really lost control around you, you know. I wanted to chuck you off a cliff, yet I bit you before I knew what I was doing. I think my body knew, my magic knew. And you tasted… So good. I hated you for it’”……. hhhhhhhhhhh.

I can’t think of many arguments for this NOT contributing at least a little to the “he’s mean because he loves you (and stick it out because someday he’ll figure it out)” trope. And while it might be a bit different because Aelin was quite mean as well, her behavior was just… meanness. Not some sort of weird outlet for repressed sexual attraction/love. I guess I just get flashbacks of “No sweetie, that boy in your class kicks your desk, pulls your hair, and calls you names because he likes you and doesn’t know how to express it.”

And I think this decision on Sarah’s part to go back and say he was into her all along is 1) a result of the mating bond thing she’s so fond of and 2) kind of a panicked backpedalling to the backlash she might have gotten over Rowan’s behavior in HoF? Which is…. so ironic because she made it SO much worse. In my humble opinion, she should have just doubled down on what she originally wrote as enemies-friends-lovers (and had Rowan bring up his early behavior and apologize in some way), and the problem would have been solved. And while I personally feel that I can recognize this for what it is - a shitty retcon - and enjoy the relationship despite it, I don’t think we should talk over people for whom this is a deal-breaker for the ship.

5. I don’t think about all of this and have the reaction that so many “anti tog” people seem to have of “FUCK Rowan he’s ABUSIVE and PREDATORY and I wish he was DEAD!!!” I think there are things to criticize about his behavior and about the way Sarah decided to spin their relationship, but they have had many great moments, especially in the later books, and I don’t think I or anyone else is “shipping abuse” by enjoying that. All of this is just to emphasize how, in OP’s very succinct words, “your inalienable right to enjoy two characters’ dynamic does not outweigh the right to criticise it.” Because there ARE valid things to criticize, and we as Rowaelin shippers (lol.) need to be careful not to conflate ugly hatred with valid criticism when we speak over it.

And because there IS so much ugly hatred for Aelin and her relationship with Rowan on this website, I completely understand why there’s a kind of knee-jerk reaction of jumping to defense of this ship we love. But that impulse, quite frankly, means nothing to me if defense of Rowaelin includes the erasure of Aelin’s canonical experiences. And maybe this is wacky and controversial, but I’m pretty sure we can express our enjoyment of Rowaelin AND keep Aelin as an individual from being swept under the rug.  

6. More than saying any of that what I really really want to do (and have been trying to do in the previous paragraphs, but maybe unsuccessfully) is bring the conversation back to OP’s original point which was not “abuse!” or “not abuse!” but about how the ways in which we discuss “abuse or not abuse” often includes a stomach-turning lack of concern for Aelin and some frustratingly reductive arguments. And somehow I have the sneaking suspicion that Rowaelin shippers are reading this post and missing the point, which that this is happening on BOTH sides of the argument.

Everyone is perfectly entitled to ship Rowaelin and argue their opinion about its merits or lack thereof, but when we cover our ears and say “she was mean too she was mean too she was mean too she was mean too la la la la la la la” that’s completely ignoring the genuine pain that she did experience in HoF and the power imbalance that she was subjected to, no matter whether or not we personally feel that it was sufficiently rectified in later books.

And I see this ALL THE TIME, in both the fandom and “anti-fandom”, and I’m honest to god quite sick of it. I’m sick of the willful ignorance of a teenage girl’s pain in order to further an agenda. Yes, it’s more stomach-turning when the agenda is to prove what an evil bitch she is or whatever, but it’s not excusable if your agenda is to prove Rowaelin is great, either! And I don’t understand why we have to throw all nuance out the window and ignore how Dorian hurt her, ignore how Chaol hurt her, ignore how Rowan hurt her, fucking hell, ignore how SAM hurt her, just so we can make our arguments! Because as much as the antis love to scream about “WHAT MESSAGE IS THIS TERRIBLE SHIP SENDING THE TINY GIRL-CHILDREN WHO READ THE BOOKS???” it’s also like, what kind of message is our ongoing discussion of it sending by sweeping a teenage girl’s experiences under the rug when we argue about her relationships?

And like OP said, what have we even got to show for it? No conclusion has been reached, nothing has been achieved besides valuing a romance (or the hatred of that romance and preference for a different romance) over individual characters, namely an individual character who happens to be a teenage girl that has suffered an ungoldy amount - suffered, sometimes, at the hands of male characters we like.

In conclusion, the mass allergy everyone seems to have to giving a shit about Aelin unless its to further their agenda is sickening. If I had a dollar for every time I’ve had to hear about how poor Manon’s character was “ruined” by Manorian (although not directly by DORIAN, of course, because apparently Saint Haviliard can do no wrong) I’d have enough money to buy a lamborghini and drive it off a cliff like I wish I could every time I hear someone’s terrible hot take about how Aelin is complicit in her own alleged abuse. Yet somehow I’ve never heard anyone complain about the damage done to Aelin’s character by any of the male characters, including Rowan. It’s never “Rowan ruined Aelin’s character!!” it’s “Rowaelin sucks and so does Aelin.” In fact, one of the REASONS Aelin sucks in the first place IS Rowan/Rowaelin! What a great implicit message to send to people reading your “critiques”: if you are annoying and #problematic enough, your suffering will be used against you and you will receive no sympathy for it. Cool!

And for other ships, too: it’s never “Chaol and Dorian, while at points a very good for Aelin, also caused her a lot of pain” it’s either “Chaol was right about Aelin in QoS and both he and Dorian are ruined because of her #chaorian” OR, from the fans, who, again, are not off the hook, “Chaol and Dorian and Aelin are BFFs forever #originaltrio.” And as a teenage girl myself, who loves and identifies with Aelin, who is more invested in her story than anyone else’s… I’m just tired. And more than a little appalled. And I wish we could do better.

[questionablygourmet]

I Like This Show A Normal Amount: Will Graham As Autistic Representation

In a previous meta post about Will, I briefly alluded to my appreciation for Will as good autistic representation, and for Free-For-All Friday, @tin-can-paladin prompted me to do as I’d said I might and write a Thing about that.  (Hopefully today is the day I actually get this post finished and up!)  So here we go.

First of all, this post will be starting from the premise that Will is an autistic character.  I don’t particularly care if Hugh’s said he’s not; whether or not he meant to, he and Bryan gave us an autistic-coded character and I reserve the right to be delighted about it!  (Actually, that’s not quite true - I do care, in the sense that I wish he hadn’t said that, because acknowledging portrayals of characters on the spectrum that aren’t a walking fucking stereotype played for lulz *cough BBT COUGH* or as a tragedy inflicted upon their neurotypical family members as being on the spectrum is Important.  But whatever.)

This post will address aspects of Will as a character, but also to an extent how he’s handled in the wider context of the show, and why that matters.

Agency

This was my primary focus on that previous Will meta post, but in context of autistic representation, I think it’s an important thing to highlight in this post as well: Will Graham is a whole-ass adult in control of his actions even when other characters don’t think so (see: Alana, Jack, et al in late season 1) or are actively trying to subvert that (see: Hannibal, You Asshole).

Autistic characters in various media are all-too-frequently infantilized and handled as though their environment/circumstances completely dictate their behavior.  Will both implicitly and explicitly (“You can’t reduce me to a set of influences” - ironically for a later part of this post, the next thing he says mentions behaviorism), resoundingly rejects this, and I love that as part of his narrative in general but also as an autistic character in particular.  

Empathy

This one’s gonna be a doozy.  There’s a lot to talk about here that all generally falls under the heading of “autism and empathy,” so I’ll do my best to stay organized.

First, the simplest: He cares!  So!  Deeply!  And complexly!  And we know that throughout the show!

Frankly, this in particular massively exacerbates my irritated wish that the creators would explicitly acknowledge him as autistic because holy shit the stereotypes he combats with this.  Autistic people in the real world have widely varied, diverse relationships with empathy and compassion (which are different things, and I have some beefs with the way the show uses the word “empathy,” but that’s a digression and this is already going to be a long post), but media largely erases this, conflating difficulties with normative, neurotypical-passing social behavior with inability to empathize, and/or display compassion, and/or even feel emotions (FFS).  

There’s a related point about “normative-passing social behavior” that I want to expand on a bit, here: we see a lot of profound differences in demeanor for Will over the course of the show, and that’s something I’ve seen interpreted as manipulation sometimes when it really isn’t.  (Not to say Will is not manipulative/capable of being manipulative, because he is, very!  But not everything calculated is necessarily manipulative, and I see the two conflated a lot and that annoys me.)  Will has, to my eyes, four basic social “modes.”  

I’m Dealing With Most People With Whom I Have No Particular Antipathy Or Affection - Aloof, and either standoffish or polite depending on how his boundaries are being treated.  He’s not particularly interested in making people comfortable when they’re making him uncomfortable (and being a white dude generally enables him to take this attitude without big repercussions), and people frequently make him uncomfortable.

I’m Dealing With Someone I Perceive As Vulnerable - Exaggeratedly calm, kind, careful.  He’s trying to connect and provide comfort and support.  He’s minding his every move and word because he doesn’t want to cause harm incidentally.  (Abigail, Peter, Walter, etc. and to some extent, Margot, though with her it’s mixed with other attitudes.)

I’m Dealing With An Enemy - This is where the manipulativeness (and even, particularly in the cases of Bedelia and Hannibal, cruelty) comes in.  He’s minding his every move and word because he wants to elicit a specific response from the person he’s interacting with.  (This comes into play with Jack and Alana at various points even though they are rarely full enemies.)

I’m Dealing With A Trusted Friend - Has neither the deliberation of 2-3 nor quite the standoffishness of 1.  He’s neither projecting an image appropriate to a specific kind of fraught social situation, nor actively trying to deflect attention and interaction.  In my opinion we really only see this with Hannibal (in season 1 and then with flashes of it in 2 and 3) and Molly, though he gets close in a handful of moments with Alana, Beverly, and Jack.  

All these modes deal with a) to what extent he is acting, and b) why he’s acting.  And I love that we get to see this breadth of social interaction modes from him, because that is an accurate and sensitive portrayal of an autistic adult, reflecting the often-dramatic differences in “difficulty setting” of an interaction - how and to what extent are we expected to (or otherwise have a need to) mimic neurotypical mannerisms?  What are the stakes of the situation?  These are explicit considerations for a lot of autistic people, and Will demonstrates that vividly throughout the series.

Another way in which empathy and social interaction come into play in terms of autistic representation is that Will can and does form strong social bonds - not very often, because the way most other adults treat him isn’t conducive to it, but with people who display acceptance/a lack of judgment for his non-neurotypical reactions and behaviors, and importantly, who don’t treat him as Other for the way he can reconstruct crime scenes, we see that can form very strong bonds.  Hannibal is obviously the prime example of this, but also Molly, and to a much lesser extent, Alana and Margot.  (Though Jack refers to him as a friend and they have some friendly interactions, their bond is not a strong one and not at all marked by the kind of humanizing acceptance it takes to get truly close to Will.)  People who accept who he is, and who are neither threatened by his skills nor dependent on them.

Finally, in this section, let’s look at the crime scene reconstructions and “getting inside killers’ heads” bit.  

I have complex feelings about this aspect of the show, or more precisely, how other characters talk about his reconstructions and serial killer profiling - they (even Hannibal, to an extent) talk about it in mystifying terms, and I thoroughly dislike the term “empathy disorder” that gets thrown around so much in seasons 1-2 to explain what he does.  Will is apt to testily correct people that he just interprets the evidence, and that is exactly what he is doing.  His vivid imagination coupled with years of active study of criminal psychology allow him to take that interpretation a lot farther than anyone else would, and sometimes make intuitive leaps that the other characters can’t follow.  But it’s clear that this intuition is founded in concrete evidence, as we frequently see him stymied when he doesn’t quite have enough of it, much to the frustration of Jack, who is particularly shitty about treating him like an oracle.  

I like that Will gets to stick up for himself and correct people on several occasions, but I wish the ableism and the Othering was less pervasive amongst the other characters because it makes me want to slap them.  I find that I really appreciate how most of the fic I’ve read since entering the fandom thoroughly and often explicitly rejects the pseudo-magical divination and/or Crazy Person With Magic Brain angle.

Perspective

There was something I was reaching at that was eluding me in my first attempt at this draft, and then I ran into an excellent article about writing autistic characters that suddenly and thoroughly solidified it for me.  It’s really brilliant; it discusses and illustrates the strong difference between a behavioristic (see previous reference) approach to characterization and a humanizing one.  Behavioristic analyses divorce themselves from the actual mindset and experience of the subject, whereas humanizing portrayals display the subjective experience of the person who is perhaps behaving in a way other people may find confusing.  

Since Will is the main point of view character in the show, we get front-row seats to his subjective experience and can therefore more properly empathize with him.  An abnormal reaction to an abnormal situation is normal behavior.  The behavior that Jack and various other characters are exasperated, impatient, and/or unnerved over all looks pretty reasonable when we know how Will is experiencing the crime scene, or are seeing his nightmares and hallucinations along with him!  And while the nightmares and hallucinations in season 1 are a matter of encephalitis and trauma rather than neurotype, it still matters that we’re led to understand something of what he goes through, from his own perspective rather than an outside one.  

It’s incredibly necessary emotional context moving forward in the show, giving us an autistic character who is flawed but deeply human and whose darkness we can understand.

[pelikinesis]

ended up typing a lot about JJBA

finally making my way through JJBA Stardust Crusaders. On the one hand, from what I’ve seen of JJBA in general, a lot of shit happens basically for *THE DRAMA*, but due to artistic choices, clever execution, and committing to its own outlandishness, it really does work on a certain level. and if you’re down to meet it at that level, you’ll have a good time probably.

at least, that was my initial takeaway after having watched the first two seasons. But even though the whole point of JJBA is that each series creates its own paradigm (Phantom Blood is basically Great Expectations meets vampires meets sunlight kung fu, and then Battle Tendency replaces the noble and pure-hearted Jonathan with his conniving shonen Tom Sawyer-esque grandson, Joseph), I feel like Stardust Crusaders is easily the biggest change.

not just because of The Stands, but actually because the main cast broadens to including at least 4 characters early on. It’s really the only way a character as stoic and seemingly-unflappable as Jotaro can really work in a story. There always needs to be another character on-scene and similarly invested in his quest to react to all the shenanigans going on, so he can bide his time just glaring impassively at the obstacles in his way before he gives them the ora ora ora and then yare yare da ze at the right moments.

And while Jotaro is starting to grow on me, i imagine i would have been way more into his character when i was in my teens or early twenties. But these days, I’m much too aware of how the story twists and turns so that Jotaro always looks SO FREAKING COOL. Like, i couldn’t manually activate that particular section of my suspension of disbelief even if i tried. if i could do that, believe me, i would, because i can see the appeal of Jotaro at a distance. And maybe by the time Stardust Crusaders is over, that’ll change things.

but as for right now, I equally like Jonathan and Joseph, though since I relate more to Joseph i’d pick him if i had to have a favorite. Phantom Blood is really short, but since Jonathan is such a simultaneously straightforwards but also immensely likable character, it works. 

If anything, it’s the other way around: if Phantom Blood were longer, that might be a problem, because Jonathan barely changes at all as a character (because he’s already a precious cinnamon roll too pure for this world) and essentially just learns Hamon as far as development goes.

If it had gone even a few more episodes, Jonathan might have started to get stale. But since he’s taken from Erina and Speedwagon and the rest of the cast (and US) far too soon, his passing is tragic, and all the more fondly remembered for it. That’d be kind of a shitty thing to say about an actual person I think, but since this is fiction I guess that’s alright to say.

and Joseph is just...incredibly entertaining. nonstop. He reaches near Deadpool-levels of zaniness, but since he’s picking up where the almost impossibly noble and heroic Jonathan left off, it feels fresh to begin with, and then Joseph continues to grow and change throughout Battle Tendency. 

At first he seems to inherit little of Jonathan’s character, due to his cocky demeanor, but those sparks of brilliance back in Phantom Blood that added a garnish of depth to Jonathan go supernova in Joseph and never look back, because he’s all about outwitting his opponents. So as compelling as the fights get in Phantom Blood, they become absolutely fascinating in Battle Tendency as Joseph pulls gambit after gambit out of his ass while having to fight the Pillar Men who are way above his weight class.

In Stardust Crusaders, they “preserve��� Jotaro’s image usually by having Polnareff or Old Joseph fall into the situations that do a number on their bodies, minds, and dignity. I’m not saying Jotaro never struggles or gets worried, it’s just that he shows it a lot less than everyone else, and since (thus far) he always comes out on top a lot quicker or at least more abruptly than the rest of  the cast, I find myself being a lot less concerned about his well-being and the possibility of his victory when he’s in danger.

And for what it’s worth, that’s completely telegraphed and likely deliberate. It’s my understanding that he’s the one that faces DIO in the end, so i would imagine there’s a payoff for him being handled relatively ‘safely’ in comparison to the rest of the main cast. I say it’s telegraphed because in the very first episode, characters comment about how powerful his Stand, Star Platinum is, and of course those attributes seem to transfer over, or at least get conflated with its user as well.

This wasn’t originally what i wanted to talk about though, precisely because i’m not yet done with the series. I actually wanted to write a bit about Hol Horse, because he’s just such a great antivillain, but I realized that what really makes JJBA so compelling, aside from its fascinating artistic direction and the fact that it’s very good at doing the main things it wants to do, is that the writers understand drama--and I said it was conspicuously, even overly-dramatic earlier, but right now I’m focusing on each episode’s ability to build and release tension.

No matter how wacky the show gets, it’s unfailingly adept at ramping up the tension. Even when I’m presented with a character so grotesquely, cartoonishly evil and unpleasant that it begs the question of how such a person could exist in the world as is. Even though I know the writers are unsubtly trying to play me so i rejoice when the bad guy gets ORAORAORA’d into the stratosphere. Even though everything at the forefront of the plot often ORAORAORAs whatever verisimilitude the setting has. I still cheer when the bad guys get obliterated. I still worry when the good guys are on the ropes.

And so I have a hard time critiquing the writing of JJBA. Maybe I’m just not qualified to form an opinion more refined than, “I enjoy it and it’s special, but not for everyone.” I guess what I would say, is that the story is extremely compelling to me as I’m watching it. But when I stop to think about it with some distance, the impact of the story beats and the characters’ fates become greatly diminished, and when it comes to other stories the opposite is true.

Because when I think about His Dark Materials, or Final Fantasy 6, or my other all time favorite stories, I feel a lot more strongly about them even if I haven’t read, watched, or played them in years. But on the other hand, maybe nostalgia has a lot to do with it. That’s probably a topic better suited for a back-and-forth discussion than as a stream-of-consciousness post though.

I wanted to return to the topic of Hol Horse for a second though, because by the third time he shows up in the story, he’s the POV character of the episode, and the main cast are positioned within the narrative of the episode as the antagonists. And it’s the weirdest thing, because I don’t know how many stories have managed to pull this off, or even try to do it.

But it works, because Hol Horse has already been established as being an ineffectual villain, but we don’t hate him because it turns out he failed to kill Avdol, and he hasn’t done anything absolutely reprehensible. He’s a bit of an everyman who is way in over his head and doesn’t want to die, and he even kinda sorta helped out the heroes once.

All that makes him sympathetic to a certain extent. And over the course of his episode, the tension comes from the question of will he or won’t he put his trust and faith in Oingo’s prophecies. It actually reminded me of the Biblical stories of Abraham and Isaac, or Job. Any time the character has their faith tested. Hol Horse gets that exact arc, and we see him struggle on whether to trust his own instincts and judgment, or entrust his life to the will of a higher power (I guess. It’s a Stand, so...).

It’s because Stardust Crusaders does stuff like this that it gets away with being structurally formulaic. It’s really just a sequence of them running into enemy Stand users, struggling to survive, figuring out how the Stand works, then coming up with a way to use their own Stands and/or the environment to overcome them. 

Except when there are other resolutions, including but not limited to using the enemy Stand’s power against their users, using their enemies’ fear of Dio against them, and Jotaro overcoming the setback of being de-aged back to 7 years old through the strategy of Jotaro being able to kick a grown man’s ass at 7 years old.

In every way, JJBA is just an explosive riot of unfettered creativity, with enough strong consistent elements to give it a unique flavor, and if nothing else, i feel like i should be taking pointers from how it creates dramatic tension.

[gummybuddha]

Pokemon: Facts & Opinions

I don’t play Pokemon games. This is because I’ve been out of the loop for five generations. I did try to play Pokemon Black, but I ended up losing my DS during a move, so that was the last time I played a Pokemon game. That was also the start of my curse of never managing to finish Final Fantasy Tactics A2. But that's another topic. 

So I don’t have a dog in the fight when it comes to Pokemon Sword & Shield. I was perfectly fine with my friends saying they were on the fence about getting the game. I didn't even think that was an extreme take because it seemed that the Pokemon community was fully aware of what Sword & Shield was: Game Freak doing a rush job to meet a deadline.

I honestly think the controversy of Dexit ( as it's being called) only really started because of game media sites like Kotaku and Polygon. I can understand arguing the point about why Sword & Shield might still be worth a player's times despite its flaws. What I don't understand is trying to absolve criticism from the discussion of Sword & Shield. I don't think that helps anyone. The simple fact is that for a game series about “collecting em all”, not being able to bring your whole collection over into the new game is a very large departure for the series. And people are gonna judge the game for that reason alone. Which, last time I checked, was a reasonable consumer response to a product.

Oh, but not in 2019.....

For example, Nathan Grayson of Kotaku wrote this article.

...

The fact that I have to play mental chess about whether or not Nathan Grayson is joking about this topic is the most concerning part about that article. I can’t help but feel like equating one bad game in a series to politics is just immature.

As I can tell, the real problem is that Kotaku, for whatever reason, has conflated people’s desire for them to be objective as journalists with personal attacks for liking something.  If people are actually harassing staff members, look I get that. There is nothing I can say at that point. If there were some real-life threat element and not just an assorted collection of people on Twitter calling Kotaku out on its bullshit, then yes, avoid those people.  But! I think Richard Lews stated it best when he said that the core problem with Kotaku is they hide behind their identity as a blog when people have found that they have done shitty journalism. So many of their articles are written like opinion pieces, which for a blog is fine. But when you are trying to cover news and events in a consumer industry, being objective, and practicing good journalism fucking matters.

As for Polygon and the others, I don’t even know what their excuse is, but at least they dont’ shove it in your face with dumb articles suggesting your 30-year old parents are equivalent to boomers now. 

And just for context, here is a real article by Kotaku writer Jason Schreier.

God, I wish I would have gotten a Jason Schreier hot take on Sword & Shield. That would have been dandy. I might not agree with it, but at least I would feel like there was an adult conversation being presented.

I’m starting to feel like this whole rant is silly. I hope everyone has a good Thanksgiving free of debates on which starter is the best. Because that’s the real beef right there. 

[radiqueer]

I read Natalie’s endnotes to the aesthetic and this is disturbing the fuck out of me so here are some. rambly thoughts I guess. people are welcome to add to this if they like

first she goes “this video is primarily about trans women” and like. caveat that I am not a trans woman, I’m nonbinary & afab so that’s not an experience I have access to in any way. so keep that in mind I guess

I wanted to show a wider audience the way trans people talk about gender amongst ourselves

look...I’m not an expert on trans people or anything but I watched the aesthetic and I can tell you that that’s not how trans people talk about gender. at least, I’ve never known them to. I’ve never participated in a conversation about gender that works that way. 

....no wait. I have. I’ve seen truscum talk about gender, and the way Justine talks pretty much mirrors the way truscum talk. 

I wanted to work through some of my private doubts about common explanations of what it means to be trans

I can’t argue with that.

I also wanted to reconcile the existence of a devoted Tabby fandom with my having created the character as a caricature of leftist ineffectiveness

I mean. how do I say this. I’ve been thinking about the difference between revolutionaries and incrementalists, and it’s clear to me that they need each other. but throughout the video, the way Justine treats Tabby mirrors the way incrementalists treat revolutionaries; as laughable, disposable, pitiable. like they’re caricatures of themselves. 

I had to google what veracity means. 

Some non-binary people disliked this video because they felt that the dialogue excluded or invalidated them. Whereas most of the feedback I got from binary trans people is positive. Which, fair enough—this is a video about binary trans women.

look...I try not to be like “binary privilege” and stuff because when it comes to trans people that concept becomes increasingly incoherent but how else do I talk about how it feels to be a nonbinary person watching that video, listening to people harp on and on about passing, when I myself will never pass? not just because I’m brown even though that plays into it - white people remain the standard of nonbinary presentation and aesthetics - I won’t ever pass. people are never going to look at me and think “oh, nonbinary” because that identity is not articulated in mainstream society at all. and I have to live in mainstream society, right, even as a marginalized person I still exist in the same spaces as other people. 

it feels like this is basically going “articulation of a binary trans identity has to exclude and invalidate nonbinary people” which is how you get truscum. it’s literally. the same thought process. 

I feel like I'm being grossly misunderstood by NBs when they characterize the desire to pass, Justine's point of view, as "respectability politics."

nonbinary people are not characterizing Justine’s (or Natalie’s) desire to pass as respectability politics. they’re characterizing Justine’s efforts to police Tabby’s presentation, and by association the presentation of all trans people who “fail to pass” (scare quotes because Tabby passes just fcking fine) as respectability politics. you can’t misrepresent our position and then accuse us of misrepresenting you. holy shit. 

My wearing long hair, makeup, changing my voice, generally softening my confrontation with the world is nothing like e.g. a black man wearing a suit and speaking in "white voice." I'm not doing "woman voice" to please cis people. I'm doing it because I want to be a woman.

oh god this is a mess. this is such a goddamn mess. starting with that simile I guess but omg Natalie. who the fuck decides what “woman voice” is? why is that song-and-dance necessary to be trans and to be a woman? like if you want to do it for yourself then that’s fine, but trans people remain trans even when denied the ability to perform their real gender. a trans man who is forced by circumstance to wear dresses and heels and makeup when he desperately does not want to is still a trans man. equating your transness with your desire to pass is just, straight up truscum shit. this is why people are calling you a transmed. 

Cis women understand this deeply. They know that they aren't oppressed as women because they psychologically identify as women. They know that misogyny is foisted upon them regardless of their psychology, so long as society views them as women. Trans men escape misogyny to some degree—generally to the degree that society views and accepts them as men. And trans women are in the sad situation of having to claw our way into a social position where we begin to experience misogyny.

dskjhvdkjfhkfdgdslg this is another mess. 

trans women do not have to “claw their way into a social position where they begin to experience misogyny” they already experience misogyny by virtue of being women. a woman who looks like a man is still experiencing the world as a woman. she’s still being affected by the things which affect women. 

trans men are harder to parse because trans men who fail to pass experience misogyny and the associated violence in addition to violence for refusing to conform to their assigned gender. but they’re experiencing all of these things through denial of their real identity. and that colours their experiences to a great degree. additionally, the social aspect of trans manhood is very, very conditional because manhood, even for cis men, is very conditional and highly gatekept. it’s very hard for trans men to access these structures and weaponise them against others outside of like...a tiny bubble saturated with queerness. to simplify, they’re men without privilege. 

It's not psychological identity that makes this happen. It's the interpersonal recognition that comes about as a result of habitually living/performing the identity. Let's be good leftist materialists here.

I don’t know what kind of materialism it is to reject the realness of the mind, of our emotions and experiences, of our internality. I don’t know much about materialism, but if it leads to takes like this I’m not sure I want to. the internet and what happens on it is real. the mind (or brain, or whatever the goopy shit in your head that lets you be a person is, whatever you wanna call it) and the thoughts and emotions it experiences are real. I feel so stupid arguing this. I feel like I’m trying to teach someone that 2+2=4 but I have to start by convincing them that numbers are real. it’s degrading. 

Before I transitioned I identified as genderqueer for a while. I presented basically as what used to be called a male transvestite. People were sometimes shitty about that, but my coming out with the NB identity was greeted mainly by, "sure, whatever bro, wear whatever you want." I found that as an AMAB NB, I was for most intents and purposes—socially, structurally, materially—still a man.

I don’t want to explain someone’s experiences to them but that’s them dismissing the reality of your nonbinary identity. and because you were and are a massively privileged person in every other way. 

surely an account that begins and ends with "I'm not a man because I don't identify as one" is pretty weak.

[uncharitability cw] I mean. sure. lets all set out to prove why we deserve to exist. that’s a good use of the trans community’s time, because we don’t do that enough in our private lives. lets make it the only story we tell. brilliant plan. and then everyone clapped. 

okay and then she goes on for a bit about the relationship between Tabby and Justine, which is fine. they’re good characters. if they were 100% fictional I would write fic for them. thanks for the extra content, I guess. 

The most hurtful things Justine says are my confessions. I have no security in "feeling like a woman." I feel like I'm desperately trying to be a woman though confronted by endless obstacles. It's a shadow that hangs over me every moment of every day. But these are just some feelings I have. I don't have opinions.

I don’t like telling people that they need to cope in private but if you’re coping then the content that you create to cope with your feelings and insecurities needs to be separate from your activism. conflating the two is a really bad idea and I have about 4 years worth of fandom drama on tumblr dot hell to show for it. bad things happen when people look at someone working through their emotions and trauma and go “oh yes, are these your politics?” and worse things happen when you do that to yourself and then you end up being invited to ted talks and fuck a whole bunch of people over. 

I keep trying not to talk about contrapoints because it serves no purpose and leads nowhere - she’s not going to change. but on some level talking about it helps me and maybe someone wants to hear me talk about it I fucking Guess.

this is okay to reblog, and written entirely in response to those tweets. if you’ve got additional responses to those tweets or want to talk about something I said, feel free. but if you’re going to come here and defend contrapoints, then save it. I’ll block you at best. there are times when I can have a rational, nuanced conversation about this but I won’t ever on this post because that’s not what this post is for. 

[knightofbalance-13]

https://rampantlytyping.tumblr.com/post/174581718969/for-fuck-sake

“Oh, it gets worse. Because I’ve read the archives of KOB’s reddit account. (Link here for reference, someone may wanna archive this in case KOB pulls a Delete Fucking Everything)

Never before have I seen something that would backfire so hard.

First of all, I’d recommend a look at the very first comment on that Reddit account, which was a screed about FatManFalling’s Volume 3 review. So much of modern KOB can be traced back here- has hatred of the word “the” and insistence on trying to replace it with “teh,” his long paragraphs, condescending attitude and personal attacks/insults (Also, for the record, “Fatass” is one of the worst mocking nicknames I’ve ever see on Reddit).

Actually-

https://www.reddit.com/r/RWBY/comments/5jdst1/cowardly_lion_taiyang_fanfiction/

This is. Thing is: this would HUMANIZE me. But god knows you can’t think of your opposition as human.

First is mischaractization.

Second is not a moral argument.

Third is conflating me being angry with who I am normally.

And fourth is downplayed since this whole post is nothing BUT a personal attack.

Also: Never said I was clever.

There’s also this post after Volume 4 which is basically “So the RWDE tag sucks amirite?”

No, the title is what I meant.

But a relevant comment that Caddeter and @psyga315 should see is this one. I’ll quote it directly, emphasis mine at the end:

Backfire in 3...2...1

“Now I know many of you are thinking “Why should I care?”

Well, because these people are in a dangerous mindset of ignoring everything that isn’t their opinion and warping that to justify their feelings.

I gave a comment on this journal pointing out the flaws in his work. The closest thing I said to an insult was saying that his usage of the term “man-pain” was stupid in any context. And when I admitted I wasn’t aiming towards him but his audience who weren’t sure about V3’s finale, he blocked me, deleted my comments (EDIT: he’s admitted to being wrong about teh previous two and has restored my comments. Still blocked but I have a way around it that he knows) and warped my words. Something he claimed Miles and Kerry did, minus the last part.

I ask of you: Say what you think about this. And not just the journal, what you thought of Pyrrha’s death. Not what he said, not what I said. But what you want to say.

Now GO!”

Now, if I was a generous man, this in context could be KOB asking for discussion on the Reddit.

I am not a generous man. To me, it looks like KOB deliberately inciting the Reddit post-Volume 3 (when they were most protective of RWBY as it was the last season that Monty would have definitely worked on) and encouraging them to dogpile the journal author.

Yeah...

Three things:

A. The time period this was made is post Volume 4, Not 3. So that’s bullshit.

B. https://www.reddit.com/r/RWBY/comments/5khw9y/my_thoughts_on_pyrrhas_death_rwby_and_rt_by_jswf/dbo9z0v/

Oh hey look, there’s someone disagreeing witrh me and I ENCOURAGED them. So that’s also bullshit.

C. https://www.reddit.com/r/RWBY/comments/5khw9y/my_thoughts_on_pyrrhas_death_rwby_and_rt_by_jswf/dboysk7/

Okay everyone, I have to ask that no one goes to the link and comments. The author is getting too stressed out by his debate with me and I don't want him to break.

So please, keep your discussions here.

Outright contradicted. Three strikes, you’re out.

And the worst thing? He had no empathy to the situation. Quote (again, emphasis mine):

“Well, don’t fight him. He’s…not right in the head.

Like I was arguing with him and he…wanted to kill himself.

And I didn’t even try being mean.”

Remember that in the Deviantart comments, KOB said that he could be “far far far crueler.”

As evidence by this post, where I am going to turn EVERYTHING against you. https://comments.deviantart.com/1/619991269/4290345087?offset=25#comments “*Sigh* Look, I never meant for you to get this stressed out. Hell, I understand where your coming from. Thinking about killing myself is such a common occurrence now I'm not even fazed by it anymore. So putting aside my feeling towards you and your conduct, I want you to listen to what i have to say: Your life matters. No matter what you think I've said, no matter what other people have said, no matter what you say, your life matters. You have friends and family who love and care about you and if you kill yourself, all it will do is wound those around you. It's painful I know but it's true. The best thing you can do is seek help above all else. Trust me, psychiatrists maybe be expensive by by divinty' sake they are miracle workers. And I know you're sick of hearing about this anime but really, look up Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann. That anime is a large part of why I get out of bed in the morning even thought I know there's a very good chance I'll choke to death on my breakfast, lunch or dinner or that my life probably doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things. It taught me to keep moving forward no matter what I lose or what I suffer because there is a light at the end of the tunnel. The journey is hard and long but it's worth it. I never intended on hurting you. Had I known you were this psychologically fragile or you were this invested in Pyrrha I would have said nothing. I understand where you are coming from and I'm sorry I did so much damage to you. I was wrong and you were right. Good day.” No empathy huh? “Also while I’m here, how about this long callout post about RWBY Analysis after she was angry at some art from Dishwasher that had Enabler undertones (complete with the classic “I used to respect you” card which you can always imagine someone saying within the context “I used to respect you when you agreed with me.”). And here’s her reaction, which should be recorded alongside the Great Fire of London as one of the greatest burns in history.”

Ah yes, a callout post...Where I didn’t call her out once...

But I guess the actual post looks pretty fucking bad for you (https://knightofbalance-13.tumblr.com/post/172361707730/httpsrwby-analysistumblrcompost172345982047) since it is short and-oh yeah-SHE WAS SLANDERING SOMEONE. Good job completely missing the point eh?

But sure Knight of Balance. Tell us all about how you never meant for any of this to escalate and how sorry you were. It’s not like your own accounts show you to be a liar who instigated a harassment campaign and showed no empathy upon hearing that it was partially successful. You can surround yourself all you want with your little cabal of white knights like Sunder the Gold and MageKnight who will go to bat for you when they can. You can claim all you want that what you do is a crusade to purify RWBY and Make The FNDM Great Again or some bullshit like that because you seem to think that if you kill RWDE, Miles will personally fly out to thank you for saving RWBY. And you can even run to other fandoms like Darling in the Franxx or FLCL where your name isn’t poison. But we all know what you are.

I didn’t mean for thing to escalate as evident by how I TRIED TO STOP IT,

No empathy when I actively tried to call him down MYSELF.

That sounds pretty fucking ironic  considering that you surround yourself in haters like Dudeblade and Cadder there who will never ever think to question you or themselves. But as for that Sunder thing.. Well I’ll get to that latter but let’s just say, it’s a show of self control how I’m not screaming my head off.

Oh and you’re any different? You probably think ‘I f I get rid of all the fanboys, M&K will HAVE TO listen to my obviously not biased criticism and I’ll Make RWBY Great Again! Then Monty Sempai will rise form the grave to thank me for saving his legacy!’

Please, I’d sit Miles down and give him a lecture on how a timeline is VERY important for a long running show and keeping time skips vague to ‘avoid plotholes’ would in fact make MORE of them. Though I’d probably force him to attend a writing class, Just because I respect the guy doesn’t mean I see him as flawless.

Yerah, doesn’t work when I did the EXACT SAME THING I did here in Franxx. I obviously do not care about my reputation worldwide.

Here’s the thing: I do not regret many things in my time on the internet. I regret not asking about internet customs so i could know things like alt accounts were a bad thing. I regret my raging outbursts at innocent people because I was an immature fuckhead. I regret interacting with RWBYcrit. ... That’s it. My fight against RWDE? My battle against shitty critics? I do not regret that one bit. I fought for what I believed was right and got to meet amazing people along the way. I think I’ve even grown as a person. So no dice bitch.

You’re a schoolyard bully with a stick and anger problems. You’re a child throwing a temper tantrum, unaware of how if Miles or Kerry saw what you’ve said and done, they’d be disgusted in you and would shame you for the world to see. You are nothing. In the grand scheme of life, this will be your legacy. You will never amount to anything significant in this lifetime, and your life peaked before you even hit your twenties. KOB, I really hope you realize how in just under two and a half years, you have made nearly the entire fandom hate your guts.

... And?

Oh you thought this was gonna hurt me? You think you saying I have anger issues is gonna hurt me when I’ve acknowledged that as one of my worst traits. You think telling me Miles and Kerry would be disgusted with me is gonna hurt me when I am not them, they are not me and I am fighting primarily for myself? You think you calling me worthless and saying I will never amount to anything in my lifetime when I’m a fucking existentialist AKA someone who believes that there is no inherent worth in life? Bitch, I say worse things about myself every day.

And the rest is either lies (the fandom as a whole, even on Tumblr, DOESN’T CARE ABOUT ME.) or shows you’re projecting onto me (’You’re a bully!’ says the bullies.)

Let me break this down: We all hate you on Tumblr,

God, stop projecting your ego onto me, I know the fandom as whole on Tumblr doesn’t care about me.

You haven’t shown your face on Twitter

https://twitter.com/KOB13x

Shows what you know.

and when someone cited you in a Reddit post, everyone warned them not to link to you because you’re a toxic influence.

Considering how you’ve been posting links throughout this whole post, why should I believe you if you suspiciously DON’T provide proof of this. And again: stop projecting your ego onto me.

For Christ’s sake KOB, FatManFalling can get his stuff posted on R/RWBY. It’s extensively mocked, yes, but it’s still allowed.

To the point it regularly gets kicked off reddit for having massive downvotes.

You’re so bad you haven’t even got that privilege. Let that sink in and realize what it says about you.

A. Proof

B. Not the same context.

And C. I don’t care.

Because this is coming from someone who tried throwing Sunder The Gold under the bus by saying he associates with me. DESPITE the fact that we haven;’t talked to each other in MONTHS. Why did you say this then? Oh right, Sunder is a fan of RWBY ergo he must be eliminated right? Because anyone who doesn’t conform to your fucking hivemind and treat the show AND ESPECIALLY the creators like shit is a heretic right?

That’s why I do this. Because you people are fucking AWFUL in every sense of the word. Everything you just tried to pin on me applies to YOU instead and then we can add on EVEN MORE and EVEN MORE DISGUSTING shit to that pile.I don;t like Steven Universe but I am JUST as disgusted by SU‘s fandom and it’s bullshit. This has nothing to do with RWBY anymore, this has to do with you people DESTROYING INNOCENT LIVES. That is YOUR legacy: the ruins of people’s lives and the destruction of a show people hold dear all because you decided to embody the WORST aspects of humanity.

In short: Fuck you.

Oh, PS:

https://knightofbalance-13.tumblr.com/post/162724070290/rampantlytyping-knightofbalance-13-hey

Guess you’re in the same boat as me eh?

[quranreadalong]

#165, Surah 33

THE QURAN READ-ALONG: DAY 165

We will get to Mohammed’s sexual adventures today, but first: more whining about the cowardly fake Muslims. Some of them, 33:20 informs us, would rather be in the desert with the Bedouin clans than have to serve under Mohammed in battle (this is making me sympathize with them tbh). They should remember that Allah has sent Mohammed as an excellent example, a paragon of virtue, and therefore everyone must pattern their behavior on his own. (For someone who loved to declare his religion free of saint nonsense and such, Mo sure did a fine-ass job of turning himself into a pure holy man eh?) Therefore, real believers weren’t afraid of the siege, because Mohammed wasn’t afraid of it. Real Muslims simply believed that “Allah and His messenger are true”.

Good Muslims are the ones who stood with Mohammed in battle (or rather ready for battle), bad ones are the hypocrites who were afraid and wanted to turn tail and run. Maybe Allah will forgive them, maybe he won’t. Well, fair enough. Neutral so far. We’ll finish up this particular topic with a recap of the events:

Allah repulsed the disbelievers in their wrath; they gained no good. Allah averted their attack from the believers. Allah is ever Strong, Mighty. And He brought those of the People of the Scripture who supported them down from their strongholds, and cast panic into their hearts. Some ye slew, and ye made captive some. And He caused you to inherit their land and their houses and their wealth, and land ye have not trodden. Allah is ever Able to do all things.

Those last two ayat are in reference to the poor Banu Qurayza, of course. Allah tells us that their brutal end was his doing, which is bad. Hey, at least the bloodiness of the massacre meant that they made it into the Quran! Most of the Bedouin clans Mo & Crew raided never even got a mention.

At any rate, we are now going to start talking about Mohammed’s wives. This entire section is in fact personally addressed to them. It begins in 33:28, in which Mohammed says that if his wives prefer “the world's life and its adornment”, then they should leave him. But if they stay with him and are good, they will be rewarded (in heaven). I guess that qualifies as a good-Muslims-go-to-heaven ayah and is good? Whatever. Moving on to the meaty part.

O ye wives of the Prophet! Whosoever of you committeth manifest lewdness, the punishment for her will be doubled, and that is easy for Allah. And whosoever of you is submissive unto Allah and His messenger and doeth right, We shall give her her reward twice over, and We have prepared for her a rich provision. O ye wives of the Prophet! Ye are not like any other women. If ye keep your duty (to Allah), then be not soft of speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease aspire (to you), but utter customary speech. And stay in your houses. Bedizen not yourselves with the bedizenment of the Time of Ignorance. Be regular in prayer, and pay the poor-due, and obey Allah and His messenger. 

Oh lord. Let’s break this down.

The first ayah is talking about sexual immorality (fahisha). Previously, in the fourth surah, we saw that slave women get half the punishment as free women for such things--interpreted in the ahadith as subjecting them to flogging but not screaming at them. Mohammed’s wives, on the other hand, deserve to be punished twice as much as typical free woman for sexual immorality. What that means, exactly, we don’t know. Twice as many lashings? The death penalty, but extra spicy? None of them were ever found guilty of adultery (that one “slander” of Aisha was the closest they ever came to that), so it’s unclear.

Regardless, the second ayah tells them to be submissive to Mohammed (oh, “and Allah”) to get their heavenly reward. Telling women that they have to be submissive to their husband is bad and no, “doeth right” does not make up for it. The third ayah is a bit strangely translated, but you probably get the idea: Mohammed’s wives shouldn’t flatter men or speak to them in flowery language, in case it makes the men feel like they’re flirting with them. They should just speak plainly and should not use any language that could be interpreted in more than one way. Policing how your wives talk to other men seems pretty bad, tbh, but in comparison to the line before and after this, I guess it’s neutral...

Finally, 33:33, which literally instructs Mo’s wives to “stay in your houses” (which is bad). It means exactly what it sounds like: they had to stay in their houses unless they had some pressing issue requiring them to leave. Men could talk to them in their homes, but (as we will see later in this surah) they could not look at them--they had to address them from behind a curtain. This is the literal meaning of the word hijab. Some “Muslim feminist” types claim that the tradition of female seclusion only entered Islam after it absorbed Persian culture or some such bullshit. But as you can see, it was a codified part of the religion the whole time. Yes, this verse is addressed to Mo’s wives, specifically. But Mo’s wives were supposed to be role models for other women.

Also, in case you were wondering what “bedizen” or tabbaraj means, Ibn Kathir offers various opinions:

“Women used to go out walking in front of men, and this was the Tabarruj (flaunting) of Jahiliyyah.”

“[It means] When they go out of their homes walking in a shameless and flirtatious manner, and Allah, may He be exalted, forbade that.'' 

"Tabarruj is when a woman puts a Khimar on her head but does not tie it properly.'' So her necklaces, earrings and neck, and all of that can be seen.”

So... Mo’s wives can’t walk in front of men, can’t walk like it’s for sale and the rent is due tonight, and/or can’t leave their headscarves hanging straight down so their necks are uncovered. Take your pick, but all options are shitty.

One last curious note here. The last ayah above, 33:33, concludes:

Allah's wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household, and cleanse you with a thorough cleansing.

As it happens, this sentence is a bit of an odd duck. Despite being stuck to the verses commanding Mohammed’s wives to seclude themselves, a hadith says it’s about a completely different thing:

'A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) went out one norning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said:  Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)

Hasan and Hussein were Fatima and Ali’s sons, with Fatima being Mohammed’s daughter. So “people of the household”, or ahl al-bayt, evidently just means Mo’s family members. Ibn Kathir notes this hadith, but then notes a dissenting opinion:

[Ikrimah, a slave/student of Mohammed’s cousin, said] "This was revealed solely concerning the wives of the Prophet.'' Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn `Abbas said concerning the Ayah:  "It was revealed solely concerning the wives of the Prophet.'' `Ikrimah said: "Whoever disagrees with me that it was revealed solely concerning the wives of the Prophet, I am prepared to meet with him and pray and invoke the curse of Allah upon those who are lying.'' So they alone were the reason for revelation, but others may be included by way of generalization.

Hmm. Ibn Kathir tries to make sense of the dissent here by saying that this “people of the household” verse applied to Mohammed’s wives and Fatima and her family, thus why it’s included in a section directed at his wives. That makes sense, I suppose, though clearly some people like Ikrimah here believed it solely applied to his wives and that the story about how it related to Fatima, Ali, et al was false.

For the record, there are other versions of the story about Mohammed wrapping Fatima’s kids with his cloak, and not all of them have this verse affixed to it. So it may be an improper conflation (or it may be a legitimate one! Who knows!). The fact that it directly follows a list of demands for Mo’s wives indicates to me that it was at least partially directed at them, in the sense that doing all these things will make them “pure”. It doesn’t really make sense otherwise.

But anyway. This section concludes with Mo telling his wives (or... whoever) to remember Allah’s revelations.

We’re around halfway through the surah, so I’ll leave it there for today. More on Mo’s sexual adventures later. Stay in your houses and don’t walk sluttily til tomorrow, pls.

NEXT TIME: The Prophet (PBUH) outlaws adoption so he can sleep with his daughter-in-law, and other tales of moral uprightness!!!

The Quran Read-Along: Day 165

Ayat: 15

Good: 1 (33:29)

Neutral: 9 (33:20-25, 33:28, 33:32, 33:34)

Bad: 5 (33:26-27, 33:30-31, 33:33)

Kuffar hell counter: 0

⇚ previous day | next day ⇛