#edcourse

[bougiebutchbinch]

*E1-3 of Season 2*

Me: oh wow they're really giving Ed a dark villain arc! I love it! Of course, this means we will get a glorious redemption arc throughout the rest of the season where he does his best to make amends with Izzy and the crew, who he was explicitly shown to torture and traumatise <3

*After Ed's canonically-acknowledged-as-incredibly-shitty apology to the crew*

Me: Right, well that is obviously the moment where he changes and starts developing as a character! We're going to get a lot of growth this season; I can feel it. He's going to figure out that this isn't about him, it's about the people he hurt. He's going to actually improve as a person, in such a way that he starts to respect and care for his crew in a way he's never been shown to in the past! What an awesome arc! Yay!

*Season finale*

Me: ....

[who-the-fuck-knows-blog]

[looking nervously out of the corner of my eyes at this fandom] y’all know you can be mentally ill and have disorders and trauma and still be responsible for your actions and those actions can be toxic or abusive, right?

[electric-friend]

saying ed was wrong for some of his actions of violence genuinely bares no reflection on izzy’s innocence or lack thereof. firstly, more people than izzy were involved in these incidents, and secondly, the writing clearly implies that ed was doing things for which he was not justified. he feels, understandably, guilt. i don’t even think izzy is innocent but i don’t beleive he deserved what he got. additionally it’s also unnecessary to tie ed’s accountability for the hurt he’s caused to any moral judgement on his person as a whole, like the idea of calling him definitively good or bad, or irredeemable, because neither he nor izzy are meant to be read as irredeemable, as the narrative suggests.

but because i’m frustrated and sick of seeing it happen, let me just repeat myself.

ed having been wrong for some of his actions genuinely bares no inherent implication of izzy’s innocence or lack thereof.

people often seem to read meta about ed’s accountability for the hurt he’s caused others as being about izzy, and it can be, but because people hate izzy and hate the idea of izzy being liked, they often equate the idea of ed’s guilt with the idea of izzy’s innocence, and the two are actually unrelated. someone can have done bad things and still not deserve bad things in return, and that applies to both ed and izzy in different ways.

[bougiebutchbitch]

every time I see a take that flattens Ed's character into this boring perfect angel who can do no wrong and has 0 agency because literally every choice he makes is determined by the actions of white men, I add another sentence to my stories where he's a sympathetic, complex and multifaceted trauma victim - but also an abuser who made terrible mistakes of his own volition, who seriously hurt people he cares about and left them traumatised, who feels crushed beneath the terrifying hypermasculine persona he built for himself (which he is still figuring out how to escape/incorporate into his new self/define himself around). A desperate, affection-starved, suicidal man who struggles hugely with his mental health, who deserves a loving support system (just not from his victims unless they want to be a part of it), who can grow and change and do better, who can work on himself and explore himself and find love and happiness.

but y'know, maybe I'm the one who 'hates his character' lmaoooo

[something-about-sunflowers]

Right. So. I really need people to get okay with people disliking or even hating Ed. Like. As soon as possible.

I have always maintained that people are allowed to feel however they want about Izzy but they need to show the fans the bare minimum of respect by keeping it out of the tags and off their posts and out of their askboxes, as well as not moralizing over the fact that we like the character that they hate.

I feel the same about Ed.

I say this as someone who does still love Ed and is happy to see where this season takes him when he gets his chance for growth past his destructive spiral. (Note: I did not say 'self' destructive, because while he is hurting himself, he is also hurting others and that should be acknowledged.)

Think of what it tells survivors of DV/IPV when they see you say things like 'I can't believe people are vilifying Ed over what he's doing to Izzy'. You don't even have to be a survivor to find discomfort with a character who is doing those things. Regardless of how the season in full treats his behavior, what we've been presented with so far has very obviously been compared to a DV/IPV situation. The crew staged an intervention and held sympathy when Izzy cried. Even someone who doesn't like Izzy might find it difficult to still love - or even like - Ed at this association.

All this aside. It literally doesn't matter why someone hates Ed. As long as they have the common decency to not put outright hate in the character tag or on other people's posts or askboxes and not moralize over people who do still like/love the character it's fine. Which I have not seen really anyone doing anyway. At least not with any frequency with which to warrant the amount of 'give fans of Ed some grace' or 'you shouldn't hate Ed he's literally so sad and has never done anything wrong' type posts I've seen since the s2e1 clip came out.

It really is frustrating that Izzy-antis have used all the right phrases in this type of discourse without actually holding to any sort of principle of common decency, because really: Someone hating your favorite character does not affect you. Pointing out the things they did wrong is not hate (though it should, ideally, still be tagged as '[character] critical' or some such similar term). Having a reason for reprehensible behavior does not excuse said behavior.

We do not need to close ranks around Ed the way the Canyon tends to with Izzy because there is no wide-scale attack on his character or the people who still like/love him. Yes, have some grace to his fans but let's not create an environment where people feel like they're not allowed to criticize the character at all, even untagged on their own accounts.

[sky-fire-forever]

Are people unaware that crisism can be fun for people? That it can make people happy?

Like, if people are coming onto your posts and complaining about things you've said on YOUR posts, then of course you have every right to complain. But being upset that people are being critical just... in general is so odd to me

I am fairly critical of a LOT of media I really enjoy. If asked, I can probably point out at least a dozen flaws in my all time FAVORITE pieces of media. Not because I go looking for flaws with a fine comb, but because my brain just is highly analytical. It picks up on things I don't like

But flaws don't make anything unenjoyable for me? At all? Everything is flawed. Sometimes I don't like things that other people love and that's perfectly okay!! It doesn't mean I'm not allowed to talk about things I don't like

Sharing opinions is fun for me. I enjoy it. I'm not angry or filled with hatred when I dislike things. I can be disappointed or frustrated, sure. But sometimes it's nice to feel those things? The same way people like feeling scared or sad. Media causes emotions to come out and that's okay. And finding people who agree with me about things I dislike helps me feel less alone. I feel kinship with those people the same way I feel kinship with people who like the same things I like

It's just very odd to me when I see people complaining that people are being critical of something they enjoy, saying that critical fans should just leave the fandom if they don't like certain aspects of the thing. But people can be critical of stuff while still enjoying it. They can hate certain parts while enjoying other parts. Some of the best fanfics I've ever read were written to spite the canon. Disliking the way something is done can encourage so much beautiful creations from other people!

I dunno. This idea that if you have any problem with anything, you should keep quiet or you're not a real fan is genuinely baffling to me. Yeah, tag critical posts appropriately, but if you don't want to see those posts, block them

We're all just enjoying ourselves the way we want to

[autisticwriterblog]

I've seen some people talking about Ed's behavior in early season 2 and coming to the conclusion that Ed never tried to kill anyone. And I just can't understand this interpretation.

Yes, Ed is undeniably suicidal and trying to push people far enough that they kill him, but he does still try to kill people too. What else would have happened to the crew when he purposely sailed them into a storm and broke the wheel? He also ordered Archie and Jim fight to the death, which should have killed Archie if Jim didn't refuse to kill her. Both of these actions undeniably target the crew. Ed was also trying to get himself killed when he sailed into the storm, but he still was fine with the crew being collateral damage - and there was no reason for him to make them fight to the death other than being upset and wanting to take other people out with him.

I guess what I'm trying to say is the statements "Ed was trying to push the crew until they killed him" and "Ed tried to kill the crew" are not mutually exclusive. Ed was suicidal and struggling, yes, but he also tried to kill the crew. And I can't see why anyone would deny this unless they're trying to diminish the ways Ed hurt the crew. It's okay to like characters who do bad things, but you don't need to pretend they didn't do things that hurt other characters. Ed wanted to die and he also tried to kill the crew. That's all I wanted to say.

[bougiebutchbitch]

if people were only saying 'okay' rather than outright attacking people for daring to criticise their favourite show - especially those pointing out their discomfort with the depicion of physical disability, suicidal ideation, and abuse apologism - we wouldn't have a problem now, would we?

"Like stuff. Don't be someone that doesn't like stuff, and if you don't, don't be a dick about it."

- David Jenkins

[bougiebutchbinch]

I do appreciate 'softer' interpretations of canon where everything is happy and nothing hurts. I think these headcanons and rewrites of characters have a huge and important place within fandom. This is not to say anything against people who prefer this sort of content.

But.

When I love a fucked-up character, I love the whole character, warts and all.

So.... a massive grateful shout out to the writers and creators who acknowledge that Ed was abused by his father, but don't shy away from the fact that Ed struggles to care for his crew. Thanks to the writers who acknowledge that he made terrible abusive choices towards his crew that there would realistically be consequences of, but this doesn't mean he's beyond changing - he can still choose to do better and can confront his own actions & his fear of becoming his father. He is worthy of love and support throughout this journey (though this absolutely shouldn't be expected to come from his victims).

Thanks to the writers who acknowledge that Stede survived his father's abuse and some truly atrocious childhood bullying - but also remember that he is a cis white ablebodied man born to extreme privilege, who needs to be reminded on occasion that piracy is not a game and that his crew are the lives he is gambling with when his plans veer even more dangerous than normal. That he started off as a class tourist, and is still very much learning what life is like outside of his circle of the landed gentry, even if he's throwing himself into piracy with adorable enthusiasm.

And thanks to the writers who portray Izzy as a victim of Ed's abuse, as he is in canon, and who also continue to depict him in all his twisted, messy, bitter glory: a man inured to violence, who warped himself to fit a crueller world of piracy than the one we see in the show, who enabled many of Ed's darker choices in S1 and pre-canon (although... he didn't make him do shit. 'I fed your darkness' =/= 'I made you abuse your crew, myself included', holy crap). Who is still learning to accept the kindness of others without biting every outstretched hand. Who was an imperfect man and is an imperfect survivor, but is a survivor nevertheless.

In short: Gimme all your flawed 'unloveable' characters, and watch me love them anyway.

[who-the-fuck-knows-blog]

holy christ. this fandom is fucking exhausting about mental health and mental illness and abuse. i dont want to directly engage with people saying this stuff because i am pretty sure they wont change their minds or really listen to me, but Ed can be mentally ill and abusive/toxic (<-those aren’t necessarily interchangable but I’m going to be using both in this case).

Ed’s actions can be a result of his trauma, he can hate that he does it, it can be within his own justification a result of previous threats or negativity from others, and they can still be not okay or justified.

The majority of people who have been abusive in my life have been struggling with something. Mental illness, addiction, trauma, all of the above. Trauma and trauma reactions can lead to further abusive behavior.

When you have personality disorders or mental health issues that come with extreme cognitive distortions (everyone has cognitive distortions, but mental illnesses and trauma tend to lead to more extreme examples or more cognitive distortions than you would have otherwise), it can lead to you continuing with dangerous/manipulative behavior in a more unaware manner. Many are aware it is manipulative, though. and I suppose that’s where the distinction can be made between whether or not this is a toxic or abusive relationship. One comes with more of an intent to control, the other is more about mutually lashing out/having disproportionate emotional reactions to situations.

This post, to me, isn’t about determining whether Ed was Abusive or Toxic, but moreso about conversations around abusive behavior. The way it has been described, Ed’s behavior towards Izzy in S2 has been deliberately controlling and manipulative, as Ed has been towards the entire crew in that season. Does it matter if he’s doing it because he is spiralling and wants to push everyone to their breaking point to kill himself vs just to be a dick? Yes, to a degree. It means he likely just needs help and is capable of changing. On the other hand, no. The behavior is terrible and not justifiable, and having mental illnesses that caused it doesn’t make it suddenly not his responsibility.

I guess I’m more annoyed at the overjustification and removing Ed from his own autonomy and responsibility for his behavior than anything. There can be reasons behind why someone does something, and those reasons can be very sympathetic and understandable and make a lot of sense, it just gets to a point where people seem to be using that to excuse the behavior and remove Ed’s agency in the harm he himself has caused deliberately (even if the intention wasn’t to make people miserable but to kill himself, the goal and method through which he did it was to cause emotional and physical damage and torture to ensure this would happen, with little to no care for the wellbeing of the others.)

If people are upset about Ed’s behavior and lack of actual personal accountability for what he’s done, that’s fine. The same way that it’s fine for people to be upset about the emotional harm Izzy has done to Ed.

I know a lot of posts are not super nuanced when it comes to Ed and abusive behavior, I’m not gonna say hes iredeemable, and in fact he’s already ahead of other people who display this behavior in that he realizes he needs to change and puts in an effort to do so. He’s still sympathetic to most folks, and I personally still love him.

I also acknowledge I, like everyone else, am not immune to personal biases and lack of insight and emotional reasoning. Many folks have been having trauma reactions based on the events in the show or have had their trauma triggered or have fallen back on (understandably) emotional responses that are due to trauma. Some people have been applying their personal experiences with people that behave similarly to characters on the show to their analysis and impressions of the characters. I’m not gonna say that’s morally good or bad. It just exists and is unavoidable when you have a ton of people with trauma discussing things. But it can skew perceptions, as trauma does. so it’s just something to be aware of, because it doesn’t feel like you’re being skewed it feels either like you’re being attacked or you are more aware of/closer to/have a better understanding of the emotions and responses of the characters you are projecting onto.

I dunno. maybe I’m full of shit! Who knows! I just wanted to ramble more about this stuff bc it’s very upsetting to me (<-could be a trauma response I am not adequately handling or aware of or acknowledging) to see the way ppl have been defensive of Ed via “he’s not doing it because he wants to do it/live like this, he’s traumatized, he’s mentally ill, and Izzy pushed him into it” because those can be explanations of his actions but not justifications of his actions.

[gydima]

I feel like it's a small but VERY vocal minority of Ed fans who have willfully blinded themselves to Ed's culpability in the crew's suffering. The people I'm talking about are the ones who dug in so deep on the anti-Izzy front after S1 that I feel like they ended up backed into a corner where Izzy HAD to be the one to blame.

Here's my theory, and I don't know if it will make sense, but I believe most of the friction within this fandom springs from the human propensity to be contrary. Sure, there would have been plenty of disagreements without it, but it pushed the vitriol to absurd heights.

Like, I will fully admit that I doubled down on loving Izzy when certain Izzy antis stopped blaming him for everything he DID do (perfectly fine), and started blaming him for things he didn't do (annoying). Obviously there was plenty to blame Izzy for because he WAS an antagonist in S1. But some of the most vocal Izzy antis tended to assign blame from someone else onto Izzy or reach REALLY HARD to interpret him as an actual villain rather than antagonist.

But I think they did that because THEY, like we Izzy fans, loved Ed (and/or Stede) so much. I'm sure they felt more and more contrary because they were annoyed to see Izzy had more fans than they thought he "deserved." (Possibly the most divisive word in all of OFMD meta.)

So each time these certain Ed/Stede/Gentlebeard fans saw Izzy fans offering opinions (whether genuine or tongue-in-cheek) that didn't jibe with their more Ed-friendly or Stede-friendly interpretations, they pushed back a little harder. Then we pushed back. Then they pushed back. And so on and so forth, until we ended up with people mulishly sharing the absolute worst bad-faith takes I've ever seen.

And it sucks that the resulting conflict (and anon hate) spawned the so-called Izzy Canyon in the equal but opposite corner. I mean, I can't even pretend I haven't blocked multiple people here on tumblr because everything I saw from them led me to believe that they would never give an inch. They had dug so deeply into their own trench that they would never for a second consider Izzy fans might sometimes be right.

And here's where I think the contrariness REALLY fucked us. Do you think some of the most vocal anti-Izzy folks would have changed their tune a bit after the first few episodes of S2 if only it weren't for those trenches and that contrariness? If it weren't for the smugness they'd expect from Izzy fans if they admitted Ed wronged not just Izzy, but the rest of the crew? Did they remain in their trench more for self-protection than the actual belief that Ed had nothing to apologize for?

Because I wonder.

(To be very clear, I believe most OFMD fans are reasonable people. I don't love sweeping generalizations about "Izzy stans" or "Ed stans," etc. These are not huge sectors of the fandom I'm talking about; but the little clusters of vocal people who bring out the worst in each other.)

I am once again begging Ed stans to understand that it's possible to love Ed and believe he deserves love AND also admit that he mistreated and tormented the crew during the Kraken era. Not only is this possible, this is the position the show wants you to have. You think Izzy deserved everything he got? Fine, whatever, forget about him for a minute. There's a whole crew in there you're supposed to empathise with and feel sympathy for, too. The six of them that Ed actively tried to kill or left for dead, for starters. Pay attention to the crew's experiences and reactions. They're shown to be traumatised, grieving, clinging to disassociation (Frenchie) and nihilism (Archie) as coping mechanisms and suffering from PTSD flashbacks. And, since this type of fans constantly go on about how it's racist to think Ed did anything wrong... what about the fact that a lot of the crew are PoC too? What then?

If you've watched the first 3 episodes of S2 and there was only one person on that ship you felt sorry for, then you're not a fan of OFMD, you're just a fan of Ed in isolation. And if the only way you can love Ed is by denying that he ever did anything wrong, then you're completely missing the point of the show. OFMD never said that people only deserve to be loved if they're morally perfect and flawless. The show doesn't subscribe to the dichotomy of Good vs Bad. Good people can do bad things. They can hurt the ones they love. Even if they didn't mean to, even if they themselves were suffering at the time, it doesn't mean they don't need to take responsibility for their actions or avoid the consequences. Stede didn't mean to hurt Mary and his kids when he left, but he still did. He had legitimate reasons for leaving, he didn't just do it for the lolz, but it was still wrong and Mary was right to be angry at him. And Stede needed to face up to this - not just for their sake but his too. Even though it turned out their lives were better off without him, reconciling with Mary was still crucial for his character development.

It was the same for Ed, it just didn't get handled quite as well due to lack of screentime, but the idea was the same. When Ed realises he'd been cruel to Fang and apologises, he isn't sinking into self-hatred and despair. Quite the contrary, this is a moment of growth for him. Because the fact is, just because you as a human being are inherently worthy of love doesn't mean you can go around hurting everyone and expecting them to put up with you. That's just not how it works. You don't need to be perfect, but you do need to listen to people when they tell you that you hurt them and apologise genuinely and try to be better. The show is very sympathetic to Ed but it does NOT excuse his actions. The crew aren't portrayed as villains or antagonists for being scared and angry at Ed for what he did to them. Even Stede was on their side with this one. If even Stede is able to see things from the crew's POV and have sympathy for them, then you should too. Stede doesn't love Ed because he sees Ed as a pure uwu angel. He loves Ed... because he just does. He loves being around him. They really click together. They have so much in common. That doesn't mean he approves of literally everything Ed has ever done. It just means he loves Ed despite that.

[electric-friend]

i would respect someone’s different opinion on ofmd2 if that opinion wasn’t mainly “people who disagree with me are inherently wrong and evil”, you know what i mean, guys? like ok, so you thought season two was good and izzy’s death made sense. that’s cool? i’d still be your friend like idc, we can disagree. but like… if you think people who thought ed’s narrative didn’t get resolved or who interpreted it in a different way than you did are *worse people* because of their opinions and that they’re wrong and bad and you’re the one who is right and good… i just can’t stand that.

[bougiebutchbitch]

anyway I love that House does shit that is 9000000x more Problematique than Izzy (except, arguably, The Murders Of Nameless Enemies, which is pretty much a genre convention) but I never got any hate for liking him lol

I got less hate for being a Joker fan than an Izzy fan, which is fuckin wild (and - oh hey - look at that - it's possible to love a character like Ed who canonically abuses another of my favourite characters!! Maybe.... You don't gotta pretend Ed is a perfect angel in order to love him!! Imagine!!!)

like I know I'm Loud And Annoying(tm), but if you're gonna come at me for liking 'characters who did meanbad things!!1!!111!' and literally all you can point to is Izzy pulling poor Fang's beard when Fang questioned Ed (which was mean!! it was absolutely mean and shitty!!! bad Izzy!!!! bad!) on a show where appendages are amputated and fed to the victim, I promise you there is way better material in my archive lol

[bougiebutchbinch]

Not to beat a dead horse but

if I see one more take to the tune of 'saying that Izzy was abused is a disservice to his character because he would spit in your face and reject the idea that he was abused' (:staring at a certain post made 6 days ago by a certain someone:)

I am going to go apeshit.

People who are nasty and mean can be abuse victims.

People who are proud can be abuse victims.

People who REJECT THE CONCEPT OF BEING ABUSE VICTIMS can still be survivors and have still suffered very real abuse.

Denying that Izzy was abused because 'he's tough' is just so fucking disturbing, and really shows what you think about abuse victims IRL. Please take a good long hard look at yourself and ask yourself WHY you think that is a good stance.

Ditto for everyone who liked that post. Maybe think about how it reads to people who've actually been through abusive relationships.

This fandom truly has thee most rancid takes sometimes, and I think a lot of it comes from an unwillingness to critically engage with why you think certain characters 'deserve' what they get.

[bougiebutchbinch]

Look, the long and short of it is -

In what universe does 'defending yourself from emotional abuse!!' look like repeatedly mutilating a guy who is not fighting back in any way, for the sin of speaking up to protect other people from you; encouraging him to commit suicide; and forcing a group of people who have literally never done you any harm to live in constant fear while you psychologically, emotionally and physically torture them until they fulfill your suicidal fantasies?

Oh, that's right. No universe.

[bougiebutchbinch]

This is your daily reminder that anyone can criticise your favourite show. And disabled people, queer people, mentally ill people, and people from any other minority group are always allowed to criticise representation within your favourite show.

Obviously, a few people from the same minority group will disagree with this criticism. Everyone's gonna have a different opinion - that's great.

But that does not in any way invalidate the original criticism, especially when it's coming from so many people with visible mobility disabilities, survivors of suicide and abuse, and queer people.

That doesn't mean critics think the show is evil and should be destroyed forever. It doesn't mean they think that the show isn't good representation for you, with your specific intersection of representation needs, or that you can't enjoy it - or that you are a bad person for enjoying it.

Critics are allowed to stop supporting the show for future seasons because they dislike the representation, or the writing, or for any other reason. If you are sending anons over something so minimal as someone no longer wanting another season of your favourite show, then, frankly, I suspect you are a literal child. But also, you have a weird cultish relationship with this fandom and should probably step back.

Hell, I'm gonna try and step back, for the sake of my own mental health. I always wind up getting at least one weird anon per fandom, as I am Loud And AnnoyingTM - to the point where I see it as a bit of a badge of pride. Means I'm part of the fandom now, if I'm in deep enough - and noisy enough - to get nonsense. That doesn't particularly bother me.

But I cannot deal with the constant frustration of seeing fellow fans not understanding the very basic concept of 'a stranger on the internet can love this show, but still be disappointed in it and criticise it, and that is not an attack on me, personally'.

I encourage you to love the show! I love that you love it! I still somewhat love it, and I certainly love to criticise it! Criticism is just another form of interaction with a piece of media, and one that is integral to any fandom! It's not a threat to you or your appreciation of the show!

What becomes problematic is when you mock criticism, especially when it's coming from a whole bunch of marginalised voices.

Why are you being so aggressive about decrying everyone who complains as 'overemotional' and 'hysterical'? Why are you trying so hard to minimise and misinterpret the opinions of visibly physically disabled people who have struggled a lot with their disability, when invisible disability rep and casual positive disability rep are no less important but entirely different sorts of representation?

If you disagree, maybe just have some empathy and let marginalised people speak? Why are you so determined to die on the hill of defending a TV show from any and all criticism?

Which is all to say:

Your fandom is not exempt from criticism. Yes, you are still allowed to love your blorbos and your show. This is pretty fucking basic Fandom 101.