#i also have the right to observe and think critically about what i've seen

[isekyaaa]

Reading Novel Updates spoiler forums makes me so sad bc you see how bland and boring some people are in that they only want to read novels with perfect male leads that treat the main character with 100% politically correct and Twitter feminist approved respect. Flawed men are morally reprehensible in their eyes and are deserving of judgment and death.

[keelanrosa]

terfs when a study shows literally anything positive about trans people/transitioning: 'hm i think this requires some fact-checking. Were those researchers REALLY unbiased? Because if they were biased this doesn't count and if they weren't knowingly biased they probably were unconsciously biased, woke media affects so much these days. Have there been any other studies on this? Because if there haven't been this could be an outlier and if there have been and they all agree that's a bit odd, why aren't there any outliers, and if there have been and any disagree we really won't know the truth until we very thoroughly analyze them all, will we? Were there enough subjects for a good sample size? Did every single subject involved stay involved through the whole study because if they didn't we should be sure nothing shady was going on resulting in people dropping out. Are we 110% sure all the subjects were fully honest and at no point were embarrassed or afraid to admit they didn't love transitioning to the people in charge of their transition? Are we 110% sure none of the subjects were manipulated into thinking they were happy with their transition? In fact we should double-check what they think with their parents, because if the subjects and their parents disagree it's probably because they've been manipulated but their cis parents have not and are very unbiased. How many autistic subjects were there because if there weren't enough then this doesn't really study the overlap between autistic and trans and if there were too many then we just don't know enough about what causes that overlap to be sure this study really explains being trans and isn't just about being autistic. How many AFAB subjects were there because if there weren't enough this is just another example of prioritizing AMAB people and ignoring the different struggles of girls and women and if there were too many how do we know sexism didn't affect the results. Was the study double-blinded? We all know double-blinded is the most reliable so if this one wasn't that's a point against it even if the thesis literally physically could not be double-blinded. Look i'm not being transphobic, i want what's best for trans people! Really! But as a person who is not trans and therefore objective in a way they cannot possibly be, i just think we should only take into account Good Science here. You want to be following science and not being manipulated or experimented upon by something unscientific, right?'

terfs when they see a study of 45 subjects so old it predates modern criteria for gender dysphoria and basically uses 'idk her parents think she's too butch', run by a guy who practiced conversion therapy, 'confirmed' by a guy who treated the significant portion of subjects who didn't follow up as all desisting, definitely in the category of 'physically cannot double-blind this', completely contradicted by multiple other studies done on actual transgender subjects, but can be kinda cited as evidence against transitioning if you ignore everything else about it: 'oOOH SEE THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKIN BOUT. SCIENCE. Just good ol' unbiased thorough analysis. I see absolutely no reason to dig any deeper on this and if you think it's wrong you're the one being unscientific. It's really a shame you've been so thoroughly brainwashed by the trans agenda and can't even accept science when you see it. Maybe now that someone has finally uncovered this long-lost study from 1985, we can make some actual progress on the whole trans problem.'

[makerofmadness]

Ok, op, I get where you're coming from, but I would like to state (AS SOMEONE IN A MUSLIM FAMILY, WITH MUSLIM PARENTS, WHO ARE VERY ACCEPTING OF ME FOR BEING QUEER [I've kinda flip-flopped overtime on if I consider myself Muslim or not. My dad says I am 'Cus he and my mom are but in terms of like beliefs and stuff I don't really follow anything specific. But aspects of Islam do influence my life [I believe in God and I don't eat pork, for two things): keep in mind that Islamic extremists (as with any religion) do exist and that Islamic countries aren't often the most gay-friendly places on earth (including the very country my family is from)

I know like nothing about Sudan specifically so I can't speak on it. But I think accusing people of just being racist for believing this is true is kinda extreme of you. Like I legit took it at face-value when I first saw the stuff. (though from posts I've seen people haven't bought that this was a Sudanese group, especially after I think the official ao3 Twitter themselves made a statement that they don't approve of islamophobia for this. I saw a screenshot of the tweet, and I think in the same post I saw speculation that it might've been a Russian group? I forgot and I can't find the post on my blog so I think I forgot to reblog it). I think it's rather obvious that I don't think all of Sudan is giggling maniacally at the idea of attacking gay fanfiction but I wouldn't be surprised if it was like just. A group of homophobic teens or some shxt. Like there are bad apples in every bunch, believing that sometimes extremists exist isn't racist or islamophobic or whatever it's called having a brain cell.

That being said: yeah the way that thing was worded about the attack makes it look like a parody or something. Like I don't know how their language works and how it'd translate but something definitely feels off and kinda cartoonish. Though from what I've seen the ddos itself was legit (at the very least in that it happened) and I have yet to see any real evidence that it was for some reason some elaborate setup by some ao3 dxckriders to brew hatred against Sudanese muslims... and like if it were then it's just a stupid thing like you literally attacked the website you like and for what? To have people later assume you were a group of Russian hackers or whatever people were saying?? Like. It doesn't make sense either. Y'know?

y'all cannot be fucking serious about believing that ao3 is being hacked by a "sudanese extremist group" be fucking for realllll i think you guys are just racist

[bloodpen-to-paper]

Gonna throw my hat into the ring here, as someone who very recently had a streamer they loved and supported go down for serious allegations and crimes. Feel free to skip around my long ass response, I'll break it down into parts:

---Public Reception

Part of the reason I despise these situations is because people online don't ever know enough to make 100% accurate assessments, but will act like they do anyway (I don't care if its authoritarian, I want a bill where people on Twitter can't post about drama until after at least 5 minutes of being forced to critically think). Having said that, here's my opinions on how everything should go forward:

-Shelby shared her story in order to spread awareness on domestic abuse and the signs, so that others can read those signs and keep themselves safe (or leave an actively abusive situation they've been convincing themselves isn't that bad). That is the priority here, that is what people should be focusing on. If you make this situation about stirring drama with the other CCs, you're a dumbass and you need to stop posting. Give support to Shelby, uplift the voices of women like her sharing their stories, spread awareness on what domestic abuse can look like so everyone can learn, and wait for more information. Its that simple.

-CCs don't owe statements for conflicts they weren't involved in. Philza, Tommy, Quackity, Charlie, and other CCs close to Wilbur who aren't part of this don't owe you an explanation. They're people, they're most likely having to come to terms with the fact that a dear friend, someone who could've been like family, isn't who they thought he was. Have a fucking heart and cut it with the parasocial entitlement. I'm hoping Quackity will remove Wilbur from the Qsmp, but just like with Forever, he probably won't make a big announcement of it, and that's perfectly ok. I understand wanting to make sure you're not supporting a CC who would defend someone guilty of committing domestic abuse, but its still not your right to get anything from these people. If they share, they share. If not, then they don't. If you can't handle that, then leave.

-Having said the above, its worth noting that CCs aren't just a fun group of friends, they're coworkers. Much of what they say publicly and when they say it can be shaped or restricted by situations that can affect their careers or get them in legal trouble. You don't know these people personally or what goes on behind the scenes, its a network and you can't measure their responses the same way you would your own opinion piece. The CCs will always need to be careful about how they respond to an issue, and they will most likely respond in "safe" ways considering what's on the line. Not accusing anyone of anything, nor demonizing them for it, just something to keep in mind. They're human, but they're also working a job.

-If you have Lovejoy or Wilbur-related merch, DON'T THROW IT AWAY OR DESTROY IT. I've seen lots of people pointing out merch can be donated to thrift shops or shelters, and its more eco-friendly than burning or trashing. Remember, anything can be repurposed; a book, a hoodie, there's always someone who can find a use for it. Likewise if you want to keep your old merch, that's fine to. You can wear it if it brings you comfort, or if its something you just like the look of. As long as you're not supporting the source, you already have the merch so don't let people pressure you into thinking you're bad for keeping it if you're not ready to let go/throw away those $70.

---My Opinion Regarding His Response

Everyone and their cousin has been dogpiling on Wilbur's response (rightfully), but I think people online don't understand how public responses work when there's legal team and PR interference. The tweet for me had a weird lack of personal touch and emotion from the guy I've observed to be very personal in his writings, whether its his music or a community post about a life update (blah blah parasociality I know, but I'm letting you know the observations I've made of his behavior simply as someone who notices these things). He also never explicitly stated Shelby's name, rather saying "that person" (you even had the textbook 'black text on a blank white background' screenshotted response). Finally, there was a consistent standing on Wilbur 'not being aware of how the other person really felt' regarding his actions. What I'm trying to say is... y'all really gotta start putting two and two together. Its a textbook PR response. As in, I'd be surprised if Wilbur had over 50% involvement in making it because the wording is exactly how it reads when a response has been initiated by someone's lawyers rather than themselves. The reason he doesn't take more accountability and openly admit to having abused Shelby (other than the obvious public backlash) is probably cause his lawyers are banking on the feigning ignorance angle, that Wilbur didn't intentionally abuse Shelby and was ignorant to how his actions affected her. Its the best way to get him out of hot water on the legal side, because again, this isn't messy drama; its a genuine accusation of a crime. I don't think the response is tone deaf and unaware, I think its a deliberate and measured legal move not even fully created by Wilbur himself. This isn't to say I think he's innocent, but I do know that Shelby and others have brought up some serious accusations, and Wilbur is lawyering up as a result.

---Nuance

Prefacing this part by saying that things are not looking good for Wilbur in regards to what other CCs have brought up about him, and I fully believe and support Shelby, hence why I support that the community should start distancing from him and his work. But I would like to take this opportunity to look into the greater aspects at play. We are within a system that brings up men to do what they want without teaching them to be considerate and aware of the consequences. Men are taught their harmful behavior is perfectly fine, often at women's expense, which makes these situation a very different story depending on who's telling it. Its because of this that we need to critically analyze the system and how it causes men to turn out as they do, instead of giving an immediate opinion without any nuance.

There's a possibility that Wilbur is being genuine in not realizing how bad his actions were. There's a possibility he truly is a manipulative liar who knew exactly what he was doing. He could be a piece of shit. He could be genuinely trying to improve and do better. We don't know. I'd say its pretty cut and dry that he hurt Shelby, and for that I'm glad she's getting justice for herself and spreading awareness. But if we're to entertain the idea of redemption, we need to look at situations like these with nuance so that we can understand the "why". I'm not trying to justify Wilbur's actions or even give him the benefit of the doubt, I have no idea what's going on in that guy's head. I'm just putting this out there because its something I want everyone to think about, especially when it comes to topics regarding narcissism and mental health issues. Don't support him or Lovejoy, just keep something like this in mind for the future.

---The Community/Now Displaced Fans

To everyone who's immediately telling Wilbur's fans (the ones that don't support his actions and are actively mourning no longer being able to enjoy his stuff) to just listen to other music or move on, and who are celebrating each negative new thing that comes out about Wilbur's current status, sincerely, shut the fuck up. You are completely lacking in empathy or emotional intelligence, and what you're doing is the last thing the community needs. Wilbur and his work could have and for many did get fans through some of their hardest moments, and losing that wonderful sense of community you get from streamers and their work (especially with the roleplay stuff) is awful. It fucked me up losing that after almost a year, for some of his fans its been even longer.

If you're a (former) fan of his, its ok to feel like shit. We're human, we get attached and we grieve losing something like this because that's how capable we are of loving. Take your time, as long as you know where to stand (supporting Shelby and raising awareness on domestic abuse), you're doing good. You can keep enjoying his characters and work and making content about it, separating the art from the artist (though don't stream his music from platforms that would give him the money, find a way to pirate it).

This sucks. I feel it as a casual fan who was once hugely into his content, I can imagine what its like for those who were huge supporters all the way up until now. You didn't do anything wrong supporting someone you thought was a good person, its just a thing that happens and its so fucking shitty. You ain't alone though, I know some of you have that knee-jerk reaction to avoid anything to do with him but reaching out to others in the community and actually processing it all is way better, you won't be bottling it all up. Don't be afraid to continue engaging with this part of your life until you're ready to move on from it in your own time, and be kind to yourself. From someone who went through exactly what you are now, trust me, you'll get through it.

[sliverslipped]

What qualities of you attract friends?

Piles: 1-3 from left to right

Please do note that this is my first pac. I'm still a beginner and is practicing tarot with very limited resources. Please be mindful of your words and as it's said not everything might resonate. This is a general reading. Take what resonates and leave the rest. This is for entertainment purposes only.

Credits: Pictures aren't mine. I got it from Pinterest. I've also used the divider from @cafekitsune !! Check them out

Close your eyes and take a deep breath after taking a close look at the images. Choose the one that attracts you the most. Feel free to choose two piles if you feel drawn to both.

Comments and feedback are highly appreciated.

PILE 1

Queen of cups you're someone who's seen as the mom of the group, the one who's always there for their friends, the one who's very loyal. Very loving too and this is one of the key qualities that attract strong friendship to you. You're a nurturing soul. Not only are you nurturing you're also very intuitive. You're very sensitive and when you make a connection with a person you treasure them. Page of swords you're a very charming individual who knows how to give the rest a good company. As pages depict someone who's younger either you might be younger by age or you have a youthful energy to you. You're quick witted and you might also be very curious and open minded. Five of cups you're not afraid to show your vulnerable side to your friends. Crying over spilt milk doesn't make you a miserable person either. Though the cards may depict a miserable one, think of it as you showing your vulnerable side to your friends and how much they cherish that you trusted them enough to open up to them about your worries and insecurities. Hermit you're someone who's wise and mature. You know when to withdraw from people and situations to assess and evaluate your feelings and thoughts better. You also have a healing energy to you. You're also very self aware and critical and is also the friend who's very reliable. You're also very spiritual. The sun you have strong leadership skills. You're very charming and you do not hesitate to shower your friends with compliments. You're not afraid of others stealing your spotlight either. You have a healthy ego. You also help people to grow and see their potential.

Gemini, cancer, virgo. Some of you may have these signs or have these placements. It doesn't necessarily have to be though.

PILE 2

Strength you have great leadership qualities. You're someone who's very resilient. You have a healthy self esteem. You don't find the need to get extrrnal approval or validation because you're very confident in who you are. You also make your friends feel supported. Four of wands you're someone who enjoys your life. There's never a dull moment with you. You don't take anything for granted either. You're also someone who's very social. You're also full of ideas and curiosity. Seven of pentacle you're someone who's well organized, patient and systematic. You have a balance between feminine and masculine energy. You're also a keen observer. You know when to let go and what to let go of if you think that you no longer have a control over it. You do not rush into things, it doesn't mean that you don't want to get it done fast but rather you take your time and know when to rest. You're very reliable and commited. Hanged man you're patient and is capable of viewing things from different point of views. You're someone who's afraid to stand out from a crowd. You're very welcoming of others and make them feel at ease.

Leo, venus in aries, saturn in taurus. You may have these signs or have these placements in your chart. It doesn't necessarily have to be though.

PILE 3

Hanged man you're capable of viewing things and situations from a new perspective or point of view. Very open minded. You're also very patient. You also make people feel at ease and welcomed.Queen of cups you're someone who's seen as the mom of the group. You're always there for your friends and is very loyal. Very loving too. You're a nurturing soul. Not only are you nurturing you're also very intuitive. You're very sensitive. Seven of cups you're very fun to be around. Your energy may feel like it's all over the place but in this context and getting the card upright it's not bad. You may also have many interests that keep you engaged and make you bit more interesting to your friends. You're also able to view things from different perspective. Page of cups you're vulnerable and emotionally open. You're attentive to the needs of others and is there for them. You're also Idealistic. You're very caring and compassionate. You're selfless. You also make others feel loved and appreciated.

Gemini, virgo, Venus in scorpio, Saturn in libra. You may have these signs or have these placements in your chart. It doesn't necessarily have to be though.

I'm sorry that this pile is very short compared to the previous ones so feel free to check the other ones if you felt attracted to any for more messages.

Ⓒsliverslipped

[wild-magic-oops]

People really be bending backwards in order to defend Larian and the consistent way that Gale is treated worse than other companions. Truly baffling behavior, but I guess that's what happens when people can't extend the same amount of care to characters other than their favs, and think Larian is amazing for doing what should be the bare minimum in the industry actually (but the industry is so shit that people are ready to praise and defend any studio which doesn't try to rob them while spitting in their faces). Not criticizing obvious flaws won't get you a better product next time, and since I'm a petty person - I hope everyone who's telling people it's not a big deal now have the next character they're really into be the one done dirty by both the creators and the fandom.

Another thing I've never seen anyone bring up is how Gale is specifically the only companion whom Durge can kill due to an urge (which is even worded in a way which you can't guess the outcome of). Where's the urge option to kill Astari*n while he attacks you hm? Or that's right, there isn't one. Guess the fuck why. And retaliating while attacked makes a ton more sense, but sense is not smth that Larian bothers with much when it comes to their preferences.

And people choosing to indulge the urge and explaining how it's in character... I bet the majority would be finding loopholes real quick if it was their fav getting killed instead. Double standards is smth that really irks me and they're just so apparent in this fandom, it's exhausting.

Gale is also a companion you can accidentally kill instead of recruit by failing a simple dice roll. That's all it takes.

Both of those instances are smth very much outside of Gale's writer's control, so immediately the bias is showing, how easy it is to kill him.

So please, by all means, keep defending a company against the fans' criticism based on clear observations (which other people have brought up, not specifically what I talked about in this post) which you just don't want to acknowledge, I'm sure that'll work out so nicely for you the moment your preferences stop aligning with theirs.

And if you're a Gale fan who doesn't care and think people are overreacting - you do you, but the way Gale's exploding ending is treated gives really ugly irl implications which can't be ignored. Characters are fictional, but the way certain types are treated speaks of irl biases, and if you can't realize that, I really don't know what to tell you honestly. But aside from all that - professionals shouldn't let their biases show. But they did and continue to do, and that alone is definitely 100% worthy of criticism.

[adamsmasher]

Okay it's after 1am and I've had a lot of wine so obviously it's time for a late night wall-of-text post, but this time it's less likely to piss off your weird uncle or whatever because once again, I gotta talk about the best $4.99 a month I've ever spent.

Please, if you haven't yet, I'm begging you to look into all of the incredible content available on the Dropout.tv streaming service (formerly known as College Humor) . Not only did Whose Line Is It Anyway's Wayne Brady say that the Dropout crew are the only ones doing improv comedy on the same level as Whose Line, but they were also one of the only studios/streaming services allowed to work during the writers' strike because their contracts went above and beyond industry standards. (And, from my own observations, Dropout LOVES hiring queer, trans/nonbinary, and BIPOC performers + crew. Obviously I don't know much about the industry, but they seem like one of the most inclusive companies in Hollywood.)

"Alex, thanks for the recommendation! What shows do they have that you think I'll like?" Oh, you're asking me to gush about my favorite tv shows? Don't mind if I do!!!

Are you D&D curious, but took one look at actual play shows like Critical Role and thought "6 hours an episode? and there's like 750 episodes or whatever? oh baby not my adhd ass..." Don't worry, me too (sorry CR I love you I promise). But Dropout has a show called "Dimension 20" where comedians play Dungeons and Dragons with emotional, immersive storytelling, gut-busting laughs, and spectacular set design that makes you forget it's a fully improvised series controlled by the roll of the dice. They even did a miniseries perfect for D&D beginners called "Dungeons and Drag Queens" where absolute novices and Drag Race royalty Jujubee, Monet X Change, Alaska Thunderfuck, and Bob the Drag Queen embark on an adventure full of mystery, intrigue, and stupidity. I mean, Alaska plays a muscle-bound, axe-wielding, caveman-grunting Orc named Princess, what more could you want? Plus, the primary game master Brennan Lee Mulligan is so easy on the eyes. Oh, you're not into dorky ginger dudes? How about Aabria Iyengar, a 6 foot tall goddess who's equally as nerdy as Brennan but loves basketball. that's right, if nothing else, there's eye candy for every person in every season.

"Oh, why aren't there any good game shows on TV?" you wonder, wishing that the Game Show Network could come up with something that isn't a lame remake of a free-to-play phone game. Well how about Game Changer, "the only game show where the game changes every show (except for [...] Game of Games, Taskmaster, and a few others that have come to light AFTER [Game Changer first aired]. That's right, [the] players have no idea what game it is they're about to play. The only way to learn is by playing, the only way to win is by learning, and the only way to begin is by beginning." And yes, I did sit there and watch the beginning of an episode to make sure I was accurately quoting Game Changer host (and Dropout CEO) Sam Reich's description of his flaghship game show that has THREE separate spin-offs. (for context, he only mentions the other shows that copied his in the one episode I pulled up to get an accurate quote. could you imagine how uncomfortable it would be if he said that every episode? hah!)

Are you more of a traditional Whose Line fan? Look no further than Game Changer spin-off Make Some Noise, where contestants act out "improvisational prompts that [they have] never seen before, isn't that right contestants?" ("We won't know if we've seen them before or not until we see them!" Brennan insists every time he's on...)

You like musicals but wish they were less... ya know, scripted? Check out "Play It By Ear", a fully improvised musical! (you may be familiar with its primary cast members Jess McKenna and Zach Reino from the podcast that inspired it all, "Off Book: the Improvised Musical Podcast with Zach and Jess")

Or maybe you're more into trivia, cuz you're a total nerd like me (and every single performer that's ever appeared on dropout.tv). How about "Umm, Actually" where contestants are given an incorrect statement and have to buzz in to correct it - but you have to say "Umm, Actually" first!

Straight up, you can't go wrong on Dropout. Please, check it out. They're nearly doubling the amount of original shows they have in 2024, and no other streaming service is doing it like them. If I haven't convinced you yet, get the 7 day trial and give em a chance. There's no referral code I can give you that gives me some sort of kickback or whatever, I genuinely wrote what looks like a thousand word essay about Dropout at 1am just because I love them so much.

[losticaruss]

not sure if people have already posted about this but i think it's important to share. i know they've posted follow-ups on tiktok (and maybe ig), including the statement that it is OFFICIALLY happening CHRISTMAS EVE AND CHRISTMAS DAY. DECEMBER 24 AND 25. there's also an official list that includes, but isn't limited to, spotify, tiktok, ig, ANY meta products, hulu, netflix, and the like. genuinely this is SOSOSO important

[ID: a tiktok from @/skyfisherforskyfish.

audio begins:

"i've moved on from feeling spiteful. im officially feeling... diabolical. the next big thing we can do to harm big business- after you've cancelled your amazon subscription, after you've cancelled your audible, after you've moved your money out of big banks and into local credit union, after you've figured out a way to buy local- the next big thing, ladies and gentlemen, is the data strike of Christmas 2024. why would a data strike be effective? because data is the most valuable asset on earth, right after human suffering from denying people who need healthcare, healthcare. that is actually the reason behind the tiktok ban. it's not about national security, it's about the data war that's happening between the united states and china. Christmas is a very pivotal moment, because all of the gifts are purchased, and now companies get to observe what you do with the money and gifts you've been given. your data is critically important right now for training their models and training their campaigns going forward on how consumer behavior is influenced by the holidays. that's not the only thing. following the shooting of the united healthcare ceo, the surveillance state has absolutely exploded in popularity- as you can see, many cities particularly los angeles (where i live) expanding their budgets for next year to use video surveillance on its populations. it's horrifying! it's dystopian! it's entirely preventable. the data strike is one to two days where we simply get off social media. you do not give them a second of your time for advertising dollars, for data mining, for any of it. this would not only kneecap the marketing budgets of big businesses, which have already been spent, they've already been expended, you will only ruin their r.o.i.. you will also prevent them from furthering the expansion of the surveillance state. you could directly say fuck you to zuckerberg and musk easily, with no pain. further, it's a great opportunity because during the holidays, we're pretty busy anyways, and you're there with family. and i know you're like 'oh, i don't want to hang out with my family, i just want to tap out!' challenge yourself. even if you're not having a good time, just have a time, rather than being completely numbed out by your screen, don't you think? one day won't kill you. two days would be a superhuman feat and i would be so impressed, i'd be so proud of you. you could also save on carbon emissions, because it requires a lot of energy to run this app (tiktok) and all of its servers, and every other social media. i have already seen such an enormous amount of collective action taken- people cancelling their amazon subscriptions, people taking their money out of big banks, going to local credit unions, decentralizing their purchases, starting small, local community gardens, going back to their libraries- people are taking action, and just because you don't see it online does not mean it's not happening. in fact, i want you to be absolutely aware that the reason you're not seeing it online is because it is happening. together, we can do the data strike of Christmas 2024. please share this video, please encourage your friends and family to take this shit seriously because the effect and the impact we could have on the market, on the surveillance state, and on the environment is legitimately enormous, and i believe in us. thank you for watching, i know this video is long, i know you've got shit to do. have fun scrolling. talk to later, bye."

/end ID]

[gilbirda]

what are your thoughts on watcher’s new announcement?

So.

I've been watching the Boys since they started back in 2016 (i think around that era), and honestly I'm very conflicted about the decision. I've read so much stuff in favor and against the announcement and I don't know if my answer will satisfy you.

I have managed a community and I have the blessing and curse of being somewhat of a Name, experiencing the ordeal of being Known, and I can tell you that 1)you can never please everyone 2)people will always rush to crush you the second you do something they don't agree with 3)people will always twist everything you do with the worst faith in mind and 4)fandom forget very quickly that at the end of the day you are just human.

I think they made a calculated risk based on a purely economical viewpoint. I think they considered their loyal fanbase and how willing people have been so far with spending extra cash to support them — The live shows, the exclusive streams (like the Valentine's Too Many Spirits) and Patreon. How much of their fanbase was the "broke students" tumblr claim they are and how much was people with spending money willing to pay extra for them.

I also think that the decision seem stupid if you look at it from the perspective of "why the hell would I pay $6 to watch such little variety of content?" and that's a Correct Assumption, but Observe — they have been very slowly pulling everyone that made Buzzfeed famous and enrolling them in. Very recently they gathered the Worth It boys, the second show that kind of carried Buzzfeed back in the day (apart from the Try Guys). I think they can't talk about it right now, but the goal is to relaunch Buzzfeed but without ads and without making it the soulless content machine it became. I think their dream and goal has always been making what Buzzfeed could have been with better management, kind of like "If I was the Management in this company, things would have been better" dream fulfillment. That's why they made the direct jump to a streaming service instead of the logical steps of Patreon-exclusive content or even jumping to Nebula like other youtubers. It was never meant to stay one single channel, it was supposed to be bigger.

Is the projection of making a "better Buzzfeed" worth risking this step? Time will tell. I don't know. I personally never cared about anyone except Buzzfeed Unsolved. I still watch Unsolved on repeat. Is my comfort show. Maybe they are overestimating how much people care about other shows not hosted by them.

Although they did hint that "we want shows not hosted by us". This tells me that they are settling down, they want to ramp down a little bit, do the hook with Ghost Files aka Unsolved Supernatural Lite for the streaming service, and once people are hooked, launch more shows by the old-school Buzzfeed people. Won't be as big as a show hosted by Shane and Ryan, but it will still make people feel like they are getting their money's worth.

I would forgive all of this if only they didn't use the excuse of "if we want to do Netflix-level productions we need money". I'm sorry but that means nothing to me. We loved them when it was a powerpoint slide show with 2 idiots in a set. We didn't fall in love with the toys or the trips or the high tech. We didn't fall in love with the fancy animations at the beginning of Ghost Files episodes that they are so proud of. That was all their idea.

I've seen this trend of content creators ramping up their creations to an unsustainable point, completely crash and burn and then having to apologize about having to step back. Then making it the moral trap of an argument that they have been doing their best to bring quality content to their audience, and of course making it impossible to argue against. If you speak up and say "well we never asked you to break your back" then you are ungrateful audience. That's exactly what's going on in here with the Watcher announcement — "true fans" criticizing people who point out the fact that they created this money problem on their own. Is not the fanbase responsibility to cater to a company's bad money decisions. Is not our fault that they decide to scale up their operation to a point they "haven't been making a profit for 2 years". It's unfair that the fans are at each other's throats for daring stepping back and saying "I don't want to be part of this".

I don't think Watcher Entertainment is actively wanting to collapse their fandom like this. I don't think this was a calculated move. But I do think that they are a group of adults trying to make a career of something they enjoy doing. I think they made this move with the perspective that fandom is not end all and they can always rebuild it.

— And that they are planning on making a machine that can work without them, and that requires breaking something in the fans, it requires kicking themselves out of the pedestal fans have put them on. They know they won't be allowed to have a normal life until people stop looking at them waiting for them to say their phrase.

In conclusion I think they made a choice that made sense if they are planning on separating Watcher Entertainment from "The Ghoul Boys" fame, and it makes sense if they are aiming at something bigger than what they've been doing now. Money of course is the goal and the reason presented, but there's a lot that they are not saying and we will not know until it happens.

Until then, it does feel like they have just shot their careers in the foot.

Also I'm salty that I can't join the service because I'm outside the US.

[petrichor-idyllic]

Vol and Friends Information | The Maze Runner Fanfic Concept

This is a character and idea I wrote a long time ago and found sitting in my drafts. So, I figured I would finally share her with you guys. Character writing is my thing and I thought I should post something since I've been so inactive.

UNIVERSE WRITING NOTES

As most of you know, the Maze Runner movies and books are actually quite different from each other. Of course, I prefer the books but there are some things I think the movies do better, so I've decided to use aspects from both the books and the movies to use in this potential fanfiction.

From the Movies

Takes a couple of days to recall names.

Layout of the Glade/the Maze is the same.

Characters look like their Movie counterparts for the sake of simplicity.

The Grievers look how they're depicted.

Alby is kinder and less brutal like how he's depicted in the movies.

The Gladers have been there for three years (as of the arrival of Thomas, the story starts a year before the end.)

From the Books

The Beetle Blades exist and are how the Creators observe the Glade.

Thomas and Teresa have their telepathic connection and psychic style dreams/flashbacks exist.

Minho is more sarcastic like how he is depicted in the book.

Grievers don't only come out at night. Whilst not as common, Grievers are active during the day. The Runners have encountered them many times.

The Changing isn't rare to go through and the Gladers already have the serum provided by the Creators.

The Box comes up once a week with supplies and once a month with a new Greenie.

I thought it would be smart to clarify and show the best aspects of both media.

GENERAL CHARACTER INFORMATION

Protagonist Name: Vol

Named after: Voltaire; François-Marie Arouet, also known as M. de Voltaire was a French Enlightment writer, historian and philosopher in the 1700s. He was famous for his wit, and his criticism of Christianity (especially of the Roman Catholic Church) and of slavery. Voltaire was an advocate of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and separation of church and state.

Subject: A0 "The Trespasser"

Sex: Female

Pronouns: she/her

Sexuality: Unlabeled

Age: 17-19, exact age is unknown

Job: Builder, then later a Med-jack

Appearance:

Face claim: Iva Varvarchuk

About 5'4" with a slim but lean build, she has white skin with freckles and some scarring. She has brown almond eyes and dark eyebrows. She has short, slightly messy brown hair that is often tied half up half down or pulled back in a tight messy french braid. She wears whatever clothes she can get her hands on, but is normally seen wearing the worn leather jacket and off-white hoodie combo that she came up in the box in. She also can be found wearing the grey tank top and baggy cargo pants she arrived in.

Personality: Vol is fiery and critical with a slight violent streak and a drive to do what's right. She believes strongly in equality and that she is just as capable as her male counterparts. She has no problem putting the boys in their places if they stare for too long or make an inappropriate comment. She often gets in arguments for her beliefs and ideas and isn't above going against the Keepers and Alby to get her point across. She's often described as "too smart for her own good"; her intelligence and quick nature often being a tense point in the Glade. Her intelligence is also exaggerated by her suspiciously good biology knowledge. She's very easily frustrated, especially when people don't listen to her. Despite being very critical and harsh, she can't always take what she dishes out; Vol struggles to take valid criticism and is quick to become defensive as she takes most things to heart. Due to her politically charged nature, she's often routing for the underdog and has a soft spot for Greenies and struggling Gladders- she's almost always willing to risk her mental and physical health for anyone that needs it. She's also beyond willing to jump to anyone's defence should she believe they need it. Because of this, she becomes somewhat of a big sister figure in the Glade- caring but sarcastic and occasionally violent. When she's around the few people she actually looks up to/admires, she becomes more relaxed. She's genuinely witty and often makes jokes that go over people's heads, but she's not nearly as reckless and cutthroat. She tries to lighten the mood after rough days and try and lift spirits, especially after the dreary repetition the Runners go through. She even makes flirty comments and jokes just to watch the boys squirm. Though, the pressure can get too much, especially after certain events skyrocket her into more popularity and conflict than she'd already managed.

OTHER ORIGINAL CHARACTERS

LEO

Name: Leo

Named after: Leonardo Da Vinci - Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (15 April 1452 – 2 May 1519) was an Italian polymath of the High Renaissance who was active as a painter, draughtsman, engineer, scientist, theorist, sculptor, and architect.

Subject: A17 "The Deliquent"

Sex: Male

Pronouns: He/him

Age: 16 - 18

Sexuality: Bisexual

Relationship to Vol: Friend

Job: Slicer

Appearance:

Face Claim: Benjamin Wadsworth

About 5'11" and with a pretty strong build. He has tanned skin and several scars and can often be found stained with blood.

Personality: He's extroverted and boisterous, often causing problems and liking being the centre of attention. He's weak-willed and doesn't seem to care about leaving as much as the other boys. He doesn't get along with Minho and most of the Runners for this reason. He's a thorn in Alby's side and has a record for breaking most of the rules- the Slammer is basically his home. He can be incredibly overprotective and forward with his feelings and opinions. He loves to argue and get a rise out of people. He is a definition problem child.

OTTO

Name: Otto

Named after: Otto Hahn - a German Scientist known as the "Father of nuclear chemistry."

Subject: A23 "The Shield"

Sex: Male

Pronouns: He/they (the latter going unused in the Glade)

Age: 16 - 18

Sexuality: Homosexual

Relationship to Vol: Best friend/found brother

Job: Track-hoe

Appearance:

Face Claim: Unknown model

About 6'1" and very skinny. He has slightly crooked teeth and a slit in his eyebrow.

Personality: Otto is more timid and introverted than his counterparts. He lives is Vol and Leo's shadow, opting to just be known as the boy that came up with the girl than making a name for himself. He's kind of a pushover and can be talked into pretty much anything. He kind of a hopeless romantic but he's fueled by logic, providing a much needed level-headedness to his friends, especially when Vol is worked up and willing to go along with Leo's schemes.

DALTON

Name: Dalton

Named after: John Dalton - An English chemist best know for introducing the atomic theory into chemistry.

Subject: A19 "The Statue"

Sex: Male

Pronouns: He/him

Sexuality: Asexual/Aromantic

Relationship to Vol: Friend/Body Guard

Job: Bulider

Appearance:

Face claim: Mukasa Kakonge

About 6'4" and well-built. He towers over most of the other Gladers. Has a lot of scars on his hands from his job.

Personality: Dalton is the quietest one of the group. He prefers to stick to himself and the only reason he's social at all is because Leo was the Greenie before him, and had to show him around - now they're friends. Though, unlike Otto, he isn't timid. He has a very intimidating presence and simply doesn't care for the Gladers' conversations or opinions. He is very protective of the people he does care about, though, and isn't scared to intervene when the others get themselves in trouble.

RELATIONSHIPS TO VOL

Friends

Otto: After waking up in the Box, Otto was lost and dazed but had enough common sense to try and wake up the teenage girl who was also passed out. After that, Vol took to protecting her timid friend and is often the more offensive of the pair despite her being the odd one out. Otto is the only person she truly trusts because they're the only person that she's knows for sure is in the same situation as her.

Leo: Vol meets Leo during her trial as a Slicer. He offers her advice and helps out, giving her tricks and ways to make the job easier. He's also the person that convinced Vol to ask Newt about becoming a Med-jack due to her anatomy knowledge. He's more laid-back than most of the Gladers around her so she gains some respect for him and they quickly become friends. Though, Leo quickly shows himself as a bad influence, causing problems in Vol's other relationships. But, due to Leo's unfaltering loyalty, she sticks by him.

Dalton: He kind of came as a deal package with Leo. Vol wasn't sure what to think of him at first, but Dalton proved to be a big softy that would crush anyone that got too close to her, and the pair became close fairly quickly.

Newt: Like most of the Gladers, his relationship with Vol is few and far between as she's got her own little group and she chooses to spend time with them. That being said, Newt is probably one of her more favoured people in the Glade. He's one of the most respectful Gladers and he helps where he's needed, even if he can be sarcastic and nihilistic.

Alby: Alby is more of a leader than a friend to Vol, probably because he is. Though, he does have a soft spot for the girl and sees the same admirable traits in her that he saw in Minho when he first assigned him as the Keeper of the Runners. He tends to keep an eye on her so that he can make sure none of the boys are causing her problems.

Frypan: Due to his small crush on the girl, Frypan is very kind and understanding towards Vol, often letting her vent and giving her extra food under the table. Because of his kindness, Vol occasionally helps out in the kitchen, even delivering and making food for the Runners before they go out into the Maze for the day.

Chuck: She becomes somewhat a mother figure to Chuck, her need to protect and look after him coming to the forefront of their relationship. She's definitely one of Chuck's favourite people in the Glade.

Jeff and Clint: Her coworkers who try and keep her out of trouble. She likes them both equally and appreciates their help and the lack of questioning of her abilities.

Love Interest: Minho

Kinda Enemies to Lovers.

They got off to a bad start when Vol tried to escape the Glade on her first day and Minho had to stop her.

She punched him in the jaw and had a meltdown.

She tried to apologise once she'd calmed down (and Ably made her) but Minho was just sarcastic and bitter. Due to her stubborn nature, she insulted him and stormed off.

Leo's negative opinion of the Runners only adds to this.

Tension lies in physical attraction and occasional staring at first.

Minho comes to admire her morals.

She comes to admire his work ethic.

The pair argue for fun, but no one else seems to notice the spark behind their sarcastic exchanges.

Alby thinks they don't like each other because they're too similar.

Which is exactly why Newt thinks they do like each other.

Other

Gally: The pair got off to a rough start on her trail as a Builder, and then later arguments during her time as a Builder, so there is some tension between them. She eventually comes to admire Gally and his passionate and caring ways, even if he doesn't show it in the best way. She finally starts to respect him as a Keeper, even if their frenemy status still remains.

Thomas: A late arrival to the Glade, she tried to be kind to Thomas when he appears but since he moves at a million miles an hour and is more reckless than she is, she's normally too busy to spend time listening to his antics.

Teresa: Initially, she was beyond pleased to have another girl in the Glade, but overall they don't spend much time together apart from Vol attempting to befriend the girl, who's all too interested in thinking up ideas with Thomas.

Ben: Since he's a Runner and spends a lot of time with Minho, the pair have had a fair few conversations and he witnesses a lot of arguments. He actually likes siding with her because he enjoys annoying Minho. But she wouldn't exactly consider him a friend.

Winston: He's a Glader she sees around and doesn't really talk to. He seems nice enough and she has nothing against him.

Zart: The same applies to Zart as it does Winston.

[rebeccathenaturalist]

So. ID apps. Do I use them in my classes? Yes, but only iNaturalist, because you get an additional layer of verification by actual human beings rather than just the initial algorithmic suggestions. And, more importantly, I stress again and again and again that apps are NOT to be the only tool you use, but need to be used in conjunction with field guides, online groups, and other tools, which we also discuss in class. This is especially true if you're planning to eat anything you pick.

I get incredibly frustrated by how ID apps are often touted as all you need to identify animals, plants, and fungi. (I've even seen them described as "a Master Naturalist in your pocket".) Yes, it's nice to have a convenient tool on your phone that allows you to take a picture of something and get a suggestion of what it is. But that's all it is--a suggestion. iNaturalist, Google Lens, PlantSnap, and other apps are incapable of critical thinking and observation skills. All they can do is take the visual, temporal, and location data that you give them and churn up suggestions based on whatever they already have in their databases.

Nature identification is a detail-oriented skill that takes time and practice to learn, and if you want to do it right there aren't any one-step shortcuts. Can an app potentially narrow down the possible species you're observing? Sure. But YOU still have to be the one to do the actual work in determining whether the species the app has suggested is the one you're looking at in person or not; you CANNOT just take the app at its word, because apps can often be wrong.

And this is even more the case when we're talking about edible mushrooms, many of which have lookalikes. (Trying to figure out which Little Brown Mushroom you have can be an exercise in frustration, to say the least.) While there are a lot of people getting into foraging who are willing to do the actual work needed to determine a given mushroom's species, there are unfortunately also those who just want quick and easy answers without a lot of effort, and those are the people who are going to go no further than the app's results. The articles that promote apps as the quick and easy answers these people want aren't helping, either.

By the way, I am ALWAYS happy to help people find resources to help them with identifying various beings in nature. I'm also fine with taking a look at photos and giving my perspective on what something may be (though, again, don't use me as your only source.) While I do teach foraging, I am first and foremost a nature identification instructor, and I want to help people go about learning the life forms around them correctly (and in the case of edible species, safely.)

[bogkeep]

hmm

so a sentiment i've seen repeated many times over the years is "advocate for intersex people because we deserve rights, not as a gotcha to prove transphobes wrong" and obviously i 100000% agree with this, human rights are their own merit and argument!!!

HOWEVER i am struggling to wrap my head around, like... How do you educate about gender Without talking about the reality of intersex people? i will fully admit that i might just not be plugged in enough to the intersex community to have experienced the particular phenomenon that's being referred to. there's probably discussions i'm fully unaware of.

like, theoretically, even if sex WAS a very rigid, strictly binary phenomenon, we would still have to advocate for the rights of transgender and non-binary people on the basis that we deserve human rights and dignity.

but "biological sex" is NOT a very rigid, strictly binary phenomenon. to me, the understanding of biological sex as an incredibly diverse spectrum is FUNDAMENTAL to understanding gender. when i was volunteering for the queer youth organization, i was taking courses on how to educate teens about sex and gender. what that particular education initative had found, through experience, was that teens best understood what was meant by "gender assigned at birth" and gender as a social construct when we started the whole section by explaining that intersex people exist and that "biological gender" is a lot more complicated than we're often taught.

i think the thing is maybe, like, that intersex people as a category are frequently thought of as outliers, 'defects' even, when we're not. intersex people are a part of the natural diversity of humans. our existence is as natural as the existence of any non-intersex person. like that's the THING. is it a gotcha to reinforce the reality of our existence? to remind bioessentialists over and over that they're the ones denying the observable truth?

i also just think that advocating for intersex rights and trans rights are deeply intertwined in so many ways. so much of the societal fear around transition and detransition strikes me as a fear of intersex bodies. by accepting the capability of a human body to change, to exist within multitudes, to not be beholden to our silly little categories nobody has ever fully belonged to perfectly to begin with - to accept women with beards and men with boobs as not only possible but perfectly natural, to prioritize our own health, wellbeing and bodily autonomy above the tyrannical categorization of the gender binary...

idk!!! my personal intersex experiences are vital to how i experience and talk about gender and how i advocate for trans rights. i can't separate them. maybe it's different for me because i do self-identify as intersex. maybe i'm just clueless about what the criticism is directed towards. this is my personal and biased opinion, please don't take my word over that of far more established intersex activists :')

[ingravinoveritas]

impalationship replied to your post "| NTAs red carpet 2021 vs. Pride of Britain red…”

I've been in a fandom for quite some time now where there used to be a fan who was a professional body language expert. They taught us a lot about what to look for in photos like this and I have to say it's clear as day that M and AL can barely tolerate being near each other while M and D are exhibiting signs of strong physical and emotional closeness and attraction. Who knows what goes on in their lives behind closed doors but this is what we can see from all of these pics and videos.

rainbowposes replied to your post "New red carpet pics and ugh what is wrong with..."

Anna especially looks so uncomfortable. As a couple they never look quite right. The age difference for one looks too pronounced. Michael looks like her father! I know they have two daughters but I still really can't see them going the distance. Anna's dress is gorgeous, though, and she looks stunning. Their vibes are just so off though. I can only really say that here. In most SM places you get slaughtered for any Anna negativity. Same with Georgia!😳

@impalationship Oh, wow. That is very interesting, and I appreciate you sharing those observations about Michael and AL vs. Michael and David. I think many of us have wondered what a body language professional would have to say about their body language, and so I am wondering if this expert has ever shared anything about "tells" (i.e., small gestures or signs that give away what a person is truly feeling). If so, would you be able to share those/what sort of "tells" you think Michael and David are giving off? I know deciphering subtle body language cues has never been my forte, so your insights are certainly fascinating.

To your comment, @rainbowposes, I agree with you about the vibes between Michael and AL being off. I've said this previously, but for me it's never been about the age gap (although I find that the legitimitiate criticisms many of us have are decried and often chalked up solely to that). It's the "everything else" gap that is so noticeable, IMO. It's that Michael and AL have nothing in common except for the kids. It's that neither one of them "lights up" around the other, and that the normally ever-present twinkle in Michael's eye disappears when he is with her. I'm genuinely at a loss for how Anna in particular seems so uncomfortable holding her own boyfriend's hand and looks like she would rather be anywhere and doing anything else instead. I'm also floored at the disconnect happening with the fans on Twitter saying how happy they both look, as at this point it seems like willfully ignoring everything that is actually happening in those pictures.

I'm glad you felt comfortable sharing your thoughts here, though. Going by the sheer volume of comments on both of these posts, a lot of other people feel similarly. Truthfully, I've never seen this many comments of people speaking honestly about what they are seeing in the last four years. I'm not sure what exactly has caused the change, except that what's plainly obvious apparently can no longer be overlooked. So interesting...

[iamacolor]

my take on sweet mobster is different I like it but every post on twitter about the show since basically the start is a variation or more precisely not a variation of "SJH is a such a looser in love" and that's not a good sign for me if the entire thing the fans are taking away from the show is how down bad the guy and him being pathetic means the the drama is focusing on that to a very high degree and my idea or a romantic lead is a not a dude who spends his time blushing and kicking his feet over a girl I'm sorry if there's not a specific reason for it or if she's not matching his freak in every instance. In this case I don't feel like they are at all yeah she likes him but they're showing that he likes her a lot more in so many ways it's not even close you cannot tell me you think they've shown the same degree of caring for each other because it's not true.

hi anon! I think you're raising an important point by pointing out the fandom's reaction to the show (and I have to say I only caught up with it last week so I've not really been aware of what people have been saying about it until this week) but to me that's something that's observed in kdrama fandom no matter what the show is, it sometimes go so far as to direct criticism towards the female lead whenever she doesn't stick to her more passive traditional role (I remember seeing people criticise sol from lovely runner for trying to go back in time again to save the ml and for taking away their first meeting because it wasn't his choice when she was clearly doing things that no one would've criticised from a male lead and when she clearly had the main goal of saving him no matter what because she loved him sooo much) and in this previous ask I've talked more in details about the traditional gender roles in kdrama as a genre when it comes to how female and male leads are expected to show affection (where women are supposed to be more passive and men more active and more intense and be romantic and devoted etc which I don't think is good) if you're interested. so I do think this is often an issue in the writing but to me a fandom's reaction isn't necessarily representative of what's actually written especially when a kdrama's fandom is often composed of people more willing to fawn over a new man (although why is loser in love the new keyword like can't we find something else lol nothing about loving a woman is a loss of dignity and it feels very overused now) than to appreciate the nuance in a woman's personality. I've seen entire fandoms of many different types of shows or movies focus on a random secondary or imaginary ship or go as far as to turn a vilain into a simply misunderstood man while constantly criticising everything the female lead does so fandoms can be very volatile and irrational

as for the kind of romantic lead that jihwan is, I personally don't think the whole blushing and kicking his feet over a woman disqualify him as a romantic lead and it's fine if he isn't your cup of tea, there are plenty of heroes who don't do that and who are also very interesting and entertaining and intense in their own ways - I know I couldn't watch just these kinds of leads all the time I like to see different types of characters - but that's not an issue that's just a question of personal preferences

as for what I can or cannot tell you, I've never said that they've been shown to have the same degree of caring - I said that I think their dynamic is more "he falls first" (which necessarily implies we're going to see more of his feelings) than "he's the only devoted one" and that yes he's the one who gets flustered the most because it takes more time for her (and also they're different people who react differently to things). I agree that his feelings are definitely the ones pushed forward for entertainment purposes (especially for comedy purposes) but the narrative we're on right now balances that out. until ep10 (which I haven't watched yet so maybe that changes things) she's the first one who has admitted to someone else that she has feelings and who has approached those feelings with him by saying she doesn't want to be confused, that she's hurt and that she liked the time in his house and specifically the time spent with him, who's calling him out for his inconsistencies precisely because he's shown many times he cares and yet he says nothing about his feelings (and that's after many times where she shows she clearly cares for him, is curious about him, wants to defend him, wants him to take better care of himself - the hospital scene was a really big step in shifting their dynamic to me -, is attracted to him, finds him funny, enjoys teasing him, is willing to put herself at risk for him when he goes missing etc which isn't always the case with female leads). she's also clearly been shown to be jealous several times - and that was clear to him - and so has he. I'm not pretending the show doesn't rely a lot on him having no idea how to handle his feelings and making a mess of it (most of which she doesn't even see so it's mostly for us viewers) while also protecting her and caring for her and being a very romantic brooding hero but the writing also gives eunha a lot more agency than expected and an actual voice over her relationship with him and I feel like we're progressively getting to see different layers of her that makes this whole thing much more balanced than what is usual in kdrama and also more nuanced than how the show started out. I'm not just going "oh this is good because it's a little bit more than what we usually get" I also genuinely feel a progression in the show itself. I purposefully pointed out examples of her actively caring for him precisely because for a non viewer most of what the fandom highlights are jihwan's actions when many of eunha's actions don't get the same treatment

there's another imbalance that's caused by the fact that he already knows she's his childhood friend but she's still in the dark about hyunwoo - and so obviously that adds a depth to his feelings that she can't show even though it's there but that's obviously meant to change

[merp-blerp]

So I haven't seen Disney's Wish myself (I'm waiting for it to assumedly go to Disney+, theaters are a lot of money to spend too often), so I can't speak on the film from my own point of view yet, but I have seen the reaction to it so far and I wanted to share my thoughts on why I think some of these reactions are happening, based on my own experience of watching and listening to the Disney fandom's critiques over the many years I've done so. These are just my observations based on my experiences and it's okay to disagree, just be cordial.

Opinions below the cut ↓

I feel like a part of why Wish is the way it allegedly is has to do with something that has been plaguing Disney for a while: trying to prove bad-faith criticisms wrong instead of knowing their strengths.

I'm sure they still happen, but especially in the early and mid-2010s Disney had a lot of half-baked criticisms directed at their stories and characters. Wish might be another one of many attempts to quell these critiques. For example, I remember a common piece of writing advice would be to make villains complex all the time, with villains who are evil for evil's sake being seen as less well done (this was towards media in general, but it applied to Disney too), so Disney began the surprise villain and/or the sympathetic villain trend in their films. Now people have seen that shtick so much they want traditional villains back (me too). It's now overdone and no longer shocking or subversive in their movies anymore. [And as a little add-on, I understand why people want King Magnifico's design to be more "traditionally villainous" but I'm actually happy he isn't, as it's really hard to design a villain like that without perpetuating some kind of bigoted stereotype that a lot of traditional villains have. Even Mother Gothel, one of the last, if not the last of the classic villains Disney has attempted, had a lot of antisemitism baked into not only her design but also her actions. Disney's done that a lot, which is likely accidental, but still bad. I'd much prefer him to look and act like some guy over an awful Jewish stereotype or something similar.] People also called princesses with the temperaments of, say, Aurora, Belle, or Cinderella "boring", or hell, "sexist" in their characterization, so the heroines were made more relatably quirky, as that type of humor towards/by girls and women were very popular in the 2010s. Asha is allegedly somehow both socially inept and socially competent, which arguably isn't a flaw at all, just contradictory. (My neuro-spicy brain wants to somewhat lean towards neurodivergence when I hear that, but I haven't seen the film, so what do I know?) Now people are souring to that too, understandably, as that humor's kind of dated and overdone with Disney's heroines. These traits aren't bad on girls automatically, especially if they make sense for the environment they grew up in like Anna or Rapunzel, but they've just been done to death with Disney. Ironically, now when I see people suggest alternative traits for Asha they propose a more "sophisticated", "mature", or "self-assured" type of personality, aka, what the "sexist" traditional heroines had a lot of the time.

The newer tropes Disney tried to do in place of their old ones don't have as much staying power as the old. Once they're done so much they get stale. If they're based on trends in media rather than being actually captivating in writing, they become timely. People can digest characters like Cinderella, who are interesting and aren't overly worried about upholding trends in their characterization, for centuries whether they realize it or not. But characters like what Asha is allegedly like are based on trendy, shallow politics that aren't as deep as they sound, maybe sometimes even circling right back into the bigotry it was trying to combat (like the girl-boss stuff), and become overdone and/or dated if they aren't done well or in a new way. I feel like because of the poorly made assessments that people used to make towards Disney, Disney is almost embarrassed by their past films when they really shouldn't be. This is why the recent remakes tend to over-correct the originals. In the original Beauty and the Beast, it was not a flaw that Adam was eleven when he was made to look like a beast in my opinion, it just made it more interesting, but some reviews saw it as a bad thing, so they changed the line in "Be Our Guest" that implied his age. It was seen as a flaw that the original Cinderella didn't have a clear reason to stay with her abusive family, even though that's how familial abuse works often and it's really rude to victims to ask "Why don't you just leave?" or something like that; so Disney gave Ella the explanation that she stays because it was her father's home in the 2015 remake, which only added more flaws when you remember that she does leave the house in the end anyway. What was the point in saying that? People wanted strong female characters, so Mulan in her remake is a flawless, emotionless girl-boss. It was seen as sexist when female characters wanted romantic love because "girls don't need a man, so romance is sexist", so Disney stopped telling love stories and focused more on issues of the self, which isn't bad, but now people want Disney to tell love stories again and are disappointed that Asha didn't have a romance with the mostly cut "Star-Boy" character in Wish (again, me too, I love Disney's love stories). All of these are overcorrections to things that were never flaws to begin with, just nit-picks from bad observations of their films. There are too many examples. It's like Disney is insecure.

If Disney understood that these things weren't bad in essence, Wish would be more liked by its critics; if Disney wasn't afraid to let their female characters have actual flaws, not see romantic love as something dated, not continue to listen to these types of shitty judgments, or just take more risks again because that's what shaped the company—taking risks against the odds, Wish would be better (I assume all of the former based on what I've heard, again I haven't seen Wish myself). The pseudo-feminism and CinemaSins type of critiquing from the 2010s has mostly died out. The culture's changed. The tropes people once condemned are now being begged to be brought back. What goes around comes back around. It showcases what was truly timeless and what was just a trend in media.

In my opinion, old bad-faith "fan" responses are partially to blame for these themes in recent films, but of course, Disney is ultimately at fault because they make their own choices. There could also be plenty of other reasons why Wish feels half-done to some, like the alleged poor treatment of employees behind the scenes.

By the way, if you were a Disney fan who had these types of opinions in the past, you shouldn't be hard on yourself about it, especially if you were just a kid listening to and trying to appeal to the adults that were around you or influenced you. The latter is the boat I was in once, and now I've grown up past that. Needlessly cynical film takes and pseudo-feminism were all the rage for a while and many have had that phase of being really into those mindsets. You're not bad if you've been in it at any time in the past as long as you are learning and growing.

I'm choosing to be optimistic about Disney. Somehow I still am. They have been in a creative rut for what seems like a while now. Disney-creative doesn't seem to be allowed to tell the stories they want to tell, instead being made to cater to the wrong people. The people who like to insult Disney more than they like watching their films. They should make movies for the fans of all ages who love them. But I believe Disney can bounce back from this. Disney has been through rough patches before, but these rough patches in the past have led to eras like the Disney Renaissance. I'm hoping the backlash from Wish will lead to Disney making changes once more. They've done that repeatedly in their complex 100 years of establishment. Gone are the times when the Disney remakes were panned by fans but still made tons of money that justified their continued production. And long gone are the days when fans were actually excited about the prospects of Disney recreating their movies (because yes people felt that way once upon a time). Now the remakes aren't making as much as Disney wants and sometimes even flopping. Gone are the days when their animated films were their critical lifeline, Wish proves that they are not immune to being received poorly. It's time for something new. Or old done new. Just something different. It would be one thing if this were just another bad movie, but this was their 100th-year celebration, you think they'd be more careful to not muck it up. But apparently, all it did was reflect all the flaws that have been in Disney's storytelling as of late. That's why the backlash is so great. It feels like the last straw. Once time goes on past the 100th-anniversary era, I think the hate for Wish will die down, but that wouldn't make it less potentially flawed. When I first caught wind of this film, way before we had a trailer even, I was very excited that it seemed like a return to form for Disney, but apparently, it might not be, and that's got a lot of people disappointed, especially since this movie was meant to be a celebration. I've loved Disney for as long as I can remember and I know a lot of people are the same way. People wouldn't be so disappointed in the state of the company if they didn't care deeply about Disney and believed that they could do better. I still think Disney could be great. I still believe in them. They just need to believe in themselves again.

If you made it this far, thank you so much for reading! ♥

[alovelywaytospendanevening]

Hello again, not quite sure how to formulate this question, but on the topic of EM Forster, I read most of his novels many years ago, and then recently re-read The Longest Journey. I really enjoyed it and I like the themes, but I found the style quite strange and a bit hard to follow at times. I've read that the book was meant to be 'symbolic' and not particularly realistic. But anyway, I wondered what you made of the style of it and how you like it (or not) in relation to the others. I am planning to re-read (and re-watch) Maurice soon.

Hello again!

I got to say I haven't read The Longest Journey. I love Maurice, but I'm not really a big Forster fan (I actually know considerably more about Fred Benson!).

However, I do know The Longest Journey is commonly referred as Forster's most polarizing novel. It is, after all, his only novel that was never adapted into a film. I read a short summary of it on Drewey Wayne Gunn's Gay Novels of Britain and Ireland (a very useful guide) and I confess I wasn't very impressed. So your thoughts don't seem to be unusual.

On the other hand, it's interesting that for a long time Maurice was considered a lesser work among Forster's bibliography, to the point its rights' owners were reluctant to give Merchant Ivory their permission to adapt it. Just take a look at some reviews from the time of its release:

C. P. Snow, in The Financial Times, found the novel 'crippled' by its "explicit purpose," with the ending "artistically quite wrong" (a near universal criticism at the time). Walter Allen in the Daily Telegraph, characterised it as "a thesis novel, a plea for public recognition of the homosexual," which Forster had "wasted" himself doing, instead of an autobiographical work. For Michael Ratcliffe, in The Times, it stands as "the least poetic, the least witty, the least dense and the most immediately realistic of the six novels." Philip Toynbee, in The Observer, found the novel "deeply embarrassing" and "perfunctory to the point of painful incompetence," prompting him to question "whether there really is such a thing as a specifically homosexual sensibility." Toynbee went on to state that he could "detect nothing particularly homosexual about Maurice other than it happens to be about homosexuals."

The reason for such a cold reception seems clear to me: Forster was seen as a "serious author", and a story about two homosexuals falling in love and having a happy ending was still interpreted in the 1970s as purely trifle activism, and not really “real art”. You can still detect the influence of this line of thinking in contemporary gay literature, where the gays-suffering-and-dying-because-they’re-gay releases remain the most acclaimed and “serious” ones.

Maurice’s reputation (both novel and film) grew a lot in the last few years, thankfully. Forster benefited from writing what he truly wanted: it’s a tightly written, focused story. The themes of romantic friendship, institutional oppression, interclass relationships, masculinity, the English nature and even religion are well presented and utilized. I also appreciate how Forster wasn’t afraid of making his protagonist imperfect, in an “uncool” way: Maurice Hall is an aggressively average middle-class snob, and he's also quite misogynist toward his mom and sisters (and went no contact with them, even though they didn’t deserve it). Some people complain its narrative is too slow for modern standards, but I’m used to it. And maybe Forster needed some missteps like The Longest Journey to reach to this story.