#i know it's kind of controversial to say it but frankly i don't believe in infantilizing mental illness

[inkskinned]

maybe i'm a bitch but if i hear you go out of your way to judge someone's weight, i immediately lose trust in you & will probably forever find you a little unbearable . yes also the little floating bar over my head will start reading [hostile]. this is natural and u caused it.

[bunnwich]

A bit of controversial post maybe??? (feel free to skip)

Not to be controversial but I keep seeing how ppl are reading the “Leona is kind to Sally” situation and just thinking how my perspective is bit…different.  (if you don't care about my opinion ofc you can always skip)

SPOILERS FOR EVENT

When I saw it, these were my thoughts:

"Oh I love this so much!! It's adorable for one, and I’ve been saying for years that Leona is only mean to ppl he doesn't like/finds annoying or doesn’t care about. Like he HAS the ability, like everyone else to be polite and nice but we only see him interact with ppl who annoy him etc. Which is...um most of the cast. AND we rarely get a peak at how he would be with someone he likes.

I hope that this helps ppl see that he can be gentler to act toward someone he's SUPPOSED to like as a friend or even like romantically. 

Banter is one thing but I don’t believe he'd ever act straight-up rude to someone he was true friends with, dating or had a crush on?" 

So, a lot of ppl loved this scene I DO TOO! However…

This whole “Leona said men ain’t shit” joke is worrisome. Like…do you guys think that Leona would in fact be ruder or less gentle to a masc or nonbinary S/O vs a femme one? Some of these remarks…feel uh not really nice to those who have nonbinary/masc pairing with him.

He grew up in a matriarchal society, he respects women NO DOUBT.

I just think it would be nice to for us to be kinder in how we phrase things like this. I know they are jokes but still Yumes and ships mean a lot to ppl and I think it's just another catalyst for masc and masc-leaning fans to feel further alienated in the fandom space, yk?

Do I believe he respects women OFC, but much like those who had the “consent king” take about the voiceline of him being offended at Scully kissing the MC's hand I ONLY agree to an extent. WHY? Bc Leona is a big-ass hypocrite! Leona, for all I defend him, is not always keen on physical boundaries himself and can be quite rude. I think that line is more him being annoyed at Scully than genuinely worried for anyone's virtue, yk?

And to bring it back to the Sally/Leona thing I think it's not just bc Sally is a woman he is nice to her, bc she is SMART and cunning and was quickly underestimated by the rest of the cast. She was able take care of herself. He liked that about her. I really don't think it was just cause she was girl by itself.

Idk thats all I have to say, this is just my opinion as usual but it just didn’t sit right with me from a fandom perspective and I genuinely feel the “Leona is the feminist king of all time” is not a full reading of the character when we’ve seen him be nice to others and neutral to other women. Plus, he’s IS a hypocrite about the manners thing! The cast even call him out on it.

Leona is still flawed just like any other character in twst and I don't think him “bowing down at every women's feet” is something I subscribe to. Not in the way some ppl are acting anyways.

And frankly how some ppl are wording themselves in their tags and reblogs of these posts about Leona “drinking respect women’s juice bc he dislikes men” feels alienating toward those who have nonbinary/masc ships with him.

This is meant as no offense to anyone's fun I just thought I’d give my perspective on it. 

TLDR: I do think that it is genuinely funny and endearing to see the juxtaposition of how Leona treats everyone else VS Sally HOWEVER I don't think it is purely a gender thing and making that just doesn't sit right with me.

[topazadine]

Things that immediately turn me off a fiction book

I'm pretty picky with what I read, because the time I spend reading is time that I could spend writing. I generally know if I will like a book within the first chapter, and I feel no shame in giving up if I'm not vibing with it.

And no, I don't believe in the "oooh read further it warms up" because does it? Does it really? Do I want to waste time finding out?

Frankly, at this point in life, I read more nonfiction than fiction because there's just so. many. bad. books. that are getting published. Worse than fanfictions.

Anyway, here are the things that make me give up. Maybe hearing this will help you as you write your own masterpiece.

Too Many Proper Nouns

Three characters maximum in the first chapter or two. Do not throw dozens of people at me. I will get confused and give up. Let me get to know the main character, by themself or with a few of their closest companions, before you make me remember everyone else. And go deep with those characters! I want someone to stick with!

You can reference other characters, to create a sense of a deeper world, but do not go all-in on them. Make it clear that they are just there to provide a bit of context, and we don't have to remember them yet. We should only be meeting three characters maximum.

Throwing Us Immediately Into a Dramatic Action Point

This is controversial I know, but I hate when something immediately starts with a battle. I don't care if any of these people live or die. I don't know them. I haven't grown attached to any of them.

Even just a page or two to get to know them first will help. You can have them gearing up for a battle, thinking about what's going to happen, maybe talking to their friends, maybe checking their armor, whatever feels natural for them. But do not just start with stabbing people! I don't care about them yet!

Too Many Details

Many this is just me, but I simply do not care about every piece of armor your character is wearing. I don't need to hear a play-by-play of every single color of every single thing because I don't care. Pick out a few specific things for me to focus on and that's it. Stop overloading me with colors and patterns and armor styles.

Yes, yes, you've done your research on historically accurate gear. That's great. It would be good for a movie. But if I have to look up different armor pieces every five seconds, I am glossing over it and moving on. I don't care. I'm here for the story. If I wanted an infodump about medieval armor, I would simply pick up a nonfiction book (and maybe I will).

White Space Syndrome

Tell me what the overall scene looks like instead of all these hyperspecific details of certain objects, like carts or emblems or whatever. I want to know where I am!!

Don't just say "a forest." Tell me what kind of forest. Tell me if it's a young forest or an old snarly forest or a swampy forest or a cold alpine forest.

Don't just say "a castle." Tell me if it's a bustling castle or a gloomy castle or a rundown castle.

Don't just say "on the sea." Cold sea? Tropical sea? Far far away from land or is land in sight? These are the things I want!

Too Much Backstory

For the love of god do not explain the entire history of this culture in the first chapter. The first chapter is for getting to know the characters we're going to be following. You can introduce those things slowly and carefully as the story unfolds.

I get that fiction writers are delighted by all the worldbuilding (or research, in historical fiction) they have done. But the reader does not care right away. They need to get invested before all those little specifics matter at all. My eyes glaze over and I give up because I don't want to have to remember all of that all at once. It's like you just threw a college textbook at my face.

Plus, if you're doing third-person limited, you have to remember that the character is not going to be thinking all of that! They won't say all of that either! Because they know all of that!

Even a general on the brink of a major battle is not going to go "yes, this all dates back to when we took Iuanfutila back in 181, when the brave Iuanfutilans protested the rule of our Yawwbaawnwhryr leaders ...." They are focused on the present moment, and they may discuss the backstory later. Tell us what we need to know now because that is what the character would be thinking too.

"Oh, but Topazadine, how will the readers understand the context if I don't tell them??"

There's a battle. Two groups are at war. Or something was stolen. Or two people are fighting. Whatever. We understand those things. We can get the basic gist of how things are going to play out by just showing us these things happening. Then, as we have gotten a feel for the characters, you can tell us more about the context.

If you walk into a store that's being held up by an armed robber, do you give a shit about his backstory, or do you only care once that person has been arrested and you have to testify? I think we know the answer. You're not going "ohhh why is he doing this??" at first. You're going "HOLY SHIT THERE'S A GUN WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN NOW???" and then you'll care about the other stuff later.

Too Much Play-by-Play

I also do not need a play by play of a fight scene. I need to know the general movements, and then the overall atmosphere. I want to feel what the character feels rather than feel like I'm watching a football game.

Your reader will fill in the gaps if you give them enough information, but when you overload them with every single action, they're now trying to keep track of what went where instead of how this moment is supposed to feel. And now the action and drama has gone out of the writing because it's become a manual of fighting techniques.

Pointless Dumb Conversations

"Oh, could you turn around for me? I want privacy."

"Sure, of course, I'm a respectable man." Manfred knew that a lady-in-waiting would be unsettled by the presence of a strange man, so he wanted to be respectful.

"Thanks."

"You're welcome."

Oh my god no one cares!!! No one!! We don't need this exchange. Cut it. This is stupid. Unless something is actually happening or something is meaningful about them saying this, shut up.

How to Not Write a Horrible First Chapter That Makes People Ragequit

Can you tell I'm mad today? I started and stopped three different books because they were all so bad.

Three characters max in the first chapter, with deep discussion of each. (One or two is better.) General appearance, demeanor, profession, whatever.

Restrain the urge to infodump! Dribble it out over the chapter!

Give the setting more attention than random little details that ultimately do not matter. I don't need to know the pattern of the curtains on the horsecart that's about to be burnt. Don't care.

Do not give a play by play of every single action that a character takes because it's boring and no one cares.

In media res is great but do NOT start with a big climactic intense battle or fight or whatever because we don't know these characters and don't know who to root for (or why we should care).

Your character is not going to give us a history lesson in why this conflict is happening. Do not do it yourself either. Give us just enough to get intrigued and no more. Think how your characters would think and what they would prioritize in discussions.

If a conversation is just pleasantries and has no purpose, drop it, we don't care.

[ixiot-ghostrebel]

Some Stuff I Should Probably Address.

Alright, For most of you lot who knows what fandoms I write for, this shouldn't come off as surprising to you:

But yes, this is about the Demand to Recasting Certain Voice Actors, Natlan's Characters Being Whitewashed, and my personal thoughts about these matters. They will be under the "Keep Reading" cut if you wish.

TL;DR If You Want to Avoid This, But Want Updates About My Blog: I am closing requests for Genshin and HSR for the time being. I will still be open to discuss HSR and Genshin, but not controversy. I'm sorry.

People Waiting For "Barren Lands, Final Wishes" Letters:

They're on their way, I promise! Unfortunately I haven't been able to make time for them as much as I wanted to, but they Will be out soon!

Now back to more Serious Matters.

⌨︎ Warnings: The Follow Will Contain Mentions of Sexual Abuse, Abuse, and Whitewashing. If I Missed a Warning, or Wrote the Wrong Warning, Please Notify Me Immediately!

Alright, first off: The Voice Actors of Sunday and Moze.

I frankly am not the kind of person who indulges in drama, nor do I like reading/watching them in my free time, but it can't be overlooked at this point. Griffin Puatu and Chris Niosi are quite the controversy recently.

For those who don't know, here's a (probably oversimplified—apologies, on that part) basic idea of what's happening:

Chris Niosi has been accused with sexual and emotional abuse by his ex-partners, as well as friends.

Now, the real big problem, however, is that Hoyoverse, the company who owns the HSR character by the name of "Moze" has decided to hire Niosi to become his EN Voice Actor, which is sparking a lot of disapproval, for Hoyoverse is being blamed for not checking his background/history well enough.

(For More Information About Him: Click This For an Article About the Matter.)

Now, I don't have much to say about Griffin Puatu, who is the current EN Voice Actor of Sunday, but judging from screenshots and tumblr posts I have seen by the Reddit post he wrote, many people are not liking him as well because Puatu is standing up for Niosi.

Now, my Personal Thoughts on the matter, and, as much as I hate getting into drama (apologies, these personal thoughts will be a rant):

Just why? I'm unsure who was at TRUE fault of hiring Niosi, and I don't have full context of WHY Puatu is backing up Niosi when people say he hasn't changed, but seriously, why?

As much as I really hate to say this, but honestly, with this amount of controversy around a game people download to have fun and enjoy, all of it is pretty much ruined for me at the moment. I'm fed up with this—Again, I'm not sure whose fault it was, but they seriously need to be CAREFUL.

I also don't believe that Niosi should have gotten the role of Moze (HSR), but at the same time, who the hell decided it was a good idea to get/give him the role? As I live under a rock, I didn't know who Niosi was. At the time of Moze's drip-marketing, I really thought it'd be cool—for the first time in a while, I actually felt excited for a character rather than the plot of a game. After hearing all this, and taking time thinking about it, I really just don't want to touch HSR content anymore at the moment. It's annoying, because HSR has really good content—it has the potential to be great.

I seriously just can't wrap my head around who hired this guy. I'm not going into Puatu specifically because I don't know much about what he wrote, and (again) I don't like getting into drama. My apologies on that part, but honestly? I'm just done.

Alright, Second off: Natlan Characters—Skin.

I'm pretty sure most people are aware of THIS controversy, but to simplify: Natlan Characters are too pale and it's inaccurate.

Geographically, it makes no sense. They're in warmer temperatures, they should be more tanned. On top of that, their skin tone DOES NOT MATCH their cultures, or where they're taken inspiration from. Hoyoverse are being boycotted (from what I heard) for whitewashing and neglecting to represent the people of said-cultures/said-traditions.

My Personal Thoughts?

COME ON, HOYOVERSE. Do better! It was one thing to drop Natlan Teasers about the characters, but seriously? Please, try a little harder! Genshin Impact has GOOD POTENTIAL—EVERYONE SEES THAT! But you can't make them tanned? Why?

This was the first thing that has been bugging me BEFORE the entire Moze EN VA bullcrap. Come on, Hoyoverse, do better. You are losing respect out here. I am so disappointed, and even that is an understatement! You are losing your respect and recognition as a worthy company brand! What is going on in their building???? Hello???

Someone better fix this skin tone problem soon. I am so fed up with this. As much as I love the characters they just drip-marketed, it's also quite unfair: Take Liyue, for example. Their culture and their people are represented accurately, as far as anime can go.

Natlan? Yikes, suddenly they aren't able to create that same amount of accuracy potential. Why though? What's stopping them? Why are they not doing what is ethically right?

Everyone's waiting for a proper answer, myself included.

Alright, With that all being said—the final Part: What's Happening to the Ghost Rebel's Blog?

Well, for starters: I need a break. I am not only disappointed, but mentally drained. I am so done with all of this, and I need an utter breather. I usually go on Tumblr to cool down or read some nice, wholesome writing posts I find on some fandoms I like. Now, however, I am in dire need of staying away from Tumblr.

I'll be on a little bit of hiatus from writing so much—but not for now, as I currently have an event going on.

However: I am no longer taking any HSR and/or Genshin requests until these issues are either resolved or fixed. That is my stance, and I hope you can respect it.

Yes, this will mean my blog will decrease in activity. However, I am still open to Genshin/HSR discussions—so long as they are not about drama/controversy. I think I'm drained from all of this.

To everyone who read to the very end of this post: Thank you for reading to the end, and I apologize if you were also trying to avoid witnessing these kinds of controversies. However, some things can't be overlooked.

Hope y'all are doing safe/good. Have a good day/night.

[danieyells]

In Tokyo debunkers I have been thinking about the first years and what they have in common.I think all of them are short-sighted or have tunnel vision this isn't a bad trait

I may be wrong on this or miss remembering so if I'm wrong please correct it.Please excuse the formatting I'm on mobile and the length.

Leo-

He is the easiest one for this,the speech that Alan gave him at the end of vagastorm kinda sums up lot of leo problems.There was a post about Leo possibly self-sabotage or disregard for his own self, there's merit look at the scene of Leo,Alan and Thoma.

He may have figured out that Alan wasn't going to hurt him but Thoma was a complete wild card in that situation,he was grabbing his axe.Along with setting up the PC,he used her to his liking and was planning to fuck her over after the fact.Image if his planned success what would have happened most likely no more access to the PC if she believes her boasting does not work.That means no more spying on Thoma and Alan.

Please tell me if this has any weight.I have to go to work.Thank you

Sorry this took so long, anon! I wanted to reply earlier but I thought that maybe mobile wasn't showing parts of the message(it sounded kind of like you were going to list the ways the other first-years were short-sighted/prone to tunnel vision) so I wanted to check it on desktop and my Taiga brain ADHD made me keep forgetting 8'D Excuse me for rambling so much, I get a little long-winded! TL;DR, I do think you're right, although Leo isn't as careless as you think, and I think Sho isn't really prone to tunnel vision or short-sightedness beyond that he seems to bounce between interests somewhat easily.

Yeah, I agree that the first years are a little prone to tunnel vision--like, they all must have come here with something in mind and that something will expand in their time here. Ritsu intended to acquire clients--particularly the famous and wealthy Frostheimers who are prone to controversy and scandal. Ren has implied some issues with his family so he possibly did this to escape the responsibilities of home--and now he has to try and escape the responsibilities of work too. Sho. . .I think Sho is the least short-sighted of them in a sense? Sho seems very much like he takes things day by day and he does whatever catches his interest and whatever makes things easiest for Leo, even if it means he gets in trouble when Leo should've. He's really intelligent and has a plethora of hobbies and interests, although he puts a lot of his passion in cooking and tends to drop most other things that aren't sports. And Leo, like he said, came here expecting it to be a lot more fun to be around other people who made pacts with demons, and he acts like he only cares about thrills, profits, and having a good time. Most of them don't care about others or only care about others in superficial ways that benefit them(again, with the exception of Sho who at least seems to be more good-natured and considerate so far, unless Leo is telling the truth when he says Sho acts that way to get and keep customers, which wouldn't make sense since Sho only recently started the food truck.)

About the meeting in the car, both of them were reaching for their weapons, not just Tohma. Because they didn't know what was happening when they were summoned to the car by the other but they were both confused, so they suspected foul play and prepared for a fight either way. They may have been about to fight each other, suspecting the other wasn't actually themself, frankly. I think they had their hands on their weapons before that panel was shown. See how they both already have their hands off to their sides by the time Leo pops in, after they both get confused? Reaching for their weapons was happening before Leo made himself known.

But Leo is smart enough to know Alan wouldn't let him get hurt even if Tohma started swinging--although I imagine he was being sarcastic when he said he didn't think Tohma knew who he was and he knew Tohma wouldn't just start attacking him mindlessly. Tohma was at the entrance ceremony(he already saw Tohma's information with Darkwick so he would have recognized him anyway, and he could probably ascertain from how diligent Tohma is that he would also recognize Leo already) and he also knew Tohma knew of him from when he listened in on them previously. Even if Tohma did pull out his weapon, Alan would have recognized Leo and his voice when he started speaking and protected him. Leo knows who his muscle is. He wouldn't have had put himself in a situation he didn't think he couldn't safely get out of. He does this kind of thing far too much to not know his exits--not to mention, you don't immediately hurt or kill someone who pulled something like he did. You get information first. It's just the smart thing to do, especially when they're already worried about a spy. (Plus you can't just willy nilly try and kill motherfuckers on campus. The likelihood that Tohma was actually going to try and kill, or even injure, him was slim to none.)

As for convincing the PC their power didn't work, they already knew it worked from when they used it in Frostheim. They just wouldn't think it always worked. He would still be able to ask them to come and use it on the basis of 'let's see if we can get it to work.' He'd be claiming it'd help them, because if they don't know what does and doesn't cause it to work, they and Darkwick would want to figure it out--and since he would be able to say 'it seems like it works when we use it together' they'd end up relying on him to help them understand when it does and doesn't work. The PC just probably wouldn't be sent on missions with them due to being a liability. Also, he could still spy on Tohma and Alan--just not while they're in the soundproofed car. He mentions in the campus chat that they likely have more than one place they meet up(unless he wasn't spying on Tohma and Alan at that point, but somebody else), and he also plants bugs in the car according to his home screen dialogues(although they get destroyed.) He'd be able to spy on them less, but it's not like they only ever meet in there, and I'm sure he'd figure that out quickly enough.

You have to remember what the guy does for a living outside of being an influencer--he corners rich people and basically makes them give up money in exchange for him not releasing information they'd wanna keep private. His proper introduction is at the "mercy" of a guy with a knife who's clearly threatened to stab him multiple times based on the multiple stabbed pillows around them, summoning Sho to help him. He puts himself in danger all the time, but he always has at least one way to be backed up. He was second in scholastic ability among all the first years. He's extremely intelligent and clever. Yes, he is short-sighted, but that's in terms of making things work. He'll treat the symptoms without resolving the problem if he can, like Alan said--if it gets the desired result who cares if it's right or wrong in the long run? But he's not so careless that he'd put himself into that much danger with no backup plan--although he is careless enough to put himself in the danger in the first place, but. Everything involves risks.

The problem is that backup plans can fall through and understandings of situations can too. Like Alan said, he does need to take better care of himself because he absolutely is careless--not extraordinarily so imo, but definitely careless. Leo is willing to put himself in danger for an end goal, but it's not like he runs into things with no plan and no backup. Leo is smart enough to get things to work with his wits and his words 99% of the time, but that one percent is gonna get him in real trouble eventually--and we've already seen his plans partially fall through two or three times(although two were after they served their purposes.) Alan realized when Sho wouldn't eat the spicy donuts that he and Leo lied about who was at fault for their acting outside of the scope of their mission. Even at the end of the encounter with the anomaly, Sho ended up telling the [half?] truth and backing up that the PC was able to buff his stigma instead of going on with their deal, which Leo hadn't expected. And the PC and Alan, in Alan's character story, end up investigating the actual circumstances behind Jun and Takeru's deaths. He's used to things working out for him and going his way, so he doesn't consider enough what could happen if they don't. Short-sighted, yeah, careless, yes but not as much so as you might think. Calculated risks, normally really good at math. But sometimes you get the math wrong.

I do think you're not wrong as far as most of them being a little short-sighted though. The only one I kinda disagree with is Sho, but even Sho's like. . .he only cares about his interests, but he goes through with what other people want from him anyway sometimes? Like he tends to train with Alan in The Pit despite complaining about it a lot, enough so that Alan doesn't have to use the punching bag in his room as much when he trains since he can spar with Sho instead. He's also constantly doing whatever Leo wants despite seeming to dislike it, and letting himself take the fall for Leo's bad behavior. But maybe that follower mentality is a sort of short-sightedness and tunnel vision as well. . .then again, like he said to Hyde, "If I can use you to get ahead, I'm doing it." That's not really very short-sighted at all, he clearly has other things in mind. . .but it's hard to tell with Sho. We rarely see his motivations. Like I can't really pin down what Sho is. . .after in life. But also, Sho cycles through interests(with the exception of cooking and maybe basketball) frequently, so I get the feeling that's the point. Sho doesn't know what he wants either, and he follows who and whatever seems most interesting. When the PC says he could make money off of cooking, he takes a shine to that idea and immediately opens up a food truck. Fortunately he seems to like cooking and serving food for others a lot, because he's sticking to it at the moment.

[aqua-dan]

What are your thoughts on preboot Garth vs reboot Garth? You seem to be one of the only people who like reboot Garth. What is appealiong about him?

Well, "like" might be a strong word.

It's really no surprise that I'm saying this, but Reboot Garth has NOTHING on Preboot Garth. Let's not kid ourselves and pretend that Preboot Garth isn't superior in literally every conceivable way.

Preboot Garth is such an incredible character. He is kind, gentle, smart, and powerful. He is emotionally impactful and occupies a space that is so specifically Him that no other character could fill it. He is so compelling, so relatable, and frankly he's downright adorable too! When I have been at some of my lowest points in life, he's been a character that I've grown up alongside and used as an example of emotional strength to help me stand back up and carry on despite the anxiety and sadness and pressure. Truly, he is one of my comfort characters of all time. His story and the things he can do are also extremely interesting!

Physically strong ✔️

Control over water ✔️

Magic ✔️

Eye blasts ✔️

Diplomacy ✔️

Like 50 other things that he forgot to mention that he can do, but totally can ✔️

So you may be wondering then, why I still like Reboot Garth who is… hardly at all like what I just described. And my answer to that is: I don't know.

You would certainly be right to say that for the most part*, Rebirth Garth is nothing like his pre-n52 counterpart. (*World's Finest: Teen Titans was the closest we've gotten. It was kind of nice in regards to Garth, with the exception of a few gripes I have here and there.) And you'd be right to be upset about it. I know I am. Quite often, to be honest.

But for some reason I just can't bring myself to fully condemn Rebirth Garth. At the end of the day, I'm in fandom to have fun, you know? And if I spend all my time hating something that's out of my control… well what good does that do me? At this point, I feel like I've resigned myself to the knowledge that I simply will not be getting what I want in regards to Garth, and so I've turned to becoming a bemused spectator at the things happening in current comics. I can still become excited about it when I DO manage to find a bit that I like. There was a post a while back that went something like,

"N52 and Rebirth suck except the parts that I like. And those bits I'll toss into a blender, puree, and mix in with preboot canon."

Yeah, that. Basically, when it comes to Reboot Garth, (in my own head) I ignore the reboot and then blend up the little bits I enjoy to create the utopian world of Canon+. And from my little imaginary perch, I can choose to still enjoy this character who has taken my blorbo's name, but sadly isn't really him.

With how changeable comics are as a medium though, I do also believe that there will be a writer someday who is willing to do the legwork necessary to bring Garth back around to being the blorbo I once knew. Some currently canon things will definitely have to be tossed out, but hey, that's the nature of comics!

That said tho, I think another one of the things that prevents me from disliking him is (surprisingly) the design. It's a controversial take amongst Garth fans for sure, but I honestly like it for the most part. There are a few things I'd tweak to make him look like more of an extension of Preboot Garth (CURLY HAIR, PLEASE), but there are a lot of elements that I just so happen to find aesthetically appealing and thus don't really mind. That isn't to say that Garth didn't already look fucking incredible, because he ABSOLUTELY did. I'm just not that bothered, I guess haha!

[wraith-caller]

Wait I’m confused what are you a pro-shipper of? I didn’t think any of the ships I’ve seen here were controversial but I don’t go here very often

pro-shipper, as i understand it, means you are okay with dark themes in fiction(like those found in elden ring!). there are a subset of fans who believe they have some moral imperative to harass and bully artists/writers who also engage with those themes.

my fics for elden ring have touched on topics such as non-con, incest, and necrophilia. All 3 things which are found in the game itself, but become suddenly a sign of moral impurity when handled by a fan. these people operate under some kind of bizarre illogic that posits if you write about these things, you must want to do them in real life to real people/you will "normalize" them in your own mind and stop seeing them as bad things. which is, quite frankly, deranged. i'm a pretty firm believer that there's no place for censorship when it comes to art, and that it's a "give an inch, theyll take a mile" sort of slippery slope that will eventually stifle all creatives, "problematic" or otherwise. regardless of that, it's absolutely ridiculous for a group of loud mouthed bullies to try to hold a fandom hostage because they don't know how to block and move on when they see something they don't like. nobody in a fandom has any say on what kind of art you should and shouldn't be able to make, and i'd rather not associate with people who believe otherwise.

[wickedts4finds]

Equiliberty Transphobia and Censorship - Jocelyn and company react to my departure

Thrilling followup of Jocelyn/Moe/Crownhill EC/cathcc/cath-creative-corner/bambisimmer responding to the farewell message I had to post as a screenshot because she blocked the word 'transphobe' from the server to keep people from talking about her revolting behavior and bigotry.

Red mark-out indicates her complicit (at BEST) mods - people who are morally okay with working along someone who believes pronouns are "political", loudly argues that there are only two genders, misgenders people (even calling one trans person it), comes onto posts about respectfully playing Native American characters complaining about cultural sensitivity, and more!

You'll notice Jocelyn's typical victim complex behavior here and emotional immaturity - she is being attacked, she is being bullied, not the transgender people she's treating like dogshit.

Jocelyn, I want you to know that there's not a damn thing that's going to deliver you from the community's wrath on this one.

There's nowhere you can run to get away from your choices. You can change your url or the name of the server or delete channels over and over again as many times as you want, but this community has a long-ass memory. Make a new account! Change your username again! We're going to find you. There are eyes on you in that server. There are eyes on you frankly most places you post. I want you to know it's not safe to vomit up your hateful "opinions" anywhere on god's green earth without it ending up in another public post, and honestly, you're going to be exceptionally lucky if youtube's simmers don't pick up on this one for views from the controversy. You had an okayish rep as a creator back in TS3's equine community and you, nobody but you, threw that all away why? To hurt other people who did nothing to you.

Most of us are LGBT+ in some way and those who aren't are almost always allies, not fellow bigots.

Without further ado! Here's my post in the 2 minutes before Jocelyn deleted it (after saying to me specifically 10-15mins prior she was going to stop deleting posts she just didn't agree with).

Sooo much here.

"when people aren't older" This is deranged behavior from someone who's allegedly not a minor.

"If it causes drama, hurts someone or the like it should go to be honest." I guess the exception is if it hurts trans people, right, Mod?

"I didn't call the person an it on purpose" 1) oops accidentally fell on my keyboard, hit the I and T keys in the correct order followed by space, then finished my sentence & 2) the way she avoids saying "them" EVEN NOW by saying "the person" instead lmfao

"What I'm upset about is people painting me bad, when I'm not" Girl you are a bad person. You are not kind to people who are already oppressed. You're immature, incapable of leadership at 30something years old, desperately clinging to a failing server which you imploded with YOUR OWN hateful diatribes against people who did NOTHING to you, trying to jealously hoard members and talking about "poaching". You had to create an entire server because you were not welcome elsewhere simply because of your personality before you even started spewing hate speech!!!! Honestly when I joined the discord I kind of anticipated a fall of Rome scenario given who was at the helm, just tried to not interact with her, etc, but nah man. Nah.

"and try ruining my rep" You already ruined it.

But my favorite of all, from the mouth of the bully herself, is this:

It's not okay to post, I'm being attacked. Can't you see how wrong that is?

[donnerpartyofone]

We are now entering the holiday season, more or less, which starts early for my family due to a birthday, and I wish this didn't fill me with ambivalence. I like my family, they have interesting things to say, they're great hosts, they can create an idyllic sort of environment; but meanwhile, there is the exhausting obligation to somehow promote oneself, to find something to take to market, and I don't have anything like that and it causes problems. I'm the only person in my family who isn't outrageously accomplished. I had all the same opportunities as everyone else, it was just never going to happen, I'm not good enough. Which sounds self-pitying but honestly it only sounds that way because our ears are conditioned to hear it as some kind of criminal admission of an unacceptable circumstance, instead of a casual acknowledgement of a completely normal circumstance. I think I would feel a great, cathartic relief if it were socially acceptable to just concede that you're a loser, that you're not going to amount to anything due to personal limitations. I mean, I feel like this should not be controversial actually, but it seems to make people feel frightened and confused and angry and if you even come close to saying "This is about it for my personal potential, nothing really worked out"; anyone who hears this will immediately go to great pains to try to force you to take it back, even if they believe it themselves.

I think this might be more true than usual in my family. I think they're embarrassed to know me, but admitting such a thing could make anybody feel like a bad person even though they shouldn't, they have a right--but to avoid feeling guilty (about something they shouldn't feel guilty about), there has to be this endless, exhausting game of make-believe where we all pretend to like me and to be interested in what's going on with me. So I have to like "bring something to the table", I can't just say I have nothing going on; I have to describe one of my dumb little hobbies that I kind of just nominally get paid for once in a while, and they don't understand what it is or what is the context or why any normal person would care, is so I have to describe it in a lot of boring detail, and then by the time I finally get through clarifying what the service/product is everyone's eyes are totally glazed over but they still have to find the energy to respond as if they are somehow impressed. And then the next time it comes up, we have to do the whole entire process over again because no one ever remembers what I said because they didn't really get it the first time, and it's really something they wouldn't even have to know about if it weren't for me, and it's at least as exhausting if not more so.

Recently I tried out a strategy of just saying less. I thought that if I just clammed up and didn't draw attention to myself, then that would put everybody at ease. (Asking other people about themselves only gets me so far, they always seem a little annoyed, like when you're trying to explain fashion to your uncool aunt or something) Sometimes it's like I'm not really there anyway; when I got engaged they threw a dinner for me, and there was about twenty minutes of discussing the wedding before the rest of the evening was devoted to someone's restored, vintage BMW and the drama of where to park such a beautiful and valuable object. Then there was the birthday outing where nobody asked me any questions, the whole afternoon was devoted to someone else's brand new Audi, which distraction prevented them from attending a super important professional event I had actually-on my birthday. The deflection to someone's fancy car whenever I require attention has become a private joke between me and my spouse, who frankly I sometimes think they are not nice enough to because he's married to me. He's an interesting person with a serious career that tells him a lot about how the world works, but sometimes I think they kind of see him as another stunted child because marrying me reflects poorly on him.

Which could totally be a projection on my part, but anyway. The point is I tried out my policy of only speaking when spoken to, or at least not saying anything personal, and everything indicated that this should have worked out, but it seemed to just make people even more mad at me. Admittedly there was an extenuating factor, that someone's famous friend came over and immediately challenged me to say that I was a professional writer like everyone else, and when I confessed that I was just unemployed, he kept trying to put words in my mouth about how successful I must be in some other way, and it was mortifying for me but more importantly it was mortifying for him that I couldn't reward this behavior. Meanwhile, another relative asked me exactly one question about myself--a career question--and when I didn't have an answer, that was the end of all conversation until we were all departing and she accused me of refusing to commune with her even though she missed me and was dying to talk to me. I don't really know what I'm supposed to do.

I feel the need to defend these people. I'm certain it's true that they care about me in that deep-down, fundamental, blood ties way. That's a lot more than many people get from their families. And it's mostly true that they have not been openly hostile or insulting; I mean this is absolutely not true historically, some pretty fucked up things have been said to my face and in front of groups, but this hasn't happened in long enough that I think it's right to try to let it go. In some ways it would be easier if everything were just bad enough that we could all give each other the finger and part ways. What I'm grappling with is this feeling that if I don't work really hard, I'm going to become estranged, which I think would be bad both spiritually and strategically, if you have a family who doesn't actively harm you I think you should keep them around for many different reasons. But it's an established thing that if one family member pulls away, there's a loving conspiracy to draw them back, whereas if I seem to become a little distant, I'm going to get accused of something, like even in writing sometimes. So I have to be on my best behavior all the time, and I have to keep playing this game where I pretend that big things are happening for me and I have to do a whole marketing presentation on this total lie even if everyone is bored to death and not a little embarrassed. I don't know, I guess it's nobody's fault. There's no way we would ever know each other if everybody weren't forced to be related to me, I might as well try to make it easier for them. It's just hard because there is nothing about me that would make it ACTUALLY easy for them to be associated with me, so I'm dutybound to kind of just laboriously smile and make shit up for the rest of my life in order to keep clinging to the fringes of our existence.

It just sucks because I love the fall, I love Halloween and Thanksgiving and Christmas and New Year's. And it's not NEVER fun to be with my family. But the season I love is just tainted with this anxiety because it's like illegal to admit that you're just sort of a loser, and my family could never admit that they just basically kind of dislike untalented, unsuccessful people, because there's a cultural prejudice that that's a moral failing--which it isn't, it's just a personal preference, but I guess we're all saddled with the same baggage. Everything would be so much more relaxed and intimate if we could openly accept the way things really are, but it's definitely never going to happen. Stress.

[roo-bastmoon]

Let's get into the Angel Pt 1 controversy

Summary of Roo's Point: Please follow your conscience but do not bash Jimin for other people's crimes.

More in-depth analysis of the underlying issues:

Let me start by saying I'm a musical theater geek so I have no idea who any of the other artists on the Angel Pt 1 track are, I don't know their music, I don't know their backstories, and frankly, I don't really care to. But yesterday a full kerfuffle kicked off on Twitter with many people ready to cancel Jimin (and by extension, ARMY) for working on a song with someone called Kodak Black.

Who is Kodak Black?

Well, apparently he's a rapper who brought a high schooler back to his hotel from a concert and then ripped her clothes off and bit her and raped her but he entered a plea deal and got probation for it. Not to be confused for the times he had illegal fire arms, committed armed robbery, possessed marijuana, and tried to evade police. Or the time he punched and kicked a woman at a strip club. By all accounts he sounds like a total asshole, and not someone whose pockets I want to line with my hard-earned money, even if I weren't a survivor, myself.

I think we can all agree that Kodak Black is not the kind of person ARMY would ever want to support.

So if at any point you feel like you cannot get behind the Fast X movie or soundtrack because Universal chose to employ that man? Please feel free to boycott and sleep easy at night. That's your value-based decision and I respect it. Don't let anyone call you an anti for it.

However.

There is another legitimate take on this with regard to Park Jimin, and it's a bit more nuanced than simply "don't work with bad people."

For a decade, we've gotten to know who Park Jimin is. He is kind. He is considerate. He is gentle. He has excellent manners. He gives to charity. He obeys and honors his parents and elder members. He has never been violent. He has never broken the law. He respects women deeply. He is a hard worker. He is a good human being.

I can't help but recall how Jimin had absolutely no idea that the song he made was going to be in Eternals. Like, he didn't believe it at first.

Clearly, this company has some serious issues with communication and the handling of Jimin's releases. I could say more but we don't have all day for that.

It is therefore plausible to me that Jimin was approached for this song, possibly by Jvke. Jimin has said he's seen all the movies so we know he likes the franchise. Maybe he said sure, he'd love to sing for Angel Pt 1. So he recorded his parts and moved on to the next amazing groundbreaking industry-shattering piece of work on his schedule. And then Universal brought in other artists and no one said a thing to him about it.

And you might think there's NO WAY Hollywood wouldn't tell you who all you're working with. Listen, I never worked on any big productions, but I lived in LA for years and worked in entertainment long enough to know you could make something and months later find out it's a whole other thing with people you've never heard of, and you signed off your work and likeness so it is what it is and you gotta live with it and not make waves, especially if you ever wanna work in that town again.

Then again, maybe Jimin met the rest of the artists during the filming of the music video. Maybe he knew Kodak Black was on this song. Maybe he, like me, had no idea of that man's past and never once imagined someone with a rap sheet that long would be in such a large-scale production in the first place.

Or maybe he did know, because it appears Kodak Black is billed as a "creator" of the song, but as an industry professional, he also knows nothing is ever totally clean or pure in this business. So oftentimes in entertainment, you will see people mentally separate the art from the business.

(Side note: To be honest, nothing is ever clean or pure that you pay to consume. The wage slaves sweating in the shops that make the clothes on your back or the device you're reading this post off of. The migrant workers toiling for pennies and living in communal shacks for the veggies in your salad. The animals crammed into horrific crates and slaughtered inhumanely that end up on your plate. The earth that's raped every time you write on a sheet of paper or put gas in your car. The plastics in all of our products are also in our landfills, our oceans, our blood streams. We all of us live and consume off the suffering of others. Doesn't mean we shouldn't fight for a better world--of course we should--I'm just saying, none of us consume anything that's "perfect" and cancel culture fails to acknowledge that.)

Which brings me back to the point about boycotting. If you feel like you just cannot support the business of employing someone like Kodak Black, that is a worthy choice and no one should bully you for it or label you an anti. But please do not consider Jimin "tainted by association." Because everyone is associated in one way or another with harmful people and practices. You'd never get to consume anything ever, if you could only consume things made by "good" people.

For my part, I don't believe Universal will see people refusing to stream or buy Angel Pt 1 and think "Gosh, we shouldn't have hired a man who batters and abuses women, it will hurt our bottom line on this soundtrack, we were very mistaken, let's do better." Maybe they will, but probably they won't. They have yet to even witness the buying power of ARMY anyway so they have no results to compare a boycott to. It's already a done deal and they will likely pull this shit again if it's expedient to do so.

On the other hand, this is Jimin's first OST for a major motion picture and I intend to support the hell out of it. I think it's a good song and I want Jimin to be seen by the industry as a safe bet to bring in numbers. I think the more projects he has, the more opportunities he has to promote good people and good music as alternatives. I say this AS A SURVIVOR OF SEXUAL ASSAULT who is no way making light of sexual assault. It frankly galls me that by association, Kodak Black (and numerous other unknown assholes) will benefit. But I'd rather that than, by association, Park Jimin suffer.

And I'll square with you: I think Justin Bieber, Charlie Puth, Park Jay, and others are opportunistic assholes problematic and it galls me that they will benefit by association with BTS members. But on a case by case basis, I will choose whether to support BTS members' collaborations. So far, I'm still all in. That's what feels right for me, according to MY conscience.

I cannot dictate to you what your conscience should tell you. That's between you and your soul, and it's no one else's business. Do your will and harm none. Trust yourself and honor your limits.

So if at any point you feel like you cannot support JK's Dreamers because of the horrible inhuman treatment of the World Cup stadium workers, abstain. If you cannot support Jimin with Angel Pt 1 because of Kodak Black's inexcusable violence, abstain.

But please do not lay the crimes of others at BTS' feet. They are responsible only for themselves, and we have seen they are sometimes not given complete information around their projects. I'm certain they do their best. When it's clear that a collaboration would go against their values (such as playing for their current president's inauguration), they decline. When they have the opportunity to make informed decisions, they usually decide well. But not always, because the members are human too.

I guess my point of this ramble is... human beings will be human. They are flawed. They inevitably make mistakes. Intention goes a long way. I can make a pretty clear-cut case that Kodak Black intentionally caused harm. So I'm happy to not support his art or business ventures and I hope after a lot of soul searching he becomes a better person but I'm not holding my breath. However, I cannot make a clear-cut case that Park Jimin endorses the harm Kodak Black caused just because he lent his voice to a song Kodak Black is also now a part of. Not yet, not without Park Jimin making a statement defending Kodak Black.

Until he does, I'm not going to hold Jimin responsible for anyone's choices except his own. I trust Jimin. He's earned it. So I'm going to support Jimin.

If you very strongly feel like I'm choosing to do harm here, that I'm anti-feminist, or a rape apologist, or a fan girl making light of serious crimes, please protect yourself and block me. You go ahead and do what you need to do to police your own experience. But I worry that eventually you are going to find yourself in a very lonely, very sparse and dull echo chamber, because that sad truth is... nothing and no one is pure. Certainly not in business, and rarely in art. Considering one out of four women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetimes, it's a safe bet that almost every song or movie you've heard of is somehow benefitting a man who was part of it and who has also abused a woman. I know k-pop idol culture heavily manufactures this PG13 image of artists but the truth is the world of entertainment is a cesspool and a viper pit, and we are very lucky to stan seven artists who are, by and large, truly good people. That's super rare.

My unsolicited advice is to take everything on a case-by-case basis and listen to your gut. Support Angel Pt 1. Don't support Angel Pt 1. It's a deeply personal choice what you endorse with your money.

But please miss me with trying to cancel Jimin, or any of the members, for other people's crimes.

Shunning, dogpiling, mobbing, shaming--cancelling people--those are Mean Girl tactics, designed to make people afraid to work with the "unworthy" and it doesn't work in the long run. (Extended, organized boycotts do work because money talks loud. So feel free to boycott if you want to.) But ruining people's reputations because of who their coworkers happen to be is in no way helping solve the actual problem.

If your goal is to make it so big studios don't employ rapists, keep the heat on the rapist and call out Universal and Kodak Black.

If your goal is to support Jimin, then trust and support Jimin and his songs.

Where those two goals conflict, trust your gut. That's all anyone can ask of you.

For my part, I choose Jimin.

Whatever choice you make--as long as you aren't bashing Jimin--I can respect it.

That's pretty much all I have to say about that. Feel free to disagree but keep it kind and respectful in the comments, please...

Love,

Roo

[anhed-nia]

PS I almost saw IN A VIOLENT NATURE for the first time at an open air screening on Governor's Island, a popular NYC destination for outdoor entertainment and close-to-home glamping. I thought that was a great idea, but ultimately I skipped it because I wanted to see the film for the first time without the light pollution and ambient noise. They made this cool graphic for it, though...which immediately triggered comments section controversy about AI.

The social media person replied that the image was not AI-generated; though the "scene" does not take place in the movie, it is a photograph of a person wearing the screen costume, just doing something fun on Governor's Island to advertise their cool event. No matter what your general feelings are about AI in commercial art, we can probably all agree that it sucks that we have to have these onerous arguments about everything now.

For me, and I think for anyone who enjoys visual art, the medium matters--not because of some imaginary hierarchy of importance, but because different media have different effects, traditions, and implications. And because, with respect to AI, the statement "This really happened!" and the question "Wouldn't it be cool IF this really happened?" inspire very different responses. My personal, casual feeling is that AI art is OK as long as it is easily identifiable as such; like I've seen some really fun AI images whose particular kind of outrageousness makes appropriate use of that specific medium. I'm a "right tool, right job" person, I think some things should be paintings and some things should be photos, some things should be stage plays and some things should be movies. You should carefully choose your medium and exploit the unique qualities of that medium based on exactly what you're trying to accomplish. For this reason I think that AI images that are just trying to fake the effects of i.e. painting or photography kind of suck. And related to that I object to living in a world where we all just have to throw up our hands and say "Oh well, there's no way to know anymore whether something is physically-real or whether it's just a hypothetical representation of something that maybe-could-be real, I guess the only thing we can do is not give a shit about where anything comes from or how it got here and what that all means." For me, "There's no way to ever know anything for sure so who fucking cares" is not an acceptable default setting. (And I realize this is becoming the central issue of our day due to all kinds internet-enabled misinformation and I'm treading on the hem of a way bigger topic here, but never mind all that now...)

But still, I find myself just as annoyed with fakery as I am with people who instantly declare something to be fake. Frankly I think those guys are just scared of being fooled and so they're trying to preserve their own sense of superiority by declaring everything to be fake before they have any evidence one way or the other. This is a very different thing in its consequences, I know, but some of these guys sound just like the bigots who go around trying to clock random strangers as trans; they always have these ridiculous lists of "evidence" that turn out to be just as applicable to afab and amab people as they are to people who have transitioned. It's all roughly the same flavor of defensiveness from people who are scared of being tricked into believing or feeling something that will turn out to be a fraud. And I can sympathize with that to some degree, I don't wanna be tricked into believing in, for instance, awesome-looking photo shoots that never happened; like if you said it wouldn't matter to you if the photos Thierry Mugler shot on top of the Chrysler Building turned out to be digital fakes, then I would happily call you a liar. But what I really hate more than anything right now is this immediate effect where as soon as anything cool-looking appears online, we all have to have these contentious arguments where insecure jerks pound their chests about how un-foolable they are...and sometimes it turns out that the "AI art" is real and so their claims to amazing powers of perception are a big embarrassment. I guess my conclusion is that if everyone agreed to make AI imagery clearly identifiable in some way, then we could all stop having our good time spoiled by this paranoid bickering that has become the prerequisite for enjoying anything. But that's probably an impossible dream.

[blackpearlblast]

Was gonna reblog the post to ask but now I can't soo I'll just ask here:

I'm genuinely confused how Nintendo licensing some company to open a store in Israel back in 2019 equates to them supporting Israel? Especially if Nintendo themselves don't even consider the store official.

In addition, I believe the BDS have gone on record to state that you should only boycott what they've officially announced boycotts for, as boycotting things willy-nilly won't work in the long-term if there is not a dedicated effort behind it.

you're right that BDS isn't about individual consumer boycotts and the BDS targeted boycotts will Always be most important. however, BDS does not say that people cannot or should not engage in their own consumer boycotts.

"Many people are personally boycotting brands that have stated support for apartheid Israel, and that’s great – but we want to stress that consumer boycotts are most effective when taken as a collective action, and BDS isn’t just about consumer boycotts." -BDS Guide to Strategic Campaigning for Palestinian Rights

the BDS movement has also recognized some of the organic boycotts that have shown up since oct. 7th, such as the mcdonald's and wix boycotts. (source)

in my post i tried to explain the reason that boycotting nintendo was important for me, personally, and might be something other people would want to do based on the information i had found, was that i frankly don't usually purchase most of the products on the BDS list anyway. my post wasn't meant to declare nintendo a strategic target for boycotting and i apologize if that was what anyone took away from it. my point was, for those of us who games are a significant hobby and we tend to spend money on games as opposed to any of the BDS list targets, we might want to be aware of what one of the major game companies is supporting so we can withdraw or limit our spending on their products. i am not trying to call an organized boycott on nintendo, only make information available.

i'm still trying to piece together the timeline on what happened with the tel aviv location and why it was announced as a landmark, official location but no longer seems officially recognized by nintendo. it's possible that nintendo realized the controversy of opening an israeli location and hoped to dodge that controversy by letting a different company manage the location and letting it essentially fall by the wayside. i don't know! i do know that it is using official nintendo branding and they are profiting from that. there are multiple kinds of ways a company can support israel, in this case i mean that they are economically invested/in a mutually beneficial economic relationship. trying to sever economic ties between companies and israel is part of trying to get the company to divest from israel. it basically makes it clear that doing business with an apartheid state is unprofitable and isolates and puts further pressure on israel. (once again, this is the case with Larger scale boycotts. just trying to explain the strategy behind why people might boycott companies who "just" do business in israel without directly contributing to the larger human rights issues.)

[boyfridged]

please do(about marvelposting)

i specifically said i was not going to do marvelposting because frankly speaking, i know very little about marvel apart from "venom" ( and whatever i remember from a ahort time when i read lots of marvel comics, in middle school. then i completely lost any interest in it.)

but! i decided i do want to talk about "spider-verse," both to criticize it a bit and on some level defend it...

the copaganda is unreal and i don't know how people can ignore it. and i don't think the flow of the narration was all that smooth and well executed. that's the 2 main issues i have with it.

now, to where i want to defend the movie, or rather what i think the *next* movie will be about (i might be wrong): utilitarianism sucks.

lots of meta repeatedly states that well, miguel is right given all we (and he) know. but i think (or maybe just hope) that the next movie will go for the most obvious criticism of the trolley problem, which "across the spider-verse" seems to mimic with the whole 2 cakes metaphor: that it doesn't exist. i think perhaps we will find out that the whole algorithm doesn't matter, or it was wrong, or it was a manipulation. and you might think it's a cliche – but i don't think it is. i think it's a good message for our times.

this is a controversial opinion both in this context and in academia, mind you, but i will die on this hill: utilitarianism does not work for ethics. there's no way of calculating a moral decision. there's no way to predict all the facts. and very rarely will you be in a situation of the trolley problem; which essentially means that taking it beyond the thought experiment takes a logic of an exception and applies it to every possible other issue, often assuming scarcity of resources and even encouraging taking life and death decisions where it could be avoided. (think of refugees or the poor, for example: a never-ending political game of assigning arbitrary numbers when talking of the cost and resources, with no genuine source for them, causing an unprecedented amount of death, and all of that assumed as the only right "reality" and a "sacrifice" for the stability.) it's the myth of scarcity, essentially, an excuse not to share the social wealth, here applied to the concept of general ontological goodness. an idea that you cannot afford to be kind because of the bigger picture.

caring about one person, the monologue of peter b. from the previous movie (or was it a cut scene? i don't remember) does not encourage miles to fuck everyone else and leave them to die. it does not promote individualism. it sets a realistic goal and it says that caring for people close to you is the best you can do at times. and there is, of course, the conflict there when you're a vigilante, since vigilantes are put in positions where they have to look at a bigger picture than a normal human would; but a fact remains that coming from a place of genuine love and devotion even to one person/your family/a small community is what sets a precedent for how you treat other people. what builds your character. it's what makes you human and anchors your moral instincts in compassion, what stops you from premature prosecution of other people, what makes you more mindful of intricate social nuance also on a larger scale. so this is what a message of "thinking of one person" is about. it's about a starting point that opens a gateway for considering more.

needless to say, if you're a utilitarian or a strict deontologist, you will not see it my way. but i'm an ethicist of care at heart and i presume this is the direction that the series will be going on. i might be wrong irt the writers' plan but if it is what i described, i believe it's a completely plausible message. morality starts somewhere and it's not algorithms.

[cruelsister-moved2]

i'm talking to a beloved friend about how upsetting the whole "bi lesbian" business is to me as a lesbian, but he believes that labels aren't important, that it isn't really hurting anyone, that people should live and let live, that this stuff divides the community, etc., and i don't know what to say to that or how to convince him that it matters and i'm wondering if he's right. you're one of the most well-articulated blogs i know, so i wanted to ask what you think (unless it's too upsetting/controversial of a topic). what would you say?

sorry I took a while to answer this I just never feel like i have the head space to give a decent answer!

i mmean first of all assuming your friend isn't a lesbian that's pretty rich of him to assume its his place to decide. one thing I run into a lot is people who aren't lesbians and don't understand the relationship between lesbians and men is not comparable to the relationship between gay men and women. there's complex dynamics of oppression and misogyny here but to put it very bluntly, basically every lesbian either has, or knows another lesbian who has, been sexually assaulted by a man specifically because they are a lesbian. the politics of sexual availability are just utterly incomparable between lesbians and gay men and it's frankly extremely heartless not to care about WHY lesbians can be more protective of keeping men out than gay men are with women.

secondly, ironically, it's kind of just essentialising labels to use terms like this. the words lesbian and bisexual are both super clear about what they mean. when I hear the term bi lesbian im honestly just confused because some of them mean a bi girl who prefers women, some of them mean a bi girl who somehow identifies with lesbianism politically(?), or a perjorative against lesbians who are dating trans women, and more often than that it doesn't seem to mean anything in particular and is just a useless and confusing term stuck on in front of the word "bisexual" which was already explaining the situation fine on its own. I have literally seen people using the term who were gay trans men so I mean who the fuck knows 😭😭😭 there just isn't a question being asked to which "bi lesbian" is the answer.

thirdly, there's literally only one word to describe a woman who is never attracted to men. there are so many words for sexual fluidity or whatever that it's just capricious to decide you also need the ONE which applies to us. and people claiming words don't have meaning or whatever like yes and we apply meaning to them it's how we communicate. people calling themselves bi lesbians KNOW what the word colloquially means and that's exactly why they want to use it, it literally has that appeal to them because of us 😭😭😭 but you can't be a lesbian at your core based on vibe or something. it, like every other label, is something you pick to fit to what you're already doing. like you can call yourself a lesbian all you want but if you're not Doing Lesbianism then you're just essentialising some inherent meaning to the term that doesn't exist. any meaning it has is imparted by us, lesbians, doing lesbianism, regardless of how non-lesbians feel about that!!

finally, in an appeal to emotion, I don't think people who aren't lesbians realise how cruel this shit is. being a lesbian in this patriarchal society is so deeply exhausting and traumatic and isolating and I don't think people realise how much it seeps into every interaction. people don't recognise how vulnerable we are, how small a group of the lgbt community we are, and how little we are made to feel welcome when we really need a community that accepts us for who we are & lets us be us. the fact our boundaries are afforded less concern than like someone's right to feel edgy by cosplaying as us is a case in point!! lesbians deserve some fucking peace of mind!!!

final point but it's important to say that this isn't gatekeeping because no one is stopping you from BEING a lesbian. if you want to be a woman and only date women you can ;I find it kind of funny because if you want to be a lesbian that bad then be my guest <333 we are just asking for the word to be applied accurately. like if we're all in agreement that a word doesn't define who you are then you can't like change who you are by applying an inaccurate word to it

[strangeswift]

I actually think it is important to be be 'controversial' sometimes because it clears your mind. I am speaking from personal experience. After reading same things over and over again in the tag and seeing the same takes, it blurs your mind and it is like you join a caddle. Then you kinda need to step back and think more clearly and reading other takes and readings help you to clear your mind. I've changed my mind on many things because of that and I believe I have a better understanding in things now than before. Like. I am not gonna get blindsided by what happens next on the show because I do not agree with most popular byler takes (that are reaches most of the time). I still read those things but I am open to different or 'controversial' takes and ideas that are not widely accepted by the bylers in the tag.

Hi anon!!!! Oop I went on a rant so hold on lemme put a read more. Warning I talk about byler doubt (just the concept of having doubts nothing specific about it) towards the end.

Okay anon I agree and this makes me feel good about posting opinions that go against the grain. So thank you for saying this, because I'll be real even though I am confident in my takes, sometimes voicing them comes with a level of anxiety. Here's the thing. The tag likes to act like there are certain things we know for sure are going to happen in S5 (byler endgame being the biggest thing obviously, but there are lots of other more specific things, byler related and not) and the truth is: We Don't Know Anything For Sure!! And I think it's wise to be prepared for the possibility that things work out differently than we are expecting. And this goes for fandom discourse as well not just theories like I think the tag is a bit of an echo chamber, like you said. It truly is easy to get sucked it. I've always been extremely skeptical, that's just how I am, and sometimes I forget that just.. not everyone is as skeptical as I am. Don't get me wrong, I have been sucked in before too. There have been instances where I held an opinion, then when I examined it further I realized it was just rooted in the fact that everyone else held that opinion, and I didn't actually agree with it. But generally I take anything and everything with several grains of salt, which is why like you said it's probably good for me to talk about my opinions when they differ from the norm, because it offers an alternative line of thinking. I do keep my mouth shut about most things because I like to be liked, but yk... I also. hmm do I wanna talk about this.. eh fuck it. I think the biggest thing that makes me "controversial" to some people, other than disagreeing with widely accepted theories, is that I have on several occasions voiced my Byler Doubt™️. And honestly there's a reason why I do sometimes talk about it. I realize that there's no point in dwelling on the possibility of byler not happening, it's depressing. And I would never put doubt in the tag or anything like that. But here's my thing. When I was a smaller blog and didn't have the platform I do now, NONE of the big blogs ever EVER expressed any level of doubt. The narrative was "having doubt is bad, endgame is obvious, if you don't find it obvious you are media illiterate, stuck in heteronormativity, or just plain stupid." And I vehemently disagree with that. Frankly? I find 100% confidence to be a little bit unrealistic, but I would never ever think someone is any less intelligent for having 100% confidence! But I digress. My point is, I suspect there are many people, like me, who have doubts and who feel very isolated. Having doubt is literally taboo, which is insane to me. It's cult vibes is what it is. Anyway. Now that I have a big enough platform that I more or less can kind of say what I want and not get blacklisted, I almost feel a responsibility to occasionally be like hey by the way, I have my doubts! Just so people know. Because it doesn't make you stupid. It makes you realistic. Okay rant over sorry <3

[ca-cupid]

The Elvira Cleavage Controversy (and this is not judging you BTW). Anyone reblogging please be kind.

I think it's honestly fine that her neckline isn't low. Frankly, most of the people complaining seem like perverts anyway. I get that it's Elvira and that's a main part of her design, and that it's an adult collector doll, but selling a boob doll under the name of a kid's brand wouldn't go over well with non-pervs and non Elvira fans. Parents often think "doll" and just buy them for their children, so they could see Monster High and buy it for their daughter (or sex-obsessed son or her brother) and who is like, 8. Elvira looks fine the way she is TBH and you can still tell it's her without "oh look, men and lesbians! Boobs! Don't you want to do the devil's tango with her if you know what I mean!". She still has the giant hair and the dagger. If they did the boobs it would have to be under a label like Horror Icons, a sseperate line not connected to MH, same I'd say with Pennywise and the Shining sisters, but they're not dressed in a controversial way.

I think if they wanted the dark goth lady in a long dress, they should have done Morticia Addams. No giant bazookas to cause controversy, she's family friendly, she's got a similar design, and due to Wednesday, the Addams Family is THE THING right now! (Also, it's the Addams Family, I'm surprised they haven't done a doll yet)

I totally agree they should have honestly just done a Wednesday Addams doll (again, like ldd is doing)

And yeah putting massive tits on a doll that has its main series as a kids toy is absolutely fucking weird and would be called gr**ming of sorts because even though the collector dolls are for adults (I believe they say 18+ but I might be wrong, still not meant for kids though) it is still a monster high doll (also side note have y’all seen the stuff about the lol/omg dolls getting called “gr**mer toys”??)

At the end of the day elviras boobs are iconic but tits or no tits on the doll you can still tell it’s her and I don’t think it matters that much I just think it’s a funny choice because why do it if you’re not going to go all out yk? Also i honestly just want to hear Cassandra Peterson’s thoughts on the doll boobs I don’t care for any other opinion