#i love people ‘this media is so problematic/ misogynistic/ racist but it’s one of my fave media <3’ bro just go find smt else 💀

[fantomette22]

Can we talk about how The Doll basically fits the image of a conservative view of women?

No

Ok more seriously I’m actually polite so i’m actually going to answer a bit more below :

If you’re one of my followers or i follow you or we like each other stuff posts I’m actually willing to listen to your points in dm if you wish. We can talk about it more it can be interesting!

Or idk write something about it in your own blog. But i will probably not read it because i don’t like those kind of essay (i made the effort to read some in their entirety before! I don’t like it and it exhaust me).

Also i made those if you are interested.

And there a bit. And if you know my blog just look around.

I prefer to think of it that way and you know i don’t magically put it out of my hat either. There’s back up to those.

Also the doll literally have almost up to the knee boots?! (Same as Maria) Literally like if today a girl with a dress/ skirt wear basket or doc martens but ok. There’s women with more traditional attire. (Also if you think xix/19th century accurate clothes in a xix fantasy setting are conservative euh ok i guess). And she’s not fully human my poor girl act like a robot discovering emotions for the first time give her a break.

Instead of bothering someone with a very different view as you please, go hype yourself up about how much you’re smart in analyzing things and see historical/ cultural references in a fantasy world like it’s 100% accurate there, with people who think the same! I can recommand a few blogs if you want! (In dm) they block me and i block some but i’m sure you might actually enjoy their stuff more.

Now you literally ask me this 2mins after i reblog some gehrmaria drawing. Like what i am supposed to think about it. If you don’t like that (and I can completely understand)/ or if you're are not aware i like this, you can literally mask/block the tag in tumblr parameters.

But if you’re just some random stalker that is just here for trouble and bother people?

Please leave me alone thank you. Or "fuck off" if in other terms it’s more understandable.

Cordially,

[euniexenoblade]

The Rocky Horror discourse is so annoying, upsetting, and transmisogynistic cuz it often starts off as trans women just honestly discussing how they have trauma related to it or how the film has all the classic transmisogynistic tropes of killer/rapist man crossdressing or how the creator has said some bigoted stuff, and the tme response to personal stories of trauma and actual media analysis is always the same cycle of responses.

"MY trans women friends love it!" Ok that doesn't matter to the point "It's important queer history!" That's why this discussion matters, we need people to understand that queer history can also be transmisogynistic "it's from 50 years ago society is DIFFERENT!" The world is not so different that transmisogyny doesn't exist "the creator is trans!" The creator has said transmisogynistic things and just because he himself might be tma doesn't mean he can't be transmisogynistic or that his transmisogyny doesn't actually influence his identity. "Rocky Horror is ONLY popular cuz transfems love it!" Spacelazar said this one in response to a post I made about actual trauma I have related to the movie, completely discarding my actual real trauma that's not saying you're not allowed to like or watch the movie, to claim that Rocky Horror is only popular cuz of transfems - that cis society isn't more why it's considered a cult classic.

And, tme people just refuse to empathize and often resort to name calling, memes, often times not just falling into misogynistic standards (hysterical women/trannies amiright guys) but also racist remarks (I saw a white tme person make a "woke" joke to mock a black person).

It's just completely dishonest and transmisogynistic. The discussion isn't "you're not allowed to watch Rocky Horror" or "you're a bad person for enjoying it" it's that it's a piece of problematic media that exhibits transmisogynistic bigotry and instead of using their big kid brains and acknowledging that and moving on, tme people really need Rocky Horror to be exonerated as this piece of perfection. (Tbf I think it's largely just cuz it's trans women having an issue, if cis men said Rocky Horror was offensive and misandric I'm sure people would be like oh yeah it is!).

[lives4lovesworld]

Truly wish dany/targaryens stans would stop bothering. The amount of daily posts that aim to "counter" or even pander to nonsensical anti bs is excessive and after years quite honestly boring and tedious.

Quite frankly I fail to understand what we gain from this, adhering to a holier-than-thou moral code, especially since no one else is compelled to even pretend to do so? Is the goal here for them be completely distorted to the point they resemble other characters? antis supposed favorites? As uninteresting to us as they subconsciously are to their stans? Which is the real problem here and the reason why they are the way they are (hypocritical stealing clowns and nuisances?) But perhaps I have a completely different less-morality-bound approach to consuming media in my free time than the rest of my fellow stans.

No downplaying/refuting Valyrian blood purity, empathizing non-Valyrian marriages, pointing out the origin of slavery are found in Old Ghis and not the Freehold, no opting for the most gracious interpretation of members of House Targaryen will ever stop antis from painting and hypocritically single out everything Targaryen/Valyrian related as kkk- or "imperialistic" coded or whatever woke buzzword of the day. They live to pretend-clutch their pearls and hold only them to modern standards of a fantastical utopia, while every other feudal character can be as archaic as expected from their pseudomedvial upbringing with their houses being wardlords

Speaking for me, I STAN their blood purity and incest. For me, IT IS a defining characteristic of House Targaryen that makes them unique, no matter how "problematic" it may be. I STAN it because GRRM fabricated scandalous, passionate love stories that I chose to interpret as consensual and politically advantageous, that brought forward incredible, magical gorgeous characters able to ride dragons that inspire love and envy alike. Who shine all the brighter when one contrasts them with literally any other characters and unions that are and breed doomed mediocrity and are born out of stale duty. I perhaps have a bais for pure blooded Targaryens that look the part than any prefect bastards or half breeds, or targ x targ to any other couple.

I also stan cruel Maegor, particularly for showing Oldtown its place and declawing the Militant Faith because I enjoy reading about the presumptuous Christian Vatican equivalent getting its ass handed to them. I stan Rhaenyra and she still can be a pampered proud princess-turned-queen. The same way I prefer canon Daemon as a rogue, an ambitious prince who seduced his brother's heir with perhaps also political hopes in mind and because he wanted his gorgeous niece as a bride instead of his cold barren wife. A legend that slay the pathetic cunt that was his nephew.

And while I'm at it: I also refuse to care about every "likeable"/pitiful character simply because it would be the "morally right" thing to do, nor will I root for the characters I like to do it. I don't care for Helaena and her children, nor the strong boys or any half-considered-"poc" Targaryen, nor will I even pretend to see "reason" in the greens actions, nor do I even want to see Dany "overcome her hatred"/bais against the usurper's dogs and any descendants of them. Or for her to be that altruistic to turn away from the throne to save humanity.

No amount of "call-out-posts" what a misogynist, racist, cultist, classist or elistist I am will change that because why OH WHY should I give a fuck about what anyone online thinks of me. Why should I allow anyone to bully me into streamline my enjoyment?

Especially by the people that do not even have the decorum of pretend to have any sort of decency. So they can use the most misogynistic, classist language and expect submission to their attempts to rule fandom spaces with iron fists and delusions, and canonize their favorites' sainthood and entitlement to feudal supremacy often only because they ✨️suffered prettily✨️ and fit some anesthetics while I must tolerate them trying to scold me into caring so greatly about fictional grey faceless mass of common people that would die were my favorites to pursue their ambitions. Meanwhile the same people would have any would-be-subjects die of famine and cold as long as their favorites get their crowns GRRM would never grant them in canon anyway. Give me a break. And let's not even start on how dragons and incest are suddenly the solutions as long as they don't belong and is not practiced by Targaryens.

To make this clear: this post is NOT a not-so-subtle incognito-anti post of ✨️i lOve all mY wAr CrimInaL eUqally!;' LeT tHeM bE mAd AnD unHinGed uwu,"! love all mY mOderAte chAsTe hoPes Of the fUtUres and mAd imPeriAlistS. 🥰✨️

I simply wanted to say; perhaps we should NOT GIVE A FUCK, "own" the """""bad""""" and be "problematic" and "irrational" in our selective love for characters and houses like EVERYBODY FUCKING ELSE.

[wroteclassicaly]

All these people in the gator and fargo tag complaining of people thirsting over gator, calling him a nazi and how dare people find the humanity in him but praising joe for his great job like he didnt find the humanity in this character and played him to be someone you feel for. 🤡

Then being pro munch like he doesnt have problematic traditional values either

Honestly so tired of these people virtue signaling and having no nuance or media literacy for the sake of internet points, its exhausting and they just look annoying and stupid

Okay, so I wasn’t sure if I was going to answer this, because I’m trying to stay out of things. But I’ve gotten several messages like this, and I’m writing for Gator, so I feel like I owe my take on him, which had a major influence on my choice to continue.

TW below the cut, discussing Gator and his issues:

I live in a Midwestern, republican town. Everyone here owns flags like Gator’s, has blue lives matter flags, etc. If you’re raised into that life and it’s all your family knows/the people around you know - you will likely adapt to that way of thinking as well. I was fortunate enough to be able to break away from how the people around me thought and felt, forming my own opinions and expressing my disgust for the blue lives matter crap and the flag, etc. My parents are heavily republican (carry all that side’s beliefs) and so is my brother.

It’s an incredibly suffocating and confusing environment to grow up in, especially if you have no way to safely think and form your own opinions. Again, I’m grateful I could break away and think for myself!!!!

Now, discussing Gator. I just want to say that it never said he was a Nazi! Roy was. Gator was misogynistic and racist.

I’m going to compare Gator to a character called Mickey Milkovich (now this will probably upset people, due to Mickey’s character being a gay man), but I’m mostly comparing fathers/environments. Mickey and Gator were raised by two dangerous and horrific men, who beat and brain washed their sons into one way of thinking - theirs. Products of their environment, (Mickey used slurs, had flags like Gator, weapons, drugs, and even had nazi items on his wall) and what is called ‘learned racism’. They have no safe way to think for themselves, no other people around to show them love or kindness, help lead them towards a different way. Mickey found that with Ian and was able to develop and fully nurture the kindness/goodness that was in him, and he had over ten seasons to grow!

Gator only had Nadine and 10 episodes. When she left he began to let his warped devotion to the only person he had a blood connection with - flood him, outweigh his own personal goodness. Dot said it herself when she said his need to be like Roy outweighed the goodness inside. He was a product of the father and the environment. He didn’t have his own way of thinking, not really, he clung to what was beat and brainwashed into him, trying to find love and approval from his abuser/only blood relative/only person he was around (very common).

Am I excusing that? Absolutely not! Gator was not entirely a good person, and he knew that as well! He made choices he knew were wrong, to impress and gain affection from a sociopathic, demonic man. Gator was responsible for what he did, so this is not me trying to excuse or argue that!!

The only way for him to become free of who he was molded to be (he has no clue who he is, just a weak prototype of what he tried to be, hardly anything that is his own), was for him to become blind in order to see, and start serving his time. They left his ending open, which is a great way for those of us who choose to write for him - to explore his mental freedom and further nurture the soft/good side of him!

We don’t know how Gator would act or think (he was immediately apologetic to Dot and didn’t hesitate to give Roy up when he saw he wasn’t loved or cared for, so he didn’t need to protect his father), now that he is away from the environment and the man that molded him into the character he was on the show.

Gator was still a child trapped in a man’s body in some aspects; his temper tantrums, his knee jerk reactions, his hot headed plans without thought, his bedroom items (the toy cars, the sneakers, etc), his blinding anger towards Dot for leaving him behind (not even faulting her, because baby girl needed to get out and I’m glad she did). The show also alluded to the fact that he might have been addicted to some kind of substance he was stealing, as well.

Feelings on Munch are that he’s got just as much issues, lol. And we hardly knew much on him, tbh? What he did in the past, other than what he said.

Anyways, that’s my take on Gator.

We all have the right to feel how we feel!! Hate or love Gator, see his humanity or not. Some of the things his character represented effect a whole lot of people, so they have a right to be upset! There’s a lot of different factors and feelings involved!! I only look sideways at you if you thought his torture and eyes getting burnt/cut was what he deserved, because that’s just gross!

But at the end of the day, none of us who do love Gator/write for him — condone Gator’s actions! Seeing the layers and humanity in a character Joe put his all into, is perfectly normal/okay!

Sometimes there’s areas in between, and it’s not just either/or.

But I will say that not everyone who feels this way is just doing it for internet points! A lot of people have valid points/feelings about the dislike of Gator, to which I will not/have no business arguing, you know? There’s also other people that make callout posts for clout and false superiority, without even recognizing what Gator actually did and they just pull stuff outta their ass, lol.

If you don’t like Gator fans or writers, then just scroll!! It’s easy, I promise! No one is hurting anyone or being malicious!! ❤️

[badaziraphaletakes]

Uuhhh help what do I do to avoid having bad takes?? I like using my blog to just talk on and on about my Good Omens thoughts. And I love Aziraphale very much and the last thing I'd want to do is ramble on and on about nonsense thinking I'm so smart, have it be a bad take, and get people frustrated/offended/etc...

Is it about media literacy? Thinking more? I'm not sure-

Thank you for your time!

Thank you for a very thoughtful and considerate question!

We'd say it's mainly about being a decent human being, really. :) As long as we're all doing that, we'll all be fine.

Bad takes are autiphobic (is that a word? It is now lol) and/or otherwise ableist, and/or blame victims, and/or are misogynistic, racist, homophobic, transphobic, and/or otherwise bigoted, damaging, offensive, and problematic.

We call our blog @badaziraphaletakes because it's catchy, but it really would be more accurate for it to be called @offensiveaziraphaletakes (or @offensivegoodomenstakes more broadly, because we've noticed there are a lot of offensive/problematic takes about Crowley too). We don't feature takes that we disagree with but aren't actively offensive. (We did this a couple times at the beginning and realized pretty quickly that it just went against the intended spirit and purpose of this blog). So in that sense, we personally wouldn't worry too much about generating a take that's simply bad. If media literacy is the only thing wrong with a take (or it's just, as you put it, nonsense) - who cares really? Not us. 😊 Have fun and generate all the nonsense you like. We support you!

Now, supposing, on the other hand, that one does generate a genuinely bad (i. e. offensive/problematic) take - all is not lost. All that is needed is to apologize to those who were offended by it (perhaps with a brief explanation about why it's problematic) and not spread that take anymore. I

Mod X says: I have spread a problematic GO take or two (namely, the one that said Crowley was arrogant before he fell comes to mind) in the past myself. Now that I know better, I don't spread those takes anymore. And so it's all fine. It's honestly fine. :)

Hope this is helpful!

Here is a picture of a super-cute smiling Aziraphale to bless your day. Because we all need more of that.

❤️

BAT

[themultifanshipper]

The delusion in thinking you know what Lando is like... you don't know him, you don't know what happened with the media training and still you're writing so many useless apologies for him, and for what?

Everyone is responsible for what they say, no one held a gun to his head and forced him. Mazepin raped somebody and staied in the sport. Do you really think saying something against trump, or just something blander, would actually have consequences for him?

Until the day Lewis is a counter example to all of them, as was Vettel, you can't tell me that he or any of them are just trained puppets that only do what they're told and have no real agency

I'll keep writing, and apparently you'll keep reading, so here we go

Yeah Mazepin stayed in the sport because the system (in this cas f1 but true for all systems) protects rapists mysogynists etc... look at what happened with Horner. He's had no problems and the victim has been sacked. And that's where the difference between lando and some of the others is. They either stay completely out of it, or they speak, and when they speak it's ALWAYS to the advantage of the accused (I wasn't around during the Mazepin era so idk what statements the drivers put out there, but i'll bet they were not written by them).

As for consequences of going against the status quo, of course there would be consequences. It's political, it would take a comment about trump that a sponsor doesn't like for them to withdraw.

And of course I don't know Lando personally, but I am a good judge of character, always have been, and as per my last post abt this, I don't think I would get along with him, he's not a great person, but what I don't see is someone who went out of his way to endorse trump and what he stands for. It was a throwaway comment that shouldn't have been said at all, but some of you are acting like Lando is a misogynistic homophobic racist copy of trump, Which I Am Convinced He Is Not. (Not to play the "he's not racist he's got poc friends" card but... look at his friends)

Lewis Hamilton is (as I also said) a prime example, as is vettel (although I do have some doubts about the pedestal some people put him on), of how all drivers should be. However not all the drivers have the freedom that mercedes have given Lewis. Merc pride themselves of their diversity hires and pr diversity projects, but I don't believe for a second they believe a word of any of it. Can you imagine if one of the drivers of the "poorer" teams spoke out? They definitely can't afford to lose any sponsors. Even the bigger teams that stand for equality yadda yadda yadda are sponsored by brands that are: the worst thing ever for the environment (shell, ferrari), use child and or cheap labour and exploitation of poorer countries (puma, ferrari) or support/are known right wing or support palestine, CEO's a racist,rapist, homophobic etc.. Redbulls whole brand is based on AN ENERGY DRINK and old racists! If you respect your body at all you shouldn't drink redbull OR monster but anyway i digress....

Point is, there are more pressing things to worry about (including drivers actually being cunts and saying actual problematic shit) than Lando's offhand comment about it being an honour to meet trump just to keep the american right wing happy.

Anyway keep yelling at me I love the attention, keep it coming guys!

[winged-cries]

hi mari, this might sound like a stupid question but i admire your thought process a lot and i value your opinions immensely so i thought about asking you about something that i’m having trouble dealing with. when you find yourself blogging about bout art made by “problematic” authors how do you reconcile with it? one of my favorite movies is rosemary’s baby, another is midnight in paris by allen and i often find myself guilty after talking/reblogging stuff about them. i don’t know if it’s social media’s current state (where everyone is ready to call you out viciously) that influences me but i am feeling all sorts of sad about it and i wanted your advice

it doesn't sound stupid at all, don't worry! i understand why this can be really important to someone, though i can't fully relate because i don't feel particularly guilty over enjoying things made by people who have done bad things. i try not to support (financially or otherwise) artists that i find truly repulsive, but that's a very personal decision based on my own perceptions and judgements, not any kind of objective standard.

i still remember the pain of learning more about some of my favorite childhood authors. the day i found out road dahl was a huge racist was very painful to me, and his racism is actually part of his work and impossible to overlook once you're old enough to know. from that day on i think it was just downhill, as a great number of writers and artists i admired turned out to be racists, misogynists and abusers. but that became a normal aspect of life to me. i don't know if it's because i grew up loving the kind of people one should hate but to me it's not that difficult to reconcile different sides of a person. to take the good even when the bad is really awful.

as i said, there are artists that i choose not to support, but i think where i draw the line is personal and may seem arbitrary to others. mostly i try not to support in any way people who are currently doing harm. i also try to understand how certain beliefs impact the work of artists i do enjoy. but that's it, really. there are no clear cut rules for me. i wish i could've helped you a little more.

[thewarmestplacetohide]

With gore and such in horror movies, particularly where the victims are women, where do you typically draw the line between genuine horror and just torture porn? I've seen a lot of debate about the Terrifier franchise in light of the new one - I've not seen any of the movies, and I'm also not super well-versed in horror film in general. What do you consider gore/slashers done well?

this is going to be long and a tangent. apologies ahead of time.

1 - i rarely, if ever, use the term "torture porn." i think it's a means of classifying movies that needs to be retired.

this is not a criticism of you, just to be clear. it's just that:

i have seen people apply it to fantastic movies solely because they disapprove of/dislike gore. this unfairly maligns films while perpetuating the idea that violence is always cheap, tasteless, and without purpose or meaning.

i have also seen it used to frame horror fans as twisted "degenerates," which is very ugly when you consider horror is often used to challenge societal norms, and many horror fans are marginalized people. additionally, liking gory movies =/= approving of real violence or being turned on by it.

on the flip side, using it as a classification can also lead people to overlook issues present in many horror movies. calling Cannibal Holocaust, for example, "torture porn" is reductive in its own way. it ends the conversation. it says, "this was bad because it was shallow violence," when, in reality, it is so much worse than that as a deeply racist and misogynistic piece of media that exploited indigenous people and facilitated real animal abuse.

2 - i can't really draw any kind of universal line. the necessity of gore is a film-by-film issue. rather than asking, "is this movie too violent," i typically ask "why does this movie feature graphic violence? what does it do with it?"

graphic violence can be:

used to portray horrific historical events honestly (ex: Come and See),

used to drive home points about violence, those who perform it, and/or those who endure it (ex: Pan's Labyrinth, Lady Vengeance)

used to evoke strong emotions from shock and disgust to grief and rage in audiences (ex: Oldboy, The Sadness)

exaggerated for comedic effect (ex: Evil Dead II)

and/or implemented solely to show off impressive effects work and artistry (ex: Terrifier 2).

3 - women being victims of violence in horror movies is not inherently misogynistic. i'm not saying you're implying this, just pointing out that this is a fact worth keeping in mind. i've seen people act like violence is inherently anti-woman solely because it's happening to a female character, which is ridiculous.

i can also personally watch movies with problematic elements, like misogyny, if i enjoy other aspects of them. what matters is that i consume them critically.

4 - i do want to clarify that i dislike Terrifier. i find its plot shallow and most of the performances bad. it's just a vehicle for violence that, imo, is far too directed at women. it left a bad taste in my mouth.

at the same time, i enjoyed Terrifier 2, which i thought was flawed but sincerely funny with a great villain and some awesome special effects. (even then, there is an overly-long torture scene that i found weirdly mean-spirited and uncomfortable to watch as a woman).

5 - i'm not the best person to ask about slashers! i like some but it's far from my favorite sub-genre. off the top of my head, some good proto-slashers are:

The Virgin Spring (1960)

Psycho (1960)

Blood and Black Lace (1964)

and some good slashers are:

Straw Dogs (1971)

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Deep Red (1975)

Alice, Sweet Alice (1976)

Halloween (1978)

Opera (1987)

Scream (1996)

Inside (2007)

Sweeney Todd (2007)

Eden Lake (2008)

Midnight Meat Train (2008)

The Loved Ones (2009)

Dream Home (2010)

The Woman (2011)

Green Room (2015)

Don't Breathe (2016)

Hush (2016)

Revenge (2017)

Halloween (2018)

Darlin' (2019)

Pearl (2022)

as always, i recommend checking for trigger warnings before watching films.

[artsyaech]

~welcome to the sunflower field~

[image ID: a field of hundreds of sunflowers. in the distance you can see what appears to be a hill. over the field is a sunset with clouds in the sky END ID]

my names are

aech

froggie

kaos

mayhem

ocean

kandi

and i'm just one out of hundreds of xenogender coining blogs. my old blog got deleted on accident (because i'm a dumdum) but i'm the original artsyaech, trust me. i have tons of pronoun sets but here are some you can call me by:

hán/háni/háns

xae/xaer/xaerself

art/arts/artself

xeph/xephs/xephself

frog/frogs/frogself

quoi/quois/quoiself

zix/zix/zixself

boop/boops/boopself

sol/sols/solself

star/stars/starself

🌻/🌻s/🌻self [emoji ID: sunflower emoji]

i'm a white icelander with scottish ancestry, so i'm as white as can be lol. i'm xenogender and genderfluid as well as objectum, aspec and abrosexual. i'm autistic, have adhd, depression and anxiety (diagnosed) as well as questioning if i have anything more.

i am otherkin. i’m an alien so please refrain from using humane terms to describe me

special interests atm: gorillaz, the sims, postal, mcr and mlp (if you request anything related to these things, i will 100% make it)

my bestie is @hip-albatross (go send him some love, void is amazing)

(help with image IDs would be very much appreciated)

tagging system

[PT: tagging system]

search for #aech’s terms if you just wanna see my gendies and other terms

#aech rambles is just for my little ramblings

#aech’s asks is for my asks

#aech reblogs is for reblogs (some of my older reblogs don’t have that tag, fyi)

#aech helps with neos or themed pronouns for pronoun/name help :)

#aech gives tips for alterhuman self-care tips

accessibility tags

#needs id is for posts that don’t have image ID (that i might add later)

#has id is for posts that have image ID (sometimes, i will add this myself)

what i will do:

xenogenders

aldernic terms

objectum terms

themed names and pronouns

what i will not do:

coining anything potentially problematic

coining anything on my blacklist

term searching

flag combos

flag requests: open!

name and pronoun requests: open!

DNI and blacklist under cut

dni: anti-mogai, anti-xenogenders, anti-neopronouns, anti-polyamory, anti-sex work, anti-abortion, mspec lesbian exclusionists, mspec gay exclusionists, anti-feminist, republicans, TERFS, SWERFS, radfems, transcum, transmeds, truscum, nazis, sexists, homophobes, misogynists, trump supporters, transphobes, queerphobes, racists, ableists, saneists, xenophobes, anti-BLM, pro-cop, superstraights, flop accounts, troll accounts, kink/NSFW (that includes H3nt41 and 3cch1), anti-agere, “MAP/p*dosexual”, “r*pesexual”, “racefluid”, “dreamsexual” (pertaining to the dsmp), “zoosexual”, “n*crosexuals” zoophiles, gold star lesbians, “transracials” RCTA, ECTA, people who support subs like r/DIDCringe or r/FakeDisorderCringe, xenoid/xenoidentities and their supporters, autism speaks supporters, light it up blue supporters, people who sexualize agere, proshippers, transid/transx, against researched self- diagnosis, demonize any mental disorder, against alterhumans, ‘consang’, think fiction doesn’t affect reality, pro-incest, pro-sh, jk rowling fans/apologists, pro-ano/thinspo

blacklist (general): gore, real violence, real death, MAPs, l*licon, sh*tacon, s/a, s/h, su*cide, eating disorders, s*xual topics/imagery, addiction, pregnacy and childbirth, hospitals and hospital imagery

blacklist (media/people): FNF, DSMP, harry potter and other j.k. rowling media, countryhumans, hetalia, black butler, killing stalking, hisoka from hxh, yarichin bitch club, boku no pico, helluva boss / hazbin hotel, kalvin garrah, shane dawson, trisha paytas, jschlatt, sia

reminder that in some cases the media on the blacklist is not inherently problematic, i’m just uncomfortable with it.

[alleycatking]

Media Criticism Hot Take:

If you haven't engaged with a piece of media, you don't really get to criticize it. Or rather, any criticisms you have about a piece of media you haven't engaged with adds nothing to the conversation.

The Twilight Books were coming out while I was in high school, and so I was there when the opinion of "these books are trash" was all the rage. Except I didn't immediately think that when they came out. I had heard they were misogynistic, justified abuse, etc. But I hadn't read them.

So I read them. All four of them (at the time).

They're bad. They are badly written books. But they don't justify abuse, and they're not sexist. Those were just "opinions" of people who wanted to hate and judge something that was popular with teenage girls, something our society loves to do. They're bad books, but not for those reasons. If anything, there's an ACTUAL argument to be made that they're racist as hell (something a lot of people didn't want to talk about).

I see so many people, both on tumblr and other social media, who completely trash media they've never even seen/read, just because other people say it's problematic for x, y and z reasons. It's one thing to not want to engage with a piece of media at all because of personal boundaries or preferences. There's a webcomic about queer Catholic demon fighters, and from what I know of it, it's pretty popular. However, due to my history of religious trauma, I have absolutely zero interest in reading it. But that's where any opinion I have of that piece of media begins and ends.

It's not enough to say "this show is homophobic" or "this book is sexist." Why is it sexist/homophobic? What did its creator not understand about sexuality and/or gender? Why is it a poor depiction? What does that piece of media say about the person who made it, problematic or otherwise?

Criticism without analysis isn't criticism. It's just petty regurgitation.

[esther-dot]

So, HBO and Martin conferred with themselves and decided that the backlash after GoT s8 was fictional; that angry people on the net are not angry in rl. So they decided to make a story abt more seriously disturbed tyrants that no one will understand they're tyrants. My guess is the story will be so dark and disturbing it won't even have half the audience of GoT because viewers are already disgusted by the latter.

You know, even in the midst of my disappointment over s8, I told people to never @ the writers, actors, showrunners etc, because while I think most of the criticism leveled at D&D is deserved, I do not condone harassment. I hate that the fandom had been so toxic to certain actors (like Sophie, in the early years), and because of that, I can understand why the cast and crew may look at the fandom as a cesspool.

HOWEVER.

*ranting below*

@minitafan had to listen to a private meltdown over some quotes a little while ago so she can attest to the fact that I’m not here for professional writers feigning ignorance over why fans were so upset about the finale. It was objectively bad, and pretending like the criticism is just fandom toxicity and that a huge percentage of the audience didn’t agree is self-serving spin. It might work, but the claim is laughable.

Martin’s enthusiasm for seeing his characters and world on screen, his love for his endgame (however much you believe GoT adhered to his), doesn’t change the fact that how D&D delivered it made absolutely no sense. I understand that the cast put a lot of work into s8, but that doesn’t change the fact that the writing was incoherent and the final product was bad. Their effort (unfortunately) couldn’t fix what should have been altered in the writing stages. So, regardless of their feelings, I don’t care to hear them lash out at fans when they should acknowledge the real problem or just abstain from commenting.

Point-blank: I’m not here for people who have become multimillionaires turning on the fan base that made that happen.

It’s not toxic to criticize entertainment, there are people who do it professionally. They’re paid to do it. And considering how closely D&D/HBO worked with some professionals in the industry and how much they enjoyed the glossy, flattering takes, I think it’s a bit much for them to dismiss the fans who hop on here to bitch about it. I think it’s a net good that I can now see normal people’s reaction to entertainment (the critics vs the general audience score on rotten tomatoes for example) when choosing what to go see in the theater or which shows to binge. I understand why professionals think it’s a headache that they no longer need to just worry about getting trashed by critics but that they may also have interviewers ask them about online takes, but I don’t think fandoms having an opinion about a product is toxic. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In fact, knowing how abuse and mistreatment is rampant in their industry, how misogynistic and racist writing has been their norm, I find it shocking that they think pushback against us is appropriate. D&D fucked up when they had Sansa get raped and I’m glad social media allowed people to complain. They fucked up with killing Missandei. They fucked up when they didn’t even think of the implications of the Mhysa scene. They fucked up when they treated the Dothraki as barbarians unworthy of exploration as a culture/people. I think it’s great that individuals can hop online and say, actually, no, you’re wrong to do that, do better. I appreciate the fans who criticize Martin for his problematic propensities too. Creating something I like, being successful in their field, does not mean these people are above criticism.

I felt awful when I read that Emilia was pressured into nude scenes that she was uncomfortable with. I wish the fandom knew that when it was happening so that there could have been backlash on her behalf. I worry now when I’m watching anything with nudity that this is something the actress was essentially coerced into doing because the producers convinced her her fans demanded it, and I feel sick that the same people who are lashing out at us, are likely using us as a tool to get actresses to do things they aren’t 100% comfortable doing. After me too, I don’t trust the people in the industry to behave in a decent way, not after learning that what shocked us normies was actually well known in Hollywood, an “open secret”, so I think all of these pros need to stop facilitating the exploitation and abuse that’s rampant in their industry before they call fans “toxic” for tweeting.

I think @eonweheraldodemanwe is onto something when he pointed out that a lot of directors/actors do this now, where criticism about a movie is dismissed as trolling, rather than acknowledging the failures in that product. Again, do not harass people. That’s gross, but we’re under no obligation to ignore the problematic things they produce of the horrible quality of it either, especially when there is financial motivation for them to silence fans.

It’s also aggravating that they have no understanding that for us, entertainment is our break from real life, we don’t live in mansions and can’t take fabulous vacations, so when we’re disappointed by our fun distractions and hop online to find likeminded people to bitch about it, it’s because they ruined our escape. It is a severe disappointment to not be able to return to characters and a world we loved. And it seems like these multimillionaires have no comprehension of what that means to us normies.

Anyway, done with my ranting! I agree with you that the audience won’t understand that tyrants are tyrants because that’s just not an idea HBO is comfortable with. They need dragons to get eyeballs, so they have a vested interest in keeping the audience’s sympathy with the Targs. I’m not here to see them convince the audience to support blood purity enthusiasts/conquerors/tyrants again. If they had allowed me to see the Starks ending that threat/that family as good, I’d feel different. Instead they acted like killing fictional Hitler was sad, so nah, not a fan of this at all.

It does seem to me that the fandom as a whole is open to it though, so I’m not that optimistic that as a collective we’re over it. You might be right about the general audience. When real life is so bleak, it feels counterintuitive that we’d turn to such a dark show for escape, but I’m not sure. Few shows have the ability to really transport you, and with Martin on board, they may be able to do that, just like the early seasons of GoT. It’s been years since the finale, and I’ve seen more and more people talking about rewatching, so it’s possible enough time has passed that people’s rage cooled down and this will be the success they’re hoping for. From my perspective it’s a miscalculation, but time will tell.

[bestworstcase]

I'm sorry, but claiming that the people who are upset with how Cassandra and Varian were handled are not only part of the fandom, but misogynistic is absolutely insane. I'm sorry that I don't think one measly apology to Rapunzel, and no one else, after going out of her way to try and hurt and KILL Rapunzel and her loved ones is enough to redeem her or make her any type of hero. She was handled SO poorly, and so was Varian. Varian played an important role as the antagonist and to Rapunzel, challenging Rapunzel's morals and having to force her to ask the question: who do I prioritize, my friends or my kingdom? and then he was left to rot in a prison for an entire season. And then he was brought back and used as essentially bait and nothing more. But then the next season with Cassandra goes against her entire arc with Varian, because then she just drops everything, ignores her duties as a princess, and fixates on Cassandra. She ignores the fact that Cassandra is hurting her subjects and her loved ones, kidnaps Varian, and tries to fucking KILL Rapunzel, but somehow, she's more important to Rapunzel because "she can fix her", which is a problematic concept in itself. So, yeah, I think it's entirely unfair to assume that people who don't like how your favorite and least favorite characters were handled are part of the hatedom, and even worse, misogynistic and racist. It's really bold and disgusting and downright delusional. Please, think about how your words affect others and realize how the world doesn't revolve around you.

beloved are u trying to insinuate that i think the writing in season three was good? SKDHKLGSKDF

you must be new here

so to break it down:

s3 was objectively bad on technical merits

s3 is where the myriad structural weaknesses in the tts narrative collapsed, after two seasons of the story mostly making the 'grand overarching quest narrative but rigidly episodic storytelling' thing work. this is largely because cassandra is, structurally speaking, the protagonist during s3

the character writing from ep to ep was exceptionally poor for everyone in the cast, with cass, rapunzel, & varian getting the lion's share of the fucking-over

i am categorically anti-redemption arc for reasons i have discussed at length, literally just search 'redemption' on my blog lmao

the primary reason cassandra's villain arc got fumbled so badly is that tts was unwilling or unable, as a narrative, to tackle the actual legitimate grievances she had against rapunzel, and therefore resorted to using the gothel fig leaf and not allowing rapunzel to reflect or grow or change meaningfully throughout the season; varian's s3 arc suffered in a similar way but to a lesser extent from the inability of the disney princess cartoon to actually like. focus on the systemic problems that harmed him. the blame for this lies squarely on disney and corporate fiction in general

being cognizant of / acknowledging / talking about narrative weaknesses or failings and/or expressing disappointment or irritation at the way a story turned out =/= participating in hatedom, hatedom is the toxic phenomenon that emerges when subfandom spaces begin to revolve primarily around vitriolic vivisection of a piece of media

i want u to look me in the eyes and tell me that the tts fandom by and large taking the arab-coded man whose central motivation is attacking the kingdom that conquered his people a few hundred years ago and going 'this is a sadistic insane child rapist here are a hundred fics about him viciously abusing varian often so the white protagonists can brutally retaliate' isn't racist jesus christ anon

tts put the 'don't be blatantly racist about the racially diverse separatists of saporia' bar under the ground and the tts fandom collectively pulled out a shovel

anyway,

let me put it like this:

in s1, varian slips through the cracks of corona's non-existent support network and is let down by his friends while the king sends secret police to hunt him down after the traumatic (apparent) death of his father, and as a consequence he slides into a downward spiral which ends in him terroristically attacking the capital, grievously injuring many guards, kidnapping and threatening to murder the queen, and then trying to personally murder three people before he's stopped.

the typical hatedom stance here is that varian did nothing wrong because he was just a child and how dare that bitch rapunzel not help him like she promised (even though she...did, without hesitation, as soon as he got in touch with her and she discovered that her father was lying to her about having handled his problem!)

in s2, after two years of being taken for granted and having her boundaries stomped into the ground by rapunzel--who for all that she does truly care has zero experience with what it takes to be a good friend and fucks up a lot--& a LIFETIME of being expected to do two or three times the amount of work for a tiny fraction of the reward as anyone else, cass gets her hand burnt to a blackened husk by her best friend, who then 1. does not apologize for this, 2. gets mad at her for being upset, and 3. blames her for the injury. as a consequence, cassandra decides to trust the weird ghost who is kind and sympathetic to her and grabs the moonstone, then spirals hard on account of the ghost being a malicious demon bent on manipulating her, and eventually returns to corona to... terroristically attack and eventually raze the capital and try to murder rapunzel.

the typical hatedom stance here is that cassandra is a narcissistic abusive power-hungry bitch who had zero reasons for doing what she did and deserves to be executed or at least imprisoned or otherwise harshly punished for it. (even though the entire point of varian's imprisonment and subsequent radicalization by the separatists, and his hasty redemption arc after rapunzel offered him a second chance, was to illustrate the vague stance tts takes that punitive measures are not the answer to criminal behavior and are in fact actively counterproductive and harmful. which. is a stance that the folks in the tts hatedom will largely agree with as long as you are talking about varian instead of cassandra)

like u see the contradiction here, right. i invite u to explain to me why "boy does bad things because trauma = boy did nothing wrong, girl does bad things because trauma = girl is evil bitch who should die" isn't a misogynistic double standard gmksdfh

[writing-for-life]

I love everything you’ve written here, @tickldpnk8 . You are always so nuanced—I found myself nodding and agreeing, especially about flawed characters. Reading back my other commentary, I just want to clarify a few things a bit further:

a) I personally love The Kindly Ones as a story arc, I just find Hempel’s art jarring, so I don’t have a problem with the story as such (it’s one of my favourite arcs, that’s why I greatly lament that I couldn’t connect with the art). Doesn’t mean it doesn’t have problematic bits of portrayal of course. The individuals are all who and what they are, and perhaps not as problematic (as fictional characters). Where it gets trickier is when they, in their entirety, start to feed a certain narrative. But we all have ingrained worldviews and are products of our time and environment, also goes for writers. The important thing is to be aware of it, learn and change (and I’m inwardly groaning at using the word “change” when I write about The Sandman).

b) I am near certain that Neil is neither intentionally racist nor misogynistic. From all we see and hear from him, I’d say the exact opposite. And I’ll expand on that a bit more, because I’d hazard a guess I’m the oldest person in this convo (could be wrong of course):

I was a teenager when The Sandman came out and read it first back then. As already hinted at, these were really different times with different problems, and a writer will always mirror his immediate surroundings and experiences, at least to a degree. I experienced first hand what it meant to be queer in the 90s, and I also experienced bi-erasure from *within* the LGBT community. Characters like Thessaly are exemplary for parts (!) of the feminist movement back then. I won’t go too deeply into the commentary bi-women got from some of these people, but it was harmful, hateful and had a clear agenda that very much went into the direction of “choose: us or them”. That’s why I can never see Thessaly the way so many younger people see her, and I don’t have the same problem with her because I see her as a criticism of the times (and honestly, many of us reading The Sandman at the time just felt seen and understood), not as the condonation many narratives seem to turn her into these days. But I think you really need to have lived through these times as a queer person (and a woman tbh) to fully understand it.

BUT it’s not 1990 anymore. We are living today when it comes to the TV show, and that’s why certain things need careful handling and change.

It is actually one of my major bugbears if works of art are taken out of the context of the time they were written in. All the while, we have to see them through a critical lens and make sure that if we adapt them to today’s media, things don’t start to look wonky. I have faith that Neil and the other writers involved will manage to do that, but some things might be trickier than others.

The one thing we disagree on is in your tags (and this is firmly tongue-in-cheek)—no happy ending for me please. I want the tragedy, and I’m not sorry…

P.S: I think one character I’d like to throw into the mix as well is Ethel Cripps. I’d say she’s actually exemplary for the change we already see in comics vs TV show. She has so much more agency and is written so much better. While she is still selfish from the get go, partly a terrible mother and largely responsible for John’s fate, we also see sides that make us feel empathy and understanding. She’s both a victim of patriarchy and (internalised) misogyny, but she also actively fights it, and then she falls back into it, both subconsciously snd consciously when she can use it for her own interests.

Dream-Killing Bitches, Evil Exes, and Bad Moms: Portrayals of Women in "The Kindly Ones"

So, I've been attempting to write a more formal meta about this for months, but I've not gotten it to ever gel properly, so I thought I'd share my thoughts more informally here.

COMICS SPOILERS AHEAD

Basically, there is something really weird about how women are treated in The Kindly Ones arc of The Sandman.

The semi-official guidebook "Sandman: King of Dreams" basically called The Kindly Ones a #GirlPower arc, but I don't find much particularly empowering about it. Lyta literally goes insane from the stress of being a single mother, albeit exacerbated by supernatural forces. Thessaly is a TERF bitch who serves the role of "spiteful ex" to the protagonist. Nuala is passive and sad and ultimately just pushed around by the whims of the men around her, and when she finally makes a choice of her own it kills the person she cared about. Rose's quarter-life crisis is miraculously "solved" by an unplanned pregnancy. Chantal and Zelda die of AIDS. Even the unstoppable Furies are ultimately a tool in a man's orchestrated suicide-by-magical-cop.

Maybe this is a leftover from when the books were written? Maybe this was the epitome of feminism in the 90s? Or maybe the guide was meaning that the women were powerful as in LITERALLY powerful...women sure do wield a lot of deadly strength and magic in this, even if none of them are particularly EMpowered, if you catch my meaning.

There's also layers as to how we're supposed to interpret this in relation to Morpheus, our doomed protagonist. I've written previously about how we might be intended to see him as an unsympathetic misogynist. If that's the case, then perhaps his doom at the hands of multiple female forces is supposed to be karmic and positive, no matter how questionable those women are. Support for this interpretation is the myth the old ladies (a manifestation of the Kindly Ones?) tell Rose, wherein a deceptive man who abuses and kills his wife meets a karmic comeuppance at the hands of his magically transformed daughters and resurrected wife.

There's also the fact that Overture reveals that Morpheus has MASSIVE issues with his mother. If one decides not to interpret Morpheus's death as a suicide, there is the possible alternate explanation that he frankly underestimated Lyta's threat level to him. Having never experienced a mother's unconditional love, he couldn't fathom that a mother could love her kid enough to literally go insane and kill gods over them.

But even as motherhood is a negative path to stress, insanity, and threatening the fabric of the universe, it's also VERY uncomfortably presented as a cure-all. Rose only gets her heart back by getting knocked up, and we're supposed to see Lyta's suggestion of an abortion as further continuance of Lyta's madness. But of all people, Lyta knows what she's talking about! She knows how difficult single motherhood is! She was going mad even before supernatural intervention... In fact, multiple sequences in The Kindly Ones make it ambiguous what elements are supernatural and what are just her mind interpreting mundane signs as godly while cracking under realistic stress!

This goes outside of the arc I chose to focus on, but I also can't help but contrast the two lesbian couples: Foxglove and Hazel vs. Chantal and Zelda. Foxglove and Hazel end up on the path of traditional motherhood, down to having to choose a child over a career, despite being lesbians! Meanwhile, Chantal and Zelda, as mentioned, die horribly of AIDS. The paths for women are motherhood, tragedy, madness, or some combination thereof.

I'd almost say that the ultimate message of The Kindly Ones regarding women is "no matter what type of woman you are, things will go horribly for you, you cannot win, and no matter what you are at the whim of a violent patriarchal system. The closest you can come to 'winning' is unfortunately by playing into the male-POV fantasy of devoted motherhood." But. like. that was DEFINITELY NOT THE INTENDED WRITTEN MESSAGE. BUT THAT IS THE MESSAGE THAT RESULTS.

Forget asking if Morpheus is a misogynist, the NARRATIVE ITSELF of The Kindly Ones pushes misogyny more than any individual character does!

tagging those who I know like discussing/reading meta:

@serenityspiral @orionsangel86 @violetoftheendless @duckland @notallsandmen

[sixstepsaway]

Great post about purity culture in fandom! If you don't mind me adding on, I think another major contributor is Baby's First Literary Criticism. It as been common online to see people critiquing media through queer, feminist, etc. perspectives, and a push for diversity and positive representation of marginalized groups. Problem is, they use that purity culture framing instead of viewing these issues at the complicated, nuanced matters they are. It doesn't allow room for a particular piece of media to be good in one way or lacking in another. It doesn't take into account that one person from a marginalized group's real experience is another's tired trope. If you try hard enough you can make everything problematic. For example, is it reasonable to argue that Ed is a problematic stereotype of as moc because he is a violent pirate? Well, it's a pirate show about pirates. Lucius might be considered the 'gay best friend' for constantly giving advice, but does that really count when all his friends are also gay? And this stuff is so nuanced it's easy to pick and choose what argument is affective against your least favorite show/character/ship/etc. Voila, now everyone who likes, uh, Blackhands is a racist, homophobic, misogynistic abuse apologist. -dd anon

Oh you are absolutely right and you should say it.

I saw someone saying how nice it is to have OFMD because until OFMD the only queer shows we had were things like Queer as Folk and they said how Queer as Folk was bad rep and cringe and bad

and I wanted to scream because Queer as Folk is not bad rep! QaF was representative of a lot of gay communities. Queer people didn't have marriage equality and couldn't adopt, so they didn't ride the heterosexual relationship escalator instinctively, and so their lives ended up looking entirely different. Club culture and promiscuity was a big part of queer culture even as recently as 2005 (and I would argue it still is) and a lot of that is to do with the conversations that go on at those places about consent or just because going to a gay club you are surrounded by other queer people, instead of having to hope and pray someone is like you at a coffee shop.

Good rep vs bad rep is a reductive argument, in my eyes. The issue is quantity rather than quality, which I realize is backwards to how it usually is, but... in a show like OFMD, where you have [frantic finger counting] I'm willing to say fourteen main characters all of which are stated word of god to be queer in some way? One of them bodying the trope of 'gay best friend' doesn't actually matter

because he's just one among many. I'm-- Okay, my labels are many because my brain is a mess, but to boil it down to something simple I'm a bi ace agender/maybe genderfluid person (idk i havent dug enough into my gender stuff yet i've been putting it off like a knitting project), and I do not fucking care about the discourse around Toni Topaz or Jughead Jones

let me explain: in Riverdale there are two characters I just mentioned. Toni Topaz is bisexual and Jughead Jones in the original comics was asexual but has been in sexual and romantic relationships in the TV show.

Lots of people yell that Jughead isn't rep and he could've been, how upset they are he wasn't made ace like the comics, etc etc

I don't because I am an ace person who has had sex and relationships and plans to do so in the future

so Jughead boning Betty in s1 does not bad ace rep make. He's never looked at Betty or whoever and gone (as far as I know, I'm behind on the show), "Man, I am so cishet. I am so sexually attracted to you in an allosexual manner." though I wouldn't put it past the writers to have him say something like that lmao

so maybe he isn't sexually attracted to her but enjoys sex with her anyway. Maybe he isn't romantically attracted to her but loves her anyway (though asexual =/= aromantic but that's beside the point)

and Toni Topaz has been criticized for being a "slutty bisexual stereotype" or whatever, but... she's fine? She's just... a person living her life? She fucks Jughead, she fucks her girlfriend, she fucks... idk, I think she has a boyfriend now I'M BEHIND OKAY

to me that isn't bad rep it's just... a character. Potentially not a well-written character because Riverdale (again, I am behind, maybe it's not as bad as I imagine) but still just... a character

When the 100 killed off Lexa, the issue wasn't that they killed A Lesbian, the issue was they killed the only lesbian, thus taking away 100% of the lesbians from that show at the time (though I think Niylah became a main character later? I don't know. She was just a one or two-off at the time iirc). plus the writer was a toxic piece of shit about lexa and wielded her as a way of getting his follower count up on twitter and then killed her off but that too is beside the point

We don't need good rep or to delete all bad rep from the universe. We need more rep, period. We need more lesbians and more gays and more bis and more queers and more people of color and so on. We need shows with diverse casts to be so common we don't have a metric fucktonne of people looking at OFMD and hoping for Perfect Rep because it's all they're getting.

Queer as Folk's characters felt real. They felt like real people. Brian's fear of getting old (I had the realization the other day that he was, in fact, 29, and I nearly cried), Mikey's fear of being alone, Ben's fear of bringing Mikey down with him, Justin's fear of never being loved, etc etc. None of them were good or bad rep, they just were, much like the characters in OFMD.

Assuming the party line of 'Izzy is a homophobic homosexual', are (general) you telling me you've never met a homophobic homosexual in your life? Bet you have. Lots of us have. Izzy isn't good or bad rep, he's just a guy, and a guy who could easily exist in real life, flaws and warts and all. Violent men of color exist just as much as cute lute-playing men of color do.

Good rep is not a goal we will ever achieve because the goalposts will always change. The quantity of rep, the variety of characters of color, the variety of queer characters, the variety of queer characters of color are what matters the most.

We need more rep, not to be cherrypicking and pruning the rep that looks a little ugly on the outside to some people.

Real people look ugly on the outside to some people, too.

[starburstgurl]

To a certain subset of R-W-B-Y fans (not all but some) what is your obsession with RWDE and people not liking the series? They use their own tag.

They don’t like my show?

And?

Every series has a hatedom but R-W-B-Y is the only series where I’ve seen people be religiously mad that people don’t take the show as holy gospel. Every product in the world has its critics. Even if you don’t like it.

It’s not a small passion project anywhere when I understood the need to protect it. It’s heavily corporate. It’s under WB for God’s sake and made a cameo in the matrix. It’s mainstream.

They don’t like my ship/characters?

Welcome to fandom 101. Is it your first time? RW-BY is no different from every other fandom in existence. All that’s alien is everyone in this fandom’s reaction to it.

They insulted C-R-W-B-Y! That’s over the line.

I turn your attention to comic fandoms who sends daily curses to every writer in its bullpen. And many other cartoon show runners. Check out how people feel about Miraculous Ladybug’s show runners for example.

R-W-B-Y is not special in This regard. I promise lots of series get treated this way. You can not like that some people do this. That’s fair. But don’t act like R-W-B-Y is the first fandom to experience this.

Rewrites are disrespectful!

I turn your attention to Naruto, GoT and marvel. Who all have significant rewrites under their belt on YouTube. People want different things from a show then you. And describing the ideal product for them.

R-W-B-Y is not being victimized by people doing this. You don’t have to lash out at people doing this.

Monty’s vision!

These guys are asshats. Fuck everyone who says this. But brushing everyone who criticizes R-W-B-Y as saying this is just as immature. And highly reductive. By saying all R-W-B-Y critique is people using this. You’re not engaging with them at all.

For example many black Critics complained about white fang portrayal while Monty was alive. You just weren’t paying attention to them. You cannot just dismiss their complaints under that blanket.

They said my show is problematic.

Congrats. Welcome to all media. Everything is problematic. You’re job is to determine what’s acceptable to you. And people making essays about why they find the show problematic isn’t a big deal. I promise the show didn’t get a boo boo from that.

Marvel is awful military propaganda. That doesn’t stop it from being the world’s biggest franchise.

In Conclusion

R-W-B-Y is not special. It’s a fandom. And like every fandom. It will have a hatedom. Nothing R-W-B-Y’s RWDE or HTDM is anything special in the grand scheme of things. It’s not being unfairly bullied compared to other shows. It’s being treated like every other fandom does.

It’s a show. 90% or you reading this are old enough to know better. It’s not that fucking serious if you see someone have a opinion you don’t like on the internet. As someone who has bounced from fandom to fandom for years I beg you to interact with other ones to see common fandom etiquette because a shit ton of you don’t have it.

Critics splintered off and used the RWDE tag so you don’t have to see it. Don’t actively search for stuff to get you upset. Enjoy R-W-B-Y for yourself. Don’t get mad other people don’t.

Tagging it only RWDE but not R-W-B-Y (changed the spelling just to not get casuals by accident) because the people I’m talking about will definitely find it that way.

Don’t worry I won’t respond.

BTW before anyone calls me a misogynist or a racist, homophobe or whatever like this specific fandom loves doing. I’m a Disabled black woman so fuck off with that ahead of time.

[battlestar-royco]

okay here it is... THE acotar show announcement post with all my opinions in it

first off, i see ronald d moore is going to be involved. aka the creator of battlestar galactica. he really gave me my rights just to revoke them huh 🤡 (i mean i stopped trusting him after season 4 and the fact that he runs outlander but wow bro u really going stupid now)

secondly, yes i will be watching it. if there is a visual adaptation of a book i've read, i watch it on principle. this isn't out of spite (though the spite will surely come). i do genuinely like to see different interpretations of a book, and i love tracking production from start to finish! so i'll be evaluating the show both as an adaptation and a story.

which leads me to my third point: i've always thought that the first adaptation never got off the ground because the concept of adapting this series is just ridiculous. the plot of acotar never held water, and the series gets progressively more outlandish, rushed, problematic, and nonsensical as it goes. sjm is working on the pilot now, so we can assume she'll be close to the writing (maybe not a full-on WRITER, but possibly a consultant or exec producer or smth) and that she'll want to adhere to the book plot. assuming they do the 1 book=1 season formula, seasons 3 and on are just gonna be soft porn. just the scintillating television we need 🤡. maybe they'll retcon the plot to make sense, but i genuinely don't see how they can do that because the fuckery is so deeply rooted that you kinda can't (ie, the entire 1st book being retrospectively 100% unnecessary, the reasoning behind rhys being "evil," all the inner circle info-dumping their personalities onto feyre mid-acomaf, etc)

four: i really want to talk about something sabaa tahir recently posted on her stories: that she's been struggling to get aeita picked up for film/tv because there's way more likelihood for hollywood to buy rights for fantasy books written by white people and then race-bend the characters. we've seen that with like... 100% of all ya book-to-screen adaptations. so the fact that this horribly misogynistic, racist, homophobic, transphobic series is getting picked up and will most likely be race-bent before we see pretty much any ya adaptations written by poc is just extra salt in the wound.

which leads me to five... the CASTING. are they actually going to race-bend people? i think so? and if so, what ethnicities will they go for? will the stans still love rhys if they "officially" make him brown?? i've talked at length about how the illyrians are just white dudes with tans, based on textual evidence, official fan art, sjm's social media etc. so for all those reasons i honestly feel like a race-bent acotar will be more deplorable than an all-white one. as stated above, the fact that this woman who doesn't care whatsoever for poc will be able to use actors of color to promote her own racist books and fake feminism before authors of color get to see their work adapted is a no from me. and here are the canonical reasons why poc!illyrians doesn't work. and we have the whole lucien scenario now as well, so there are many ways this can and will all go wrong.