#i would also like to recognise that i do have a pretty privileged view on life

[dhaaruni]

Hi! Hope you’re having a good day - mines been pretty shit tbh so if the tone of this is dumb I’m sorry and it’s also very long and rambling so feel free to ignore but I’m just kind of shocked to see you defend being bdsm (aka being against the sexualisation of abuse and violence particularly against women)?

Like ‘what a man does in the privacy of his own home is his own business’ has always been peoples response to mens abuse. I just don’t understand how is it not incredibly fucked to get off on abuse? How is the physical damage done when strangling/beating/hurting someone in one of the millions of ways people (men) hurt each other (women) different when done consensually? If my boyfriend hits me during sex why is it a big deal if he does it during an argument if he didn’t even hit me as hard during the argument as he did in bed? What if he strangled me in bed (something that could kill me and is one of the biggest indicators that a man will kill you) then hitting me isn’t actually that bad in comparison considering the level of harm. What is the difference between ‘after care’ and bringing your girlfriend flowers after hitting her? How does it not create the same trauma bond? A lot of people into bdsm make it very clear that they are mentally unwell (not judging, I am too just different poor coping mechanisms) and I just don’t see how being a masochist different from self harm. How is bdsm not the biggest example of rape culture? How can you recognise the patriarchy’s influence on so many womens choices but not the choice to want to submit sexuality? How are teen girls supposed to cope with their boyfriends literally wanting to beat and rape them but all the adult sources around them are telling them thats totally normal and not dangerous they just need to consent? Because teenage girls are amazing at enforcing their boundaries and totally don’t give in to peer pressure or do things they don’t want to do for male approval. How are you meant to break up with a man who you know enjoys and is capable of beating and raping you?

TLDR : I’m just trying to understand your perspective because it seems very contradictory to your other views like being against rape, violence against women, anti racist, anti incest ect. just everything that bdsm sexualises and normalises

No you're all good, I don't mind answering lol. I'm not letting this be reblogged for obvious reasons though.

I completely agree with you in that societally speaking, BDSM is constantly used to excuse violence against women and it's really fucked up to get off on hurting others, and any man that says they're into BDSM on principle should likely be in jail.

That said, I also think that in the context of consensual romantic sexual relationships between adults, it's possible to enjoy certain things on occasion that aren't super vanilla on principle. And, I'm not really talking about hookups here, I'm talking long-term relationships with people you trust lol. I'm also not giving teenagers sex advice and I think "blowjobs are empowering" feminism that young millennials and Gen Z was raised on did more harm than good to our perceptions of healthy sexuality, but the rumors are true: I, an unmarried adult woman, enjoy sex with people I romantically like and trust as people lmao.

But to clarify, I'm really not a proponent of anything truly extreme, and I'm extremely intentional about setting boundaries and if anybody crosses them, they get blocked and banned for life. I'm generally cool with trying sex positions, but both parties always have veto privileges if something is painful or uncomfortable or simply not enjoyable. And personally, anything involving metal, spanking or hitting, choking, etc. are all total no-gos for me and I will never be swayed on that. A light hand on the neck is not remotely the same thing as asphyxiation, and to even get to that point, I need to trust the guy.

And, I would never trust let alone fuck a guy who can't get off without that stuff! My point is that it's okay to try things out, whether that's basic kink or weird sex positions that you fall out of and laugh at yourselves, not what you do every single time you have sex. If a guy whines about women being boring in bed or "vanilla," kick the man to the curb lmao.

All that said, I would never tell women they're bad people if they are against stuff I'm personally comfortable with. My point is just that sex isn't like a cut and dry thing, and it's really healthy to communicate and discuss what you like and don't like with your partner.

Does that make sense lol?

[wy-lz]

tags by @amarriageoftrueminds:

#I really don't think ppl see how much of a bastard will is in his own right?#most of what we see as poor trembling uwu chihuahua 'somebody help will graham' in S1...#is will NOT BEING HIMSELF. being OOC and so ill he doesn't even recognise himself#cut out almost every (OOC) scene from the pilot until will getting treatment for encephalitis...#and you have a guy who is 90% of s2 murder husband will already bar the wardrobe change#(tho there are flashes of the real guy; in his sessions w/ hannibal; telling jack to stfu/nobody else does it better than him etc.)#to me he reads not as a trembling puppy but like a snarling street dog who has learned to be vicious to protect himself after mistreatment#...but that mistreatment did not begin or end with hannibal it has been going on his whole life#LOOK AT THE WAY HE TALKS TO FREDDIE LOUNDS#he was murder husband-ing before hannibal and outside of hannibal#in a funny way IMO hannibal brings out his nicest side because he makes him happy / doesn't judge him like others do...#like his snarling snappiness is an empathy-reflection of how he's seen by others + him being annoyed at how he's seen#he's nicest with people who see him how he would like to be seen (hannibal abigail molly colluding!freddie briefly alana)#when ppl don't see a will graham he'd like to be... he gets pissed off about that and also empathy-reflects their view of him#fine china with jack a bro with beverley a good husband with molly...#but a bastard-teacher to his students a psycho to freddie and chilton etc etc.#maybe that's another part of his problem with bedelia?#that she sees him as an inferior to herself -- the last wife that bluebeard wouldn't have married if she'd had her way#so that's what he reflects; and he's (also) bitchy because he hates that image of himself... let alone coming from his replacement#hannibal likes to say they're alone because they're unique#but a big part of why they're both alone is because they are both... Such Pricks 😔#hannibal by nature will (I think) by nurture#something something pretty privilege makes you a dick something somethingReblog

Sick of the socially anxious, shy Will Graham retoric; this guy’s anti-social and is a mistrustful prick. He sucks. He’s rude on purpose. He barks. He bites. He spreads rabies.

“How does that make you feel?”

*scoff, “How does that make you feel?”

?????

“Tell me about your mother.”

“Some lazy psychiatry, Dr. Lecter.”

???????????

“Let’s keep it professional.” “I don’t find you that interesting.” “You could wreck some foster homes and torment some children…” “The light of friendship won’t reach us for a million years, that’s how faraway from friendship we are” “There will be a reckoning.” “You didn’t die enough.” “Soup isn’t very good.”

Brother is so soft-spoken to his doggie children. Then he meets a human being and cringes like he can’t wait to go home and wash his eyes with soap.

[myopicry]

Helloooo long time no see!

Read the post you reblogged about men always thinking that they're always right and objective, and honestly I think it might be (partially) bc if they DIDN'T act or think this way, then they'd have to analyse their own thoughts and behaviour in relation to the patriarchal society (even the most mysoginistic man knows he lives in a patriarchy imo).

They'll have to put so many things about themselves into question as well as the system they're part of, and that's something which I believe is harder to do when you're in a position of privilege in said system. Sure, they might have no problem recognising their privilege in terms of "men are better than women har har har I am part of the superior sexe", but not in the "negative" way.

I feel like it could tie into the "not all men!!" thing which sometimes gets obnoxious these days. There's a defensiveness and wanting to not go TOO in depth in analysis because of what that'll inevitably lead to. There's a need to retain positive thoughts about this particular aspect of society because of the part they play in that aspect.

I'd probably have more things to say but I just woke up lol. (keep in mind I have not proof read this so apologies in advance) Hope to hear from you soon!

~🪼

lolol ironically I am answering this as I just woke up time zones are funny

the thing is I kind of get it, why men are so reluctant to think about this kind of stuff. it is a bit challenging on anyone to upend their entire comfortable worldview for something more truthful because it does come with having to confront all the ways you've been wrong and have wronged in the past (literally my experience of peaking and desisting lmao) so, to me it definitely makes sense that the last thing men want to do is truly confront their privileges and their place in the world in relation to women, because they're probably going to find themselves on reflection quite guilty for many, many transgressions and things that probably conflict with their moral character and self-view. that being said, imo it's more than a bit cowardly that men won't ever really take this step to truly reflect.

it's not even misogynistic men either, I've talked in depth with a few self-proclaimed progressive men (back when I thought I still needed to actually talk to men lmao) and even if they were "feminists" or were trying to be a different, more respectful of women, person, they would never really interrogate their own treatment of other people, ESPECIALLY women* and make a meaningful effort to change that would require them to put themselves in a vulnerable or lower position than they felt used to. I've seen women reflect and change so much, I think when you're born and raised in a world that tells you all your perceived flaws and works to put you down into a handful of easily digestible roles there's not as insurmountable of a mental hurdle to overcome. still not an excuse for men! if anything, if they're supposed to be so much smarter and reasonable, I'd think they'd jump at the opportunity to become enlightened or whatever.

*god I wish I could do spoiler text on tumblr uhh just look away from this page break dear readers if you don't want some personal blog moments about how men are shitty. nothing explicit just general implied yuck and discussion of sexual harassment.

wow I have no idea why I'm so willing to lay my boring shitty backstory all out on tumblr but here it is!

but essentially of the two men (self-described as progressive or feminist) I knew pretty well, like talking about childhood trauma and personal deep topics, both at some point ended up pushing my boundaries and contributing to I guess the worst mental states I've been in as a young adult. the first time I was too much of a clueless teenager driven by zero self esteem, very untreated anxiety, terrible self deprecation skills, and also zero social awareness coming off of the pandemic, so I ended up in a relationship I didn't really enjoy at all because I wasn't attracted to him romantically or sexually but stayed in out of aforementioned self-loathing and the "obligation" of it all to fit in with my straight girl friends (did not help that I recently realized I had a crush on one of them and really wanted to push down that feeling) and the cultural norms I saw around me and my family. the second time I was lost in the gender juice, dissociated from my body to the max, and IDed as aroace lmao but was also very lonely (and once again was developing feelings for a straight girl holy shit I'm writing this and maybe I should stop knowing so many straight girls lmao) but luckily I was older and cut that shit out (not fast enough to not have experiences and time to regret and have boundaries violated ugh) anyway this guy told me his sad backstory about being a sexually harassing little shit in middle school but also had a really bad home life and high school experience and even after I kept giving him (not to brag) amazing advice to get his shit together and see women as people, he kept avoiding actually doing the work. In hindsight, I think the only reason he even listened to me talk and told me all this was because he believes in the "queer identity culture" stuff (bisexual + he/they lmao) and since I didn't label myself as a woman + was attempting to pass he must have "not considered me a woman" enough to immediately write off. yet he still assumed he could push my boundaries unlike how he would treat other men. curious.

anyway, tldr!! yeah men are shit and even progressive men are their own kind of self-blinded shit. they're fine as acquaintances, even some could be okay as friends, but I guess I've learned to not expect much out of them. maybe this is cynical, but it becomes much easier when you look for their value first, before leading with the natural empathy to befriend on an equal level. always keep the upper hand. this might not make a lot of sense I should write a separate post about it hmmm anyway

anon thank you for visiting again!! I'm sorry for the wall of text followed by the wall of text but I assume you keep coming back because you actually enjoy walls of text, so I hope you get something out of this set of walls of text!! and more walls of text to come! I've been in a very "sorting through the archives of my life and coming to terms with everything leading up to now" and it's been great for a lot of self-reflecting writing ideas. unlike men, I hope after truly confronting the events of my life and breaking it down, I will change and be aware of my (many, many) faults and become a much better person for it.

[digicomm-timecapsule-20009]

Week 9 - Is That Really What I Look Like?

Let’s face it, that one dog filter is pretty fun to use

But with the constant rise of social media filters like those found on Instagram, what can be said for our self esteem? And what are these filters doing to our perception of self given how prevalent they are in everyday life? 

Right now on Instagram you can find a filter for virtually anything. Want to make your pics look like they came straight out of the hit 2007 movie Twilight? Yep, you got it. Cat ears, clown noses, the possibilities are endless thanks to the thousands of filter presets available. But while no one is getting body dysmorphia from seeing themselves with devil horns, the same can’t be said about beauty filters.

Beauty filters rely on artificial intelligence in order to reimagine a user's face in real time and tap into their “pretty privilege”. In other words the filters enhance what good features a user has and hide away any potential insecurities a person may have about their face. Or rather, they give them new ones to feel self conscious about. (Hunter 2023)

A study done in 2021 found that over 90% of participants aged 18 to 30 used beauty filters in order to edit their photos into seeming “perfect”. The same majority claimed to feel extremely pressured to look attractive as they compared themselves to their peers on social media. And the result from this is even bleaker. Over 75% reported that they feel they can never live up to the person in the pictures posted online with 60% stating this made them feel depressed as a result. (Jantz 2023) Other research also found that young people with low self esteem and negative views on their body were more likely to use filters in a bid to feel better about themselves. 

However, as we all know, this is counterintuitive as it further reinforces their negative beliefs that their appearance, and by extension themselves, aren’t good enough or worth it. (Well 2023) Worse, the age to do so is getting younger. In conjunction with their “Self Esteem Project” back in 2020, Dove found that 80% of girls would have downloaded a filter or used an app to alter how they look, all by the age of 13. (Dove 2020) An interesting phenomenon has also risen in recent years due to beauty filter misuse known as “Filter Dysmorphia”. A subset of Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD), filter dysmorphia worsens when individuals believe that various cosmetic procedures can make them resemble their filtered images and thus cure their self esteem issues. This can involve minimally invasive procedures like fillers and Botox, to more extreme measures like nose jobs and Brazilian butt lifts. (Sadati & Radanfar 2022)

So what can we do now? For one, it’s important to recognise that beauty is ever evolving. Look at the beauty standards from the 40s or 50s and compare them with those of today. Were those people not considered beautiful for their time? The same can be said for us in the today and now. With the speed at which the standard of beauty evolves, and the use of AI gets more prevalent, maybe the best thing we can do is simply love ourselves just a little bit more.

References

Dove, 2020, Kids' Self Esteem, Dove, viewed 10 June 2024, <https://www.dove.com/us/en/dove-self-esteem-project.html>. 

Hunter, T 2023, Should women use beauty filters online? We all have opinions., The Washington Post, viewed 10 June 2024, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/09/20/beauty-filter-criticism-benefits-tiktok/>. 

Jantz, G 2023, How Social Media Filters are Impacting Our Mental Health, The Center - A Place of Hope, viewed 10 June 2024, <https://www.aplaceofhope.com/how-social-media-filters-re-impacting-our-mental-health/>. 

Sadati, MS & Radanfar, R 2022, ‘“Filter dysmorphia”: an Emerging Phenomenon in Cosmetic Dermatology’, Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, vol. 22, no. 3. 

Well, T 2023, The Hidden Danger of Online Beauty Filters, PsychologyToday, viewed 10 June 2024, <https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-clarity/202303/can-beauty-filters-damage-your-self-esteem#:~:text=Other%20research%20finds%20that%20young,and%20behaviors%20start%20quite%20early.>. 

[slightlyrebelliouswriter23]

Hey! I wanted to know why Taryn's character gets a lot of hate even tho she was trying to survive in faerie just as Jude did. Except her way of survival was more traditionally feminine and demure.

this has honestly been my point since like... forever lmao. if you've been on my blog for any length of time, you'll know i'm a pretty big Taryn apologist. i speak more about it in this post. but essentially, it's exactly what you said. and i have more to say.

[DISCLAIMER: this post is tagged as pro-Taryn Duarte. any comments or asks i receive expressing the reason why You Hate Taryn are entirely unsolicited and will be deleted on sight. if you don't like my opinion you can block the pro-Taryn Duarte tag, and scroll away.]

I. Me, harping on about Madoc deserving more of the fandom's scorn, part 300

it will always boggle my mind how this fandom allows Madoc every grace of "the complex character/relationship" but we don't afford Taryn even remotely the same attempt at understanding. even when Madoc committed infinitely more betrayals, infinitely more attrocities, than Taryn ever committed–or indeed has had time to commit given her extremely young age (compared to Madoc's centuries of life).

that's not to say i don't love Madoc. i think he's a great villain and his character, particularly his relationship with his children, is very complex. but why can't this be the same way we treat Taryn?

regardless of this blatant double-standard, people still hate her, and i think it has a lot to do with (as you said) the way Taryn handles her traumatic life events.

II. Trauma Responses and How They Are Received

[FOR LEGAL REASONS, THIS POST IS DISCUSSING HOW THE TRAUMA RESPONSES ARE PERCEIVED STRICTLY IN TERMS OF CHARACTERS, NOT IRL PEOPLE/SITUATIONS!]

i've discussed this on here before, but the Duarte sisters exhibit three out of the four recognised trauma responses in the way they cope with their parents' death/being taken to Faerie:

Jude- fight

Vivi- flight

Taryn- fawn

i think we can all agree that, in terms of what an audience wants to see from characters, Jude's fight response is the most palatable of the three. not only because she is the main character (and thus, everything is from her perspective/justified in her eyes), but also because it is what i believe most of us would want to be able to do ourselves in the face of adversity and hardship.

it's the most commendable. it is probably also the hardest to maintain (as is made apparent by the series as a whole). which is why the other two sisters employ alternative modes of survival.

as discussed in this post, Vivi survives by escaping. whenever and however she can. i'm not sure how everyone feels about this one. until recently, i had no idea people even had strong opinions about Vivi.

but i do know that the flight response could be considered a bit cowardly, even if it's effective. if there's anything to be respected about it, though, it's that the person knows in no uncertain terms that they are not cut out for facing the trauma head-on. and they are the first one to admit it.

the fawn response, however, is a kind of camouflage. it's doing everything in your power to be perceived a certain way, to fit in, to please people.

the thing i think people dislike about the fawn response, is that (if you twist the perspective enough) it could be viewed as dishonest. deceptive or manipulative. perhaps even spineless, depending on the situation.

and indeed, these are all phrases i've seen thrown around in close proximity to Taryn's name.

throughout the book, Taryn plays nice in order to get people to like her. she does whatever the fae tell her to do, even at the expense of her own or her sister's humiliation. and instead of making her own place at court, she announces that she will "fall in love" to earn her seat. meaning that she will rely on one of the fae (likely someone with station) to give her the privilege of staying at court, through means of marriage or children.

it's a more passive route to survival than Jude's. but that route isn't any less valid. it's just less masculine.

III. Active vs. Passive (and how it leads to misguided sensationalism)

society has taught us not to see passivity as a mode of operation, and unfortunately, this makes for overtly sensationalised (and therefore inaccurate) interpretations of character.

if the only actions a character takes are deceptive ones, we conclude they are intentionally deceiving people. if the character doesn't act at all, they are apathetic people. no matter the character's own motives. if they do not act the way we wish them to act, they must be in direct opposition to what we want.

take Taryn, for example. if her modus operandi is to camouflage, or passively fit in, we don't recognise this as an action. rather, we look at what she does do.

in order to achieve her goal, Taryn must actively betray her sister (multiple times), lie to her (multiple times), and kill her husband in cold blood (an attribute, if you ask me, but whatever). through these actions, we, as the audience, realise Taryn is not nice. but she portrays herself this way so she can get what she wants. as all good writing does, we are made to feel deceived right along with Jude.

but even though Jude herself forgives Taryn eventually, we still dislike her. because she is not our sister. she is not the main character. she doesn't mean much to us. we don't regard her as a nuanced person–she becomes, to many, this two-dimensional "enemy" or "other".

and if you aren't thinking critically about the text, and instead take the story personally, then yeah. you're going to hate Taryn at the end of it all.

people have a way of interpreting actions as the sole basis of character, while disregarding motive or intention. i don't think this wise. it's reductive at best, disingenuous at worst.

actions are a product of our nature and the conditions of our environment. Taryn is in just as much peril as Jude is in Faerie. the only reason you, dear reader, might not like Taryn is because she didn't act how you wanted her to act, and because she didn't act how you wanted her to act, she ended up hurting someone you care about (Jude).

this well-meaning loyalty unfortunately doesn't do much for an accomplished understanding of the text. which i get it. some of us are just here for fun and that's fine. but if you take the time to hate a character with as much passion as people seem to hate Taryn, you have time to think at least a little bit critically about the text.

—Em 🖤🗡

more theories & analysis

[cecinestpasunblog]

I was raised in two very different halves of Scottish culture; I went to one of the best state high schools in Scotland, with people who (for the most part) had very clear voices and good pronunciation and who talked mostly English-English or Scots-English (which is different to Scots), but I lived in small flats in poorer areas with my mum, who speaks with a different accent and with a lot more Scots words in her vocabulary. When I think back to how I used to speak in school, it's worlds away from how I speak now, because I had to smooth off my accent in order to fit in back then, and make myself more palatable to the people who held the fate of my education and future employment in their hands.

In the past few years, I have been desperately trying to claw back all of the wonderful words I used to let roll off my tongue as a kid, picked up from my mum and grandparents and great grandparents and dusty old scots poetry books that I used to inhale in a matter of hours. This language represents so much more than just some words, it's an entire chunk of my identity that got ripped to shreds before I even knew I had it.

Also, while writing these thoughts out, I've been thinking about how the code switching between Scots, Scots-English, and English cannot be viewed in isolation, for me and for everyone else. It is INCREDIBLY tangled up in classism, but also for many other people it will be tied up in racism too. I am autistic and nonbinary, so not only do I code switch based on peoples' perceptions of my accent and vocabulary, but also based on how I need to present myself according to those intersections, and none of these things can really be separated out.

I am tired of whole languages being made out to be this "cringe" thing that people on the internet can laugh at, and that are never taken seriously in job interviews. I'm tired of wee kids getting teased by their classmates and told off by their teachers for using the words their families use. I'm tired of English being this domineering force that is hell-bent on strangling the life out of every other language until we all conform. Its high time for English-speakers (and I am including myself in this somewhat, given that, other than English and Scots, I don't really know any other languages) to be the ones making the effort to understand others, rather than everyone else accommodating us.

And don't even get me (or @pog-mo-bhlog) started on Gaelic.

So some people are @’ing me (sorry, inbox is still closed and my IMs are a Nightmare atm so I’m largely avoiding them while I try to work) wanting to know how the Scots Wiki thing could have gone on for so long without anyone noticing, and tbh, there’s several factors at play here.

One, Scots is a marginalized language (and I will not argue this point. It is a language, not a dialect of English. If you’re going to argue this with me then save yourself some time and fuck off now.) that is primarily spoken, so it doesn’t surprise me that people didn’t even realize the website was a thing. We’re not used to seeing our language written down, and those of us who are, only ever see it at academic levels. Or y’know, Scottish Twitter. There’s also issues regarding dialect, and how there’s not one true form of Scots, so wrangling a project like Scots Wiki would require massive effort on behalf of people who both know it, and are technologically savy enough and have the time to do so. Which is where point two comes in.

Namely that up until recently, Scots was not a part of any official curriculum. We were banned from speaking it in my school, and often told to “speak properly” if we lapsed too far away from Queens English. Scottish Literature only became a thing when I was in my final year of high school (15 years ago), and even then it was an elective and not compulsory. You could choose to study your own language in your own country if you wanted to. But the only books you could read were things like Robert Louis Stevenson and Rabbie Burns. Hardly conducive to the study of contemporary Scots as a living language. I only actually got to study it linguistically when I was in my second year of university and opted to take it as an extra class, and the department was constantly underfunded and struggling. They still are. 

My parents were certainly never allowed to study it, and while I was merely scolded for sounding “uneducated” by my teachers if I used Scots words in the classroom, my dad tells stories about corporal punishment being doled out to instill a sense of fear around using it instead of “Proper English”. So while I still spoke Scots at home with my family and friends, there was also a deep sense of shame about it. I was sent for elocution lessons, partly for a mild stutter, but also to make me sound more British. Because my parents knew, they knew if I wanted to get ahead in the workforce I needed to sound less like myself and more “proper”. And I didn’t really realize how right they were till I got a job working at an English based publisher who were surprised to find out I was Scottish. Apparently I “sounded much smarter than that”.

And the microaggressions didn’t end there. It came out in the form of things like “you’re surprisingly thin, I thought all Scottish people ate deep fried mars bars” or making jokes about Scottish money being fake so they could pay me in monopoly money if they wanted to. (Legal tender discourse explained.) They used to refer to me in the office as “the smart” or “civilized Scot”. Usually before they laughed and handed me off to some American writer who needed help unpicking the mess they’d made of their Scottish dialogue. And I would smile and nod and grit my teeth, because it was that or make a fuss and potentially risk losing the only career job I’d managed to get because they made it clear over and over, there were plenty of people who could do my job.

Except there isn’t, not really. Oh there’s plenty of folk who speak it and could have a fair crack at it. But there’s not many actual Scots Linguists. Certainly not enough to save a language. I don’t even qualify as one. I just studied it for two years out of sheer interest. So things like the Wiki project rely not only volunteers, but on people being aware of it. And as mentioned, there’s very good reasons for Scottish people to either not know it existed, or to not want to be associated with it. The Scottish Cringe is very real. And it’s the end result of generations of cultural death and the insidious mantra: “speak properly” repeated over and over again until part of you believes it. I still code switch if I need to do something like talk to the bank or talk to a client. I tell myself it’s because I’m living in America and I want to be understood. But I did it before I moved here. I did it while living in Scotland, because I knew having the “proper” accent helped.

So yeah, the idea of a brony destroying a Scots based wiki with nonsensical gibberish sounds funny. But only until you realize it’s part of a broader problem rooted in systemic cultural and class warfare. It’s also why it’s no very funny when people post things like “what language is that LOL” under Scottish media, because the answer is Scots. And it’s dying.

Edit: I also shouldn’t need to say this, but seen as how this is tumblr and we are in Hell: if any of you take this post and use it to play oppression Olympics with Black and marginalized people I will manifest in your home like snakes, rip your spine out through your toes and beat you to death with it. Our history of oppression does not negate the harm we do. If anything it means we ought to know better, and the fact that we don’t is beyond reprehensible.

[cc-tinslebee]

If I’m being totally honest, I don’t even like Billy Hargrove that much. I’m just realising that.

I’ll defend his character not because I believe his actions were justified, but because very few people view his character as that of an abuse victim, a broken kid who grew up in a static, violent, homophobic and racist household, where he couldn’t grow as a person because his basic emotional needs were not being met. Billy antis cut out a HUGE part of his character. That’s what upsets me.

But his personality? Eh. It leaves much to be desired. Billy certainly has a lot of pretty privilege in the fandom, and I was not immune to that. I recognise that now.

Really, what I like about Billy Hargrove is the potential. The fandom’s Billy, if you will.

The Billy that’s a member of the party, that could banter with Steve while fighting demogorgons.

The one that would bicker with Dustin.

The one who could have the “you’re not good enough for my sister, end. of. story.” “… 🎶so why don’t you give me one more chance🎶” dynamic with Lucas.

The one that would be annoyed at Erica’s sass but admire her spirit.

The Billy that would be hyped at Nancy’s badassery, and be snarky with Robin (who engages wittingly, but is also lowkey terrified of him).

The Billy that protects Max, El, and Will and takes them under his wing.

I miss and love the Billy that Max wanted, the one she could’ve had. The brother that made her resonate with “if only I could, I’d make a deal with god, and I’d get him to swap our places.” (Because she must’ve believed he could change.)

I guess it’s like Dear Evan Hansen and the fandom. People would ship Connor and Evan, but the thing was, that wasn’t Connor. It was the Connor that Evan made up. Connor could’ve very well had the potential to fit somewhere into that narrative had things gone differently, but something about that reality would be different from the stories the Evan — and the fandom — we know told. Because that was our perception of Connor twisted to meet our narratives. Not Connor as he was.

I don’t love Billy Hargrove as he was. I love him as what he could’ve been.

And for the longest time, I thought harringrove was neat. I still do! It’s one of those cool little “what ifs” I like to explore sometimes. Not because I think they deserve each other or I think they’re soulmates. It’s just… a couple that would be interesting. A reformed minor antagonist helping another little-less-minor antagonist becoming a better person by giving him a safe, caring environment in himself. Steve knowing what it’s like, on a much different scale but nonetheless having sympathy/empathy for Billy’s situation. That’s what appeals them to me (as well as Joe Keery and Dacre Montgomery’s chemistry).

[ellestra]

Superpowered life

I really liked how this episode took time to humanise both John Walker and the Flag Smashers.

I like how it gives us those moments from Flag Smasher’s point of view. Showing the small moments like Karli taking time to make sure the guy Walker shot is OK. And then her clear heartbreak for the friend who sacrifices himself. This is so different from the opening of last episode when Sam was killing LAF men left and right and Batroc didn’t care his people died. They were treated as disposable but Flag Smashers aren’t. They think themselves the heroes who fight for those who lived through Blip.

Last episode we saw the hurdles the returned have to go through but we also got a taste of the way those extra five years changed those left (from Hayward to Sarah). This episode we see the Walker and his group created as enforcers of the Global Repatriation Council so the returned at least have a body that takes care of their needs (even, as we see with Sam imperfectly) but it just makes those who grew up in the world without them more resentful (this movement seems to attract a lot of young people for whom the world without half of humanity became norm).

They had to give up a lot and their needs got swept under the rug when billions of people came back wanting the world to be just like when they left. It’s a misplaced anger (it’s not like those people had a choice and they are refugees often with even less than FS) but it is understandable and it’s no wonder there are so many people willing to hide them. And it’s hard for them not to feel vindicated when GRC sends men to “pacify” them. Making the Flag Smashers so diverse and throwing a guy dressed in American paraphernalia to fight them somewhere in Europe just drives home how not completely wrong they are.

But it looks like neither Walker nor our heroes are really the Flag Smashers big problem. It looks like they stole the serum that makes them super soldiers form Power Broker and that’s what was in those creates not vaccines. I wonder if they want to make so many more super strong followers or d the powers wear off with time and they need to keep taking it.

In many ways John Walker is a lot like Steve. He wants to help people and make the world better. He believes in the ideas of America and wants people to believe in them too. He wants to be the hope Steve was. He jumped on top of grenades. And he got really good at throwing that Shield fast (the way he saved Hoskins was pretty cool). He’s the best man for the job, isn’t he?

He’s even appropriately bashful about being lauded for his accomplishments. Feels weird about being trotted for shows in public. And have doubts he can live up to being Captain America. He’s also a little cocky and likes to use his influence (the government line, releasing Bucky) but that’s not that different than Tony. Or Thor. And he even has the same Big Three idea as Sam. He’s just like our heroes.

He’s just like those guys before they learnt their lessons about humility and blind trust. So isn’t us, or Sam and Bucky, not wanting to have to deal with that journey again just unwillingness to give him a chance?

But then the uncomfortable parts hit you. From the fact that he took the job over a black man. Sam isn’t completely wrong about becoming his own symbol and not just using Steve’s clout. The fact that John took it like it was something he deserved is already telling something about his confidence and show points us to the “white men confidence” on that by making it uncomfortable. From the way they have people of colour telling him he can do it. To the black best friend/sidekick. That last one really hit hard.

This is, however, not fully on John really. It’s on people who created him. In universe, the men who lauded Sam for giving up the Shield only to give it to a white dude. In real world on all those who keep creating protagonists like these.

This hit differently when the character of Captain America was created almost century ago and we were already so accustomed with him it’s easy to ignore the dissenting voices for the comfort of it’s always been like this. But there is still to many media that repeat this pattern over and over again with new characters.

The patterns so ingrained it has to be pointed out again and again how skewed that is and the show rammed it home with Walker calling both Sam and Bucky Steve’s wingmen. He was implying he wants them to be his now and they both went clearly “sorry, man, we are the protagonists now”. And that made him resort to threats and that is on him.

The thing about Steve was that there was plenty of brave, smart, decorated men with him in that camp. He wasn’t chosen because he was better then them at fighting but because of his heart and willingness to stand up for what is right no matter what. And when he jumped on the grandee he didn’t know he would survive. Walker has special helmet. And he clearly enjoys the privileges and power that comes with the position.

It’s all fun when he is the main character in this story - saving the Avengers and getting them out of trouble - but when they refuse to be appropriately grateful and fall in line his generosity turns to anger. And that really drives home that white man entitlement, doesn’t it? (I hope it does.)

And the show doesn’t stop there. There is still the way US government treated Isaiah Bradley. Bucky got pardoned for everything with just Steve’s backing but the man who protected Americans from him got nothing but abuse. All Bradley can have is being left alone while Bucky is recognised as an Avenger. At least Steve was always a hero but Bucky used to be a villain and he still is better off. It reminds us how long this has been and issue. (The kid is Eli, though, isn’t he?)

And then there is the way police treat Sam. The tone they use when they ask Bucky if “this man is bothering you”. And then complete change when Bucky says “do you know who that is” and the celebrity status hits and suddenly Sam isn’t jut a black guy but Mr. Wilson, the Avenger. But it really hits when it turns out Bucky is to be arrested because he missed his therapy session for a trip to Europe. The policeman is still polite and all “Mr. Barnes” and “sorry about this”.

We see Bucky’s super soldier serum powers in work (with jumping and running) and Walker I think just has the suit and good coordination but it’s clear their greatest superpower is being white men.

I liked this episode take on racism better as it was better at showing it as a background didn’t involve Sam ignoring his sister’s agency and her knowledge. And because it showed the status his celebrity grants him better, especially when contrasted with the life of Isaiah Bradley who has powers but not fame so none of the perks and all the burdens of being experimented on.

And I like the way it shows it also gets to those who are discriminated. After all the kid who calls Sam Black Falcon is black too. It’s just Falcon. No qualifiers necessary. But then Sam calls Bucky White Panther. The colour coding gets to all of us. (In Polish pantera = lampart and both mean leopard so we actually say żółta pantera = yellow panther along with black but I’m glad no one uses that for people.)

I also liked that Sam thought Bradley meant white people when he said Bucky’s people. I mean he wasn’t wrong since Hydra was pretty much white supremacist but still funny.

The only thing that bothered me was Bucky’s therapist forcing Sam into the session. The excuse was flimsy, the was no real indication she knows they fight all the time and the whole thing seemed to be only for that one line when Bucky admits he’s afraid Steve was wrong about him. But the execution of this was clunky and the moment with Bradley worked much better.

[radkindoffeminist]

youve reblogged things that include trans slurs, and a post that claims trans people are trying to erase lgb people, which is not true and also ignores the fact that there are lgb trans people. you also claim that calling you transphobic is violence against you, which seems to point to the fact that you hate trans people but don't want to be called out on it. same with being called sex-worker exclusionary.

anyway, im trying to understand why there is so much hate for trans people and sex workers when otherwise i would agree with most of your ideas. i would like to understand where your viewpoint comes from, and why you're so resistant to being called trans exclusionary when you specifically exclude trans people from your activism

Lmao, going to have to be more specific than ‘you’ve done this’, especially with the slurs because I generally avoid reposting anything with tr*nny in it because I don't agree with using that. It is a slur which shouldn’t be used against people.

And it's not untrue that trans people are trying to erase the LGB community. Like, I have a whole side blog where I collect receipts and my longest post is about homophobic rhetoric which is spread in the name of defending/supporting trans people. Also, if the best reason you can give for me hating trans people is that I hate that they’re erasing the LGB community, something you simply don’t believe is happening despite masses of evidence that it is, then that’s pretty pathetic.

And that line in my bio is a joke so congrats on completely missing the point on that one. And that’s not really evidence that I hate anyone anyway.

Try harder.

And if you would ‘otherwise agree with me except on trans people and sex work’ then you don’t really understand my views, do you? Much of my views on feminism revolve around understanding that oppression is sex based something that is effectively incompatible with trans activism. (I say effectively simply because it is not technically incompatible if you separate the ideas of sex and gender and treat them as two different things however most of trans activism does not see the relevance of sex and actively fights to recognise gender based oppression while dismissing the idea that oppression might be sex based at all and suggesting that it might exist, even in tandem with gender based oppression, will get you called a TERF.) Meanwhile my views on ‘sex work’ come from actually listening to ‘sex workers’ and not the privileged ones who run an OF and make thousands a month but the more average ones who are street walking and getting pimped out and who are abused with no other options.

[procrastinatingfeminist]

Re-imagine Snape

Someone recently went through pretty much every Snape-positive meta, sometimes with my own additions, that I reblogged (thank you, sweet person!), and for one, wow! I hadn't realised I had so much of it floating on my blog. For another, rereading one of the posts brought something to the forefront that I was too emotional at the time to formulate.

I sometimes struggle to with understanding criticism of media, when the critical voices come from people with a very different lived experience from my own. I am a cis white female who lives in a country with socialised healthcare, I am fully aware that I am insulated by privilege and accept that there are certain things, that I will never fully understand. Doesn't mean I shouldn't at least try. There is an exercise that I found useful, even though it falls back on the use of... very narrow stereotypes.

When 50 Shades of Grey suddenly went mainstream, I found the best way to explain why I disliked the franchise, despite it's fanfic origins, was to substitute the names of the protagonists with arabic sounding ones. Anastacia and whatshisname Mr. Grey became Aisha and Yusuf. And suddenly the fact that the male protagonist demands authority over what the female one wears, eats, where she lives, what she buys, who she socialises with and what she talks about, all outside of their sex play, stops sounding edgy and kinky, and starts looking a whole lot like abuse. Because we are conditioned to recognise abuse only when applied to certain groups, when viewed through certain lens, and it was easier to identify what my exact problem with 50 Shades was, only when I fully leaned into the stereotypes, eliminating my blind spot.

Now, reimagine Severus Snape as a black boy/man. He grew up poor and disadvantaged, in a town/part of town where most people had similar struggles. His home was abusive and neglectful, and he is socially awkward, whether as a result of the neglect or because it is something inherent to him, it doesn't matter. Despite having gained access to an elite school and showing talent, it is clear that his upbringing makes him an outcast. He is discriminated against and is further sidelined, subtly and overtly, by other students, by teachers and by the Headmaster. He is sorted into a House where the majority of racists are sorted into. He is denied access to networking opportunities by Professor Slughorn, despite his show of aptitude. He is constantly and viciously bullied by boys from very rich, very privileged families (I know, that only Sirius and James are from Ancient and Noble Families, but they are also the main driving forces behind the abuse at school; Peter and Remus were at best characterised as hangers-on), and his teachers ignore it; to the point that when his life is endangered the Headmaster outright refuses to even publicly aknowledge any wrongdoing by the responsible parties. He has no recourse against bullying, because he is much more in danger of being expelled himself if he retaliates in kind than to receive justice if he follows the acceptable course of action; and we don't really know how much bullying or peer pressure of participation he was under from his own housemates.

He will have very quickly realised, that even if he manages to finish the school he will have a very hard time to be compensated fairly for his work, despite his talents; because people will look down on him either because of his class background, or his race or his lack of social graces. And his only friend, a white girl, despite sharing the disadvantage of class and race (in the sense that she is also not a pureblood, since blood purism was used as a metaphor for racial inequality), she had a very different experience than him. One - she didn't grow up in an abusive household, two - because her family wasn't quite as poor as his, since, you know, her dad didn't drink away all their income; and three - she was planted into a much more socially flexible environment to make connections, aka the Gryffindor house.

Hell, even the way that some parts of HP fandom insist on hypersexualising the relationship of two prepubescent children is consistent with the portrayal of black boys in media. Because a thirty year old white man is a considered a child, but an 11 year old black boy is seen as a man. And if he is a man, the only thing he could want from this innocent white girl must be sexual in nature. Thus all the accusations of a 9-yr-old Severus stalking Lily somehow making sense.

And while I am not going as far as to equate the Death Eaters to Black Panthers, I do remember that the latter were often vilified as violent thugs and armed gang members, when what they actually wanted was to create a unified, defensible front, to be able to provide a safe, nurturing environment for their weakest members. Circling the wagons, if you want. If the Death Eaters weren't comprised of bigoted purebloods with more ambition and money than ability, but of muggleborns and muggle-raised halfbloods who would seek to increase their bargaining power in the Wizengamot and with potential employers, how quickly would they be labeled terrorists, intent on destroying the traditional pureblood ways? They wouldn't even have to kill a single pureblood.

What if they vowed to never accept less payment for services than what is fair, to never accept abysmal working conditions (except maybe to gain the mastery and then adios, motherfucker) and contracts with immoral stipulations; to invest in each others entrepreneural ideas instead of finding investors from pure blood families; at best accepting loans from Gringotts, because if anyone understands unfair treatment, it is goblins? What if they wielded their combined buying power among their own businesses and charging purebloods horrendously; what if they only apprenticed the children of their own circle, especially if the halfblood master of the field was the exceptionally gifted one and thus much more sought after among purebloods? Their social and financial power would be significant enough for a potential Minister of Magic to invest into courting their voting bloc, and for the Guilds to consider representing their interests. They wouldn't have any power on the Wizengamot, not at the beginning, but not every pureblood family was aligned with blood purists, though it is a big question, whether they wouldn't ally themselves with their former enemies once they perceive the ‘unpure’ as a threat. But if they would at least gain one pureblood family as a dissenting voice in the Wizengamot, as an avatar to promote more egalitarian laws... and then reinforce their message by applying the financial pressure... it is not unreasonable that at least some changes will be made. If this sort of power is what Severus imagined to gain from joining the Death Eaters... I can't actually fault him for that.

But I went off on a tangent. The point is, that Snape is one of the few characters who genuinely regretted his actions, but was still perceived as a criminal and a convicted felon, who only escaped imprisonment because an old white privileged man still had something to gain from pressuring him into a life of service and danger. The way his character arc is handled is also reminiscent of the discussions of the school-to-prison pipeline and incarceration rates in the US. And when he died, he died an ignominous death that no one but Harry Potter even valued. No one else would ever see him as a hero. No one else named their child after him, not even Draco, in whose protection Snape was so invested. He stayed a footnote in history, his contributions to the war effort forgotten or attributed to the man that manipulated him; the man who was lauded a hero and managed to finagle a  state funeral while Snape bled out on a dirty floor in an abandoned shack and no one knows where his body is, still vilified as a Dumbledore’s murderer and Voldemort’s bootlicker.

What I am saying, is seeing Severus Snape as conceptually a black man changes a lot in how i perceive his character, despite not changing even one word of canon.

[musette22]

is it weird that I can't even look at their pics right now (seb and chris) because I can't help but feel icky and disappointed? the recent evens reminded me that they are truly two rich and privileged white men who are so dumb just cos they wanna get some. I'm out. Maybe in a year or so I'll check what their projects are. maybe never. I just can't right now. what a shame.

Okay guys, I’ve been debating over whether or not to “open my big mouth” about this (as one anon so sweetly put it once), but I’ve been getting quite a lot of messages like this one and I think I do want to share a few thoughts with you all. I’m going to put them under the cut because this is a long one, and I don’t want to clog up everyone’s dash ❤️

First of all, let me just make it clear that I am fully aware of the severity of this pandemic, especially in some places, including in the US, and that I am in no way trying to make light of any of it or undermine how serious this situation is for a lot of people around the globe right now, many of you included. It’s a terrible situation, and it’s far from over. I’m also not aiming to be an apologist for the bad decisions of privileged white males just because I have a crush on them, because that idea is abhorrent to me, but I’m aware some of you might still feel like I am, and that’s your right.

Having said all that, I am getting a bit worried about all the posts I’ve seen about how people are angry and disillusioned with Sebastian and Chris’s behaviour. I’m not trying to invalidate your disappointment, because it’s totally fair to wish they’d made different decisions, more akin to the decisions you yourself presumably would have made. And if that disappointment goes deep enough then it is absolutely fair if you want to unstan them and stop following or supporting them (that does not extend to sending them hate though, that is not in any way acceptable, no matter how disappointed we are).

But, as anon rightfully points out, the fact of the matter is that they are privileged white male celebrities. This is not news. They (especially Chris) have been successful celebrities for a long, long time, and with celebrity come certain privileges. They can afford massive houses in LA and big apartments in expensive areas in New York City, for instance. They get to go to cool parties, they get free stuff, everyone kisses their ass. They get paid exorbitant amounts of money (Chris much more so than Seb of course) that bear no direct relation to their work and responsibilities anymore, at this point.

And that’s not to say they don’t work hard, they do - but so do most of us, and we’re not getting paid nearly as much as them. It’s inherently unfair, but that’s what celebrity culture (and capitalism) are. Now, I’m not saying everyone has to blindly accept the status quo and just ignore how unfair it all is – far from it. In some ways, I wish more people would denounce celebrity culture, because it is in some senses terribly toxic and unfair. But listen, if you want to stan celebrities because it brings you some joy in this fucked up world, then I think that’s also perfectly understandable. That’s what I’m doing too. And to stan celebs (at least of the calibre of Chris and Seb) we need them to be famous, otherwise we wouldn’t even know them and we would get no content to consume. They are famous because they are in Hollywood movies, and they are in Hollywood movies because they play the Hollywood game - to some extent, at least. Playing the Hollywood game means everything from flying all over the world for movie premieres and leaving a huge carbon footprint, to going to glitzy parties where there a are lots or questionable people present, to “lying” in interviews because of contractual obligations - and sometimes it also means playing along with fake PR rumours or relationships, even if it’s bad PR.

I know people are worried about Chris, and especially Seb, being “bought” by Hollywood and its money and temptations, and losing his integrity and that he won’t be that sweet, soft-spoken, well-read boy who loves his mom anymore. I personally believe that so far, both Seb and Chris have managed to maintain an impressive level of integrity throughout it all, and I’m still hopeful that that isn’t going to change (much).

But it’s not realistic to have the same expectations for them you would have for your loved ones for instance, because they’re not. We have zero relationship to them as people, and they owe us nothing. They give us movies and pictures of their pretty faces, and occasionally good advice or lovely hugs at comic cons, but that’s all we’re gonna get from them. They are not our friends or potential partners. They’re human of course, and in that sense just like you and me, meaning they have feelings and thoughts and a right to privacy and they make mistakes, but their circumstances are wildly different from most of ours. They’re surrounded by the Hollywood circus. They are PART of the Hollywood circus, because they’re actors and if you want to be a successful movie actor you have to play the game to some extent. Sebastian cannot be expected to be home all the time and decline going to parties because he prefers staying in with a good book even if he did prefer that, because that way he’d never be noticed by the people who matter, and who could get him where he wants to be. He said it himself, he’s an ambitious guy. He wants bigger roles, bigger challenges. And he’s not going to get them if he doesn’t do some annoying, dumb shit sometimes, unfortunately.

In my view, that doesn’t make him a bad person who doesn’t care about anyone but himself, but it does make him a privileged human. Being a privileged human also entails some responsibilities, though – if you don’t want to become corrupt, you have to make sure you also use your privilege for good. And in my opinion, both Sebastian and Chris do that. They use their voice and their money to help people less fortunate than them. That’s part of that integrity I was talking about. Some of you may disagree, and that’s fine, but this is how I view it.

As for everyone who is upset with them for traveling to Europe during a pandemic and not wearing a mask in public: I completely understand your frustration, and I am frustrated too. This is literally a deadly virus and it has to be taken very seriously, and unfortunately, they’re not taking it very seriously right now, and that kind of sucks. But the truth is, neither of them are breaking any rules and neither of them is being more callous than the majority of people in the countries they’ve been seen in are. The situation in most of Europe is stabilising (not everywhere, and the UK isn’t doing all that great to be fair), and governments are reopening their countries and facilities. Wearing a mask in the street is not mandatory in either Spain or the UK, except for in specific situations such as public transport or if you’re in certain professions. The rules here are different from those in New York etc. because they have been adapted to how each country is faring. 

I live in the Netherlands, and no one here is wearing a mask in the street, not even in the hospital or at the doctor’s, and yet the situation continues to stabilise (I hope to god it stays that way, but that of course remains to be seen). From my friends in Spain and the UK I have heard the situation is much the same. Yes, Sebastian is acting differently from how he did in New York, but he’s in different circumstances too, so that makes sense. Moreover, both Chris and Seb will have been tested before traveling, because they’re privileged celebrities who have access to testing even where lots of normal folks unfortunately don’t.

Now, I’m not saying both guys shouldn’t just have stayed put and not left the country (especially a country where the virus is still rampant), because they should have, and they’re both dumbasses for not doing so. I am definitely disappointed that they’re not being smarter and more considerate about this, but I recognise that my disappointment in part stems from the fact that I put them on a pedestal that I shouldn’t have put them on in the first place. And I know a lot of you are mad at them for flying to Europe “just to get some”, but that is disregarding the fact that both Sebastian’s holiday and Chris’s trip to London seem to be at least partially for PR reasons, most likely pushed and arranged by their agency. The exact extent of how much of it is PR is still a little unclear to me at the moment, but I think it’s fair to assert at this point that they did not just fly to Europe to “get some.”

I know this is ridiculously long, but I have been thinking about all of this a lot these past few days and wanted to get those thoughts out! I hope most of you can understand where I’m coming from here. Love you guys ❤️

[banghwa]

Probably unpopular opinion, but I think a lot of people have projected their own views onto BTS and are now angry/confused that BTS aren’t living up to that idea they had in their head, when BTS never promised them that and never actually changed. They have always done sponsorship/brand partnership stuff. The earliest I can think of was in 2014 but it may have been even earlier and I’ve just forgotten. They chose to be idols and they would have known this is part of that life. They were attacked enough for that decision early on (particularly Yoongi and Namjoon), so it’s sad to see their own fans seeing it as a mark of inauthenticity when they themselves have long since made peace with what other people can only see as as a contradiction.

And personally, as someone who’s been with them nearly their whole career I have to say it’s a little weird seeing people (especially newer ARMYs who weren’t even here then) try to rewrite history and pretend that stuff wasn’t always there. It’s also particularly strange to me seeing some stuff be seen wholly negatively. So few people seem to recognise that just by putting their name to something they can have a stream of income for the company they are still largely carrying that doesn’t require them to work themselves to death. It takes off pressure and they can concentrate more on music, and with that music they can pace themselves rather than needing multiple comebacks a year. For example, I remember the relief I felt with BT21 because I knew those characters could essentially do the work for them.

Idk, it’s almost like people romanticise their pain before when they were exhausted all the time and struggling financially, rather than seeing them as human beings who would inevitably want security and chance to rest without worrying how it would affect their company and everyone who works for it. I was there then, it was heartbreaking to watch and I find it pretty messed up that people talk about it wistfully. That’s not a fair thing to expect of them just for whatever ideal you’ve projected on then.

Obviously you don’t not have to agree with all their choices or agree with BH/HYBE all the time, that’s fine. It just bothers me people don’t recognise their own discomfort and instead project it onto a group of grown men either supposedly betraying them by changing (they didn’t) or being used/forced to do these things (pretty ridiculous considering they could easily walk always from HYBE and sign with whoever the hell they like, I’m sure they’d have plenty of offers). If they’re not who you want then to be, accept that it’s your standard that is causing you to feel unhappy, don’t put it on them.

no i totally get where you're coming from, and i want to reiterate i KNOW that this is coming from personal disappointment, dont get it twisted.

i don't think there's anything wrong with bts doing brand deals, nor do i think it necessarily makes them inauthentic. my concern mainly comes from how much promotion they're doing relative i guess. i cant count how many brand deals they've done this year, on top of so much of their recent content being paid as well. its just frustrating to me as a consummer that the stuff i want to interact with is constantly showing more ways to waste my money, even when you pay for the content. its just inaccessible and alienating, and again, thats a personal frustration.

and i do see your point about "romanticizing" their struggle, thats really not what i mean to do at all. i know for a fact that bangtan deserve all this success more than everyone, and while it did shape them into the artists they are, no one should have to go through that struggle just to be validated. that being said, i think there is a conversation to have on art made from a marginalized background vs art made from a place of privilege, not a conversation i will have here tho bcs there are too many layers to it. on the other hand, while i do agree that the brand deal are probably a good break, i cant help but wonder when does it stop being a break and when does it start being work as well. you could probably also easily argue that the amount of time they've dedicated to things that arent their art ie soop, brand deals, american promotions, more brand deals, interviews, more brand deals, that it hardly leaves them proper time to rest. the difference now too is that the deals don't come from a need. bts dont need any more money. this isnt an act of survival or an investment for them to get a bit of passive income. its just work now.

again, i do get where you're coming from, but i do think things are a little more complicated than you have them layed out to be. bangtan cant just up and leave hybe without a lot going into it im talking lawyers, ndas, etc etc and thats not even covering public backlash. its really not that simple, and i know the same can be said about my own opinions. its not really about holding bts up to some promise they never made. of course we shouldnt expect specific things from them, but it also doesn't mean that we can't be disappointed when certain decision are made. thats just how interacting with people works, we're all bound to have different values, doesn't mean i can't be a bit miffed when they do or say something i dont agree with. also i dont think its fair for you to belittle the efforts bts have made throughout their career to stand for causes and values they obviously are very passionate about, like social change and their music. i get being upset with people having high expectations of them, but to pretend like bts never expressed any emotions of pride into anything they've ever done to show that they care is honestly insultin. how are you going to tell me not to have standards when im here because bts set them in the first place.

[messymindofmine]

OK so this post is probably going to be long and convoluted but I feel like the things I have to say are important and I implore and encourage everybody who sees this to please read and share with me. One of the reasons I think Zayn is so important is not simply because he is South Asian like me but because he is a South Asian who grew up in Britain in one of the most racially segregated areas in the country. What Americans as a whole don't seem to understand is that the way race and racism is defined in America is not necessarily defined the same way in other parts of the world. The UK for example does not define racism in the exact same way as America. As someone who had followed Zayn since the beginning of his career, it's pretty obvious to me how his experiences (specifically his experiences as a mixed race, South Asian Muslim from the North of England) have shaped his views on topic like racism. Yet I've also seen this aspect of his identity go completely over the heads of far too many American (both white and nonwhite) fans. This isn't meant to be an attack on anyone but rather me pointing out just how American-centric the discourse on the way Zayn has been treated is. I've even gotten into several disagreements with fans (some of whom are South Asian) about this. To start, it's important to recognise that race itself is not viewed the same way in Europe and the UK as it is in America. Brexit for example was an act of xenophobia against Eastern Europeans (particularly Polish) but Eastern Europeans are still white. But they still face a great deal of harassment and will often be discriminated against like POC in Britain. Southern Italians aren't treated the same as Northern Italians even in Italy and thus don't necessarily view themselves as white the same way they would be viewed by Americans. In fact, Irish, Welsh and Scottish people aren't treated the same way as English people are in the UK. And with Ireland in particular, there is also the history of partition (something we South Asians know a thing or two about). Irish, Welsh and Scottish people were also forbidden from speaking their own languages by the English colonists for a long time. There is a reason why there has been such a massive push for independence from England since Brexit by all three countries.

All that said, it is important to acknowledge that even Eastern and Southern European people do still have white privilege as do Irish, Welsh and Scottish people. An Italian, Polish etc. person can change their name and adopt a different accent and find acceptance and of course you could argue that this is something they should never have to do at all and I would absolutely agree but the fact remains that it is something POC can not do no matter how hard they try. As far as South Asian in Britain are concerned, the horrific history of colonization continues to play a role today. With regards to Zayn, I have seen British South Asian people get attacked by Americans (often by American POC) when they try to explain why Zayn would react to something the way he did or why he said what he said. And I've had to deal with that too as a South Asian who has spent enough time in the UK and the US and thus has a different perspective than American South Asians. Because I have faced not only attacks but also simple microagressions such as being expected to be the spokesperson for all things regarding Zayn's entire identity (as have other South Asians) it has made me extremely sensitive and admittedly I have lashed out at other fans before who have said something that rubbed me the wrong way. The kicker is that sometimes I even agree with what the person is saying but disagree with the way they've said it. At any rate, I do think there is a fundamental misunderstanding among American fans in general about Zayn's background and how it has impacted his views. Obviously, there are certain things about the South Asian experience that are universal and thus South Asians around the world are able to relate to him but it is important to acknowledge the fact that Zayn is British and thus his views on many things (including racism) are not going to be exactly same as Americans. Obviously, I can't claim to know the entirety of Zayn's views but I have been around long enough to have gotten a pretty good idea of where he stands. It's honestly a bit hurtful the way far too many American fans in general have a tendency to talk over British South Asian fans when they try to offer some perspective to the things Zayn says. I'm not saying that all American fans are like this but I do think it's important to point out that this is something that happens among the fandom and I know plenty of British South Asians who deleted their blogs because they felt so discouraged by the backlash they got. Hell even American South Asians who were able to look beyond the American centric view had to deal with backlash.

Honestly, this whole issue goes beyond just Zayn. There is a serious issue that I've both noticed and experienced when talking to American fans. I have no doubt in my mind that they have nothing but the best intentions but there is often a serious disconnect between Americans when they talk about the racism Zayn us experienced and British South Asians who are trying to explain why the issue goes deeper than they think. I'm not one to beg people to read or share my post but I will do it this time. Please, to all my fellow Zquad members especially the South Asians, take some time to look and share. I'm happy to have a discussion but please don't just scroll by

[talenlee]

Welcome to ERFs

Have you enconutered the term ‘TERF’ and left wondering: Wait, what’s that?

There are some people, TERFs mostly, who think that TERF is a slur. It’s not; slurs are terms used to direct social power against a marginalised group. If you shout TERF at someone on the street, they’re not going to assume someone else is going to attack them because of being so painted. If they are, they’re incredibly paranoid, because TERFs are typically very privileged people who are afraid of being criticised by trans people.

It may sound like I am overdoing it, but I really am not. The typical TERF discourse is an attempt to weaponise outrage at the idea of women facing disagreement from, pretty consistently, other women. But what is a TERF? And what about those other -ERF terms I’ve heard?

So, content warning: TERF stuff! And SWERF stuff! And BLERF stuff! What’s a BLERF? Well, after the fold.

The -ERF grouping of letters stands for -Exclusionary Radical Feminist. To further break that down, let’s work backwards.

Feminist means someone who aligns themselves, politically, with the position of feminism – that is, that there has been a system of power in our society that has directly imposed on women, and, once further examined, many, many groups, and the removal of these power systems will be to the benefit of everyone.

Radical means that there is a direct advocation of change. That is, it’s not enough to vote for these things, or to hope things get better on their own, or just do the things the best way you can in your own life. Radical change is advocated for, in the change of systems and removal of power structures. This is important, a radical feminist is someone who both recognises and wants to change structural power systems in our society that marginalise women.

Exclusionary and here’s the place where the problem starts. Because I’m down for radical feminism. It’s this word, where the term suddenly takes on a term. This is the letter that signals that this person has a radical feminist position but there is someone excluded from it.

So there are a couple of -ERFs, and they’re defined by who they exclude from their feminism. The most notable and commonly known are TERFs, Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists. This position is that yes, feminism is one thing and it’s very good and we need to dismanle all the systems in place that make gender enforcement unfair and that marginalise women, but we also need to make sure that any progress doesn’t benefit trans women. This is obviously shitty as hell, but it also works against itself. Suddenly, there are all these projects that have to be scaled back or done more carefully and more unhelpfully just because ‘well, what if a trans woman benefited as much as a cis woman?’

It sucks!

SWERFs are SEX WORKER Exclusionary Radical Feminists. That is, they think that anything to do with sex workers is somehow outside of feminism. This leads to some weird ideas like the notion that sex workers performing sex work are ‘doing men’s work for them,’ or ‘oppressing themselves,’ which sounds like an interesting academic conversation to have but it’s not an academic conversation, it’s a conversation which involves telling women doing work that they like and they are willing to do that the problems aren’t abusive labor practices or people refusing to pay them, their problem is that they’re only doing this for bad reasons.

Swerfs also tend to have to ignore a lot of things like the presence of nonbinary people, or, uh male-on-male gay porn. That’s pretty weird!

And my newest favourite is BLERFs. That is Bi Lesbian Exclusionary Radical Feminists. The conversation about ‘bi lesbians’ is one of those ones that should kind of not reach beyond the boundaries of ‘oh, that’s a bit silly.’

The idea is that some lesbians describe themselves as bi lesbians. Some other presumably non-bi lesbians, or, conspicuously, non-lesbians, object to this, usually framed as it being somehow harmful to the idea of lesbians to allow it to include lesbians who are bi.

This is, at its core, a disagreement over a word that could be regarded as a sort of clerical disagreement in a style guide, but that would require BLERFs to have an ounce of chill. Instead, BLERFs, as other ERFs, believe in radical, transformative, change-based feminism that extends to all of humanity, except lesbians who describe themselves as ‘bi lesbians.’ And the result is a kind of public discourse where people who rail at the idea of ‘bi lesbians’ say things that kind of give away why they are so annoyed by the idea of ‘bi lesbian.’ It inevitably starts to be about definitional arguments and brings in a wing of toxic conversation about things like ‘gold star lesbians.’

It’s important to remember that -ERFs aren’t just your run of the mill anti-sex worker or transphobic dickheads. -ERFs are still people who are wedded, in their own mind to the project of radical feminism – that is, feminism that sees the world as in need of change. Conservatives aren’t TERFs, they’re just assholes.

Part of why I think recognising -ERFs is that it’s important to have a way to recognise the people that you think might be on your side, but aren’t on the side of the other people on your side. If your aunt is pretty progressive on some things but isn’t okay with trans people, that indicates she’s already drawing lines about who the project of feminism shouldn’t be allowed to include – and that is a problem.

[onelungmcclung]

Hello <3 Could you share what behind the scenes goodies are making you interested in Welsh/Roe? Also, could you share some more about the W*bgott dislike? Specifically how W*b comes off as anti-Semitic? I genuinely want to be educated and appreciate it in advance!

hey!

re welsh/roe: haha, sure thing.

re My Soapbox: that’s a more serious question, but you asked very courteously and I’ll do my best to answer. I hope it will taken in good faith by everyone who reads it. I haven’t discussed it publicly before, and I’m unlikely to do so again.

[nb. I’m going to request no rebl/gs on this, just because it’s a two-part answer dealing with two entirely unrelated subjects.]

i. welsh/roe: it came to me in a vision (it did not)

It’s Not That Deep: sometimes I like to pick two characters and speculate what their dynamic would be like in canon and how it might play out as a ship. (sometimes my experimental oneshots backfire on me horribly and I lose sleep over what is suddenly The Love Story of the Ages. I still think the basic approach is... fun? no I have not “learned better”.) so, that’s a mindset in play.

I think perhaps it was this that made me realise that they don’t have much onscreen interaction and thus wonder what their dynamic would be like. I guess baberoe being such a popular ship (and I do like it!) means that most of the roe fic is written through the lens of that dynamic (much angst, much fluff), and I just like to try out other angles. rarepairs are a great way to investigate characters’ less-explored facets. roe is often written as angst-ridden; welsh is probably one of the least angsty characters in the show; he’s a tiny fearless powder keg of energy & humour. what would they bring out in each other? this is for research purposes. (they certainly share a tendency to charge headfirst into danger without hesitating.)

roe does shout at welsh (“an officer & a grownup”, etc). I think welsh respects it, tbh. and I think that’s pretty much their only interaction apart from when welsh is injured.

which brings me onto rick warden’s quote about shane covering him while harry’s injured - he’s discussing it more in the context of acting choices, but the character implications are what I care about. roe is trying to protect welsh while he can’t protect himself; welsh feels protected by him. which is something welsh very rarely seems to need.

of course this is just what roe does. but for both of them, it’s a crucial moment. and for me, I’m always interested in small, potentially revealing interactions between characters who don’t have much screentime together.

ii. so you hate w*bgott

oof. ok.

a disclaimer: it’s only recently I analysed why I’m Not Into this ship. when I first discovered its popularity, my initial thought was “why?” but I didn’t dwell on it. (ship hate means it’s time to go outside.) coming back to the fandom made me think about it a little more closely. 

admittedly, I find webster self-absorbed, entitled and privileged in almost every scene he’s in, so that doesn’t help. but I’m capable of taking an interest in his friendships (1st platoon, for example); I just do not think he and liebgott are friends, at any point in the narrative, and I would ship liebgott with literally anyone else in the company before w*bgott would ever occur to me. frankly I think it’s as plausible as martin/webster or guarnere/liebgott, and it never did occur to me. (that is, of course, just me, but this is my Opinion Hour and everyone has to live with it.)

firstly, I dislike the scene in wwf when he pulls a gun on the german shopkeeper. to some viewers, I think this reads as righteous anger. to me, it reads as self-involvement. what he should be doing is helping the prisoners, not threatening random shopkeepers. (lesniewski gets that. web doesn’t.) no doubt the shopkeeper is complicit in local antisemitism and his business has likely benefited, but he’s not important. the wellbeing of the jewish prisoners is the priority. 

(his anger towards the german troops also comes across as self-indulgent and rather... unearned. the rest of the company has gone through a much more brutal war than he has. I’ve tried, for the sake of argument, to read his anger as altruistic, but that is not how it comes across to me.)

liebgott prioritises the prisoners completely. when he realises the nature of the camp, he reins in his feelings - of horror, grief, anger - in order to focus on the man he’s talking to. he knows this man has seen horror, cruelty and death beyond anything he himself has ever seen or imagined. this is the first time in a long time he has been around other jewish people, and it is nightmarish, and all he cares about is helping them. these people could be his friends, his family, his neighbours, himself: they are his people. at first, he refuses a direct order to tell the prisoners they have to remain here. when he relays it to the prisoners, he tries hard to be calm, not to distress them further. when he cries, it’s only for a few moments, because they are still what is most important: not his own grief for them.

I emphasise this as the emotional context of the mountaintop scene in “points”. liebgott feels unable to show his grief in front of the other soldiers, because they don’t share it, but he can show anger. the commandant mission offers the possibility of some catharsis, of a glimpse of revenge. (what he needs, I think, is to be among other jewish people, to grieve with them, to know that his feelings are understood, shared, recognised, accepted; but he wants to avenge his people.)

webster has lashed out at germans twice: the shopkeeper, the troops. he views that anger as justified. and yet in this instance - an order to interrogate and kill a nazi commandant - he balks. he argues the man might be innocent. the commandant is more culpable than anyone else they’ve encountered, but webster treats liebgott’s anger, which is far far more personal than webster’s, as disproportionate and irrational. he has no understanding of liebgott’s grief and rage; he makes no attempt to understand. he’s uncomfortable with it; he dismisses it. it’s deeply privileged and condescending.

part of me thinks this is just bad writing: it’s a contrived moral debate; webster wasn’t on the mission irl and his presence seems unnecessary; if he’s so opposed to the mission, he should have voiced that to speirs, not liebgott. but bad writing or not, this is the show and characterisation we’re all working from as fans. 

(I think this ship is somewhat responsible for fans mischaracterising lieb as “angry”, for... reacting to antisemitism?. but because I don’t read anything for this ship, I have limited engagement with that.)

just for the record, while I’m pouring out my heart, I don’t see any evidence of a friendship, even a volatile one, in tlp. web didn’t know the men in 2nd platoon particularly well before, and still less post-bastogne. I think he plays politics with jones to try to get off the patrol, and then plays politics with 2nd platoon in order to be more accepted by the group. (the fact neither plan works is... quite entertaining, really.)

I know people point to their conversation about plans for the future as evidence of a friendship, but to me that interaction seems fairly one-sided. liebgott is looking forward to getting home; he wants to talk about it. web isn’t particularly interested in the conversation. that and their scenes together in “points” seem scripted to emphasise how little they have in common. and, of course, that their backgrounds have little in common isn’t necessarily a barrier to friendship, but webster dismissing liebgott’s anger over the camps is. there’s no way to write them being friends that doesn’t involve a heartfelt apology and a lot of slow relationship development.

I don’t lose sleep over what other people write/ship; that’s their prerogative. I don’t have to read it (in this case, I haven’t and won’t). I’m not telling anyone they can’t write this - or any other - ship. I’m simply uncomfortable with its popularity. 

liebgott has some great onscreen friendships (mostly implied, as is the way of the show): tab, popeye, grant, ramirez, babe, mcclung, alley; maybe dukeman, jackson, tipper, luz, martin, malarkey, roe... I could even make an argument for liebgott & lesniewski. personally, I would much rather see more attention given to any/all of those.

[buddha-in-disguise]

This is how it's done

Episode 5.15 at last.

While the emphasis has been on Nia's story in this episode, the synopsis made it clear Alex, Kelly and J'onn had a secondary storyline running as well. So again we were eager to watch knowing they were finally getting more than a token few minutes together.

Did it deliver?

Oh hell yes.

You just have to look on Twitter to see the praise being heaped on it by fans.

But first let's get the elephant in the room out of the way. William.

The opening sequence as Kara is fighting with Nia, and Nia has to be the one reminding Kara she has a date? Already covered by me and others, but to reiterate: that does not give a vibe of someone excited to be going on a first date. You can't even use the excuse of her mind was on the fight, because so was Nia's.

As to Kara at her apartment with Alex prior to the date?

Those words, "Cancel it for me."

Lets say (for arguments sake) it is nerves again speaking. Maybe it is, but that she is even having those thoughts? That she completely forgot about the 1st date, and needed reminding? If Kara can't get invested in the date, how are the audience expected to become invested?

As for the date itself. Kara arrives.... having been told by Alex to wear the blue top because .... well reasons .... and she is wearing the purple? So, not wanting to go with the best look then?

I didn't mind the date per se, although I did wonder if Kara was simply trying to not show pool skills, because I can't believe for a second, with Alex as a sister, and the control Kara now has on her powers (worry over lack of control would be the only other reason for her hesitation that I can think of), Kara hasn't been pulled into playing many times.

Did I get a date vibe? No. I felt more bonding yes (like why has it taken until now to even vaguely have that much), but date? Nope. Still not feeling it. If any of the above was a one off instance, you could shrug it off. But all of them? Sorry but as I say, if Kara isn't that invested in a first date, then we can't be expected to be as invested. However, that isn't to say that William annoyed me. In truth having him more on the sidelines was a relief as it finally allowed others to get some much needed screen time.

The Nia storyline.

This is obviously one extremely close to me, as my husband is transgender, and we have other family who are also transgender.

Nicole's input was definitely felt. Some of the lines she spoke were ones we have said ourselves almost word for word.

This is a topic that is one I've been extremely vocal about, and one in particular I have spoken about (in the William and Kara at CatCo scene) is the figures for transgender people killed in the last year alone in the USA, but more importantly that this number is likely not a true representation as many who die are misgendered after death.

It was so important to show just how bad for the transgender community it is. And no, it wouldn't necessarily be a fact Kara would know. Even those in the LGBTQ community aren't always aware of these figures. As for William being the one stating the figures back to Kara, again in the context I had no qualms about it. In fact having a CIS straight man write the piece and be a supportive ally is an important message in it's own right. I was worried that wouldn't come across, but I felt it did.

If ever there was a line that spoke volumes in this weeks Supergirl episode it was this:

"They want us to be invisible because of their own fears, they want to erase us so...... we need to shine even brighter." - Nia Nal

And shine Nicole Maines (and Roxy Wood, because the additional line about being a Black transgender woman - take my heart, stomp over it, then expect me to function), did. Both deserve so much praise on the way they delivered their performances.

I genuinely cried at some of this weeks episode, because the experiences have been ones we have faced as a transgender household. Being white does afford us a privilege that Black transgender people (especially the women) don't have. But as I say, it has been something I've been vocal about for a long time.

Lastly Kara and Nia on the balcony. Holy mother of god (or goddess), tears. Again. Nicole and Melissa once again were so good it felt like a punch to the gut. Kara wiping that tear off Nia's cheek. Big ugly sobbing from me. Gah! Just ....

Now Alex and Kelly. While I'm still craving a nice intimate atmosphere at home with them, having had so little of Dansen (and Kelly) it was a relief that for once Kelly wasn't given diminished screentime. Not only that, she was instrumental in helping Alex navigate through the VR world.

Alex having that PTSD flashback to being in the tank. Whoa, finally acknowledging it affected her and obviously still does. I loved how Kelly is so good at helping Alex maintain her equilibrium. You could tell it wasn't just because of her training or profession, but as a girlfriend who knows and understands how to communicate to Alex in that moment of stress, much like Alex was able to realise Malefic was manifesting as Kelly in the earlier part of the season, simply because she knew her girlfriend well enough.

Watching Alex train to get used to the Martian weapon, felt very reminiscent of S1 where Alex was training Kara early on. It was good to see her off balance for once in her training, as she has always shown a confidence in her ability until now. For those who complain she brought up wanting to be back at the DEO, as someone who has heavy military presence in our family (for at least 4 generations on my maternal side), I can safely say, going from military (and remember the DEO is recognised and spoken about in canon as being a military operation), and suddenly and unexpectedly thrown back into civilian life is one heck of an adjustment. It's an adjustment for most even when they know it's coming. To be so abrupt, so unexpected? Alex is going to want that structure back, and have that support around her. It is absolutely not unrealistic for her to feel this way or to talk about it. I would've been more surprised if she hadn't.

"And this is my gun."

Alex giving no crap. The whole rescue sequence was a joy to watch.

If I had a complaint, as I mentioned, I would've loved just a moment of real quiet intimacy between Kelly and Alex. We've barely seen anything of that sort. I hope we get something next episode (which also looks amazing from the trailer).

I could go through the episode and pick up so many times on how good it was. It was so much, I know I will have forgotten something I wanted to say. But I'm exhausted (almost no sleep will do that to you, damn being in the UK and these stupid o'clock viewing times), and it was so much to unpack.

Brainy, was barely in the episode but damn, so lovely (& heartbreaking) to see him give the information to the NCPD to help against transphobic attacks.

Onto a side plot, but finally we have more about Leviathan.

Leviathan have those bodies suspended.

What if William dies in 5.19 and becomes one of those suspended bodies for 5.20 or was supposed to, as Nicole mentioned on her Instagram story they still had scenes to film, and a couple were pretty amazing? With Staz back, would it have involved him, possibly as a sleeper agent? I've touted this idea before. While I would prefer that a MOC isn't cast into being a bad guy again, or killed off, I would more than happily see him simply go back to London and The Times. But I guess we wait to see what happens there.

But if, like Russell in 5a, he becomes an unwitting agent of Leviathan & a bad guy, cue fight scene, possibly in a VR setting? Maybe? Who knows.

Last but by no means least - they killed off Jeremiah. Since we're not entirely sure if Cadmus operated in the same way on Earth Prime as they did on Earth 38, we don't yet know the circumstances behind his death.

Will we get more explanation about it? Honestly I'm not overly bothered unless it helps serve a current storyline. Merely because episode numbers are running out, and it does at least bring us closure on his character one way or another. Something a lot of us have questioned for so long now.

As for complaints, the only ones expressing any real disappointment have been fans who have either regularly attacked other fans (especially those of in the SC or Dansen fandoms), or the outright transphobic users (I won't call them fans), who as the episode makes clear, are everywhere. The transphobes come out in force everytime with Nicole, so it isn't a surprise to see them again. As Nia says, it what transgender people face on a daily basis.

Plus with no Lena in the episode, it helps show that fans didn't need a Lena/Kara centric episode for this to garner such positive reactions, particularly from the LGBTQ fans. In some ways, as many have been saying (yes even SC fans), this Lena drama has long since gone by its sell by date and not having Lena once more stuck in her laboratory wasn't missed. And god, I say this as a huge Lena fan. I still want her on screen of course, but we need progression on what is happening with her. Both Lex and Lena have felt stale of late, and while I know it changes as we get into the last few episodes, I can truly say neither was missed this time. And before anyone jumps in, no this isn't bashing SC (I still ship both Dansen and SC, as well as Brainia), or saying SC shouldn't happen, or Lena is evil, or not needed. I don't think that at all. I merely am getting tired of a merry-go-round on Lena in her laboratory that we've had of late, & the only interaction has been with Lex. Time to break her out of that cell!

I don’t know what they were putting in the water in Vancouver when they did the Batwoman and Supergirl episodes this week, but they both had me simultaneously laughing & crying! It looked ugly for a minute there.

Both were outstanding episodes.

As much as I've had my criticism over some of this season, when Supergirl get it right like they did here, they soar! This was one of my top episodes for the entire series.

And despite all the news in the world right now, Supergirl trended on Twitter again.

Gif courtesy of @ Daily_danvers on Twitter.