#idk like the fact we don’t have marriage equality for disabled people???????

[heartslobbf]

oh also can people stop saying that literally every single tiny fucking thing is ableist. like hi physically disabled neurodivergent person here, able bodied people are really out here claiming that everything ever is ableist in the most performative way imaginable, doing nothing to actually help disabled people and just speaking over us instead, pushing an inaccurate idea of what disability is and how disabled people are. for instance, you all seem to think we’re unintelligent as fuck, and you also think that all physically disabled people? cant go outside? you infantilise us and generalise our needs, when disability is so complex and each individual has a specific set of needs to be met that could be contradictory with another’s. you love to coddle white neurodivergent people, shielding them from criticism for racism by claiming that ‘they don’t understand’, thereby enabling racism from white neurodivergent people and also reinforcing the infantilisation of disabled people as a whole. this also suggests that kids are like? naturally racist ??? literally what the fuck like go outside get off the internet stop pretending to give a shit about disability when all you really want to do is enable racism and still somehow get woke points on twitter. like do i even need to mention how the only activism you see about physical disability from able bodied ppl is saying that the phrase go outside is ableist. you guys go on and on about autism and adhd (not the only disabilities in the neurodivergent bracket anyway) in an uneducated and gross way and just ignore every other fucking disability all while claiming to be suuuuch a good ally. shut the fuck up. stop making jokes about diabetes or pay me a tenner for each fucking one so i can afford better medical equipment

[verdantmoontruther]

the anti-bkdk ramble that turned into an anti-internet ramble

i’m not like the biggest or most present bnha fan on here (i’m more about naruto personally) and i know this point has been discussed to death within the more intellectually capable circles of the fanbase, but i think we should really talk about the hypocrisy of people that excuse or ‘forgive’ bakugou’s behaviour for whatever purpose they come up with, whether it be shipping or ‘bc he’s hot’ or whatnot.

the tl;dr of what i want to say: bakugou and midoriya do not like each other. there is no evidence for that in the books or otherwise. it is unwise to view their genuine dislike as unresolved sexual tension because injecting a sexual component into bakugou’s decade-long antipathy makes for a much, much scarier bullying scenario. also, please touch grass and get a hobby outside of media consumption; i make friendship bracelets and photograph graffiti around my town. it’s very fun. take a break from the online world.

first things first: i UNDERSTAND, fully and wholeheartedly, the desire to see a queer enemies-to-lovers relationship happen in mainstream media. i may be young enough to be on the cusp between gen z and millennial, but i’m also old enough to remember when homosexuality was the weird joke paraded out on late night telly to explain a man’s bizarre behaviour, or be the shitty punchline to an equally unfunny joke. i remember feeling young and disgusted, young and scared, young and hopeless when i thought that we would never see anything remotely resembling a healthy gay relationship on tv. i didn’t even think legalised gay marriage is something that would be won in my youth. but you’re going about it the wrong way.

bakugou bullied midoriya for a long time. that is an immutable fact, and a very important aspect of both of their identities. in their childhoods, bakugou cemented midoriya into a victim role by singling him out and tormenting him. it’s important for some of you to understand that you can’t come back from that. whatever relationship they may have in the future will forever be tainted by the fact that, when bakugou knew he had the upper hand physically over midoriya, he chose to ridicule, belittle, and hurt him, and was never told by those around him that he may have been wrong for it.

it bothers me to no end that the people who will recognise how well the bnha universe fits as an allegory to the treatment of disabled people in society - which is, in my opinion, a completely astute and intelligent observation - will fail to see bakugou’s treatment of midoriya in their formative years as not abusive or ableist, but criticise a character because they said something demeaning about the quirkless population. it’s interesting because the allegory only extends to the characters and actions that are easily dealt with (cancelling a minor character for their words is very easy), but as soon as you raise the issue of physically, emotionally, and mentally abusing someone for their disability, it gets wishy washy because that’s their favourite character that we’re accusing of unsavoury behaviours. it begs the question - do you actually give a shit at all?

the reason i raise this is because fiction directly translates to real life. the things an author, screenwriter, or mangaka write about and the perspective they write about it from effect our view of ourselves and other people, especially in an industry aimed at, and mostly consumed by, the youth. that’s why i discussed what i did in the second paragraph - representation is important because it makes people feel more comfortable in their skin. and i can understand why you crave seeing yourself depicted as the hero of a story. but it also means that bad interpretations can weasel their way into the malleable minds of the young people consuming these stories: think about everything jk rowling was cancelled for. her only irish character constantly blowing things up. hook-nosed elves in love with money. werewolves preying on young boys as a metaphor for the aids epidemic.

i can’t blame horikoshi for the way that people infer his writing because there is absolutely no evidence in his writing that bakugou and midoriya harbour romantic feelings for each other, but i do know where this sentiment comes from: you kids are grasping at straws, wanting to make genuinely antagonistic characters into some sort of star-crossed romance because this is your first time being exposed to fighty blowy uppy shounen that doesn’t give a shit about love, and it worries me, because it means you begin romanticising all the wrong behaviours. if i was reading half the shit you guys like about the mythical bkdk dynamic in an actual book, it’d be raising red flags immediately. no communication. possessiveness. jealousy. entitlement. belittling. taking out their anger on each other. i’m concerned for you lot.

some of you aren’t going to like hearing this, but i think the reason we are seeing such a strong insurgence of the romanticisation of such an unhealthy relationship dynamic, apart from representation, is because being bombarded by so many stories and headlines and works in a day due to the internet has desensitised us to a lot of things. you look at a news headline about a bombing or a murder and you don’t feel anything anymore. same thing with fiction: ten years of bullying, when you have nothing from your own personal life to compare it to, doesn’t sound that bad. someone telling you to kill yourself gets brushed off like water off a duck’s back because everyone tells everyone to kts these days. having no friends is normalised because all of us people online are ‘depressed and anxious uwu no fwends’. in order to get a real hit right in the gut you need something that takes the word angst and amplifies it by a scale factor of seven million. in a culture that sensationalises pain and is devoid of empathy, midoriya’s situation is just not enough anymore.

once again idk if any of this made sense. i write what i think and if it comes out like a jumble of random letters then oh well.

[codenamesazanka]

You know that “survival of the fittest” phrase. MLA taking that too literally. :/ there’s no equality in their little shit of an ideology. I was wondering what’s the real life counterparts of the MLA? And what do you think will happen to them? Got any predictions? I hope The LOV just steals a truck load of moneys at the end uwu

Hi @shinakiraarts​ !!! I love you for this question because this is gonna let me indulge in topics I’m really interested in: evolution/sociology/bioethics. So, warning: nerd blabber. and super long. 

-

First fact: You’re right! The Meta Liberation Army is shit. 

The phrase “survival of the fittest” is often attributed to Darwin, but it was actually coined by Herbert Spencer, a philosopher who is now associated with the ideas of Social Darwinism. Basically, he believed that the concept of natural selection should be applied to human society - humans are/should be in an all-out competition in the struggle of life. 

The ‘weak’ got their due in destitution and will/should die off, while the ‘strong’ deserved their wealth and power and will lead civilization to greatness. So, social inequality was the ‘natural way of things’. It was a very attractive idea to rich people already in power, and was often used as rationalization for exploitation, racism, colonialism... a lot of oppressive politics and laws. 

There is never any equality in an ideology that believes in ‘survival of the fittest’ as social policy. It’s intended for there to not be equality. 

*

The real life counterparts - or close to it - of the MLA unfortunately existed (and some continue to exist), and their ideology contributed to countless human right abuses. 

According to Iceman:

“One's rank in society will be directly tied to the strength of one's meta ability. Beyond sheer strength, life has no value.” 

For Social Darwinists, one’s rank in society already signifies their ability and strength. The wealthy were fit, the poor were unfit. And because social stratification wasn’t only due to class/wealth... The idea would come to include: individuals without disabilities were fit, those with disabilities weren’t; Western societies were fit, other non-western cultures weren’t; and one race above all was fit, other races weren’t. 

“[Some] life has no value” was often the conclusion. This would lead to eugenics - making sure only the ‘right’ people would reproduce - and that turned into policies such as marriage prohibitions, forced sterilization, and euthanasia. The most notorious example is Nazi Germany; but the United States deserve a mention for having a huge movement that influenced the Nazis; Imperial Japan dabbled in it; and many other countries. 

*

Here are the actual facts. Evolution is a law of nature - it’s the change in the characteristics of a populationover time. Natural selection is how evolution occurs - some characteristics that can be passed down from parent to offspring allow the individuals to survive better in a particular environment and reproduce. Because they are able to have kids, who also survive, those characteristics will become common in a population. 

It’s really important to understand that evolution is just change. Evolution has no purpose and no goal and no foresight. There are no ‘higher-evolved’ creatures, there is no endpoint that accumulates into an ‘ultimate being’. Natural selection isn’t picking out the ‘best’ traits - it’s simply that some traits happen to give an advantage in survival in a particular environment and so they are passed on. 

“The gazelle has evolved longer legs to better escape predators” 

is more 

“Gazelles with slightly longer legs hada slightly better chance of surviving to reproductive age, andthus came to dominate the population.”

*

BTW, ‘fitness’ in a biology context means “an individual’s ability to produce viable offspring”. If Iceman had his balls chopped off before he ever had any kids, he’s not fit anymore. He lost the ‘survival of the fitness’ contest. 

*

A funny and often overlooked thing: the ‘strength’ that the MLA believe in, is subjective. Are we classifying quirks by combat power? Flexibility of usage? Impact on people? And they know that some quirks do better in some environments, and others in other environments, right? Oh, but I have a feeling they’re not generous enough to figure out what quirks are most powerful in what environment.

Iceman is no doubt very powerful and strong right now in Deika City, where he has access to ice, and to water to produce more ice. So what happens when you stick him in a desert, or any other arid place? And put him up against someone who can manipulate sand? 

And what about having a quirk that isn’t ‘strong’, but becomes one when combined with a clever and strategic mind? Mr. Compress’ quirk is odd, not immediately obvious that it can be dangerous; but he’s demonstrated he can toss boulders at cars and rip off limbs. 

Should Iceman be defeated by someone with a small, quiet quirk because he didn’t go to fucking school and learn, idk, physics, and the person did, I guess he deserves to die? 

Or what about a quirk like one that allows a person to be immune to diseases? Not immediately demonstrable? When a plague comes, they’ll be the strongest person in the city. 

A bunch of megalomaniacs with flawed, unsustainable ideas - that’s the MLA. Their society would’ve been shambles. 

*

I wanna talk about the ‘law of the jungle’ the MLA has, in comparison to the League of Friends Villains’ apparent policy of ‘we don’t really care about your quirk, just be loyal and willing to kill and become part of Shigaraki’s harem and we’ll find a way for you to help.’ 

As cruel and driven by ruthless self-interest as humans can be, people can also be so incredibly kind and compassionate. Selfishness may have been a part of human evolution, but so was/is empathy and altruism. 

There is the idea of aggressive cavemen society that weed out the weak - including the ‘deformed’, the old; but archeology also has evidence that early humans and hunter-gatherer groups loved and cared for their disabled, had helped them and each other survive. In some tribes, the old people past reproductive age might be frail and unable to work as much, but they served an essential function: transmitting culture. Watching the children, teaching socialization and language, telling the stories that will be retold again and again. The traits we consider to be ‘human’.

Culling or accommodation. 

Twice - with a paper bag over his head, afraid of getting hurt, was limited in his quirk usage, trying to recover from a traumatic event - was readily recruited into the League of Villains. He - according to himself - wasn’t able to do much, so he helped out in anyway he can, and he became the League’s most loyal member. He was allowed to set his boundaries, allowed to be himself, and allowed to go at things in his own way. 

The MLA wouldn’t have done any of that. Helping, finding alternatives, accepting, nothing like that for Twice. Just look at the MLA’s attempted ‘recruitment’ of Twice - break him down psychologically, force him to use his quirk in the way the leaders would want, probably kill him had he been too troublesome. Instead of succeeding, it backfired on them badly. 

“Embrace your ‘meta-ability’, live as you like, and be free to be themselves” is the supposed values of the MLA. The problem is, they put too much weight on quirks, on training them and using them and judging each other by them. All their focus is on the ability, as if it was a single separate thing - and they forgot to look at the human that ultimately controls that ability. 

*

Anyways! I hope the League are able to reunite and completely wreck these mega-idiots and break Redestro’s stupid L-shaped fingers and steal all their resources!!! Ahhhhh I love the League of Villains!!!