#if someone isn't on here that isn't an indictment of any kind - i'm just some guy that's only read and remembers so much 😳

[bylertruther]

Hello hai I’m messaging you because you seem knowledgeable about the fanfic sphere and also seem to be one of the few people that actually understand Will and stuff so I was wondering if you have any fic recs that characterize him well. Obviously ur a byler person so stuff like that but if you have any others you think are good (like Will interacting with Jonathan or something) that would also be cool. Don’t answer if you don’t want to but if you do it would be much appreciated <3

ooooh, fun! i love talking about fan fiction, so thank you for giving me the opportunity to gush. :) i haven't read everything out there, but i'll try my best to share what i have come across. i'm very sick right now so i'm most definitely leaving authors out, but here are some that i found myself really enjoying and that resonated with me:

anything by wiseatom and boygirl. their will always reads as really balanced to me, and that same gentleness and whimsy that will has and represents in canon is threaded through and highlighted in their works in such a fantastic, reverent way. they allow will to be as he is, to exist in his every shade, and it's so lovely to read. i always come away from their works feeling like they really love him and don't want or need him to be anyone other than who he is.

belonging to your dreams. it's a series featuring richie and will! the first part focuses on their friendship, and the second part is an in-progress season four continuation that is admittedly more of an ensemble piece, but the will scenes are still fantastic. honestly, this feels like the biggest love letter to will byers ever. they don't make him out to be anyone that he isn't and they really capture his values in such a lovely way. it has so much heart and so much love—for the source material, for will, and for those that see themselves in him. i post screenshots from these fics all the time and reread them over and over again, because they just make me so happy and fill me with so much love for him lol.

anything by byliever. they write married adult byler with kids and i really, really enjoy it! i feel that their writing and characterization is really unique in this fandom—it provides a perspective that i've yet to see in any other works. it feels really true to character, too, and i love the depth they've given them. so, so, so much love in their writing.

anything by pseudologia. it's unfortunately rare to see people break out of that "hyper-repressed will (re: everything, but especially his sexuality)" characterization that's common in all types of fandom works, and this author's work feels like one of the most accurate representations of what an older will could be like. it just feels like a natural progression for him and the journey that he's on now in the show, and i'm so glad that someone sees the vision, too. their will sounds like will, thinks like will, and has little details that i love and personally agree with. another really balanced portrayal, i feel—he's allowed to be so many things and it all just feels so natural and so human.

be the boy. it's mostly mike pov, but my god... it's just so beautiful, fun, and full of love and life. i reread it while grabbing the link and i got all emotional again. it's just... beautiful. that's the only word i can think to describe it. they capture his essence so wonderfully in this lighthearted context—that unwillingness to love anything other than what he loves with his entire heart and his commitment to that, that mischievousness and razor-sharp awareness that he has, his capacity for mercy and hope, the strength that he draws from mike and his love for him—and it really pulls at your heartstrings. the ending scene is perfection. the jonwill is jonwilling. the willel is willeling. a feel-good fic for sure.

an ode to hope (and other funny things). i think about this fic whenever i eat ziti now <3 hehe. yet another fic that i felt captured will's heart, his hope, his love, and his merciful nature so, so beautifully, and with such care, too. it's such a treat to read and it leaves you feeling held.

The Breath That Passed From You To Me. mermaid!will au, who cheered? another author that you can tell really loves will. beautiful world- and character-building. this author captures will perfectly in every single way, i feel. he's brave, sincere, loving, and adaptable. he's just... will. their writing is so dear to me. a must read for sure.

anything by smoosnoom (moonsooms). they're well-known for a reason! i particularly love that they're not afraid to shine a light on and bring out every side of the characters they write about. their characters and the stories they tell are always very human, very layered, and treated with such care.

blackdeathmamba you will always be famous! another fantastic writer with such vision, such creativity, and so much heart. their characters are layered, complex, and so human-like.

I'll Be Waiting, Time After Time. the byler fluff of all time to ever and that will ever. so good, so sweet, and so full of love. will's reactions are so very will and i love his relationships with everyone else here.

Wrathful Wishing Star and Poisoned Apple Tree. a tribute!will x victor!mike hunger games au! so riveting and so beautiful. fantastic writing, world-meshing, and characterization. will is so balanced here, too. he's tenderhearted, brave, strong, scared, smart, determined, loving, sweet, and so much more. this fic really doesn't get the attention it deserves, i feel!

anything by lilacline! oh... my god. whatever i say won't be enough. if you haven't read lilac's work, then don't even look at me. literally click away right now and get to reading! chop chop! seriously just fucking superb all around in every way. no words can do it justice—it's just something you feel. even when will is a bat, he's still will. i just. no words! only an immense sense of love for their writing!

it goes without saying that this is not an all-encompassing list! i've only read a small fraction of all that's out there, and i'm relying on sick-brain memory right now to boot, too.

also, as flattered as i am, i want to reiterate that the king understanders and knowers are ultimately the duffers themselves. these are just the works that i, personally, felt captured will's canon essence in such a brilliant and scratched-an-itch-in-my-brain way that i came away from them feeling... changed? they touched something in my heart in a way that i struggle to put into words (clearly).

anyway, i hope there's something in here that's new to you and that you'll like. happy reading! 💙💛

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

AITA for asking someone out as a joke?

😥🙊

Normally I would never ask someone out as a joke but I thought it would be funny this time because of the situation!

So we are all in high school. I'm the youngest. I'm 16m, and everyone else involved are seniors. There is a girl in our friend group who I was pretty sure didn't like me. "Em".

We don't really get along, but Em's not too mean or anything. Sometimes, she disagrees with me just to disagree with me. An example is one time I was talking about how one of my classes was hard and she said "I don't think it's difficult" I'm in an AP class and she isn't, so she has no idea how challenging or unchallenging my classes are. Another time when she found out I liked dogs, she made fun of me for being 'one of those men who hates cats because I don't understand consent' I don't really know what that means. I like Jack Russell terriers. I wasn't aware that was indictive of some sort or personality trait or lack of boundaries. I also don't dislike cats so I'm not sure where it came from. She also shoots down every suggestion I make on principle. Once I suggested we go bowling, and she gagged, but then got excited about it when someone else in the friend group agreed with me and acted like it was the other friends idea. She's also made negative comments about my body, namely that I don't have a girlfriend because I don't work out and my arms are small. I'm the only one in the group she acts like this with.

I just always got the impression that she just did not like me in any way at all.

Em dumped her boyfriend 3 months before Prom because he was "boring" (her words) and wasn't sure what she was going to do. I jokingly suggested she take me to prom, with the joke being. "You don't like me, imagine being stuck with me at prom." Because we have never once had a normal conversation and I genuinely thought she disliked.

She agreed, and I thought she was matching my energy and I was like "ok hahaha"

One of our other friends came to talk to me about prom and I said I wasn't going, I'm too young. They said they thought I was going with Em. I replied "that was a joke because she kind of hates me?" And I was told she thought we were actually going to prom together.

The next time we were together I apologized and told her I thought we were joking about prom because she obviously doesn't like me.

She started crying and it was super awkward. She now isn't speaking to me at all. She says I embarrassed her and was needlessly cruel.

Our friends are divided but ultimately decided it's between us.

Some of our friends think it was just a miscommunication and not a big deal because they also thought Em disliked me and got the joke when I made it. Others think I was being a bit cruel to her but ultimately decided it was none of their business. There were secret third options as well but they still agreed that they didn't want to be involved in the drama.

She also left our friend group because the others chose not to get involved instead of backing her up. She sits with different people at lunch now (or so my older friends say).

There are two people who might see this from my friend group so I'm going to just here ask them: hey if you see this please don't not weigh in because you have a bias, thanks!

I also won't get defensive if I'm voted the asshole.

aita?

[spooky-momth]

I'm probably gonna be a bit of a hypocrite for saying this and I never want to rain on anyone's parade but I think. For me, it's less the shipping focus but more so the fact that friendships never get any focus, or like the non-romantic parts of a relationship

Like I'm a big Polyhatz and Fireskulls fan but first and foremost I love their dynamics with each other, how they bounce off each other and the care they clearly have for each other as friends -- that's what makes the ships so good!! They have that bond before and then when the actual crushes and romantic affection happen it feels so natural

I'm a sucker for slow burn. I want to see the steps between the first meeting and the first kiss, dammit, don't just show me the romance!!!

Also just- this is kinda related but in a different way. I will never forgive SM AO3 for putting both Kevin/Streber and fucking Bob x Reader above Skid & Pump in fic count. I swear like half of the SM AO3 tag is smut fics and it is SO frustrating that this world and it's characters are so cool and interesting to explore yet all anyone wants to write about is the same few characters boning. I've grown numb to it at this point but it's also why I rave so highly about fics like Roy Against Society or Not So Bad After All, because they're actual character and in RAS' case, plot focused fics!!

(disclaimer: I am not dissing Candybats or the Bob selfshippers. I find Kevin/Streber to be a fun ship under the right circumstances and people wanted to smooch the cannibal so bad they made a full-ass game for it, I am in no place to diss them)

I just. Idk. Does this make any sense?? I'm tired as hell I don't know if what I'm saying makes any sense but I'm going to drop it in your inbox Anyway because I have Thoughts about this. Maybe I'll send another ask when I'm not so tired, idk

HI sorry this has just been sitting in my inbox for DAYS hgshfgj. you know how it is with college, and then The Other Horrors, Also.

disclaimer for anyone else: sometimes we just wanna complain about things. this isn't an indictment of your fandom experience, go have fun and live your life, we're not your moms, etc etc.

all of that out of the way- YEAH. true. (my reply also gets long, so to spare your dash I put a cut here.)

I don't think it's 'hypocritical' to have a nuanced take on something, really. You can like things in multiple ways and it's no betrayal of yourself to be like that!

I've always been fascinated with romance as a concept (especially as an aromantic; it always seemed like some kind of fantasy thing, like magic, to me.) but as time's gone on I've found myself more interested in what a romance can bring to the table than the romance itself.

Like, for example- Part of the reason I've been putting off Candlelight for so long is that I… still need to figure out the finer details on WHY Carmen and Lila actually get together, despite that being the "central premise" of the AU. Whoops!

I've got a lot of stuff planned out for how Roy & Skid adapt to it, what their feelings are about their new moms, about each other- But the leading romance has NOTHING LMAO.

and… fair. I get it as someone who's been on both sides of that battle in the Deltarune fandom. I was both the rabid reader looking for x Readers and the exhausted reader filtering everything that wasn't a Gen fic out so I could find something I actually wanted to see.

It can be frustrating to find so many threads that canon leaves for you to pull on, but look around and have it feel like no one else is interested in it.

(Also, I need to check both those fics out soon, thanks for reminding me, hehe.)

Romance is an interesting lens to view the show from, yes, but it's also not the ONLY lens and it can be tiring when that seems to be the majority of what people write.

[scaryarcade]

i hate this damn post so much and it showed up on my dash recently so i need to rant a little bit about the parts that bother me the most lol. putting it under a cut because it's not the prettiest or most well-constructed argument i've ever made, i mostly just want to be a bitch about it.

almost cult-like in what way, lmao??? all the preceding sentence describes is...someone being attached to a community they like and feel valued in. following that up with "eww, culty, right?" is just weird fearmongering. also, why wouldn't this hypothetical person look any further? in what plural circles are you witnessing anybody be anything less than wildly supportive of self-exploration??? really the fearmongering about cults is what squicks me out here though lol you can't just say shit like that without an actual argument to support it

this conjecture is so fucking stupid i don't even know where to begin. where is proof for any of this? do you actually think endogenic plurality research has more funding than research on dissociative disorders? do you think even if that were the case that would be endogenics' fault or responsibility??? i dare you to point out anything, anywhere, indicating the endogenic community has any kind of collective opinion on how DID treatment should work. it would sure be weird if they did because most people who do not perceive their plurality as disordered therefore aren't looking for treatment for it!

i mean, yeah, you're just describing an unwillingness to work on a symptom, you've very nicely made it look like there's a correlation with iding as plural here but there really isn't. if someone who IDs as plural thinks they can get away with "my alter is just an asshole" then that person would be just as likely to use the logic "i'm just an asshole" if they didn't. "well, somebody COULD use [x] to avoid working on their problems!" is not an indictment of [x] because people can use literally anything to do that.

ok im just going to be a huge bitch here and get on my antipsych high horse a little bit but LOOOOOOL. LMAOOOO. oh noooooo...ND/MI people supporting each other and creating resources for each other instead of revering the psych industry above all else...ahhh so scary!!! Somebody do something!!!

could not disagree more! i'm diagnosed with DID, i experience complex dissociation and posttraumatic stress symptoms that inform literally every area of my life, AND I STILL find a lot of common ground with endogenics/nondisordered plurals and have learned a lot from them and been helped significantly by what i've learned :thumbsup:

anyway this post sucks, i think it's full of fearmongering and bad faith arguments. i also think fearmongering is something this particular user is really good at along with sounding like they're making clever and insightful points when what they're saying doesn't actually have any weight behind it, and their determination to villainize endogenics (and their attempts to paint them as a group with some kind of significant societal power???) is alarming. don't like to see that.

[pinene]

my problem with the "sexuality is fluid" crowd as a lesbian who's confident in their sexuality is that it's often weaponized against us in a way that isn't against gay men due to the added factor of misogyny, plus the fact that we're one of the smallest groups in the community. and to a lot of lesbians drawing a clear line is necessary for us to be happy under a patriarchy. it doesn't help that 90% of the time when people insist that sexuality is fluid they have some weird grudge against lesbians being proud in our lack of attraction to men and will use terfs as a "gotcha" against us

This is perhaps unnecessary, but I want to take a moment to thank you for being respectful and taking what I had to say in good faith, while still offering up your perspective. A lot of people have been very quick into making assumptions about what I'm getting at, and now I not only have to defend my initial point, but also deal with points I never made.

Anyway--Everything you said, I entirely agree with. I think I just made a big mistake with that post in not fully acknowledging the broader, heteronormative contexts which make people uncomfortable with things like "sexuality is fluid" "gender is fake"-- because I was writing that post with the mindset of like, I'm on tumblr surrounded by lgbt people and this analysis ONLY exists within that context. I also addressed too many things-- perhaps my indictment of the vagueness of the term "gay man" came across as me implying that nobody really is one, when all I meant was that, these words are just for convenience, and shouldn't be taken as law.

Like, I really hope y'all understand that I ALSO get hot when some guy tries to tell me he thinks everyone is a little bit bisexual, because in that moment, I now have to defend peoples' right to be entirely homosexual in a society that wants nobody to have gay attraction in the first place. This might seem at odds with my post, but in reality, my goal-- both here and there--is to illustrate that people come with all kinds of sexual identities and attractions and levels of fluidity or rigidity, and BASING pride and confidence in certainty--whether what you're certain about is "all people are 100% gay and men are real" or "everyone's a little bit bi and sexuality is inherently fluid"-- will cause you to feel insecure when you encounter someone who feels differently, or if you yourself start to feel differently. EDIT: But we also don't live in a perfect world! And like you said, sometimes you literally HAVE to base your pride in certainty, because uncertainty is weaponized against you. I should've acknowledged that more clearly.

THAT'S all I meant. I just should've chosen my words more carefully. I should've made the post more hypothetical rather than call to action, since we absolutely don't live in a world where we can be that free yet. And yes agreed, we absolutely need to deal with the misogyny before any of this shit. Thank you for your input.

[rhythmic-idealist]

Wow, that reblog on that trans woman's post was really obnoxious. No one is fucking responsible for someone else's trauma. If you can't refrain from making people WHO HAVE PERSONALLY DONE NOTHING TO YOU uncomfortable, afraid or ashamed then that's on you, no one else.

Also, knock the condescension down a notch or three.

Well, I typed a response here and it's been just thrown into the void by Tumblr, so I'll do my best. It's wordier now, because I'm sleepy, but I felt you deserved a thoughtful response (which you don't need to read, but deserve the option to read). Deleting the tags.

The tags, for posterity (I think that reading a post about something that's been deleted can be both stressful and useless without context):

If it's worth anything to you, here are the other points? In the end this bit does not matter but I know some people will generally prefer to know what was going through my head here (and others will not! I personally am reassured by knowing Why someone said some weird shit):

Basically on first read I thought that last sentence was doing a sort of weird and needless "ummm if you look at your trigger you're not traumatized??" at people doing the normal good faith act of Being Traumatized About Penises and seeking good faith advice on how to be normal. This is not because I assume transphobes speak in good faith: it's because I somehow didn't realize the last paragraph was addressed to people who say they should't have to see trans women's bulges in public. This felt very strange to me, and was not me assuming OP Would Say A Thing Like That. It in fact startled me so much that I was like what I'm confused by this. I failed to read grammar.

Back when I thought it said that I still had no problem with it being said. Raises the question of if a tag saying I disagree with it is a reasonable thing to do but also not a question we need to answer since, well, the decision has long been "I'm more comfortable deleting the tags regardless"

I want to be extremely fucking clear to any potential transphobes in the audience. Being triggered by specifically trans women's penises/bulges isn't a thing. Reasons for this do include but are not limited to the fact that you literally do not know the gender of a person when you are looking at them. But that is also, like, perhaps the smallest fucking reason and maybe even a distracting one to bring up here. --- IF there is one person in the world for whom it is a thing, then sure, literally anything is possible, surely someone somewhere is triggered by guys who do tapdances in funny little hats or whatever. No discourse is required about that and no one is doing anything wrong by existing. --- Being specifically uncomfortable with trans women is a thing. White women feeling uncomfortable around black men is also a thing. This is called bias, and, even (especially!) when it manifests internally as fear, absolutely fucking must be worked on and overcome.

Anyway, thanks for the message.

This is a REAL long post about something that I don't want to accidentally present as more... struggling for adjectives here.... than it is because of the length of the post? This is also hard to articulate. What I mean is that my tags were never about a very strong opinion and that my opinions of OP were never negative. What I do NOT mean is that the OTHER side of this interaction is something that must be downplayed. Reasonable response, ty.

Final addition that for the record I don't think I was ever saying anyone is responsible for anyone else's trauma, I was very much saying the opposite? I was saying that so many other ways in which penis related trauma is triggered can just be other completely innocent parts of day to day life, so the existence of trans women is not some kind of exception. Especially if you're not going to indict the sheer existence of cis men, but also, even if you are going to (it's a bad take).

I still think they were bad tags though so they're gone now.

[softer-ua]

i can't be the only one who wants izuku to get fucking pissed at his situation, at all might, start questioning what the fuck is going on with OFA.

because if you're going to trust a fifteen year old with something like OFA and bind them to the life of a symbol, you do not get to withhold information. deku was not told he'd be dealing with an enemy like AFO when he got the quirk, nor was he told that basically its whole point was not fighting some vague concept of evil, but fighting a very tangible very dangerous villain. he wasn't told that up until all might, inheriting this power was guaranteed suicide, and even after all might you only have a vague chance of survival. to be offered such a life altering "gift", Izuku should have been warned of everything. from the start. and if not then then from the very moment izuku started seeing vestiges, or at least when AFO resurfaced. WHY IN GOD'S NAME WOULD YOU HIDE ANY, ANY BIT OF INFORMATION ON A QUIRK THAT IMPORTANT?????

no because, if you look at it cynically, All Might took this kid who had nothing and who looked up to him as effective god. He took this kid who he knew had no sense of no self-care or self-preservation. This extremely reckless kid who he saw putting his life at risk three times (sludge v1, hanging on to AM as he jumped, sludge v Katsuki) within 24 hours. He picked this kid who he knew would give everything (because Izuku had "nothing", and therefore nothing to lose) and "gifted" him with a ticking time bomb. Of course Izuku is willing to break himself if it means using OFA to max potential. So much of his self-worth is based on OFA. He's said time and time again he isn't sure if he deserves it, that it's a borrowed power. If you've taken this kid and given him everything practically overnight, of course he'll go to self-destructive lengths to prove himself worthy of it. Who'd want to go back to being nothing after all?

And this is a logical conclusion. Someone like Izuku, someone like All Might probably used to be in his youth and still kind of is, they're perfect to be put on this kind suicide mission. They're a perfect vessel. Sure they're heroic and brave and selfless, but most importantly they're willing to die for the cause. OFA the quirk knows this. Literally two seconds after Katsuki sacrifices himself telling Deku not to do shit alone, Deku renders said sacrifice useless by doing exactly what Katsuki warned him not to😭 And the quirk and vestiges encourage him. They don't give a shit about repercussions and Deku's chronic pain or possible arm paralysis. They just want to beat AFO. You go son you break those arms 🤠

Doesn't it all feel a little bit exploitative?

Look at it like this. A kid is born with no power. This kid wants to be great, but the world says he can't. He meets his hero, and the hero says he can't either. Then the kid acts heroic, but reckless. The hero sees an opening. This kid is good and doesn't care one bit about his well-being? Jackpot! He offers the kid a deal. Great power, an extraordinary gift at surface layer. But one with so many more hidden strings attached that hurt and break and haunt the kid, that he was never warned about or taught how to deal with. But he can always give it to someone else! Can he, really? Can he go back to being nothing? With a personality like his, well nope. And that's why you pick the overly selfless reckless ones. The ones that will feel indebted to you to a ridiculous degree.

Isn't it like dare I say... like a deal with the devil?

As we progress more and more into the lore of AFO and OFA, I can really see why Katsuki's started to view it as a cursed power. And with how wildly different from expectations (at least mine) + far more nuanced the Todofam drama has revealed itself to be compared to what it seemed upon first intro, I'm inclined to believe there's more to the OFA story than clean cut, young bro good guy vs mean big bro oppression.

TL;DR - All Might is the metaphorical devil jr who gave Izuku a passed down deal, and neither he nor broccoli boy read the fine print.

Bakugo’s ghost sent me this ask 💀

Lol but seriously, these are all excellent points and I’ve been sitting on this ask until I had time to answer it because you’re absolutely goddamn right

This shit is explotive af, and I’ve got a suspicion as to why

I don’t think Deku was a random choice, there’s a layer of fate/mystic woven into the bnha world that gets over looked.

Sir had insane fortune telling abilities that were never once wrong about anything except when it came to the 2 OFA users fates. Deku even specifically says he’ll smash any fate in his way, and I think on some level he knows he can because he has a different destiny.

The vestiges break him from Shinsos hold, meaning the can have some level of control over Dekus body. You think AM noticed every time something like that happened? AM didn’t even notice Bakugo internalizing all the blame for his retirement even after watching his mom force him to apologize for it??

“I keep forgetting that your still a child” AM, sir, this is the third time you’ve admitted out loud that you were just gonna let Bakugo suffer his own fate 💀 please stop indicting yourself and at least pretend you care about Bakugo outside his relationship to Deku jfc

Also what are the chances you get nine random holders and none of them turn out to be corrupt or at least too self serving to die for the cause??? Slimmer than the pages bnha is printed on.

There’s something pulling some strings here, and I think it’s the true power of First users quirk.

What would be the point of transferring a quirk if that’s it’s only power?

What would be the point of this quirk being essentially password locked?

What would be the point of this quirk being able to forced on to someone?

There’ wouldn’t be any.

But what if that’s not what the quirk is?

What if the quirk is actually passing something along, and that’s why it’s dna based, it’s the transfer of an integral part of them.

Something that would change a person if forced on them but would possibly eradicate someone if stolen. Something like a souls desire? That could be a dangerous thing to give to someone else especially if it’s something they didn’t want, now they suddenly have to?

Then you give this quirk a strength enhancing quirk?

Now it’s got some juice, how much stronger did it get? Can it sense others with a similar goal, can it make its host gravitate towards those people?

Is the firsts quirk purposely finding exploitable heros, like Nana AM and Deku. All people who were/are willing to give up everything for the cause. How much of the first is in there, how much sentient power does this quirk have?

We know that Nana gave up her family, her child, for the cause. AM never bothered cultivating a family and pushed away Sir and anyone else who is anti him dying, and now we’re seeing Deku do the same.

Deku who had no friends to begin with, a dad who’s out of the picture, and an already slightly strained relationship with his mom?

Is this quirk capable of learning? Does it know that having people you care about slows you down from sacrificing yourself?

Does this quirk compound with the other users goals make the drive stronger each time?

Idk but there’s a glimmer of hope that Deku isn’t doomed to be a glorified meat puppet, and it exists in the form of Kacchan.

No one else had someone so deeply rooted to them, who could fight right along side them. Bakugo is an outlier in this story, almost the exact opposite kind of hero OFA wants, his connection to Deku breaks the cycle.

Deku would never give up on Katsuki, and even if he tried Endeavor will start coughing up ice cubes before Bakugo lets him. He couldn’t leave Deku alone when he was convinced he hated him, there’s no way he’d do it now.

Dekus story will be different from the other users that’s for sure.

[thenuanceddebater]

Sorry I'm just now getting to this post, and thanks for the tag!

TL;DR: Yup, this is a thing. Jurors are not allowed to do internet research as it may bias them, or they may try to apply inapplicable law, or misunderstand the law they are supposed to apply. In fact, this is a pretty big problem. For example, in this case the patch was a pretty insignificant detail seeing as the charge was for resisting arrest and there was no argument that the ICE officers started a fight. Even if the patch was a white supremacist as opposed to a trade patch, it doesn't change the facts here. As for if juries can be lied to, the answer is "yes" but the frequency depends on how you define lie. Depending on the definition, juries are lied to all the time. They have a check through the fact that they can decide what information to believe, and there are also measures that go above the jury to resolve issues of knowing dishonesty by an attorney. Remember: There's always someone on the other side looking for mistakes, lies, and general bad behavior–whether that person is a judge or another attorney.

It is in fact illegal for jurors to do any internet research, or at the very least it violates jury guidelines. This is because jurors are supposed t decide a case based on the information and the evidence that they heard in the case and not based on outside information. One of the most common questions in jury selection for cases that have attracted media attention is if the juror has heard any coverage of the case, and what that coverage was/ if it has influenced the juror at all.

Likewise, jurors are also supposed to rely on lawyers/ the judge to explain the law to them. This is because (1) lawyers understand the law and jurors do not and (2) if jurors were allowed to research the law, they would likely either not understand it or apply law that isn't meant to apply. The number of people I have seen on this website and others look for federal criminal definitions for offenses such as sexual assault, murder, etc. is insanely high when that is an area largely (if not almost exclusively) determined by the state law of the court's jurisdiction. So, it's also a precaution against jurors trying to apply law that doesn't exist.

Furthermore, in this case, the details of the patch were irrelevant. The patch is only relevant if the actions of the ICE agent are relevant, or the moralistic or ethical implications of ICE are relevant. They aren't. This is a case involving whether or not the defendant, a lawful permanent resident, resisted arrest. Whether or not a patch was a trade union patch or a white supremacist patch has no legal bearing on the case. Regardless of whether or not the ICE officer was or was not a white supremacist, the defendant was not entitled to resist arrest when there was a lawful and legitimate warrant for his arrest–even if the cause for the warrant was mistaken. He claims he was reaching for a coat. An officer was injured in some kind of scuffle. The defendant was indicted for assaulting a federal officer. There is no counter implication, to the best of my research, that the ICE officers began the assault. Therefore, the patch on an ICE officer is irrelevant. Wearing a white supremacist patch, which it is not even alleged that the defendant knew about, is not grounds to assault an officer if that did indeed occur. So, I'm not sure if that changes your read on the situation or not. But it certainly affects mine.

As for whether or not juries could be lied to by prosecutors and defense attorneys, well that depends on your definition of "lie." If by "lie" you mean "are told misinformation unintentionally" then this already happens. Prosecutors or defense attorneys occasionally take clients or witnesses at their word, especially about irrelevant or less-relevant details, and that can result in minor falsehoods being told to the jury. Likewise, if a defendant testifies in court and their attorney tries to make the defendant appear credible when they are in fact fabricating information, then the jury is also being "lied to." This is a very common incidence and is why the jury is permitted to decide which among the sources of information it has been presented to believe.

If by "lie" you mean "intentionally put forward false information" then this also happens, though less often. As some post-conviction research has revealed, sometimes police, prosecutors, etc. just flat-out lie to the jury. Likewise, a defense attorney that does not believe their client and believes that the client is going to fabricate testimony is supposed to stop them. However, if an attorney has plausible deniability and believes that the client testifying could help, they may not actually do this. Therefore, the jury could also be confronted by flat-out misinformation and lies as well.

This is why we have an appeals process–for when the jury makes a decision that is not supported by the facts on the ground. Heck, that can even happen if the jury wasn't lied to and is just unreasonably biased for one side over another. If you've ever heard about a motion to "set aside the verdict" or a judge setting aside a jury's verdict, then you know about this phenomenon. Just as there is a check on misinformation from what the jury is or is not willing to believe, there is a further check on misinformation through the ability to set-aside verdicts, motion for retrials if evidence of deception surfaces, and through the appeal and post-conviction appeal processes.

Juries aren't perfect, and quite simply I'm not the biggest fan of juries, but one lawyer's deception is likely going to be counteracted by another lawyer. Lawyers don't like it when you lie to them. And neither do judges.

Finally, the kind of penalty in this case is basically unprecedented. However, the cost in this case ($11,227) is the cost of empaneling the jury and other associated costs. So, essentially the penalty is trying to shift the cost from the state onto the juror who committed misconduct.

So, pretty interesting situation. Happy to take any questions or comments that you might have!

I understand why jurors need to be sequestered from media coverage and stuff, but it's crazy that they're prohibited from doing ANY internet research or fact-checking related to the case. Some guy is being fined $11k because he Googled a patch that an ICE officer was wearing in their case -- the jury was told in court it was a trade workers' union patch, but the guy didn't think it was since he was a retired pipe fitter and didn't recognize the logo. So he went home and googled it and says he found it to be a white supremacist logo. And since he googled it, he's being charged with contempt and fined for the costs of the mistrial he caused by doing so. But like… doesn't that mean that our court system is set up so that juries could be lied to (by prosecutors, etc) and be unable to do any verification or fact-checking without literally committing a crime……?

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

alright it's 6:22 AM and I guess I'm not sleeping anymore, so I've decided to pester hang out with my wife while she works her big bucks third shift call center job and I continue to plod through my twitter likes until my daily yoga video gets posted on youtube.

article 11: "To Well and Back: The Bleak Future of Positive Thinking" by Nora Salem at Bitch. this is kind your standard "we can't journal and yoga our way out of this one, boys" but makes some keen political observations as well, including likening "sentient wellness brand" (lmao) Marianne Williamson's platform to Trump's. also gave me yet another reason to dunk on Gwyneth Paltrow, so that's a W.

I should mention that at this point we are entering the realm of articles I liked in December 2021; it turns out there was only one left last night when I flagged. lmao.

I should also mention that I've decided to simply skip and unlike anything behind a paywall rather than exerting the effort of finding a way to read it. not my problem, NY Times, figure it out.

anyway. article twelve: speaking of quacks we've got "The Political Life of Dr. Oz" by Olivia Nuzzi for Intelligencer. if you like a long and involved mess, boy do I have an article for you! a terrible indictment of the Republican party's descent into primarily endorsing gibbering loons and deluded celebrities. the biggest twist here is that Dr. Oz's main weakness appears to be that he's neither enough of a loon nor sufficiently famous to be taken seriously as a candidate. read this one.

lucky number 13: "Sometimes Writing is Just a Job" by Ijeoma Oluo for her Substack. writing absolutely isn't my job, although I would love if it were someday, but I think there's probably a little nugget in here for anyone who writes in any context. #2 and #3 really nailed me.

article 14: "I'm a bisexual woman and I don't know how to date men" by Lois Shearing at Mashable. I'm going to go on record as saying that I think the term "bi+ feminism" is kind of silly, which I'm allowed to say because I'm bi and a feminist, but it's hard to argue with the central thesis of "hold male and female partners to the same standards." (no mention of partners who are neither, shame.) I wish this article had lived up to the title more instead of reminding us how hard it is to be bi because everyone's biphobic but c'est la vie.

article 15: "How Gen Z Killed Basic Black" by Isabel Slone for Harper's Bazaar. this is actually a lot less about gen z and more about how the pandemic has shifted a lot of people's approach to fashion. as someone who's been dressing certifiably weird for years I'm not like... that impressed by some of these outfit descriptions, but I'm never going to boo anybody having fun with style and realizing they can wear whatever the fuck they want.

article 16: "The “Dark Academia” Subculture Offers a Fantasy Alternative to the Neoliberal University" by Amelia Hogan at Jacobin. nuanced examination of the appeal of dark academia, critical without being entirely unsympathetic. interesting read!

article 17: "A QAnon con: How the viral Wayfair sex trafficking lie hurt real kids" by Jessica Contrera for Washington Post. if you, like me, watched the wayfair sex trafficking scandal play out while saying over and over "you are all so stupid," or if god forbid you got caught up in spreading that truly unhinged misinformation without a second thought about it's veracity, this is gonna be a great read for you. it dives into the impact of the twitter hysteria on the children whose names and faces were involved, as well as the cost of redirecting resources into false leads and away from actual survivors.

article 18: a brisk change of pace to "Making the News a Little More Fun" by Daniel Lavery for his newsletter the Chatner. a good solid goof about replacing the terms trans women, trans men, and nonbinary people with Catwoman, Batman, and the Riddler to put a fun spin on transphobic writing. I enjoyed a sensible chuckle.

article 19: "The Great (Fake) Child-Sex-Trafficking Epidemic" by Kaitlyn Tiffany at the Atlantic. similar topic but much more wide-reaching than the Wayfair piece, with a particular focus on the shady-as-hell Operation Underground Railroad. another big recommend.

I'm not counting it because I've read it before and shan't reread it right now, but Geraldine DeRuiter's piece about a profoundly unhinged Italian Michelin restaurant was one of the best reads of 2021. give it a read if you haven't already.

article 20: Olayemi Olurin's op-ed "Law & Order Taught Americans to Root for the Police", published at Teen Vogue. "It might seem cliche to blame societal ills on the media, but the relationship between our country’s comfort with mass caging and the depiction of crime and punishment that we see in popular culture seems more than coincidental" she's right and she should say it, etc. not reaally just about the show or pop culture in general, also making some sharp points about the assumptions inherent to a carceral state (some people are "just bad," it's acceptable for police to do whatever is necessary to lock up "bad guys," treating those convicted or suspected of a crime as less than human is justifiable, etc).

I was originally planning on chunking these out by the month in which I originally liked them but there are at least 3 or 4 articles left for December and I need a little break because as of rn it's 9:45 AM, meaning I've once again been at this for a little over three hours. ciao.

I'm gonna do something silly and try to clean out my liked tweets over the long weekend. there are more than 2400 of them and most of them are articles I meant to read. might liveblog the journey somehow because I'm nothing if not a silly little piñata full of content.