#it’s not necessarily negative

[lesbianonna]

i’m starting to understand why my lead is the way she is…

[brenatto-apothecary]

I am a very vocal hater of the whole "the game is just for the cast you can't criticize it ever!!" mentality, to the extent that even when it's in response to a take I think is awful, it will always bother me more than the original take. After some reflection, I've broken it down to five key reasons why it upsets me so much.

1) The obvious one is that the idea that the show is only being made for the cast is false. If they didn't intend to make a piece of entertainment, they wouldn't have posted it online. A lot of creative works are made with the creators enjoyment as the highest priority. That does not mean that's all it was made for.

2) The way these posts commonly focus on how the cast isn't obligated to do what other people want is a fundamental misunderstanding of what criticism is and why we make it. I assure you the vast majority of people do not think their complaints should be met with the cast personally kneeling before them.

3) It implies that something being made with love automatically makes disliking any element of it wrong. Which is a belief that is impossible to hold without becoming a hypocrite. There is no way in hell you have never disliked a piece that the creator(s) had fun making. I'm writing this post for my personal enjoyment. Have fun with that paradox.

4) There's this weird belief that all complaints are about specific desires that weren't met. There are actually a whole lot of posts about whether the story succeeded in doing what it intended to do, but I guess I can't expect people to read things.

5) This is my big one. Art deserves to be criticized. It's one of if not the most important way of interacting with a work. I don't believe saying actual play is uniquely exempt from critique is respectful of the medium. You are treating it as though it shouldn't be engaged with in the way we engage with all other art and is, therefore, lesser.

[raining-its-pouring]

Five Pebbles is so funny. Shoutout to characters who learn to prioritize compassion but still have the same deep-rooted self-actualization and self-worth issues they always had. Shoutout to characters who use compassion as a bludgeon to hurt themselves with under the guise of self-sacrifice. Shoutout to the guilt that drives one to heap blame upon themself until they feel the only way to atone is through punishment. That’s just as much about inflicting misery upon yourself as it is about helping the person you hurt. Get therapy king.

[ohhgingersnaps]

I'm seeing some frustration over fandom creatives expressing anger or distress over people feeding their work into ChatGPT. I'm not responding to OP directly because I don't want to derail their post (their intent was to provide perspective on how these models actually work, and reduce undue panic, which is all coming from a good place!), but reassurances that the addition of our work will have a negligible impact on the model (which is true at this point) does kind of miss the point? Speaking for myself, my distress is less about the practical ramifications of feeding my fic into ChatGPT, and more about the principle of someone taking my work and deliberately adding it to the dataset.

Like, I fully realize that my work is a drop in the bucket of ChatGPT's several-billion-token training set! It will not make a demonstrable practical difference in the output of the model! That doesn't change the fact that I do not want my work to be part of the set of data that the ChatGPT devs use for training.

According to their FAQ, ChatGPT can and will use user input to train itself. The terms and conditions explicitly state that they save your chats to help train and improve their models. (You can opt-out, but sharing is the default.) So if you're feeding a fic into ChatGPT, unless you've explicitly opted out, you are handing it to the ChatGPT team and giving them permission to use it for training, whether or not that was your intent.

Now, will one fic make a demonstrable difference in the output of the model? No! But as the person who spent a year and a handful of months laboring over my fic, it makes a difference to me whether my fic, specifically, is being used in the dataset. If authors are allowed to have a problem with the ChatGPT devs for scraping millions of fics without permission, they're also allowed to have a problem with folks handing their individual fics over via the chat interface.

I do want to add that if you've done this to a fic, please don't take this as me being upset with you personally! Folks are still learning new information and puzzling out what "good" vs. "bad" use is, from an ethical standpoint. (Heck, my own perspective on this is deeply based on my own subjective feelings!) And we certainly shouldn't act like one person feeding a fic into ChatGPT has the same practical negative impact, on a broad societal scale, as a team using a web crawler to scrape five billion pieces of artwork for Stable Diffusion.

The point is that fundamentally, an ethical dataset should be obtained with the consent of those providing the data. Just because it's normalized for our data to be scraped without consent doesn't make it ethical, and this is why ChatGPT gives users the option to not share data— there is actually a standardized way (robots.txt) for website servers to set policies for how bots/crawlers can interact with them, for exactly this reason— and I think fandom artists and authors are well within their rights to express a desire for opting out to be the socially-respected default within the fandom community.

[farshootergotme]

https://www.tumblr.com/ruestheday/765956792656265216/one-of-the-biggest-lies-the-fandom-will-tell-you

Opinions on this post?

I'd say that I agree with what this person is saying. As much as I give Bruce shit for his parental skills (which are flawed and shouldn't be overlooked, don't get me wrong), we can say Alfred is partially one of the main reasons why Bruce is the way he is.

I won't say anything about "Alfred should've/could've taken Bruce to therapy" because then we gotta consider a lot of things about the decade when Alfred was introduced and his age in-universe, as Alfred might've not lived in a period in which therapy was widely accepted and even recommended. But I won't dwell too much on that.

Now, I don't think Alfred is necessarily an evil person, but he can be quite selfish and a coward when it comes to facing consequences (which he rarely gets, if ever).

When shit hits the fan, he's the first one to back out. Why should he be responsible? He's only a mere butler (until he goes and calls Bruce "his son").

He's always detached just enough from the situation that nobody will look at him when looking for someone to blame for a problem that Alfred was most likely involved in.

Bruce might be the Batman, but it's Alfred who works from the shadows and leaves the responsibility of his decisions to the rest.

Does he do this on purpose?

Hard to say. I think he's in a way aware of his cowardice and harmful tendencies, but he doesn't have an active intention of hurting others. However, lack of intention does not mean lack of action, and despite whatever he might feel or believe, he does many things that end up in someone's hurt and even death.

And don't many consider it, but to me it doesn't come as a surprise that Bruce is so emotionally constipated and an unavailable father when he never had someone to learn from about proper parental skills.

Bruce never knew where he stood with Alfred, and Alfred didn't help to make it clear. At first, Bruce was just his master. A responsibility left behind by his parents, but still with the authority to order around the person who's supposed to be his caretaker. And Alfred? We know how much of an enabler he is, but also how inconsistent he can be when it comes to letting Bruce get away with things. And how confusing that must've been for a child? To never have clear boundaries to respect, rules to follow and his behavior corrected.

Kids learn from habit and patterns, and I don't believe he'd see much of that with Alfred, who jumps from his role as a father to his position as a butler way too often for a young mind to fully comprehend. Add to that the fact Bruce already had a position as a rich kid, which would've led to even more people forgetting to set boundaries with him due to his influence.

Now it's not so weird to see him getting away with his toxic behavior towards his children instead of confronting his mistakes like a parent should, right? But I digress.

So, moving onto the next point: child soldiers.

The post you sent mentions Alfred's involvement in the later creation of Robins. But how can he normalize sending kids out there to fight a war that isn't theirs? Well, that's when you remember Alfred joined the army at quite a young age, and there he must've seen even younger kids working as soldiers. What are the chances he has a messed up view on what children should and shouldn't (have to) do?

Subconsciously, he must've internalized this idea of children fighting for their country, and when he saw Robin for the first time, it might've brought back that idea and so he allowed this child to fight for a city that was not even his yet. And then came Jason, then Tim, then Steph, Cass, Damian, Duke... They just kept coming, and Alfred kept pushing this idea.

Jason died? That's a shame, but war is unrelenting, and soldiers are expected to die. It doesn't mean the rest should stop fighting, right?

"Jason Todd, a good soldier".

On top of all that, Robin is good for Batman. Robin is the light Batman needs. Robin can help Bruce, his boy. His son. And who's Alfred if not a messed up man? He'll put the children at risk if it means helping the boy he failed to help before. And when he gets attached to said children, it'll be too late to try pull them out, and then they'll be just another repetition of what Batman came to be when he allowed Bruce to leave.

As for Julia Pennyworth, Alfred was separated from Marie—his then partner—due to war, and found out about Julia's existence only two years after she was born. Their relationship had been distant since then. Julia didn't know about Alfred, but he requested a friend to take care of her and kept sending money all the years to come after making his friend promise not to tell Julia about him, his real father. Why didn't he ever go to see her? That's because, according to Alfred, he was afraid to disrupt her life. But if I'm being honest, I think he also didn't feel ready for the responsibility. And when he became Bruce's guardian, he still was not ready, but Martha and Thomas were his friends, so there must've been a sense of responsibility and guilt influencing his decision.

To summarize, Alfred Pennyworth is an extremely flawed individual and he should not be absolved from any of his mistakes.

[buccellato]

I personally think it would be very amusing if Tesla gets revived alongside Knives in Stargaze and spends her entire time being rude to him and nitpicking his actions based off of some petty grievances. Like imagine he's trying to do one of his little murder speeches and she steps out of the shadows where she was standing (menacingly) going "Hey remember that time you got a whole cake for your Birthday? I never got a birthday cake. And you guys got a whole one to yourselves" or just going "Oh that's a cool thought, did your best friend Child Killer Conrad give it to you?"

Just real hater energy from her

[sunsetcdiscs]

Posting to tumblr as well because its genuinely just sooo. Ugh

[fastepp]

For me, I guess, the locked tomb is really superficially a good story and has lots of aspects that are good in isolation and appeal to a wide variety of queer readers but I think this series would have been better and more satisfying if Ms Muir had leaned more into the gothic and away from the internet humor. In my mind there’s no reason why each House wouldn’t be entrenched so deeply in things we consider taboo and repulsive that it’s unpalatable to most readers. Instead it’s like if Homestuck 2 was good

[tezzbot]

The more tired I get the more I think about how good a character Sonic is. My bedtine thoughst. I love him

[robbyykeene]

Potentially unpopular opinion, but I love that Miguel was an asshole again in the second part of this season! It’s a reminder that he’s a character and not just Johnny’s main support. I mean Robby didn’t deserve it at all, but it makes sense that Miguel couldn’t help taking his anger out on him. And I love that Johnny was on the receiving end of it, because it feels like the tension between them just went away for no reason.

Sorry if I’m bothering you!

You’re never bothering me, and I completely agree! They so rarely give Miguel any narrative agency these days, and like Johnny all it does is reduce him as a character. Miguel is a whole, complicated, messy teenager. He isn’t a saint. He isn’t perfect. He makes mistakes and has ugly unfair feelings sometimes, like every single teenager does. And I love when this show actually lets him be like this, lets him be wrong, lets him be a little bit of a dick to the people he cares about who don’t deserve it. Lets him be a real person with actual human feelings. And then also lets him take accountability for what he does wrong, apologize, show how much he’s grown, that he is a good person and a good friend. I love it truly, and it feels like it’s something that in a lot of ways hasn’t really been granted to Miguel since he fell off that balcony.

[heartcircus]

every time someone says ros is like sneeg’s and/or clown’s daughter or sister i want to rip my hair out why does it always gotta be familial can’t they just be friends or found family or whatever without having to be parental/siblings omfg

[deservedgrace]

I think I feel like..... 85% relief toward the people who are now getting into political activism, who are getting involved and reading and doing the work and staying updated and speaking out

But I have to admit.... I am like 15% frustrated that it took this long. That us pleading and yelling about it earlier didn't impact them. That us warning them that this would happen didn't sway them. That it had to get to a point where they personally feel like they are in danger for them to start caring

I don't want to come across like I'm shaming people for getting involved now, second best time to plant a tree and whatnot, it's a good thing you're here now, please stay involved and taking care of yourselves so you're able to....... but I can't lie and say it's not disappointing, and I wish I had a better place to put that feeling

[jq37]

I'm so confused about Kalina, she helped them??? And now she's being set up as the villain?

Yeah man, as far as I can tell this is just a straight up retcon.

Which was technically soft setup earlier in the season when we learn that kitten Kalina was a wedding present which isn't how you'd usually get a familiar (see eg: Adaine summoning Boggy). So hypothetically she could have more agency than a regular familiar if she's essentially just Cass's regular pet. But she's still mechanically treated like a regular familiar--Brennan says that if she kills herself she can just respawn. So that's not quite buttoned up.

And she did 100% help that out by giving them the Ragh clue and killing herself in the Baron episode to keep herself from attacking any of them.

If you want my read on the situation, I think that Brennan intended Kalina to be not evil but at odds with Kristen because of how blasé she was at the top of the season in a way that was hurting her mistress. But Kristen/Ally seized onto the idea that Kalina was shady so Brennan leaned into it with Ankarna also hating Kalina and used it as the plot hook for season 4 since it was one of the untied loose ends. And I can say confidently that this is plausible because in the AP, Brennan said he was gonna have it be just that Fabian was getting a new dog not a new sibling, but that got a more muted reaction so he pivoted to the funnier thing.

But yeah, that's not typically how familiars work and it struck me as an odd choice, especially since I didn't really read Kalina as being wrong at the top of the season, even thought Kristen didn't trust her.

[willowser]

willie🥺 i feel like u always write bakugo as the more strict parent, saying out teeth are gonna rot and making sure his kid is polite... what do u think he's lax about? if anything? cuz i don't want to be judged all the time by him LOL

hmm hmm ! i'm not sure ! i—didn't realize i was writing him to be too strict if i'm honest LOL i think...there are things he's very particular about as a parent—like his kiddos' dental hygiene and their manners—but i guess i didn't consider his take strict bc....those are things i think he has to be firm about, when it comes to being a responsible parent ??

like, he's letting the kiddos have their candy or letting them drink juice with dinner or eat a donut for breakfast...but, yes, there is no negotiation on brushing their teeth afterward. okay, if they wanna have a fit and be mad, that's normal kid shit, but it’s no excuse to be disrespectful to anyone. they can be mad about being made to eat a few veggies off their plate, but they're not gonna huff and puff and hmm! in their mommy's face, you know ???

idk !! in my opinion, him giving a sort of gentle reminder of minding their manners and taking care of their toys and being nice to their siblings—that is him being lax ??? sort of quietly nudging them, giving them a look from the corner of his eye that they understand without question; there's no screaming or hollering, no raised voices, no real anger taken out on them. i don't think any of it comes from a judgy place, he just sees it as his responsibility as a parent to not let a little gremlin loose in society, like he was LMAO

idk !! maybe i have a different perspective on what exactly is strict parenting !! which is normal, considering we all came from different households and families and walks of life 🩷

[bloomeng]

i made the joke earlier about how steddyhands fans tend to like edstede the least of all the pairs, and i just wanted to elaborate bc actually i do have more to say about this

when i first watched the show i didn't really participate in the fandom (so i don't know pre-s2 fandom drama), i was neutral about izzy and i suppose i liked edstede the most simply by default. in general in season 1 i thought their relationship was charming back when the show was still firmly in the realm of a comedy. then s2 happened...

i wouldn't say that s2 ruined edstede for me permanently because i still like them, but i will say that it definitely reshaped how i see their relationship. suddenly their relationship was stagnant, going in circles, and generally starting to feel more like active bad influences on each other. which is wild considering how in s1 the whole crux of it was that stede and ed were actively making each other more authentic people. i will say though that i personally feel the reason edstede fell flat to me in s2 was mostly due to ed's behavior and the way stede overlooks it. ed's behavior in s2 will always be one of my biggest complaints of s2 (the rest of the issues are more technical).

recently i've seen the opinion that edstede are now MORE problematic than edizzy, which i don't exactly agree with. i agree with the sentiment that with all the developments in s2 edstede feels worse, but i think that has more to do with the fact that their relationship issues are far more tangible to the majority of the audience. with edizzy their issues stem from an intense bond forged by a deep codependence that is pushed to extremes. simply put their dynamic is rare. (i want to quickly note that this doesn’t make their relationship better narratively; there’s a space for both in story telling and both are equally valuable.) edstede's issues on the other hand are more grounded, to the point where most people have experienced some level of their conflicts in their life whether that be firsthand or secondhand. so it's not that their problems are worse so much as more people have stronger reactions because they can relate directly. not saying people don't relate to edizzy, it's more about the scale to which people relate.

my famous example is breaking bad (spoilers for a decade-old series) but i think one of the reasons people hate skylar so much more than walt (besides the obvious misogyny) is that they can relate to the anger of being cheated on while it's harder to relate to the feeling of your husband secretly being a drug lord. like sure his thing on paper is ten times worse but audiences usually relate strongly to the things they personally relate to.

edizzy will always be worse on paper (the toe incident alone makes sure of that) but edstede now feels worse is what i'm getting at. and sure i know izzy emotionally matured leaps and bounds in s2 but unfortunately that doesn't fix edizzy. in order for it to actually be a healthy relationship they both need to grow, so yeah they're still firmly in the toxi yuri category.

anyway i actually do like them a whole lot, but they also make me angry on izzy and the crew's behalf. and on a personal level, i just tend to prefer non-canon ships because i feel like i have more wiggle room. that and if they're canon i'm usually satisfied with that canon so i don't find myself hyper-fixating as much. hence why i didn't really get into the fandom after s1, despite liking the show more at that point.

this is just my observation but i think a lot of the reasons people are now drifting from edstede and into the safety of non-canon ships is simply because s2 stripped their relationship of some of their whimsy. a lot of people are angry with ed and stede and are seeking refugee amongst ships that don’t feel like they have to confront the glaring holes in their relationship.

but these are just my musings i don’t speak for anyone but myself.

[br1ghtestlight]

i love how both of the semi-canon relationships in inanimate insanity are kinda annoying and toxic for everyone involved. like None of these mfs have a healthy relationship with anyone at all