#it’s that the discourse is with my main account

[bamboozled-distress]

starting mpreg discourse in the comment section of a trolls band together fanart post on Instagram is probably my favourite thing I’ve ever done in my life

[batsplat]

Not to want to get you into hot waters but one of the blogs on here shared Marc’s onboard from the 2015 sepang kick incident and I’m a bit unsure how anyone could watch that and not consider it a deliberate kick? Really don’t want anyone to get mad because I’m no expert so maybe there’s something about Valentino’s movements that allows for the “accidental” kick option but if so, what is it? Because as a layman, watching it… I wish it were possible to show that video to Valentino and make him explain exactly how that kick was not on purpose…

I think it's genuinely ambiguous! this is what's interesting about it, right - if you look at the onboards and the helicopter shots there's a decent chance that depending on what you watch you'll end up with a pretty different view on it, and it's inarguable that from certain angles it looks incredibly like a kick. it's also inarguable that whether valentino kicked marc or not, he did deliberately attempt to run him wide, which you can see was intentional by how he looks behind him just before they make contact. it's still not clean riding whichever way you look at it, which is why he got the penalty

I'm going to defer to someone else's opinion here myself (you'll find I link back to this site a lot and broadly consider it trustworthy), from a bloke who does very much believe valentino was in the wrong that weekend. this is in the aftermath of the fim requesting that honda doesn't release data which would have 'proven' valentino kicked marc in an entirely futile attempt to make the controversy die down. the piece talks first about what data like this even involves, including this bit:

the main point here is that the data isn't going to tell you whether valentino kicked him or not, because that's not something you can actually read in data. I have another ask that's vaguely related to this sitting in my drafts, but it's always been one of the most interesting elements of all the controversy in late 2015 - both sides attempting to definitively prove the unprovable with a few numbers. let's quickly bring in what arguments both sides as well as race direction made in the immediate aftermath from the post-race piece by the same author:

that's valentino's explanation, right, marc's handlebar hit valentino's knee, which caused the leg movement as well as the crash. a little more from the immediate post-race write-up:

basically, the view here is that the two bikes make contact - and as a result of where marc hits valentino, valentino's foot is dislodged from the foot peg, catching marc's handlebars in the process. again, none of this actually exonerates valentino. whether there was a kick or no kick, you are NOT allowed to run another rider off-track! whether valentino literally wanted marc to crash or not, this was always going to be a possible consequence of his actions - which he would have known was the case! it is obviously worse to kick someone, partly because it just feels like a particularly egregious offence, but there is no version of this story where valentino comes out with a clean scorecard

as the 'post-honda promising to release conclusive evidence' piece goes on to say:

of course, all this is just one bloke's view. I don't think it's unreasonable to believe that valentino did kick marc. but I also struggle to see how it's a clear cut case for the prosecution. again, however, it really is important to stress that valentino by his own admission was engaging in an extremely dubious move. the kick would be the cherry on the icing, if you will, but running another rider so wide that you are probably trying to force them to leave the track is generally not considered acceptable behaviour. the kick question is very much something everyone has to decide for themselves - or not! I still think it's the ambiguity that helps make the whole thing so interesting, that every single clash between the two of them that year still has so many unanswered questions. that both sides have their own unshakeable views of events - sometimes close to 'reality' and sometimes a little less so, sometimes reasonable and sometimes anything but. it's the subjectivity and the fallibility of the human capacity to understand events that we ourselves have experienced - it's this lack of knowability for both outsiders and insiders that makes it so endlessly fascinating and rewarding to analyse. even the two men themselves cannot completely understand what happened that day, what happened in those few seconds, and they never will. we're all in the dark, in the end

[fiona-fififi]

...

[tubbs-is-innocent]

ok so i have never been part of the tubbs fandom but wtf lead to the "tubbs is innocent/evil/etc."

like i am very much feeling this:

I've been wondering the same thing to be honest! I was there, but it's been a while. I've got the details figured out now.

It seems like in November/December of 2015, Neko Atsume had gotten real popular, and people on tumblr started talking about Tubbs. There was a sudden influx where people took really polarized stances on whether Tubbs was Good™ or Evil™ because he's the only cat who eats all your food. It was fueled by joke blogs dedicated to hating him, and resulted in a bunch of blogs being created and dedicated to their opinion of him (or just to Tubbs in general). People were just arguing about Tubbs all the time as like, a hobby. And, if we're being honest, as a way to score some dopamine from a small taste of fame on tumblr.com.

[magnuficentwo]

Wait a minute... Are you telling me that giving a bunch of people who care way too much about fandom discourse, with way too much free time on their hands, a platform where they can anonymously say Anything they want without any real way for them to have consequences for their actions, can lead to like... A bad environment ? Where everyone's constantly arguing ? Oh my gooooooodd who could've seen this cominggggg. It's a tragedy that no one could've predicted. We're all trying to find the guy who did this...

[jackpotsadnessgirl]

i fucking hate the pro vs anti argument bcs it always goes down to fiction and reality are seperate versus fiction affects reality when BOTH of those statements are true and should be treated as such!!

fiction and reality are not the same, if you maim and torture a fictional character guess what? theres no real damage bcs they arent real! same for literally anything that falls under "proshipping", you are basically playing dolls its not like these are real people that are doing this!

on the other hand YES! Fiction can affect reality. but on the 2 sides of that- if someone imitates what an author did in a story, that is not the authors fault and they should NOT be blaimed for others actions. and then if the author genuinely wants to do those things? id rather it be expressed in fiction than irl. if they do it irl yeah then i have a problem but the fiction itself is not the issue then!

and then just. theres no nuance in this argument i swear. theres no room for depictions of trauma, theres no room for morally grey storys or unreliable narrorators. if you dare depiction the "bad things" without explicitly saying they r evil then u must be hung!!! its fucking stupid.

i just wish both sides would shut up

[freckliedan]

idk if you've seen, but there's been some discourse about Lorde with people speculating if she might be nonbinary (mostly lightheartedly). A lot of people responded with "how DARE you ACCUSSE her of being some type of trans" but the other night at the Met Gala she had an interview where she said she feels like "both a man and a woman," so no announcement but something that sounds very genderqueer and people pointed out she's been talking about a gender journey in other interviews before pretty recently. It just sounds like something you might find sounds familiar on your blog about a certain someone and what you have to deal with lol

oh my god i didn't even see the discourse. i just saw people on my dash going "lorde's transmasc swag <3". yay nonbinary lorde <3

[starryjkoo]

Some ARMYs seriously need to touch grass because their ability to make every situation so much worse because they're chronically online and incredibly reactive is genuinely astounding.

[rat-rosemary]

honestly you're better off having people block you on here instead of harass you

Fair

However! Because they're dteam fans and seemingly friends with people who seem to be fine with me it makes me want to put my head through a brick wall. /lh

[i-c-u-p]

going to start using this platform like twitter again and by that i mean posting relentlessly and going on rants in the tags

[syneepsis]

So... I've been thinking

Listen, I've been in this bangtan sonyeondan shit for a few years now.

I've seen plenty.

I've also been a shipper for pretty much just as long, and a tkk supporter/believer/whatever for a while.

So why not, right? Why not try to actually use tumblr for a change, after 14 years of being on that website and enjoying the peace and quiet of having a lurker account.

Cause man, are there things to say. Still. Surprisingly.

I really thought that, with CH2, things would calm down, shipping spaces would empty out because of the lack of "content".

Boy was I wrong... Chaos is everywhere, Taekook have been amazingly loud and this stupid war (you know which one) has reached (imo) unprecedented levels.

And I have thoughts. And maybe some time to put them in writing.

So yeah, why not, right?

[lordsardine]

.

[hamliet]

Adolescence Review (by someone who used to work in child protection)

Recently watched Netflix's Adolescence and it was probably the best TV series I've seen. It's superbly acted (how was this Owen Cooper's first role?), fascinatingly filmed (every single episode is shot in one take), and brimming with empathy and nuance.

It also resonates personally with me. Once upon a time, I worked in child protection for a year. I've worked with kids like the main subject of the series, Jamie Miller. I can't and won't give details, but this series probably captures the heart-wrenching, soul-crushing reality of what it's like to work with kids who do horrific crimes.

Episode 1 is an excruciatingly detailed account of the dehumanization of arrest and imprisonment, and that's even with everyone doing their best to be kind to Jamie because he's a child (13, but looks younger). I guarantee you most cops don't try to be nice to most intakes.

There's really only one moment where a cop is cruel until the interrogation, and that's when Jamie's being strip-searched. The man conducting the search tells his father, who asks, in essence, "how would you feel if you were thirteen and strangers wanted to do this to you?" that "I was never accused of a crime." Well, bully for you, jerk-face.

Yet the viewer also understands the cruel necessity of having to conduct such a search, while also wanting to throw up. I do think a lot of the discourse around juvenile criminals resorts to "throw away the key" without considering what that means, and what humiliation and abuse kids go through when they're arrested (rightfully or wrongfully). The show following each and every motion and forcing the viewer to observe the father's face rather than the actual search forces the viewer to face their own thoughts on juvenile justice (especially because, at this point, you don't know whether Jamie did it).

But at the same time as Jamie is dehumanized in this way, you're confronted with the reality of how much he's dehumanized his victim at the end of the episode, when you see that he absolutely, 100% did do it. This thread of how Jamie dehumanizes women in particular continues in Episode 3.

Episode 2 is easily the weakest of the series. It's still great and offers, via a chaotic school with checked-out adults who can't care anymore and adults who do care completely overwhelmed and limited by their own humanity, a symbolic picture of what teenagers face. How can they learn when they aren't willing to listen? At the same time, how can they learn when no one is teaching? How can people teach when they are drowning themselves?

My criticism here is that the school appeared not exactly unrealistic, but also slightly hyperbolized. I think they could have stressed the struggles of trying to care when there's too much to care for even more than they did via an additional episode, an episode I think the second one almost introduced and then left dangling--one that focused on Katie's loved ones.

We hear about Katie's mom, and we meet Jade and see her rage over losing her best friend. We even see one detective voice how frustrating it is that Jamie will be remembered but Katie won't be. I wouldn't quite call this lip service because I do think the aim of the show isn't quite about this, but I do think the show should have spent an episode on Jade and/or Katie's family.

We know Katie isn't perfect as a victim, but that doesn't mean in any way that she deserved to be stabbed to death (or to have her pictures leaked). In fact, the show makes this emphatically clear. But I still think they missed a chance to make her more human, to show the loss through her loved ones.

If Episode 2 is the slightly-less-than-the-others episode, Episode 3 is the standout. The psychologist examines Jamie and he vacillates between inappropriately flirting with the psychologist to childishly requesting more hot chocolate to terrifyingly screaming in rage to sobbing in fear like a child in a nightmare to condescendingly mocking her like a rabid fan of Elon's would to desperately trying to wrench away the reality of what he did and trying to talk himself out of facing reality. And Owen Cooper, the child actor, makes all of this believable.

The reality is that the cruelty of what Jamie's done sinks in during Episode 3. He tells his psychologist that most other guys who have assaulted their victim, but he didn't, so he's better, right? And then he screams and sobs minutes later begging for someone to tell him that they like him, anyone. I found myself wanting to grab the psychologist and beg her to say that she "cared" (something I said in a similar moment during my work doing child protection). But I also understand why she didn't--not just professionally, but in terms of Jamie having to realize that he can't be entitled to people liking him when he's so cruel to women.

The psychologist also asks Jamie if he understands what death is. While he says all the right words to show he does, everyone over the age of 20 knows that he doesn't, and the show knows it too. I genuinely think that, until you get older, you cannot fully understand what it means for someone to be gone from this earth.

And therein lies the paradox of the show: Jamie doesn't fully understand what he's done. At the same time, what he's done has permanent, gruesome, irreversible consequences for everyone around him--and beyond that, because of the internet's influence beyond local boundaries.

Episode 4 is an episode I would call beautiful in a lot of ways, despite the fact that it's jagged and raw. We follow Jamie's family (dad, mom, and older sister) as they try to celebrate the dad's birthday about a year after the crime. We see how they're wrestling with the fallout and agony of knowing they raised Jamie--but they also raised Lisa, who is kind of an awesome kid.

And while Episode 1 actually has detectives musing that the parents might be abusive and that might explain it, this episode removes any doubts: Eddie and Amanda, Jamie's parents, are good parents. They are not perfect. Eddie has a temper. Amanda should have monitored his computer use more. But also? No parents are perfect. Arguably, the detective who interacts with his son in Episode 2 is a worse parent than they are. Yet his son is great, and Lisa is great.

There simply isn't a good explanation. Jamie was hurting, yes, but his pain can't be pinned down to a singular cause. The internet hurt him and gave him messages about masculinity that were harmful to say the least. But he also got those messages at school, even if he wasn't on the internet. And he got love at home, as well as some flawed interactions with his parents.

So who is responsible for Jamie's actions? Jamie himself. He chose.

Yet, the series also acknowledges that Jamie is a child, and he is not just "born bad." We see how other kids, like Jade punching Ryan, and Ryan loaning Jamie the knife, and Tommy joking around, and the bully leaking Katie's pictures--they have no comprehension of the extreme ramifications of their actions... but some of them also don't appear to care to learn. Normally, society would demand they care to learn, but that's not happening.

So then what? If society creates these kids, then what does society owe them? That's a question the series wants viewers to walk away contemplating, rather than giving a simple answer.

And there is some hope: Jamie deciding to plead guilty and accept responsibility. In that, we see how kids are supposed to be able to make mistakes and learn and grow. Yet Jamie's "mistake" is so shattering that Katie will never get to grow beyond it because of him, and to what degree Jamie can after pleading guilty isn't clear either. And in an era where their every action is captured online, can they ever really grow beyond?

I don't know that I have an answer to that. I've seen some kids I worked with grow up to be awesome. And I've lost touch with others, particularly those whose cases were more serious. There is no agony like seeing a child who has done something horrific and is suffering themselves and knowing you can't save them, and not knowing what the future holds for them. All you're left with is being able to hope that they'll learn to accept responsibility and grow, but in a system and society that makes that really impossible, is that even much of a hope?

[crossingbaranduin]

frantically working on these most recent couple WIPs because i know the second i start playing pokemon scarlet + get the DLC next month, it's all over for anything but that haha

[kxsagi]

this one doesn’t rlly involve a reader but i’d love to see blue lock boys react to what their irl fandom has to say abt them like from thirst comments to shit like “fraudtoshi rin” “plotsagi” “goatsagi” or idfk like “does ness hold it for kaiser when he pisses bc he can’t aim?” you can pick the characters, tho i feel like isagi, rin and kaiser are easier to do bc of how many comments there are about them

thank you for taking the time to read this random ass hc idea i love ur account🥀🥀💔💔

“𝐫𝐞𝐟, 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 🥀”

a/n: i loved this one so much, the blue lock fandom truly is the best 😭😭😭

ft. isagi yoichi, itoshi rin, kaiser michael, ness alexis, mikage reo, nagi seishiro, shidou ryusei, itoshi sae

isagi yoichi

isagi's the type to search his name on twitter. daily. you think he's just analyzing plays but no, he's reading threads like: "isagi plays soccer like he's plotting a murder and we're just watching the body count rise." "plotsagi got that rizz. man manipulating the ball and my feelings." 

he scrolls in silence for a good 10 minutes. then asks himself, “do i really look like i monologue in my head before i pass?” 

but then he finds one that says “if isagi had a fanfic it’d be tagged ‘obsession’ ‘manipulative behavior’ ‘this is not a love story’” and he goes, “okay, but they’re not wrong.” 

thirst tweets? he reads one that says, “i would let isagi use me like he uses spatial awareness” and drops his phone (that was tweeted by kxsagi). 

refuses to look anyone in the eye for a full 12 minutes. 

itoshi rin

the absolute worst person to find his fandom discourse. 

at first it’s fine, he sees “itoshi rin owns me” and “he could spit on me and i’d bark” and thinks you’re all mentally unstable (he’s right). 

but then. then. he hits a comment that says: “fraudtoshi rin only shows up when sae breathes near him. man folds faster than my GPA.” 

he stops breathing. who said that. he’s scrolling like he’s trying to find the IP address. 

goes into a full-on rant like, “i literally scored more goals in the NEL than– you know what, never mind. i don’t care. i don’t. i don’t even read comments.” (he absolutely reads the comments.) 

the worst part is he sees people arguing over who the hotter itoshi is. someone said “sae is sexy. rin is just cold and tall.” this man is FUMING. “i am not just tall.” 

kaiser michael

he lives for this. googles himself once a week. you can catch him reading a post that says: “kaiser looks like he’d insult you in german during sex and then ghost you after stealing your charger.” 

he chuckles and goes, “hm. they get me.” 

there’s another tweet: “kaiser plays football like the main villain in a sports anime and i’d still let him ruin my life.” 

he saves it. makes it his wallpaper. “they get it.” 

but then he sees one that says: “does ness hold it for kaiser when he pisses because he can’t aim?” 

that man screeches. pure betrayal. “WHAT? why would they say that? why would they say i can’t AIM? i am the best striker in blue lock! in the world!” 

he turns to ness like, “tell them it’s not true. say it.” 

ness alexis

he sees the comment about him holding it for kaiser and his face goes red. “i don’t do that!! i– i– kaiser can aim just fine!! i mean– i’ve never– WHY IS THAT A QUESTION!?” 

his favorite tweet is actually: “ness is like a clingy poodle with abandonment issues and i want to pat his head and tell him it’s okay.” 

he reads it twice and mutters, “i don’t have issues...” 

but then sees someone say “ness is just the manager who got promoted to player because kaiser needed a fanboy on-field” and he looks heartbroken for the entire week. 

mikage reo

he’s lowkey offended that people don’t thirst over him enough. 

“why does everyone simp for nagi? i have the body of a greek god and a bank account that would fund a small nation. where’s my edit with lana del rey playing in the back?” 

he finds a comment that says: “reo has rich twink energy and i respect that.” 

he reads it out loud and then mutters, “... what does that mean.” 

nagi seishiro

only finds out about the fandom when reo shows him. doesn’t care until he sees a tweet that says: “nagi looks like he’d sleep through a nuclear war, but wake up if you open a bag of chips.” 

he stares blankly and goes, “they’re right though.” 

reo shows him another that says “nagi looks like he gives the worst hugs. like hugging a fridge.” 

“do i?” he asks, genuinely confused. “maybe it’s just all the muscle i’ve packed on.” 

shidou ryusei

he’s already in the comments. like. not just reading them. replying. 

thirst tweets? he's in there with a “bet 😘” and a selfie of his abs. 

reads a tweet that says: “shidou plays like a demon possessed his body mid-match and now it’s just him vs god.” 

he likes it. reposts it with “and i’m winning.” 

but then he sees someone tweet: “if shidou had a tumblr, it would be just gifs of himself and ‘do u guys think teeth are sexy’ polls.” 

he grins, full teeth. “yo wait. that’s genius.” 

there’s another one that says “shidou would call you ‘mommy’ during sex just to see your reaction” and he cackles. 

“nah, i already have. she cried. it was awesome.” 

but the real chaos? he finds a post that reads: “shidou is what happens when red bull sponsors a felony.” 

he screenshots it. makes it his lock screen. 

itoshi sae

did not ask to see the fandom discourse. but a teammate showed him anyway. huge mistake. he stares blankly at the phone like: “what the hell is a ‘dilf agenda’ and why am i on it?” 

he sees another one that says: “sae looks like he’d ruin your life and then act like you were the problem.” 

he hums. “that’s just facts.” 

another says: “sae is hot, but i just know he’d leave you on read for 3-5 business days with no explanation and still expect you to be in love with him.” 

he glances over, shrugs. but then. then. he reads: “sae is just rin with prettier hair and daddy issues.” 

his entire soul leaves his body. “excuse me?” 

turns to his teammate like, “do i… do i look like i have daddy issues?” his teammate blinks. he’s already reevaluating his childhood in real time. 

worst of all, he finds a photo of himself mid-match with the caption: “sae itoshi could run me over with his lamborghini and i’d say thank you.” 

and now he won’t shut up. “you think i should get a lambo? it’d match my aura.” 

© 𝐤𝐱𝐬𝐚𝐠𝐢

[valdevia]

Very funny that tumblr is having discourse about whether my art is misinformation or not, after I've been posting it all over the internet for years without any controversy. So let's talk about it!

I know people arguing are a vocal minority, but I'm not going to dismiss anyone's concerns. It's an actually interesting topic that I really consider, and it touches some important issues in society. So here's my (rambly) two cents.

My art is meant to misdirect, in some way. Photomanipulation and the tone I typically use are meant to briefly confuse the person reading it into thinking they're hearing a real story, at least for a few seconds.

The Intended Experience™

In this sense, I feel like my art can be misinformation! And it's not only people who don't think critically about things like "how come I never heard about mermaids being real before?".

So, no disrespect to anyone that fell for one of my pieces! My work plays with reality, so if you fell for it for more than a minute, it just means my tone and style worked a little too well for you! And there are legitimate reasons to be confused when you see something online, too. For example, there are people who can have trouble telling real and fictional things apart. When you post something that goes out to a million people, you'll get one million different reactions.

That's why I always take care to make it really clear, outside the main piece and snippet of text, that my art is no more than fiction. There are tags, the tone of my account, even my profile picture is meant to reinforce this. I also have a website which, in part, is meant to capture the clicks of people to wonder if my stuff is real and google it, so they can find a real source that's clearly an art website. You can try googling "mycelium infection 1806" or "pupillosarcoma" to see how my website tends to appear first.

If I get this comment I know I've done something believable!

But let's say, for the sake of argument, that my art wholly constitutes misinformation. What we need to understand is that misinformation is not the same as disinformation. Misinformation is just incorrect information. It's your grandma seeing a little bit of a found footage movie on TV and thinking it really happened. She might be spooked, but nobody is harmed. Disinformation is false information that's purposefully crafted and spread in order to cause harm, division, or further a political view.

Now I ask you: what real world harm does my art create? The worst that can happen is that a tiny percentage of those that see it get a little scared thinking a weird bug is real, or that mushrooms really grow on faces, or that scientists have released millions of trilobites into the oceans. Is that really that bad?

Anyway, that's my take on the topic! I'm obviously biased, but this being my style, I do put a lot of thought into it and I'm always open to people's opinions! (Just don't scream at random people on the replies or you'll get blocked!)