#it’s the weird moral superiority of it all

[hacash]

I find this take really interesting when applied to one of my all-time favourite detectives, Tom Barnaby from Midsomer Murders: because by all accounts Barnaby is an Insider Detective. He's a police detective, he's a straight white man, he has a wife and daughter, he is a very Nice Normal Person. The writers went out of their way to make him the most boring, white-dad-shaped detective in the history of television. He is just Some Guy.

But IMO the best episodes of the show come when there's a clash between what's expected of Barnaby as Insider Detective and what morally he thinks is ok to do as Insider Detective. You see this happen in ways that are classed as 'anti establishment': eg ignoring his superiors' orders not to piss off the local aristocracy, insisting on treating everyone as equal suspects, etc. One of my favourite episodes, Blood Will Out, is a prime example of this: Barnaby chooses to look the other way when a group of travellers set up on public land because they're not doing any harm, even if they're annoying the local community. However, in the next scene he then refuses to look the other way when the local manor owner plans to use the power of the establishment - ex-army buddies and the like - to drive the travellers away with clubs and baseball bats. In effect, employing a bit of picking and choosing to decide when the law gets applied and when it doesn't, against the aims of the 'Insider Community', but instead acting for those who are the more vulnerable within this community.

Now, it's impossible to argue that this makes Barnaby any less of an Insider. He's still the same guy with the same social status. But it's when MM employs the narrative tension between what is expected of Barnaby as Insider Detective and what he actually chooses to do (in effect, his refusal to be used as an enforcer of 'private law', which is what policemen used to be used as by the rich aristocracy) that the show is made a little more interesting.

(the fact that also Barnaby presents as an Insider Detective to our standard British culture, but potentially more of an Outsider to Midsomer's insane culture of Weird Cults, Incestual Aristocracy, And Murdering People For Social Status, also adds something to the show. But then Barnaby being the only sane man in the insanity that is Midsomer is done more for comedy than drama)

The Insider and Outsider Detectives

So there's a lot of discourse about detectives floating around, ever since 2020 shifted a lot of people's Views on the police. Everyone likes a good mystery story, but no one seems to know what to make of a detective protagonist- especially if they're a cop. And everyone who cares about this kind of thing likes to argue over whether detective stories hold up the existing order or subvert it. Are they inherently copaganda? Are they subversive commentary on the uselessness of the police?

I think they can be both. And I think there's a framework we can use to look at individual detectives, and their stories, that illuminates the space between "a show like LAPD straight-up exists to make the cops look good" and "Boy Detective is a gender to me, actually".

So. You can sort most detectives in fiction into two boxes, based on their role in society: the Insider Detective and the Outsider Detective.

The Insider Detective is a part of the society they're investigating in, and has access to at least some of the levers of power in that society. They can throw money at their problems, or call in reinforcements, and if they contact the authorities, those authorities will take them seriously. Even the people they're investigating usually treat them with respect. They're a nice normal person in a nice normal world, thank you very much; they're not particularly eccentric. You could describe them as "sensible". And crime is a threat to that normal world. It's an intrusion that they have to fight off. An Insider Detective solving a crime is restoring the way things ought to be.

Some clear-cut examples of Insider Detectives are the Hardy Boys (and their father Fenton), Soichiro "Light's Dad" Yagami, or Father Brown. Many police procedural detectives are Insider Detectives, though not all.

The Outsider Detective, in contrast, is not a part of the society they're investigating in. They're often a marginalized person- they're neurodivergent, or elderly, or foreign, or a woman in a historical setting, or a child. They don't have access to any of the levers of power in their world- the authorities may not believe them (and might harass them), the people they're investigating think they're a joke (and can often wave them off), and they're unlikely to have access to things like "a forensics lab". The Outsider Detective is not respectable, and not welcome here- and yet they persist and solve the crime anyway. A lot of the time, when an Outsider Detective solves a crime, it's less "restoring the world to its rightful state" and more "exposing the rot in the normal world, and forcing it to change."

Some clear-cut examples of Outsider Detectives are Dirk Gently, Philip Marlowe, Sammy Keyes, or Mello from Death Note.

Now, here's the catch: these aren't immutable categories, and they are almost never clear-cut. The same detective can be an Insider Detective in one setting and an Outsider Detective in another. A good writer will know this, and will balance the two to say something about power and society.

Tumblr's second-favourite detective Benoit Blanc is a great example of this. Theoretically, Mr. Blanc should be an Insider Detective- he's a world-famous detective, he collaborates with the police, he's odd but respectable. But because of the circumstances he's in- investigating the ultra-rich, who live in their own horrid little bubbles- he comes off as the Outsider Detective, exposing the rot and helping everyone get what they deserve. And that's deliberate. There is no world where a nice, slightly eccentric, mildly fruity, fairly privileged guy like Benoit Blanc should be an outsider. But the turbo-rich live in such an insular world, full of so much contempt for anyone who isn't Them, that even Benoit Blanc gets left out in the cold. It's a scathing political statement, if you think about it.

But even a writer who isn't trying to Say Something About The World will still often veer between making their detective an Insider Detective and an Outsider Detective, because you can tell different kinds of stories within those frameworks. Jessica Fletcher from Murder She Wrote is a really good example of this-- she's a respectable older lady, whose runaway success as a mystery novelist gives her access to some social cachet. Key word: some.

Within her hometown of Cabot Cove, Fletcher is an Insider Detective. She's good friends with the local sheriff, she's incredibly familiar with the town's social dynamics, she can call in a favour from basically anyone... but she's still a little old lady. The second she leaves town, she might run into someone who likes her books... but she's just as likely to run into a police officer who thinks she's crazy or a perp who thinks she's an easy target. She has the incredibly tenuous social power that belongs to a little old lady that everyone likes- and when that's gone, she's incredibly vulnerable.

This is also why a lot of Sherlock Holmes adaptations tend to be so... divisive. Holmes is all things to all people, and depending on which stories you choose to focus on, you can get a very different detective. If you focus on the stories where Holmes collaborates with the police, on the stories with that very special kind of Victorian racism, or the stories where Holmes is fighting Moriarty, you've got an Insider Detective. If you focus on the stories where Holmes is consulting for a Nice Young Lady, on the stories where Holmes' neurodivergence is most prominent, or on his addictions, you've got an Outsider Detective.

Finally, a lot of buddy detective stories have an Insider Detective and an Outsider Detective sharing the spotlight. Think Scully and Mulder, or Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde. This lets the writer play with both pieces of the thematic puzzle at the same time, without sacrificing the consistency of their detective's character.

Back to my original point: if you like detective fiction, you probably like one kind of story better than the other. I know I personally really prefer Outsider Detective Stories to Insider Detective Stories- and while I can enjoy a good Insider Detective (I'd argue that Brother Cadfael, my beloved, is one most of the time), I seek out detectives who don't quite fit into the world they live in more often than not.

And if that's the vibe you're looking for... you're not going to run into a lot of police stories. It's absolutely possible to make a story where a cop (or, even better, an FBI agent) is an Outsider Detective-- Nick Angel from Hot Fuzz was originally going to be one of my 'clear-cut examples' until I remembered that he is, in fact, legally a cop! But a cop who's an Outsider Detective is going to be spending a lot of time butting heads with local law enforcement, to the point where he doesn't particularly feel like one. He's probably going to get fired at some point, and even if his badge gets reinstated, he's going to struggle with his place in the world. And a lot of Outsider Detective stories where the detective is a cop or an FBI agent are intensely political, and not in a conservative way- they have Things To Say about small towns, clannishness, and the injustice that can happen when a Pillar Of The Community does something wrong and everyone looks the other way. (Think Twin Peaks or The Wicker Man.)

Does this mean Insider Detective Stories are Bad Copaganda and Outsider Detective Stories are Good Revolutionary Stories? No. If you take one thing away from this post, please make it that these categories are morally neutral. There are Outsider Detective stories about cops who are Outsiders because they really, really want an excuse to shoot people. There are Insider Detective stories about little old people who are trying to keep misapplied justice from hurting the kids in their community. Neither of these types of stories are good or bad on their own. They're different kinds of storytelling framework and they serve different purposes.

But, if you find yourself really gravitating to certain kinds of mysteries and really put off by other kinds, and you're trying to express why, this might be a framework that's useful for you. If your gender is Boy Detective, but you absolutely loathe cop stories? This might be why.

(PS: @anim-ttrpgs was posting about their game Eureka again, and that got me to make this post- thank them if you're happy to finally see it. Eureka is designed as an Outsider Detective simulator, and so the rules actively forbid you from playing as a cop- they're trying to make it so that you have limited resources and have to rely on your own competence. It's a fantastic looking game and I can't recommend it enough.)

(PPS: I'm probably going to come back to this once I finish Psycho-Pass with my partner, because they said I'd probably have Thoughts.)

(PPPS: Encyclopedia Brown is an Insider Detective, and that's why no one likes him. This is my most controversial detective take.)

[dross-the-fish]

Dealing with casual aphobia feels so weird because it doesn't look like the kneejerk horrified homophobia or transphobia you normally get from bigoted people so it's easier to ignore for awhile but I find that it does eventually get under my skin. "If you're alive you have a kink, everyone has kinks they just don't talk about it!" - No? I don't have kinks or fetishes, I don't even really have a sense of physical attraction and with each passing year my interest in having any kind of sex at all disappears. My relationship to sex is not the same as that of Allosexual people. "Celibacy is admirable! It's commendable," -It's not really being celibate if the interest isn't there. I'm not abstaining from anything. I don't think there is any virtue in abstinence or that there is a moral superiority attached to the presence or absence of sex. Being sexual is normal and healthy for most people. "You're a prude" -No, I'm just not horny. I have no strong feelings about how active other people are. It's no different from realizing I don't like chocolate cake so I just don't buy chocolate cake ever. I don't want to ban all discussion or consumption of chocolate cake. Why does that make YOU so uncomfortable? "You should see a doctor! That can't be healthy!"-I'm not unhappy with my lack of sexual interest. it's only a problem for me because other people keep acting like it is. "But you write NSFW!" -Sex as a topic is still interesting and it is a facet of some character's identity. I think it's worth discussing and exploring how some characters communicate emotions through sex. I even enjoy reading about it sometimes. I just don't actually want to have it. "You just need the right partner!" My current partner is the right partner. Sex is just not part of the equation because it never needed to be. "But asexuals CAN have sex" -why is it always this and never "Allosexuals can live without it."? And if you truly can't live without it stop trying to hook up with asexual people!

"That's not fair to anyone who starts a relationship with you" -been in a happy queer-platonic with my aromatic partner for 10 years, thanks.

[willowways]

I hate a “starving kids in Africa” ass bitch

[starscream-is-my-wife]

Sometimes a day makes you want a Starscream to bite and squeeze

[skitskatdacat63]

.

[goldensunset]

re: the music rant I tagged you in I am so sorry for tagging you in my double-dose caffeine fueled haterism explosion post. truly was off the shits and did not realize how much random garbage talking points I was ready to spill on the first person to ask

but i love haterism…..

[eldrichthingy]

not to be an ass but I do wonder now after developers stances on controversial endings how does majority of astarion's fandom feel knowing that they were wrong the whole time with their "holier than thou" attitude lmao

[maegalkarven]

I interact with brains in jars and the archive of brains for the first time and got to the True Soul one.

And yeah, I think June definetely needs to tadpole Gortash. Make him taste his own medicine or so to speak.

[aceaphs]

i think we as a community have forgotten this scene from mystreet and im here to curse you all and make you remember

[veone]

One day probably soon yoonie will no longer irritate my soul. I learned the hard way on not moving with my first instincts and giving people the benefit of the doubt. Will say if I follow you could do you me solid and tag him so I can block the tag ���.

[maipareshaan]

I think fandom is most divided on s8 in the Sam and Dean wars, like the Dean stans and D/sticule never shut up about it as evil Sammy won't let Dean have friends and the codependency evil and bad and i woke and good and do media right by hating the codependency and every evil person who likes it. Then they'll share Cas and Dean beating each other and how hot it is and how you should like toxic characters and toxic dynamics bcz that's the POINT guys, do media right but you HAVE to be against the codependency and want to get it fixed via D/stiel and characters should be treated like real people who deserve better which is a found family and being gay, or you are evil and not woke like us who do media right and know what's wrong with the show which is that its about glorified toxic family and not about toxic glorified found family. Wah.

[here-there-were-dragons]

all modern writing advice is optimized towards creating the most digestible and marketable mass-appeal piece possible, which everyone has decided is The Only Way To Do Art Right for some reason. i hate it, i fucking hate it so much, i had to stop listening to movie and art concrit videos because it became infuriatingly clear that literally no one has opinions of their own, they're just parroting from a list of How To Make The Most Marketable Thing that they heard from other criticisms, taken as gospel of The One And Only Way To Be Right, and have put no real actual thought into it themselves.

literally all of them now just boil down to "here's how this did/didn't follow the Standard Marketability Checklist to the exact letter. also at least a third of this essay is me randomly interjecting about how much i want to suck off puss in boots 2"

Every 21st century piece of writing advice: Make us CARE about the character from page 1! Make us empathize with them! Make them interesting and different but still relatable and likable!

Every piece of classic literature: Hi. It's me. The bland everyman whose only purpose is to tell you this story. I have no actual personality. Here's the story of the time I encountered the worst people I ever met in my life. But first, ten pages of description about the place in which I met them.

[maiteo]

The pundit part is sooo true “ugh why didn’t x former player praise x player, he’s always biased to x club” and then they themselves proceed to shit on every player that doesn’t play for the club they support. Likeeee?? I get having faves and having players to hate, we all do, but surely it’s not healthy turning every little thing in to a competition and expecting everyone to love ur fav and hate whoever u hate. The way agendas spread so easily bc of this is crazy

literally mention it ALLLL

[barnbridges]

people's tastes in ANYTHING seem to be performative and only exist to uplift the person liking the thing, which is why we can't have genuine superfans anymore.

[dualityvn]

I would like to address a recent trend I am seeing pop up in the yandere community. I feel that people are kind of pointing fingers at each other trying to decide who is more morally correct than the other. And I find it a little silly. We're here for hot stalkers. None of us are consuming moral fiction.

I sympathize with Fantasia and the backlash she is getting because of her recent update to her game. I still stand by my belief that devs should write what they want before they let themselves be influenced by outside opinions. It is her choice and her game first and foremost. Not to mention it's her first one and being thrown in the spotlight while you're making your first game is a pretty horrible experience. Because you don't know much about the process of making games or what you even ultimately may want to do with your game. It's a trial and error type of thing. And you can't make everyone happy. I still support her and encourage her on her creative journey and I hope the finished game is something she will be proud of.

I also understand that the game originally looked like a yandere romance game and it did not turn out to be that. So people are upset and feel betrayed. Some have spent money thinking they'd enjoy it and the recent update may have changed that. I understand, but I ask them to be understanding themselves and give their feedback without harassing or insulting the dev.

At the same time, I'm observing some weird new mentality in this attempt to support Fantasia. Now, we are claiming that "realistic" yanderes are superior? And that people who enjoy softer yanderes are delusional idiots who don't belong in the yandere fandom? And don't get me started on the word "romanticize." Can we please stop the holier than thou attitude?

We are all in this pig den together. We are all muddy. We are all consuming dark content. One isn't more moral than the other. You are free to prefer yanderes who are cruel and awful and psychotic, but do not belittle the devs and fans who prefer a softer alternative. If someone outside the yan fandom were to look at us, they'd judge us all the same: people who like toxic obsessive love interests. We all know real life stalkers are bad. I am afraid of them everyday. None of us are delusional children and it's insulting and ridiculous to claim so.

Likewise, it's a little silly to claim you can't have darker content in dark fiction. Dark fiction is here to explore the awful parts of humanity without having to worry about morality. It does not reflect on the type of person the creator is. It does not make them an advocate for murder, stalking or sa.

Please be mature. If you wish to criticize, do so in a well thought out way. Do not simply throw around words.

[thatbadadvice]

Help! I'm a Perfect Genius, but This Potential Employer Asked Me a Boring Interview Question!

Ask A Manager, 13 Feb 2024:

I was rejected from a role for not answering an interview question. I had all the skills they asked for, and the recruiter and hiring manager loved me. I had a final round of interviews — a peer on the hiring team, a peer from another team that I would work closely with, the director of both teams (so my would-be grandboss, which I thought was weird), and then finally a technical test with the hiring manager I had already spoken to. (I don’t know if it matters but I’m male and everyone I interviewed with was female.) The interviews went great, except the grandboss. I asked why she was interviewing me since it was a technical position and she was clearly some kind of middle manager. She told me she had a technical background (although she had been in management 10 years so it’s not like her experience was even relevant), but that she was interviewing for things like communication, ability to prioritize, and soft skills. I still thought it was weird to interview with my boss’s boss. She asked pretty standard (and boring) questions, which I aced. But then she asked me to tell her about the biggest mistake I’ve made in my career and how I handled it. I told her I’m a professional and I don’t make mistakes, and she argued with me! She said everyone makes mistakes, but what matters is how you handle them and prevent the same mistake from happening in the future. I told her maybe she made mistakes as a developer but since I actually went to school for it, I didn’t have that problem. She seemed fine with it and we moved on with the interview. A couple days later, the recruiter emailed me to say they had decided to go with someone else. I asked for feedback on why I wasn’t chosen and she said there were other candidates who were stronger. I wrote back and asked if the grandboss had been the reason I didn’t get the job, and she just told me again that the hiring panel made the decision to hire someone else. I looked the grandboss up on LinkedIn after the rejection and she was a developer at two industry leaders and then an executive at a third. She was also connected to a number of well-known C-level people in our city and industry. I’m thinking of mailing her on LinkedIn to explain why her question was wrong and asking if she’ll consider me for future positions at her company but my wife says it’s a bad idea. What do you think about me mailing her to try to explain?

Sir,

You have been wronged in the most grievous of ways by a coven of retaliatory, self-aggrandizing women who have failed in the extreme to recognize your brilliance, your talent, and above all, your general superiority.

Of course you should mail this mediocre "grandboss" on LinkedIn to inform her of the deep offense she caused you by interviewing you in the first place, let alone doing so using a boring question — indeed, you have a moral and professional obligation to do so in order to preserve your honor and the honor of scores of men like you who have never done a single solitary thing wrong in their lives, ever.

But I beg you to consider doing more. A single, private message to one incompetent bitch may not convey to the necessary parties the depth and breadth of the situation. Many, many people have important lessons to learn from your experience, and I encourage you to share it widely. Consider making a public LinkedIn post, and ensure that it is shareable across platforms. Depending on your financial resources, a billboard with your name, professional headshot, and contact information could go a long way toward ensuring that everyone in your industry who needs to know just how you handled the way these women treated you, does know about it. I hope that in your continuing job search, you are able to connect with potential employers who have a much better grasp of all you bring to the table.