#its still a shitty portrayal of a real mental illness

[japeneselunchtimerush]

You know the whole scissors scene would have been way funnier if the takeaway was "akashi can turn anything into a weapon" rather than "akashi loves scissors".

If you think about it, the entire scene hinges on midorima's lucky item. It could have been quite literally anything(a stuffed toy, a printer, a grain of rice etc.) so it would have been all the more funny if akashi managed to get a hit on kagami with whatever it was.

[codename-adler]

Dear Tumblr toxicity,

Hi. Adler here. We need to talk.

- TW: mental health issues, depression, bipolar disorder, self-harm, homophobia, transphobia, coming out, xenophobia, islamophobia, racism, implied sexual content, rape, non-con, addictions, abuse, parental negligence, depictions of violence, swearing (please message me kindly if I forget anything)

- What prompted this message: The release of Skam France S7 teaser (emphasis on teaser, will get into that below)

- Where I’m coming from: I will talk from the pov of a white, cis and queer 22-years-old woman (she/her); this is the pov that affects my experiences and the opinions I will share below; but my message comes from a place of deep hurt, and love

- What this is about: My goal is to share a recurring experience that has hurt me in order to spread a message of awareness, maturity, peace and love

- Central content: Skam France, Skam Wtfock, and Skam/remakes in general

From now on I will assume people have enough information for me to talk about the topics without explaining every plotline/character. There are plenty of wiki pages to help you out and I will gladly answer any (respectful) questions asked if a plothole bothers your comprehension of my message. I’m only making these assumptions in order to alleviate the text.

January 9th, 2021.

The francetv slash YouTube channel releases an unexpected teaser video for an equally unexpected seventh season Skam France. The video features Tiffany, a white, cis female teenager, going into labour from denial pregnancy just after winning what appears to be a gymnastics championship. Overall, the video and its release are very dramatic.

The character of Tiffany, also called Tiff, was previously seen on season 6 of Skam France as a bully who persecuted the main character, Lola, both at school and on social media. Outside of this characterization, nothing is known about her. It is majorly accepted that Tiff is not a liked character; she rather poses as one of the antagonists of Lola’s arc.

Now you know the details of what happened, in the most objectively possible way. 

Now I’ll speak for myself.

Before I went digging around for people’s reaction, here is what I initially thought of this video.

1) Shock: I thought Skam France was over, so... Big, big shock.

2) Excitement: I hold this web series very close to my heart. It has gotten me through depressive episodes, anxiety attacks, coming out to my best friend. To see this new development? It couldn’t bring me more joy.

3) Curiosity: I recognized Tiff immediately. I was intrigued as to what would happen to her to set off a new season in true Skam Fr fashion. As soon as she started gripping her stomach, I knew she was pregnant and wasn’t aware of it. Big, big surprise here again.

4) Numbness/Overthinking: As I stared at my screen, motionless, my mind went off. What did it mean? How did she not know? Who is the father? Do we know him? Will the baby survive? Where are the other characters? Will Lamifex be present? What? How? When? Why? Who?

5) Disappointment: No, I did not like Tiff one bit in S6. Yes, I sincerely wished for a season on either Jo (ambiguous and funny teenage girl, cis + white), Sekou (seemingly neurodivergent teenage boy, cis + black), and my favorite, Max (mysterious and grave teenage boy, trans + white) So why Tiff? It felt to me like a missed opportunity, but I did not lose hope.

So, these were the five stages of my emotional process. And then I made the terrible mistake to go look for the fans’ reaction. I didn’t even look at the YT comments, I didn’t go on Instagram, I went directly here on Tumblr. Why? I’m still asking myself that. From S1 to S6 of Skam Fr, I kept my love for the show to myself and only looked at ig and video edits. I tried once, and only once, to look it up on Tumblr, and was greeted by fervent agressivity, disrespect and hate. Why did I ever forget that after watching the S7 teaser? I still don’t know.

The reactions on this platform were wild. People are furious (I get that). People are disappointed (I get that). People are anxious (I get that). People are also verbally agressive, insensitive, hateful, disrespectful and bullies. I don’t get that.

Comments along the lines of “What she gonna do with a fucking baby?”, “Are we gonna watch the baby do nothing all fucking season?”, “Wowwww, teenage pregnancy, so new and relatable!” (note the sarcasm made in the comment here), “Who gives a shit about Tiff?”, etc. 

And then all the mistakes Skam Fr ever made flooded back onto the feed. The wlw misrepresentation, the whitewashing, the overdramatization, the dubious sex scenes between minors, all of it.

Let’s take a break here. Do I condone these mistakes? Nope. Am I a white-bully apologist? Nope. Did I forget every horrible action Tiff has made in the past? Nope. She manipulated a whole school against Lola, she profited from Lola’s mother’s death, she bullied her, harrassed her, pushed her deeper into mental distress. Tiff was a despicable character that I never once liked. The way she was played by the actress made it clear that Tiff was not intended to be a good guy. If I could replace her as the main of S7, I would, in a heartbeat. I’d choose, as I said, Jo, Sekou or Max.

Skam France deeply lacks diversity and made mistakes when attempting to diverse the issues represented. This is not an opinion, it’s a fact. 

Poc representation is very, very low. Only one season has a woc of Islam beliefs as mc (Imane, S4) with poc entourage/family. Only 2 other characters not related to Imane were poc (Sekou and Sarah, S1-S2). These 2 characters were very in the background and served to further the mc’s plotline, they had no real content. (I am not a poc, and so my opinion does not matter here. If you are not poc, your “opinions” don’t matter here, this point is not for you to debate. These are facts.)

While I do not particularly find the wlw representation bad, I do understand how it hurts/bothers other queer women. From my perspective, the bar was very low regarding my expectations of the Lola/Maya pair (none of them died *yay* they had a happy ending *yay* they were not typically overfeminized or overmasculinized *yay* Lola  and Maya were respectful of each other, understood each other, accepted each other with all their flaws and their beauty *yay* I truly believed in their love and it gave me confidence and hope *yay* I ould really go on but this is not my main point so I’ll stop here) Regardless of my opinion on Mayla, I understand that to some queer women, it was bothering/hurtful. (If you are anything other than a woman / wlw, this point is not for you to debate. Keep your “opinions” to yourself, it does not matter here. These are facts.)

Like every remake of the original Skam where the S4 was given to Sana/Imane, the Muslim community was not represented at its best, at its most beautiful and respectfully. The character of Imane, although she is my favorite girl of the series, was not portrayed in a way that respected the majority of the Muslim community. (If you are anything other than Muslim, this point is not for you to debate. Our opinions do not matter here. These are facts.)

And so the same goes for the portrayal of sexual assault and child pronography in S2, of mental illness and homophobia in S3, of disabilities in S5, of addiction, transphobia, self-harm and neurodivergence in S6. Again, if you are not part of these communities, your opinions do not matter on these issues. These are facts that are not up for debate.

In other words, Skam France, as well as the original Skam, Skam Wtfock, Skam España, and probably all the others I haven’t watched in their entirety, are NOT perfect shows. They (maybe) tried their best to portray issues of the younger generations that are ugly, shameful, taboo, hard-to-swallow-pills. Of course they made mistakes. Of course they have to be held accountable. Of course they can and should do better. Of course it must be spoken about.

Here is my problem.

The so-called “fans” shamelessly SHITTING on the WHOLE show because of ONE TEASER TRAILER. (btw, this is where I get angry)

I am not talking about the fans making fun of the show and this season’s premise like “Better MCs than Tiff for S7: a romance between the car that almost hit Lucas S3 and the car that hit Arthur S5, or the school’s nurse, or Imane’s dad, or Elu’s rabbit” (that shit’s funny and I’d watch all of these).Or the joke about Wtfock and Skam Fr shaking hands while signing the same contract to disappoint the fans with white MCs (it’s funny cuz it’s trueeeee).

I am not talking about the fans criticizing the producers’ choice of Tiff as MC. There is a difference between shitting on issues and adressing/discussing them. I WANT to talk about how this season’s issue would have been so much better if a woc, specifically a black woman, had been the MC, because black women and doctors are a whole different level of issue than white women and doctors. Add on top of that an unplanned teenage pregnancy? It would have been IMMACULATE. I WANT to talk which wlw couple was better represented, Mayla or Croana/Crisana, and why is that. I WANT to talk about disabilities in black and poc communities. I WANT to talk about headcanons, AUs, to rectify the missed marks. I WANT to talk about our takes on seasons about Max, Sekou and Jo, instead of Tiff’s.

I DO NOT WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOUR SHITTY, NEGATIVE, UNHELPFUL, HURTFUL COMMENTS.

Just because the protagonist is white, doesn’t give you ANY right to dismiss the issue that is unplanned teenage pregnancy. This is a problem that affects countries WORLDWIDE. Do you know how many deaths are related to minors giving birth? Do you know how many babies die at birth from these pregnancies? Do you have any idea the trauma it puts you through, to go into labor without even knowing you were pregnant in the first place, and then giving birth, and then having to care for a defensless human being? The dilemma of keeping it, or giving it away? The fear that lives in every person able to give birth, that one day they’ll become pregnant, because society turns sych a shameful look to that? No matter your ethnicity, your gender identity, your sexuality, your political stance or whatever shit you bring up to justify your disgraceful and downright degrading comments, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY THAT A MINOR GIVING BIRTH IS NOT AN ISSUE. 

You think the topic has been covered plenty before? Yeah, because shows like “16 and pregnant” and “I Didn’t Know I Was Pregnant!” are such good examples and show the reality with such an objective point of view! 

Bullshit. Teenage pregnancy is still a taboo, it still kills, and people are still morons about it. 

“Well I guess everybody is secretly pregnant now!” No, Jessica, but you wouldn’t know about it, would you? Because I wouldn’t tell you shit if you were my “friend” and I was going through it. The whole message of all the Skams is not that it presents super relatable issues of teenagers, although it is a big topic of the show. They present some issues that affect the youth in an authentic light, but that’s not it.

Tous les gens que tu rencontres mènent un combat dont tu ignores tout. 

Sois indulgente. Toujours. x x x

//

Everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about.

Be kind. Always. x x x

THAT’S THE MESSAGE. THAT’S THE WHOLE POINT OF THE SHOW.

And you all missed it.

All of you making dead baby jokes and death threats, degrading people who give birth, shaming teenagers for their pregnancies... Listen to yourselves.

“Well she deserves it, she was such a bitch!” No, Michael, you shit stick. Let’s rewind a bit for you, yeah? It was a GOD DAMN TEASER. We literally know nothing! Nothing at all! Why are y’all getting mad when we saw 3:25 minutes representing a whole ass season! Listen to yourselves. Y’all judge so fast for people pretending to love Skam and its authenticity and its motto.

You say Tiff is irredeemable?

Emma cheated on her boyfriend.

Manon lied and manipulated her friends.

Lucas was homophobic and prejudiced agaisnt mentally ill people.

Imane was homophobic too and went behind her friends’ back to get what she wanted.

Arthur cheated on his girlfriend too.

Lola dragged Elliot down with her in her addiction, lied, was verbally abusive, etc.

ALL THE MAINS ARE PROBLEMATIC.

Any guess why?

BECAUSE THEY ARE TEENAGERS. THEY ARE STILL GROWING AND LEARNING.

Yet we still loved them all. 

So don’t you dare tell me that Tiff deserves this, that her baby deserves to die, that teenage motherhood is irrelevant. Motherhood is not a curse in the first place, nor is it something to wish to inflict upon anyone. Motherhood is different for every single person and nobody except the person living with it can have an opinion on that. We don’t even know if the baby survived, for God’s sake!

There is no excuse for this kind of behavior..

It makes me so angry. Women are discriminated against in a fandom I thought was safe, again and again and again. 

I have to stop here because, well, this is just too much. There is much wrong with Skam (the original AND all the remakes), but there is even more wrong with the fans. I’m done.

You don’t support the show anymore? Fine, then don’t watch it! If I really am wrong, the number of viewers will go down and the show will die, just like you wished. There is no need to be vicious about it. 

I hope y’all are proud of your misogyny. 

Sincerely,

Adler.

[destroy-trash-boys]

everyone in the persona 5 fandom makes the most brain worm arguments because they keep making thermian arguments and arguing as if the characters are real people making choices and not just doing what the writers want them to do. any criticism of the game’s writing gets people going “oh but psychologically a real person would do this, i would do this!” and that’s not. the point guys

ann is a fictional character, if ppl point out the hypocrisy in how the kamoshida arc is set up and then how ann is oogled the rest of the game, arguing as if ann is a real girl who can make her own choices is a stupid argument. it’s not a good rebuttal against the sexism.

haru forgiving her father isn’t “well abuse victims can have complex emotions” because she’s not a real victim. she forgives him because she’s meant to be a good girl and the game itself tries to whitewash okumura just because he’s dead. the same thing ppl hate the game for doing with akechi, they’re fine forgiving with okumura. haru doesn’t forgive him because the game gives a fuck about how rl victims can feel, its because haru would look less sympathetic if she wasn’t a dutiful daughter and good girls have to forgive their shitty fathers. ppl always bring up their headcanons for haru to make this make sense but its still just headcanon.

likewise akechi isn’t a portrayal of victims under the system and “abuse victims can be angry”, he’s the way he is because atlus wanted the shock value. his writing then became the way it is because atlus wants money from baiting the fujoshi. they’re not trying to write nuance with him, he’s not angry because they give a fuck about irl victims who are angry. he’s like that for ppl who get off on “unhinged anime boys” and the type of yaoi that ppl like with those characters. you really think they give a fuck about portraying mental illness with him? please. saying that is even more ableist than ppl hating akechi, and i ask why ppl think some “unhinged!!1��� character is always bpd representation. if you’re trying to lessen the stigma, you’re doing the opposite.

[aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaoldretired]

some p!g-drv3 theories (spoilers obvi)

First of all I think people demonize the pg versions wayyy too much because its a good way to be le sexy in like fanfictions. And i get it, villains are hot or whatever. and also hs is a horny age to be. But even the edgiest and horniest of teens aren’t like. that sexual/monstrous. its kind of insane the portrayals people are placing

maybe this could also be like me being older bc when i was early hs i was like yea its fair to place these super mature portrayals on a 18-22 year old they are like adults but young and now im that age and im like woah there pardner. might be an age/maturity thing. 

also like its normal for people to relate to and portray characters their same age in a similar fashion, but when adults write more sexual content about the dg kids i get hella fucking sus

idk where i was going with that first comment i guess its like a preface and in the end i think its important when characters especially teenage characters are morally grey not because they’re mature and dark/brooding but because they are still young and learning. fuck im older than like most of them, but im still young and learning. its good to be in turmoil and confused, especially the drv3 cast. they are more confused than anything.

which i think is a reason why people would join dr because if you are completely loss and in turmoil, it is appealing to be given a purpose in life and amazing talents/abilities. despite the morals of danganronpa, it is a simple reality to be told who you are and what to do

OK ONTO HEADCANONS (not doing all bc i dont have thoughts about all)

first of all i understand changing stories but i think, deep down, you can’t change fundamental personalities/values. so while the backstories might be different i think, in the end, a baseline is always the same

SHUICHI being a Bad Boy is like canon obviously but i dont think he’s as manipulative as people make him out to be. i think he falls in the more the bully role that like. mae borowski or tf2′s scout filled before they grew up. rough background, bad anger issues, lots of emotional turmoil, and the only way he knows how to deal with shit is by committing crimes and beating the shit out of people. and, similar to those characters, drv3 represents an older, more emotionally sober yet equally confused version of himself. the urges are still there as foreshadowed in the dialogue. i think he struggles with guilt, mostly survivors, but there is still a lasting impact of guilt of what he did in his past, even if he can’t remember.

KOKICHI is a child. a piece of shit motherfucker child but a child. I really do think he’s like one of the youngest people in the cast. he reminds me a lot of when my brother doesn’t take his adhd medicine and takes jokes way too far and does mean and cruel things because he thinks its funny and that its just a fun joke, but is hurting people. he desperately wants approval, which is why his leader role is so interesting because in the dr narrative he has the approval he craves and so he is satisfied. still, he does try to impress characters like rantaro and values his opinions a lot, even developing a brotherly relationship in the time they knew each other. this being said, its established kokichi was bullied before, but i dont think he’s like. the wimp people make him out to be. i think he’s more of like the class clown who desperately uses humor to make people like him, and ends up resorting to be the butt of most of his jokes. you don’t just develop a good sense of humor out of a brainwash, and that’s not something you can program in. i think that was a remnant of before, and he’s so good at bullying people and coming up with roasts - i just think that in p!g the roasts were about him.

KAEDE is baby but her p!g personality seriously reminds me of any ~quirky/edgy~ girl in a teen coming of age story who tries to be edgy and cool and act like she doesn’t care but deep down, she really does. if she didn’t have an empathetic personality, she wouldn’t want to end the game. i also think she has that self-identifying QuIrKy personality because its like she lives in her own narrative, practically announcing this story is about her and she is the protagonist. i know i used to self narrate like that and distinguish how i was different when i was like. 15-16. she has a tumblr. 

I really like the theory where KAITO is a make-a-wish kid who was better when he was younger but relapses later in teens. he never used his wish before, so he decides to use it now to be on danganronpa and become the hero he always wanted to be. i also think he might have joined as a way to raise awareness about adolescent healthcare. definitely the type who puts on a “heroic” character to make everyone else feel better about the fact he is literally dying of a terminal illness, and keeps that act up till the end. 

i think KOREKIYO is still a serial killer. i think honestly a reason why he mightve auditioned for danganronpa is because he is a serial killer. maybe his sister found out and he felt so much shame that’s why he auditioned. he probably mentioned why in his interview because duh, tell them im a serial killer and then only reason im coming clean is my sister found out and im ashamed, that is like a guarantee to get on the show.  i LOVE the theory that his sister is still alive, however, and has to watch her brother go insane because they wrote her into the story as the villain. because technically, she brought on this guilt, and is the reason why he auditioned - as a way to cause despair, twist it around so she’s the one to blame for his insanity. also, because its pretty accepted DR members become celebrities, kork’s sister is totally bombarded with paparazzi and is demonized in the media. she might end up writing a tell-all memoir about kork’s actual childhood and personality. quiet kid, thoughtful, interested in anthropology, she never thought he’d hurt a fly. watching her brother go insane probably destroyed her. 

I also think, timeline wise, kork is probably one of the oldest members along with rantaro. tbh i think kork actually graduated hs and went on a gap year doing the whole “hitchhike around the world to discover myself thing” which is where he began killing people. he was getting ready to go to college when his sister found out about what he did. this is when he decided to go on danganronpa instead of university. this would help explain why he knows so much about other cultures/travel/been so many places with so many memories/killed/is knowledgable on a level most other students are not. this would place him at like, 20-21, where everyone else is like 15-18.

ok so there’s two p!g RANTARO, p!g before 53 and p!p!g before 52. i’d like to establish now i think rantaro is the oldest of the characters, seeing as though he was already pretty old to begin with in 52, it takes time between television seasons, and he was in another game. so im placing him like 21-23, similar to yasuhiro in d1 being so much older than everyone else. i do think, in all iterations, rantaro was pretty much raising his sisters, though i don’t think he had twelve like the story (i think that’s an exaggeration, his sisters mean a lot to him, lets make him have a TON and then lose them all and feel GUILTY) rantaro joined the first game, partially to get money for his family and hopefully establish them as celebrities and let them have a comfy lifestyle, even if he doesn’t live...and also to finally ahve some sort of experience without his siblings tagging along. if he’s been raising his sisters all his life, he’s never had like something that’s JUST his. that’s his adventure. 52 is his ULTIMATE adventure. ahaha. mostly for money, kind of dreading it, still a tiny bit excited

ok p!g rantaro between 52 and 53 probably came back broken. he did the signings and appearances, but mostly wanted to spend time with his family and make sure they were set up. i think he knew the whole like few months between seasons he had to go on another show, but he did’t tell his sisters. his family found out when they saw a billboard with his face plastered on it hyping up the return of a fan favorite. yikes!

ok i get it a lot of people hate HIMIKO but i think she’s not nearly as similar as other “useless” characters in other games. its like, pretty clear she’s depressed, and the only thing she’s holding onto with dear life is magic. lack of hygiene, lack of personal care, constantly tired, social interaction exhausts - she has depression, but she’s not an UWU depressed character. so people find her depressive traits (which are some of the most realistic portrayals of mental health in the series) SUPER annoygin. she joined dr because she was completely lost and needed some sort of direction in her life, even if she’ll die for it. the thing is, even with direction, her mental state didn’t change because she wasn’t getting legitimate help. it’s like that one SNL skit that’s like. same sad you from before but in a new place. i also think she knows the magic is not real, because how could she not. i think she’s so adamant that it IS real, less as a way to convince others, and more of a way to convince herself. it’s like really super cruel that team danganronpa took a girl who is desperate for meaning and gave her literally a meaningless, fake talent.

i also kin himiko and find her a comfort character because i feel seen by her, replacing her useless talent of magic with mine of like shitty film making and comedy. i am seen.

related i don’t think she’s nearly as ugly as everyone says she is, i think she’s probably just depressed and takes absolutely no care of her hygiene and sleep and looks like sick and greasy all the time. same queen.

honest to god i think RYOMA’s backstory, tennis and all, is like 100% real and he’s the only one who keeps all of his memories except for the fact this is a tv show. i think he rolled up, a hot fucking mess, and the danganronpa team were like damn. we cannot improve upon this. 

[mermaidsirennikita]

dhaaruni replied to your post “actually in a truly blunt way I gotta be real and say that one of the...”

I recently read "Sex With Queens" and I got so MAD at how Diana was described and the same with "Mistresses" like would it kill you to not call Diana a crazed bipolar nympho and contrast her with Camilla, Charles' "properly homely true love?"

lol girl I lost my mind with anger at Sex With Queens for its portrayal of Diana

the thing is that Diana definitely suffered from mental health issues and obviously owned that in a major way, and she was so honest about having bulimia and self harming and even throwing herself down the stairs when she was pregnant with William--something that a lot of people could twist to really make her look bad, as I’m sure she knew?  and though of course she knew this would also gain her the sympathy of some, I also think that like... the woman was trying to do good by being honest, and connect with people in a life that had soooo few genuine connections

the thing that though it’s definitely not the majority view, I’ve noticed a lot of faux feminist bloggers and writers attempt to rehabilitate Camilla’s image by putting down Diana’s.  and the thing is that yeah, Camilla was not the ultimate villain, but--there’s a reason why it’s hard to to rehabilitate her image.  and the reason is not that she was homely, or that she liked sex (which lmao.... idk where this prudish Diana take came from bc she was getting around too...) but that she was old enough to know better as a married mother when a 20 year old virgin Diana married Charles; she was actively pretty fucking malicious by harassing Diana about how to act prior to her wedding, and then refusing to even be subtle about her affair out of politeness after; and she never seems to have taken much responsibility for her own part in the whole thing, according to ~sources.  lol, the book that Harry and Meghan probably fed a lot of their views too that just came out indicated that William and Harry STILL have mad beef with their father, and I frankly am sure that some of it comes from that pain always being on display because he’s with Camilla.

and that’s not to say that he shouldn’t be with the woman--for God’s sake, he definitely loves her.  but they were very very shitty, knowing better as experienced adults who’d been in a THING for years, to someone who had zero experience.  

and yes, some of this pro-Camilla take also most definitely comes from this weird identification these women have with Camilla because she’s frankly plain at best and poorly-dressed, while Diana was gorgeous and the muse of artists, designers, singers, etc; and still is.  it rings of “the plain girl wins in the end” which lol... she helped destroy a woman’s marriage.... and if Diana was alive?  idk that that Charles and Camilla would be married.  

but uggggh, Diana was imperfect but the twisting of her mental illnesses to make Camilla look better is DISGUSTING.  these takes also come off as like, how dare Diana expect her husband to not fuck other women!!!!  so demanding!!!!

[twinkledadwa]

Twinkledad’s #2

Dear Twinkledad,

Am I moving on too fast? I just got out of something super toxic... and not even 10 days later I’m hooking up with someone I just met. My ex really damaged me and I don’t know if I’m doing this to distract myself or if I’m really ready. I feel bad bc this new kid is very sweet and I don’t want to lead him on but also as of right now its just friends with benefits. also I’m talking to a old flame. I just feel lost and like I need a second opinion.

Anonymous.

 Dear Anonymous,  When I answered this question on air, I ran into a few technical difficulties with Serato. As a result, the first song had the audio quality of Never Meant earrape once it finally played. I hope it wasn’t too abrasive! Logan was a big fan of it, though.

 So. 

 Here at Twinkledad’s, we support healthy sex lives. The act of hooking up with someone, even right after a breakup, is completely okay. You have this freedom and it’s in your right to use it. Where you should be careful is your intent behind this FWB relationship. What are you getting out of it? Is it sex for the sake of sex, or are you reaching for something deeper?

 It is wholly possible you could be wanting the “emotional intimacy” often associated with relationship sex. That could be trouble for you and the other party involved.

 Toxic relationships, from common knowledge and experience, can leave a lot of emotional trauma. Now is the time for you to learn how to heal. Finding healthy coping mechanisms is a trial-and-error process. That is what essentially takes up most of the timetable for moving on; once it clicks, and you’ll know when, it’s a matter of days from then.

 The question could be, “am I trying to move on too fast?”.  Forcing yourself to move on, actively or subconsciously, does not allow you the respect you deserve. Applying what was previously said to your specific question, you could be ignorant to what your emotions need right now. Likewise, if your FWB or old flame are not on the same page as you, they could become more attached than you are. No one’s at fault for this. You’d be coping and that’s reasonable.

 You simply asked for a second opinion, and probably didn’t want this long of a response. To give an answer to your original question, yes, I believe you are. I know nothing beyond the question you’ve sent in, but I really wish you the best with everything.

 “Anniversary Song” was chosen for its subject matter. The entire album, Just Married, is a very bitter and real portrayal of breaking up, moving on, and dying angry. 

 “Heathers” is not only catchy, but (possibly) about a booty call. It is a fun introspection about staying up all night and needing someone to talk to.

Glocca Morra - Anniversary Song

Insignificant Other - Heathers

Dear Twinkledad,

How do I apologize to someone who doesn’t want to talk to me? Is there a way where I can apologize without it being self serving?

Anonymous.

Dear Anonymous,

 In essence, I feel like this is impossible.

 There’s nothing wrong with that. You should give your interests and the other person’s interests the same amount of respect. It is difficult when you have genuine regret over something and you can’t necessarily go across portraying that when the other person, reasonably so, is hurt/upset/any sentiment that results in them not wanting to talk to you. 

 Apologizing right now, in this situation, will realistically be seen as self serving. In Moral Philosophy we discussed the concept of psychological egoism. Egoism is pretty different from selfishness, as egoism is acting in one’s self interest with wisdom, charity, and kindness towards others. Common critique brings up the possibility that other interests (in this case, the feelings of the other person) could be prioritized and therefore egoism can’t be achieved. Yet a lot of classmates, including myself, argued for all actions being inherently self-interested. Apologizing to your person, how would you consider it? Are you apologizing because they are hurt, or because you miss them?

 That’s not to imply you don’t feel regret. We’re humans, philosophy was never meant to be taken as universal truth. It’s to suggest a possible answer on whether or not it would be self serving.

 I suggest waiting for them to reach out. They could not be fully over what happened, and that’s straight chilling. I’m sure they recognize how you feel. One point in the future will come a time where both of you are on the same page in the same book. 

 “Weird Dream, Conscious Stream” was chosen because A.) I Hate Sex is stellar and B.) suggests an impossible reality for the narrator where the subject and other coexist.

 “Do You Still Hate Me?” was chosen because of the title. According to Hugh, one of the best songs ever.

 “I’m Here for The Pizzah Partie” was an obvious choice. Very obvious. Glaringly obvious. Fact. It’s fact.

I Hate Sex - Weird Dream, Conscious Stream

Jawbreaker - Do You Still Hate Me?

Two Knights - I’m Here For The Pizzah Partie

Dear Twinkledad,

I’m becoming more aware of my sudden anger and sadness outbursts. but I’m scared to go and get checked out bc I don’t want to be drugged up or I guess Face the music.

Anonymous.

Anonymous,

 Let’s say you do get checked out. If you have a mental health diagnosis, good news! You have a mental “illness”. 

 Downside: you are stuck with this for the rest of your life. 

 Upside: you have all the time in the world to learn how to cope with it. 

 Getting checked out does not mean you’ll be drugged up. If you are of age, that’s entirely in your control. There are routes of dialectical behavior therapy (or just normal therapy) you can take. Nobody’s necessarily pro-medication in all situations. It’s hard not to have some ignorance of mental health problems if you don’t have the problem for sure. Take whatever path you feel best suits your needs. 

 We are not our diagnoses. However, it can be of great help to recognize your shitty behavioral ticks and understand why you have them. The start of your question implies you have been aware of specific behavior for some time now. With that, you have already begun to face the music. If you do decide to get checked out but give it a lot of time, a diagnosis could feel like a no-brainer to you. In fact, it could be a weight lifted.

  Misdiagnosis can happen. Wrong meds, taking the medication, can happen. It’s part of coping, it sucks major ass. Time will come where mental health can feel worse than ever and like it is inescapable. The important thing is keeping your head up. I really hope you find the answers you want and or need.

 I chose “As Cool As An Attempted Suicide”, beyond what the name suggests, for its energy. It’s a fun song for its subject matter. Being sad is not necessarily always bad.

 “Why Am I Not Going Under Water?”/Snowing as a whole was an emotional crutch for me when I went through similar struggles. Galm’s vulnerability made me realize I was not alone, and hopefully it does the same for you too.

Leer - As Cool As An Attempted Suicide

Snowing - Why Am I Not Going Underwater?

Dear Twinkledad,

I've never really been in a real relationship my whole life, haven't even lost my virginity. It bothers me more than it probably should, but I feel almost desperate for a more than just a platonic relationship with someone. Wanna be able to have somebody to kiss/cuddle but seem to screw up every opportunity to have something good with someone.

Anonymous.

  Anonymous,

  A few weeks ago, I matched with someone on Bumble. We had this conversation:

 “Heyy”

 “Sorry, my mom said I can’t talk to girls.”

 “Damn that’s crazy my dad said I can’t talk to boys *frowny face emoji*”

 Then I left her on Read. Point being, everything will be okay.

 Virginity is frustrating, in theory and in practice. It shouldn’t be a crime to not be sexually active or never had a serious relationship. Yes, love is great. However, one thing you’ll most likely learn when you experience love, because you will, is you can live without it. How we’ve constructed what virginity means has set pretty high expectations of what sex is like. In actuality, it’s pretty mediocre. Fun, but as you continue to open the bag of magic sex tricks, you’ll have plenty of mixed experiences. It is not a necessity by any means.

 Love, on the other hand, is uncomfortably tied to our values. For a lot of people, having a family is their primary goal in life. I’ve seen this referred to as “honorable” multiple times as multiple people. What it does, subsequently, is pressure people into viewing sex and love as an accomplishment the same virginity does. Falling in love is an awesome feeling. Falling out of love is a terrible feeling. Experiencing neither does not put such a great weight on your shoulders like love does. To quote Quarterbacks, “love is situational”. You’ll have it. No way in hell you haven’t. The situation has yet to arise.

 Dating apps are not worth it. Love is a feeling, right? There’s no need to force it. If you are relatively new in experience, your perception of love can be greatly skewed. I’m sure, whoever you are, you are in safe hands. You’ll be carried into the world of sex and love naturally, not at your own will, where it’s inevitably messier.

 Once YOU, not anyone else, are satisfied with your romantic life, please send a message back. I wish you the best of luck knowing you have it, and just want you to be happy.

 With a lot of music, worlds tend to be created through the instrumentals and not the lyrics. “Hardly Art” always forces a great sense of introspection and how I handle myself in situations of co dependence whenever it comes on.

 “Try to Sleep”’s vocals, lyrics, and stripped back, lo-fi production echoes loneliness from all fronts.

 Closer - Hardly Art

 Attic Abasement - Try To Sleep

[slashertalks]

What’s Up With That Shit?

So, I thought it would be fun to do something besides just a standard review— welcome to “what’s up with that shit,” a (hopefully recurring) piece where I’ll look at an issue/aspect of the genre as a whole and ponder about what’s up with it. Hopefully by the end I’ll reach a conclusion, but who knows! It’s the journey, not the destination.

For the inaugural What’s Up With That Shit? I’m going to be looking at three 80s horror movies with surprising depictions of mentally ill villains, and picking apart 1) why I like them, 2) why their portrayals are unique/good, and 3) why we don’t see many similar portrayals anymore. Ready? Let’s kick this off.

What inspired me to do this was a movie I watched last night, called Pin (link to the full movie on YT). Released in 1988, Pin follows the life of two siblings, one of whom (the older brother, played by one of the actors from Cube) becomes obsessed with a medical dummy his father used to use to teach them (via ventriloquism). The brother, Leon, becomes obsessed with the idea that the dummy is alive, and this only worsens following the death of his parents. He murders his aunt and attempts to murder his sister, Ursula’s, boyfriend. She destroys the dummy, causing Leon’s personality to fracture (Pin takes over completely).

Leon is described at one point as a paranoid schizophrenic (versus having DID/MPD, but this is from the 80s so I think shitty understanding of mental illnesses can be given a mild pass), and his sister is hesitant to send him away, wanting instead to help him at home, where she can be there for him the whole time and support him. At the end of the movie, it is revealed that Ursula has found in-home care for Leon and visits him often, continuing to look after him despite Pin taking over completely. The horror of Pin comes from the tragedy of Ursula watching her older brother degrade and being unable to do anything; Leon’s not turned into a monster by the end of the movie— he’s still a human, and one who hasn’t been abandoned or forgotten either! Damn.

Next up, Mortuary. Now, this is a little more standard than Pin with regards to its portrayal of its villain, BUT, and that’s a big fucking BUT: the villain of this movie was not shaped by his own actions, but those of his father. Paul Andrews, Mortuary’s antagonist, is a high school boy working in a mortuary with his cold, verbally and emotionally abusive following the death of his mother (the parent he was close to). He’s portrayed as strange but isn’t hated by the other students— our main characters even sympathize with him. Later in the film, it’s revealed that the main girl’s father tried to get Paul help for his mental illness, but Paul’s father refused and the problem spiraled out of control to the point where Paul began killing.

The final movie I want to look at is Fade to Black, wherein another character, emotionally, verbally, and I believe physically abused (to an extent), winds up killing people who had harmed him (beginning with the aunt who had been abusing him since he was a child). I talked about this movie a little bit in my review of Butcher Baker Nightmare Maker, but it was the first movie I saw out of these three, and it immediately struck me with its portrayal of Eric Binford as a tragic character. Yes, he is the movie’s slasher, but rather than some supernatural force or blind hatred, Eric’s reason for seeking violent revenge is easily understood. It’s hard to fault him.

Now for the juicy bits: what’s up with these films? Why haven’t we seen even more portrayals of tragic mentally ill characters in horror, or just tragic villains in general? What’s up? The most modern horror movie I can think of with a mentally ill character is Split, which I haven’t seen due to the overwhelming shitstorm of a portrayal it is. I remember the outcry online leading up to the movie’s release, and hearing that the way it showed mentally ill characters was actively harmful— I don’t need to give any money or attention to that kind of movie. Then, what about all the horror movies with scary asylums, featuring titles like “Madhouse,” “Dark Asylum,” and “Insanitarium.” What the hell happened?

Unfortunately, it comes down to money, as many of these things do. If people are paying to see a horror movie, they want to be scared! Fuck the plot! Fuck the characters! Bring on the gore, bring on the tension, give me some damn nightmares! I enjoy horror movies with plot and I’ve fallen into this pit a lot, feeling unsatisfied when I sit down to watch a horror movie and it’s not scary. Mortuary is the scariest of the above three movies, but even then it’s too cheesy to really be scary. Horror movies that aren’t scary don’t sell, and, unfortunately, mentally ill people are an easy target. They’re not an audience film companies are afraid to alienate, meaning open exploitation.

All three of the films listed above, were, I believe, smaller budget films, which could also lend them the freedom to portray these characters as tragic versus simply as evil. There’s more pressure on big budget films to make back their budgets and appeal to target audiences, which also helps explain the apparent degradation of portrayals of mentally ill characters. I think this could also be expanded into a pretty interesting discussion of supervillains and their portrayals, though my expertise lies mostly with Batman, which is an interesting case: as Bruce Wayne he’s actively involved with villain support programs, sometimes offering villains jobs at Wayne Industries if they’re trying to reform, and he himself is shown to go to therapy as an adult, which is rare for superheroes.

Touching briefly on supervillains VS horror villains, though, I think there’s a less apparent outcry about supervillains because of the depth and attention they’ve received over the recent years (Harley Quinn having her own comic series and becoming a deep character, etc. etc. etc.) whereas horror villains with mental illnesses are JUST monsters. They’re given no depth, because depth doesn’t sell horror films, especially not to a broad audience. Horror CAN touch successfully on sensitive topics and provide interesting commentary (American Mary is a prime example), but that limits the interest in it. One of my largest gripes with the progression of horror is the expectation that viewers don’t want to think about the movies they’re watching. There does seem to be a shift away from mindless content, but there’s also an over-saturation of remakes. The 80s and, to an extent, the 90s, had a wealth of content that may not be as well-produced as its genre siblings, but provided viewers with real depth of settings, premises, and characters! Strange films, underground films, but DEEP films. Films that could get away with portraying mentally ill villains as still human.

What’s up with that shit? Like a disappointing amount of things, money is what’s up. Commercial success, broad appeal, and the need to make more than a film’s budget. Sucks, but c'est la vie. At least we’ve got a little pool of movies we can return to when we’re fed up with seeing bullshit like Split hit the big screens, and we can do our best to avoid contributing to sales for these kinds of movies. Making a small dent is better than making no dent, after all. Maybe we’ll see horror with a message start to leave the territory of independent films and hit big screens in the future. You never know

[preserving-ferretbrain]

Sarah Monette, the Victim Dilemma, the Aesthetic of Suffering and the Uncanny Valley of Arse Rape

by Wardog

Monday, 27 April 2009

Wardog fails to finish Sarah Monette's Corambis.~

Massive massive massive massive spoilers for about 1/3 of the book. Also, as the title suggests, this article is about nasty things so don’t read if you’re likely to be upset

Preramble (like a preamble but … d’you see?)

This is a bleak day indeed. I just got my hands on a copy of Corambis, the much-anticipated (by me at least) concluding part to Sarah Monette’s Doctrine of Labyrinths quartet and the truth of it is, I don’t think I can finish it.

Oh, Sarah, what happened? I do still love you, I just don’t think it’s working out.

I think it’s partially problems associated with reading through a series over a lengthy period of time. When I read Melusine, The Virtu was already out in hardback and I tore through at them enthusiastically, so drawn into the world and the characters that I barely noticed they were so heavily saturated in angst and woe that one could drown in it by simply opening the book a little recklessly. There was a bit of a wait for The Mirador – which I seem to recall I felt slightly less positively about but still adored – and I fell upon Mehitabel Parr’s I’m sure welcoming bosom to save me from the tidal waves of A&W. As much as I love Felix and Mildmay, it was Mehitabel’s narrative voice that made The Mirador bearable for me. It was such a necessary contrast to the boys: someone with some redeeming sense of self-irony, hurrah!

Of course, Mehitabel isn’t in Corambis. And, God, I miss her. There is a new viewpoint character, Kay Brightmore, blinded and imprisoned and weighed down by the terrible military failure that kicks off the book. He’s basically lost everything that ever mattered to him, can no longer fight on account of being blind and, needless to say, he has angst out the wazoo about it. I was broken and crying by Chapter three.

And, quite frankly, I just can’t take it. I know there is redemption in the future of these characters (characters I really care about, having spent three books with them), I know there is self-actualisation and the potential for happiness, I know because I cheated and looked, but I’ve really really struggled with Corambis. The worst of it is, I’m sure it will be a triumphant and satisfying conclusion to the quartet. Sarah Monette is an excellent writer, I love her world, I love the way she uses language, I love her characters, I love everything about her but I think I’m going to have to accept the fact I simply can’t read her.

Oh, Sarah, what happened? I do still love you, it’s not you, it’s me.

Maybe in a couple of years we’ll be able to work something out.

I think circumstances might be playing into this unhappy state of affairs as well. When I read the early books, there wasn’t a cloud in my sky. But having emerged from a rather bleak year, there’s something a little too close in all that guilt and grief and self-loathing and despair, and I can’t distance myself enough from it to enjoy it. There is a systematic aestheticisation of suffering to be found in all of Monette’s books. I’m not going to try and argue that as either a positive or negative quality in her work. I think it’s probably neutral: it’s

something

art

does

sometimes

. I acknowledge the difference between literary suffering and real suffering, in that there can be a romance in the former which is impossible in the latter. Also literary suffering exists in a wider, symbolic and allegorical sphere than that of an individual having shitty things done to them by life or others, mainly, I suspect, because it’s not real. Take madness – there is something deeply attractive and romantic about the artistic representation of madness (like Felix’s madness in Melusine) and it’s perfectly possible to appreciate that, and to find in it a kind of beauty, without ignoring the genuine distress suffered by the mentally ill. In short, Ophelia is not my friend who killed herself last year.

But the boundaries between the fictional and the real are not comprehensively signposted. There isn’t a traceable spectrum between Lavinia, daughter of Titus Andronicus, and Elizabeth Short. And ultimately I think there comes an impossible point when the literary and the real collide, corrupt each other and prove they are utterly irreconcilable and yet simultaneously inseparable. Yes, they must be understood as different things operating in a different way – a painting of St Sebastian is not the same as footage of the prisoners at Guantanamo bay – but there comes a point when it is necessary to remember what it is that’s being aestheticised and ask yourself why.

Page 152

Okay, so, there’s a gang-rape scene in Corambis.

Felix – former prostitute, broken gay wizard with ex-cruel master and traumatic past - ends up subjecting himself a thaumaturgic orgy in order to earn money to pay for his ailing brother’s medicine.

It’s awful.

It’s not that it’s explicit, just awful.

And I’m no wuss, okay. I’ve read Last Exit to Brooklyn. I’ve read The Wasp Factory. I’ve read American Psycho.

But something about this scene in this book bought me a first class ticket on the ARGH! Train and whizzed me straight out of my comfort zone.

It’s strange to say that something is “outside your comfort zone” in that it feels like a confession of personal failure (also something that’s outside my comfort zone). And then I thought about it more, and I thought: hey, so what, gang-rape is outside my comfort zone. Surely that’s normal. Gang-rape is absolutely something that should be outside all our comfort zones. But here’s where it gets complicated: in fact, fictional gang-rape is not outside my comfort zone. I play H-games, for God’s sake, where they’re ten a penny. You can’t take two steps in an H-game without stubbing your toe on a gang rape. So it’s something more specific than that. It was something about this particular portrayal of it.

It’s not shock value. Felix gets himself sexually abused on a pretty regular basis, so much so, in fact, that it’s kind of part of the fun, and it’s very much tied into Monette’s aesthetic of suffering.

I could not see, and I could barely hear, save for my own harsh breathing. But I could feel. I could Malkar’s hands like silk, running up and down my back, tracing the scars, the old palimpsest of pain. I could feel his body arching against me, his bulk, his heat. I felt his hands slide under my hips, stroking, exciting, felt the stiffness of him against my thigh. Pain, then, but not too much. Pain … and arousal all woven together like a tapestry. I was moaning, gasping; the only word I could form were “Please, Malkar, please, lease,” and I didn’ tknow if I was begging him to stop or continue. Not that it would made the slightest difference either way.

Let’s pin our colours to the mast here. That’s beautiful. Terrible, but beautiful and absolutely literary in its unrealness. It’s also about as accurate a portrayal of sexual abuse than St Sebastian up there is of martyrdom. Perhaps I’m just an irredeemable sicko but I’m pretty sure it’s there, to an extent, to be enjoyed, partially as spectacle (straight women do not generally write about beautiful gay boys sexing each other manipulatively because it’s a Serious Social Issue) and, also, partially as vindication for all the crappy things that have been done to innumerable female characters in a seventy years of fantasy fiction. I’m not, of course, advocating backlash (more manrape!) but there is something compelling and, even perhaps comforting, in characters like Felix, Alec and friends, these beautiful men, who are as sexually vulnerable as women, suffer and fear the sort of things women suffer and fear, and are very much created to be subjects of an extra-textual female gaze and the intra-textual male gaze. I’m not saying that men don’t get raped and looked at, but the sheer saturation is demonstrably less. I am not trying to say that what happens to Felix at the start of Melusine isn’t dreadful. It is. But it’s a literary violation, and it reduces him to a literary madness that is as terrible and as beautiful as the horror that creates it.

But let’s talk about gang rape. Now there’s something you don’t say everyday.

The scene itself written in a very similar style – opulent, not too explicit although more explicit than above, and contains the same awkward issues of dubious consent. In Melusine, Felix chooses to go to Malkar in a fit of self loathing. In Corambis he agrees theoretically to an orgy in order to raise money for Mildmay’s medical treatment. In both cases what ends up happening to him is far more devastating than what he originally signed up for but, equally, there’s an element of complicity to it. If you return to your abusive master, expect to get abused. If you agree to be the centerpiece of an orgy, expect to get fucked. This abject stupidity is granted a psychological plausibility because Felix is a messed up little bunny, with a supposedly tragic conviction of his own profound worthlessness.

Obviously I don’t want to get into real issues here, but I think the reason the dubious consent became one of the bothering aspects of the scene in Corambis is that the sex abuse came plot-approved. I mean, if Felix was walking down the street and happened to get jumped and gang raped by a bunch of guys I think many a reader might rightly cry “Sarah Monette, what the fuck?” as there are very few occasions in which it is either appropriate or necessary to get one of your characters gang raped. But this way he has a “real” reason to put himself voluntarily into a position where he might be. It’s even, perhaps, meant to be on some level noble – in a hopelessly fucked up way, of course. So what you end up with is a deeply uncomfortable situation in which everything conspires, including (conveniently) Felix himself, to create a scenario in which a horrible but beautifully written gang rape is, to an extent, okay. And this is where the aesthetic of suffering starts to come apart at the seams.

Essentially this scene falls right into the uncanny valley. If it was purely designed for titillation I wouldn’t have a problem with it, but as it is there are elements are titillation and elements of horror. We are meant to be shocked and appalled – and it is shocking and appalling – but it’s framed in such a way that we are simultaneously liberated to relish the aesthetic. And quite frankly that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I think there’s something profoundly hypocritical and, indeed, deeply disturbing in the idea of enjoying both moral outrage and illicit sexual excitement (see Joss Whedon’s Dollhouse). The scene bears all the hallmarks of erotic non-con (there are elements of psychological exposure as well as physical, the victim is physically aroused throughout, the abusers are appreciative of his beauty and his apparent eagerness, and so on and so forth) but worked through a guilt-appeasing filter of “oh gosh, isn’t this terrible.”

My ankles were still chained and somebody had me scruffed like a kitten; I was keening in protest, but I was dragged upright, forced to straddle someone’s thighs, while he continued fucking me with the same relentless steadiness. I was displayed for all of them, my arousal jutting out shamelessly, the tear tracks on my face attesting to my weakness.

Now, I know that, unlike erotic non-con, Felix is not secretly into what’s being done to him and that he’s breaking and being broken here but you still have a scene that’s running in two directions simultaneously and trying to have its cake and eat it. It goes out of its way to tick the non-con wink-wink boxes but then slaps you face in the face with its insistence that this a terrible and traumatic event. Essentially you can’t have a gorgeously written gang rape that positions itself within a carefully constructed aesthetic framework and a psychologically accurate and traumatic portrait of a terrible ordeal.

And, ultimately, I guess you have to ask yourself if it’s okay to have an aesthetic gang rape scene full stop. The idea bothers me less as pornography but here, I would argue, that it gains an added erotic piquancy from the fact it really is annihilating Felix, which, again is troublesome. Essentially it’s why raping Clarissa is so much more interesting than raping Justine, and why it’s all right to get off on the latter and not the former.

The more I’ve thought about this and tried to articulate my issues with it, the more complex and convoluted it has become. There is, of course, an element of the purely personal about – I didn’t like it and it upset me – as well as these more abstract, intellectualizations of it. I dug around on Monette’s Livejournal – on which is usually charming and sensible – to see what I could find and, lo and behold, she has written quite comprehensively on the subject, which I shall now quote pretty much in its entirety:

I knew from very early on that Felix was going to turn back to prostitution to get the money for a doctor for someone he loved (I knew this was going to happen before I knew Mildmay existed), and I knew that he was going to end up in a situation that was completely out of his control and that hurt him badly. Because Felix is reckless and self-destructive and because under all his vanity, he doesn't think he's worth protecting. And because it is a kind of answering horror to his being raped by Malkar at the beginning of Mélusine. And because he needed something that would force him to confront these issues--force him to see that he doesn't deserve to be abused--and it had to be something superlatively unbearable if it was going to get through to him, because Felix has way too much experience at ignoring his own pain.

Say what? So it’s redemptive gang rape, the sort makes you a stronger and better person? What … the … fuck? It’s like those Hollywood amnesia plotlines (one blow to the head gives you amnesia, another blow cures it) except with sexual abuse. I know, again, we’re operating in a fictional sphere but this is so made of wrong that I’ll just content myself with linking to Dan’s article on

the victim dilemma

and throw my hands up in despair.

I quite enjoy Monette’s aestheticisation of suffering, I could probably navigate the uncanny valley if I really had to but I am sick to death of male fantasy writers using sexual abuse as a textual shortcut for character development and I’m damned if I’m going to deal with women doing the same thing. Sarah Monette, you are better than this.

Sexual abuse is not good for you. It happens and people react. Constantly depicting characters who react to it in courageous and life-enhancing ways is not empowering, it’s fucking demeaning to people who struggle along every day as best they can.

I’m sure in a different time in a different mood I’ll pick up Corambis again and I’ll get to page 152 and I’ll shrug and go “gang rape, meh” and read right on.

But not today.Themes:

Damage Report

,

Books

,

Sarah Monette

,

Sci-fi / Fantasy

~

bookmark this with - facebook - delicious - digg - stumbleupon - reddit

~Comments (

go to latest

)

Arthur B

at 14:44 on 2009-04-27It's depressing when series go south like this. It's especially annoying when they burn down the virtues of the earlier volumes. I was looking at your first Monette review and you were saying how you were impressed by the fact that Felix was gay, but it kind of wasn't a big deal; I'm getting the impression that as the series goes on that becomes less true, since that LJ extract makes it sounds like Monette intended all along to reduce Felix to a weepy gay man being abused by angry gay men. (If I'm interpreting that right - if Felix pimping himself out predates the existence of Mildmay, that means that Monette was planning to make this happen since before the first book, right?)

permalink

-

go to top

Wardog

at 15:11 on 2009-04-27Mmm, that's part of the problem though. I don't actually think it's "gone south" - despite the Xtreme angst I was quite absorbed until page 152. It was merely that scene that tripped me out. I'm sure if I could put it behind me and just get on with the book, I'd probably really like it.

permalink

-

go to top

Rude Cyrus

at 20:32 on 2009-04-27Great, now I need a shower.

While I suppose rape can be presented as being aesthetically pleasing, like in erotic non-con, I still don't like it. I've always found consenting sex between happy, willing partners infinitely more pleasurable -- don't ask me why. This sort of stuff just makes my skin crawl.

What's funny is that I can make it through The 120 Days of Sodom without blinking, but I think that's because De Sade insisted on using the driest, most tortured language possible.

permalink

-

go to top

Wardog

at 21:15 on 2009-04-27Sorry Cyrus. I'm not sure but I think it's probably easier to be into erotic non-con / rape fantasy if you're a woman than a man, either because you're more likely to imagine yourself as the rapee rather than the rapist which is slightly easier to deal with morally speaking or because the world seems generally reluctant to admit that women can rape people too. Whereas if you're a man who fantasies about forcing women to have sex with him ... well ... hostility many ensue from quarters unwilling to concede the very real difference between fantasy, reality and simulated non-con.

Hmm, I think the thing about 120 Days of Sodom is that, as you say, it's incredibly dull. And de Sade is a terrible writer. There's only one thing worse than a rape scene and that's a badly written rape scene!

permalink

-

go to top

Arthur B

at 21:18 on 2009-04-27I do wonder sometimes whether deSade was an early pen-and-paper troll. Most of his books seem to be the literary equivalent of telling someone a particular link goes to an interesting and thought-provoking philosophy website when actually it points to goatse or 2girls1cup.

I mean, he went to jail for it, but you have to make sacrifices for "the lulz", as I believe the young people call it these days.

permalink

-

go to top

http://roisindubh211.livejournal.com/

at 02:43 on 2009-04-28"Constantly depicting characters who react to it in courageous and life-enhancing ways is not empowering, it’s fucking demeaning to people who struggle along every day as best they can."

I have to disagree here- not with the point you make, but with the accusation being levelled at Monette. Felix has spent three books getting abused and every reaction to it has been, basically, "I was right all along, I am worthless. Hmmm, should I hurt myself again or just re-alienate everyone who cares about me tonight?" The enormity of the gang-rape is something he's not prepared to consider his just desserts, and it isn't the only influence on his growth as a person. A lot has to do with having Mildmay -who has been developing his own self-confidence, on his own, without the help of shitty things happening to him- be there for him and push and push to get him (Felix) not to hurt himself any more.

permalink

-

go to top

Wardog

at 09:13 on 2009-04-28

The enormity of the gang-rape is something he's not prepared to consider his just desserts, and it isn't the only influence on his growth as a person.

I do see your point and I wasn't really dissing Monette, who I actually adore. There was just something about this scene, or the way it was presented, or *something* that was a bridge too far for me. And at first I was inclined to just ignore it and tell myself to stop being a wuss and then I got interested in *why* this scene was so problematic and, secondarily, I realised that, on a wider level, it should probably be okay to stand up and say "for me, this gang rape is not okay."

I will at some point finish Corambis, because I have *hugely* enjoyed the Doctrine of Labyrinths quartet (I have some reviews knocking around here in which I give much sweet sweet love), I think I just need some time to get away from the gang rape.

permalink

-

go to top

Wardog

at 09:29 on 2009-04-28

I do wonder sometimes whether deSade was an early pen-and-paper troll

Dan and I like the idea of historical trolls, and also explains the Marquis far more than most of pop-psych nonsense I've read does =P

Lucifer, of course, would be the first troll - complaining about the mods.

permalink

-

go to top

http://miss-morland.livejournal.com/

at 11:54 on 2009-04-28*giggles at the thought of de Sade and Lucifer as trolls*

I haven't read Monette's books, but I still found this post very interesting - it articulates my issues with non-con and dub-con in fiction very well. (I do wonder, though, if ambiguous portrayals of rape scenes are sometimes meant to make the readers think and question their own attitudes, instead of jumping to the safe reaction of 'OMG so horrible'?)

permalink

-

go to top

Dan H

at 14:25 on 2009-04-28

I do wonder, though, if ambiguous portrayals of rape scenes are sometimes meant to make the readers think and question their own attitudes, instead of jumping to the safe reaction of 'OMG so horrible'?)

You might well be right, but even if that is the intent, it's a deeply flawed one.

Perhaps I'm just an arrogant shit, but I really hate it when people try to make me think about stuff unless it's in a medium *specifically designed* for that.

If you want to challenge my preconceptions about rape, write a book that is *about* challenging my preconcieved notions about rape. Don't try to do it in the middle of a fantasy series that is mostly about hot gay wizards gettin' it on.

If I want to have my ideas about absuse challenged, I'll read Lolita, or possibly I'll track down some abuse-survivors' weblogs. I won't read an otherwise ordinary fantasy novel or, for that matter, watch

Dollhouse

.

permalink

-

go to top

Dan H

at 16:05 on 2009-04-28

The enormity of the gang-rape is something he's not prepared to consider his just desserts

I can't speak for Kyra, but the problem I have with this is that it suggests, falsely, that the more traumatic an experience is the less likely you are to blame yourself for it. I'm by no means an expert on the subject of abuse survival but from my limited experience people's tendency to self-blame for things is wholly unrelated to the severity of the abuse suffered. For that matter, the whole idea of rating abuse experiences in order of severity is a bit of a dodgy precedent.

Essentially I think there's an important, and worrying, difference between "Felix has experienced things like this before but, because he has grown as a person, and because of the influence of Mildmay, he does not blame himself for this experience" and "Felix has experienced things like this before but, because this experience is so much worse than the others, he cannot blame himself for it".

permalink

-

go to top

http://sistermagpie.livejournal.com/

at 21:38 on 2009-05-01I haven't read this last book yet, but I'm glad for the heads-up. Having read the other 3 I can definitely see how this kind of thing would play, and I'm not surprised that she'd planned something like this from the beginning. It does make you think thought, about the idea that this character is constantly going through situations like this, and it's finally when he acheives the kind of abuse he might have always thought would be what he deserved, that he realizes he didn't deserve it. Even if Mildmay and other experiences are also part of his turnaround, I don't know whether that kind of catalyst will click for me the way another one might.

Like, rather than having him be in a situatio that's the same as before, but with one clear difference that makes him see it clearly, it's almost like Helen Keller at the well. Repeated fingerspelling over and over and finally he gets it.

permalink

-

go to top

Wardog

at 15:28 on 2009-05-11I lost this temporarily in the deluge of comments about other things.

It is possible I've over-reacted to the gang rape; I suppose responses to these sort of motifs are always going to be extremely personal. I feel almost hypocritical because, as you say, there's plenty of indication previously that we were on the Sex Abuse Superhighway and something like this was probably bound to happen. But the way it's framed and written, combinated with its narrative function as a catalyst for change really really squicked me out. I know it's not necessarily meant to be psychologically plausible but there's something deeply worrying in the idea that there is a scale of sexual abuse, the extreme end of which teaches you self respect.

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 14:04 on 2011-07-12I tracked down

this interview

and I'm now extremely, thoroughly grossed out with Sarah Monette:

I think this does happen to gay male protagonists (the most obvious example is Mercedes Lackey's Last Herald-Mage books). And I think Felix does fall into this trap to a certain extent, although in my defense I will say that the reason he gets raped is because I was interested in the tension inherent in a character who could be both rapist and victim. Which could have been a woman, or a heterosexual man, but it was most obvious and easiest to mobilize with a gay man. I also chose a gay male protagonist because my abiding interest is in the power dynamics of human relationships, especially sexual relationships, and it is VERY VERY HARD to write about that with a heterosexual female protagonist without pigeon-holing her and yourself into either a re-inscription of patriarchal gender roles (male dominant, female submissive) or a simple gender reversal (female dominant, male submissive) (which I did work with some in my novella, "A Gift of Wings," in The Queen in Winter). A lesbian relationship is also a possibility, but it's far more interesting and attention-grabbing to take power away from a man than it is to give power to a woman. [...] Also, because we live in a patriarchal society and have for several thousand years, there's nothing new or shocking about the idea that women are victims. (I'm not saying this is a good thing, mind you.) You can get more narrative charge out of victimizing a man and you aren't reinscribing the same old gender role patterns into that ever deeper groove of men act and women suffer.

What the fuck, Monette? My word, lesbian relationships aren't just ~hawt~ enough unlike slender

yaoi stereotypes

wizards sexing it up and... female empowerment is just too boring? Female victimization is just too

banal

to write about so gay men being degraded (and in this case, often raped by women) has more "narrative charge"? There's also something toward the end that basically goes "well, if you are writing about male rape it's super

titillating

shocking so people will recognize RAPE IS HORRIBLE whereas women being raped is just so

every day

so... hey, manpain! That'll get people

thinking

, right? Right!"

I don't know, all of this reads like the slash fangirl's justification why she's not interested in writing girls but wants to write hot boys instead, all disguised under a pretend layer of ~*soshul justeese*~.

permalink

-

go to top

Wardog

at 23:33 on 2011-07-12Oh dear. I'm actually really annoyed with myself that it took me to Book IV to unpack what was going on with the, err, sexay mainpain and all the arse rape. I did quite like Monette initially - I think partially because when I first read Melusine I was still under the impression that gay characters were pretty rare in fantasy. To give Monette credit, when she actually bothers to be interested in them, she does write interesting female characters - I mean I *loved* Mehitabel from this series.

I think what freaks me out the most is that, as you observe, it's blatant titillation under the label of trangression. I have no problems with people getting their kicks from whatever they get their kicks from, as long as it's a carefully demarcated fantasy space, but pretending it's anything else is deeply toxic.

Also that interview was just awful :(

Maybe it's just because it doesn't apply to me but I don't understand why so many women find two dudes so unbelievably hawt but two women apparently tedious. Ho hum.

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 05:06 on 2011-07-13I think gay characters are still pretty rare in fantasy, but the gay dudes all seem to come from the same wellspring of fanfic tropes. I've read all the arguments as to why dudeslash is a female-positive space that enables women to explore their sexuality and I do get some of it, but I can't shake the feeling that so much of that is hot air; no matter how hard a slash fan argues I can't really see how spamming rape at gay dudes is particularly, y'know, feminist. Maybe it plays with power dynamics and whatnot but, on the other hand,

rape culture

.

I don't get the thing with YAY HAWT BOYS EWW GIRLS ARE BORING either, though it's been explained to me that most female characters aren't decently written so people'd sooner generate fanfic about boys instead. But that doesn't fly because fandom churns out great volumes of fanfic dedicated to minor male characters, even though some of them barely have a presence in the book/show/movie--see Figwit of the LOTR movies fame--whereas women, primary or tertiary, still get written out or villified. There are even

bingo cards

. Somewhere in that

is

a valid clause regarding how we're trained to look at media through male gateways thanks to patriarchy and we internalize that. Still don't get it on a personal level because I've always preferred female characters over male, but there it goes.

permalink

-

go to top

Melissa G.

at 06:30 on 2011-07-13

Maybe it's just because it doesn't apply to me but I don't understand why so many women find two dudes so unbelievably hawt but two women apparently tedious. Ho hum.

Speaking as a straight woman who gets paid to translate yaoi, I can understand that pretty well. :-) It's not that I find girls boring as characters, but as someone who isn't sexually attracted to women, I find myself gravitating toward situations where I can look at/write about two sexy boys instead if I'm looking for smexy times. (Though I'm very, very picky these days about yaoi because of tropes I'm sure I've mentioned before.)

I feel some sympathy for Monette because I do have a hard time verbalizing my tastes without resorting to those same basic arguments about power play or feeling the need to judge the female character and how she is portrayed specifically because she's female (which I wish I didn't, but I do so...). What I find odd is the fact that everyone insists on asking me *why* I find male-on-male romance so appealing, and then I'm stuck in this hem-hawing, putting-on-airs defense because I'm too embarrassed to just go, "Two guys doing stuff to each other is hot?"

(Uh-oh, now I'm having Dorian Gray flashbacks. Oh, Ben Barnes, you scamp, you!!)

permalink

-

go to top

Steve Stirling at 07:07 on 2011-07-13

I don't get the thing with YAY HAWT BOYS EWW GIRLS ARE BORING either

-- you get exactly the same in reverse from male writers a lot, so I don't see that there's any mystery about it.

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 07:20 on 2011-07-13I don't think Kyra's asking "why male-on-male?" but more "why do people find women inexplicably boring?"

but as someone who isn't sexually attracted to women, I find myself gravitating toward situations where I can look at/write about two sexy boys instead if I'm looking for smexy times.

That doesn't make sense to me because, even outside of sexual context, a lot of slashers just don't want to write women period and I'm sure we don't always only write about what's sexually/romantically attractive to us (or no straight man would ever write male characters).

It also doesn't really answer why women are so villified and hated by fandom at large: why people like Monette believe "it's more interesting to take power away from a man than to give power to a woman," or why slash is passed off as some wonderful female-positive space when it involves a lot of female-negative things, including but not limited to slut-shaming and othering women. Ogle hot boys, whatever (but even so, why so much fucking rape all the fucking time? Why the infantilizing tropes?). But I think you can do that without contributing to misogyny and rape culture.

permalink

-

go to top

Steve Stirling at 07:24 on 2011-07-13

I don't think Kyra's asking "why male-on-male?" but more "why do people find women inexplicably boring?"

-- I don't. I actually had to start flipping coins at one point to make sure my characters weren't predominantly female.

Maybe it's because I was in single-sex schools for a lot of my adolescence, but I just find women more interesting than men. More complex and variable, on average.

permalink

-

go to top

Steve Stirling at 07:38 on 2011-07-13

Ogle hot boys, whatever (but even so, why so much fucking rape all the fucking time? Why the infantilizing tropes?). But I think you can do that without contributing to misogyny and rape culture.

-- I don't read much (any, really) slash, but the actually-published equivalents like the book described here don't seem particularly misogynist to me. Just obsessed with Hot Boys in Chains.

As for the rape and stuff, a lot of people get off on that. Trying to tell people that the sexual fantasies which ring their chimes aren't permissible is roughly equivalent to trying to scold water until it voluntarily runs uphill. Much effort, little result.

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 07:45 on 2011-07-13

I don't. I actually had to start flipping coins at one point to make sure my characters weren't predominantly female.

Thank you, Minority Warrior, but if you are a bloke that's not exactly addressed to you.

I don't read much (any, really) slash, but the actually-published equivalents like the book described here don't seem particularly misogynist to me. Just obsessed with Hot Boys in Chains.

I've only read the first book and the gang-rape scene in the fourth, but a lot of the women in this series like to rape gay men for some strange reason.

Melusine

opens with an anecdote about the pure, true love between men. Two women get between it; one proceeds to rape one of the men repeatedly until he wants to kill himself. So, yes, both fandom slash and published slash perpetuate a lot of the same crap. Then there's Monette's interview and strange leaps of illogic which read sexist as hell to me.

permalink

-

go to top

Melissa G.

at 08:48 on 2011-07-13

That doesn't make sense to me because, even outside of sexual context, a lot of slashers just don't want to write women period and I'm sure we don't always only write about what's sexually/romantically attractive to us (or no straight man would ever write male characters).

I can't speak to that. I don't know why so many writers are so anti-female characters, and it would take me pages of musing to try and come to a conclusion. I was referring specifically to sexual situations (by which I mean stories centering on sex) because the comment I was particularly responding to was "why do so many women find two dudes so unbelievably hot but two women apparently tedious". Which I read as "why do so many women love writing about two guys (sexually) but find writing about two women so boring (sexually)". Perhaps I misinterpreted what Kyra was saying. I stated clearly that I don't find women boring as characters to read and write about, but that I understand why many women gravitate toward male homosexual relationships and why they might find it arousing when they are writing merely to titillate themselves/others.

I haven't read the series in question so I take everyone's word for it that the rape isn't handled well and misogyny abounds. And trust me, I'm the first person to get fed up with the kind of tropes male-on-male stuff tends to come with - especially when written by someone who's probably never even spoken to a gay man before. I got fed up with one author in particular because her protagonists kept falling for their rapists, yuck. But just because a lot of it sucks and perpetuates some seriously shitty stuff doesn't mean that it's not okay to find guy-on-guy stuff hot. And I really don't appreciate being made to feel like because I like it, I am somehow in danger of losing my feminist card.

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 09:57 on 2011-07-13I don't think I have been suggesting that if you like slash, you're in danger of losing your feminist cred; being a feminist doesn't exactly mean everything you consume must be feminist, after all, and we all enjoy things that are problematic to some degree. I just don't like how it's put forward as a YAY WOMEN field when it's not really. Likewise, I've been shouted down in fandom spaces for calling out misogyny in slash, something along the line of

you will find it is you who is misogyny

.

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 10:06 on 2011-07-13(Sorry that I'm coming down harshly such that you feel you're being discredited as a feminist, though.)

One more thing--I've been told over and over that there is a strong presence of queer women in slash circles, so for some it's not so much a matter of "I'm straight so more cocks yay!!!" In fact, with so many queer women around--so many lesbians even--you'd think there would be more F/F fanfic. But there isn't, so...

permalink

-

go to top

Melissa G.

at 10:23 on 2011-07-13

I don't think I have been suggesting that if you like slash, you're in danger of losing your feminist cred

I think I was responding defensively to this comment:

Ogle hot boys, whatever (but even so, why so much fucking rape all the fucking time? Why the infantilizing tropes?). But I think you can do that without contributing to misogyny and rape culture.

It basically felt to me like my entire sexual preference/fetish/whatever was being boiled down to "ogling hot boys". It’s those kinds of dismissive, judgmental comments that make me feel like I need to somehow justify what I find arousing. That’s why you have people arguing that it’s pro-women or empowering or whatever to write and read man-on-man love stories. When an attraction is called into question, I think often women in particular feel the need to base that attraction in something intellectual and philosophical. Because it would be wrong for a woman to just find something titillating or arousing. Because women aren’t supposed to like sex just for sex.

I think there are ways that it can be empowering (I wouldn't go so far as to say 'feminist'), but most of it fails in this regard. For me, when I read a story with a male bottom that I can relate to as far as sexual behavior, it makes me feel less weird. There's something freeing about the behavior being related to the position and not the gender, for me anyway. I think that also relates to why an author might find it more interesting (and by interesting I mean because they find it hot) to take power away from men. For some women who are attracted to men, there is something very fascinating and seductive about a man submitting (either sexually or emotionally), probably because it's something so commonly associated with female behavior. So again, it becomes less of a gender thing and more of a relationship role thing. If that makes any sense....

I just don't like how it's put forward as a YAY WOMEN field when it's not really.

I totally understand that. I actually avoid fan written slash like the plague because most of it is just not good. Most of it is (I think) influenced by yaoi, which oh dear god, has such problems. There is so much rape and questionable consent and a lot of "I'm only gay for that guy" and such overly traditional female behavior (even though one of them is male, go figure). And the kind of people you've probably argued with are likely the kind of people who make me afraid to admit I'm part of the yaoi subculture.

But there is good stuff out there. I promise. :-)

permalink

-

go to top

Melissa G.

at 10:26 on 2011-07-13

One more thing--I've been told over and over that there is a strong presence of queer women in slash circles, so for some it's not so much a matter of "I'm straight so more cocks yay!!!" In fact, with so many queer women around--so many lesbians even--you'd think there would be more F/F fanfic. But there isn't, so...

Sorry, I made my long post before I saw this! That is odd. Why don't they focus on yuri? Yuri is slowly becoming a more female dominated genre. It's kind of cool actually that the female authors are slowly co-opting a genre that was once basically male-written lesbian porn for men. To each their own, I guess?

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 10:59 on 2011-07-13

It basically felt to me like my entire sexual preference/fetish/whatever was being boiled down to "ogling hot boys".

But... I said that because I think it's pretty dandy if you're just in it for the ogling of hot boys, or balls being cupped gently, or even self-lubing anuses. I don't think you, or anyone else, need to justify it any further than that. Think it's hot? Go for it! That's excellent. Objectifying

men

in and of itself, separate from the concern over straight people fetishizing homosexuality, doesn't really bother me. I'm not questioning the appeal of slash: I'm questioning some of the tropes, the homophobia, the misogyny. Which certainly aren't universal, but there sure is a lot of them to go around. Hell, gay male characters written by straight men also get raped an awful lot (hi Richard Morgan, thank you for that graphic schoolboy gang rape).

Disclosure: I think lesbians are awesome. I'd like to read more stuff with lesbian representation. Being homoromantic does have something to do with it, though.

permalink

-

go to top

Melissa G.

at 11:11 on 2011-07-13

But... I said that because I think it's pretty dandy if you're just in it for the ogling of hot boys, or balls being cupped gently, or even self-lubing anuses. I don't think you, or anyone else, need to justify it any further than that.

:-) I think it just came off as hostile because of the swearing, lol. To be honest, I was probably overly defensive because it's kind of a touchy thing for me.

I'm not questioning the appeal of slash: I'm questioning some of the tropes, the homophobia, the misogyny.

Yes, I'm with you here. I have a lot of trouble with a lot of boy/boy stuff that's out there.

Re: Lesbians

If you're looking to try out some yuri, I can lead you to some scanlation sites. I haven't read much yuri so I can't totally vouch for the content, but these are sites that I know of:

Lililicious

Payapaya

Just be sure to check for ratings and such. There was one on Lilicious I read years ago that I was enjoying.

permalink

-

go to top

valse de la lune

at 11:14 on 2011-07-13OMG yay :D :D :D Thanks for the links. My friend's been sending me some too. I'm also quite pleased to see that a lot of yuri writers are female. Awesome.

permalink

-

go to top

Cammalot

at 15:23 on 2011-07-13I JUST WANNA WATCH DUDES EMOTE. ;-)

I actually got into yaoi (not slash for whatever reason) because I was attracted to what I thought was the innate equality in such a a relationship. There are a variety of reasons I don't really seek out much fanfic anymore (one of which is the decade-plus that has gone by) but one of them is that I don't really see that equality getting embraced. (I'm necessarily truncating this, I have to imitate being a productive employee at the moment.)

permalink

-

go to top

Melissa G.

at 19:40 on 2011-07-13

I JUST WANNA WATCH DUDES EMOTE. ;-)

Ooh, yes, good observation. I like that too.

I actually got into yaoi (not slash for whatever reason) because I was attracted to what I thought was the innate equality in such a a relationship.

Ditto. That's what I really like about it too, which is why I hate when they skew the power dynamic too far in one direction without somehow compensating for it in another way. I've never been into fanfic, but I do love doujinshi.

permalink

-

go to top

Cammalot

at 19:48 on 2011-07-13I wrote up this whole long comment yesterday, but today with you guys' further conversation I realized I was addressing something that Pyro was not talking about, so I'm tweaking, but I don't think I'll have a chance to get to it today.

The extremely short version is that there's a very definite blockage that some women seem to have about writing women, and I had it myself for some time (and that some more extreme versions of it outright baffle me), and have spent a lot of time trying to process, discuss, and debate what the fuck that is about. With theories. I have theories.

permalink

-

go to top

Melissa G.

at 19:53 on 2011-07-13

The extremely short version is that there's a very definite blockage that some women seem to have about writing women,

Definitely noticed this myself at times. I gravitate toward writing male characters, or at least I used to. I'm very interested to hear your theories whenever you find the time to write them up. :-)

permalink

-

go to top

Sister Magpie

at 20:07 on 2011-07-13

Sorry, I made my long post before I saw this! That is odd. Why don't they focus on yuri? Yuri is slowly becoming a more female dominated genre. It's kind of cool actually that the female authors are slowly co-opting a genre that was once basically male-written lesbian porn for men. To each their own, I guess?

I would guess that that's probably not all that related to the whole "that's my kink" thing, only not all kinks are sexual. That is, expecting them to explain it would probably be similar to having anybody explain why they find one thing more hot than another.

For instance, I like het and I like slash, but there are certain kinds of stories that could definitely be considered non-sexual kinks that I am more likely to read about in a m/m pairing than a f/m pairing or f/f pairing. I suppose I could try to relate it to power issues with gender IRL, but it's probably more just a kink if it's something I've pretty much always been drawn to.

I don't find that rape or "I'm only gay for that guy" seems to dominate most of the slash I come across, but I think that might often come down to different pairings leaning towards different dynamics. Or else also some authors being better than most.

permalink

-

go to top

Steve Stirling at 22:44 on 2011-07-13Pyrofennec:

-of the women in this series like to rape gay men for some strange reason.Melusine opens with an anecdote about the pure, true love between men. Two women get between it; one proceeds to rape one of the men repeatedly until he wants to kill himself.

-- that is odd. I'd say it was evidence of misogyny if a guy wrote it, but I have trouble -imagining- a guy writing it, even a gay man. You'd need a very strange set of quirks to do so.

[susandsnell]

it's been bugging me for a while now, but five worst parts of the dark Knight and one good part. bc I know you hate the movie 😂😂

boh. oh my gosh. b please don’t hate me.  😂😂

Five worst parts of the Dark Knight: 

5. The Filmmaking. More specfically: LONG AND WASHED OUT PALETTE. IT’S SO FUCKING LONG. IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE OVER TWO AND A HALF HOURS WITH TEN PLOTS TO WRAP UP AND HAVE NO FUCKING COLOURS IN IT. WE GET IT, NOLAN, A MAN DRESSED UP AS A BAT BRINGS YOU NO JOY AND SO NOW WE HAVE TO NOT HAVE ANY JOY IN OUR HEARTS EITHER, THANKS A LOT. HERE I THOUGHT I WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE FUN AT A MOVIE ABOUT BATMAN, BUT YOU SURE PROVED ME WRONG. 

4.  The Writing. Holy pretentious dialogue Batman! Where do I begin?Harvey Dent’s “I will state the theme of my arc in the most lazy and blatant foreshadowing speech until Emma Stone literally says she’s gonna die in the opening of The Amazing Spiderman 2″ gets quoted all the time and yes, superhero movies aren’t known for their subtlety, and not all great movies need to be subtle, but the “die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain” is egregious not only for the reasons I stated, but is a nauseating indicator of the film’s cynicism (despite what the boat climax purports to be proving!). Alfred’s “some men just want to watch the world burn” speech is similar albeit less facepalmy and Theme Stating. It’s blunt and heavy-handed, overly expositional, and very hit-you-over-the-head with regard to commentary. 

And here’s the thing! It could work in the context of the type of movie it is - The Shape of Water pretty much opens with a statement of the “who the real monster is” idea, but it works because the film is a fairy tale and presents itself as such, whereas this movie wants to have its cake and eat it too as a “super adult DEEP subtle COMPLEX movie” with incredibly clear and simple shit like this. Beyond that,  Nolan really has a dialogue issue in a lot of his works where nobody just has a fucking conversation. Everything has to be the most serious issue in the world or a ten thousand word treatise on the fundamental dichotomies of human nature or some shit you’d hear in a freshman philosophy 101 course from that guy nobody can tolerate who thinks he’s G-d’s gift because he wears glasses or some shit, I don’t know. Even the Joker, an agent of chaos, gets wrapped up into it! Like he is a showman, but the yammering and rambles of shit that isn’t even that deep but pretends to be gets on my damn nerves. And the worst part is that it comes at the expense of the characters. 

They don’t really…develop emotional bonds (even with Rachel, the token woman And Therefore the Object At Which Emotions are Thrown). I’m not invested because none of these characters are real or relatable or have human interactions. The script shouldn’t be an anchor that drowns the actors and suffocates the characters to the point that there’s no chemistry, no connection, no believable core. Alfred is practically Bruce’s father and I get no love out of them! Harvey and Bruce don’t connect at all! Lucius Fox, the only POC in the entire movie, is literally reduced to a plot device despite having moral concerns! 

3. That damn third act. This one takes special mention because it just pisses me off. It’s just too much! The chase with the Joker would be fine, but that’s not the end. His plot already extends way beyond where it would logically end (hence the bullshit runtime), but on top of that, on top of the drama with the escape ferries hammering you over the head with the point they’re trying to make about humanity and the obnoxious moralizing, and then you have Harvey’s fall to the dark side which I’m sorry, needed a lot more time than just getting crammed in to the back end of the movie. His descent into evil happened way too quickly. Two-Face is a great villain! But take Batman the Animated series (to me, the best adaptation of Batman there is, while not perfect) as an example: he’s established as a character and his descent into Two-Face receives the full focus of entire episodes and impacts the characters later on! Having him play sideshow to the Joker is a huge mistake, especially with something as huge at play as threatening Gordon’s family; it completely disrupts the focus of the plot and unnecessarily prolongs the film as a whole, but he goes down pretty easily in one of the movie’s shitty-ass fight sequences that I’d make their own point if there weren’t worse things because I can’t tell who’s punching who. And if you’re gonna rush Dent into villainy only to kill him, that makes his whole plot kinda a waste.

And The Dark Knight Rises was a lot more criticized than the Dark Knight, so how’s this for a fix for the entire trilogy? Don’t kill Two-Face. Keep Joker getting carted away gloating about having corrupted him, but then have Two-Face get away too.  Don’t make whitewashed lamely written Bane the villain of the next movie - instead, let the tail end of this movie build Two-Face up as the main villain for the final part! That way, you have more time for development, cohesiveness, consequences, exploration of themes, and you don’t waste characters. 

2.  Batman / Bruce Wayne’s entire character. Okay, so whenever I fawn over the Lego Batman movie and how it confronts the issue with modern portrayals of Bats and rightfully points out it’s not deep, he’s just a humongous dick, this feels like the source material of that popular portrayal. Of course, it pre-dates it in the comics - Miller and company are to blame for Grimdark Asshat who Batmansplains, but I feel like Dark Knight especially, for its success and greater accessibility as a film, is what widely propagated this portrayal. 

Secret identity or cape and cowl, there is a serious issue in your Batman movie if your Batman is terrible. He’s the protagonist, the titular character, and he’s fucking terrible! At best, Bruce Wayne is like…completely deadpan and not even there (I don’t give Bale shit because I think a lot of the fault lies with the writing/direction, Ledger was pretty much the only lively performance in the movie), placeholder of a protagonist. At worst, he comes off as deeply self-centered, self-aggrandizing, entitled, and violently unstable. I don’t care how bad the Joker is, when in custody, he still had legal rights, and Batman fucking tortured him. Even brutal criminals should not ever be tortured for information! And the film never engages with Bats reaching the point of beating people to a pulp as means of interrogation; he just feels conflicted about who’s worse and broods over it after the fact instead of, I don’t know, maybe thinking twice about torturing someone. The darker Marvel Netflix shows have their characters doing a lot of grim things, but the narrative or other characters almost always holds them accountable for it in ways beyond “aww, I feel kinda sad that I beat mentally ill people to a bloody pulp” – it challenges them often, or has other characters call them out. Batman just does this shit and people are like “oh you shouldn’t do that” and he’s like “AHHH I’M A MONSTER” and it borders into uncomfortable real-life implications with regard to authority and violence. There’s something to be said for introducing grey morality into superhero media, and I get the anti-hero thing, but Dark Knight codified the “white guy grimdark antihero being actually just a terrible fucking person who is the good guy in name only” deal we see in a lot of our media today.

It’s one thing to have a complex and flawed protagonist, but you have to balance that out with redeeming qualities, otherwise, he’s not even a fucking superhero! Again, I refer back to the 90s animated series: Batman has his moments of ruthlessness, but it’s balanced out with the philanthropy work we see in Bruce Wayne, and moments of genuine compassion that he shows many of his enemies – he apologizes genuinely to Two-Face, often tries to give them an out, and is frequently super kind to Harley Quinn, bringing her the dress she was accused of stealing when she was sent back to Arkham in the episode where she tried to redeem herself, and frequently trying to get her to acknowledge that the Joker is abusive towards her, as well as convince her she can still start over and be a good person. On top of which, Batdad is super popular in both the show and the comics. He’s frequently shown as having an especial soft spot for children; addition to all his adopted kids, you also have a lot of his interactions with children, whether as Bruce or as Batman, marked by gentleness, care, and compassion, largely based on what he went through as a child. 

You get no such moment in the Dark Knight. I cannot for the life of me think of kids who would go to see this as a Batman movie and leave looking up to Batman and wanting to be like him except on the surface level of wearing a cool costume and punching bad guys. There is nothing heroic or admirable about this Bruce. He fights crime as a vigilante - brutally, I might add -and this time, it comes off more as a desire for vengeance than a desire for justice, a point which the film raises, but ultimately doesn’t resolve or engage with in a satisfying character arc. 

The closest thing we get to humanizing this character is his relationship with Rachel, and even then, his interactions with her have heavy shades of Friendzoned Nice Guy which is especially bullshit because he won’t pursue a relationship with her yet is bitter about any decisions she might make about her own love life. He doesn’t even care about her that much as anything more than a conquest! He really doesn’t, and Alfred tearing up the letter proves that – with regards to how he behaves towards her, it really feels like it’s not so much that the letter would break his heart as it is that he’d resent her beyond the grave! 

Worse yet, he gives no shits about anyone else. This has a lot to do with Nolan’s scripts having a toxic masculinity problem where it’s not cool for guys to sympathize with or have emotional bonds amongst themselves, but like… he’s allies in a shared venture with the other characters, and nothing more. Alfred is practically his dad but you wouldn’t know that. Gordon, as revealed in TDKR, was kind to him after his parents’ deaths, but they’re just partners. Harvey is a rival for claiming a woman!  In other adaptations, Bruce and Harvey’s friendship is fleshed out a lot so the guilt and shock of his transformation into Two-Face is really impactful! Here, Bruce doesn’t really give a shit beyond it just being another thing to do. 

And that’s what heroism and motivations are to Batman in this - just a thing to do. I don’t want to watch a hero who’d rather bitch about doing good than actually just fucking do good, this is the safety of your city, not a school essay! He doesn’t really seem to want to help people, he wants to complain about people, but then thinks he’s so fucking special and such a snowflake martyr for still helping them regardless! It’s such a deeply childish and yes, toxically male mentality. I know it’s become a meme, but the ”I’m not the hero Gotham needs, but the hero that it deserves” line pisses me off so much for this reason, as well as the fact that he thinks that Gotham’s flaws justify the fact that he beats the fuck out of people and roars in their face to get answers; I think the perfect refutation to both that line and how a superhero protagonist that explores what heroism means can actually be found in Wonder Woman – “It’s not about deserve, it’s about what you believe.” In fact, that’s what made Wonder Woman so good (and feminist!) – it’s rejection of toxic masculine ideals and emphasis on love, compassion and vulnerability being one’s strength, and that people are inherently deserving of being saved if you believe in the good of the world - a much better treatise on good and evil than “see, people sometimes don’t explode boats but they still suck so it’s okay for a billionaire in furry cosplay to beat the shit out of mentally ill people because that’s what this city deserves, a guy who’s more into violence than saving people.” He just doesn’t care, so why the hell should we?

And there’s just no arc. He just reacts to shit and that’s it, which makes him boring when he’s not being a fucking maniac. Despite the script not allowing him to have feelings for other human beings, having him break his no-kill rule with Harvey at the end would have been impactful….had he not already broken it in Batman Begins by leaving White Ra’s al Ghul (Liam Neeson I love you but there is no reason to have whitewashed him or Talia the way Nolan did in the series - same as he did with Bane and arguably Catwoman since she’s been portrayed as a WOC many times before, actually come to think of it, there is a LOT of whitewashing in this trilogy) to his death. 

The film comes up with no real way to challenge it’s hero, have him grow, or change, or even show consequences for his failure to change, making him come off as stunted, unlikeable, and yeah, not much of a hero.

1. The sexism. (You knew this was coming, and yes, it is the worst part). I already mentioned how the men in this movie all fall prey to toxic masculinity as is common with Nolan characters, then even more characteristic of a Nolan movie is The Dead Girlfriend, Wife, or Daughter (you know, the only three things women could ever be!) of Sad White Guy(s). Rachel is the only female character (strike one) and she is handled nothing short of atrociously. Her entire job as a lawyer, intelligence, and hard work established in Batman Begins (which is also too grimdark but actually doesn’t piss me off half as much!) is hardly even mentioned and takes a backseat to her being a prize for the men (including her boss!) to throw feelings at and squabble over. While the male characters have no personality except for one characteristic and a goal because this script was written by an edgy thirteen year old boy, Rachel has no personality except to be a living emotional crutch/plot device. She does not exist as an autonomous individual outside her relationships to the men in the movie. Shit, she’s barely autonomous within these relationships! Bruce is a bitter little shit about her not wanting him back and we’re supposed to feel for him despite him literally offering her nothing relationship-wise for two movies and actively pushing her away at times! He feels he can’t be with her, but the framing is such that she shouldn’t have the right to be with anyone else, either! What the hell? I would even go so far as to say that her choosing Harvey just as she gets blown up, as well as how both of them got to that point, almost feel like the narrative punishing her for not wanting Bruce. More male entitlement bullshit. 

 And her fate…well, I mean. There’s a damn reason The Dark Knight is my go-to example when I want to explain what Fridging/Stuffed in the Fridge means. After having every possible stereotypical pigeonholed white girl trope tossed at her, Rachel is killed off callously for the character development and man angst of not one, but two self-obsessed stubbled white guys who make it about themselves and their right to act like phenomenal turds. She’s Helen of Troy – a woman blamed for people’s reactions to her (Harvey becoming Two-Face, Batsy or Bruce being saaaaaad, etc). She’s the Lost Lenore; a person reduced to how their death impacts their romantic interests.  We have reached peak Nolan here, and frankly, peak Batman too, because the franchise (comics, movies, etc) has always had this same problem with its treatment of women. Her fucking death isn’t even about her! It’s Harvey’s fucking villain origin and Bruce’s sad ending and Alfred’s resentment and note-burning and would she have waited, oh boo hoo, how about, did she have a fucking family, what would have happened if she hadn’t been murdered young, et fucking cetera. 

The thing that really gets me is that Rachel is by no means the worst treated woman in speculative fiction (especially not those that make a claim to some degree of intellectualism); she’s white, so her death is beautifully tragic and she’s put on a pedestal rather than being subjected to racialized misogynistic tropes (being treated more roughly by the narrative, having her suffering ignored or erased altogether, her death being callously ignored except for a throwaway line of dialogue, etc), she’s not unnecessarily and gratuitously sexually brutalized for shock value (that looks uncomfortably like fetishism at times) like the women on Game of Thrones or in nu!Bond movies, or, if we’re still in the Batman universe, Barbara Gordon in any iteration of the Killing Joke (which is another tentpole of misogyny in the Batman universe and I fucking hate it and it clearly influenced the Dark Knight, so, chicken, egg). She isn’t forcibly sterilized and her inability to get pregnant treated as making her a freak like AOU Black Widow. She has no pointless and insulting fanservice scenes like Carol Marcus in her underwear in Star Trek: Into Darkness. Her suffering is not treated as empowerment like any number of women written by Joss Whedon, she isn’t used to be chewed up and spat out and destroyed in a romance with either a guy who terrifies her and in whom she’s shown no prior romantic interest or an outright villain who has caused her nothing but pain in some stupid half-assed not-redemption arc where she has to sublimate herself and be stupidly forgiving beyond the willing suspension of disbelief so some horrible man can evolve.

But why this sexism sticks out to me is that it’s so insidious; if it were more on the nose like the examples I listed above, it’d almost be less jarringly offensive, but it masquerades as her being an empowered yet tragic character and weaves into an overall narrative that validates all the tropes I mentioned, and legitimizes itself in a way that feels fundamentally dishonest about how sexist it’s being. Worse yet, there’s the fact that The Dark Knight is more than just self-contained; its influence on not just comic book movies, but all kinds of media as we know it, is undeniable. And as far as setting the example goes? This hugely well-regarded, influential film is almost entirely white, and tells us that women exist as distractions, tragedies, and extensions of men’s storylines, and this bullshit has been echoing in similar media works since. 

AND NOW, THE ONE (or multiple!) NICE THING(S): 

All this being said, I admit there actually are a lot of things I like about this movie if I can separate them enough from the main issues! 😂For one thing, Hans Zimmer’s work on the score is top-notch; I listen to Like a Dog Chasing Cars and Harvey Two-Face all the time and the music alone provokes stronger emotions for the characters than anything in the movie actually did. The opening heist is just fantastically entertaining, and up until the messy third act, the pacing and plot is pretty tight and engaging! Heath Ledger’s performance as the Joker is of course fantastic; although he’s not my favourite Joker, he really gave it his all, and is by and large the highlight of the film. Nolan is really good with visual appeal (with the exception of that damn colour palette) and the shots are fantastic. I really love the chase scene with the Joker and wish the rest of the movie held my excitement like that.  

Finally, it’s odd to say this, but I really like the world of the movie once I ignore the characters and plot. The Gotham that was built in Nolan’s trilogy, the contrast between the classes with the lavish receptions and dinners versus the underbelly, the corruption versus the goodness, how these disparate elements work in a terrible symbiosis, the architecture and technology reflecting this character – it’s incredibly vivid, both grounded in reality and yet sufficiently speculative fiction-y enough to be intriguing. I just wish that the people in it matched the quality of the setting. 😂😂😂

[just0nemorepage]

It's Kind of a Funny Story || Ned Vizzini || 444 pages -------------------------------------------------------- Top 3 Genres: Young Adult / Contemporary / Mental Health

Synopsis: Ambitious New York City teenager Craig Gilner is determined to succeed at life - which means getting into the right high school to get into the right job. But once Craig aces his way into Manhattan's Executive Pre-Professional High School, the pressure becomes unbearable. He stops eating and sleeping until, one night, he nearly kills himself.

Craig's suicidal episode gets him checked into a mental hospital, where his new neighbors include a transsexual sex addict, a girl who has scarred her own face with scissors, and the self-elected President Armelio. There, Craig is finally able to confront the sources of his anxiety.

Finished: January 28th, 2020.

Progress: 3 / 10. 30% complete.

My Rating: ★★★☆☆. [3/5]

My Review: [Under the read more - NOT SPOILER FREE]

So to be upfront – I have a half hour to write this review, as my night is very busy and I don’t want to wait until I get home to get this done, so I’ll see what I can do in thirty minutes!

I thought this was an incredible and well-represented depiction of mental illnesses in general, and particularly depression and anxiety. I thought it did an excellent job portraying and de-stigmatizing mental hospitals and the people in them, and the reasons WHY people go to them. I thought the process getting to the point of suicide, and the process in the hospital on the path to healing were accurate and well-paced and felt very realistic. Other illnesses and conditions were also mentioned, albeit briefly in the form of other patients in the hospital, but they were there.

What was honestly pretty terrible was how trans people were handled. There was one transgender character, and she was misgendered, stereotyped, insulted, belittled, called slurs, made fun of SO badly – so much of the current bullshit trans people have to go through, and it was portrayed as completely normal. None of it was challenged, none of it was corrected or fixed – in fact, her being trans was very much implied to be the reason why she was in the mental hospital in the first place. It was awful and cringey and SO badly done, SO badly handled – even the NURSES seemed to think her being trans was a disorder. Even SHE seemed to think being trans was a disorder.

Likely, using “transsexual” instead of “transgender” in the BOOK SUMMARY seems to be a dead giveaway that this is the author’s view of trans people, not a character’s poorly educated views.

So. Welcome to the reason why the book gets knocked down from five stars to three.

Honestly, if it didn’t handle mental health in general so annoyingly well, it would probably have gone down to a one or a two, for how badly it was handled.

There were some other poorly handled and unchallenged things, too – like saying someone has “balls” to have guts, calling someone a “pussy” for being a coward, the MC calling something “gay” as an insult ON THE LAST PAGE, MC being told to “not be a girl” when he gets emotional, one of the girls being called a “slut” behind her back for poorly reacting to a breakup – they weren’t overly frequent, but they were THERE, and they were COMPLETELY unchallenged and just passed without acknowledgement and just – yeah.

I would have liked to read a book like this – where the MC spends time in a mental hospital – where said MC doesn’t have a rich family, or a supportive family, even. Where MC CAN’T just “switch schools” and doesn’t have understanding friends willing to learn and be better and doesn’t have any kind of support system. A far more realistic situation of real world people with real world mental illnesses – since this one was so painfully focused on a white boy who is in literally EVERY WAY privileged as fuck – just, who happens to have severe depression and anxiety.

I like that that illustrates that mental illnesses don’t discriminate, but I feel enough emphasis wasn’t placed on how damn lucky he was to have all he had – all the systems and all the opportunities – to work towards getting better. That was mentioned a few times, sure, but in throwaways, and not in any kind of real context to make you actually THINK about how hard it would be if you were LITERALLY ANYBODY ELSE. The ending felt very hopeful, very full of sunshine and fairy tales, but almost like it was making a mockery of the mental illness journey of anyone – read, most other people – who would NOT be this lucky. It was a feel good ending, but boy it did NOT feel realistic. Maybe it was for Craig, but if you’re NOT a 15-year-old white boy? Don’t make me laugh.

For what it is though, and for the simplicity of what it portrayed, it was still very good, very well done, and is an excellent weapon against the stigma and shame that comes with mental illnesses. However – if you can find any better portrayal, any better character, any better writing, in ANY kind of similar book – dump this one, and read that one instead.

This one gets an average rating purely because it’s the first I’ve found of its kind, so far, and I myself had no idea what it would be like staying in a mental hospital. I did, in fact, learn quite a lot.

But the moment I find one that’s better written, and with better representation and handling of shitty language, out this one goes.

[rationalisms]

1, 4, 5, 7, 9?

1. What OTPs in your fandom(s) do you just not get?

any ‘male protagonist/their (usually almost entirely offscreen) female love interest completely devoid of personality, drive or any real character arc’ ships tbqh

like i get the concept of fleshing out minor characters but this specific phenomenon usually only makes me feel gay rage at lazy straight male writers so no thanks

special shoutout to hermann gottlieb/vanessa gottlieb in pacific rim for being an iteration of this in which the female character literally does not exist at all in canon and the only mention of her existence is her name in a file (as his next of kin) in a non-canonical novel about the film in which hermann gottlieb is ablebodied for some reason and raleigh hospitalizes someone for vaguely insulting him

4. Do you have a NoTP in your fandom? Are they a popular OTP?

lmao i notp almost all m/f ships in my fandoms which are inevitably always popular so yes, loads. i don’t mind though, as long as i don’t have to see them on my dash i don’t care what other people are into and that’s easily achieved by just not following people who post het ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

apart from that i don’t like dorian/iron bull which is fairly popular with many of my friends/mutuals but they tag it for me so it’s chill

5. Has fandom ever ruined a pairing for you?

i went off root/shaw for a bit during and directly after season 5 of person of interest aired, partly because of how furious i was at the bury your gays nonsense, but also partly because so many of its shippers were incredibly undeservedly nasty about my favourite character and i couldn’t browse any of the tags or read any fics without coming across super vitriolic hate for harold finch

it’s mostly died down though ime so i’m back to being able to love them again

7. Is there anything you used to like but can’t stand now?

M A R V E L

listen marvel comics had been part of my life for 15 years and especially wanda maximoff was incredibly important to me as a fellow mentally ill romani person who had never seen an even slightly sympathetic portrayal of romani people before her, much less mentally ill romani people but uh

yeah. i’m done with them. it’s been fuck up after terrible fuck up for years on end and i have reached the end of my rope.

9. Most disliked character(s)? Why?

i’m finding it hard to find something to list for this... i don’t really hate characters passionately tbh i’m way too focused on loving characters passionately

WAIT NO fucking raleigh becket from pacrim solely for being the most boring shitty white dude protag possible and still having people kiss his ass for limboing just under the bare minimum, fuck that guy

[digitalsisters]

Legion -R

The good: At the beginning, they did such a magnificent job at portraying mental illness in a respectful way and it truly felt like we were sharing in David’s confusion and his pain. Adding ‘addict’ to his narrative really allowed me to explain his quick ascension into tyrannical demi-god and falling in “love” as a replacement for his substance abuse problem, where instead of drugs he uses power and “love” or “lust” to fill an empty void that still persists inside of himself. Lenny was someone who seemed so multi-faceted and certainly the antagonist all throughout but still likeable. As the negative influence in David’s entire life she did a marvelous job in portraying the manipulative ways in which she managed to convince David into believing he needed her and should only trust her because everyone else is lying. From someone who has not read the comics I truly did not see her becoming the main villain. She was portrayed similarly to Beetlejuice, Angelina Jolie in girl interrupted and yet a helpful companion all at once. Although she could have very well existed on her own you got the sense that she needed David and their relationship remained confusing until the end. She was wonderful at orchestrating her further descent into madness in a beautiful way, im so happy with how many ways she was allowed to act on this show. The bad: Syd. That sums it all up. There were so many problems with her character, from her unexplainable “love” to David, to her being overtly sexualized and infantilized at the same time to her acting, to her narrative and her sole reason for existing being David and her shitty powers which are not explained very well and seemingly have no real purpose except to kind of rape her mother and her mother’s boyfriend by inhabiting her body when she was 16 and making the boyfriend have sex with her only to be changed back to her actual self in the middle of it; which is about the only backstory we have for her. This character is used as a means to explain away where David gets the power to overcome literally every single one of his obstacles in an unimaginative “magical” way that really requires no thought. It is a tired old trope to have this woman be so devoid of personality that she comes across as a robot both in her manner of speech and I have equated her existence as being capable of being replaced by a life like mannequin. Syd is meant to be the driving force for David, both in his journey to recovery and in an attempt to lure him to the establishment with dr.bird. The only inkling I got in the entire 1st season that she might be capable of having non-David loving thoughts are when she gives a smirk at his losing control of his powers. Sadly throughout the rest of the show the talks about true love continued and at this point if she did have alterior motives not only would it not be surprising in the least but she also has not played the love card well either. Stereotypically, when Syd and David have sex for the first time, they are suddenly portrayed as evil or just consumed by lust by making them wear all black and Syd seemed to have a black eye for the rest of the season which nobody addressed. My immediate thought was that much like a virus and since Syd had inhabited David’s head multiple times now through her and his powers, perhaps they were susceptible to transmitting mind diseases since she began to see the angry hitler boy in her mind as well and that in her case it was overtaking her and making her body decay from the inside out. There were a lot of concepts introduced that served no purpose and it felt very frustrating to give the audience so many mysteries and in one episode they managed to boil them down to being all a manifestation of one main villain. The other mysteries like the father and his blurred out face was not a surprise to people who know the backstory of David to an extent and that was what they chose to end the season with, again, falling short of intrigue. The way they supposedly trapped Lenny a la kill bill style really did not make much sense and them being naive enough to believe he was gone was pretty foolish. Lenny had a mere few moments where I did not like what they did to her character, at the start of the show she was genderless and her sexuality was made to be of importance in some way. Once that initial “kiss” between David and Lenny happened, in an effort to sexualize Lenny they began to feminize her as well which I didn’t think was necessary and nobody explained what the relevance was of her having been Benny in real life and what the relevance was of her having different faces in general in his mind. I thought the angriest boy in the world was going to matter in some way but it ended up being a backstory for hitler boy which was unnecessary entirely. Part of me would want to give it another shot but considering their lack of portrayal in regards to POC characters and adequate female portrayal its not looking too bright. R. I didnt proof read so its from my heart.

[violet--minds-blog]

Awesome Queer Media to Check Out!

Piper Gibson | March 20, 2017

Sorry for the absence (school is kicking my ass but what else is new) but I’m back with another list! This time, I’m cataloging some of my favorite pieces of media with LGBTQ+ characters and plotlines. Of course, nothing is perfect, and all these shows/books/movies/etc. have their problems, but I still think they’re pretty damn cool.

1. Check, Please!

What is it: A webcomic

Who makes it: Ngozi Ukazu 

Why you should read it: Queer boys who play hockey! Lots of pie! Discussions of mental illness and drug abuse! An ensemble cast! Comedy and drama in one! Slow-burn, healthy, communicative, gay relationship!! Confirmed happy gay ending!!! Most of my friends know that I love this comic with my whole heart, and it’s really easy to see why. There’s a character in it for everyone, and they’re all easy to relate to and care about. Personally, I relate so hard to Jack having anxiety and trying to navigate his life and career in the intersection of being mentally ill and queer. No spoilers, but this comic includes the best queer relationship I’ve ever seen portrayed. Don’t get discouraged by the hockey-- I knew nothing about the sport going in and it really doesn’t stop you from enjoying the comic at all! Currently in Bitty’s third year and gearing up for more spring updates, Check, Please is a master of storytelling and will make you laugh and cry. Read it here!

2. The Get Down

What is it: A Netflix Original series

Who makes it: dir. Baz Luhrmann

Why you should watch it: Almost the entire cast are people of color, it’s set in the 1970s and focuses on both the dying out of disco and the arising hip-hop scene, and the performances are incredible. You see this world through young Zeke’s eyes, a complex and talented kid looking to be a part of something bigger than himself and for a community to fall back on. No matter what’s going on, the story never lets you forget these characters are in the middle of the South Bronx in the seventies, fighting for a way out of poverty, strict religious family, or gangs, all while holding on to their passions. The music and the performances of these young actors are what sold me immediately. The queer relationship in it (I won’t spoil it) is lovely and gentle and blooms very naturally. The story, the characters, and the music are the focus, and if you’re like me, you’ll be hooked immediately. The second season just came out this month and it’s incredible but holy shit so intense. Catch it on Netflix!

3. Carry On

What is it: A young-adult novel

Who makes it: Rainbow Rowell

Why you should read it: Did you read Harry Potter and think: “Wow, Harry is super bi. Wow, he’s pretty obsessed with Draco. Wow they could be friends if Harry was sorted into Slytherin WOW THEY COULD EVEN BE MORE THAN THAT!” ...Okay, well this is the book for you. Set in a magic school more different from Hogwarts than you’d think, Simon and Baz are roommates that hate each other. But things are complicated when you’re the chosen one and you think your roommate might be a vampire and there’s an evil something out for you. It’s like Harry Potter except different and more queer people and people of color. Plus a happy ending that’s so, so much better than that “17 years later” shit. If you like gay magical boys and ass-kicking best friends and plot twists, you’ll definitely enjoy this.

4. Fourth Man Out

What is it: A 2016 movie

Who makes it: dir. Andrew Nackman

Why you should watch it: If you’ve been searching your whole fucking life for a queer rom-com like me, this’ll make you immensely happy. The story centers around Adam, who comes out to his mostly clueless friends in his twenties. They’re all a little uncomfortable and shitty at first, but they all grow and learn and by the end of the film have created the kind of caring and casual atmosphere any queer person hopes for when initially coming out to friends. The movie explores those awkward first steps after coming out, including online dating and homophobic neighbors, in a comedic yet respectful way. It’ll make you laugh and it’ll make you care a lot about Adam-- his puppy-dog face just makes you root for him from the beginning. Watch this if you hate that more comedies don’t center around queer themes, and then please recommend me more!!

5. About a Girl

What is it: A young-adult novel

Who makes it: Sarah McCarry

Why you should read it: Okay, maybe you should read the first two books in this series first, All Our Pretty Songs and Dirty Wings, but I read this one first and I think it can stand alone pretty well. There is an abundance of queer people of color in this, a beautiful, mythological storyline, a girl/girl romance, and a main character you’ll fall in love with. This book is so gorgeous to read and so rewarding, and I couldn’t put it down. In fact, I’m due for a reread... good thing I just impulsively bought all three of these so now I OWN THEM. Please, please give at least About a Girl a read, though-- the lyrical, soft nature of it was so incredibly healing and I can’t tell you how much I loved it.

5. Moonlight

What is it: A 2016 film

Who makes it: dir. Barry Jenkins

Why you should watch it: First of all, if you haven’t been following the mess that happened at the Oscars with La La Land being announced incorrectly and this film winning Best Picture, where have you been? I saw this rather recently, I’ll admit, but it blew my socks off. This film is so completely centered on the experience of black queer men, and allows them to be so honest and tender, so complex and multi-faceted, in a way we haven’t much seen in mainstream media so far. We know why this is-- mainstream media is overwhelmingly white, overwhelmingly straight, and wants to put down and silence differing experiences as much as possible, making Hollywood a boring and homogeneous space. But Moonlight has broken through and shown that when these stories are told, and they are listened to, something incredible can happen. 

6. Ask the Passengers

What is it: A young-adult novel

Who makes it: A.S. King

Why you should read it: Holy shit, y’all, I loved this book so fucking much. I reread it a little while ago and it still punches me in the gut just as hard. The book centers around Astrid, a teenager navigating her sexuality, her family, and suffocating small-town life. She’s a philosopher at heart, so nothing comes easy, especially not love-- it’s not as clear-cut as her other queer friends may think. This is a really honest portrayal of figuring out sexuality and Astrid is such a lovable narrator that you just want to bundle her up and let no one else hurt her. The book hit close to home as a queer girl who spent a lot of time figuring out my identity and what it meant to me personally. If you have a similar story, prepare to get emotional.

7. One Day at a Time

What is it: A Netflix original series based off Norman Lear's 1975 series of the same name

Who makes it: Too many directors & executive producers to name! But if you’re a Norman Lear fan, he stayed on to be an executive producer for the remake.

Why you should watch it: The show centers around a Cuban-American family living in California and tackles topics like immigration, religion, sexuality, PTSD, divorce/separation, and more. Elena’s coming out storyline is beautifully and respectfully done and I really appreciate how realistic it is. This show will make you laugh and make you cry, but mostly, you’ll just fall completely in love with the Alvarez family and their story. And they’ve just been confirmed for a second season!! (GET ELENA A GIRLFRIEND!!)

8. The Real O’Neals

What is it: An ABC comedy series

Who makes it: Executive producer Dan Savage

Why you should watch it: Okay, I’ll admit, I have more problems with this show than the others-- namely its consistent biphobia and very few characters of color-- but besides the problems, it’s still hilarious and honest. In the very first episode, Kenny comes out to his conservative, Irish Catholic family in an... explosive way, and what follows is them all trying to figure out how to navigate his identity while still being religious. It’s important to see representation of queer people who keep their faith after coming out; it reminds us that religion and queerness aren’t mutually exclusive. Plus, I love Kenny’s relationship with his siblings, and the fact that his younger sister Shannon is the smartest and most put-together of them all. The show just finished its second season, and as of yet there has been no announcement of a renewal for a third season.

9. The Raven Cycle

What is it: A young-adult novel series

Who makes it: Maggie Stiefvater

Why you should read it: Holy wow, this book series is fantastic. I had no idea what it was about when I read it (because I read it for the gays...), but the story is complex and fascinating. Blue is our narrator most of the time, the daughter of a psychic who has no psychic abilities herself and who lives in a house with a bunch of other awesome psychic ladies. Her life has always been surrounded by magic, but it gets even more magical when she meets Gansey, Ronan, Adam, and Noah, four boys who go to the near Aglionby Academy and are dubbed “Raven Boys” because of the raven on their uniforms. I’m pretty sure shit starts to get Really Actually Gay in the last book, but the entire series is fantastic and well worth a read. If you like ghost boys, dead kings, magical dreamers, and weird curses, this series is for you. It’s recently been announced that there will be a TV show based on the books, and there will also be another book series just about Ronan, so I’m super pumped for those cool things... Unless they ruin the TV show, in which case I will be incredibly disappointed. (In the meantime, though, you can read the first chapter of the first book, The Raven Boys, here!)

10. Yuri On Ice

What is it: An Japanese sports anime series

Who makes it: Creator Mitsurō Kubo, dir. Sayo Yamamoto

Why you should watch it: LISTEN, I’ve never finished an anime before this, because I’m not really that into anime. But this series is about figure skating, has twelve episodes, and is hella gay, so it’s not hard to binge it. (For the love of God, please watch the subbed version if you can, the dub voices give me nightmares.) The story is beautifully done, Viktor and Yuuri’s relationship is stable, loving, and realistic, and the portrayal of Yuuri’s anxiety is so important and made me cry in spots. Plus, it’s really funny and the competition scenes are thrilling as all hell. You can watch the series in literally a day, so what are you waiting for?? Binge it and then listen to the soundtrack on Spotify on repeat while crying, like I did.

11. Brooklyn Nine-Nine

What is it: A Fox-produced police sitcom

Who makes it: A million directors and producers, it’s a comedy sitcom

Why you should watch it: A diverse ensemble cast, comedy that isn’t at the expense of any marginalized group, complex characters, a stable gay relationship, Andy Samberg??? I love this show so much, y’all. To be fair, the main relationship is between a man and a woman, but the captain of the 99th precinct is an openly gay black man who’s in an amazing, loving relationship with his husband. And the relationship between Jake, the main character, and Amy (Spoiler! But you’ll see it coming from a million miles away, promise.) is one of the most delicious slow-burn plotlines I’ve ever seen. And as far as I know, the writers have no intention to break them up for “conflict” (cough cough New Girl cough). In an episode from the current season, a character called something transphobic, which was the first time I’ve ever heard that word on television, and I had to pause and look at my girlfriend in wonder, like “Did he just really say that? Oh my God??” Anyway. Please watch this show. It’s currently in its fourth season, just recently back from its haitus, so go binge it now!

There’s so many more to add to this list (Legend of Korra! Rock and Riot!! Etc etc etc!), but since you now have 11 new (or not-so-new) pieces of queer media to consume, I’ll leave you with that. Till next time!

[thezoequinn]

“Triggered”

Today I heard the last shitty joke in passing I can handle about my mental illness without speaking up. Not about the people making the joke, or even the joke itself, but about the illness - it’s extremely poorly understood, partially due to media presentation of it, and partly thanks to the internet hijacking the terminology of one of the symptoms and extrapolating it so far from it’s original, highly specific meaning that most people have no idea what they’re referencing. 

I don’t blame anyone who doesn’t know the first thing about PTSD, because I didn’t know what PTSD was until I was diagnosed with it. Not really, anyway. I had the same pop culture version of the illness most people have - it was something soldiers had, and flashbacks were hallucinatory caricatures about as accurate as most portrayals of what taking LSD is like in pop culture - with the character and the writer equally divorced from reality.

When my doctor handed me the preliminary screening inventory sheet to fill out while I was mid-sentence during our first meeting, it seemed so obvious. So many things that I’d chocked up to having depression and going through a… significant amount of stress, but that weren’t getting better and seemed to just kind of linger unwanted in my head, ready to flare up and shit all over whatever I was doing made sense. He explained to me what flashbacks actually are, that it wasn’t simply a hallucination and more a spiral down a memory well of horrible shit you’ve gone through, of feeling like you’re mentally and emotionally “unplugging” in response to something bringing all that up, and the feeling that everything is just as fragile and fight-or-flight as it was when you were actually in danger. He explained that the most common sufferers of PTSD aren’t soldiers, but survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault, and were more often women than men. He even explained the changes to my body that had occurred, that the acrid, metallic taste that would pop up in the back of my throat was *adrenaline* - that I was physically tasting the flood of “oh shit” that my brain was producing because parts of my body had a hair trigger for locking into survival mode.

I scored a 73 out of 100 on the inventory, and later my doctor would categorize my ptsd as “severe”, but told me with trauma-specific treatment I could hope to see that number lower into the teens. It’s been over a year since then and it’s taken *so much work*, but he was right. I’m a lot better than I was several years ago, especially before I knew what the hell was going on with me.

I’m a comedian and can find so much to joke about in my mental illness. When my doctor added a C for “complex” onto the PTSD I felt that combined with my ADHD, I had started collecting an alphabet. My doctor laughed when he prescribed me the medication that would take my extremely vivid, constant nightmares away and told me that it would also take my regular dreams with it, and I responded with “I’m sorry doctor I’m an artist you can’t just phrase things that way without spawning a million insufferable conceptual pieces”. Anything can be joked about - being a dick about it is more related to how you do it.

I make jokes because comedy can take the sting out of having a nasty knot of pain lodged inside my skull that my ex planted there when I took away his ability to hurt me himself. If I didn’t have the jokes, all I’d have is the anger and violation I feel at being someone who can go from joking with friends in a UPS store to a crying mess because someone grabbed my arm and spoke to me in the same place, the same way, as that ex the last time I saw him, before I had a friend stay with me for a while because I was so afraid he’d come back. I hate that I’m like this, and that even with all the work I put in and the therapy I do, there are still these little, extremely specific things that cause that familiar ember in my brain to ignite and immediately need to be dealt with. It’s a nightmare to feel like there’s any part of you that seems so frail where it was once strong, to be someone who has to be tough enough to put up with an enormous amount of shit but still have these things out there that can immediately pierce any armor you have, like the shittiest version of magic words. The sheer irrationality and the sense of lost control is such a deep and frustrating violation, it’s hard to write about without seeming too melodramatic.

There aren’t many things that will send me down that rabbit hole anymore, or make me taste adrenaline and feel the same fear that everything I have is about to be destroyed again. But they exist. They’re extremely specific, innocuous to everyone else but poison to my peace of mind. I’ve calloused over a lot of the minor ones, but there are two or three big ones that feel like a crack across my skull and immediately knock me on my ass seemingly no matter what I do.

You’d think the specificity of these things would make them easy to avoid or to tell people in my life about, but it’s kind of the opposite. I largely don’t bother, because the language around it has been so completely and utterly demolished and politicized in a way that makes it nearly impossible for me to use in a productive way without having to take on the additional, exhausting work of explaining my illness to people.

I’m talking about “triggers”. It used to be that only anime nazi assholes used it as a joke, but then “trigger warnings” became a cultural battlefield over imaginary “political correctness” and a ton of other shit I don’t remotely want to get into. I don’t want to talk about other peoples’ experiences when it comes to triggers, and I know triggers aren’t limited to PTSD - but speaking for myself, as the Discourse evolved, I felt completely left behind. My mental illness doesn’t have any political affiliation, it just exists. Now I see obnoxious “trigger” jokes just about everywhere, even people who are just parroting a “meme” 20 steps removed from the anime nazi assholes who send me the corresponding Junkrat UI image along with their misguided efforts to actually trigger me. It’s to the point where even nice people say shitty things without realizing it.

And that fucking sucks, man. Having a very real aspect of your mental health made into a meme and a joke that has seemingly worked its way into nerd culture at large helps make it feel impossible to actually talk about my mental health, especially when it’s an illness that pop culture constantly misrepresents. The last thing anyone needs when they’re trying to speak up and identify something to someone as being bad for them is to be made fun of. It’s like showing someone a knife in your back and asking them to pull it out for you, only to have them kick it a little to see if it’s real or not first.

Hearing “triggered” jokes is grating and tiresome, especially since bringing up what being triggered actually feels like makes you a huge no-fun killjoy (not to mention the inevitable backlash of people with underdeveloped empathy glands actively trying to trigger me after saying this), but here we are all the same. If it sounds annoying, trust me, I am *way* more annoyed that I have a mental illness than you are. I’m tired. I want to be able to explain to people what is going on with me without the baggage of other people misusing a word for cheap jokes with hidden costs, simply so I don’t have to do all the heavy lifting of educating people just so I can get them to understand that a specific thing messes with me. I’m not about to tell anyone what to say, and I largely feel that plenty of otherwise well-meaning people legitimately just don’t know any better (I know the people who want to continue being little shits will continue to be little shits, water is wet, don’t @ me about it). I want you, dear reader, to know all this so you know what you’re actually making fun of.

I want you to know all this so you know why I’m not laughing with you - it’s because you’re laughing at me.

(in b4 bland peepants hacks respond with lazy “triggered” jokes)

[tenitchyfingers]

Reasons you should watch Bojack Horseman:

animated dramedy about a bunch of b-list celebrities or has-beens and all the people surrounding them, where their problems with fame are only a backdrop for their personal issues and their past problems (alcoholism, drug abuse, having had really shitty childhoods) which are more relatable

The side characters aren’t only there to be a corollary of subplots servicing the main character who always gets the spotlight. Actually, there is an entire episode where Bojack doesn’t appear at all and he’s barely discussed too, and it’s an episode that stands on its own without any problem at all. The secondary characters all have their own motivations and their own path to grow and live in a healthier way with themselves and others.

Creative and almost experimental narrative techniques were used to convey concepts like the struggle to communicate emotions honestly for someone who never did, or to show the state of mind of someone with senile dementia and also show us more about their personal history and explain their actions towards other characters. 

Burning social commentary and political satire delivered through puns, jokes and paradoxes and punching up, not down. 

All the main characters are complex and multi-faceted, which means none of them is “good” or “bad”, but is an intricated jumble of experiences that shaped what they do and how they think (save for Mr Peanutbutter, who’s an antropomorphized Labrador and more similar to a dog in his personality than a human, but he still has depth to him, he’s not two-dimentional)

Serious topics like mental illness and abuse are handled respectfully, and there’s an obvious love and compassion for the characters coming from the staff. This becomes very evident by season 4, while season 1 is more raw on the edges and resembles Family Guy more, honestly. But it does get more visibly sensitive towards its own characters. 

Celebrities cameoing and voicing themselves: Jessica Biel, Tim Gunn, Vincent d’Onofrio, Stanley Tucci, Zach Braff, Lin Manuel-Miranda (briefly), Stephen Colbert, Kristin Chenoweth, Naomi Watts, Character Actress Margo Martindale, Wallace Shawn, Paul McCartney, Henry Winkler, Daniel Radcliffe (not Elijah Wood), Lance Bass.

AND there are eight men in a polya relationship, all being fathers with their own quirks unrelated to their sexuality, who adopted a girl whom they clearly love, and who’s the only instance in the show of a functional, healthy person having functional and healthy relationships with the people around her, while everyone else had straight parents who also raised them poorly, which means the other characters more often than not have unhealthy relationships with everyone else. 

AND there’s the first instance of accurate, respectful and open portrayal of an asexual character, uttering the word “asexual” multiple times and never doubting that asexuality is a real thing, never shitting on it, and never doing to the asexual character any of the shit media usually does to ace characters. Even better, his realization that he’s ace is organically part of his more ample character arc in season 4, which has more to do with healthy independence from others and stopping from getting stepped on without a protest. Basically, acknowledging and embracing his sexuality becomes part of his journey to seeing himself as a worthy being deserving of respect and autonomy. It’s really well done, but I sure wouldn’t recommend the show only on the basis of this. It’s more about the sum of all these things. 

Basically, If you like well-written shows, I truly do recommend this one. 

But also, topics you should look out for if you want to watch: drug use/abuse, family abuse, lobotomy, sexualization and mercification of young girls in Hollywoo(d), portrayals of depression and suicidal tendencies, alcoholism, death, terminal illnesses, abortion, discussions on gun crime, and that should be it. 

i’m tired of “REASONS YOU SHOULD WATCH [SHOW]” posts and it’s only a checklist of identity politics discourse with tumblr lingo and nothing about the plot or quality of the show

[kffandom]

tsulong replied to your post: and here we have yet another instance of media...

yeah i really wanted to like that show but that part upset me a lot? and im kinda telling myself its ok just bc she’s not actually mentally ill its something shes not supposed to be on? deluding myself some i guess :

ok forewarning: spoilers for the o/a below!! 

ok yeah see i thought that for a bit too, like it’s bad to medicate her because she doesn’t need it, but here’s the thing: at the end, they want you to debate whether what she went through was “real” or not, especially since they have her back on medication at the end (fueling the: “no, it wasn’t real, it was her trauma and her being undermedicated” theory). her fbi counselor dude talked a lot about her being traumatized, and if you think back to when she was telling her backstory from her life in russia and everything, you could DEFINITELY argue she has had ptsd most of her life (wouldn’t you after nearly drowning on a bus with other screaming children?) 

which!! arguably could also require medication. so we could argue she was being incorrectly medicated, but that doesn’t mean they had to demonize medication the way they did. 

“it didn’t help” okay yeah because it sounds like they were treating you for schizophrenia or some other nameless mental illness they didn’t want to specify because that would be too damn hard for them to pick rather than ptsd like you 

“it made me feel numb” okay, again, potentially because you were being medicated incorrectly, but that’s still a shitty thing to say when that’s what a lot of people worry about happening when they start taking medication. like i have a friend who has said, “yeah i think i should get medicated but i don’t want to be numb”, that’s what people widely believe and we really!! never need another portrayal like that at this point, everyone believes medications like that already 

“it didn’t help” okay well if it didn’t help then the medication was wrong and that sucks but that doesn’t mean being /medicated/ wouldn’t help and being medicated would be bad for her 

like yeah i just went off for a bit on that, and while i didn’t like the story of the show very much if i’m being honest, i don’t think it was a bad show. i think they handled a lot of topics pretty tastefully, i think they did something semi-interesting, the actors and cinematography was phenomenal---i think they dropped a lot of balls, personally, but i don’t think they did poorly enough that it’s not worth watching if you wanted to like it or give it a chance, if that makes sense? 

also sorry for literally writing like 12 pages in response we watched the entire series tonight and i have a lot to say and complain about because i didn’t like it and i love to complain lol