#just a big blanket statement for. all of it. every discourse.

[familyabolisher]

L + ratio + you speak from a place of narrow experience and apply those experiences to a far broader scope than they can accommodate instead of asking what might lie outside of your immediate perception + you don't interrogate the underlying assumptions shaping your own discourse + your arguments are reductive to the point of meaninglessness + you made up a guy to get mad at

[sysciety]

[cont. of this] ('factives are more than cc introjects')

It's because it's not trendy or marketable to say you have an introject of someone who abused you, or even someone who might be your friend who's a great person but doesn't happen to be popular. This has devolved into complaining more about tiktok/twitter but it feels like people won't talk about the downsides or the non "quirky" sides of a disorder unless it's done in some quippy or marketable way. (Not that they necessarily should do that either but it does unintentionally create a skew)

Saying "oh I felt dissociated on my way to x" doesn't make good content. "Here's a day in my life with a cdd" and it's me sitting at a desk doesn't make good content. There's nothing wrong with wanting to go "here's what a switch looks like" but I think it's still to some extent catering to an algorithm based on shock value as opposed to serving an educational purpose, especially when something like that is meant to be the highlight of a video (this is about tiktok again bc due to formats system-youtube does this in a much better way).

Saying you have a guy in your brain vs saying "I literally become x char from y media" will evoke two different responses from the average viewer even if to the system in question these could be two coexisting alters. But the latter is more shock inducing. On a reactionary algorithm that's what becomes popular and so other people follow suit, resulting in media introjects becoming more talked about, and eventually becoming the norm. Subsequently it also becomes a whole lot easier for people to target, creating a discourse feedback loop.

(i.e it's easier to fakeclaim fictives/make discourse around them)

Tumblr a) has an older userbase, b) is notorious for having no algorithm, c) doesn't have a character limit so discourse can be discussions instead of statements and d) isn't considered profitable/popular and I think that's why it's exempt from like, 90% of this

Remember when this post was about factives? How did we get here.

I think the general view of CDDs stems from the content portraying systems. It's like the inverse of "everyone with did is a murderer." The old (pre-2010s) perception/blanket statement to the general public was this, even if jokingly. Now it gets seen as the roleplaying disorder because of the sheer volume of content that's about having fictives and sources and source calls without enough understanding of the full picture.

(The murderer one's still there too tbh now there's just a second stereotype)

No one should be forced to talk about whether or not they endured something so traumatic it permanently changed their brain structure. I don't think everyone necessarily should, either. And I don't think just because someone never shows the negative sides of a disorder doesn't mean they don't have it. This isn't anyone's fault just a product of how to get views quick. The takeaway shouldn't be that media introjects are bad for the community at large. I don't believe that at all (still wanna get to the bottom of the rise of introject heavy systems, but that's for another post). This is just a general issue I have with turning every aspect of life into something consumable. When I say marketable/content I don't mean the person filming is trying to sell anything it's more like the persona presented online type of thing.

I know it probably only feels tangentially related but it's related enough for me to talk about. I don't know if there's anything here that can really be solved but at least to me it feels like a big part of the issue

[fuckedupwizard]

putting my response under a cut bc it got long sorry

hi sorry for a somewhat late response and for jumping on this post in the first place! however i'll admit that i'm not very familiar with sv tumblr and i've never been to "danmei-confessions" so i have no idea what the sj fans on here are like, but i had a kneejerk reaction to this bc as someone in the 'twitter sj stan' circle i really dislike blanket statements about what sj stans are like and the assumption that we all excuse his bad behaviours or whatever? my personal experience has been the opposite - myself and every other sj stan i know (imo, the vast majority) are well aware that he Did Child Abuse but we're kind of tired of feeling like we have to preempt posts about him with some kind of "disclaimer i know about the child abuse and that it was bad" in order to justify liking this fictional man?

like my experience with other sj stans is generally that we're all chill people who want to vibe and don't bother the other corners of the fandom even if we're not big into the main ship - like i have a lot of bingqiu fan mutuals even though the book is just like. The Qijiu Novel to me at this point. however me and my mutuals have been subjected to

a) his tag being filled up with garbage/general character hate/discourse along the lines of "he's irredeemably evil (but binghe isn't)". which... i know nobody "owns" the shen jiu tag but it's still kind of unpleasant to see and happens WAY more with him than any other sv character,

b) our posts being replied to or qrt'd with something along the lines of "why do people like him, he's a child abuser" and "[x character] would NEVER like shen jiu, no one gaf about him" on ship posts, and this weird constant comparison between him and shen yuan? i remember one person literally saying they were bitter that some people like shen jiu more bc shen yuan has "all his interesting qualities" without the child abuse as if they're not drastically different people, and made it hard for me to like shen yuan until i literally took a break from twitter and went back and reread the novel to familiarise myself with him and not just associate him with being harassed online by fans (i guess kind of ironic). there was also a sj server that i wasn't in but someone joined just to send lots of gore pics?

c) just general assumptions made about us and what we believe and how we view child abuse and shen jiu. like, because i consider myself to have a nuanced view on shen jiu and believe that while he was a bad person it was not an "inherent quality" in him (i don't believe in inherent badness anyway lol) and that he deserved better (i don't mean from mxtx, i mean when we talk about these characters as if they're real people) while still not being justified in his abuse of binghe, i can't vibe with much of wider fandom bc it's like. unless i write him off as "guy who sucked and was 100% happy about sucking" when his character is way more nuanced than that, i'm woobifying him or something.

d) the assumption that we're child abuse apologists while many of these same people engage in abuse apologism themselves? i've seen it argued that bc sj was "rotten/manipulative" as a child beggar and later grows up to be an abuser he deserves no sympathy even as an abused child, that his own abuse wasn't that bad, and there's a lot of weird denial of qiu jianluo's predatory nature towards him (for the record i don't think sj was raped but i think he was sexually abused in that qjl was getting off on his treatment and sj knew it) which i don't think would be handwaved away if it was binghe or shen yuan receiving said treatment. i've also seen it said that sj fans want to believe he was sexually abused bc that makes him more of a victim than binghe, something i have never heard a single sj fan say in my whole life and definitely don't believe myself (i don't think child abuse cases should be compared like that).

anyway sorry for writing you an essay i just felt so tired as a SJ stan who just wants to vibe seeing another post about how we all excuse his crimes and think he was an innocent baby since i've seen this stuff lead to real harassment of SJ fans who at the end of the day are real people.

It's so funny how SJ stans are like "nonono you don't get it actually LBH was in love with SJ no wait LBH also deserved the lifelong childhood trauma. SJ sensed the evil SJ didn't KNOW the manual was fake—".

And SY stans are like "I need this man PREGNANT by YESTERDAY outta my way Luo Bingay I'm about to fuck your wife through the fourth wall go sit inside the cuckcage."

Diametrically opposite priorities

[renthony]

May i ask what types of things were different that you found in intersex vs trans spaces?

I say all the following with the caveat that this has been my personal experience. I don't intend to make "everything is always like this in every trans and/or intersex space" blanket statements. There are perfectly lovely trans spaces, there are intersex spaces with a long way to go. It's not black-and-white. It's complex, and I'm only one person with one person's lived experience.

That said:

The biggest general difference I've experienced between trans spaces and intersex spaces is the fixation on birth assignment.

Trans spaces get a very frustrating laser-focus on "AMAB vs AFAB," even toward nonbinary people, and there's a big trend toward ranking the different "kinds" of transphobia. There's been a lot of discussion around tumblr lately on the topic, but I haven't seen very many people point out that it is extremely, aggressively, inherently intersexist.

There is an entire category of discourse circulating tumblr that seems to boil down to "one sex is more oppressed than the other sex, and we're going to argue endlessly about which one it is. Also there are only two Real Sexes and intersex people are actually part of whatever sex they Look Most Like. No, I don't know what the phallometer is."

Meanwhile, my experience in intersex spaces has been much more, "we really don't care about your AGAB, because it was incorrect and doesn't have any inherent bearing on your biology or lived experiences in the slightest." Far, far fewer assumptions get made about my anatomy in intersex spaces, and I've never felt like I'm being passively ranked according my (assumed) AGAB, unlike in plenty of trans spaces where my AGAB gets treated like it should be on my nametag right beside my pronouns.

I've also seen a major difference in the way dysphoria gets discussed. Any sort of "born in the wrong body" narrative is incredibly alienating to me, because I wasn't born in the wrong body, I was just born in my body. Obviously that narrative is alienating to a lot of trans people as well, but it feels doubly alienating as an intersex person in a way I struggle to articulate.

In general, any sort of "transfemmes experience this sort of body stuff, transmascs experience that sort of body stuff" is alienating. I have a mix of traits and experiences that don't match either binary sex, but people try to use "biology" to cram you into a binary even in trans spaces.

If I ever speak up and talk about ways I relate to transfemme people, suddenly it turns into "shut up, theyfab," and if I talk about ways I relate to transmasc people, I start getting misgendered and crammed into the "transmasc" label against my will. I'm not transmasc or transfemme; I'm intersex and nonbinary, and my AGAB tells you absolutely nothing about my anatomy.

I've had trans guys taking testosterone give me "advice" because they assume I'm on HRT when I'm not. I've had trans women do the exact same thing. Even in trans spaces, it is a persistent problem that people hyper-analyze my body to figure out which binary box to cram it into. This happens even in nonbinary spaces, because "AFAB nonbinary" and "AMAB nonbinary" have been set up as yet another rigid binary, even by other nonbinary people.

In trans spaces, I have the experience of other trans people trying to guess my AGAB based on things like my facial hair or my shoulders or my hips or my feet or my neck width or any of the other tiny minuscule attributes that, to be perfectly honest, are the same things that terfs like to point out when they climb into my comments to call me slurs.

(Notably it seems to be only other white trans people doing this. I have never had a trans PoC do this to me as far as I can recall. So it's worth noting how much of this is specifically grounded in white Eurocentric ideas of gender.)

Basically, trans spaces have a real problem in the way they weaponize AGAB discourse. Intersex spaces, less so. I won't say it never happens, it just seems way less common in my experience.

Though BOY HOWDY is there some rancid discourse in intersex spaces over "what counts" as intersex. But that's another post entirely, and a topic I ain't touchin' with a ten-foot pole.

[transfaguette]

I specifically hate the "pro ship vs anti ship" stuff because they are so clearly not fighting in the same argument.

People who say they're pro ship are like: people should be allowed to enjoy whatever fiction they want and small writers on ao3 shouldn't be harassed over their content. Purity culture is a big problem.

And then the people who say they're anti ship are saying: pedophilia is bad and major companies and content producers painting toxicity and harmful relationships in a good light or romanticising things like that should stop.

And it's confusing because, yes. To all of it. Those aren't mutually exclusive.

The term "fiction affects/doesn't affect reality" is much too black and white. Each 'side' is meaning different things when they say it, in different discussions all together.

"Mainstream media shouldn't promote unhealthy things and depict them as okay" is a good statement

Depiction isn't always condoning the actions" is also a good statement"

"It is not anyone's business but your own about what you enjoy reading or writing, and people should not be harassed over any conventially non-pure content they make/consume" IS ALSO A GOOD STATEMENT.

A lot of this discourse surrounding these issues becomes divided before it even begins because people assume the other 'group' believes something that is too much of a blanket statement to cover every factor in the situation. Most in these circles seem to have preconceived notions on how bad faith people who don't fully agree with them are being.

So nobody has a proper discussion on these (very interesting and debatable) topics because they are too busy accusing the others of something they associate with being "pro ship" or "anti ship" that probably isn't true at all for the majority of people

!! yep. And there are also a lot of different stances, both more and less extreme, outside of those two main ones, which just makes the label essentially "whatever you want to be angry at" because I'm sure you could find One Guy who believes the things you want to be angry about. The labels are more than worthless. Just say what you actually mean.

and god, the "fiction does/doesn't effect reality" debate is mind-numbing.

[popshoveitqueen]

A Look at the Queer Community: Allies and Straight Folks

       When it comes to these articles, not every topic is going to have enough content to fill an entire post, so today I’m going to cover two somewhat similar topics at the same time, those being why allies are important, but not part of the LGBTQIA+ community, and why it’s not okay for queer folks to say that straight people are not part of the community in a blanket statement. So, to start off...

Why Allies Are Important, But Not Part of the Community

          When it comes to the LGBTQIA+ community, a lot of the letters are pretty common knowledge - Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Queer, and Intersex - but then comes A. It should stand for Asexual and Aromantic, and yet I’ve seen discourse involving people claiming that it actually stands for “Ally”, to say that people who support the community are also a part of it, and this simply isn’t true. Now I know there may be people who hear that and get offended, but it’s not meant to be mean or discrediting in any way. Allies are infinitely important, and I doubt the community would be where it is now if there weren’t allies helping us queer folk along the way. Despite that, however, there are two big reasons I have as to why a non-queer ally is not part of the community.

Safety and Acceptance

       A big reason for the queer community to exist is to recognize a group of people who have been regularly treated poorly or as lesser then others for simply living their truth, and allies just don’t fall into this category. The chances of someone getting kicked out of their home for being gay are significantly higher than someone getting kicked out of their home for supporting gay people. Again, that’s not to downplay the support, the fact of the matter just is that being queer and being an ally are entirely different experiences. When you’re queer, you’re queer, you can’t change that, but if an ally would be in danger for supporting the community, they could just choose to stop. 

Asexuality and Aromanticism

       As I said, the A is supposed to stand for Asexual and Aromantic, so when people claim instead that it stands for ally, they’re removing the representation of the ace and aro spectrums from the acronym. While there are plenty of times where it’s shortened to LGBTQ+, and the + could easily encompass both of these spectrums, it’s still giving priority to people who shouldn’t be a part of the community in the first place. We live in a world which pushes romance and relationships to everybody, so it’s really important to not let these two spectrums be swept under the rug and ignored. 

       Really, the reason I don’t have all that much to say about this issue is that it’s relatively simple in nature, but it’s still something that has to be touched on. To all the allies reading this, I want to genuinely thank you for being supportive, and I hope you can understand that there’s no harm meant by saying you aren’t in the community. It’s just important to recognize that the queer community is just that - queer. And, on that subject, let’s move onto...

“Straight people aren’t in the community!”

       ...is something I would never say, as it simply isn’t true. However, just because I know it isn’t true doesn’t mean I haven’t been somewhat problematic with the issue in the past. For a long time, I referred to the queer community simply as ‘the gay community’, and the fact of the matter is, that’s a somewhat harmful way of phrasing it. Being not straight isn’t and will never be a requirement to be queer, but sometimes it does feel like that might be the impression a lot of people have. This could come from issues with straight people in the past, or maybe even from things like the term ‘gay-straight alliance’ which is used in schools.

         If you’re still not entirely sure how straight people can be queer, let me run you through a few examples. For starters, people under the trans and asexual umbrellas can both be straight, as those parts of their identity have no effect on their sexuality. Also, people who have fluid or otherwise fluctuating sexualities may have times where their attraction is akin to straight. I’m sure I’m probably not covering everybody with those examples yet that’s already plenty of people with the potential to be straight and still in the community, so really, there’s no need to be so hostile towards the idea of straight people who are queer, as they’re just another part of the community. It would be like claiming that every person whose cisgender or allosexual couldn’t be part of the community, which I’m sure probably sounds ridiculous, but the fact of the matter is that this is the exact same reaction that saying straight people aren’t in the community should spark. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again - we need to stand together, not divided, and be a queer community.

         And just for some finishing thoughts, I’d just like to mention that there’s nothing wrong with being straight by any means. Now I know to certain people that might sound like a weird take to add in, but sometimes I see discourse involving queer folks being mad at people simply for being straight, so I’d just like to share my take. Sure, there are problematic straight people who may be against the community, but like... there’s problematic people of all types, that’s just how people are, unfortunately. All too often, it feels like a lot of people will default to not having respect for an entire group instead of just the people in that group causing trouble, and this is incredibly problematic. The world we live in is far from two-dimensional, so it’s simply unfair to judge an entire group based on only one side of a much, much bigger picture.

Hey, So… Why Did You Make This?

  I’ll gladly answer that question! It’s incredibly important to get queer experiences straight from the mouths of people in the community out there, because that’s one of the best ways to get educated on or educate others about LGBTQ+ matters. I know my parents looked at plenty of media about trans people in an effort to understand what I was going through and how they could help me when I came out, so without information like that available it might be just that much harder for people to get through certain challenges. That’s why I want to do this, because I know looking at blogs by trans women in the early days of my transition really helped me figure certain things out, so maybe, just, maybe, I could end up helping fellow queer people who might need a bit of help on their own journey.

   But no matter who you are, if you made it to the end of this, I’d like to genuinely thank you for reading. I hope you got something out of it!

[phoenix-is-the-hottest-thing]

it’s not a matter of being old, I just don’t like hearing anti rhetoric parroted— I’d rather shut that down right away. It’s always “why not use college students if you’re going to sexualize them” and never “what age do a lot of people start becoming more aware of their sexuality again?”

I personally don’t give a fuck (and I’m not mad at you just annoyed about age discourse in general) but allow me to play devil’s advocate for a second.

Sexualizing youth at roughly the age a lot of people start exploring sexuality isn’t weird to me. It’s, like… representing a particular experience a lot of folks have.

It’s not something I care about, because high school kinda sucked for me and I don’t have all that many fond memories, but sure I do find those struggles relatable, or at least understandable. I’ve been reading a manga where a bunch of baby lesbians start dealing with having romantic feelings, or their crush kissing someone else, it’s something that you’d get over more quickly in college because you already have the experience and development to deal with it.

This development is something people like writing about! They’ll pull from their experiences, or other people’s, and it’s so common/popular that it practically became its own genre, them being minors isn’t even a bleep on the radar.

I mean come on it’s almost all coming of age stories! What age do you come of age again???

16~17 is when people go through that kinda character development, they get super hormonal/particularly horny or their peers do, or they start having new anxieties about their future post graduation, etc.

16~17 is the toughest age to be and probably sees just about the hardest changes to handle. So that’s when most coming of ages stories happen. It’s perfect as a setting for a story about maturing.

I also assume it is more relatable to everyone considering going to college isn’t a given, nor does it have a true standard for the experience— there are manga drawing schools now, but I don’t think every mangaka went to college to write their stories.

Finally, you have to think about the target audience. Coming of age manga is often written FOR TEENAGERS, just like YA novels. Why wouldn’t you write about teenagers going through teenager bullshit when you’re talking to teenagers going through it?

I’m an adult now, to pick the manga I mentioned earlier back up— my view of them has changed because I’m no longer the primary audience for shoujo/shonen type stuff. Back when I was younger I would have identified directly with their struggles. Now I relate because I see my past self, or it feels like watching little siblings or younger friends going through struggles I know seem sooo big now, but they’ll be okay. It’s not about going wow so hot they are kissing. It’s playing on my nostalgia. I was once 16 too!

A lot of the time I’ll read josei or seinen now, much more often than I used to, and guess the fuck what I found one set in college last week.

So tldr, why high school? Target audience and memories of growth, primarily. Why is it sexualized? Because that’s the age you start discovering sexuality, and it’s very charged for both teens and adults in that context.

Are there also standard tropes like sexy loli stuff, yeah, manga is kind of a weird genre with that, but it probably comes down to more social context which I’m not going to try and get into— imo it’s literally just a symptom of saying the quiet part out loud, young girls are extremely sexualized in the west too.

Anyway rant over. Don’t like don’t read don’t come into my inbox throwing around blanket statements about how weird or suspicious a super common trope with years and years of context and thousands of works with various degrees of questionable content is.

Instead of “isn’t it kind of weird (weird means ew, I am distancing myself from this gross concept I’m being judgmental about), why do they even do this thing where there’s an obvious solution to this thing I personally perceive as a problem”, try to think about it or do research.

Coming from a place of compassion and understanding is more interesting! People have good or at least understandable reasons for what they do 90% of the time.

isnt seele 16?

I was about to answer “no” and leave it at that but I decided to battle misinformation and make myself clear

If you’re making a high school AU, then sure Seele would logically be a teenager. Just like if she’s in a, say, florist and tattoo artist AU, as a working adult, she would not be 16.

If you’re talking about canon, not only is she old enough to drive a motorcycle, she is a 2000 kid and it’s currently happening somewhere in 2018, definitely not 16.

So no, in the man-eating mermaid AU, be reassured she is definitely not 16. Man-eating mermaid Seele gives no indication that she is a minor, nor is she meant to read as a minor. She’s definitely munched on humans though.

(If it had been the case I would’ve probably mentioned it or tagged it Underage. I try to be thorough.)

[whitetrashjj]

most people that don’t like kie don’t like her because she

1. gets mad at JJ when he calls her out for being rich

2. prioritizes john b constantly because whatever feelings she has towards him gave her tunnel vision

3. tried to guilt-trip pope into missing his scholarship interview despite the fact that, like he said, she wasn’t there for any of them when big john went missing

4. talks about the gold, pope’s scholarship, and things that happen to the boys because of them living in the cut as if it’s okay to just toss them aside when it’s only okay to do that for her- seeing as she doesn’t need the money, and she doesn’t need a scholarship. the only thing that makes her a pogue is that she decided to hang out with them, which is fine but she can’t act like she goes through what people on the cut do seeing as she doesn’t actually live there or go to their school. these things are only expendable for her.

5. she tried to fight pope on the boat because he rightfully called her out on her “moral high ground bullshit”

6. she gives off performative activist. she’ll talk about saving the turtles but when jj is clearly hysterical or something with his buying a hot tub using his share, she says he could have “literally given it to any charity” as if he isn’t quite literally the charity… even without seeing the bruises it’s clear that jj is in an unstable environment with someone who doesn’t care about him and can’t support him financially.

7.she doesn’t sympathize with jj until after the jj/pope/kie hot tub group hug when she sees his bruises. she just ignores whatever he says when he mentions her financial privilege and insults him in a non-friendly way. (he insults her too obviously, but since the show never goes in depth to discuss kie’s struggles as a biracial girl or pope’s struggles as a black boy, it’s not something that jj can randomly sympathize with, seeing as it’s never brought to light. if it was brought up and jj were to react like she’s being annoying for pointing it out or pointing it out to spite him, i would have major problems with jj because acknowledging whatever privilege you have is important, especially when you’re with people that don’t have that privilege/when you’re someone whose character is supposed to be the activist type. and i’m not equating racial privilege to financial privilege, i’m just mentioning it because classism is pretty much the basis of the entire show and its plot.)

anyway… this is the reason i’ve seen most jjpopes dislike kie. mentioning the “kiara sucks” anon as if that is a blanket statement of all jjpopes is strange. we aren’t some raging misogynists out to get her, but you saying that pope is a very flawed character with no examples to back it up but also getting irritated when someone says kiara sucks with no examples to back it up is ridiculous. these are examples. since this is in response to your response to that ask, i’ll also add that while your experiences as a queer person are valid, they aren’t universal (“Any queer person knows that you can’t be as forthcoming and open about our affections as straight people are.”)

i get where you’re coming from with saying a regular character might not be outward about his feelings, but jj is not a regular character. jj is a nothing-to-lose kind of character, so your reasoning for why those many displays of affection throughout the show weren’t intended to be romantic just doesn’t really add up? of course he values pope’s friendship and wouldn’t want to risk it, but it’s also evident that he’s a very good liar and could easily say he was joking or wasn’t trying to seem like any of his actions were romantic, something you can also probably understand/have experienced as a queer person. your very statement that jj is someone who flirts with anyone is counterproductive to the statement that that means he doesn’t have feelings for pope. he flirts with every girl, but he can only form a lasting bond while also doing things you’d normally do with a crush, with pope. a lot of jjpopes including myself think he’s gay, and comphet/trying to prove to yourself that you’re straight by engaging in meaningless hookups (like jj) is reason for that headcanon. i get what you’re saying for other characters, but there’s no indication of jj not having that same nothing-to-lose attitude when it comes to people he has romantic feelings for, so there would be no reason for the pull-back or hesitation that you mentioned. and since he knows pope and his connection (whether it be platonic or romantic to both of them) is so strong, he probably assumes nothing could break that bond/dynamic either way.

also no one called you anti-black or implied that you were for saying pope is a flawed character, but it would be surprising to see one that isn’t rooted in that because all of them in the past have been- this fandom is wildly colorist and homophobic (another reason representation like jjpope is so important) and it’s extremely hard to find someone that doesn’t like pope without an explanation for their dislike that isn’t rooted in racism. that’s just common sense, though.

You know, I've been looking at this ask for a long time just wondering if it's worth my time to address all of this - like I didn't realise one could send asks this big. But I'm bored and got a beer in me so fuck it let's go.

So first let's talk about the reasons you hate Kie. I'm gonna admit that I to think she is flawed, like every other obx character, she is also a victim to bad writing and under developed. But also I just do not understand how people can hate her or insists that she is a bad person, don't get me wrong sometimes you just don't vibe with a character and there is nothing wrong with that but hating them and tearing them down is a very different thing.

Now I've said this before but let me reiterate. Not liking a character or ship or preferring one over the other does not automatically make you racist, misogynistic or homophobic. But I do think it is important to take a step back and assess our motivation and perhaps internalised biases. Sometimes you will find that you reasoning is without much substance and realise that you have some things to work on, sometimes even though mentally you don't have the conscious block there is something internalised about that - I know I have been subject to that. This doesn't make you a bad person, and you don't have to force yourself to like it or anything, but just be aware and sometimes it's okay to just remove yourself for the conversation because the people who do like it aren't supporting something that is morally corrupt and it doesn't have to be the subject of discourse. People can like different stuff.

So:

1. Did you mean pulls faces when JJ calls her rich? Cause that's what she does, gets a little annoyed, pulls a face but doesn't say anything because she know he's got a point. I'm very confused about you definition of angry and perhaps be careful about perpetuating the 'angry black woman' stereotype.

Also, I think it's important to note that clearly the kooks vs pogues divide has pretty much abolished the middle class, and you are either lower class or 'rich'. The Carrera's very clearly still struggle with money and are not on the same level of kooks as the Cameron's. So yeah, I think she's justified to roll her eyes at JJ saying she's rich as fuck and doesn't need money.

2. Prioritizes John B because his dad's gone missing, he's been abandoned by his guardian, is being threatened with being taken away from his home and everything he knows and is in general spiralling? Yeah. What a fucking monster. Also, I find it hard to find a justification for Kie having canon romantic feelings from John B that isn't just born from heteronormativity - her caring about him and then getting kissed by him does not equal a love match.

3. It wasn't about missing the interview - which wasn't until the next fucking day - it was about not giving up looking for their friend who was in a really bad way. Like - you cannot say that getting a scholarship when you are 16 is more important that John B's actual life being at stake ?

The fact that she wasn't there when John B went missing wasn't relevant? Like I've talked about why I hate Pope in this scene. But like, Pope is saying 'um you can't call me out on being a bad friend now cause you were a bad friend then'. That's the point, Kie caring so much about John B is rooted in guilt cause she wasn't there, and now she's trying to be there and support him, to prove that she's a better friend now. That's she's different, because she is.

4. I would love some specific examples of her brushing this stuff off like it means nothing. Other than the boat scene which once again, justified. And once again, Kie isn't destitute at all and no she doesn't fully understand the struggles of the boys or the cut but her family is not rolling in it and spending weekends on Yachts. Like this point is such a bloody reach.

5. I don't love that she got physical with him either. But she didn't do that because she got called out. She got upset because Pope was the one person she confided in about that happened during her kook year, about how bad it was, about the fact that she was suicidal and Sarah saved her and that's why she was so drawn to that, not because she wanted to be a kook, and Pope just throws that back in her face because he's jealous that Kie cares more about John B's problems than his.

6. Well this is just a misrepresentation of what happened. She said give it to any charity because in that moment it seemed like without a reason JJ just blew that money on stupid shit. Pope thought the same thing that's why he yells at him for not using it for restitution. In that moment he just seems like he is being drunk and irresponsible, because they didn't think he would go back to Luke, Pope literally says that he wouldn't. And then note how when they see the bruises they know what happened and the tone instantly changes cause they realise what happened. And that he did try to do the right thing and got flogged because of it. And she is right in there to comfort him and reassure him. So like... yeah.

7. Please give me example for this. I don't see Kie insulting him that isn't a justified call out or playful banter that is returned and part of their push and shove dynamic. You know... just being friends.

The only times we see Kie react to JJ's home life she is concerned and sympathetic. She's the only one who's worried about JJ going home when he storms off and is instantly there to comfort him when she knows he's had interaction with Luke. I really don't know where you are getting this from.

I don't use it as a blanket statement, I know not to group shippers in as one, I know there are jiara shippers that I do not see eye to eye with for a second. The reason I bring up the 'kiara sucks' thing is because of the context it was used. We weren't talking about Kie, it wasn't relevant, it had no reason to be there or anything to back it up. It was random bitching and as you say fandom is a very racist place so yeah, it seemed like racism to me. Like you realise you are calling me ridiculous for being annoyed that someone just came to me and said Kie sucks without reason, and then this ask goes onto be annoyed that I have some issues with Pope and that more than likely racist for thinking it because you've elected to ignore my massive post outlining my stance on this.

My experiences as a queer person are not universal, no. But I do know they are very common. I'm so thankful that there are people out there who don't experience this and I hope that in the future it will be the norm. But realistically, with what we know about JJ, I think it is more than likely that would be his experience.

Look if you headcanon him as gay say the things with girls is comphet, then that's your view and I won't fight you on it. But remember that that is a headcanon. And what I have been talking about is were they intentionally setting up jjpope and are those actions indicative of romantic attraction, which if they we're they would have made a point to frame it as comp het, which they didn't, they might in the future but for now - they aren't. In terms of being a good liar, I just- like gay panic is a very strong thing. There young girls who tell everyone they don't like hugs because they actually really liked the hugs and feel like people will know that they are gay if they hug their friend, a hug. I can't see 'I'm a good liar' being enough to overcome those sorts of feelings.

The thing is while JJ has a nothing to lose attitude when it comes to his life and future the same doesn't apply to his relationships, because the Pogues are his thing to lose, his only family, the one good thing. I can't see him just saying fuck it I could risk losing Pope. So I can't agree with you there.

First of all, I was called anti-black for not liking Pope, despite the fact that I don't hate him, and just had valid reasons for thinking he is flawed, not the devil incarnate. Two, I am well aware that this fandom is racist, like all fucking fandoms, and have talked about it. And I think that fact that I don't hate Pope and laid out very clearly the reasons I don't think he's some perfect angel that does no wrong kinda shows that I'm not just random bitching because he's black. Also - I'm a fucking Kie stan. I have to deal with people hating on Kie for the same reasons they love Sarah - it's very obvious to see people motivations there.

And you are right. An interracial mlm ship would be great representation. So would an interracial ship between the hot guy that everyone loves with the black girl - because doesn't he always end up with the white self insert? But reminder that ships don't automatically have superiority because they have 'better' representation and certainly does not represent a shipper 'wokeness'. Personally I think a platonic relationship between two men that are as close and physically affectionate as JJ and Pope - especially when one is so traditionally masculine as JJ, especially if one or both of them could be queer - would be great representation for young boys struggling with toxic masculinity.

So yeah, I think your reasons for hating Kie don't have much basis in canon. I do not give if you like her or not but.. hating her and trying to prove that people shouldn't like her, that she's not good enough for JJ and coming into my ask and putting her down for no reason, still does not sit right with me.

[voxofthevoid]

Taking It Up The Ass Isn’t Character Growth - A Rant

So, in response to an ask a while back, I said I had a rant brewing on fandom and sex positions, and well, a lot of you wanted to see it, so here you go. You literally asked for it.

Disclaimer: This is going to talk a lot about top/bottom roles in slash fic and fandom attitude towards them and is heavily filtered through the lens of my own tastes and experiences with fandom. I’d also like to be upfront that I am 100% in favor of people writing whatever fictional content they want, and it’s not what fandom does with characters that bothers me but rather how that translates into attitudes towards real, live people. Also, this is the essay version of a slow burn AU because I regurgitate my entire fandom history before getting to the point. Beware.

I discovered fan-fiction around a decade ago, had no clue what the hell it was, got hooked and dived deeper. I started participating in fandom circa 2013, and I was fairly young and also completely inexperienced both sexually and romantically. The fandom in question was Hannibal and my ship of choice was Hannibal/Will. It was/is a very chill fandom in general, but we had our drama. And chief among the contentious topics was—you guessed it—the top/bottom debate. I can’t actually remember any other topic that was discussed and argued for so ardently in that fandom, at least in those days. Even after I drifted away, I came across a few posts on the matter.

Generally, you had two camps—people who supported strict roles and those who were in favor of switching*. And because we’re a society plagued by illogical assumptions, the strict role camp mostly had people who thought Mr. Big Bad Cannibal in the Fancy Suits wouldn’t take it up the ass because he’s older, more experienced, more mentally stable, and of course, more ‘dominant’ in personality. Yes, that sentence is chock full of problematic shit. I am aware. Lots of people were aware and argued strongly against attributing top/bottom roles to personality. I don’t remember anyone arguing as enthusiastically for Top Will, but those voices were also there. But the general idea was that assigning strict top/bottom roles to a male/male couple was casting them in a heterosexual mold and thus, the progressive option was to make them switch. Strict roles also garnered comparisons to “yaoi” and uke/seme stereotypes, which was of course bad and fetishizing and we, the Western media fans, of course had to do better. Stealth racism is fun to untangle.

Anyway, I lapped up the woke juice. Partly because I was a baby queer from Buttfuck Nowhere, Asia, who had zero exposure to LGBT+ communities and what queer folks did with each other. Partly because it was the stance taken by most of my favorite writers so it seemed like a good position to emulate.

Emulate it I did. Most discussions I had about this happened in private with the handful of close friends I had in fandom. Where it really showed was in my writing. I made sure to write switching—maybe not in every fic, but then I alternated between fics. Thing is though, I did have a preference. I liked Top Will. I created and consumed a ton of Top Hannibal, and sometimes it was okay, sometimes it was not, but I couldn’t pinpoint why it made me uncomfortable. Back then, I thought I was a cis questioning/bi girl and once again, the impression I got was that not being MLM, having a preference was automatic fetishization. So I tried my best to justify my preferences, to my friends at least. I think what I said was that fandom was skewed towards Top Hannibal, and I liked the opposite because I’m a contrary fuck. Which I am, to be fair, but this was just me desperately trying to figure shit out without being offensive.

That’s the line I touted all the way until 2018, which was when I fucked off to grad school in A City, finally freed of Buttfuck Nowhere and able to actually date. At this point, I was settled in my sexuality (girls only) and questioning my gender (non-binary or trans guy). I had also tentatively figured out during undergrad that I’m an exclusive top and a Dom. Actual attempts at dating cemented that, yes, those are my preferences, about as flexible as a steel rod. Cue motherfucking epiphany over my fanfic tastes.

And see, over these years, I was engaging intermittently with fandom. I dutifully wrote switch couples. I also continued to have rigid tastes and continued to explain it away as being a contrary fuck—to be fair, until Steve/Bucky, my preference did seem to be the opposite of the larger fandom preference. But correlation, as we know, isn’t causation. Until Steve/Bucky, I continued to write versatile couples because I honestly didn’t have the guts to just say I liked it just one way. I do now but even then, I feel compelled to add that it’s because I want to see my own taste reflected in fic, so I write/read the character I relate to as a top, it's not that deep etc. Would I be as forthright if I didn’t have that reason? Would I have such strict preferences in fic if I didn’t have strict preferences IRL? The latter’s a mystery, but the former isn’t—I wouldn’t be because fandom is still entrenched in the same ideas that got me to this point to begin with.

In every fandom I’ve been in, I’ve seen some version of this debate go around. Sometimes, it’s one party saying “why would you write Character X as a bottom, he’s so Reason A” and a reblog chain that insults the OP and/or extols the virtues of switching. Sometimes, it’s a general-ish message that says they don’t understand why people have strict preferences when we all know real gay couples switch. Sometimes, it’s blanket statements that accuse anyone with preferences of fetishizing. Sometimes, it’s the same reasoning that gets you “Character Y is a top because of Reason B” transposed on versatile couples except this takes the form of “they switch because they’re equals.”

Ya’ll, I’m fucking tired.

I have long since lost count of the number of stories I’ve seen where an exclusive top learning bottom and liking it is character growth. Where a character who prefers to bottom taking a turn on top is empowering.

Isolated, these are fine. But I’ve seen enough of such stories that it’s distinctly discomfiting and a major squick. Sometimes a trigger, if I'm too immersed in the story. I’m not going to try and burn an author at the stake because they pissed me off. I am just going to close that window and quietly handle my shit. People can write whatever they want. But this one theme hits too close to home, as you can see from this 1.6k rant.

My friend (also my ex-girlfriend) and I had an all-out bitching session about this the other day. Both of us are kinky fuckers who have rigid, complementary roles we prefer and we have both had our grueling days of struggling to reconcile our sexual tastes with our ideologies precisely because of how these things are frowned upon in conservative and progressive circles. Seeing that in fandom, of all places, is both insulting and exhausting. Topping and bottoming aren’t personality traits. Neither is D/s. It’s sexual preference and power play. It really does not have to be that deep. I am not exorcising childhood trauma using the bodies of women. My partners, former and current, have not been brainwashed by the patriarchy. We will not become better, more complete individuals once I magically stop being a stone top and my partners embrace the joys of a strap-on.

I have, with my own two eyes, seen someone say that in a really committed relationship, of course the couple will switch.

Bullshit.

It’s transparent bullshit. This does not get attributed to cisgender M/F couples. Even when the automatic assumptions of woman = bottom and man = top get addressed, switching isn't presented as the default. No one’s saying “oh, if you really love your husband, you’ll peg him”. I do know butch/femme sapphic couples get their own share of shit. Because it’s all heteronormativity, right? Can’t have any other reason for top/bottom roles.

You have two extremes with “so who’s the woman” on one end and “it’s woke only if they switch” on the other, and as far as I’m concerned, they’re equally damaging. There shouldn’t be a pressure, however subtle, to conform your taste in fiction to some arbitrary idea of progressiveness. People are going to like whatever they want anyway; all this does is create an atmosphere where those likes can’t always be freely expressed without a lot of mental gymnastics. We’re seeing so many versions of this in the pushback against so-called problematic content, but smaller, subtler versions exist too.

Fictional characters aren’t real. They can be whatever you want them to be. And yes, other people will often want them to be the exact opposite of your ideas, but that’s just how things work. Meanwhile, the people behind these usernames? They’re real. No one should be throwing real people under the bus to ‘protect’ characters that don’t exist. Hannibal Lecter doesn’t care whether he gets fucked or dismembered in Author B’s fanfiction, but the discourse that surrounds the dick up his ass? That does affect flesh and blood people.

I am not claiming that this is the only attitude in fandom. Middlegrounds do exist. Plenty of people abide by fic and let fic and there are folks who pipe up to say not every RL queer couple switches. But it’s often the extremes that reach most people. That was certainly my experience, and I’m not the only one.

I don’t really know how to end this post. It is 100% a rant and one that’s been building up for a while. Bottom line is that people’s sexual behavior varies wildly and whenever you attack sexual tastes in fanfic by saying it’s unrealistic - or worse because let’s be real, that’s a very tame word choice - please remember that there’s likely someone out there who practices it.

* I’m using switch and versatile synonymously in this post. It’s mostly concerned with top/bottom debates. A lot of what I’m saying is also echoed in portrayals of and discussions surrounding D/s dynamics, but I’m not addressing that as much for now.  

[night-filled-mountain]

People on my dash keep mentioning “shipping discourse.” If it’s happening, I’m pretty much oblivious to it (probably because I don’t go in the tags, and I have the “discourse” and “cr discourse” tags blocked). But its existence, as a phenomenon, is so fundamentally weird to me, and I think it might be because I approach shipping in a weird way?

I never think about/daydream about/read fic about scenarios like “What if Caleb and Jester [or Caleb and Nott] [or Caleb and Essek] [or Jester and Beau] [or Beau and Yasha] [...you get the idea] got together? What would that look like? How would it happen? How WILL it happen? I NEED IT TO HAPPEN.”

I just...sit here enjoying what’s already happening.

I love the soft looks Caleb gives Jester, the way he openly appreciates and supports her, the way he recognizes her pain and complexity at times when others don’t, the way he pines in silence because he considers himself fundamentally Unworthy (I am a sucker for that).

I love Beau doing all of those exact same things and feeling the exact same way.

(I also love [love love LOVE] the thought of the two Empire siblings getting drunk together sometime and bonding over their mutual profound hopeless love for Jester Lavorre.)

I love the wistful way Nott has been talking to Caleb lately, the fact that she kissed him in a moment when she thought she was about to change irrevocably in body and soul, the way she visibly struggles between the bonds of home and hearth and the life of adventure that Caleb’s come to represent.

I love Caleb and Essek’s nerdy-wizard interactions, their mutual angst and loneliness over being prodigies and being Chosen and being intellectually ravenous but politically ambivalent. I love the gentle courtesy they show each other. I love that Essek is the teacher Caleb should have had all along, and that his feelings (and actions!) regarding the political landscape may be fundamentally changed by his feelings for this trash wizard and his family.

I love Yasha’s softness toward Jester and her awkward flailing around Beau. I love Fjord and Caduceus currently fucking off from the whole romance scene and exploring their faith like a couple of aro-ace monks (...which is how I see it, but other people see romance there, and that’s valid too!). I love Jester loving every single one of her friends so passionately that I find it impossible to tell if she harbors romantic feelings for any of then, or for all of them, and I genuinely do not care. Because Jester/Laura hasn’t chosen to explore that yet.

I just...love everything that happens with everyone, in the moment that it’s happening. I have no idea what will happen next. I trust that it will probably be awesome. I trust that the players and DM know the characters well enough that it will make total sense, and at least some of my meta will feel super validated. 

And, like...this has always been a point of confusion for me due to my personal quirks as a fan (in my post about my one big crack theory, I think I described myself as ��the soberest, canon-est critter that ever lived” or something), but I guess I just can’t imagine getting so wrapped up in future possibilities, or fanfic, or headcanon, or whatever, that I (an adult human) start feeling anger and bitterness over fictional characters’ possible fictional relationships instead of just enjoying the ride?

I swear that this is absolutely not aimed at any particular person, group, ship, or anything--I have no idea what people are saying in the tags. This is just, like, my one and only blanket statement/manifesto on the entire concept of “shipping drama” and why I can’t quite grasp the fact that it’s a real thing that people take seriously. Because I just...want to watch CR. And write about it. And have a ball doing both. And stop doing so at any point when it stops being fun.

[maverixcollective]

DUAL PURPOSE

David Adjaye and A-Cold-Wall’s Samuel Ross on architecture, fashion, Covid-19, anti-racism, and the future of the creative industries

‘Architecture and fashion move away from each other, and then come really close, and then move away again,’ says Sir David Adjaye, on a video call from Accra. He is in conversation with Samuel Ross, stationed in London. It’s mid-summer and the world is in the grips of the Covid-19 pandemic and anti-racism protests. This is a transformative moment for both industries.

The architect behind the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, Adjaye was recently commissioned to create Brixton’s Cherry Groce Memorial and Abu Dhabi’s Abrahamic Family House. He continues to work on the landmark Ghana National Cathedral, and champion new African architecture and architects.

Ross, who founded A-Cold-Wall* in 2015, is a rising star of the fashion industry. A natural master of cross-disciplinary collaboration, he has partnered with brands as wide-ranging as Nike (to create emergency blankets upcycled from plastic bottles, with aspirations to make them freely available in parks), Apple, Converse, Diesel, Oakley and Dr Martens, as well as recently establishing a grant fund for Black creatives.

Their discussion covered the impact of technology, localised production, the politicisation of architecture and fashion, anti-racism, the effects of pandemic, and the future of creative industries. Right after, they were photographed – Ross in person and Adjaye via video call – by Liz Johnson Artur, who has dedicated her three-decade career to documenting people of African descent.

Adjaye Associates’ design for the Abrahamic Family House on Abu Dhabi’s Saadiyat Island, comprising a mosque, a synagogue and a church.

Collaboration has long been key to Adjaye’s work. Artist Chris Ofili’s Within Reach, the British Pavilion at the 2003 Venice Biennale, designed with Adjaye and engineered by Charles Walker, Arup, featuring a glass sculpture titled Afro Kaleidoscope above the main gallery space.

Wallpaper*: How does the responsibility of creating lasting works – as opposed to ephemeral ideas –influence your designs and process?

DA: There’s a bit of a myth with this idea of permanence, because nothing is really permanent, not even architecture. It all ends up disappearing. Architecture [just] has a larger duration.

SR: It all comes down to having the ability to quantify if a product should exist, which goes back to functionality and use.

W*: As a discipline, architecture can be really slow, whereas fashion feels faster – but that’s not always the case as the after-effects can last a long time.

DA: Fashion seems to be absolutely immediate, but [its] impact might be in the way we look at the bodies of males and females. [Take] for example the work of Yves Saint Laurent: it’s profound, it changes and resonates through generations.

SR: Totally. I kind of look at fashion like a moving slipstream. This idea of [how garments can serve] changes from generation to generation, as times move forwards and as social movements move forwards.

‘I kind of look at fashion like a moving slipstream. This idea of [how garments can serve] changes from generation to generation, as times move forwards and as social movements move forwards.’  — Samuel Ross

W*: How do the materials you use embody the ideas that you want to portray in your work? Does sustainability play into your material choices?

SR: I’ve dabbled with technical and synthetic materials, although I’m moving into more sustainable materials. There is a movement happening within big tech that needs to be integrated into fabrication, which can then define fashion as a whole for the 21st century. Fashion should mean smart materials and patented weaves that are antibacterial, that cling and mould to the body, versus just being about a point of expression.

DA: In the built environment, we spent the 20th century industrialising, making very efficient materials that will get things done fast. With speed came excess and pollution and degradation and destruction. Now we are asking, how do we build responsibly? In architecture, we are talking about microbial issues and creating healthy environments. That’s become much more heightened with Covid-19. We have to look at the things that destroy the planet – pandemics and ecological collapses – and really be responsive. I’m working with communities here [in Accra] and discovering that compressed mud has incredible properties that we totally underestimated. We just assumed that it was primitive, but actually it’s one of the best performing and most abundant materials on the planet.

W*: How much of your work is about educating people in your respective professions, to push your industries forwards?

DA: With all design there is a kind of public role, especially if you’re interested in pushing the limits of your industry. You deliver things to the public, so the public needs to be able to hold you accountable. I taught for about a decade and then I stopped, because I was teaching in elite schools to kids who are already very privileged. Instead, now I mentor and I’m interested in finding emerging voices that are not getting attention, trying to support them or to help them think about their businesses in the early stages.

‘I chose architecture because it was part of a language that I felt was very much under-represented from the position of a person of colour within the global discourse. I felt that I had a lot to say and I wanted to be part of that conversation about how we make the contemporary world.’ — David Adjaye

A look from A-Cold-Wall’s pre-S/S21 collection.

Ross’ Beacon 1, presented at Serpentine Galleries as part of the 2019 Hublot Design Prize exhibition.

W*: How important has the role of mentor or mentee been in your career? When you started out, could you identify Black creatives you related to?

DA: A real hero for me when I started was Joe Casely-Hayford. He was simply a man of colour doing really excellent work. And I thought, ‘Why don’t we have that in other places?’ It actually drove me to want to do it. I have a stubborn disposition. To be faced with ‘You can’t do this because…’, well, the ‘because’ better be damn good! It made me angry when I was younger. I’m much more chilled out these days.

SR: Mentors have been seminal to my journey. I shifted my direction [from product and graphic design] towards fashion to be a little more expressive. At that time, Virgil [Abloh] and Kanye West happened to come across my work, and I started working underneath the two of them. They were great mentors, able to articulate between Western European and North American ideologies, whilst having an intrinsically Black imprint on the work they were producing. They took these references to an industry, cross-referenced them through channels of mass communication, and built a new language and discourse that a lot of designers of my generation now operate within. From these two mentors, I learned how to communicate ideas and to have this ‘scatter diagram’ approach to zig-zagging across industries.

‘For me, the act, the statement, the building, is always political, it’s always making a statement about the world that we are in, it’s always positioning an ideal of some sort. The building isn’t mute, it speaks volumes about a certain world value and morality.’ — David Adjaye

W*: In terms of communication, is fashion more inherently attuned to marketing, whereas architecture is built on letting the work speak for itself?

DA: Absolutely. There’s a desire to depoliticise architecture continually, and I fight against that all the time. For me, the act, the statement, the building, is always political, it’s always making a statement about the world that we are in, it’s always positioning an ideal of some sort. The building isn’t mute, it speaks volumes about a certain world value and morality.

SR: The work I showed at Serpentine Galleries [Ross won the 2019 Hublot Design Prize], and the work I’m soon to do with Marc Benda from Friedman Benda gallery, is about that. I’m pivoting towards the long form conversation, and how we stabilise and re-chisel the playing field for the next generation.

W*: How does collaboration enrich your work?

DA: When I left the Royal College of Art I missed not being in a campus environment. I would collaborate across disciplines, with a scientist or a musician. When I did the Venice Biennale with Chris Ofili in 2003, we flipped roles – I said, ‘you design and I’ll do the visuals’. It was amazing to see my now dear friend talking about architecture, to learn what was interesting to him. It teaches you different ways of seeing the world.

SR: I’m a moderately sized brand, so collaboration offers access to tooling and technology. It’s also about having an opportunity to push forwards a social consciousness. I’m thinking how I can carry as much information through a macro partner, let’s say Nike, without being too cumbersome: can I hijack a community to a certain degree and fix the attention?

Moving forward, the idea of showing collections needs to be completely rearticulated.’ — Samuel Ross

W*: Practically, has Covid-19 affected your business?

DA: I moved to Accra as I’m doing a lot of work in West Africa right now. This decade feels like the decade of Africa to me. This pandemic has unleashed this new connectivity that I’m very grateful for. I have three offices on different continents, and most of my time was spent moving between those. And now it’s become very technologically based. What’s kind of amazing is that it all works! Apart from the amazing aromas that you miss, I love the aroma of construction sites!

SR: We’ve decided not to do two shows a year any more. This idea of a continuous critique to an open market every six months when you’re building and growing didn’t necessarily sit right with me in the first place, but I was willing to participate and spar and win in that arena to show a more intellectual Black approach within fashion design. But moving forward, the idea of showing collections needs to be completely rearticulated. We are looking at more personable presentations, which almost feeds back into the early days, when counter-cultural movements actually began to swirl and churn around fashion brands. I’m becoming a bit more hands on with discourse with consumers. We’ve been able to compress and condense down the modelling of the company. And be more emotive and sensitive to market needs. And take a lot more risk. I’m hoping that it will kick start a few other contemporaries in a similar situation to ourselves. 

[realisationanddoubt]

The binary: realisations and rants

Can we talk about the gender binary a bit? Of course we can. It’s my blog, we can talk about Naruto or the impossibility of clown cars if I wish. So I’ve been thinking a lot about me after my break up as, I suppose, is normal. Thanks to this I’ve stumbled across an identity crisis I’ve been putting off for years. I’m non-binary and that’s a weird thing to just non-chalantly write down for me. See, I’ve spent years talking about how I don’t really care about gender. As a bisexual, I’ve had the conversation numerous times. As a stereotypically effiminate person I’ve spoken many times about how I’m comfortable in myself acting however I want because the gender stereotypes hold no interest to me. But I’ve never really bothered to delve into why.

It’s taken awhile to come to terms with being non-binary. It’s like coming to terms with my sexuality all over again. As usual, I’ve been presented a choice. The sexuality and identity fairy came to me twice now and happily asked “men or women” and I, in classic me style, didn’t really pay attention to the fact that there was a clear binary choice and only half listening just replied “Oh, no thank you!”

It’s difficult to live in a world defined by binaries and then realise you’re not really interested in participating. When I very first realised I might be non-binary a couple of months back, I got lost in a strange narrative. Do I need to start wearing make up? Should I make myself more androgynous, shave my beard? How do I present as non-binary? Of course the answer (For me) is you don’t. I should have really known that from the start because I had to do the same thing with my bisexuality. It took many years to get from “How do I let everyone know I’m bisexual?” to “I don’t really care who knows what my sexuality is and I have no desire to share that information.” I’ve approached being non-binary much the same. I get that people are proud of their sexuality and identity and seriously, good for them. That must be a nice thing to have. Thing is I’m not particularly proud. Let me see if I can put this into words.

So for me, sexuality and identity are both very matter of fact. I’m not proud of either of those aspects of me but don’t get me wrong, I’m not ashamed. The idea of being proud of either of those things is, for me at least, the same as being proud of having curly hair or brown eyes. Sure, there was some emotional turmoil coming to terms with my sexuality and identity but it’s not like these are things I had to strive and work for. They’re just facts. I don’t really care if people call me he or they. They feels a bit more natural I guess but it doesn’t particulalry bother me being called he. And note, I get called he because I have a beard and a masculine build. When I was a teenager with heavy eyeliner and long flowing hair I got called miss and she a lot and that never particularly bothered me either. I’ve never particualraly felt some kind of rage at being misgendered. I don’t really care that people assume I’m straight (I kind of care in that way of, Jesus dude open your mind and stop making assumptions but not enough that I’ve felt the need to correct anyone.)

Though I wonder how much this is a story I tell myself. Just like it’s difficult telling yourself actually, you’re not any of the traditional genders, telling yourself you don’t really care about presenting and pronouns in a community that’s so fired up about them feels weird. 

“Welcome to the queer community! Would you like to be angry about misrepresntation of your sexuality or your identity?” The queer fairy politely but firmly asks.

“Ah, no thank you, I’ve already eaten.” Josh replies, not really paying attention to the climate or the question.

I even considered whether I’m supposed to change my name. Am I supposed to change my name to something a bit more androgynous? Maybe start calling myself Alex or Frankie or any other name that could be either gender? But I don’t want to. I’m just Josh. I’m a bisexual, non binary mess and Josh is my descriptor. 

Should I care more? Should I be fighting some war against ignorance? Am I somehow doing a disservice by not participating?

Not participating is basically my default. “Here lies Josh, they didn’t participate.”

I kind of make life more difficult for myself by not divulging these things. People have asked me before “Are you gay?” and I just reply “nope!”. Then I get annoyed that people just assume I’m straight despite literally never giving any evidence to the contrary. I guess it’s just a problem with the system. My sexuality and identity are improtant to me but they’re personal. I’m not going to talk about them to work colleagues or friends anymore than I’m going to talk about my kinks. 

“Hey Josh are you gay?” My well meaning but misguided colleague asks.

“Oh no, I’m bisexual, non-binary and I like scratching and biting during sex.”

You really going to just out your kinks like that online huh my dude? It should say enough about me that I feel a swell of anxiety to putting a fairly vanilla kink on a personal blog no one I know will ever read. Do I really want Tumblruser420 to know I like biting in bed? Feels like an overshare. 

This really became a bit of a deep dive into gender identity huh? I guess I’m just going through some stuff. 

Quick tangent, whenever I hear a noise in my house, despite having two cats that are always the cause, I need to check every room just in case. I even check the bathroom which only has one very small window next to the door. Just in case some sneak thief broke in through the plughole I guess. Some S’wit. Some N’wah.

God I’m just going through some Stuff y’know? I worry how much of my outlook might be down to internalised shame and not just non-chalant IDGAF attitude. I haven’t put Non-Binary on my tinder profile. I mean I have but I’ve set it not to show. I don’t know if that’s out of fear of being judged for it or simply because I haven’t come to terms with it myself. To be clear, I definitely haven’t come to terms with it myself yet. I have bisexual on my profile but I guess I’m still kind of ashamed of that.

Is it shame? I guess it’s more fear. Not like a fear for myself or my safety or anything. More a fear of people’s perceptions. It’s not even that I’m scared people will be shitty to me because of it. If that’s the kind of person they are, fuck them. I just don’t want to be “That queer one”. Does that make sense? I kind of hate to term cishet because it only seems to be used as derogatory but I need to use it a sec. I think the main reason I’m happy to just pass as cishet is because then I’m allowed to be a person. The second you’re something different that’s it. That defines you. I get it needs to be a conversation so people stop being ignorant and hateful but at the same time even just the discussion about it feels like it’s pushing me into this definition. Like being bi or being non-binary means I’m a certain kind of person. 

I guess it’s the classic tale of any ism. Racism, sexism, homophobia...ism. I am bisexual. I am non-binary. But I don’t want to be the bisexual. Being defined by something like that, something so out of your control... It feels so... dismissive? I’m not a person anymore. I’m not Josh. I’m a bisexual. I’m non binary. I’m white. I present as a man. All that shit. This is starting to become a rant on the construction of society as a whole and the role of privelege and what that means huh?

I’m creative, emotional, witty. That’s what I’m defined by. That’s who I am. I’m not just some pigeon hole word. Define me by my facets, not my facts.

Realisations are a funny thing. I have a lot of realisations in my life and mostly I like them but this one leaves a sour taste in my mouth. It’s not that I don’t care, that much is apparent after this rant. I’m just so tired of it. I avoid all the discourse and conversations about any kind of identity issues because I’m tired of defending myself. It doesn’t matter where you fall on the spectrum. These kind of labels aren’t useful. They’re just a method of pinning something to someone that says “Can I just hate this person out of hand.” and it’s rife. It’s everywhere and it’s all the same. I don’t care if you’re having a rant about black people or a rant about cishets. It’s all just vicious hate. We live in a world where people are so desperate to have someone to hate because they’re different. Whether that difference is in the majority or the minority it doesn’t matter. Hating all men or all straights or all whites is no different from hating all trans people or all queer people or all black people. Hating all millenials because they’re special snowflakes is no different from hating all boomers because they’re not progressive. It’s just pure hatred because they’re different. Just blanket statements attached to something someone can’t control to give you a reason to say “Oh don’t worry, I’m allowed to hate them”.

Maybe keeping my identity or my sexuality to myself makes me a coward. Fine. I refuse to participate in these wars of hatred. I just want to spend time with my cats, fall in love, help people and laugh. 

As always, as will be written on my gravestone one day, I refuse to participate. To all those people who fight for my ideal world on my behalf, thank you. To all those people on either side, progressive or traditional, just to hate one subset of people, go fuck yourselves. I’ll just be over here, trying to make the dying smile and trying to give people a little longer in this world to spend with the people they love.

That’s it. Rant over. I’m going to try and get another hour or two of sleep before work. I know it’s customary to drop the mic after a big speech but know if it felt like I did, I just fumbled putting it back into the mic stand and I’m trying to own it. If you look closely you’ll see that the blood has drained from my face and perspiration is clear on my forehead.

[nightcoremoon]

re: Ok Boomer

I'm so fucking sick of the argument "not every boomer is responsible for the recession and saying ok boomer is an ageist slur". shut the fuck up boomer apologist. boomer is obviously very specifically directed towards the slice of rich white cishet christians with money who are responsible for the specific issues that slice of people are responsible for. saying "ok boomer" is not generalizing every single human over the age of 54 and saying that literally every single goddamn one of them is a big evil bastard who deserves to die.

I know nobody will listen to logic based on its own merits so here have some analogies that even the discoursers can't disagree with

when women say "ugh men" or some variation they don't mean that literally every single male human on the planet is a creepy rapist with no social skills or hygiene rituals or respect for women (although terfs legitimately do mean that but they don't mean men they mean all people who reflect Eurocentric ideals of masculinity and maleness but they're dumb n ugly and don't count). we mean that, at its core, often times men benefit from male privilege, perform misogynist microaggressions, do annoying things that testosterone makes you do, and behave in bad ways that society being what it is enables and encourages. sending gross dick pics, manspreading, mansplaining, not wearing deodorant at conventions or game tournaments, groping, etc. while it may be true that these behaviors do not apply to 100% of all men, saying "not all men" just detracts from the original point, especially considering that ONLY men do these things.

furthermore, when POC say things about white people to vent their frustrations about white privilege and institutionalized racism, they don't mean that literally 100% of every single white person ever is a big evil racist kkk nazi monster who should die in a fire, simply that it's a problem that happens way to fucking often and only white people perpetuate these. while it shouldn't be ignored that different ethnic groups can often be prejudiced against each other, it's not pertinent to the current point. and regardless, acknowledging that ONLY PROVES THE POINT MORE. a black person saying "ugh @ wypipo defending saying n*gga without the hard R as if it's any better and that endentures them to be able to say it" isn't ignoring the fact that mexican, chinese, native american, etc etc people are frequently antiblack racist and also make the same arguments, but it's PREDOMINANTLY white people doing this. and, devils advocate, even if it wasn't predominantly white people, that would just further enforce the point that them saying "white people" isn't a literal absolute blanket statement. ITS ALL FUCKING SEMANTICS YOU DENSE ILLITERATE IDIOTS so can other white people please stop with all the "not all of us do that" bullshit? all of us will at some point inevitably eventually fuck up and pretending we don't is just recklessly irresponsible, immature, and cringe to the max. I was raised by racist white people in a racist white neighborhood in a racist predominantly white town in a racist predominantly white state in a racist predominantly white country, as was most white people in america. If I'm not free of institutionalized racism neither the fuck are you. what was I talking about? oh yeah, ok boomer.

to get back on topic, when we queers vent our frustrations with cisgender or heterosexual people, we KNOW that there are some cishets who aren't nasty evil hateful pundit assholes. we KNOW there are cishets who have no problems with being gay or trans or whatever. we aren't physically pointing out and attacking YOU SPECIFICALLY unless we say your name. some of my closest friends in high school and onward are cishet and they were my own personal support network through coming out as bi and trans. if I say "stinky straighties" they're clearly excluded or "ew cis" it's not a coin flip reverse hatred that applies the same way backwards. when we want to shatter garbage social constructs and bullshit societal idelaogies from white western christian colonialist europe, we don't want to shatter The Bones of every person who hm idk doesn't experience attraction towards people of the same gender or identifies with the gender they were assigned with at birth. it's more about the cishet mentality if anything, which affects and is displayed by individuals.

I could go on. "Not All Goyim" "Not All Ableds" "Not All Neurotypicals" "Not All Allistics" "Not All Cis" "Not All Straights" "Not All Whites" "Not All Men" "Not All Boomers" it's all the same stupid garbage tired nonsense melodrama from crybaby little bitches with victim complexes. Jewish People aren't all Antigoyische, Disabled and Neurodivergent People aren't all Reverse Ableist, Queer and Trans People aren't all Heterophobic or Cisphobic, People of Color aren't all Reverse Racist, Women (/Nonbinary) aren't all Misandrist, and Zoomers or 90s Kids or Millenials or Gen Xers aren't all Ageist,

JUST FOR SAYING A GODDAMN MEME

ok? we understand now? good.

[bubblesthemonsterartist]

Obiyuki and the Great Snow Symbolism Discourse (Part III)

Part I | Part II 

I’m baaaaaaack

Last one.

For now :3

To my greatest displeasure, the reunion scene between Obi and Shirayuki did not involve snow. However, there were reunited inside a hall, so I am going to choose to believe that it was ankle deep outside because that’s my prerogative. XD

However, as mentioned at the end of the last section of the Great Obiyuki Snow Symbolism Discourse, Shirayuki’s participation in the motif has been... minimal, at best. Moments of fleeting emotions before she gets distracted or reorients herself to Zen. 

That is, until Obi leaves.

When Obi leaves to help out Zen & Co., we get Shirayuki in Power Up pose with her previous light flurries becoming heavier. This is where her emotions become something not ephemeral, but more... persistent. Something that has a chance of sticking.

And stick, it does. So much so that even Zen notices when he arrives in Lyrias.

(Chapter 95)

That’s right. Last time Zen was in Lyrias, there wasn’t a flake in sight. Whatever tender emotions Shirayuki had in her heart was aimed towards the South. But now, with two years and a hell of a lot of distance between them, the whole of Lyrias is completely covered in - say it with me! - snow.

Now it is also important to note that a Very Important Obiyuki moment occurred on the road to Lyrias, mainly being that completed scream-worthy exchange that Obi agonized on getting out of his mouth: I’m home and Welcome home. So the build between Obi and Shirayuki, the accumulation of it, happened after their reunion with Zen is exemplified in the snow blanketing their physical home - Lyrias - upon their arrival.

(Chapter 95)

It’s worth noting - it’s worth pulling out - as @infinitelystrangemachinex​ brought up in her tags of the first posting - that Zen gets ill playing in the snow with them. That the representation of their relationship prevents Zen and Shirayuki from making out in the tent because he has a fever.

And even though he’s better in the above panels, what is one of the first things that he’s told upon waking?

It’s still snowing...

(Chapter 96)

And it only snows harder once Obi is spotted at a marriage meeting.

(Chapter 96)

Like, this scene can be read one of two ways. The big clumpy snow has, up until now, belonged to Obi. So one could read this scene as Obi cooling his jets because this marriage meeting he just finished only further solidified what was already in his heart, or...

This snow is not his snow.

Hear me out, because I think this is a good scene to consider the question, because not only did Shirayuki look surprised about Obi being with a girl she’s never seen him with before, she looks outright nauseous at times because she’s pretending she doesn’t know what she’s seeing. But she does. She knows. And the fact that Obi is walking away - that he’s essentially playing a game with Shirayuki and Zen as they think that they’re going to spy on him, of all people - makes me think that this heavy snowfall is not his.

So we’re seeing Shirayuki’s snow. And it’s stronger than ever. Because jealousy is a hell of a drug. XD

Now the next little mini scene is a bit of a stretch because, like, I can’t tell if that is some artistic bokeh hovering above the both of them or snow, but I am going to go for snow because it’s blurry and out of focus and Shirayuki is blurry and out of focus.

(Chapter 97)

Also, they’re adorable. How could I resist including that in there?

It was a little snack before we get into a meaty scene. :)

Just a little earlier in the inn, Obi confessed that the girl Zen and Shirayuki spotted him with was marriage partner and that he was essentially letting her (and her overenthusiastic brother) down easy. When questioned if he was going to meet other girls, Obi said “no” which, to an outsider POV could be read as “I am never going to marry.”

Now, hearing a potential love interest say something like that could cool anyone’s adore. To the point where they would be encouraged to let a passing feeling go for good. But it’s in the moments that follow, and the sweet words rendered by a rejected girl, that it does what?

It starts snowing again.

Not only does it start snowing, but it starts snowing more the more Shirayuki hears Obi’s resolve not to see anyone else.

And even more still when they fall into step with one another, just like they always have.

But it’s that light snow. Those flurries that have always been Shirayuki’s standard. Now that her heart is at ease and she doesn’t think that she’s going to lose him to some girl she doesn’t even know the name of.

(Chapter 97)

And I think there is something to be said about the openness of Shirayuki’s face in this moment. They’re looking to each other full on and she knows, has confirmed yet again, that Obi doesn’t lie. She can trust him. He’s not going anywhere and her heart opens back up.

Now I know that this may make Shirayuki look fickle, but I think it’s rather realistic. Obi has been very good at being her work-husband but not crossing a line. He supports, but he does not take what is not offered. And she knows that she can trust him implicitly, but-

BUT

How many among us would be willing to risk an established romantic relationship and a friendship for the sake of feelings that we have no confirmation on? I daresay Shirayuki is at the place that Obi was at the beginning of the manga. She knows she feels for him, but she’s fighting it. Her heart has always been skittish with romantic love, and this- well, this is no different.

AND NOW THINGS GET MESSY. BECAUSE WE’RE BACK TO OBI. AND THIS BOY IS ALWAYS HOT GARBAGE FIRE.

(Chapter 98)

This. T h i s. A confession freely given. An exposure to a friend. Kiki didn’t order Obi to share the state of his heart, she didn’t even expect it, but Obi did it, and in the very next panels, big fat snowflakes start blanketing the ground.

And if I would, begging your pardon for a moment, go on a small tangent. In Part I, I said that zenyuki was symbolized by flowers. After staring at this manga and being in this headspace for the past few days, I would like to amend my previous statement. They’re not symbolized by flowers - they’re symbolized by stars. 

Because, at first glance, stars are beautiful. They are unchanging and pure and eternal. They are far away yet their light doesn’t dim. But I have also noticed that Sorata uses a lot of Buddhist symbolism in her art, so I propose she is flipping the script here, because nothing is eternal. Stars go out. Permanence is a lie, even in something as steady as the night sky. And you cannot just take something for granted simply because it seems everlasting. It has to be developed. Accumulated over time. Like snowfall. 

And in the next scene, my oh my does it fall.

(Chapter 100)

Unpopular opinion, but entirely probable, this blizzard symbolically belongs to both Obi and Shirayuki. Obi, because he always freaks out when Shirayuki is alone with Zen. Obi knows what he would do if he had a romantic evening alone and was snowed in with his cute girlfriend. His heart is a wreck even thinking about it. So the external matches the internal in this go-round.

(Chapter 100)

Look at this boy. He’s giving himself hives over here.

But this evening didn’t start this way. It started with a steady drift. Peaceful. Until Shirayuki realized that she was alone with Zen. And it is not a stretch to say that our favorite pharmacist wasn’t... completely at ease during that private dinner. She was a stuttery mess that couldn’t complete a sentence. She threw Zen’s title between them - something that she scolded Obi for doing in early canon.  She ran from the room to try to go home when she saw the storm roll in. And the last thing she seemed to want was to spend an entire night alone with Zen. Go back and look. Every single panel of her in that room has a sweat-drop drawn on her brow or her hands shaking.

She was not comfortable in the slightest.

Now it could be because Sorata is doing the stereotypically virgin thing where she needs to be convinced (god I hope not). Or it is because this is a next level of a relationship. Or, perhaps, Shirayuki is starting to realize that the man sharing the night with her is not the man she wants to share every night with.

So all those tumultuous emotions form what? A blizzard.

A force of nature.

The first time for the both of them.

And what happens when the emotions calm and the boys and girls have split into their own rooms?

The snow remains, but it calms.

(Chapter 101)

And now, we’re to the final panel of this Snow Discourse Journey. And I think that it may be the most important one. Because, as with the beginning of this section, it is Zen that brings it full circle.

(Chapter 101)

When the snow melts, let’s meet again...

Will the snow melt? Only time will tell :3

[wizardrights]

That "Oh, what a neat female character" comic you reblogged makes me rather uncomfortable. In the "racism" part, it seems to imply that the OP considers drawing a light-skinned/white character with darker skin to be racist, which gives some "reverse racism" vibes. There's nothing else on her blog that I could find that showed further evidence of those sorts of beliefs, but I'll leave it to your discretion what you want to do about that.

Okay, I’ve been getting asks like this lately and so I just want to make a blanket statement first- I’m not going to sit and analyse every post I reblog to the t. If you want to do that with your blog, go ahead, but please don’t start doing that to mine. I’m a big girl. I can read and come to my own conclusion about posts. If you have an issue with what I reblog, go to the creator. Letting me know I reblogged a TERF or something is one thing, but coming to me about your own conclusions you drew from a post i reblogged is another.

“I’ll leave it to your discretion what you want to do about that.” I already did. I already noticed that AND other things I didn’t care for. But I decided to reblog it anyway, because I came to my own conclusion (the one that matters most as this is my blog) that the main point of this comic outweighed the problems I had with those other things. Because there is literally nothing in life that doesn’t have problems, and it’s up to each person individually to determine for themselves if the good of that thing outweighs the bad.

If you had found other things about the OP and were telling me about them directly and not that one thing in that one post, I would delete it. But not from one vague thing we don’t even have context for.

And another blanket statement, but y’all... idk if you know this yet but I’m literally just here for a good time. I’m here to get away from shit in my life. I’m here to laugh. I don’t care about follower count, I don’t care about keeping my tags all neat (in fact the only things I tag are spoilers and triggers), I don’t care how many notes I get or how many I don’t get, and I don’t give a single fuck about any kind of discourse on here. So this is the only time I’ll reply to anything even remotely close to this ask.

Again, this answer is coming from not just this anonymous ask but others. If the OP is a bad person, tell me and I’ll take it down. But if it’s just that a post I reblogged made you uncomfortable, I don’t need you to come to me. You can ignore it, or unfollow me, but I’m not going to spend any more of my energy on this kind of stuff because it really isn’t in my interest to.

[paceunknown]

what's your opinion on harry about the BLM flag , if you don't mind sharing? if not I understand!!

ah yes, bring me into The Discourse, anon. rip but idk i guess ever since i saw people trying to bring flags/posters that weren’t specifically about pride i figured fans would get all ~this is just a show stop trying to politicise us/force politics onto harry~ and lookie lookie ! bc at least in more western, mainstream spaces the whole idea of lgbt pride isn’t as radically political as it used to be, so voicing your positive opinion on it is becoming more synonymous with saying something like , i dunno , trump sucks. like yeah duh he sucks we all know it. same with all the “love is love” rhetoric being spewed, which is great, but it’s certainly not as radical or shocking as coming forward and definitively supporting blm or rallying for muslims to feel safe in this country. like those things are still heavily politicised despite being the most basic and right thing to do/right way to feel SO!! yeah making harry’s concerts safe spaces where not being cishet is concerned is okay bc it’s such a widespread blanket that transcends race, religion, etc etc, but once you start Pandering To A Niche Market people are gonna get uncomfortable and possibly roll their eyes and/or blatantly ignore it

and so i’m definitely not saying he was right if he did indeed ignore the flag but 1) he’s a white man and white men don’t really concern themselves with that which doesn’t concern them so what can ya do, 2) at the end of the day that was unfortunately still a massive political statement and the reality is that celebs got a brand to protect and fans to maintain and headlines they don’t want written, and harry rarely publicly says political/social stances anyway sooooo again who’s surprised if he did indeed let it fall to the wayside. but something else i can’t rightfully ignore is the fact that at this point in the tour it’s well known he picks up flags and waves them, dances with them, wears them every single show, but these flags tend to be colorful or otherwise indicative of being some form of a pride flag. i don’t think there is a specific blm flag (and if there is an official one i haven’t seen it) so to see some random fabric thrown on stage that isn’t the usual cornucopia of colors like i’d be kinda wary too. bc it’s only a matter of time before someone takes advantage of what he does every night to get him to hold up something vile or awkward or what have you just like people did during 1d shows. so in that respect—bc if you know nothing else about me know i’m a big believer in the benefit of the doubt—i can’t exactly fault him for shying away, IF that’s what was running through his head. that’s obviously all speculation, duh, but it’s reasonable i think.

either way i’m not gonna be over here begging for harry to be burned at the stake nor for him to hold up the flag. like i said last night i’m much more disappointed in those fans that took those posters and didn’t hold them up