#just because you don't agree with my opinions didn't make me a racist

[trexalicious]

Interesting as this article is dated March 12th, 2022...Bower claims the couple is willing to stay married for the time being, as their shared goal is to destroy the royal family.

"They are bound by the common business plan to trash the royals as much as they can, promoting the Sussex brand, but it's a dying cause."

[creatingblackcharacters]

Hello! Sending it here again:

I play an mmo game which recently had a big character model update, it's still not perfect but we're getting there! They're sharing behind the scenes work on curly hairstyles, for example, which just... weren't there for the longest time. Oh the beauty of scandinavian white-centering... (sarcasm)

anyway, I'm from eastern-central Europe, I play on eastern Europe servers. Seeing someone with a character that's not white is... pretty rare, honestly. So rare that when I do see someone using a character that's clearly meant to be a POC, they're very often roleplaying. Recently I saw a player whom I know for a fact is white, as I know them irl (we're not friends, don't even talk much but I know what they look like) and their character used to be white too before the big update.

So my question is, does that count as digital blackface, and what even is the consensus on digital blackface as a whole? I used to be in a facebook group about unlearning racism (used to because it got deleted after some admin drama, I think? If anyone knows a similar group, let me know please) and there, most Black members agreed that if someone is white, they shouldn't be using Black emojis for example (the topic of mmos never came up, I think). I don't remember the exact reasoning but I think it was the same explanation as actual blackface. But then there were some Black people saying it's going too far and we should be focusing on "actual issues" instead. I know that's to be expected, I'm trans and I know all too well that a community is not a monolith. But seeing the player reminded me that I don't actually know that much about it, and I've seen you educate people before. I hope it's okay that I'm asking you, I'd love to do some further research as well though (I love learning things, I just also don't yet trust myself to find actually good sources).

I hope this ask makes sense, english is not my first language and all. So if I wrote something wrong, please assume I meant well, as I still don't know how to word things properly in english sometimes.

Thank you for doing what you do, btw. I really appreciate having someone compile everything like you do here, it's one of my favorite creative blogs on here.

Okay so I sat on this one for a minute to make sure my answer wouldn't change.

1) there is no one consensus. White people don't agree on everything, neither do we 😅. This would just be my opinion.

2) I definitely don't think you should be using Black emojis if you're a white person, no. That's overt Blackfacing. DEFINITELY don't pretend to be Black if you aren't!!

3) for me, I think designing your characters as Black for online play can be okay in theory, as long as you're coming at it respectfully. Like, I'd have to trust that you actually wanted to learn how to play as someone that didn't look like you, that you actually cared about Black character features and presence in games as a whole. Especially on a game where you get to design the character, versus when you're forced to play as a Black person. It's hard to trust the intentions of white people online, especially when far more often than not the good intent is just... Not there 😅. So for me, if someone asks you why you designed your character, be ready to answer, answer truthfully and answer well! If you're playing as a Black character design because "big tough guy" or "big dommy mommy" yeah you're just digital Blackfacing amongst other racist issues. But if you actually have good intent, and are willing to learn, then you'll be able to stand on that when confronted.

And again- that's just my opinion! I would listen to other voices on it as well.

[joesquinns]

https://www.tumblr.com/joesquinns/759493106439782400/from-racist-songs-to-problematic-boyfriends-doja?source=share

JQ & DC is most likely a PR stunt, not a real relationship. Joseph had (most likely/pretty much) rejected her back in 2022 and she had dissed him in one of her songs called "Attention", basically saying he's lazy as shit, how he needs a new wig (Eddie reference), how he thought he was above her (he basically is), how she didn't care that he wouldn't fuck her (she does), and how she had him famous from the problem she had with Noah (she fucking didn't, it was all Joseph that made him famous). Obviously, she couldn't take rejection. Also, she has an album coming out and tours to do and he has Gladiator 2, F4, and he was in British Vogue. She's a very bad person and I have no idea why she had to be the pick for the PR stunt but whatever. Also, the stupid thing is that people are attacking Joseph's father for "raising his son badly". Which passes me off because his dad didn't do anything. This is all JQ and DC's issue. I don't want them bringing his father into this. See many people are saying to "just accept the fact that they're dating" but they aren't even dating. Joseph didn't like her in 2022 and she's very bad. She couldn't take rejection like a bitch. And she's very demonic and weird as fuck. This has to do with Marvel or something and this JQ and DC news is from a person who's notorious for PR stunts. Also, JQ isn't the only one doing these things. It's just a Marvel thing I guess. And to anyone who supports DC or even likes her, that's insane. I talked about this to my mother and grandmother and they even say that it's fake and it's just a PR stunt. A similar thing happened with famous rappers Ice Spice and Central Cee where they did a PR stunt with their new collab song. And they both are problematic in their ways. Also if anyone thinks that hating on Doja is "racist", most people agree that Lupita and Joe would've been way better and cuter. Lupita is a real woman and very kind and not problematic while DC is just a stupid girl who's weird as shit. And I'm not jealous at all, I could care many fucks less about Joe's dating life. But this is DC, a very problematic girl who's done very bad things and is very demonic and weird as hell. If it was any woman that people knew and wasn't problematic, it would've been way better. But this isn't any chick, it's Doja. So people can make all the articles as they want but in the end, it's fake as fuck. It's a PR stunt. I will always love Joe but he gave me the ick and I feel like I need a break. And maybe others. Joe can do whatever he wants, he doesn't know me. And I only know so much about him. He's a grown man and he has a job. But I can disagree with things. I can have opinions on things. My opinion on his choice is....well wtf Joe? But I can't just tell him what he's doing is bad. We all just need to like- ignore it and not talk about it and just suffer for a couple of weeks. Then we can have our old Joseph back but for now, he's just Joe.

Dw JQ fandom, chill, and take a deep breath, it's fake. It'll go away. We'll hold each other's hands through this bumpy road and eventually, we'll cross it. All we have to do is wait and pray or whatever. And if you have your own opinions, that's fine. But here's something to ponder over and think about. There's more to it but I'm too tired to type it out lmaoo😭😭

I rest my case.

To be honest, how everything has been handled and came out since Sunday I'm leading it to being a PR stunt as well.

No one can claim that it is not at all suspicious...

We'll get the blurry pic on Deux and then suddenly not even an hour after there's an article on THE SUN and then suddenly there's a video from two weeks ago and then suddenly someone saw them a day earlier and all this happens in the span of what? 2 hours? And oh suddenly someone spots him on a concert of her from a month ago where his neck seems like the one of a giraffe?

The video where he's grabbing her "ass" is's suspicious as hell...it's more her hip than her ass but ok we could argue about that but it's clear that he's asking her before he lets his hand slide down so for me it's staged af and doesn't scream "comfortable".

DC is a bad person and everyone who says something else is simply...I don't know...

No matter "If she has changed" or "maybe she's different"...I don't care that her fans are saying "she's calmer" and what else.

In Italy we say A wolf may lose its fur, but it will always remain a wolf

I also don't believe that Joe is "not online" because hell, I didn't know about all her shit before Sunday and it didn't take me that much and that long to find it and he has his phone with him all the time WE see him so he knows how to google

Believe me, I can disagree on things as well and I am disagreeing on his choice here. I know for him it doesn't matter but just because I'm a fan, I can still express my anger about the bullshit he does (and everyone who has been following me for longer knows that I'm usually one who defends him).

And before anyone comes in - no I'm not jealous. I know he doesn't know me. I know I don't stand a chance with him and yet I have the right to be angry if he pulls such a bullshit and to post that on my little blog.

To sum it up:

I don't find this funny and I hope this is over soon because otherwise if this really turns out to be "serious" and "longlasting" (like some people claim it to be) I need to unstan him because I don't know if I can support someone who showed himself to be this sweet guy and gentleman person (the past two years) and then turns around and does this bullshit. Either you're real or fake and I'm not here for fakeness.

That's just my two cents and I can guarantee you all this comes out of my brain and I don't have a friend of a friend of a friend who knows him/works in PR/hooked up with him/is in the industry.

Thank you and now I go outside to touch some grass instead to go to his dad’s insta to leave a stupid comment….how old are you? 5? Get a grip

[utilitycaster]

Hi there, I saw in one of your tags recently that "if you think the raven queen was being unfair, I'm not really interested in your opinions." I was wondering if you could talk a little more about that because I'll be honest, Vax isn't my favorite character but I've seen all of C1 and I really don't get why some people HATE the RQ, call her unfair, manipulative and pretty plainly say this moon conflict is mostly her fault because she took Vax and through a Domino effect Ludinus is releasing Predathos. Also, I enjoy your theories and analysis for CR so much you got me listening to Midst, so thank you.

Hi anon,

Great question! This is going to be a very long post, with a relatively short initial answer, because there is both the literal misinterpretation that indicates this is not someone with strong analytical skills nor knowledge of canon, and a number of potential mindsets that lead to this manner of thinking in the first place, none of which I respect. You happen to have sort of hit upon the foundational elements of my whole deal re: CR meta, so, buckle in.

The first part is simple: Vex died because Percy triggered a trap before she'd been healed up. We've seen this sort of trap elsewhere in non-divine contexts (Folding Halls of Halas); it's just a form of trap. A particularly nasty one, but this is for a very powerful relic she doesn't want falling into the wrong hands, and, moreover, the party could have likely disabled it either through rogue skills or magic had Percy waited. Vax, then, as the third part of the resurrection ritual, told the Raven Queen to take him instead of Vex. The Raven Queen did precisely as he asked. He did not need to offer this (Scanlan was going to make an offering, the other parts of the ritual had gone well, it was Vex's first death so the DC was low, and Vax could have made any number of other, less dramatic offers), and he did so with the understanding that he would die in lieu of Vex, right then and there. He did not. I think that's the only case, actually, where the Raven Queen was not 100% upfront with her intentions before Vax accepted something; but he offered it voluntarily. Vax was a person who formed extremely intense connections, to the point where it was perhaps unhealthy, and did not believe life without his sister was worth living, and was willing to sacrifice himself to a god.

Everything after that was extremely straightforward. Vax communed with the Raven Queen, who spoke very directly with him in his vision in the Raven's Crest. She was extremely clear when she met with him following his disintegration: he was given the option to refuse her offer, and he took it instead. It is not manipulative to give someone a difficult decision, and if a character you like makes a choice you don't like, it is not automatically the result of manipulation.

As for the moon conflict being her fault…that is, to put it bluntly, unhinged, and what's more, ironic given that that's the manipulative argument. Ludinus tried to commune with Ruidus using a random crystalline artifact beneath Molaesmyr, centuries before Vax was born. He was going to do this regardless. If he couldn't get Vax, he'd get some other sliver of divinity, and what's more, it's been all but stated that Vax is not actually supposed to be leaving the Shadowfell to protect Keyleth, and is disobeying the Raven Queen directly (and it's been stated that this isn't necessarily helpful for Keyleth, who is trying to grieve and move on). So: Vax made his choices with the knowledge of what they entailed, is trying to bend if not break the conditions to which he agreed with full knowledge in a way that probably isn't healthy for him or Keyleth, and it's bananas to be like "wow look at how the Raven Queen made Ludinus try to free Predathos." Like. Even if she had tricked Vax, which she didn't, Ludinus literally could have just kept on his racist imperialistic longevitymaxxing beat indefinitely and left the moon well enough alone. The domino meme is a meme. I mean, while we're at it, couldn't we trace it back to Vecna instead, for killing Vax with Disintegrate in the first place, since had he not done so, Vax would have either survived that fight or would have been resurrected normally? Or perhaps it's Percy for triggering that trap. Or the Chroma Conclave for being the reason why Vox Machina was seeking the Deathwalker's Ward in the first place…but that only happened because Allura and Kima didn't kill Thordak but rather sealed him, and because a priestess of Melora cursed Raishan so that she had reason to ally with Thordak. We can go on indefinitely; the point is, to assign blame specifically to the Raven Queen when Ludinus literally did not have to do a goddamn thing with the moon is a fucking stupid take.

Below the cut, I talk root causes behind why people might decide the Raven Queen was unfair and come up with the above nonsensical argument to support that, since I don't think people say stupid things just to be stupid.

I think one root cause for this mentality of this is that the person in question wishes Vax hadn't died and is looking for someone to blame because they don't want to blame Matt Mercer and Liam O'Brien, even though yeah, that's who to blame. The thing is, as we learned in Campaign 2, character death is quite literally on the table. Had Vax not made his bargain, either in episode 1x103 or his original one during Vex's resurrection? He might have simply remained dead. Had he not given his life for Vex's, he was pursuing paladin anyway with the Everlight, and we don't know what she'd have required of him. But more importantly, for all people like to bring up a PC-centric perspective (which, in Actual Play, is inevitable) Vox Machina's frequent use of resurrection spells was in fact a massive privilege most people in Exandria do not have. And, unsurprisingly for a table whose DM made up rules specifically to make resurrection more difficult, the Critical Role cast is open to a story where death exists. I do not think it's an accident that resurrection has been made even harder in the subsequent campaigns. I also happen to think that Campaign 1 is a far richer and better story with Vax's death, given the other events that occurred. Had Vax not been the sort of person who would offer his life for a god to take in exchange for his sister? Sure, he'd possibly have lived to the end. But he was, and that's the character those people who wish he were still alive loved. If he wasn't that person, they wouldn't have liked him in the same way.

D&D is fundamentally about exceptional characters becoming more powerful, and will be focused on those characters. I do not think D&D supports a story about characters who reject all power. They can give up political power (the Mighty Nein, for the most part, do this - certainly more so than Vox Machina, and Bells Hells is yet to be seen) but they will progress in levels, which is power. Even if unwanted, it is power, because most people in the world are commoners with 5 HP and 10 in all their stats. With that said, a lot of people desperately want a subversion of this power narrative. Vax is, I think, the closest we get. In D&D you are not going to get a player character who finishes a campaign and remains Just Some Guy. But you can have someone like Vax, who doesn't have any interest in power (compare to Vex, who very much is about power and who gets a much happier ending) who nonetheless ends up on the Tal'Dorei Council and the favored of a god…and yet, in the end, his equally powerful friends still can do nothing to save him. I think a Power Bad story is overly simplistic, but "there are limits to power, and ultimately none of us have complete control" is not. I think Vax's death gives the story of Vox Machina a finality and heft that it would lack otherwise.

A second possible cause is the "What if the gods are BAD" argument. I'm going to be totally honest: I did not see this in the fandom until Campaign 3, and honestly, not until EXU Calamity in any widespread sense, which does lead me to believe that most people did not come up with it as a reasonable idea on their own until characters started saying it, because it is so plainly in conflict with the themes of Campaigns 1 and 2 that to make this argument would be obvious projection. Do I think a nuanced view of the gods as flawed beings, rather than perfection, is warranted? Absolutely. Mortals, too, are flawed, and we don't kill them all for it. I think Vax's story makes them uncomfortable because it makes it clear divine favor is not, as Ludinus Da'leth tries to argue, the gods just bestowing and withholding their gifts arbitrarily, but rather that divine favor comes with a divine responsibility as well. Clerics and paladins do not study the way wizards do; but they must live lives in service, whereas a wizard can shut the book at the end of the day and do whatever. Clerics and paladins have powers that can be taken away; a wizard does not. That's the fundamental concept behind the Age of Arcanum - wizards trying to get around the fundamental rules of this world! Vax's paladin powers came at a price. His options are guided, but also limited, by the oath he took. He is far more fettered than a wizard, in the end, and I think that fucks with the narrative of the gods cruelly withholding their gifts from all but a select few, so they instead make their gifts into manipulative punishments…while still, contradictorily, arguing that characters such as Laudna or Ashton or Imogen were denied the mercy of the gods. Now, setting aside the obvious, that these characters have their backstories because Marisha and Taliesin and Laura decided they would because this is a story, and one in which someone had a perfect life would be boring and so the gods didn't intervene with Laudna because Marisha Ray wanted to play a Sun Tree corpse (see next section), it really is fascinating to see how people who hate the Raven Queen so neatly align with Ludinus. It's fine for sorcerers to have inborn powers, apparently, and Ludinus actually has himself tried to ape druidic magic; it's not about power, it's just about that power source. Honestly, they're not even above the gods as a power source - Ludinus used the crystal beneath Molaesmyr seemingly unaware if it were of the Archheart, and he's demonstrably using Vax, and everyone loves a resurrection from the gods, but heaven forbid you pay someone for the work you feel yourself entitled to. (Entitlement: this will also be a theme throughout the rant portion of this post.)

As a brief subsection to this: the idea that bad things happen to good people because the other side of that coin is free will is an ancient theological and philosophical discussion, and one we are obviously not going to solve here, though it is a little depressing I have had multiple rewarding conversations on this topic, thanks to an academically rigorous religious education, starting from the tender age of 9, and a lot of adults on Tumblr seemingly can't engage on the level of my third-grade classmates. I think, however, it tells a truth that fits in well with the wizard (and entitled fan) desire to control everything. People are terrified of random forces. Cancer, for example, is a matter of probability. There are things that can increase your chances of developing cancer, to be sure, but the simile I used when I was taught about radiation-induced cancers was that of lottery tickets: if you buy more, you have a better chance; but sometimes someone who bought a single ticket "wins" and someone who bought a ticket weekly never does. By believing the gods of Exandria are on trial for not intervening with every little hardship or for not taking Vax precisely as he intended, they reveal a profound terror of random chance and of the free will of people who are not them. Which is very funny when you consider we're watching Actual Play, where random chance is a deliberately induced element. I think the takeaway of all of this is "I think some of you guys are really mad this is a D&D game." But let's continue.

The third, and honestly most likely cause, is honestly sort of a continuation of the first but not centered around Vax so much as just a general, in my opinion deeply childish discomfort of any sort of tragedy or unhappiness in fiction. I've noticed this a lot lately, and I am not a cultural critic and don't have a high enough level view to pretend to be one, but as others have noted a lot of people seem affronted when whatever show they are currently watching does not meet their specific standards of "comfort media" or "hopepunk." It's a self-infantilization I don't care for, and it's certainly not limited to the CR fandom (see: any grown-ass adult passionately defending a choice to only watch children's cartoons and only read YA) or even fandom at all (see: the baffling popularity of the Mr. Rogers "look for the helpers" line which was intended for anxious young children, not for adults who can and should be the helpers). It really came into focus for me with CR when people referred to both EXU Calamity and to Candela Obscura's Circle of Needle and Thread as specifically "hopeless." They are, to me, deeply hopeful series. They are sad, and tragic, and many characters do not get a happy ending, but they are ultimately about how some people will endure, and will live on and find meaning after great loss. Calamity explicitly states that because of the actions of the heroes, while devastation will occur, total annihilation is mitigated. It's like the adage of how courage only means something in the face of fear; hope only means something in the face of darkness. Happy and fluffy tales are not hopeful; they are merely not things that require you to have hope. The root word of catharsis is that of cleansing and purgation and it originally related to physical excretion - cathartic stories are about getting those complicated and ugly emotions and fears out and feeling better for it by briefly feeling, perhaps, worse! Now, again, this has worsened with Vax's story with time. Shortly after Campaign 1, it was very common to see stories where Vex or Keyleth were utterly distraught, indefinitely, but those at least were engaging with grief, even if in a very shallow and unproductive way. But this has morphed into this idea that the fact that a work of fiction might make you even feel sadness makes it bad, and wrong, and hopeless, and the machinations of a cruel and heartless god. Which brings me back to the entitlement narrative: it's really as simple as "the story didn't give me what I wanted (whether that was a happy ending for Vax, or for Keyleth, or just a lack of sadness generally, or a narrative about the gods that validates my personal beliefs, or a way to justify Ludinus's actions), so it is bad." Which again is about being in control of the narrative, which again, in D&D, is simply not something anyone can claim. Why are these people here watching a D&D game? I don't know.

So that's really it: on a basic level, if you think the Raven Queen is unfair, you are profoundly ignorant of canon, so I'm already going to have to fact check anything you cite (if you cite at all), but there's a much deeper refusal to meet stories where they are and expand one's own comfort zone at play, and that means any analysis will never consider the possibility that your pre-existing beliefs were wrong (absolutely crucial in meta). You will always play it too safe and be uninspired and reactionary because the alternative is uncertainty and fear. I think a refusal to embrace tragedy in fiction is itself a profound tragedy; that is someone who is terrified to believe that life goes on.

[sharp-rosee]

Hey funny story: I haven't been around Tumblr at all for months, but today someone told me menalez had deactivated or something so I came on here and looked it up. First result was a post by you, i checked out your blog and wouldn't you know it your most recent post had you defending me post mortem lmfao. I sent an anon to the other woman too but it seems she won't post it so to clarify to you: when I supposedly said "studies showing violence suffered by bisexuals are cringe and useless" what I remember thinking about that is that those studies that I've seen are never used to try to understand why bisexuals suffer such insane rates of violence (more than homosexuals) and trying to stop it. I've only seen them be used as battering rams in discourse when homosexuals criticize bisexuals. Which is crazy for such a serious issue and totally trivializes it lol. Also that my explanation for it was that such studies show that many abused people incorrectly id as bi for a time. You can disagree or wtv just those were my points, she made it sound like I'm cheering on women beating if they're bi or something. Also your defense of me (thanks queen lol) is accurate if you were wondering. I used to be sorta pro strict separatism but I outgrew the anger/ denial phase of "most women will partner with men" and reached acceptance. Most people are built for romantic partnership, that's just human nature, I can't be hating het women just because their lot in life in that means they're more likely to be abused. Just because I'm not drawn to men, or even much to romance, doesn't mean I should act like that's everyone else too and judge them on that standard, I accept reality and want women to be safe within that rather than pointlessly hate on them and get all worked up because some women have boyfriends..

Well I'm also a mean asshole, I'm sure you noticed, and I definitely would give the bi girlies on radblr a hard time here at the time lol. I don't have the "one side" sort of takes on this divide on radblr. It was funny but I can't feel the energy to that anymore since leaving tumblr, way too few bis or gays irl to care about that stuff. But at the end of the day these are my actual takes on all that disk horse. Funny to see it immediately on such a causal stroll around here lol

-sleep3r4gent

QUEEN I used to follow you ♡ at least when I was crypto a few years back I did.

Also, I'm glad you clarified because the way some women on here seem to hallucinate things they read almost makes me feel insane as well. Like you sending an ask saying you never thought of a certain perspective is not indicative of you agreeing and obviously one can change their opinions over time.

I really have no opinion either way tbh, I myself am straight and in a relationship, and have had others on my last blog send some anons calling me a "dick worshipper" and other misogynistic BS, but they stopped once I didn't let it bother me much. It's so obviously a group of trolls that it's embarrassing that they still believe it enough to keep bringing back the same users, some like you who aren't even misogynistic, to further their persecution complex.

It even is more annoying because these are the women who made Mena/Moideater leave, the above drama is a big reason why. The way radblr will still reblog posts from very racist blogs and not bat an eye but then freak out over a clique of women who aren't even radfems really does show what demographic makes up this site.

I know it gets exhausting to be involved in arguments, but it's nice to know you're still somewhat around. I hope you, Mena and Moid come back someday. If not I understand. But I'll never forget any of them and I haven't forgotten you 😭😭😭

[mytearsbuckochet]

What's your most hated Bummy scene?? I'll tell you mine. It has to be the kiss in the hospital lobby and buck getting outed because of his soot covered mouth. Never hated a 911 episode more than that. I love Buck. They just made a mockery out of him by that scene.

Where do I even start.. Couldn't agree more about the soot scene, although I'm more angry at the writers about that one than I am at Tommy, given how important it was to Buck that he came out to Eddie and Maddie on his own terms and how much weight he gave those interactions I feel like even though that one was supposed to be a cute little "hehe look this is very Buck coded", it fell short in that I would've liked everyone else at the 118 to find out in a more heartfelt way ya know??

In terms of my least favourite(s), the whole arc with billy boils was a very interesting play by the writers in that it highlighted the differences between Eddie and Tommy in a meaningful way. On one hand, Eddie, who has presumably been with Buck in the hospital the whole time he was being treated for his boils, is used to Buck's hyperfixations and Wiki deep dives, and finds them wholesome and cute. I reblogged a post a little bit ago where Buck told Maddie about how her and Chim always finish each others sentences and that theyre basically already dating, and then contrasted with how Eddie was finishing Buck's sentences in that scene. Buddie fanatic aside (I will admit im obsessed with these two idiots), THIS is the kind of domesticity I've always wanted for Buck's partners, where they acknowledge and love those little moments that he has.

Now lets go ahead and look at Tommy's side of this whole thing: Tommy's reaction to seeing the boils + how he treated and viewed Buck's obsession as exactly that, an obsession + the graveyard scene??? You can break it down into "oh well Buddie have known eachother since s2, Bummy have been together 6 months", but from my perspective the fact that Buck didn't even realise Tommy didn't like women until their 6 month anniversary (???) just goes to show that they don't really know that much about one another. Tommy was completely right in the breakup scene; he was definitely not Buck's last, and the poor guy is definitely in need of some self exploration (#letbuckfuck) before I'd be happy to see Buddie honestly (and thats not even considering the work that needs to be done on Eddie, my guy is going through it rn with Chris). Anyway; I just read this amazing fic by playinginthundestorms (on ao3) and I think the way they described Tommy (slightly Tommy bashing), was overall how I imagine he sees Buck. It never really felt like Tommy was fond of these little things Buck does in the way that Eddie (and the rest of the 118) are, more seeing him as childish or juvenile as the fic described. And it makes sense, tommy is older than Buck. A whole other can of worms and probably the icing on the cake for me was the Abby debacle, the misogyny really showed??? like man you have not changed since Hen my lord. Calling Abby out for running off with some "himbo half her age" was wild considering thats what he is currently doing with Buck? Especially with all the shit she had to go through with her mum at the time? Like what on earth is your excuse Temu? Anyway, to cut a long rant short, I actually have given you like 50 reasons, but i definitely think that Tommy was a well placed plot device and it was obvious from the start. Also, ABC could've chosen ANYONE to be Buck's first experience with a man and they were like yep lets use the racist homophobe from Chim and Hen begins cos why not?! I probably would've had a far less negative opinion of him if he was a fresh character, and I think that's on purpose, I think it would be really interesting if they go down the road of hen and chim sharing their experiences with Tommy now that they've broken up, and that they didn't say anything cos they just wanted Buck to be happy. Definitely after that heartfelt scene with Hen especially, that I didn't get cos of that bloody soot scene.

[velvetvexations]

I'm putting these asks in as text because my inbox is so packed rn lol. Love you Velvet Nation!

i swear to god cisfeminist spaces are the worst. a lesbian was asking why straight people have such bad sex (for the woman in the relationship, regarding the orgasm gap) and everyone jumped onto how testosterone is the reason for it (as in testosterone makes you want to orgasm in 3 minutes with no regard for extending sex outside of wanting to orgasm), even a trans woman saying the sex is so much better with oestrogen in her system. and me and a few other transmascs pointed out to this trans woman that it was probably because she was running on the wrong hormones, and any of us transmascs that dared to say we have extremely fulfilling sex that is infinitely better than the sex we had before we started T was absolutely shat on and berated for “speaking over women” even though we were just sharing our experiences, it’s just that those opinions went against the bioessentialism held deeply by the community

Yo, that's fucked? What the hell? Do people seriously earnestly not get how they come off here?

aside from OOP ignoring all of the black transmascs and other transmascs of colour in the discussion around transandrophobia (including a trans man of colour coining the term), i wonder if they believe we’re making up black transmascs because the transradfems i’ve seen so far have been overwhelmingly white. maybe because radfeminism is inherently racist or something… and their bible is written by a middle-class white woman with no perspective on transmisogynoir and this reflects upon a lot of the discussions of transmisogyny to this day…

Radical feminism is inherently Karenesque. They cross the street when they see the PoC transmascs they spend every waking hour slagging off approach on the sidewalk.

I just really want to chill and watch anime together with you some time, your taste is based as fuck

It sure is!

most bizarre thing i have seen today: a transradfem who clearly believes 100% closeted and non-passing transmascs have privilege over cis women but dancing around actually saying it because they know deep down it might get them backlash from the less radical transradfems

I don't even think it would.

I am still very "read another fucking author" at all the transfeminists who only ever quote Julia Serrano, but finding out she *also* hates the terms TMA/TME made my fucking week. Like, the transradfems' hero doesn't even agree with them!

A lot of them didn't even read Whipping Girl.

Can confirm male/female socialization is not actually a consistent thing because I was literally too autistic to internalize any gender roles, at least in relation to myself. Just. Never learned! Like water off a ducks back

High five!

Really if you take a character who presents as one gender and transition them some trans person is going to be mad about it cause they saw themselves in the original conception of the character. It's inevitable.

Yeah, that is the unfortunate truth of the matter.

That second paragraph is literally what terfs say about trans women. Turning that on trans men doesn't make you any more feminist it just makes you transphobic. (This is directed at the op of that post not you velvet)

Radical feminism is so fucking easy to recognize no matter how repackaged it is.

Racist feminism anon here: see this is the reason I feel like shit for having any critiques of feminism whatsoever. Like hashtag Not All Women obviously but literally these specific women aren't listening to marginalized men. We're not talking about whatever cis white able-bodied Elon Musk fan they think stands in for "men" in this situation. They put "valid concerns" in scare asterisks as though the very idea we have any is laughable. And no actually racism is not a "secondary manifestation" of misogyny and while transphobia stems from misogyny it shouldn't be treated as secondary for any trans person. How the fuck are we supposed to point out that white woman separatism leaves behind men who actually do suffer under patriarchy when it gets telephoned into "you stupid fucking bitch shut up I'll fucking kill you"

The point is making it so you can't.

BTW, I didn't get to edit it into the post before they blocked me, but they were reblogging Actual Nazi shit, like, the OP of the post was progressive but our dumbass here didn't notice that "if there was no hope their propaganda would be unnecessary" is (a) a popular Nazi thing and (b) added to the post by a literal Nazi.

It never does, they're fully removed from this plane of existence.

Note: At this point I kinna forgot I wasn't screenshotting these

<3 <3 <3 <3 <3

I can't believe someone who's BFFs with a tankie is a hypocrite.

You're the second person to apologize for using that format and it always makes me think of the clown-names drama every time.

[heartstringsduet]

Hi there! If you don't mind me coming to TK's defense in the fight, and specifically the issue of how he seemed so harsh. And I agree that there's a bit of an assumption on TK's part thatCarlos would support his decision. So from what I saw TK didn't really get mad until Carlos brought up his father and the search for his killer. And I think also a better way to approach him doing that would have been to try and reason with him that he has to be able to see an end to things that might not be him catching the killer, most people do because they aren't cops. But I can see how TK has already been here for a year and a half with Carlos. And he has been supportive, he only asked for therapy when it started affecting their marriage and even then he didn't ask Carlos to give up the case. So now he's the one in crisis (not the same of course) and he's looking for that support and its not there. Instead Carlos seems to be insisting TK live with him in that grief of Gabriel's death until he's ready to move on, the "and it always will be" line, and that's not fair either. Sadly crisis rarely line up so that one person has fully processed everything when the next one hits. And for TK's POV it looks like Carlos is willing to let his little brother, a living person, be shipped off to be raised an ocean away, in the name of Carlos getting closure on a dead person, the whole future versus the past thing. And I could see why this would set him off so strongly. I don't think he's ignoring this painful subject in Carlos's life, he hasn't for the past year and a half, but he is saying in this instance he has his own needs and he's putting them first. This is just me imagining TK's POV, I don't think that's what Carlos was saying really but maybe he didn't think what he said through to the end very well. Does that make sense??

Also I totally agree with you on the Wyatt and "doing right by Julio" nonsense. I really hate when this show goes all out on the copaganda to justify questionable behavior. And if it wasn't for the specific "make things right" line used I might be able to see what Carlos did in a more favorable light. But Wyatt didn't do anything wrong, he actually did a really amazing job under pressure, and he shouldn't be made to feel this is something he owes the cops, or Julio, or anyone. I do know the show tends to do this and its why I always have to brace for episodes like this. And yeah, killing a bunch of people shouldn't be viewed as "making things right", I don't care who they are.

Hi <3 This is gonna be an ESSAY. I apologize in advance. Whoever has time to read all this...wow 😂 First of all, I don't mind anyone writing me with an opinion as long as it isn't racist/queerphobic/etc. So all good. I think it's super fair to want to talk about an issue and I will reply whenever I have the bandwidth 💕 Also, as someone who's not a native English speaker, I will not try to nail you down on word choices. But I think if you meant it literally, coming to 'Tk's defense' at least with me isn't necessary at all. My criticisms toward him or Carlos are never an attack on them and having a different opinion or coming at something from another angle is just that. No defense necessary. If that makes sense??? I hope that doesn't come off as condescending I'm just hoping that the implication of people criticising or stating opinions is taken less and less as an attack in general. Because fandom often falls in such a binary. Good vs. Bad. And I don't prescribe to that in life or fiction. All of this to say, I think you make really valid points for why TK feels that way. I agree to certain extends. TK for sure has had to struggle with watching his husband be consumed with work and his father's death. And even if Gabriel had died of natural courses, it is TOUGH supporting a partner. It surely was tough for Carlos to support TK in season 3. And that is a struggle you are willing to take when you love someone but it takes a toll nonetheless. BUT: narratively, what Lone Star gave us was this: therapy - resolution through a compromise with the box - Carlos helping with the barn - gigantic birthday party Carlos seemed to have organized or at least was heavily involved in and present for and THEEEEN - TK not communicating well. In real life, issues like that are so messy and take forever to be resolved. Ngl, I've been hurt about some things a lot less severe for yearrrs. And I go to therapy too lol. But Lone Star's short season and pacing and cramming all of this in one now leads to this narrative to feel so jumbles because we as viewers can guess that the issue wasn't resolved for TK. How could it be?

But to give us two episodes of only seeing them happy and united again and then have TK not talk about adopting Jonah with Carlos first? THAT for me is the issue. Not TK being snappy and being upset when Carlos brings up Gabriel. Despite not seeing the on-screen struggle of it continue, that still made sense to me. I don't see that to be the reason why TK sprung the Jonah thing on Carlos like that. And he DID spring it on Carlos. That is human and again, don't mind him not finding the perfect words. But S4 established Carlos as someone who said he might not want kids. That's where we left things off. Jonah challenges that. That is super fair. I honestly have a case like that in my family I won't go into details for, but when I was 20, I was very briefly considering taking care of a toddler despite the circumstances being very very bad. It resolved in another way, but still, I have an idea what it's like to have family crisis and beign forced into making that tough decision. TK is so valid in wanting to take care of Jonah. And not thinking through logistics like Carlos would have. He is a very heart-first person. I was still surprised why they made the dialogue as it is because TK gives NO room for Carlos to weigh in. Yes, it could be clear to TK that he won't allow his brother to be raised by an institution and Carlos would likely agree. But to not even consider asking Carlos if he is okay with it? To take that agency from him? I don't think that's right and maybe we will disagree on that. It's a HUMAN BEING. And Jonah would deserve better than to have one of the men raising him not be in it 100%. That's the reason I don't want kids. I don't think it's fair t be wishy-washy about a child. "and he's looking for that support and its not there. Instead Carlos seems to be insisting TK live with him in that grief of Gabriel's death until he's ready to move on, the "and it always will be" line, and that's not fair either." -I don't think Carlos is insisting anything. I think the scene was too brief even to get into what Carlos wants more than it showed us what Carlos FEARS. He fears he wouldn't be able to raise a kid right now. And I think that has only partially to do with Gabriel's murder. Again, even in s4 he doesn't think he's ready. Give that man a minute to come to terms with maybe having to adopt, or lose TK. That's what it boils down to. Being in a crisis, dealing with trauma, and your life changing basically forever. You can logically support TK 100% but you can't deny how someone saying: "Hi babe we'll be dads now" isn't going to make you panic. Hell, someone dropping a dog in front of my door would make me panic. A full on child. AH. And TK didn't go about asking for support. He demanded it. He didn't allow another path. And Carlos in turn said: I don't know if I can cross that line for my own needs and sanity. Controversial opinion but even the best relationship would not make me cross certain boundaries and I don't think that should be the norm. TK said he accepted Carlos not wanting to be a father. The circumstances are so out of norm that he now brings it back up and has to be insistent. I just wish he would acknowledge that this is not something Carlos can do easily. I texted Mar that TK starting the dialogue off differently would have changed the entire thing for me. Like something similar to. ""I'm looking at adoption lawyers because Enzo wants to send him to a boarding school and I don't think I can watch that happen."" - Shows that TK is struggling with that himself at least. Still disregarding what Carlos would say but it leaves the door open just a little more to show a conflict and Carlos might have not felt as bulldozed. Others would surely write it even better. This is already so fucking long .... Feel like I would all get this out a lot better if I wrote a fic about it ngl. I'm so sorry if this is jumbled and messy. I promise you I take your words in good faith.

[brass-tacked]

was he also too suicidal to recognize that buck had come along way from where he was in season 1? was he also not in his right mind when he told hen "you got this" to her ease anxieties over adopting mara? or when he told her that all she had to do was welcome mara into her family when she was worried about mara never having felt a part of a family? or when he noticed ravi didn't need help with the hoses anymore? or when he told buck that he was on his game that night or letting him cook for the team, or telling him the food was good?

that argument doesn't make any sense unless you're also saying that nothing bobby says in that episode counts or matters? the point of that scene was to show these characters have grown through the under bobby. the point of the bobby and buck scene was bobby telling buck that he'd come along way and doesn't constantly need guidance anymore, which is true. also chimney, hen, eddie, and chris all love tommy. chim literally said "tommy is so cool." eddie literally said "i like him too." chris was gushing about how awesome tommy was off screen. bobby also openly liked tommy alongside hen and chim when he first met them in bobby begins, when hen, chim, and tommy were all getting drinks together. genuinely curious if you actually watch the show you're talking about or have you fallen victim to your own echo chamber? it's fine not to like a character, but it's very clear the show is trying to tell the audience that tommy is a good guy. like no amount of "b-b-but" is gonna change that. even if they do break up, he's never gonna be the villain you're creating in your head. all of the mains clearly approve of tommy, you just don't wanna hear it.

I’m not going to spend my night arguing with an anon. But I will say that the show does a pretty good job of showing how Tommy was not a good guy in the past. I’m not going to forgive a misogynistic racist.

Go rewatch the episode in season 3 where Buck befriends the retired firefighter who is all alone. When Buck asks Hen and Chim about their relationships with past members of the 118, they both admit that they aren’t friends with those guys, including Tommy. Chim straight up says he only called Tommy for help that one time because Tommy owed him a favor. That’s all. That’s the only reason they’d had any contact.

For the cruise ship episode, Hen wasn’t even trying to reach Tommy. She wasn’t even thinking of him.

But you know what the most important thing I’m going to say is? It’s that the best thing about consuming media is that we can all have different opinions and interpretations. We can all like different aspects of the same show, derive enjoyment and pleasure from it, and still never agree with each other.

Just like I’m never going to convince you that Tommy isn’t a good guy, you’re never going to convince me that he is.

So have a great night, enjoy your weekend, and let’s please agree to go to our separate corners of fandom in peace. You can also feel free to block me if you don’t like my opinion. It’s another great option to protect your own peace.

[demonqueenart]

- dan and phil have no reason to come to latam at all, they are ENGLISH content creators who make videos in the ENGLISH language and whose majority audience speaks ENGLISH. it's kind of baffling to me that you feel entitled to them going completely outside their audience when no other content creator does that, youtubers need to make money off their tours, they need to go to the places where their fanbase mostly is, other people and even artists do exactly this because why would they come here? there's an entire language barrier in between. all the other countries they're going to that speak a different language are either physically closer or they have more english speakers as a second language and they aren't giving that many dates in them. and of course they have a lot of dates for the US? that's where most of their audience is? they need to know where their audience is, that's their job, so they definitely know more than us about it

- saying they can just "dip into" mexico for a few shows is ridiculous, if they were to give a show here the most likely place for their audience to be is mexico city and, again, even that would be risky

- i can't speak for other latam countries but i have never in my life met someone who's offended at getting called a third-world country. that's just? the correct way to say it? like i'd rather he say that than call us poor or smth obviously. i will say that i agree it's a *stupid* term because it doesn't apply to the modern world anymore, the US has many problems that third world countries also have and third world countries have a lot of progressive aspects that first world countries don't. however, acting like latam is only big cities and progressive people is ignorant and avoids talking about the real problems we face. the term comes from a war that has been used to stereotype us but it is also the way it's taught in schools, society and the internet. dan saying this seems to me like it was just the way he knows how to say it (which is the way most people know) and he didn't strike me as having malicious intent which is always what is most important

- dnp have never promoted this as a world tour. they don't owe us explanations or apologies as to why they're not going to certain countries. it's okay to be upset that they aren't coming to yours, i was too, but they really have no reason to go because it's *their* tour not ours.

- the one thing i agree with here is the racist stuff they've said and done in the past, especially dan. the things he did were disgusting and not okay. but i am absolutely giving him the benefit of the doubt because, in my opinion, actions are better than words. he was a teenager (!!!) and he hasn't repeated his behavior since, i'm also pretty sure he Has apologized but even if he hadn't i'd much rather he actually fix himself, which is what he's done imo, instead of saying sorry and continuing to do the same thing

- racism is a constant problem in most fandoms and it should be addressed directly as to put a stop to it. it makes sense to me that you think the way you do as you said you've never experienced such a thing in your life but please please please take a step back and realize that dan and phil don't know every single internal problem happening with their fans and giving up on them completely the way you seem to have is insanely and undeservedly pessimistic when they most likely don't even know what's going on.

Sincerely, a mexican dan and phil fan.

That’s a very valid point! I won’t disagree, what you said could be the reasons underlying all of this events that’s been happening. And mind you, I don’t even care if they’re not going on the tour in my area. It’s never been about that. The problem is tho, why does this explanation come from a fan instead of dnp. Don’t get me wrong, these are very valid points! If dnp were to say that to me and others, I would have been okay! There has been many instances where dnp knows their actions have hurt others, but they stay silent and try to cover it up. These reasonings are not bad! And it won’t make them look bad if they say anything about it. But it’s weird why they wouldn’t say anything when so many of us have been hurt by them staying silent.

I’ll give you an example to clarify this. Mirian from twt, one of the community team that did subtitles for dnp videos, she has expressed she was very hurt by the term 3rd world country. And although you and others are not offended by it, you should not tell others how to feel about the term because we have different experiences. This term are derogatory to a lot of people, and diminishing other people’s experiences is not right. Mirian and many others have addressed this issue multiple times: during wad, when dnp did a fake apology. And dnp could just dip in and say, “we’re sorry that the term offended you. It was taught in school and we didn’t mean anything by it.” Does that look bad to you? It’s not to me! But they never did! They turned a blind eye on it, and so are other people in this community.

Do you know what that feels like? When white people just keep ignoring you as if we’re crazy for feeling offended when they have offended us? There has been far too many shooshing in this community, and in the name of them keep doing this to us! We want them to address things because we want to know that they are there for us, that they are trying and didn’t mean by any mistakes they’ve done. Instead, they keep trying to bury us up, pretending we’re not there! How do you think I would feel about it? Should I be glad that they see me being hurt as this ugly thing that should be buried down because that’d make them look bad? I’m telling you right now, if they do not acknowledge those people they’ve hurt, you cannot say this space is inclusive to everyone.

I was hoping to bring light to these issues, not pretending it’s not there, not enabling them or this community. What do you think it says about this community that we cannot bring light to issues that can hurt people so severely. If people were to be called out about someone saying transphobic slurs, you would not have diminished their feelings. You would speak up in hopes that it won’t be repeated again. This whole thing could be solved by just a good communication, but them not choosing to do that means they’re not choosing us to be here. And to that, idk. Maybe I should find a space that actually treats me like a person, not a thing that keeps making excuses for others

Auto-message: This ask’s purpose is to acknowledge dnp’s past/present exclusivity, not to cancel them! But to embrace mistakes that they’ve made so that 1. we won’t exclude people in need in this community, and 2. we can normalize bringing up exclusivity so that improvement can happen. Hopefully this will one day help dnp realize that this is a safe space for them to talk about their mistakes, so that this space can become safe for people of all kinds too <3

*If you don’t understand what is happening, scroll through my blog for context. And I’ll be taking time to answer my asks, so don’t think I’m ignoring youuu*

[trexalicious]

One of the children was unwell so Rachel couldn't attend...😉

[violetganache42]

Highlights from Saturday's Oops! All Episodes! night celebrating everyone's favorite adorable and badass pink duckling, courtesy of @knuckles-junior and yours truly!

(I couldn't make it to most of it, so any highlights I do add in the episode up until "The Last Adventure will be anything that catches my eye while scrolling back through the chat. As such, mine will be in purple while Any's are in pink. If we both have the same highlight, then it'll be left uncolored.)

Garfunkel and Oates - Rainbow Connections

Learning this song was originally for Kate Micucci and Riki Lindhome's friend

Discord and YouTube already experiencing technical difficulties to where everyone went straight to the episodes/There was a delay but don’t worry, Will. Thanks Puffy for hosting!

"Cold Duck"

Huey, Dewey and Louie are hunting for Beakleys (*Elmer Fudd laughter*)

Launchpad appearance!

Literally everyone being racist/sexist to the girls (1987, everyone. Shit like this is why the phrase "product of its time" exists.)

Dreamy: Webby is my favorite fan artist.

I never like HDL in the 87 version. Thank god I didn’t get jumped. (You're in good company with the Cafeteria Table, and we don't tolerate getting jumped for different opinions. ^^)

Puffy: WHO RAISED THEM TO HATE WOMEN SO BAD Will: Uncle Donald Puffy: "NOOOOOOOOOO BUT DONALD LOVES WOMEN HAVEN'T YOU SEEN THE THREE CABALLEROS" Dreamy: "He respects women while craving that bisexual crisis"

Everyone agreeing the DT87 triplets deserved to get sent to penguin jail

Club Penguin

Puffy: "it's not a toro it's a uuuuh goes to google morsa"

"Um, Mr. Scrooge?"/"Call me Uncle Scrooge."

Webby gaining a new sister in the form of Skittles the Penguin

"Daytrip of Doom!" (Rewatch)

Me freaking out about Scrooge being spectacless

OW MY TAILBONE (That line always cracks me up. 😂)

"Um, ocupado." Me: HOUSE MEETING. NOW.

“Wait are they gonna kiss?” (Again: I don't need that image burned in my brain, Llewellyn. >< This is why you're the evil triplet!)

*Webby kicks a sack into a tree, causing it to fall down* “WEBBY DAAAAANNNNGGGG” (This is what I would've shared in response to that scene. lol)

Spider Webby real

The entire scene with Donald flooding the mansion's main bathroom with his hose and Scrooge's golden reaction to it

Jane appearance!

THE SPORK (Shout out to @danaterrace for storyboarding that scene!)

"Like New Zealand" (I did recently hear New Zealand is a great place to live in.)

Just the entire Beakley and Donald subplot in general

Webby being a mood

Ma Beagle appearance!

THE COINS JUST SHOWED UP OUTTA NOWHERE (THAT SHIT IS SO FUCKING HILARIOUS. 🤣)

"Well, that's not something you wanna hear when you're tied up in a meat locker."

"Normal's overrated."/"We want you to be Webby normal."

Everyone when Donald attacked Bouncer and Burger:

Surprise batman appearance

"I'm on Webby's team!"

"The Good Muddahs" (Rewatch)

Us remembering Bubba was in the later seasons. -_- (Yeah, I don't blame you guys at all. 😓 DT17!Bubba can stay though; he's cool, especially since he didn't replace DT17!Webby in the group unlike his original version.)

The return of whitewashed Daffy Pt. 2: Electric Boogaloo

Missy's Discord making a random ass scream thanks to a server she's in

HDL continuing to be sexist (Seriously, WHO THE FUCK GENDERS SOMETHING LIKE HOPSCOTCH?!)

Beagle Babes appearance!

I DIDNT KNOW THERE WERE BEAGLE GIRLS CALLED “BEAGLE BABES”. (Unlike the Beagle Boys, they're not created by Carl Barks. They're a trio of one-off characters exclusive to DT87.)

THE COPS DON’T DO SHIT JUST LIKE IRL COPS

Pink guns!

(It's around this vicinity that Any's highlights for this episode dramatically decreased because she still couldn't believe what she watched, so the rest will be handled by me. Besides, she was more eager to cover Confidential Casefiles and TLA.)

Any: 12 HOURS (Remember, DT87!Webby is younger than her reboot counterart by what? A few years or something? It's normal for a kid as young as her to cry. Between how the DT87 triplets treated her and being kidnapped at literal gunpoint, she was not having a good day, so of course she would be upset. That being said, 12 HOURS? Someone get this girl some water to rehydrate herself with because that cartoon logic went into overtime!)

Shoplifting list

THE ICONIC WORRY ROOM

Missy and Puffy rooting for Beakley

nepdapurrbeast: "the police shouslve been pigs smh"

caro: "Bubba thinks he’s part of the team 💀" (FR)

WEBBY WITH A GUN

puff

The triplets behind the wheel, with Dewey driving

"From the Confidential Casefiles of Agent 22!" (Rewatch)

OTTOMAN EMPIRE MARATHON!

Black Heron appearance!

Louie having Pep priorities

Webby's special interest in Scrooge and Clan McDuck

Donald somehow locking himself in the pantry (Easily the FUNNIEST moment in season 1. 🤣)

LUDWIG APPEARANCE!

Scrooge being a sassy bitch in the flashbacks. (He was a lot cockier in the 1960s. lol)

"First ever Webby-McDuck team-up!"

Beakley punching Scrooge in the face

Story Blossom: "A rubber ball? PERRY THE RUBBER BALL?"

"Louie mostly just cries." (He is not wrong. In all seriousness, someone give Louie all the hugs.)

Scrooge McFucking dies ("Worse. I got a stem caught in my throat.")

Vengeance for Number 4

"Aww, that was gonna be so impressive." (NGL, I would do the same thing. XD Just chucking a nearby object at a runaway enemy and feeling bummed about it missing.)

Scrooge and Webby bonding (I can hear the scene in my head and I am SMILING. 😊)

spam: "every evil plot starts with a declaration of hatred speech…"

Any and Puffy: "OH NO"

Everyone freaking out about Webby almost getting killed

The art book revealing Black Heron realized Webby is April after seeing her kick the Gummiberry Juice out from her hand, drinking it, and untying Scrooge

“Call me Uncle Scrooge.”/“I’m Webby!”

Any: Several episodes later (STOOOOOOP. 😭 IT'S BAD ENOUGH DISNEY XD AIRED LAST CRASH A FEW HOURS BEFORE WEBBY NIGHT.)

Oh, and we were jumpscared by Goldie three times. (THREE?! Aw, man!)

"The Last Adventure!"

Pt. 1: A Tale of Three Webbys!

Crazy that Lena can rig an import game.

Can we talk about how Scrooge only wasted money on a birthday party at funzo’s for Webby? Slay king. (YES, WE CAN. FULL. FUCKING. PRICE. FOR HIS DAUGHTER. IT SPEAKS VOLUMES ON HOW CLOSE THE TWO HAVE GOTTEN.)

Us when Missy wants to smash both Bradford and Drake:

Violet joining at the right time ^^ (Glad to have made it in time for the family storming the Funso's base!)

Darkwing showing off by walking on two fingers

MAY AND JUNE

Any and I commenting about how OP Lena is/Violet: “We may need to start putting handicaps on Lena XD”

“You already got sisters.”

Me and Violet: AMONGUS (btw you read my mind) (I had to. 😂 On a related note…)

Puffy: "WEBBY VENTED SHE'S SUS"

"Have you eaten a hamburger?"

“COUGH UP THE INFORMATION, BENTINA!”

Webby's conspiracy board now turned into her family board

Puffy: "you know who else came out in 1996" Me: "MY MOM!"

Beakley lying to Webby./Everyone calling out Beakley and her fabricated story about Webby's parents

SHES FIBBING FIBBING FIBBING. (Oh, hey! I quoted that! :D)

NOT THE VULCAN NERVE PINCH

Webby vs. June:

Pt. 2: The Lost Library of Isabella Finch!

Donald wearing his signature blue sailor outfit again

spam: "The ducktales logo looks like a censor there i cant"

Bradford abuses/manipulates children/Us talking about Bradford being a child abuser in the finale

"It's Webby."

Scrooge smiling proudly at the kids as they board the Sunchaser

Bradford being a manipulative creep towards Huey

Phantom Blot and Pepper appearance!

Scrooge: "Any questions?" Me: "GOLD TEAM RULES!"

Lena being really op by making the sunchaser invisible.

THE ORIGINAL THREE!/TRIPLE MCDUCK FAMILY TEMPER!!!

Gyro being the biggest baby ever./Pepper obliterating the twink

"I live again!"

Violet—the character, not me—panicking

“Finally!”

Everyone after Bradford after ripping the pages off the journal: 🤬��🤬/Me, Toku, and Any: "BASTARD"

Donald and Della gushing over baby Jeeves

Us talking about the implications of Bradford killing Duckworth

Steelbrain

Gandra appearance!

Ludwig revealing he got way too busy to die (King shit. XD)

The revelation that Bradford kidnapped EVERYONE! EVEN SANTA CLAUS!

April.

Beakley killing Jeeves

This out of context photo Any took:

Jeeves and Don Karnage die/Dewey officially getting a kill count in the funniest way possible

Everyone freaking out at the end of part 2.

ME POINTING OUT A VERY HEARTBREAKING PARALLEL RIGHT AS PART 2 ENDED

Pt. 3: Tales' End…

Dewey hitting the dab

Puffy, Missy, and I complimenting the finale

Manny being a living Gargoyles reference

"When they do something right, they're heroes. When it gets a little hard, wE’rE cHiLdReN!"

"Aw, phooey."

Me and Missy: "STOCK POSE"

"All women… are queens!"/"If she breathes… she's a THOOOOT!"

Puffy: "hard cut to scrooge getting his spine broken lmao" EllaKai: "legit i vocalized 'agh my back'"

"How do you think Della found out you built the Spear of Selene?"/This scene and everyone freaking out in the chat again myself included:

I’m literally the only one who is happy that Heron died. Rest in Piss. (I'm sure Scrooge would agree with you on that, mainly because he did not react to her erasure from existence at all. Like, that boy just STOOD THERE. 😂)

The Webby twist never gets old. 🙂 (HUGE agree. Also…)/YOUR DAILY FUCKING REMINDER, EVERYONE:

Launchpad becoming Gizmopad

ALL OF US PANICKING AT BRADFORD NEARLY ACHIEVING VICTORY (NO FUCKING JOKE! MY BODY WAS SHAKING WHEN I SAW THAT SCENE AGAIN! ><)

"Ow?"

“GET AWAY FROM MY DAD!” ("Wait, what?")

FAMILY IS THE GREATEST ADVENTURE OF ALL!

SCROOGE FINALLY SAYING "WEBBY DARLING" 😭💖/WERE ALL DEFENDERS OF THIS FINALE DUCKBLUR FOR LIFE. SCREW THE HATERS.

Team Uncle embracing their fatherly roles, from Donald taking May and June under his wing to Scrooge making a parallel to "Woo-oo!" and worrying about Webby's safety

THE FINAL END CREDITS

[thatdebaterguy]

Forcing Beliefs

I saw this post here, and clearly they think what they're doing is spreading a good cause, but god they've done it so wrongly. The entire reason of wars stems from different opinions. Hamas believes Israel is some hellish creation that should be wiped off the face of the Earth, Israel thinks it has a right to exist. Saying that's a debate that actually exists genuinely blows my mind, that a country's right to be sovereign and exist peacefully is debated, because barely any Israel supporters say Palestine should be wiped out, but a scary amount of Palestine supporters call for the death of the state of Israel.

It's a debate. I believe strongly that my stance is correct based on morals, facts and evidence, but I don't deny people their right to oppose me or believe Hamas is in the right. Even if Hamas are literally terrorists, I'll let anyone debate that. Also using the 'silence is complicit' argument has never worked in history, when German's just wanting to get through their lives under the Nazi regime weren't out protesting, it doesn't mean they wanted the death of all Jews, they just didn't want to die a horrible death for voicing it. In fact, the way people push supporting Palestine is very similar to the way the nazis were, since many people who speak up and say Israel is in the right, could lose their jobs, their social status, friends, family, get told to kill themselves, just for a difference in opinion. If I was part of a certain fanbase, or even better, if I was queer, and started voicing my opinions for Israel, I'd be called a fake member of the community, a traitor, an oppressor, told to kill myself, and be isolated from that community entirely.

I can't speak for all Israel supporters, many of whom think differently to me, but if you support Palestine, I'll watch movies with you, joke with you, play games with you, go on walks with you, go to restaurants, as long as you aren't some brainwashed incredibly headstrong supporter who refuses to acknowledge any difference in opinion. If you can even just tolerate that one difference, I'll happily get along with you.

One thing they're doing though, they're linking things like supporting Palestine with supporting human rights. I had a teacher who ran the debating club I was part of who taught us the basis of logical argument. An argument can be logical without being true, and the structure went like this; IF you support human rights, AND supporting human rights makes you Pro-Palestine, therefore you MUST support Palestine. I'm a literal example of why that framework is logical, but untrue. I support human rights, innocent victims of war, victims of genocide, but not Palestine. It's a way to rope in more people to their cause, by trying to play on peoples emotions rather than logic, to make the idea of refusing to support Palestine, an alienating, racist, bigoted thing to do, which just isn't true. Don't let people bully you into having certain beliefs. Form your own logical argument that IS true and contains evidence, to base your opinions on. For example, IF genocide is defined by the purposeful extermination of people based on race, ethnicity or other categorical factors, AND you accept that definition of genocide, as it is in the dictionary, therefore you MUST accept that Israel is not committing genocide, because based on the very definition you said you believe, it simply isn't happening, and if you agreed with that definition, then still believe that Israel is committing genocide, then your opinion is illogical and factually wrong, so either you believe they aren't committing genocide or you change the definition of the word, OR try debate that Israel is attempting to wipe out all Palestinians, to which all I have to say is, IF Israel has a weapons arsenal that could wipe out Gaza in minutes, AND Israel is attempting the extermination of all Palestinians, therefore Gaza MUST currently be flattened to the ground. Which it isn't. It really isn't that hard to debunk. Don't get brainwashed.

[gorogues]

it-is-i-zim replied to your ask post: This is just my opinion but Ostrander's revamp of him was the worst thing thing to happen to him character wise. Fans of Boomerang are sometimes straight up harassed for what Ostrander did to his character. Like on one hand, one of the reasons why he was on the suicide squad for so long and we see him AT ALL is because of Ostrander but I'm sick of being called racist because of how my guy was written by Ostrander.

it-is-i-zim replied to your ask post: Identity Crisis was bad for Digger still though. It also made me kinda dislike Tim Drake fans but I also get that for ages their only exposure to Boomer was that comic. And the Knight Terrors: Robin comic bringing that comic back into the established canon did no favors either seeing that it was through the eyes of someone who wasn’t even there. An artistic choice for sure, but it’s also made Tim Drake fans feral about how AWFUL Digger is.

Unfortunately this is more of a fan problem than a writing one. I definitely sympathize with people who love pre-Crisis Digger but hate his post-Crisis self, because modern Digger can be a lot. But people being jerks to other fans because of it is 100% a problem with fandom, and it's got to stop. There's nothing wrong with liking problematic characters as long as you're honest about their flaws, because they aren't real people and they haven't actually hurt anyone real…and just because you like them doesn't mean you approve of everything they do.

It's also fine for people to dislike a character or avoid other fans if they make you uncomfortable for any reason, but it shouldn't get to the point of mistreating a real person over fictional stories and liking/disliking fictional things.

(To make things extremely personal for a moment, it took me over 25 years to figure out why I gravitate to unpopular villains: it was only once I understood that I was the family scapegoat that I realized I like unpopular villains because I'd been considered one/treated like one my entire life. People can have their reasons for liking villains and problematic characters that have nothing to do with the shittiest thing(s) the character(s) have done.)

it-is-i-zim replied to your ask post: And with Owen, arguably his worst characterization was in that one Supergirl comic where he tried to get with a 15 year old Supergirl while being established as an adult man and was like, “I’m not a creep” but then on the same page also called her “jailbait” which uh… Gross. I must say I’m not fond of him because of that and therefore didn’t mind the kinda bad revamp back in Suicide Squad (2016) #47

The question was "the most common way they're written badly", and while that was weird and creepy, it was thankfully just a brief anomaly in the Supergirl book (that's why his strange Rebirth revamp didn't get my pick; it was just one story). I found Owen's intelligence and skill level varied wildly throughout his appearances, and sometimes he was competent and sometimes he was a clueless dumbass. He seemed reasonably smart in his debut story, so IMO him being an idiot was the primary example of being written badly.

it-is-i-zim replied to your ask post: Sorry that my thoughts are kinda all over the place on the Captain Boomerangs.

That's completely okay, it's why we're all here! :)

parkakingrolo replied to your ask post: I'm gonna go a little against the grain on Lisa, and say some of her other characterizations I'm not too fond of are when she's now the moral compass, and I agree The Rogues should have a stronger one, but forcing it on Lisa feels awkward. Don't get me started on when she hinted at feelings for Barry too. Maybe it's just two extremes and they struggle for a healthy middle.

Yeah, that's fair. That one's a problem too, though the one I mentioned bothers me more so I guess that's why I went with it. Truthfully I think both versions are manifestations of sexist beliefs about women, one benevolent ("women are morally better than men") and one misogynist ("women are crazy bitches, especially ex-girlfriends" -- and on that note, I really hate what was done to Magenta by Waid and Johns. She should have been included on the previous list).

It would be good if DC strove for some middle ground between the two, because Lisa should be flawed but not constantly jonesing to slash people's faces.

[batsplat]

Tysm for your deep dives into MotoGP I LOVE your posts no matter how long or short, you have such a keen eye and pen for weaving history with narrative and the psychological patterns of the sport. 

I was hoping to hear your take on the decline of the Japanese manufacturers in MotoGP. I’ve only been into the sport since the end of 2023 so still super new!! And I’ve learned so much from ur blog 🙏🏽

Ive been seeing some takes on here about how a lot of prominent MotoGP podcasts present the decline of Yamaha and Honda as a result of the Japanese “culture”. Idk if you’re an avid podcaster so basically there’s this narrative of the Japanese as an isolationist developer which refuses to bring in/poach European engineers and copy off Ducati bc of national pride + historical dominance . Also that they’re too risk adverse and slow to develop and test new parts on the bike.

I Totally agree with the tumblrinas that this  seems very one-note (and racist) analysis to say a “cultural difference” is the ONLY thing influencing the Japanese teams decline over the last decade. Would you know/could guess of any other factors that could’ve led to this decline in performance? Sorry for the long ask <3

never apologise for a long ask, and that's very kind!!

I haven't seen the tumblr takes but I do listen to the podcasts - and yup, some of the discussions of the japanese manufacturers make me pretty uncomfortable. on a semi-related note, sometimes feels like motogp for an individual sport is oddly preoccupied with questions of national character and broad strokes generalisations of entire countries/linguistic groupings/continents? idk, I can't articulate it well, but I do think it's a thing... in any case, the cultural essentialism when it is directed at japan often threatens to take on quite a condescending, patronising tone. essentially propagating a narrative that the wise europeans need to go over to japan to teach them their ways etc etc... it's really not great

now, the problem we're faced with here is that like a lot of people, I get most of my motogp news from the guys who are also doing the podcasts. which means that I am inevitably pretty reliant on them in forming my own opinions on this sport - like,, I'm not going to know all these other factors for the current struggles of the japanese manufacturers if they don't tell me about them. that being said, sometimes it's an issue of framing more than it is of the actual content of the reporting. to the best of my knowledge, it does seem true that japanese manufacturers have stagnated in part because they haven't hired widely enough, including probably from the europeans. this isn't because europeans are inherently better at designing bikes - the japanese manufacturers did dominate the sport for decades, after all - but that's just how things go sometimes... centres of knowledge shift, it's easy to fall behind. right now, for the current formula of the sport, getting yourself dall'igna or a dall'igna protege seems like the way to go. it's not some uniquely japanese national pride or intransigence that has made them so sluggish in embracing the new era... it's mostly just human nature that you're going to be resistant to change if your way has been the right way for a long time, right

worth pointing out that plenty of manufacturers can be arrogant about this kind of thing, including the italians. look at ducati's complacency after winning the 2007 title that sent them on a bit of a downward spiral until around 2014 - not helped by how they didn't rate their star rider and only had a wake up call when they gave their national idol an unrideable trash can for two years. which brings us to another reason for why the japanese manufacturers are doing so badly: the margins being so small nowadays. like, in absolute terms, honda/yamaha aren't dramatically further away from ducati than ducati was to honda/yamaha in circa 2012, but everything is just a lot closer now and you've got a million ducatis plus an assortment of aprilias and ktms to reliably slot into that gap. doesn't help!! so suddenly you're finishing p14 rather than p7 in the championship... a related factor is how strong satellite teams are nowadays; in the alien era, riders not on a factory bike were generally at way more of a disadvantage than they are now. that era specifically also featured quite a 'weak' grid for various reasons related to the impact of the financial crisis, teams lacking resources and dorna making up the numbers with crt bikes, etc... the point is that while on paper ducati's wilderness years look considerably less catastrophic than what's happening now, the strength of the current grid has made honda/yamaha's situation look even worse than it otherwise would. what's happened to the two traditional powerhouses in the series is pretty unprecedented, but not entirely so

that being said, obviously honda and yamaha are in serious trouble - and have been for a while now. you can kinda get into the weeds with both of them about how their competitive situations have developed... honda's overreliance on marc, for instance, their willingness to build a bike nobody else could ride - or how yamaha traditionally treated their satellite teams as customers rather than partners, plus how they never really managed to respond to long-standing rider concerns about the bike that went all the way back to when they had valentino/jorge on their team. (yamaha being chronically underpowered is something that does actually crop up in the mid noughties and never quite went away - there's something kinda fascinating about how motogp bikes in some respects seem to have quite an immutable character.) I wrote a short 'how did we get here' post for honda specifically - and as mentioned in that post, setting aside fabio's 2021 title, the decline for yamaha basically started when the switch to michelins and ecu happened in 2016. on the flip side, you can also focus on the ducati side of the equation and figure out how they've gotten so good, from how they've pushed the sport on in their technical developments with the wings and infernal ride height devices and all of that... how aprilia and ktm have been more willing to just straight up copy them, while the established powerhouses have been more reluctant to change their ways. you can point to how the pandemic (plus the war in ukraine) impacted different manufacturers to differing extents - including of course in making the third japanese manufacturer leave the grid entirely

which is all well and good, but it would still be interesting to get a bit more insight into why it's the japanese manufacturers specifically that have been flagging so badly. it feels like there's a pretty obvious next step here - get some takes from japanese people themselves. this does feel like something english language reporting on motogp in general is woefully short on given how big a role japan plays in the sport... journalists seem far more likely to discuss what has been reported in italian or spanish or german or whatever sources than drawing from japanese publications. which feels like a problem!! I have a twitter list with a few japanese accounts that talk about motogp, and I've tried to poke about to figure out some answers to this issue before. one bloke who seems to be quite well-respected and established in the paddock is akira nishimura, who writes for this japanese site and also occasionally publishes columns in the japanese version of motorsport dot com. now, I'm aware that getting one japanese perspective and drawing conclusions solely on the basis of that isn't ideal, but I reckon getting one japanese perspective is still better than getting none at all. so let's get some of his thoughts!

firstly, here is an article about the transfer of 'brainpower' between suzuki and honda after suzuki left the sport. I thought this was really interesting in terms of discussing some of the structural factors at play here that can help explain why there haven't been more outside hires:

isn't this helpful? cut out all the essentialising bullshit, and here we have some actually useful context. even namechecks the dall'igna move from aprilia to ducati as something that wouldn't really happen with japanese manufacturers - and yes, that does feel like it would be a problem if it means you're trying to figure out this aero business with no outside help. also helps contextualise how the big name hires made by yamaha and very recently honda are pretty significant, given how relatively unprecedented they are. and here is another article about how japanese companies are structured, in the context of poorly timed reshuffles at honda. again, it's not about the japanese needing to be 'shown the way' or some such crap... it's just that right now, the people best equipped to figure out the current formula of bikes are probably being employed by some european manufacturer or other and you probably want to get them on board. you hire their guys and copy their tricks, tale as old as time

then there's this column from last year about ducati's current dominance, which is useful in both giving us some insight about what some of the japanese discourse looks like as well as in providing explanations for the current malaise

that's really the main takeaway, isn't it - it's all part of the competitive cycle. sometimes it's european manufacturers who have had the upper hand, sometimes it's the japanese ones. there'll always be some competitive paranoia and mudslinging going on, as well as heavy criticism of those who are currently losing out - and at times people will get pretty racist about it. also makes sense that a more closed-off approach to knowledge sharing would help you when you're the ones currently winning, right, whereas it'd hurt you when you need to have some knowledge shared with you... ducati is doing really well because they happened to crack the code for how to build the best bikes for this current era in motogp, and the japanese manufacturers probably should have been faster in copying them. that's how it goes sometimes

also - while I haven't differentiated between english language reporters in this post, it is worth pointing out that the bloke I've been citing has been published on the motomatters website and was on an episode of the paddock pass podcast when news first broke of suzuki's withdrawal back in 2022. that one's obviously primarily just focused on suzuki - but it's still interesting, not least because suzuki was at least doing better than honda when they withdrew from the sport. the episode also discusses some historical context surrounding the last time the sport was in crisis in the late noughties with the financial crisis and kawasaki's withdrawal. then there's a thursday paddock notes episode from motegi last year, which included this exchange:

Q: Akira, is it enough to change personnel in Japan, or do you think there also needs to be some harder implementation of a program in Europe? I mean, we see Cal Crutchlow is doing a wildcard appearance this weekend for Yamaha, he was talking a little bit about Yamaha's processes and it does seem that there needs to be kind of a harder effort on both sides of the world for the Japanese to make some big strides quickly. Nishimura: I think only changing personnel doesn't change anything. Probably they will - it's my personal impression but probably they have changed their engineering philosophy, or their organisational structure itself. And [I would say] changing, or fixing. [...] Even if they bring some more from Europe to Japan, that guy cannot work how they want to. So the problem is down to structure itself or their management in engineering.

look. it's a complicated topic and we're not going to get into all the nuances in one tumblr post. obviously you'd want to get a bunch more sources than this from inside japan to get a better sense of what's going on. I am not an expert on the japanese labour market and kind of just have to take this reporting at face value, which isn't ideal. but let's just finish this post off with a list of plausible-ish-sounding reasons for why the japanese manufacturers been struggling so badly (x, x, x):

smaller margins between bikes, more competitive european manufacturers, and the strength of satellite teams exaggerating how far behind honda/yamaha have fallen

ducati bringing in dall'igna, the subsequent aero revolution, and the fact that the other european manufacturers have been more willing to copy ducati than the japanese manufacturers have been

japanese manufacturers being less willing to employ outside hires in their important roles, limiting the extent to which they can make use of ideas already developed elsewhere

a more sluggish development rate, leading to a bike that isn't changing fast enough to deal with the scale of the problem they're facing

somewhat nebulously characterised differences between european and japanese manufacturers, criticising the working process of the latter - in particular their conservatism in making changes to the bikes

the delayed impact of cost cutting measures implemented after the 2008 financial crisis, which has forced manufacturers to rethink their approach to testing. having to operate from both a japanese and european base - in particular in the context of the pandemic - has hindered the japanese manufacturers

a more substantial language barrier between test riders and engineers than in european manufacturers - paired with a conservatism in not letting enough race weekend testing happen. there has been a post-dall'igna cultural shift away from that conservatism in european manufacturers that has helped them progress faster

ducati making better use of their satellite teams, partly by running more bikes and partly just by treating them better (cf yamaha scaring off their satellite teams)

so yeah, I agree with the distaste for some of the english language reporting on this issue - though my issue primarily isn't with the actual content of the reporting as much as it is with how it's being framed, how the problem is being diagnosed. you can say that the current approach to testing probably isn't ideal and also that they need to be poaching more brainpower without talking about how all this reflects the japanese national character or whatever. just... dial down the condescension, guys. and maybe tell us what japanese sources themselves are saying now and again

[alatismeni-theitsa]

I usually always agree with your stance on depictions of greek gods in media and how they should look greek (as a greek myself, its frustrating) unfortunately in the case with Hades many of these conversations have been tainted by or are thinley veiled talking points in support of racism and alt right values (which I know is not YOUR intention! Or the intention of some others pointing this out, but from what ive seen of the majority it is racism/alt right rhetoric...unfortunately many game communities are running rampant with this) these people have no interest in anti colonialist values, and in many cases are actually advocating against what you're calling out and want the greek gods to look "white" not "greek" (blonde hair, blue eyes, pale skin, just as you mentioned these depictions still being racist these types of people would have no issue if the gods looked like this and are actually they types to see this as their ideal ancient greek). I am just letting you know as someone who has seen this happen time and time again in game communities and has come to know how these people talk....Even if what they're advocating for at face value has a bit of truth I dont think these are values you want to align yourself with in this specific context 😅

I've seen these things too, and I disagree with the racist statements as you pointed out. The messages here asked for my opinion so I only gave it, without presenting any post/line I agree with.

I know the types you're talking about, the Greeks who think pale/blue eyes and light blond hair are the "ideal" 😭 I don't know how many of them are out there in this specific argument (I didn't spend too much time on X) but I've seen many Greeks here who agree the presentation of gods wasn't ideal, without going to the ALT right side.

The racists are against the design for their own stupid reasons. Following the "I don't like the design" line, doesn't mean I or others are following the racist line as well. Μακριά από μας 😂 These idiots go "no light skin = no Greek, Black people Africans GRRR", and they give me the hives. I think many of them also lack the critical thinking to understand what the underlying problem is. (I don't equate bad articulation with racism, I'm just saying our racists are not too bright and sometimes they don't put much time into understanding why they're annoyed 😭)

I put many disclaimers in the post to avoid being mistaken for one of them. I think we have to learn how to express our worries without slipping (accidentally or not) towards bigotry. I don't want our concerns to go unnoticed just because of some stupid assholes. I'd like Greeks to find ways to push back the racism and bigotry in the game community, and also advocate for more respect when it comes to our culture. I'm tired of racists ruining it for everyone, I'm tired of having to put disclaimers like "I think people should have rights" when talking about archaeology and culture. This is still the racist's fault, since their existence and prevalence makes us all look shit. The rest of us have to learn how to handle them and separate ourselves from them.

What do you think?