#like not necessarily because of anything problematic (I don’t remember enough about them to know about that)

[smol-blue-bird]

my little sister made my dad watch the entirety of the new Percy Jackson miniseries on Disney+, and when it was over, he just turned to me and said “well, I didn’t like it”

[lasenbyphoenix]

Shipper tag game

Tagged by @sunriseverse thank you!💜

What ship were you completely obsessed with when you were a teenager, but now you don’t care about anymore?

I didn't know the concept of shipping was a thing until I was 29 and stumbled onto fandom on tumblr, (didn't know about fandom either until then), so I'm trying to think of any couples I would have considered cute in anything I watched/read growing up... and I really dont know?? Joshua Jackson was a fave actor from back then and I can't even remember if I had an opinion on the Dawson/Joey vs Pacey/Joey debate on Dawson's Creek. I was always more interested in the story than the ships! (Can you tell I'm on the aroace side of life? Lol)

Which ship would you consider your first one?

Captain America is what lead me to finding fandom in the first place so Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes is the first that comes to mind. But before that I was very into Dr Who, so I'd probably consider The Doctor/Rose Tyler the first fictional couple I had any emotional investment in.

Your first fanfic was about which couple?

My first shippy fanfic (written before I knew what "fanfic" was) was James Bond/William Brandt Skyfall/Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol crossover.

You know the scene in Skyfall when Silva has Bond tied to a chair and starts toying with his chest and teases him about this not being in his training and Bond replies "What makes you think this is my first time?"? And then in Ghost Protocol when Jeremy Renner's character pulls himself out of the vent at the last second and gripes "Next time I get to seduce the rich guy."? I joked to my best friend that "Now we know what James Bond's first time was." And that's how that idea was born.

I started writing it as a joke for my friend but never finished it, and if I find the notebook it was written into I might just revisit it because I still quite like the idea!

Do you remember the first couple you saw fanart of?

Not for certain, but possibly either Dean/Cas or Rose/Ten.

Have you ever gotten into ship discourse?

Like ship wars or 'problematic' kind of discourse? If I did it would have been in my Captain America days (Stucky vs Stony and Peggy vs Sharon being heated topics of memory), and even then I don't remember specific incidents - as a newbie to fandom I tended to lurk and watch instead of engaging. Now I'm very much Ship And Let Ship (and only bitch in private to your mates, not in public!)

Did you use to have any NOTP or have one currently?

There have been plenty of ships I've come across that weren't my thing, Stony for example, but I'm not going to invest enough energy into recalling any others. I'm not here to spread hate on something other people like.

Who were the couple in the last fanfic you read?

On tumblr? Li Lianhua/Di Feisheng (Mysterious Lotus Casebook)

On Ao3? Ming Lou/Ming Cheng (The Disguiser)

Currently, do you have any OTPs?

So many. Zhang Rishan/Ba Ye, Hei Xiazi/Xiao Hua, Steve/Bucky, Steve/Peggy, Data/Geordi, Stiles/Derek, Jiang Cheng/Nie Huaisang, Shen Wei/Zhao Yunlan, and likely more that havent come to mind yet

Is there any couple that, to this day, you are extremely mad about not getting together?

Haha no. I think I've always just accepted canon couples as "the thing that happened in the story", and now when I have my own ship preferences, then I accept that it's *my* headcanon and not necessarily anyone else's (especially not the writer's headcanon).

When Captain America Civil War came out I realised I'd gotten WAY over invested in what was or wasn't included in the movie (although I knew realistically they weren't going to make Stucky canon ) that I took a big step back afterwards and very much made a mental separation between "this is the story those writers want to tell" and "this is the story I like to imagine".

Is there any ship you used to dislike but now you think they are kind of interesting?

Dean/Cas maybe? It wasn't so much that I disliked them but that I didn't read them as a romantic relationship for most of the time I've known the ship existed (I'd always read Cas as ace). It's only been since the show ended that I think my idea of what makes a ship had widened to more than just "stereotypically romantic" which recalibrated how I saw them.

Do you have any ship that, in the past, would’ve been considered normal but now you would be cancelled over?

Incestuous (Thor/Loki, et al,)? Teacher/Student(I blame ABBA)? Torturer/Torture subject (Hydra Trash Party)?

What is your favorite crack ship?

I will certainly have come across crack ships that appealed to me, but honestly if the writer/artist sells it well enough then I stop thinking of them as crack ships and instead think of them as rare pairs.

What is the couple you read the most fanfics about?

Currently? HeiHua. Overall? Stucky.

What do most of your ships usually have in common?

Someone to be vulnerable around, someone who understands you better than anyone else, "you're not alone anymore"

What do you absolutely hate in a ship?

If I don't like a ship it's probably more to do with a singular character I don't like than the couple itself.

Tagging @gaiahenshin @fangdoubing @epicwalrus @tazzy-ace and anyone else who wants to!

[frenchly-anxious]

Here’s why you (and I) have been studying the wrong way all this time - part 1

Have you ever studied hard for a test, spending all your evenings on it, feeling prepared, just to fail it spectacularly?

Have you ever been told to re-read your lessons to learn it better?

Have you ever been told after a failed test that you obviously didn’t learn despite you knowing you definitely did?

If so, I’m very sorry, it means school has failed you on something it was supposed to teach you: how to learn. And really, the fault isn’t yours.

Fasten your seatbelts my friends, we’re going on an adventure to explain why school sucks at its own fucking job!

First of all, a little experiment by Tulving. We have 2 groups and we ask them to simply read 6 times a list of 22 words. Then, we give Group 1 the same list and ask them this time to remember as many words as possible. With Group 2, same task but it’s not the same list as before.

Question time: which group will do better? Group 1 with the list they have already read 6 times, or Group 2 with a totally new list?

I can guess you’re probably telling me Group 1, right?

Well. Actually, there is no difference at all between the groups. Nothing, nada. Reading the words 6 times before didn’t give any advantage to Group 1.

What is this witchcraft, I hear you say?

Let me introduce you to the biggest misconception of our school life: reading your lesson over and over won’t help you at all.

How is that possible? Well, there’s a concept we all heard countless time, but that was never explained correctly: effort. To learn something, you need to make efforts. I’m not saying you’re not being serious when reading your lesson, not at all.

The thing is, reading is by now is a reflex for you, it doesn’t require a lot of efforts. Do you remember how hard it was to read when you were a child, or have you seen a young child trying to read? Every word is a battle, to the point that sometimes, they have finished reading but can’t remember what they read: all of their attention was on how to pronounce this group of letters, not on what they were saying.

For us, adults, reading is not something very complicated. It became a reflex, so now our attention isn’t on how to read, but on what we read. It sounds like a good thing, right? It is, but not when it comes to learning.

The action of reading isn’t complicated, and so you don’t have to be involved that much. You’re reading it, you’re understanding it; but when are you making the effort to memorize it? That’s where the problem is: reading is mostly passive, whereas learning is active.

You probably already encountered this paradox, though: the more you read your lesson, the more familiar it feels. You’re reading it and you’re like “Yeah, I remember that, and that too, and this after too”. But once in front of your exam: nothing. Or at least, not enough. This familiar feeling is just that: a feeling. Your brain is only telling you “Yeah, I already read that”, but we mistake it for “I already learned that”.

The difference is quite important, but we aren’t necessarily aware of it. So when teachers are telling us “You didn’t study”, we’re offended because we’re certain we did. Yes, we did work; but we didn’t in the right way.

Another study to prove my point (Roedinger & Karpicke, 2006):

Once again, 2 groups. My question would be: when asked to remember as much info as possible in a text, who would win?

Group 1, with 4 sessions of 5 minutes to read the text?

Or Group 2, with 5 minutes to read it and then without the text, 3 separate sessions of 5 minutes to write down as many things they can remember (without any correction from the examiners of course)?

This time, you already know where I’m going. But our instinct tells us “Obviously Group 1, they had more time!”. Which is technically true. 5 minutes after the end of that experiment, when we ask each group what they remember, Group 1 takes the lead. They get around 85% of the notions from the text, while Group 2 gets 70%. It isn’t much but it’s indeed better.

Which is great. But that’s 5 minutes after learning.

If we meet with them again 1 week later, and ask again what they do remember, Group 1 falls at barely 40% of the notions, not even half of what they learned. What about Group 2, you ask? They’re at 60%, which is very good!

The funny thing is, if asked, Group 1 will tell you how confident they feel about what they remember and that they will nail the test, while Group 2 will be saying they don’t remember a lot. Because once again, Group 1 has this feeling of familiarity about the text.

But then why is Group 2 so much better after a week?

It’s about effort.

The 5 minutes they spent reading didn’t require a lot of efforts. They understood what was written, maybe had enough time to read it a few times. Then they didn’t have the text anymore, but we asked them to write down what they remember. Once. Twice. Thrice.

During those 3 sessions, they had to make efforts. Efforts to search in their memory for what they had read. And this, contrary to reading, isn’t really easy and definitely isn’t passive.

“What did I read?” they asked themselves in front of this blank page, the text long gone. “Wait, I almost forgot this! And didn’t they talk about something else? Wait, what was it?... Oh!”

By doing so, they re-activated neurons, creating paths, reinforcing them. They did that 3 times. So their brain was like “Wait, we searched for that info multiple times, it must be important!”

Then what about Group 1, you wonder? They had 4 sessions to read it! Didn’t their brain also realize it was important?

Your brain’s goal is to automate things you need. Because if those things are automated, you don’t have to focus on them anymore, you don’t have to spend all your energy on it.

Do you remember when you learned how to ride a bike? It was hard, you fell often, but now you don’t have to think about; that’s because your brain was like “Shit, this is giving us a hard time. This is a problem, because if it takes all of our attention to just stay on the bike, we won’t be able to avoid obstacle or anything.” The solution to that is making ‘staying on the bike’ a reflex, something you know so much you don’t have to reinforce it anymore.

With Group 1, reading that text wasn’t hard. Their brain was like “meh, no problem, it doesn’t require more of my help”. If it isn’t problematic, no need for trying to automate it or make it easier.

But for Group 2, it was harder. Making the effort to try to remember what they read was very consuming in time, attention and energy. Their brain HAD to do something so it would become easier: it learned, and it learned for a longer time. Because of the repetition of that effort, because this difficulty kept appearing and being annoying in a way, their brain realized they needed to know that. Just like how you learned your phone number, your address,... You searched for it multiple times, you used it multiple times; now you don’t need to re-learn it, it’s there to stay.

So Group 1 spent 20 minutes reading a text, just to remember it for a day or two.

Group 2 also spent 20 minutes, but 5 for reading, and 15 to test themselves, and it lasted way more than a week.

Both groups did work. But one of them is obviously more efficient.

You want to learn efficiently? Leave your notes aside, and make the effort to try to remember it, even if it’s imperfect. No: especially if it’s imperfect.

Yes, I know, it seems counterintuitive. However it works incredibly well!

But that will be for a part 2...

[acourtofthought]

Heyyo, I’m the person that made the callout post towards Elriels and their beef with the color yellow that your most recent anon post was about. I just figured I stop by and clarify some things. Sorry in advance if this doesn’t make much sense, I’m super tired rn lol The post I was talking about/calling out was actually made a few days after your toga post, and basically the anti-toga blogger made a post that agreed w/ an anon saying that fan artists were responsible for Elain hate or some shit. If I’m remembering right, it implied that two artists were problematic because 1 said they associated Elain w/ the color yellow, and 1 didn’t want to make fanart of her for an acotar project they were doing. No artists were called out directly, and I haven’t been in the fandom long enough to know all of the big fan artists, but the post did use pretty specific examples of things certain Instagram artists did, so someone knowledgeable on the fandom might be able to deduce who they are. Normally I wouldn’t of had enough of an issue with that to feel the need to make a callout, but the blog ended up accepting another anon confession where someone called neutral elriel commission artists a “waste of money” and asked for a list of pro elriel artists to commission. Obviously people are allowed to have their preferences and whatever, but I am worried that the elriel community is jeopardizing commission artists by fostering an environment where artists will be under a lot of scrutiny. That’s why my petty little callout post was mostly me promising Eluciens that I’d make them some fanart, it was kind of a “fuck you elriels, artists don’t like you anyways” lol. Also, I pissed off one of my elucien muts by making a joke about how the real problem w/ Elain’s black dress was that it wasn’t slutty enough, and I wanted to make up my bad joke with some Elucien content (I’m only mentioning this because they follow this account) (shoutout to my girl, this fanart is for YOU bestie). TL;DR: No artists are being harassed yet, but Elriels are starting to create a worrying environment. I don’t think any of your posts are responsible directly, but I do think you advocating for toga fan art kinda pushed the anti-toga blogger to openly not like fanartists in general. I’m hoping that we’ll stop with the toga/suit/black/yellow debates because all of these debates are heavily linked to commission artists jobs, and I don’t think ships are worth jeopardizing someone’s financial stability/mental health

I am sorry that your original post went over my head because honestly I had no idea that was all going on. I've recently been blocking a lot of accounts I'm uncomfortable with because I've become a lot more Anti E/riel lately and I realize that's a bit of a change from when I first joined (when I was open minded to either ship). I didn't want to deal with stirring up E/riel supporters because that just leads to a lot of inbox hate messages.

I do apologize if a post I created somehow led to discontentment towards fanartists although I feel it has to be said, E/riels have already created a worrying environment that's been around for quite awhile. I'm a super small fish on Tumblr and don't have the following a lot of other bloggers have so I'm not sure that anything I've posted has the sort of major impact that would drastically spill over elsewhere.

Also, I wasn't necessarily advocating for Toga fanart. More acknowledging why artists who have already created Toga fanart should not be attacked for their work. There was already fanart shared during Elucien week that anti's were up in arms over and I felt their arguments were fairly baseless so I was addressing that more than saying Elain and Lucien should be in Togas all day, every day :D I just felt bad that someone's work was being attacked.

Unfortunately, I think Anti E/riels will find a way to rally against anyone they think might show loyalty to those that are Pro Elucien. That is extremely childish and I feel horrible that any artists would have to deal with that sort of behavior. And I think if that is the type of person they are, it doesn't really matter what we blog about because hardcore anti's will use literally anything we say to further their cause.

[floralovebot]

I'd love to read more about what you think about how often they get in trouble! And since you said Riven would get flack for Musa's songs, do you think he'd get flack for having dated Darcy?

FUCK YEAH DUDE

Fair warning, this is a bit long!

So, for the Winx, I said that most to least likely to get in trouble was Musa, Stella - Bloom, Flora, Tecna, and then Aisha. And for the Specialists, I said Riven, Sky, Brandon, Helia, and then Timmy. Again, I do think who's the most hated greatly depends on the planet and culture, so how often they get into trouble also depends on this (for instance, Stella having a more laid back approach to certain things may get her in trouble on Zenith, but not on Solaria).

Musa: The classic problematic. It's not that she's a bad person, she's just in the news a lot. Sometimes it's about another heartbreak song, sometimes it's about a fight she had with Riven in public, sometimes it's about her dry humor and sarcasm being interpreted as mean, and other times it's about some vague tweet she wrote and never deleted. She advocates for a lot of good stuff and definitely uses her platform to try and change things so she's not the worst celebrity out there, but she also tends to speak before she knows everything and that can occasionally be a problem. She fiercely defends the others when they get into trouble and constantly vagues "news sources" (aka drama sites) so people still view her as a little negative by proxy. (Also, some people think her being a fairy of music gave her an unfair advantage in the music industry and that she isn't actually talented.)

Stella - Bloom: I'm putting them on the same level because I think they're both fairly similar in how often they get into drama. As princesses who often get involved in things, their every movement is under scrutiny. Stella handles it a lot better than Bloom due to her media training and being watched since she was young.

Bloom usually tries to stay out of the negative spotlight but that often makes her seem avoidant of important issues. She does speak up about things but it's usually after days of editing and rewriting her words so she gets accused of only talking about something because people wanted her to. She also tends to get nervous answering anything about politics or Domino so that makes people reluctant to listen to her words. Then there's the obvious drama with Sky. While they aren't as public as Rivusa, things get out quickly and when they're in a heated moment they tend to forget about their surroundings. People from Eraklyon tend to hate both of them because Bloom is "too loud and angry and just being rude" and Sky is "forgetting his place and rising to the challenge, not a great sign for a future king". On the flip side, Bloom has saved the magical universe multiple times and continues to do so. Basically, she's one of those celebrities that you either really love or really hate.

Stella is another classic problematic! Again, it's not that she's a bad person, she just gets noticed a lot. People accuse her of being classist and ignorant just because she's royalty. They also hate whenever she spends a lot of money on things like clothing and makeup because it's seen as a wasted expense (since most of her money pre-S3 was coming from her parents). People absolutely see her as a spoiled brat that can't read the room and doesn't deserve to be queen. Stella often tries to prove those ideas wrong in very subtle ways because she knows outright denying them would only further the problem. But just like the others, she spends a lot of time advocating for the good and for the better. She also cares deeply about her friends and it's obvious to everyone, even the people that hate her. So while she is in the news a lot, most people can see through it and support her. But she does still get into trouble for her shopping sprees. Her spending a lot of money on things is largely why people sometimes have trouble being on her side. It's almost always seen as a spoiled princess move and a large factor in why people think she's classist and/or ignorant.

Flora: Flora is interesting because a lot of people initially assume that because she's a very shy and nice girl that she won't get into any drama. So it's a complete surprise when she argues with people online and starts calling people out. She's often fighting for the right thing and she rarely gets her facts wrong, but people hate getting called out and they hate it when someone they think should be quiet and nice goes to town on their ass. Even the people that agree with her often think she's too aggressive in her replies (while others think her tone is fine). Flora also isn't extremely open about her personal life outside of fighting crime with the Winx so that doubles her online persona as being just mean and "too political". People say that she should just stick to watering plants and leave the politics to the actual politicians. She responds by calling them hypocrites since they were just asking for celebrities to use their platforms. She gets called out for thinking she's a celebrity. She responds that she has a large platform and people follow her for her work. It's just a constant cycle and she never runs out of things to say (which isn't bad, but it always gets her into trouble). Tbh, I can also see the exact opposite where Flora just doesn't get involved in anything because she's too busy posting pictures of her plants and random dogs she sees but, I think eventually the need to defend her friends would win out and once she gets a little taste of activism, she wouldn't stand down (yknow how she constantly berates the Winx for wanting to attack the controlled animals? Basically like that. She has very strong moral opinions).

Tecna: I had some trouble with this because I almost wanted to put her last but overall I think her general personality would get her into trouble more than what happens with Aisha. Tecna is often blunt and she doesn't necessarily hide when she doesn't like something. So sometimes reporters will come up to her and ask her a question and she'll just hit them with an "I don't want to talk to you." and then walks away. Tecna doesn't see anything wrong with this because she views being honest to the media as relatively important as they could easily find out if she's lying through spying and technology. Overall, people just see her as a little too honest and she gets into trouble a lot with being open about not wanting to interact with fans a lot or being cautious about press.

Aisha: It's a bit surprising that a princess is the last on the list no? Andros has a very good handle on things like media and press, and while they definitely aren't controlling it by any means, most news sites know not to mess with them. They're very strict on things like personal boundaries and privacy and try to protect anyone who could be affected by the media (celebrities, online personas, royals, athletes, etc). Aisha also has the best media training out of all the Winx and is really good at knowing what to say and what to share. People know just enough about her social life through sns that they aren't constantly asking about it but not enough to try and cancel her for anything. She's almost seen as the goody-goody of the bunch since she just doesn't get into a lot of drama (and when she does it's handled extremely well).

Now the Specialists!

Riven: It's no surprise that he's first I mean cmon. With Musa being the most "problematic" of the Winx, Riven is bound to get his fair share of scrutiny. People absolutely judge him for having a past with Darcy. Although... I really don't think it would be the biggest factor. While he did genuinely like Darcy, she used magic on him multiple times to manipulate his thoughts and then later betrayed him. Riven wouldn't want to put unnecessary hate on all witches, but he'd also be mad enough to eventually allude to what actually happened (he'd never outright say it since it also hurts his pride). Most people accept that he got manipulated by Darcy and assume that the entirety of the relationship was based on that, which Riven doesn't like either, but trying to defend her wouldn't exactly help his case. On the other hand, the relationship he does get hated for is his relationship with Musa. Musa definitely shares the good and cute stories about them too, but her sad/angry heartbreak songs are always the ones that get remembered. People assume he's a lot worse than he actually is and whenever Musa or one of the others tries to defend him, they just assume Riven manipulated them into doing that. However, after S4, people get a lot more understanding of the relationship and there isn't as much hate towards him (he does still get called out for being a bit brutish though).

Sky: I almost put Sky as first, but then I remembered he's royalty and definitely has a PR team. Still, he gets into a lot of drama. The Diaspro/Bloom situation was blown out of proportion and every news site was reporting completely different things. To some, Sky is a dirty cheater that lied to his wife and got some random girlfriend, "who knows how many other girls he's talking to! Someone get his phone records with Stella". To others, Sky and Diaspro were happily engaged before homewrecker Bloom came in. And to others, Sky was just the prince trying to protect his identity and got wrapped into some catfight. No one knows what actually happened with them but a lot of people start to assume Diaspro was in the wrong once it's confirmed Sky is officially dating Bloom. They start actively hating her when she tries to magic her way into a relationship with him. And that's just the relationship stuff! Erakylon's politics are so weak and absolutely crumbling before our eyes. Sky would constantly get asked about specific things to try and break him and it doesn't help that the media sites from the other royal characters are the ones doing it.

Brandon: Is this ranking a bit surprising? Idk? But anyway, Brandon would literally just get hated by proxy. Most of his "drama" includes what's happening with Sky and/or Stella. If one of them is getting into trouble, then people are bringing him into it for absolutely no reason. Brandon knows more about Eraklyon and Solaria's political climates than he will ever need to know. While he doesn't have as much media training as Sky, he does have to follow some rules just so Sky doesn't get into trouble for what he says. That means he can't speak up about as many issues and he certainly can't constantly defend his friends from harsh words. He tries to get away with it by liking comments instead of making his own. It helps a little.

Helia: Helia gets into the same exact trouble that he gets into with the Winx fandom. He's quiet and he shares absolutely nothing about his personal life. He's an artist but he doesn't post about it nor does he talk about it. He avoids talking to the press and when he does its always vague answers that could mean anything. Helia cares a lot about Saladin and Red Fountain's image and we know that what he does affects said image. So he treads very carefully and doesn't involve himself in anything. However, this is largely what gets him into trouble. People hate that he's not open about anything and some even go to the extreme of thinking he's suspicious. While Saladin's legacy largely protects him from this, it doesn't protect him from the media and random people constantly asking about his personal life. Helia also rarely if ever defends the others online (1. as he almost never looks at it and 2. because he doesn't want to get involved). He comforts them and gives advice to their face but no one else sees that so people often call him things like "pretentious, two-faced, avoidant, etc". People are also weirdly suspicious about his relationship with Flora because "it can't be that good right? there's definitely something suspicious about them".

Timmy: Timmy's just a genuinely nice guy that rarely gets into trouble. He chooses his battles (so to speak) very wisely so when he does defend the others online, it's almost always something a majority of people will agree with. Almost all of his social media is about the latest in technology and gaming so he's pretty big in those crowds but most media sites can't really do anything with that. Sometimes people from Zenith see him as weird but they recognize that he's a good match for Tecna so they're okay with him. By the time all of the Specialists are truly in the spotlight, he's already gotten buffer and more confident so those issues from S1 wouldn't be a huge deal either. The others also speak highly of him so no one really doubts that he's a good specialist. For the most part, he just doesn't get into trouble and when he does it's always connected to someone else rather than something he alone said/did.

[tcm]

Reframing Films of the Past: An Interview with TCM Writers

All month long in March, TCM will be taking a look at a number of beloved classic films that have stood the test of time, but when viewed by contemporary standards, certain aspects of these films are troubling and problematic. During TCM’s Reframed: Classics in the Rearview Mirror programming, all five TCM hosts will appear on the network to discuss these issues, their historical and cultural context and how we can keep the legacy of great films alive for future generations.

Also joining in on this conversation are four TCM writers who were open enough to share their thoughts on their love of classic movies and watching troubling images of the past. Special thanks to Theresa Brown, Constance Cherise, Susan King and Kim Luperi for taking part in this conversation. Continue the conversation over on TCM’s Twitter.

What do you say to people who don’t like classics because they’re racist and sexist? 

KL: There are positive representations in classic Hollywood that I think would blow some peoples’ minds. I always love introducing people to new titles that challenge expectations. 

That said, anyone who broadly slaps a sexist or racist label on a large part of the medium’s history does a disservice to cinema and themselves. That mindset keeps them ignorant not only of some excellent movies and groundbreaking innovation but history itself. 

I think people need to remember that movies are a product of their time and they can reflect the society they were made into a variety of degrees - good, bad, politically, culturally, socially. That’s not to excuse racism or sexism; it needs to be recognized and called out as such for us to contend with it today. But it’s important for people who say they don’t like classics for those reasons to understand the historical context. In particular, we need to acknowledge that society has evolved - and what was deemed socially acceptable at times has, too, even if sexism and racism are always wrong - and we are applying a modern lens to these films that come with the benefit of decades worth of activism, growth and education.

SK: I totally agree K.L. For years I have been encouraging people to watch vintage movies who keep proclaiming they don’t like black-and-white films or silent films. For every Birth of a Nation (1915) there are beautiful dramas, wonderful comedies and delicious mysteries and film noirs. 

 These films that have racist and sexist elements shouldn’t be collectively swept under the rug, because as K.L. stated they shine a light on what society was like – both good and bad. 

CC: First off, fellow writers may I say, I think your work is amazing. I'm continually learning from the talent that is here, and I am humbled to be a part of this particular company. Similar to the prior answers, for every racist/sexist film the opposite exists. Personally, classic musicals attracted me due to their visual assault, creativity and their unmistakable triple-threat performances. While we cannot ignore racist stereotypes and sexism, there are films that simply are "fantasies of art." There is also a review of evolution. In 20 years, what we now deem as acceptable behavior/conversation will be thought of as outdated and will also require being put into "historical context."  What we collectively said/thought/did 20 years ago, we are currently either re-adjusting or reckoning with now, and that is a truth of life that will never change. We will always evolve.

TB: I would say to them they should consider the times the movie was made in. It was a whole different mindset back then. 

Are there movies that you love but are hesitant to recommend to others because of problematic elements in them? If so, which movies? 

TB: Yes, there are movies I’m hesitant to recommend. The big one, off the top of my head, would be Gone With the Wind (1939). The whole slavery thing is a bit of a sticky wicket for people, especially Black folks. Me, I love the movie. It is truly a monumental feat of filmmaking for 1939. I’m not saying I’m happy with the depiction of African Americans in that film. I recognize the issues. But when I look at a classic film, I suppose I find I have to compartmentalize things. I tend to gravitate on the humanity of a character I can relate to. 

KL: Synthetic Sin (1929), a long thought lost film, was found in the 2010s, and I saw it at Cinecon a few years ago. As a Colleen Moore fan, I thoroughly enjoyed most of it, but it contains a scene of her performing in blackface that doesn’t add anything to the plot. That decision brings the movie down in my memory, which is why I have trouble recommending it.

Also Smarty (1934), starring Warren William and Joan Blondell, is another movie I don’t recommend because it’s basically about spousal abuse played for comedy, and it did not age well for that reason.

SK: Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961): Audrey Hepburn is my favorite actress and I love her Oscar-nominated performance as Holly. I adore Orangy as Cat, as well as George Peppard and Buddy Ebsen, who is wonderfully endearing. And of course, “Moon River” makes me cry whenever I hear it. But then I cringe and am practically nauseous every time Mickey Rooney pops up on screen with his disgusting stereotypical performance as Holly’s Japanese landlord Mr. Yunioshi. What was director Blake Edwards thinking casting him in this part? Perhaps because he’s such a caricature no Japanese actor wanted to play him, so he cast Rooney with whom he had worked within the 1950s. 

CC: I cannot necessarily state that I am in "love," but, a film that comes to mind would be Anna and the King of Siam (1946). It is an absolutely beautiful visual film. However, Rex Harrison as King Mongkut requires some explanation. 

Holiday Inn (1942), and the Abraham number...why??? Might I also add, there were many jaw-dropping, racist cartoons.

How did you learn to deal with the negative images of the past? 

KL: I often look at it as a learning experience. Negative images can provoke much-needed conversation (internally or with others) and for me, they often prompt my education in an area that I wasn’t well versed in. For instance, blackface is featured in some classic films, and its history is something I never knew much about. That said, seeing its use in movies prompted me to do some research, which led me first to TCM’s short documentary about blackface and Hollywood. I love how TCM strives to provide context and seeks to educate viewers on uncomfortable, contentious subjects so we can appreciate classic films while still acknowledging and understanding the history and the harmful stereotypes some perpetuated.

SK: It’s also been a learning experience for me. Though I started watching movies as a little girl in the late 1950s, thanks to TCM and Warner Archive I realized that a lot of films were taken out of circulation because of racist elements. TCM has not only screened a lot of these films but they have accompanied the movies with conversations exploring the stereotypes in the films.  

CC: As a Black woman, negative images of the past continue to be a lesson on how Blacks, as well as other minorities, were seen (and in some cases still are seen) through an accepted mainstream American lens. On one hand, it's true, during the depiction of these films the majority of Black Americans were truly relegated to servant roles, so it stands to reason that depictions of Black America would be within the same vein. What is triggering to me, are demeaning roles, and the constant exaggeration of the slow-minded stereotype, blackface. When you look at the glass ceiling that minority performers faced from those in power, the need for suppression and domination is transparent because art can be a powerful agent of change. I dealt with the negative images of the past by knowing and understanding that the depiction being given to me was someone else's narrative, of who they thought I was, not who I actually am.

TB: I’m not sure HOW I learned to deal with negative images. Again, I think it might go back to me compartmentalizing.

I don’t know if this is right or wrong…but I’ve always found myself identifying with the leads and their struggles. As a human being, I can certainly identify with losing a romantic partner, money troubles, losing a job…no matter the ethnicity.

In what ways have we evolved from the movies of the classic era?

KL: I think we are more socially and culturally conscious now when it comes to stories, diversity and representation on screen and behind the scenes, which is a step forward. That said, while there's been growth, there's still much work to be done.

SK: I think this year’s crop of awards contenders show how things have evolved with Da 5 Bloods, Soul, One Night in Miami, Minari, Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, The United States Vs. Billie Holiday, Judas and the Black Messiah and MLK/FBI. 

But we still have a long way to go. I’d love to see more Native American representation in feature films; more Asian-American and Latino stories. 

CC: There are minority artists, writers, producers, directors, actors with the increasing capacity to create through their own authentic voice, thereby affecting the world, and a measurable amount of them are women! Generally speaking, filmmakers (usually male) have held the voice of the minority narrative as well as the female narrative. I agree with both writers above in the thought that it is progress, and I also agree, more stories of diversified races are needed. 

TB: One important way we've evolved from the movies made in the classic era by being more inclusive in casting. 

Are there any deal-breakers for you when watching a movie, regardless of the era, that make it hard to watch? 

KL: Physical violence in romantic relationships that's played as comedy is pretty much a dealbreaker for me. I mentioned above that I don't recommend Smarty (1934) to people, because when I finally watched it recently, it. was. tough. The way their abuse was painted as part of their relationship just didn’t sit well with me.

SK: Extreme racist elements and just as KL states physical violence. 

Regarding extreme racist elements, D.W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation (1915) is just too horrific to watch. I was sickened when I saw it when I was in grad school at USC 44 years ago and it’s only gotten worse. And then there’s also Wonder Bar (1934), the pre-code Al Jolson movie that features the Busby Berkeley black minstrel number “Goin’ to Heaven on a Mule.” Disgusting.

I also agree with KL about physical violence in comedies and even dramas. I recently revisited Private Lives (1931) with Norma Shearer and Robert Montgomery based on Noel Coward’s hit play. I have fond memories of seeing Maggie Smith in person in the play when I was 20 in the play and less than fond memories of watching Joan Collins destroying Coward’s bon mots.  

But watching the movie again, you realized just how physically violent Amanda and Elyot’s relationship is-they are always talking about committing physical violence-”we were like two violent acids bubbling about in a nasty little matrimonial battle”; “certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs”-or constantly screaming and throwing things.  

There is nothing funny or romantic about this.

KL: I try to put Birth of a Nation out of my mind, but S.K. did remind me of it again, and movies featuring extreme racism at their core like that are also dealbreakers; I totally agree with her assessment. I understand the technological achievements, but I think in the long run, especially in how it helped revive the KKK, the social harm that film brought about outdoes its cinematic innovations.

CC: Like S.K., Wonder Bar immediately came to mind. Excessive acts of violence, such as in the film Natural Born Killers (1994). I walked out of the theatre while the film was still playing. I expected violence, but the gratuitousness was just too much for me. I also have an issue with physical abuse, towards women and children. This is not to say I would not feel the same way about a man. However, when males are involved, it tends to be a fight, an exchange of physical energy, generally speaking, when we see physical abuse it is perpetuated towards women and children.

TB: I have a couple of moments that pinch my heart when I watch a movie. It doesn’t mean I won’t watch the movie. It just means I roll my eyes…verrrrry hard.

-Blackface…that’s a little rough; especially when the time period OF the movie is the ‘30s or ‘40s film.

-Not giving the Black actors a real name to be called by in the film (Snowflake…Belvedere…Lightnin’). I mean, can’t they have a regular name like Debbie or Bob?

-When the actor can’t do the simplest of tasks, i.e. Butterfly McQueen answering the phone in Mildred Pierce (1945) and not knowing which end to speak into. What up with that?

Are there elements they got right that we still haven’t caught up to? 

KL: I don't know if the pre-Code era got sex right (and sensationalism was definitely something studios were going for) but in some ways, I feel that subject was treated as somewhat more accepted and natural back then. Of course, what was shown onscreen in the classic era was nowhere near the extent it is today, but the way the Production Code put a lid on sex (in addition to many other factors) once again made it into more of a taboo topic than it is or should be.

One thing I particularly hate in modern movies is gratuitous violence, and it perplexes and angers me how America weighs violence vs. sex in general through the modern ratings system: films are more likely to get a pass with violence, mostly landing in PG-13 territory and thus making them more socially acceptable, while sex, something natural, is shunned with strictly R ratings. Obviously, there are limits for both, but I think the general thinking there is backwards today.

CC: The elegance, the sophistication, the precision, the dialogue, the intelligence, the wit. The fashion! The layering of craftsmanship. We aren't fans of these films for fleeting reasons, we are fans because of their timeless qualities.

I'm going to sound like a sentimental sap here, ladies get ready. I think they got the institution of family right. Yes, I do lean towards MGM films, so I am coloring my opinion from that perspective. Even if a person hasn't experienced what would have been considered a "traditional family" there is something to be said about witnessing that example. Perhaps not so much of a father and a mother, but to witness a balanced, functioning, loving relationship. What it "looks like" when a father/mother/brother/sister etc. genuinely loves another family member.

I was part of the latch-key generation, and although my parents remained together, many of my friends' parents were divorced. Most won't admit it, but by the reaction to the documentary [Won't You Be My Neighbor?, 2018], the bulk of them went home, sat in front of the TV and watched Mr. Rogers tell them how special they were because their parents certainly were not. We don't know what can "be" unless we see it.

[thessalian]

Thess vs Demos

So Steam had a Next Fest the other week, which was basically just them hurling demos at us like confetti. So I grabbed a few and have been whittling down the list the last few days. Some big ones, some little ones, some I didn’t finish, but enough to get an idea of a few of them. So here we go, the story so far:

Tales of Arise: It was already on my wishlist at least as something that sort of piqued my interest, but this is the first chance I had to actually play it. It’s ... well, it’s exceedingly Japanese. Combat’s better than some of the later FF games, at least. It moved a ways up the wishlist on that basis but it’s still not a priority.

Disciples: Liberation: Weeeeell ... it’s quirky, combat-wise. Turn-based but trying to maintain that action feel. A bit problematic in that you can’t necessarily tell what enemies and how many you’re going to get into at any given point, at least not with how they’ve set up the demo, so you don’t necessarily know how far over your head you’re in until you do the combat. And if you have “Survive Three Rounds” combat scenarios twice in the space of a fucking demo? That says things and I’m not sure I like them. It’s still on the wishlist because I did somewhat enjoy it, but it’s going to take some getting used to.

I Was A Teenage Exocolonist: I would like it to be out right now, please. Its story is interesting in its reveal, its card-system handling of challenges didn’t put me off the way most card-related things do, and anything that manages a system by which your character can be nonbinary if you want is okay by me.

Big Ambitions: It’s a business-running sim, basically, but I didn’t get much further than “Buy a fridge for your cheap-ass apartment and then go get a job”. I figure the full game would be better than the demo but if there’s not a way to skip that first day of doing nothing between getting job and doing job, or at least more things to do in said day, that’s a stumbling block right out the gate that nobody needs.

A Building Full Of Cats: Does what it says on the tin. It’s kind of a hidden object, point and click, messing-with-the-set-dressing Zen thing that’s all about finding all the cats. I can cope with that.

Terra Nil: Meeeeeeeeeh ... I prefer Dorfromantik. It’s like Sim City with plantlife and no people.

There was another one but I basically just dismissed that as “Stardew Valley meets Jean M Auel” and moved on so I don’t remember what it was called. Something about a sacred tree but mostly about playing flutes for animals. Also a hidden object / puzzle game that I didn’t get past the a particular scenario because it was fucking annoying.

Yeah, I deleted the demos I’ve played - except for I Was A Teenage Exocolonist, which weirdly has replay value in and of itself and probably isn’t too resource-intensive on my hard drive. Those I really liked went on the wishlist; those I was okay with and were already on the wishlist stayed on the wishlist. A few didn’t really make the cut, but that’s probably just as well. My wishlist is stupid enough as it is and the priority order of it changes often.

Yaaaaaaay video games.

[time-to-write-and-suffer]

I wouldn't mind that post on VNs!

So I was gonna write three different lists, but then after writing the first part I realized this is very long and takes a while to write and nobody cares anyway so I’ll just post my recommended list only. Well, I mean, you asked, but I doubt you wanted all this lol. Thank you for giving me an excuse to talk about this stuff, though. Hope you enjoy my ramblings!

An explanation for what this list is: Sometimes I know a game isn't perfect in many aspects but I still had a genuinely good time playing it, hence why I'm recommending it. Also I should mention that I could talk for hours about some of these games so if anyone’s curious about more of my thoughts, let me know.

Alright, now that that's out of the way ...

How to Take Off Your Mask / How to Fool a Liar King / How to Sing to Open Your Heart (f/m): This is a trilogy of smaller, single-RO games where you can take one of two routes depending on how you act, and they’re all interconnected where you get to meet and interact with the previous games’ characters in the sequel games. I went into this expecting very little but what I got blew me away with how funny, charming and cute the games were. They don’t take themselves too seriously, at one point an angsty male character monologues deeply about some shit, and another one just slides into frame and starts mocking him. It was so fucking funny, holy shit. Also, a central theme is literally racism against catgirls? Which is monumentally stupid, and probably the games’ main flaw, especially in the final game where it pairs up a catgirl with a catgirl racist, but that one still ends with a literal bisexual queen literally making a man her malewife because she fell in love with his cooking, so like ... It speaks for itself. My favorite game of the three is the second one, where you get to play a punchy fake catgirl and romance a pink-haired prince. And honestly, all the female protags in these games are lovely and a breath of fresh air, and the male characters are fun and not abusive assholes either. There’s full Japanese voice acting, and two out of three female protags are literal catgirls who pepper in “nya” and “mya” into their dialogue, and it’s just treated as a quirk of their catgirl race. I AM NOT KIDDING. Yet somehow it never comes off as cringe, because it doesn’t take it self too seriously. These games are just cozy. That’s the only way I can describe them. Cozy and hilarious. Play them yesterday. Dream Daddy (m/m): Man tumblr did this game dirty. This is just a cute, wholesome daddy dating simulator with gorgeous art. Coming out on Top (m/m): So you know Dream Daddy? What if it was EXTREMELY, MAJORLY NSFW? Though I realize how bad the comparison really is, the only thing these games have in common is that they’re gay dating sims and don’t have an anime art style and oh, yeah, they’re both really well-written. Or at least, extremely funny. COOT (heh) is DDADDS’ horny older cousin, and I first encountered the game on a lesbian letsplayer’s YouTube channel. Yes I watched a lesbian play a gay porn game and it was GOOD. I was there for the cringe and fun and got surprised by how genuinely funny and sometimes actually touching the game was. I can’t give it my universal endorsement because it’s not a game for everyone, as I said, it’s extremely NSFW and the menu theme literally includes the singers screaming “SEX SEX” at the top of their lungs. There’s more to this game than the porn, but there’s just so much porn. It can be censored in the settings but it’s unavoidable. However, I still think it’s worth a look just because of how funny it is and how charming the characters are. If you don’t want to play it yourself, at least watch Anima’s playthrough of it. It hasn’t aged super well in some spots but I still go back to it every now and then. Akash: Path of the Five (f/m): This game markets itself as a more “professionally produced” western dating sim, and that’s accurate in some superficial aspects. The game is pretty poorly written, but it’s absolutely gorgeous and has really good English voice acting by actual professional voice actors. The premise is quite self-indulgent, but I genuinely respect that about it. You play as the only female elemental in a village with only men, and all five of your classmates want a piece of you. It’s clear the writers have put some thought into the lore and worldbuilding of this world, but barely any of it comes through in the actual writing and plot, which is basically just a vehicle for you to get together with your boy of choice. The ROs aren’t very well-developed either, and the plot is the same in every route with only minor variations depending on which guy you pick, up to the point where the protag has the same voice lines in some parts regardless of which guy she’s talking about. It also has one extra half-route that’s so bad and pointless I genuinely wonder why they wasted resources on making it instead of spending a bit more on the writing/adding some variations to the main plot. So why am I recommending this game? Well, it’s pretty, and it sounds nice. This game is a himbo, gorgeous but dumb as rocks. Enjoy it for what it is. I know I did. Get it when it’s on sale, I think if I hadn’t gotten it at half-price I would’ve felt a bit more cranky about it. Also Rocco is bae. Mystic Destinies: Serendipity of Aeons (f/m): Yes that’s the full title, no I don’t know what it means either. You may have noticed how most of the games so far I’ve enjoyed because they don’t take themselves too seriously? Well, this one does. It takes itself SO FUCKING SERIOUSLY. Like, way too seriously. It’s a little embarrassing at points because baby, you’re an urban fantasy dating sim. Calm down. But the game has gorgeous art and 3 out of 5 routes are very good. The last route, the one with your teacher, is both the most problematic yet somehow the one that breaks down the very concept of a dating sim within its own narrative (yes, this shit gets fucking META) and it got so wild at the end that 1) I still listen to the soundtrack for that route and 2) I still remember it to this day despite finishing it ages ago. My favorite route is Shou, he’s a sweetheart, but the mindfuck route is so buckwild that I think the game is worth playing just for that. There’s also a route that’s like a neo-noir mystery? I Do Not Know. This game is many, many things and it does them so sincerely and tries so hard, you can’t help but respect it. It doesn’t always stick the landing but man, just let this thing take your hand and wax poetic at you for a bit. Also get this one at a sale because it’s very expensive to get the full version. I got it for 9 bucks on itch.io and I felt that was a fair enough price, I’d say I wouldn’t have minded paying more for it because there’s a lot of content to enjoy and/or be baffled by. Arcade Spirits: This one’s a bit more weird from what I recall, and I honestly couldn’t tell you much about it, but I remember having a very good time with it and recommending it to a friend when she was going through some tough times and she said it made her feel better. I remember it making me feel better, as well. This is a VN about an arcade and the ROs are wonderfully diverse, with very real human conflicts that get explored in each of their routes. It can get quite existential and heavy at times, but in the end it’s a kindhearted game that I think everyone can enjoy. The main character was also, how you say, mood. It’s a game about getting possessed by a video game and then learning self-love. Ebon Light (f/m): This one’s free/name your own price on itch.io so go play it. It’s a weird plot where you play as a girl who ate an elven relic? And then the elves kidnap you because you’re the relic now. All the ROs are extremely pasty (like, literally white, as in literally the color white) dark-haired elves, except for one, who’s an extremely pasty blond elf, so ... diversity? I honestly don’t know what this game is aside from unique. I used to be a bit put off by the art style but now I think it contributes to the general atmosphere. It’s a weird game that technically doesn’t do anything groundbreaking but still left an impression of “huh. weird” in my mind and I think more people should play it. The ROs are all pretty generic dating sim archetypes but done well, with bonus points to Duliae who’s just a massive creep and I love him, and also Vadeyn who’s the only bitch in this house I respect. The worldbuilding is honestly a bit buckwild and I can’t give enough credit for how unique the elves’ culture is in this game. Definitely give it a go. Hakuoki: Kyoto Winds / Hakuoki: Edo Blossoms (f/m): These two are newer releases of an older Japanese visual novel. I wouldn’t call it a dating sim, it’s ... it’s more of a super depressing historical fantasy epic with some minor romance aspects awkwardly wedged in. It’s seriously some of the heaviest and most grimdark shit I’ve ever played in a VN/otome. I don’t understand why it’s a dating sim, it doesn’t read like one, it’s just historical fantasy based on real world events with characters based on real people, and they kill and they die and they grieve and they suffer. The games are literally about the downfall of the Shinsengumi, there’s no way of avoiding everything going to shit and you get to watch and be in the middle of it all as they struggle to stay alive and relevant in a world that doesn’t need them anymore. And there’s the protag in the middle of it all, being useless and submissive and bland just the way the usual otome protag is. I don’t think these games are necessarily fun, and the romance is certainly a lot more downplayed and deeply problematic just based on the age differences alone with some of the men, but the sheer amount of horror and sadness in these games make them stand out above its peers. It’s like watching a war movie. Since most of the characters are based on real people, they feel like real people instead of the usual otome archetypes, and they are so, SO flawed, it’s interesting to just watch them deal with the shit the world throws at them. It’s an Experience, and if you’re up for it, I think it’s worth the time. Cinderella Phenomenon (f/m): This game is free on Steam so go get it. You play as a really, genuinely shitty princess who gets cursed to be poor and forgotten and she has to help one of the ROs break his fairy tale curse so that she can learn about being a good person herself and return to her normal life. This game doesn’t look like much, but it has a genuinely well-written main character who’s actually at the center of each of the stories and in the overarching plot instead of just being around to make eyes at the real protagonists, aka the love interests. Aside from the main character, my favorite part of this game’s writing is how each route slowly but very smoothly expands upon the overarching intrigue. If you play them in a certain order, you get more and more info revealed to you that you didn’t see in other routes, gaps are filled in as you find out more about what actually happened and why, but every route also stands on its own as a full experience and none is more canon than the rest. There’s also some really heavy emotional parental abuse explored, which I found quite potent at times. The romances themselves were alright, I think Karma and Waltz were my faves.

[scriptlgbt]

in the story i’m planning, the two main characters are a brother and sister who were separated when they were very young (the brother around age ten and the sister around age six) and reunite as adults (their mid-to-late thirties). the sister is a trans woman and had not come out / realized she was trans while growing up with her brother. during their separation the brother starts wearing a mask and using only a code name at all times—because of this, she has no idea what he looks like or what his real name is and he doesn’t realize who she is even though they’ve been traveling together for months. eventually an antagonist reveals the identities and backgrounds of several main characters, including the brother, and then the sister. this is the part i’m struggling to approach—how can i properly do a reveal about the sister so that the brother knows she’s his family without framing it as blatant outing? if the villain were to say “your sister, [deadname]” and the brother expresses some confusion like “i don’t have a sister?” would it be alright for the villain to say something like “i should clarify, i am referring to the one now going by [name]” and the brother realizes who she is? i’m writing this as a cis woman and i feel like this approach is problematic but i am not sure how else to approach the reveal. if this doesn’t work do you have any advice on how else i can do it? thank you!

Your instincts that your approach is problematic are definitely right. It’s literally an outing and the trans character’s deadname is used as a weapon. These kinds of stories can sometimes work, but those kinds of stories are usually by trans authors trying to explain to an audience that it is morally wrong to out someone and use their deadname as a weapon against them. That, or it’s a trans author writing something that’s meant to be cathartic for a trans audience, or to depict the deep evilness of a specific character, or some other deeply important reason. (Mainly, those scenes and plot tools require trans authors, the majority of the time if not all, I’d say.) Explaining a trans character’s identity to an audience is just not a good enough reason to use a scene like that, in my opinion.

I’m not personally going to go so far as to say that you should never even consider the existence of a deadname for your trans characters, BUT I question the relevance, because it’s almost never actually necessary in 99.99% of the occasions most authors of trans characters seem to think. I just need people to deeply question why there is this compulsion to include something like that as some kind of go-to option. It can be avoided the vast majority of the time.

To give actual advice on trying to communicate this to the characters and the reader, we have a stealth tag that will probably help you in terms of inspiration.

Specific to a situation like this, I would probably find some ways to hint at something like this being possible earlier on. Something like pointing out coincidences that are more common when people are related (like similar stature, allergies, whatever), or mentioning a shared memory of their sibling. Or a very clear birthmark, or port wine stain, or some other thing that’s distinctive.

I also think that it might be a pretty nice subversion of common tropes like this to have the cis brother be able to immediately accept the possibility that he has no idea who the person he once knew could actually have become. Including the possibility of that person being a woman. (... Just don’t frame that as a joke.) Being open to your missing family being anybody makes a lot more sense to me than thinking you would be able to recognize the six-year-old you knew decades later.

Making it a big dramatic reveal is... dangerous and generally not okay. We’ve written on this a bit over the years but I’m struggling to remember what specific post to link that would be helpful for this. Among other reasons, avoid it because if something like that happened in real life, it would probably give a trans person some extreme trauma (to have a friend out them, let alone an enemy) and cause someone to fear for their life if not be in immediate danger. A villain respecting a character’s Actual gender does not guarantee safety if they are literally committing the act of outing someone. Outing is a dangerous act and it causes harm in itself. It’s terrifying.

Think of it like having all of your clothes taken from you in front of people you do not know or trust. You had no way of fighting to keep those clothes on. You have no way to get those clothes back. You just have to live in the cold, maybe until you freeze to death.

Another thing you could try is to have a scene like that but before the villain can say anything, it’s immediately guessed by the brother that his sister is his sister, with the smallest amount of external hinting. Because other coincidences have lined up.

You don’t have to have the brother and sister sharing everything and trusting each other in order to hint at commonalities either - there’s definitely ways that things can slip up that work together to paint a picture. Like being early risers, being able to trade shoes in an emergency because they have the same size, having similar cultural backgrounds that they are both aware of even if they don’t necessarily have the same relationship with that background.

- mod nat

[beybladefanboy]

Top 5 Worst Episodes of Beyblade

I'm gonna say this right off the bat: ranking Beyblade episodes is weird since they're all so tightly knit together. However, I was able to find five episodes that I find either dull or problematic in some way to make a top 5 worst list. When I make the best list, it’ll likely be top 5 of each season because there are way more good episodes than bad ones. In fact, I don't really think most of this list is bad besides the top two. Anyways, let's get started.

5) Episode 109: Kenta's Determination (Metal Fury)

Yeah... I have really mixed thoughts on this episode. I really love parts of it and I really hate other parts of it. I enjoy it every time I watch it, and I've watched this one A LOT, but if I think about it in a critical way at all, it falls apart. It really does feel like the narrative is gloryfing Kenta for stalking someone. Ryuga told Kenta to go away multiple times and when I first watched this episode, I assumed Ryuga was taking a difficult path specifically to throw Kenta off his trail. We don't know that Kenta's statement about Ryuga taking difficult paths on purpose is true, we're just trusting Kenta's word on that, who is still a total stranger to Ryuga at that point. Kenta and the audience have no actual indication that Ryuga wants Kenta around or is letting him follow him until that moment where Ryuga waits for him in the desert, which you can easily miss if you're not paying attention. I know this because younger me missed it. There isn't as much emphasis on this frankly cute moment as I feel there should be. Still, it does save the rest of this episode and later episodes with these two. Without it, the scene at the end where Ryuga allows Kenta to follow him could easily be interpreted as him giving in because he can't get Kenta to go away. "Remember kids, if you stalk someone for long enough, they'll give in!" You see what I mean? It's obviously not trying to teach that but the way this episode is framed, putting Kenta in the right for this, really makes it feel that way. Still, there is at least that little hint that Ryuga wanted Kenta around before the final scene and honestly I love this episode too much to put it any lower. It bothers me when I think about it critically but dammit I enjoy watching it. I hate that dream sequence where everyone is out of character but putting it aside, I love seeing Ryuga kick ass, I still laugh at that scene where he first meets Kenta and doesn't even know his name, I love seeing Ryuga scare off a tiger just by looking at it, and goddammit, him waiting for Kenta in the desert and that entire scene at the campfire are some of the cutest damn things in this show. I love this episode, even though from a critical perspective, it's a disaster.

4) Episode 68: We Meet Again! Wang Fu Zhong (Metal Masters)

This is ironically the only Masters episode on the list. It's the least of the three seasons for me because the overarching story just isn't as interesting but the individual episodes themselves are fine at what they're trying to do. The only exception for me is this one. I will admit I am not very invested in the Wang Fu Zhong characters. I dislike Chi-Yun and Chao Xin, and before his episode with Julian, Da Xiang as well. Mei Mei is fine though her gag of forgetting words is more often dumb than funny. So seeing them wasn't very exciting for me. I'm also just not invested in this conflict. Gingka, Masamune, Yu, and Tsubasa struggling to work together as a team makes perfect sense given their characters and adds conflict. It makes sense it's just not interesting. There were what... two team battles in the entire tournament? And the way they all worked together in the final act was by fighting their own individual battles so this whole conflict didn't feel like it amounted to much in the end. There was this big emphasis on teamwork with no real pay-off (in this season at least, Fury did a better job with the teamwork angle). It also makes the characters really damn annoying. I mean, I can't stay mad at Tsubasa but the other three were being so bratty, to the point where I was getting just as frustrated as Madoka. There are some good comedic moments in this episode but overall, it's just kind of a slog for me.

3) Episode 37: Rock Scorpio's Deadly Poison (Metal Fusion)

Jeez, another Kenta episode. Kenta is one of my favourite characters. Why are his episodes so hit or miss? This one is kinda like my number four pick: not necessarily bad, just boring and annoying. Busujima is an annoying nuisance and I don't find Sora or his pack of randos interesting. This episode was also really misplaced, coming after Tsubasa leaves the Dark Nebula and before he goes to confront the others. If you skip this episode, you will miss nothing. In fact, this episode takes away from the flow of the story and is just a distraction. Sometimes filler episodes can be okay like the Kenta and Benkei changing parts episode in Fusion or the Blader DJ battle in Masters. The difference is those were fun and the latter especially came at a time when the audience and the characters actually needed a breather. This episode doesn't do that. It takes more than it gives.

2) Episode 130: The God of Venus, Quetzalcoatl (Metal Fury)

Okay, Yu and Tithi's battle is perfectly fine. It's quite fun actually. My problems with this episode occur after that. I've complained about this so many times but I cannot stress it enough: this episode destroyed Kyoya's character. It made me hate him the first time I saw this. Kyoya beat up a child who didn't want to fight. When has Kyoya ever demanded to battle a cowering opponent, much less a child? Tithi being a legendary blader isn't an excuse by the way, he was still a non-combatant. RYUGA was above bullshit like this at this point. Also, Kyoya's reason for deciding to return is horribly stupid and forced. Destiny is a theme throughout Fury but it was always portrayed as a choice the characters made of their own accord, impacting the world around them, not some invisible unstoppable force making them do things. I really respected that about this season. Destiny being a choice is more applicable to real life and just more inspiring and interesting in general. But that's thrown in the trash in this episode when Kyoya feels that destiny is forcing him to be with the group, despite him helping them of his own accord in past episodes and destiny not actually forcing him to do anything. It sounds like an excuse and abandons the actual emotional reason Kyoya left the group in the first place. His internal conflict of feeling weak for being in a group was left unresolved and he comes off as a selfish guy only sticking with the group because he feels he's forced to by some invisible concept, something every other episode in the series disagrees with.

1) Episode 48: The Truth About Light and Darkness (Metal Fusion)

In my opinion, this is the only episode in the series that actively hurts other episodes. The Phoenix twist was already incredibly obvious at this point yet they still feel the need to take up the majority of this episode explaining it and the lore about L-Drago and the dark power in excruciating detail. This episode is nothing more than an exposition dump. In the case of the L-Drago lore, it's actually important, but I ask you: what did the Ryo twist actually add? After this point, it gives us a stupidly incompetent director of the WBBA to make frustrating decisions for the sake of the plot in Masters and to a lesser extent, Fury. However, there was no reason this character needed to be Gingka's dad. Or exist, really. These conflicts could've happened whether or not there was a figurehead for the WBBA orchestrating it. However, this episode even more negatively impacts past episodes by painting Ryo's aggressive actions toward Gingka, especially him breaking his point counter, as abusive. He abandoned him, let him think he was dead, and broke something of his for the sake of shaping him into this "noble hero" and the episode has the fucking gall to not only put him in the right, but have the characters and the narrative glorify his actions. "Remember kids, it's okay if your parents abuse you as long as they're doing it for your own good." This is Kenta's Determination levels of messed up implications. Except while that episode was sweet, funny and didn't hurt any other episodes, this episode is drawn out, boring, and actively makes Fusion as a whole worse. And the worst part is it's unskippable. Like I said earlier, there's a ton of important exposition in this episode as well as Ryuga killing Doji, which is a hugely important scene that shows that not even Ryuga's allies are safe and really hammers in just how greedy for power he is. It's honestly the only good scene in the episode. The L-Drago lore is important and strengthens the final battle but everything else should've been scrapped.

And there’s my list. I tried to make this list somewhat objective, only putting episodes on here that had actual problems and not just episodes that annoyed me. That’s why the Garcias episodes aren’t on here for the record. I actually wanted to put episodes 82 and 83 on here so badly but there’s actually nothing objectively wrong with them. Those characters are annoying but the battles are mostly pretty good, the knockout battle set up is unique, and it’s not a distraction. The world tournament is the main plot after all. Call those episodes dishonourable mentions if you will, I enjoy Kenta’s Determination more than both of them, even though that episode is probably objectively worse.

[jinmukangwrites]

Whumptober Day 15

Science Gone Wrong

Ao3

-o-o-o-o-

It really wasn't everyday that Jason found himself teaming up with a bat. Let alone that bat being none other than Robin. But here he was, punching the noses of various villainous evil-dooers in the nose with Damian—the shortest stack to ever exist—fighting right beside him. 

Jason wouldn't be one to really complain about it though. He may not have the most lovey-dovey big-bro relationship with the squirt, but recently Damian could be known to be at least civil with him. They kinda got the sibling bit down, and Jason was alright with that, he didn't want to go anymore into that. 

And really, it wasn't like this team up was planned or anything. Jason simply ended up patrolling Crime Alley and happened across a group of gangsters cornering some poor hooker. He was in the middle of taking them down when Robin jumped in out of nowhere, saying it looked like Jason could use the help in his better-than-thou-but-joking-about-it tone of voice. 

Which whatever. Jason could handle the brat any day. As long as him being here didn't mean the big man was around, Jason was alright with letting the kid stick around. Damian wasn't all bad. He had his quirks, yeah, but can't look a gift horse in the mouth, especially when that gift horse had two swords and knew how to use them. 

Jason ducked under the swinging arm of one of the gangsters, then propelled himself forward to punch them in the gut. 

The gangster went down like a crashing tree, but Jason didn't stick around long enough to listen. He turned around, looking for another opponent—which there was still plenty of—but he stopped in his tracks when he saw Robin involved in a furious fight with a rather large contender, focused on the task of hand and not noticing the thug coming up from behind with a tire iron raised in his hands like a baseball bat.

"Robin!" Jason called, but it was too late. With a loud thump, the metal bar was swung into the middle of Damian's back, causing the kid to call out and fall to the ground. Jason yelled angrily and ran forward, punching the man who hit Damian hard enough to where he probably saw stars dotting the cloudy atmosphere. 

Jason made quick work with the others, no longer somewhat enjoying the fight and now just wanting it to end. Soon enough, Jason returned to where Damian laid on the ground, curled up and not making any moves to get up. 

Confusion settled in Jason's gut at the sight of it. He knew the kid got hit pretty hard, but not that hard… right?

"Robin?" Jason asked, kneeling down and bringing his hand out to shake his shoulders. However, the moment Jason touched Damian, the kid whimpered. 

"Don't-" Damian gasped, his voice laced with so much pain that Jason pulled his hand back like he’d just burned the kid. Damian didn't move after that, just took staccato breaths.

Okay, now Jason was concerned. He left Damian alone for the moment and moved to turn on the comms. Spinal injuries were never something to disregard or ignore, no matter how badly Jason didn't want to deal with Bruce at the moment. 

"Hood to Cave," he said, "we’ve got a downed Robin."

Nothing replied for a moment, but when the noise did start, it was chaos. Jason realized just as it was too late that he should have worded that a bit better. 

"What happened?!" Came the first voice. Dick's, shockingly enough. Didn't know he was in Gotham. Huh.

However, before he could answer, the grumbling voice of Bruce interrupted. "I'm on my way to your location, stay where you are."

“-is he okay? Is he bleeding?" Dick sounded close to hysterical. "Should we get the medbay ready- can I talk to him-?"

"Wing," Jason snapped, a headache beginning to form behind his eyes. "Someone got a lucky swing on his back. I think something's wrong with his spine, so yeah, medbay would probably be good."

"His spine?" Dick squeaked.

"Robin's armor is heavily padded and nearly bulletproof," Batman growled, and that headache Jason was talking about earlier was spreading toward his temples now. "A hit with the swinging force of a human shouldn't have done that kind of damage."

"Yeah, well, you tell that to the kid who hasn't moved from the ground since he went down," Jason snarled. Damian hadn't moved an inch since Jason started this practically redundant conversation. 

Silence fills the line; Jason, because there wasn't much more to say. Bruce, because he was single-mindedly making his way towards their location, probably with the Batmobile in tow. Dick, because… why was Dick so quiet? 

"Big bird?" 

A moment of silence. Then an exhale. "Jay, you remember Eduardo Flamingo? Back when I was Batman?" 

Something cold slithered into Jason's chest cavity. Not because the Flamingo was any kind of particularly horrible villain, but because the whole entire fiasco that took place that short few years ago was something he wasn't proud of. At the time, Jason honestly thought he was simply doing what needed to be done. Flamingo came to Gotham looking for a fight. He shattered Jason's helmet, almost got Scarlet killed, and…

And shot Damian five times, as close to point blank as you can get, right into his back. 

Jason's thoughts roared as Dick explained to Bruce what happened. At the time, he hardly even noticed Damian laying in a pool of his own blood. He was too busy getting arrested and worrying about where Scarlet ran off to. He remembered feeling a little bit of confusion seeing the kid a few months after, flipping around and fighting the same as always, but he didn't really care at the time. 

"After that… Talia took Damian and surgically inserted a new, artificial spine-"

How far gone was Jason all those years ago to have noticed? 

"Turned out Talia had engendered some sort of remote into his spine. She had Deathstroke control him and use him to try to kill me-"

Protecting children and innocent people. Hadn't that always been his thing? Why didn't Damian ever count as a child? He saw him in that bloody pool, yet all he did was brag to Dick about how he dumped a tractor load of rubble onto the Flamingo, like it was something to be proud of. 

"But we got it fixed. Decoded. I broke the machine they were using to control him too."

"Why is it hurting him like this now?" Jason asked, his voice oddly level. "If Talia made him a new spine, it should be in mint condition."

"Spinal injuries never go away, Hood," Batman said, and as much as Jason wanted to argue he also knew he really didn't have any high ground here. Not when the man who said that had his back broken by Bane. "What I'm wondering is why Nightwing never told us."

Jason could practically feel Dick bristle. And as much as Jason would love to listen to Dick yell at Bruce about how he's never noticed, Damian was beginning to try and shift. Little whimpers escaped his mouth, which was such an un-Damian sound that he almost couldn't believe he heard them. 

"Kid?" He asked, ignoring Dick snap back at Bruce in favor of checking on the young boy below him. 

"I'm fine," Damian hissed through clenched teeth. There were tears escaping the bottom parts of his mask. Jason wondered if he noticed. "Sometimes… sometimes it's like this."

Jason frowned. "Hey, try not to move too much, okay? Your old man is on his way-"

"I said I'm fine," Damian snapped. His eyes flickered up to Jason in a very pain laced glare. "My mother constructed my spine and inserted it inside me with technology beyond our time. It's strong and- hnn- durable. B-but sometimes it just..."

Jason's never heard Damian cry before. And while Damian wasn't necessarily crying now, he still sounded close to it. That must be testament to how agonizing a spinal wound could be. It's probably one of the most important parts of your body… so of course once it got damaged it would never be the same again. Even if the spine was completely replaced with something new and stronger. 

"What…" Jason tried, guilt gnawing at the back of his mind. He might not have shot Damian, but this might as well be his fault. Flamingo was his problem. Damian shouldn't have been involved. He swallowed. "What do you need me to do?"

Damian bit his lip, his face scrunching up into immediate uncertainty. Like he knew exactly what would make this all a little more bearable but he was too afraid to ask.

Well… ask Jason. Because everyone knew Jason wasn't the world's best older brother. Points for trying though, right?

Then, shocking Jason, Damian opened his mouth. "Could you… play with my hair?"

Of course. Dick was rubbing off on the little tyke. Jason should have expected that they'd find similar preferred ways to be comforted. Well, maybe it wasn't the whole hair thing, but the need to be touched gently. Softly. And with Damian's spine aching the way it was, Jason doubted there was any place in his body besides his scalp that didn't pulse with agony. 

"Sure," Jason replied, almost shocking himself. It was awkward, initially, placing his fingers into Damian's hair and running his digits though the stands. Though, when he saw Damian close his eyes and release a shaky, almost relaxed breath, he decided he wouldn't stop no matter what. 

Jason had been an awful big brother for so long. He could do this much right? Like… this was all technically his fault after all. 

Okay, now he felt really guilty. He gave Dick and Damian so much shit back then. Yeah, he wasn't in his right mind back then, and honestly now he could see why Dick worked so hard to get him in Arkham. He killed a lot of people and constantly fought with Dick. He was problematic to the highest extent. Dick saw that and made sure Jason would go somewhere he'd be safe from others and himself. At the time, he hated it. He hated being in the same place they would lock the Joker up at, or Two-Face, or Killer Croc. Even though Joker wasn't even there he could still hear his laughter while laying in his private cell. 

But Dick did make sure Arkham was up to standards. He was anal about it. Jason was safe, comfortable, fed, treated well by the guards. The horrors of the prison were all in his head. 

And how did Jason repay him? 

By letting his kid get shot in the back five times. 

Jason never said sorry about that, hadn't he? 

There was the sound of shrieking tires from behind, and soon enough the Batmobile came to a screeching stop. The drivers door practically shot open as Bruce ran out, dragging a backboard similar to the ones lifeguards and paramedics used with him. 

"Are you alright?" Bruce asked, and Damian opened his eyes for a moment, before shaking his head ever so slightly and squeezing his eyes shut again. 

Jason could feel Bruce turn his gaze toward him, but he kept his eyes on Damian. He had never seen Damian admit to pain and weakness like that before. 

This was his fault. 

"Let's get him back to the manor," Jason said, clearing his throat. 

Bruce nodded and leaned down to explain to Damian what they were about to do, and how much it was probably going to hurt. Getting Damian into a neck brace and onto the backboard was a struggle and a half, ending up with Damian openly crying while on the road back. 

And Jason hated it. Damian wasn't supposed to cry. 

By the time they made it to the Batcave and Alfred rushed on to assist Bruce with x-rays, Jason's regret was practically eating him alive. He stood back near the bat computer trying to convince himself that he didn't care as much as it felt like he did. He should go, right? Go back to his home-base and pretend he didn't see and learn what he did tonight?

He was in the middle of planning his escape when Dick came up to Jason. He was on crutches, his left foot covered in a heavy cast. So that was why he was not only on Gotham, but working the computers. Jason… didn't know.

"Hey," Dick greeted, smiling. "Thanks for calling Damian's injury in."

Jason nodded sharply, but said nothing. Dick sighed and hobbled closer and placed a hand on Jason's shoulder. His face melted into sympathy and Jason remembered that Dick was the biggest empath in the entire world, second most to Raven, an actual empath. 

"Neither of us blame you for what Flamingo or Talia did, Jason," he said, "I know I said some harsh stuff to you back then… but neither of us were in the right place, ya know? I'm sorry for that. I should have-"

"You did the best you could do," Jason replied, surprising himself. Jason cleared his throat and looked to the ground. "I deserved you yelling at me."

A moment of companionable silence passed, and soon Dick had Jason's shoulder a friendly squeeze then let go. "Good thing we're better now, huh? Learn from our mistakes."

Jason nodded, this ooey-gooey emotion talk becoming a little too much. Thankfully, Dick didn't push him any further or heaven forbid hug Jason. 

"C'mon," Dick said, his face going back to a bright smile, "you and I are going to go to the nearest Walgreens and get some heat pads for Damian. There's also a Redbox near where we're heading, so we can grab a couple movies." Dick jerked his head over at the exit of the cave, "I'll let you drive."

"Fine," Jason grumbled, stuffing his hands into his jacket and glaring. He'd have to get dressed quick, but his old bedroom should have something stuffed in there. Jason hardly spent the night here, but Bruce did have a knack for being prepared for the impossible. "And it's not like I'll let ya drive anyway. Your whole foot is broken. How'd you do that anyway?"

Dick immediately began to launch into an exciting story about half human half ostrich hybrids that tried to take over downtown Blüdhaven and honestly? Jason didn't listen past that because of course Dick broke his foot doing something that sounded completely fake. He looked towards the medbay before he left and saw Damian laying in a cot, still curled up but looking a little more relaxed now that he's on something soft and being worried over by both Bruce and Alfred. Jason was about to walk away, but stopped in his tracks when Damian caught his eye. Green eyes stared at Jason with an intensity that had Jason keep the gaze.

Then something even more rare than Damian crying happened. Damian's lips twitched into a slight, thankful smile. A smile… directed at him. A smile that said thank you and I forgive you and don't blame yourself. Jason had never really seen fully what Dick was talking about when he said at his core, Damian was a kid like any other. He’d only catched glimpses of it. 

Damian could smile huh? 

Huh.

Dick called his name and he was knocked out of his thoughts. Jason cleared his throat, nodded, then broke eye contact with the kid. He walked away before he could do something crazy, like hug him goodbye. That would be too out of character for the both of them… but… maybe someday.

[bisluthq]

Can I ask a question? I hope this doesn't come across as offensive but I'm genuinely wondering. I noticed when Kaylors assume Josh or Mikey are gay you tend to judge the way Kays are using stereotypes to assume someone's sexuality (as you should!!). But on the other hand, you make assumptions too saying Klossy seems 100% straight, person x has range, person y seems gay/bi... and by assuming that you are... also... using... stereotypes?

Well things like “person X has range” are mostly a joke dude like we can’t KNOW a person’s sexuality unless we are in their heads. The ONLY person whose sexuality we can know is US like ourself. I say this literally all the time. We don’t KNOW anyone else’s sexuality unless we’re that person. Sexuality is complex and confusing enough to understand FOR OURSELF let alone for someone else.

I’ve used Tom Hardy before as an example: Tom comes off SUPER straight but he’s been like “well of course I’ve experimented with men wtf kind of question is that?? Who hasn’t?” Straight people, Tom. Straight people haven’t.

If Kays were like “Josh Kushner has range 👀” I’d not have a problem with it. I’d disagree because he seems like a hetty tech bro frat guy to me but like that’s just about Gaydar right and since Gaydar isn’t necessarily accurate - see Tom Hardy example above - it’s literally just someone’s opinion.

I don’t know if Karlie is queer in any way - she could be! If she pings for you, fair enough like go off queens. That’s just an opinion. Like we can’t KNOW for sure because we’re not Karlie. 

I’ve said before that I get why Saoirse pings for people. I don’t think she’s queer because she’s called herself straight TWICE on main out of like nowhere tbh and is weird when she’s kissing Kate in Ammonite lol so I do think she’s hetty but I can understand why people think she mightn’t be.

The reason the Kays - and like hectic shippers generally - get icky isn’t because they’re like “ohhhh my Gaydar is atingling I think these folks are queer and like one of us and isn’t that fucking cool if we’re right?” They’re TRUTHERING it as fact that these people are all Kinsey 6 gay, not with their partners, lying about their kids, and in the case of Kays and mlm they make out as though that’s deviant and gross.

Also there are “stereotypes”/vibes that are behavior based and which generally alert Gaydar - ergo like Klossy doing that Makeout Fakeout thing with Ash Graham pinging as EXTREMELY straight girl behavior, or like Sebastian Stan getting flirty in interviews with both men and women pinging as bi - and then there’s “well he’s wearing a cardigan and would a straight man do that???” and the latter is what’s problematic. Even just in life like your Gaydar shouldn’t be pinging based on CLOTHES unless that person is wearing like idk something that references gay culture (like a bi flag on their head if you know what I mean).

Again, I don’t have an issue with someone having a different Gaydar reading to me. That’s not the problem. What I have an issue with is people treating that Gaydar reading as fact (and this does apply to Klossy too like we don’t KNOW dude like I am not in her head but I just see… absolutely no reason to think she’s anything other than extremely straight and if she isn’t like she’s still EXTREMELY committed to a man she’s been with since summer 2012 which hypothetically wouldn’t make her less bi but like again there’s just no reason to think that and she sure as shit isn’t a gold star lesbian like IF she’s a lesbian that’s a big drama for r/comphet to work through) and using like appearance and shit and, again, making out as though being mlm is gross.

I think all speculation on sexuality should be taken in good fun and as like a bit of banter and we must ALWAYS remember that we don’t KNOW anyone else’s exact sexuality because that’s for them to figure out.

[aching-tummies]

Have you ever dealt with food-restriction or ED or whatever?

I really debated answering this one. I understand that it's a sensitive topic for a lot of people, and I do go into some personal details with my struggles, so I'm going to put most of that under a cut.

I know a lot of blogs have something like "we do not stan ED in this house" and that's the extent of their address on the topic and some get pretty angry if anyone even mentions ED around them. I get it, it's a triggering topic and it can be unhealthy and maybe hearing about it or seeing it or whatever pushes someone (back) into bad habits. I understand all that. In my opinion though, shutting down the topic is problematic. I believe that destigmatization saves lives--and not just for ED. Making it a dirty little secret and something one feels ashamed of talking about or struggling with creates more problems. It doesn't go away just because someone feels they cannot talk about it. I'm on the side of destigmatization--where "how are you" is an actual question rather than a casual greeting where "good" or "great" are the only acceptable answers. No--it's supposed to be a question and we shouldn't have to feel ashamed when we are going through crap. Maybe neither party has time to get into it then and there and maybe the other party isn't comfortable/or the right person to go to with those particular issues...but "how are you" is supposed to be a genuine question, not a greeting.

Short answer to whether or not I've dealt with food-restriction or ED: yes.

I don't want to invite drama onto my blog with this...but I think it's time I said something on the topic. For one, I'm sick of how people go "we don't stan ana on this blog--GTFO"  and leave the discussion at that. I don't think that is healthy. People that actually struggle with EDs and Ana maybe want to get help...but professional/formal help is not always accessible and not necessarily always the right tool for what they are going through in that moment. I understand that EDs are unhealthy and I am not trying to glorify them...but I want to say that I care about the people struggling with the stuff and I admire their resilience. There's enough shaming going on around the world and I'm not going to dish it out to someone struggling with an ED. I'm not going to make it out to be something that's taboo to talk about like it's some dirty little secret. I want to de-stigmatize it. I want a world where someone can be like, "I struggle with food/eating and I had a setback last night" and those of us listening can be like, "Alright. Is there something you need/want me to do with that information? How can I help?" Currently, I see a lot of, "Shh! That's a triggering topic! Do you want to set off all the other ED suffer-ers in here?! Don't talk about that noise!" even in my IRL friend groups and I think it's just sad. These are the same friends that are constantly reblogging, "It's okay to not be okay" and “I’m a safe person to tell stuff to” stuff but clearly they don't believe that.

The way I see it, living with EDs is like living with a pet alligator. It was once small and cute and early on maybe you made one choice: you chose to keep it. Great...well, now it's grown and it's a problem and you don't know what to do with a full-grown alligator that eyes you like you're it's next meal. Who do you talk to when everyone shuts you down and maybe there isn't an "animal control" number you can reach out to because it's expensive or it doesn't exist in your area or they're so over-booked that you'll be alligator-chum before they get to you? That's how I see ED. It's terrifying but it's still 'your' pet alligator, even if you feel more like it's pet human at times.

Onto the personal aspects.

I've never been officially diagnosed with an ED and I don't believe I've ever done something that's extremely dangerous on this front. That being said I have (and sometimes still do) struggle with intrusive thoughts about my body.

I'm "average" sized...maybe on the bigger side of average in North America...however, there's a different standard in Asian culture. Like the "Asian F". I was always told I was supposed to be smaller. I was supposed to be no more than 5'3, no more than 110lbs, have a bust no bigger than 34C, and be able to fit into anything marketed to teens and up. Yeah...I'm none of that.

I'm going to try not to rant and get angry and upset...so here goes, take 7 on trying to answer this.

I grew up surrounded by judgmental adults. I eat and I'm fat; I refuse to eat or eat less and I'm exhibiting worrisome behavior. My take away: I bring dishonour on my cow no matter what I do. Sure, there are those that'll be like, "they'll judge me whether I eat or not so I may as well eat some good food"...yeah...that's not me. Choosing to skip the meal and the company entirely is the only way I feel/felt like I 'win'...but as a child that wasn't an option.

I mostly ate alone in University, but my brain filled in for the silence of judgmental comments. If I ate my whole lunch in one sitting I'd get upset with myself. I'd pack smaller portions and I'd be aware they were smaller, but I'd still be upset with myself for finishing it...or even finishing it and still being hungry. If I caved and bought a sugary drink or a snack or something because it looked good, I'd scold myself for using up the food budget as well as the calories budget. I used to break apart individual cookies--one cookie would take 3-4 sittings/days for me to allow myself to finish because I'd only allow myself two fractured pieces at a time. Some days, i.e. weekends, I'd intentionally skip a meal or two and rationalize that I was simply indulging in kink and that I'd eat later. I always did end up eating later and going about my life as normal. "Fasting once in a while is supposed to be healthy", I'd tell myself...but I won't deny that there was some part of me that would tell me that every skipped meal and calorie ignored was gradually working toward shrinking my body.

Despite how it sounds, I wasn't actually doing noticable damage to my body. Physically, I was within the realm of healthy...maybe on the bigger side of average and definitely not mentally sound...but my body was fine. My body didn't change--I didn't gain or lose weight. I ate...I just felt bad about it and beat myself up about it. In retrospect, it was a heck of a lot of mental anguish I did to myself with nothing to show for it.

Life after University is pretty stressful. Stress doesn't agree with my tummy so I got (and still get) frequent upset stomachs. I've become pretty conscious of eating and how my stomach feels so I end up being careful to eat less so that there is less to upset my tummy. I do it because an upset stomach is inconvenient...but I do enjoy the fact that it seems I have lost a little weight. Losing weight isn't a big part of my rational though. My coworkers have mentioned that I look thinner. I don’t see much of a change when I look in the mirror...but my belt does up two notches tighter without too much fuss so I guess I have slimmed down just a smidge. I didn't intend to lose weight, I just cut down on eating because I didn't want to deal with so many upset stomachs...I think I'm allowed to enjoy the unintentional weight loss without it being a problem...but if I had a problem then I guess what I think about this situation doesn't count for much.

I wish I was thinner--just enough to fit into acceptable sizes in the women's section. Enough to not feel like "the big one" when among my friends. I don't idealize the extremes of weight-loss...like...I don't want to be able to count my ribs or have my joints be wider around than my biceps or whatever. And I don't feel like I'm obsessed with losing weight/being thinner. It's something I want...but I also want a burrito and a can of Cola. I tend to partake more than I deny myself nowadays...just in smaller portions. I’ll still get mad at myself for indulging...but I do indulge and try to lessen the mental kicking by splitting things between two meals or something. I still break apart my cookies and eat them over the course of a couple of days...but most of that is because I run out of time to enjoy the treat or because I want to ration it so that I don't have to spend money to buy another one every single time. I don't try to count calories and all that. I still see eating less as a good thing...but I'll still eat a decent portion...I won't pick at my food rather than eat it.

My opinion here, but I don't think I'm unhealthily obsessing over weight and body issues and stuff. They're a part of my life but I don't think they do enough to be super problematic at this stage in my life.

And now onto the tie-in with the content on this blog. I've answered quite a few asks about how I feel about 'stuffing' and the thing that rhymes with "Geight Wain" with "for reasons I don't want to share, I'm not comfortable with that stuff". Most of the reasons I was thinking of for those asks is covered in the personal stuff above. I'm not comfortable with stuffing and the big "double-u gee" because for all of my life I've felt or internalized some judgements about body size and weight. It's very upsetting for me. It's also why I hate a lot of the degradation talk and things mentioning chub or fat or rolls or whatever--because it brings be back to being a kid sitting amongst judgmental adults feeling ashamed of how much of the universe’s matter I took up. If other people like those tags they're free to do so...I just don't want that sort of thing shoved into my face or imposed onto me because it makes me feel bad and makes me remember bad times. I’m into tum-kink and stuff and would love to indulge IRL with an actual partner someday...but I don’t think I will ever be comfortable with putting on weight or even RPing something like that. The thought of getting bigger terrifies me and it’s not something I want encouragement for personally. You do you if that’s what you’re into...just leave me out of it. 

[ashintheairlikesnow]

hi ash! i know you said before that you're not autistic you just did a lot of research to depict chris realistically- do you have any advice for finding resources on writing disabled characters that isn't like... horribly abelist? im writing someone with an intellectual disability from head trauma and who is nonverbal, and i want to get it right but everything online seems very autism-speaks-y. im autistic and semiverbal but i dont have an id and i want to be realistic and respectful.

I cannot speak with any expertise or sense of speaking from enough experience to be taken as an expert here, and defer as always to those with lived experience with intellectual disability!

But I will give a few more general tips for what to do when looking to write a character with a neurological makeup that doesn’t match your own, as far as what has worked for me with Chris:

1. The story should never be ABOUT their lived experience if you do not also have it. Chris’s story is not about autism, or being autistic. I would never presume to try and write a story like that because, whatever my intentions, I don’t have that knowledge that comes from living it. I would at BEST be taking the experiences of others, their voices. At worst, I would be someone standing with a megaphone shouting over those who deserve to be heard.

Making the disability what the plot revolves around is... generally just not going to be a good idea, in any sense. It’s moments like this where I feel like it’s best to defer to the writers who have lived it, instead. 

This is not to say “never write someone different than yourself”, because... I don’t think that’s at all good advice. I think that way lies stunted writers who never push themselves. But it does mean “do not center the story on this thing if you have not experienced it and don’t have that knowledge and understanding”.

2. At the same time, don’t try to be coy or dance around or hide the disability behind purple prose or refuse to acknowledge its reality. Trying to make a disability sound cute, or talk around it instead of speaking it out loud, can be minimizing or shaming in ways that I think it’s easy to miss, if you don’t live with that disability yourself! To me, this touches on one of my hugest pet peeves - characters who are written as having a particular neurodivergence in media, or shown on tv, but they never expressly admit to it or name it. 

I know I hesitated with Chris, more because I didn’t feel comfortable giving him a diagnosis until I understood autism better myself, and I do regret how long it took me to embrace that reality about him. I just thought it better to err on the side of researching before I embraced. But I do feel some guilt about waiting so long when I had readers who were identifying so heavily with him, and I kind of knew, but just didn’t feel comfortable owning it yet.

3. On a related note - disabilities in a story that become melodramatic tragedy or turn the disabled character into a ‘redemption story’ for an abled character. This is so, so prevalent in common media and pop culture and once you recognize it for what it is, it’s so hard to not see it in so many places. Think of how many movies, novels, etc contain a disabled character who exists to teach abled people some virtuous lesson about living life to the fullest or ‘what it really means to be human’ blah blah blah blah blah. Don’t do that. Please. (I mean, I kind of feel like you definitely won’t, but I’m just speaking very generally here). If you find the story going in a direction in which abled people learn something from the disabled person, please think very carefully and critically as to why the story is heading in that direction.

Language alone can also be a problem here - think about the difference between openly describing a character moving around their life with a wheelchair vs. calling them “wheelchair-bound” or “reliant on a cane”, when the cane or wheelchair may actually represent freedom to that person - an aid they need, yes, but one that allows them to live with far more agency than they might have had otherwise. 

To describe them, especially from their own POV, as “wheelchair-bound”, may ring false to disabled people who understand that the wheelchair isn’t a cage, but a tool that allows that individual person to feel less caged by being able to more freely leave home.  

(This varies person to person, just providing an example)

4. Educate. Research. And don’t just do so by asking people with disabilities to tell you their stories. I often express gratitude to the autistic readers, those with ADHD, etc who spoke up about Chris, talked about their own experiences, identified with him, found him very resonating for aspects of their own lives. 

These stories, this information, this sharing of their lives was given freely to me, and I’m fucking amazed and grateful for how welcomed Chris was, and how willing readers were to share about themselves when talking about him.

Their willingness to speak about these things is something I treasure. But I absolutely would never believe that a single person owed me the story of their life to make sure I got Chris right. That was my responsibility, you know? I try to keep in mind the concept of ‘emotional labor’. Asking a disabled person to be your resource is asking them to give, and give, and give of themself. They may want to give you that kind of labor, they may not. But I definitely wouldn’t ask it of anyone without understanding it was something they were happy or felt comfortable giving.

Research, on the other hand, is essential. You mentioned things being “autism speaks-y” when trying to research on your own, and oh god, do I feel you. It sucks that autism speaks is the first thing to pop up when trying to research the lives of autistic people - and in my research, I was lucky to already know AS sucks and write them off and anyone who heavily referenced them as not helpful. I can see how someone might not know that, though, and stumble on them and believe they were a helpful resource for writing autism when they... well. Nope. 

Try to think about the express disability you are writing for this person, and why, and then go research! I looked up “books on autism recommended by autistic people”, and found some invaluable books, yes, but also papers published online, websites, etc! Each of them vetted and looked over and recommended by autistic people, so I knew I was getting information that came from people with those experiences and that understanding. A good example - I picked up a book on the history of diagnosis and treatment of autism in the United States, mentioned it here, and @redwingedwhump recommended a book called Neurotribes... which turned out to be immensely more helpful, spot-on, and provided some really excellent foundational information I wouldn’t have found in the first book at all.

There’s a lot of information out there on Traumatic Brain Injuries and their lasting effects on individuals who receive them, so I would start there. What you’re describing sounds like a TBI with lasting effects! So I would start your research there, and also look up being nonverbal separately, as well as combining the two. Make sure you’re not just looking at the top links - often paid ads or problematic organizations that are able to pay more for better exposure - but also scanning for blogs, nonprofits, lived-experiences stories, too.

I found a lot of information on the second or even third page of results i would never have seen if I only stuck to the first. Remember the algorithm on search engines is usually showing you what other people are clicking on, not necessarily the best source.

5. This is one you the asker already know, but I want to include it for general reasons: do not ‘dumb down’ the thought processes of a nonverbal or semi-verbal person. I see this in fiction surprisingly often, and I think it’s this sense we have as abled people (’we’ just meaning I’m including myself) that being verbal is required to have a highly complex thought process, and it’s... it’s just fucking not. Speech and though are related but not completely wound around each other, and the ability to verbalize is not the same as the ability to think. 

Like I said, I know you know this, asker, but it’s something I see in fiction/media and it drives me up the wall. So I wanted to include it.

6. For the love of God, do not use medical terminology unless you actually know what you’re doing/talking about. Many disabled people or those with serious medical conditions become what amounts to experts on their own diagnoses, because they have to. They have to be experts to receive the care they should be able to rely on. If you constantly fuck up terminology - trust me - it will be noticed, and it will take people out of the story or hurt their ability to suspend disbelief while reading.

There are ways to do medical scenes/conversations with doctors that avoid falling into this problem! I would just be very very careful to heavily research before using any complex terminology.

7. This disabled person does not exist to evoke pity. They are a human - nuanced and multi-layered - living their life, and their story should always, always reflect that. I don’t really have anything else to add to that.

I would love to hear further advice from anyone with anything else to add.

[citrineghost]

Humans Are Historically Known for Being Terrible

Hi I’m here with an opinion today. Let’s see how many words it will take for me to adequately get it across on this very fine 15th of January

I personally believe canceling things from the past* is fruitless, pointless, and accomplishes about as much as censorship does

*We aren’t talking about shit like nazi Germany, let me elaborate further

So, as I occasionally do, I have seen a post on my dash today criticizing something historical that people are ‘problematically partaking in.’ That thing today was the wellerman sea shanty due to its ties with colonialism, slavery, and so forth. 

I’m not going to dive into this specific example, because I don’t know enough of the details and am not interested in going to find them out because I’m not planning to defend it or its history, so there’s no point. I learned what I needed to know from said callout post and it’s enough to work with.

To me, it is important that we remember that people, in general, have been historically pretty terrible.

There’s colonialism, there’s slavery (of all kinds, including chattel), there’s thievery, murder, genocide, sexism, the murdering of queers. There’s lying, manipulation, propaganda, and so many more things that I couldn’t possibly list them all. I’m not saying that everyone was equally shitty. I am aware that, especially in the most recent couple hundred years, white people, especially Western Europeans and Americans, have been pretty Shite.

Am I excusing them for their actions? Absolutely not. I think it is always important to bear in mind the way they played a part in cultures’ growth, death, and, ultimately, development from one year to the next.

The reason I’m pointing this out is because the result of people being historically shitty is that most, if not all, of our historical content, our history, is steeped in horse manure. 

There is not one thing you can enjoy from centuries - even decades - passed that is not here because of something inhumane, unjust, or otherwise terrible.

The only thing keeping us from canceling every other historical thing that we enjoy is our lack of awareness of how each thing ties into the whole mess.

So, we’ve learned that wellerman was sung by slavers and thieves and colonialists. What about that nice little folk song from uh, idk, Ireland or something? Let’s take this metaphorical song and ask the question, “who wrote it?” The truth is, for many folk songs, we just don’t know. There is a very very good chance that 90+ percent of nice, soft folk songs about lying in the grass or feeding chickens or baking bread for your spouse were written by racists, sexists, abusers, homophobes, and so forth.

Does that make it wrong to enjoy that song about lying in the grass and looking at the stars? I don’t think so. No one is profiting off of you listening to it, regardless of who wrote it. It’s hundreds of years old. Do you even know the name of who wrote it?

Remembering that times were different may not absolve something of its wrongdoing, but it does provide us context.

We have to allow ourselves to admit that most, if not all, historical things, came from or benefitted from atrocities or injustices that we would not stand for today. That’s just how human progression works. Frankly, if people 200 years from now don’t look at US, CURRENTLY, and think we’re terrible assholes, I am actually very concerned by that. 

The nature of humanity is to get better and better over time and to build a world and a society where we don’t feel the need to be controlled by greed or to consume unethically. The problem is, it takes time. It takes lots and lots of time. Would it take less time if certain people weren’t terrible, terrible people? Yes it would. But they are, and so it doesn’t.

The fact is, human progression and improvement will never reach its end because, as things improve, our perception of our past actions will change as well and we will begin to realize that what we were doing wasn’t acceptable and is no longer necessary nor excusable. 

Hate Jeff Bezos? Look around and see that 90% of people still buy from Amazon, because it provides the only affordable source of many products for people who don’t make enough money under capitalism to buy from a small business.

Hate Bill Gates? How many of us are willing to switch to Linux to quit using Microsoft? Speaking of Microsoft, they own Minecraft. Do we stop playing Minecraft?

Think Steve Jobs is a terrible person? Why are people still buying iphones, ipads, and macs? Why don’t we stop buying those so that he and current CEO, Tim Cook, quit making billions of dollars?

These are just a tiny amount of examples, using big names. We also must consider, if you have 100 books on your bookshelf, how many of the writers of those books are racists, homophobes, sexists, or abusers? I guarantee you it’s a non-zero answer. The thing is, an author who’s relatively nobody is not someone who gets canceled. No one knows anything about them but that they wrote a neat work of fiction and it’s a good book.

The question is, should we be expected to quit buying, consuming, and enjoying things made by problematic people?

In some cases, the answer should be yes. If someone is currently profiting massively from people consuming their media or products and people are ignoring their atrocities, that person could end u making millions or billions of dollars despite being terrible, which is something that undoubtedly affects all of us, economically.

In the other cases, the answer should be, do you want to? If you’re not comfortable with something, you should, of course, stop consuming it. If you can ignore the thing, you might not need to bother. And, that doesn’t necessarily mean you’re excusing it.

If we look at all of humanity, even in the present day, mathematically speaking, 50% of people are more bigoted and terrible than the rest. There’s no other way for it to be. Less than 50% would be a mathematical fallacy. Does that mean we only consume content from the better 50%? Does that mean we rigorously research producers and creators and their personal lives only to decide it’s not worth the risk of ‘contributing’ because they have no trace online except for a private Facebook account? Is them having a Facebook account enough of a ‘sin’ that it’s not worth it to buy their book?

This brings us to the censorship point

If you know your history, you know that censorship is a nasty thing. When one person decides who or what is unethical to consume from, they sometimes seek to get rid of that thing so that no one has a choice - so that no one is Allowed to consume that thing.

This has led to book burning, the destroying of decades and centuries of research about sexuality and gender. It’s destroyed religious texts. It’s destroyed content created by women that painted any single man in a bad light. It’s destroyed progression.

“But I only want to get rid of the bad thing that everyone agrees is bad!”

It doesn’t matter. If you open the door to censorship for yourself, those who wish to use it for worse reasons will become just as justified, in their own eyes, to do the same. You’ll have Christians saying it’s okay to get rid of gay content because it’s objectively wrong according to the bible. You’ll have conservative parents burning books with complicated topics like abuse and assault because they don’t want their children to have access to anything controversial or complex like that.

You cannot open the door to censorship for one group without opening that door for everyone. And that is why we do not censor things.

The question then becomes, but what of the people consuming that media? Even if it’s not censored, consuming it still makes someone bad, right? 

Not necessarily. People consume problematic stuff all the time - things considered objectively bad. However, people don’t always consume said media because they support it being normalized in the real world. For example, fanfiction or books with rape in them may be something a victim reads to cope with their own past or present. A book with abuse depicted may actually make a young teen aware that what they’re going through is abuse. Content largely seen as ‘problematic’ can often play a part in solving the problem it portrays.

Then there’s historical, problematic media. Now, this is an area where I feel things have actually been OVER complicated.

Because everything historical has some tie to injustice, there is no ethical way to consume it. 

There is no ethical consumption under passed time.

So, how do we judge whether something should or shouldn’t be consumed? It is my opinion that something historical should stop being consumed and become shunned when its meaning is well-known enough and its message is still pervasive enough that it is actively causing problems.

For example, we generally try not to consume content when it is made by someone who is a known nazi. This is because nazis are still a problem in our society, presently. We have antisemitism all over the place. Therefore, we cannot let the message become that it is okay to be a nazi by way of us treating nazis like normal people and allowing them to succeed in society without consequence.

However, there are certain problems that are no longer particularly prevalent or which are agreed to be terrible on a large enough scale that consuming the content does not necessarily imply you believe it is okay. For example, if you look at literally any media from the 1800s or which is placed in the 1800s, you will see a lot of casual sexism and gender roles. Should we despise that time period because sexism was readily available at every turn? Should we refuse to enjoy 19th century fashion or culture because it had problems? I think not. I think it would be pointless to refuse to consume, read about, or otherwise engage with the 19th century. It wouldn’t change the past and it isn’t going to somehow undo the progress we’ve made on women’s rights. 

As a matter of fact, if someone merely suggested that perhaps the people of the 19th century were right for forcing women to wear long dresses and darn socks all day, they would be laughed into oblivion and called a shitty, sexist incel (which would be correct).

Does enjoying media from or placed in the 19th century mean you support sexism? I certainly hope not, since I enjoy it very much and know a lot of progressive people, women especially, who do enjoy that kind of thing. It is common sense enough, at this point in time, that people don’t generally believe that the sexism of the 1800s was acceptable. I am not going to see someone watching a period drama and assume they desire for our present-day social laws to be like what’s portrayed. That would be a ridiculous assumption. However, I could not assume the same about someone I saw watching openly antisemitic content. I would quickly wonder if they’re an antisemite/nazi/white supremacist.

So, what about that one thing I heard had a sordid past?

Listen, if we’re being honest here, most things from history have a sordid past. Sea shanties? You bet. But then when we talk of sea shanties being steeped in colonialism, we have to look at the bigger picture. What about pirates? Pirates were, by and large, a huge contributor to slavery, theft, colonialism, and murder. Does that mean enjoying media with pirates is glorifying or contributing to slavery, theft, colonialism, and murder?

(I’m about to talk a lot about pirates but this can be applied to anything that was historically bad but is no longer prevalent)

Pirates of the Caribbean is only a movie, but pirates did once exist and they did kill people. They did raid ships of merchants and tradesmen and they killed them and stole their goods. They took many good men from their families and even killed working children aboard the ships. Does that make enjoying pirates in media a contributor to these things? No. It doesn’t. We are looking at a dramatised, cleaned up version of the original piracy. I think most people are aware that pirates, in the real world, are bad and harmful and should not be supported. That doesn’t make pirate media any less fun in theory, and under our own terms.

Then we arrive at our perception - because most of this does come down to perception. When you watch pirate media, should you enjoy that, are you able to divorce yourself from their actual history enough to enjoy the media? If you can, you might enjoy it a lot. If you can’t watch a movie about pirates without thinking the entire time about how terrible they were and how much damage they did, then pirate media just isn’t right for you. But, it doesn’t mean you should attempt to take it away from others. Your opinion and perception of pirate media is not the global perception.

I have to ask, do you think others view it the same way you do?

When you read that question, you may be wondering what exactly I mean. What I’m asking is, do you believe others view that media with the same “clarity” that you do? Do you believe they understand the atrocity of real pirates and Feel that the entire time they watch the media and still enjoy it anyway?

Perhaps that’s why your response to someone enjoying something you feel guilty partaking in is, “these people all must not care about the real-world damage pirates did. The fact that they can watch this (despite sitting here and feeling the same things I do) makes me sick.”

However, if that is the case, you must remember that for a lot of people, the awareness of real world consequence is suspended during dramatised depictions of it. It doesn’t mean they have forgotten about the real-world consequences of piracy or that they don’t know it at all. It just means they are choosing not to think about it in that light while consuming media.

There is also the assumption that people must not know about something when partaking in it. You may think, “How can they enjoy this media? They wouldn’t be able to stomach it if they realized what really happened with pirates.”

In many instances, you would be correct. A lot of people are ignorant to what pirates have done in the real world. If you told every ignorant person the truth, maybe 5% of them would then become turned off by pirate media, and the other 95% would keep the truth in mind and then divorce themselves from it to continue enjoying said media.

There are realities that it is safe to divorce yourself from, and there are those that are not.

Is allowing yourself to enjoy dramatizations of pirates making you ignorant to present day conditions? Not largely. There are still pirates today, but not nearly enough for the average Joe to need to take them seriously. Those who need to know about them and do something to stop them are aware.

However, it is not safe to divorce yourself from, for instance, the holocaust. Divorcing yourself from the holocaust and seeing it as merely a dramatic setting with dramatic events and not a present-day real-world problem is exactly the kind of thing that leads to young teens being sucked in by white supremacy and naziism as well as what leads to many average conservatives believing the rise in white supremacy isn’t actually real or is not a big deal. They have distanced themselves so far from the real-world atrocity of the holocaust that they have forgotten it was real and that real people, like them, were contributors. They don’t want to believe that everyday people had any power in it and that it was tiny acts of willful ignorance that made concentration camps so successful. 

All in all, there is a different answer for everything we consume.

Want to know if something you’re consuming is okay to consume? Ask yourself: is this produced by someone who is contributing to present-day conditions? If the answer is yes, quit consuming it. If the answer is no, ask yourself, does this media make me uncomfortable because I’m aware of its roots? If the answer is yes, stop consuming it. If the answer is no, it’s probably fine. You are most likely not doing any damage, so long as you are aware of what is wrong with the content and are not using it as grounds to perpetuate harm. 

If, when thinking about something problematic in an old piece of media, you cringe? You’re on the right track. If you feel inclined to make excuses for it or justify the wrong in it, it’s time to step away and reevaluate why you feel the need to do so. If you’re doing so because you feel guilty for consuming it, you need to realize that it is actually more harmful to make excuses for the wrong in order to justify your consumption than it is to admit, “Yeah, this media is problematic and contains a lot of sexism, but I still enjoy it for its other qualities.” It is better to admit that you enjoy something problematic than to spread the message that what is happening in it is okay.

Some of you may be thinking, “Or, just stop consuming problematic media.”

I think in many cases, especially recent media, where your consumption has an effect on production, this is true. However, for media that is no longer being produced, I will remind you that most things have something wrong with them - yes, even pretty recent stuff.

Supernatural kills off women constantly, queerbaited the fuck out of its viewers, and sent a huge character to fucking mega hell for confessing his love.

Scrubs has no end to its sexism, transphobic and homophobic slur usage, and other problematic content.

V for Vendetta glorifies and shines a heroic light on a character who kidnaps and tortures a woman for what appeared to have been weeks or months so that she would be forced to understand his trauma and “no longer be afraid.”

Star Wars has incest, the producers/directors abused Carrie Fisher and sexualized her as a young teen, and probably a lot more that I’m not aware of because I haven’t seen the movies nor read the books.

I don’t even need to start on shows like Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, Community, That 70s Show, and so many more. Almost every popular piece of media has something worth canceling in it. There is no point trying to curate your media consumption to only unproblematic content, because it simply can’t be done.

Curate where it makes a difference. Sigh heavily the rest of the time. Make yourself aware what and how things are problematic. Put critical thought into how your consumption is capable of supporting or perpetuating a problem and how it is not. Make informed decisions.

Do not feel guilty if you are unable to flawlessly live up to the standards of purity culture. None of us can - not really.

[thedreadvampy]

Like idk what you want from me here. If you want to engage me in a specific question about ace/aro identities, as I've said several times and nobody has ever actually done, then ask me the specific question. Don't fuck around with vague gestures at Points of Discourse and then get cross with me because I haven't answered the Exact Question you Didn't Ask But Expected Me To Intuit.

Preface: If you don't want to answer any of these because you are allo/allo and don't have a say because its not your place, say that. In fact, I'm asking these because you seem to do have opinions on things you shouldn't based off things you have said in the past.

I also want to state that I agree fully with your points about Martin- minus the blatant aphobia. Not just acephobia, arophobia as well.

1. Do you think qprs are problematic? I believe you once made a post saying roughly that qprs are just normal friendships, or something like that, that has since been deleted. What is your current opinion?

2. Are het aros lgbt?

3. Are het aces lgbt?

4. Cis aro/aces lgbt?

5. Cishet aro/aces?

6. Do the spectrums and micro identities exist? You've implied in the past they don't, in the post about how they were supposedly created from sex positivity

7. Can aros be in or desire romantic relationships?

8. Can aces have or desire sex?

9. Does the split attraction model exist and does it benefit people?

10. Can teenagers identify as aro/ace or do you think they're too young?

11. Can you be, say, an aroace lesbian, or an aroace gay, aroace bi, etc. Idk how to phrase this one but like can you be aroace and still id with another orientation?

I could send another anon detailing the aphobia in the post, because I at least am certainly not upset about Martin being sexual, rather it was the very blatant aphobia. It could have stemmed from ignorance, and if that's the case I don't mind explaining it.

Ok this is a lot of questions, some with quite involved answers, so I'm gonna answer them chunk by chunk so it's a bit more manageable, and then I might come back to some of the surrounding message. This isn't gonna be an immediate bang bang bang, but I'll try and work through them over the next couple of days.

Question 1

1. No, I don't think qprs are problematic. I don't necessarily understand them but I don't need to understand them to understand and respect that they're a thing that's important to a lot of people. I don't know what post you're referring to, but I'm surprised that you say it was deleted, because I very rarely delete posts except, occasionally, reblogs where people have flagged up misinformation or dogwhistles or which I reblogged by accident. tbh I'm the messiest online presence I'm way too lazy to delete past posts or block people even when I probably should bc I don't like to feel like I'm ~hiding evidence~. So I'm not saying you're wrong, you're probably totally right, but I'm surprised.

I'm thinking about what posts I've made that you could be thinking of, and obviously I don't remember everything I say on here bc I say A Lot and I actively post to get things out of my head so 🤷‍♀️ but I do remember making a post a while ago where I said that it was a normal expectation of friendship to have some friends close enough that you'll live with them, raise kids with them, etc, and I'm wondering if that was the post you're thinking of? I did have qprs in mind while writing that to a degree, but only because I think 'you wouldn't do this with your friends' is a very common argument people put forward about qprs and I think it's a weak argument, because many people have different definitions of friendship, and the only argument I think is needed for any sort of I Have X Emotional Relationship To This Thing is...I Have X Emotional Relationship To This Thing. Like you can't offer a universal materialist definition of the differences between romantic, queerplatonic, sexual and platonic relationships, because the boundaries are very personal and it's really an emotional and experiential difference. so if that is the post you're thinking of, I wasn't criticising The Concept Of QPRs as much as saying that I thought trying to put hard lines around What Friends Do Vs What QPPs Do was a) counterproductive when arguing with someone who thinks QPR is Just Normal Friendships bc. if they do those things with their friends then saying NO THIS IS A QPR THING just reinforces their existing belief that you're talking about the same thing as they mean by friendships and b) to me seems to set a painful expectation to young people that you can only get these kinds of close friendships occasionally and in the form of a QPR and it will be stigmatised and misunderstood (and depending on how people talk about it, is only accessible to aspec people and allo people should only expect it to come through romantic/sexual relationships), when in fact most people of most ages I know have friends with whom they can share things like housing, deep feelings, futures, finances, who they miss if they don't see for a few days, who are mutually supportive and vital to their wellbeing. I don't think that's mutually exclusive with the existence of QPRs though - like I personally don't know what the difference is between a QPR and a close friendship, but I also don't know what the difference is between a romantic relationship and a close friendship but I know there is one and I know it's not a question of What You Do but a question of How You Feel And Interact, and that's pretty hard to define in unambiguous terms.

Like generally I don't Not Think QPRs exist, and I think it's a dick move to try and tell people they're wrong about how they experience and define their relationships because???? how are you meant to know that better than the person whose relationship it is??? but I do think the way people talk about QPRs (both from the perspective of defending them and from the perspective of attacking them) is pretty rife with problems and I don't think it's invalidating the reality of QPRs to talk about where the arguments and language around them potentially falls down or has unexpected consequences.

On the other hand, I don't know if that actually is the post you're referring to - the reason I'm calling back to that is that that and a few resultant asks are the only time I remember talking about QPRs on here in the last year or so. So like, several of these questions reference past posts, which is very fair, but I do need it to be clear that, since I don't really tag anything and I don't have a great memory, I can only really speak to What I Think Now In This Context, not to what I posted in the past and what I was thinking when I posted it. Like, this isn't too deny responsibility - I reckon I'm responsible for what I post even if I don't still agree with it, which is why I don't tend to delete my own posts on purpose - but just to deny capacity, I guess? I don't really KNOW what I've posted so if you talk about it in vague terms (and I do understand that if it's been deleted there's not a lot you can do but that) I may not necessarily be responding to the part of it that's worried you, so if I'm not speaking to something specific I've said or done, it's not because I Don't Want To, I just don't necessarily know to.

I'm waffling about this because looking through your messages there's a lot of "you said X" and like. given that the intended message of the post that's kicked this off was very different to the message people have taken from it, it feels important to me to know whether if I looked at the posts you're referencing I'd be like "ah yeah I did believe that but now I believe X" or if it's more a situation of "oh right I can see how you took X from that but my thinking was more Y".

(also sometimes when people say "you made a post" they mean "you reblogged a post" and I am a compulsive discourse scroller so sometimes I reblog a random post to bookmark my place on someone's discourse blog or I accidentally longpress the reblog button while scrolling - I try to delete reblogs that I don't agree with but sometimes I miss some, all of which to say if there's a post on my blog that doesn't seem to reflect what I say in my original posts then it doesn't necessarily mean I'm a crypto-whatever so much as I'm very lazy and messy with my blog. Doesn't mean I shouldn't be held accountable for reblogs but it's useful to know if we're talking original content or reblogs bc I'm unlikely to fully accidentally make a post. but I quite often accidentally reblog stuff. I doubt this is the case with this sitch just bc of your phrasing but I want to cover my bases)

anyway tl;dr: no I don't believe that QPRs themselves are inherently problematic, nor do I think I have at any point believed that, but I do think that a lot of the language and ideas used to talk about them are based in miscommunication or absolutist ideas about relationships and can have damaging knock on effects.