#like not saying i don't support them

[sidejobin]

Brett and Reagan have both casually killed people on screen

[mroddmod]

they are like puppies. 2 me

[ariaste]

Me: [sees everyone talking about how Assad Zaman was "literally" coming up with RPF about himself and Eric Bogosian in an interview]

Me: ah, fandom's doing its little "interpret an innocent comment in Some Kind Of Way" thing again, let's go find the video and do our own critical thinking about what was actually said here--

Assad: What would happen if I said-- [words that cannot be interpreted as anything but RPF fanfic]

Me:

Me: ok fandom gets a pass on this one actually

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Bros before Ho(oh my god is that Hanguang-Jun?)

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[theceaselessidiot]

Eloise Bridgerton being an absolute mood:

and Cressida's reaction of 'this girl is so weird, but I'm into it??? Wait am I into this??'':

[bitegore]

Zionists want you to conflate Judaism and Zionism. Zionists want you to believe that Judaism cannot exist without Zionism and that all Jews are Zionists. Zionism would have Jews believe that a Jewish state is the only way that they can be safe from antisemitism and will point to any instance of antisemitism as proof that Zionism is the solution- so Zionism wants gentiles to be antisemitic in their support of Palestine. They want you to conflate all Jews with Zionism and the state of Israel, and they want you to treat all Jews regardless of political affiliation as the face of Israel. Antizionist Jews exist, and incidences of antisemitism ostensibly acting against Zionism will not help dismantle the forces propping Zionism up.

Don't do their work for them.

[frogsare-friends]

"war on palestine" "war on gaza" "israel palestine war" "israel palestine conflict" actually it's none of those things, it's a genocide and an ethnic cleansing, hope this helps!!

[taxinealkaloids]

horrible children who are. so so mean to each other

[what-am-i-doing-in-this-fandom]

Okay, I know I'm a fandom art blog, but would anyone be interested in seeing my welds?

[whetstonefires]

Hey you said something about the my hero academia creator being unhinged about sexism, do you mind explaining?

I tried to write like, a thorough explanation of this and it just got longer and longer and longer and I have not touched this series in actual years and yet I've still got all these receipts a;lkjk;lfasd.

So rather than trying to build the whole massive case, here's a pared-down version. It's normal to have sexism in media, and shounen manga especially. Everyone does it. The level and mode and intentionality and so forth all vary, but of course it's there.

What's not normal is to have lots of varied and interesting female characters with discernible inner lives, and on-page discussion of how sexism is systemic and unjust and holds them back in specific ways, and then also deliberately make consistent sexist writing decisions even where they don't arise naturally from the flow of the narrative.

Horikoshi is actively interested in gender and sexism, he's aware of them in a way you rarely see outside of the context of, you know, fighting sexism. He is hung up on the thorny issue of what women are worth and deserve and how power and respect ties into it. He genuinely wants, I think, to have Good Female Characters, and not be (seen as) A Sexist Guy!

But. He doesn't actually want to fight sexism. He displays a lot of woman-oriented anxieties, and one of the many churning paddlewheels in his head seems to be that he knows intellectually that morally sexism is bad, but emotionally he really feels like it ought to probably be at least partly correct.

There are so many things I could cite, and maybe I'll get into some of them later, but the crowning item that highlights how the pattern is 1) at least partly conscious and deliberate and 2) about Horikoshi's own weird hangups rather than simply cynical market play, is Mineta Minoru.

The writer has stated Mineta is his favorite character. Mineta is also designed to be hated--that is, he is a particularly elaborate instantiation of a character archetype normally deployed to soak up audience contempt and (by being gross and shameless and unattractive and 'unthreatening') make it possible to include a range of sexual gratification elements into the narrative that would compromise the main characters' reputations as heroic and deserving, if they were the actors.

Good Guys don't grope girls' tits and run away snickering in triumph, after all. Non-losers don't focus intense effort around successfully stealing someone's panties. Nice Girls don't let themselves be seen half-dressed. And so forth. You need an underwear gremlin for that. So, in anime and manga, longstanding though declining tradition of including such a gremlin, for authorial deniability.

Horikoshi definitely uses him straight for this purpose, looping in Kaminari as needed to make a bit work. And yet he has Feelings about the archetype itself.

The passages dedicated to the vindication of Mineta, then, and the author's statements about him, let us understand that Horikoshi identifies with the figure of the underwear gremlin. He understands the underwear gremlin as a defining exemplar of male sexuality, at least if you are not hot, and finds the attached contempt and hostility to be a dehumanizing attack on all uh.

Incels, basically.

It's not fair to write Mineta off just because he's unattractive and horny (and commits sexual harassment). Doesn't he have a mind? Doesn't he have dreams? Doesn't he have human potential?

So what's going on with Horikoshi and gender, as far as I can figure out, is that he knows damn well that women are people and are treated unjustly by sexist society, but however.

He also understands the institutions of sexism as something protecting him and people like him from life being nebulously yet definitively Worse, and therefore wants to see them upheld.

So you get this really bizarre handling of gender where obviously women's rights good and women cool, women can be Strong, and the compulsory sexualization imposed by the industry isn't them or the author, and so forth.

But also it's very important that in the world he controls, women never win anything important or Count too much, and that jokes at their expense that disrupt the internal logic of their characters are always fair game, that women asked about sexism on TV will promptly get into catfights amongst themselves, and they are understood always in terms of their sexual and romantic interests and value, and sexual assertiveness and failures to perform femininity well enough are used to code them as dangerous and irrational, and that the sexy costumes are requisite and will never be subverted or rebelled against--at most they might be circumnavigated via leaning into cute appeal.

And that Yaoyorozu Momo, who converts her body fat into physical objects, is being frivolous when she wants to use money to buy things instead (rather than as sensibly moderating her Quirk use) and is never encouraged to eat as much as possible at every opportunity to put on weight and even shown being embarrassed by hunger (even though Quirk overuse gives symptoms that suggest she's been stripping the lipids out of her cell walls or nervous system to keep fighting) and always, no matter how many Things she has made, has huge big round boobies.

[hazel2468]

I keep seeing people bitching about "uwu when I say 'from the river to the sea' people say I'm calling for geeenocide! They say I'm antisemitic!" and like.

Maybe. instead of clinging to a phrase that a bunch of white leftists have co-opted because they think it sounds nice. And digging your little immature heels in. You should LISTEN when people tell you that yes. The phrase's FUCKING ORIGIN was a call for the eradication of Jews from the area known as Israel and Palestine. That NO, you cannot divorce it from those roots. YES, it IS still used to mean that TO THIS DAMN DAY.

And look. Maybe you DON'T think that Israelis should all be killed and/or exiled from Israel and Palestine. Maybe you DON'T think that the genocide of an entire people is the solution. Maybe you DON'T hate Jews and want all of us dead. And if that's the case? Great!

But how the FUCK are we supposed to tell the difference when you are using the EXACT same phrase as countless people who DO want those things. People who DO hate Jews, who ARE supportive of organizations that want to commit violence, people who SUPPORT what happened on October 7th?

When people tell you "hey, this phrase means something else, it has ALWAYS come from those roots, and using it is NOT OKAY because it is STILL used as a rallying cry for violence against Israelis and Jews worldwide", the way to react? Is NOT to fucking double down and use it.

Because that? DOES make you an antisemite. And if I see you using that phrase? Then I MUST assume that at best, you do not know what it means and have SOMEHOW avoided the countless Jews and non-Jews I have seen talking about it, or at WORST you actively hate me and want me and every single one of my people dead.

And frankly? You are not worth that risk to interact with.

Stop saying it. There are SO many ways to support Palestine, the Palestinian people, and their fight for rights, that do not involve spouting genocidal, antisemitic rhetoric. it is NOT HARD.

But apparently, some of y'all are insistent on being racist.

[inkly-heart]

please don’t be sad little sprout, you are loved 🌱 🖤

🌱

[songofwizardry]

ok I'm not an expert but I'm not seeing much specific info going around here, and there's a lotta Palestine solidarity protests in the UK this weekend, so here is some (including UK-specific) protest info and resources (mostly pulled whole-cloth from Twitter)

policing is heavy at Palestine protests generally

Hamas is a proscribed org under UK law. that means "inviting support" for them or "wearing clothing or displaying articles" that implies you are a supporter is a criminal offence (if you're interested, here's the full list of criminal offences from gov.uk). Palestinian flags etc are ok*, but do not have something that could be mistaken for Hamas imagery. don't go out there looking for convictions pls.

*in spite of what Suella Braverman has implied, the London Muslim Community Forum has just confirmed that the Palestinian flag is not a proscribed flag and is not banned (apologies for quoting the "we advise the met police" group but I thought it was important to have that info explicitly)

don't talk to cops. that includes the police liasion officers in blue bibs.

particularly if you're concerned about your face ending up on social media etc, but also just good practice in general (both in terms of COVID and protest safety)—mask up. cover up tattoos etc.

have bustcards or contact details for protest legal support on you. Green and Black Cross can be contacted on 07946 541 511. write the number on your arm etc.

if you witness an arrest: check if there's a legal observer nearby and if so call them over; if not: if the arrestee doesn't have a bustcard, give them one, find out where they're being taken, and contact eg GBC or a protest support line

if you have the time and can help out, there will likely be arrestee support required after—GBC tend to post callouts on Twitter for this

other links

for particularly children and young people and their families being referred to PREVENT for pro-Palestine statements, contact PREVENTWatch and maybe also Palestine in School (newer initiative I think, I don't have an excessive amount of detail on them just FYI)

Liberty, Migrants Organise and Black Protest Legal Support have bustcards in different languages, including Arabic and Somali (also Liberty's website has lotsa useful info, including advice for disabled protesters, protesting and immigration status, and what to do if you're kettled)

GBC's thread on what to do if you see an arrest is useful, as are all their resources generally

if I've missed anything or made a mistake, lmk—as I said, I am very much not an expert. if you know people who are protesting, pass them the legal support line numbers; if you're attending, stay safe and be vigilant; and ofc carry water.

[buddiesmutslut]

I know I've said it before, but I think this upcoming episode is going to be so interesting, even if we don't get Queer Eddie OR BT Bones (neither of which I'm fully convinced are going to happen on Thursday), & it's really for this one interesting phrase that Ryan & Oliver have both used.

They have both mentioned "rose-colored glasses" when it comes to Tommy & Shannon, and I would argue that they each have to reckon with these relationships before we can have any movement towards Buddie.

Eddie thinks that Shannon was the love of his life, that he failed her and has to carry that guilt with him for the rest of his life. I believe that Eddie placing Shannon on a pedestal is partially what's stopping him from realizing his queerness (along with the catholic guilt and repression, but a lot of that is also tied up in Shannon & their failed marriage.)

Buck's convinced that his big feelings last season were all about Tommy, and I'm not saying that some of them weren't, but I don't think it'd be too far of a stretch to say that he figures that he's in this relationship now and that obviously everything is fine now. He figured out this part of himself and he's dating a man and that means everything is Fine and he absolutely does not need to do any further digging or searching or learning, despite the fact that he and Tommy don't really seem to like each other all that much, nor do they seem to be all that compatible.

Buck has to reckon with the fact that realizing his bisexuality and immediately jumping into a relationship with a man that he wasn't even sure he wanted (his speech at the coffee date) might not be the solution to all the problems he's had, and Eddie has to deal with the fact that Shannon was not perfect, that what she did was not the same as what he did, that she's responsible for her own actions and that this romanticized vision he has clung to of their lives is not real and is not consistent with the actual relationship that they had.

There's a Divorce Arc this episode - which I'm begging does something with Eddie - and an uncomfortable truth learned about Tommy's past; it's not completely out of left field to assume that the Rose-Colored Glasses come off this episode.

And the fact that it's happening for them BOTH, at the same time? In the relationships that I think are the biggest obstacles to them realizing/accepting their feelings for each other???

I'm never fully convinced they're actually going to go there with these 2, but it will be SO interesting to see how this episode plays out, regardless.

[v-arbellanaris]

sorry i WILL shut up about this (and start posting abt my new hawkes) but seeing "can you guys take a breath" and "decisions from 10+ years ago in southern thedas will not affect the current timeline set in north thedas" from specific blogs is genuinely wild. as if we don't literally live in a world where we are STILL just starting to face consequences to actions taken 10+ years ago, and as if US politics 10+ years ago did not have anyyyyy global ramifications for anyone outside of the US even 10+ years later. like. rivain, antiva, nevarra are all IN southern thedas wdym??? im half tempted to start actually listing out all of the things our decisions could have feasibly impacted 10 years later but seeing this take from blogs that genuinely still discuss the impact of the exalted marches on thedas hundreds of years later is WILDDDDDD

[aro-culture-is]

aro culture is getting really annoyed with the relationships unit in your sociology class because the whole thing is just 100% amatonormativity.

:\

if think your teacher, professor, and/or TAs might be interested in discussing the concept, I have some idea of bringing up the topic?

I'd personally say something like, "Hi, During our section in sociology around relationships, I couldn't help but think it would be interesting to discuss how a sociological theory called "amatonormativity" might relate to these lessons. I gathered a few sources from the professor who coined it, a thesis written on it, and a law review written about the connection between it and laws in the USA. There's some connections between its use in feminist thought and in queer theories, and I'd love to know your thoughts about it. I personally was thinking of when [specific statement] was said, and how I would apply this theory. I hope it's as interesting to you as it is to me."

Coiner's current webpage: https://elizabethbrake.com/amatonormativity/

Thesis: https://vc.bridgew.edu/honors_proj/330/ (click download in upper right hand corner for the PDF, depending on the individual it may be worth downloading and sending that rather than a link)

Law Review: https://uclawreview.org/2022/06/09/amatonormativity-in-the-law-an-introduction/