#like that's just personal taste stop making this a moral issue.

[gamora-borealis]

lol so I was looking at my twt to find a few peoples' @'s to follow on bluesky and actually came across the rumored phan twt plushie kissing discourse... i nearly started laughing that's WILD to me that there's really serious discourse about that!!!??? i know there's weird structural stress on phan twt from phil actually lurking sometimes but... still!

[shorthaltsjester]

okay but i am very confused about the energy regarding the weavemind as. bells hells specific enemies? like sure they’re on ruidus and have been introduced in campaign 3 but none of bells hells have expressed a specific interest in taking them down, the weave mind has committed no specific crimes against bells hells that would equate it to being Justice™ for bh to fight them. even if you want to make the tenuous connection that like imogen and fearne are ruidusborn: both of them have focused much more on the consequences and revelations about their families that have come about from their ruidusborn existence than the authoritarian leaders of ruidus itself. so, uh, it is profoundly more interesting to have the party go after the person in charge of the army cult that contextualizes both of their existences and the trauma of the entirety of their party than a obscure group of villains that bh has no actual tangible relation to. like this was literally laid out in the conversation. bh get the cage and ludinus because that’s Their Fight that they’ve been fighting since imogen started dreaming and since orym’s family got killed. vox machina is taking the bridge because of the vax of it all. and mighty nein got the third less prevalent thing, because they’re experienced with psychic threats and manipulation (and also because of course the mighty nein are the ones dealing with the assignment less likely to be seen or heard about).

like the in-character reactions to the breakup of activities were only really considered anything close to negative by braius and dorian who while certainly now members of bells hells aren’t the ones upon which people are claiming to build their “this story is an injustice to the bells hells” sure it is. like ignoring the fact that being unable to get closure on every single issue and potential villain is a long-standing tradition in cr campaigns, i thought the thing everyone loved so much about bells hells is that they’re the npc party? and for better or worse c3 has been about being fast paced and it would be extraordinarily out of character for matt to say “oh these two high stakes and powerful groups have decided to fulfil their plans one at a time so that bells hells can sufficiently take them out.” like the only way that bells hells — the lowest level party — getting to take out One Of The Most Powerful Exandrian Mages is an injustice is if you’ve ignored the entire campaign and its context. like seeing the complaint that “it’s not bells hells story” yes, that has been made clear time and time again in the past 100 episodes. it’s completely fair to not like this, it’s extremely odd to see this as some sort of surprise wrecking ball that has come about in the decision to have more than one party of eight fuck ups trying to stop the unavoidably obvious world ending threat that exandria currently faces and not as something that has been made repeatedly clear by the themes and position of bells hells. like, throughout, unlike vm or mn, they have been handed their missions rather than choosing them (even if between 2 or 3 choices as was often the case with mn), they have explicitly discussed being the npcs or little guys, they have consistently gone to the bigger guys for help with things that previous parties either managed themselves or suffered without or had allies to help them (versus the like. Leaders that bh look to), even the dynamics of the parties express that bells hells are people stuck saving the world due to a bunch of personal moral codes rather than a specific decision to save the world because they’re the only ones who can, they’re expendable. that has made this campaign different throughout, it has made the characters less explored because they don’t have the time or means or desire to do so. and again it’s a matter of taste whether that’s something you enjoy, but it shouldn’t be a matter of “why would they do this” this far into the Bells Hells Aren’t Special They’re Just There campaign (which isn’t to say the characters aren’t special or whatever like they’re a bunch of weirdos but as a party they’re just a party)

[olderthannetfic]

Re: discourse about using outliers / the worst examples of a group to justify generalizations-- this is also a problem with the femslash wank asks

I'm one of those filthy f/f folks who actually does want to see more femslash relative to mascslash, but I'm not anti-fujo or a terf or telling ppl to change their own tastes. I'm proship / SALS and kinkmato and I think fujoshi are great; I appreciate their massive contribution to fandom culture including AO3's existence itself

But some ppl seem like they just hate f/f fandoms generally and want a reason to bitch about us? and I've felt super demoralized by it whenever I read your blog lately

Like the complaints about f/f being too wholesome and fluffy and that this is somehow bad?? tumblr is C O V E R E D with cutesey fluffy bubbly m/m art using That Artstyle we all know and nobody complains about it. But when sapphic art is like this suddenly its cause we're boring sexless puritans who dont know what pussy should look like? The huge amount of kinky weird depraved f/f thats out there gets totally erased and the wholesome stuff gets scapegoated as a symbol of regressiveness.

Or the constant lecturing to "JuSt CrEaTe It YoUrSeLf" as if nobody who says they want more f/f would actually be making it??? How do you KNOW they're not making it? Are you stalking the tumblr of every ao3 f/f author to make sure they never expressed the opinion you hate , and vice versa??

Yeah a few awful ppl have been super obnoxious, terfy, or puritanical bullies with how they talk about this topic. But when you constantly bring those people up to demonize talking about it at all it feels like you're creating a taboo around it because you want those annoying lesbian feminists to shut the fuck up. Cause how dare we, right? How dare we express desire for something in a way that reminds you patriarchy exists.

You won't even let us express that we're bitter or sad about feeling like a minority even amongst other queer women. You won't let us express simple jealousy without interpreting that jealousy in the most terfy antiship bad faith way possible!

I won't defend those who actually harass ppl or moralize over ships. I won't defend anti-fujos. But when you constantly lump me in with those people just because I looked at AO3 stats and went "Hmmm, it would be cool if this was more balanced :/" or whatever it feels like you just don't want me to say anything at all

--

Is this about me personally? Yes, I agree that topics that are repetitive start to feel like an attack.

But with regards to AO3 stats, this is my pet peeve, as you probably know if you read here often, and I'm unlikely to stop being angry about it.

AO3 is extremely unusual in the history of fandom for being a very big, very multifandom site that is not m/m-specific but where m/m outnumbers other things. There have been large-ish slash archives before. There have been and still are other large, multifandom archives, from FFN and Wattpad, which are in AO3's weight class, to medium size ones like MediaMiner. The spaces that aren't m/m-specific generally have f/m vastly outnumbering m/m. They also make it harder to get stats than AO3 does.

I don't have an issue with people looking at overall fandom stats and complaining that f/f has the short end of the stick when it comes to fanfic broadly. I do object to people pulling only AO3 stats and going "The one anomalous clubhouse that looks like this is the problem" and pointing at m/m.

It's the same problem you point out, just in another direction. After being told "Okay, but the amount of m/m..." constantly for years, people are fed up and never want to hear it again. Even if it's phrased nicely. Even if the person saying it is also hurting.

[fantasygerard2000]

Tastes and Preferences Are Not Standards

There's this issue with fans of any media complain about the lack of original works over actually watching them.

So, recently, D23 announced a ton of upcoming projects for the parks, games, shows, etc with their movies being the one that got the most attention. Majority of them are sequels and live action remakes and per usual, people are outrage over the big D for prioritizing on nostalgia baiting than making new ideas.

Here's the thing tho, alongside the sequels and live action remakes, they also announced Hoppers, an upcoming original film by Pixar directed by the guy that made We Bare Bears, Daniel Chong. Response to Hoppers, was near nonexistent. Like, very little anticipation as in "it exists".

Not only that, another original film before Hoppers is currently to be released next year, Elio. Just like with Hoppers, Elio only seen as this movie that was originally supposed to be released this year before swapping places with Inside Out 2.

Now, the obvious answer to this is rage culture. Being angry over the current thing is an easy content mill. Mufasa is being blasted because it had the audacity to not be faithful to an obscure prequel book series and Snow White for even much more dumb reasons, mostly centering on the lead actress because, if that didn't work on Halle, might as well try again on Rachel.

And when other people addressed that Pixar and Disney did made original films with Elemental and Wish being their current examples, the response these grifters is "We want GOOD original ideas." Now that just shows that they genuinely don't actually care about wanting to watch original ideas, regardless of quality, and simply only using them as a point to why hollywood is dead, blah blah blah.

Original ideas take time to get people invested into watching them. People prefer to engage with media they are more familiar with over the new ones, hence why they are always needlessly comparing things.

Elemental was mocked for being a Zootopia clone but with living elements and themes of racism, but while Zootopia is about general prejudice, Elemental is about personal prejudice. It doesn't use allegories like Zootopia, it's straightforward about the characters being immigrants. Just like any other Pixar film, there's more to the story than the general concept. But that didn't stop people saying that the characters being living elements didn't contribute to the story. Just like with Turning Red, the creator chose so because he want to, as if kids totally wanna watch a movie about immigrants. It's his story, based on his own life experiences told through a lens so kids can enjoy it.

I already talked about Wish to death, but it is a major factor considering that it's an original story that is deliberately made to be an homage to classical and renaissance era Disney films. The comparisons of to to previous films like Disney's more well known works like Snow White are dubious because they're oddly biased and surface level when there's another Disney film that's even more comparable, The Princess and the Frog.

Princess and the Frog is a lot like Wish, black lead, classical villain, hand drawn animation (though Wish's is stylized) and themes about working hard to achieve your dreams. While Wish has problems about how "half cooked" it is, Princess and the Frog has more problems than Wish; Tiana, their first black princess being a frog for majority of the movie, the sugarcoating of a 1920's setting, the demonization of an active closed religion that people use as an aesthetic coughAlastorHazbincough and a complicated story about technicalities to break the spell and a forced moral about love and family, and not in a good way.

Despite these issues being present and are still discussed today, the fact that it's hand drawn animated and has a cool looking villain wallpapers all over this issues. This is also extends in a lot of Disney's other older films. The mess of a cultural mix setting that is in Aladdin and Raya, the racism in Peter Pan, the usage of g*psy in Hunchback, Pocahontas existing and characters of color being played by white actors that the same thing literally happened with Raya (SEAsian characters, not SEAsian actors). Even though these problems have always been present, people dismiss them with "It was fair for the day". They value their personal nostalgia over the issues other have during them.

Coming back on the topic of comparing films, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish is often brought up to compare anything Disney and Pixar make. People had low expectations towards The Last Wish because it was a sequel to a spin off no one asked for and it succeeded their expectations. The reason why I brought up The Last Wish is because a minority of animation fandom use it as the standard for animated films. The comment saying "We want GOOD originals" is practically them moving up the goal post because to them, any original idea isn't good enough for their tastes. We can't have an original idea without someone bemoaning about how it's inferior to an already existing idea based on surface level comparisons.

Bringing back Wish because it's a good example, people wanted it be like the previous Disney films. However, being like them means loosing its own identity. Turning Star into a generic pretty boy for the girls to salivate over means losing what Star represents, the hope people have to keep on pursuing their ambitions.

An ironic thing is whenever they find a good idea they liked, they want more of it. Basically, wanting others to be just like it. What's the point of wanting an original when all you just want is the same old thing again?

[lullabyshark]

gender in the mars house

this isnt very long & is mostly haphazard and off the cuff but i had to put down some of my thoughts as a nonbinary person on the way gender is portrayed in this book. spoilers obviously

i know as a long-time fan of miss pulley to not take the things she puts in her work at face value. obviously, i think thats true for basically anything not written for children, and even many things that are written for children. something else has to be going on, right? i found myself constantly thinking "whats the catch?"

it feels strange for the love interest to say literal terf rhetoric and imply that bioessentialism is part of the world building. because on one hand this is the love interest, a person that comes across as a charming, awkward nerd in the majority of the text, and theyre saying something completely hideous. not necessarily what they personally believe, but a truth about why things are the way they are on mars.

and because then i look at all these people who were assigned they/them at birth and wonder if any of them ever feel gender euphoria. if you are gender neutral because society says so and you were genetically modified, is there any joy in it? is there any real freedom in it? what about binary trans people? what about people like myself who use neopronouns? is this just neo-cisgenderism? this society is much less widespread gender equality and more of a rigid absence of diversity. otherwise wouldnt we see more genders instead of less?

most of the time everything is very normal. i know so many people who use they/them that it feels very comfortable and homey to see it used so much. but sometimes it feels off. its definitely a cis persons imagining of gender neutrality. because when you create a world where the reason these people are "nonbinary" is bioessentialism and not because they genuinely feel that way, it feels like the gender neutrality is... bad? wrong? misguided?

it makes me feel crazy. on mars gender is no more bc men historically have power over women and kill their wives? women are the victims of biology so now everyone is assigned they/them at birth? it leaves a very odd taste in my mouth. gale only ever addresses it once after this, admitting that actually abolishing gender didnt stop anyone getting killed, it was changing marriage law that did. so where does that leave us

i love a morally gray pulley love interest--if mori was real i would forgive him for all the murders then bat my eyelashes and say anything you want beautiful LMAO. but i think that mystery, when we're dealing with something like systematic oppression, thats a very different thing. i was waiting the whole book for them to say that it was a lie and gender was abolished for a different reason, or that they only said that for the optics.

i wonder what other trans & nb ppl think about it. is there something im not getting? do you like this mono-gender mars? do you think im completely off the mark? if anyone actually reads this i genuinely want to know 😭

natasha i love your work queen but theres a lot in this book that fails to convey what i think you were trying to convey. obv this is just one issue, there are plenty of others that i dont feel nearly as equipped to discuss, in this and her other books. and while i will always enjoy her prose and try to go in w good faith, certainly no one is infallible.

[gakriele-lvs-blog]

Vee is ond of those characters,) in parallel with Luz and Hunter) who I can't stop thinking about, and since I has been reading a lot of pots and comments talking about Vee and Luz being portrayed as mean and selfish person... I got me inspired to write this:

97% of the time Vee is quite literally just the sweetest child you could meet, serene, calm, kind and while shy most of the time she proves to be brave if she believes to have a shoot in the situation.

But for that other 3%, considering her origins and filling the gaps by visualizing what she must have endured just to survive up to this day; I'm quite certain if pushed hard enough she could snap, and with that I mean sudden outbursts that tend to bring to light all of those buried emotions from her time in captivity.

We are talking about 15 years (her whole life) worth of represed anger, fear, sorrow and hopeless

So it shouldn't be surprising she can be harsh at times, especially if emotions are running hot and just wants to be done with the conversations, it happens to everyone and we all tend to regret them shortly after.

Vee judging Luz's actions was something that happened in the heat of the moment as a result of Luz comparing her situation to Vee's. This lead to Vee feeling a mixture of anger and frustration and her first reaction was to prove her wrong, especially since from Vee's perspective Luz took her "perfect life" from granted and for some nonsensical reason decided to run away to live her "irrealistic dream" of being a witch. Meanwhile Vee spent her entire life either as a slave or as a fugitive with nobody or nothing to rely on until she ran away to literally another planet and took someone's else lives

Vee took Luz's place because Camila give her a taste of what being loved and cherish was like (just like how Eda loved Luz's mannerisms and personality) and from her perspective Luz left with the intention to return, so by the time Luz found out what Vee has been doing the latter's reaction was to leave, she recognized pretending to be Luz was wrong and was willing to leave without a fight

And at the end she said: “I resent you for running away. But I'm also thankful that you did. I dunno. It's... confusing.” this is where she came to realize how much of a moral dilemma their situation was, Vee did what she did out of necessity but doesn't know at all why Luz did it

This puts into perspective the complexity of the circumstance that lead to that moment. Luz never intended to abandon Camila in the first place, her intentions were to prove she didn't need to change and her dreams were not only possible but valid; while Vee's was to find a place where she could live as a normal person, a place to belong.

Definitely one of the most important bits we missed as a result of the shortening was a proper chat between Luz and Vee (and Camila) many of their issues were never addressed in the finale, Heck! They actually never spoke or said each other's name at any point!

And on top of that... They are children, you can't shame children from making a mistake and trying to fix them

[bookwormlover10]

look i love people talking about Terry, it's nice to have some more people in the fandom. But what REALLY rubs me wrong is how people are treating the Epilogue Clone Son Twist like it's Everything about Terry's character. You would Not introduce Harley Quinn as an anti-hero with her gf Poison Ivy. You would go into her PHD and history with the Joker first. I don't like how the "Batfam" fans just gloss over and "blorbo-fy" Terry into "poor widdle baby clone" and "sassy Future bat #7". His FAMILY and his attempts to keep his relationships stable despite being Batman ARE the things that make him stand out in the Batfamily. His past as a gang member and his acknowledgement of his mistakes with his repayment IS important to him - stop making him Damian but Better! or Jason but Better! He's Terry! he's a 90s child with all the cringe that goes with it!

Yea I agreed with you on somethings. Even though I personally don't really like the half clone twist, in the Grand scheme of things. The whole clone thing was only in one episode of justice league unlimited and they never brought it up again. It was never batman beyond itself. I don't read much comics but from I know the clone thing was Recon in comics. But that what people remembered and when people hear about they forget everything else that is interesting about his character! Which makes me not really liking the existence of epilogue. Even Thought I think the the episode fine on it own ending the cadmus ark

For the blorbo thing. It something that I noticed in a lot of fandoms. I just learned to ignore most of it.

For the Damian but better! Is something I don't really see. Because Damien was raised by literal assassins and Terry had a normal childhood. Don't really see how Terry could be Damien but better..... There origins or nothing alike.... There anger issues maybe. But that a common trait with bat boys. Like dick has it and Jason has it. So that not special. The only thing that I could think of that they have in common is there sperm donor and that their both future batman. Thought I personally think that there dynamic has potential

Jason but better is something I understand with giving how similar they are in a lot of things. Even fashioned tastes. But Terry was rocking the brown leather jackets and red bat symbols longer than Jason did... But seriously though with the simulator organs in some places. Terry was still a kid with a normal childhood was both his parents. He only started acting out is cause he couldn't handle his parents divorce and was a really bad kid. ( And from from what I know Terry is in the middle class) For what I know ( don't at me I haven't read a lot of comics) in his post crisis ( his second one) organs Jason only act up to survive. But overall was a good kid. ( For the most part. I think from my research...) I'm not going to continue this part before I butcher something. Their morals quiet different to. sent I got interested in Terry first I compared Jason to Terry. This that they would have an interesting dynamic.

For the sassy future batman is something I could see. Thought me personally I see Terry like a spider man like Batman.( Maybe because I'm bias and I like Spider-Man) Terry organs has things similar to a spider man story. ( But people have talk to death about that.) Terry also has that spider man humor. Thought he is seared when need to be. ( This is just me rambling at this point)

[slocumjoe]

If Sole wasn't around, who do you think each companion would hook up with? (If anyone)

Since all of them meet through Sole, we're just going to keep that funky guy around...maybe they go moon over Edward Deegan, like a civilized person of taste and class

Cait; i could see her ending up with anyone, but I can't see her ending up happy with most of them. Honestly, I think her best bet would be Piper, maybe Preston. Preston, she'd have to have a lot of character development for...shake off some of her more raider-y traits. As for Piper, that's more her speed, and I think Cait would do well, having Nat around, getting to be Auntie Cait. Piper is more of a troublemaker and spitfire, and I think Cait could easily get bored with Preston. Happy, yes, but Cait gets a little stir crazy, not getting into trouble.

Curie; I fucking love Mac x Curie, I'll admit...but I'm not sure she'd, in text, care much for him. I also really like Curie x Danse, both are very cute to me. I think I like Danse x Curie more, as they're both scientifically minded, care very much about history and preservation of it, and big scary man who loves his small and sweet wife who's actually the weird, unsettling one is top tier.

Danse; Again, I can see him with Curie...and again, Preston as well. I've said before that Danse is very adaptable, romantically, so really, you could make a case for any of the other companions?? Some would absolutely be harder than others, and Gage is an outright fuck no, period. Gage is a fuck no for literally everyone here, spoilers. But Danse...as long as you've got some morals, and will be nice to him, you've got a chance. Low bar? Yeah. Yeah it is.

Deacon; Deacon can't even be romanced by fucking Sole. Bitch needs a crowbar to open up. But...if you have a taste for romantic black comedies...X6 x Deacon is fucking hilarious. Is it possible? No. Not even an inch. But that's not the point. The point is I like it and it's funny. As for what Deacon could actually land? Uh...no one? He's a known liar, he's closed off as shit, and he's prone to identity theft. I think the only one that stands a chance is Nick, but would Nick put up with it enough to fall in love?? Idfk.

Gage; No one. Not even X6. I've seen people say Cait, and I have to ask, WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU? CAIT WAS A SLAVE. GAGE IS A SLAVER. I LOVE HIM TO BITS BUT HE VERY MUCH IS A SLAVER THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE

Hancock; I kinda like MacCock but Valencock is also pretty good...honestly, Hancock has never struck me as a...romance kinda guy? Like, I get why he's romancable, but...I always felt like he'd be better with a bunch of casual romantic relationships, rather than one super serious one. But, I can see Hancock getting with Nick, Mac, and for a very fun wildcard, that I love for being a shitshow, Danse. Yes. Yes I just supported DanseCock. Its FUNNY AND QUESTIONABLE. OF COURSE I LIKE IT.

MacCready; So, Curie and Hancock I've already said, but if I didn't think Piper was a lesbian, I'd say her. What? They both got kids, both like candy, both have similar values and methods of getting around...but they'd butt heads a lot. A very bickery couple. But MacCock is also cute, though I think they'd have a lot of Very Real Issues. Curie, less so, because Curie is better at communication and doesn't do things Mac is Very Not Okay With. Though, he'd have some shit to stop doing for both MacCurie and MacCock, ei, stealing and murder, etc.

Nick; VALONGFELLOW SQUAD LETS GOOOO. But honestly, no one. Maybe Codsworth. I say Hancock, but pretty unlikely. Nick is a Confirmed Bachelor, man. Thats just how the cookie crumbles. UNLESS YOU GET ANOTHER OLD MYSTERIOUS DEAD WIFE MAN LETS GOOOO

Piper; If not Cait, Ellie, maybe? I always struggle to look at Piper beyond my Very Famous Issues With Her. It's just, Piper is lesbain to me. There are Two Other Girls. Curie is an...okay option? I think Piper would seriously butt heads with Curie in a relationship, though I can't put my finger on why exactly...on the other hand, Piper has genuine chemistry with Cait. Honestly, I don't put much stocks into canon x canon ships, anymore, I prefer the found family thing. Piper really showed that for me, thinking about this, because I don't really go crazy for her with anyone? It doesn't help she's got one option.

Preston; I've said he had a hoe phase and boy howdy, could Preston pull any of these bitches if he put his mind to it. But who would he want to pull? Not Curie, too naive and optimistic. Not MacCready, used to be a Gunner and acts like it. Cait, he wouldn't like her that way, as we know her. Again, personal growth needed there. Gonna have to say Danse as a flat, completely possible possibility. For a non-companion, Sturges. Obvi.

X6-88; I liked Curie x X6 for a time until DeacX6 revealed itself to me in a fever. But neither of these are based in reality. So, much like Gage, no one. Maybe they can hang out as bachelors and make fun of people together, idk. Bromance.

[initiumseries]

If you had to pick between spuffy and cangel, which one do you find more interesting? And why?

I'm gonna preface this with, I don't think either of them are particularly interesting. That's a large part of why I don't like these ships lol. My dislike of these ships has less to do with personal taste, and more to do with the obliteration of their characters and the overarching story integrity to make them happen. An example of this is, when I saw TVD was moving toward delena, I hated the idea of breaking Elena and Stefan up, especially when it felt like they'd barely been together and I gad serious problems with how damon consistently and without repercussions, violated obvious boundaries of everyone around him but especially Stefan and Elena. That was a personal issue for me, but I was also curious to see how they'd handle the story. I'd said this to Zal at the time, but I was prepared to be on board a delena ship if it meant the show taking an interesting character/story turn. If we actually got to see that darker turn in Elena, the fallout of her choices, and how being with damon messed with her morality, perceptions, isolated her from her friends etc, I would've liked to see that story progression and character arc, even if it meant the (temporary) end of a ship I liked. When that didn't happen, and the story rapidly deteriorated, I resented the ship because it essentially ruined the show (among other issues) to keep it working.

So to the point of the ask, I don't think that either were particularly interesting, but I will say that Spuffy, for a time, had better execution. I had tired of Spike whining about Buffy, dreaming about Buffy, becoming a pathetic shadow of what made him interesting as a character for Buffy. It sucked. So to see the return of his vigor as a character in this dysfunctional, abusive and hypersexual relationship with Buffy was refreshing. It was also uncomfortable, which its meant to be. Buffy is the white knight. But she died, and was finally at peace and her friends traumatized her by bringing her back, then traumatized her again by abandoning her to dig herself out of her own grave. She was angry, depressed, isolated and she had no one to work her issues out with, and here was Spike, allowing her to revel in the worst parts of herself. Something she never allowed herself before she died. That was interesting. It was moreso, because it was so obvious this wasn't about actual affection. It was clear at the time, Spike didn't love Buffy, he was obsessed with her, and Buffy didn't even like Spike, he was a site for her to work out her pain. That was more interesting to me than anything else, because, again, Buffy's relationships up until then had been about mutual affection, partnership and love, and now she's slumming it and hiding it from all her friends because she's embarrassed. That's good story stuff. Where I jumped off and immediately lost interest is when both Buffy and Spike became OOC-ish just to bring them back together in some weird, pointless amicable companionship thing. Spike assaulted Buffy and then got a soul to punish her for her rejection. Forcing her to not only accept him, but defend him and protect him against her loved ones, then alienate her AGAIN, to bring them back together is cruel, and a betrayal of Buffy as the titular strong female character she was always meant to be. Buffy in any previous season would never have forgiven her attempted rapist, much less stopped GILES from killing him when he was a KNOWN liability and danger to her work. She killed Angel - the love of her life - to save the world, but defends Spike? Makes 0 narrative sense. Spike becomes a sad little bitch because of the soul no one wanted or asked him to get, then just sort of...returns to himself, and shows no remorse, no repentance for what he put Buffy through, and how that affected the group. And suddenly we're all supposed to believe this is...what, love? How? We've SEEN what Spike looks like when he's in love, and this isn't it. So, that's where it becomes uninteresting to me, because in order to make this ship work this way, they have to betray the characters, insult the viewers, and compromise the story. Those are bad narrative choices.

[clearwillow]

To the Morality Police: I see you, I suspect I know who you are, and it wouldn't be (sadly) the first time I see attacking writers/artists over what YOU assume is right or wrong. (A certain doujinshi, along with the original fic comes to mind) Newsflash: enjoying something on FICTION does not mean we like/support it in RL. So how about you leave artists/writers the fuck alone,l et them enjoy what they want, and shove your purity mentality up your arse.

OH NOES, A BUNCH OF PIXELS AND WORDS ARE DOING IMMORAL THINGS! MOM, HELP! How about you put the same energy into raging AND ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING about REAL LIFE PEOPLE BEING VICTIMS OF GR00MING? (yeah, your morality high horse comes from both Dark/Arshes and the HY ship you keep clutching your pearls about. Like I said, I SEE YOU)

HOW DARE YOU JUDGE SOMEONE'S CHARACTER OVER WHAT THEY ENJOY IN //FICTION//?! Grow the fuck up and learn the difference and stop demanding in your pseudo polite way for writers to stop writing their "problematic" fandoms/ships.

Carra, I for one love your Joshua/Kai and cannot wait to see what happens next 😏

Not what I expected to see when I woke up today...

I'm only publishing this ask because of the little bit at the end, and I wanna make a few things clear.

I don't care what a person ships. If they're sitting next to me with a plate of green beans and offer, I'll tell them it's not my taste. It's not that big a deal until the person tries to force feed you the green beans.

If I have ever tried to demand someone to read or view anything I've made that wasn't in their sphere of interests, I am sorry. Sometimes I reblog my stuff because my timing sucks and some fandom tags tend to get flooded at times, so it might not get seen that way.

For every fandom that you feel is "perfect", there is gonna be someone who will find a fault and that's fine. We don't all have to all like the same things all the time.

For fandoms where it is...clearly got issues...that doesn't mean you can't enjoy it still. Ignore what you don't like about it. Change it with your creations. That's what I thought fandom communities were built on.

I didn't realize my character was being called into question this weekend; shows how out of it I've been 😅

I think, as a general statement, that fandom creators have final say in what they post...and they can pull it down just as fast. I can't imagine going up to someone and telling them that their hard work was wrong because it didn't suit my tastes. My late-aunt actually did this with a meal she spent hours on. People complained, and she threw every bit of food out the front door.

If all people are going to do is complain, what is to say that fandom creators won't throw out their work as well?

[bonefall]

Is the Dark Forest still as terrible as it was in the books? In the books it sounded terrible, literally hell, even from its appearance. In the Bonefall Rewrite it says cats like Cloudberry and Ryewhisker don’t hate being there, going as far to say prefer there over StarClan (mostly reasons of rebellion). Now, does the physical appearance or anything of the Dark Forest change because I can’t imagine how anyone can not hate living there? Or was Ryewhisker and Cloudberry able to ignore the literal depressing atmosphere of it?

Oh in the books it really is hell. It canonically has a "worsening" effect on the cats that live in it, making them generally more violent and spiteful while condemning them to a dark, preyless, desolate existence.

I think that was fine when it was JUST mass-murderers like Tigerstar, but it stopped being ok when more morally gray cats started to threatened with it. And I don't like that, because I LIKE the stakes of NOT going to StarClan!

But in order to justify having that conflict for a wider range of cats, the Dark Forest can't be as horrible as it was in TNP.

Bonefall Place of No Stars

It's still dim and grim, and the same way that StarClan still has Fourtrees because it exists in the memory of the Clans, the Dark Forest has dark landmarks.

There's a thunderpath, the Bonehill is there, the 5th tree of Fourtrees stands alone, there's a river that's perpetually flooded... but one person's HELL was another person's heaven. It's just a matter of working together to piece them together.

For example... the worst place to Ryewhisker is the battlefield he died on. The worst place to Cloudberry is where they passed the law to ban halfclan relationships. But neither one of them has an issue with Morningstar's memory of ThunderClan camp!

If you work together, the Dark Forest doesn't have to be a terrible place. One guy's nightmare is another cat's dream. This living cat had a horrible dream of mouse that tasted like fish, now there's a species of mousefish in the river. Shrewpaw's pheasant is tempting people across the road, but with a team, they can catch it.

Yeah, sure, it's dark, and the moon's a big eyeball and sometimes it blinks just to psyche you out, and mandrakes scream if you pull them out of the ground, and,

Ryewhisker: "Don't scratch the bleeding willow"

Redwillow: "PFF why not?? And don't you mean weeping w-UGHHGHH"

Ryewhisker: "No. I mean bleeding willow. Now go wash your paws, kiddo. And tell Cloudberry to fetch the firkin, we can't be letting good bloodsap go to waste!"

It can be home, if you let it be.

[mikelogan]

hello. i really enjoy your content, but i have to say i'm kinda disappointed on you still being a ts fan. this woman knows what disney does and yet she still gave them the rights, meaning she either doesn't care or actively supports the genocide. or maybe she decided to turn her morals off because money is more important. not to mention how she consistently associates herself with questionable people and how a person literally died in one of her shows on brazil and she gave zero fucks. this woman is not a good person and there are no excuses to being her fan anymore.

no, i fully understand what you're saying and where you're coming from. over the last like. idk year and a half? ive been pretty vocal about my disappointment, distaste, and disagreement with a multitude of the choices she's made lately. i 100% agree that her silence on the subject of palestinian genocide (as well as many other human rights/social causes) is at best a sign of apathy and at worst a sign of support. especially when miss americana was all about her wanting to be more outspoken and be an activist. that all feels so incredibly performative now -- and has for a while. a lot of things that she's said and done since midnights, which is when i became more active in the tumblr swiftie community, have left a bad taste in my mouth for her as a person.

like i said, i genuinely agree with what you're saying. the only thing i take issue with is that she didn't care that a fan died at her show. she donated money to the fan's family and took time to meet them. regardless of my many issues with her, i do think she can be an empathetic person and i don't think that she just straight up didn't care that someone died before her show. it's one of those things (of which there are many) where we'll never know her true thoughts bc she doesn't talk about things. which is frustrating in itself.

now that's not the point of your message, so feel free to write that off as a digression. i strongly disagree with her making yet another version of the eras tour movie and hosting it on disney+. I'm personally boycotting disney+ and have been for a while. I don't even intend on watching the new version and like the vast majority of everything I gif, that shit is pirated -- that's how I watched the original release of the movie. obviously my consumption/boycotting is just one person compared to blondie, who has influence over millions, who could make real change if she spoke out against genocide.

at this point, im not supporting her financially either apart from listening to her music. which i love. im sorry, but I do. if I didn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation. i think her constant churning out different exclusive versions of the same albums are a transparent money grab and maybe an effort to set more records as far as sales or streams or however that all works. and I'm not just saying that bc I literally couldn't even afford to buy a digital copy of an album right now.

so yeah. I appreciate that you enjoy my content and thank you for saying so, but if you need to unfollow or block, i understand. I've definitely toned down/completely stopped sharing posts about her as a person bc I'd much rather focus on just the music. and maybe that makes me a bad person for continuing to listen to and enjoy her music. im not saying i necessarily feel good about it, but i think the fact of the matter is that a lot of the celebrities, actors, musicians, etc. we like or whose content we enjoy hold views we disagree with and have different values or priorities. nuance exists. right now, im someone who is vocal about the palestinian genocide and I try to share resources/posts about it when they come across my dash and im also someone who is a fan of Taylor's music.

Idk, I hope what I'm saying makes sense at least on some level. I've done my best to word things coherently, but brain fog fucks w me a lot. and like. it's probably whatever, but I do plan on changing my url after ttpd releases. That probably upsets you more and I can see how people might think im a hypocrite or something and yeah, I get it. Idk, I just want to enjoy someone's music without endorsing them as a person, but that's extra difficult when the person in question is the biggest singer in the industry. but you'll never see me making excuses for her on things like this or the m*tty situation or numerous other things she's said and done that gross me out. im not so far up her ass that I think she's perfect or that I feel the need to defend her at every turn. like I said, nuance. anyway, if you feel the need to respond, i welcome you to do so as long as we both remain respectful, which I think we've done. this is a difficult topic, but that doesn't mean we can't discuss it. I appreciate your point of view and I'm sorry that I've disappointed you!

[arcobalenoss]

i think one of the reason why mammon is so intolerable to fon is because of the environment they're used to being in, the blurred lines between conceitedness and confidence for them and the way fon presents himself to them.

we know that in canon, mammon does not enjoy being told what to do. in fact i believe their obsession with money isn't a matter of money itself despite varia being the sins bla bla is the fact that they are obsessed with control. they needed to hoard money because they need to be in control of rainy days.

i mean they quite literally just, blew their money off just for the rings for the arcobaleno battle, which kinda shows how much being in control meant to them, because the curse was out of their control, they and the other arcobalenos were outsmarted into it. so i think that their obsession doesn't stop at money but at control.

and fon's nagginess is just a soft form of control that they could not stand, sure, they could just not exercise, not learn martial arts, not stop their obsession with money because fon is quite literally powerless against them and these choices. but the naggings have to hit nerves more often than not. plus fon, in my opinion, is not the most tactful with choice of words. he is definitely imo, genuinely nice and morally good, but lacks sensitivity in his word choices, which is obvious when he was shocked that mammon was bothered by most of the things he told them.

then comes the actual battle. it's important to note that at it's peak, the only contenders were fon, hibari, mammon and xanxus. and with the use of mirage r, it is quite unsurprising that it doesn't affect hibari and xanxus that much. both of them are super competent, super confident about their abilities and actually look down on people, and do not make it a point to pretend they don't.

while i don't actually think fon looks down on anybody's abilities and whatnot, i think the issue lies with the fact that viper's environment makes them feel like confidence is cockiness, which is a dynamic seen in varia and some of the arcos alike. the former just having that kind of personality while the latter are genuinely the best in their fields, dubbed the "strongest seven" on arrival. that with the added fact that fon seems to, mostly jab illusions, intended or not, just leaves a bad taste in their mouth. he is not seen telling colonnello hey sniper guns isn't as competent as using your fist, or telling verde that being zen in your soul beats science. so to mammon, it may feel like he simply thinks he is better than them and to them, that is cockiness.

so when mirage r fails to hit him, they couldn't tell if it was confidence or cockiness, because even irl, these emotions are hard to tell, maybe the best way to distinguish them is competency. yet, in the khr environment where almost everyone is the cream of their crop and is subjected to being outplayed solely because someone's best is better than your best, the lines are thoroughly blurred. mammon, for probably more reasons than one, already doesn't have an A+ impression of fon, so it is natural they assume the negative. and that piles up with the fact that they just don't buy his good person act.

[shinelikethunder]

SPN Brain Rot Tasting Menu

this is not a viewing guide. (the only SPN viewing guide i'll sign off on is "bomb your way through the first 3 to 5 seasons in order, then decide whether you want to watch the direct-to-VHS sequel eras.") this is a "someone near you caught SPN brain rot and you're trying to decide whether to join them in hell" tasting menu, based on what piqued my personal interest when i was still on the fence about continuing with the show.

criteria: basically, "ideal episodes to catch by wandering through the room with no context while a roommate is watching SPN." so, skewed towards self-contained, less-spoilery, solid episodes that don't make me want to fistfight them in the denny's parking lot, but did made something in my subconscious sit up like it had been slapped.

okay, shine, what the fuck is this show's deal: 2x16 Roadkill. god's perfect little self-contained one-off ep. nothing spectacular, just a solidly-executed ghost story set on a lonely mountain highway. fairly representative of how SPN monster-of-the-week episodes roll, requires zero prior investment in the characters to be good, and i'm fond of it because this is basically the point where i buckled in and committed to watching the rest of the show. but also, quietly, almost covertly, a thesis statement for some of the core underpinnings of the whole thing.

shut up and give me the sickos-haha-yes.jpg: 1x06 Skin. what if you thought you were in an X-File but ended up getting erotically tortured by a shapeshifter in the guise of your codependent brother? what if you fuckers were so repressed that this was the only way the show could bring itself to air the dirty laundry of your sibling dynamics. what if the monster was all the parts of yourself you could never quite bury deep enough. what then, huh.

tell me more about the childhood trauma AND/OR c'mon gimme more sick shit: 1x18 Something Wicked. still obsessed with how fractally disturbing this episode is. there's a monster that preys on children at night in their beds and the only way to stop it is to catch it in the act. if SPN were a show with anything to say about morality it could eat itself alive chewing on the question of using children as predator bait, but it's not. it's a show about The Horrors + the shit that couldn't be buried deep enough + family as the first and most inescapable hell + the ways it intertwines damage with salvation. also there's lots of Winchester family flashback content in this one if you want to get invested in these assholes and their daddy issues.

under the cut: duos and trios of episodes on specific themes, including some spoilery ones

fine, get me invested in these assholes and their daddy issues (low-spoiler Lite Edition) AND/OR gimme those Americana aesthetics: 1x11 Scarecrow + 1x12 Faith + 1x16 Shadow. 1x11: SPN does "small town that sacrifices people to the harvest gods" and the brothers have their first big fight (guess who precipitates it). 1x12: SPN does "faith healer with some shit going on" and we get our first go-round with both Sam's belief in a higher power and Dean cheating Totally Certain Death No For Serious You Guys. 1x16: SPN starts in on the relentless pilfering of world mythology and the construction of its own demon lore, and we finally get to meet dad in person, which will exacerbate the mental illness of zero overly-enmeshed twenty-somethings.

(early SPN demon lore fucks incredibly hard, btw, and goes some creepy-ass Twin Peaks places towards the end of the season, which the show later doubles down on just when demonic possession is at risk of devolving into a plot device. this doesn't prevent it from devolving into a plot device, but it does retroactively justify some wild gothic-horror readings of s1.)

the I DON'T CARE ABOUT SPOILERS AND I'M FINE GOING IN WITHOUT CONTEXT menu

get me invested in these assholes and their daddy issues (spoiler-tastic speedrun): 2x08 Crossroad Blues (+ 2x11 Playthings) + 2x14 Born Under a Bad Sign. 2x08: a banger of an episode based on some classic "earthly success by selling your soul at a crossroads" folklore; gains twelve extra layers of crazymaking if you end up finishing the season. 2x11 (optional): a "haunted gothic mansion" monster of the week with some fun stuff between Extremely Normal Siblings. 2x14: more quality sickos-yes content a la 1x06 Skin, with a "woke up covered in someone else's blood with no memory of the past week" setup that goes even further off the rails from there.

i want to study Dean Winchester like a bug: 2x18 Hollywood Babylon + 2x19 Folsom Prison Blues + 3x10 Dream a Little Dream of Me. no comment. no fucking comment. don't look at me. we're not going to talk about it.

ok but tell me about the angel content: 2x13 Houses of the Holy + 4x01 Lazarus Rising. you HAVE to get down in the crunchy details of how SPN has been treating the entire concept of god and angels to get the full effect of 4x01, which is one of the show's banger episodes of all time. 2x13 is great, self-contained, and surprisingly low on spoilers, but 4x01 of course contains massive ones for season 3, my stealth favorite of all SPN seasons.

people keep talking about SPN's goofy and/or meta episodes, what's that about?: 3x11 Mystery Spot + 4x18 The Monster at the End of This Book. both casually spoilery. 3x11 is the beloved "yesterday was Tuesday, but today is Tuesday too" time loop episode where Sam watches Dean die approximately 8908234 times (and then shit gets dark). the arc-plotty parts of 4x18 require head-spinning amounts of context, but this is the one where the show exists in-universe as a series of trashy pulp novels by a guy named Chuck, and it flies impressively close to the sun of some kind of meta-storytelling singularity.

i am a masochist who loves fun side characters whom the show will end up mistreating horribly: 3x12 Jus in Bello. contains all three of my problematic(ally treated) faves: Bela Talbot, a shameless con artist and dealer in supernatural artifacts who's just enough of a Dean parallel to drive him batshit cuckoo-bananas insane with hatred for her; Victor Henriksen, the cocky ambitious FBI agent assigned to investigate the Winchesters' multi-state crime spree; and Ruby, a demon who shows up claiming to be a defector from hell and tries to befriend Sam. this is SUCH a well-constructed base-under-siege ep with SO many moving parts, forcing Henriksen and the Winchesters and eventually Ruby into a great reluctant team-up. it's also my big exception to "no recommending episodes that blow my socks off AND make me want to hunt the writers for sport." mostly because its Big Bullshit is an unnecessary sucker-punch inserted after the main plot wraps up, so i can just cross it out with my mental red pen and go "it's fine, they're lying, all my faves are alive and well and in witness protection." if you've made it this far, you need a warning shot anyway about what this show is going to do to you.

notable omissions that also rot my brain like a compost heap: the last 3 eps of s1 for being best viewed with a whole season's worth of intricate rituals as context; fully half of s4 for being incomprehensible without a ten-minute spoiler reel; 2x17, 3x06, and all the Gordon eps, among others, for being simultaneously incredible and enraging. (notable omissions that are important and have their moments but put me off watching the show for over a decade: the pilot and its 2-for-1 special on women in refrigerators.) do NOT @ me for leaving out other Core Brainrot Episodes. i laid out my criteria already.

[shreddheir]

This is going to be fairly long, and also much more serious than my usual jjba meta. apologies in advance if i seem stilted: i have some issues with verbalizing things in a formal matter

Terunosuke Miyamoto's fate and portrayal are another egregious example of the subconscious bias present in Araki's work.

When I mention how Terunosuke was one of two characters to be given a fate worse than death in part 4, that he was the only p4 character to be nameless until years after the manga was completed, or that his fate was arguably undeserved, i am not saying anything new.

But I feel like not many people consider or realize that Terunosuke is canonically the only dark-skinned character in all of diamond is unbreakable.

Not only that, he is somewhat implied to be a foreigner in the manga (i cannot find a scan with a translation, but the canned drink he destroys is notably labeled as fruit lassi and it has a small drawing of an indian elephant on it).

In a part set in Japan, the only dark-skinned character, a character who is also implied to not be Japanese:

-is one of the few villains deemed irredeemable.

-is portrayed as uniquely sadistic, manipulative, and predatory, even when his actions are less or equally malicious than the actions of other characters. He kidnapped people and took hostages, but so did rohan. He threatened Josuke's family, but so did akira, and josuke was perfectly content with letting akira go to jail regularly.

-in fact, his crimes, crimes which are not unique among the cast of DIU, are deemed by Josuke to be as horrific as angelo's crimes, which were in fact uniquely horrible among the cast of diu.

-is given no characterization or motivation outside of sadism, to the point where he had no name for a good couple of years.

-is never mentioned or shown in canon again, which happens to few other DIU characters. Not even in the added davidpro epilogue scenes, which show other characters that were previously MIA after their respective arcs (such as toyohiro).

In fact, Davidpro actually makes his portrayal WORSE, all because of one small detail.

When his cover is shown onscreen, there's a small sticker on it that says, verbatim, "Morioh Public Library." Josuke hasn’t been to the library at that point. I may be reading in too deep, but the implication is that this sticker is part of his “body” and can’t be removed.

Terunosuke is the only dark skinned character in diamond is unbreakable, and the last proper shot of him is an image of him being..basically branded. It’s hard for this to not leave a bad taste in one’s mouth.

I do not think araki or davidpro were being intentionally malicious or bigoted in their handling of Terunosuke. The meaning of subconscious bias is that it is subconscious, so i do not think the enigma boy arc or terunosuke in general were written in bad faith .

However, the racism, colorism, and xenophobia that saturate his role in the story (to be a disposable and irredeemable villain who is only meant to be another obstacle in the face of our golden-hearted hero ) and his fate (to be literally dehumanized and locked away, never to be seen again, presumably for the "safety and greater good of morioh") are very clear.

Anti-discourse disclaimer fine text:

i am not trying to cancel jjba, diu, araki, davidpro, or any related concepts and parties, and i am not trying to make claims about the personal beliefs or agendas of hirohiko araki or members of david productions in any way, shape, or form. i am just writing about subconscious bias and how it possibly shaped a story arc in diu. i am not trying to give moral judgement to araki, davidpro, or any fans of jjba in this post. i am not trying to stop the collective you from enjoying things, just trying to inform. also, racism, xenophobia and colorism are bad. I edited this post due to quoting something based on an unofficial and incorrect translation and making a hypocritical point in the concluding paragraph.

[mbti-notes]

Anon wrote: ISFP, asexual, beginning a 5-year PhD in a a conservative state. I’ve noticed grad students in the program like to bond over dating/guys (the cohort is mostly women in their 20s). Although my love life is technically none of their business, at every place I’ve worked, people have asked if I’m seeing anyone, what my taste is guys is, etc. I usually “play along” with assumptions that I’m straight and give the sort of answers people seemed to be looking for. But 5 years seems like a long time to fake such a fundamental part of myself. I think I’ll end up having to go against the grain one way or another.

Many people don’t know about asexuality, so not only would I risk people’s prejudice, at minimum I’d probably have to play “educator” about my identity. I’m trying to decide whether to a) clearly communicate that I won’t discuss my dating life with my cohort and then keep enforcing that boundary (which will be hard because I do want to bond with people in the program), b) just say I’m not interested in dating or that I’m “not inclined that way” (although in my experience, that doesn’t deter people from further prying), or c) be honest and open about my identity if anyone asks (but then have to “explain myself” to people)

-----------------------

It is unfair, tough, and taxing to feel as though you have to hide or suppress such an important aspect of yourself. I do find that it helps to think of it as just one aspect of oneself rather than one's entire identity. The fact of the matter is that people don't know every aspect of each other unless they are in a very close and intimate relationship.

The kind of conversations you're referring to are classified as "small talk". People use small talk as a way to subtly feel out if a deeper relationship is possible, which means it doesn't have to be any more serious than discussing the weather. You get to control exactly how near or far you want to be from people by choosing to respond or not respond to their small talk seriously. Perhaps you're taking it more seriously than is necessary because it's a sensitive topic for you?

Option 1: Limit the truth because it's none of their business. If other people want to assume, then it's their problem, not yours. Speaking from my own experience, unless the person is an outright bigot, I often find it extremely funny rather than offensive when they reveal how ignorant they are through their assumptions about me. Once again, you can choose the degree to which you take such things seriously, which is easier to do when you feel secure in your identity.

I don't think you need to be a hard-ass about it, as you won't make many friends that way. Setting a hard and solid boundary out of the blue or without provocation often leads people to think something's "wrong" with you, which isn't ideal.

I think the issue here is what you call "being fake" or "playing along". I don't really see it that way. I think it's quite possible to be private without being inauthentic. When you're a good communicator, it isn't necessary to lie. There are a million ways to say something without saying it directly. Perhaps your thinking on the matter is too black-and-white if you're framing it as "honesty" vs "lying". Socializing successfully requires more nuance than that.

Yes, you could say it's private business, in a friendly way. There's nothing morally wrong with being a shy or private person, is there? Or you could say... Relationships aren't your priority right now... It's not something you care much about... You haven't met anyone you feel that way about... You haven't really thought about it... You care much more about <fill in the blank>...

None of those statements are lies and they are honest enough that a savvy person might even grasp the subtext. For the less savvy, yes, they might ask further questions, but they'll eventually stop once it becomes obvious that you have little to contribute on the matter. And if someone does press too hard, take it as a helpful sign that they should be avoided.

Although, you shouldn't assume that people are "prying" just for asking questions. It might appear to be prying when you're standing in the perspective of having a secret to keep, but, to them, it's merely curiosity. Curiosity is necessary for furthering relationships, otherwise, how would we get to know each other? Maybe you can learn to take people's curiosity in stride? For example, sometimes a bit of humor works better than a hard boundary.

Option 2: Be open because it shouldn't be a big deal. Do you derive pleasure from challenging people's ignorance and prejudice? There is something to be said for standing up, being visible, getting counted, and providing representation as a minority. You could help advance people's awareness and acceptance. However, if you don't want to be a crusader, what's your reason for being open?

You say you're ISFP, so you presumably think it's important to be yourself and freely express who you are? I agree that this is an important value to hold and uphold. Unfortunately, freedom of expression doesn't mean you are free from consequences. Being a person of integrity isn't always easy since upholding your values can bring undesirable consequences. The logical consequence of expressing yourself freely is that your business becomes other people's business if they take an interest in what you're expressing. The question is: Is this a price you're willing to pay, or is it a price you believe is worth paying?

Option 3: Be selective. There is a third option, which is to only come out to the individuals you trust. Perhaps this middle ground would be more comfortable for you? You won't have to "educate" and "explain" to everyone and face public scrutiny. You'll get to express who you are in a way that's satisfying enough. Of course, the tough part is exercising good judgment about who to trust. It's important to remember that there are good/accepting and bad/prejudiced people everywhere, regardless of whether the place is conservative or liberal leaning.

It is entirely your prerogative as to what aspects of yourself to reveal to others. This is why it's not my place to tell you whether to reveal or not. I can only tell you to weigh the options thoroughly and make the decision that you can best live with.