#like whatever crime they commit in their fictional reality Does Not Harm Me

[todayisafridaynight]

Most evil character in Yakuza and most good, if you could give examples!

'evil' and 'good' depends on your personal definition and tolerance so it's really hard for me to tell you who i objectively think is the most evil HOWEVER rikiya was the sweetest most goodest boy this world had ever seen and then they killed him and i miss my son so so much anon i miss him dearly

[fictionfreedom]

Gonna just ramble/rant what I'm thinking of. Tw cw for discussing more harmful things. Suicide, vague mentions of crimes, stuff like that. Grooming and predatory behaviors. Mention of harmful paraphilias.

The saying that antis use that is "fiction affects reality" is technically true. But not in the way they use it.

Most people that DO use media to hurt others OR ended up committing crimes in the name of whatever fiction they like. It's not that media's fault for it. There's been plenty of times someone has killed themselves because of a fictional character. And even I have been there too.

And then for like art or something being used to groom as a reason it shouldn't be available. Predators are gonna use anything they can to groom. Doesn't matter what it is. A lot of porn is used to groom children. Dolls are used to groom children too. And porn is something that already exists in only online spaces.

There is no way to protect every single thing from happening. If someone misuses the media for such things, that is not the fault of a creator for making it. People shipping fucked up things or drawing weird art is not the reason people are being groomed. Because of course the creators of such things NEVER intend for it to be used like that. And it is not their fault if it is used like that. There's plenty of adult only media that's more mainstream/normal that gets used to groomed people too.

Fiction DOES have some effect on reality. I can't deny that because I am someone that is sensitive to it. But it is not in the way antis use it. It's often very individual based. And a lot of people that use media to commit crimes or whatever were already at risk of it. Because a lot of the time they have issues already and often don't have good support systems. It's not because of the media they consumed putting ideas in their head. It's not because they had access to stuff.

Also antis will say it's gross to make art of that. But actually when it comes to harmful to act upon philias like pedophilia fictional outlets are recommended by professionals. A good support system, fictional outlets, and not being treated as a monster actually lowers the risk of offending if someone were at risk of it. :/ Like. That's actually what professionals say helps someone that is at risk of offending.

No matter how you look at it, antis are contributing to harm rather than protecting from it. And if they didn't want to see it especially if it's triggering then...block the people, block the tags or key words. There's solutions for it.

A lot of the time these people stick to their own niches. The fact it "breaks containment" isn't their fault at all. And if their art is used to harm others, they never meant for that to happen.

Just because media is used in support of crimes or whatever is not the fault of the media or its creators. It's a very nuanced discussion. And while fiction CAN affect reality, it is often up to the individual or those around them to help. They're using the exact arguments parent groups used for video games.

People always and always will make fucked up content. Some people may use it for bad things. But that is no reason it shouldn't exist. Censorship is NEVER okay. And even as someone that HAS been affected by media in negative ways, it becomes up to you to handle it. Or if the person has good supports then they help too. I often don't stop myself so my girlfriend has to literally make sure I don't consume things that'll affect me.

And even then, a lot of the time people are affected by it is because they weren't receiving help or they're mentally ill. It's far more complicated than just "this piece of fiction caused this to happen!!!" as antis usually say.

Others can probably say this way better than I could. But like. I tried. I'm semiverbal and struggle with disorganized speech so. I tried my best. I just had these thoughts and needed to get them out of my head.

!!!

Also just a vague add on is the reason that antis are so pushy that all "dark" fiction is bad is because they mainly just hate sex. Nothing to it but the fact that they've been effectively taught, whether by themself or others, that sex is a bad and evil thing that can only ever cause harm unless it's monitored severely closely.

[coraniaid]

🔥 honestly just let loose with controversial btvs opinions I’m ready

So ... I think I've probably said this before, but at the risk of repeating myself: I don't like the way the show treats the idea of Harmony as a vampire.  In particular, I really don't like the way the show depicts Buffy Summers finding out that Harmony is a vampire (in Season 4's The Harsh Light Of Day).  I don't think it's consistent with her character as established to this point, and I don't think it makes much sense logistically either.

Before Season 4, I think the show is actually pretty consistent in how it treats the idea of 'becoming' a vampire.  Yes, a vampire remembers their past life: we see that with Jesse as early as Season 1's second episode, The Harvest. And yes, a vampire's personality is heavily influenced by the person they were when they were alive: again, see Jesse's continuing obsession with Cordelia, and also what Angel (almost) says in Season 3's Doppelgangland about Willow.

(Indeed, this is really the only excuse for Giles repeatedly telling Buffy about the crimes various vampires she faces in the first three seasons committed while they were alive: which he does for Andrew Borba in Season 1's Never Kill A Boy On The First Date, for the Gorch brothers in Season 2's Bad Eggs and for Zachary Kralik in Season 3's Helpless.  Why bother doing that unless it tells her something about the vampires she'll now be fighting?) 

So yes, a vampire remembers being human and (at least sometimes) retains a lot of their former personality.

But equally, the show has also been consistent up to this point -- and, more importantly, it has consistently shown that the characters in the show believe it to be true -- that the human does die when turned into a vampire.  The vampire retains the memories and something of the personality, but something ineffable -- call it a soul, continuity of self, whatever -- is lost.  As Buffy tells Ford in Lie To Me, you categorically do not "become" a vampire:

"... that's not how it works.  You die, and a demon sets up shop in your old house.  And it walks, and it talks, and it remembers your life, but it's not you."

-- Buffy Summers, Lie To Me

This is why Buffy can't just let vampires turn people into more vampires, even if (as in Lie To Me) those people are willing for them to do so.  Because it's murder.  Because it's wrong.  It's something that's pretty much central to the premise of the show.  Not that it is necessarily a true belief about the world -- the show is fiction, after all, there is no objective truth to be found -- but that Buffy herself believes it.

And, at least for the first three-and-a-bit seasons of the show, she does believe it.  Ford gets turned by Spike, and -- just as she promised him she would while he was alive-- Buffy waits up by his grave that night and she stakes the vampire he has become.  She doesn't congratulate him on his plan to beat cancer succeeding because -- as far as she's concerned -- it did not succeed, it could never have succeeded, and her old friend Ford is already dead.  In Doppelgangland, after meeting the alternate reality vampire Willow, the gang all react as if their Willow has died: they speak of her in the past tense, they offer up eulogies for her.  They don't wonder why Willow has decided to 'become' a vampire.  They mourn.  Buffy blames herself, because (she thinks) her best friend has just died.

That's the other thing the show is consistent about.  By Season 2, if not earlier, Buffy has deeply internalized the notion that she personally has a duty to protect her friends and her classmates from harm.  And when she fails in that duty she blames herself.  Willow's a vampire?  Well, that must be because Buffy called her "reliable".  Angelus turned Theresa into a vampire?  Well, of course that's Buffy's fault: she's to blame for everyone Angelus kills, isn't she?  Buffy's new college friend Eddie's a vampire now?  Well, that's definitely her fault too, so she'll apologize to him even as she readies herself to stake him.

But then there's Harmony.

Granted, Harmony Kendall is not a particularly admirable person in life.  She's a bully, she's shallow, she's fickle.  She does not treat Willow or Marcie Ross or Cordelia kindly or well.  And when Buffy Summers, Class Protector, asks her to, she risks her life, just like all of the graduating class of 1999 - without powers, without destiny, without training -- to try to stop the Mayor's Ascension.  And we see on the screen how it ends.  One of the vampires she's fighting gets close enough to bite her; and that's the last we ever see of the human girl called Harmony.

Harmony is not a good person, but she dies a hero. She dies fighting to save the world.

And how does Buffy react to finding out that Harmony has been turned into a vampire?  Does she mourn her?  She's known her for over two years, by this point, far longer than she'd known Eddie.  Longer than she'd known Theresa or Jesse as well. We first see her in The Harvest, as part of Cordelia's clique, and so -- since Buffy tried befriending Cordelia when she arrived in town -- it's possible that Harmony was one of the first people Buffy ever met in Sunnydale.

Does Buffy blame herself?  It was her plan, after all, to have her fellow classmates arm themselves and fight the Mayor and his vampires.  She had to have known there would be casualties.  None of them have superpowers.  They'd just given her an award for protecting them.  This isn't like Theresa or (as she mistakenly thought) Willow.  There's no complex, convoluted chain of reasoning required here.  Harmony is dead because Buffy decided her best option was to ask her to risk her life.  Most of the time Buffy is wrong to assume it's her fault people have died, but this time I think she might have a point.

Just how does Buffy react to finding out that Harmony is a vampire?  Well, she says this:

"Harmony's a vampire?  She must be dying without a reflection."

-- Buffy Summers, The Harsh Light Of Day

She makes a joke of it. And ... uh, that's it. Although Buffy will run into Harmony again (and again, and again...) that's the most reaction we ever see.  We never see any suggestion that Buffy blames herself for Harmony's death: we don't even see her acknowledge the fact that Harmony is dead. There's no apology for Harmony.  At best, she's a punchline.  The fact that Harmony's dead is funny.

So yeah, I think that kind of sucks, frankly, and I don't think it's consistent with how Buffy was acting as recently as two episodes earlier.

But also ... how, exactly, can Buffy only be finding out that Harmony is a vampire now?  Graduation Day was months ago.  Buffy stayed up by Ford's grave in case he'd been turned.  Did she not bother to do that for the kids she talked into dying in a fight against the Mayor?  For that matter, how does Willow not instantly know that the 'Harmony' she runs into must be a vampire?  Did she not even bother to find out which of her fellow students died in the battle?

(Or, maybe, is the point meant to be that Harmony got bitten in the battle, didn't actually die at all, but then somehow got bitten again later that summer? Everything I've read online suggests Harmony was meant to have died in the Season 3 finale, but I guess it's not explicitly stated in the show that she did...)

More generally ... well, I think having one of Buffy's old classmates come back as a vampire is a solid writing choice.  I don't think it would have been a good idea to have it be one of the regulars -- that would have been far too depressing -- so a minor recurring character makes a lot of sense. Personally I'd have liked to see School Hard's Sheila come back in a later episode, but failing that Harmony is as good a choice as any.  And -- since the show has already established that a vampire's personality owes a lot to the human they were in life -- it makes sense (albeit it's a bit mean-spirited) to have Harmony as a vampire be vapid and self-absorbed.

I don't think it's quite as funny a joke as the writers obviously did though.  Funny enough for one episode, maybe two.  Not twenty-eight (across the full runs of both Buffy and Angel).

[oops-prow-did-it-again]

I am blocking on sight anyone that puts any fucking discourse over "moral" fiction or whatever the fuck on my dash. I have blocked 5 people in the last month. I don't care if I've been a mutual with you for years, if you engage in this kinda shit, especially on the side of believing that certain fiction shouldn't be allowed, then you are someone I have no respect for.

Unless someone is actually straight up committing a crime (I.E., posting *actual* photographs or videos of REAL LIFE PEOPLE, not fictional/drawn people, REAL PEOPLE, being harmed/sexually abused) I Do Not Care what other people read or write or watch or make. I Do Not Care. I do not trust anyone else's, especially on the piss on the poor website, to be able to determine if a text is "glorifying" something or if they are just uncomfortable with the subject as a whole. You people all suck at media comprehension and I am just flatly not interested. I keep seeing posts of people making good points and then people ripping them apart in the most bad faith possible. "Someone else's media consumption doesn't hurt you" "yes except for when abuse is portrayed as love, or-" no. shut the fuck up. You Missed The Point. You DO NOT KNOW, and you CAN NOT KNOW, why someone else wrote or created something nor can you know why anyone chose to engage with it. Also, sometimes the fucking point of a story is to portray something bad as good, to serve a narrative purpose. that doesn't mean the author thinks it IS.

I Do Not Care about icky feelings. If you can't tell fiction from reality, that's a you problem. Leave us writers/artists the fuck out of it. And if your knee-jerk reaction to this is "oh, you're just making excuses For The Freaks" you are part of the problem and I also have no respect for you.

FWIW, I am an abuse survivor and I find everyone's moral panic over shitty fanfiction stupid at best and upsetting at worst. You people freak out over fictional bad things happening to fictional people, to the point you waste the resources and time of people that actually hunt down predators by sending them loli fanart? You make me feel like you care about fictional people more than you care about the victims. Also, you'll be fucking fine if you hear about weird art or fic happening. Just don't fucking read it yourself. But knowing it exists won't fucking hurt you. You know what does hurt you? ACTUAL ABUSE. Like the kind so many of the creators you demonize go through, bc like I said before, you can't know why people make the art they make and you certainly can't know whether someone's a victim or not. And people shouldn't HAVE to disclose their victim status for you to make sure you're only attacking the "acceptable" people.

Maybe just don't fucking attack people over some fucking fanfiction or fanart. period. go the fuck outside.

You crave ruthless, vindictive justice more than you crave to help people. You are after the high of feeling good about putting people down, the "right" people.

And I Have No Respect For You.

[brideofhantengu]

I love him but he murdered his children and I'm not ok with that and the reality of it is setting in. I know he's fictional but Hantengu was...a very bad man. And he stole and killed and denied it all. I know he was sick, ok, I know. But he still committed those crimes. I researched kleptomania and it mentioned that most sufferers will act nervous around the theft and sweat and even cry sometimes and panic and they'll steal anything like chapstick or something they won't use and it'll just sit somewhere, be thrown away or given away once the rush is over and they realize it was just petty. Did he fucking do that? Did he just, aimlessly steal shit to steal it? Or was he poor and needy. I have no fucking clue. Whatever it was, he didn't even make excuses to validate his own actions he just straight up acted delusional like he didn't do it. But when the magistrate called him out on his eyesight, HIS PUPILS MAGICALLY APPEARED BLACK AS FUCK LIKE HE KNEW HE JUST GOT CAUGHT. HIS FUCKING SHAKY ASS LITTLE OLD MAN THING IS A FUCKING GAME, he doesn't actually act like that, he does it so he looks harmless. That means there's a fucking monster of a man hiding under all those trembles and tears and I'm starting to wonder what's wrong with me that I could ever fantasise about him having sex with me. HIS HANDS WERE COMPLETELY STILL RIGHT BEFORE THE BLIND MAN SAID HE WAS GONNA TELL THE MAGISTRATE! Once he got called out it was all shakes and sobs. I can't. I can't with him. Why do I fall for it? Why was I such a dumb little girl who fell for him? I would just be one of those girls he married and killed! He'd kill my babies! How could I fucking DREAM of this man knocking me up? And how disgusting am I to bounce on this pillow of him, and penetrate myself to the thought of him and I have literally purchased lingerie with his gaze in mind. His sinful hands have no right to my body yet I fucking write it, dream it and speak it. Idk if I can forgive him OR myself. Bottom line is, he's an anime character but there's REAL MEN JUST LIKE HIM WHO HARM AND KEEP HARMING. He should have been helped but damn those hands of his. Damn them, and damn Muzan for giving him a chance to assault and kill even more. That sick man would have hurt my babies, I doubt he'd have made an exception for us. I almost want to cry because I allowed this to go on for so long.

[unpopularfanopinion]

I never understood you fiction doesn't effect reality people because it's so easy to prove it does. Did that movie make you feel something? Fiction effected reality. You guys say fiction doesn't effect reality but what you really mean is fiction doesn't effect reality if it's about ships.

You aren't delusional enough to think whitewashing characters isn't harmful. You aren't delusional enough to think propaganda doesn't exist. You aren't delusional enough to say pedophiles don't fantasize before they do their first crime. You aren't delusional enough to say racist stereotypes don't hurt people if it's in fiction.

You say fiction doesn't effect reality. What you mean is fictional ships don't effect reality. But, just like all the other examples I threw out, it really does.

Are you familiar with the conception of psychological projection? it's when you project your own beliefs onto others and assume they think the same way you do. You might want to look into that and think about it.

Because believe me we notice that you and the rest of the anti-shippers only seems to screech and scream about "fiction affecting reality" when it's about ships. Specifically when it's about ships you don't like for whatever reason(mostly because you prefer a different one) At which point you will make up any excuse to say a ship is problematic and claim it's normalizing something when it has no such power to do so.

And for the record when we say fiction doesn't affect reality we mean it doesn't affect reality the way you claim it does. Fiction by itself does not have the power to change your morals. Watching a gangster movie, or heist flick won't lead you to commit crime. Watching a slasher or playing violent video games won't send you on a murderous rampage. Reading about an unhealthy relationship won't lead you into an unhealthy relationship. People have made claims about fiction leading to a decline in society multiple times in the past. And they have always been wrong.

From Dr Wertham and his claims that comic books were responsible for an increase in Juvenile delinquency in the the 1950's

(and if you'll note, that even after comic were censored Juvenile delinquency didn't diminish until starting in the 1980's and 1990's when there was a decrease in crime over all)

And then of course in the 1990's everyone got up in arms claiming that violent video games caused violence and they trot that line out after every school or mass shooting. To desperately try to deflect from systemic and societal issues and pin everything on a scapegoat

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-11-08/no-evidence-violent-video-games-lead-to-real-violence-study

But again it's a lie.

So maybe you should try not continuing to lie and claim "fiction effects reality" about XYZ ship somehow leading to or causing people to fall into abusive relationships, or suddenly make people think rape and incest in real life are okay.

It's a lie, and you know it's a lie. You're just hoping people are stupid enough to fall for it

[wxlfbites]

You know what bothers me the most about the whole "accept zoophiles because thought-crimes don't exist", "catching zoophiles before they commit bestiality is promoting mental health awareness" bullshit....

It is a gateway. It is hypocritical. It is a form of grooming and intentional misleading that lures vulnerable individuals into a false sense of security that ends up harming them.

As a fan of true crime, I can not tell you how infuriating it is to hear "fiction/fantasy does not influence reality or crime". Because it's just so false on so many levels. It is so frustrating that I can't go anywhere in the alterhuman community without seeing someone saying "paraphiles aren't that bad if they're anti-contact". What does that mean? What stipulations are you putting on that? Where do you draw the line on accepting paraphiles? Cause zoophiles are the same as pedophiles in their attraction to things that can not consent... so are we just gonna go ahead and let them chill with us now too as long as they're anti-contact? At what point do you no longer accept a paraphile into your space? Do you acknowledge that this is a subjective field that can become bias based on forming/formed bonds within the community and therefore the tolerance level you have toward certain acts or fantasies then increased based on your level of involvement with said paraphile?

You know... Ya'll were the same people demonizing physical shifters as dangerous cult leaders who took advantage of children... Some of you still do.. some of you still vehemently despise p-shifters... some of you still actively advocate for their exclusion in the alterhuman community... some of you, despite claiming to be ontopunk/radically accepting, do not advocate for p-shifters mental health, just spew venom about their delusions and how we need to separate ourselves from them. Even though... by your logic... if a physical shifter were to follow the same standards as an anti-contact zoophile... that would mean... that they are also... chill.... so... I mean.... make it make sense?

You guys sit here going on about the zoophiles... how helping them before it's too late is the best course of action.. You neglect to mention forms of OCD that can make a person have intrusive sexually deviant thoughts or other mental illnesses that can delude people into believing they have committed heinous acts when they haven't. You want to advocate for a zoophiles mental health? Donate to, spread awareness of, and point them in the direction of reputable organizations that specialize in mental health. I'm not saying therapy is accessible by any means. I know it's not. Do not twist my words. I am saying that going around online saying shit like "zoophiles are just misunderstood", is not going to help anyone. It is going to confuse people who CAN actually cure their urges because they aren't zoophiles because you've just lumped everyone who even looks at a dog the wrong way into a category based on a fucking survey.

From now on, any slight mention of neutrality on zoophilia or "advocating" for them in any way is just going to get you blocked. I'm done hearing any arguments about it. I genuinely want nothing to do with this shit after this. Go be friends with people who think about fucking your cat, just stay away from me.

(P.S. I will be ignoring all responses and reblogs this post gets for my own sanity. You're still welcome to go at it with whatever you gotta say, just know I'm not reading it.)

[grayhouse3]

SJTR is my villain origin story

So I finished Stalking Jack the Ripper.

Originally I told myself that I was going to just stick it out and read the next one (“Oh, it’s about vampires and Dracula. It’s probably more fun. You can forget all about the pain this one inflicted on you"). No. I got 12% of the way through and had to DNF. So here are my messily compiled thoughts on the book, basically expanded from the last post. Honestly, kind of feel free knowing I won’t be writing more about this series. (Also I am adding some TWs down below but don't know if I am doing them right!)

More on the exoticism, weirdness with Audrey Rose's Indian mother, and the British Empire:

In chapter 14, we read, "Dark strands of hair were piled atop my head, my eyes more mysterious somehow with the dark liner, and my lips were the bright crimson of freshly spilled blood … I thought of my mother and the saris she’d brought me to wear from Grandmama’s homeland. I felt just as stunning now as I did then, and the memory warmed me.” I am still trying to figure out why Maniscalco made Audrey Rose mixed race. Why is Audrey Rose’s grandmother from India? Literally, what did it add to the story? Was it nothing more than just a cute lil quirky fun character trait to her? I don’t think I missed any key moments where there were important conversations about race, imperialism, British occupation, etc., mostly because Audrey Rose’s father (a big fancy rich lord) is a white man and because Audrey Rose is white-passing. I can’t recall any moments in the book where she faces the realities/consequences of being a socially mobile POC WOMAN in LONDON IN THE 1880s. Honestly, if someone else can point out a passage I glossed over or explain some nuance I missed I would actually really appreciate it, because this drove me CRAZY.

(Audrey Rose and her brother also go visit a circus in town in chapter 15; of course these events existed purely for England/colonizing countries to exercise and display their power and to exoticize/exploit the communities/cultures that they came into contact with. Audrey Rose sees silks, beads, etc. that remind her of her grandmother’s saris, smells the foods of her family’s “homeland,” etc. Also in the same chapter there’s this great scene where her brother is describing their mother and father’s marriage: “Grandmama told me she’d refused him twenty times just for fun,” Nathaniel replied. “Said he squirmed like a cobra in a basket. That’s how she knew he was in love.” Uhhh … Is that supposed to be romantic?)

On the feminism stuff:

I am too *gestures vaguely* to write much more on this. Yeah, it’s heavy-handed. Yeah, it’s cringey. But at the end of the day, it’s not really that harmful, I guess. Here’s just a fun sampling of some of my favorite lines from the book:A few of my favorite bites from the book:

***“close-minded society” (chapter 21) Okay

***"Why turn a murderer of women into front-page news?” (chapter 15) Bro do you know how the media works

***"But what of her [mother’s] insistence that I could be both strong and beautiful? Surely Father had to be wrong.” (chapter 21) Yes girl you are strong and beautiful!

***"There would be no skirts or bustles to wrangle with anymore. I was through with things confining me” (chapter 22) Ugh down with corsets just another tool of the patriarchy amirite

On the violence against women, weird classism, and stuff about prostitution:

I was bound to be uncomfortable about a lot of this because I have weird feelings about true crime stuff, and this is historical fiction set around the Jack the Ripper murders. It was going to go sour somewhere.

Consistently Audrey Rose wants to be sympathetic, but is unable to connect all the parts of this situation together: she struggles to imagine the women (very real-life victims) beyond their lives of prostitution, poverty, squalor. When she does, we see something like this: "The women he murdered did matter ... They were daughters and wives and mothers and sisters” (chapter 28). Oftentimes she wishes she could continue to cut cadavers open in peace (women in science!) without having to think about how those cadavers came to be on her examination table: “I needed to get away from those women and their tragic lives before my emotions got the better of me” (chapter 25). Perhaps Maniscalco deserves more credit here, and perhaps I’m just being a bitch, because Audrey Rose is a very privileged girl and her actions and thoughts make that clear. It’s just that the conclusions she comes to in the name of feminism, justice, etc. weren’t at all satisfying to me.

Also: OH MY GOD. Oh my god. There is this one moment that is BRANDED AGAINST THE GRAY MATTER OF MY BRAIN FOREVER and I will never forget it. At one point, Audrey Rose and love interest Thomas decide the best thing they can do is go out and—yes—stalk Jack the Ripper. To do this, they know they need to “blend in” with the crowds in East End. So … like … cosplaying as poor people? Audrey Rose manages to find and wear the dress of ONE OF THE MURDER VICTIMS (long story short her medical doctor uncle was in a relationship with this woman and when she died he acquired her worldly possessions). It’s like, so fucked up, I can’t even describe my reaction when I read it. In chapter 25 we read, "The dress was a little too old, a little too ragged, a bit too big. If I were to wear this ghastly dress out, I’d look as if I belonged in the East End, begging for work to feed my addictions … It was absolutely perfect.” Oh my god. And THAT’S NOT EVEN THE WORST PART. While they’re “stalking Jack the Ripper” on this incredibly stupid mission, the two main characters just … make out in an alley. Like, okay. People are being murdered and you’re wearing a dead woman’s dress and you suspect your father of being guilty, but yeah, that kind of stuff makes us all a little horny. Super relatable. Absolutely no concept of reality or consequences or anything at all.

Another random note on class: I noticed the only time Maniscalco writes in dialects/accents, she’s writing seedy/working-class characters. Not saying this is a problem unique to Maniscalco’s writing by a longshot, but ... something to think on. (I think it’s ingrained in a lot of author’s writing habits/minds at this point.)

Weird stuff about the dad, the brother, and what justice means to Audrey Rose:

I had to add a whole new highlighting color for this stuff!

Any growth Audrey Rose might’ve shown over the course of the novel—anything about how these women mattered, and how they deserved justice as any “highborn” individual might, simply by dint of being humans—goes away when she and Thomas come to the conclusion that the Ripper murders must have been committed by Audrey Rose’s father. She realizes her moral dilemma when she contends with the harsh reality: if her father is the Ripper, can she turn him into the authorities? Audrey Rose worries how that might impact her own moral virtue: "They’d hang Father. Given who he was, they’d make it as public and brutal as possible. Just because blood might stain his hands did not mean I wanted his on mine. No matter if it was right or wrong” (chapter 24). First of all, BITCH. You have to. You have to report this kind of thing. No ifs, ands, or buts. I HAVE to imagine Maniscalco’s intended audience would feel the same? It’s? Serial murder? Second: Audrey Rose, baby, sweetie, honey. This is just a reminder that ACAB. I actually don’t know a whole lot about how the late Victorian criminal justice system functioned, but something tells me her family's public outlook would’ve been less bleak than she imagines here.

Lucky for Audrey Rose, her dad isn’t guilty in the end—but her brother sure is. He’s a mad scientist, using the brutalized bodies and souvenirs of his victims for Frankenstein-style experiments. Ultimately, he wants to reanimate the corpse of his and Audrey Rose’s long-dead mother, and he believes he can achieve this by transplanting fresh organs into ? Her dead and decomposed body? The thing is that, this moral dilemma persists for Audrey Rose—and her dad, too. He pressures her not to bring the little matter of Nathaniel’s issue—you know, his casual murder of a number of local women—to Scotland Yard: “They’ll have your brother hanged,” he said quietly. “Could you honestly watch that happen? As a family, have we not suffered enough?” (chapter 29). Nathaniel electrocutes himself to evade capture by the authorities, and Audrey Rose and her father feel relief. The book ends by confirming that "Lord Edmund covered up Nathaniel’s involvement, I didn’t ask how. One day I’d let everyone know the truth, but the pain was too raw now” (chapter 30).

((Side note: Listen. I knew Nathaniel had something sinister going on from the GET-GO (I’m not trying to be obnoxious) because he basically started some nighttime vigilante group called the Whitechapel Knights of Justice or whatever bullshit, I don’t know. All I know is that my red flags IMMEDIATELY started going off because that sounds exactly like the terrible and awful Crusader cosplay clubs from my (bad) Catholic childhood, where everyone thinks they’re a knight for Good but really they’re the bad guy.))

Overall, kind of ...

I think one of my biggest issues with this ending was … You have already stepped into a realm of fantastical revisionist history here in writing such a fictionalized version of these real-life events. (I know Maniscalco is far from the first to do it.) That means that the rules you are playing by are essentially your own—evidenced by the liberties she points out in her Author’s/Historical note (dates changed for convenience or storytelling purposes, real-life individuals changed for narrative purposes, etc.). So WHY would you not conclude this fantasy retelling of the Jack the Ripper murders by meting out some form of justice? I hear the counterargument: "Well, because we still don’t know the culprit today. This book would ring hollow if it named someone since historians, forensic scientists, etc. still don’t know who committed these crimes." My question: is that really a problem though? This is a work of fiction. Nothing in history happened the way it is written here. Is it crueler to the women who were murdered and who remain spectacles for true crime junkies and authors like this, less satisfying to readers who want some more concrete kind of closure, to not offer that up? I am asking this in earnest here, because I don’t know. Maybe it is insensitive to make up a murderer, to fill in the gaps in order to make sense of the violence that happened. But in my brain it feels almost like a responsibility at this point, since these murders served as the backdrop for the romance between Audrey Rose and Thomas, for the background to Audrey Rose’s empty feminist diatribes, and as inspiration for a book that went on far longer than it needed to. To me it kind of feels like the least an author could do, but I have no clue.

Anyways, I'm just glad I get to put this series to bed. No more.I truly lost sleep over it this weekend. Onto something better, please, for the love of god.

[lilfellasblog]

I'm gonna address that anon there. Romantic Roman and Remus shouldn't exist. But it does. Brotherly or platonic is good. For me that's the creativity twins but I will not judge people. If you ship romantic okay but I will not support the content. They are twins. They decided to be twins. Thomas made them brothers and twins. Yes they were the same side. But people get older. Meaning their creativity will split. If that makes sense?

Fictional content doesn’t bring harm to people, and I have dual degrees (psychology and social work) in this. Therefore, I will vehemently disagree with the “should” and “shouldn’t” aspect of it, as the only thing that leads to is attempted censorship. Moxiety, a father and son dynamic, never got this much hate, it’s only because some people had a knee jerk reaction and didn’t think things through. People used to be able to say “I don’t like moxiety because they father/son thing makes me uncomfy, but the content itself is harmless!”. For some reason, remrom gets a very different, very exclusionary treatment. People can block the tag for moxiety and move on, but not so for remrom.

I don’t know what your own reasons are for saying that an entire section of fiction “shouldn’t” exist are, but I’ll tackle a few of the common ones since I’m answering asks and other folks might see it. If they don’t apply to you, my apologies! Fiction doesn’t cause crime, even if the person who committed the crime swore up and down it did. Another common argument as for why remrom “shouldn’t” exist is because it means that the authors support incest in real life. Writing about something in fiction doesn’t mean someone condones it in real life, and I can’t believe that that’s still something that is heard frequently as an argument. “Fiction” is, by definition, a divorce from reality. And that last point is actually the most harmful one for me, as an incest and trafficking victim/survivor, to hear. I haven’t ever written remrom, but if I did, it wouldn’t make me one iota like my abusers.  One of the key definers of human beings is that we’re equipped with critical thinking skills, and yes even the more impressionable people or whatever the new buzzword is nowadays. And I was a brainwashed kid who had been trafficked their entire life, yet I was still able to think critically.

There is no moral imperative to fiction, and therefore no “shoulds” and “shouldn’ts”. Any reasons beyond not liking the content is a personal preference and a tag that can be easily filtered. There is literally no reason why any genre of fiction “should” or “shouldn’t” exist, because fiction is not reality. Censorship occurs when a person or a group of people have decided that they are the knowers of truth and they specifically know what is and is not “acceptable” or what “should” or “shouldn’t” exist. Applying your own preferences about what content you want to see and stating their worthiness of existence based off of that is the thing that shouldn’t be happening here.

[liechotomy]

okay not about the hat BUT this is more about Kokichi in his backstory and I'm curious about your view. if he uses something in symbolism of defeating evil, was he and DICE also facing a lot of evil? i have the impression he learned in trial by fire but there's so little information which weirds me out. i just feel like it was pretty bad, like he was actually fighting a bad organization or something? tho this is a bit conspiracy theory ig lol

okay a bit more clearly in case it came across wrong: if he's doing that stuff outside of the killing game (the whole pretending to be a bad guy thing) does it mean that the world is fucked up outside besides 'obsessed with dr'? I feel like Tsumugi pulled a lot of nonsense with the fiction and Kokichi's situation is messed up like he had to deal with life or death a lot to get to how he is now 

I’m still mulling over much of the specifics of Ouma’s backstory. Eventually I should put some verses and/or backstory information up regarding my ideas. But for now... In my view, there are basically two backstories to consider--the fictional one Tsumugi created and the real one that existed before the killing game (the truth, basically). Everything we know about Ouma is pretty much restricted to the “fake” backstory, including the existence of DICE. According to my headcanons, the reality of the situation is that a despair cult has been continuing to run and broadcast killing games after the events of DR1-3 (and that those events being fictional was a lie). I also believe the events of DRv3 all occurred inside a program resembling Neo World.

Buuut all that’s just a tangent, sorry. Since we’re talking about the backstory with DICE in it, this would be the fictional history. So that means the whole story including the meteors that hit as the world was recovering from the Tragedy, the virus, the Gofer Project, space, earth’s destruction, etc. Just to be clear.

Anyway, my perception of what DICE seemed to be like, and the way Ouma operates as sort of a chaotic element for change/progress, gives me the feeling they were more the type to want to defy the harmful aspects of the status quo. The fact that they committed (non-violent) crimes indicates to me that they might be thwarting a concept rather than an organization/s, if that makes sense? Like, they’re not evil, but they’re also not lawful. In my tentative headcanon, it could be that as the world was recovering from Despair and the Tragedy, society might have reactively swung the other way in regards to order and control--meaning in order to combat despair, societies (or at least Ouma’s community) began to impose harsh regulations and a strict, inflexible view of proper conduct. Basically, they retaliated against the uncertainty and chaos of a world in despair, with excessive order. And for whatever reason, maybe just personality-related, Ouma and the other members of DICE did not fit in well in such a stringent environment. They chose to rebel, holding the belief that a little chaos won’t kill anyone. It’s not the same as despair; in fact, too much order and control are their own sort of burdens that could also end in despair. But yes, I would bet that the world definitely still had a lot of problems and that Ouma’s life (fictional--and real, honestly) has been unusual and difficult. No one develops so many masks and lies as a coping mechanism for no reason.

Regarding the symbolism of his hat (that represents a heroic traitor to the Nazis, for those of you just tuning in)... In general, Ouma seems to secretly encourage others to look at reality from various angles, not just accepting truth or lies at face value, but understanding different, hidden truths that are proven by the actions of others or even the results their plans. So his hat, and the fact that his crimes are laughable, that he’s never honest about his threats of death or violence... They all point to the lesson that you have to look deeper at a person (especially him) to truly know them. The example he wears is this: one could lash out in offense at the perception that he’s wearing a Nazi hat, but that perception is a lie, because his hat is worn in honor of the German officer who gave his life try to kill Hitler and demolish the SS. And if you don’t care enough about him to try to truly get to know him, he will play along with your vapid notion that he is a villain, continuing to give subtle hints to the contrary.

[babybubastis]

The amount of people on this site that can’t (or refuse to) separate reality from fiction is alarming. Insisting that shipping anything “squicky” makes you do that thing in real life is one of the least intelligent and most harmful things I’ve ever heard. MORE harmful than whatever “problematic” ship/fanfiction they claim is damaging young minds.

These are the same people who would assert that “marijuana is a gateway drug!” Or “any position other than missionary is filthy!”. I mean, if you think that, do you, but you can’t run around butting your head in other people’s lives trying to control how they live.

A lot of these people seem to be under the age of 25, which is also interesting to me. Some of y’all haven’t even grown up enough to have any life experience at all, but you all already have enough self-righteousness and hate in your little hearts to go around condemning (and in some cases, harassing) real-live people who aren’t harming anyone, simply because you don’t like the FICTIONAL things they’re into? Get out of here with that.

Half of those people would never even have the courage to butt in if they witnessed real abuse occurring right in front of them.

This is the type of culture that insists video games make people violent, that women shouldn’t enjoy sex as much as men, that any kind of kink is disgusting and dysfunctional. This is the type of culture that eventually leads to book-banning and book-burning.

Are REAL-LIFE cases of pedophilia, rape, abuse, incest, murder, and the like repulsive and need to be stopped? ABSOLUTELY. I can’t think of any person I’ve ever encountered in fandom who has written something “problematic” who wouldn’t agree.

But let’s be clear: FANFICTION IS NOT REAL LIFE. Reading about someone committing murder doesn’t make me want to go out and murder. Playing an RPG game doesn’t make me want to go out and shoot a bunch of people. And writing about a sexual relationship involving two people with an age gap doesn’t make me want to go out and condone/watch/engage in illegal sexual relationships.

A lot of you need to have a really good think about why your blood pressure gets so high when you see someone you don’t know from Adam, minding their own business, enjoying something that has nothing to do with you.

It’s really not about “representing the fandom” or “protecting young, impressionable minds”. As an abuse survivor, I knew people, had friends even, who did absolutely nothing to help me when I was going through what I was going through. Some of those same people were also the loudest when it came to what we now call “purity culture”. Where were they?

My point in saying that, is that writing can be a powerful thing. It can change your life for better or for worse. But I guarantee writing or reading about illegal activities in fandom isn’t pushing anyone over the edge into thinking XYZ is “ok, therefore I will engage in it in real life”. Anyone who does assert that has no critical thinking skills, and those are the people I’m actually concerned about.

Why do I read and write fanfiction? BECAUSE I WANT TO. That’s it. It’s not feeding some dark need or giving me the courage to work up to commit some heinous crime. I see two (or three or four) attractive people that I think would have an interesting dynamic, and I want to see them kiss, so I read/write it. That simple. I’m not crusading. I do enough advocating for people in REAL LIFE. The way I treat ACTUAL PEOPLE speaks more volumes about who I am and what I believe than the fiction I consume and create. Some of the best people I’ve ever met are in my favorite fandom.

I don’t give a shit what you ship. If you ship it, great. Enjoy it. I grew up in a household where we couldn’t really talk about anything; there was a lot of repression and denial. I choose not to live my own life that way. It’s healthy to experiment and explore your desires in a way that doesn’t cause any ACTUAL harm to REAL PEOPLE. What better way to explore than through writing?

So if you’re running around calling people “sick,” “disgusting,” “horrible,” “pedophiles,” sending threats, telling people they’re going to go to jail simply for writing about FICTIONAL CHARACTERS, I will say this: BLOCK ME. You are the people that are toxic to fandom. Fandom is supposed to be a safe space. It’s not a place for you to crusade for fictional characters and earn useless brownie points that don’t count for shit in the real world.

[otomeshistarlight-blog]

Rant incoming

I was scrolling through the JoJo tag when I saw this post and I just ... I’m really tired y’all.

First of all, according to a google search it looks like the age of consent in Italy is 14 (if I’m wrong, please correct me) so Narancia is very legal, as is Giorno. America’s laws are not universal. The world is not so UScentric that whatever we as a country deem inappropriate is likewise considered to be inappropriate in other countries. There are varying standards throughout different societies and one is not necessarily more correct than the next. Whether or not I think real life fourteen year olds should be having sex is irrelevant- because even if I don’t agree with it, it’s gonna happen anyway - but Narancia is not a real fourteen year old so whatever the law dictates in America OR Italy is irrelevant.

What this boils down to is that there is no victim here. Narancia cannot be taken advantage of. Narancia cannot be sexually assaulted and face the physical/emotional consequences of such trauma. There is nothing inherently wrong with shipping him in ANY pairing, regardless of the ages involved. If I want to write about him getting wrecked by Bruno I will damn well do it because not a single person is being hurt by me doing so. If this is something that triggers you and causes you distress then don’t 👏🏻 fucking 👏🏻 look 👏🏻 at 👏🏻 it. 👏🏻

Fighting for the rights of fictional characters solves nothing. It helps no one. It doesn’t benefit real victims and it sure as hell does not stop real people from being victimized in the first place. This is a nonissue that people are taking up arms over for no reason other than a perceived moral superiority that makes them feel more in control of the world around them. It stems from feeling helpless and lost in a society that doesn’t bend to their every whim. Fandom space is the only place they feel like they have any power so they take on the role of morality police, try to dictate what people can and cannot like, and then accuse anyone who won’t do what they say of heinous crimes. It’s extremely toxic and harmful, not to mention it lessens the severity of sincere pedophile/abuse finger pointing so the chances of a real predator getting away with it are greatly heightened, and I’m just done with it at this point.

Let’s say I’m looking through the porn tags as I am won’t to do and I come across a post that features blatant child porn. Real child porn. The 3D kind that, yknow, actually features real children being exploited and assaulted for realsies. I’m understandably appalled so I file a report with tumblr and they don’t even look at it because they’ve been bombarded for the last year with false harm to minors reports and the user is never penalized for actually doing something inherently wrong and immoral. Y’all have heard about the girl who cried wolf right? Like, y’all know how that story ends don’t you?

But no. Instead of directing your efforts towards anything worthwhile, you’re going to keep going after shippers. And for what? Because oh no, the fictional seventeen year old who could just as likely be nineteen is being paired with a fictional twenty-five year old. The horror. What is the world coming to? Think of the children!

Except ... these supposed children don’t exist. How can you victimize a piece of paper? The same argument applies to loli/shotacon too mind you, and there is no crime in looking at drawings regardless of their perceived age, especially when the topic is anime where you can have a character who looks like a five year old girl and she is in fact a 400 year old vampire. Like?? There is absolutely no logic you can apply to this that has any internal consistency let alone actually makes sense.

Me: these fictional minors don’t even look like sixteen year olds, where have you seen a real teenager who looks like this?

Antis: they look like teens you pedo!! And ageing them up is still pedophilia because they are canonly sixteen so you’re still thinking about teenagers in a roundabout, highly contrived way

Me: *shows you a 300 year old loli vampire* okay so I can definitely fuck this one right? She’s unrealistically old!

Antis: no!!!! You’re just using her canon age as an excuse to be a freak who preys on children! She might be 300 years old but she still has the body of a child!!

Me: okay so I’ll just age myself down to self ship, no biggie.

Antis: absolutely not!! You’re still an adult and ageing yourself down doesn’t make it okay!! I’m reporting you to the authorities right now!

Me: but ... who am I supposed to imagine fucking then?

Antis: one of the few adults you find in anime, except this one because he’s an abuser, or this one because he tortured a little girl and not the serial killer either because wow problematic

Me: so what you’re telling me ... is that I’m only allowed to thirst after your preapproved, precious cinnamon roll faves even though my tastes or needs in a relationship might vary greatly from yours?

Antis: yes, exactly. I’m so glad you’re finally on my level of intelligence and moral superiority. : ^)

Me: oh, I see now. So what this boils down to is that you just don’t want people to enjoy something you don’t personally agree with. Got it.

Antis: absolutely not!! I’m thinking about the betterment of society by telling you what you can and cannot enjoy! You liking these questionable things is harmful against the greater good! Won’t you think of the children!?

Me: soooooo we’re just gonna ignore how much that sounds like a fascist/communist society or ...?

Antis: : ^)

Y’all should absolutely read 1984. It would do you some good. Because having an attraction to a fucking anime character is not a slippery slope, but this puritanical shit? It sure as hell is.

Let me pose this query: what is stopping an anti from going on a book burning campaign or fighting to get certain books banned? Lolita? Flowers in the Attic? All of the works by Marquis de Sade (a personal hero of mine)? Alternatively who are the only people who actually engage in book burning/banning?

Overzealous religious nuts. Everything about the anti movement is the same “our children shouldn’t be exposed to such filth” battle cry that religious sects - specifically the western ones - have screamed for decades now except with a cute little sjw hat on top. No rock n’ roll music. It’s Satan’s music. No porn. It’s tainting America’s youth. No alcohol. It’s leading our country down the path of sin. No violent video games or movies. They’re turning people into mass shooters. No problematic themes in fictional works because it’s turning people into pedophiles/abusers.

And that is just ... factually incorrect. There is absolutely no correlation between Lolita being published and an uptick in children being sexually assaulted. There is no correlation between lolicon or shotacon breeding more pedophiles. Because that’s literally not how it works. Period. I’m not going to accidentally stumble on a loli doujin and think “huh yknow what? This sounds fun!” I could even read loli doujins at length and that’s still not going to convince me that actually engaging in sexual situations with toddlers is okay. Like ... I don’t know why these people think we’re so stupid that we don’t know the difference between right and wrong but this is just insane. The only people who look at loli or shota and then go on to commit crimes against real children are the ones who were already having those kinds of thoughts in the first place. The only people who play Grand Theft Auto and then go shoot up a church are the ones who were already having violent thoughts to begin with. These thoughts are not magically implanted into our brains regardless of what media we consume and that’s just a goddamn fact.

Yes, media impacts reality but not the way you think it does. Even all those sources antis link to about the supposed correlation between the two are twisted to meet their own rhetoric. It’s called marketing and anyone with half a brain cell knows that it exists. It’s meant to encourage us into thinking we need some product so we spend money on junk and keep capitalism going strong. it works more often than not. However no amount of marketing is going to convince a mentally sound person that shooting up a mall is a valid life choice to make. It just doesn’t work like that and you could scream until your blue in the face that fucking kids is the bees knees and I still wouldn’t touch a real child because that’s gross. Period. And since I can’t touch Bakugou Katsuki or Narancia because they’re just figments of someone’s imagination and pen and paper ... then where lies the problem?? What is the issue with writing or drawing fictional characters, regardless of age or moral compass, in sexual situations?

I’m a CSA survivor that has been on the internet for a LONG time. I’ve seen some shit I sorely wish I could forget. Everything from real life gore, real life death, bestiality, necrophilia and yes even real life child porn. I don’t think there’s a single problematic thing I haven’t accidentally stumbled on and it’s horrific. It’s disgusting. I know all too well how awful these things are and I know even better how it feels to be a victim of rape and sexual assault and pedophilia and grooming. Like. That was my life growing up. I know what these things look like and I can assure you without a shadow of a doubt that whatever is going on in fandom space isn’t even comparable. Please. Draw your OC fucking a dragon mascot character instead of fucking a real animal. Please write about a fictional father fucking his fictional son instead of fucking a real child or a real sibling. Do whatever you want with your imagination - and I do mean WHATEVER. If you want to think about eating your favorite characters shit then by all means. Enjoy. It doesn’t effect reality in any way besides maybe giving someone a cathartic coping outlet and there’s nothing wrong with it.

There’s nothing wrong with ANY topic being explored in fiction.

The only problem is when someone commits a crime in reality. When someone hurts another living being. And consuming this so called problematic fiction does not lead someone to real life crimes. Period.

Finding myself on that stupid gore site when I was 14, BestGore I think it’s called? Did not make me want to try killing someone. I’ve never even seriously contemplated doing it because death is awful in every regard, I wouldn’t seriously wish that on anyone let alone convince myself that it’s okay. But according to antis me being exposed to that sort of content means I’m more likely to go out and commit murder?

Literally what crack are you smoking?

Get the fuck out of here and do something worthwhile with your time if you honestly find these topics so disturbing. If not then shut up, sit down and let people enjoy their fandom experience however they see fit. Because this right here? This treating fictional characters like they matter, like they’re real people? It’s not fucking cute. And as someone who was raped from the time I was eleven until I was eighteen by a family member I can safely say that you aren’t doing shit to help anyone with this holier than thou, I know better than you crusade.

And that is the goddamn truth whether you like it or not.

[bigskydreaming]

So there’s a post going around that’s popped up on my dash a lot lately, about the secret to fandom being love what you love and don’t worry about what anyone else is doing.

I.....look, its not really a shock to anyone that I Couldn’t Disagree More Strongly, right? LOL.

The problem I have with posts like that is they don’t make a distinction between “like what you like and don’t worry about if other people agree b/c everybody likes different things and there’s never going to be something that pleases everybody, so don’t try and base your fandom opinions/ships around pleasing everyone” 

and

“like what you like and don’t worry about if other people agree b/c people are racist and sexist and homophobic and there’s nothing you can do about it so don’t devote your fandom experience/time/energy to having a problem if the reasons people are hating on your favorite characters, stories, opinions are rooted in racism, sexism, homophobia and other shit.”

Like, these are two ENTIRELY different things, and the first is valid and fine and I agree completely but the second is HELL FUCKING NO. And the problem is when you spread around fandom positivity posts that put no effort or awareness into acknowledging that these are two entirely different phenomenon, effectively all you do is give implicit support to the people who deliberately REFUSE to acknowledge a difference and thus point to fandom positivity posts as fodder for why someone’s being Difficult for pushing back against bigoted bullshit.

Fandom isn’t a fun, shiny happy place and it isn’t MEANT to be, because all fandom is....is another place/way in which humans congregate around a certain shared interest or focus. That’s it. That’s all fandom inherently is, which means when you push back against people ruining it by ‘worrying about what other ppl are doing in it aka being shitty bigots’ on the grounds that they’re infecting it with like....reality? idek. But you’re simply doing the exact same thing humanity does in EVERY SINGLE SPACE it carves out for people to congregate for whatever reason or purpose......and that thing is the group or groups who hold a majority in that space speaking over or shutting down anyone who has something to say that the majority do not want to hear for whatever reason.

People turn to fandom for escapism a lot of the time. I get that. Everyone needs escapism from reality. Everyone DESERVES a place to go to get away from the cares of reality and enjoy themselves.

But here’s the problem: there’s a lot of things in life that EVERYONE deserves, but only some people actually get.

And while I fundamentally agree with the idea that everyone deserves a fun fandom experience and a place to escape to.....it becomes a problem if the only way you can maintain that fun fandom experience and escapist refuge is by shutting down other people when they say ‘hey, this place isn’t as fun for me and all the problems I came here to escape from are still here thanks to these people.’

Because once you do that, you’re essentially no longer saying that you think everyone deserves a fun fandom experience or escape from reality. You’re saying you deserve it MORE than those other people.

Don’t get me wrong, I think we all need to figure out a balance for ourselves, and prioritize what’s best for our own mental health and emotional well being. I’m not telling people to develop martyr complexes or bullshit like that. We have to take care of ourselves before we take care of other people. That’s a thing. It’s true. We don’t do anyone any favors by neglecting what we need to get through the day. It’s OKAY to be selfish sometimes. It’s just not okay to be selfish all the time, or to say what you’re doing to put yourself first has no impact on anyone else.

Like, its literally just about being aware of reality?

I’m just saying, there’s a difference between focusing yourself on a corner of fandom that’s solely about the things you like and not worrying about what’s going on elsewhere because its what you need to do FOR YOU, because there’s things in your life you need escape from, because in this place you retreat to in order to replenish your spirit, you don’t have the spoons to spend on anything but that, so you have the strength to go about your day....

and between telling people to just like what they like and not worry what anyone else is doing or saying even when they pop up to give you shit for what you like, no, just blacklist things and block people and continue liking what you like, that’s the secret to a good fandom experience.

And that’s where I go like, ummm....no. Again, mental health and well being is a priority. Absolutely people should blacklist and block people and just look for positivity with like-minded individuals if that’s what they need to get something enjoyable out of a fandom experience.

But my problem specifically lies with the flip side of that, the implication that fans are doing something wrong by yes, worrying about what other people are doing and how this impacts them and their fandom experiences, and responding to and reacting to and calling attention to the fact that shitty people are being shitty in fandom, just as they are elsewhere in realms of human interaction.

Because that’s when you get into telling people with less power to suck it up and settle for the fact that they have less power, and that the people with more power will always be shitty so the best thing you can do for yourself is to find a way to ignore that.

That’s not how society is supposed to work, just because the people with the most power in society have spent generations just trying to convince everyone else that this is how society is supposed to work.

Power, voice, visibility, are not excuses to be shitty. The inability of people to effectively push back against you being shitty, is not an excuse to be shitty. This is how its always been, is not an excuse to be shitty.

And we know this. We ALL know and understand this. As a society, we have NO problem using collectively held opinions to push back against things we all agree are shitty, and no, I’m not talking about laws even, so much as....shame, the way we express opinions to each other and about certain things, the way we interact with each other and acknowledge what are and aren’t acceptable social behaviors.

Like, we shame people for committing certain awful crimes. We all do this. We say murdering innocent people is bad, and cast shame at people who do it. We teach kids (supposedly, hah) that taking stuff that doesn’t belong to you just because you want it isn’t acceptable. We all, as a society, shape what is or isn’t considered behavior we’re willing to put up with from each other in an endless variety of ways.

And guess what? Like all tools, the tools with which we do this do at times end up used in negative ways as well as positive. To harm instead of help. Absolutely there’s a LONG history of people in power hijacking the tools with which society determines what is and isn’t acceptable behavior and using it to advance their specific agenda, encouraging people to turn on each other or specific groups and express that certain acts or behaviors or entire identities are shameful, not because they actually are but because it serves the purposes of those in power to convince people that they are.

But a tool being used wrongly in the wrong hands does not like.....magically negate the validity of that tool or its ability to be used positively, and that’s where online culture, and fandom specifically, so often has me going UMM WHUH?

We’ve got people out here proudly and defiantly taking a stand against ‘being shamed’ for stuff like pedophilic works of art as though they’re the disenfranchised underdog, the powerless victim pushing back against the oppressor because SHAME IS BAD AND THUS ANYONE TRYING TO SHAME ME IS BAD or whatever.....as though we haven’t as a society collectively spent the last several decades saying umm yeah, pedophilia is shameful.

I’m not looking to get into the fiction vs reality argument here since I’ve had that one to death elsewhere, but also because its not the point. The point isn’t whether certain fans should feel ashamed or not for specific behaviors others express should be shameful.....the point is the way so many people in fandom seem to be in agreement that the very ACT of someone trying to shame someone else, or express disapproval of their behavior.....has somehow been come to be seen as a call to arms, as though that in and of itself is the issue, not whether or not there’s merit to either side’s position.

Like its all or nothing, regardless of context. 

So many people in fandom are happy to act like other groups in fandom (USUALLY made up of marginalized communities or people expressing ‘controversial’ and thus less commonly held opinions) - so many people act as though those groups expressing judgment over some other part of fandom’s behavior is in and of itself an UNACCEPTABLE attack, something that should never be condoned....instead of simply an example of what society has ALWAYS done to convey whether or not certain behaviors are acceptable.

Again, I’m not talking about the MANNER in which this judgment is expressed. I don’t give a single fuck about hearing arguments about how ‘antis’ are ‘just as bad’ as people who create fanworks they consider harmful or toxic and how they harass people, etc.

I’m not saying that never happens. I’m not saying that’s okay. I’m just saying....that is not the point I’m making here, not the point plenty of other people have made before me, and yet its one of the handful of expected and predictable responses that ALWAYS come up as though it (true or not) addresses the actual point. Which it does not.

The point is....take issue with the specific reasons someone pushes back against certain behaviors, fine. You don’t have to automatically agree they’re right. Take issue with the specific ways someone pushes back against certain behaviors, fine. You don’t have to condone them or say they’re justified.

But don’t dance around the issue as though you’re incapable of grasping that the point is its not somehow wrong or victimizing or oppressive for people to express that they think certain opinions and behaviors are shitty and bad.

The fact that shame has been used to oppress at times in the past does not mean that a bunch of people gathering together to express “We think this thing that you’re doing here is bad” is like....inherently oppressive ESPECIALLY THE FUCK WHEN THE BUNCH OF PEOPLE GATHERING TOGETHER HAVE LESS POWER THAN THOSE THEY’RE CALLING OUT BECAUSE OF THE TWO GROUPS, THEY’RE THE ONES WHO ARE ACTUALLY OPPRESSED.

Because when the only alternative to people expressing they feel certain behaviors in fandom spaces are harmful, oppressive, toxic, or in other ways impairing other peoples’ ability to have a fun fandom experience or use it for escapism.....is to tell those people to just ignore all that toxicity and focus on something positive, like.....call it what you will, but that’s not for their benefit, its for the benefit of those who like and are comfortable with the status quo.

NO SHITTY BEHAVIOR IN HUMAN HISTORY HAS EVER BEEN ‘FIXED’ BY TELLING ITS VICTIMS TO IGNORE IT.

The ONLY thing that has ever accomplished is to allow people who are capable of ignoring it without their lives in any way being impacted....to continue to go about what they were doing, without seeing or feeling there’s any reason for things to change, for efforts to be expended, for them to have to adjust their view of their surroundings or how they interact with their surroundings or other people within them.

And like, lol, but ‘having the choice whether or not to acknowledge something because it doesn’t innately affect your life either way’ is literally another way of describing privilege, so....I mean.....

ANYWAY.

[renzjasper-blog]

Verdict

The movie “Verdict” is directed by Raymund Ribay Gutierrez, a little background about Gutierrez. Mr. Raymund Gutierrez is a  Filipino director and screenwriter. He graduated as a multimedia artist here in the Philippines but still pursued his career in the field of filmmaking. Throughout Mr. Gutierrez’s career, he was mentored by the famous Mr. Brillante Mendoza and became his protege, Mendoza’s famous works include “Thy Womb”, “Ma’ Rosa”, and “Serbis”. During Mr. Raymund’s screenwriting ‘era’, he was guided by Found Story’s founder and teacher Mr. Armando Bing Lao. One of the first short films that Mr. Raymund directed is called “Imago” it was released in the year of 2016, the movie received various nominations, recognitions, and awards from different known film festivals like Cannes, Toronto International Film Festival etc.

Going back to the film, “Verdict” which means “a decision on a disputed issue in a civil or criminal case or an inquest” or “an opinion or judgment”, The film was categorized in a genre of crime drama. A crime drama is a type of drama show or movie which has as its primary focus or heroes people whose main occupation is to investigate, punish or commit crimes. So basically Verdict was set in the slums of Mandaluyong City. It tells the story of an abused and battered wife named Joy Santos (played by Max Eigenman), who filed a case against her alcoholic husband Dante Santos (played by Kristoffer King) because of domestic and child abuse to their daughter named Angel Santos (played by Jordhen Suan).

At the beginning of the film they showed Joy with Angel doing the things they do in the evening. Then Dante arrived in their home drunk and interrupted them, and just as what we expected, he soon brutally beats up his wife Joy and during their fight Dante, because of the heat at the moment, accidentally harmed Angel, their six-year-old daughter. During the first scenes of the film we can already tell that the movie will be a drama because of the fact that we, the viewers or audiences were dragged by Mr. Gutierrez with a very intense, frightening, and heavy sequence of events where Joy and Angel are being hurt by Dante who came home drunk. During that very intense scenes, I was confused at first because the acting seems so realistic and raw which is good. That scene was also paired with the in-motion and shaky hand-held cinematography and I mistakenly thought that it was a factual documentary and not a fictional film at first. That scene was very frightening and kind of hard to watch because of the violence and there was a kid involved in the scene. After that, Joy escaped with Angel and then head towards to their barangay hall and filed a complaint against Dante, and this is where it begins for the viewers to see and learn the Philippine justice system from the blotter in the barangay to court hearings. As what we can see in the film Joy’s face was really beaten up to the point that she was barely recognizable because there are parts of her face that are swollen, also we can see Angel as well who has blood rushing in the side of her head. Seeing them, a victimized woman and her child in that kind of situation make me want to immediately give them justice right away. Good thing the barangay was fast to react to the complaint and arrested Dante, the Violence Against Women and their Children or VAWC was also there to rescue Joy and Angel. At this point I don’t feel remorse towards Dante, just like Joy, I just want him to just go to jail as soon as possible. During the following scenes I was rooting for Joy and her decisions, she’s deciding without showing any hesitations, that there will be no reconciliation between her and Dante. Joy filed a criminal complaint under R.A. 9262 against her abusive husband. But later on, in the film they showed the extremely tiring, draining, and demanding step by step procedure or process of pressing charges, so my hopes for Dante to go to jail are slowly sinking too because it’s a long and tiresome process to go through, there are many things to consider and needed to be done to get the justice that they deserve, from settling the bills and payments from the hospital for Joy and Angel’s treatment due to their injuries, to acquiring a medical certificate, gathering witnesses, getting a lawyer and eventually, to the long, traumatic, exhausting and draining trials. Thinking if it will still be worth it to move forward with the case or if can they just leave Dante or vice versa. But the case progressed, with a lot of paper works going on. As time goes by in the movie, many days and weeks passed by, Joy’s scars and swollen face are beginning to heal and fade as well as my hopes for their justice. Joy’s social isolation works against her when the female fiscal tells her she needs some witnesses to testify on her behalf. But apparently,  Joy's fully documented with photographs complete with a medical certificate of obvious scars and injuries aren’t enough to make her case. The two neighbors who saw Dante beating her up who appeared outside their window to complain about the noise in the opening scene was not called by Joy to serve as her witnesses for whatever reason which just adds to my frustration as a viewer. Unfortunately, Dante was not charged under the complaint case of RA 9262 and for also injuring Angel, his daughter, seriously enough to the point that the kid was also required to be  treated at their community hospital. What I’m disappointed about is that the letter “C” at the end of VAWC was not used against Dante because it would have really helped Joy’s case to be stronger, but I think the intention of the film is to stack the deck against Joy that she must be as fully victimized as possible. The movie had me thinking that Joy will just remain to be a part of or just another file cases among thousands or millions of victims in a pile of a folder inside a stockroom drawer, as well as Dante, that he might just be a source of income of his private lawyer. The film sort of tested my patience in a way because, during the process of building a criminal case though there’s no action, thrill, or drama happened there, it still made feel frustrated to the point that it’s painful to watch because of the fact that the system is messed up, it shows how uncompassionate and uncaring the justice system here, that the people or the authority officials around Joy and Dante’s case merely respond to their concerns but show a lack of genuine care about them, it looks like it just purely work or money for them even though the evidence of abuse and it’s clear who the bad guy is were very obvious already. As for the people who are supposed to be helping them, they are scary looks uninterested and robotic prolonging the trial case. The last scene which shows Joy’s files was abruptly placed in a storage area that does not seem to have any proper or logical filing system, just shows how frustratingly messed up the justice system or the courts here in the Philippines.

Mr. Raymund did a really great job in directing the actors because it seems so flawless like there is no script or acting at all, their performance was so realistic and natural, from the lead actors to the lawyers to extras and also the six-year-old kid did a very good job in acting, it’s like they’re not acting for the camera, maybe that’s the reason why I feel so affected with the movie because it felt real for me, also the bruises and scars of Joy looks very real.  Though the movie was said to be a film about fighting the rights of abused women and their children because it tackles one of the problems here in the country which is domestic and child abuse, we can see that it’s not just about that it also showed us the harsh reality of the justice system here in the country in terms of the quality. Whether you’re a victim of theft, unfair practices of labor, and domestic or child abuse, you are just another piece of paperwork and/or name in a memorandum of agreement. No one will earn your sympathy other than your family or loved ones. No one will be giving a shit and will think about your wounds for more than several minutes. Not to generalize but at the end of the day, the only concern of the people inside the justice system is where to eat for their lunch and to get home by 5 p.m., that they don’t care about you and that’s real life. Thoughts about the movie is It’s kind of painful to watch the first scenes of the film because this is where Dante did the violence to his wife Joy and her daughter Angel and it’s frustrating when it comes to whole trial process  and sort of boring in the part where the viewers are kind of schooled about the requirements of filing a complaint to the court whether you’re the complainant or the accused. The title “Verdict” fits the movie because while you’re watching the movie you will have this thought of what will be the final ‘Verdict’ or decision or judgment for the characters since they are in the mini court. Also, the film possesses the questions, that is it worth it? to go through the hassle of the compassionless system? to seek justice? The ending was disappointing since Dante was not sent to jail by being charged under the filed case, so it left Joy and Angel’s safety in sort of danger. Some parts of the movie are somewhat frustrating and terrifying, and kind of boring because of some reason. The movie has a very interesting way of cinematography style which I believed was called cinema-verite, to be honest, for me,  it’s not really easy to watch because the camera was always in motion and often shaky and most of the shots were also in tight close-ups, this film will really trigger your motion sickness.

Overall the film was still great and it is the Philippines’ official entry for the 2020 Oscars for the category of Foreign Language Film. The film was very informative in terms of the issues or experiences of a Filipino family, woman, and child, as well as the poor justice system. It’s really nice to see these kinds of movies at film festivals. Movies that are not scared to tackle social issues that are very timely and relatable in the country with a very great direction and cinematography. Pista ng Pelikulang Pilipino and Cinemalaya, from the past years and this year, has many great lineups of movies with powerful messages and takeaways that will truly leave us in awe and make us think twice of the things that are happening around us. This just proves that the Philippines are becoming more open-minded when it comes to absorbing this kind of movie, especially the newer generations. Some will say that these types of films are toxic and just poverty porn but it doesn’t take away the fact that it somehow helped open the eyes of most Filipino people in the country as well as foreigners and made them aware of the societal issues that we are facing in the Philippines. Pista ng Pelikulang Pilipino, as well as Cinemalaya, is not just for pure entertainment, it’s also a great outlet for us, the new generation even the old ones, to learn, gain knowledge, and open our eyes as well as our minds towards our culture and the things that we thought are true and perfect here in the country.

[freelancesumandas]

How to handle a situation where your spouse is being unfaithful to you.

Spring Divorce Lawyer: One of the fears that many people that I have met with in my time as a family law attorney have presented to me have to do with whether or not their spouse is being faithful to them. When you make a commitment to another person you can only hope he or she is as willing as you are to do whatever it takes to ensure that your life together is a prosperous and happy one. Unfortunately not every situation in marriage leads to these desirable outcomes.

This is where the concerns over infidelity and unfaithfulness come into play. You may have been in prior relationships where you have had negative experiences and therefore are expecting your partner to violate your trust. On the other hand, you may have seen physical signs of infidelity in the relationship being displayed by your spouse and that has caused you to become skeptical of their assertions that he or she is being faithful despite your gut telling you something different.

So, the question that you need to ask yourself before you start to act like a private detective is whether or not it is in your best interest to go into full on sleuth mode and attempt to catch your spouse in the act of having an affair. Today’s blog post from the attorneys with the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC will hopefully be able to shed some light on this subject and help you to make a decision one way or the other as to what the best move for you to make is.

What will a court say about your attempt to investigate your spouse?

When you are talking about getting into another person’s personal business, even when that person is your spouse, you are necessarily talking about an invasion of their privacy without their permission. This is a crime in Texas as every person has a right to be left alone to their affairs unless he or she grants you permission to become a part of these intimate affairs.

For example, if you somehow manage to gain access to your spouse’s phone calls and listen in on their conversations without their permission you need to be aware that you stand to face punishment from the legal system. The bottom line is that the act of you recording a conversation or intercepting an email could stand to hurt you more than it would your spouse in any future divorce proceedings.

Going to jail, being fined by a court, and simply being ordered not to divulge information relating to these conversations may be the result of your engaging in this sort of behavior. Attorney’s fees, court costs and on and on go the consequences of being caught in this sort of act. Before going down this path be sure that it is something that you are prepared to face potential consequences for if goes the wrong way on you.

What about attaching tracking device to your spouse’s vehicle?

I think we’ve all seen movies or television shows in which one character manages to slap a little tracking device on the undercarriage of their opponent’s vehicle. It should come as no surprise then that reality has begun to imitate fiction in that now that same sort of technology, and the opportunity to use it, has now become available to regular, everyday people. What does the law in Texas say about engaging in this sort of act, however?

The fact is that this too is illegal. You cannot use a mechanical or electronic tracking device to chart the movement of a person’s vehicle. This law does not prohibit you tracking the whereabouts of a vehicle that you own, however. Meaning that if your spouse is using your vehicle to meet up with their paramour then you can attach a tracking device to your own vehicle in order to keep tabs on where it is going.

What can you do (legally) in the event that your spouse is being unfaithful to you?

Spring TX Divorce Lawyer: So far all I’ve done is throw a bucket of cold water on your ideas of playing James Bond in connection to discovering the nature of your spouse’s infidelity. The question remains: what can you actually do to protect yourself in the event that your spouse is being unfaithful that is both legal and safe?

On the legal side of things, you should contact an experienced family law attorney if you have proof that your spouse is being unfaithful to you. An attorney knows the law and can give you advice regarding the infidelity.

For example, if you do go into detective mode and photograph your spouse in the act of an affair do not expect to be able to use those photos in court. Your spouse has a reasonable expectation of privacy even if he or she is violating the promises made in your marriage.

On the other hand, if your spouse is admitting to you that she is engaging in an affair you can record the conversation. In Texas as long as one party to the conversation knows the conversation is being recorded it is legal to do so. You do not need your spouse’s consent in order to record the conversation but you cannot go and record any conversation involving your spouse that you are not a part of.

If you are interested in getting elbow deep in the muck of your spouse’s life, you can search through their trash for evidence of an affair. You may be thinking that it is unreasonable to expect anyone to want to look through trash for any reason. I would argue that you haven’t met some people who are going through a tricky divorce.

Finally, if you are spying on your spouse’s text messages and come across something juicy regarding an affair keep in mind that you can use that as evidence against your spouse in a divorce but only if you take a photograph of screenshot of the text message. Your attorney will be able to tell you the most effective way to document text message evidence for optimal use in the courtroom.

Consider how useful the evidence you are attempting to accumulate will be to you and your case

Before you start to engage upon dangerous paths towards intercepting evidence related to unfaithfulness and your spouse, be aware that unless your spouse’s infidelity has cost you money in form of community assets being used up or has harmed your relationship with your children, adultery is not a silver bullet that can solve all of your issues in conjunction with your divorce. Just because you have made the judge aware that your spouse has been unfaithful does not mean that you will be awarded all of your marital property or that your children will be able to remain with you for an indefinite period.

On the other hand, repeated instances of infidelity, use of community funds to pay for gifts for the paramour and the skirting of parenting responsibilities in favor of spending time and attention on the “other” person can lead a situation where a judge is willing to award you a disproportionate share of the community estate. Spousal support considerations and visitation with your child can also be at stake in certain circumstances where infidelity has occurred. Of course, you would be well served to speak to an attorney to learn more about these issues.

Questions about the role of infidelity on a divorce in Texas? Contact the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC

Divorce Lawyer in Spring TX: The attorneys with the Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC offer the sort of dependability, advocacy skills and toughness that you need to be successful in your divorce or child custody case.

We can set up an appointment for you to meet with one our licensed family law attorneys by your contacting our office today. A consultation is free of charge and are available six days per week. We proudly represent clients across southeast Texas and would be honored to be able to do the same for you and your family ... Continue Reading

[james-bow]

With Kevin O'Leary entering the Conservative Party leadership race, other contenders are not afraid to call him out by name. It's a shame that, in Steven Blaney's case, he does so in such a way that I am tempted to bang both their heads together. Read on for Blaney's latest e-mail: > James, > > Justin Trudeau's Liberals have a new friend in Kevin O'Leary, the > American star. Ooo! American! Kevin O'Leary didn't come back for Blaney, clearly. > He wants everybody in the country to smoke a joint and live in > a fantasy world. Given the state of world at large, that frankly is not such a bad suggestion. > Colorado has pursued the hazardous adventure of legalizing > marijuana, with devastating consequences: > > - The crime rate increased. > - The number of road accidents increased. > - The number of young people using drugs increased. Oh, hold on. Blaney is wrong, wrong, wrongwrongwrong. Steven Blaney either has his head in the sand, or he is lying through his teeth. Since Colorado legalized recreational marijuana, "Colorado experienced a 3.1 percent drop in property crimes and a 12.8 percent decrease in homicides." (Source: http://ift.tt/2kz3fwK). Road accidents have NOT increased, and are indeed at historic lows (Source: http://ift.tt/2lj8uF1). Youth drug use has NOT increased, and indeed teenage use of marijuana in Colorado has DROPPED since legalization (Source: http://ift.tt/2f43LVK). This makes me really, really angry. Blaney is pulling facts out of his ass and slandering the good people of Colorado whose only crime appears to have been to legalize marijuana without the sky falling in. His stance has no basis in fact, is not logically consistent, and is going to waste taxpayers' money and cost lives by perpetuating the fruitless War on Drugs. And when I say logically inconsistent, I mean this: Blaney ignores the fact that legalization does not mean we make it legal for teens to smoke it. I expect we will treat it like a combination of alcohol and tobacco (which is already the case in these other jurisdictions). We will tax it, and regulate its spread. You don't get to smoke or drink until you're an adult, and the same will go for marijuana. If Blaney is terrified that this arrangement means that marijuana will end up in the hands of children, why the hell is he not manning the barricades demanding temperance and the prohibition of alcohol? It's a far more dangerous drug, but society figured out pretty darn quick that a blanket ban was, shall we say, counterproductive. Better to treat adults like adults, and give them the choice of whether to imbibe or not. When it comes to marijuana, however, Blaney would treat us all like children. Shame on him! > It is a disaster, with lost lives, more crime, and more young > people exposed to a drug that is harmful to their development. No it's not, you liar. > Canadians are not laboratory rats. And they wouldn't be. Colorado, Washington and Oregon have kindly stepped forward to take the job. > Justin Trudeau would like Canada to join countries like North > Korea and Uruguay in exposing citizens to calamitous risk. Oh, yes, legalizing marijuana is totally like living in the dictatorship of North Korea. And legalized marijuana is the reason why North Korea is in the mess that it's in. > As a former Minister of Public Safety, I am opposed to allowing > the government to perform this dangerous experiment on > Canadians. Not an experiment anymore. Washington, Oregon and Colorado (and, soon, California) have produced results for all to see. Positive results, which Blaney can only ignore by sticking his fingers in his ears and shouting "LALALALALALALA!!!" > Canada deserves better than irresponsible promises and images > of a fictional future that are meant to seduce and appease the > population. Canada deserves better than a gormless wing nut who ignores reality to thump the drum of prohibition and baseless marijuana hysteria. > At their Vancouver convention in 2016, the Conservatives > adopted my policy proposal on drug enforcement, which would > allow police officers under a Conservative government to issue > tickets for possession of small amounts of marijuana. > > This measure is approved by experts and by police. > > The best drug for our youth is sport! (Total eye-roll). Youth sports are fine, and not likely to go away just because adults can purchase marijuana the same way they purchase wine and spirits. But let's gather around the harmonium anyway and sing some hymns. It's wholesome! > I see proof of this every year when I swim across the St. > Lawrence River with young people who are committed to > improving the lives of others. (Sigh). Whatever. Blaney's going pretty darn near the bottom of my ballot. Possibly beneath O'Leary. http://ift.tt/2kz3fwK