#most likely that will not happen and they will make microaggressions

[cripplecharacters]

How to Support People with Facial Differences - the Face Equality Week 2024 Special

[large text: How to Support People with Facial Differences - the Face Equality Week 2024 Special]

Today is the 13th of May, which means that the Face Equality Week has just started. This year's theme is “My Face is a Masterpiece” which is probably my favorite sentence ever said about having a facial difference. Huge fan, should be used way more often in my opinion.

Because of this occasion, I would like to share some thoughts about Face Equality that I think are rather entry-level, i.e. you don't need to know much to execute these, but you can still support us.

Stop the stare.

I know it's fun to stare - or so I guess, at least - but maybe you shouldn't. Next time you see someone who has a scar or who's face does not move the same way as yours, just mind your business. We can tell when you're “discreetly” looking.

Don't call us deformed. 

Knowing how the people you're trying to support actually call themselves should be an absolute first step, but most people still fail here. Most of us don't appreciate being called “deformed”. I certainly don't. Say “facial difference”, or “disfigurement” if you must. It's 2024. Leave “deformed” to medical reports from the 70s.

No more “What happened?!”s.

If you aren't a doctor, there's a high-to-100% chance that it's none of your business. It's cool that you're curious - keep it to yourself.

Stop insinuating that we are ugly.

“Support people who are ugly!” isn't very supportive. I would say, not in the slightest. Say “people who don't fit the current beauty standards” if that's what you mean. 

Or, to go with this year's theme, “people whose faces are masterpieces” : )

Use critical thinking online.

Is the reaction photo actually funny, or is it just a person with a craniofacial condition? Is the meme actually a meme, or is it just making fun of a person with a facial disfigurement? Is body-shaming suddenly hilarious to you when the person shamed has strabismus? 

If the entire punchline is “lol they have a disability xd”, it's ableism. Plain and simple.

To go with the point above - your joke is probably not funny.

We get it! You can't help telling us how "you're going to hell for laughing" (which yeah, probably) and how we remind you of the ugliest character you have ever seen. I guarantee you that we heard it, and that you are behaving like an edgy middle schooler who hasn't "found out" yet. It's boring and annoying. Also ableist, but you're aware of that already if you're saying that you're going to hell.

Stop with the goddamn trigger warnings. 

We aren't “body horror”, we aren't “gore”, we aren't something that you need to advise your viewers to use their discretion over. Every “graphic footage: child with neurofibromatosis” and “#tw burn scar” is a sign of ableism and disfiguremisia. People with facial differences deserve to be seen. Ableds can survive seeing a person without a nose.

Do a basic reading on what disfiguremisia is.

New word! And a pretty damn important one. It's a brand of ableism that intersects with more or less everything, and it means discrimination and hatred of people with facial differences/disfigurements. The bullying, harassment, endless name-calling, and microaggressions are all results of disfiguremisia. The ways in which everything is harder for us isn't some unchangeable rule of how the world works, it's just an extremely prevalent type of discrimination.

Understand that we are people.

I know, revolutionary - and yet impossible for so many people to get. We can be a visual representation of evil when it's necessary, we can be a feel-good inspirational story on a morning talk-show, but not much else, it seems. In reality, we are complex, we have our own lives, we can be happy and sad and have the same exact joys and worries that you have.

Hey, artists - facial differences don't make you evil.

Title stolen from a great essay by Lise Deguire (link). When's the last time you saw a positive character with a facial difference that wasn't inspiration porn? I mean a character that's not edgy, full of angst, a murderer, or a villain. Based on what you see in the media, you'd think that having a scar renders you evil on the spot, but in reality it just makes you loathe how artists apparently think you are like. It's boring, it's overdone, it's ableism. Stop doing this, and start noticing when it's being done. Point it out if your friend is writing their new villain to be an evil burn survivor. This kind of portrayal needed to stop ages ago, but tomorrow will be a great time as well.

Before you reply with “I've never seen this” - Darth Vader, Lion King’s Scar (subtle name, great thing to teach kids!), Freddy Krueger, Voldemort, we could be here forever. You're just not paying attention.

Pay attention to where we are not included.

As discussed, there are some places where you see us all the time. But where do you not see us?

Advertisements (unless it's for a scar-removal cream, of course). Fashion shows. Magazine covers. Romance movies where we are the main character.

We deserve to see ourselves in what's around us in the same way able-bodied people do. Trying to make it seem like we don't exist - that's deliberate. 

Interact with our art.

We draw, write, sing, act in movies, we do everything! Support us in the most tangible way - leave us a nice comment, read our books, listen to our songs. Watch movies where actual people with facial differences star, not pseudoinspirational stories about how “being disfigured is ok” where they shove an able-bodied actor into a full face prosthetic just to not have an actor with a disfigurement on set.

Include us.

As this year's Face Equality Week calls for, include us. In art, in movies, in books, in your life. Show us as positive people who are valuable, who are a part of your community - I guarantee that we are in every one that's out there. The world is hostile and unwelcoming to people with facial differences - be the change, wherever you are!

I know that it is different from the usual posts I make, but I hope it was somewhat educational. I just like to use every occasion that I can to force Face Equality into people's heads. To make this at least a bit about writing to keep the blog's theme, I will say that if you want to write about us, you need to care about us in real life as well. Otherwise, it's shallow and pointless.

Below the readmore are some links/resources that you can click to educate yourself further. A lot of them lead to Face Equality International because they have just about everything you should know. If you want to be a better ally to people with facial differences, I heavily recommend them!

#MyFaceIsAMasterpiece

mod Sasza

https://faceequalityinternational.org/2023/04/why-i-will-not-hide/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/disability-is-diversity/202111/hidden-community-the-movement-face-equality

https://faceequalityinternational.org/2022/05/facial-differences-in-the-media/

https://faceequalityinternational.org/2023/04/advertising-excludes-women-with-faces-like-mine/

https://www.phoenix-society.org/resources/burn-community-bookshelf

https://faceequalityinternational.org/about-fei/international-face-equality-week/

https://faceequalityinternational.org/2023/04/hidden-from-view-women-with-facial-differences-in-the-media/

https://www.phoenix-society.org/resources/i-dont-see-your-scars

whoa thanks for actually clicking the readmore!!

[plaidos]

just another transmisogyny story: I’m a tme butch in community with a lot of transfemmes, and even in pretty welcoming radical spaces holy shit are the microaggressions constant. I’ve seen a girl and her cis boyfriend both try to speak in a meeting, and a tme nb (who I know for a fact has a crush on her!) literally said “oh his hand was up first” when uhhh no, it clearly was not. and he started to go ahead anyway!!! like just TEXTBOOK sexism in a space that thinks it’s so far past that shit, because they can’t recognize that it’s now reserved for trans women.

anyway I said something in that moment and have been trying to make sure she and others get support and credit for their work, but FUCK. and I’m sure I’m not picking up on a lot of the dynamics!

it’s even worse than just textbook sexism because you’ll find that most of these people come down harder on trans girls specifically because they think we’re “over focused” in the trans community and are “relatively privileged” and like, as you pointed out, this is even extended to cis men!!! like, there’s no location on planet earth where a cis guy needs to be defended against a trans woman talking over him even if it was happening 😭

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

Ok so I can't screenshot so I'm putting this in the asks but people are talking about netanyahu because he's getting the attention right now. And that's because he's genociding Gaza right now and nothing else of that scale happened since. So of course he's the it girl rn.

Like I wholeheartedly agree with you, we shouldn't be saying people "deserve to die", I just want to point out that I don't like it whenever people go "but why are people talking about this figure (who's getting all the attention right now) and not these other figures? (Who aren't getting attention)"

But TLDR netanyahu's doing some fuck shit that's getting reported on so obviously he's getting talked about the most generally.

To bring it back to the original conversation, people were talking about Putin when the Russo Ukraine war was going on. I saw people get excited at the idea that he might have cancer when that lump on his face showed up. Putin was the it girl and now it's netanyahu.

Look I'm sure you don't mean it this way, but the original comment I was responding to was antisemitic and your comments excusing it are microaggressions.

[Original post for reference]

There are a few things going on here:

1. People are giving a hugely disproportionate amount of attention to Israel's military response to the October 7th massacre in Gaza because they are antisemitic. There have been plenty of humanitarian crises affecting Palestinians in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt, yet the world literally only cares about them if they can use it as a cudgel against Jews. Obviously it's a humanitarian crisis and it deserves attention, and Israel deserves scrutiny and accountability for its actions. But the laser focus on Israel and only Israel belies the true motivation.

2. There are numerous other humanitarian crises happening right now that affect substantially more people, and which are unquestionably genocide. Can you name them? Can you tell me the relevant major players by name? Can you tell me the number of people murdered? Why or why not?

3. Specifically naming Bibi out of every possible vile human one could name, to me, specifically, a Jew - that's extra sus. Taken in combination with the previous points? Yeah, it's antisemitic.

4. The genocide of Ukraine by Russia is still ongoing, and ignorance about it is leading to dwindling support to such an extent that Ukrainians are having to ration bullets to defend themselves with. This one isn't meant as a scold, by the way — the plight of Ukraine is getting intentionally buried. Please don't stop talking about Ukraine, they need all the help they can get.

[And in b4 someone thinks I'm trying to say you shouldn't pay attention to what is happening in Gaza: please DO keep paying attention to Gaza and keep holding Bibi's feet to the fire. He's awful, his policies are awful, and he's encouraging the absolute worst members of Israeli society for his own selfish reasons. The people of Gaza are going through hell and need our help. Just please, for the love of G-d fact check things first and make sure you're not "supporting Palestine" by being antisemitic. Also make sure you are holding Hamas responsible for its part in the humanitarian crisis.]

[creatingblackcharacters]

hello!! (and welcome back!!!!)

i have a question about how to properly write a scene in a fanfiction i have

so, it's a zombie apocalypse thing, and theres some level of fantasy racism against a white character. he gets turned into a zombie and then turns back, and everyone is pretty wary of him sometimes, but for the most part they just kill zombies and dont actually have an issue with HIM, but he considers it wrong to kill ANY zombies (which i fully disagree with as a zombie media enthusiast, they literally kill people)

so, i'm going to have one of those scenes where the white character goes to the Black character with 'oh, you could NEVER understand how this feels!', EXCEPT, the plan is that the Black character (Juliet, and the white guy is her boyfriend Romeo) gets kind of angry after hearing him say this to her all the time and pretty much goes 'Romeo, i'm a Black woman'

i was wondering how to properly write this scene, and to show that Romeo is completely in the wrong for acting like Juliet wouldn't understand the racism she's been going through her whole life (because i am SURE that some people would think 'wow thats so fucked up of Juliet to be mad at him when hes just talking about his experience')

in reality i don't think Romeo would do this but disappointingly he somehow ended up like that in the series because i write it with someone else. but i feel that this scene would be important to include even though i would honestly like to completely change so much of what we've done with Romeo's character

thank you!

Of course you would name your characters Romeo and Juliet lmao. Okay so admittedly this will be biased because I am stunned at the audacity of your co-writer for putting you in this situation. But there are two things I personally would do, maybe both, maybe one or the other:

1) remember how I've said before that the mark of a genuine ally is how they respond to being approached with their racism? If you think this is an unironic reflection if your co-writer's beliefs, you need to stop and tell them that you are uncomfortable. Period. I'm not going to sit here and roleplay microaggressions. No. And if they don't want to change, then I would simply no longer write this story. Just because they want to write racism and call it romantic doesn't mean that you have to participate.

2) if you want to commit to the bit, you can always show what would actually happen in this situation with a Black character with self respect, which is Juliet dumping him. 😊👍🏾 I can't imagine being in the zombie apocalypse and letting somebody be racist during. I don't have time for that. and I'm already making time for a romance? With a zombie? That treats me microaggressively? Nah. I could be doing anything else at the moment. Survival is key, I risked it, and you think that's how you'll do me? Unacceptable. Let them write out of that one 🤣 no happily ever after without a genuine apology and reflection 🤣

Jokes aside (well, theyre not really jokes) you're asking how to reflect the Black woman's experience with racism in your story. And if that's not something you're confident in writing, something that you've studied, read, listened to, and have a grasp on, I wouldn't do it at all. In addition to how this story is supposed to be a romance (I assume, given the names) racism isn't romantic. Hiring a Black sensitivity reader could be key at this moment as well.

As I have said before, I'm always iffy on fantasy racism anyway, because it usually reveals that people don't actually understand what real world racism is and how it functions. I don't know how well you and your co-writer have written this story. But if your white zombie Romeo really is experiencing "zombie racism", then it stands to reason that he should be able to recognize racism when it's in front of him, and he should be checked for that.

[for-ships-that-never-sail]

Okay Y'ALL I saw Episode 5 today and these are the thoughts I jotted down while watching it (PART 2 OF 2)

Please don’t read below the cut if you are avoiding spoilers until you get to watch it yourself 

And FYI some of these may not have any context, but I guess it won’t matter cause you’ll have context in 7ish hours anyway (also sorry about how long all my thoughts and feelings are lol)

Awh Kate you’re so pretty - kinda weird to see her so chill though - she was so stressed all of season 2 that seeing her so serene is throwing me off tbh - I am so happy for you though my love

Also her outfit that looks like a sari is soooo gorgeous I WANTTTT

Love the cinnamon biscuits vs fruit jellies bit

Portia ma'am please listen to Varley FFS

lol I hope they did in fact fuck again like she wanted

Ugly crying at MY MESSSSSS

PARIS? oufff I love how comfortable she is, just casual teasing chit chats with bestie

“Undefended”? Charlotte needs a different hobby pleaseeee

LOLLLLL when did Penelope learn to do her hair and makeup by herself???? Cause there’s no fucking way she would’ve looked THAT fucking good after alllll of that lol

We were going to be KNIGHTS!! OMG sweet babiessss

“as much as I do” I can’t even blame anyone for anything they’ve done or said so far tbh 

This is such nuanced writing — I understand exactly where pretty much everyone is coming from and that’s really nice tbh 

Omg they really do want Cressida to marry a dinosaur 

WTF Cressida you do you girl fuck shit up for Penelope I don’t even care do whatever you have to do and go all out and save yourself cause no one else will I’m so sorry you were ever put in this position  

We have been acting uncouth AS OF LATE??? as of late????!? Omggg Portia girl pleaseeeee you had ONE job and you’re just gonna pass the buck to your daughters instead? STAHP own up to your shit cause you knowwww they bully her because youuu bullied her and the gall to say this is just happening LATELY on top lmao 

Though like in her eyes I always do see remorse too - I think she just lacks courage to ever really own up to everything in full because she’s just so guarded 

Honestly this is such stellar acting 

And also like, Penelope, most of you is your mom my girl - your brains, your overthinking, your inability to just say Yuh I done fucked up my bad lol 

Greg’s hat

Yesssss lord Kent find you some Bridgerton besties 

I actually do love Portia - yeah she’s been a colossal dick of a mom to Pen but as complex women go, I get her - If she makes amends with Pen for them daily microaggressions and general abuse one day, for real for real, she’d be really great 

Omg Mama B and Lady D are such big shippers - wish they didn’t fully cut out the Lady D stuff from the books though le sigh 

Eloise has a point - I agree - she had lotsss of alone time to say it - I understand Pens fear completely, but she must realize that her saying this is still soooo much better than him having to find out on his own - and there is no way he wouldn't - and he’d be more hurt by that part than the actual LW part I think and honestly Eloise is right about her being involved in that painful deception too, I wouldn’t want my own brother to feel betrayed by me like that either, given how often he wished LW ill out loud - and the longer Pen stays quiet the more guilty Eloise becomes as a sister too - If anything her not immediately snitching makes her moreee team Pen than team Colin - this is still a lowkey loyalty to Pen for sure - I think I may have issued this same ultimatum under these conditions too

Omggg JOHNNNNNN stop he’s having a panic attack why did Fran put him on the spot like thissss????

“As you rightly mocked me last season” lolllll

Awh Colin and the toast 

Eloise should nottttt have done her second toast - now THAT part was uncalled for, but I guess they want to keep the stress levels high 

Lmao Kate to the rescue 

I loveeeee how close they are sitting in public - but like… does nooooo one else see this??? Hips glued together? Hands holding??? Just out in the open?? No one thinks this is insanely intimate for a newly engaged couple of the ton??? Even if it’s a love match? None of the older women are clocking this and saying 1. Sit the fuck apart 2. Did yall fuck already cause yall look like you fucked and we don’t even have a wedding date set yet??? Are you not going to even ask for a special license?? You just want her to pop a baby before she technically should and cause more drama?? Like who is in charge of all these fools?? Mama B what is you doing??? Do you not think Colin is being a nasty girl with his wife-to-be?? lol

Lol Anthony I love you, you competitive lil bitch 

Lmaooooo Eloise and Penelope being the smartest bitches of the ton YESSSS

Portia trying to show where Pen's brain comes from lol

Muddy boots panic again 

LMFAOOOOOOO Mama B your face is going a mile a minute right now listening to the muddy boots

"I saw straight away" OH MY FROHN you will end me one day

Pen get your shit together pls grab a brown paper bag or smthn 

Oooohhhhh fuck I get itttttt

Cressida girl my bad I get ittttttt sooooo much more - I didn’t fully understand her thought process behind what we already knew she was gonna do until just nowwww - they really set it up for her well - girl needed an exit and everyone fully offered her one - I have no issues with this at all tbh 

Omg omg this is the most chaotic midnight strike of all time like 6 different things happened at the same time???? 

Well that was some good old fashioned Bridgerton CHAOS Hope y'all enjoyed it too!!!! LESS THAN 8 HOURS TO GOOOOOOOOOO

[ravi-is-my-beloved]

What’s your stance on the many POC that are huge Tommy fans, because he has a surprising amount of them. Do you think they’re in the wrong for enjoying him?

I don't think they're in the wrong for enjoying him, it's their choice to think he's changed and grown off-screen. I don't personally think he's changed and grown (I think he hasn't grown, he just has recognized that times changed and people higher up than him usually won't tolerate him being vocal about his thoughts), but you can think he's changed and not actively brush off/diminish what he has done in the past.

And that part is the part that bothers me. Of course, this is not a generalization of all of the Tommy fans, but this is what I see from the most vocal ones.

The problem comes when they try to say he wasn't an active participant in the bigotry (he started it in Chimney Begins) and they try to say he has canonically apologized in the Begins episodes and has canonically reported Gerrard in Hen Begins. All of that is not canon, but they use it to defend Tommy and say that all of the antis are just trying to say whatever because we don't like the ship.

There's also a rhetoric the people of color who like Tommy/Bucktommy push which is "Oh, the antis have never experienced racism in the workplace because no person of color would ever tolerate/be friendly with someone who's still racist." Which a) it erases the fact that there are people of color who don't like Tommy because of his problematic past, and b) it pushes the narrative that there's not people of color who choose to keep their head down.

We see Chimney keep his head down and not be as bold as Hen is in standing up for herself in his Begins episode. And yes, part of it was because speaking up against bigotry even in 2005 was not really normalized, but that still doesn't mean people of color don't still just keep their head down because they know it's not worth it to stand up for themselves. I've seen my mother be polite to her coworkers who ostracize her and use microaggressions against her just like what happened to Chimney.

Firefighting is a dangerous job, one where you need your coworker to like you so that they have your back, you can't just go making an enemy out of them. Sure, you can be bold, stand up for yourself, and have the outcome be good (like it was for Hen), but more often than not, it's not worth it in that line of work.

And just because you wouldn't tolerate a coworker who's still racist, doesn't mean that all people of color think the same way. We all deal with racism in different ways and some people just decide it's better to not fight it in the workplace.

So TLDR: No, the fans who are people of color who like Tommy aren't in the wrong, but how they react to other people of color who don't like Tommy and how they help push the narrative that every anti Tommy fan is white and doesn't know what they're talking about when it comes to the racism in the fandom is wrong.

[snake-and-mouse]

Regarding the issues surrounding the Kindergarten Mafia discord server, a large fandom server mostly dedicated to the kinnporsche fandom. It is an issue that encompasses multiple events and many other people have been hurt who I do not want to speak for, so this will not be the full picture, just a part of my part. If anyone reads this and has questions, they can reach out to me.

I am Will/Logan, also known as Sweet-William in fanfic circles, and I am not making this post because I have a vendetta, or to be malicious, as some of my previous actions have been called by the moderators of the server. I am making it because I have the right to speak on my experiences (as others I hope will speak up and share theirs, now that they know they are not alone), and because I want to warn people so what happened to me does not happen to them.

I am also making this post because @accal1a aka Hann the admin of the server has refused to delete content created by myself and many of my friends from the server, all of who left because they like me felt unsafe. The original request was sent by proxy as Hann has me blocked, and though they said they would unblock me so we could discuss it, they never did. As a writer I take it seriously when my work, and also details of my personal life, are taken. When I even offered to go through and delete it all myself if temporarily given access to the server, my messages were completely ignored.

The server is not a safe place for people of colour. It is not a place safe from racism, or xenophobia, and its leadership has historically been and continues to this day, to perpetuate racism in fandom spaces and shelter people who have hurt others with no real repercussions, accountability, or transparency.

The original issue was the result of this conversation between myself and Rachael, one of the moderators. I earlier stepped into a conversation where several microaggressions occurred regarding native american culture. As a Native, it was my right to speak up.

After this conversation I was urged to bring the issue directly to Hann, and from there the issues spiralled out of control. Hann originally was very supportive, and we became what I thought to be close friends. They made many reassurances Rachael would be held accountable, and changes would be made to the server to make it a safer place for pocs.

Rachael was never actually held accountable. Even when it came to light she had messaged me to issue the warning while lying to the rest of the mod team that she had "checked in on me" to see if I was alright after the incident. This was not the only time she secretly issued warnings to people, usually to defend her friends.

She was "demoted" but in actuality, the entire mod team was restructured and she simply was not on the top rung. Over the next two months many things happened, most of which are not my story to tell, and then it came to light Rachael had even further lied and never issued any warning or otherwise spoke to the person originally being racist in a mod capacity, this person being her friend, and refused to show what messages she did actially send.

To avoid any punishment she tried to "step down" as a mod before a choice could be made. And this was allowed. She was allowed to step down and continue to be in the server with no one knowing the actual story or that she couldn't be trusted and had abused her position.

After an incredibly vague statement was posted by the mod team regarding Rachael no longer being a mod, I broke and posted the conversation publicly and laid out the actual events. This was met with an overwhelming negative backlash, where it became clear to me this was a community where I was not safe, and any poc speaking up and calling for accountability would be seen as malicious and rocking the boat unnecessarily, while the moderators just watched on in silence.

The few moderators who were advocating for the poc server members were promptly fired, and though at one point a timeline vaguely outlining the events was posted, it and all evidence of what happened to me has since been deleted. And while Rachael originally left saying I was obviously trying to run her off the server, she has already returned at the urging of Hann.

Protecting people of colour and standing up to racism and xenophobia was never a priority in the kingergarten mafia server. And now that Hann has escalated to stealing work from people of colour that they have absolutely no right to, I am speaking up.

Respect us, be an ally, or face the consequences of what your community looks like with us gone.

[cripplecharacters]

Alright, I'm just gonna bite the bullet. Worst that can happen is I make a fool of myself. I've been working on superhero stories, versions of the same universe since I was in 8th grade and what I want more than anything is to modernize superheroes, create a world where they act for all people's social good and take representation to the highest level I can think of. From your position of expertise, what can I do with the creation of disabled characters that would buck the trend, do some good, and show a good side. The non-prosthetic and non-corrected for disability rep in the genre is basically nil, I have no ideas and nothing to draw on. I guess I just wanna know what disabled audiences might like to see for once in their lives.

Hello!

Disabled superheroes are awesome. There's really few of them but the ones that we do have are often really important to us - you can look at the reactions to Sun-Spider being first introduced to the Spiderverse, back then I couldn't open my fridge without seeing that one panel where she explicitly says she has Ehlers-Danlos.

Here are a few suggestions of what I'd like to see in the superhero genre:

Superheroes with facial differences. Comics love to use us for their ugly disfigured evil villains but not much else unfortunately. I'd kill for a superman type hero who saves people with a smile and a facial difference on his face. Especially for superhero stories that are geared towards kids and teens, we just desperately need something to help with shifting the public perception of people with facial differences from "evil and ugly" to "people that can be awesome". A hero with burn scars, with Treacher Collins syndrome, Bell's palsy, neurofibromatosis... anything.

Superheroes who use disability aids (and still need them when doing their job!). Sun-Spider is an awesome example, she swings from her crutches and has a spider wheelchair. That's cool as hell. But even a less in-your-face aid would be great. A superhero flying above the city with her ankle-foot orthoses visible would go really hard. Also, superheroes who are concerned on how much these things cost and try their best to make sure they're still functional while they save the city.

Heroes with different causes of their disabilities! The vast majority of morally good disabled characters were involved in An Accident or some sort of Attack that disabled them. That's not bad or wrong at all, but I think in media is kind of oversaturated with this specific portrayal when a lot of people have progressive or congenital conditions. We need more stories that show those who were born disabled as heroes equal to those who were born abled and spent most of their lives abled. Superheroes with cerebral palsy, chromosomal disorders, congenital rubella, achondroplasia, all the disabilities that tend to get ignored despite so many people having them. Same for really common chronic illnesses, diabetes or COPD are criminally underrepresented.

Disabled superheroes that aren't saints because of their disability. This is the whole "disabled person can do no wrong" trope that appears sometimes. I'm mentioning it since superheroes are more "perfect" than most characters in other genres, so try to not make it so the disabled ones can do no wrong. Disabled people can still make mistakes that are their fault, make poor decisions, or just simply be angry sometimes.

When there's no active superhero action going on, show the normal human parts of the disabled experience. Depending on the demographic you're writing for it would be different things, but there are some fairly universal concepts like inaccessibility, microaggressions, or just boring things like the prosthetic leg no longer fitting well after the character gained some weight. If your characters are from the US, don't be afraid to mention that their insulin costs are barely affordable with their superhero pay. Show how the common everyday kind of ableism affect them when they're in civilian mode. This will make it much more authentic to disabled readers.

These are my suggestions, and I hope they are helpful. My last advice is to have multiple disabled characters, and in different roles. Maybe a character with late ALS can no longer do superhero fighting, but he can still be a wonderful parent. Maybe the character with Usher syndrome is more interested in the hero than being a hero themselves (disabled heroes in relationships!). Maybe the character with phocomelia can't be a hero yet because she's six, but she can train hard to be one when she's older. Keep it varied, have them come from different life situations and have different goals just like abled characters do.

I hope this helps!

mod Sasza

[daylightaftertherain]

s3 thoughts in no specific order bc I'm trying to not start crying rn

- TYE INTIMACY WE'VE GOTTEN BETQEEN THEM AND THE LITTLE HUGS AND TOUCHES AND KISSES

despite everything that's still happening I'm so grateful for all of that because they've come so far from kissing in a dark hallway and at the very least they got to be a normal couple for little moments

- sara and her arc with her dad and I'm so glad we got more on their relationship but the way it fell apart was so heartbreaking??? and it did feel like it was coming but GOD did I feel for both of them

- erik!! and finally bc we as a fandom have known he was not perfect and he wasn't the best person, but for wille to realize that and because of something he went through as well was just so fucling painful, but I think really really needed, and I think it's one of my favorite arcs jist based off first watch

- felice addressing all the little microaggressions and sifderneces and struggles she goes through was SO important and I'm glad this season finally started talking about how kids outside of the status quo even in hillerska feel, and they did her character much better justice this time around

- august and nils were actually one of the most interesting parts of s3 and I liked how they handled their past with the initiation but also just august's character. he's still flawed as all fuck and a massive asshole but I did empathize w him, and him and boris's convo was rlly necessary to his character

- idk I feel like all of wilmon's conversations and attempts at communication have been very choppy and unfinished, and I'm really really hoping they do get a chance to have a sit down and talk things through, because there still so much they haven't figured out with each other

- omar and edvin's acting was on POINT thus season I genuinely am so emotional over how they portrayed the heartbreak and confusion their characters went through ;;;;;

- linda finally getting some fleshing out and we see a fuller picture of the eriksson's dynamic, and simon finally relying on them more and expressing some of his frustrations with always being the strong one like oh my god

- kristina and wille's final fight was probably one of the most interesting and heartbreaking, but I'm glad it happened and there were many points that wille needed to make. I'm praying they figure themselves out in episode 6 and talk things through. I do feel for kristina though and the parallel between her and wille dealing with how to deal with erik's presence is so heartbreaking

- some discussions about the monarchy and the system! honestly there was no way to develop that plotline fully given it's the last season and they still only have six episodes, but I am grateful for what we got

-for now just waiting for episode 6 (PLEASE let it be longer) and for everything to tie up before my final thoughts

[ros-sauce]

Tumblr ate the ask before I could get to it, but here are my two cents on why viewing a transfem-coded character as Not That is Not a neutral act. Other people have worded this better than me, but I can't find their posts, so my janky explanation will have to do. Discourse post ahead, check the tags and scroll away if any of the things I mention will make you upset, let's go

I recognize that a person's beliefs regarding fiction aren't 1:1 with reality; like, someone who writes about murder is 99.99% likely to not actually be a murderer. But there are times that beliefs regarding fiction and reality do come a little closer together, and this is most present when it comes to prejudices.

An example I can think of, of the overlap between these beliefs, is... If someone uses racist stereotypes when writing a character of a certain race, it's fairly likely that they also hold this belief about that race in real life. Reading that racist depiction, too, can affect real life people's thoughts. Because marginalized people are already subject to a lot of stereotypes by other sources in real life, the presence of those stereotypes in fiction reinforces a belief that the reader has already heard. Since the reader presumably enjoys and respects what they're reading, the thought "Oh, the author thinks x race is like this too, maybe there's merit to that belief." can reasonably follow. And thus, their opinion of x race is worsened, and this opinion can then influence their actions towards actual real life people of that race.

It's also worth noting that the person being stereotyped will feel hurt by the stereotype. If a person of x race sees how unkindly this person writes about someone like them, they're obviously not going to feel excellent about that.

That was a lot of talk that didn't relate to transgenderism, for a post that is about transgenderism, so now here's the part about transgenderism.

Misgendering and degendering are, as we know, tragically very prevalent in the world. Many folks do not like trans people, and invalidate their identity. From what I've seen and heard, transfems are especially affected by this. The majority of transfem people I know have spoken about how they're often incorrectly they/themmed by people around them, even if these people are aware that they/them isn't in that person's pronoun set. More well-known than this degendering is aggressive misgendering. "That's a man in a dress", "that's a pervert who wants to peep in women's bathrooms", etc etc. A lot of people in the world do Not want to recognize trans women as women. They will do anything other than recognize trans women as women, from comparatively small microaggressions to violent aggression-aggressions.

Basically, "trans women aren't women" is a popular prejudice. So, when someone says "Despite the subtext that categorizes this character as a trans woman, that is not a trans woman.", the "Oh, the person I respect believes in this popular thing? Maybe there's merit to it, then" response can happen. And then those people become more likely to be biased against trans women in real life.

The feelings aspect also comes in here. Transfem Mizuki fans don't feel very good when people are like "this character who's just like you isn't a woman."

With the main point out of the way, now I'm going to reply to the other parts of the ask! Which I'm hoping I'm remembering right. Sorry if you didn't ask me these things at all.

How is headcanoning a trans character as Not That any different from headcanoning a cis character as Not That?

I think the difference is that there isn't a violent stereotype being reinforced. That's not to say that stereotypes aren't reinforced when cis characters are headcanoned as trans; they definitely do exist. People love to look at canonically-cis-girl characters with short hair or masc clothing and say "that character is transmasc."

But! Stereotypes like that, like "boys have short hair", don't really further the existence of hate. I'm not saying they're perfectly pure and good stereotypes!! Obviously there are girls with short hair who get harassed over looking masculine. But I can't say that that form of harassment is anywhere near the severity of the harassment marginalized groups face.

Why did you start shit with someone on the internet? What do you gain from that?

If you believe I did a Bad Thing by starting shit, I'm not going to disagree with that! Part of why I instigated that was just that I was mad. That's definitely nowhere near the Top 10 Most Mature Things I've Done In My Life.

I would also like to defend myself a little bit, though! I feel like, by making that piece, that artist was entering a conversation. I was entering the same conversation, albeit viciously. I think entering a conversation means opening yourself to other viewpoints, even if people who hold them are mean about it. If someone decides to be harsh to me about what I said, I obviously won't enjoy it, but I will recognize that I signed up for it.

As for what I gain from that: Lowering the artist's reach, hopefully. If people rescind their internet clout, or analyze that piece and notice that it supports something they might not want to (refer to how large the trans flag is on her as opposed to the "crossdresser" note, which is so small that it escaped some viewers' notice), then it won't go quite as far in the algorithm. And the prejudice present in the work won't get as many eyes. Maybe it will have slightly less of an effect on the real world!

[chicagofires]

a good rant to start the morning because i have thoughts about something

i think it’s insane when people who hate stella say “we should be allowed to dislike stella without being called racist or misogynistic!” and it’s like… in theory they’re right! disliking a female character or a POC doesn’t inherently make you misogynistic or racist! if you have valid criticisms toward them that’s obviously fine and no one would be mad at you for it except there’s no such thing as a valid criticism against stella because she’s perfect. but the issue arises when your “criticisms” are actually just microaggressions😭. because what do you mean you hate stella because she’s “aggressive” or “bossy” or “too masculine”. just things that would never be said about a man or a white person. and you hate her for these things to the point that you PUBLICALLY post that you want her to brutally die in a fire… weirdo behavior

i know we say this all the time but it bears repeating: stella would never in a million years get away with half the stuff the white men on the show do. kelly severide would hate seeing how people spew hate toward his wife while worshipping him despite the objectively worse things he’s done

and let’s talk about how the two most widely loved women on the show- brett and shay- also happen to be the only white women to be series regulars (until novak came at least). and the most widely hated female series regulars (stella and gabby) happen to be the WOC who have been on the show the longest. not only is that alarming in and of itself, but i also find it interesting that, unlike stella and gabby, shay and brett were never firefighters. on the show at least, paramedicine is portrayed more as a “woman’s job” and firefighting more as a “man’s job” and therefore paramedics might be “less threatening” in the eyes of misogynists. maybe i’m wrong but that seems like a red flag. plus like brett is super traditionally feminine and cutesy and sweet. and shay frankly wasn’t around long enough for people to stop liking her. i am by no means saying if you like brett and/or shay you’re racist or misogynistic. obviously that’s not true. but it is an alarming pattern i see in stella haters

so yeah… if we call you racist or misogynistic for hating stella kidd it’s because you probably just are…

[star-anise]

Pulling a piece out of an already massive post to reply to @zenosanalytic :

Most of this is great, but I feel like this overstates the influence and power of exclusionists; they never took over either Feminist or Lesbian groups or turned them en masse against bisexuals and transpeople, at least not in the US(in Britain it's an accurate description from what I've read). They def were still there, TRYING to(they were majorly annoying in the Fair scene), and you'd meet them or lesbian-separatists moving in wider queer circles, but they were pretty consistently losing that fight especially in academic and political queer orgs and, by the 00s, were pretty much irrelevant. They stayed that way until the Conservative movement deliberately revived/coopted them in the 10s.

Because... here's the bit from the original post I think this is talking about:

That process of expelling bi women from lesbian groups with immense prejudice continues to this day and leaves scars on a lot of bi/pan people. A lot of bisexuals, myself included, have an experience of “double discrimination”; we are made to feel unwelcome or invisible both in straight society, and in LGBT spaces.

It is absolutely true that radfems did not succeed in making exclusionary politics the mainstream policy of LGBT institutions. Hooowever. That's not what I was talking about.

Most people do not engage with the LGBTQ+ community solely by, like... walking into a policy meeting at GLAAD. Generally we do things like finding LGBTQ+ content on social media, or by attending LGBTQ+ social events, or by trying to find people to date!

In those settings, groups that are minoritized within the LGBTQ+ community (bi, pan, m-spec, ace, aro, trans, nb, etc) experience being treated in ways that are invalidating or derogatory. Not all the time! #notalllesbians!! The majority of the community might actually be kind and welcoming, and it might be relatively small microaggressions. But those microaggressions can happen often enough, and in a context where not much is being done to show that we are valued by the community, to create a sense of wariness and unwelcome in a space that ought to be safe for us.

I didn't attend a single LGBTQ+ event, or try to date a single woman, my entire undergrad career, because when I was 16, the first real-life gays and lesbians I ever met laughed and joked, in my hearing, about how bisexual teenage girls are just sluts who are doing it for the attention, not actually gay. It's not that I believed them, since they were obviously wrong; it's just that I went, "Oh okay, so LGBT spaces are still ones where I'll be bullied and shit-talked. I absolutely cannot deal with any more of that, so I'll just never go into those spaces."

Mine is a very small story. There are a lot of little stories like mine, and also ones big enough that they'd look exclusionary even to an outside observer. I know people who actually did get pushed out of their college GSAs, or lost their whole social support network, or had people try to coerce them into thinking they were horrible misguided tools of the patriarchy, in LGBT spaces, because they were bi, pan, m-spec, ace, aro, trans, nb, etc.

If you'd clicked the link in the post labelled "double discrimination", you'd read an NBC article that says, in part:

“This study adds to the growing body of research confirming that bisexual people face unique mental health disparities [that are] closely related to stigma and discrimination [they face] from straight, gay and lesbian communities,” Heron Greenesmith, a senior policy analyst at LGBTQ advocacy organization Movement Advancement Project, said.

(Note: this means "unique" as compared to gays and lesbians, which have been the focus of most mental health research and practice in this area. Namely, bisexuals tend to face certain pressures as a group that cis gays and lesbians don't so much. It does not mean "unique" as in "only bisexuals experience this". Bisexuals are just one of many groups that feel unwelcome or unsafe in LGBTQ+ spaces they ought to belong in.

Maybe you didn't mean to imply that all these experiences didn't happen. I hope you didn't. Because it would be really goshdarn silly for someone who's been on Tumblr for years to suggest that the 2010s were not a fucking golden age of young LGBTQ+ people tentatively reaching out to explore their gender and sexuality, and being deluged with immense volumes of bullshit by other LGBTQ+ people for it.

I don't want to in any way discourage people from reaching out to LGBTQ+ groups, because it's very possible that the reward will far outweigh the risks. It's possible that other people will welcome you and will enforce a code of conduct against anyone who gives you shit. I'm not saying, "Hide forever! You're on your own, kid!"

But on the other hand, it is very easy, in a million different ways, to say "We didn't think very hard about making these groups feel welcome and protected in our space" without ever writing it into official policy.

[saintarmand]

wait I need to hear about the Daniel Lestat parallels

in answering your question i ended up typing a lot about a lot of things... some of which i think is pretty good and some of which is messy nonsense. enticing sneak preview:

daniel and lestat's similarities

the show overall as a story about how substance abuse affects families

how daniel mirrors both louis and lestat as a husband and as a father

facts, conjecture, and lots of theories about different aspects of daniel's backstory:

how antoinette may parallel armand, madeleine, and daniel's daughter

how daniel might mirror claudia???

like lestat, daniel can be pretty arrogant. they both love to lecture. "this is just how it is, listen to me, i would know! i have so much experience and knowledge to share." classic old white man behavior. hell, they're both old bisexual white men even. like lestat, daniel doesn't think of himself as racist but is still throwing microaggressions at both louis and armand.

daniel & lestat, danlou & loustat

lestat and daniel are both judgmental of some of louis's life choices (though usually different ones) and are not shy about saying so. they both make faces at louis eating animals—daniel also just louis eating in general ofc. but WE KNOW he still secretly thinks it's sexy and is also perhaps a bit jealous when louis is drinking from a hot guy, much like lestat. (don't pick the jacked sailor louis!!! great aesthetic but NO.)

so personality-wise, daniel is a combination of both louis and lestat. (he even has some claudia in him with his quest for the truth. i bet claudia would love to be a journalist, digging up dirt on people, exposing corruption! she's already a prolific writer too. but i'm getting sidetracked.)

both loustat and danlou are fond of each other, attracted to each other, but are also constantly bickering, sometimes in all good fun and sometimes not.

we see daniel yelling at louis in the show, and he's always yelling at armand in devil's minion. like lestat, he has a lot of anger in him. i bet he could throw a punch too back in the day. and while i don't think he was abusive to his wives, we know he wasn't a good husband either. especially while he was using.

and this is where we get to the most important parallel between them: lestat's "overindulgence" in killing is analogous to substance abuse. of course drinking too much blood doesn't actually make him act the way he does, but what happens in the show is still very reminiscent of the way alcoholism and drug abuse contributes to relationship problems. the substance itself doesn't lead to abuse, but it exacerbates things.

human blood is drugs actually

in the books, lestat talks about getting drunk a lot when he was human. louis calls himself a drunk too, and in the show their relationship starts by them going out all night almost every night. then they start going out every night to drink human blood. louis feels pressured to drink in order to please lestat, but eventually he wants to cut back. lestat is angry, telling louis it's stupid, there's nothing wrong with drinking, it's pointless, it's gonna be so hard, you won't be able to do it. and of course he feels like it's an attack on his own blood drinking. louis doesn't ask lestat to quit with him, but out of respect for louis's choice, he doesn't drink around louis anymore. lestat starts having parties at the house all the time. louis is totally fine with it, he's there, it's fine, it's fun. at least until it starts to get out of hand. and then lestat's fucking around on him too. eventually louis has a big relapse, things get way out of hand, it costs him his job even, lestat's like lol welcome back! told you this would happen! so louis breaks up with him.

but whooops he comes back carrying a child. you know, in his arms! he really wants to keep the kid. lestat acquiesces. louis doesn't go back to drinking human blood, but he doesn't have to because lestat has a new drinking buddy, a 14-year-old girl! he gave her a taste and she loved it! yay! louis tries to warn her about potential consequences. he's had a lot of them. she was a consequence even, but a good one. but she likes drinking with lestat, and eventually she starts going out on her own. and it gets out of hand.

daniel is sober now, "like louis", but he had a big drug problem back in the day. louis asks him about the "best he ever had." black tar heroin is nothing compared to what lestat gave louis that first time. yeah, it's not just drinking, it's hard drugs that lestat gave his kids.

louis's family doesn't know what the hell he and lestat get up to all night but they know it's nothing good. he stopped coming over for months, even years, but one time he showed up, watched the baby for just a second, dropped him on the floor. he wasn't invited to the kids' birthday party cause they're afraid of him. he showed up late and broke the door. they cut him out entirely. are he and his... partner, the right kind of people to adopt?

one time the cops get called. they raid the house but the evidence is well hidden. mostly. they refrain on calling the child welfare league but they don't like what they see. louis and lestat lecture claudia; louis about the drugs themselves, lestat about not hiding her tracks well enough. and speaking of, are those track marks on her arms? we don't do that kind of thing in this house!

claudia tells louis he's the one who brought her into the house. enabled lestat to give her a taste. she leaves home, staying somewhere new every night. she's still using, on her own and in dangerous situations. eventually she returns home. it's safer with someone watching your back.

lestat and claudia say louis's abstaining comes off judgmental. so he starts using again too. they throw a big big party with great party favors. claudia puts something in lestat's.

in season 2 (and i'm spoiling the whole plot), claudia and louis will travel around looking for people who are into the same stuff. the ones they find are pathetic, living like trash. then they find a group having some real fun, big parties. louis's not into it, but he's into armand, who doesn't mind that he doesn't use as much. claudia will get sick of the parties but get louis to give this woman she meets a little taste like lestat did with her. but armand doesn't want claudia around. armand and louis will keep using together, meet a guy in a bar. give him a taste of the good stuff. eventually louis will want to cut back again, and armand accepts it, even helps him. but louis's not much fun anymore.

just this once, daniel is a step ahead of louis; daniel's second marriage has already fallen apart.

daniel and alice

daniel compares louis to his first wife when he tells her about her dyeing her eyebrow; she thinks she has a flaw and tried to cover it up, but daniel likes her the way she is. lestat treated louis's aversion to killing like a flaw, and louis internalized that, calling himself a botched vampire, but daniel likes that about him. louis is like alice in a way.

some wild conjecture: what if alice was an addict too? what if daniel somehow contributed to her addiction like lestat did with louis? what if alice stopped using like louis, while daniel continued like lestat? or maybe she never used any drugs, but started drinking due to strain on her marriage; a more indirect cause. and what about the kids? what if, like claudia becoming a blood drinker like her parents, daniel's kids ended up inheriting his addiction too? becoming alcoholics as teens or adults? or maybe it affected them even more directly, like one of them accidentally ingested something he left lying around, and almost died like claudia? okay, that got dark... maybe daniel avoided getting his kids directly involved, perhaps by simply not being around much, and that's one of the differences between their stories. narrative foils aren't supposed to be identical after all, just further the same themes. a parent's substance abuse affects the children, one way or another. we don't know the details, but like lestat's fledglings, daniel's kids don't talk to him anymore.

daniel proposed to alice "after he got his shit together" but we don't know when this was. we do know daniel had a daughter by 1978 (7 years before car seats are mandatory) though we don't know how old she was—probably under 6 given he was imagining her in a car seat. we can probably assume alice is the mom, and based on her commenting on this part of his memoir that he never owned a buick, we can probably assume they were together around this time, or at least in contact. we also know he used black tar heroin in 1978.

this is only like semi-canon but on his linkedin page it says he started working as a freelance investigative journalist in 1982. it could be a random date but i imagine he's "got his shit together", working real jobs. so maybe it was around this time that he and alice got married. if we're assuming the devil's minion mind wipe theory is true, it would also be very fitting if the confusion of lost memories was what drew him specifically to investigative journalism as opposed to the portrait pieces he did before that. he doesn't know what the truth is anymore, so he starts looking for it wherever he goes.

and speaking of devil's minion, if daniel was cheating on alice with armand, then he's a lot like lestat indeed. but his secret lover is so secret he himself doesn't even know about him anymore. (or maybe alice did know there was someone, and felt very gaslighted when daniel suddenly started insisting it never happened after basically admitting it before? or maybe daniel's denials just suddenly got so convincing she agreed to marry him?)

two marriages, two children?

in 1985, daniel and alice were talking past each other when she told him she was pregnant. he was like remind me again later

louis and lestat didn't have another kid together, but lestat did make another vampire: antoinette. lestat had a child! while the marriage was going badly, a few years after getting (back) together. just like our boy danny.

after "breaking up" with lestat, louis will also have a "child", madeleine. he's giving claudia a "sister" while he's dating armand.

so here's a two-part prediction: 1. alice dumped daniel before their second child was born. 2. daniel met his second wife before his second child with was born.

so like lestat turning antoinette, daniel got alice pregnant BEFORE getting dumped like lestat (pun intended).

and like louis turning madeleine, daniel's second child was born AFTER he met his (soon-to-be) second spouse.

what if, like armand, the second wife didn't like daniel spending much time with his kids? it's been known to happen. we know absolutely nothing about this second marriage but i think we'll get something in season 2. is there something daniel shares with armand as the types of husbands they make? i bet there will be

daniel's childhood?

we know where daniel is now, and a little bit about how he got here. but the thing we know absolutely nothing about is where he started.

daniel was already struggling with drug abuse by the time he met louis and armand, doing what he "had to" to get high. we know it's not really the only reason he frequented gay bars, but still. he was at a point where he was willing to play the crack whore. so what led to it? addiction doesn't come from drug use alone, and genes aren't enough either. there's always something you're struggling to cope with that leads you to drug abuse. so what was it? his sexuality could be enough, but i bet there's more to it than that.

if we're looking for lestat parallels, rape trauma works. maybe his interest in claudia's assault was personal, his flippancy a defense mechanism? certainly a possibility. but childhood trauma seems like the safest bet, doesn't it? lestat certainly had it. but i don't wanna focus on him now.

i mentioned earlier that daniel and claudia share a passion for the truth and for writing. what if he had some of her childhood too? abusive parents, parents abusing drugs or alcohol, parents fighting a lot, parents cheating on each other. pick as many as you like. maybe he was even a band aid for a shitty marriage. maybe there was a difficult divorce. maybe one of his parents had an awful new partner and said they'd dump them but never did, or got back together every time. picked someone else over him over and over again. he certainly had a lot to say about that! maybe he gets so incensed over being lied to because his parents always lied to him too. maybe his outburst wasn't about louis at all. maybe memory is the monster. maybe his parents cursed him into the darkness. lestat's did, and he cursed his own children in turn. i bet that's what happened to daniel too: they fuck you up, your mom and dad; the poison drips through; we dance on the strings of those who came before us; memory is a monster. maybe daniel became his own father too. his father or his mother or both. it's usually both, right?

this is louis's story first and foremost but parts of it are claudia and lestat and armand's too, and daniel functions as a funhouse mirror for all of them!!!

whew

in adding the chapter headings i ended up moving things around so idk how coherent this is but i fear proofreading would only result in me editing this forever and i would really like to avoid locking even more posts into the drafts vault. 😭 hopefully it coheres? thank you for reading and please let me know your thoughts!

[commsroom]

eiffel's problem is that he sees every injustice as an interpersonal issue. he doesn't understand how his flippancy or apparent leniency towards hilbert might look to hera; in his mind, it doesn't contradict his support for her. to eiffel, it seems obvious - he is also one of hilbert's victims, hera is his friend, of course he's completely on her side - but he fails to fully grasp how the stakes are different for her.

ep 19: "you need to stop treating this like a joke, officer eiffel." / "hey, i'm the person for whom the joke tolls." / "i get you're scared he put something inside you. but i hope you haven't forgotten emergency code alpha victor. he put that in me." and ep 51: "they're just jokes! they don't really mean anything." / "see, eiffel, you get to have that. they can be 'just jokes' for you because you're... well, you. but we don't get that."

the issue in shut up and listen is eiffel's repeated, if unintentional, microaggressions, but it's also his general use of dark humor as a coping mechanism - jokes he feels justified in making because of how the subjects of those jokes have impacted him. eiffel sincerely believes in treating people equally, but his idea of 'equal treatment' can be idealistic and naive. he has an awareness of interpersonal harm, but he's lived most of his life without ever being confronted with the reality of structural harm - being pre-judged and othered and having his life devalued on the basis of outside categorization.

but the thing about that is that it has happened to him, too. eiffel is an addict, and a convict, and marked as from a lower socioeconomic class than minkowski or lovelace, and those things are the reasons goddard futuristics was able to buy him as prison labor and - without his consent - consider him expendable for medical experimentation. none of that is a coincidence, but he doesn't see the systems at work, only his own actions and regrets. which he then equivocates to the worst actions of people who don't share his sense of morality or guilt.

eiffel's ability to recognize and bring out the humanity in the people around him is one of his best qualities, but... on the basis of his identity, he's been able to live a life where he conceptualizes himself as the default person, and that's been reinforced by the pop culture he loves so much. that's a massive blind spot. he assumes everyone navigates the world in a similar way, and so, on some level, he sees everyone around him as an extension of or a reflection of himself. if evil is always personal, then it can always be reasoned with.

[writingwithcolor]

My main character is black and her boyfriend is white. At some point in the story they break up, partially because her boyfriend is ignorant when it comes to racism. I don’t want their break-up to seem like a statement against interracial relationships. How can I avoid it coming across like that?

Ignorant / racist ex-boyfriend

I don’t want their break-up to seem like a statement against interracial relationships.

I think it's tough, perhaps impossible, to not inadvertently be making some sort of statement from a set-up like this. No matter how much or how little it’s explored, there's some residual takeaway from the racist incident(s) that happened leading up to the breakup. These problems don’t exist in a vacuum and hard to treat as an isolated incident that won’t lead to a deeper takeaway from the reader.

I'd recommend either leaning into it and properly addressing the matters in the story, which we’ve discussed the “hows” a lot here or, if you want to avoid making a "Statement"... make the breakup about something else entirely, minus racism or other 'isms, which would likely have an intersection of race to consider too. 

Note: 

Not every story with BIPOC needs racism, piles of microaggressions, struggles or meaningful statements about these topics. So, I personally find it completely appropriate to leave these things out. Keeping in mind, that culture, language and acknowledging race is not racism and is most welcome!

~Mod Colette

[sleepynegress]

HELLO! I'm sorry you've been getting idiotic anonymous people being rude about Uhura. I saw your lovely post about her and it made me happy to see that people appreciate her! She is so much more than lots of fandom pretends. Also I high-key agree that Karl Urban absolutely nailed his performance of Bones. It was so dead on!!! Zoe's Uhura was lovely too but as you say, sharper around the edges, and personally I felt her relationship with Spock was very sweet but difficult initially for me because I really get stressed when one person doesn't get the emotional needs of another. So their really gentle scenes made me SO happy when they finally happened. The warmth and gentleness shone through and won me over entirely. Zoe played sharp with just enough warmth. But I still love Nichelle's too. Uhura is great! Anyway didnt have a huge point here just happy that you also love her and call people out LOL

The main issue is the misogynoir and perhaps TERF leanings against the most recent player in the part, Celia Rose Gooding. She is non-binary and goes by she/they pronouns. She also has a short close-cropped style which beautifully frames her face. The troll is hyper-fixated on attacking that, disparaging her presentation of femininity using coded language to imply aggression or masculinity. This is extra backward because, of the three players who took on Uhura, she has the darkest skin tone, has the fullest lips and a wide nose bridge, and her hair is the only one not in a straightened or processed style (which is fine for an option BTW). All of these things together are rare aesthetics for a Black woman, and appropriate, especially for an sub-Saharan African woman's character presentation, especially in a futuristic sci-fi mainstream iconic franchise, like Star Trek and so important for young people to see as normalized femininity. I think of Lupita Nyong'o talking about the effect Alek Wek had on her...just being there as this South Sudanese supermodel, with very dark skin and short natural hair...

Celia Rose is the particular target this troll has framed as their "fanhood", with thinly veiled insults and backhanded "compliments" that keep dogwhistling in their posts with various account names.

As for Zoe's Uhura, that professionalism and sharpness, when it came to her abilities and focus on her studies was an obvious intentional writing choice to stave off the very criticisms *she still got* because of the misogynoir of that era...

People were accusing her of coercing Spock into her ship assignment and even assaulting him(!).

That mess never makes sense, but hating Black women for existing or having what we are perceived as not "deserving" is sadly an old tradition (see those who make a hobby out of hating Megan Markle). And now, I see people praising the OG Uhura, Nichelle, for aspects of her character that were actually forms of limitations on her because of production bigotry...i.e. the forced interracial kiss, that people constantly cite as some forward thing w/o the context that it was forced because the implication was that no one in her crew would willingly kiss a Black person. IOW, aliens assaulting them for their entertainment was the lesser evil and more palatable to white audiences than someone choosing to love on Uhura (and I would add *especially* someone white, because even showing Black affection and love in that time was a rare thing, and her episode showing some yearning towards an old love showed no physical affection between them either). Anyway, all that to bring it right back around to ALL the Uhuras are great. And the weird microaggressions, macroaggressions, hatred, and attempts to shove them into a particular box are misogynoir; a microcosm of the kind of bullshit too many Black women go through on the regular just for existing.

Celia is a Rose and I hope she shines, gets loved on, has friends (including some Black ones) who are genuinely concerned for her well-being and actually help her when she's in need.

P.S. I missed this reading way too fast before but this bit is sus IMO Zoe's Uhura was lovely too but as you say, sharper around the edges, and personally I felt her relationship with Spock was very sweet but difficult initially for me because I really get stressed when one person doesn't get the emotional needs of another. If you meant Spock not reading Uhura? Then yeah, I agree. If you mean Uhura not reading Spock?? I can't walk with you there because Spock literally almost hindered Uhura's career and got her on an exploded ship(!) because of his emotional bias and almost killed Kirk on the bridge because he was not managing his emotions well. Meanwhile Uhura read him well enough to provide some comfort after the loss of his mother.