#now another conversation to be had is media literacy

[austin-friars]

twitter writing community was doing too much again, but one of the discussions i absolutely hated was the shaming of people for not reading or obtaining classical literature. there is this idea that if you aren't reading classics, of if you can't read classics (or books modeled off of classical literature, for example like, contemporary classics or historical fiction) then in short, you are an idiot.

enough people made excellent points about how unfair this was to to immigrants, people who spoke english as a second language, people outside of the US, etc. But even in the US, the ability to read classical literature/contemporary classics/historical literature is a privilege that many...many people do not realize. To be taught how to read is one thing, but to be taught how to read complicated texts and literature, and to actually be able to absorb and analyze what you are reading is a skill that is inaccessible to many.

I started reading complex books from a young age, I went to a college prepatory private highschool where it was expected that we were able to read such literature, and then my minor was in English and American lit where I was writing literary analysis daily, pages worth. And that was all a privilege. That was a privilege that my family worked very very hard for me to be able to have, especially given I am Black American, and the power to read wasn't always granted to my ancestors.

THAT ALL SAID, my being able to read this content is still a privilege. My family set me on the path, my family was able to provide me that education. Not everyone in America gets that. There are tons of people living in low income situations that do not have access to this type of literature, that don't have access to learning, schooling, etc., that would teach that. Some teachers just give upon students, some schools don't have funding. In America, Black and Brown kids, in both the elementray and highschool level are still below the national reading average....

The point is, there are so many snobs in these cirlces. One of my favorite series is probable the Wolf Hall series by Hilary Mantel, and if I did not have the education I had, I would not even begin to be able to read it , let alone enjoy it. Let alone COMPREHEND it! Mantel's historical works aren't classical but like many historical fictions, it is heavily modeled off of classical english literature.

The point is be nice to people and don't be a damn snob! You don't know everyone's education, experiences, background.

[gb-patch]

Sorry to send another ask amongst the sea I'm sure you're receiving, but I find myself more concerned about Rose being a sensitivity reader as I find more information. One of Rose's friends continues to insist that the conversation about Tamarack and male MCs was part of a larger discussion about biphobia in the fandom. However, they claim that Rose's position is "people erase Tam's bi/pansexuality by refusing to portray [her] as being attracted to anything other than men." This explanation of Rose's belief is, in-and-of-itself, biphobic. It claims that portraying Tamarack as attracted to men erases her queerness. This is textbook biphobia and bi-erasure that I as a bisexual encounter every day. It is NOT a good-faith defense of a queer character. It reduces us down to our partners and makes the claim that if we end up in a relationship that's "straight-passing," we're erasing our queerness. Especially as a bi sapphic myself, it reduces my identity strictly to the perceived-man I'm dating, and not my inner or previous experiences, or those of my partner. It's very uncomfortable that Rose, a non-bisexual, was discussing this like they're defending Tamarack's queerness when they're doing the opposite.

This is a doubly strange position when Our Life is a game about the acceptance of love in all its forms. The conversation could be different, MAYBE, if Our Life was a TV show or a book or a comic. But this is a game where people are meant to play as characters of their own design. I do not feel confident about Rose being a sensitivity reader for a game with bi/pansexual love interests if these are their beliefs about bi/pansexuality, particularly if they're unable to adapt their opinions to be relevant to different formats of media; this shows they're lacking in skill in the areas of media literacy and critical thinking.

I’ve been trying to make a post that presents the concerns people have about this, but your ask touches on the points I was going to, and I’d say it’s better to have it said by a player than me deciding what people are thinking. So, this is something that I want to make clear- that I see this and other asks/comments about it. What you’ve said is something a lot of people are unsure and upset about. I am sorry that you feel so out of place in this community now. And I am also sorry to players of any sexuality who use a male MC. That comment dismissed players and Tamarack’s identity.

It did come from a longer discussion about bi-phobia issues. The overall feelings were “if people did only want Tamarack to be interested in men, I really wouldn’t like that and wouldn’t it be a funny concept if Tamarack then left them for a woman?”. The comment itself didn’t encompass that idea at all. It does not give a good impression about where they’re coming from. It was unkind.

The viewpoint Rose is trying to have isn’t that “Tamarack can never express an interest in men” which would be wrong, it’s “I stand by the fact that Tamarack is someone who wouldn’t only be interested in men and no one else”. If it’s true that Rose likes Tamarack being interested in all genders and doesn’t want her bi-ness to be forgotten, I’d say that’s an acceptable view. If the point actually is that Tamarack should only be with women and if she’s not than Tamarack is no longer bi or she’s a bad character, then you're right- that isn't acceptable and that is going to get someone removed from the project. I do believe Rose agrees with what you’re saying and means it when they say they want to stop bi-erasure, not participate in it for real. But they had a very harsh way of talking about it.

I understand that people don’t know Rose and this situation has made them believe they do seriously hold that first view. But from working with them, there’s never been any feedback that shows an opinion of the sort.

Right now, I think that comment was being edgy and making a quick, very poorly-worded quip to people they’d been chatting with about that topic already. Rose has left the GB Patch discord servers, they used to be a mod, and may or may not ever be back in there. Rose won’t make blog posts responding to players going forward. They’re going to take a break from this and then try to give helpful feedback. We’re going to see if things can be okay from here.

And with this coming up, we’re all really aware that it’s something to consider about the game. I’m going to be as conscious as I can for any advice that seems to go against the character’s identities and I’m going to question my own knee-jerk choices for how I handle things. Other sensitivity readers will be able to give their viewpoints as well, so will the players. If the game’s content isn’t welcoming or is biased people will notice, and I’ll be here to accept what I’ve done. I don’t want that to be the result of this, of course. I hope the game will be thoughtful and considerate, but I can’t fire Rose at this point to try doing that.

No one has to keep following the game, though. I’m sympathetic to anyone who is too uncomfortable with all this to stay around.

[oraclesblog]

🛑 Major SATSV Spoilers 🛑

I recently saw SpiderMan: Across the Spider-Verse, and it was amazing. I love all the hype the movie is getting, however, I’ve been seeing a lot of Gwiles (Gwen x Miles) slander for the dumbest reasons ever. So, I thought I would just debunk some of them because it’s clear you antis struggle with media literacy. Let’s go.

1. “Gwen and Miles should’ve just stayed friends; they were so much better platonic”

Saying this just makes me think you watched the first movie with your eyes closed. In what world were they ever “just friends”?

You can’t say they were better platonic when they were never even platonic to begin with. Both Miles and Gwen had a mutual crush on one another in the first film, so they were never “just friends.” The first film was literally building up their relationship.

2. “Gwen betrayed miles in SATSV; she’s fake”

No, she didn’t. Gwen didn’t invent the laws of the multiverse, and she doesn’t run the Spider Society. It’s not Gwen’s fault that Spider-Man becoming an orphan, or half an orphan, is a multiversal constant.   There’s nothing in her power she can do to change that. Miles being chased by the Spider Society wasn’t Gwen‘s fault either—that was Miguel’s. Saying things like, “she should have told Miles about what was going to happen to his dad,” again just makes me think you watched the movie with your eyes closed. Gwen wasn’t even allowed to interact with Miles. If she told Miles (a Spider-Man who isn’t even part of the Spider Society) about what was going to happen to his dad, Miguel would’ve kicked her out. She was almost kicked out in the first place just for talking to him; If that had happened, she’d be homeless, because—just in case you forgot—her dad disowned her after holding her at gun point. Gwen quite literally had no other choice but to comply with Miguel’s rules. She also states in the movie that she didn’t know how to tell him, which makes sense given that she hasn’t seen him in over a year. How would something that big and consequential even come up in a conversation? Not to mention, she’s young and inexperienced as a hero. She’s gonna screw up and make mistakes. She was put in a completely unfair situation by the adults around her and had an enormous amount of pressure put on her shoulders. Blaming the teenage girl for a situation like this, instead of Miguel, Jessica, or Peter B. is absolutely wild.

3. “They have No chemistry”

Now, this one is just completely biased. You know damn well…

these stills alone just prove you wrong. No way you watched the movie, saw the way they looked at each other and interacted, and actually said, “they don’t have chemistry.” 💀

4. Interracial Relationship Backlash

Lastly, I’ve seen people hate on Gwiles solely based on the fact that it’s an interracial relationship. The fact that this is a problem in 2023 is absolutely mind-boggling. Some of you are just racist bigoted people who need to learn how to stfu.

[distinguishedstudentfishalien]

AHHH ok, let's talk about Lucifer and Alastor

I've been reading a lot of reactions to Hazbin: from the gushers who think the show is perfect to the hyper-critical who hate the show, the creator, and everything in between. I don't fall into any of those categories. I had a lot of fun watching it, but there were some things I liked, and some others I didn't. You know, as it's usually the case with any piece of media one interacts with.

I love reading other people's opinions. It makes me pay more attention to things I might have missed. BUT for Hazbin, most of the criticism I've seen boils down to two things: either "I, personally, didn't like it, so that means it's bad" which is not the hot take people seem to think it is, or just lack of media literacy.

I won't go over all the examples of that last point (there are plenty), but one example people are using to criticize the show --which I can't seem to get out of my head so now I have to write about it-- it's how out of left field it was for Alastor to think of himself as a father figure to Charlie.

My guys and guysettes, that's because he doesn't.

He does it to piss off Lucifer, because he doesn't like him. That's it.

"But they just met, why doesn't he like him?" I don't know! but let's go over some examples, shall we?

In the first episode, during Alastor's TV ad, we see a picture of the hotel, clearly drawn by him. I ask you to look to the bottom left where it says "No tacky circus decor! I promise"

Do we know what he is referring to? Sure we do! the ring circus master himself! Lucifer Morningstar, whose whole schtick is circus-related. Clearly, Alastor is not a fan.

When Lucifer arrives to the hotel, did anybody catch Alastor's first reaction? (besides calling him short to his face, ofc)

Do you see that trembling eye? He is PISSED. Why? Who the hell knows! But he clearly does not care for the King of Hell himself (if you force me to give you my opinion on this, I think it's because of Alastor's delusions of grandeur, and plain-ole narcissism, but that is a conversation for another post, if I ever gather enough energy to write it)

He introduces himself and immediately does this. R-U-D-E.

Now, let's talk about the song itself, which, again, is clearly just an attempt to piss off Lucifer and not really about Charlie. At all.

He only cares about Lucifer's reactions. Because he is not being HONEST. We can all see that? right?? I mean, it is pretty FREAKING obvious. He is just trying to get a rise out of Lucifer.

And now, the moment we were all waiting for, the infamous "call me dad" moment.

Which had nothing to do with Charlie, and it was just another example of Alastor being the most annoying bastard alive. He is not even looking at her! He is staring Lucifer dead in the eye and saying "piss off shortie".

Why? Again, I dunno. Your guess is as good as mine. I hope we'll get the answer in season 2, because immediate animosity against the King of Hell himself is something I need some context for. Is it funny? Absolutely! I love that song! The violin solo? PURE GOLD (he he)

But for the love of Christ and the Antichrist, please stop thinking of "Alastor thinks of himself as Charlie's dad out of nowhere" as a valid criticism. As some have speculated, Alastor involvement with Charlie will probably have something to do with Alastor's deal and 7-year absence. If it's never explained, then sure, what the heck Vivzie?? please include it on the show!

There are PLENTY of things we could criticize about Hazbin (and people smarter and with more energy than me have done so already). But there are so many examples of "criticism" that are just examples of "I don't know how to interact with media anymore" and I beg of you to do better. This is a tiny example of the show showing and not telling, and some of y'all failed the comprehension test.

It is a fun show, guys. Enjoy it.

TL;DR: Alastor does not think he is Charlie's dad, ffs. He just wanted to piss off Lucifer.

[buddiebeginz]

I keep seeing posts about how us Buddie fans are just being delusional. How we need to stop reading so much into what’s being said during interviews and oh also how it’s offensive to the current ship.

First of all let’s be clear here Buck is NOT in a relationship with Tommy. I feel like this is something you Buck/Tommy shippers are failing to grasp because I constantly see posts about how Buck shouldn’t cheat on Tommy. They have kissed once and been on 2ish dates they are not a couple yet. Being exclusive requires a conversation or at least some acknowledgment by the characters and we haven’t had that yet. They still barely know each other.

Second we have always theorized about Buddie when the characters were with other love interests. We did when Buck was with Taylor. We did when Eddie was with Ana. Is it somehow different now because Tommy is a guy? Is it different now because Buck and Tommy aren't straight? Or is it just because Buck is dating the guy you want him to be with now? I don't know there's just something very strange about how some of you are responding to Buddie/Buddie shippers with all of this.

What's even crazier to me is that so many of you who are all about Buck/Tommy now used to be Buddie shippers or still say you'll be happy if Buddie happens down the line. Yet you're still attacking Buddie and our meta and speculation because it threatens the current ship you want at the moment.

No one is saying that every one of our theories and speculation is 100% correct but we have always speculated on the show and the interviews this isn't something new people are doing. I feel like the response some you have is that we're somehow seeing/hearing only what we want to and or twisting the words of the actors/etc to fit some kind narrative we have about Buddie.

It's not like we're seeing interviews where Oliver, Lou, Tim, etc are saying Buck and Tommy are going to be together 4eva and then immediately twisting that to mean oh they must be lying Buddie is so obviously happening tomorrow. We're inferring what we think might happen based on spoilers and what the actors (and Tim) have said combined with what we hope might happen. We know not everything we think will happen will. We had a ton of theories on 7x04 and 7x05 (many of which turned out to not be true) and despite what some of you think we didn't all collectively lose our shit because they didn't come true.

You can dislike Buddie and us all you want and can disagree with us or our theories all you want but these posts talking about how we're just seeing what we want and setting ourselves up for disappointment come across as hypocritical (considering most of you used to be Buddie shippers) and patronizing. We don't need or want you to save us from our fandom experience. If we're disappointed by the storyline that's our business but right now we're having fun with where things in the show are and are going.

---

I also really don't like how some of you are trashing Buddie to prop up Buck/Tommy. Basically saying that because Buck and Eddie's feelings haven't been verbally confirmed on screen (like in an I'm in love with you kind of way) that we're making it into something it's not and it's not fair to Buck/Tommy because they are canon.

Buddie isn't in a romantic relationship at the moment but they have loved and supported one another and always been been more than friends since basically the beginning. Even Oliver just confirmed that Buck was attracted to Eddie from the first scene. And no attraction alone doesn't equal love but if you can look at the six seasons of history shared by these two characters and only see two bros being the bestest friends you really need to take some media literacy.

I feel like some of you don't understand that not every part of a fictional story is spelled out super literally nor should it be. We know how deep Buck and Eddie's love goes because we can infer that based on their scenes. On all the ways they are there for one another, on how they treat each other, on how their relationship differs from the other friendships on the show. On all the things they say and don't say to one another. A big reason we want to see them in a canon romantic relationship is because of how clear the show has already made it that these two men love each other.

As for Tommy even though I'm not a multishipper I get Tommy's significance in the storyline. I'm also more thankful than I can put into words that Oliver and the show have decided to do Buck's bi awakening storyline epecially considering I'm bi myself. Buck being bi and his journey is incredibly important all on it's own but Buddie being canon is equally as important not because we need to see these guys together but because of what they represent. We have never had a slow burn same sex love story like this and the way it would change media forever if Buddie were to be canon cannot be understated.

[meraki-yao]

Ok I got four asks in my inbox about the new Nick interview and I'm actually mad. I'm actually livid and exasperated because I've been getting and answering similar asks over and over again, and yet people still come to me with the same statement and the same conviction EVEN AFTER I POINTED OUT EVERY FUCKING FACT THAT CONTRADICTS IT.

Do you really need a 19-year-old to teach you reading comprehension and media literacy?

Ok, fine.

Statement One: Nick doesn't appreciate RWRB, he's brushing it aside, which is why it wasn't mentioned in the New York Times

One: Editorials don't always portray the actual thoughts or agenda of the interviewee.

Unlike a video interview or a podcast interview where we can hear the whole conversation directly from Nick with his voice, and even if there are cuts and edits we can pick it up via visual or audio continuity, in a written editorial the only thing we can rely on is the writer's words, or in other words, the writer's paraphrase or quotation of what Nick said to him. This gives much bigger room for any changes or manipulation in content because we have nothing else to reference.

It is clear that in the past three editorials, the writer or the magazine itself has deliberately demeaning and devaluing RWRB. In NY Magazine, it was only mentioned in one line and degraded to "a queer take on a common straight trope" (see the choice of word "president's daughter"), with the implication being at its core, it's a straight story/ reliant on past straight stories to be interesting; Hunger Magazine calls it fujoshi-pleasing (fujoshi: Japanese slang, denoting how a straight woman who enjoys fictional gay content is "rotten", too ruined to be married, an insult to both the audience/fans and the movie itself ); and this time New York Magazine didn't even mention RWRB, when let's be honest, it's Nick's biggest breakout role.

"Once Is Chance, Twice is Coincidence, Third Time's A Pattern" this is deliberate. I can't say what the agenda is, my guess is some extent of latent homophobia, but it's clear that this is a fucking pattern. In fact, besides the hidden agenda of devaluing RWRB, these editorials show another hidden agenda, but that's something for a later day. PM me id you want to now, I won't discuss that one on my public platform yet.

Again, there is so much more room for twisting and hiding words in a written editorial. In all the video interviews Nick did, especially in the UK, when has he ever avoided a question about RWRB? When has he ever not shown gratitude towards the project?

Two: In all video evidence that can't be manipulated, that clearly shows Nick's own thoughts which not influenced by any other party, he has made it clear that he adores RWRB.

Why else would he sign books during the M&G London premiere, going as far as to stay behind after the event just to sign books? Same with the LA M&G premiere and TIOY premiere: those were promotions for other projects, he had a valid reason to refuse to sign the RWRB books and posters, but he didn't, always signing with a big smile on his face, even playfully signing on Taylor's face. He said it himself in his Instagram post, and I quote: "The love that Henry has received has been one of the most heartwarming things to watch. It's been difficult to not talk about him. So thank you for seeing him for all he is. He was a joy to bring to life." There's your proof, directly from the man himself.

Statement Two: Nick's not interested in doing a sequel, he said he's done playing princes and he's done playing romantic leads

One: "Done playing princes" doesn't mean literally done playing princes, it means he wants to try more roles and not be stuck with only being known as the "prince" guy. (even though he's literally a prince lol)

Plus, he said that after Robert, but then Henry came along and he was attracted to Henry as a character with his scared but loving heart. He doesn't just view Henry as a prince, he views Henry as a complex, delicate person who so happens to be a prince. Him saying he's done playing princes means in the future, he doesn't really want another royal on his filmography, but this doesn't mean he doesn't want to continue Henry's story. With the given context, namely asking him about future projects he wants to take up, "he's done playing princes" and "he doesn't want to play Henry anymore" are not mutually inclusive.

Two: "Done playing romantic leads" means he wants to try new things and take up new projects that aren't romance films.

This doesn't include the continuation of already established characters i.e. sequels, this just means if he were to take up brand new projects, he wants to try something else. Sequels are inherently different from new projects because again, sequels are based on already established characters.

Three: He said several times ON VIDEO that he'd be in for a sequel

In this one, when asked if he'd be up for a sequel, he said, and I quote "Look, I think with any opportunity of doing a sequel, I think, you know, the script has to be right. But obviously, it was so lovely to see how many people it touched and having that resonance is incredibly important to me, so, yeah. Of course."

In this one, when asked if they have had conservation on a potential sequel, he said, and again I quote: "Yeah, I mean definitely had conversations. I think we're all on the same page in the sense that, you know, the script needs to be right, and sort of all the different components need to be right because we made something that has such a positive effect and I think the last thing you'd wanna do is ruin that or take that in a way, so, you know, the conversations are definitely being had."

And there are more videos from red carpet interviews that I can't be bothered to find right now but he says more or less the same thing.

(look I even transcribed it)

Not only is he on board with a sequel, he's also being careful about it to make sure once they do get to making it, it's something good. He's on board, and he values it. And again, that's directly from him.

We have a phrase in Chinese: 斷章取義, meaning "breaking off a small part of an article and deriving the meaning from that single part" That's what so many of you, in particular, the people who come to my inbox with the sentiments of the above-mentioned statement are doing. Please, use critical thinking and look at the whole picture. Stop making judgments from the surface of one source.

Tagging my friends @alittlefrenchtree and @myteavsricochet because it looks like they've been getting the same things I got

[juana-the-iguana]

Sometimes I just think of fan interpretations of the cut-away between Zuko telling Katara that he knows where the man who killed her mother is and her packing things and getting ready to leave, and Aang and Katara having their last in-person interactions on screen (when they are lone together in EIP and when they are in a group in the finale) be fights to them kissing at the end.

People who support Kat-aang and do not like Zutara (and specifically comment in the Zutara tag about this) often say that Zuko had to convince Katara to go after her mother's killer. A lot of those people also assume that Aang must have apologized to Katara off-screen for the EIP kiss.

I have had a lot of people who share these interpretations accuse me and other people of not having "media literacy" because we can't clearly understand he must have apologized off screen. The irony is that is the exact opposite of the truth.

The cut away between Zuko telling Katara he knew how to find her mother's killer and her getting ready to leave signifies swiftness. Her response to this knowledge is so clear that showing her reaction would actually take away from conveying it. Things are moving fast, her mind was made up right away and she kept moving so the scene did too. And because she is moving so quickly, the audience can fill in the fact that any conversation she may have had with Zuko about this (How do you know this? When did you find out? etc.) did not play a role in her decision to find her mother's killer.

We know from both her past actions (being haunted by her mother's death, her righteous fury) and her future ones (trying to take Appa without talking to Aang or anyone else, telling Sokka that he didn't love their mother like she did, bloodbending) there is nothing Zuko could have said in a period of time that would have been a few hours, tops, that could have made her that angry or driven if those emotions were not already there. Zuko telling Katara he knows where her mother is isn't actually the completion of that narrative moment: her affirming that she needs to confront said killer when her actions are questions is. (I should note that part of the cut away could have been to leave room for a commercial break - I can't remember if that was the case when this aired on television - which would break up the viewing, but does not take away from the fact that Katara's shown response to this knowledge is to leave as quickly as possible).

Now compare that with the EIP kiss. We see the full moment play out, from Aang meeting Katara on the balcony to pressuring her to commit to him to kissing her when her eyes are close to her getting upset to her running away to him reflecting on what happened... Set up, action, response, reflection. This is an emotional scene, Katara is clearly distressed and this is one of the few times we actually see her mad at Aang. Their kiss at the end is another emotional moment, as it marks the culmination of Aang's journey as an Avatar. There needs to be a bridge between these intense scenes for them to make sense. Kat-aangers will argue that the EIP kiss is A and the ending kiss is C, so B must be the implied apology. But if A and C both matter a lot, and there needs to be a connection between the two things, then B should matter a lot too. C is the last scene in the show! This bridge should be shown, or at the very least referenced!

Unlike the TSR scenes, there is so much time between EIP and the finale that there is no clear flow between these moments. To the contrary, there are moments that break up this romantic sub-subplot, from them playing at the beach together again to them fighting again over how to deal with the Fire Lord and Aang running away (something worth noting is that Katara is the last person who is talking when he runs away - he literally left her - and she lets him go after a light touch on the shoulder from Zuko). Fight, friends, fight, love.

Since that B scene, the thing that bridges together Katara and Aang's relationship, is not there, then it either isn't important or did not happen.

Now let's get into media literacy. Media literacy isn't filling in gaps to make things make sense. Media literacy is understanding the messages that a piece of media is sending, intentionally or unintentionally. Even, in theory, if Zuko did have some conversation with Katara convincing her to seek out Yon Ra, it isn't shown and it isn't alluded to, so it doesn't matter. What we are supposed to take away from that episode is that Katara was ready to hunt down Yon Ra, she needed closure and got it, and that Zuko helped her. The same can be said for an apology after EIP. It doesn't matter if one happened off-screen, if it wasn't shown or referenced to, so it isn't important to the narrative. And if Aang making amends for hurting Katara isn't important to the narrative, but her kissing him after he fulfills his duty as the Avatar is, that is a huge statement about their relationship. Katara only rejected Aang because he wasn't an Avatar yet, so the only thing that matters in their relationship is him being the Avatar.

But the thing about media literacy is it isn't just about what is shown on the screen itself. It is about the bigger picture, what this is trying to convey as a message to the viewers.

So what does the gap in time in TSR tell us? Katara is this caring, nurturing friend who, in her brother's words, doesn't hate anyone except the people who took her mother. If she doesn't hate anyone except for the people who took her mother away from her, and she was immediately able to act on that hate when she got the chance to seek closure, then that hurt must have been closer to the surface than anyone thought. She acted fine, but her trauma was still there.

So what does this mean? She was able to address the anger conveyed in the scene in the episode and by the end of it, even though she was still conflicted about Yon Ra, she made peace with Zuko. Zuko whose mere presence caused her distress for weeks, not only because of his betrayal, but because he reminded her of her mother's death. Zuko who became her good friend and saved her life later on. Confronting her demons not only brought her peace, it improved her life tremendously.

So what is the "media literate" message from the lack of apology? The absence conveys is that the most important thing needed for Katara to like Aang was for him to fulfill his role as the Avatar, because that is the only thing that changed in between those two scenes. He didn't treat her any differently, he didn't apologize for hurting her, in fact its vague that he even acknowledged that what he did was wrong because it hurt her (the "I'm so stupid!" could easily mean he blew his chance, not that he cared). And Katara never went through the process of forgiving him or making peace with him wronging her. She never even acknowledged that he underwent a significant change as a person in the last episode either (Aang, who ran away from his duties at the start of the series, faces them head on in the last episode. YMMV on how good that was developed) - if it's not shown, it doesn't matter.

So what does this mean? It doesn't matter when Katara is hurt, conflict resolution doesn't matter, and apparently Aang's personality doesn't matter either. Their interpersonal relationship and emotional connection mean very little. Men do great things and women love them for it, how they act or are treated does not matter.

And before anyone comments "they're kids, it's not a big deal," this is a direct response to accusations about media literacy which, by definition, is a big deal - it's about the messages being made to viewers and its commentary on how society works and how things should be.

[night-market-if]

Helloo, while I agree with you that Milo is also a victim, I also think that the other anons are also justified in feeling that way about him. I'm really sorry if I'm wrong, but the way you reply to other people's thoughts, about things that you don't have the same opinion on, feels like you're telling them that they are wrong to feel that way.

Let's unpack this for a minute. Because I think this is a great opportunity.

I am not invalidating that anyone has an opinion. They are allowed to have an opinion. And, if they approached me like you just did, I would most likely respond to that opinion in a constructive way. But someone messaging me and just throwing out a random feeling they have that is negative, and then getting mad at me in return when I don't agree with them, is childish. I will not be apologizing for that because most of the people that are "angry" about something, come at me in a really negative context. And then when I state something differently (without attacking them even) they get irrationally upset. I mean, a prime example is me saying that Milo is also a victim. That there can be more than one victim. I then got a response saying I was the one flying off the handle. Following that was another response telling me that I am a hated author. That my game is terrible. That I am a bad person. I mean, think about that for a minute here. Does the response corelate with what I said? Does it warrant that? No.

People are always valid to have an opinion, but there are two things to say about it. Most of the time, the people coming at me, are internet trolls. Not actual readers. And I'm sorry, we were indoctrinated at a young age to "ignore the bullies" and I just don't think that is the right response. Because now we have a generation that ignored the bullies and they got way worse because no one had a social contract to call them out.

Two, the ones that are not trolls, are lacking a lot of media literacy. That is actually an extreme problem within our society. And, since I am the author, it is my job to offer what I was trying to say within my story. That may not align with someone's opinion. But me having my own opinion, does not warrant someone getting mad at me. I didn't get mad at them so why am I suddenly greeted with toxicity.

I get where you are coming from saying that people are allowed to have their own opinion. And I have stated over and over again that everyone is valid for it. I'm not even saying for someone to change their mind or go away. But, someone else's opinion does not invalidate my own. Just as my own does not invalidate theirs. And if someone feels like it does, and this is going to sound cruel, but it is not my responsibility to regulate that for them. That most likely stems from a personal standpoint. I am not responsible for someone being offended by what I have to say about my own story and my own fictional characters. You don't see me coming on here and crying out that someone on anon made me "feel bad". That's not a thing.

There is a difference between just saying something out loud and engaging in a conversation. Constructive criticism is where you offer a opinion, give why you are offering it, and then explain how it does or does not work for the narrative. Then, I can come back, ask questions, respond with what maybe I was intending, and figure out a better way to get what I was intending across.

Non constructive criticism is just coming to me as an anon, and saying they are angry and want to hurt someone. Or that they don't like something of my story without giving why.

To further some points. Milo is a triggering character. I knew this from the beginning. The things that he did is not for the faint of heart and speaks to betrayal. And a lot of people who have been in a situation where they feel betrayed, are going to respond negatively to that. But, that is on them. That is for them to work through and own. It is not the responsibility of my story to change because of that. And coming on to say that you hate a character and want to harm them. Or coming on to say that I'm a bad writer. Or even coming on to say that I'm hated on reddit (to which I say, isn't everyone?) is providing nothing to this community, world, or our author reader relationship. It is done solely with the intent to try and hurt someone because the reader themselves was hurt.

To end this, I am going to make this statement. Telling me it "feels" like I am telling someone they are wrong is based in a personal feeling towards a situation. It is not based in facts. It is not based in anything that I have said. And while everyone has a right to their opinion, just because I am an author and a content creator, does not mean I don't get to defend my story or my characters. If I was being racists, sexist, transphobic? All things to come at someone for. But because I wrote something that makes people angry and they don't want to continue going on a journey with the characters and would rather just block their minds to character growth? I can't do anything about that. If there is no conversation they want to engage in, if they simply want to come on and troll me, then they need to not be surprised when I treat them the same way they are treating me.

I hope this makes more sense and provides some understanding.

Zinnia

[sserajeans]

you are in love | 44. making the bed (written)

note: is my olivia rodrigo obsession showing..

timing was definitely on hanni’s side as the moment she stepped on minji’s porch, the taller walked out of her front door with a white jacket over her pajamas.

“are you kidding me minji…”

“what? completes the doc kim look i think.”

hanni shook her head laughing before taking a seat on the front steps of the house. minji shrugged and followed, leaving a small space in between the two.

“so what’s with the emergency meeting?”

hanni hummed, her gaze fixed on the empty road in front of them.

“how do you know you like someone?”

minji smirked hearing the line. whether she was proud hanni was getting somewhere, or was excited she’d get to talk about her ultimate rizzler skills, she liked where the conversation was going.

“ohhh~ we’re getting into this huh?”

“hey i’m asking a serious question here, didn’t you want to help?”

minji laughed at the shorter, shifting herself sideways to lean on the handrails of the steps and to face her friend.

“i don’t know.”

“…are you fucking serious?”

“hehe no i’m kidding! i figured out i was at least interested in wonyoung when we were partnered up for mrs. choi’s media literacy project. we had to spend a lot of time together and i don’t know… i got to know her better and i found myself wanting to spend more time with her.”

“is that it?”

“well… i knew it was something else when i started messing up my drills if she was watching…”

“WHAT?”

“HEAR ME OUT-“

“this is down-bad behavior, kim!”

“and you walking in the rain to cook breakfast isn’t?”

hanni’s smile slowly dropped into a more blank face, but her eyes were clear and full of thought. she stayed silent for a couple more seconds before minji started snapping her fingers in front of her face.

“bro. seriously.”

“sorry.”

“don’t worry. but anyways, yeah that’s how liking someone feels, other than the physical side effects like the butterflies and crap. i doubt you’ve never felt it before… you probably just didn’t identify it as such.”

hanni nodded slightly, still choosing to bask in the combination of the silence and the cool wind, a reminder of the christmas season that was beginning. the village, or well, the town in general was a sight during the holidays. lights and decor everywhere, snow sculptures on the frontyards, a couple of christmas themed food trucks at the park. during the season of late november to early january was always the happiest and prettiest the small city was.

“an idiot can figure it out faster than you, you know?”

the vietnamese-australian flinched at the sudden voice, having completely forgotten she was at her best friend’s house after sitting on the porch, completely lost in thought.

“what?”

minji let out a deep sigh (something she’s been doing ever since she decided to get herself invested in hanni and y/n’s business) and shook her head.

“the pieces are all laid out in front of you. what’s taking you so long to put them together?”

hanni looked down at her clasped hands, fiddling with her fingers and cracking every joint with deep inhales and exhales every time.

“i’m scared, okay?”

“i mean i got it the first time, you know. you weren’t very sure about everything. but like now you literally….“

hanni took another deep inhale and exhale before deciding to continue.

“y/n’s the closest friend i have. the person i value the most. one i hold at utmost respect and regard. i could probably even say i care more for her than my own damn family.”

“well okay. wasn’t expecting a speech! but if that’s the case then why aren’t you-“

“that means i have everything to lose if i mess things up.”

the shorter girl finally looked in minji's direction, her eyes, though not watery, were dark and heavy almost. her expression a mix: frustration, tiredness, disappointment.

“pham, this is y/n we’re talking about.”

“i’m very well aware.”

“so?”

“every direction i look… if i dug into this whole emotions thing deeper, every direction i look would end up with me losing her. if i figure out i don’t like her and tell her straight up, i lose her. if i figure out i do and i mess things up because i have no idea what the hell i’m doing, i lose her.”

minji chuckled, very softly so as to not anger her friend in front of her. 

“those are all uncertain endings, pham. how are you so sure of it when you haven’t crossed the bridge yet?”

she gave no response.

“the one thing you think you’re avoiding is bound to happen for sure with the way you’re going about this.”

still silent.

“this isn’t just any friend, right? you said it yourself. this is lee y/n we’re talking about, right?”

hanni nodded, following along.

“is she not worth the risk? is your friendship with her not worth exploring feelings you’re so scared to look into?”

hanni stared silently at her hands in front of her, slow and heavy breathing the only sound that could be heard from her.

“you know the answer already pham. you know what to say. i think i do too. and if anything encourages you to actually say it, it’s that you’re starting to lose her already.”

hanni let the words sink in, closing her eyes and letting out another sigh. though her words were stern, minji’s tone never lost its light and comfort. as much as she wanted things to be better for y/n, she’s hanni’s best friend too.

the two exchanged a couple more words on the subject, hanni not forgetting to thank minji and whoever philosopher possessed her that night. things are a lot clearer now. 

she made the bed, now she must lay in it.

masterlist. next.

taglist: @yyeonmis @lostamoeba @jisooftme @yoontoonwhs @awkwardtoafault @lcv3lies @limbforalimb @kaypanaq @manooffline @kimsgayness @justme-idle @mightymyo @sewiouslyz @txtbrainrot @li0ilthecxnt @captivq @paranoxic @sofakingwoso @pandafuriosa60 @haerinkisser @lesleepyyy @haechansbbg @rosiehrs @jiwoneiric @blue4hour @bzeus28

[saras-almanac]

I’ve seen this idea or comment multiple times: That Tommy has no character. Which is either on its own or in connection to not understanding why anyone likes BuckTommy apart from two hot guys together. I’m not going to get into the second one here, but the idea that Tommy has no character is just false and either a completely failure in media literacy at best or a blatant ignoring of canon at worst.  

Now do we know everything there is to know about Tommy? Absolutely not, and I’m not trying to claim otherwise. But I would also point that question to any of the other characters on screen: Do we know everything about Bobby, about Chimney, about Buck, etc? I would say No, we don’t. I think the one we have the most information about is Buck just purely because the framing of the first season being about his growth and also because Buck is just such an open book about pretty much everything in his life and feelings. But even still, I don’t think we know everything about him. And that’s okay!

But back to Tommy—we actually do know a fair bit about him and have seen him grow and develop a bit. When we met him in “Hen Begins” in season 2, he’s not outright rude but he is very much, “not gonna put a target on my back here” because of Captain Gerrard (and/or perhaps because he had already realized his sexuality or was beginning to uncover it). When we meet him for the first time chronologically in “Chimney Begins,” he’s more rude and pretty dismissive of Chimney’s offer of friendship, even actively avoiding him. Again, this could be because of Gerrard, the environment here where it didn’t feel like anyone was really friends per say, or it could be down to what Eli tells Chimney: That these guys are not going to let just anyone in until they prove themselves, especially not a probie.”

However, the thing that shows the most about who Tommy is and his growth is his time in “Bobby Begins,” where it’s clear he’s got a really solid friendship with Hen and Chimney, making bets about the new Captain, going out for drinks, having those looks in the engine as Bobby gets them lost. It’s clear in the narrative in season 2 that Tommy, for all of being in only 3 episodes, has grown and changed a lot. (Which is why I find it so ironic that so many people criticizing this “retcon” of Tommy’s character always forget to mention Bobby Begins where it’s clear that Tommy’s friends with Hen and Chimney. I get that some fans want a full apology, but to me it reads like that probably already happened, or at least a conversation, a clearing of the air. Not everything needs to be directly spoonfed to you.)

Tommy coming back in season 7 has shown a bit more growth, as well as showing us sides of him we haven’t seen before. His patience and kindness with Buck and the newness of their relationship and Buck’s sexuality. His humor being dry and a little dark—“We’re all gonna die anyways” or even him suggesting to give Buck flying lessons because his fees are competitive. He’s open with his vulnerabilities when he feels safe enough to do so—immediately sharing his own jealousy at the 118 to Buck when Buck’s talking about his jealousy, telling Buck he cut the date short because he didn’t want to pressure Buck. To me, it shows maybe more growth or just another side of him because we only saw him in connection to his friends, where as Buck is a love interest.

Is this a lot of information? I guess it depends on what you want. Do we know his favorite color or his interests or how he romantically woos people or what he likes to do on his days off? I would argue that we do know a decent amount of that—he likes monster trucks, I assume watching romantic comedies as his favorite movie is canonically Love, Actually, he enjoys craft beers, knows and participates in Muay Thai, has a car lift in his garage so must know something about cars or mechanic stuff, is a pilot and firefighter, enjoys flying for fun on his days off, and has a trivia / karaoke thing (I’m still not sure if it’s a karaoke trivia or trivia at a karaoke bar, the wording confused me but whatever). Honestly, that’s more information than we have about any love interest Buck or Eddie have ever had when they were just starting a relationship.  

And that’s also a huge point that I think is being missed by these types of arguments: Buck and Tommy are just starting a relationship, as in they are just getting to really know each other. So there is more to learn and uncover about each other. And honestly, we the audience are probably not going to be privy to a lot of that because it’s an ensemble show. So instead, they’ll likely show us that they’re moving forward and getting more comfortable with each other when they do interact—the kiss in the hospital reads to me as two people who’ve been spending time together and getting to know each other a lot more where they feel more comfortable. Hell, even just Buck’s change from his hesitance in episode 5 to his confidence in episode 6 is supposed to show his growth in accepting his sexuality and comfort being with Tommy.

The whole point is that the show sketches the outlines and maybe fills in some spots, but they sort of expect you to be able to still see the bigger picture of things. We know the outline of Tommy and are waiting to see it all filled in. That’s why he’s such an intriguing character and love interest for Buck—because he’s developed enough as his own person but there’s still enough blank spaces to explore with. He is the most developed love interest that Buck’s ever had, but he’s still just become Buck’s boyfriend so there’s still more to learn about him. That’s what dating and being in relationship with someone is: learning about them, their likes and dislikes, and what they are like in relationships, seeing if you’re compatible. So while there is already a massive head start in characterization than anyone else (except maybe Abby but even she wasn’t a fabulously written character and was honestly a terrible protagonist), there’s still more to learn about him and that’s a good thing. And while I can’t speak for everyone who ships BuckTommy, I can say that for me, it’s so fun to extrapolate on the bare bones of character and see how they develop in canon.

Tl;dr: Tommy does have a character. It's just a lot of showing and not telling and some people can't handle that.

[andreal831]

TVDU and Morality

I've recently said, a few times, that the morality debates in the TVDU fandom are boring, and some people have gotten offended so I thought I would explain.

First, this idea of hypocrisy in the fandom is laughable. The amount of times I've been called a hypocrite because I've called out problematic behavior, while also liking a problematic character. The gut reaction for so many in this fandom when their favorite character is being criticized is to shift the conversation onto a completely different character and even to the commenter themselves. This is boring and even downright offensive at times. Every single character has been a hypocrite at times. It doesn't inherently mean someone is bad. It means they are "human" and life can make hypocrites of all of us at times. Also, just to clarify, I am not a hypocrite for merely liking a problematic character. I promise I have never nor will I ever commit the acts that I criticize these characters for, which would be the definition of hypocrisy. I have also never told anyone they can't like certain characters.

We have these complicated characters and none of them are "good" people because, guess what, people aren't just one or the other. Everyone has the capability to be "bad" or "good." Trying to put a character firmly on one side is a generalization and ignores so much nuance. Some of their actions may be completely bad or completely good, but typically even that is an oversimplification. Are there characters that seem to do more bad things or more good things, definitely. Are their some characters that cross certain, unnecessary lines, absolutely. Are we allowed to criticize and question every character, please do! That's literally what media literacy is about.

Every single one of these characters has had completely selfish moments (except maybe Bonnie) and every single one of them has had moments of selflessness. These acts don't inherently demonize a character or automatically redeem one. This is what it means to have interesting, complex debates about characters. Looking at the characters as a whole and having open discussions of what it means. We can still love the character and acknowledge the good and the bad of the character.

Another annoying point that is always brought up is, "they weren't born evil, they were made that way." Yes, we get it. No one is born evil. Whether it is mental illness or life events that shape a person, they still have to take responsibility for their own actions. Obviously certain mental illnesses didn't have treatments for a very long time, but that doesn't just allow people to be serial killers.

Every single character has dealt with trauma, and how you react says a lot about a person's character. Separating out characters to say well "x" didn't deserve it but when they became "x" they did. No one deserves good or bad things. I know I say it all the time, they deserved better, but when I do, I'm being facetious. I'm saying I wanted better for that character, better writing, better storylines, a better ending, etc. That phrasing implies that some people deserve better lives than others and I just morally don't agree. No one deserves trauma or abuse. That logic only furthers the cycle of abuse. Now, that being said, people are responsible for their own actions. Spend centuries creating enemies, and guess what, a lot of bad things are going to happen to you.

But the real debates I enjoy having, and have been fortunate to find so many people to engage in these debates, is the morality of the decisions in context of the characters. I like to apply similar logic from the Trolley Problem. If you don't know what that is, enjoy this tik tok I made of Cami teaching the Mikaelsons.

Essentially, many of the characters weight their options, like Jeremy killing Kol and thousands of vampires with it in order to find the cure. Kol is a thousand year old serial killer and is attempting to kill Jeremy, but again Kol is attempting to stop Silas from rising. Neither side is inherently right or wrong. There is a debate to be had.

In the majority of situations in the show there is a debate to be had. The only exceptions being any SA. I will never debate the morality of these actions. Even for immoral characters, there is a line to be drawn.

These debates get even more complex in TO because we move into a world where nearly every character has done absolutely horrendous things. It's okay to sit down and say, "This thing that x did was awful, but I can see their reasoning." It is not justifying their actions, but allowing the characters to be the complex morally corrupt characters that they all are.

[micro-meltdown]

Personal rant about shipping in Mouthwashing

Now, I'm a person who enjoys all kinds of ships - the wholesome, the hatefucking, the healthy, the nuclear - but shipping in a game like Mouthwashing isn't appropriate, given the context and thematic.

However, I know fandom is going to ship regardless, and I get it. I'm not saying "stop shipping this or that," because people are gonna do their thing either way. I just think it should be handled more... thoughtfully, more mindful.

A popular ship is Curly/Anya;

For one, I get it. Anya trusted Curly, and the only times we see her be herself first and nurse second is with Curly. But that's a ship that makes me really sad and upset. It can be comforting, but people. People. Curly was so fucking useless in the face of the assault. He was concerned about him first. He failed Anya in such a fundamental way, and that Can Not be ignored. Again, I get it. But don't ignore the fact that it was Curly who turned a blind eye to Jimmy's red flags and brought him on the ship. Don't ignore the fact that Curly knew who assaulted her without her saying it because Jimmy had been a problem for a long time. Don't ignore the fact that Curly was hesitant to do Anything about Jimmy.

Another ship that I've seen that I want to get deeper in is Curly/Jimmy.

I don't even know where to begin.

"Toxic Yaoi" is so incredibly tone deaf and sickening. Using such an un-serious thing to excuse fetishizing a crippling disabled guy who can't physically do Anything against a mentally insane rapist is... I don't think there's enough verses in the Bible to describe how bad this is.

Curly enabled and condoned Jimmy, but he was a victim. Not innocent, but fuck man. In every conversation between them, Jimmy acts like a brat and gaslights him. He blames Curly with every other word and guilts him into enabling him further.

Fetishizing them is sick and wrong, and some people lack media literacy. Tho I'd be a hypocrite if I said I didn't find them fascinating.

Don't get me wrong. This is not me agreeing with "those" kinds of people. But I really enjoy analyzing and dissecting their dynamic because it's the forefront of the game. I like reading people's rants about their codependency and how they are two sides of a coin. I like rambling at my bestie and theorize with them how Curly and Jimmy got to this point, how their friendship and relationship dynamic must have been like before the events of the game.

I haven't seen such an irredeemable character who was so well written in a long while, and I admire the game devs for their ability to create such a well-rounded Asshole. I adore the writing of this game and how good it is in characterizing the crew. And I can't help but adore the fucked up dynamics that feel so... Human.

In conclusion;

Anya/Curly - it's upsetting, but I get it, it can be a comfort ship, tho please keep in mind how Anya was failed

Curly/Jimmy - using it to satisfy a kink or fetish? BAD. dissecting their fucked up dynamic and analyzing their codependency? Hell yeah, dissect with me

[vote-democrat-president-congress]

Just One Question for Trump and Vance: What Is Wrong With You People?

By Thomas L. Friedman, NYTimes Opinion Columnist, July 25, 2024

Ever since President Biden’s Sunday announcement that he would not seek re-election, clearly because of age, I keep thinking about Donald Trump’s and JD Vance’s contemptuous reactions to one of the most difficult personal decisions a president has ever made, and what it says about their character.

“The Democrats pick a candidate, Crooked Joe Biden, he loses the Debate badly, then panics, and makes mistake after mistake, is told he can’t win, and decide they will pick another candidate, probably Harris,” Trump wrote on social media on Monday. He later added: “It’s not over! Tomorrow Crooked Joe Biden’s going to wake up and forget that he dropped out of the race today!”

Not to be out-lowballed by his boss, Vance wrote on social media: “Joe Biden has been the worst President in my lifetime and Kamala Harris has been right there with him every step of the way.”

All they had to say was: “President Biden served his country for five decades and at this moment we thank him for that service. Tomorrow our campaign begins against his replacement. Bring her on.”

I can guarantee you that is what Biden would have said if the shoe were on the other foot. Because he is not a bully.

Biden’s good character shone through on Wednesday night in his dignified, country-before-self address at the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office. As I watched and listened, I remembered a lunch I had with him in May 2022 in the dining room next to the Oval Office. After we were done and he was walking me past the Resolute Desk, I mentioned to him a reading-literacy project that my wife, Ann, was working on that she thought might interest Dr. Jill Biden. The president got totally excited about the idea and said, “Let’s call your wife. What’s her number?”

He then took a cellphone out of his pocket, dialed it and handed it to me.

“Honey,” I said, “I’ve got someone here who wants to talk to you."

“I’m in a meeting,” Ann replied. “I can’t talk now.”

“No, no, you’re going to want to talk to him. It’s the president.”

Then I handed the phone back to Biden, who engaged her in a conversation about reading and how much his wife was passionate about that subject, too.

Look, I’ve been to the rodeo — this is what smart politicians do. But there is one difference with Joe Biden that I observed over the years: It’s how much he authentically enjoyed it, how much he enjoyed talking to people outside his bubble and giving them a chance to say, “I got to meet the president. He talked to me!”

That sort of kindness came naturally to him. It brought him joy. And I have no doubt that Trump’s and Vance’s venomous first reactions to Biden’s resignation came naturally to them too.

I’m sure it brought them joy. But it sure left me wondering: What is wrong with you people?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/22/opinion/trump-vance-biden-speech.html

[thefrogwhobarks]

Damn, black Rock Shooter ova is such good yuri... I'm so glad I watched it 14 years later, when I finally picked up some media literacy. a lot of the story happens in the subtext: In their tones... the camera direction... i mean... watch this

Through clever blocking and camera work, we're now looking at this adorable girl through the lens of another girl who is very much in love with her. She looks so small because of the height difference on top of the girl having a hunched down position. And this kind of attention to detail and amazing storyboarding can be seen in several parts of the film. It's not the kind of flashy spectacle clip that would go viral on twitter or youtube, but it's beautiful animation that elevates the text. I've got all that to say for a 6 second clip. Imagine what I have to say for the remaining 900-ish seconds.

This is the kind of movie that makes me wish I had a film degree.

The narrative structure follows the structure of the song it was based on. That's some... *looks up the fancy word* intertextuality right there.

The conversations are so incredibly real too... to the point where I would forget that this is anime. The way they talked is so... grounded... in a way that makes me realise how characters in so many other media talk in larger-than-life way that I've subconsciously just learned to think nothing of. I'm not saying the quirky anime-talk is sucks, but to make characters talk so naturally is very skilful and artful of the creators.

anyways, that's all (for now?)!! I hope my rambling has gotten you interested in BRS ova, or if you've watched it and have felt a similar love for this film, I hope I have made you feel seen!!

I found my copy from open archive!! i think the studio themselves uploaded it ? From what i heard, the ova was disseminated for free during its release as well, so that kinda tracks!!

it's worth watching twice but if you're not up to it...

just keep in mind that the interspersed wasteland fight scenes are happening in the future

[bfpnola]

IMAGE DESCRIPTION UNDER THE CUT.

A new task force! Admittedly when we first discussed this, we were a bit upset, knowing how passionate we were to start up a new media literacy workshop for the summer. But upon further thought, honest conversations like these need to happen in every organization, ones where we admit our current capabilities and limitations so as to best protect everyone's time and energy while simultaneously continuing to fulfill our mission statement.

Further, we've already noticed a weight lifted amongst our volunteers! We utilized yesterday's Sunday meeting time to discuss BFP's history thus far, what it means to be a 501(c)(3), the nonprofit industrial complex, why we utilize a horizontal organizational structure, and then the best part? Our core beliefs! We only got to the first three (the right to organize, intersectionality, and educational equity), but the conversation was SO productive! Youth were given the chance to openly ask and answer questions with fellow activists around the globe. Even with just those three topics, we were able to cover: organizing tips, COINTELPRO, the gamification of politics, elite capture, epistemic injustice, the infantilisation faced by those at the intersection of transness and disability, equity vs equality, and accommodations in school! So much!

Next Sunday we'll continue this educational dialogue, so feel free to join us on Zoom (link available through our Discord server as well as college and career mentorship, peer support, mutual aid, private channels for marginalized communities, and the space to openly ask any social justice related questions without shame)! And once we eventually cover all of our core beliefs, BFP will officially begin designing a specific mission and timeline for this new task force, ensuring that all of us fully understand what our nonprofit stands for before making concrete decisions. Genuinely so excited to see how our little family transforms as we have already learned so much from one another in just one meeting since making this decision :)

[P.S. We do have bots in our server that can translate text messages for our non-English speakers, bots for those with dissociative identity disorder so their alters/fronts appear as different accounts with different names, bots for our nightly studying and music sessions, nonverbal emotes, and more!]

[ID: All 10 slides are a very pale mint green with a white circle made of diagonal stripes inside of a white tilted square made of thick dashes as the background. In the foreground is a white rectangle with curved edges meant to mimic an iPhone's "Notes" app with the bold, italics, underline, strikethrough, numbered list, and bullet point icons pictured at the bottom of the rectangle. Which icon is being highlighted shifts with each slide depending on the formatting of the text. At the top left corner, it reads "Notes" with a small arrow pointing left. And at the top right corner, "@bfpnola."

The slides read as follows:

"Honoring our dedication to transparency, this is BFP's current state of affairs:

Developing proper onboarding

Activity & Retention Task Force

Nonprofit Industrial Complex"

BFP was originally founded in 2016 by a team of 12 year olds in New Orleans, Louisiana. As the organization grew internationally and the work became more complex, we began to lose volunteers almost immediately as they joined. Why? We didn't have a proper onboarding process, aka a clear and efficient orientation and trainings for newcomers! As kids ourselves, none of us had entered the workforce yet so we weren't even aware that "onboarding" existed. Because of this, new hires would either become overwhelmingly confused and leave or be thrown straight into the work and burn out. As young adults now, we aim to create an efficient onboarding process and share our discoveries with other youth organizations in the future!

Due to that confusion, BFP has become incapable of hosting any more large-scale workshops, as we have failed to thoroughly prepare our newer volunteers with clarity. We owe it to those directly impacted by coercive hierarchies to do better. So, what's next for us? On 03/26, we decided to create a cross-committee Activity & Retention Task Force. This team will be dedicated to expanding our audience, maintaining the family that we've curated thus far, analyzing the success and failures of our work, and most importantly... Emphasizing BFP as a safe space for marginalized youth globally. With such a diverse team, we are always learning from one another and we'd like to continue sharing that opportunity with as many people as possible. But there's something we'd like to keep in mind!

The Nonprofit Industrial Complex. We are aware as a 501(c)(3) that organizations' radical missions can often become co-opted either by their donors or distracted by their own maintenance. If BFP ever becomes too focused on its own survival rather than that of the oppressed… We will take that needed step back. Community should always be our focus. This task force is meant to broaden youth’s access to political education and peer support, not necessarily propel BFP within the nonprofit industry. The people must come first and foremost.

More concrete steps will be released soon to hold ourselves accountable. We look forward to improving this organization so that BFP can put out the work that y'all deserve and that we know we are capable of producing. Thank you for reading! Check the caption for more information."

End ID.]

[findablog]

I can’t believe I’m about to post in a main tag because some people cannot fathom that someone has a different interpretation of an actor’s action than them.

I have NEVER stated that bi Mike was incorrect. And I never will. I have NEVER stated I prefer gay Mike. And I never will. I am an RPer I write with all interpretations of Mike and all interpretations of Mike are valid.

However their are many interpretations of Mike. I am allowed to disagree with a public opinion posted in the public Will Byers tag (cause yes that is where I found a post about Mike’s reaction to El in s1 a scene in which Will is one, not present for, and two, not even thought of in).

I disagreed with a personal opinion with my own, and now through shade on their blog its will80sbyers it is being insinuated that I am not only a “Gay Mike truther” but crazy, and rude.

I said it was my opinion that I disagreed with theirs. I explained why. Media Literacy is important but it allows for different interpretations for example I took classes in media literacy, and convinced one of my professors that Terminator 2 was a Road Trip movie. Because that is how media literacy works, that is the basis of most English papers in high school and college, your interpretation of a work. And it may be different than someone else’s. You can disagree, and I did.

I stated what I thought. I was immediately laughed at by them, and then told I was wrong. Which is a trend I see on their blog, no matter how respectful you are of their opinions on bi or gay Mike if you don’t agree they will get defensive and tell you you are wrong.

I’m not going to apologize because again I never invalidated bi Mike, I just said my interpretation of the pretty scene is different, and it is. You give a girl a makeover everyone’s mouths drop it is trope at this point. I will say I am sorry I ever stated my opinion on a public post in a tag about Will Byers when the post had nothing to do with Will Byers, disagreeing with another opinion as is a normal thing to do.

If you cannot take someone may disagree with your interpretation of a scene, NOT OF IF MIKE IS BI OR NOT, a scene, then your problem is not with me, but with yourself and how highly you hold yourself. You are a big influence in the fandom and being so vehemently shady and mean to people who disagree with you is a bad look.

I did block you because despite trying to end the conversation with an agree to disagree you would not let it rest. I will miss your posts because I genuinely enjoy your analysis even if I don’t always agree with it. But your behavior towards me and frankly others who also disagree with some of your opinions is not something that I want in my life. I wish you the absolute best.

If any of you have a problem with what I said. my askbox is open, please take it up with me and be direct instead of being shady and underhanded.