#parasocial relationship: an imagined relationship with someone a person does not actually know. they should learn this definition

[teamhawkeye]

Okay so they still won’t leave us alone. They’re still in Ted’s tag and just won’t go elsewhere now trying to make something of the mass unfollow Ted did for whatever reason he wanted.

But they’re still just harassing g the tag.

the best solution i can give you is to utilize the Block and Report buttons.

because they don't actually care about truth or justice or anything they try and masquerade this crusade as - they just want to ruin a man's life, plain and simple. there's absolutely no other way to spin it at this point.

it's been proven that the misconduct they've been so hellbent on crucifying him for is FALSE/COMPLETELY MADE UP and yet i still got to see with my own eyes "i don't care if that girl was lying, he still should go down for it". go down for a complete lie??? you're going to keep insisting he's a groomer when you have just admitted yourself that it's not true????

they also at one point tried to say this was "to protect the minor" in question. and yet doxxed her, slutshamed her, continue to keep calling her names and harassing her and her family. this is a child - one saying and doing stupid shit online that has done damage, yes, but a legitimate child. and these are grown ass adults trying to destroy her while flying the banner of "we must protect-" literally shut the fuck up, no one believes you. especially when they're still stalking and harassing said minor even as of just a few hours ago - a literal child, remind you.

they're deranged and have no lives - no one else would devote this much time to trying to destroy a B-list actor for no other reasons than petty revenge. and because he didn't give them the attention they wanted, because they formed a parasocial relationship with social media accounts they don't even know that he runs himself or alone.

no other explanation other than being chronically online and unhinged.

and frankly, it's pathetic.

don't give them your time, don't give them your attention. block, report, move on. you can hope they'll lose interest with time, but probably not soon, so just spare your peace of mind and ignore them

[opinated-user]

This might be an unpopular opinion but I feel like Mikayla gets an unfair short end of the stick by LO critics, unless she did something terrible I was unaware of.

I just got out of a relationship with someone very similar to Lily, at least based on what we know her to be. My ex was incredibly manipulative and let me tell you, when a partner is *really* good at doing that shit it's a psychological nightmare. The 2+2=5 shit they were talking about in 1984 is no lie. You will genuinely start to believe things you've known all your life to be false and it's fucking scary to finally be free of those shackles.

So when I see people deride MO for being a bad person because "she defends her wife's actions and backs up her cyberbullying!" I... take pause. Because one part of me knows you can't get away with being mean to others JUST because of manipulation and she does have to take some accountability, but the other part of me knows that she probably wouldn't be like that without Lily's overruling fist.

idk this is probably just me being parasocial but y'know. A patterns a pattern no matter how small

indeed, i absolutely agreed with you, anon.

we can talk about MO's questionable actions (her stealing fanart for a video and still profiting off of it even after the artist said they didn't want their art there, participating along with ginger on the harassing of Lizzy and also strip herself for youtube next to LO), but we should never forget that for every abusive action we have seen LO display during streams, where she knew she was being watched, there's a lot more behind the scenes that we can't even imagine.

we don't know what a MO without LO is like. we don't know if that MO'd have agreed with the actions of the current MO because none of us ever met that version of her. a person is not themselves when they're on a relationship like that.

t's worth repeating: leaving an abusive partner can be one of the most difficult things a person can go through. it can take multiple attempts before it's actually effective and MO is still on the phase of just excusing LO whenever possible, there's no intention of leaving. we need to take that into account and realize that for whatever thing worth calling out MO has done, LO still has done so much worse, to her and to others. unlike with MO, we do know for sure that LO is that bad completely out of her own volition without any influence. she was always toxic, always bigoted, always entitled and abusive, regardless of who she's with.

[robin-josephette-biden]

A Statement Through Horror: BDG and YouTube

In his video announcing his departure from Polygon Bryan David Gilbert [BDG] stated, “I want to make things that one day people will make a show like unraveled about.” [Paraphrasing here]. Since that announcement he has made some of the most interesting and engaging comedy videos on the platform. On Bryan’s channel, there is a section called “bdg’s scaries” that contains three videos. The first how to make jorts was released April 27, 2019 and will not be part of this analysis, as we are focused on the other two videos. These two videos are Earn $20K EVERY MONTH by being your own boss which was released on October 25, 2020 (two months before his final Unraveled video and departure from Polygon) and Teaching Jake about the Camcorder, Jan '97 which was posted March 3, 2021. If you have not seen these videos yet you should stop reading immediately and go watch them both (honestly everything on his channel is amazing, especially the surprisingly compelling and personal Dances Moving! series) before continuing to read this as I will be spoiling both of them. The position of YouTube celebrity has been the source of a good bit of commentary as short form online media has become more and more central in our culture. Bryan has created two videos that I feel do an excellent job of exploring the relationship between youtuber and audience. I should also point out that this is merely my interpretation of these videos and is in no way BDG’s intended message. I’ll start by going over the first video. Earn $20K EVERY MONTH by being your own boss opens with BDG outside an apartment building, standing in front of a black car. BDG points up at one of the windows and says, “Three years ago I was living in that apartment right there. Third floor, leaky windows, cockroaches, the worst.” I do not know if the real life BDG actually lived in that building, but the 3 years timeframe does line up neatly with his beginning to work at Polygon. BDG continues to bad mouth his old apartment and mentions how he has turned it all around stating, “But just last week I paid off my very first Subaru Impreza. And I own my own house in Nebraska.” This radical change in life-style he credits to, “. . . [working] from home, [making] my own hours, and [being] my own boss. And you can do it too.” I think that it is interesting that BDG’s career up to that point mirrors that of his character, going from newly graduated content creator making small videos in his apartment to one of the most popular creators on Polygon. And all that being accomplished through work that many (rightly or wrongly) would not see as fitting into the mold of the traditional 9 to 5. The idea of making millions working from home, at your own pace, and with no boss is intrinsically tied to the mystique of the YouTube celebrity. Moving into BDG’s office he explains that he makes $20k a month working on spreadsheets. A massive spreadsheet appears behind him that is dated, 01.12.88 (nothing of note happened on January 12, 1988 and the only thing that happened on December 1, 1988 is a large cyclone that struck Bangladesh, January 12, 1888 is the day of the Schoolhouse Blizzard which struck the midwestern US and killed 235 people (remember this for later)) and is filled, seemingly randomly, with garbled nonsense symbols. Many of the cells are the same as other cells and there are empty cells scattered haphazardly throughout the spreadsheet. BDG explains that he got this strategy from Dorian Smiles. In exchange for working on these spreadsheets BDG receives $10k - $20k a month (an amount that lines up pretty damn well with the amount he should be getting through his Patreon page currently, I don’t know if this was true when the video was made though) from Dorian. Wanting to know where the money is coming from BDG asks his bank and they explain that he is wiring the money to himself from another account he has. He grows confused as to the nature of this work and the disproportionately large amount of money it brings in, explicitly mentioning his confusion as to how the money is coming from someone with, “. . . my name and my voice.” and sets about to find and confront Dorian Smiles. BDG sets off for Center Nebraska, which is close to where Dorian lives (a small town in the northeast corner of Nebraska). He states that Dorian’s address hasn’t existed since 1888 (that’s a familiar year isn’t it?) when it was supposedly condemned during an enormous blizzard and is, “. . . just woods now.” The video then transitions to BDG walking through dark woods while his narration talking up the Dorian Smiles program continues becoming increasingly broken. He comes across a figure sitting in the woods that is convulsing strangely, when he calls out to it the figure turns and is him (heretofore named Dorian). Dorian slowly puts his hands over his nose and mouth while staring at BDG at which point the narration cuts out. BDG copies Dorian and when Dorian removes his hands in a flourish, BDG does the same to reveal that he no longer has a mouth. The video quickly cuts back to BDG in his office talking about the program, he asks the viewer, “Why don’t you join me?” and then sits back and smiles while that line repeats without him moving his mouth. The most pressing mystery is who Dorian Smiles is. I think the most likely answer (and one I know I am not the progenitor of) is that Dorian is a reference to The Picture of Dorian Grey by Oscar Wilde, the story of a young man that has a portrait that ages and takes on the ravages of the debauched life its subject lives while Dorian himself does not. BDG would therefore be the unwitting recipient of that blessing, reaping massive rewards while his double, Dorian, lives in poverty and solitude. I like this explanation for Dorian, but I find it to be far more mechanical than thematic. On a metatextual level you could read that Dorian represents the character of BDG. The person that is in all of BDG’s videos, and the one with whom so much of the audience forms a parasocial relationship. In this lens the parallels with BDG’s own life make more sense. By this point in BDG’s career it is not difficult to imagine him feeling stifled creatively at work (I feel comfortable saying this given how soon after this video came out that he departed Polygon). His character had grown too large, potentially becoming alien to him, no longer reflecting the art he wanted to make and so he made a video about a distorted version of himself stealing his voice. In this way the video becomes a statement on his artistic integrity and his desire to test new boundaries and go in different directions. In hindsight, with the knowledge of his departure and then success after leaving Polygon, the video becomes almost heartwarming (if it weren’t terrifying) in the same way that a before and after picture of someone improving themselves can be. We will return to the Dorian Smiles system, but now we must move to the second video, Teaching Jake about the Camcorder, Jan '97. I’ll save you the blow by blow breakdown and aim for a quick summary instead. This video is a simple stationary shot of an old CRT tv. A VHS tape is inserted and a video of a man teaching his, evidently young, son how to use a camcorder plays. It is relatively wholesome and corny in that way that all home movies are and when it ends the tape rewinds and the segment plays again, this time with a few deviations. Over replays the father becomes aware of what is happening and begins trying to reason with Jake through the camcorder begging him to stop watching the tape and move on. The father is menaced by a large shadowy figure that does not speak or move when confronted. Eventually the father resorts to simply taking the camera and recording his own screams of pain. On the final rewind the father simply says, “Attaboy.” before calmly walking out the room and into the dark hallway, a doorway opens at the other end, filled with orange light, and the father walks through and down stairs. The final shot of the video is of the television, showing the hallway, as orange light begins to flicker in the background of the left side of the TV. The sound of the father descending the stairs transitions from the TV to diegetic and a shadow appears briefly in the light. On one level the video is clearly a statement about loss and about trauma. Jake is losing himself by watching these videos on repeat, trying in vain to relive a happier time. In that desperate desire to regain what was lost he is distorting it, making it into something it isn’t, hurting it. At the beginning the father says, “Never ever press the rewind button, otherwise you might record over a precious memory. We always keep the recording going forward . . .“ I think there is an additional, and more personal for BDG, reading however. The father is the modern character of BDG, and we, the audience, are Jake. He is pleading with us to leave the past behind and move on. This was only his 3rd video that he posted after leaving Polygon. It is a plea from him to leave the old character behind and stop trying to make one into the other. To stop obsessively comparing the new videos to the old. To let the future be the future and let the past be the past. He is telling us that his new work will not be like the old, that he has progressed past that and that now his viewers need to as well. The detachment and confusion of Earn $20K EVERY MONTH by being your own boss has transformed into a desire to move forward. But he needed to ensure that his audience was ready to come with him, and so he made a video about loss and the dangers of sinking too far into it. I know that there are some of you that feel I am reading too much of what I assume to be BDG’s thoughts and emotions into these interpretations, and I am the first to admit that I might be. In no way am I trying to say these are the only interpretations of these videos or even that they are correct. I think there is so much more of an artist that they put into their work than they realise. I do not know the mind of BDG, only he does, but these videos made me feel that I had a glimpse into the feelings of a man whose work I admire. These videos are either longer or a drastically different tone to the material he has put on his own channel and as such they stood out to me. They felt different, and they seemed to ask for a different level of scrutiny. On some level maybe BDGs videos can not be divorced from the story of BDG as a content creator, the same as any modern internet semi-celebrity, or indeed any artist. I guess there was also a part of me that wanted to answer the call to action I heard when BDG left Polygon, to unravel his work. I hope in some small way I’ve been able to do that.

[ms-demeanor]

Hi, can I get some clarification? At one point does lusting for a person/feeling lust for someone become objectification?

Objectification is treating a person like an object, like a *thing* instead of a person.

(for the purposes of this post I am primarily going to be talking about sexual objectification though parents treating their children like objects is DEFINITELY a thing)

I would argue that objectification happens when you disregard a person’s autonomy (not that you overrule or deny he fact that they HAVE autonomy, but like it doesn’t even occur to you that your choices should be considered because they’re not real enough to you in that moment for it to matter).

Having a crush on your friend or thinking that the cashier at a store is sexy isn’t objectifying them. Resenting your friend for not returning your crush or taking a photo of a sexy cashier to share on social media is objectifying them. Arguably just thinking about someone while masturbating is, to an extent, objectifying them. But imagining the sexy cashier taking you out on a nice picnic date and showering you with presents and buying you a pony is objectifying them too.

I’ve got a hot take here: Objectification isn’t inherently bad.

There’s a person at my gym who has some fucking THIGHS. Every time they’re at the gym they’re on the stair machine for a minimum of thirty minutes. I’m pretty sure they can’t wear jeans because I can’t *imagine* the kinds of jeans that would fit over this person’s quads. Every time I’m at my gym and this person is working out their thighs it’s a little bonus perk for my gym visit. In fact it’s kind of an incentive: if I go to the gym maybe I’m gonna get to see THIGHS and that’ll be cool.

This person is an object to me. At a conscious level I know that they are a real person with their own thoughts and desires and agenda and whatever but that’s not what they are to me. What they are to me is Damn! Thighs!

And that’s not a problem.

However if I *follow* them around the gym to look at their thighs, or if I stare obviously and move so that I’m working out behind them, or if I follow them out so I know what their car looks like so I can make sure to go into the gym if I see them in the lot THAT is a problem. And if they introduce themselves to me and I don’t remember their name or their interests and all I ever want to talk about is how hot their thighs are then THAT is a BIG problem. And if they were my coworker and I ignored their achievements and didn’t listen to their requests because their needs were less important to me than hot thighs and anyway if you spend so much time looking good you’re probably an idiot who doesn’t really work but just gets a paycheck because the boss likes looking at you and your work doesn’t matter THEN that is a VERY VERY BIG problem.

You are allowed to lust after and objectify people so long as it doesn’t impact the actual real world and that actual real person.

Chris Evans is an object to me. He’s pretty. I like looking at him. He doesn’t have any idea that I exist so me seeing him as just a pretty dude and ignoring everything else about him doesn’t matter. And I cannot tell you how much I DO NOT want to personally humanize Chris Evans as a celebrity and form a parasocial relationship with him where I know about his dog and his siblings and look at pictures of his family at the holidays. I’m much more comfortable experiencing Chris Evans as an object than as a person, thanks, and I’m pretty sure that for most celebrities that’s how they want most of the world to interact with them. But if I were to meet him and objectify him by presenting him with sexual fanart of him or if I were to have an interview with him about his political website and only asked him questions about his workout routine THEN it would be a problem for me to objectify him and I would be doing so in a way that was directly harmful to him.

Also. In terms of nonsexual objectification:

I keep hearing random liberals say that Biden needs to nominate a woman of color as his running mate.

I hear it over and over but I’m not hearing names, just “Joe Biden needs to nominate a Latina” “Joe Biden won’t win if he doesn’t run with a Woman of Color on the ticket.”

Over and over. But no names. No policy. Almost as if people are seeing this possible running mate like some kind of talisman or token or object or fetish (in the original “magical object’ sense, not the sexual sense) instead of a theoretical politician with experience and ideas of her own.

Hm. Gross.

And yes it is COMPLETELY possible to objectify men and we as a society do it A LOT and I kind of have the objectification of men as commodities in the popular music industry as a special interest that I’ve done a lot of reading and research and writing about.

Objectification is a thing that people do. It is arguably a *necessary* thing that we do in our society, where we’re aware of so many hundreds or thousands of people that we can’t actually individually treat them like humans (and we can’t even meaningfully conceive of MILLIONS or BILLIONS of people).

So let’s look at George of the Jungle (because that’s what we’ve been talking about today)

The ladies looking wistfully at George as he plays with the horses: these characters are objectifying the character of George but it is likely harmless because he doesn’t even seem to notice that they’re ogling him.

Ursula’s roommate/friend staring at George naked: this character is objectifying George and it *could* be harmful to his character because it will change their interactions and the way she views him and the dynamic between him.

The advertising for the film focusing on a shirtless character slammed into a tree: Not objectifying George.

Tumblr focusing on gifs of George/Brendan Fraser without his shirt: Objectifying the character/actor, harmless (though if you approached the actor on the street and said “Oh my god, I am so hot for your ass in that one scene where you’re wearing the bowl” that would be harmful)

People focusing on Brendan Fraser’s weight gain and lamenting that he’s no longer sexy: Objectifying the actor, potentially harmful to the actor (because people frequently tag the actors in criticism like this) and definitely bodyshaming in a way that can be harmful to the people who encounter the criticisms.

Fans expecting actors to maintain a particular level of fitness outside of a film: objectifying the actor, harmful.

Studios expecting actors to perform complicated stunts without adequate preparation or safety precautions: Objectifying the actor, harmful.

Studios and audiences expecting actors to be dangerously dehydrated so that they appear extremely muscular or extremely fit when filming; Objectifying the actor, harmful.

A film executive expecting an actor to perform sexual acts for them or to tolerate sexual touching because they’ve cast the actor for a part: Objectifying the actor, harmful. 

So it’s interesting that while the actor Brendan Fraser was likely objectified in the process of making this film (especially considering that, yeah, there was probably some unhealthy dieting and some dehydration to look as lean and muscular as he did in some scenes) the film as a whole does not objectify the character of George.

Anyway.

Shit’s complicated and there’s not a clear dividing line but it’s okay to think of people as objects sometimes because that’s honestly a thing that we have to do to get through the day without keeling over from overextended empathy but it’s not cool to *treat* people like objects and media that treats people like objects frequently models behavior that people normalize even if they don’t intentionally emulate it so it’s worthwhile to have discussions about the objectification of characters in media.

There we go.

Easy, right?

[marcilled]

[this is gonna be a big long post about minecraft youtuber drama... press J to scroll past this if you don’t care about that. lol. sorry]

idunno if anybody took my post the other day as me “cancelling dream for cheating in a videogame”, i posted it mostly out of bemusement of the whole situation, and because that video was really well put-together. (context: his 1.16 speedruns were disqualified by the minecraft speedrun.com moderators & there was a video & document explaining why).

I definitely don’t correlate cheating a speedrun w/ ableism, racism, etc etc. I already knew about a lot of nasty shit dream has done, like the video he did with Notch, and how all of his early content was about pewdiepie, just further normalizing those two to his young audience. I’ve always disliked him for those things, which I’ve been aware of pretty much as long as I’ve known of him, and he has never apologized for those things. It’s why whenever I posted about him before (which was... maybe once or twice?), I always say “don’t stan him or anything he sucks”.

I had no idea there was so much more to it honestly. It’s kind of galling seeing the full context now, because whenever I’ve seen any kind of criticism against him, it’s been him presenting it in an apology. I dunno why I wasn’t suspicious of this given what I already knew about him, but the guy seems to be very clever with how he damage controls any sort of possible controversy regarding him. He presents a really heartfelt, honest apology for whatever happened and gives a few cherrypicked examples of things that people said about him and says how wrong he was and how he doesn’t want to alienate his viewers.

The fact that it’s Dream presenting the evidence of his controversies, means that he gets to control how the conversation goes. Instead of a popular “mcyt” stan account getting to control the conversation, pointing out the shit he’s said and done, he addresses it in a livestream, and does not provide the original context. Huh, I wonder why. It’s almost as if he doesn’t want everyone to see that his mistakes are more than just little “oopsies”, it’s him being actively malicious and getting so defensive that he tells off anybody who could possibly disagree with his view of things.

While his actions and words are pretty horrid on their own, I think the thing that has me most concerned about Dream is... He seems pretty fuckin’ good at manipulating peoples’ perception of him.

-----

After the video about his speedruns being cheated came out the other day, he had this to say on twitter (this is his second, “personal” account):

Now, as I said before, cheating in a videogame isn’t at all comparable to racism or ableism. What I’m trying to point out here is his response to any sort of criticism.

The video he’s referring to is this one, published by Geosquare 2 days ago (dec 11th). What’s interesting to note here is how he singles out Geosquare specifically in this tweet. If you click on the video, the first few seconds establishes that it’s a video made by the entire Minecraft java edition speedrunning mod team (which is made up of a team of over a dozen people). The video and document was a true team effort from every single one of them, and it only got posted to Geosquare’s account (& got his narration) because he’s already a youtuber with a pretty comfortable amount of subscribers.

So, instead of pointing his ire (and those of his many, many fans) at the whole speedrun mod team, instead, he points it squarely on Geosquare, so that people have a convenient name to latch onto. He then accuses Geosquare of using his name as “clickbait” in order to get “easy views”, sowing the seed of this idea that Geosquare is doing this in an opportunistic grab for personal gain. If you clicked on the video and saw the description/pinned comment, you’d see that not only did Geosquare disable monetization on the video, he disabled monetization on his entire channel for as long as this drama goes on (and he knew there would be drama, dream made extra sure to threaten the mods with a video of his own in retaliation if they ended up banning him).

Then, in a reply to the first tweet, he says that there are “multiple moderators” messaging him saying the verdict was “biased” and that they may quit the mod team. He provides no evidence for this. However, if you click on the tweet and view any of the thousands of replies from his fans, it doesn’t matter that he gave no evidence, his word is enough. If you’re wondering, Geosquare and a few other mods have stated many times that it was a group decision on their part, and nobody had any question in their mind that Dream must have cheated. So... Dream, who are these “mods” that are messaging you? He won’t say.

Lastly here, I want to point out that in his next tweet on the matter, he makes this very bitter comment about how useless it was for them to investigate a “16th place run”. It’s a minor detail, but I think it’s worth mentioning; this kind of downplays how impressive his run was at the time. At the time he submitted his sub-20 minute speedrun, it was a top 5 run, in a very competitive category of speedrunning the game. In the 2 months since, several people have passed his time using new strats, but that doesn’t diminish the fact it was a pretty amazing “run”... if it weren’t cheated of course. But, I’m just rambling on about how petty I am about him cheating at this point so let me get back to the main point here.

If you see the numbers on these tweets (hundreds of thousands of likes), you’ll understand why this is pretty scary for those speedrun mods. The same day this happened Geosquare joked around “I’ve only gotten one death threat so far!”. Dream’s fanbase is unparalleled in minecraft youtube, and incredibly sizeable for a youtube channel overall. If you’re not familiar with this new wave of “mcyt” minecraft accounts, it’s... it’s pretty much exclusively because of Dream’s fame. He’s the driving force of minecraft youtube content right now. Any youtuber who even breathes near the guy blows up in subscribers & views. His minecraft server, “Dream SMP”, is like... it has a legitimate cultural impact, whether that sentence disgusts you or not. Especially for young gen Z kids.

The point I’m trying to make is, ever since he came onto the scene in early 2019, he’s grown and grown at exponential rates, and I can’t understate the kind of influence he has on not just his own fans, but the fans of like. Pretty much anyone who is plugged in to anything minecraft youtube related right now.

People have discussed this before, but Dream’s sudden rise to fame happened shockingly quick. So quick that it’s almost impossible it were by accident. He’d spent something like a year or two studying how the youtube algorithm works, how famous youtubers grow their popularity, etc. He spent a lot of time studying, and it paid off for him. It makes me wonder if he’s studied how youtubers deal with controversy as well. Because it seems like he’s doing everything right to keep his fans “loyal” to him.

So I think it’s not unreasonable to say that it is pretty goddamn concerning when he reacts to criticism like this. His immense fanbase, who are often worryingly obsessed with him, of mostly impressionable kids... It’s a recipe for disaster, in the hands of someone so entitled and immature.

I think what really has me worried, though, is a video he published to his second channel the other day. Recently, he published a video about his “stans”. The entire video essentially boiled down to him disputing claims that “dream stans” were toxic, or that stanning people or “stan culture” was creepy/unhealthy. He spent a lot of the video comparing stans of content creators to passionate fans of football teams, and expressed repeatedly how he thought it was normal and OK to be totally obsessed with a content creator and engage in “stan culture”, as long as you weren’t being a legitimate stalker. He pretty much only talked about the positives of being a Dream Stan, and how positive the “community” is. The whole video painted this really idealistic image of what it means to be a Stan of a person, and fandom in general.

Now... I don’t know about everyone else reading this, but I found that video to be... incredibly creepy and weird. It completely ignores any actual arguments about how stan culture can be unhealthy, and how engaging so heavily in parasocial relationships can be quite damaging, especially to younger people.

But, mostly? It seemed like the whole video was basically designed just to reinforce the most unhealthy impulses of his stans, and reward them with the positive encouragement that he actually enjoys it when they are obsessed with him so much that they can’t imagine he could ever possibly do anything wrong.

And that? That is fucking dangerous for a person with such a huge fanbase to be peddling to their fans.

Surely, he must know- a great deal of his fans are so obsessed with him, that they think they know him as well as, if not more than, a personal friend. So that when he does something disagreeable and wrong, and he claims “no that’s not how it happened, they’re biased and trying to cancel me because they’re jealous”, they just take that at face value, because why would he lie? He’s so honest and genuine in his videos and livestreams!

This sort of behavior from Dream, along with his tweets I posted earlier, reads to me as if he knows exactly what he’s doing. I think he is purposefully insulating his fans from the truth of his actions, so that he can present this idealistic picture of him in their mind, so that it seems absurd that he would do something wrong.

I think it’s only a matter of time before it comes out he’s done something much worse, honestly. What it is, is hard to say- he’s already done so much that anyone reading this should rescind their support for him, imo. But, I know that none of this matters to his millions of fans. While I worry for them, I also worry for anyone who becomes a target of Dream. I could see this speedrunning drama being the start of a downward spiral for him. Things could get real ugly with all that minecraft clout getting to his head... I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

TL;DR, dream sucks, and not just because he cheats at videogames.

I apologize again for writing a multi paragraph post about a minecraft youtuber. I will not post about this anymore (probably) please do not unfollow me .

[gamebunny-advance]

The Thrilling Continuation~

@kujo-supernova​

As to not clog the dashes with increasingly long posts of anyone who has to put up with this, I started a new post~

[Original response here]

K, I agree with 95% of what you said, so I don't feel the need to go over it point by point. Even the stuff I don't agree with I’m not going to really address  because it's irrelevant to the argument I’m trying to make. This isn't even an argument about each other's opinions anymore so much as I'm just commenting on the fandom at large now. So basically everything I'm about to say is not really directed at you (except for the last part), and is more directed at this fictional straw man of the fandom that probably doesn't exist, but I'm gonna attack anyway because it helps illustrate my thought process.

But thanks for reading anyway if you do~

I don't take issue with the fandom because I'm trying to defend Kliff or say that anyone else is 100% in the wrong here. This is a story about flawed individuals that make bad decisions. It's multi-layered and complex, and that's why I love this game so much.

My issue is largely with how the fandom in general is hypocritical in the way they treat Kliff because they see him as *more* "wrong" than he actually is, but my goal is not to prove that he was in the “right”.

Yeah, B2J (mostly Mayday) did get to learn from the experience that they were wrong because they're the protagonists: the purpose of their story is to learn that lesson. Kliff exists to be Mayday's "shadow". He represents an extreme that Mayday could have become had she not realized that taking over NSR isn't the solution to her problem. But as the true antagonist, Kliff literally *can't* come to that same realization: it would be redundant. And that's fine. For the purposes of the story that it wanted to tell, Kliff getting a resolution was not necessary, even if it leaves him in a bad spot with the other characters.

But that story is done and now fandom gets to write new ones. He still has a lot of character that can be explored: Now that rock is back in the city, what will he do? Why is rock specifically so important to him? Why does he know so much about every artist in the city? Why does he look so much younger than he actually is? *cough*becausehe'savampire*cough*

But largely the fandom doesn't seem interested in exploring any of that and more than just a handful of people seem to outwardly reject the idea of writing him as even *capable* of the kind of growth that B2J went through.

I brought up DJSS specifically as a counterargument to Kliff because he is THE scummiest person in the cast for all the reasons you said and more, but he is still one of the most popular characters because he has a cool design and a sexy voice, and maybe some people see him as a "sad boi" and want to coddle him. I am also one of those people for all 3 1/2 of those reasons, but I don't believe that you need to think that a character is a good person to justify liking them. There's a lot of reasons to like a morally gray or even morally black character, and agreeing with their actions/opinions doesn't need to be one of them.

I just think it's hypocritical to excuse one character for their flaws and not another with similar ones. Like there's some nuance to it that can change what makes something okay in one context and not okay in another, but I think the comparison between DJSS and Kliff is apt.

In my opinion their shared flaw is being egocentric. They are both willing to sacrifice the health and happiness of others for their own agendas. They express it in different ways, but it all comes from the same place: They think that what they're trying to achieve is more important than the feelings/condition of others.

DJSS seriously does not give a damn about anyone other than himself and he doesn't even have the courtesy to try and hide it. Even after his district is restored, he's still the same asshole he always was. He STILL calls B2J "Plutonians" (and I don't count him saying that "they aren't so bad after all" as "change", because even as a professor he was capable of expressing backhanded gratitude) and his reason for playing music is STILL "self-importance". He is in the same place that he started and will probably continue to abuse his district over his sense of ego unless Tatiana or someone else finally forces him not to. And everyone either accepts that or disregards it because that's just who he is. And again, that's fine, but I find it hypocritical.

Like I feel like many people's problems with Kliff is that they're not interested in exploring his character beyond what has been presented in the text. And that's fine too. It is perfectly valid to enjoy the game as it is and not want to explore it beyond that, but if having such a small scope of a game's themes and characters causes you to get "bugged" when someone presents a different interpretation, then it might be beneficial to look at another reading.

For example, let's go back to the satellite argument. My point about the satellite being "symbolic" was to disprove "murderous intent". His motivations for dropping it are totally separate. You say that you still think his motivation is being fueled by bitterness over Tatiana leaving rock. Your exact words: "I still think part of it was done out of spiteness for Tatiana leaving rock", but I feel like that's a very surface level reading.

In my opinion, rock is just the window dressing to the core of his actual problem: he feels like he's not getting back what he gave. He drops the satellite after her response to this question: "Did my loyalty mean nothing to you?" Which was, "I don't give a damn about you. I owe you nothing." which I think is far from a trivial response.

In any relationship, even a non-romantic one like this, it hurts knowing that the other person isn't as invested in it as you are. Even more so if they were to flat out say, "I don't give a damn about you." Like, can you imagine being told by your favorite content creator that they hated you to your face after you've done everything you could do to support them as a fan? Would most people react calmly to that in the heat of the moment?

Like we don't know the extent that Kliff was involved in Tatiana's life, but Tatiana never implies that he's lying about supporting her after the Goolings disbanded. Their relationship couldn't have been completely parasocial because she immediately recognizes him and addresses him by name when she sees him, and her being Kul Fyra isn't common or easy to obtain knowledge, so he must have been close to her to even know that. We know what he may have been willing to do for her given how much he helps B2J, and had Tatiana been upfront about her feelings with Kliff in the past, then I don't think he would have even bothered to give his sob story because he would have known that she wouldn't be receptive to it.

What I'm getting at is that "abandoning rock" isn't the actual reason he felt hurt enough to want to retaliate. It was likely more about "abandoning him" than it is a loyalty to any particular genre.

Even with this reading of his motivation, I don't think he was justified in doing what he did. Tatiana was totally right in calling him out, even if she was harsh about it, because in the end it doesn't matter how much he might have done for her if she didn't want it to begin with. He should have just walked away and accepted that she wasn't the person he thought she was, but people don't always do the right or rational thing, especially if they're caught up in the heat of their emotions and I think that's a relatable emotion worthy of discussion and dissection, even if it's not positive.

Will reading any of that change your mind? Probably not, but it's another perspective, and that's really all I want to offer.

Saying you're okay with someone liking something that you don't, isn't the same as understanding it, and that's what I want to change. I don't need anyone to agree with me, I wouldn’t start these discussions with strangers if I did. My end goal is to get you to understand where I'm coming from, and I think you're just *barely* missing my point. Hopefully I’m understanding your points too, but maybe I’m wrong about you’re getting at as well. UoU

[insidious-apple]

LONG POST ABOUT SHIPPING IN FANDOMS

Last night, my gf and I were discussing shipping in fandoms (specifically mcyts) and it got me thinking so I’d like to present my fully awake thoughts on the matter.

okay so!

Shipping isn’t new. shipping has been around since fandoms have been around and fandoms have been around a long time. but with how expansive and connective the internet is, fandoms have become way more of a thing and so has shipping and ship art and parasocial relationships and all that jazz. parasocial relationships are actually completely normal because as humans, we seek to form social connections with people, so when we hear or see them (i.e. on TV or on youtube), we seek to establish a friendship bond with them. This is why celebrity crushes are a thing. The problem with that is that these celebrities are people too and they can be completely overwhelmed by all the attention, especially if it’s sexual in nature. None of this is new information.

Then there’s a completely different thing, which is shipping. When fans ship a celeb or cc with one of their closest friends, that can make stuff a bit weird. Like, imagine if all the randos at your school thought (and told you) that you and your best friend would make a really good couple. Or even if they said that you and an acquaintance of yours would be really good friends. Kinda creepy, right? Because it’s none of their business who you date or who you’re friends with. Same concept, only it’s hundreds of thousands, or maybe even millions, of people telling two celebrities or content creators that they would be really good friends or make a really good couple. It’s creepy and it’s none of the fans’ business.

On one hand, fandoms should stop shipping altogether. It’s creepy and rude and it’s especially tolling for these celebs that can’t get out of the limelight, whether that be physically, mentally, or online. It’s got to be extremely difficult to just let all that stuff wash over them all day every day. This includes fanart and fanfiction (both sfw and nsfw), comments on videos, blogs, everything. Also, it’s kind of dehumanizing. When a person is famous, they get all these pictures painted of them, but the unknown gaps are always filled in, whether they want them to be or not. This turns the person into more of a brand or character that can be whatever the fans want them to be and that can pressure the person into trying to be more like that character instead of being more like themselves. Stuff like this can also violate boundaries as some people are just straight up not okay with seeing fanart or fics of themselves, to name a couple of things. And these celebs are people and their boundaries should be respected. If you draw a weird drawing of your friend that you know they wouldn’t be okay with, you wouldn’t post it on the internet for everyone to see because it would hurt their feelings. Same goes here, just on a much larger scale. This ESPECIALLY goes if the celebs or content creators are young and still mentally developing. And I don’t just mean young like under 18. I mean young like college age, like 25 and younger. These people are still developing in the world and the fact that they have to encounter all this stuff about them on a daily basis is just not good for their mental health and we should respect that. Like even if they said they’re completely fine with it, it still gives me weird vibes when I remember that the art or fic or whatever is about real people who are trying to live their lives without everyone knowing every little tiny detail about them, yet they still know that people are trying to find every detail about them. This sucks because fans aren’t entitled to every little detail. That’s just a fact, and always will be. And fandoms are kind of riddled with this. It almost looks like people trying to talk behind someone’s back, which always weird for they person they’re talking about, whether they’re talking shit or talking good.

On the other hand (especially with the dream smp), fanart and fics are so fucking cool! Being inspired and making art out of your inspiration will never not be one of the coolest things the human brain can do. And holy FUCK there are so many talented individuals out there who can do so much with so little information, it’s insane. And fandoms are the perfect place for these people because they have stuff to go off of, but they also have the freedom to express themselves. Especially when celebs say that they’re okay with stuff, it opens up a whole new world of expression and I think that’s super fucking cool.

Another note: the internet has free speech, which i think is pretty damn cool. However, this does not include freedom from consequences. If you say some dumb shit or some fucked up shit on the internet, I guarantee you there will be consequences. These can come in the form of your post getting taken down for violating community guidelines or someone calling you out in the comments. And I think that’s a good thing. Reporting and blocking are some of the best functions on the internet and i think that people should use them more often, especially in relation to aforementioned things that violate people’s boundaries. Often, people will just comment and share it saying “yo wtf this is gross” but that just draws more attention to the fucked up thing in question.

I didn’t really have a place I was going with this, but basically: - Don’t violate celebs/content creators’ boundaries. - Don’t dehumanize people just because you don’t know every little thing about them. - DON’T MAKE NSFW ART/FICS ABOUT MINORS. - Don’t push stuff on celebs/content creators. They’re people too. - Differentiate between characters and the people behind them in your works. The difference is VERY important. - If you do any of the above things, don’t be surprised if you get called out about it. - Most importantly, have fun! Don’t be afraid to put fanart or fanfic out there if the celeb/content creator is okay with it. The internet and fandoms are supposed to be fun for everybody, including the fans and the thing/people they are a fan of.

Okay that’s all I have to say about that for now. *steps off soapbox*

[wellknownwolf]

I want to move into a new phase in my relationship with fandom, as I mature with new experiences. I'm not sure what exactly that looks like though. What is your take on the parasocial affection inherent in an RPF like Rhett & Link? Or even the deep attachments that can form with fictional characters? Or a desire to emulate fantasy worlds? I'm sorry if I've made you uncomfortable with all this, it's just that it's been a long time coming, and once I got started I couldn't stop. - Natasha (5)

First, let me post the full question, since it came in 5 parts:

Hey, it's me again. Your 'mystery inquirer', as you so adorably dubbed me. You're right, I had forgotten I'd sent in that ask. Just now, I couldn't help but think about a scene from Life After, as I am wont to on a frightfully regular basis, which is what got me back here. When you said you pondered over my seemingly simple, banal question for a good while, and wrote out a beautifully thoughtful answer like you always do, it made me happy.

Your narrative voice is similar to my own, and it made my chest ache in a certain way to have gotten such a response to what felt like a random shout out into the abyss (though it obviously wasn't, I sent it directly to you, I guess it's more what it felt like taking a chance on a conversation with a random stranger online). And now I'm cringing a bit at how melodramatic all sounds. But I'm committing to it, anyway. That's the beauty of anon, eh?

Wolfie (is it presumptuous to call you that? Please do forgive me the liberty I'm taking), I must admit. I'm quite envious of this community you have with @missingparentheses, @lunar-winterlude, and other wonderful people. Since childhood, I've been head over heels in love with fandom. Not a specific fandom, I've been a traveller through dozens, but fandom in general. I've read probably thousands of fanfics, spent countless hours daydreaming about beloved characters and their stories.

To the point where, in my most recent and worst depressive episode, it may have been for the worse, if I'm honest. Escapism and yearning to the point of impairment, engendering a sense of constant bereavement. But it's taught me so much about life and its wonders, I can't write it off as just some damaging habit. It's such an integral part of who I am, a deeply curious soul (shout out to my Enneagram Type 5-ers out there!). But I don't anyone to share it with, and it can get quite lonely.

I want to move into a new phase in my relationship with fandom, as I mature with new experiences. I'm not sure what exactly that looks like though. What is your take on the parasocial affection inherent in an RPF like Rhett & Link? Or even the deep attachments that can form with fictional characters? Or a desire to emulate fantasy worlds? I'm sorry if I've made you uncomfortable with all this, it's just that it's been a long time coming, and once I got started I couldn't stop. - Natasha

.....................................................................

Thank you for giving me so much to respond to, Natasha.  Thank you for continuing to reach out.   I accidentally wrote something like a paper in response to your thoughtful question.  I even conducted a little research and cited a source.  ENGLISH TEACHER, ACTIVATE!

Also, for what it’s worth, I feel at times that I communicate exclusively through shouts into the abyss, so it’s a language with which I am at home.  In fact, it is this very technique, this experiment with intense vulnerability at the hands of a virtual stranger, that earned me one of my absolutely most-treasured friends: @missingparentheses.  I have poured out a great deal of my own melodrama to her, and she has received it and reciprocated it in a way that, three years later, continues to teach me how to be a better friend.  In short, I’m a firm believer in diving straight in when it comes to new friends.  Cringe not; I’m on board.

So let’s dive.

R&L is really only the second “fandom” with which I’ve been involved.  Third, if we count my preteen obsession with ‘N Sync (and considering how much wall space I dedicated to their posters and self-printed photos, we probably should).  My point is, while I don’t have much experience with the community facet of fandom, I do relate to your feeling of near-obsession.  Or clear obsession.  

I know the feeling of escapism you’re describing, and I know the yearning and melancholy that can come on our worst days, where we feel like “real life” will never measure up to the color and brilliance of the worlds we spend so much time considering. These worlds, these characters and their relationships, their challenges, victories, and defeats all seem so purposeful: they’re the plot points we use to craft the stories in our heads (regardless of whether we’re writers at all).  It can be much harder to view ourselves as protagonists worth analyzing, viewing and reviewing through new lenses, perhaps because we’re warned against navel-gazing, perhaps because our self-perception just won’t allow for it.  Maybe a little of both.

But yes!  It teaches us!  We DO learn about life, other people, love, risk, all kinds of things through what we consume in these fandoms, so I would never classify it as a “bad” thing.  We hone our imaginations and learn to pay attention to our own emotions as we recognize feelings from our favorite shows, games, books, and characters arising in ourselves.  

I used to be a little afraid of the fact that I was always telling myself stories, internally imagining myself as someone else, a player in the worlds I often loved more than my own.  I suspected that someday, somehow, I would be caught playing pretend all the time in my own little ways.  I was a bright and ambitious young woman, so why would I give so much of my mental energy to such frivolous pursuits?

In my first semester of graduate school, though, I learned from a Lit. Theory professor who intimidated the hell out of me that we all do this.  We’re all telling ourselves stories all the time, some of which are true and close to objective reality, some of which are more subjective to whatever fantastical (or fandom) material we last consumed.  I’ve whispered my own dialogue in the shower, but so have you whispered yours in your head (if not also out loud in your shower!).  And through this act, however it is performed, I have made those worlds part of my own.  So have you.  In this way, they are real, and I no longer feel fearful of being “found out.”  

When we have those moments of doubt, though, when we wonder whether we’re going too far, it probably stems, at least partially, from the “us v. them” divide between fandom and mainstream society.  We love our little worlds, but we also feel that twinge of anxiety that we might be bordering on obsession, that our guilty pleasure might be discovered and we will be socially punished for it, namely, as Joli Jensen writes in “Fandom as Pathology: The Consequences of Characterization,” because “the fan is characterized as (at least potentially) an obsessed loner, suffering from a disease of isolation, or a frenzied crowd member, suffering from a disease of contagion. In either case, the fan is seen as being irrational, out of control, and prey to a number of external forces” (13). According the consistent covert (and overt, at times) messages of the mainstream, “[f]andom is conceived of as a chronic attempt to compensate for a perceived personal lack of autonomy, absence of community, incomplete identity, lack of power and lack of recognition” (Jensen 17).  Yikes.  That doesn’t feel good to admit about ourselves, does it?  

Luckily, it’s bullshit.

Treating “fans” as others (outsiders, people who can’t form relationships or find fulfillment in the “real world”) “risks denigrating them in ways that are insulting and absurd” (Jensen 25).  Those who take this stance, who see fans as victims of hysteria or desperate loners, do so in order to “develop and defend a self-serving moral landscape.  That terrain cultivates in us a dishonorable moral stance of superiority, because it makes other into examples of extrinsic forces, while implying that we [members solely of the mainstream] somehow remain pure, autonomous, ad unafflicted” (Jensen 25).  In short, that us/them thinking just makes people feel better about themselves by pointing out an easily-identifiable “other.”

 I have also grappled with the concept of parasocial affection, particularly with R&L.  I was well into writing my first Rhink fic when the thought crossed my mind, “Oh my god, what if I actually met these people someday?  How would I look them in the eye?  I’d feel like a crazy person (again)!”  From the safety of the Midwest, I laughed off the thought.  And then a year or so later, they were announcing their first tour. And I was still writing, here and there, still deep in my affection for them, sometimes wrestling with the thought that I’ve devoted so much energy to people who would never know I exist.  

It doesn’t matter that the attachment was in the most obvious, tangible ways only one-sided.  As an adult who is ever-learning how to navigate the worlds of her own creation and the ones over which she has far less control, I view my intense attachment to characters both real and fictional with deep fondness.   And while I may not receive affection or attention directly from the sources (R&L, fictional characters, sports teams, who/whatever we build fandoms around), I am still earning some very real rewards for my involvement: Because of them, I found my way to a participatory culture in which I was supported and encouraged to express my creativity.  This gave me the push and interest that I needed to hone skills that have not only made me a better writer, but also a better teacher and mentor.  With fandom comes the ability to immediately strike up a conversation over shared interests. With fandom comes a sense of belonging in what we have proven is an awfully divisive world.  

Right now, I’m consuming far less fandom-related material than I did a few years ago.  I don’t really watch GMM anymore and I’m on a break from Ear Biscuits (though I still love it), Gotham ended over a year ago and I’m not in the habit of reading fics right now, and I can’t yet play the remade Final Fantasy 7, so that’s out for me, too (though I know I will fall deep into that well once the game is in my hot little hands).  This all happened by itself.  I never consciously moved away from these sources; I just floated on to other interests and other levels of interest, knowing that if and when I wanted to dig back in, I could always come back.  

I used to feel quite sad at the thought of someday “moving on” from these intense interests.  I couldn’t fathom somehow falling out of love with those bands, actors, or video games.  But for me, the transition into wherever I am now has not been painful in the least.  I’m glad I knew the intensity that I did, and I’m happy with the distance I have now. And there’s a good chance I’ll be fanatic about something else someday.  I’m looking forward to it!

 Here are some responses that I couldn’t organically fit into my essay:

Yes, you can call me Wolfie if you’d like.  That name started with @missingparentheses (her second appearance in this answer!), and quickly became a reminder to not take myself too seriously.  

Second, I don’t think I know any other Type 5s!  I’m a type 8. 

Also, here’s my MLA formatted citation for the Jensen source:

Jensen, Joli. “Fandom as Pathology: The Consequences of Characterization.”   The Adoring Audience: Fan Culture and Popular Media, Routledge, 1992, pp. 9-29.

[migleefulmoments]

This is a brilliant self assessment from someone who was obsessed with Jake Gyllenhaal. She wrote a blog post every week about Jake but after 11 months, she had enough self awareness to realize the trouble she was getting into.  Please read the entire piece -but here are the highlights” 

A year ago, I started writing a weekly newsletter about the life and times of actor Jake Gyllenhaal. The newsletter followed what he said, what he wore, where we went, who he saw, and how other people reacted to it on the internet.

Here is everything I learned.

1. BEING AN OBSESSIVE FAN WILL COST A LOT OF MONEY

Once in a while, it occurred to me that my fandom constituted labor — sifting through Google News alerts, transcribing lengthy interviews, writing film criticism, and cordoning off half of my Saturday to think about Jake G — and that I was usually paying for the privilege of performing it.w. BEING AN OBSESSIVE FAN WILL BECOME YOUR DEFINING CHARACTERISTIC, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT

2. BEING AN OBSESSIVE FAN WILL BECOME YOUR DEFINING CHARACTERISTIC, WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT

3. BEING AN OBSESSIVE FAN WILL OFTEN DISAPPOINT YOU

I wouldn’t have noticed these things if I hadn’t been paying an absurd amount of attention to Jake Gyllenhaal, reading Google Alerts and scrolling through hundreds of tweets each day. It made me sad and tired to know so much. It was easy to extrapolate and decide that any person would fail me if I looked at them too hard.

“They say not to meet your heroes or your celebrity crushes, but I think another piece of valid advice would be not to pay too close attention to anyone for months at a time — they will disappoint or bore you.

4. BEING AN OBSESSIVE FAN WILL FEEL LIKE BEING IN LOVE WITH A STRANGER

There is no obvious answer to the question “What does anyone get out of principled fascination and one-sided communication with a celebrity?”

The relationship between average people and celebrities (or fictional characters) is often described as being “parasocial,” meaning that we can feel and experience their words as though they’re being spoken to us one-on-one, even if they’re being broadcast to audience of millions. This is how I wrote in the Jake Gyllenhaal newsletter, as though the book or sneaker or dog park he chose was a secret message to me. “Just once, I wish Jake would find a way to communicate with me in a code that I could prove,” I complained. Investing time in a character or celebrity can feel like investing time in a relationship, even if we don’t actually know these people. These relationships can be enjoyable and real in certain ways that count — investing time in people is good for you and investing time in someone who will not outright hurt you, ever, is a rare experience for any person. But talking to someone who will not talk back can also make you feel like you’re losing your mind.

Jake Gyllenhaal is someone I’ve both never met or spent a lot of time with, and he’s also one of my most labor-intensive relationships. A little more than halfway through my year of fandom, I wrote, “Jake is of course, not my crush, nor my parent, nor an inanimate object. He is his own thing, and a figment of my imagination. He is a person, but I made him up.

5. BEING IN AN OBSESSIVE FANDOM FEELS BETTER THAN GOING IT ALONE

It felt better to have a shared fascination.

By talking about Jake Gyllenhaal with the people who wrote to me or tweeted at me, I could start to figure out, to borrow a phrase, “where my rational mind had gone.” Or, I could decide that my rational mind hadn’t gone anywhere; we all have infatuations and fascinations we can’t explain in a satisfying way, even to ourselves.

6. lBEING AN OBSESSIVE FAN WILL MAKE YOU A BETTER PERSON?

The day I started the Jake Gyllenhaal newsletter, I was 22 years old ....Jake’s life and work was a filter for other things that I was obsessing over: gender disparities in Hollywood; the horrible political climate; a boy; a song; a longing to make valuable art. Fandoms can be “temporary or permanent,” says Zoe Fraade-Blanar in Superfandom: How Our Obsessions are Changing What We Buy and Who We Are, “but they are always timely.” Jake went to the Women’s March in Washington with me in January (half-literally). In September, shortly after I got my feelings hurt by some dude, Jake talked about how he’s never lonely because he has himself. 

Jake Gyllenhaal, was useful to me, Fraade-Blanar would argue, because popular culture — including celebrities — represents “modern mythologies.” They’re “the stories that tell us how we should approach the world right now, at this point in our personal history.” My year of obsessive fandom allowed me to make up stories about someone and insert myself into them. It put me where people who were going to be nice to me could find me. I don’t know if it made me a better person, but it forced me to think much harder about what makes fandom worthwhile and sometimes necessary.

My relationship with Jake Gyllenhaal has been thoroughly explained to me, by me, with the help of a bunch of internet strangers, and so it isn’t so necessary to comment on it week after week.

He’s a figment of my imagination. He’s a person, and I made him up. He disappointed me, but I love him.

[curious-minx]

Entering into a new dawn of Corporatist Neoliberalism, all while leaving behind a rising Fascist Empire. A solid Bob’s Burgers and a surprisingly decent Simpsons is your reward.

“Fast Time Capsules at Wagstaff School”  once again finds the show operating in the territory it does best: A Poignant twee commentary with the junior Belchers and a nearly pointless sideplot with the adult Belchers that actually sports a satisfying conclusion. The ingredients of a quality kids subplot requires a touch of Tina having the conflict of wielding too much power passed down to her by Mr. Frond whose mere appearance reliably bumps an episode up a notch. This episode not only also weaves the usual Tammy and Jocelyn jealousy games with Tina but also splashes two other of Tina’s peers into the mix: Jim Gaffigan’s Kelsey Grammar indebted Henry Haber and girl friend Sasmina voiced by National Treasure Aparna Nancherla. The episode focuses primarily on Tina’s gatekeeping of the contents of the Wagstaff time capsule. A particularly timely concept for a year where history is a constant 24/7 newsfeed of dramatic historical importance. 

I fold up my muted pink streaked swimming trunks and put them into my personal time capsule. No way will I ever be braving a public beach or swimming hole. The act of exposing any amount of flesh during a pandemic is unthinkable, but in another 50 years I am sure there will be a lot more living to do. The episode goes even further in poignancy with layering a coinciding  Louise conflict over a pair of Boyz4Now lands a lot differently in these Quarantined Times. Never have I related to Louise and her desire to go see a cute pop group sing in an intimate live setting, singing such hits like “Your Heart Fell On The Floor, Let Me Get It For You,” a level of cuteness not even Belle and Sebastian or The Magnetic Fields could probably come up with. The main plot moves along with a clean efficiency of storytelling bringing Louise and Tina conspiring together using their combined sister brain to retrieve the tickets, but due to further conflicting interests. The episode concludes with the characters taking their personal losses and rolling with the punches, which is another central sweet spot. Earlier on the series I felt like the Belcher family were constantly losing and being put down upon by the world around them. The pendulum of justice remains in flux giving the Belchers and friends minor victories, but the last image of this episode really gets to me.  The sight of group of kids  in a parking lot bonding by singing the hit “Someday We’ll Spoon” as it plays off in the distance. Another song title that hits so much harder than it ever could have without the rampaging socially distanced disease.

“If you see a cop, whistle!” - Teddie, and me whenever I see a cop because I always make sure to harass and wolf whistle at cops like they were a piece of construction worker street meat. 

One of my new favorite Bobspressions. 

The B plot with Bob and Linda is essentially that Bob can whistle, but Linda cannot, although Linda can roll her R’s. This teasing and taunting domestic squabble is cushioned by the looming gentle omnipresence of Teddie. Teddie, Bob and Linda are a solid trio and play off each other as characters really well and the repartee between the characters feels a lot looser than it has in past episodes of this season. The subplot culminates in Teddie making one of my favorite comedic moves being dependent on his parasocial relationship with Bob and Linda’s marriage. Teddie is the friend that believes in the love of his friends’ marriage more so than his own friends do and it’s always pretty touching to see Teddie play that card. The adults largely stay completely static inside a one-shot of the restaurant with Bob in the kitchen window, but there is a discernible rise and fall conflict between Bob and Linda that culminates with simple silly sweetness. Once again the adults are left fuddling around in their comfortable boxes and squares they have created for themselves, while the children are foisted out in the world having to deal with Future. 

One other particularly timely one-off joke that the writers would have no way of knowing how timely and off-putting it would be is when Eugene makes a reference to Sean Connery. Gene compares Linda to the late actor responding to Linda on her R syllable rolling flexing. I am sure the writer of the episode felt some kind of something with this episode airing a week after the man died. 

This episode is a Boyz4.5(4)Now. 

///

Thankfully this next episode of the Simpsons did not trot out Mr. James Bont. Episode 5 of Season 32 “The Seven Beer Itch” is a rebound episode from the last three exhausting conceptual excursions. I failed to do a write up on the Season 32 premiere episode, “Undercover Burns,” which I give a Pass (A Pass btw means that you won’t be harmed passing this show through your system, whereas Skip speaks for itself). Both the season opener and this fifth episode are just Simpsons episodes based in and around Springfield. No historical role-play or contrived literary surrogate puppet shows. This episode initially begins filling the viewer with “Simpsons on Holiday” dread opening the episode with The Groundskeeper Willie serving as the episode’s narrator. What’s completely confounding is that Willie has no bearing on the plot of this episode in any way whatsoever other than the fact that both he and UK Treasure Olivia Coleman are both from across the Pond. 

The Simpsons have become one of the most musical series on television, and frankly it  saps away the energy of the when songs pile on top of one another. I know I  should be more wickedly delighted by having The Gosh Dang Favourite singing a pub song to Homer at Moe’s Tavern, but instead these songs make me go dead inside. Especially when Dan Castellaneta has to be a total diva belching out melodies with honey voiced Barney. Maybe if the songs were relegated to once a season or specifically to the ending credit sequence a la Bob’s Burgers that would be one thing, but a song  (or three! Or five!) per episode is simply too busy. Then again “busy” describes everything about the Simpsons in 2020. The show continues to astound me visually with Springfields starry purple skies, brief glimpses of London clock towers served up alongside Marge and kids trip to Martha’s Vineyard. We even take a pit stop in California with Olivia Coleman’s Lily doing a forced, weirdly gentle riff with Leonard DiCaprio (who goes uncredited, making matters even stranger). Overall, modern Simpsons is the nicest looking adult animated sitcom around until Tuca and Bertie comes back on air. That being the said the plots of each episode feel like they are being pulled out of a magic foam wizard’s hat stuffed to the brim with Simpsons conceits. This week the writer’s pull Homer Seduction from out of the hat.

The Homer seduction plot can be traced back as early as Season 3 with the episode “Colonel Homer.” This episode more or less grafts its main plot swapping out a Pretty Country Singer with a Charming British Lady. The songs in “Colonel Homer” were actively related to the plot with country star Lurleen Lumpkins becoming infatuated with Homer Simpson, because he’s, he’s a simple and um sweet man. Homer has fidelity! 32 plus years on the air and Homer still remains the kind of man that will still choose his wife over whatever hot piece of Academy Award Winning voiced action comes his way. 

I will end this review with this image of Homer giving us viewers come hither and fuck me eyes. Imagine an artist sitting down and drawing Homer Simpson giving you this coquettish glance and try not feeling sick with existential dread:

This episode deserves a Pass.

///

Addendum:

A response to Digital Spy and hand wringing queerness out of a cartoon child 

The article in question is available here. 

The journalist of this article insistence that Lisa be a LGTBQ+ icon is understandable, but taking umbrage with Yeardely Smith’ for saying that she views Lisa as a child is queasy and infuriating. Smith isn’t a Karen trying to rob Lisa of her Queer freedom. Lisa’s queerness is innate and subtly woven into the character and explicitly spelled out in future glimpses of the character. I really shutter to think what the Simpsons mostly white and male writers room would concoct for a “queering” of Lisa. Dissecting and analyzing a cartoon child’s sexuality is all fun and games, but the world is also dying and full of real life children, not cartoon characters, in pain far more worthy of our concern. I would much rather there be support for Queer artist making their own adult animated sitcom and let Lisa Simpson just be a little girl that loves as Yeardely Smith calls “girly things.” Interpret this literally. Lisa is a cartoon girl living in a cartoon world and she’ll probably grow up to be a nonbinary polyamorous Super Computer or Sax Master General.

If you haven't already I strongly recommend readers check out Smith’s appearance on the currently defunct podcast Harmontown. In the episode “I Was A Simpson” she comes across as charming and thoughtful and worth a listen. She’s not someone that strikes me as a hateful advocate of queer erasure. She strikes me as a cagey performer not wanting to nail down too many concrete details about her character. Ultimately the writers and Smith know Lisa is a queer character,  but unless the show is willing to hire a LGBTQ+ writer to help create a Queer Coming of Age centric coming of age episode I am content with having her identity be nudged and winked at in glimpses of the future and left at that. Good grief. 

[astroninaaa]

Hot take ; The unhealthy aspect of a Parasocial Relationship isn't discussed enough.

For me personally, I have been working on getting over a Parasocial crush on a CC for a long time now because I realized just how unhealthy and awful it was for my mental health and such.

People talk about Stans and discuss some aspects of it but never the full picture and I hope that changes soon because it's not healthy at all to love someone to a degree when that person doesn't care about you or know you.

completely agree!!! you're completely right anon!!!!

and i think (just adding stuff to your take bc i agree with everything you said so take this as a "plus" okay) people don't realize the depth of those relationships either!!! it's not only having crushes or thinking a cc is your friend it's also putting them in a pedestal and thinking theyd never do something wrong ever bc you know them and theyre not like that. you don't fucking know anything about cc's LMAOOOOO NO ONE DOES they are real people not character for you to love and analyse, yk? it's fucked, it really is.

i get a lot of people don't develop relationships like that on purpose and i don't blame them at all but i think, as a community, we should talk more about what actually are parasocial relationships and how bad they are, not only for the "stans" but for the cc's as well. can you imagine the pressure of knowing a bunch of random people feel like that towards you? knowing a bunch of random people have sky high expectations for you? yeah, that's not good for anyone involved.

send me a hot take!!!