#people on reddit were saying that it wasn't

[petitabricot]

phil dunphy and "innocent" incompetence

Rewatching modern family and it's shocking to me how Phil Dunphy for a very long time was pushed by MF fans as the ideal husband. At first glance, he is a goofball, kind husband with childlike wonder who helps counterbalance Claire's uptightness and seriousness.

But in reality, Phil is like what many men are expected to be in their married relationships : useless. He is completely useless to Claire, which she brings up all the time : lets her do all the chores, all of the home rearing tasks even though he works so little he might as well be a stay at home husband. Him being so childish and refusing to enforce boundaries with his own children by acting like an adult is a very funny joke for a sitcom, but if it were real life it would make Phil a terrible husband, father and a complete burden on Claire who now has to take care of her husband's incompetence on top of raising her 3 children. If you've ever been in a situation where you had to work with someone else, but the other person doesn't know how to make themselves useful, so you have no choice but to micromanage them, then you KNOW how exhausting that is, even more so than doing it alone.

And before people "it's just a sitcom, it's not real" I KNOW. But there are so many people who watch this show and genuinely believe that Phil is great. I read a post raising the same concerns as me, and people were like "Phil is clueless, so he's harmless" and honestly something sparked in my brain. Women are always expected to forgive men's complete incompetence because they are "clueless". Running a household is after all a woman's task, and men can't be expected to ever learn how to do it, even if they're married with 3 kids. So women need to just happily accept the heavy burden, and accept to deal with a manchild as a husband. Not only do they have to accept this burden, but they should be grateful.

As if that alone wasn't enough, Phil constantly disrespects Claire. The fact that people (and that includes me on first watch), think his behaviour towards his own wife is funny is telling. He is constantly disrespectful of her, openly flirting with other women and openly crossing the line, such as staring at other women when his own wife is talking to him or hesitating when others flirt with him. And people say "oh but it's normal to still be attracted to others when you're married!" but there's a complete difference between attraction and his sleazy behaviour. That's what annoys me so much, not Phil Dunphy who is a gimmick character, but people who are insisting his behaviour is totally acceptable and that's just what a normal, healthy marriage looks like. The whole show, Phil belittles Claire, jokes about her uptightness even though she has to be strict because she literally gets no help, even makes a "marriage is prison" joke (which Claire does call him out on it), he has the most divorced dad energy I've ever seen. And yet people expect women to see him as a perfect cute baby husband who is harmless, and not what he actually is, a grown fucking man.

I keep thinking about how many of my girlfriends dated incompetent, lazy, dependent and pathetic men and excused their behaviour saying "oh no he just doesn't understand thesse things!" "yeah he forgot my birthday for the 3rd time in a row but you know how he is!" "oh yeah i hate it when he does that but you know how guys are!" Women constantly give men the benefit of the doubt (while never offering women the same benefit) and they use it to get away with being more useless.

This just sums up a big problem I have with dating. Women from birth to adulthood are raised into being the perfect wives and eventually the perfect mothers. I mean just look at the women in MF, Claire, a perfect household leader who takes care of everything that needs to be done for her family while her husband gets away with being a disney dad, and Gloria, the hot trophy woman who giggles and makes snarky replies when her husband throws racist or objectifying comments at her. They have created fantasy stereotypes of what a woman should be like that caters to men (all while denegrating said fantasies), but have never done so for men. Men are not, and have never been taught to be good husbands and fathers. The few advice they get on this does not come from women, or with women's needs in mind, but from other men, with the idea of impressing other men down the line.

[ali3nboyfriend]

whyyyy do so few people actually put consideration into their dog's breed when assessing unwanted behaviors

[pocketgalaxies]

hi! seeing you during all this ep95 mess has been a breath of fresh air. you seem to have a really firm grasp of canon so I wanted to ask what you think of the recent discord message from Liam where he says Orym didn't know that Laudna was under Delilah's influence when she killed Bor'dor? I watched the clip from 4SD, & it's pretty clear that Liam says Orym understood Laudna was opening the door for Delilah when he encouraged her to kill Bor'dor & even says "we'll need that." But the Discord message seems to walk that back. It's been super frustrating being accused of vilifying Orym or infantilizing Laudna for repeating what Liam himself said. I just don't really know how to reconcile these two statements from Liam & it has me a bit confused on Orym's character.

hi anon, thank you!

this turned into a much longer one than i was expecting dfksjdkfs

so last week i posted this Really Long Ask about the whole discussion, if you want to take a look. but i intentionally didn't bring up liam's discord message because you're right! it seemed contradictory to something that was stated in the past, which was confusing

honestly i think the most realistic answer is that liam probably didn't mean for what he said on 4SD to be understood as such a strong and maybe even polarizing character choice. i think a lot of us heard it as "orym sees delilah as a useful/necessary asset that outweighs what might happen to laudna afterward." particularly because he framed it as something that made the whole situation "even creepier," and during that same convo, marisha was emphasizing the psychological impact that killing bor'dor had on laudna. it's a strong stance and it reflects what orym is doing to himself (handing his endgame over to the questionably fickle nana morri to increase their chances of success against ludinus)

but i suppose liam's clarification suggests that he meant it in a softer, more practically level-headed way, like "orym knew he couldn't do a whole lot about delilah's return but he also thought it could have benefits," or something along those lines. they're obviously two hugely different interpretations with pretty big implications on how we understand orym's relationship with laudna

i'm not a connoisseur of orym's character by ANY means so i can't confidently tell you what the change might mean from a narrative perspective, but i personally still prefer the former stronger stance. because i think it raises interesting questions about how orym views his own place in this war and whether or not it's valid for him to (intentionally or subconsciously) project that placement onto the other party members. is it okay for orym to expect the same level of personal sacrifice from laudna, or imogen with predathos (a whole separate can of worms), or anyone else? is it safe? etc etc. but maybe liam doesn't want to go in that direction, or maybe he does but just not in the way we expect, i don't know! only time will tell!

also regardless of what he meant, i think it's important to acknowledge that it's really easy and completely understandable to feel like he was walking something back. that episode of 4SD was almost a whole year ago! many of us built that statement into our perception and understanding of orym's character for a long time, so it's totally valid to go "wait what the fuck???" when liam suddenly pops into the discord to say that's not what he meant. those feelings are valid and real! especially when discourse can already make you question your own intelligence and your personal interpretations of a story, having that pillar, as big or small as it might've been in your mind, knocked over can be really jarring. you are very much not alone in that, and it's okay!!

[ratsbanes]

throwback to the time i asked on reddit "what's wrong with first person fanfiction" because i justed wanted to weigh it and then proceeded to get bombarded with people either saying "it's just a matter of opinion" (not helpful) or even "well your being entitled so stfu" (how... did we get here?)

[solidsnakepenis]

sorry men it turns out i might not be a wanted man

[challengers]

despite the lukewarm response to the Hannibal panel at NYCC, i am praying to every god out there that this is not the last time they attend an event together, because i only got into Hannibal a few months ago, and even though i was lucky enough to get photos and autographs with them this time, i would give just about anything to see them at least one more time

[treeembrace]

I almost never posted when I used reddit. I left comments maybe once every few weeks. But here on Tumblr I feel like I need to be posting something. I know I don't really, but I've got 5 followers for some reason. I have a responsibility now. I wasn't ready to have kids, but here they are, all 5 of them, and I need to keep them fed. Here, my children, have a meager text post.

I am rewarded for my efforts with a little pop up that says some people reblogged my post. Once again, I cannot imagine why they would do that, but here we are. Back in the reddit lands, there were no tantalizing little notifications for upvotes. There was a little ticker for people to click, but that's passive. I got over a thousand upvotes once and I said "neat." But here on Tumblr, these interactions are active. If I get reblogged, it's not just a passing bit of reassurance. It's someone actually taking the garbage I just spewed out and sticking it up on the fridge for everyone to see.

I'm up on the fridges of like 10 strangers. And I want more.

[roecomplex]

thinking about hs^2 again and gosh reddlt really put the stake in that coffin over, and over...

I miss hs^2, I hate reddlt, what a toxic disaster that was

[allpiesforourown]

Roommate Binghe would absolutely make the most insanely hilarious Reddit thread that’s so out of touch with reality. I can just hear the comments begging him to give the woman he dates a break and just bend over and fuck his roommate already

That thought is literally what inspired this au for me in my head I had this idea of binghe saying "am I the asshole for not picking my BEST FRIEND OF TEN YEARS over a woman I've been dating for two weeks?" And it's one of those aita posts that have a deceptive title because everyone reads that and goes of course not! Then the actual post is this:

"I (21M) met my best friend (22M) when I was 11 and he was 12. I used to be really weak and scrawny back then, and he saw me getting bullied at the playground and became the first person who ever stood up for me. After that he asked his parents to hire my mom and we could finally move out of poverty. She was really sick at the time and getting a better paying job really helped her get better. I'm saying all this to show how important he is to me and why anyone should understand that he'll always be the most important person in the world to me.

He's also a bit sickly. Nothing severe but he has asthma and picks up illnesses way easier than most people, so I often take care of him.

Recently he said he wanted to meet my girlfriend, so I agreed the three of us should have dinner together at a nice restaurant. She was weirdly quiet the whole time, staring at the two of us talk. When we left it was late, and the night air was making him shiver, so I gave gege my jacket. I thought we'd all head our separate ways from there but my girlfriend got super moody and said it was my job to drive her back too?? I said "I'm not making gege walk back because you want me to drive you home" and she was about to yell at me when gege stepped between us and said I can drop her off and then take us home. It was annoying because she lives in the opposite direction but I agreed.

When we got to her apartment, instead of saying thanks and leaving, she said she wants to talk to me. Obviously I didn't want to leave my friend alone in the car, but he just smiled and said I should say goodnight to my girlfriend. He's always very sweet and indulgent to the people I date, to the point it's a little frustrating.

Once we were alone, she blew up at me, claiming I ignored her all evening. She got mad at me, saying that gege was wearing jeans and a full sleeve shirt while she was wearing a short dress and I gave my jacket to him instead. I explained to her that his immune system is weak so if he caught a chill he'd be sick way longer than if she got a cold.

That was our first argument. She got over it in a few days. but I didn't want her around gege anymore lest she said something about me "picking him over her" and made him feel guilty for no reason.

Afterwards she invited me to be her plus one at her cousin's wedding. I said I'd go but just two days before gege got really sick. I said I'd stay with him, but he insisted I go to the wedding and he'd get someone else to look after him. He mentioned this guy who I absolutely hate and that's when I knew I couldn't leave him in anyone else's care.

Gege's friend is a terrible influence on him. He's an idiot with no brain and a creep who clearly wants to take advantage of him. I absolutely could not leave the two of them alone when he was so vulnerable so I refused to leave him alone even for a few hours. Gege was too feverish to remember the wedding after the first day so he didn't say anything about it.

I was so busy taking care of him, I forgot to tell her I wouldn't be able to come to the wedding. I didn't bother picking up my phone until gege was back on his feet and saw about 50 missed calls all from her. When I called her back she was screaming so loud, gege could hear her even though she wasn't on speaker. After I hung up on her, he looked so sad and said he was sorry for being the reason I couldn't go. I told him I didn't even want to go and it was just her cousin, but for the last week he's had a perpetual frown on his usually smiling face. I feel so terrible. I want to tell him it's not his fault, of course I'd choose his HEALTH over a date, but he's really beating himself up about it... I hate that I made him feel that way.

Top comment: THAT'S THE PART YOU FEEL GUILTY FOR???? THAT YOUR GEGE FEELS BAD????????? NOT HOW YOU MISTREATED YOUR POOR GIRLFRIEND?????

Second comment: just fuck your best friend instead of making her suffer bro 😭😭

[sonyaheaneyauthor]

I've almost reached my breaking point with this genocide in Ukraine. I'm older than most Tumblr users, so I was being yelled at in university tutorials in the early 00s for talking about the Holodomor, and being told that "If it happened, Ukrainians deserved it for being Nazis".

I was out there in 2007 when we had the worldwide march for the Holodomor to be recognised as a genocide, only for so many countries (the USA being one of them) to tell us that they won't do it because it might upset russia.

I remember when russia invaded in 2014 and Obama said it wasn't his business, and that russia can decide what happens in Ukraine. And then he sent Ukraine fucking helmets and "hygiene kits" instead of the military aid he was supposed to.

My family in Donetsk walked out of their homes with their lives packed in plastic shopping bags nearly eleven years ago. But people prefer to believe the russian lies that Donbas wants to be part of russia.

I remember sitting at home on the 17th of July 2014, hearing about russia shooting down MH17, and feeling my blood run cold because the initial reports said the aeroplane was full of Americans. Being so sure that the USA might finally live up to the Budapest Memorandum and get involved in the war.

Of course they didn't.

And then the Malaysians went and protested at the Ukrainian embassy, as if they were to blame for being invaded by their genocidal neighbour.

I remember being at a protest at the russian embassy in Canberra just after Crimea was annexed, and the only people who turned up for us were other Ukrainians. Soon after there were massive protests for Palestine and BLM from Melbourne to Dublin and beyond. Ukrainians are too white for leftists and too foreign for right-wingers to care about.

More people dumped buckets of ice on their heads than supported us.

I spent Easter 2016 in a hotel in Ukraine. 8.5 years ago I was the only guest who wasn't a soldier on leave from the war.

Now I go on reddit and see that Americans are discussing how Ukraine "has a neo-fascist problem". Um, you guys just voted for Donald fucking Trump?

Then I see an Australian journalist say that the US election result means that America is "becoming like Eastern Europe". No. Eastern Europeans aren't Nazis. They suffered more under the Nazis than anyone.

We're always on our own. Millions upon millions of Ukrainians have been killed in the last ninety years, millions more sold into slavery in Germany (including my grandparents), hundreds of thousands sent to gulags (including the entire population of my grandmother's village), and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of thousands dead or missing now, but we're still not seen as worthy of caring about.

I have family members whose dead bodies have been lying on battlefields for over a year. One killed in Bakhmut, a city that no longer exists. Another taken hostage from Mariupol, a city russia bombed to the ground. The mass graves there can be seen from space.

We can't get the bodies back because russia has colonised the area. I have a relative who was moved on from fighting in Vovchansk because there was no point fighting for another city that no longer exists. My relative who was taken hostage in Mariupol was starved and tortured for 2.5 years.

And then last week our city's magazine had a three-page interview with the russian ambassador, explaining why his country "has" to commit genocide in Ukraine. The editor laughed at my aunt when she phoned to register a complaint.

But teenaged tankies on sites like this will mock Ukrainians' deaths, stick a fucking hammer and sickle in their profile, and lecture people like me about things they know nothing about.

The world needs to end its ridiculous love affair with the russian federation.

[ericsnaturalerection]

i hate when

people paint adam lanza to be some pro anorexic pedophile. He had started off his opinions on pedophilia with "I am not a pedophile". what part of that do people not get?

sure this will be a rant, but either way, he only defended it which does not make him a pedophile. nothing proves he himself was a pedophile and he mentioned before he wasn't. He had mentioned before on fuckcomments (which, before you say its not him actually do research), someone will find you beautiful no matter what weight you are.

"fuckcomments 4 years ago: A woman’s weight has NOTHING to do with her beauty. Sorry that is something they don’t teach. If you are under 300 pounds, you are attractive to someone, if you are over 300 pounds you are attractive to someone out there, who is probably 300 pounds as well or maybe not even! So what. Just be healthy. There is someone out there for everybody no matter what they look like. Eating poorly makes someone feel like dying, regardless of their mental disorder."

his 30 reasons were taken from a tumblr meanspo thing.

Proof on fuckcomments-https://archive.is/SZtXz

Just look up an archive of CulturalPhilistine on reddit. Let's stop making adam a rapist pedophile. We don't even know if he was a pedophile and he would not rape an adult or a kid. No, he'd not follow people around stalking them. He was more of an online guy for that. It's not that hard to do research.

He would not hurt his partner, make fun of them in anyway. In his YouTube channel, "CulturalPhilistine" he mentions he'd care for his partner. He also said he wanted to die with his partner, suffer with his partner, cuddle with his partner and care for them. He would not abuse his partner.

[homunculus-argument]

I think if we're going to make any sort of progress as a society, people who actually are in positions of unearned privilege should be allowed to casually aknowledge that without either having to grovel about it or be accused of boasting about something they did nothing to obtain. There was some guy on reddit who didn't understand why people always assume he's an idiot, like not only did people assume he's wrong every single time he opens his mouth - even about something he had a degree in - but were genuinely surprised every single time it turned out that he is actually correct.

And he just wanted to know what he could possibly be doing wrong to get treated like this, why do people talk over him and correct him incorrectly and talk down at him like he's a toddler, what's he doing wrong that makes people do this. And someone pointed out that this is unfortunately just what people do to people who aren't able-bodied white men from one of the specific Approved cultural and social class backgrounds.

And OP replied that he literally is all of those things, and people still talk at him like he's stupid, and he doesn't understand what he does wrong to make them do that. And he wasn't just downvoted to Hell but all the way down to the deepest pits of Tartarus for that comment. Like people were thoroughly offended and sickened that he'd say something like that. And then downvoted him for asking what he did wrong.

I mean come on. The dude wasn't going "why do people not give me the respect I am naturally entitled to as a white man" or some shit, he was very clearly asking it as a "I am literally playing this in Easy Mode with training wheels on, how can I possibly operate this so thoroughly wrong that despite of allthat I am still losing".

You would also be asking what you're doing wrong if you were shooting fish in a barrel and somehow kept missing all of them.

[animentality]

while I try to be compassionate to teens online, because I know they're just kids and they're still learning, and even if they don't learn today, they will probably learn some day, I gotta say this... sometimes...

even I wasn't that fucking stupid as a teen.

I never sent anon hate (still fucking haven't, by the way, y'all are so inferior to me if you have), I didn't spend my fucking time on 4chan or reddit being an incel or flirting with neo Nazism, I never doxxed anyone or encouraged other people to harass or threaten people I didn't like.

I didn't bully people for drawing Steven universe art I didn't like, I never tried canceling people or making up fake rumors about how xkitguy was a pedophile, I didn't go around accusing people of being pedophiles with no evidence.

I never harassed creators online or sent death threats because someone doesn't like my favorite character and I actually unsubscribed and forever ignored content creators I found out were fucking pedophiles rather than doubling down.

Some of y'all are just dumb and mean and it has a little to do with your age, but also has to do with you being an asshole.

being a teen is not a catch all excuse.

you're not fucking 6.

you do know right from wrong at the ripe old age of 17.

you can be a piece of shit as a teen, and I can judge you despite being an adult, because I know I wasn't like that when I was a teen.

and even if I was, I can still say, knock it off.

you bullying little shits.

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

I know that there are a lot of feelings right now, and everyone is absolutely entitled to them. The announcement certainly hit hard.

I did, however, want to add a little bit of my own hope into the mix. Maybe it won't matter. But maybe it will help someone feel just a bit better about everything.

For context, someone on Reddit made an excellent point that 90 minutes is plenty of time to tell a great story. Many have been told in less than that. Lion King, Nightmare Before Christmas, Beauty and the Beast, Totoro, I could go on.

I completely agreed with them. But I also wanted to add my own personal spin as well.

When you really get down to it, the plot of season two was truly only compromised of 90 minutes worth of plot between A + C. Maybe even less than.

A lot of it was drawing out a mystery that didn't need to be as long as it was. As much as I love me some putzing and meandering, seeing this entire 90 minute drama go down has made me realize just how weak season two was.

Did I love it? Hell yes.

But I'm also realizing that the plot wasn't tight.

Most of the memorable moments are comprised of seconds of screentime.

Not minutes.

Seconds.

The touching of Aziraphale's hand to Crowley's chest

"Look at you, you're gorgeous."

Hands touching during dancing

The final speech and kiss

Michael Sheen's bitchy little eyebrow raise

Michael Sheen eye fucking Crowley every chance he gets

Just Michael Sheen's quiet, quick acting choices in general

When breaking it down, most of what mattered added up to less than 90 minutes, with the rest of it being unfocused and dithering.

Now imagine 90 minutes. 90 minutes of focus on these two characters. No chance for meandering, no opportunity to wander off. These two will be forced to confront their issues, their grief, their resilience, their LOVE with nothing to pull us away. There won't be time for side characters to take the focus. There won't be time to worry about other relationships or spending time apart.

This is going to be about them because it can't waste time on anything else.

AND ANOTHER THING.

I keep seeing people saying "90 minutes isn't enough time to tie up all the loose ends". And to that I say...

What loose ends?

We really only have two. The second apocalypse and their love.

And to those who say 90 minutes isn't enough to stop an apocalypse, I counter with; season 1 stopped it in 5 minutes while they stood on what was essentially a parking lot. And they were side characters at that point.

In conclusion: we will be okay. Would I have loved six episodes to watch them circle one another? Sure. But I have spent more time reading fanfiction of them than watching the actual show, and those writers have created better scenarios than Neil Gaimen ever could. The kind of stories that would make Terry Pratchett proud.

We will get what we need. Because the people who fought for this love these characters. And because David and Michael would personally square up with Jeff Bezos in a parking lot just to be able to lock lips on screen again and again in a cottage by the sea

We will be okay. More than that, we will thrive.♡🖤

❤.

[enarei]

also I think most people forget that even outside 4chan the average tolerance for overt racism, antisemitism, misogyny, much less homo/transphobia was completely different ten years ago, which is the timeframe where the "4chan phase" most often comes up. chances were that if you were in any gaming related forums you were regularly exposed to people saying racial slurs and making rape jokes. I'm not old enough to remember the worst of it but even reddit didn't have any site wide rules against hate-speech until the last like 5 years, and it wasn't actively enforced in the sense that moderators not complying could be banned until much more recently. being on internet forums at all before 2010 somewhat implies you were complicit in what "having a 4chan phase" is essentially trying to convey as an accusation, which is knowingly participating in communities where hate speech was somewhat tolerated, at least to the extent that users weren't consistently banned for it. the state of online discourse was completely different before it coalesced around a handful of professionally moderated social media sites.

[endiness]

okay, i have gone through probably 50+ s2 interviews of hc researching this so far and i have to say that at this point i really don't see how he wasn't deliberately trying to manipulate the fanbase and the media against the writers and the show to get them onto his side. (and also, like, a very specific, extremely toxic section of the fandom at that.) (it's the sexist incel gamerbros. i'm talking about them.)

"I wanted to represent as much of a book-accurate Geralt as possible and a lot of the fans did as well, and so I campaigned really hard to make sure that he was more verbose, he sounded more intellectual, his choice of words was more thought out and that his approach to Cirilla and everyone else wasn’t antagonistic. Because it initially came across as he was just grumpy all the time with everyone and everything and I really wanted to show this three-dimensional character […] It’s gonna be tough to do the stuff which is as brilliant as Sapkowski’s writing, but it’s something I’m always gonna campaign for and it’s hopefully fit into the vision of the show."

there are so many interviews (ie virtually every interview out of 50+ with the exception of maybe, like, 3) where hc says the exact same thing about how he just cares so much about book accuracy, specifically where geralt's characterization is concerned, and that he really started to push for a more book accurate geralt in s2 and wanted him to be more verbose and intelligent and show that he isn't just a one dimensional character who just grunts and says hmm all the time like in s1 — and at no point does he ever take any responsibility for how that was due to his acting choices in the first place because he would cut his lines.

he also just straight up lies about the situation because the writers originally wrote geralt as being more verbose and book accurate in s1 but then changed the way they were writing him due to the acting choices he made. and yet he acts like that was never the case and that geralt was never originally written that way and he pushes this idea that a book accurate geralt went against lauren's vision. even though, once again, that was the original vision and it only changed due to him.

and on the extremely rare occasion (i'm talking, like, maybe 2 con panels here) that he ever takes any kind of responsibility for his role in all of that, he still waffles about and tries to present this image that he wasn't really cutting that many lines and they weren't really that important anyway and it didn't really matter:

"I didn't even cut that much. Just little bits when someone says how they feel, I thought if Geralt says nothing, and maybe the well-known grunts or hmms and sometimes the occasional f-word, people can take from that what they will."

even though that can't be true as confirmed by joey:

"Henry likes to cut his lines, 'cause he's lazy. No, he literally just likes to cut them. He likes to do more up here [frames his face with his hands] and just with face and hmms and grunts. There's a lot of hmms, and so I often have to take a lot of his lines and turn it into a lot of my stuff so that the plot happens."

and even hc himself confirms this and what joey said in a s1 interview:

"All the grunts, I either added or I didn't say anything and just grunted instead. It was often up to the other actors to go, 'I think he's not gonna say anything now.'"

i also have to point out that hc directly links his push for a more book accurate geralt to reading comments on reddit as i think that's very relevant to what section of the fandom exactly that he's pandering to and why he's been so vocal about it while lying about the role he played in everything and what actually happened:

"I’m on all the Reddit forums. I’m reading all the reviews. I’m literally trying to get everyone’s information. Some of it is not useful, and other criticisms are incredibly useful. I take it all in, and I look forward to bringing it even closer and closer to Sapkowski’s writing. I think any of those criticisms, they often lie in things like I was saying—we don’t have the advantage of a long involved conversation or dialogue with Geralt, so they are criticisms which I think I was prepared for. So for me, it’s about seeing that, understanding it, and working out how I can do my job better within the framework provided, [how to] appease and make those people feel comfortable that I do actually understand this character—and love this character just as much as they do."

"As a source for information, it's really helpful for me to see what everyone's saying, what everyone's thinking, and to see how much my thinking falls in line with whichever side of that spectrum it is and whether I'm doing the wrong thing, for example, by campaigning hard for the book Geralt to exist or whether I'm doing the right thing."

and just another important thing to point out imo: virtually the only times hc ever takes any responsibility in any capacity whatsoever for his own role in the show not adhering to the books (which even then he barely does and it's still always with a lot of excuses), it's only ever at con panels — which are far less likely to get picked up by news outlets and seen by a broader audience — and not in formal interview settings. (except for, i think, one interview he gave early on when s2 first went on hiatus. but even then, it still has the same problems that the con panels have where he comes up with a lot of excuses that don't match what happened.)

then there's an interview hc gave where he went on about how he added some book dialogue into a scene and he made it out to be like it was some kind of rebellion against the writers and he didn't consult them as he was just going to do what he wanted, consequences be damned:

"I did not feel like having long discussion about whether I could add this bit somewhere. So I just did it, said the words in front of the camera, and was ready to face the consequences."

and meanwhile what actually happened was that lauren eventually let hc have free reign and rewrite a scene that he was unhappy with. which, y'know. kinda fucking weird to present what happened in the way he did.

and then there's him pushing this narrative that the female characters — namely yennefer and ciri — were given more depth and focus than geralt and the male characters as if that came at their expense and all of which is somehow due to lauren's women-centric vision of the show as if that's somehow opposed to how the books themselves are:

"On season two, I wanted to bring as much of 'Book' Geralt into the show that Lauren's vision and that the plot would allow. That's a tricky thing to do, because the plot, as Lauren has said, is very centred around bringing women into the centre of The Witcher."

"In Season 1, there wasn't really much of an opportunity for expansive dialogue which Geralt is known for — in the books, he's often known to monologue — because we had two original origin stories which were the center point of the show."

"Lauren’s vision was more of an ensemble piece than the first Witcher books. It’s driven a lot more by the characters of Yennefer and Cirilla."

"I wanted to make sure we really explored as much as showrunner's vision could allow. She has her own plan, so I’ve got to toe that line between book Geralt and Lauren’s vision."

"I wanted to try and bring as much of the book’s Geralt into Season 2 as possible, and as much as the vision, the plot and storylines would allow. The toughest part for me was finding that balance between the showrunners’ vision and my love for the books, and trying to bring that Geralt to the showrunners’ vision."

"It’s important for me to have the character be three-dimensional and it’s tricky to do, as I was saying earlier, because there’s a certain vision and there’s a certain set, storyline and plot. And so, it was about me trying to find Geralt’s place within that."

"There’s only so much space to provide the same character from the books within the showrunner’s vision. But, I did my best to provide a bit more of a three-dimensional character with a bit more emotionality."

"It's important to me that the men in the story are three dimensional as well."

like, first off — and not to continually reiterate this but — that's not true. in s1, geralt was originally written as being just as verbose and intellectual as he was in the books and that only changed due to hc cutting his lines and we know that joey often had to take his lines, too. so there was, in fact, always plenty of time for geralt to be book accurate and for yennefer and ciri to have their own focus. these things were never mutually exclusive and it's definitely some kinda take to imply otherwise.

secondly, while it is true that geralt is the main character of the short stories, ciri is the main character of the main series starting from blood of elves, the book that s2 adapted. and despite claims otherwise, her pov has always had the most focus — yes, even more than geralt (sans baptism of fire, obvs.) and it's not like ciri is the only female pov, either, or that there aren't other important female characters that make up the series. there's yennefer, triss, milva, philippa, fringilla, nimue, condwiramurs, kenna — and that's just off the top of my head. there are plenty more where that came from. women and their stories have always played a central role in the books. nothing about that goes against them or is unique to lauren's vision.

and just with boe in particular, like. triss's pov is either focused on more than geralt's or at least about as much as his depending on how you want to break things down. and with dandelion following very close behind them, too! like, ciri may be the main character of the main series and geralt may be the main character of the short stories and their povs are the most focused on overall, but the books are still very much an ensemble piece made up of a collage of many, many povs to paint a full picture of the universe. and, yeah, the women make up a huge part of that. so the show focusing on ciri and yennefer and the women — and, yes, the men as well because it does actually do that! — is um, still book accurate. so y'know, why the fuck is he presenting this idea that's somehow not the case.

in general, hc emphasizes in a lot of interviews how much he fought for "male characters to be three dimensional." which yeah, given the context of everything else, is some suspicious kinda phrasing because it gives this undertone that the show wasn't writing three dimensional male characters in the first place as opposed to the women and that it's only due to his efforts that anything changed.

also, i have to highlight this quote of him talking about the three dimensionality of men because ~curious that he omits women from the list of people real menTM can be loving and caring toward:

"I believe that real men are very sensitive. They are very capable of doing things which can be violent, if possible, or necessary. But at the same time, they are incredibly capable of love and caring amongst men and towards children and family and all sorts."

and then there's the way hc talks about changing things which comes across as so suspicious, too, imo. especially when there is every other cast member to compare him to. because the way the rest of the cast has talked about this is that they all very consistently say that the whole process is very collaborative and that lauren is very much willing to hear them out about their thoughts and concerns and that it really feels like a team effort and that everyone is working together. and meanwhile the vibes that hc gives off is either "me vs the world (ie the writers)" or "but there's nothing that i can really do to change anything and it's all on the writers~" either way, his attitude very much comes off like all bad decisions are the writers' fault but meanwhile any good decision was due to him and him alone (or maybe the rest of the cast, but definitely not the writers.) like, weird af to play it off that way especially since every other cast member didn't seem to have any problems and they all gave credit where credit was due ie to lauren and the writers.

in conclusion, it'd be one thing if hc had just taken the l and admitted that he is the one who fucked up geralt's characterization in s1 and so he sought to rectify that in s2. but yeah, he doesn't really do that. instead he lies over, like, 50 times to create this narrative of him pushing for book accuracy as if that's somehow in opposition to lauren and the writers and as if they didn't originally write geralt book accurately in the first place and as if he played no role in the lack of book accuracy at all. and then that there's also him pushing this subtle (or not so subtle) narrative about how the women were taking a more central role as opposed to the men and that's somehow unlike the books and something purely due to lauren's vision, too? even though women have always played a central role in the books to the point where ciri is the main character of the main series? and that he's directly linked this narrative he's pushing to reading comments on reddit? (and that he also has a history, since s1, of trying to cater to game stans?) yeah, i just don't see how this doesn't add up to him trying to manipulate the media and audience — especially the worst parts of the fanbase — against the writers and the show and onto his side.

(also just one last thing i'd like to note as i find it super weird that when hc was asked about giving freya any advice, he immediately shut down the notion that he would ever do anything like that and he would never offer her any unsolicited advice and he would only ever give her any if she came to him first. like, there are literally s1 and s2 interviews where freya talks about hc giving her advice. i mean, maybe she did come to him in the first place, idk. but the immediacy in which he shut down the idea that he would ever do anything like that as if offering someone younger than you advice and being a mentor to them is wrong… weird. sus, even. like, why are you scrambling to cover your ass for something that's not even bad and, also, why are you lying about it by omission in the very least.)