#please note when I say discourse I don’t mean racism

[pumpkinpaix]

It was only when starting MDZS that I came across the terms “seme” and “uke.” To me these categories seemed too rigid and simplistic compared to actual gay dynamics I have observed. I wanted to ask whether such categorisation is truly reflected in the way gay Chinese people behave or is it just a stereotype?

okay so -- there’s a lot to unpack here. I’ve been sitting on this ask for months at this point but let’s give it a shot. to forewarn you, I found this ask really upsetting for a number of reasons, and I am. really kind of at the end of my patience with this fandom, so this is going to be harsh. please bear with me if you are in a space to do so.

so. seme and uke are japanese terms that come with their own genre conventions and such, even though they roughly mean top and bottom. you can read a little bit about it here under the “seme and uke” section on the yaoi wikipedia page.

the equivalent chinese terms are 攻 (gong1) and 受 (shou4). you might notice that the hanzi/kanji used are the same as seme and uke because i’m fairly sure the chinese terms were derived from the japanese ones. there’s a lot of cultural crossover in ACGN (anime, comics, games, novels) fandoms.

the use of seme/uke vs gong/shou does matter when it comes to anglophone spaces. because one of the facets of anti-asian racism in anglophone spaces is the way that people treat all (east) asians as interchangeable, the choice of which language to use for which media is important, even if the terms are linguistically equivalent.

it's a small thing, but even just saying gong/shou instead of seme/uke in this ask would have softened the blow a little. all of this information is easily obtained with a quick google search of "seme and uke" and "chinese version of seme and uke" and a little bit of analytical thinking. before you ask a random stranger on the internet to dispense cultural information, please do the minimum of research on your own.

with regards to the actual question:

I know this ask is old so maybe a lot has changed for you anon, but regarding this ask specifically, I’m going to ask you to think very hard about what you’re asking, who you're asking, and why you're asking it next time. for a start, I am not a gay chinese man. i have been very clear that I am abc, and i live and grew up in the states. That's not equivalent to "a chinese person who happens to be fluent in english". we are very culturally distinct, and there is absolutely no way that my background gives me any inherently privileged insight into the lives and culture of gay chinese men in china. why are you asking me to speak for them? why are you asking me to tell you about them? gay chinese men behave like individual humans. i am not your convenient tour guide into all things chinese just because I speak english. moreover, please remember that your experience, like mine, is limited. whatever observed "actual gay dynamics" you're talking about are a product of your specific position, location, age, culture etc. and it would be absurd to extrapolate your observations to generalize how all gay people interact with one another even in your specific culture.

I will be very honest: the tone of this ask evokes purity wank bait because of the wider context of the question. there has been a Lot of discourse surrounding the “roles” in danmei in anglophone fandom that essentially boils down to fujoshi discourse redux, which often has a lot of racist underpinnings and comes from an extremely white, western, misogynist, and identity politics-heavy perspective. i put links and such about fujoshi discourse in this ask if you aren't familiar, but I want you to understand that, regardless of your intent, my initial impression of this question (because of the context of these discussions) was uncomfortably close to "I'm better than those oppressive, uneducated straight chinese women who unrealistically fetishize gay men, right?" I am choosing to believe that this wasn't what you meant, but. to draw an analogy: would you ask me this question about twinks and bears in US gay culture? would you ask me if those labels/roles/categories were representative of the way US gay men behaved? what about top/bottom? if not, then why are you asking me about chinese gay men as if they're a different species?

if you can understand that top/bottom or bear/twink are not representative categorizations (though there are, of course, people who happily fall into them, self-identify as them, label themselves as such etc), why are you holding gong/shou to a higher standard?

I get that we're all in different places re: our cultural knowledge, but just. look, if you're coming to me with a question like this, the least you could do me is the courtesy of ten minutes of googling before you hit me with a racist microaggression right out the gate on a sensitive topic. As I said, I don't think you meant harm, but please try to be more aware in the future, okay?

(please do not dogpile anon in the notes, it's not constructive, thanks)

if you are curious about the lives of queer folk in china, there is plenty of interesting information out there in english as well. here's an article to get you started.

[aruthlessblackthorn]

Something to Address

Disclaimer: I have nothing to be jealous of when I deleted my instagram account months ago, but I am genuinely upset at the situation. The fandom (and Cassie) deserves to know the truth.

If you’ve read Cassie’s newsletter this morning (or yesterday, depending on time), then you know she’s started her promotional project for Chain of Iron, called The Letter Game. I won’t go into too much detail because the premise of the idea isn’t what’s important-- it’s about who is involved. 

I’m nervous to talk about this but this has to be talked about. For Thursday, tsc.updates on instagram is doing one of the promotional pieces. But if you know who runs the account, then you might know they’re also the person who ran shadowsconfess. And if you were around when that account existed, then you know there was a lot (and I mean A LOT) of controversy that steamed from almost every confession post made. 

When shadowsconfess was a thing, there was a lot of discourse surrounding the controversial things that were shared. One of the biggest things was their hate for Jem, and from that came a lot of people who sought out shadowsconfess as their gateway to be hateful and bigoted towards Jem (and many other characters, specifically POC). Now, I am not saying someone isn’t allowed to dislike a character, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but what I am saying is that shadowsconfess didn’t check those hateful confessions, like the racist ones, or the sexist ones, and it honestly played such a huge role in ruining the fandom and community. Arguments were happening left and right, and it was hard to remain neutral especially when it came to differing opinions (especially about Will, it was considered awful if you disliked him). 

Here is an example of what I mean by allowing bigoted confessions (coloring out usernames for obvious reasons):

Overtime, shadowsconfess would post other opinions of theirs, specifically about their heavy dislike of Cassandra Clare. One of their biggest things was how they hated her, how they were a firm believer of separating the art from the artist. Which is fine, but given the fact that they’re currently working with CC... make it make sense. Shit doesn’t add up.  

They were also known for having the scoop on what CC feels towards her characters, such as her disliking Will (prob because of the CP2 epilogue and jessa being canon in the future books). Going back to the hate on Jem, they has a history of disliking POC characters. Like Maia and Alastair, the former reminding her of someone (same argument made against Jem) and the latter being because he’s a bully and not wanting redemption for him. Like I said, it’s okay to dislike a character but this is a pattern. A racist/prejudiced one. 

There’s also this on their tumblr where they try and compare Alastair’s suffering from racism (he is half-Persian) to his bullying of James Herondale having demon blood in his veins as to being the same thing. Idk what to make of it, but it’s fucking weird. I’m sorry, but that’s not the same thing. Not at all.

When they deleted shadowsconfess and made tsc.updates, they kept their tellonym. And here they went along with others making fun of Cassandra Clare’s appearance, where they berated Alastair’s character, etc. 

There have been other instances where they have been awful, such as comparing Cassie to h*tler and jumping on the bandwagon of hating her because of the incest plotline in TMI. Many people I know have gotten into an argument with her and/or their friends over these issues, and for the most part we’ve asked that a lot of this hate and negativity to stop. But there has been a bruise left on the TSC fandom because of things like this, and now CC has her promoting Chain of Iron, which leads into this point:

I am not making this post to be spiteful, or to “re-hash old feuds,” but instead I am pointing out how unfair it is that someone who claims to hate Cassandra Clare and has caused a lot of damage to this fanbase gets to work with her. There are plenty of fans who would die to have been part of this project, and unfortunately this has turned into one of those things that happens when someone doesn’t research a person they collaborate with. There are a bunch of other things that have been said and done but I know I can’t bring them up without proper proof, but I hope what I have shown here is enough. 

I have been wanting to talk about this since I read CC’s newsletter this morning, but I am nervous to post this due to the way I’ve been treated when calling tsc.updates/shadowsconfess out on their bs in the past. I don’t care that they don’t post confessions anymore, but point still stands that there has been harm done. And on an obvious note, don’t send hate to them. Instead hold them accountable for their actions. Because that’s what this post is for. 

So @cassandraclare , if you read this, please reconsider working with them in the future. 

[pyaasa]

lesbiansandgayssupporttheminers is racist; she thinks she understands racism better than poc, stands by racists, and attacks poc for trying to speak to her about racism

Tw: racism, rape mention, incest mention. also possible transphobia 

For the full story, you first need a bit of background: if you’ve been following me for a while then you will be aware I have called out @ayeforscotland’s racism several times. I would recommend reading this post for a full explanation.

In addition to the incidences mentioned in the post I have just linked, ayeforscotland has also had interactions with neo @androidgynes who is Romani and another person who is black (but didn’t want to be named) and they’ve both also called him out for his racism.

Anyway so. @androidgynes​ saw that lesbiansandgayssupporttheminers was reblogging from ayeforscotland, and that the op of the post was @/getpoliticaluk (who defends incest). Androidgynes messaged lesbiansandgayssupporttheminers (who I will from now refer to as lagstm) and informed her that ayeforscotland is racist and getpoliticaluk defends incest - the conversation that followed went like this. (the below screenshots are posted with permission from @androidgynes​)

The post that neo (@androidgynes) linked of mine was this. And I mean... clearly that particular post by ayeforscotland was very racist, he literally just sat there laughing about anti-black racism as if it was a joke. When @mangopickled​ tried to speak to him about how offensive this post was, he removed her comments from the notes of the post (like. to be clear: ayeforscotland, a WHITE MAN, made a post about racism, and then removed a WOMAN OF COLOUR’S commentary from that post when she told him that his comments were inappropriate). When I saw that, I called that out, and he blocked me. There’s many levels to his racism here that I don’t have the energy to explain, and if you don’t understand why it’s so problematic then you should probably stop reading here cos you clearly know nothing and probably care even less about anti-racism.

So on that particular post that neo linked to lagstm, there is ayeforscotland being racist, and 2 woc calling out his racism. And yet on having this post shown to her, this is how she chose to respond

lagstm literally says that she thinks my views on racism lack nuance. I am a woman of colour, I am visibly muslim, and I’ve experienced racism pretty much all my life. And here is a white woman saying that she thinks my views on racism “lack nuance”. I,, I genuinely don’t have words to convey how angry this makes me. Literally who does she even think she is. Not even is it racist to dismiss my literal LIVED experience of being a woman of colour in this country, but she is literally saying “look at these stupid brown folk, they don’t know what they’re talking about cos they’re so stupid :)”

neo points out firstly that as a white person lagstm doesn’t have the right to make that call, and also that there is ofc another woc on that post saying that exact same thing, and androidgynes themselves are roma. lagstm is not just dismissing me as a stupid savage who is too stupid to form complex thoughts, but she is also indirectly saying the same thing about 2 other poc, and saying that her judgement, as a white person, is more sound than all of ours.

It’s also worth mentioning that neo, who is Romani, was polite to lagstm during this exchange, and lagstm was rude and dismissive. I find this deeply hypocritical. Lagstm has been talking a lot about the policing bill and how it will affect GRT communities, but when she’s talking to someone who is actually *from* the Roma community, she is dismissive and condescending. All this shows is that she’s fake AF. She pretends to care about the Roma community on her blog and then speaks down to them in private.

And again this is worth repeating: AYEFORSCOTLAND WAS BEING RACIST ON THAT POST. IT WAS RACIST. WHAT HE SAID WAS RACIST. So lagstm isn’t just ignoring 3 poc, she is also ignoring,,,, you know,,, the actual racism,,,

And she also says ayeforscotland is borderline racist? Like she acknowledges ayeforscotland is borderline racist but she’s still happy to follow him? Like that alone would be enough for me actually

neo then blocked lagstm and messaged me and told me what happened, and showed me the above screenshots - btw prior to this neo and I had never interacted. Anyway I was obviously a bit disgusted but instead of going straight to blocking lagstm or making a callout post straight away, I messaged her to explain herself and take back what she said. That is now two poc who tried to resolve the matter privately - clearly a lot more than lagstm ever deserved. Androidgynes messaged me last Friday, and I messaged lagstm the next day on Saturday

My convo with lagstm went as follows:

So you can see that initially she was apologetic and said she “didn’t mean to imply that that my judgement on racism was flawed” (even tho that’s literally what she said) and defended herself by saying “I react poorly in interactions like this” - genuinely not a defence but whatever. She then proceeded to say that what she doesn’t trust my opinion on is Scotland and Ireland - which completely irrelevant. Firstly I am ambivalent to Scottish nationalism and have always said I don’t know much about it, and I support the reunification of Ireland. And secondly, my issue with aye has got literally nothing to do with Scotland or Scottish nationalism; he is racist all on his own. And the post neo linked was barely even about scottish nationalism, it was just him being anti-black. So lagstm saying “I don’t trust your judgement on Scotland and Ireland” is ridiculous considering that Scottish/Irish nationalism have nothing to do with this.

Like akjfbkjdfbs this is actually so ridiculous. It doens’t make any sense. Lagstm clearly says “I don’t trust pakisstani’s judgement on THIS issue [the issue being racism] and her views on THIS issue [the issue being racism] lack nuance” but now turns around and says “I wasn’t talking about racism, I was talking about Scotland/Ireland” like she must really think I’m dumb

And you can see Lagstm bringing up unrelated hypothetical scenarios, and saying “in this situation, you can’t tell me to defer to poc” which i found ??? Like why are you bringing up scenarios in which you think you are allowed to educate us poor and stupid black and brown folk?? I then told her she was straw-manning and that her points about Ireland/Scotland were ridiculous, but then she claimed it was me that was engaging her in bad faith. Like SHE, the white woman who practically said that I am too stupid to understand racism, and when confronted on it started straw-manning and bringing up unrelated scenarios, said I am not engaging her in good faith. AFTER both neo and I tried to speak to her privately about this. Like I tried to speak to her privately AFTER I FOUND OUT SHE HAD SAID RACIST THINGS ABOUT ME. BUT I’M NOT ENGAGING HER IN GOOD FAITH? LMAOOO

And then the accusation about rape threats which is actually the most disgusting part of this entire thing. I shouldn’t have to explain that accusing 2 poc of conspiring to send her rape threats (without any evidence whatsoever. Frankly I think she’s lying about the rape threats 🤷🏽‍♀️ it’s quite a transparent attempt to distract from her own nasty behaviour and deflect onto us) is actually extremely racist. She is invoking her white fragility and painting me and androidgynes as aggressors who are threatening her safety and inflicting/threatening to inflict sexual violence on her. It is beyond disgusting 🤮

What’s more, neo is trans, so when lagstm is baselessly accusing them of issues related to rape, she is also playing up to transphobic tropes.

One more thing worth mentioning is that there are several lies peppered throughout lagstm’s comments. Firstly when she claimed to have briefly unfollowed me - she didn’t actually. I was checking regularly, and she never unfollowed me. This was a small lie that I picked up on striaght away but because it wasn’t relevant I didn’t say anything about it. But I just think it’s interesting that she would lie for no reason. And another lie - feigning ignorance about ayeforscotland’s racism, and actually even asking for receipts is incredibly disingenuous when on this particular post, if you scroll through the notes, you can see she has literally liked it. Like she had already seen the posts where me and mangopickled called out his racism and literally LIKED it, and when neo says to lagstm that aye is racist, lagstm says “receipts please :)” YOU’VE ALREADY SEEN THEM! AND LIKED THEM! screenshot in case she unlikes it (sorry for including dumb comments by dumb scots but i need to prove it’s the same post so):

LASTLY. Last point I swear. When lagstm said “it was also coloured by the statements they’d made about another tumblr user, which didn’t relate to racism, which I didn’t address with them because I didn’t want to upset them” <- she must mean getpoliticaluk defending incest? So like what is lagstm saying here, she didn’t want to bring up that she also herself defends incest?? Like is she tryna say she’s a pro-shipping freak?????????????????????? What other way is there to read that statment

Okay that’s everything.

I’m not interested in discourse on this post - if you are white and think lagstm isn’t racist or you’re inclined to defend her then save your breath, I don’t need white people telling me what is or isn’t racist. I gave her the chance to defend herself, which is way more than she deserves, and this is how she responds. Her actions and indefensible and she can choke ☺️❤️  I will be unfollowing/blocking anyone I see reblogging from her because I deserve better than to follow people who are ok with racists ❤️ 

[colorseeingchick]

The Inevitable Dystopia of My Hero Academia (WITHOUT manga spoilers)

As noted by your local political science anime lover.

(This is a summary/rambling about a political science paper I wrote on My Hero. This is only based on the anime. I’m not caught up on the manga)

Warnings: Vague reference to abuse (Endeavor), discussion of political theory, discourse.

A/N: It’s lengthy and all over the place. It also might be impossible to follow. So I’m sorry in advance lol.

THESE ARE JUST MY OPINIONS AND A FORM OF DISCOURSE. I’m open to discussing if you have thoughts! Political science is about understanding policy and structures, not taking a stance. Any comparisons to ‘modern society’ are in reference to 1st world/developed societies, as those are the governments that parallel the My Hero Academia government. 

The politics of My Hero Academia is... pretty morbid if you ask me. It’s not worse than the real world, sure, but maybe that’s why it’s all the scarier. Even with quirks and super powers, the impossible becoming possible, it isn’t enough to save them from the undesirable. Their society seems to have fallen into a cycle of suffering and oppression that has no end. 

Now, I know no one really gets excited about political theory (unless you’re like me, then please be my friend), but there are some concepts that you’ll need to understand in order to follow along with my argument. So bear with me. 

First, utopia. Utopia is probably a term you’ve heard casually, but the definition political theorists hold it to is simply- “a good place.” Often times it is depicted as a far away dreamland, only possible in the realm of fiction (and this makes sense given that My Hero is fictional). It is very important to understand that utopia is not necessarily perfect. It’s just better than average. There are a few standards that characterize utopia, one being the utopian focus on having very strict laws to repress the unstable nature of mankind [1]. I’ll come back to this. 

Next is dystopia. Dystopia as an idea was actually made in response to utopia. It’s the ‘not-utopia,’ and is lumped with ‘anti-utopia’ (this comment is in reference to the semiotic square, if you would like to develop a further look into it). The simplest way to understand dystopia is to know it’s ‘a not-good place.’ [2] But that’s surprisingly broad. Dystopias can be a failed utopia, or they could have developed on their own as a result of any number of reasons. You’ve probably seen all sorts of depictions of dystopia (climate dystopias, medical dystopias, technology-based dystopias, literally any YA novel from my childhood, you get the idea). Its key to note that unlike an apocalypse, where there is utter destruction and it ends with complete annihilation of humanity, there is hope* inherently written into it. 

*Hope here meaning there’s theoretically a way for the government to be changed/overthrown without death of the majority. 

Now that all that boring stuff is out of the way- let’s talk about My Hero Academia. 

I’d argue that, at first glance, Hero Society seems to be working towards utopia. When reading from Deku’s perspective, especially in the beginning, you would think that their society is close to becoming utopian. The impossible is possible, being a hero is a reality, and a symbol of peace tangibly and definitively exists. When you compare it to pre-quirk society, these changes would appear to be developments. As for the ‘in progress’ aspect, I think Hawks verbalizes it best when he says his goal is for heroes to have too much time on their hands. They aren’t there yet, but if that goal is achieved, it would be a mark of utopia. 

They’ve achieved some level of utopian standards by meeting the ‘strict laws to repress the unstable nature’ standard. Think about the concept of licensing quirks, quirk regulation, and the government institutions that regulate quirk society. Remember when Tomura cornered Deku at the shopping mall and mentioned something along the lines of, ‘all these people could wield their quirks at any moment they want, but choose not to? Instead they smile and laugh.’ 

He has a point. Why is that? From a political theorist point of view, it’s honestly very shocking. For centuries, theorists have argued about how to manage human nature. It’s a difficult task as is. Give everyone superpowers? That would have to be 10x as chaotic. But in the My Hero world, it’s not. It’s well organized. The government took action to regulate the physical instability of humanity which arose from quirks. What’s so impressive to me is that they managed to mitigate (not eliminate) the instability of human nature/behavior along with it.

But if you take a step back to look at My Hero Academia, slowing down and stepping out of Deku’s shoes, I don’t think the instinct is to classify it as a utopia in progress. Of course, its superpowered with quirks- adding to the realm of possibility. But crime of all sorts is superpowered, just as the justice systems/law enforcement in the country. 

When I made this realization, I understood I had kind of been drawn into the propaganda the society puts out. It’s a sort of cloak built up by the positive media around the heroes, the narrative being focused on young heroes and their great mentors, and the universal title of ‘villain’ being put on everyone that breaks the government’s laws (this really bothers me, and maybe I’ll discuss it another time). Things aren’t better. Crime rates have gone down I believe, but the anti-hero sentiments being harbored are more intense than in certain real world societies. Hero society hasn’t necessarily resolved any of the problems that our society would have. The balance is the same, but the possible actions people can take, or the behaviors that are exhibited, are scaled up on both sides of the law.

What’s worse is that- even if its not a universal experience, this society is also a dystopia for many people. The first hint of this society being less than perfect is when we hear from Stain and his pursuit of a ‘just society’ by eliminating fraudulent heroes. His ideals are surprisingly level-headed, and very rigorous in standard, even if it is based in questionable morals. But it’s easy to brush it off. However, its less deniable as you learn more about these characters. 

Shigaraki was abandoned and waited for heroes to save him, but they didn’t. Overhaul was also an orphan living on the streets. Eri was abandoned by her mother because of her quirk. Twice was villainized, when in reality he has mental health issues (dissociative identity disorder I believe). It broke my heart when Twice said “heroes only save good people.” Who decided they were bad people? Why weren’t they saved?

Also, can we talk about the quirkism? (Which I don’t know if that’s a real term within this fandom yet, it might be, but just to be on the same page, I mean quirk-based discrimination) You have people like Shinsou, who’s treated as villain even though he wants be a hero- solely because of his quirk. I believe Toga was also treated poorly because of the nature of her quirk as well (correct me if I’m wrong). And then you have Midoriya, who was harassed and bullied for not having a quirk at all. Clearly none of them have control over the way they were born, and yet they all had to deal with how society treats them because of the uncontrollable. (At this point I’m sure its clear there are a lot of parallels with the discourse around quirkism, racism, and sexism, which is a whole nother conversation).

Having good quirks also seems to get you a pass, or puts you outside the reach of the law. The only example I need for this is Endeavor and his children. Despite all the abuse he’s done that makes him a villain in my book, he stays the number 2 hero. That’s all I need to say. 

The suffering of all these individuals is a direct result of the failure of the government. And this isn’t a ‘government should have taken extra steps to help them.’ This is a situation where the government’s structure, including the sensationalized media and monopolization of quirk use, has actively attacked and oppressed people who otherwise would have been untargeted. 

This is a world of misery for them- the people who make up the underworld. We call them villains and criminals because they are- but I don’t think its fair to call all of them bad people. They definitely didn’t start out that way. They are the results of suffering. They are created by a society that solely aims to remove them from existence. This hero society is so unjust that its faults create its own villains. The villains they aim to stop came to be because of the ‘heroes’ in the first place. The irony there is painful, and I hate that it’s a sort of self fulfilling prophecy. 

The reason why I think it’s morbid is because there is no escape. Quirk society in its current state is undeniably a dystopia for many. But the issue is (and this was the crux of my argument in my paper) dystopia and utopia inevitably and consistently coinhabit space. What is utopia to one will be a dystopia to another. There is no way to get everyone to uniformly view society. 

What that means is, somebody will always be suffering in this society. At least, that’s the cycle that’s been set up. In the episode where Tamaki got shot with a quirk erasing bullet and Kirishima fought the gangster on quirk enhancing drugs, that gangster did say that this was ‘their time’ to rise. “It’ll be the age of those who live in the shadows.” They’re not looking for resolution. They’re looking for revenge. They want to flip the script and be the ones living in utopia while everyone else is subject to suffering. The concept of everyone living happily in harmony and true peace isn’t even in consideration. 

There seems to be no middle ground, no solution to the push and pull between the ‘heroes’ and ‘villains.’ The unfairness will continue to be passed around, and unless someone can break the cycle, attack the corruption of the system at its roots,

the problem is not going to go away. 

Sources!

[1] Claeys, Gregory, and Fatima Vieira. “The Concept of Utopia.” In The         Cambridge Companion to Utopian Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.

[2] Robinson , Kim Stanley. “Dystopias Now.” Commune, November 17, 2018.            https://communemag.com/dystopias-now/.

Copyright © 2020 Colorseeingchick. All rights reserved. 

[akari-hope]

not to burst anyone’s bubble but you ARE racist if you continue to support shera because white saviorism and a piss-poor colonialism metaphor are literally baked into and inextricable from the narrative. adora is the poster child for a white savior and she’s even born of colonizers. That isn’t mentioning the white-washing and Glimmer’s skin turning YELLOW on Dril. you people use your autism as an excuse & will do anything to ignore racism if it comes from your faves. It’s literally so gross.

2/2 And if you’re a poc fan of it you absolutely DO have internalized racism you need to unpack. I don’t give a shit if my wording makes ppl with ocd uncomfortable, because that gets used as a flimsy excuse, too. It’s the truth. Y’all have to stop hiding behind your neurodivergencies and mental illnesses, because they don’t matter when you’re willfully ignoring or outright excusing blatant racism. Continuing to support spop means you’re racist, end of. I’m really not trying to be mean, but damn.

i agree with the points you're making. these are all parts of the racism present in the series. along with mara's whitewashing, and several other elements. you're correct. these are all problems. whether they're meant to be malignant or not is up for interpretation, but their existence is certainly not.

however, once again, everyone is going to have a different comfort level. and not throwing away the show does not make them racist by default. just as it does not make them transphobic, ableist, etc. this is coming from someone who has decreasing love for the series, closer to indifference than anything else at this point, so please note i'm not saying this to defend myself. this is just something i believe - my answer remains the same for harry potter, twilight, steven universe, whatever. enjoying a fictional work on its own is not a moral statement, regardless of the content of that fictional work (if it were then horror as a genre could not exist).

do i personally approve of every element in all of the works i listed? absolutely the fuck not. hp is full of racist, homophobic, transphobic, antisemitic bullshit. twilight is racist in more ways than i can count and justifies grooming. steven universe, while i have less knowledge of it, is not without its problems as well, many similar to she-ra's if the discourse i've encountered around it is to be believed. but i do not think that enjoyment of these works means someone inherently supports or excuses any of these things.

someone can engage critically with problematic media while still enjoying it, and that does not make them a bad person. if they are acknowledging the problems, seriously taking them into account in their interpretation and judgment of a work, and not just wiping them away, they are not inherently immoral and bad people for liking a work with any number of racist elements. (please note i am NOT speaking of those who willfully ignore or excuse. that is a problem and something they need to address. however i do not find them to be the majority of people i speak to.)

i'm going to be honest, we could do this song and dance with any piece of media. we can look for problematic elements all we want. and we would find them in anything. and you're allowed to. rip things to shreds if you want, kick them to the curb, hate them all you want. but ultimately you cannot dictate how others engage with fiction, and you will drive yourself crazy trying to. i really recommend just not engaging with the media or communities around it if it's so upsetting to you. i did the same largely, so it's very possible. saves me a lot of strife.

side note, i do not know why this is directed toward me. i do not use my autism as an excuse for anything to my knowledge, but you're free to correct me if i'm off base. if this is directed at an anon, don't send it to me bc i do not speak for my anons.

also, while i respect the attempt to backtrack, this all does come across as rude considering you're directing it at someone who really doesn't even support the series anymore. i'm giving the benefit of the doubt that you did not know this and are tired/upset, which i understand and do not blame you in the slightest for. but please do not make assumptions like this about me in the future. it is rude regardless of intention.

tldr: you make solid points, but people are also allowed to make their own decisions regarding how they engage with fiction. all that being said, i hope you have a nice evening anon (or whatever time of day it is for you)

[diversetolkien]

Hey yal! Below is a submissions I received regarding my Eol and Maeglin post. My responses are indented with the grey line! OPs are not!

——————————————————————————————————

First of all, it is absolutely necessary to draw attention to the things you’re drawing attention to. Whether you are “right” or “wrong,” or whether anyone is “right” or “wrong” is beside the point of the argument in my opinion: these issues simply need to be addressed! We need discussion and different points of view and they all need to be considered and we need them now more than ever. There are clear examples that are sketchy to say the very least: good guys are fair-skinned but the evil men ((, Haradrim) are not; orcs, clearly bad guys, are “swarthy” and “slant-eyed”. However, I do believe your point about Eöl and Maeglin on June 10 are off the mark. I believe you get too carried away by the title “dark” and hang your entire argument up on that. As far as I know, there is no textual evidence that Eöl was a dark-skinned elf at all.

Hello there! Thank you for the message. I do want to emphasize that I’ve been incredibly reluctant to answer this. As of resharing my meta I received a terribly racist message from a user on the website, and will tread cautiously with addressing any messages regarding Eol and Maeglin due to that. I completely agree that we do need discussion, and I’m open for it. This is the only way we can progress. But I won’t tolerate blatant racism.

I’m not accusing you of doing such, but for future references I want to make this clear.

While you believe I may get carried away on the aspect of dark or ‘swarth’, I think it may be important to explain what racial coding is, and also to remind you of Tolkien’s history with coding and with people of color. I talked about coding on my twitter, but in short coding is ascribing real world traits to fictional characters.

This includes attributing the historical and social context to the text to prove a point.

We’ve discussed how Tolkien has borrowed from cultures aside from his own, and with The Silmarillion published in the late 70’s, it’s not impossible to see how influence from America and racial influence there have played a role in his writings.

I also wouldn’t call it being ‘carried away’, when, as we both agree, Tolkien has a history of racism directed at people of color.

And at the same time, I think it’s important to note that while you dismiss the possibility of Tolkien considering Eol dark despite the use of swarth, you ascribe swarth to the orcs and their skin tone in the same breath. I don’t see why it’s impossible for the two to mean the same thing. Not when we do have a racist author who grew up in a very racist society already using dark skin to describe evil characers. Not when Eol’s narrative of the brute mirrors that of the orcs (ie: Celebrian and the Orcs).

And regardless if it is explicit or not, Eol is still coded. Again, we know this because we have canon stories that mirror his completely. This being, again, Celebrian and the Orcs.

We can also accept that Tolkien’s constant use of “dark” to describe evil things, and “light” to describe good things comes from a place of racism. So why is there such push back when we analyze that further?

Tolkien was known to ponder about problems, such as missing words in the Germanic languages. The term asterisk-word is coined by August Schleicher for exactly this purpose: words that should have existed in a (dead) language but aren’t recorded and needed therefore to be reconstructed. For example, Tolkien doesn’t have a recollection of how he came upon the word “hobbit” but to make it fit his Legendarium he made the asterisk-word *holbytlan, supposedly an old English word meaning “hole-builders” because hobbit language was akin to Old English. This word doesn’t exist in old English but could (and maybe should) have. Tolkien also wrote a long argument about a particular difficult passage in the Beowulf-poem which you can read in “Finn and Hengest.” Now normally I would never try to talk straight what’s curved, but Tolkien is a bit of a different case as I hope the above examples show.

The case of Eöl is a trick(s)y problem that stems from the “Prose Edda” written by Snorri Sturluson, an Icelandic poet who lived in the 12th century. This is thoroughly explained by Tom Shippey in his essay “Light-elves, Dark-elves, and Others: Tolkien Elvish Problem”. A quick summary is (but one really ought to read Shippey’s essay to understand it) that there are light-elves, dark-elves, dwarves and black-elves in the “Prose Edda.” Germanic scholars such as Nikolas Grundtvig and Jacob Grimm bent themselves in all kinds of shapes to explain the “error” that Snorri made. Are the black-elves the same as the dark-elves? Are both black-elves and dark-elves dwarves? What about twilight-elves? Tolkien pulls all the different strands of this one problem together and called it Eöl the Dark Elf. He could never have done this in an academic work if he wanted to be taken seriously, so his fiction seemed a great outlet to deal with this. Maybe it was all a private amusement because Tolkien never mentioned it as far as I know.

I personally can’t recall Eöl ever being called dark-skinned. He is considered “black” due to the armour he’s wearing made out of the metal galvorn that he made himself after coming into contact with dwarves (which also ties in masterfully with the whole elf-problem, again, see Shippey’s essay), but it’s not skin colour. Eöl was called the Dark Elf because he lived in a place where the sun never came. It was called Nan Almoth, the valley of the star pool, and he loved the stars, and loved to live in the twilight. The twilight-part is important in the above discussion as well.

I understand you are trying to be informative but please don’t be patronizing. Please do not explain to me what I already know. In the future, I will not be answering messages like this again. This is incredibly rude. You are assuming I don’t know about what I made a meta about, and that’s an insult to what I’ve written.

Please read my blog fully before you attempt to whitesplain something I already know. I understand debate, but there is a clear different between wanting to have a healthy discourse, and flat out patronizing me and treating me like a child.

Back the the point; The same, again, can be applied to the orcs. The orcs wear dark armor, were tortured by a creature who is often described as dark, reside in dark areas—but we know clearly that they are coded off of people given the description of them being swarthy.

The same attribute that’s given to Eol. And again, we have a clear historical context and in-canon context. And we know that Tolkien borrows from American history, and that England itself had a huge role to play in that history.

Finally, the citation from the Book of Lost Tales (BLT) where Maeglin is called swart is problematic to me. I think it’s as much proof against your point as it is in favour of it. Many, many things have changed since the BLT was written and turned into The Silmarillion (I mean Sauron was a giant cat at first!). The BLT version of Maeglin being “swart” is a discarded  version and in The Silmarillion, a way later revision, “his skin was white”. I think it would be wrong to conclude Tolkien discarded the swart skin of Maeglin as he realised it was racist. I think he simply hadn’t figured out the elf problem of the Edda when he wrote the BLT.

I think this is all negated by the fact that Tolkien has canonical characters of color, and that they have been coded. I’m having an incredibly hard time wrapping my head around why that’s accepted, yet when it comes to Eol and Maeglin it isn’t. We can accept that Tolkien has a history of racism with people of color, based on evidence far less than what I’ve provided. Maeglin’s light skin can be attributed to the fact that his mother was light. It’s possible to have a dark parent and be born light.  

And regardless if it was changed or not, it’s incredibly important to discuss it due to the fact that it was racist, and deserves to be brought to light.

I want to stress, again, that I think your work and thoughts are important, no matter if I or anyone else agrees or disagrees. It is of the utmost importance to address issues of racism, genderism and any other kinds of ism that is out there. Discussion is what matters!

[segenassefa]

9: Why Gatekeeping is Ok (#FufuChallenge Discourse)

African restaurants in the U.S., while not as popular as their foreign counterparts, are not far and few between in states such as a D.C., New York, and Georgia having large African communities. In recent weeks, videos of people trying variations of fufu and stew have popped up seemingly out of nowhere, unknowingly creating a “trend” called the #FufuChallenge. While some of the reactions were positive, many of these videos were quite the opposite, in which individuals with little to no home training had the absolute gall to record themselves treating the food as if it were 50 Shades of Grey – including but not limited to spitting, slapping, tossing, and other things that are considered incredibly disrespectful.

Now, fufu is native to West Africa and made from boiled and pounded cassava. Different countries have their versions of the same food, give or take a few ingredients - banku, eba, ga’at, ugali, mofongo, and cornmeal coucou (fungi, for my VI people). As disclaimer – I am an adventurous eater, and the first time I tried fufu, I was a fan. I don’t think it’s a food that’s hard to enjoy flavour-wise, but I can see how the texture may not be agreeable for everyone. Additionally, being from a culture that eats with their hands, there’s a lot of etiquette that’s instilled in at a young age– the most important being that food is not a toy. However, the recent videos have sparked a debate about Black acceptance between different members of the diaspora.

It is interesting how, during a time of inclusivity and unification within the Black community, it is taking no more than pounded root vegetable for most of you to show your ass. I don’t feel like now is the time to remind Black Americans that some of “common” foods would be considered abhorrent to others – chitlins and pickled pig feet, we’re looking at you. Everyone is losing their mind over pounded cassava, but the idea of eating soggy cornmeal – also known as grits – is a normal phenomenon. We can also bring snack foods into this - hot pickles in a bag, Vienna sausages - but the point of this conversation is not to sit here and bash culinary history, but to make the argument clear that every culture has foods that others would find less than palatable.

In the same breath that we want to come together, fight systemic oppression, and be on some fake Marcus Garvey shit, people are referring to African food as disgusting, garbage, and even “dog food”. But you want to go back to Africa, right? Find your roots?

Have you all lost your damn minds?

Black people exist everywhere, and that inherently means that the techniques and methods of cooking we use are prevalent in a lot of other cultures. If you don’t believe me, take the time to Google Korean fried chicken and the fact that the idea of frying chicken in batter was introduced by Black soldiers stationed abroad in the 1940s and 1950s, or how gumbo and jambalaya are variants of traditional African foods, created using recipes that date back to slavery. So, there’s a chance that there are other foods across various cultures – including Black American meals - that resemble traditional African cuisine. Why don’t you drag those on social media as well?

More likely than not, before the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, this is probably the food that peoples’ ancestors were eating, and by reasonable conclusion, it’d be the food that OUR ancestors were eating. Additionally, there are so many other cultures with foods that can be turned into trend, so why was the Internet’s thought process to bully African people for no reason other than for laughs on social media? No, just traditional African food? Ok, noted.

Like ENNY said, please free my people from clout. PLEASE. I’m begging at this point.

And non-Black people have not escaped scrutiny either – so if you found yourself at a protest this year or have a cheeky little “BLM” in your bio, but you still found the time to degrade African culture on your timeline, I’m going to need you to go ahead and click backspace on your bio for me really quick, because the math is not math-ing. When it comes to other ethnic groups asking for parts of their culture to be respected and kept sacred, everyone wants to be quiet and listen, but when Black – specifically African people - ask for the same respect, people struggle to do so and are left with two options, or what they think are their only options – to, A, dismantle parts of Black culture to be co-opted and renamed to be acceptable to the white gaze or, B, label these things as disgusting and left at the mercy of Twitter think piece writers and Clubhouse podcasters who have nothing better to do than talk about things that they absolutely have no knowledge on.

Lastly, a LOT of foods from other cultures that are popular in the United States are not even authentic to that culture. To stand in front of a Taco Bell, or Panda Express, or Olive Garden and tell anyone that is your idea of eating “ethnic” food is not only a lie, but the curse of nationalism and Western closed-mindedness.

If you think our friends in Mexico are sitting down at their tables each night with a Crunch Wrap Supreme and Nacho Fries, you are highly mistaken, beloved.

But, with no empathy, authentic African culture has been co-opted as a sort of internet trend in which it’s acceptable to bash damn near an entire continent for food that takes immense labour and cultural knowledge to create successfully. And then, the people who posted their negative reviews actually had to sit, order the food, set it up, film themselves eating it, decide they didn’t like it, go back and edit the video – with their disrespect front and centre – and thought they could post it on the internet free of scrutiny. Like, we (as Americans) aren’t even eating traditional foods from other cultures to BEGIN with, so why was now the time to start, and why did you all start with African food?

Answer, and quickly.

There has always been tension within the Black community between Black Americans and the African diaspora, over feelings of perceived superiority and inferiority on both sides, and in all honesty, this is an argument I don’t subscribe to - at the end of the day, systemic racism does not care what flag you have in your bio, or how long you’ve lived in America – you’re Black, plain and simple.

But West Africans were not the first people who hopped on the internet and begged people to try their food, so the unwarranted opinions are more proof that maybe sometimes, it’s ok to gatekeep. And no one is begging for these reactions either or saying that you have to like it – if you’re not a fan, just nize it and maybe just…delete the video? Outside of the topic of respect also, the Internet is forever. So those of who you unabashedly are posting disrespect on the internet, think where this video will be circulating in a year or so.

Lastly, if you think Africans are blowing the response to the “fufu challenge” out of proportion, keep that same energy next time you see white women in box braids, rocking evil eye pendants, doing intricate henna on your timeline, or trying to lecture you about aligning your chakras, since it has now been established that disrespecting peoples’ culture is no more than acceptable social media discourse.

Be blessed!

[bigskydreaming]

lesbianscottsummers replied to your post:

Jfc. Okay, let me be perfectly fucking clear,...

I just wanna day as an inc*st survivor myself I’m so sorry what has happened to you, what these anons are putting you through, and what they will undoubtably continue to put you through. I’m here if you ever need to vent/talk/etc ❤️🧡💛💚💙💜❤️

*hugs to you for your shit as well* 

Thanks, I appreciate it, but honestly I’ll be fine. The thing none of these anons ever get is how fucking powerless and pointless they are. Its like....LMFAO, I’ve survived abuse, rape, and a gaybashing. You really think your shitty little hostile messages are what’s going to break me or shut me up? LOL, please. You’re embarrassing yourselves. The most they’ve ever managed is being obnoxious gnats that are hard to swat and annoy the shit out of me.

Tbh, its not the anons that really bother me. Its the silence about their behavior. I’ve been out here catching shit like this for years...and so does most every other survivor I know who’s vocal about their trauma and how unsupported they feel by the very fandoms that pay the most lip service to caring about abuse, rape and rape culture. Not to mention all my friends of color who are vocal about racism, etc, etc.

And yet how many non-survivors (most white, because let’s be real, the vast majority of other ‘antis’ who are non-survivors themselves are people of color due to the overlap between people who fetishize and invalidate racial generational trauma and people who fetishize and invalidate survivor trauma of all types and individuals).....like, time and time again, you hear about ‘anti’ behavior and how disruptive it is to fandoms....with this signalboosted and perpetuated by people who just claim they want to ‘stay out of it’ and be civil and mannered and can’t we all just get along....

Well, no. We fucking can’t.....because the day some of us, whether survivors, people of color, nonbinary or trans individuals, started to say “hey, there are elements of fandom that actively are HARMFUL and ostracizing to us” a lot of people decided they just didn’t want to hear that, and only peeked their heads up to acknowledge when ‘antis’ rocked the boat a little too loudly.

But yeah, its only us who go around harassing people, never the other way around. At least, that’s the impression anyone would get from looking at any of the blogs of people who just want everyone to be nice and civil to each other....but only seem to get the alert when that goes in the direction that requires zero action on their part.

I mean, just speaking strictly to matters pertaining to being an abuse/rape survivor, I’m just so fucking sick of hearing all the lip service about how “I support survivors”.....from people who then make it clear that only is actionable for them WHEN NO ACTION IS ACTUALLY REQUIRED.

Hence why there’s always that tiny little qualifier in arguments around various forms of ‘anti’ discourse.....stuff pertaining to rape, incest and pedophilia fetishization....so many people when they say they support survivors in fandom ACTUALLY seem to mean “well I really MOSTLY support the survivors who say they write these things to cope, because even though I don’t ship or read or write these things myself, I support their right to do so, as opposed to those other ‘anti’ survivors’ right to have fandom experiences that don’t require being IMMERSED 24/7 in romanticized reminders of their own traumas.’

*Shrugs* I’m sick of it. I’ve watched it happen for YEARS, being right in the middle of it, and no one can tell me this isn’t EXACTLY what’s been happening for all this time, and why so many fandoms have remained exactly the way they are, problems and all, with zero effort to change or be more inclusive of all the people on the margins for various reasons saying “HEY WHAT ABOUT US”....and then turning around and patting themselves on the back for being so civilized, so courteous, so ABOVE descending into the kind of barbaric behavior that only antis are guilty of. Never the reverse. Never the things that INSPIRE our anger or vitriol as a reaction to the fact that we’re just trying to fucking EXIST in fandom spaces and everyone else who was just fine with the way things are now saying “no, change doesn’t actually work for us, because that means....effort?”

How can you say you support survivors if you never actually DO anything supportive? How can you say you support people of color if you never actually SPEAK UP for them when you see or are surrounded by blatantly evident racism? How can you say you support LGBTQ+ individuals if your READING PREFERENCES are more of a priority to you than their living experiences?

I’m not pissed off about the barrage of insects in my inbox, honestly. 

I’m pissed off by the crickets that resound from everyone who at other times is first in line to say “I absolutely support xyz! Just, y’know, in that quiet, invisible way that’s more enabling of toxic, harmful, racist, homophobic, transphobic and rape-culture tropes and individuals than like....the actual people I’m claiming to actually support.”

Here’s a “if a tree falls in the middle of the forest and no one’s around to hear it, does it make a sound” for the social media age:

“If your support can’t be pointed to, quantified, singled out, observed, identified, or in any way meaningfully proven to exist....then DOES IT?”

Idk. I mean, I just really love how in just the few months I’ve been an active presence in this particular fandom, I’ve garnered a reputation of being unreasonable and disruptive and overly aggressive....all while sticking ENTIRELY to my own blog, not going NEAR any tags, only jumping on someone else’s post a grand total of three times that I can think of....and all while my own fandom related posts are continually garnering hundreds and even thousands of notes and being spread around by people who at the same time actively avoid interacting with me as an individual because I’m ‘unpleasant’.....as opposed to all the big name incest shippers who well, even if someone doesn’t ship those icky things themselves, at least they can say those incest and pedophilia shippers are a lot less disruptive and unpleasant to be around and know how to be polite and well-mannered.

LOLOL.

When civility is indistinguishable from apathy, you’ve fucking missed the entire freaking point of civility. 

THAT’S why I don’t bother blunting myself with it, when I don’t particularly feel civil. Because its become pointless. People have fucking WEAPONIZED it to use it to silence people, and that’s so gross to me. Nobody benefits from that unless they’re already benefiting from the status quo, and the status quo is fucking gross to me too.

My question, to all the people who see things they think are wrong and never say a damn word about it...is and will always be:

WHY????

[ddaenggtan]

about ddaenggtan

✧ WHADDUP my name’s bette (not really), i’m 24, and i never fucking learned how to read write ✧

click here to go back to my full nav

｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆ me  ｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆

✧ bette. she/her, but i don’t mind they/them.

✧ i’m in est, and i live in the mid-south usa

✧ 24. libra. year of the pig. (pisces moon and gemini rising, if ur curious)

✧ the gayest bisexual you’ll ever meet, except when it comes to bts

✧ engayged and i talk about her a LOT

✧ i write fic and whine about how bts exists and yet i’m not their friend

✧ ot7 biased

✧ adhd + anxiety + depression + chronic pain ftw

✧ i don’t do tag lists bc i can barely remember to link my ao3 in those posts

✧ i’m a kinky bitch and i am not afraid to be horny on main on this sideblog

✧ if you find my main rip you i’ve had it since 2008 and it’s a clusterfuck 

✧ bts is the only kpop group i stan, but i listen to several others casually. i also really fucking love hozier.

✧ i really fucking love space. like,,,,,,it’s a little alarming. i love it so much tho.

✧ i play a ridiculous amount of video games, and run a D&D campaign for fun

✧ i collect clue games. like. the board game. because i’m weird and a nerd.

｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆ things to know  ｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆

✧ i’m very politically opinionated and i tend to keep it off this blog and strictly on my main, but you’re definitely gonna hear me bitch about the president at least a little

✧ you’re also gonna get some Moral Lessons in my fic because it’s basically impossible for me not to preach about how people deserve to live without justifying their existence in the world, and also how people should be treated with respect

✧ i don’t do any kind of non-con, because that’s just straight up sexual assault and i literally do a charity every year to bring attention to how much of a fucking problem that already is in the world today. 

✧ i might occasionally tag something as dub-con, but i can guarantee you that it isn’t actually dub-con, because consent that isn’t given freely and enthusiastically is not consent uwu

✧ i firmly believe that teenagers have the right to read and even write erotic/smutty material because for a lot of people, that’s the only chance they have to explore their sexuality and what it means to them. that said, please do not interact with me if you are not of age (preferably at least twenty tbh) because you all are fantastic and lovely and i cannot wait to see what you do in the world, but i am not comfortable talking to minors on a blog where i write smut

｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆ things to avoid  ｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆

✧ homophobia, transphobia, biphobia, ace/aro-phobia (ace/aro people are part of the lgbt community and i will not debate that with you, and will in fact unfollow if you start doing any kind of discourse about that fact). i’m literally one of the biggest supporters of my queer siblings and i will fight for them. 

✧ racism, of any kind, be it anti-semitism, xenophobia, anti-blackness, any of it. i make a lot of jokes about white people because i am a white girl, and we’re ridiculously privileged, and also jokes about white people are funny as shit. 

✧ fetishization of anyone, particularly of wlw, mlm, and non-white people. queer people aren’t your kink, and poc are not ‘exotic’       ✧ on that note, do not follow if you support whitewashing, because it’s gross       ✧ also FUCK h*adl*ner and fuck  m*m*btsgh*st and fuck all sasaengs

✧ don’t follow if you actually ship real people together, it’s not cute, it’s fetishization and it’s gross, and i remember the 1d days too well for that shit. i may occasionally write mxm fics, but that’s doubtful, and even if i do, i can guarantee you i do not ship them in any real way together and instead essentially use them as a storytelling medium. 

✧ any kind of body-non-positivity, because it is a FACT that ugly does not exist except in personalities. seriously, i’m literally a fat girl, if you come on here trying to talk shit about fat people, you’re gonna get destroyed. and don’t come here saying anything about thinner people either, because that’s not alright, and i will shut you down just the same. 

｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆ tl;dr be respectful and we’re chill  ｡･:*:･ﾟ★,｡･:*:･ﾟ☆

[moro-nokimi]

Good day, japanese person present here to say: dear person, please go outside and better your life, it's the best you do. Also, exposing people in the manner that you and your other 2 friend are doing is harassment. It not matters that one of friends of yours are minor, harrassment is bad thing. Excuse my poor english, I just know to read most things english in language and have western artist friend in Tumblr and I also artist and would like not to get exposition this way.

all right. i’m out here bettering my life and one of my new year’s resolutions is a small step in the right direction (being kinder to myself). i’m doing stuff that’s best for me. just because i got into discourse today doesn’t mean i’m a recluse with nothing better to do. (trust me, I do. I just happen to give a fuck about how my friend was treated and how i personally am being treated.) i don’t typically get into discourse; they brought the discourse to me.

furthermore, there was no harassment on mine or mantis’ blogs. none. the people who were dicks to mantis, who posted their opinion in their blog, decided to call THEM pathetic and cringe, among other shitty names. this is a 15 year old you’re talking about. mantis didn’t bring this upon themself because they posted their opinion and tagged it accordingly. there wasn’t any shitting on anyone; they weren’t crawling into someone’s house with a crowbar telling people to shut up about matt. that is harassment. other people ganging up on a 15 year old is fucking harassment, and there’s not a damn way around it.

look, there was no harassment on my side. harassment requires a pattern and a power imbalance: neither of which are at play when i made that interaction public record. and yk what’s more likely? they have more followers than me and they’re a fucking adult. they were the one that went after a fucking teenager with less than 200 followers, which could’ve been avoided if they hadn’t been a fucking idiot and scrolled past those notes while going “ah shit, that’s something i have to be careful of!” … which they didn’t. if you want to talk about harassment, again, have that same energy towards the fuckwads/raging assholes/what have you in mantis’ notes. where’s the power imbalance necessary to make this a case of harassment and bullying?

and furthermore, if you send messages to me where you can go unchecked, i’m not going to let that happen. if i’d chosen to continue the discourse in messages, they can do whatever they want, block me, and forget about it. (and i did mull this over: i decided it was better if i just screenshotted it and added it onto my textpost.) it’s not easy to pull up messages on tumblr from some idiot who’s blocked you, and in textposts, they’re now public record and easily accessible. it’s now public record that some idiot went after me for mentioning racism in the notes instead of in a rb, to be clear.

i’ll put up with a lot but i won’t put up with being strawmanned and having someone be rude to me. them being passive aggressive and talking down to me is rude, and I won’t stand for that. 

this was not something that affected them, and i think it’s telling that they were so offended that i pointed out the racism in the aforementioned art. they could have scrolled past it, chosen not to check the notes, etc, and they didn’t. instead, they chose to call me a jerk and a bully and escalate things. 

and look. i’m aware that harassment is a bad thing - hello, bullying victim here! I know what it looks like, and none of the situations at that point were harassment or bullying perpetrated by me. 

btw, your english is perfectly fine. i’m sorry you had to be exposed to all that in the way you were.

[balioc]

Once upon a time, @slatestarscratchpad talked about “Conflict Theory vs. Mistake Theory.”  His particular take on this idea always struck me as a bit odd, for reasons largely having to do with its being super-focused rhetorically on one particular issue suite (distributive macroeconomics). Regardless, the dichotomy is a helpful thing to have available in your philosophical toolkit. 

For general-purpose use, I’d suggest a refinement: replace “mistake theory” with, uh, let’s say “solution theory.”  There are, roughly speaking, two analytical lenses you can use to examine a given debate.  You can say “people are trying to figure out the Overall Best Solution [by whatever criteria], and their arguments represent either empirical disagreements-of-fact or genuine disagreements over the values that determine the Best Solution.”  Or you can say “people are trying to advance their own interests against the conflicting interests of other people, they have formed alliances and coalitions in order to do this more effectively, and their arguments should essentially be understood as gambits and rationalizations within a power struggle.” 

Each of these lenses is obviously going to be helpful sometimes, depending on the circumstances.  Some people have a natural proclivity towards one, some towards the other, etc.  We all know how useful conceptual dichotomies work.

OK.  All that said, let’s talk for a minute about the kind of collective-grievance-driven identity politics that have taken over mainstream culture for the past five years. 

If you want to understand how these arguments are working for the people making them, and why they have the particular effects that they have, I think it’s very helpful to try looking at them through a conflict-theory lens. 

Which is to say:

Identitarians make claims like “members of the Oppressor Class act in ways X and Y and Z, it totally sucks and makes us miserable, the world is so unfair, justice must be done.”  And a lot of people -- in particular, a lot of the sort of people who Take Arguments Seriously -- read this as having its obvious surface meaning, which is something like “the current ruleset is bad for us, we should change to a different social equilibrium where a different ruleset is enforced, a new Overall Best Solution is hereby proposed.”  In the saddest cases, this leads to bewildered nerds screaming, “PLEASE TELL ME WHAT TO DO!  I DON’T WANT TO BE A SEXIST CREEP / RACIST IMPERIALIST ASSHOLE / WHATEVER-IT-IS!  I’LL DO ANYTHING!  JUST LIST THE RULES I HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT WILL MAKE IT ALL OK!” 

Which of course never works even a little, which breeds a lot of resentment.  It especially breeds resentment because there doesn’t particularly seem to be a correlation between “people who make the identitarians mad” and “people who counteract the identitarians’ stated desires.”  (As has been pointed out time and again, many of the most-admired men in feminist circles are pretty traditionally masculine, in exactly the ways that come up in discussions of “toxicity.”  Visibly trying hard to avoid Doing A Racism will at best make you a punchline and at worst get you hit with serious accusations of actual racism, whereas people who breeze right through the stated norms with a cheeky grin often get away with it.  Etc. etc.) 

But -- as @bambamramfan has recently noted, correctly -- it’s dangerous, and wrong, to read that lack-of-correlation as an anti-correlation.  It’s not like the confident jocular straight white cis asshole is safe from potentially getting slammed by the wrathful end of identity politics.  He’s just as vulnerable as anyone else, probably more so, the moment anyone gets upset enough with him to make an actual move. 

The only real difference is that, because he’s a confident jocular asshole and therefore conventionally-likeable, he’s not making people upset quite as easily. 

This bizarre circle can be squared, and the facts of the world accounted for more cleanly, if you drop some of your discursive charity and put on your conflict-theorist goggles.  All those arguments about oppression, all those claims about what exactly the Oppressor Classes are doing in order to make the world horrible for the Oppressed Classes, are...beside the point.  I’m not even commenting on whether they’re right or wrong, I’m saying it often doesn’t matter, because the people making them often don’t really care except insofar as they can win points by convincing people through logic or sympathy. 

The actual “claim” underlying it all is something like: In conflicts between Oppressed People and Oppressor People, the Oppressed People should get to win more often and more easily.  The very-generalized justification is something like, “life is overall very unfair to Oppressed People and therefore they should get to win more.”  And there’s a real argument that the very-generalized justification is true, at least to some extent. 

(...but of course it’s impossible to separate “I believe I should get a handicap because life is genuinely unfair to me” from “I believe I should get a handicap because, well, I’m a human being with cognitive biases and therefore it seems intuitively obvious that life is unfair to me.”  At some point the justification stops working, and there’s absolutely no reason to believe that that’s the point where it will stop being employed.) 

Anyway.  Most of the time you can’t just say “I should get a ‘Win an Arbitrary  Fight Free’ card,” because that doesn’t play well, everyone knows that justice doesn’t work that way.  You have to say “I am being wronged in these specific ways and the following changes would make it better.”  But of course the changes mostly won’t make it better.  If that were the actual effective medicine, then people who sedulously followed the alleged rules would be rewarded for it.  The actual effective medicine is -- 

“ -- I get that job/promotion/award I want so desperately, instead of one of the other people who might get it, many of whom are white/male/straight/whatever.”

“ -- when my boyfriend and I break up messily, everyone agrees that he is worthless slime and I am a Very Tragic Heroine.”

“ -- when some hopeless loser displays too much interest in me, I can extract myself from the situation cleanly without having to feel mean and without having to put in too much effort.” 

“ -- when I get into an argument at a party, everyone will know that I am very wise and enlightened and that my interlocutor is a hopeless bigot.” 

Or, in other words, “I should get some number of ‘Win an Arbitrary Fight Free’ cards.”  That is what conflict theory looks like, on the social micro-level.  That is claiming your share of the spoils, not because you can somehow prove before God that you deserve them, but because you’re going to stand up for yourself and your own and it’s not like those assholes in the other tribe deserve them any more than you do.  Don’t you get the short end of the stick way too much already?  Isn’t life just one long testament to that? 

This is actually really bad.

I realize that, by putting it solution-theory-versus-conflict-theory terms, I’m kind of implying “this is just how the world operates at a fundamental level and we should wise up to it” -- but, no, it’s a cultural disease, and we’re already infected, and finding the right antibiotics is critical.  It probably is “just how the world operates at a fundamental level” for a sufficiently narrow understanding of “the world” (globalized, atomized, multicultural)...and yet we used to be holding it at bay almost completely, and right now we’re definitely not.

It’s really bad, in part, because it poisons the well of discourse.  If your opponents don’t mean the things they say, if they’re just trying to rack up enough sympathy to get another ‘Win an Arbitrary Fight Free’ card, eventually you’re going to notice and stop paying attention to their arguments; and then, on the occasions when they’re actually right and you’re wrong, everyone is screwed.  Debate is important if we want to fix the problems.  That means we have to be able to have it, for real. 

But even more so, it’s really bad because there’s no obvious place for it to stop once it starts.  This is how group grievance politics work generally; this is why Lee Kuan Yew sold his soul to the devil to ensure that Singapore would not divide politically into the obvious ethnic factions.  The goal is peace and harmony and stability, but individuals are always going to feel aggrieved in ways that can be theoretically traced back to group membership, and we’re not going to find a [viable][compromise] equilibrium so long as people think it makes sense to keep pushing for more spoils.  Which in the end is equivalent to total war.  

So...solutions?  What does the antibiotic look like?

Shit, man, I don’t know.  If I did, I’d be out saving the world, not writing this Tumblr post. 

The best I can give you is: don’t let yourself get sucked into this game.  Don’t honor anyone’s claim to a ‘Win an Arbitrary Fight Free” card, and don’t ever think that you yourself deserve one.  If someone proposes a new social rule, follow it or don’t as your conscience dictates, but don’t imagine that doing so will actually mollify anyone.  Try to evaluate right and wrong by the standards of the actual rules/principles/virtues/whatever that you espouse, not by simple demographic heuristics.

And if you’re reading this, you probably didn’t need me to tell you any of that.  So great.

It’s worth putting in an addendum to say:

At this moment, as it happens, the cultural left has the particular kind of dominance that allows it to play identity politics and actually accomplish things sometimes.  But it’s not as though the right hasn’t been positively eager to play the exact same horrible games when the constellations align differently...or as though the slimier parts of the right aren’t trying to play the exact same horrible games right now. 

[xoruffitup]

BlacKkKlansman: Double Consciousness & Extremist Identities

I saw BlacKkKlansman last night, and I’m still trying to properly breathe around the cold stone it left in my chest. I’ve been thinking about it constantly, and whenever that happens I always feel the need to write some sort of analysis to try to articulate why I’ve reacted so strongly to something. So, here’s my half-baked BlacKkKlansman review.

First things first, I’m white. Of course, that affects the way I view the world and whatever art/media I choose to consume. I fully recognize that my experience and takeaway from this film are likely very different from those of a viewer of color. And sure, I can say that I try to be progressive in how I live my life and I took college courses on race politics and minority marginalization, but at the end of the day, this is a film about black voices and black equality and those are topics I have no right to discourse on. So please, if something I write below seems misguided or uneducated, please let me know so I can self-examine and adjust.

First of all: The simple fact that this movie had such an effect on me as a white viewer. I was in a crowded movie theatre, with an audience of diverse age and race, and never in my life have I felt such a powerful moment of silent, unified shock when the credits started. The ending left every single person speechless. White privilege means that when I read news articles or books about institutionalized racism in our country, I have the option of closing the book, walking away and thinking about something else for a while. Not the case whatsoever with this movie - It didn’t discriminate in its devastating impact. While I’ve read about Black Power ideologies, there’s always an aspect of such movements that are designed not to be fully understood by those outside of it. These are not for me. This seems as intentional as it is justified. Black communities are excluded from so many mainstream ‘white’ narratives or locuses of power, these movements are the sole spaces that belong entirely to them and which they entirely control. They are designed to alienate, the same way these communities are alienated from so much else in society. However, BlacKkKlansman seemed accessible to a multitude of viewpoints and cultural/racial positions. The film does not strive to tell the audience how they should feel, but leaves elements of interpretation up to the viewer by presenting a chorus of voices, rather than a single one; By presenting multifaceted characters experiencing conflicts of identity - Rather than a single protagonist with a single political message. This is certainly not to say that a film is only good if it panders to the understanding of white viewers, but in this case I was impressed by the multiplicity of narratives and perspectives that were portrayed.

What’s so thought-provoking to me about the film was the decision to tell the story from the position of the undecided and conflicted center. By following Ron and Flip’s investigation, we watch each character grapple with the opposite sides of extremism. While Flip has to ingratiate himself with the Klan members who would revile his Jewish heritage, Ron has to spy on his own community at Black Student Union events as they call for war against the police. Both characters must play roles in order to pretend to fit into the groups they look like they should belong to. In Flip’s case, feeling threatened and despised by the Klan’s ideals makes him re-evaluate the meaning of the Jewish identity he never thought much about. For Ron, he feels torn between his loyalty to his people, and to his own hard-sought and prized work as a policeman (an institution equally reviled by Patrice and Klan members). Ron and Flip both wear masks, and their feelings of separation from “their” respective communities makes them each consider the conflicting identities within themselves.

Aptly, Patrice speaks to Ron in one scene about double consciousness. She questions whether it is possible to be both a black woman and American citizen. To her, putting her country first would be a betrayal to her black identity. In juxtaposition, the Klan members dress up their intolerance behind the values of “America first” (I can barely describe the chills that went through me when the Klan members all started chanting it.) Ron’s struggle throughout the film is exactly this - His determination to be both a black man and a police officer. He and Patrice disagree on whether it’s possible to change a corrupt system from within, and the movie leaves ambiguous how much Ron succeeds in this front. It’s crushingly infuriating when, towards the end of the film, Ron is himself detained and beaten by policemen who don’t believe he’s an undercover cop. But shortly thereafter, he enjoys a triumphant entry into the police station where all his white colleagues congratulate his work and embrace him. The scene when he calls David Duke to reveal his identity with his three colleagues giggling on either side of him is downright charming in its camaraderie and gaiety. It looks like acceptance; But tempered by the fact that all his hard work on the investigation was ultimately scrapped in the end. 

These themes of double consciousness and ambiguity permeate the film, and lend to its impactful success. Split-screen parallels are presented between Klan and Black Power movement meetings - Certainly not to equate the two, but to show in stark, unmistakable terms that these are the polar opposite, yet intimately interrelated effects of racism. This is how distantly racism divides our country - And how it leads to beliefs on either side that people will kill for. Towards the climax, a Black Student Union meeting listens to the horrific history of a young black man being brutally lynched, while the Klan members cheer and applaud a scene in Birth Of A Nation depicting the hanging of a black man. Neither side exists without the other to perceive it as a threat - And both stand firm in their respective beliefs that their hatred of the other side is justified. 

Yet, the film wasn’t the story of the Klan, nor of the Black liberation movement - It was the story of the two men caught in the middle, looking for footing on quickly-shrinking ground between the two sides, as their mutual hatred brings the two warring sides to an inevitable conflict. It is the same story of many modern viewers, wondering how in hell we’ve come to the present moment with “Black Lives Matter” on one side and Trump proclaiming “America First” on the other - with not an inch of common ground or even common perception between the two. 

Although I hope most viewers would intuit which side is truly more justified in their grievances, a strength of the film was its balanced, rather than caricatured depiction of the Klan members; Who believe that yes, they live in a racist country - “An anti-white racist country.” The chilling brilliance in the depiction of David Duke was how harmlessly normal he first seems - Cheerfully spouting off phrases like “you’re darn tootin’“ on the phone to Ron and ending the conversation with a chipper “God bless white America!” This is exactly how ideologies of hate become disguised as civilized, mild-mannered “values.” David Duke has given up the flashy title of “Grand Dragon” for the more innocuous “National Director” (or something to that end). The first time he goes undercover, Flip is quickly admonished never to call the Klan “The Klan,” but rather “The Organization.” In a conversation between Ron and one of his superiors at the police station, it’s even discussed how a high-ranking Klansman might have the long-term goal of placing “one of their own” in the White House, after they’ve disguised their intolerance and bigotry under the empirical rationales of policy. It’s one of the most painful moments of the entire film. 

Yet, while Flip has to endure the Klan members’ talk of killing black people, and Ron hears Kwame Ture speak about race wars with inevitability, another stroke of the film’s thoughtful genius is the choice of individual who actually enacts violence - Felix’s utterly apple pie looking housewife. She looks like the plump, harmless woman you wouldn’t want to be in line behind at the grocery store because she’s likely to have fifteen coupons. She is the last person you would expect on sight to leave a bomb at the house of a young black woman. And yet, this is another powerful message: How the vulnerable and susceptible can so easily become radicalized. I certainly don’t have sympathy for her because she’s an adult who made her own decisions; But I’m also aware of the way her Klansman husband manipulated her into becoming what she was, and it’s an extra layer of nuance I appreciated. 

Finally, I’ll wrap this up on a personal, perhaps silly, note. There were multiple layers of this film that really disturbed me, and it’s taken me a good 24 hours to put my finger on this last one: I’m not sure I enjoyed Adam Driver as Flip. Don’t get me wrong here, I’m all over that shoulder gun holster look and he looked 500% finer in flannel than any man has a right to. Also, I’m not sure I would feel this same discomfort if he’d been played by a lesser-caliber actor, or one who I don’t have such an attachment to. But I realized that on an instinctive level, it upset me to see his face under a Klan hood, and to hear him say vile racist comments. Rationally, of course I know that A) He’s acting, and B) Even his character is acting, but Adam’s an utterly convincing actor, playing an undercover detective who’s very good at his job. Maybe both his and Flip’s performances were too good. I asked myself why it didn’t bother me the same way to hear Ron spout racist bullshit on the phone. Part of it is because he isn’t played by an actor I happen to deeply respect and admire, but there’s more to it than that. There’s a passage in the NYT review that got as close to my nebulous discomfort as anything I could express:

"The most shocking thing about Flip's (Adam Driver's undercover detective role) imposture is how easy it seems, how natural he looks and sounds. This unnerving authenticity is partly testament to Mr. Driver's ability to tuck one performance inside another, but it also testifies to a stark and discomforting truth. Maybe not everyone who is white is a racist, but racism is what makes us white.”

Adam’s performance as Flip is discomfiting because it shows how easily a white person can take up the mask of extreme bigotry and intolerance, and how easily they can be perceived as supporting a hate movement, regardless of their true internal ideologies. I know Flip doesn’t mean the things he’s saying, but he’s damn convincing because he looks the part. His whiteness paired with his words - regardless of whether they’re genuine - is powerful and terrible. And racism is what lends him the ability to put on that convincing mask. And if racism is what “makes us white,” Adam as Flip makes me wonder if I could do the same. If, for whatever reason, the situation was such that I had to convince someone I believed in these things... Would I surprise myself by finding that I’m capable of saying things equally terrible? Is this a role that every white person is capable of, at a certain subconscious level, because of systemic racism and implicit biases? 

In conclusion: This movie has fucked up my life. It’s genius and I think I need to see it again. (If I can stomach it...)

[lesbian-so-queer]

@ fellow adult tumblr activits

please don't argue with children (let's say less than 15) who have very bigoted ideas on something and are convinced about them. don't argue with them like they have actually thoughtfact-checked through their thesis and fact-checked it to make sure it is founded. they didn't. kids don't source what they believe and verify how sound it all is.

keep in mind you platform people when you reblog from them to argue. you give them notes, credibility. a bigoted kid, who's making a past time of bullying people on tumblr and repeats shit you hear from grownass republicans/non-usa equivalents ? loves that.

kids are plenty intelligent, i do not question that. they are able to understand so many things, some i can't myself understand, like maths, for one.

but this isn't a matter of intelligence, or even culture.

kids simply do not fact-check strong beliefs, especially if these beliefs are bigoted ! because they need to feel in control, and like they can trust their role models !!

and, i don't think i will surprise anyone saying this, most bigoted kids are so because they are surrounded by bigoted adults. so when you're arguing with them, you aren't having a conflict of interests between two relatively informed individuals ! you are confronting a child ! who is still developing their core moral code and by arguing, you are endangering the development they've made so far !

i'm not sure i'm making sense enough. what i mean to say is when you argue with someone, you clash with them. clashing with someone that is not the source of most of their belief systems yet is not productive. all you'd be doing would be antagonizing a vulnerable individual.

that is not what we want, i think. it's not helping raise awareness on social issues.

so just block the bigoted kid, or ignore them ! don't confront them, because they will NOT interpret you confronting them on their, say, racism, because they will likely interpret it as a mean-spirited, personal attack and just go all smartass and edgy on you. they won't listen.

like seriously. would you really, irl, debate with a "pro--trump" 12 years old kid whose parents are pro-trump, and as such thinks trump is right, because "mommy and daddy says he's right" ?

please tell me you wouldn't.

what these kids need is help, education.

and if you can't make the difference between arguing and education, please keep your mouth shut and think about it. you still need some growing yourself.

and learning to make the difference is not something that's worth trial and error with kids on here. when you know you can't make a kid see the wrong in their ways, even if you know they are wrong, admit it. own up to it. hush up. don't pretend otherwise. please.

ALSO I SEE THE ONES OF YOU WHO HECKLES KIDS AND MOCK THEM FOR THEIR AGE ??? DO YOU THINK YOU'RE BEING CUTE ?? YOU THINK YOU'RE COOL ?? B I T C H. YOU'RE BEING A CLOWNASS IMMATURE FOOL. shut the fuck up.

respect children. what are you even doing discoursing them like they're a threat to you ?

when the tree is sick, you don't cut at the leaves because if they're bruised, you take it to the rotten roots.

you don't blame the victim for believing the oppressors.

[plounce]

on “all taakos are good taakos”

there's a lot to say about this comic (where taako magically changes his appearance every morning, which includes changing his race), and before you read this, read these posts by actual people of color.

this is about how ambiguous “representation” isn’t effective and is honestly what you need to read rather than this post.

these two address why taako honestly has to be mexican.

this about why green taakos aren’t good. 

this is about why that comic is bad.

i also want to preface this by saying that i'm white, and that with this post i'm speaking to other white people in the taz fandom, especially those that consumed that comic wholly uncritically. i'm not saying anything novel or remarkable, and as such i really don’t need to be lauded for this post, since it was made possible by listening to people of color who obviously have the best perspective on this kind of stuff.

i'm honestly not the person you should be listening to, but hopefully you'll listen to me.

fandom is so uncritical of this comic, because it's easy. it's easy to talk like that because it avoids all the difficult realities of race. look! taako can be everything all at once! now we never have to argue :))) and anyone who DOES argue (aka, say anything to disrupt the fantasy that taz and taz fandom are perfect) is a "discourse attention whore." (those are all tags from the SIX THOUSAND notes that comic has at time of writing)

and like... as a white person, i know i have to try my best every day, because the mental difficulty of wading through the racism ingrained in me is paltry compared to the actual reality of being a person of color in our society. that's non-negotiable. i - and other white people - don't have to deal with anything, comparatively.

and to blame every instance of people of color in this fandom - in every fandom - being uncomfortable and rightfully frustrated with the massive amount of white designs, the elevation of those white designs, the token lip service very occasionally paid to nonwhite (and no, i don't mean GREEN) taakos by the vast majority of fandom, and then people of color talking about these issues and those posts being spread because those voices deserve to be elevated listened to -

to blame that on... "discourse" is awful. calling it "discourse" is saying people are talking about insidious racism just because they want a fight, not because it actually matters to them.

and look. as i said, i'm white. i also went through the stage where i thought it was productive to say "all designs are good and valid and perfect uwu artistic freedom!!!!," but that was because it was easy, and made ME feel good. and certainly, that phrase can be used to validate taakos that are latinx, that are black, that are asian, that are hugely underrepresented designs in fandom that the podcast medium lets one have the freedom to create.

but when that is used to sweep away concerns over the MOUNTAINS of attention white taakos are given - look at the zine, carey pietsch's much-lauded and infectious designs, the thousands of notes on white (and green) taakos - it's counterproductive. it doesn't do anything.

sure. in a vacuum, a white, blond taako is as good a design as a latino taako. you can even try to say that the universe taz takes place in has no problems with our definitions of race, the true liberal fantasy.

but we don't exist in a vacuum. fandom doesn't exist in a vacuum. being white gives the privilege of pretending that we do, but... it isn't.

why are people inclined to draw taako blond and white (as well as skinny)?  especially when taako is literally said to invent tacos.

why is that the default we repeatedly see, that we white people repeatedly create, over and over, with ambiguous-appearance beloved characters - cecil, wheatley, etc?

why do those designs receive so much attention (and don't pretend they don't, because they do)?

why do people so fiercely defend adding to that mountain?

listen and change. none of us are infallible - not me, not you, not the mcelroys. we are subconsciously inclined to be defensive of this power structure that we benefit from. not being a member of the kkk doesn’t excuse us from anything, even stuff that was well-intentioned, like that comic. we have to consciously strive to be better in every situation, to affect positive change, because again - that is nothing compared to the reality of being a person of color.

it is more constructive to draw taako as a person of color. and as a white person, it is honestly the least i - and you - can do. the ambiguity of "all taakos matter :)))" is appealing because it is so feel good, but it does nothing besides wipe away fans' criticisms.

actually having people of color be seen and celebrated in media (which includes fandom) is more productive and - dare i say - better.

(this isn’t a full description of everything there is to say on this and related issues. there’s a lot more to all of this than what i wrote here, but my intention was to communicate this issue in a way that makes sense to other white people so hopefully this whole issue is clarified to some degree. i tried to speak fairly gently in this post as a rhetorical strategy, but that doesn’t invalidate people of color’s anger and frustration about issues discussing race and racism.

again, the posts i linked at the top are much more important than what i wrote here. please, please use those as a resource before this.

i did my best to be thoughtful in writing this and i did check with a friend before posting, but if any people of color have anything to correct me on, i’m absolutely willing to edit this post.)

[garden-of-succulents]

I've taken some time to think over and process recent criticisms that people have made of me. Thank you to everyone for being patient while I took this time to reflect--I think that a brief review of my behaviour in the past has shown that I often respond poorly and clumsily in the heat of the moment, and these conversations benefit when I give them the thought and effort they deserve.

I am responding to people whose direct responses to me, or public commentary, seemed to indicate they wanted some sort of response from me. I hope I've addressed everyone; please let me know if I've missed anyone. I have also, as was requested, cleared out my OMGCP-related blocklist.

Briefly, about that: I have, in the past, blocked people for two main reasons. The first is that they're producing fannish content (fic, art, or meta) that triggers my anxiety, which my body reacts very poorly to; the other is that I have disagreed with them about something, but know that they are significantly younger/less privileged than I am, and blocking is one of the tools I use to make sure I don't impulsively strike up an unfair argument about something unimportant.

I would like to apologize for the distress and insult my blocking users caused them; it was not intended. I have been investigating ways to curate my online experience to what I can manage with mental health that varies from day to day, with less of a negative effect on other people and maintains their ability to draw my attention to important conversations.

Although I believe listening to criticism is important, especially on topics where I am privileged or ignorant, this is something I have to balance with my mental and physical health; I have to carefully budget time and energy to engage with it when I am capable of thinking clearly and deeply. Sometimes I'm able to seek out and read criticism, but sometimes I'm not. I miss conversations or misunderstand peoples' points. I know this is frustrating to people who do not have the luxury of ignoring or escaping these issues in their daily lives, and I'm sorry.

On a practical note, I am taking pains to make sure that people can contact me through my des-zimbits account, but I should make clear that unfortunately, I cannot accept anon messages and I am very unpredictable about seeing things written on blogs I do not follow; my friends are not in the habit of telling me about criticism made by third parties. There have been times that I only found out long after the fact that someone has put enormous amounts of time and energy into critiquing my behaviour on their blog, and become upset that I have not responded or changed. In those circumstances, I never saw the original posts in the first place. I don't have a complete solution for this, but I encourage people to tag me or message me a post they think I should see; if you don't want to deal with me thereafter, just say, "Don't reply."

I am making this apology not in hope that anyone will change their opinion of me or forgive me. I know that people of colour in this fandom are frustrated by white fans' inability to listen and respond in a way that makes things better, and I know that my own behaviour has contributed to that. My sincere desire here is to make it plain that I am willing to listen and try, and perhaps even make other fans feel that they can directly approach me with their frustrations and concerns.

I am beyond grateful to the fans of colour who have expended energy and time educating me, criticizing me, talking to me, and helping me. Your willingness to be open about your feelings and experiences, and to speak truth to power, have been unspeakably helpful in helping me see my blind spots, and understand the effect my behaviour has on other people. I know that it takes a lot of energy and courage it takes to speak about such a painful and infuriating subject. I want to thank the people who, despite my resistance at times, continue to engage me in these issues. Your feedback is valuable and appreciated.

@dexydex and @georgiapeche, re: this post

You’re right, I haven’t been responding correctly to your criticism. I’ve taken it too personally instead of taking a step back to consider your perspectives in a more nuanced and empathetic way. Thank you for all of the emotional labor you’ve expended up until this point trying to get through to me. I’m sorry that I’ve made it your responsibility to teach me what I’m doing wrong rather than go out and learn for myself. I’ve been complacent in the ways I’ve interacted with my own privilege. I’m sorry that my apologies have fallen flat time and time again. I’m sorry I haven’t done enough yet to unlearn my implicit racism. This is something I will increase my efforts to address and correct in the future. It is not your job to forgive me. It is not your job to absolve me of any ill will.

phillipsheabutter, re: this post

You're right; Kent's behaviour in canon is cruel and abusive, which Nursey's isn't. My response to them is very backwards the usual responses. I am especially sorry that my answer about him didn't address the word "hate", so I flatly said that I "hated" him, which is a strong and unwarranted negative assessment to make of his behaviour. This was especially wrong of me because the behaviour I was criticizing is a response many Black readers identify with, to the experience of having their emotional responses intensely policed and invalidated. It is a testament of my ignorance and prejudice that I felt this perspective was something I could choose to discard when thinking about him.

As to how I struggle to have empathy for one behaviour but not the other, I can't offer any excuse for my racism, but I can briefly explain: I’ve tried to articulate in the past that Kent’s narrative strongly evokes people and relationships that have been incredibly formative for me, and that I have dedicated years of personal searching and academic study to understanding Kent's kind of extreme behaviour and maintaining relationships with people who display it. My relationship to invalidating behaviour is still too raw and painful to talk about in detail, but in short, it was something I had powerfully negative experiences with when I was young, and as an adult I have found it deeply distressing when it was directed at me; I have embraced a career based around validating emotions. I hadn't yet truly realized the extent to which it is used as a coping mechanism by African Americans--the majority of Black people I have known have been first- or second-generation Canadians hailing from Africa or the Carribean, who have had expressed different cultural and racial experiences to me, and I haven't consumed enough American media to truly understand where Nursey is coming from. I struggle to relate to him as much as I do to characters like Ransom whose cultural experiences and coping mechanisms are more familiar to me.

In equating Nursey to generic white hipsters I encountered this behaviour from, I was erasing his Blackness in favor of pointing to an implied socioeconomic privilege that in no way makes up for or safeguards him from the experiences of being a Black man living in the United States. That wasn’t just wrong of me, it was careless and racist.

There’s a lot to his character that I’ve yet to explore and it was wrong of me to say I hate him when I haven’t done enough work to understand who he is or where he comes from. I'm going to work more to expand my knowledge and find deeper empathy for him.

@oluranurse, re: this post

You’re right, I keep making the same mistakes over again. I can understand how frustrating it feels when a larger blog says repeatedly that they will be different, and better, but the results are disappointing at best. I can only hope that by taking the time to listen, really listen, to your feedback, that someday I won’t have to apologize for my mistakes (because they will few and far apart).

I realize that as someone who doesn't have Borderline Personality Disorder, it is potentially problematic that I am so invested in its fictional depiction, especially given the extreme stigma against the disorder by members of my own profession. As I've explained before, however, it's a condition I've had significant personal experience with, and writing about mental health issues helps me build the skills that may let me someday write coherently about my own C-PTSD. What's more, I am not pulling these conditions out of nowhere or treating them lightly; I'm a licensed mental health professional, and I take a great deal of care to root my mental health headcanons in close analysis of the source material. The diagnoses I suggest for characters are by no means the ultimate truth about them and alternate perceptions of them are wholly plausible

I would like to talk more about your classification of BPD as "a mental illness that fandom likes to give to characters that have 'bad attitudes'," but on a separate occasion where that discussion doesn’t detract from the real conversation we’re having here.

In reference to the disagreement I had with brenbits, I still believe that the way they engaged me could have been more direct, and less heated, from the start. But I respect that other users confront issues they find problematic differently.

In reference to my post about dealing with criticism, I understand that the tone implied something much different than what I intended. I was attempting to be a resource for content creators who feel discouraged by discourse and offer show them how to respond to said criticism in a thoughtful and nuanced way. I realize how ironic that may sound considering some of my past responses. I know that in that post it sounds like I will apologize and defend every microaggression and racist comment that comes my way. That was never the case, but I’m sorry I did such a poor job of articulating that. Times that I have provided this service include helping writers find essays written by members of minorities about common difficulties or pitfalls in depictions of their experiences, or in helping them personally connect with someone who has the cultural competency to assess a situation, and is willing to expend the emotional labour of providing an author with a critique.

With regard to the time that I answered the question, "Are genderbends transphobic?" I shouldn't have answered, given that I am cis. I will make an effort in the future not to summarize trans peoples' opinions, and step back to amplify the voices of trans people who have already made their thoughts accessible.

I feel that the fandom should do more to support content creators and to talk through (especially with younger creators) what they could be doing better in terms of representation. I do understand, however, that doesn’t mean members of the fandom should have to stand for racist and stereotypical content and/or be grateful that it even exists.

You’re right, I’ve been complacent and racist in how I treat POC characters. I need to take a step back, consume more media and academic material related to the experiences of these characters. I need to immerse myself in the positive representations and transformative works this fandom already has for these characters. I need to make these already available transformative works more visible by interacting with them on my blog in ways that are supportive and enriching. I need do more to change my racist thoughts and tendencies because this is a comic made by a WOC that seeks to better minority representation and inclusion in the sports world. I need to be more present in how my behavior affects the experiences of others in this fandom.

I also concede that I do not understand the inherent danger that POC and trans people endure daily. I cannot take your concerns for granted just because I don’t understand them at first. It’s my personal responsibility to seek out information and understanding. I’m also sorry that I have focused more on my personal reaction to criticism rather than on the concerns raised about my behavior. I have many privileges in this fandom, I need to do a better job of utilizing them properly.

@eriquebittle, re: this post

You’re right, my apology focused too much on my feelings and not how my actions have hurt others. I was attempting to start a conversation I wasn’t ready to engage in properly. My apology was lackluster and nothing new at best. As I’m addressing in other posts, I am working on active change. From now on, I'll give the performative white guilt a rest and focus on listening and changing my behaviour.

@senor-lapin, re: this post

I meant what I said about doing my best. However, my apology was neither warranted in the way I handled it nor effective at articulating how I’m taking steps to fix my racist thoughts and actions. As I’ve addressed previously, I have removed the blocks I placed on other members of OMGCP fandom and will work in the future not to exclude them from the discussion. I will listen, research, and reflect for as long as I need to in order to understand my critics. That is the least I owe them.

@duanlarissa, re: this post

I was ineffective in trying to articulate or consider an intersectionality between neurodivergence and racial identity. The way I addressed Nursey and Dex’s relationship was very simplistic and downright racist. There’s a lot of nuance to their relationship that I haven’t begun to explore and shouldn’t have commented on. Nursey has every right to negotiate Dex’s behavior in a way that keeps him both mentally and physically safe.

@onethousandroaches, re: this post

It isn’t worse. You’re right.

In trying to dissect different aspects of his personality, I was not only minimizing his experiences and struggles, but othering and essentializing him. It was racist. I was racist. I need to consider and accept every part of his identity. I need to take a hard look at what I haven’t liked about him in the past, accept that I’ve been narrow minded and prejudiced, and unlearn those tendencies. I need to set a better example of how white fans should support characters of colour (especially Black characters in a fandom created by a Black woman). I need to use the privilege I have (as a white person, as a popular blog) to support this character and the people who enjoy him. All of him.

[evangelineartemiasamos]

Before I say this, really don't mean it to be rude, but why do you think Victoria decided to inject homophobia into a fantasy series which didn't have to mimic the world we live in? I really don't mean to start discourse, but as a bi girl who uses books as an escape, the pattern of straight authors putting homophobia into a book that takes place in a different world kind of bothers me.

I can totally see your point as I’ve seen this argument before, in other contexts. But I,as a straight person, cannot relate to this personally. I can only make arguments about what I’ve learned. Aveyard does use homophobia as a plot point and the question is whether or not this was a good decision. It was certainly a controversial and problematic one that could’ve been approached better.

I think she uses homophobia to show how intolerant and power-fixated the Silvers are even among themselves and to each other. I don’t think she wants to mimic the world we live in this way, but to portray the Silvers. There are certainly other ways to show this, though all would’ve been triggering in one way or another. Be it the child soldier part, or how Silvers might treat rape survivors, or the general child abuse that is alluded to. Red Queen isn’t supposed to show a happyland to begin with, as more or less metaphorical racism is the main conflict of the series, though that doesn’t excuse including homophobia as well.

Please note that the Silvers aren’t homophobic in a forbidding way but in forcing their children into arranged heterosexual marriages. Same-sex relationships aren’t a taboo, though Aveyard defintely doesn’t do enough to show this. Look at Mare not reacting to the Evane relationship at all when Aveyard certainly could’ve found a place to give Mare an opinion or have her feel compassion. Maven seems ashamed of his former relationship with another boy, though that has probably other reasons as well (taking blame for his death, the general mind-control via his mother, Thomas being Red) whereas it seems like Evangeline has to make a secret of her relationship with Elane though if you look closely at the text, she is not exactly trying to hide it either.

Aveyard could’ve been more plain about these characters not feeling ashamed of their sexuality. And while Evangeline isn’t ashamed or trying to suppress her sexuality, the whole point of her being forced into a marriage with a man when everyone, most of all her family, knows she’s lesbian, is indeed used for drama, as in letting the lesbians suffer. Generally, as I’ve said often, before, I’m very upset that we don’t get to see Elane’s feelings for Evangeline and about the whole arranged marriages. All we get to see is Evangeline who agreed to the marriage with Cal before, who then changes her stance after she gets to have a fulfilling relationship with the person she loves. Maybe Aveyard will remedy this part in the last book, giving us more info about Elane while Evangeline dares to speak up to her parents with them actually agreeing with her, that she doesn’t need to marry Cal if she doesn’t want to. Give her a choice to decide over her life by herself. This sounds like she needs her parents’ approval, I know, but this relates to the point of your question - is the world of Red Queen homophobic and why can’t it be less so? If her parents, and other Silvers, showed a different opinion on this than we assume now, it would shift the problem a little.

Honestly, here I am listing points how Aveyard could’ve done better, but of course, I cannot know if this really makes anything better. I’m straight. Maybe it would help if the canon gay characters presented in the books so far weren’t all Silver, and I hope the canon Red gay characters, confirmed as spoilers, Davidson, Rafe (though she hasn’t said he’s gay but lgbt+) or Saraline from Steel Scars, get more page-time and positive representation but this is just an assumption.

I hope my rambling has been helpful in any way. But it’s out of anyone’s hands if people already felt offended by the first three books of the series and don’t want to read on this reason. It’s the general problem of series, that these books might improve after you’ve decided to drop them about which is nothing wrong.