#queer media critical i suppose?

[aestheticcrab]

forever annoyed that a lot of queer criticism of Heartstoppers boils down to “these young teenagers aren’t having enough sex”

[lukolathoughts]

Miss Nicola - supporting LGBTQI rights

Dearest gentle reader,

I have been itching to write a blog post now for a few weeks, but not really knowing where to begin. There have been frenzied weeks and days of activity, but then silence and the fandom meanders like a lost boat at sea. We are often rudderless without the reassuring presence of our ship captains - Luke and Nicola. This also tends to get the sub fandoms spouting nonsense claiming to have seen Nicola in Birmingham or some ridiculous crap. I didn't want to bother her by asking for a photo! No photo, no proof my friend.

I'll talk about me for a moment. I had a week from hell last week. There was something so upsetting for me to deal with, I couldn't go into work as I was crying that much. Try to explain this to your manager: that nasty comments on YouTube made you late for work. Luckily, she is an understanding person and I have told her about my YT channel. Saying some things out loud to real life people make me sound barking mad. But it is the price you pay for being public on YouTube. It also makes me an easy target. I am used to online trolls and people who hate me for saying that Jake is gay and believing in Lukola, but when the stab in the back comes from a supposed friend, it really is the ten of swords. My phone blew up that much, I opened my eyes that morning genuinely thinking Lukola had launched. My hope turned to ash, when I saw what was really happening. I share this with you all because, I have had to have a reckoning with myself the last week. My online life and my real life are not the same. My real life is way more important and I actually need my job, so messing it up because I've got people I don't really know online saying mean things about me, that are not true, shouldn't matter. But it still hurts. But I also realise, they are trying to stop me sharing and trying to ruin my credibility and reputation in order to send me off into my discord crying never to return again.

Well think again. No one tells a Sagittarius woman what they can and can't do. I am made of stronger stuff. Love will always conquer hate. No one puts Baby in the corner, and I will not stand for it. I have scaled back most of my online life now. It had helped me cope with the last year and losing my friend, but sometimes you have to go back into reality. I'm never leaving the ship though. You'll have to chuck me overboard and I'll still jump back on like Rose from Titanic. "I couldn't go, Jack! You jump, I jump, right?"

Anyway, enough about me. Let's talk about Nic. I love Nicola by the way and nothing I say here is a criticism of her or her choices. I see what you're doing though, miss Nicola. I said in my last blog that the shit would hit the fan when Jake has to start press for his new upcoming BBC3 drama What it feels like for a girl. I will admit I have not read the book. Regardless of who Jake is playing, it is reportedly an all queer cast, a queer director and at least one queer writer that I know of. Why would the director of an all queer cast hire a straight man in a homosexual role? If this show is as big as It's a Sin, that aired on Channel 4 a few years ago, then there will be press and a lot of it. There will be press from queer magazines also. Jake is currently in an awkward position, because some press believe he is in a romantic relationship with Nicola Coughlan, a woman who is also 14 years his senior. So, what will Nicola and Jake do?

Jake is holding onto his cash cow with both hands and Nicola needs Jake to continue to pose as her boyfriend to stop the media digging. But honey, they know. It was clear all the press at the SAG awards knew exactly what was going on and they were not afraid to say it. The 'happy ending' comment levelled at them directly by a reporter, had Nicola stunned and Luke smiling like all his Christmases' had come at once.

Nicola knows what is going on. She knows there is a deadline and she knows if she doesn't extricate herself from the narrative she is dating a gay man, she is screwed basically. What is she doing? She's getting out her, I love gays!! T-shirt, hats, scarfs, sunglasses, whatever. She is doing it. Look at me, I love queers! I love her for this and I already know she is an advocate for LGBTQI rights. She has a ton of gay friends. The fandom knows this of course, but do the general public?

At the Neutrogena event on 27th March 2025, there was a very tall drag queen doing some MCing. We know Nic loves drag queens and has been to many shows, so this is nothing new to us. I'm not being overly cynical that the drag queen might have been there for a reason, right? Neutrogena is a product that is targeted at women mostly for their skin products. What has that got to do with a drag queen? I just found it odd.

Next up we have Nicola's Pink Pony Club Post that she shared to both her Instagram stories and grid last Thursday 10th April. The song by Chappell Roan is synonymous with the gay community and one that Jake danced to at her concert last year in a pink cowboy hat. "You guys, remember when my old flat was a gay hotspot!" Nicola, posts 4 polaroid's of her looking fabulous in pink and lays them on a pink blanket. What made you feel so nostalgic, Nic? Or are you sending a message? Look at me, I have loved my gay besties for donkey's years. Prominent gay friends such as JVN and Jack Rooke commented all in agreement, that indeed, Nic's flat was the place to be. And, no I do not think Nicola is coming out herself as gay. Get real, she is supporting her friends and peers.

Then there was yesterday's selfie of Nicola wearing her black - 'I just wanted to say if you are trans and reading this, I love you and so do all my mates' T-shirt. There a few other details in that post that other bloggers such as @toriaaniin have covered beautifully, so I won't go into it here. My eyes sprung wide when I saw this post. I know she advocates for the charity Notaphase.org and I commend her for doing this, but two queer posts in a few days seems to be a lot for Nic, when lately she hasn't been posting at all.

There is also the male hairdresser Halley Brisker in her Opalex video on her Instagram, They make a big deal of letting us know he flirts with male makeup artists. Nicola is clearly good friends with Halley and it is an endearing watch. But to me this seems like a lot of overkill in the last few days for the general public to look at her Instagram and instantly know, yes Nicola does love the girls, the gays and Luke Newton. (FYI Halley Brisker is married to a woman and has children, but to the general public this conversation is implying Nic is comfortable with these conversations).

This, in my opinion, is setting the stage for the final act. I can see Nicola doing some sort of article or interview where she clears a certain narrative up. If you notice, Douglas has also been quite forceful again in implying certain things about Jake and Jake himself does not stop others from posting suggestive posts and videos of him. Nicola must remove herself from this mess in order to move forward with her own career and life. Hanging onto old connections are no longer serving her personally and professionally. Her engagement on Instagram is down by a lot, so I'm told and she is losing followers. She has done all she can career-wise for Jake now, he has to make his own way.

If this does not happen and we remain in this weird heteronormative bubble, I fear the press for What it feels like for a girl, will be a shit show. The truth will come out eventually and it will drag both Jake and Nicola down with it.

[nyxofdemons]

upon consideration i'm pretty sure i've found the reason for this and it's because i've basically been listening non-stop to arcane season 2 critical videos analyzing the writing differences between s2 and s1 (i am experiencing a lethal hyperfixation it's been going on for like 3 weeks) and i think that's why i'm being recommended anti hb stuff also. but this is actually really funny bc it demonstrates a thing i've been wanting to say which is that the reason hb antis are so ridiculous is bc they're going at the writing of hb as if it's made to be judged on the same scale as something like arcane. they are tearing hb apart over details that i, too, am aware are flunky, but i simply brush them off because it's a wacky dark comedy musical show MEANT to be fanfic-y and hyper indulgent. it's not trying to solve world hunger it's SUPPOSED TO BE A SILLY GOOFY TIME

is the writing perfect? no!! is the show giving me absolutely everything i want out of a queer dark comedy adult cartoon??? YES!!! and that is all that matters. peace and love<3

why are my youtube recommendations all anti hb videos

[imaginative-123]

Vivziepop glazers will basically downvote you and make excuses if you call out the sexist writing on how Viv writes her gay men, btw this is from r/CharacterRant

Edit: Minors do not interact, reblog or like my post bec I will block you.

I'm pretty sure if OP posted it in the main sub Hazbin Hotel, he might as well get downvoted for sure despite being an SA Victim. Viv Glazers surely never failed to disappoint me and I'm so glad Tumblr exist bc this is the website where you're allowed to rant about Viv and her shows. FUCK THIS SHIT MAN. Maybe Viv Glazers should learn that people have different perspectives and actual issues in her works. VIV is not a SAINT OR GOD you GLAZERS! GET THAT IN YOUR DAMN HEAD FUCK I HATE THIS FANBASE IT JUST MADE ME MAD.

Edit: About to go to sleep since I will finish my work tom my comment just got 16 upvotes I guess glazers must've realized I got a point LMAO.

Also the comments that got downvoted who point out the issues in Viv's writing got upvoted including OP's comment on Stolitz in regards to sexual coercion since there's also a person who denied the r@pe got upvoted before hours later got downvoted and it shocked me why people would upvote that comment that screams mental gymastics to defend a Ship that is made through sexual coercion that includes the class difference and power dynamic. The post from CharacterRant sub got people's opinions turn into 180 I guess bc they realized the other people like me who point out the issues and have concerns about the show might as well have a reason the shows that Viv write is not really good most especially when it's related to queer representation and SA.

Lastly the point of this post is to showcase the double standards in the fandom on how they view criticisms most especially when you apply that to stans/glazers who refused to see the actual criticisms and think it's mixed with the so called "haters" when I myself am a fan of Viv's work but also recently gotten more critical bc the roses tinted glass fell off when I start to analyze Viv's behavior online including her shows. So if you think this post is just whiny, egotistical and immature, sure tell me that, I'm not perfect and I accept that but that wouldn't changed my issues with the Standom's behavior that invalidates valid criticisms that critics like me have been voicing for years nor how the Fanbase has gotten even way more toxic over the discourse surrounding Viv's immature behavior including how divided the fanbase is, let's not forget the Standom's cultish behaviour to defend Vivziepop from any form of valid criticism, btw I also don't agree with other critics all the time but I can also see when there is criticism that is valid. So before anyone accuses critics for being "haters" maybe try and understand where we were coming from, the people became critics are also fan of Viv's work, if I was truly a hater then I wouldn't reblogged or like fanarts of the show including listening to musicals from Viv's work, just bc I'm a fan doesn't mean I have no right to voice my concerns over Viv including her work. Sometimes Stans should understand that fans can like the work but also criticize it.

Also the mods from CharacterRant removed the post from an SA Victim, damn for a sub that is supposed to make essays of your issues from any media, they would sure remove a post from an SA Victim's issues with Angel Dust's character. Truly the most Hypocritical moment from that sub.

Update: I went back to see the post and it seems to me the removed post was brought back again. I guess the mods feel guilty for what happened.

[ladyloveandjustice]

Winter 2025 Anime Overview: ZENSHU

Premise: Natsuko Hirose is an animator and director lauded as a genius, but she’s struggling with her newest movie, insisting on doing everything herself. Then she dies from food poisoning and is transported to the world of her favorite anime movie, the one that inspired her career. Natsuko finds she has the power to literally draw and animate beings that will then fight the monsters attacking them—can she use her power to save the day and avoid the movie’s tragic ending?

Zenshu is a love letter to animation, artistic inspiration, and stories in general. I’ve been waiting for an isekai anime that actually uses the “transported into the world of my favorite piece of media” in a creative and meaningful way that explores storytelling and the ramifications of interacting with a narrative, and Zenshu is finally it.

Natsuko is struggling with creating a movie about "first love" because she’s never had one, and then bam, she’s transported into the world of A Tale of Perishing, a movie that flopped hard (likely due in part to how depressing the ending is) but it’s been Natsuko’s favorite since childhood and was what inspired her to become an animator.

Natsuko specifically using her animation prowess to save the day is just also an amazing idea, and it looks great. She basically pulls out her pegboard, and then undergoes a magical girl transformation that just ends with her being at her desk. The animation she creates then rises up and beats the monsters, and they’re usually references to something—the first one being the God warrior from Nausicaa.

There’s a lot of fun little gags, like her needing to sleep for three days after because that’s how long that sequence would normally take to animate and a lot of little nerdy in-jokes, like Natsuko being in rapture at finally getting to eat anime food, or coming up with a sentai pose for her team.

(And speaking of references, Natsuko's first hit show was a clear combination of Sukeban Deka and Sailor Moon, which I now dearly want to exist in real life).

Suiting a show about an animator, the animation for the series is consistently gorgeous and full of individuality. The comedic and storytelling strengths of the director and screenwriter duo of Mitsue Yamazaki and Kimiko Ueno (two women who previously worked together on adapting Gekkan Shoujo Nozaki-Kun, one of my favorite anime) are on full display here too.

Natsuko is a fun and relatable character, avoiding some of the typical tropes for anime girl leads- she’s an adult, she spends the entire anime in an oversized hoodie and jeans and a lot of it with her hair covering her face Cousin It style, and when her “style” is pointed out as sloppy, her response is “I’ll dress how I want." She’s cynical and sarcastic and a huge nerd. It’s fun to see her automatically clash with the characters she��s loved since she was a child, showing that characters we love can be annoying as real life people, which I’ve always wanted isekai to explore.

The other characters are fun too—Luke is our stereotypical Hero character, but spending all his time fighting evil has actually made him extremely socially clueless, and he reveals himself pretty adorable after a while. Natsuko and the cute little mascot unicorn hate each other on sight, and it’s incredibly fun.

The often puts a clever twist on some tired tropes—Natsuko runs into Luke’s damsel in distress love interest (who's supposed to end up fridged, to boot) and rather than fight with her over Luke, Natsuko leads her to realize she actually has agency and can be whoever she wants—the result is amazing, and includes some lighthearted criticism of misogynist narratives. I go into it in detail in this post, minor spoilers.

The show is also very queer positive. We’re introduced to a dragon-person who, in the dub, uses they-them pronouns. In the sub, some viewers interpret them as a lesbian, but whatever your take, they're queer regardless, and Natsuko indicates some physical attraction to them. They’re also a great character, funny and tragic and cool all at once.

One episode goes into the people who have crushed on Natsuko over the years (while she remains oblivious) and the first one is a young girl and classmate of hers, who identifies Natsuko as her first love. I go into more detail about how sweet this part is in this post. It’s just a very casually queer show, and I appreciate that.

The themes of the story are interesting, the show explores the pressures of being a creator, the way you can shut others out and insist you know best, and what inspiration is. Natsuko begins to struggle with the fact A Tale of Perishing is her favorite movie in part because of how it puts a more dour spin on a fantasy story, and it's inspired her so much...but now the characters are real people she cares about. So she has to stop their fates even if it messes with the creator’s vision. But the question is, CAN SHE, or are they literally doomed by the narrative?

The ending is where things get a little muddled. It isn’t bad, but it’s rushed compared to the rest of the show, and feels a little too easy. I wish Natsuko had interacted way more with the original creator and we’d really gotten a clash of their opposing viewpoints. I feel we barely scratched the surface.

Going into slight spoilers territory with this paragraph, skip if you don't want any: The ending I think, can either be interpreted as either 1. Fanworks and interpretations are valid as hell and creators who look down on them are wrong (this is a bit of a stretch since the series doesn’t mention fanfic or doujinshi at any other point) or 2. It’s fine to take inspiration from your creative heroes, but you have to be willing to do something different, and accept the support of others. Conversely, a creator that is too precious about their work, who shuts out others and who looks down on those who take inspiration from them because they’re doing something different, is wrong and misguided.

That’s my best guess, but as I said, the themes get muddled in the last episode, in a way it takes some serious thinking to decipher a message that’s super applicable to real life. Like “these characters are real people now” is a nice motivation and drama, but not one that seems to a ton about art, though it does play into the theme that Natsuko needs to learn to let others in and connect to them.

Like I said, it’s not a bad ending, I was happy with it, it just felt a little undercooked. There were characters I wanted to explore a bit more. show’s message about art could have been stronger, and it left some potentially really interesting and meaningful stuff on the table...but the show was still amazing. I loved its creativity and characters all the way through.

The story is good, the characters are lovable, and the animation is top-notch. This has already earned it’s place on the top anime of the year list and I really implore you to check it out if you love anime and art at all! It's a thoroughly good time.

[sapphiresaphics]

^^^———

Okay two things:

1. That’s NOT the lens of season 1? Season 1 discusses the political issues between the cities, sure, but that’s more SETUP and SET DRESSING than anything else.

But whatever, let’s say you’re right. Let’s say that Season 1 actually IS supposed to be about the oppression and inequality between the two cities.

What’s the end of Season 1 say then? Because the end of season 1 is the council agreeing to make Zaun independent and Jinx blowing them away and getting rid of all opportunities to better the two cities. If the show is all about the oppression, what does Jinx blowing up the council when they’re ready to NOT oppress the city anymore mean???

The reason you’re struggling with viewing Arcane through this lens is because it’s NOT the intended lens and it doesn’t match with what the show is doing.

But that also brings me to my next point:

2. If you’re viewing it through this lens, then you understand that you can view it through DIFFERENT lenses, right? Like that’s the basis of most modern day media criticism and analysis isn’t it? Take a work of art and use different lenses to critique it and see how it fares.

So if you agree that lenses can be swapped… why the heck do you struggle with the idea of viewing Arcane through a different lens? Why does it have to ONLY be viewed through this one narrow lens you’ve decided on? Could you also not view it through a queer lens? Or through the lens of civil rights? Or women’s rights?

Or how about… you view it through the lens of the “cycle of violence” which is what the show was INTENDED to be viewed through? Why is that so hard?

If a particular lens isn’t working to view it through, why are you blaming the writers for that? Why wouldn’t your first thought be “hey, maybe I was wrong and this isn’t the lens the show was meant to be viewed through? Maybe I should try another one and see if that’s better?”

You guys all BAFFLE me.

[sophie-frm-mars]

Queer Culture is an orphan culture

Queer people aren't normally born into families of other queer people, so the way that for example the culture of racialised people can pass down intergenerationally, this doesn't happen for queer people. The advice for surviving as queer doesn't pass down to queer kids the way that advice for surviving white supremacy passes from racialised parents to racialised kids or advice for surviving patriarchy passes from mothers to daughters. The way that elders in racialised communities can guide the resolution of conflicts or harmful patterns or older women can advise younger women, we don't have that. We have an orphan culture.

Immediately we will say that this is what queer elders are for, and this is true, but it isn't the same. We aren't raised in families with any kind of consistent framework for what it means to be us, in fact we're often raised by families that try to actively stop us from being ourselves. There will never be as many elders (who are actively engaging responsibly in their roles as community elders) as younger queers and even if there were they can't be in those younger queers' lives in the way that a parent ideally is from birth.

I'm not saying this to undersell the value of found family, or the ways that found family relationships can be robust and long lasting and bigger than interpersonal turbulence the way family is supposed to be. If anything, I want to stress how important the role of queer elders is, because in a lot of smaller queer communities elders just don't exist. A queer elder isn't just a queer person who has been around a while, they're someone who chooses to take responsibility for the younger people around them by sharing the lessons they've learned and providing the benefits of greater life experience to others.

In smaller queer communities, older queers may choose not to act as elders because if they did they would be seen as responsible for everyone. There has to be a critical mass of older queers before all of them feel safe to engage with community as queer elders. I was outlining this to a friend in Seattle, talking about how barren of elder queers most UK queer communities are, and she said "oh yeah I live down the road from an LGBT retirement community. I know a bunch of queers in their 40s and 50s." In more queer friendly areas of the US, communities aren't just bigger: they contain more of our collective gathered knowledge and history.

In some places the orphan culture is more pronounced, and in some places it is partly remedied by the presence of elders. For many queers, we either learn the lessons about the patterns that shape our communities by reading about them in books and online, or we learn about them the hard way - by repeating them.

My dad had a brain tumour that was diagnosed when I was less than a year old. The effects of the tumour and the surgery to remove it completely transformed him as a person. Growing up I got to know about who he had been through stories that people told me. I identified ways that I was similar to him not by seeing him being like me, but from those stories. Seeing social media dissections of transmisogyny, advice columns from queer authors, endless discourses about mental health in queer communities, I feel the same way I felt learning stories about my dad before he was sick.

I think young queer people cling to queer people of note they see in the public sphere in that same way. It isn't an adequate substitute for a parent who can teach you about who you are, but it's often all we have. Even if those publicly visible queers aren't focussed on queer politics, even if they don't give the kind of support that elders provide to communities, even if they have no experience to draw from and no advice to give, they will inevitably be looked up to by a tonne of young queer strangers, because we're all orphans trying to raise ourselves and each other at the same time.

[crooked-wasteland]

The Karen client said about her husband "he probably cheated on me" which implies that she doesn't have any evidence of it, and given that she is meant to be homophobic-commenting that her husband is "poisoning" her daughters with his "immoral" lifestyle-I think the implication is that she is just working off her preconceived assumptions about gay people.

I've seen fans call Stolitz criticals "homophobic" for not understanding this implication and for criticisms of Stolitz, which is part of the reason I'm bringing this up.

In your opinion, does this remove the unfortunate implications of Sinsmas justifying cheating when its between two men, and the portrayal of the woman as an one-d "homophobic Karen"?

In my opinion the way female characters are written in the Helluvaverse is still clearly influenced by misogynistic attitudes, and a more mature media would be able to give complexity and even compassion to "jerkass" characters.

It is true that there are negative stereotypes around Queer people being cheaters, and while the show implies that there is no evidence and so it may not be the case that he cheated, the show also turns around and has Blitz compare his relationship directly onto these characters as a means of saying "Cheating isn't that big a deal".

It's one thing to have the idea that the implication of the victims cheating isn't grounded and the characters genuinely think this is a level of pettiness that even they find unethical (which goes against their entire premise of a business, but let's not think about that). To which the Karen Client should have been made a mockery of. That is how framing sets up that what the character believes is actually something to be critical or skeptical of. Not simply the use of demeaning stereotypes to discredit her.

By the story comparing Blitz and Stolas to the two gay dads in the episode, it is trying to say that cheating doesn't matter. While we don't know if the gay dads were a product of cheating, we are not under that sort of deniability with Stolitz. The message cannot both be "There is no evidence and so they are innocent" as well as "Even if they aren't innocent, they should be innocent". The stereotyping is extrapolated while the justification for cheating is explicit.

The Karen Client as well is not shown to be all that terrible a person. She feels resentful and slighted, but because she is in Hell I'm supposed to believe she deserves to be there? When the premise of the first episode was that Mrs. Mayberry was a model human just under Jesus Christ himself and had one moment of rage from such a deep betrayal by her husband (oh look, cheating again but when this man cheated, it was with another woman so I guess that's why it's bad) that made all the good she did in the world null.

The Karen Client is at best ornery and unpleasant. But that's not evil. And I think this could tangent into a complete discussion over how Medrano's idea of Pure Evil is Beatrice Horseman: a woman who lost hope.

[canichangemyblogname]

Great. The rabid shippers are once again trying to turn this (re-hashed) “fetish discourse” around onto queer men. “The faggots are the REAL fetishizers”— because apparently it’s 1963 again, and a man liking a man is an unhealthy and irrational reverence; an obsession. This originally started out with us pointing out our own invisibility in fan spaces and talking about how many people in fandom who ARE NOT queer men speak over us, write off our lived realities, and rely on harmful real-world rhetoric about us to malign our visibility while building their fan community on our sexualized bodies and their fantasies of our lives. They build their relationship with media exclusively through an obsession with m/m relationships, and—perhaps predictably—then trample over us when we ask for respect.

I suppose part of what’s most frustrating is that when we, rightfully, point out that this—and similar rhetoric— is homophobic, an unfortunate not-infrequent response has been “Pfts— but I’m queer,” as if that excludes someone from being a piece of shit. You all do realize that being part of a protected class does not prevent you from contributing to systems and spreading ideas that harm those in other protected classes or the same protected class, right? “I experience an axis of marginalization, therefore I could not possibly contribute to a system that harms me and others like me,” certainly doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny, not just because it’s untrue, but also because its use here functions as a thought-terminating fallacy, designed to end the debate with a cliché rather than address the point put forth: your homophobia. It is also an Irrelevant Conclusion Fallacy, as the argument that members of a marginalized class are more likely to be sympathetic to members of that same class is certainly valid, and could be argued, but this conclusion does not address the issue in question: your homophobia. It may also be characterized as an Argument from Incredulity, where you cannot imagine that a queer person could be queerphobic, so it must be untrue. Which, of course, I have all seen people point out.

However, now, as if on queue, the next most frequent “come back” is, “So you just want women to shut up and take it? You want to silence queer women?” 1.) The people saying and doing this shit aren’t all women, 2.) The people saying and doing this shit aren’t all queer, 3.) What lead people to call out your post wasn’t anyone’s identity; it was the contents of the post, you are now using identity to shield yourself from accountability, and 4.) This is a strawman fallacy being used to distract from the original critique: your homophobia. It is also an Ad Hominen attack being used to move the focus from your homophobia to the implication that your critic is motivated by misogyny to critique you.

Although, this “come back” is more of a “case in point” at this point when the original argument was about how fans who do not live as queer men (or those adjacent) do their damnedest to speak over and discount the lived realities of queer men (and those adjacent) to instead center our visibility and our representation around the preferences, pleasures, and desires of women. Like— y’all do realize that what started a lot of this “discourse” months ago was a post that quite literally said that mlm visibility/representation has always been about and centered women and their desires in relationships with men, as well as a post where a woman said that if she ever saw a man flirt with another man in public, she’d shoot him, right? You know this, yes?

[ilikekidsshows]

Funny how nowadays, when a media with female lead that come with buzzword like "girl power", "feminist", "girlboss", etc and it flop so hard, some people claimed it's because the people are sexist or racist (if the lead is poc) instead of, you know, think that maybe there's something wrong with the media that make it flop. Like how the recent Snow White live action flop for example. Weird weird.

---

The annoying thing is, I get where this attitude comes from. The show’s creator has been crying misogyny at his critics for years and it's easy to believe something you hear repeatedly is true. In addition, media that's labeled as socially aware due to it just starring minorities or actually discussing social themes is held to stricter standards both because the people viewing fandom as activism want their “activist media” to be perfect representation and also because the anti -woke crowd want an excuse to be bigoted towards something they see as “too woke”. However, an important aspect of this backlash is that it's more likely to happen to queer media than because the protagonist is a girl/woman. The typical reaction to female protagonists is to label their media as only for girls and, like, that's the attitude of this show's showrunners who only discuss their female demographic and seem to resent having to include a male lead to appeal to male viewers.

Also, like, I don't think people going: “hey, this show for preschoolers shouldn't have unchecked abuse apologia in it” is people grasping at straws to hate a show with a female lead. Especially when it's coming from people who used to staunchly defend said show before that abuse apologia. Even when the show admits their protagonist did something wrong, it's only because she's “keeping secrets”, and not the belittling of the abuse her boyfriend suffered, and that's all because the writers decided during the production of season 5 that their chief child abuser was an awesome character actually so the child abuse has to be waved away so that they might one day get to make that spin-off/flashback episode starring Gabriel they mentioned wanting to make.

It all actually comes down to these middle-aged men loving their middle-aged man OC so much they make their female lead babble nonsense about his good intentions to vindicate him, making her the mouthpiece for the show’s abuse apologia. But, the worst part about it all is that's it's not even out of character. Marinette is the number one character not taking the concerns of victims of abuse seriously, taking it on herself to try to “fix” these parent-child relationships and never accepting she's in the wrong to do so. I can't say the abuse apologia came out of nowhere, because it's been a part of the show since ‘The Bubbler', where Marinette insists parents can do no wrong because they love their children and then never changes her mind despite what abuse she witnesses for over 130 episodes. At this point, I think the showrunners aren't going to have her change her mind because they think she's correct.

Also, like, Miraculous isn't even a flop, the people whining about haters/"misogynists" ruining Miraculous' rep are making stuff up because Zag keeps greenlighting more seasons of this garbage. The fans defending Marinette are even willing to defend the abuse apologia and the target demographic of small children lack the experience and critical thinking skills to realize they're being presented with abuse apologia as the sympathetic perspective on child abuse. Unfortunately, a lot of the grown people watching this show just don't think gaslighting and abuse apologia are that big of a deal, don't even recognize when it's being shown to them, especially when the perpetrator is a female character who's really upsette about it. Miraculous is still a massively popular show, which is why I wish it wasn't feeding kids abuse apologia through their supposed role-model protagonist. Kids deserve better.

[ohrightgaypeople]

this chapter defies religion and I love it

I'll start this by prefacing that this is what great character development looks like 👆

and sorry for the tangent/rant is this going to become because, truly, 19 Days has no religious plot or tones, doesn't offer commentary or criticism on it- hell!! it has nothing to do with it at all

yet my hurt heart can help but heal a little bit more every time a queer piece of media has moments like this

ngl, when I started reading the chapter I was nervous, but afterwards it became one of my faves of the series; it gives the same vibe as Charlie's final talk w/ Ben in the Heartstopper series

we, who grow up on extremist religious households, are often groomed to the idea of "always forgiving", always taking the "high ground" and "being the better person" - whatever it even is supposed to be like. and it takes a long time to shake off the guilt of simply not wanting to forgive someone that hurt

because, here's the thing, YOU DON'T!! nb needs to forgive everyone; forget and move forward? absolutely, yes. but if someone pushed you too far and you want nothing to do with them anymore, it's your right to it. you're not going to hell, nor is any other Deity you believe going to punish you for that

it's why scenes like this, specially to lgbt ppl, is so important and will always have a deep impact on me (and a lot of others, I'm sure)

Translation: @19daysmanhua

[leandra-kinard]

On Oliver's social media behavior regarding Bucktommy vs. Buddie

Kind of in line with many of the good points raised by @bbbuckaroo in this ask response, but I wanted to make my own post about it.

I, too, have seen posts that prompted this ask - from more well-meaning people remarking that Oliver could/should maybe say something against the toxic Buddie shippers and promote Bucktommy more, to more critical voices saying he's essentially ship-baiting with Buddie because he keeps posting about them.

As the referenced post says, Oliver "knows how important and pivotal the Buddie FRIENDSHIP is".

So let's look at that from Oliver's (and in connection also Ryan's) point of view for a moment here.

You're an actor who's been playing one half of what is one of the most integral relationships on a very successful show. That relationship has textually always been a friendship, but with elements that make it richer and deeper than most regular friendships; it's a sort of family dynamic.

It could be read as having a potential for romance, and you're open to that, should the writers ever decide that's the direction they want to take it. You have said so multiple times, not just to appease a large group of fans, but because you genuinely mean it. You're open to it, but you don't know if it's ever going to happen, nor do you have any power over it.

You do love the way fans are celebrating this relationship though - whether they highlight the canonical platonic aspects or take it a step further. You "love the love" (as Ryan has put it). It's great, it's heartwarming, it's moving because the potential of that romance and your character figuring out he's bisexual means so much to queer fans who are looking for good queer representation (which your show already has, but there could always be a bit more, right?). You see and want to acknowledge all the creativity people pour into it.

But you're careful after a while, because, so far, that relationship has only textually been platonic, and some fans are accusing both the writers and you of queerbaiting.

So you take a step back, do less social media for a while. You don't want them to think you're confirming anything just because you see value in certain fictional interpretations of the text.

But then you are told that your character is supposed to come out as bisexual; he'll have a romance with a background character they're bringing back for a couple of episodes. While that's not exactly the relationship many of the fans hoped to get, it's still amazing. It's the right representation of bisexual characters that is very rarely done right, and it'll confirm that they always read your character correctly as bisexual. It'll be so validating to the fans to know they didn't misinterpret that, and you're very happy about that.

But you still love the family-like, platonic relationship you've built with the other character for 5 whole seasons before this. And you love the relationship your character has with his son, too. (In a way, Buck is to Christopher what Bobby is to Buck - a father figure).

You want to keep celebrating that because your new romantic relationship doesn't replace the year-long friendship with Eddie. You want to show fans that 'hey, even though this isn't exactly what you hoped for, it's still great; it's important. Eddie and Chris are still and always will be a huge part of Buck's life. Don't worry. Buck will not abandon them. I still see you and acknowledge you, but let's focus on the textual friendship and platonic love here. Which is also very, very important, and very dear to me personally."

And there isn't that much to share about a romantic relationship that's just begun yet anyway, especially with the season being so short and packed with multiple story arcs around the main characters. It's all still at the start, and while it's great, exciting and has the potential to become something lasting, nothing's set in stone yet. You probably also don't want to have people get their hopes up that Bucktommy is 'confirmed' as endgame; and you don't want to put a main character who has his own, very complex story arc going on this season on the backburner.

You've obviously 'done it wrong'. But no matter how else you could have done it, it would have been wrong as well. You probably know this by now, because no matter what you did in the past, there were always people who interpreted your actions and words in bad faith to confirm their own agenda.

So what the hell are you supposed to do other than what feels good to you while applying a little bit of caution?

---

Oliver CANNOT get it right. It's simply impossible. If he didn't post at all, some fans would be mad that he doesn't say anything. If he only or primarily promoted Bucktommy, they'd be mad that he ignores Eddie and Chris entirely. If he only promoted Buddie (platonic) and Chris, they'd be mad that he's ship baiting. And if he goes for the balance of putting his character's 6-year history with Eddie+Chris and the newly developing romance with Tommy in perspective, i.e. what he's doing right now, they're still mad.

In any potential scenario, the loud and obnoxiously entitled portion of the fandom would find a reason to criticize. It really does not matter what he does.

So, where does that leave us? Personally, I'd say leave the man alone. Let him post and say what he feels is best, and don't try to look at it under any 'bad faith' lens. He's probably given it sufficient thought and does what he thinks is best and feels right.

[wh1speringwinds]

Help me choose my essay topic :D!!

okay okay

I NEED your opinions on something anyones opinion is welcome!

So, this year, for uni, I will have to write a SHIT ton of essays- one of them is in a class about cultural studies and involves themes of culture, power and identity. We read marxist literature, a gender studies approach, critical race theory and much more and the essay we are supposed to write is entirely our decision. The profs words were essentially "pick something you like and write an analysis of the cultural context"

So now I have like 15 potential topics and I CANT CHOOSE ONE. Lemme give you a list of the potential topics I have, and you guys can gimme your opinions on it:

Class consciousness in the commedia dell'arte: a marxist analysis

Queer politics of non-human characters (yes this is just an excuse for me to write about my favourite characters)

The political implications of merch for revolutionary media (think a critical analysis of the hunger games x shein or british crown x les mis collabs)

Representation of repressed mythologies in modern media (a specific focus on Irish, Welsh and Scottish mythologies, since it is technically British Cultural Studies)

Politics of language learning (Essentially about the inequality and inaccessibility of learning languages, especially minority languages)

[rjalker]

The most common responses I've gotten to criticizing bigotry in media are, in no particular order:

1. Clearly you didn't actually read the books / watch the movie

(A patently absurd statement to make, when you are discussing details that could only be known by reading the books or watching the movie. Sometimes they will cave and admit you did read/watch the thing in question, but then, clearly, you're lacking in media comprehension. For criticizing the things that require actually comprehending the media to even notice.

Because a shallow reading of the text would literally make you think this isn't a problem because that's what the writers wants you to think because the writers are bigots.)

2. The person summarizes the thing I am criticizing, and then acts like them summarizing it means it's magically no longer a problem.

Example:

Me: The slavery apologism in this series is bad.

The person: So, you are upset by the fact that the author is going out of her way to demonize slaves and slave rebellions and keeps having the protagonists murder slaves like they're mindless automatons while doting on slave owners and none of this is portrayed as a bad thing? We're still supposed to think the protagonists are good people? That's not actually a problem.

3. The person acts like their headcanon magically fixes and erases all the bigotry in canon.

Example:

Me: This movie is doing the racist trope where the white girl is not allowed to get together with the Black boy at the end of the movie simply because he's Black, when we all know that if he were white they would have gone riding off into the sunset together, kissing and smiling. But he's not even allowed to try and hold her hands without getting grossed out. That's absolute pure racism.

The person: Well, I headcanon the white girl as aro, and I thought she wasn't interested in him at all, maybe even scared of him, so it's not racism at all, she's just Queer.

[biconickyoshi]

Okay y’all… I was very critical of eps 3 & 4 (especially 4) of NAtLA. Then all of a sudden eps 5 & 6 kinda slapped me in the face with how much better the show suddenly got.

Spoiler-free thoughts first:

Zuko, Iroh, and Aang have cemented themselves as the best parts about this adaptation - which is really funny considering I’m currently writing a longfic AU where Zuko and Iroh discover Aang in the iceberg right after Zuko is banished at age 13 and end up becoming the first members of the Gaang (albeit reluctantly at first lol). Episode 6: “Masks” (the Blue Spirit adaptation) was so good, I’d venture to say that it actually improved and fleshed out some things from the original series.

Episode 5: “Spirited Away”, while not as good as E6, was not as bad as I heard people say it was going to be. I think that the changes they did make didn’t bother me nearly as much as the changes they made in the last episode, and it was actually entertaining.

There were several scenes that made me cry in both of these episodes (moreso in episode 6, which I’ll get into further down in the spoiler section). These are the scenes that I feel like really tapped into the heart of the original show rather than feeling like a soulless remake.

Now for my in-depth thoughts (INCLUDES SPOILERS):

EP 5: “Spirited Away”

- Staring out, I was bummed because I had just rewatched the first two eps of the original animated series lol.

- It was an interesting choice to have all three members of the Gaang get stuck in the Spirit World, but I think it worked.

- Wan Shi Tong just showing up randomly was a bit unnecessary, but I suppose it will be kinda interesting to see him again in S2 since he’s already met the Gaang

- Hei Bai plays a much smaller role in these eps, but I strangely didn’t mind that either?

- Seeing Katara’s last memory with her mom was devastating, especially the fact that she had to witness her death and hide in the igloo with Kya’s charred body :(( she definitely has severe PTSD.

- Even Sokka’s memory made me tear up a bit

- Koh being the villain and a soul-eater or whatever was a bit of an odd choice, but I guess I can see why they did it. I do prefer him just being an asshole who steals ppl’s faces lol

- Appreciated the Fog of Lost Souls reference from the LoK lore

- Aang reuniting with Gyatso made me cry. I know some people didn’t like him being in the Spirit World, but I really liked it. Also, the fact that Gyatso was the first person to tell Aang that it wasn’t his fault the Air Nomads died, and that if he had been there he would have died too? THANK YOU! My poor boy has been berated enough for “abandoning” the world.

- We got some interesting lore about the afterlife for humans from Gyatso and Aang’s convo, which we’ve never gotten in AtLA media before. Idk if it’s just for Air Nomads, but Aang mentions that Gyatso stayed behind instead of “seeking enlightenment”. I know that the end goal in Buddhism is to reincarnate until you eventually achieve nirvana, so I wonder if that’s what they were alluding to (I’m not an expert on religions so pls correct me if I’m wrong)

- Oh yeah, I forgot June is here lmao. As a queer person I loved her (bc beautiful goth woman) but I didn’t like the weird choice to make her hit on Iroh - I guess to contrast the Iroh being creepy towards her thing in the OG series. I wish they would have just had them interact normally tbh, no weird “flirting”

EP 6: “Masks”

- Here we go y’all. The best episode in the show so far and probably the best the show is gonna get this season. I’m still pretty shocked at how good this one was.

- I think the decision to include flashbacks to Zuko’s Agni Kai was a good decision here. It felt like an appropriate episode for them and the flashbacks were very well done.

- In general, Dallas is doing a phenomenal job at portraying a Zuko who is angry and aggressive, yes, but also so very sweet and compassionate at his core. I love when little inklings of his true self shine through.

- Roku was… not what I expected. He was very much more of a lighthearted and jokey person… I didn’t hate it, it was just unexpected lol. I wonder if they did that to contrast him with Kyoshi. Which, speaking of, I’m glad Roku clarified that Aang doesn’t just need to be a merciless warrior (and that he didn’t berate Aang for “abandoning” the world like she did). But I still am annoyed about the mischaracterization of Kyoshi in general.

- RIP Shyu :/

- Thought it was kind of strange how June captures Aang at Roku’s temple lol. Like how did she get on and off the island??

- Zhao continues to feel like a completely different character to me lmao. I think this version is pretty funny, but it’s so weird to see Zhao being portrayed as so goofy and incompetent when he was such an intimidating force and the main villain of Book 1 in the OG series. Just a weird direction they went with his character.

- The Yuyan archers look cool as fuck. 10/10 no notes

- Still not sure how I feel about Azula already being this insecure and jealous of Zuko. I think it makes her feel a bit more realistically like a child, but the whole point of Azula’s character is that she is really good at maintaining this cool and calm persona on the surface, which she uses to scare and manipulate people. I can see her maybe getting to a point later on to where she hardens herself into that though. We’ll see.

- Baby Zuko asking Iroh how he looks and his little smile 😭😭😭😭 I had a physical “aww” reaction to that. THAT’S MY SON (me and Iroh shouting in unison)

- War Room scene was handled very well. No complaints. I like how Ozai tried to test Zuko with battle strategies.

- Blue Spirit break out scene was extremely close to the original, and it was really good. They adapted it almost shot for shot with all the important parts.

- Here’s probably my favorite part of the episode: Zuko and Aang’s talk inside the abandoned house after they escape from Pohuai!!!!!! Gahhhh I could gush about this scene all day. I love how they expanded it to be an actual friendly conversation between Aang and Zuko. Like we get to see Zuko’s true self coming through - the sweet, kind boy we know he is. Zuko and Aang just have such great chemistry as well, wayyy more than Aang has with either Sokka or Katara. Like I adored them bonding over painting and caligraphy!!! I think this is the best acting we’ve seen from Gordon so far, and Dallas did a phenomenal job switching back to that hurt, angry version of himself (of course a trauma response). And the fact that Aang said “sorry, I didn’t mean to hurt you” when he blocked Zuko’s firebending attack??? My sweet boy 😭

- The final flashback to the Agni Kai was really well done too. I’d already heard Zuko fights back, which I wasn’t sure I’d like, but I actually didn’t mind it. I really liked that they showed Zuko’s hesitation whenever he did actually have an opening, and that was what angered Ozai the most - Zuko showing compassion, “weakness”. Daniel Dae Kim is of course doing a phenomenal job (no surprises there), and I really liked that Iroh actually attempted to stop Ozai at one point. It also looked like young Azula had tears in her eyes, which I again actually liked because it humanizes her.

- I loved that Aang was still there when Zuko woke up on the boat 😭 he wanted to make sure he was okay!! I full on started crying when we got the “do you think we could have been friends too?” lines from him. Again, Gordon killed it. I love how you can tell that Aang knows Zuko has been hurt and that’s why he acts the way he does. He doesn’t blame him for any of it. 10/10

- the last flashback to Zuko in his bed recovering from the burn… god the tears just kept flowing. I really liked the choice to have Ozai almost give Zuko a chance to like… idk understand why he did what he did, and how compassion is “weak”?? And then Zuko’s response to give people a chance 😭😭😭 as if I couldn’t love him any more!!! And then of course Ozai gets pissed. But seeing baby Zuko just cry in his bed UGH I’m dehydrated at this point

- Of course I can’t finish this review without mentioning the 41st division. What an incredible way to expand upon the source material by making them Zuko’s crew!!! It shows just how much Zuko truly cares about others and it moved me so much (once again to tears).

I don’t have high hopes for the last two episodes, but honestly, if this is what the live action can be, it gives me a bit of hope (at least for future seasons). I really think that Dallas, Gordon, Paul, and Daniel were the stars of this ep and are a big part of what made it so good.

[generalzaroff456]

IASIP, Transphobia, and Material Conditions

Trigger Warning: Discussion of transphobia

I would guess that most people on this hellsite who are fans of Always Sunny have grappled with the transphobia of the early seasons in the context of a fandom that has Queer ships and a show with some iconic Gay Mac imagery. Recognizing the flaws of a show and liking it anyways because we can be critical of the things we like or because it addressed the problems is a great way of engaging in media without expecting everyone to be perfect. However, my understanding of the discourse is that there are two contradictory responses to the transphobia and, either way, neither addresses some other issues.

Responses Basically, I’ve heard two responses for the transphobia of the show. The first one I heard from Rob McElhenney himself and it’s a recognition that they shouldn’t have used the slur they use to describe Carmen. The second one, which I’m sure a lot of people have said, but Lily Simpson made a solid video detailing, recognizes transphobia plot points and language in the show, but accepts them on account that they characters are awful people, so the show paints the transphobia in negative light.

I think both arguments have some flaws. Lily’s argument centres around the fact that the main characters are framed as awful people, so the audience is supposed to recognize their behaviour as bad. Lily gives a lot of weight to the fact that Mac gets beat up at the end of Charlie Has Cancer. What I think Lily’s recognizing is that a lot of jokes in the show are structured around a gang/normal guy dynamic. The gang says messed up things which is contrasted by normal people who react in shock. We, the audience, are supposed to be on the side of the normal people and recognize the problems of the gang (e.g,. the lawyer calls them anti-Semitic for saying he’s Jewish just for being a lawyer). Other times, the gang just says things that are so horrible that we must realize the problems immediately (like the psychological torture in The Gang Goes to Hell), which is a little like the misogyny in Mad Men.

However, just because the normal points out that the gang’s speech is problematic doesn’t mean it’s explained. Seeing two guys beat Mac up for punching Carmen doesn’t leave the audience with a lesson. It’s almost like they’re showing blatant transphobia with a sigh that says “transphobia” and nothing more. Are they proud of it??

Other times, we see the problematic/normal guy dynamic being played out between Mac and other members of the Gang. For example, in Mac Fights Gay Marriage, the gang is being the voice of reason against Mac’s attack on Carmen’s husband. Mac calls him gay for marrying a trans woman. Here, the gang doesn’t take Mac’s side, but only because Carmen had gotten bottom surgery. Reading the show through a problematic/normal lens leaves us to believe that trans women are women only if they’re gotten bottom surgery.

Ok, that’s Lily’s argument. Then there’s the one McElhenney himself made. His is centred around regret for using a slur and leaves it at that. Rob’s argument neglects Lily’s framework that sometimes shows can show bad things and still be good shows. So instead of rectifying the problem by making the gang learn their lesson or inserting good trans representation (Rob writes and directs several episodes), he simply wrote Carmen out of the show entirely, with her last appearance being in like season six. It’s almost like he’s cancelling himself. This creates a taboo where, once a cis person is told their trans representation has some issues, they start ignoring trans people rather than trying to be better.

Some More Issues

Cool, that’s Rob’s argument. Thank you for staying with me. Now, I think there are other problems I want to address. Following Lily’s framework, I posit that the gang members are all awful people and that we can see internal responses to their behaviour. Within that line of thinking, though, we see half-baked responses to transphobia:

In Mac is a Serial Killer, Mac’s ashamed of sleeping with Carmen and the gang validates the shame when they find out. There’s no recognition that you shouldn’t be ashamed for sleeping with a trans woman.

Before Mac comes out in like season ten, the show is a little bit on-and-off about whether he’s gay. We see Mac struggling with internalized homophobia in The Gang turns Racist, but he’s flirting with women in other episodes. I don’t have a problem with that, the show is still finding its stride in the early seasons. However, the fact that he flirts with Carmen in the context of a season where he’s sometimes gay makes it seem like flirting with a trans woman might be gay.

There’s just casual transphobia being thrown around, like when Charlie calls Carmen “the dad” in Dee Gives Birth, or when Dennis calls Carmen a dude in Charlie Has Cancer.

Maureen Ponderosa’s whole thing about transitioning to a cat is basically the attack-helicopter joke. And then Dennis kills her. Dennis basically murders a trans woman, and the issue is never discussed. Yes, the show undoubtedly frames murder as bad, but trans people getting killed just for being trans is a serious real-world issue that deserves more discussion than a jumping off point for a true-crime parody. Fuck. This isn’t even in the early seasons when they were figuring things out.

There’s also a more material problem with the production of the show. There’s an ongoing problem about material conditions of actors and I’d like to write a post exploring this issue using The Gang turns Black as an example. But for now, I want to highlight that Carmen is played by a cis woman, Brittany Daniel. While it’s not always bad to cast a cis woman as a trans woman, it takes away a salary from a trans woman. If you’re gonna make jokes at trans people’s expense, you might as well pay them a salary. It also means that, in a show that makes so many trans jokes, there were no trans people at the table read or rehearsal room improving new lines or making edits to the script.

Conclusion

Overall, I think Always Sunny’s pretty good at showing characters who are problematic but want to try their best (we see this when the gang policing their own language to be good people in The Gang turns Racist and The Gang Goes Jihad). Because of past mistakes, I’d like to see them lean into positive trans representation and hire trans cast and crew members. We see drops of trans representation in the later seasons, but Mac’s comments in 2020: A Year in Review and the plot A Woman’s Right to Chop, the actors still have a lot to learn.

Despite all this, the show has a thriving Queer audience craving more seasons. This is the perfect context for more Sunny, more trans creative workers, and more trans story lines.

Please let me know if you have any opinions on my post. I’m not trans myself, just a simple bird lawyer.