#she's so incredibly sexualized as if she isn't compared to a child multiple times in her article

[carcasscounty]

Aé my daughter

She's literally just a little girl

[heavencasteel420]

I find it really frustrating when people interpret Jonathan (particularly Season 1 Jonathan) as being an edgelord who dislikes people for no reason. As a joke, it's stale and, as a remotely serious take, it's devoid of empathy or even basic comprehension of what happens in the show. Let's think for a second about how the citizens of Hawkins (the town where Jonathan has lived his entire life, and therefore his main reference point) behave towards him, his family, and others he's shown to have positive feelings towards (such as Nancy and Will's friends):

Kids bully his younger brother for homophobic reasons;

His younger brother's friends are bullied, both verbally and physically, often for racist and ableist reasons;

The police gossip about how his mom is crazy and speculate about her sex life;

Lonnie, his abusive deadbeat father, commands more respect in the town than his hardworking, loving mother;

Nancy is the only person at school to show any concern about Will, a missing little kid;

Steve makes a snide remark about him hanging up missing posters (although he has the decency to object to Tommy's crueler remarks);

Tommy makes a sick joke--twice--about Jonathan killing Will;

Even Barb, a "nice" girl who generally disapproves of Steve's crew, doesn't go up to him with Nancy or say "hey, in addition to my concerns that you are sexually in over your head with Steve, he and her friends were really fucking mean about a literal missing child"; this doesn't mean she was cool with it, of course, but it does suggest that this type of talk isn't noteworthy to her;

Steve and his friends--however legitimate their grievances--chose to confront him about the photos in the most schoolyard-bully way possible, which may have not been so bad in that context, but (in light of their behavior at other times) does imply that they also just kind of enjoy bullying;

Multiple people just stare and don't try to help at all when he and his mom are completely imploding in front of the morgue (although I understand it's an awkward situation for a bystander);

Steve and his friends slut-shame and humiliate Nancy in the most public way possible (at least pre-internet);

Steve says that he "always figured [Jonathan] for a queer," which at best means that Steve is willing to use homophobic slurs in a fight (even if he never actually thought that and is just talking shit, and even if he's not a particularly passionate homophobe) and at worst means that this is something that is generally said of Jonathan and that he's subject to homophobic bullying (whatever his actual sexuality);

Steve compares him to his "screw-up" father, knowing this is a sore spot;

Steve calls his mom--Joyce, a hardworking single mother with an objectively hard life--a screw-up;

Steve says "it's no surprise what happened to your brother"; this is an incredibly cruel thing for him to say, and also seems like the kind of callous thing he's heard from his parents or other adults ("it's a shame about that little boy, but something like that was bound to happen in that family");

Hopper and Karen Wheeler are the only non-related adults who show any concern for Jonathan.

Why would Jonathan like the people of Hawkins as a whole? From his vantage point, they're largely callous, bigoted, and cruel. Many of the main characters experience them as such. What kind of masochistic suck-up would he have to be to like Steve as he is for most of Season 1? Maybe he's an edgelord, but he's got his reasons.

I mean, I don't know. I disliked a lot of people in middle school, and some of it was being a moody teen, but also a lot of people in my middle school were homophobic conservative religious fanatics who were regularly horrible to me, my friends, and others. I was still a moody teen in high school--moodier, even!--but I was generally fine with my classmates because they were a lot nicer and less prejudiced. My mom is a warm and sunny person, but she'll talk shit about her hometown because a lot of people were racist or sexually predatory. Sometimes people thinks badly of those around them because those around them act badly.

[vergess]

First, rude, I'm not attacking you, and I agree with the general gist of not treating reality and fiction as equivalent. I just think you're getting very angry about something that wasn't in the post.

OP never says this is equivalent to sexual harassment, or that the manga is real life. She's saying that this isn't information the author owes you. Perhaps she meant more but I do think it's presumptuous to assume you know for sure what she meant. In my eye it's no different than assuming you know a person is evil because they consume "problematic" media: you're constructing a whole strawman based on incredibly tiny information on a person.

Even if she meant more, it's not like it's a binary subject. Can be anything from what you assume she meant to "I think the subject needs a bit of tact" (arguable) or just "I personally don't want it discussed on my blog" (also arguable). I think for 3 sentences on the internet someone can be given the benefit of the doubt. Especially considering she had the thoughtfulness to not reveal who wrote down those tags (not something someone on a moral crusade would have done).

I mean, it'll be unfair if YOU made a 3 sentence post and someone immediately assumed the worst possible take and blew up at you and made it a symptom of the whole internet.

1) It's not "rude" to respond to a faceless, nameless piece of shit making light of sexual harassment with negativity. You're the fucker that follows my blog, you should damned well know what to expect by now.

2) I am being far more polite than you fucking deserve, because I've taken the time to screenshot the OP and highlight just for you the part's where OP equates sexual harassment of real children to the fictional character. You know, since your reading comprehension is so fucking abyssmal.

Image: Screenshot of this post, highlighting the lines "comment on her underage trans' character's reproductive system" and "details of trans people's bodies" highlighted.

If your wretchedly ignorant piece of shit ass doesn't understand that publicly demanding the details of a trans child's genitalia and reproductive systems is sexual harassment then I don't know how to help you. You're at a level of ignorance that exceeds my patience to repair.

This bullshit treats the actual sexual harassment of real children as equivalent to asking a fictional character's fictional biology from the person who, godlike and omnipotent, literally controls that characters existence.

If one wants to argue that it's sexually harassing the creator of Ranma 1/2 to send in unprompted questions about implicitly sexual subjects (assuming the question was even unprompted or asked directly of the author), then sure. As a real fucking human being, Rumiko Takahashi can be subjected to sexual harassment. Her fictional characters cannot, and their ~bodies~ are not real.

The entire commentary of that post foundationally rests on the presumption that a fictional character and a real trans child are equivalent, and that asking an artist a question is therefore equivalent to sexual abuse of a child.

And you know who else wants us to believe that foundational assumption and begin harassing and attacking predominantly queer and non-white people for enjoying art?

Fucking antishippers with their wretched little child-raping death cult.

Maybe the OP isn't actively a member of said cult.

But OP certainly fucking does use their rhetoric and further their goals, so I don't care.

Stop. Equating. Sexual violence. Against children. To fucking. Comic books. You nasty little piece of shit.

3) If I made a ~3 sentence post~ that managed to so concisely delegitimize real victims of childhood sexual harassment and abuse by comparing real sexual harassment to fucking comic books, while also aggrandizing myself as the morally superior agent for doing so, while also managing to support the goals of a violent cult that has killed and raped multiple children, a cult which I know for a fact exists because I've literally discussed them before?

And then people got pissed at me for it?

I would fucking consider the impacts of my actions on other people.

In a shocking twist, this is in fact something I actually have had to do in life.

It's also clearly something your stupid ass lacks the capacity for.

4) Fuck you.

5) You get one more ask, just in case you'd like ~additional clarifications.~ After that, I will be blocking your cowardly grey-faced anonymous stupidity.

Stop wasting my time acting like comic books and the sexual harassment of children are equivalent things which can and should be discussed interchangeably, you fucking cretin.