#someone called a portion of the fandom racist

[postcardsfromheapside]

Yesterday a little portion of the fandom lost their minds over this post, and I've been chewing on some of the outrage and the post since then, because honestly not only is the OP correct, the post tied together two nodes.

It's not just that Veilguard hits intensely personal themes instead of relying on systemic struggles for its narrative tension.

It asks "what are you going to do about it?"

It's so easy to play a chosen one in an organization where the leadership specfically works to spread "pro-main character propaganda" and it's only out in the wider world that your companions get called slurs (or you hear them wandering around your home base, that's fun). Most of the conversations in Inquisition are little more than info dumps, and then you occasionally get cut scenes where you make a few decisions deciding the fate one way or another of a character.

It's not easy to sit in awkward homebase conversations where you're asked to mediate on topics that you might have personal experience with. Probably unresolved issues in relation to. Or maybe you think you don't care, but if you get out into the adult world or if you have a family you're taking care of, or a team you're leading professionally, those kinds of conversations matter.

Again and again, Rook is put in the situation where they can choose to be kind, or helpful, or open and welcoming, or stand up for their colleagues/friends, vs taking the easy route, or the thing that might make them more comfortable. You know that the helpful route is the right one because it's a game, and that's a mechanics feature. But in real life, it's not easy to put aside your own discomfort or ego to listen with an open heart, or be empathetic, or patient, or to stand up for someone.

Everyone wants to fantasize about saving elven slaves. Fewer people want to stand up to their belligerent, racist family members over Thanksgiving dinner.

[hrizantemy]

The Weaponization of “Interpretation” in the ACOTAR Fandom

One of the most frustrating aspects of the ACOTAR fandom isn’t just the toxic dynamics within the books—it’s how a portion of readers respond to critique, especially when it comes to uncomfortable truths about race, power, gender, and narrative bias. There’s a particular attitude that gets thrown around whenever someone dares to challenge the dominant reading of the story, and it’s essentially this: “I can read it however I want, and if you don’t like it, just ignore it.”

On the surface, it sounds harmless. Everyone should be able to interpret art, right? Isn’t that what stories are for?

Yes—and no. Because this attitude isn’t really about interpretation. It’s about avoiding accountability for the biases and implications embedded in those interpretations. It’s used not to invite dialogue, but to shut it down.

What makes it worse is that this behavior often comes from readers who are the most vocal in defending the canon characters—especially Rhysand, and the Inner Circle—as infallible, morally perfect, and beyond critique. These are the same people who masculinize Emerie, demonize Nesta, infantilize Feyre, and ignore the colonialist, classist, and misogynistic structures in Prythian, all while claiming they’re just “having fun” with the story. But the moment someone points out that their interpretation upholds harmful tropes or flattens characters of color, they double down, insisting that fiction is off-limits to criticism.

What they’re really saying is: “I don’t want to think about what my interpretation says about me or the world I live in.”

And look—no one’s interpretation is neutral. Every reader brings their worldview to a text. That’s normal. But when people aggressively defend readings that erase marginalized characters, glorify abusive power structures, or uphold racist and sexist tropes—and then cry censorship when they’re called out for it—that’s not just annoying. It’s dangerous.

Because stories shape culture. Stories inform our understanding of love, power, justice, and identity. And when a fandom refuses to reckon with the uglier parts of those stories—when it insists that any discomfort is “just your opinion”—what it’s really doing is creating a space where critical thinking is punished and harmful ideas are celebrated.

You are allowed to interpret a story in whatever way you want. But once you share that interpretation publicly—especially in a fandom space—you don’t get to act shocked when people respond. You don’t get to cry “bullying” when someone says, “Hey, that reading is actually kind of racist/sexist/classist.” You’re participating in a conversation, whether you like it or not.

This fandom has a habit of hiding behind the idea of “personal interpretation” to excuse the dehumanization of certain characters (Lucien, Nesta, Emerie, Eris), while worshipping others (Rhys, Feyre, Azriel) with a level of aggression that borders on propaganda. And when you question that narrative? Suddenly you’re “too serious,” “toxic,” or “just hating for no reason.”

But it is serious. Because the characters people uplift, the ones they rewrite, the ones they silence or erase or demonize—it all reveals something. And if you’re not willing to examine that? You’re not interpreting the book. You’re reinforcing your own biases and using the story as a shield.

So no—it’s not just fiction. And it’s not just an interpretation.

It’s a choice. And we’re allowed to interrogate the ones you make.

And let me be clear: this is not me saying only I get to judge. You’re absolutely allowed to question why I like Nesta, why I don’t vibe with Cassian, why I’m critical of Morrigan’s flat characterization. Ask me. I will answer. I have answered. I’m not afraid of critique. I welcome it—because that’s what makes fandom richer.

But what I won’t do is accept the idea that “critique = hate” and “neutrality = attack.” If you can write endless metas about how Rhys is secretly the most benevolent ruler in Prythian while overseeing Illyria’s mutilation camps, I can write one about how Nesta’s anger is valid, or how Eris might be a victim of his own environment. That’s not me overstepping. That’s engaging.

You’re allowed to read how you want. But I’m allowed to ask why. And if that question threatens your enjoyment of the story? Maybe the issue isn’t me. Maybe it’s the narrative you’ve built to protect your favorite characters from accountability.

[hexhomos]

i wasn't around when s1 of arcane aired (and know basically nothing about lol), but since you mentioned it in your answer to that other anon, i will never in a million years understand the reactions (and downright hatred) jayce got. i watched the first season last year, knew nothing about the fandom, and loved him. i thought he was a well written character with a lot of depth, especially when it comes to the class issues that were so present in s1 and how he certainly did not fit into piltover. i was gobsmacked when i found out people hated him. at most i can understand not caring for him, but anything other than that i do not understand.

A big portion of that was just people wanting someone 'to blame' for things going on in s1 and given jayce /is/ a primary mover of the plot they defaulted to him because 'he failed viktor... viktor deserves better...' (lol, lmao,) and jayce was a convenient racialized vessel to belittle. bc in one hand the gamer racists already called him a stupid mexican and in another hand the lesbians were overprotective of him being seen close to cait (which was associated to past cishet gamer shipping, and ppl questioning cait/vi's sexuality whenever they interacted with jayce just to be assholes)

those things coming together... in the middle of arcane fandomtwt... resulted in the biggest ballooning of jayce hate and him being seen as an aggressor/ idiot/ brute/ trump supporter and whatever else they felt that day depending on who was saying it. Most importantly: It became Funny to dunk on jayce for absolutely anything, including shit he didn't do, and since it was funny it was never challenged and he was never taken seriously or examined as deeply as other characters were lol

relatedly: that is the whole reason why i made and maintained this account. it was Dire. Season 2 was NOTHING compared to it, even during the act 2 meltdown over him shooting viktor

[doberbutts]

Scrolling the fandom tag for BES and once again finding longwinded rants about how white trans mascs aren't allowed to find any similarities with themselves in Mizu's story because A: it's racist and B: her story is more for trans fems (and ofc it's not trans fems saying this) and I'm like

So trans mascs of color don't exist and mixed race trans mascs don't exist and there was never a single trans masc that felt caught between womanhood and manhood and felt joy at just being free to be themselves rather adhere tightly to society's gendered expectations? There was never a trans masc that saw themselves in cis women who lived as men or in masculinity even if it was just for safety? You sure about that?

Like I've said before I'm not really offended either way what pronouns someone uses for Mizu because I think any of them in English are varying degrees of incorrect because *Mizu is [half] Japanese living in 1600s Japan and Japanese pronouns are not one-to-one equivilants of English pronouns and 1600s Japanese gender roles are not one-to-one equivilants to modern American gender roles* and *Mizu herself reacts with violent rage when called a woman, while the creators explictly stated that she is a cis woman and exclusively use she/her to talk about her in interviews*

But it is really interesting that non-trans-mascs are so, *so* angry that trans mascs watching this show are seeing themselves in her journey. I think there is something to be stated for people who are not understanding the racial aspect of it- I'm mixed race myself though not with any Japanese blood, so maybe that lets me see a portion of this story more easily than someone who has never been so caught between worlds and identities, but also like. Japanese trans mascs and trans men exist. I just watched a documentary about being transgender in Japan, I know they're there. Being trans masc is not exclusively a white thing nor is it exclusive to Western gender roles. We've existed, everywhere, as long as gender has. Whether we were explictly called "transgender" or a different word.

I'm neither a woman nor a lesbian but that didn't stop me from seeing myself in almost every butch and stud I've ever met. And those I've talked to about it have said they've seen themselves, in me. We're allowed to have similarities and to share experiences.

[marinsawakening]

Also while I'm on the topic, watching the LU fandom is fascinating to me as someone who's also been in the DC Comics fandom. Specifically, comparing it to the fanon Batfam fandom is fascinating.

In case you haven't sold your soul to mediocre superhero comics, Batman comics have a large cast of hero characters beside the big man himself, who are not merely side characters but main characters in their own right. This group of characters is casually called the 'batfamily' or 'batfam' for short. It is by far the largest fandom within the DC Comics fandom as a whole, and a very, very large portion of it (probably even the majority) does not actually read Batman comics. They are not basing their fandom off the movies or cartoons either, this is a fandom for the Batman comics. That they have not and categorically refuse to read.

These fanon batfam fans instead base their fics, art, and general characterizations off of a long game of canon telephone, where they get seven-hand information from the fandom itself. Fanon batfam is not so much a fandom for the actual batfam as it is a fandom for common fandon tropes that they can project onto the batfam. As such, it focuses mostly on the white or whitewashed guys in the batfam (Bruce Wayne, Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Damian Wayne) and largely ignores the non-white/whitewashed and/or woman members of the batfam (Barbara Gordon, Stephanie Brown, Cassandra Cain, Duke Thomas). Its characterizations and canon state are based on headcanon and a long game of telephone, often making the characters virtually unrecognizable. It focuses on a very nuclear family-type 'found family' or m/m slash, with elaborate headcanoned dyanmics that have basically nothing to do with actual canon. While the wider batfam fandom is certainly racist and sexist, these problems are more blatant and obvious in the fanon side. For example, there is a big problem with women of colour (such as Talia al Ghul, who is Arab) being demonized as abusive rapists, with no thought given to the context in which they were written or their own complexity/interiority, all in service of white man angst.

And then we have the Linked Universe fandom. A subfandom of the wider LOZ fandom based on a fancomic. This fancomic features the various canon Links with distinct designs and personalities, such that they are effectively the author's OCs. Many LU fans have played few to no Zelda games, and base their understanding of canon off of seven-hand information from the fandom. The LU fandom is more based on this telephone game of headcanons and elaboration on the LU comic that much LU fancontent is virtually unrecognizable as such. It focuses on a very nuclear family-type 'found family', with elaborate headcanoned dynamics that have basically nothing to do with actual canon. While the wider LOZ fandom is certainly racist and sexist, these problems are more blatant and obvious in the LU fandom. For example, Cia, a woman with brown skin, is universally demonized as an abusive rapist, with no thought given to the context in which she was written or to her own complexity/interiority, all in the service of white man angst.

See what I'm getting at?

There are definitely differences. A variety of them that I really cannot let myself get into because then I'd add like six more paragraphs to this post, so source: trust me bro. But the similarities are overwhelming, and they are both examples of what happens when people start seeing fandom as 'content'. As media in and of itself, rather than transformative works. There is nothing inherently morally wrong with this, but it does tend to lead to deeply shallow characterization and even more 'self-indulgent' behaviour than is already standard in fandom, which usually comes pared with blatant racism and sexism. Because if there's anything a fandom likes, it's a white guy, and if they get the chance to focus on those to the exclusion of everything else, they will take it.

Hope everyone enjoyed this way-too-long post about niche fandom dynamics. Everyone enjoys examining fandom dynamics as much as I do, right? Right?

[damnfandomproblems]

7790

Wish I could go off anon for this, but I don't wanna get repeatedly @ by whoever submitted the post

As a HP fan who hates Rowling and called her BS out before it was cool (hipster sounding, I know), that submission is just not true. The fandom was DESPISED on the internet, including by other HP fans, long before Rowling outed herself as a transphobe.

The Cho Chang controversy was in full swing

People were getting sick of the fandom comparing every political and social issue to Harry Potter ("(insert any politician) iS vOlDeMoRt (other politician) iS dUmBlEdOrE")

People got sick of HP fans who admitted they refused to read other books

Fans have been known to bully each other for liking or disliking characters. I had to get a mod involved after some asshole tried to go into my DMs for not liking Snape. "yOu hAvE to LiKe SnApE Ur a SlYtHeRin!" "Umbridge is a Slytherin too, do I have to like her?" "(Calls me a slur and attempts to video chat me)" And don't get me started on the racist crap she said to the mod despite having an "End Racism" profile pic

There were also fans openly saying they thought the pureblood fanatics and Salazar Slytherin were right (yikes) despite the witch trials not even occurring when Salazar was alive, and canonically not affecting the actual wizarding community in-universe.

Rowling was being all sorts of crappy on Twitter to the point there were entire video essays calling her out for treating fans badly if they were sorted into Slytherin. Long story short: She openly told someone to break up with her Slytherin boyfriend (he didn't even do anything bad, the girlfriend was making a lighthearted joke), and claimed all racists would naturally be sorted into Slytherin (ironic, isn't it?)...not our fault most people don't consider ambition evil, Rowling. And not all racists are ambitious or cunning.

As a matter of fact, the very idea of a hat telling an eleven year old they're in the evil house because they're ambitious was so controversial it led to Slytherin being completely rebranded by the marketing team and all future projects as "the misunderstood house"

She was taking credit for representation that she never actually wrote (claimed she never said Hermione was white despite literally drawing her as a white girl next to a black character while writing the story, claimed there was a Jewish wizard with a stereotypical name all along that she "forgot to mention"...plus the Dumbledore is gay "but he became asexual later" thing)

Her descriptions of other wizarding schools on Pottermore were based on xenophobic stereotypes and people noticed QUICK. And there was no excuse for her lack of research at that point. The proper resources to get her facts straight were widely available by the time Pottermore was a thing.

And finally, the fandom was starting to suspect she was a transphobe before she outed herself, because she was openly supporting transphobes and accidentally copied and pasted text from a transphobic article in response to a child's drawing. We knew something was wrong, and were discussing it, as well as voicing our disappointment in her showing her true colors.

The majority of the fandom itself hates Rowling (especially since a large portion are LGBTQ or otherwise very liberal) and are willing to point out the books and Pottermore have problematic material mixed in. We're also trying to leave behind the toxic side of the fandom that's been prevalent for years. The HP fandom is still alive, but is also still boycotting Rowling (or at least minimizing purchases while donating heavily to LGBTQ charity organizations to compensate).

The Rowling and Harry Potter hate isn't a bandwagon. It's been developing for years.

Note: The only reason I don't mention the goblins is because technically goblins were portrayed like that in fantasy at least half a century before HP was written (Just look at old DnD manuals or Hobble from Labyrinth), so I don't know if it was intentional on her part or if she had no idea. This is the same woman who didn't know Muggle was a slang term for a pothead before an interviewer asked her about it.

Posting as a response to a previous problem.

[08melancholie]

(Just a warning, non-con is mentioned in this but I’m not talking about it in a graphic way)

I wanna yap, and you’re the only person I know who will most likely agree with me, so get ready

Okay so I wanna talk about how people use that news paper clipping (will add it below)

If you can’t read it, the basic summary is Micah and his father killed a farmer and his wife. Micah the second(I’ll just call him Micah the second) was 38 and Micah was 17 years old, from what we know from the game and Micah literally saying it himself that his father was a bad man, and we have no idea what his mother was like, maybe she was mistreated by his father, Left or was bad too. Anyways back to the original conversation is that no 17 year old is gonna kill someone without being influenced to do it, obviously Micah the third was pressured by his father to kill people. He says it himself, “my daddy said sympathy is for the weak” so his father most likely groomed him into crime (or whatever word you use for that) and his brother Amos luckily got away from that mess and started a family. It’s obvious that Micah the third was influenced by his father.

off topic I wanna talk about his relationship with his brother

Micah brother doesn’t exactly hate him, and something I wanna talk about is that Micah is atheist and Amos is Christian, Amos had the chance to change from being a outlaw but Micah didn’t because his brother didn’t want Micah near him anymore. So Micah continued on the outlaw path, I wish we knew more about the bell family.

And last but not least, I wanna talk about some of the narcissistic people in the fandom and how stupid they sound.

“Micah is a grapist” The thing is, we don’t know that and nobody in the fandom knows that he is or isn’t, it’s not confirmed and it’s a theory. Also we don’t know if he actually did it with Jenny, he could’ve been lying just to gain attention and we don’t know if it was non-con or not. “His looks give off pervert vibes” that’s a bit odd to say considering his actor looks like him? It’s really rude to say too, it’s kinda sad how Peter got death threats and people say “That’s how you know he plays good as a villain” that’s how you know people are too sensitive to be playing a game about outlaws

Yet again, they don’t call out any other characters for it? Like Dutch, bill, and Javier and harass people for liking Micah.

“Micah’s racist and you support his actions!” That’s the way Micah was brought up, although it’s still wrong and nobody supports it. Do they support Arthur killing people? No I don’t think they do

Sorry gang I had to yap

OKAY WOW THERES A LOT TO UNPACK HERE lets do it

more after the cut <3

Firstly, I do absolutely agree on Micah's upbringing. I have a brief post on it already ("Upbringing.") and I very much think that his dad set him up for failure very early on, giving him no chance to pick his path himself.

Amos and Micah were both influenced by their father as all three did crimes together, but Amos was lucky enough to get himself out of it, while Micah sadly couldn't. That's the very reason I think Micah ended up killing his own father; never having a chance to choose his own path.

Now, I don't blame Amos for disliking Micah, but I wish there was just a little sympathy he had for his brother, because he himself was in Micah's shoes for a good portion of both of their lives.

Unrelated: I find it very interesting Amos is the only on here that has his own name, and isn't Micah IV or something. Do you think this also influenced something between the two of them, that made them more distant? I know I would be pissed if my brother got his own name, while I had to continue family tradition. Just a thought.

Now, the Jenny Kirk situation is very tricky; we don't get much information about it. All he really says is that he 'had her', said she was a 'dirty little thing', how he felt for Lenny because he 'got her before he could', and last how she 'might have been carry Micah IV.', but that's really it.

We don't get anything else from Micah about it, or in the game in general. That really means it's left for interpretation of the fandom, which we know most will say that it was a non-con situation. Now—maybe a little controversial—I don't think that he necessarily assaulted her. I mean, he isn't ugly to everyone. Let's talk camp interactions; he fake-flirts with Susan Grimshaw, who plays into it. Would she be doing that if she thought him unattractive? I don't think so. Then again, I do wish we had some confirmation on this, like with other characters (Colm, Dutch etc.)

While on topic of that, I want to mention another thing. Whether or whether not Micah is a rapist, I think the fact that Dutch is confirmed to be one in RDR1 is just wayyy too overlooked, while everyone makes their speculations and accusations on Micah through a singular interaction with him. In RDR1, when Dutch is being described, one of the names is 'rapist' and I wish that more people talked about that, and not so much Micah's that isn't even hinted at to be an assault. But, to each their own.

Small edit: This was still wrong of Micah, considering Jenny's age. It's not exactly known, but she was very young (17-21) and absolutely out of his age range. Even if consensual between the two of them, it was very prominent that she was way too young to have sex with him, and that's on him as the older one in the situation.

Another small edit: I've since changed my view on the Dutch thing, as in him being a rapist. Before this post I hadn't yet played RDR1 and believed what I was told happened in the game. After playing RDR1 and talking to people about it, I'm in a very lukewarm spot just like with Micah where it's up to interpretation, but I personally believe it may not be true.

Peter Blomquist getting sent threats was proof he could play an amazing villain, and it makes me pretty sad to think people don't know how to separate the character from his actor. It was pretty immature to send him literal threats, and I still sometimes see comments on his instagram, which is just insane. It's been years, and we still act this immature?

As far as Micah's racism comments go, the root is most likely also his father. But, I can't much excuse him there because I myself grew up around some very vulgar language about people of color. Not to forget, with me being Croatian, I was around when people still talked ill of Serbs because of the war. But, even as a very impressionable kid, I was able to grow myself out of it. I never spoke ill of Serbs or people of color. (Briefly while I was still around 12, but I feel that can be overlooked.) I think it's possible to change your views, and this is one of the few things where I can't much find a way to defend Micah, but I'll take into consideration his upbringing and the fact that during the Western times, a heap of people were practically all racist.

They may see themselves as vigilantes, but everyone in the gang is a bad person, that has done/is doing bad things. Micah is a bit more ruthless, that much I'll admit. But again, another ideal of his fathers and how he was brought up. "My daddy always said, sympathy is for the weak." He says even more lines like these, spreading his fathers' bad teachings because that's what he knows. But, I do find it very intriguing that he still spreads his fathers' word, even after killing him himself. Oh, Micah; my fellow daddy-issue-haver.

Yapping session completed chat, also good morning!!! I just woke up and saw this long ass ask and immediately rose to my feet. I love yapping with you guys <3

[antivan-sprig]

Salty Asks

Thanks to @becausedragonage and @bygonesigh for the asks!!! (As well as you anon, wherever you are ♥️✨) I love being low stakes salty.

Also @/beacusedragonage I really agree with your Varric take and was happy to see someone else who felt that way. I love Varric now but it took me a long time to come around to him and even now I think what I like about him is different than what the majority like about him (this sounds so pick-me oh my god)

So I’ll preface this with the disclaimer that I’m gonna ignore the fact that a large portion of the fandom is gross men who are racist, sexist, and afraid of everything (and likely not on tumblr).

The person who got me into DA is one of these people.

They represent a huge portion of players but I do consider peeps like us to be the real fandom. (Gatekeeper I know 😉)

I’m going to ignore them just like they ignore me.

4. Do you have a NoTP in your fandom? Are they a popular OTP?*

Starting off so controversial and saying Solas x Lavellan. I like to interpret Solas in the absolute worst way possible and in my playthroughs I always felt like every romance scene was super manipulative. In my personal canon (which I do not extend to anyone else or insist to be the right interpretation) Solas does love her but loves himself justtttt a bit more. And initially goes into the relationship wanting to use her.

I have no issue at all with people who do ship them though. The art which it has inspired is beautiful and I reblog a lot of it. If anything I think my interpretation of Solas is probably less correct than theirs, but it’s very drama to see him as the biggest male manipulator ever 😅

9. Most disliked character(s)? Why?

Ooof Lelianna. Both in the meta sense of her character writing and in the “If I were actually a protagonist in the story” way. For the later, she seemed to disagree passionately with everything I did- so by extension, if we were to meet in real life we’d probably not get along that well.

This is probably a skill issue but I don’t understand her arc that much. She is very tragic for becoming everything she never wanted to be but for some reason that doesn’t resonate with me at all. I kinda wanna shrug whenever she starts talking about it. Also as someone who loves making their OCs be god’s favorite princess, I really wish she still thought she was chosen by the maker.

She’s super cute and I love the art she inspires though! I’ll always reblog little bard Leli ✨

10. Most disliked arc? Why?

I hate the main storyline of inquisition. It’s such a boring arc that peaks with the destruction of Haven and never takes off. I’ve never been able to relate to the inquisitor and actually don’t have a canon one because it was so difficult for me to come up with anything meaningful (skill issue I know). The whole time everything goes so well for the inquisition, and I thought for sure the inquisitor would die or have to sacrifice themselves at the end- but nope. Everything just works out and pretty easily at that. Boring in every way just like a lot of DAI

Trespasser is fantastic and rounds out the end, but since it’s dlc I don’t think it’s fair to call it part of the arc. Ironically I think inquisition might have the best characters/companions though.

14. Unpopular opinion about your fandom?

Worldstate choices crossing over into other games is unrealistic and I think people should stop complaining about it. Choices affect events in the game they are in and that’s all we should expect.

(Although I do think BioWare shot themselves in the foot by marketing the “Your choices matter” so much)

19. What is the one thing you hate most about your fandom?

I think there’s a very small percentage of the fandom that likes to look for the worst in everything and make reductive 1:1 comparisons to real world scenarios. For example I’ve seen people say liking Aveline is akin to being pro-cop. They also seem to think that the Devs are Satan and not just under-appreciated writers who have their own flaws and blindspots.

Yes, I completely see the cognitive dissonance between this answer and how I like to interpret Solas 😅

22. Popular character you hate?

I don’t hate any of the characters but I don’t really see the appeal of Mae or Emmrich. For Mae I think VG probably fumbled her and she’s cooler in the extra media (which seems to be the case for a lot of the female characters, Fiona for example). For Emmrich I just don’t feel very comfortable around older men (which is my own problem, not his). Also we are in a custody battle of Manfred and I am losing.

I really wanted to like Mae since I’ve heard how cool she was! But I found her sooo boring and feel like they totally fumbled her style too.

23. Unpopular character you love?

A lot of people don’t like Merrill or Aveline, which I cannot wrap my head around.

I’ve seen people say liking Aveline means you’re supporting cops which is a WILD take and that Merrill is a bad depiction of women because she’s sweet, meek, and soft spoken.

Merrill’s type of femininity is really appealing to me and I relate to it a lot. I think calling her meek is super reductive and ignorant of her unique sense of strength. She’s really not meek at all, just little.

Aveline is probably the most moral character in DA. I’ve seen someone say she’s “bad” because she has Hawke investigate suspicious activity instead of assigning her guards to do it… and it’s like… guys she literally says “Can you do this for me because I don’t feel good assigning the 20 year olds under my authority to something potentially dangerous.” How is that a bad thing?

27. Least shippable character?

Shale because she’s too good for them all. Shale supremacy, let her squish you like the bug you are.

[evansbuck-ley]

i'm sorry but may i say something on the whole tommy racist situation? bc i was reaaaally confused when i got on the fandom and "everyone" was calling him a racist tbh i thought it was some inside joke or smt until i realized they were just talking about hen begins. i never saw him as an active bully or racist, not even back when i watched that episode the very first time. for me it looked like tommy didn't even like them, much less agree with them, and that he'd been working with them for a long time and just had to find a way to bear with them. you can barely see him even talk to them. you can see him giving hen sorry looks. he wouldn't have even be able to call them out because he was bullied by them for being gay. and if he did, then what? their captain was the one cheering on the racism. i mean, i get he could've done something, i just don't know exactly what. he could've tried to show hen she was welcome, he could've stand up for her. but as far as i'm aware, being a white knight warrior is not a good look either. and it's something hen clearly didn't want.

i mean i get why some people call him racist but the way some people pretend he just goes throwing slurs around confuse me so much, because you can tell that's not what was going on with him back then if you just had a tiny little bit of media literacy

i totally get the stance of people seeing tommy as racist with the comments that he made in chimney begins (the whole delivery driver comment he makes when chim arrives at the 118) and frankly without watching hen begins I don’t remember him saying anything racist there??? (please correct me if I’m wrong). but throughout the begins episodes you can see him evolve and change.

chimney begins ends with tommy and chimney hugging and becoming friends.

hen begins ends with tommy showing that he has respect for hen and who she is as a person and a firefighter (and some say that he was one of the people that filed the complaint about Gerrard)

bonby begins again STARTS with them all being friends, they have banter, they go out to the bar together, they throw him a leaving party. both chimney and hen are very well adjusted characters, if they don’t like someone or how they were treated, I doubt they would do ANY of this.

with that being said, the tommy being racist argument is screamed and hollered by bvddies that are not happy with the fact that tommy is in the way of their ship going canon and will find any reason to hate him.

according to them tommy is a predator and groomer because he is twice the age of buck (canonically he is 40 years old, that is a 7-8 year age gap) and he’s a racist and a misogynist bc of the begins episode (which again I understand and the feelings around this are valid) but it’s used as an excuse to hate a character in a fandom that a large portion of is incredibly homophobic and misogynistic and no-one gets hold accountable for it. (that’s a whole can of worms in its self)

anyway that’s my thoughts on it.

[sammyunhinged]

This fandom is so divided right now that it’s stressing me out.

Everyone is either pro- or anti-Tommy, pro- or anti-Bucktommy, or loves/hates Lou. It’s the only reason I was hoping bucktommy would break up in E10—I just didn’t want the shipping war to continue over hiatus. However, I’m a multishipper who enjoys bucktommy, especially all the amazing fan works people have been making, and has loved buddie for years. I would like for each side to take a moment to understand the other’s perspective. This is my likely futile attempt to get people to do so…

For the bucktommy shippers:

I need you to respect those who can’t forgive Tommy yet. Just because Hen and Chimney seem to have forgiven him, doesn’t mean that the marginalized communities that this character has been prejudiced against on screen need to forgive him too. He’s been misogynistic, racist, and homophobic (which yes likely stemmed from internalized homophobia but that doesn’t excuse his behavior).

I need you to realize that so far we’ve gotten nothing from canon except a couple kisses and few brief conversations. People are allowed to be upset with the writers for not giving us the potential this relationship has, or not be on board yet because canon hasn’t given them reason to, or simply just not love Tommy and therefore not love their relationship. Unlike Taylor who got lots of on screen development and backstory, Tommy hasn’t had that yet. It may take some time for people to get there, if they get there at all. It doesn’t mean you’re not allowed to ship it.

I also need you to be aware that a huge portion of that shipping side of the fandom consistently hates on Buddie. Plus, a significant number of people have just started watching the show and jumped into S7 without context and so so many—honestly the loudest portion of the shippers—are fetishizing gay men and are clearly just here to watch two hot white men kiss on screen. It’s disturbing and understandably turns people off to the shippers and often the ship. Fetishization of queerness is something fandom in general has been dealing with for decades and just because it’s 2024 doesn’t mean it’s still not happening. Just because you haven’t seen it also doesn’t mean it’s not happening. Also I’m not saying it doesn’t exist on the buddie side of fandom—it absolutely does—it’s just very loud with the bucktommy shippers atm.

I need some of y’all to understand that the hate for Lou at the moment is also understandable. There are some fat-phobic, misogynistic, and racist things still posted on his Instagram from about a decade ago and while this was a decade ago and people can change and grow, the fact that they’re still up says things about a person. Until they are acknowledged, disliking him and not supporting him is completely valid. The exact same goes for Ryan Guzman, but that’s a whole other conversation.

Edit: as of June 3, Lou Ferringo Jr. has proven, through a reply to someone calling him out for a racist Instagram post, that he is still racist and ableist. He replied to the person on Twitter with an ableist joke and then deleted it when he got shit for it.

For the buddie shippers:

There needs to be more respect the art of Multishipping in general, especially by younger fans lately. It’s the heart of fandom. Just because you don’t get bucktommy doesn’t mean others can’t see the potential for this relationship to be interesting plot-wise and great for Buck personally. Someone enjoying a ship you hate doesn’t mean they’re a horrible person. Also so many people love both ships and truly just want the best for Buck. These are the people that are so happy for him and want this relationship to be happy and healthy and meaningful for Buck.

But I also need you to be sympathetic toward those who jumped onboard with bucktommy because they’ve been burned by queerbait too often to ship a non-canon, bait-y ship like Buddie. No matter how much you love the show and love Buddie, you have to admit there’s been relationship baiting between them. I shipped destiel and merthur and all those things too. I get it. I need others to respect that the peak of queerbaiting was a very difficult time for fandom. It’s left some people unable to get on board.

I also need y’all to stop speculating about Lou and Oliver’s personal relationship and whether or not Oliver hates Lou. It’s strange, parasocial, and speculating about people’s lives is never appropriate. At least don’t do it online and in public forums. Talk with your friends, dm people, do whatever you want in private, but in public, let’s just leave them be. They are actors with a job. Let them do that job in peace.

I’ll probably get some flack but I consider myself to very middle of the road about all of this, a space I often find myself in fandoms. Maybe because I’ve been here so long. I so often just want people to chill out. It’s fandom. It’s supposed to be fun. Have fun!!

[pynkhues]

Historical context is important but it doesn't change the definition of what rape is. I also don't see how suggesting louis would drug them is out of character or how that isn't a very real possibility. And for the record people talking about it aren't all white either. I also don't care about it in the sense that they ALL are rapists/bad people and I find them all great characters , it just seems that louis is usually pardoned for his actions more than the others. Your opinions are yours and I'm not trying to change them or argue. I just think this topic should be discussed without people being called names.

https://x.com/otherbully/status/1892617497842446399?t=7WkN3l7NbQWc9BPBMm7R2Q&s i think this tweet sums it up nicely

What is also causing this conversation to happen is people finally talking about louis being older than jonah and statutory rape that might have happened.

Ohhhh, anon, I hate that you're making me do this, because as a feminist and someone with a history minor / ongoing interest in history, I am always chewing glass over it, but yes. History, culture, context does actually change the definition of what rape is, at the very least legally, and usually socially, and to decide that it doesn't is a bit naive. With my feminist hat back on, we have to understand context to deepen knowledge, talk about, and ideally better understand historical figures, and better protect people moving forwards, and with that -- yeah! Sorry. Applying a modern lens to sex when you talk about consent actually doesn't work with a show that leapfrogs through history.

That's not to say that we can't talk about that modern lens or the ethics of it - - you end your ask with the sentiment that Louis was explicitly older than Jonah the first time they had sex - a point I've talked about before! - but it wouldn't have been statutory rape when they had sex when they were younger. The legal age when they had sex would've been 12 in Louisiana, and Jonah was explicitly 16. I did a post touching on the ethics of it here, but the reality is age wouldn't have been a legal issue when they had sex, but sexuality would have been, because gay sex only became legal in Louisiana in 2003.

But - - to your other points:

You don't see how suggesting Louis would drug someone is out of character. I'm going to counter you there, since I've already said I don't see it in any circumstance, frankly - can you give me an argument as to why him drugging someone would be in character? With evidence from the show?

Re: non-white people arguing the point: okay! Are there any good arguments by people that I should read?

Re: that twitter thread - - I don't know. Louis has unfortunately become very polarised and politicised as a character, and while I can appreciate what that person is saying, I also think there is a flipside which is that a portion of this fandom is extremely anti-Black and weaponising any discourse about his character. I haven't spoken about this on here before, but when I was reblogged by that particular user who accused me of being an anti-black racist, I got a handful of anons about both Louis and Jacob, that were extremely racist, which I blocked and deleted. I still don't know if they were attempts at bait or real people, but honestly I don't care. The reality is that you can't divorce race from these conversations, nor bad actors, and to enter this conversation, as I said in my last post, irresponsibly at best, does matter. I'm never going to pretend it doesn't. You can talk about it, but I'm yet to see a real argument that's not bad faith.

[jesncin]

5 days long anon again. Yeah, it took a while because I kept reworking and trying to find the right words. words are hard. Plus anxiety. Constantly worrying if it would be right or sound right. Right now I'm riding the high of "it WAS fine!!" so I'm feeling more confident in sending this.

The whole "oooh superhero lied to someone how bad" when it's about their identity? One thing I clipped from the previous ask was talking about how of course a hero should not disclose their civilian ID because that would put any family or friends in danger. A reporter SHOULD understand that! Or at least a kind one. Of course Clark wouldn't be going around telling people if only because he wants to keep his parents safe. Yet you can't look me in the face and tell me that the Kents wouldn't be leery about telling people their son's origins as an alien regardless of when the story is set because technically? Illegal immigrant baby. Illegal immigrant alien baby, whom any spooky group (military/research/???) might want to get their greasy mitts on. I can see that kind of worry leaving marks on him too, even though he is trying to be kind and good.

Maybe it was "too soon" but Kal-el is talking to someone he's grown to know as both Clark Kent and Superman. Who he feels he can take that risk with. And with something... not small, exactly, but not as harmful to his life as he lives it on Earth? It's not quite a test of trust because that would be too calculated for it but it is something more honest and raw and the little voice in the back of the head going "do you understand? do I understand?".

"I've had to justify fanon to canon" is... odd. Have you had to with the Martians or is it specifically your take on Lois? I admit I haven't been able to read all the comics and random sketches yet but everything I've seen has been built on the trend of compassion and care whether it is for it or in spite of it. ...and sexy abs. (Rudy.)

Run out of steam/focus so hope you have a good night again.

Hiya 5 days anon (Here I am responding now after the strike)! And no worries, I appreciate people taking their time thinking of what to say.

Right! Even without any Superhero-level fantasy stuff- irl journalists write under pseudonyms or protect the privacy of the people they're interviewing all the time (Lois did this in Girl Taking Over!!). This notion that reporters are Kantian "Lying Is Always Bad No Matter What" people is frankly a caricature. Fun for silver age shenanigans, but not if you want your story to have any sort of depth. And yeah! Clark is an illegal immigrant baby. It shouldn't take much imagination to see why he and the Kents would want to keep that a secret (alas some stories think otherwise- I can't help but call the emotional intelligence of the characters into question at that point).

Yeah! I don't imagine Superman telling Lois his Kryptonian name as something pre-meditated, it's very spur of the moment trust. The idea is that he's not ready to disclose his civilian identity yet, but he is trusting Liando with something far more personal.

It's mostly been my Superman stuff. I don't post my Martian art on twidder especially since well. I've always gotten one or two racist comments on my Clois comics but the Private Interview comic just unleashed the floodgate for racist comments. If I get that much heat for a cishet interracial couple, you can imagine how gross people would be to my Martian stuff. There's a portion of cape fandom that just doesn't understand fanon or interpretations and are vehemently against any sort of change. So I get silly comments asking me to justify the change ("Why is Lois Black??") or backhanded compliments hailing me as "the exception to racebends". It's annoying, but in the end the comic really wasn't for them. It's for people like y'all who get it! (like Rudy)

Thank you and good day/night!

[deeenerys17]

This fandom just keeps showing that they don't give a shit about Taylor as a person. Now they can have their unproblematic popstar again. Guilt free because you know they never stopped consuming her music even after calling her racist, bigot and other vile names.

The portion of this fandom is bad. They are so mean and so entitled. Imagine the post I read from that blog, the world is so dark.

Taylor has never been problematic, even industry peeps loves her. It's only a portion of this fandom who treats her like their barbie doll.

I'm a minority and I dont understand the hate she received in dating Matty. Its sexist and stupid. I really hope they didn't broke up because of these people because its so sad. Even the psychoanalysis of these people every night is disgusting... She doesn't want Joe. So please ship Joe with someone else!!!

[sunlit-skycat]

I actually write for a fandom where characters are not allowed to say a lie, otherwise they will be punished by losing their magic. At the same time, characters are incentivized to gass themselves up as much as possible while dismissing the capabilities of their opponents. This actually significantly changes interpersonal dynamics.

For one thing, just because they can't lie, doesn't mean they have to tell the truth either. There are plenty of ways to be evasive by telling only a portion of the truth, changing the subject, refusing to speak, and more.

For another thing, it's still possible to show personality in how characters approach telling the truth. One character in the canon routinely misleads other people who don't know about magic by telling them that such and such magical thing happened, and lets them dismiss it as the product of an overactive child's imagination. The other charcaters are much worse at this, so when they need someone to mislead people for them, they let the first speak. Another character uses the fact that she cannot lie to feel more confident in herself when she notices racist microaggressions, because if she calls something out and still has her magic, that means she was right. A third character, an antagonist, makes extremely bold statements and then takes drastic action to ensure those become true.

Notably, being forced to tell the truth doesn't make these characters automatically lapse into bland therapyspeak. People still try to mislead each other, lash out emotionally when they feel hurt, confidently state opinions that can't be proved, and have conflict with each other. If characters tell the truth all the time, that should be a noticeable trait and still not necesarily get rid of all conflict. There's plenty of ways to wring drama out of a situation without characters deliberately uttering a lie.

That post that's like "stop writing characters who talk like they're trying to get a good grade in therapy" really blew the door wide open for me about how common it's become for a character's emotional intelligence to not be taken into consideration when writing conflict. I remember the first time I went to therapy I had such a hard time even identifying what I was feeling, let alone had the language to explain it to someone else. Of course there are plenty of people who've never been to therapy a day in their life who are in tune to their emotions. But even they would have some trouble expressing themselves sometimes. You have to take into account there are plenty of people who are uncomfortable expressing themselves and people who think they're not allowed to feel certain ways. It also makes for more interesting conflict to have characters with different levels of understanding.

[wonderneverlandsystem]

TW/CW// Brief mentions of Homophobia, Transphobia, and Islamophobia, Mentions of Abuse, Racism, and general fandom idiocy

If you replace a poc with someone else, lets say another minority, and it is obvious that they r a minority, like they r wearing pride flag stuff, they're wearing a hijab, etc. and something vague that someone says about that person, like. idk. about them not being the kinda person you should hang around with. and you would call that person homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, etc. for saying that about the person? It isn't bigotry. If the statement could be applied to anyone. Then it isn't bigotry.

Yes this is about Billy Hargrove. Also YOU GUYS HAVE NO CLUE WHAT CONTEXT MEANS AND IT SHOWS. Max literally yelled at Lucas IN FRONT OF BILLY. HE WAS LIKE 20 FEET AWAY WATCHING AND LISTENING TO THE FIGHT. She yelled at him that he makes her feel like shit/that he treats her like shit. And whether u wanna admit it or not, Billy does care about Max. And even if he didn't, he is forced to take care of her. He has to be the parent. SO WHY THE HELL. After hearing that this random boy he's never met, treats his little sister who he cares about and is forced to be responsible for, like shit. Would he NOT tell her that there are some people you shouldn't be around. And that that boy is one of them. And in the Byer house where he sees her with Lucas again, AFTER HE WAS JUST ABUSED BECAUSE SHE RAN AWAY, of fucking course he's gonna target Lucas and not one of the other boys. He hasn't seen them with Max, he has no reason to thing of them as being bad influences or harmful.

And fuck no it doesn't excuse his actions or make them okay. He still attacked a 13/14 (don't remember their exact age) yr old. But nothing about his words or actions are explicitly, outwardly, whatever word u wanna use, racist. And even if he is racist (which by the way, every yt person, especially/specifically in America has institutionalized racism at the very least which takes a long time, and lots of education to break down, which isn't gonna fucking happen when u live in an abusive household where you have other things you have to focus on so you and ur kid sister don't fucking die, especially in the 80's), Max never fucking says anything about it. Even if what he said or did was racist, Max never said or did anything. Obviously I could understand her not saying anything to Billy because she might think he'd get angry. But she never goes to Lucas trying to comfort him, apologize for Billy's behavior, anything.

While I'm on the topic I might as well bring up the fact that NO ONE IN THE SHOW. EVER FUCKING TREATS LUCAS WITH RESPECT OR UNDERSTANDING IN RELATION TO HIS STRUGGLES WITH BEING A BLACK TEENAGER IN THE 80'S. In season 1, he gets SO MUCH shit from the fandom for not trusting Jane/El. A random girl who showed up out of no where, who, through no fault of her own, brings a bunch of dangerous ppl coming after the group. And basically no one gives Mike any shit for doing the same thing to Max in season 2. In season 4 when he is trying to fit in, to not be seen as a weirdo, outcast, freak, etc. So fucking many people treated him like he's an asshole for that. He is a black 15 yr old boy in the fucking 80's. In a town that is predominantly white. Where all of his friends are white. Most of the people at his school, are white. Of fucking course he's gonna do whatever he can to "fit in" and stay with the popular crowd. Not doing that would put even more of a target on his back. I'm so happy they put in that brief moment at Benny's where the only other black person on the team and at the house comes over to tell him it will be okay after the police show up. That he's not gonna be in trouble. Despite a good portion of the fandom being really diverse, be it queer, poc, etc. so many of y'all put the cishet yt characters on a pedestal and either ignore or straight up shit on the few queer characters & poc characters.

That's the end of my fucking rant for now. I'm tired. Thanks for coming to my TEDTalk. night guys.

[opinated-user]

Anyone else think her Huntlow post was a bit…unhinged?

I mean, I like the show. I don’t care enough to join a discord or anything, but it’s a fun watch.

But her constant accusations of the fandom being racist or emo edge-lords is starting to take up her identity as a fan of the show. And as someone who has only tackled a bit into the (tumblr) side of the fandom, I think majority of them are sane, nice people. Sure, there’s always a bigot, but what fandom doesn’t have one? They generally accept anyone until that someone crosses the line.

Idk, I read her post and I was just thinking “bitch where” every sentence. Where is she getting these crazy accusations from?

“People like Hunter because he’s a white boy”

“They only ship him with Willow because Luz and Amity were taken. Also something something racism”

“Wannabe edgelords won’t shut up about Huntlow”

…what are you talking about? What’s wrong with people liking characters you don’t? Just keep away from them! It’s not hard!

I think this woman needs to stay away from this fandom. All she adds is toxicity and unnecessary conflict between fans.

i think LO legitimately just forgot that a not small portion of the TOH fandom are teenagers, a majority of them probably teenager girls or afab people, because the show is all about that demographic. i always found it so disgusting for a grown woman on her 30s to go around telling teenage girls that they couldn't find a teenage fictional boy attractive. that would be some "i'm not like other girls" type of behaviour that reeks of internalized misogyny if LO was of their same age, but since she's a lot older than that? it's... pathetic. i actually don't have another word to describe it. it is pathetic for a 30 year old woman to be this mad about what teenagers girl like online on a show that was made for them, not LO. side note: that is not straightwashing means. Luz is bi so she dating a boy wouldn't contradict anything at all about her canon identity. i feel like LO slip up here by showing off, once again, that to her the only valid representation is when there is a romantic/sexual relationship between two people of the same gender and nothing else. a bi girl dating a boy is not legitimate representation according to LO, who loves to commit some bisexual erasure even against real life bisexual women who disagreed with her by calling them straight too. bisexual women are always queer, no matter who they date. here Rowan Ellis (no relation to Lindsay Ellis so LO can relax) made recently a whole video going in depth about the concept:

i do really recommend people to watch it, but to make it short: straightwashing is when a company decides to take a character that was established to be queer on it's original story and erase that identity when translated into other type of media. example: character was a lesbian on the novel, gets a boyfriend without any mention of queerness in the movie adaptation. people writing fanfiction can't do that because fanworks are never going to be on the same level of legitimacy as an official adaptation. those people who, again, on this context are most surely underage, afab and likely to be not straight themselves. people with zero power to erase the canon identity of any character like big production companies have. as to "fans of white boy needing to calm down"... i'd say the same about the 30 year old woman who celebrates for the death of a fictional teenager boy in a show made for tweens.