#sorry; we live in the real world which often means complex systems are at work

[dolugecat]

On some Japanese social issues I had learned about at uni and abroad):

(Rb ok!)

Legit had an epiphany about the true hidden meaning of the last arc of Mob Psycho 100. It’s hella projection but for real there is nothing neurotypical about Mob or Mob Psycho. I do not wish to enforce my interpretation on others (ironic bc I do that all the time but this is a serious social theory). There are some interesting and very sad social issues in Japan that the west really doesn’t understand but would I think help people understand a lot of context behind not only Mob Psycho, but also a lot of other anime. I learned this at my shitty university (prestigious but horrific) and while studying abroad in Japan and talking with Japanese peers. Get ready here we go (and tw for bullying and darker things):

Unfortunately in East Asian education systems, bullying can be extremely intense. Growing up I assumed it was over exaggerated extremely in anime for drama but it really can be so horrific. From what I’ve heard, there is often a single kid or so who is just shit on by everyone else, even the teacher. Mogami land *is* the reality of some Japanese kids. I’ve read that in Korea, this social punching bag sometimes is just the darkest skinned person (yayyy colorism /angry) and or someone who does not fit in. I mean, we have that in America too, but maybe not as common for the bullying to be as focused on one misfit rather than several. These kids just can’t escape the stigma too, kids from other schools find out they were a major victim at their old school and it starts anew. Thus there is so much stigma and incentive to join in on bullying so you aren’t the one. Sadly, this also ofc leads to higher suicide rates. That’s where the “shoe on building roof” anime trope comes in, bc somehow taking off shoes is relayed to death (I forgot why sorry)

There is a difference in how intense in general high school vs college is too. In the West, commonly college is the more intense curriculum and is harder than high school, but in Japan it’s usually the opposite. Grind suuuupppeeerrrr hard for entrance exams (huge standardized tests that determines what college you can qualify to) bc unlike the ACT or SAT here, that test is by far the most important factor for college admission. Then chill and relax a bit in college. Can’t relate. Name and prestige is very critical for job application, more important than here. That’s why planning out your future is sooo much more intense for Japanese high schoolers than in America, and why there is sooo much more pressure to excel in high school than here. Japanese school years and holidays are done different than ours, I’d suggest looking it up.

Social prestige of going to an American high school or college is nuts. Like whyyy do you value our shitty education, Japan’s is much higher quality (it’s bc we neo colonized them). Being able to speak English is very, very highly valued and any association with Americans make you cooler. From my experience, some Japanese students got very excited to practice speaking English with us, and their biggest issues with learning it is pronunciation, lmao. Wasai english is unique slang that is indeed English words but it’s kinda different and it’s kinda jarring to remember lol. So, Teru having parents that are working overseas isn’t too uncommon, idk about leaving him absolutely alone, but I did have a ex-friend who just came from Japan in middle school who’s situation probably wasn’t too far off from that. Empty wealth with no love, it’s no wonder those kind of people can end up being huge bullies (minori?)

I did a presentation on 引きこもり(hikikomori) for which means “shut in”, (like Serizawa) and it’s fucked up. It’s a social phenomena where according to some Japanese researchers a mix of undisciplined parenting, guilt/not living up to expectations, and hopelessness makes an alarming amount of youth/ young adults literally never go out side their house/room. Often a parent is “enabling” the behavior by supporting them, but idk the articles seemed a bit victim-blaming to me when I read it, but I don’t think I should make a judgement too hard, not my place. I will say I do suspect and believe I read something to support that ASD might play a role in hikikomoris (there is pitiful resources for autistic people in Asia, much much less support than even here, to the point I don’t think most know it exists). Like come on, with the other points I laid out my personal opinion as an Asian American with autism is that it really seems it’s unknowing ableism against autistic classmates, but I didn’t grow up in Asia so I don’t want to say.

Mental health in general is tragically quite abysmal in Japan, and with it being so hyper competitive and brutal work culture, it’s no surprise birth rate in Japan is so low; some Japanese young adults say it seems unethical to bring a life to such hostile world. Suicide rate is of the highest in the world. It’s fucked, I’ve interacted with some of the locals in Tokyo and they were so nice, but the business men just looked dead inside, it’s so sad.

Relationships between child and parent is also strained bc of this intense work and school culture. Quality time is too scarce when you gotta work so much. And the pressure from parents to do well in education or else you might end up socially stigmatized is rough. Bc your job is who you are, it’s hyper capitalism (thanks us for making them do this)

With autism being so unknown, support for parents in raising autistic kids is almost nonexistent. What happens if the “darker” side of ASD shows up in kids? I used to be a menace when I had meltdowns, I felt so bad but really just became so indiscriminately violent. See where this is going? Legit, I think ESP is a sort of metaphor for neurodivergance to ONE. There is so much stigma around it, and even less way for kids to understand why they are different than the others. My Korean family can’t admit we all got ASD, too much fear and internalized shame.

I got finally diagnosed with ASD as an adult and I’ll tell ya, I relate too much to Mob hurting Ritsu. I felt so bad, but also not in control, I knew what I was doing but not how to stop. Luckily, is was blessed in that my hyperfixations involved science and logic, so I did well at school. Sadly, our boy Mob just don’t got the passion or ability to do well at school. His kanji is very bad, even to point of not being confident he wrote a kanji (世) they learn when they are 9, in elementary school (thanks @katyatalks). Him being a bit berated by his parents for having bad grades and bending spoons seems harsh to Westerners I think, but IMO it’s pretty tame from what I’ve seen of some Asian parents (I get to say that lmao). Ofc, however the shaming is very real and Mob just agreeing with them about how weird and stupid he thinks he is so sad. There is even more pressure for the eldest to be better than here, I feel from some interactions. Nonetheless, it’s implied Mob is quite emotionally detached from his parents, even though he loves them, which also adds to his emotional complex. Combined with originally fragile self esteem and feelings of worthlessness, we got one emotionally stunted boy. However, contrary to common belief people with ASD are sometimes hyper empathic and experience emotions very intensely. We are prone to having “meltdowns” which if not assisted with can be quite violent if very intense. For me, my worse meltdowns as a kid came from when I didn’t understand why I wasn’t getting what I wanted, it seemed selfish and cruel of me but I couldn’t control it. I wanted to be a good kid, so why did hit my moms leg at target when she refused to buy me Pokémon toys? I couldn’t come up with a good reason for why my mind just commanded my body to do bad things, just a single thought was controlling me, I want I want I want I want I want ____. Which I argue could be what ???% represents… bc well…. Yeah….. hmm….. not in control of self (mob unconscious), selfish (not actually, I’ve forgave myself but my “normal” kid self was so ashamed), destructive, hurt family, wanting to stop but can’t, that’s kind of…. Too relatable.

But legit, since realizing my new HC, I’ve started to think of the last chapter of mp100 when I “explode” and it helps me feel better and I do gain “control” a bit easier. I don’t feel so bad anymore either, Mob!

[ouyangzizhensdad]

I'm gonna go on a limb here and say something I've been thinking about. So, I watched cql before reading the novel, and when I first read mdzs I have to say I was a bit thrown off by the Phoenix Mountain kiss, so of course my first instinct was to come to this hellsite and try to find what other people thought of it. The more I looked into it, the more I was convinced that the reason so many people hate it so irrationally and why it is apparently so hard for some to analyse any possible meaning beyond the obvious things in that scene, is because people that were introduced to mdzs via cql often go into the novel trying to get some sort of "fandom experience".

What I mean is that people will read mxtx's work and expect to get the same gratification they get whenever they find a good fic. Something tailored to their taste and characters built upon the preconceived ideas (often fanon) they have of each of them. It's a problem I've noticed a lot with queer media reception by people who are active in fandom. It's one of the things I am critical of and why I am so adamant to join fandom discussions, because I feel like many fandoms have created spaces where the queer characters are made to be these perfect examples of representation, so whenever queer characters are allowed to be flawed and make bad decisions people often jump on the bandwagon of calling it problematic and homophobic, instead of putting some effort into reading further than what is in plain sight and being critical of the possible meaning behind the character's actions.

Sorry for the long ask, but I wanted to get this out of my system. Tried my best, but English is not my first language, so I'm sorry if anything is weird or hard to understand.

Hi anon, 

I think you are definitely unto something when you say: “people will read mxtx's work and expect to get the same gratification they get whenever they find a good fic. Something tailored to their taste and characters built upon the preconceived ideas (often fanon) they have of each of them.” It certainly would explain why so many people, even while aware that the series is an adaptation of the book, say stuff like “novel!LWJ is OOC”. They might have approached the novel as just the “fanfic” of CQL that includes “canon Wangxian”, without considering how much had been potentially changed through the process of adapting MDZS and making it palatable according to censorship.

I agree with you that the current state of fandom, where fic writers seem focused on avoiding being Problématique at all cost, has not only stiffled creativity but created in certain fans unreasonable expectations towards other works. Fandom, as a creative context, is generally focused on (self-)indulgence, on feel-goodness, and is largely pretty dry in terms of themes. But to expect all creatives to have the same “goal” or approach when it comes to art is simply ridiculous. For some people, art is a safe means through which to explore difficult, violent or outlandish set-ups. Art can be used to make people feel uncomfortable, unsettled just as it can be used to make people feel uplifted and moved. Art can be focused on exploring nuanced and controversial topics. Art can be used to portray irredeemable assholes, losers or monsters. Art can be depressing and deny us any feelings of satisfaction. Art can do so many things! And, yes, sometimes creativity is mobilised in the service of writing the nth wholesome gay coffee store AU for a popular anglo property: but that’s neither the norm nor the rule. 

I think as well in terms of queer representation that we lose a lot when we try to argue that the only way to “fight” homophobia is to present queer characters and queer relationships that are Unproblématique and fit a constantly-shifting standard of what is “not-homophobic”. Take the current obsession with the idea that all gay men must be vers or otherwise be a homophobic stereotype: putting aside all that needs to be unpacked in that belief, imagine a world where it’s the accepted idea everywhere that you can’t write about gay men lest they be vers. How many queer experiences would we be erasing in the process? Or, again, this weird idea that it’s “bad” to write in fem queer men because that’s a stereotype, when the real issue is just that fem queer men have generally only been written as one-dimensional characters present in the narrative for comedic purposes or stereotypes, and not as fully-fledged humans with complex internal lives and relationships. As a Problématique Gay, I hate the idea that only perfect queer narratives can exist. Nah, people, queer existence is complex, and queer people are not perfect (although we’re cooler than the str8s). It’s just.... believe me, the continued existence of homophobia is not determined by whether characters in books have the “correct-according-to-you” kind of sex or whatever. 

NB: I have to say, as well, that the first time I came across the Phoenix Mountain kiss, I thought (in bad faith) that it had been added just as a sort of unfortunate fan service since the novel was published chapter by chapter. But when I finished the book and thought back on it, the inclusion of the Phoenix Mountain kiss made sense, narratively and thematically. It also forced me to recognise that, even if I had read MDZS before I ever watched CQL, I had started reading MDZS with my own preconceptions (which were certainly not helped by the framing of the translation) : that it would be a middling danmei full of the same tired tropes. I was glad to be proven wrong!

[darylandbethfanforever9]

Devil’s Backbone

Devil’s Backbone

Chapter 5 

Story Rating: Explicit, 18+

Warnings: Smut, violence, past flashbacks of sexual assault, descriptions o torture, racial hate and forced abortion. Not Tony Stark friendly.

Relationships: Bucky/OC, Steve/Natasha, Billy/Wanda/Grant, past Clint/Laura, eventual Clint/Yelena and Frank/Karen.

Summary: In the aftermath of the Blip, Bucky struggled to find his place among the world and the Avengers. However, when he is sent on a mission to Madripoor to investigate a young woman, he starts to realize that maybe his past isn’t too far behind him. Co-Written with WalkingPotterGirl14

Nat was acting weird. Clint usually was a very noticeable guy. He may be the man that never misses, but he was also the man that could read people like a book. And right now, Nat was acting very much not like herself, even with her usual stoic face.

He felt like she was hiding something from him and Laura, which made him conflicted. He knew Natasha's past with the Red Room was horrific, but she was keeping something secret, and had been on the phone to a woman last night. She usually never went on calls late at night. Sighing, he texted Laura to let her know that he was alright and that the kids were settling into school. After Tony had exposed their location to Thaddeus Ross, he'd had to move them to the outskirts of New York. He frowned when he saw Natasha in the conference room, running the facial recognition software. The tech had been created by Pym Industries and X-Con Security Consultants, as Stark Industries' facial recognition software was for more expensive and didn't always work. "What are you doing, Nat?" he asked quietly. Natasha ignored him as he entered the room. She was reading a file that was in Russian. "Trying to find out who this mysterious woman is, Clint. Steve isn't exactly talking to me right now, so I have to do this on my own," she answered harshly, causing him to grimace at her answer. Steve and Natasha's relationship had become strained after she had survived Voromir and revealed that she had been pregnant. Then she had suddenly broken up with Steve, devastating the man. He knew how much Steve loved Natasha. He'd been a shell of himself after Natasha had supposedly died. The man was far more guarded now and simply kept things civil with Natasha. "You should have told him, Nat. He loves you and it clearly shows in the way that he looks at you," he argued firmly, trying to understand why Natasha was acting this way. Natasha refused to acknowledge Clint's words. She knew Steve loved her, but she just didn't feel like she wanted children. She was upset that she had miscarried, but she hadn't been sad in the same manner as Steve had been.

Ana had gotten ready for Sharon's art gallery. She had decided to wear a red dress for tonight made with red satin and had a V-neck. It would partially show the faded burns on her chest, but no one would hardly notice them. She didn't like thinking about the burns, or the agony they had caused. It was better to just forget about it. She finished applying her makeup, adding some eyeliner and grabbed her handbag. She had put a knife in there, along with her cell phone and lipstick, before heading out. The car was waiting for her outside the building, and with a quiet smile, it drove her across High Town to where Sharon lived.

Bucky had left Sharon’s after a little but to head back and get ready for the real art show tonight. While he did, he had memorized everything for the mission, including his backstory and the reason as to why he was in Madripoor, looking at himself in the mirror. He'd showered, and let some slight stubble grow on his face for tonight. He was wearing a black blazer, black trousers, and a black shirt. He nodded to himself as he left the bedroom and said goodbye to Alpine. The cat meowed at him affectionately, before going to sit on the bottom of the cat bed. He'd made sure that no one would be able to break into the house, using the security system to its best advantage for heading out. He left his place after making sure he had everything that he needed, including his gun, a knife, and keys. He walked to the motorcycle, getting on, and quietly drove to Sharon's house.

The party was in full swing when Ana arrived at the house. She smiled at Conrad, who had already arrived and was with his girlfriend. He raised a glass to her from the corner as she approached. Sharon was showing a client some beautiful paintings as she wandered around, admiring the art gallery. She was about to ask Sharon about a Van Gough painting when a strange silence fell over the room as most eyes headed towards the door. Curiously, she turned around to see a young man with short dark brown hair, dressed in clothes that made it clear he was part of the Russian Mafia. Her brow raises in surprise. His eyes though were what caught her attention. They were a dark grey, like a wolf's eyes. She couldn't shake off the feeling…that they had met before but where? No, no way. She hadn't met anyone like that. Or at least…her memory sucked. "Everyone, this is one of my clients who has come from Moscow, Russian. His name is Yakov Surkov," Sharon said calmly, introducing the man, who nods. Ana got the sense that this man was dangerous. "He's a Russian mobster," Conrad whispers to her discreetly as they turned back around. "He doesn't do the usual Mafia stuff, but he sells weapons to resistance groups who fight dictators." She raised an eyebrow at his words, watching the man intently as he walked up to the bar to get a drink. She wasn't surprised when he ordered a Ruskova vodka to drink. The party returned to normal quickly after, with many people returning to what they had been doing. She excused herself from Conrad, whispering that one of the paintings he was looking at would be hers to which he laughed, and sat at the bar contently. She enjoys her glass of red wine, when she got the sense that someone was watching her. She glances up and feels herself smile when her eyes dance across the room at Yakov, who had been looking directly at her. Without breaking contact, he downs his drink before standing, walking over to her. Ah, a man of confidence, she could see. However, as he moved closer, a weird sense of peace settled over her. Conrad had told her who he was, what he did, but coming over to her, she didn't feel fear. In fact, his eyes almost felt familiar. It was such a strange sensation. But even so, she didn't let it show on her face. "You came over her nice and quick," she remarks, her brow raising. "Almost like you're on a mission." "What can I say? When I see something, I like, I know what I want." Okay, now that brought some colour to her cheeks. He was smooth. "For a Russian man, your English is very good." "I've been around them enough in the past for me to know. Takes some practice but you learn to work with it well." He reaches out and holds her hand, bringing it to his lips in a kiss. "Yakov Survok." Oof, he was pulling out all the stops. She couldn't remember the last time she had been treated with such respect from a single man. Surely not of this year, that's for sure. However, she still had her smarts ahead of her, and knew that it wouldn't be too brilliant if she gave out her regular name. So, she instead smiles and states back another name. "Maria Kapitonova. It's a pleasure to meet you." He lowers her hand again, smiling. "A pleasure to meet you as well." He glances around and gestures to this. "You been going to this for some time? I've never seen you around." "You've been here before?" "Couple of occasions," Yakov states quietly. "Usually for business reasons, but I've been to Sharon's a couple of times, trying to find the right piece for back home. However, I recently decided to move here all together." Ah, so he was in the area? Good to know. "To be honest, I haven't been here that often," she states lightly. "I only just recently showed up in the city…had some high friends in some good places so they got me into this big shindig. Sharon is a nice woman…smart one too." "That she is," he agrees before raising an eyebrow at her. "So, you're new to Madripoor?" "I am, yes." "Well, obviously you do know the city…isn't necessarily safe." Ana chuckles a bit. "Trust me, I know. But I think it was exactly what I needed. A change of scenery. Last place I was in was far too cold." The man snickers a bit. "I've heard that the summers in Madripoor are beautiful. I look forward to it." She looks back at him. "Then why did you move here?"

"As you said. A change of scenery," he agrees lightly. "It can be quite cold in Russia too." Ana smiles a bit and nods. "That is true…I've been there as well. All over the world. It's almost like people, in a way." At his furrowed brow, she continues. "Every person has warm and cold parts in a way. When you're close to someone, you get to see their warm parts, but if you anger them, the cold parts emerge, as vicious as ever. But even in the cold you can find warmth sometimes, and coldness withing the warmth – if that makes any sense." She found herself chuckling at the end. "I'm sorry. Maybe the wine is getting to me." Yakov chuckles before shaking his head. "No, I…I get it, really." He glances at the ground. "God knows I've had my fair share encounter with warm and cold places within me." Ana could see a bit of a fight in his eyes, glancing at the ground. He clearly had some sort of past, and for a moment, she forgets that they were practically strangers and reaches out, squeezing his arm. It causes him to look up. "We all do. That's the beauty of people. They're complex and wonderful in every way. If you're not willing to accept all parts of someone, then why even try?" That causes him to smile as well, although this one was smaller. "That is true…a beautiful statement for a beautiful woman." Ana rolls her eyes. "Now you're just saying that." "I mean it," he argues back, but there was a certain twinkling in his eyes that had her smiling. She takes the last sip of her wine, standing. "Well…thank you, Yakov." She clears her throat, remembering that she wasn't here to flirt with men. She needed to focus on actually getting the art she needed. "I have to use the restroom, but after that I plan to peruse the art here. Do you want to join me?" "I'd love to," he answers back with a smile. "Good," she responds back, offering her own grin before turning around, grabbing her purse, and heading to the restroom. Jeez, she hadn't felt something like that in…God knows how long. She wondered what Yakov had to offer her. Maybe being friends with a mafia man would benefit her greatly.

God-fucking-damn, she was gorgeous. As soon as Bucky had arrived back at Sharon's place for this whole party she was throwing for the art, she had directed him directly to where the mystery woman she knew was sitting at the bar. And while Bucky of course followed up on her and began to talk to her, trying to learn her name – Maria, of all things, but he knew that was most likely a front – and all about her for his own case, he couldn't deny the beauty that she had.

She had the most beautiful eyes that he had ever seen, a light grey that he compared to opals. She had wavy dark brown hair that was almost black but had a mahogany colour. She was tall, but barely reached his height. The red silk dress flattered her figure and emphasized the curves she had. He noticed a few men were watching her as she left for the restroom, her hair glowing in the disco lights. She was most certainly a looker, that was for sure. "Enjoying the party, Yakov?" a voice asked with amusement. He turned around to see Sharon had come over to the bar, and had ordered herself a Piña colada, eying the drink that he was drinking. "It's enjoyable, Miss Carter. And I just met the delightful Maria Kapitonova. She's a charming young woman," he answered smoothly as he saw a young woman with blonde curly hair enter the art gallery and go to the restroom. "That she is. She's friendly with Conrad Mack, the Smiling Tiger, Melissa Gold who is known as Songbird and two hackers called Polina Astakhova and Evan Drake. She's making a name for herself in this city - plus she's laid down some ground rules for everyone," Sharon said impressed. After a moment however, she turns him around, looking at him carefully. "Be careful, Bucky. She's not like most of the people who live here but she's dangerous. She's killed at least three folks who didn't abide by the new rules," she said warningly. Before he could reply, Maria returned from the restroom, her bag in her hands. "I'd love to see the new art collection you've acquired. Sharon, I heard from Conrad and Melissa that you have some art nouveau pieces?" Maria asked curiously. She'd loved the art nouveau art and architecture. Bucky takes her up on that. "I'd like to see this art collection as well, Sharon. I have a deep fondness for Art Deco, and Art Nouveau style," Bucky added, genuinely interested. Sharon smiled, as she showed them the collection upstairs, moving along gracefully through the halls until they arrived where it was. Bucky admired the paintings on the wall, knowing fully well that these paintings and sculptures were the real deal. Most of the paintings and sculptures in the museums and art galleries, including the Louvre, were elaborate fakes. "I'll take those and some of your Asian Art collection as well, Sharon," he answered smoothly, handing her a wad of cash in Russian ruble. She smiled at him as she took it. "You have great taste," she mutters to him, to which he chuckles. Both of them saw Maria admiring the one of the paintings on the wall, before she turns to Sharon. "I'd like to buy this and a few other pieces," she said softly. Sharon smiled and arranged to have them sent to her house, as well as Bucky's place.

The party continued going on in their absence. Bucky noticed that some people were smoking marijuana. He didn't have a problem with people taking it. He knew Leah smoked the painkiller to help relive her back pain she'd gotten from a car accident during the Decimation. It had nearly paralyzed her. He glanced up at the grandfather clock to see the time and was astonished to see it was 2:30 AM in the morning. He saw a young woman with silver hair that had pink highlights at the front, and she came over to greet Maria. So she was using an alias to keep her real identity a secret? On that he didn't blame her. If Thaddeus Ross found out that there was another survivor of the Red Room aside from Natasha and Yelena, then things would get ugly. He would check in with Steve, Sam, and Wanda along with the others tomorrow. He went to say goodbye to Sharon and Maria, and found them talking to Conrad Mack, his girlfriend Jeannette and Melissa. "You heading off, Yakov?" Conrad asked amused. The Russian mobster had a cat that he was fiercely protective of. God help the idiot who tried to hurt it. They'd have the White Wolf hunting them down, like John Wick. "Tired from the flight. The party was wonderful Sharon. And it was lovely to meet you, Maria," he said smoothly, kissing Sharon on the left cheek. She flushed, chuckling a bit. Deep down Bucky hoped Sam wouldn't get upset about that. He knew there was something brewing between the two. He smiled at Maria, shaking her hand. He could smell her perfume from where he was. It smelt of lilies, red roses, and cherry blossoms. "I hope to see you again, Yakov," Maria said softly. He smiled at her as he watched her go inside and got onto his bike before taking off.

Steve, Sam, Wanda, Clint and T'Challa were in the conference room with Fury looking over the photos. They had been taken by Bucky when he had been at Sharon's art gallery. "Ok, so I've identified most of the guests at the party. Conrad Mack also known as the Smiling Tiger, was there with his fiancé, Jeanette Deveraux. Now, believe it or not, his criminal record isn't that bad. He sells marijuana to people on low incomes, and he is an arms dealer, but he sells weapons to Algeria, where there is a civil war going on due to the former prime minister coming back and trying to make a dictatorship," Amy explained patiently. "What about the chick with the gorgeous breasts and pink highlights? Did our Manchurian Candidate I.D. her as well?" Tony asked rudely, causing most of the team to stare at him in disgust at his cruel jibe towards Bucky. "Stark, don't call Bucky that. It's insensitive and unkind," Sam said firmly, before Steve could speak in defense of his friend. Tony had becoming very unkind towards Bucky since he had joined the Avengers. Tony started laughing at Sam's words, an expression of disbelief, contempt and disgust on his face. "Oh I'm sorry, Wilson - or wait is it Captain America? You think I shouldn't be unkind and insensitive to the bastard who strangled my mother to death and is the reason the team broke up?!" he shouted angrily, slamming his fist on the table. The piece of furniture rattled violently, and Peter squirmed uncomfortably in his seat. "It wasn't Bucky's fault, Mr. Stark. He is as much as a victim of HYDRA as were your parents," T'Challa said compassionately, but firmly to the man. "I don't care. He killed my goddamn mother! Because of Barnes and the man who I call father, I lost my mother, and Rogers had the nerve not to tell me!" Tony raged, his face turning red with anger. "When could I tell you, Tony?" Steve asks. "I didn't know if Zola was telling the truth at the bunker, and everything was a mess. I'm sorry I didn't tell you, sooner. Truly, I am. But you wouldn't answer my calls after retiring from the Avengers and the Accords happened," he reasoned calmly, trying to keep his temper. "Barnes should be rotting in the Raft or be fucking dead. He's a murdering, sociopathic bastard who ruined my life! He's the reason why Morgan doesn't have a grandmother!" Steve's hands turn to fists, but he refuses to yell. He wouldn't stoop so low as to lose his temper. So instead, he stands, aiming at him. "You don't think that Bucky feels that every day? You don't think he hasn't apologized and tried to make amends with every damn person he's hurt in the past? If anything, you don't even have the right to talk, because you've had so many people that you have hurt in the past as well. Do you deserve to be rotting away?" "You want to know everything I've done for this organization? For this country? I know that we've hurt others and we've tried to redeem that by singing the Accords and trying to make things right! Barnes was a literal psychopath that, just because we choose to believe what the Wakandans did, he's out there right now just living when he could snap at any moment!" T'Challa raises an eyebrow. "Are you questioning the power of Wakandan technology?"

Tony sighs and raises a hand to T'Challa. "I have nothing against you or your power, your highness. Your tech is great. My issue is with the current former assassin that is on the streets!"

"Will you two sit down!" Fury snaps angrily, causing the two of them to let out a puff of anger before doing so. "I know that you two don't get along but for the love of God get your damn selves together, because if don't figure out what is going on, then we might have another fucking breach." He angrily waves his hand. "Tony, the rest of your team head out and do a bit more research on Madripoor. Steve, called up Barnes and get more info. And when we get back, you two act like fucking adults."

"Yes, sir," was a collective muttered response.

Steve saw Tony glare at him before getting up, heading out with the others. Steve goes to talk to him but feels someone reach out to him, and he turns to see Wanda, shaking her head.

"It's not worth it," she says softly.

Steve sighs before running a hand along the back of his head, and turning around. "You're right." He looks to Sam and Wanda, who then he nods towards the meeting room. "Let's go call up Bucky."

[scripttorture]

I'm not sure if this question has been asked before, but what would be usually the reason why people would torture someone? Not to justify (torture is unjustifiable in any situation) but I really needed a driving force for a villain why they would w/o sounding ridiculous or implausible, and any reason I come up with falls kind of flat (... Which I suppose is expected, since that's how the reasonings behind tortures are in rl I guess)

I can help you out here. And I want you to know that from a writing stand point this does make perfect sense. Motivation, however shallow, is important for capturing a character.

 Yes a lot of the motivations in reality are flat, shallow and outright stupid. And it can be a careful balancing act, showing those motivations making them understandable without straying into justifying them. It can also be hard to make an interesting character with flat motivations.

 I think I’ll start off with talking about motivations/‘reasons’ in reality and then talk a little about when and whether we should break from reality when we write about torturers.

 Remember that there isn’t a lot of research on torturers. So I’m working from the little bit of research I can access, interviews with torturers and anecdotal reports. It isn’t perfect, but this is (so far as I can tell) the best information we have at the time of writing.

 Understanding why torture occurs means understanding that it is structural violence.

 I do take questions on abuse, I personally don’t see much point in sticking to the strict legal definition of torture when I’m trying to help authors do a decent job portraying trauma survivors. But sometimes the definition matters. And torture is essentially defined as abuse by government employees*, by public servants in positions of authority.

 Over and over again the reasons torturers give for their crimes come back to flaws in the organisations they were part of. Consistently, across cultures and time periods, they describe understaffed, high pressure environments with no training, little supervision and the instruction to produce results or else.

 This combines with cultural messages that violence ‘works’ and existing sub-cultures of torturers within organisations to perpetuate abuse.

 It’s also worth mentioning that for most torturers they’re coming into an organisation where there are already established sub-groups of torturers. The group dynamics do seem to play a role in all this. Though it’s difficult to say how much when we’re entirely going from what torturers say and they are… demonstrably inaccurate when it comes to talking about torture.

 Having said that; torturers do seem to encourage each other to more and more acts of violence. They treat it almost competitively. They will also, sometimes, approach new recruits and bring them into the torturer sub-group, pressuring them to participate.

 I’m unsure how much of a role the social factor plays in torturers starting to torture, but it definite seems to keep them torturing when they say they’d rather stop. There are a couple of reasons why.

 First of all there’s a sort of implicit threat; refusing to torture is seen as a threat to the torturer sub-culture. And these are people who have already shown a capacity for violence. There have been cases of torturers attacking other members of the same organisation for their opposition to, or refusal to, torture.

 There’s also a social aspect; once involved with the torturer sub-culture the individual tends to become more and more cut off from the rest of the organisation. The group of torturers becomes more or less their entire social circle.

 We’re social animals. So leaving, rejecting the entire social group, is a big deal. It’s hard for us to do.

 The toxic sub-culture torturers form encourages them to root part of their identity in their capacity for violence and how ‘good at it’ the other members of their group think they are. They tend to tie ideas of toughness, dependability, achievement and (often) masculinity to torture. They frame themselves as especially manly, strong and ‘willing to do the tough jobs no one else has the guts to’.

 It’s complete nonsense but it’s what they do.

 And it means that facing up to the fact torture is pointless feels like an attack on their self worth. A lot of them choose to double down rather then face that reality.

 This isn’t a definitive list of relevant factors. It’s my assessment of the ones that always seem to show up. There are usually other factors that feed into particular situations. Rejali’s Three Systems is a worth a read on that front.

 Ideas about social hierarchy and transgression are common features. So things like ‘anyone who does That Terrible Thing deserves to be tortured’ or ‘no one Like That would be in this part of town for an innocent reason’.

 All of this means that motivation can be tricky to write, because the real motivations are often not the sort of thing we’re taught are ‘interesting’.

 Real, honest motivations are often things like:

‘I think those people deserve it’

‘I was told to’

‘Everyone else was doing it’

‘I couldn’t think of anything else to do’

‘I got angry and took it out on someone else’

‘I thought it would work and no one ever taught me another way’

 That’s not a definitive list but you get the idea. And probably get the point about these sorts of shallow motivations being narratively unsatisfying.

 So let’s step back from the reality and tackle the writing problem at the heart of this: how do we make this interesting?

 There are a couple of different approaches.

 The first approach I see is to accept that the motivation and the villain are shallow and shift the interest away from the villain.

 Villains don’t need to be interesting. And they don’t need to be the focus.

 If your story is structured in a way which primarily makes the villain a looming threat and focuses on the heroes, their journey, their relationships then adding detail or depth to the villain is unnecessary.

 The Lord of the Rings trilogy does this with several of its major villains. The Shape of Water does it for the main villain. Zelda: Breath of the Wild (yes I bought a switch during lock down, and it’s my first Zelda game I am not sorry) does it with Ganon.

 Another approach is to accept the motivation is shallow and shift the focus away from the villain’s motivation.

 Villains do not need to have a grand philosophy or deep motivation or underlying pain in order to be a good read. They don’t need to be an intellectual threat to the heroes in order to be a legitimate threat.

 For instance Joker in Batman: The Animated Series, I’d argue one of the best takes on the character ever. But if you go back and watch the episodes he isn’t deep. His motivation almost always boils down to pettiness, greed and a vindictive streak a mile wide. It is incredibly shallow.

 But he’s fun to watch, because he’s unpredictable and funny. He’s also a legitimate threat to the heroes because he’s so incredibly destructive. More then any other villain his crimes are aimed at effecting large numbers of people. That sets the stakes high without any motivation or philosophy coming into it.

 The focus is on what he does each time he shows up, not why.

 Persona 5 pulls off a similar trick. Every single one of its villains has a shallow motivation. But each of them also has power over one of the heroes or another innocent person. They don’t need a deeper or more interesting motivation in order to make life miserable for the heroes. And every caper hinges on the heroes trying to stop that worst outcome.

 As much as Fullmetal Alchemist is a deep story which touches on many complex topics, neither version (the original manga or the 2003 anime with it’s very different plot) had a particularly complex villain at the end of the story. In both cases the ultimate leader of the ‘bad guys’ just wanted more power. And didn’t care how many lives they destroyed to get it.

 Not all stories need a Killmonger.

 It’s always worth taking the time to consider what your story needs, rather then what’s fashionable in fiction at the moment. On a personal note some of my favourite stories have been either entirely focused on the heroes or had explicitly shallow villains.

 The reality is that most of the time motivations for large scale atrocities are shallow and unsatisfying. Giving fictional villains deeper or more complex motives can work, but it can also mean twisting the narrative up to make it look like the villain (and hence their actions) are more reasonable then they are.

 Killmonger’s twisted vision of what would make Wakanda ‘better’ works in Black Panther, just as White Wolf’s similar motivation did in the comics a decade or so earlier. They work because they’re directly competing with the hero’s vision of what would make the world better. And because ultimately it’s about showing why T’Challa’s way is better then the villain he’s facing off against.

 But I can think of other stories where giving the villain a ‘deeper’ reasoning just served to make them look reasonable. While they were arguing for torture and genocide.

 And… I just think we’ve got enough of that in real life.

 At the end of the day your villain should be serving a role within the story you’re creating. Motivation is one of many ways that we try to make sure they serve that function effectively and entertainingly.

 But, despite what some people would have you believe, it ain’t the be all and end all of whether a villain or story is entertaining. Personality, plots, aesthetic and sometimes how satisfying it feels to see their day ruined, all feed in to how well a villain works.

 The threat they represent in the story isn’t dependant on whether their motivation is deep or nuanced or rational. It’s about their ability to follow through and sometimes the horrific nature of the desire itself.

 So I guess a lot of my advice here is to consider what your villain actually needs to do in the story. Then take a step back and consider whether deeper motivation adds anything to that.

 Be aware that the more complex motivations and drives you add the further you’re getting from a realistic torturer. Which is not inherently apologia, or inherently a bad writing idea, but consider what any deviation from reality implies.

 I hope that helps. :)

Available on Wordpress.

Disclaimer

*The international definition can include groups that control territory, ie an occupying force. In some countries the definition is slightly wider and encompasses some international criminal gangs.

[betweentheracks]

My question is regarding styling for promotional work in the US - I see so many female stars who are in a different outfit, with full hair and makeup, for their interviews, sometimes with multiple changes per day. And then, there is their male costar slouching along in jeans and a rumpled shirt for a whole days worth of appearances. Is there a contractual requirement placed on female stars or is this just an industry norm? Thank you in advance for any insight you can offer!

Ah, look at you go Greyface! Taking a real stab right into the black heart of the style industry. How bold and perceptive of you! 🤭

The simple and direct answer is, this is a double standard.

The more complex path that still leads to same resulting answer is very worth traversing though and is filled with the peaks and plummets of the fashion industry's history. So, naturally, we'll walk this way together and take a look.

Buckle up, rack mates, this ride is a doozy. 

The following is my insight and perception as a professional stylist and is subjective to my position and role. 

It is a well and widely known fact of fashion and beauty that at the heart of all the glitz and glamorous there is a horrible ugliness beneath. It is treated as an unseen slight or even a "secret" we shouldn't talk much about. It is as old as fashion itself and has only been worsened over time and with the evolution of marketable style and beauty standards. Women are more promotional than men = women are more desirous than men = women are the pitch and men plunder fame by proxy.

Sex sells. Point of fact; type face bold print. This is the truth of fashion and entertainment and is a marketing strategy at this point.

Specifically, however, it isn't that "sex" sells but rather which sex sells. As in which gender is the apparent and clear choice to use as a promotional feature and living advertisement. The answer is, as it has been for ages now, women. Feminine features are fair and pleasing to behold. They can be dressed up and toned down; styled into an ideal of wanting and craving. Women can be influential to both male and female audiences by beckoning men's gazes to the treats she has for them (treats being whatever it is she is being used to stage and sell) while sitting loftily as an iconic standard of beauty for women to reach for and in turn take up anything to help achieve this ideal (meaning they'll buy whatever is being promoted in their wish to be like the woman on the package).

This strategy and double standard extends well beyond the immediate scope of fashion or upselling the brands of luxury labels. It is also very present in the entertainment industry as a means to promote films, television, and other media. You'll see an actress working the promo circuit or doing interviews dressed to the nines even in casual and laid back styles and then you'll blink and she's done up entirely different but no less coifed and glamorous. Meanwhile her male counterparts and costars are parading about in very understated styles or even sloppy attire, sometimes dressed out in high quality suits but still not quite up to snuff. The efforts of stylists clearly more aimed towards maintaining the woman first and the man second, if at all.

The second and less often discussed pigeon hole that fuels this sexist standard is money. Femme fashion, while typically more expensive, is still unquestionably more versatile than menswear. This is because fashion profits more off female consumption and interest than male and thus caters to that market with more variety and visibility. Wardrobe budgets for filming are skewed with more money funneled into the styling of an actress or female celebrity with a limit on how much is spent on the men. This is symbiotic with the pricing of menswear being less than womenswear but altogether more durable in its make.

It's frustrating and awful and I am ever so glad and thankful that it is slowly having attention called upon it by those within the industry. As modern style continues to evolve and dilute the boundaries between gender stereotypes and typecasting, this double standard becomes more and more frail. Many voices have started gathering in outrage over such rampant and asinine misogyny. Men have come forward to demand that they are as equally marketable and appealing, women have put their foot down and refused to be sexualized or sensationalized. There is the rising trend of androgyny and transgender recognition. Each step is in the right direction and in pursuit of an equal playing ground where women and men can each be glammed up and used as a standard for beauty or poised as a pinnacle of style.

I work extensively with male clients to this effect. I not only enjoy gender neutral styles but have clients that have made it clear they like the glamor of femme styles and want their image to be a balance of masculine and feminine. My oldest client wears heels and likes glittering eye makeup and has often made a case to be allowed to wear skirts or dresses, while my only female artist prefers more of an asymmetrical blending of menswear with feminine accents and likes her footwear to be the type that she, in her words, "can kick ass and stay looking class" while wearing.

There's an uptick in the emergence of queer brands and LGBTQ+ labels in the US with ideals/ethics steeped in the goal of gender neutrality and equality. With them comes the new hope for fashion's future where gender lines are not drawn and women are not the golden rule of promotional value for their supposed sexy/cute/inviting stereotype.

I hope to see men as a campaign centerpiece for lingerie, make up, and other needlessly gendered interests and women in ads for suits and leisure activities such as fishing or mudding and the other inherently male coded interests. I hope to see all gender typecasts and molds fall away entirely with people simply promoting things they enjoy. To see a full cast given the same amount of primping and stylized effort when making the rounds to talk up their projects.

Progress is slow but the world of fashion hinges upon welcoming change and being influenced by current climates and trends just as much as it influences outwardly. One of these days this double standard will be stripped out and the industry will again be revolutionized or it will become obsolete.

Beauty is beauty; people are people; style is style. Promotional/marketable viability cannot stay relevant against the might of such simple truths. The coming years will see the divide between gender being filled as designers and labels fight to remain prominent empires of fashion, and from there other interrelated industries will have no choice by to comply lest they find themselves stripped bare ass naked and lacking affiliations.

This post went and became a sort of tangent, whoops. I'll rest my rambling here and call it good. I intend to make a full post detailing the reshaping of fashion in the height of today's evolving inclusivity of gender roles and norms and the correlation of how fashion has long since been steps ahead in this movement. This ask happens to be a good sounding place for what some of that content will look like.

Fashion and style was never intended to give distinction between the masculine and feminine nor to place significance on gender. Segregation in fashion was initially between wealth and status; a determination of class in way way back when clothing first became an expression. Originally, fashion had no actual gender associations and men and women all worse similar styles of robes that would now be considered dresses. Class and wealth gave way, buckling to the thought of using one's showy status to promote goods to be traded and this was the birth of marketing women as a means of interest. Ever since it has been an internal struggle between ethics of material misuse of rights (sexism) versus capital relevancy (turning profits via brand visibility). A number of fashion houses are guilty of going with the flow and hoping the fortune and reputation made along the way could either cushion the blowback of systemic misogyny one day being aired out or could be used to steadily alter the trajectory of style's evolution.

Consider fashion as a tightrope act being performed between the politics of brand recognition and the conceptual idealism of expression. One small and out of sync step will result in a dire fall with no way of knowing if there is a safety net to pardon a brand or label from plunging into obscurity. This is why the fashion industry prefers taking time to plan careful steps forward and seldom rushes out. Fashion keeps pace while also staying baby steps ahead to change the course of current societal trends, even willing to sometimes relinquish any ground it has in effort to remain on the wire at all. It's a precarious give and take.

Three paragraphs later, truly, I yield to the length of this post and am done. I can’t guarantee this was even close to what you wanted to know and for that I am sorry. I get swept up by the passion I have for the inner workings of the business and lose myself (and my train of thought so if this doesn’t make a lick of sense, that would be why lol). Still, I do hope some of this sheds a little light on the matter. 

[hotforhandman]

Are the Villains “right”?

Okay, so I was scrolling through the bnha spoilers tag whilst procrastinating work and I’m really not living for the vibes there. My biggest issues fall into two main camps: “this arc is going to be the end of the League”, and “Villain stans are hypocrites with no reading comprehension for condemning the Heroes’ behaviour”, and I believe both of these statements can be addressed simultaneously, whilst also giving me a convenient excuse to not write. So without further ado,

Part 1: Themes

Right from the very beginning of the series, literally the first line, one thing is made blatantly clear: This series is not going to be about good guys and bad guys. “All men are not created equal” is not a line that implicates an inherent divide between good and evil, unless you’re an actual eugenicist. And pretty much every important character is designed to criticise a different aspect of the established system.

Izuku: The Quirkless are worthless. Not explicitly, but... everyone knows it. 

Bakugou: If you have a good Quirk, you are praised and treated as special, and as a consequence you’re never expected to learn and grow as a person. 

Shoto: Dedicating your entire life to becoming strong to the detriment of your own health is the best way to climb to the top. 

All Might: You don’t have to worry about anything. A Hero will save you. 

Shinsou: If you have a Villain’s Quirk, you’re going to be a Villain, no matter the quality of your personality. 

Kirishima: If you’re not flashy, there’s no point even trying.

Hawks: Similar to Shoto, if you show natural promise then it’s acceptable to groom you as a weapon. 

I’m sure there are others that I’ve missed. Each of these characters’ individual developments have been focused around them overcoming these ingrained ideas and growing and succeeding despite them - with the exception, perhaps, of Hawks. So if several of the major Hero characters are designed to illustrate and criticise the established system, what about the villains? I guess if the Heroes are stories about people succeeding despite what the world tells them, then the Villains are stories about what happens when they don’t. 

Spinner: Mutants are second-class citizens and should be treated as such. 

Toga: If your Quirk is considered to be bad or gross, then you should be punished for wanting to use it. 

Twice: The world won’t make space for your special needs. 

Magne: If you don’t fit the mould of what people want you to be, you won’t be respected.

And Shigaraki: It’s not our responsibility to help you. If you weren’t saved, that must mean you’re not worth saving. 

The one thing that both the Heroes and the Villains have in common is that they are tools to show the audience the flaws in BNHA’s society. It’s canon that Quirks appeared suddenly, and though by the time BNHA is set in, society has tried to adapt to fit it and is making some progress towards being functional, it’s clear that it has a long, long way to go, because it’s failing so many people. (Draw some parallels to real life, hm?). BNHA’s overarching themes of individual worth not being more important than collective good and how rules and structure created in good will can result in a lot of pain and abuse are, first and foremost, exemplified in the characters themselves. I like to tell people who find Shigaraki’s motivations vague and uncompelling that Shigaraki doesn’t need to have a point, he is the point, and this is exactly the reason why. 

I also believe that this is primarily why for Horikoshi to end the League here would be, frankly, terrible writing. We have engaged with the LOV more than pretty much any other Shonen villain group I can think of, almost any villain group at all. We’ve seen them develop as much as we’ve seen the heroes develop, especially in Shigaraki’s case, and to have Shigaraki only be their ‘first-year villain’ or whatever would be disrespectful, wasteful, and thematically inappropriate. To have a more classic, pre-developed villain whose villainy seems to stem from some inherent evil characteristic like AfO or Overhaul would ultimately defeat the story of how the worst villains are created by flaws in the system, not born. 

Part 2: Fan Response

Sometimes I can’t believe I still have to reiterate this to people, but it is possible to stan a character whilst simultaneously recognising that they are flawed, often critically so. When did we move from adoring villains to saying if you like this character you must be an inherently bad person because of this list of bad things they did? 

The thing is that the vast majority of ‘opinions’ on fan blogs are... poorly thought out and shallow, to put it lightly. When it’s 2am and I’m answering an ask about my opinions on x plot point, it’s not gonna be well thought out and thoroughly researched. I’m probably a bit tipsy, kind of tired, and just typing out whatever my initial response is. And really, if I reblog a bit of art with the caption ‘Shigaraki did nothing wrong’, do you really think I’m being serious? A lot of what we say is hyperbolic and meant to either be funny or to evoke an emotion, not because we actually believe it. 

That being said, the League in particular, I believe, resonates with a lot of people in the current political climate. A group of outcasts with characteristics considered undesirable by the wider population coming together and genuinely caring about one another whilst they aim to completely eradicate the system that hurt them? As an angry, marginalised leftist in a society that seems increasingly determined to wipe my chances at a good life out without blinking an eye, hell yeah that resonates with me. Being able to crumble the cripplingly complex and morally vile system I live in to dust and starting over is one hell of an appealing power fantasy. Does that mean I think murder is okay? Obviously not. It’s a fantasy. If there’s one place where I can live out those fantasies without consequences, it’s here. In fiction. And so it seems really stupid to me to be confronted with the idea that if I like a fictional violent radical I’m accused of condoning murder and kidnapping. 

Part 3: Are the Heroes right?

So a lot of the posts I saw that aggravated me were framed like 'how can the villain stans think Miruko and Gran Torino's behaviour is worse than Shigaraki's?', but like... who was saying that?

I feel like certain people's views of the heroes versus villains debate falls under the same fallacies as a lot of political arguments- that is to say, if I'm criticising one side, I must be defending the other. Which is... just blatantly untrue. When we say that the heroes' consistent dehumanisation of a man who is, first and foremost, a victim of significant grooming and abuse throughout his life, is gross and cruel, and that this attitude is mirrored in an awful lot of the hero-villain interactions implying a certain level of empathetic alienation and lack of accountability, we're not saying they shouldn't be trying to take Shigaraki down. Of course they should, he's going to decimate hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. But, like, does that mean they're exempt from all criticism? Should we be excusing the cruel and dismissive attitudes of the heroes and ignoring the behaviours of their side that lead to further 'villainisation' of marginalised people just because they're responsible for saving lives? No. Because once again, one of the key themes of BNHA is that neither side is perfect, and neither side is right.

Mass murder is wrong. So is systemic cruelty towards the oppressed. You don't have to approve of one to criticise the other. So next time you see one of those posts and jump to the conclusion that villain stans have no reading comprehension, pls remember these points.

Anyway, that's my little rant. Sorry.

Tl;dr, villain stans aren't stupid or glorifying murder, we're just capable of criticising more than one type of bad behaviour.

[sydney-briar-is-alive]

Our Super Fun Cultural Dark Age. Some questions about what I’ve been soaking up.

-By a Sponge.

Fairy tales are interesting because they are originally cultural artifacts. Have you ever read Homer’s Odyssey or Iliad and noticed the language of the text? If not, give one a go!

 A diversion further into why you might ‘give one a go’.

 Secondhand bookshops are brimming with Homer. I mean that. Brimming. They’re practically paved in it. You’d be doing them a service. Most translations use very simple language (more accurate to the original text), honestly Harry Potter uses more complex language and if you don’t like it you can just close the book. So, you can’t have much of an excuse, eh?

 *Thank you*

 Welcoming one back to the actual direction of the writing.

 Now then, regardless. Back to the actual point. They are full of ceaseless references to gods, divinity and praise to ‘Pallas Athena’ and such. I mean, these people probably had Athena bless their milk and Weet Bix every morning. These days, it might seem a bit much to many readers, myself included (pressed wheat scraps are blessing enough). However, these works are cultural artifacts, and as readers we can learn something from the interpretation of the time depicted. They offer a breath of fresh air from dusty old artifacts and lists of statistics from ancient bureaucracies. They give us clues into how actual, regular people, actually thought day to day. How their brains worked.

 Broad, sweeping generalisations aside-

 Generally, in pre-revolutionary France, it’s safe to say a great many people were hungry and angry with the unfair Ancient Regime. Therefore, the French versions of Red Riding Hood and Hansel and Gretel, told at the time were fatalist lessons. Pitting peasant guile against cruel and greedy hoarders of food, rather than treasure or power. Whereas in at the same time in Germany, the same stories were often told as cautionary tales, depicting the horribly violent fates of greedy peasants stealing and the scamming powerful forces around them. The French of the time clearly had a hero of sorts, however the Germans did not. There are possibly hundreds or maybe even thousands of versions of Little Red Riding Hood alone all around the world and all through history all with their own twists and conclusions relevant to the time and place.

The Brother’s Grim famously travelled around assembling these stories from Europe into definitive, marketable versions. More or less standardising fairy tales into the ones we know today. What this means however is that- and be warned, I’m about to make some broad sweeping generalisations! It means that more or less every human culture has had the same stories. From Ancient China to Rome, there was a culturally relevant ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ or ‘Hansel and Gretel’.

This is important to understand because these days, typically when fairy and folk tales are reimagined for an adult audience, they are taken in one of three directions.

 1. Just how lovely and shiny must it be, to not be a dark age?

 The first direction is retelling a familiar story or set of tropes and putting it into a more contemporary setting, such as, high fantasy or outer space. Media that does this is very well known, popular and recognisable. Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Snow White and the Huntsmen, or Maleficent. Typically, these stories are written to appeal to a wide audience and follow particular tropes and ideas, making a big splash at the box office. They need very little introduction, so, that’s it really. Moving on.

 2. Some might say analytics is just punching yourself in the gut, over and over again.

 The second direction is in my opinion more interesting, the self-referential, deconstructive direction. As it typically targets a more niche audience, allowing for a more unique perspective and viewing experience. Media like Pan’s Labyrinth, American McGee’s Alice and Jin Roh: Wolf Brigade. All these reinterpret themes into a more contemporary context, keeping their value as cultural artifacts and ‘true’ fairy and folk tales. While I am not arguing that Star Wars and the Lord of the Rings are not an important part of our culture. They serve a moral and idealistic fantasy that offers an escape to the reality of the world. Rather than interpreting that reality into a fantasy setting. This isn’t to say one is better than the other, this is merely to highlight why one is a more valuable item to our history and culture.

This direction confronts the elements of society and culture that create fairy tales, they are simply a more direct line to the value of the stories. Perhaps then they are not the same, perhaps by doing away with a lot of the symbolism they are no more than blunt instruments? Perhaps it is not fair to lump any media like this together, as each is deserving of its own fresh analysis (I did however warn you about broad, sweeping generalisations). The same can perhaps be said for all of this. Finding the line that separates any of these things is probably more personal and this is all very subjective. So, bearing this all in mind, I will introduce the final direction.

 3. Doctor Frankenstein, and how I learned to stop worrying and fear humanity.

 The ‘Horror’ genre. Now, I will not allude to my warning of broad sweeping generalisations a third time. So by ‘Horror’, I will let you use your own opinion, informed or otherwise. Typically many cultural fears and taboos are explored through horror entertainment. In many ways this is the natural progression of the fairy tale. What makes a horror film scary is relative to what you as a person are afraid of. Films like Dawn of the Dead and It Follows are not particularly scary on their own. But the cultural baggage that follows them is. They pray on our insecurities, which is why different parts will be hilarious and terrifying to different people. The same is true for fairy tales, to a starving person, a Witch living in a house of gingerbread, who lures children in to cannibalise them is probably terrifying. To a starving hungry peasant your entire existence is a battle against a cruel system that starves you and exploits you. So, maybe it is in this way, fairy and folk tales are perhaps better viewed as horror stories?

 That was a question. But you should probably just go on.

 Each of these three directions are a part of our culture and so then a part of us. We need them all to keep our identities. However, the investment in escapist storytelling is an unfortunate trend. This habit of converting important artifacts into objects of escapist fantasy is perhaps damaging to us. It’s in a way a form of censorship and it impacts everyone’s own identity in some way. By not spending time and money on a more balanced approach to storytelling, but rather focusing on a more focused one. It can damage the storytellers themselves. For example, Disney’s company image often directly clashes with this and while they produce many technical and visual masterpieces. Personally, I don’t see them as particularly focused on preserving or analysing culture. Rather creating fantasies based off false, hyper real cultures. The more media a company like this produces along this line, the more normalised its direction becomes. Thusly, the more obscure silenced the other directions become. And while it is important to remember, there will always be demand. But there may not always be works of quality to satisfy that demand.

 In conclusion: squeezing the sponge.

 In many ways this is a very subjective line of thought and please treat it as an attempt to question rather than to answer. I am just trying to have a conversation and I hope this perspective helps you understand what you are soaking up a little bit better. As it has for me! If not, I hope it none the less makes for an interesting read (I have tried to make it fun, honestly). 

To summarise. Paranormal Activity is more of a modern fairy tale than Maleficent. And Pan’s Labyrinth, while certainly using an archaic formula. It is perhaps better viewed as a brilliant satire in a classic formula than a modern fairy tale. The Avengers, Star Wars and The Lord of the Rings are culturally significant and incredible works of fiction, but offer little to society as a hole aside from first class, prime cut, rib eye escapism (that is not to say they cannot have great personal meaning and value). Lastly, history is more than dusty old ruins and bones. It’s more than lists and battle statistics. History is people. It’s us. And if our stories and artifacts reflect us. I think it’d be shameful to be remembered for an age of escapism.

  A final thought-

To all of this, a quantity of pot might beg a question:

Does this then mean we create reality, based off a fear of ourselves?

I don’t know and I haven’t bothered to ask the question, sorry. Perhaps ask your neurologist?

[upfrog]

So I finished reading Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality

This isn’t so much a review, as an attempt to cement some of my thoughts, and to at least write something down, the better that I will not look back in a year and not be able to remember a thing of what I thought of HPMOR. But overall... that was quite a thing.

HPMOR is long. Longer (by word count, which isn’t a perfect method of judging this) than War and Peace, the normal benchmark for “really long books”. I don’t consider getting through it to be an accomplishment, in the sense of say, getting through Homestuck, though maybe that’s only because I have tried, and failed to do the latter several times. It may also be because the plot is, for all it’s time travel and scientific tangents, less complex than Homestuck. I do not expect it to stick in my mind the way the canonical books do. While I do not consider them to be high literature, the canonical Harry Potter books, in addition to being entirely an entirely decent story, had a certain... Depth, of sorts, to them. Some of this may come from the midi-chlorian effect; the workings of magic are never discussed greatly in the canonical books, but much of HPMOR Harry’s efforts are devoted to understanding magic from a scientific perspective. I think it is more likely that it is because HPMOR simply had a more limited scope.

HPMOR set out to be a puzzle, an encouragement of rational thought patterns, a demonstration of how they might be applied to great benefit. And it does this. While potential plot holes and inconsistencies exist, it does this fairly well on the whole. But there isn’t that much beneath it, at least not that I have seen. It’s a good enough story, and the way it chooses to fill in the unfinished coloring book of Rowling’s world creates a compellingly interesting universe, albeit not a pleasant one. It has some good humor at some parts (more on that later), many clever moments, and some moments that are, frankly, just plain awesome, though these often contribute to the monstrously overpowered being that Harry is. Both versions shared the core theme of (spoiler warning: the rest of this paragraph. If you’re interested, I’d really advise you to just read it so that you don’t have the dramatic tension reduced) Harry ultimately triumphing by virtue of who he is. Triumphing by being, as we would describe it, a better human being than his opponent. The difference is that in the canonical books, this is a much more theological process. By the final book, Rowling is pretty much bashing us over the head with a crucifix. I still maintain that, unless the hill you wish to die on is unmarried teen snogging, declaring Harry Potter as heresy for the simple fact that it includes magic is to foolishly ignore the veritable flood of Christian messaging the books contain. I thought I’d made a post about that, but apparently not, so I’ll divert myself to that briefly. 

Spoilers for the whole canonical Harry Potter main series in the following paragraph:

The entire story is based on an innocent child who was permitted to live because of the intensely real power and protection offered by the selfless sacrifice of another to protect said child. So there, straight off the bat, right in the premise. And then in the 7th book, Harry does the exact same thing, but more so, and pretty much pulls an Aslan, “dying” willingly to protect others, but not by this being truly killed. And it’s not like the Christian messaging in Narnia is obscure. And at the end of the first Harry Potter book, Dumbledore, the most “good guy” character that the series has to offer goes off explaining how “to the well organized mind, death is but the next great adventure”. Then, in no particular order, having not done anything like a read through specifically looking out for these: the primacy of the soul over the physical, the specifically soul-corrupting nature of evil and killing, the power of redemption and forgiveness, the ultimate triumph of good over evil, the concept of powers that, while attainable, will damage your soul forever, and the existence of life after death. Anyway, back to the main matter.

HPMOR lacks any semblance of this depth (not that this is the deepest thing in the world mind), at least that I have been able to detect, and this makes it a lesser story to me.

The first ten or so chapters of HPMOR were pretty great as comedy. Harry constantly befuddling the wizarding world, and being befuddled by it, makes for some great laughs. Later on it undergoes a pretty significant tone change, and I had a very hard time adjusting to it, and enjoying the latter portion (which makes up most of the fic) for what it is. I did ultimately reach that point, but it was jarring.

This fic has some pretty obscure references. Have any of y’all read “Negima!?”? The author of this fic has. ( or at least, he’s watched some of the show.) It also had an offhanded reference to Madoka Magica, which is less obscure, but I still appreciate it. 

HPMOR Harry just keeps on getting more and more powers. (potential spoilers ahead, less severe): It seems like every month he’s making some discovery of how to do something that the entire wizarding world “knows” is totally impossible. It makes a certain sense, in context, but it certainly does contribute to some Mary Sue-like feeling. But on the other hand, Harry routinely oversteps his cleverness, failing to think things through enough, missing obvious points that would have counter-indicated his action. And some of the consequences are rather severe, so I don’t knock too many points off for it. Harry is powerful, but he is also rather a child genius in this telling, and all things considered, most of his discoveries don’t seem too ridiculous. 

I earlier mentioned that the world HPMOR painted was rather interesting. It (mostly) doesn’t directly contradict the wizarding world as portrayed in the common, but it does color in many of the blanks, and this author paints in dark colors. Wizarding britain, as portrayed in HPMOR, would be considered barbaric to most of the people reading this. Or perhaps it would merely be considered “medieval”. It certainly has some things going for it. It is portrayed as a place with relatively little history of institutional sexism, or racism amongst wizards. Even the stodgiest pure bloods find it silly to discriminate based on skin color. Wizarding Britain sees little wrong with homosexuality, and it is entirely un-taboo. But things get worse from there.

It is implied, or at least, I took away the message from my last reading some years ago, that the Wizarding power structure in the canonical books is... incompetent. That the benchmark of being a “fully qualified” witch or wizard does not in fact entail very much true competency, and many of the more powerful figures are somewhat dumb. HPMOR confirms this, and brings it into the light, offering more examples of just how useless most wizards are in matters non-magical. Wizarding Britain is controlled by an incompetent government, which is primarily controlled by one or several “Noble and Most Ancient House(s)”. The extent of Lucius Malfoy’s influence is brought up often in the canonical books, and the same is true here. This is a world where (minor spoiler for something before chapter 10-ish) a young noble raping a girl, and yes, girl is the proper noun here, repeatedly, and getting away with it indefinitely, is an open secret. Where this young noble’s security is secured by: a) the victim and her families’ fear of his familial power, b) memory charms, and c) a court system where the interests of the Noble Houses are often a primary concern. 

Wizarding news is minimal, and it seems to primarily toe the ministry (which is to say, aristocratic) line, save for the Quibbler, which... on the whole, isn’t great news either. There is no particular concept of a fair trial at play in this world, especially if your crime was committed against a noble house. Less than three days investigation is considered enough to go from crime to a sentence of ten years in Azkaban. And then there’s Azkaban itself. For all it is a prominent feature in the books, and Dumbledore’s opposition to it is often mentioned, Azkaban doesn’t get much light shone on it in the canonical books. This is likely in part because it is such an incredibly, ridiculously cruel place that it becomes very difficult for many of us muggles to imagine it being an appropriate punishment for anyone. I won’t go into great detail, but there are very few crimes capable of causing enough pain that, even working from a perspective of vengeance, instead of justice or rehabilitation, it becomes very difficult to mathematically justify Azkaban. 

To clarify, by mathematically justify, I mean, what percent of the pain a criminal inflicts by his misdeed can fairly be unleashed upon the criminal as punishment. Is a beating a proper punishment for beating someone? What about two beatings? Or three? At what point does the severity of the punishment become so much greater than that of the crime that it stops being sensible? If you slapped me, would I, absent any concerns about self defense or ensuring my future safety, be justified in immediately shooting you? Or boiling you? Or beating you to death? The murders who are so successful that we stop calling them murders and start calling them statesmen might have a shot at a mathematically (if not necessarily ethically) justifiable cell in Azkaban. For everyone else, it’s pretty difficult. And in both versions of the story, wizarding justice is NOT perfect. Innocent people go to Azkaban, and are exposed to this as well. Azkaban is pretty terrible, and most of the wizarding world just sort of... accepts it.

Anyway, I probably have more to say, but I really need to wrap this up. This probably wasn’t very coherent, so sorry about that. 

[jcmorgenstern]

@superohclair oh god okay please know these are all just incoherent ramblings so like, idk, please feel free to add on or ignore me if im just wildly off base but this is a bad summary of what ive been thinking about and also my first titans/batman meta?? (also, hi!)

okay so for the disclaimer round: I am not an actual cultural studies major, nor do I have an extensive background in looking at the police/military industrial complex in media. also my comics knowledge is pretty shaky and im a big noob(I recently got into titans, and before that was pretty ignorant of the dceu besides batman) so I’ll kind of focus in on the show and stuff im more familiar with and apologize in advance?. basically im just a semi-educated idiot with Opinions, anyone with more knowledge/expertise please jump in! this is literally just the bullshit I spat out incoherently off the top of my head. did i mention im a comics noob? because im a comics noob.

so on a general level, I think we can all agree that batman as a cultural force is somewhat on the conservative side, if not simply due to its age and commercial positioning in American culture. there are a lot of challenges and nuances to that and it’s definitely expanding and changing as DC tries to position itself in the way that will...make the most money, but all you have to do is take a gander through the different iterations of the stories in the comics and it’ll smack you in the fucking face. like compare the first iteration of Jason keeping kids out of drugs to the titans version and you’ve got to at least chuckle. at the end of the day, this is a story about a (white male) billionaire who fights crime.

to be fair, I’d argue the romanticization of the police isn’t as aggressive as it could be—they are most often presented as corrupt and incompetent. However, considering the main cop characters depicted like Jim Gordon, the guys in Gotham (it’s been a while since I saw it, sorry) are often the romanticized “good few” (and often or almost always white cis/het men), that’s on pretty shaky ground. I don’t have the background in the comics strong enough to make specific arguments, so I’ll cede the point to someone who does and disagrees, but having recently watched a show that deals excellently with police incompetence, racism, and brutality (7 Seconds on Netflix), I feel at the very least something is deeply missing. like, analysis of race wrt police brutality in any aspect at all whatsoever.

I think it can be compellingly read that batman does heavily play into the military/police industrial complex due to its takes on violence—just play the Arkham games for more than an hour and you’ll know what I mean. to be a little less vague, even though batman as a franchise valorizes “psychiatric treatment” and “nonviolence,” the entire game seems pretty aware it characterizes treatment as a madhouse and nonviolence as breaking someone’s back or neck magically without killing them because you’re a “good guy.” while it is definitely subversive that the franchise even considers these elements at all, they don’t always do a fantastic job living up to them.

and then when you consider the fetishization of tools of violence both in canon and in the fandom, it gets worse. same with prisons—if anything it dehumanizes people in prisons even more than like, cop shows in general, which is pretty impressive(ly bad). like there’s just no nuance afforded and arkham is generally glamorized. the fact that one of the inmates is a crocodile assassin, I will admit, does not help. im not really sure how to mitigate that when, again, one of the inmates is a crocodile assassin, but I think my point still stands. fuck you, killer croc. (im just kidding unfuck him or whatever)

not to take this on a Jason Todd tangent but I was thinking about it this afternoon and again when thinking about that cop scene again and in many ways he does serve as a challenge to both batman’s ideology as well as the ideology of the franchise in general. his depiction is always a bit of a sticking point and it’s always fascinating to me to see how any given adaptation handles it. like Jason’s “”street”” origin has become inseparable from his characterization as an angry, brash, violent kid, and that in itself reflects a whole host of cultural stereotypes that I might argue occasionally/often dip into racialized tropes (like just imagine if he wasn’t white, ok). red hood (a play on robin hood and the outlaws, as I just realized...today) is in my exposure/experience mostly depicted as a villain, but he challenges batman’s no-kill philosophy both on an ethical and practical level. every time the joker escapes he kills a whole score more of innocent people, let alone the other rogues—is it truly ethical to let him live or avoid killing him for the cost of one life and let others die?

moreover, batman’s ““blind”” faith in the justice system (prisons, publicly-funded asylum prisons, courts) is conveniently elided—the story usually ends when he drops bad guy of the day off at arkham or ties up the bad guys and lets the police come etc etc. part of this is obviously bc car chases are more cinematic than dry court procedurals, but there is an alternate universe where bruce wayne never becomes batman and instead advocates for the arkham warden to be replaced with someone competent and the system overhauled, or in programs encouraging a more diverse and educated police force, or even into social welfare programs. (I am vaguely aware this is sometimes/often part of canon, but I don’t think it’s fair to say it’s the main focus. and again, I get it’s not nearly as cinematic).

overall, I think the most frustrating thing about the batman franchise or at least what I’ve seen or read of it is that while it does attempt to deal with corruption and injustice at all levels of the criminal justice system/government, it does so either by treating it as “just how life is” or having Dick or Jim Gordon or whoever the fuckjust wipe it out by “eliminating the dirty cops,” completely ignoring the non-fantasy ways these problems are dealt with in real life. it just isn’t realistic. instead of putting restrictions on police violence or educating cops on how to use their weapons or putting work into eradicating the culture of racism and prejudice or god basically anything it’s just all cinematized into the “good few” triumphing over the bad...somehow. its always unsatisfying and ultimately feels like lip service to me, personally.

this also dovetails with the very frustrating way mental health/”insanity” or “madness” is dealt with in canon, very typical of mainstream fiction. like for example:“madness is like gravity, all it takes is a little push.” yikes, if by ‘push’ you mean significant life stressors, genetic load, and environemntal influences,  then sure. challenge any dudebro joker fanboy to explain exactly what combination of DSM disorders the joker has to explain his “””insanity””” and see what happens. (these are, in fact, my plans for this Friday evening. im a hit at parties).

anyway I do really want to wax poetic about that cop scene in 1x06 so im gonna do just that! honestly when I first saw that I immediately sat up like I’d sat on a fucking tack, my cultural studies senses were tingling. the whole “fuck batman” ethos of the show had already been interesting to me, esp in s1, when bruce was basically standing in for the baby boomers and dick being our millennial/GenX hero. I do think dick was explicitly intended to appeal to a millennial audience and embody the millennial ethos. By that logic, the tension between dick and Jason immediately struck me as allegorical (Jason constantly commenting on dick being old, outdated, using slang dick doesn’t understand and generally being full of youthful obnoxious fistbumping energy).

Even if subconsciously on the part of the writers, jason’s over-aggressive energy can be read as a commentary on genZ—seen by mainstream millennial/GenX audiences as taking things too far. Like, the cops in 1x06 could have been Nick Zucco’s hired men or idk pretty much anyone, yet they explicitly chose cops and even had Jason explain why he deliberately went after them for being cops so dick (cop) could judge him for it. his rationale? he was beaten up by cops on the street, so he’s returning the favor. he doesn’t have the focused “righteous” rage of batman or dick/nightwing towards valid targets, he just has rage at the world and specifically the system—framed here as unacceptable or fanatical. as if like, dressing up like a bat and punching people at night is, um, totally normal and uncontroversial.

on a slightly wider scope, the show seems to internally struggle with its own progressive ethos—on the one hand, they hire the wildly talented chellah man, but on the other hand they will likely kill him off soon. or they cast anna diop, drawing wrath from the loudly racist underbelly of fandom, but sideline her. perhaps it’s a genuine struggle, perhaps they simply don’t want to alienate the bigots in the fanbase, but the issue of cops stuck out to me when I was watching as an social issue where they explicitly came down on one side over the other. jason’s characterization is, I admit and appreciate, still nuanced, but I’d argue that’s literally just bc he’s a white guy and a fan favorite. cast an actor of color as Jason and see how fast fandom and the writer’s room turns on him.

anyway i don’t really have the place to speak about what an explicitly nonwhite!cop!dick grayson would look like, but I do think it would be a fascinating and exciting place to start in exploring and correcting the kind of vague and nebulous complaints i raise above. (edit: i should have made more clear, i mean in the show, which hasn’t dealt with dick’s heritage afaik). also, there’s something to be said about the cop vs detective thing but I don’t really have the brain juice or expertise to say it? anyway if you got this far i hope it was at least interesting and again pls jump in id love to hear other people’s takes!!

tldr i took two (2) cultural studies classes and have Opinions

[hisvanity]

ABOLISH CAPITALISM uh i mean, here is a list of the things that can be done to solve the training crisis. sorry for the wait!

(an add-on to this post)

first of all, nations around the world should change the minimum legal full-time training age from 10 to 18. a large part of the problem is the fact that kids are being told to leave home and choose their careers in the middle of their education--in the united states this would be equivalent to leaving school in the third grade and then never getting a decent education further. technically according to child labor laws they shouldn’t even be working at that age anyway. children who need to train to supplement their family’s financial needs should be given welfare instead. no ten-year-old should have to work 4-8 hours a day at training to provide for their family because what is this, industrial england?

second, corporations and governments need to stop marketing to kids that full-time training is their best shot at fame or even at living a comfortable life. not only is this not entirely true, it’s also unethical. this requires a global cultural shift away from the push toward full-time training--which means that, fundamentally, the pokémon world will have to change from how we understand it just so trainers can lead the better lives they were promised.

third, there needs to be more options and support for people who are part-time trainers. the vast majority of funding goes to activity meant for full-time trainers because those are the matches that earn the most profit. this necessitates a conscious choice on the part of corporations sponsoring tourneys to use some of their money to provide more for the community. with this change, part-timers won’t feel pressured to go full-time to get some of the money they need out of something that honestly in the majority of cases should only be a part-time job.

fourth, serious training among young kids should be treated as a school sport and not a job--and low-income communities especially need support because let’s face it, education in low-income communities is generally underfunded by the government, even school training teams. once again this requires a massive cultural shift: people need to stop seeing school tourneys as “the little leagues” or as any less awesome as professional battling by same-age children (because spoiler alert, it isn’t really).

fifth, there also needs to be more local support for battling. part of why most trainers can’t train and go to school at the same time is because they have to travel constantly. leagues could solve this problem by expanding their numbers so that each town can have a full set of eight gyms, or 1-2 places where you can go to challenge them all. there also needs to be more marketing for some of the lesser-known local tournaments, which can be just as kickass as some of the international ones--especially tournaments hosted by high schools and colleges that are open to the public. 

sixth, leagues NEED to take action--and first, they must be willing to admit their role in propping up the training conspiracy. without the leagues, the head honchos of pokémon battling adding their voices to the conversation, this conversation won’t gain ground at all. doing so will require every league to recognize their own complicity, witting or unwitting, in the training system. without a single exception worldwide, all leagues encouraged--blindly or otherwise--ten year old children entering training as a profession and facing up to that legacy is going to take some guts that many leagues just don’t have. in some cases, they may need to make a show of strength: unjust governments sometimes do not respond unless force is threatened, and some of them really need a reminder that every member of a league working together can take down a government because that’s how leagues were designed.

seventh, in unovamerica and the other countries that have adopted its system, benefits given to trainers should be expanded to the general populace. the fact that free healthcare (and/or cheap/free quality government housing) are often tied exclusively to training has created a trainer-industrial complex that funnels people into training to line the pockets of poké mart, inc. and any other corporation that draws a significant part of its profits from training-related goods and/or services. in order to truly improve the lives of all citizens, this complex MUST be destroyed. in order to do so, radical political change needs to take place.

lastly, piggybacking off the sixth point, governments must take seemingly unrelated political actions to improve the lives of their citizens so that they aren’t incentivized to take on a dead-end job because it’s slightly different from all the other dead-end jobs that are their only options. striking down the billionaire class will free up all that hoarded wealth for helping people stay afloat. shifting money from the military to education will provide support for people who were misled by the propaganda to quit school and train, and who would otherwise not be able to get those years of their lives back. in unovamerica and other countries where a prison sentence means a lifelong stigma during job hunting, people need to create reform so that this is not the case and so that the cycle of poverty has one less way to be perpetuated. 

and like i was kinda joking when i said “ABOLISH CAPITALISM” but let’s be real, abolishing or reforming capitalism would help all of these processes immensely.

hope you like!

[velvet-tread]

so revisiting octavia blake (especially after what we’ve seen of her in s5e06 tonight)... what’s your understanding of octavia blake, in relation to bloodreina and also as one of the most disliked characters in the fandom?

 TW – there follows some discussion of abuse so if that is one of your sensitivities, I wish you well and recommend caution with what follows. Are you asking if I still stan Octavia now she’s Blodreina? Because the answer to that is complicated but basically yes. For clarity: stanning, to me, doesn’t involve nailing my colours to the mast and then contorting myself into ever more unlikely shapes to justify every single thing my fave has ever done. It’s possible to love and emphathise with a character, while also acknowledging the terrible things they’ve done or are. Maybe I don’t need to tell you this, but maybe others need to hear it: don’t let ANYONE shame you for loving Octavia. And by that I mean if someone tries, just tune them tf out. They don’t get it, they never will. They aren’t worth your time and energy. Let that truth set you free. So yeah, I still love Octavia, with all her flaws and her sharp edges. I can’t love Blodreina, but while Blodreina is certainly Octavia, Octavia is not Blodreina. Blodreina is the very worst of Octavia. Spoiled, demanding, hard, judgemental, imperious, unyielding, cold, unempathetic and very, very violent. She is the culmination of the story of a non-person, disempowered and locked up under the floor, coming into being and being handed a sword. And power. So much power. She is a product of necessity. She is an amalgamation of Jaha’s lessons, Indra and Kane’s guidance, Kara’s support and Gaia’s teachings. She has a god complex which, imo, can only go the way of Mount Weather. By which I mean it will probably consume everything in its path before blowing to smithereens and taking at least one of our faves down with it. But while Blodreina is certainly real, let’s not get carried away with OCTAVIA IS REVEALED AS FOR THE MONSTER SHE’S BEEN ALL ALONG. Deep breaths everyone, and maybe a sip of water. Blodreina is a persona who enables Octavia to carry out the most monstrous of deeds (hi Jaha!) and live with it. Has Octavia drunk the Blodreina Koolaid? Most certainly. But Octavia embracing her worst is not the same has Octavia being the worst. Also see: Bellamy season 1 and season 3a. Would you look at that A PARALLEL WE LOVE PARALLELS. Blodreina serves a purpose for Octavia-of-the-butterflies too. Because this show is this show and we are never more than a few monologues away from “love is weakness”, Blodreina is also a protective casing that locks away Octavia’s grief, her pain and her misery, her loneliness and self-loathing, along with her vulnerability and empathy. It seems super obvious to me that Octavia’s personal journey this season, apart from trying and presumably failing to keep Wonkru intact, will be about disassociating herself from Blodreina. And that, probably, won’t come without falling spectacularly from grace and facing her pain, and reckoning with the things she’s done. Also see: Bellamy seasons 1-4. Huh. What happens when the exoskeleton crumbles? What’s underneath? What will Octavia-who-washed-Lincoln’s-wounds, come to think about Blodreina and the things she’s done in the name of her people? How will she confront the agony of being Octavia Blake, naked, piteous and vulnerable, the girl under the floor who was denied existence?

I want these things for Octavia. I want the narrative to subject her to the most abject moral scrutiny because that is what you should want for the characters you love. It’s what makes them interesting. It’s what makes them matter. ALSO SEE BELLAMY FOREVER. Now I’ve been in this fandom long enough not to expect many others to see it this way. We are balls deep in moral monochrome here in the Bellarke fandom, and while that gives me pause for a sip of tea and a short prayer to the patron saints of patience, it’s not a situation that anyone can change, least of all me. And why would I? People are free to engage with the show how they want, as long as they stay in their lane.

And look, I get why some people can’t see past some of her sins. I, too, have characters that I dislike with varying degrees of rationality. But objectively, Octavia’s level of moral turpitude is at about the same level as any of the main characters. That’s just a fact. People’s personal preferences, while as valid as any other preference, are just that: subjective opinions. Where I start to sip my tea and raise my eyes to the heavens is when people start presenting their subjective opinions as objective FUCK YOU AND YOUR INBOX truth and thanks but no. It seems to be fanon lore now that Octavia is unempathetic and…it just makes no sense. This is the girl who was filled with wonder at Earth, who refused to let Jasper die even when everyone in camp wanted him to. She saw the humanity in Lincoln when Bellamy, Clarke and Raven could not. She saw the humanity in humanity when all anyone wanted to do was kill each other until they burned in Praimfaya. Wonkru exists because Octavia inspired them with her faith in them. The only way it begins to make sense is when you consider Octavia’s actions through the prism of Bellamy’s experience – which 8/10 is how the BC fandom at least views the show. (Also valid btw. I also project onto my faves! Bellamy among them! But see above for subjective opinion vs objective fact.) With Bellamy, the lack of empathy is real. Octavia, or at least the Octavia of seasons 1-4 high key struggled to see Bellamy as a fully realised person with desires and feelings of his own. But, while this sucks for Bellamy, from Octavia’s perspective it is entirely understandable. No matter how young Bellamy seems to us, to Octavia he is her parent figure. How many of the people on here haven’t put their parents through hell from time to time? I shouldn’t have to point out the bleeding obvious here, which is that teenagers who care deeply about animal welfare, trans rights, LGBTQA+ rights, poverty and climate change can also go through phases of being absolutely fucking awful to their parents. Often, that’s because in our world, teens are subjected to an unholy amount of pressure with which they struggle to cope, and the overspill of that hurt lands on the people responsible for them. It doesn’t make them bad people. And, yes, that can, occasionally, tip over into emotional and, more rarely, physical abuse but we don’t usually call it that. We call that “teenagers being fucking awful” and I am 100% sure that this is the context the writers room is working from. Do I think it’s acceptable, or justified? Hell no. But it’s important to take these narrative threads in the context of the real-world understanding of the people who develop them. This show isn’t created in a vacuum. Now work the scenario I outlined above into a post-apocalyptic landscape with 2x traumatised victims of systemic injustice, one of whom was locked up by the other because of that injustice. Yeah. What is so interesting to me is that the blind spot Octavia has wrt Bellamy – the blind spot that denied him access to the empathy she showed everyone else - has come into play again now she’s Blodreina, but in a different way. After 6 years of having everyone kowtow to her, and after vowing not to love, suddenly Octavia is making concession after concession for her brother at huge personal risk to herself.  It might not seem like that to us, or to Bellamy (and legit! I get why, from Bellamy’s POV), but to Octavia it must seem like she’s trying SO HARD to give him what he wants within the framework of what she thinks is achievable. Consider love is weakness. Consider that she throws herself into his arms on sight, in full view of all of her people. Consider being the arbiter of life and death for 6 years. Now consider Bellamy asking her to trust him. She does and is rewarded with a sonic blast. Bellamy delivers her an ultimatum about Echo, and she concedes. She fucking concedes! When has she ever willingly conceded on anything and ESPECIALLY NOW SHE HOLDS THE POWER OF AN EMPEROR? It’s fairly obvious from the Blake siblings sparring session that Bellamy was the symbolic winner. He got through to her. Octavia NEVER forgives. But she offers Echo – the woman whose sins Octavia will never forget - a way out. When Echo and Bellamy refuse, does she banish Echo? She could do. She’s Blodreina. She’s used to doing whatever the fuck she wants. But, no. She accepts the alternative, and even helps Echo on her way. Yes, it’s brutal and Blodreina-y and serves a double purpose but still, she helps her. She’s not doing that for Echo.  She’s doing it for Bellamy. No, she’s not doing it with a winning smile and a cuddle, but that’s not Blodreina’s style. She tries to thank him for saving them, in the only way she knows how. She reaches out, and he lashes out with cold anger. And perhaps it’s deserved. No, it’s definitely deserved, but GODDAMMIT that was a “you’re dead to me” level of cruelty. Can I just roll back a second and talk about how co-dependent the Blake sibs are? Cool. A friend (I can’t remember who, sorry) once said that Bellamy and Octavia carried their cage back down to Earth with them. And for seasons 1-4 that is absolutely what happened. They are spectacularly co-dependent. Bellamy depends on her to give him purpose, and a direction and reason to live. Octavia depends on him to absorb the overspill of her hurt, to push against, to take the blame for all of the ills in her life. It sucks for them both, and they’re TRAPPED, so terribly trapped, and neither is the other’s jailer but neither can walk away either. And just, what strikes me about the interactions we saw in the sneak peek for 507 is that maybe, FINALLY, Bellamy has broken free of their co-dependent relationship.  He may not even realise it yet, but he has completely re-centred his world around Spacekru now. And I think, that if push comes to shove, he will prioritise Spacekru above Octavia, even if it hurts them both.  It doesn’t mean he loves Octavia any less, but after 6 years of love and support and peace and quiet, Bellamy has broken out of the cage. Bellamy is free. Excuse me while I cry tears of joy. But Octavia isn’t free. Octavia hasn’t had 6 years of peace and support and love. Octavia’s life has been marked by trauma from the moment of her birth, and the trauma hasn’t let up for a single goddamned second it just keeps coming and coming and coming until all she has is her walls and an alter-ego and the hope that she can keep Wonkru together and her brother by her side. Believe me when I say that Octavia is still very much trapped inside the cage which Bellamy has now vacated. IT IS ALL VERY HEARTBREAKING OKAY. IT HURTS. So yes, I still love Octavia and I am ready to see her again when Blodreina falls.

[meggannn]

cut for negativity about AC Odyssey cause I just need to bitch

the short version: I’m mad. and I can’t tell if it’s just my fault for having unrealistic expectations of Ubisoft.

the long version:

I fully expected a sequel to Bayek’s and Aya’s story and am massively, massively disappointed they aren’t treating them with more content like Ezio. this was my fault, I guess, because they never promised me anything and I did get my hopes up for another trilogy or at least one sequel with Bayek. crafting good protagonists then doing FUCKING NOTHING with them for the rest of the series is Ubisoft’s MO, but the fact that they have these two great characters that establish the entire Assassin Brotherhood and you just leave them right when their lives really become interesting… like, be honest with me. Aya/Amunet, an Egyptian woman, is the person who founded the Roman Brotherhood. Bayek, a medjay, founded the Egyptian brotherhood which eventually led (we assume) to an eventual migration to Masyaf Castle where the brotherhood became so recognized that it became a symbol around the world. given Aya’s statue in Monteriggioni, we can assume she’s remembered throughout their history as one of the founding members of the entire brotherhood. this is a non-white woman who you have established is integral to the founding of the faction around which the entire series is based, and then you drop her and her partner like hot potatoes right when things get interesting in their history. would it not, say, make sense? to follow up Origins up with a game set in perhaps Ancient Rome or Syria? featuring the brown woman or brown man who established the Assassins that spread across the world? maybe???? not to be overdramatic but for me this is like, emotionally on par with Bioware announcing Dragon Age 4 only to say we’re not going to Tevinter or Nevarra, and that none of the old DA2 or DAI characters are coming back, but instead DA4 is bringing us back to Ferelden and we’ll be running around the Hinterlands for another fifty hours. If you set up a game with the logical conclusion to follow your old protagonists’ journey, then like yeah… I will feel… mad… when you don’t… follow through with them… in the next game… and just go back… to more… fucking… European… locations… I just cannot get over the disappoint I’m feeling and it’s overwhelming any excitement I might have initially felt for a character like Kassandra.

I still loathe Ubisoft’s take on the RPG genre, particularly their combat system. it’s mostly my ongoing rivalry with the hitscan system. I don’t find it fun, but also in general it’s just not what I associate with AC games -- with AC, I know exactly what I’m getting. or lmao like, I used to. I don’t know what this combat is anymore. I liked knowing exactly what I’m getting. I liked not having to waste time on combat and inventory bullshit and my choices mattering -- I’d play a better RPG if I wanted that. I play AC to sneak around places and focus on the story and assassins I’m hunting. I mean the quest system in Origins was… not great, but definitely a step in an interesting direction, I’m not inherently opposed to all RPG elements here. I feel like they could improve it with more tweaking, but what I did not want was them to “tweak” it in the style of The Witcher or Dragon Age where choice determined how the actual story pans out. I’m not convinced Ubi can do it. I sound like a snobby exclusionist, I know. I just am finding it really hard to see Assassin’s Creed in the game we were shown. when I plan AC game, I want (and expect) an emphasis on stealth. everything I’ve seen is…… not that. I know, assassins didn't come until later, but you can’t tell me sneaking around was invented when Altair first did it. Origins tried to allow you choice in how could approach a mission, but everything from the wide, environment to the millions of fucking weapons they make you pick up  expected you to fight a fair amount of the time. it’s not, to be fair, unrealistic, considering Bayek’s background as a medjay. I suspect the same reasoning will be made for Kassandra and Alexios. so much effort was put into revamping their combat system with an expectation people would use it more, and now in Odyssey… no… hidden blades…? call it a new IP set in Ancient Greece, I’d be way more receptive, but I don’t like that the game mechanics and simplicity that I grew attached to, the ones that made up the AC brand, is now -- apparently -- gone for good. I liked that shit. It was easy! I knew what I was getting into! I’m not thrilled how instead of dialing back from Origins, they’re just charging ahead deeper in the same direction re: combat complexity. I find it overwhelming and I’m not gonna use half the shit you give me. it took me like fifty hours to learn what signs were in The Witcher 3, even later for potions, and another twenty to actually start using them, cause it was just too much.

now i’m ready to complain about the main characters. sorry. yeah, it does bother me that there’s no set character. one staple of AC for me is that even if it’s fantasy, it’s historical fantasy; you’re given a predetermined character and watch them grow into an assassin and make their mark on history. it’s beyond strange to now see that that role is… flexible. Someone on reddit phrased my unease a very good way: there’s one scene in, I believe it’s AC Brotherhood, where Desmond is jerked out of the Animus after he witnesses the attack on Monteriggioni. Desmond immediately wants to go back, he’s yelling for them to let him back in the Animus so he can go back and save those people caught in the attack. Lucy takes him and gently says, “Desmond, those people are dead. They’ve been dead for centuries.” part of the series is how you can’t change the past with the Animus: you’re only viewing it. it already happened centuries, millennia ago, all of it is set in stone. all you can do, all you should do, is learn from what they did and work to make what went wrong, right. this new choice system with the ability to ‘change’ the past, via Layla’s new Animus system is… just bizarre. I don’t know. what’s the plot excuse for it? is there really going to be narrative payoff or explanation, or is it just so Ubisoft can rebrand the franchise an RPG?

it’s another thing that the dialogue choices themselves I’m seeing aren’t particularly… I’m searching for a word here, but “natural”? the conversations read like all they did was write a scene conversation between two characters, then spit up the dialogue and make half of it optional instead. but the thing is it’s all stuff you need to know anyway, so making it ‘optional’ doesn’t even matter like it would in a BW game where the optional dialogue really is optional. in the Odyssey clips I’ve seen it just feels stilted and weird.

anyway call me a whiner, I fully own it, but another big thing is that I’m thoroughly sick of this strange trend of making it choosable between a man/woman protag as a side-step around commitment to diversity. most of the time it strikes me as… lazy is not the right word, because technically they’re doing more work. but it's becoming more apparent to me that devs are seeing it as a noncommitment to having a female lead. play as Sara or Scott Ryder, play as Emily or Corvo, play as Alexios or Kassandra. (Sara/Scott less so, cause BW is an RPG company where you’re MEANT to build on a character, and choosing a gender is a part of that, but you’ll see what I mean in a sec.) but anyway, yay, diversity. except you can play all three of those games without once playing a woman like you’re forced to play a man in other games -- my irritation is because it still allows people to avoid female protagonists entirely. like. my hope is to make a woman protagonist unavoidable? don’t make her optional. make her mandatory. give me more undeniable canon female leads. give me Aloys and Ellies and Laras and Chells and Faiths. if you want to know why I feel so strongly about this, it’s because: a. so long as there is a choice, it is inevitable that the male lead -- in this case Alexios -- will be promoted more and featured in marketing. how do i know, it’s because we’re already seeing it. they did the same thing with Scott Ryder. looking at the trailer or box cover for Odyssey and you’d have no idea you could play as a woman. (it’s a little too early to say the same for Cyberpunk 2077 marketing, but I’m getting the same vibe there.) it lets devs, say, feature male leads in the trailer, but female options only in the gameplay. guess which one gets promoted on the big screen in E3 presentations and which one is only viewed by people who actually seek out the game? b. I am already seeing people claim that Alexios is canon and Kassandra is “just the female option.” Ubisoft is not going to comment -- and therefore commit -- either way. usually there’s a half-hearted “it’s more realistic” explanation for why people see the guy as canon, but more often than not it’s just because he exists, and therefore, is assumed the “real lead.” I'd like to see games with a canon woman leading instead of an option where she might not exist at all. and honestly if there were more female leads I probably wouldn’t feel so bothered by this, but seeing men saying “I plan on playing Alexios and ignoring Kassandra the whole time” makes me want devs to give us more games where they’re forced to play a woman. sue me c. the thing is I know Ubisoft can get this ‘balance’ of man and women leads right, because they have already, once. sort of. Evie and Jacob was a great idea, because that story was one they shared, and one in which you had to play as both and had to understand both. refusing to play as one or the other was not an option, because they were a package deal. people who bitched and complained about Evie were forced to play as her anyway. their relationship and mutual involvement was crucial to the story because she, a woman, was crucial to the story.

I’m not even one to complain about this, I mean I even took all of the Andromeda animations in stride, but the Odyssey animation doesn’t look… great. poses, faces, mouth movements, are tellingly awkward. this time last year when they promoted Origins, I feel like it was in a better position, and Origins and Odyssey are both releasing/released in the fall? I dunno. I wouldn’t even be bothered by it because I’m not bothered by it with BW really, except it’s noticeable when it’s a step down from what I’m used to in the crisp, cleaner AC cutscenes I’m used to that aren’t just talking heads. I can’t help but feel it’s another downside of making dialogue optional instead of making scenes crafted every time: some things, like faces and idle dialogue animations, will be entirely automated,

BIG MAP! OUR BIGGEST MAP EVER!!!!!!!! EVEN BIGGER THAN ORIGINS, THE ONE WHERE HALF THE REGIONS HAD NOTHING BUT SAND!!! please stop. I’m so tired.

[queeranarchism]

8 Steps Toward Building Indispensability (Instead of Disposability) Culture

(Reposting this article by Kai Cheng Thom because Tumblr ate it. Sorry long post, page break hates me)

give an mc without integrity a mic

and s/he will rhyme the death of the people

—d’bi young anitafrika

When I first came into activist culture, I was a runaway queer kid searching for a home: a terrified, angry, suspicious, cynical-yet-naïve teenager whose greatest secret desire was for a family that would last forever and love me no matter what.

Yet I also knew that such a family could never exist – at least not for me.

You see, I had another secret: Underneath all of my radical queer social justice punk bravado, I knew that I was trash. I was dirty and unlovable. I had done bad things to survive, and I had hurt people. Sometimes I didn’t know why.

So when I found activist culture, with its powerful ideas about privilege and oppression and its simmering, explosive rage, I was intoxicated. I thought that I could purge my self-hatred with that fiery rhetoric and create the family I wanted so much with the bond that comes from shared trauma.

Social justice was a set of rules that could finally put the world into an order that made sense to me. If I could only use all the right language, do enough direct action, be critical enough of the systems around me, then I could finally be a good person.

All around me, it felt like my activist community was doing the same thing – throwing ourselves into “the revolution,” exhausting ourselves and burning out, watching each other for oppressive thoughts and behavior and calling each other on it vociferously.

Occasionally – rarely – folks were driven out of community for being “fucked up.” More often, though, attempts to hold people accountable through call-outs and exclusion just exploded into huge online flame wars and IRL drama that left deep rifts in community for years. Only the most vulnerable – folks without large friend groups and social stability – were excluded permanently.

Like my blood family, my activist family was re-enacting the trauma that we had experienced at the hands of an oppressive society.

Just as my father once held open the door to our house and demanded that I leave because he didn’t know how to reconcile his love for me with my gender identity, we denounced each other and burned bridges because we didn’t know how reconcile our social ideals with the fact that our loved ones don’t always live up to them.

I believe that sometimes we did this hypocritically – that we created the so-called call-out culture (a culture of toxic confrontation and shaming people for oppressive behavior that is more about the performance of righteousness than the actual pursuit of justice) in part so that we could focus on the failings of others and avoid examining the complicity with oppression, the capacity to abuse, that exists within us all.

And I believe we did it in part because sometimes it’s impossible to imagine any other way: We live in a disposability culture – a society based on consumption, fear, and destruction – where we’re taught that the only way to respond when people hurt us is to hurt them back or get rid of them.

This article comes out of that queer kid’s longing for forever-family, and from countless conversations with other members of social justice communities longing for the same. It comes out of my own fuck-ups having been generously forgiven by others, and from my effort to forgive those who have harmed me.

It comes from a desire I feel all around me for an alternative to the politics of disposability, for a politics of indispensability instead.

“Indispensability politics” isn’t a term I’ve coined personally. It has existed various communities for some time, and I learned it orally, though I cannot find a written source. But the following principles are ideas – suggestions for a foundation on which indispensability culture in leftist activism might be built. They are a work permanently in progress.

They’re not meant to be a new set of rules for activism. Nor are they a step-by-step guide for holding accountability processes or a complete answer to the questions that I’m raising around.

Still, I hope that they are helpful to you.

1. The Revolution Is a Relationship

sometimes

we want to close our eyes

jack off to pictures of radical disneyland

not watch as we gnaw our own

flesh into meat

—Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha, “so what the fuck does conscious mean anyway”

Something that worries me about social justice communities is that we tend to conceptualize “revolution” as a product, as a place and time that we expend all of our energy and anger to create – often without regard to the toll this takes on individuals and our relationships.

In this way, “The Revolution” occupies a position in activist culture that actually reminds me of the role that Heaven played in the Chinese Christian community I grew up in: It is a fantasy of ideological purity against which our actions are judged, a place that we long to live in, but seems impossible to reach.

In our – often justified – anger and disappointment at the failure of ourselves and our communities to uphold the dream of revolution, we lash out.

We try to cleanse ourselves of the pain of betrayal by cutting off and driving out the betrayers – our abusive families, our conservative friends. We try not to look at the betrayer in the mirror.

What if revolution isn’t a product, some distant promised land, but the relationships that we have right now?

What if revolution is, in addition to – not instead of – direct action and community organizing, the process of rupture and repair that happens when we fuck up and hold each other accountable and forgive?

2. The Oppressor Lives Within

The most important political struggle I will ever have is against the oppressor – the racist, transmisogynist, ableist, abusive person – in myself.

I don’t mean to say this in a self-flagellating, self-blaming way. I’ve experienced oppression, violence, rape, and abuse from others, and this is not my fault.

I mean that I’ve started to believe that I can’t engage in authentic activism, I can’t create positive change without recognizing and naming my own participation in the oppressive systems that I’m trying to undo.

Coming from this position, I’m forced to have compassion for the people around me who I see also participating in oppression, even as I’m also angry at them. With compassion comes understanding, and with understanding comes belief in the possibility of change.

When we become capable of holding that contradiction in our hearts – when we can be angry and compassionate at the same time, at ourselves as well as others – entirely new possibilities for healing and transformation emerge.

3. Accountability Starts in the Heart

Too often, I’ve seen accountability processes in social justice communities devolve into vicious “your word against mine” situations and social power plays in which people accuse each other of harm and abuse.

As witnesses to these situations, we become trapped, caught in the double bind of either having to pick a side or doing nothing. Both options carry the risk of becoming complicit in the harm being done, and the “truth” becomes impossibly blurred.

I often wonder how different things would look if it were more of a cultural norm to understand accountability as a practice that comes from within the individual, instead of a consequence that must be forced onto someone externally.

What if we taught each other to honor the responsibility that comes with holding ourselves accountable, rather than seeing self-accountability as a shameful admission of guilt? What if we could have real conversations with each other about harm, in good faith?

In a culture of indispensability, I cannot ignore someone when they tell me I have harmed them – they are precious to me, and I have to try to understand and respond accordingly.

To become indispensable to one another, we must also be willing to be responsible for and accountable to one another.

4. Perpetrator/Survivor is a False Dichotomy

There is an intense moral dynamic in social justice culture that tends to separate people into binaries of “right” and “wrong.”

To be a perpetrator of oppression or violence is highly stigmatized, while survivorhood may be oddly fetishized in ways that objectify and intensify stories of trauma.

“Perpetrators” are considered evil and unforgivable, while “survivors” are good and pure, yet denied agency to define themselves.

Among the many problems of this dynamic is the fact that it obscures the complex reality that many people are both survivors and perpetrators of violence (though violence, of course, exists within a wide spectrum of behaviors).

Within a culture of disposability – whether it be the criminal justice system of the state or community practices of exiling people – the perpetrator/survivor dichotomy is useful because it appears to make things easier. It helps us make decisions about who to punish and who to pity.

But punishment and pity have very little to do with revolutionary change or relationship-building.

What punishment and pity have in common is that they’re both dehumanizing.

5. Punishment Isn’t Justice

Punishment is the foundation of the legal criminal justice system and of disposability culture. It’s the idea that wrongs can be made right by inflicting further harm against those who are deemed harmful.

Punishment is also, I believe, a traumatized response to being attacked, the intense expression of the “fight” reflex. Activist writer Sarah Schulman discusses this idea in detail in her book, Conflict Is Not Abuse.

It isn’t inherently wrong to want someone who hurt you to feel the same pain – to want retribution, or even revenge. But as Schulman also writes, punishment is rarely, if ever, actually an instrument of justice – it is most often an expression of power over those with less.

How often do we see the vastly wealthy or politically powerful punished for the enormous harms they do to marginalized communities? How often are marginalized individuals put in prison or killed for minor (or non-existent) offences?

As long as our conception of justice is based on the violent use of power, the powerful will remain unaccountable, while the powerless are scapegoated.

But even beyond this, a culture of disposability and punishment breeds fear and dishonesty.

How likely are we to hold ourselves accountable when we’re afraid that we’ll be exiled, imprisoned, or killed if we do? And how can we trust each other when we live in fear of one another?

We have to find another way to bring about justice.

6. Nuance Isn’t an Excuse for Harm

One of the most common responses I see to critiques of call-out culture and disposability is that perpetrators of violence and predators use these critiques to obscure their own wrongdoing and avoid accountability.

Furthermore, we, as communities, use the “complexity” and “nuance” of such critiques as excuses for not intervening when harm is being done.

But indispensability means that everyone – especially those have experienced harm – are precious and require justice. In other words, we cannot allow the fact that something is complicated or scary prevent us from trying to stop it.

Trapped in the perpetrator/survivor dichotomy of understanding harm, it might seem like we have only two options: to ignore harm or to punish perpetrators.

But in fact, there are often other strategies available.

They involve taking anyone’s – everyone’s – expressions of pain seriously enough to ask hard questions and have tough conversations. They involve dedicating time and resources to ensuring that anyone who has been harmed has the support they need to heal.

7. Healing Is Both Rage and Forgiveness

If the revolution is a relationship, then the revolution must include room for both rage and forgiveness: We have to be able to tolerate the inevitability that we will be angry at one another, will commit harm against one another.

When we are harmed, we must be allowed the space to rage. We need to be able to express the depth of our hurt, our hatred of those who hurt us and those who allowed it to happen – especially when those people are the ones we love.

It is up to the community to hold and contain this rage – to hear and validate and give it space, while also preventing it from creating further harm.

The expression of anger and pain is key to the transformation of violence into healing, because it allows us to understand what has happened and motivates us to change.

And it’s up to the community as well to then provide a framework for forgiveness, to help envision a future where forgiveness is possible, and how it might be achieved.

8. Community Is the Answer

There are no activist communities, only the desire for communities, or the convenient fiction of communities. A community is a material web that binds people together, for better and for worse, in interdependence…

If it is easier to kick someone out than to go through a difficult series of conversations with them, it is not a community. Among the societies that had real communities, exile was the most extreme sanction possible, tantamount to killing them. On many levels, losing the community and all the relationships it involved was the same as dying.

Let’s not kid ourselves: We don’t have communities.

—Anonymous, Broken Teapot Zine

The above quote is a revealing glance into the inner dynamics of social justice and activist culture.

It reveals the source of our incapacity to create accountability and the deep emotional and material insecurities that lie beneath it.

Perhaps the reason we tend to recreate disposability culture and trauma responses over and over is because we are all, secretly, that frightened runaway kid, constantly searching for a home, but not really believing we can find one.

Maybe we don’t create communities of true interdependence – of indispensability, of forever-family – because we are terrified of what will happen if we try.

But I believe, have to believe, that true community is possible for me and for all of us. The truth is, we can’t keep going on the way we have been. We need each other, need to find each other, in order to survive.

And I have faith that we can.

[im-the-king-of-the-ocean]

Father and Son

A rambling sort of snippet/sort of story thing that exists because I wanted to explore the relationship between Vraxel and Ralph (Toby’s dad) so just started writing and this is what came out.  Also hints at the narrative of a oneshot I’m working on.

Also I’ve started to collect Nana’s Troll Husband AU snippets here on ao3 (though I changed the title and may change it again)

Despite it taking hours of in-depth, detailed conversations about considerations and concerns, numerous potions (and one very complex spell), and nine months of perpetual worry about his wife’s health, Vraxel had never once regretted the decision to have a son.  He did, however, regret that the resulting child, Ralph, as his own flesh and blood, had to be half-troll and therefore susceptible to the weakness of all trolls, daylight.

No, Ralph wouldn’t turn to stone under the sun’s brutal rays as Vraxel would, but its glare did agitate the young boy’s skin and exposure could leave him feeling queasy for hours.  After a few years of struggle to get the local elementary school to recognize Ralph’s “skin condition” and their persistent refusal to do so, Vraxel and Margaret had finally decided to homeschool Ralph.  At least until they could figure out a permanent solution.  Which meant, after his morning lessons with his father ended, Ralph now spent most of his afternoons wistfully gazing out the window at the sunlit world he could never hope to explore.

And, every day, Vraxel grew more and more worried.  Of course, he was stuck indoors until nightfall as well, but Vraxel could, under the moon’s gaze, then go to Trollmarket and talk to old friends if he so wished.  Ralph had no such opportunity for community, only his parents.  His existence was a well-guarded secret from (most of) Trollkind and experience proved integrating him with humans was, for now, impossible.  So, Ralph remained without playmates or peers and lonely in a way neither his father nor his mother could truly hope to solve.

That day, under Vraxel’s concerned watch, Ralph left his place safely behind the window’s curtain to go over to the shelf of textbooks his parents had gathered for his education.  He pulled out a big book of maps of the United States and began to flip through it.

“Hey dad, what was that human city we stayed in after you and mom took me to see the Eternally Glowing Stones a couple months ago?”  Ralph looked up at his father.

Vraxel had to think.  His mind ran through a mental map of places in the troll world and their counterpart locations in the human world.  The Glow Stones, a formation of ancient rock coated in a bioluminescent fungi (famous for their many healing properties), were found deep in a cavern off what the humans knew as Mammoth Cave, a massive cavern system in the midwestern state of Kentucky.  He and Margaret had taken Ralph to see the stones on what Margaret called a “educational field trip” at the beginning of that past summer.  Afterwards, they’d travelled to the largest nearby human city so Ralph could get a taste of human culture too.  It took Vraxel a minute to remember the name of that city.

“Louisville, I believe,” he finally said.

“Can we…can we go back there?”  Ralph flipped through his atlas until he found a map of Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio and located Louisville on it.  He pointedly made an effort not to look at his father, even as he brought the book over to him.

Vraxel frowned.  “Why do you want to go there?”  He personally didn’t remember Louisville being that memorable, but he wasn’t very fond of human cities in general (with the one exception of Arcadia).

“I…” Ralph bit his lip, and then actually glanced at Vraxel.  “…um I may have sort of snuck out one night while you and mom slept in the hotel and met someone.  A girl.  A ghost girl.  But she’s not really a ghost.  She just hunts them.  Until we went to the movies.  And I kinda got her in lots of trouble.  So she didn’t really get to catch any ghosts.  But I’ve been reading this book from Uncle Blinky’s library on ghosts.  And I think some of the stuff can help her.  Catch ghosts, I mean.  And I thought I could give her some notes I made out of it.  To make up for the getting her in trouble thing.  Cause she said she wanted to be my friend.  But I got her in trouble.”  He paused.  “I’m sorry about sneaking out?”

Vraxel absorbed all this, but kept a passive expression as his brain split off into the two factions of “happy his son had found a friend” and “very, very perturbed that his son had been wandering a strange city on his own” to fight an epic battle.  Eventually, he decided the potential of Ralph having at least one friend was extremely important and agreed that, when Margaret returned home from work, they would talk about returning to Louisville.  

However, for that to happen, Ralph had to sit and listen to a very long lecture on safety and not wandering around on his own in strange cities, and then write a three-page essay on the importance of being careful.  An essay Vraxel then “graded” (Vraxel never bothered with the human letters system, but did check that Ralph’s writing showed clear comprehension of the issue).

After all that, Vraxel and Ralph took all the cushions off the couch, built a fort, and played yet another round of their adventure game where the couch was a fortress, the floor was lava, and Vraxel a dragon Ralph had to catch until Margaret got home.

Margaret gave her permission over dinner (a new type of fish Vraxel was trying out called “salmon” that absolutely no one liked and all three of them agreed to never eat again) for the trip.  Though, she wanted to stay behind this time and have an evening to herself to relax while Vraxel and Ralph went.

So, that night, Vraxel shoved his son in a potato sack and headed for Trollmarket (the gyre was still faster than most all forms of human transportation and, as long as Ralph didn’t move around too much, no one would question what Vraxel was doing with a large sack).

One gyre ride later and they were in Kentucky.  It took a bit of time to reach Louisville after that.  Because Reasons.  Namely racing.

Vraxel stood back up after crouching down and allowing Ralph to climb on his back.  “You secure?”  He asked, even though he felt his son’s hands wrap around the horns on the sides of his head and hold on tightly.

“Yup, dad.”

“Alright, now hold on.”  Vraxel’s attention turned to a pasture of grazing horses.  “And let’s see if they want to race.”  He charged forward.  It only made sense, after all.  Horses had hooves.  He had hooves.  A part of Vraxel wanted to show off for his son.  Plus, wasn’t this the place where humans did a lot of horse racing?  Clearly, the best course of action was racing these particular horses.  Who didn’t want to race.  They lifted their heads from grazing to watch the running troll and then returned to their munching.

So, Vraxel, out of breath, headed off for Louisville.  After a couple minutes of silence but for Vraxel catching his breath, he and Ralph started chatting about any topic that came to mind.

It took them some time to find the cemetery where Ralph met his “Ghost Girl” friend but, when they did, she wasn’t there.  There was no one there but gravestones and the whispering wind.  It was then, among the reminders of death, that Vraxel began to truly wonder about the girl Ralph claimed to have met.  There wasn’t much evidence of the existence of actual ghosts, but Vraxel knew that it was feasible that his son may have actually met one.

“She’s probably at home.”  Ralph looked up at his father after an hour of fruitless waiting.  “I got her in trouble so she probably can’t sneak out anymore.”

Ralph led the way to a nearby apartment building.  There, he climbed a massive oak tree and tapped at a window on the second story for a full five minutes.  After that didn’t work, Vraxel finally climbed the tree himself and peered into the room, which was clearly a child’s bedroom.  But, from what he could see, every surface was coated in dust.  Clearly no one had inhabited the room for a long while.

Vraxel frowned.  “Son, maybe-”

“She wasn’t a ghost!  I know it!”  Ralph’s voice faltered.  “I…she was real.  A kid.  Just like me.  Well, not just like me.  But she was still a kid.  Who hunts ghosts!”  He ended in a defeated whisper.  “She seemed so real.”

“They often do.”  Vraxel sighed, regretting his choice to allow this trip to happen.  Ralph would have been better off with a fond memory than the sad truth.  “Now, come on, let’s head home.  I’ll talk to Uncle Blinky to see if he can come up with anything that’ll help you walk comfortably in sunlight.  If anyone can figure it out, it’s him.”

“Does that mean I get to be in the library?”

“If you’re careful and quiet and no one else is there, yes.”

“YAY!”

And so Ralph quickly forgot all about his disappointment over the girl he’d met, who probably had just been a friendly ghost and not a ghost hunter. 

It was too bad that he was completely unaware that a troublemaking young girl, who’d once slept in the room Ralph and Vraxel had peered into, had been sent to live with her strict grandmother for what would be the longest summer of her life, but would be returning home for the school year the very next day. 

Ralph would, however, get to meet her again many years later.

[dragonfly-system]

Hiiii!!!! one of you're reblogs said "it's not as simple as only having multiple people in our brain, like some of you seem to think it is." so can you explain-post what else what else you're experienzce is like and have beyond? (you said your an education blog!)

I DIDN'T SEE THIS I'M SO SO SORRY!

Assuming you're talking about this post in specific, I should clarify that I didn't really make it, but I do agree with it. A "trigger" is what happens when someone is forced to front. "Fronting" means taking control of the body's actions and mind- like when someone possesses someone else, except this isn't because of religious reasons I promise.

So when people are forced to front, it kind of takes away the moment that the current fronter had. If I'm, the host, fronting and trying to go about my day at college, and someone comes up to me trying to trigger out our co-host, it's entirely possible I'll be so disoriented that he will come and take full control (making me unable to do anything, and stealing my control over myself, even though he didn't mean to do it), or we'll wind up blurring. "Blurring" is like meshing together two people like two wads of gum and having a very hard time trying to pull ourselves apart- they're still individual people, but things get very confusing.

So the problem with triggering out a little, is uh... Well, a little is a child. I want to say littles can vary from the age of 0 to the age of 13 or 14...? Some people have "middles" which range from 14/15-18/19, and then adults after that. Littles are also usually created as a copy of whoever was fronting at the time that the body went through trauma, like a kid stuck in that traumatic time period. Triggering out a little is the same thing as luring out a kid with candy- it's creepy, it's gross, and they don't have the same experiences and ability of consent that an adult does, even if they're in an adult body.

As far as my own experiences, they're not 100% for every system you'll encounter, but I've put some of them below.

For us, we have an entire inner world, which is exactly as complex as it sounds. There's a few different places where various people live, and that part of it is like "multiple people in our brain."

The other part of it that isn't is the dissociation part. If something that I can't believe or don't process properly as real happens, there's a severe disconnect from myself and my body and the world around me. Often this is when someone else fronts, and while I'm still there, I'm not really in control of my body or voice. I struggle with not leaving the front when there's a switch, since whether I want to or not I'm stuck there, which means... I kinda have to deal with whatever trauma is happening, I just am usually not the one reacting to it. (Probably stems back to stuff that's happened to me in the past.)

Another thing that can happen when I'm dissociating is, and there's a really good diagram somewhere, where it's not 100% me or someone else. For example I had a panic attack once where I wanted to get up and do some Not Good Stuff to myself. Person A took control of my legs so I wouldn't get up and do that, Person B started forcing me to take deep breaths and took control of my lungs, and Person C was mentally talking to me and trying to calm me down. In the end it worked, and after that I just fully switched out for that night I think.

[shieldagentscully-blog]

SAS 8: Avengers - Textbook Narcissism

(So this bears a passing resemblance to a thread I have with @imnottheherotype  - as it should because it is based off the same OOC conversation! But it’s not the same storyline, however, I jotted these stories in a series and wanted to include it. Let’s say that RP @shieldagentscully is likely going to have a lot more productive conversation with Tony in RP than this one in which she shoots her mouth off. Sorry, Tony.)

2012 - SHIELD Offices, New York City

Make no mistake, SHIELD paid Scully much better than the FBI ever paid her, she recognized this. But there were days, particularly this one, in which she realized that they certainly did not pay her enough for the job she sometimes had to do.

“Subject is identified as a ‘Chitauri’, a race of alien beings as identified by...Thor Odinsson of Asgard, a planet off of this world.” Scully rolled her eyes at the ridiculousness of that statement, refusing to name his as “Thor, God of Thunder”. The advanced recording system in the lab began taking her dictation as she made her visual observations.

“My analysis will be, obvious, very rudimentary as this is the first time a subject such as this has been observed by human scientific methods.” She cleared her throat, unsure of where to even begin. After all, it was an alien, a real alien. Absolute proof that there was not just one type of creature outside of themselves living in the universe, but several. She didn’t even know where to begin with it, nothing in her entire background had prepared her for anything like this.

“So is this your first alien autopsy?”

The question was followed by a slurp that caused Scully to spin on her heels, startled out of the quiet of the high-tech lab to stare at the intruder. It only took her half-a-glance to identify him as he leaned over one of the other lab tables, a cup of what looked like vanilla ice cream in his hand, blissfully sucking on the end of a bright pink spoon. If the distinctive goatee didn’t give it away, then the glowing blue light in the middle of his chest just under his Ozzy Osbourne t-shirt certainly did. At least she could appreciate his taste in music.

“I was warned you would be around here, Mr. Stark.” She turned to her subject again, heartily wishing he wasn’t. After all, her autopsy was going to be challenging enough, and now he was going to be in the back as her personal her peanut gallery?

“I’m glad to hear my reputation precedes me, Agent Scully….Doctor Scully...Agent Doctor Scully? When you are doing this, are you still an agent or are you officially a doctor?”

“I don’t see how one precludes me from the other as long as I’m licensed to practice.”

“But is it practicing if the subject is dead to begin with?”

“Are you here for a purpose, Mr. Stark, or just come to be annoying and puerile?’

“I see fancy words came with that fancy degree from Stanford, and yes, I do know what ‘puerile’ means. We weren’t complete ingrates at MIT.” He sauntered to the table where the specimen lay. “Can’t imagine they had too many of these at Stanford, though, but you know the FBI may be hiding one or two…”

“If your want to be of assistance, you can sit over there.” She gestured to a stool by a keyboard connected wirelessly to a glass screen on the far side of the lab. Stark merely scooped up a large spoonful of vanilla and chocolate, sucking on it petulantly with large, brown, puppy dog eyes that had utterly no effect on Scully.

“Fine! See if I share my ice cream with you.”

She pointedly ignored him swaggering to where she indicated as she continued her oral examination. “The subject seems to be semi-humanoid in structure, though it’s appearance is perhaps more analogous to reptilian than homo-sapien.”

“Do you think the Chitauri would agree with that?”

She glared across the body at Stark, who pointed at creature with his spoon. “I mean, I suppose that it goes without saying that they likely don’t have what we assume are ‘reptiles’ on whatever rock they live on. They just are what they are, and yet here we are putting labels on them that make no sense outside of a human context.”

“Since I have no other context to use in the study of them, what do you suggest I use?”

“I suppose ‘creepy ass nightmares’ isn’t a properly scientific term?”

“Maybe it is at MIT, but certainly not Stanford.”

That earned a snort and smirk out of Stark. “Touché, Agent Doctor! Well played! Tell me, how do you think that they all could move like they did, communicate like they did, swarm like a hive?”

“Since I’ve obviously not even gotten a chance to do a medical examination on the body yet, I can’t begin to speculate.”

“But there are answers you could conjecture, right?”

“Sure! There are animals in nature who can do what you suggest, insects, birds. They use a combination of pheremones and patterns of behavior to be able to communicate in a way to make that possible.”

“What about more complex life forms?”

“I don’t know, a bee is a fairly complex being.”

“I’m sorry, Agent Doctor, I didn’t nearly get killed fighting a giant bee, so I’m asking more on the level of a creature who is large and sentient enough to form an army for a megalomaniacal deity with daddy issues.”

Scully took a deep breath and counted to ten, releasing it in a low, slow sigh. “Till I’m able to cut into one and do a proper examination, I’m not going to know anything. If you let me do a bit of dissection, maybe I can tell you something. My best guess, if it’s not natural then maybe it’s enhanced. maybe technology is used to keep them all in line. I don’t know.”

“Right.” He nodded thoughtfully, his attention already somewhere other than her. He returned to his cup of soft serve as Scully ignored the growling in her own stomach and returned to her notes. “The subject appears to be between 6.5 and 7 feet tall and weighs around 375 lbs.”

“I’d have not seen that one coming. Rather heavy for that frame, don’t you think. Course, could just carry the weight well.”

Scully ignored him as she continued. “The subject’s build indeed seems to not quite match its weight as presented. This could be attributed to a difference in bone and tissue density or any modifications that have been performed on the subject during its formative years.”

“Nice, I didn’t think of the bone and tissue density. I suppose, being human, I just assume since we are mostly water everything else is.”

“The subject seems to display symmetry of bodily development, displaying four limbs, both anterior and posterior and symmetrical facial features, including eyes, what appear to be nostril cavities and a mouth.”

“And a face only a mother could love, assuming they have those.”

“Do you mind?” She snapped across the space at him as he paused in his ice cream contemplations to blink at her.

“My pardons, Agent Doctor, the habit of brainstorming out loud.”

“Do you need to brainstorm here?”

“I’m curious about your work.”

“Then let me do it!” She snatched a scalpel from the medical tray beside her, wrapping one gloved hand around the cool stainless steel. “I will begin with a standard Y-incision.”

“Are you sure you want to start there?”

“Mr. Stark…”

“Tony, please, and frankly I have to say while it’s a little hot seeing you just carve into it like it’s a Thanksgiving turkey, I’m just saying you don’t know what you’ll find in there. I mean, treasure hunting is fine and all, but I do have some medical equipment I could loan SHIELD that might help the process, let you get a sense of what you are dealing with.”

“You have medical equipment that can do a full body scan workup the likes of which we need without me having to cut up an alien entity for 7 hours?”

“Yep!” He popped the last “p” as he scooped up the drippy dregs of his downed sundae.

“And you haven’t thought to offer it until now.”

“Well, you know, was rather preoccupied with defending us all from alien invasion, nearly dying because of it, and cleaning up my hometown after it got demolished, but I got around to it.”

Scully gripped her scalpel tighter. “Would you be so kind to offer it to SHIELD for their use?”

“Sure! I’ll have my boys upstate send some stuff down. In exchange, you share your results with me.”

“I plan to make them open to give a full report to SHIELD.”

“Ahh, but I want them all, unadulterated and complete, and SHIELD is not me! I am many things; an engineer, superhero, sometimes businessman, often late, and Romanoff said I was a textbook narcissist.”

“Wonder where she got that idea,” Scully breathed, tossing her scalpel on the tray.

“You barely know me, Agent Doctor! I’m hurt!”

"Hardly the first time, I imagine, judging from your impeccable social grace and long history of emotionally stable relationships. But, please, tell me how to do my job, a woman whose been in field work for twenty years and has seen more weird shit in her career than you could imagine before breakfast. I'm sure your Masters' Degrees in building erector sets will be endlessly useful in telling me how I get it wrong!"

Where in the hell had that come from?

She turned wide eyes on Stark, as stunned as he was that she even said it. For long, horrible moments, nothing but silence reigned between them. When it broke, it was him clearing his throat as he quietly scrapped at the bottom of his little, plastic container.

“I don’t know, Agent Doctor Scully, after the last week, I can imagine a lot of weird shit before breakfast.”

Right now would be a great time for the earth to open and Scully to be swallowed up. She doubted her prayers would be answered, though, as Stark rose, tossing his empty container into the bin nearby, not-so-quietly wondering where Fury got these red-heads he kept bringing into the building.