#that will answer like 90% of criticisms about what the writers did and didn't do

[praetorqueenreyna]

One thing I have wondered for years, why wasn't there any Pacific Island/Polynesian inspired Water Tribes in ATLA? Why couldn't there have been a tropical tribe along with the two polar tribes?

Because ATLA was not an encyclopedia on every subculture of bending, it was an action/adventure fantasy about Aang, the last airbender.

I mean this in the nicest possible way but yall gotta stop taking headcanons like this and turning them into anger/frustration with the creators of the series for not including them. ATLA was never intended to include aspects of every single non-white culture on the planet. They created a world that supported the story that they wanted to tell, and left it AT THAT.

There are 61 episodes of ATLA, and each one is 22 minutes. That is not a lot of time to tell a compelling story of a group of kids that travels the span of the entire world. The show is incredibly well-paced and well-executed, and every episode is vitally important to the development of the story being told. Where exactly were the creators supposed to cram in another Water Tribe? What should they have sacrificed to make that happen?

idk man I'm just tired of this attitude where fans smugly point out all the ways that ATLA could have included MORE and act like it's a moral fault on the show that they didn't. This is what fanfiction is FOR. The show gives us this rich, diverse world and makes it very clear that there is more to it than we see and what the characters know! We're given glimpses into other bending types that do exist in the world, such as the sandbenders, the foggy swamp benders, the sun warriors, etc.

Like I get that we want ALL cultures to be represented, but no single piece of media is going to be able to handle all that. And attacking a well-made show like ATLA for not doing so actually discourages anyone from creating diverse media, because it tells them that no matter how hard they try, they'll always be attacked. Appreciate the show for what it is, expand on the amazing world in headcanon and fanfiction, and stop approaching every aspect of the show that you PERSONALLY think should be different with anger.

[kitkatopinions]

If your doing that violence asks game well

7,9,10,16

Alrighty! 'Choose violence ask game!'

7. what character did you begin to hate not because of canon but because how how the fandom acts about them?

I'd say the answer for this one might be Yang tbh. Lately, I've been really struggling to like her, and it's because for the past couple of years and especially now that V9 happened, no one is allowed to dislike or criticize ANYTHING Yang does or says. She's treated like not only a completely flawless character who is always in the right, but she's also put on a pedestal way above her sister and tbh her love interest as well. And on top of how people act like it's immoral and wrong to ever think Yang might be slightly in the wrong, they do this weird thing where they'll convince themselves of things that aren't true, like volunteering her for a 'buff woman' tournament and then some of them arguing and fighting when she got rejected. I also don't like how some of Yang's fans treat Blake.

I loved Yang for seasons and I still love my headcanoned version of her, but canon got bad. I could've ignored that though, but some Yang fans are just so annoying that it makes me just get so freaking sick of her.

9. worst part of canon

Okay, can I say that V9 in its entirety is imo the worst part of canon? Even rwby at its worst historically has some good concepts that can be salvaged. V9 is the first time that I came out of a rwby season going 'about 90% should've never even been on the table.' The concepts weren't even good. It was a completely pointless detour that made almost every single main character look three times worse, and it did speed of light badly done 'arcs' that make it seem like they're going to stop developing those characters, and the badly handled suicide allegory is super bad. Anything good they introduced in volume 9, they took back and ruined by the end of the season. It was a total waste of time that doesn't even belong in the story of rwby.

10. worst part of fanon

I'm not very involved in the main rwby fandom, but from what I've seen, I'm gonna say the fanon invented stuff for Ironwood about him being like an evil dictator grooming Winter and trying to use Team RWBY as weapons and stuff is just so annoying. Like he's such a hate-sink, I don't know why people have to make things up to hate on him. XD This wouldn't even be that bad though if fans didn't convince themselves it's true and that anyone who thinks otherwise is evil. Like, when people said that Ironwood invaded Vale in volume 2 and when I was like "where" they told me 'that's what the writers wanted us to think' and then told me they had to go with what was true rather than what I wanted, after providing zero evidence. Like bro???

16. you can't understand why so many people like this thing (characterization, trope, headcanon, etc)

Ooh, okay. I can't understand why so many people like the characterization of Blake as a sad submissive shy girl who can't stand up for herself and flinches away from angry people and doesn't really care about politics or the world that much, and acts the opposite of how Blake in the first five seasons acted. I can't understand why so many people liked Jaune's 'got old, turned young again' arc. I can't understand why so many people get so much from Summer Rose when she is very dull and badly done in the narrative imo. I can't understand why so many people are down for endless betrayals in a show supposedly about hope and goodness and growth and how working together and being good beats out evil. That's just off the top of my head.

Thanks for these asks!

[dearestaeneas]

resisting the temptation to ask you every one of the questions from the writer ask game and instead asking: 2, 3, 7, 13 (i'm guessing i know the answer to this but consider this an open invitation to share some fun lore), 26, 29, 30

kicking my feet and writing your name in hearts all over my dream journal

2) my two newest ocs are Matt + Justin! i was working on a thing for a zine i want to submit to, and the theme was 70s/80s/90s campy horror, so i picked just two lame ass 90s boy names. it's a silly little queer slasher story that i didn't expect to go so in-depth on!

3) uhhhhhh. my biggest self insert is probably that John Dearheart character i post little blurbs about sometimes. i realized i'm probably gonna need to change his name if i post more about him, though, because i completely forgot he's a Discworld character. i've been rereading Going Postal lately and while i was waiting for the library loan to come in i was scrolling through its tumblr tag and got whiplash seeing his name. it is deeply humbling thinking you had an original name and not only seeing its an already-established character, but an already-established character from a BOOK YOU'VE READ BEFORE. outside of him as my vent character, i put myself into all my characters! i'm very vain! Branwen and Ardan are my two biggest ones from hh, and lately its been Branwen more just for the sake of story themes :3

7) Celeste and the Old God is actually one of my favorite pairs to write about, and it's wild to me that i don't have them interact more. i think what really gets me about them is that Celeste's entire deal is that she's...normal. she has a "normal," healthy relationship with religion, and criticizing it is included in that, i think. and for that reason, those two are the closest to being equals. having one character be a devout believer/her religious trauma being something you actively get to see be established throughout the story (branwen) v. another character who's extremely cynical to the point of numbness who doesn't believe in anything (ardan), and in a context where branwen is genuinely helpless vs. ardan having more control than he realizes/freaks him out when he does realize it, it's so fun to write Celeste as being on equal playing ground. it's important to me that her entire deal is "actually no fuck you, you need me just as much as i need you." and i think that equal playing ground is why they have kind of a begrudging friendship.

i also like writing branwen and ardan together because they are bisexual.

13) not really any of them i don't do that kind of stuff<3*

26) American Gods!!! And Slaughterhouse Five. those are the two i always automatically say when asked! i read If We Were Villains sometime last year and it rewired my brain, also. i found it because of The Secret History, which also rewired my brain. Both of those books fundamentally changed my brain chemistry, but secret history did it derogatorily, if that makes sense. great book. i never think i have feelings about it until i start talking about it. Donna Tartt i am nearing your location. (also Piranesi!<3)

29) probably Harry Potter? unfortunately? (also, sucks that i have to say 'unfortunately'. like most people, those stupid books were very important to me at one point in my life! mostly because of the stuff i did with my friends because of it! go fuck yourself, Joanne!) i deffo wrote fanfic, though. i had a huuuuge fic i handwrote with a bunch of my friends

not my first fandom, but i thought you'd appreciate: i was also a huge percy jackson kid. obviously. probably more so than harry potter. i took latin in middle school, and one year we had this pretty big multi-part project where we could pick different prompts for different parts. super cool and fun, had i been the person i am now who actually like, cares about things and puts effort into them! but i suffered from the disease of all middle schoolers where i Fucking Sucked. i didn't realize one of my parts was due one day, and during the lunch period i speed-wrote percy jackson fanfiction that i had to Read Out Loud To The Class and then hand in for a grade. i got a 100, but only after reading it out loud, having what i believe was my first out of body experience, and then going back to my seat where one of my friends leaned over and said "was that the fucking plot of Mark of Athena"

30) good!!!! we're actively getting a snowstorm and i'm hoping it keeps up so work is cancelled tomorrow! who knows how lucky i'll be but i can hope!!

*if i was normal i could have left 13 at that and just let myself be funny, but i am nothing if not verbose. obviously hh! in taking up your offer to share fun lore, there's one character who i have been avoiding talking about because i think everything about him is so integral to the plot that like, making goofs about him would be a spoiler (is that...full of myself to say? it would be, though). that said, since the idea of "equals" is so relevant throughout hh, he's been fun to write because he technically falls on the Celeste end of the spectrum, but he's using it for evil. literally. a lot of his deal is unintentionally "what makes a god a god" and how he's this sort of nebulous figure because no one can agree what his deal is. he is accidentally my Odysseus character, and it kills me to admit that. little pansexual freak who wants to kill god.

[snugglyporos]

Okay so, gonna expound a bit about something I see not just in lgbtq media, but lots of media in general these days and how people engage with it. For context, I'm autistic, so I've dealt with this in autistic portrayals, and while I'm asexual, I grew up in a time where people thought I was gay and did what I'm going to talk about.

So there's this thing in media where the first stage of inclusion is stereotype, and then once it is accepted enough people demand change, and that's good. But the problem arises when people then decide what 'good' or 'positive' representation is, because it turns into 'right' versus 'wrong' representation. And that translates to the same pressure that existed before in a new way.

As an example, in the 80s and 90s, things like what it meant to be a woman or what it meant to be black changed considerably. The question of 'what does it mean for a woman to be liberated' came up. Questions like 'what is the real black American experience' came up. You saw this in the fights over what feminism meant. If you've seen the Fresh Prince episode where Carlton answers a critic who accuses him of pandering to white people, you've seen a portrayal of this debate.

But beneath all of that is an expectation, that there is a right way to be something and a wrong way to be something. To refocus to gay people, for a long time there was an expectation of what it meant to be openly gay. That is now an antiquated term, but it had weight when the public's concept of gay people were the cast of Queer Eye For The Straight Guy and the guy on Will And Grace. There was an expectation that being gay meant acting a certain way, talking a certain way, behaving in a certain way, and that not doing so was a rejection of your identity.

Speaking from my own personal experience, when I was in high school, and not diagnosed yet as being autistic, people thought I was gay. I am not, but that didn't stop people from trying to convince me that it was okay to come out of the closet. This amounted to essentially being put in a box, something which I'm sure lots of people can relate to.

It's good to reevaluate things that came before. It's good to remove harmful things. But this desire can also create a cage, where boundaries of what constitutes 'correct' identity are created. One of the problems many writers in the 90s struggled with was that once they stopped considered 'woman' as a character trait, they didn't know how else to write them; but more than that, when they did write women as being more than the sum of their sex, they were accused of not writing women correctly, of not showing the authentic experience of women.

Because the thing is, as something becomes more acceptable, the ability to define someone by their identity becomes harder. She-Ra is a show where the characters are lesbians, and yet this is not their entire character. They are characters, with many traits. And yet the fact that this one trait does not define them makes people say that they are not written correctly, that the representation is incorrect.

In other words, this isn't a question of nuance. It's a question of whether or not people are willing to allow identities to escape the box that people's expectations have created for them. In some ways this boils down to 'is She-Ra a lesbian superhero or a superhero who is a lesbian?' People's expectations shift with how you order those character traits, and that's the box's walls moving in real time.

In many ways, the modern movement to create collective identity has been a positive one; it's allowed marginalized groups to organize and demand fairer treatment. But it has also created a situation where people are not seen as individuals but as parts of a group and therefore expected to adhere to this identity, whether or not it represents them accurately.

In She-Ra, the reaction to it amounted to 'yes this is representation but the representation is not the defining aspect of every part of these characters, therefore it is bad representation.'

But the problem with this is that it becomes regressive. It returns people and characters back to the time when there were standards of acceptability for someone's identity. If you're sitting there and writing that She-Ra and Catra are not accurate lesbians, then you're assuming that there is one way to be a lesbian, and that the only way to be empowered in that identity is to fit a mold that was created for them. That's not really empowerment. That's just a new version of what existed before.

Again, I speak from the perspective of an autistic person here. Representation usually amounts to either a person being entirely defined by their autism, or it amounts to the characterization that it's some kind of super power (looking at you, predator movie).

But that's not real to life. It's not accurate, even if the people presenting it feel that it's accurate. People react to She-Ra because they feel like it's not a correct depiction, which is itself, regressive. They're doing the same thing that came before, just with different standards. In the end, all that concerns them is whether or not they conform to an ideal of identity that does not actually exist in practice.

In some ways, the desire to remove all unproblematic from lgbtq characters so that they cannot be ever critiqued as a problem is no different than the sanitizing of lgtbq characters by bigots so that they can never be offensive to anyone's sensibilities. The queer coding of characters in movies in order to make them acceptable to cis audiences shares a lot in common with people demanding that lgbtq characters and people only be portrayed in ways that are considered 'positive.' This amounts to stripping them of things like agency, because you're now reduced to arguing about the correct way to be gay.

In other words, if your argument about She-Ra is 'they're not being proper lesbians because they are flawed people' then you're actually arguing that 'lesbians that do not adhere to this set of guidelines are not real lesbians' and that's not that different from what bigots do.

I'm not saying that people come at this from a place of bigotry; questions about things like internalized bigotry are too ethereal and amorphous for me to talk about in any real way. What I can say is that the experience becomes similar when you encounter it. In the end, people hide parts of themselves that they think people will object to. If the end result is that people feel the need to go back into the closet for different reasons, they're still being forced back into the closet to make other people happy, and that's still bad. The reason it's being done does not matter. A lesbian being pushed into the closet to make bigots happy is not fundamentally different from a lesbian being forced into the closet to assuage the concerns of erstwhile allies who demand 'correct' representation.

It is a sign of progress that we have gotten to a point where shows like She-Ra can be made with openly lesbian leads and the writers feel that this aspect does not need to define their entire existence. It means the concept that the 'base' character is a white straight male is not being applied. But it is deeply worrying when the response of people who believe they support inclusion decide that there is a good and a bad way to be lgbtq. That there is a right and a wrong way to be a lesbian, and a right and wrong way to write lesbians, as though these were character traits and not people who are complex and not defined entirely by their sexual and gender identity.

Acceptance of identities means that those identities become less novel and noteworthy over time; things that shocked and appalled people fifty years ago are entirely shrugged at now as just a thing that exists. And that's good, because true acceptance of something is to consider it entirely banal. You move from a lesbian person to a person who is a lesbian, and you can be more than just that one identity in the eyes of those around you.

The discussion around She-Ra, I think, is more about the discomfort that people have about her identity and the identity of the other characters not being central to every part of her being, rather than a question of nuance.

"we need less sanitized queer stories" yall keep saying fucking she-ra romanticizes abuse. you couldnt possibly handle less sanitized queer stories

[cf56]

In the reboot the Warners are very openly violent with each other, they go after each other in ways that in the original series they saved solely for their enemies. Do you think this is something they are being forced to do by their new writers or has there been some sort of negative shift in their relationships with each other? Primarily it seems to be Wakko and Dot against Yakko. Could this even be part of the reason Yakko created Yolko?

I think criticism of the reboot can often be over the top, but this is one point I do agree with. I think the writers (real world writers) fell into the trap of knowing they needed to include cartoony violence but didn't know when or how to use it. In much of the reboot, the Warners are the only cartoon characters around, so they end up directing the violence at each other. If you think about it compared to the original, though, they also seem to be strangely reserved when it comes to using violence against their human "special friends" in the reboot. Why aren't they dropping anvils on Ralph or smashing Nora with a mallet? They just sort of hang around and talk most of the time. Almost seems like they've mellowed out, but the opposite has happened in regards to how they interact with each other.

In the original, they were kind of written in most cases as a single character with three different personalities. Rarely separated, always pursuing the same goal. Basically, if you wouldn't write a single character malleting themselves, you shouldn't write the Warners malleting each other. I think the change can be described succinctly like this: they went from acting like the Marx Brothers to acting more like The Three Stooges.

In-universe, I think there are some things we have to establish first when looking at this dilemma. First, toons cannot be permanently injured except by means of a plot device specifically devised to injure them (Dip). It's also unclear if they actually feel pain, or if they just have comedic reactions to violence that simulate being in pain. It's possible that the Warners aren't hurting each other at all. If you knew you could hurt your siblings without actually causing them pain, would you?

Perhaps the answer to that is irrelevant in the Warners' case, because the Warners are closer than regular siblings. They are not just the only family each of them have ever had. The only people in general who care genuinely about them is each other. Their relationship is built on total, implicit trust. Whether they can really hurt each other or not, the fact that they try at all is troubling. I'll get into detail on that lower down.

I have one solid theory on why it started happening, in-universe. We all know the Warners can't physically change. But I think some people let that fact trick them into thinking the Warners also can't mentally change. Like any other living being with a brain, the Warners learn and develop and grow (mentally). If they didn't, they wouldn't really be living beings. People have often pointed out that it feels like the Warners are older in the reboot. And, yeah, they kind of are. I don't know if that's what the reboot writers intended, but I don't think it's really canon-shattering to think that the Warners aren't exactly the same now as they were in the 90's. There's one particular event that may have changed their outlook on life permanently- the cancellation of their original show, followed by whatever happened in the 22 years in between that and the reboot.

My headcanon is that the cancellation of the original show deeply affected Yakko in a negative way. He felt like he failed his siblings, let their livelihood and ticket to freedom be taken away. Worst of all, he didn't even know exactly what he did wrong to deserve the cancellation. In truth, it was nothing, just the changing economics of the animation industry, but that doesn't stop him from blaming himself. So, when the Warners are reanimated and put back on air, his mindset has changed. This is what led him to becoming more openly protective/paternal towards his siblings in the reboot. It led to him becoming more anxious as well. He has decided that he must guide them more firmly if he wants to protect them and avoid another cancellation. However, becoming more like a father figure and exercising his authority over his siblings had an unintended side effect- his siblings started to rebel. Not in any major way, but they take what liberties they can to get back at him for his annoying behavior, which is where the violence comes from. I have explored this concept in some of my fics, most openly in "The Warners Write."

That's my best explanation for this- but it isn't that simple. Before I elaborate, let me eliminate some other possibilities. First, that the Warners are simply getting tired of each other after almost a century. Maybe, but I don't think it's the case. I don't think it's possible for the Warners to get tired of each other. They adore each other, now and always. Second, the possibility, as you said, that they are being forced to do it by the fictional writers of their in-universe show.

There's nothing about that theory that inherently makes it unlikely. It probably is the best explanation overall. I just don't like it, because it's kind of... lazy? I don't know, there's probably a better way to describe it. But when you start getting into this territory, there's nothing to stop you from saying that everything the Warners do is just part of the script, and then the entire canon falls apart and we're back to square one. If nothing the Warners do represents their actual personalities and actions, then there's no point speculating on anything they're shown to do, ever, at all. Plus, if everything they do is part of the fictional show, then there's really no difference in discussing it from discussing it as a real world show. They're still directed by writers and live a fictional life, which is exactly how it really plays out on our screens. You're just adding another pointless meta-layer to it.

Anyway, now to that big climax I've been putting off. You heard my best explanation. That explanation works well enough for when it's the younger siblings directing violence towards Yakko. The problem arises when it's Yakko directing violence towards them.

The single worst instance of this inter-sibling violence problem in the reboot, the one I absolutely can't stand or explain at all, is, coincidentally, its very first scene. There's just no way to explain it that's consistent with the characters of Yakko, Wakko, and Dot.

When I first saw this scene... it didn't bother me at all, of course. It was the first scene of Animaniacs I ever saw. I couldn't have known then how awful and out of character this moment is. But I do now. And it's hard to watch. Am I being too dramatic about it? You be the judge.

It isn't the using Wakko as a battering ram that bothers me. It's the slap after. Yakko says "Oh, right, it's a pull, not a push." Then he promptly punishes his little sibling for his own mistake, after he already gave him a pointless head bashing against the door. Neither he nor Dot even show an ounce of concern at any point.

Now, sometimes siblings play rough. Sometimes they seriously hurt each other. This doesn't necessarily harm their relationship. In some cases, it even makes it stronger (as long as it doesn't rise to the level of bullying). The same would not be true if, say, a father did the exact same thing to his child. That would be abuse, possibly, negligence at best, if it was accidental, and the father should feel guilty for it.

To see what I mean, imagine this exact same scene playing out, but Slappy is in the place of Yakko and Skippy is in the place of Wakko. Kind of changes the connotation, doesn't it? But it shouldn't, really. By and large, Yakko is just as much of a parental figure to Wakko as Slappy is to Skippy. The size difference is even similar. Some of you may not know this, but Yakko is actually taller than Slappy.

Point is, Yakko holds the absolute trust of his siblings. They can be violent to him, but him being violent to them is a completely different ballgame. Using Wakko as a weapon, making him visibly beat up, and then twisting the blame for your mistake onto him and hitting him once more for good measure is almost abusive-level conduct. It would be straight-up abuse if we didn't know these were toons who can take damage without actually being injured. There isn't a way to explain it in-universe. As much as I hate to resort to such simple answers, the best explanation here is that the reboot writers simply got it wrong. They tried to write the Warners like Daffy and Bugs. This scene would be absolutely fine if it was between those two, because they're rivals, not the closest set of siblings in the world.

Sometimes the reboot gets it right, though. For example, when Nora knocks Wakko off the desk, and the next frame shows his siblings at least checking on him.

Since the egregious example of Yakko hitting Wakko happened in the first scene of the first episode, I can just chalk it up to the writers not really knowing the characters yet (though they should've, but that's beside the point). To frame this all in a more positive way, ignoring that one scene, I think Yakko might actually be proud of his siblings for standing up to him more and developing their own boundaries. He did his job- he raised them to be self-confident and assured. It took a century, but he did it, and he can withstand a little physical pain along the way. It's worth it.

As for Yolko, if you take my main theory earlier, it could be connected. Yakko is proud that his siblings are branching off a little, but he does miss when they followed him without question. So he gave himself someone else to raise from scratch, an egg. Though it probably isn't literally alive, since it would need to be constantly incubated.

I didn't really intend for this post to turn into a long rant about the reboot. If this is the only post of mine you've seen, you might think I'm some reboot hater. If you've been following me for some time, though, I hope you already know that isn't the case. The reboot got me into Animaniacs. Even if it was the worst thing in the world, I could never hate it. And it's far from the worst thing in the world. It has a few flaws, some glaring, but overall I still love it, and I think it's only gotten better as time has gone on.

I'm really pleased with the number of asks coming in over the past few days. If the current pace of asks continues, though, I probably will not be able to continue answering them the day they come in, especially since I returned to college yesterday. Keep sending them if you have them, but my response may not be instantaneous.

[wishesunderthestars]

I don’t know if you’re gonna answer this, but I have a few questions in regards of writing.

I always read a lot but I never had the ambition of writing anything. However, before I even knew it I already had a plot figured out (I won’t say I have planned every detail but 90% of the storyline is ready) and it’s been YEARS since I realized I had a whole universe sitting in a corner of my brain but I just can’t write. I’ve tried multiple times, either the characters feelings are not shown in a proper way or the description of the scene is horrible. I wonder if I’m being too perfectionist, it’s just that it doesn’t happen fluidly as I feel it should. I even have a Pinterest for inspiration, did not help (I still add a lot of pins though hahaha). And on top of everything, I’m in university now and working a part time job so time is everything I don’t have. 

I know you’re also a very busy person, and I cannot imagine how you still manage to write cause as you can see I could never lol. And I know that every writer has their own method as well, but do you think I should figure every single detail out, decide what will happen in each chapter and then try to write? Or try again with less self criticism idk haha. Also, how do you balance the description of things like places, clothes, characters and their feelings? Do you think (as a reader and a writer) that the place should always be descripted or there are times that are not important?

(I forgot half of the questions I had while I made this rant and will not wait until I remember cause I'm anxious but I just want to let you know that Eunoia is a masterpiece and I love every single line that you wrote)

Okay, I remembered to mention that it revolves around a lot of grief and other intense feelings that I swear I can feel myself but have no idea how to even begin to put in words without being repetitive, incredibly boring and unconvincing.

The second part of this question wasn't sent on anon but I'm pretty sure that it's from the same person. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Now, to answer your questions. What I think you're suffering from is a bad case of perfectionism and I can tell because I suffer from it too. Daily. It significantly slows down my progress and I haven't figured out how to combat it yet. I would suggest writing a very rough draft at first just telling the story to yourself. Write all the scenes you want to write, everything you have pictured, and not get too critical about it. Just get the story out. When you finish it you can see what worked and what didn't. Rereading it you might find that some parts are actually really good and don't need much editing. Personally, I write one chapter at a time because it would take ages to finish the story but that also depends on if you're writing fanfiction or a book you want to publish.

And I don't think it's necessary have every detail figured out when writing, some things just come naturally when writing. But again, that depends on you and what works best for you. For me, I have a general outline and before I write each chapter, I list the scenes that I want to include. An example from Chapter 21 of Eunoia is:

Mc and Namjoon discuss what they mean to each other and what they want from each other. Also the boy her mother wants to set her up with. She turns down the invitation.

Taylor shows up to congratulate her with cake and the mc panics a little. She talks to Taylor and she is understanding

Jimin makes a flower crown and places it on Taehyung's head.

etc

This is taken directly from my notes and that's usually the level of detail I include when I'm outlining each chapter. And often I add new scenes when I'm writing or change the plan for some of them or move them around.

Balancing descriptions is hard and I don't think it's something I've mastered. Each writer is unique in how much description they add. There are best seller books that the descriptions are minimal and then there is J.R.R. Tolkien who could write ten pages about a rock.

Describing the place isn't always necessary in the sense that you don't need to dedicate a whole paragraph to it. Sometimes just referencing where they are is enough, like the park or a clothing store. The reader can imagine what that looks like. Also, if you have described that place before you don't need to describe it again. But describing places can set the atmosphere and the tone of the scene. You can sprinkle in single lines of description throughout the scene.

Again, just write the words as they come and you can edit them later. You don't have to write long paragraphs about the characters' feelings. And it's okay to repeat some things a couple of times. Just take a look at how repetitive some things in Eunoia are.

[bigskydreaming]

I'm not sure if you got my request because i didn't had internet when i sent it, so i'll write it again xd Do you think Dick (and the batboys in general) are famouse like Bruce? Because in the comics there's not any clue about it, i've never seen anyone say something like "oh look! Its Dick Grayson!, y'know, Wayne's first ward/son And its a shame, because reporters would make such a hard life to all of them, it would maka a good narrative tool

Honestly, this is a prime example of that inconsistency I rant about, and also DC’s refusal to just COMMIT on even the most basic aspects of their universe like….uh…how many kids does Batman have. 

afhsahfklahsklfhal

Like, you would think that would meet the MINIMUM requirements of “shit you should probably have figured out and make sure everybody’s on the same page with” but DC’s like….nah, that’s not important.

So I mean…..I’m reasonably certain - like this is just my personal belief, but I’d put money on it being right, lol - but I think the primary reason there’s so little mention in the comics of how Bruce’s kids are viewed in the public eye/how much the public are aware of them (in the New 52, at least, as pre-Flashpoint there was a lot more plot around that kind of thing, especially back in the 80s and 90s)……

…is because 90% of the writers and editors have no clue either, and nobody wants to be the one to ask, and like, open that can of worms. I 100% think you could ask five different writers at DC which kids Bruce has OFFICIALLY adopted in this current continuity, and get five different answers, lol.

There’s been so much handwaving about Dick’s status ever since Spyral, and again - I think its because nobody bothered to think through the logistics of the Hypnos/global-mindwipe machine BEFORE writing it into the story, and then once it did occur to any of them to like….wonder just how specifically it worked, they were like, fuck it, better just be as vague as possible. So, according to Grayson, everyone Helena didn’t program into the exclusion list before the satellite was activated should have no recollection of Dick Grayson, which is why he was able to ‘go back to his old life’ and be Nightwing again, without worrying about his secret identity having been unmasked…..

But what does that mean for his official identity as adopted son or even just ward of billionaire Bruce Wayne? People can’t have NO memory of Dick Grayson and still remember that Bruce Wayne took in a kid named Dick Grayson. I mean, as far as I can tell, the overall consensus in the comics seems to be that after the satellite was activated, Dick just kinda started from scratch as ‘Dick Grayson’ like, he was free to be himself again, but it was like he was a blank slate/came out of nowhere as far as everyone else was concerned. But again, that means as far as anyone outside of their close circle of family and friends know….Dick Grayson is a non-entity to Bruce Wayne and the two have no history. 

Which I mean, is fairly shitty and you’d think if nothing else, there’d be massive story potential there for delving into Dick’s character and his relationship with Bruce and examining how he felt about ‘having his old life/identity back’….except with the caveat that as far as the world is concerned, his life and identity don’t and have never included his father.

Cut to DC: Naaaaaaaah.

But even WITH that, plot holes persist, and abound, because…..why didn’t the satellite erase the Court of Owls’ knowledge/memory of Dick? Even before Luthor gave Cobb those goggles and files to help him with bringing Ric into the fold, Cobb clearly was already stalking Ric and knew exactly who he was….the Court obviously already had that doctor in place while he was still in recovery…so, whoops. I mean, you could probably come up with an explanation about the Court, via their own tech and resources, having had some protections in place 24/7 that kept the satellite from affecting them even though they weren’t on guard for it specifically…..but again, Occam’s Razor….I feel like the real answer is DC just didn’t care enough to think things that far through. Especially since the average Bludhaven citizen, like Bea, at least didn’t seem totally blown away when Ric revealed to her that amnesia aside, he was supposedly some rich billionaire’s adopted kid….which again suggests that as far as the writers were thinking, people in general are familiar with the idea that Bruce Wayne has more than one kid.

Then you’ve got Jason’s whole situation, and to be honest….I really only have the vaguest idea what’s going on there, because reading Lobdell books is against my religion, and I am a devout and deeply spiritual person, as you all probably can tell. I mean, I know that there’s something going on where like, Jason had himself legally resurrected in the public eye and is openly referring to himself as Bruce Wayne’s formerly-assumed dead foster kid……but like, is that the official official word, or would other writers if you asked them say they’d been operating under the assumption Bruce had adopted Jason too at some point in the Rebirth timeline, or….idek, man.

I…..honestly don’t have the faintest fucking clue what to make of the many back-and-forth retcons about Tim and his parents and his official place in the Batfam/relationship with Bruce, and am actually slightly terrified of even trying to make sense of that clusterfuck of a Gordian knot, so my official stance on Tim is to just like….back sloooooowly away from the anthropomorphic-migraine-masquerading-as-a-backstory, without like….agitating it and accidentally setting off another multiverse Crisis birthed wholly from just that one all-consuming black hole of a retcon.

I mean, there’s a reason I basically just shoehorn all the kids’ official pre-Flashpoint family statuses into anything I write in Rebirth continuity, and that’s not just stubbornness and my refusal to play the “now this kid is adopted…now he’s not…now he is again….except he’s not….oh he’s adopted again…..oh wait now he’s not again" game. 

Its like. Also for the sake of my sanity and stuff.

(And also hahahahaha fuck you DC times infinity, every time you use the words “blood son,” or “real family” in a comic, or have one of Bruce’s other kids refer to Bruce as “your father” when talking to Damian, as if that’s not an utterly bizarre and roundabout way for any sibling to refer to their mutual parent and thus I j’ete REFUSE to acknowledge it as valid….ahem, anyway, my point is, every time they do that in a comic, I double down and headcanon Bruce throwing a random as fuck gala for literally no other purpose than to remind all of Gotham that he has half a dozen kids and they’re all better than everyone else’s. Ugh. Kill it. Kill the “blood son” nonsense with fire and lightning and also lots of stabbing maybe).

Anyway, that’s my official stance on DC’s stance on Damian in the books.

Then as far as Cass goes….ugh, her origins were pretty much utterly butchered by the New 52, which IMO has also failed to give us Cass and Bruce bonding and dynamics sufficient to Sate Mine Ire™, sooooooo…..I mean, my perception of the current canon is that Cassandra’s official status is “secret mystery foster child that nobody really knows about,” but because I do not care for that and there’s the whole not sufficiently sated ire thing I mentioned, I officially reject this canon and willfully replace it with pre-Flashpoint Bruce and Cass love and adoption. DC’s welcome to kiss my critically acclaimed hiney if I’m doing it wrong.

Which brings us last, but certainly not least, as its only this way because I go sequentially and Duke is still Shiny and New comparative to the others and will be until the next inevitable fostering/adoption/clone hi-jinks bumps him up the sequential ladder (except I randomly switched Damian and Cass around this time because LOOK I DONT MAKE THE RULES, THERE ARE NO RULES i hvea Adhd hiccup sob leavem e aloooone soooooob)…..

Duke’s official status, much like the rest of the Batkids, can be summed up as Honestly, I Really Don’t Have A Fucking Clue And Am Just Winging This Whole Thing.

I mean, there’s less inconsistency with him, due mostly to the fact that so few writers other than Snyder use him (boo, hiss, and not just because I hate having to give Snyder credit for stuff - look, I love his Duke, but I loathe how he writes Dami, its a thing, I just…don’t get me started). But what inconsistencies there are….well….they’re a bit glaring.

Basically one major storyline showed Duke as being an official foster kid/ward of Bruce’s and living out of the Manor with Bruce and Damian and occasionally Tim when he’s not off road-tripping around the multiverse….and then Batman and the Signal had Duke in the care of his uncle, who was stated to be his legal guardian and Duke was constantly sneaking out in order to meet Bruce in the special Signal-cave he built specifically for Duke to operate out of so he didn’t have to like, drive all the way out to the Manor to change just so he could then drive back into the city and patrol. And then Batman and the Outsiders just said fuck all that, here’s Duke and Cass hopping hemispheres with the Outsiders every other issue, so apparently nobody’s making unscheduled visits anywhere back in Gotham to make sure these two are where they’re legally assumed to be, which again, for the record is…..*error, source not found*

LOLOL and the really fun thing about this little back and forth is I’m pretty sure allllll these conflicting takes are all the work of the same writer. Like. GET ON YOUR OWN PAGE, DUDE.

Also, again I have to assume the “Can’t Be Bothered To Give A Shit, Or Maybe They’re All Just Really Bad At Logic” curse has struck again, because….uhhhh…..

….at no point anywhere in Duke’s stories have I seen Bruce or literally anyone else express concern about the fact that Duke living with Bruce as his official foster, like he definitely and clearly was at some point at least…..means that literally every single one of his We Are Robin friends who knows that he was taken in by the Batfam (and there’s several of them who know this)….like, by the transcendent properties of You Can’t Honestly Think They’re That Dumb, that’s a good five or six civilians out there who probably took all of five seconds to play connect the dots and figure out the Wayne family, having officially taken Duke in on paper…..is pretty likely the Batfamily.

I mean, I like all of Duke’s friends and would definitely headcanon/write them as all being trustworthy and able to keep this knowledge to themselves for Duke’s sake, if nothing else, but I mean, its pretty unprecedented for Bruce to out himself and all of his kids/allies by extension, to like, that many civilian teenagers all in one swoop….

…sooooooo, you’d think, AGAIN, logically, maybe, perhaps, this is the kind of thing that should be brought up in a narrative somewhere as a plot point worth delving into, y’know, just for shits and giggles and maybe a little bit of that whatchamacallit - oh right, character development, but.

Cut to DC: Naaaaaaah.

 *throws up hands and does the I Can’t Even Shuffle all the way home*

In conclusion:

DC is a mess. The official/public status of each and every Batkid is a mess. Except for Damian, the blood son, but we have that pencilled in on the schedule to be killed with fire and also stabbing, so he can get filed under ‘just a fucking mess’ with the rest of his siblings. Hashtag Solidarity.

I mean, I say just write or headcanon their official status however you damn well please, and it’ll STILL be more effort than I believe DC has put into organizing and staying consistent with all of this, and thus STILL make more sense than what we currently have to work with.

*Shrugs* If they don’t care enough to provide a clear canon blueprint to follow when mapping the Bat Family Tree, I can’t be bothered to care if the one I make up myself happens to contradict one single mention of one kid’s official status as claimed by one issue of one book.

Especially if it was written by Lobdell.

Jason’s just a foster son my ass. grumble mumble bitter vengeful swears and a pox on all DC’s houses. WHY DO YOU PEOPLE HATE ADOPTION SO MUCH, INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW AND ALSO FUCK YOU.

[vaarsuvius6]

"I must've missed the part where I implied that Steven Universe was the most flawless show of all time."

You compared it to Star Wars and Dragon Ball, two of the most popular and influential science fiction/fantasy franchises of all time (granted, there are aspects of those franchises that didn't age well, but it can't be denied they were incredibly influential). You didn't oughtright say "the show is flawless", but you did kind of imply, at the very least, that SU is as important to pop culture as Star Wars is. That probably wasn't what you intended to say, but it is kind of what you implied.

"You can't call my arguments bad faith when you don't know what I'm arguing against."

No, I get what you're arguing against, I just didn't think you did it well. Again, you're argument is "this kind of story arc wasn't controversial back in the 90's, why is it controversial now?" To which the answer is "it's not the 90's anymore." So bringing up old franchises like Star Wars and Dragon Ball IS a bad faith argument, because those franchises were made a while ago and SU is more modern. You might as well try to defend a controversial book like Save The Pearls (if you've never heard of that book...good) by pointing out the racial stereotypes in the Narnia books. Just because something wasn't controversial back then doesn't mean it's not controversial now.

"I was complaining about people like Lily Orchard and her ilk who use progressive sounding word vomit to spread a transparent hate campaign."

I've never watched Lily Orchard, but if that was your intent, you didn't really convey it that well. It came across like you were talking about people who criticized the show IN GENERAL, even if that wasn't the intent. Also, just because Lily Orchard says the sky is blue doesn't mean the sky is actually green - sure, I'm aware that Lily is widely regarded as a garbage content creator, but other reviewers like Pieguyrulz criticized SU's writing decisions, and those reviewers were not controversial like Lily was. And again, I'd like to point out that at least some of the people who didn't like how SU handled its writing decisions were BLACK.

"I was complaining about the part of the internet that insists on turning SU into a joke..."

I don't know how to say this, but if people want to treat a show like a joke, that's their perogative. I know it hurts to hear a show you like insulted, but people have the right to pan whatever shows they want. I'm not even saying I agree with all of the criticism, I'm just saying people have a right to go "this show sucks" if that's how they honestly feel. I mean, if you don't like a show, what are you supposed to do? Lie and say you liked it when you didn't?

"...and completely obliterating it's legacy in ensuring that better, more progressive shows like the Owl House can even exist."

By that logic, no-one is allowed to criticize Destiny of a Shrine Maiden because it paved the way for better yuri series in the future. If you're not a weeb and don't know what that is...Destiny of a Shrine Maiden was one of the first yuri series to give the leads a happy ending together instead of going the "kill your gays" route (okay, technically, they get reincarnated...long story. Point is, the gay leads are alive and well when the series ends, which was a big deal at the time). However, the series didn't age well, and while it did pave the way for better stuff, that better stuff is so much better that you could easily argue that Destiny of a Shrine Maiden is just not worth watching anymore. I am capable of thinking that a show paved the way for a later writers success while also thinking that it didn't age well.

Or if DoaSM is too obscure - Harry Potter paved the way for a lot of YA literature. Does that mean no-one can criticize the House-Elf slaverly supblot?

"I was complaining very specifically about the mindset that "flawed media = bad person" that fandom has largely become, especially pertaining to Steven Universe."

Agreed, but just because some of the people who criticized the show were way too hostile to the creators doesn't change the fact that the show is flawed. I mean, Ahmed Best got way too much hate, to the point where he considered committing suicide, but does that make everyone who didn't like Jar-Jar Binks automatically wrong?

"And I was complaining about the double standard shown towards large franchises when queer creators don't even get half that amount of slack, especially as Dragon Ball and Star Wars still are ongoing and, thus, open to the same criticism."

Again, I don't know much about Dragon Ball other than that it was very influential, but Disney Star Wars was HEAVILY criticized. Among many things, one of the complaints people had about Rise of Skywalker was that some people found Kylo Ren's redemption arc flawed, especially since The Last Jedi strongly implied he WOULDN'T be redeemed. And it's my understanding that the people Vegeta killed were brought back via the Dragon Balls (because death is cheap in that franchise), while Steven Universe makes it clear that the Off Colours shattered by the Diamonds ain't coming back any time soon. One of the more popular recent DB movies, Broly, made it clear that Broly was a child soldier forced into villainy, so it made sense the heroes forgave him, while White Diamond did everything she did of her own volition.

And if you want to talk double standards? Maybe I'm biased here, but I've seen minority reviewers attacked for not liking something just as much as I've seen minority creators attacked for making something (i.e. women who criticized Age of Ultron for being sexist being told to "shut up"). I'm not saying either double standard is good, but again...why do the minorities who criticize stuff deserve less sympathy than the minorities who created it?

I'm sorry if I came across as being overly hostile. I was having a bad day, and maybe that was reflected in the verbiage I used. But I reject the idea that criticism of SU was automatically unfair, because a lot of the people who criticised the show were minorities who felt it handled topics like racism and ableism badly. And they had every right to feel that way.

"Steven Universe is Nazi propaganda because characters who destroyed planets got a redemption arc!"

You guys act like two of the most popular redemption arcs in fiction didn't also happen to characters who destroy planets.

Hell, the Galactic Empire Vader works for is supposed to be a direct analogue to the Nazis for fucks sake. No one is calling Stars Wars or Dragon Ball Nazi propaganda just because these two got character development. That'd be fucking absurd.

Like, complain about how the Redemption Arc got rushed all you want (even if that's on the producers for canceling the show early and not the writers), but please just acknowledge the calling the Jewish woman a Nazi sympathizer because you didn't like her kids cartoon is fucking vile.

[thegreymoon]

Sorry, You didn't really say or do anything to make me think that you are Asian. I thought that I read sth in your lj where u said that you were and just run with it. It was a long time ago and I must have misread. Also, you don't really post a lot political stuff, it is more like I notice it more because when I visit your page I skip all Merlin related stuff and am interested in the rest so again my fault. As for my ise of imaginary- yeah, it was passive agressive, altough not intentionally so

… my bad. I rarely engage in political conversations online because it never ends well, especially when my views clash with 90% of tumblr users so I am used to combative tone and it was unnecessary.. As for SJW I am not sure if that is dissmissive term as it discribes the “movement” well? I am not native speaker and am aware that it can be used as derogative term, but was also convinced that it is used by people on the left if political spectrum. I asked you why you are mainy interesetd in USA because I was working under the assumption that u are Asian it seemed to me weird that a person coming from China/Japan etc would be championing social justice in USA when it not that big of a problem(or at all IMO) whie ignoring very real problems in their own country. But since you are not Asian and you post political stuff rarely you are right it is a silly discussion. The fault is completely on my side. I am allergic to these kind of stuff and you are one of my favourite writers so I exaggerated. Once again sorry.

As for the rest of your response: I also come from relatively poor country that was screwed over by both Britain and USA and many other countries, and I don’t agree with many of their policies (or most) but I don’t hate them and believe that as much as people like to say they start wars for the oil etc it is not really true. There are many political and global players and everyone single country is motivated by greed it is only that not every country can exercise their power.  

Relatively they are not the worst, it is just that since USA tries to paint themselves as heroes they are held to different, much higher standards than other countries. To sum it up, I am not defending their foreign policies, they have done a lot of wrong and are shortseighted but I still think that are better than other superpowers that will soon take over like China or maybe India. Also, I don;t understand why would you include global warming in your answer?why do you believe it is their fault

I am trying to leave as “green” as I can, I am a vegetarian and I believe we should do everything to preserve environment, but I wouldnt want my country to sign any deals concerning CO2 emission as long as other countries do not do the same. Otherwise, they would just cripple their economy and not help the world? As for Trump(if you are still interested) I find him the epitome of self-important, conceited stereotypical american but still so much better than alternative and despite distaste. would still vote for him. Because he at least apppears to be anti globalist and has a much higher moral ground than Hillary. what are his SPECIFIC actions that you find so abhorrent? Anyway, what I alluded to in my message was not politics of USA but the social justcie issues, like support BLM or me to movement(I am not sure if you posted enything regarding that, so srry if I presume wrongly) which I find are absolutely not based on facts and despite that people still perpetuate that, and if u don’t agree you are racist and sexist. No arguments whatsoever. It is also silly to me when I see the posts about the West being this cesspool of sexism while honour killings or FGM is nearly a non issue on social media or racism when considering the West is still the least racist place in the world when you compare it to China/India/SA or any other place. So, I find the social media effort to be misdirected and controlled by emotions. Even the indigineous people issued you mentioned. Americans get so much shit for their history, while pretty much every single country that exist was created by conquering or displacement of the previous population(u just have to go far enough down the history). So, yeah wht happend to Indigenous people and dissappearance of their whole civilization is a great tragedy but not the first and unfortunately not the last in human history. Why are we hearing about it but not about Anuit people or Persian or Byzantians? it is so imbalanced. Ok, anyway, sorry for the rant it shouldn’t be directed at you and tumblr is definitely not the place for it. Sorry if I offended to you. As I said I love your writing, “DC” is my all time favourite fic, and because I creepely once read through all of your lj(including asks and responses) I(like an internet creep and stalker)liked you and thought you seemed smart, well balanced and knowledgeable so I guess I felt entitled to to make the ask. Wish you all the best in life. 

No worries, I’m sorry I came off so aggressive in my answer. I did actually live and work in China for a while during my LJ days and it’s entirely possible I may have tagged myself as being there on my fandom profiles at the time. It was a happy period for me and I talked about it a lot to anyone who had the patience to listen, so it’s very plausible that you have read something about it on my LJ! I’m very sorry if it was misleading, but I was only ever an expat there!

I used to be a lot more open about my real name and real-life dealings in fandom communities, but that almost backfired spectacularly, so I locked down a lot of stuff because it could do me quite a bit of damage. 

OK, I concede your point that if you remove the Merlin stuff, a lot of what is left on my Tumblr is going to be either me reblogging cats or raging about social injustices (oops) 😅

I’d just like to make it clear that I absolutely do not hate either the USA, the UK or any other country in the world. Like I said, people are people, and disgusting policies are disgusting policies and every single country is guilty of them. It’s just that some have a bigger impact and are more visible. My own country is a source of so much shame and anger for me, it far outweighs anything the UK and the USA could have ever done because it’s personal, but our nonsense is just not something that I come across when casually scrolling through Tumblr, so I don’t reblog it. It’s possible to love a nation and its people and still be critical of the evil they have done. 

Also, let me just clarify that I’m bothered by all injustices and human rights violations everywhere, but usually there isn’t a post about them when I’m scrolling at 2 am at night that I can reblog. The USA is just… low hanging fruit, and let’s face it, from where I stand, hating on their president, the white supremacists, the Nazis, fundamental Christians, racists and the Republicans in general after what they have turned into is not hating on the USA, but rather cheering on the sane part of the country to get rid of this toxic waste ASAP. The same goes for Brexiteers in the UK and I am so, so sad for all the people that are going to suffer because of it. 

Of course, I’m aware that China and Japan have issues and human rights violations that are mind-boggling, but again, they just don’t appear on my dash very often, or at least not in English or from a source I can easily fact-check. The Japanese and Chinese stuff I follow is mostly art, nature and pictures of pretty clothes. My knowledge of either of these countries is very superficial compared to Western countries, which impact me directly, so it really isn’t my place to appoint myself as a champion of human rights in the Far East when my own country and continent are a growing dumpster fire that cannot be contained.  

On the subject of global warming, I’m not blaming the USA (entirely, because they, of course, played their part, but so did the rest of humanity). I’m enraged by their governing body’s rhetoric as of late, the denial of climate change, every single action that Trump took since taking office (such as withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement), him making ignorant, snide remarks in the middle of the polar vortex just days ago while people were suffering, deliberately sabotaging scientists and spreading dangerous, false information when each and every single country should be all-hands-on-deck if we want to avert a disaster of global proportions (especially with all the signs pointing to us being too late already). Nobody is suggesting that the USA should unilaterally reduce carbon emissions, all countries in the world must do it and develop the technology to make it feasible to convert to clean energy. And yes, the USA, China and other giants have to lead the way because they are the ones with the power! My poor, tiny country is not the one that can impact anything, so yes, the USA is absolutely more responsible to lead the way forward, but instead of at least moving in the right direction, Trump is deliberately lying and sabotaging all effort because he likes the money he gets from Big Oil companies, and he’s giving a platform to religious nutcases for votes, who think that there won’t be a global disaster of epic proportions in the near future because God promised Noah he would never again flood the entire Earth in the Old Testament. It’s not even the outright evil that is bothering me the most right now, but the mind-numbing stupidity. 

I have nothing but loathing for both of the Clintons. They have caused so much destruction in my country and I do not want good things for either of them, ever. I will never pretend that Hillary Clinton is anything even resembling a good person because you do not reach that level of power by having a conscience, but at the very least, she is not a rapist and paedophile that the general public knows of (which is more than we can say for her husband, btw). Trump has no moral high ground whatsoever, IMO. He has done everything imaginable, from scamming charities (this was proven in court) to raping minors (see Epstein). He has no redeemable human characteristics and is not even intelligent enough to pretend that he does, which is at least one thing that Hillary has going for her. I’m not going to sit here and list all the reasons why Trump is abhorrent because a) it cannot fit in a Tumblr post b) I would be sitting here for years. 

I will also not engage in discussion about whether or not BLM is a valid movement, ever. I don’t understand what you mean when you say it isn’t based on ‘facts’. Which, facts are in doubt, exactly? It’s based on multigenerational, still ongoing trauma and persecution of an entire race of people! I’m neither black nor an American, but I believe African-American people when they talk about the terror they experience on a daily basis in their own country. I have eyes and I have ears, I know plenty of white people and have insight into how they think because I too am white and have been raised with similar bullshit. I have lived in Africa for years and seen things with my own eyes. I will never not take the side of black people when they protest racism anywhere and I will never not believe them when they talk about police brutality, race-based violence and systemic racism in countries built on slavery. 

Of course, I’m not saying racism doesn’t exist in other places and in other forms, but talking about one does not negate the other. 

Also, I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make about the West not being sexist because other places have it worse? I’m sure I misunderstood this, so forgive me if that is the case. FGM is terrible, yes, but that in no way invalidates other types of gender violence that still ruins the lives of countless women. Just because the women in, say, Saudi Arabia have it worse, that doesn’t mean that the women here or in the USA should not talk about issues that directly affect them (and, btw, I have absolutely been outraged about Saudi Arabia and FGM and shared posts about both). All are bad! This is not a competition. 

On the topic of you saying that America gets so much shit for its history, which you think is unjust, I have to mention that European settlers killed up to 95% of Native Americans in some areas in relatively recent history. Just days ago, I was reading an article about how they killed so many people, it actually changed the global climate! This is genocide on such a massive scale, my brain can’t even comprehend it, and yet here we are today, with Columbus Day and Thanksgiving as holidays while the surviving Native Americans suffer all kinds of indignity and discrimination, so no, I don’t think we are talking about it enough and I feel that America deserves all the shit it gets for its history. IMO, it is not getting enough shit! The fact that there are other issues out there that need to be talked about too and are being silenced does not in any way take away from any of this. 

Anyway, let’s not argue about which country is The Worst™ and which human rights issues are more worthwhile than others because that is pointless. We already agree that all governments are corrupt, that evil happened and is still happening all over the world and that all human rights issues are important. I firmly believe that if they were to be evaluated by a psychiatrist, 99% of all high-ranking politicians would be diagnosed with serious clusters of antisocial personality disorders. Most of them would do anything and the only thing stopping them is whether or not they can get away with it. The remaining 1% cannot really do much and keep both their conscience and political power intact. 

In any case, the last thing I want in life is to get into Tumblr discourse with LJ people, so how about we just put this behind us? Let’s agree to disagree on who is worse, Trump or Hillary, because that is a pointless disagreement, especially since neither of us is an American and this is getting out of hand. I feel like we are actually miscommunicating and talking about different things. We seem to be arguing different points, so all of it is coming off worse for both of us than it really should be. Also, I wish you hadn’t sent me this ask anonymously, because I now have no way of responding to you except publically, and Tumblr is seriously not a good place for this. 

On a happier note, I’m very glad that you enjoyed DC! I’m very sorry for the extremely long hiatus! Unfortunately, I’ve been going through things that stopped me from writing for a long time. I hope that one day I can still come back and finish that story, in spite of everything! Have a good day/night! :)

*hugs*