#that’s the core of critical media literacy

[sleepydrabbles]

How many of you hate Bakugo because he represents everything inside yourself with the power to destroy that moral superiority you hold over everyone?

I did. I didn’t like Bakugo until I was more honest with myself. Until I realized that my rage against him was also pointed inward.

Funnily enough, Izuku’s arc with Bakugo seems to be less about repairing a friendship and more about coming to peace with himself, loving himself, and choosing to stop lagging behind for Bakugo’s benefit. He doesn’t obsess over Bakugo’s strength the way he used to— and tbh, I don’t obsess over the destructive side of my personality as much either.

I think that’s the lesson, here. Not “forgive your abuser”, not “repair a broken friendship”, but “see that you are one coin with two sides and make peace with that— then you’ll leave the side of yourself you hate behind.”

And that’s my prerogative. People can learn from a story without participating in the main narrative. People can learn lessons from a character who to you is just an echo of times past. Learn to let go of your need to have everyone agree with and accept your interpretation; it’s poison.

This isn’t just “don’t like, don’t read”. This is “accept that you are not all people and all people are not you.” Bakugo triggers you. Bakugo reminds you of a past that hurt you.

Bakugo triggered me. Bakugo reminded me of the small, neglected, tired part of me that wanted to set the world ablaze and scream until people remembered I existed. Bakugo is loud. Bakugo swears at people who don’t deserve it. Bakugo jumps into battle guns-blazing and, if the stuff I’ve seen on trauma symptoms holds true, is a walking example of ptsd red flags. He’s everything I’ve fought not to be since I realized at 16 the direction my life was headed. I hated him.

I wanted to be him.

In a sense, Izuku and I fought the same battles as he and Bakugo clashed again and again. That tension between the desire to help people and the desire to destroy, to come out on top, to always be the best because that was where the validation was coming from— I knew that. That same fight was going on in my own psyche.

Then the fight after Bakugo’s kidnapping, like a slap in the face. The idea that both my destructive and creative sides could present something of value to the world? Unreal. Too much. Watching Bakugo and Izuku settle into this unsteady peace where they at least seemed to respect each others’ power and viewpoint was… holy shit it was groundbreaking.

After that, it was easier to laugh at my own destructive urges instead of shoving them down, fighting them, ignoring them. Because they’re impossible to ignore. Because they’re always going to be there. I can’t shut out the child and teenager who were locked into this disgusting play of better and best— instead, like Izuku, I can huff out an exasperated “kacchan!” And move on with my life.

Because eventually even Bakugo decided Izuku’s way was better. Because as much as Bakugo is morally imperfect, even reprehensible, he’s relatable. Because Bakugo Katsuki is not just a bully, he’s a fucking human being, and if you can’t see that past your trauma that’s not my fault.

Do what you have to do. Say what you have to say. But get the fuck off your high horse and put your feet in the mud like the rest of us before you criticize us for being soiled.

[vexwerewolf]

I feel like a large part of the reason that so many criticisms of Union in Lancer can come off like they're willfully refusing to engage with the intent of the setting is that the whole "is it a utopia if there are people in/near it who are oppressed?" "Is it post scarcity if it's not existent throughout known space?" "Is this 'utopia just if it's not opely fighting the unjust polities it co exists alongside" line of questioning comes off as ignoring the points where Diaspora and Core rubbing against each other is a clear point of contention, where you're supposed to be able to explore or ignore these possible themes.

Also another of it has been done before by Star Trek several times, and rehashing it too much could bore readers

Media literacy on Tumblr is pretty bad, I agree.

[abattre]

It's actually so disappointing that Naruto's narrative took the route that it did. Kishimoto created an incredibly interesting world and premise, and ruined it by having everything amount to a shallow message of forgiveness that undermines almost every meaningful element in the story. And it's like,, I want to appreciate the world outside of the plot, but the moral framing of the story makes it virtually impossible because of how disingenuous it is. It completely undermines the audience's understanding of the tragedy and horror of the world so that Naruto becoming Hokage and being the most powerful person in the world by the end doesn't come across as distasteful as it actually is.

Like it's made abundantly clear throughout the story that the village system, and Shinobi society as a whole, is incredibly flawed. Kishimoto goes out of his way to show us that Konoha's council is made up of objectively horrible people. We see first hand how the council's short-sighted ideas of what 'protecting the village' means results in devastating tragedy for people both in Konoha and outside of it. It's clear in how Danzo and the rest of the council act that their atrocious behaviour is them just blatantly abusing their power to maintain their authority. The council has no remorse in anything they do; human experimentation, genocide, slavery, and blatant exploitation is all fair game to them if it preserves their status quo. And instead of maybe, like, addressing Konoha's skewed morality in a sensible way and setting the village up for reform, the narrative just tries forcing the audience to perceive Konoha's genuinely heinous actions as necessities. Which, you know, will work when you're like 8, but once you've grown up and developed some reading comprehension and critical thinking,,, it just feels annoyingly manipulative.

At its core, Naruto is a story that attempts to deconstruct morality. Like this is abundantly clear in how Kishimoto is constantly paralleling the dichotomy of good and evil literally every chance he gets. In the end though, this dichotomy just doesn't work in the context of the Naruto story because the narrative framing of the village being the good guys is just hysterically ridiculous. Konoha is an awful place, that does awful things, and is run by awful people that refuse to change anything because it benefits them for the village to remain awful forever. To anyone with a developed sense of media literacy the village cannot in any way be framed as morally good, so when the story resolves itself with Naruto becoming next in line to govern Konoha under the same unchanging authoritarian regime, with the same council supporting him because of his sheer physical prowess and complete dedication to their twisted ideology,,, it's honestly just an incredibly underwhelming conclusion to a story that made itself out to be more profound than it actually is.

If I had to guess, I imagine Kishimoto just didn't think through how negatively the world he created would reflect on the plot. Ultimately though, you can't write a moral story that's so deeply entrenched in real world social inequity and decide halfway through that because you don't know how to fix these things your story's going to have to be about how they're actually okay to be doing and perpetuating,,, like that is awful and also a terrible lesson to impart on an audience of children. With how serious the issues are in Shinobi society, trying to resolve things with the power of friendship was always going to fall flat. These broad scale injustices can't be brushed aside in that way without undermining their severity and diminishing the understandable impact they had on the characters that experienced such extreme oppression. That's essentially the trap that Naruto's conclusion falls into though, and so the story just ends up feeling incomplete and unfulfilling because none of the issues brought up are actually addressed or discussed with the gravity they deserve.

[damnfandomproblems]

Fandom Problem #5898:

"You should consume every piece of fiction critically!"

I'm sorry but I don't think that's possible. I have read thousands of stories and have several ongoing stories I'm simultaneously consuming and even more in the back burner. I simply don't have the energy to dissect every message and problematic element of a story because I have too many. And there are some stories I just consume for the cool scenes. Do they have important messages or whatever? Of course, but I don't really care that much about the story to think too much about it and I'm only reading it for fun. I reserve my energy for only a couple stories where I am very interested in the plot, characters, messages and themes and worldbuilding.

" You should consume every piece of media critically!"

Also, almost every time I see someone say this, they have the absolute worst media literacy. They are too biased and intentionally misinterpret the core themes of the story and character motivations. I'm saying this with a particular fandom in mind who constantly parrots this phrase. Most of them couldn't accept that the antagonist was getting a redemption and acted as though they were completely blindsided when they did, in fact get one even though literally every sign made it obvious that they were going to get one. Even if they couldn't tell from the vibes of the 1st episode that it was one of those shows where everyone got a happy ever after, it should have been obvious around episode 5-7 where the redemption signs were starting to increase rapidly. It was super obvious to me, someone who just watched the show for the cool scenes AND I disliked the antagonist. I did not watch the show critically at all yet I could recognise that the antagonist was getting a redemption from the story beats, the character interactions and the themes of the story. But somehow the fandom was surprised about the redemption and acted as though it was badly written. Even though I don't like the guy, I could put apart my bias aside to see that their redemption is essential to one of the core themes of the show and resolves quite a few of the main casts' character arc and the show would not be as good nor would the message hit as hard had the redemption not be there.

[johannestevans]

The Real Harm in “Harmful Content”

Exploring the true harm in “harmful content” and “problematic” media.

Photo by Ethan Will via Pexels.

We live, unfortunately, in a world increasingly defined by people’s lack of media literacy.

It isn’t as simple as people not reading, because people do — as schools and universities increasingly cut or allocate resources away from English literature, history, and other humanities, students are robbed of their opportunities to exercise their critical thinking stills; in the USA, “balanced literacy” strategies all but ensure many children don’t learn the vital skills to read text in the first place; many CinemaSins and Ending Explained- style videos are critiqued for their contributions to these wider cultural concerns of anti-intellectualism.

What defines this anti-intellectualism, and the culture that goes with it?

Every film or book or article or opinion I don’t understand intuitively and immediately is “pretentious”. It’s superior and self-involved — it’s a waste of time. I might make snarky comments about black-and-white Serbian films from a hundred years ago shot from the perspective of a pigeon, and I come up with that hypothetical in the most scornful manner possible, because I don’t understand why someone would want to watch such a bizarre film, or why they should want to make it in the first place.

People blame TikTok, they blame YouTube, they blame iPad babies, they blame technology, but it isn’t video formats that impact people’s lack of skills — it’s the fact that their intellectual development is cut off at the knees, in primary and comprehensive schools, in universities, in life outside of school. In response to what people do not understand intuitively or immediately, robbed of these tools to let them understand it, they react negatively.

To teach children, then adults, how to understand and analyse things on their own terms is in itself an individual process — it takes that time, it’s complex, and this tutelage is increasingly impossible with large class sizes, underschooled and understaffed teachers, and a lacking syllabus for teaching these skills in the first place.

How can someone understand their own inability in this area? How is someone to come to terms with this, to become comfortable with the idea they might not understand things, or that they might read them wrongly, when to be “wrong” is bad, and scary?

After all, the underlying reason for the defunding and reallocation of resources from the above humanities I mentioned, on paper, is that these things take more time to examine, test, and score. To the anti-intellectual, STEM subjects have right and wrong answers: humanities don’t.

If things don’t have right and wrong answers, if the answers are in shades of grey, how can they be trusted? What is the value in degrees or nuance when nuance is so costly — when it takes time, effort, money? How can I automatically dismiss anyone who is “wrong” so that I can be “right” — so that I can win? Because if I win, I get to stop thinking about this?

When that’s the reward, it’s more than winning, isn’t it? “Winning” this sort of thing isn’t just about one’s feeling of superiority — it’s ultimately about feeling safe, secure, and unchallenged.

This is the core foundation of many anti-intellectual movements and perspectives — ideas that challenge our core beliefs and ideas, the thoughts we hold as certain and most secure, can be frightening, destabilising, even.

People become frustrated with adages like “There are no wrong answers,” because of course there are wrong answers. How can anything be right, if nothing is wrong? If nothing is wrong intellectually, does that mean nothing is wrong morally? If nothing is wrong morally, then what separates good people from bad people? What keeps good people safe from bad people?

Here comes the crux of what this piece is about: “harmful content.”

Read more in An Injustice!

Also on my Patreon and my SubscribeStar.

[david-talks-sw]

It's a shame that the multi-media franchise of star wars have twisted the original narrative of the Jedi. I really love the sequel trilogy, I love season 7 of TCW, and Dave Filoni is amazing storyteller. But over the years, it's gotten to the point where the Jedi are being criticized to such a degree that now some people believe the Jedi should've changed their entire belief system. It's great to criticize the Jedi. They are flawed and not perfect. But now because they are now being framed negatively over the past 2-3 years and so now, some justify their genocide, disrespect their belief system, and believe Anakin was a poor victim who got caught up in everything. Lucasfilm or any writer is to blame for this, but I think people need to look a little more deeper into the media literacy behind star wars, and consider the fact that a child is going to love the Jedi despite their flaws and will be sad when they see them get killed. Because star wars is made for children who can look up to the Jedi as role models.

All of this.

I frankly don't know what else to add, @thecenturyofmusic said it all.

I also think there's an argument to be made for shifting global values.

I don't know about how it was in the U.S. specifically, but I don't remember there being as much of an emphasis on mental health back in the early 2000s as there is today.

Back then, I remember many fans sorta getting the core story but hating it, which resulted in a lot of them just bashing the Prequels.

Nowadays, a spin has been put on the Prequels wherein Anakin is the poster boy for the mental illness, he's just a victim:

he grew up a slave which gave him severe PTSD,

then was ripped away from the arms of his mother by

an elite order of emotionless monks whose emotionally-repressing teachings are the perfect representation of toxic masculinity and force you to never get emotionally attached,

who berated and rejected him at every turn,

he also doesn't have a father figure except for the Chancellor, who grooms him and isolates him,

and instead of supporting him in his hour of need, the Jedi hurt Anakin psychologically to a degree where at some point he just loses it and kills them all, because as far as he's concerned they were evil to him.

And... yeah. It can be interpreted that way. It resonates more to people when seen that way.

But it wasn't meant to be seen that way.

If it was, then we'd have seen very different Prequels.

Watto would have physically abused Anakin left and right like he's DiCaprio in Django: Unchained, instead of joking around about humans with him.

Shmi would've been on the ground crying, holding Anakin's leg and screaming "please no give me back my babyyyy!!!"

Literally every shot of the Jedi emoting, screaming, chuckling, being worried would be absent and they'd all speak with a monotonous voice, including Yoda, Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan.

If we were supposed to feel like Anakin is in the right and the Jedi are in the wrong then we'd be shown an Anakin who isn't petulant, arrogant and overly emotional. We'd see a normal person who gets berated by a group of unfeeling old men.

Anakin wouldn't call Obi-Wan his father twice (which is admittedly a nuanced situation because while Anakin may see Obi-Wan as a father, Obi-Wan sees Anakin as a little brother so hey).

We'd see Anakin explicitly state that he's afraid of his wife dying, maybe carrying her unconscious body to the temple steps begging for help only for someone to reject him at the door because "it goes against protocol" and that's when Palpatine swoops in.

Y'know, more explicit, emotion-eliciting stuff?

But we didn't see any of that. Because it wasn't about any of that. If it was, then it goes about delivering its message in the weakest way possible.

While nowadays, the popular take is that Anakin's downfall is the fault of everyone around him, the intended take was that Anakin's fall was his own fault. Anakin is a victim of his own flaws.

The Prequels weren't meant to show you what happens when you keep pushing a mentally unstable person, they were about cautioning children about not giving in to their own fear and greed.

"How does a good kid become a bad man?" He let his inner demons - fear, anger, greed - get the better of him.

And that's not necessarily a take most people agree with these days, but that takes us back to how much importance you actually give to GL's original vision.

[mwebber]

and can i say. the contemporary assumptions that reduce multi 21 to seb being a brat or mark being betrayed or whatever--they all go back to the core issue re: the fanonization of f1, where people have bought into the mythos and fanon of multi 21 and martian without bothering to understand seb or mark or seb&mark within the context of f1 from the 2000s onwards, within the more limited context of red bull racing, within the broader context of their individual lives, or within the overarching context of technological and societal advancements through the mid 2000s and early 2010s. these are real people. they did not exist and act in a vacuum of reality.

whether this phenomenon has come about as a result of twitter echochambers, general internet brainrot culture, a societal decline in media literacy and willingness to engage critically, or some combination of all that and more, is probably something that'll be studied by audience studies academics for years to come. regardless, i remain staunch in my insistence that, especially for rpf, we should continue to treat these people with the complexity they deserve. mark is not your cringefail momager, seb is not a grid dad, or whatever the fanbase has reduced them to. they're not fanfiction tropes, and i'm so glad eve's post shed some light on that.

[samaspic31]

God I fucking HATE academic gatekeeping and disciplinary segregation. And classism and selective access ofc (why do you only want to teach people who already know)

Like. None of these disciplines should be that separate. If you're teaching history or philosophy without sociology, giving dogmatic language classes without analyzing linguistic construction or semantics, if you're doing gender studies without biology, religious studies without rhetoric, history without political science, marketing or medicine or even law without ethics (and those ethics classes accounting for ALL discrimination, core bigoted beliefs and giving precise examples) (most fields tbh omg give the people in stem and studying law some goddamn critical thinking and frameworks to combat ingrained bigotry), teaching "intellectual" matters without addressing capitalist devaluation of physical labor, no media literacy or how to read statistics, nothing to actually make sure students have absorbed the material (not graded tests) the education is incomplete

[commando-rogers]

ok I’m sorry if this seems mean but the lack of media literacy and critical thinking that is necessary to look at this season and hate aziraphale and think he wanted to hurt crowley is astounding. like. is it not clear that aziraphale has been in an abusive relationship with heaven for millennia? that heaven has groomed him to want to be a good little angel who does their bidding??? is it not clear that aziraphale has been made to think heaven is good at its core simply because it is heaven and heaven must be good because hell is bad simply because it’s bad because that’s what we were told? that throughout both seasons he keeps trying to get crowley to do the “bad” “harmful” “evil” things because that’s what demons do, not angels, because demons are bad and evil because that’s what god said but not really god just heaven wielding this ambiguous “god’s will” as a means of gaining power?????

like. there was literally a parallel of an actual abusive relationship in this season in order to make it clearer to us. somebody who has affection for someone else but thinks they can’t act on it because they have an obligation to their controlling partner who won’t let them step out of line???? Nina’s journey was RIGHT THERE as a parallel to aziraphale’s.

some hallmarks of abusive relationships are when you are gaslit and fed lies in order to separate you from others. when you are promised something great to get you to comply, when really they just want to use you for their own means. “your friends can’t love you as much as I do, you should stay with me because I’m the only one who loves you and can make you happy. others are evil and must have evil intent because they’re not me. and you want to do what I say is best because if I don’t love you you’ll be alone.” and after the abuse, the cycle becomes love-bombing, being kind and gentle again, making you feel special. like. it’s right there guys.

Aziraphale didn’t go with metatron because he wanted to take this job and say fuck you to earth and crowley. of course, that’s the collateral damage, but aziraphale can’t see that!!! and heaven KNOWS that if aziraphale stays with crowley they could present too big an obstacle. so they need to alienate aziraphale from him. and what better way to do that than to manipulate him and promise him this incredible opportunity that can’t possibly be bad because it’s heaven and we’re good see!!! we know you’ve been having doubts and are becoming happier without us than with, so we want to give you this to pull you back. you’re so special, you’re so smart, nobody could do this except you. but they know they can exploit aziraphale’s eagerness to please and use him as a puppet to execute their plans.

aziraphale isn’t going to have an ounce of authority in heaven. they’ll make him feel special, yes, but they won’t let him do anything that doesn’t serve their interests. look at Gabriel!!!! that wasn’t some cutesy side plot, that was a demonstration of what happens when the most powerful angel in the universe finds something that matters more to them than heaven’s agenda. Gabriel wasn’t abiding and stood in the way of their plans, so they eliminated him. and they let him go off with beelzebub because they know how formidable Gabriel can be, and letting him go posed less of a risk than trying to fight him on it. but they think aziraphale is soft. so to fill Gabriel’s vacancy they used the path of least resistance.

aziraphale is a victim of heaven. he’s been kept in the dark and lied to so much. he WANTED crowley to come with him SO badly, but he was so afraid of losing his abusive partner/parent/anything because he’s been made to think he’s nothing without them. so he hurts crowley. he insults Crowley’s very nature by implying crowley could ever be happy being an angel again. the very essence of crowley is questioning authority, he could never be an angel, he’d never want to. but aziraphale can’t understand that yet, because he’s caught in this cycle of abuse.

the entire Edinburgh storyline shows aziraphale unable to recognize that sometimes doing the “bad” thing is the right thing. even when he realizes crowley was right and he was wrong; he still has to spin it as “well, this is actually benefitting humanity so it’s still something heaven would approve of.” everything has to be twisted to fit the narrative he’s been force-fed, otherwise he is bad and evil and worthless and he’s been groomed to think those are the worst things he could be.

as Maggie and Nina said, even though crowley and aziraphale talk, they never say what matters. they both hide so much from each other. aziraphale spends the better part of season 1 lying to crowley and pretending he doesn’t know where the antichrist is, because he believes heaven actually wants to avert Armageddon. if he can do good and help stop this with heaven, then everything will be good in the end, right???

but crowley also hides things. he hid what Gabriel said to him before the hellfire. he tried to hide his holy water heist. he hid the book of life. he thinks he’s protecting aziraphale, but they both struggle so much to realize in order to have Their Side, they need to be completely open and vulnerable, and both of them have learned to never ever do that as a coping mechanism from their respective abusers.

we literally saw hell do this same thing to crowley!!!! they said find Gabriel and we’ll forgive everything you did wrong and make you a Duke of hell. and crowley went “lol yeah ok sure.” he was offered the same deal but he’s the one who’s always questioned things, it’s in his very nature. he’s seen how demons work, he knows better. and he’s seen how heaven works and how evil they can be, but aziraphale hasn’t, and can’t see past his nature of wanting to be capital G Good. so when he’s offered the same thing, he can’t see heaven may have ulterior motives, because that’s not holy or good, and that’s what heaven is supposed to be, right? questioning them would make me Bad and that’s the worst thing I can be.

obviously there’s more nuance to this that I can’t elaborate on right now. of course they hurt each other and that’s awful. of course they both have trauma, and there’s a million reasons crowley is rightfully insulted and devastated. but it goes So Much Deeper than “he chose heaven over him how mean!!!!!!!” both seasons of this show work to show us that the “good” guys are actually evil. that we need to question what we’ve been told is “good”. that heaven doesn’t give a damn about good. they are controlling and all they want to do is win. and they’ll use aziraphale for that in order to eliminate the threat that he and crowley pose together.

if you think that aziraphale is the bad guy here, you clearly missed the entire point of the show.

[author-by-night]

I’m watching Terminator Zero, and it’s a great example of how the corporate media scene’s approach to IPs is a disease.

I have a lot of issues with the show on its own merits. The pacing is awkward, the only real twist I’ve seen was poorly foreshadowed in narrative but painfully predictable from metatext, and the pseudo-philosophy is framed as profound while being beyond basic when it isn’t totally incoherent.

But much greater than that, the show just can’t seem to escape the gravity well of the installments of Terminator that came before. Four episodes in, I’ve watched the show rip off a string of the more popular elements from Terminator 1 and 2. The police station shootout. Miles Dyson’s lab and character beats. Kyle Reese’s costume. The motorcycle cop disguise of the T-1000. The No Fate dream, done about half a dozen times over by now. It’s a new installment by way of meme culture, endless self reference…

…only without any understanding of what made those memes work in the first place, and that’s the fatal flaw.

As an example, why was the T-1000 disguised as a cop in Terminator 2? It was because that made it a better predator. James Cameron understood that the core fear the terminator invokes is of an unstoppable, implacable predator, and that framing it as a cop added a layer of unquestionable authority for this predator to abuse and immunity to the red tape of society. But is any of that theming or nuance actually involved in Terminator Zero when the terminator disguises itself as a cop? No. It shows up where its targets are and starts a slaughter, it just used the costume because the T-1000 did so many movies ago. So the reference feels cheap, and pointless.

This kind of thing happens time and again. In the MCU, in modern Star Wars, Star Trek, adaptations of Batman, Jurassic World, Ghostbusters, both live action AtLA remakes… I could go on. While I think the most common reason is that corporations focus on entertainment as a business rather than an art and capitalism gives them the real control over it, I don’t think that’s the only reason.

I think fandom does this too. A fan of a certain thing will get the chance to make their spin on it, whether “officially” or otherwise, and they know they like the thing but haven’t really thought critically about why. So we get nods to the original which feel totally out of place because they are narrative devices lifted out of their context and recycled into a less fitting beat.

So yeah, TL,DR: capitalism works against the creation of art and good derivative media takes solid media literacy and comprehension skills to create.

[rawliverandgoronspice]

Yeah, so... Just to clarify a specific TotK-related thing I haven't been super transparent about, or not enough perhaps? I'm not accusing Nintendo of being this machiavellian entity with TotK's storytelling. I mean, it's not impossible that some narrative limitations were put in place to avoid rocking the boat too hard (and some people actually are conservative and have conservative beliefs that they champion in the work they make/fund, it's A Thing too also that we tend to ignore or wave off because Surely nobody would actually think like that, buuut sometimes people do think like that also and it's really unfortunate but people do be conservative the same way people do be gay and try to inject gay stories in corporate settings that try to maximize profit and audience reach, conservatives also do that it turns out!!! not saying it's what happened because I have no idea but I'd hardly say it's impossible), but: I think the final result and what I criticize about it happened mostly because of carelessness and/or lack of power from the narrative department to make their case (I didn't even see a "Writer" or any mention of a narrative department in the credits btw, so I don't know what's up with that), and not from active malice.

I am a consultant, it's kind of my job to work with game companies to mesh gameplay and narrative together, and honestly an enormous portion of my job is to just... point out that some tropes and some "evident" writing shortcuts have Implications, or might end up saying the opposite of what the game wanted to say (not my favorite part of the job, let me tell you this). The game industry is really super fucking bad with themes and media literacy in general to be really honest with you, so sometimes this conversation goes over super well and lead to very interesting places where we get to define a clearer narrative purpose to collectively push, and sometimes people get incredibly defensive and reject all and any criticism before slamming the door on your fingers. It's a known thing in the industry (and everywhere tbh, like trying to get a guy who is "such a feminist" to admit that he's systematically torturing his female characters to give them character growth is uhhhh very veryvery fun as you can imagine)

So while I'm not blaming Nintendo for twirling their copyrighted Italian Mustache while secretely trying to inject imperialist propaganda in their good fun game, I do blame them for not spotting their biases during a 6 year development cycle and for not making their narrative ambitions a bigger priority given the subject matter, and I do side-eye them for addressing said biases in ways that reinforce the core issue, which is to create a fictional conflict that refuse to self-examine and will sabotage its emotional beats, its writing and its character arcs to preserve, at almost all costs, an extremely flat worldview that also happens to parallel really unfortunate real life propaganda stories in its imagery, themes and tone (and this is a criticism I only have for TotK, and not towards the entire Zelda canon which has historically been much, *much* better than this, even in entries that were pretty close plot-wise).

[lostcauses-noregrets]

Lost, how have you managed to keep your sanity while being in the aot fandom? I'm almost going insane because of all the vitriol, especially on Twitter. I know Twitter isn't the ideal place for fandom experience, but I spend a lot of time there for the fanarts, and I can't seem to avoid the toxic side of it as the algorithm keeps suggesting reposts of people with similar interests (mostly Erwin or Levi or Eruri) about some toxic takes antis have. And, of course, I find myself engaging and making it worse for myself. Should I just block everyone and everything and keep myself sane? 😭

Learning to set boundaries in fandom, or indeed any area of your life, is never easy and it's made all the more difficult by fucked up social media algorithms. I always recommend blocking and muting people who bring drama onto your timeline, but that will only get you so far. You also have to learn how to disengage, to take active steps not to consume content that you know will upset or enrage you. It's very easy to get sucked down the rabbit hole of negativity and outrage, and I'm certainly not immune. Whenever I find myself doing this I try to consciously think "do I really want to spend my precious time reading this bullshit?" The answer is usually no, so I look at the pretty fan art instead. Figuring out what your own boundaries are and learning how to maintain them is critical to navigating not just fandom, but the world at large, and it's a constant practice that requires attention and determination.

I came across a really interesting paper last year in the Association for Psychological Science journal called Critical Ignoring as a Core Competence for Digital Citizens, by Anastasia Kozyreva, Sam Wineburg, Stephan Lewandowsky, and Ralph Hertwig. The abstract alone makes salutary reading:

Low-quality and misleading information online can hijack people’s attention, often by evoking curiosity, outrage, or anger. Resisting certain types of information and actors online requires people to adopt new mental habits that help them avoid being tempted by attention-grabbing and potentially harmful content. We argue that digital information literacy must include the competence of critical ignoring—choosing what to ignore and where to invest one’s limited attentional capacities. We review three types of cognitive strategies for implementing critical ignoring: self-nudging, in which one ignores temptations by removing them from one’s digital environments; lateral reading, in which one vets information by leaving the source and verifying its credibility elsewhere online; and the do-not-feed-the-trolls heuristic, which advises one to not reward malicious actors with attention. We argue that these strategies implementing critical ignoring should be part of school curricula on digital information literacy. Teaching the competence of critical ignoring requires a paradigm shift in educators’ thinking, from a sole focus on the power and promise of paying close attention to an additional emphasis on the power of ignoring. Encouraging students and other online users to embrace critical ignoring can empower them to shield themselves from the excesses, traps, and information disorders of today’s attention economy.

I don't know if that helps Anon, but I hope you find a way to continue enjoying fandom while avoiding the worst of its excesses.

[winxwiki]

I utterly loathe these vocal winx "fans" who have nothing but contempt and disdain for the series, only nostalgia and what they made up in their head over the years. No respect whatsoever for the original writers, artists and designers, complete ignorance on the original italian version, doing nothing but complaining online about how much Winx sucks but they could totally fix it guys! How bad the character writing is because "Bloom is soooo annoying", no real criticism and media literacy. Surely this english parody is superior to the original.

And then you cry and complain on why hasn't Iginio catered to adult fans till now. Geez, maybe don't scream online how Winx is shit and your fix it parody fic is totally better. I dunno. Good thing Iginio changed his mind thanks to italian fans at conventions being passionate! And they do listen to real criticism, like regretting Season 8's artstyle or fucking up the story continuity for the sake of broadcasters' approval.

Not people making bad faith complaints and unfunny parodies that misunderstand the very core of the series.

I'm not saying the kids multimedia project made to sell everything with a Winx license is exempt from flaws or something but these people do nothing but complain and disrespect what they claim to love instead of just moving on, understanding that Winx isn't for them (anymore) or actually engage in good faith by watching the original, as so many complaints are the fault of a badly translated english dub or made up dialogue... because this isn't even about later seasons but fucking S1-3, the very classic Winx.

People like you aren't fucking welcome here. I will throw rocks to your window

[ripplestitchskein]

Heey I really like your Stolitz and Helluva Boss Takes! They are very insightful and interesting to read. Your circus theory is adorable :)

I’m wondering, why do you think this fandom in particular is… so rabidly against media literacy. I too am an old trooper from the Destiel days and I remember the days when internet fans would beg for more complex characters that have grey morality. Also when people would BEG for gay representation like this. I’m so confused man. The “vivziepop critical” hashtag just makes me depressed. So many people seem obsessed to criticize this show and I don’t get it. I haven’t seen this much hate since Twilight. Also did the mistake of checking twitter… Also, why do people act like one person did everything when animation is a highly collaborative medium and there are 100+ creator names at the end of each episode? I’m so confused because I’ve enjoyed the show so much and went online to find fanart and fanfics and found… insane levels of hate and projection?? Why does everyone and their dog want to cancel this woman for making an animated TV show with millenial style sensibilities? Why are they saying the writing is horrible and atrocious when I personally think it’s better than Family Guy, Big Mouth, American Dad and many other adult animation show’s writings? I’m so curious because I’m from Eastern Europe and it feels like something particular about american culture doesn’t click to me in all of this…

Thank you so much Nonnie! If nothing else I might illustrate Blitzo’s little circus with everyone in their roles. I’m working on a Stolitz piece I am VERY excited about but maybe after that.

As far as your question. Whooboy is that a question I have both given a lot of thought to and found no real satisfactory answers, but I have some ideas.

I think it’s a mix of things and I think a huge part of it is the medium and the accessibility of the creators combined with the show reaching a huge internet audience other fandoms don’t really normally touch.

The audience numbers for both of the Spindlehorse/Vivziepop properties are ENORMOUS. On the main channel alone an episode will reach 20+ million views. This doesn’t include other channels that take the same episodes and put them on their channels and reach several million as well. The Nielsen numbers average around the 18-20 per episode but Nielsen ratings are a flawed metric especially with internet based media. We’ve seen some of the Amazon numbers as well and they are insane.

We also live in a time where people are under an extreme amount of scrutiny all hours of the day, the likes of which we really don’t have a comparison for in human history and we have a independent creator who was largely available to that fandom for a long period of time. A lot of media properties are corporate, are sanitized and managed by large PR firms. I think VivziePop said some things before she had fully grown and developed as a person that people latched onto as a core belief system, something the internet is really good at. There also isn’t a lot of grace given to people who change their views after taking in other viewpoints and information. If you say something it will live on in infamy and I think some of the hate stems from that.

I went into it a little in this post here that I just don’t think people are aware of the creative process that goes into making such a thing. An indie creator has to be way more transparent than a corporate entity to get the funding they need and that transparency builds expectations with people who can’t grasp that plots and characters change as the story actually develops. They are very used to prepackaged, sanitized and complete productions and this messy and chaotic realtime creative process is very foreign to them.

Critical thinking skills are also a precious resource in humanity in general, and when you’re dealing with a fandom this large you have more people who lack those skills than normal. These two shows do not spoon feed their audience, a lot of things are in the details and hidden under character complexities and I genuinely believe that they aren’t used to not being told flat out “this is what is happening. This is how the characters feel about it.” By the media they consume. We’re also dealing with two different shows with similar visual elements and comparisons are made between the two while ignoring the actual shows themselves. A great example is the chains in Hazbin for Angel and Husk being compared to the chain in the drug hallucinations in D.H.O.R.K.S. They are not remotely the same, or for the same reason but because they are visually similar, being from the same team people really thought they were on to something while ignoring the actual content and dialogue of the scene itself. Meme culture used for wrong imo.

Having characters that do “problematic” things, say “problematic” things and behave in realistic and nuanced ways is hard for people to separate from the creators or the fans. Any whiff of perceived “toxicity” is jumped on like rabid dogs. They believe it’s a reflection of what the creator and fans actually WANT in real life. It’s purity culture run amuck and it’s a HUGE issue. Like actual fascism in action and it’s extremely concerning to me but what can I do but continue to engage critically with what I like and provide analysis while enjoying it?

There is also this sense of competition in fandoms. My ship is less problematic than yours. My blorbo is a better person. Etc. It’s the silliest shit.

There is also a huge wait time between episodes. In a binge watching culture, or a serialized tv culture where seasons are completed and then released all at once or on a regular schedule with maybe a week or two between it is hard for the audience to retain what they saw previously and connect it. They also build up expectations and have months to sit with them only to be disappointed when it doesn’t play out how they wanted. The Sherlock fandom was notorious for this. The years long gap between seasons let things fester and rot and now we have a show like HB that will go months between episodes and take years to tell a story.

Being completely honest almost all the criticism I’ve seen is not rooted in actual problems with the show but people saying “if they had done X and X and X it would have be a better show” but because the show didn’t deliver what they specifically wanted it’s “not good”. Or they don’t realize it is delivering that, just at a very slow pace.

I think it can best be summed up by a lot of the internet are what me and my partner call “baby brained”. I don’t mean to be dismissive of real criticisms but I haven’t seen any that hold water yet that aren’t rooted in the things I’ve mentioned above. If I’m presented some I’ll engage with them logically and will use the text to determine their validity.

I have more thoughts on this but this is already pretty long so I’ll save it for specific posts on this subject. But like I always say, just block them and do things that make you happy with the things you love. You don’t owe them your time or your attention and the creators don’t owe them anything either.

[dairy-farmer]

anti-semitic themes up ahead.

i hope this reaches well, the court of owls is tied with anti-semitic things. i'm not really the best with explaining but reading a post from someone might help and spread awareness.

https://www.tumblr.com/kalelraejepsen/665890471924678656/i-just-finished-reading-scott-snyders-court-of?source=share

i hope this helps :)

unfortunately it looks like the post may have been deleted, this ask is from july 15th so it's been a few months and looks like i wasn't able to view it in time before op took it down/it was taken down.

unfortunately the whole court of owls being antisemitic doesn't surprise me. as much as i may enjoy one character from dc i definitely don't like the entire media distributor as a whole, like their handling of tim 'coming out' where he's apologizing to his girlfriend for...not knowing he was gay? and needing time to come to terms with it so he broke up with her was the most recent thing i could think of and that was more mildly irritating than in the territory of the very long list of the racist, sexist, misogynistic, homophobic, islamophobic, and other things they've done or poorly portrayed.

i honestly mostly ignore the entire court of owls thing unless someone brings it up because it, to me, was just such a balloon-deflating plot. because whole thing was like someone did a middle school interpretation of 'eyes wide shut'

to me, one of the major reasons the whole court of owl thing wasn't good because it basically removed all the very real reasons gotham was struggling. gotham parallels many major cities that have problems with crime and violence and poverty and saying that it was some "rich shadow secret society" pulling the strings and not the: chronic poverty, absence of social safety nets, gang violence, widespread substance issues, corrupt law enforcement- it just really undercut a lot of the core values that batman fought for: dignity and justice for the people of gotham.

it's understandable as well though that once you start looking at the court of owls comics through a more critical lens that other things pop out as well like antisemitic themes that may present and whether conscious or not- if a writer or artist is bigoted that does have a tendency to leak into what they make which is why 'separation of the art and artist' is not always successful or possible.. and dc does not have a history where they can be given the benefit of the doubt. and i'm not one to defend corporations.

media literacy and developing a good base for interpretation is important for people to be able to pull meaningful lessons from what they consume as well as to recognize patterns and potential issues as well. as a result some antisemitic things aren't as in your face like a plainly derogatory rap lyric against jewish people by jay-z and for many nonjewish comic readers the antisemitism probably doesn't even occur to them. however being able to read an analysis post from the perspective of a jewish person who picks up on many uncomfortable scenarios that are all to reminiscent of antisemitism is a good way to help people remain aware and critical of the media they consume. it's a shame i wasn't able to read the post but even if i can't i can definitely see how the whole 'secret group of ultra wealthy people are behind literally poisoning the city' is uncomfortably similar to many of the deeply antisemitic ideas that have led to violent persecution of jewish communities for centuries.

[nozunhinged]

I kind of forgot tumblr is literally my brain-vomit site and I've been brooding over these thoughts since I switched from manga/webtoons to TV shows which is a little over a year now. This is not about any show specifically, this is just me while scrolling through any BL story synopsis.

I'm not gonna claim or act like I researched this or used some form of degree knowledge to write this down, this is just me rambling based on what I remember.

Alrighty. The good old term Yaoi.

Once used to describe a plotless manga genre to live out the creative freedom that was limited by classic Japanese storytelling structures and today used as a mocking term for outdated tropes in the BL genre — by me mainly. Because for me it's the perfect word for stale, overused tropes that imho can just leave. As to why, we need a little historic context.

First of all, the Yaoi genre wasn't even intended for the telling of queer stories. It is literally a portmanteau of "no climax, no point, no meaning". The main content of those stories was sex and it was men who fucked. Why? No clue. And also — contrary to bara, the nsfw manga genre for "real gay men" — the main audience turned out to be heterosexual women. Why? Also no clue. Doesn't matter because what's important (TO ME) is what happened after.

Tried and tested literacy around Yaoi developed after the genre grew in popularity and it turned out that most of the audience liked their men toxic, harassing and violent. So of course the literary structure would develop to cater to those characteristics. They would sell. But we're definitely not where we were 20 years ago, especially not the queer community.

Also, what I hated the most, there was always, always some kind of excuse needed as to why the protagonists needed to fuck 1. a lot 2. and nasty. And the EASIEST way out was always some form of toxic assholery. A person (nevertheless a couple) simply being horny because they — 😱 — just liked fucking? Nah, that was just for the straights. I absolutely hated that and still do.

And while we have Yaoi A LOT (if not everything) to thank for we have today in terms of queer asian media, I feel like just because it is historically relevant, sticking to it gives boomer energy. The genre flourished so beautifully in the last decade that I feel that it's almost a disgrace to stick to the old ways.

Back then (until today) the criticism and backlash regarding the rise of Yaoi was HUGE, especially within the (japanese) queer community that Yaoi Manga have nothing to do with real life, queer experiences. Until today there's a massive issue with women fetishizing gay men. And I feel like we keep forgetting that part.

Even the term "Boys Love" was coined to move away from its worsening image. And thanks to who? The Gays™️ of course.

Because the core audience of Yaoi may have been het women including all the issues that came with it, but also a lot of young queers found a safe space in this genre. (Including meeee)

They started making their own stories. The vast landscape of queer stories we have today, especially in BL, is thanks to them slowly but surely finding their voices. And I adored watching that development. I personally loved the emotional explorations in shounen ai as well as the nasty fucking in Yaoi, but they rarely overlapped back then. Today, there is literally everything you can choose from, be it gay vampires, gay salarymen, gay princesses and my personal favorite, gay autistics (who would've guessed 🙄). And I love it here sooooo much.

So yes, it may be seem all cool and smart to be well-versed in a tried and tested genre and make use of certain literary structures that developed with it, but the criticsm of it all should not be forgotten. And why the genre was renamed into "BL" in the first place. Replicating toxic tropes without reflecting on it just feels lazy to me and doesn't match our current times. There are a million ways to make toxic tropes work without feeding off of outdated power imbalances.

My favorite example for this is VegasPete. These two were the whole textbook of toxic, from stockholm syndrome to psychological warfare to dramatic apologies to even trying to end their lives. But the storytelling made it work. They were equally insane, complimenting each others crazy while being toxic AF. Even KinnPorsche were toxic on so many levels but it was great. Hell even KimPorchay had their own little version of toxicity and it was perfect.

We got from "no plot" to shows like these and I think that is fucking awesome. So why stick to the old stuff?

And by that I don't mean you shouldn't like or enjoy Yaoi-tropey shows/novels, enjoy whatever the fuck you want who am I to tell anyone that. I mean at the end of the day we're all just here because we fucking love watching the queers eat each others faces, aren't we.

But wanting to move on and have other, different stories without the assholery we have to deal with on a daily basis by real life humans is my way to go and I will forever defend that. I actually like the wholesome polished stuff Thailand makes. And everything else too. The more range, the better!

So please just let the queers do whatever they want on screen without inventing the dumbest reasons for it! Let them fuck, snuggle, giggle, fight, kill, whatever the heck they want, just because. That's the magic of a flourishing genre. Now make it all gay. Like Pit Babe (by that I mean the car racing part lol). And if you really need to give me a reason as to why someone is horny on main 24/7 (or not), I feel like I can expect a little more brains than just "well he's traumatized so he acts like an asshole with a heart of stone and compensates it with fucking (or not) instead of going to therapy"— no more of that pls. At least for me.

TLDR; I'll forever use the term Yaoi to describe lazy storytelling because we live in an era where you don't need to tell me why you want to fuck nasty and especially not if the reason is that you're an emotionally constipated asshole. And I think that is absolutely amazing.