#the arguments against criticism just baffle me

[helluvabinge]

Oh calm the fuck down.

A. This is a reblog, not a repost. Reblogs do not show up in searches or tracked tags, so literally no one on the main HB tags is seeing your post because I added tags on mine. Tags on reblogged posts serve one function and one function only - organizing posts on your own blog.

B. If you want to stand by the claim that you're pointing out the "truth" about Stolitz, put up or shut up. I came to this discussion with receipts and completely eviscerated your arguments with silly little things like reading comprehension, critical thinking, and logic. But sure, I'm only saying these things because I'm just so sad that a stranger on the internet doesn't like the same ships that I do.

I've said it before (like... literally in the post you reblogged, not that I think you read it) and I'll say it again. You don't have to like Stolitz. That doesn't offend my sensibilities. It's not everyone's cup of tea and I legitimately don't care. Dumb arguments, on the other hand, always offend my sensibilities, no matter what they're in response to. And while I don't like to dwell on that shit, sometimes I do feel the burning desire to say something. Which brings me to...

C. There's a block button right there. Feel free to use it. No one's forcing you to defend your arguments or engage with people who disagree with you. You can go on being wrong without being bothered by anyone who will ever challenge your opinions. I honestly don't care if you block me. Have fun. Adios. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

The way "Look My Way" has no purpose for existing besides being a Stolas pity party. I'm gonna dissect some lyrics I hate.

"A deed we forged to mutual gain." Excuse me while I throw up <3. You mean how Blitzo has to have sex with you or else he won't be able to do his job? Is that what you mean?

"What's left for me and my broken heart, if I cannot have you?" Oh I don't know, maybe your daughter?

"Unless it's me, and no matter what in this world I could give, it's not enough to save you from the walls you've conjured up to live." ....Maybe he doesn't want to date you because you forcing him to have sex with you?

"I don't care if you're of lower station, or primed to state my dark temptations" Ah the hellfire scene, the perfect example on how Stolas fetishizes imps. Also, nobody really seems to have a problem with Stolas and Blitzo being together? Except in Ozzie's, nobody seems to care about it.

"Why can't you understand? Let me explain!" Are you seriously asking him why can't he understand that you love him when you've only shown interest in his body and literally called him your impish plaything.

Yeah I'm not feeling bad for Stolas, this song just made me hate him more <3

[trblsvt]

3:00 am | yoon jeonghan

summary | sometimes he just didn't understand what he did wrong, and neither did you. genre | angst, hurt/comfort, fluff (?) warnings | swearing word count | 1.4k words pairing | yoon jeonghan x reader minli | lowercase intended requested by this lovely anon! i apologize if this didn't really follow the prompt :(

"well, if you don't want me here then i'll just go!" he yelled grabbing his coat and keys. you said nothing. "i'll be joshua's if you need anything," he said before leaving.

"i won't," you muttered as jeonghan left. "i don't need you for anything."

jeonghan made his way to joshua's door, head hung low. the fight was stupid, but it was obviously a sensitive subject that he already regretted bringing up. if he was honest, he forgot why he even brought it up at all. your friends were none of his business, he just saw some things that were concerning, so he brought it up. his mistake.

he trudged his way up the stairs of joshua's apartment and knocked on the door. the door unlocked and swung open. "jeonghan?" joshua asked, obviously exhausted. "what are you doing here? didn't ___ just get back home from that trip?" jeonghan didn't know how to respond. you were extremely close to joshua, and jeonghan worried that joshua might gut him if he found out about the fight despite being his best friend too. "we had a bit of a disagreement, an argument," jeonghan confessed. joshua stared at him and slowly opened the door enough to let jeonghan in. after joshua closed the door he said, "i knew you had a fight. i just got off the phone with ___. good choice being honest with me."

joshua brushed past jeonghan and into the kitchen. jeonghan followed quickly after. he could feel joshua's coldness spreading throughout the room. "do you want something to drink?" joshua offered, which was strange because he never did that. he always just let jeonghan get what he needed. jeonghan shook his head and went to sit down on the couch. he registered the sound of joshua sitting down next to him. "so why'd you do it?" joshua asked finally.

"do what?" jeonghan groaned.

"criticize ___'s friends."

"i wouldn't say i criticized them."

"you said they're awful people and that ___ shouldn't hang out with them." jeonghan couldn't refute that. it was true. your friends treated you horribly, and he felt like he was going crazy. "okay fine! yeah i said that! it's true though," he tried to defend himself.

"you do realize i'm ___'s best friend, right?" joshua deadpanned. jeonghan just stared at him baffled. he couldn't believe this was happening. first you, now joshua. the world was just out to get him. "i'm not talking about you, just please try to stay out of it," jeonghan buried his face in his hands.

"okay, i will. just don't ruin this really amazing thing you have because if you hurt ___-"

"you'll beat the shit out of me okay, yeah got it," jeonghan finished for him. "i'll be out here, just go back to sleep. thanks for letting me crash here."

"yeah, no problem," joshua mumbled, getting up and heading back to his room.

jeonghan had been awake for the last three hours. it was now officially 3:02 am. he hadn't been able to sleep at all. he knew what he said was out of line, but it didn't mean it wasn't true. your friends sometimes treated you like you didn't even exist. constantly not including you in outings, posting trips that they didn't invite you on, and jeonghan swears to you that he heard them talking poorly about you behind your back. how could you stay friends with people like that? he didn't understand.

but, he knew that wasn't the thing keeping him up. it's what you said after he brought it up.

"it's not like i can just drop them!" you yelled. he had rushed to your side holding you, "yes you can! they're horrible to you. why are hanging out with people who don't treat you nicely?" you flung your arms against him and pulled away. there were tears in your eyes, "they're the only people i have!"

the only people you had? what about him? he knew that he was around less because of his work, and it was a bit new to both of you because he usually wasn't as busy as he is now. but what you said before he left was stirring.

"i don't need you for anything."

he was sure it was just the anger that made you say it, but you said it when he was leaving. could there be some truth behind it? maybe he was overthinking it, but he needed to get this sorted out. it was his nature. he grabbed his phone off the coffee table and pulled up your contact. other than his family, you and joshua were the only ones in his favorites. he didn't know what he would do if he lost you.

his finger hovered over the call button. would you even pick up? what if after you talked you would want to break up with him. he bit the bullet and clicked it. it rang three times and finally, the other line picked up. "han?" you answered. you sounded like you hadn't slept at all. "___, did i wake you? i'm sorry. you can go back to sleep," he rushed, not wanting to worsen the situation.

"no, han, what's wrong? why'd you call?" you didn't sound upset. you sounded concerned. his mind was reeling. "no reason, it's stupid," he coughed. "i'll let you go."

"jeonghan, what's going on? where are you?" you repeated.

"i'm at joshua's. i just- god, this is so stupid. when you said that you don't have anyone, what did you mean by that?" he finally mustered up the courage to ask.

"what are- i don't know what you're talking about," you spluttered, and you were being completely honest. you knew that. jeonghan knew that. you never lied to each other, ever. "when we were arguing. you said you wouldn't drop your friends because they're the only people you have," jeonghan breathed. "i just wanted to know if that's how you actually felt." he heard a catch in your breath so he gave you time. "you have me, and i'm not saying i'm the only person you need because friends are great to have, but only if they treat you well. you said that you didn't need me for anything, but i need you. please tell me you didn't mean that. i'm sorry i'm gone a lot more now, i will do everything to make it up to you." you wanted to say something, but it died in your throat. he continued, "i need you so much, i can't do

you honestly didn't know what to say. you had been friends with your group for years, but suddenly things began to shift. you would have to be blind not to notice it. but, they were the ones who were there, through everything. you could overlook a couple times they forgot to invite you to things, right?

jeonghan obviously didn't think so. it all started when he came home from work, throwing his bag onto the ground and collapsing on the couch next to you. "didn't you have plans with your friends?" he had mumbled into his arm.

"yeah, they, uh, i got the times messed up. they left earlier than i thought," you had said. it was a red flag of course, and jeonghan knew it. "times messed up?" he scoffed. "this is like the fourth time this has happened. do you think they might be doing this on purpose?"

that's what did it. jeonghan had said what you were afraid of and you snapped at him. of course you didn't mean what you said to him. now he was calling second guessing everything. "hannie, of course i didn't mean that. i- i know i have you, it's just so weird for them to be treating me like this," you sighed. "you're everything to me too. i'm sorry i said those things to you, you have to know i didn't mean it. i never meant for you to second guess anything. i was just upset, and that doesn't excuse it-" you rambled on and on, and jeonghan couldn't stand it anymore. he did feel partly responsible for the state you were in. "it's okay, ___. it was a heat of the moment thing. i- i'm just being overdramatic. i know you didn't mean it. it's late and we're both tired. i think you should get some sleep. i'll see you, okay?" he cooed.

"han, can you come back? i don't think i can sleep on my own tonight," you mumbled.

"of course, my love," he said. "i'm sorry for everything, we can get it sorted in the morning, okay?"

"okay. hurry back."

"i will."

minli | not proofread yet! this was so fun to write. i'm so out of practice with writing angst, i'm sorry! and i'm not sure if i followed the request correctly either :( either way, anon, i hope you like this! leave a like or comment or reblog, anything is appreciated!

[pessimisticpigeonsworld]

I feel like this poster doesn't understand how generalizations work in analysis. TB stans say that TG hates the Targaryens and Dany because most TG stans hate them. That doesn't mean every single one of you hate them (although it's baffling to me why you love TG while loving Dany). If what we say doesn't apply to you, then we're not fucking talking about you! Why is that such a difficult concept to grasp?

Also this poster apparently doesn't understand basic genetics. Aegon, Aemond, Helaena, and Daeron are all half Targaryen. Jace, Luke, and Joffrey are also all half Targaryen. TG stans using the Velaryons' paternity and legitimacy as a gotcha is such a tired and baseless argument. It's just utilizing bastardphobia, misogyny, and blood purity (something the Targaryens are criticized for).

If op sees this, you confuse me, so much. Dany would hate the greens. They're misogynists, Dany fights against men's disdain for her gender constantly. Aegon's a rapist, Dany hates rape and rapists (obviously). The greens massacred hundreds of innocents, something Dany vehemently is against. Finally, the greens are usurpers, Dany's family has been usurped, supporting the greens would be like supporting Robert Baratheon.

TG stans, no matter if they love Dany/the Targaryens, are always ridiculous. Their hatred of Rhaenyra and her family just blinds them to everything. TG stans are one of the most annoying and insufferable groups in this fandom and every time I come across one of their posts I lose a year off my life.

[hii-hawaiiu]

Bored

Pairings: Sirius x Reader

Summary: Sirius Black is so full of himself and Y/N seems to be tired of it.

wc: 965

A/n : posting it at 1 am rn (a girls gotta do what she gotta do) angst?? kinda?? idk its more like arguments and all nevertheless i hope you all enjoy!! don’t be shy to leave some likes/comments/reblogs or all three idm

Why don't we

Call it for what it is?

Can't remember the last time we kissed

And it tickled my heart

I think that it's best that we spend time apart

I just yawn

Listening to you

Talk about yourself again

And again

“And then, I managed to close that major deal with the goblins,” he said with a smirk. “I don't know why everyone thought it was impossible, but I did it, of course! no one could refuse someone as charming as me.”

Sirius sat in his chair, leaning back with a pompous air surrounding him. He was recounting yet again his latest achievements to Y/N, his tone laced with arrogance as he boasted about himself again and again.

Y/N let out a yawn struggling to keep a neutral expression, her patience wearing thin with each word that came out of his mouth.

Y/N sat in silence as Sirius droned on about himself, feeling a familiar sense of boredom wash over her.

She couldn't take it any longer. "I'm bored siri," she blurted out, her voice betraying her feigned interest.

Sirius looked at her, a baffled expression on his face. "What do you mean, you're bored?" he asked, clearly annoyed that she had interrupted his monologue.

Y/N sighed. "I mean, I'm bored of this. Of always listening to you talk about yourself, and never once asking me anything about myself."

Sirius scowled, clearly offended by her remark. "Well, excuse me for trying to share my life with you," he said sarcastically.

Y/N rolled her eyes. "It's not about sharing your life, it's about listening to mine as well. This conversation is always one-sided, with you doing all the talking," she explained, her frustration growing.

Sirius huffed, clearly not used to receiving criticism. "So what exactly do you want me to say then?" he snapped back.

Y/N felt the anger bubbling up inside her. "Maybe try asking me how my day went or what I did, instead of just talking about yourself over and over again," she suggested through gritted teeth.

Sirius rolled his eyes, clearly not appreciating her feedback. "You're being ridiculous," he retorted. "I talk about my life because it's important, and you're supposed to be interested in it."

Y/N's patience had reached its limit. "And what about me? Doesn't my life matter too?" she shot back, her voice rising.

You followed me out and said, "Darling, don't leave"

Your passionate monologue woke up the street

"I'll marry you someday, you're perfect for me"

I got in my car just to drown out your plea

Y/N stood up abruptly, the sound of her chair scraping against the floor echoed through the room. She had had enough of Sirius' self-centeredness and knew that she couldn't bear to sit through another minute of his boastful chatter.

“oh come on! Y/N! Darling, you know I don't mean it that way!” He yelled/exclaimed as soon as she stood up waving an arm in the air as if to express his sorry.

“Look, I'm sorry darling, I love you, you know that right?” He voiced out his concern, outstretching his hand as if he's begging her to stay, “I’m sorry, love, please,” his voice began to shake.

She stormed out of his flat, slamming the door behind her. She couldn't believe how far their relationship had deteriorated, how he’s so self possessed. How he was so charming at first but now just the thought of him makes her depressed.

He followed her out and said, "Darling, don't leave," his passionate monologue woke up the street “I’ll marry you someday, you’re perfect for me”

She quickened her pace, feeling irritated at his attempts to win her back with empty promises and sweet nothings. She got into her car just to drown at his plea.

As Y/N sat in her car, engine running, she could make out Sirius' voice through the closed windows. He continued to speak, his words barely audible over the sound of the engine.

"Y/N, please listen to me!" he shouted, banging on the passenger window. "I know I've messed up, but please, please don't leave."

Y/N refused to look at him, keeping her gaze fixed straight ahead. She gripped the steering wheel tightly, her knuckles turning white with the force of her grip.

Sirius continued to talk, his words blurring together in a jumble of pleading and desperation. "I promise to change, Y/N. I'll listen to you more, I'll value your thoughts and feelings. Just please, don't go."

“I can’t do this anymore, Sirius” Y/N's words echoed in Sirius' ears, silencing his pleas. He stood outside the car, his shoulders slumped in defeat, as he absorbed the weight of her statement.

"You can't do this anymore? With me?" he repeated incredulously, trying to comprehend her meaning.

“yes, we’re done Sirius, I’m done”

As Y/N drove away from Sirius, her mind and heart were in turmoil. Every mile she put between them felt like a weight lifting off her shoulders, but at the same time, it felt like a dagger lodged in her heart.

Once she reached her own apartment, she parked the car and buried her head in her hands. The tears she had been holding back since the night before came streaming down her face, and she couldn't stop the sobs that racked her body.

With her forehead against the steering wheel, she let out a strangled cry, the pain and exhaustion finally taking over.

Cause I'm bored (bored)

Bored of this love, oh, I'm bored (bored)

Bored of this talk, and

Maybe you're just way too vain to be interesting

Baby, keep talkin' but nobody's listening

Don't mean to walk out the door

But, baby, I'm bored, oh

[sophieinwonderland]

I'm sure we've vented in your inbox before but we're seeing this round of "it's just ableism" shit and it's so annoying we wanna drop this here to share our thoughts/point:

Anti-endos are doing this repackaged transmed shit, and we were there for the transmed shit. We remember when people were telling non-binary folks that the discrimination they faces was "misdirected transphobia". We were there when people were saying that it was just an online issue. These arguments are the same ones! And they were mainstream!

And what gets to me is that this was like, less than ten years ago. Idk if it's because they were too young to be around for it, weren't in those spaces back then, or what. But it baffles us that this exact same rhetoric is being shouted completely unironically.

Any person stating that anti-endo bigotry is only a tumblr issue or it's DID discrimination that's just a little confused, would have sided with the transmeds during Obama's second term.

-Faye

This is way too true, and it's really sad that it is this way.

It also frustrates me that people keep having to relearn the same lessons every decade. That the exclusionists who pretend to be inclusive today because it's popular end up repeating the same exact arguments as the ones who oppressed them.

And it feels to me a bit like their values are just dependent on what's popular at the time, not any deeper moral philosophy or critical reasoning. Which if I can go on a bit of a side tangent, I hate this above all else. It's one thing that I just really can't stand. Morality that's subject to the whims of popularity.

Like, stepping away from syscourse, I feel like this is true for a lot of queer exclusionists. These are people who have gained a fair amount of acceptance because of people with inclusionist values. People who worked hard to make the world more inclusionist by going against the majority. By looking around at the world and saying "actually, how things are now is wrong, and they need to change."

And that's a hard thing to do. It's hard to realize that the vast majority of the population is wrong, and to stand up against the overwhelming majority because it's the right thing to do.

I feel that exclusionists are coasting on the work done by inclusionists who have fought tooth and nail for them, while clinging to the same mindset as people who, in past generations, supported their oppression. And ultimately, repeating their same rhetoric on new "acceptable targets" that haven't gained the same widespread acceptance yet.

(Note that when I refer to widespread acceptance, I'm referring to within individual communities that queer individuals are regularly interacting with. Nonbinary acceptance isn't everywhere, but it's common enough on sites like Tumblr, and locally in left-leaning cities. Adding this addendum because I'm sure somebody will want to read this in bad faith and argue that I'm claiming there's acceptance of nonbinary people everywhere, or something of the like.)

[hotchfiles]

i think the reason so many people are pressing against you is that you’re just taking it like a communism vs. capitalism type of game were there are also more factors besides capitalism as to why communism isn’t entirely effective in modernity. it’s not just that but the way you’re acting so cynical about it like when you took the ss of the anon with their usernames on just to have people validate your point which doesn’t sit very well with a 27 year old adult. people who showed you their views because this is a public space and they did so without insulting you while all you could do is be more aggressive about it by actually using insulting names and posting memes about it instead of actually moving on. but well, why do i even bother about it if you’re just gonna make fun of me, anyway. kind of sad that’s all that YOU being LAWYER has to give in such discussions.

the person i took a screenshot from made a new account to bother me because i specifically had closed off the anon option from my blog because i had spent the entire day replying to people (most of all pretty politely when they were polite to me) and i was tired

that was a new account, the screenshot was from a comment they publicly made on one of my posts stating i never take criticism well and i always tell people to fuck off which is simply not true

again, this debate didn’t start with me, its a capitalism vs communism because people came over quite literally defending capitalism

when people send me polite messages i answer them politely, when people are condescending (saying they are sorry for me, calling me weird or acting like i don’t know what i’m talking about, telling me to go china, that i’m poor and unhappy etc etc etc) i reply back with the same level of impoliteness

i had a lot of people sending me actual texts about how lenin was also very ruthless, quotes and all, and not only did i post it but i also agreed with them, because they were sharing information and being polite although they don’t agree with my political stance

all of this was brought TO ME, and i replied to people matching their exact energy, maybe some of you just can’t accept the fact that i can in fact argue back or simply not agree with the arguments sent to me and still be polite

i don’t think you were polite, you tried to, i’ll give you that, but that little ad hominem by the end kinda ruined it.

still, i’m replying to it politely because it truly baffles me how people can come to my ask and act like i’m stupid and then if i’m cynical then i’m the impolite one

[utilitycaster]

as someone who doesn't engage in the fandom a whole lot, the whole "the prime deities are colonialists" rhetoric is so surprising to me

like....who came up with this? how did it get so popular? and were they running out of reasons to hate them that they had to make things up? truly baffling behavior

I have an answer for this! It's speculative, but I'm probably right.

There are two scenarios in which this argument has come up:

EXU Calamity

Campaign 3, starting around when the goals of the Ruby Vanguard solidified, but reaching a height around episode 3x49.

There are two groups of people putting it forward:

People who are atheists primarily because they are mad at people who are not atheists, and want to see their hatred towards belief in a deity validated in a world where deities objectively exist (doing this in both scenarios)

People who are doing Cirque du Soleil level contortions to avoid the blunt truth that, as Orym and Ashton outright say: The Ruby Vanguard is a group of people who have repeatedly killed innocents, including Laudna, and yet Imogen did not find that alone to be sufficient reason to automatically reject it without further consideration (doing this primarily in response to episode 3x49)

Anyway, the need these people have to see the Prime Deities as evil in order to support and validate the outcome they specifically want, mixed in with a deeply Tumblr/fandom brainrotted "there needs to be an underlying social justice reason for your like and dislike of fictional characters, ships, or plot points" mentality means they've latched onto the idea of the Prime Deities as colonizers.

What's funny is that both these stories accommodate a philosophy that is entirely humanist (well, in a fantasy world, personist, but you get what I mean), and the moral stances of the Prime Deities can be entirely ignored:

In Calamity, the heroes are not affiliated with the deities at all until Zerxus begins to show Asmodeus kindness, which Asmodeus in turn hates and kills him for, but in the end the party mitigates the worst-case scenario without the aid of the deities, and indeed, are able to do it because of Laerryn's Hubris Against The Gods machine. Also the heroes themselves achieve this - without any Prime Deity's assistance or known involvement - when they fully yeet exile the Primordials across the planes. So if the issue is "any hostile action against the Primordials is inherently colonialist" then the argument necessarily ends with "so the people of Exandria should fall entirely, as was prophesized." Like, ultimately, once you argue that the world belongs to the primordials and the humans, elves, dwarves etc. are the invaders, even if you were to kill off the Prime Deities, the people would still like, be on Exandria. So either the harm is already done and you've just killed the original perpetuators but the Primordials remain dead or sealed; or the Primordials come back. And then, either the people then kill them to save themselves, thus perpetuating the colonizing will of the Prime Deities; or they lie down and die and it's Campaign and World of Exandria Over, which is a very poor strategy for continuing to have Critical Role as a show. Anyway the point is that if you are an atheist because you believe that people are capable of great deeds and have free will and should answer to no gods, Calamity is deeply validating; if you're an atheist solely out of spite and hurt and anger, then it's not.

In Campaign 3, Ashton and Orym outright say it: who gives a shit about whether the Ruby Vanguard has to do with the gods, or if Predathos will only kill the gods; or even if the gods are good or bad. In the end, we're talking about a group of people who have an idea for how they believe society should be, and they're murdering anyone who even slightly stands in their way, and how the gods factor into this doesn't fucking matter. Moreover, with the possible exception of FCG, the main people we see fighting the Vanguard are, prominently, people who either are not worshipers of a Prime Deity at all, or whose involvement does not relate to their religion: they're either doing it because they want to protect people (humanism) or because they think Ludinus fucking sucks and want to take him down, and they do so of their own power. Meanwhile, the Vanguard, for all their talk of liberating the people's of Exandria to achieve their greatest potential, need to appeal to an ancient power greater than them to do so.

So in summary: the impetus for coming up with the colonizer narrative about the Prime Deities always boils down to "I want the gods I'm told by the story that I'm supposed to like are bad, and the evil gods to be good, regardless of what's actually happening in the present" but the actual story is pretty much entirely consistent with secular humanism, accounting of course for the fact that it does take place in a world where gods are real. And the impetus behind that is either "mad at my religious upbringing and haven't dealt with it well so I want the D&D show to tell me I'm good and right," or "shipping goggles nonsense that this still will not remotely begin to address."

[masterrainbowcat]

More recycled insults and wild assumptions—that's all you've got. Framing my needling of your girlfriend as 'harassment' when all he does is call people stupid and then refuses to engage with anyone who criticizes him (which, by the way, he does with everyone, not just me) just shows what a bunch of pussies you anime-infused gamer boys really are. And to then turn around and accuse me of 'debate rape' is fucking hilarious (what's DARVO?).

I'm not outraged—idiots say idiotic things, and there's no use getting your knickers in a twist over that. It's entertaining to me to see how you fuckers defend your lies and historical revisionism. Especially baffling is the dehumanizing language against refugees that comes straight out of the Nazi playbook from people that call themselves 'christians.'

FYI, I'm not the person behind the @evil-fact-checker account (hardly on tumblr anymore, anyway and i wouldn't be as polite), but I may have steered them toward toradora and his measly echo chamber—and it's been very gratifying to see a chatbot take their insane arguments down with facts and logic. To my knowledge, nobody has caught them making any factual mistakes—certainly not 'multiple times.'

And the @captainsquare you mentioned is just another cowardly dipshit who had a big mouth and then quickly blocked me before I could reply. I've been provoking the people around you so hard, but none of you have anything of substance to say except for ad hominem attacks on anon (full of spelling mistakes, lol).

Eat shit, fool.

A lot of what you said just reeks of projection, but I am amused by the idea of recycled insults. Like, should people be making up new insults each time they interact? Is that why you started referring to @yourtoradorasextendedwarranty as as “my gf”, even though he’s a guy? Or is that just one of your dudebro insults, despite stumping for a political ideology that tends to frown on such behavior?

I’m fairly certain you’ve referred to yourself as an alt during one of these inane exchanges with EFC and yourself, but if you don’t want to claim him, whatever. That you find his style of arguing “gratifying” doesn’t exactly dissuade anyone from thinking you lack substance. And it’s sure interesting that know so much about his engagements despite not being on Tumblr as much anymore. Not sure whether to laugh, imply you’re a liar, or take a page out of your book and imply you have a romantic relationship. Tough choice, really.

Anyway, it’s really hard to take your disinterested act seriously when you spend your supposedly lessened time on Tumblr “needling people” and practically pissing yourself in people’s replies and ask boxes. Though at the same time, it’s also hard to take your claims of hypocrisy and crying Nazi seriously when you’ve evidenced so little substance as a human being. It’s like “Oh no, the guy who gets his morality from his Reddit alerts is likening me to a Nazi, whatever shall I do?”

Either way, I always find it interesting when you send multiple asks or replies and hardly ever reblog. Don’t you want people to see your epic takedowns of “anime-infused gamer boys”? You clearly crave attention, so why would you limit your ability to get it?

As for @captainsquare, I think that’s actually the better way to engage with you. If that’s what he actually did, as I’m pretty sure you’ve also accused me of blocking you in the past. But I could be getting my numbnuts mixed up.

Anyway, cry some more.

[redditreceipts]

www.tumblr.com/crippled-peeper/729279617705345024/

Most calm, head-adjusted and critical tif when she's told that objective biology and statistics exist, and also is simply called "girly" 😶

(also not mfs in the notes straight up saying "buh pedos/zoos are just having though tho!! They aint hurting anyone yet!!)

nobody said that not committing crimes was an accomplishment. we only said that it speaks against men that so many of them are predators, not that it speaks for women that they are less likely to be predators??

"the world is a better place without you in it" - the instrumentalization of suicide is something that really baffles me and that I don't see in any other community. I mean, isn't their main argument that we should coddle and affirm anyone and everyone so they don't kill themselves? (saying this as someone who has received dozens of messages from people telling me to kill myself)

this fucking argument is the bane of my existence. "you say group x oppresses group y?? but didn't you know that there are individuals from group y who harm members of group x??" you basically say goodbye to any sociological analysis here. like, YES. female rapists exist. I have personally witnessed such cases. they are horrible. a woman who rapes a man or a boy or anyone should FUCKING ROT IN PRISON. but social analysis is about trends, tendencies, averages, etc. there are black people who attack white people. there are autistic people who bully neurotypical people. there are gay people who harass straight people, and there are women who assault men. but in the majority of cases, power structures influence the direction of the assault. I mean, why would you even do any social analysis at this point? when a couple of exceptions render the entire analysis meaningless?

I just looked into this person's blog and they're talking about how they wished they died over the entire last week. idk i would post it here because of the raging hypocrisy of telling someone that they would be better off dead, and then whining about how hard your life is... but I guess they already have enough to deal with

yeah thats the energy... social analysis is totally useless because i personally have not experienced the same amount of female abuse that statistics would predict. do you know what an average is??

[losttranslator]

listening to a bunch of arguments against the gospel rn and I'm kinda astonished by the fact that one of the main taking points that keeps coming up could be lifted verbatim from Kaamelott.

It's this idea that 'condemning people on the basis of their unbelief in the cross is really unfair' (depending on who you ask, either because God could have simply not had Jesus die on the cross and/or because eternal condamnation is a really disproportionate punishment for something as neutral as mere unbelief or belief in something else). I'm bringing up Kaamelott because at his most depressed, Arthur says something I've always found fascinating but completely wrong:

"What do you call someone who suffers and spills his blood on the ground so that everybody be found guilty? All those who commit suicide are the Christ."

To me that quote and the argument against the fairness of the gospel come from the exact same place of profound misunderstanding. We are not condemned 'just' for not believing, and God didn't send Jesus into the world as a sort of twisted test for most people to fail. The very premise of the sacrifice for redemption (not suicide, not something Jesus could just not do and then we'd have all been fine) is that we are all condemned before the cross. If there was no cross to believe in, then guess what? The message would be that we are condemned, period.

The overarching story of the Bible is that we are already deserving of punishment for all that we do (all the hate and contempt we have for one another, all the good we should be doing and don't do, all the selfishness, all the hurt we cause...) and it's not lack of belief in what Jesus did on the cross that condemns us - lack of belief is what keeps us in our state of condemnation. We are not guilty because Jesus' blood was spilled (although that too is added to our sins if we remain in them), Jesus' blood is spilled because we are guilty. People asking 'so just because I don't believe in your God he's going to punish me?' as a gotcha to try and prove that God is malevolent are getting the most utterly basic cause and effect of the Gospel reversed.

This is how Jesus himself explains it in John 3! (which, btw, I saw some people quote as 'evidence' for this weird take)

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 

Whoever does not believe stands condemned already. And of course, people who reject the light remain lost in the darkness because they 'have not believed in [the light],' but the darkness was already there before the light came (duh).

It's expected that a tragicomic take on King Arthur in a wacky show that very deliberately has myth as its essence above even internal consistancy would have some wonky theological takes (by the way, that line is not even something Arthur believes, it's something from a dream that he had in his near comatose state after a suicide attempt, and he's recounting the dream to someone - which I wouldn't take as indicative that the line was meant as a bold philosophical epiphany reached through full clarity of mind) but it's baffling that people who want to seriously deconstruct the New Testament, the cross, the gospels or the concept of a redemptive offering for sin would be satisfied with something so shallow. Criticism of a belief system should get its fundamentals right to be meaningful, not be virtually indistinguishable from the angsty musings of some French polymath's Arthurian self insert.

[the1975attheirverybest]

Do you know where did he referenced Sam Harris' The End of Faith? 'Cause I've read it when I was around 13 and even then... Let's just say i wasn't impressed that much. I do find his arguments on nonthestic spirituality and psychedelics quite beneficial but it's just there's something that gives me the ick as an ex-muslim atheist when he talks about islam and terrorism with great confidence, while having absolutely no in depth knowledge around the subject. Also i've heard he talks about "gender critical" stuff in his podcast now, apparently? It's ironic that public figures of "new atheism" were not immune to bigotry, after all, lol. I wonder what would Hitchens do nowadays if he were alive, sometimes.

I think Matty mentioned the book on some podcast? Yeah, Sam Harris has a LOT of blind spots and he seems to operate from a place where he’s doing a lot of confirmatory thinking. Like, he cherry picks evidence that only confirms what he already believes and will not entertain other options or challenge his biases, especially concerning other cultures/ non-western traditions. Which is the exact opposite of philosophy, lmao.

I mean this as no slight against atheists, I only mean it as a slight against atheist philosophers lol. it baffles me when they do this kind of shit. Like, they accuse religious people of being dogmatic and irrational, yet they refuse to do their research and due diligence, and end up bigoted in their own ways. My BIGGEST pet peeve is fuckin Richard Dawkins. Thankfully, I’ve never heard Matty reference him.

But, yeah. I think as Matty has said himself he used to be an ATHEIST but now he’s just an atheist. So, maybe he’s evolved past the Sam Harris bs? I sure hope so. And…maybe from some of his recent songs and general statements about religion I think he has.

[rise-my-angel]

I am an avid fan of your work!

Seriously, the Dany fans are worse than militant Swifties sometimes lmao. (I also feel it necessary to point out that I’m referring to the deranged swifties) Don’t let them bother you (which is easy to say, I know)

It’s clear from some of the hate you’re getting that there is a particular culture of Dany fans who have no skills in engaging with texts critically - in that sometimes they have to consider both sides of an argument. If they see anyone disagree with their ‘absolutely right opinion’ then they throw huge temper tantrums.

There’s nothing wrong with people who like her and I’m not saying they’re stupid at all but that little microcosm of people who are obsessed with her and actively go out of their way to harass you clearly lack any sort of decorum and make it so very clear they don’t understand the series lol.

Or better yet, if they don’t like seeing posts that are anti Targaryen then perhaps they should consider not interacting with that post.

In my opinion, I think it’s daft to feel so passionately about a character who is clearly extremely power hungry, because if a Dany stan was magically transported to Westeros they likely would have been burned because let’s face it, she doesn’t care about her people to the extent people suggest she does, she only cares about power.

Basically, I think you’re great and your writing is beautiful and keep it up!

It sort of just baffles me at this point how often they feel the need to defend her against any and all criticism. I see criticism of characters I love, but I ignore it. I see a lot of Ned Stark criticism from Rhaegar stans but I simply instead make my own post about my own views and opinions on that matter rather than engage in arguing. I am fine with the fact that I probably haven't changed anyones mind on Dany as a character, I am here to just explore my interpretations and why I got to them. Not to debate her fans on their own personal enjoyment.

I've had a surprisingly high number of even random one off anons tell me to just "shut up about her keep her name out of your mouth" and it's like, I never tag her name alone. I only ever use anti tags so that people who disagree or like her don't have to see my stances against her but it's like they seek out ways to get angry when I never post my thoughts to the tags I know normal Dany stans will be in. I can be a snarky smart ass sometimes in my tags but I don't actually go out of my way to upset these people.

Blindly defending everything a character does to me, seems nonsensical when we are talking about a character with a violent streak for cruelty and uses her dragons as a threat for mass death. I feel like on a very surface level analysis, those are things which naturally deserve criticism about her as a character. Even with my favourite characters, I can explain WHY they did something negative but I won't blindly defend them as being correct or in the unquestioning right about the matter.

I had someone yesterday send me an ask claiming I was being disingenuous and blaming Sansa for something by pointing out a bunch of things I write literally did not say, because they were just mad they disagreed with my point.

It just doesn't make sense to me, going to someones blog or adding onto someones own post JUST to tell you they think your interpretation of something is backwards and wrong or stupid and mean.

That is not a productive way to convince someone that you have a point worth listening too.

[echodrops]

Lately I’ve been seeing a lot of posts going around about how you should never leave criticism on someone’s fanfic unless they directly ask for it, and while I agree there’s a definite line between constructive criticism and cutting someone down just to cut them down, I’m struggling to grasp the fact that there are people who post their works out on the internet in front of the public and don’t, in any way, shape, or form, want their works to be open to criticism. Something something Roland Barthes is rolling over in his grave something something.

I started writing fanfiction a staggeringly long time ago, and when I started, my writing was really, really bad. Like, truly embarrassing. I cringe just thinking about it. And actually, I received many positive comments, even on those original cringe-worthy pieces! (Not that my fics currently aren’t cringe-worthy...) But none of those positive comments changed my writing. The only comments that ever helped me grow were the negative ones.

Sometimes (oftentimes) negative remarks pissed me off. Sometimes (oftentimes) I insisted until I was blue in the face that the person who commented negatively was wrong. If I had had the power to reject those criticisms--or to stop those readers before they could give me their criticisms and tell them I didn’t want them, I definitely would have. As a young writer, I had a very hard time admitting that my work wasn’t at the level I thought it was (I was even more full of myself back then, you know). Who are they to talk?! I thought.

But at the end of the day, the negative comments were almost always right, even if they weren’t kindly worded, and the things they were pointing out in my writing really could be improved a lot. When, after huffing and puffing and feeling bad for myself a bit, I finally got over each criticism and actually thought about their comments, my writing always improved.

I have received thousands of positive comments. I have seen hundreds of variants on “My favorite part was this; you did this part so well!” People have changed careers because of stuff that I wrote, they liked it that much. But you know what sticks with me most, even more than that? One time someone told me my pacing sucked. One time someone told me my dialogue felt robotic. One time sometime told me my writing was about as subtle as being hit with a bag of bricks. I literally remember, almost word-for-word, every critical comment my fics have ever gotten.

I never explicitly asked for those criticisms. And I certainly didn’t think I needed them at the time. If someone had said first “Do you want concrit?” I would have flat out told them no. I wouldn’t have even known to ask for criticisms in those areas if I had wanted them because I didn’t even know those areas existed. But some people took the initiative to tell me what I was doing “wrong” or what I could “fix,” and first I got mad but then... I got better.

A bit of a jump here, but this situation brings to mind two moments where I made very different decisions as a reader. Once, maybe 10-ish years ago (Jesus Christ), in the height of the Durarara’s fandom’s peak, I read a fic whose plot and characterization I found very well done, but which, about half way through, picked up a bad habit of truly excessive use of repetition. I’m talking the same line being repeated 14 or 15 times in a single chapter. Once this had dragged on (and worsened) for five or six chapters, I finally couldn’t take it anymore, and I--politely, thank you--explained in the comments that while I appreciated some repetition, it was getting hard to enjoy the story because the repetition was losing its impact from being overused.

The author didn’t ask for that criticism. That was actually the first time I’d ever even commented on their work at all. They didn’t know me from George at the corner store. But I felt compelled to say something because I loved their fic’s idea and I knew it could be fantastic if the author just addressed that one thing. I genuinely cared for that fic and wanted to see it, and its author, grow. And you know what? The author listened. The repetition dwindled to an effective level and the fic was infinitely better for it; she received a greater number of positive comments, and now, my hope is that person is somewhere else, in some other fandom, still writing away--with effective repetition this time.

Contrast that with a fic I read much more recently, just last year. Originally the writing style started out straightforward and easy to follow and I quite liked the premise, so I followed it for a long time. But over time, the writing grew into... just a deluge of metaphors and similes. We’re talking a metaphor or a simile on virtually every line, often with minimal connection between them, so that the images changed so rapidly it felt like the actual characters and plot were being completely lost underneath the churning sea of literary devices (see what I did there?). I was at a crossroads. I could comment on the fic and tell the author that I really wanted to keep enjoying it but was finding it hard to follow with the new writing style. Or I could just stop reading.

In the end, I dropped the fic, and I guess I’ll never know how it finished. I didn’t give the author my criticism, not because I thought they’d take it badly... But because I just didn’t care enough about their story. I wasn’t emotionally invested enough to try to help it become clearer. I didn’t feel passionately about wanting to see it improve.

As a writer, excited keyboard smash from happy fans certainly doesn’t displease me... But it doesn’t make think deeply about myself, my achievements, or who am I as an artist. It’s moments like the ones above, when the question of criticism arises, that truly leave me thinking... How many people have silently engaged with my work, wanted to see something about it improve, and instead... just gave up on me, stopped being my readers at all?

To me, that’s so, so, so much worse than the occasionally rudely-worded critical comment, because, hey, those people still took the time to tell me what they thought was bad. They felt enough about my story that they thought it was worth commenting to try to effect change. Whether they did it politely or not, they did care.

But somewhere out there, there are thousands of people who just didn’t care enough to feel compelled to comment before quitting my stories. What were their thoughts? What weaknesses did they see in my writing?

If every one of them had commented to suggest improvements, I can’t help but wonder, how much better could I be?

[teukiemomo]

It is true I didn't follow the US politics before the election. This is just based on what I've seen so far since the election (since like the debate where Trump said questionable things about dog and cat eating since that kinda blew up everywhere lol):

As far as I know Fox News is Trump's ass-kisser. CNN is the opposite. NBC, MSNBC are anti Trump's dumb things which are... all Trump's things. I'm not sure what their usual stance is before the election, but during the election it was kinda like Fox News vs. everyone (it still is now). And based on what I've seen so far on Fox News their correspondences sound so... insensitive and delusional I'd immediately question their professionalism and therefore no longer trust whatever excuse they make for Trump.

Late night shows hosts are very against Trump. They dissed him every time I saw them on youtube and this is like every night? Some of them do sound unserious so people may disregard them, but Jon Stewart and John Oliver are 2 people whom I think really look into the issues like Project 2025, gun issue, inflation, crime etc. and bring evidences to the table, lots of times, to expose Trump. Both are also very critical of Dems on certain issues but often pointed out how Trump is always the worse option. With that much exposure to Trump's darkness (and, like, with proofs) I honestly thought the result would go the other way. Unless there's something I missed.

Twitter - I know there's an agenda pushed there 'thanks to' Elon Musk but somehow most of the posts showing up on my 'For You' are against right-wing extremists, like I don't even follow, like or retweet any political tweets that should make the algorithm swing that way (and gosh I WISH they could've done the same for my favourite artist, I like him and somehow they only show tweets talking shit about him, like Elon DO BETTER PLZ?) Anyways, my point is, even on a platform that is so blatantly right-wing, I'm still able to see that many tweets (with actual proofs, logical arguments etc.) criticise Trump, warn about Trump and his ppl, etc. that reach huge amount of engagement on Twitter, I was kinda under the impression that whatever right-wing propaganda on Twitter wasn't really working that well.

Trump is just... idk after those 4 years of bad-mouthing everything everywhere, fumbling Covid terribly, leaving White House with a coup, getting into another election running his mouth about dog eating cat eating, 'i'mma do this to women don't matter if like it or not', 'criminals coming from prisons and insane asylums', convicted felony, convicted rapist, proposal to get rid of Dep of Education, performing oral thingy with the mic on stage (??????), etc. Evidences of him doing stupid shit, saying stupid shit are like everywhere, and most things he said can be easily proven a lie by a simple google search. People may be disappointed at the Dems and hate the establishment, but how a man like Trump can be a better choice, under any circumstance, seems... baffling. Lots of ppl seem to choose him for the economy, which actually can be debunked by looking at other countries after Covid and Russia-Ukraine; inflation was a common issue, and the stats showed it's already gone down considerably at the time of the election. To me it just seems very easy to figure out all the arguments Trump used are pretty bullshit: no pro free speech person will bash and threaten to harm people who don't talk nicely about him, no 'America-first' person will ever spread lies and lead a coup, and never trust a multi-billionnaire when he says he's all for the working class.

I'm not saying the US mainstream media is not to blame, or the Dems is not to blame. They should've done a better job, but at the same time, the US is one of the countries where it's easier to see through propaganda. Freedom to access information and opinions from a wide range of perspectives with little restriction is a privilege some other countries don't even have.

I'm not from the US, I only made this comment based on what I've seen, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one outside of America who experienced this bewilderment. But if I've missed something, I'm willing to learn.

Gotta admit the headline is a banger.

[ladyluscinia]

Not going to put this directly on the long discussion chain that prompted it because it's somewhat topic adjacent at best and I have no intention of derailing a discussion of fandom racism, but - while reading some of the "Izzy critical" responses that @bromelads got - I did see mention of one thing that I have both passionate feelings about and a near constant desire to elaborate some oft ignored context for. So.

One of the things mentioned as a source of discomfort in fandom for "Izzy critical" poc was posts rejecting that Edward was growing or healing in 1x09 and 1x10, suggesting that it mostly serves to empathize with Izzy over Ed and to make Izzy's actions look better at the expense of Ed's character / softness. The same person who gave this example later agreed that there's some truth in the idea that Izzy crits' misinterpretation of Izzy fan meta has something to do with the (very baffling) perception that we all don't like Ed or think he's the simplified villain of Izzy's story or something, which I just want to a) appreciate for a second because I do actually adore Edward so much, and b) mention specifically because I think the whole Ed healing debate is a great example of that.

I'm not going to argue why I am staunchly in the "Ed wasn't healing" / "Kraken was inevitable" camp because I've done it before, but I do want to point out some related thoughts around that argument that I've picked up on each time it loops back around.

I feel like a lot of the people who strongly disagree with or get mad about that take frame it as though we are minimizing or rejecting the existence of Edward's softness entirely. It's like... Ok, so there is a distinct sequence of moments where Edward is displaying emotional vulnerability or a draw toward fine things that fans noticed, and then they interpreted the pink robe Ed's "healing" as all that starting to pay off in his character development (before being interrupted by an external obstacle: Izzy). A very straightforward A -> B. Only when I push back against B and say "hold on I don't see any healing in 1x10," then I feel like people hear me rejecting that all the moments of A meant anything at all. If I see the shadow of the Kraken as an internally motivated obstacle being built in earlier episodes, then I must think that's the dark and violent payoff, and the evidence of softness was a diversion or manipulation or just not going anywhere significant in character terms.

Which is very frustrating to me because Edward is a romcom protagonist.

Yes, this is very obvious to everyone. But it matters in this debate because protagonist status comes with very significant guarantees - namely, Edward is going to grow / heal / get his happy ending, etc. We've even got Stede's S1 arc (which remember is still unfinished too) as a good example of structure and focus on internalized character flaws framed by plot hurdles. There is no version of this story arc where Edward ends as the Kraken, and I have never seen anybody suggest he's not currently on a character arc toward growth and healing and a circle of true companions in Stede's crew who love him for who he is.

So when I or anyone else says he's not there yet, it's almost exclusively because we are arguing about where he is on this character arc in 1x10. Of course the appreciation for fancy clothes and slow mornings with overly sugared tea is going to pay off! Of course he's going to become friends with the crew (I'm rooting for Frenchie S2 bonding)! Of course he's going to get to beat back that self loathing he's carried since his dad! But people get defensive and angry like you are personally targeting them and declaring their blorbo an irredeemable asshole because you suggest character development major enough to drive a character driven show probably takes more than a few weeks of easygoing vacation to reach final form. That's not what I'm saying at all!

Interpretations upsetting or offending people even when written with a complete lack of malice is nothing new, but it really seems like making up a whole army of guys to get mad at for takes is happening more and more. (And I'll admit I'm probably getting more and more guilty of this myself as my understanding of what exactly people are arguing in different fandom city states gets more and more fractured. Meta builds off of meta, and if you randomly see one post by one blog you already disagree with, you might be missing a lot of context to clarify what they actually mean vs "of course that's the awful take you would have".)

[subtheory]

Here are my two cents on A Hacker Manifesto by McKenzie Wark.

"It baffles me just how uneven this book is. At its best, it is an insightful elucidation of a new type of relationship emerging and thriving within political economy, which is that of the hacker class and vectoralists, and, at its worst, it is an uninspiring rehashing of the philosophies of Marx and Deleuze.

First, the good stuff. The hacker class is never fully demarcated but is cast as a kind of middle-class precariat which works via abstractions. That is, they create new abstractions by writing a piece of code, a poem, or inventing a new concept with which to analyse a current issue. They are not farmers or welders, they deal only circumstantially with tangible objects; instead, they work on the immaterial that at least initially resists easy commodification. Vectoralists, on the other hand, are a new iteration of the bourgeoisie, believes Wark, and they function by capturing vectors and turning them into commodities. They usually do not own the infrastructure giving rise to the vector but they manage to make themselves inevitable due to their ability to highjack its flows. Throughout, this relationship is well-described and nuanced. For example, Wark fleshes out how these two classes are sometimes able to come together and work against similar enemies.

The bad stuff consists mainly of Wark's writing style and the book's insistence on squashing thought into pre-made Marxist and Deleuzian conceptualisations. It is a trick similar to what Wark does in Gamer Theory. Therein, Wark tries to recast the role of the critical theorist through the conceptualisation of video games. It ends up being an example of old wine in a new bottle. Nothing substantial arises from such an act. In this work, however, I believe Wark's argument would have benefitted from not turning the hackers into their own distinctive class of difference, but, rather, to occupy a two-way position of a surplus and a nothing. It might be what Wark is going for but the relationship between the hackers and the vectoralists resembles more closely the one between the Lord and the Bondsman in Hegel's system.

However, I believe this rehashing is deliberate on Wark's part. Oftentimes, Wark will commend the idea of plagiarism, propelled by an underlying idea of the Situationists's "literary communism". The point is to wrest ideas free from becoming private property by avoiding citation. References and citations make out a tax; in order to use a concept, you must first pay the tax of referencing the owner of the concept in your text. Wark's interpretation of literary communism leads her to claim that removing the private property aspect of concepts opens up a space in which ideas may flow freely, in which so-called canonised Master Thinkers have been dethroned, and in which everyone may participate without the presupposition of having read a lot of difficult texts beforehand. The idea is refreshingly egalitarian, and I commend it, but I always wonder what such an influx of new participants might do to the quality standards of the works being created. If we are to avoid gatekeeping editors and publishers, these standards need to embedded within literary communism itself in such a way that people end up recognising the standards as patterns and conforming to them unwittingly.

At the end of the day, Wark's prefigurative literary communism has not worked out yet, I believe. If you want the good parts, just read the following chapters: Abstraction, Hacking, Information, Vector, and World."