#the finale discourse

[sunnibits]

heyyyy so like. could we maybe make a tag or something for the people who are super genuinely upset about the finale. like #ofmd negativity or something. bc shit I’m upset too but I don’t think I’m necessarily upset in the same way you guys are and reading 1 million posts just shitting on the show isn’t really making me feel better 😭

[peachviz]

ok TikTok may not think unification confirmed spirk but I keep seeing old insecure bigoted men on Facebook angrily calling the short brokeback mountain so that right there is solid confirmation of spirk

[stolenkissesdiaz]

showing ppl this whenever anyone asks about ‘the gay firefighters’ like here *shoves phone in ur face* get to know them separately and together *makes sure to not tell u the Horrors that are part of the package*

[metamatar]

At the time, writes Casumbal-Salazar, “there was no public consultation, no clear management process and little governmental oversight.” Environmentalists soon began opposing further construction on the mountain, arguing that the existing telescopes had contaminated local aquifers and destroyed the habitat of a rare bug found only on the mountain’s summit.

Native Hawaiians joined forces with environmentalists, arguing that any construction on the summit is desecration of a sacred mountain that is the site of spiritual and cultural practices. “Indeed,” Casumbal-Salazar, whose ancestry is partly native Hawaiian, writes, “Mauna a Wākea is more than just a list of physical attributes; it is our kin. As our kupuna [ancestors] are buried in the soil, our ancestors become the land that grows our food and the dust we breathe.” Soon, native Hawaiians were required to seek permission from the state for spiritual practice on the mountain.

[...] Swanner finds that for native Hawaiians, “science has effectively become an agent of colonisation”, “fundamentally indistinguishable from earlier colonisation activities”. [...]

James Cook, the British explorer who was the first European to establish contact with Hawai’i, was tasked with leading an expedition to Tahiti to observe the 1769 transit of Venus (to help determine the Earth-Sun distance). But he had also been given sealed orders to search for Australia, indicating “that astronomy and colonisation have been entwined in the Pacific since first contact.”

[the-moogs]

i think in part 3 they should make a world where these two are confirmed gfs

[nortism]

Talking to people outside your fandom about your media of choice is always so interesting because after a while in fandom, you get used to the same old discourse but in real life you will be hit with some completely orginal and insane takes. I was taking about Les Misérables to some family friends over Christmas and they tried to argue that Javert was a completely unnecessary part of the plot. Like he didn’t need to be there at all. Truly a level of discourse that some of you on tumblr could only dream of coming up with

[ourflagmeansgayrights]

actually can we stop talking about “deserve” when it comes to characters dying in fiction. not everything is a fable with a moral lesson to be learned. romeo and juliet didn’t “deserve” to die. bambi’s mom didn’t “deserve” to die. izzy dying in the finale doesn’t mean ofmd is saying that certain types of queer people “deserve” to die. fictional death can serve more narrative purposes than just punishment for the character doing the dying.

[jay-wasreblogging]

"I won't forget you Buddy"

Comic book Eddie would've started to track down and slaughter Knull. 😭

[idolomantises]

Sometimes I get messages about certain dialogue in my comics about how a character is being passive aggressive when I'm just writing them as straight forward and blunt.

idk, as an autistic person who's dealt with genuine harassment several times (including a few months ago) because his straight forward and blunt demeanor was misinterpreted as being "rude", "ungrateful" and "bitchy", its just kind of interesting seeing people interpret dialogue in a more hostile way.

it's not a complaint, i prefer those fictional interpretations over terminally online twitter users who need to be coddled over everything but it is kind of fascinating seeing how people interpret certain dialogue.

[kiapet2]

Alright, it’s less than a week since the Owl House finale aired and as expected I’ve already seen two direct comparisons to Steven Universe’s ending and several more vague-blogs, because one of this site’s hobbies is using other queer shows to put down Steven Universe. So let’s do this, then. Let’s compare the endings of Owl House and Steven Universe, and what each is ultimately trying to say.

Steven Universe and the Owl House are both shows that deal heavily with the clash of individualism and self-expression vs. socially-mandated conformity, and both shows’ final villains ultimately embody this conflict. One major difference, however, is that Owl House approaches this from the perspective of legal/societal structures, while Steven Universe approaches it from the perspective of family structures.

Steven Universe has always been about family--and particularly the ways traumas and biases are passed down through a family--and it has always heavily used the language of metaphor to discuss these topics. The Diamonds are the ultimate extension of this theme, something a lot of bad-faith (or just bad) takes on the ending miss; they interpret the diamonds in their literal capacity as dictators, rather than the way Steven Universe always portrays them, which is as matriarchs, i.e. the heads of a family who dictate and control all the family’s other members. This metaphor becomes more and more blatant until it outright becomes text, with the Diamonds turning out to be Steven’s literal family members, with whom his part of the family is estranged because of their previous controlling behavior.

In accordance with this theme, we ultimately find out that the Diamonds’ toxic ideology, with its rigid standards of perfection, are not only something they enforce on the gems below them, but also on themselves. They are suffering from the system in their own ways, unable to live up to the standards they themselves created. And who among us hasn’t known someone like that? A parent or grandparent who grew up under a cruel, oppressive worldview, and instead of rebelling against it internalized it--who turned around and said “I dealt with this, and so can you”? And so the ending of Steven Universe is the Diamonds realizing exactly how toxic the rigid ideology they’ve spent their lives perpetuating really is, and confronting the fact that their adherence to this ideology is what destroyed their relationship with Pink, and that the only way they’re going to have a relationship with Steven is if they’re willing to commit to changing both themselves, and the family structure they’ve enforced for so long.

Emperor Belos, in contrast, is not suffering from the structures he created, because his rules were never meant to apply to him. He sees the witches (and demons, and so-on) as lesser beings, evil beings, who exist to be controlled, and ultimately, exterminated. And every element of the society he built--the schools, the government, the police force, the religion--he intentionally constructed to keep these lesser beings under his control. The real-world allegory isn’t hard to see, here. And because what Belos represents in the story is, in fact, a fascist leader, the story shows that he can’t be reasoned with in any way that matters, and instead he is ultimately ground into paste beneath the boots of the people he sought to destroy. Different themes, different endings.

Now the usual argument that comes up here is as follows: but the Steven Universe ending isn’t as realistic! Not everyone is going to change, not everyone is going to be able to be reasoned with. Not every older, conservative family member is eventually going to accept you for who you are. And while that is true, ultimately SU isn’t meant to be realistic; it’s meant to be a power fantasy. Rebecca Sugar has come out and said before that they wrote a world in which there was good in everyone, because that’s the way she wishes the world could be. That’s the world they want to be able to believe in. And I am never going to begrudge a person, much less a queer person, for finding healing in writing that kind of world.

But you know what else is unrealistic? What else is ultimately just a fantasy? Grinding your government’s fascist leader into paste under your boot, then taking over and remaking society into something that accepts everyone. Sadly, Trump is not likely to get his ass beat any time soon. And more generally, punching fascists, while ideologically sound, is something most people are not going to get to do, due to real-world consequences such as “getting beat up by the fascist’s angry friends” and “being arrested for assault”. And even if you did depose one leader, our very society is set up in a way that perpetuates all manner of injustices, and systemic change is a complex and lengthy process that almost certainly won’t be completed in our lifetimes. But it’s fun to imagine we could, isn’t it?

Both endings are power fantasies. Both show the way they want the world to be, rather than the way it is. They are very different power fantasies, which fill very different--and at times conflicting--needs. And in situations like that, internet culture really likes to pick one to be the right fantasy, the right way to look at the world. 

But the truth is, both fantasies are needed! Some people need stories about your queerphobic relatives finally realizing the error of their ways and taking the necessary steps to accept and reconcile with you. And some people need stories where you get to grind fascist bastards beneath the heel of your boot. It’s okay if you prefer one type of fantasy over the other! But in the end, both are valuable, and both are important. 

And isn’t it wonderful, for us to have such a diversity of great queer stories? That we can explore both of these deep, conflicting needs? Let’s appreciate each of these fantastic works for what it was meant to be, rather than trying to pit them against each other or make them conform to a single, “best” way to tell a story.

[angelsdean]

✨ blasts him with the pinkification beam ✨

[sunnibits]

nah bc imagine they really do pull a lucius on us and bring back izzy for s2 and it turns out that was the plan all along and we just like. went through extreme depressions and discourse for nothing 💀

[moonstrck]

Rereading ACOSF and Nesta and Cassian’s first sex scene ended in such a fucked up way, imo.

Despite obviously feeling a connection and saying he was “beyond lies right now” after calling her “sex” beautiful, Cassian immediately switches up and stonewalls her. She had said “just sex” at first when they began messing around, yes, but you can tell he pulled this just to spite her and leave her reeling.

Especially how when complimented she said “no one’s ever called it beautiful before”, showed him her genuine self and shared that the experience was “too good”. Almost like she knew it was too good to not end with some kind of punishment and pain, like everything in her life had up to that point.

I just found this so… ick. I’ve been in a position like that where someone just changes their demeanor and shows complete loss of interest in you after they’re satisfied and it’s such a disgusting feeling of being used. She even said she felt empty afterwards. And she had been self harming via sex before this (WHICH WAS ONE OF THE REASONS SHE WAS LOCKED IN THE HOUSE OF WIND!!!) and he did this. Again, ick

[hadesoftheabyss]

"We need more gay ships that include people of color!"

The Spiderverse Fandom: does that

"Actually no, don't do that. In fact stop touching people of color and forcing themselves into gay ships!"

[ride-thedragon]

Because I'm seeing the discourse pop up. Fake Rhaena enjoyers do not have a valued opinion when it comes to the leak about her and Nettles.

"Rhaena gets a bigger plot." Rhaena is literally a beckon of hope for her house by the end, the only dragonrider with her dragon of house Targaryen by the end. She has the entire Vale plot, which , as Rhaenyra thinks Tyraxes isn't enough, could easily be her playing the game of thrones and forming a close alliance and meeting her future husband.

"She deserves a dragon." She has one. It's one of the prettiest dragons in ASOIAF history. One that matches with her sisters.

"Nettles' plot points can be transferred." They can't. It's the worst part of the rumour and people acting as though they care about either characters. It's literally impossible for the characters because of how different they are. Neither of their plots can be transferred one to one. Rhaena is a Sansa parallel in the Narrative, Nettles is Daenerys'.

"It stops this conflict." Any conflict in this instance with these two is point of the story. Their conflicts are there for a reason.

"Rhaena can still get Morning" Then WHAT WAS THE FUCKING POINT???? That's actually insane. What would be the point?

To those people who say Rhaena is black, she isn't. I'll link the multiple post as to why:

Here

And here

And Nettles specifically.

The bottom line is that Rhaena is Valyrian. She isn't black within the written narrative even though her actor is. The way these two gentlemen are black, she isn't.

If she takes Nettles' place, it's racism.

So you fake Rhaena enjoyers who probably have a Daemon daughter oc to revoke her in your canon, who can go on for hours about Daemon and the Velaryon boys without one post about his actual children and who hate Laena for no reason can disrespectfully sit this one out. This change doesn't affect you or your enjoyment.

Let's not act as though the Nettles replacement theory doesn't predate Rhaena’s introduction as a character on the show.

Either all the final girls are on screen, or the point of the adaptation is lost before it can establish itself.

[zabreus]

one thing i see a bit with disco elysium fan script is a conflation between a failed skill check and bad advice from a skill. one of the beautiful things about DE is the skills are not arbiters of truth; successful checks won’t always lead to the correct outcomes, and a skill level being too high can impair you. in that sense, a failed passive (“anti-passive” according to wiki) wouldn’t be a skill giving bad advice, but a skill failing to fulfill its duty.

(bad example ahead) so it wouldn’t be:

LOGIC [Trivial - Failure]: Stick a fork in the toaster.

but more like:

BREAD-TOASTER: You peek into the narrow opening at the top of the electric bread-toaster.

PERCEPTION: You find a slice of bread wedged between the filaments. Smoke wafts into your nostrils. It’s burning, and you seemingly have no way of retrieving it.

INTERFACING [Challenging - Success]: The metal fork you found in the cupboard. It should be both long and sturdy enough for the job.

You: Grab the fork.

INLAND EMPIRE [Medium - Success]: The tips of your fingers tingle. This seems like a very bad idea.

LOGIC [Easy - Failure]: You are uncertain of the outcome here.

1. Use the fork to fish out the toast.

2. “This is beneath me.”

3. [Half-Light - Godly 16] Establish dominance. Fuck the toaster.