#the problem isn't women characters the problem is bad writing

[neverendingford]

.

[emdotcom]

*remembers what they did to Vanny* 500 FUCKING PIPEBOMB ATTACK.

[gojohatemail]

Sorry to still be a #Hater but, knowing I Will be playing 3 playthroughs of Persona 3 (2 Portable runs and one FES+The Answer run) sounds so much more fun and enjoyable than playing Persona 5 for a second time, vanilla or Royal I'M SORRY THIS IS A P5 HATE ACCOUNT NOW

[cardentist]

fandom isn't activism by the way. there's no way to do it good enough that it can stand in for putting in the work of real activism, but there's also no way to do it Bad enough that it cancels out any of your actual beliefs (as long as you treat the real people around you well, of course).

like, there's a difference between noticing that women tend to be under-represented in fics and linking that to societal misogyny (fandom as a whole is simply big enough that these trends are at least partially reflective of societal biases as a whole), and measuring specific characters and ships against each other and deciding that if one number gets below the other then feminism is LOSING.

or going up to specific People and grilling them about which characters they talk about most and why.

if someone is nice to women in real life and posts about wanting to raw old men all the time online then I think it literally doesn't matter at all actually.

recognizing that a trend As A Whole is probably influenced by societal bias doesn't translate to that Same bias being ever-present on an individual level. there's no way to write fanfic in a way that saves feminism.

fanfic is the Symptom, not the solution or even the problem. you treat the Societal Bias and the fanfic numbers change, you don't change societal bias by arguing with people online about the fics they do or don't write.

Sometimes people only write fics about gay sex because they're gay, and that's fine actually

[leahkentwriter]

Backstories for girls and women in stories that *don't* involve sexual assault.

I beta read a lot, and am involved in writing communities of various kinds, and I briefly taught English way back in the day, and I consume storytelling media in general - and one of my biggest pet peeves is sexual assault backstories. While I think this is improving, it's still annoying to me that a lot of writers (of all genders, but particularly men) fall back on a sexual assault backstory whenever they need to make a girl or woman in a story complicated or haunted or fucked up in some way.

Unless your story is dealing with the topic of sexual assault in some way, please don't use it as a way to give a character depth or angst.

Here are some prompts, just to get you started with some ideas.

Why would a woman be trying to escape her past? Why would she be seeking a fresh start?

She hated her small town; the people there didn't understand her and she never felt like she fit in - she's queer, she has a weird birthmark, she's got unique interests, she has magical powers, etc.

She's a criminal - she robbed banks or stole cars and she wanted a fresh start

She was an addict and hurt people, and she wants a fresh start now that she's sober

Her parent is a criminal or an addict and she's trying to outrun the stigma of being related to them

She didn't get along with a stepparent and skipped town as soon as she turned 18

She had big dreams of being something else, and left to pursue them

Her childhood home was haunted, but no one believed her

She got married young then divorced, and wants to start over somewhere that no one knows her

Heartbreak of any variety - she's leaving a place that reminds her too much of someone she lost or couldn't have

She wants better; maybe more money, or a career, or simply a higher quality of life

Some other violent tragedy occurred - a school shooting, an explosion at the plant, police brutality, her best friend was killed, etc.

Her hometown no longer exists (climate change, the main factory shut down, it was overrun by rabid squirrels, etc.)

What would make a woman distrustful of others?

Heartbreak; being lied to, cheated on, left for her best friend, etc.

A big betrayal - her former best friend told everyone a secret about her, someone weaponized her trauma or her past or a major flaw she's sensitive about, etc.

She witnessed a traumatizing event as a child

Her mother was a grifter and used her as part of her scams

One parent cheated on the other and broke up the family

Her older brother isn't dead after all, he was disowned for being gay and now she's questioning everything her parents ever told her

She has problems with her memory, and is never quite sure what the truth is

She's bad at reading people and has been taken advantage of

She finds out a dark secret about someone she loves and is having trouble processing it

She gradually comes to see that someone she idealized as a child is not at all what they seem

Someone she thought was a good, kind, and genuine person is arrested for a terrible crime

Spiritual abuse - the worldview she was taught was right turns out to be exploitative, represses women, etc., so she leaves

What would cause a woman to have mental health issues?

Any form of abuse - doesn't have to be sexual

Her parents had really high expectations that she couldn't live up to

It simply runs in the family

Survivor's guilt - she survived something that someone else did not

She was bullied and no one protected her

Her parents were very controlling and destroyed her confidence

Her sibling was the golden child and she was the scapegoat

She's had issues since childhood but her parents refused to admit there was anything wrong with her, so she didn't get help

Being a part of any oppressed group of people who experience discrimination - she's a person of color, she's an immigrant, she's got a disability, she's queer, etc.

Any major trauma, either witnessed or being a part of - weather events and natural disasters, infrastructure collapse, crashes and accidents, fires, a shooting or a murder, etc.

You're a writer - get creative. There are lots of ways to traumatize and haunt a girl/woman character without having to resort to a sexual assault backstory. You can even make her the problem! Maybe she's the one who did something bad and is trying to outrun the guilt.

Let's also let go of the idea that it's meeting and falling in love with a man that saves her from her trauma. Let her have a healing arc that doesn't involve a man - a love story can still be there, but it can't be the magic healing balm that fixes her. Make her have to save herself. Give her autonomy to both make her own mistakes, and improve her own situation. Don't let your man go into savior mode - let him get frustrated with her. Let her push him away without him clinging to her in a desperate bid to show her what unconditional love is. Don't let him be a martyr to her trauma.

Women are complicated for many reasons. We have trauma for many reasons. We have mental health issues for many reasons. We may want to escape our past for many reasons. We're angsty and weird for many reasons.

Please pick literally anything other than sexual assault.

[genericpuff]

What is the thing you feel like Lore Olympus failed at or did the worst. The comic has a magnitude of problems but what is one problem that you have the most hatred for or just flat out makes you angry?

(Just curious)

There are so, so many things I could point to as "the worst" thing that the comic did, because it has a LOT of worsts, but I think ultimately the failing of the original myth's messaging has to take the cake because it's ultimately the root of all of LO's problems.

Rachel herself seems to have this disconnect between what's going on in her head vs. what she's actually writing. It's especially present in her Q&A's and interviews where she claims certain things about the comic / text that just aren't present in the slightest during the actual comic. One such example that ties into my answer is this response she gave to Girl Wonder Podcast:

"I feel like female characters in general, people will be a little harsher on them and sometimes way harsher on them, and I used to be like.. before I started writing the story and like making a story I was like yeah, sexism is not that bad, and [now] I was like oh it's bad. It's quite bad [laughs], so like, I don't know, I feel like the female characters in the story don't get so much of a pass. But this isn't consistent across the board, it's not all the time"

It's ironic at best and tone deaf at worst that she would claim that it's her audience being harsh on the female characters, when she's the one who wrote them into the characters they are that would get that reaction. Minthe had her BPD retconned so now she's just the abusive other girl. Hestia was turned into a cruel hypocrite when it was revealed she was a lesbian. Hera is racist to nymphs and cruel to the lower class and yet she's still rewarded in the end by getting to run off with a nymph girl who we've never seen her have any extended interaction with. And worst of all, Demeter was robbed of all of her agency all in favor of turning her into the evil Mother Gothel mom who's overbearing and cruel to poor Persephone. Some of these women deserve to be called out (Hera and Hestia), and others like Minthe and Demeter were simply used as props to do exactly what Rachel claims she doesn't like people doing and is labelling as sexism - to get harsh reactions and give the audience someone to hate on. Rachel desperately needs to learn to read her own work. Her audience is "sexist" towards these women because Rachel wrote them that way.

It fucking sucks and it's, ngl, extremely disrespectful to the messaging of the original myth that was written to comfort and empower the mothers who had lost their daughters to marriages back in the day. It wasn't some simple "aww the girl moved out and now she doesn't visit anymore!" girls who got married off were often literally never seen again and it wasn't by choice. Not only that, but in certain regions (such as in Athens) the women were isolated to their own section of the house upstairs (while the men lived downstairs) so that they wouldn't be seen by visiting guests or strangers.

It's why in some cultures the original H x P myth was considered a "golden standard" for marriages (at the time) because not only was Persephone given power over the domain alongside Hades, but she actually did get to see her mother - but it wasn't because Hades was just such a kind guy who would let her go willingly, it's because Demeter had to literally hold the world hostage and fight for her right to reunite with her child.

So for LO to not only twist Demeter's love and justifiable concern for her daughter into "helicopter parenting", but also rob her of her agency and power in fighting for her child, it fundamentally misses the entire point of the original myth and undoes itself as a retelling that's trying to be taken seriously in the discussion of Greek myth media. And for that, Rachel should be ashamed of herself.

[josru]

a little rant:

If you need to understand one thing about the Bear subreddit, here it is.

It's not a supportive place for women, let alone black women/women of colour. (Not surprising, as reddit is male and white dominated.) Sydney gets mad hate for daring to be apart of the main relationship in the show (that is now defunct), something that the writers wrote for her? Regardless if you see Sydcarmy as romantic or not. The whole point of the Bear is their partnership.

And yet the Bear fandom on reddit loves to diminish her role, and act as if Sydney is an uppity black woman who needs to be rid of. They act like it's surprising that people want to talk about her or like her. And they also think Sydcarmy is mad overrated and implausible. They bring it up constantly because it pisses them off that a sizeable portion of us love it.

Probably because Sydney is an actual character we can relate to and root for. But oh no, men don't like that because that means she isn't a perfect little white fantasy, and she has actual problems and ideas and speaks on them, and she's BLACK, god forbid!! And they could never have empathy for someone who wasn't themselves. Sydney is annoying to them because it reminds them they don't care about other people.

It's barely a place for white women too, because they only like you if you're a gf/therapist/not your own person. A flat, 2-D image with no problems. They don't care about Jess or Claire, they just want to fuck them. Even in this post, the respect of relatability and empathy is given to Richie in the title, because he finally "got some", despite the picture being of Jess. Like, great, guys, you diminished a woman (a PERSON) to being a "win" for a man, because that's all that matters, right? Whether or not a woman is a fuckable prize?

Even the writing of the show actually just pushes the whole "if women = gf, = only gf, nothing else" trope. So in a weird way, I guess I know where they're getting it from, but I expected more from adult men? My bad.

Women deserve to be more than someone's fantasy!! I am sick and tired of this misogynistic drivel. I also think it's fucked up how much of these dudes on reddit love Richie this much. Like, we get it, you think he's a self-help sigma alpha chad king now. Just keep ignoring the problems he keeps creating, how irritating he can be sometimes, as well as the fact that men picking up their lives will always have way more support than female characters. Richie is not some underdog character lol. The narrative of the show has made it clear he is very beloved and will have a nice, sweet arc.

Unlike Sydney, and Marcus, and apparently maybe even Tina. But yes, keep talking about how your white male character is the underdog who is being sooo mistreated and finally got something he deserved, even though in actuality, Syd and every other POC got treated like shit this season. It's like they swapped them, the real main characters, and made them the underdogs/tertiary while Richie has become so important. But it's key to reddit's white male victim complex that Richie is finally getting "good treatment" when he never suffered being completely ignored by the writers at all, and he was never at risk of that either.

[varpusvaras]

Winnick will come this close to writing a good, rightfullly angry character with BPD/CPTSD and ruin it by making him his conception of "a dangerous psychopath" because dc's understanding of mental illness begins and ends with the joker.

I like that Jason was angry i'm not gonna lie I enjoy the "bad victim who doesn't accept that they were a necessary sacrifice, who doesn't think what happened to them is something they should be expected to tolerate, like fuck your greater good, you weren't there, it isn't worth this." I think even looking at Jason's past before getting adopted he has reason to be angry, like he is poor af and starving and he had to take care of his mom and his dad is in jail because he couldn't see another way to provide and he gets trafficked -he has so many reasons to be angry. And he's not, and I love jaybin, but I think there are so many ways and things he can be angry about without it feeling classist. And I love that he can't emotionally regulate, that he has so clearly BPD/CPTSD because why the fuck would he not, have you seen his life (and that's not even counting the csa hc, which i am because willfully and consistently implying csa and then not addressing it/denying it feels like feeding into a culture of taboo that ruins lives and getting away with covert victim-blaming at the same time). The issue is that they lack finesse or any kind of understanding of anger. The think anger is a personality trait. They think angry = evil. They think being angry means you're violent at and about everything, that you shoot indiscriminately even though you've known better since you were a kid, that you're suddenly treating women like shit (which, wtf seriously) which okay maybe THEY treat women shitty for no reason when they're angry, but that'd be more of a them problem I'd say. Their portrayal of anger is classist because their conception of emotions hasn't evolved since fucking Descartes. Think anger = bad = poor and not only doesn't it occur to them that this is classist, they so instinctively assign moral value to the concepts of poor and angry that they don't realise it and just conceptualise poor=angry and end up with incredibly classist portrayals of anger. You can write characters that are mentally ill and violent without being ableist, you can write characters that are poor and angry without being classist, but that requires a level of respect for people, introspection, humility willingness to learn about the sensitive topics you are exploring that is simply not accessible to Winnick and so many other dc writers.

And here comes my very hot take that I'm too cowardly to say off anon: the pit shouldn't have healed Jason's malnutrition. Like, outside of canon I love big jay, I love big men who are emotionally vulnerable and need comfort etc. but in canon? It just comes off as another way to adultify Jason, and make the horrible things that happen to him acceptable. Jason "sleeping with Talia because he is fucked up about Bruce" because they both look like adults until you realise this is actually just rape and you can't put any responsibility of Talia taking advantage of the kid under her care (very ooc of course) on the child himself. Jason fighting Mia looking like a 40 years old beating up a teenage girl when they're the same damn age. Fucking Ethiopia 2.0. And Jason's murders as well, for the matter. Like don't get me wrong the duffle bag of doom is an iconic villain move, but it's just that: a massive shock effect and a "psychopathic" move. We shouldn't need Jason beheading anyone to be horrified, because just one murder, if written correctly, should be enough. A child killing someone is a terrible thing. A child being put in a position where they think killing someone is the only solution to ending suffering (thinking about the Garzonas case) is a terrible thing. A kid trying to kill his murderer (because fuck his death has to matter it has to) and only begging to be allowed it should be horrifying. Jason, with his unhealed malnutrition making him look a couple of years smaller and younger than his physical age, should look his mental age. It should be impossible to look away from the reality of what he is: a traumatized teenager who wasn't allowed to grow up. And he has a gun. This is already a horror story.

Make utrh!Jason a villain if you must, but have the guts to sit with it. Don't shove the fact that he was a hero and a victim under the rug because it's uncomfortable. Sit with the unease that sometimes someone is doing something bad and is suffering a lot, and maybe they're doing the bad thing because they don't know how to survive the suffering, and suddenly it's not easy separating hero from villain from victim. Your imaginary lines in the sand will not protect you from the crude reality of the complicated and shitty situations you have chosen to depict; you open the can of worms now you can't look away and let the worms roam free just because you're squeamish.

How does it feel to be psychic and be in my head and write part of my essay on Jason for me? Fuck, I have so much to say about this but I need a good night of sleep to formulate it correctly. Look for a longer answer tomorrow, but in the meantime, everyone sit down and look at this and look at it hard. Thank you.

[lagosbratzdoll]

Ryan did a bunch of interviews recently that I've been reading and I have some thoughts. You can find the interviews here and here.

There's a lot of terrible stuff in it but I don't have the time or inclination to bother with all that. I'm going to be focusing on two things he said in the interviews.

Starting with this from the House of the Dragon podcast which I've linked above.

In it, Ryan talks about why he decided to contrast the lives of Hugh Hammer and Ulf the White with the lives of the privileged Targaryens. It was fascinating to get a peek into his head.

Ryan reads a rapist and thinks "this is a person worth deepening. We need an in-depth exploration of what goes on in this rapists head. We need the audience to sympathise with them."

Which wouldn't be so bad on its face, there's always room to analyse a fictional rapist. The problem is that he then reads about a little Black girl who raised herself on a tiny island rising up to become a dragon rider on her own merit. A little girl whose Valyrian heritage is constantly debated and discounted. He reads that and decides that there's nothing worth exploring there. Her story isn't unique. She isn't unique. In fact, she's so common that while we adapt and humanise not one but two rapists, we're going to erase one Black girl and turn the other into everyone's punching bag.

Then I read his puff piece from Big Think.

This is a fascinating glimpse into his thought process. I read this and Ryan Condal's baffling decisions began to make a little more sense.

By his own admission, Ryan's ideal show is one where Black women are erased, flattened and ignored. He claims to write powerful women but we've not seen hide or hair of these women. In Ryan's show, nothing is ever deliberate and the women are largely passive participants in their own lives.

In Ryan's ideal show there's no room for a little black girl to claim a dragon with nothing but faith and her wits. In Ryan's ideal show we need all of the rapist men but the Black women are interchangeable AND replaceable.

In Ryan's ideal world, it is too much to ask that a Black girl be adored, have songs written about her and knights joust for her favour. In Ryan's ideal show, Black people aren't fully developed characters, they're props that he forgets about for episodes on end.

And that is why the show will continue to drop in ratings. When I saw the Nielsen numbers for the premiere, I laughed until I cried. The biggest streaming day ever for Max and they couldn't beat The Boys or Your Honour. The most recent numbers are even funnier.

But don't worry gang, House of the Dragon is doing great. It's now number three. It finally beat a four year old show! Everything is fine.

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

Why do you think they don't show Marinette comforting other characters? It's always been a weird writing decision to me, and I sometimes wondered if I was legit just erasing all the times it happened out of my memory or smth. Like the first character trait established for her is she struggles to say no to people, she is a people-pleaser. And there isn't a better way to make ur mc lovable than showing how they effect the people around them. AND it would make her breakdowns genuinely heartbreaking, because she keeps giving and giving and it's a genuine flaw. Like, she rushed off to comfort Ivan in Origins, right? We should have had more of that. I'm reminded of that one Lady Wifi (i think?) scene where Ladybug is smiling at her adoring fans and the camera while Chat Noir is in the background actually comforting a child lmao. It just feels so weird, because I think Marinette IS actually supposed to be someone who does that, who provides that comfort to her loved ones all the time (even at the cost of her own mental health, boom, an actual thing she can work towards). But we just keep getting the reverse instead. She just kinda feels like a shit friend? Showing that emotional labor would also make her exhaustion work because like, what does the guardian even DO? Tell not show, but they ain't telling shit.

One of the things that drew me to Miraculous is the fact that the show tends to write the characters in non-standard gender roles, so I actually like the fact that Marinette tends to be more of a fixer than a comforter. She drives people to action and wants to solve problems and is very good at taking the weight of the world on her shoulders, but she kind of sucks at emotional vulnerability and comforting people. It's genuinely a good flaw for her character and a lovely thing to see in a show aimed at girls. No, we don't all need to be stereotypically maternal figures. Women can be just as bad as men stereotypically are when it comes to emotions!

The problem is that the show is obsessed with Marinette holding every important role in the story, meaning that we don't get a more emotionally aware character or characters to balance her out. Nor do we get to see her learn that this is a flaw of hers and either improve or just own that she's bad at this and learn to trust someone else with these types of issues. (This is one of the many things I think Adrien should have been allowed to do, btw. Ladybug is the brains, Chat Noir should be the heart.) We also don't get a true sense of Marinette's struggles because the show's formulaic nature rarely allows for those types of problems.

The Lila thing is a good example. Lila says that she's going to destroy Marinette's friendships, but she literally can't do that because that would mean changing the way the characters relate on a massive scale and formula shows can't do that. So instead of seeing Marinette struggle as Lila lies and manipulates everyone into hating Marinette, we get extremely annoying episodes where Lila lies and everyone believes her, but no one gets all that upset at Marinette's constant accusations. They just treat it as a minor quibble which is actually more aggravating than Lila changing the status quo in my opinion.

There's also the issue that you brought up: we don't see Marinette truly struggling to be the guardian, so her new role doesn't feel like a big deal. Not much changes for her save for the kwamis being around now. We don't even know what her relationship with Master Fu was really like because he was barely ever on screen so we really don't feel her loss.

All of this is just another problem to lay at the feat of our ever-present issue: Miraculous does not have the right conflicts and characters for a formula show. Formula shows thrive off of things being lighthearted and the heroes lacking major flaws. Miraculous chose to make things somewhat serious and give everyone flaws that are just begging to be address, but that can't be because this is the wrong format for that type of thing.

In a team show where character arcs were a thing or even just one where character dynamics were a thing and Marinette was allowed to share the screen in a more balanced manner, then everything about her would work fine. She's set up perfectly for that kind of show. She is not set up for a formula show where she's basically the only character that matters outside of the villains. If that's what they wanted to write, then Marinette needed to be limited to minor flaws that never last more than an episode or at least limited to flaws that are purely situational such as being stubborn or the classic sudo-flaw of being clumsy that the show already embraces.

[captainuranium543]

Thing I've noticed about the Fairy tail fandom misogyny problem (I'm about to sound like such a nerd)

Not to be the loser of the year but the easiest way to see the bad treatment of women in the ft fandom is by imagining what would happen if you swapped the genders of gray and erza.

As we all know gray has a running gag of taking off his clothes, however while people clown on him for this it's also well known and obvious that he is more than that. He has depth and character beyond just that gag. In the more recent 100 year quest he really hasn't done that much by comparison to natsu Lucy erza or even Wendy. This has been (reasonably) upsetting to some fans arguing that he deserves better. I agree with this but I need you to imagine what the reaction would be if he was a women because it would be a completely different story.

If gray was a character who didn't get a lot of development and was always taking off his clothes as a women people would not be saying he deserves better then would be absolutely dog piling this dude calling him useless and fanservice only completely ignoring all his previous development.

How do I know this? Because that is literally what happened to Lucy. Back in the 2010s people WOULD NOT GET OFF HER ASS. people were constantly calling her useless (completely ignoring the fact that she's a brand new wizard being compared to guys who've been doing this since before puberty and NO SHIT SHES NOT THAT GOOD YET. THATS WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT COMES IN). It made sense for Lucy to be weaker than the others she was brand new to this and that was literally the point of her entire story to watch her grow as a wizard and become more independent and powerful. In some instances Lucy was written to be a damsel in distress character but rather then looking at her as an obvious victim of bad writing it was treated like it was somehow her fault. Gray and Lucy are very similar characters but gray is treated far more favorably right now than Lucy ever was back in the early days.

As for erza, people cannot stop calling her a plot armor character. All I see online is none stop hating, some people even claiming it's worse than natsu. The things is, to a degree they are right erza does have plot armor, the issue is that so does literally everyone else. As much as you don't want to accept it erza fights more so it's more noticeable with her but every single fairy tail fight outside of a few will have an element of plot armor ESPECIALLY for natsu.

The issue I have isn't that people are wrong it's that they completely ignore the fact erza is literally only being treated the same way male anime characters have been since the dawn of time but now suddenly it's a problem. Being overpowered and winning by punching things harder is fine as long as you're a dude ig.

It's even worse when people argue she's a Mary Sue because she objectively isn't. She not only has so many flaws that come to mind easily, she had probably one of the strongest character arcs I've ever seen. She's gone through more character development then 99% of the cast the only problem is that it happened very early and afterward Hiro didn't really know what to do with her.

That being said, even if she had no character arc at all I STILL WOULDN'T SAY SHES A MARY SUE. BECAUSE A MARY SUE IS A CHARACTER WITH NO FLAWS. AND NOBODY IN THIS SHOW IS MORE FLAWED THEN ERZA IS. I've heard people argue that all her flaws are comedic and, ignoring the fact this is just not true she has plenty of flaws that are genuine problems she needs to grow from (ie galuna island, tower of heaven and edolas), who cares if they are comedic? Natsu is also a very flawed person and has not had to change even a fraction of the amount Erza has and does that make him a Mary Sue? No. Do I still love him? Absolutely, he's funny as hell.

This post was not made to complain about gray or natsu btw Its not that I think they're useless or Mary sues I just don't think any of these characters are at all and I think people who do think that should all explode. Anyway this is just what I think feel free to disagree but don't try to argue with me because nobody is changing my mind on this one.

[very-straight-blog]

Making Aegon a r*pist was lazy writing, and it only further demonstrate how the screenwriters aren't able to understand the concept of "grey character".

Do I think it should be completely overlooked? No. Because even if he didn't hurt Helaena he did r*pe Dyana (it was completely useless to his character and it only served the purpose of making him appear more irredeemable, but that's beside the point), and he should be held accountable for it by the viewers at the very least.

Do I also think Aegon's sexual trauma — that would be having to sire children at FUCKING FOURTEEN — was grossly overlooked and glazed over not only by the viewers but also by the screenwriters, and that it could have been represented in a vast variety of more poignant ways (for example, instead of making Aemond an SA victim because yes, they could have given Aegon that kind of relationship with the madame and dive deeper on how he seeks the love he doesn't receive from his family elsewhere)? Do I also think the screenwriters treated Aegon unjustly just because they are not capable of handling a male character with such deep, complex scars that cannot be fully explained in an eight-episodes-long series, and have therefore decided to butcher him because they prioritized hype instead of delivering an actual good product to the public?

Yes. Yes to all of that. As a mainly TB fan I felt myself being forced into my faction, because "who would support a r*pist?", and I came to find unjust how unreasonable this argument is: Daemon and Viserys are r*pists too, with the former literally asking young virgins be set aside for him in brothels and the latter being seen forcing himself on Alicent. Neither of them is held nearly as accountable for their misdeeds as Aegon, and to this day I don't understand why.

I agree with everything here in general and will talk a bit about this topic (I like to talk about Aegon, in case someone suddenly didn't notice).

Yes, the show certainly manipulates facts to endear viewers to one character and make them hate another. Almost everyone in this story has done terrible things, but a lot of fans behave as if the incident with Dyana was the worst of them. Well, I don't know, what about those women Daemon slept with in the brothels? Who often didn't want to be there, who were very young, because he preferred virgins. What about that servant who was killed to hide Laenor's escape? What about Rhea, whom Daemon killed in cold blood to marry Rhaenyra? And so on and so forth. And believe me, such planned crimes shock me much more than what the drunken idiot Aegon did without even remembering it later. Once again, did he do a bad thing? Yes. Is he a good person (character)? No. But at least I'm not trying to make him into someone he's not. And yes - Aegon is still an interesting and complex character that I adore. Not a villain and not just a "drunk and r*pist."

The problem is how his actions are presented to the viewer. Our acquaintance with adult Aegon literally begins with this rape scene, this is our first impression of the character. Aegon has eight minutes of screen time in the first season, and three of them are devoted to the discussion of this incident. Plus, they don't give him anything that could justify it. Did Daemon kill his wife? Well, he did it for love. And this is deeply explored, we're forced to sympathize with the character and then we easily forgive him for such an act. Aegon is shown simply as an asshole without any redeeming traits.

Time skips cleverly mask the fact that Aegon and Helaena were teenagers at best when the twins were born. Helaena gave birth to TWO children at such an early age, they became parents against their own will, not being ready for it. It's interesting, it adds depth to the characters, it might explain why Aegon drinks so much - but of course the screenwriters won't show us that.

Again, Aegon's hypersexuality isn't something funny, it's not what makes him an asshole, it's a sign of trauma. He uses it to numb his loneliness. I believe that Aegon literally didn't have the opportunity to feel what love is in any form. His father disliked him and showed it openly. His mother loved him, but she never knew how to express it the way he needed to. He was married to his sister (the tragedy for both of them) and it was a matter of duty, not feelings. At the time of the first season, Aegon is deeply unhappy and this is obvious. I have every reason to believe that his need for physical intimacy is based on the fact that this is the only form of love he can receive. Considering that Aegon is quite smart, I even think that he himself understands how ugly this form is, but there's nothing he can do. During the act, I guess in some unhealthy way it really saves him from loneliness, longing and the need to be loved, but in the end it makes him even more unhappy.

My thought turned out to be a bit messy and it's time for me to shut up, otherwise I'll never finish, but the point is that the show manipulates the audience to create "the right" point of view for them and it's very annoying. And they also don't know how to create deep, controversial characters at all.

[yuri-is-online]

I'm asking this question because I find it an interesting topic. It relates to the criticism the Tokyo Debunker MC receives.

It's not just TD's MC—it's a common theme in otome and gacha games. Genderless MCs in games like *Obey Me!* and *Twisted Wonderland* face less criticism than female MCs. Even though the genderless MCs get some hate, it’s nowhere near the backlash female MCs receive. For instance, *Twisted Wonderland* had debates about a female MC being unsuitable for an all-boys school, despite the presence of monsters and robots. This debate ended with a female MC in the *Savanaclaw* manga.

Another example is *Tears of Themis*, where the female MC is well-received in my opinion due to her having a character. I am very happy that she isn’t a self insert and people seem to agree.

In contrast, female self-insert MCs like TD's MC and *Love and Deep Space*'s MC get a lot of hate for what seems like trivial reasons. TD's MC is often criticized for being ordinary, while LADS's MC, who is strong and brave, also faces backlash, with some claiming she's rude despite evidence to the contrary.

In conclusion.

woman mc in this day of age can’t have flaws now….wait no they can’t be prefect either! As then they are Mary sue! What do you mean that LI are grey sue as well? No that not true Leo having a backstory would justify his actions don’t you get it? What do you mean we should hold the male characters as same standard? Jin treating mc as a servant is her fault as she didn’t say no…..😐 

... so I have two lines of thought about this particular topic, it is something I have thought about for a while because I am working on my own game/games and pay a lot of attention to what people think.

It isn't personality people like it is competence

The love and deepspace MC and Rosa from tears of themis actually have very similar personalities. They are bad at/hate studying. They really love food. They both are sort of dorks and known for being kind. What people like about them isn't any of those things, what they like is that both of them are adult women who you can believe live on their own. They actually have skills related to their jobs, you can believe Rosa is a lawyer and that MC is a hunter, the love interests aren't the only competent people in the narrative. I think this can sort of relate to the target audience for both of these games being working women, but that's for a different post. Right now I really want to focus on that concept of competence: the two other otomes I really love and want to bring up are Amnesia: Memories and Hakuoki. The Amnesia MC makes a lot of really stupid decisions, but as the game title gives away she has amnesia. There is an underlying explanation for why she's a bit dim so I don't see too many complaints about her personality (outside of Toma's route but that is a different story) because you don't exactly expect her to be competent. The same goes for Hakuoki's MC whose name escapes me at the moment, she is the daughter of a doctor so she is never made out to be incompetent in medical matters, but she isn't the best fighter. And she doesn't need to be that's the male love interest's role in this particular story.

The problem with MCs like our dear Luna? I believe you said her default name is, in Tokyo Debunker is that we don't exactly have anything she is stated to be good at beyond boosting Stigmas. The various ikmen games get around this by giving their MCs a job, but we don't have that for Luna so we don't have anything to show some backbone or character so people read her as being a bit of a doormat. Like I have said numerous times before, I don't mind this and think that so long as they keep allowing us to see her thoughts this the writing will be good. A relatively easy fix to this could have been to make her someone who really loves music and constantly talks about it, she was going to a concert at the start of the game so that little bit of character would go a long way for her to be more of a human for people to project themselves onto. Generally speaking, when writing an MC, it is perfectly acceptable to give them certain personality traits and a history. But if you do that you need to make sure the narrative respects that interest and does not use it as an excuse to make the male lead look cooler.

Gender Neutral MCs

*sigh* so you bring up Twisted Wonderland and I uh... have some experience with that fandom! And I have observed the gender wars over Yuu with a weary heart. I genuinely could not care any less about how people identify or the type of o.c.s they make, but some people really really care and if I am honest I find that a bit disturbing. It honestly makes me sad to see fanfic, which used to be a really accepting space, fight over writing... well anything really. m/m blogs screaming about how they don't want fem aligned reading their things, f/f blogs screaming about men, the f/m fic writers feeling the need to defend themselves writing for a female reader- doesn't that exhaust you? Why do you care so much? I do not have the energy to care about people writing fanfic I am not interested in reading, is this because I am anemic or have I managed to be normal about one singular thing?

My personal theory is that the commodification of fanfic and fandom has made people think there is something fundamentally wrong with properties that are marketed towards people who are not them. The reaction to Love and Deepspace not having a male MC option sort of cemented that for me, there is nothing wrong with wanting a game where you can be a man or non-binary and date anime boys. There is also nothing wrong with writing m/m fanfic for a property like lds, or wishing you could play as a man in it. I think there is a genuine market gap in good games for people who aren't fem aligned, but you do not get good games by harassing people or implying they suck for wanting games where you can play as a woman. You get that by financially supporting projects aimed at you! There is a blog I follow on here called @amaregamesdb. They post a bulletin of projects, both vn and if, with an emphasis on making people aware of projects that aren't simply otome (ie male love interests with a female protagonist.) I think the people who run it are also the people who coined the term "amare game" to use for games where the MC isn't necessarily female. They also ran a blog to help people like me learn how to code if/vns so I am very grateful for them, so please do give them your support.

I write for a gender neutral reader because I wanted to write interactive fiction and felt like I needed to practice doing so. I have continued to do because honestly? I really enjoy it. I love seeing how many different people identify with my writing and are moved by it. There are some projects I want to do in the future (original works, not fanfic) that I probably will lock the MC to female for, but I want to continue providing gn fic for people for as long as I write. And original projects too! I have two in particular I am working on behind the scenes. The solution to the problems like "what gender is yuu really," if you will permit me to preach for a second, is to not care. Yana said Yuu was meant to be you, and dear reader I don't actually know who you are! So you can be whoever it is you wish to be in your heart and I will make room for you to sit next to me. I'll even make tea (｡•̀ᴗ-)✧

[callofdudes]

Bro Ghost is literally military, he's literally a grown ass man 💀💀 he's not gonna cry and all that shit. You write him so bad bruh, learn joke ass 💀

I hate to waste my energy on this but I feel it should be said at this point. A lot of people have different opinions on Ghost, here's mine.

I know Ghost has a character. I know Ghost has been through hell and back, he's had a horrible family life and trauma even after.

Ghost probably does not have the best relationship with his emotions, but that doesn't mean they aren't there. Just because he's in the military doesn't mean he isn't allowed to have insecurities and such.

And I'm so sick and tired of people thinking that in order to be confident and masculine you have to have no problems. Like, 'hes a grown man'. Ok?? Men have feelings. Men are humans. When Women break down and cry it's a totally different reaction than seeing a man do so.

It's not emasculating because Ghost has connections. He has deep rooted ties with other men which I think is incredibly healthy for guys.

Simon has a strong group of men that he can deeply connect with. A lot of men have that fear of not getting vulnerable around male or female friends, but are more likely to be vulnerable around other men.

As someone who is deep into psychology, I make most of the choices I do to write Ghost from a standpoint of how a human normally reacts to what they've been through and so forth. Keep in mind I'm female so I cannot always confidently react from the body of a male, to another male how some guys would.

Because I'm just different. But saying that Ghost is in the military has little effect to his emotions. How he portrays and conceals them sure, but he still has them.

So at the end of the day I say this. It is not weak to have emotional connections with the men in your life, it's healthy for men to have those pillars, especially in times like these.

Ghost has emotions, he has very deep connections and through those connections he can learn to be vulnerable. Men can still be strong and masculine while having trauma and vulnerability. Their not exclusive to each other.

Stay strong kings, just like Simon Riley 💪🏻♥️

[expectopatronum18]

Hot take on Lily's characterization in this fandom

Ik I've written abt this before but I really cannot understand y this fandom insists on limiting lily's characterization to being good and right all the time and making the narrative sympathetic towards her even when she isn't coz ppl don't want haters for her. And this makes sense coming from the new marauders fandom coz they see all of their favs as incapable of being wrong. But I can't understand y the traditional marauders fandom acts this way too coz they tout themselves as being oh so progressive, but they write lily exactly the way rowling wrote her but in a different sense

Rowling wrote all the women in the franchise with the lens of what she sees as an 'ideal woman', but imo lily gets hit by this the most. She exists to further the narratives of other, more important characters, everything we ever hear abt her r positive attributes (harry goes thru tht phase in ootp where he realizes tht his father whom he looked up to so much was a flawed person, for whatever reason his mother is exempted from this), and the highlight of her life was dying for her son(despite the fact tht james did the same and we do know quite a bit abt him).

The conventional view of women has progressed beyond this now, but i d argue tht the underlying issue hasn't been resolved. I get tht fandom is a space for relaxation and fun, but then y do ppl hv a problem with lily being a tad bit flawed in a bad way when the boys r literally out there murdering each other and becoming fascists? The fandom sees her with the modern lens of what an ideal woman is(intentionally or unintentionally)- she's a perfect sjw who starts off with all the right values and has nothing to learn and grow from- she's an ideal feminist, she's always understanding, sympathetic and accepting, she accepts remus instantly, she's the moral voice in the marauders vs snape debate, she always stands up for the underdog, she doesn't let societal prejudices influence her views and waver her morals, etc etc. And while these r undoubtedly very fine qualities to hv, thts not how things work. Ur not being progressive by writing a woman who has no growing and learning to do like a normal person, and who's never allowed to be wrong in a way tht hurts others without making her sympathetic

Let lily be a catty bitch in a way tht can be interpreted as 'cheeky and vivacious' from an outsider's pov. Let lily not hv any proper female friends because she was a popular, well liked girl in high school who wasn't really a girl's girl. Let her be hated by ppl for reasons outside being a muggleborn and being friends with snape. Let her be friendless coz she's just a bad friend, she literally almost smiled when her best friend was being assaulted. Let her be homophobic coz it was the 70s and her social circle consisted of ppl lyk teenage snape and petunia. Let her not be accepting of remus immediately coz the whole ww was prejudiced against werewolves and she's new to it. There r infinite possibilities and none of them need to take away her good aspects in canon, much lyk they don't with the boys

LET HER BE FLAWED AND COMPLICATED AND CONTRAVESIAL COZ WHO CARES, SHE'S NOT FUCKING REAL

[jerryterry]

There was one inevitable downside (/upside for Tumblr Drama fans?) to all of these poll tournaments coming to Tumblr, and that's "fandom polls being run by people with a massive bias/opinion that they can't help from plastering all over the posts". Like, there's this one New Vegas poll currently running where the OP has a seething hatred for Cass, among others - badmouthing characters in their poll posts, getting into ranting arguments about it. It's inconsequential and funny, and situations like this are a dime a dozen on this site, but seeing this made me want to take a look at this one a lil closer. Because it brushes into something small I've always found interesting about New Vegas: the rumor of homosexuality in the Legion, as well as a wider factor about the writing of companions in general (Under a read-more for length).

OP literally says "If you tell her you're a gay man, she calls you a nazi", so lets take a look at the line they cite for this:

There's multiple points where characters joke about the Legion having similar prominent homosexuality to the actual Romans (which was notable enough that there's straight-up a "Homosexuality in ancient Rome" Wikipedia page). For example:

- Veronica

- Major Knight

What's interesting is that the one character who talks about his direct experience with this subject, Jimmy (a former Legion slave), actually says something that contradicts that last quote:

This opens up the likely possibility that it's NCR propaganda - a homophobic lie to emasculate the enemy. Even if maybe it IS something common in the Legion, it's something frowned upon and is at best a rampant open secret. Either case makes Major Knight's quote provably false.

Regardless, it's a wide non-Legion belief that homosexuality is common and accepted in the Legion. If the source of that rumor IS cooked-up homophobic propaganda, it's interesting that it hasn't worked on the only characters who talk about it. All three of those quotes not only have no ill will toward the idea (Cass immediately states it's not an issue AND notes how common it is behind closed doors), but two of them are mentioned in a context of longing: Veronica's quote is immediately followed by her being angry that only men are allowed to be gay, wishing the same for lesbians. Major Knight's quote is in the context of him having to hide his homosexuality at work -- which sadly makes it clear that the propaganda was likely more effective in general than on the one straight character who mentions it.

I'd say it's funny that OP has a hatred of Cass for being homophobic despite being one of the few characters in-game who makes an explicit statement of not having a problem with homosexuality (I for one would've loved to see Boone - the biggest NCR bootlicker around - make his stance clear on the matter). But admittedly it IS tactless and clumsy to make a backhanded comparison of gayness to the Legion (that statement's obvious expository purpose aside). They also read "there's a lot more of that in the Mojave" to mean "ew, it's not this bad where I come from!", but Major Knight makes it clear that where she comes from is actually MORE supportive. As well as another comment she makes about having slept with women while drunk, which OP construes as likening homosexuality to a drunken mistake.

Like, relax. Yes, "I have no problem with it" isn't the most heartfelt statement of support. But the most Cass' words betray about her is ignorance. I think it's clear she's well-meaning but ignorant, and for the most part intentionally written that way. Most of the companions have intentional personality flaws - Cass is crass, tactless, and stubborn. Arcade is an idealist to a fault (in the game's opinion). Boone is blinded by loyalty to a flawed system despite enacting the worst parts of it. Veronica talks like every line was written by Joss Whedon. The others' flaws are a little more external, but ALL of the companions are intended to be flawed and have pros and cons (while not entirely equal), and all are still intended to be well-meaning people despite this.

It reflects a realism in the nuance of human beings. In general, the writing often tends to rely on this "no black or white, ALWAYS nuance" approach to an almost frustrating degree - like I WISH you could get a better ending for the Followers in a "did everything right" Yes Man ending, even though I know the phrase "did everything right" itself goes against the core philosophy of NV. The poll thing was intended as more of a jumping-off point to talk about some stuff in New Vegas I find interesting rather than a response to that post, but honestly - I know Tumblr has a bit of a problem with seeing nuance, but have a little faith in the writers, will you?

Oh. They... think the game itself pushes the idea that "all fascists are gay"??? How can you be a fan of this game yet have such a low opinion of its writing? Such a lack of critical understanding? This person says "According to my academically trained eye..." and then goes on a series of reaches that critically misunderstand the text in a really unfavorable way, just because they were (understandably) offended by a clumsy offhand statement a character makes and immediately clarifies. And they chose to run a poll despite their open hatred for some of the characters involved (they also seem to hate Boone, for obviously more understandable reasons). Interesting choice.

What's funnier is that OP's open disdain for this character makes it more likely for Cass to win the poll on account of spite votes. Cass would've absolutely been buried by Arcade and Veronica in any other scenario.

Anyway, here's a YouTube comment I found while grabbing these quotes that I found funny:

[Transcripts of screenshotted quotes are available in the alt text]