#the worst thing about it is that it has ''creator has a problem with women'' written all over it... it's like unignorable some episodes

[shoechoe]

ren and stimpy was just like a combination of bizarre nonsense things happening and gross out and it was funny about 20% of the time

[ecoterrorist-katara]

The only stereotypically masculine thing about Aang…is his romantic arc

There’s a really popular post on Tumblr called “Avatar Aang, Feminist Icon.” The thesis is basically that Aang, unlike his female teachers and friends, is actually not a badass. He listens, he defers, and he respects women. He seemed to have no problem with Katara’s crush on Jet, despite his own crush on her. He chooses love and kindness and friendship and pacifism. He’s not tall and handsome as hell or buff. He wears flower crowns!

And I agree! This is Aang for most of the series and I love those qualities (though I do think the bar is in hell if those traits make a character a feminist icon, as opposed to a person who simply sees women as human beings). Anyway, I just think there’s a glaring omission. And that’s Aang’s romantic arc in season 3.

Bryke managed to take the worst of both worlds: Aang’s romantic arc retains the male-centricity that make most romances so problematic, while retaining none of the characteristics that make problematic romances compelling to women.

Aang falls in love at first sight with a beautiful girl. For the majority of their friendship, he remains respectful and supportive. As his crush hits an all time high, however, it gets distinctly more stereotypical: he kisses Katara at the invasion, and when she didn’t want to talk about that kiss, he firebends at her (the fact that this comic is canon, and was published years after ATLA’s conclusion, only demonstrates that the creators still don’t understand critiques of their romance). Aang considers Katara “his girl” and becomes furious (“I would be in the Avatar state right now!”) when the actress version of Katara didn’t like him romantically, and then he kisses her again — this time explicitly against her wishes. Throughout the show, people reassure him that she will come around, continuously reinforcing the idea that Katara is “his” and he just has to be patient. And even though Ka/taang is supposed to be endgame, we never hear directly from Katara how she feels, even though we’re no strangers to her opinions and feelings on other topics. It’s almost like the creators wanted Katara’s feelings to be a mystery because we’re meant to resonate with Aang. That’s…a male-centric, action hero romance.

In addition, the friendship dynamics between Katara and Aang feel pretty gendered. The distribution of emotional labour between Aang and Katara is quite skewed: Katara takes care of Aang much more than he takes care of her. She’s the one responsible for calming him down from the Avatar State. She’s the one who cooks for him and performs a whole lot of domestic chores. Post-canon, Katara’s storyline revolves around Aang, and she’s treated as his accessory and the keeper of his legacy instead of her own person, to the degree that she’s not even recognizable in LOK anymore. A beautiful, badass, independent woman who dedicates her energy and intelligence to a man’s needs? Wow, that is definitely something I’ve never seen in media geared towards men!

A lot of gushing about Aang’s lack of stereotypical masculinity seems to also hinge on how Aang is not conventionally attractive, but that’s…not true. Aang may not behave like James Bond, but he has plenty of admirers. Meng and On Ji liked him even without knowing that he’s the Avatar. Post-series, Acolytes descend en masse to steal Katara’s man. And of course he grows into a tall, buff dude. Aang’s romantic arc is not about becoming attractive to women, or finding a woman who loves him despite his looks. His romantic arc is about getting the girl who’s hard to get, because she only sees him as a friend or a little brother / babysitting charge.

Bryke do not deserve the credit for creating a “feminist icon,” not when the only stereotypically masculine traits they gave him are in relation to his romance arc. It honestly feels more insidious this way, because it’s like, “see? You don’t have to be masculine to reap the benefits of performing masculinity” — the benefits being, of course, “getting” the girl you want.

[theblackfemininesociety]

🪞Inner Dialogue Diaries — Part One: Are Your Inner Thoughts Your Biggest Cheerleader or Harshest Critic?

Hey Besties and Future Besties of B.F.S,

As your accountability partner, I think it's important to highlight all the struggles women face during their feminine journey and give solutions and tools to help you conquer those obstacles.

Our fellow Femininity and Level Up content creators are doing a wonderful job with helping women look and even act like their best selves. We realized that we don't often see the real conversations about the daily mental reprogramming that has to happen in order to let your feminine energy flourish✨

🌟 The P.V.N Method:

There are two ladies that most of us know of, heard of and even embody on a daily basis. I would call them arch enemies but one cares for the other and the other can care less about them. Who am I talking about? The infamous "Positive Polly" and "Negative Nancy" we all have had our moments with both of these ladies both externally and internally.

Who is Positive Polly:

Miss Positive Polly is very upbeat, encouraging and optimistic. She is always looking on the brighter sides of things and people. She is solution oriented and maintains a hopeful perspective even in challenging times.

She relies on her friends FAITH and CONFIDENCE, together they create a supportive and encouraging environment.

Who is Negative Nancy:

Unlike Positive Polly, the infamous Negative Nancy isn't so glamorous. She is actually very dull suffers from perceptual blindness which causes her to having to depend on her fake friends “The Debbie Downers” (Scarcity, Fear and The Past)

Together they tend to focus on the on problems, obstacles, and worst-case scenarios. The Debbie Downers are often critical and sees the downsides in situations.

The P.V.N method is the practice of identifying which posse your inner voice is akin to, this is how you will perceive everything you are doing, analyzing and believing about yourself.

Which Posse does your Inner Voice belong to ?

The Daily Reprogramming:

After identifying what side your thoughts are on (positive vs. negative) it's time to download this information into your brain. If you are normally pessimistic, This is a daily ritual, yes daily. Sounds exhausting but all of the greats became great because they had to do this very thing.

What To Reprogram?

Self-Awareness and Reflection: Recognize when your inner dialogue leans toward Negative Nancy or The Debbie Downers. Reflect on how these thoughts are affecting your actions and emotions.

Reframing Thoughts: Challenge negative thoughts and replace them with more constructive, Positive Polly-style affirmations. For example, if you think “I always mess up,” reframe it as “I’m learning and improving with each attempt.”

Building Positive Habits: Practice gratitude, celebrate small victories, and set realistic goals to reinforce a positive inner dialogue. This helps shift your overall mindset from self-criticism to self-encouragement. (Click Here For Our Habit Breaking Guide)

Seeking Support: Support is a big part of your femininity journey, commonly as black women we feel like we need to do everything alone bt thats not true! Sometimes external support, such as talking to friends, mentors, or therapists, can help counteract negative inner dialogue and promote a more positive self-view.

🚨 The Good News: There is an ultimate kryptonite to depleting your negative thoughts 💭

[depressedbloggerwrites]

i feel like writing an essay on why jeffannie is a horrible ship

disclaimer before i rant: you are completely entitled to your opinion on whatever ships you prefer! this is just what i think :)

i'm going to begin with the most obvious problem with jeffannie: the age difference. at the start of the show, she's eighteen (a TEENAGER, guys) and he's in his thirties. they are at vastly different stages of life. he has way more life experience than her.

even if we ignore that, they just make no sense together. they already have that father/daughter dynamic, and the chemistry community reddit is constantly on about is nowhere to be found. all the kiss scenes felt forced (maybe not debate 109, but i'll talk about that later). also, jeff having two awesome women competing for his love, and then going after the teenager with a boyfriend...interesting.

i don't think jeff is necessarily predatory; he is very clearly not exclusively attracted to girls as young as annie, but that doesn't mean his attraction to her isn't at least slightly iffy.

i saw someone say annie and jeff, a recovering addict and someone who currently has an addiction, would not have a very healthy relationship in the long run, and i agree. as the original poster said, annie worked so hard to put her addiction behind her, and being with jeff wouldn't be good for her.

also, whoever made that tumblr post saying every jeffannie episode would work better with jeffbritta or abedison was 100% right, which is why i'm going to discuss the problems with each jeffannie episode.

jeffannie began in debate 109, when annie and jeff had to argue the point that man is inherently evil on the greendale debate team, and the debate ends in a scene where the leader of city college's team launches himself out of his wheelchair; jeff instinctively catches him, and the leader uses this to support the point that man is good. annie proceeds to grab jeff and kiss him, which makes him drop city college's leader, which wins them the debate, because 'he dropped him because he was horny!'

god.

obviously, you can see why that made me uncomfortable to watch, but i guess you could look past it in the comedy and chaos of it all. anyway, jeffbritta would have made that episode so much better. britta would definitely be on the debate team, and since she and jeff actually had a normal age gap, which would make everything far less creepy.

next, let's talk about the worst thing in the world:

pascal's triangle revisited.

actually, the episode was fine. i enjoyed it. but that kiss at the end makes me so angry. jeff, you have these two beautiful women who you have been pursuing this whole season, and you go and kiss the teenage girl. THE TEENAGE GIRL. jesus fucking christ. and she had a boyfriend too. you know what would have worked? abed convincing annie not to transfer instead. infinitely better chemistry, and an abedison kiss that actually impacted the plot would have changed my life.

the conspiracy episode was excellent, but jeffbritta would have made it perfect. i don't think it expanded on anything problematic jeffannie-wise though, so that's a win.

and then you have intro to political science. i haven't really seen anyone talk about this, and it's once again not a bad episode, but i really think the writers just didn't want britta to have a storyline that actually developed her character, because she would have devoured in annie's place during this episode. jeff's dynamic with her is already perfect, and it would make so much more sense for them to run against each other, as opposed to jeff and annie.

all those alternate timeline jeffannie scenes in remedial chaos theory already sucked, but i didn't care too much because i knew they weren't going to push it into anything too serious, but then you had annie tell jeff he reminded her of her father mid-makeout and it's just...wow. so the creators knew they had this very obvious father-daughter like relationship, were fully aware of it, and still forced the ship. cool.

now, don't kill me for this, but i'm one of those people who actually genuinely, really liked season 4. and one reason why i liked it was because the one major jeffannie scene they had was the imaginary alternate timeline one, which acknowledged that jeffannie would not be good together, and was hilarious. so thank you season 4, they can never make me hate you <3

introduction to teaching was also great because there was a plotline centered around jeff and annie that never tried to force any sort of awkward romantic chemistry (at least that's how i remember it), which seems impossible in community. honestly, this episode just proved that platonic jeffannie is superior to romantic jeffannie.

but that period of bliss where there was no romantic jeffannie didn't last long, because then you have g.i. jeff.

i love g.i. jeff. it's one of my favorite episodes, and was phenomenal for jeff's character. there was just one line, where animated coma dream jeff tells animated coma dream annie, 'look at the rack i gave you.' that was just kind of gross and didn't sit right, especially since a major plot point of this episode was jeff turning 40 and having a crisis. annie was *checks notes* 23-24 during this episode. the age gap is still very concerning here, and was made worse because of the fact that it really highlights how jeff is aging.

and then season 6 got so close to leaving jeffannie behind, forever, and then they had to ruin it with the series finale. i'm just saying, we couldn't have a platonic jeffannie goodbye like we got with jabed (speaking of which, the jabed goodbye arguably hurt more than the jeffannie one)?

anyway, i am desperately hoping we get jeffbritta/abedison (or trobed!) in the community movie, even though i know that's probably not going to happen, i do not like jeffannie at all, and thank you for reading my explosion of angry thoughts!

[lousyglitch]

Scott pilgrim takes off inhabits the same artistic space as the matrix 4, or even the final fantasy 7 remake. I mean this as a good thing. It has the distinct touch of an artist that made something that defined a generation revisiting the art that outgrew them a thousandfold with more maturity and different interests.

These interests usually skew meta, they're about what drives someone to revisit something made by a past version of oneself, about the experience of suddenly gaining more influence than anyone could reconcile, where criticisms of your work (which you also, no doubt, have many) become synonymous with criticisms of your culture. If you've been here a while, you probably know (and are tired of) what I'm talking about, manic pixie dream girls and aloof average male protagonists, toxic nostalgia, pick your theme and it's a video essay title.

Imagine having every read of your 2004 funny video game-coded coming of age comic reverberate infinitely toward every direction, people saying your main character taught a whole generation of men to be self-absorbed while the exact opposite type of people rant about how your secondary lead "ruined a whole generation of women" because of hair-dye or whatever. Imagine Edgar Wright makes a movie adaptation of your cute little comic that somehow launches the careers of half of the current celebrity pantheon simultaneously. How would that change you?

Well, for one, it makes you less relatable. The truth of an aloof nerdy guy dating in his early 20s is a lot more universal than the truth of an artist in his 40s forever defined by the event horizon of a thing he wrote half his life ago. The matrix 4 couldn't stop talking about how it feels to have created the matrix. The final fantasy 7 remake can't help but to constantly examine what it means to remake final fantasy 7. It's easy to see why someone would hate that indulgent meta trend, I'll probably never write a generation-defining story, why would I care about the first world problems of someone who did? It can feel distant, and at its worst it can feel insulting. Like it's pointing the finger at the fans, whispering 'you did this to me'. I get that.

I get that, but I love it.

It's the fundamental difference between wanting something that is like something you liked, and wanting someone that is from the same creator of something you liked. The difference between feeding the mona lisa into an AI and finding a new authentic da Vinci. You can't make something entirely new if you religiously stick to using the parts of something that's already there. The human behind the work will always have influences you didn't realize, thought patterns and aesthetic preferences that weren't entirely clear in their previous work, no matter how much you deconstruct it. More importantly, the human will also change, and this organic self-continuity will reflect on the art. I don't want the creator of something to hold their own creation with the same zeal as its fans, because someone who did that simply wouldn't have been capable of creating the original piece in the first place.

I don't want a product, I want art.

Scott pilgrim, the original, indulges the most earnest impulse we have-- that of self-mythologizing, of creating a narrative off of our own lives. To depict the mundane as fantastic, interpersonal relationships as adventures. It resonated with so many people because it was earnest, and it was also picked apart to hell and back because it was earnest. Its flaws were on display, and not just the ones it intended to show. But in my opinion, the opposite impulse, that of washing off everything that could be criticized and presenting the cleanest possible image of yourself through your art, is just... bad. it makes for bad art, or it just freezes you. The very first hurdle of creating anything is getting over that, then maybe the spotlight will fall on you. If it does, you'll get everything you ever wanted, but everyone gets to see through you.

So, how do you revisit something like that? You have two options. Either you take all the pieces and try to reassemble them exactly how everyone remembers it, signing your name as a formality, looking at a mirror in which you no longer see yourself, or you talk to it. You dialogue with your own work, with who you used to be. You travel in time and talk to yourself. You question them, acknowledge them but also teach them a thing or two. You don't respect the product, you respect the feeling. You find the same earnestness that made you put pen to paper for the first time, and you point it towards your new loves and fears. Maybe you make it less about the main guy, take the chance to develop your secondary characters, maybe you give the girl more agency. Maybe you summon the future and refuse its answers. Maybe you fight yourself.

That's the harder choice. It submits your new self to the scrutinizing eyes of a whole new generation, it risks alienating the people who identified with your previous piece. It's riskier, probably less profitable, and by any pragmatic lens probably a bad idea. But it's the only way you can make art. It's truth, the truth that got you there in the first place.

It's how you get it together.

[writing-for-life]

Sandman Meta-Analysis

Literary/Conceptual/Psychological

“Where the Blood Fell, Red Flowers Grew”: Red Flowers as a Symbol for the Loss of Innocence & Guilt in Tales in the Sand & Brief Lives

Hob Gadling’s Involvement In The Slave Trade Between The Late 16th And Early 19th Century (This is a new, revised and expanded version of this addendum to someone else’s post)

Perspective Requires Being Anchored in Reality—About Holding the Entire Collective Unconscious and Dream’s Struggle with Connection

The Importance of the Dreamstones—The Ruby as Dream’s Essence (and the consequences of locking it away and then receiving it all back)

He Hears the Sound of Her Wings—When Death Equals Solace

“But He Loved, He Should Have Been Forgiven”—About Free Will, Responsibility and Agency: Lucifer and Dream as Foils

When Destiny is Inescapable or: He Truly Is the Worst Older Brother (Based on a fun ask prompt that turned into a serious meta)

The Portrayal of Womanhood in A Game of You

The Sandman Overture and Exiles: Omnia Mutantur, Nihil Interit—Everything Changes, Nothing Is Truly Lost (Not Even Hope)

The Ultimate Character Tag Library

The Mortifying Ordeal Of Being Known (Or: Does Morpheus Really Have Commitment Issues?)

Death’s Wedjat Eye: Deeper Symbolism or Random? (Based on an ask)

The Women of the Sandman: A Collection of Meta-Analyses, Fics and Art

Spun Stories And Hard-Hitting Realities As Bookends To Brief Lives

The Thing About Daniel (is that he is not a palette-swapped Morpheus)

The Sandman Timeline As Published In The Annotated Sandman (timeline with a few meta thoughts)

The Truth Of Mankind Is Also Dream’s (short comics panel/show quote comparison)

The Endless Are Not Their Opposite—They Only Define It

Only Hope (!) Calls You Out Like That (Dream, Desire, Hope And Loneliness),

The Difference Between Daydreams And Desires Or: How Dream And Desire Wouldn’t Have Saved The Universe Without Hope (Based on an ask)

Dream's Relationship To His Emotions & The Differences Between Show!Dream and Comics!Dream (Based on an ask)

About Love As The Catalyst For Change

Morpheus and Calliope: About Inspiration, Personhood and Change (Based on an ask)

What Does Morpheus Like in Women? (Based on an ask)

Dream’s Loss of White Hair as the Loss of Innocence: The Killalla-Situation

Touching Death or: Why Dream is Not Simply Touch-Starved in The Sound of Her Wings (Addendum to someone else’s post)

Keeping Them In Character: Could Morpheus Be Saved? (An exploration of fanfic, but lots of good meta thoughts, so I included it here)

Did Morpheus Want to Die? (Addendum to someone else’s post)

When Desire Stops Being the Villain

When a Story About Stories Can Be Read in More Than One Way, and Why a Story About Change Changes With Us

If It Is Implied Lucien Is Adam, What Does That Make Lucienne?

Sunday Mourning—About Dream Entities and Stars (Why Head-Canons Are Wonderful, But Forcing Them On Creators Isn’t)

Who Is at Fault for Dream’s Death? The Endless as Concepts (Based on an ask—I accidentally deleted the OP 😩, but thankfully, I still had reblogs to link to)

Dream and How He Experiences Love (Or: When the Unreal is at War with the Real, and Finally Understanding Unconditional Love Tightens the Noose Around Your Neck That Has Been There All Along)

Tales In The Sand—Did We Find the Women’s Story? Or: The Rejection Of Dream/Hope As A Concept

How Do You Solve The Orpheus Problem? (an exploration of ideas for fanfics, but too many good meta thoughts not to include it here)

Nuance in (The Sandman) Fandom

To Be Human Means To Die (Even For Morpheus)

Let’s Talk About Thessaly (In The Context of Second and Third Wave Feminism)

The Blood on Morpheus’ Hands (more a processing attempt than a meta)

Why The Order of the Last Three Issues of The Sandman Matters

The Facet is Not The Jewel (old post about the ubiquity of Dreamling)

Sandman Comics Reread & Netflix Sandman Rewatch: All my Sandman Book Club contributions, ordered by issue/episode (we are currently discussing on a weekly schedule, join us!)

#sandman meta: Even more metas of all kinds, like those of others I (sometimes quite extensively) participated in.

Next: Sandman Meta-Analysis Music >

Link to full pinned post

[gryficowa]

You know what irritates me? Text about white privilege (No, it's not that I'm mad that it's said that white people get sympathy more often, because it's true, I can confirm that, yes, I'm white myself, but I've seen so much shit that I agree with that), specifically addressed in the fandom to underage characters, who are victims of their parents (Mean characters who are mean because of toxic relationships or abuse), it sounds weird, like writing off a child for being defenseless because he is white and has rich parents, WTF

I saw it often with Chloe from miracolous, but it also happened with Pacifica from GF, that their redemption or sympathy in the fandom was related to it, people are children, often victims of their parents' abuse (in Pactfika it is the father, in Chloe it is mother), saying that white privilege is disgusting by context, so what, that they come from rich families when violence occurs in them? Are we seriously going in this direction when we attack characters who are children because they do not want to burn them at the stake? (Although Chloe is an accident and the worst thing is that many people defend it, I remind you, she is fucking 14 years old)

Have we seriously gone in such a bad direction that we want children to be harmed because they are white and have rich parents? I wonder if if these nasty characters were non-white, would you feel the same way, because they are also privileged, because many non-white people are not wealthy, so if they are victims of abuse, you should ignore it, because they are too privileged…

White privilege is then, for example, the approach of the police towards whites, which is different from the way the police see black or Latino people, or the case of Ukraine, which is more publicized while Palestine, Sudan and Congo are silent, this can already be called white privilege , not a child who is a victim of violence, damn it

If redeeming a white child who was a victim of violence is a white privilege for you, then something went wrong with your thinking, Chloe and Pacifica are two spectrums, one was thrown into the wrong pile by its creator, while the other got redemption (Maybe it wasn't as good as Sasha and Amita, but it inspired the creation of these two and I love it)

It's just irrational to me to say that a white child who is a victim of parental violence or struggles with other issues cannot be redeemed, or others cannot want this character to be redeemed, because it means white privilege, which makes no sense. the child is not privileged, rich parents are not a feature of privilege, when they abuse this child, the child is not privileged on many levels, because it does not have the privilege of safety, parent-child relationship, lack of loneliness, etc.

As you will notice, many non-white characters have such privileges, which shows the bleak world of this character who you consider "Privileged", in the real world he would struggle with problems related to poor parenting and go to therapy, she would also have a lower view of his problems because "Others have it worse", so she would lead to ignorance of her mental state by constantly telling herself that things are not that bad

Many people with this type of parenting end up like this, either they have narcissistic traits (Chloe and Pacifica) or they look at themselves worse (Amity)

If you believe that responding to this type of violence is "White Privilege", then you ignore that being white does not always mean that you are "Privileged" (LGBT+ people, people with disabilities, autistic people, women, etc.), because it is doesn't work, yes you are in some but you are not in many

A child who experiences violence is not privileged, regardless of whether he is white or his parents are rich, because he is a victim, and being a victim is not a privilege, it is the opposite of "Privilege"

I had to write this because it pisses me off in the fandom, it is not an attack on non-white people, it is an attack on people who think that white = privileged (Which, as I mentioned, has nothing to do with the truth, because so what if you are white, if you are a victim of discrimination due to your orientation, gender, disability or origin? Exactly…), look at children for what they are and what they experience, not on their skin color and the wealth of their parents, because now you deny violence in the case of children who are white and their parents are rich, and all violence should be seen in the same way, because a child is weaker than an adult, no matter what wrong he or she does, you should look at him as a child and remember that his brain is not fully developed to make you 100% aware that what she is doing is wrong

Yes, the child should be punished, but he or she should also receive support, because often doing bad things is a child's cry for help (he often does not understand how he hurts others, and often does it to regulate the emotions that are inside) and yes, you can feel it with Chloe (Who, as I mentioned, was put in the wrong pile by Thomas and many people in the fandom, which shows a big problem, the creator himself and many of the fandom also deny that Chloe's mother abused her, which is sick)

It's just that when you are an adult and you see how many adults in the fandom hate a child, you shake your head, because no matter how much the character irritates you, wanting him to suffer shows that you are not yet mature enough to understand the seriousness of the situation of what you want. for this child to experience, using the argument "Because it's fictional" is weak, because it's still a child, so it doesn't deserve your hatred, but an attempt to understand

Children are irritating, children are cruel, because their brain is not fully developed, finally understand it, they have not yet developed empathy and understanding at the same level as you

So your argument about "White Privilege" in this context sounds cruel, because you are directly saying that reacting to violence when a child is white and has a rich family should not be saved because he is mean and cries for help in his behavior, that's how it is terrible train of thought that makes me wonder what went wrong in your life, being a victim should not be about wanting others to suffer, it should be about wanting others not to experience this, yes, I was a scapegoat (Before I was diagnosed with ASD, mutism and social phobia), I was always "Abnormal" and everyone was laughing at me (They were teasing me, I mean…), no one told me why, and when I asked, it ended with laughter…

Do I now want every able-bodied person to experience this? No, because no one deserves it, I can only hope that those who teased me feel remorse today, but they are ashamed to say it and suppress everything inside themselves, this is already enough punishment for everything, no more is needed

I don't want other children to experience this, I don't want children who do this to be punished for their parents' mistakes, but they get help when they have time to change and become better, this is something they should get, not a stack waiting to be burned

Children don't know what good and evil are, children follow the crowd, children can't handle emotions so they hurt others to feel better, children are children and we can only help them understand or help them with their problems

I just had to write about what irritates me in this way of thinking…

[tobiasdrake]

With your tonal language I can’t tell if you are exaggerating or genuinely hating Yakou.

My relationship with Yakou is complicated, in large part because his creator and I have very different sets of values. Yakou is a character designed to be complicated, but to leave you with an ultimately positive feeling towards him. He's a man haunted by his past, but also one with strong enough values and convictions that he can serve as something of a role model nonetheless.

My issue with Yakou is that a lot of the things that are designated as his flaws - his heavy drinking and willingness to murder - are things I don't have a problem with. Meanwhile, the things that are designated as his virtues? Well....

Kazutaka Kodaka is a man with profoundly heteronormative views on gender that come out in his work. He has strong opinions about binary masculinity and femininity, which get expressed in his writing - and his record with trans and non-binary characters is spotty.

With Yakou, this comes out as a sort of inadvertent foot-in-mouth syndrome, where he can become incredibly obnoxious in the moments where he's meant to be likable simply as a consequence of what Kodaka thinks are good values.

Yakou and Desuhiko are the two characters through which Kodaka explores masculinity. Fubuki, Yuma, Kurumi, and Vivia all have genders, but their stories aren't about gender. Halara, meanwhile, has neither a binary gender nor a story about gender. But Yakou and Desuhiko have masculinity itself as a major topic of conversation.

Which. Means. Kodaka, a guy with spotty views on gender, uses these characters to talk about gender. That's. Okay.

Desuhiko is used as a negative portrayal of masculinity. His worst traits are derived from trying too hard to express his masculinity. He's a kid with low self-esteem chafing under the yoke of trying to live up to a cultural standard, to earn respect by Doing The Thing whether he even understands why he's doing it or not.

This leaves him drifting through life constantly exclaiming "HAVE I MENTIONED HOW STRAIGHT AND NORMAL I AM!? OH BOY I SURE DO LOVE WOMEN!" to everyone he meets. He's identified The Womenz as the cure for his insecurity, even though he doesn't actually seem that invested and is honestly surprisingly chaste. He's just performing masculinity, hoping he'll get an A+ grade in Manliness and that maybe that will finally give him value as a person.

For as much as I dunk on Desuhiko, this is a fairly good commentary on what a patriarchal and heteronormative society does to insecure boys.

But then we have Yakou. He offers the counterpoint, as a more positive portrayal of masculinity. But. Like. His central thesis isn't that different from Desuhiko's. He's a romantic at heart who's central thesis is that the true measure of a man is defined by his relationship to a woman.

He's the heteronormative ideal: A man who controls his emotions, loves with all his heart, objectifies women to demonstrate a healthy sexuality but is committed in his heart of hearts to this one woman, who he would give his life for without question. He would be happily married with a white picket fence and 2.5 kids if not for this one asshole who stole his woman from him.

The moments where you're meant to roll your eyes and chuckle at Desuhiko are when he's trying to express masculinity. And the moments where you're meant to like Yakou are, similarly, moments when he's successfully expressing masculinity.

But the values he expresses in those moments? The things that come out of his mouth that are meant to make you appreciate him more? They're things like "Men exist just for women" and "You'd be prettier if you smiled more", confidently asserted in what's supposed to be a touching moment of emotionally connecting with the player character and, by extension, the player.

Most of the time when I'm dunking on Yakou, it's just for fun. He's far from my favorite character but he's harmless, and there are things I do enjoy about him. But the moments Kodaka writes when he's trying to make Yakou look good are the times when I can't fucking stand him at all.

[alicentsgf]

The series has its share of bad takes, but the fans really take it to a whole new level. On AO3, you'll come across some truly disturbing interpretations of characters that make you want to chuck your phone across the room—some of the stuff with D*emyra and Rh*enicent is gross...and the endless fics about A*mond and Luke. There are harmful narratives being celebrated or romanticized in fanfics. The abuse directed at dark-skinned characters is truly disturbing, as is the way abuse towards women is twisted to seem like something positive. Most of these fanfics completely miss the mark with dark-skinned characters, either vilifying them, sidelining them, or acting like they don't even exist. Like... how are there so few fics with Baela and Jace, yet you find heaps with Jace paired up with other white characters. Yeah, the series is bad, but also fans too...

I think for certain shows these two go hand in hand. When you write an empty story thats more worried about soothing the egos of a large part of its fanbase than anything else, you attract people who dont want to be challenged. and thats a problem when its a story like this one. you get people who just want to revel in things that were obviously written into the original text to be autopsied and interrogated, rather than accepted or glorified.

Im all for writing whatever you want, stuff that seeks out the worst and rolls around in it, and clearly fanfic shouldnt be held to the same expectations as multimillion dollar piece of media, but it doesnt mean certain things shouldnt be challenged. but in this space theres no room for having the conversation, no one talks, it isnt a good enviroment for proper discussion of any kind, everyone is just in their bubbles. like the amount of black and brown creators (women especially) on tiktok i've seen be absolutely bombarded with dumbass comments for daring to question the treatment of hotd's black and brown characters, either in the show or by the fandom. and then with it being a popular show the problems just exacerbated. i've not read much hotd fanfic myself im too picky with it i think. but even in what i have read/seen i know what you're referencing, especially when it comes to the black characters.

[writingbeforemidnight]

Why we have compassion for incels and hate "femcels"

Femcel. What a weird word. But I see it. Every scroll through my insta reel feed reveals it. "You're such a femcel", they might say. Bitter, hidden behind their phones. It's probably a women's rights post. Maybe something about abortions, toxic tampons or just that one video of that girl that recorded herself every time a man disappointed her.

"Femcel", the commets scream. As if women ever have problems getting laid. I'm one, and I'm striving. But that's besides the point.

The main difference between an incel and a femcel begins with the name. Incels, men "involuntarily in celibate", are a group that came off reddit. They named themselves that. They chose that name, and created their own community with their own vocabulary. "Femcels" however, is a name created by similar people. Men, frustrated with women and so called "radical feminism" (even though most things they are mad at, aren't even radical, but primarily human rights).

Now, creating these terms is a form of power, because it creates a narrative, the incels can control. They are the incels, they hate the "chads" but also the "stacys" and especially the "femcels". They have the power to paint the caricature of the femcel however they please. Surely, if there is a bunch of man haters, that has to mean, that women hating is also somewhat okay, right?

The incel movement is perceived as a defensive movement, that shields itself from female violence, femcels, unrealistic beauty standards other people set on them, loneliness and more.

You can see that, if you type in "incel" into the YouTube search bar. There's a Joe Rogan podcast, where the movement is seen as reactionary, or there is the Jubilee "ask an incel anything" video, further humanizing incels or videos about how little men are actually incels. But no video is harsh (enough).

Incels are rewarded with sympathy and humanity. Their actions have validity in context of their struggles. They are broadly seen as human.

But all of these videos fail to see, that the movement is not defensive, but offensive. It doesn't defend itself from violence, it creates it. It creates it's enemies, not based on stats or facts, but based on opinions from other radical content creators, that tell this tale of the "evil woman" and carry on their prejudices like a virus. The movement does not react to beauty standards, it makes them up and then blames other people for it. The movement doesn't help against loneliness, it creates a vicious circle that reinforces it.

---

I still remember being a Christina Aguilera fan in my early teens. And she has one kind of unknown song called "I hate boys", where she talkes about how boys "suck" and how "all men are dogs" because they play with girls and all of that stereotypical stuff.

Anyway, people were PISSED. No one bats an eye when men say they hate women because they are sensitive, stupid, gold-diggers and bad drivers, but don't you dare call a boy stupid! It's so fucked up how women can't call men stupid, while also being called ho3s, s1uts and almost every other slur there is on every rap song.

Male misbehaviour is always overshadowed. And when it's too big to be overshadowed, then it's being justified.

And "femcels"? Well, there are many reasons to treat them differently and hold them to higher standards! First of all, the patriarchy has women stuck in a very strict role. Of course women can have rage, but if so, even their rage is required to be aesthetically appealing, not ugly or disorted. We, as a society, don't allow women to be ugly. The worst image we know isn't the one of a man raping a woman, but the image of a feminist, with short blue hair and long armpits, smelling of sweat.

It's because even in 2024 women are still oppressed. Oppression creates structural barriers, that benifits some at the expense of others, the expense being the creation of a dilemma. When you can't do anything right, ever, that's called oppression. Women can't conform to society and women can't not conform.

The reason why we have compassion for incels and hate femcels, is because they are women and we don't have compassion for women.

Because we never see the humanity in women.

It's so sad, that we have more compassion with the movement that created several serial killers, like Elliot Rodgers, than with women. But then again, when has our society ever treated women with respect?

I really hope to one day wake up in a world of respect and love. Or maybe I just need to delete Instagram.

---

What do you think?

Love, xx

[mlsofh]

Vivziepop Criticism

Hello Wayward Sinners!

I wanted to do a full on post about the criticism of Viv because a lot of the things I see people raving about with Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss usually are just very hateful. I'd like to take a moment to address the fact that Viv isn't the sole creator of Helluva Boss or Hazbin Hotel, and giving her all of that hate is honestly unfair to her. She is a director and producer, yes, but this does not mean she had all creative liberty. This doesn't mean she isn't to blame but it's also not on us to solely blame her for the possible problems of both respective shows. As a person who wants to be an indie animator and even a director myself, I know the effort it takes to make a production. It's a lot of people! We have to remember that as a society, we have bias pushed onto us. We have subconscious bias to be more disrespectful towards women in media who are successful. That's because we're brought up to think women are lesser or aren't competent, but I'd like to remind everyone that Brandon Rogers is equally a producer and director of Helluva Boss. And lets not even forget that Hazbin Hotel is a whole production with multiple writers, artists, and so many more. A professional company decided Viv's designs weren't bad which means it's likely intentional. I also want people to remember that humans aren't a linear species. We aren't linear, we have learning curves. Give other humans the benefit of the doubt. If you're going to send hate then rethink why you're sending that hate. If you're criticizing I'd like for everyone to remember to criticize the whole production/direction (Not including Voice Directors. They have no say) staff who works on this production. Stop sending only criticisms to Viv, and instead send them to overall staff. It was written by Vivienne. The story is by Brandon, Vivienne, and Adam Neylan. Just because it's directed and produced by her doesn't mean she has all creative liberty. A good director takes others opinions into account when the creative process happens. I personally think it's a little ridiculous all the shit she gets for her writing skills. She gets quite a bit of shit for the "one dimensional" nature of Millie, Loona, and Stella for Helluva Boss. To which I say you're not looking at the character's bigger picture. Millie clearly deals with self worth issues, Loona deals with deep trauma that comes out in little hints, and Stella grew up in a very privileged position. Millie is incredibly well written if you look at her from her own standpoint. She doesn't talk about her deep past because she has a good relationship with her parents, didn't have a poor childhood overall, and is emotionally stable mostly. But we know that she got outshined by her sister, Sally may, frequently! She needed to be validated by teenagers for her physical skills. Millie sacrifices a lot for Moxxie, but that doesn't make her a supporting character to him. I'd love to have another episode about Millie: we all would. But she’s actually a well written character.

Don’t get me started about Loona either! Loona is very true to how people work. She is standoffish, and pretty rude in the start of most new interactions. She’s a traumatized young adult. As a traumatized young adult who has/had friends who are traumatized young adults, one of them acts like Loona! She’s really standoffish but incredibly sweet and needs lots of thoughtful attention. Loona has had lovely character development. I think even Stella being one dimensional is like how Striker is one dimensional, but I do not see a single criticism for Striker. I don't see criticism for arguably the worst written character in the series: Crimson. People want to call out when women aren't portrayed as inherently vulnerable. But what have we gotten that's good, that is so downplayed in modern media? Men being vulnerable. Men being abused, physically(implied by Stella’s interaction with Stolas.) So, yeah. Helluva Boss and Hazbin Hotel aren’t bad and we give Viv way too much overall flack. Give flack to all creators.

Anyway that’s all I have,

What do you think?

Stay tuned for more!

[bittcnneck]

NEW MUSE! WARNING‼️‼️:sexual assult, pedophilia, Eating disorder, animal abuse, child abuse, cannibalism, human organs and stalking is mentioned in this characters introduction story. Be warned.

also, spoilers for Laceys flash games. I Went into detail because they all play a part in her personality and backstory.

ᵠHow do I meet the strangest men?

They always seem to find me...

Remember that time way back when I...

Kissed a guy who 🅐︎🅣︎🅔︎ his women friends...

Now only dogs will follow me..

..ƃuᴉʍolloɟ ǝɥ sᴉ...?ᵠ

name: Lacey Ghosttundra

age: 19

ethnicity: Brazillian

fandom: laceys flash games

Sexuality: hypersexual bisexual

occupation: Chef in her own restaurant

Personality: Lacey is a kind and sympathetic girl. She is very timid when meeting new people, and introverted at the start, but she can get quite extroverted as time goes on. Because of everything that happens to her, she has a very, very hard time trusting people. Especially men. She is unfortunately sort of.. sexist. She does not think women are better than men, she likes to believe in equality, but at the end of the day, men have always hurt her. She has been assaulted and lied to too many times to not have a negative view on them. If your muse is a girl, she is a lot more likely to trust them, as she feels safer. She loves physical touch, but can only let people she trusts show her affection in that way. Her love language is usually acts of service, as she loves making people proud. She is quite the people pleaser, she loves compliments, words of affirmation is the love language she likes to receive the most. She has a bad relationship with failure. She hates failing. She hates being a disappointment, as she often sees herself that way. She always tries to do her best. She often acts "silly" as a way to disguise everything that happened to her. She would hate to trauma dump or make her problem others problem. It is hard to get her to open up about her past. But she sees nightmares almost every night. She is very anxious and pessimistic, almost always assuming the worst, because the worst always happens to her. She over thinks quite often. But she is a very nice girl overall. She loves to help people and share her things. Despite being a chef and loving to cook, she has an eating disorder, which is why she is super skinny and fragile. She is very weak, and she often eats a meal once a day and spends rest of the day either snacking on something small or just starving.

story: Lacey has never had a good day in her life. Ever. And as the creator said, she never will. She has been physically abused her whole life by her family, and sexually abused by her uncle in a young age. There is not exactly a story about her. Or well, her backround. So I'm writing from what I have observed. In the game Laceys wardrobe, she has a stalker who watches her in picnic, watches her get dressed up after a creepy phone call, and also sends her a heart box full of human organs. Lacey begs the player to not make her go outside. Player has no choice but to do so. Lacey gets sexually assulted, chopped, then eaten by the stalker. In laceys diner, after you fail to make the food on time two times, in the third time.. things get scary. There are ingredients such as used condoms, cigarette butts, dead cockroaches, pornograhy, and also... her dead uncle. She force feeds them to the costumers. the diner closes due to health code violations. Next thing we see, lacey is lying dead on the street. And yes, she did it herself.

in laceys pet shop, things are a lot more complicated. She does WHATEVER. Her costumer wants, going as far as to cutting off a bunnys ears and tail because she was requested to do so. Some weird things happen, i'll skip a little. Next thing we see is a few pigs eating flowers. the pigs represent her family. the flowers? the fact that she got deflowered when she was so little. She sits in a cage. She talks about getting a cat. then images of a puppy pops up with the sentance "you can hurt me all you'd want but weren't allowed to take it from me", indicating her uncle killed her dog.

Lacey is immortal. At least, my version of her. It is sort of like Kenny from south park. There are 3 animations of Lacey, and all of them ends up in her death. But these deaths never get mentioned in other episodes. So my interpretation is: she is cursed by God. That is why everything terrible always happens to her. She can not die, and is forced to live through this terrible life. When she dies, she wakes up the next morning in her bed, as if it was all a dream. But even though she is immortal, she can still very well feel pain, and she often still feels what she felt when she died after waking up. Lasts a few minutes.

[melonteee]

Hi i hope you're doing well. I just wanted to complain about something. Am i the only one who isn't annoyed by the way the female characters are drawn in one piece? Like i have been in the fandom for years and i see alot of fans complaining and being like "one piece females are overly sexualized they have weird proportions" and im being like.... okay one piece has a unique art style and alot of different character designs we see the ugly, the pretty and the neutral and thats it. One piece, for me, has one of the best female cast in shounen anime like they're smart, pretty, strong, have dreams and MOST IMPORTANTLY have personalities. I watched alot of anime and sometimes the female characters are either shallow or have their whole personalities about the male protagonist (thank god we don't have this in one piece). So it really makes me sad when i see alot of fans saying that one piece females are sexualized... sorry i would rather have them like this with importance to the story rather than good for nothing characters who are put in unnecessary fanservice (last anime i watched has one of the worst female cast that even the author himself said that he can't write female characters 💀). Sorry it became too long i just have no one to talk about this 😅 in the end i want to tell you that you're one of my favourite content creators, i follow you in twitter and i was surprised when i saw you in tumblr so i'm just happy and wanted to talk a bit ❤

Hello hello!

I understand what you mean because it's less about agreeing with it, and more "Yeah we get it, we KNOW. But there are OTHER things to look at!" which is more so where my frustration comes from with it.

Cause the issue is, yes, they're pretty misogynistic in their portrayal - due to the fact nearly EVERY One Piece girl has the same body. And that's the MAIN problem with why it's frowned upon.

Is it disappointing? Yes. Do I wish it were different? Yes. Are they still fantastic characters and shoot past the majority of mainstream women in fiction in terms of writing? Yeah!

I also do complain in terms of the bodies at times cause I GET IT, but at this point it's been 2 decades of people just saying the same thing. I think it's just as important to focus on the good as well as the bad, you know?

[soleminisanction]

I just went through most of your character rants and analysis and I love them so much!❤️ It’s so nice to find someone with a lot of the same opinions as me, especially after seeing a good bit of Tim hate in TikTok comments lately. I love the animatics and cosplays on there but it sucks that it seems like it’s seen as cool to be nasty to Tim’s character over there, or maybe it's just the comments of the videos I get? It’s usually people thinking he’s a misogynist or that his character steals from and or makes other robins look bad to hype him up. I don’t get these comments because I feel like all of the bats have been written with misogynistic dialogue at some point, even the girls! I don’t understand why people latch this on to Tim as some big character trait. Maybe it’s some joke I’m just not understanding. Also with the bringing other characters down to prop his character up, isn’t that what pretty much every character that is currently in the spotlight does at some point (like Steph’s Batgirl run infamously does to Babs and Tim)? Why do they attribute this only to Tim? Also, all the robins steal traits from each in adaptations and other comic runs, again why do they act like it’s a Tim only thing? Basically, all the other Bats do what they claim they hate Tim for?! It’s genuinely mind-boggling to me!

TikTok's algorithm is the worst thing about that app, because it's got a terrible tendency to send peoples' feeds into negativity spirals, and that in turn fosters a community of people who are either looking for rage-bait, are mad because they can't get away from the rage-bait, or try to bait other people to rage because that gets them engagement. There's no way off the merry-go-round once you get on it either, it's just miserable; it's why I eventually had to drop the app and now only watch the videos ported over to YouTube or Tumblr.

For my money, the reason Tim specifically gets blamed for this thing that is very obviously a problem with comics as an industry, not with his character specifically, comes at least in part from the drama involving Steph.

Because see, defenses of Steph tend to start from a seed of truth -- she was the subject of sexist writing in War Games, both in the fact that they chose to fridge her for Bruce's manpain and that artists during cuts away to the infamous torture sequence (which did not need to be as long as it was) drew her in a highly sexualized manner. But some people took that truth and ran with it, leaping onto this frustrating, stupid second-wave feminist idea that women are inherently innocent and can only ever be victims of The Patriarchy and therefor if anything goes wrong in the life of a woman, it MUST be the fault of A Man. And since it can be hard to pin-point which comic creators are responsible for these things, the brunt started to fall on the in-universe men.

So all the men around Steph became scapegoats, and Tim is the man she's both around the most and whom she has wronged the most. And then that attitude got amplified by her Batgirl run, which does this really manipulative bullshit where it only brings up Steph's past in terms that make her look like a helpless victim with no agency, without acknowledging or even mentioning any of the things she chose to do of her own free will. It especially went out of its way to demonize Tim and paint him as unreasonable, judgey and sexist, because the alternative would mean acknowledging that Steph had done some really fucked-up shit to him in the last days of Robin, and it was in fact perfectly reasonable for him to want her out of his life.

But see, that would mean that a good guy (gasp) didn't like her. And had a good reason not to like her. And trying to write a character who rises to become a true hero because they're fighting to make up for the shitty things they did in the past is so much harder than writing a innocent widdle victim who only has the best intentions and whose only problem is that the world is unfair to her specficially. White women with no self-awareness can project themselves on the latter, but not the former.

Amplify that by the faction of Damian stans who treat fictional rivalries as Deadly Serious Business and the fraction of Jason stans who hate him for existing as the result of Jason's death, both of whom will jump on and amplify any criticism no matter how baseless and uninformed just to score points against their perceived "enemy," and there you go. That's what I've observed unfolding since about 2007 anyway.

[squibstress]

HP Rec Fest - Day 16

Prompt: A fic that made you laugh @hprecfest

Circumstances of a Small and Accidental Nature

Pairing: Minerva/Severus

Creator: dueltastic

Rating: T/PG-13

Word Count: 26,750

Summary: Severus and Minerva manage a small problem.

Why You Should Check It Out:

This multi-chaptered fic has Severus Snape and Minerva McGonagall managing a small, dark-haired problem. Spot-on characterizations, dry wit, and wonderful dialogue are highlights of this genre-fic that somehow makes you say, "Yeah, that could happen."

Old Friends and New Ones

Characters: Filius, Neville, Pomona, Hagrid, Minerva

Creator: pyttan

Rating: K+/PG

Word Count: 3,000

Summary: Summary: Sometimes youth catches up to age.

Why You Should Check It Out:

So funny. I love the way the author uses the obvious-since-Book-1 fact that Hogwarts' teachers (some, anyway) are dreadfully cavalier about safety.

Filius’s POV is one we don’t get often enough, and this fic does it beautifully. He’s perspicacious and wildly funny. And the author also gives us a Neville who has developed a bit of a Slytherin side!

Only Technically Dead

Characters: Filius Flitwick, Kingsley Shacklebolt, Minerva McGonagall, Rosmerta, Severus Snape

Creator: themightyflynn

Rating: K+/PG

Word Count: 6,368

Summary: A mishap with the Ministry filing system may turn into something more than just an annoyance for Severus. Especially if Minerva has anything to say about it.

Why You Should Check It Out:

This fun romp through the Ministry archives has Severus dealing with administrative headaches and banking bureaucracy and Minerva exercising her inner Slytherin.

It is, as one would expect, very funny, but it also contains some lovely character studies.

Two Capable Women

Pairing: Irma/Minerva

Creator: therealsnape

Rating: M/R

Word Count: 6,700

Summary: A great many dreadful things have befallen the Hogwarts staff over the years, but the motivational training by Wilberforce (Bertie) Arbuthnot counts among the worst. However, Irma and Minerva rise to the occasion with the fortitude one may expect of two very capable women.

Why You Should Read It:

"Two Capable Women" is a fabulous story that wryly eavesdrops on the developing relationship between Minerva and Irma in the context of a motivational course. You can just imagine the reactions from the two redoubtable ladies and the other Hogwartians. Oh, wait … you don't have to imagine them, you can read them (and they're hilarious) at Beholder.

[ac-lesbians]

I've been really thinking about Valhalla lately and the way the story played out from my perspective as a player who solely plays f!Eivor and how that plays into the larger AC franchise. And I'll say that my hottest take is that if Eivor Varinsdottir was supposed to be canon, then they shouldn't have had the m!Eivor option at all.

And like, I get Ubisoft is a deeply misogynistic developer and this is not at all a new criticism, but just think about how much more depth to the entire world of the Assassins and Templars there would be if we actually had like, real female characters, let alone playable characters.

I've only played Odyssey and Valhalla because those are the only games I give a fuck about, but my point remains. The depth in those two games would have been amazing had they focused on one female protagonist and not making the game as gender neutral as possible so that misogynistic fan boys can keep their power fantasies and never have to consider a perspective outside their own while the rest of the world does.

Like Eivor would have had a MUCH more interesting story if she had to deal with the fact that she was a Norse woman in 9th century England. That changes the WHOLE STORY.

Dag would have had a legitimate reason to be mad at Eivor for using the power and authority lent to her by Sigurd. Sigurd would have had a real reason to be so dismissive of Eivor's input into his decisions. The Christians would have had one more reason to despise Eivor and the Raven Clan, not only are they heathens but Eivor is a woman daring to defy her social position.

The world of Assassins Creed would have had leagues more depth to it if the creators acknowledged that being a competent gender role defying woman is SO different from being a competent dude. Eivor should have had a million more roadblocks ahead of her as a woman trying to lead a clan in 9th century England.

And the worst part? We know it's not a research problem and we know it's not a "we don't believe women had those problems" thing either. Because RANDVI IS RIGHT THERE.

Randvi is one of the more important female characters in Valhalla and her backstory includes marrying a man she didn't know for the sake of securing an alliance. This isn't about shipping or anything, that's just basic info about Randvis character. And it doesn't take a genius or a historian to know that her situation is not a novel one, that happened over and over again throughout all of history. We KNOW that Randvi's story is not a unique one, and it's actively acknowledged in the game! So playing an entire game as a hyper competent female leader, who is also surrounded by plenty of competent female NPCs, fell REALLY flat for me when we see other characters face the woman-problem (AKA being a woman trying to get anything done at that time in that place) and Eivor never once faces it.

No one says "why should we listen to you, you're a woman" even when you are playing female eivor because that's how the game has to be for those who play male eivor. But I'm sorry I get that shit now as a woman who knows what she's talking about in this time, at this place. Eivor should not have been an exception. We see her regularly prove her mettle to other characters for different reasons (you're a heathen, you're a stranger, you're not from around here) but never the most OBVIOUS barrier being "you're a woman."

And I'm not saying that Eivor shouldn't have been a badass warrior or anything. In fact, it would add so much depth to her character to think about how different she is in comparison to the women around her who DO follow the expected gender roles of the time.

Eivor's parents died when she was young. We know that her mother was a competent enough warrior to hold her own in battle. That would not be surprising to me and it wouldn't have broken my suspension of disbelief. But when you think about Eivor and this pivotal moment to her character, knowing that she was a child of a nobleman and would be raised by both parents to be able to fight and be of noble blood, the fact that she's rather rough and tumble, focused on fighting and valhalla, then it really raises some questions.

If Varin and Rosta hadn't died, would Eivor be a viking? She probably would have had a better political education. She wouldn't be fumbling her way through leadership the way that she does in game. She'd probably have to be more clever because she has to manipulate her way through society, instead of blustering and fighting.

She'd also probably be married. Either to someone she cared about, or to someone politically viable like Randvi and Sigurd. She would have had her father choose a match for her, and she'd probably have little say in the match as well.

But styrbjorn raised her "as his own." So she learned to fight and became a viking. But that doesn't change the fact that she came from a noble family. She would not be so high status if she didn't come from a noble high status family. The idea that she doesn't behave like the other noble born women around her is kind of a key characteristic. And it's never brought to the front or explored because that would break the immersion for the fan boys who'd rather play as Havi.

Anyway this is my thesis for many of my fics because there's just so much there that is completely ignored because it literally CANT be explored if Eivor is a man. Ubisoft for the love of god hire a female historian I'm begging