#they're also so racist

[hannibard]

Witcher reddit is so fucking homophobic/biphobic

Shut up shut up shut up!!!!!!!

[iwasbored777]

Me on ao3 desperately trying to find a Gwiles fic where Gwen and Miles are both in character

[fromtheseventhhell]

Arya being masculinized, adultified, and having her trauma ignored because people think she's "too strong" to be a victim is such a core experience for young girls of color

[sergle]

I love to hear what people say about Youtube Drama* but it's SO tacky when it gets so offbase that the posts people make start to be about completely off topic infighting within the Watcher fanbase

[autisticrosewilson]

So do you guys actually think that Jason's entire story, relationship to the others, and philosophy amounts to him being a rebellious teen who wants his dad's attention? Like are you 100% serious? I thought you were joking about that but too many of you are saying it with your whole chest.

And what the fuck is this "Bruce antagonizing Jason is fanon!" Shit I've been seeing? You guys are aware that a parent can love their kid and still be a shit parent right? I know you guys don't want to fathom the thought that maybe your blorbo might also occasionally have to face responsibility for consistently endangering children but let's not start being delusional now.

Bruce does love his kids, that doesn't mean that he hasn't hurt them. And I'd also argue that for the most part he feels in the right for it, and he's said multiple times that he believes it's for their own good, so you can't even argue that he's sorry about it. It's okay for you guys to admit that your PERSONAL INTERPRETATION of the character wouldn't do that but don't sit here and pretend that it's not a facet of the source.

[bonefall]

tall shadows line of "she was only a kittypet" kinda reminds me of the line "they were only slaves" from the prince of egypt.

What kills me about it is that like, at that point in the movie, the Pharoah Is Bad. Him saying that a billion babies where fed to crocodiles is A Bad Thing. It's the point where Moses realizes he can't be part of the royal family without being complicit.

But Tall Shadow says "calm down, Bumble was less than human anyway" and Gray Wing nods along (complete with the jiggly clicking noise that comes with shaking a can of spraypaint) and this is an example of them being reasonable. Level-headed, even, not getting swept away by the passion of the angry mob.

There are so many levels to how fucked up the Bumble Debacle is that you can't explore every floor all at once. It is an onion. It has layers.

[ganymedesclock]

To explain The Goblin Problem and not go on a tag rant on someone else's reblog, I will explain it in the nutshell.

The Goblin Problem is when a story establishes a group of creatures to serve as recurrent antagonists (not necessarily all one species; in a lot of rpg games this can broadly apply to "monsters") THAT:

Are never negotiable, or the negotiable parties among them are Token Heroic Orcs- that is to say, they are seen as objectors or 'good' versions who have absolutely no connections to, and hold no objections toward you attacking, the rest of their brethren, who they have forsaken as the price to be paid for being good.

Have obvious unique technology; they may attack you with weapons found nowhere else in the game, demonstrate the ability to speak, have their own obvious language, tame a creature that nobody else tames so that it's thus impossible that they are stealing already-tamed specimens from someone else

Are characterized primarily or exclusively as raiders who attack others, with the justification this means they are inferior creatures parasitically dependent on Good, Civilized Settings, e.g. they cannot possibly be sustainably hunting, gathering, or practicing either nomadic or settled agriculture.

Are often defined as having no choice to be evil or are created by a greater evil to serve as thralls, and yet, will not under any circumstances be regarded as indoctrinated victims, or if that is mentioned, there will nonetheless be an overarching lack of narrative concern as to where or how the survivors should live after the greater evil is taken care of, or if effort should be made to challenge the indoctrination and give them the ability to choose their lives.

What this ultimately creates is that they are unambiguously people, who obviously check all the marks of sapience, who are quite possibly wearing clothes, but the goblin or orc exists as a stopgap. You want your fantasy hero to get into a swordfight but you don't want him to kill another human being. So you invent something that wields a sword but is in some way "not a person", which is senseless. Unless you want the nature of this swordfight to be that a chimpanzee picked up a knife, at which point they are not going to use reliable sword techniques.

[butwhatifidothis]

The fact that someone in 2024 can say "a person is bad because the blood from another race mixed with theirs and made them bad" without any shred or irony or self awareness is ghastly.

Probably comes from the idea that they are "good people," so they can't say racist shit or be racist because racism is bad and they are good people.

Which leads to shit like Shandale and multiple other people repeatedly saying shit like "The Nabateans as a race are ontologically evil and deserve the genocide that happened to them and the humans who genocided them were the good guys." "The Nabateans need to have their rights stripped away from them and live as second-class citizens to atone for what other Nabateans did." "The Nabateans are so savage and violent and evil that having their blood mixed with yours makes you evil like them." The Nabateans are evil, so they deserve to be erased. They deserve to be oppressed. They deserve to be killed. All of them. Even the children. No exceptions.

But they're not a "real" race so it's fine to advocate for their genocide. It's fine to cheer on their genociders and wish they were "properly" portrayed as the good guys they clearly are. It's fine to say "only humans should rule over humans" as if that isn't an ear-bleedingly loud dog-whistle for racial supremacy. Shandale is a good person so Shandale can't say Bad Person things, of course.

And the worst part is that Shandale knows what they're saying sounds bad. They fucking hate it whenever anyone with enough nuts in that cesspit of a discord directly tells them "hey yo this is some racist ass shit you're spewing out, can you like, stop?" They and the people who agree with them pull the "YOU'RE pulling the real world into this, and THAT'S so distasteful and bad!!" because Shandale knows that they only have that cover to hide behind. Shandale isn't saying what they're saying because they aren't aware of what they're saying or don't know why what they're saying is bad, they're saying what they're saying because they found the race they can scapegoat into getting away with saying this.

They all very clearly desperately want to say this shit. They will all go on for hours upon hours at a time vehemently going to bat for this hateful rhetoric, to the point that they will quite literally make shit up about what the Nabateans have done to make them evil. They owned slaves! They destroyed culture! They were tyrants! All of them! Genuinely every single one of them! All that shit is the CORNERSTONE to Shandale and their buddies' rhetoric, and they fucking made it up! It makes you wonder why they're so desperate for this clearly untrue thing to be true, and none of the answers to that question do them any favors to put it kindly.

And everyone in that server with the means to kick Shandale and all the other people who are clearly fucking racist and are using Nabateans as a scapegoat to vent their clearly fucking racist views would rather DM me to tell me ~oh so kindly~ that I should stop airing their moldy tattered laundry (in exchange for the mods following their rules of their server that they've been ignoring for fucking years) than do fucking ANYTHING about the mod that is peddling the racism. Shandale and their buddies don't need any shred of awareness - or more accurately, any shred of acknowledgement - because they know the second they bare their asses to the world the other mods will fucking scramble to cover for them. It's all beyond pathetic and disgusting

[welcometoteyvat]

as a chinese person yall need to stop blaming the ccp for everything (read: hoyo is capable of making colorist design decisions and not everything is a result of censorship pls)

[mintharasthrone]

thousands of comments from white people especially white women saying 4B, korean women, and korean lesbians are biogted and "transphobic" 🙄 you are all homophobic racist mra colonizer freaks who think you're so "progressive"

[dappy-dappernette]

Unsurprisingly the Z-onist AI-Generated Isr-el OC person is a terf, a race fetishist, and likes content from far-right users on Twitter. What a lovely woman. 🙃

[districtscare]

ok re: weird race stuff in thg i literally was just thinking about your post and how every single black boy is described as a threat. anyways. i am dropping in to ask about any thoughts you have on chaff and seeder and how they're treated in the narrative - i've been thinking about seeder's connection with katniss and chaff's with haymitch and how it made wayy more sense for them to be allied with katniss and peeta. idk. felt like another way for them to be more Tragic Deaths. but i also don't know if i'm making a mountain out of a mole hill

hey, hi! you're totally not making a mountain out of a molehill and i do actually have some thoughts.

i feel very strongly about chaff and his part of the narrative (if that wasn't already apparent) and how i absolutely loathe his introduction. kissing katniss as a joke looked very predatory at first to me, and it was weird that suzanne collins would pose one of her black characters in such an unfavorable light as SOON as he's introduced. then you've got the comments about “he could never stay out of a fight,” and then that poses him as predatory AND aggressive. those negative traits will overide the positive in a read where he's been mentioned.

his redeeming qualities is looking over katniss and peeta, (and bonding with him specifically,) alongside playing a huge role in haymitch's life, as a best friend/drinking partner, which even reads as queer-coding, considering that the first person that we see is important to haymitch, is a man. and yes, men have best friends! not denying that! but it's the nature of descriptions in their relationships, and even peeta's adamance to mention chaff every so often. chaff ALSO lasted a long time in the arena, being smart enough to likely figure out the tree + water trick without a spile.

with seeder, she seems almost forgettable. a seam-resembling woman who reassures katniss about rue and thresh's family, and holds a sense of comfort and wisdom as an older woman. and yet, first chance, she's one of the first people to go. we don't get her story, or any important details otherwise, and it really stunts getting to know the (introduced) victors of 11. it simply seems as if they weren't important enough in comparison to other victors, when they were in on the rebel plan in the exact same way.

and on the subject of reaper, chaff and thresh, it is so repetitive to have all 3 of your main black characters be brutal, fighty, aggressive. reaper killed a peacekeeper. thresh killed clove brutally. chaff, we don't know. but if he's a fighter, then i assume his actions aren't any better. it's okay to make your black characters good people. you don't have to weave in microagressive stereotypes to display racism, especially when it isn't your place. each of these characters do so much good, yes! but by collins constantly giving them that fatal flaw of violence and aggression, which is ALREADY a trait that condemns black people in the modern day, true or not true of any character, she undoes that. she harms the community she's attempting to represent in her work.

i could also mention how the torture system in district 11 eludes to lynching, and how strange it is to beat people for eating crops, or kill them for harmless mistakes. it is not racism representation, it is harm, because we don't have to be tied to slavery every time! a lot of our history is, but in the same vein? it's not the only thing that happened to black people, and you don't have to hint or reference it to create a successful black character/population.

very true that suzanne uses each character as a tragic death. it's literally like how every black character dies first in a horror movie. overused, and absolutely uneducated. because we have reaper & the poisoned water (and in the movie the snakes,) seeder in the bloodbath, rue and the spear and her mural/tribute grave, chaff dying right as they were leaving the arena, boggs getting his legs blasted off and dying violently. all of this is repetitive, and she gives life to these characters, just to have that discontinued. and it's unfair, it isn't representation to the full extent.

[ghetto-omega]

I have scary dog privilege in a very specific way. I am not tall or muscular or even particularly mean looking (at least I don't think so...? Lol I have very soft features) but I am very strange and weird to those who meet me. Strangers tend to be freaked out by me before I've even said anything, and if I'm in a group with all my fem friends I'm always the one they turn to when they feel threatened/scared. I take pride in this btw.

[agirlinthegalaxy]

It's been rolling around in my brain the last few days for some reason, but I still hate the family backstory reveals for Sophie and Eliot. I've seen some of the meta for it, but quite frankly, it still makes no sense. If it had been something actually thought of and intentional in the original, I think it could have been so fascinating. I mean, Sophie's willing abandonment of Astrid to contrast with Nate's loss of Sam or Eliot's adoption in contrast with Hardison's and Parker's? Could have been excellent! But they came out of nowhere in Redemption and don't work with these characters.

Sophie was still actively using the fucking alias that she met Astrid under! She met with someone from her past on the show! Like. Quite frankly, that one is unequivocally bullshit that they made up and threw in and pretended could fit with the established canon. (And I'm sorry, but the idea of Sophie abandoning Astrid and never telling Nate about her just... So much of Nate's trauma was rooted in the loss of Sam, and I think that introducing this element after he's gone and unable to respond to it taints Sophie and Nate's relationship in a way bc I'm not exactly sure how Nate would've responded to learning about this but I think that it's something he'd have needed to know. I don't know how to fully express my thoughts on that but yeah.)

As for Eliot, I don't like the adoption aspect literally at all. The way that he would interact with his family and the memory of his family would be different, and I think that it's flat out ridiculous to think that he'd have never mentioned it to the team in the original show, especially when dealing with the kid cases. (I also dislike the biracial adoption as its own element because if Eliot was actually raised by Black parents in the... idk what 80s/90s? That just. doesn't feel congruent with how they write Eliot interacting with PoC, not necessarily in a bad way, but babe, he's written like a white southern man raised in a specific kind of culture that does not jell with that. It also makes Eliot look... really bad that he was apparently raised with the knowledge of how fucked up the military was and his parents' history and made the choices that he did.) Like the show may not have explicitly stated it but the implication of that relationship was vastly fucking different throughout the original show.

Just. These were not backstories that were congruent with their depiction and characters in the original show, and they're also just moves that I don't particularly like or find interesting directions for those characters. There's also something to be said about how it was apparently unacceptable for a woman to not have kids or someone not reconciling with their biological family when that was something that the original show handled a lot better. Out of all the directions to take Sophie and Eliot's stories, that's just not really one that I think was a good idea.

[archivist-the-knight]

also a good way to go into fantasy society worldbuilding or just worldbuilding in general is just to remember "no animal is inheritly evil, no human is inheritly cruel and deserving of punishment for being alive, and no species is deserving of a death penalty simply for how they look. no matter what."

like. if you have a species that say. is being ruled by an evil overlord and as such rules under a very violent society. however if person of that species is taken outside of this society, they can become a better person and learn from their misdeeds. if a member of the species isn't raised inside the walls of this violent society, they'll turn out just how their parents raise them, not how the society expects them to act.

but if you have a society where the species inside of it is "inheritly" seen as evil or stupid, where even raising a child out of this environment they are still mean no matter what. stop. that does not make sense. that gives off a very weird message. it's way more compelling and thoughtful if you state that its an upbringing, or a society, that makes someone who they are, not that its "inherit." holds up hands. back away from the stage a little. no one is inherently evil no matter what even if you dont like them. and especially even if you dont find them pretty or "cool."

[novella-november]

Well, I now know what original story I'll be writing for Freedom February ...

👀🤖⛓️‍💥

Can't wait for people who use l33tspeak or are greek mythology nerds to immediately realize what is happening with the lore and are excited to see how it plays out.