#this is just a post on anti behaviour

[avalonmoonshinesstuff]

I just realised Something about a portion of fandom I don't really engage with all that much. Because I don't want to, btw.

In all other shows, movies, books, etc, every single bad person is at least somewhat 'ugly' according to the narrative. The 'problematic' characters rarely get acknowledged because there are so many good looking characters who are good themselves (I remember Annabelle from the first book of Percy Jackson, I think, and there were more ofc).

However, Rowling's main idea about appearances was that it was an illusion. Every single good looking character is either reprehensible or ends up dying (Cedric) in the same book they were introduced*. The story wants to be relatable to how every teen feels, and no matter what, we all have insecurities.

However, they're just teens, and on top of that, at least one or more of our main teens have done something terrible or badwrong (Hermione with skeeter and Marietta). So, they aren't exceptionally beautiful and neither are they exceptionally good. Even the side characters who are popular come across as jerks to some of their family members, making their sibling cry.

This creates a problem for the people who don't have a sense of self yet, or are so scarred they can only look at life through black & white lenses.

The Halo effect playing greatly onto the above, we're presented with another set of teens, two of whom are described as extremely sought after by the opposite sex, one of whom is popular, and the final one who has endeared himself by showing ugly Snivellus his place (via map and the Verbal Sparring). They all, by the end of this introduction, understand that Snivellus is badwrong and doesn't deserve anything good.

'It's clear he's the villain, and has been since forever, see, these people agree with me and they're the Protagonist's parents.' Whether this is believed because of the Halo effect or taking Harry's perspective to mean a God pov, I can't tell. The point being, they are even more convinced.

They want an escape from how difficult it is to sort out their feeling about these people the author keeps throwing at their face so why not attach to the characters who are dead or strongly attached to the protagonist (so they can never be badwrong in later books). A safety blanket of sorts, if you will. And in doing so, they completely ignore the nuances of the scenes presented in the last book. Because they are attached, they'd rather call badwrong Snivellus' love impure than explore what the montage of all his memories implied. That beauty is skin deep.

The thing about people who like such black and white scenarios and people is: they will always fall prey to the Halo Effect. And it's extremely painful to be disillusioned about your favourites. So they may never get disillusioned.

All this to say, sometimes I wonder why that part of the fandom is like 'that'. And it's just that this is the safety net in this series, or this is just how vanilla people outside of fandom coming in can take.

And that's fine (coz I'm crazy for the marauders era as well, just with a slightly wider taste pallet).

TL Dr: The antis are attracted to wholesome ships and since Rowling made it so difficult to find such ships until much later where you are emotionally connected with each character, the antis attached to a bunch of (mostly) dead people who, by association to the Hero of the story, being pretty, popular, and clear on their behaviour with the badwrong confusing character, are all good. They were desperately looking for the safety net in the books and found some. Also, since antis are the way they are, maybe they believe the fictional character being dead means people would not criticise their wholesome ship? Idk.

A/N:

*The only properly handsome man - Bill - barely gets mentioned, marries a beautiful woman, and imo the only reason he doesn't die is because he didn't revel in his handsomeness or popularity (him liking Snape in school is so cute + that disqualifies him from being popular with the antis since he likes the badwrong character). Also, he was literally scarred on his once handsome face to show that his wife actually loved him and didn't just choose him to have beautiful babies. Her being a veela and owning her Frenchness were already flaws (in the narrative's opinion) so all she needed was a scarred husband. Now, they both don't have to die 🤣.

[chaos-in-one]

Daily reminder not to call traumagenic systems who aren't anti endo, endogenic. It's fucked up.

[spop-romanticizes-abuse]

i think i've talked about this before but fuck it, i want to talk about it again. i find it concerning how little the spop fandom cares about morals or compassion towards others.

they think that adora should have stayed with catra and let the horde kill everyone in etheria.

they think that catra trying to destroy the universe and kill thousands of people was justifiable.

they think that shadow weaver is evil only because she's abusive, and refuses to acknowledge the fact that she's the only character who was actually trying to do something useful during the war.

they think that adora should not have taken the failsafe and that she should have instead stayed with catra and let everyone die, including herself.

they don't give a fuck about the characters who suffered because of the horde and because of catra, especially angella, micah, glimmer, etc.

and i know that these don't necessarily reflect their actual morals. i'm not saying that these people are bad just because of their opinions regarding fiction. but it is still a bit icky to see people be like “omg adora is so mean for abandoning catra, she should have stayed in the horde” when adora was trying to put an end to a war.

we're talking about a war here. adora didn't leave the horde for glimmer and bow, or for some luxury she didn't get in the horde; she left because she didn't want to support the group of people who were literally slaughtering innocent people by the hundreds.

[areawest]

usamericans will see a post (rightfully) criticising them and start going “but what about europeans” “what about the british” like. there are also valid criticisms to be made there but we were talking about you. I thought you liked it when everyone was focused on you?

[ghost-bison]

why i don't like amy pond: if we follow moffat's logic, guns are bad but domestic violence is ok (as long as the perpetrator is a sexy woman)

she cheated then called rory an idiot because he had doubts about their relationship (i mean... shocking?)

she's written as such a badass character but is literally always in need of saving/passed out in some man's strong arms

she has no compassion. she literally said "rory no offense to the others but could you let them die first" and it wasn't a fkn joke and even if it was, who tf says that in a situation where multiple people are gonna die to protect u and ur baby

she and river keep slapping their men for no fkn reason like it's funny (sorry but it's not. if it were the other way around people would make a scene)

she flirts with herself (all she's good at tbh) (i wouldn't have a problem with her flirting with herself if she had redeeming qualities of some consequence but. girl have you met yourself)

she's nothing more than a surrogate for the storyline, not a real character. things just happen to her because they do, and that would be ok if it was done like with donna. cause donna had a personality outside of hating and making everyone around her feel bad yk. but amy is just there, not likable, and on top of everything she usually doesn't really do anything (that's probably why my fave amy episode is the beast below cause it gave the false impression that she was nice and compassionate). she's just there bossing everyone around just to feel powerful i guess, but i can't find any explanation behind the fact that she needs to feel powerful other than she's a bitch

so yeah we had her for two and a half series and since there was nothing to her besides being mean for no reason, being sexualized and being in distress and that it was basically the same with river, i was kinda really fkn bored

she told rory leaving him (= throwing his arse out of the house and keeping it for herself because apparently adoption is not a thing anymore and having children is obviously the only real reason people fall in love and get together) was harder than him staying awake and dragging around an enormous box with her body inside for 2000 years all alone (and she didn't say it nicely, either, she guilt-tripped her way through this conversation)

she also couldn't understand why rory thought she was confessing her love for the doctor at the beginning of series 6 after she'd 1. cheated on him 2. thought he was gay their whole childhood (wow, is amy so self-absorbed she can't even see anything outside of her own reflection including the boy who keeps staring at her 24/7 wide-mouthed? that's actually record-breaking) 3. forgot about him (ik it's not her fault she forgot but she also didn't care how insecure rory felt about this or anything else) 4. keeps calling him names 5. ditched their wedding to go traveling with a near-stranger 6. flirts with the doctor in front of him 7. calls him and the doctor "my boys" like she owns the place (she doesn't) 8. i could go on but you get the point

she's generally selfish, arrogant, bratty, abusive, shows no lasting emotion (or psychological damage) to the things that happen to her, misdirects her anger, shows anger for no reason (wakes up and slaps rory because he asked her if she was ok - that's called abuse)

if i were the tardis i would have thrown her arse out in seconds

[brick-van-dyke]

Thinking about how batshit Zionists are when they're like *say obvious thing that's common knowledge is Actually Fake* and I just ??? Are they okay in their little echo chambers. I think they should go for a walk and get some fresh air, maybe touch some grass (not the imported one from Europe though, the natural grass preferably).

[harriertail]

I’ve been thinking about Thunder

(dotc rewrite) The fire-red tom is the last surviving kit. His mother is still alive, but frail- the moorland cats say she is dying of a broken heart, an old superstition regarding queens and their lost kits- Wind and Hawk Swoop both agree to help her settle into the moorland camp, but with no medicine cat, she quickly deteriorates. Her son is named Thundering Storm in honour of her and a reminder of the storm of rubble that nearly killed them both. Tragically, Storm passes, but Thundering Storm is loved and treasured by Hawk Swoop and his adoptive siblings. Grey Wing is a good father- maybe too critical when he sees Clear Sky’s temper flashing in his son’s outburts, but feels Clear Sky should at least come visit his only kit. After the fire, when heat lightning crashes across the sky, a paranoid Clear Sky is adamant; Thundering Storm belongs to him. He is given to the forest and renamed Thundering Sky, now he has proven himself worthy of Clear Sky’s attention. Thundering Sky is one of them, a forest cat, he belongs with his kin. But Thundering Sky has know nothing but love: pure from Storm, gentle from Hawk Swoop and Turtle Tail, tough from Grey Wing, the love/hate banter of young siblings rushing to grow up together, and cannot fit into Clear Sky’s world. He returns to the moor with Frost. His father goes insane. Clear Sky wants boundaries, Clear Sky wants laws and order in a chaotic world, One Eye will help him achieve that. The winters in the mountains have made him paranoid. Thundering Sky is trapped between Grey Wing seeking peace with the others and Jagged Peak seeking revenge, and Clear Sky seeking order, he is caught between the forest and the moor, and his non-mountain blood. 

Even after all of it, Clear Sky’s jabs and comments, the murdering of innocent cats, working with One Eye to strengthen the group, the young tom just wants his father’s approval, truly. He wants his father’s laws to work, for the borders to bring peace, but they cannot. Not with Clear Sky determined to continue leading his group alone, and One Eye looking to take it. 

The mountain cats have brought nothing but trouble and bloodshed, and they fight to the death in the hollow with five trees until a lightning strike destroys one ancient oak and brings the dead back to life- over what? Over the rights to hunt? Over the land? Over him? Thundering Sky returns to the forest, seeing his father quiver before the spirits of their dead. They both just need someone to prop them up. He can temper Clear Sky’s rage, Clear Sky can make him into a cat he will be proud of.

He will not learn, even after One Eye is gone, Clear Sky is certain his way is right- after all, he and One Eye united the forest, the moor, and the strays. Unite or die, says the spirits, they must all come into Clear Sky’s control. You are a forest cat- you belong with me. He speaks of wanting a group, a set of rules and regulations to strictly keep the peace and honour, but he has no honour. None of the mountain cats do. They can all take their groups to the other side of the world. When the time comes, you will make it right, and Thundering Sky knows what he must do. He storms from Clear Sky’s camp in the dead of winter, he is nothing like his father, or his kin, he will make his own group. A group where the ill are tended too, the young trained, the evil punished. He sheds his name and becomes Thunder, not a forest cat, not a mountain cat, his own cat. He is not one of them. A new age is beginning, he vows, and sets to make his camp.

Clear Sky is furious, humiliated. His mother disowns him when she travels from the mountains, she curses Clear Sky so that he will never succeed in his bloodthirsty plans. He unites with Slash, regathers what is left of One Eye’s rogues and rogues from beyond- he has so much power he can gather cats from places beyond the forest, beyond the mountains. He makes one last push to unite the five groups, he bleeds into the ground by the river. Thunder gets word- Grey Wing is dying too, pushed to the edge by his brother’s actions. His last kin is gone. The new age is truly beginning. ThunderClan, RiverClan, WindClan, ShadowClan, and SkyClan- led by Sparrow Fur, will rule the forest. Five Clans around Four Trees. Thunder’s code, the warrior code, will grow and spread, and the Clans will grow. Leaders will get their nine lives, their medicine cats will learn to harness the power of the living and dead. All is well with the world. In the future, they will wonder about the fifth tree, decayed by time, and if Quiet Rain’s curse has anything to do with the monsters rolling across the SkyClan border.

[zazikels]

why are tb stans genuinely so fucking disgusting

[gameofthronedd]

Daemyra: Archaic Vs Contemporary, Bias and Double-Standards

One thing that really ruffles my feathers in regards to support of Daemyra... is being all "Well, in medieval times..." but not applying that same logic to other aspects of the show and characters.

In the Daemyra situation, it's the logic of "no, he isn't a gr***er because at the time Rhaenyra is eligible for marriage and is a 'woman grown'". But there's a completely different attitude involved when it comes to the situation with Rhaenyra's bastards and premarital sex.

Warnings for: mentions of gr**ming minus the asterisks for brevity/accessibility/readability etc., long post, cursing/strong language

If we're using period/universe accurate logic, then, yes, perhaps Daemon's relationship with Rhaenyra isn't strange and it certainly isn't uncommon (see: Viserys and Aemma, Rhaenys and Corlys). However, I think that if you're using in-universe logic then you can't really maintain integrity whilst losing your shit when someone points out that Rhaenyra's actions are politically problematic and, daresay, inappropriate (using in-universe logic, of course!).

Based on contemporary morals, we know that premarital sex isn't inherently bad (except in the eyes of some religions, for example) and that having bastards is not a bad thing (obviously may be an issue for the aforementioned). We know that women can be sexual beings and find pleasure in that, that agency and autonomy are important for women just as it is for men. So on, so forth.

But with contemporary morals, we also know that Daemon's relationship with Rhaenyra when she is young is inappropriate. In the first episode, she is 14/15 and is involved in what may amount to grooming (such as gift-giving as seen via the necklace which is specifically crafted for her). We also see that Daemon provides and fulfills her desires for freedom and adventure, and he does pose as this "untouchable bad boy" figure.

When she's about 18 in Episode 4, Daemon takes her to the brothel and allows her to explore sexuality... before abandoning her and leaving her exposed, and consequently compromising her integrity. Whilst she is the "acceptable" age here, by contemporary morals I'd assume that we can all agree that it is inappropriate for Daemon to take Rhaenyra to a brothel and put her in a physically dangerous situation, away from the safety of the Kingsguard and her sworn protection, and to then leave her there in that situation.

It just appears strange to specifically rely on in-universe/period appropriate logic solely for the Daemyra situation yet other issues being addressed through this perspective are met with anger. Personally, I think both should be used and interrogated. But most Daemyra supporters I've seen tend to have a more contemporary stance on other issues yet only apply this in-universe logic to the Daemyra situation, and dislike it when such a perspective is applied to Rhaenyra's situation.

In regards to that, and as an example...

Based on archaic logic (I'm just going to call ASOIAF/in-universe/period-accurate logic "archaic logic" from now on lmao), Rhaenyra engaging in premarital sex, whether with Daemon or Criston, would be considered inappropriate. Women would be expected to remain a "maiden" until marriage and it would be highly dishonourable to engage in sexual activities before marriage. Rhaenyra's adventure to the brothel (and subsequent engagement with Criston - though the former is the extent of what the important figures become aware of, excepting Alicent) places her in a precarious decision in terms of her integrity as a woman & as heir.

From a contemporary perspective, we know that's bullshit. Men, Viserys and Daemon both included, frolick often in brothels and their sex lives are not as highly criticised as women. I can't name a male heir or ruler in the ASOIAF universe whose legitimacy and position was/would be called into question because he had sex. Yet Rhaenyra, being a woman, inherently faces prejudice if her engagement in premarital sex becomes widely known. We know, as a modern audience, that Rhaenyra's sex life shouldn't be everyone's business.

But why is it unacceptable to consider an archaic perspective when considering this... yet we can only use an archaic perspective to discuss Daemyra?

The obvious answer is bias, of course. I'm not into shitting on people's enjoyment. Like what you like, I won't stop you. But I'm going to critique because, uh, I can. And my personal bias is not for Daemyra, if you couldn't tell. So, anyway...

The HOTD fandom is a situation where lines are drawn and there is very transparent bias. I'm biased, you're biased, we're all biased. That's life. The situation with Daemyra definitely shows that.

Fans of Team Black, especially diehard Rhaenyra stans, tend to rely more heavily on contemporary/modern values and morals... except for Daemyra fans, whereby there's a noticeable shift towards archaic logic. This is noteworthy because it evidences that the subconscious bias recognises that sticking to contemporary values would result in having to make excuses for behaviours that are noticeably inappropriate aka grooming. So it's easier to rely on archaic logic to explain it away as being appropriate for the time. Ta da, no moral quandary!

The issue here isn't that they're using archaic logic because then I'd be a hypocrite. The issue is that those in this locus are transparently making an exception for themselves to avoid addressing the behaviours that are inappropriate based on contemporary values, whilst being critical of archaic logic being applied elsewhere. Obviously, the same can be said about other groups and situations.

My point is this:

Analysis of HOTD is interesting and media literacy of any entertainment content allows us to perceive the world in different ways and address a variety of issues in society, as well as understand the characters, ourselves, others and the world.

I think it's good to consider both archaic and contemporary attitudes towards different situations presented in HOTD. I also think it's good to be aware of and reflect upon personal biases, and perhaps scrutinise more closely why we instinctively shift towards one form of analysis, archaic or contemporary, over another.

Personally, I think that the show's narrative somewhat purposefully portrays Rhaenyra and Alicent's interactions with "romance" as both highlighting the damage patriarchy can inflict upon young girls, and the different ways it can manifest. Alicent is married off to an old man against her will and has his children whilst still being a child herself. Meanwhile, Rhaenyra is being drawn into sexuality and romance by Daemon, more or less being "lured" into what is expected of women as well as being lured into a precarious situation that places her wellbeing and position as heir at risk.

Both are women being manipulated as pawns of the patriarchy. Alicent evidently has no choice, devoid of her agency as a girl, whilst Rhaenyra has the illusion of choice, believing she is in control whilst being pulled left and right by Viserys, Otto, Daemon etc.

I could definitely go into more detail. But, anyway, those are just my thoughts on the double-standards of the Daemyra situation. Just a personal pet peeve. I feel like if you're supporting Daemyra then there's a necessity to acknowledge the contemporary/modern perspectives of it, especially if being critical of instances where archaic logic is applied elsewhere. Hope that makes sense 🙏🏻

[cryptids]

ok I know Danzo and Jiraiya are always at the top of everyone's worst Naruto character lists, but I actually think its unfair to put them on the same level because they are the worst in completely different ways......... like Danzo was horrible and responsible for so many atrocities, but he was written to be that way and we're supposed to see him as a bad person. Meanwhile Jiraiya is written as a hero and all of the shit he does that makes him the worst is just excused or ignored by the narrative. like his creepy behaviour towards women is played off as jokes, his unecessary harshness with Naruto on several occasions then not teaching him literally anything during the 3yr gap is just totally ignored, stealing money from Naruto just gets immediately forgotten about and he doesn't even act like it's something to apologise for (and not even promising to pay him back when it was his entire savings?? girl...). Like Jiraiya is so annoying because none of his flaws are ever addressed and bc the writing expects us to like him, when he's just super unlikeable to everyone except like a handful of people lmao. Meanwhile Danzo's crimes are far worse, but he's actually a well written villain imo and all the hatred people feel for him is the intended response we're supposed to be having

[br1ghtestlight]

watching these tv shows about serial killers has me thinking about how my younger brother was only like 10% bad choices away from being an Actual murderer. he's calmed down a lot now but even 5 years ago i wouldnt have put it past him to try and kill me or my sister, he used to try to stab us with a kitchen knife and we'd lock ourselves in the bathroom FJDMDMDKDSMJ

[not-poignant]

Absolutely wheezing at the idea that a writer ~might not know~ that what they're writing is ~bad irl~. How fucking condescending is that? As someone who mostly creates and consumes horror media, my perspective might be a little skewed- but c'mon, people KNOW that dubcon/gaslighting/torture/murder/&c is not okay in real life. Inadequately tagged fic (& media which deals with these topics poorly) might well be a problem, but people still know the TOPICS are morally bad (& illegal) & not ok irl

I really weighed whether to give your mockery a platform on my blog, so I might still delete this response later, but I'm just going to say a few things.

Firstly, my post was around people having irrational emotoinal responses and having subsequent thoughts that try to make sense of those emotional responses. This isn't really about what the author knows, it's about the emotional response. (But even then, anon, abusers exist in fandom, abusers write fic, and it's very naive to not know this). At any rate, my whole point was that if an author is tagging or warning, they generally know, lol. But there's reasons readers might not know that.

Since my post was solely about reader response I'm going to address the readers who don't know or realise something in the moment, because they're having an irrational emotional response.

Readers having emotional responses to something that squicks them or hits them the wrong way are rarely rational and based in what people 'know.' You might want to research emotions and emotional responses in order to understand this better.

Secondly, there are actually some fairly prevalent reasons why people may be unable to give others the benefit of the doubt in the moment and assume that the author knows what they know (not least: fic authors are often complete strangers). Some of those reasons are as simple as 'I've been raised to be wary of other people and what they believe.' But others include having been abused themselves, or alternatively, knowing that abusers and rapists write fiction and live in the world among us, and sometimes having a moment where they're just not sure based off what they've just read. (It's nice to assume that not everyone thinks abuse is okay, but it's a lot harder to assume that once you've been abused by someone you know, you might want to apply some compassion to other people on this - folks who are paranoid of others often have reasons for doing so, even though that never excuses abuse or bullying in turn).

At any rate, I can think of a lot of reasons why someone wouldn't automatically just 'know' something in the moment, especially if they've been triggered or squicked (which I mention in my post). It doesn't excuse bullying or abuse, which I say in my post, but the emotions themselves and the irrational thoughts they can lead to aren't bad by default - that's part of the normal human experience, you're having it yourself right now anon - that's an attempt the brain makes to protect the person who's just had that experience. After that, we make a choice re: our behaviours.

Your perspective is a little skewed, anon, simply because you've made the mistake of assuming everyone must think the same way you do - but not everyone has had the same experiences, upbringing and education you've had. And vice versa. Someone who has been abused by someone in fandom, for example, may struggle to assume benefit of the doubt in certain circumstances where something - the person or product - reminds them of that abuse.

You might want to research the cognitive impacts that abuse and interpersonal trauma have on people, anon, especially if you mostly create and consume horror media, because that is pretty important in the understanding of some horror. This struggle doesn't make their behaviours right if they're hurting others, but judging folks for not knowing what you do, or for the things that make them uncomfortable is rude and patronising.

It bothers me that you can't conceive of a world where folks might have frankly understandable but strong and irrational emotional responses to fictional content. If you can accept that for example, some horror will make people scared or too unable to engage with it (can you accept this?), even if they do know it's not real, then I think this is a concept you do foundationally understand, and are just not applying to this situation, perhaps because it disturbs you to think that some people don't just know this by default. I don't know.

Finally, given you felt the urge to come into a complete stranger's inbox and speak derisively and with open mockery towards a bunch of folks who don't make the same assumptions you do, or have the same knowledge base that you do, it's fairly obvious that you yourself know exactly what it's like to engage in behaviours based off irrational emotional responses. So maybe you have more in common with the people you're mocking than you think? Food for thought.

You probably know - when you stop and think about it - that there are many reasons why people may not 'know' or be able to assume what you know in this circumstance, but if you don't:

Highly recommend you do deeper dives into aversive emotional responses and emotions, and also look into how abuse and trauma can cognitively affect some people.

[traumacodedtransbitch]

Good news: every day is a step closer to d*pp dropping dead

[ghelgheli]

i would actually like to hear more of your thoughts on whipping girl, whenever you feel ready enough to talk about it. i've only ever heard positive recommendations for it. i was thinking of reading it. i've read one or two introductory 101 texts on transmisogyny as well as some medium/substack posts, and always looking to read more as a tme person. ty!

thanks for asking! I'm gonna try to be concise because I'm stuck on my phone for the month, but here are my thoughts on whipping girl:

serano is at her strongest in the book in three areas: manifestations of transmisogyny in media (e.g. how trans caricatures pervade movies), the history of medical institutions developing a pathology of transsexuality (like the diagnostics of blanchard et al. or how trans people seeking healthcare were and continue to be forced into acting out prescribed expressions and manufacturing memories), and the construction of her own transition narrative (telling the reader what it was like for her to grow up desiring femininity in a way that confused her, the experience of crossdressing, the effects of hrt for her)

whenever she's just sticking to this, I think she effectively communicates a lot that the unaware reader could benefit from—even many trans women/transfems/tma people who are otherwise in tune with the history of medicalized transsexualism and our popular depictions could probably benefit from her own personal narrative, by nature of how variegated our experiences can be.

unfortunately I think the book fails at its primary—stated—goal, which is to theorize about transmisogyny. in the big picture this is a bifurcated failure:

on one branch of her argument, she remains committed to there being something biologically essential/innate about gender. this manifests thru multiple claims: that we have "innate inclinations" toward masculinity/femininity and "subconscious sex" rather than what I believe, which is that the latter are constructed categories imposed on different matrices of behaviour/expression/desire in different cultural contexts; that there is "definitely a biological component to gender" (close paraphrase) after a discussion of how she believes E and T tend to affect people (thus equivocating gender with dominant hormones!); that we have such a thing as "physical sex" which is the composition of our culturally decided "sex characteristics" (don't ask me how the dividing line is drawn) even as she says we should stop using "biological sex" as a term; that there is "no harm" in agreeing that "sex" is largely bimodal with some exceptions; that social constructionism is necessarily erasure of transsexual experiences in early childhood... altogether she is unwilling to relinquish arguments about the partial "innateness" of femininity/masculinity and gender. this is at tension with her admission on several occasions that these are neither culturally/geographically nor temporally stable concepts! but that doesn't seem to be a line she can follow thru on.

on another, intertwining branch, she engages in what I think is a deep and widespread mistake in the theorizing of transmisogyny: reducing it (mechanistically) to what she calls effemimania* or essentially anti-femininity. it is her stated thesis at the start that masculinity is universally preferred to femininity. she doesn't offer a definition of either term until one of the final chapters, where she defines them as the behaviours and expressions associated with a particular gender. but I think this reduction just misunderstands transmisogyny. it is even in tension with an observation she makes early on, that trans women are often punished for their perceived masculinity! but again, this is a thought she seems unable or unwilling to follow thru with.

my problem with the thesis is that masculinity and femininity do not float free of gender—it is not possible to speak of their valuation in the abstract. anyone who grew up as a masculine cis girl and never "grew out" of that "phase" can attest to the violence wrought upon expressions of masculinity from women. and this applies doubly so to the subjects of transmisogyny! not only are we punished for any perceived bleed-through of masculinity from our supposed "underlying male selves", those of us who are willingly masculine and thriving as mascs are punished for our failure to conform to the rules of the normative womanhood that is imposed on us (just as we are punished for any willing femininity as "false" and predatory upon cis womanhood—observe that transmisogyny is reactive degendering in every case!).

on both branches serano makes only perfunctory remarks about the intersections with race, class, and colonialism. "sex" as such was made to only be accessible to the "civilized", most of all the white european! for a racialized person and particularly a Black person navigating gender the waters are just not the same; the signifiers of sex neither available in the same way, nor granted the same medical legitimacy. what is the "physical sex" of someone who is de-sexed altogether? how can gender have a "biologically innate" component when its expressions between the bourgeoisie and the working class are at total odds with one another? this all goes for the masculine/feminine distinctions as well. what sense is there in the claim that we have innately masculine/feminine inclinations when globally (and transmisogyny has been made global!) what is feminine and masculine can be very nearly mirrored? nor is "masculinity is always considered superior to femininity" innocent of obviating race. transmisogynoir adds yet further degendering thru the coercive masculinization of someone as a Black woman—masculinization as punishment, again!

and as a final point, the account fails to be materialist. there is no attempt to place transmisogyny in its role as an instrument of political economy or, as jules gill-peterson might say, as a tool of statecraft. it is just a psychological response to the way the world is, as far as serano has anything to say about it. but how did the world become that way, and why?? serano's solution, the abolition of what she calls gender entitlement, is naive to the fact that gender entitlement is necessary to the maintenance of the capitalist state, which is structured thru patriarchy and built on colonialism. it is not possible to reskin this into something innocuous!

this is why I cannot recommend whipping girl as a work about transmisogyny except at the most shallow level. it could be a helpful critical read, but imo, it is just wrong about transmisogyny.

[covenists]

✦ FULL OF FAN BEHAVIOR, M. VERSTAPPEN

everybody knows that this account is full of max. from his first win to now, from his most random things to his glory time, she's always there to post his pictures. they only know her as his friend and nothing more, but who is she actually?

req: Saw your post for smau requests, maybe a Max Verstappen where people don't realise his girlfriends account is you know her official verified account. Because practically every single post is about Max. Full on fan behaviour, in the sense she was his first fan as his childhood friend, she has been there supporting him since they were kids, and now they're adults and together, but some habits doesn't change.

(bonus if the posts makes people question why she choose Max as her mans.)

2016 - 2018

verstappenight

liked by maxverstappen33, and 1,942 others

verstappenight WOOOO P1🏆🏁 congratulations to you maximus, i'm soo proud of you!

view all 125 comments

maxverstappen33 I won't say anything about the name Maximus, but thank you 😄

danielricciardo Well deserved! 👍🙌

username look how young he is

username I love a supportive fan ^^ Plz post more of this man.

   ⤷ yourusername glad to be on your service, ma'am

username how old is he?

username He's so happy, he turns red.

username I usually don't trust redbull after Sebastian, but he might be my new exception🤷‍♀️

verstappenight

liked by danielricciardo, and 1,230 others

verstappenight that eyes glint with mischief. #throwbackthursday

view all 65 comments

maxverstappen33 Oh my god, I thought I trusted you by taking this years ago

   ⤷ yourusername never trust anyone

username The half smile😂

username He's been pulling the red string with Red Bull from a long time ago, and look at the hat. I bet it's not a coincidence.

username how is she even managed to get this out? this looks so ancient

   ⤷ username It's not ancient, it's probably old, but not ancient.

danielricciardo He looks like he's planning to steal one of the cars steering wheel

   ⤷ username exactly! 😂😂

username if it's a throwback, how old is this pic then?

   ⤷ username i mean he looks way younger than him on her recent post, so just figure it.

   ⤷ username he always looks younger

verstappenight

liked by victoriaverstappen, and 963 others

verstappenight how is it feel to have a duplicates?

view all 72 comments

maxverstappen33 Why are you taking the second one?

   ⤷ verstappenight and why are YOU posing to that one?

username Why is he looks younger and younger each time?

   ⤷ verstappenight i don't know, but i definitely recommend him to have a slug treatment for anti aging.

   ⤷ username username it's him in torro rosso, so that's why he looks more like a teenager.

username it's not even thursday yet, but i had a bad feeling for this week's throwback thursday.

verstappenight

liked by carlossainz55, and 3,573 others

verstappenight boo! happy halloween #throwbackthursday

view all 269 comments

username what did i say, my feelings are never lying

carlossainz55 Got you! 😆🤣

   ⤷ maxverstappen1 If I got a heart attack next week, it'll be completely your fault

landonorris is halloween on 29 or 30?

   ⤷ username depends on what region you're in, i guess?

   ⤷ landonorris don't guess, answer.

maxverstappen1 And how are you even managed to take this?? Seriously. yourusername

username I can't believe it's actually Carlos who did this

   ⤷ username Yeah, but I think this is so Carlos-like behavior.

username i would do that face too if someone dressed as scream beside me

username Who is running this fanpage?

username why are you liking him so much?

   ⤷ yourusername because he is so nice, cool, and he looks like sid from ice age which is my favorite character.

   ⤷ danielricciardo we got a whole stack of characters here: first we got maximus the horse from tangled, sid from ice age, and then what? jimmy neutron?

username 😂😂😂ajajaja mira su cara!

verstappenight

liked by redbullracing, and 3,782 others

verstappenight found this on twitter and now i can't stop laughing! can't wait to send this to my family group.

view all 90 comments

maxverstappen1 I really can't trust you with my digital footprint 🤦🏻‍♂️

   ⤷ verstappenight i found this on twitter alright, it's not taken by me!

   ⤷ maxverstappen1 Still.

   ⤷ carlossainz55 Ooh, someone's upset...

username who is this person behind this account?

username Why is his reaction is always looking so hilarious

username Max: 😦

username i feel him

username you sure it's not throwback thursday?

MID 2023

verstappenight

liked by charles_leclerc, and 97,182 others

verstappenight i changed throwback thursday with this questionable sense of max's fashion. hope that's alright.

photo credit via verstauri on twitter.

view all 348 comments

username NOOOOOOOOOOOO

username #bringbackthrowbackthursday

charles_leclerc If you get rid of throwback Thursday, how am I going to tease him?

   ⤷ verstappenight by searching it on pinterest🤷🏻‍♀️

username Is that real or photoshopped?

username Okay, I know throwback thursday is made a long time ago since 2015 but man I really miss it sm... 💔💔

   ⤷ verstappenight same, but some people don't need that old max (except for charles). we need the new one because life goes on -max via my message

   ⤷ maxverstappen1 I don't remember saying it

   ⤷ verstappenight shut up

username oh cmon i know charles want it because he's in love with max

   ⤷ username should i be surprised?

   ⤷ username i mean if there's no throwback thursday, who's going to tease him with his past when she's not there

   ⤷ username Daniel and Lando or Y/n could...

   ⤷ username oh come on, i don't even know who's the person behind this account anyway, for EIGHT YEARS

   ⤷ username As if you've never heard of twitter, just search her username and you'll see her REAL face.

THE TWEET SHE MEANT:

verstappenight

liked by schecoperez, and 113,809 others

verstappenight guess which one is the real one

view all 462 comments

schecoperez The first one of course!😂🤣

username since when did checos ass becoming that juicy

   ⤷ username since he listened to daddy yankee's song on repeat

   ⤷ danielricciardo His actual morning routine:

username the first one because what else would he be doing if not eating omelette and seeing checo's ass in the morning

   ⤷ username even checo himself agrees

username I'm glad that she still post here, even though there's no throwback thursday anymore😞😔

   ⤷ username but i guess even though we did not have throwback thursday anymore, we still have this crack post of him😄

TWITTER, 3 DAYS AFTER THE COMMENTS ON VERSTAPPENIGHT'S DADDY POST:

maxverstappen1 added a photo to their story! 2h

ON THE OTHER HAND, HER ACTUAL IG:

yourusername

liked by maxverstappen1 and 82,147 others

yourusername good moooorniiiiinggggg from my room<3

view all 97 comments

username Thank God it's not private

username damn yall work faster than the fbi

username Anyone come here from twitter?

username Omg I've never realized max pulled this hottie ever since they were born

username THIS IS VERSTAPPENIGHT ADMIN?????

   ⤷ username eight years of waiting is finally getting payed off..

username why are you even choosing max to be your man when there's charles or daniel who's sexier

   ⤷ yourusername sometimes i don't need looks to see to be having someone like max. he's my best friend first, and i'm glad i choose him right the first place.

   ⤷ username Oh that's sweet...

   ⤷ maxverstappen1 I love you too, My biggest fan.

   ⤷ username I LOVE YOU TOO??????💔💔

   ⤷ username oh my god max is having a REAL relationship with a fan account admin

   ⤷ username AWOOP🚨🚔 THEIR MEDIUM LAUNCH????

yourusername

liked by maxverstappen1, and 278,903 others

yourusername nobody knows that this phone addict is once my best friend. happy birthday maximus! 🥳🤍

view all 486 comments

landonorris happy birthday facebook dad.

maxverstappen1 I once again not going to take the Maximus name. It makes me feel like a horse from Rapunzel.

   ⤷ yourusername wait, you've watch tangled before?

danielricciardo Happy birthday, Big boy.

redbullracing Happy birthday to our number one champion! 🥳🥳

username awww baby maxiee🥺🥺🥺

lewishamilton Happy birthday, mate!

carlossainz55 To be honest, your real account is sometimes still kinda feels like your other one.

   ⤷ yourusername force of habit probably?

   ⤷ carlossainz55 No, it's because you're acting like Max's biggest fan everywhere.

   ⤷ maxverstappen1 That's probably because she is.

   ⤷ yourusername wipe that smug smile off your face while you're typing

username He looks the same weirdly or not

username AHA I FOUND YOU VERSTAPPENIGHT ADMIN

username i love how she just hanging to his arm like they're been a couple since god knows how long

username SHE'S SOO LUCKYYY

username i'm gonna melt

username i feel like it's a hard launch, but she have been doing this for a long time ago

sophiekumpen 🥳🥳🥳

maxverstappen1

liked by zedd, and 627,834 others

maxverstappen1 How was I going to get her bad side if she's there and looking so beautifully?

👤: yourusername, verstappenight

view all 446 comments

landonorris poetic. remember your other girlfriend's waiting

   ⤷ maxverstappen1 I don't remember having another one?

   ⤷ charles_leclerc How are you even forget about us?

yourusername awww i can't believe you tag the fan account one too!! i love you so much!!!

   ⤷ maxverstappen1 I love you too❤️

username #justiceforcharles #lestappenforever

username SHE'S SOOOO CUTE no wonder max pulled her

victoriaverstappen I didn't know you pulled this cutie

   ⤷ danielricciardo Me too until I found out yesterday at the club

username poetic max is going to be the end of me

username I really had a bad feelings of he becoming poetic and gets all over like this

username Okay, this is max's hard launch. And now I'm waiting for Y/n's

   ⤷ username i thought she already doing it for so many times at verstappenight? 😏🤭

yourusername

liked by redbullracing, and 579,420 others

yourusername 💌

📸: landonorris

view all 461 comments

username PARENTS CONFIRMED???

username YESS (adopt me pls)

username is verstappenight still going to be there? let's see for the next two days...

username verstappenight nation how do we feel after this? (we can get a new max pic daily)

username i'm gonna thank lando forever for this

username With the bouquet, the dim light, and the black and white + sepia filters. What are they doin that night?

username AWWW ROMANTIC😍😍

danielricciardo They left Charles in the back that night

⤷ landonorris aww poor him. but anyway...

username how are you converting from lestappen to this one so fast?

TAGLIST @queenofmanydreams @muglermami @4limq @avengers-assemble123456 @cabbyhabs @meowtastick @4mula-1 @miarabanana @amel1ee @dinosushilun1 @auggieblogs @namgification

[newsfromstolenland]

In one private chat group conversation, a Mountie was accused of saying a new female employee "was overweight and insinuating that the shape of her vagina was visible through her clothing."

In another, a second RCMP officer allegedly bragged about "Tasering unarmed Black people" and called a sexual assault investigation "stupid" — drawing comments from other members of the online group who "made fun of the victim" and said, "she's a dumb Mexican c--t."

An investigator with the RCMP's professional standards unit detailed those allegations and many more in a search warrant sworn to obtain evidence now being used to call for the firing of three Coquitlam Mounties for violating the force's code of conduct.

The CBC has obtained a copy of the search warrant — which recounts behaviour which led the officer who sparked the investigation to complain to RCMP brass about what he saw as "atrocious" and "racist and horrible" activity in a private group operating on the Signal messaging app.

Full article

Tagging: @allthecanadianpolitics

More from this article below the cut, because I think it's important to understand just how much fucked up shit they were saying:

(tw misogyny, domestic violence, racial profiling, anti-Indigenous racism, racism)

The documents reveal that investigators also reviewed 600,000 messages posted to the RCMP's internal mobile data chat logs — finding evidence of "frequently offensive" usage by the three officers facing termination of "homophobic and racist slurs."

"The reviewers had identified a variety of comments that were 'chauvinist in nature, with a strong air of superiority, and include flippant or insulting remarks about clients (including objectifying women), supervisors, colleagues, policy and the RCMP as a whole,'" the warrant says.

Code of conduct hearings against Const. Philip Dick, Const. Ian Solven and Const. Mersad Mesbah had been slated to begin in Surrey this week but have been adjourned until March of next year. All three officers have been suspended since June 2021.

Although Dick, Solven and Mesbah appear to be the only Mounties currently facing code-of-conduct hearings, the court documents say seven other officers were also part of the private chat group — including two supervisors.

Among the details contained in the search warrant are allegations one of the officers facing discipline joked about a domestic violence victim, calling the victim "a dumb f--king bitch, should've worn a mouth guard."

The whistleblower — Const. Sam Sodhi — claimed that outside of the private chat group, members of the group also "belittled Indigenous people, talking about how they were 'stupid' or 'drunk' and saying they have 'unfortunate bodies' and all have fetal alcohol syndrome."

"They would say, 'We're not going to the reserve,'" the search warrant claims Sodhi told investigators.

"We're not going there because we're not going to help those people."

According to the court documents, Sodhi was posted to Coquitlam in 2019.

"As part of that process, he wrote a letter about wanting to work in an urban centre and help at-risk youth that didn't have role models," the warrant claims.

But Sodhi claimed that on his second day at work, Dick — his trainer — asked him: "Are you a cool brown guy, or are you a Surrey brown guy? Because in that letter, you're whiny, like, 'Ooh, I want to help brown people.'"

Sodhi claimed there were two chat groups for members of the Coquitlam detachment assigned to Port Coquitlam — one for all members of the watch and a second private group that began on WhatsApp but then moved to Signal. He said he was told once he was "worthy" of the private chat group, "we'll add you to it."

The officer claimed he was admitted to the private chat group in March 2021 but left after a few days because of the "constant negativity." He said he was then accused of "not being a team member" and encouraged to return.

According to the search warrant, Sodhi complained to his superiors in May 2021, and a chief superintendent mandated an investigation into five Mounties — including a corporal who was accused of failing to take measures to prevent misconduct.

The probe initially focused on text communications between the RCMP's own laptops — known as Mobile Data Terminals. Investigators reviewed messages between the five men from January 2019 until May 2021.

"When members of the [Signal] chat group realized there was an investigation, they opined that the investigation was probably about 'MDT chats' ... since the private chat group was kept 'amongst the trusted' and 'there's no way this got out,'" the warrant says.

Examples cited from the RCMP computers include statements like, "Why do brown guys have unusually high pitched voices." "As an idiot woman would say ... 'toxic,'" and, "I just racially profile pulled over a car."

A review of the chat logs also allegedly found the three officers facing termination "appeared to use 'goldfish' as a slur for Asian people."

"For example, they talked about how 'goldfish' have 'bulging eyes' that 'can't see anything,' how a Korean church in the detachment was a 'goldfish church' and how 'goldfish' were bad drivers (a common Asian stereotype)," the warrant says.