#this is just my personal feelings its okay to disagree just dont be rude at me for the love of fuck

[heroictoonz]

Light LMK s5 spoilers:

I mean this in the kindest way possible but ppl who are talking about the s5e1 scene were Wukong calls the stone “our” birthing stone to MK and pointing at it like AH YES THEY ARE CANONICALLY BROTHERS AND/OR CANONICALLY BLOOD RELATED drives me honestly a little crazy. Like, if it’s ur preference to hc that that’s super totally cool and fine and you’re entitled to your own opinions and hcs but like I see people arguing about it or getting mad that they did this in show and I’m like? Really? What the fuck?

Like I’m a white American but to see so many other fans go here and accuse the show of saying SPECIFICALLY that MK and Wukong ARE BLOOD BROTHERS feels so westerners thinking westernly western to me. Again I’m a westerner so I could be super wrong and anyone who’s actually Chinese/not western correct me sure but like idk it feels ridiculous to jump to blood brothers bring full canon here

For one I’m pretty sure that Nuwa didn’t make Wukong. Obv I’m not like an expert on the lore but I know a decent amount and from my memory I don’t think they really explicitly state how Wukong came to be. Like yeah bro popped out a stone but i don’t remember there ever being any other specifics over that. Heaven just saw it happen and was like huh guess the egg does come first and then moved the fuck on (till the Problems™️ of course)

The stone like its a rock it is a literal and honest to god rock. Like if you WANNA hc them as blood brothers thats cool whatever but I just do not understand the ppl who are acting like this is DEFINITIVE PROOF. If anything it reads more like clone shit than brothers lmaoo but also like why read into it like that at all idk I don't even think I'd care normally but its super off putting it feels like I'm back in the fucking Shield Brother discourse and would literally rather throw myself into a pit

[m1ssunderstanding]

If Paul can't be who he is, or talk to people, keeping it in him who's to blame for this. If he has problems he doesn"t talk about or we older fans see him the way we do, whom is he hiding from? Is it really fare to blame his fans for thinking like he's happy and got it together. Do the younger generation see things differently? I care and adore Paul and don't want to think he isn't. Is that it? Or do we need to feel he's lying and all pr I know pretty much everything public about Paul. I dont mean to be rude or disagree with you. I enjoy seeing new fans and sees him from your pov but I wanna know what you think what he feels he can't share.

Hi! Okay, let's break this down.

Question one: Who is to blame for Paul not being more open about his private life?

Jim McCartney. Next question. No, it's a lot more complicated than that. Besides it being just a natural part of his personality, the foundation of this trait was formed through the whole context of his upbringing which laid the groundwork for how Paul would react to fame, as opposed to the other three. Then, because he was already set up to do so, fame and its side-affects and consequences made Paul double down on closing up. Then during the breakup, John's diarrhea of the mouth syndrome and Linda's encouraging Paul to lean into his home life and let his public life be, put Paul further into a pattern of craving privacy.

Question two: Is it fair to blame older fans for taking Paul's public self as his private self?

Firstly, I don't see the point in talking about blame in the first place. A) being a private person, putting on a face in public, is neither bad nor uncommon. (Maybe nobody really does it to the degree Paul does it. Maybe it does have some negative outcomes and does point to a lack of self-assurance and a strong tendency to emotional avoidance) but to some degree, Paul's cagey and fake public self is normal and healthy. B) blame is the least interesting mystery here.

Secondly, no one is trying to blame older fans for Paul's behavior. What I personally am frustrated with is what such a large group of people taking the surface as the entire ocean does to Paul's character as a historical figure and to the Beatles narrative as a whole. However, this large group is certainly not limited to older fans, nor does it contain all the older fans. Additionally, people can do, think, and say what they want. It's not some pressing humanitarian concern if people misunderstand Paul McCartney and the Beatles. It does seem to indicate and contribute to a large-scale cultural deficiency which may negatively impact more important social issues, but it is certainly far from a life and death situation.

Question three: Does the younger generation see things differently?

I'd actually never thought of these views in terms of generations, but yes, I guess many younger fans do look beyond the surface more than many older fans do.

Question four: Do we need to assume Paul is lying and all PR?

Again. Nobody needs to do anything. Do what you want. But. If you are looking to gain a more serious understanding of one of the most influential people of the twentieth century, then I suggest you don't take every word from his mouth as one-hundred-percent truthful as you should with anyone. This is absolutely not to say Paul is a liar and only cares about looking good to the public for business reasons. In fact, I believe if he was completely open about a lot of the things he guards against fully sharing, he would come off a lot better.

My personal rules of thumb with the Beatles are these: 1. John (and to a lesser extent George) often speaks from a place of strong emotion and uses talking about his experiences and feelings to regulate and soothe. Therefore, his statements are often extreme and often emphasize the negative. Paul (and to a lesser extent Ringo) cannot express strong emotion and fears talking about his experiences and feelings without disguising them or softening them. Therefore, his statements are often evasive and often emphasize the positive. If John says "I was going through murder," he means, "my mental health struggles were particularly difficult at that time even with all the good things I had going for me." If Paul says, "but it wasn't all, you know, great," he means, "Despite what I've made it seem like, that period of my life was not even safe, let alone perfect." 2. Take into account the culture these men were raised in and the attitude that culture would've pushed on them about certain topics. None of them are going to be particularly open about anything they would've been in any way punished for during the bulk of their life experience.

Question five: What do you think Paul feels he can't share?

If you were internationally famous, would you share absolutely everything about your personal life, innermost thoughts, politics, desires, regrets, hurts, and loves? I don't think so. Now, imagine you had most of your ability to be emotionally vulnerable beaten out of you as a child, you and your three best friends experienced death threats and permanent career damage due to one seemingly innocuous comment, and the person you trusted most in the world turned on a dime and exploited all your insecurities and the entire world followed suit for decades. I imagine there would be galaxies filled with all the things you feel you can't share and that you would use whatever protective measures necessary to keep yourself sane.

[stormblessed95]

I'm Stepping Away For A While...

Over the past week, and then some, I have been called a multitude of names in an effort to make fun of me and rude names including wh*re, p**sy, bitch, a liar, a fake, etc. I've been told I'm a fake/bad ARMY, a fake jikooker, etc. Ive had people call my friends deragatory names and misgender them. And I've also had someone in my DMs try to gaslight me into believing that this was not harassment or Bullying, but that I should apologize to my followers for threatening to block people and that people were just expressing strongly worded commentary over how my actions hurt them. And that I needed to take responsibility for creating the drama at all. And none of that is okay, and honestly it's been a lot. And the way people just brushed over the name calling and harassment regardless of if they disagreed with me or liked me, that was a lot too.

Blocking people to curate my space is not harassment or bullying or disrespectful. Its simply protecting myself and trying to curate a safe space for me personally. Nor have I ever started a hate campaign to try and drive another blogger off the platform. And if a post of mine encouraged people to send messages or hurtful asks to someone else, and I KNEW about it, I would've said something and asked them to stop. Sharing an opinion or disagreeing with someone is not me sending anyone hate. Nor would I ever want that for anyone regardless of any disagreements we had over whatever topic.

I've lost quite a few followers over the past week, people believing things that are being said and that's fine, i was never here for the numbers anyway. Id rather you unfollow or block me peacefully if you dont like me or my posts. Some of the people engaging with this hate against me were honestly surprising. But it is what it is. But I don't feel safe in this space anymore. I honestly haven't for a while. Blogging isn't as fun anymore. I don't want to post while it feels like a chore. And that's not because of anyone or anything in particular. I opened this blog because it brought me joy and it was fun. And it's really sad that something that brought me happiness is no longer doing that for me. It's not just all this drama either. It's probably been awhile coming, making my timeline posts for longer posts felt more like something I had to do for you all instead of something I wanted to do for me. And that's not what I want for this space.

So I'll be stepping away for awhile. When or if I come back will depend on if I can get that joy back for doing this and I feel like this can be a fun corner of the internet for all of us together again. And also for if I feel like I can do this without it being so mentally draining and just not good for my mental health like it has been lately.

I'll leave my blog here and my masterlist because I know that a lot of people enjoy the archive of some past content I have cataloged there. I don't want to take that away from anyone for that reason alone since I want people to be able to access that content if they can't otherwise find it. I also want the option to be able to come back to this blog again at some point. So I don't want to delete it or say I'm stepping away permanently, nor do I want people wondering what happened to me or anything. I just need a break. I do apologize for all the post series I have started that are remaining unfinished now for a little while.

If you want to unfollow me knowing that I'll be absent from here for awhile or for any other reason, that's totally fine. Honest. No hard feelings. I wish you well and hope everyone will continue to do well and enjoy the next few months of music, content and love from the members. Maybe I'll try to be back in time for JJK1 whenever that happens.

Again, this is just something I need. I'm okay, I'm not hurt or upset. I just need a break. I appreciate you all understanding. I'll still be in this fandom and be ARMY for life. I'll still be around for the next day or so. Thank you for understanding. I do love you guys and hope to back as soon as I'm able to.

[juni-ravenhall]

i rly think that ppl who feel a strong need to go "us versus them" in the sso criticism discourse need to just, take a deep breath and look within. there is so much black and white mindset always going on here, and so much bad ppl vs good ppl. its always been lacking in nuance and individuality and its frustrating.

there *are* ppl in the fandom who say really dumb shit, like fatphobic shit, sexist or racist shit, ableist shit.... but not everyone who criticises sso fairly and positively does any of that. not everyone who criticises sso annoyedly does any of that. not everyone who absolutely fucking hates sso does any of that.

there are equally ppl who genuinely are defending the most dumb shit from sse/sso just to be a defender and supporter without reason..... but not everyone who says something positive about the game does that. not everyone who loves the game does that. etc.

its not good and not okay to take out frustrations on people who dont actually do anything wrong or harmful (giving regular criticism, expressing personal opinions, giving fair praise - vs attacking staff, attacking other users for their opinion, posting harmful things, etc).

when you do that, you're blaming an innocent person for a perceived wrong from a "group" (like "haters" or "whiners" or "ppl who ruin my fun") that you have defined, that you associate "anyone who criticises things i disagree with" or whatever instead of "ppl who genuinely and provenly did something harmful". anyone who *seems* like they might be in that group annoys you, even if they arent.

consider why you think its okay to label people as invalid or unfair or unreasonable in their opinions if they have a different opinion than you but arent hurting anyone. (if you feel hurt by commercial media criticism, especially when its not even *your* product/work, there is a problem on your end that you should address.)

consider why you think its okay to say words like "ungrateful" about people who are simply voicing fair criticism or fair opinions about a videogame. i could call ppl ungrateful for not liking all my posts that i put so much work into making, but that would be really rude and ridiculous. its not kind and not nice to say things like that about ppl when they havent actually done anything wrong (criticising a videogame doesnt make someone "ungrateful", and posting harmless opinions on your own blog is not a problem).

the "us vs them" group system in sso fandom is usually along these lines: haters vs non-haters, haters vs defenders/whiteknights, or "any other critics" vs "those who see themselves as the only Good and Fair and Nice critics"... all of these are more or less the same groups just slight variation in the person's point of view. and all of them are bad, because these groups are not actually rigid and applicable in reality. people are individual and people are nuanced.

some of you guys post what i consider kinda unfair comments on sso sometimes. it could be good or bad comments, that i personally consider a bit too subjective or unfair or unrealistic or whatever. but i dont post rude, disrespectful or mean things about that on my blog, and i try to not act as if you belong to some group that youve never claimed to belong to (encouraging the "us vs them" mentality in the community).

if i *am* going to say "sso defenders" or "sso haters", i would be making sure to actually be talking to/about ppl who evidently belong to that label. ppl who defend sse even when it makes no sense, not just ppl who praise good things about the game. ppl who actually *hate* on the game, not just ppl who say something critical about it.

and you end up in those boring repetitive healthy-community-ruining social patterns when you give in to "us vs them" and to black-and-white, polarised, mindsets, when you dont actively see things as nuanced and varied and individual.

i really wish that ppl would step back and think, "this opinion / this criticism about sso made me feel annoyed/upset. why is that? what about it made me feel bad? am i taking something personally that isnt? did this person actually say anything harmful or wrong, or is it fair personal opinion? did they *actually* shove it in my face, or am i visiting a public space that is not curated only for me? am i painting this person as something they might not be in my mind? am i trying to sort them into a group, and if so, why?"

someone from the bullies will have a field day with this post and be like "omg juni is saying that ppl who disagree with him are mentally ill again!" (twisting words is helpful when you really want to make things black-and-white and "us vs them") but i do genuinely want to say that if you feel really hurt and upset by ppl having harmless disagreements or harmless criticisms about a videogame, there is a problem. it might have to do with your emotional boundaries ("criticism feels bad even when its not about me"), it might have to do with your self-worth ("you say sso is bad so you think im bad for liking it"), or various other things, and its not healthy. however, its also okay to feel unfair emotional reactions if you cant help them, but the problem is, you CAN help how you act, how you judge, and how you treat other people.

[septimus-heap]

God. Okay. Just saw a post and like. Yes if ppl r saying that likes r a genuinely malicious thing then they r wrong. Obviously people don't like posts to be rude. No one is saying that?? We r saying that it Feels like a bit of a slap to the face when someone goes through liking all ur art and not rbing,, I'm so annoyed and idk how to phrase this without linking the post and directly responding to it which. I'm not doing bc I'm not an asshole and I don't want to be harassed. But. This post said smth along the lines of that a like is an expression of Positive Emotion and a reblog is Exposure and I can't. I can't disagree with that more,,,, yes reblogs r exposure but its not. I don't want reblogs because they're exposure™ I dont. The phrasing makes it sound like I'm not a person it makes it sound like I'm just looking for notes and. I want reblogs because they're engagement because I want other people to see my art and react to it and enjoy it and that just can't happen if it doesn't get rbs!!! Yes I'm looking for my post to get shared but I'm not looking for it to get Exposure that's not it idk idk I'm. I'm mad and upset and idk how to phrase this,,, I don't see likes as someone going "I enjoy this post" I see likes as someone going "I saw this post, and I did not hate it". Likes function more like bookmarks than anything else,, a reblog is. Idk. It's more it actually makes me feel like someone Liked it like they Enjoyed it I can't. I can't word this right i can't figure out how to say what I'm trying to say. I'm a human person and YES I want attention for my art of course I do of course. I hate the implication that wanting attention for things ive spent hours on is bad. I hate it I hate it

[ver-slxt]

before reading please know this is from experience and i am NOT dictating everyones experience, i am just ranting about bad instances about privilege/bad therapists/therapy, so before you comment (and ill know if youve read this at all by your comment = blocking) please read the four points!

…

THIS. i see antis all the time get their thong in a twist because people ship stuff they want to (that the anti doesnt agree with). and they usually follow up with a ‘kys’ or ‘get therapy!’ like, first all. therapy is NOT cheap, and no, online ‘free’ therapy isnt good either. it takes a LOT of work to find a therapist WITHIN price range AND actually agrees/supports/is okay with you as their client + that you even get to the point (which would be months or even years) being comfortable enough to tell them this stuff anyways without the fear of them insta reporting you and hauling your butt off to the ward (happened to me almost three times, two worked..).

as someone whos experienced bad stuff growing up, ive been to therapy for almost a decade now and let me tell you four things ive run into..

…

1• you have to pay a lot for these people. my therapist + med doctor NOW, costs about 2-300$ a visit, AND THATS PER (separate) PERSON, not two people in one visit. and this is out of our insurance (doctor recommended). but not everyone who goes to therapy has really good insurance/insurance at all, therefore cannot go because its too expensive + its a very priveleged thing to say ‘instead of projecting your trauma in a normal (or even non-normal) way through comships/proships FOR FREE (without it causing harm to yourself/others) go pay HUNDREDS of dollars because thats mainstream/it worked for me!!’ like do you hear yourself,????? everyone is different and no two traumas are alike, and even if once in a blue moon they ARE very similar, two seperate individuals can cope with that similar experience in ENTIRELY different directions/ways… anyways, you may say, ‘why not go to a person in your insurance’ you ask? I HAVE. many times. which brings me to number two.

…

2• bad therapists. listen, cheap isnt always better. ive had therapists make me pay my entire 30$ BEFORE the session starts, then cut me off around 30/40 minutes in (mid session/even mid talking) (they lasted an hour/hour and a half typically). cheaper therapists/local therapists that arent connected through doctor recommendations are not usually the best imo, along with ive heard really bad stuff about the free ones online + new psych students treating patients like guinea pigs/other issues..

…

3• they dont like you. listen, this is not the case EVERY time, but from experience, every therapist ive seen/talked too (about 10 of them now) has disagreed with me on my OWN viewpoint of my toxic household. but you may say, ‘oh but theyre allowed to disagree?’ yes! they can! but you cant be disagreeing about my abuser not being the issue and I am the issue instead (wacko). most (not all) therapists treat it as their job, and you as their customer. yes, some people have really good relationships with their therapist, but please dont think for one second they wont report you + say some out of pocket stuff because theyre the ‘experienced one’ (trust me, its as rude irl as it sounds).

…

4• what ‘tools’ they use/let you talk about SUCK. my newer therapist, granted, isnt the best but its all i have rn, doesnt personally let me vent or talk about my childhood trauma/stuff that actually bothers me. its always “catch me up since weve last talked” and thats it. always the same thing.. along with that, they give you packets about journaling your feelings, and someone who cannot just ‘breathe and count to ten to feel better’ these packets are genuinely useless and i usually dont do them. most therapists have a very basic and general approach to these intense things (especially neurotypical therapists) because they have the mindset of: A) works 9/10 times but if not, B) is the next best thing. and most times they dont actually get to know their patient outside of friendly conversation/med records..

…

if anyone stayed for the entire rant thank you lolz, it was a huge thing to get off my chest but it seriously irks me that, again, antis actually just look at surface level things within communities instead of actually hearing people who belong in this (and other) communities, then without a thought they deem it ‘problematic’, and spread mis-info and demonize the people doing it.

…

TYSM FOR STAYING HAVE A COOKIE IF YOU READ IT ALL 🍪🍪🍪🍪🍪 ILY ALL!!!

"you need to go to therapy" no thank you, fictional incest is cheaper

[bittyfromquotev]

"imagine telling a minor to shut up" I dont see what you being a minor has to do with it? Being a minor doesnt excuse stuff, it just means that adults shouldnt be inappropriate with you and you should avoid adult spaces because they arent suitable for your age group. being a minor doesnt mean someone cant tell me to stfu and check my behaviour, like parents and teachers do it all the time and being a minor doesnt stop that. Like I dont agree at all with how that anon went about it because that was rude and uncalled for, but that tag confused me cause its irrelevant to being told to shut up and stop stirring the pot. They should have said it not at all like that, but yeah.

and that other post where you said they were assuming your intentions? Im not sure I understand that either. Like im glad you see how the things you say makes it sound like you wanted them to try and harrass you and how that takes away from victims, but all i read from that was that they were just calling your behaviour attention seeking which isnt assuming anything about you as a person? you dont have to know someone to see what they do and perceive it in certain ways. i think it might also be a good idea to take down posts you recognise as being said impulsively in anger once youve calmed down, cause it keeps bringing you back into drama and stuff you dont wanna be a part of and if you remove them then theres less chance of people seeing it and potentially mentioning you again, which would also be safer for you.

also i dont think its great that just because someone disagreed you immeaditdly assumed they were a gore a non or supported them, cause thats also minimising what the victims go through. if you make everything "oh must be the gore anons" then it makes the actual gore anon problem meaningless cause its thrown around so much where there isnt an actual gore anon. if everyone is a gore anon then theres no gore anons bascailly. its not nice to accuse people like that willy nilly even if you dont like them. its a serious acusation that shouldnt be taken lightly and its unfair to place blame on everyone when the victims need actual answers not wild accusations

*siiigghhhhhhh* Okay. One more time, everybody!

I honestly have no idea why I said that. Thank you for pointing out how confusing that is. I think I just said that because they were being rude as fuck and I didn’t know what to say.

I say they are assuming my intentions because with the way they worded it, they think I was doing it on purpose or really DO just want attention. While I enjoy being interacted with, I don’t want to be popular in any sense. I don’t want a bunch of random people who I haven’t talked to more than once to flood my blog honestly.

While that is a reasonable idea, I don’t feel like taking down the posts I made when I was impulsive. I think people have the right to know what I can be like when I’m emotional or under pressure. I feel like me taking down those posts would be the same as me trying to hide my ugly side. If my IRL friends and family can see that ugly side, people online can too, at least to some extent.

I didn’t say that they were probably affiliated with the Gore Anons simply because they disagreed with me. I said that because they were rude and typed in a similarly aggressive way to said Gore Anons. Not many people IN this fandom other than them are rude when disagreeing with someone. Keep in mind I also said “probably” in that post. Not “definitely”.

This has been ANOTHER “clearing things up” post.

[tianshiisdead]

Re: your post about cultural appropriation, I have a few things I want to ask/get your take on? Firstly, "the people who are uncomfortable shouldn’t be ignored" I understand this and agree, and at the same time I can't help but think, doesn't that kinda basically mean "Don't do it or you're an asshole" in the end? Because there will always be people uncomfortable with it, especially in the age of the internet where even private gatherings can have pictures posted publicly, etc? Secondly, even if you're invited by Chinese people (in some cases FAMILY members) to wear it in a specific situation, if others know about it and take issue, you'll still be criticized as a disrespectful colonizer (if you're from or look like you're from NA/UK, but sometimes even when you're not), and you can't even say "This was shared with me/I was invited to" because that comes off as a "My Chinese friend" kinda argument. Also in conversations I've had w mainlanders, many seem to feel like they're not allowed to have a say about their own culture in these conversations in international circles, bc many diaspora are trying to make rules about it, and shut them down w 'you don't understand bc you're not affected by racism' (which is not at ALL true, even tho its different) and even tho they dont dismiss the pain of the diaspora experience, they feel very frustrated by diaspora trying to claim authority over their culture. (Which is made worse by many diaspora not even understanding or respecting China themselves) (sidenote this is an experience that seems to be shared by MANY mainland/diaspora relationships, not just China) And I just wonder if this is possibly another instance of a very common thing online these days, where people feel they have to turn their personal feelings about something into a strict idea of morality by which they expect everyone to follow, else they be labeled racist. But just because their feelings and experiences are important and valid does not mean they are universal. So they're probably not a good basis to be making moral judgements by. Idk if I'm making any sense at this point. It's a complicated topic I've had a lot of thoughts about that I kinda wanted to share and talk about so that I can develop my understanding of it, but it's hard. I just wish we could have more civil conversations about it. I understand it's sensitive but I don't think people being hostile about it is going to help anyone, and it's very disheartening. Because shutting down conversation and arguing and harassing and gatekeeping is only creating more division. It's the very opposite of cultivating understanding and unity. And I do think the latter is the only way meaningful progress can really be made.

Hi! This is a pretty complicated issue, I'll try to answer one by one but I might ramble a little.

First, to clarify, I originally made my post because I follow a few prominent diaspora hanfu fashion blogs/channels/tiktoks and some of them have drawn pretty clear lines on what they consider acceptable VS appropriation, yet they get constant non asian people in the comments insulting them and saying things like 'well I think it's totally okay to wear hanfu whenever stop gatekeeping', and that is never okay. To go into an asian person's space where they share parts of their culture and talk over them on what they can or can't do right in that space is incredibly rude, and it's frustrating to see so many people ignoring diaspora voices or wielding 'I heard this from a mainlander' to discredit what a diaspora says. We are no less 'asian' than mainlanders. I've seen too many situations where these creators repeatedly make their stance clear but still get people complaining in their comments and such - it's always preferable to block and move on if you disagree rather than harass someone who's made it clear they don't care to have this conversation (which they are not obligated to have). In general, it costs nothing to not harass marginalized people about what you're allowed or not allowed to do regarding their culture when they've made their stance and frustrations clear.

This got pretty long (sorry) so my answer is under the read more

Disclaimer: everything I say is my opinion formed from my experiences, which doesn't invalidate any other person's feelings on appropriation of their culture. It's a complicated issue and people are allowed to have strong feelings about it. Other people might be stricter or less strict and that's okay, no one can solve the issue with a single post and no one should make themselves the single spokesperson of an issue that affects so many people. This is just my take on it.

First question! In my opinion, it's a situation where 'people's discomfort should be listened to if they voice it' not 'never do anything ever for fear of being seen by someone who would be uncomfortable'. There are obviously plenty of situations where a non Chinese person might be invited to wear hanfu, or a non Chinese person might do research and end up concluding their hanfu/cosplay/whatever is respectful and okay. I'm not here to say you shouldn't just in case someone in the world would be offended, however, you still have to be aware you're a guest partaking in someone else's culture, so if you choose to post it on social media, you should be prepared for potential criticism, keep an open mind, and not become defensive when you get it. That is to say, harassing is never okay, and if there is harassing going on I don't condone that, however a lot of the times (in my experience) it's not harassing, just valid complaints brought up in a not incredibly gentle way, and that shouldn't be discounted as bullying. Messing up (unintentionally, after doing research) doesn't make someone an asshole, but if someone decides to post and face a lot of criticism and they choose to ignore it or lash out against the people criticizing them, that does. In my personal experience, I've for example seen a lot of MDZS cosplay that are generally met with very little pushback, and there's a writer I like who's 100% white and lives in China and writes short and distinctively Chinese fiction, and he has a moderately decent audience and gets pretty much no criticism even from diaspora because he's careful to be respectful. This isn't a failsafe and I'm sure no matter what someone out there will be uncomfortable, but there are plenty of situations where non-Chinese people interact with the culture and wear the culture and get little to no pushback. I don't like the implication that the diaspora community is needlessly volatile and hostile - because from my experience most of it really isn't. And, to be completely honest although the internet and videos have made things less private, very few people end up getting enough attention (especially unintentionally) that would result in a great deal of pushback unless they're being Distinctly Offensive. I've seen quite a few douyin with foreigners in hanfu and they're just like any other hanfu video and they rarely gain that level of traction because most people aren't looking to get upset over things that don't genuinely bother them. I do think it's a situation where you have to make your own judgments, but I stand by that if for whatever reason you interact with Chinese people who make their discomfort clear, their discomfort should be taken seriously and listened to.

Second question. Um, this sounds kind of specific? This might be the case sometimes idk, I've personally never seen this happen (not to say it hasn't just that I haven't seen it), but in that case if you're wearing it in a specific (respectful) situation and you were invited (especially by family) then it's not at all a "My Chinese friend" argument I think. "My Chinese friend" is a bad argument because it's vague and tokenizing and used to talk over other Chinese people, but if you were invited to wear it then that's way more direct, so I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to establish. However, like you mention later, Chinese people are not a monolith and many don't have great connections with their culture, or see no issue with racism, or have internalized self-hatred etc. that would cause them to enable non-Chinese people in doing offensive things. I really do think this is a case-by-case basis, I can't make any sweeping judgments. Sometimes it's the Chinese family/friend who invited who is in the wrong.

Third question kind of (the part about mainlanders having a say etc.) I do think that again it's a case-by-case basis! In the conversation between a diaspora and a mainlander, respect should be given to both sides (and diaspora who don't understand as much should listen to the mainlander about things the mainlander understands better) however, in my original post, I was more referring to non-Chinese people using what mainlanders say to shut down diaspora. Again, the issue is not that mainlanders shouldn't have a say, it's that their words are used by non-Chinese to discredit diaspora voicing their concerns. I honestly haven't seen that much mainlander-diaspora communication online for obvious reasons but that would be a completely different topic. I do think that it's important to remember even mainlanders aren't monoliths or infallible, and sometimes they can discredit diaspora opinions on topics diaspora have more experience on just because they don't have the same experience. Although people in China certainly face racism and oppression in the global framework of north VS south, and many parts of China have remnants of colonization and imperialism which mean white westerner travelers and expats get better treatment than even the locals or ABC, it's also true that they don't usually face the day to day constant racism diaspora face, which is often what informs discussions on why foreigners wearing hanfu might be considered offensive.

(This part will be about diaspora talking over mainlanders, intracommunity politics, self-hatred, etc. These are my own opinions as a Chinese diaspora and it's a sensitive issue, plus people who are not members of the community please Do Not Make Judgements or try and get involved. Again, this is an intracommunity issue, not an open invitation for non-Chinese people to criticize Chinese people on their Chineseness.) The same goes in the other direction, like you mentioned, a lot of diaspora can also talk over mainlanders or claim authority when they don't have it. There's also a lot of issues with diaspora who hate and look down on themselves and their culture through no fault of their own, it's taught by the society they grow up in, but then they never unlearn that hatred and disdain, and the remnants of that will inform how they treat the people and culture even if they try and advocate themselves as a spokesperson. Obviously, I'm not a huge fan and I think it can be super harmful. It's okay to grow up and realize the culture you rejected is something beautiful, it's okay to slowly rediscover it, but one should always keep in mind that they are rediscovering it, they lack a lot of knowledge because knowing about culture is not innate, and to be open to learn and not yell too loudly about things they don't understand. Culture is so vast, no one person can claim they understand fully and should be taken as the single spokesperson. This disdain and internalized racism show up in diaspora, but also in mainlanders to some extent, because we all live in a post-colonial world with a clear racial hierarchy. That is to say, although it's not useful or reasonable to categorize mainland Han Chinese as oppressed POC, especially when they are the privileged majority within mainland, they nonetheless also face white supremacy that is woven into the culture post-colonization and imperialism (white people. are not at all oppressed. in China. :/)

I also think that in the specific situation of cultural appropriation, personal feelings kind of do matter. It's not a strictly moral thing, messing up doesn't mean moral failure and neither does getting offended or whatever, and I also don't think the discussion around cultural appropriation through wearing hanfu will ever be 'universal' because everyone has such different experiences. In a perfect world without a recent history of colonization and imperialism and western dominance, this wouldn't be nearly as big of an issue. The point is that it's not universal, you can only try your best to be respectful but understand there are limits and that if you post for a lot of people to see a lot of people will have different thoughts, and to try and listen to those thoughts the best you can. None of this is a moral issue, just one facet of a larger societal one informed by history and power dynamics, and no one person is responsible for any of it, but it's important to be educated and sensitive.

But yeah! It's definitely a complicated issue, your ask made sense don't worry lol I'm sorry I couldn't give that many definitive answers and so much of it came down to 'depends on the situation' and 'it can vary from person to person'. Like with all these sorts of issues, it can be intensely personal to people because this sort of racism Is very personal. for lack of better words. it's not a concrete thing, the reason it's harmful at all is that it can hurt people, just because of the context of racism and such, and that means it will vary from person to person. Sorry idk if that made any sense but kjlfdhg I think harassment and dogpiling and rudeness is never okay, but a clear line should be drawn between harassment and a Great Deal of People voicing their criticism. I agree that there should be civil conversations about it, but tbh... I don't think any progress will be made regarding this Because it's such a complicated issue with so many diverse voices and experiences that should be accounted for and not asked to conform, it's not at all a solidly moral issue. There's no rulebook for it! All cultures are different too, I can only speak on my thoughts on hanfu and qipao and such, however, other garments from other cultures may have different purposes or ideas behind them and that's not something for me to comment on, I can only listen and respect. I think the only way progress can be made, is for society to progress regarding racism and such built into the system, and the post-colonial state of the world. Foreigners in hanfu and appropriation stuff, this is all just manifestations of the greater systemic issues, and it can only be solved through the solving of the greater systemic issues.

Thank you for the ask! i enjoy talking about these things :3

[creweemmaeec11]

I’ve been thinking about getting a pet rat, do you have any tips or what to start researching??

Absolutely! Pet rats are fantastic!

Heres a bunch of general info!

They are easy to care for, super interactive and intelligent, they can be trained to do tricks, mine are shoulder trained, which means I put them on my shoulder and just leave them there while I walk around and do whatever else, and they just sit and watch and hang out and it's great (they have awesome balance) and they love it. They can even be litter trained.

What rat should you get?

The first thing to know, is you can never, ever, have only 1 rat.

You NEED to get at least 2.

They are very social animals, and they need a friend. I can not stress this enough. Under no circumstance should you be buying a single rat.

Having only a single rat, on top of being just generally cruel, leads to behavior problems, depression, aggression, anxiety and just a really bad time for both the rat and the owner. Most rat breeders will actually refuse to sell you single rat baby unless you already have rats and your looking on simply getting another one. Please do not buy a single rat.

The next thing to consider is whether you want males or females. There is actually a big difference between their behaviors, potential health problems, and even diets.

-Male rats tend to be more lazy, cuddly, and want to spend more time with you. However, they do smell more, as they scent mark. Males should never eat anything citrusy, (lemons, oranges, ect) as studies show it increases chances of tumors.

-Females tend to be more energetic and playful and just want to go,go,go. They don't want to be held as much, and good luck getting them to stay still long enough to cuddle. They smell less, though. They can have bits of citrus, but most reccomend to just steer clear of it regardless. Females are also prone to mammory tumors (how I lost hex) unless spade at a young age.

Some health tips for both genders:

-They can eat pretty much anything, I often call mine "glorified greenbins". They love supper leftovers, scraps, ect. One of their favour treats is the bones from cooked chicken(good for grinding down teeth too)

-in general, avoid things with too much protein and try to keep it low in their diet (so dont give them too much meat) protein has been linked to hair loss, tumors, and other health problems

-stay away from peanutbutter or other sticky foods unless its watered down. Rats don't have a gag reflex, and thus can't dislodge something if they choke. Many risk it, but it's not worth the risk in my opinion.

If you have a cat or dog, make sure their cage is in a place your other pets cant pester and scare them.

Their cage

Just some quick tips and info:

While rats don't need a big cage, the tiny hamster cage the guy at the pet store will try and sell you won't cut it, esspecially once they are full grown. I personally recommend Critter Nation cages (as most people do, they are the community standard) but they are expensive new. Search facebook marketplace or other sites for second hand cages, they are a great way to get a good cage cheap.

Rats will chew through any cage that isnt metal, they can't be kept in plastic bottomed cages either.

Rats need airflow. Most rat owners of the western world strongly disagree with keeping rats in tanks.

It's important your rats have at least one place to hide, somewhere out of site they can go if they feel stressed or scared.

Toys! Rats are very intelligent, and need stimulation! They arent picky though. While you can buy fancy toys, they also don't mind diy (theres plenty) or even just some cardboard boxes, pompoms, cardboard tubes, fabric scraps like old destroyed clothing cut up, socks, ect! (I could make a whole nother post on great rat toy ideas alone)

Rats are great climber and jumpers, something to keep in mind while arranging their cage

I'm ready to get my rats, where do I get them?

I'd personally urge you to avoid big pet store chains, as those rats are typically mass bred with little care. Leople have bought females that turned out to be pregnant, rats that had mites, ect. Search online to find local rat breeders. These rats are bred to be healthy, handled daily as babies, ect. They will be more expensive, but will have less health and behavioral problems and will typically live longer (trust me, I learned the hard way)

Other things to keep in mind and be aware of:

people don't like rats. Especially elders. I've heard it all, many claim you'll catch diseases from them (despite the fact theyve lived in their cage their whole live and have been bred to be pets. Where would they have caught the disease to give to me in the first place? Its idiotic and completly false) I've had family members comment rude things of their photos, "I'd scream if there was a rat on my shoulder" ect. (If you rent, you may have problems with other tenants or the property owner, worried about them "getting loose in the walls" or some sh*t)Don't let idiots sway you. Rats are wonderful, very clean and intelligent animals. Just be prepared to defend your babies, and teach/show people to give them the respect they deserve.

rats don't have a long life span, and while some can live to be around 5, most only live about 2 years. Just understand this.

Know you will make mistakes, and that's okay. Every single pet owner has and will make mistakes. You will learn.

Anyway, that about sums up my little spiel, but here are the basic topics to research when thinking about getting rats:

How to care for pet rats

Rat diet and limitations

Things to know about pet rats

There are many, many good resources online! I also reccomend joining some rat facebook groups. The people in them are super nice and informative to questions, and its wonderful having a community behind you, and have somewhere to go with any questions!

I hope this helped! If your thinking about getting rats as pets, I encourage you to! Just do your research. They make wonderful pets and companions.

Also know that I'm not an expert, or a vet, I'm still learning everyday. This is just what I've learned via owning them. I urge you to do your own research into some of the things I mentioned here.

[coldmorte]

So i have some unpopular opinions; i feel like Dutch doesnt sleep around as much as people would like to think. He probably likes the fact that people think that of him, even if its not his style. Also...i dont think Dutch and Molly have any chemistry.

Howdy! (ASK 1 OF 2)

I apologize it took me some time to actually reply to this, especially because it is such a great ask! I definitely agree with both points made here, but I was debating how I wanted to write a response (and how far to take it).

Anyway, I'm open to hearing unpopular opinions! I know I have plenty of my own, so I'm not really one to judge others (as long as there is mutual respect) ☺️

My response is fairly long, and it deals with some sensitive topics. I decided to add a cut to this first ask, just to be safe! 💜💜💜

(Warning: SPOILERS below)

In regard to Dutch sleeping around, there are a few reasons why I don’t think he does it as much as it is often implied/assumed (I’m primarily limiting this to the timeframe of RDR2, Ch. 1-6).

First of all, Molly explicitly says Dutch doesn’t show her a lot of physical attention, even though he is her SO. If he’s not sleeping with her much, I doubt that he is going around with any other women at this time. He seldom leaves camp, outside of doing missions, so it is unlikely that he would meet up with anybody not in the gang. It just doesn’t seem plausible to me, as it would put him in a vulnerable position.

Dutch complains multiple times - including to Molly - that he is under stress and concerned about the Pinkertons closing in on them. Why would he go around outside the camp sleeping with random women? It would put him at the risk of being seen or reported on, and I believe he is smarter than to take on the unnecessary danger. Generally, he doesn’t spend much time in civilized areas, unless he needs to.

Not to mention, stress can be a real inhibitor of sex drive. For the entirety of the game, Dutch exhibits various degrees of anxiety and depression. I believe the gang and his personal safety were of much more concern to him, thus diminishing his interest in sex.

Speaking of the gang, I don’t personally see Dutch as sleeping around with the women in it that much. He did have a relationship with Susan in the past. Whether anything was still going on between them or not is uncertain, but if there was something, it probably was not serious or very frequent. In RDR1, he also suggests that he slept with Abigail, but if this happened, I doubt it would have occurred during the events of RDR2. They hardly ever interacted, and when Abigail did talk about Dutch, it was almost always in a negative manner. Dutch also showed some interest in Mary-Beth. However, I don’t think it went beyond flirting. She didn’t show much interest in him, and I think word would have gotten around if he tried to force anything, especially to Arthur (I am not going to discuss the events of RDR1 in any more detail here because that is a whole different conversation). But other than them, who else in the gang? There were not enough interactions with other women to suggest there was anything between them and Dutch.

Also, sex was considerably more risky in 1899 than it is today, and the means of contraception were not as dependable. For instance, The Pill didn’t go onto the market for another 60 years, and it was more difficult to get ahold of other birth control methods. This was partly because there were not as many technological advancements in this field and because there were a few laws that prevented reliable access to contraceptives (ex: The Comstock Laws). Condoms were arguably one of the easier birth control methods to find, but they still were not as widely available then as they are today (the quality was arguably not as good either). As I understand it, some searching was generally required to get ahold of condoms (usually in more civilized areas, which Dutch tried to avoid).

Dutch is a very contradictory character. My point in bringing up birth control is because although on some level I think Dutch probably would have liked to have actual children, I do not think he was serious enough about it to take any risks that might have led to an unwanted pregnancy during the timeframe of RDR2. As I mentioned, he was under a lot of stress with the gang. A biological child on top of that most likely would have overwhelmed him, and it would have required a long-term commitment to not only the child, but to the mother as well. I believe Dutch was smart enough to recognize this danger, and since birth control methods were not as widely available or reliable, he would not have wanted to sleep around too much (unwanted pregnancies were relatively common during this era).

I’ve written in the past that I believe Dutch had a certain degree of self-consciousness underneath his pride, so I do agree that he probably would have liked people finding him attractive or seductive. These traits emanate a sense of power and confidence, which would have provided a more favorable presentation of himself to others. These perceptions certainly would have helped to conceal his own self-doubts and insecurities, so he would have welcomed them, rather than try to refute them.

Now, in regard to the chemistry between Dutch and Molly, I agree. I think it was a pretty bad relationship all around. I don’t see its flaws as being entirely one-sided.

I will get into this a little more on the next ask, but I will discuss a few things here first.

Starting with Dutch, I will admit that he could have treated Molly a lot better. Even if he wasn’t happy with her or the status of their relationship, he should have seriously talked to her more. She deserved that, at the very minimum. There were a few instances where she tried to get his attention, and he just brushed her off. Again, like I said, even if he wasn’t very keen on the relationship anymore, he should have at least been honest about that. Then, as I already discussed, he had some mildly flirtatious conversations with Mary-Beth. I certainly do not think this helped matters. It was rude the way he insulted Molly for bringing up his interactions with Mary-Beth and how he pretended he had no idea what Molly was talking about.

Onto Molly, I don’t think she was perfect either. I know Dutch didn’t talk with her nearly as much as he should have, but she didn’t seem to show a whole lot of support for him in return. Dutch expressed that he was feeling stressed and not up to much physical activity, to which she got quite upset. She seemed to turn some arguments towards herself and her needs, with little regard for Dutch’s wellbeing. I do think she was selfish for demanding him to give her something he did not want to give/could not provide. Also, she refused to help the gang find leads or assist with chores, even when told to do so by others (ex: Dutch and Arthur). She tended to act above everybody else, claiming she wasn’t a servant to the needs of the gang as a whole. Though I can respect her sense of independence in that regard, it did show a sense of entitlement. Even Dutch donated to the gang funds, and as the leader, he was the one responsible for overseeing the vast majority of missions they engaged in. Molly was the only person who really did not contribute much. (Side note: Even UNCLE - the laziest bastard in the West - helped with leads and contributions!!)

I will get into this more in the following ask, but although I know she loved Dutch to an extent, I think part of her fascination with him was rooted in infatuation. Little is known about her background, but it is canon that she came from a wealthy and influential family in Ireland. I think part of the reason why she liked Dutch so much was because of the powerful position he held. She frequently lashed out at people who she perceived as challenging the reality of her “love” for him, such as Abigail and Karen. In one instance, Molly even went so far as to slap Karen across the face because she thought Karen was talking negatively about her. There was no evidence to prove or disprove Molly’s beliefs, but it did show that she was pretty sensitive about criticism (whether it was perceived or real) in regard to her relationship with Dutch.

Now, Dutch was wrong to use Molly’s fascination with him and his role in the gang to seduce her. But like I said, both of them had their issues. It was just a bad situation from both sides, and I do not think it should have happened in the first place. I don’t necessarily blame one more than the other. To be honest, I think they each deserved someone who fit them better.

And if I am being even MORE honest, I think Dutch should have stayed with Susan. She loved him, and he made a big mistake in ever giving her up. I believe the events of RDR2 would have turned out very differently, had he kept her closer.

(Ending note: Outside of serious posts - like this one - I know I make quite a few jokes about Dutch on my blog in regard to sexuality, but I do not mean for much of what I say in that regard to be taken *too* seriously. I don’t particularly want to discuss my personal life in the text of this post, but I will say that even if Dutch was a person I knew in real life, I’m not sure I would seriously want anything to happen between us. However, that is another matter entirely that has nothing whatsoever to do with him. I absolutely LOVE his character to death, and my blog will remain dedicated to his role in the RDR story for as long as I am around! That is all that should matter!!!)

Also, it is perfectly fine and normal to separate fiction from reality! It is okay to alter interpretations of Dutch (and/or Molly) for the sake of artistic expression, as long as the reasons can be justified. Furthermore, it is fine to disagree with me!!

I just hope this response gave you a thing or two to consider. Thank you again for sending your message in!! 💜💜💜

[zevlors-tail]

how are you mad that the mc isn't customisable?? this isn't a fucking dress up game on barbie.com can you imagine if they were to make it customisable how much work has to go into that?? all the cgs and cards have to be changed to YOUR ideals and how in the world does she look white to you?? just bc her eyes are big and her skin is pale?? if you have so many issues with it please just DONT play the game its so annoying do you see CN or JP players criticising the game like you do???

Look I blocked your other anon because you were rude as hell to me, but somehow this one is still in my notifs so I'm only gonna say this once: I'm not mad. I never said I was mad.

Just because you enjoy a game I do not does not mean I can't express my opinion on it. I have a right to voice how I think the game could be better.

First, there are ways to go about about changing MC without changing the CGIs, or they could have started that way in the first place.

Second, in your other anon you told me "fix it yourself" or smth along those lines but insulted me while doing so. Fuck you, being smart literally has nothing to do with also being a game developer lol. And just because I'm not a game developer doesn't mean I can't ask for things from the devs or share my opinions with them either. That's what customer feedback is for.

Third. You must not have read any of my following posts before finding the OP, because you would have seen me address the issue of claiming MC was white here. You can also find another discussion about it here, because I wasn't the only one confused on the ethnicity of some of the characters. And yes, from my view, before it was explained to me, pale skin and big eyes most definitely seemed like white traits because...well, they are?

Not to mention, because my language is English, they have English names, some of which sound very white, which I also didn't realize at first made a difference. I thought those names were the same for everyone across the board. Turns out they're not. I'm not sure what the hell you want from me, do you want me to tell you I was wrong about MC? I was, but the game doesn't explicitly give any background (at least not yet from where I'm at in gameplay) on any of them except for Marius a bit and how Luke and MC were childhood friends. So is it not likely for me to have assumed this at the time?

My whole problem with an uncustomizable MC anyways was both that it made the game less immersive and that it didn't give others a chance to play as themselves if they aren't white or Asian. THAT is my qualm with it. Even Mystic Messenger allowed players to have choices in their responses and kept their MC kinda neutral in the end.

I can still enjoy a game while simultaneously pointing out it's flaws and problematic content (an entirely other issue btw). I never said anywhere that I hate the game? I actually praised it's mechanics and art in my original post, as much as I ripped into it too. I very much enjoy collecting evidence and clues and then debating and objecting at trial. The story itself was well written for the most part. The cards are beautifully illustrated and the BGM as well as SFX are so fucking crisp it's insane. It is a visual masterpiece, in that regard.

But it does have problematic content, and it's not perfect, personal issues with the MC aside. To say it is perfect is just being woefully ignorant of the fact that there's room for improvement. There's always room for improvement with games. Also, it wasn't released that long ago, right? It's okay to enjoy the game in a different way. Just don't jump down my throat with anon on because you disagree with me.

And as for others complaining about the game, I got a variety of mixed opinions in my ask box. I'm happy with that. Clearly some people agreed, and some clearly disagree. I'm just one person.

If it bothers you so much that I have a differing opinion that you feel the need to come into my ask box twice, maybe go take a break from tumblr? Seriously. It did me wonders.

[char-lotteral]

Spill the tea. Don't worry about it being long XD

This has been in my ask box for a while now, and I keep forgetting to respond to some of my anons, so im sorry.... x))

This'll be a little debunk between Nart's feelings for Sak and Hina but first, LISTEN HERE

This isn't a breeding ground for discourse or shipping wars or whatever tf negativity you have going on, I just wanna ramble my thoughts. This is an innocent post and if you disagree with it, well--i really dont care :DD

Anw, here are my thoughts as to how different Naruto's feelings are for Sakura and Hinata

I just randomly thought of making this longass essay because apparently, there's been another "war" over on narutwt with NS vs. NH and ohmyGODDDDD, WHO CARESSSSS. SHUT THE FUCK UPPP PLEASEEE.

this shit should've ended in shippuden, I hate it here

If youre an nh fan, please I beg of you, let ppl ship ns if they want to, its really not that hard. It's so embarrassing seeing nh fans go rogue whenever they see an ns related post. Like please stop being rude to ns shippers, let ppl ship their drawings, who tf cares. Ur embarrassing the fandom ://

Okay so i think i wanna start off with how Nart fell for Sakura. They were kids. Kindergartners even. He saw Sakura as the "pretty, smart, popular girl" and like the attention deprived child that he is, he chose he wanted to be with her. It was a CRUSH. An innocent and childish one at that.

Did he love her? Yes. Was he in love with her? Debatable tbh. He was infatuated with her. It's a normal infatuation vs. real love type of shit.

I mean, he was too busy to even focus on himself and with the whole Sauce drama, so i doubt he even had the time to even sort out his own romantic feelings. I'm not even sure if his feelings for Sakura were really that deep rooted as what alot of fans claim it to be.

BECAUSE BECAUSE GETTHIS. If Naruto was really that in love with Sak, why didn't he introduce him to Minato when he was about to depart? If he was really that confident for his feelings for Sakura, then why didn't he share those thoughts to one the most essential things his mother imparted to him?

The only thing similar between Sakura and Kushina are their hot headedness. Even kishi himself admitted that scene with the girlfriend thingy was a herring. Even freaking Tsunade admitted that if Naruto were to be with someone as willful as him, they'd be butting heads all the time.

Do they have a special bond? Yes. Would they work out together as a couple? Yeah, as a bickering married one

And another thing, remember the fake confession scene? Sakura said "I love you" to Naruto. She said those words that Naruto himself has been "dying" to hear, so why didn't he get all ecstatic?

Because he knew she was lying!

Exactly!! He knew she was lying. He knew he'd never have a chance with her. He knew the extent of her feelings for Sasuke and respected it. He didn't act on it, he joked around with dates and what not but there was never any impactful romantic scene between them. Oh and shouldn't romantic scene have i dunno; mutual romance?

Theyre "the most developed ship" but Sakura has established mulitiple times that she was only in love with Sasuke. Narusaku was just as one sided as the other ships in shippuden but some of you aren't ready for that concersation.

Naruto would get rejected every damn minute or at every "moment" they had. How is that mutual??

They just had the upper hand because theyre mcs and they had the most screentime, let's be real

And what I absolutely hate the most about how people perceive Naruto's feelings for Sakura is that they see him as this pathetically in love, obsessed weirdo who only chose Hinata as a rebound or a second choice.

NEWS FLASH

PEOPLE MOVE ON. IT'S NOT THAT SERIOUS

It's not rocket science, it's not some philosophical shit, it's healthy and normal and realistic.

Istg some diehard shippers are too detached from reality that they can't even grasp the concept of moving on from a crush.

They act as if Naruto didn't give a flying fuck for Hinata in the entire series or that he barely knew her name. I mean c'mon, it's self explanatory¿¿¿ He moved on. Same with Ino with Sasuke, they both moved on.

How👏is👏it👏that👏hard👏to👏understand

And I'd also like to compare the scenes with Naruto being rejected by Sakura wiith Naruto being rejected by Hinata.

Naruto gets rejected by Sakura - he gets beaten up - He laughs it off- He moves on

Naruto gets rejected by Hinata - crippling depression - looks like shit - loses all motivation - fights for the girl

Yeah, I'll leave that to you

I also see some say that Naruto needed a partner who could keep him in line and reprimand him for the stupid stuff he does.

Pft, like what? A mom?

What Naruto needs, as someone brash and acts on impulse time to time, is someone patient and understanding and considerate. Everything he didn't have growing up. He needs a partner, not someone who berates him for being all goofy and for being himself. Hinata in a way is kinda like a neutralizer.

Also, I think its important to remember that there was a TWO YEAR TIME SKIP AFTER THE WAR WHERE NARUTO AND HINATA CANONICALLY GREW CLOSER.

Man, none of this would have been up for discussion if Kishi just knew how to develop fucking romance between het couples. If we're being honest, sns would've made the most sense. Im not even kidding. Sns would've the only endgame couple that'd make sense. And this is coming from a person who loves NH xD

thus ends my ramblings :DD

I regret ever delving into the world of Naruto. Now I can't fucking escape

[orchidbreezefc]

OKAY COOL I WAS ON THE FENCE ABOUT POSTING MY OWN EXPERIENCES IN THE KFAM DISCORD BECAUSE A POST ABOUT People Being Mean To Sage Specifically SEEMED KIND OF MASTURBATORY OR SELF-PITYING OR WHATEVER BUT IF WE REALLY ARE GOING TO STILL BE OUT HERE PUSHING THE This Server Is A Lovely Familial Community And Dissenters Are The Problem NARRATIVE EVEN NOW? HELL NO. ABSOLUTELY NOT.

obviously this is hard to be objective about. this stuff is a lot less concrete than my first post, a lot more based on vibes i got, which, yknow, is why it’s not in my first post. but if anyone identifies with this, if anyone sees their own experiences in this discord reflected in mine, then it’s going to be worth the worry i’m reading too much into things, or others thinking the same of me. if i can help anyone who felt like THEY were mistreated there and weren’t sure if they were reading too much into things, then. it’s worth it. especially since the M.O. in there was ‘everything’s fine and if not we’re going to MAKE IT FINE by silencing anyone who disagrees’.

a lot of talk has been done about the censorship (word used loosely, first amendment protects from the government not from the mods etc, definitely a specific suppression of dissenting ideas though) the mods have been doing--once more i suggest @kfam-tea for receipts and screenshots. not something i feel great about, but not something i have personal experience with, so i won't speak to it. see also my first post about my interactions with the creators. it touches on the dogpiling, which i'll go into more depth on in this post. you can find it [link: here].

so. the first thing in the official discord that tipped me off about the hivemind samethink phenomenon is that the whole place is distinctly frosty on the subject of samben. that’s a post all its own, one that follows through to numbers on ao3 and whatever, but i’m not here to make a ship manifesto. suffice it to say i got attached to the ship upon listening, inhaled the (suspiciously small) ao3 tag, and was stopped in my tracks at the discord server where any implication of such ship inclinations were met with silence and pointed changes of subject.

distinctly weird. distinctly unusual fandom behavior, that i couldnt even hint around shipping the two men whose incredibly profound relationship is literally the crux of the show, who have exchanged ‘i love you’s, one of whom is confirmed gay--all other romantic entanglements aside, because when have those stopped shippers? that was weird. i realize that's maybe a bit tinfoil hat of me. it could have been the goldfish-bowl big-brother-is-watching vibe from having creators in there, except, as i said, it carries to other sites.

anyway, much more concrete was when i spoke out about my thoughts on ben’s actions in ep68. again, enough there for another post, so tl;dr: he was doing his best, he’s a good guy and a good friend, but his actions DIRECTLY outed sammy to the WHOLE town, without allowing sammy to say the words himself. it was an accident, yes, but it had tangible, harmful consequences, and even accidental harm warrants apology. it should at least be... acknowledged. at some point. by the show OR the fandom. it's a disservice to ben himself to never get the chance to own up to it.

this was an unacceptable take. i tried breaching this topic and making my case twice, and got THOROUGHLY dogpiled both times. a dozen fans crawled out of the woodwork to argue heatedly, sometimes getting quite aggressive, sometimes toeing the line of outright hostility toward me personally. definitely some downright rude messages. not once did anybody speak up to defend my right to put forward my dissenting opinion, let alone SUPPORT my argument, god forbid. ben’s were the actions of a good friend, i was told. outing someone to their whole town without giving them the chance to say it on their own terms didn't qualify as harm at all, i was told, on account of ben's heart being in the right place.

still, the opinions being argued matter less than the attitudes and behaviors. people don't have to agree with me about that ep, i don't care. i do care about being given the right to, as a single person on my own, have space to make an argument without being shouted down by a dozen people. i do care about how it fit into a greater pattern of forbidding any criticism of the show, and ben in particular, who is a good friend and therefore all of his actions are good and harmless, who is our resident heterosexual unassailable paragon of purity. which might explain the samben problem--sammy/ron[/jack] was perfectly fine, even popular, but there was never a whisper of shipping ben with anyone but emily. they're Official. theyre The Perfect Couple. don't you dare challenge that (and for the most part, i didn’t dare. i quickly learned not to).

my [link: previous post] details kyle's response to these fun events, where he specifically went out of the way to follow me being shouted into silence (a result of me being driven to literal tears and shutting down rather than invite more argument) with a warm congratulations to everybody for their conduct in this discussion. because that's the kind of conversation kyle wants to specifically and explicitly praise and encourage, i guess.

anyway. this contributed to the growing sense over my time in the discord that people held a certain distaste for me but didn’t want to say anything direct. instead they talked around me, ignored me, immediately changed the subject from my messages, the whole while bestowing constant glowing compliments on each other and endlessly repeating saccharine sentiments about what a nice family type community they were, how grateful they were for the discord being such a positive space. i suppose that’s an easy impression to get when negativity is ruthlessly suppressed (and apparently outright censored nowadays) and instead of insults or, god forbid, communication with people with whom folks might take issue, they just (more or less) silently stonewall and cold shoulder them.

again, i could be misreading cues, being egocentric or tinfoil hat by reading this pattern into how i in particular was treated. either way, the fact that i was given the fandom friday shout out the week after KFAM live was definitely... strange. fishy, even. i was already mostly out the door at that point, had been for weeks--it was actually in my last few days speaking there period. i felt strangely guilty that they would dedicate a day to me when i didn’t like being there much and hardly spoke any longer. one thing’s for sure: my congratulations were fewer and more impersonal, perfunctory, and/or generic than other fans got (i kept a screenshot). i still have no idea what to make of that one, but there you have it.

p.s.: since vagues are in vogue now apparently, i might as well mention the person who's been accused of being A Problem In The Discord For A While Now, among nastier things, which definitely is not an effort to justify kyle's passive aggressive response to their untagged post which used the phrase 'death of the author', or kyle subsequently crying on twitter about death threats because apparently he couldn't be bothered to google a basic literary analysis term and thought if he was vague enough nobody would look into what was actually said. i guess he was right, if the hundreds of asspats and outcries against The Evils Of Podcast Fan Meanies were any indication.

i digress. i just wanted to testify that the fan in question was one of maybe three or four people on the server who consistently treated me nicely and acted like they liked me. and that another fan who claimed to be uncomfortable around death-of-the-author-person was the person who came the closest to being outright nasty to me when i expressed a critical opinion. make of that what you will i guess!

p.p.s.: if i never say anything more about this whole thing or the creators’ part in it, i do want to say for the record: noah james is fully exempt from all of this and remains absolutely wonderful and a whole treasure. like dont pedestalize male creators and assume them incapable of wrongdoing etc etc but i had an hour long midnight denny’s breakfast sitting across from him and he was nothing short of an angel the whole time. sweetest guy i’ve ever met. he hasn’t breathed a word about any of this drama. he may not even know it’s going on because he’s too busy being the most beautiful and talented man in america or something. i love you noah

[pjo-trash-and-remy]

So, you're a hater

It's the title for me (smack) jeez calm down

So I'm back. But this time I'm going to be talking about how to rebuttal the hate + how to put out your thoughts without sounding hateful. (If you didn't read my last blog "Why the Riordanverse Fandom is Hateful" check it out because it will greatly help you understand this blog.)

So, you see a post that's rude. I want to start with its not your job to tell people they are wrong. If you personally disagree with something just scroll on. Now, if its presented in a rude manner or flat out hate here's what you can do:

Hey! Your post seemed a little hate filled, maybe a kinder approach would help?

Some of your points seemed a little harsh and unclear, a gentler response might be better

I personally disagree, but I can see where you're coming from. But a friendlier approach would be better and people won't see it so much as offense or disagreeable :)

Now, you might get bashed at for calling someone out. Simply stating, "a nicer approach or responds would be better." Would get to the point. You also need to emphasize your words. If you don't make it clear that you're trying to help you will get into a virtual argument.

Okay, if you get hated on your post because someone disagrees that's an entirely situation. I posted my personal thoughts on Caleo (in my opinion, in a pretty decent manor) and *surprise* a lot of people disagreed. That's OKAY. You're not trying to force people to agree with you. I had a really good discussion with someone on how and why they disagreed. We both respected each others choices and stayed within reasonable territory. Now, if you get a hate comment, delete it. If you don't feel called to tell this person that its hate. Delete it. You have standards. Their's a difference between someone respectfully stating their opinion and hate.

You can't choose this person's opinion for them. But just because you disagree doesn't label it as hate. Confused? Here

You're wrong, Caleo is the worst ship ever, you're stupid.

Guess what? That's hate, feel free to delete that because you don't need that toxicity in YOUR life.

But

Hey! I think your post was presented really well but I have to disagree! Caleo does have some wrongs with them and their just not my favorite and here's why (Continues to respectfully state why.)

That's not hate. That's politely disagreeing and that's okay! But if you start bashing them that's on you hating. You're being the hater buddy. Don't do that. Agree to disagree respectfully. Want more of the green and less red on your posts? It helps if your post is presented in a well manner. Need some help with that?

How to respectfully present your comments and posts.

Let's start with posts. I'm going to choose Frazel and why people need to stop sugar coating them. For almost anything you need three things.

A subject, what are you discussing?

And a view point, what are we trying to see?

A reason, why is this important?

The subject is Frazel. My view point is that Frazel should be viewed differently, they're not just cute characters. And my reason is that people should understand that Frazel is powerful and not just adorable. To narrow down my post to only a couple of sentences so this blog isnt ridiculously long here is a short example.

Frazel (subject) is more than just a cute cuddly ship. (View point) Hazel and Frank are both extremely powerful characters and putting them together would probably make them more powerful than Percabeth. The characters personalities are both sweet but together they are badass and kick butt. They are more than just what some people present them as. (Reason)

Now for some backup I would most definitely pull scenes from the books and explain. I 10/10 reccomend you do this, it gives you good resources and you have "proof." Some things that will help people understand is respecting the opposing side. The Frazel doesn't really have an opposing side since I'm just making a point. But if you were to say your thoughts on Rachel Dare and why she's a great character, you can respect the people that dislike her, by:

Saying you understand where they're coming from and why

Saying why you like the character and think she's great, but don't enforce that she's perfect

Pulling scenes from the book that highlight her

And not bashing what other people think.

This goes along with posts and comments, but adding things like, "If you dislike Rachel you're fucking stupid." Or "People who dislike Rachel have zero brain cells." Like I talked about in my last blog, that's toxic and hateful. Exactly what we do not want. You have to view things from both sides and accept thing from both sides. Putting in some view points from the opposing side of your subject makes you favorable. It helps people see and understand, even if they disagree with everything else, they have something you can both agree on.

Now, if you dislike a character just because you don't vibe with them. That's cool too! You dont have to have a reason to like/dislike a character, just don't be a jerk about it. To state, "I just don't vibe with Percy." Is not offensive, I get it. But maybe don't state, "if you like Percy your fucked in the head." That's rude.

I've said it before and I'll say it again

The Percy Jackson fandom is toxic

This post is to help you achieve how to put your thoughts on the internet without sounding like a bitch. If you need to see how the fandom is being toxic check out my other recent blog. That will help this post make more sense.

But the thing is, its you. You can't be the issue. If you're the one making rude posts with no goal or hating in some poor persons comment section, you are the issue. The entire point of this post was to help you not do that. So put in effort in and try. If you get offended easily, its obviously going to be a lot harder for you but you have to put in an effort and try.

Don't be a jerk. Don't do it. Be kind and courteous. Remy said that anyone can cook. Anyone can be kind with a bit of practice.

Respect all because at the end of the day we all need to work together.

[juni-ravenhall]

It’s the way they criticizing the game we don’t like not people criticizing the game . We forget people work month/weeks/years on things that players take one look at go this is ugly sso is dying giving no constructive criticism that could actually help sso. Also for example let’s say you draw something that I think is bad but instead of giving you things I think you should work on I just say this is ugly you need to stop drawing you are ruining the art community what’s that going to do? It’s probably going to make you mad and block the person

well i'll start at the end - it wont make me mad or block the person (i never block ppl if i can help it, and i dont get angry at ppl in general), i would tell them "thats nonsense" and offer to talk to them about why its nonsense to see if i could help them understand why its wrong, but thats kinda besides the point of ur ask lol.

theres basically two issues here:

1) the reason i talk about that stuff a lot, is bc i see a lot on here of ppl feeling upset that sso gets criticised. SOME of that criticism is the unfair type that you talk about - not the constructive, fair type that i talk about in my posts - but there seems to be a lot of "any criticism makes me annoyed, no matter if its fair or not" happening, and most of all, "some criticism makes me annoyed and i project that on everyone criticising the game without paying attention to if those particular ppl are being fair or not". (this is black-and-white thinking, where you're "either for or against", instead of seeing it nuanced where some critical ppl are 100% fair and constructive while others are not, and those ppl have nothing to do with each other.)

i also think that making fun of ppl for posting criticism - even the unfair type, that rarely anyone on ssoblr posts - is a bit questionable behaviour. when is it healthy or acceptable to make fun of ppl publically, when is it not? as a victim of bullying and abuse i just think thats something for everyone to think about. im not saying theres a clear answer, im saying it makes me uncomfortable to see such things sometimes, bc im not sure i think its ever okay to make fun of ppl publically who havent hurt anyone. ive been bullied a lot, abused a lot, it makes me feel icky to see ppl do it. you can disagree with someone without ridiculing them or being rude.

2) criticising a product from a company is not the same as criticising individual artists/workers. absolutely nobody should be hurt by anyone criticising sso as a game, or the way the company is handled in general. this ties back to what i said above too - ridiculing or making fun of a product, a piece of media, also isnt whatsoever the same as making fun of an individual person.

anyway, there is certainly unfair criticism of sso (not so much on ssoblr that ive ever seen), but thats not rly what ive been talking about. in this case its more about getting unfair and fair criticism mixed up and seeing all criticism as one big evil cloud when thats very far from reality.

thanks for being nice and not a hater :D

[enthusiasticmusicalquotes]

QUESTION OF THE DAY #12: What is your opinion on theatre bootlegs? Spill as much or as little tea as you want.

MY ANSWER: it would be incredibly hypocritical of me to say there’s nothing good about them. i discovered a couple of my all time favorite shows through bootlegs, and when i was a high school/college-aged theatre nerd stuck in the midwest (which i still am, just a bit older now), they brought me a lot of comfort that i could relive my favorite shows again. that said, i can understand POVs re: they weren’t filmed with consent from the actors. however, actors who are speaking out against them need to realize that mainstream theatre needs to be made more accessible in one way or another for poor, disabled, and international theatre fans. tldr: bootlegs aren’t going to go away if celebrities disavow them, but theatre might be able to become more accessible if more of them talk on THAT instead of how evil bootlegs are.

SUMMARY OF ANSWERS: out of 41 responses: 21 were an enthusiastic heck yeah, 13 weren’t as enthusiastic but still along the lines of yeah i support them, 3 answers were like eh i can see both sides i guess/leaning towards no, and 4 people outright said nah bootlegs are not the answer. All the answers under the cut!

if you wanna fight or agree with anyone, refer to the # and send in an ask or reply to this.  

also: while i agree with much of what was said under the cut, i will not come out and say which ones i agree with and what i don’t. my opinion is above and that’s all you need to know about what i think. i do not necessarily condone or agree with anything below. okay, enjoy reading.

1. Anonymous said: I may not be the biggest fan, but I totally get why they exist and have watched a few when they pop up

2.  Anonymous said: for the qotd: bootlegs are godsends

3. Anonymous said: oh god i literally just went on a tangent on twitter just now but bootlegs good!!!! people willingly watch blurry footage of a show bcs they want to know what the show is like, want to experience it live. bway shows arent accessable for everyone (due to prices and distance) but ppl still want to know what its like performed on stage. bootlegs literally dont harm the community. ive seen poto boots, proshots and the tour yet id willingly pay 2 watch again. boots make theatre more accessable imo !!

4. Anonymous said: Boots are good to get a glimpse of different productions? Like even despite Proshots existing of certain musicals, I'd still be curious regarding other interpretations of it! And also besides this it definitely helps make shows accessable to people who physically cannot watch the show!

5. galactic-greens said: I truly see no harm in bootlegs as long as they are treated respectfully. While the creation and consumption is technically a crime, it by no means whatsoever makes you a bad person. It's essentially documenting theatre, and ensuring generations to come will be able to experience what could have been so fleeting. They maintain a community, and as long as NFT dates, masters, and general spread of bootlegs are respected then there really can be no problem. It's just a way to immortalize the art!

6. Anonymous said: On bootlegs: oftentimes they’re the only way someone could be able to see a show, because not everyone can afford the tickets or even the cost to just go to New York for a show. However, it should be acknowledged that filming obviously in the actors’ faces is pretty rude, but at the same time bootlegs at least give a chance for people like me to see shows I might never get to see otherwise.

7. Anonymous said: I love bootlegs because I don’t have the means to be able to travel to see shows or afford tickets, i also do theater and i feel like the point of the art is to share it as much as I can

8. Anonymous said: i've never seen a large-scale live show bc they are not accessible to me. bootlegs are amazing. truly glorious.

9.  Anonymous said: i understand that this is a rather unique experience, but i live in nyc, so bootlegs never measure up to the real thing for me. i know that this isn't something everyone can be lucky enough to say, but live theatre could never be captured in the form of a bootleg-- i don't even like released proshots as much as the real thing

10. Anonymous said: for me bootlegs are fine for those who can't see it live because of the price and they are living from another country though i know there are a lot of actors disagrees about it

11. Anonymous said: as someone who can't afford to go to a professional production of anything, absolutely gimme a bootleg. obviously I wouold prefer, like, a proshot of a show and I really hope that becomes more of the norm (I watched the Newsies proshot on Disney+ and had the happy wiggles for hours afterwards, and I can't wait for the Hamilton one to come out) but until that starts happening I'll take a bootleg any day.

12. Anonymous said: I like that it helps people get into fandoms/musicals that they wouldn’t’ve otherwise but I would prefer if theatres professionally films them.

13. maycombhoney said: they will be a part of theatre culture until live theatre is made accessible for more people

14. Anonymous said: bootlegs are great and until the theater community decides to produce pro-shots i’m all for them

15. zoueriemandzijnopmars said: I would personally feel kinda bad for watching bootlegs, because it won’t directly bring money to the people who worked on the show. I don’t judge people who do watch bootlegs though, because let’s face it, bootlegs are not a replacement for actually going to the theatre and it’s not gonna lose the creators actually money. It might even make them money, because people will listen to the album/buy tickets anyway when they can. I’d just personally be more comfortable watching a proshot

16. Anonymous said: I don't pretend bootlegs aren't stealing but whatever harm they do is abstract enough - and my decisions are drop-in-the-bucket enough - that I do it anyway

17. Anonymous said: I’m totally fine with bootlegs. I’ve watched so many of them that it wouldn’t be fair if I wasn’t. The fact is most people just aren’t able to see shows. Either they live too far away or they can’t afford it, and if this is the only way someone can experience a show, it’s better than never seeing it at all

18. Anonymous said: i think bootlegs are important for accessibility but i really wish more theatres would release proshots. i wouldn't even mind if it were after the broadway run or after the original cast is switched out, but i think it's valuable to have those recordings out during the run of the show to get more people interested and actually wanting to go out and see it. plus, if they're worried about money, they wouldn't *have* to be free. just cheaper than tickets and travel.

19. Anonymous said: about the question of the day, honestly i think bootlegs are fine as long as they're done respectfully and the filmers aren't distracting with it

20. locke-writes said: For the question of the day: If there’s absolutely no way I can see the show live or from a professional recording then I’m going to watch a bootleg. Theater should be more accessible and sometimes a bootleg is my only way to access a show. Having been part of film crews who have shot live theater I think a lot of the lack of pro recordings is the idea which that theater is difficult to record. It isn’t. Give me a pro shot show over a bootleg anyday but I’ll take what I can get

21. Anonymous said: My opinion on bootlegs is I prefer professional recordings ONLY because bootleg quality is terrible for my auditory processing problems and I hate the washed out quality. But since professional recordings are rare (unless you are, interestingly enough, Sight & Sound Theatre); for everyone else: BRING ON THE BOOTLEG! ~ Stripe Conlon

22. Anonymous said: Bootlegs are complicated! As a fan/consumer I think they’re okay, especially considering how inaccessible theatre is for people living in other countries, people who can’t afford to experience shows live, and disabled folks. But as someone who also performs, i understand that it can be distracting and legally complicated for actors who are trying to do their best and did not consent to being filmed that night. I just hope that pro shots will become more common.

23. penguinated said: Bootlegs are fine. They don't cost Broadway a thing since people will literally never not pay to see live shows (except during covid of course). and for many people, seeing a certain show with a certain cast will NEVER be possible, so what's the harm in watching the bootleg? The bootlegs aren't the problem, it's the inaccessibility of live theater, ESPECIALLY Broadway shows. If more things were available to stream (i.e. BroadwayHD) there wouldn't be a need for bootlegs. Bootleg away, imo.

24. Anonymous said: until theatre is made accessible to everyone and there is a proshot released for every show, bootlegs are absolutely necessary for the prosperity of theatre

25. Anonymous said: It's so sad that people think bootlegs are necessary! and it's even sadder that in a way they are. however, too many people use them as an excuse to not pursue alternate affordable alternatives for theatre (such as broadway hd, pursuing local shows including high school and college theatre, and utilizing legally free shows online). In addition, bootlegs absolutely CAN be unethically sourced- recordings of locally produced shows can get theaters in trouble and bankrupt them with legal fees. and if you're recording something from Broadway (which is fine imo usually), if you're actually making people PAY for your illegal recording, that's profiting off the work of others and is both very unethical and exploiting the very people many bootleggers claim to work for the benefit of. When it comes to bootlegs, it's one thing to pass around shows that have finished their runs on Broadway for free- but there's too much unethical and even HARMFUL bootleg behavior and it needs to stop.

26. Anonymous said: since Broadway is too rich and doesn't wanna spend money(for some reason) streaming their shows, then bootlegs are the only option.

27. Anonymous said: Theater is so inaccessible that bootlegs are necessary for a lot of people because with a lot of shows you can’t get a good idea of the show just from the soundtrack but people that share nft boots are assholes

28. Anonymous said: Bootlegs do more good than harm. Those against bootlegs are elitist and don't understand some people cant afford hundreds of dollars in theatre and plane tickets. Bootlegs make people crave the live experience more, a dark and shaky video with shit audio doesn't satiate the desire to see a show live. And if the show is closed all the more reason to watch a bootleg!

29. lynntjeeee said: Theatre bootlegs are amazing and are why there are fans. I live in a country with no musical theater (except the occasional sucky original production with a local celeb who can't sing) so if it not for bootlegs I wouldn't be able to watch any shows and wouldn't be a fan (thus not spending money on cast recordings, etc). People need to realise this, bootlegs do not harm the theater, in fact it only helps it. If there were official recordings, there would be many more fans (and thus more profit!)

30. Anonymous said: Opinion on bootlegs: They wouldn't be necessary if the theater industry would get with the times and release professional shots of their shows on streaming services/cable.

31. Anonymous said: I think that people are really overreacting about bootlegs. ESPECIALLY bootlegs if shows that have already closed- you may never get a chance to see that show! Ever! Now there’s an affordable and accessible way to see shows that people would kill and die for. It isn’t losing Broadway money, in fact it is bringing more people into the medium. Maybe if full proshots were more common I would feel differently, but since there is literally no other way, boots are fine.

32. Anonymous said: Bootleg opinion: just go absolutely hog wild. Fuck it. Be gay do crime.

33. Anonymous said: Bootlegs are one of the few things that are keeping me sane right now, plus the fact that not everyone has dat cash money to see the shows live, so yeah they're good stuff (as long as they are available online w/ at least vaguely good sound quality anyway 😆)

34. Anonymous said: I see it both ways. I can understand why those in the profession are against it; it’s their hard work that’s getting pirated. But I’m also poor. I have no access to theatre outside of cast albums and bootlegs. I don’t watch bootlegs because I personally feel guilty, but I will not and do not judge others if they do.

35. whatdoscissorsdo said: I think broadway bootlegs r okay?? eat the rich amirite

36. Anonymous said: I trade and watch bootlegs and don't plan on stopping, but I've recently realized that it must be super uncomfortable for actors to be filmed without their knowledge or consent, or just to have to have on their minds that they might be being recorded at any time in a performance. Like, I've happily watched Many™ Spring Awakening videos in the past year, but I doubt Alexandra Socha is that thrilled knowing there are videos up on YouTube of featuring her nude at age nineteen.

37. i-am-having-an-emotion said: they will remain a necessary evil until theater is more accessible to the masses. seeing real live theater is always better than a boot but literally like 95% of people can’t access live theater, especially at a broadway caliber, so like..... do The Poors not *deserve* theater??? what are we supposed to do BUT make bootlegs?

38. ope-okay said: bootlegs are blessings from heaven and no one can convince me otherwise

39. Anonymous said: I think it can really hype up the want for the musical. And a really good boot release can bring new creations to an otherwise small fandom. Personally I’m more interested in seeing the musicals I’ve seen boots of than the musicals I haven’t

40. Anonymous said: On the topic of bootlegs, I think they’re great but like especially for people who do not have the means to go see the shows during their runs, I feel like if you do have the means to go see the show you should do that instead

41. Anonymous said: I have a REALLY hard time with bootlegs. Because artists deserve to be paid for their work, and there are a whole host of copywriter issues that come with the mass production of a show. In addition though, I understand the anger you feel at not getting to see a show live, however there are so many resources available to help people get the idea of their favorite show even if they never see it. Honestly Wikipedia is my favorite resource, as often that has a full synopsis of the show. I’ll read that and then listen to the recording a bunch so I can understand the story and imagine what it may look like. A lot of shows put clips on YouTube, the Macy’s parade, the Tony Awards, NBC does a whole broadway week, there are so many ways that you can get glimpses into these shows without resorting to bootlegs (which at this point are still illegal) I’m not a supporter of the “theater must be seen live” idea. While I LOVE live theater (and as a performer I like feeding off an audience) but I’ve see shows with just proshots or just the movie version and they are still just as good. Unfortunately I think the only way we’re are going to make theater more accessible to audiences is through time. Bootlegs I think only make people less inclined to record shows and mass produce them. There are a whole lot of legal things that go into that as well. What I can say is what I’ve done. Read up on the show, watch all the clips you can, sometimes scripts are posted online maybe read those, listen to the album, look at pictures. It SUCKS that theater is exclusive, but bootlegs are not the solution.

let me repeat: if you wanna fight or agree with anyone, refer to the # and send in an ask or reply to this post.