#this post brought to u by my hatred for the name 'moonstar' thank u xoxo

[rollercoasterwords]

i do think it's odd when people talk abt r's lycanthropy as though it is somehow offensive to like....acknowledge or emphasize the fact that he is a werewolf at all. like i think it's weird when people say that it's gross or harmful to write lycanthropy (which is, of course, a fictional disease that is an allegorical tool for exploring themes related to disability) in a way where r is written with "wolfish" traits, or he or the people around him refer to him as a werewolf or just in any way emphasize that being a werewolf is part of who he is.

and i'm not trying to overstate this like it's a huge issue, because at most it's just like. a couple people making posts online, y’know? but i just think it's odd when i do see people say stuff like "don't refer to him as a beast/wolf/etc!!! he's a person!!" or act like it's disgusting for lycanthropy to alter his characterization at all to make him more "beastly"

because like. ok. what we have here is lycanthropy as a chronic illness that is vilified + stigmatized by the wider wizarding world. and typically in fics remus has a very negative view of his own lycanthropy since he's grown up in a society that tells him he's a monster. so if the response to that is "don't emphasize that he's a werewolf at all by giving him negative werewolf traits!!!" it's like....that is. exactly the message that we are supposed to be questioning if we're going into this allegory with a critical reading. bc u are also now treating being a werewolf like it's a bad thing.

like if u think it's an actual issue for him to be portrayed in a way where he is more wolfish/beastly....why? who's saying that those things are bad? why is it so important for him to be portrayed as "civilized" rather than "monstrous," and who in this context is qualifying what counts as "civilized" vs. "monstrous?" why is monstrosity diametrically opposed to humanity/personhood in the first place?

obviously this is all fanfiction and if somebody wants to write r's lycanthropy so that he's just a werewolf once a month + otherwise isn't that affected by it, or is only affected in ways that are easy to deem sympathetic (ie, he gets hurt + has to spend time in the hospital wing but he never exhibits any kind of aggression or "animalistic" or "beastly" qualities otherwise) then that's fine. and i'm also not saying that he has to be written as like hyper-dominant alpha wolf beastman either--i don't necessarily think that's the only possible interpretation for how lycanthropy might manifest in traits outside the full moon. it's more just that i think it's weird when people moralize about like...."playing into werewolf stereotypes" lol bc. again werewolves aren't real. but also in the context of lycanthropy as allegory, the goal is not to say "you can't write those traits related to disability bc it's a negative stereotype," which does nothing to question why it's a negative stereotype and ultimately just reinforces the idea that those traits are something negative. the goal is to use the allegory to explore how people who fit "negative stereotypes" of disability navigate an ableist society that stigmatizes them + insists that the only path to acceptance is to hide their disability as best they can + assimilate, while simultaneously making assimilation an impossible goal.