#this would be something antis were into

[aqours]

hi former Warrior Cats Kid here, most of that post is accurate! the incest is largely unintentional and happens because there's like 900 cats and 7 authors and all of them have different ideas on what the cats' family trees are supposed to look like (many instances of, for example, cousins or niece/uncle mating, at least one niche instance of full-blood siblings doing so). there IS a novella/bonus story that basically revolves, iirc, around a side character getting groomed by someone much older than her as an apprentice (which is basically analogous to preteen/teen age), but aside from that there are many other age gap ships that aren't handled very sensitively. i can't recall any specific examples of spousal/mate abuse but i'm sure it happens. i vaguely remember the "there's no reason for gay cats to exist" thing happening in a Q&A, though i think that was just one author going off-script rather than the collective opinion. i don't have any personal anecdotes on how the fans treat(ed) poc tho, but i do think there was some discourse about the fake religion of one of the groups of cats in the middle of the series being a stereotype of indigenous cultures. don't quote me on that one

unsurprisingly the post doesn't mention the at times Very Explicit Gore permeating the entire series (this makes it even more convincing satire in my humble opinion). in the first six books alone multiple infants get kidnapped and one gets killed, someone gets run over by a car and permanently disfigured, someone gets mauled by a pack of dogs and permanently disfigured, someone gets chased by a (different, i think) pack of dogs off a cliff and she drowns, a mother slowly poisons her blind son to death in an act of assassination, and someone gets graphically disemboweled, among other things. it's pretty brutal!

HOLY FUCKING CHRIST LMAO

THANK YOU FOR ACTUALLY CONFIRMING THIS

[cozylittleartblog]

snow miku 2024 🧡🥄❄

art print on my etsy for the holidays!

[soath]

The thing about Bells Hells is that asking their opinion on anything is like setting up a political survey at a rave under a bridge or in some sort of especially niche genre specific goth club or backstage at an off-off Broadway conceptual show; you’re going to get really interesting answers! They are not going to be representative of the general population in the slightest. There is a faction of people who think we need to solve this by introducing one Designated Average Relationship With The Universe Dave to the polling sample, ruining their beautiful natural diversity of guys-who-could-be-in-the-musical-RENT. To which the wise man says: “Never!” This is the little freaks with half baked philosophies and unresolved personal issues party. More pressingly, it has been noted that Bells Hells doesn’t seem to realize that their relationship with power writ large is bafflingly different from the average Exandrian. This is an problem, but it’s one that could be in-character, one more extension of an admirable commitment to trauma-informed alarming theological opinions.

[ofbreathandflame-archive]

(heavy discussions on sa - this is actually an older post that i made like months ago, and was actually the first draft of the amarantha taboo post, so some things sound similar! just a heads up!)

you know i actually think there is a wider discussion to be had about rhysand's sexual assault - or sexual assault and trauma as it functions in the wider narrative. ive always felt that bc the story puts rhysand in this vulnerable position (i.e. a victim of sexual violence) the story always needs to like...make up for it, if that makes sense? 

what i mean is: the story creates this dynamic where rhysand is a victim; he has no power, control, or say - but it also has a very hard time reconciling to the fact that he was placed in this position. and so there's these weird placeholding pieces of information that often addle or confuse the narrative. and i talked about this before with rhysand's framing of his 'service to amarantha.' i also contributes to the moments of hyperviolence with rhys in the books, as if he constantly has to make up for the fact he was placed into these vulnerable positions in the first, implicitly.

the first book - and other books thereafter - imply that rhysand's court is specificially shielded from amarantha because he aligns himself (action word). rhysand's decision is framed as a 'sacrifice' which implies a choice (that he didn't really have). it always implies that rhysand is the one consciously 'one-upping' amarantha by 'agreeing' to be her 'right hand man' again - notice how despite the fact amarantha is characterized as a sexual deviant, she's rarely the focus. its what rhys 'gave' and not what 'amarantha did.'  

and this is fine if this is the way rhysand chooses to see what happened to him - bc then that's a trauma response. he can't acknowledge it so its better for him to rationalize it - that would have been great writing. 

but thats not how his sexual assault and role utm is discussed. 

other characters view rhys sexual assault as a statement of heroism (which ew) and not a just a statement of amarantha's capacity for sexual violence. tarquin literally says something along those lines. which again is implying that RHYS HAD A CHOICE. we can't frame this as heroism. he was raped, he did not sacrifice something...it was taken. 

in the initial scenario - where we remove the idea of autonomy (e.g. the idea that rhys purposely aligns himself with amarantha) he's a victim. but then - so is tamlin, tarquin, beron, kallias, and helion. in short - rhys being taken advantage of says nothing about him. it's a statement on amarantha's cruelty. but the story isn't satisfied with this bc...how would he be any different than tamlin whose vilified for being directly affected by his trauma, who 'sat on his ass for fifty years' as the book says. 

its the tragedy of how male sexual assault is rationalized in this series. the story literally purposely sets up a mirror position where rhys and tamlin are consistently compared for how they work through some of the craziest trauma ever known to man. the level of trauma the story is asking these characters to 'overcome' is actually quite insane. 

so the story ups the ante, it doesn't want rhys to be 'just a victim,' it wants him to be the MAN TM. bc tamlin and tarquin are 'just victims' so ewww. like even lucien is given another horribly written experience with sexual assault (which it literally has to bend the worldbuilding to accomplish) and then kind of position his complaints abt ianthe as whiny. or how tarquin's trauma is...not 'dark' enough for feyre. these men are often characterized as cowardly or not enough in relation to rhys. helion, thesan, tarquin, and tamlin are all consistently characterized as 'cowards' with little to no initiative or backbone.

so the story does that thing where it provides impossible situations: rhysand is the most powerful being in the world, he's so powerful that even without his 'real' power, he's still light years more powerful than the others when they're powers are ripped away. he can read minds, and has two wraiths that can literally walk through the walls and spy. he's often sent on missions on behalf of amarantha and can waltz in and out of the spring court without any issues (ie. its easy for him to convince amarantha he needs to go to the spring court multiple times. and then when he works for amarantha - he's the mastermind, not her. he's playing her all along and blah blah blah). but then it doesn't know how to write this dynamic with rhys and amarantha. and then it depowers him, while shaming the other men in the series for not doing 'enough' even when the most op character with all of those advantages isn't even able to over power her.

there's little introspection into amarantha as a character and as a villain -- and you'll notice she's hardly ever mentioned after the first book...despite the fact that she was literally the high queen of prythian and was the governing oppressive force for a half-century. as said in this post - the story isn't actually concerned about making a point about male sexual asault.

and that's why i talked about why that amarantha taboo is...kind of important to how the story chooses to conceptualize sexual violence/assault. the choice to create amarantha (and ianthe and maeve too) as these caricatures of sexuality - which is pretty much the case of all of sjm's villains. 

the story doesn't want to fully commit to a tactical scenario, because it doesn't believe that he's a victim in that capacity  - or at least that the victimhood is valid. bc its spends so much time invalidating the male trauma around rhys, the only way to make a distinction between rhys and the others to have rhys "orchestrate" his own assault to save everyone.

[lab-gr0wn-lambs]

Ok do the thousands of Bethyl shippers realize it means they're headcanoning Daryl as a pedophile or

[blossoms-phan]

guys remember the phagenda

[daughter-of-lethe]

Nesta halted him with a hand on his chest. Just one hand, and he stopped, utterly at her command.

If she wanted it to end here, it would. It softened her enough that she couldn’t quite keep the tremor out of her voice

Chapter 38, Acosf.

I can't voice what this scene did to me 😭

[evocatiio]

if chibnall was the one writing this season you lot would be talking VERY differently

[literaryspinster]

I don’t know who needs to hear this but

Sky dying was Viktor’s fault and him covering it up was bad actually.

[buddiebitch]

ALSO why is “he was hacked” what they’re going with? if he had been hacked, wouldn’t they say something worse? like if someone really hacked him because they really wanted him fired they could have done SO much worse.

[rabbits-of-negative-euphoria]

I feel like I'm missing the crux of the man vs. bear debate because it's so silly. of course I would pick the man, because neither my Sig nor jiu jitsu is going to take down a bear

[acourtofthought]

The biggest argument from the other side is that Elain in canon wants Az.

Present tense.

Please show me the proof of this from the day after Solstice forward and I'll admit that Elain still wanting Az is current canon.

Feyre was engaged to Tamlin in January and happily mated to Rhys 5 months later.

Why should I believe Elain is pining for Az after the 5 months that passed from Solstice to the end of the book when absolutely nothing supports this?

If she managed to get over Graysen, who she was engaged to, in love with and gave her virginity to after a year than I'm pretty sure it barely took her a month to move on from someone she never even kissed.

[throwawayasoiafaccount]

if westeros was created to reflect our modern society instead of being loosely based off of western medieval society, then i think people would understand that these political marriages are for alliances, not love, and would agree that the modern lower class sentiments towards marriage are simply not applicable to these arrangements and both bride and groom cannot and should not expect love from their partner.

if our story occurred in a modern westeros very similar to our own modern society, then a lot of the obstacles our characters face would not happen because, simply put, modern society benefits from equality.

as an example, i am quite (100%) certain that the introduction of gender equality and other modern values and advancements to westeros would only be beneficial to rhaegar and elia, which means that this ideology benefits westerosi society on an individual level.

so, in this modern westeros au, if rhaegar and elia still married for a political alliance, and then had two children like they did in asoiaf, they could then peacefully divorce and write out a contract that secures both rhaenys and aegons inheritances. if lyanna and rhaegar met and fell in love while rhaegar and elia were married then the misunderstanding that sparked a war would never have happened. why? because lyanna would have a say in who she marries in this modern au. also, elia would have possibly been seeing others as well. why? because this was a political marriage and love shouldn’t be expected, so why would anyone be concerned about either party finding love outside of their marriage? plus modern westeros would have dna testing so there’s no reason to question the paternity of their children.

also, if elia had a child with someone else (in this hypothetical scenario, perhaps her lover died) and rhaegar decided to claim that child as his own while knowing that he’s not the real father in order to give this child a better life, then this wouldn’t be a problem either. why? because rhaegar’s in the know. (i’m only bringing this up bc of the rhaenyra and laenor situation. guys… laenor is perfectly aware that biologically those kids aren’t his, yet he still claimed them and loved them bc he and rhaenyra had an agreement. i do not understand why real ppl are even concerned about jace, luke, and joffs parentage. in the eyes of the law those boys are legally laenors.)

however, since asoiaf isn’t based off of our modern society and is instead a society riddled with misogyny, xenophobia and other social issues without the progress and advancements that we in the 21st century have benefited from, i will concede one thing to these antis who harp on and on about how selfish rhaenyra and rhaegar were for loving someone who wasn’t their spouse and for having a child(ren) out of wedlock.

because yes, rhaegar and lyanna’s love can be considered an act of selfishness, and rhaenyra loving harwin and having children with him can also be considered selfish.

but guess what? love in general is a very selfish state of being. you are prioritizing your partner and your desires over everything and everyone else in your life.

one of the greatest love stories of all time, romeo and juliet, is a tale of two selfish lovers who seek to be together despite the immense hatred between their families. selfless and dutiful children would never love an enemy. and yet, despite romeo and juliet’s love story ending in tragedy, no one would ever argue that these two lovers were in the wrong for simply trying to be together even though their love caused their families great grief. why? because the feud between the Montagues and the Capulets was stupid. and the story ends with the characters agreeing that this feud went on for long enough and acknowledging the fact that this petty feud between the families was the cause of their misery and the tragedy that befell them.

though the circumstances of all three love stories are different, it’s undeniable that these lovers were selfish for prioritizing their own desires over their duties to their houses.

to end this little spiel, i’d like to mention that the reason i first brought up a modern au was to remind people that the only reason rhaelya and rhaenyra’s relationship with harwin can be so decisively called selfish is because these characters live in westeros. and westeros is a fucked up society rooted in systematic oppression, violence, and abuse and other forms of exploitation in order to further the agenda of the powerful despite the harm it causes. any modern comforts and progressive ideas hinder the control the patriarchs have over their families and put a name to the bigotry expressed against these unconventional relationships. so yes, their love is selfish because being unconventional in such a backwards society is a recipe for disaster, especially since both of these relationships hinge on a woman deciding to take control of her sexual autonomy, which is a big no no in westeros since a woman’s body only belongs to her father and husband. so yes, these love stories are selfish because these characters are prioritizing themselves in a society that benefits from them losing their autonomy and harms them and their loved ones when they try to take back their autonomy.

to finish off, the reason i brought up the tragic love story of romeo and juliet is to remind people that even though rhaegar and lyanna’s love was selfish, other characters still need to be held accountable for their actions that helped to escalate this misunderstanding into a tragedy that consumed all of westeros.

[ofbreathandflame-archive]

Why do Rhysand stans always pretend to be Feyre stans? It's always a bit pathetic bc they're like "I'm Feyre first" and then you look on the blog and they've gotten at least three metas about "why I understand what Rhysand did😔" or they're like 'we know he was wrong but"

Why aren't y'all just honest about what you like? If you know you are going always prioritize Rhysand feelings and actions, even when they objectively clash with Feyre's why are yall so adamant on lying about it. These conversations would be so much more fruitful if people just admit they enjoy the bad boy more. This literally happened with Darkling and Alina and as soon as Alina was disentangled from Darklina y'all called her everything but a child of god😂

Y'all love for Feyre is conditional on her love for Rhys. Feyre is bbygirl as long as Feysand is the name of the game. Which is fine for personal preferences, but is a bit taxing when you feel obligated to care for a character you don't like outside the dynamic.

[blossoms-phan]

genuinely when did they have the time for all of this. they probably decided to bring the gaming channel back towards the end of summer-early fall right, then boom october. spooky week, gamingmas, wad recording, ywgttn rerelease, dnpbeats, dnpcrafts, merch, etc etc- a combo of their own work but also smaller projects with help, editors etc. once they realized this was a possibility and they have an audience that would want this and it was something they wanted to do- it can’t have been before february at the EARLIEST imo. they’ve worked so hard over the years and value work-life balance now which obviously they deserve and not to say they’re not ambitious and still have long creative careers in front of them, on top of making it clear they’re here to stick around, but still I would 100% support them if they never did any big projects again and just kinda hung out with us online and lived their lives in peace. but they said fuck all that we want to see y’all in real life and cause us psychic damage live on stage again and I could not be more grateful

[cto10121]

Rowling: Got lucky with two by-the-book faithful film adaptations with Columbus, and the rest built up on that. Had virtually no backlash until the last decade and after the films were finished

Collins: Not only was the film adaptation largely faithful to her books, but she actually wrote the screenplay for the first film. Had no backlash except the “Battle Royale rip off!!1!!!” BS

Meyer: Got “This is the skin of a killer, Bella�� and other non-canonical OOC bullshit, an indie director with no budget and then a slew of corporate directors, actors who openly hated the story and the characters they portrayed, and a severe pop culture backlash from pop culture feminism, neo Puritan scolds, and “vampires don’t sparkle” misogynistic edgelords.

Yeah. I would have been over it too.