#too much discourse posting

[ess-presso]

hey , arseholes , here’s some news for you - hating on a popular fic instead of simply saying “it just wasn’t for me” isn’t cool. doesn’t make you cool either , dm the alike dungarees ? you’re saying a fic was bad because he wore dungarees? whatever happened to clothes don’t have gender ? and men don’t need to prove their masculinity ? or is that something you only say in pride month and forget about every other month ???

[jackalopescruff]

That girl with the fat tummy and loud laugh will save you

[darishima]

made a chart of the straw hats' skin tones with the colors being screencapped directly from the episodes, to show how much they've lightened. this is more than just an "artstyle change" or "design evolution" or "just the timeskip" this is blatant racism/colorism. it's fucking ridiculous and i don't understand how toei is continuously getting away with it please reblog btw, i think this is something people should see

[skellagirl]

Gordon/Barney/Alyx is really really funny to me conceptually bc it's like, two hot geniuses in their 20s who look at the 40-something smartass who hangs around and go 'yeah that guy. we both want him carnally'

[buckleyreid]

I don’t wanna feed into the “bucktommy is purely sexual”, “bucktommy shippers are fetishizers” discourse so this will be the only thing I’ll say about that.

I think it’s incredibly interesting how there’s soooo many posts about bucktommy here on tumblr (and no doubt in other platforms too), there’s sweet wholesome posts, there’s analytical posts about their relationship, there’s headcanons, there’s fanarts and yes, there’s smutty fics too for example.

Yet, the people who are pointing fingers, calling others fetishizers, are the ones solely focused on the sexual content. Bucktommy fans aren’t the ones making their relationship all about sex, the call is coming from inside the house.

Unhinged buddies are the ones choosing to ignore the part of the scene where both characters open up about their rough family histories and, instead, are making it all about a very quick sex joke that was used to lighten the mood. And because they can’t stop at that, they then proceed to say two grown ass queer characters flirting with each other is gross, disturbing, and a reason one of them should get killed off. That’s the real disgusting thing.

This just in, gay people have sex. I know, shocking. They also talk about it, they make jokes about it. It’s almost as if it’s a normal thing- oh wait, it is. In bucktommy’s case, it’s far from being the only facet of their relationship, but it’s still there and it’s not deviant, it’s not disgusting and if it makes you so uncomfortable to think about then maybe that’s something to reflect on.

Touching grass is not enough, y’all need to roll on it like a dog excited to go on a walk. And maybe retake some reading comprehension classes too. Dead serious, grow up.

[bookwyrminspiration]

It's fun to bemoan the odd lines and such, and I was gonna make a joke, but I do think it is genuinely sad how much of Unraveled's promo is leaning so heavily into shipping.

Not because I hate sokeefe or Keefe, but because this is such a massively popular story that has so much to offer outside of a single ship, and it's such a disservice to the years of work Shannon has put in to crafting these characters' stories and world. And to the countless fans who adore the story and characters outside of this single ship.

Both Sophie and Keefe are more than sokeefe, and the way this story about injustice, and rebellion, and loss of self, and grief is being overshadowed by a relationship? See the kiss scene! sokeefe art! foster-related quote! These things themselves aren't bad, but there's no balance; they should be part of more, not the whole thing. KOTLC deserves to retain its complexity in marketing! The readers, including young, deserve to have the story not watered down for them when it's being pushed!

There's also something about how publishers told Shannon KOTLC wouldn't sell because Sophie's a girl, and she pushed through that, only for Sophie to become almost an accessory to Keefe's story here? Making appearances that focus on what Keefe thinks of her instead of Sophie herself. I don't have this fully articulated, but hopefully you see what I'm getting at

Shannon's said for years she hates love triangles, didn't mean to write one, and tries to stay firmly Team Sophie. And I believe her, which makes it worse seeing how despite Shannon's efforts, her story about a brave, stubborn, reckless, passionate girl trying to find herself and do what she can to right the wrongs she sees in the world is getting pared down to a love story.

Now we do have six more weeks to go, so we could get some variety in the future. it's just frustrating so far, and as fun as it is to make silly little jokes about it, I do think there is a genuine critique here of publishing and marketing and treatment of female led stories (yes, unraveled is about keefe, but Keeper is about Sophie), and I wanted to say something

[miraculouslumination]

You know sometimes it just hits you that so much of queer "discourse" is basically one group of queer people trying to cultivate a subcommunity for themselves and their identity while another group of queer people cry and scream about how that group, who is just trying to exist and have their own bubble, is the cause of all their own group's problems

[shuffleoflove]

"heartstopper is unrealistic they're all too nice to each other" have you ever heard of having friends

[maevefinnartist]

"we don't need to learn how to read historic documents or ancient manuscripts because they're all digitally scanned and you can find transcripts/translations online"

"we don't need to learn about extinct or endangered languages because we can just google what it means in english"

"we don't need to preserve anything for posterity because we seem to think we're the last modern society that will ever exist and there will never be scientists, archeologists, and historians after us wondering why there are so many gaps in human history because we all decided we don't actually need to learn or save anything as long as a computer knows it for us and we can just google it"

it's really concerning how many people think the internet will just. last forever.

[elflikesfrogs]

the daredevil netflix fandom is kept alive by 3 things: foggy stans, charlie cox simps, and that blog that posts about the 1/6 scale model apartment

[danishphoner]

one thing that really fascinates me about alex is his devotion to art – and more specifically, how he chooses to get some inspiration from scientific works of what he aims to implement in his art. every time one gets to examine some of his lyrics, or even how he explains these lyrics in an interview, they can be greeted by some bits of actual scientific information. an example is how he named his taquería on the moon with the term “information-action ratio”, coined by the critic neil postman, and referenced it in the song four out of five, something that might also indicate an interesting articulation with postman's concept. the line “cute new places keep on popping up”, for example, can express his well-known sardonic discontent regarding the flood of information being generated and transmitted over and over and, as much as it seems visually appealing and does give the idea of benefiting from advanced technologies, it doesn't really add anything substantial to the receiver's critical thinking – and worse, it distances the information receiver from the sender in a communication channel, according to postman.

what i'm saying with this interpretation is, it's known that alex is enamoured with the idea of gathering a bunch of references and condensing them into a mixture of metaphors in his writing, but it's so thrilling how, at times, we can find some bits of science inside of it – and it's even more exciting, just like playing a puzzle game, to find these references and analyse them by doing a similar research to what he did to create his works.

[wild-moss-art]

For disability pride month I’d like to give a shout out to fe3h for all the canonically disabled characters included. Dimitri’s schizophrenia and eye, Constance and Jeritza’s DID, Bernadetta’s agoraphobia and panic disorder, Marianne’s depression, Lysithea and Edelgard’s cptsd and chronic health issues, and a number of other subtextual inclusions. I know people love to poke holes in these things, but I think overall they are well done and I appreciate the game’s obvious attempts to portray them sensitively.

[muirmarie]

Me: I joke about writing the same McCoy centric story over and over again in different ways

Me: and like. I love doing it and imma keep doing it because it makes me happy.

Me: but also. I do sometimes wonder if it's like. A little Much.

Me: like maybe I should branch out or something

Me: [reads another fundamental and extremely insulting misread of McCoy's character by someone who is clearly making a Choice to cast McCoy as the villain, because they have to get him out of the way of spirk, because they're too???? idk immature??? to realize that even when you're in a relationship with one person, other ppl can and SHOULD still be important to you]

Me: lmao I hope I AM too much actually!!!! I hope it is 100% obnoxious how much I love that doctor!!!!! Time to write more versions of the same story of McCoy being forced to realize that he is loved and cared for!!!!!!

Me: I KNOW MY NICHE AND IMMA DIE IN THAT NICHE, THANKS

[anxiouspotatorants]

This whole «Lorelai is evil and so is Rory and Emily is the real MVP of the show» shtick is getting on my nerves.

Like don’t misunderstand me, I love Emily and Richard. They are interesting and complex characters with strengths and weaknesses and a whole lot of baggage (like almost everyone in Gilmore Girls, except maybe the Town Troubador). But they aren’t this perfect well meaning couple with an ungrateful daughter who refuses to accept help and grow up.

Lorelai is not perfect either by any stretch of the imagination. She’s presumptuous, stubborn, used to getting her way and struggles to see things from more than one angle, but she’s also kind, hard working, supportive and able to strike a balance between being open and setting boundaries. She’s a complicated, flawed person, like all good protagonists should be (as opposed to heroes). And she doesn’t fight with Emily or cut her parents out because she’s being immature, she’s doing it because they genuinely hurt her several times.

Imagine if things had gone exactly like Emily and Richard wanted things to go. A 16 year old Lorelai would be married against her will to a guy who would likely then spend the rest of his life under the thumb of his parents for the «mistake» of having Rory. Her social life, her work, her education, all of it would be heavily monitored by Emily and Richard, as they would insist she only engage with what they deem respectable work and social circles. Lorelai in the DAR, Lorelai running charity functions, Lorelai staying married to a Hayden. So much of what makes Lorelai herself would be gone: the inn, her friendships with Sookie and Michel, cooky hobbies and a band of semi-adopted misfits and Luke.

Certain people (not many but still some) seem to forget exactly what it is Emily and Richard ultimately criticize Lorelai for, because it’s not her childish remarks at Friday Night Dinner. They criticize her for her lack of university education. For her lack of a high status job even though she runs a successful inn that she co-owns herself. For her terrible pick of men - not because of how they might be as lovers but because they’re not high society and not the kind of wealthy guys who could let Lorelai retire to the life of an affluent housewife (like did we forget that one of the times Lorelai cut them out was because they refused to accept LUKE?). Hell, they usually don’t criticize Lorelai for reasonable issues with how she raised Rory, they criticize her for not controlling Rory’s love life more.

I do think Emily and Richard love Lorelai and Rory, and that at the end of the day they want them to be happy (otherwise none of these characters would fight so hard to stay in each other’s lives). But time and time again they let their love of status and fear of a bad reputation stand in the way of recognizing their daughter and granddaughter for what they love and for what make them happy. Dislike Lorelai all you want, Rory too, but don’t come here and tell me that Emily is the one in the right.

[ingravinoveritas]

Oh, boy. Well, I was on a plane when I saw this, but now I'm finally at my hotel and have time to answer.

So right off the bat, I'm having a little trouble discerning the "tone" here, of both the comment and Georgia's response. I honestly can't tell if what the commenter is saying is meant positively or negatively (it kind of comes across as a backhanded compliment, or at least one that was worded badly?). But because I can't tell how the comment was meant, it also makes it difficult to tell how Georgia took it. Did she respond out of genuine annoyance, or was she not annoyed but just saw an opportunity to give a sarcastic/funny response? I have no idea, but I'd love to know what everyone else thinks.

All that said...there is certainly a lot going on with Georgia's response. We already knew that Michael had a stealth/private account on Instagram, so does this mean he's created another one? I noticed as well that Georgia cropped out the avatar of the person who left this comment, but did leave in the avatar of another commenter whose comment she posted in a story after this one (which has since been deleted). So it seems strange that she cropped one, but not the other, for some reason.

Then there's the undertones (overtones? Today is the day for tone issues, apparently...) to Georgia's response. What struck me first is that she read this comment and associated it with Michael, suggesting (on some level) that Michael is jealous of her for being married to David. This could, of course, simply be playful jealousy--which would speak to what a lot of fans seem to be embracing, that idea of Michael, David, Georgia, and AL as one big, happy, Brady Bunch of polyamory--but I have a feeling that is not actually their dynamic in reality.

This brings to my mind comments I've read from @cloud-based-and-rainpilled and others about how poly arrangements can go so far south because they quickly become about ownership and possessiveness. As I've talked about previously on my blog, Michael does not seem to be a big fan of sharing (thinking of how he got jealous/possessive toward Chris Hemsworth when he and David were on Graham Norton in 2019). So if there is jealousy on Michael's part, I can't help wondering if it's because Georgia gets to be with David in the public way that Michael wishes he could be.

(Also I would really like to know what the hell the rationale was for Georgia using "Nessun Dorma" as the song in this Insta story. So many questions...)

Whatever the case may be, the implications are definitely implicating, in some way and on some level. I would love for my followers to weigh in to see if anyone else has made sense of this, though. Thanks for writing in! x

[lena-cant]

I started replaying fire emblem: path of radiance earlier this week after recently really only playing modern (awakening onward) FE for the past 5 years and it's really hitting home for me how much of modern fe's script is taken up by useless minutiae. camp conversations in por are the thing really hitting it for me. In more recent fe games, there's a lot of little bits of dialogue in the between-level hub but it rarely ever adds to our understanding of a character or interact with the story. It's just there because the characters are in the hub and therefore they need a sentence or two to say to the protag.

meanwhile path of radiance has these wonderful little conversations in the camp. they're not all like, peak fiction or anything but they almost always deliver on short nuggets of story that let you know how specific characters are reacting to what's going on in the story, or otherwise just something about them. I can count on my hands the amount of moments in three houses and engage where characters outside of the "main cast" of those games actually react to story events but they're doing it left and right in path of radiance.

this, along with the fact that most characters only have 3-5 supports means that the characters all feel sharper, more present, and like they're a part of the story. I'm not gonna pretend that every character in por is a masterful study or anything but even the weak characters in por feel less annoying than some of the strongest characters in three houses or engage because they're just inserted into the world more elegantly.

so much of the dialogue in the newer games just feels superfluous by comparison. xander doesn't have checks notes 12 romantic supports because the devs/writers felt that he as a character needed that much fleshing out. he has them because they needed him to have that many girls to kiss for the eugenics mechanics to work! part of the reason why characters in the newer games feel significantly more one note in comparison is that they're stretched thin. there's so much pointless shit they have to say, decided by quota before the writers even got their hands on the characters and it all builds up into a weaker end product

anyway this has been one elitist whinging about the new games that I like less