#we can criticize choices and I will always back that but nuance is needed here

[jjongslight]

.

[swordsandholly]

Double Date - Double Down

NSFW | MDNI

Simon ‘Ghost’ Riley x Fem!plus size!reader

Word count: 4.9k

Summary: When you get a call in the middle of the afternoon from your friend begging you to fill an empty spot on a double date your initial instinct is a hard no. After all, no one wants to go on a blind double date and be surprised by the fat friend. It doesn’t help that this Simon guy is stupid fucking hot and obviously doesn’t like you - if his lack of talking is anything to go by.

A/N: Just a fun little oneshot I used as a warmup between working on chapters of future multi chapter projects.

“I said *no*.” You snap, angrily folding the washcloth in your hands.

Your friend splutters from the other side of the phone, the desperation in her voice only growing now that she’s on her fourth ask. “*Pleeeaase*! Steph backed out last minute and no one else is free-“

“How do you know I’m free?”

“You just said you were!”

You huff. She’s got you there. When she first called, you admitted you didn’t have anything going on but that was *before* she told you the plan for the night. Before she mentioned that her very, very conventionally hot military boyfriend wanted to do a little double date with his friend and one of hers. Plus, you take a least a little offense to being second choice. Really, last choice, it seems.

“Cass, you can’t just set up a blind date and take your fat friend. That’s not-“

“You’re not fat, love. You’re beautiful.” Her words drip with turned honey. You make a gagging face to yourself in the mirror. “You just need more confidence!”

You sigh loudly, pinching the bridge of your nose. You could try, for the millionth time, to explain to her the nuanced ins and outs of dating as a fat woman. The rules and stats that could rival even the most complex rpg… or you could be petty. It takes less time to be petty. “If I go, you’re paying for my drinks.”

“Johnny’s friend will probably-“

“Yeah, and when he leaves you’re paying for my tab.”

“He won’t-“

“We got a deal?”

She clicks her tongue. “*Fiiiine*.”

At least you can get wasted for free either way. A small consolation. She texts you the time and location, barely leaving you with enough time to shower and turn yourself into something presentable. Not that you really care. It’s going to be shit either way, most likely. Staring yourself down in the mirror, you suppose you could at least try to look somewhat attractive. If you’re about to get rejected (or possibly shouted at, you’ll never forget *that* horrendous interaction) you might as well feel your best.

The pub is small as you push through the front door. Casual. A couple pool tables, some darts, a large bar and few booths with stools on the outer side. You scan the room, searching for Cass’s familiar face.

“Over here!” Cass waves with a wide arc at you, a grin plastered from ear to ear. At least she’s having fun.

You take a long breath, bracing yourself for whatever is about to happen. Cass introduces you to her boyfriend - who is somehow even hotter in person. You can see why she’s so smitten with him. Johnny looks you up and down as he shakes your hand. He doesn’t comment, or make a face, or really react in any particular way, but you can feel a shift. Something in his eyes…

Maybe it’s just your imagination. You’ve always been a little over sensitive.

“Si will be back in a sec. Stepped over tae get a drink.” He flashes a grin.

You hum, quietly folding your hand as Cass pushes a cocktail for you that she preemptively ordered. Criticize her as much as you like, she knows her mixes.

“There he is.” Johnny grins, turning slightly.

You follow his gaze, heart sinking as your eyes settle on the man approaching your table. He’s massive. Tall and wide. Total brick shithouse. His face is mostly covered by a black surgical mask. A few years ago you might have questioned it but at this point you couldn’t care less, especially when his dark eyes meet yours, small flecks of gold honey catching the low bar lights. Barely styled tufts of blonde hair stick up from his head. They look like they might curl if he let it grow a little longer.

All in all, wayyyy out of your league.

He settles into his seat with all the confidence of any military man - back ramrod straight. He extends a large hand. “Simon Riley.”

You murmur your name, somewhat enthralled by the half lidded, almost bored look in his eyes. Now that he’s closer you notice a large scar splitting his left eyebrow and light, newly forming crows feet in the corners of his eyes.

“S-so you’re military, too?” You stutter, eyes trained on his the massive hand holding his glass. It’s nicely vascular, his nails are well groomed but it also looks like he could snap you in half with it.

Not that that’s entirely a bad thing - whatever that may or may not say about you.

He nods. “I’m a Lieutenant.”

“Oh! Officer position. So you’re smart, then?” You try to be charming, to give him a sweet smile and keep your body language open.

“Enough.” He deadpans. It takes a few beats for you to realize he’s not going to say anything else.

“Uh…” You squirm awkwardly under his gaze. It’s intense - his dark eyes nearly black in the low light of the bar. “I do hair.”

Conversation is slow, to say the least. The longest answer he gives you is maybe five words. He only flips up the mask long enough to take a sip of his drink every so often. You start to talk less, opting toward a group conversation in which Johnny takes the lead, which he is obviously very good at. He regales you and Cass with a few stories of his and Simon’s adventures. Some funny, some brave, some worrying. He’s setting the man up to be a god, nearly, but Simon himself just shakes his head and insists Johnny is exaggerating.

You wonder what he sees in Simon. Alternatively, you wonder what *you’re* supposed to see in Simon. Besides his good looks, of course. He’s… bland. Obviously bored if his constant glances toward the exits and rhythmic, occasional tapping on the corner of the table are anything to go by.

“Want tae go dance, lovie?” You overhear Johnny as he leans in toward Cass.

She glances at you, then Simon, then back to you before nodding enthusiastically. “We’ll give you two some time *alone*.”

In any other situation, you’d probably beg her to stay in desperation for a conversation buffer. Here and now, though, you’re grateful. You can finally let this poor guy off the hook. You wait until they’re gone; fully out of earshot before turning to the man in front of you.

“I…uh… look…” You chew your lip, glancing between him and your folded hands on the table. “Sorry… I know I’m probably not what, uh, what you expected… I get it if you want to leave. It’s - you don’t have to stay, or whatever. Don’t have to be polite…”

He cocks an eyebrow, eyes boring through your skull. “Why would I want to leave?”

“I know what I look like. You don’t have to be nice.”

His raised brow turns into a slight frown. “I think you’re quite pretty.”

You scoff - blushing despite yourself. “Again, you don’t have to be nice.”

“Do I seem like the type to just be nice?”

You continue to gnaw at your lip. He’s got you there. Simon definietly doesn’t come off as the type to bow to polite society. “You’ve barely talked to me.”

He stares for a moment. It’s his turn to avert his eyes, swirling around the whiskey in his glass awkwardly. Almost bashfully. “It’s not you. I’m… not great in public… especially in crowds…”

Oh.

*Oh*.

You’ve completely misjudged him, haven’t you? Shit. He’s just a big awkward lug isn’t he?You sigh, rubbing your temple. “Oh God, *I’m* the asshole, aren’t I?”

He chuckles, “I wouldn’t go that far.”

“I’m sorry it’s just…” you scrub a hand over your face. “Most men don’t really want to be surprised with a fat girl on a blind date. Guess I assumed the worst.”

Simon hums. A low vibration that settles into your bones. He gets up, sliding into the booth side of the table beside you - his massive frame pushing into your space. He smells like spices. Cinnamon and pepper. A little hint of leather and tobacco underneath. It’s heady, and some primal part of your mind wishes you could roll around in it like a dog.

“Some men might like a waifish little thing, that’s their business, but personally…” He leans in, a large hand resting on your wide thigh. “Yeah. I like somethin’ I can get a proper handful of.”

“*Oh*.” You squeak, back stiff. Was that what you saw in Johnny’s face before? Approval?

“‘Ere’s a thought - we go back to mine. S’quiet. Can talk more freely. See where the night goes, hm?”

You smile hesitantly, finally looking up to meet his gaze. It’s honest. Kind. Dark pools of sincerity. It’s against your better judgement. Impractical. Out of character. Even so, you allow yourself to surrender with a warmth in your cheeks and a small nod.

“I’ll get an Uber.” He pulls out his phone, tapping away. “Five minutes out.”

“Want to wait outside?” You offer, nodding toward the front entrance. Simon just nods, following you out close behind. Neither of you say much of anything while you wait, but you watch him out of the corner of your eye. He taps on his leg a few times in much the same way as he did on the table.

He dutifully opens the car door for you, letting you slide in before climbing in beside you, long legs slightly cramped in the small sedan.

“You don’t live on base?” You ask as the Uber drives away from the infamous military housing. You’d been there once or twice - a while ago when you were younger and messier.

“S’too loud.” He shrugs. “Too crowded.”

“Well, at least you’re consistent.” You smile.

Simon hums, resting his hand on your thigh once again. It’s casual, not too high up or too much pressure. Not presumptuous.

“How’d Johnny get you out there in the first place? If you’re so *averse*.” You tilt your head.

He shrugs, “Was supposed to be another Sergeant we work with but I guess he cancelled. No one else was free.”

“Ah, so we’re both last choices, then.”

“Yeah?”

“Made Cass promise me free drinks if I came.”

“Smart girl.” He chuckles, holding out a hand to help you up out of the car upon your arrival. His hand is warm when you take it, and a small part of you feels disappointed when he lets go.

The building is small. Old. All red brick with a thirty year old intercom and an elevator that you’re pretty sure hasn’t been inspected since the place was built. About halfway down the hall, you start to second guess yourself. You don’t know a thing about this guy - you don’t know what’s going to happen as soon as you get on the other side of his door. His weird, bright red door. Wait - why is this whole floor covered in red doors?

“Alright?” He grunts, back turned to you as he wrestles with the lock.

“Uh - why is your floor color themed?”

Simon laughs, wide shoulders shaking with the movement. It’s a low sound, something that vibrates in his chest. Makes you want to press your ear to it, see how it feels. If it will reverberate into your bones as well. “The old lady that owns the building is a bit… unique. Likes to talk about colors and karma and destiny stuff.”

“Ah.” You nod, as if that makes any sense at all. “So you’re red?”

“Apparently.”

His apartment is actually quite homey, as you step into it. From a stiff military man like him you expected something akin to an ikea floor model. Instead it’s furnished with a well worn, green couch. A large TV with an extremely up-to date surround sound system and an entertainment center filled to the brim with CDs sits against the wall. A few movie posters fill the walls. All horror classics - you count three of the scream movies. The first two final destination. There are condensation rings on the coffee table.

Behind you, you hear the door lock and unlock three times, but you don’t pay it much mind.

“Want a drink?” Simon asks, already popping open a decanter full of something gold on a small drink cart beside the kitchen island.

“Sure.” The agreement is automatic - blurted out before you can second guess taking a drink from a total stranger.

You watch a little too closely as he takes off his light jacket, exposing his strong arms and a half sleeve tattoo. It’s a bit tacky, all skulls and military symbols. The black ink has been sun worn over time. The motif of a young getting his first tattoo after enlisting. He settles down on the couch with the decanter and two glasses, patting the spot beside him. You plop down. It’s pretty comfortable, honestly.

His fingers loop into the mask’s straps. You find yourself watching with wide eyes and bated breath as he removes it. His nose is crooked - broken more than a couple times, you think. There’s a scar running from his nose to upper lip that could only come from a cleft palette. It’s charming, in a way. When he turns toward you, you notice a patch on the side of his face that looks like a rather large burn all the way down to his sharp jaw. The roughness of him works, somehow. The scars and tattoos and choppy hair all coming together to create the visage of a life hard lived.

“You’re really pretty…” the words slip from your tongue before you can stop them.

Simon splutters out a laugh, the slightest hint of color appearing across his cheeks. “Didn’t take you for a flatterer.”

“I’m not.” You huff before nodding toward the posters. “Horror fan?”

He hums, passing you a glass. “Are you a fan? Of horror, I mean.”

“Found footage!” You grin a little too excited. “It’s the best genre.”

“Terrible taste.” He scoffs.

“Wrong! Found footage can be anything you want it to be - slasher, thriller, mystery, mocumentary. Anything.”

“Which makes them messy.” He argues. “Anyone can make one.”

“Yeah! Theres so many hidden gems out there.”

“Whatever you say.”

“Oh, I’ll put you on them. We just need to get you a good one.”

“Askin’ me on a second date already, love?”

“Oh, fuck off.” You shove at his shoulder. He was right, it is so much easier to talk freely out of the bar. Away from everyone and everything. His posture is far more relaxed, laid back into the couch with his hips canted forward rather than stiff as a board.

“We could watch one now?” He offers. If you were more sober, you might have heard the twinge of pleading in his voice. As it stands you’ve already drained the glass he gave you and are perfectly buzzed enough to be ignorant to the subtler parts of communication.

How convenient.

“Okay.” You whisper.

After a bit of debating back and forth you settle on Hell House. After all, it’s been your tried and true method for getting anyone and everyone into the genre. You don’t notice it, at first, but you slowly begin to scoot closer to him as you fold your knees up on the couch. Eventually, tucking yourself under his arm sling across the back cushions. Between him and the drinks - which you’re pretty sure is a rather fancy bourbon - you feel what could only be described as snuggly. Limbs loose and pliant, smile easy and words flowing as you cheer and jeer at the characters together.

At some point, Simon’s dark eyes meet between yours. You lean in, so does he. Inch by inch until your lips meet. It’s tentative, at first. Testing the waters. His lips are soft and move expertly against yours. You part for him has his tongue darts across your lower lip.

It’s easier than it usually is for you. Easy to let him pull you over his lap. To rest your hands on his broad shoulders as you take each other in. Normally, you’re not a person for one night stands. A commitment kind of gal. You can’t exactly say no, though, when you have a beautiful man’s hands traveling over your body like it’s the only thing in the world worth paying attention to right now.

He breaks the kiss just long enough to grunt, “Bedroom?”

“*Yes*.” You gasp between kisses.

Suddenly those large hands grasp under your ass as you’re hauled up. You grapple to hold onto the back of his neck, keeping your weight forward.

“Simon!”

“Yes, love?” He asks as if he didn’t just life you like a sack of potatoes.

“A-aren't I heavy?” You question as he makes his way through the apartment, peppering kisses over your neck and jaw.

“No.” He replies bluntly. Like what you asked was stupid.

You’re placed on a bed with all the gentleness of a rare china plate- one hand cradling your upper back and the other tucked under your thighs. There isn’t any time to take in the room before Simon is kissing you again but you do count approximately five pillows and zero navy sheets.

That shouldn’t be as hot as it is.

Simon leans in close, nose ever so slightly bumping yours. “Before we keep going, I want to establish a rule. Red light means stop. At any time, for any reason.”

You can’t help but smile. “Okay.”

“Say it back, doll.”

“Red light means stop.” You reach up and cup his face. So handsome. So warm.

“Good girl.” He murmurs. “Let’s get these off, hm?” Simon pulls your clothes off deftly - dragging those rough palms over your skin as he moves and kneading at the plushness of your hips appreciatively.

You reach up to tug at his shirt. “S’not fair if I’m the only one naked.”

Simon chuckles and hastily sits back to yank the shirt over his head, giving a lovely show in the process. You think this what people mean when they talk about an Adonis. There’s a comfortable soft layer of his strong abdomen. Something you want to sink your teeth into. Your fingers trace each dip and curve of his muscles, the lovely shape of his pectorals, the raised scars littering his body. Floral shapes from bullets along with slashes and smaller jabs. A particularly nasty one runs down his side, coving his ribs. A burn, you think.

“You’re beautiful.” You murmur. Definitely out of your fucking league. You move to sit up, reaching for his waistband.

His hand pushes your shoulder back on the bed. “Let me take care of you tonight, bird.”

Your face warms. Simon kisses your cheek, continuing down to your chest and taking one of your nipples in his mouth. Gently sucking and nipping at it while flicking the other with his hand. A shameful whimper escapes your throat.

Simon leans up to murmur in your ear, “What do you want, sweet girl?”

“Want you to fuck me…” You murmur, embarrassment making you want to close your legs. His solid hips block you.

“Oh, I will, but first I want those beautiful thighs wrapped around my head.” Simon continues to place kisses down your body, over your stomach, stopping right at your panty line and tracing along it with rough fingers. His arms circle your thighs and in one swift motion your hips teeter on the edge of the bed, Simon kneeling between them. His fingers hook in the waistband of your underwear.

“W-wait…” You sit up on your elbows.

He freezes, looking up at you.

“I, uh, I haven’t exactly *landscaped* in a while… wasn’t really planning-“

Simon huffs out a laugh. “I’m a grown man, love. You think a little bush is gonna scare me off?”

All thoughts related to anything within the proximity of embarrassment come to an instant halt as Simon’s lips wrap around your clit- sucking and nipping and lapping like a man starved. Like he’d die without it. A low groan rumbles through his throat.

“F-fuck!” You gasp, whimpers and moans interrupting any chance you may have at putting words together.

“Taste so fucking good, princess.” He mumbles against you. A shaky moan rattles through you as he pushes a thick finger in, working it gently. His other than grips your hip tightly, pinning you in place. The pet-name sends a shiver down your spine - leaving you rolling your hips and clenching on the finger inside you.

“Fuck, Si…” You gasp, tangling your fingers in his hair.

“I can tell your close, baby.” Simon groans. “Cum for me. Come on, be a good girl and cum all over my fucking tongue.”

The bastard knows the power he has in that voice. He *has* to. That baritone gravel sinks in your veins and all you can do is whimper. Panting pathetically the closer you get. His fingers curl up and your back arches harshly as your climax washes over you. Your legs tremble as he works you through it; stopping just shy of pushing you too far.

“Hey!” You gasp indignantly as a jolt shoots up your spine as he settles a final, harsh suck on your clit.

Simon taps your hip, climbing back over you as you scoot up on the bed. He carelessly kicks off his pants as he goes, toeing them off before settling between your legs. Those dark eyes rake over you leisurely - taking in every inch. Every curve and dip and flaw categorically. He sucks in a breath and sighs. “Bloody ‘ell, look at you… so fuckin’ pretty.”

Your face heats and you look away. “Who’s the flatterer now?”

“Not me. Just bein’ honest.” He places a quick kiss to your soft jawline before reaching over to dig through his nightstand drawer. You don’t miss the gold foil of the condom wrapper.

You can’t stop yourself from licking your lips as he pulls off his boxer briefs. Simon is uncut, already ruddy and leaking and just begging for your mouth. Maybe next time, though. He’s already slipped on the condom, carefully hooking one of your legs over his shoulder and the other around his hip. The man has a laser-focus to him, you’ll give him that.

“Still want t’ keep goin’?” He mumbles, eyes locked on his cock as is drags between your folds.

“*Please*.” You whine pathetically. Simon’s chuckle turns into a gasp as he presses in. It’s achingly slow and you roll your hips in demand for more.

Simon lets out a low groan as his hips meet yours. The stretch is perfect - just enough to feel completely full without pushing you too far. As though your bodies were made to slot together just so. Your head falls back, chest heaving as you beg him to move, to fuck you, just *please* for the love of god-

“Needy little thing.” He gives you a sloppy smile before setting a brutal pace. You find yourself clawing at his back, clinging to him as your back arches and the most obscene sounds are systematically torn from your throat. The angle he has your hips placed causes his cock to bully that sensitive spot inside you - dragging over it with every thrust.

Simon leans toward, bracing himself on his forearms and pinning you under him as he fucks into you. “So fuckin’ good f’me. Knew you would be. So soft and sweet and goddamn *pretty*.”

“*Fuck, Simon*.” You gasp, nose bumping against his as your lips intertwine. Breaths and moans intermingle as you both chase that edge. There’s nothing else, in this moment, just you and Simon and the sounds only he has ever managed to pull from you.

Your orgasm hits you like a train. Out of nowhere and all at once, tensing every muscle into a trembling mess as you clamp down around his cock. Simon sinks his teeth into your neck as his own climax takes him, cradling you close and moaning out your name so muddled you almost miss it.

For a few moments, you stay frozen in place trying to catch your breath as you come down. Your limbs feel like jelly when you finally try to move, body limp and pliable. It almost feels like a loss as he pushes off of you, leaving you open and vulnerable to the cool night air while he ties off the condom.

“Be right back.” He murmurs, slowly climbing off you and heading for an attached bathroom off to the left.

You let your eyes slipped closed only to jump and shoot back open as a dap rag drags between your thighs. A little yelp escapes you as the rough material drags across your oversensitive clit. Simon chuckles at you, tossing the rag back somewhere in the bathroom before crawling into the bed beside you. It’s so easy to curl into his chest and let those strong arms encircle you.

“Have fun, love?” Simon murmurs into your hair.

You just hum happily, smiling against his hard chest.

“Good.”

It’s just as easy as the rest of it to fall asleep like that. To seek out the warmth of his body in your satiated haze and press into him, allowing the night and rhythmic beating of his heart to overtake you. You feel four small taps between your shoulder blades just before tipping over the edge into comfortable nothing.

You wake slowly to an empty bed. The light from the window above you streams in - bathing the room in a light golden tone. It’s cozy. The blankets seem to pull you in, keeping you snugly in place. Distantly, you hear the sound of pots and pans clinking.

Shockingly, you’re not hungover. Well, not much at least. There’s a slight twinge in your head and a not unpleasant soreness in your hips. You dig around, finding your clothes strewn across the room haphazardly. Your underwear are nowhere to be found and you eventually give up with a shrug. They weren’t one of your best pairs anyway.

When you come out of the bedroom, you pause. Simon stands in the kitchen, working on something over the stove wearing only a pair of sweatpants. They hang loosely around his hips, showing off the rises and dips of his strong muscles and well defined waist. This scene somehow feels too intimate despite your activities the night before.

“Perfect timing.” Simon turns, placing a plate down on the kitchen island. The omelette before you looks immaculate, all the way down to a light garnish on top.

Your eyes turn to saucers. “You…you made me breakfast?”

“Course.” He nods sharply as if it’s the most obvious thing in the world. As if *not* doing so would be some sort of affront. Either you’re still asleep and this is all a dream or you stumbled upon the perfect man through pure happenstance.

He turns the stove off and on and off twice before standing at the counter across from you while you sit on one of the stools at the island. It’s a comfortable silence as you both eat. Simon keeps glancing up at you as if waiting for your disapproval. Boyish, somehow, despite the size and breadth of him.

It’s perfect. The eggs practically melt in your mouth and the goat cheese and vegetables taste fresh. You can’t help but him happily as you eat.

By the time you’re done, you think you might be a little in love.

Maybe you should text Cass and thank her or something. Maybe a gift basket. “Oh. My phone’s dead.”

“Didn’t charge it before y’left last night?” Simon cocks an eyebrow, chewing on his last bite.

You snort. “It was last minute, remember?”

“What if I’d been some sort of psycho? What was your plan?” He grins as he takes your empty plate. If you were a more impulsive woman you may have gone so far as to lick the damn thing.

“Are you a psycho?”

“Not generally, no.”

“Well then, nothing to worry about.” You grin, watching a little too happily as he rinses down the dishes and loads the dishwasher.

Simon just scoffs at you.

You glance at the time above the stove, disappointment settling deep in your chest. “Shit. I should get going.”

“I’ll get you a cab.” Simon offers automatically, reaching for his phone.

You shift side to side, twiddling your thumbs. “Y’know… we never finished the movie…”

Simon cocks and eyebrow. From the pleased smirk on his face you can tell he knows what you’re implying. He still patiently waits for you to say it out loud.

“Would, uh, would you want to exchange numbers? Maybe… meet up… again…?” Your voice is more timid than you’d like. This fear of rejection is new. Being rejected is nothing new for you, so why does it suddenly feel so high stakes with this one guy you barely know?

You don’t miss the way his eyes light up ever so slightly at the question. “I’d love to.”

[sojourner-between-worlds]

Not so long ago, another Christian on here shared an article about the "problems" with the Chosen. Now, I fully believe and support thinking critically about the media we consume, especially for something depicting the life of Christ. That being said, I'd like to offer some thoughts of my own about some of the most commonly cited "problems" with the series. (I ended up referencing the above article in most points, but almost all of them I have see elsewhere as well. That article was just an easy frame of reference.) I'm not here to convince anyone to watch it; I'd just like to offer an alternate perspective for anyone who is willing to listen and think critically.

As a disclaimer: no, this show is not flawless. It's a flawed show made by flawed people doing their best. There are times I take issue with it myself. There are valid criticisms. The ones below are, quite simply, ones that I believe are not.

Buckle up; this is going to be a long one.

1.Mormon Influence I can't believe I still have to explain this one, but I still see it listed as a reason not to watch, so here we go: VidAngel/ Angel Studios Mormon ties had no more bearing on the series content for being the streaming distributor than CBS currently does for being allowed to broadcast it. When a company solely has distribution rights, that does NOT mean they are making content decisions. The only time a distributor would have say on content is if they are partnered, which usually means they are paying for production in some way. Angel Studios never gave a penny towards production (this is the largest crowd-funded series to date, remember? They have no studio backing). They never had any influence. And, oh yeah, as of May 2024, they were deemed to be in breach of contract and now the Chosen no longer has any ties to the company. No influence. Got it? Good. Then we can move on.

2."What does your heart tell you?" (This one could be included in point 4, but I've seen it so often it gets its own, haha.) Okay, this one? This one I agree was not a good writing choice. However. I think this one needs a little more thought rather than taking it at knee-jerk. Yes, the heart is deceitfully wicked and cannot be trusted. But there's some nuance here that I think gets left behind when well-meaning people call out the series for this line. The heart, as referred to in Proverbs, is the will of man. The heart, in pop culture, is often synonymous with emotions. Within the context of the scene, its very clear that the second meaning is the one intended. Now, I will say "feelings are fickle" until the day I die (because they are) because they can't always be trusted to reflect the truth. Again, however. Feelings do exist to tell us things. That is literally their purpose. Not always accurately reflecting the truth of something doesn't change their purpose. And that is what the writers were going for in this scene: the emotional weight of the truth Nicodemus has found. Could they have probably found a less controversial way to convey this? Yeah, maybe. But I can say that this wasn't intended to be the Disney "follow your heart" mumbo-jumbo it constantly gets written off as.

3.A Hearsay Gospel This point was taken directly from the referenced article. I'm choosing to address it not because it's a popular "problem" but because it's actually one I'd never seen before and I think it shows a gross misunderstanding of the inspiration of the Gospels and Scripture as a whole. This point posited that it's unbiblical to show Matthew and John taking notes because it undermines the Spirit-led inspiration of their writings. Except that it doesn't. The Greek word used when talking about this is more literally translated "God-breathed." Which is not the same as "God-dictated." If it were the latter (and what the writer of said article implied), then there would only be one Gospel account. That would be all we need because everything would be in it. Or, if there were still four Gospels (given that they were written with different intended audiences), they would all sound the same and have the exact same details about shared recorded events. But they don't. Because God didn't tell them, verbatim, what to write down. This is why there is variety yet harmony. This is why each writer has a distinct voice in the way they wrote. Because God didn't dictate; He led. There is a difference.

There is also the matter of the Gospel of Mark. Many scholars believe that Mark may have used Matthew's Gospel as a reference when he wrote his own because it shares so much in terms of content (93% of Mark can be found in the others). Does that make it less inspired? The obvious answer is "no" (or it wouldn't still be in our modern Bibles).

The episode most criticized for this point was s2 ep3, where a woman runs past Matthew and he desperately calls after her, "Healed you of what?" Therefore making it something he didn't personally witness that he wrote down. But here's the problem with this: that entire episode is based on one single verse from the book of Matthew: 4:24. Which, if you look it up, says only that Jesus healed many people. As any writer can tell you, not every note makes it into the final draft. Provided something like that did historically happen and provided Matthew did write it down, that doesn't mean everything he took notes on would have been in the completed manuscript later. Therefore: no hearsay.

Bottom line: what made it into their Gospels is still being presented as things they personally witnessed, and taking notes doesn't detract from being led to write or from being led what to include.

4.Unscriptural Script There are several points under this one, so we'll take them one at a time. --"House" vs "Business". This one is, once again, directly from the aforementioned article, but I wanted to address it briefly anyway. This is in reference to Jesus, at age 12, staying and teaching in the temple when his family had already started home. The author claims that "the Bible says, 'Be about my Father's business'" and claims that saying "in the house of my father" (as the show does) is Catholic-inspired and unbiblical. I don't know about the Catholic-inspired part, but I can say that it depends what translation of the Bible you're looking at. KJV uses the business wording. ESV and HCSB both use the house wording. (And if you want to mince accuracy, ESV and HCSB are both more literal than KJV/NKJV.) Unless you take only one translation as being the True Translation, then you can't say the line they went with is unbiblical.

-- Apparently certain things demean Christ, such as him practicing his Sermon on the Mount as opposed to it "being inspired" (see point 3 for the rebuttal of the second part). Except it doesn't. Because Jesus was also very human. Which people tend to forget when talking about this point specifically. It's wrong to have him practice what to say specifically. It's wrong to show him with a sense of humor. It's wrong to [fill in the blank; there are many of these]. Most of them amount to "it's a sin to be human." There are a lot of things that are a direct result of the Original Sin that are not, of themselves, sinful. It's not sinful to say something in a way people don't understand (so he practices to make sure people will understand what he means). It's not sinful to be nostalgic (its an acknowledgement of things that were good in the past). It's not sinful to show Mother Mary supporting Him (we all need earthly support in the form of other people; this is literally one of the purposes of the church!). Every single thing I've ever heard anyone say is "demeaning" is actually just portraying Him as every bit the human He became.

-- The first "arrest". Quintus wanted to talk to Him. He wasn't charged with anything. He wasn't imprisoned. Quintus gave Him a warning and let Him go. This does not contradict Jesus declaring it was not yet His time because it wasn't. He wasn't arrested. I don't know how many more ways I can say this.

-- "Nathanael couldn't have been a drunk because Jesus said there was no guile in him." Except the definition of "without guile" is not "sinless". The definition of guile is "deceit, cunning, hypocrisy or dishonesty in thought or deed" and many modern translations use the word "deceit" in that verse instead. Jesus is saying that he is honest and not a hypocrite. There's nothing about drinking in there at all. I'm not trying to call out this author specifically, but when I say that it's important to understand what words mean, this is exactly what I'm talking about.

-- John the Baptist. One of the points I've seen repeatedly is that it's sacrilegious for Peter to call him "Creepy John". I have to ask if these people understand that Peter called him that in anger and before he met Jesus. After that, it's a running joke along the lines of "remember when you didn't believe me" from Andrew. This is peak sibling behavior. That's all I can say about that.

-- "Matthew couldn't have been autistic because it's not in the Bible/ it didn't exist back them/ etc." I haven't seen this one in a long while, and I made a whole post about this way-back-when, but it bares repeating. The word "autistic" doesn't appear in the Bible in part because the word wasn't even coined until the 1900s. I don't know what else to tell you on that front. Since I've already made a post about this, all I'm going to say here is that it's important representation that is made all the clearly by the overwhelmingly positive response it received from autistic fans. Jesus called all sorts, the outcasts of society, the lowest of the low. And, yes, He calls autistics, too. If there's a problem here, that's all on you, buddy.

5. The Music This particular writer pointed out this lyric specifically: "Got no trouble with the mess you've been" and quite frankly I'm having hard time understand the problem with it because he doesn't come out and say it. It is, in fact, a completely true statement. God is not put off by our messes. We don't have to fix ourselves before coming to Him. Its also worth pointing out the past tense here: been. As in, He calls you out of your mess. You don't stay there. So I have no idea what the supposed problem here is; I only know that it's not one.

In general, I don't have a problem with people not liking certain styles of music. I do take issue, however, when anyone tries to assign morality to a style. Music is amoral. It can be used in immoral ways, just like anything else can be, but music itself does not have a morality. It doesn't have "mystic undertones"; it is in a style that you yourself associate with mysticism. If you don't care for the style, that's fine, but don't assign it a morality it doesn't have.

.

.

Know of something I missed? I certainly didn't cover every controversy so let me know and I'll let you know what I think of it!

[moltensmusings]

I watched a video of someone talking about it a few months ago, so let me add more Epic thoughts while I'm here.

I don't think the simplicity of Epic's lyrics is a bad thing. One thing with Greek stories is they're always very simple in their ideas and morals in ways that anyone will be able to understand. Part of why stories like Eurydice and Orpheus, the Odyssey, and Icarus stick with us is because there's tragedy in ways that the audience doesn't necessarily have to dig through to understand.

Now I want to say: there is nothing wrong with complexity in story telling. We need complexity for people to be able to analyze and deconstruct ideas. But when we're talking Greek myth retellings there isn't anything wrong with using simplicity. Even more than that, I'd argue there's still a fair bit of complexity and layers to the characters themselves. It's enough to push the story and make it enjoyable.

The crew slowly losing faith in Odysseus as he makes questionable decisions and eventually gives into his own selfish desires at the expense of all of them. Odysseus wanting so desperately to reach his home and losing his humanity along the way because there is no way he can make the journey without sacrifice. Various antagonists being given nuance to make them more than simple obstacles Odysseus overcomes and instead having it be that their presence deeply changes him each time.

Another complaint the person had was about the underworld saga not giving us more time with Odysseus' mom when, the whole point of her and Polites appearing was to highlight what Odysseus could never get back. In the underworld no one directly interacts with Odysseus out of the souls of the people he lost. They're in a stasis based on their final thoughts/intentions. A deep conversation with Odysseus' mom would've not only slowed the story in a jarring way, but also negated the point of her appearing.

Everything in the saga just ramps up Odysseus' desperation to return home to his kingdom.

I think you can definitely be critical of the writing in Epic, but should also consider whether the writing choices made benefit the narrative being laid out or not. Sometimes what is more satisfying for the audience would simply weaken the story.

[the-seas-song]

Tumblr is being extremely weird right now and won't let me answer @transexualpirate's ask about why I hate Tony/Pepper. This post is my answer to him:

Hi! Sorry for the late reply, my life got crazy.

The short answer: Pepper emotionally abuses (and slut-shames) Tony from IM2 onward.

The long answer: Pepper's behavior is extremely subtle, and a lot of people miss it. Unfortunately, it's been so normalized (at least here in the US) that a lot of other people will deny – and even defend! it. However, I grew up with family members like her and I have a background in psych.

I have to start this off with a disclaimer: I CAN'T be objective/un-triggered when talking about Pepper Potts or Peggy Carter (we don't shoot at someone just because we have a crush on them and they kissed (got assaulted by) someone else!)

Anyway, back to Pepper. …. I thought I could write out a full analysis without getting too triggered, but I can't. So I've included links to some great articles that cover the nuances of emotional abuse:

https://nycchildtherapy.info/emotional-abuse/ (Pepper checks almost every box on this list)

(scroll down to the 4 horseman) https://www.marriage-family-counseling.com/good-marriage.html

Personally I feel like the term 'gaslighting' gets overused, but it's definitely applicable here:

How do you know that you're being gaslighted? A victim experiences increased self-doubt as the gaslighter insists that what he or she remembers, thinks, and feels is wrong. The manipulative individual will introduce lies in more sensitive arenas, aiming to disrupt and distort foundational aspects of the victim’s being, wearing them down, establishing confusion, and forcing them to rely on the gaslighter’s version of reality.

Passive-aggressiveness is just as insidious as gaslighting:

Passive aggressive people take genuine pleasure in frustrating others. They are masters at getting others to act out their angry feelings--to explode and appear crazy--while the passive aggressive person sits back and watches the emotional outburst with satisfaction, total control, and always with their own poise intact.

Here's the transcript (and my commentary in [brackets]) from IM3 (a transcript can only do so much, because a lot of this is tone of voice as well as word choice):

[later Pepper returns to Tony's home, as she gets out of the car she sees a large stuffed rabbit outside the house that Tony has bought for her as a gift, she walks inside]

Pepper Potts: I'm sorry I'm late. I was... What the...? What is that?!

[she notices Tony sat in his Iron Man suit on the couch]

Pepper Potts: You're wearing this in the house now? What is that, like Mark 15? [criticism and sarcasm]

[Tony looks at the small number marked 42 on the suit]

Tony Stark: Uh...yeah. Something like that. You know everybody needs a hobby.

Pepper Potts: Oh, and you have to wear your hobby in the living room? [passive-aggressiveness]

[Tony rises and walks toward her]

Tony Stark: Just breakin' it in. You know, it's always a little pinchy in the gooey bag at first, so.

[Tony shakes his ass and Pepper laughs]

Tony Stark: Oh hey, did you see your Christmas present?

Pepper Potts: Yes, I did. I...I don't know how I could have missed that Christmas present. Is it gonna fit through the door? [more sarcasm and passive-aggressiveness]

Tony Stark: Well actually, uh...it's a good question. I got a team of guys comin' tomorrow, they're gonna blow out that wall.

Pepper Potts: Okay.

Tony Stark: So, uh...tense? Good day?

[Tony walks up behind her and starts massaging her shoulders]

Tony Stark: Ooh shoulders, a little knotty. Naughty girl. I don't wanna harp on this, but did you like the custom rabbit?

Pepper Potts: Did I like it? Tony Stark: Nailed it, right? Pepper Potts: Wow. I appreciate the thought very much. [even more sarcasm and passive-aggressiveness; withholding the validation Tony's seeking]

[Pepper turns to face Tony, she rises from her seat and stands close to him]

Pepper Potts: So why don't you lift up that face mask and give me a kiss? [not only takes control of/manipulates the situation but makes it physical/sexual]

[Tony knocks the metal helmet on his head]

Tony Stark: Huh. Yup, dammit. No can do. You wanna just kiss it on the...

Pepper Potts: Uh-huh.

Tony Stark: The facial slit?

Pepper Potts: Well, why don't I run down to the garage and see if I can't find a crowbar to shimmy that thing open?

Tony Stark: Crowbar. Yeah.

[Pepper starts walking towards Tony's lab]

Tony Stark: Oh, except there's been a...uh...a radiation leak.

Pepper Potts: I'll take my chances.

Tony Stark: That's risky.

[Pepper walks down the stairs to Tony's lab]

Tony Stark: At least let me get you like a Hazmat suit or a Geiger counter or something like that.

[Pepper sees Tony is in fact not in his Iron Man suit, but in the lab exercising as he remotely controls the suit, which follows Pepper into the lab]

Tony Stark: Busted.

Pepper Potts: This is a new level of lame. [explicit criticism and contempt]

Tony Stark: Sorry.

[Pepper notices the food tray in the corner]

Pepper Potts: You ate without me? Already? On date night? [passive-aggressive criticism, even though she was the one late and didn't call ahead]

Tony Stark: [referring to Mark 42 suit] He was just...

Pepper Potts: You mean you?

Tony Stark: Well, yeah. I just mean we were just...just hosting you -

[Pepper scoffs] [passive-aggressive contempt]

Tony Stark: -while I finished up a little work.

Pepper Potts: Uh-huh.

Tony Stark: And yes, I had a quick bite. I didn't know if you were comin' home or if you were having drinks with Aldrich Killian.

[Mark 42 suit turns its face toward her]

Pepper Potts: What?

Tony Stark: What?

Pepper Potts: Aldrich Killian? What are you checking up on me? [defensive accusation]

Tony Stark: Happy was concerned. [THE TRUTH]

Pepper Potts: No, you're spying on me. [gaslighting]

Tony Stark: I wasn't...

Pepper Potts: I'm going to bed. [Pepper turns and starts walking off] [passive-aggressive power play]

Tony Stark: Hold on. Come on. Pep.

[as Pepper starts walking upstairs]

Tony Stark: Hey, I admit it! My fault. Sorry. [NO ITS NOT]

[Pepper stops and looks at him]

Tony Stark: I'm a piping hot mess. It's been going on for a while, I haven't said anything.

[Pepper walks back down]

Tony Stark: Nothing's been the same since New York.

Pepper Potts: Oh really? Well, I didn't notice that, at all. [sarcasm]

Tony Stark: You experience things and then they're over and you still can't explain 'em. Gods, aliens, other dimensions. I...I'm just a man in a can. The only reason I haven't cracked up is probably because you moved in. Which is great. I love you, I'm lucky. But, honey, I can't sleep. You go to bed, I come down here. I do what I know, I tinker. [he pauses for a moment and sits down]  [lots of healthy I statements!]

Tony Stark: But threat is imminent, and I have to protect the one thing that I can't live without. That's you. My suits, they're uh...

Pepper Potts: Machines. [gaslighting]

Tony Stark: They're part of me.

Pepper Potts: A distraction. [GASLIGHTING]

Tony Stark: Maybe.

[Pepper walks towards Tony and they hold each other. He rests his head against her chest and she removes his headband that controls the Iron Man suits]

Pepper Potts: I'm gonna take a shower. 

Tony Stark: Okay.

[Pepper turns to walk off, then stops and looks at him]

Pepper Potts: And you're gonna join me. [sexual control/manipulation instead of validation and comfort]

Tony Stark: Better.

[later that night, as Tony and Pepper are sleeping, Tony starts having nightmares about when he was in New York with The Avengers and had to get rid of the nuke in space, Pepper wakes and starts to shake Tony awake]

Pepper Potts: Tony! Tony! Tony! Tony...

[suddenly Pepper gets grabbed and shoved off Tony by Mark 42 suit, this wakes Tony who commands the suit]

Tony Stark: Power down!

[the suit shuts down and Tony hits it making its pieces fall apart, he looks over at Pepper who is in shock]

Tony Stark: I must have called it in my sleep. That's not supposed to happen. I'll recalibrate the sensors. Can we just...just let me...just let me catch my breath, okay?

[Pepper rises and starts to leave]

Tony Stark: Don't go, alright? Pepper?

Pepper Potts: I'm going to sleep downstairs. Tinker with that. [verbal attack and gaslighting]

[Pepper leaves the room]

Pepper has every right to be scared and upset here. She does not have the right to take it out on Tony – especially since he is obviously still in the middle of his ptsd episode. Even then, his immediate response is to take responsibility and explain the actions he's going to take to keep it from happening again. This is incredible! Most people aren't able to do this in a normal setting, much less during a ptsd episode.

And we know Tony's still going through it, because he then desperately begs her not to leave. And not only does she leave, she does it while blaming him and Iron Man. But Iron Man didn't create Tony's trauma. The wormhole did. The Iron Man suits are the only security blanket Tony currently has.

Lets contrast this with Steve. MCU!Steve (and Stony) are not nearly as abrasive or antagonistic as people make them out to be. In fact, the reason why Steve's “Oh God, Tony! Every time. Every time I think you're seeing things the right way...” and Tony's “And you’ve been a complete idiot!” hit so hard is because they don't normally talk this way. They don't insult or verbally attack each other (at least, not since the helicarrier)

AOU is a perfect example:

Bruce Banner: This is insane.

Steve Rogers: JARVIS was the first line of defense. He would've shut Ultron down, it makes sense.

Bruce Banner: No, Ultron could've assimilated Jarvis. This isn't strategy, this is...rage.

[Thor barges in and grabs hold of Stark by his throat, holding him up]

Clint Barton: Woah, woah, woah! It's going around.

Tony Stark: [to Thor] Come on. Use your words, buddy.

Thor: I have more than enough words to describe you, Stark.

Steve Rogers: Thor! The Legionnaire.

[Thor lets go of Stark]

Thor: Trail went cold about a hundred miles out but it's headed north, and it has the scepter. Now we have to retrieve it, again.

Natasha Romanoff: The genie's out of that bottle. Clear and present is Ultron.

Dr. Helen Cho: I don't understand. You built this program. Why is it trying to kill us?

[Stark starts laughing, Banner subtly shakes his head at him to get him to stop]

Thor: You think this is funny?

Tony Stark: No. It's probably not, right? Is this very terrible? Is it so... is it so... it is. It's so terrible.

Thor: This could've been avoided if you hadn't played with something you don't understand.

Tony Stark: No, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It is funny. It's a hoot that you don't get why we need this.

Bruce Banner: Tony, maybe this might not be the time to--

Tony Stark: Really?! That's it? You just roll over, show your belly, every time somebody snarls.

Bruce Banner: Only when I've created a murder bot.

Tony Stark: We didn't. We weren't even close. Were we close to an interface?

Steve Rogers: Well, you did something right. And you did it right here. The Avengers were supposed to be different than SHIELD.

Tony Stark: Anybody remember when I carried a nuke through a wormhole?

James Rhodes: No, it's never come up.

Tony Stark: Saved New York?

James Rhodes: Never heard that.

Tony Stark: Recall that? A hostile alien army came charging through a hole in space. We're standing three hundred feet below it. We're the Avengers. We can bust arms dealers all the live long day, but, that up there? That's... that's the end game. How were you guys planning on beating that?

Steve Rogers: Together.

Tony Stark: We'll lose.

Steve Rogers: Then we'll do that together, too.

[Stark looks at him for a moment before turning away] 

Steve Rogers: Thor's right. Ultron's calling us out. And I'd like to find him before he's ready for us. The world's a big place. Let's start making it smaller.

I bolded the verbal attacks, you statements, and sarcasm – all of which come from Thor and Rhodey. Steve's angry and feeling triggered (he is obviously flashing back to SHIELDRA and Howard and Peggy's betrayal), but he's not using abusive speech patterns to express his anger.

[Steve and Tony are chopping wood outside Barton's house]

Tony Stark: Thor didn't say where he was going for answers?

Steve Rogers: Sometimes my teammates don't tell me things. [looks at Barton with his kids] I was kind of hoping Thor would be the exception.

Tony Stark: Yeah, give him time. We don't know what the Maximoff kid showed him.

Steve Rogers: “Earth's Mightiest Heroes.” Pulled us apart like cotton candy.

Tony Stark: Seems like you walked away all right.

Steve Rogers: Is that a problem?

Tony Stark: I don't trust a guy without a dark side. Call me old fashioned.

Steve Rogers: Well let's just say you haven't seen it yet.

Tony Stark: You know Ultron is trying to tear us apart, right?

Steve Rogers: Well I guess you'd know. Whether you tell us is a bit of a question.

Tony Stark: Banner and I were doing research.

Steve Rogers: That would affect the team.

Tony Stark: That would end the team. Isn't that the mission? Isn't that the “why” we fight, so we can end the fight, so we get to go home?

Steve Rogers: [rips log apart] Every time someone tries to win a war before it starts, innocent people die. Every time.

Tony is the one who escalates the conversation here (“Seems like you walked away all right.”) – Steve's angry, but his tone is conversational and he's opening up to Tony. His response to Tony is sarcastic (“Well I guess you'd know. Whether you tell us is a bit of a question.”); but it's still direct, and he still isn't using any insults. He's expressing his anger in a mostly healthy way.

[Steve and the twins turn up at the lab]

Steve Rogers: I'm gonna say this once.

Tony Stark: How about “nonce”?

Steve Rogers: Shut it down!

Tony Stark: Nope, not gonna happen.

Steve Rogers: You don't know what you're doing.

Bruce Banner: And you do? She's not in your head?

Wanda Maximoff: I know you're angry.

Bruce Banner: Oh, we're way past that. I could choke the life out of you and never change a shade.

Steve Rogers: Banner, after everything that's happened--

Tony Stark: That's nothing compared to what's coming!

Wanda Maximoff: You don't know what's in there!

Steve Rogers: This isn't a game--

Wanda Maximoff: The creature--

[Pietro uses his speed to destroy the lab equipment]

Pietro Maximoff: No, no. Go on. You were saying?

[Barton shoots the glass Pietro is standing to stand to destroy it, and Pietro falls through]

Wanda Maximoff: Pietro!

Clint Barton: What? You didn't see that coming?

Tony Stark: I'm rerouting the upload.

Bruce Banner: [to Wanda, as he grabs her] Go ahead, piss me off. [After some fighting, Thor enters and hits the cradle with his hammer, sending a powerful bolt of lightning through it that brings the body to life] Wait! [they all look in shock at the new entity]

[Vision launches himself at Thor, who throws him at a window, but he catches himself right before hitting it.]

Vision: [In JARVIS' voice, as everyone gathers around him] I'm sorry, that was...odd. [to Thor] Thank you.

Steve Rogers: Thor, you helped create this?

Thor: I've had a vision. A whirlpool that sucks in all hope of life and at its center is that. [he points to the gem inside Vision's head]

Bruce Banner: What, the gem?

Thor: It's the Mind Stone. It's one of the six Infinity Stones, the greatest power in the universe, unparalleled in its destructive capabilities.

Steve Rogers: Then why would you bring it to...

Thor: Because Stark is right.

Bruce Banner: Oh, it's definitely the end times.

Thor: The Avengers cannot defeat Ultron.

Vision: Not alone.

Steve Rogers: Why does your “vision” sound like JARVIS?

Tony Stark: We... reconfigured JARVIS' matrix to create something new.

Steve Rogers: I think I've had my fill of new.

Vision: You think I'm a child of Ultron?

Steve Rogers: You're not?

Vision: I'm not Ultron. I'm not JARVIS. I am... I am.

Wanda Maximoff: I looked in your head and saw annihilation.

Vision: Look again.

Clint Barton: Yeah. Her seal of approval means jack to me.

Thor: Their powers, the horrors in our heads, Ultron himself, they all came from the Mind Stone, and they're nothing compared to what it can unleash. But with it on our side...

Steve Rogers: Is it? Are you? On our side?

Bruce is the one who insults Tony here (and poor Steve just wants to understand what the hell is happening).

Back to Pepper. A lot of people forget that Rhodey was the only one who wanted Tony to grow and change:

James Rhodes: You don't respect yourself, so I know you don't respect me.

Tony Stark: I respect you.

[cut]

James Rhodes: You are constitutionally incapable of being responsible.

[cut]

James Rhodes: That's what I'm talking about. When I get up in the morning and I'm putting on my uniform, you know what I recognize? I see in that mirror that every person that's got this uniform on got my back!

Tony Stark: Hey, you know what? I'm not like you. I'm not cut out...

James Rhodes: No, no. You don't have to be like me! But you're more than what you are. And you don't see it.

Tony Stark: Can you excuse me if I'm a bit distracted here?

James Rhodes: No! You can't be distracted right now! Listen to me!

Contrast this with Pepper and Happy:

Tony Stark: Same drill. They've been dealing under the table, and I'm going to stop them. I'm going to find my weapons and destroy them.

Pepper Potts: Tony, you know that I would help you with anything, but I cannot help you if you're going to start all of this again.

Tony Stark: There is nothing except this. There's no art opening. There is no benefit. There is nothing to sign. There is the next mission and nothing else.

Pepper Potts: Is that so? Well, then, I quit. [Pepper throws the lock chip on the table.]

Tony Stark: You stood by my side all these years while I reaped the benefits of destruction. And now that I'm trying to protect the people that I put in harm's way, you're going to walk out?

Pepper Potts: You're going to kill yourself, Tony. I'm not going to be a part of it.

Tony Stark: I shouldn't be alive, unless it was for a reason. I'm not crazy, Pepper. I just finally know what I have to do. And I know in my heart that it's right.

Pepper Potts: [Pepper picks the lock drive back up.] You're all I have, too, you know. 

And:

Happy Hogan: Yeah, I miss you too. But the way it used to be. Now you're off with the 'superfriends', I don't know what's going on with you anymore. The world's getting weird...

When we are in a relationship with someone (it doesn't matter what kind) and they grow and change, we are left with the choice of either growing ourselves, or walking away/growing distant with that person. 

Pepper does neither. She uses emotional abuse to try to control Tony and manipulate him into acting the way she wants him to act – giving up Iron Man and living a selfish civilian life as her kept genius.

This is in direct contrast to Rhodey, Yinsen, and Steve, who see that Tony has had the potential to be “Earth's Best Defender” all along.

[the1975attheirverybest]

hi! longtime lurker, first time commenter and i need your help with something. i made a tiktok video about a recent 1975 show i went to and someone left a comment saying “he’s a racist but sure” referring to matty and i feel conflicted about their comment because while i don’t believe that’s true, i also don’t know if my love for the band and for matty has made me quick to dismiss some of his more problematic behavior. i know you’ve talked a bit on here about wrestling with this and i was curious if you would mind sharing how that process has been for you and where you’ve landed with it. thanks in advance :)

Hiii 💗 thank you for reaching out.

Yeah, this is something that came up a lot for me last year and earlier this year with the whole podcast drama. I’ve spoken about it in great detail before but since the tags STILL 😡 don’t work on here I can’t find the posts.

I think it’s ultimately a personal choice that you have to make for yourself. I won’t tell you what to think or do, but I can tell you how *I* think about it.

It’s normal to question yourself, I think. I mean, none of us really know Matty on a personal level, right? I think o wondered if, like, my love for his work and attraction to him had blinded me to some bitter truths about who he is. And I tend to pride myself on critical thinking and always talk about nuance on here, so what kind of person would I be if I didn’t practice what I preach, right? I took a step back and examined it all.

I went back through interviews, stage “speeches,” tweets, jokes, etc. saw them IN CONTEXT (cuz we all know how the internet loves to take stuff out of context and twist its meaning), thought about each instance and whether I perceived it to be harmful, bigoted, etc. or not, and kinda decided from there. I went through each and every single accusation, looking at it in context, thought about it, heard the arguments, and made my decision.

The conclusion that I came to after this examination, looking at actual evidence and the actual words that he used and the situations that he’s used them in, is that he’s not racist. Not at all.

A racist person wouldn’t write songs like Loving Someone, LIIWMI, etc. mind you this all happened in 2018, NOT the summer of 2020 when it was suddenly hip and cool and profitable for celebrities to be “woke.” I think he has a career-long record of showing exactly who he is. Whether it was in his best interest to do so or not.

I also found, through this digging and thinking about it, that he has his blind spots (as every human being does). He’s insanely privileged and doesn’t always seem to realize how his privilege has molded his experience of the world. The nepo-baby argument that he always makes is a great example of this. His stance on gender is also another example. So, as a result of his privilege, he will sometimes do or say things and assume that everyone will understand them the way that he does, and that’s not always the case.

To be clear, I’m not saying he’s naive. He’s not. But sometimes he assumes that the things that are common sense to him are common sense to everyone else. Maybe to some people those blind spots of his are too much. That’s fine.

In the end, what matters to me is that he be someone that I can stand behind. I can have faith in. I can believe is a good human being. Even if he does make mistakes sometimes. And I believe that to be true. He’s not bigoted, he’s not racist, he’s not a bad person. He speaks his mind. He stands up for what’s right even when it gets him into trouble. He’s smart, he’s self-reflective, he’s kind. BUT he’s a human being. He’s flawed. He says things too quickly without considering the consequences sometimes, he gets caught up in situations and feelings. He’s not perfect. And that’s okay. To me it is anyway.

It’s possible to disagree with someone and still love and support them. As long as the thing we disagree on isn’t “should black people have rights?” “Are women inherently inferior to men?” “Do queer folks deserve human rights?” Then it’s perfectly okay for him to sometimes do or say things that I wouldn’t. I have no expectation of him to be like 1000% flawless every single moment or every single day. Nor do I expect him to be in complete agreement with me all the time.

To be clear, supporting him doesn’t mean making excuses for him or looking the other way when he does do something “wrong.” I have called him out on stuff before and I will continue to do so. I guess I just don’t think that the occasional mistake makes him a bad person. And maybe that’s not right. But I know I’ve made mistakes before. And if it weren’t for the kindness of others who took the time to show me that I was wrong and to teach me, I wouldn’t have learned to grow.

Maybe that’s not for everyone. That’s okay. There are other artists who strive for that kind of flawless image. Perhaps those are better suited for people who dislike Matty’s way of doing things.

Ultimately it’s really down to what you believe him to be and whether or not you think you can, in good faith, support him. So, above all else, I would say tune out what the world thinks for a bit and find out what YOU think. Everything else will fall into place after that.

[kitkatopinions]

Watched the second ep. I don't have pics this time but I'm gonna do my best to make a good post anyway. RWBY volume 9 spoilers and criticism below the keep reading. Also this is a long one!

Praise

The use of 'business person.' About ten years of gender-specific stuff like 'Huntsman Academies' instead of 'Hunter Academies' aside, it's nice to hear some gender neutral terms.

On its own, removed from the comedy and bad tone of the volume and the moment two seconds before it, I really enjoyed Weiss reflecting on the weight of what happened, the loss of her home, the fact that their plan could've been (and kind of was) a disaster that put people at risk, the possibility of losing the Relics, acting like they made mistakes... I also really like Ruby's response to it, her "you did the best you could to save Atlas" was said in this weak kind of stiff way like Ruby knows that's a meaningless comfort that doesn't help. And then when Weiss talks about Penny, Ruby just turns away and keeps walking? That's good. This on its own felt like a really good moment.

Also, I like the choice of framing in the conversation, specifically Weiss gripping her sword. Yesss those trauma responses motherfucker, yeeeeah! That's what we wanna see!

I really love the concept of the weather in wonderland clearly connecting to emotions (and so far, more Ruby's emotions than anything else.) I kind of even like how it changes on a dime.

The soldier waving to the little kid? Kind of cute!

Ruby's "Look, we may not know exactly what's going on. But for whatever reason, this place is putting us on a similar path as a book we all read as kids. I say we follow it... And stop pretending we know what we're doing." First off, this is what I mean when I say the voice acting for Ruby has much improved. The delivery is great, the emotions are great, the twinge of bitterness despite her seeming to be trying at the start to give one of her usual speechesTM leading to her ending with her dark statement of them not knowing what they're doing, it's great. Second off, she's her uncle's niece, that's for sure, I love this new angle for her actually. Third off, please please please don't have this written off by the end of the season with an "actually there's nothing we could've done differently, nothing that needs to change, Ruby is back to normal." I have a lot of complaints about this episode already typed up (because I'm writing both criticism and praise as I watch) but this is a good direction for Ruby and I'm liking this growth for her actually surprisingly a lot. Everything else, I do not like, but Ruby is so far my absolute favorite part of this season, which is as it should be. And I want these changes to mean something in the long run even if she - as she should - regains some confidence and optimism near the end. I want her to come out of this more cautious, more mature, a bit more cynical, a bit open to council and other solutions and working on her own shortcomings and accepting some nuance. This is good groundwork, I'm really hoping the writers can take this thing the whole way through.

Guys, I feel kind of bad, I really expected to have more praise... But by and large... I didn't like this episode. Let's talk about why.

Criticism

First off, gonna say right away. Yang being like "are we just gonna sit here thinking about that in silence, or...?" What a weird way to start an episode. That's a 'back from a commercial break' line you'd find in Phineas and Ferb.

The way that the 'anime-animation' has gone up by a hundred in this volume is bad, the show has been written so that it's mostly normal with maybe two or three anime-animation gags a season for ages, and they always feel out of place because of how little they're used, and now they kicked it up to eleven jam-packing as many into their show as possible, and it's annoying! The "reason" may be because the writers wanted this volume to feel different than RWBY. If that's the case then congrats the show RWBY doesn't feel like RWBY at all even in vibes right now.

Weiss: "And Yang got her arm stolen by a- by a- what was it, that you said?" Boy howdy. Let's just gloss over Yang actually telling them what happened, so we can by pass their reactions and act like it's all just old hat and stupid and tiring. It's not like the audience needs to be engaged. It's not like this is meant to be the first time the audience is hearing about this.

Weiss (paraphrased): "Just because this place is weird doesn't mean we're actually inside a fairy tale." Me: "Good, someone is going to point out that the sentencing is really weird considering that it doesn't make sense for them to think they just blue-skadoo'd into the pages of a fairy tale and they're going to take this moment - the most logical moment - to talk about how it's more likely that this world must've been traversed by someone who returned to Remnant and based a fairy tale they've read off of it (which is VERY Journey to the Center of the Earth starring Josh Hutcherson and Brendan Fraser by the way) and therefore whether this is an after-life or another dimension or something else that they logically ought to consider, they can get back." Yang: "Also this thing that may be reflective of something that might have happened in a fairy tale happened to me." Weiss: "Actually yes we're probably 'in a fairy tale.'"

Ruby, the girl who explicitly loved FAIRY TALES SPECIFICALLY: "Some of this is sort of familiar." Blake, the girl who may like fairy tales alongside the other books she reads (once joked at majority being trashy romance novels in the show, and repeatedly in Chibi): "I recognize this at once!" Weiss, the girl who grew up in a strict home where she's never once mentioned ever liking even any form of entertainment as far as I can remember: "That's just something we all read as kids." Gee whiz, I wish this was actually... Something better. XD

"Alyx" fought a "Jabberwalker" and beat the "Red King" and met the "Curious Cat." Listen, this is all... Very boring. I know I haven't actually encountered some of these things yet, but despite feeling like them doing things like making Pinnochio become a real person was lazy, RWBY has never been this lazy before. At least when they literally uncreatively named a character Sun Wukong, he wasn't just an immortal godlike character you meet in a rushed journey to the west pocket of an adventure where everything is Journey to the West themed and the characters in RWBY were like "this is the world of Travel to the Western Location, it's a book that exists that we're going to have to go through." Not only am I bored, I'm very annoyed.

Little: "I'll lead the way! Right to-" *Cuts to Little sleeping* Immediately, I'm done as hecking heck with the pointlessness of this mouse so far. "They might have a point later" Well until then, they're annoying, and they could have a point right the frick now by acting as a guide, but instead all they're doing and seemingly their only purpose as of yet is as bad comedy in a season so far filled with more than enough bad comedy.

Blake: "Alyx didn't know the customs and ended up starting a war." Yang: "Well, she was kind of a bad person, right? She lied and cheated her way through most of the book." Weiss: "She was trying to survive. The morals of those old stories are so simplistic." Weiss...... Do you remember how you all fucking hated Ozpin for three seasons because he lied and were fine with him getting punched over it? Do you remember how you guys decided that 'saving what we can in a trolley problem' made someone evil? Do you remember when you pointed what was essentially a loaded gun at your underage civilian brother because he was in the way? Do you remember how you acted like Yang had slapped Ruby because she suggested that Ruby might have been wrong about something? Do you remember when Blake accused May of acting like Ironwood when she told you guys that you had to choose to do something to help people instead of sitting around and doing nothing and you were just like "yuh-huh." And that's not even getting into how this show has treated so much as cut-and-dry either you're good or you're evil for the past three seasons in the narrative, leaving no room for nuance in the conversation. Hopefully this season will address some of that, but it still leaves Weiss looking like a massive hypocrite for this line.

When Yang says what happened with the racoon, the animation used to tell that story is not it for me champs. Idk who decided that. Why couldn't they just mimic the art style of Yang's story about looking for Raven when she was a kid and Qrow helping her? What, is the 'tone' of that style of art too serious for their comedic stuff they've got going on?

Yang and Blake: *Almost touch hands.* Weiss: "About time." ABOUT TIME FOR WHAT, WEISS? THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING! They've literally held hands at least twice now

And that Blake has also done with Ruby and Weiss

Yes, this time Yang and Blake are doing it with Energy that was non-existent for Blake and Ruby and Blake and Weiss, but they've been doing everything with ENERGY since volume six. This is nothing new, this is just another way of the show writers and Rooster Teeth going "see? See? They're actually something (probably) so just wait teehee" but first off, I don't like it and I wish they'd just progress Blake and Yang's relationship because they haven't done anything now that's different from the cake picture or the practicing their dancing. But second off, boy does Weiss look an oblivious chump. "About time." Where have you been???

And also, at the writers, just because you act like it's new and significant doesn't mean it is. What is this hesitation for?

Also! Weiss and Ruby: *Stop walking, start having a serious conversation.* Yang and Blake:

Bro, when I'm walking with my sister and she stops, I??? Stop walking??? So we can walk together??? When my sister stops walking to have a sad serious conversation about being sad and serious, I just??? Stop to talk to her?? It kind of makes Blake and Yang feel like they're so caught up in each other that they're just ignoring not only the dire situation they're in and the dire situation Remnant is in, but also the feelings and suffering of Ruby and Weiss. And it's just... Not what I want to see tbh? Like I want to see them acting like they care enough to at least notice what the other two are going through.

The amount of screentime that's already been spent on Little being just so silly and quirky is really wrecking my enjoyment. I wish they had left Little behind when they left the mice army. Actually, I wish Little (and also the mice army) had never existed at all.

"So which one is Yang's arm?" I feel like this is from a little kids show for five year olds. "Okay kids, the mean racoon has disguised what he stole as something else. Is it the green doll, the pink rabbit, or the yellow-and-black staff that looks kind of like Yang's arm that's made of metal? Do you guys remember what color Yang's arm is?" *Kids voice* "Yellow!" Hand of the Creator making Team RWBY look like idiots here tbh. Cringe. At least Yang went on to assume it's her arm - because that's what her heart told her - but yikes was that dumb.

Also though the racoon is massively bad and bigoted. Everything about this racoon is a negative stereotype associated with the Romani people and it's coming out in 2023, this is a really bad look especially from Bigoted "NO WE SWEAR WE'VE CHANGED" Bad Business Practices Inc.

The sword thing doesn't make sense to me tbh. Other people who say things better than me have talked about the lack of logic regarding the sword being here in the first place, but what I'm gonna talk about is the lack of emotions tied up in this item. By talking about Doctor Who. So, the writers of Doctor Who wanted the Eleventh Doctor to have something to remember his companion Amy Pond by after she left after a whopping two and a half seasons (more than achieved by even Rose Tyler in modern Who) for his remaining half a season left on the show, as an emotional gut-punch for the many fans who loved Amy and the other companion Rory who left at the same time. So they had the Eleventh Doctor wear Amy's glasses.

The problem with this is... Amy only ever wore glasses in her very last episode, so... There was no real emotional significance in them. They weren't iconic to Amy, they weren't something the viewer knew well, they were something transparently invented for an emotional moment that was completely unearned. This is a bit more than what happened with Penny's sword which I think probably were just invented to give Penny something to fight with now that she was no longer a robot. But it's still the case that I feel zero emotional connection to this thing I've seen in the last like two episodes of volume eight that only appeared right before Penny's death. It isn't like this moment

Especially now that Penny's been in five seasons with her regular weapons tied to her robotic body. That's what we're used to. This is one (of many) reasons why they should have left Penny as a robot. This is already a do-over - Penny died in a terrible fall of a kingdom more or less at the hands of Cinder and Ruby is left with her sword. It's almost like they realized that Penny's death mattered to the viewers and yet nothing significant was ever really done with Penny's death, Penny's sword, or Ruby's reactions and so they copy-pasted the events, tweaked 'em for the story they were in the middle of already, and then were like "OKAY TAKE TWO." But because of them changing Penny's robotic body out for a flesh one and therefore tossing aside the iconic design of her weapon we all know and love, I'm sitting here going "Oh look, green glass that the writers want me to associate with Penny."

Although I do think that the voice actress for Ruby has improved this season, someone please tell them that their whimpering doesn't sound good or convincing.

Also that whole 'get our stuff' section lasted about five minutes. "We're gonna have to get our stuff back." "Oh no we don't know what our stuff is?" "Let's use our feelings to figure out what our stuff is." "Omg, we can't pay the cost of that." "The stuff is revealed as our stuff." "We're gonna have to fight for it!" "I'm so sad about Penny!" "Okay we got our stuff, let's get out of here!" I've said before that RWBY struggles to let people sit with the weight of any emotions which makes things seem really shallow, but this is ridiculous. I feel nothing about Yang not being willing to give up what it feels like to be loved as the price of her arm, because... If I had been grabbing my Red Bull for the two seconds that had happened, I would've missed that, nobody reacted to it, and it was just gone. All of that legit could've been a whole upset with emotional beats where the girls grapple with concepts of having to give up things or not having enough hope to fill up a jar, but instead it's five minutes of rushed comedy-centric nothing that started and then just kind of stopped while I'm just like feeling nothing.

Blake's "I've read so many stories, I... Never thought I'd be the moral of one" Is clearly played straight? As in, it's clearly played as serious and not just for laughs, as 'emotional' music starts playing. But what part of the last scene outside of Ruby's whimper and holding the sword was I meant to take seriously? The whole thing was played up for comedy and Blake didn't seem to be taking it that seriously either - and five minutes prior had been joking and teasing and laughing with Yang in the most carefree manner. I'm sorry if I can't take her crisis seriously now, but I really can't. I actually got confused because I was like 'ah somebody messed up and started playing serious music? Oh wait no, it's gonna cut out for a joke. No? They're being serious?" Bleh

Weiss: "We are not IN A BOOK." Me: "Good, someone is going to point out that it doesn't make sense for them to think they just blue-skadoo'd into the pages of a fairy tale and they're going to take this moment - the most logical moment - to talk about how the author or Alyx or whoever probably just wrote about someone having an adventure in this place that could be an afterlife or another dimension or something else that they logically ought to consider, and their own adventure shouldn't be the same as there's because this is a different time and it's not the foregone conclusion to think the exact same things that happened to her would happen to them (some of this is reminiscent of Tim Buton's Alice in Wonderland btw) but that they can try to get out the same way she did." Weiss: "And even if we were, we know how it ends!" I guess at least they're doing the last part??

Weiss: *Hits herself with a rock so hard that she falls to the ground and doesn't get up for at least two seconds.* The other members of Team RWBY:

Can this show try to convince me these characters care about each other outside of Big MomentsTM, at least a little? Nobody tries to help calm Weiss down? Nobody asks her if she's okay? Nobody tries to help her up? Nobody even reacts? Ruby doesn't even look up? "It's a comedic moment!" Well, first off, not three seconds before it happened or two seconds after it happened, it isn't. And second off, so? Even in a comedic moment, it'd make sense to have someone say "are you okay?"

Also the toy looking guards remind me of Orbot and Cubot from Sonic the Hedgehog... That's not a compliment, they're super annoying.

Okay... Ruby's speech about Penny is not nearly as emotional as everyone made it out to be. I've seen so many people be like "This episode had me crying so hard over Ruby's eulogy to Penny" And then I get to the ep, and she says kind of really impersonal stuff? I mean, maybe it would've seemed shallow if after Ruby's lack of happiness at Penny's actual resurrection she acted like she and Penny had been best friends, but still. "The most powerful warrior to ever live." Okay, I'll believe that Ruby believes that. "She was touched by magic." And so are at least five other characters Ruby knows including herself. "She gave her life for thousands." Sure, okay, but that's still not personal. "She took a message of hope to the stars." Well, that message may have caused mass hysteria that could theoretically bring down every civilization in Remnant, but yep, Ruby sure thought that was an important act that should be done. "And she saw the world through better eyes." See, this is the only one that seems kind of emotional or something specifically connected to Penny, but it still sounds like something people would say about a long dead astronaut they never knew at some kind of gala. Look, I'm ribbing on this, but I actually think this makes sense - Ruby is pushing down her emotions, and she didn't have the connection with Penny she used to after her first death based on her reactions to Penny being alive (it's more like she really wanted to have the connection she used to,) and she's suffering with the concept that all she (and tbh Penny) had done in the most recent fall could've meant a lot of bad despite her (and Penny's) best intentions. It makes sense that her speech given while in the middle of squashing down her feelings is stiff and not very personal, but it's just really not what I imagined. And with RWBY's history, I'm not sure this is meant to be played as Ruby being stiff and impersonal, it might very well be meant to be a deeply emotional tribute to a beloved character that's meant to trigger waterworks in fans everywhere. And if so, it's just wildly disappointing tbh.

Also, the tone between comedy and serious was horribly done yet again, and also still not combat.

All in all, this episode...

[my-mt-heart]

hi mt.

i’ve been reading your posts recently and you’ve been pretty critical towards zabel. as someone who’s watching the show i can’t disagree, there is much i don’t like, but you seem absolutely sure he isn’t acquainted with the original show (and even more so with caryl’s story), but whilst that’s true in terms of daryl’s character, i can’t really say about caryl.

what i mean is, he seems to have done his homework, or at least a part of it: the daryl we see in the spin-off reminds me of the way he was in the first seasons, when he didn’t really trust the group or anyone around him. sure it feels real far from the character he’s grown into during the last seasons, but maybe they thought it’d make sense for him to act the same way in this somehow similar context?

and this brings me to the next point, caryl. if you watch carefully, the hints are all there: episode 1, the flashback, episode 2 daryl blows up some tanks of gas in a way that any diehard twd fan will immediately associate with carol’s terminus scene. and we know there’s another more important flashback of carol and sophia coming up, and for that they even had to do specific casting and everything. Daryl now even carries a knife identical to carol’s signature weapon.

so maybe zabel did do his research? and if not, who do you think is responsible for these tiny details inserted here and there? is it all some sort of shipbaiting to keep caryl fans interested despite all the shit they’ve had thrown their way?

We can assume Zabel read scripts from the first few seasons because on the page, Daryl's scars are first described as cigarette burns and when asked about them in the spinoff, Daryl says his "daddy was a smoker." But that makes me wonder if Zabel only realized when the time came to look at reference photos that the burns never actually made it on screen in the main show, and that's why they're suddenly plain as day in the pilot. Why doesn’t Daryl have the bullet scar on his chest? We see it in 10x07, so did Zabel not watch that far? Does he not know Daryl got shot in S6/S7? Does he not realize Norman’s newer tattoos were visible in S11 and didn’t need covering up? (Side note: if you are going to make the choice to cover them up, make sure they’re consistently covered up 🤦‍♀️)

If the intention was for Daryl to revert back to the "fish out of water" he was in the early seasons, then yes, Zabel would probably have to watch at least parts of those seasons to get a sense of his voice. Fwiw, I think that’s an odd decision because that's not the version of Daryl most fans were drawn to. It was the nuances he started to show during and after the Cherokee rose scene with Carol. I suspect Zabel was following the mandate to “reset” the character, but at the same time, he still should’ve been 💯familiar with the source material. That’s doing the bare minimum, so I don’t excuse him for cutting corners if that’s what he did, and there seem to be too many inconsistencies to prove otherwise.

I also don't doubt he and/or the other writers watched pivotal Caryl scenes because, yes, the parallels are there like you said. Whether they were always intended to set up Caryl’s arc or initially just evoke the same emotions for another character/relationship, well 😒 Keep in mind that contrary to what will inevitably be spun, it was not known from the start that Melissa would come back. Yeah, there's the flashback in the pilot, and Daryl looking at the photo of the Irish man with his wife and daughter, and the Irish man's V.O., but those may not have ever been in the script, they could've just been decided on in post. I can’t be sure, but the point I’m driving at is, if Zabel didn't know he had to set up Carol's return for a good long while, honoring her character and Caryl’s relationship wouldn’t have been his first priority. His fist priority would’ve been the characters he could actually write for. I’m not suggesting he maliciously gave away Caryl’s arc. AMC on the other hand tends to assume women are interchangeable and if one character mirrors our favorite, we'll grow to like that character for the same reasons. Remember Maggie’s jacket that we all said looked like Carol’s? 🤷🏻‍♀️

Obviously we know that Carol is coming back now and at some point Zabel would’ve had to start writing to that which he could’ve done by retroactively adding small bread crumbs in the first half like the flashback, maybe some lines of dialogue, or anything else that wouldn’t have required massive rewrites (or more rewrites than there already were). So if something feels shoehorned in or contradictory (I know people were talking about the scene where Daryl tells Laurent he has “nothing like” a wife and kids), that could definitely be why. Not saying all of this to rain on anyone’s parade. If the small moments bring you comfort, please do take them. After all the “parallels” throughout the Leah arc went absolutely nowhere though, I would personally much rather wait until we get the real deal i.e. an explicit Caryl arc before I bother to watch.

I’ve definitely written too much for someone who’s not watching and I’m trying to wait a few more weeks before I elaborate on anything, but since you asked, I hope this gives you a better sense of where my head is at right now.

[cosmics-beings]

Thank you for bringing that up because I am not a black person but the choice of making Megatron a slave and the way the fandom reacted to it in succession always made me really uncomfortable. Frankly, I found it ridiculous that to make an "interesting" narrative for Megatron, it relied heavily on using the trauma of BIPOC people in an unsatisfactory manner because it wasn't FOR them. Their narratives and their history were simply just transferred onto Megatron without much thought of the connotations

The fandom's tendency to favour/popularize something and make "continuity soup" (mix the lore, facts and characterizations), proceeding to enforce them onto other continuities also contributes heavily to this because it affects the view of other iterations. I enjoy Megatron as a character because I think he has a lot of untapped potential, but I cannot engage in almost any fan content of him because I heavily disagree with some of his portrayals and how his fans view him; and it ties back to his portrayal as a slave

Though iterations do not ultimately have a direct impact on each other (unless multiversal travel is involved), there's still a narrative that extends to all versions of a character. It's why people can react so negatively to one portrayal of a character, I don't like IDW1 Optimus Prime nor am I interested in analysing his "complexity." Optimus started off as a lower class character and he is slowly getting more privileged which I don't like, that's me enforcing my preference for G1 onto other continuities; I personally find it odd that Optimus "must" be given a position of power as a spokesperson but they choose to take away the fact that his original characterization had him as a marginalized person...

I like Earthspark Megatron and I think his characterization is handled better than TFP Megatron, whose character flaws I cannot differentiate on whether they're intentional or subpar writing... But there are still elements of Earthspark Megatron that makes me slightly wary due to the context of his slavery history in other continuities; despite the fact that his backstory in Earthspark is unconfirmed

TW discussions about slavery and abuse (for both megatron and starscream), some IDW and ES critical opinions as well.

This has been sitting in my ask for some time now, but I really REALLY agree. I’ve wanted to answer this for weeks and I’ve just been finding a way to do so. I’m gonna break this down and answer /agree with this the best I can.

Coming from someone with recent, traceable ancestry, and whose whole existence is because of slavery, I agree. And I think there needs to be HONEST discussion about why a lot of writers, who aren’t black or who aren’t familiar with slavery or don’t have ancestry tied to it, think that making someone a slave is an interesting narrative device, if they're just going to make them an abuser, a genocidal tyrant, etc., at the end. Because at that point, the narrative is just, shaming an abuse victim. Especially, in the case of Megatron, where it is not handled right and not everyone actually has the nuance to understand that or how problematic it is. The thing is that I actually like IDW Megatron, he is my favorite one. And next to him, is actually Earthspark Megatron.

My opinion however, is that we don’t really need anymore narratives where slaves rise against their oppressors and abusers, and become oppressors and abusers themselves. This isn’t just an issue with Megatron, but we also see it with characters in other popular media like…Hama and Jet, from Avatar or even Daenerys from Game of Thrones (and I use her loosely because while she was a slave turned into a dictator, her narrative also relied heavily on white saviorism. But that isn’t for here or there). Why is it needed? What does that tell victims and survivors of these things?

Another issue is that Megatron, despite how evil he IS, isn’t really ever painted as a victim before all of this. We've got his origin in IDW and a few more chapters in the LL, but we don't really get to see just how gritty it is. His narrative of slavery and abuse, because Megatron is an abuse victim is not actually highlighted in a way it should be imo, and the readers are mostly left to either have a vague idea of what he went through, or not understand how brutal it is. And slavery.is.brutal. it is one of the most violent and dehumanizing forms of abuse. And for the writers to not portray that shows it was something they didn’t really research or explain. And I will also come back to this later.

That narrative of an oppressed person, turning into an oppressor imo just perpetrates harmful ideas. And it takes real life issues, like slavery, colonization, violence, abuse, and ends up shaming the victims for their uprising. We don’t really need the whole “even someone who is hurt and tries to do better, can also hurt people. And they can be as bad as their oppressors” if it’s not written well, and if it’s not really adding anything positive to the struggle it’s trying to portray.

IDW Megatron ended up right where he started, but IMO worse. Yes, he got a family on the Lost Light, but the Lost Light was a prison sentence, with the understanding that he’d eventually be executed, or worse. He was still, by definition at the mercy of a prime when working with Rodimus, and even by extension Optimus. He still, at the end of his life had no power, agency or true autonomy. There was no way he, as a surrendered Decepticon, could have such privilege when he was aboard the Lost Light.

So while the Lost Light offers us a light hearted and even gut wrenching conclusion to Megatron’s story, it still rubs me the wrong way. He is still a slave, who the narrative decided to turn into a monster and abuser, and at the end of the day, he gets executed. That is just not comforting to me in the slightest.

I personally thought that ES would remedy that a bit, and it seemed to do so. The trope of slave turned into genocidal warlord, still existed but not only did we get to see him changing and redeeming himself, but we also got to see him making up to people he’d hurt. And his narrative, at least, from what we know, didn’t end in death.

But there are still aspects of ES that I don’t like, and with the recent Starscream episode, it’s confirmed that Megatron was still an abusive person (and lemme make it clear that i am HAPPY that starscream's abuse was finally taken seriously and not made a joke, but I still have critiques about how Megatrons' writing was handled, and those two opinions can co-exist T-T).

And this is where fandom in itself has kinda caused me to nope out because we have fans, wrt to both Megatron and Starscream not understanding the concept of a flawed victim and not really letting victims of abuse take accountability for what they’ve done wrong.

I’m seeing a lot of people saying they don’t like Megatron because of what he did…and saying that he is an abuser and that he deserves to be killed or that, he shouldn’t be redeemed in the show. Likewise, I see tons of people saying that it’s unfair to blame Starscream for how he hurt people, because it was a side affect of Megatron’s abuse, and therefore, he is blameless.

Remember earlier in this ask, I mentioned how Megatron’s own slavery and abuse wasn’t highlighted enough because the writers didn’t care? Well that’s what that is. And this is what I mean by fandoms cannot handle a flawed victim of abuse. Megatron is ALSO a victim of abuse, and his abuse is a reason he treated Starscream the way he did. This isn’t to take away from how Megatron treated Starscream at all, because I’ve talked enough on this blog about how he needs to be held accountable, to the point of being blocked and harassed. Megatron treated Starscream like absolute garbage and essentially made him a punching back in IDW and it SEEMS ES. That is something that shouldn't be igored and Megatron needs to be held accountable.

But my point is that if you are saying that Starscream shouldn’t be held accountable for his treatment of others (which is abusive!!) because of how Megatron treated him, then you’re also agreeing that Megatron cannot be held accountable for how he treated Starscream! Because Megatron's abusers caused him to abuse Starscream.

And that is bullshit.  And that is what I mean that fan spaces a.) don’t know that victism can be flawed and b.) the writers again, don’t have the emotional capacity or empathy to portray a victim of slavery as a survivor/traumatized person in an impactful and meaningful way.

Point a.) affects Starscream and Megatron. Because Megatron is seen as doing bad things, because the narrative again, doesn’t know how to write slave narratives. And because Megatron is bad and does bad things, this idea that he also a victim of abuse and that impacts how he treats other is not focused on at all. Likewise, Starscream is also abusive himself despite being a victim, because of shit that happened to him both because of Megatron and other things. But because fandoms don’t think abuse victims can be flawed and cause harm, a lot of fans do not actually allow Starscream to be flawed. A lot of fans attempt to act like he shouldn't be held accountable for the abuse he perpetrated and that's not true. Because that also doesn't allow him to grow and heal. Healing isn't always pretty and sometimes, it takes accountability but it's still healing.

Point b.) is the most important point because this ties back to the current conflict with both Earthspark and IDW Megatron. And that is the writers not having nuance or understanding to write a slave narrative where a revolutionary becomes corrupted. Because…at the end of the day, those narratives don’t need to exist. As an abuse victim, as a starscream fan, as a megatron fan, and as a Black person living in the South, I just do not think Megatron’s narrative in IDW AND Earthspark is given any sort of justice of nuance. And by the way a vast chunk of the ES Fandom acted, understandably, it just makes me angrier at the writers. And I would think, that for a show like Earthspark, that prioritizes Black people, and Black narratives, then a story such as slavery would be given proper care and nuance.

But that’s also an issue…the Black characters in ES aren’t written well, at all. They aren’t even characters, they are concepts and used as plot devices and are at large forgotten by the fandom. Which is disrespectful but we have writers that don’t actually understand the characters and narratives they are writing, again.

And we see it with Megatron for sure. I thought that ES would do better by him, but it didn’t, and the fandom discourse and lack of nuance and understanding SHOWS me that. Am I happy he’s getting redeemed – yes I am. Show wise. But what im not happy about is that, they have once again, chosen to go a slavery route (at least that is HEAVILY implied), but haven’t done enough to show or offer any type of empathy or actual, deep discussion about how that form of abuse deserves actual nuance. Even if we do see a redemption, it’s still not enough, especially if the writers—who write him wishy washy anyway—aren’t going to go all out and explain exactly why he became a Decepticon and the horrors of slavery.

This also isn’t to excuse him! Because I know that’s where this was going. Because as much as I love him, I can’t act like what he did is excusable despite his oppression. He was a genocidal tyrant, he became what he hated, he –as a victim of abuse, decided to take that abuse and trauma out on someone else. This isn’t excusing his actions.

It is more so, me wishing that ES handled things better, by earlier writing rather than dropping bits and pieces of a harmful IDW narrative, and not expanding in it in such a way that offered the fandom discussion points or allowed us to have nuance. It seems that, if you don’t have a personal relationship with slavery and the abusive dynamic, then you just don’t understand how bad it is.

And that was finally, my issue with IDW. For all Megatron changed at the end, and got better, he was still ultimately shamed, by the writing, for not wanting to be a victim of abuse anymore. The Lost Light was a bandaid on a very large, and unhealing wound.

The writers took a victim of violent abuse and instead of giving him agency and a good resolution, they made him worse than his oppressors. They made the people that oppress him, at the end of the day, treat him like a dog.

And I AM talking about Optimus here, since you brought him up. And that should also be a dynamic spoken about more. Optimus coming from a place of privilege, and being the ‘good’ one, the one who puts Megatron in his place, the one appointed by the gods to quite literally force the slave, who has turned corrupted, back into a bondage is just…I love Optimus, but that was not good writing. That wasn’t good writing at all. And it again, showed the lack of concern, empathy or understanding for handling a narrative like slavery.

If at the end of the day, your mission was to make a cop, turned prime (another oppressive group), throw and control the life of a slave who had, in the process of his revolution, lost his way…then idk you didn’t need to be writing his narrative in the first place. Because you don’t understand how harmful it is and how it’s not needed.

I don’t think the slave, turned into tyrant/abuser is needed. Especially since Megatron is an abuse victim, and by making him an evil warlord, the writers ended up shaming/punishing him for his abuse. But if it IS to be done, it needs to be done right. And for the longest time, I thought ES was doing it right but chile…

These recent fandom discussions have told me otherwise.

Do nawt get me started on TFP Megatron because that is another 5 pages of negativity.

Anyway, thank you so much for understanding.

At the end of the DAY, I DO love IDW megs the most, and I also love ES megatron. Because I wanted to see him turn good and find redemption if that was the route they chose to go. But idw fumbled, badly..like really badly. And ES, kinda did so with the writing as well. I know it’s an unpopular opinion to critique ES writing so I’ll keep it to a minimum. But similar to how the black and Asian characters in ES are more concepts, not characters, the writing for Megatron (and some other legacy characters) is off…it just doesn’t make enough sense to me.

But thank you so much and I am sorry it took so long to ask. If you have any more questions then please, throw them my way <3.

alll i can say at this point is thanks for reading, and if u liked this consider following my twitter &lt;3

[blackbird-brewster]

So sorry you have dual illnesses rn and I hope you feel better soon! What's your take on some of the fandom assuming that Emily outed Tara to the team? It seems like everyone except JJ already knew when Emily told her, leading me to think that we didn't see Tara telling the others.

Oh god, I have complained about this endlessly to my partner. YES, I understand that PERHAPS Tara told everyone else and JJ was simply the last to know.... BUT that still doesn't change the fact the viewers literally saw this...(we're going to look at this through a cishet lens because let's be honest, the show is mostly consumed by cishets who wouldn't understand queer nuances here.) 1) Emily sees Tara smiling at a woman and IMMEDEATLY 'clocks it'

Why I hate it: The fucking jokey line of 'Ohhh you two are SO a thing!' is just really annoying to me. CISHETS DO NOT DO THIS???? Like we all fucking laugh about 'they're just gals being pals!' Cishet people go out of their way to explain two women being close to each other, they don't INSTANTLY see two women just SMILING at each other and go 'Oh you're dating!?' "But Kit! It's because Emily is gay!" No. Emily is NOT canonically queer. As far as any of us know, Emily is canonically STRAIGHT, so this in itself was a type of forced-outing. This entire 'coming out' scene with Emily was unnecessary. Why did someone else have to 'clock it'??? Why couldn't they just have Tara say "Hey, Emily...if Rebecca is going to help us out, cards on the table. We're dating." << This makes the coming out part Tara's CHOICE. 2) "Oh we're so going to give you shit about this" - Emily

Why I hate it: It really read as "We're going to give you shit about DATING A WOMAN" and I fucking hateeeee it. They could have EASILY made the line more specific "Can't believe you've been dating and we didn't know!" Like??? Why do they need to make jokes about giving her shit???? Queer people get bullied and teased (and assaulted and murdered) just because they're queer. The whole "haha Tara's coming out is going to be a point of joking in the team!" is such garbage imo. It's really damaging in the implication that her dating a woman should be joked about AT ALL. I know people reading this will say "Oh, but the team always teases each other when they date people!" Sure, they tease STRAIGHT people about it. But the implications of teasing Tara (A BLACK QUEER WOMAN) AT ALL is completely unnecessary. 3) "Did you say...girlfriend?" - JJ

Why I hate it: YES I 100% felt like this was Emily just casually outing Tara. And I really hate how they used that as a 'punchline' moment. All the press releases talked about how JJ/Tara worked as the only two following up on ALL consults for a YEAR. That to me indicates out of any of the team who might have ALREADY know...it would be JJ???? "But Tara probably already told everyone else!" Okay, AGAIN... let's look at this through the lens of the main viewership (cishets).... they aren't going to get that nuance or come to that possibility. They're going to see this scene and be like "LOL this was a funny punchline!" or "Wow, outing people is a fun joke!" No, FUCK THAT. It would NOT have been that hard to INSTEAD, have Tara bring Rebecca into the round table room and preface it with 'This is Rebecca from the DOJ, who is also my girlfriend, but that's unimportant right now...." Personally, I think a lot of (queer) fans are desperately trying to look at Tara's coming out as a 'perfect' scene. But y'all do know that even if you enjoy a piece of media, even if you're hyped that Tara is canonically queer.... YOU CAN STILL REMAIN CRITICAL of how that was played out in canon!!!! I mean the very next episode they have Rebecca and Tara moving in together or the 'u-haul' stereotype. It is ESTABLISHED that Rebecca doesn't HAVE to move back to the city (if she stays with Tara in Virginia) so why not just have that?? Sure it's a commute, but she's going to have a commute either way???? If they had been dating longer than 'a couple of months' and were talking about moving in together, I'd probably be okay with that??? But I really felt like it was YET ANOTHER stereotype being played out and I just....I'm tired, y'all. I'm so tired of seeing most queer media play out in harmful stereotypes. I don't know why it's so impossible to just have queer characters who have regular, healthy, wholesome relationships?? (Probably because MOST showrunners/producers/writers are cishet and don't understand that these relationships exist....but that's a whole other rant post in itself) So, Anon.... I guess to answer your question: Yes, I feel like Emily outed Tara and I'm quite angry at how that's played out. (I haven't watched E3, but as far as I know....Tara never (on-camera) came out to anyone else???) >> [More Thoughts] [About Tara's] [Coming Out] << These are my opinions. You're allowed to have other points of view, but make your own post. Because I'm not here for discourse.

[ugisfeelings]

Actually, I regret that ask. I don’t want to excuse the anthropologists and linguists, and thinking back over what I wrote that’s kind of what it sounded like I was saying. That is not what I meant to say.

,I’ve always found Kroeber allowing the Smithsonian to take Ishi’s brain after death disturbing and unforgivable, but I think it’s easy to simplify the story of Ishi’s years at Berkeley.

Gerald Vizenor, an Anishnaabe scholar of Native American studies at Berkeley has written a lot about Ishi, and his life at Berkeley, and about the choices he made about how he presented himself and how he told Yana-Yahi stories.

There was a terrible imbalance of power inherent in the dynamic where Ishi was living in essentially a foreign culture and needed to rely on Kroeber, Sapir, and the others, but at the same time he was also invested in their project of “preserving” his language and culture. (Of course salvage ethnography does not actually preserve culture— recording isn’t enough. You need living, thriving people, and you need to dismantle colonialism.)

hi! thank you for writing and if it is okay to publish, i did not interpret your reply as an excuse for anyone and upon rereading my own post addendum, realize i myself did not responsibly articulate ishi’s time at berkeley with all the proper historical contingencies and respect i had wanted to. yes you’re right, ishi’s actual story is much more complicated than just the set of discourses i referenced and i was careless and obfuscatory in my shorthand (’studied,’ ‘specimen,’ ‘display’-- these were not the contemporary language to describe his tenure there until after death n i shouldve said/cited more). im glad you brought up gerald vizenor bc he was among the first to propose renaming a uc building after ishi, and i wish i had thought to at least link his incisive essay, “ishi obscura” (2001). anyways there’s much to address that i took for granted in my post, and i hope i can take this as an opportunity to clarify a bit here and direct to more sources—

first, to explain my own point of entry into this ‘discourse,’ i initially came of awareness about ishi’s story in 2020-- namely during the messy back-and-forth abt removing kroeber’s name from berkeley’s anth hall, to which my anthro/lit friends n i closely followed from the east coast as we engaged in our own institutional battles against [redacted]. much of the blog posts, internal documents, op-eds, and other journalistic coverages are still up online, which i revisited while drafting the post. they formed a lot of the more recent conservative “scholarly” perspectives insisting on ishi’s so-called happy “celebrity” status and kroeber’s “disordered mourning” decision to remove ishi’s brain, which i found myself unconsciously arguing w/ within the post lol (this is all from nancy scheper-hughes). this obvs came at the expense of fleshing out ishi’s own participation in sharing his cultural knowledge and hermeneutical agency in narrativizing his life story, but vizenor and norman denzin (building on vizenor’s ishi and the wood ducks, which i dont have a linked copy for) have made critical efforts to recuperate and deconstruct those figurations.

i did write up a longer summary abt the impact of ishi’s death on the kroeber family, which was indeed devestating for kroeber and which leguin was likely most intimately impressed by and thus likely affected her public discussion later on, since she was born long after ishi’s death. i deleted it bc there’s a plethora of (understandably) sympathetic explanations for the kroeber family’s ‘silence’ on ishi, and i didnt think it productive to rehash scheper-hughes’ already tortured, naval-gazing apologia circulating on behalf of kroeber (and  which the kroeber sons themselves vociferously protested in their edited volume together). i can link some of the 2020 coverage but imo there are better and yes more ‘nuanced’ discussions of kroeber’s legacy not coming from a white woman anthropologist terrified of the ‘cancel culture’ mob.

and as you pointed out, there exists long and rich traditions of rigorous, indigenous-based critiques emanating from anthropology and linguistics. the traumatic conditions that kroeber, the boaisian school, and salvage ethnography emerged from and of their own fraught interventions into racial discourses at the time. ishi’s relationship with kroeber and their posthumous representations has been extensively re-evaluated, re-staged, etc--including kroeber’s sons editing their own collection of essays in 2003 after ishi’s repatriation. more recently, indigenous visions: rediscovering the world of franz boas (edited 2018) curates provocative perspectives from indigenous & black scholars.

finally-- i dont have a bg in literature nor do i read leguin’s fictional writing extensively by any means so i cant speak too much further abt her literary development and its critical reception aside from the anthropologists’  perspective (rip). i think my suggestions abt leguin’s latent politics came off as polemical and ungenerous, but i do consider myself indebted to her essays n shorter works for introducing me to anarchist politics and humanist inquiry in anthro. i recommend her books to students curious abt speculative fiction and radical worldmaking (which we should continue to do btw, learning abt kroeber should encourage us to read leguin not put her off), which is why i think it’s critical we not only explicitly "acknowledge” ishi as i concede leguin did (altho i rlly did use those examples to highlight how thin those mentions are but would b interested in more substantial writing on the matter given her brothers’ involvement) but encourage an analytical repertoire to think with the larger politics of representing ishi’s lifestory as intimately bound up in leguin’s own reckoning with civilizational-racial discourses and indigenous epistemologies... and perhaps to exercise some caution abt potentially espoused universalisms (there r some rlly interesting altho idk how persuasive anthro-based rebuttals against fedric jameson’s historicist analysis of her work). idt we should b as concerned abt morally evaluating her writing for evidence of settler ‘complicity’ and ‘exploitation’ (i semi-regret using that language now in the context of leguin’s own mediations), as i am abt how we should understand how leguin’s proximity to colonial abuse is inflected textually and animates the political horizons of her own literary narrations-- and our reception of it. it rlly is not abt her anymore but how we interpret certain so-called silences (again, not always ‘bad’ or complicit)--which is why im drawn to jameson’s ‘critique’ prev bc unless ive been misreading it completely (note 2 reread), actually appreciates n takes seriously the conscious world-production moves made by leguin’s the dispossessed and id would like to see a similar literary treatment of leguin’s anth debts too.

[night-faye]

THERE HE IS!! MACZILLA FIREFOX! He protecc, he attacc, he Macacc. Anyways. In his little edgy cave I like to joke is like living in Wukong's ceiling attic XD good view of the mountain from up there? Adore the lanterns Macky hung up here, he really likes them!! There's some of those during the Brotherhood's dinner scene too. Probably his decor suggestion for their little kingdom :D When we next see him again when the gang drops off, he's in a whole new cave because the last one was over a cliff, this new one seems to be in Wukong's secret room? Would this be the monkey equivalent of couch surfing 🤔 also dwaa, he's just napping with the monkey but lol sir? Why are you opening your blind eye to check, I mean. is it the instinct of possibly being right side dominant? but he's smiling happily at the hugs and MK's choice 🥺 *punches his shoulder* knew you had a heart in there bud! So goofy, he swings on the vines of the shadows. The physics of this power is fascinating. It's a total different plane of existence oooh, I forgot to mention we actually call that void Macky's "Shadow Realm" in the fics :D Lol, I mean. I suppose Wukong has difficulties facing things and that could seem like ignoring them, but not because he doesn't care. I'd say MK is pretty accurate in his assessment here. But the question is: Which assessment does Wukong agree with VS what's true. We're always our own worst critics especially when we internalize *gets dragged off stage-* Somebody's shocked, hard to tease a guy flickering and defeated. "Nice tail by the way. That's new." NICE ATTEMPT AT SMALL TALK LOL. "C'mon misery kid. I've got something to show you." 1) MISERY KID. 2) ITS THE FACT HE HAD THIS GAME PREPARED. Did you know. 3) "As for Macaque, well. That coward has tucked himself away. Somewhere even I can't sniff him out." Why did you have to say it like that. WHY ARE YOU SO OBSESSED WITH HIM. Lmaoo. Anyways, maybe Macky's ears heard Peng was looking for him and was like "peace out" ✌️ 🚶 Being a bird and calling a monkey a rodent and also knowing how to hunt him by scent mmm 🤨 Alright splitting the text and waiting for you to get there so I can just back track on what I said instead of sending another ask going "and here's why I had to reference that last one a lot!" I see you've gotten to where Macky himself confesses that he can ALSO sniff out Wukong. Where's that poetry that's like "I would know his scent even in death." C'MON my guy, you're tattling on yourself here and it's also why I was raising my eyebrow at Peng earlier that is SUSPECT. *looks at me getting dragged off stage above.* hehe, soon. Because yessiree! It's that "Not the Great Sage! He's gotta drag everyone else into his mess." Just like S3 Wukong who flew off saying he needed to stop dragging everyone into his mess :D almost like all those faces they were making during MK's rant meant something, almost like this whole thing about not abandoning your best friend- HAHAHAHAHA >:) BY THE WAY FAYE I HAVE EVEN MORE FUN NEWS. Remember when I was so hooked on Macky's intro? Finally four whopping seasons later. "It's great seeing ya bud!" Yeah he was just throwing Wukong's line here right back at him. Same emphasis on "bud" and all. A whole divorce and couple centuries dead and he's STILL hooked on that. The fact that it was followed up with "just run off like you always do." is extra ouch because it's what Peng always saw him as and Wukong never stepped in and here he's AGREEING. Have you always thought that. I'm glad you're having a breakdown over all the cuteness, as promised ^_^ and the voices yesss, they managed to capture so much nuance here I ADORE IT. Best animated verbal fight EVER.

[murfpersonalblog]

"We can all interpret them however we want."

Only so long as Lestat's not the one being criticized, apparently.

"This was a comparison of Louis's relationship with Armand and Letsta and how those two differ.... You call Lestat's support of Louis's reading by giving him a ton of his books to read mockingly gracious and manipulative"

It's not me! The SHOWRUNNERS, the ACTORS, the REVIEWERS, etc. already confirmed that it's manipulative love-bombing.

THAT is the "gospel" I'm using--not that I need it, cuz it's obvs. to anyone familiar with how toxic abusive relationships work, even when they are genuinely loving. OP included a specific comparison about Lestat giving Louis the Book of Hours in 1x6. THAT is what my post focused on--the insidious nature of Lestat (whom we'd just seen pissed that Louis read books instead of having sex with him; who had just dropped Louis a million miles in the air in 1x5), who was blatantly manipulating Louis by giving him a book when he knows Lou's pissed at him & not returning his calls & refusing to even look at him.

"You call Lestat's...annoyance that Louis chooses to read books and philosophize on morality instead of spending time with him and murder people together a microaggression. Like it has anything to do with race at all?"

Wrt Louis as a Black man Lestat appealed to in 1x1 as someone he himself said had been treated "appallingly" by white men? Yes, it has EVERYTHING to do with race; ESPECIALLY when Lestat's tryna get Louis to do things Louis doesn't want to do, either using verbal, physical, or emotional abuse to get his way; or using Louis' book-reading against Louis when participating in a lynch mob designed to paint Louis as Les's sexual predator & abuser. Even though that wasn't even my main point--it was about love-bombing & the ways Lestat was manipulative in general. But yes, the racial undercurrent's there, too. Rolin made Louis Black for a reason, as a CHOICE, just like the set designs. Funny how the racial aspect is quick to be dismissed so we can sit here talking about book props in isolation from everything else, yet people wanna accuse folks of being one-dimensional.

"That's your interpretation and good for you but you're acting like it's objective truth."

I LITERALLY said "This show gives me a effing headache, cuz the crazy thing is that we can actually flip this whole thing around and it would still be valid." If I thought my POV was "objective truth" I'd've said OP's was INVALID. Instead, I agreed, cuz I DO ship Loustat over Loumand--but I can still point out that there's ANOTHER side of Loumand & Loustat's handling of Louis' book-reading where they're BOTH exhibiting toxic behavior towards Louis. But once again, Lestat's always centered in these convos, and not Louis.

"Why is iwtv discourse like this?"

The discourse is "like this" cuz different people have different opinions, but some tend to treat Loustat & Loumand as if one is better than the other at the expense of glorifying Lestat & demonizing Armand, when BOTH of them can be critiqued for their handling of Louis. Fans only looking at ONE interpretation IS what makes IWTV discourse less nuanced and one-dimensional, insisting that any critique against Lestat is in "bad faith," when the production team themselves say Lestat's toxic, too!

"The contrast in set design of the books is obviously a choice."

Of course it's a choice. None of the set designers/show-runners denied that 1132 was another cage/"back to the crypt," "where's your coffin? you''re standing in it." There are literal bars in Loumand's room, and yet some fans STILL swear that Armand was the better/safer choice for Lou, or they blame Lou for NOT being with Lestat--

"Same with Armand. Yes Louis was lied to. But he still chose to stay with a man who was complicit in murdering his daughter. He chose to stay in another shitty partnership for 77 years. Louis is a grown ass man. Things didn't just happen to him. Same as Lestat and Armand, he had choices and he made the wrong ones."

And you just proved my point. 🤦 Louis was literally lied to when he asked Armand point blank if Armand saved Louis with "Banishment," and Armand said YES. Which is the ONLY reason why Louis chose Armand over Lestat, putting his trust in the snake who'd plotted HIS death and then mind-wiped him for 77 years, with god knows how many false memories planted in Lou's head that Armand used to shape Louis into the perfect compliant stepford spouse.

"Same thing with Lestat mocking Claudia. Very bad parenting and he was very cruel to her in general. But again it's not a microaggression because he thinks she's dumb or cruelty just for cruelty's sake, it's obviously for a purpose, which she herself spells out for the audience, to prevent her and them from leaving."

She ALSO spells out for the audience that SHE FEELS he's being macroaggressive, which is why she calls him "MASSA Lestat" and says he's treating her like his SLAVE she can't get away from. Which the show ALSO leans into in 1x6 with the dog in the cage--which I already said was a scene/parallel originally given to LOUIS in 1x1.

Lestat insults her intelligence all the time, in 1x5 AND 1x6, and she spells it out clearly for the audience that SHE FEELS "Lestat, you must think me an IDIOT!"

He IS cruel to be cruel, lashing out cuz he IS hurt--he's BEEN hurt since he read her diaries, "inked with ungratefulness."

I'm all for giving Lestat his flowers when he's NOT being a psychotic menace to his spouse & child. But let's not build a shrine glazing his meat, acting like Louis' & Claudia's perspectives matter less than yours, when they're the ones who had to pay for Lestat's bad actions--which yes, include manipulation & abuse, even when couched in gift-giving Les is QUICK to throw back in their faces (knowing they're eavesdropping in 1x6) when they don't act the way he wants/expects. What kind of "gift" is that, when it comes with so many strings attached?

And ESPECIALLY when show AND book Lestat himself admits that despite everything he did for them, his toxic expression of love was UNWORTHY & inadequate, and that he DESERVED Louis leaving him; which is why he accepted Louis' cold shoulder in 1x6, and his "death" in the 2x8 Tower Scene & kept his mouth shut, cuz he knew Louis' anger was STILL valid, regardless. Eff those books.

For all of his shortcomings, Lestat loved Louis as he was.

Even at their worst, as the books took Louis away from Lestat--the same way books had taken his mother--Lestat never took the books from Louis.

And in an effort for forgiveness, Lestat looked to gift Louis a precious tome from his favorite bookstore.

Yet Armand always kept them out of reach for fear that something else might capture Louis.

[smhalltheurlsaretaken]

So do you guys remember my post about Jedi meeting their birth families and being chill with it? 

I’ve been thinking a bit - a lot, for like a year - about all the headcanons around Jedi’s biological people, and there are really only two possible cases that seem to get explored: the pure of heart, flawed but loving, desperate parents who ‘had’ to give up their precious child to the Jedi and didn’t feel they had a choice (most commonly seen from the more Jedi critical parts of the fandom, but not always), and the horribly abusive no good parents at all who gladly dumped their baby onto the Order (which appears to be the way of some Jedi fans to ‘justify’ the adoption into the Order as legitimate, which really shouldn’t be the point because adoptions are just as legitimate without abuse factoring in).

What’s kinda sad is how little we’re willing to explore all the possibilities, maybe because we don’t want to be perceived as on the wrong side of the fandom by our own pals. We all deal with just so much bad faith discourse that we smooth out any sort of human drama and nuance to try and have clear cut narratives that are so black and white that they must prevent bad faith interpretations. Jedi have to be perfect pure angels that have never done anything wrong to be recognized as good, because we’re afraid that if we write them in an interesting way people will jump on the opportunity to accuse them of all sorts of stuff.

Well, I’m tired of vanilla fics and good guys vs bad guys when dealing with purely human everyday stuff. Bad guys are for the galactic battles, the epic clash of eternal forces. When dealing with how Jedi younglings come to the Order, we can have plenty of amazing, heart-wrenching drama and warm, happy moments where all sorts of good and regular people have different goals and meet and clash without anyone being at ‘fault’ or being to blame for it. I want to see (*sigh* to write) complex, difficult situations that can’t be perfectly resolved but where people do try and everyone feels like a *person*.

With that out of the way, what about:

- the unanimously proud communities, so honored that their daughter will represent their people and traditions among the Order, wear their clothing and bear their name

- the desperate mother with proud relatives, who doesn’t want to give away her child, but feels pressured into it by well-meaning relatives. The Master feels her reluctance and tries to reassure her, but she insists that it’s fine - and it is, she wants it to be, she wants to believe it’s for the best but it’s just so hard...

- Stass Allie’s parents, who saw their niece Adi GAllia go to the Order a few years prior. Their two families are influential on Coruscant, but with Adi already in the Order, do they need to send Stass too? Will people think they’re making a grab for power? Will Stass be better off over there, with her cousin? 

- Tiplar and Tiplee’s parents. How many children do they have, besides their twins? Is it easier to let your children go when you know they will be together? Did they make the Master promise they wouldn’t be separated no matter what? Did they dress them in matching outfits, or were the Jedi the ones to come up with that?

- the teenaged single mom who cries tears of relief when she realizes her baby will have a good life

- the single dad who can’t bring himself to let his daughter go, because she’s his whole world. The Master presses, not fully understanding, because she would would give up everything for the good of her Padawan, including her relationship with him if need be. The dad still says no.

- the struggling addict parent who is glad to dump that kid (but who still wakes up at night crying, cursing the Jedi, cursing themselves - who get their life back on track for their next kid, maybe? Who meets more Jedi and is thankful after all, or who never does and stays bitter, but better...)

- the family using the adoption for clout, and the consequences for the Order PR-wise, with the younger Jedi having to let go of the bitterness and the anger

- the communities with their own customs surrounding the Force that the young Knight or the wise Master’s inexperienced Padawan struggle to grasp and accept

- the happy parents who are mildly Force-sensitive themselves but didn’t know (or did know, and expected some of their children to be sensitive too), with the Master or the Knight pondering what their own life would look like as a civilian, maybe a parent themselves, maybe giving their own child to the Order like those are doing now. Would they do it? If they could met that hypothetical version of themselves, what would they say about the life they have? 

- the superstitious, incredulous or religious parents who are just glad to get a real explanation for the floating rocks, instead of all the theories and the judging and the gossip

- the ones who are desperately poor, and so very grateful, and the younger Jedi struggling with this, wondering if that’s why they were given to the Order as well. Struggling not to judge, because they wouldn’t be happy to give up their own younglings no matter what, right? Learning to be grateful, and understanding, and compassionate. 

- the parents who decide to give their child away against the community’s pressure, finding comfort in the Jedi’s genuine desire to support them

- the siblings struggling not to feel betrayed by their parents’ choice - and the jealous ones, the proud ones, the amazed ones, the ones who were just toddlers and spend their life holding onto faded memories

And on the flipside to all of that, what about:

- the Jedi who find a baby among dead bodies, like Mace and Depa, and are so thankful they could save this one tiny light

- the Knights filled to burst with warmth and pride as the three of them get this little toddler to giggle on the way home

- the baby who has been screaming in the Force for weeks, wanting to go home, and who finally gets to feel a presence caressing his mind gently, telling him someone is coming

- the Masters who hold the little ones at night, when those who miss their old home feel lonely or sad, rocking them and singing to them

- the Jedi who have their niece, nephew, cousin, or sibling arrive in the Creche, who call their birth family to reassure them that it’ll all be okay, and yes, ‘the child will know who I am, don’t worry, we keep our names. I’ll help them along the way, I’ll keep an eye on them.’

- the Knight who shows up somewhere and experience a supersonic boom because that’s the one, this little one will be his Padawan, he knows it

- the Knight awkwardly trying to comfort the parents, but she can see that they can see that the baby has already latched onto her, and she senses their turmoil

- the Master feeling that the child won’t be suited for the life of a Jedi, and saying that, even as it’s so hard to turn away from those sparkling baby eyes and that little mental tug 

- the Padawan balancing babbling triplets on his shoulders, because they’re from a species that makes a lot of babies

- the Master-Padawan pair visiting a child a lot during the transition period, and bonding with the other siblings as well

... Just... a mess of relationships and love on all parts, with understandings being reached, people finding peace and joy, and the opposite of all that, all acknowledging that there are no bad guys here, just complicated circumstances.

[liquidstar]

I feel as if many people, myself included, have been having problems with the way “critical thinking” is conducted in fandom circles more and more. Which I’d say is a good thing, because it means we’re thinking critically. But still the issues with the faux-critical mentality and with the way we consume media through that fandom group mentality are incredibly widespread at this point, despite being very flawed, and there are still plenty of people who follow it blindly, ironically.

I sort of felt like I had to examine my personal feelings on it and I ended up writing a whole novel, which I’ll put under the cut, and I do welcome other people’s voices in the matter, because while I’m being as nuanced as I can here I obviously am still writing from personal experience and may overlook some things from my limited perspective. But by and large I think I’ve dissected the phenomena as best I can from what I’ve been seeing going on in fandom circles from a safe but observable distance.

Right off the bat I want to say, I think it's incredibly good and necessary to be critical of media and understand when you should stop consuming it, but that line can be a bit circumstantial sometimes for different people. There are a lot of anime that I used to watch as a teenager that I can’t enjoy anymore, because I got more and more uncomfortable overtime with the sexualization of young characters, partly because as I was getting older I was really starting to realize how big of an issue it was, and I certainly think more critically now than I did when I was 14. Of course I don’t assume everyone who still watches certain series is a pedophile, and I do think there are plenty of fans that understand this. However I still stay away from those circles and that’s a personal choice.

I don’t think a person is morally superior based on where they draw the line and their own boundaries with this type of stuff, what’s more important is your understanding of the problem and response to it. There are series I watch that have a lot of the same issues around sexualization of the young characters in the cast, but they’re relatively toned down and I can still enjoy the aspects of the series I actually like without it feeling as uncomfortable and extreme. Others will not be able to, and their issues with it are legitimate and ones that I still ultimately agree with, but they’re still free to dislike the series for it, after all our stance on the issue itself is the same so why would I resent them for it?

Different people are bound to have different lines they draw for how far certain things can go in media before they’re uncomfortable watching it and it doesn’t make it a moral failing of the person who can put up with more if they’re still capable of understanding why it’s bad to begin with and able to not let it effect them. But I don’t think that sentiment necessarily contradicts the idea that some things really are too far gone for this to apply, the above examples aren’t the same thing as a series centered solely around lolicon ecchi and it doesn’t take a lot of deep analysis to understand why. It’s not about a personal line anymore when it comes to things that are outright propaganda or predatory with harmful ideals woven into the message of the story itself. Critical thinking means knowing the difference between these, and no one can hold your hand through it. And simply slapping “I’m critical of my interests” on your bio isn’t a get out of jail free card, it’s always evident when someone isn’t truly thinking about the impact of the media they consume through the way they consume it.

I think the issue is that when people apply “Critical thinking” they don’t actually analyze the story and its intent, messages, themes, morals, and all that. Instead they approach it completely diegetically, it’s basically the thermian argument, the issue stems from thinking about the story and characters as if they’re real people and judging their actions through that perspective, rather than something from a writer trying to deliver a narrative by using the story and characters as tools. Like how people get upset about characters behaving “problematically” without realizing that it’s an intentional aspect of the story, that the character needs to cause problems for there to be conflict. What they should be looking at instead is what their behavior represents in the real world.

You do not need to apply real-world morals to fictional characters, you need to apply them to the narrative. The story exists in the real world, the characters and events within it do not. Fictional murderers themselves do not hurt anyone, no one is actually dying at their hands, but their actions hold weight in the narrative which itself can harm real people. If the character only murders gay people then it reflects on whatever the themes and messages of the story are, and it’s a major issue if it's framed as if they’re morally justified, or as if this is a noble action. And it’s a huge red flag if people stan this character, even if the story itself actually presents their actions as reprehensible. Or cases where the murderers themselves are some kind of awful stereotype, like Buffalo Bill who presents a violent and dangerous stereotype of trans women, making the character a transmisogynistic caricature (Intentional or otherwise) that has caused a lot of harm to the perception of trans women. When people say “Fiction affects reality” this is what they mean. They do not mean “People will see a pretend bad guy and become bad” they mean “Ideals represented in fiction will be pulled from the real world and reflected back onto it.”

However, stories shouldn’t have to spoon-feed you the lesson as if you’re watching a children’s cartoon, stories often have nuances and you have to actively analyze the themes of it all to understand it’s core messages. Oftentimes it can be intentionally murky and hard to parse especially if the subject matter itself is complicated. But you can’t simply read things on the surface and think you understand everything about them, without understanding the symbolism or subtext you can leave a series like Revolutionary Girl Utena thinking the titular Utena is heterosexual and was only ever in love with her prince. Things won’t always be face-value or clear-cut and you will be forced to come to your own conclusions sometimes too.

That’s why the whole fandom-based groupthink mentality about “critical thinking” doesn’t work, because it’s not critical. It’s simply looking into the crowd, seeing people say a show is problematic, and then dropping it without truly understanding why. It’s performative, consuming the best media isn’t activism and it doesn’t make you a better person. Listening to the voices of people whom the issues directly concerns will help you form an opinion, and to understand the issues from a more knowledgeable perspective beyond your own. All that means nothing if you just sweep it under the rug because you want to look infallible in your morality. That’s not being critical, it’s just being scared to analyze yourself, as well as what you engage with. You just don’t want to think about those things and you’re afraid of being less than perfect so you pretend it never happened.

And though I’m making this post, it’s not mine or anyone else’s job to hold your hand through all this and tell you “Oh this show is okay, but this show isn't, and this book is bad etc etc etc”. Because you actually have to think for yourself, you know, critically. Examples I’ve listed aren’t rules of thumb, they’re just examples and things will vary depending on the story and circumstance. You have to look at shit on a case-by-case basis instead of relying on spotting tropes without thinking about how they’re implemented and what they mean. That’s why it’s analysis, you have to use it to understand what the narrative is communicating to its audience, explicitly or implicitly, intentionally or incidentally, and understand how this reflects the real world and what kind of impact it can have on it. 

A big problem with fandom is it has made interests synonymous with personality traits, as if every series we consume is a core part of our being, and everything we see in it reflects our viewpoints as well. So when people are told that a show they watched is problematic, they react very extremely, because they see it as basically the same thing as saying they themselves are problematic (It’s not). Everyone sees themselves as good people, they don’t want to be bad people, so this scares them and they either start hiding any evidence that they ever liked it, or they double down and start defending it despite all its flaws, often providing those aforementioned thermian arguments (“She dresses that way because of her powers!”).

That’s how you get people who call children’s cartoons “irredeemable media” and people who plaster “fiction=/= reality!” all over their blogs, both are basically trying to save face either by denying that they could ever consume anything problematic or denying that the problematic aspects exist all together. And absolutely no one is actually addressing the core issues anymore, save for those affected by them who pointed them out to begin with, only for their original point to become muffled in the discourse. No one is thinking critically because they’re more concerned with us-vs-them group mentality, both sides try to out-perform the other while the actual issue gets ignored or is used as nothing more than a gacha with no true understanding or sympathy behind it.

One of the other issues that comes from this is the fact that pretty much everyone thinks they’re the only person capable of being critical of their interests. That’s how you get those interactions where one person goes “OK [Media] fan” and another person replies “Bro you literally like [Other Media]”, because both parties think they’re the only ones capable of consuming a problematic piece of media and not becoming problematic themselves, anyone else who enjoys it is clearly incapable of being as big brained as them. It’s understandable because we know ourselves and trust ourselves more than strangers, and I’m not saying there can’t be certain fandoms who’s fans you don’t wanna interact with, but when we presume that we know better than everyone else we stop listening to other people all together. It’s good to trust your own judgement, it’s bad to assume no one else has the capacity to think for themselves either though.

The insistence that all media that you personally like is without moral failing and completely pure comes with the belief that all media that you personally dislike has to be morally bad in some way. As if you can’t just dislike a series because you find it annoying or it just doesn’t appeal to you, it has to be problematic, and you have to justify your dislike of it through that perspective. You have to believe that your view on whatever media it is is the objectively correct one, so you’ll likely pick apart all it’s flaws to prove you’re on the right side, but there’s no analysis of context or intent. Keep in mind this doesn’t necessarily mean those critiques are unfounded or invalid, but in cases like this they’re often skewed in one direction based on personal opinion. It’s just as flawed as ignoring all the faults in the stuff you like, it’s biased and subjective analysis that misses a lot of context in both cases, it’s not a good mindset to have about consuming media. It’s just another result of tying media consumption with identity and personal morals. The faux-critical mentality is an attempt to separate the two in a way that implies they’re a packaged deal to begin with, making it sort of impossible to truly do so in any meaningful way.

As far as I know this whole phenomena started with “Steven Universe Critical” in, like, 2016, and that’s where this mentality around “critical thinking” originated. It started out with just a few people correctly pointing out very legitimate issues with the series, but over time it grew into just a trend where people would make cutesy kin blogs with urls like critical-[character] or [character]crit to go with the fad as it divulged into Nostalgia Critic level critique. Of course there was backlash to this and criticism of the criticism, but no actual conversation to be had. Just people trying to out-do each other by acting as the most virtuous one in the room, and soon enough the fad became a huge echo-chamber that encouraged more and more outrageous takes for every little thing. The series itself was a children’s cartoon so it stands to reason that a lot of the fans were young teens, so this behavior isn’t too surprising and I do believe a lot of them did think they were doing the right thing, especially since it was encouraged. But that doesn’t erase the fact that there were actual real issues and concerns brought up about the series that got treated with very little sympathy and were instead drowning out people’s voices. Though those from a few years back may have grown up since and know better (Hopefully), the mentality stuck around and influenced the norm for how fandoms and fandom people conduct any sort of critique on media. 

That’s a shame to me, because the pedestal people place fandom onto has completely disrupted our perception on how to engage with media in a normal way. Not everything should be consumed with fandom in mind, not everything is a coffee-shop au with no conflict, not everything is a children’s cartoon with the morals spoon-fed to you. Fandom has grown past the years of uncritical praise of a series, it’s much more mainstream now with a lot more voices in it beyond your small community on some forum, and people are allowed to use those voices. Just because it may not be as pleasant for you now because you don’t get to just turn your brain off and ignore all the flaws doesn’t mean you can put on your rose-tinted nostalgia goggles and pretend that fandom is actually all that is good in the world, to the point where you place it above the comfort and safety of others (Oftentimes children). Being uncritical of fandom itself is just as bad as being uncritical of what you consume to begin with. 

At the end of the day it all just boils down to the ability to truly think for yourself but with sympathy and compassion for other people in mind, while also understanding that not everyone will come to the same conclusion as you and people are allowed to resent your interests. That doesn’t necessarily mean they hate you personally, you should be acknowledging the same issues after all. You can’t ignore aspects of it that aren’t convenient to your conclusion, you have to actually be critical and understand the issues to be able to form it. 

I think that all we need is to not rely on fandom to tell us what to do, but still listen to the voices of others, take them into account to form our opinion too, boost their voices instead of drowning them out in the minutiae of internet discourse about which character is too much of an asshole to like. Think about what the characters and story represent non-diegetically instead of treating them like real people and events, rather a story with an intent and message to share through its story and characters, and whatever those reflect from the real world. That’s how fiction affects reality, because it exists in reality and reflects reality through its own lens. The story itself is real, with a real impact on you and many others, so think about the impact and why it all matters. Just… Think. Listen to others but think for yourself, that’s all.

[nerdygaymormon]

What do you think about the possible excommunication of Natasha Helfer?

Before this week, the only thing I knew about Natasha Helfer is I’d read an article she’d written about masturbation being part of normal sexual development, and she doesn’t see it as sinful. I agree with her. 

Because of the publicity surrounding her summons to a membership council, I now know much more about her. 

She made a video about being summoned to a membership council scheduled for April 18th. For starters, a stake where she hasn’t lived since 2019 has decided to do this, which seems strange to me. 

Here’s the things the summons letter cites as “misconduct”:

Support for same-sex marriage

Teaching that masturbation is part of a normative sexual-development journey and should not be seen as “sin” or as a reason to keep our youth from being considered worthy to serve or church activities

Her stances on sexually-explicit materials, aka pornography (she believes this is because she educates about using a values model vs an addiction model in the treatment of such concerns)

She’s been critical of Church leaders

Concerns she has encouraged people to leave the Church 

—————————

I went to section 32.6 of the General Handbook which lists the things someone may face a membership council. Frankly, the things listed in the letter sent to Natasha Helfer are not found in the Handbook. 

I suppose these could fit under the charge of “Apostasy,” because she publicly declares opinions different from the Church. Here’s what the Handbook says constitutes apostasy:

Repeatedly acting in clear and deliberate public opposition to the Church, its doctrine, its policies, or its leaders

Persisting in teaching as Church doctrine what is not Church doctrine after being corrected by the bishop or stake president

Showing a pattern of intentionally working to weaken the faith and activity of Church members

Continuing to follow the teachings of apostate sects after being corrected by the bishop or stake president

Formally joining another church and promoting its teachings (Total inactivity in the Church or attending another church does not by itself constitute apostasy. However, if a member formally joins another church and advocates its teachings, withdrawing his or her membership may be necessary.)

—————————

Natasha Helfer is a well-known LDS marriage counselor and certified sex therapist in Utah. She’s written several articles that have been widely read. She’s been a recurring guest on the Mormon Mental Health podcast, Mormon Matters and appeared on many other podcasts. 

She’s particularly sought out because of her training & expertise and her experiences in helping members of the Church overcome their sense of shame regarding sexuality. 

As a marriage counselor, she helps couples where one or both goes through a faith crisis, she says she doesn’t encourage anyone to leave the Church but honors their choices and helps them work through their thoughts & feelings, and also the effect it has on their marriage.  

Because of the news about her being summoned for a membership council, I’ve learned more about her positions. Here’s a list of some of the things I’ve seen in her writing: 

Sex Ed in Utah public schools should be comprehensive and accurate

Sexual assault is a crime & should be talked about as such

The LDS Church should know how to address sexual misconduct and sexual assault much better than it currently does

We should embrace and minister to our trangender neighbors, not fear them and make church difficult for them

Excommunication is cruel and unusual punishment which often is a traumatic experience used by the Church to silence its critics

Service Missions should be setup to be meaningful and seen as equal to proselyting missions

LGBTQ+ members should be affirmed and included in their faith community

LDS teachings & messages to LGBTQ+ members is akin to bullying and has real-world consequences on their mental health & lives

Fear of the BYU Honor Code actually causes many to not seek repentance for fear of academic punishment

The Church teaching that only certain families that fit the mold will get to enjoy the afterlife together is harmful. Mormon Heaven = Sad Heaven. She lists many groups who are harmed by this teaching, including: mixed-faith families, LGBTQ+ individuals & their families, families where someone struggles with addiction, single-parent families, families trying to deal with abuse & trauma, families dealing with mental health conditions such as bi-polar or impulse-control, family survivors of someone who died by suicide

When the Church rescinded the policy of exclusion against gay couples and their children, it should have been accompanied by an apology, not just a brief statement of the announcement with no explanation for the change

Social media isn’t the problem, how we use it is. If we’re keeping in touch with family & friends with whom we otherwise wouldn’t because of distance, accessing support you wouldn’t find in your area, obtaining ideas & resources, these are good. Comparing ourselves to others’ “best selves”, debating others, writing mean comments and such are not helpful. Too often people behave differently online than they do in person

We should wish people well when they leave our church and faith community and wish them well on their spiritual journey. We do a good job at celebrating newcomers even though many of them had to say goodbye to something in order to say hello to us

We need to speak of abortion more than as if anyone who gets one is evil. Even the Church’s position makes room for abortion in certain circumstances and we should be more nuanced in how we speak of it

Biological sex and gender are not binary. This may be LDS doctrine but the sciences of Biology and Psychology say otherwise

She supported the law ending conversion therapy in Utah of LGBTQ+ people

Racism is a public health emergency in the USA, racism is more than hate, it’s in our systems. It’s in our scriptures, our folklore, our culture, our history

Forgiveness is a gift you give yourself. It’s acceptance and moving forward

She also has many articles & podcasts about improving marriage relationships, how to talk with your child about sex, tips for a mixed-faith marriage and similar topics directly related to her job as a marriage counselor and sex therapist.

I’m very impressed, from what I see. She is a tremendous force for good in our LDS community. We need people willing to speak the truth. 

—————————

Here’s two articles that especially impressed me. 

First is one is about masturbation, how it’s a legitimate way to meet one’s needs and some of the many benefits associated with sexual release. 

Second is one about pornography, the LDS culture gives pornography more power than it deserves with our blanket bans, secrecy & shaming, and calling virtually all porn viewing an addiction.

—————————

Frankly, based on what I post on my blog, I could be charged with all the same things that Natasha Helfer is being charged with.

Do I support same-sex marriage? Yes. Absolutely.

Do I think masturbation is a sin? No, and I think many Church websites, publications, and the General Handbook back up this view. 

Is masturbation a normal part of sexual development? Yes. And it has many benefits for individuals, especially singles like me, and even within a marriage

Is porn always wrong? I definitely can think of ways porn can be included inside a healthy marriage, perhaps as a way to help a partner get “in the mood,” or for someone with a higher libido to use along with masturbation, as part of foreplay, or even getting some ideas to spice up their love life. 

Have I been critical of Church leaders? You betcha. I think they’re wrong on LGBTQ+ topics and I say so. 

Do I encourage people to leave the Church? I don’t view myself this way, although I wouldn’t say that I try to get them to stay, either. It’s their path to walk. I know most LGBTQ+ people leave the Church, it’s the way our journeys normally go. I feel God has told me it’s fine for me to leave this church, so in no way do I think poorly of people who leave. This church isn’t ready for queer people and I don’t think God requires us to remain some place that harms us.

My understanding is we’re allowed to have beliefs that differ from the Church, as long as we’re not recruiting people to our side. Simply sharing your opinion or some differences in how you view things shouldn’t be something we can be punished for.

I suppose the difference between her and me is she’s seen as a high-profile individual and she’s using her credentials to give weight to her opinions, and I’m just some rando gay guy who has a blog.