#you get how unfairly the fandom and the show treats sam!!

[hood-ex]

Who needs drugs when you have blogs that defend Sam Winchester with every fiber of their being.

[queermania]

hi i recently came across your blog and have been reading a lot of your posts about dean - your analysis is incredible. i was wondering... in your opinion, which arc is the worst when it comes to deancrits misunderstanding/critiquing dean unfairly?

so i'm 50/50 on whether this is genuine or bait. if it's not bait, i'm so sorry. you did nothing wrong. it's just that i get a lot of messages that are so very clearly not in good faith. if it is bait, well, joke's on you because i'm about to say a bunch of words and a bunch of people are gonna read them. so.

i think the most obvious answer to your question is the jack situation but i'm not sure it's the correct one. i think by the time we even get to jack (especially to the soulless!jack part of it all) a lot of people have already sort of lost the plot on why dean is ever behaving the way he is. there's this tendency to view his behavior as if he wants to control the people closest to him, not always because he's inherently malicious but often because he wants to keep them safe and keep them close to him to the detriment of himself and everyone around him (see look! it's not deancrit! we know he's not a bad guy. we're just being objective and he's just an abusive asshole who should burn in hell). and i get it. i see how they got there.

but it's frustrating because how they got there is by 1. taking every single thing the characters say at face value despite all evidence to the contrary 2. viewing every single thing dean does or says in a vacuum, removed from any and all context and 3. forgetting that supernatural is a fantasy show, not a family drama or sitcom.

take the demon blood story line for example. what we actually see is:

sam going on a mission for revenge regardless of the costs or consequences (which he's aware exist even if he doesn't know the exact details)

dean trusting his brother until he finds out his brother's been lying to him

sam being told that what he's doing is wrong on multiple occasions by multiple people

dean offering ruby his gratitude for saving sam's life and an apology for the way he's been treating her since he got back from hell

sam continuing to lie and act shady

dean telling sam that he doesn't care about the demon blood/sam's powers, he just cares about sam's behavior

sam draining an entire nurse and killing her

sam almost killing dean on purpose and telling him he's not strong enough, not like sam is

dean still being the one to offer an apology when all is said and done, twice

but all of that gets rewritten into a narrative that dean's just never trusted sam ever and sam was only doing something he thought was right because all he ever wanted to do was save people. how could he have possibly known something bad would happen? and now, even after the fact, even after sam's said he's sorry, dean still won't let it go and holds it against sam forever and ever.

this narrative persists throughout the fandom. why? because sam threw a few tantrums in which he rewrote what was happening and dean didn't protest and the fandom took it at face value. (1)

on top of that, deancrits treat each of dean's actions like they happened in a vacuum. one of the things deancrits fixate on the most regarding the demon blood plot is dean saying, "You walk out that door, don't you ever come back." in 4x21. they treat it as if dean was being controlling and manipulative; abusive, even. they treat it as if, out of nowhere, dean just decided to throw john's words in sam's face because sam simply wouldn't do what dean wanted him to do.

what actually happened, however, was that sam had been lying to dean for twenty-one episodes about what he was doing, despite the continued warnings not to do what he was doing, and now sam had beaten the shit out of dean, left him bruised and bloodied on the floor, to go do something that dean had been told repeatedly, from a source they all thought was the authority on the subject, that sam absolutely should not do. what actually happened was dean made a last-ditch desperate effort to stop his brother from doing something dangerous that would get himself and possibly a lot of other people killed. (2)

the deancrits also tend to magically forget they're watching a genre show, not a family drama, when it comes to analyzing dean. the source of conflict wasn't that dean just didn't like sam's new girlfriend because sam trusted her more than him. it was that sam's new girlfriend was a demon and dean had just gotten back from forty years in hell being tortured... by demons. it was that dean had angels of the lord, before he really knew that the angels couldn't be trusted, telling him he needed to stop sam. it was that the angel that rescued him from an eternity of torture and becoming a demon himself told him that he needed to stop sam. (3)

so the deancrits frame this conflict between sam and dean as if dean just didn't trust sam, for no reason other than sam was hanging out with somebody else, and dean was being irrational about it. after all, sam was only trying to stop lilith, right? dean was being irrational and controlling. and it sounds reasonable when you look at it from their perspective. but their perspective is not anywhere near the reality of what was actually happening.

and that happens over and over and over again. we see it with the idea that dean is the one who is codependent to a toxic degree, despite all evidence to the contrary*. we see it with the idea that dean thinks all monsters should die and sam wants to save/help them. we see it with the conflict in s6 being framed as dean just being angry that cas dared to do something without his permission. we see it with the fractured relationship between the brothers in s8, both regarding dean's return from purgatory and the trials. we see it with the gadreel arc and then the one with cas leading the angels. we see it with the mark of cain and the darkness. we see it with mary's return. and then we see it with jack, and most especially we see it with soulless!jack.

it's all so exhausting. by the time we get to jack, the deancrit has piled up the same way the narrative circumstances weighing on dean have, and so it feels like deancrits are fundamentally misunderstanding the situation more severely than they have anything else but i think in reality it's just the last straw.

so i guess what i'm trying to say is that the misunderstanding isn't necessarily about the individual arcs but about the way a genre story is told in general. they're not just unfairly critiquing an arc. they're mischaracterizing a whole ass dude and fifteen seasons of a show.

*dean dragged sam back into hunting. how do we know that? because sam said it. what did we actually see? dean bringing sam back to stanford for his interview. sam going back to hunting because of the fire that killed jess. dean wanting to take a break from hunting several times while sam kept pushing them to keep going. dean wanting to split up and stay away from each other for awhile after the demon blood thing. sam leaving amelia before he even knew dean was alive/back from purgatory. dean telling sam to go back to amelia. sam choosing, all on his own, not to go back to amelia. sam basically threatening suicide because dean had other friends. sam unleashing the darkness because he didn't want to be alone. etc. etc. etc.

**also i think there is a conversation to be had about dean's coping mechanisms and trauma responses being less palatable though not anymore harmful than both sam's and castiel's but that's a different conversation for a different day

[lokiinmediasideblog]

One thing I've noticed abt Marvel iterations of Loki is that he has a toxic masculinity problem, but it's only when he's on the evil side of the scale. There are good guy characters who have toxic masculinity because the writers don't see it for what it is or they intend it to be a deliberate flaw in an otherwise good person, but with Loki his ability to respect women seem to be aligned with his general sense of morality. He calls Black Widow a gendered slur and underestimates her for being an emotional woman, but when he's abducted by TVA and has his redemption through watching a video he never disrespects women again and treats Sylvie decently even when she's openly antagonistic toward him. Same with the comics. Old Loki used to treat women like complete garbage, but his reincarnation made him suddenly drink respect women juice even toward ladies who are antagonistic to him or treat him unfairly, like the AllMother, whose authority he respects even while they openly blackmail him. I think it's interesting to see how Loki's dynamics with women are a measure of his current character.

On comics!Loki pre-reincarnation:

There's also the shift that he has more allies/acquaintances who are women now.

Before he had more women as acquaintances/allies, there was pretty much just Amora and Lorelei to a lesser extent. Him and Amora have an interesting dynamic in that he was the only man in Asgard on whom her wiles and enchantments didn't work (in the disparaging "not man enough" typical bs of earlier Marvel).

To me, Loki gave internalized repressed/closeted vibes back then. And Thor is an ideal that he can't reach and is constantly defeated by (And it's why I extremely dislike "Asgard is a socially progressive utopia and not a very toxic patriarchy" retcons). Asgard's cyclical nature is a metaphor for generational divides and cycles of abuse.

I (personally) interpret Loki's reincarnation as a last-ditch effort to escape his oppressive environment and Loki has to constantly fight an uphill battle to not get dragged back into it because everyone's trying to put him back in his former role or box. And as Ikol, they've managed to discover more about themselves, become a better person, and are doing somewhat better (still very traumatized tho).

On MCU!Loki:

I think it's a mix of Loki being the dark horse of the MCU (can't have the such a popular character saying those terrible things), Loki playing up his villain role to be taken more seriously, and things that were ok to show in 2012 are not okay anymore (and I remember a lot of criticism for that scene back then while a lot of people laughed about getting that past censors).

For example, Peter Parker is casually homophobic in the Sam Raimi movies. Tony Stark makes transphobic jokes in Iron Man (And that movie is an example of islamophobic white saviorism). And queue my annoyance with early 2010s badly written think-piece's fixation on Loki as a "character you should not like. you impressionable teen girl! you're going to get into abusive relationships!" when those exist...

Seriously, I'd be significantly less of a Loki fandom-wanker if it weren't for my exposure to the beginnings of "liking evil characters leads to DV irl" 2010s thinking in fandom and its over-focus on Loki.

Past the Doylist explanations, Loki's instances of toxic masculinity could be characterized as Loki playing up his villainy to seem more threatening. The two instances, he is trying to get a rise out of his opponent (e.g. Threatening to harm Jane to get Thor to fight him, calling Natasha a mewling quim). Outside his short villain career, he doesn't have such incidents (and I was surprised to see that he risked his life for Jane in T:TDW ).

[antigonewinchester]

15x08 Nice that the writers rectonned the Cage/Hell time so Adam & Michael were only there for 10 years. Makes Sam and Dean a little less terrible.

DEAN: Adam, I want you to know we are sorry. What happened to you… You're a good man. You didn't deserve that. ADAM: Since when do we get what we deserve? Good luck.

Again, foreshadowing for the ending, Rowena stopping demon deals so people end up “where they belong,” Dean (and Sam) getting the Heaven they “deserve,” and all that.

15x09 Another ep I’ve seen and don’t particularly like :) Again, it’s Berens’s characterization of Dean and how he resolves the emotional conflicts, blurgh.

I’ve mentioned before how similar Dean’s speech about being angry in this ep is like Sam’s speech about being angry in 5x11, esp how in an earlier draft of 15x09, the writing had Dean talk about blaming people unfairly, even more similarly to 5x11. And I just don’t buy Berens’s characterization of Dean as “always” angry, because Dean hasn’t always been angry in the way he gets characterized as in later seasons. Dean talking about how he “[gets] so angry” and “can’t stop it” sounds directly like something that could’ve been said during the Mark of Cain arc, you know? And Berens (plus other writers) then kept that characterization of Dean thru the rest of the show, and it’s just... frustrating. No character development for Dean, he gets to be the angry resentful guy with or without taking on the evil murder curse.

CAS: Well, this place will bring that out in you. Guilt. It was my fault the Leviathan got out. It was my fault we were here the first time. I carry that guilt every day. DEAN: I know you're sorry, Cas. About Bel, about Mom. CAS: I was talking about Jack. I already apologized to you. You just refused to hear it. DEAN: Sorry I brought it up. Maybe if you didn't just up and leave us. CAS: You didn't give me a choice. You couldn't forgive me. And you couldn't move on. You were too angry. I left, but you didn't stop me. ... DEAN: No, no, no. [Dean looks around and then speaks quietly in prayer] Cas? Cas, I hope you can hear me... that wherever you are, it's not too late. I should've stopped you. You're my best friend, but I just let you go. 'Cause it was easier than admitting I was wrong. [Dean breaks down, sniffles, and then kneels at the base of the tree] I – Ohh. I don't know why I get so angry. I just know – I know that it's – i-it's just always been there. And when things go bad, it just – it comes out. And I can't -- I can't stop it. No matter how – [Sniffles] how bad I want to, I just can't stop it. And – And I – I forgive you. Of course I forgive you. I'm sorry it took me so long – [Sniffles] I'm sorry it took me till now to say it. Cas, I'm – I'm so sorry. Man, I hope you can hear me. I hope you can hear me. [Sniffling] Okay.

It feels like Berens’s treats Dean’s resentments as significant because it unfairly hurts whomever he’s mad at, so the right thing for Dean to do is to let go of his hurt feelings to make everything better, for the sake of his relationships, for the sake of other people... This framing almost paints Dean’s anger as something he’s doing punish or hurt Cas, instead of Dean himself feeling hurt and not wanting to be around him. It’s a striking similar (and dysfunctional) notion to Bobby’s speech from 4x22 about how family is supposed to hurt, so get over it already. Cas feels guilty, and he apologized, so Dean should forgive him and he’s a dick for not doing so. But Cas could have stayed with Dean even if Dean didn’t forgive him. I think Cas leaving was the right call, but Dean didn’t make him leave, Cas chose to do that, and so him framing it as Dean being too angry/unforgiving/giving him the cold shoulder is shifting the responsibility/agency for Cas’s choices onto Dean. (Thinking of fandom, it’s kind of funny for Cas to criticize Dean for not stopping him leaving, because you know people would call Dean a controlling asshole if he had tried to stop Cas from leaving at the end of 15x03! And I’ve already seen people call Dean a controlling jerk for how he actually acts at the end of ep.)

There’s also how Dean’s speech here really sucks because it raises some major red flags - somebody talking about being angry and not being able to “stop it” or not being control of their anger is… not a good sign. Again, I don’t think Berens intended it to be read as harshly as you could read it, but I can see how/why someone could interpret it that way, even if I don’t myself.

On another note, we’ve again got vampires connected to a monstrous family, in the bad ending having Sam & Dean “giving up” on being heroes and becoming killer vampires. The metaphysics of how the writers think about the world becomes clearer, too. The solution isn’t to lock away (or kill) God, but to replace him with someone better, who ends up being Jack. It ends up very, the King is dead, long live the King. I do think people want the show to be a much more revolutionary text that it was ever going to be, and so people wish the ending had gone further, but... the show was never going to fully upend the system. Wasn’t cool enough for that, unfortunately. So Sam and Dean (and Jack) do end up ‘defeating’ Chuck, but I don’t think the show was ever going to end in a world without God or without a Heaven, not at this point.

[wasflypaw]

Talking about Fanon c!Wilbur VS Canon c!Wilbur

Gonna start with... Guys it's not even IMPLIED that we're supposed to dislike c!Wilbur based on him "turning c!Dream into a villain". We have not once seen c!Dream talk about c!Wilbur negatively, we have not once seen him talk about being unfairly villainised by c!Wilbur, we have not once seen him talk about becoming a villain due to L'Manberg or c!Wilbur's actions or "propaganda". The most we have is the line "last time I tried taking a stand on behalf of the Dream SMP I was touted a villain", which doesnt mention c!Wilbur, which is written in a book that speaks kinda positively about c!Wilbur?

Compare this with villains like c!Quackity, c!Sam, c!Jack, etc. c!Quackity repeatedly talks about c!Schlatt, we know he had a lasting effect on him. c!Sam talks about how c!Dream acted in prison, which we dont get to see on-screen but it's at least Implied that affected him negatively. c!Jack's whole motive is how c!Tommy hurt him, we know for a fact c!Tommy made c!Jack spiral into what he became. If you watched their stories from their POV, you have reason to dislike the characters they mentioned

He doesnt ever mention c!Wilbur as a motive. The "c!Dream that was villainised and forced to be a villain" is not ever depicted in the story. Hell, c!Dream doesn't even claim to be Forced to be a villain in general!

Genuinely I think its... so unfair to base your entire opinion of c!Wilbur on c!Dream's actions. We see next to No evidence of any propaganda turning the server against c!Dream as they were all still by his side until he personally hurt them? It's Never, Ever been a big plot point or shown in the story that his friends turned against him due to L'Manberg. Because nobody did. Skeppy questioned him and That's It, and even he decided to side with him. c!Sapnap, c!George, c!Puffy, etc. ALL turned against him long after c!Wilbur died because they felt he didnt care about them, based on his own actions, based on things he did to hurt them. In season 2. After c!Wilbur died. It is never ONCE stated that L'Manberg swayed their beliefs.

People give L'Manberg era c!Wilbur too much credit. They act like he has sneakily crafted propaganda placed everywhere that brainwashes the entire server against the dude he disliked. He really didnt. He was literally made fun of most of the time AND inactive. The dude didnt even leave a DENT in c!Dream's relationships with his friends. Bro he was away and left c!Tommy in charge a good 70% of the time. What a scary evil nation ..

It's so genuinely unfair to c!Wilbur's character. It's one thing to look deeply into a story, it's another to repeatedly butcher a character and treat him like he's been the villain all along for something he Didnt Do? There's plenty of stuff to criticize c!Wilbur for, there's plenty of bad things he's done, there's plenty of evidence as to why he's done said things! It's so sad to me that his entire sympathetic character is kicked down by the fandom in favour of "he forced c!Dream to be a villain" which isnt even true and it is never implied in the story you're supposed to base your entire opinion of him from this

You literally Cannot show me evidence of his friends or the rest of the server turning against c!Dream due to L'Manberg, the evidence doesnt exist. Why do people base their opinions of such an interesting and well crafted character off one line that doesnt even mention him :(

It sucks so bad because its become such a heavily widespread myth that he turned c!Dream into a villain, and now when I look up opinions on him it's all "i dislike him because he set up c!Dream as a villain" "yeah he sucks because he made c!Dream a villain" I wouldn't care if it was an opinion a small amount of people held,,,,,, may I remind you that. c!Dream's villain arc didnt start with L'Manberg, he showed no signs of changing, he was the same guy before, during and after L'Manberg, and his villain arc really kicked off when he betrayed Pogtopia for Schlatt?

c!Wilbur is one of the most heavily slandered characters in the DSMP based on evidence that isnt canon and it genuinely sucks ass. It's up there with "c!Tommy started most of the conflicts on the server" for me. Which again just isnt true and is repeatedly used against his character, once again based on no canon evidence. Because of this whole "he turned c!Dream into a villain" mindset, he's indirectly blamed for all of c!Dream's actions that are entirely his own. He's treated like he created a monster and trampled the entire server with it.

Bro c!Dream literally called him a pussy at one point do you expect me to believe he, a character who's shown to be incredibly stubborn in his beliefs, wouldve been influenced to become a villain by this dude?? He also yknow had him betrayed by a friend and slaughtered in a room leading to a spiral of paranoia and trauma we actually have canon evidence for... c!Dream didnt seem threatened by L'Manberg, he didnt claim they were unfairly villainising him, his reasoning for declaring war on them was "sometimes you just gotta kill some people", he doesn't claim he did it to bring peace to the server. I dont understand, him beating down and traumatizing the L'Manbergians he had complete power over is treated as more of a necessary evil than it actually was. He literally could've found any other way. Going by canon evidence it seems like he just did it for fun. And he left them alone once got the discs, he let them have independence for discs. That just kinda shows that L'Manberg wasnt as bad as ppl make it out to be and he definitely didnt see it as some sort of threat if the guy let it stay bc he got some discs.

c!Wilbur was never morally good imo, but he was not a bad guy from the start. I was there for the OG L'Manberg era, I watched every single stream from that era live. None of his citizens seemed uncomfortable around him, they treated him with respect, he genuinely cared for them as there is just so much evidence for if you go back and watch. When he's offline they, especially c!Fundy, talk about him in a positive manner. He is never seen being manipulative or controlling of the L'Manbergians.

What we see in canon is not the evil manipulative "haha I'm going to turn everyone against c!Dream and divide the server" pulling the strings that we see in fanon. Not in the slightest. It's not even implied he's manipulative or evil during this time. He also doesn't fit the role of "dictator" even a little

Him being bad the entire time not only has not much canon evidence but also wouldnt make sense with the story? It's a story they're telling guys, we're not analysing real people. They're playing characters, and there's canon evidence for how these characters are. Which one is more compelling? Guy who genuinely tried his best to be a good leader and create a safe space loses everything and spirals, becoming paranoid and lashing out. Or....... guy who was always manipulative and bad loses everything and turns slightly more manipulative and bad

Again. It's a story. There's no reason to believe he'd be evil from the start, he wasnt acting evil from the start, there is literally no reason to disbelieve anything he says at this point, and the whole idea of the spiral has to come from him. Not being like that in the first place?

Fanon c!Wilbur has been twisted into this depiction of an evil dictator that just wanted power and it sucks sooooooo bad as that's the furthest from canon you can get. Even the "he wouldnt let Americans in!" thing - bro they trespassed anyway they did Not care!! There is a stream where Sapnap sits in L'Manberg and shoots at the salmon in the river during a tantrum while the L'Manbergians are quite literally powerless to stop him. Because they have Never had the power to keep Americans out. Mainly because the non-L'Manbergians of the server are usually decked out in OP armor and decent PVP skills. There is an entire stream of Eret Karl Punz and Ponk casually hanging out inside L'Manbergs borders, with Tubbo and Niki who were L'Manbergians and didnt attempt to get them to leave. The Americans would not have benefitted joining L'Manberg, they werent being oppressed for not joining, they didnt suffer in any way or lose resources, in fact they regularly mocked the L'Manbergians. Eret once stole all their torches and built a roof over the land so mobs would spawn, forcing Tommy and Tubbo to spend like 40 minutes destroying the roof. You expect me to believe these guys turned the big bad villain into what he is? The entire narrative has been flipped - it's so strange! The rest of the server were more biased against L'Manberg than they ever were c!Dream and his friends.

At one point c!Dream and c!Eret threatened to "shrink" the L'Manberg walls, and because they knew they are quite literally POWERLESS to stop anything c!Dream does, they had to place signs on the walls saying he didnt love Patches if he touched the wall. I promise you L'Manberg is way more pathetic (affectionate) than the fandom makes it out to be

I'm actually begging at this point to go back and rewatch streams from this era. Not only are they fun but it gives the actual answer to a lot of myths that spawned from.. nowhere. Please I can give you VOD links they're permanently scorched into my brain

Tl;dr: Please actually look at c!Wilbur's canon character instead of treating his existence as a scapegoat for c!Dream's actions I promise you it's not canon. c!Wilbur's existence is not an extension of c!Dream, c!Wilbur's existence shouldnt be treated as fodder for c!Dream's plot. The fandom has thrown away all his actual characterization to make him "the reason for c!Dream"

Ppl seem to have this idea of "well we can form whatever opinions we want based on the story" which is true, but they take it to mean "all opinions are therefore canon and my depiction of a character is correct" ,,, and some opinions,,,,,, dont have much canon evidence... it's like if I took the Fandom's "feral nuke boy!!" version of c!Tubbo and based my entire opinion on him as if he's always enjoyed nukes and wants to blow everything up for fun. Imagine if I took Quackity, Jack, Tommy and Tubbo's cartel bit and genuinely held it against their characters, making it a huge part of my analysis posts. I dont doubt I'd be called annoying

Main tagging this one because I'm genuinely proud of it. :]

[captainpikeachu]

John Walker: a study in story framing, character archetype, established canon details, and audience manipulation

There’s been a ton of discourse surrounding the character of John Walker, everyone has a lot of opinions. But having read many articles, posts, tweets, and watched reaction channels and video essays, I have found a common theme among them: a fundamental misunderstanding of the character due to the story framing.

In fact, the character of John Walker that exists in fandom discussions is more of a projection of what people think he is and what people want him to stand in for rather than the actual canonically established character that exists in the story of The Falcon and The Winter Soldier. This is why I have decided to write this post along with an episode-by-episode breakdown, because I think John Walker the character has been completely eclipsed by John Walker the symbol, lost underneath the iconography that he’s been associated with and not really given a fair look as an individual person.

I should make it clear upfront; it is not my intention with this to tell people how they should feel about a character. Whether you agree with my points or not doesn’t really matter. My hope is that this at the very least provides you with a different perspective on the character and his motivations. Maybe have you consider him in a new way.

So, let’s start from the beginning.

--------------------------------

EPISODE 1

Story framing is important, it effects our perspective as an audience, and it is deliberately controlled by the writers and filmmakers to manipulate certain emotions and impressions out of us. The Falcon and The Winter Soldier expertly does this from the very beginning by framing John Walker immediately as someone whom we should not want.

Because the music is mournful and ominous despite the celebratory occasion shown on TV.

Because Sarah is upset.

Because Sam has his fists clenched and is unhappy and suspicious, and then closes his eyes in upset.

Because when dialogues like this is delivered, the show is purposefully playing into real life iconography and feelings that already raises our hackles.

Because Sam retired the shield and the hero position, so when someone else seemingly carelessly and casually steps in waving like a propaganda piece with a gun on his hip, and a grey flag symbol that looks so close to the thin blue line flag used by cops, there is something unsettling to us even if we didn’t consciously pick up on it, we just know that it goes against what we want and what our main protagonist wants. 

Because this strange person in a Cap costume winking looks like a jerk. We didn’t ask for this. 

As it’s always said, first impressions are important. How someone first perceives you decides how someone might judge anything that you do. If someone thinks you’re an arrogant jerk, then anything you do will be colored by that impression and they will never think well of your intentions. But if their first impression of you is kind and caring, then any mistakes you made is automatically given leeway because your intentions would be well considered. And in one fell swoop, the show firmly planted into the minds of every single person watching that John Walker is an arrogant jerk espousing propaganda no one wants and everything he does is automatically suspect and questionable. 

In fact, they even go the extra step to make that very clear by how the cast credits is used. Notice the difference between the image of Walker in Episode 1 and Episode 2-6?

The red mark over his eyes, blocking him from us, not only feels foreboding, it feels as if it’s warning us. 

So, when I say that John Walker was from the beginning set up to fail, it’s because he was, the story intended for it to be. We have to hate, question, suspect, and think the worst of Walker in order for Sam’s eventual reclaiming of the shield to mean anything or have that emotional catharsis. Because nobody wants to see Sam take the shield from a nice dude, it would be bittersweet or even mean, but if the story tells us that this guy is someone we can dislike or hate right off the bat because there is something vaguely “bad” about him, then we would root for Sam to take that shield.

There is a reason we don’t get Walker’s perspective at all in his introduction. He’s just this stranger we’ve been programmed as an audience to hate. We are not treated to Walker waiting to go outside and feeling nervous, or Walker doubting himself or perhaps even not wanting to take up the shield at first when it was given to him. The purposeful lack of his perspective is done so we only feel the weight of emotions from the Wilsons being upset, because we must relate to the protagonists.

Walker is not the hero of this story, he’s not the protagonist of this story, if he was, then the story would have framed his unveiling as Captain America in a completely different way, and we would have been treated to a sympathetic look at what he was feeling about taking on the shield, we would have had an inside look at his mindset before he walked out there and looked into that camera and winked. But because we the audience lack that important context that was deliberately kept away from us, our views on Walker formed and solidified without it, and then we all stewed on those feelings for a whole week. 

By the time Episode 2 rolled around to open with Walker’s perspective, the damage was already done, it was too late, because people had already made up their mind about what kind of a person he was, and even those who might have given him a chance was just waiting for the other shoe to drop. 

The show had very clearly made sure that John Walker was always going to have an uphill battle in the eyes of the fans, however fairly or unfairly. And that deliberate and purposeful removal of his perspective and context would be the key to how the character will be misread. Because the reality is, Walker hasn’t even done anything wrong yet and people have already made assumptions just because of one wink, just because of his mere presence. There was no objective consideration that Walker winked because he understood having to put on a cheerful public facade, no consideration that he could have been told to play along nicely for the cameras and directed to look there and wink, no consideration that he didn’t ask for this job but was ordered to do so and is as much a “victim” of the government as Sam. Because the show had already used every trick in the book to make us feel bad and ominous about his presence, the audience would automatically assume the worst.

CLICK THIS LINK TO CONTINUE TO EPISODE TWO AND THE REST OF THIS 219 PAGES AND OVER 28K WORDS ANALYSIS

[sugar-coated-prat-dragon]

How did you feel when Jon said tory and robby so far (as it sounds) would have only 1 scene together

Thank you for the question. 💚💙

I hope the producer is just trolling and saying that to rile the fandom up in order to get people talking about what’s going to happen.

I know this would actually come as a shock to people (since I like Keenry the most), but I actually do like Robby and Sam as a couple or at least I did in the second season.

They were cute together and Sam truly seemed like she made him happy, but she also hurt him a lot and blamed him unfairly for a lot of things that weren’t his fault. Including, insinuating that he broke her heart and downplaying the severity of her own actions.

If the show was able to have Sam have a change of heart, realize she truly loved Robby and had her make it up to him.

Than I would actually be rooting for the couple, but Sam would have to earn his trust back and be deserving of his love.

That said. I would hope Robby would stay with Tory, because I think they have a lot more in common, understand each other better and the pairing makes more sense.

But…I wouldn’t be adverse to Robby and Sam being a couple as long as the show did the relationship justice by having Sam accept her role in hurting him and have them genuinely fall for each other. Rather than, have Robby come running back to her and getting treated like a love sick puppy waiting to get kicked.

[booasaur]

random ask which isn't even an ask but... i've just finished kevin can f himself s1 and there was something bothering me and i just had to talk about it with someone who has watched the show. anyways

first of all, i love allison/patty, their relationship is deliciously developed and i'm positive they are going to be endgame (i have to believe that bc otherwise it would be a freaking queerbaiting and we can't have that)

now talking about patty/tammy. for hours i've had a strange feeling about them but was having a hard time putting that into words. at first i immediately liked them as a couple for no reason (ok, i tend to like side couples even when i know they are not gonna make it to the end, maybe i like the drama, sue me). then tammy's attitude started to slightly bother me, like the way she was kinda pushy (trying to teach patty how to like vodka?) and straightforward idk. and i was like "great, now the fandom is going to hate her and nobody is shipping them and there will be 0 fanfiction about them". then i realized, that's not why people don't like her/the ship. the fans weren't going to like it no matter how, the show just gave them an excuse. tammy was destined to be disliked bc she is a black woman who got in the way of two white women who are strongly shipped. the same could be said about sam as an asian man.

and it reminded me a lot of dead to me s2 (the two shows are very similar btw). except that the character who got in the way of the "main couple" (both also white women) is a latina and also a very nice person. despite that, despite her being the healthiest relationship one of the main characters has ever had, most of the fandom hates her for no reason other than She Got In The Way Of Their Ship.

anyway, this is just a random rant about this trend of shows putting a poc between the fandom's favorite ship. and i hate that kcfh made tammy kinda annoying bc i find it 1) a lazy way of making her and patty break up in the future and 2) the perfect excuse for the fandom to dislike her as much as they want.

i guess i just wanted to verbalize that feeling and know someone's opinion on that.

(okay to make it public)

Heh, I'm not as sure about you on the endgame part, nor did I see the reaction toward Natalie Morales's character on Dead Like Me or even really Tammy outside of pointing out the ways in which her behavior hasn't been great, but yeah, in general I'd agree with you on how fandom treats POC and how media itself enables that.

I had the same reaction as you where initially I was like, oh, cool, that's gonna be romantic, and then kind of wincing every time Tammy was overbearing or pushy, because it really is convenient writing to make her unlikable. I'm not even sure for what purpose, unless they want Patty to stand on her own as well, or if the point is simply, people aren't perfect.

And yeah, they aren't, so some might say, well, why can't Tammy be a little imperfect, POC should get to be flawed and messy, but it's really quite different when they're not given much agency and interiority. Hell, POC who ARE given more space and time as leads and co-leads to establish their feelings aren't given much grace by audiences, so I do think that as nice and luxurious as it is to be like, I'm going to write this character as annoying and unlikable because they should be allowed to be, writers DO need to be aware of the reality in which their work is consumed.

Even white women, right, on a sliding scale compared to what white men get away with, can be disliked unfairly but WOC, I mean, a case study on their treatment on DCTV alone is proof that they can be everything that people think they should be, brave, noble, gracious, also flawed and imperfect, and people will just be terrible about them. In a TON of m/f ships (and probably more f/f ships, the more we get), it's so common to see the perfect but not perfect for them Black girlfriend obstacle to the "main" ship, the Disposable Black Girlfriend trope has a name.

Plus, this is IF these characters are written with good intentions, a lot of the time other biases do sneak in. It's not a coincidence most of the main cast is white, that the two rival love interests are POC. Yeah, Kevin is the worst character on the show and a white guy, but characters like Sam and Tammy don't get the luxury of five million portrayals as good guys and antiheroes and deconstructions the way Kevin does.

I'd like to say that Tammy third-wheeling what is now clearly the main love story of the show (mutually romantic or not) would always have placed her at a disadvantage, even if she'd been played by a white actress, but I dunno about that, lol. I've seen people really like these kinds of side ships (the beTRAYAL from the Lost Girl fandom...).

Ultimately, I know you're not really asking a question, just making an observation, and I definitely get what you're saying, even if this isn't the most egregious case of it. But hey, if you want to see Candice Coke not be treated like that, try to give Proven Innocent a chance if you haven't already.

[romanticsuspense]

People are getting really defensive about Cait at the moment which I totally understand. People are making really rude comments about her and that is not ok. But there is a lot of hypocrisy going around considering that some of those same people basically all the time make rude comments about Sophie&Richard and Roger&Bree. When their fave is being trashed that is not ok but when they do it to other people and character then that's ok!? Like I said it's so hypocritical.

I received this ask several weeks ago, so I don’t know what rude comments were being directed at or made about Cait at the time, but I’m assuming it’s either about her personal life or appearance.

It’s all about perspective and a fan’s personal beliefs about what is and is not okay fandom behavior. You and I see this behavior as hypocritical (and sometimes appalling) because we believe that it’s not okay to trash an actor’s personal life or appearance. Period.

But, an Outlander fan who sees Cait as the only “good” or “decent” person involved with the show, will think it’s perfectly alright to defend her but then turn around and condone the behavior of fans who are trashing or bullying Richard, Sam, or Sophie. And that’s what it is—bullying—at least if it’s done on an actor’s social media accounts.       

Actors are real people with feelings. It is my personal belief that they should be treated with the same decency and respect that you would to any stranger. I also believe that an actor’s personal life is none of my business and I am not in any position to speculate on their relationships or criticize their appearance. I don’t need any of that negativity in my fandom life so I unfollow or block blogs that do this.  (I urge you to do the same, Anon.  There’s no point in getting worked up over a bunch of negative, mean, or entitled “fans.”) 

As for the trashing of certain characters...everyone has their favorites. It’s obvious who my favorites are.  Not that having a favorite excuses the trashing of other characters.  I think it’s perfectly alright to criticize a character’s actions or behaviors, or the writing or costuming of said characters.  What I don’t think is okay is sending anonymous hate in people’s inboxes, or dropping hate in the replies of a gifset, or reblogging a positive post just to add negativity.

Thank you, Anon, for sending this ask.  But, to be honest, I wasn’t sure if I even wanted to answer this.  I’m growing quite tired of talking about and analyzing the behavior of this fandom.  It seems that no matter what I say or how carefully I try to word things, someone will take offense.  Or they’ll interpret my defense of Roger/Richard and Bree/Sophie as hatred of Sam/Jamie and Cait/Claire.  It’s not a competition.  I’m not trying to create even more divisiveness in this fandom by speaking up for the characters or actors who I feel have been unfairly vilified.  I wish we could all coexist peacefully.  But, I cannot for the life of me understand the many different circles within this fandom, so I’m no longer up for commenting on or analyzing fandom behavior.       

I am, as always, up for spirited discussion of the books or show, or anything, really!  My inbox here, and at @themackenzies is always open.

[nancyswhlr]

7, 16, 23 for the salty ask :)

Thank you so much JBB

7. Is there anything you used to like but can’t stand now?

hmmm….That’s tough…I used to watch riverdale & I hate that now, does that count?? haha

16. If you could change anything in the show, what would you change?

How Jonathan and Nancy were written in season 2, for sure. I could write a book about how Jonathan and Nancy could’ve been treated better but both their writing as a couple & individually is a mess in the second season. For example, Nancy inviting Jonathan to the halloween party, saying he should meet someone & then looking at him longingly down the hallway?? Nancy admitting she didn’t love Steve & broke up with him but still trying to tell Murray she does love him?? Jonathan thinking Sam was dressed up as a member of KISS, Jonathan MUSIC NERD Byers?? Jonathan and Nancy being pushed together by Murray (who, don’t get me wrong, I loved) instead of their own feelings & chemistry?? 

This is adapted from a rant I never got around to posting about if I could rewrite season 2, & I’m sorry its long but like I said I could write a book. Firstly I’d write both Nancy and Jonathan in character - but then focus on their slow burn a little more. Steve & Nancy would’ve already broken up (like they should’ve been in season 1) & Nancy had time to mourn that relationship and be single. Jonathan and her friendship would’ve been focused on more & been more clear (Nancy knows his entire Friday night schedule but they “only hang out when the world is gonna end”??? How does that make ANY sense???) & their tension & chemistry would be the forefront. I’m talking blushing mannerisms where they don’t realllllllyyyy know how to act around each other because they like each other so much. Both vaguely aware of the others feelings & wondering if they should make a move but having no idea how ‘cause it never seems like the right time sort of feelings.

In the meantime they work on being a detective duo like they’re good at. They can even go to Murray’s and he can tease them about their chemistry, making it more awkward for them since they really don’t have a reason they’re not together, but then they race back home without staying the night because they’re worried about Will. They arrive back sooner, help the Byers’ so they’re not isolated the entire season & Steve could still be jealous and have his little moments. But maybe something like after all the dust has settled & their lives are upside down AGAIN - they CANT hide their feelings anymore. Then recreate the freaking scene from Murray’s in the Byers’ house the night they closed the gate. Nancy’s on the couch though (they could even keep the pull out joke) but she feels like they went through this THING & she should talk to him. Obviously he feels the same & she goes to his door to knock but he’s already there and then they’re whispering for the sake of the kids but they do the back and forth before they kiss. Jonathan tells Nancy she can sleep in his room &  she nods and kisses him again softly & hums something about de ja vu (because that scene, as established, also made no sense). Right there you have a season that incorporates jancy into the main plot more, builds on what made them so lovable in season 1, keeps them in character & addresses the complaints from the fandom about their friendship AND confirms their feelings without making it feel like “Okay we got Jonathan and Nancy getting together out of the way”. 

23. Unpopular character you love?

UH this one’s torn between Jonathan freaking Byers & Nancy freaking Wheeler (because they’re both unfairly hated for no reason)!!!! Besides them, Lucas never gets the appreciation he deserves, but I wouldn’t call him hated or unpopular :(

[matrixbearer]

How would you compare bayverse!Optimus to his other versions? While I love bayverse!Optimus (his rages are a thrill for me) I don't feel as if the portrayal is fair to his character.

♞ ┊ ( ooc. )

i delayed addressing this ask because i knew it would be very long and very intense.

before i proceed i need to warn that this is MY opinion and MY assessment based on what is rather intensive research into the character across the continuities. i do feel as though i am right, but i will not deny that i may be in error. in the end this is my analysis, and i ask that it be respected as limited to myself.

I will include IDW’s Optimus very little in my response, for reasons that should become apparent as my reply is read further. (Mostly because he is not a variation most are comparing Tyran OP to)

PS: ❛ Tyran ❜ = Bayverse

Tyran (erroneously referred to as Bayverse) Optimus, in full true capacity a True Optimus Prime. I believe he is a fair and accurate portrayal of the character within the narrative he exists.

Over the years I have seen many discussions and even some condemnations of Tyran Optimus as being “too violent” and “too angry,” stating that he is excessive. When taken into consideration the enemies he has faced, the losses he has endured, and all the harm inflicted on him I do not feel hs is excessive.

To explain him and compare him to other iterations of Optimus cannot be done without comparing among the versions of the stories. In comparison to all the other continuities, including IDW, Tyran is the most violent and visceral version of the stories. Optimus is more violent than other versions of his character because he has an equal portion of excessive violence inflicted upon him.

Decepticons in his world do not just putz around trying to steal energon; they attempt to blow up our sun.

They do not just look for fragments of the AllSpark to fuel a sequel to their war, they tear apart cities.

The Decepticons do not just laugh and form unhealthy friendships with humans; they manipulate and terrorize an entire family for generation shut down the space program and do their bidding.

Decepticons in Tyran do not just want to repair a device that will regenerate their dead Cybertron, they wish to bring an entire planet into our orbit (which would have devastating consequences to our world based on the shift in the gravitational field alone) hold the entirety of Earth hostage and use the human race for slave labor.

THE HUMANS of Tyran are more likely to betray the Cybertronians. Those humans who hate the Transformers hate them with a vitriol that is far more realistic than would be shown in any of the animated series. The humans HUNT Transformers, melt them for scrap metal, try to reprogram their DNA. Anyone known to be a friend of the Transformers live with the constant threat of being killed. This threat is not a bluff: based off TLK we can safely assume that Sam Witwicky is dead.

The Transformers, as a species, in Tyran are not warm and cuddly. They joke around, but it is not kid-friendly. They are all violent—all of them. It is in their nature, and that is part of their culture and their very nature.

Where do i get this claim from? Please refer to the instances we see hatchlings that are not the Dinobots. The AllSpark is not inherently evil, but anything brought to life by its power immediately fights and begin destruction. It could be argued that this is because our modern day technology is based off the study of Megatron, but I would not agree that dismisses my assertion. In addition to the hatchlings and new sparks we see in the movies, the comics depict the hatchlings little else. There is a scene in the comics where Megatron lays a trap to kill Optimus by leading him to a nest of hatchlings—the hatchlings act pretty much like TFP’s scraplets. There is also the consistency of each and every Transformer reacts quickly with more with more aggressive than we could typically tolerate.

Transformers are exponentially harder to kill than a human; they have an exoskeleton made of regenerative metal and built in weaponry, they can shift and adjust themselves to survive in situations that would leave humans critically injured or even killed. To the Tyran Transformers a greater degree of violence than we consider acceptable appears to be nothing but rough housing for them. Thus, when they do fight—it will be far more aggressive.

It is my opinion that segments of the fandom are unfairly harsh on Tyran Optimus, criticizing him for fitting into the story he is written into. Their fast-past conflicts are resolved with brutality unmatched by their previous versions. They make TFP && TFA look like child’s play, but that is because IT IS child’s play; those shows are written for younger audiences. As the movies progress they get more mature, until we get the last two movies which are removed almost all jokes geared towards teenage boys, less women are objected for hormone rampaged teenagers, and the jokes are more cerebral. The story is the same way; it has progressed in its severity.

Optimus Prime has also endured tragedy in Tyran than the other versions come little  close to experiencing—the only one would be TFP, and arguably IDW who is written exclusively for adults. G1 and TFA cannot hold a candle to the beastial cruelty in Tyran; they are just too immature when compared. He has been hunted, TRULY hunted, treated like an animal to slaughter. The human population supports the extermination of the Transformer species on their planet. They do so with their benefit, stripping them of their LIVING metal, disregarding the sentience, and retrofitting their biology into our technology.

To me there is nothing thrilling about Tyran Optimus’ rage; he is SUFFERING from the betrayal and loss inflicted upon him. His reactions to Cade in the start of AOE are clear indicators of PTSD. He is on the defense from insurmountable forces—a species he && his Autobots gave his life for to protect!! Of course he is filled with rage—because he has been hurt so excessively by everyone.

Optimus Prime is my favorite character, no one would be surprised by that. I have dedicated the four years since I’ve become an invested fan in this franchise to studying him, to learning about him, to put myself in his situations and try to feel empathy for what Optimus is written in.

Tyran Optimus is, out of all the rest, the most brutalized and tortured of all the Optimi. I do not feel he deserves the accusations he is somehow less than. In AOE he once swore, in a fit of anger, that he would kill all those who were involved in the death of the Autobots. This was such a disturbing dichotomy to how he felt when he arrived on Earth; in the beginning he was so concerned with protecting humans he did not fight them when Bumblebee was captured. This declaration disturbed many, including his voice actor who struggled to perform the line, and I can understand why—it startled me when I first saw the movie. HOWEVER, in AOE when he was given his chance to fulfill his swore—he didn’t, not even when Joshua Joyce DARED him to do it. Optimus had every opportunity and he STILL did not keep his word and kill the humans that were responsible for Ratchet’s death. Why did he not? Because it was just something he said in distress; he was angry, he was hurting, he was overwhelmed by what was done to his people after all they sacrificed for the human race. He still did not go on a rampage and kill. THAT is what measures him as an equal in comparison to the other versions of the character.

Cade Yeager barely had to try to inspire forgiveness in Optimus. With all done to him, Optimus had every right to be frustrated, hurt, and angry at the human race. OK, Megatron had done the same. But the humans?  He loved us how he loves Bumblebee. Imagine if you will how Optimus would react if Bumblebee betrayed him so. It wasn’t until Agent Savoy became a clear and present threat to Cade that Optimus stepped in.

The measure of him comes out when consequences is put into action. Tyran Optimus is a product of his story, of his universe, of the dynamics between him and the other characters. He has been traumatized repeatedly, devastatingly, and seemingly unrelentlessly.

In the end, I cannot force anyone to consider my points of defense for Tyran Optimus, other than to lay out what I know and how I feel about the assessment. Take of it what you may, but Optimus from the movies will remain one of my most beloved versions of the character. He is visceral, victimized, battered, and still brave, kind, and forgiving. He just isn’t with a laugh or perfect composure. He is just as much Optimus Prime as any of the others, he just the Optimus Prime of a world gone wrong.

Optimus Prime in the movies is a messiah carrying a cross through a mob, he wears his crown of thorns and there is blood in his eyes. He is still carrying that cross, he is still marching up towards that hill. He is STILL a savior.

I will also defend him because he is a victim of PTSD.

[koriginaladdict]

supernatural

Send me a show/fandom and ill answer - Top 5 favourite characters: Castiel / pre S5 Dean / Sam / Meg / Balthazar

Other characters you like: Ruby 1.0 / Meg / Rowena / Donna / Kevin / Adam ...

Least favourite characters: Lucifer, Dean On s6+...

Otps: MEGSTIEL, Hanstiel, Sam/Eileen Dean/Lisa (On s3)

Notps: DESTIEL!!!! Can’t stand it, also Sabriel and Especially Samifer

Favourite friendships: Sastiel, Calthazar, TFW in a perfect world, Sam/Meg

Favourite family: The Angels

Favourite episodes: 1x01 Mystery Spot, The prison ep, 4x16 6x20 that s2 ep when jo joins dean in her first hunt (the first spn ep i watched when i was a kid)

Favourite season/book/movie: S1/2/3 were the best 

Favourite quotes: the only time cas got to express how unfairly he’s treated “I’m doing my best, under impossible circumstances, my friends they abandon me, turn against me, it’s difficult to understand”

Best musical moment: “HEAT OF THE MOMENT!!!!!” But also every time there’s an AC/DC soundtrack

Moment that made you fangirl/boy the hardest: I was such a fangirl over dean, too many scenes to remember one in particular, but for cas it’s definitively 6x22 that was a huge turn on, how powerful he felt, the mannerism the low voice...

When it really disappointed you: SEASON 6, dean disappointed me so much then s7 happened and he became irredeemable in my eyes, sorry you can’t be the most ungrateful bastard to exist, bully the man who sacrificed so much for you when he’s at his lowest and expect me to overlook how awful you are

Saddest moment: Dean’s death on 3x16 I cried so much

Most well done character death: Dean’s

Favourite guest star: Rachel Miner

Favourite cast member: Misha Collins

Character you wish was still alive: hard to choose, the cas girl says Balthazar but the megstiel trash says meg

One thing you hope really happens: CAS TO BE HAPPY, APPRECIATED and RESPECTED but that’s too much asked

Most shocking twist: Ruby turning on sam in s4 finale

When did you start watching/reading?: accidently when I was 7, very late at night my parents fell asleep and i wasn’t, so after bones came supernatural and I became addicted right away

Best animal/creature: Angels

Favourite location: Heaven

Trope you wish they would stop using: BRINGING DOWN CAS TO PROP UP THE CHARACTERS THEY LIKE (THE BROS AND MARY)

One thing this show/book/film does better than others: On s1-2-3 I’d say, have a compelling show, badass, funny, with amazing family bond without turning it into a ship fest, I really loved that aspect of spn

Funniest moments: Too many to choose, cas getting drunk, “I’m batman” “I lost my shoe” 

Couple you would like to see: Megstiel

Actor/Actress you want to join the cast: Tyler hoechlin playing an angel, friend to cas 

Favourite outfit: Cas’ original trench coat

Favourite item: Does the impala count?

Do you own anything related to this show/book/film?: nope

Most boring plotline: BMOL, Mark of cain

Most laughably bad moment: how the bros completely forgot about adam and a stranger had to remind them of who he is!!! 

Best flashback/flashfoward if any: 4x03 young mary 

Most layered character: Cas/Sam/Dean (when he’s not a douche)

Most one dimensional character: LUCIFER!!! all he does is whine

Scariest moment: i forgot 

Grossest moment: 5x14 when they were dealing with famine

Best looking male: Sam winchester definitively, even tho i liked dean better in early seasons

Best looking female: Meg 2.0, Ruby 1.0, Rowena, pamela, too hard to choose

Who you’re crushing on (if any): Castiel

Favourite cast moment: Harlem shake

Favourite transportation: IMPALA

Most beautiful scene (scenery/shot wise): Cas standing alone in heaven 6x20

Unanswered question/continuity issue/plot error that bugs you: We’re gonna spend  years discussing those

Best promo: The one with cas, wings and black trench coat, a pity there’s no HD version

At what point did you fall in love with this show/book: the second i first saw it