"Cloud can't be with Aerith, she's dead!"

You're right, my bad. I forgot that this was Final Gritty Reality and not Final FANTASY.

Actually, the fact that Bella had to think about who was more beautiful—Rosalie, whose literal vampire GIFT is her beauty, and Edward, who is not described as extraordinarily beautiful by any other vampire—speaks volumes. Volumes.

Is it really true that some people are trying to defend Halle Bailey's casting as Ariel by claiming that she's a better singer than Jodi Benson in the animated version?

That the original Ariel "can't carry a tune"?!

I want to defend Halle Bailey's Ariel from the racists as much as anyone else. But calling Jodi Benson a bad singer?! What alternate universe do they live in?

Its kind of wild (though I suppose makes some kind of sense) that a lot of the residual Harry Potter fandom post-JKRgate seems to be made up of people who are militaristic, gleefully violence endorsing, and in denial.

There was a fascinating thread on reddit's r/harrypotter today that really emphasised this.

Somebody had quoted the scene where Harry uses Crucio, the torture curse that causes the victim unbearable pain and can cause brain damage due to the severity... as something not that they thought was morally questionable or a talking point, but as a heroic winning moment that they were upset wasn't adapted into the movies, and they hoped the tv show would include!

Up and down the thread around 2000 people agreed!

Those few people that pointed out that Harry's use of torture being okayed because he believed it was for the good of society retroactively also legitimised its use by any of their enemies who believed the same were pilloried by the group. Ah, you see, but Harry is the hero. Its fine for him to use literal torture as long as its for the greater good. So what if he causes so much pain his victim passes out? It's the greater good, man!

It kind of struck me that by retaining - and encouraging - this side of fandom, its making HP quite a good recruiting ground for general zealotry and extremism. If X is fine when Harry does it for the greater good, then is it also fine when Rowling does it? Or when the political candidate that Rowling endorses does it?

These people are being carefully shielded from the fact that just because a story has a first person perspective and a character is called a hero by others around him, that does not mean that everything they unilaterally do is objectively right. If you fight fire with the fire in the pursuit of your defeat of fire as a concept, haven't you become... exactly what you seek to extinguish?

Sucks to be a WHALITC fan because going into the tags, most days it's half Sebastian Stan thirst from Marvel movie fans and half pretentious "well, ackshully"-ing how others can interpret the novel from book fans and you're all so exhausting maybe I'll just slip some arsenic into YOUR sugar

Hate the Munsters all you like, but their fans don't resort to bullying, harassment, ableism, classism, and attacking people's looks when they're mad the other spooky family gets love 💅

Percy seeing an old satyr that is a completely different race than his best friend and saying with his whole chest “Man, Grover got really old” is the FUNNIEST FUCKING THING IN THIS EPISODE FIGHT ME I AM RIGHT

I remember when I was perusing the Munsters' character page on TV tropes and someone had written that Lily had a white stripe in her hair to differentiate her from Morticia.

Bro... watch more movies. It's a pretty obvious homage to the iconic Bride of Frankenstein. Not everything is about the Addams Family, least of all the Munsters.

How I feel like when I see new pjo fans calling percabeth by the name annacy

So. In "The Chase" episode, was Toph wrong in her argument with Katara about refusing to help the gaang with the chores? If she is, can you explain why?

Yes, Toph was wrong about not wanting to pitch in with chores.

She's part of a team now.

She has to contribute and help others, not just take care of herself.

Especially since she is fighting in a war now, not just for a competition, and not just for show anymore.

And the episode saying that Katara was too hard on Toph and misrepresenting Toph's flaws as not wanting to accept help rather than her actual wrongdoings of not wanting to help others makes The Chase the worst episode in the show to me, personally.

By the way, is this a braindead question from an anon who apparently is blind to Toph's faults?

Apparently the answer to that is also yes.

Why is this even a question?

sure dave filoni might not be a particularly careful planner, or respect the works of people that are not him, or care about lore or character consistency, or think about the implications of his worldbuilding on the wider franchise. but at least he doesn't respect the characterization of his own ocs either

Fred, you had a part people loved. I mean, my TV Guide interview was six paragraphs about my BOOBS and how they fit into my suit. No one bothered to ask me what I do on the show.

Sigourney Weaver as Gwen DeMarco in Galaxy Quest (1999)

I think I had a breakthrough as to why the tiresome fan theory that Meyer was racist towards Jacob to the point of “destroying” her own character to elevate Team Edward is so popular. And I think it has to do with racism.

Almost from the very beginning Jacob has been framed as the socially appropriate and even conventional choice of suitor for Bella. His dad and Bella’s have been friends for years and Bella had known and played with Jacob’s sisters. When they meet again after many years Bella remarks how easy it is for her to talk to Jacob. During New Moon Charlie approves of Bella’s friendship with Jacob and is firmly Team Jacob in Eclipse. When Jacob says that he and Bella together as a couple would be as “easy as breathing” and that Bella wouldn’t have to give up anything of her human life with him, it not only rings true but is affirmed by Bella’s narrative, re: her vision of two kids running into the forest. And he’s a Native American character.

Edward, on the other hand, the inappropriate star-crossed lover—forbidden in a particularly visceral way—the one for whom it would be downright dangerous to Bella’s health to be with, the one who is most attracted to her blood, the one that haunts Bella’s dreams and fills her with aching passion, lust, and fascination, the one whom she goes the distance (literally) for to save and be with, the one who incurs Charlie’s wrath and disapproval and Renée’s concern…is the fantasy equivalent of a rich white guy.

Socially and economically, Bella is not supposed to be with Edward. Her true “social math” match as a girl from a working class white family is with Jacob.

In framing these love interests the way she has, Meyer subverts the common love triangle framing of dark/light, forbidden/conventional, even in classic romances (Linton as the conventional rich white guy and Heathcliff as the racially ambiguous forbidden lover in Wuthering Heights, the rich white Fleur-de-Lys and the poor but exotically beautiful Esmeralda in Notre Dame de Paris). In doing so Meyer elevates class as the most potent obstacle for the romance instead of race.

I’m not sure why Meyer did this—most likely her Austen influence reared its genteel bonneted head, as Brit Lit is notoriously class-obsessed. But for a series written for an American audience and is otherwise very American (the car culture especially, ho boy), this inevitably inspired backlash. Americans are notoriously very precious about race and Meyer’s blatant disregard for it in the romance definitely struck a racist (and classist) chord.

To say that a low-income Native American love interest would have been a perfectly acceptable if conventional choice for the white heroine than the rich white male love interest is something few people with racial prejudice (or who see everything through race and disregard class entirely) would accept. Meyer did not toe the race line—which means, of course, that she is racist herself, either in not making race the exclusive factor or in making the white lead as the superior and more intense love. Is she truly, though—or is that mere fan projection in being triggered by antiracist choices in the narrative?

Obnoxious, pretentiously "edgy" opinions on classic literature that I've read too many times

"Romeo and Juliet isn't a love story. We're supposed to view them as two idiots whose silly teenage lust leads to their deaths."

"A Christmas Carol is too dark to make a good musical."

*Jan Švankmajer's Neco z Alenky is the most faithful adaptation of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland."

*Little Women's ending is only fake-happy: we're supposed to find it disappointing because Alcott didn't really want Jo to get married."

Can anyone else think of any?

“Fanzine” rhymes with “magazine” and not with “enzyme.”

If I was in a lucid dream with a ghost, I would simply impress them with my blunt rolling skills