While I've seen plenty of criticisms of Outlast for ableism/stigmatizing mental illness (because your enemies are murder-happy asylum inmates), I honestly beg to differ—at least for the most part. For one thing, only a handful of inmates actually attack you. Most of the other patients there are either in shock or just trying to lay low and stay alive through all the chaos going on around them. Even the more proactive of the non-combatant characters, such as the pyro you encounter in the kitchen, are just trying to get out—and their desperation is made to be pretty relatable. Even the boss characters like Chris Walker and Eddie Gluskin were victims of the asylum. For crying out loud, the Whistleblower DLC opens with Eddie getting dragged into the morphogenic engine kicking and screaming and begging for help—it's what solidifies Waylon Park's determination to take down Murkoff. Even when you find Eddie's files later on and see that, yes, he was already a murderer before he wound up in Mount Massive, that also comes with notes about the sexual abuse he experienced as a child and his denial of it. It doesn't excuse his actions—of course it doesn't—but it shows that he didn't become the way he is from nothing. Furthermore, the entire Mount Massive arc focuses so heavily on the theme of abuse of power. The patients are enduring horrific experimentation at the hands of people like Blair and Trager, and that is what sets up the rest of the story. The people running the show are the catalysts for all hell breaking loose—not the patients, who are instead victims of a system that is exploiting them by pushing them past their mental and physical limits, and has no qualms about treating them as replaceable test subjects. They are already sick people thrust into terrifying circumstances. Some of them were already dangerous to begin with, but most of them were not. They were all in a place that was supposed to help them cope with their conditions and rehabilitate, but instead were exploited and had their issues exacerbated by being traumatized further, and that's part of what makes Outlast terrifying.  So yeah, the portrayal of mentally ill people in Outlast isn't phenomenal, sure, but it goes beyond making all the patients out to be horrible monsters. Most of them are just trying to stay out of all the awful shit going on and stay alive without completely breaking down. The games still makes you feel for those people after you see how desperate and terrified a lot of them are, due mainly because of the abuses they have suffered from the people who were supposed to help them.

Anon this is so fascinating cause I agree with you sm. I think all of this stuff is true. From the way I see it Outlast is an attempt to subvert all the other mental asylum horror stories. Which I think adds all this complexity you're talking about. But while I do think it's more nuanced and better written than contemporaries, I don't think they did a good enough job. The "evil asylum" trope is inherently ableist, and stigmatizing. And I do agree the main source of long term horror in the series is from the incredible abuse the patients suffer- it cannot be ignored that the majority of scary moments aren't from the abuse, but from the patients acting violent and "crazy". And yeah it makes sense why they're violent and "crazy" that doesn't change the fact that the average joe schmoe is gonna go through the game and take away the message that mentally ill people are violent, and scary, and mental health facilities are bad and scary. Which- as someone who's been to a psych ward- I find to be a very bad message. They have their issues but stigmatizing them makes it worse. I think Red Barrels realized this, and for the Whistleblower made more of an effort to emphasize the abuse as a front line horror. Jeremy Blaire, the Walrider, The Morphogenic Engine, etc etc. Although the complaints I have still stand. Overall I agree with you that Outlast is a nuanced portrayal of this trope. That point about how not all of the patients are violent, is one of my favorite parts of Outlast. How they're still humans. And that creates some really great moments, like Someones Playing Piano. But as I've said before I still think it's inadequate I really want people to realize that Outlast being a story about systemic abuse where innocent people are victimized, and Outlast relies on ableism to get it's scares- are two statements that can coexist. I think at this point I should just write a paper about outlast

Ngl ,i love your work,but it rubs me wrong how Peter's discomfort w venom doing sexual things without Peter's consent or knowledge is treated as a joke,or just generally kind of dismissed. Also- I'm autistic and love love love autistic peter parker hc,but the fact he was called 'on the spectrum' soley because he got upset at venom for this and 'couldn't put himself in venoms shoes' also kind of felt really bad.

ough, bless you anon! I really appreciate you vocalising your thoughts and concerns in a really sincere respectful way. I want to respond so you don't feel unheard!

I'd also like to take this chance to say that the actions of one Wade W. Wilson do not reflect the thoughts of the ask-spiderpool moderator. The ask-spiderpool moderator does not condone his words or actions. He is a bad man. The words he's saying are bad.

Deadpool is definitely playing the role of a villain here, and he's kind of intentionally choosing his words with the intention of punishing Peter and invalidating him. He knows what he's doing. And Spider-man knows it too.

I know it's something a lot of people don't like to see from Wade – but it's a part of his character that I find interesting to explore and to see him eventually overcome. His ability to weaponise everything, and his instinct of self-sabotage. It becomes dangerous territory to write sometimes because people generally want to side with Deadpool and believe he'll do no wrong, but - I don't know, to strip him of all his ugliness would be untrue to him. Similarly with Peter – I guess I'm just really interested in parts of Wade and Peter that you don't really get to see explored in fanon very often.

It's kind of a problem though that yeah - when you write this sort of a thing there's the risk of people who don't look at it critically - so you get people idolising or siding with Deadpool when what he's doing is really bad actually. It's kind of a miracle, the sorts of things Wade gets away with, while Peter's attacked for it - and that's something I kind of like to examine, too.

I think I do have a responsibility to make this blog feel safe, but also challenging and interesting - and I think I'll be working hard to kind of find a balance between the two. I'm still trying to figure it out - to write what I find interesting, knowing my own intentions but knowing it probably will be misinterpreted – or writing something else that is easy and pleasing to everyone (not really my bag, and also near impossible!), or just not write at all (also impossible for me! Got a brain-itch to scratch...)

I really appreciate when people read my writing and see what I'm getting at – but it doesn't always happen, and it isn't really anyone's fault. I kind of like to offer explanations and further meta, and the fics, because I love to be understood - and the server where I love to have discussions with people about how they receive these posts. The reason I love running this blog is the discussions I have with people about it. The back-and-forth, and so I really do love people to look at Wade and Peter a little deeper.

I have a genuine interest in autistic Peter and it's something I want to explore further in a sincere light, this is kind of just the first tease of something I want to explore more later, if the asks permit. I think every Peter Parker is autistic-coded - I've written a little bit about it here! I'm no expert on diagnosis - but as fantastical as ask-spiderpool can get sometimes - I kind of always want what Wade and Peter are going through in their heads to feel real and tangible and understandable, and come from a place of sincerity.

The consent issue is a complicated one – (as is the way with applying real-world-logic to the realm of alien sex with what you thought was just a slick space-age onesie...) Peter's relationship with the symbiote occupies more of a realm of metaphor than anything - and I don't think there's any sort of 1-to-1 comparison to the real world. (Has your sex-toy ever gained sentience and passed judgement upon you? Peter Parker's worst nightmare!)

There is a running theme of Peter kind of having his boundaries crossed - and the symbiote is sort of tied to that theme. The symbiote was entirely responsive to Peter's thoughts and didn't do anything Peter didn't will it to do - the real issue is the mortifying ordeal of being perceived. And it's a running theme with Peter - he hides so much and very often his privacy is violated.

It's often played for laughs, because Deadpool doesn't always take Spider-man's boundaries seriously and likes to push him – but it's something that will come to a head, and Peter will be laying down the law very soon.

I'm really thankful for your message anon, and I really hope this response reaches you with similar sincerity that you reached out to me with and that I'm understood! - I love you so much anon! My DMs over on @sciderman are also open if you'd like to talk to me more!

Nearly 75% of fic on AO3 has less than 5 reader comments. Can we please acknowledge that lack of engagement in a positive fashion is the norm in fandom and that writers are expected to work for nothing in return yet readers are allowed to be entitled?

The source of my number

https://www.tumblr.com/transholmes/738776926733336576/and-even-those-numbers-on-the-lower-end-are

--

Hahahahaha.

Oh, anon.

Okay, first of all, I just posted a bunch of graphs showing exactly this, so not only am I well aware of it, but you also clearly don't read my tumblr much and are just here because some friend of yours is upset that I responded negatively to them about their dumb bookmarking opinions.

Second and more importantly...

No, no one is expected to do anything.

That's crazypants influencer talk where you think your hobbies are jobs that you have no choice about doing.

I suppose I do expect fans to have something at least marginally worthwhile to say—or else I'll block them for being whiny little bitches who make my day dumber as well as less amusing.

But mostly, what I expect is that people will do hobbies because they are fun. If I ever decide that writing fic is too boring, I will stop.

I write because it's fun.

I write original work for money too, and if you want to read that, you're going to have to pay Amazon your cold, hard cash. But I still do it because I enjoy the actual act of writing... at least a lot of the time.

What I see in the bookmark boo-hooing is a bunch of people who haven't noticed the last eighty thousand rounds of this same dumb wank and who not only expect to get the last word but expect that somehow I'm going to signal boost it on my tumblr as that... a tumblr known for contentious debates and nobody ever getting the last word till everyone's exhausted and never wants to hear about paper plates or beans again.

I also see that some of the thinnest-skinned people have fic patreons.

Now, I chose not to bring this up before because it sounds a bit below the belt in that "And thus you're morally impure and thus I can ignore your argument" way... But it's a consistent pattern in these conversations over time, and I do think it's relevant. The biggest sensitive babies are always the ones most afraid of bad reviews but also low engagement, and I think it's because they're caught in some half-pro, half-not limbo where they want the best of both worlds but keep getting the worst of both.

If you behave like a professional who is owed compensation, you can expect a more professional style of response to your work.

And what does the pro world look like? Radio silence. The occasional harsh review. Nobody caring why you wanted to write X or why you couldn't finish Y on time.

If you're here to socialize, you should look for a beta or a couple of good friends who like your blorbos and your style of fic, and then you can squee together about what you've written. It may not come in the form of visible AO3 comments. It may be in private chat.

In some cases, it may just be friends you can talk to about your writing but who aren't actually going to read it. I have plenty of friends who read different things than what I write.

That's what socializing and hobbies look like, dude.

It's fine to point out that many writers do get discouraged by low comment counts and then stop, so if I, as a reader in a fandom, want more, it behooves me to befriend writers and make them feel good.

But at the same time, writers get discouraged or move on to the next fandom all the time for all kinds of reasons. If the critical mass and the zeitgeist aren't there, then they aren't.

Do your hobbies for reasons internal to you.

If the main point is external validation, get into BDSM and find someone excited to indulge your praise kink. It will work a lot better than chasing fame via art.

Whenever Anons tell me that Jared fans are just as bad as AAs and hellers, I always ask for receipts.

The reason they won't ever be able to provide this (besides the ones Jai & co have been exposed as having faked to frame Jared fans...) is they don't exist (I know you know this lol, just making a general statement). The thing is, AA's are soooo beyond sensitive that they literally think saying we don't like Jensen's outfit at a con, or that he looks tired, or that he's had botox is "hate". You say anything even remotely critical about Jensen? You must hate him. They take such personal offense to things that are barely a slight to Jensen as hate.

Jared fans on the other hand, have had over 16 years of dealing with the hate and insults and biting their tongues. They have a much thicker skin. They are getting more assertive and pushing back more nowadays, but they still had to stay quiet for 15 years to keep the peace because, for some reason, it fell on them (much like it falls on Jared).

Btw this is exactly how and why I left the Jensen fandom completely. I was a Jensen leaning J2 fan when I joined the fandom. Problem was that I didn't immediately turn on blinders to Jensen's behavior when I joined (like a good little Jensen fan is expected to). So I made a mildly critical comment about him and was dogpiled. I was told I wasn't a real fan and that I actually hated him and was just pretending to like him. I was called some pretty gross stuff and told I wasn't wanted there. And from people I really didn't expect (at the time I didn't expect it at least). That's when I realized there weren't a lot of "safe spaces" in the Jensen fandom and it was exhausting trying to get news about him from sites where I also had to see (tagged) Jared hate and them attacking other fans like me. It was just easier to not bother anymore.

I actually saw a few posts recently from TB/GenV fans who were really annoyed that Jensen had a cameo in GenV because it's annoying how he takes over and all the gifsets and everything are all him. They didn't want him on the spinoff because that was a show mostly safe from his fans. It took them less than one season to piss off TB and GenV fans. Jared fans put up with it for 15 years.

Thank you for sharing your history. This completely jives with the many private convo I had with Dean/Jensen fans laminating the lack of safe space within their fandom that doesn't include Destiel and/or hating on Sam/Jared (X) but also expected to never discuss Dean or Jensen other than a perfect victim because AAs viewed themselves as perfect victims that the world must change and cater to them. The only advice I could provide them was to go to original posts by Sam girls (because at least they respect the show's canon) and look at who are reblogging or liking with Dean's avatar or his name.

Yeah I never understood why it fell on Sam girls to keep the fandom peace by appeasing the demented Sam haters. Just like it fell on Jared to protect Jensen from Destiel hellers' campaign to slander Jensen as a homophobe (*wave hello to MallorytoyourMickey aka Heidi aka High-D aka my buddy!*) but they won't protect Jared from slanderous lies spread by their own fandom on social media.

Which is why AAs, hellers, and even Kripke get the shock of their lives when Sam/Jared girls do strike back because they're like cats - chill and indifferent but have murder mittens and Freddy Kruger hands when rudely poked.

I’ve joked that Jared’s stans’ response to the Prequel debacle was “I’VE BEEN FREED!"  They no longer have to support and defend Jensen especially now that SPN is over, then the Prequel debacle was the cherry on top because it gave them the ultimate permission to no longer do the geek social fallacy thing. And I like to think that Dean fans are also free from Ackles Army's death grip of the character now that they're moving on to The Boys fandom.

Speaking of which, I'm not surprised to hear TB/GenV fans are annoyed by the AAs. The soap opera and SPN fandom couldn't stand them, why would TB fandom be any different? As long as AAs view themselves as perfect victims, they don't believe they need to change their attitude.

The comparison to Ken was a failure, but how was that tweet immature?

He said he understood their opinion but the show wouldn't change. Was he supposed to lie? Write an essay using formal language? Not respond at all? He didn't call them a whiny child and didn't belittle them. He was just blunt.

I've literally never seen a minute of that show but I don't get the issue. OK, the writing is bad and lazy, and doesn't utilise it's characters. Creator isn't planning on changing it and admits to it. Creating a shitty show doesn't make someone immature, neither does being blunt. Have you considered you might have a bone to pick with him cause he made a shitty show, so now you view every tiny misstep of his as immaturity/something worse than it actually is?

(The post this anon is referring to)

The thing was the way Astruc phrased his response, basically saying it like "You don't like it. I get it."

With Astruc, he will always find some way to dismiss criticism of his show while boasting about his team's writing skills or how his show is deeper than fans give it credit for.

And while I understand if you haven't seen the show, the problem was that there have been several episodes and even a major story arc last season that was all about showing how Adrien is more than Ladybug's sidekick, which is why so many people are upset by the Ken comparison.

As for my own feelings on Astruc, he has done more than make a bad show. He has said a lot of things that more people need to be aware of. Not only is he terrible with taking criticism, but he has said a lot of insensitive things to his fans on Twitter, like ignoring claims of unintentional racism in his show...

Generally dismissing fans online for either making fan theories or misunderstanding the show...

Boasting about how his show is better than other products...

And even comparing people who like one of his characters to Trump supporters and abuse apologists.

Astruc has said a lot of bad things, and he has always been terrible with taking criticism. I call him immature because of how poorly he reacts to any negative feedback online while refusing to see himself as nothing but the best.

I understand that you aren't as familiar with Astruc, and most likely discovered the first post through the Barbie tag, but I figured I owe you an explanation as to why I run this blog in the first place.

Orym for the trauma ask. Besides the fandom's treatment of The Nod, one discrepancy that really stuck out to me was that in the middle of all the 'Orym is consumed by vengeance and that's terrible BS' was going on, we saw Keyleth explicitly vow revenge against the Ruby Vanguard ("The last thing that I saw, before the light took us, was someone important to me. Someone I lost long ago. And I will do everything in my power to destroy them who did this.") and I didn't see anyone giving her shit over it, even though her anger is directed at the same people and comes from a nigh-identical place. Was it because Vax, unlike Will, is someone the audience knows and his orbification happened onscreen, and that forced people to recognize how awful it would be to expect her to calm down and Be Reasonable™ about the whole thing?

throwing in the anon who asked me about Orym in general.

I think the core problem is again that this fandom has a truly awful track record re: people who lose romantic partners young and more generally about people who are grieving. That is the more useful Keyleth comparison; it's gotten better but the post-campaign meta for C1 (that I saw about a year after C1 had ended, after I had binged it) truly just treated Vex and Keyleth as boxes of grief and grief alone instead of people with lives marked by but not ended by tragedy. Once Yasha said she had lost her wife people started treating her notably differently; again, we had the people claiming Orym would be happier had he stayed dead despite Liam explicitly saying death felt like a failure; and this is ultimately the core of lifespan angst and why I find lifespan angst mostly tiresome. Like, Essek will outlive Caleb by centuries! Keyleth was, even had Vax lived a full and long life, going to outlive him by over a thousand years! Unless you die very young you will outlive someone you love. It doesn't mean it doesn't hurt, but like, this fandom (and probably others) truly seems to treat grief as a life-ending thing for the grieving rather than just the dead. So that's the big problem re: fandom response.

The other is that Orym gets thrown under the bus for Laudna a lot, for some reason. That's where the "Orym would be happier if he were dead with Will" came from and that's where the dumb discourse about the nod came from. It's just people who cannot abide by the idea that bad things can happen to Laudna and that she can do bad things deciding to pin it on Orym. I also think that Liam explicitly said on 4-Sided Dive that Orym could not be objective about this, and because they are very stupid and cannot understand things that are not explicitly spelled out, they could not put together that, for example, Imogen, whose mother is deeply tied up in the Ruby Vanguard, cannot be objective either. Ashton just nearly exploded due to a critical lack of objectivity about the situation.

Sort of as a companion to talking about Caleb but I think Liam makes his characters' trauma and how they feel about it fairly explicit and plainly stated, more so than most in the cast, and this is an entirely valid choice but I think it means that, for better or for worse, people who lack the skill to interpret characters whose feelings and motivations are not quite as clearly laid out will gravitate to them to make their arguments, either for or against them.

i don't know if you answer asks but you're one of the few blogs still consistently posting pjo tv crit and it's been such a relief. with the amount of praise it's gotten i feel so gaslit like am i just being a baseless hater?? but no there's a reason a lot of the people criticizing the show are writers. it's a poorly written show and the more i think about it the more problems i find

like i was thinking about the way the kids in the show just know everything and how boring it is to watch, especially the casino scene, and something hit me

the lotus casino functions perfectly as a metaphor for traits associated with adhd--the need for stimulation and time blindness. anyone would fall for the casino's lure, but especially adhd kids. the fact that the show takes that away is REALLY weird to me, to put it kindly

if i were being less kind? i would say there's grounds to argue that having these characters, who are children with adhd, be impervious to something that is designed to trap people exactly like them is, on some level, erasure of their disabilities. especially since the one character who does get affected by it is the one who doesn't have the same neurodivergencies as the two who don't. the explanation for why percy and annabeth didn't start to forget themselves was such a lazy cop out and i can't believe people ate it up

i don't know what that writers' room has against literal adhd children falling for traps that are designed to trap people, but it's embarrassing for them tbh

i’m so glad to hear it anon!! i’m a little surprised to hear it too tbh, i wasn’t sure if anyone else was still. interested in discussing it? it seems like the pjo/atla fanbase overlap means most people have moved onto to the live action atla show. and while i am an atla fan, i didn’t grow up with the show the same way i grew up with the pjo books, so based on what we’d already seen/heard of the natla show before it even released + my utter disappointment and heartbreak regarding the pjo show, i decided to spare myself the watch. i would rather keep my memories of the original show untainted; what i have seen of the show resonates with people’s criticisms of the writing (and as someone who has done costuming work. one look is all you need to understand THAT criticism lmfao).

but i’m honestly… surprised? the pjo show did not get the same level of criticism as the natla show? it’s not like pjo is not also very popular with that same generation, sure, atla being a show perhaps made it more appealing and accessible to more kids, etc etc, sure. but from the fan bases themselves, size aside? proportionately? the pjo fandom is FULL of show defenders just blatantly ignoring the show’s major foundational issues if not just outright parading them around as successes, meanwhile the critics are in the minority. compare that with what i’ve seen where the complete opposite is true of the atla fandom, it’s weird!! and especially jarring to me bc it seemed pretty clear to everyone in the atla fandom the show had Issues, meanwhile the pjo fandom heard the promise from rick riordan’s very own mouth this show is going to be faithful to the series’ spirit. it’s so weird to see the wildly different responses to what i think are prolly equally bad reboot shows, with a fandom of similar demographics (clearly not the SAME demographics or the response would prolly be more aligned but you get my point). so i agree anon, i do feel a little gaslit by the pjo fandom, and watching the atla fandom’s very reasonable response to the natla show is like. whiplash. another sign you and i are not losing it lmao

as for the lotus casino, this is an excellent point! i don’t even think it can be called unkind to point out how this episode is a symptom of the show’s overall disability erasure. i would say it’s unkind of the show to erase adhd and dyslexia representation. in fact, because of the explicit promise by its creator to see that representation, i would go as far as to call it cruel to then erase it. if anything, based on rick’s promises to add more representation, i was hoping for elements like autistic annabeth confirmation, since when pjo was first written, it was based off rick’s son and his friends who were all ND, and at the time it wasn’t thought to be possible to be AuDHD, but likely some of those kids probably were (and that then made its way into the books in characters like annabeth!). that would have been the perfect opportunity to add something with the foresight of modern times, but instead we got… absolutely no disability rep from the show aside from a few short lines of dialogue as a lame-ass bone-toss to the book fans.

the pjo show’s biggest crime is its lack of spirit of the original book series, and that book series cradled myself and every other ND child or child in an abusive situation who read it. it offered us a mother who never got angry with us when we showed “difficult” symptoms. it offered us camp half-blood, the idea of a place, a home, where people like us were not just accepted, but thrived. it offered us a new world. it offered us a friend in percy jackson. i do not feel the show truly offers anything substantial. it only takes.

It’s crazy ironic how you go on and on about how “Penelope stans call Eloise a white feminist/criticise her/etc to bring up their fav (Penelope)” when literally all u do is criticise Penelope as a half baked attempt at defending Eloise.

Let me be clear - I am not a Penelope fan. I do not like her, and I fully agree with your criticisms of her. That said, it’s ridiculous how pretty much ur only method of responding to Eloise crit is by bringing up things Penelope has done. Like, they are two different people. Penelope’s bad behaviour does not in fact have any bearing on how Eloise should be examined.

And all this while constantly complaining about the same damn thing u urself are doing ??? Insane levels of hypocrisy honestly

You know, I went a good chunk of the summer without getting any obnoxious anon messages. But all good things must come to an end, and of course, the peace would end over Regency Era Perez Hilton. So let's get into this anon.

If you've read my blog you'll see that my issues with Penelope Featherington pre-date her falling out with Eloise. I've said I think she punches down quite a lot. I've said I find it wildly unethical that her stans call what she does "reporting" because reporters have ethics, editors, a responsibility to fact-check, and ways of being held accountable if/when we get something wrong. When you're hiding behind a pseudonym and printing whispers and rumors as fact, with no way of verifying if it's truth that's just not happening. Additionally, at the end of season one after the reveal I posted that I didn't think Penelope's hurt feelings over an unrequited crush were as serious as the threat facing Marina as an unmarried pregnant girl (google fallen women, they tend not to live long). I don't think that Colin deserved to be tricked, but given the alternatives of a lifetime of poverty or being married off to a creep twice your age who approaches an engagement the same way a person purchases a horse, I understand why the desperate 17-year-old pursued the boy her own age who she knew would at least treat her well. Not only that, but I said I found it gross that she was smiling in Marina's face while having exposed her secret in the cruelest way possible.

Here's another Eloise-free critique of Penelope, she's the worst kind of mean girl, the kind with a victim complex who wants to do nasty things while still being seen as an angel who can do no wrong. Do you want another criticism of Penelope that has nothing to do with Eloise? I think it's icky that she mocked Kate for being a spinster and called one of the few Indian women on this show a beast. I heard that was in the books too, but fun fact, Black and brown people being compared to or flat-out called animals has a racist history and present. Despite the "Penelope woman of the working class people" song and dance, I pointed out that she's trying to stay in Madame Delacroix’s good graces because she can blow the whistle on her.

I've said, it annoys me that people behave as if Penelope's crush being unrequited is a terrible hardship that justifies all her misdeeds, when Colin has never been cruel to her about romantic feelings he doesn't know are there. Contrary to Penelope stans version of history he hasn't tried to lead her on or hurt her, he treats her like a friend and nothing more. In Queen Charlotte, I said it was a dick move to needle the Queen about her lack of heirs during her granddaughter's funeral.

Now, you're saying that I only use Eloise to criticize Penelope, but not only is that untrue it's devoid of context. I only started comparing Eloise and Penelope because after their falling out Penelope's stans started saying that Eloise was a privileged white feminist as a reason that Penelope's actions weren't wrong and why she had no right to feel betrayed. Eloise's feminism is flawed, there's a lot she hasn't considered because she's been sheltered. ICYMI, I pointed out that she failed to understand that due to their class differences, Theo was in more danger than she was because he didn't have a rich family nor the protection that comes with her surname. I even agreed with Theo getting frustrated with her because due to class he is vulnerable in a way she is not. Furthermore, when Penelope stans say Eloise is an entitled white feminist it's not really about what Eloise has done, it's said in service of absolving Penelope of any wrongdoing. I've pointed out that it's said as if in comparison Penelope is Audre Lorde and hasn't been almost as privileged as Eloise up until her father died.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Who acts like more of an entitled white feminist. The girl who is ignorant or the girl slut shaming other women and notably hurting women of color for her own selfish gain? Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony would be proud. Sure, it's despicable that they used racism to gain support for women's suffrage and threw Fredrick Douglas under the bus, still wanting voting rights is less selfish than wanting the high and financial gain that comes with running an anonymous burn book.

Call me a hypocrite if you want but I've got the receipts to show I started criticizing Penelope way before she fell out with Eloise. And frankly, it's hypocritical of you not to realize that my Eloise and Penelope comparisons are a response to the "Eloise crit" that are just thinly layered Penelope apologism and revisionist history.

Have the day you deserve anon.

Angry

I just out about this post from November. I think this might be the oldest post in the "Sophiecourse" tag. It starts with this screenshot of my post.

The ask itself was super gross.

And... I legitimately thought that was it. I shut them down, and I don't think the anon said anything further.

And then I found this...

Apparently, gender identity is only worth respecting if you explicitly identify as transgender. Otherwise, this is totally acceptable behavior. /s

And just a reminder, we're not in the minority when it comes to having headmates who identify as cis while having headmates of differing AGABs.

This is the overwhelming majority of systems who answered.

But the post still got 13 likes...

Which might not seem like a lot, but it's legitimately surprising to me that 13 people saw that, nodded their heads, and decided this was acceptable discourse because it was against somebody they didn't like.

And yes, I'll say it: misgendering headmates who don't identify by their body's AGAB is transphobia, even if the headmates don't identify as transgender.

It's also pluralphobic, sanist and ableist to try to justify misgendering systems using that as an excuse.

Everything about this post is completely disgusting.

And you know what I just learned... here is a cherry on top.

The system who made the above post is the admin of the Survivor's Network discord server.

Wait... do most people even know about this... I'm going to need a separate section dedicated for this. Well, this post is getting way longer than I meant it to be. I just was going to make a quick post here, but okay! Let's get into this!

The Survivor's Network

For those who aren't aware, there was a bit of discourse several months back with a former member of The Survivors Network who left and started talking about disturbing behavior they witnessed there.

This included multiple users making fake Tupperbox profiles of me to roleplay as me and mock me. And to be clear, the one speaking out on this was anti-endo and very passionately hates me, and whatever was going on there made even them uncomfortable.

They didn't mention the server by name at first, but immediately got several hate asks, as well as people calling them out the Confessions blog. And again, they didn't even name the server by that point. They just said they had been in a server that had done these bad things.

It was only after continued pushing that the user finally named the Survivor's Network as the place responsible.

I... don't like making cult comparisons... but in the days after this user blew the whistle, several major Syscourse blogs started making posts praising the Survivor's Network. I would be lying if I said it wasn't a little creepy as an outsider how the Survivor's Network being barely criticized, not even by name, elicited that type of response. Both the instant praise to prove their allegiance to the group, and the attacks against the whistleblower.

Other anons sent in asks to the whistleblower talking about bullying, toxic and clique-y behavior they witnessed in the Survivor's Network

Ugh...

I legitimately started writing this with no idea of the connection. I just was going to write about this really gross post I found out about. But this does give me a much clearer picture of the Survivor's Network if the admin is saying things like this.

And many of the major syscoursers are part of this group. Especially anti-endos, "neutrals" and "unaligned."

Anyway, if anyone is considering joining The Survivor's Network, I think it's important to know the type of people who run it.

Sorry for submitting an ask related to The Discourse. This ended up being such a wall of text that "i ain't reading all that" might be the only appropriate response. I feel like very often when there's some internet outrage directed at a person (like mass reporting or sending annoying asks) it's a direct consequence of a fucked up game of telephone where someone is reduced to one thing they once posted, and that thing in question is gradually stripped of any nuance to the point of being spread around as something else entirely. I have not been following your blog closely in the last couple of weeks, but from everything that I have seen recently it seems that people are going through this chain of misinformation (or willful malicious ignorance, or stupidity. we may never know): This user wrote a story which included depictions of CSA! -> This user makes pornographic content of fictional children and gets sexual gratification from seeing that content! -> This user makes and enjoys actual, real-life CP! The jump from the first step to the second is already an insane leap, but from what I have seen this is how internet hate mobs snowball into successfully mass reporting or bullying people off of social media. Just going with the least charitable imagining of the step they're currently at so they can arrive at the next one, squeezing a person into a "that guy who did that thing" box, as if there is no other context surrounding said thing. What bothers me about this especially, is that there might be an interesting (though difficult and draining) conversation about the first step of that chain, which as far as I know, is true - but it gets buried under braindead criticisms of either things you haven't done (like every subsequent step in the chain) or something that's boring and irrelevant (like "but what if someone ignores every content warning imaginable and reads it anyway and gets traumatized!!!"). Not all portrayals of CSA are created equal. Like, example, loli hentai is literally just porn made for pedophiles as the target audience. Obviously, that's super far off from what you're creating but I think it gives rise to a valid question: given a piece of media depicting CSA of fictional characters, where is the line between that piece of media being a worthwhile exploration of the topic and it being just CP with fictional kids as a proxy for real ones? Authorial intent? Whether someone ends up getting off to it? I have no fucking clue if I'm being honest. And I'm sure as all hell that tumblr also doesn't, so they just default to "it's all bad and irresponsible, delete your blog".

no need to apologize, anon. but i am sorry for responding with an answer you may not like, and i understand if you don't want to interact or associate with me now.

i think sometimes yes, it is a lot of misunderstandings and miscommunications. but i am the second step. i do get sexual gratification from explicit fictional content (drawn or written) with fictional minors.

the thing that makes it complicated, and apparently too complex for some people to understand, is that the sexual gratification is not because of a sexual attraction to children.

for me, it's about what fictional children represent. it's about twisting that symbolic innocence into something disturbing. it's about using the undeveloped psychology of a fictional child and the naive trust in order to craft more twisted, manipulative scenarios. it's about putting a symbol of youth and purity in adult situations and playing with those elements, seeing if that youth and purity stays or if it's destroyed by the trauma. if there even IS trauma -- not all of the content i make will be angsty or whumpy, because sometimes it's still just as delightfully disturbing to make it Simple and Sweet.

once upon a time, my dad did something incredibly traumatizing to me as a kid, and it's a trauma that i cope with through Logan all the time. it's literally the 'David using his son as his wife' trauma.

i've had a lot of time to do some self-reflection ever since then and i've realized now, that night changed me. it changed how i think. it made me drawn to explicit fiction with fictional minors, specifically paired with or abused in some way by adults. that wasn't just something i always felt.

you're absolutely right about things snowballing, and i do think at this point, people think that they can just 'cancel' anyone they don't like. and i absolutely agree that not all portrayals of explicit content with fictional minors are made equal.

but i don't think loli hentai, or any animated medium with fictional minors, is just for pedos. i think it can be CONSUMED by pedos (like anything), but like…you can find plenty of adjacent things on any porn site. underage kink, ageplay, daddy's little girl, mommy's little boy -- there is a kink for every genre in that category, and i don't think getting sexual gratification from it makes you a pedo.

the icky morally gray area that people tend to avoid is that fiction cannot, and should not, be judged by intent. fictional CP could range from anywhere on a scale of 'artfully written story about abuse' to 'totally obscene PWP'. and ultimately, it just comes down to whether you want to engage with it, and whether you can still value a person as a person knowing that they might get off to something that gives you the creeps.

Hi! I really enjoy love and relationships, and one of my favorite ways to celebrate them is through selfship moodboards! I also do personal/character ones, you can find that info (when I get the post up LMAO)!

I do have set questions I would like you to answer so I can make your board as best as I can and those can be found under the cut! Please send them in an ask!! Feel free to be as wordy as you want! Again, the more info I have, the better it'll turn out.

🌸 The fandoms I can make boards for are the following:

❥ Attack On Titan ❥ Demon Slayer ❥ Critical Role (Vox Machina, Bells Hells) ❥ One Piece ❥ Naruto (first series, I haven't finished Shipudden yet no one @ ME) ❥ ☆ My Hero Academia ❥ ☆ Jujutsu Kaisen ❥ Leon S. Kennedy

☆ - I'm not caught up with the manga so please keep it to most recent anime episodes lol

🌸 My rules are as follows:

❥ Please answer my questions as if they exist IRL. The images provided on Canva do not provide me with the images needed to visualize a fictional world so it would help me a ton if you imagine a modernAU. ❥ I am pretty open to a lot of things but please be aware that I do reserve the right to turn down certain aspects of the request if I feel uncomfortable with it. ❥ I cannot and will not put/use explicit images in these boards. I can do suggestive things but don't be asking for [redacted]. ❥ Have fun with your responses! I won't post your responses with the finished board unless you send it through anon (if you'd like me to post it with your answers tho, lemme know!) ❥ OCs are okay! Just give me more information about them in your ask, please.

You think about your blorbo, what are some things that come to mind? (could be scenarios, objects, colors, etc) How did y’all meet?? What was your first date? What is your dream date with them? Are you married or just dating? If the former, how did they propose?? What is your favorite memory with them? Where would you like to vacation with them? How do you both like to spend time together? What’s a mundane thing you enjoy doing with them? (driving around, cooking, napping, grocery shopping, etc.) What’s something that they do with you that never fails to make you smile/feel loved? What do they do to help you when you’re having a bad day? Vice versa? What general aesthetic/vibe do you tend to visualize when imagining them? (paris romantic, grunge concert, summer backyard bbq, etc.) Following that question, can you be more specific on that aesthetic? Are there any songs/quotes that remind you of them? If so, what? Bonus points if you tell me what lyrics speak to your soul the most. Where do you see y'all settling down? What does the environment look like?

"It's become so popular to cyberbully people in this fandom, especially if they hold any opinion outside the extremely limited and strictly enforced one-way-only 'acceptable' opinion."

This. Fucking this. I haven't experienced anon hate ir any sort of harrassment, but hearing the hate people can get boogles my mind.

You like Adam or dislike how things ended for him? You feel uncomfortable how fndm treats him? You're an abuse apologist. (because the only villains you're allowed to like are the ones WE decide you can like.)

You like Ironwood or dislike how things ended for him? You dislike how his villain arc got writen? You feel uncomfortable how fndm treats his paranoia and prosthetics? You're a terrible person who supports facism, because you dared to do some critical thinking and don't agree with the group by daring to have different opinions (how ironic)

You ship Blacksun instead of Bumbleby? You're a hompohobe, 'cause Yang and Sun are totally the same people so you should be shipping BB too. (Lets ignore how I water down Yang and Sun to 1 surface level trait and that both have different plotlines with Blake)

And now shipping FB is bad? I thought this fandom cared about f/f ships? Guess, not and only care about keeping everyone in line. For god's sake, you're telling me people got shitted on for theorizing that Qrow is Ruby's dad?? Sheez, with this pathern of behavior I can safely assume I would get accused of being a military bootlicker who supports bombing cities because I like Harriet.

For my time in this fandom I learned the only way I can enjoy RWBY, without mentally blocking out the toxic part of Fndm or getting mentally tired in the Rwde side and without getting frustrated by the canon...is to stay in my corner. No matter how friendly Rwby positive blog looks like - I'm staying in my corner. Quick look at their posts about Rwde, Ironwood etc. and I'm taking a distance.

And what sucks more, I do want to talk about RWBY with people. I want to talk without bringing up it's flaws. Once I brought up RWBY to a mutual of mine and they hadn't heard of it before, but said they would check it out.

I was happy because I would have someone to talk about RWBY, but then later I remembered about how Fndm can be, about the war with criticism they have. I would get worried them getting harrassed if they talk about the flaws. What if Fndms toxicity influences them? Maybe, I did the bad thing for mentioning RWBY to them??

I get, Fndm not wanting constant critcism in their dash. Trying to enjoy a show with many pointing out the cracks can be draining. But all this? All these rules of what to think, like and ship? This isn't ok.

I agree that RWBY haters can drive off new fans of the show. but there are times where fandoms are too responsible for this. Congrats Fndm, I'm tired.

Largely since my re-entry into the fandom I've been incredibly careful about separating positive posts from critical ones. I'll tag things as rwde/rwby critical liberally because I don't want to chance a post I make finding someone who thinks it's too negative. I tend to be more critical this days or think a lot about alterations I'd make to canon to enjoy myself more and I'm having fun doing that in my corner of the internet.

I think mainly the part that threw me was to see a harmless post get someone upset, and then a request for people to manage their internet space only caused this to worsen. Last time I posted freezerburn content (2016 I believe) it was treated as normal and not subject to controversy. It felt a bit like getting a bucket of ice water dumped on me because I wasn't ready for a completely angry response to positivity.

The fandoms response to my recent posts about this situation has been overall more positive in all honesty with a lot of support and mutual aggrevation (like this) at how many rwby fans can often live in an echo chamber where canon is law and anyone who ignores said law is out to destroy RWBY regardless of how much they might enjoy the show.

This defensive nature might stem from fans getting incredibly protective of the series because there was a point when it would get a lot of unnecessary hate in the early days for dumb things (animation and episode length when budget was clearly an issue). But even so they now begin to lump everyone enjoying the show differently together and assume the worst which is what isolates so may people.

I do appreciate all of you for being supportive though and it's unfortunate that the fandom got into a state like this, I feel like it's one of the worst versions of this type of thing in fandom that I've seen. But when we get the fans who accept people are going to have differences of opinions and handle their online space to make sure they're having fun it makes enjoying the fandom easier!

Alcohol anon: Whoa, lots of less-than-charitable assumptions made about me in the notes! I don't appreciate that. "Why did you mention addiction when we were discussing fandom?" because I've witnessed this convo on this blog before and I know "conservative about alcohol" has been used to mean anywhere from "believes addicts are The Devil" to "has unrealistic ideas about alcohol in fanfiction" to "reblogged a post once criticizing mommy wine culture." I actually agree that a lot of people are sort of babies about alcohol in fanfiction, and I believe the idea that authors have a responsibility to caution against alcohol consumption is just another manifestation of anti ideology. To address the assumptions: No, I wasn't raised conservative, or in the Bible Belt. I was raised very progressive. No, my first thought about alcohol isn't "ZOMG BUT ALCOHOLISM." My intent was not to moralize about alcohol or addiction, and I attempted to be clear that was the case. I am aware people DO use the concept of health to moralize about alcohol - my point is, it should in fact be possible to say "alcohol has health detriments" and for it to NOT secretly be a moral statement about addicts, BECAUSE health doesn't determine morals. I am also aware that most people know alcohol has health detriments - but some people genuinely don't realise that alcohol habits considered completely safe actually might not be. And, in part because of the moralization about addiction, some people have this idea that if they're not an addict (or what their idea of "an addict" is), their alcohol habits must be completely safe. I didn't know what the actual definition of a "binge" was before recently! One person in the notes accused me of condescension - I'm sorry if I came across that way! I don't assume EVERYONE who chooses to drink, even to an extreme extent does so uninformed. I also don't make it my mission to constantly "uhm, actually" people about alcohol. It rarely crosses my mind, and I would never ride a horse so high I'd inform an acquaintance or friend "that's actually considered a binge and it's bad for you :)" when they mention their alcohol habits. I was just reminded of the discourse of yesteryear, and curious for clarification if "weird about alcohol" just referred to fanfiction here. Because I vividly remember "one drink a day won't hurt you" and "but uh, it can?" being responded to with "what are you, a prude?"

--

Nonnie, I'm sorry, but nobody really cares about the actual medical advice in the US, which right now is something like no more than one glass of wine a few days a week for women and one a day for men. Yes, it's a lot lower than things considered culturally normal many places. But you're not going to get people to care about this.

In the context of fic, what I care about is that it's generally also OOC for these characters to care.

Any more thoughts about the whole Twitter situation? What do you think will happen to that site over the next while?

Hi Anon, thank you for the Ask!

By the gods, what to even say now?

I wish that I had the wit to voice my thoughts with brevity and good humor. The Twitter Musk situation is hilarious-but-also-serious, and alas, I am verbose in my thoughts and not very funny.

I'm not sure that Twitter will survive, if I have time I'll post more deeply on what I think will happen with that.

I don't follow much outside of USA Twitter, so I can see all of this going in a lot of directions, such as the platform being irrelevant in the US, while remaining utilized outside of the USA.

We can still use Twitter and curate our experience by muting every slur that ever existed while using mega block on shitty tweets to expand our block lists, but that's not gonna change the fact if Twitter survives—without Furry Musk-gland backtracking on moderation—then the winners will be authoritarian regimes and con artists. Both rely upon sowing disinformation, distrust, propaganda, and conspiracies.

There are many choice threads on Twitter that reveal the convergence of serious issues, and I don’t even know where to begin summarizing them all. I’ve included a list of URLs to a variety of threads that might be of interest. What's happening here is not a simple thing, it's bigger than one spoiled mediocre man's ego.

Content is king, and Black people did a lot of labor in creating the kind of content that draws users to Twitter. Michael Harriot of The Grio has some words.

Hark! A graph showing Mastodon new user sign up spikes plotted against new user sign-ups on Twitter

A kind and thoughtful thread by Gerard K Cohen about his team members. Their entire team (Accessibility Experience Team) was among the mass firings at Twitter last week.

Of which, the unsurprising firing of thousands of employees (not all of them whom are software engineers) potentially poses as serious legal issue for Twitter due to California’s WARN law.

Also in Ireland (though small potatoes I suppose).

Apartheid Clyde (thank you Black Twitter for this most excellent name for Elon Musk) tries to blame advertisers bailing on the platform on activists. Gets called out by the president and Chief Operating Officer of MMA Global (a multi-national marketing trade association) whom he had just had a call with.

On the value of experts discussing in an open public forum

Concerns from a Chinese dissident

Discount Stark is fact-checked on his lie about advertising

Profoundly bad business decisions. There is no 5D chess here folks. There may well be a case for Tesla stock-holders to sue for breach of fiduciary responsibility.

Being an asshole to everyone and then firing the security team (who were already pissed at you very likely) as you’re rolling out a feature that requires both financial and personal data to be transmitted and stored is beyond foolish.

Ohhhh, hmmm about those critical employees…

Some of the fired employees are here on work visas

Potentially disruptive for upcoming elections in the USA.

Listen, I work in tech. I co-founded a startup back in 2013. No job is worth a 9:30pm stand-up while your colleagues are being fired by a useless billionaire.

Does Twitter really matter though?

Learn to host your own content.

Make a list of your fave Twitter artists, authors, etc.

When parody is only comedy if it comes with a disclaimer

Comedy as a venn diagram

Use lists to get around shadow banning of un-verified accounts

Paying for verification reduces identity to a trademark. The average person does not have the resources to continuously litigate their identity, such people who are recognized experts in their field, journalists, government officials, etc will be the ones impersonated.

A must-read thread about Twitter and counter-convergence (spoiler, Harry Potter was a counter-convergence)

Faith and trust rely on knowing that people are who they claim to be when they speak on subjects with authority and expertise. Undercutting the ability of such people to verify themselves is a form of discrediting, and when that happens systematically to scientists, educators, and public servants, then we have fascist propaganda tactics on our hands.

I hope you find these useful Anon!

(Y'all give me some reblogs because I'm not sure if this post will show up organically since it has links in it.)

Reply

Yeah. It's basically why I'm thinking of lessening my inputs in some art communities. So many of the people in Discord alone are very touchy when it comes to receiving criticism over webcomics and even art. 

The last server I was on banned me for basically talking about how the owner of a server's art piece would probably improve if they go back and finish it. All I got was a response that amounted to "shut the fuck up! Let the artist do what they want" with the artist/owner pointing up to it in agreement when they were the ones who asked for an opinion. Always treating me like I'm a negative user and a whale (basically meaning a person who consumes a lot of media and treating it like it's a part of the conversation). 

Generally speaking, webcomic servers are just terrible places. Like all of them just run on echo chamber energy. Sure you can say that about social media sites, but forums and especially Discord servers have it worse to me. Like the times I keep getting vague answers on comics that seemingly have no directions and all the artist does it post sarcastically smug emojis over the questions while saying things like "that's an interesting idea" or "Ooo! Maybe. Guess you got to keep reading". No real engagement. Just garbage responses.

Or one time when I tried to ask a simple question about a flaw in a character or even story that I didn't like how it was written, and the author spent time divulging their character's bio and how story writing works without actually engaging with me and answering what I just asked. Acting like I didn't read or understood the story/intentions. You know, before blocking me on almost all accounts. Furaffinity, Twitter, Tumblr, ect. ect. Just a waste of time, especially mine.

That's one of the things you're wrong about, GW dude. It doesn't matter if they're a big shot or not. As long as an artist/person has AN AUDIENCE they're all the same. Just borderline insecure and most times arrogant people who really have a specific audience in mind that will take the good and the bad, not say anything about either, and put users down if they didn't like what they said.

That is unfortunate and irritating to hear and I don't know if it's the internet that caused this or does popularity really go into people's heads. This reminds me of the anon who came here like a month ago to tell me to critique Marvel movies instead of webcomics. I think they might have been a webcomic artist who comes from that exact mindset. These people also need an example of what a negative person is. Go on Twitter, and I am not naming names but certain users who spend their whole timeline shitting on shit. Those people give me the idea they are very hard to be around. Likely nicest thing they can say about something is "looks like shit lmao". I know you've critiqued me as well and I don't get the idea you're inherently a negative person. I do take everything you say to heart and if I say something stupid you're not afraid of saying it to my face. You don't go on twitter or some grassy forum to crop my statement and go "THIS PERSON IS CLUELESS! FUCK HIM!". That's being a dick. I guess the inability to handle criticism is just something that's very common in indie scene, like gaining an audience is the worst possible thing that could happen to you as a creator. I don't think you should give up. Webcomics already have a ruined reputation and it's not the fault of webcomic critics but the webcomic creators for being so shallow, self-centered and pardon my french, fucking delusional.

the people in your ask box giving their reasons for not liking ronance is like. yes, you do you, but they are literally proving your point because what is it about a random f/f ship existing that makes people wanna argue against it ??? but yeah the anti ronance tag is truly a wild place.

This response is quite long, hence the read more! I kinda got off track and it goes into a discussion of canon vs headcanon and speaks a bit about Byler too.

If I were to be generous to Ronance antis, I think a lot of people are frustrated that there is a new canon bisexual character who's been introduced to the show but a lot of the fandom are ignoring her for a headcanon. And in general, members of this fandom and Ronance shippers are quite harsh against Rovickie and I don't think they'd be as harsh if it was an m/f pairing. Because it's the only canon gay pairing so far (I know it hasn't happened yet but it clearly will), people are expecting it to be this perfect romance like Jopper or Lumax but in eight minutes of screen time which is just impossible.

However, I think turning this defensiveness of people who ship Ronance is a bit unfair. So far, Vickie is just not an established character; she's barely had any screen time and she exists only to be Robin's girlfriend. At the moment, it feels a bit like pandering/fan service (although a lot of people make that criticism in bad faith because they view queer relationships as inherently woke or political which is bullshit). I can see the potential in the pairing and I guarantee I'll love them by the end of S5, but I've just not seen them interact as much. I am allowed to think that without it being problematic; just because a queer ship is canon representation doesn't mean I have to like it.

I also think it's quite obvious a lot of people in this fandom haven't had any fandom experiences before. A very frequent response I get to shipping Ronance that I don't respond to (because I can't be bothered to reply every time) is that Nancy canonically likes Jonathan and that Robin canonically likes Vickie. Or that there's no proof that Nancy's gay.

The thing is, I'm not shipping Ronance because I think they're going to canonically get together, I ship them because I like their dynamic both hypothetically and in many on screen interactions they had. I just prefer rivals to lovers than two very similar girls (I know talking a lot doesn't make them the same person but it's all we've really seen of Vickie so far) getting together. When I ship a ship, it's not because it's the most canon, it's because it's the best dynamic.

I see this response to people who ship pairings like Will and Lucas where people will get annoyed because they act like Will hypothetically liking someone other than Mike is erasure which is so odd because I doubt anyone shipping that pairing actually thinks it will be canon, they just think it would be an interesting pairing to explore.

Or how when people try to convince you to ship Byler, they try to convince you why it'll be canon and not why it'll be good (I'm not talking about responding to Byler antis who tell you that it won't happen or talking to fellow Byler shippers, Byler proof and analysis is very valuable). This also applies in reverse when an anon tried to prove that Byler won't be canon...in response to me saying I like friends to lovers.

TL;DR: I'm not gonna ship Rovickie over Ronance just because it's the canon queer relationship. I ship based on whatever pairing is the most interesting to me instead of which one is the most attainable. I understand that lots of people like it and I'm cool with that, but sending me long asks explaining that Rovickie/Jancy are canon isn't going to change my mind on Ronance.

Also a lot of Ronance antis are Nancy antis and that's a whole thing that I've responded to before (check my post index under the Ronance section and go to Ronance and boy drama or the follow up or just click the words there).