It’s really funny how much people misremember certain aspects of ATLA and then proclaim to the internet stuff that either never happened or is extremely distorted with absolute certainty. For example, today I saw a person claiming that whole point of Katara’s character arc was unlearning the parentified behaviours she developed in wake of her mother’s death. That a huge part of Katara’s arc was a confrontation of how that trauma fundamentally shaped her maternal tendencies.

The thing is though…WE the audience, can recognize that the parentification Katara experienced was something that was really straining for her, but the TEXT doesn’t. The audience (or at least certain parts of the audience) can identify that her maternal tendencies were indicative of a responsibility that she took on far too young and subjected her to unnecessary pressure and stress. There are flashes of recognition maybe, but for the most part, the show doesn’t actually confront the negative impact that Katara’s maternal role had on her.

Katara never truly unlearns the maternal behaviours that put so much pressure on her because the text doesn’t see it as a bad thing. Arguably, the text doesn’t see much of a problem with the emotional labour Katara takes on and how that labour goes unreciprocated for the most part (particularly from her canon love interest). We see some reflections, but it’s not enough to support a reading of the text where that element is actually extremely obvious and a prominent point in her character arc.

We’re not the ones “watching the show with our eyes closed”, I think you’re just misremembering the canon progression of Katara’s arc to avoid confronting a real issue in the text.

“We need more reception arcs like Zuko’s!”

Baby girl, you couldn’t even handle Taigen.

A huge reason why Zuko has been immortalized so fervently is because ATLA came out in the mid 2000s, nearing two decades ago. With the state of basic reading comprehension, much less media literacy, social awareness, and chronically online behaviour that exists nowadays in a way it did not exist fifteen years ago, I would be surprised if the live action ATLA tv adaptation didn’t make Zuko a bit more likeable right off the bat. I’m not saying I agree with it, but if the show-runners are concerned about audiences reactions to Sokka’s (wrong, but relatively mild) sexism that exists in only the first few episodes of the show, then the idea of redeeming Zuko has got to be terrifying them. Tbh I don’t entirely blame them, even though I’m not certain it’s a good idea for the story as an adaptation.

“Zukos the best character!” “No, Katara is!!” “it’s literally sokka!” “azula is the best!!!”

SHUT UP.

Appa is the best. bam. all character discourse solved. go home.

"master your element" maybe yall should master casting brown actors idk though

I just have to laugh when people insist that zutara shippers are responsible for perpetuating the ship war when KA shippers send messages like this.

Like, you really think I want to debate this with you on discord? Be serious.

All this discourse about if Katara healed Zuko’s scar, Aang woulda died, but everyone’s neglecting that if he’d had the chance to say yes, he wouldn’t have sided with Azula—he’s honorable to a fault and would have felt even more of a need to side with Aang and Iroh. It would have been Azula and the Dai Lee against our scorned boys and the GAang. A lotta things woulda been different, fam

i already have so many gripes with the original show and how they handle aang’s character arc and his relationship with katara/how they disserviced her by putting her in that relationship and i don’t trust netflix to fix ANY of that in the slightest, in fact i think they’ll probably make things i actually like about the original even worse and the actors are so young too oh my god Kiawentiio get behind me and it’s gonna be another horde of new fans rehashing the same tired old discourse i cannot do this again helpppp

Hot take: Iroh and Ursa struggled to parent Zuko and Azula because parenting abused children is hard, actually.

Anti Tagging is a Broken System

So there was this anti Zutara post that I saw a while ago that was tagged as both 'anti zutara' and 'zutara'. As you can imagine, zutara bloggers were mad and the OP claimed they tagged the post as 'zutara' as payback for zutara fans bashing kataang in the 'kataang' tag.

There was also a jedi critical post that was considered to be insulting to someone's religion or culture or some other nonsense. The person asked (**demanded**), the post be tagged as 'anti jedi' because seeing it in the 'jedi order' tag was causing real-world harm.

It confirmed my belief that the tagging system is severely broken and lacking.

These are two issues at play that I notice:

Villain vs Hero Double Standard

What's interesting is that this issue is mainly relevant for protagonists. If I want to bash Ozai, Palpatine or Joker on Tumblr, I don't have to tag my posts as anti. Maybe their fans would prefer it but we all know that these men are villains and the lowest scum in media. It's not bashing - it's the cold hard truth.

So why is it that my calling Ozai a bad father is not Ozai bashing, but me calling Aang a bad father is Aang bashing?? Why the double standards?? Sure, the hero will likely be more sympathetic because we are meant to root for them. But at the end of the day, just like Ozai, Aang played favourites and this left scars on his kids even in their fifties. If you are an Aang fan you can try to justify it, but his actions still hurt his kids no matter how you spin it.

What Does 'Anti' Even Mean??

There are too many ways to be anti character, anti ship etc which makes things murky.

Let's use Kataang as an example. Are you anti Kataang because you objectively looked at the ATLA show and you think how it is presented makes it a bad ship? Are you anti KA because you genuinely like the ship but you think it was not developed properly or did not go the way you thought best? Are you anti KA because you are just emotionally repulsed for whatever reason even though canon may give you reasons to support it? Are you anti KA just because it may be popular to be so in your circle?

That's the problem. Theoretically, the first two scenarios could be classified under the general 'kataang' tag. Because people who hold those opinions are not just bashing it for no reason but have objective truths that they have observed about the ship. Saying that Aang kissed Katara without her consent is an objective truth. Why should that be labelled as 'anti kataang'? It's the truth about the ship.

How would I address this?

The general tag should not be treated as a safe space. If you want a safe space, stick to a 'pro' or 'anti' tag. The general tag should be treated like a neutral zone where everything is laid on the table for debate and discourse. So if I browse the Jedi Order tag, I should see metas about cool Jedi powers and master-padawan relationships but also metas about the separation of families and the social harm it causes kids.

People need to stop being babies and grow up. If someone posts a critical meta about the Jedi order, it does not mean they are attacking whatever religion you have or calling for genocide in real life. Do you know how much witchcraft, paganism, atheism and other kinds of Christian bashing posts I see in the Christianity tag?? If you don't like something, just scroll past it like a big kid. Don't send death or rape threats to someone if you disagree with them.

I think if someone does not have substantial or accurate reasons for hating something, they should stick to the anti tag and avoid the general tag.

What do others think?? Tagging is hard because it's up to the discretion of the poster but I hope my arguments here made sense.

@caripr94

@tragicfantasy-girl

@sokkastyles

@the-badger-mole

No, actually. It is not “shaming Katara’s femininity” or her “maternal traits” to critique the ways in which her character was relegated to a the passive role of the Avatar’s grieving widow and largely ignored by the narrative post-ATLA. Oh my god, we are not “degrading” Katara by pointing out the sexist implications of how her character was handled and to suggest such a thing is just so…infuriating and very revealing of the underlying sexism in the fandom.

No thoughts, just people endlessly glorifying Katara’s maternal tendencies without bothering to question or investigate the adverse effects of her parentification. Apparently anyone who criticizes the writing of Katara’s character is just denigrating “traditional femininity” and THEY are the true misogynists! Not the male writers or viewers who consistently minimize Katara’s significance to the narrative and mock fans who ship her with anyone other than Aang.

Not at all, really we should just accept the conditions of the narrative uncritically and never question the biases of the creators. How dare we criticize them and point out the underlying sexism in their writing?

Finished ATLA live action and…I hope the original creators are called in for the next two seasons. The original audience has grown up now so why should I be fed exposition like I’m a child- the actual kids show didn’t even do that.

What changes would you guys like to see?

something something fire and water are opposites… something about air and earth being opposites… something about moon and sun, and an earthbender appearing to an airbender in a place of strong spiritual connection… something or such about waterbending techniques being used to create new unique firebending maneuvers… oh yes something about age and maturity in relation to peers… sometimes in regards to push and pull… or maybe equal and opposite action and reaction and how balance in all things (especially the elements) is always needed and as such is a primary reason for the avatar’s existence… mmhhh yes yes

You know, so much of the fandom bashes Katara harshly for one harsh comment she made in The Southern Raiders to Sokka, when she was highly upset about her mother's death and she felt Sokka was dismissive of her feelings (which he kind of was, to be honest) and they go on about how unfair it is that Sokka didn't get an apology. Meanwhile, I've never seen any fans complain about how Zuko literally says the most disrespectful thing about Aang's culture (the "this isn't air temple preschool" comment) when he's literally the prince of the imperial nation that wiped out Aang's entire culture in the first place. Aang is just supposed to let that slide and no one in the Gaang defends him either. He never gets an apology for his culture and religion being mocked by an imperialist. Zuko is two years older than Katara here and this is after he went through the Day of Black Sun development when he realized that the Fire Nation were horrible to the other nations. There's no excuse for Zuko being such an asshole to Aang but I guess because he's Zuko, he gets a free pass while Katara has to be bashed forever for saying something unfair when she was traumatized and no one was really listening to her.

Katara and Azula are two sides of the same coin, they’re complex but so important to me AND OF COURSE THE STORY.

Not to go on my soapbox about this but the connection between online social justice warriors in fandom spaces and people who are only willing to engage in serious topics such as genocide, colonization, and child soldiers in terms of children's media is exactly why I blocked that person making callouts in the zutara tag the moment I saw them post about how zutara was badwrong and somehow thought they had a right to speak about this "as an adult with a special interest in childcore."

If you are an adult, you really have no business telling people that they need to engage with children's media the same way they would engage with realistic depictions of war and genocide in adult media, and its clear that the reason you are doing this is because you only want to engage in those topics in ways that are comfortable and safe.

Not that there is anything wrong with adults engaging with children's media, and even exploring adult topics via children's media, but don't pretend it's anything other than what it is.