#but that's Discourse ™ for another time | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

am-i-the-asshole-official · 5 months

Note

AITA for arguing with someone over ships?

🧀⛵ so i can find this later

Yes, this is ship discourse AITA #294729472 you can scroll away, english isn't my first language, my apologies.

So I (16M (But 13-14 at the time)) am in a very niche fandom. As in, we didn't have any new content for the past 5 years and media is old af (2013), very few fans, most of us know each other already.

I used to have these mutuals Cheese (Not their real name) (around my age i think?? I can't remember) and Breadstick (Not his real name) (18M).

We all had our little ships, ok? I like the little (dumbass golden retriever boy) x (badass traumatized man) ship, Cheese liked the little (badass traumatized man) x (literally the same thing but evil and abusive) and Breadstick liked both ships.

I met Breadstick before meeting Cheese so we were already friends before i met Cheese. I thought "Cool, another person likes this little niche thing i'm hyperfixated on!" So we became mutuals.

I didn't anticipate that we would argue about ships, but oh well. So, i'm a very chill person regarding ships, literally any, although i do have NOTPs, i'm not really toxic about my hatred, i just go "Ah, not my thing" and scroll away not without blocking the person, but really nothing personal and no hard feelings, i can perfectly be friends with someone who loves my notp.

In fact, that was the case with Cheese. They shipped my NOTP, like A LOT. But I was okay with it, i mean these are just characters and all we're doing is being silly. I didn't take this THAT seriously. However, when I seemed to talk about my ship, Cheese seemed uncomfortable in some way.

When I was talking about my fankid (call me cringe idc) of my OTP, Cheese got very confused and asked who was i talking about. Breadstick came in and introduced my fankid to them, since he knew about it before. Cheese just started being rude, literally saying swear words (Not against them but, the context didn't really call for it? No one was being mean or mad), saying, and i quote as best as i can, "I don't know what the fuck made you think i knew who the hell [Fankid] was".

I got very mad about it, so i privately dm'ed Breadstick about Cheese's attitude. We began trash talking about them, which, i admit was a very trashy thing to do and definitely asshole material™.

Reason why may i be the asshole: over time, Breadstick just started complaining a lot about Cheese, and I could honestly agree, it came to the point of us disliking them to some degree but not telling them and not breaking the mutual, that could be considered two faced behavior.

This was partly influenced because of another incident. So Cheese and Breadstick where rambling about an OT3 (3 person ship) they had in common, basically sharing ideas and stuff. I thought it would be fun and went "Hey, I have an OT3 too, maybe i should post about it too". So I went and posted about it, but Cheese felt very uncomfortable with that, since basically my OT3 was exactly like Cheese's OT3 but one character is different, "basically".

They said "You have your thing, let US have ours". Felt bad and honestly, maybe i shouldn't have intruded their ot3 rambling. I didn't expect such negative reaction out of them.

In other occasions they complained about me posting a little too much about my ship, even though they did the same thing with theirs. And they also had a mutual that said "If you ship [this character] you suck and i fucking hate you. [character] is too abusive to be shipped with anyone and you can't just make an AU, that would just change him as a character completely" which, dear god, that language wasn't needed, right?. And despite that crazy person saying that, Cheese agreed with their take, despite literally shipping the character in question with another one. And abusively too, which like you do you, lord knows i do that too, but agreeing with a take like that while doing exactly what it is complaining about is weird. On the other side, that person wasn't my mutual, so it's unrealistic of me to expect Cheese to control their mutuals over me, Cheese can mutual whoever they want, but i can still be weirded out right?

That is without including them telling other people to kill themselves over shipping, so it was clear that Cheese took this shipping thing seriously while me and Breadstick to some degree didn't. Honestly another reason why i might be an asshole, clearly they felt their otp was personal and me not liking it + ignoring it caused a bad environment, mala mía, but what else could i have done?

So, clearly Cheese is kind of an asshole to some degree. But i think what makes ME an asshole too is when I trash talked behind their back and cut them off way later than i should've. And also, i guess i shoved my ship down their throat taking by how mad they were about it? I didn't do it intentionally though and i could definitely say they did the same thing too when 80% of the fandom and character tags was them posting about their ship. Again, small niche fandom for old unpopular media, we are keeping it alive ourselves.

What are these acronyms?

#aita #am i the asshole #ship discourse #posts that make me crave one of those lil cheese dip breadstick snack packs #which i have not eaten in roughly uhhhh at least a decade and a half #but the taste. you never forget that taste

104 notes · View notes

aro-bird · 3 months

Text

I do have to say, as someone on the camp of "you could probably ship someone else who isn't non-partnering but honestly I don't care as long as you don't harass people over this", I think it's lost on some people that the reason why so many non-partnering aroaces may become defensive over these characters even if "it's just fandom" is the fact that a lot of aroaces who do fit these stereotypes and who may fall into this camp genuinely had horrible experiences about their social circles and yes, especially this fandom site, harassing them and saying they don't exist or that they're mentally ill and should "get fixed" among other things.

As common it is to see aspecs here on Tumblr, the queer social media site, you need to understand that there's still a lot of contempt for aroaces outside and inside this place. Hell, I received an ask calling aros and aces delusional just last Christmas Day 2023 that came with a wave of increased arophobia around that time. As much as that time period was definitely discourse against aroallo men, aphobes did not cherry pick on who they're sending hate to.

Besides this, a lot of non-partnering aroaces often receive this kind of dismissal in real life too and as much as some people may think it's not a big deal, it definitely fucks up your brain when people say you and your experiences not only don't matter but you are doomed to live a lonely and miserable life if you don't find someone. Even my otherwise very supportive relatives expressed this concern and it's absolutely out of care but it's fucking damaging to constantly hear that I will die alone if I don't find a partner (romantic, platonic, or otherwise).

This is besides dismissals like this or even non-acceptance had literally barred me from mental health care when I was a teenager because my specialist said I had a "distressed sexuality" and had specialists focused on that aspect rather than all my other issues.

The shipping of a non-partnering (typically romance repulsed or uninterested) character feels like another form of dismissal for someone like me, like my sexuality is not good enough or serious enough to be respected. The shipping of these characters sometimes reinforce the narrative that non-partnering aroace people can't find happiness on their own and do need someone (romantic, platonic, or otherwise) to be happy or they will become happier if they do find this someone. People are having fun with their ships but there are still many people who don't want to spend the time actually extending grace and understanding towards me and my experiences. I'm just another discourse topic and someone who's inconvenient to some of them.

This doesn't even account for how these fan communities aren't just filled with aspec people and do extend to allos who may take some of the discourse and actively apply it in real life to other real life aspec people. People who go and interact with real human beings and may hurt them or harass them. It isn't even accounting for the fact that even online things affect real people too.

Of course, I do understand that a lot more complex aspec identities often don't get the spotlight so they may express themselves through shipping fandom characters but non-partnering people should deserve more than these people isn't really the point of this post.

The point here is that there's a reason why a lot of non-partnering (typically repulsed or uninterested) aroace people get defensive about these things even in fan communities and it's very likely that it's because aphobia and especially against the stereotypical aroace™ still very much exist outside of our little community and they can be informed by media and the fans that consume it and this shit could genuinely have negative consequences. This of course extends to those who do have complex aspec identities as society does not treat those who don't live up to what is expected as "normal" in terms of romantic relationships and sexual attraction kindly.

Distancing yourself from these aroaces who do have frustrations with how media and fandom treat their sexuality because they're being "prudes" or are just affected by "purity culture" is unhelpful to say the least and honestly veers eerily close to shit I hear aphobes say about us.

Absolutely do stop people and block them if they're instigating and participating in harassment over shipping of all things, even these aroaces, but trying to say that every person who do have issues with shipping aroace characters are the same way with this is extremely lacking nuance and absolutely dismissive of other members of the community and why they may have the opinion they hold.

#mayaposts #shipping #ship #shipping discourse #aroace #aroace representation #aro #ace #aromantic #asexual #aromantic asexual #<- again sorry for tagging these it is relevant since the discussion is more community wide #the disk horse #<- tagging this here bc yes this is definitely related to that discourse too #amatonormativity #allonormativity

42 notes · View notes

terukotime · 9 months

Text

Hihi guys. I don't necessarily like to engage in fandom "discourse", which I don't really even know if that's the proper term to use in this case, but in regards to DRDTDev's response to a confession on the DRDT Confessions account (I posted a reblog with a response to it directly here, in case you're curious), I want to say something on the situation revolving around the OP of that confession.

I agree that the confession itself was obviously harmful, if unintentionally, and that it was poorly-worded, and overall would have been something better kept to themselves. However, I acknowledge that the anon of the confession is only human, and we all have made mistakes without the judgment or maturity needed to understand the repercussions of it. So I ask to everyone who has been harassing that anon (who has come out on a burner account admitting to being the OP of that confession and apologizing), to please stop.

I 100% agree that the confession made was, in the long run, hurtful and (for lack of a better term cause it's currently 5am as I'm writing this) tone-deaf. But I do sympathize with the anon because I can understand where they were coming from with what they said, though I still disagree with how it was said, and I don't think it should've been said at all.

But to those who have gone out of their way to say some absolutely atrocious stuff to that person, that is extremely out of line. People have said that the OP is a coward for not having posted it non-anonymously, called them horrible names, claimed that they aren't even really sorry, and other abhorrent things. I do understand the anger, but the actions some people have taken against this person are incredibly out of line and not okay.

I understand that this is a fandom of predominantly minors, and I am not a minor myself, so the levels of emotional maturity of many people in this fandom differ vastly. So I won't say anything harmful back to those who have harassed the anon of that confession. But I will say once again that behavior like that is unacceptable, and though you are trying to be in defense of DRDTDev, this is likely not what they want at all, either. You don't need to say such cruel and terrible things about someone who you don't even know who made a mistake, has owned up to it publicly, and has apologized for it. Being upset is one thing. Taking it out on the OP and acting like this is somehow going to be the downfall of the DRDT fandom is in an entire other universe of being another thing.

So please, let the takeaway of this situation be that we all need to be kinder, more mindful, and more respectful to not only DRDTDev but each other within this community. The immediate jump to hostility from some people is both disappointing and disgusting and is not at all how we should be reacting to this situation. Overall, we should be showing DRDTDev our support, our love and appreciation to them and all that they do, NOT going at each other's throats about this and only further proving that DRDTDev has a reason to be afraid of us.

That being said, I want to take this moment to promote @nicohakobyan's idea for a #drdtdevappreciation event, of which I will definitely be partaking in. It's something I think is very much needed at this time, and will be a great way to show our respect and admiration towards the creator, and I highly encourage everyone to do the same!

Thanks to everyone who took the time to read this little PSA, as I feel like this desperately needed to be said before it continues to get out of hand.

Sincerely, the Certified Teruko (and DRDT as a whole) Stan™,

Giselle 💖

#drdt #danganronpa despair time #despair time #drdtdevappreciation

65 notes · View notes

frost-felon · 3 months

Text

I aim to accomplish three things in this post:

1. Make an argument for why I believe Gojo Satoru's death and afterlife scene don't give his character arc a satisfying resolution.

2. Argue why Tsumiki would be crucial for advancing Satoru's character and giving her more of a role than "Megumi's Motivation™", whilst working within the confines of what JJK has been written as, previously.

3. Give Yuji-lovers more hope that we'll see our little guy give an earnest smile again.

Because this post is pretty damn long, here are the effective starting and ending points of each argument. Please note that no words in this meta are meant to be extraneous, other than some light-hearted asides.

1. "Personally, I think that the airport scene only makes sense/can be consistent with Satoru's portrayals throughout the story (even right before the fight, in Chapters 222 & 223) if it's meant to highlight an internal struggle."/"While key characters like Geto and Nanami show up, with Amanai shown seated separately, there is one crucial absence:"

2. "Fushiguro Tsumiki."/"And I just...I want some real depth to Tsumiki, be it in service to another character for the 50th time or not."

3. "Because somehow, I don't think that what Yuji wants right now is for someone to take away all the boo-boos and make his situation better; I think he wants to go home and relax with the people he cares about, and he'll do anything--eat anything--to accomplish that."/"So depower Satoru, but let him live, so Yuji can finally get out of this misery porn and into his loved ones' arms."

So, without further ado!

248 really made a lot of people excited for the possibility of Gojo Satoru coming back, while making others groan. Why? That actually requires a nuanced answer--but the gist is that many people adore Satoru's character; some people think his character arc was abruptly ended (even spat-on, in some cases); the fallout of 236 left a lot of people angry and/or divided on the story's direction (for more than just Satoru's character, but in many cases, focally so); some fans got really annoying about it; and some people just don't want to hear about Satoru Discourse™, regardless of how they feel about his character. All of these are valid reasons for a cocktail of reactions to the knowledge that Ui Ui and co. have been snatching bodies from the field. If you think Satoru's story is over, then giving this hope to the people who wish to believe he's going to be alive can be quite irksome. And if you want Satoru to live, then the uneasiness of not knowing how Satoru living will affect the narrative may be eating at you, too.

Personally, I think that the airport scene only makes sense/can be consistent with Satoru's portrayals throughout the story (even right before the fight, in Chapters 222 & 223) if it's meant to highlight an internal struggle. Nanami's words are...suspect¹, let's say, in 236, but he discusses clinging to your past versus becoming anew, betting on the future. This, I think, is the main conflict of Satoru's character arc:

The struggle between keeping to what you're familiar with and remaining within expectations, in opposition to taking risks and trusting who you are and what you want to others around you, working with them. Effectively, shedding Satoru's superficiality and being fully open to new ideas.

Satoru's goading, jocular personality has been noted to be fake before, but the intensity he occasionally shows has never been doubted, even if what the intensity is for has. Like in 222 and 223, with Ijichi's long-running guilt and self-doubt. In 222, Satoru says, "Now it's just the three of us, huh?" when alone with Ieri and Ijichi. When he expresses his thought on Nanami's death, this exchange occurs:

SATORU: "I thought Nanami was the type to survive no matter what."

IJICHI: "I'm sorry."

SATORU: "What do you have to be sorry for, Ijichi?"

IJICHI: "I thought you were implying why did he die and not me?"

SATORU: "Is your opinion of me that low?!"

SATORU: "You still have a big job to do..."

SATORU: "...so stay sharp."

Notably, throughout this exchange, Satoru is first looking away at the ground from his elevated, but seated position, when commenting on Nanami's death. However, when Ijichi reveals that he thought Satoru was disappointed that Ijichi had lived 'in place' of Nanami (which is a false mutual-exclusion serving Ijichi's guilt complex), Satoru turns to Ijichi, looking directly at him. As he admonishes Ijichi, he raises his left hand to point at the man, with what looks to be an irritated expression of his own. It's pretty uncommon to see Satoru express any form of anger, severe or not, though we've seen him do so here, in Shibuya, in parts of Hidden Inventory, and most importantly to Satoru and Ijichi's relationship, when Satoru revealed his rage at Yuji's death in Ieri's morgue.

Before I go further, I'd like to acknowledge that Satoru's personality is significantly mellowed-out from his pre-unsealing demeanor, though he's still not emotionally-open, even if he isn't quite evasive in his answers. He's a lot more visibly serious, but his writing still suggests that he's keeping some of his thoughts and feelings close to his chest. If you know me, you know that I despise the timeskip for robbing us of several opportunities for character growth and exploration, including Satoru's change in mentality after being stuck in solitary isolation with a bunch of suicidal skeletons, in what he describes as,

"Like when work is insanely busy."

"A week would pass in a flash..."

"...but it's so draining that you'd never want to do it again."

"Like that."

However, I must ignore the majority of the 34-35 days that were skipped, harder than even Gege has, in order to stick to what JJK canon has given me. At the time of this writing, no further flashback sequences during the timeskip involving Satoru have been revealed. So pretty much all I have are from scenes in the chapter shortly before the battle, as the battle itself doesn't really give any indications on why Satoru is acting the way he is. Thus, I'm going to continue to look at some of these scenes, including the 223 conversation with Ijichi, the 223 confrontation by Gakuganji, and Ieri's words in 220.

First, with Gakuganji:

Here, Satoru expresses what appears to be relieved amusement at Gakuganji's change of heart. Interestingly, his behavior here does get evasive in his body language, and clipped in his dialogue; by turning away, he makes it harder for Gakuganji to judge his reaction to Yaga's last words. He also acknowledges his responsibility in having let down his allies by being sealed. To Satoru, fostering "strong and intelligent allies" has been his dream since well before we came to know him in JJK proper. Ieri's flashback in 220 shows him talking about his dream in an intense manner as he removes his JJK 0 blindfold; when we see him discuss this in Chapter 11: A Dream, he's shown with his eyes obscured, either by his then-current blindfold, or with his hand, as in the chapter cover. So it's pretty important to him, and this moment, along with his discussion with Ijichi before this scene and mere pages afterward in 223, suggest a regret for having been unable to support his allies, and a responsibility to those left in the wake of his presence or absence.

In the scene before, after Ijichi has received his answer for what it's like in the Prison Realm, Satoru asks,

"What happened to the people on Floor B5?"

Notably, he is looking forward while walking to their destination, instead of at Ijichi when he raises this question. Ijichi answers with,

"That was² the epicenter of the Shibuya Incident where the Cursed Spirits were released."

"Non-Sorcerers all over Tokyo were less likely to survive the closer they were to Shibuya."

"However, thanks to the remnants of Gojo-san's Cursed Energy³, the Spirits never came near B5."

The next lines come with Satoru striving forward on stairs and to Gakuganji and Utahime, still not slowing down to look at Ijichi, who is trailing behind Satoru.

SATORU: "Any after-effects of Unlimited Void?"

IJICHI: "No. Everyone's lives have returned to normal.⁴"

SATORU: "That's good to hear."

Here, Satoru stretches, before changing the subject.

SATORU: "Well, shall we do this?"

In the later scene with Ijichi, right before Satoru deploys on the field, we get these pages:

This scene is mostly focused on Ijichi's perspective of himself, while touching upon his relationship to Satoru. Satoru's assurance that Ijichi is necessary and someone that he trusts shakes Ijichi, who is plagued by self-doubt. Now, he's striving to "live up to [Satoru's] words", pushing past his own insecurities to aid Satoru in creating a safer world. Like with Gakuganji, Ijichi can't read Satoru well, which is a consistent pattern with other characters; largely through Satoru's own behaviors and cagey control over what he allows others to see, other members of the cast are kept at arm's length.

Enter Ieri Shoko, his longtime friend and classmate (who doesn't get nearly enough to do), and consider her words from 220:

"But you idiot, who's alone? I was there all along."

"There're a bunch of monsters now...awaiting your return. Come back, Gojo."

This scene, where she reflects on her relationship with Satoru, as well as her reminiscence on both of her classmates and Satoru's intensity with his dream ("I will foster...a strong and intelligent group. I won't leave anyone alone."), are pretty revealing. Both to Satoru's emotional distance from others driving his ambitions, as well as how he hurts his potential relationships with others. Ieri reflects on her presence and support going unappreciated (or simply underappreciated) by Satoru, since she can't reach through the walls he's built up over the years. Largely because she doesn't get to actually matter outside of her usefulness as a medkit in most scenes, sadly.

Then 236 comes along, and has Satoru just. Die, suddenly, and an afterlife scene that feels cheesy at best, and actively hampering the narrative, at worst. While key characters like Geto and Nanami show up, with Amanai shown seated separately, there is one crucial absence:

Fushiguro Tsumiki.

Tsumiki is more of a plot device and source of motivation for Megumi than a character. That's disappointing, but she's served her purpose in the narrative. Except...I can't remember ever seeing a scene where she talked to or interacted with Satoru, especially not as the focus. My understanding is that Satoru is her legal guardian/provides her with shelter, utilities, and likely food, with everything else being speculation, because...they've not been explored together. On the other hand, Tsumiki and Satoru are crucial to Megumi's character.

I have no illusions of Tsumiki being a vital character to Satoru's development, but damn, I wish she was. Or that she had a presence, an acknowledgement; and there's really only one last chance to do this, barring Megumi getting Mega Murdered.

Yet, she's missing from the airport. It could just be that even now, developing Tsumiki and her relation to Satoru (as his ward/former ward) is a cardinal sin that Jujutsu Kaisen cannot indulge. It certainly wouldn't be the first time that a woman character was treated poorly, and left on the wayside⁵, though Tsumiki has always blatantly been more of a tool for the narrative than a character to me. Which is why I think this may be her last real chance at having a character with fleshed-out relationships, and could also provide a satisfying ending to Satoru's character arc.

I'm angling for a scenario in which Satoru is pulled from the suffering of the past to the suffering of the present. In which Tsumiki coaxes Satoru out of his isolationist grip on his heart with hard-hitting questions. Finally, Satoru could let go of his failures, and the discord in his soul, to do what he does best: providing unexpected and vigorous support to the people he believes in. The next generation, the competent allies--be they ones he had already become attached to, or ones he'd in some way overlooked. If nothing else, I truly believe that Gege could pull off a scenario of Satoru overcoming his baggage, and renewing himself to turn intense, conflicted feelings and hard-to-read value in others into full-fledged devotion. Because she was there from the beginning, wasn't she? A teenager walked into her life and her brother's, and gave them the aid the children's parents would not or could not, and throughout it all, she's watched the people she loved grow, until she was robbed of years of her life to a coma.

She'd know so intimately, wouldn't she? Of never being enough, of losing time.

And even in her minimal character, she has never struck me as a character so chained to the past. But to expectations? Sure.

So. While I don't think that it's likely that Jujutsu Kaisen will prominently showcase a woman's inherent value, I do think that a woman's value being tied to the men in her life has a shot. Even if it's a dream, I don't think it's far-fetched, a mere fantasy, to have Tsumiki play a large role and help make this messy, jarring afterlife scene stand better with the rest of the work. And I just...I want some real depth to Tsumiki, be it in service to another character for the 50th time or not.

As for how Satoru's revival could not be an irritation? Have him sacrifice his Cursed Energy and Six-Eyes. To his students, and to those who trust him, his value can't be so simplified as "The Strongest". Geto asked him a silly question once, when struggling with his own demons. This time, ten years and at least twice as many bonds later, Satoru will finally have an answer.

He's not the Strongest. He is Gojo Satoru, and his loved ones need him, wholly and honestly. Whatever it takes.

Because somehow, I don't think that what Yuji wants right now is for someone to take away all the boo-boos and make his situation better; I think he wants to go home and relax with the people he cares about, and he'll do anything--eat anything--to accomplish that. But it wouldn't hurt to let him know that he isn't alone. That his loved ones aren't full of regrets bleeding from their hearts (but never their mouths, because "I can't say that to him"; "It wasn't so bad!"; "That's what you should do."⁶) as he watches them die, over and over again. So depower Satoru, but let him live, so Yuji can finally get out of this misery porn and into his loved ones' arms.

Really, I think we should come full circle. Sukuna self-admittedly doesn't have an ideal, or a higher purpose to pursue. A dream. Other than in 220's flashback, Satoru can't be seen with visible, open eyes when discussing his dream, and even then, he's looking up and away. I'd like to see Tsumiki help him achieve his dream with earnest, open eyes. To leave the airport a changed, fully-realized man, and with unseeing eyes wide open to a future of strong and intelligent allies achieving their own dreams.

↓ Notations and my closing paragraph/mid-leak edit, lmao.

¹They're not consistent with Nanami's portrayals as an adult, but are consistent with how Nanami thought of Satoru when enrolled in Jujutsu High. In general, the characters in the airport resemble the incarnations (largely teenagers, around 10-11 years in the past) they are shown as, but with the knowledge and some of the mentality of their older selves. Nanami most resembles his later self when discussing Mei Mei's advice. If this is going to connect with Satoru leaving the airport (and thus, his past) behind, then this can work. As it is, it's very jarring.

²For most of the analysis, I use the VIZ lines. However, this set of dialogue has a mistake, so here, I have switched to a scanlation group's work (if you know, you know). This is the only time I will be doing so. That said, I have tweaked the start of this line to say "That was...", as in the VIZ version, since the present tense used by the scanlation group feels off, given the context.

³"Residuals" in VIZ translation.

⁴We're back to the VIZ lines now, with this line and the preceding one.

⁵I don't like the direction of Maki's character at this point, and I think Hana's narrative role has probably been fulfilled, but I'd really like to see them get important scenes that flesh out their characters. Kirara (who I am assuming is a transwoman or she/they; my apologies if I'm wrong), Nishimiya, and Miwa are dying in the streets, though.

⁶I'm using the VIZ line, but this has wildly different translations, and seems to be...very left open to interpretation in the original wording. Alternatively, the "My role..." line could work here.

Edit: The fuck you mean we got 249 leaks early?! I was just finishing up after a bad week! Which explains part of why this post is disjointed--I may have to go into more detail on certain parts at another time. If 249 ends this meta and myself, so be it. Thank you for reading!

#Jujutsu Kaisen #JJK #Spoilers #Jujutsu Kaisen Spoilers #JJK Spoilers #JJK Manga Spoilers #I haven't read the new leaks yet. I will cry.#Gojo Satoru #Satoru Gojo #Fushiguro Tsumiki #Tsumiki Fushiguro #Itadori Yuji #Yuji Itadori #Meta #JJK Meta #< It's theorywork and narrative-analysis...so...#Analysis #JJK Analysis

49 notes · View notes

negrowhat · 6 months

Note

Hello Lovely,

This message is here to request that you share, overshare, word-vomit, Ted Talk™, or pontificate about any subject you feel particular feelings or emotions about. It can be a current interest, something you are curious about, a show/book/music group you're really into, or just overall general knowledge you feel like sharing.

So please share with me something that you find interesting, and I hope you have an amazingly wonderful day.

💜🌻

Hello Lovely! Right now I'm just really vibing with the series I'm watching right now. I took a little break from BLs for like idk 2 or 3 months and idk as soon as November hit we were gifted some really good end of the year series. Series I genuinely feel excited to watch. We're getting back actors we haven't seen for awhile. Billy, Pavel, Nut, and Kaownah??? OFFGUN ARE BACK TOO! I haven't seen them in awhile and I'm super excited to see them on my TV again.

I've been waiting all year to get some decent action plots and now I have three series. Gangster Oppa has been such a treat. Meen is doing the gangster role well. Love to see Tew actually rough people up and have people cower in fear around him and then he turns into this big sweet softie for Guy. Sad he's quitting the life but whatever makes Guy happy. Also I love Guy, he's the cutest and sweetest boy and I want to protect him forever.

Pit Babe, I still don't quite know what's going on but gotdamn Pavel as Babe is epic. That character was made for Pavel, he lives that life anyway. 90% of his pics he's leather clad, smirking, and straddling a motorcycle. Also the bottom discourse has been wild to see, Pavel is really fucking with people's preconceived checklist of what a top should look like. Meanwhile I'm just enjoying Babe be the world's sluttiest Alpha speed racer. Also IDK if Way is going to be good or bad in the end, but I'm just loving seeing Nut Supanut's face on my screen.

The Sign just started and I'm already obsessed. Saint has produced another banger, but I wasn't worried he did give us SCOY and GAP. The Sign has a bigger budget and they went all out with the production. I've missed Billy terribly and that man is so foine and he is the king of sex appeal. Alot of people felt like there was too much combat in the beginning but I ate it up. I loved all the action. I'm excited for the fantasy aspect. We have some soulmates happenings going on. Babe is new and I'm loving him as Tharn. He's quite pretty with great brows and a lovely beauty mark. He and Billy have great chemistry and I just know they're gonna have us by the neck the whole time.

Cooking Crush started today and I'm just excited to see OffGun have a more comedic series this time around. Off is so good at comedy and I'm glad his character seems to be doing the chasing for once. It's going to be very light-hearted...until the script flips and they have us SOBBING! It's only a matter of time, they have the range and none of OffGun's series stay light for long.

#my dear gangster oppa #pit babe #pit babe the series #the sign #the sign the series #cooking crush

23 notes · View notes

sapphire-weapon · 11 months

Text

Clive, hush. Not only is it appropriate to give you the title of Mythos, but it’s one that you should’ve reclaimed and taken for yourself. In fact, I don’t know why Ultima even gave you that title. It’s kind of like naming a kid “Roger Stabbington” and then being surprised when he says “ok” and stabs people.

FFXVI had a lot of storytelling problems, but one of the issues that stands out the most is the refusal to explain the whole Mythos/Logos thing. There’s ATL entries about them, sure, but they’re kind of the most barebones, reductive explanations as to why those particular words/titles were chosen for Clive.

It’s time for me to put my “I was raised in an obnoxiously Greek family” hat back on once again and -- just as I did with the Hades II trailer -- break down all of the dumb ancient Greek nonsense being thrown at us in a video game.

“Mythos” isn’t actually a word that’s meant to be used as a title. The word “mythos” in and of itself refers to one of two things, depending on how it’s being used:

1. the compilation of folklore around a particular subject. For example, there’s the very famous myth of Hades and Persephone’s marriage, but there’s a whole mythos around the explanation of why seasons exist, and Demeter’s mourning of the loss of her daughter is only part of that mythos.

2. the plot of an ancient Greek tragedy -- just in general. The mythos of the story should have some sort of reversal (either the story starts off with the protagonist in a good place and ends with them in a bad one, or vice versa), and the intention should be to evoke fear or pity from the audience. Aristotle believed that the most tragic of stories were those involving violence between friends and/or family (and who does that sound like?) -- and, the worse the tragedy, the stronger the mythos.

So, to use the word “mythos” as a title implies that the person holding this title carries with them the legends and stories born from the hearts of mankind -- the “reason” behind mankind’s existence -- and then, through great tragedy, will become a legend in and of themselves.

Yeah, that kinda sounds like Clive, doesn’t it?

Ultima’s a fuckin idiot moron for naming him that and then expecting him to become anything else.

Another fun fact about the word “mythos” and how it relates to Greek tragedies, though:

Greek tragedies were historically performed in worship of Dionysus, who was the god of pleasure and indulgence. So, for Clive to be the human embodiment of Mythos, that means that his very existence serves the purpose of exalting carnal pleasure.

Clive Rosfield is actually, literally just personified sex appeal. He, himself is not a walking libido, per se -- but he’s meant to inspire that in everyone around him.

And he kind of does, considering how many characters in-game want to polish his knob.

Anyway. We’re getting off track I WANT HIM TO GIVE ME SADDLE SORES THAT LAST AT LEAST THREE DAYS

The word “logos” is also not meant to be a title -- and, to be completely honest, I don’t feel like it works the way that the devs wanted it to work. Like, it’s fine. It’s serviceable. But it doesn’t exactly fit what Clive becomes the way that Mythos does.

A more modern interpretation of what the word “logos” means would probably be The Discourse(TM). Logos is the use of logic and reason to explain the nature of the world and mankind’s role in it. Aristotle basically thought of logos as being the thing that sets humans apart from animals -- it’s our sense of self and our ability to think objectively enough to create an actual moral compass.

So, basically, by calling Clive “Logos” Ultima’s just saying he’s attained free will and learned to think rationally on his own -- but that’s also a very basic bitch way of thinking about logos as a concept.

And it’s not as clean of a fit for him as Mythos is, considering that it wasn’t exactly Clive’s sense of self that got him to where he was (he spends like 85% of the game wondering what his purpose is), nor did his attainment of power have anything to do with rational, logical thinking. In fact, the game even goes out of its way to say that Clive is being held up by the faith of those who believe in him, which, I mean --

sure, if you also take into account the whole “Jesus Christ is thought of as being logos incarnate” thing, but like. Then that pulls away from the whole ancient Greek philosophy thing happening and goes into a different metaphor entirely, and everything just gets really muddy.

There are some scholars who believe that the concepts of mythos and logos aren’t mutually exclusive -- and, in fact, that logos actually grew out of mythos. The idea was that people started looking at the myths that they were using and started to apply logic and reason to them in order to get a more nuanced view of the world. But like...

In XVI, mankind started with rational thought when they realized that God (the God that they knew existed and were not just making up as myths) had abandoned them, and then they joined together as a community to create their own image for the world through their use of mythos.

So, I really think the game got it backwards. Clive wasn’t Mythos who became Logos. He was Logos who became Mythos.

But like. Gold star for trying.

I’M JUST SAYING THAT CLIVE HAVING THE TITLE OF “MYTHOS” IS REALLY FUCKING HOT AND EVERY TIME SOMEONE CALLS HIM THAT MY PULSE QUICKENS BECAUSE HE IS LITERALLY SHOULDERING THE HOPES AND DREAMS OF MANKIND AS THE EMBODIMENT OF THE POWER OF HUMAN CREATIVITY IN SERVICE TO A SEX RITUAL

#final fantasy xvi #clive rosfield #ffxvi spoilers #meta analysis

42 notes · View notes

spinningbuster98 · 4 months

Note

As bad as it may sound, it really seems to me that N!Isaac and N!Annette have both been written as Perfect Minorities™.

OG Isaac was the perpetual second one. Not incompetent by any means, but you know the deal, he was salty as hell that Hector was just a tiny bit better :P In the show, the dynamic is flipped: it's Isaac who is Dracula's special babyboy. But he is the special babyboy to such an exaggerated degree that he makes Hector's inclusion not only completely useless, but even detrimental: why would Dracula bother to hire an average Devil Forgemaster, without a shred of physical prowess, who he considers to be "a child in a man's body", and who he had to resort to lie to (Hector literally shouts in the war room that he doesn't enjoy the needless suffering Dracula is causing)... when Isaac by all means is strong, smart (allegedly), much more efficient in Forging, and 100% on board with Dracula's extermination plans to the point of being the only person Dracula can trust?

The story would improve if Hector, again, was the better Devil Forgemaster, even with his pesky morals. But we can't have that, can we? They were absolutely adamant, for whatever reason, that Isaac had to be black, despite him being probably the worst character to make black and Muslim. And black people can't be inferior, right? They can't need the help of a white person lesser POC, right? So Isaac in the show has become literally untouchable by the narrative. He gets everything he wants. He gets all the sympathy, because boohoo don't you feel bad that the guards are a bit mean to him, of course he should kill them all and turn them into monsters. He gets all the badass scenes, hell he literally gets wounded once in the whole show. He gets to be Enlightened.

And Annette... well, we talked about it plenty of times. Annette has Special God Powers. Annette gets coddled by total strangers. Annette has the right to hurt Richter where it stings the most without anyone calling her out. No one dares to point out Annette's genuine mistakes or bad behavior, even the most confrontational character after herself, Maria. Annette gets to make a Rousing Revolutionary Speech to the same French people she looks down upon. Annette gets to have the most prominent character arc, while Richter is left bumbling around and gets one (1) cool scene.

Representation in NFCV seems to be limited to three characters: 1) the narrative's darlingest babies who can do no wrong because they need to be popular on twitblr, 2) cardboard cutouts with barely a speaking line to pretend our world is more complex than it actually is, and 3) jesus christ please think more than three seconds next time.

Let's be perfectly real here:

both Isaac and Annette are the way that they are to appeal to a very specific,wide and vocal crowd on social media, the same crowd who cries for representation, by which they usually mean utterly perfect characters who can do no wrong and can easily vent their frustrations on other cast members because people, through these characters, can feel vindicated for their own frustrations. Frustrations that can be justified in a way, especially where racism is involved, but it essentially means that characters like Annette and Isaac are not really characters, but rather they are meant to be power fantasies of sorts. They're there to be black characters who are very strong and look down on the white oppressors etc. And you know what? There's nothing wrong with power fantasies, but only as long as they're written competently. Otherwise you don't really have a power fantasy. You have a weird amalgamations of Mary Sues mixed with social media discourse

This is especially blatant with Annette since, at least with Isaac, I don't think he ever uses the color of his skin as a justification for his attitude (he uses his religion but that's another can of worms).

I am almost certain that characters like these are inserted partly because it's a no-lose scenario, because you absolutely cannot criticize them without being accused of bigotry. This is made all the worse by many ACTUAL bigots chiming in and making any actual discourse impossible. I'm sure that big corpos like Netflix know this by now: create a character who's a minority who the US public cares about (I need to specify that last part because I get the feeling that people would not get nearly as uppity about, oh I dunno, Roma characters? Native American characters? Because social justice is only about those "cool" minorities that the public has been taught to think are worth it, anyone else barely even registers on the radar), write them in a way that satisfies the social media pseudo activist crowd, wait for the bigots to show up in order to easily paint any detractor as a racist, thus creating a very easy equation of "show has representation= good. Bigotry= Bad. Hate the show= You're a bigot"

I say "almost" because there's always the possibility that the guys behind the wheel genuinely think they're doing a great job

This may sound crazy, but look at all the praise they get, look at how much encouragement they get. And all this goes beyond NFCV, this sort of phenomenon is very widespread so it wouldn't surprise me if even the Deats brothers think they're masters of representation who can do no wrong because if enough people keep saying one thing without pause then you're bound to think it's the truth.

For instance I am pretty certain that Deats and the gang genuinely don't think that Alucard's threesome is not rape, or Lenore's treatment of Hector. Because they're not conventional depictions of rape and if you go ask most people on social media, hell even on the street across your own home, they'll most likely tell you the same.

I hate NFCV but what I think I hate more is the overall social climate that lead to its creation

#anti netflixvania #asks

19 notes · View notes

joys-of-everyday · 9 months

Text

MXTX's women part 2

Let's do ✨discourse™✨part 2

This is a follow up to this post where the only conclusions I came to were vibes based... mainly because my opinions here are generally vibes based (except svsss - I am pretty firm on my view of svsss, but that's a separate post). I think there are strong arguments either way, and tbh I have nothing against vibes based conclusions, but for fun, I'm going to take a position and argue for it.

disclaimer: 1) this post is not my opinion. 2) nonetheless, this post is entirely unironic. I think these are compelling arguments.

Position 1: MDZS and TGCF are sexist.

To recap, I posed (dramatically, in bold face) that the most important question to ask are: What is the intent? How is that intent received? This can be summed up as: What is the message you take away?

Obviously, you can fight me here, but I'll expand. Firstly, the question doesn't fundamentally come down to what the work contains, even though this is important. Every statement on the lines of 'x is sexist because it contains y' has a counterexample. Is the Handmaid's Tale sexist because it contains men in power and women treated as objects? Well op, this is a dumb example, you might say, and you would be right. The message of the Handmaid's Tale is clearly different from, say, MDZS and everything it contains is a support of that message - that a woman's reproductive freedom is her right. And I would go, ah ha, yes. Intent. (You can still disagree with me lol. This came out of a conversation literally a week ago.)

But also note, the author's actual intent is secondary. It's a useful framing to understand what the message is, but due to e.g. unconscious bias, or internalised sexism, the message gained by the reader/audience can be entirely independent of the intent of the author. For example, (one of my all time favourite c-dramas) the Secret of the Three Kingdoms I think is trying to be empowering for women, has lots of cool female characters, but the ultimate message can be summarised as 'men plough, women weave'... which is :/

Another subtlety to point out is that trends and popular tropes/archetypes tell a very different story when looked at overall. 'Woman in the refrigerator' and 'bury your gays' isn't a problem about individual works (although it often is mixed into other problems), but it's prevalence and dominance spreads harmful messages. A work which is great on it's own can actually be contributing to a wider problem, thus making it a problem.

MDZS: Women as accessory

It's not that difficult to argue that MDZS has an exceptional cast of women. I have no intention of arguing that MDZS's women aren't well developed, because enough people have come up with compelling counterarguments and they aren't hard to find. I think MDZS's portrayal of sexism is both exceptionally nuanced and not something you see much of. I love the way MDZS uses and breaks down tropes. I would argue (have argued) that the way MXTX puts sexism into her works is (at least partly) very much deliberate, and not with the intent of being sexist.

But remember, death of the author: author's original intentions don't matter in the face of what can be read from the text.

Notable in MDZS is 1) the lack of female characters who aren't defined by their relation to a major male character 2) women in the refrigerator.

1) Jiang Yanli is Wei Wuxian's older sister. Yu Ziyuan is Wei Wuxian's adopted mother. Wang Lingjiao is Wen Chao's girlfriend. Madam Jin, Meng Shi, Qin Su. Now, there are notable exceptions. Wen Qing is Wen Ning's sister, but her character is substantial even without that. Luo Qingyang (mianmian). Sisi (arguably). But there are overwhelmingly more male characters, and perhaps more importantly, hardly any male characters defined by their relation to a female character. There are a few. Madam Mo and her husband. Jin Zixuan as Jiang Yanli's husband (arguably). This isn't an exhaustive list but you get the idea.

2) Well, firstly, most of them die. Yu Ziyuan ends up in an unhappy marriage and dies as her sect burns down. Jiang Yanli loses a husband and then sacrifices herself for her brother. Wang Lingjiao gets offed by Wei Wuxian. Qin Su is killed by her husband. Mo Xuanyu's mother and Madam Jin just die of 'heartbreak' for what? Plot convenience? More egregiously, all of these deaths are there to either a) plot reasons or b) to add to the development of a male character. This is precisely the 'women in the refrigerator' trope, but multiplied a million times.

The only female character who got her happy ending was Mianmian... who lives a simple life with her family in the middle of nowhere. And it's great that in being brave and pursuing the right thing, she found happiness for herself, but this being the only example is um...

Well, the message feels suspiciously like women exist only for men. Men are the protagonists of their stories. Women are accessories. Sounds pretty sus. Maybe this is all due to the sexism of the world, but the message is then that the only way for women to succeed is to leave the system altogether, which is a nuanced thing but not true and somewhat unhelpful as a message.

Now, arguably, MXTX is leaning into tropes in order to be critical of them. Her female characters are full of tropes, and subversions of tropes - they could act as a critique of female characters in BL (in the way the female characters in SVSSS are critique of female characters in harem). There are a few pointers to this - Mianmian standing up to sexism, or the depth and nuance of Yu Ziyuan finding power+influence through her marriage of Jiang Fengmian. But the point stands is that isn't the message most people take away, because of the way MDZS is framed. MDZS just works as a xianxia action/romance. It isn't a parody (or at least, you don't need to read it as one to follow it). It isn't explicitly critical of how the women end up, nor is the narrative centered around the experiences of women. It is very easy to take away the surface level messages, which I think many people end up doing.

Whatever MXTX intended to say with her female characters, arguably MDZS already adds to an existing problem in how media portrays women. Media plays a huge role in how we see ourselves and other people, and unideal representation of women can lead to unconscious biases and stereotypes which are harmful. This being the case, one could argue that any media that fails to either fix the issue or address the issue sufficiently is problematic. On this vein, MDZS falls short.

TGCF: women as secondary

While TGCF improves on the front of women in power doing well, and more explicitly calling out the sexism of the world, it fails at a different front: the lack of women within the core plot.

The structure of TGCF is very different to MDZS, in that it contains a lot of what I would call 'side quests'. This is not a bad thing (this is sort of the whole point of things like (old) Star Trek or Doctor Who). But the core story of TGCF is (arguably) 1) Xie Lian's two ascensions and in between 2) Meeting Hua Cheng at various points 3) Tonglu mountain. And within this core story, there isn't a single female character necessary for the plot.

Ling Wen, Xuan Ji, Banyue, Shi Qingxuan, Yushi Huang... are all exceptional female (and non-binary) characters in their own right, but the story doesn't require them. They could be swapped out quite easily with other characters, unlike e.g. main pair, Feng Xin, Mu Qing, Jun Wu... (Note this isn't about how often they appear, or how developed they are. Lang Ying (the old one) doesn't appear a lot, but is essential to the plot.) (Yushi Huang and Ling Wen are kind of required, but equally for like... quest and item giving purposes which is not really the same.)

It's almost like there is no female person in Xie Lian's life who is essential to his personhood. And the message might inadvertently be that women are part of side quests - they aren't necessary.

This is, in part, a Xie Lian problem. The narration is tied closely to Xie Lian's pov (but isn't third person limited, interestingly), and we get delights like this:

Aside from the fact that Xuan Ji went mad whenever she ran into Pei Ming, she was otherwise much more detail-oriented and cautious than Qi Rong - she was a woman, after all.

(btw, be exceptionally suspicious of statements like 'women are more detail-oriented and cautious'. They are often wrong, or with heavy caveats.)

This is not on it's own a bad thing - e.g. compare with Shen Qingqiu's narration in SVSSS. But it is arguably a bad thing if you pair it with the fact that Xie Lian is 1) presented as much more likable than Shen Qingqiu 2) is not as obviously bias. He comes across as a trustable character, and so we are less likely to question his biases... so we run into the same problem as in MDZS: we aren't led to question the surface level messages, so the message we take away is an unhelpful one.

I feel like the way around this is (somewhat paradoxically) to reintroduce female characters whose lives (from narrator pov) revolve around the protagonist. (e.g. get in an Jiang Yanli) (The 800 year time skip means they either need to 1) become gods, 2) become ghosts 3) die, all of which have their own potential problems but that's for the author to figure out :p) Making Xie Lian less sexist would be slightly unrealistic but not at all out of character. Having Xie Lian's biases explicitly called out and this be a big thing is another way to go. Or both.

To conclude

Both points fall down to something along these lines: although both MDZS and TGCF make attempts at commentary on the struggles of women, because this narrative is not at the forefront of the story they inadvertently give across only half the message, which is worse than no message at all. 'There are tropes within the genre which treat women badly and this is bad' becomes 'women are like what these tropes say they are like'. 'Women aren't given opportunities so end up worse off' becomes 'women end up worse off'.

Maybe something in between MDZS to TGCF would be an improvement, but also, if the focus on male characters meant these narratives were difficult to execute within a reasonable word count, it might have been better to just skip sexism altogether. (sci fi is usually where this is attempted seriously, but fantasy definitely has scope for imagining better societies.) (This is all much easier said than done btw. Part of a fan's job is to stand on the sidelines and complain, right? 😂)

#mxtx #mxtx meta #mdzs #tgcf

24 notes · View notes

arueshalaetablebuildingsociety · 2 months

Text

I think it's quite telling how toxic and disingenuous the "proship/antiship" ""discourse"" is seeing the same people who denounce "harassment" accusing sexual abuse survivors of being "feelings yakuza" and "antis" when they point out the existence of such things as anxiety/ptsd triggers.

But, since I'm undoubtebly injecting myself into that "discussion", why don't we throw in another wrinkle: is denouncing fictionalized Revenge Pornography, like the kind that David Cage did to one of the (many) women subordinates he forced into sex or sex acts with him in Heavy Rain, "feelings yakuza?"

And if that person is you, if you are feverishly typing up a reply to say that I'm actually discriminating against other cultures by pointing out how demanding everyone tolerate your fucked up fanfic is demonstrably shitty, you should just log off instead. Have a Nice fucking Time™, loser.

#feelings yakuza #proship/antiship #oh and shoutout to the one commenter who scrounged the self-awareness to reqlize that several “antis” were SA survivors #and then immediately accused all of them of using “censorship” as an “unhealthy coping mechanism”#hope that person in particular Has a Nice Time™#the whole thing reminds me of how chuds whine and cry about “wokeism” and “PC”

8 notes · View notes

soapofbar · 1 month

Text

i think the thing that bugs me most about the Discourse™ surrounding 3H is that it is just kind of pointless, and i don't mean that in the "it's pointless to discuss video game stories way" because it isn't! it isn't pointless to do that!

it's pointless because 3/4 routes in the game end with Byleth in a position of absolute power and authority over the entire continent of Fodlan, and therefore has the ability to institute whatever changes they damn well please, backed up the god-like ability to reverse time itself. Being the Archbishop of the Church with the ear of the King in AM, and simply just actually being the Ruler of United Fodlan in VW/SS, Byleth will pretty much always end the game as an enlightened despot. Byleth is, also, a blank slate self-insert, and while they do have some semblance of a personality in their various dialogues and scenes, their actual political beliefs are pretty much up to player interpretation, hence the reason you can even choose between the 4 paths in the first place.

in essence, it makes it very easy for the player to say "well Byleth will simply fix everything" after the credits roll regardless of which path you chose. Especially considering that all their students, who they most likely have very good relationships with, are liable to lend Byleth their political support. Not getting into characters like Sylvain who were already looking to institute change and reform in the areas they had direct control over.

To that end, the game does kind of undermine itself and the routes end up being more about who you want to live more rather than any actual ideological conflict no matter how much the game tries to frame it as the latter. if you agree with Edelgard's motivations but simply like Dimitri, Rhea or Claude more as characters, than there's no reason to really side with her since the player is actively put in a position where it's easy to imagine that after the credits roll Byleth simply does institute the changes that Edelgard seeks in a way that doesn't involve the death of their blorbos/continent-spanning war.

and I think this kind of ends up a factor in why there's a lot of undeserved vitriol thrown Edelgard's way. People see Byleth be given this absolute power, with the support of some of the most powerful noble houses of the land, and they imagine whatever kind of utopia they think Byleth could build with that power, and get retroactively mad at Edelgard. Never-mind that Byleth's ascendancy is only really possible specifically because of Edelgard's war, among numerous other different factors that led to it.

The real sort of funny thing is that the debate is also pointless in another way: Edelgard pretty much always accomplishes the objectives she sought out regardless of which route you chose. In all 4 routes Fodlan is unified. The Agarthans are either completely destroyed (VW) or majorly set back (AM/SS). Huge social reform is coming all across Fodlan, mostly of the variety that she wanted (yes, even in AM, I need to remind people that Dimitri's dad literally got killed for being "too radical" for the Faerghus nobility, not to mention that Dimitri is literally said to institute a new form of government in his solo ending)

idk how to end this just stop getting mad over video game characters

#fire emblem three houses #my rambles #edelgard discourse #should I tag it as that? idk. i think it mostly falls under that category #edelgard von hresvelg #dimitri alexandre blaiddyd #claude von riegan #rhea fire emblem

15 notes · View notes

akajustmerry · 1 year

Note

Merryana, please, talk about Joel and Rick and bad comparisons 👉🏼👈🏼

alright, we're doing it. I've just taken a headache pill I'm lying under a fan - let's go.

so a lot of what I hate about these twd/tlou bad faith analysis and comparison has to do with a larger trend in social media discourse where things are discussed in tropes.

Prioritising short form media on socials means less time, less nuance and reducing things to their lowest common denominator because in a 10 second tiktok it's just quicker to say something is enemies to lovers than explain the actual premise. And I've been watching this reductive style of media discourse reshape how we discuss complex concepts and stories in real time and it fucking SUCKS.

A lot of the bad faith comparison of TWD and TLOU is built on the reduction of both these shows to Zombie Shows™ and Rick and Joel to Apocalypse Dads™. But describing them this way is kinda like saying that a shark and a puffer fish are both fish because they live in the ocean, but you've decided the puffer fish is better at being in the ocean and then high fiving yourself as if you made some poignant observation.

Starting with some basics, my guy Rickles is a literally a cop. The great irony of his character is that he's trying desperately to reclaim order in a world that has none and how this morality is constantly tested by an inherently lawless world. Joel is working class, a contractor with next to no moral claim on the world and that claim becomes zero when Sarah dies.

Reducing Joel and Rick into apocalypse Dads in the zombie shows flatten both characters into a vague concept rather than whole characters with very different worlds to navigate with very different motives. This kind of flattening of tlou and twd into zombie shows also ignores the very different world building in both shows. For one, there is no cure in TWD because everyone already has the virus and it activates when you're dead - no fuss, no muss and no hope for a fix. On the other hand, tlou is predicated on the question of whether a cure is worth it's cost. This is not even a question in TWD, so the shows are working from fundamentally different ideas. Not to mention, TWD is a show motivated by community building, tlou is.... Made by Zionists.

But I think probably the most egregious way I've seen the shows compared is culture writers comparing their first seasons (as if twd doesn't have another 10 seasons after that too). I can see why, obviously. At a surface level here's 2 shows that end their first season with "no cure" bombshells, but it's literally just surface!!! The journey the shows take to get there is so different, even in terms of time! Twd s1 is all at the start of the outbreak where Everyone is on the same page. Season 1 of tlou establishes that Joel has been living post-outbreak for 20 years. Yet another point of incomparable difference between the characters and the world of the shows.

I'm sorry but I'm just over it!! I'm over this obsession with reducing narratives to their tropes. It's bad marketing disguised as psuedo analysis! it's boring and does no justice to these stories. Like, people can just say they like tlou more than twd, you don't have to psuedo-intellectualise that opinion by copying and pasting bullet points from tvtropes.com.

There's also an element of... Gentrification to this comparison too in that tlou has a much higher budget production value and prestige marketing that, yes, means it looks a lot sleeker than TWD but also.....kinda makes it look the same as any other high budget scifi. Like the fact ppl have made parallels to the Mandolorian and Stranger Things just shows the total lack of character in the show's aesthetics itself. Its got the same gentrified scifi horror look that's become standard since about 2017. Say what you will about TWD but that make up department were forced to invent whole new techniques in practical make up because the show's low budget meant they couldn't use a lot of CGI and their innovation made the show LOOK and feel DIFFERENT.

The ONLY thing twd and tlou truly have in common is that they're both weak adaptations of their source materials. Beyond that, comparing them is just giving psy-op levels of incoherence and displaying disastrous levels of media illiteracy. Besides we all know that in a just world where TWD wasn't written by conspiracy weirdos and TLOU wasn't made by Zionists, Joel and Rick would be husbands 🥰

#the walking dead #the last of us #/

28 notes · View notes

henri-apollo · 1 year

Text

Today, on the internet, I know there’s some Discourse™ about what friendship looks like because of this tweet:

And so I’d like to say one thing: it’s okay to ask friends to help you with things! That’s what friendships are for! I mean, obviously within reason, but still, we build friendships and communities partly to assist and support one another!

In American culture (and I’m sorry to all my non-American friends; I can only speak for my culture, but I’m sure other cultures may be similar), we’re so obsessed with self-sufficiency and then when you couple that with this commodification of friendship and this pseudo-therapeutic idea about “you don’t owe anyone anything,” you end up getting wacky takes similar to the one here (though, I concede that this individual here is—I believe—Irish, but regardless, we still get similar takes in the US).

In a culture that has reevaluated our relationships in relation to capitalism and neoliberalism, we increasingly lose sight of what it means to be a part of a community as friendships become just interactions or simple transactions between individuals. But friendships should be about supporting one another, building a community, and actually being responsible to others. I don’t know, maybe I’m lost in my language, but basically, friends should be like family, and I fear that isn’t happening as much anymore.

I think what this is all about is I found myself about a year ago experiencing one of the worst weeks of my entire life, and when I came back from a really devastating trip, I was broken and exhausted and just needed a ride from the airport and when I reached out to my friends, the people I thought were my community (who were also VERY aware of what I was doing), people said they were too tired or worried it was too late, and so I showed up back home, alone and without any support. And it felt like others said what they did because they were impelled by this idea of “well, I don’t owe anyone anything,” or “gotta protect my well-being first or else I can’t help others” and you know, I get where those ideas come from, and the latter is good within reason. But sometimes it’s good to do the hard things, to give up a little bit of comfort, of peace, to help someone who is really in need. Or to help someone move. Or to support them in the myriad things they could be doing. Now, obviously, within reason! And there’s a whole ton of nuance and exceptions that would take an entire dissertation to discuss and unfold, but for now, suffice it to say that you should show up for your friends! You should sometimes do the hard things for your friends! Perhaps think about it this way: Friendship is for all the good times and everything in between!

30 notes · View notes

lemonhemlock · 9 months

Note

do you have any thoughts on Baelon and Alyssa? I’ve been seeing lots of discourse on what they would think about Rhaenyra or how the dance would play out if Baelon was king

an ask from May, lol. sorry it took me this long!

i'm gonna be a bit lemontarty and go against the grain on this one. a popular take i've seen is how alysanne was so brainwashed by targcest that she interpreted alyssa always being glued to baelon's side as marital intention and thus paired them up from a young age. kind of like how straight people have that annoying habit in that they see a boy and a girl playing and, as a result, call them boyfriend and girlfriend and start planning their wedding. i don't think it's an outrageous take, but i also don't think it was necessarily the author's intention here.

not that targcest fucking up family dynamics isn't a worthwhile topic of conversation, but i don't really see it in the way those two specifically were written. it seems to be one of grrm's exceptions he throws in ever so often. i say this because neither baelon, nor alyssa ever expressed regret with their relationship or even any kind of dissatisfaction, nor is even one argument or point of contention between them ever mentioned. they apparently couldn't keep their hands off each other and baelon never recovered mentally after alyssa's death.

that being said, i take issue with how alyssa was written bc she is way too much of a Cool Girl™. now FB came out in 2018 and Gone Girl in 2014, so idek what george was thinking with this, bc alyssa is 100% the girl in the monologue. she is sporty, low maintenance, the only thing she wants to do is fuck her man, fly her dragon & give baelon enough sons to field a football team etc. she's so much of a male fantasy it's hard not to laugh, tbh. you just know she'd eat only pizza and never gain weight.

as for what they would think about rhaenyra, who knows. it's worth mentioning that rhaenyra would have never been in the running for queen if rhaenys, daughter of prince aemon and baelon&alyssa's niece, hadn't been passed over. now, alyssa was long dead when aemon died, but had she been alive, for thing to happen in the same way, then she should have been complicit in the passing over (twice) of rhaenys. so if she would have been comfortable with that, why would she be a rhaenyra supporter? alyssa honestly gives me boy mom vibes. if she didn't die, she would have given baelon a ton of children & possibly more sons who could have, in time, produced other male offspring, complicating things even further.

the dance wouldn't happen during baelon's reign, it would happen after baelon and viserys both died. but it could happen while alyssa was a queen dowager. so, in this scenario, who's to say she wouldn't have already convinced viserys to name aegon as successor? thus avoiding any dance at all. i find it hard to believe she would champion rhaenyra for queen when she herself would have been complicit re: rhaenys.

also, another thing to consider is that viserys' obsession for a son was also born out of the scarcity of targaryen heirs at the time: daemon was a loose canon, rhaenyra was a girl and rhaenys had married outside of the family so her children were technically velaryons. if alyssa gave baelon more children, it's very possible that viserys would not have pressured aemma for more offspring so much as he knew that, if push came to shove, he could call another great council and they had more options to consider as heir.

ANOTHER thing i would like to add to complicate this timeline even more is that alyssa could have provided sisters for viserys and daemon to marry, thus negating the need for viserys to even marry aemma in the first place (and rhaenyra's existence) and daemon's fixation on his underage niece. or, you know, viserys can still marry aemma (say it's true love or whatever) and, after she dies, he can marry a younger sister of his instead of alicent.

and with that i've provided plenty of AUs out there for you potential writers 🎈

#alyssa targaryen #baelon targaryen #ask #anon

11 notes · View notes

virtualcarrot · 1 month

Text

the good omens fandom representation discourse did enough damage to me that every single time* I meet another queer person irl and we talk media, and they express utter bafflement at the idea that season 1 would be Irrefutable QueerRep™, I genuinely feel a weight lift

#*so far: three times #not to feed the Discourse again but if you think it's rep: good for you!#but the destructive thing was seeing just so many people #even people I otherwise appreciated and respected #go around touting “only straight people don't see that it's representation lololol”#and shut down the possibility of saying otherwise #like jfc #fandom #good omens

3 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 1 month

Note

You can answered this Tomorrow but this remind a issues I have

https://x.com/pandasandvidya/status/1773337304658051521?s=46

Also how um white liberals talk about black men and write them

Wait you guys opinion is based off how they are portrayed in pop culture?

But yeah I mention to a friend when compare Killmonger to another villain we like but we are called Nazi and abuse apologists for it. And the hamas post you pointed it

The infantilism of black Americans

“Oh don’t mind that Killmonger is a navy seals trained cia agent that purposely destabilize countries for the American empire and wanted to cause a race war. He was abandoned by Wakanda and his ancestors was slaves!”

And I been noticing a lot of writers in Hollywood and game studios said they need counslants to write black characters…I understand might want to talk to a black friend here and there to avoid bad stereotypes

But why paying offical groups?

And the huge demasculination issues

“Oh here a new black role model, please ignore that he barely have a backbone!”

Also Dave pointed out on his blog about the facism discourse like with star troopers thing

Okay I’m not a “KILL EVERY XENO SCUM” sci-fi fan as I also love Transformers

But like…yeah boys like militarism, I about FUCKING TIRED of the Rebel look

Especially since tumblr and twitter show how many pink hair upper middle bitches see me

Also why must we see the protagonists faces all the fuck time? No directors that understand body language? Like ugh it annoying

But something I notice in media….and my own world building

I'll start in the evening and see how it goes

Was thinking that may not fit, but lack of empathy is in there along with others that line up with sociopathy.

Also how um white liberals talk about black men and write them Wait you guys opinion is based off how they are portrayed in pop culture? But yeah I mention to a friend when compare Killmonger to another villain we like but we are called Nazi and abuse apologists for it. And the hamas post you pointed it The infantilism of black Americans

The infantalism is encouraged by certain segments of the black american population too, usually hidden behind pseudo intellectualism, see tariq nasheed or the ladies of the view for examples.

Ya there's that one that got awful butthurt when that thing came out showing which games they'd consulted on, you pay for a official consultation so you get the receipt and anything problematic you can blame on them, which actually means they're likely to go overboard in order to be completely woke™

Also Dave pointed out on his blog about the facism discourse like with star troopers thing Okay I’m not a “KILL EVERY XENO SCUM” sci-fi fan as I also love Transformers But like…yeah boys like militarism, I about FUCKING TIRED of the Rebel look Especially since tumblr and twitter show how many pink hair upper middle bitches see me

Starship Troopers is supposed to be a criticism, movie took a bit of a different path but it was supposed to be over the top satire, doogie houser dressed like a nazi should have been the last sign, but folks missed that.

kill xeno scum thing, I'd avoid Enders Game if you're not looking for a genocide situation, even if it does move on to 'genocide bad'

Also why must we see the protagonists faces all the fuck time? No directors that understand body language? Like ugh it annoying But something I notice in media….and my own world building

you're aware of all of it, so you can do what you want to change it, if you so choose.

#zoomer huey anon

3 notes · View notes