Tumgik
#fandom ableism
eelfuneral · 2 days
Text
Tech is a grown man and a special ops pilot. He can drink, use firearms, and care for children. He has male pattern baldness and lines on his face. He is a capable adult and I wish that the fandom treated him like one.
Yes, Tech is autistic and has more issues socializing than everyone else, but that doesn’t mean that he needs to be coddled in-universe or by the fandom. He is a grown man who is perfectly capable of figuring out socializing on his own, even if he stumbles more than others. Other characters not understanding him 100% at all times is a fact of life that Tech is likely well aware of as an autistic adult. He is also capable of making genuine mistakes that hurt others to the same degree that a neurotypical person would, and other characters calling him out on it is not ableist. In fact, it would be super weird and ableist for everyone to assume that he is an uwu baby incapable of understanding how to be unkind.
Tech does not need “protection” from other characters flirting with him. Being attracted to an autistic adult is not inherently predatory, and many autistic adults can and do form romantic and/or sexual relationships. Tech almost certainly knows what romance and sex are, and is capable of deciding how interested he is or isn’t in either topic. Him being autistic doesn’t make him a helpless child incapable of understanding “grown-up” topics, and if he ever feels harassed by another character, then I believe that he would not need any help sticking up for himself. Tech is assertive and blunt. He called Cid ugly TO HER FACE once. He does not need Hunter or Wrecker or whoever to intervene for him if he needs to tell someone no or call them out.
Tech isn’t portrayed as innocent and cutesy in canon, but I see this characterization a lot in fanon and I have a hard time believing that it has nothing to do with his autism. As an autistic person who has had to deal with my own classmates talking to me like I was four months old for a good chunk of my childhood, I can’t say that I love this fandom trend.
127 notes · View notes
sassydefendorflower · 4 months
Text
I want to talk about something. I want to talk about ableism in fandom. And sexism in fandom. Oh, and racism in fandom.
Mostly though, I wanna talk about how the discussion about these things often gets derailed because people don't understand what trends and typical behaviors actually are.
Whenever a Person of Color, a woman, someone disabled, someone queer (or an intersection of any of these groups) points out that certain fandom trends are bigoted in some shape or form, half the replies seem to be "but they are my comfort character! Maybe people just like them better because they are more interesting!" or even "people are allowed to have headcanons!" - the very daft even go for a "don't bring politics into fandom" which is a personal favorite because nothing exists in a vacuum and nothing is truly apolitical. But alas~
What most of these replies seemingly fail to understand is something very, very simple: it's not about you.
You, as an individual, are just one datapoint in a fandom. You are not the trend. You do not necessarily depict the typical behavior.
When someone points out that there is racism in fandom, that doesn't mean every fan is racist or perpetuating racist ideas*. By constantly mentioning your own lack of racism, quite often, you are actively derailing the conversation away from the problems at hand.
When someone names and describes a trend, they don't mean your headcanon specifically - they mean the accumulated number of headcanons perpetuating a harmful or outdated idea.
I am not saying this to forbid anyone from writing fics about their favorite characters or to keep anyone from having fun headcanons and sharing their theories and thoughts - quite the opposite actually. A critique of a general trend is not a critique of you as an individual - and you're going to have a much better, and more productive, time online if you can internalize that. If you stop growing defensive and instead allow yourself to actually digest the message of what was pointed out.
I am saying this to encourage some critical thinking.
Allow me to offer up some examples:
Case 1: A DC blogger made the daring statement that maybe Tim and Jason were such a popular fanfic focus because they are the only two undeniably white batboys. Immediately someone replied saying "no, it's all the fun traumatic situations we can put them in!". Which is an insane statement to make, considering the same can be said for literally ANY OTHER DC Batman and Batfam character.
The original post wasn't anything groundbreaking, they didn't accuse anyone, didn't name any names... but immediately there was a justification, immediately there was a reason why people might like these characters more. No one stopped to take a second and reflect on the current trends in fanfiction, no one considered that maybe this wasn't a declaration against people who like these characters but a thesis depicting the OVERALL trend of fandom once again focusing on undeniably white (and male) characters.
(don't get me started on the racebending of white characters in media that has a big Cast of Color and the implications of that)
Case 2: A meta posted on Ao3 about ableism in the Criminal Minds fandom caught my attention. A wonderful piece, very thoughtful, analyzing certain characterization choices within the fandom through the lens of an actually autistic person. The conclusion they reached: the writing of Spencer Reid as an autistic character, while often charming and comforting, tended to be incredibly infantilizing and at worst downright ableist. They came to that conclusion while CLEARLY stating that the individual fanfic wasn't the problem, but the general fandom trend in depicting this character.
Once again, looking at the replies seemed to be a mistake: while many comments furthered the discussion, there were quite a few which completely missed the point. Some were downright hostile. Because how dare this author imply that THEY are ableist when they write their favorite character using that specific characterization.
It didn't matter that the author allowed room for personal interpretation. It didn't matter that they noted something concerning about the entire fandom - people still thought they were attacking singular people.
Case 3: I wrote a fic about abortion in the FMA(b) fandom (actually I've written a weird amount of fics about abortion in a lot of fandoms, but alas) and I got hate comments for it. Because of that I addressed the bias in fandom against pro-choice depictions of pregnancies. I pointed out that the utter lack of abortion in many omegaverse stories or even mpreg or het romances, painted the picture of an unconscious bias that hurt people for whom abortion was the only option, the best possible ending. The response on the post itself was mostly positive, but I got anon hate.
(which I can unfortunately not show you since I deleted it in the months since)
And I'm not overly broken up about it, but it also underlines my point: by pointing at a general problem, a typical behavior, a larger trend... people feel personally attacked.
This inability to discuss sexism, ableism, racism, transphobia, etc in fandom without people turning defensive and hurt... well, it damages our ability to have these conversations at all.
Earlier I said YOU are not the problem - well, i think part of this discussion is acknowledging that: sometimes YOU are in fact part of the problem. And that's not the end of the world. But you can only recognize yourself as a cog in the machine, if you can examine your own actions, your own biases, your own preferences critically and without becoming defensive.
And, again, this is not to keep you from finding comfort in your favorite characters and headcanons. This is also not to say that I am free of biases and internalized bigotries - I am also very much a part of the system. A part of the problem.
This is so you can comfortably ask yourself "but why is there no abortion in this universe?" or "why are my favorite black characters always the top in my slash ships?" or "why do I write this disabled character as childish and in need of help?" - and sometimes the answer is "because I am disabled and I want comfort", and that's fine too.
There is no one shoe fits all in fiction. There is not a single trope that captures all members of a group. There is no single stereotype that isn't also someone's comfort. No group is a monolith, no experienced all-encompasing (or entirely unique).
There is never a simple answer.
But that doesn't mean you should stop questioning your own biases, your own ideals.
Especially, if you grow defensive if someone points out that a certain trend you engage in might be racist. Or sexist. Or queerphobic. Or fucking ableist.
*this does not mean negate the general anti-blackness perpetuated by most cultures as a result of colonialism and slavery
783 notes · View notes
soullessjack · 7 months
Text
not only should any autistic character who’s ever been infantilized by their fanbase kill and maim more people, but they should also fuck as nasty as possible too. as a treat
2K notes · View notes
1863-project · 7 months
Text
Please reblog for a bigger sample size - this is part of the same project as my earlier polls! (For extra data, please feel free to mention the character(s) in question in the tags if you've experienced this!)
PLEASE DO NOT ANSWER THE POLL IF YOU ARE NOT AUTISTIC. This is specifically for autistic people's testimonials.
926 notes · View notes
gay-jewish-bucky · 10 months
Text
As much as I'm glad Daniel Sousa got away from Peggy because he deserved so much better than her, I won't ever forgive Marvel Studios for proving Agent Krzeminski's ableist, misogynistic ass right when he said, "No girl is gonna trade in a red, white, and blue shield for an aluminum crutch."
What a great message to send to disabled people in the audience, "You are only ever good enough to be the second choice to an abled person, you don't deserve a have a happy ending."
300 notes · View notes
rejectedfables · 9 months
Text
Headcanoning [villainous character] with [stigmatized neurodivergence] but like. Not like that. Not to villainize the disorder but to humanize the villain. It makes them relatable to me. Not to "explain" their violent behavior (which is irrelevant), but to acknowledge their trauma. The author gave them trauma and said "their response makes them evil" and I say "that's the least interesting take a person could have. I want to dig my claws into how trauma affects people. I want meat."
If I tell yall which character and which disorder though, somebody is gonna clown too close to the sun about it. Can't have SHIT in this villain loving house
207 notes · View notes
Note
with the new Azula comic that showed her as a traumatized abuse victim like Zuko out I have seen so much victim blaming sh*t from a bunch of zuko stans
I f***ing hate this fandom and I want to hear your opinion about it
Nothing new under the sun and to be expected, especially since Azula actually rejected redemption this time (unlike all the other times people claimed she "rejected second chances" she was never actually given).
The fact that Zuko ALSO rejected redemption in Ba Sing Se, and that even with that no one was saying "He is a villain therefore what his father did to him doesn't count as abuse because he isn't an 'innocent' victim" doesn't matter to them for four reasons, that often overlap:
1 - Zuko was never described as being mentally ill, while Azula was, so she has to deal with a ton of ableism Zuko got to avoid.
2 - Zuko is a boy, so he avoids falling victim to the sexism of some parts of the fandom.
3 - Zuko is a victim of physical abuse. The proof of his suffering is literally burned into his face. Azula's scars are all emotional, so it's easier for people to dismiss them without being called out. Nobody is gonna have the balls to say being disfigured by one's own parent doesn't count as abuse.
4 - The writers never intended for Azula to be a victim at all, hence some EXTREMELY tone-deaf things like Iroh saying "She's crazy and needs to go down" or the script literally describing Azula like she's an animal during her breakdown. She was meant to be the crazy, evil villain that is evil because she's crazy, and crazy because she's evil. It was only when other writers on the team started giving her a bit more depth and people really thought of all the implications of things like hering being raised by Ozai, considering herself "imperfect" for things like one hair out of place, having a breakdown due to feeling like an unwanted monster, acting as bait for the enemies while her father was hiding away safely during the invasion, or the fact that Ozai is canonically the only person to ever manipulate her (which shocking ease) that people realized "Holy shit, this is abuse too."
5 - This fandom, for all their praise of Zuko's redemption/healing arc, doesn't actually understand or like said arc, hence them taking away all of Zuko's flaws and pretending his bad choices were not truly his - after all, if he isn't an "innocent" victim, then he is no victim at all and thus deserved all that happened to him like his evil sister does.
(I'll say it again: this fandom does not actually understand why Ozai was an awful parent, they just think he was too harsh on the wrong child. They think Azula is the "good-for-nothing" child that deserves to be abused, while Zuko is the "golden boy" that needs to be perfect - or else)
116 notes · View notes
enby-axels · 1 year
Text
izuna: *warns madara to not trust the senju and correctly predicts doing so would end with their clan's demise*
naruto fans: the AUDACITY, how dare he say something so factually true. how can he be filled with so much justified HATRED, it has to be due to a genetically inherited MENTAL ILLNESS bc as we all know no SANE person would say such a horrible, accurate thing
437 notes · View notes
rjalker · 6 months
Text
"OMG, it's a kids series, why are you criticizing the bigotry in it? That's so cringey!
"Who cares if a show aimed at little kids is teaching them that it's romantic for boys to sexually harass and assault girls?
"Who cares that this kids book series with over 60 entries is defending slavery and genocide??
"Who cares if there's victim blaming and rape apologism in just the second book??
"Who cares if [insert children's series] is teaching kids horrible, cruel, bigoted ideas that they will absorb and reproduce in real life?
"Who cares that the media we show to kids plays a massive role in shaping our society?
"It's just a kids series! Stop criticizing the blatant bigoted propaganda being fed to kids by conservatives who want little kids to think that being abused by their partner is the height of romance!!!"
Tumblr media
[ID: The Garfield "you are not immune to propaganda" meme, with Garfield the orange cat's head smiling on a blue background, with the text now reading, "Children are especially susceptible to propaganda.". End ID.]
65 notes · View notes
ashesofdawn · 3 months
Text
Kaeya: Assigns Noelle, someone who has a massive need to please others to the point of neglecting her own needs as well as a need to just be preoccupied at all times, small tasks helping him that won’t push her limits and even prevented her from trying to fist fight Dvalin at her own risk
Most people: OMG what a lazy sus dude!
Me, an ADHDer who has been in Noelle’s shoes: Damn what a good friend, where were the people with Kaeya’s energy when I was younger?
48 notes · View notes
autistic-evil-xisuma · 11 months
Text
ok. sorry to post discourse here but continuing to quietly seethe about it is unproductive & will eventually make me explode. so.
here is why I have come to really hate the cane user goodtimeswithscar headcanon!
(first of all, a disclaimer; I'm aware that Scar doesn't care about people portraying him in fanworks with or without his irl disability. I'm not white knighting for him. This rant is on the behalf of myself & my disabled friends who have similar feelings on it.)
Because Scar is disabled in real life, a lot of fans also want to portray his character as disabled in fanart too. Which is awesome! not a bad thing!
It is difficult though. Scar, playing Minecraft, is piloting an effectively able-bodied character. With his disability & the tech available in real life, IRL-Scar wouldn't be able to navigate the world the way he does in game.
To portray character-Scar as disabled in the same way he is in real life would be to massively change how Hermitcraft and Minecraft as a game function. Which I think I've seen some people figure out how to do! Which is awesome! But obviously, it's not an easy thing to do.
So it seems that the thought process of many artists is, okay, so I can't make him as disabled as he is in real life. But I still want to portray him as disabled for representation!
So boom, a cane, a simple and obvious visual indicator of disability to draw character-Scar with! ...which doesn't require thinking about how his disability would impact him in-world, at all.
Of the people who do this, I've only once seen anyone talk about about what Scar's disability is, how it affects his life, how he functions with it and how it limits him. I hope it's needless to say that if you haven't put any thought into how a character is disabled, then... that isn't a disabled character.
Beyond that, many artists who draw Scar as a cane user will only include it when it's easy. It's not so simple to mine, or build, or have an archer superhero persona, or run around the server in general with a cane. So as soon as the context makes it inconvenient, the cane is gone, making it essentially a prop, not a genuine disability aid. (Of course, there are ambulatory cane users. But it's real obvious if the cane being there or not in art is completely based on convenience.)
When the headcanon is used like this, it isn't to show a genuinely disabled character. It's just for the look of one, which can be forgotten whenever it doesn't suit the context.
Scar is a very popular character. And this headcanon is getting more and more common. There isn't any getting away from it short of blocking Scar tags entirely. The constant message I feel like I'm getting from this fandom is that cane users — like myself — are just the version of disability that's easier to ignore.
I know people who do this aren't trying to cause harm, or purposefully being ableist. But it still is. Giving a character the watered-down aesthetic of disability while still being effectively able bodied isn't representation. It sucks, and imo it's better to portray Scar as non-disabled than to do this.
(And yes, I know this isn't always how it goes. Some people who headcanon Scar as a cane user do write him as genuinely disabled, especially people who are projecting their own disability. No salt to them, this isn't who the post is directed at.)
So. my points are these, I guess.
please. please don't just slap a cane on your Scar design and go Yay representation! it doesn't work like that.
In general, if you want to write or draw a disabled character, you need to spend time thinking about what their disability is and how it impacts their life. And show it.
If you're going to take away a character's disability whenever it isn't convenient then just. don't make a disabled character at all.
115 notes · View notes
the-ghost-king · 2 years
Text
imagine saying some variation of "the thing about baymax is that he will help you whether you like it or not" and not batting an eye, switch baymax out with literally any medical profession ever and then tell me you don't see some sort of problem with some of the morals this show is promoting? i get "it's a kid's show!" but tbh that's why it's even more important that it shows accurate and healthy relationships with medical professionals... teaching people about their right to bodily autonomy starts young, and disney rewarding the robot for overstepping people's boundaries, tricking them into doing what he wanted, and forcing people to accept medical help and punishing the characters he works with for not letting him do those things... it just isn't that is it?
482 notes · View notes
soullessjack · 5 months
Text
autistic spn fans: hey I relate a lot to jacks character and feel really represented as an autistic adult who has the same issues and experiences he has in the show :) here’s why I think he’s autistic and I’m gonna ask the silly actor man if he meant to do that bc he did it so well :)
silly actor man: I think he’s definitely a little bit on the spectrum, most of his traits were just from not being fully human but it’s important that people get to see themselves represented on tv and I like having that connection with you guys :)
the rest of the fandom: yay that’s so cool we love representation that’s so important he gets to be autistic just like his dad we love our autistic nougat child 😝😝😝
autistic spn fans: hey since we all agree that jacks autistic could you guys like dial it back on the baby thing it was cute at first but now that’s like the only content you ever make with jack and it’s kind of irritating and infantilizing
the rest of the fandom for some stupid fucking reason: I mean yea but I just like this better 😋😋 so cute and domestic and destiel family yay 😁 he’s basically a toddler anyways already its not hurting anyone 😜
autistic spn fans: … he literally says he isn’t a child and hates when ppl treat him like one and half of your reasoning for him being a child is just his autistic traits
the rest of this stupid fucking fandom for some stupid fucking reason: anyways i actually think that jack should’ve always been a baby and never ever an adult so that dean and cas can be uwu soft domestic gay dads with him 😝😝
autistic spn fans who related to jack as autistic adults and felt represented by him enough to thank the actor for his portrayal:
Tumblr media
62 notes · View notes
1863-project · 8 months
Text
Please reblog this if you vote, and if you'd like to share your own stories with me, please do, as this poll is part of a larger study I'm working on and the more data I can get for that, the better! If you'd be okay with sharing your story with me and having it anonymously included in the essay I'm writing, you can message me so we can discuss further.
381 notes · View notes
gay-jewish-bucky · 11 months
Text
The amount of abled people who are smugly like "it's an au, don't like, don't read 🙄" when disabled people complain about disability erasure in fic (which is deeply rooted in societal ableism) make me so sick. Like no, fuck you.
For one, 99.999999999% of writers don't tag the fact they've done this, so it's literally impossible to avoid. Especially in fandoms where the majority of AUs have erased character's canon disabilities.
Second, Canon disabilities, even acquired disabilities, being included in every universe are vital to maintaining character integrity, no matter how far you stray from canon.
There are countless ways for someone to be born or become disabled. Many of these ways are not as traumatic as canon! If the story isn't about them becoming disabled, you don't even have to include how it happened, you can just have them... be disabled already!
If you erase a disability because you can't be bothered, or you think disabilities existing ruin lighthearted stories, or if you intentionally replace a mobility aide with an accessory or tattoo: you're an asshole.
Disabled people exist in the real world, stop erasing us because you see our disabilities as burdens that can't exist in cute little fantasies, and can only exist in tragedy.
225 notes · View notes
akiizayoi4869 · 1 year
Text
Never change, ATLA Reddit. Never change.
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
134 notes · View notes