#i get that many situations are nuanced but i'm talking about people who say that it's okay to date someone despite “political differences”
Text
Yes, people do need to take accountability for the partners they choose to date, at least to some extent. And no, this doesn't apply to abusive relationships, that situation is entirely different.
I'm talking about white people who date other white people who are openly racist. I'm talking about "allies" who date other people who are openly homophobic and transphobic. I'm talking about liberal women who date very conservative men. And seeing bigotry as nothing more than a "political issue."
Of course, it's different if your partner lies and actively hides their political views from you. But if your partner is openly voting for people like Trump, openly supporting conservative politicians, openly hating/harming minority groups, then you should leave them. And you should be held accountable if you to choose to stay with someone like that.
#personal#rant#just because i see this a lot#if you stay with someone like this it enables their behavior#oh and this applies to queer people too#because queer people can be shitty and bigoted#i get that many situations are nuanced but i'm talking about people who say that it's okay to date someone despite “political differences”#that excuse completely stops when it comes to human rights
8K notes
·
View notes
Note
"I just want to clarify that I’m well informed on the situation that is going on but Byler has only one chance of happening. Meanwhile Palestinians are dying anyway. They have been for years and will continue to die. Since when do y’all care about them and their lives? You started talking about it only when it became trendy.
Fake activists, move on and continue eating expensive food in your comfy house and not giving a fuck about people far away from you dying. That shit happens everyday and if you get involved your psyche will be hurt. Let the politicians deal with this instead of bullying a random actor that didn’t do anything harmful"
browsing through the noah schnapp tag to see what he did now and seeing these words was a literal slap in the face how can someone post this and think theyre a good person???
(When I first read this, I thought you were saying that shit in my inbox and was ready to throw hands, so I was very relieved to see you were just sharing the bullshit from someone else's blog.)
I just searched in the tag and saw this exact post. How fucking horrifying. Instant block. I doubt anyone could reason with this person.
"Palestinians are dying anyway. They have been for years and will continue to die." Can't believe anyone typed this genuinely and without pause. Just say you don't care about Palestinian lives and stop there, you'll get your point across better.
"Since when do y’all care about them and their lives? You started talking about it only when it became trendy." Many people are only just now beginning to really educate themselves on the history of Israel and Palestine. I'm among them - I used to be one of the folks who thought it was too complicated and nuanced to take a stance on. Then I read Palestine: A Socialist Introduction, started reading from news sources and independent journalists outside of mainstream western media, started listening to Palestinian and anti-zionist Jewish voices, and realized how false that was. I take responsibility for not educating myself sooner. But it's actually weird to frame people educating themselves and having empathy for people dying as jumping on a trend.
"Let the politicians deal with this..." Ah, yes, let's leave it to the politicians, who notoriously have our best interests in mind and would never do anything to cause harm. (/sarcasm) "... instead of bullying a random actor that didn’t do anything harmful." If you think sharing violent zionist rhetoric such as "you stand with Israel or you stand with terrorism" or trivializing the deaths of eleven thousand Palestinians with stupid stickers calling zionism sexy, in front of your audience of millions as a celebrity, is "not harmful" then we clearly are not going to agree on anything.
#noah schnapp#answered#anon#free palestine#israel palestine#current events#death mention#islamophobia tw
250 notes
·
View notes
Note
God I am so tired of Bramble fans who refuse to use critical thinking and believe that brambleclaw and squilf are equally bad. Many also hate on moonkitti's video which they most likely haven't even watched or misconstrued points in it. You can like a character without defending all their actions please I'm begging you
And people will sometimes jump to their defense, saying that people just dogpiled them for liking a character the fandom doesn't like, and while that can happen, sometimes people are actually dogpiling them for ignoring abuse and insulting creators with different opinions
(Some discourse happened on Twitter recently about this but it's something I've seen happen before, I'm not specifically talking about anyone)
I'm going to be honest and drop my feelings.
Never have I ever actually SEEN a Bramblefan "get dogpiled" for liking Bramble.
I come out here on my massive soapbox every couple of weeks and drop whole essays on this guy, I chat casually about how important he is to me as a character, both as someone who was abused in a way similar to Squirrelflight AND as someone who can relate to Bramblestar's situation, and before BB got so large and my attention was easier to divide I even ran an AU called Sweet Nothings which had a "big brother" Bramble take in it.
There is no shortage of Bramblestar-related posts around here, yet, I have never, NEVER gotten shit for when I talk positively about Bramble.
In fact, he's commonly cited as one of the favorite cats to see on this blog from my audience. I get praise for addressing him with nuance, explaining how his actions are abuse while also keeping him human, talking about how his life is a painful cycle of self-doubt that makes him double down on his worst decisions. Every time I post about him, I get an influx of comments centered around how my takes on him are appreciated.
What I DO see is people who make art where they try to bothsides him and Squirrelflight, or say something completely false about his behavior, or straightup post DARVO tactics to defend their fav's honor. When someone makes a comment that goes "uhmm? Bit strange innit?" they call it "harassment." Or when people block them, they call that "receiving hate."
OR when someone makes a vaguepost like "Heyyy, DARVO is an abuse denial tactic where the abuser or their apologists Deny the abuse took place, Attack the accuser, and then Reverse Victim and Offender to claim they were actually the person harmed. Bramblestans are playing this out, step for step, and that's bad!" they call THAT dogpiling.
Meanwhile Moonkitti got death threats and was actually harassed for posting Bramblestar Is Worse. To the point where she is hesitant to ever make another video on the topic.
So y'know what? Hot take? The stans don't actually like Bramblestar. They like the vague idea of a sadboy character who broke free from his dad's legacy so they slurp up the framing of the notorious abuse apologist writers, and they get mad when people who have critically engaged with the books don't see what they desperately crave.
How can you really LIKE a character if you can't engage with their actions? If you need to surround yourself in an unpoppable bubble and can't accept anything he's done in the 20+ years he's been active? How can you truly love a man without all his mistakes?
It's sooo hard to be me, Tumblr User Bonefall, the ONLY one who likes Bramblestar correctly. It's rough out here.
141 notes
·
View notes
Text
⚠️Attention:⚠️ very long post. It talks a little about: state of lack, take your desire off the pedestal, time it takes for a manifestation, get distracted about your manifestation , self-concept, and Cassies
one more night high and having crazy epiphanies about manifestations. and another day using a translator to translate my text to post here, because I haven't claimed to be fluent in English yet 😛 So, as I always warn, if there are possible grammatical errors, it's for this reason.
I'm here to bring you an analogy I created while discussing with a friend haha. (Yes, this time there's nothing about lana del rey!)
you know those people who humiliate themselves for others? Who do everything for someone specific to love them, try to talk to them even if it's unhealthy, or beg them to stay in their lives. (yes, it's quite depressing and sad)
i haven't been like that much in life, usually when someone didn't care about me, i cared even less about them. but I won't lie, there have been situations where I may have humiliated myself a little, but it's human.
anyway, going straight to my analogy, let's imagine that you struggling to manifest something is a friend "Cassie," and the manifestation will be her ex-boyfriend, okay? (i swear it will make sense in the end)
what I write outside the parentheses is Cassie's situation, and what's inside the parentheses is possibly the situation you're going through on your manifestation journey.
okay, you have this friend Cassie who keeps saying that her ex-boyfriend doesn't care about her, doesn't respond to messages, and shows no signs, and she's going crazy and desperate about it (just like you when you see no progress in your manifestation). so she does EVERYTHING to get him back (just like you when you try multiple methods non-stop and feel needy). and as Cassie's friend, you think, "poor cassie, she doesn't deserve to suffer like this" (and she really doesn't deserve it, just as you don't deserve to suffer for your manifestations). there are also moments when she sends a message for you saying, "I'll forget him this time, I promise." but after two days, she's there messaging him again (just like you affirm on the first day all motivated and trying to convince yourself that this time your manifestation will come true, but after a few days, you see no progress and start panicking), and then she gets very sad because she thinks they will never get back together and she will never be happy with him again (just like you think you can't manifest anything, that the universe hates you, that you will never get what you want, that the loa doesn't work). But meanwhile, there are other people out there getting back with their exes and you admire them, wondering what it would be like if it were you... (just like when you look at other people's success stories and think "why can't I do it?") spoiler: You can do it too, honey. If everyone else can do it, so can you. Wake up.
If I were Cassie's friend, I would tell her to STOP acting like that and start valuing herself and just distract herself. because let's be honest, men ALWAYS come back, right? 🤣 and many people may disagree with me on this and think that if she doesn't chase after the guy, he won't come either. but that's how it works for me, even before I started using the law. every time I started valuing myself and stopped begging for others' love, the person came to me. so let's agree with my thinking on this, okay?
and one more point that I think is worth mentioning is that if Cassie really doesn't want to do this alone, maybe a manifestation coach would be a good idea (if it were a real situation, I would suggest her to seek a therapist). There are nuances about "manifestation coaches," I honestly don't use them and I recommend working on your self-concept. but it's an option if you want, but please do thorough research and find a trustworthy one.
returning, what can you do to not be another Cassie? I'm telling you to stop doing whatever you're doing to try to achieve your desire? no. just get out of the state of neediness and desperation, like a Cassie. you don't need that, my love. you don't need to worry, "Is my manifestation coming?" You don't need to use a thousand methods because you don't think it's enough. whatever you believe will bring your desires, will indeed bring your desire. If you believe that jumping three times, building a castle, and kicking an elderly person will give you what you want, guess what? If you do all that, then you will get what you desire. and if you believe that affirming once in your life will get you a beachfront mansion, guess what? you will achieve that.
so, to not be a Cassie:
1 - trust what you're saying, please trust yourself. nnow that ONLY WHAT YOU THINK is the truth, and it will be. (my last long post talks about this exactly, I highly recommend it, okay).
2 - take your desire off the pedestal. your desire may be your biggest dream in life, I don't care. take it off the pedestal. the powerful person who can have anything they want is YOU, not your desire. tou are a thousand times greater than your desire. you don't chase after your desire, your desire chases after you. you know when manifestation coaches tell you to start manifesting just a blue butterfly or a candy? well, it's because for you, that's not difficult. It's something you find easy to manifest and know it's totally possible to have. but you can literally manifest a Porsche at the same speed as manifesting an ice cream, okay? take your desire off the pedestal; you are fully capable of having it.
3 - get out of the state of lack. In the law of assumption, some people talk a lot about states and some manifest just by being in the state of the wish fulfilled and ready, they succeed. but the state of lack is literally when you feel the lack, the absence of your desire. you don't feel like you have it or you don't feel worthy of it, so you probably fall into a spiral of despair with millions of thoughts like "what will I do if I don't achieve it?" "I don't see any progress" "time is passing and I don't have my results". Anyway,
- But what do I do to heal my state of lack?
just don't be in it 💐💐💐 yes, it's easy, okay. please believe that it's easy and it will be. I know it's very easy to affirm when you're motivated, especially after reading a success story. but motivation doesn't last forever and I don't think it's healthy for you to keep restoring your motivation by reading success stories all the time. there's nothing wrong with it, but you don't need success stories to heal. every time you feel like you're entering the state of lack, start trusting yourself. when it happens to me, I start affirming "none of this, I have my desires" "I don't care about what my 3D shows me" "I have what I want", I also imagine myself with my desire as if I really have it now. I'll admit, there are times when I start affirming this to avoid entering the state of lack and at first it feels like I'm feeling wrong, the feeling of hopelessness even. but regardless of how I feel, I keep visualizing and eventually start feeling strong and motivated again. in those moments, you have to be strong and disciplined with yourself, okay? you can do it.
4 - try not to care about time or the 3D reality. i know it's difficult, but please live in your imagination and believe that if you have it in your imagination, you have it now. about time, it depends, okay? Some people manifest in seconds because they believe they can, while others manifest in weeks because they think it takes weeks. if you're the second type of person, you can definitely manifest in seconds if you allow yourself to do so. self-concept affirmations help a lot in this aspect. Just don't worry about time in the 3D reality. If you know that in your mind you have your desire NOW, then you have it now. once you're fully living in your imagination, it will come in the 3D reality. I know it's difficult, but just trust yourself and your mind. I promise that if you live 100% in your mind, your desire can come very quickly.
5 - distract yourself! don't spend the whole day thinking about your desire. usually, the desire comes when you accept that you have it and continue living your life. I know it's complicated, especially when it's something you want, but distract yourself to avoid excessive and negative thoughts about your manifestations. and please get off tumblr for a while
6 - improve your self-concept, please. Just do that, and your manifestation journey will be much easier.
I think that's it for today. I talked a lot as always 😛😛
I usually don't respond to people asking for help here on my blog (mainly because I don't receive any requests) but if you're having problems, you can send me a message, and I'll respond ❤🩹 I just want to help someone like loa bloggers helped me when I needed it. good night everyone, and stay hydrated.
#law of assumption#master manifestor#void state#mentaldiet#neville goddard#selfconcept#success story#voidstate#loa motivation#loa#loa blog#living in the end#affirm and persist#affirmations#affirmyourreality#law of attraction#manifestation#affirmdaily#dream life#successstories#manifestation coach#self concept#loa tumblr
207 notes
·
View notes
Note
Do you mind elaborating on how Dave was *sexually* abused by Bro? It's been a long while since I've read Homestuck but i hear many other creators say that that's an "absurd, chronically online" thing to say. so you specifying that that's exactly what happened morbidly piqued my interest (no pushing of course, given the gross subject matter i completely understand if this is not something you're comfortable with answering)
The idea of calling that statement "Absurd" and "Chronically Online" is baffling to me, because you'd honestly need to do significantly more mental gymnastics to say that Dave hasn't been sexually abused by Bro. It's textual, and it's a major part of Dave's intro.
Putting this under a cut, because you're entirely correct- this is a really touchy, disturbing subject matter. But it still needs to get talked about. Lucky for you, I'm perfectly okay with talking about the darker aspects of Homestuck's writing... Without filtering it through a fetishistic lens.
I apologize in advance if this is more rambly than my usual essays. It's an uncomfortable series of topics that's hard to tackle for any normal person.
Let's do this.
Content Warning: Heavy Discussion of CSA, Mentions of Incest and Pedophilia.
I think where people are getting tripped up is that they hear the phrase "Child Sexual Abuse" and automatically think of the worst forms of it possible. It's an easy trap to fall into, and a pretty understandable one. The word "Abuse" is loaded, and perceived as an inherently violent, extreme action- a callous, sadistic disregard for the safety of someone who is seen as weaker, something done only by an unfeeling, inhuman monster who wishes to dominate the victim. It's a violent word, so people envision it as a violent crime.
I can't fault anyone for hearing the term "Child Sexual Abuse" being applied to two brothers with a significant age gap and instantly assuming that what's being said is that the older brother is committing absolutely heinous acts on the younger brother. That is easy to digest. That's the simplest takeaway one can get from that statement. It's a fair assumption.
I can't fault anyone for assuming that the phrase "Dave was a victim of CSA under Bro's care" means that the person stating it thinks that Bro sexually assaulted Dave. I can't fault them for having the assumption that what is being said is that Bro is an incestuous pedophile. I cannot fault it for a second. It's just the easiest takeaway, and the most mentally and emotionally intense one. It's easy to digest, and easy to get mad at. Because saying that would be wrong.
Most cases of abuse are more subtle and nuanced than its most extreme cases. Sometimes abuse come in the form of Neglect. Even sexual abuse can come in the form of Neglect.
For The Record: We have no reason to assume Bro Strider ever made sexual contact with Dave, nor do we have any evidence to the idea that he even had any sexual thoughts or feelings about him. To assert that idea as fact would be fucked up. But that doesn't automatically negate the presence of sexual abuse.
What I want everyone to understand is that it is sexually abusive to constantly, wittingly expose a child to sexual material, be it websites, videos, photos, or objects. It is sexually abusive to do this, and the fact that Dave is surrounded by sexual objects and pornographic material- and has been since he was a literal baby- should absolutely concern people. The comedy of it is surface level, and a quick prod quickly reveals the abject horror of the situation.
Bro's main business appears to be in the porn industry, specifically making puppet fetish content.
A parent being in the porn industry and having a fetish... Isn't inherently a bad thing. Kinks and fetishes are normal, and so is being a sex worker. If that's what you want to do, go for it. But Bro leaves his Smuppets everywhere, which are, by and large, sex toys. Whether or not they are for his own personal sexual gratification is irrelevant to the debate- if you are a parent and your business is making and selling dildos, it is still your job as a parent to hide those dildos from your kid, even if they're not for your own use.
Dave knows this. He knows that Smuppets are sex toys. Dave is very aware of the fetish porn site that Bro runs. Bro knows that Dave knows this. The sexual boundary between Bro and Dave is incredibly thin- inappropriately so for one's own young child.
And Dave, the child in this situation, knows this lack of boundaries is wrong... But he's genuinely not in the right place to fully acknowledge it. He's too unsafe still, so he has to keep making excuses to try and bury his trauma.
[Homestuck, page 461.]
The thing you have to keep in mind throughout reading Dave's entire introductory segment is that "Irony" is a code word. A lot of abuse victims, when they're still too unsafe to fully acknowledge their abuse, tend to make excuses for their abuser's behavior in the form of "At Least" statements. As in, "At least they don't hit me", or "At least I can still talk to my friends". Things of that nature.
"Irony" is Dave's "At Least". That's him saying "At least this is a joke", "This is creepy, but at least it's not serious", "at least he doesn't mean it".
All of this Smuppet stuff is creepy, and Dave wishes Bro would stop. He wishes he'd put his puppet sex toys away, wishes he'd stop tormenting him every waking moment of his life, wishes he'd stop forcing him to fight. He wishes he wasn't trapped in an apartment that feels like hell, and he wishes he didn't have to hide any drinks and food he could get his hands on in the closet to get any chance at sustaining his own life and body. He wishes he was a normal kid in a normal home with a parent that loves him, just like his friends.
But hey, it's all ironic. At least Bro doesn't mean it, right?
It all stops being abuse when you declare it to be a prank, right?
It's fine, guys.
[Homestuck, page 467.]
Totally fine.
#homestuck#homestuck meta#homestuck analysis#beta kids#beta guardians#dave strider#bro strider#cw abuse#cw child harm#dave.pdf#bro.pdf#nekro.pdf#nekro.sms
375 notes
·
View notes
Text
There's something I feel like gets overlooked in metas about Stede's self-loathing being selfish and his communication style not always meshing with Ed's and Mary's, and it always digs at me when I'm reading an otherwise good post about these issues.
The thing is trauma.
Self-loathing does make you self-centered, it's true. You get focused on hyperanalyzing yourself and your behavior, which can potentially stop you from noticing what's going on with other people or from believing them when they like/compliment you. It's obviously not good for anyone involved in the situation, and it merits therapy. But it's also a trauma response.
Why does Stede believe Chauncey so easily? Why does he avoid expressing his preferences strongly in certain situations? Because he's been told his entire life, up until Discomfort in a Married State, that he deserves to be self-loathing. That everything he likes and wants is wrong, that his personality is wrong, that even the fact of his birth is wrong. Say he's not happy with the way someone treats him? That sounds like a you problem, Stede.
This obviously relates to homophobia and toxic masculinity, like so much of the show, but I'd also point out that it's familiar to a lot of un-dx'd autistic people who mask/have masked (which is part of why so many autistic people are leopointing.jpg at Stede). In that situation, you know that you're doing everything wrong all of the time, whether that's how literally you respond to people/how you miss the nuances of their social cues or what you choose to do on your down time, and since you don't really know why you're so weird, you learn that you need to ruthlessly self-critique in order to make a version of yourself that can be tolerated. If someone interrupts you to shut you up, it's because you're boring and so it's your fault - maybe don't talk at all, then?
That kind of internalized punishment doesn't go away immediately. Stede's spent his whole life being told to hate himself. It's not surprising that a few weeks of one amazing person telling him that he's actually pretty cool couldn't completely counteract that, and that he still needed to work through it by ep 9. It's as valid a trauma response as Ed's trauma responses.
512 notes
·
View notes
Text
Fire and Dynamite Can Sit With Me
There have been a couple of really excellent posts about Fy and Dy on my dash this evening, and I wanted to yes, and them but am making my own post because things were getting long. First, if you haven't read this post by @waitmyturtles or this one by @lurkingshan or this one by @bengiyo do that first!
In addition to the moments all of these brilliant people have pointed out, I wanted to highlight a couple of other things.
First, like Ben mentioned, we find out later in the series that Dynamite first fell for Fire because he beat up bullies for him. The important thing this informs about how Dynamite interacts with Fire in the early episodes is that he sees Fire's fierceness as safety. This is important because Fire is RUDE, and it alienates other people from him. It also means that he knows Fire is a straightforward person who is not afraid to punch people he's genuinely mad at. Dy knows what Fire looks like when he's genuinely mad.
Second, one of the things that Dynamite picks up about Fire is how much attention Fire actually pays him. He says himself, if you weren't interested in me and you were interested in Jane, you wouldn't notice or care about my presence.
Third, Dy did not move in with Sansee in order to stalk Fire. It was a series of coincidences that led to them both being in that condo building. And when he says it's fate thanks to a goddess granting his wish, Fire doesn't disagree, he just curses out the goddess for granting Dy's wish.
Fourth, Dy is excellent at reading people and situations. You have to be when you have been bullied for your attitude in the past. He's constantly correctly reading Ten and his reactions to Prem, and he takes encouragement from how Fire reacts to him up until Fire legitimately wavers, and as mentioned by Shan in the previous linked post, that's when he backs off. Dy is not ever pushing when he can tell he's really unwanted, and he doesn't stand in Fire's way. He encouraged Fire to speak to Jane; he even got Fire Jane's contact info. He continues to flirt in front of Jane but he can tell she doesn't mind--we see him look at her and clock her reactions in those scenes. And he steps in immediately with Fire's mom to take the heat for Jane being in Fire's condo, without even talking about it, because he knows how damaging it can be to be cut off by a family member for being a disappointment.
So much about consent is body language and nuance. I'm not saying "no means yes" or whatever nonsense, but pushing when someone is genuinely uncomfortable even if they're not saying no is so much worse than sticking around even when someone tells you to go away because you can tell they're relaxed and not actually upset. The contrast in power dynamics, reading of body language, and consent vs non-consent is strong between Fire and Chef Changma, and Changma heartily loses that competition.
Despite clocking Fire as closeted from jump, Dy does not push Fire to come out. As Ben mentioned, he puts his own friend group--friends who at this point are functioning as his found family replacing the family that abandoned him, like so many of us have had to do--at risk to respect Fire's right to come out at his own pace.
Fire at first defaults to staying in the closet. But when he sees the toll that this has on Dynamite he decides to push himself to come out anyway, even though Dy is not making any demands.
As Turtles mentioned in their linked post, when Fire stops fighting himself with his whole being, he's soft. And this is how he is used to expressing love, it's how he expresses his love to his mother too.
In short (lol), I LOVE THEM YOUR HONOUR.
#cooking crush#bl meta#typed so that i can stop thinking it#yes and#AND ANOTHER THING#these two are great#I feel for them so much#I'm so glad they found one another#they are making one another better#dy is giving fire the confidence to be who he is without fear#fire is giving dy the confidence to believe that someone he loves will be in his corner and show up to support him#i have a lot of feelings about dy not expecting fire to show up to the competition and fire not only showing up but being cuddly
78 notes
·
View notes
Note
The biggest truth that solves all plot holes in Miraculous: they’re bad writers.
No excuse of this being a kids show works because if you want to be not held accountable for holes then fine act like SpongeBob
but you can’t have everything
Yeah. I didn't give a damn about the "plot holes" in Seasons 1-2, or even Season 3 to some extent, because those were mostly monster of the week type of episodes. Sure, there were some semblances of plot and world-building, but it was still mostly episodic and the show still mostly focused on being goofy and entertaining, so I turned of my brain and enjoyed it greatly.
But then Season 4 came along and tried to change the tone of the series entirely, from being a monster of the week to having an actual plot and overarching story, and proved that the writers for the show don't really know how to do that? And then they started digging their holes deeper and deeper and made so many baffling decisions in the writing that the show just turned into a huge mess, full of unresolved plot points, underdeveloped characters, convoluted storytelling, and many unfortunate implications.
And it's like you said. If the show wants me to take it seriously, I will. I'm going to look at a show for what it is. When the show was presenting itself as a goofy episodic show to entertain kids, I judged it as such and I enjoyed it, because Miraculous is good at that. I loved Seasons 1 and 2. Season 3 less so, because it started The Plot™, and it wasn't good at that, but I still enjoyed a lot of it. But Seasons 4 and 5 came along and demanded I take them seriously, so I did. And they weren't good, because the writers aren't good at that kind of storytelling. They're good at goofy shenanigans, but not at complex plots and characters.
And "it's a kids show" is not an excuse. Kids shows can explore complex subjects and can have great plots and characters (ATLA). But it still has to be, you know, good. Kids aren't stupid. I know that kid me would have also hated the Season 5 finale, because Adrien is my favorite, and he wasn't there, and they made Marinette lose.
But at the same time, this is still a show for kids. Miraculous is a kids show, and therefore, it has the responsibility to not promote harmful messages. What would an abused child who is in a situation similar to Adrien's think when they see him call Gabriel a hero in the finale and say that he doesn't know if he'll ever be like him? Children aren't stupid and incapable of understanding anything, and they do deserve good quality of writing, but they also aren't capable of complex media analysis. And when you see people making these long-ass posts talking about how the finale is actually not what it seems like, actually, you have to consider the target audience. A kid isn't going to be picking up on the deep and nuanced hidden meanings in Gabriel final moments that prove he hasn't changed. They are going to see Gabriel hugging his wife, smiling and surrounded by pretty and warm lights while beautiful music plays. If we have to write all these long theories justifying the ending and trying to suggest that what was obviously portrayed on the screen isn't what the show is really trying to say, is a kid really going to get it?
Which is why you see so many people saying shit like "aw Gabriel was really a good man," or "he was never the villain." These people are probably like, 12–13 year olds, and they are watching a show meant for kids. And as a kid, I'm not going to like that Adrien wasn't in the finale, sure, but does that mean I'll understand that Gabriel is supposed to still be a bad guy when the show tells me to my face that he isn't?
It's not like the show can't deal with complex and nuanced characters. I myself have written many character analyses and have treated these characters as complex and nuanced, and they could have been. Again, look at ATLA. Zuko, for example, is a very complex character, but he is still brought to life in a way that allows kids to understand all the nuances and subtleties in his story clearly. There is a lot of rather complex symbolism, but the kids get the jist of it and can understand his story well, even if they don't catch all the minute details. Hell, take Azula. The show doesn't shy away from showing her doing bad things, but it also makes it blatantly obvious that you should feel sorry for her in the end, and that she's also a victim. Again, kids can understand this.
And that's where Miraculous falls flat. The writers fucked up their message. They wrote some deeply problematic stuff, where the abuser won. The bad guy won, but he was actually a good guy. So, people who act like Gabriel maybe aren't all that bad. What Gabriel did in the end was good, and we should all try to be like him. Kids aren't going to question it. In this way, "it's a kids show" goes from being an excuse to being a problem. It's what it says on the tin, and what's on the tin is not good. That's how I feel.
Thank you for your ask!
67 notes
·
View notes
Note
Sorry for the incoming long rant.
I just rediscovered your blog, and I always enjoyed your thoughts on WHA and wanted to rant a little bit. I found a post of yours talking about how WHA is getting less nuanced and I feel the same way. I feel like in an effort to make every character feel like a person, the manga treats everyone’s issues as if they’re on the same level. I’m not sure if that entirely makes sense, but it feels like the manga is trying to make you sympathize with everyone to some extent, even though that doesn’t really work. For example, there is a chapter that pissed me off so much that I had to put the manga on pause. It’s the chapter where Coco shows off a spell that can clean water, and the townspeople are uninterested because they don’t need it. And the moral of the chapter is that Coco should make her spell for everyone. No. No no no. These people need to learn some damn compassion and realize that they need to help end what suffering that they are able to. The moral of the chapter should’ve been that these people need to stop thinking of only themselves. Everything else was aimed at them, so Coco’s spell didn’t need to be for them. It shouldn’t have been for them. There is also the situation with the knights. You went into this already but who gives a shit if they are offended by a grieving husband taking out his anger in them when they are a part of the system that caused his grief. The manga wants you to sympathize with everyone, and while I don’t think these people should be one dimensional their issues should not be treated on the same level as others. Anyway, sorry for the weird long rant, it’s just everyone treats this manga like it is The Most Flawlessly Progressive Manga Ever and your one of the few I’ve found who acknowledges is flaws without devaluing its strengths
Thank you for your ask! I agree with what you're saying and think you worded it very well. It's a bit of a shame it's so rare to find people openly critiquing the series in the community, while it's nothing serious (and minimized by being a bit of a hermit, lol) I've seen some animosity for doing it, I assume because many assume critiquing art means you don't like it or are opposed to what it's trying to do! Which isn't true. Granted Witch Hat Atelier contains many an obvious fantasy metaphor for real life social issues it should be under more scrutiny than normal if you ask me, because those are serious topics that affect people's real lives. I do have faith in the author's serious handling of touchy topics, but in the execution there are things I'd do differently for sure...
The manga wants you to sympathize with everyone, and while I don’t think these people should be one dimensional their issues should not be treated on the same level as others.
WHA has in its writing strong expectations from the reader regarding how you think of its cast I find hard to read through a lot - the latest arc in particular, comparatively, has much of its character based moments revolve around if they're good or bad in a way that implies it'll change how you think of a character and it disturbs me. Qifrey and Sasaran are two early examples of characters that do *not* play into that - Qifrey's beginning arcs simultaneously show him as a shady manipulator and genuinely good teacher who betters the life of his students, and it participates so much to the dramatic tension. Sasaran is a villain of the week who while shown to be a huge cunt, has a backstory that implies his original motives were not nefarious ones, and his life was not easy.
Compare this to a character like Dean who, as much as I'm a fan of his concept, falls rather flat because he's, depending on the chapter, pushed as good/bad to the reader, regarding his moral alignment. Characters who are just meant to be despicable don't have the same level of attention placed to their writing which is a similar issue. It feels insecure, like if the story was saying: we have those important characters, their role is to bring up difficult situations, please don't hate them, like them, see, they're nice too! And giving them chosen positive traits. People don't work like that and it feels cheap. Fandom's obsession with villains should show well a character being despicable doesn't make them unlikeable, and I'd like WHA's characters to be less "good"/"likeable" myself to make them a bit more human. This would detonate a fandom nuke given I still regularly see passionate debates about how mean and terrible characters like Agott or Custas are but hey
As for priorities in the depicted suffering of characters in universe - yeah, it's true some scenes feel a bit off in that department...the water cleaning scene you mention did not rub me the wrong way too hard, because it's centered around Coco, who's our main character, the story bending to give her a central role makes sense, and her unique position in witch society and how it relates to helping others are, with the responsibilities of witches, very important to the story. The apprentice backstories are an earlier example I had trouble taking too seriously because while they're all terrible, tiny silly Riche and her brother's experience with physical child abuse felt drawn with the same intensity as Agott being pushed to mental disarray by her rich fancy perfectionist family. It's all hard to complain about and might sting less if the writing was a bit less dramatic and preachy, but that might just be a me issue, I've seen many fans praise WHA's writing wholeheartedly, so...
What I am hoping is that the latest arc will conclude and lead to the shorter previous structure and we'll get individual attention brought to character stories, one after the other, instead of the all at once formula going on right now... We'll see!
#no real conclusion. if u wanna discuss more feel free to:)#ask#witch hat atelier#sounding like a broken record at this point but if you want a kids having variousproblems manga that im#o does characters right: read sunny
33 notes
·
View notes
Text
I don't like making posts like this, I don't like opening my blog up for people to come and harrass me but oh my god, why does the fandom allow posts like this to get away unscathed?
You don’t have to like Marina. I'll never claim that. You can like or dislike whoever you want.
But I do wonder, if Marina was played by a white woman would we get nearly as many posts like this? Would everyone be as okay with it? Would we have been so quiet about the fact that Ruby Barker was harrassed for this role? Or would there be way more people defending her? Would she suddenly be sympathetic when now shes not?
Why are we all so okay with taking this character with a nuanced story, put in a horrible situation with almost no options and turning her into a villian?
Like did we watch the same show? Did you miss the bit where she doesn't want to find a husband at all and only starts when she thinks shes been abandoned, which she only believes because she gets a forged letter saying she was? Did you not see Portia slap her? Did you not also watch a man old enough to be her grandfather being forced on her?
Lying to Colin wasn't okay, I'm not defending that, but literally tell me what her options were?
The man she loves is dead, but she doesn't even know that she thinks he abandoned her, so she can't reasonably assume Phillip will take responsibility when his brother won't. The only people Portias interested in introducing to her are those she wouldn't introduce to her own daughters. She can't reasonably think Colin will be open to her as a wife since shes pregnant becausethats not the norm. But Colin is, he says he would have married her even knowing. And Colin also doesn't view Marina as a villian, in season two hes sad yeah, but he’s also guilty because he doesn't think she deserved what happened.
This is a nuanced messy situation but no one wants to look at that.
Like you all make it very clear you view her as a whore, because she did a very normal thing and had sex. You all view her as a manipulative snake of a person, when if she was even the Whistledown article wouldn't have been a stop for her because she would have tried to get out of it. You conveniently forget that she almost killed herself in an attempt to abort her children because of her mistreatment post Whistledown article because that takes away from the idea you've concocted that shes some villainous bitch.
But then you turn around and want Penelope to have sexual knowledge that she realistically wouldn't and canonically doesn’t. You praise her for her Whistledown work even though it keeps hurting people she loves and shes lying about doing it.
This is weird, posting about how you can't wait for a character to die, and how you hope the death is - lets be honest here- humiliating, is a bizarre thing to do.
Its even more bizarre to do that, tag the character, and then also tag two ships that really the post really isn't about.
Like why is Polin tagged? Because they're both mentioned? This isn't a polin moment. You don’t talk about them at all in the meat of the post. Why is Philoise tagged? Because she's an 'obstacle' for them? They haven't even met, they aren't mentioned at all, they have nothing to do with this.
And on top of tagging these things you say "don't try and defend her to me" which why would we you clearly wouldn't listen. You follow that with saying "If you like her you probably suck" and claim to have tagged this as anti marina when you didn't. You put this in her main tag and then added "death to marina".
Theres no respect to your peers in the fandom, and clear disrespect to people who do like this character and are actually willing to engage with the character beyond fanon portrayal. Because thats what this is its not even taking her at face value anymore.
You wonder why people dislike this fandom, specifically the polin side of it, and do things like this. We as a community need to improve because stuff like this isn't uncommon, this is just one of the most blatant I've seen.
I'm going to be entirely honest if you follow quotegirl19, or don't see the issues with Marinas portrayal and treatment by the fandom this is not the blog for you.
#rainy talks#yeah I bit the bullet but i feel abit better#bridgerton#marina thompson#colin bridgerton#Penelope Featherington#I'm only tagging them because they're metioned rather prominently (which is how you actually use tags)#polin#for the same reason as stated above#I'm not tagging philoise though I don't think its important enough#marinas treatment in this fandom reeks of racism and misogyny
43 notes
·
View notes
Note
Idk if my addition will matter.
I've been following Hanza since back when they were making my deepest secret, so I've seen the development of the guy upstairs first hand and how hanza writes it. Even back in the concept stages, it was so blatantly clear that it was supposed to be a thriller/cat mouse vibe where Adam (killer) was horrible and not to be rooted for. They've compared him to irl serial killers and how those guys will often use women as shields to hide their true selves from the public and how that's messed up and bad to do.
They've shown Adam as a horrible irredeemable person and honestly there's little to no nuance with how they handle it, but that makes sense because how else can you handle an audience like what they've gotten without beating them over the head with the facts. How many ways can you outright show your main character despising and wanting to yank their best friend out of the jaws of a murderer before the audience realizes its not foreplay.
I think them going from an actual romance to a fully thriller non romantic story meant that the residual audience expected some kind of messy toxic romance, but Rozy to me has always explicitly read as Queer so idk why people aren't getting the hint.
I get their frustration and it seems like they might be shifting into a potiential issekai romance about a grandad and a middle aged woman who got reincarnated as his grandson's fiance (hard to explain but its hilarious if you want to check it out) without any thriller elements from their recent non comic posts. Whatever they do I hope they can find something to be passionate about again.
your addition VERY MUCH MATTERS actually because I don't read TGU and have very little context to the situation as a whole aside from what I've seen people talking about, which makes me reluctant to speak on it because I don't wanna go spreading misinformation in any regard. So I appreciate you taking the time to lay it all out for me, thank you!!! <3
And yeah, I've seen posts shared in the /r/webtoons sub from other blogs claiming that Hanza was being an awful person for "taking people's money" and "baiting them" into reading a dark romance story when that's very obviously not what it is? Even one excerpt that was literally like-
And I just... since when is any romance plotline that ISN'T abusive and problematic at its core (such as between a serial killer and a victim) considered "super conservative" and "pure"? It's really baffling to me how people have gone so far in the opposite direction of "purity culture" that they've started arguing on behalf of legitimately harmful and toxic relationships. It's extremely concerning especially when you know the majority of people saying this shit are between the ages of 16-21. IDK what the fuck we're doing anymore when it comes to the romance genre (and TGU isn't even a romance ffs).
Aaaand yeah in relation to where the Hanza topic came up, that's really why I'm moving away from WT as an audience and why I don't consider it a "loss" to not use WT anymore. Once upon a time I wished for Time Gate to be a contracted series, for it to have thousands of readers and be my job. But seeing what's going on with Hanza's work just informs me that I'd be dealing with a lot of the same shit - people expecting Uzuki and Mitsuhiro to be the endgame of the romance when they're literally NOT good for each other, which is the POINT. Like sure, unlike the main duo in TGU, they actually are a couple with a 'relationship' but it's not meant to be healthy and the last thing I need are 15 year olds thinking they're "couple goals". If you ship them in fanfic or w/e the fuck that's fine but please don't get mad at me when they don't wind up being the endgame couple, they're both terrible people and make each other worse when they're around each other (・_・;)
Either way yeah, I don't blame Hanza in the slightest for getting so frustrated with it all that they'd rather just be done with it. It sucks for the more loyal and sane part of their audience that the series is gonna be ripped out from under them like that, but at the end of the day if the creator is being harassed and decide they're done as a result of it... why should they have to keep putting up with bullshit just for a comic? I don't even blame Rachel if she was ending LO by choice due to the noise of the fandom, and unlike Rachel, I don't have anything in the slightest against Hanza or their work LOL But I also don't have the full picture on it all so maybe my opinion will change if I find out more about it. I just don't think any of this shit is worth directly harassing a human being over.
That said, can't get any better than someone who's read their work since before TGU, so again, thank you !
50 notes
·
View notes
Text
With the dream situation, other horrible cc's, but especially dream... i just think its really disheartening not only do people not believe victims/victim blame/harass victims/etc., but that there are also many other pipelines people go down for the sake of defending their cc.
Like, with the allegations especially in the beginning there was so much discourse about the law, the definition of grooming, and what is normal behavior for a victim. It's bad enough people didn't want to believe a potential victim, but then people went further. So, now you think the US Justice System is the pinnacle of justice, and is in fact designed to help "real victims" when there's a lot of evidence to the contrary? So, now you think the fact that it's "technically legal for an adult to flirt with minors in the US" means it's just a okay to do that? You think the US legal definition of grooming is encompassing enough, that it doesn't exclude any one, that it does it's job perfectly to help victims? And i'm not a law expert myself, but I am aware of the harm the US justice system does to victims. And it was really scary how many people who seemed to present themselves of understanding of that, especially in regard to other situations with cc's, just dropped that and started touting the company line about the US justice system being perfect all because they are incapable of saying Dream is fallible in any way. And i'm specifically referring to the american fans that did this who should be aware of the justice system, especially if theyre going to use it in "defense" of a cc. And then people went further and were suddenly a trained psychologist and nitpicked every victim behavior from Amanda especially that doesn't fit their perfect view of a victim, which is to them one who is silent and doesn't harm their fav cc "when he just face revealed :(!! my poor dreamie". Fuck you, is all I really have to say to that.
And it goes further, now it's okay that Dream bought a trump flag and thought it was funny that "oh look it looks like my white friend supports trump!" (even as someone who used to be an active trump supporter...) as if that is funny when it not only had a monetary support from its purchase, but as if that flag at all is "funny". That flag is a monument of hate, of white supremacy, of the attempted insurrection to overthrow our government, of just so much bigotry. I don't see how it's funny for him to use that flag as a "gag christmas gift". It's weird, and it's weird how many people just ignored those facts in favor of "its dream!" and "it wasnt that much money anyway!" and "well [insert cc with nuance i will ignore for the sake of supporting dream] also bought a [insert maga item]". And listen i'll just directly say it, I don't really watch or enjoy hasan's content anymore, but to compare what Hasan does on the daily and dream's "gag gift" as the same you really just don't get it, and you know that you don't.
And then we have Hannah and Niki coming forward about misogyny, who both talked about lack of support from male cc's and coworkers. and then we have people, who support dream, making it about dream. Calling them ungrateful, saying it "wasn't dream", and suddenly misogyny doesn't matter to them, except once dream tweeted his "support for Hannah" then it's something to listen to (clearly, seeing as that his tweet ratio'd hers), when it was a bare minimum statement from the man who is considered by many the face of mcyt. Some of which were same people on twitter and tumblr who call hannah/niki/sniff/aimsey/etc. annoying, who only supported aimsey because he "clapped for sapnap and we have to save them from their evil fanbase (of which many of us didn't support them getting harassment mind you)", some of which were the ones upset a woman/afab cc would be on a team with dream for mcc and potentially "tear down" his precious score.
And let's get into queerphobia too, because as long as it's not against dream queerphobia is a okay with some people! With ranboo first, of course, because it's totally fine to say one coming out overshadows another and it's totally in allyship with the queer community to say that it does /s. You can comment on fandom behavior without taking it out on a queer person's coming out, i promise you can, meaning you can say "hey the queerphobia i witnessed with dream/unlabeled people at large was fucked up" not "wow ranboo really overshadowed dreams coming out and that people were positive about a cc's coming out", like be serious. Oh, and then we have the slurs and queerphobia scott smajor faced over mcc teams on twitter (especially in regards to his dream team placements), and we have people wishing hatecrimes against Prezoh for what he said on twitter recently, again another queer person. And i'm not speaking for these cc's and their feelings on the matter, or assuming their feelings on it, but i am speaking as a queer person who cannot stand to see this from people i once felt in community with in this fandom.
Because at a certain point this highlights how performative you are. You don't care about victims, or misogyny, or queerphobia, or any of that kind of stuff. You just don't. Because dream as your cc matters more to you. and as long as dream is doing it, then i'm convinced you'll go down any pipeline to defend him.
And as a note, i am speaking on things that ive seen and do not attempt to claim its "every stan who does this", but i've seen enough of this behavior to want to call it out. and have for a while.
And listen, there's definitely more to this story but this is what i feel confident speaking on. So as always please reblog and add on if you want, it's an important conversation i think. And you can send me asks/correct me on anything/etc.
#dream situation#fandom critical#discourse#fucking fine im posting it i edited this just now#long post#tw grooming#ask to tag
210 notes
·
View notes
Note
On a lighter note, I’m curious why you think Dipper is similar to Stan and Mabel is similar to Ford
LONG POST INCOMING
Man, great question, but this is a difficult one to articulate in words, without using way too many. So here you go.
I wouldn't say they're more or less similair, I'd rather say: There are similarities between them that run a little deeper than "nerds" and "their less nerdy siblings" and I feel they're under-acknowledged.
Also I do like Stan and Mabel and Ford and Dipper moments, they're usually very cute. ^^
Keep in mind I'm probably gonna get things wrong and I don't consider myself particularly savy with characterisation and identifying it's nuances.
[Dipper and Stan]
Dipper and Stan are both presented as the "straight men" to their "eccentric siblings".
They have their own quirks and general odness but they're both more "socially aware" than their siblings. That doesn't mean socially capable or good with people. But they seem to have an easier time using sarcasm or "getting the joke" especially when they disagree with it.
They both have a somewhat prickly demeanor when they interact with someone they don't like, they make it more than obvious.
Dipper jabbing Pacifica springs to mind, far more sarcastic and quick witted than dip tends to be characterised.
And Stan is just that way with most people he isn't trying to haggle.
They're both quick to reassure their siblings, and help them "get out of their heads" about something that's bugging them, by offering advice or a potential fix. (Stan more when he and ford where little) Hence why they're considered so "selfless" by the fandom. And their sibs are considered.... not that.... for failing to meet certain social expectations while under intense narrative pressure-*cough*
[Ford and Mabel]
Ford and Mabel both are more bright and polite than their siblings, at first glance. They seem more eager to please during first impressions, wich also leads to both or them having trouble saying when something is bugging them. They seem to fear rejection just a smidge more. They're aware people think they're wierd and may subconsciously struggle with it.
(Ford obviously outgrew this, but, he barely talked when he was a teenager especially. I know that's probably because they didn't have a seperate voice actor for teen Ford so they tried to limit his dialogue. But still.)
First things Mabel does is acknowledge his difference and complements him on it, and he complements her back. Very good first impressions.
It makes me so confused when people portray Ford as dismissive of her overall, instead of within the specific context of "understanding being different or invested in paranormal discovery".
They're both still very outgoing on the surface compared to their siblings who come across as a bit more grumbly at times.
They both aren't as overall cynical as Dipper or Stan, but when they are upset it's usually quite significant. It's usually about something more significant than a passive jab or remark, often it's something more serious that they struggle to communicate and have very emotional outbursts.
[Overall]
All of the Pines communicate poorly for the sake of the narrative but I feel the specific way both Ford and Mabel handle those situations to be similair.
Backed up by people's ableist reactions to them when comparing them to their brothers- *cough*
Also this:
While functionally Dipper and Ford are in a similar boat [missing a great opportunity] and Stan and Mabel are both upset for similair reasons [being left behind by their siblings] the way these scenes play out reverses things somewhat. It shows two versions of the same problem, it demonstrates two versions of a similar falling out.
No one in these arguments is technically wrong [except Stanley if you wanna nitpick] aka:
ITS NO ONE'S FAULT.
It's also all of their faults.
It's complicated.
But the fandom-wide "blame game" is juvenile.
I think people don't acknowledge this, instead focusing on poor stanny and his falling out with his brother and sweep ford and mabel under the "selfish" rug for convenience. Even though Mabel was in Stan's position technically [without the guilt of actually ruining anything].
But I guess Mabel doesn't have "failman" charm so she's selfish and dipper's the hero because he has "failboy" charm.
But god forbid Mabel and Ford feel good about themselves, that's so self centered and arrogant!
Just look at these selfish monsters!
In the case of Dipper and Stan:
INSECURITY IS NOT HUMBLE.
In the case of Ford and Mabel:
Self confidence is not arrogance.
This could just be me being neurodivergent but I didn't get the impression Ford thought he and Dipper where "better" only that they where "different".
I was always annoyed by their portion of "Dipper and Mabel VS the future" and I think it's because it rushes a connection that isn't earned.
Plus framing Ford as an almost sinister presence through the lighting and dialogue, as if he's leading Dipper astray. But in the next scene Dipper is declaring his loyalty in a life or death situation.
Like- Dipper, honey, you've known him for a week at most- and you've spent most of that time preventing the apocalyps or worried he's possesed-
Of course Dipper doesn't want Ford to get hurt or die but this moment feels like it's compensating rather than culminating.
It feels rushed and somewhat confusing. Are we supposed to be on board with their connection or not? Is Ford being supportive or misguided?
Is the narrative agreeing that some form of "the suspension bridge effect" is happening and the characters are rushing a connection that may need some second thought?
Tangent aside, the similarities between Dipper and Ford always seemed... a little surface level? More a means to a somewhat rushed end rather than a natural progression. Unsurprising considering they had three episodes to set it up.
However Mabel and Stan at least had a whole show at that point to back it up and make it feel more natural. So I don't really have any tangents to write about it. It's good. :)
OK I think that's all I got. Hope this is half-way coherent, hope I didn't just embarrass myself by stating the obvious.
193 notes
·
View notes
Text
This situation with Noah isn't a new problem in the fandom. These fans have been harassing everyone for months in them name of progressive causes they aren't well-informed about. This is obviously not specific to the Stranger Things fandom. Go anywhere online and you will likely see a bunch of teens screaming about something even though they clearly skipped the step of educating themselves.
Not only have I been the target of the dumbest shit, but so many other people have too. No one can post here without someone getting self-righteous and yelling about it.
I have been accused of the following simply for posting something to my own blog:
- I've been called misogynistic because I said El wasn't the main character. A thing the writers have said several times now (it's Will). The writers aren't misogynistic either.
- I've been called misogynistic because I said El has character flaws like everyone else.
- I've been called a condescending bitch when I politely tried to explain what misogyny actually is. A thing you'd think they'd be interested in learning if they actually cared about that cause (clearly they don't or I wouldn't have been called a bitch so much).
- Been called racist because I said Hopper wasn't copaganda, even though I explained clearly why I thought this was.
- Got called racist because I pointed out that Lucas was often filling his Ranger role and that's why he is helping Mike in S3 (the boys all play their D&D characters). But the trendy thing to say at the time was that he was being written in racist way so obviously this means I'm racist too.
- Had multiple people say I was silencing them when I wrote my own damn post (not a response to theirs) about many of the above topics. I just simply disagreed with their points and that isn't allowed here.
- Had someone I never interacted with spread a rumor that I sent them anonymous hate filled asks even though I had no fucking clue who they were. And those posts were anonymous so they have no idea who actually sent them. They just wanted my attention. But I never sent anyone an anon ask before anyway so this was just bizarre. But a several people believed it.
- Pretty much every adult on here has been accused of pedophilia for watching a show with kids on it. This gets pretty relentless sometimes.
I'm sure I could think of several others and other people have had a lot as well. The thing about this as someone who has actually experienced things like misogyny first hand is that being called this is incredibly upsetting, especially when you are being called this by someone who doesn't know what they are talking about and doesn't care about the impact of these words. They just want you to shut up and stop telling them they did something wrong.
This is all happening because they are watching a show that is overwhelming them and they can't deal with people discussing it in a more nuanced way than they are. This wouldn't be happening if there were more adults here to drown it out. But as it is, no one can actually discuss this show and it has nothing to do with Noah. It's because kids are watching when they shouldn't. And they have weird, boundaries with the fandom and the cast that are constantly causing problems.
This didn't happen back in the first 2 seasons because it was only adults watching. I'm not saying adults can't be problematic too, but most of this shit is from people who are way too young to handle this. And now we are all getting lectured by 14 year old foreign policy experts. It's not ok and they need to spend a lot of time learning about how to interact with people online better. This isn't the shows fault. But they can make it clear who this is actually for. Because these kids are going to throw a fit over everything. They always do. They aren't going to like S5 either. They are only watching because it's cool and they have FOMO. They can't understand it and are constantly insulting it and everyone associated with it and the fandom.
Seriously, amp up the horror. Make it rated R. A lot of us would really love to be able to discuss this show and can't because of how awful it is here.
25 notes
·
View notes
Text
Right, never thought I had to make one of these callouts in my entire time of using social media, but unfortunately due to the seriousness of the subject matter at hand, I have to get this out here to prevent more people being mislead.
Now for a lot of people who follow artist Tumblr might be aware of this one thread circulating in regards to people using Glaze & Nightshade in response to the recent updates made to Tumblr's data services. With the posting in question, @ reachartwork discouraging use of it and presenting an argument for it.
Now unlike most other people, I can tell how off their argument is as it lacked the nuance of how these programs worked and talked about it in a way that came off more enthusiastic, despite their claims of having sympathies people trying to protect themselves.
It's only until I took one little look at their blog and knew what was up, and their later behaviour proved my suspicions.
Now to get this right off the bat, I do apologise for whatever misgendering I exhibited as I didn't notice that about them, nor am I justifying this callout to harass them.
So please don't
Rather, it's to be weary of this user, and how you really shouldn't be sleeping on these programs.
Now as the original featured, it went out in presenting their argument as followed:
As you can notice in the thread, it's providing very little evidence of their findings of its supposed workings without proper sources, while trying to show ways to work around it (again, enthusiastically mind you).
And yet as you notice, they didn't bother providing an alternative way to combat this scalping situation everyone is in, especially with how replies have been of users expressing their grievances over this.
You'll think that maybe you should have added something to help others or worded themselves in a more sympathetic manner?
But that's when I checked into their profile and knew what seems to be up,
They're into this tech.
I knew this was clear propaganda, why would somebody who is invested into generative tech try and discourage methods in protecting others of data scalping?
Like I'm sorry but you can't be somebody who claims to be sympathetic about the whole power imbalance this whole field is causing, yet enthusiastically be into this tech. Those mixture of ideologies just do not match.
There's no such thing as "ethical AI use" for this tech.
Now upon knowing many were falling prey to this nonsense, I had to step in and present my own counter arguments and why they are so wrong. Both programs Q&A (along with demonstrations of it acting as written) thay explains the inner workings of it as thoroughly as possible:
https://nightshade.cs.uchicago.edu/whatis.html
(Paper is in QA)
https://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~ravenben/publications/pdf/glaze-usenix23.pdf
https://twitter.com/zer0int1/status/1749574897179742353
Now comes the part when things get more heated
After I posted my retort, this is the response I got:
A) Again, while I didn't intend disrespect for their gender, "AI-bro" has literally become a catch-all for us who are against the very people who are engaged in this field
B) Since when in my original argument that I did try to villainize the entirety of programmers in general? My wording was superficially against those in that field of ML tech who are for this tech.
C) Trying to spin my own findings with proper context and immaturely handwave it by boiling it down as me going "nuh uh" is making you look childish, the info I provided literally explains the very points they argued.
D) Reason I blocked them straight away is because I knew a lot of these pro-AI tend to be very combative when it comes to criticism, I felt it in my gut that they were going to do so first. And later on other factors of their character proved my point.
Like I'm sorry, you really think me not having a degree of X matter is somehow making me a worst person and that I shouldn't be allowed to voice criticism of something?
Just because somebody is in the field of something, doesn't automatically mean they have the best interests to heart.
And here's my confirmation that like a lot of these AI enthusiasts, they're very sensitive & combative.
Now not too long, I decided to try to reblog my argument on another reblog of the artist @ Kang-Bang as they have a bigger artist presence, while they fortunately did realize what the OP they were quickly blocked upon reblogging my own post:
But it wasn't that confirmed that behaviour.
I found out through a conversation I had with somebody on the server of artist-rights advocate Zakugu Mignon, that this individual had a similar encounter with this user a year ago on Twitter (I'm Hollow btw);
And here's the conversation this person had that led to this similar experience:
https://twitter.com/Acfusi/status/1691261322988527617
Notice a familiar pattern of behaviour?
The unfortunate pattern behaviour that these pro-AI types are once again present.
It's always trying to justify the usage of this succeeding.
Now look, I'm not against the idea of the physical unabled being given the ability to produce creations of their own with the help technology means nor do I think that Artificial Intelligence is inherently bad.
But this generative tech is just doing it all the wrong way.
It's by all intentions & purposes, displace hard working people as cheaply and quickly as they can.
It has unfortunately happened to certain working sectors such as journalism, advertisement and translations as we speak.
Now on the topic of whether or not you use Glaze or Nightshade.
Please don't drop it
Now yes it's not a panchea for the societal problems we're currently facing.
But you shouldn't just leave whatever you post online out in the open without any forms of protection is not the wisest route to take.
As the Q&A already shown, it at least offers some way to ensure a means of sabotage data scalping.
There are still many other creatives and general users utilizing these programs for good reason, and WHY they're desperate for a means of protection.
https://www.tumblr.com/astraskylark/741393628982886400?source=share
https://www.tumblr.com/leahfrog/743484550954598400/theres-also-nightshade-if-you-havent-heard?source=share
https://www.tumblr.com/thetreetopinn/738157011350470656/ill-say-what-ive-said-in-the-past-ai-art-can-be?source=share
https://www.tumblr.com/in-ravenlight/743565614387494913?source=share
https://www.tumblr.com/luimnigh/743036171813273600/what-is-this-about-the-tumblr-staff-wanting-to?source=share
https://www.tumblr.com/taikova/738369881482919936?source=share
Yes, I understand there's some skepticism going around and we're all frightfully confused about what to do in these uncertain times.
But please.
Don't skim out on a solution to offer some forms of protection.
Having a little protection is better than having none.
#personal post#serious talk#important#psa#signal boost#anti generative ai#call out post#supportrealartists#glaze#nightshade
21 notes
·
View notes
Text
I literally can't fall asleep because I remembered Wayhaven exists, and I am going to make this a problem not only for myself, but anyone else who sees this post as well. I don't even write posts but I really need to throw my thoughts out somewhere lmao
Warning: spoilers for every TWC book, what did you expect. Also talks about mommy/daddy issues and some mentions of harmful stereotypes about POC, both in media and real life. ALSO probably lots of mistakes and rambling, it's literally 3 am give me a break
Wayhaven is such a promising series of books that fell so flat with book 3, even though some could argue there were already issues popping up in book 2. I, personally, enjoyed it just as much as the first one, but that's up to anyone's opinion. Hold on, this deserves a whole list.
My personal and biggest gripe, MC's relationship with their mom. To write something so complex and then chuck it down to two choices (the choices being "forgive your mom" or "don't forgive your mom and everyone will make you feel like a piece of shit") feels so disappointing, especially if you consider what people with parental issues usually deal with irl. Of course there are people who choose to forgive their parent or not, but more often than not (and, as a result of that, what feels most realistic to write in a book) they end up somewhere in-between - it's a bittersweet relationship which you can either choose to continue or not, but the past memories and missed childhood can't just be forgotten and thrown under the rug. That's what MC's relationship with Rebecca could've been, too: a *complex* relationship that can either continue or get cut off completely, and it's a choice that should be respected, because a child that has been neglected has the full right to not trust their willingly neglectful parent again. And to some degree the author does try to achieve it, but in the end you will still have only two choices. And also, in Wayhaven you can literally feel what option author considers to be correct and not choosing that gets you punished severely, e.g. the carnival situation and every dialogue where you choose to not be cordial with Rebecca (the author never forgets to mention how you made everyone feel terrible. "Congrats you piece of shit, you ruined everything because you just can't accept that your mom wants to be buddy buddy again, ugh.") This pattern of turning complex situations into only having yes/no answers, with a negative choice having severe punishments, is such a recurring pattern throughout the whole book series that at this point it feels like a feature that I just didn't get (e.g you don't even get a choice if you want to join the agency or not, you just do, because that's the correct option). Also, I don't believe that literally no one, not even MC's best friends or partner, would try to see their side or god forbid agree with MC cutting contact with Rebecca.
You can literally feel that N and A are supposed to be the star children of TWC. While it was less obvious in book 1, it can't be ignored anymore in books 2 and 3. It does feel even more weird because M and F have the darkest complexions out of the cast, and are depicted as overtly sexual/flirty for absolutely no reason, to the point that sometimes it literally contradicts what the author established about the characters before (M can't handle most fabrics touching their skin and can't eat food because the taste of anything is too much for them, what do you mean they are hypersexual?? isn't sex one of the most stimulating things you can do that can literally be too much for a lot of people that don't even struggle with overstimulation on a daily basis??), but it doesn't feel appropriate to say too much on this issue as I'm literally as white as paper, not to mention that this topic has been brought up by many POC in the IF community who can have more nuance on this situation than I ever could. I can, however, talk about how inconsistent and over-exaggerated M and F's personalities are, compared to A and N feeling much more realistic and well-paced. I hate how M and F are mischaracterized in their own universe and all the meaningful things are overshadowed by "haha M likes sex and is lewd and aggressive" and "haha F is a silly lil' goober". Their romances suffer from it too, which brings me to-
The romance routes could be so much better. And I'm not talking about N or A obviously, even though that's another can of worms that I, frankly, don't want to open, but F and M. M is dumbed down to being aggressive, sexual and borderline feral at times, which are all GREAT traits to give all at the same time in your book to a person of color btw (they're not), but their scenes perform best when the author acknowledges that M is actually none of those things. Just them existing in the same space as MC and feeling at ease and relaxed (and, dare I say, vulnerable) feel much more intimate and rewarding than literal sex scenes, and I feel like that's what romance with M should've been about: two people, who are both lost and confused and overwhelmed in this new to them world (M from memory loss, MC from being thrown into the supernatural scene) bonding, finding comfort and familiarity in each other. Breaking all that buildup with innuendos and sexual propositions feels unnecessary, to be honest.
Continuation of the previous point, but the same could be said about F too. Poor F, the forgotten child of TWC; they're my absolute favorite, and it hurts to see them being thrown somewhere in the background as a comedic relief side character so many times. I feel like they could be the character who gets MC the most, even if they're not dating or particularly close. They have a difficult relationship with their mom, they're thrown into an unfamiliar world that's hard to navigate and it feels like everyone wants too much from them. You can't tell me that it's not some great exposition for a deeper connection between F and MC, both romantic and platonic, as well as an opportunity to explore anxiety and impostor syndrome/separation anxiety (not interchangeable, just feels like either one could fit F) in a seemingly optimistic character. But nah, they like Rebecca and are just a funny little fella. Definitely not playing into more media stereotypes of the only black character in the main cast being a flirty comedic relief.
At this point TWC is going to rival One Piece on the amount of meaningless fillers. And they wouldn't feel so meaningless if the author didn't try to mix slice-of-life and supernatural, or at least didn't mix them so poorly, but most of the time an occasional meaningless scene is thrown into the plot for some short-term tension for what feels to be absolutely no reason other than increasing the word count. Take the blood drive thing as an example of this: what was this scene for?? It started unnecessary tension, had a weird solution and just offered nothing to the rest of the book except for allowing Bobby to finally confront the RO of choice in a very awkward manner. I feel like the author promising 7 books (correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember something like that mentioned in the earliest tumblr posts) feels like a the author chewing off more than she can bite. And it sucks, because had she not had that amount of books (and subsequently a gargantuan word count) looming over her head, we could have had more actually meaningful and fulfilling scenes like ones in the bakery, literally my favorites. It could benefit the pacing, worldbuilding and reader enjoyment greatly.
I could write so much more but at this point I could just go on forever lol
#interactive fiction#if#wayhaven#the wayhaven chronicles#twc#cog#original post#if rambling#literally no one's going to read it but at least now i feel better gnight
44 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
divatheeva
manic pixie nightmare girl
jinxopp
°jinx
lorene1voice
lorene1voice
antariies
chrono pro bono
shinrakotls
Shinrako's.