#i think you could also make the argument that the viewer is really meant to pick up on all this only on the rewatch
Note
Objectively speaking, light is a more compelling character than bakugo 🤷🏽♀️
i think this meant to be bait but i assure you my bakugou glazing is nothing in comparison to my light yagami hating
there are lots of other characters you could make this comparison with. like you could say lawliet or misa is more objectively compelling. in the traditional sense of the word, light just isn't lmao. he has a negative growth character arc and the most satisfying part of that arc is him dying miserable and alone
compelling usually means awe-inspiring or you know, invoking conviction. but light does neither. if you think that's too focused on semantics and you use compelling as a stand-in for interesting, then i guess you could make the argument that he is more interesting. but ill be honest i think the only reason light seems more interesting is because he's narrating the story unreliably. "objectively speaking" he has a similar life to bakugou, with a similarly overinflated ego.
as such, objectively there's nothing all that interesting about a 17 yr old, middle class, suburban popular kid with a good home life and social life being bored. he is an excellent catalyst for the story of death note, and his egoism and god complex make it very interesting. but he is not interesting. his boredom and intelligence and the opportunity the death note are what make death note fun. lets put this guy in situations. but he has a limited world view and lacks depth and nuances. even little touches of humanity that make him well rounded. he's not even evil for evils sake, just genuinely deluded and very boring. he also has virtually no personality aside from being kira. insane maybe but boring. if you want a comparable character who is more interesting then lelouch from code geass is an excellent example, though death note has better story telling.
again that's not to say death note isn't interesting, but it's certainly not lights character that makes it that way. most death note fans agree that the series dies when L dies and that's done with intention, as its meant to hold a mirror up to lights reality.
im not really a bakugou glazer enough to defend him as more interesting. but if you're asking me subjectively, it's a lot more moving to see a kid around the same age and from the same background - humble himself as a result of his failings and develop true and genuine emotional maturity. that might be boring to you and that's okay! but it's certainly more traditionally compelling and very difficult to execute, yet is done very well in bnha which makes him a more interesting character.
death note and bnha are not comparable to begin with though. like death note is one of the greatest animes ever made and lights story is a very well told one. but it's not because he is actually interesting but because he is narrated that way and the Story is narrated. its the way his simplicity snowballs into the dire and unbelievable circumstance, and the way it all ends with him dying a miserable, pathetic and ultimately human death. the circumstances around his simplistic and shallow character that make for a tragic and beautiful show.
bakugou is compelling, because any viewer can derive satisfaction and attachment seeing him become less of a little worthless bastard. his character is in many ways is one of the major moving forces of the bnha story and he would be a fun character in any universe because of his tenacity and general quirks and spirit. the same cannot be said for light. in any world that is not death note is an above average intelligent guy, but just some guy. he sucks
#return to sender#either way it doesnt matter because i hate light and i always will#he sucks lol#but like. light is simply not the character to call compelling or even interesting#a main driving element of death note is that light is neither of these things!!!!#he's actually done so well for himself that he's bored#and the death note appearing really brings out the worst in him#instead of challenging himself he simply immediately decides that he is of divine importance#and boy is it interesting to watch#but he himself? wet cardboard#NOW L / LAWLIET?? NOW THATS A COMPARISON !#or even misa. or mikami. or yamada. or lights dad. literally anyone else i would've been like yeah i can see that#not light though
21 notes
·
View notes
Note
2, 6, 8, 12 👉👈?
THANK YOU YINNIE 💓💓💓
2. a compelling argument for why your fave would never top or bottom
this requires me to narrow down my favs, which is so much more difficult than i ever could have expected. yin if i don’t answer the ask quickly this was why. catelyn tully would never top because ned lays pipe and she’s a freak like that. saw a ss of a reddit post that was like ‘my wife likes to get blitzed and then come home and have me fuck her brains out’ and thats her. brienne is never bottoming and jaime is never topping because jaime has some kind of reversed gender thing going on that makes him want to be a girl but not to another man. and brienne lives to serve. she literally is a sword. and thats a penis metaphor as we all know. margaery is never topping men because despite being the first ally in westeros she thinks thats weird. these are compelling arguments to me! daenerys stormborn is NEVER. NEVER NEVER NEVER. never bottoming because A). thats the prince that was promised B). jon likes to get dicked down C). i personally believe that being sold and traded will lees her to discover (amidst her several trysts with irri jhiqui and doreah (bc u cant tell me otherwise. irri is canon first of all)) that she, as the breaker of chains and mother of dragons and khaleesi of the great grass sea, is not inclined to experience things at the whim of others but rather the opposite. is that appropriate to say.
6. which ship fans are the most annoying?
oh god. SORRY PLEASE DONT SHOOT ME EVERYONE! daemyra (this might be biased bc i just dont like daemyra) some sansan ppl really get under my skin…. LUCEMOND JESUS CHRIST. almost forgot about them (was almost free). wow sorry lucemond shippers first place for annoying. its not that im an omegaverse toxic incest yaoi anti its just. Its the people it truly is i cannot even enter that circle. there is a blog on here though i can’t remember the url of that makes cute sfw art that doesnt frighten me and ive been known to browse, even hit like once or twice. lucemond still stay away from me please
8. common fandom opinion that everyone is wrong about
daenerys is not going to be queen of the seven kingdoms NOR SHOULD SHE BE. if daenerys takes the iron throne the whole series is pointless
12. the unpopular character that you actually like and why more people should like them
what qualifies as unpopular. also what do we consider like. because i consider like as in ‘this is a fun character to see interact with the world’ and NOT!!!!!!!!! ‘i support this guy’. just to clarify for any other viewers at home. a character ive seen a lot of people Dislike but i think deserves to be heard out is criston because he’s funny and thats it thats why everyone should like him. but i dont consider him unpopular? hmm tough tough …… will i get flayed if i say larys like i mean he’s just sick i love wondering what is going on in that head. in regards to characters i think are not given enough attention: jaehaera targaryen. ‘she’s a little girl shes a non-character’ SHUT UP. she’s a little girl exactly. she didn’t get the chance to be her own person she is alicent’s pain helaena’s pain and her own. GOD MY BABY GIRL….. she names her dragon death…… AUGH DONT EVEN TALK TO ME DOONNTTT EVEN. um also rhaella, daughter of rhaena the lesbian AND! mother of daenerys. bc first of all rhaella and aerea switches thats true. so like. rhaella septa rhaella wondering if that was meant to be her. wondering if maybe it would have never happened if she hadn’t traded places. is it kinder to force her twin into the faith or to let her die? Augh. also daenerys’ mommy just… why dont we know about her i need more people on here like me willing to band together to make up canon. i guess thats not really a reason why people should like them. ALSO SHIREEN BARATHEON I DONT KNOW IF YOU CAN TELL BUT IM THE BIGGEST SHOOTER FOR SHIREEN THATS BABY THATS MOTHER THATS THE PRINCESS THATS MY DAUGHTER THATS ME I LOVE HER SO BAD OH NY GOD SHIREEN PEASE COME HOME THE PEOPLE MISS YOU. and i know everyone dgaf about baby boy bowl cut brown boba eyed broken bran. but i gave birth to him. and thats why you should like him.
i don’t consider myself a targ girlie and then it comes to questions abt asoiaf and i can only answer in reference to them 😔 tried to be diverse 🤞
12 notes
·
View notes
Note
I sorta see where that anon was coming from regarding the MC's siblings having their own romance with another MC, etc, but in my personal opinion (my 2 cents), I think we are all aware that MC and their siblings will not be involved romantically? or anything like that? I'm not going after that anon by saying this btw.
It's just that, yes, it's true that a lot of people who involve themselves with IFs may use their OCs or have themselves be the MC, and so it's understandable to see the MC's siblings as siblings. With that established, I imagine it would be rather natural to draw the line at just siblings? I assume that's what you thought (as the author) because if you do plan on playing the (potential) side story or DLC (not sure sorry!) starring the siblings as the romance options, you obviously wouldn't be using this story's MC (their sibling) as the MC for said side story?
I also don't quite understand what that Anon meant by "imagining them with different mcs is akin to imagining your relative with their own partner" ? cuz they made a point about the MC being of personal connection to the player? Like the siblings could have a romantic relationship regardless of the potential side story. I wonder if this problem would rise if the siblings had their own separate blog with their own seperate introductions, prologue, etc, as the main romance options but either way
And they did mention it being borderline incestuous to entertain NSFW asks of the siblings using you/your and again, I see where they're coming from, but also again, it really boils down to the perspective in my opinion. As an author/creator, i think it's wonderful that you're providing content for different players/viewers, because clearly there are a lot of people that are romantically interested in the siblings, and I can bet that they don't really see the siblings as siblings and that they're most certainly not using their MC(s) from this story (their sibling) to envision with the siblings y'know? (again, again, I assume this is what you thought as the author too?). I really don't think the asks featuring the siblings should take away the real sibling feelings so long as you understand that the romantic partner of the siblings isn't the MC from this story (aka their youngest sibling)?
Besides, you did tag all the romantic asks regarding the siblings with a specific tag so people who aren't comfortable with that can always block it if need be.
Also, I'm not trying to start arguments here, and I personally am not interested in romancing the siblings (even if I was that wouldn't change anything), but "whatever makes you feel better about your fantasies" is a bit condescending don't you think? especially after talking about how concerning and borderline incestuous it was to you? I don't think that you (the anon) are weird for what you've said and believe; however, people who have shown interest in the siblings clearly understand and view the two MCs as two different people (again, perspective). Not to mention, MC just means main character, a super broad term to describe literally anyone. And sure, if you view yourself as the MC you'd experience wanting to romance the siblings and being their sibling if you play through this story (you're pretty much forced to experience being their sibling. that really can't be avoided) but I think it goes without saying that the siblings won't "feel like your siblings" in that case. You absolutely don't have to engage with the siblings (with a different MC) if you don't want to, but let's not imply that the people who are interested have this "fantasy" to be with their siblings (I say imply because of the "whatever makes you feel better about your fantasies" after calling the idea really weird and borderline incestuous).
And please note I used the word "siblings" to describe Cienna, Persephone and Christian. So when I say "romance the siblings" I don't literally mean romance the siblings with this story's MC. I just didn't want to type out their names over and over y'know. Please take in what I said using context.
(also unedited sorry!)
I completely understand what you mean! The Midnight Sun MC is absolutely not, and has never been, the MC featured within the sibling romance asks. I think I’ve made that clear (once or twice), but I’m not too sure on that one. Cienna, Persephone, and Christian would never see the Midnight Sun MC in that light. Ever.
The MC, or character, that’s featured within the non canon romance tags aren’t even the same between the siblings— as Cienna’s is her Secretary/PA, Persephone’s is a Baker, and Christian’s is a Party Crasher. I’m well aware the siblings romance scenarios, and everything else, aren’t everyone’s cup of tea— which I can completely understand— and it’s for that reason I made the tag to begin with. It gives the people who don’t want to see it an easier time to block the tag and for the people that do, they can simply search it up and get all the answers. I also try my best to keep the siblings at the bottom of romance asks when it also involves the canon ROs too (so you can simply stay at the top of the response and not scroll down and interact). I don’t know how many romance asks I’ve actually responded to with both the Midnight Sun Cast and The Siblings being included (I think I’ve done it a couple of times), but I’ve tried to maintain that medium at the very least. (It’s also why I put what the “non canon romance” tag means in the FAQ at the top of the pinned post.)
I wasn’t upset necessarily by the Anon— more confused than anything else, which was probably easily distinguishable within my response. What I don’t appreciate is getting some Anon’s after the fact saying I’m an “incest sympathizer” and that I should just come forward and admit that fucking my siblings is in my own fantasies and that I was finally given a reason to live them out because of people interested in Cienna, Persephone, and Christian. That I don’t appreciate and I don’t agree with in the slightest.
People, of course, are allowed to have their own opinions, just as I am, and everyone that follows Midnight Sun is free to agree or disagree, but there should always be, at the very baseline, a level of respect. That’s all I ask and all that I expect— as it’s the exact same thing I try to show to all of you. I do appreciate you all— for interacting with me, for taking an interest in my characters and story, and everything else.
And I’m more than aware that this, meaning the asks in my inbox, does not represent the majority of you. I know that you all are sweet and considerate individuals and I’m honored to have garnered your attention with Midnight Sun.
I apologize if I come off as aggressive, or like I’m annoyed at you, within this ask (I’m not in the slightest mad/annoyed at you). Just wanted to articulate a few of my points. 😅
29 notes
·
View notes
Text
One of the most notable recent examples of why I love modern art came from seeing the piece “Privatization” by Carolyn Lazard at the Museum of Contemporary Art a few weeks ago.
This picture doesn’t capture the haphazardness of the placement. You walk into one of the gallery rooms, and there are 3 air purifiers scattered about the corners of the room, seemingly at random. This strikes you as a little odd and you kind of note it in the back of your head because it’s the only room in the museum to have air purifiers. You kinda think, “Maybe they had a ventilation problem?“ and may very well move on.
Unless you notice that there’s actually a label on the wall with a short blurb, and you see the words “MEDIUM: HEPA filter purified air,” and you realize that these air purifiers ARE an art piece.
The piece was on living with chronic illness, and it was presented in such a way in order to bring awareness to the subtleties of the things that someone who lives with chronic illness or disability has to be aware of that those who do not… do not. I was so fascinated by the way this piece made use of the gallery space to achieve this. It really effectively achieved what it set out to do: Create a piece that so casually fits into the space of the gallery as a utilitarian tool that the majority won’t even notice it, except that it’s just slightly off. The average person will NOTICE it, but they won’t pay it close attention, or question it deeply. A family member I was with didn’t even realize it was an art piece. I loved the way it existed to engage with the physical space of the art museum, the way it required an inquisitive viewer to go through this mental process of noticing, questioning, ignoring, barely even fully comprehending it, the way it demanded an investigation of its existence in order to be understood, and the way this functions as a microcosm of the life experience the artist was trying to articulate through it. It was a really neat, subtle thing to do.
I was also really intrigued by the use of completely plain, basic, unmodified air purifiers. They were frankly pretty ugly, and not in a “cool” or “punk” or “grunge” way. This was the sleek, blank, glossy white of a modern iPhone charger. It felt really sterile and impersonal, one could make an argument that on their own they made the gallery room less “pretty,” really cemented in aspects of modern aesthetics, commercial production, and industry standards that I think most people, but especially those visiting art museums, let alone making art themselves, have grown tired of, to put it lightly, and I can’t help but feel that this was also an intentional decision... Especially within the context of a name like “Privatization.”
What’s interesting is I didn’t really like this piece all that much, in terms of my own personal aesthetic preferences. I mean, in the sense that… it’s not the kind of modern art that grabs me, specifically. I understand the decision to use the industry standard air purifiers but I’m more, and I mean this fully as a personal opinion, a fan of art with a little more of a fantastical element, I suppose? As an example of what I mean—and this is NOT meant to force these two artists into conversation, just my positing a simple aesthetic comparison—is Briccs 2 by Lauren Halsey, one of my favorite pieces of modern art I’ve ever gotten to see at the MOCA, a really striking city street made of mirrors and rainbows and hand drawn graffiti, large enough to walk through like a hallway. Halsey’s works have been described as Afrofuturist urbanism. I think the dreamlike, fantastical element here really grabs me, that’s the kind of modern art that tends to really speak to me the most. I could go on about this piece because I LOVE it, but I’ll save that for another day.
But anyway, that’s not a criticism of “Privatization.” I guess I say all that specifically to emphasize that when it comes to this piece, it wasn’t that I was like, “Wow! I love this!!” It wasn’t about it speaking to the depths of my soul or even just my more shallow aesthetic eye. It was more that I was just SO impressed by how thought provoking it was and how the ideas it was centering were executed. I’ve never seen an art piece make use of its space within a museum like that before, and engage with its viewers with the knowledge of being in the physical space of a museum gallery in such a way. Angel and I probably talked more about this piece than any other during our visit that day, debating its meaning and the artist’s intentions and if it was successful or not. I think that’s really impressive. I think art that demands conversation is the best. The spatiality of the piece and the mental journey it sends its viewers on in order to provoke thought and spark conversation about the subtleties of daily life we can often take for granted was really, really neat. I love modern art.
14 notes
·
View notes
Note
This is a weirdly...personal thing to ask so feel free to ignore it. But when it comes to scenes involving reconciliation between characters, do you think the word 'sorry' is always neccessary?
I've seen such scenes play out with viewers saying 'X didn't even say sorry!' even if 'X' was demonstrably remorseful for what they did. Personally, if someone who wronged me was trying to make amends, and they couldn't muster a simple, singular word, 'sorry,' I'd come to the conclusion that they're not sorry at all, and that they don't really give a shit. But...do you think I'm being too harsh, thinking that way?
Sometimes, remorse for one's actions can come about in ways besides simply saying sorry. I mean, characters' expressions alone can convey apologies in ways words can't. So again, is the word 'sorry' always necessary for a reconciliation scene in stories to actually work?
Absolutely not. I have criticized characters before for barely remembering to apologize but that's because apologies are complicated. One of the first lessons a child learns after learning the word "Sorry" is not to say it if they don't mean it. This is why going "Sorry, but-" will immediately kill your apology. If you lead off with a huge excuse for why you were a colossal asshole, GUESS WHAT! You're still a colossal asshole because you only care about not feeling guilty, not being at fault, and NOT the other person's feelings. Just because you EVENTUALLY remember to say sorry doesn't fix that first you wanted to make it clear you hadn't done anything wrong.
An exceptional classic example of an apology that doesn't even need an "I'm sorry" is when someone breaks something they don't know the meaning of. The wronged person gets upset, the wrongdoer gets defensive, they both storm out, furious and hurt. Then the wrongdoer is told why the thing was important, understands the deeper meaning of what was done and goes out to replace it. Then when the victim sees it, they don't have to say sorry. In fact, "Sorry, I didn't know what it meant to you," is actually the weaker option here because it still includes an explanation. Now admittedly, that option allows the victim to also apologize for not explaining why they were so upset.
The better option is that when the object is seen, the wrongdoer asks about what made it important. "Someone told me your grandma was a hell of a woman. They made her sound preeeetty boring though."
"Oh yeah, then they didn't know her, just like you don't."
"Well, I'm all ears then. What was she like?"
That shows such a deeper understanding of the wrong done, and is genuinely better for showing that the character has understood why the other was hurt, than a simple, "I'm sorry." Using the default can work but if it just sounds like someone reciting what you're supposed to say when you're in trouble... It doesn't sound genuine, does it? Even if it's technically the right thing to say.
Hell, you want a GREAT breakdown on shitty apologies and how saying sorry can just make you sound like more of a douchebag? Pop music is FILLED with this problem and Todd in the Shadows has a great example of it. Check out the video if you have the time.
youtube
(Oh god, this is from EIGHT YEARS AGO)
To the general complaint though, it's a lot like how people view redemption arcs. "Did the person get forgiven?" "Are their crimes able to be redeemed from?" etc. like that. Claiming that reconciliation and apologies can only work if a character says sorry is trying to quantify these elements. To be able to check a list that then says whether or not an element empirically fails or not. To make it so someone cannot refute your argument.
That's not how writing works though. What works for one book won't work for all of them. It depends on context and skill. You could copy the greatest apology scene in media and if it doesn't work in your setting or with your characters, it will feel as hollow as a character being forced to say sorry because their parents told them to. Writing rules are fluid like this and we shouldn't try to say something has to, or can't, be included in a scene for it to work.
Sorry if you don't agree. evil grin
======+++++======
I got WAY too much enjoyment out of that last line. XD
I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!
I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past.
I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead.
If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.
A Twitter you can follow too
And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.
3 notes
·
View notes
Note
Removing my soriku lenses for a sec: even if the tunnel visions were about Kairi, it makes me mad FOR her. The game could have easily set her up to sacrifice herself to save Sora. She even had a whole scene prior about how she was going to keep him safe, her sacrificing herself would have been a decent narrative. But she just… gets caught and dies lol. So like, going back to the visions, are we as the viewer supposed to interpret Sora seeing those visions to be about him sacrificing himself for her? Like was he just prepping himself up in advance in case he needed to save her? If anything, it would have made sense for him to have those visions after the final battle before he sets off to save her. So now we have Riku sacrificing himself, Kairi dying, Sora sacrificing himself, and now Riku going to save Sora. What am I supposed to think lol
All I can say is that if we are supposed to read S and K as a romance especially in kh3 then Nomura really is as abysmally bad at writing romance as people say (well, and even worse than many people think). To the point where I think it's actually insulting to Nomura to think that he's THAT bad lmao. Like for example the paopu scene. How does one mess up what should have been the easiest layup of romantic scenes in history- Starting the scene with having Sora worrying about Riku instead of paying attention to Kairi who he is sitting alone with on a tree overlooking a romantic sunset, then having a team of animators making him have Those expressions when offered a paopu, not taking it until being reassured that it's just a good luck charm, nothing more, recording a version where they don't even share the paopus, AND failing to tell Sora's own voice actor that it was in fact supposed to be romantic at any point, so he felt the need to say that he doesn't see it as romantic??? I'm sorry but all that cannot be satisfactorily explained by "haha Nomura bad at writing romance". Like there's badly written romance and then there's narratives that look like badly written romances until you realize it's SUPPOSED to not make sense as a romance. ANYWAY back to the tunnel scene: Even in the novel which shows Sora's thought process through that scene, when he sees/remembers those moments and associates them with Kairi (which makes perfect sense for him to do since he doesn't remember Riku's sacrifice anyway, he has no other context for them) he NEVER thinks of them in terms of sacrifice or true love. All he thinks is "Oh, Rapunzel and Elsa/Anna are princesses of heart, so is Kairi. They have powers to save people they care about. I want to be able to do that too, but I guess that's why she was able to save me" So even IF the tunnel scene flashbacks were meant to be about Kairi, Sora himself still doesn't think about it in romantic terms lmao.
And yeah, I've also seen the argument that the flashbacks are supposed to be about Sora eventually sacrificing himself for Kairi, which I can kinda understand that reading? Except again, Sora himself didn't view those flashbacks as relating to true love or sacrifice- only about the princesses' powers and also it misses the whole reason for Sora's journey to the worlds in kh3: He was trying to learn how to regain the power of waking, and his clue, as stated in the kh3 ultimania and in the novel was: "To protect a precious person with all your heart". His heart was guiding him to these worlds to show him this. I don't think it's an accident that Sora regained his powers of waking when he dove into the Realm of Darkness to protect Riku, and lost his powers when he misused the PoW to bring back everyone else + Kairi. The power of waking is not meant for bringing people back from the dead, but something else we were shown in kh3 is.
#soriku#it's love. the answer is love.#Sora doesn't know this because he says himself he doesn't understand love and how it's different than caring about friends#he knows there's overlap but he also knows he's just missing something here#And it doesn't help that he just straight up forgot Riku's sacrifice#like what is he supposed to think when he's shown those flashbacks and Kairi is right there and he knows she saved him right#so of course he'd make that connection#and he isn't even WRONG because she did help save him with her powers#He's just missing half the story#however the audience is not#we remember Riku's sacrifice#so it's up to us to say hey something aint right here
128 notes
·
View notes
Text
Will was introduced to the audience as a love interest for Mike first. He honestly was. But El was introduced as a character first, so the focus was on her character while all that really existed of Will in his absence were Mike’s feelings for him, El was more tangible throughout season 1. That put Mike and El at the forefront of people’s minds because everything onscreen is so important, you can’t waste a second thinking about anything - or anyone - offscreen. Even if they’re trying to get to Will, you aren’t thinking about him or what he’s doing, you’re thinking about how they’re trying to get to him. You’re thinking about what they’re telling you to be thinking about and what they’re thinking about. So El takes the forefront then the backburner.
But that makes Will taking the forefront come a bit secondary in the romantic scheme of things because thought the established relationship makes COMPLETE romantic sense, it’s sort of established retrospectively. We see one representative scene of them to jumpstart Mike’s grief, see Mike and El meet, then are told that Mike and Will's story - which we knew happened before Mike and El’s, but we didn’t know what it was yet. Again with the show vs tell! We are shown El and Mike’s meeting as a story and told Mike and Will’s with the emphasis of story being on the present, but that makes their present story come AFTER his with El, making hers still take precedent with a sort of viewership “dibs”. But everything else makes sense without that, it’s just being buried right now.
So then season 3, they break up and you assume they’ll get back together. And they do. But Will also brought up a good point about how Will and El can’t seem to coexist in Mike’s life, so that plants an idea - or more importantly, urges out an existing idea via hope that it’ll be addressed. But that’s left hanging there because now NEITHER of them are gonna exist in his life for a minute. And then they have another fight about Will and El not coexisted, which it is now VERY clear with El and Mike RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER that they can’t. Will doesn’t say much out of the ordinary here - it’s mostly just the same argument. The one who changes it this time is MIKE. He repeated bullies’ words last time which was strange and yet to be addressed but this time he directly stated that Will and El could not coexist in his life because he was romantic with El. That Will contradicted his relationship with El.
And boom, now it’s conscious. It isn’t so much that it went unnoticed as you put aside ideas you don’t expect to be addressed in order to enjoy the show more. But they said it - directly. They addressed the viewer’s observation of Mike and Will that they labelled as contradictory by having a character acknowledge it as existing-ly contradictory. THIS was the turning point. Because Mike pointing out precisely what would have nullified EVERYTHING were it to not be acknowledge. Mike’s line here was directly to the audience to say “I know why you don’t think this will happen and you’re wrong”. He was the voice of the writers saying “we know we planted both of them in there as love interests. we meant to.” And maybe the GA doesn’t go “I knew it” because it wasn’t a conscious observation, but they DO go “that makes sense”. Because it explains a subliminal feeling they were left with.
The writers established Byler by making Mike’s feelings clear but not tangible, distracted from Byler by establishing something else consciously in the viewers first (why they use “tell”, it’s informational to explicitly establish it this way), revived suspicion by acknowledging that it was contradictory, then brought full attention back to it by acknowledged HOW and what idea that contradiction made you bury in the first place.
Now it’s known. Now it’s clear. Since the rink. They were special friends but we didn’t know more than they were special friends who couldn’t be anything more then they were special friends suspiciously displaced by romance then they were two people explicitly REplaced by romance - by deductive reasoning, naming their own relationship romantic. And now they’re a romantic relationship not IN a romantic relationship that is replacing the other in its absence, and even bleeding into it, while people reorient to the fact they’re issues mean by relation that their relationship is ending and try to catch up to predictions.
And then we meet in the middle. And then they’re caught up with us. And we’re just all speculating on how it’s gonna happen. Because we all know that it is. Because NOW, we’re supposed to. The GA separation from us now is just how we figured it out and how soon.
(This also means that Byler will be canon because we don’t have any more information than the general audience should now. We know about metas and HOW that information was planted in RETROSPECT. But actually knowing? We’re all in it together. Nothing is supposed to be hidden about what’s going to happen anymore. That’s the fun in predicting how much is hidden of how)
#stranger things#general audience byler#byler#byler endgame#narrative analysis#byler analysis#byler proof
76 notes
·
View notes
Text
Submission #80
i rewatched sonic x for the first time in years for no reason, and in season 2, sonic stands amy up on a date, so she goes on a date with chris’ uncle lol, but my main point is that chris jokes about sonic standing amy up and cream gets super mad at chris and sonic, like, go off cream
i’m glad that cream is mad at sonic and chris haha
–
((Hoo, boy, do I have some feelings about this episode. I watched it both subbed and dubbed for the full effect. One of the few dub edits is this line, which is only in the sub:
I’m not ashamed to admit I laughed. I know a few Sonic X fans who wouldn’t mind if she did, tbh.
First off in the episode, Sonic stands Amy up on a date:
Poor girl. The interaction referenced in this ask is likely the one below, which takes place shortly afterward:
[Those tiny subs say:
Cream: “Poor Amy. She’s been waiting to go out with Sonic for a long time.”
Chris: “Yeah, guess Sonic doesn’t take dating as seriously as Amy does.”
Cream: “Huh, I think that’s awful.”]
And you know what? With any other character, this would be awfully mild…but this is Cream. Sweet, mild-mannered Cream, who’s probably seen Amy cry time after time over Sonic. It only adds more credence to my assertion that Cream doesn’t like S0namy. I also think this is a great example of Amy rubbing off on Cream. I always wish Sega played up the sisters the way they play up Sonic and Tails. Where else would Cream have learned this assertiveness? It’s Amy’s influence, no doubt in my mind, and I love to see that. Even Cheese looks upset.
As for the rest, ahhh…I have some frankly very negative feelings about Sonic and S0namy in this episode. The way Amy was treated here put me in an awful mood. It’s harsh enough that I’m putting it under a cut.
I should preface this by clarifying that I normally love Sonic as a character, but there are times in Sonic X where he’s flat-out cruel, and this episode really takes the cake in that regard. Amy isn’t one to sulk, but after he ditches her, she says this:
[“The truth is Sonic doesn’t care about me. That’s why he didn’t show up for our date.”]
Knowing how Sonic usually is, I would love to disagree, but as you’ll see later, it’s hard to argue with her. This is reinforced by a dub-only line that muddies the issue further:
[“Thanks to you, I’m running late for my date with Amy.”]
This leads viewers to believe he remembers and values the time he promised to spend with her, something that becomes confusing later on.
This episode is weird because you can tell they wanted it to be a S0namy episode, but Amy is miserable the whole time thanks to how she’s treated. It also perfectly demonstrates every reason I have for why I don’t think the pairing works:
[Subs: “Sonic is too self-centered. He always runs off to wherever he wants to go and leaves me behind. Even if I could keep up with Sonic, he’s not the kind of guy who could settle down.]
They’re making the arguments for me. Amy is loving and sociable. She deserves someone who’ll pay her just as much attention as she pays them. If Amy, of all characters, is sulking because of you, you’ve really screwed up.
[Subs: “But Sonic belongs to no one. He won’t turn around and look at me. Sonic’s always gonna be on the run. I guess the two of us just aren’t meant to be.”]
Yeah. She’s right, and she should say it. How can Sega put someone so dedicated with someone who won’t slow down and acknowledge her?
There’s also this scene, which probably bothers me more than it should. I’ve always loved Amy’s navigational skills and instincts, so I was happy at first that she took charge and went to get a map. Unfortunately, it turned into this:
Stopping to smell the flowers is great and all, but it’s important to know where you’re going. The way the narrative is structured, however, makes it seem like Sonic’s carefree attitude is the only one that’s “right.” There’s no compromise. Amy’s skills and grounded approach are discarded, and she leaves this interaction feeling like her input is inferior to Sonic’s spontaneity. To quote Cream, I think that’s awful.
So how is this all resolved by the end? How do they turn things around and try to sell us on S0namy?
I’m also including a youtube link for full effect. There’s something about hearing her cry out, “Sonic, you do care about me!” before immediately falling face-first on the ground because he refuses to acknowledge her existence that really hammers this home for me.
Is this supposed to be funny? Is it supposed to be romantic? This isn’t the Sonic we know and love. I sure hope it’s not the one Amy knows and loves. There’s no word for it other than cruel. Even if he forgot the date, dodging her and letting her fall painfully on her face is inexcusable. That’s our hero? That’s supposed to be the one who deserves a sweet, dedicated person like her? A guy who ditches her on a date, doesn’t apologize, and won’t reschedule or make it up to her? Thank god game!Sonic would never pull something like that!
…Wait…
I’d almost be willing to forgive his behavior in this episode if he didn’t let her think she had a chance. Just ten episodes later, we get this:
Sonic isn’t stupid. He knows full well how she’ll interpret this. There’s nothing wrong with not being interested, but there IS something wrong with knowingly leading someone on.
Sorry to turn your nice, short ask into a rant. As someone who loves both Sonic and Amy, interactions like these honestly hurt me. Sonic being uncharacteristically douchey while Amy is miserable for 20 minutes isn’t the comedy gold these writers seem to think it is.))
#amy rose#sonic the hedgehog#ahhhhhhh200#submission#anti-sonamy#no offense to anyone who does ship them of course#i know this episode isn't their best#Cream the Rabbit
60 notes
·
View notes
Note
(a bit of rant)
the Hypocrisy is truly the only thing that destroyed my enjoyment of hotd/f&b people take the whole team thing waaay to seriously as if we're rooting for footballs teams and not an interesting story that could be analyzed and interpret in many ways . not to talk about the moral police who attack you for enjoying problematic characters\ships but also go in their way to enjoy other problematic characters\ships. like the asoiaf fandom was become waaay worse than it used to be after GOT s7\s8 for some reason
I completely get it and I'm sorry they sucked the enjoyment out of you.
I'll admit I used to get frustrated over some people who would say "it's just color wars" or "they all suck so pick a fav criminal and move on" 'cause in my mind that meant they didn't understand or appreciate the story told from the book but after taking some time offline and touching some grass, I came to the conclusion that while I can't and shouldn't push my interpretations onto others I also don't have to put up with terrible takes I see.
I'll admit the fandom has become an extremely unwelcoming space: side 1: are the book purists who while I 100% can sympathize with wanting a faithful adaptation, I've often see them treating others like shit over crackships and toxic pairs, as if the entirely of asoiaf isn't built on that. The truth is they don't really care about "problematism" they just hate seeing a character they like being (what they consider to be) misinterpreted by others in fan content like fics, headcanon and arts etc.
Again I sympathize because I used to feel the same for another fandom (the grisha trilogy) but holding onto these feelings can only make you feel miserable. The two healthy solutions I've found are: either move on or create content you want to see - because I guarantee there will be others who want to see the same thing you do
side 2: show viewers who don't care about the book (which is valid. you can't force someone to read or becoming invested in the lore) but will also lose their mind over canon discussions because it doesn't match up with the version that exist in the showverse so that leads them to interpret the rest of the fandom as whining and lacking joy because "it's not that deep" and "why can't you just enjoy this"
side 3: is a mixed of both, which i consider the worst bunch because there's no victory with them. You show too much love for the book? Then you automatically hate the cast and you're -ist -obic. You love the show? Have you written 10 think pieces a day and support what is commonly accepted for the characters by the fandom? Because if you haven't you're a fake. You like a single green character despite not supporting their side of the war? You're obviously a misogynist. You ship non-canon ships? you're deranged. You ship canon ships? you're problematic and an apologist.
See?
the way I've come to treat asoiaf as a whole (including f&b/hotd side) is how I treat the star wars fandom (which consists of a similiar toxic fanbase):
a) don't. enter. discourses.
you'll never change anyone's mind and they'll never change yours. Only enter an argument if the person gives normal sanity vibes or is a friend and won't have a problem if you two have different opinions on something
b) treat it as a solo thing.
The way I view this account is basically. I throw a ball at a wall and maybe someone will hear the noise and come play with me. Can it lonely? Sure. But it pays off when someone sees the earning signs I've left on this account and still decides to interact on their own
c) Be the person you want to interact with
This one can be hard because emotions always have a way to get in the way, but try to be someone you'd want to hang out in a fandom. In the past, I've gotten asks that say even though they don't agree with some of my interpretations about the characters they feel welcome here in regards of "teams". That's something I've been aiming for myself.
Anyways as to recent fandoms have become a bit of a nightmare with hypocrisy obsessive need for censorship and morality lessons as well as the quest of ending "romanticization" of anything, it has become a struggle for many. Try to combat it if you're willing because there are definitely other people other there who feel exactly the way you do.
Otherwise, a pause for personal space and to take care of yourself is never bad. In the end, I hope you can re-find some enjoyment for this fandom and if you ever need to vent more about it my asks & dms are open and judgement-free ♥
3 notes
·
View notes
Note
Yeah sorry for asking byl3r questions again and filling your page, but yeah I agree. I think one of the things that makes me not vibe with Byl3rs' thoughts is that, they say Mike has been leading El on since S2 or at least since S3, and that he never actually loved El romantically, he's just been with her to hide his sexuality and be 'Normal' and he continued to be with her because that's what she wanted. They're saying it would make sense because 'gay people go through this all the time in real life so it is realistic', but i think they do not get the narrative. El is like you said, the show's protagonist. Having one of the hero guys (Mike) lie to her for 3 seasons straight about loving her and lying to her for basically years would just take a lot of time to wrap up and it just messes up the characters. It simply makes no sense. Especially when they made El get strength from Mike's words.
And thats where a lot of Bylrs logic falls IMHO because they have to come up with contrived narrative reasons and bend the story to make bylr make sense within the show. Because as it stands, bylr makes no sense. So for that reason, they have to come up with contrived reasons or not-likely-to-happen scenarios. It's laughable to expect that Mike will say he's never loved El romantically and he's been lying to her and lied in his monologue. That's just not what you do as writers to the show's protagonist... and it makes no sense for the characters either.
They also use 'Mike and El will move on from each other during the time skip' argument but by that logic, it makes more sense for Will to move on from Mike in that time and find another love interest. Actually it's like a perfect narrative setup, but ofc they don't entertain that idea bc for them 'it's bylr or not'. They do actually lack any real engagement with the canon source of the show too IMHO because their wish fulling thinking prevents them from coming up with fitting expectations. And at that point one might ask, why should bylr even happen if it is happening in the show's last season at the last second?
Yeah, pretty much. The thing about the "realism" argument is that it doesn't hold true in a manufactured narrative. In real life, yes, it's totally possible that a young boy could behave exactly like Mike does towards El for four seasons and still be gay, because you never really know what is going on in someone else's head. But in fiction, character arcs need to be shown to the audience. Even if Mike himself wasn't able to admit to his sexuality yet, the viewers, at large, should be able to tell the storyline is taking place - like they can with Will.
Re: the time skip, I think B*lers assume everyone else is as immediately willing to have Mike and El break up as they are. Now, I'm not a M1leven shipper, and I don't think the audience would, like, quit the show en masse if they broke up, but it would confuse a lot of people. I think most viewers would be left wondering why so much time was spent in the relationship in the first place, if they were never meant to last.
#also b*lers consistently think mike and el have broken up for no reason lol#like i remember before s4 came out they said they were not together anymore because of mike's reaction to the kiss in s3#and... nope#then in vol. 1 they said they had broken up because of el's note#and... nope again#etc#antibyler#anti byler
6 notes
·
View notes
Note
It's crazy just how good the animated movies are for Hanzo and Kuai to an extent (the extent being made since his modern take was only really in the 2nd movie while snow blind is more of an au but it is still really great)
Like they get that he's vengeful, he doesn't want to make peace he's here to avenge his entire being, but he still somewhat cared for the earthrealm group enough to not fight them, to tell him to hide and not die trying, and to even saving them all in Revenge.
And then in Battle of the Realms, UGH, so great. They know he lingers in the middle because he's not entirely altruistic, but he's good. He knows hes done awful things and would let Kuai finish him if it ultimately meant the saving of all realms. He is tired but unwilling to just lay down and croak.
And Kuai is like his usual self but with more spite towards Hanzo is so intense and interesting. It really makes him feel human.
Like sure the overall plots for both movies are a bit all over the place but SubScorp is so fucking good in both. Kinda like the actual game plots now that I think about it. Huh.
But god, the music, the voice acting, the way Hanzo is treated as a main character, hell THE main character in Revenge. I'm glad they actually did give him top billing cause hot take but Hanzo reaaally doesn't get as much screen time in games as much as people think. Extra skins and cover arts sure, but not a lot in game stories.
those movies are SO bad (I should know, Ive watched each more than 10 times) and Jeremy Adams is my mortal enemy but yeah as usual the ninja storyline is the most entertaining and compelling one.
The Shirai Ryu massacre in the first movie is literally the best part of it and then its all downhill from here and it makes you, the viewer, instantly sympathize with hanzo bc you want to root for this guy, hence making you buy him being a lot "nicer" and a LOT MORE reasonable than he usually is/should be this time around. Scorpion in Revenge IS OOC compared to his previous incarnations but its not necessarily a negative if the details of that aspect and incarnation of him are explored thouroughly, which they are not due to the lack of time and focus bc its a 1h20 minute long movie and lack of good writing and yknow, SUBTLETY, the mk:legends movies are corny as hell. Mandatory Dam "MK: Legends shouldve been an animated tv show à-la Invincible" Argument.
I do agree with you that in game, Scorpion does NOT get as much focus as people think he does, not a hot take at all in my book, but my own hot take is that hes also sidelined in Revenge, HIS OWN MOVIE, bc he has to share more than half his screentime with the entire tournament, like, introduction of liu kang, raiden, sonya, johnny, shang and the gang, the rules of the tournament... Quan chi gets focused on well enough as the antagonist, bc well, hes the main antagonist, but the third character thats CRUCIAL to his story, bi-han, the ACTUAL bi-han, is LAUGHINGLY underused. The actual bi-han has less than three lines. THE ACTUAL SCORPION AND SUB ZERO FIGHT BARELY LAST A MINUTE.
Also since I talked about quan chi. What the hell. His entire reason for doing All That to hanzo was so hanzo could be reborn as a wraith he could manipulate to infiltrate shang's island to get the key of shinnok back, AND HANZO DOESNT EVEN DO THAT, HE DOESNT EVEN DO HIS ONE JOB, and they NEVER show quan chi being upset about that??? What was the POINT OF ALL THAT THEN??? Quan chi goes to fucking... BRAG to hanzo's dying face, as hes chilling there impaled with bi-han, that he killed his family FOR NO REASON WHEN IT WOULDVE MADE SENSE THAT HE REVEALED EVERYTHING TO HANZO TO MAKE HIM MAD BC HES MAD HIMSELF THAT HANZO DIDNT BROUGHT HIM THE KEYKFJDURVF??? WHY.
One genuine interesting thing also is that Scorpion begins and finishes his entire story arc in a single movie, this being: happy life -> losing clan, wife and child to the lin kuei and sub zero -> dying -> coming back as a wraith for revenge and entering the mk tourney -> killing sub zero -> finding out quan chi orchestrated everything -> killing quan chi -> ??? unexplored area, and THAT is smth I wanna see, with his arc ended, scorpion really has the opportunity to mature as a character.
Which brings us to Battle Of The Realms and yeah, its interesting that scorpion (hanzo) and sub zero (completely) COMPLETETY switched personalities with each other. Surprise! Sub zero is ALSO OOC in legends: sub zero has always been the cool-headed voice of reason while scorpion is the impulsive one, here it's the opposite because scorpion has nothing else to do, nothing driving him other than a general goodness within him wanting him to not let the world get destroyed. Legends Scorpion is not and has never been in a grey morality area because every single one of his decisions have been good.
You fucking know I love the fire temple confrontation between scorpy and subz, how do you see that chin tilt and the way scorpion says "That's what makes you different... That's what makes you better." in THAT tone of voice and not go crazy. But if you think about it, Scorpion is PROJECTING LIKE CRAZY onto this lin kuei. The only thing kuai has done that couldve deserved this epiphany from hanzo was that he agreed to tag-team attack with him to stop the cyber lin kuei, and that was mere seconds ago, and then he tried to kill him. Again. If anything, Kuai is MORE revenge-driven in botr than Hanzo was in revenge. His clan is in shambles and his friends are getting turned into robots but no he see his brother's murderer and its on SIGHT, and we didnt even see him having a similar kill bill reaction as scorpion did in revenge when he saw bi-han. WE know Kuai is good because we have known the guy from his 30 years of history, but in mk:legends, hanzo took one hell of a gamble with this guy, which of course turned out to work in his favor. I also disagree that hanzo did awful things, the only thing that's adressed is the killing of bi-han and not only we know he has been tricked into doing it, but we 1) never saw kuai liang and bi-han interact at all to make us sympathize as to why kuai is so determined to avenge him and 2) we never fucking see anything of bi-han in the first place. Hanzo has virtually nothing to atone for and that he is willing to give his life to the guy whose brother he mistakenly murdered only if he promises to help save the world is yet another testament to how good he is compared to that same guy who tried to literally stab him in the back a few seconds earlier.
I WILL give botr one major W for being the only instance that gave us Kuai crying on screen, THIS was good, THIS is why the ninja storyline is the best thing out of these movies.
If you take the gay glasses off for a second, I'm pretty sure scorpion shoving sub zero out of the way when the temple of shinnok collapses is a call back to the original storyline of scorpion being sub zero's guardian, and its the only "save" between the two thats kinda. Just there because🏳️🌈. But still.
If you just ignore the rest, the Subscorp is so fucking quality in mk:legends. its genuinely one of its accidental saving point.
Btw dont let my rant fool you into thinking I hate those movies, I fucking love them so much. The timeline theyve built has incredible potential thats, as my favorite blue guy once said, wasted. And I love MY personal interpretations for them so much, but personal interpretations doesnt mean its actually textual, yknow? Long story short: those movies sucks so bad, I love them so much Im gonna rewatch them for the 20th time.
Have a subz
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
Not sure how I went from casual Stranger Things fan to Byler truther literally overnight but here I am to give my take as a once-casual viewer.
I never really looked into any of the subtext in the show until early s4 when I had a come to Jesus moment. I rewatched seasons 1-3 recently so I think having the whole story fresh in my mind helped me see the truth a little more clearly than many other casual viewers. ANYWAY.
In seasons 1 and 2 I could tell that Will and Mike were extremely close, but I never really looked at it as anything more because they were still little to me and Mike seemed to be innocently interested in El.
Season 3 was when I started feeling a shift in my perspective, but only somewhat. I was torn between “Mike is just a stupid teen boy and Will misses his friend” and “wait, do these two like each other?” But again, I didn’t look too much into it because it wasn’t BLATANTLY OBVIOUS to me at the time that these boys are more than friends.
In comes season 4. I literally immediately knew that there was something going on. As soon as Mike gave Will the bro tap I thought “wait, MIKE? Crying while confessing that becoming your friend was the best thing I have ever done MIKE is brushing off his bestie that he went to the ends of the earth to save?” As the season went on, I just knew I was not delusional and that I was literally witnessing these boys pining for each other, so I decided to do some digging around to see what was out there on this topic. That’s how I ended up here. I’ve read the Google docs, the analyses, etc. and all of it just makes so much sense. I truly, 100% believe that Byler was always meant to be endgame. This show spends a LOT of time developing their relationship and it’s not for nothing. It’s honestly beautiful and pure and makes me want to cry. I don’t know how I was so blind all these years, but holy shit, the DB are good…they are really good. They had me in the first half, not gonna lie.
The proof that stands out to me the most:
-Mike’s shadow is basically an open closet. That last s3 kiss in Will’s room + Mike’s one way sign in s4… cmon, they are basically shouting Mike’s next big arc to us in the last few(s3)/first few(s4) minutes. This is absolutely, positively on purpose and it’s honestly brilliant foreshadowing.
-Mike and Will are basically attached at the hip. Even after their dramatic argument in the rain in s3 which is never fully resolved, they are quite often within a foot of each other. Even while Mike is dating El. They are both very comfortable being up on each other until Mike’s airport stunt in s4, but it all comes back after Mike lets his guard down and becomes mush for Will again. The shootout starts, and they basically cling to each other. They are also both totes cool with Will holding Mike’s hand over the payphone. I could go on but if you get it, you get it. These two are COMFY together
-“We’re friends, we’re friends” We know, babes. Do you? This line feels suspiciously similar to “it’s not my fault you don’t like girls” in that they both come up in arguments where Will calls Mike out for pulling away from him. Mike is supposed to be oblivious to Will’s crush so…who is Mike really trying to convince?
-Will’s drawings El has lots of Mike reminders in her rooms in s3 + s4. Mike has no visible El items, but Will drawings are permanent fixtures in his basement. I don’t think Mike even thinks twice about it, he just cherishes those effing drawings. (So sweet) Then Will painted something for him that Mike likely thought was for a girl…I’m…I’m going to cry. Bet that gets added to the wall before Mike’s bags are even unpacked.
-Where is Mike’s attention really? Mike acted like he wasn’t giving Will any mind when he arrived in Cali but then called out his eye rolling, moping etc. Did Will have your attention, or nah, Mike? Will seemed to feel genuinely hurt by Mike’s words and Mike picked up on that. He soon gave a genuine apology, something that he only ever consistently offers Will.
-speaking of the apology, that shit was FLIRTY. Mike didn’t have to force it, he just said what he was thinking and Will looked like he felt so validated. They both smiled and looked so happy to be back on good terms and ugh it was just the sweetest thing. Their connection is effortless and only wavers when Mike panics + Will feels ignored. This did not feel the slightest bit platonic. Zero percent.
-the triple take. Like, come on. A TRIPLE take?? Mike, baby, it’s gonna be ok. Will loves you, too. This shot was one of the most blatant indicators of Mike’s internal struggle in s4 IMO
-season 4 arcs Mike’s arc with El and his arc with Will are happening at the same time. That is because they are the same arc. This should be setting alarm bells off in general audience heads but I know that many people cannot seem to connect the damn dots still. They. Love. Each. Other.
Anyway…you’ve converted me. I wanted to put my two cents in as someone who has only fairly recently caught on to validate that you guys who have seen it for years are NOT delusional, you are doing the Lord’s work by compiling all of the data that us normies are too dense to see. Long live Byler!
27 notes
·
View notes
Note
I’m sorry my ask annoyed you. I honestly wasn't trying to, I was asking after your opinion and thus shared my viewpoint on it as well. I don't think that to be discourse starting. It wasn't a guise. I wanted it to be an exchange of different opinions/viewpoints between two people because not everyone shares the same views and I sought to hear more details from someone else’s perspective. I wanted you to share yours so I shared mine, that way you could understand where I was coming from and then I could read your viewpoint and understand yours if you replied. I wasn't asking for justification or an argument. I only wanted to hear why you shipped them and how you saw them together. Which you provided. Thank you.
But I realize my ask was unsolicited and came out of nowhere which isn't right. I should have led into the conversation rather than just dump all of that into one single ask. It was a lot all at once. Thank you for replying nonetheless and for sharing your views on the ship. I’m sorry I caused you to be annoyed/irritated. That wasn't my intention.
gonna start this out by saying i don't plan on answering another ask about this after this one
a conversation here ALSO would not have been appreciated bc the last thing the vast majority of anyone who ships anything wants is someone starting a conversation with them with plans to eventually tell them why they don't actually like the ship you ship.
you might not have been around my blog long enough to remember me posting about this stuff when st*cky shippers started coming into the s*mb*cky tag (blocking the name out just bc i don't want this showing up in the tag, as it's not about the ship, even though i adore the latter ship) and talking shit about the latter ship because they just "didn't see the chemistry" and "didn't understand how people could ship it when st*cky were so obviously meant to be soulmates" or whatever the fuck, but i really did not take kindly to that, and wouldn't have even if it wasn't ship wars based. i might clown on ships on my own personal blog (always blocked out so nothing shows up in tags) or with my friends that i know have a similar opinion, and i might even really dislike a ship to the point that it makes me want to block every instance of it and all the people who regularly post about it, but i'd never start a conversation with them with the intentions of telling them all the reasons i personally actually really disliked it, unless they started shit first
like, i understand you were trying to understand, which is fine. again, if the first ask had simply been, "what do you like most about phee and tech?" or "what made you ship techphee in the first place?" i would have been happily gushing about the chemistry i see between them, i'm sure. but if that conversation you think you should have led into at all included your opinion on disliking tech and phee together, i can assure you i would have been just as mad because, quite frankly, i did not ask. i did not plan on asking. i do not want to know. i am not particularly sympathetic to your opinion, and even less so now, and all i wanted was to be left alone to be happy about the ship i thought was cute getting screen time of them being soft and flirting with each other
but the fact of the matter is that saying things like "as if it's 'funny/cute' to watch someone who doesn't understand social cues or needs time to adjust to interactions be thrown for a loop" (implying that the ship is problematic as it's a way to make fun of a neurodivergent character) and "their line of overused tropes that more so appeal to the masses of heterosexual neurotypical viewers" (to someone who is very much not heterosexual, by the way, and is very vocal about that) is going to be taken as inflammatory and discourse-starting, because it is. those are highly charged things to say, with a lot of negative emotional weight behind them, which is the prime breeding ground for discourse, especially when tacked onto an ask whose purpose is to ask why i don't think that way. it felt very "well i see that this ship is problematic for x and y reasons, why do you not see it?" nothing in that ask read like it was asked in good faith and, even with this added on explanation of intent, it still is hard to ignore how charged your (once again, unsolicited) reasoning for disliking the ship was. it felt almost accusatory, which is why it felt like a demand to explain myself
like i said, i don't really want to keep going with this conversation. i mostly just wanted to answer this second ask to say please don't go out looking for a conversation partner with the express intent of eventually offering your viewpoint, which is essentially shitting on a thing that they like. ask people why they like the ship if you want to know, and end the conversation there. keep your opinions on your own blog, and i'm sure you'll eventually find someone who shares them to talk about it with, but like keep your negativity about it from the people who love/like/enjoy it. i can assure you they do not want it, and they didn't ask.
#just like. don't be negative about a thing someone likes bc you personally want dialogue about it#it's going to upset them having to defend a thing they enjoy to cater to your wants#and there are tons of ways to ask and get their opinion without letting them know you don't share it#especially when they've done nothing to start that negative dialogue in the first place#star wars#the bad batch#mak rants#ask#anonymous
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
Bit of a long ramble
Don't really like putting or seeing transphobia related shit on my dash, but this one has been cooking for a while on and off.
---
You see, there is this one streamer who I will not name and who we will simply refer to as this dude. For someone who by chance happens to know of this dude, it would be very easy to guess who he is, but I don't imagine many people are aware.
So. There is this dude. Member of a certain community I was also a member of (still kinda am, but meh). To this day he remains the only person kicked and "unpersoned" by his attitude and words, as opposed to being kicked for cheating, as a few others have.
As a player, he has amassed quite a few achievements and was well known and respected for a long time. This part is just context.
As a person, he has always been very outspoken about certain topics that streamers usually avoid. Topics about race (he is brown, in his own words), about sexism, about politics, you get the idea.
Now, I don't like the expression "rent free in X's head" because I don't believe in the concept of rent. But I often reference his case, as I remember it happening in real time, as the archetypical example of how transphobia rots your brain. Nothing in this paragraph is meant as a joke. Fully serious including the rent part.
For added context, this dude was someone that I "took seriously" as in, I expected that if a conversation was about a serious topic, he would actually treat it as a serious conversation instead of saying some platitudes or treating it as unimportant, as streamers are known to do. When I talk about this dude there is sadness in my voice; not sadness because he could have gone differently, as I consider him a lost cause, but sadness in the choices some people make and how they end up much worse as a person.
---
Although the timeline is not exactly as I'll explain, the general idea remains the same. It's been years, so any mistakes are a product of my bad memory.
Around the time the BLM movement was a big thing, this dude got caught in a rather unfortunate series of events.
He got into a twitter argument involving a developer of a game congratulating a white player for a (relatively speaking) minor acomplishment when compared to his own. His point was to call out the racism of ignoring a brown player while praising a white one. For what it's worth I think he was in the right here, as much as I roll my eyes when typing twitter argument. Nothing good came out of it, as the developer did not "reward" him in the same way they did for the white player. What it did though, was attract a lot of bad faith viewers to his chat. You know the ones that like to stir shit up, debate me kind of guy.
This influx of assholes, coupled with the fact that BLM was big at the time and the fact that this dude loved talking about complex issues assuming others are looking for a conversation, to learn from each other and all that, instead of the obvious trolls he was getting, he started getting very defensive about things.
This dude used to have a blog, he's moved urls last time I checked, where he would write out his thoughts. He wrote about a very extensive list of controversial topics and his stance on them, in what I can only assume was an effort to have to explain himself less every time he streamed.
Among these topics was younger people's access to hrt, although with a far more dramatic phrasing. The arguments he posed had a telling stench to them, the fake concern that you get from sources marked in red by shinigami eyes. He got "called out" as I see people say, and he did admit that he was not well informed, that he would do more research and all that.
During all this one of his closest family members passed away. He talked about what it meant for him on his blog. I'd rather not expand here.
As this dude stopped streaming for a while (around a year perhaps?) when he came back he was a bit changed, to put it euphemistically. Aparently he had been getting harassed on twitter by people who disagreed with him over those topics, and he eventually doubled down and kept getting more into the circle that quotes the likes of jordan peterson and other such cockroaches.
Not being involved in this kind of thing, when I got notice of this changed behavior I was skeptical. This dude, who calls out anyone being racist (to him, or to others) is now talking about these grifters? Surely it's a misunderstanding (how naive...). At some point he got kicked out of the community I mentioned earlier. Many in his audience literally begged him to reconsider what he was saying as it was getting too bigoted. At some point I simply blocked any mention of this dude on platforms I use.
---
Make no mistake.
Occasionally he comes up when discussing the history of the earlier mentioned community, as he was there when it was started and he got his contributions, which have been erased and are not talked about unless strictly necessary.
I feel no sympathy for someone like this dude. Many such cases, sadly.
I just want to illustrate a point that we keep seeing time and time again. People tanking their careers, driving away those who care about them. And what for? To tell people that kids taking blockers is dangerous? To shit on those who can't access hormones? To mock those who don't present on a socially acceptable way? To cling to some idealized worldview rooted in bigotry and violence?
I don't know what this dude's point of no return was. I can only guess and I won't out of respect for those who are no longer there.
But past a certain point I stop caring, stop giving chances, stop giving the benefit of the doubt. You can either stand against all bigotry, and I mean all of it. Or you are an enemy, someone to be ignored and forgotten in the best of cases. Or. Should fascism not be squashed before it's too late, someone to be rid of, violently.
No mercy. No excuses.
0 notes
Text
Star Trek wank below the cut
I love SNW, i think its everything star trek should be and is doing the philosophy part of star trek amazingly but... (spoilers and critique below the cut cause its long and Im not sure its wise to have a nuanced media critique that on poorreadingcomprehension.com)
This isnt well articulated, im procrastinating
they are simply not engaging with the eugenics plotline, and kinda ending up in a bit of a pro eugenics position????
Like maybe they have something planned but it certainly does not seem like they view genetically modified people as anything other than poor oppressed babies who should be allowed to do whatever they want.
I think within the star trek universe genetically modifying humans on scale seems to create a group of people that believes they are better than others and that seems to on some level be inevitable imo given human psychology. Which is also why we’re very leery of doing it in real life. But that’s being completely unaddressed within the Illyrians, as if they would never dream of considering themselves as better than anyone else.
The whole episode where they’re on trial was throwing a ton of analogies at the viewer, none of which I think really apply to the complex situation depicted. The show is making a huge deal about it being a ~*cultural practice*~ and the thing is that I am not a cultural relativist. My understanding is that the planet voted to stop doing genetic modification in order to join starfleet which has a very understandable ant genetic modification policy and a certain subsect of the population decided to 1. continue to do this to their children despite it being an unnecessary medical treatment 2. continue to live on the planet when it meant they they could not seek medical treatment for their children. I can entertain arguments about how the transitional period should have been handled and the show made a lot of very vague and spooky allusions to horrific oppression but never said anything outright other than bullying. I believe this dynamic can be compared to some modern ethical situations but gay marriage and racism isn’t one of them. And I think the question of where to draw the line is an interesting discussion to have but they are not having it.
There was also the kill baby hitler episode right after that which didnt really take the ethical quandary of killing baby hitler seriously. In fact one could (ungenerously) argue that it made the assertion that the eugenics wars were a good thing. It very much brushed past that which is a shame because i think its an interesting argument to have. The narrative seems to be acting like Una and La’an should not be at all wary of their personal situations and anyone advocating otherwise is a bigot. It feels very much like saying you should ignore your darkest potential self because you are not capable of becoming that person which i think is how you end up with people feeling very justified in doing terrible things.
I think DS9 handled the issue very well by showing how modification can really fuck people up, although they also sidestepped the real debate about how much genetic modification is ok and what do you do with people who were genetically modified as children. And I think there is an interesting story to explore with Una about being an ubermench in the military but to do that they would have to engage with the fact that they’ve got a supersoldier.
At the end of the day i dont think that starfleet is being unreasonable in any sense for disallowing genetically modified people to join, and while the show is paying lip service to that its not really engaging with it which is leading to some very interesting subtextual arguments that I dont think they realise they’re making.
Una could be an interesting character but they would have to engage with touchy and edgy topics which they dont want to do because that could make her unlikable, and mean they have to engage with heavier topics than they want to. But they do want to jam in an oppression metaphor. and theyre dancing around it too! Someone in the writers room is aware of the implications of their arguments.
#I need to be studying right now#im not looking to get in an argument i was simply dissapointed in reddit for not engaging with this in the post episode thread#i shouldnt expect intelectuallism of reddit but i do expect edge and this seems rife with opportunites for it#Ok I really need to study now#I will probably delete this if it gets any attention
0 notes
Text
the untamed is very much about credibility, credulity, gaps, bias, spin. it's about assuming you have all the information when you only have a fraction and you don't even fully understand the information you do have. it's about making judgments and decisions based on incomplete data and unreliable sources.
and i don't just mean for the characters in-universe - the show itself plays upon the viewer's expectations and assumptions and often points out to the viewer that it is doing so. the very first & second scenes lay this out for us - some of it we don't realize until a later episode when we see a different shot of jiang cheng on the cliff, but even from the first episode we know this much: that the guy telling the younger generation (and us) the story of the yiling laozu is being paid to do so by some mysterious figure lurking in the shadows. we don't know who's paying him yet, or for what purpose, but we know there is something we don't know! we know there is some motivation behind the story as it is being told to us that is hidden. so from the very beginning we're being reminded to be skeptical about the sources of information available to us.
this is subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) reinforced throughout the series (by the whole Empathy flashback sequence, for one major example - but also see my tags that i didn't even notice the discrepancies between the two versions of these scenes because they happened so far apart in the show) and really hammered home by the last episode, when we finally learn a piece of information about jiang cheng's core loss that we didn't even know we were missing. if we didn't know we were missing something that big, what else could we be missing?
i think this is a show that rewards you for paying attention, for catching the empty spaces, and for questioning everything you're shown and told. that makes talking about the "canon" of the untamed very interesting. any show (or book or movie etc.) is not just the things that happen in the show (the plot) but also the way in which they are communicated to us, and that includes the way in which other things are not communicated to us at all. so it's interesting to me to see people say that something isn't canon as a way to argue that it didn't happen. so we didn't see it happen - does that mean it couldn't have happened? for that matter, just because we saw something doesn't necessarily mean it did happen! if you only want to talk about things that are shown on screen, that's fine, but i think the show itself makes a pretty strong argument for not doing that. so it's not canon - so we can't prove that it happened - is that really the most interesting and fruitful way to engage with this story? when the story itself is about misinformation and assumptions and doubt and lies, and when the way in which it is told reminds the audience that those themes are also playing out between the show and the viewer?
#i think you could also make the argument that the viewer is really meant to pick up on all this only on the rewatch#for example you could interpret the second scene in the exact same way as above but draw the complete opposite conclusion#the juniors in the teahouse are listening to the storyteller. they're an audience. we're also an audience - also learning the story#of the yiling laozu for the first time. but the show immediately indicates to us that we are privy to special information#which separates us from the onscreen audience - it shows us the screen with a shadowed figure#so we know something's going on. the onscreen audience doesn't know anything's afoot but we do even if we don't know what it is#this is a form of dramatic irony - when we know something that the characters don't know#and could be used to make us complacent. 'look at all these characters who don't know anything. not like YOU. you know stuff'#'if there's something weird going on don't worry we'll point it out to you'#and on the rewatch you can be like 'hey wait a minute' but the first time around you might just buy into it#so i don't know! but i do know that it is fun & sexy to engage with the text on this level#through the understanding that the text is self-aware about the power it has over our perceptions#the untamed#unreliable narrators#storytelling#framing#my posts#f#links#and i'm not saying anything goes and you can just decide that stuff happened#i mean you CAN but what i'm saying is that often it doesn't make sense to me to say definitively that something DIDN'T happen#does it make sense with what we *are* shown? does it make sense with what we are shown when you take into account#the biases inherent in the way it's shown to us?#does it make sense with both the decisions that the characters make & the decisions that they *don't* make? or that we don't see them make?#this is why it's so strange to me that e.g. the general assumption in the fandom is that wen qing died#and that you can decide that she lived but it's just a headcanon. or you have to have some specific agenda to come to that conclusion#when actually i think the text does not support one reading any more than the other!#that is i think that assuming that she died is just as much of a headcanon as assuming that she didn't!#and you can make pretty compelling arguments in either direction#anyway. i'm not like mad at anyone for their takes on what's canon and not i just think it's so limiting
635 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
earth90214
most normal comic book fan 🐈⬛
fundamentosdelafotografiapo-blog
Fundamentos de la fotografía
sanyskan
linger longer
cutiegrumpycerym
🐵Nirvana☸
ask-these-dl-hoes
I'm always a slut for Vampires.