Been thinking about how I engage with media knowing I have autism versus how I used to engage, before I understood why I felt everything so damn much, too much, all the time, why does it seem so easy for everyone else but I crumble when my shoelace is tied wrong. It’s the first time in my life that things have made sense.
(So.. yeah. Maybe logically I know that Bowser would be a sensory nightmare to be around, but like, if you slap on some headphones and stay away from the lava moat so you don’t overheat, you should be good, right. …right? 💀)
265 notes
·
View notes
OKAY who wants to hear about why i think nimona challenges amatonormativity? you do! 🫵
one of the main ways this is accomplished is through ballister and ambrosius’s relationship. it’s arguable that it doesn’t necessarily fit the traditional model of romance - not only are they a queer interracial couple, and not only is their relationship ambiguous in the book, but there are certain instances, especially in the movie, that subvert traditional ideas of romance and friendship.
one instance that really stands out to me is when the director asks ambrosius what’s on his mind and he goes on his imagined rant about how arm-chopping isn’t a love language - you know the one. when he mentions ballister, he refers to him as “the man i love, my best friend.” and not just one or the other, but both! the man i love, and my best friend. he places equal emphasis on both the romantic and platonic aspects of the relationship, valuing ballister in both a romantic context and a platonic context without treating either one as more important than the other.
and even moments such as the first “i love you” and the kiss manage to subvert tradition. both of these things are generally seen as a pretty big deal, especially in fiction - if the characters are kissing or saying “i love you,” it’s usually a moment in which everything changes. a line is drawn, dividing the story into after and now. sometimes it’s dramatic and climactic, with fireworks and a swell of music, but even when it isn’t it’s still seen as a turning point of sorts. now it’s official, now it’s real. but this isn’t the case in nimona. both moments are certainly significant - they do a good job of showcasing the character development and where ballister and ambrosius are on their respective journeys, and are certainly important in terms of representation - but neither one follows the path that most fictional romance does.
another way in which nimona challenges amatonormativity would be the emphasis on friendship! in the tavern scene (in the movie) when ambrosius suggests killing nimona, ballister disagrees and says “she’s my friend.” ambrosius replies with “aren’t i more than that?”, implying he’s more important than a friend - thus upholding amatonormative ideas. ballister becomes angry at that and leaves - challenging this idea and prioritizing his platonic relationship with nimona over his romantic one with ambrosius, as nimona is the one he wants to defend.
additionally, a big part of this scene is the way ballister deliberately rejects institute values while ambrosius unintentionally upholds them. and because the story challenges homophobia and transphobia (and other forms of bigotry) through the lens of the institute, it would make sense for it to challenge amatonormativity too! it’s something that’s become incredibly normalized, to the point that lots of people don’t even know it exists, and this is reminiscent of the institute brainwashing, especially when it comes to ambrosius - he’s been manipulated his whole life and probably genuinely doesn’t understand the level to which he’s internalized institute beliefs.
ballister prioritizes nimona many times, actually. when he tells ambrosius she’s “smart, kind, and quite sophisticated,” when he’s overjoyed to see her again at the end, when he refuses to kill her and saves her instead. over and over, he proves how much he cares about her, even when this involves directly going against what ambrosius wants - which, of course, is really what the institute wants. a core tenant of amatonormativity is the false notion that romantic relationships are more important or valuable than other types of relationships, but ballister actively goes against this!
to conclude, as a story that at its core is about identity and challenging societal beliefs, nimona defies expectations and traditional ideas of what it should or shouldn’t be. it’s possible that amatonormativity wasn’t what the creators had in mind, but the story still manages to challenge it with grace and elegance. just like its main character, nimona refuses to conform to what others want it to be.
940 notes
·
View notes
I really wonder where you got the idea that the greens consider Aegon a worthy king. No one thinks of him as such, including his family lol. Even he himself says that he does not want the throne and is not born to rule. People support the greens because: 1. They just like these characters more. 2. They believe that the greens in general would be better rulers than the blacks in general. 3. They believe that the greens have usurped the throne to protect themselves. In neither case is it a question of Aegon being a good king. Stop attributing thoughts to people that they didn't express.
i’m going to need y’all to read my post front to back at least three times, and then back to front thrice more. no where in the fucking post did i put down that the greens consider aegon to be worthy to the iron throne. the whole worthy statement literally goes “…aegon did nothing to prove he was worthy of being named heir, let alone being king.” the key words are ‘did nothing to prove’, HE did nothing. no where in the post did i mention the team green fandom, minus putting the tag ‘anti team green’. you’re nitpicking because otherwise you wouldn’t have something to whine about. i get that media comprehension can be tough, but really? is this the best you all can come up with? i understand all of the ‘reasons’ why people support the greens over the blacks. that’s why i’m not team green. it’s a comparison. how many times have you and your buddies haha-ed over rhaenyra being a privileged brat who did nothing to secure her claim? i’m guessing quite frequently, considering i still see the same dumbass talking points despite blocking the tags. your precious uwu aegon and his stans can handle having one of your arguments pointed out as sexist, right? you can’t come after rhaenyra for one thing and then give aegon a pass for the exact same reason. it’s hypocritical and contradictory to do so. use your brain. i PROMISE *pinky promise at that* it’s not that difficult to do.
42 notes
·
View notes