One thing that's kind of funny to me are the people who say "X show/movie/whatever ruined the Empire by making them incompetent" like there was ever a point in Star Wars where they weren't by meta standards.

Straight out of the gate in A New Hope they get exactly one scene where they're competent (again, by meta standards) in defeating a Rebel crew and after that it's all downhill. The only battle they ever win being on Hoth and only because they had gigantic walkers.

They were a meme long before Disney, so I can't help but chuckle every time I see someone complain that X Disney project ruined Stormtroopers. There's nothing to ruin, they always sucked.

Which is why it's best to look at them from a narrative perspective rather judging them by the standards of a real-life military.

Ive been laughing for almost an hour at this. Im thinking that OP was right. The entire casting team and production team was in on it too. 🤣🤣

I mean tbh 👀👀

They saw Ewan McGregor and then George Lucas just went and said… 👀👀

✨Let us make him a slut.✨

like it was some Bible verse and thus the Sluttiest and Sassiest Jedi was born.

Imagine wanting some pretty boy who can't act to be playing Thrawn instead of Lars fucking Mikkelsen. Couldn't be me. I'm a hundred percent here for the man who delivered the most chilling monologues and sick burns in that silky voice of his. Lars was on absolute fire in the season finale of Rebels. Remember when Thrawn had enough of Pryce's bullshit and roasted the ever-living hell out of her, "I expected Governor Pryce to fail, but not so completely.” Remember when Ezra gave that long-winded speech about how they had beaten the Empire only for Thrawn to answer in the most I-couldn't-give-a-shit tone, "Are you quite finished?" Remember Thrawn’s first lines in the show and how Lars delivered them expertly, “I will start my operations here, and pull the rebels apart piece by piece. They will be the architects of their own destruction.” Lars Mikkelsen embodies Thrawn perfectly, and I wouldn't want anyone else but him in the role. 

Anti Tagging is a Broken System

So there was this anti Zutara post that I saw a while ago that was tagged as both 'anti zutara' and 'zutara'. As you can imagine, zutara bloggers were mad and the OP claimed they tagged the post as 'zutara' as payback for zutara fans bashing kataang in the 'kataang' tag.

There was also a jedi critical post that was considered to be insulting to someone's religion or culture or some other nonsense. The person asked (**demanded**), the post be tagged as 'anti jedi' because seeing it in the 'jedi order' tag was causing real-world harm.

It confirmed my belief that the tagging system is severely broken and lacking.

These are two issues at play that I notice:

Villain vs Hero Double Standard

What's interesting is that this issue is mainly relevant for protagonists. If I want to bash Ozai, Palpatine or Joker on Tumblr, I don't have to tag my posts as anti. Maybe their fans would prefer it but we all know that these men are villains and the lowest scum in media. It's not bashing - it's the cold hard truth.

So why is it that my calling Ozai a bad father is not Ozai bashing, but me calling Aang a bad father is Aang bashing?? Why the double standards?? Sure, the hero will likely be more sympathetic because we are meant to root for them. But at the end of the day, just like Ozai, Aang played favourites and this left scars on his kids even in their fifties. If you are an Aang fan you can try to justify it, but his actions still hurt his kids no matter how you spin it.

What Does 'Anti' Even Mean??

There are too many ways to be anti character, anti ship etc which makes things murky.

Let's use Kataang as an example. Are you anti Kataang because you objectively looked at the ATLA show and you think how it is presented makes it a bad ship? Are you anti KA because you genuinely like the ship but you think it was not developed properly or did not go the way you thought best? Are you anti KA because you are just emotionally repulsed for whatever reason even though canon may give you reasons to support it? Are you anti KA just because it may be popular to be so in your circle?

That's the problem. Theoretically, the first two scenarios could be classified under the general 'kataang' tag. Because people who hold those opinions are not just bashing it for no reason but have objective truths that they have observed about the ship. Saying that Aang kissed Katara without her consent is an objective truth. Why should that be labelled as 'anti kataang'? It's the truth about the ship.

How would I address this?

The general tag should not be treated as a safe space. If you want a safe space, stick to a 'pro' or 'anti' tag. The general tag should be treated like a neutral zone where everything is laid on the table for debate and discourse. So if I browse the Jedi Order tag, I should see metas about cool Jedi powers and master-padawan relationships but also metas about the separation of families and the social harm it causes kids.

People need to stop being babies and grow up. If someone posts a critical meta about the Jedi order, it does not mean they are attacking whatever religion you have or calling for genocide in real life. Do you know how much witchcraft, paganism, atheism and other kinds of Christian bashing posts I see in the Christianity tag?? If you don't like something, just scroll past it like a big kid. Don't send death or rape threats to someone if you disagree with them.

I think if someone does not have substantial or accurate reasons for hating something, they should stick to the anti tag and avoid the general tag.

What do others think?? Tagging is hard because it's up to the discretion of the poster but I hope my arguments here made sense.

@caripr94

@tragicfantasy-girl

@sokkastyles

@the-badger-mole

Every year with every new season, all the chatter about whether Pedro will be on set for The Mandalorian or not returns. The only season this wasn't a problem for was season 2, and still, a rumor about him being a "behind-the-scenes diva" still caused gossip to fly around.

Trust me, it happens every time, and every time it's proven wrong. Pedro shows he's just as committed to the role, that he loves it just as much, and that sometimes it's simply a matter of what they work out for the scheduling or for the sake of his own physical body.

It's totally okay to be upset about Pedro not being in the suit that much, all feelings about it are valid, of course! It definitely adds a charm that was evident in many season 2 scenes. Din, however, has so far been someone else in the suit probably 75% of the time - and that's the Din we continue to know and love to this day, too. Thus, the story and character wouldn't be impacted by Pedro's absence alone.

For some reason, it seems people want to specifically discredit Pedro's contribution to the role, but that doesn't make sense. It's the same as Darth Vader has been ever since the beginning, but Pedro's been given an even more active role in it. Even for Vader's return in Obi-Wan Kenobi, Hayden wasn't the one in the suit for every single scene. Katee also spoke about how Bo-Katan isn't always her, too. The same goes for Din and Pedro.

Season 3 didn't feel the same because it was a darker tone, and it focused on more than just Din and Grogu. It had a lot to accomplish, and in doing so, it had to sacrifice some of the things that are most beloved about the series. You can agree with that decision and love it, or you can not agree and consider season 3 a miss. Either way, it wasn't any of the actors' faults, as season 1 proved that Din Djarin is just fine without Pedro physically there at all times.

Din Djarin has been a three-person team since the beginning. The things these actors can control about Din's character will be just fine in their hands. The blame for the way a story goes, as was the case in season 3, doesn't deserve to go to any of them.

It's hard to drown out the noise about this situation for every season, and trust me, I've been in this fandom long enough to know that - but a lot of what's said about Pedro seems to be, for some odd reason, many people wanting him to fail, and he won't.

Masterlist of all my anti-Jedi posts

The Meta:

The divide between Prequels era fans Here

The way you take the story depends on how you look at it Here

The Jedi's downfall is a tragedy and this inevitable and that doesn't mean I support genocide wtf??? Here

The Clone Wars both wants the Jedi to be unquestionably good and be three dimensional and these things conflict Here

The Republic and the Jedi are shown to have fallen in the canon but the audience overlooks it cause the Separatists are the bad guys Here

Why are we treating the massacre of the Tusken Raiders so lightly???? Here

The Jedi being the issue:

The Jedi Order is itself flawed Here

The Jedi's actions are the issue, it doesn't actually matter how they internally handle their emotions in the face of those actions Here

The Jedi encourage emotional repression, thanks Here

My issue with the Jedi's attitude towards attachment Here

The Jedi aren't impartial they just don't care Here

The Jedi having all the force sensitive kids is weird actually Here

The Clone issue:

The clones are slaves and we need to acknowledge that Here

On a similar note, there is no AU where the clones have free will that is consistent with the canon Here

Anakin:

Anakin's fears are valid actually Here

How can Anakin be too old to become a Jedi, how is this not alarming to you Here

Can we like, agree, that every Star Wars character has the mental age that their body is presenting?

Grogu is 50, but physically and mentally he's a young toddler.

Clones are 10-13, but are physically and mentally young adults.

You wouldn't ship Grogu with Obi-Wan, even if they're both 40 around the end of Clone Wars

Why would you ship a Ahsoka and Rex? You saw how YOUNG she was during the Siege of Mandalore. Just why?

Hey. By the way. Here's your reminder that the way you talk about the Jedi Order can and does spill over into talk of real world religions and sometimes the ways in which you talk about the Jedi betray some really concerning and alarming views of those religions!! So maybe!! Be careful about that shit!! Thanks!!

I've definitely said this before but one of my big issues with fandom purity culture, specifically with Star Wars, is like...

Buddy this franchise started out with a love triangle that was one part incest and two parts major age difference. Why are you here.

The only ships that are relatively unproblematic are BailBreha, OwenBeru, and Kanera, and even THOSE I can argue as shifty if I really tried.

There’s nothing I hate more in Mace Windu memes and videos than when he’s suddenly characterized as talking in “gangsta” slang and “hood” speak.

He doesn’t talk like that in canon. Ever. At all. The only reason people suddenly have him talking like the Black Best Friend in Not Another Teen Movie is because he’s black.

There is no other reason. There is no other reason to have him suddenly drastically switch speaking patterns than the color of his skin.

It’s racist. Stop it.

Rian, that’s bullshit and I believe if Hamill had more of a say about Luke your movie would’ve been oh so much better received and loved by audiences. Also, to many fans he is Luke Skywalker.

I just saw a post saying "None of the Jedi who survived Order 66 are shown apologizing to the Clones for what they did to them :("

... LOL! The Jedi can literally be slaughtered down to the children and yet be blamed and expected to apologize to their killers for it after the fact! Yes it obviously wasn't the clones fault, Palpatine mind controlled them, but as far as most of the Jedi know their long-time allies turned on and participated in a genocidal campaign waged against them. Why would they apologize?

If we're going split hairs I could just as easily point out that the Clones haven't been shown to apologize to the Jedi either. Even after they started breaking programming they don't seem to experience a, "Oh my gosh I slaughtered the Jedi!" moment. One of the few interactions we see of Jedi and Clones post Order 66 was Rex in Rebels who seemed more mildly annoyed by Kanan being nervous and traumatized around him than anything.

Am I saying the Clones necessarily need to apologize as if they're personally guilty? No, if they know about the inhibitor chips they'll know it wasn't their fault. But in that case what sense does it make to demand the Jedi crawl back to the people they think betrayed and murdered them to apologize for something they didn't even have a hand in in the first place?

Oh no, I’m participating in Star Wars discourse.

Uh, so there’s a post floating around that I’m not reblogging mainly because it’s just this person’s headcanon and, whatever, people can have headcanons, but the main points they make in the midst of talking about their headcanon that I’ll be addressing are:

Leia and Han getting married and having kids is the most boring thing you can do with Leia

Leia should be a Jedi like every other dang Skywalker because somehow continuing an assumed dynasty isn’t the most boring choice you can make for her

Leia is more cut out to handle lack of attachment than Luke which we know because of her lack of response to Alderaan being destroyed

Leia and Han shouldn’t get married or even be around each other much because Han is a wandering soul and needs to travel and go places

Leia never expresses a desire for marriage or children in the OT, so removing these things won’t contradict George Lucas’ canon

And, look, these are just…missing the point of the character growth that occurs in these two during the OT.

(there's just a whole-ass essay below the cut if anyone cares to read about the many thoughts I have on Leia Organa and Han Solo.)

So, I'm not saying existing or past canon/EU has done it right, but I disagree with the statement that having them marry and live kind of basic lives is the most boring choice. If that's all there was to it, sure, but those two choices by themselves show a monumental amount of character growth for both Leia and Han. (I mean, frankly, I think "Skywalker = Jedi every time no matter what" is a pretty boring choice storytelling wise, but I also think the Jedi on the whole are incredibly boring characters, so, uh...I'm biased.)

Leia was never going to live a quiet life even if Alderaan hadn't been destroyed. Like, she did not have that option, period. She would have either remained in politics or taken over as queen, may or may not have had to marry for political reasons, and may or may not have been involved with the Rebellion. Her life was chaos starting as a teen and she had no reason to believe she wouldn't die living a hectic and chaotic life.

And then she loses everything. This isn't emphasized in the movies obviously because they are fun family romps and not gritty dramas, but, good night, in a single second, she loses every family member, nearly every person she knows, every place she finds most familiar and comfortable, everything and to top it all off, the guilt that it's happened because of her unwillingness to give up the Alliance will probably always be there. She was tortured, they lost lives in battle, and, yeah, they destroy the Death Star, but at the end of that day, literally all she has left is the Alliance and those three pilots who managed to unlock her cell door without too much trouble.

I don't know about you, but I'd be straight-up shut down emotionally at that point. Like, I don't think PTSD even covers what Leia probably has going on in her head. And I think that's kind of what we see in ESB (I know the filmmakers weren’t thinking in terms of PTSD, but there are still hints of it there regardless). She's angry, she's afraid of losing people (she's obviously pissed Han is leaving after he said he'd stay, but also, there's a scene that was cut -- a good move in my opinion because the dialogue is beyond dramatic and Carrie seems out of it, but it stands that this was the intended source of Leia’s frustration -- where Luke is telling Leia he's leaving the Alliance for Dagobah and she is extremely upset that both he and Han are leaving, goes on a whole rant about how she should know better than to trust anyone but herself, etc.), and when she finally lets Han in, she promptly loses him and nearly loses Luke.

And then the events of ROTJ happen and she finds out that the man who tortured her, who stood idly by while her entire planet was destroyed, who tortured the man she loves and handed him off to the space mob to be murdered, who cut off her brother's hand and nearly allowed him to die, who has terrorized the Galaxy in general, that guy is her bio dad. And that guy is the entire reason she's Force-sensitive.

Leia stopping her Jedi training in the new canon was for a dumb reason, I agree there. Leia not wanting anything to do with the thing that, from her point of view, nearly ruined her life and the lives of those she loves about a thousand times over...I dunno, I think that's way more interesting than her just going, "Ope, I'm a Skywalker! You know what that means! Gotta be a Jedi!" And as far as her being more of a natural at it...do we know that Leia is better at healthy non-attachment than Luke? Like, any response to a planet being destroyed could easily just be a trauma response. Is shutting down like that good, actually? Or is it just going to cause problems down the road, Anakin-style?

I don't know, I just think that after living through all of that as well as a freaking war, girly might want a quiet life -- that she gets to choose -- with a husband -- who she gets to choose -- and kids -- who she gets to raise without the threat of the Empire or her nightmare of a biological father looming over their lives. And the very fact that she's able to open herself up to that sort of love and affection when the fear that it might all be ripped away from her is likely ever-present is a big deal. Her having kids knowing they'll likely be Force-sensitive even though that aspect of her biology terrifies her is a big deal. And as far as her not expressing a desire for marriage and kids in the OT...I mean, Leia isn't given the opportunity to express her desire for much in the OT, let's be real (she also never expresses a desire to become a Jedi in the OT either. We can't use what Leia didn't express in the OT to dictate whether she wants or doesn't want something is what I'm saying). They're at war. She's a military leader. She probably can't even hazard wishing for anything beyond waking up the next day. But that's not to say she didn't want such things or grow to want such things once she felt it was safe to do so. We literally don't know, but I don't think the absence of that expressed desire is indicative of anything.

As far as Han goes, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure in every iteration of his story, his itchy feet weren't like...a part of his personality. He had a highly traumatic childhood that left him with few options and ended up living a transient lifestyle out of necessity. He actually seems remarkably easy to keep around if you don't treat him like garbage. I mean, he's given exactly one day of friendship, and he sticks around with the Rebellion for three years before some run-in with a bounty hunter makes him realize he needs to take care of his debt with Jabba. He's not leaving just for funsies or because he's bored or just really needs to be a smuggler again...and he seems legitimately sad have to leave when he's not busy getting pissed at Leia for not having the emotional response he wants her to have (first half of ESB Han is being a big ol' baby and I'm perfectly fine admitting that). And what character growth to see Han "I'm in it for the money" Solo learn to care for his friends, learn to support a cause, learn to love Leia when he's spent so much of his life unattached. Han making boring life choices is indicative of character growth and learning to care about others more than himself. What a lovely thing for this man to learn.

The call for Leia and Han to remain living separate lives but still committed to one another kind of demands that they move backward in character growth in my opinion. We have two people who are in rough places due, by and large, to trauma, who eventually open up to one another and seem better for it and then they...just go back to what they were doing before except they occasionally see each other? Why would they want that? They've grown as people, they've won a dang war, and they're finally able to live somewhat securely. Why wouldn't they want to live basic lives when they were denied the privilege of such choices for so long? And how is them making choices based on their love for another person — love that they had a heck of a time coming to terms with — boring?

Here are all the absolutely horrendous takes I’ve seen this week and it’s not even Tuesday:

1. Enemies to lovers is only okay if they never try to kill each other

2. Timothy Zahn is a bad person for giving Thrawn a sympathetic backstory

3. Kalluzeb is problematic

4. The lives of fictional characters are more important than real people

For the record I think the sith apologists (if they really exist, since I've only ever heard of them secondhand) are fucking weirdos too.

But the "Jedi did absolutely nothing wrong ever, no matter the entire film trilogy that says otherwise" crowd don't just annoy me but legit give me bad vibes.