Im finna hurt some feelings. Mkay.

Oh no. Not the yt blondes feeling..sad cuz they dont get represented.

Im sorry youre shown as dumb sometimes?? Im soo sorry for you. How very unfortunate.

Annabeth is black now. You know how many white people you assholes have to look to?? Stop tryna feel like it was sad being blond, holy shit.

Black people STILL are barely represented and when we are no one gives a shit cuz its the characters no one thinks its relevant, or we're shown in shows being the most annoying stereotypes in the damn world, finally a black girl that isnt light skin gets to be a main character of a FANTASTY show. She gets to be the daughter of a greek goddess,

Shut the fuck up. Im soo sorry blonde people havent been represented for once.

the way that no one wears a mask at my local LGBTQ clinic, and in fact comments on my mask like it's just this hilarious little idiosyncrasy that I still wear one and not because I'm immunocompromised and we're in the middle of a pandemic ... as if there isn't an airborne virus that literally fucks up your immune system ... as if we didn't lose a generation of queer people to another virus that fucks up your immune system ...

Over 1000 people murdered because Israel bombed a HOSPITAL and proceeded to defend it by first lying and saying it was a Hamas misfire and then secondly outright admitting that they told them to evacuate then continued to destroy it anyway yet the media and stupid fucks online will insist this is a “war on both sides.”

okay some of yall are just ignoring natives at this point where is the outcry??? how loud do we have to scream? how many of us have to go missing or be found dead before you start screaming with us?

please sign the petition to let us keep our children! and educate yourself on the true history of turtle island: hint, you gotta talk to real natives to get the true story. history is written by the victors.

through the heart!

I kind of wish we could talk about racism in the community (rampant occurrence) without getting sidetracked, because it comes from all sides. I made a post about it and about the straight up fetishization we go through before and it blew up but to this day, I don't know the answer to this problem, aside from doing the work to become antiracist, which is constant work, not just "oh I'm now antiracist".

As far as white people are concerned there isn't one group better than the other, all of you have work to do, I don't care if you're lesbian, bi, trans etc, if you're white, you're privileged.

It doesn't make one group any less racist to say "what about this other group instead?"

As a person of colour I have a hard time feeling safe around any white person, because I don't know them, I don't know how they're going to act and I have my own experiences with all groups, really don't think that one is better than the other.

It's kinda shocking to me how few people seem to know how prevalent the 'my great grandmother was cherokee' myth is and how it's almost never actually true, especially when it comes with things like 'never signed up' or 'fell off the trail' or 'courthouse burned down destorying the documentation' etc etc.

People just don't even seem to know the history like.. when the Trail happened. My great great great grandfather was 2 years old during Removal in 1838, so peoples 'my great grandmother hid in the mountains!' is so clearly wrong. And we have rolls. From before and after removal, rolls done by cherokee nation and others by the government, rolls that were not stored in one random flammable courthouse. It's not difficult to find the actual evidence of ancestry.

And just.. there are lots of ways those family stories get started. It was a practice during the confederacy to claim cherokee ancestry to show one's family had 'deep roots in the south' that they were there before the cherokee were removed. Many people pretended to be cherokee and applied for the Guion-Miller payout just to try to steal money meant for cherokees - 2/3rds of the applicants were denied for having 0 proof of actual cherokee ancestry. [We even see lawyers advertising signing up for the Miller roll just to try to get free money.] And the myth even started in some families in the cherokee land lotteries, where the land stolen from us was raffled off, including the house and everything that was left behind when the cherokees were removed. We have seen people whose families just take these things stolen from the cherokee family and adopt them into their own family story, saying that they were cherokee themselves.

If you had some family story about being cherokee and you wanna have proof one way or the other, check out this Facebook group run by expert cherokee genealogists that do research for free. Just please read the rules fully and respect the researchers. They run thousands of people's ancestries a year and their average is only around 0.7% of lines they run actually end up having true cherokee ancestry.

Full on saying "sex based oppression isn't real, that's a radfem talking point" seems like way too much to me. Like, it IS real. Every single person who was assigned female at birth, or who is considered to be female bodied in any way (so, including eg trans fems who may be considered female bodied due to surgery, intersex people who were maybe assigned as female later on in life), is oppressed because of that. That's an inarguable fact.

But that doesn't mean every single person who was assigned male at birth oppresses every single person assigned female at birth through the axis of sex. Like, obviously trans people who were amab don't have more social privilege as a group than cis gender conforming women.

Both things can be true at once.

I will ALWAYS be protective of Anne Frank and how people speak about her or depict her. She was a child who was murdered, she's not your allegory, life lesson, punchline, or book character.

White people who race to discredit other white people by calling their ideologies "white person problems" to appeal to their audience of white people while speaking as if BIPOC, mixed, and nonwhite people can't speak for themselves: you're not doing anyone any favors and you could make the discussion floor a lot safer and more welcoming for the people you're shouting over by shutting up

this is somewhat of a vent post & something i said i would not do again but has been plaguing me enough that i think getting it out might feel better. so. has anydoggy else been. Baffled and upset by nora sakavic’s refusal to speak on how terribly aftg has treated its characters of color? with the author of the series coming back with a new book and starting up on her online activity again, and questions of what she’d change about aftg bubbling up, it’s particularly glaring to me that we are all playing this very long game of pretend where we ignore how badly the non-white cast has been treated & her lack of thoughts on it

and i understand not wanting to bring up nicky and thea because people pick on her for it. i’m not trying to discredit nora sakavic’s terrible history of getting harrassed online by aftg fans. but i think it is very cynical, and it is very juvenile, and most of all very cruel, that she gets to ignore the very real ways the books have set up these characters to be hated. i think it’s obvious why the characters who get the most hate are the only canonical characters of color, and i think we do not get to treat this like a deliberate decision on the fandom’s part when the books have put these same characters in degrading and embarrassing and terrible positions in the first place. aftg is not a story about nice characters with clean pasts, but there is a very specific nastiness to the only characters of color being a brown man who sexually harasses and later assaults the main character, a black woman whose only scene is her lashing out at her love interest after being ignored for the first two books, and the japanese villain who gets maybe two lines of complexity before he goes back to being a terrible person. the white cast, in comparison, while not at all free from flaws, are never shown to commit mindless evil; all of their actions are ultimately justified. the book goes out of its way to give them concession after concession. we know exactly who to side with, because aftg tells us who these people are. does nicky’s assault ever get addressed in the books? does riko’s reasoning to be the way that he is ever gets more than briefly aluded to? is thea reserved even a shred of humanity or grace in her one scene?

anyway. it’s been years of talking about this and the fandom has been constantly hostile to criticism in this regard, and more recently any criticism at all, and it’s Grating to be on the other side of this discussion. it’s exhausting to know that in ten years we do not get even an acknowledgment besides the author saying she will not answer questions about nicky and thea anymore. it’s upsetting and it’s ugly and i wish no one had to talk about this again, but we do because what i thought was common sense has been washed away by a sudden influx of no-nuance adoration for the trilogy. basically i hope we all explode

two hours later edit: you're allowed to reblog this! sorry about the confusion

post s4 steddie fic where eddie, finally free of high school, realises he doesn’t know who he is without the rigid cliches he’s defined himself by his whole life. he doesn’t know who he is if he’s not performing and loudly declaring himself to be a freak just to desperately grapple for attention and respect.

eddie who, like steve, realises it’s all bullshit.

eddie, who’s jealous that steve so easily understands who he is and how he fits into his life, regardless of any jokes other people make at his expense. who accepts people wholeheartedly, despite the fact that cliches would have them hate each other.

steve, who helps teach eddie how to be himself, regardless of the ‘munson doctrine’ and what other people would define him as. who teaches eddie that being a ‘freak’ doesn’t actually define him, and he can find and enjoy interests outside of what society dictates he can.

eddie, who gets into sports, and enjoys drama, and music, and tv shows that teenaged him would’ve mocked and bullied him for years ago. eddie who grows and changes as he gets older, and isn’t constantly trapped in his performance of ‘the school drug-dealing freak’.

Batman Annual #25

Before Talia took him in, before he was dunked in the pit to have his memories restored, even when operating purely on survival instinct, he always split a meal with the other homeless people. It may not have been essential to his survival, but caring about and helping other people when he couldn’t even help himself was just always such an intrinsic part of Jason’s core.

Allison Hargreeves is being unfairly vilified?

Allison Hargreeves as in 'SA'd Luther' Allison Hargreeves? Allison Hargreeves as in 'confirmed Viktor's worst ongoing fears and anxieties just because Viktor was grieving his friend/stepson and it annoyed her' Allison Hargreeves? Allison Hargreeves 'contributed to the deaths of two of her siblings' Allison Hargreeves? Allison Hargreeves 'nothing anyone else has lost over the course of this nightmare matters as much as what I lost so I'm gonna fuck everything up potentially irreparably' Allison Hargreeves?

That Allison Hargreeves? I mean don't get me wrong I like her but she's very much a villain right now. She's an interesting villain, a compelling villain, a better villain than Reggie since we actually know wtf her problem is and we wish things hadn't turned out this way. But a villain all the same.

i don't think allison is a villain. at best, i'd say she's an antihero. at worst, she was a catalyst for viktor's arc in season three.

i would like to start by saying that i'm not defending allison's actions. i think what she did was wrong. however, i don't think she deserves all the hate that she's gotten. she's a character that is very morally gray, and people continue to paint her in solely black or white.

what i try to convey in this... very long post is that there's a reason for what allison does in season three. the question of if she’s a villain or not can be debated, but i believe that the reasons for her actions don’t make her a villain.

a big reason why the umbrella academy is such an incredible show is that all the umbrellas are flawed and nuanced, and despite it all they love. all of the umbrellas have their faults, and allison is no different.

in season three allison has lost all hope. she thinks she will never see her child again, her husband is dead, the world is ending, and to her it seems like her siblings don't give a shit. amidst all the chaos and the whirlwind of her life, she needs something that she's used to. something she knows how to navigate.

so she turns to luther. and she gets the comfort she's looking for but it's not right.

allison and luther's relationship is something that has been a topic of many debates in this fandom. i don't really want to get into it right now, but they've always been a person of comfort to each other. allison wants to feel loved and cared for, and she thinks she can get that comfort from luther.

allison is naturally selfish. she's used to getting what she wants. she's used to having the world at her fingertips. and yet almost everything she's held close to her heart has been ripped away from her. and she's never getting it back.

in season three she falls back onto her old habits, rumoring people left and right with no consideration for others. it makes sense because it's the only way she knows how to get what she wants.

and then she rumors luther. she doesn't want to lose him either, and she thinks that he's choosing sloane over her (which is true, but she thinks he's leaving forever. she thinks she'll lose him too). but she almost instantly realizes what she's done, almost instantly tries to take it away.

as for her relationship with viktor, that's another can of worms. in season one, allison is the only one really trying to mend that relationship with viktor. but it's a rocky road. allison snaps at viktor, viktor snaps at allison. these two have had tension from the very start. eventually, that bond had to snap.

at the start of season three, viktor is the only one that really tries to help allison. he stands up for her, and comforts her after she returns from la. but by episode three allison is so consumed by her grief that she's already clashing with viktor.

and when harlan makes an appearance, it just gets worse. harlan is like a son to viktor. someone viktor can care for. and when viktor turns that care and attention away from allison and instead towards harlan, it hurts. why is viktor allowed to have his child when allison will never get to see claire again?

in season three luther tells viktor that allison has “always been good to you (viktor)”. but there comes a point where your love and gratitude towards someone can morph into bitterness and hate.

the reason i say allison is a catalyst for viktor in season three is because the writers needed someone to contest his ideas. someone that will create a struggle for viktor that he will ultimately come out of with a new lesson learned. and allison is a great contender for that position. the show needs conflict in order to have an engaging story at all, and tense relationships between the siblings can be seen throughout all three seasons. (luther and diego in season one, ben and klaus in season two)

as for the deaths of her siblings, do you really think she wanted that to happen? she doesn’t want to lose any more people, that’s the main driver of her character shift in this season.

allison turns towards reginald because she sees it as the only option left. klaus does the same thing, so why is it any different when allison does it? she didn’t know her siblings would die in the process.

allison isn’t even the only sibling that has contributed to a sibling’s (almost) death. viktor slashes her throat in season one, ben sacrifices himself to save the world, and luther willingly walks into the room to talk to reginald. how is that allison’s fault?

i think this is also why five gives his talk to viktor, not allison. he understands what allison is going through on some level, understands the despair of losing those who are close to you. understands being willing to do anything to get them back. even though he quite loudly disagrees with allison making a deal with reginald, it's because he knows she's getting tricked. reginald never had their best interests at heart.

they’ve all lost people, and they all react to that loss in different ways. in season 1, when diego finds that patch was killed, he instantly wants to go for revenge. he plans on going after hazel and cha cha but five inevitably talks him out of it.

allison doesn’t have that influence. in fact, diego suggests to instead let that grief out through anger. i don’t think it was a very good solution in the end.

and despite all that, she wants to redeem herself. she tries to tell viktor the truth, she admits that she made the plan for all of them. she kills reginald and she’s the one that pushes the button at the end of season three. there’s so much left that we don’t know. did allison know what would happen when she pressed the button? did she know what reginald’s real plan was?

but in the end, allison is the reality of a person who has lost those who are closest to her. it’s probably the best job the writers have done while showing trauma and grief. i don’t think allison is a villain, and i think that accusing her of solely caring about herself is unfair.

Funny how these edgelords will disown and hate on the original ATLA for being made by white guys ,even though said white guys went through the painstaking effort to make everything as respectful and accurate towards the cultures that they were influenced by as possible.

Meanwhile we have people who let NATLA get away with sexism, miscasting races as other races, using Google translate and literal gibberish for writing, and other things purely because non-white people were making it.

Let’s not forget M. Night is very much NOT a white person too. He managed to be extremely inaccurate and white-washy with his entire movie.

Are we really just to the point where we determine the merit of cultural and racial representation based solely on the figureheads of the property? If Bryan and Mike were doing everything in their power to be respectful, why are we beating them down, especially when none of the criticisms against them have anything to do with the representation in the show itself and solely to do with the race they are? Can we stop excusing disrespect and bad representation purely because the face of it isn’t white? I thought we were past this.

Here’s the thing with people shipping Alastor, I could not care less about who people ship Alastor with or whether they ship him at all, what I do care about though is people making him allo.

This is one of the few cannon ace (possibly aro) characters out there and he can 100% be shipped in verity of ways without ignoring he is ace or aroace.

Make him aroace but still platonicly obsessed with Lucifer or Vox.

Make him sex repulsed or indifferent it doesn’t really matter (I could 100% see him having sex with someone for entertainment purposes just like I can see him being sex repulsed).

Even make him Demi/grey-ace if you must show him reciprocating sexual attraction.

Bonus points if he’s aro and you play around with platonic relationships/QPRs.

I know at the end of the day he is a fictional character and people will do what they want, but please listen to aro/ace fans when we ask you not completely ignore his sexuality when there are so many ways you can still play around with his characterization without disrespecting one of the few cannon ace characters to exist in TV.