so far the only plans i have are in the form of a bad summary so!
a toddler too young to be placed in cryogenic hybernation, the reader was raised by those who stayed behind on pandora, the only world she had ever known. her father, a military man who retreated with the rest, and her late mother, a biologist who chose the other side. the reader quickly took on spider as her younger brother, only a baby when he was abandoned beside her, but while he quickly took to the trees and the sully children who were close to his own age, she happily stayed in the lab.
the reader will also probably have chronic headaches (because i'm self indulgent) so she stays in the lab just in case a bad one hits. and because of this she's only met neteyam a handful of times. i'm thinking also that her mother originally was going to have an avatar, but there was a complication and it had to be restarted, then she died before it was fully grown. and then because of the complication the new avatar ends up more closely matching the reader's dna or something.
that's all i have right now because i'm playing sims and only thinking about avatar in the background of my brain lmao
Its the (baby can’t be put in cryo) that did it huh?? OH I LOVE IT!!!! 🥹🥹🥹 I honestly can’t wait!
4 notes
·
View notes
My unpopular opinion is that in languages with grammatical gender like french, it does make sense for Murderbot to be referred to by whatever pronoun is usually used for robots or constructs. (In french, therefore, grammatical masculine.) Because there are no traditional « it » pronouns in these languages for objects, and while there are neo-pronouns, they are things one must choose for themselves. Do you honestly think MB actually spent time thinking about its pronouns?! No it didn’t. On forms it picks « non-applicable ». When people ask it what pronouns they should use, its honest opinion is « why do you even need to talk about me. Just don’t fucking do that. Don’t think about me either. Just fucking stop perceiving me altogether! »
Thinking about what pronouns to use probably makes it way more uncomfortable than letting people call it what they’ve already been calling it. Making a conscious choice about its identity? And telling other people about it??? No thanks bye, it’s just gonna walk into the ocean now, see you never.
Lbr it probably thinks the only bots that get fancy pronouns are comfort units, and the pronouns are probably shoved into them by humans same as everything else. MB would meet a bot using a neopronoun and it would wish it could barf. Because in a language like french, he/him and she/her, when applied to objects, ARE fulfilling the function of the english « it ». Nobody is saying the table is a woman or related to feminity in any way outside of stand-up comedy; when it comes to objects grammatical gender really has fuckall to do with human gender even if we use the same words. Even animal species names have grammatical gender and everyone gets that there are male and female turtles even if the word « turtle » is a female word, it’s not that confusing.
(I know this is strange when your language has different pronouns for people and for objects, but understand that english uses the same word to indicate if I’m addressing one or many people, and that is confusing to me.)
TL;DR; stop harassing international fans for not getting the correct MB pronoun in english right off the bat. Yes in english calling it « he » or « her » or « them » is upsetting because it’s projecting an identity unto it. But same goes for trying to get a foreign language translation to use a pronoun intended to express or showcase an identity (or even a lack of one!). Murderbot has not thought about it this hard, refuses to think about it this hard -> and that is its only canon accurate gender identity.
129 notes
·
View notes
melanie's relationship to the slaughter is interesting for many reasons, but one of them is how very little she seems to neither enjoy nor be tortured by it. the main difference between slaughter and desolation is how personal it is, and that's reflected in their avatars - all desolation avatars seems to on some level enjoy the pain they cause. but beyond that, most avatars get something out of their status, like how jon says he likes some of the power and knowledge he gets, or how daisy likes the purpose of the hunt. even those who have nothing positive to say, like oliver, act more like a victim to their entity instead, where they themselves and their pain and fear are actully feeding it. but melanie always seems to speak about the slaughter like it merely numbs her. like, at least during her time as an avatar, there's no space for enjoyment nor fear nor any other emotion beyond anger. and i really like that, because once again, the slaughter is impersonal. we hardly ever get an actual description of the perpetrator in slaughter statements. it reduces someone from person into weapon
195 notes
·
View notes
hm hm hm i feel like this will be really interesting to read with the knowledge of korra and how that effected her instead.... because korra (from my limited knowledge so i could be talking out my ass here) knew she was the avatar at an early age and DID get that community. she had katara and her parents, she had her mentors, she was isolated from the real world during so and perfected the elements other than air (which i kinda recall her struggling with and how its the opposite element of earth so im excited to see if those kinda play out :3) and she was more eager to be the avatar and the excitement and significance it brought (which was a bit clouded by her being sheltered but also would have been expected more before the war impacted things)
i also remember matty saying kyoshi struggled with earth bending (which im super excited to get to and see/see her journey and how it will differ) but!!! i just think its really fun how theyre kinda off the bat setting up this expectation and new grounding for readers who have a past grasp of the avatar universe. even as someone who isnt super familiar with the lore, i know enough to recognize that oh! thats something new!! so just kudos to the writer(s?) for just setting this up to be something very different and in a natural way :3
35 notes
·
View notes
The misogynistic pitfall of anti-misogyny morals (ATLA and Artemis Fowl)
[Note: everyone both suffers from and upholds misogyny no matter what. It's everywhere and in everyone's subconscious biases. People of all genders make the world a better when they take that effort to listen to others' experiences and recognise we're all human.]
‘Show, don’t tell’ is one of the most fundamental rules of writing because nothing takes you out of a story like battling with what you’re reading for the right interpretation. It forces you to back out of the reading experience and re-process everything.
This is where the pitfall of anti-misogyny morals lies in otherwise very well-written media like ATLA and Artemis Fowl.
In the Book 1 finale of ATLA, the protagonists arrive in the Northern Water Tribe where Katara is told she cannot learn martial Waterbending because she is a girl. Katara and the other protagonists revolt against this and the episode ends with Katara being able to join the boys’ class. Similarly, in Artemis Fowl (Book 1), Holly Short is the first female Recon officer. She revolts against surrounding male officers who tell her she should not be in Recon because she is a woman and she continues despite it.
Surely, the interpretation is meant to be “Don’t exclude or look down on people just because they’re girls/women”. However, what do they actually say about girls/women at large?
In ATLA, we don’t see any other girls discuss their inability to learn martial Waterbending, either for or against. We don’t see any other girls join Pakku’s lessons even after he acknowledges Katara as a master. When the Fire Nation invade, we don’t see the women’s healing or general Waterbending skill come in handy. The interpretation you could reasonably come to is no girl or woman in the Northern Water Tribe wants to learn martial Waterbending or has anything to contribute with their Waterbending.
In Artemis Fowl, we learn of one other female officer in the LEP: Lili Frond. But Short balks at the idea of her being in Recon because she’s a “bimbo”. In other words, Frond cannot be Recon because she is unintelligent in a specifically feminine way. Of course, this could reveal Short’s biases. She’s been so degraded for being a woman, she’s internalised that femininity is not appropriate for her profession. However, Frond only ever appears in reference to her rising ranks because she’s an attractive woman riding her family’s coattails. We never hear of other female officers trying to follow Short’s lead or involve any other female fairy. The other prominent female characters in the book are Juliette Butler, who’s a distractable teenage maid that Short mind-controls, and Angeline Fowl, who spends the book catatonic in grief over her husband’s disappearance. Minor roles. The interpretation you could reasonably come to is no woman advances in the LEP on her own skill or has anything to contribute in the central kidnapping plot.
When you set up an anti-misogyny plot in a piece of media that doesn’t lend much agency or interest to other girls/women, it becomes an issue of ‘telling’ not ‘showing’. “Girls can do anything” becomes “Well, Katara and Holly Short can do anything”.
12 notes
·
View notes
I really don’t think Harry Potter is particularly worse than other franchises either in its fictional politics or in how its revenue is used to cause political harm in any way other than how notorious JKR has made herself as a public figure. Arguments about it seem less about any content or crime unique to the property and more about the spectacular position it’s found itself in where supporting or hating it is more about your stance on transphobia (and increasingly antisemitism with that game coming out) than it is about the content of the series.
11 notes
·
View notes