#....they're not making any real points. they're saying ''i personally hate xyz even if it is harmless so i am going to call anyone who does | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

cashandprizes · 10 months

Text

you... are trying to get my ass in trouble. I'm into it. Thanks for sending the ask <3

Link to the choose violence post here!

1. the character everyone gets wrong

It's probably going to be Alexis. I support women's rights and wrongs, but I think she was in a damned if you damned if you don't situation. Is she just gonna let Sam bleed out? He lived and found his soulmate, or whatever, and seems pretty damn happy all things considered. I want to die as much as the next person but... idk. Doesn't seem like there were any good choices.

2. a compelling argument for why your fave would never top or bottom

This discourse doesn't really apply to me because I'm a 100% switch on the bdsm test (yes, this is documented) and so I always love switching. And since my fave is either Guy on a good day or Regulus on a bad day, there is only the switch variant. I was never that kind of shipper, even back in my hardcore anime days.

3. screenshot or description of the worst take you've seen on tumblr

This will sooooo get me in trouble. But between the "I want to break Alexis's ribcage" and the "people who don't hate [redacted] ship are [long list of words calling people evil and abusive]" and the "if you write dark content or support Erik writing darker content you don't care about people who have experienced xyz" they're all pretty bad. I will not be screenshotting even though I think there's mutual blocking going on, but just know that I'm pretty sure the only reason I didn't also get death threats a month ago was because I had already blocked that person over something else.

Oh also? I hate the idea that the fandom needs to be welcoming to minors as a whole. I love when youths are into a fandom and make friends online, because that's what I did when I got on Tumblr pretty much a decade ago! I'd just like them to do it in their space for minors while I do things in my space for adults. I'm gonna be a whore and I don't need somebody's mama scrolling through their Tumblr and trying to be mad at me when I clearly say minors DNI. I don't understand why I have to make myself kid friendly when I tag my shit and make my stance clear. Literally what it says on the tin.

4. what was the last straw that made you finally block that annoying person?

I did at one point go through the Alexis tag and just block... so many fucking people for bad Alexis takes. I block A LOT of people without ages in their bio. I tend to block liberally, actually. Um, something that really annoyed me was realizing people couldn't understand don't like don't read. Instant block.

9. worst part of canon

This is a joke but I want more worldbuilding lore of how society functions. I love the lore for like the sky gods and all the old magic but I JUST WANT TO KNOW PRACTICAL SHIT. What happens when vampires go in the sun and does it change with age? How alive are vampires? Why don't my wolf shifters have knots, this is a real problem for me. How big are magical cities? How big is Shaw security? How big are most packs? Do all shifters form some sort of pack/collective group? How do empowered people get access to empowered resources or the internet or radio or tv? Do vampires piss?

I need answers.

Also. When will Erik finally write me the Avior BA using Calico's fic?

More realistically, I wasn't super satisfied with the Quinn ending which isn't a big deal, but I definitely felt like Darlin got wubified by Sam and David at the end. I'm sure some people liked them taking control, but that's the last thing I'd want. Just personality differences and also not the worst thing.

10. worst part of fanon

Why is everyone white?

I've never not been black so I'm used to this in fandom spaces at this point, but goddamn. Racism really is everywhere. Minority solidarity is more mythical than fucking unicorns.

#themonotonysyndrome #asks #speed run #i cannot put this in the tag or else people will fight me... if they don't have me blocked already lmao #redacted

3 notes · View notes

sage-nebula · 2 years

Text

Probably going to lose followers, but I don't care, I need to get this off my chest, and the best way to do that is with a meme, so here it is. This is mostly about him showing up in PokéMas where he doesn't belong (and the TRio don't belong there either, and neither does any other character from the anime or any of the various manga), but is also my general feelings about him as a protagonist. He should have left after DP at the absolute latest, and his character has really suffered for it. But while that's unfortunate for him, it's also unfortunate for those of us in the audience who wish that we could have an interesting protagonist, so I'm more annoyed by him now than I feel sorry for him.

Copy-pasting a comment I left on Reddit after someone asked me what I meant when I said that staying on as a protagonist for too long ruined his character under the cut:

Although Ash has always wanted accolades and trophies, the point of his character (originally) was not to be a super strong trainer who always won battles all the time, but rather to be a protagonist that approached the world of pokémon with the same love and wonder that the audience most likely did. So the fact that Pikachu lost to Snivy or whatever—idgaf about that, that doesn't bother me. I started with the OS, I've seen far worse.

So when I say that Ash's character was ruined because he stuck around too long, what I mean is that while other characters in the show (sans the TRio for the same reason) got to have character arcs where they not only accomplished new things, but also grew as characters, Ash doesn't get to have that because they're not allowed to end his story. OS -> DP was a proper progression; we saw him start out as a cocky brat who made mistakes all the time and threw tantrums and sulking fits, to a seasoned trainer who was still snarky as all hell and had flaws, but had made a lot of progress both in his professional (for lack of a better word) goals and his character as a person.

But the problem is, there was nowhere really for him to go after Sinnoh. Oh sure, they could have him try the Unova League, the Kalos League, etc—but in terms of personal growth he had plateaued, and unfortunately, that makes for a boring as shit protagonist. The "reset" in BW was as much to coincide with the games (because the theme behind the BW games was that they were supposed to be a "back to basics" a la the RGB games) but also because they had to try to find something for Ash to do, some way to allow him growth. Only that wasn't received well at all because of people who hated the fact that he had his skill set back, so then in XYZ they decided to make him an Ace Trainer who had the remainder of any negative traits smoothed away (save for that one teeny tiny arc in Snowbelle when he pouted a bit because he lost a couple battles) and won almost every battle he was ever in. But then people threw fits over the Kalos League, and on top of that XYZ was beaten ratings-wise by slice of life anime like Yo-Kai Watch, so for SM they made him act more childlike (but still without any noticeable character flaws and thus no room for growth), but had him win the League. And now in Journeys they're keeping that, but it's even worse because his strongest pokémon were just HANDED to him (Dragonite, Gengar, Lucario) and, again, he has no real flaws and no room for growth.

From OS -> DP, Ash was a great protagonist. He was such a dynamic and interesting character because he messed up, he made mistakes, he could be a jerk sometimes, but ultimately he had a good heart, was trying his best, and was improving and growing. But the writers were forced to stagnate, and as a result he's not really a character anymore, but instead a vessel for the audience wholesale. And because the audience throws massive shitfits every time he loses or doesn't get the very best of everything (e.g. the Kalos League even though that loss was justified, Lana getting Eevee instead of Ash, Gou getting anything at all ever, etc), he's now had his place in the Masters 8 basically handed to him on a platter, with the assurance he'll make it through to Leon because anything else would cause the fandom to have a conniption. There are literally zero stakes because we already know how this will go down. And while it would be great if they were just trying to write him off as the protagonist so they could tell new, fresh stories with new, fresh protagonists, replacing Ash means replacing Pikachu, and his specific Pikachu is the franchise mascot, so that will never happen. Much like Ash himself, we are stuck.

TL;DR: Ash sticking around too long ruined his character because when a character doesn't have an end to their arc, they just don't have an arc, period. Ash is no longer really a character, and it's REALLY noticeable if you go back and watch the earlier series (namely OS -> DP).

#not tagging this because people who actually like him shouldn't have to see this in his character tag #but I needed it off my chest because I am just. listen I understand he'll never leave the anime #and I understand why that is and I've accepted it even tho it's detrimental to everyone (including him)#but to put him in the gacha made for games blorbos? it's like I can't escape him fml

7 notes · View notes

concubuck · 2 years

Note

(( Do you have any guidelines as far as limits go, for those extremes? Stuff you want avoided, or not talked about in detail, or TWed? Things you don't mind a mun bringing up during plotting, but you don't want an anon dropping on you out of nowhere? Like extreme gore, or assault, or ageplay, raceplay, etc? Sorry if this has been asked, I checked your rules and didn't see anything about it ))

((As far as Alastor's limitations go, he won't do anything involving racism or raceplay, because he saw/got enough of that when he was human and it'd make him feel too grody/guilty to even touch it. He wouldn't even be able to think about sex at that point, he'd just be lying there like "what would grandma think?" (This only applies to human racism, like, if an imp goes "can you play the prejudiced succubus and say Demon Slurs at me" he's gonna be like "I have no emotional connection to this scenario! Sure!") He also won't do incest play with his partner playing a maternal figure—or even call someone "mommy"—for similar "it hits too close to home and feels gross" reasons.

The reason this isn't in the rules is because I wouldn't mind if people ask him about these things, because if people ask me OOC about a kink, then I write a boring dry explanation, but if people ask Alastor IC about a kink, then I get to write his vivid in character perspective on it, and also maybe get to write him delicately dodging the question in a way that makes it sound like his answer is "you know I'm up for anything. ;)" That's what I'm here to do—write Alastor being Alastor—not write boring dry explanations.

As far as my limits go, I've got some things I'm uncomfortable with, but I've been on the internet long enough to know that if somebody provides a handy dandy list of all the things they're uncomfortable with, then the second a troll develops a grudge against them, the troll treat that list as Vulnerable Weak Spots To Hit For Extra Damage. I've only got squicks, not triggers, so you don't have to worry about giving me an accidental panic attack.

The one thing I'll mention—because this isn't a squick thing, it's a personal preference thing—is I won't have him interacting with real life (in)famous people. You can say Alastor hooked up with a notorious serial killer cannibal. You can't say he hooked up with Jeffrey Dahmer. You can say he hooked up with Hannibal Lecter. I just don't want to write funny little make-believe stories about horrible people whose victims' families/friends are still alive.

If someone sends something I don't think oughta be displayed on the dash I can put it behind a read more and/or add warnings as appropriate; if it's something I simply don't feel comfortable answering or don't want to answer, I can just ignore the ask, no harm no foul—I won't hate you for sending it.

But please note that if I don't answer something immediately, that doesn't necessarily mean I don't like it—it might mean I went "oh this is REALLY GOOD" and I'm hoarding it for two weeks until I can draw something or write a juicy reply.

If you've ever got any doubts, I always appreciate communication and I'm never bothered by somebody DMing me to go "hey is XYZ okay with you?" But since I know y'all got that social anxiety and DMs are scary, if you want to just risk it and plop an anon straight in my inbox, that's okay, you can do that.))

#((actually you can't say he hooked up with Hannibal but it's because Hannibal is his therapist))#((he's one of the few pro cannibalism therapists in Pride))#((before Alastor became a succubus he went to Hannibal for his ADHD meds))#anonymous #ask #ooc

2 notes · View notes

fedorahead · 6 months

Text

random thoughts

maybe the hypermobile audhd depresso fibro fatigue body wrong brain broken group of people is all one evolutionary branch. we get a lot of shit done that people without these weird clustering disorders can do, and most of us are still out here existing in some way, affecting the world around us even if it isn't always societally valued. i don't want to be lumped into some tribe of these people because, like all people, the majority are cunts. but also, it is interesting to see how often all of these things are comorbid and the real defining difference between all of us is whether we believe each others' tales of their experiences.

i hate people in general, why wouldn't i hate people who have similarities to me that have rendered them some degree of also alienated and outcast? like, maybe it's all one systemic difference from people whondon't have all these issues, and that's why they're popping up more and more. in a society built for people with all these things, very few of us would be rendered disabled. every human is protected from the sun by clothing, and can burn without any. why wouldn't the next step be people supported by orthotics? it's inconvenient but if shit were readily available to accomodate our needs, we largely wouldn't be as miserable or unproductive. if all of society had all the issues this group of people have, we would be accomodated for and maybe thrive. because once you address the nerfs, there are biological advantages to, say, hypermobility and reaching weird angles, autism and the way thoughts are less restrained by social expectation and traditions, the clarity and focus depression can grant, the safety hypervigilance *can* bring, the firsthand empathy feeling pain regularly (again, if it were accomodated) can extend to others, the hyperfocus and creativity adhd brings to the table.......... if we built a world where this shit were expected and made that world more comfortable for everyone struggling with it, we could do some crazy cool shit.

so maybe it's not about whether this person actually has xyz diagnosis or struggle, it's about whether or not they're an asshole and deserve to be in pain all their life. (the answer would sometimes be yes except that people weaponize that struggle and use it to get ahead while stepping on others, too, but also. those people would probably not change and would do the same shit even if it weren't chronic pain they were weaponizing)

anyway, maybe lots of people really do have all these struggles and we're in a turning point in society where they are accomodated and accoladed in some people (often shitty ones) nd punished in other people, and that's just a facet of society rather than a sign anyone actually has anything wrong with them.

the problem is the lack of empathy people weaponizing these traits show to others who are struggling, often more than them. because it's easy to be beloved and pitied when you're cute and your whole mask is some chibi waving and cheering "ganbattemasu" and making a fist in determination, but maybe you don't really have any room to speak on the person whose mask is brash and slips during total meltdowns and gets a bad reputation for both sides. maybe it's the divide in the tribe between the autists and the non-autists who are all struggling with something? but people genuinely find autists offputting even when we're not doing anything wrong, and if you haven't got that experience your entire life, you're not gonna estimate the capacities of those who have. so you can't say "x is easy" or "anyone can do y" because the barrier, the social and traumatic barrier of being an actual alien, is nonexistent for you and you can't perceive where all its tendrils reach. but maybe it's not autistic vs allistic. maybe it's empathy vs very little or no empathy.

i dunno. i just wish people would stop being cunts, and also stop acting like their capacities set some standard for others. i can juggle. it's easy for me to juggle very poorly. i can teach kids to juggle, the very basics, in a day or two. is it fair for me to exclaim "i lost the use of my hands in 2015, and worked my way back and can juggle now, so joint issues aren't a real barrier and anyone can juggle if they try"? or is that wilfully (or otherwise) ignoring the obstacles that others have to it that i lack (like the fact that i was taught in childhood and have practiced on and off for 20+ years)?

it is annoying to watch people have less obstacles, do better, and get told how strong/hardworking/determined they are though. like the beaten down of us are there for a reason, not just through some personality flaw. you never see the battles others are fighting in private or whatever.

i'll also add, in terms of social treatment, being perceived as a cute girl and wearing a mask of determination even while you spiral is absolutely the easiest combo to get support. people who don't have that combo are fucked. i can say that pretty solidly having experienced both sides lol

0 notes

straightfromthetorturedpoetsdept · 2 years

Text

Calling someone with ASD stupid because you disagree with the implication of their words that you pulled out of your ass crack is...... something alright.

How many times does a person with asd have to tell you read the words I used and show me where I said that xyz and you respond with words like "imply" or just paraphrase my argument with a ridiculous strawman, you're arguing in bad faith and you're being a little ableist.

Asd people do not communicate in implication. If I tell you that I am communicating exactly what I mean and not anything that you're reading into it (i especially hate when ppl say things like you said ONLY this groups will be affected by this when I never said it was ONLY one person's problem. Don't put words in my mouth bitch), it is on YOU to accommodate that.

Understand that regardless of whether or not you THINK i said something, if I didn't write those words, I did not imply that meaning. It's fucking ableist to get angry at people for words that they never spoke themselves.

A recent example: you are implying that black women are only going to be affected by terf ideology.

No, i am not. At all. Terf ideology affects all women but black women always get hit the hardest with any type of bigotry. This is just reality. Nobody protects them, as a society they are left to hang out and dry. So when I tell you, hey, this will harm black women, I am not telling you that I think black women are the ONLY ones affected by it.

They are hit the hardest though because racism is nasty and targets them the worst. In every aspect. Child birth, rape, murder, etc etc etc. It's not because they're men or I think they're manly. It's quite literally because society will use terf ideology to attack black women they don't like.

Like, if you can point to where I said that black women are not women, I would love to hear it. But you can't, because I never said that. I SAID RACISTS will use terf ideology to attack black women.

It really makes me mad when people argue about shit that is said in their heads, because I didn't fucking say that. Like argue the actual content of the post. Show me that black women are not dehumanized, are not targeted as trans women even if they are cis and say they are cis, show me where ciara wasn't misgendered. Show me scientific studies that prove that terfism isn't a stepping stone to the alt right.

You can't because it doesn't exist. In fact, black women have been talking about how transphobia hurts them for years now. For decades. I am not the one who is taking away their womanhood but for me to be quiet about the people who are normalizing that behavior, has never been who I am.

I have never allowed that type of racism to go unchecked and I never will. If you do not want to accept the fact that gatekeeping womanhood will gatekeep some black women who are cis from it as well as a result, that's on YOU and your own internalized racism. You cannot be an activist and claim you're for black women when you use terf ideology that harms them.

Not because black women are manlier or whatever but because racists will claim black women are not real women. 🙄 it's very simply to understand my argument and i dont know why you NTs are putting words in my mouth that I never said.

It's dishonest and it's lazy arguing and debating.

#ableism

0 notes

iamanartichoke · 2 years

Note

People argue about what even is canon in the first place anyway. Even the starting point can't be agreed upon.

Including the 2nd ask bc I'm assuming they're from the same nonny? (pfft like more than one person would send me asks in one day lmao)

Anyway ... I mean, I'm mostly ambivalent on the first point re: people disagreeing over canon, bc ... like, idek where to start on all the shit that I could say about fans' relationship to and interaction with canon or even what canon technically is, like, by definition (and therefore what even qualifies as canon).

But I did want to address the second point bc I think it's a good opportunity to just sort of toss this hot take into the void: "Stating that fiction is subjective will ruffle some people's feathers at the minute" - so what? So. What. Fiction is subjective, all art is subjective, and that's something that is true, has been true, and will be true regardless of some fans' decision to just decide that things don't work that way.

They can get their feathers ruffled as much as they like, but people need to learn that their personal emotions and feelings about A Thing don't mean that they can just decide that That Thing is suddenly something else (or decide something else is suddenly That Thing). It's just like how words like gaslighting and narcissistic and abusive and torture and trigger have become so diluted bc people a) don't actually understand what gaslighting, for example, is, and therefore cannot possibly call it out with any real degree of accuracy, so they just end up throwing a really weighted term at something as basic, human, and everyday as telling a lie. Or an emotional argument becomes abuse, or being squicked by something makes it a trigger.

OR, on the opposite side of the coin, b) maybe they actually do know what gaslighting or abuse is, but then they will categorize anything that remotely falls within the realm of the same definition as being gaslighting or abuse. I, personally, for example, really hate the way that some people claim Mobius tortures and enslaves Loki. It drives me up the wall when I see those takes because - okay, are these terms technically correct? Yeah, technically, which is what they use to justify it - "Well, this source defines "torture" as xyz, and Mobius is clearly doing z, so Mobius is a torturer." But words mean shit, so are you really asking me to accept that Mobius tortured Loki just as Thanos tortured Loki? Yes? Okay, how? No? Okay, why not?

Here's the thing - Mobius never laid a hand on Loki, nor did he sadistically, literally play with Loki's mind. Remember, Loki was being influenced by the mind stone in Avengers and the Other had a constant connection to Loki's consciousness. Thanos (and the Other) tortured Loki. Mobius ... was mean to him during an interrogation and also lied about Loki being responsible for Frigga's death (and I've said it before, Mobius was being an unreliable narrator in this scene and anyone who believes - because of Mobius - that Loki actually killed Frigga is both factually wrong and also an idiot). Like, Mobius is shitty to Loki but Thanos is torturous to Loki. The two are not the same, regardless of how they may technically be defined. By calling the former torture, consistently, bc his behavior meets some arbitrary technical definition, you're actively diluting the word bc you feel like its weight lends credibility to your argument that Mobius sucks.

... I got off-topic for a second there, I'm sorry. But back to my point: fiction is subjective and I don't care whose feathers I ruffle by saying that. It's true, and acting like it's not so that you can feel like you have the "right" interpretation of the character (thus giving you personal validation which, I'm sorry to say, the Emperor thought that he was wearing fabulous new clothes but that didn't change the reality that he was butt ass naked) is just ... *gesticulates wildly bc words fail me* shitty.

#also yes i do realize that there are degrees of subjectivity and a certain amount of objectivity applies #to art and fiction but i'm not gonna go into all that #suffice it to say i have a degree i know how fiction works #interestingly i just saw a post the other day that struck me bc well #it's an ernest hemingway quote and he's talking about how the symbolism in the old man and the sea doesn't actually exist #he's like 'the sea is a fucking sea. the old man is an old man. that's it'#and i mean yes he was most likely drunk and just firing off some annoyed reply bc he was an unpleasant person especially later in life #and thus should be taken with a grain of salt but my point in bringing it up is to say that hemingway asserting there's no symbolism #doesn't negate the symbolism that ended up in the novel. that book is consistently taught in english classes #especially in college #it's taught and analyzed and various meanings and interpretations have been extracted from it and those things don't suddenly become *wrong #just bc hemingway was like 'no i didn't intend that.' - once consumed by an audience the material becomes what the audience makes it #death of the author is actually a pretty significant thing in literature #tld;dr: fiction doesn't stop being subjective just bc you want it to the end #incidentally the line 'people are heartless about turtles bc its heart beats after it dies #but the old man thought i have such a heart too' or something like that i can't remember #is just *chef's kiss* that's a raw ass line #anyway sorry i have to go now bc my shift is over lmao rip my post i don't have time to revise #asks #a nonny mouse #charlotte replies #also none of this is aimed at you anon your ask just happens to be my soapbox

111 notes · View notes

butwhatifidothis · 3 years

Note

Lysitheas mentality is very much about doing the best with the time she has and not letting herself be limited by her traumatic experience despite the toll it took on her health. All she wants is to provide for her parents and she never once blames the Church for what happened to her in canon. Captain is just butchering every single character and uses their corpses as mouthpieces for his headcanons. I dont understand how you can manage reading this, I can barely get through you notes.

A lot of the times I don't even really like calling them headcanons really - that implies that it can be congruent with the canon work. So often we see ideas Cap'n spits out that flat out go against canon, so at the most generous they'd be parts of an AU more than they'd be headcanons.

Like, for example, Byleth losing their humanity in SS is flat out wrong. Period. That is explicitly not what happens in that route. They're worried about Rhea and are happy to find her alive - from just that alone, that's not how someone "without humanity" behaves. Cap'n saying that that is what happens to Byleth, even as a headcanon, would be wrong, since the idea is actively shot down by canon. Same as Byleth "neutrally drifting" to the Church's side being the reason why they side with them and not Edelgard. Again, that's not what happens - just because the default for the player is SS doesn't mean that it's not Byleth as a character deciding to stand against Edelgard and side with Rhea. This one at least has the problem of "is Byleth an avatar or a character" muddying the waters, but hell, even with that mud, when you have the choice, you can still actively choose SS. The headcanon is still wrong.

Like... it's like saying "Sylvain was never really abused by Miklan, he's just lying about Miklan to make himself look like a victim to manipulate people," as an off-the-cuff example of something similar to get my point across. That's how incorrect some of these "headcanons" of Cap'n's are. It's flat out wrong and only serves to severely mischaracterize a character for XYZ reason. It doesn't even qualify as a headcanon - it's just mindless character bashing.

Reading through it is... something lmao. Not even just the mischaracterization, but like. The fic itself is just of such low quality, on as objective a level as writing is allowed.

Below the cut since it got long lmao

The prose is just so much to read through - the majority of it is just Edelgard feeling sadge about how horrible her life is and how everyone hates her and how she's so ugly and how she's so lonely, but there’s rarely anything of real substance. Her thoughts are rarely about her actually doing anything, and the rare times that they are ("I'm gonna help Jeralt, and this is how I'll do it") they rarely amount to her actually doing something (she doesn't actually do much to save Jeralt). It goes around in circles without there being much actual progression in any regard, repeating information that reader already knew and has known for a while.

Her actions are acknowledged as something that she knowingly and willfully chose to do, until they make her too mean, and then she was "outmaneuvered" and she "didn't know what TWS were doing." Then the fic pretends that it didn't sweep Edelgard's agency out the door and that Edelgard totally grew as a person, even though she tossed all accountability in the trash and proved that she has improved 0% as a character. It never has Edelgard take a step back and realize "huh, wait, maybe I wasn't betrayed by my friends, maybe I wasn't left behind and maybe I left my friends behind through my actions" - it's just a half-hearted "I'll do better!" without actually doing better (she stopped using Demonic Beasts - in this fic - but she's still working with TWS, which is the core problem but is something she just handwaves away). Same with Kronya - she's willfully mean, she's actively despicable, until those actions make her too mean, then she "didn't know what she was doing was even wrong," she's "almost an innocent."

Epithets. Ohhhh my god, the epithets. Cap'n wants to make a distinct difference between Edelgard being the Flame Emperor and Edelgard being El, which ey, neat idea! Playing around with identity is interesting! But not when you can't be consistent - that's when things get needlessly convoluted and annoying. Flame Emperor = Edelgard doing bad meanie mean stuff - except she calls herself that casually all the time. El is slightly more consistent (more innocent, nicer, etc.), but then you have Edelgard referring to herself as a "girl" - that thing that El is, not Edelgard - constantly. Flame Emperor is a shell of dogma and ideologies that protects the inner core of Edelgard, which is... El. And Edelgard. But Edelgard and El are two separate identities. Until they aren't. And then the Flame Emperor is just another epithet referring to Edelgard, not a shell. Until it is again. And then the question "wait, so is Edelgard both El and the Flame Emperor, similar to how Dimitri is both a "boar" and a prince? Is Edelgard still El deep down, and the Flame Emperor nothing of Edelgard's true self? Is Edelgard a separate, third identity with her own characteristics that differ from El or the Flame Emperor? What exactly is going on?” Like, this image I showed my sis sums up why this is so confusing:

Back to back, the Flame Emperor is used as a shell hiding the true Edelgard (as in, not the true Edelgard, but a tool she is using to hide her true self) and also just another way to refer to Edelgard, the same as saying "the young woman." Not only is it poor form to use the same epithet immediately following each other, but now the Flame Emperor's role in Edelgard’s identity is unclear.

This isn't even getting into how confusing it can be to a reader to constantly use epithets, even without the identity crisis angle Cap'n wants to go down, especially constantly using different epithets for one person. Waaay back when I first took a peak at Chapter 52 when that was the most recent chapter, the passages I looked at had Edelgard and Hanneman speak with each other. Edelgard was called the Emperor of Adrestia and the Flame Emperor. Hanneman is called the man, the scholar, and the academic. In snippets of one scene. With two people in it. And there are five different epithets between them. And they're used a good bit too. I've legit never came across something that uses so many epithets to refer to the same person - because remember, this is just one scene. That chapter as a whole, skimming through it, also has Edelgard be called Emperor, Emperor of Adrestia, and the Flame Emperor - oh boy, just what I wanted, three different versions of calling Edelgard an emperor! Two of which are constantly said in one chapter! Because that’s not repetitive at all! And this is what happens to pretty much all of the characters - can’t just say their name or a pronoun, nope, just slap on a title for that person. You have to keep track of every single epithet that applies to every single character, and every single character has so many epithets.

Character arcs are dropped immediately upon arrival all the time, or aren't focused on at all. Ferdinand, for the former, is presented with the horrifying realization that his father - and most of the notable nobility of Adrestia - have been involved with torturing children, and he's understandably distraught by it - until he instantly gets over it after one pep talk from his romantic love interest. Ingrid, for the latter, has had her whole "but do I really wanna be a knight tho" shit brought up often enough, but it's never really been developed much at all. There's no gradual change in Ingrid's beliefs, it's just "I believe this, then you tried to kill me and now I'm considering changing my lifelong dreams to conform to what you told me after not really budging on the idea."

Not showing a lick of the SS timeline but just saying that there was totally development in and between the characters (before the post ts portions hit that timeline) that gets transferred over to the CF timeline is just lazy writing. Period. It barely even qualifies as the "tell, don't show" misstep, since it's not even the text itself that's telling the reader this, but the author himself imposing Word of God to try and justify his poor writing decisions. How are we supposed to genuinely feel invested in Edelgard and Byleth’s relationship if the actual beginning of it - the one they had in the SS timeline - is never shown? That beginning which is crucial in the reader’s understanding of why their relationship seems to speedrun past any actual development? We’re given the sequel of a story, told the first installment was very super duper mega important to how the sequel goes about its story, and then never given the first installment. We have no context, we have no buildup, we have nothing, but we’re supposed to just accept that their relationship was so good until it just wasn’t.

And speaking of - Edelgard and Byleth’s love story makes no sense. Okay, so we’ve accepted the idea that CF’s romance is going better because of a residual connection the two of them formed during the SS timeline being so strong as to withstand the forces of time. If that is the case... why did Byleth kill Edelgard? Why did she side against her? What stopped her from saying “nope, I changed my mind, I am siding with my fave student ever”? Why did she agree to be the one to kill Edelgard? Sure, with this fic’s version of Edelgard that lacks even the knowledge of what agency is, you can maybe argue the case for her not trying to fix anything with the two of them (she’d probably Sadge and then do nothing to help herself, as she has been doing the entire fic), but what’s Byleth’s justification? Why’d she just go along with killing her lover? Why didn’t she just... not? Do that? Again, we just have to accept that Edelgard and Byleth were “unfairly torn apart by fate” when everything points to the two of them as individuals not caring enough about their relationship to try and amend anything. And remember, this is the critical component of this fic. Edelgard and Byleth’s love story is arguably the most important thing about this fic, being connected to most things Edelgard and Byleth do in the story, but their “love story” is flimsy, needlessly complicated, weak, and, for the most important parts of it, entirely hidden from the reader. This is the crux of the fic’s emotional investment, and yet we’re never given anything solid to anchor said emotional investment with.

These are the actual writing writing flaws - as in, even as its own separate work, the fic fails - I can think of the fic commits at the moment, when ignoring all the problematic aspects within the fic that I’ve talked about before. TEatG is an interesting read partially because there’s just so much wrong with it, both as a fanfiction of a media and as its own literary work. It really is like Twilight, in that something this objectively bad managed to become so popular and influential, (though obviously, this fic doesn’t have as wide an influence as Twilight, but the idea’s the same). So in that regard, it’s neat to look at the fic and point out exactly what is wrong with it. As much as this fic is grating it’s been a ride as well lmao

#ask #anon #exqueuese me princess #o captain my captain #sorry that this answer got a little long lmao but yeah #there could be more wrong with this fic from a writing standpoint but this is long enough already lmao

18 notes · View notes

elftwink · 2 years

Note

i don't think trans*ndrophobia truthers realize that they also make it Harder for some transmascs to talk about our experiences properly - personally it's become a lot harder to talk about my experiences with both transphobia and misogyny as a transmasc m+f multigender person bc every discussion inevitably becomes some form of justifying "trans*ndrophobia" as a term, or someone pulling the ~we ALL experience transmisogyny~ shit. people insisting on terms like "trans*ndrophobia" and etc

(2) really just feels like trying to establish another form of binary tbh; transmisogyny as a term exists bc there's countless statistics and years of evidence setting it as a form of oppression apart from other forms of transphobia, but now people are just scrambling for an oppression label for the transphobia every "type" of trans person experiences. it just doesn't sit right (sorry for the rant in your inbox btw, it's relieving to see smn else fed up w the "trans*ndrophobia" crowd lmao)

yes exactly my thoughts on it; the attempt to create some kind of universal transmasc oppression alienates people who don't fit that kind of framework. and it this point it's often difficult to even talk around it because if you try someone else hops onto your post and attempts to stuff you into that framework. admittedly this is often well-meaning but the fact that they don't view that behaviour as derailing the conversation to me is what has always indicated that they don't care about the nuances of that convo anyway, unless it can be used to further validate what they already believe.

one thing that really drives me up the wall about it is when you read posts about the term by people who use it, it feels like they're not willing to acknowledge that a lot of the pushback is from other transmasc people (or they don't realize, or whatever). instead it's framed really vaguely like "oh they're trying to take away our language" presenting 'trans*ndrophobia' as some topic that unifies all transmascs while only outsiders push back, thereby further proving how oppressed transmascs are and how much "we" need the term. i.e. "if it wasn't real, why would people hate us so much for suggesting it was?"

only that's not what's happening. this is a purely intracommunity debate that exists at this point almost solely online in primarily transmasc circles. most of the people who speak on it are transmasc, most people who form an opinion at all are transgender in some way. while i can't read anyone's mind and am not accusing anyone of intentionally misleading people, it does get a bit frustrating to have people act like i'm in the in-group (and therefore agree with them) while attributing my actual opinions to some nebulous "them" in an equally nebulous "us vs them" depiction of the situation. it allows them to feel like they're speaking for the good of all transmascs while ignoring whoever doesn't already agree with them. and it allows them to severely dramatize and play up what is, at its core, online tumblr transmasc discourse. which isn't to say it's not important but that i resent reading posts about how not using a stupid term many of us don't even like or find useful presents an existential threat to the transmasc community when really it's like some transmasc people said "i invented a term lets use it for xyz" and other transmasc people went "i don't like that and think it's bad for abc reasons" and that's literally where we are now. it's dishonest, regardless of whether it's intentional, and it demonstrates they're not really paying that much attention to any criticisms (but what else is new in this community lmao)

you're on the same page i am re: labelling although i think the establishment of any new binary is accidental and probably not even noticed because it's really buried in this idea of 'everyone deserves to have a label' which is then obfuscated by saying "everyone deserves to have language to talk about their experiences" (which. lmao. i guess we never were able to talk about our experiences before this term was invented, what, less than a year ago? a couple years ago? okay); at its core it's a deeply self-centred analysis of oppression. it's honestly frustrating to even bring up any facts or try to make a counter argument because it doesn't and will never matter bc they will never ever address these criticisms head on. bc it's simply so much easier to willfully misunderstand what transmisogyny (the term) means and the significance of it, and characterize any dissent as some kind of censorship or silencing or transmasc voices. if you can fold in any genuine criticisms of your views and behaviors and make them synonymous with the marginalization you face, you never have to deal with the substance of the criticisms. i have yet to see anyone give a satisfying rebuttal to any points about transmisogyny, and about 90% of the time they miss the point entirely and default back to "if trans women get a label we should get one too". which is both childish and also does not address literally anything anyone is (or at least what i personally am) actually arguing. like we're going "it's not necessary and is often harmful to make up terms for different 'versions' of oppression. the reason some people have those highly specific terms is because in general that language is used to describe power systems, not directly apply to interpersonal experiences (though it often can be applied that way)" and they're like "but i want a specific term for my oppression to indicate it is also unique and important" like. nobody said it wasn't and that is so beside the point i'm gonna explode

#tried so hard to be nice and charitable towards ppl who use the term i do not think it worked #but just fyi this is the nicest it gets its the nicest its ever gonna get bc i do not have many nice things to say #really gets my goat the way they create an environment hostile to disagreement from ppl they supposedly #are trying to represent and provide language to #only to turn around and be like 'every convo about transmasc issues gets derailed must be the trans*ndrophobia'#the call is coming from inside the house.#both in the sense that they created that situation #but also in that everyone mad at them about it is also inside the house. we're all in this stupid annoying community together #that was mean. but also all love to other transmasc ppl but you gotta admit it's stupid and annoying sometimes right #what community isn't sometimes stupid and annoying.#anyway no need to apologize about the essay! i was getting bored of studying for midterms anyway #anonymous #answered

1 note · View note