Tumgik
#AND ARE FAR MORE PROBLEMATIC
rythyme · 1 year
Text
big dragon is like if two equally terrible mame villains suddenly became the protagonists of their own BL show after their attempts to out-manipulate each other ended in accidental hate sex. and like... it's not good. but it does compel me.
513 notes · View notes
thestrangestthing89 · 5 months
Text
Just going to be blunt - This fandom would be a very different space if it was only people over 18. But somehow a horror movie for adults ended up with a bunch of very young teens watching it who are struggling to keep up and are harassing everyone on here with dumb drama every goddamn day. If every little thing associated with the show upsets you, STOP WATCHING. And leave everyone else alone. No one is here for your uninformed political takes.
If you don't want to watch the show anymore, no one is making you. But stop commenting in the fandom all day if you really don't care about the show anymore. No one else cares if you are watching and what your reasons for stopping are.
44 notes · View notes
kafkaesquedyke · 1 year
Text
The new Velma show seems to neatly fall into this trend of tv shows (paramount heathers, leaked powerpuff girls script) that want to seem progressive by having a diverse cast, while simultaneously wanting to preserve that same edgy, punch-down comedy style found in 'centrist' or conservative media. They want the praise for having female, queer, and characters of colour while still retaining an audience made up of mainly edgy white men laughing at how ridiculous ‘the minorities’ are behaving. It’s a punch-down comedy wolf in progressive sheep clothing.
The fundamental flaw in this logic is that show runners assume the audience that would enjoy this humour will see past that supposedly progressive façade… and that often doesn’t happen. A lot of these specific edgy types see diversity as a red flag and immediately presume some type of agenda. It’s almost like seeing a minority participate in the joke (even though they’re still very much the punchline) zaps all the humour out of it or they can’t understand that the joke is still for them if it isn’t said by someone that looks exactly like them. And because they (especially, but not only, cishet white men) recognise all the jokes from things they like, but don’t find them funny anymore, the only reasonable explanation they have is that diversity is bad and makes it unfunny, instead of realising their inherent inability to recognise and relate to any character that isn’t a white man.
Meanwhile, an audience that would appreciate a diverse cast does recognise the comedy for what it is: cheap jokes made at their expense. At most there are occasional jabs thrown in at the white and/or male characters which often don’t relate to these identities in any fundamental or even realistic way. So you have this show that constantly uses their minority characters as punchlines and only includes vaguely progressive, but ultimately pretty universally accepted, messaging hoping progressive audiences will be enamoured with the occasional ‘girlboss moment™️’, while not noticing that vast amounts of regressive ideals.
In the end neither audience feels appealed to and the show is a massive failure. While it might be satisfying to see that these conservative audiences are too blinded by, let’s be honest here, identity politics to recognise something that is clearly made for them, ultimately all that is remembered is that ‘the comedy show featuring a lot of diversity’ failed. And it becomes harder for people who actually want to make media with, and especially for, minorities have a harder time getting any funding. Shows like these are a lose lose situation when it comes to furthering diversity in the media landscape and it’s increasingly frustrating to see this happen again and again.
306 notes · View notes
fictionadventurer · 3 months
Text
I didn't realize just how much Little Town on the Prairie meant to me as a book. I've barely started and every bit feels iconic. This one and Little House on the Prairie feel more like home than most of the other books do.
26 notes · View notes
tethered-heartstrings · 6 months
Note
nothing but facts! (your Jack post) Jack gets so much hate for no reason even tho actual terrible people get a pass. I’ve even seen people pick MASON over Jack. It’s giving racism tbh
literally. every character is flawed, no one is perfect. but to think jack is more evil than hannibal or mason is just batshit insane
50 notes · View notes
bogkeep · 5 months
Text
gotta blog about what i read every now and then so people don't get jumpscared when they find out i like reading fucked up books with fucked up things in them sometimes and send me messages like "hey did you know that book has fucked up stuff in it" and i gotta be like "yeah i know i read it"
53 notes · View notes
whatudottu · 10 months
Text
Tumblr media
This just in, local bisexual disaster finds his taste in women in need of a rain check- is the imagined kabedon suggestive enough to need a tag?
Hey what if Tranformers Prime really emphasised that Airachnid was very much a poacher and that her schtic as an (albeit temporary on her part) interrogator of the Decepticons were skills she had taken from poaching endangered game and mounting them on her walls?
#airachnid#tfp airachnid#breakdown#tfp breakdown#transformers#tfp#humanformers#maccadam#fanart#do i ship these two together? no. but do i stare intently as breakdown is 'intrigued' by airachnid? yeah sure#breakdown is married to his husband but he is not immune to m/f thoughts#as a breakdown fan you may think that i am far too fond of airachnid to make that statement true but like problematic women 😌#gave airachnid that full safari hunter look because i'm not the best at sci-fi clothes outside of like- cloaks but like my girl poaches ya?#gaston behaving ass- uses antlers in all of her decorating ass#takes photos of her standing over rhinos she's shot- doesn't even do it for the money does it for the fun and trophy of it#literally villainous and probably something that could have been more compelling than 'oh i have a torture rivalry for arcee'#let's just say that arcee knows after her experience with airachnid that apparently human skin is too thin to taxidermy#a fact (among her personal experience under airachnid's tools) that haunts her very much#besides in a more human-based setting it's not as if airachnid can come equipped with organic webbing#she loves her nets and probably drop any form of humanisation at the tip of a hat#a safari hat#we stan a problematic queen#or maybe i do- she is imagining pinning breakdown like one would a butterfly (at the least graphic)#ask to tag#for the kabedon part of the whole bi breakdown section#who's brain just immediately shortcutted and went 'kabedon' instead of probably a more literal butterfly pinning#because 'hot lady'
65 notes · View notes
anthropophagiie · 1 year
Text
non-vegans rly have no idea what veganism is and that’s why they assume it’s a diet and that’s why they argue constantly that not everyone can go vegan
163 notes · View notes
radiosummons · 1 year
Text
Not to compare apples to oranges or whatever in regards to fictional characters' trauma, but Anakin wouldn't have been able to handle even 1/4 of what Obi-Wan went through.
Look, I’m an Anakin stan myself. He’s not my number one blorbo, but I do adore him and purely for the fact that he’s a goddamn fucking mess. But I can’t help but feel like some of the more extreme Anakin stans keep missing the point of the prequels/Clone Wars as a whole. That being: Darth Vader could not exist without Anakin.
I only bring up Obi-Wan because a lot of the takes I’ve seen from people trying to defend Anakin from any speck of criticism tends to almost always revolve around his trauma/shitty life experience. And, like ... he’s not unique in that aspect. If anything, Obi-Wan shares a very sad, almost mirror-like amount of experiences with him.
For example:
-Obi-Wan was a slave. A lot of characters in the Star Wars universe were slaves.
Anakin was a slave!
((Update to the above: someone asked for clarification on this point, and I made a lengthy response in my reply/reblog. If my reply is too difficult to find down the road, I can add that bit here. Otherwise, the short version of the above isn't that Obi-wan's trauma is more valid than Anakin's. Just that 1) Anakin being a slave is not unique in the world of Star Wars and 2) Obi-wan and Anakin do share similar traumas but react very differently to said traumas)).
-Obi-Wan’s father figure (Qui-Gon) died in his arms.
Anakin’s mother died in his arms!
-Obi-Wan lost the love of his life. Who also died in his arms. Who also, strangely enough, did not die because of anything he did.
Anakin lost the love of his life!
Anakin was criticized by the Jedi Order for his inability to let go of others!
-Obi-Wan was criticized by the Jedi Council and his peers for his attachments to Qui-Gon, Anakin, Ashoka, Quinlan, Satine, etc, etc. The Jedi did not condemn him (or Anakin) for forming these attachments. He learned to let go of those he loved when their time came, no matter what form that took, i.e. death or simply them choosing to take their own paths without him in their lives.
Anakin had anger issues that made it difficult for him to form proper relationships!
-Obi-Wan had horrendous anger issues. Qui-Gon initially refused to taken him on as a padawan specifically because he had a horrifc temper. He learned to control his anger so that it would no longer control him. 
Anakin was being targeted and tempted by a Sith!
-Obi-Wan was directly targeted by multiple Sith at multiple instances throughout his life. They all at one point or another tried to force him into using the Dark Side (Maul, in particular), or tried to convince him to leave the Jedi Order and become a Sith (Count Dooku, mostly, but also Asajj). He didn’t. 
Palpatine manipulated Anakin!
-Obi-Wan was also manipulated by Palpatine. Everyone in the fucking galaxy was manipulated by Palpatine. Anakin is not special. 
I could go on and on and on. This is just a small list of one to one comparisons, but like ... this doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of the absolute amount of horrendous shit that Obi-Wan has gone through, even prior to Order 66. I’m not saying that Anakin’s trauma isn’t valid, nor am I trying to say that Obi-Wan is a better character than Anakin because of how much more he has gone through in comparison.
My point is this: At no point, did Obi-Wan give into the Dark Side or become a Sith. Despite the actual living hell that his life was, he never ever ever turned to the Dark Side. A lot of people like to say he came close when he faced off against Maul during the episode “Revival,” and I can definitely see where people are coming from. But he didn’t.
In the grand scheme of things, Anakin does not have a fucking excuse for becoming a Sith Lord. Not that he (or any other Sith for that matter) ever had a valid excuse to begin with. But holy fuck, my guy. If someone like Obi-Wan, who literally has not known a single day of peace, can still somehow manage to keep themselves from giving into the temptation of becoming the emobiement of all things evil, especially in response to great emotional pain ... like, my guy, there really is no fucking excuse. 
96 notes · View notes
Looking through the Pruliet tag and realizing there are different flavors of Pruliet shippers
8 notes · View notes
trans-cuchulainn · 8 months
Text
i do think it's kind of funny that ao3 seems to have made a blanket change to all the "mythology" tags to make them "religion and lore" (not a good change) EXCEPT the "arthurian mythology" tag, which remains intact despite a Number of people trying to get that one reworked or at least different wrangled for ages. they're like "we're taking mythology away from all the contexts where it might be applicable. and leaving it in the context where it's dubious. this is a sensible change"
17 notes · View notes
merrygejelh · 4 months
Text
having such a 7girl moment today but literally ive been saying since. maybe as early as 2019 that i knew id love 7 so so much when i got to him and youll never guess whats happening rn
7 notes · View notes
Text
Larys Strong and Criston Cole: *listen to Alicent rant about her frustrations as her only confidantes and then do unhinged shit of their own accord in not just an attempt to aid her but also because of their own motives and feelings because they take the initiative and act of their own free will*
Some of y'all: how dare Alicent do this!
Not like Larys and Criston are they're own people or anything folks.
100 notes · View notes
maddenedbythesstars · 2 months
Text
i think i finally found a semi-famous (?) blog that blocked me lmao
4 notes · View notes
daisyachain · 11 months
Text
there’s one version of an f/m/m triangle that crops up so often I’m surprised there isn’t at least a tvtropes/vernacular name for it. Miyokichi/Kiku/Shin. Molly/Fitz/Fool. Asuka/Shinji/Kaworu. Futaba/Taichi/Touma. not-really-but-you-could-shove-it-in-here Luthien/Beren/Finrod. Utena/Touga/Saionji is a twisted spun-on-its-head version of it. Specifically comprising:
masculine male character A: either is the protagonist or a character on to which male viewers can project.
female character B: a secondary character and A’s official love interest, often kept apart from A by story/circumstance/gender roles. Shows some resentment of the trials she’s put through by the story in being A’s lover such as being shoved to the side, cut out of his life, or put in danger.
less masculine male character C: another major character, A’s devoted sidekick, feminine and/or conspicuously cold toward women or sexuality, somewhat ill-used by A but not resentful about it, as a contrast to B.
The dynamic is used pretty equally by female and male creators, though probably with different purposes. Outside the story, there’s a clear explanation for how the roles are divided: men are main, women are peripheral. Obviously the female love interest has to be on the margins of the story. Obviously the male main character has to have an ally in-story who can bounce dialogue back. Any human person has to have a best friend (for men, has to be male) and a lover (for men, has to be female). The major character male bestie and the minor character female gf is the minimum character dynamic you need to sustain the main character as a believable construction.
Except within the story, the dynamic begs far too many questions. On B’s part: her other half and love interest uses her for sex once every few chapters and dumps her to go off on another plot-relevant adventure. She’s kept in the dark, talked down to, pushed away, and distrusted. Her place at her sweetie’s side is occupied by Some Dude and no matter how much she puts into their relationship, she’s always going to be a prize for after the mission. Why does she stay with him? What could possibly attract her about this bestubbled grunt machine whose passion for the sword outmatches anything she’s given him?
On C’s part: he gets used as an emotional support crutch, designed to service his best friend’s every need at the expense of his own goals or story. He’s a housewife, he’s a domestic, he does every thankless story task with a smile because he has to provide the exposition/set up the plot/set the plan in action that carries the main male character to victory. He doesn’t have a love interest of his own, meanwhile the most important person in his life is obsessed with a woman he barely speaks to. Why should he care so much about someone who only takes? Why is he committed to this one-way friendship? What does he think of taking the backseat, providing support, submerging his own will for the sake of a person instead of an ideology?
On A’s part: if he’s a red-blooded heterosexual male character who pursues a woman as is acceptable, why does he dig himself so deep in with his designated ally? Through dialogue and because he has to in order to show the audience, he exposes his heart and soul to C and keeps him in his pocket for as long as we are watching, so why then does he cast him aside so easily? He invests the most time and energy into his relationship with C, cultivating love and loyalty there, but he draws the line so firmly in the sand that the audience is sure he’ll never, ever step aside for one minute to follow the friend. Why does he choose a man for his emotional battery? Why doesn’t he communicate with his supposed partner? Why does he choose to use B and C for sex and solace respectively, and why don’t they ever mix?
The gender dynamics wrap around to simple: women aren’t up to being equal partners to a cool guy, so you need a male wife to do everything for you and appreciate the protagonist’s sick abilities. romance with a man is perverse and impossible, so you need a female love interest to prove that the protagonist isn’t gay and fulfil the audience’s needs. But in-between all of that you could ask some interesting questions of the spoke character, A, the male protagonist whose actions are taken as normal. the question being: bro. what’s wrong with you
#kelsey rambles#aaaaaand the only thing that satisfactorily calls the A-character on his mistreatment is the podcast CARAVAN. which is not good#actually i'd go as far as to say it's bad#rgu goes into it a little but it's nowhere near the main focus of the series#using asuka-shinji-kaworu as the example that just sucks so bad#shinji's treatment of asuka is so horrible and misogynistic and despite her screentime. in shinji's mind she's never more than peripheral#and gets dumped at the last second and turned into a corpse. she's an object of desire and he refuses to recognize the ways they're the same#on the other hand shinji loves and idolizes kaworu.....only in as far as kaworu is his own dream guy who gives him everything he wants#and never makes even the slightest hint of a glimmer of expectation of anything from shinji in return#the moment kaworu's desires become explicit--he's not only killed but erased from the story altogether#eva rebuild 4.0 does this in the most insulting way possible by farming him off with....rei?#not to try and take eva rebuild seriously but the way it expands on kaworu and sidelines asuka is somehow insulting to both of them#even moreso than the original series was. which is saying something#someday i have to read the eva manga because i hear it takes kaworu in a more problematic direction that is still a direction and so better#or as for SGRS--shin is far more loving and devoted to kiku than he is to any woman and takes a killing blow for him#he watches him in life and guides him through the underworld. he gives more to kiku than he gives to anyone.#yet as a character any possibility of like-liking kiku is denied. what's the damage there?#how does it make story sense? why does kiku have a more serious relationship with a woman than the ostensibly straight shin?#the answer is The Misogyny but even then it's jarring to have shin's plain love be obfuscated with the constant references to being straight#as opposed to kiku. who actually has girlfriends and not one-night stands#it's nonsensical to read shin as a straight man and yet any possibility of him returning kiku's feelings is barred off blacked out redacted#leaving us with a dog's breakfast of a dynamic that IS fun. because in this case it's intentionally bad. and the author is winking at us
17 notes · View notes
ladyluscinia · 1 year
Text
Not going to put this directly on the long discussion chain that prompted it because it's somewhat topic adjacent at best and I have no intention of derailing a discussion of fandom racism, but - while reading some of the "Izzy critical" responses that @bromelads got - I did see mention of one thing that I have both passionate feelings about and a near constant desire to elaborate some oft ignored context for. So.
One of the things mentioned as a source of discomfort in fandom for "Izzy critical" poc was posts rejecting that Edward was growing or healing in 1x09 and 1x10, suggesting that it mostly serves to empathize with Izzy over Ed and to make Izzy's actions look better at the expense of Ed's character / softness. The same person who gave this example later agreed that there's some truth in the idea that Izzy crits' misinterpretation of Izzy fan meta has something to do with the (very baffling) perception that we all don't like Ed or think he's the simplified villain of Izzy's story or something, which I just want to a) appreciate for a second because I do actually adore Edward so much, and b) mention specifically because I think the whole Ed healing debate is a great example of that.
I'm not going to argue why I am staunchly in the "Ed wasn't healing" / "Kraken was inevitable" camp because I've done it before, but I do want to point out some related thoughts around that argument that I've picked up on each time it loops back around.
I feel like a lot of the people who strongly disagree with or get mad about that take frame it as though we are minimizing or rejecting the existence of Edward's softness entirely. It's like... Ok, so there is a distinct sequence of moments where Edward is displaying emotional vulnerability or a draw toward fine things that fans noticed, and then they interpreted the pink robe Ed's "healing" as all that starting to pay off in his character development (before being interrupted by an external obstacle: Izzy). A very straightforward A -> B. Only when I push back against B and say "hold on I don't see any healing in 1x10," then I feel like people hear me rejecting that all the moments of A meant anything at all. If I see the shadow of the Kraken as an internally motivated obstacle being built in earlier episodes, then I must think that's the dark and violent payoff, and the evidence of softness was a diversion or manipulation or just not going anywhere significant in character terms.
Which is very frustrating to me because Edward is a romcom protagonist.
Yes, this is very obvious to everyone. But it matters in this debate because protagonist status comes with very significant guarantees - namely, Edward is going to grow / heal / get his happy ending, etc. We've even got Stede's S1 arc (which remember is still unfinished too) as a good example of structure and focus on internalized character flaws framed by plot hurdles. There is no version of this story arc where Edward ends as the Kraken, and I have never seen anybody suggest he's not currently on a character arc toward growth and healing and a circle of true companions in Stede's crew who love him for who he is.
So when I or anyone else says he's not there yet, it's almost exclusively because we are arguing about where he is on this character arc in 1x10. Of course the appreciation for fancy clothes and slow mornings with overly sugared tea is going to pay off! Of course he's going to become friends with the crew (I'm rooting for Frenchie S2 bonding)! Of course he's going to get to beat back that self loathing he's carried since his dad! But people get defensive and angry like you are personally targeting them and declaring their blorbo an irredeemable asshole because you suggest character development major enough to drive a character driven show probably takes more than a few weeks of easygoing vacation to reach final form. That's not what I'm saying at all!
Interpretations upsetting or offending people even when written with a complete lack of malice is nothing new, but it really seems like making up a whole army of guys to get mad at for takes is happening more and more. (And I'll admit I'm probably getting more and more guilty of this myself as my understanding of what exactly people are arguing in different fandom city states gets more and more fractured. Meta builds off of meta, and if you randomly see one post by one blog you already disagree with, you might be missing a lot of context to clarify what they actually mean vs "of course that's the awful take you would have".)
48 notes · View notes