#THEN we can talk critique. and even then i will still tell them what they're doing well

[mokutone]

I'm drawing Kakashi for the first time (as much as I love them, I rarely ever draw naruto characters so this is a little fun and new for me) and I'm struggling a little bc I'm trying to draw him relaxed, reclining with pakkun (in the way I recline with my cat) and I'm realizing there's something so personal abt drawing him in such a vulnerable pose ig. Like? I'm very tired too rn so maybe I'm being extra emotional and rambly but there are so few scenes of kakashi in canon where he's not wearing the jounin vest, where he's alone and relaxed and out of uniform. And I didn't realize it until I was trying to think back to other similar scenes and there really weren't any. and I'm kind of mesmerized by how you draw him because you capture that so so well, your art is gorgeous but it's also so real and expressive in a way that shows a lot of practice and a lot of love. Idk i think I've said this before and I'm sorry if it's annoying that I'm saying it again (I'll just shut up after this lol) but I went to an art school and I had massive burnout and only really started drawing again in the past 6 months and you were one of my inspirations 2 start drawing again and I'm still not as good as I'd like to be but I draw so much more now and having an actual passion for art has led to a huge improvement, so thank you and thank u for bearing with me and my sleep-deprived rambles. I think my original point got sidetracked. I forgot why i started writing this ask.

dkgjhsdgkjdshg no i think you're 100% right abt the kakashi relaxed thing, even when we see him "relaxed" he doesn't ever really Look relaxed. like

here he is chilling out in the hot springs. this man does not look relaxed but he DOES look exhausted and maybe a little like he's gotten lost. somebody help this confused man find the exit.

anyway art + motivation talk beneath the cut

djhsdkjghsdkjhg thank u for all the compliments abt my art, i do work really hard in order to draw expressive characters, and spend a lot of time paying attention to how the small details in posture and expression change how the character comes across, and im glad it pays off!

also yeah no, similarly, once i left art school (when the pandemic hit) i did have a good 6 months where i did not pick up the pencil even once, and like, usually i feel rlly bad or guilty when i'm not drawing, but my burnout was real bad and i was straight up angry abt everything dgkjhsdgkjh so i just...didn't draw for like 6 months. i didn't even feel bad about it bc i was too busy being angry

and i had a bad relationship with art at the time and eventually realized i kind of had to like? make a different relationship with art—like, try to stop seeing art as something which gave me fundamental worth as a human being, or part of who i am? you know? that's a LOT of pressure to put on just...something that i do. if i took that kind of approach to literally any other task in my life, i'd never do it. imagine thinking that the way and style with which you descend the stairs gives you your worth as a person and if you don't do it exactly right then it means you're worthless as a person? buddy i'd just find a way to go down and out through the window LMAO

i think this is the thing which gives a lot of people burnout, it's exhausting to be constantly working on something and ALSO believe that if you fuck it up even a little, it's because you are the fuckup, and a fundamental failure of a person. god thats so much pressure.

anyway so i decided to make a naruto art blog because i don't even like naruto That Much but my best friend had been trying to get me into it for years (ty kate ilu kate), and so any art that i made would be purely for fun, wouldn't have anything to do with my self worth, and might make kate laugh too, and that's why this blog exists! and taking the pressure off of creating art like that has been enormously helpful to my mental health and my ability to create, also i take breaks alllllll the time, i'm like...way healthier about my art thanks to that, and also just...a nicer person, i think? anyway i'm very glad that i inspired you to get back into art but i'm far more glad that you've found a passion for it, cultivating that passion and joy is so important

#a lot of the way i approach art is bc i worked with kids for a while and like. u can kinda tell when a kid is at the breaking point w/ art #where they're like ''if one more thing goes wrong i am going to Lose It'' #+ at that point as a ''teacher'' u have to pick between giving them critique on their artwork to improve OR letting it go + saying their #art is good and they're doing really well #and i always pick the second one—LIKE. once the kid is no longer feeling soooo frustrated abt their art that they're at a breakin point? #THEN we can talk critique. and even then i will still tell them what they're doing well #until theyre at that point tho its all ''yeah!!! you're killing it! look at these new skills you're learning! look how you're improving!'' #''look how funny/beautiful/exciting/cool your piece is!!!!'' #because first and foremost. i think that art should be enjoyed #having creation as a friend and ally vs A Duty is sooo important #TO BE CLEAR LIKE. this is also still technically a form of critique #i dont just say ''good job champ! great work doing art!'' if u wanna compliment art and have it mean something you do have to be #specific about what is good...not ''that looks great!'' but ''wow you draw really fabulously detailed noses! #or ''wow the fashion you're drawing is really cool—i wish i had that jacket!'' like. #as in all things. compliments and praise are only meaningful if they are /meant/ and you cant fake that #MY POINT IS. if we want to take the pressure off ourselves with art. i think we also gotta treat ourslves like this #look at what we're doing and compliment things we genuinely think weve improved upon. love our successes #nothing better for the ego than to compare new art to old art and look at what weve changed #i should do some redraws at some point #my jutsu

[qqueenofhades]

I understand how important it is to be able to criticize the President, and am not at all of the belief he should be beyond critique, but the critiquing of Biden makes me so nervous. (That's not to say I agree with every decision he's made - I absolutely do not). But I feel like people see things he's done wrong and decide they won't vote for him because of it. I'm not sure if enough people have the ability to see that he's done things wrong but also is our only hope of staving off literal fascism.

So many people talk about how sick they are of it constantly being a lesser of two evils situation, constantly having to vote for a candidate they hate because the other side is worse (I heard it in 2020, 2022, etc), and I guess I just- I don't really get it? We're here because they didn't do that in 2016. All of this could've been avoided had the result been different then. I just feel like people don't comprehend how different of a place we'd be in if Hillary won and engage in all this cognitive dissonance to make themselves feel better about being part of the reason she didn't.

Like.... this has been a long-running topic of discussion on my blog, not least because it is so inexplicable and maddening. It also shows how terribly shallow most people's understanding of the American political process is, and how toxic the "I can only vote for a candidate if every single personal belief/position of theirs matches mine" belief is, as well as how much damage it has done to American democracy even (and indeed, especially) by people who technically don't identify as right-wing. Yell at Republicans all you like (God knows I do, because they're the worst people on earth) but they vote. Every time. Every election. Every candidate. Whereas the Democratic electorate still holds out for Mister Perfect, and it very definitely is Mister Perfect. The amount of "evil HRC!!!" Republican-poisoned Kool-Aid that so-called progressives drank in 2016, and then afterward when they insisted they could have voted for someone like Elizabeth Warren and then didn't do that in 2020, is... baffing.

Frankly, I don't care if Hillary Clinton's personal positions on XYZ issue were the most Neoliberal Corporate Centrist Shill to Ever Shill (and Online Leftists' intellectual skills being what they are, I seriously doubt that they were using any of those words correctly and/or accurately). American policy is not made by "personal dictate of the ruler," or at least it shouldn't be, because we are not an absolute monarchy. We rely on the operation of a system with input from many people. As such, if Hillary had been elected, we would have 2-3 new liberal justices on SCOTUS and have secured civil and environmental rights for the next generation. Roe would be intact, and all the other terrible rulings that SCOTUS has recently handed down wouldn't have happened. We wouldn't have had January 6th, the attempt to stage a coup, all the tawdry scandals, our national security being at risk because of Trump stealing classified documents and probably selling them to Russia and/or Saudi Arabia, etc etc. If you think that's in any way an equivalent amount of evil to what would have happened if Hillary was elected, or if she was "still evil!!!," then I honestly don't know what to tell you. She could fucking murder puppies in her spare time if she had preserved SCOTUS for us, WHICH SHE WOULD HAVE, BECAUSE SHE WARNED US EXACTLY WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

(Hoo. Sorry. Still steamed. 2016 war flashbacks, again.)

In short, Hillary would have been a solid continuity Democrat and she would have signed whatever legislation a Democratic House and Senate passed, not to mention been hugely inspiring as the first female president. But because it's so important to the Online Leftists' moral sense of themselves that BOTH PARTIES ARE THE SAME!!!, they can't possibly acknowledge that ever being a factor, and/or admit that they have any culpability in not voting for her in 2016. It's like when you read the British press about any of the UK's equally numerous problems, and they BEND OVER BACKWARD to avoid mentioning that Brexit might be a factor. They just can't mention it, because then that means they might have made the wrong choice in pulling for it as hard as they did, and blah blah Sovereignty.

Basically, if HRC had been elected president, everything would be so much less terrible and terrifying all the time, we would be talking about her successor in 2024 as someone else who could be the "first," we could explore handing the reins over to Kamala as a Black/Asian woman, we could promote Buttigieg as the first gay president, etc etc. But because 2016 was so catastrophically fucked up, we are in damage control mode for the immediate future and every election is just as pivotal. And yet, because people think that the only thing that matters is a presidential candidate's personal views, we're stuck having the same old arguments and desperately begging people over and over to please vote against fascism, since that somehow isn't self-evident enough on its own. Yikes on Bikes.

#anonymous #ask #politics for ts #hillary clinton was right about everything: the redux redux redux

[planetarynerd]

Here me out. Luke learns how to do braids.

Annabeth was such a baby when she first ran away from home, she definitely had no clue how to manage her hair. She didn't really have a mom in the picture, and her dad.....well, I cannot confidently say that he would have put in the effort to teach her then.

A few years pass, and while Annabeth is training she catches some Aphrodite's kids making fun of her. Not because of her training style or anything, not even because of what state her hair is in(which was definitely just a natural afro), but because of how unmaintained her hair is. They start asking her question about her current routine and when she shrugs and just says she washes it, they make even more fun of her. She tries and fails to cuss them out, and now Annabeth is determined to get these kids off of her back.

So, she bursts into Luke's cabin complaining about how the Aphrodite kids are making fun of her because of her hair. They're talking about edge control, gel, leave-in, and she has no idea what they mean. Regardless, Luke can see she's really upset, and simply rolls up his sleeves and gets to work. Why? Because he will not have anyone making fun of his baby sister. Since smartphones are established in the pjo-la, he scrolls through countless Youtube videos, tells Chiron to get the supplies he needs, sits Annabeth down and gets to work.

The first set of braids are a little clumsy, pretty loose, and the parting is....attempted. So now, when the Aphrodite kids see her, they don't make fun of her as much, but still critique Luke's work. Well, now he and Annabeth are pissed, so for the next set of braids, they stay holed up in their cabin, spending hours on the parting. Luke making sure the braids aren't too tight as to not rip out Annabeth's hair. Annabeth also helps him out, by taking over when his hands cramp.

It takes them the entire day to do these braids. Braiding hair litters the floor, there is leftover gel on the back of both Annabeth's and Luke's hand...even on the ground. And after all that work, they emerge victorious. Her edges are laid, her braids (although impractical) are down to her knees, she is ready. Without a glance or a word, she walks by the Aphrodite kids, flips her braids over her shoulder, and heads to the dining hall with her big brother Luke right behind her. The Aphrodite cabin is speechless and never comment on this matter again.

The braids we see in the live action are the handiwork of both Annabeth and Luke (he only really helps out with parting the back) and they are fabulous because they did it together.

#percy jackson #pjo tv show #pjo #annabeth chase #luke castellan #percy jackon and the olympians

[ao3commentoftheday]

Hello!

How do you leave a good comment on a work when you notice a large error? Or a small error,m I get so nervous to leave a comment nowadays because not many people have clear statements regarding criticism. So, I'm hesitant to point out anything out/ leave a comment that's anything but positive.

I remember a few months ago, on a BNHA work, I corrected the timeline of canon events that author got wrong (because the WIP seemed to be going down that route of "canon adjacent" work that spawn from a canonical event). The author had a message beneath the chapters that "all comments were welcomed," so I thought it was okay to leave the type of comment I did. But I dealt with several aggressive messages from the author and the author's friends about needless critique and how rude I came off as afterwards (I apologized,but I still got messages for a while).

The whole thing freaked me out a bit because I hate any semblance of confrontation ,so now I'm nervous about commenting any work- even those with explicit statements on criticism (welcome ,not welcomed,etc). I leave kudos and such ,but sometimes I debate over whether or not the author needs my comment about their typos. I try to sandwich a critique between two compliments like everyone says,but then I end up with a paragraph-length comment, and I worry about coming off too strongly.

I'm rambling,sorry.

Is there a guide to good comments for criticism in fanworks? Besides not giving criticism when criticism would not be welcomed??

Thank you for your time.

First of all, I'm sorry that you had such a bad experience. I'm sure that was awful for you, and I totally understand why it would freak you out.

When it comes to correcting things in fanfic, there are a lot of things to take into account.

Why does correcting the error matter to you?

How well do you know the author?

How long would it take to make the correction?

There are others, but these are the bigger "buckets" I see most of them fitting into.

If the error matters to you because you get annoyed when you see typos, for example, then that's more of a "you" problem. You can download the fic and edit out the typos and then when you reread it, you won't have to worry about them.

If the error matters to you because you'd be embarrassed if you had posted a fic and there were typos in it, that's also kind of a "you" problem. If the author feels the same way, they'll likely have an author's note indicating that they want to be notified. Otherwise, they're likely resigned to the idea that typos will happen, and if they reread their work themselves, they'll edit them out if and when they catch them.

If the error matters to you because it's non-canonical, this one is more of a wait and see. Maybe the author made the error by accident, but it very well could be on purpose. Perhaps that small change is relevant to the overall plot they're developing. Maybe it's just a thing that they personally hate in canon and have decided that they don't want to include for that reason. Maybe it's a genuine error that they'd be horrified to notice later. There's no way to know.

And that last one is where we come to the second item above. If you know the author well, you can message them and have a chat and bring it up there. I'd recommend just starting out by talking about the story as a whole and what their plan is for it. As I said, maybe what you see as an error is actually a conscious choice that they've made for the story that they want to tell. During that conversation, you'll be able to figure out whether it's actually an error and whether they'd want it pointed out or not.

If you don't know the author well, you could point an error like that out in a comment but then you need to think about the third factor.

Typos take seconds to change. Plot points take hours, days, weeks, or longer. Asking someone to put in a lot of time to make a change to something they've already been working hard on can be really demotivating - even crushing.

For a lot of authors (possibly even most?) they put a lot of work into their fics before they ever get to the point of posting them. They've read, revised, planned, and plotted. They might even have additional chapters already written that are in the revision process and just haven't been posted yet.

Especially in long works, authors look to the comments as a cheering section to urge them on towards completion, so posting corrections or pointing out errors can feel like someone standing up and booing. I think that's what happened in that BNHA situation you referenced in your ask.

That's why the general suggestion when it comes to commenting with corrections is just to not do so. If you want, you can comment about all of the things you like in the fic and then ask if the author wants a beta. That would allow you to have those conversations about their vision for the fic, and it would also allow you to offer feedback before the work is posted and while it's still being edited and worked on.

Otherwise, if it really does bother you, I'm afraid you might just need to dip out and find a different fic.

#asks and answers #long post

[aceing-on-the-cake]

Compulsory Heterosexuality Info Dump

So because a friend of mine didn't know what comp het was and their internet history is monitored by their parents so they can't just use google, I'm doing a very quick research dive and giving you guys the results in case there are others out there who are in the same situation. I'll also be tagging blogs bigger than me because again, there might be fellow queers out their who are in the same boat as my friend and I want them to have access to this information.

So what is compulsory heterosexuality (or comp het)?

Comp het is in essence the societal belief and enforcement of being straight.

What does this mean?

In basic form it means that the only options presented to everyone, from the moment of birth, is that of a cis, amatonormative, heterosexual lifestyle.

You are given two gender options, these gender options determine the two roles you're allowed to fulfill, husband and wife, and you are told that these two roles are what will make you happy and are what you are supposed to strive for.

Meaning society, if you are born AFAB, tells you you're going to one day get married, it's going to be a boy, and this is what will make you happy. Almost everything in life is then seen through this lens. How attractive your are, how you are supposed to talk, how you're supposed to behave, etc is all considered through the lens of if a man will be attracted to you.

On the flip side, if you are born AMAB society tells you there are roles you have to fulfill as well. You are told you will one day want a wife, that you have to be able to have a job to provide for her, that you have to behave in a certain emotional way to be strong for her, that if the things you like are too feminine well then you're gay or a girl which is a problem because at the end of the day you're supposed to want the girl-fiance-wife.

This literally just sounds like the patriarchy.

Yes, it does, because it's caused by it. Nowadays people commonly know about compulsory heterosexuality from the Lesbian Masterdoc, but the term actually originated by Adrienne Rich in 1980.

Adrienne Rich in her article Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence put forward three ideas, 1) that heterosexuality and lesbianism were institutions themselves/possible political ideologies, 2) that heterosexuality as a system if not constantly maintained and upheld would eventually crumble and 3) that heterosexuality as a system could be opted out of and actively fought against whether or not you were actually attracted to women/non-women.

This is very different from the way we currently think of and define those terms, I am aware of that, but her point does still stand to some degrees that comp het, cisnormativity and amatonormativity all crumble when we stop rigidly enforcing the structures that uphold them, i.e., the patriarchy, misogyny, classism, and racism.

Ok but like what does that actually look like?

It can look like a lot of things, for a lot of different people. In the Lesbian Masterdoc you see comp het presented from a straightforward lesbian lens (of a 19 year old figuring out and defining their own sexuality guys, I'm not gonna sit here and critique it and rip it to death, go do that somewhere else).

This is therefore presented through things like women/non-women who were raised/socialized as women possibly having crushes on men, but they're always unattainable in some way (celebrities, fictional, someone real but they wouldn't actually ever be able to truly be in a relationship with, etc). It might also show up for lesbians as liking the idea of a man but being uncomfortable when one actually wants to move forward in the process. Or even sometimes it might show up as sexual fantasies with men but they're faceless, they're more an idea, or you're actually viewing another woman sleeping with him.

This presentation of comp het has made a lot of bi/pan/mspec people uncomfortable because they feel they too have experiencing comp het and when reading the Lesbian Masterdoc it's presented as if experiencing this is a straight shot towards being a lesbian.

And they're right that comp het isn't experienced by just lesbians. For mspecs who present feminine/as women this could be in the feeling that they have to dress a certain way to be presentable, but presentable is based on appealing to men. This can mean something as simple as women are expected to wear makeup, always, regardless of if they're looking to seek men's attention or not, because that's the base standard.

For mspecs who present masculine this can look like the inability to express themselves in an overly emotional manner because that doesn't make them "strong" and if they're not "strong" then they won't attract women, and that's what they're supposed to be doing.

For mspecs in general that can look like their queer looking relationships to be seen as a phase even if their mspec-ness is respected because of course they're eventually going to get married to a man/woman.

This can affect polyamorous cishet people in that they're seen as doing heterosexuality wrong because you're supposed to have the one partner and the 2.5 kids.

This can affect aspecs because they're told they'll never truly feel fulfilled if they don't have that boyfriend/girlfriend/partner to love them in a way that's so special nothing else could match up.

This affects all of us guys is my point.

How is this helpful to me?

Well for sapphics and lesbians (or sapphics/mspecs confused on if they are actually lesbians) this can be a helpful concept to consider because it can help you determine what relationships you truly want to pursue, which is the main point I feel is to be gained from the Lesbian Masterdoc. As she's put it "it's way more important to ask yourself if you can be truthfully happy with a man than if you’re attracted to them"

So if you're a sapphic who experiences attraction to men but you honestly can't ever see yourself willingly entering into a relationship with them, consider the idea of comp het.

If you're Achillean the opposite of this can be true, if you've been attracted to women before but honestly can't ever see yourself willingly entering into a relationship with them, consider whether comp het is working on you.

For mspecs this can be a helpful term to throw over the table back at your parents when they ask when you're going to get a "real relationship".

This can be a helpful term to consider when asking "am I forcing myself to wear mascara because I feel this is the only way I look presentable or do I actually like mascara."

Or it can be a helpful concept to look back on when undermining our internalized ideals of misogyny, towards ourselves and others.

This is a helpful term to put in our tool boxes to talk about the harm the systems of patriarchy, classism, and racism impose upon us.

Comp het can help us to understand why so many people look down on polyamory as a legitimate way of life.

It can be a helpful term for aspecs who are trying to figure out if they really want to date/have sex, or if they just believe these are the only things that will make you happy.

In general

Compulsory heterosexuality is just another term to describe a system we are all intimately familiar with. But by giving us the words to describe our experiences, it gives us the power to communicate those experiences more effectively, and to possibly understand why we're experiencing them.

This is just a bare basic knowledge post.

Honestly if you have the ability to, as in your internet history is not monitored in the way my friend's is, I encourage you to go on the deep dive through the sources listed below. Many of them are honestly only 30 pages long, that's a relatively short read, and understanding queer theory like this not only helps you to understand your own identity, but the ways in which you are connected to the rest of the fellow queer community.

Sources

Lesbian Masterdoc

Queer Theory 101: Compulsory Heterosexuality

Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence

Normativities Defined

Taglist

I'm tagging blogs bigger than me so that this has an easier time getting passed around as I mainly talk about aspec issues because I am aspec, but as stated above, I wanted to make sure that queer people who's internet histories are monitored and are only able to find information through tumblr safely could do so.

@our-queer-experience @our-sapphic-experience @our-lesbian-experience @our-aspec-experience @our-polyamorous-experience @our-pansexual-experience @our-unlabelled-experience @our-aroace-experience @our-mspec-experience @our-questioning-experience @our-bisexual-experience

#lgbt #lgbtq #lgbtqia #lgbtq positivity #lgbtq history #queer history #comp het #compulsory heterosexuality #transgender #bisexual #pansexual #mspec #polyamory #queer

[0w0tsuki]

It's always telling that the only time when transandro bros even dain to recognize intracommunity transmisogyny, it's only when they're forced to distance themselves from the rampant transmisogynists in their community whose transmisogyny is so cartoonish it becomes undeniable. And it's only to preserve image and position themselves as the non-reactionary alternative.

They did it when one of their own sent out rapey sexual harassment copypasta anons to trans lesbians. They did this when already infamous "transmisogyny group chat"/"The TMRA Radfems warned you about" faggotwithopinions/transmascpeterwenz treated becoming mutuals with the CEO who permabanned a trans woman for no reason and followed her off-site to violate privacy data protections in order to paint her as a sex pest as Huge Get. They did this when TERFs felt comfortable with their communities transmisogyny to openly talk about how they plan to use transandro bros specifically to drive a wedge in the trans community, something trans andro bros accuse transfeminists of all the time.

And when I say it's only in these cases it is ONLY in these wildly cartoonish scenarios. Back when the "transmisogyny group chat" was still fresh news, something that usually happens when a queer transmisogynist shows their full ass happened. A bunch of TERFs who stalk these discourses because they're obsessed with trans women went into his anons to send the most vile hate they could summon while pretending to be trans women so our abusers have something they can point to to play victim. And all the transandro bros took these ANONYMOUS HATE MESSAGES sending gendered slurs/sexual harassment at FACE VALUE when they said they were coming from trans women. It got so bad that prominent transandro bro GenderKoolaid when "dissecting and analyzing" a cropped screenshot of a post by Predstrogen (you know the trans woman who was later outsted by the CEO himself) made some wild speculation about how an offhand comment about "transfems taking the piss" was a direct joke reveling in this harassment.

And there are still plenty of blatant transmisogynists that are propped up as prominent members of the transandro community because they haven't had their own "Me and CarExplosionsHammer Photomatt are besties!" moment. There's the aforementioned GenderKoolaid who routinely engaged with "critiquing" transfeminists posts out of context behind their back and alongside spacelazarwolf has promoted the kiwifarms style blog transandrophobia-archive.

They harbor loads of ex TERFs. ftmtftm who left a 31 paragraph college dissertation with proper citations carefully explaining why I'm either purposely unintellectual or actually stupid and what I was saying was radfeminism aktually when I was looking through his blog before blocking him I saw 1) him lamenting about feeling abandoned by the radfem community he was apparently raised by and 2) him sighing with fucking "transmisoginy group chat" faggotwithopinions of all people about how "these Actual Transmisogynists™ make it so hard for us Actually Nice TMRAs and we need to put an effort to come across as considerate to their experiences with them when we engage with transfems" acting like they they aren't the very problem they are complaining about.

An out Ex-TERF nothorses is responsible for cultivating the current transandro echo chamber tried to use his influence in the community he helped create to try and redefine TERF to try to allow for the label to paradoxically include trans women. After that he wrote an anti-transfeminist manifesto that "defined" Beaddelism and cited open TERF sources. And this manifesto is still constantly linked by transandro bros whenever someone outside the discourse asks what a beaddel is.

The transmisogyny is so bad in their community but simultaneously is explicitly an outlier and not representative of them. Every prominent member is transmisogynists Georg and should not be counted but only when you can prove he is unequivocally, beyond the shadow of a doubt, transmisogynist. Up until then everything he does is fine until it's not.

To transandro bros "transmisogynistic trans men" is this Mystical Other problem that can only be solved with better PR and is completely unaddressable and says nothing about their community at all. Something that they've wholly separated from themselves that's only addressed in the theoretical until they're forced to confront it because they've fostered it so much it's become too big to ignore.

Like if your truly "one of the good ones" whose "only trying to talk about specific issues trans men face" then ask yourself why you've aligned with an ideology founded directly in opposition to transfeminis?. Why do you stand with a community whose mest well regarded members are also some of the most rampant transmisogynists on this site? Why you are constantly having to do PR work to not be instantly regarded as on the transmisogynists that you're community has become known for?Why you refuse to address the transmisogyny problem so much that out and proud TERFs feel comfortable enough to walk right in and start proposing "AMAB supremacy" theory?

Like I've said before. The disgusting actions and behaviors from the community alone are enough to not regard any "theory" they put forth to excuse it.

#transfeminism #transmisogyny #transandro bros #no true scotsman

[becauseplot]

Anyway for entirely justifiable reasons (<-is a glutton for angst) I need Chayanne and Tallulah to be present when the hummingbirds come around or a note about the 'wise old crow' appears in their house, causing qPhil to have one of his derealization/reality-questioning episodes. I need it. I need it to happen SO bad. Because they’ve seen Phil get roughed up in a fight, they’ve seen him angry, they’ve seen him wary and even nervous, but they have NEVER seen him doubt like that.

People have already made posts talking about how the cage-for-a-cage/child-of-the-sky stuff has been particularly rough on qPhil, who relies heavily on his constant vigilance, keen senses, and hyper-awareness of his surroundings for reassurance. He's the kind of guy who walks into a room and has already charted at minimum two escape routes by the time he takes a seat, you know? He sees and processes and stores information on everything, at all times, and he uses this to act in the best interest of his and his loved ones' collective survival.

His kids see this side of him too, most significantly in the ways that he looks after them: always keeping an eye on the back of the group, never far from Tallulah, and constantly analyzing Chayanne's fighting style to give helpful critique to optimize his attacks. Chayanne and Tallulah know that everything he's ever done was to protect them. Also, he's always there to offer them advice when they're feeling lost, and even if he doesn't have all the answers they need, he gives enough reassurances and promises to put their minds at ease. Phil is confident in what he knows. In their eyes, he is strong. He is a fortress, safe and impenetrable.

You could say that about a lot of children's perceptions of their parents/guardians/mentors. The older, guiding forces in our lives always seemed strong and infallible to us as kids. That's why it was always unnerving to see them get sick, or get stressed, or cry. Observing weakness in those people felt so, so wrong because we never considered the fact that they were capable of it; it was just impossible.

So, the situation: Phil is suffering in a way that makes him question the very same reality that he was a master of not too long ago. Whenever it happens, he goes quiet, looks around, mutters to himself, breathes shakily, fidgets. He is visibly unnerved and uncertain.

If Chayanne and Tallulah are there, they're gonna notice---they're perceptive, just like him. I'd imagine they'd try to ask him if he's okay, and he'd reassure them that he's fine, and maybe that's enough the first time. But, as more incidents arise, and as time goes on, they start to see more of this out-of-nowhere uneasiness, fear, from him, which is worrying, especially because he won't tell them why.

NOW. Phil has been upfront about a lot of things with Chayanne and Tallulah in the past. For example, during the height of the code attacks, Phil told them everything he ever learned about the codes, every single new development, to ensure that his kids were well informed and prepared. He was frank about the threat on their lives because to sugar-coat anything would be doing them a disservice. It was important they knew all of the cold, hard facts, even if it took away even more of their precious childhood innocence. He values their happiness, but safety comes first. It has always come first.

But this is different. It's not cold hard facts. Phil doesn't know what to believe anymore. When the hummingbirds come around and his reality comes into question, he doesn't know what is real, what he can trust, what is fact. His senses have been compromised. Hell, he's still trying to convince himself that he's not going crazy when all evidence seems to suggest that he's losing his goddamn mind. He doesn't know what to tell his kids, so he tells them nothing.

So now here stands Chayanne and Tallulah. There is something that is scaring their dad, and he won't tell them what is, so on top of the knowledge that their unwavering father is, in fact, capable of true, genuine fear, he's suddenly keeping things from them. Their dad is keeping things from them because he is scared. And I can't imagine a realization more terrifying than that.

#goddamn i did not mean to write an essay i just have SO many thoughts about this #cw derealization mention #look idk if what qphil goes through when he starts questioning the presence of birds/if he's dreaming is like an *actual* dereal. episode #but man if it doesn't make him question his reality and freak him the fuck out #so im calling it 'derealization/reality-questioning' just to cover my bases #yall get what i mean though #dont mind me im just rambling #qsmp philza #qsmp chayanne #qsmp tallulah #actually super nervous to post this longpost so if it vanishes uhhhh you know why

[khruschevshoe]

Jim and Oluwande got the worst end of the deal. I'd even say they regressed as both characters and partners and anything they had built up in s1 was almost completely stripped away from them. The way they're portrayed together and apart in s2 is not only unlike the characters we saw in s1, but their rich storyline was reduced to extreme side characters used only as plot devices in a way they absolutely did not have to be used. I LOVED them in s1, and I was so disappointed by what s2 did to them and their potential growth, which I think applies to pretty much everything in s2, not only them.

Mind if I piggyback of this ask to go into all my critiques of the handling of Jim/Olu in Season 2? Thanks!

OFMD Critique: Tealoranges, Dropped Storylines, and Wasted Potential

God, the issues I have with the writing of Season 2 extend in so many directions. Jim's character, I felt, was well-handled for at least the first two episodes but then slowly starts skewing wrong as early as episode 3 (I am still chewing glass over the way their reunion scene with Oluwande was written- or, rather, NOT written). Episode 4 was good, but everything after that? Someone said that Jim in the back half of the season feels more like Vico than Jim, and though I do love and appreciate Vico, it's completely true. Jim doesn't feel like the same character we've come to know, whether from Season 1 or even what is set up in early season 2.

And yet, I STILL feel like they're written better than Olu, if you can believe it? So, I haven't talked about this much, but I feel like Olu is done dirty from almost the moment he is introduced in Season 2. At least Jim (through editing alone, but hey, we'll give the show the smallest benefit of the doubt) gets an acknowledgement that they miss Olu during that flashback sequences while they talk to Archie- Olu doesn't even get that. I read about a deleted scene that would have had Pete and Olu desperate to reunite with Lucius and Jim in episode 1 and I feel like that was DESPERATELY needed to make the Season 1 finale -> Season 2 jump make any sort of sense. I like Zheng, but for the love of God, her romance with Olu (which I had my own issues with for the disservice it does both their characters) is not worth destroying the tealoranges build up from Season 1. Just cut something from the first episode or one of the Zheng/Olu scenes from the second episode to make it make sense.

Then, moving onto later in the season- I've posted about how Olu and Jim deserved the grand, epic reunion otherwise 1x10 and everything set up with them in Season 1 doesn't make sense. Could the writers of the show have possibly redistributed some of the glorious cinematography from Ed and Stede over to Jim and Olu? All I need is one shot of their reunion (a proper, emotional one, not played for laughs or friendship or whatever) framed by the sun to parallel Ed and Stede's being framed by the moon and I would have been happy on that front.

And then later in the season...I was down for the poly elements if they could have been executed better. Fanfics have shown that the Archie plot could have been executed well. But the fact that Zheng is straight up NOT MENTIONED until 2x7 by Olu? And then Jim says that he's been pining for her the whole time? I'm sorry, but it doesn't compute. Show, don't tell. There's a reason why I'm down for Jim/Archie/Olu (if executed well), but can't see Zheng/Olu at all.

But of course, 2x7 comes along and we get the "family who fucked" line. And the implication that Olu could have ever left the Revenge without Jim, when in Season 1 he became a wreck because Jim left for A FEW DAYS, much less was FORCEFULLY SEPARATED from him for MONTHS. Then in the finale, at the lupete wedding, they were separated out, him with Zheng and them with Archie, and, well, at that point...I was tired. I'm not gonna lie. Because this wasn't questionable or problematic writing, it just fundamentally DIDN'T MAKE SENSE.

And this is just on a romantic relationship POV. I hated seeing Olu lose his leadership arc from Season 1 and his loyalty to Jim and his nuanced emotional level-headedness/sense of logic. Season 1 really felt like it was slowly building up the idea that the ideal Captain was neither Stede nor Blackbeard but someone a bit more rational, a bit more grounded, a bit more communicative with his crew- someone like Olu. And he gets shoved into the back in Season 2 and reduced to the guy who can't sort scrolls or know that the BOATS ON A MAP MATTER. He gets no influence on plot or major decisions when he was often the voice of reason in Season 1 (we all remember Lucius being a romantic voice of reason in Season 1, but rarely remember that Olu was a major supporting deciding factor in a number of decisions made on the Revenge).

And as for Jim, I wanted more exploration or even just acknowledgement of their trauma post episode-4. I wanted an actual organic continuation of their character arc post-vengeance quest and post-Blackbeard, not just them getting defined by "funny knife thrower with a girlfriend and an ex-boyfriend who they want to get with his crush." They were so much more than that, and it killed me to see the two people who were basically main character 3 and 4 in Season 1 get shoved aside for unneeded subplots about Ricky and Zheng or Gentlebeard's three separate breakups when Jim and Olu's plotline had so much more potential than any of that. They weren't just star-crossed lovers- they were a slow burn ship built of absolutely interesting, complicated, and well-developed characters who brought out the best in each other with a DEVASTATING midpoint to their arc and it honestly would have made a better season not just for them as characters, but for the show overall if someone had just realized that the parallels between a couple that fights and claws to stay together no matter what (tealoranges) and a main ship that was still figuring itself out (Gentlebeard) would have SLAPPED.

(I am now picturing a version of this season where instead of the Izzy fakeout death/Gentlebeard reunion in the beginning of the first episode, we get an Olu/Jim reunion in episode 3 to parallel whatever reunion the writers wanted to slap together for Stede/Ed. I would have actively cried over the Olu/Jim reunion and it would have drastically improved the season.)

#oluwande boodhari #jim jimenez #tealoranges #my asks #ofmd critical #ofmd season 2 #meta #analysis #jim x oluwande #jim x archie x oluwande #rant #just in case #garlicule rides again

[arokel]

If you’re not swamped with requests, could I please have anything Bobby related with angst or hurt/comfort? 🙏🙏

Maybe Bobby is struggling to bond with the team because they’re very put off by his approach to rowing? (Like this guy sits and screams at them and critiques them all the time in the boat so it makes sense that they don’t like him at first, and Bobby gets it but the crew needs to fully trust their coxswain in order to be successful. And then maybe something happens and the team has to step up and be there for him, or alternatively Bobby does something that puts himself into harms way for them?

Honestly, feel free to do whatever, I’m happy so long as Bobby is in it 🙌

hey! sorry i went a slightly different direction than your prompt - i didn't think i could do it justice in a tumblr-sized fic <3 but this is at least in the spirit of it i think!

Befriending Al's Babies

Words: 1387 Rating: G Notes: this is book canon - aka Bobby, Chuck and Jim were in the varsity boat while Joe, Shorty and Roger were sophomores. Ulbrickson clearly had a soft spot for Joe's boat, which pissed off the varsity guys enough that Bobby created a specific chant about it - BAB, or "Beat A'ls Babies"

Bobby should be thrilled. They've got Rantz now, finally - Bobby knew he was the final piece long before Ulbrickson did, even though the prospect of working against Rantz's uneven technique doesn't fill him with joy - and the boat is flying. It's what Bobby has wanted, what he's known he could have, ever since he saw what that stupid sophomore boat could do last year and knew he could have made them even better.

But instead, there's something nagging at him.

"Alright, Moch, you've been frowning to yourself long enough," Chuck says, jogging slowly beside Bobby as they make their way up from the shell house towards campus. "Tell uncle Chuck and auntie Jim what's got you down when we should be celebrating."

"Why am I auntie?" Jim says. With his long legs he doesn't need to jog to keep up, even though Bobby is striding as purposefully and quickly as he can in the hopes of escaping any conversation.

Chuck is loping now, circling around in front of Bobby with a little backwards dancing step. "Because I don't want to be. Out with it, Bobby. You're no fun when you're moping."

"No one is fun when they're moping," Bobby mutters, but he knows when he's beaten. He keeps walking anyway just to make Chuck jog backwards for a little longer. "It's Morris and Hunt."

Chuck frowns, stumbles, and winces. Serves him right. "What's wrong with Morris? I like sitting behind him. He's steady, never crabs. And Jim likes Hunt, too."

Bobby doesn't want to have this conversation. He never wants to have any conversation about his interpersonal skills or lack thereof, but Chuck and Jim are his friends and they're trying to act like it, too. He can only keep pushing them away for so long before they stop. He sighs, making an about-face towards the water and starting to walk again. If he has to talk feelings, at least he can do it with something to look at besides Chuck or Jim.

"They're fine in the boat. They row well and they listen to what I say. But out of the boat... I don't know. There's something off, like they don't trust me or they don't like me. And I know I'm not exactly a likeable guy -"

"Shut your trap, Moch. Don't fish for compliments," Chuck says cheerfully. He winces a little with each step; he must have tweaked his ankle.

Jim is slightly more understanding, but that might just be because he's not dealing with a minor ankle injury. "Have you considered that maybe, possibly, they're still a little sore about you calling them Al's babies all last season?"

"That's - well - that's true, I guess," Bobby says. It feels like pulling a staple out of his thumb to admit it, but Jim has a point. He keeps walking anyway. "But I'm nice to them now. Outside of the boat."

"Right, because you've never held a grudge in your life."

That's true too, and ordinarily Bobby wouldn't be ashamed to admit that he can nurse a grudge with the best of them, but in this moment he's frustrated and a little bit hurt - both by Roger and Shorty's obvious distance from him and by his friends' ability to brush it off so easily as being all Bobby's fault.

He stomps down the grassy embankment towards the cut and doesn't check to see if they're still following. Maybe it is his fault; people often find his abrasiveness in and out of a shell off-putting. But that's just who he is. Roger and Shorty will just have to deal with it.

"Well there's nothing I can do about it," he says, once scuffing footsteps in the grass behind him have confirmed that he does still have a captive audience for his fit of pique. "I can't go up to them and apologize; it was just smack talk. If they're still mad then that's their issue to fix."

Suddenly there is a hand gripping his bicep to spin him around, knocking him off balance. He sets his jaw as he finds his footing again and glares even further up than usual at Chuck Day.

"Robert Gaston Moch. You can use your grown-up words and tell them hey, all's fair in love and crewing, no hard feelings. It's that easy." Chuck heaves a sigh and releases Bobby's arm, smoothing out the wrinkles left in his sleeve. "They'll like you just fine once you've cleared the air."

It's petty and childish to keep arguing back, but Bobby is petty and childish, and he's so damn frustrated that he can't just feel good about a successful practice, or at the very least sulk about it peacefully in his room.

"It's just that people don't like me, usually, and I'm an asshole most of the time and -" he says, ignoring how his voice has gone tighter with suppressed emotion. Then, even more suddenly, he is hoisted into the air.

Jim, now holding him bridal-style, shakes him gently, like a cat taunting a captive mouse. "Okay, into the lake with you."

"What -"

Before Bobby can question or protest, he's in the water. It's cold - colder even than it usually is for March, and for a second the shock of it leaves him unable to tread water. He recovers quickly enough to glare at Jim without betraying his momentary loss of control and paddles slowly to the bank, gritting his teeth against the icy pins and needles pricking his bare arms.

Jim grins, raising his voice just loud enough to be heard. "Are you ready to take it back?"

Bobby is even less ready now.

"You bastard," he pants as he clambers up onto the grass. "And people call me unpleasant to be around -"

"Haven't learned your lesson yet, I see," Jim says, deceptively pleasant, as he pins Bobby's arms to his sides and hefts him into the air again. Bobby tries to kick out and escape, but Chuck is immediately there to restrain his legs as well.

Voices behind them briefly postpone his soggy fate.

"Are we throwing Moch in the water now? Did we win something?" Roger Morris slopes into view, seemingly unfazed  by Bobby's torment. Then his dark brows come down in concern and displeasure. "Shit, he's shivering. Are you guys hazing him? Weren't you on varsity together?"

Bobby feels his face burning with embarrassment and anger despite the shivers. Of all the people to come to his defense, to see him when he looks this pathetic at the hands of his so-called friends - of course it's one of the two guys who currently like him least.

"I'm fine. I don't need anyone babying me," he says. He realizes his unfortunate wording immediately, but it's too late.

Roger grins. "That's odd; I thought we were the babies."

Bobby grits his teeth and looks away. He won't snap back. If Chuck and Jim are right, he'd only be making things worse. He can be the bigger person, even if his jaw hurts with how much he's holding back. It's not fair -

"Don't look so hang-dog, Moch, we know it was all just talk," Roger says, with an audible roll of the eyes. "We were just letting you stew in it for a bit before we forgave you all the way. You're too good of a cox to stay mad at forever."

"And Rantz?"

It's still spoken through gritted teeth; Bobby can't forgive that easily either. But he feels a little less cold anyway.

Roger shrugs. "Joe will forgive anyone anything, poor man. You can ask him yourself. Anyway, we're middle children now, just like McMillin and Day. We're all grown up and mature; holding grudges is beneath us."

Jim turns a laugh into a cough.

"Oh, I like him," Chuck says, delighted. "Morris, I think you and I are going to be great friends."

He gently lowers Bobby's legs until Bobby's feet can find purchase on the ground again, and once Bobby is steady Jim, too, lets go with an encouraging back-pat.

"That's good to hear, because you've lost me as a friend after today," Bobby says sullenly.

Chuck pouts. "Aw, no, Bobby, I like you too. You're a likeable guy; isn't he, Roger?"

"We'll see," Roger says, but his faint smile goes at least a little way to soothing Bobby's wounded pride.

#the boys in the boat #bobby moch #roger morris #chuck day #jim mcmillin #bitb fic

[chaifootsteps]

it's kinda sad fans will talk til they're blue in the face about how good it is for HB or HH to represent abuse and have messy queer relationships, but won't think critically about Stol*tz and just swallow what the show is telling them is the 'right' way to look at it.

I also think it's frustrating to see fandoms use having supposedly progressive values as a pretext to shut down critiques by generalizing all of it as 'just hating a bisexual Salvadoran female creator' (while ignoring threats, lies and doxxing done to the critical community), but then they'll completely refuse to do any class analysis in terms of the failings of how the show is written.

There's a really interesting conversation that could be had about the class structure in Hell and the way imps are obviously written as an underclass - they literally provide most of the food through farming and in nearly every other context we see them working, it's in menial or as literal servants (Stolas has a meeting about the divorce in a cafe literally called The Richest Cup with the side advertisement Where the Poor Pour For You! in Western Energy) - and how Blitzo fits into that.

As an imp he's supposed to settle for whatever he can get in life but he refuses to. He starts a business - something Striker says most imps don't do - and the idea is so ambitious he needs to get to the human realm to pull it off. And I think there's another conversation to be had in the way that critcizing Stolas for the Full Moon deal is immediately met with 'Blitzo could just wriggle out of it / Blitzo didn't have to start that kind of business / Blitzo should run IMP some other way' - putting it another way, viewers are more comfortable suggesting that Blitzo should settle for being a servant or working a minimum wage job & potentially bankrupt himself and his employees by closing IMP, than they are questioning why it is that the rich and powerful have unfettered access to the human realm through powerful artifacts when even lower class hellborns like Hellhounds can learn magic and use the Grimoire's spells proficiently.

They're more comfortable taking Blitzo saying he doesn't fuss about when he and Stolas hook up literally one time at face value and use it as 'proof' that Stolas never did anything wrong coercing him into a deal for sex because they claim Blitzo doesn't mind, instead of digging into the notion that Blitzo has internalized the message from a very young age that it's fine for him to be literally bought if he can get what he needs to live out of it, all because he was born a poor imp. In other words, viewers want any out that Stolas didn't do a bad thing and don't apply any nuance to the fact that Blitzo is doing what he needs to do to keep the lights on. Just because Blitz has learnt to cope with it by either disassociating or even trying to eroticize his own subjugation by being the 'dominant' one in his encounters with Stolas, it doesn't make it right. Being as blunt as possible, even if Blitzo looked happier later down the line in hanging out with Stolas the initial agreement was still made under coercion, and Blitzo keeping it going is not the evidence of a free choice.

I just think it's typical of the way people view power and wealth that they will endlessly nitpick someone trying to survive if they complain about their poor treatment and cherrypick examples to undermine why they aren't really a victim, instead of critiquing the wider system that allows Stolas all that power and wealth in the first place. And if we must do individual critiques - why is it OK to say Blitzo should just give up on the book and his business, but it's not OK to ask why Stolas couldn't just get him an asmodean crystal or not propose the full moon deal in the first place?

And on a more basic level, I think a lot of this is just human nature - fans want to like both Stolas and his creator so they'll do anything to say they're in the right. I'm sure if other characters or creators behaved the way Stolas & Viv did but they just weren't as popular or well-loved, no one would present so many bad arguments trying to defend them. It's just plain old cognitive dissonance because fans don't want to give up on a fandom/show/character they're attached to

This is a good analysis, Anon. Agreed.

#Anonymous #stolitz critical #viv stuff #helluva boss critical #actual blog post

[dorianwolfforest]

So I was given this response by a dev about the AI thing who I have since blocked, primarily for what I'm about to talk about in this post.

I want to talk about your right to absolutely be critical, mean, negative and angry about star stable online if you want to, and why that in no way, shape, or form is "harassment".

There's this saying in bookworld, "no authors in review spaces, reviews are for readers". Its intention is to say that, no matter how much you as an author want to know how people are reacting to your book, you do not go chasing down reviews because they're not meant as a learning opportunity for you, they're meant to let others know more about your product. You do not watch videos reviewing your book. You do not read through your goodreads. You do not intentionally seek out the two or one star reviews. You are, however, encouraged to find a friend who can look through the reviews for you, find positive or constructive ones, and give them to you.

If you want to learn how to improve for your next book, you make use of the beta readers. You make use of the sensitivity readers. You make use of the editors. There is nothing a review can say that will help you, because the book the review belongs to has already been written.

In a similar vein, I do not believe developers should involve themselves in fandom spaces. Yes, I will be overjoyed at an Ismael tweet, because that is Ismael's own space. That's his world. That's his presence, he's allowed to exist online if he wants to and Ismael is still allowed to talk about SSO on his account like how authors are allowed to talk about their books, because he does not go chasing down sso neg about his own work, the server upkeep. I, as the "reviewer", do not go into his tweet replies and let him know how much I hate the most recent quests or how bad a horse breed is (much like how I, if I don't like a book, don't go on twitter and tag the author to tell them that their book sucks). I save that for my space, the reviewer space. SSOblr, in this instance.

In our own space, as reviewers, we are allowed to be critical and negative about the product we consume, because we understand that it's about the work, not the people behind it. In many instances, we don't even know who the person behind what we're critiquing is. There is also the assumption, the hope, that the person will never see it, because developers, like authors, shouldn't hunt down reviews of their work, and if they do find something that is critical, it should be a standard that they either ignore it, or read it but don't respond to it.

We've had a grown woman on this platform beef with and publicly call out a teenager for expressing the opinion that the quests she made weren't good, with the justification that the review was "hurtful". Plenty of reviews have the potential to be hurtful, it comes with the profession. That's why you don't read them. Even then, no one who expresses critical thoughts does so specifically to upset or hurt the person behind the work, far from it. That's why we stick to our tiny individual corners of the internet and don't chase you down to tell you our opinion.

Within Star Stable Entertainment, the friends an author might use to collect positive and constructive reviews are your support team (which, unfortunately, isn't all that great. Hooray for being told to overlook antisemitism) and social media accounts. All you need to know about how people react to you and your work should be filtered through them.

If the person who used AI art feels targeted and harassed, that is on them. We didn't know it was even one single person who did it, you as a company singled them out to us so that we'd stop blaming you as a whole. Furthermore we don't know who it is, we physically cannot harass them. Who do we tag? who do we send messages to in order to harass them? No one. They would need to go on SSOblr and look through the tag after a massive controversy caused by them, purposefully searching for outrage. That's not on us.

You are fully within your right to have public opinions about the content you consume, and if a developer oversteps the creator/reviewer boundary you are not the one who should be apologizing.

#sso #ssoblr

[ssaalexblake]

At some point y'all have to admit that you can't trust anybody who is that saying They're not the ones being sexist in their dislike of 13, bc literally nobody is going to admit that out loud unless they're one of Those people, and most people aren't.

At some point you have to realise that people are ragging on at Chibnall bc he's a "safe" target for them to slag off Without being potentially called on what they're saying because people aren't thick, they often know the script of the "correct" progressive thing to say even if they lack the critical thought to examine Why that it's correct.

Fandoms Always hide their biases behind an acceptable excuse, both knowingly And subconsciously. Probably more subconsciously.

dw is now that thing where you can sit around and analyse fan reception when it's got diversity and when it hasn't and the results are depressing. Everybody is claiming it's got jack to do with any diversity, and do we Actually believe that? Are we actually naive and stupid enough to think that's true? Were we all born yesterday? This issue did not magically disappear when Whittaker got hired to make all comments about her doctor objective critique.

(and I have, more than once btw, seen people say they loved episodes by Chibnall totally unaware that he wrote them when harking back to the ~good old days~ of dw, so l o l)

So why should I believe You specifically when you tell me it's Just taste? In what world have fandoms not always shown excessive bias? In what world have fandoms Not been weird about media that doesn't give them a white man 35 or younger? Why should I trust that You are the one totally void of unconscious bias just cuz you said so? May I point out that a metric Ton of people are all claiming the exact same thing and then, when asked to specify why, are vomiting absolute rancid sexism without even noticing?

I hate just ranting into the void but like, it's the 'not all men' of media analysis. There is most definitely a problem, that is irrefutable. Statistically not All haters are coming from a place of prejudice. But you've got to realise that even if you're not doing it out of prejudice, a bunch of your buddies Are and we can't tell the difference because you're not bothering to call them out on it. Or you feel the same thing as they do and Are, in fact, the ones we're talking about and still just haven't noticed.

#dw shit #ppl not realising chibs wrote for dw pre showrun accidentally saying an older ep of his is great is so funny #so he's fine when the doctor he writes is a dude then? Okey dokey

[sevlawless]

okay so the n route has been bothering me ever since i played it and i needed to air my frustrations out as a way to cope i suppose

for reference my main detective who i use for n is felicity, but sometimes i also use arabella to test out some options i wouldn't normally pick and just to see how the romance works with a detective that isn't exactly that compatible with n. so when i first played, i used felicity and then later on when i was doing a deep dive into the romance and the plot, i was using arabella just to see if certain things held up yk! and lord how i wish it did LMFAO

just a little disclaimer that this is all just my opinion and i'm willing to listen to other points of view about this! and i do not mean any of what i say as a dig or to be hateful toward n, they are my favorite li in twc and the fact that i love their romance and their character so much is probably most if not all of the reason why their route in book 3 was so weird to me, and why i make the critiques that i do.

under the cut because this is a doozy and also book 3 spoilers

first of all the main thing in the demo chapters is that n gets mad if you try and fight the trappers bc they are so scared of losing you and like i GUESS i get it but this is literally our life now you're just gonna have to get used to it. and this wouldn't have even been an big issue for me if it was properly addressed! when i played using arabella i tried being mad, i tried staying mad, and it kept getting swept under the rug by the plot. like are we seriously not going to talk about this??? at all?????? and it seems very ooc for n NOT to say anything about it when you get a moment alone because why would they not address it, ESPECIALLY if your mc was still upset over it. AND ESPECIALLY IF YOU’RE IN A RELATIONSHIP LIKE- these things need to be discussed in order to grow as a couple and there needs to be healthy communication or else this is not going to work. like you're telling me we were living with unit bravo for WEEKS and this shit just never got brought up again?

this also ties into my next gripe- n's backstory. so, if you snooped in the demo they won't tell you anything, which okay. mc shouldn't have done that, sure, but n doesn't even give a reason as to why they're upset by that. obviously you can be like "well i think anyone would be upset if you delved into their past without their knowledge or permission" but YOU ARE IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS PERSON WHY IS THERE NO COMMUNICATION OF FEELINGS. i would have appreciated that scene a hell of a lot more if n sat you down and was like "i'm upset that you did this, here's why," but all they do is get sad and then that's it. when i played as arabella i had her snoop AND get upset over the argument during the trapper fight, and n said something along the lines of "i know sometimes we regret doing things" as a reference to snooping AND the argument which??? just does NOT hold up at all and had me irritated as hell.

if you didn't snoop in the demo, n takes you to their room and shows you a picture of their family and talks about them and how his brother joined the navy and didn't come back (their brother was killed by vampires) and that's why they decided to join the navy, as a way to try and figure out what actually happened. this scene started off great, but it's cut short way too quickly because n drops the photo and the frame breaks. and then they basically just shoo you out. there's really not any option to comfort them, and the option that is there is not good enough. and it's not that n had to tell us EVERYTHING in that one scene, but it's more so the fact that it NEVER gets brought up again. your mc can't take a moment to bring it up and n sure as hell doesn't say anything else about it. which is so ?????? im sorry you supposedly love this person (im saying this for both mc and n) and yet neither of you address it again??? it makes no sense at all.

onto the research/combat scene… i've done the combat scene once so i can't really speak on that as much as the research one so. most of the research scene is fine aside from the fact if you're not in a relationship (which i did for one playthrough with felicity) n brings up bobby if you dated them which felt so bizarre but anyways. the option to realize you love n… i would love this IF the option where you tell n you love them actually mattered. LMFAO if you tell n you love them they literally just stare at you and then the sex scene pops up. like are you kidding me??? n would not just leave you hanging like that even if it was just to say that they don't feel that way yet. and the sex scene itself is… fine i suppose but it doesn't feel as intimate as it should be. there's little to no dialogue and it just feels so weird to read. like why would neither of you be saying anything?? not to mention the fact that you're literally OUTSIDE of the warehouse where any of ub could see you at any point it just feels wrong to have sex at that point at least in my opinion. and the talk after feels so short and weird i feel like both the detective and n would have more to say. and that moment is quickly brushed away by the plot.

i guess the next plot line is whether u told tina or verda or nobody about the supernatural. going into book 3 this was probably what i looked forward to the most and ofc it barely delivered. i liked seeing tina and n interact but that quickly turned sour for me, not because tina started rightfully bringing up how much mc has been through, but because n really does not do anything with that pov being voiced to them, which is so fucking ooc it pains me. when they go to talk to mc after their conversation there's no discussion just "i wanted to see you" okay but WHY did you? i would have taken a li pov of what tina relayed to them literally anything! and it's just another thing that gets swept under the rug because of the stupid ass plot.

another thing about the dinner that gets lost in the plot of book 3: tina/verda bringing up your li possibly drinking your blood and mc can react a number of different ways and i wish it had been talked about more than just in that moment 😭

the only scene that i genuinely enjoyed in all of n's route was after that building caves in on mc and you're back at the warehouse traumatized and bruised and defeated. n runs you a bath and if you pick that option helps you out of your clothes and then helps you settle into bed. i wish there had been more discussion of anything in that scene but mc was so out of it i was okay with no talking. and then redacted petname <3 the other thing i was most looking forward to! one thing i did dislike about this scene though was that we didn't really get a glimpse on how n was feeling yk usually mishka offers the li's pov on a scene and not having that made that moment not feel as rounded out.

the pool scene… first of all why did n get this one. like it would have made sense for m, hell even a! and again the scene felt so shallow and then the option to have sex. you're telling me your first time with n can be on a fucking pool table???? that is so not their vibe AT ALL and it feels so weird to even have that there. it was unnecessary as well as the other opportunity to have sex and i feel like mishka just put them in there as like fan service when who (in my opinion) genuinely wants this if they romance n and have them as their main route. i had hoped the first time n and mc have the opportunity to have sex it would be a more intimate setting because that's more fitting for them and my nate mc, felicity. but nope! and then the scene gets cut short because n has to go on patrol??? and again the sex scene itself … neither of them feel personable it's like a "one size fits all" type of approach and that just does not work if this is supposed to be interactive fiction where we create a personality for our mc's that cannot fit this specific mold mishka wants to put everyone in.

being invited to what might as well just be a fucking slave trade (i have many thoughts about this auction plotline as well but for now im discussing n's route) had me so confused because why would mishka even do that and then n's comment about the stationary? i need you to be fucking for real. the scene before you leave for the mission with n just felt so weird like we get it n is protective of mc but at this point it just felt like a hinderance which sucks because one of the things i love most about n is their deep care for mc and they just sounded like a broken record and it annoyed me so bad.

after all that, the scene when you come back and n is in tears confessing their love for mc i wanted to enjoy it i really did and i just could not upon replaying because it feels so unbelievably hollow. we have not discussed anything pertaining our relationship and when there are things that need to be discussed they are so underwhelming it's hard to even care. there are a handful of things n and mc both need to work on in order for this relationship to work and the fact that they're not being addressed makes it difficult for me to enjoy anything about this route. you can't even tell n you love them back for fuck's sake like hello.

a theme that i did not think was going to be as prominent as it was in this book but n contemplating mc turning into a vampire and AGAIN there wasn't ever really a discussion about this between mc and n and i feel like this will come to a head as the books progress but i don't think it fit into book 3 considering so many other things were being thrown at us.

all in all i truly desperately wanted to enjoy book 3 and enjoy being with n but i cannot when there are so many things ignored, sidelined, or just completely forgotten in order to push the plot forward.

#n sewell #twc book 3 #twc book 3 spoilers #again this is in no way an attack on n i love them sm it's embarrassing at times #i just wanted better for their route and for this book and it sucks bc these are such minor tweaks in the grand scheme of things - #but when they pile up like this it becomes hard to ignore and just feels like the amount of discrepancies is overwhelming #it has been a horrible couple of days being natesewell . LMFAO #anyway if u made it this far thanks for reading <3 #i seriously was debating even making this post as well but my brain needed to do SOMETHING like #ugh . #twc is such a comfort to me and so is n it's just hard to not take this so hard #and i know that probably sounds ridiculous to say since this is literally just fiction #but yea ! #feel free to send me asks/dms abt this i would love to discuss this more

[queerfables]

I LOVE picking at Christianity (my major is Abrahamic Religions lmao), but in a Good Omens context I always feel the need to point out that Neil and Terry had "no horse in this race" either- the condemning of homosexuality thing is a uniquely Christian interpretation, and Good Omens is a satire of Christianity written by an atheist and a Jewish person. There's another part of the book where Aziraphale criticizes Christianity as a whole for the commercialization of religion. So given the repeated emphasis on Aziraphale's association with queerness, and that GO doesn't shy away from critiquing religion, maybe we are meant to take this one at face Christian value. Especially considering that Sandalphon becomes outright violent with Aziraphale. The scene in the book where Aziraphale brings THIS up as an example of Heaven's cruelty, not Job or the Flood, and they sit in tense, solemn silence for a minute can be reinterpreted in the show as the 1967 scene, where Aziraphale gives Crowley a suicide pill the same year that sodomy became decriminalized in the UK. The constant theme of them being fearful of getting caught and Crowley mentioning having to pretend they're not a couple. You're right about Sodom and Gomorrah- but I think it's intended to be a homophobia thing, here.

Hmm, this is a complicated one because like - I do think that on some level, themes are more important than facts in the way Good Omens approaches Christianity. But also, Neil Gaiman has read the Bible. And I just don't see any way that you can read the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and think that a queer person would identify themselves with the rapists who died there.

There are stories where queer people are villainised but in a queer reading remain sympathetic, and it turns their fate into a tragedy. This really isn't one of them. It isn't even about queer people. The sexual acts threatened are all about cruelty and power.

In my opinion, the right wing Christian understanding of Sodom and Gomorrah is damaging to the queer community precisely because it characterises violent gang rape as a reasonable commentary on queer relationships. I don't know if you can take the story at face Christian value and still effectively satirise Christian homophobia. That said, and probably this is what you mean, I do think you can rewrite the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah to be about unjust punishment for queer love if you reframe the story that appears in the Bible as outrageous propaganda that's covering up something else.

My favourite version of this is one that totally doubles down on that horror of getting caught that you're talking about. This isn't what I think Neil would do with the story if he ever revisited it in depth, and it's soooo fucking tragic, but it would add so much baggage to Crowley and Aziraphale's dynamic that I can't help spinning it around in my mind like a pinwheel.

Like, ok, I know it's early, so early in their 6000 year situationship, but what if there was something between Crowley and Aziraphale, even then? I mean, what if something happened between them? And what if, that night in Sodom, Sandalphon found out?

It's a nightmare thought. It makes me feel sick to even contemplate. Knowing how the story ends - for Sodom and Gomorrah, for Crowley and Aziraphale - it's impossible not to see the consequences spiralling out from this mistake.

Sandalphon knows. Every interaction with him from then on becomes fraught with the secret he's holding over Aziraphale. Even if Sandalphon likes the prolonged fear and leverage he gets out of keeping this to himself more than the sadistic joy of outing Aziraphale, Aziraphale's fate is still in the hands of someone who despises him. He's never going to feel safe again.

Sodom and Gomorrah are razed to the ground. In the story's telling, the people who died are transformed into monsters, even though their only sin was shielding a demon who dared to know an angel.

(And Crowley tries, for them. He refuses their shelter. He tells them to believe whatever they hear about him. He flees into the night and hopes that when Sandalphon catches up he'll be far enough from the city to make a difference. But they know Crowley, round these parts. They know men like Sandalphon, too. When Sandalphon questions them on where Crowley is, not a single person will talk.

Aziraphale tries, too. Before he ran, Crowley took all the blame onto himself, taunting Sandalphon as though he'd forced himself on Aziraphale, a last desperate bid to protect him. But Aziraphale sees the holy fury in Sandalphon's eyes as he presses the people for answers, and he can't let anyone else suffer for him. He tells Sandalphon the truth. He begs Sandalphon to spare the city. And when Sandalphon looks at him with calm contempt and doesn't say a single word, Aziraphale realises he already knew.

Sodom and Gomorrah are razed to the ground, and Crowley and Aziraphale watch them burn. Crowley is Lot's wife, looking back on the destruction, and to be turned into a pillar of salt would be a kindness. Aziraphale is Lot's son-in-law, unable to get out, unable to believe it's happening until it's raining down around him.

The people of Sodom hold their ground. Sandalphon decides they're beyond saving. If they won't give Crowley up, they can burn for his crimes in his stead.)

It's their transgression but they aren't the ones paying the cost. And the cost is too fucking high. That's the whole story, right there. They are never going to talk about this. There isn't anything to say. For as long as they are an angel and a demon - for as long as they belong to Heaven and Hell - they are never going to touch each other again.

#good omens #good omens meta #good omens fic #ish?? type thing?? #fable talks good omens #fable answers #anon ask

[transmutationisms]

i agree that a lot of the critiques of s4 are baseless, but i haven't seen a lot of people acting like stuff is coming out of nowhere. like the consistency of themes doesn't seem to be the issue. i guess it's that the dialogue feels a lot less nuanced and you can make arguments either way for that. the thing for me is it doesn't feel like we're covering new ground. everything they're telling us we already knew. i am biased bc s2 was my favorite (which seems to be a common sentiment) but it feels like s3 onwards has just been reiterating points we already knew without building upon them that meaningfully. the decline of empire stuff has come into play a bit more in s3 and s4 which i like and they built towards it really well, but character wise i don't feel like we've learned anything that valuable in the past 1.5 seasons?

i disagree with that. kendall spends season 3 trying to play knights on horseback, leading to him finally offloading his guilt about the waiter to his siblings, leading to season 4 where he seems to have lost that shred of humanity that made him feel guilty over it; i think that's pretty important information to learn about him. roman went from proposing business-marriage to his father (season 2) to deluding himself into thinking he could just playact as the chosen son (season 3) to actually gaining the corporate position he wanted and going insane over it. shiv is working out an actual viable way for her to survive in this world beyond "go through dad," and everything between her and tom this season is new ground. even connor has had some critical beats in very little screentime (the wedding convo with willa, buying logan's apartment, etc). i acknowledge greg has been foundering for a while and im sorry to greggirls for your loss but frankly i personally never really cared about him the way i do the siblings.

also, i can't really read the political storylines and the psychological explorations as being separate from one another. like, roman and mencken is political commentary, but also a really important psychological beat for roman. same with shiv and matsson; same with kendall and his new tech infatuation; same with connor and the developments in his presidential run. if the political commentary is accomplishing something, it's because the character writing is accomplishing something, and vice versa. to me this sort of political-psychological monism has always been what makes succession tick, both in these storylines and in the broader way the show situates familial abuse as a function of the larger capitalist social matrix.

in general i guess i would question what type of character development we expect from a show whose psychological premise is that people don't fundamentally change. to me this was what made an episode like 'honeymoon states' so brutally effective: it's a reset in many ways, only with the centre of the universe gone forever, and the remaining characters finding new ways to make many of the same old mistakes. i think this does convey new information about the characters, and i think that sense of cyclical psychological claustrophobia is very much on purpose. you might still think it's executed poorly, or you might just dislike it as a narrative engine for a tv show—fair, i'm not going to try to talk you out of that. but i disagree that this season hasn't told us anything important, either about the characters or the political realm they operate in.

like i said, i do have more sympathy for dialogue critiques and i won't pretend none of the convos in season 4 have been clunky. i also do have some issues with season 3 (misuse or underuse of guest stars and secondary characters, a few episodes i don't think go anywhere, etc). personally though, i think season 4 has been stronger and tighter overall so far.

#s4 critiques

[flower-of-knighthood]

Bruh, Dimitri is only king because of his Crest, that's literally a case of crests being abused and creating conflict or did you miss Miklan and Sylvain's arcs entirely.

What about Sylvain's misogyny? What about Ingrid's lack of personal autonomy due to being the literal breeding cattle of her family, fed before her siblings.

Yes Hanneman and his story come from Adrestia, but that same shit absolutely happens in Faerghus, we just don't see people like Hanneman or Manuela come from Faerghus because they're fucking idiots with the near sole exception of Annette. Mercedes is Adrestian and a victim of crest abuse, absolutely, but it's not like her current adoptive family isn't sending her to Garreg Mach to find a husband because she has a crest!

Crests inherently create a privilege within their societies, and this happens in EACH country. Just because some of the most privileged people in the entire game don't have a clear cut abuse narrative doesn't mean you're getting the full picture of the actual situation. AND beyond that, crest related discrimination affects the women in the game disproportionately to the men. Which house has exclusively crested women? Which house has LESS women than any other house?

So, and follow me here because I know this is probably pretty difficult, how do you imagine life is for women without crests in Faerghus when we don't get to see them?

Leonie, let's use her. The Alliance has some of the most empowered non-noble people due to their strong merchant class. Who is still crestless and poor as dirt going to the one place in the entire continent that could give her the best education in return for a lifelong debt? Leonie! Woo. Ignatz too is also fascinated with the art and library of Garreg Mach. Why? Because someone banned the printing press to keep the commoners dumb! (That would be Rhea of the Church of Seiros, btw.)

So, rampant sexism, homophobia, a king who even in his best scenario can ONLY marry women who have a crest. Hmmm. Yeah. Look. Idk.

Do you think maybe Adrestia seems worse because the people from Adrestia are actually CRITIQUING their home country? Edelgard, Hubert, Dorothea, and Hanneman are ALL very anti-crest and anti-noble. We hear their stories BECAUSE they are stories of abuse that they wish to prevent from happening. Dorothea extends that same empathy to Bernadetta and Ingrid.

Meanwhile on the flipside, it's pretty much just Sylvain who is like "this shit is fucked and no one is talking about it." Perhaps because they have a culture that doesn't reject is as harshly as the questioning nobility of Adrestia, such as Hanneman who is also attempting to remove the power differential created by crests. Because his sister experienced what was most likely repeated marital rape to produce an heir. Hate to tell you what's in store for Ingrid, Mercedes, and Marianne if basically anything goes wrong. Whoop. There's another one. Marianne. Another candidate for the King to marry and simultaneously another character with a father so determined to get her to marry. Wow! It's almost like the game heavily features the need for women to get married so that can be bred by men purely for the sake of having crest babies and we're literally given an example of what that's like by three major characters in the game. Hanneman, Dorothea, and... Sylvain!

Because guess what Miklan's story is literally still just abuse founded on crests and Edelgard is genuinely sympathetic to what happened to him in game.

Miklan was raised for several years expected to inherit his family's territories then his mother died and his father remarried and this new kid came along and stripped him of all his birth rights specifically due to having a crest. His abilities as a powerful leader meant nothing in the face of his bother's crest. His entire life was stolen from him.

This doesn't justify what he did next, but it does highlight the importance that Faerghus places on crests. Had Miklan been someone like, idk, Dorothea, a first daughter instead of a first son, she probably would have been wed into a powerful crested family to be as Sylvain implies, a cumdump for crest babies. Because let's not forget! Crests are extremely important to the Kingdom (that's canon) and they're becoming rarer. So. How does a Kingdom keep the strong crest lines alive? The corpses of abused and tossed away women of course!

This generation just got lucky with how many of them were crested from the start without much work on behalf of their parents. But it's so dire they swapped crowned princes for it.

Is it really so hard to understand that the Blue Lions only has 3 women in it because the Kingdom is just that sexist? That the most powerful woman in Faerghus is an extremely powerful MAGE who is reliant on sex appeal to maintain her position? Not physical combat, unlike, idk characters like Ladislava or Judith? Catherine barely counts but is still crested and part of the CoS as one of Rhea's pets that she has a life debt over. She literally excels OUTSIDE of the Kingdom.

No the Blue Lions have a mage, a mage, and a woman betraying her family to be there as a knight. And one of the mages isn't an heir, and the other one isn't from the country to begin with. And they're all privileged.

While we're on the subject of classmates, say what you will about Edelgard at least her prisoner from a vassal state isn't codependent. Petra perceives Edelgard as going off the path and is free to side against her. Dedue sees that and decides to jump off the cliff with the insane man who can't do math. And literally desecrate a woman's corpse, but you know. Faerghus probably just ran out of respect women juice during the war due to rations or something.

I mean, then there's the whole disability thing with the "unempathetic" Edelgard.

Okay, so the Black Eagles feature disability with Lindhardt, Bernadetta, Edelgard, Jeritza and Lysithea. Yes, Lysithea counts as she joins of her own volition.

Edelgard creates a new form of employment for researchers who struggle with ADHD and ASD for Lindhardt. She is the literal most effective as helping Bernadetta in overcoming her issues with severe anxiety (something Dimitri goes out of his way to belittle her for having during his paralogue, women, amirite?) Edelgard manages Jeritza's DID as best she can by limiting its impact and trying to structure it productively and also providing pathways to atonement that aren't just punishment. She does what she can to lighten Lysithea's load, but also attempt to ease her loneliness at being the only one affected by her affliction. She manages her own issues with PTSD and likely ASD is you pay literally any attention to how she speaks or makes jokes, which is likely why she's so good at communicating with Byleth. And if we want to go further, and I do. She and Hubert were the first friends that Petra made in Fodlan, and while learning a second language isn't a disability, Edelgard consistently offers her assistance to Petra in her adjustment to Fodlan's way of life and expectations. She approached Caspar with the assumption that he would be disheartened like Miklan about the situation regarding nobility birth order only to find that he was one of those bootstrapping people who didn't care and would just work harder (the kind of person Dimitri criticises Edelgard for assuming everyone is,) which surprises Edelgard because she never thought she would meet someone like that, expecting that everyone needs help and support in order to reach their full potential. Because Edelgard never assumes anyone is born fully capable or strong vs weak.

Which just so happens to be mirrored in Marianne's dialogue regarding Edelgard and how she wishes to be strong like her and change the world.

Jeez, it's almost like the very idea that someone is either born strong or not born with the ability to be strong is literally undone by the failed endings of each character and how they're all supported by Byleth and each individually MADE strong by her ongoing support. Each and every character literally goes through the exact arc Edelgard preaches about when given the correct levels of support and opportunity that she and Byleth provide. Even Dimitri. It's incredible. Fucking hilarious too. That's called a ludonarrative, where the gameplay matches the storyline.

The idea that Edelgard somehow isn't obscenely empathetic when that literally her every interaction with every character she can interact with as a house leader, including those who's perspectives she initially disagrees with (Manuela for example) is just brain-dead.

Here, I'll help. Rhea isn't empathetic. Why? She started a war. Because that's how those two things relate right? No, obviously fucking not.

And the whole Knights of Seiros are helpful actually is just, oh my god. Say Blue Lives Matter. Do it. I dare you.

The Knights of Seiros are useful because they're a standing army within every nation on the continent because Rhea has no respect for the individual sovereignty of ANY of the nations. Not to mention that Faerghus didn't even revolt for their own reasons it was manipulation by the Slithers, so they're hardly staking their country's pride as individuals when the impetus for doing so was corrupt to begin with. Rhea was going to conquer it all when Sothis came back anyway. That's why it's so xenophobic.

Or did we forget that. That Fodlan is xenophobic? That Rhea actively tries to keep cultural influences from other countries out so she can maintain Fodlan as it is, her mother's kingdom.

But yeah, sure. Edelgard who doesn't force those from other countries to fight for her cause, such as Brigid, is so lacking in empathy. So blind to the corruption despite her literal every interaction with her classmates and supports.

"But her actions as the Flame Emperor!"

Oh yeah? Which ones? Because the last thing she did as Flame Emperor was target the casket of Seiros. Everything else was the Slithers going over her head. Not to mention that she was really only enabling the ideas that Lonato and the Western Church already had to conflict the Central Church, she didn't create those for them, they already thought that Rhea was disrespecting the saints, we see that with Christophe. Someone Rhea had killed and then lied about it. Then she massacred the remaining Western Church people, for. Something. I'll be honest, I forget why Seteth went to the coast and killed people practicing their regional sect of their faith?

The Knights of Seiros help people. It's kind of funny. Because they don't have a country of origin, which means they're taking militant forces to be controlled by an external form of government FROM their countries of origins, but only specifically those who are the best and can afford to be there. Which, diminishes the abilities of the other countries, say, like the Kingdom with the absence of Catherine. Which creates a need to call on the Church to deal with these supposed threats.

Like everything in the game and that is related to the church is a self fulfilling cycle. Nobles are made noble by crests, crests are significant because of the church, other religions would diminish the power of the church, the church backs the nobles, so the Seiros faith is taught to everyone so the church stays in power and all the people know how just the nobility is.

Such ethics. I believe the word is indoctrination.

Oh, and since the Kingdom only exists because the church says it does, they have no choice but to back each and every play the church makes, so despite the fact Edelgard only declares war on the Church, the Kingdom, flexing their autonomy, joins the fight to back their sugar mommy. Based on a decision that wasn't theirs to begin with. Sovereignty is fun.

So yeah. The war was for the people who are being abused and tricked into compliance with the only governing body who is providing them with any help even if that helps just reinforces the oppression. Like Catherine and Shamir's conversation. Or the NPCs in Abyss express. Rhea's little pet foreigners that she can make grateful because she isn't lynching THESE ones. They're the exceptions.

It's for the women like Dorothea who couldn't get into Garreg Mach from Faerghus even if they tried. Seriously, Dorothea and Leonie DO NOT have a counterpart in the Lions. Ashe comes close but he was legitimately adopted and a guy. The other women in the Lions are marriage fodder or literally privileged prodigies. And none of them have severe criticisms for their living situation because defiance of their country is akin to defiance of their goddess blessed king who they need to either lie down and get fucked by if they're crested or die for in battle.

But no, I'm sure liberating the straightest most emotionally repressed, and least disability friendly country from the clutches of the church who removed their ability to practice medicine, develop literacy through the accessibility of books, and use their natural resources of oil, had absolutely nothing to do with Edelgard's plans. Because she says something about uniting Fodlan (which since her plan is to undo the Church that validates Faerghus' existence in the first place means that she would be fucking them over and creating a power vacuum if she didn't install a new system of government), a few times as her party line, and is completely independent from all other facets of her character. Heaven forbid anyone takes into account what the game is saying through her supports and actions instead of the nationalist war leader she is forced to play under the scrutiny of Those Who Slither. Or did you assume they added Kronya to the Black Eagles just for fun and NOT to isolate Edelgard from the people who she was supporting and being supported by in turn?

It's honestly like people are trying to misrepresent her, which makes sense for those who support a nation of sexism, ablism and homophobia. It truly is a wonder why disabled, lesbian women from outside of America love her so much and ship her with FByleth, while all the guys and yaoi fangirls go coocoo for the forbidden romance guy who is so centrist and impotent it hurts. I can't think of a better example of defying the status quo and making a change within a single lifetime to better the situation of those around us, vs someone who is so afraid of conflict that they'd prefer to avoid it at the cost of real human lives and then take all the credit when some woman comes along, gets 95% of the way, dies and has her crusade coopted by that centrist who makes minimal and less impactful changes in the long run but still gets heralded as a hero.

I understand the inability to conceive that someone in Edelgard's position might stand up for a non-selfish reason, but that's what happens to minority groups who are backed against a wall and have no options but to lay themselves on the line and hope they can fix it for everyone else. Believe me. I've experienced it personally and have put my employment and education on the line so I can achieve effective change for people like me who can't risk losing those opportunities to affect things.

But for fucking real, she destroys the Slithers, her lineage and abdicates. She wasn't doing it for fucking power and everyone she removes from power, The Slithers, The Church, and Rhea are removed in every single other route too or under new management. (that idk if you've noticed, but religious institutions that persist as major players in government decision making tend to love restricting human rights, especially those of women! That's just a thing that's true in our world.)

If you enjoy any of the endings that also don't respect sovereignty, Rhea's leadership (which she admits was corrupt), or include the existence of the Slithers, then how in the fuck can anyone say she was wrong? Everyone mimics what she was doing. It's all built off of her war. That PROSPERITY is only happening NOW because she started a WAR and effectively killed everyone she wanted removed from power. She fucking always succeeds and Fodlan is ALWAYS better for it.

The game genuinely says that the ends justified the means, every time. Fodlan is always better for the war. That's why Sothis says it's "time to begin" by the way. That's why it's inevitable. That's why you can't go back and prevent the war in any route. Because the game isn't anti-war.

You are always rewarded through acts of war in Three Houses. It's not diplomacy. It's acts of violence and war. The game has a theme of mercy, but it agrees that conflict is a necessity for progress. It depicts the tragedy that progress requires, but at no point does it say it wasn't inevitable. I mentioned ludonarrative earlier, the idea the game says "war bad" but then rewards you with happiness and glory through acts of war is literally what ludonarrative dissonance is about.

The game is about causes, justice and necessity. And that's why no one can point to an ending where Fodlan's future didn't require the war. Sylvain's success with Sreng and removing the crest/nobility system would never have worked with Rhea in charge.

Crests and church bad. Fodlan's sexism and homophobia and ablism bad.

Stop not listening to what Edelgard says and does. She genuinely cares about helping people. If she wanted power, why does she abdicate? Why empower the people? Why leave the church's faith alive? Why educate the people. Why do everything Rhea doesn't?

If you wish for a actual response to your essay, learn how to structure your arguments properly, and most of all stop randomly jumping from topic to topic. If a topic doesn't fit in the scope of your arguments, put said topic in another essay that is more fitting.

If you continue the way you are with how you structure your essays, no one will bother to actually read them, instead just giving your essay a brief look before giving a funny response making fun of your efforts.

#edelgard discourse #edelgard critical #ask