#but don't condescend or harass people for having an opinion

[watermelonsloth]

No, Sasuke Did A Lot Wrong

(Disclaimer: There's nothing wrong with liking Sasuke as a character or sympathizing with his backstory. I'm also not talking about all Sasuke fans, only the extreme "pro-sasuke/anti-konoha/anti-itachi" fans.)

I'm getting pretty sick of the defenses used by Sasuke fans to justify his behavior throughout shippuden. The defenses themselves are fine enough, Sasuke did have plenty of reasons for his anger and resulting actions, but his fans always seem to be trying to absolve him of blame. The worst of them even act as if you're some morally reprehensible monster if you dare say Sasuke made a lot of terrible decisions that hurt a lot of people. God help the poor soul who dares to like Itachi or Tobirama.

I'm not going to defend Konoha or their actions here and, from what I can tell, no one else is. The entire shinobi world is fucked up in a frustratingly realistic way, so it makes sense that anyone trying to do something to fix it would immediately earn audience sympathy and relatability. However, most of those characters are villains. Why? It's not because the Naruto series is pro-violence, authoritarianism, war, or complacency. It's because they're terrorists. They react to personal wrongdoing, sometimes perceived but often not, by creating violent plans that are undeniably extremist. Madara and Obito basically wanted to hard reset the world by placing everyone into an eternal genjutsu and Nagato wanted to nuke the planet every time a country asked for war until all conflict disappeared. Those are objectively bad plans that would put the world into an even worse state and I hope I don't have to explain why.

Sasuke's "revolution" was no better. As a quick reminder, these were Sasuke's plans to "fix" the shinobi world: first he wanted to destroy Konoha, then he wanted to become a tyrant over Konoha, and lastly he wanted to act as a threat so dangerous that the world was forced into cooperation to fight him off. Not one of these plans is good. All of them would catch many innocent lives in the crossfire and none of them would build a better world. The best argument to defend Sasuke's goals is "complacency to wrongdoing makes you just as guilty as the wrongdoer." Ignoring that that argument is flawed, especially in the context it would theoretically be used, that argument still wouldn't change the fact that his methods are violent and extremist.

What makes all of this worse is that Sasuke's goals are also extremely hypocritical. Tell me if this sounds familiar: to prevent future conflict, one Uchiha erases a group of people because select members of that group were a potential risk. That Uchiha, in this process, agrees to take on all responsibility for this action and all anger resulting from the fallout. Was I talking about Sasuke's initial goal to change Konoha? No, I was talking about the Uchiha Massacre. His goal to become a feared tyrant over Konoha to reform it into a more peaceful state according to his image bears a striking resemblance to Danzo Shimura, of all people. His final plan is the only one that can be considered uniquely his, but if you simplify it to its core(an individual taking the burden of all of the world's hatred onto their shoulders), then it mirrors the intention of Madara(and sort of Obito, but mostly Madara). Sasuke is repeating history by mimicking the solution that he's already experienced being in the crossfire of, the goals of a monster he scorned for his morals, and the plan he personally watched fall to pieces.

Of course, this is a post about Sasuke's actions, not the plans he never enacted. The most he could be punished for is conspiracy. So, let's talk about what he did. I'd say for all of part 1 and the start of shippuden, Sasuke's worst offense is being a bit of a snarky jackass. He wasn't cruel, he had a set of morals that he consistently held himself and others to, and he deeply cared for his friends and allies. His interactions with Itachi were upsetting, Orochimaru manipulating him was tragic, and his struggle to decide between his friends and revenge was interesting. The most morally skewed thing he did was his fight with Naruto, but even that was forgivable. The start of shippuden maintains him being mostly in the clear: he nearly kills team Yamato, he kills Orochimaru, he starts traveling with some morally questionable people(scaring the crap out of some civilians and stealing a sword in the process), and he fights and kills Itachi. Again, he's not exactly a stand up citizen, but he remains just and easily forgivable. The Five Kage Summit arc is where this changes.

After learning the truth about the Uchiha Massacre and Itachi's true role in it from Obito, the Five Kage Summit arc begins with Sasuke joining the Akatsuki(a.k.a technically a mercenary group, but better called a terrorist organization considering their, at this point known, goals). The arc is easily a shift in the story's direction(for better or worse), meaning a shift in the main characters, and easily an arc I'm going to discuss in more depth in the future. Sasuke's character shift is revealed to be downward when he and the rest of team Taka attack and "kill" Killer Bee. I don't care how much you like Sasuke or how much you agree with his anger, you cannot justify him attacking and attempting to murder someone who has done nothing but be a jinchuuriki. Soon after Sasuke's role in the attack is revealed, Karui, Omoi, and Samui leave to Konoha to tell the Hokage about the planned five kage summit and that Kumogakure is taking the responsibility of Sasuke's punishment out of Konoha's hands. This is the arc where Sasuke undeniably becomes a criminal and his crimes have victims. Say what you want about Konoha and complacency and injustice, but let's make some things clear.

Killer Bee had nothing to do with the Uchiha Massacre.

Kumogakure had nothing to do with the injustices Sasuke was fighting against.

The samurai of the Land of Iron had nothing to do with shinobi affairs.

Team Taka didn't deserve to be betrayed for being "too weak."

I didn't make this post to complain about Sasuke or make him out to be a bad character. Actually, I think he's one of the best written within the series and he's among my favorites. Sasuke is a morally complex character, a fantastic foil to Naruto, an impactful warning on what happens when someone is consumed by hatred and abandons their humanity in pursuit of their goals, and the end of his arc was really nice(until Boruto ruined it, but that's another rant for another day). I get so upset about people making Sasuke out to be an innocent or wholly justified character, not only because those same people often take an undeserved moral high ground and talk down to/shame people for having problematic favorites as if Sasuke isn't problematic, but because it doesn't give his character the credit it deserves. Sasuke is such a good character because he and his actions are imperfect. He's good because he is morally complex.

The Naruto series is about a boy who is ostracized by his home and targeted by a terrorist organization for something he has no control over. He responds to his circumstances by building connections, finding peace, and making an attempt to change both himself and the world around him rather than giving into his anger and lashing out. Naruto and many other characters struggle to maintain their humanity in a world that seeks to destroy it. Sasuke's story is not one of a tragic hero burning his perpetrators and the world that allowed them to the ground. His story is about a hurt and manipulated child abandoning more and more of his humanity under the assumption that it'll somehow help him do good in a bad world until he becomes the bad. His story ends with him confronting that humanity and coming to terms with it because there was still someone waiting for him with a hand held out.

#Anti Sasuke fandom #Anti Sasuke Uchiha fandom #I don't want to tag this anti-sasuke so... #Sasuke Uchiha #Naruto #Naruto Shippuden #I don't really care if you love or hate Sasuke #but don't condescend or harass people for having an opinion #Naruto is a shounen action series about hope stop trying to make it into a grimdark #I don't know how cohesive or readable this is since I didn't write it all in one go like my other posts #Rant #Analysis #Character analysis #sort of #kind of #my stooff

[professorsta]

I find it funny how weird people are with the alastor shipping debate. Some people (with a very condescending tone) are stating that fandoms cannot be controlled and will ship whoever they want (true but I doubt people who are on the fandom website aren't aware of the porn rule), or people on the other side telling those who ship alastor that they are purposefully being ignorant douchebags. I think alastor is of course being side lined in his sexuality. I don't believe thats a crazy concept considering it happened to gay characters getting shipped with women, happened to lesbian characters bring shipped with men. I think at the end of the day that argument ended on "you're not a morally bankrupt person for shipping a gay man with a woman, you're just probably lacking creativity and an imagination that exceeds your personal lived experience, as well as possible prejudice/bias that you can self reflect on," (again you're not a Stupid Bigot for needing to do this. We all have our subconscious biases we need to work and reflect on). Aro/ace people have a right to their feelings lmao even if you're partially right in that alastor will still be shipped. We can feel like the fandom is ignoring Alastor's core of who he is, his richness of characteristics, and his depth to pidgin hole him into a common archetype. Which i think is a fair opinion to have. Ones sexuality is a fundamental part of who they are, and ignoring Al being aro/ace strips him partially of his canon characteristics. You don't have to defend you're entire existence if you ship alastor tho. I was in the voltron fandom when keith and shiro were being shipped, ive been in the discourse trenches and couldn't care less about fake people kissing. But i can see how, you know, when you're excluded it can get annoying, and ones blog is a place to let go when the patience well has dried up. The character aren't real, but you're fellow queer members are. And they see how easily it is for you to forgot to engage with aromantiscm. A lack of interest and compassion in understanding our views and way of navigating the world. Its not as simple as "fandoms will ship whoever they want its not important" or "anyone who ships alastor should be harassed and shamed". Its a hard knock life for all of us. Lets see other's perspectives before judging? And maybe have some understanding for those in your community who are forgotten, who are just trying to make some noise, whether is be angry, sad, or desperate, just to be heard

#alastor #hazbin hotel #alastor aroace #vivziepop #aromantic #aromantism

[sempercredens]

Post about fannicalcascade part 2 because sigh.

Here's a link to my first post from the middle of December about them where I go over their takes on the s3 finale and their take that the love between Hannigram is unrequited from Will's side. At this point I also immediately want to say that I don't necessarily disagree with that they have a different opinion on the season finale, I just found it very poorly argued and gave counterarguments.

Not a lot of new talking points came up but that isn't the point of this post now. In the first one, I already broached the topic of their behaviour in the ending paragraphs because I found some of it very odd. For example, that they were sending anons to bigger Hannibal/Hannigram blogs in a clear attempt to bait them into discourse, how they claim not to be anti-Hannigram but tag their posts as such, and how I personally perceive the undertone of their posts as very condescending towards shippers.

This post here is basically just about expanding on that.

Disclaimer though: this is a silly internet ship war on a large irrelevant website, with no real world implications about anyone's morals. While I'm gonna say straight out that I find them annoying (and I will get into the reasons in the following), they have done no actual moral wrongs. Don't go insult or harass them (or the other two people running the blog. If you absolutely must seek them out, stay polite or get eaten. That includes refraining from using ableist language (e.g. calling them "delusional" or something). Thanks!

List of contents:

1. Shipping goggles 2. Cherrypicking 3. How they talk about Hannigram shippers and handle criticism 3.5. Middle school-isms 4. Arguments (or lack thereof) 5. General conclusion 6. "Fandom critique"

Let's get into it:

1. Shipping goggles

The fannibalcascade blog has stated in their introductory post already that they want to view the s3 finale without shipper goggles. So far, so good. However in this post they reveal the existence of a sideblog they have. It's been edited out by now and I'm unlucky not to be able to provide that evidence but said sideblog was revealed to be @/lecterlure. lecterlure has also been participating in replying to other blogger's responses to baiting anons, basically giving the typical fannibalcascade takes. As a benefit of the doubt I will also say however that according to themself the fannibalcascade blog is run by three people and lecterlure could be either of them. It adds up timewise for me since the first content on the lecterlure blog is from the beginning of January.

I'm bringing up lecterlure in the context of shipping goggles because as of me writing this there are just over 60 posts on the lecterlure blog which focuses on the book and Hopkins film version of the Hannibal canon. Half of the posts on that blog are unambiguously about Clannibal. (Yes, I counted.)

Nothing wrong with Clannibal, of course! You do you. The reason I'm pointing it out is just because it seems that the Hannigram faction is not the only one with shipping goggles. Considering they claim that they ship "neither", I just find that very untransparent.

EDIT: in the notes of this post lecterlure said that she is one of the three but NOT the one mainly running the fannibalcascade blog. My assumption that the two are the same people is therefore null and they are to be regarded as two people! She is only little involved in the blog's postings, merely sharing theories with thel and reading over the posts. Nevertheless, I'll bring her up again in some points since she is associated with the fc blog and whether that is her intention or not her interactions do reflect back on the fannibalcascade blog.

2. Cherrypicking

When they were called out for cherrypicking metas, they replied they didn't. The metas they've reblogged are from bonearenaofmyskull and mendelsohnben respectively. Said metas had been posted in the years 2015 and 2016. You'd have to do some digging to find them to reblog them straight from the ops.

Not to mention that there is a huge amount of Hannibal meta posts around when you search the tag for it. So to claim that out of those many, many meta posts, you organically found metas from over 8 years ago that apparently agree with your viewpoint - the view point of a minority in the fandom - does not come across to me as very believable. You've got to have searched for those.

3. How they talk about Hannigram shippers and handle criticism

Most of the criticism they received for their bahaviour around sending anons, cherrypicking, and reblogging ship posts to exercise "fandom critique" was, admittedly worded quite harshly and I don't endorse that. That said, it's not entirely unfounded.

There is two posts I'd like to highlight for this point. In this one they refer to the people who criticise them on anon as "pathetic teenagers" or "teenage conspirators" with "delusional takes". The "delusional" take being that fannibalcascade is behind the anons that people have received. While I can't 100% make the claim that fannibalcascade is in fact behind those anons - and I don't actually think they are behind all of them - I find it suspicious how the anon activity coincides with the activity of the fannibalcascade blog and how you can find the lecterlure account participating in the notes. The only other clue I can offer is how this anon highlighted the blog name in red, which is a very fannibalcascade thing to do since they like to highlight things in red in their posts.

The other post I want to highlight in this regard is this one where they mock shippers for thinking that getting validation from a bigger blog means they're right, and "How naive does one have to be to rely on someone else to stand for their points?" Which is rich coming from someone who reblogs the (old) metas of other bigger blogs to validate their own point, and are incapable of forming their own meta since their original meta posts are basically just repetitions of those they've reblogged. This is, for example, is just repeating this one by bonearenaofmyskull, but cherrypicked, reblogged only hours earlier.

In this same second post, they also point out how contradictory the statements of Hannigram shippers are, as if that was some big "gotcha". It's very likely that the people they mean here are, well, different people with different view points about the same thing. This is only a "gotcha" if it was the same person.

So my point here is: I find their handling of criticism and stance on shippers condescending, devaluing and not indicative of someone who's interested in a discussion on equal footing.

3.5. Middle school-isms

This is only a minor point but I wanted to point out how very middle schoolish their "arguments" sometimes are. They act all innocent when called out about adding their "shippers are delusional" takes to joke posts, the anon thing, and their down-talking tone. Examples: [x] [x]. Especially the whole thing about "my blog, my opinion" and "So I can't share my opinions now?" are such lackluster takes at this point. You're talking like a boomer who gets called out for a misogynistic take on Cpt. Marvel, like come on now, do better.

Also since I'm assuming they're the person behind this ask (linked above already)

I'm perplexed at this appeal to authority. "I'm older than you, therefore I'm right". Again: come on now, is that really the take here? This is some kindergarten level of arguing. By that logic every Hannigram shipper older than them would actually be right. As crimsondinnerparty correctly says: that's not how it works.

That's the post I saw that made me "wow, that's cringe, I'm gonna write this big ass post".

4. Arguments (or lack thereof)

As alluded to above, they barely make points of their own that aren't noticeable inspired by the metas they've reblogged from other people before. Nothing wrong with reblogging posts you agree with, per sé, but that is very much not the same thing as leading a discussion with someone. On this post they proudly announce "Here I debunked another theory" when they've had no input on the post that was originally made by youweresoafraid with an actual worthwhile addition from bonearena. You didn't debunk anything. You just reblogged a post.

I find that case worth mentioning because some anon went to crimsondinnerparty's inbox to say that "Fannibalcascade also debunked the sailing thing" when evidently, fannibalcascade didn't add anything to it.

Another post that stuck out to me in terms of leading an argument was this one about whether or not Will is a murderer.

The answer:

For a blog that promises deep metas and values the nuance of the show, I personally find this a very shallow take. If this is the promised deep meta and nuance, then I'm sorry but good night.

Not to constantly bring her up but bonearena also expressed frustration with how fannibalcascade is only capable of circular arguing [x] and their lack of evidence to support their claims. Despite fannibalcascade (or rather lecterlure in the notes) constantly crying for proof themself.

Taken from this post's notes.

Edit again: While, as noted, lecterlure is not the same person as fannibalcascade, my argument remains that the members of the blog don't actually provide evidence of their own but constantly demand it from others.

So general conclusion to this point:

I personally think that fannibalcascade is just pretty annoying. Really, what else is new here on the interwebs? There's annoying people, wow, big revelation. They're not capable of properly debating and I don't think that they even want a proper debate. I find their approach to opening a debate insufferable, especially when they go "oh, I'm just asking questions? What's wrong with asking questions? Can't I have an opinion anymore? If you've got proof, why don't you bring it up? Oh, that means, you don't have any after all. Checkmate." entirely childish. People don't wanna talk to you because nothing you've said or done indicates a genuine openness for a debate on eye-level. The sheer audacity of calling themself "the only logical person available in the fandom now" - assuming that anon is them, even if not my point is still supported by their other posts - absolutely flabbergasts me. It's this condescending tone, the implied sneering of "you're all illiterate but I've eaten wisdom with spoons and I'm your logical saviour" that absolutely rubs me the wrong way.

That their blog also focuses entirely on the s3 finale is another thing I find very counterproductive to any genuine debate because the s3 finale is their only reference for anything. The majority of their meta posts (reblogged and original) focus only on Will pushing Hannibal and himself off the cliff. That is the only thing that is ever "debated" on the blog, and especially in regards to the whole "does Will love Hannibal back?" question is an extremely narrow frame of reference.

The entire "debate" they want to introduce is also entirely pointless as, as I said, focuses on the s3 finale and whatever could possibly happen in s4. The reason I find this a pointless debate is because s4 doesn't exist and every meta or theory or what have you is only fanfiction. We're all getting upset here over each other's fanfiction, like jfc. For all we know the fall transported them into some anime Isekai world.

"Fandom critique"

According to their tagging system, fannibalcascade is also motivated by offering critique to the fandom. Which I'm not against in the slightest conceptually. Personally, I think there are many things that can be criticised about fandom, any fandom. Just to give examples, two problems I see within fandoms is 1) the lowkey misogyny is fandoms dominated by m/m pairings or 2) the everpresent problem of people reposting other people's fanworks without permission. I think tackling such issues could actually improve a fandom.

What doesn't improve a fandom is telling shippers that they're delusional teenagers for shipping the main characters of a show that is explicitly centered around their relationship. Even while making their silly little posts, Hannigram shippers are entirely aware that in a real life context that relationship would of course be toxic and terrible. The reason it's such a big ship stems largely from an actual acknowledgement of the show's nuances. It's precisely those nuances and their engaging character dynamics that make them such a compelling ship.

Here's the point where I want to acknowledge all the beautiful metas people (who ship Hannigram) have actually written. You can find something about everything in the show. You can find meta about the religious symbolisms. Meta about the character's clothing styles and what they represent in which scenes. Meta about the most inconspicuous things in the background. Meta about shot compositions. It's there.

So why limit yourself to the last three minutes of 39 episodes worth of television? Like c'mon, step up your meta game.

Coming back to the point of fandom critique, both sides are just fighting windmills. We're already biased in our approachs, we're not going to change each other's minds like this. So why not employ some standard internet/tumblr etiquette and leave people be? What people ship is not a value judgment of their irl morals.

So again, I want to clarify:

I don't think fannibalcascade is a bad, immoral person. Despite all the things I've listed in this post, I don't hate them. I don't want to encourage any harassment against them. I don't mind at all that they're presumably partial towards Clannibal. Couldn't care less, really. They're allowed to dislike Hannigram. Couldn't care less. I'd even say it's a valid take, just badly argued.

Genuinely, this is very much just about how I find it annoying to see their takes (or their takes being repeated by people who agree with them) interrupt my peaceful scrolling through Hannigram posts. And I hereby challenge them to write posts about the things they like (about the show, about the books or the Hopkins films, doesn't matter to me).

#fannibalcascade #hannibal nbc #hannibal meta #hannigram #hannibal lecter #will graham #this took longer than expected because i spent a lot of time counting things and doing maths #*sigh* the beauty of meta #i'm love media analysis and I can be trusted with images of this show #genuinely “it's a valid take just badly argued” is the thesis statement I have about them #so let that be your tl:dr ig

[dragon-central]

This is extraordinarily petty and honestly ill get blocked more for it but. Since Xaz blocked me after I replied to their condescending ass post where they used a bunch of strawman/oversimplified arguments and said stuff like "yall are just fucking mean" and we just need more "whimsy" in our hearts, I'm gonna put my thoughts in a new post.

1. Minor complaints are not mean. If you are harassing staff or people who like Dusthides, you are the problem.

2. This game is much larger than it was even a few years ago. Ancients are great! They were a wonderful solution. Everyone loves more dragons! I personally am fine with Dusthides existing, they are cute!

3. Nobody likes it when their favorites are criticized. But!! People who take time to criticize a game are usually the ones that love that game the most and want it to succeed. We worry about the behind the scenes management and decisions because so many other pet games, especially independent ones, have failed miserably after they started crunching and rushing content. Nobody wants this to happen to FR.

4. Critique is a natural and healthy part of any space, it is OK if there are no more unanimous loved updates when there are thousands and thousands of players!!!

So in conclusion, you all have to admit this is a bit of a baffling decision. Of course people are critiquing it! We used to get 1 ancient a year, than 2, now 3. This is unsustainable and could be a bad decision when they already have trouble with keeping up. I made a post about how great it is that they hired a writer! Hopefully that means good things. It's OK to like new ancients, and it's okay to not like them. That's healthy!!! Xaz was in their right to block people who disagree. You can too! But please don't call them mean, or act like they are horrible, joyless people for having opinions. That's incredibly rude! Especially when you say "it's just a game" in your post!

So to wrap up, because it goes both ways:

"just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's bad. Or that the person doing it is wrong. Or that the person doing it has to listen to you." -Xaz, 2024

#flight rising #fr #flightrising #ohg this one could get me in trouble #but that's ok #i think its important

[burst-of-iridescent]

Hello! Zutarians like you are the reason why I am moving further away from Zutara. the way you talk rudely to people who disagree with you is really upsetting. The anon who wrote to you (or several anons) did not show rudeness and spoke quite politely, but you literally immediately started being rude, talking arrogantly and familiarly. the fact that someone does not agree with you does not mean that you need to talk rudely, arrogantly or point out mistakes in English to people (it may come as a shock to you, but a lot of young people do not have the opportunity to get a good education and do not have the opportunity to know English perfectly, especially if it is not their native language). thank you, you completely ruined zutara for me.

do you think it's polite to come into someone's inbox just to mock an edit they spent a lot of time and effort on, which they tagged appropriately for the express purpose of making sure no one who enjoyed kat.aang would see it? do you think it's polite to then follow up with an unasked-for essay in response, one that misappropriates the legitimate issues faced by women of colour to tear down a fictional ship? do you think it's polite to invalidate the racial identity of an actual woman of colour just because she doesn't agree with your opinions? do you think it's polite to keep anonymously bombarding strangers you don't know online with condescending, bad-faith arguments that don't take into account anything they're trying to say?

do you think that perhaps, just perhaps, after dealing with all of that for 24 hours straight, people might not feel inclined to be cheery and pleasant to the person responsible for it?

the fact that someone does not agree with you does not mean that you need to talk rudely, arrogantly or point out mistakes in English to people

i couldn't agree more. that is why i am perfectly willing to engage in polite, civil discussion with people who are actually arguing in good-faith, and who don't harass me online or associate with others who do.

i have no idea why you seem to think i criticized that anon's english by the way; if that is from my "pay attention in english class" remark, i was referring to media literacy skills (a fair point to make, considering that's exactly what they came into my asks about). not once did i ever remark on their grammar, spelling, or anything else about their english, nor do i feel the need to.

but if it's more important to you to blame and tone police me instead of the person who's been harassing me for the last two days, then please know that i'm not the one ruining zutara and zutara fandom for you.

you're doing that just fine on your own.

#the discourse #for anyone in my asks confused about what's been happening: this is your summary #this will be my final word on the discourse and i will not entertain any further asks #whether you're pro or anti

[teaveetamer]

I will say, certainly didn't have "some guy accuses me of not understanding how the Holocaust happened as a gotcha response to me, a person of Jewish descent, explaining why the Holocaust happened" on my 2023 bingo card, but I have to say it's at least demonstrative of my whole point. That server is full of people who never actually read anything that we have to say. Their only interaction with us has been people in their own community grabbing a specifically curated collection of our posts and lobbing them in their faces like a molotov cocktail. These are things they would have never been aware of had someone not gone and curated them. And they just, like, believe whatever the fuck these people say about us without actually checking? And I'm apparently the hysterical bitch to them, not the guy throwing a tantrum and posting screenshots to every social media account he owns every time he reads a video game opinion he doesn't like, nor the guy condescending to me about how I, someone of Jewish descent, couldn't possibly know anything about the Holocaust. Because I said harassment is bad, stop stalking people who blocked you, and also don't use Nazi rhetoric it's dangerous.

I really hope certain people are questioning why, exactly, they were ignorant of this extremely relevant piece of background info, and why they felt completely comfortable accusing me of not understanding the Holocaust despite apparently having never read a word of my blog. Recognize that someone is keeping you in the dark, or they're encouraging you to keep yourself in the dark. Apparently it's working, because you lobbed such a severe accusation at me despite doing literally no research at all. Ask yourself if you really want to be around the kind of people who would let you make such a fool of yourself when they know you're missing a huge piece of the equation because I told them about my background directly. In telling you about the current situation they have never, not once, thought to mention that I'm upset about this because I am intimately familiar with where Nazi rhetoric can lead, and I am annoyed because I already had someone from your server use it to try and upset me. Why, exactly, do you think they didn't want you to know that?

[scoobydoodean]

every so often I see a deancrit post that makes me believe dean girls should be allowed to maim and bite and kill fr....idk how you find the strength to combat the nonsense because I saw a post so insane this morning that I had to get up and take a walk outside to calm down. all that to say: thank you for defending our boy because I wish I could do it but I get so upset I can't even string sentences together let alone write such eloquent rebuttals the way you do 🩷

❤️ Oh believe me I get it. I used to talk to people in the SPN subreddit jbdzfjshbjfhb. Deancrits have made posts that make me see so red I'm like Doom Guy on the last dredges of his health (if they aren't making me laugh my ass off) but they are very rarely in my face these days. My dash is a blessedly dean-positive space full of sexy people making sexy posts. I definitely recommend building yourself a nice curated dash and blocking or filtering whoever you need! You do NOT have to be in the trenches.

A lot of the cataloguing content of the blog is based on pervasive fanon opinions I have simply been here long enough to know about. Deancrits almost always just reinvent the same tired arguments, so that works in my favor. Thankfully, I don't have to expose myself to opinions I don't like in order to build up the collections I am building... though I certainly do fixate on certain collections when crits get nasty in my notifs or the notifs of the people I follow.

One thing I recommend, when you do start to feel mad, is to quickly identify what about a post stands out as making you the most angry. I think you'll often find that at the center of it, almost always, is "This person made an argument that ignores all context and is in such bad faith that it actively infuriates me", or "That literally never happened. They just made that up and everyone is just believing them!" But the thing is... as soon as you realize they said something really really stupid... it can quickly become extremely funny—a big huge joke. Laughter is excellent medicine. As soon as you see the humor in something, it becomes incredibly un-intimidating and your mind is usually cleared of a lot of the clutter your rage inspired, so you can simply focus on dispensing with what was said that was so very silly.

I'll be honest though. I greatly benefit from the fact that I am so annoying on my own page talking to myself and my mutuals and followers that a lot of deancrits I've never spoken to or heard of in my life have blocked me, and they are, overwhelmingly so full of shit that when the remaining dredges decide to stumble their way onto my blog and cry about my posts I just end up laughing my ass off at the mental gymnastics they've contorted themselves into to get the ideas they spew at me.

I mean sorry to be a huge sanctimonious dick about crits, but I'm not the one whose perpetually gone on their blogs and posts and started commenting obnoxious drivel like a pompous ass. I don't exactly have great opinions on a group of people I've mainly been exposed to through condescending tags and replies and comments and hate mail, through ridiculous and outright offensive claims about my irl character based on what fictional characters I like, through harassment campaigns launched against various people, and through their attempts to bully people off the internet.

#mail #dont feed the stans after midnight

[web-novel-polls]

Just saw your MDZS thing and I half agree and half not. Like, on the one hand, I think it's absolutely justified (though I don't generally support any torture, but this is fiction and...it's Wen Chao...), but on the other hand, it's not supposed to be black and white??? MXTX clearly wanted her readers to understand the cruelty of this moment. Wei Wuxian was so traumatized he became kind of twisted, at least with the people who massacred the Jiangs. But even though we all know WWX is NOT the evil overlord that the cultivation world thinks him to be, he is not meant to be seen as someone who can do no wrong. He makes mistakes! Some of the fault does, in fact, lie with him! He's not 100% sunshine boy! And THAT'S OKAY. In fact, him being complex is WHY he's such a good character! And it boggles my mind how people will go to any lengths to make him perfectly innocent and pure in everything (rather than being traumatized and human) while also vilifying Jiang Cheng and Jin Guangyao and Xue Yang and whoever else. Like, the latter two obviously did really bad things, worse than WWX, but they are very obvious mirrors to WWX. Xue Yang grew up an orphan on the streets. If WWX hadn't been rescued by Jiang Fengmian, he might've turned out the same way. Jin Guangyao was consistently denigrated for being the son of a prostitute. WWX also faced classism (to a lesser extent) for being the son of a servant (which Yu Ziyuan and Jin Zixun used against him). And don't even get me started on JC. People will go to any extent to vilify him when all of his actions make sense as someone who is also human and flawed and traumatized. Does this absolve any of them of their actions? No. But it does explain them. And just because someone does make mistakes doesn't mean they deserve to be hated and condemned (unless they're Wen Chao, who didn't make mistakes but who instead had an entire personality dedicated to being horrible. Pretty sure he's the only one who MXTX wanted to be a straight up bad guy, though if you can give me evidence to the contrary, feel free). Readers thinking in black and white and condemning other characters for xyz actions without trying to understand them while holding up WWX as a shining beacon who can do no wrong miss the entire point of the novel and do disrespect to WWX himself. Anyway... There's my rant over. Feel free to ignore this if you want, haha.

I’m not completely sure what you mean in regards to “half agreeing and half not” tbh. It seems to me like your disagreement lies with vilifying other characters when the main character is a morally complex character, which was my point? The morality policing was specifically what I was criticizing in my original post? Because, like, I agree with the broad strokes about Wei Wuxian and other characters’ moral complexities and grayness. 

My point was that, even if justified or understandable, the torture of Wen Chao was horrific and brutal, and I don’t completely understand how anyone who DID read the novel (which I understand not everyone has and/or has a different interpretation) is willing to harass actual, flesh-and-blood people over liking a character when the main character has literally tortured someone. That’s it.

I actually made my original post after a bunch of Jiang Cheng antis (who I do actually like talking to and seeing their opinions when they’re not harassing others) found an Aroace-spec Character Tournament poll with Jiang Cheng and were incredibly condescending about it. Which is honestly better than the death threats and threats of violence and doxxing, but it did hurt more than it probably should have to have people so unwilling to even TRY and see why I, and others, connected to Jiang Cheng, even after reading the same book that made them hate him. 

Seeing a character say, “Hey, what you did was not okay. I know why you did it, but it doesn’t change the damage you caused. I do not forgive you." to the main character was something that I needed to hear and see. It was something real, even if it might not be justifiable or “correct.” I like Jiang Cheng not because I think he’s always in the right or a perfect person, but because he’s not. And it’s fine if people don’t like him or think he’s the scum of the Earth or whatever, but I also think that prioritizing the debate about a character that doesn’t exist over actual people is cruel and unjustifiable. Ultimately, I do not care about any fictional character as much as I care about how willing people are to be so unbelievably inhumane for just disagreeing with them. 

And, somehow, this also ties into my opinions about the torture and killing of Wen Chao. I don’t think Wei Wuxian was unjustified, per se, for punishing Wen Chao, but I do think it was wrong in the sense that the action itself is wrong. It’s not a “WHOOO! WE KILLED THE BAD GUY” moment to me but a moment showing the brutality of war and a literary mark of descent to the “single plank bridge.” As someone else said (and so many more have probably said), it was fucked up, and acknowledging it was fucked up doesn’t mean Wei Wuxian is a “bad person” or a character you CAN’T like (paraphasing). It just means acknowledging that the act of torture itself is fucked up, no matter who does it or who it’s done to. Comparatively, sending death threats and threats of violence and doxxing is also fucked up, no matter who the other person is and what they’ve said. Putting a fictional story and character - no matter how much they may mean to you - over actual people for often no reason is fucked up. 

But yeah, I think “just because someone does make mistakes doesn’t mean they deserve to be hated and condemned” is one of my favorite aspects in a lot of web novels. I like that characters have “bad aspects” that while I may not condone IRL, including them make the characters… characters. That the “person” (character) is more important than whatever “bad aspect” they may have or mistake they might have made.

Anyway, I hope this clears up what I was trying to say lol. Not everything I wrote was meant specifically because I think you don’t agree or to argue with you, but to get my opinion across properly. I feel like we’re broadly saying the same thing, even if I’m not sure if I agree or disagree with the finer points like “Wei Wuxian might have become like Xue Yang.” Sorry if any of this comes off as aggressive, btw; it's not meant to be, but I lose my fight with tone everyday.

#not a poll #asks #discourse #long post #hopefully I got your point(s) right as well but lmk if I didn't #I wouldn't respond if I wasn't somewhat confident I figured it out but communication is not one of my skills lol #web speaks #mdzs spoilers #spoilers

[strangertheories]

I'm not surprised people are blowing up your Ask box. You didn't just say not all Mlevens are stupid. You blew up on the Anons who were just trying to explain to you why Bylers might be irritated and sick of constantly getting called slurs. You don't even know who sent you those asks, so how can you say they're condescending to Mlevens and that they bully them?

Firstly, the anons were in response to this post. And yes, I am going to say they are condescending because to me, that is how they came across, and they came into my ask box. They were talking down to me and saying I was only playing nice for having the opinions that I do. They also said that the majority of Mleven shippers are homophobes who use homophobic slurs and are rooted in bigotry so you're just calling out stupidity when you doubt the intelligence of all Mleven shippers and also gay Mike is the better and more valid interpretation than bi Mike. So maybe they didn't mean to and I struggle with tone sometimes, but it felt condescending.

S5 has not come out yet. Byler is not canon yet. It's weird to say anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or homophobic. I have a few Mleven mutuals who I follow for other reasons and I don't think that they ship it because they're stupid or even that they're not critical of the show. The ship has a lot of cute moments, so I understand why someone likes it even if I don't. Plus, I literally say in my original post that I'm only going to publicly disagree with these takes if they make the fandom unsafe or are in my asks, so it's not like they didn't know.

You can critique Mleven and not be condescending. If you scroll through the anti mleven tag on my blog, hopefully that is how I come across when I critique it. But I go after the show, not the shippers, unless they're making this fandom unsafe, being a homophobe or in my ask box, in which case I will call out the individual who said that. Sorry, I just feel like the enemy of the Byler fandom should be the homophobes in the fandom but because Byler is so set in people's minds, it can feel like erasure not to ship it. But it's set in your mind. After S5 and if Mike is confirmed to be gay, then I'd agree.

And I get that people are annoyed by Byler hatred. It's crap, I get a lot of it as I'm quite vocal about loving the ship. But being harassed doesn't excuse making the Byler tag a very hostile place. And I'm not even talking about Mleven shippers. If you agree with all the popular theories, you might not realise this but it's scary to have a take different to any of the popular ones on this tag (birthday gate, gay Mike, Edward Creel) because even if it is on your own blog and you haven't mentioned anyone, you get a flood of asks from people telling you that you're stupid or watching the show wrong.

So yeah, my patience has reached an end. And my ask box since I made that post just kinda confirmed that for me. I love this fandom. I think most people are nice and respectful. But I'm not going to pretend the Byler tag is not incredibly hostile and intimidating and that some of you guys can be quite toxic. It makes sense, it's a huge fandom so of course there will be infighting, but we can disagree without just insulting people or talking down to them. Ok, that's my final post on the situation for a while.

#byler #stranger things #byler tumblr

[ocpdzim]

Hey buddy, we understand that things can get confusing with so many differing opinions, but roleplay accounts are much more popular nowadays, and there are many people willing to help with any possible harassment you'd get.

Claiming endogenous origins can at first seem to help against hidden trauma, as coping with that knowledge can be very scary, but we promise that there are ways to help you with it so that you don't have to feel alone.

However trying to claim genuine endogenous origins can be very harmful as by definition, it's not possible. Systems have been trying to fight against stigmatized ideas ever since science uncovered them, and claiming that just anyone can "be" an endogenic system is incredibly offensive as, just like you, we've gone through genuine horrors that forced us to this point just to survive.

I’m going to do my best to respond to this politely, but fair warning, if I get another ask like this I am not likely to be this polite again.

First of all, it is extremely insulting for you to start this out with ~I know things can be confusing.~ I am not confused, and perhaps if you think everyone who disagrees with you must simply be confused, you aren’t cut out for this sort of discussion.

I didn’t go into this in detail in the post because frankly it was besides the point - my personal experience with these things is not the reason we should be treating others with respect and dignity - but when I was first engaging with the system community I had repressed trauma I was not aware of. Over the years, I have figured it out and come to terms with it and am generally doing fine now, but at the time, when I wasn’t aware of the trauma, it was still pretty obvious that I had a system and it was people like you who made me feel unwelcome in my own community, further worsened my already disastrously bad mental health, and further discouraged me from seeking any kind of help (although, in all fairness on that last point, my past experience with psychiatry was already plenty discouraging on its own). Although I never declared endogenous origin, behavior like yours caused me to feel unsafe and constantly on edge that some asshole might come into my inbox and interrogate me about whether I had enough trauma to justify my own existence. I highly doubt my experience there is unique. Now, here you are with your incredibly condescending ask that can only really be addressed by either ignoring it, telling you to fuck off, or providing personal background that not everyone is as comfortable with sharing as I am. It’s baffling to me that anyone familiar with the online climate surrounding this discussion couldn’t recognize this as a harmful and invasive pattern.

Endogenous systems, on the other hand, have never once made me feel unwelcome or hurt or invalidated. On the contrary, they’ve provided friendship, support, and spearheaded efforts to get accommodations and understanding for systems in groups I’ve been in. I’ve also seen how behavior like yours has hurt friends of mine who are endogenous systems, and to put it bluntly, if they’d been faking then there is no way they wouldn’t have abandoned the grift by now due to the sheer quantity of cruelty they’ve experienced about it and the complete lack of any personal gain. Is it any wonder that I’d rather throw my lot in with them than with the psychiatric system that caused me so much pain and trauma or with a group of bizarrely self-important people online who believe they are entitled to know and be arbiter of other people’s mental health, with no concern for the damage done?

Your experience is not universal and neither is mine. I’m sorry that you experienced trauma, I know firsthand how bad that sucks. However, other systems existing without having experienced trauma - or having experienced trauma but not considering that the source of their system’s existence - is not your business, does not meaningfully affect you, and does not stigmatize us. If anything, it helps destigmatize systems, although there’s still a long way to go on that.

Finally, I would not trust the psychiatric establishment as an authority on what is or isn’t possible. It’s worth noting that even if you DO want to place your complete faith in the bloodstained system that has in the past considered homosexuality a disease and autistic people subhuman, the system which to this day is so rife with abuse that there is a psychiatry survivors movement, it’s easy to google the subject and discover that when speaking about trauma causing systems to form, psychiatric sources tend to use language like “usually” and “almost always” instead of “exclusively,” but frankly I place people’s direct accounts of their own experience far above anything the psychiatric establishment has to say on the matter anyway.

If you can bring me a concrete, real example of how endogenous systems supposedly cause harm to the community - as in, not “It makes me feel invalidated to see systems that are different from me” or “I met an endogenous system who was an asshole once” or “They’re in the way of my respectability politics” or “I just don’t think they exist and somehow that’s my business” or “I’ve never actually seen it happen but here’s a harm I think is maybe possible in theory,” we may continue this discussion. However, I will not be holding my breath for that, because in 7 years I have never once seen any argument against endogenous systems aside from those. Begone from my inbox until and unless you have something actually insightful to say.

#posting from mobile #swearing - #ableism - #medical abuse mention - #homophobia mention - #i know you syscourse types don’t like being called sysmeds but like. #if you’d like people to stop calling you sysmeds you ought to get some arguments that aren’t just transmed bs with a few words swapped out #jfc. #maybe examine why the existence of systems who’ve suffered less than you makes you so uncomfortable #also none of this is even going into how common it is for developmentally disabled people to face trauma that is never recognized as such #either by professionals or themselves #there’s studies out there about autistic trauma that show its common for autistic people to be traumatized by things like loud noise #but it is NOT easy to get a diagnosis of trauma if your trauma was caused by the school fire drill being too loud #and culturally it’s very hard to personally recognize that as trauma #if you want to play trauma police developmentally disabled people will be disproportionately impacted #that ALONE ought to be reason enough to knock it off

[incarnateirony]

2po. stop projecting. everyone sees it.

That fucking twitter post was you describing yourself. I don't hang out with antis, unless you consider "critical of jared padalecki's choices but not obsessed with it" anti. You're the one that was taking feeds from Gayle and Miamigirl, before Miamigirl started threatening drunkenly to cut hellers for hellering in unapproved spaces (?? a cockles M&G) at con. YOU were the one that screwed Kelios and Vinnie. They're asshole people, but assholes fucking assholes just makes everyone an asshole. You're not morally exempt just because they're assholes.

You're the one that has asked for tens of thousands of dollars for fandom to primarily fund your entire thing so you guys can get gold and silver packages and claim it's for charity. I have [checks notes] a patreon, which I imagine you think I devised as a grand scheme. I think I make like. 30 bucks a month on it. It's a tip jar dude. I'm an artist. Unlike you I'm not just playing distributor and "con vacationer on other dimes". I make my own shit and sometimes people buy me a coffee. Are you fucking ok.

I don't change my posts. You do. In fact, every time you've claimed I've changed an opinion, you've been met with a receipt of me saying the opposite of what you claim. Then you run away, stop responding, and make up a new lie you think might work, until someone hits you with a receipt about that. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Anyone who was here before season 15 KNOWS you're a lying sack of shit with what you say I claimed "every year." I took YEARS of harassment YOU helped antagonize pretending you cared. Because you are a lying sociopathic piece of shit trying desperately to cling on to relevance in a fandom and new showrunner stint that's been slamming the flush button over and over and you're just swirling around like a fatty turd.

No seriously dude waving around like 20 scripts you can barely get a few thousand bucks, and those packages you're buying for autos are 800-1600 bucks. If you gave two fucks about charity you'd tell people to just give that money to charity, not send yourself to cons to get 20 scripts for 30,000 and go "well we gave 2000 to charity!"

Bruh. Stop pretending for the free con ride. Piece of shit. You only even started the charity shit once I started lighting your asses on fire for gaining dozens of thousands of dollars in direct tangible monetary rewards from fandom, but you're weirdly obsessed with my tiny patreon. Wild. Almost like you're desperate to distract from your grift getting called and figure screaming grifter at others resolves the fact that yes, you're several dozen thousand dollars in debt to this fandom and will never pay it back. Nor will it ever make it to charity in a meaningful amount compared to what liquid cash the fandom originally had available. Spare me your weirdly dishonest and condescending "so generous" gif, because you don't even know how to do THAT without looking like a fake piece of shit.

[questioninqthings]

Going to be honest, and sorry if it comes across as harsh, but frankly as a shipper I'm sick to death and frustrated with the expectation that I /need/ a reason to enjoy what I enjoy. I'm an adult. I do not need to justify myself to other people over what /fictional/ media I enjoy. I have been a blankshipper since pretty much when BW were released - nearly /15 years/. In 15 years of shipping twincest not once have I ever had these thoughts turned on my own siblings. Same as I don't think about committing murder or anything because I play games like GTA. I am not forcing my opinions on anyone, and I tag my content and frankly, made myself /very/ clear that I am a proshipper, yet people still came into /my/ space to harass /me/ and get upset. Do you know what it's like to be told multiple times a week "your art/writing would be good if only you didn't make things I don't like" because it's fucking demoralising. I'm sorry for being intense, but it's /exhausting/ to the point of just leaving platforms because I'm sick of seeing that garbage in /my/ space.

You likely know of the last person who came into this space asking about why we enjoy what we enjoy. I can at least say thank you for not being so fucking condescending and self righteous about it. How would /you/ feel if a shipper came into your space and went off about not condoning familial portrayals of these characters and how much they hate it, but oh they're throwing you a bone by having the "decency" to ask about it! Sorry this is so...vent-y. But it's frustrating. There is no "valid" reason why I like this ship. I simply do. And if given the time to think up a reason why, there is absolutely no obligation to justify myself to people who are likely still going to be hostile (generalised, not directed at you in particular). Do you have to justify to people why you like/don't like pizza? Or why you like a certain sport or hobby? No? So why do I have to justify my interests simply because they don't align with your (general) interests and values?

Back when I was super young and didn't think about any implications, I was also a shipper of two brothers, so I can attest to not feeling that way towards my sibling.

Fiction is another story, but real life is a lot more complicated. As I've seen someone suggest, there is a biological disgust wired into us that makes us naturally disgusted by incest.

I do think this needs to be posted, though, for the sake of proving that fiction does not always reflect reality.

[zorilleerrant]

The trouble with getting people to read comics canon, instead of fanworks, is that, well. If someone only reads fanfic, then, yeah, sure, a lot of comics fans are going to have a low opinion of them, and maybe occasionally harass them or leave negative comments on whatever they create, but for the most part, it's easy to ignore those people. Someone saying, "you must read this," "you're a bad person for not reading that," "you shouldn't be allowed to exercise your creative impulses until you meet this arbitrary threshold," like that's obviously patently ridiculous.

But once you start reading comics, those same people start getting personal. They'll start telling you to die over liking or disliking the wrong thing, calling you slurs over interpreting something differently than they did. Quizzing you on the most minute details of something you never claimed to have read. Their comments will go from short aggressive statements to long diatribes nitpicking every single thing you did wrong, and they'll think they're helping when they do this. They'll sound, somehow, even more condescending when they say all of these things.

And it's not just the gatekeepers, either. There's a sense of community in fandom, but it's the kind where the different cliques sit at different tables, and the "I only like fanon" table is pretty warm and welcoming, and not too concerned with how anyone spends their time. The more you get into canon, even before you hit the people who read (and hate) every single comic, you start reaching tables where most of what people say is "you're a bad person for not including this character" and "you're a bad person for not having an in depth understanding of that character when you do write them." This interpretation of a character or plot or world is right, that one is wrong. These are the types of fics you can write, and those ones are bad. You're stupid if you want to examine xyz.

When fandom is fandom (and not a contest), most people are cool with someone knowing or not knowing a fic. If someone hasn't heard of something popular, people get excited to share it. When someone knows something really obscure, people get excited to hear about it. And, generally, if you like something other people don't, then kink tomato. And if you don't like something they do? Ah, don't like, don't read, room for everyone with every kind of taste.

But when you get into the canon, there's all kinds of unwritten rules. No one accepts some particular story as canon, and there's an established explanation for that other thing so you're not allowed to wonder about it. Here's a bunch of contradictory plot points, but these are the right ones. This character is important, and you must care about them. This other one isn't, so you can't. This is how this character is, it isn't how they were before, but it is now, and that's more important. If you're not up to date, fuck you.

And even when people aren't trying to tell you what to think and how to feel and which things you have to acknowledge, there's still the loneliness of consensus pervading everything. If you love some extremely popular arc of some extremely popular title, great. Maybe you feel vindicated that your favorite story won some awards. But then there's something else that won awards, got huge critical acclaim, has tons of fans. And you thought it was mediocre, or even terrible. Do people go, okay, to each their own, and let up? No, they snidely explain why you're wrong, actually, and then pressure you into reading more of the same style of content.

In fandom, if you dislike a particular author, you just find a new one. Even for the same character, it's usually pretty easy to find an author with style, content, and tone you like, that you think is good, or even great. For really minor characters it can be an issue, but for major characters, or tropes, or settings, or whatever, there's choices. If you want to read ongoings there's a single person writing the character you like, regardless of how much you enjoy their writing. A single artist no matter how much you want to look at that art. And, worse, it's one person writing half of comics at any given time, so it's not like you can just turn to a different character, either. You just have to put up with him until he gets usurped.

In fandom, when you don't like some super popular work, people nod and move on. They don't care that you didn't read that fic, or you don't follow that other artist, or you don't agree with some headcanon that went viral. Once you start reading comics, you can't just skip the ones you don't like, because people will start going wait, you read comics but you didn't read that one? Suddenly you're expected to know everything that ever happened to any character in any comic, or get people leaving you threatening notes.

Because it's not just "read any comic ever," it's "read one comic now, it's easy." And then it's, "I only expect you to know the basics, the really famous stories." And then it's, "I don't see why you can't read through the main canon. No one's asking you to read all the crossovers." And then it's, "I just think if you write a character you should be familiar with them. Why haven't you read all of their appearances? Just main series, nothing drastic." And then it's, "why don't you know this very famous AU? Why don't you know this popular crossover? Why don't you know this retelling, this reimagining, this possible future?" Very quickly, "just read one comic" turns into "read every single comic I've read and none of the ones I haven't, or I'll leave you nasty messages." Plus, you know, you better agree with what each comic meant to each individual person who interacts that way.

Is it any wonder people just want to stay away from all that?

#look i said something #the grandest irony of all is that the people who act this way think they're being polite and helpful and it must be someone else being mean #that they really do have low expectations that would be easy to meet. and they would never push anyone further #negative

[littlealeta]

I may not always agree with you on R&M opinions but you have every right to share them. I think you have provided enough of a perspective to see where you are coming from and you're not bullying anybody. I'm sorry you are being harassed.

Thanks.

I'm not being harassed anymore. And I do wish people would understand that I'm just debating and not trying to personally attack them. You can have healthy debates without them coming across as just arguing and I usually try to be respectful but it's often undermined by me attacking the works or me coming across as blunt. I just find Rick being more codependent toxic especially since I'm a person that believes you should stay true to yourself and follow what you think is best instead of relying on what other people think. And it's funny because Rick often hid his true feelings behind abuse and nonchalance. It doesn't mean that I want him to be the completely selfish, rebellious asshole he was but sometimes independence is healthy and dependence and being too nice can be just as toxic because it can lead to you being taken advantage of and making things worse even though you think it's making things better and we see that a lot with Rick in not just seasons 5-6 which happens more often but even before a couple times. We see that in the love potion episode and the dragon episode but at least he had the balls to call people out on how selfish and nonsensical their desires were. Being with a toxic family really doesn't help neither with why Rick should be meeker than S1 Morty. Bottom line, Rick can grow without becoming dependent on what his toxic family thinks.

It really hurts to be blocked just because I hate something. I had a lot of internet friends leave/block me because they couldn't handle my opinions. Usually I mute/ignore people that I find annoying as long as they don't insult me. I think everyone has a right to share their opinions and everyone has a right to debate with them as long as it's not disrespectful. I have dealt with people constantly ranting about things that I love before and while I do often come in and pop in my two cents just to get them to hopefully understand my perspective and maybe see the fiction in a different way, I usually ignore them if it gets to be too much.

I really don't mean to come off as arrogant or condescending. I feel like some of my opinions are right though because they are. Being too nice can be a problem sometimes. And I think fictions are allowed to get feedback so that the creators can improve. I study writing a lot so I often push my knowledge about writing onto other people and I get mad partially because I feed off of a bunch of rant videos since I find them funny and because of the anxiety/ocd it causes me even though it's not an excuse.

#rick and morty #vent

[bae-medusa]

People aren’t deciding u aren’t gay u moron

Your gay well done, but I ain’t queer, lgbt community and queer community are different u twat, we don’t want u stop inserting yourself into our space and deciding we have to change

We get it u feel uncomfortable when u aren’t the Centre of attention you’re a cunt

Believe me, I want to be the farthest possible from your space if it's full of people like you. I also don't get why you think me not wanting to be called an actual slur somehow equals to attempting to invade your space (which, I remind you, has you in it, so I don't want to be in it.) Anyway OP pretty much went "you should feel threatened when I call you a queer" and shouted absurdities at anyone who took offense. You have a problem with it, you go see them. If anything, by telling me I have to accept being called a slur by people like you, YOU'RE the once trying to decide that I have to change. Unless it's you again, you fucking loser, in which case, please go shove your condescending tone and retarded opinions up your ass. I said I was done with you and I meant it. Go harass someone else.

[lordoffireandflame]

Angry opinions on Downpour

Downpour was fun, I have angry opinions on it.

I think a major issue with Rain World: Downpour is that it spits in the face of the old game's themes. Like, when you play the old game, you FEEL helpless, you're a reasonably intelligent tool-using prey animal that is in an environment that your species isn't suitably acclimated to and you will die if you don't adapt.

I've seen people argue that the reason why the other slugcats are so overpowered is because an iterator made them so, but that just has has the same vibe as 'a wizard did it'. The Hunter made sense as essentially a supersoldier compared to the other slugs, it wasn't overpowered, you were still hunted, but you were reasonably fast and strong.

The ones that make the most sense are Rivulet (Rivulet should have just been able to breathe underwater and not just thirty seconds, the stress should have been on the more advanced water predators, not the drowning. Hell, have the Rivulet be immune to leeches) and the Saint (at least until it got God powers).

Other issues:

Artificer just feels like it was made by a guy who didn't know how to behave around scavs, died one too many times and coded in this abomination. This was the only campaign I never finished (unless you count the modded attempts). The story feels infantile and pathetic.

Gourmand's okay. I hated the story, though. Not much else to say here other than it feels too... well, 'feel good' for Rain World.

Spearmaster was ok, the only slugcat where I actually killed a red lizard with just spears.

The Saint was so fun, zipping around the structures was legitimately the best part of the game. WTF was the rubicon, though.

-Okay, I need to talk about the new Survivor and Monk endings. The base game is extremely nihilistic and vague, there's barely any good feelings here. And that's okay! Art doesn't really have to make you feel happy or satisfied. The new endings completely change the tone of the base game and, as said before, makes everything all 'feel good' instead of the enlightened struggle in the base game.

They gendered No Significant Harassment D:

Just the plot holes in general.

I actually liked the idea of Five Pebbles missing the ancients in his cities, but it clashes with what Moon said in the base game. You could make the argument of faulty memory or just being unreliable but... I don't see any reason as to why she would specifically be wrong about that one specific detail when we believe everything else she says.

Bad dialogue, 'And as your Big Sis, you know how protective I am of you!~' for example.

Honestly, I really don't like Five Pebbles' characterization here. In the base game he is best described as cold, condescending, but overall polite. He only turns rude and extremely patronizing during the Monk's campaign while barely keeping that veneer of helpfulness, he's annoyed and tired and wants to be left alone. I get his behavior in the Spearmaster campaign, but the others? Ehh... he's just kind of an asshole. Especially towards the Gourmand. I get it, Gourmand is showing obvious signs of gluttony, but if Five Pebbles was insulting the Gourmand for that sin, he should have been just as cruel towards the Artificer (yes, he calls her a barbarian and a beast a few times, but that isn't enough) for embodying violence.

My god do I hate the developer commentary. 'We didn't want to make out Five Pebbles to be seen as a villain, we wanted to make him morally ambiguous ' yo, anyone who has ever played the game and has read the lore knows Five Pebbles is morally ambiguous. Don't think we're stupid.

Looks to the Moon felt flanderized as well. People make her out to be some 'nice girl' in the base game. She can be nice, but she is still an iterator and has the similar attitudes Pebbles has. A better description of her is that she is polite, not necessarily nice. In the DLC she's turned into... well, I don't really know how to describe it other than it feels like the character traits the fans hyper fixated on got more and more exaggerated.

I don't like the new Echo names, they make too much sense. The base game Echoes' names seemed nonsensical, and that was part of their charm.

Honestly, I don't really feel like a small animal trying to adapt to an unfamiliar environment, I feel like the hero or a villain, which isn't what Rain World is about. It's about survival and adaptation that ultimately leaves to enlightenment.

There's more to say, but I'm done for now. I enjoyed the DLC, but the story issues were glaringly obvious the more I thought about it. The accessibility options were a good add on, but the story and characters. Saint was the best one by far.

Yeeks <3

#rain world spoilers #rain world downpour #rw critical #downpour critical #downpour spoilers #base game rain world