#but so is criticism of any kind in this fandom space | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

caparrucia · 1 year

Text

Full offense and pun fully intended, but I genuinely think the very existence of "dead dove, do not eat" was a fucking canary in the mines, and no one really paid attention.

Because the tag itself was created as a response to a fandom-wide tendency to disregard warnings and assume tagging was exaggerated. And then the same fucking idiots reading those tags describing things they found upsetting or disturbing or just not to their taste would STILL click into the stories and give the writer's grief about it.

And as a response writers began using the tag to signal "no, really, I MEAN the tags!"

But like.

If you really think about it, that's a solution to a different problem. The solution to "I know you tagged your story appropriately but I chose to disregard the tags and warnings by reading it anyway, even though I knew it would upset me, so now I'm upset and making it your problem" is frankly a block, a ban and wide-spread blacklisting. But fandom as a whole is fucking awful at handling bad faith, insidious arguments that appeal to community inclusion and weaponize the fact most people participating in fandom want to share the space with others, as opposed to hurting people.

So instead of upfront ridiculing this kind of maladaptive attempt to foster one's own emotional self-regulation onto random strangers on the internet, fandom compromised and came up with a redundant tag in a good faith attempt to address an imaginary nuance.

There is no nuance to this.

A writer's job is to tag their work correctly. It's not to tag it exhaustively. It's not even to tag it extensively. A writer's sole obligation, as far as AO3 and arguably fandom spaces are concerned, is to make damn sure that the tags they put on their story actually match whatever is going on in that story.

That's it.

That's all.

"But what if I don't want to read X?" Well, you don't read fic that's tagged X.

"But what if I read something that wasn't tagged X?" Well, that's very unfortunate for you, but if it is genuinely that upsetting, you have a responsibility to yourself to only browse things explicitly tagged to not include X.

"But that's not a lot of fic!" Hi, you must be new here, yes, welcome to fandom. Most of our spaces are built explicitly as a reaction to There's Not Enough Of The Thing I Want, both in canon and fandom.

"But there are things on the internet that I don't like!" Yeah, and they are also out there, offline. And, here's the thing, things existing even though we personally dislike or even hate or even flat out find offensive/gross/immoral/unspeakable existing is the price we pay to secure our right to exist as individuals and creators, regardless of who finds US personally unpleasant, hateful or flat out offensive/gross/immoral/unspeakable.

"But what about [illegal thing]?!" So the thing itself is illegal, because the thing itself has been deemed harmful. But your goddamn cop-poisoned authoritarian little heart needs to learn that sometimes things are illegal that aren't harmful, and defaulting to "but illegal!" is a surefire way to end up on the wrong side of the fascism pop quiz. You're not a figure of authority and the more you demand to control and exercise authority by command, rather than leadership, the less impressive you seem. You know how you make actual, genuine change in a community? You center harm and argue in good faith to find accommodations and spread awareness of real, actual problems.

But let's play your game. Let's pretend we're all brainwashed cop-abiding little cogs that do not own a single working brain cell to exercise critical thinking with. 99% of the time, when you cry about any given thing "being illegal!!!" you're correct only so far as the THING itself being illegal. The act or object is illegal. Depiction of it is not. You know why, dipshit? Because if depiction of the thing were illegal, you wouldn't be able to talk about it. You wouldn't be able to educate about it. You wouldn't be able to reexamine and discuss and understand the thing, how and why and where it happens and how to prevent it. And yeah, depiction being legal opens the door for people to make depictions that are in bad taste or probably not appropriate. Sure. But that's the price we pay, creating tools to demystify some of the most horrific things in the world and support the people who've survived them. The net good of those tools existing outweighs the harm of people misusing them.

"You're defending the indefensible!" No, you're clumsily stumbling into a conversation that's been going on for centuries, with your elementary school understanding of morality and your bone-deep police state rot filtering your perception of reality, and insisting you figured it out and everyone else at the table is an idiot for not agreeing with you. Shut the fuck up, sit the fuck down and read a goddamn book.

#shut up rie

15K notes · View notes

mikkeneko · 4 months

Text

Have been pondering, following the latest round of "But why don't authors LIKE it when we leave unsolicited concrit on their stuff? :|a Don't they want to IMPROVE?" discourse:

How do fan authors improve? Because it's not, by and large, through concrit. Some authors have never gotten any kind of concrit, and still improve. I've gotten some in the past, and it definitely was not helpful towards improving my growth as an author. Some authors never have a beta, and yet they still improve.

So. If not through a workshop devoted to the process, or a classroom style series of lectures, or a dedicated editor, how do authors improve over time?

I would say, based on my 20+ years of experience and observation, that improvement as a writer comes in three ways: Practice shaped by self-observation, practice shaped by non-critical feedback as positive reinforcement, and observation of other authors.

Fandom has always been a space where people of different ages and skill levels interact. How it works, generally, is that a new author comes into the scene and presents their work. Readers -- some of whom are authors themselves -- will leave feedback praising the parts they like. Writers will then adjust their style on the next piece geared towards eliciting more of the things that readers said they like. However, in a vacuum, they won't necessarily know what to adjust towards, or what new things to try that they aren't already trying.

But at the same time, these young authors are usually (though not always) reading works by more experienced authors in the fandom. They can see, based on popularity stats and feedback left by others, what people like. If they want more of that attention themselves -- or, just generally, if they want to be part of the community -- they will adjust their works to incorporate more of the parts they perceive as successful with the audience.

They will also -- the more they read, and the more they write -- come to internalize an understanding (often, not even a conscious understanding) of the moving parts that go into a story, of what makes the work work. How to pace a scene, a chapter, or a longer work. How the characters talk, and how different characters talk in ways that distinguish their voices. What sort of language works well to describe an action scene, and what is confusing and uncertain. What words are sexy and what words will jar you right out of the mood. They will pick up these tools by observation, and hone them through practice.

The down side of this, of course, is that sometimes the authors they are observing and imitating may have... less than ideal writing habits themselves. Certain tropes, flanderization, headcanons divorced from the original canon, or various other things can become endemic in a fandom due to this -- but also much simpler and more straightforward writing quirks. (The infamous oh is an example of these.) Sometimes things that I won't necessarily say are bad, I will just observe that they are not correct.

And this is how you got an entire generation of fanfic writers using strong endings on verbs that, in modern English, take the weak ending.

#long post #fandom meta

350 notes · View notes

gffa · 7 months

Text

I'm coming to really hate this whole idea of having to pick a "side" in Star Wars fandom, like are you pro-Jedi or anti-Jedi? Or even pro-Anakin or anti-Anakin? Or pro-prequels or anti-prequels? I get why these labels evolved and there are circumstances where they are useful, especially when discussing larger trends in fandom! I don't think they should be abolished or anything, I still use them myself! But I kind of hate the whole idea of people boiling down the idea that people must be categorized as one or the other--like, I dislike being thought of as "pro-Jedi", specifically because I'm my own set of opinions and views! Whatever compliments or criticisms I have for the Jedi are mine, not part of some collective opinion. I'm not part of a monolith, I'm just my one solitary person, I'm not responsible for other pro- or anti- people's opinions on things, just as they're not responsible for mine. Thinking of fandom being split up into these "factions"--instead of a bunch of different, unique people with unique to them set of opinions--is deeply frustrating when I don't want to be responsible for others' opinions! I'm only responsible for mine! I'm not that simple, you can't just boil me down into a single category or decide that I must hold certain opinions because I was categorized into a specific group. "Pro-Jedi/pro-Anakin/pro-prequels fans just can't accept their faves weren't literally perfect!!!" is not applicable to me, because I have argued time and again against how much I hate the idea that any of these aren't allowed flaws unless those flaws are being used to show actually they were Bad, but it gets applied to me anyway because I talk positively about the Jedi/Anakin/the prequels. I wish there were more thought given to how my views are not the same as any other "pro-Jedi" or "pro-Anakin" or "pro-prequels" person, that you wouldn't want to be lumped in with those fans because you saw one person being annoying and thus think all fans hold those exact same views and your views don't align with that, so those fans are stinky. No! You don't have to put a label on yourself or anyone else, unless you want to! Just have the opinions you have without needing people to be lumped into groups! And other people are the same way! They just have opinions that are unique to them! Every new fan you meet is going to occupy a different space on the pro-/anti- gamut and I think that makes for a more nuanced, healthy way of looking at fandom.

#lumi.txt #star wars #fandom #anakin skywalker #jedi order #prequels #meta

326 notes · View notes

miafeystits · 1 year

Text

re: that last poll i reblogged, one of the reasons i find both mpreg & a/b/o fic kind of morbidly fascinating after many years in fandom (despite not liking either) is how these kinds of fic often function as a way of mapping the tropes and gender dynamics of cis/heterosexual romance onto (almost always cis) m/m stories without going so far as to gender-swap either character

like, this is pretty obvious with mpreg centered on cis men, which is often just the application of common pregnancy-related romance tropes to cis m/m couples (note: im excluding depictions of trans masc pregnancy from my discussion here because i just think its a separate convo with its own nuances, and because i think much of the fic im describing here generally draws from ideas about cis men & women without much consideration for transness). however its ESPECIALLY apparent if you look at common a/b/o tropes in m/m fic. namely, the fact that an a/b/o universe is generally a world in which irl gender essentialism and the resulting sexual power dynamics between (cis) men and (cis) women are able to be applied to relationships exclusively between cis men-- with one partner being dominant, often physically stronger and aggressive, and socially privileged for this (perceived or real) biological superiority, and the other partner (who is generally the one able to bear children) being sexually submissive, weaker, and thus socially disadvantaged or oppressed as a consequence.

furthermore, something EXTRA interesting to me is that in this type of fic these power dynamics are very frequently not just social constructs (the way they are in real life-- pls dont misunderstand me and think im saying women are inherently biologically submissive to men irl or something), but rather almost always depicted as a biological reality within the world of the story. this type of au (at least in m/m dominated circles) offers a way of exploring and depicting what are basically misogynistic tropes without ever naming it as misogyny or involving women at any point. and i'm not trying to make a moral judgement here--i just genuinely find it very interesting that one of the main ways that misogynistic sexual dynamics (and, frequently, the violence resulting from such dynamics) gets explored in fandom spaces is through the development of an alternate biological and social reality in which cis men experience a mirror of those power dynamics, often turned up to 11 via in-universe biological essentialism. it strikes me as a way to engage with irl misogyny and its role within relationships with a certain amount of emotional distance, for better or worse. on one hand, it might be used to explore this imbalance of power without ever needing to depict misogynistic violence happening to female characters, but on the other hand also often offers a way to engage with romantic tropes steeped in irl gender essentialism in a way that is justified within the fiction of the universe and therefore do not need to be considered as critically

now i dont think this alone justifies this trope's existence or popularity (i'm sure a large part of its popularity is people just thinking it's hot tbh, which is fine im not here to judge), and honestly i'm not interested in litigating the question of why people write or read this trope in the first place, but i AM continually fascinated by the degree to which heteronormativity is able to influence what are ostensibly depictions of queer relationships

#meta #delete later probably #but this has been kicking in my head for a while so eh #anyway in conclusion the main reason i never got a/b/o is not the mosterfucking its the bioessentialism #and the fact that so much of it just feels extremely straight

756 notes · View notes

lurkingshan · 3 months

Text

I've been in multiple tumblr fandoms over the years and the same shit comes up over and over again wrt arguments about how we all engage with our chosen media on here, so here are a few things to keep in mind that have helped me along the way:

Not everyone is going to engage in the same way as you, and that's good, actually. Some people are purely here to gush over the things they like. Some people are here to do deep analytical breakdowns which will include criticism. Some people are cheerleaders. Some people are haters. A lot of people are a mix of both depending on what they're talking about on any given day. It's all good and valid, and it's what gives this space variety, allows us to learn from each other, and keeps it interesting.

The filter, unfollow, and block functions are your friend. If you love a mutual but hate the volume or the way they talk about a certain thing, just add it to your filtered tags (relatedly: tag your shit so people can filter you when needed!). If you consistently don't vibe with the way a person chooses to engage on here, just unfollow them. If you find them actively offensive or detrimental to your mental health, hit that block button, baby. We are all anonymous internet strangers and no one will die.

Someone expressing a different opinion from yours is not a personal attack on you. If someone hates a thing you like, they are not calling you stupid for liking it. If they love a thing you hate, there's nothing wrong with them, they are just taking something different from it than you are. That shit is all about you and your own insecurities, don't try to put it on them.

Vague posting is rude. If you want to directly respond to something someone said to get better clarity about what they meant, reply to their post or shoot them an ask or DM and talk to them about it. If you simply want to express a counterpoint without directly engaging them, just post your own take without vaguely alluding to them and building what is almost certainly a strawman of their original point. People you're vaguing can see you on here, folks. Don't be a dick.

Credit and reblog other people's ideas when you are building on them, and be kind to the creators who provide the artwork that make this place so special and unique. Reblogging is the lifeblood of this website. It's the only way people get to see content that is by anyone they don't follow, and the gifmakers on here in particular put in so much time and effort to give us beautiful images--share their work and tell them you appreciate it! You also don't have to agree with every single word of a meta post to reblog it (why would you expect to, it comes from a different brain than yours), and you absolutely should be crediting people and sharing their words when they sparked something that inspired your own thoughts. This is just being a good community member.

Embrace the difference between meta and fanwanking. Meta writing is analysis of the actual media content as it is presented, with arguments based in the canon text. Fanwanking is doing your own work to fill in gaps or create headcanons to supplement the canon text. Some people prefer content that leaves a lot of gaps because they love to creatively fanwank; some people prefer to be told complete stories without having to do all that extra work to make them make sense. These are both very cool and fun ways to engage, but when you're fanwanking be aware that those ideas are all coming from you, not the actual media being discussed, so others might not vibe with your interpretation.

When posting your own opinions, try to be clear about where you're coming from and why. If you have a personal experience or bias that is affecting your read, own it. If you're looking at a piece of media from a specific angle related to your own interests and learning, say that. It helps other people to know where you're coming from and why you're thinking about something in a certain way that can then help them puzzle out why they feel differently.

You don't owe anyone your presence here, and you don't have to express opinions on everything or respond to tags or asks if you don't have anything to say. Sometimes you might just want to take a break from posting, some things in the discourse might just flow right on by you, sometimes you will not have a firm opinion on a debate. You can post as much or as little as you want. You can suddenly decide you don't want to talk about a show anymore. You can not log into your tumblr for days or weeks at a time. Do you, boo!

Most people come to tumblr because they do want to engage with others, and this place can be a lot of fun if you just take what you need from it and let things that aren't serving you go.

#tumblr shit #tumblr 101 #shan's fandom manifesto #i guess lol #shan shouts into the void

130 notes · View notes

comicaurora · 11 months

Note

Lighting critique of a recent panel ! Dark ambient lighting is a favorite art subject of mine, so i figured this would be a good time to give some input ! ii say as if we havent been in the undergroound chapter for like a month in which it didnt occur to me to pay attention to lighting Oh well loool here it is nowwwwwwww hope you dont mind the input

Huh.

Okay, so first off, thanks - this is cool and your lighting looks very nice. I look forward to seeing what you make!

Second - I really hope sending this kind of ask isn't a habit of yours, because unsolicited artistic criticism comes across as remarkably rude.

Art criticism for the purposes of improvement is a social contract entered between two artists, typically in a scholastic environment. An artist presents their work to other artists whose opinions they trust and value, and those artists weigh in with their thoughts. Critical to the process is that the presenting artist is showing their art for the purpose of improvement, and they're prepared to receive that input because they're actively asking for it.

In contrast, I make this comic so people can read it, and while I certainly don't mind if they take it apart to analyze it or find ways the writing and art could be improved, I, the creator, am not asking for that and - more importantly - will not really benefit from it.

For instance, in this case, my style of background lighting and shading is optimized most specifically to accommodate for the fact that I need to make a lot of these pages quickly, and correspondingly cannot give everything 110%. Any individual panel could absolutely be more polished, but I often shade these backgrounds in batches of ten pages or more, each page with an average of six panels that need individual shading. So that's sixty individual backgrounds I need to shade in one go. It doesn't make your advice wrong, or even unhelpful for an artist setting out to learn this kind of technique - but it does make it unhelpful for me. This is something you realistically had no way of knowing, and I don't hold it against you! But this is why I have a short list of artists and writers whose input I actually ask for sometimes, and that list is composed of people who know me, my creative priorities, and how my process works. Because they know what I'm working with, their advice stands a much better chance of being actually helpful to me.

Criticism, like all art, has an audience it is designed for. In art school environments or artistic coworker situations, the audience for the criticism is the artist being critiqued and the other artists who are learning from the communal experience they are all agreeing to share. This is the exception and not the rule, however. Outside of this space, the audience for criticism of a work of art is typically the subset of the audience for that work of art that are trying to learn something from the experience or understand what did and didn't work for them. This group can discuss what they did and didn't like, what they would have changed, what parts worked for them that may not have worked for other members of the audience, etc. This space of critical analysis forms the backbone of most fandoms and can be incredibly interesting and rewarding to play around in.

The audience for that kind of criticism is not the creator of the art. In the same way a creator can never be fully immersed in their own fandom audience, this form of communal critique from the audience side of things does not work when directed at the creator. In the context of this work of art, we exist in very different spaces and operate under different parameters. If there's one thing I learned from back when I used to check in on the fan discord community, it's that most conversation in this space operates under the assumption that the creator will not see it or take it personally. I cannot be in the audience of my own audience.

All that to say, thanks for the thought, but please be careful doing this in the future - tumblr is the land of kneejerk hostility and poor reading comprehension, and I don't want to see you getting shredded for a kind intention. And I hope some people find this impromptu tutorial helpful!

#asks #aurora #art stuff

412 notes · View notes

iintervallum · 19 days

Text

Sometimes I think about how the dndads cast should be on tumblr, with them having a subreddit(you know how they can be) and dndadstwt being like 10 people, tumblr would be the perfect place for them to see more of the fandom, if they wish to that is. Since quite a lot of people on here are way less honed in on negativity than reddit and twitter.

My edit of this is getting long lol so I'm putting it under a cut

Especially reddit, the people on there honestly I think just get too attached to a specific format or way of doing things, its a common pattern in any long running show fandoms i've been in where its reddit that constantly complains about the "good ol' days" and hate any new changes made. I would sometimes drop in and just see a lot of Scary hate at times, or people getting very irritated with the rule breaking, or just complaining that they're "forcing" the humor. I saw a post like that when i just started s2 and that couldnt have been more incorrect (yeah the piss jokes got a bit much but every other part was golden!...pun not intended)

There were absolutely points where I felt my interest wanning, but I think people would get pretty vicious about it and make a lot of mean spirited accusations. Like if anything the things I really enjoyed about this season was how different it was to s1, the contrast was really nice and i liked a lot of the story choices made, i still think about the apollo four teens and the fucking goof realm episodes, they were amazing. Which is why I remember thinking it was odd that they suddenly started involving the dads from s1 more, but knowing now that Anthony was struggling with people not liking this season as much it makes perfect sense.

Idk if it were just me, but i liked the earlier parts of the season for how the teens were still kind of discovering more about themselves and through gathering each anchor, learning more that their parents are people too, with their own fuck ups revealed and the teens have to clean up after them, so having it shift to be about Willy again was a little odd if i'm being honest(I didnt hate it but a repeat villian is hard to do, and for what its worth i think Willy did get the end he deserved and i loved the finale).

Funnily, in its own way it fits the theme of being a teenager and having to live up to your parents expectations. In a meta sense this being the successor to the first season and it being awkward at points and having issues with its identity is very fitting and just like how teenhood actually is.

I've gotten off topic but my point is fandom is just fandom, and letting it influence the way creators can view their own work is an interesting side effect of the internet and the way we navigate with the media we enjoy or hate. And spaces like reddit are grown in a way to encourage more brutally critical ways of analysing media which has very little consideration for the creator. By no means am I saying that the creators of things should be coddled, heck I literally airing my own annoyances with the podcast in space where i'm uplifting the positivity of tumblr over those spaces lol. I just mean that seeing the more genuine side of the fanbase would be more of a better time for them.

EDIT: (I just phrased things better, fixed the spelling and grammer errors and added more thoughts) The more I ruminate on this the more I think that it would honestly be a good idea. Like I do get the base worry of being too close to the more intense side of the fandom, as people on here are unafraid to gush about the show in ways that can be a little much and theres parasociality and all that jazz.

But it would be really good at least to see some actual genuine positivity, so many people provide their thoughtful meta and theories that even if widely off base are just interesting to read through because of how various different people see themselves in the characters they play. And even the critiques people give are not unkind, they come from a place of wanting to understand the choices made better.

I mentioned this in the old version of this post but having a blacklisted tag that only the people who don't wish their post to be seen by the cast use, something along the lines like how the magnus archives fandom has "do not archive", would be a very useful tool to create a barrier in the fanbase. I know i'm someone who feels very nervous about creators seeing the posts I make. Something like "not safe for dads" could work well or any other joke or pun about it being hidden. I doubt it would be filled with discourse or whatever it would mainly be people hornyposting since i know fandom well enough lol.

#aster.txt #dndads #dungeons and daddies #i think people understandably may not want the creators of things here because it's very fandomy #and that sort of known idea that the creator could be seeing what you post can make people be less honest #at least i never feel comfortable with the creators seeing my posts about things i get shy over it #like idk it's embarrassing lol: they know now how much i enjoy the thing they make #I've edited the post!#Please reblog this version instead its more comphrehensive to my actual thoughts #that arent just a half assed post i put randomly in the main tag #dungeons and daddies podcast #fandom commentary

75 notes · View notes

starstofillmydream · 14 days

Text

This may fall upon deaf ears/ears unwilling to listen, but as we go into the last two episodes of TBB ever, the fandom needs to seriously clean up their attitude. I've been watching shit go down from the sidelines and trying not to get involved with the drama—people being so mean to one another and bullying one another into believing their headcanons (which are OPINIONS) as canon truth—and I've been disgusted with some people's behavior on here. I'm not sure what about TBB S3 in particular has brought the worst out in people, but it's so annoying and it sucks the fun out of being part of a fandom community.

So please (and this should be common sense):

For the love of God, BE KIND. If you see something harmless you disagree with (i.e., personal headcanons and think pieces, no matter how stupid and uninformed they may seem to you), move on. Don't react because it almost always ends in a nasty fight. Be mature. I've seen people bullying others into accepting their personal headcanons as canon (e.g., the "Tech is alive" and "Cody is on Tatooine" truthers), so please don't do that either. Differing headcanons can coexist in a fandom space because they're headcanons, another word for opinions. It's not the objective, concrete truth. Don't force them on other people if they don't agree with you.

If you see any racist, homophobic, sexist, and/or xenophobic comments about the characters (e.g., I've been seeing some fucking awful takes on Phee as of late), shut them down. Don't be a bigot.

Stop insulting people's intelligence as your primary counterargument to people's takes. Everyone's critical thinking skills (I've refrained from using the term "media analysis skills" because TikTok has seemed to make it lose its meaning, in my opinion) can be improved upon, my own included. It's a learning curve and we're all growing. Be self-aware in that regard. It's a logical fallacy—the ad hominem fallacy—to attack the arguer and not the argument, so it just looks dumb and makes you look bad.

Tag your spoilers. #tbb spoilers seems to be the most widely used, so I'd go that route.

If you have anything else to add to the list, please do! I want the unity and respect back in the fandom again, especially as we reach the bittersweet end of a beautiful show that has brought us all together as friends.

#i'm not calling out anyone in particular #these are just my observations of what's been going on in general #it's felt different for the worse in tbb s3 and i miss when we felt more connected #you know?#i acknowledge there are some things i need to work on too so i'm not out here just being a hypocrite #tbb s3

69 notes · View notes

genderkoolaid · 1 year

Note

okay, so, i keep seeing this take come up a lot from non-trans men and non-trans mascs, and it’s making me a bit uncomfortable. for background, i’m a trans man that writes smut for trans mascs, trans men, and non-binary folks. i write in fandom spaces so this is a strictly fandom basis and not irl basis

more and more often i keep seeing non trans men and non trans mascs saying “if you think mpreg is gross you’re just transphobic” without nuance and when i explain “hey, this maybe isn’t a good take to have since there’s a LOT of reasons people may be grossed out by mpreg (eg. dysphoria, how heavily fetishized it is in fandom spaces by non-trans writers, how it’s used to fetishize trans m characters, the person grossed out may be a closeted trans man or trans masc or don’t realize that the “gross” feeling is dysphoria, etc.)”, i get shouted down and told that i’m wrong. and it’s kind of making me question my own line of thinking.

i guess, i’m just looking for some perspective from trans men and trans mascs on this topic? if there is any? bc i honestly can’t tell if i’m having a knee jerk reaction to my own personal experiences with fetishization. idk if you do much with fandom spaces, but i also don’t really know where else to get perspective

I think there's an important difference between different interpretations of "finding mpreg gross." One interpretation is male pregnancy being a squick for people as individuals for a variety of reasons, such as dysphoria. But in the context of systemic transandrophobia, "gross" is describing the idea that male pregnancy is an obscene, disturbing fetish akin to guro, something that is objectively abnormal and inappropriate.

The reason why "mpreg is gross" is transphobic is because its based in the idea that a pregnant man is unnatural and wrong, and that pregnant men can only exist as a "fucked up" sexual fetish. People are incapable of being normal about male pregnancy in any context and will compulsively go "EWW mpreg is so weird and fucked up!!! is this omegaverse!!!" even when talking about real men's experiences or desires. Male pregnancy is seen as a joke, a kink, or a crime against nature, but never something normal, natural, neutral.

Feeling dysphoria around pregnancy for yourself isn't transphobic, and people can write/depict male pregnancy in ways that are uncomfortable. Personally, I don't like how a lot of people's first thought when it comes to male pregnancy is cis men getting pregnant, with trans men- men who can and do actually get pregnant- are an afterthought. Its annoying to see posts joking about "getting a man pregnant" where people immediately jump to "cis male mpreg," distancing transmascs from our own bodies' abilities & replacing us in the cultural mind with cis men. I don't think cis male mpreg is inherently bad, but there are valid criticisms to be made.

And while you are just talking about fandom stuff, I don't think we should entirely separate this from the wider treatment of pregnant men- who are constantly dehumanized irl, treated like walking freaks (I was just reading an article the other day where a trans father talked about being called "it" throughout his pregnancy, and this is not uncommon), and having their gender validity heavily scrutinized for using their "female anatomy" even though they "want to be a man," sometimes even from other trans people. The way mpreg is treated in fandom spaces does very little to counter this narrative- if anything, in my experience, it just adds that "dirty" connotation, where pregnant men aren't just freaks, their pregnancy must be inherently sexual and should be kept out of public spaces. And this really does not help the idea that trans people are groomers who shouldn't be around children- I have also seen transphobes fearmonger about transmasc fathers & their children & whether or not the children will be safe, or be able to grow up properly, or if they'll be traumatized because of their father.

This is all to say: I don't know exactly the contexts you've heard "saying mpreg is gross is transphobic" in, but to me, arguing against "mpreg = gross" is a necessary part of dealing with the objectifying & dehumanizing way we see male pregnancy discussed in fandom spaces. Male pregnancy should be just the same as female pregnancy. Its normal, its natural. Some people have fetishes relating to it. Some people are really disturbed by the idea of it happening to them. & while there are unique brands of misogyny directed at pregnant women, the image of a pregnant woman isn't treated like something inherently dirty and obscene the same way a pregnant man is. People finding male pregnancy strange or gross- not because of dysphoria or personal preference, but out of transandrophobia- is the status quo right now, and its important to counteract this by normalizing male pregnancy as A Thing Some Men Do.

#m.#ask box #male pregnancy

248 notes · View notes

highpri3stess · 2 months

Text

"Why are we hating on JJK writers and fans."

Okay, as a JJK fan, let's list everything that has happened for the past three months. Take a seat and drink water. You're gonna need it. And since you people always think I'm angry, imagine me saying this with the most deadpan tone in the world. I am not angry posting this. I am jaded.

Majority of you are racist. Don't boo me you know it's the truth. Just look at how you guys wanted me to deactivate or tried to gaslight me because I said your fave is supporting a pedo. In FACT. It was a JJK writer who sent my post to that lady who opened me up to a lot of racial abuse from JJK fans. Edit; oh and she didn't apologize for doing that to me btw. I won't expose her though.

And doubling down on the racism, you people do not respect black women in your fandom. Like it is VERY bad. My jjk moots since 2021 up until now still get racial slurs hurled at them because they exist in a space that does not care or defend them. And you see your black moots get racist comments but you want to go "no discourse". I get it. You are a pussy. But to that extent? If you're above 20 and you're still scared of talking about racism in your community or standing up for black writers I am ashamed for you and I am shaming you.

I didn't even see any of you talk about noury on here. Especially ms "I will use the palestinian genocide to hide from criticism." I genuinely hope you at least donated something to her or spoke about her on your other platforms.

The way you guys excuse anything as long as the person is your friend. Because tell me why you people were jumping on Ezra's and Tee's dick, especially after what they both did. Or trying to discredit his racism. Be for real.

The way some of you come for other fandoms. JJK girls, especially that one that deactivated came around to drag aot writers because they said they are "niggerfying" the characters. You go to tr writers and start sending hate, chasing them out. Hell, there are cliques of JJK writers and fans alike on this site. You guys are fucking elitist. You don't like any other person apart from yourselves and it shows. The way you come for how people write x reader "why is she so ghetto". It is ALWAYS you people. Always.

SatoSugu fans are slowly becoming extremely misogynistic. I'd expect that behaviour from dudebros but the moment a girl says they like either of them, they come out of the woodworks. Also, let people ship crack ships in peace. I've been a satosugu girlie long before the season 2 came out and I miss when we were a lot quieter. NanaGo girlies were chill. Can't you copy them at least?

Now moving on to less pending reasons:

I've said this before and I'll say this again, stop tagging "he spat in your mouth and came" or nsfw links with x reader and about 30 plus characters. I get it, we're all burnt out. But even in my busiest of days in university I have NEVER posted that kind of shit. I take my time because writing is a skill and an art. This is not fast fashion.

And stop rewarding anyone who does that. Why are they having 1k notes in 6 hours? What the fuck is up with that?

Do better writing Gojo and hell the entire cast. I get it. Every character has a stereotype attached to them. But come on, 800 words and STILL it is a copy and paste of every other fic? I have to check twice if it is the same author and it's not. It's like every naruto oc fic written in 2016. Same face syndrome but in fic writing.

Writers are getting burned out cause you guys want the same thing over and over again. I hope salt is not the only spice you use because sending hate anons to JJK writers who write outside daddy doms and playboy Gojo is giving that energy. Be for real. These people are giving quality fics, stop chasing them away.

These are my few gripes with you all, because one day is not enough to list every issue I have. If the shoe fits and you rant in my inbox, that's on you. I did tell you to take a seat, drink water and read this in the calmest voice as possible.

#monica.speaks ♡#jujutsu kaisen discourse #as a jjk fan i'm going to point it out #you guys should change the way you behave for real or don't [as]

56 notes · View notes

scoobydoodean · 10 days

Note

what the FUCK is wrong with sam fans . this is kind of a genuine question .

I mean for some of them it's definitely connecting your personal life experiences with the experiences of a character from a TV show to a degree that is not healthy.

Identifying with fictional characters is completely normal and intended—it's what makes certain stories stick out to us over others. Using fiction to cope with and work through ones own personal trauma is not an inherently bad thing either—it can be therapeutic and perfectly healthy. But you can take this too far and reach a point where you totally lose perspective on a story being a story and can no longer interact in fandom spaces without being harmed emotionally. This emotional harm happens because you have begun to believe that the character is actually you. Not only does this make you feel as if others speaking with authority on the character in a way that challenges your own perceptions is an invalidation of your own emotions and experience... it means you begin to receive any criticism of a fictional character as a criticism of yourself, and that is not a position you ever want to place yourself in.

Art is art. There are objective aspects to it (the medium, the colors, what it literally depicts) but what it means is subjective. Art can be personal to you, but it's also personal to everyone else who observes it and likes it. It does not exist just for you to interpret and identify with or to suit your sole sense of its meaning. You cannot impose the personal meaning you place on a piece of art on everyone else and demand they view it through your personal lens. To do so is to misunderstand the purpose of publicly shared and experienced art.

We all have moments where we find our feelings about art are so incongruous with someone else's that it isn't enjoyable to view that art side by side with them. However, if you have reached a point where you find yourself claiming that those people's perceptions of art literally cause emotional harm to you, and that the onus is on them to censor their thoughts and feelings about art to protect you, you should not be viewing that art publicly. In fact, you should really be questioning whether you have a healthy relationship with the art itself and whether you actually like it. Life is too short to spend it fixated on something that you think you like, but that is actually slowly sucking you into a pit of despair.

#mail #dont feed the stans after midnight

52 notes · View notes

worflesbian · 9 months

Text

Klingons & Racialisation - the Long Post

This post is an overview of the racial coding of the Klingons from their first appearance to the present day, illustrated by quotes from Trek writers, actors and crew members taken from the Memory Alpha article Depicting Klingons, with my own interjected summaries and explanations. It is by no means comprehensive (I likely missed some stuff), and does not offer critical analysis of the quotes provided, but nonetheless is intended to demonstrate irreproachably the open fact that Klingons have always been intentionally written and designed as non-white -- something that fandom consistently fails to take into account when perpetuating racist stereotypes and reiterating racist canon content. I recommend reading the whole article for a more in-depth understanding of the subject, as well as seeking out the existing writing of fans of colour. This post is primarily for reference purposes so I've tried to limit my own analysis and opinions, but I do post those in my Klingon tag as well as more general headcanons and worldbuilding and I'm happy to answer any (good faith) questions this post may raise.

As always, if I have overstepped in any way as a white fan in making this post, I am grateful to be informed and will make any required changes.

Content warning for outdated and offensive language under the cut.

The Original Series

"There is some suggestion that the Klingons represent a Cold Warrior's view of China in the 1960s – swarthy, brutally repressive." (Star Trek Magazine issue 153, p. 66) "And I think he was basing a lot of it on the kind of attitude of the Japanese in World War II...." ("Errand of Mercy" Starfleet Access, TOS Season 1 Blu-ray) The script of "Errand of Mercy" introduces the Klingon look by saying, "We see the Klingons are Orientals," "Spray my hair black, give me a kind of swamp creature green olivey mud reptilian make-up, and we'll borrow some stuff from Fu Manchu, and put a long moustache and eyebrows on me." ("The Sword of Colicos", Star Trek: Deep Space Nine - The Official Poster Magazine, No. 8) "I think the makeup was called 'Mexican #1 or #2.' That was the name of the original makeup foundation – they actually had kind of racist names at the time, like 'Negro #1' and 'Mexican #2' – which was the basis for the original Star Trek makeups." (Star Trek Magazine issue 172, p. 59) "In the original series, all they wore was a dark face and their black hair," Michael Westmore observed. ("Michael Westmore's Aliens: Season Two", DS9 Season 2 DVD special features) The Klingons' appearance changed within the original Star Trek series; although dark makeup and heavy eyebrows were the norm, the Klingons of "The Trouble with Tribbles" were much lighter-skinned and more Human-like in appearance.... He noticed that they are not only less like Mongol warriors by having less of a swarthy appearance but also by being slightly not as fierce... ("The Trouble with Tribbles" Starfleet Access, TOS Season 2 Blu-ray) "...they were meant to represent the Communist foes of the United States specifically during the Vietnam War, which was being controversially fought at that time. (Star Trek: The Original Series 365, p. 222) "...let us never set up a situation whereby those adversaries of ours [Klingons] give any indication of ever being anything but highly aggressive and self-seeking opponents." (These Are the Voyages: TOS Season Three)

Here it is explicitly stated that the Klingons were based on various Asian cultures, with the USSR also being mentioned heavily in the article. This influence and the use of "yellowface" is covered more comprehensively in this youtube video Klingons & The History Of Racial Coding. However, the video has some notable gaps which I hope to cover in this post.

Post-TOS (movies)

The Star Trek III portrayal of Klingons took inspiration from Japanese history. "Harve [Bennett] had the notion that the Klingons were like Samurai warriors," explained linguist Marc Okrand. (Star Trek: Communicator issue 114, p. 27) Robert Fletcher agreed with Bennett, later saying of the Klingons, "I always liked to think of them as authoritarian, almost feudal, like Japan had been." (The Making of the Trek Films, UK 3rd ed., p. 52) Regarding the make-up, Michael Westmore observed, "Until now, Klingons were brown. Some had a bony ridge running down the middle of their foreheads, long black wigs and facial hair." (Star Trek: The Next Generation Makeup FX Journal, p. 28) "I thought it was an ideal way for us to have our closure too, because the Klingons for us have always been the Communist Block, the Evil Empire. It just made sense to do that story." (The Making of the Trek Films, UK 3rd ed., p. 100) "Gene was really bothered by the Klingons in VI [....] [They] were, in his words, 'too civilized, too decent, too much of the good guys in the story.' [....] [The Klingon detente] was not the way Gene would have handled it. He would have reversed it, he would have had the Klingons being the ones who couldn't handle the peace, with the Federation saying, 'Come on, let's try and work this out.'" (Star Trek Movie Memories, hardback ed., p. 289) "The story never explored the Klingon culture the way I'd hoped it would [....] I was hoping for greater insight into the Klingons." (I Am Spock) Nimoy hoped, in specific, that the movie would provide some important insight into why the Klingons had "always been so angry, such nasty, vicious murderers." Nimoy wanted the insightful knowledge to be an intellectually transformational force, changing the thinking of Kirk and the audience. (Star Trek Movie Memories, hardback ed., pp. 287-288) In an interview in the DS9 Season 7 DVD, Robert O'Reilly observed that a long-running joke among actors who have played Klingons is that they do not want to appear in the Star Trek films as, he believes, the only purpose of a Klingon in one of the films was to be killed off.

Although these last three quotes may not seem relevant, I believe they highlight an important facet of the racialisation of the Klingons. It reads as though Gene Roddenberry was against depicting the Klingons in a more sympathetic light than the Federation, and considering that the Klingons are intended to be non-white, refusing to give depth or motive to their anger in favour of keeping them "nasty, vicious murderers" comes across as fairly racist, especially when these kind of reductive and harmful stereotypes could've been challenged as Nimoy suggests. The treatment of Klingons as disposable villains is also concerning in this context.

The Next Generation

African-American actors were often cast as Klingons in TNG and subsequent Star Trek productions. This practice wasn't racially motivated but was instead carried out because it lessened makeup time, as the performers already had a brown complexion without having to have their skin painted that color. (Stardate Revisited: The Origin of Star Trek: TNG, Part 2: Launch, TNG Season 1 Blu-ray) Tony Todd, who portrayed the recurring Klingon character Kurn, stated, "I don't look at the Klingons necessarily as African-Americans, but it's about tapping into something–they're certainly an alienated people, so maybe that's why African-American actors can identify with those characters. But that doesn't mean it's exclusive to them." (Star Trek: Communicator issue 116, p. 54) Michael Westmore actually changed the Klingon facial design in numerous ways, though. He stated, "I added a Shakespearean style of facial hair and a forehead bone structure based on dinosaur vertebrae and I was able to modify motion picture Klingons for television." (Star Trek: Aliens & Artifacts, p. 59) In "A Matter Of Honor", the Klingons were intended to be used to shed some light on a common social problem prevalent at the time of the episode's making. This was, namely, what it was like to be the only person of either white or black skin coloration while surrounded by people of the other color. The Klingons were selected to illustrate this theme as a spin on the usual arrangement of a predominantly Human crew serving aboard the Enterprise-D alongside Worf. (Captains' Logs: The Unauthorized Complete Trek Voyages, p. 176) Two historical societies, the Samurai and Vikings, served as other inspirations, Moore perceiving about Klingon culture, "There was the calm, elegant reserve associated with the Samurai but there was the 'party-down' like the Vikings." (Star Trek: Communicator issue 114, p. 58) "I stopped thinking of the Klingons as the Cold War adversary," he explained. "I didn't think it fit [....] The place where the Russians were when I was doing the Klingon shows just wasn't as relevant any more." (Star Trek: The Magazine Volume 1, Issue 19, pp. 64-65) "The Klingons are not evil, tyrannical pirates bent only on pillage and plunder. They have a strict, almost unyielding code of ethics and honor and take their responsibilities as rulers seriously." Following a description of the Klingon homeworld, the memo continued by saying, "Klingon society could most closely be compared to that of Sparta or feudal Japan." ("Sins of the Father" audio commentary, TNG Season 3 Blu-ray) Having recently seen the film Malcolm X, he imagined the Klingons in the "Birthright" duology as metaphors for black people. (Captains' Logs: The Unauthorized Complete Trek Voyages, p. 274; Star Trek: Communicator issue 105, p. 16) "There's a certain way you have to carry yourself. You have to really be able to project the violence and the anger [....] All you have to do is think of the Spartans. They say, 'They'd rather have you come home dead on your shield than come home a coward.' [18]

This is where I feel the video essay previously mentioned falls short -- in the next gen era, Klingons are now explicitly black-coded. While some Asian cultural influences are still cited, they learn more towards the historical and are intermixed with other historical European influences (Spartans, Vikings, Shakespeare) rather than being fueled by contemporary prejudices towards the political enemies of the US as they were in the TOS era.

Deep Space Nine

Fields also generally based the Klingon group on American Western prototypes from the film The Magnificent Seven or, to a lesser extent, Japanese prototypes from The Magnificent Seven's movie source material, Seven Samurai. (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion (pp. 131-132)) "So, the hair [...] was permed. So, it had more of a curl instead of the straight type look, and by perming it, they were able to kind of give them larger, bigger hair, so it was more like a mane." ("Michael Westmore's Aliens: Season Two", DS9 Season 2 DVD special features) "I don't know how you could equate Klingons with what's going on in the world today," he admitted. "I think the intention was to make them like samurai. That hairdo they gave them is very much a samurai hairdo. A lot of the fight sequences, the moves with the bat'telh, are very much taken out of the Asian martial arts [....] It's very romantic you know, these three old guys, the Klingon over-the-hill gang." (The Official Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Magazine issue 15, pp. 17-18) "It was different for them to get into this makeup, because [...] [the makeup was more elaborate and] the beards were bigger, and they were greyer, and they had curls to them, and the moustaches, they had the Fu Manchu look to them. So, they weren't used to sitting that long to be a Klingon." ("Michael Westmore's Aliens: Season Two", DS9 Season 2 DVD special features) For recreating some old-style Klingons in "Trials and Tribble-ations", the Klingon-playing actors had to be made up with the same swarthy, shiny brown makeup as used in the original series. (The Magic of Tribbles: The Making of Trials and Tribble-ations) ...he had them unite in song, thinking this was "just the kind of thing that Klingons do" because they are, in his opinion, similar to Vikings. (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion (p. 449)) "I always saw the Klingons as a combination of Japanese Samurai who haven't had their morning coffee (or tea!) and African Zulu warriors." [25]

In DS9 the only inspirations cited seem to be historical, once again leaning towards feudal Japan and the Vikings. Interestingly although the Klingons here are predominantly dark-skinned, I don't think that J.G. Hertzler, who is white, had his skin significantly darkened to play Martok (at least, not compared to the obvious brown makeup worn by other white actors playing Klingons). Having a white actor play a Klingon without dark makeup could've set a precedent decreasing the use of such practices later on, but no one seems to have picked up on it.

Enterprise

The Klingons of ENT: "Sleeping Dogs" were based on the crew of the Russian submarine Kursk. "For me," said Dekker, "the point was to acknowledge the Klingons as 'people' – to find them in a clear position of distress [....] The idea to 'humanize' their plight was mine, and it wasn't anything I thought about as far as canon. It just seemed right." (Star Trek: The Official Starships Collection, issue 41, pp. 10-12) In the final draft script of "Affliction", the altered Klingons were initially referred to as "fierce-looking aliens" and were further described thus; "The aliens have a swarthy complexion, and dark facial hair... they could easily be mistaken for Humans. We'll eventually learn these are Klinqons... but their cranial ridges have disappeared."

At this point in time it seems the Klingons had essentially done a 180 from one-dimensional villains to sympathetic fan favourites, while still retaining the skin-darkening aspect of their makeup and "barbaric" characterisation. Although this is not mentioned in the article's section on the Abrams films, the images provided do demonstrate a level of skin darkening for the Klingons' brief appearance in Into Darkness.

The final section of the article is incomplete, meaning I don't have a lot of information for Discovery's redesign of the Klingons. The sources I can find cite ancient civilisations such as the Byzantines as well as Islamic architecture as inspiration for the set design, with a baroque influence on the costumes. I have heard rumours that the crew of Discovery have cited North African cultures as their inspiration for the Klingons but I can't currently find a source for this. Despite the lack of direct quotes, it's visibly clear that the Klingon makeup is still darkening the skin of white actors, although this time also to non-human blue and purple colours, as well as altering certain features in a racialised way. To elaborate: Mary Chieffo, who plays L'Rell on Discovery, is white and has a very thin nose and small lips, but in costume these are broadened in a way that seems imitative of African ethnic features.

As of the making of this post (early August 2023) I haven't seen any of Strange New Worlds, but from some cursory research its latest episode (Subspace Rhapsody) seems to have put a white actor (Bruce Horak) in brown makeup to play a Klingon. I am deeply disappointed that on a television set in 2023 people can still be darkening an actors skin like this without questioning the racial implications of what they're doing.

Thank you for reading to the end of this post. Please feel free to link to it if you found it useful enough to cite in another context. I would like to reiterate that I am white and while this is an issue I care deeply about it is not one I have an emic understanding of, and if anything I've said here is inappropriate I would be very grateful to be made aware.

#ive tried to make this like. really formal to cover the fact that im fuckin Ragin at snw for doing literal fucking brownface in 2023 #next up top ten things fans should Fucking Reconsider saying about klingon characters #anyway #i feel like as a white trekkie who's big into klingons there's this insane blindspot when it comes to The Racism #that ive only ever seen fans of colour talk about #so if i have one goal for this post its to try and reduce that blindspot a bit and give people something concrete to point to #when some fuckwits in their notes acting as tho ~theyre aliens so it cant be racist~#tlhIngan #ghItlhpu'wIj

228 notes · View notes

gffa · 10 months

Text

Ahsoka's place in SW can be a complicated thing, because I feel both things about her--I too am often frustrated by how Filoni writes her, but I too am also grateful that her character exists and isn't the "default" straight white cis dude character. (Though, I do wish she were played by someone other than RD because of All That.)

Ahsoka got so much flak when she first appeared, people hated her just for existing, for daring to take up any space in the Star Wars story, and then she swung around to being nearly put on a pedestal by a large chunk of the fandom, she was lionized pretty heavily in some corners, and I think we're now going through the further growing pains of backlash against the hype, especially because Ahsoka is in the position of often being used as a bludgeon against the Jedi.

To be honest, I don't see nearly as much criticism of Ahsoka's character as I do for other popular characters, I see far more of Obi-Wan and Anakin and Yoda, but maybe that's just the sphere of experience I have, but I see that criticism balanced out with a ton of fic, art, and positive commentary about her. And it makes me wonder if she's in that awkward spot of not quite as central to the story as the movie characters, but more important than almost any other SW character (in the sense of any one character ever being able to be more "important" than another, you know what I mean) where we haven't quite settled into a stable balance of how to approach her character.

So, she's high level enough now that she can take some people being critical of her character or even just flat-out not being kind to her, because she has so much support from the story itself and from all across the fandom, even as honestly I haven't seen much that's been notably mean to her character. Sure, I see a few posts talking about how Ahsoka is Filoni's Blorbo, but are they truly more common than the posts that are celebrating her character? Genuinely wondering, because that hasn't been my experience. (Honestly, I would say Qui-Gon fans have it worse, given that he's another of Filoni's Blorbos, just without the added bonus of actually having anything fun to counter balance it, where even the people who say he was a True Jedi don't really care about Qui-Gon, you know? There's no skits, no commentary, etc. Just a handful of fic authors who are quietly doing their own thing and being the good in the world they want to see.)

At the same time, I get what you're feeling, that it feels uncomfortable to be critical of a female character, especially one who is played by a WOC, especially in a fandom that is pretty fucking vicious towards female characters having anything to actually do in the story. That the criticism of Ahsoka's character/status as Filoni's Blorbo isn't always fair or considerate, because people are frustrated and SW fandom wears all our nerves down to the last.

I'm not really sure where I land with all of this, because I get both sides, the frustration and the affection both, and I think there needs to be space for both in fandom just because we can't police other people's reactions to stuff. It's hard to continue liking her when she's being pitted against your faves, it's hard to be kind to Jedi fans when they're frustrated because she's being used as a bludgeon against their faves, it's hard to just walk away from people ignoring that Ahsoka is really meaningful to a lot of people because she's a non-romance-focused female character coded as/played by a woman of color, it's hard not to feel like Ahsoka's such a popular character that she can take a few people on tumblr not liking her.

My best advice is to just keep loving Ahsoka in the way that you think will attract the other friends you want to have around you--like, for me, when I talk about Anakin, I often try to do so in a way that's affectionate towards him and the Jedi, how much they loved him and how much I think he loved them in returned, because that's who I want to gravitate towards in fandom, those who like both. I try to do the same with Qui-Gon now and again, when I start getting frustrated by how he's used to bludgeon the Jedi, I start going HEY GUESS WHAT I'M EMOTIONS ABOUT HOW MUCH QUI-GON LOVED HIS JEDI FAMILY and it makes me feel better! I would love to see more people do the same with Ahsoka! Prop her up by appealing to how much she loves other characters, too! Like, every time I get frustrated at the way some of fandom treats her, I remember SHE WANTED TO GO BACK TO THE JEDI, SHE LOVED THEM, and I'm like THAT IS MY GIRL I LOVE HER SO MUCH SHE IS SO BRAVE TO STRUGGLE THROUGH ALL THIS AND STILL FIND THE LOVE IN HER HEART.

Or sometimes, like with Bo-Katan, I like to lean into them being a hot mess because yessssssss I love a hot mess of a lady because I am a hot mess of a lady and Felt That. I hope Ahsoka gets to be all kinds of deliciously fucked up in her series and making mistakes and learning and being interesting and working her way back to the surface from her own depths because she is SUCH a strong character and deserves to be crunchy as hell/have bite as a character, like HOW MANY YEARS did she stew in her guilt about Anakin, refusing to let it go? How long did she hold onto that fear, so much that even the Force had to smack her in the face to try to make her let it go on Lothal? GIRL, I AM CRYING FOR YOU, YOU HAVE BEEN THROUGH SO MUCH, LET ME GET YOU SOME SOUP AND I HOPE THE FORCE-GHOSTS ALL COME BOTHER YOU TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE EATING ENOUGH, because I love a character that has bite.

This kind of got away from me, but that's usually where I end up when trying to wrap my head around the frustration of a character's place in fandom. I get why people are frustrated with the way Filoni writes her, but also the frustration of feeling like the important representation of her character sometimes gets lost in the shuffle, that both sides have validity, and my best way out of this is to double down on loving everyone in this bar.

#ahsoka tano #meta #rosario dawson #<--blacklisting tag

197 notes · View notes