Does William support gay rights?
He thinks it's outrageous that he, specifically, can't do whatever he wants, and some of what he wants but can't do is gay, so I guess in a sense he does. I don't think he cares much about other people, though.
23 notes
·
View notes
to see a milgram character as a "good person" or "bad person" is a failure of media literacy for milgram. the entire lesson of the milgram project is that thinking in such black and whites, to deem someone as "good - innocent/forgiven" and "bad - guilty/guilty" only causes damage. the prisoners voted forgiven are not helped. the prisoners voted guilty aren't either. the lesson is that such a mindset will never help you- that it will harm whatever youre touching with it.
we cannot stop this, either- we have to keep choosing one or the other, because an abstained vote is impossible. we just have to keep choosing to shock them, over and over, no matter how much they beg us to stop because there is no other choice. you as an individual can refuse to vote, but someone else will always choose to. it is better to put in a vote, in that scenario, than to have it be uncounted entirely.
stop shoving characters in such black and white boxes. this is a story about nuance. they are not only "good", they are not only "bad". acknowledge that they are both. acknowledge that these characters are deeper than that. this is, quite literally, the "look deeper" media, you're supposed to be analysing. you're supposed to be theorising and looking at evidence under a microscope.
you're supposed to be acknowledging nuance, because anything could be true and anything could be incorrect. even a theory you prize could be completely wrong, or a theory you hate could be completely right. theorising about a character is not to "excuse" their actions or make them more "sympathetic", but rather to explain their actions. to flesh them out.
plus, as a bit of rant, you've all gotta stop dismissing people's theories completely just because you believe your own is oh-so above it. acknowledge a theory's evidence, acknowledge a theory's points, acknowledge why it could and could not be true. don't become obsessed with the black and white "I Choose To Only See The Worst Of This Character And Nothing Else Because That's My Preference!!! I'm Just Critical!!!" or "I Choose To Only See The Good Of This Character And Nothing Else Because That's My Preference!!! I'm A Moral Paragon!!!". jesus fucking christ.
i sincerely hope this doesnt make you believe that i think im above this same mindset either- i'm very much not. i can be guilty of it as well. but the important thing about analysing media is the ability to acknowledge every possibility, every point of view, anything that's possible. to discard any bias you may have in order to figure out what's going on in a clear and succinct manner that is closest to the truth. please remember this!
272 notes
·
View notes
I have incredibly mixed feelings about The Owl House finale.
On one hand, I'm excited to see how the story ends and I hope they all live happily ever after.
On the other, it's a reminder that it's the last episode ever and we could have had so much more if it weren't for a few Disney execs.
1K notes
·
View notes
The idea that children are inherently duplicitous, manipulative liars is genuinely doing harm to children and further obfuscates when genuine harm/abuse is occurring because, "what can the adults do, children are demons!"
The idea that children have divine knowledge that transcends adults' own knowledge and they use that knowledge for personal gain is, simply-put, abuse apologism. You are aiding and abetting abusive behaviour from adults, parents/guardians, medical professionals, whomever it might be.
432 notes
·
View notes
every time I see an isopod going around doing isopod things when I go for walks etc I just go "omg real life hjbuh"
I would too
127 notes
·
View notes
My neighbor just leaned across the 50ft-drop gap between our apartment balconies to hand me a 6-pack of Shiner as a bribe to finish watching Red White & Royal Blue with him and his British boyfriend (“you don’t understand - it’s ABOUT THE TWO OF US!!”), and I think snapshots of time like this are probably the meaning of life
178 notes
·
View notes
I'm sorry but can we compare him in Ad22 with him in Hungary from Iguessricciardo's GIFs?
The roundness of his cheeks? the light in his eyes? The big goofy smile? I'm going to burn McLaren to the ground and Michael with them
https://www.tumblr.com/iguessricciardo/723659318690447360/post-race-interview-hungary-gp-2023?source=share
do not arson obviously
anon did this to you not me. im so sorry
(left: post-race at ad 22 | right: post-quali at hungarian gp 23)
185 notes
·
View notes
trying to make a bit of a list of the people that seem to have prompted the supernatural events within each episode. I hope that kind of makes sense? Essentially, almost each story that happens seems to be preceded by some mildly mysterious person. This is what I have so far:
First Shift: The consultant that guided harriet to the graveyard (checking in)/the anonymous DMer that was sending threats to RedCanary (red canary) (I am also curious about the site creator(?), Devan, who originally marked the magnus institute as cleared and no longer seems to be around)
Making Adjustments: Ink5oul
Putting Down Roots: this one is not particularly clear to me, but my best guess for now would be harriot manning (the grief counselor), gerald, or (a stretch) the person who owns the church that houses the garden
Taking Notes: the stranger that gifts the narrator his violin
Personal Screening: the unnamed person who originally suggested "voyeur" to tomsterrors, or cinephobia2220 who found the "voyeur" website.
There's not necessarily a conclusion to be drawn from these yet, and this could be a pattern that I am inventing in my own mind, but I do think that it's interesting that a lot of these people were clearly guided or goaded into doing whatever it was that killed/traumatized them.
46 notes
·
View notes
i was thinking about that ask i received the other day and how uncharacteristically upset the topic had made me when i usually just think "mh. gross!" and move on, and after mulling it over a while i realized it wasn't about the topic at all, it was the ask itself that freaked me out. i've mentioned sporadically before (for obvious reasons lol) that i used to be involved in fandom discourse when i was younger and that!! fucked me up quite a lot. between exacerbating my ocd and straight up getting cyber stalked (i almost feel guilty using that word, like i don't deserve it but. yeah that is 100% what happened to me), the topic is something I have very complex and personal opinions on but that i hate talking about in public because it still sets off my fight or flight response.
i know some people in the fandom are like "let me know if i ever rb someone who wrote/drew gross stuff" and that's entirely their choice and i respect it. but for the record, i am not one of these people. please, for the love of god, i am asking this genuinely do NOT come into my DMs about this, I don't want to know. assume I'm either living in blissful ignorance or my blacklist already covers me quite nicely & i wanna keep it that way. i vastly prefer the discomfort of stumbling into something unprepared and deciding what to do about it on my own, to the utter pit of dread i get whenever i open a message that starts with "hey just so you know-". i have blocked multiple people in the past over it. i WILL block more. be warned.
[note. this doesn't apply to people who have either hurt or behaved inappropriately with other members of the fandom, or spread bigotry and discrimination like racists and transphobes. please do let me know in those cases]
does this make sense? idk I'm kinda feverish you guys figure it out. I'm going to sleep.
105 notes
·
View notes