#honestly? valid critique on the discourse | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

soracities · 1 year

Note

Hey! It has been on my mind lately and i just wanna ask..idk if it would make sense but i just noticed that nowadays ppl cant separate the authors and their books (ex. when author wrote a story about cheating and ppl starts bashing the author for romanticizing cheating and even to a point of cancelling the author for not setting a good/healthy example of a relationship) any thoughts about it?

I have many, many thoughts on this, so this may get a little unwieldy but I'll try to corall it together as best I can.

But honestly, I think sometimes being unable to separate the author from the work (which is interesting to me to see because some people are definitely not "separating" anything even though they think they are; they just erase the author entirely as an active agent, isolate the work, and call it "objectivity") has a lot to do with some people being unable to separate the things they read from themselves.

I'm absolutely not saying it's right, but it's an impulse I do understand. If you read a book and love it, if it transforms your life, or defines a particular period of your life, and then you find out that the author has said or done something awful--where does that leave you? Someone awful made something beautiful, something you loved: and now that this point of communion exists between you and someone whose views you'd never agree with, what does that mean for who you are? That this came from the mind of a person capable of something awful and spoke to your mind--does that mean you're like them? Could be like them?

Those are very uncomfortable questions and I think if you have a tendency to look at art or literature this way, you will inevitable fall into the mindset where only "Good" stories can be accepted because there's no distinction between where the story ends and you begin. As I said, I can see where it comes from but I also find it profoundly troubling because i think one of the worst things you can do to literature is approach it with the expectation of moral validation--this idea that everything you consume, everything you like and engage with is some fundamental insight into your very character as opposed to just a means of looking at or questioning something for its own sake is not just narrow-minded but dangerous.

Art isn't obliged to be anything--not moral, not even beautiful. And while I expend very little (and I mean very little) energy engaging with or even looking at internet / twitter discourse for obvious reasons, I do find it interesting that people (online anyway) will make the entire axis of their critique on something hinge on the fact that its bad representation or justifying / romanticizing something less than ideal, proceeding to treat art as some sort of conduit for moral guidance when it absolutely isn't. And they will also hold that this critique comes from a necessarily good and just place (positive representation, and I don't know, maybe in their minds it does) while at the same time setting themselves apart from radical conservatives who do the exact same thing, only they're doing it from the other side.

To make it abundantly clear, I'm absolutely not saying you should tolerate bigots decrying that books about the Holocaust, race, homophobia, or lgbt experiences should be banned--what I am saying, is that people who protest that a book like Maus or Persepolis is going to "corrupt children", and people who think a book exploring the emotional landscape of a deeply flawed character, who just happens to be from a traditionally marginalised group or is written by someone who is, is bad representation and therefore damaging to that community as a whole are arguments that stem from the exact same place: it's a fundamental inability, or outright refusal, to accept the interiority and alterity of other people, and the inherent validity of the experiences that follow. It's the same maniacal, consumptive, belief that there can be one view and one view only: the correct view, which is your view--your thoughts, your feelings.

There is also dangerous element of control in this. Someone with racist views does not want their child to hear anti-racist views because as far as they are concerned, this child is not a being with agency, but a direct extension of them and their legacy. That this child may disagree is a profound rupture and a threat to the cohesion of this person's entire worldview. Nothing exists in and of and for itself here: rather the multiplicity of the world and people's experiences within it are reduced to shadowy agents that are either for us or against us. It's not about protecting children's "innocence" ("think of the children", in these contexts, often just means "think of the status quo"), as much as it is about protecting yourself and the threat to your perceived place in the world.

And in all honestt I think the same holds true for the other side--if you cannot trust yourself to engage with works of art that come from a different standpoint to yours, or whose subject matter you dislike, without believing the mere fact of these works' existence will threaten something within you or society in general (which is hysterical because believe me, society is NOT that flimsy), then that is not an issue with the work itself--it's a personal issue and you need to ask yourself if it would actually be so unthinkable if your belief about something isn't as solid as you think it is, and, crucially, why you have such little faith in your own critical capacity that the only response these works ilicit from you is that no one should be able to engage with them. That's not awareness to me--it's veering very close to sticking your head in the sand, while insisting you actually aren't.

Arbitrarily adding a moral element to something that does not exist as an agent of moral rectitude but rather as an exploration of deeply human impulses, and doing so simply to justify your stance or your discomfort is not only a profoundly inadequate, but also a deeply insidious, way of papering over your insecurities and your own ignorance (i mean this in the literal sense of the word), of creating a false and dishonest certainty where certainty does not exist and then presenting this as a fact that cannot and should not be challenged and those who do are somehow perverse or should have their characters called into question for it. It's reductive and infantilising in so many ways and it also actively absolves you of any responsibility as a reader--it absolves you of taking responsibility for your own interpretation of the work in question, it absolves you of responsibility for your own feelings (and, potentially, your own biases or preconceptions), it absolves you of actual, proper, thought and engagement by laying the blame entirely on a rogue piece of literature (as if prose is something sentient) instead of acknowledging that any instance of reading is a two-way street: instead of asking why do I feel this way? what has this text rubbed up against? the assumption is that the book has imposed these feelings on you, rather than potentially illuminated what was already there.

Which brings me to something else which is that it is also, and I think this is equally dangerous, lending books and stories a mythical, almost supernatural, power that they absolutely do not have. Is story-telling one of the most human, most enduring, most important and life-altering traditions we have? Yes. But a story is also just a story. And to convince yourself that books have a dangerous transformative power above and beyond what they are actually capable of is, again, to completely erase people's agency as readers, writers' agency as writers and makers (the same as any other craft), and subsequently your own. And erasing agency is the very point of censors banning books en masse. It's not an act of stupidity or blind ignorance, but a conscious awareness of the fact that people will disagree with you, and for whatever reason you've decided that you are not going to let them.

Writers and poets are not separate entities to the rest of us: they aren't shamans or prophets, gifted and chosen beings who have some inner, profound, knowledge the rest of us aren't privy to (and should therefore know better or be better in some regard) because moral absolutism just does not exist. Every writer, no matter how affecting their work may be, is still Just Some Guy Who Made a Thing. Writing can be an incredibly intimate act, but it can also just be writing, in the same way that plumbing is plumbing and weeding is just weeding and not necessarily some transcendant cosmic endeavour in and of itself. Authors are no different, when you get down to it, from bakers or electricians; Nobel laureates are just as capable of coming out with distasteful comments about women as your annoying cousin is and the fact that they wrote a genre-defying work does not change that, or vice-versa. We imbue books with so much power and as conduits of the very best and most human traits we can imagine and hope for, but they aren't representations of the best of humanity--they're simply expressions of humanity, which includes the things we don't like.

There are some authors I love who have said and done things I completely disagree with or whose views I find abhorrent--but I'm not expecting that, just because they created something that changed my world, they are above and beyond the ordinarly, the petty, the spiteful, or cruel. That's not condoning what they have said and done in the least: but I trust myself to be able to read these works with awareness and attention, to pick out and examine and attempt to understand the things that I find questionable, to hold on to what has moved me, and to disregard what I just don't vibe with or disagree with. There are writers I've chosen not to engage with, for my own personal reasons: but I'm not going to enforce this onto someone else because I can see what others would love in them, even if what I love is not strong enough to make up for what I can't. Terrance Hayes put perfectly in my view, when he talks about this and being capable of "love without forgiveness". Writing is a profoundly human heritage and those who engage with it aren't separate from that heritage as human because they live in, and are made by, the exact same world as anyone else.

The measure of good writing for me has hardly anything to do with whatever "virtue" it's perceived to have and everything to do with sincerity. As far as I'm concerned, "positive representation" is not about 100% likeable characters who never do anything problematic or who are easily understood. Positive representation is about being afforded the full scope of human feelings, the good, the bad, and the ugly, and not having your humanity, your dignity, your right to exist in the world questioned because all of these can only be seen through the filter of race, or gender, religion, or ethicity and interpreted according to our (profoundly warped) perceptions of those categories and what they should or shouldn't represent. True recognition of someone's humanity does not lie in finding only what is held in common between you (and is therefore "acceptable", with whatever you put into that category), but in accepting everything that is radically different about them and not letting this colour the consideration you give.

Also, and it may sound harsh, but I think people forget that fictional characters are fictional. If I find a particularly fucked up relationship dynamic compelling (as I often do), or if I decide to write and explore that dynamic, that's not me saying two people who threaten to kill each other and constantly hurt each other is my ideal of romance and that this is exactly how I want to be treated: it's me trying to find out what is really happening below the surface when two people behave like this. It's me exploring something that would be traumatizing and deeply damaging in real life, in a safe and fictional setting so I can gain some kind of understanding about our darker and more destructive impulses without being literally destroyed by them, as would happen if all of this were real. But it isn't real. And this isn't a radical or complex thing to comprehend, but it becomes incomprehensible if your sole understanding of literature is that it exists to validate you or entertain you or cater to you, and if all of your interpretations of other people's intentions are laced with a persistent sense of bad faith. Just because you have not forged any identity outside of this fictional narrative doesn't mean it's the same for others.

Ursula K. le Guin made an extremely salient point about children and stories in that children know the stories you tell them--dragons, witches, ghouls, whatever--are not real, but they are true. And that sums it all up. There's a reason children learning to lie is an incredibly important developmental milestone, because it shows that they have achieved an incredibly complex, but vitally important, ability to hold two contradictory statements in their minds and still know which is true and which isn't. If you cannot delve into a work, on the terms it sets, as a fictional piece of literature, recognize its good points and note its bad points, assess what can have a real world impact or reflects a real world impact and what is just creative license, how do you possible expect to recognize when authority and propaganda lies to you? Because one thing propaganda has always utilised is a simplistic, black and white depiction of The Good (Us) and The Bad (Them). This moralistic stance regarding fiction does not make you more progressive or considerate; it simply makes it easier to manipulate your ideas and your feelings about those ideas because your assessments are entirely emotional and surface level and are fuelled by a refusal to engage with something beyond the knee-jerk reaction it causes you to have.

Books are profoundly, and I do mean profoundly, important to me-- and so much of who I am and the way I see things is probably down to the fact that stories have preoccupied me wherever I go. But I also don't see them as vital building blocks for some core facet or a pronouncement of Who I Am. They're not badges of honour or a cover letter I put out into the world for other people to judge and assess me by, and approve of me (and by extension, the things I say or feel). They're vehicles through which I explore and experience whatever it is that I'm most caught by: not a prophylactic, not a mode of virtue signalling, and certainly not a means of signalling a moral stance.

I think at the end of the day so much of this tendency to view books as an extension of yourself (and therefore of an author) is down to the whole notion of "art as a mirror", and I always come back to Fran Lebowitz saying that it "isn't a mirror, it's a door". And while I do think it's important to have that mirror (especially if you're part of a community that never sees itself represented, or represented poorly and offensively) I think some people have moved into the mindset of thinking that, in order for art to be good, it needs to be a mirror, it needs to cater to them and their experiences precisely--either that or that it can only exist as a mirror full stop, a reflection of and for the reader and the writer (which is just incredibly reductive and dismissive of both)--and if art can only exist as a mirror then anything negative that is reflected back at you must be a condemnation, not a call for exploration or an attempt at understanding.

As I said, a mirror is important but to insist on it above all else isn't always a positive thing: there are books I related to deeply because they allowed me to feel so seen (some by authors who looked nothing like me), but I have no interest in surrounding myself with those books all the time either--I know what goes on in my head which is precisely why I don't always want to live there. Being validated by a character who's "just like me" is amazing but I also want--I also need-- to know that lives and minds and events exist outside of the echo-chamber of my own mind. The mirror is comforting, yes, but if you spend too long with it, it also becomes isolating: you need doors because they lead you to ideas and views and characters you could never come up with on your own. A world made up of various Mes reflected back to me is not a world I want to be immersed in because it's a world with very little texture or discovery or room for growth and change. Your sense of self and your sense of other people cannot grow here; it just becomes mangled.

Art has always been about dialogue, always about a me and a you, a speaker and a listener, even when it is happening in the most internal of spaces: to insist that art only ever tells you what you want to hear, that it should only reflect what you know and accept is to undermine the very core of what it seeks to do in the first place, which is establish connection. Art is a lifeline, I'm not saying it isn't. But it's also not an instruction manual for how to behave in the world--it's an exploration of what being in the world looks like at all, and this is different for everyone. And you are treading into some very, very dangerous waters the moment you insist it must be otherwise.

Whatever it means to be in the world, it is anything but straightforward. In this world people cheat, people kill, they manipulate, they lie, they torture and steal--why? Sometimes we know why, but more often we don't--but we take all these questions and write (or read) our way through them hoping that, if we don't find an answer, we can at least find our way to a place where not knowing isn't as unbearable anymore (and sometimes it's not even about that; it's just about telling a story and wanting to make people laugh). It's an endless heritage of seeking with countless variations on the same statements which say over and over again I don't know what to make of this story, even as I tell it to you. So why am I telling it? Do I want to change it? Can I change it? Yes. No. Maybe. I have no certainty in any of this except that I can say it. All I can do is say it.

Writing, and art in general, are one of the very, very, few ways we can try and make sense of the apparently arbitrary chaos and absurdity of our lives--it's one of the only ways left to us by which we can impose some sense of structure or meaning, even if those things exists in the midst of forces that will constantly overwhelm those structures, and us. I write a poem to try and make sense of something (grief, love, a question about octopuses) or to just set down that I've experienced something (grief, love, an answer about octpuses). You write a poem to make sense of, resolve, register, or celebrate something else. They don't have to align. They don't have to agree. We don't even need to like each other much. But in both of these instances something is being said, some fragment of the world as its been perceived or experienced is being shared. They're separate truths that can exist at the same time. Acknowledging this is the only means we have of momentarily bridging the gaps that will always exist between ourselves and others, and it requires a profound amount of grace, consideration and forbearance. Otherwise, why are we bothering at all?

#this is so much longer than i intended but yeah. those are my very long 2 cents #tbh i also think social media makes it worse in a way especially bc “transparency” has become a form of public vetting which is insane to m #me* transparency and honesty are not the same thing ans its ludicrous that this is where we're at and while we all have to live with this #demand for transparency i do think it affects writers differently bc the whole art as mirror thing comes to the fore in this argument #why would you sit with your feelings about a book when its easier and more accessible for you to @ the authors twitter handle #but anyway #ask #anonymous #book talks

399 notes · View notes

sukunasweetheart · 1 month

Text

//just me venting about sukuna haters sorry

Not me seeing so much discourse about whether sukuna is a well written villain or not... he essentially has no backstory shown as of yet and we barely know anything about him but he is still one of the most naturally interesting and compelling characters in the whole damn series bro 💀 buckle up bc its about to get lengthy (im just glazing sukuna in this post ngl so 🧎‍♀️)

so many whiny ass mfs are weeping about how he "doesn't have any personal goals or a proper reason to be a villain" when that is the whole point???? He lives on his own desires and satisfactions and does whatever he wants to, because he is capable enough to do that. Mfs want "real villains" but cant even handle sukuna 💀 ive seen too many shit ass threads and poorly articulated "critiques" on his character that dont make any valid points. If you can't even separate your personal dislike of a character from your analysis of their writing, dont even bother posting that shit please 😭😭😭 the fact that we haven't even gotten any information about his background yet and people are jumping the gun about him being "poorly written" is already saying a lot 🤨

The fact that yall are so bitter and angry about him that you can write 500+ words about how oh-so-terrible of a villain he is kinda proves that he's doing his job well tbh 💁‍♀️

What also bothers me to no END is how people compare him with villains of other series, who had compelling sob stories that made people empathise with them. Thats nice and all but why should all villains have grand ideals and be subject to feelings of empathy/sympathy from their audience?

Part of what makes sukuna so interesting is how he's not tied down by morals, rules or long term goals in life. He doesn't limit himself, which is what makes him an unpredictable character. He's completely left behind what it means to be human in many ways, and he's clearly not a character written to be empathised with. He is very purposefully inhumane and distant from everyone else, and that feeling transcends from within the series to real life as well. There is a clear lack of understanding bc most of us can't comprehend what its like to just live without being goal-oriented.

Sukuna is a true anomaly in the sense that he doesnt really fit in any kind of box within the series. He's born from man, but its clear that he separates himself from humans (and nobody else considers him human, either). He's not a cursed spirit. He hovers between life and death. The narrator referred to him as the honoured one, whilst angel referred to him as the disgraced one.

These little contradictions in his character make him all the more complicated and interesting to think about. And even recently, he's been shown to waver a little bit momentarily in the manga, questioning his own irritation at yuuji. He's capable of self reflection, and though sukuna does whatever he wants for the most part, he doesn't blindly go into things without some thought first, he's a constant thinker and analyser, and an intelligent one at that.

And honestly, he is always such a joy to watch and read, his personality is so flavourful, and the way he carries himself is very attractive. He's not afraid to get messy or of getting hurt, theres so much chaos in the way he does things and yet he also has a huge element of gracefulness to him, which shines through the poetic way he speaks. Its undeniable that sukuna simply oozes charisma...

And this isnt talked about enough but this man is genuinely so effortlessly funny (in a kind of sinister way i guess?) Like yes he is an old ass man having real beef with one FIFTEEN YEAR OLD for very little reason, he accidentally healed yuujis arm and somehow expected him to be grateful for it despite how he literally ripped his heart out afterwards, then he proceeded to sit on him after kicking him down likeeee 😭 what kind of behaviour is this sir

His facial expressions at yorozus yapping 💀 THE WAY HE COMPARED YUUJIS FACE OF DESPAIR TO THE HARIMA STATUE 😭😭😭💀😭💀💀😭 omg that was so foul but i was fucking losing it ngl

How he randomly compared gojo to a fish and started talking abt his scales... thats a very unique and descriptive comparison, isnt it? Even in the recent leaks, he was 100% ready and squaring up to a literal child talking abt "youre starting to get annoying" LIKE HELPPP 😭 HE FR SAID "fuck them kids and fuck you too"

I saw someone saying that sukuna has no passion, like are we talking about the same character....? This man is a literal jujutsu NERD 💀💀 he truly recognises talented sorcerers and the only time hes seen to be having genuine fun is when hes fighting a mf... is that not passion? This is literally sukuna when it comes to jujutsu: 🤓

Anyway im done here now, im pretty sure i missed a lot of things i couldve talked about as well but ive done enough yapping

#jjk #sukuna

54 notes · View notes

system-of-a-feather · 10 months

Text

Sorry for all the Tulpa-discourse lately, this is more of a Buddhist ramble / discussion than syscourse but ya know

It's been on my mind a lot between it being in syscourse circles heavily and the fact that I'm actually currently on a system-designated theraputic homework assignment to reconnect with Buddhist concepts and to incorporate it into my self care routine so I can get back to my baseline after doing something of a survival mode to help balance out XIV being in borderline-crisis lately resulting in my burn out

I'm (as Riku as a part) actually usually very hesitant to talk about much of my cultural and personal experiences and AAPI-rooted parts of my life because of old system dynamics, persecution, and a lot of other things that make me very anxious and prone to fawning when me existing in a space I am involved in is at all challenged which is largely why I leave it to XIV to voice it for me since he also is the guy that keeps me from falling into old dynamics. (<- literally is the person who thought I was *checks notes* faking being asian like that is a possible thing let alone something I thought LONGER than me faking DID)

So honestly, its kind of a bit cathartic occasionally to actually have a sense of self and security enough to have the balls to actually defend myself in terms of this sort of crap and assert that I actually, ya know, have an experience in life. So as much as I typically hate the negativity and contention that bringing this stuff up brings, it's honestly theraputic and part of me expressing a valid part of my existence and self - so with XIV's nudging I tend to let myself have that space.

With all that said, I wanted to bring up a discussion point and correction point now that I'm not genuinely and authentically triggered about racism, I think a thing I do want to comment on in regards to the rhetoric on the tulpa topic that anti-tulpa-term people get wrong when talking about Buddhism and """""""tulpamancy""""""" is that Buddhism is not a closed culture or closed practice and stating that does a disservice to the group as well; albeit its the lesser of two wrongs by a LONG shot so I shirk it off as a "to get to later" point

But Buddhism is incredibly open to anyone interested on engaging with it and its part of why - when I specifically talk about the critiques of """"""Western Tulpamancy"""""" in terms of Buddhism I try to remind myself to desalinate between "westerner" and "white". There are many many many white Buddhists - as there are many black, latin, native, Middle eastern, etc Buddhists as well.

In some cases and for some people, Buddhism is a religion and/or spirituality, for others it's more of a way of life / philosophy. Tibetan Buddhism, as I know it as a non-Tibetian Buddhist, is a lot more on the religion side of things which is a different topic I honestly am under knowledgeable to comment on - but overall the thing that ties a lot of Buddhism together is the core and underlying principles of acceptance, letting things go, connecting to the greater world, and just general enlightenment as a means of finding peace.

Myself, and a lot of Buddhists, gladly encourage people to look into Buddhists practices and principles and ideology because its honestly extremely healing and regardless of if you are SUPER into it and go become a monk or what not or if you just dabble in it, so long as you do it respectfully and understand your biases and genuinely have GOOD RESPECTFUL intent and an interest on understanding it more, its an amazing and really welcoming thing to get involved in.

The thing all the 'pro-tulpas' quote on the Dalai Lama is honestly entirely true. Almost everyone could benefit from the practices and principles found within Buddhism.

That is to say however, that there is a large difference between spending a day or two at a monastery and learning more about the culture and the ideas of Buddhism and integrating them into your life and just grabbing this Really Cool and Quirky High Level Principle / Ritual / Practice of a Specific Typically Very Dedicated Version of Buddhism and ignoring EVERYTHING ELSE about Buddhism and saying "this aspect, this aspect I like and I'm going to completely warp it how I like it while calling it and/or referencing it in terms of Buddhism to make it look intellectual and enlightened for me to be involved in it."

I've seen it said in some Buddhist communities and discussions regarding the more ritual and involved aspects of Buddhism - specifically in regards to the Mahayana approaches - that a lot of the practices and rituals when used inappropriately or unguided can be "dangerous" with danger in this sense being a worsening of the individuals conditions resulting in an increase in a lot of the core things almost all versions of Buddhism considers unhealthy and unideal such as increase in conflict, desire, and disconnect from the greater world and thus generally more suffering.

And on that front, while not being of the Mahayana school of thought and as a result not really believing so much in bodhisattvas, I can - from my personal view and perspective - entirely understand how frustrating it is to see a term often sighed with "buddhists roots" be used in a way that - in my opinion - almost exemplifies the exact opposite of what I understand to be the crux of the idea of Buddhist peace.

A large part of me getting more involved into the concepts Buddhism has to offer and honestly a thing that had both helped my healing journey and how I interact with my system is the large realization that the existence of "I" doesn't really have much ground to it in what it is and what it means and what defines "I".

That identity and human nature is largely a mobile and constant changing force part of a larger and grander thing that is just really existence as a whole and there is little that makes me more unique than say the trees or the squirrel looking for nut or a bird singing in the tree other than the fact that I have the "curse" of conscious awareness and 'advanced intellect' that makes it so that I both feel the need to >Be< something and the bother of "the next thing". A large part of practice is letting go of a lot of notions that a lot of society and life reinforce - one of the most in my current stage of learning and practice - is letting go of the concept of "me and I" and just, ya know, being.

And to me, looking at the """""Western Tulpamancy Community""""" you have people who are sectoring off a part of themselves, their experience, their life whatever and not only identifying it as seperate from them (NO!!!! We are all connected >:[ <- light hearted comment) but also giving that part of themselves an entire identity of it's own and a whole second sense of "I" beyond what was already there - combined with the overall themes of 'developing your tulpa' by giving it more traits and details and stuff until it 'becomes independent' is rooted in such American / Western individualism which DO not even get me started on how toxic individualism is and how inherently opposite it is to Buddhism and

//deep breath//

I'm getting ahead of myself, the truth is while the concept of 'creating a headmate' or whatever greatly concerns me as a Buddhist - as a human and as a Buddhist (in a different perspective), seeking out to change people is the last thing I'm interested in and it's honestly not this uber horrible or harmful thing and its really not my business; so as long as it is making someone happy and what not, I really don't care if it doesn't match to my theory cause ya know, theory is that - just theory. Live and let be ya know - yall have your own life to live and yall know how to live your own life better than I could assume to know so I'm not gonna try to tell you how to live it. Philosophical theory comes second to philosophical practice and practice says to live and let be.

But its just really frustrating a lot of the time to see how the topic is handled when its far from really what it is. And in theory, I should let it go because honestly, people using the word "tulpa" to describe experiences that are largely anti-thetical to my understanding of Buddhism - while annoying - is not the end of the world and fostering hate and aggression does nothing but increase the overall suffering (dukkha) in the world. Often, when I think about talking about it or getting mad, I do tend to repeat that mantra back to myself and most of the time I refrain and leave it be.

That being said, XIV runs on the philosophy and critique of the over theroretical approach to Buddhism over the realistic and practical in saying that by "letting go of" certain frustrations and annoyances and grievances - while healthier for the individual person - enables and perpetuates long term suffering for the masses and years to come. So that while it would be best for me / us to let it go and exist in a state closer to Buddhist peace and doing so is an entirely valid decision (thus why I respect Buddhists who say using the tulpa-term is fine), I would also be choosing to maintain my peace over acknowledging and speaking up about the honestly long and ongoing racism and disrespect that plague those that I feel particular kinship with and in XIV's perspective (one that I am starting to take on a bit more lately) - the choice of personal peace is a selfish one that is complicit in increasing the suffering of the world as a whole in favor for the individual "I" that honestly has become a bit distasteful for our system.

But anyways, I digress. Buddhist ramble done.

#alter: riku #syscourse #syscourse tw #<- not meant to be #but for filtering purposes again #buddhism #buddhism posting #riku rambles

71 notes · View notes

rollercoasterwords · 1 year

Text

ok sorry thought i was done but just. like the places where i see discussion to be had abt misogyny re:wlw ships/fics getting less attention/hype/whatever in the marauders fandom is like

1. the fact that the source material is sexist in its portrayals of women and the sexism underlying how pretty much the only characters w any canon to build off in the marauders era are men

which like. this is a valid thing to point out, sure, and it's a valid thing to be aware of, but it isn't any individual fic writer's moral responsibility to rehabilitate the text by giving female characters development that was not afforded to them originally, y’know? fanfiction isn't activism, it's a hobby. and because it exists outside a profit economy, nobody really has any right as a consumer to demand certain standards of representation. so it's like. there is a conversation to be had there, but it's not a conversation that everyone is obligated to take part in, and it's not a matter of pointing fingers and going "you're sexist if you only write fic about boys!!" like that just isn't the way you act if ur trying to build community. sure, i think it's good to be aware of how the original biases in a text impact our engagement with it, but at the end of the day i'm not going to frown upon someone for looking at a handful of characters and picking the ones that were more well-developed in canon, yknow?

2. The Rosekiller Conundrum

see this is where i feel like a lot of this discourse hinges because when point 1 is broken down i often see people go: yeah but it's not just about which characters are well-developed bc evan rosier literally has no canon personality either and neither does barty and tbh neither does regulus so why are they so popular!!

and it's like. first of all, is rosekiller actually as popular as u are making it out to be? one quick search on ao3 brought up 4000 works tagged dorlene and 778 tagged evan/barty. so. i am curious about how this popularity is being measured (of course, timeframe plays into it too--if most of those 778 fics have been written in the past year, that probably is a lot more growth than most wlw ships see). but honestly i wonder how much of the seeming popularity of rosekiller is just internet echo chambers, yknow?

but also. people going "why/how did this get popular if not flat-out sexism??" like. it seems pretty simple to me. pandemic -> tiktok explosion -> atyd virality on tiktok -> marauderstok -> jegulus surge. a few fic writers somewhat randomly decided to write evan and barty as regulus's friends, their fics happened to go viral through no fault of their own, and bc of the way tiktok interacts w fanfic where everyone talks abt the same few popular fanfics bc that's what will get their videos views (which makes those fics more popular, which makes more people talk abt them for views, etc etc) evan and barty just happened to become new beloved characters. tbh i think it could just as easily have been any other two death eater/slytherin boys if someone had happened to choose them to be regulus's friends and then their fic went viral.

so like....to me rosekiller has less to do with sexism and more to do with the way that tiktok engages with fanfic through this framework of consumer economy. and so continuing to interact w it through the framework of a consumer economy is just gonna perpetuate the issues u are ostensibly trying to critique.

and like, yes, there is of course room for a conversation of like. what role misogyny plays in the seeming boom of rosekiller popularity, and whether this is indicative of a wider trend in which people get attached to male characters much more quickly and easily than they do female characters. but that is not the only factor at play here, and it is not necessarily the most important one, or a factor that's even going to be at play for every single person, and certainly not for every single person the same way. so like--sure, let's have those conversations! i've shared my thoughts on this blog before abt how i think misogyny might impact our abilities to relate to female characters. but nobody is obligated to take part in those discussions because, once again, this is a hobby that exists outside a consumer economy, and it is neither practical nor productive to act like everyone should be constantly and militantly policing each other for any behavior that could potentially be influenced by misogyny. this is supposed to be a community. if u want to have a conversation with someone, you don't start it by pointing a finger in their face and yelling about how you're morally superior.

#added a cut bc this got long!#of course!#who is surprised!#anyway tldr is like yes let's talk about misogyny but not as a form of pointless virtue signaling #ranting and raving #txt

114 notes · View notes

ricanvvas · 4 months

Note

Hello. I have noticed your very impassioned posts about shipping male friends in anime fandoms and am attempting to write a response in what I hope comes across as an understanding manner.

I am not here to attack you. I am not trying to call you homophobic. I will not be trying to convince you to ship anything you don't want to ship.

I do agree with you that fandom as a whole could benefit from more discussions about platonic relationships. Sometimes just seeing a lot of romantic shipping posts can get a bit annoying. Society as a whole could benefit from focusing less on romantic and sexual relationships. Platonic relationships are just as valid and can be just as important and deep as romantic relationships, if not more so.

However, I don't agree with how you seem to talk down to shippers. I've seen you say that people who ship characters who are best friends must not understand friendship. That is not a fair assumption to make. You don't know those people. You shouldn't make generalizations about their experiences. For example: I have 3 best friends I've known since high school who I would do anything for and be devastated to lose, and I ship Gojo and Geto. And I know full well that they will probably never be confirmed to be canonically in love, and I'm fine with that. You shouldn't be making assumptions about people based on their shipping preferences.

And again, I am NOT calling you homophobic, and that's not the point people tried to make when pointing out that the ships you are critiquing in those posts are almost entirely, if not all, mlm ships. I haven't seen you mention non-canonical wlw ships, like Nobara/Maki, or non-canonical m/f ships, like Gojo/Utahime or Yuji/Nobara. None of those are confirmed canon. I know there are only so many ships you can list or know about, but when you only ever mention mlm ships, it appears as though you are making a targeted attack. I am saying this because I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that this is unintentional.

I've also seen you mention that you want to be a writer and how you would feel if people headcanoned your characters contrary to your intention. All I can say to that is that you cannot control how people will react to your writing and attempting to do so is futile. It may sound harsh, but it's true.

I can see that you have very strong opinions about this, but if you do care more about discussions about platonic male friendships than shipping discourse, then your time would be better spent making those discussions yourself and blocking the shipping tags. You aren't going to change anyone's minds with those posts. Sure, you'll attract people with similar opinions, but, as you've seen, you'll also attract the annoyance of people in related tags who didn't want to see posts like yours. For better or for worse, shipping is ingrained in the foundations of modern fandom going all the way back to the 60s with Trekkies writing fan fiction and making fan magazines to ship Spock and Kirk. It's something you'll have to either make peace with or ignore.

I'm not expecting you to reply to this. Honestly, I'll be surprised if you even bother to read the whole thing (I doubt I'd be happy getting a whole essay from some rando in my ask box lol). But if you do read the whole thing, just know that I say these things in the hopes that it will help you have a better relationship with fandom. You don't have to like all of it, and you don't even need a reason to dislike something. Fandom is about having fun, but I just can't imagine that this whole discourse is much fun for you.

Skimmed through your input, the respect is much appreciated.

But I would’ve really liked it if you didn’t bring up the being a writer part—I hope you realize that writers are writers for themselves and not for the satisfaction of others. Their imagination and their work. If somebody is twisting an author’s story and their characters, they have the right speak up and be upset because it belongs to them. Yes, it’s shared publicly, but nonetheless, they should be respected. I think it’s very ridiculous to try and create excuses for this.

A reminder of my main point; friendships should be left alone as friendships instead of being twisted.

I don’t care for headcanons or what ships one likes or whatnot. Trust me, I don’t have that much free time. You have your opinion. My problem is enforcing it onto others and this is an undeniable topic.

Saying these people probably don’t have strong friendships is an an unfair assumption from me, I’ll agree, but I’m not completely wrong for thinking so when they go berserk when I don’t agree with romantically or sexually shipping platonic friendships.

I was targeting specifics here, too. There are rarely any cases to the otherwise of this, but “MLM” has been fetishized immensely across anime fandoms, to the point that male friends are not allowed to stay male friends without being seen as a romantic or sexual partner which is where the toxicity starts. I hadn’t targeted “WLW” or regular male/female ships because they aren’t extremists in HUGE amount of numbers who will bash and shun you for not giving into their ideas. There is no dodging this fact—sure some of them are normal who accept their idea is not accepted fandom-wide and move on, but others will go as far as giving you death threats.

For example, I know an artist who ships Gojo and Utahime, and they got plenty of doxing death threats. It’s very common. When it’s a female and a male, suddenly nobody is entitled to their own opinion. This happens more often than you know.

In the same way, if you comment “they’re best friends” on a post where Gojo/Geto are shipped, they will come for you with ridiculous attacks and ridiculous claims of homophobia and I can test this any second to prove it. They have no sense of respect. They’re triggered by canon, so they should be the ones to find something to their liking. They don’t even watch for story, seriously. And I would like to kindly remind the obvious that people like me are preaching the givens from the author while people like them are preaching things they twisted in their head, so why are we the ones being attacked? We aren’t even the ones with opinions, we are the ones with factual givens.

It’s been barely two years since I became an anime fan and I thought the definition of fandom was to enjoy and speak about the show and author’s work all together—not twist it into something it isn’t and attack one another. If not, then I’m ashamed. I have never personally went up to somebody in the comments and said “fuck you” for shipping two male best friends but I’ve been told that several times for calling two male best friends, best friends.

And the thing about these animes is that they’re beautiful stories, they’re writings from an author portraying strong and emotional friendship between men, encouraging men to be more open and expressive and appreciate those they admire, because in reality they find it difficult to do so. It’s okay to feel angry if your friend left, it’s okay to cry if your friend hurt you in a way, it’s okay to grieve for years when your friend dies—but what does the “fandom” insensitively say? “They’re definitely gay and in love.” What’s the message people are sending when you only address males to romantic and sexual relationships?

Close friendships are damn strong. Stronger than one wants to believe.

What’s the point of watching something just to toss aside the story and contort characters that aren’t yours? That debunks almost any right to yell at those who don’t do what you do.

I’m not trying to change minds. It’s the other way around. They need to stop trying to change minds, and when one doesn’t buy it, they need to stop attacking childishly.

13 notes · View notes

olderthannetfic · 1 year

Note

i'm a literature student at a fairly prestigious university for my country and i've recently returned to tumblr - i'm honestly shocked at how fandom has changed. Obviously in traditional literature there are 'problematic' things that happen, that you can dislike and even be disturbed by, but that doesn't mean the literature isn't valid? And its the same for modern media. Like in the 'real world' at school (at least where im from) we have content warnings (we call them health warnings) for nasty topics and then we just. . . discuss and analyse, which ig is stating the obvious in a university setting but still, like what do people who are fandom purists believe actual literature analysis is like?? idk I'm just rlly surprised honestly.

I also personally believe in free publishing, because if everything is published or posted above board then everything can be open to critique and criticism, otherwise people will talk about the same things in underground spaces and it could get way more toxic than having general mild fandom discourse on tumblr. Although it seems like fandom discourse is anything but mild these days.

I don't really have a super concise point but just some thoughts ive been having since returning to fandom spaces, wanted to know what you make of how i'm feeling :)

The authoritarian puritywankers existed before, but they were slightly different demographics or in slightly different spaces from now.

I think some of the more "thoughtcrimes are real" types who freak out over the most minor of fictional transgressions live in a bubble. That doesn't mean their lives are perfect. Hell, they may be dealing with actual abuse in their daily lives. But they aren't forced to confront how messy life is even among people one respects and mostly agrees with and are able to cling to the idea of Good People vs. Bad People.

That said, for every booktuber going on about how some YA book's misstep will indoctrinate the youth and spell the end of civilization, I still see 10 old, bigoted guys bleating about "political correctness run amok" just because a school assigned a book by a black author. Annoying wokesters are very present and more of an active problem around fandom on Tumblr, but I think it's easy to imagine that they're far more powerful and numerous than they actually are.

The few young anti types I know offline tend to have random bouts of rage over problematic things but also are often too shy to speak up in person. Many of them get laughed at for their Very Online views and have trouble connecting with people offline. If someone they admire or just someone with a strong personality asserts the opposite of the anti party line, they instantly fold.

I would not say that the average Youth™ falls for purity discourse. Some do, but not only do we tend to not hear from or notice the ones who can behave themselves, but also, a lot of the most virulent wankers are older people who should know better and who are engaging in this bullshit for clout.

Bullies and idiots probably aren't any more numerous than in the past. They're just expressing it a little differently these days.

85 notes · View notes

noona96n · 1 year

Note

sorry you are getting hate for shuri/namor :(

every fandom I’ve been in, this obsessed energy against enemies to lovers pops up and it’s like these people don’t know how to enjoy their own goddamn ships without invalidating another one. it’s like there’s a scarcity mindset on what can be shipped and every ship needs to prove it’s worth both realistically and morally. like just celebrate your ship and keep it pushing - the more ships, the better! bc people will have options!

I pray to god that Shuri/Namor doesn’t ever become canon bc what I’ve learned in other fandoms (reylo lmao) is that canon just makes it worse. once it’s canon, the discourse is insufferable AND valid bc it’s source material critique. You can put that energy towards canon ships, but non-canon ships?? just move on 😭

oh anon why r u apologizing? ure not the one sending me hates or flooding my notes w/ anti fun rhetoric for Shuri x Namor

honestly, i don't expect the antis to apologize to me either bcs if they're capable of realizing their wrong in policing others' experience, they're more than capable of realizing that fandom stuff can also be just about vibing & having fun & going batshit insane, it doesn't always have to be about what's morally right & politically correct.

fandom, like human, is multifaceted.

i really don't understand why people need to put down others + what others like, i really don't. why? what comes out of that experience? it's such a strange concept for me tbh

idk if it's about validating their ships (at least i don't think so) bcs many ships can exist in parallel. seriously. i myself ship Shuri x Namor AND Shuri x Rir AND Shuri x Okoye... i just prefer Shuri x Namor more bcs of the dead dove do not eat & unhinged quality of it

in terms of canon-izing Shuri x Namor, i don't think it's gonna be so... look, im a shipper but i also understand the reality of what it looks like in such a big production like marvel lol + I don't think they have such presidence in the comics, so yeah

also @ the antis, we're very aware of all the fckd up shit going on w/ Shuri x Namor (age gap, power imbalance, kidnapping, threats of violence, literally murdering of moms, & acts of war)... we ship it anyway bcs it's just fun to explore not nice things in fandom space! das it

#shuri x namor #namor x shuri #shuri #namor #black panther: wakanda forever #black panther wakanda forever #wakanda forever #black panther 2 #black panther #noona96n #shuramori #namuri #nashuri

23 notes · View notes

inyourwildestdreams22 · 3 months

Note

You don’t have to post or anything but the posts you posted/deleted on Sunday after Taylor’s aoty win as well as some you’ve reblogged were in bad taste. I hope you understand that people have valid criticism of Taylor both in the results of the Grammys as well the capitalistic side effects of her lifestyle. Not saying you don’t have the right to love her and her music! But you acted dismissive of others, especially women of color, who voiced their valid critiques of the woman’s wins and actions. You writing their opinion off as just being “haters” was wrong. Your words came across petty and distasteful. I hope you understand the inherit bias the media/industry has for Taylor versus her contemporaries. Some of us are tired of seeing only her be rewarded for things many others (especially other women/woc) have tirelessly worked on and accomplished. This corner of tumblr has so many diverse voices and your posts (to me) wrote their perspective/commentary off completely. Frankly that just seems mean to me.

If Taylor fans can’t handle any valid criticism of her then it may be time to reflect on your relationship to her. These past few days have been so jarring on here! If you can’t take a step back and acknowledge that you’ve completely disregarded valid critique of that woman you’re going to continue to lose connections/followers on here by writing others voices off. I realize that I’m not Taylor’s target audience as a poc so I do tend to critique her as an outsider. But it was lowkey hurtful to see her fans write off our voices/opinions. Not trying to police what you say/do on here bc it’s your blog but maybe don’t be petty or rude because it didn’t paint you (or the other swifties in this corner of tumblr) in the best light. Realistically these small things don’t matter in the grand scheme of everything but it’s been on my mind the past few days. Idk it changed the way I view your blog and how you interact with the poc voices present here. I hope you continue to be open and understanding next time. :/

I accept criticism and I get not liking someone but you have to understand that when you keep reading over time nasty things about someone you are a fan of it gets tiring, specially when some people write it in a way that translates to the people who enjoy her music, basically implying that we are basic or white supremacists because we enjoy it and honestly I shut up a lot of times but you get fed up at one point, I am the first one to criticise people I am a fan of but acting like she is a terrorist and wanting me to stay cool reading that it’s a bit too much, my main Taylor fandom is not even in this corner but on twitter, as I am here mainly for TZ. Also when you mention the capitalist sideffects of her lifestyle, do you really think she is the only one that is doing that? Seems kinda hypocrite to me because every single millionare has that, you gotta be aware that all these HW people are capitalists.

Also I think that a lot of people deserve awards and recognition as much as she does (to me its crazy that Beyonce has not win AOTY) but to completely discredit her ? You can be frustrated and talk about all those conversations about woc having to work harder and that’s completely normal and valid but not to act like she is completely undeserving.

Lastly honestly you are judging me by calling me rude and mean and you don’t know me at all, you don’t know how I am in real life so making all those judgements based on a moment of lashing cause I was fed up seems unfair to me, I actually deleted it cause maybe some comments were taken the wrong way and I did not want to bring drama here and not make it weird for my tz mutuals I have here out of respect. Anyways this is the last thing I’ll say about this, I want to protect my peace of mind and this for me is about fun so yeah not dwelling on negative discourse.

#anyways goodnight #sorry for that long rant but wanted to say something cause some asks Ive been getting yeah nasty

1 note · View note

gxldencity · 1 year

Text

I don't really care that much about aot and pretty much dropped it almost a decade ago after isayama's comments about supporting imperial japan came to light and as a Filipino I honestly feel uncomfortable continuing to read the manga/anime ngl. But honestly most, if not all of the discourse surrounding it looks from a European/Western perspective which is a valid lens to look at. Isayama used a lot of Nazi imagery in the manga and people can and should critique the anti-Semitic themes in there

But I feel like you'll be missing a lot of things if you don't consider looking at it with far right Japanism in mind, particularly how the modern far right in Japan sees themselves, their country and the people Imperial Japan colonized and committed unspeakable war crimes to.

Someone actually examined that and explores the ways AoT could be read as Japanism propaganda

#elaine talks #turning off rebl0gs bc i do not want to see an*me wierdos in my inbox #also tbh a lot of an*me is filled with this kind of propaganda #they're just better at hiding it lmao #i also found an interesting podcast through this lol

7 notes · View notes

queernobi · 1 year

Text

All the Club Q shooter had to do was have their lawyers claim they're nonbinary and queer people online become a frothing mass concerned only with questioning the validity of nonbinary identities and claiming people will only claim identities to shield them from critique, honestly fucking disgusting, I hate online queer spaces.

Y'all won't hesitate to use a fucking tragedy to win fucking discourse points, it's absolutely horrendous how little you value human life.

#nonbinary #queer #trans #discourse #club q (colorado springs nightclub)

3 notes · View notes

dummerhummer · 2 years

Text

Honestly, the headline is ... uhm - it could've been better, because it triggers this kind of duh-reaction. Like, yes, we know. But it's an important read. While my corner of the internet has been mostly focused on the valid criticism (the portrayal of the main character, structure, social commentary, etc.), elsewhere the racist gatekeeping under terms like "historical accuracy" has apparently run rampant.

"While the vast majority of good faith critiques by professional critics, as well as fan reactions, stuck to discussing elements of Persuasion that were separate from race, chatter on Facebook and other social media sites reveals that racists are hiding behind fair game adaptation critiques because they serve the purpose of convincing BIPOC and new viewers not to watch the film."

And none of the other reviews I've seen have bothered to wade through the plethora of reactions to give an accurate account of it.

In another post I briefly referenced Bridgerton and now wish I hadn't, because I didn't make it clear exactly why. It shouldn't be on POC/BIPOC to give anyone the benefit of doubt, that the intentions are good, that I'm not using it as a dog-whistle.

This is one of those "the snowflake doesn't feel responsible for the avalanche" kind of situations. It doesn't really matter what our intentions are, when the result is, that we embolden racists to be racist.

Personally, I hope Cracknell & Co./Netflix double down on the inclusive casting. If they have to butcher modernize P&P and S&S, let us at least have POC/BIPOC actors in the lead roles. If I have a problem with the casting, it's that the diversity feels a little like an afterthought and not the main reason to make a new adaption. Which it should've been.

“When the suggestion came up, my reaction was ‘Sure,’” Bass recalls. “Because it’s not an issue in her time. Her time wasn’t about racial issues. Because, of course, there weren’t other races that were involved in the world that she was dealing with, so the idea of colorblind casting [worked]. Henry Golding could play Mr. Elliot because it doesn’t really matter. And Nikki could play Lady Russell. There’s no reason not to.” - screenwriter Ron Bass, LA Times 😕 (bolded by me)

Austen is for everyone!

#Persuasion (2022)#Persuasion #Jane Austen #Jane Austen Fandom #Tomito rambles

1 note · View note

exceedinglypeculiars · 9 months

Text

the internet's vitriol for rachel zegler is honestly wild. like. even if you think the girlboss-ified version of snow white that she's going to be starring in is dumb or bad or a reductive 2015 form of feminism (i tbh will probably think all of these things if i ever see it!) - she has not done anything to actually elicit the extreme level of ire she's receiving on the internet right now.

this hatred is coming not only from conservatives who despise the idea of a latina actress playing a previously white cartoon character. who think she should just shut up, do her job, and be more grateful when she says on the picket line and on twitter that she believes actors, writers, and crew deserved to be paid fairly for their work.

but also from people who claim progressivism. who think she's a bad feminist for saying she likes that her version of snow white isn't looking for a prince and doesn't need to be saved. and all that's fine - women who are docile and want to be saved have a place in feminism. but the thing that gets me is that 95% of this criticism jumps straight from valid critiques of a movie (that she didn't write plan or produce, mind you) to straight attacks on her character and out of pocket bad-faith 'readings' of her body language and tone.

i've seen so many of these tiktoks especially that so rapidly devolve from initial critiques of girlbossing a disney princess into parroting actual fox news talking points. tearing this young woman down to shreds in the name of feminism and acting morally superior while doing it. and obviously you can be critical of a woman and be a feminist - i'm not saying you can't. lots of women suck. lots of women need to be called out and called in. but so many times now i've seen these videos mocking rachel and justifying it as an inherently feminist act where the top comment liked by the creator is just a mean-spirited comment about her appearence, not-so-thinly veiled racism, or straight up some incel-ass dude saying they want to "show rachel why she needs a man to save her." like how do you lose the plot so fucking badly that you see manasphere magabros are agreeing with you and feeling comfortable to write that kind of shit in your comments and not reflect at all on wtf you're doing. how can you possibly think the punishment you're giving this girl is equivalent to the crime you perceived her to have committed.

and the thing that really gets me is that we're seeing this girl react in real time. people are seeing her tweets about feeling helpless and alone and like she can't handle the extreme level of hatred she's getting. and they don't care! they think she deserves it! they laugh at her saying she thinks the only person who likes her is her dog! because we've gotten to the point in internet discourse where people genuinely think someone is deserving of this level of overwhelming unkindness and dogpiling just because you find them kind of annoying and think they starred in a bad movie you haven't seen yet.

#don't get me started on the weird way people straight up lie about this girl to justify this level of hatred #'she deserves it bc she also said xyz' i bet you $1000 if you spend 4 seconds googling you will find out you are wrong lol #rachel zegler

0 notes

socratetris · 1 year

Text

Autism and Infantilization - A Short Reflection

Hey all. Quick preface, I am going to speak of my experience being on the autism spectrum and how my opinion differs from a lot of what i have been seeing on social media. If my perspective does not match your experience as a person with autism, that's valid.

Mainly, I want to address the issue of autist adult being treated as children by well meaning people with a lack of experience. Autism in public circles and the news is always spoken about as a children's / family issue. Due most to how young spectrum behaviors can be observed and the misinformation campaigns of anti-vaxxers. These circles never discuss the lived experience of adults on the spectrum, because the enfranchised parents are often the ones socially, politically, and economically empowered. (Because autists tend to struggle with holding employment, tend not to organize into social groups, and thus tend not to have politically empowered representation of autists by autists.)

This is changing however. Real advocacy groups are forming and growing, and autist adults are choosing more to put themselves out there on social media to take on the burden of educating the public of what being autistic is like, and how we are happy, healthy, and fulfilled as adults.

Countering the infantilization of people who deserve to represent themselves is a great goal that I support.

What troubles me, however, is how that so often translates to hostility toward the wrong groups of people. Namely, parents who are just trying to figure it out, and abstract symbols that remind us of infantilism.

Parents:

I both am on the spectrum and I am employed at a public charter school that specializes in education for kids on the spectrum, as the HR and Finance Manager. We are somewhat unique because, as a public school, children on the spectrum attend for free, at no cost to the families. As such, our parents are from every race and economic background, some were born in the US and some are immigrants. Some parents moved from entirely different states just so that their kid can attend our school, and honestly our school does so much that would be resources all public schools should implement for all kids, spectrum or not.

I say this to highlight that some of our parents are well read on autism, others spend too much time with blogs, hearsay, and anti-vaxxers. Disinformation about alternative treatments abounds, and we walk a fine line between respecting the parents who are misinformed but just trying to help and sticking to the most up to date, rigorously tested and regulated. The range of needs is a true struggle for our staff. Some kindergartens can stick to their visual schedule without prompting most days and self-direct from the start, some 4th graders havent even been potty trained or don't know how to let someone know they need to go.

There is no one size fits all "correct" answer for any of our kids, and that flexibility, i believe, needs to be extended to our parents as well.

Literally everything that is a positive goal of our organization can be twisted when taken to a logical extreme, or when highlighting how malicious actors in the national discourse around autism use the same language of fostering independence to profit off the abuse of our children and the selling of snake oil.

It is never okay to infantalize an adult, but most parents who are ushered into this world were completely ignorant of it before becoming a parent of an autistic child. They need patience and understanding, not vilification. Because, at the end of the day, no one else is caring about their specific child but them. (You may be better at caring for people with Autism in general, but that is a different value then caring deeply for one person in a real, material way.) It may be quite hard for them, when their entire identity is wrapped up in being a parent, to expand that association with autism and childhood. These things take time. Critique them with compassion. (Vent your legitimate frustrations too. That's valid. But try to critique actions and opinions, not the person.)

2: Abstract Symbols

"The jigsaw piece is a hate symbol"

My response to this is... kinda yes. I get it.

Autusm Speaks is a horrible organization designed to profit off of "awareness." Allowing neurotypicals, celebrities, and cops feel as though they are helping by funding larger and larger marketing campaigns, and less and less for money going toward actual, evidence based help. For every good step they make, they back peddle 5, and continue to make the mistake of peddling autism as a disease that needs treatment rather than as a person who is just different.

Autism Speaks is a callous, uncaring corporation unfortunately staffed by many people who are well meaning, but have been tricked into doing harm. Imo

However, the jigsaw piece has moved far beyond this one organization.

It is merely the abstraction of the concept of thinking about autism. It is merely the post-modernist sign that points toward us. It is used far and wide and away from any association with any specific group, at this point.

Why is this a problem? Because jigsaw puzzles are toys. Toys are associated with children. Defining autism by our children infantalizes and dismisses the adults they become.

If we allow this kind of infantalization to continue, it will hinder all of the work that the teachers at my school do, for ages 3 to 23, to show the rest of society that autists are a normal part of the tapestry of human life. That different does not mean bad or incapable. It means differently good and differently capable. Loving differences should be the norm. Not "fixing" them.

We may need a new symbol, but those are hard to make intentionally. Heck, even our school uses the image, because its cute and, like all kids, our kids are cute. Parents and teachers love cuteness, and often won't think about things any further than that.

So this ended up being NOT a very short writing... I hope my point came across. All this to say that I would like to see more understanding extended to the people who are trying to understand, rather than lumping them together with people who are purposefully ignorant or harmful.

Stay True

#being autistic #essay writing

0 notes

steorran · 3 years

Text

#it feels sometimes like valid critique & matters of taste/preference gets all muddled up #obviously there is meaningful overlap; i don't want to sound like that stupid let people enjoy things comic #but i can't articulate a position that feels both convincing and consistent to me #i do think that it's good to have an open mind and expose yourself to new media and ideas and whatever #but on the other hand i don't know if i think it's reasonable to act like people's leisure time should have a syllabus attached #idk i guess i think it's easy and fun to clown on people who have interests we don't share #but honestly i've never met someone who likes EVERYTHING... i don't think it's like inherently a sin to have preferences #horror bores me but i like country music and my inevitable cancellation will be bc I like it best when boring white men emote homoeroticall #that is not a good basis for a course or an education or whatever but this isn't academic #i'm just a dude who is literally a guy watching tv & listening to music after work #what are reasonable expectations to have for other people's leisure consumption? i don't know honestly #this is rambling and stupid but we have this discourse every week comrade #and i still can't come up with an answer that even satisfies just me much less other people

4 notes · View notes

odinsblog · 2 years

Note

(1/?) Thank you for posting nuanced views regards NATO. I wish American left understand that when your country is not a nuclear power you learn to appreciate NATO even if it is dominated by the US. The closer one lives to a wild bear the more bear traps become appreciated. People who live nowhere near bears do not understand this. Why do they love bear trappers so much? asks the person who lives inside a giant bear trap, who has never seen a bear and not threatened by one. America you are safe!

Ask continues: “It is a matter of survival not love of the imperialism. Russia has proved repeatedly in history it is a threat to neighbors closest to her. We do not want war! After Ukraine will be Georgia, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Putin will not stop until he is stopped. Non-nuclear countries closer to Russia wish only to be threatened no more by Putler’s Czarist ambitions and if it mean accepting NATO? So be it. Good day to you. Glory to Ukraine.”

[re: this post or this one]

Anon, I hope you are safe.

I do not personally know many immigrants from that region irl, and the handful of neighbors who I dO know, we are acquaintances at best. (A French woman and a Russian couple; all of whom still speak with the heavy accents of their native tongues. I’m dying to ask them about the invasion, but unfortunately I don’t think I know them well enough to broach the subject—just like I appreciate them not polling me, whenever the cops kill another Black person).

So this ask is, for me, a glimpse into the head of someone—other than Ukrainian citizens—who quite literally has some skin in the game, and who is directly impacted by NATO and what’s happening in Ukraine.

While I have called out American imperialism , I honestly hadn’t thought much about NATO, so I until very recently, I hadn’t formed or formulated any cogent thoughts about NATO (separate from the U.S.) one way or the other. This ask strikes me as the voice of someone who, living close to Russia, isn’t speaking from a place of privilege and isn’t being “academic” in their reasoning. It’s real for anon in a way that it isn’t for tankies who never seem to want to hold Putin accountable for his “Czarist tendencies.”

I sat on this ask for a minute because I needed to look around and see if it was at all representative of people living in non-NATO, European countries. Twitter isn’t necessarily the best place to go for samples, I know, but here is a little bit of what I found online, when someone asked to hear only from other Europeans on the subject:

I cannot vouch for anyone in the thread above bc they quite literally just popped onto my radar, because I was looking for this specific kind of discourse, but I just think that a few people calling themselves “leftists” (aka tankies) are foolishly misguided and wayyy on the wrong side of this.

I want to be extremely clear here: I am not absolving NATO or America for their unending wars or their imperialism. We can walk and chew gum at the same time, right? We can give fair and honest critiques of American colonialism and warmongering, while simultaneously addressing Putin’s history of aggressive imperialism. We should be adult enough to parse out, “America bad ≠ Russia good,” and yes, I KNOW that citizens of African countries, who are on the receiving end of NATO’s “protection” (aka, wars for oil) feel differently. And that is also a viewpoint which is valid af. We should be able to address both, without ignoring, minimizing or excusing Russia’s repeated aggression.

It’s just that the line about “people who don’t live close to bears don’t understand what it’s like to live so close to bears” really resonated with me.

And I freely admit that if Putin follows through with his threat to use tactical nukes, the increasingly real possibility of a nuclear weapons exchange between Russia and NATO will impact everyone on this planet, in a way that other current wars won’t.

I would be very interested to hear from anyone who lives in Europe, in a non-NATO country, and who has a blog that wasn’t created within the past few days.

And to the anon who sent this ask, I hope you and your loved ones are safe. If you want, please feel free to message me off anon. I fully cosign on the, “Glory to Ukraine,” sentiment. I hope Ukraine kicks Putin’s ass. 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦

#anon #ask #answered #ukraine #kyiv #stand with ukraine #🇺🇦#nato #putler #vladimir putin #adolph putin

67 notes · View notes