#i know it's kind of controversial to say it but frankly i don't believe in infantilizing mental illness | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

aqua-dan · 4 months

Note

What are your thoughts on preboot Garth vs reboot Garth? You seem to be one of the only people who like reboot Garth. What is appealiong about him?

Well, "like" might be a strong word.

It's really no surprise that I'm saying this, but Reboot Garth has NOTHING on Preboot Garth. Let's not kid ourselves and pretend that Preboot Garth isn't superior in literally every conceivable way.

Preboot Garth is such an incredible character. He is kind, gentle, smart, and powerful. He is emotionally impactful and occupies a space that is so specifically Him that no other character could fill it. He is so compelling, so relatable, and frankly he's downright adorable too! When I have been at some of my lowest points in life, he's been a character that I've grown up alongside and used as an example of emotional strength to help me stand back up and carry on despite the anxiety and sadness and pressure. Truly, he is one of my comfort characters of all time. His story and the things he can do are also extremely interesting!

Physically strong ✔️

Control over water ✔️

Magic ✔️

Eye blasts ✔️

Diplomacy ✔️

Like 50 other things that he forgot to mention that he can do, but totally can ✔️

So you may be wondering then, why I still like Reboot Garth who is… hardly at all like what I just described. And my answer to that is: I don't know.

You would certainly be right to say that for the most part*, Rebirth Garth is nothing like his pre-n52 counterpart. (*World's Finest: Teen Titans was the closest we've gotten. It was kind of nice in regards to Garth, with the exception of a few gripes I have here and there.) And you'd be right to be upset about it. I know I am. Quite often, to be honest.

But for some reason I just can't bring myself to fully condemn Rebirth Garth. At the end of the day, I'm in fandom to have fun, you know? And if I spend all my time hating something that's out of my control… well what good does that do me? At this point, I feel like I've resigned myself to the knowledge that I simply will not be getting what I want in regards to Garth, and so I've turned to becoming a bemused spectator at the things happening in current comics. I can still become excited about it when I DO manage to find a bit that I like. There was a post a while back that went something like,

"N52 and Rebirth suck except the parts that I like. And those bits I'll toss into a blender, puree, and mix in with preboot canon."

Yeah, that. Basically, when it comes to Reboot Garth, (in my own head) I ignore the reboot and then blend up the little bits I enjoy to create the utopian world of Canon+. And from my little imaginary perch, I can choose to still enjoy this character who has taken my blorbo's name, but sadly isn't really him.

With how changeable comics are as a medium though, I do also believe that there will be a writer someday who is willing to do the legwork necessary to bring Garth back around to being the blorbo I once knew. Some currently canon things will definitely have to be tossed out, but hey, that's the nature of comics!

That said tho, I think another one of the things that prevents me from disliking him is (surprisingly) the design. It's a controversial take amongst Garth fans for sure, but I honestly like it for the most part. There are a few things I'd tweak to make him look like more of an extension of Preboot Garth (CURLY HAIR, PLEASE), but there are a lot of elements that I just so happen to find aesthetically appealing and thus don't really mind. That isn't to say that Garth didn't already look fucking incredible, because he ABSOLUTELY did. I'm just not that bothered, I guess haha!

Anyways, sorry for the overly long response! Just for funsies, please have this art of a scene from a fic I'm working on haha.

#Not to turn this ask into a weird advertisement tho aa sorry #Garth #Garth of Sheyeris #Dan Says Shit #You know what I guess I can tag Roy too since he's there lol #Roy Harper

39 notes · View notes

wickedts4finds · 6 months

Text

Equiliberty Transphobia and Censorship - Jocelyn and company react to my departure

Thrilling followup of Jocelyn/Moe/Crownhill EC/cathcc/cath-creative-corner/bambisimmer responding to the farewell message I had to post as a screenshot because she blocked the word 'transphobe' from the server to keep people from talking about her revolting behavior and bigotry.

Red mark-out indicates her complicit (at BEST) mods - people who are morally okay with working along someone who believes pronouns are "political", loudly argues that there are only two genders, misgenders people (even calling one trans person it), comes onto posts about respectfully playing Native American characters complaining about cultural sensitivity, and more!

You'll notice Jocelyn's typical victim complex behavior here and emotional immaturity - she is being attacked, she is being bullied, not the transgender people she's treating like dogshit.

Jocelyn, I want you to know that there's not a damn thing that's going to deliver you from the community's wrath on this one.

There's nowhere you can run to get away from your choices. You can change your url or the name of the server or delete channels over and over again as many times as you want, but this community has a long-ass memory. Make a new account! Change your username again! We're going to find you. There are eyes on you in that server. There are eyes on you frankly most places you post. I want you to know it's not safe to vomit up your hateful "opinions" anywhere on god's green earth without it ending up in another public post, and honestly, you're going to be exceptionally lucky if youtube's simmers don't pick up on this one for views from the controversy. You had an okayish rep as a creator back in TS3's equine community and you, nobody but you, threw that all away why? To hurt other people who did nothing to you.

Most of us are LGBT+ in some way and those who aren't are almost always allies, not fellow bigots.

Without further ado! Here's my post in the 2 minutes before Jocelyn deleted it (after saying to me specifically 10-15mins prior she was going to stop deleting posts she just didn't agree with).

Sooo much here.

"when people aren't older" This is deranged behavior from someone who's allegedly not a minor.

"If it causes drama, hurts someone or the like it should go to be honest." I guess the exception is if it hurts trans people, right, Mod?

"I didn't call the person an it on purpose" 1) oops accidentally fell on my keyboard, hit the I and T keys in the correct order followed by space, then finished my sentence & 2) the way she avoids saying "them" EVEN NOW by saying "the person" instead lmfao

"What I'm upset about is people painting me bad, when I'm not" Girl you are a bad person. You are not kind to people who are already oppressed. You're immature, incapable of leadership at 30something years old, desperately clinging to a failing server which you imploded with YOUR OWN hateful diatribes against people who did NOTHING to you, trying to jealously hoard members and talking about "poaching". You had to create an entire server because you were not welcome elsewhere simply because of your personality before you even started spewing hate speech!!!! Honestly when I joined the discord I kind of anticipated a fall of Rome scenario given who was at the helm, just tried to not interact with her, etc, but nah man. Nah.

"and try ruining my rep" You already ruined it.

But my favorite of all, from the mouth of the bully herself, is this:

It's not okay to post, I'm being attacked. Can't you see how wrong that is?

#equiliberty #sims 4 horses #ts4 #simblr #sims 4 cc #sims 4 horse cc #sims 4 custom content

38 notes · View notes

roo-bastmoon · 1 year

Text

Let's get into the Angel Pt 1 controversy

Summary of Roo's Point: Please follow your conscience but do not bash Jimin for other people's crimes.

More in-depth analysis of the underlying issues:

Let me start by saying I'm a musical theater geek so I have no idea who any of the other artists on the Angel Pt 1 track are, I don't know their music, I don't know their backstories, and frankly, I don't really care to. But yesterday a full kerfuffle kicked off on Twitter with many people ready to cancel Jimin (and by extension, ARMY) for working on a song with someone called Kodak Black.

Who is Kodak Black?

Well, apparently he's a rapper who brought a high schooler back to his hotel from a concert and then ripped her clothes off and bit her and raped her but he entered a plea deal and got probation for it. Not to be confused for the times he had illegal fire arms, committed armed robbery, possessed marijuana, and tried to evade police. Or the time he punched and kicked a woman at a strip club. By all accounts he sounds like a total asshole, and not someone whose pockets I want to line with my hard-earned money, even if I weren't a survivor, myself.

I think we can all agree that Kodak Black is not the kind of person ARMY would ever want to support.

So if at any point you feel like you cannot get behind the Fast X movie or soundtrack because Universal chose to employ that man? Please feel free to boycott and sleep easy at night. That's your value-based decision and I respect it. Don't let anyone call you an anti for it.

However.

There is another legitimate take on this with regard to Park Jimin, and it's a bit more nuanced than simply "don't work with bad people."

For a decade, we've gotten to know who Park Jimin is. He is kind. He is considerate. He is gentle. He has excellent manners. He gives to charity. He obeys and honors his parents and elder members. He has never been violent. He has never broken the law. He respects women deeply. He is a hard worker. He is a good human being.

I can't help but recall how Jimin had absolutely no idea that the song he made was going to be in Eternals. Like, he didn't believe it at first.

Clearly, this company has some serious issues with communication and the handling of Jimin's releases. I could say more but we don't have all day for that.

It is therefore plausible to me that Jimin was approached for this song, possibly by Jvke. Jimin has said he's seen all the movies so we know he likes the franchise. Maybe he said sure, he'd love to sing for Angel Pt 1. So he recorded his parts and moved on to the next amazing groundbreaking industry-shattering piece of work on his schedule. And then Universal brought in other artists and no one said a thing to him about it.

And you might think there's NO WAY Hollywood wouldn't tell you who all you're working with. Listen, I never worked on any big productions, but I lived in LA for years and worked in entertainment long enough to know you could make something and months later find out it's a whole other thing with people you've never heard of, and you signed off your work and likeness so it is what it is and you gotta live with it and not make waves, especially if you ever wanna work in that town again.

Then again, maybe Jimin met the rest of the artists during the filming of the music video. Maybe he knew Kodak Black was on this song. Maybe he, like me, had no idea of that man's past and never once imagined someone with a rap sheet that long would be in such a large-scale production in the first place.

Or maybe he did know, because it appears Kodak Black is billed as a "creator" of the song, but as an industry professional, he also knows nothing is ever totally clean or pure in this business. So oftentimes in entertainment, you will see people mentally separate the art from the business.

(Side note: To be honest, nothing is ever clean or pure that you pay to consume. The wage slaves sweating in the shops that make the clothes on your back or the device you're reading this post off of. The migrant workers toiling for pennies and living in communal shacks for the veggies in your salad. The animals crammed into horrific crates and slaughtered inhumanely that end up on your plate. The earth that's raped every time you write on a sheet of paper or put gas in your car. The plastics in all of our products are also in our landfills, our oceans, our blood streams. We all of us live and consume off the suffering of others. Doesn't mean we shouldn't fight for a better world--of course we should--I'm just saying, none of us consume anything that's "perfect" and cancel culture fails to acknowledge that.)

Which brings me back to the point about boycotting. If you feel like you just cannot support the business of employing someone like Kodak Black, that is a worthy choice and no one should bully you for it or label you an anti. But please do not consider Jimin "tainted by association." Because everyone is associated in one way or another with harmful people and practices. You'd never get to consume anything ever, if you could only consume things made by "good" people.

For my part, I don't believe Universal will see people refusing to stream or buy Angel Pt 1 and think "Gosh, we shouldn't have hired a man who batters and abuses women, it will hurt our bottom line on this soundtrack, we were very mistaken, let's do better." Maybe they will, but probably they won't. They have yet to even witness the buying power of ARMY anyway so they have no results to compare a boycott to. It's already a done deal and they will likely pull this shit again if it's expedient to do so.

On the other hand, this is Jimin's first OST for a major motion picture and I intend to support the hell out of it. I think it's a good song and I want Jimin to be seen by the industry as a safe bet to bring in numbers. I think the more projects he has, the more opportunities he has to promote good people and good music as alternatives. I say this AS A SURVIVOR OF SEXUAL ASSAULT who is no way making light of sexual assault. It frankly galls me that by association, Kodak Black (and numerous other unknown assholes) will benefit. But I'd rather that than, by association, Park Jimin suffer.

And I'll square with you: I think Justin Bieber, Charlie Puth, Park Jay, and others are opportunistic assholes problematic and it galls me that they will benefit by association with BTS members. But on a case by case basis, I will choose whether to support BTS members' collaborations. So far, I'm still all in. That's what feels right for me, according to MY conscience.

I cannot dictate to you what your conscience should tell you. That's between you and your soul, and it's no one else's business. Do your will and harm none. Trust yourself and honor your limits.

So if at any point you feel like you cannot support JK's Dreamers because of the horrible inhuman treatment of the World Cup stadium workers, abstain. If you cannot support Jimin with Angel Pt 1 because of Kodak Black's inexcusable violence, abstain.

But please do not lay the crimes of others at BTS' feet. They are responsible only for themselves, and we have seen they are sometimes not given complete information around their projects. I'm certain they do their best. When it's clear that a collaboration would go against their values (such as playing for their current president's inauguration), they decline. When they have the opportunity to make informed decisions, they usually decide well. But not always, because the members are human too.

I guess my point of this ramble is... human beings will be human. They are flawed. They inevitably make mistakes. Intention goes a long way. I can make a pretty clear-cut case that Kodak Black intentionally caused harm. So I'm happy to not support his art or business ventures and I hope after a lot of soul searching he becomes a better person but I'm not holding my breath. However, I cannot make a clear-cut case that Park Jimin endorses the harm Kodak Black caused just because he lent his voice to a song Kodak Black is also now a part of. Not yet, not without Park Jimin making a statement defending Kodak Black.

Until he does, I'm not going to hold Jimin responsible for anyone's choices except his own. I trust Jimin. He's earned it. So I'm going to support Jimin.

If you very strongly feel like I'm choosing to do harm here, that I'm anti-feminist, or a rape apologist, or a fan girl making light of serious crimes, please protect yourself and block me. You go ahead and do what you need to do to police your own experience. But I worry that eventually you are going to find yourself in a very lonely, very sparse and dull echo chamber, because that sad truth is... nothing and no one is pure. Certainly not in business, and rarely in art. Considering one out of four women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetimes, it's a safe bet that almost every song or movie you've heard of is somehow benefitting a man who was part of it and who has also abused a woman. I know k-pop idol culture heavily manufactures this PG13 image of artists but the truth is the world of entertainment is a cesspool and a viper pit, and we are very lucky to stan seven artists who are, by and large, truly good people. That's super rare.

My unsolicited advice is to take everything on a case-by-case basis and listen to your gut. Support Angel Pt 1. Don't support Angel Pt 1. It's a deeply personal choice what you endorse with your money.

But please miss me with trying to cancel Jimin, or any of the members, for other people's crimes.

Shunning, dogpiling, mobbing, shaming--cancelling people--those are Mean Girl tactics, designed to make people afraid to work with the "unworthy" and it doesn't work in the long run. (Extended, organized boycotts do work because money talks loud. So feel free to boycott if you want to.) But ruining people's reputations because of who their coworkers happen to be is in no way helping solve the actual problem.

If your goal is to make it so big studios don't employ rapists, keep the heat on the rapist and call out Universal and Kodak Black.

If your goal is to support Jimin, then trust and support Jimin and his songs.

Where those two goals conflict, trust your gut. That's all anyone can ask of you.

For my part, I choose Jimin.

Whatever choice you make--as long as you aren't bashing Jimin--I can respect it.

That's pretty much all I have to say about that. Feel free to disagree but keep it kind and respectful in the comments, please...

Love,

Roo

#jimin #park jimin #angel pt 1 #jikook

132 notes · View notes

blackpearlblast · 3 months

Note

Was gonna reblog the post to ask but now I can't soo I'll just ask here:

I'm genuinely confused how Nintendo licensing some company to open a store in Israel back in 2019 equates to them supporting Israel? Especially if Nintendo themselves don't even consider the store official.

In addition, I believe the BDS have gone on record to state that you should only boycott what they've officially announced boycotts for, as boycotting things willy-nilly won't work in the long-term if there is not a dedicated effort behind it.

you're right that BDS isn't about individual consumer boycotts and the BDS targeted boycotts will Always be most important. however, BDS does not say that people cannot or should not engage in their own consumer boycotts.

"Many people are personally boycotting brands that have stated support for apartheid Israel, and that’s great – but we want to stress that consumer boycotts are most effective when taken as a collective action, and BDS isn’t just about consumer boycotts." -BDS Guide to Strategic Campaigning for Palestinian Rights

the BDS movement has also recognized some of the organic boycotts that have shown up since oct. 7th, such as the mcdonald's and wix boycotts. (source)

in my post i tried to explain the reason that boycotting nintendo was important for me, personally, and might be something other people would want to do based on the information i had found, was that i frankly don't usually purchase most of the products on the BDS list anyway. my post wasn't meant to declare nintendo a strategic target for boycotting and i apologize if that was what anyone took away from it. my point was, for those of us who games are a significant hobby and we tend to spend money on games as opposed to any of the BDS list targets, we might want to be aware of what one of the major game companies is supporting so we can withdraw or limit our spending on their products. i am not trying to call an organized boycott on nintendo, only make information available.

i'm still trying to piece together the timeline on what happened with the tel aviv location and why it was announced as a landmark, official location but no longer seems officially recognized by nintendo. it's possible that nintendo realized the controversy of opening an israeli location and hoped to dodge that controversy by letting a different company manage the location and letting it essentially fall by the wayside. i don't know! i do know that it is using official nintendo branding and they are profiting from that. there are multiple kinds of ways a company can support israel, in this case i mean that they are economically invested/in a mutually beneficial economic relationship. trying to sever economic ties between companies and israel is part of trying to get the company to divest from israel. it basically makes it clear that doing business with an apartheid state is unprofitable and isolates and puts further pressure on israel. (once again, this is the case with Larger scale boycotts. just trying to explain the strategy behind why people might boycott companies who "just" do business in israel without directly contributing to the larger human rights issues.)

#received #i hope this is coherent i am once again really sick today *___*#basically BDS and organic consumer boycotts are not the same thing but as long as BDS takes priority it's not an issue for there to be #organic consumer boycotts especially if it's something that (like for me) has a bigger presence in my life than a lot of the BDS targets #which i am also still avoiding

7 notes · View notes

boyfridged · 10 months

Note

please do(about marvelposting)

i specifically said i was not going to do marvelposting because frankly speaking, i know very little about marvel apart from "venom" ( and whatever i remember from a ahort time when i read lots of marvel comics, in middle school. then i completely lost any interest in it.)

but! i decided i do want to talk about "spider-verse," both to criticize it a bit and on some level defend it...

the copaganda is unreal and i don't know how people can ignore it. and i don't think the flow of the narration was all that smooth and well executed. that's the 2 main issues i have with it.

now, to where i want to defend the movie, or rather what i think the *next* movie will be about (i might be wrong): utilitarianism sucks.

lots of meta repeatedly states that well, miguel is right given all we (and he) know. but i think (or maybe just hope) that the next movie will go for the most obvious criticism of the trolley problem, which "across the spider-verse" seems to mimic with the whole 2 cakes metaphor: that it doesn't exist. i think perhaps we will find out that the whole algorithm doesn't matter, or it was wrong, or it was a manipulation. and you might think it's a cliche – but i don't think it is. i think it's a good message for our times.

this is a controversial opinion both in this context and in academia, mind you, but i will die on this hill: utilitarianism does not work for ethics. there's no way of calculating a moral decision. there's no way to predict all the facts. and very rarely will you be in a situation of the trolley problem; which essentially means that taking it beyond the thought experiment takes a logic of an exception and applies it to every possible other issue, often assuming scarcity of resources and even encouraging taking life and death decisions where it could be avoided. (think of refugees or the poor, for example: a never-ending political game of assigning arbitrary numbers when talking of the cost and resources, with no genuine source for them, causing an unprecedented amount of death, and all of that assumed as the only right "reality" and a "sacrifice" for the stability.) it's the myth of scarcity, essentially, an excuse not to share the social wealth, here applied to the concept of general ontological goodness. an idea that you cannot afford to be kind because of the bigger picture.

caring about one person, the monologue of peter b. from the previous movie (or was it a cut scene? i don't remember) does not encourage miles to fuck everyone else and leave them to die. it does not promote individualism. it sets a realistic goal and it says that caring for people close to you is the best you can do at times. and there is, of course, the conflict there when you're a vigilante, since vigilantes are put in positions where they have to look at a bigger picture than a normal human would; but a fact remains that coming from a place of genuine love and devotion even to one person/your family/a small community is what sets a precedent for how you treat other people. what builds your character. it's what makes you human and anchors your moral instincts in compassion, what stops you from premature prosecution of other people, what makes you more mindful of intricate social nuance also on a larger scale. so this is what a message of "thinking of one person" is about. it's about a starting point that opens a gateway for considering more.

needless to say, if you're a utilitarian or a strict deontologist, you will not see it my way. but i'm an ethicist of care at heart and i presume this is the direction that the series will be going on. i might be wrong irt the writers' plan but if it is what i described, i believe it's a completely plausible message. morality starts somewhere and it's not algorithms.

#i wasn't going to write all of that but faatima's post motivated me to express myself clearer <3 #woah things that you will learn from my dc sideblog. like my political views and takes on ethics and moral theory.#outbox

9 notes · View notes

cruelsister-moved2 · 10 months

Note

i'm talking to a beloved friend about how upsetting the whole "bi lesbian" business is to me as a lesbian, but he believes that labels aren't important, that it isn't really hurting anyone, that people should live and let live, that this stuff divides the community, etc., and i don't know what to say to that or how to convince him that it matters and i'm wondering if he's right. you're one of the most well-articulated blogs i know, so i wanted to ask what you think (unless it's too upsetting/controversial of a topic). what would you say?

sorry I took a while to answer this I just never feel like i have the head space to give a decent answer!

i mmean first of all assuming your friend isn't a lesbian that's pretty rich of him to assume its his place to decide. one thing I run into a lot is people who aren't lesbians and don't understand the relationship between lesbians and men is not comparable to the relationship between gay men and women. there's complex dynamics of oppression and misogyny here but to put it very bluntly, basically every lesbian either has, or knows another lesbian who has, been sexually assaulted by a man specifically because they are a lesbian. the politics of sexual availability are just utterly incomparable between lesbians and gay men and it's frankly extremely heartless not to care about WHY lesbians can be more protective of keeping men out than gay men are with women.

secondly, ironically, it's kind of just essentialising labels to use terms like this. the words lesbian and bisexual are both super clear about what they mean. when I hear the term bi lesbian im honestly just confused because some of them mean a bi girl who prefers women, some of them mean a bi girl who somehow identifies with lesbianism politically(?), or a perjorative against lesbians who are dating trans women, and more often than that it doesn't seem to mean anything in particular and is just a useless and confusing term stuck on in front of the word "bisexual" which was already explaining the situation fine on its own. I have literally seen people using the term who were gay trans men so I mean who the fuck knows 😭😭😭 there just isn't a question being asked to which "bi lesbian" is the answer.

thirdly, there's literally only one word to describe a woman who is never attracted to men. there are so many words for sexual fluidity or whatever that it's just capricious to decide you also need the ONE which applies to us. and people claiming words don't have meaning or whatever like yes and we apply meaning to them it's how we communicate. people calling themselves bi lesbians KNOW what the word colloquially means and that's exactly why they want to use it, it literally has that appeal to them because of us 😭😭😭 but you can't be a lesbian at your core based on vibe or something. it, like every other label, is something you pick to fit to what you're already doing. like you can call yourself a lesbian all you want but if you're not Doing Lesbianism then you're just essentialising some inherent meaning to the term that doesn't exist. any meaning it has is imparted by us, lesbians, doing lesbianism, regardless of how non-lesbians feel about that!!

finally, in an appeal to emotion, I don't think people who aren't lesbians realise how cruel this shit is. being a lesbian in this patriarchal society is so deeply exhausting and traumatic and isolating and I don't think people realise how much it seeps into every interaction. people don't recognise how vulnerable we are, how small a group of the lgbt community we are, and how little we are made to feel welcome when we really need a community that accepts us for who we are & lets us be us. the fact our boundaries are afforded less concern than like someone's right to feel edgy by cosplaying as us is a case in point!! lesbians deserve some fucking peace of mind!!!

final point but it's important to say that this isn't gatekeeping because no one is stopping you from BEING a lesbian. if you want to be a woman and only date women you can ;I find it kind of funny because if you want to be a lesbian that bad then be my guest <333 we are just asking for the word to be applied accurately. like if we're all in agreement that a word doesn't define who you are then you can't like change who you are by applying an inaccurate word to it

#ask #anon #rape tw #if bi oomfs want to weigh in from ur perspective also please do #I see a lot of like im not like the other bisexuals type behaviour but im just speaking from my experience here

8 notes · View notes

strangeswift · 1 year

Note

I actually think it is important to be be 'controversial' sometimes because it clears your mind. I am speaking from personal experience. After reading same things over and over again in the tag and seeing the same takes, it blurs your mind and it is like you join a caddle. Then you kinda need to step back and think more clearly and reading other takes and readings help you to clear your mind. I've changed my mind on many things because of that and I believe I have a better understanding in things now than before. Like. I am not gonna get blindsided by what happens next on the show because I do not agree with most popular byler takes (that are reaches most of the time). I still read those things but I am open to different or 'controversial' takes and ideas that are not widely accepted by the bylers in the tag.

Hi anon!!!! Oop I went on a rant so hold on lemme put a read more. Warning I talk about byler doubt (just the concept of having doubts nothing specific about it) towards the end.

Okay anon I agree and this makes me feel good about posting opinions that go against the grain. So thank you for saying this, because I'll be real even though I am confident in my takes, sometimes voicing them comes with a level of anxiety. Here's the thing. The tag likes to act like there are certain things we know for sure are going to happen in S5 (byler endgame being the biggest thing obviously, but there are lots of other more specific things, byler related and not) and the truth is: We Don't Know Anything For Sure!! And I think it's wise to be prepared for the possibility that things work out differently than we are expecting. And this goes for fandom discourse as well not just theories like I think the tag is a bit of an echo chamber, like you said. It truly is easy to get sucked it. I've always been extremely skeptical, that's just how I am, and sometimes I forget that just.. not everyone is as skeptical as I am. Don't get me wrong, I have been sucked in before too. There have been instances where I held an opinion, then when I examined it further I realized it was just rooted in the fact that everyone else held that opinion, and I didn't actually agree with it. But generally I take anything and everything with several grains of salt, which is why like you said it's probably good for me to talk about my opinions when they differ from the norm, because it offers an alternative line of thinking. I do keep my mouth shut about most things because I like to be liked, but yk... I also. hmm do I wanna talk about this.. eh fuck it. I think the biggest thing that makes me "controversial" to some people, other than disagreeing with widely accepted theories, is that I have on several occasions voiced my Byler Doubt™️. And honestly there's a reason why I do sometimes talk about it. I realize that there's no point in dwelling on the possibility of byler not happening, it's depressing. And I would never put doubt in the tag or anything like that. But here's my thing. When I was a smaller blog and didn't have the platform I do now, NONE of the big blogs ever EVER expressed any level of doubt. The narrative was "having doubt is bad, endgame is obvious, if you don't find it obvious you are media illiterate, stuck in heteronormativity, or just plain stupid." And I vehemently disagree with that. Frankly? I find 100% confidence to be a little bit unrealistic, but I would never ever think someone is any less intelligent for having 100% confidence! But I digress. My point is, I suspect there are many people, like me, who have doubts and who feel very isolated. Having doubt is literally taboo, which is insane to me. It's cult vibes is what it is. Anyway. Now that I have a big enough platform that I more or less can kind of say what I want and not get blacklisted, I almost feel a responsibility to occasionally be like hey by the way, I have my doubts! Just so people know. Because it doesn't make you stupid. It makes you realistic. Okay rant over sorry <3

#byler doubt #<- tagging so i don't get yelled at <3 #asks #abby rambles

12 notes · View notes

thegirlwhowrites642 · 2 years

Note

Your Harry Potter favorite characters

I imagine that this question implies a "besides Harry and Ginny".

One of my first posts on this blog was an answer to someone asking me my top 10 of my favorite HP characters and I remember saying that the first five were set in stone, and yet I'm not so sure anymore. They were in order: Harry, Ginny, James, Ron, Hermione.

The first three are really always going to be there. I still really love Ron, but Hermione? I don't know. I've always had mixed feelings about her and I've always analyzed these books but writing things down on this blog made me look at things that I never fully registered about her because I was never particularly interested in her character. I have an ask about Hermione that is tormenting me because the jury is still out on her.

On that list, there were also characters like Luna, and sure, great character, but saying that you love Luna is like saying that you love rainbows, it doesn't really mean anything. She's a positive secondary character we know three things about. Of course, everybody likes her.

The same goes for McGonagall, I love her to death but like who doesn't?

So frankly I do not know how to do a top 10 or something like that. I guess it is not that surprising, I've been a hardcore Taylor Swift fan since age 12 and I'm still unable to do a ranking of her albums.

But I thought that maybe I could still do something interesting with this ask and give you little windows on some characters that I love but that are considered controversial.

For example, in that famous list, I avoided putting Dumbledore because it was one of my first posts and I wasn't in the mood to deal with someone wanting to murder me. But the truth is that I love Dumbledore, ok? I do, I'm sorry. The man was in a large-scale version of the trolley problem, villainizing him makes no sense. How heartless you need to be to read the King's Cross chapter in DH and hate Dumbledore? He's not perfect but that's kind of the point. I think that, unlike Harry, a lot of people didn't get over the betrayal of finding out that he wasn't just a saint-like, wise, grandpa like it seemed in the first books.

Another character that I love is Slughorn. He's so real as a character. He is far from being an exemplary man but I believe him to be the best example of a good Slytherin in the entire series. And while he does sin in cowardice he ends up showing true braveness and the core of a fundamentally good man. I also find him extremely interesting in regards to all his connections and parties and while his method in the way he offers opportunities to his students may sound elitist (and it is) he's also literally the only professor who cares about introducing his students to the work market in a world (the wizarding one) that is far from being democratic and meritocratic. Even if, to be honest, that has probably more to do with JKR's poor world-building skills.

I also really like Percy. I find him quite fascinating honestly. He comes back for the battle doing the right thing and ultimately showing that he truly belongs in Gryffindor. But what interests me is the "betrayal" of his family. I've always seen the Voldermort-is-back debate as a bit of an excuse that he used. I'm sure he did believe to be right initially, like the letter he sends to Ron proves, but I think that it was more of an opportunity he jumped on to separate himself from the Weasleys. We often talk about the consequences on Ron's confidence due to growing up in his family but Percy was forced into a pretty shitty role too. He's four years younger than Charlie. There's a significant distance with his older brothers that cuts him off from the older siblings club. The Weasleys also all go to boarding school since age eleven, Bill and Ginny have never lived under the same roof for a whole year. So Percy was basically the older brother for the majority of his life, the one who had to take care of the young ones. But the thing is, he's not the oldest brother. So the youngest four glorify Bill and Charlie, which is pretty normal, but it's usually balanced by the oldest siblings becoming annoying because they impose themselves as additional parents. But Bill and Charlie escape the majority of the usual older siblings' responsibilities for years. So they take the glory and Percy is stuck with just being "hated" for imposing himself as a responsible figure. He tends to isolate himself and be very different from the rest of his family, and also, of course, he becomes defensive of his being responsible. As the cherry on top, his interests are then ridiculed. And his breaking point is in fact his father, the person he seems to admire the most, not believing in him (at least this is what happens in his perspective). There's also resentment for their economic condition, and let's face it, Percy is not totally wrong but this is another discussion. I don't know, while his method was certainly wrong, maybe I would have wanted to go away from home too in his place.

Are James and Sirius controversial characters to like? If you talk to a Snape apologist they are Lucifer incarnated. I guess it's not surprising that I love them. I think this post makes it clear that I enjoy flawed yet fundamentally good characters that own up to their mistakes. James and Sirius are funny and charismatic and talented. Their attacking Snape is obviously wrong but there are a lot of circumstances around that action that now I'm not getting into because this is something I could talk about for hours. And James' hexing random people in the halls, while certainly a sign of immaturity (an immaturity he grew out of to the point of becoming Head Boy), can't be considered bullism. A hex is not our equivalent of a punch. Think about 15-year-old boys and then give them magic wands. What do you think they would do with them, honestly? Harry does it too in HBP when he starts learning spells from the Prince and James and Sirius are basically two young geniuses, who knows how many spells they knew. I could prattle on about these two endlessly but if you've read JKR's short story about them and you still do not love them, then I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.

#albus dumbledore #horace slughorn #percy weasley #james potter #sirius black #harry potter

40 notes · View notes

marsti · 2 years

Note

hey, feel free to delete this if you are uncomfortable answering, but i have seen a post circulating lately claiming all tealbloods are jewish coded and i could not find any other jewish people say that in any other place so i wondered if you have a take on the subject? i dont want to dismiss anything said on that post or anything, but the lack of discussion everywhere else just felt kind of weird since tealbloods are well loved and talked about a lot

oh! big big big subject right there, this isn't the first time i've talked abut this and tl;dr i think it's a giant reach

now longer version:

iirc this all started with stelsa having the bullet point "troll jewish" on her original troll call, which referred to how she doesn't believe in the sufferer. this was eventually removed as it was pointed out that having it there made her an example of the jewish american princess trope which is harmful to jewish women. this is true and to be clear it is a good thing that the bullet point was removed, even though it doesn't change much about the trope she represents in the long run. at least the writers tried to correct themselves a bit.

i think this controversy made people look at homestuck and specifically tealbloods with a newfound critical lens, but i'll be honest... i can only speak as a single jewish person, but i don't think "terezi is a lawyer and eats the color red" is quite enough to go screaming blood libel. because if we're talking about the same post, then that post SPECIFICALLY claims tealbloods to be antisemitic stereotypes and i just don't agree with that. the only one who actually is that is stelsa, everything else is inference based on hypercritical thinking that doesn't actually help anyone imo.

and now i'm gonna go off on antisemitism in homestuck and a much more direct critique of that post:

if you wanna talk antisemitism in homestuck, look at rose: she's literally just a jewish american princess trope at first. as the story progresses she stops being that, but the fandom often forces her into it again because they don't realize that's what they're doing. like, hey, she's canonically a hardcore gamer! but people shove her into the "prim and proper rich therapist girl" box, and jewish fans have been telling people to stop doing that for a while but nobody listens.

the original post i saw on the subject of tealblood being jewish-coded felt disingenuous to me, because i don't see people worrying about any of the actual antisemitism in homestuck. it treated the subject as a puzzle to be solved to prove the secret prejudice of the text, when the antisemitism is right there but it's not as fun so people don't actually care.

kanaya drinks blood, she rejected her strict (christian coded) upbringing and married a jewish woman in a jewish wedding. if i wanted to rile people up i could easily point to that as a much more direct example of blood libel, but i DON'T because that's not what's happening there and we all know it. it's a mary/christ allegory and a "what if twilight but lesbian" joke that just happens to line up with conspiracy theories if you read into it with the intention to find it there. the fact is, antisemitism is much more direct and frankly boring than people think.

now i'm not saying the original post was definitely disingenuous, i'm not a mind reader, but i really do want to urge everyone here to examine the idea being presented: that there are subtextual clues that will help you find the secret jews who hide everywhere jewish coding of a character. that's freakishly close to actual conspiracy thinking and it will not lead you down a good path.

#ask #anonymous #homestuck #long post #sorry for making this so long anon i have a lot to say ahahah

18 notes · View notes

ca-cupid · 1 year

Note

The Elvira Cleavage Controversy (and this is not judging you BTW). Anyone reblogging please be kind.

I think it's honestly fine that her neckline isn't low. Frankly, most of the people complaining seem like perverts anyway. I get that it's Elvira and that's a main part of her design, and that it's an adult collector doll, but selling a boob doll under the name of a kid's brand wouldn't go over well with non-pervs and non Elvira fans. Parents often think "doll" and just buy them for their children, so they could see Monster High and buy it for their daughter (or sex-obsessed son or her brother) and who is like, 8. Elvira looks fine the way she is TBH and you can still tell it's her without "oh look, men and lesbians! Boobs! Don't you want to do the devil's tango with her if you know what I mean!". She still has the giant hair and the dagger. If they did the boobs it would have to be under a label like Horror Icons, a sseperate line not connected to MH, same I'd say with Pennywise and the Shining sisters, but they're not dressed in a controversial way.

I think if they wanted the dark goth lady in a long dress, they should have done Morticia Addams. No giant bazookas to cause controversy, she's family friendly, she's got a similar design, and due to Wednesday, the Addams Family is THE THING right now! (Also, it's the Addams Family, I'm surprised they haven't done a doll yet)

I totally agree they should have honestly just done a Wednesday Addams doll (again, like ldd is doing)

And yeah putting massive tits on a doll that has its main series as a kids toy is absolutely fucking weird and would be called gr**ming of sorts because even though the collector dolls are for adults (I believe they say 18+ but I might be wrong, still not meant for kids though) it is still a monster high doll (also side note have y’all seen the stuff about the lol/omg dolls getting called “gr**mer toys”??)

At the end of the day elviras boobs are iconic but tits or no tits on the doll you can still tell it’s her and I don’t think it matters that much I just think it’s a funny choice because why do it if you’re not going to go all out yk? Also i honestly just want to hear Cassandra Peterson’s thoughts on the doll boobs I don’t care for any other opinion

#tw grooming mention #monster high #elvira mistress of the dark

11 notes · View notes

iamnotawomanimagod · 11 months

Note

idk why but i needed to discuss and send this to you.

i also don't think this is something new to say but following your previous reblog (that tik tok) makes me think of the shit halsey does sometimes and how the majority of their fan base immediately goes 'yikes' and i think it's also how certain artists have portrayed themselves and how certain artists have created their personas/stage character. i'm taking halsey as an example cause they're the other artist i know very well but like, ever since the beginning ashley showed themselves as this open minded and very very opinionated person who has always used their persona (halsey) as an excuse to be even more vocal about things that mattered to them (i'm exclusively talking about this character that's created bc halsey's background is light years away from being the same as taylor's) and on the contrary taylor has (insert every reason here i know why she did but i also don't care) created this america's sweetheart image, the perfect white girl, the girl who does no harm and even if she fucks up "her intentions were good!!" (giving no space to actually question that aka the entire lover era with the yntc mv and the me! comment in miss americana?) and that's why people cannot even think about calling taylor out (i think this matty case is the exception since a LOT of fans did) and it's just like... taylor you're one smart motherfucker bro, it's genius but also quite fucked up but so genius. bc even tho she tried to miley cyrus her way out of the "naive/nice girl" thing she will always be that. anyway, i hope i don't get cancelled and maybe i'm wrong? but i needed to talk about this with someone, bye ily <3

Nins one of my favorite things about you is your willingness to just say shit how it is <3

100% agreed with everything you said. I know the biggest backlash Halsey got (in my memory) was when she used to go around kissing fans (I'm sure you remember, lol.) I remember Tumblr especially went after them hard because one of the fans they kissed was a minor at the time - which was deserved! (There were Halsey fans making excuses for her, but I recall them being in the minority.) But like, once Halsey started gaining more fame and realizing the connection she had with her fans and her power in that connection, she stopped doing things like that. She apologized, said she didn't know the fan was a minor, and hasn't kissed any fans since. The other kinds of backlash Halsey gets aren't really the same, but when she does something wrong, she tends to own up to it. And it's always Halsey, not Halsey's team.

Whereas with Taylor... anytime there's even the smallest bit of backlash against her, her team (be it online Swifties or her actual PR team) rush to defend her, talk about her intentions, and really make it seem like she's perfect and innocent and incapable of making mistakes. I'll honestly never get over how many Swifties were foaming at the mouth trying to defend her when the Private Jet Usage thing was going around. The backlash from that died down pretty quickly and most Swifties I saw weren't willing to even say that she was doing something wrong.

She's really done something smart - horrifying, but smart - in terms of walking this line of America's Sweetheart Girl-Next-Door and Very Savvy Rich White Woman. I do think we might finally be hitting a point where people won't be able to forgive her, though.

Matty Healy is not interested in cultivating a positive public image of himself. He frankly seems to thrive off and enjoy controversy. It's a lot harder for people to maintain that Perfect Image of Taylor when she's so intimately associating with someone who handles his own fame and image the opposite way.

Maybe she truly believes she's untouchable at this point and just doesn't care. Maybe she thinks the power of her own image will be enough to override his. Maybe she doesn't think any backlash against her is ever deserved, after all the (undeserved) hate she got pre-Reputation, so she's ignoring this and writing it off as just more mindless hating. I have no idea where her head is at, and I don't think anyone else really does, either.

If nothing else, it'll be interesting moving forward, seeing where this goes. I don't think I've ever seen a celebrity match with such opposite perspectives and methods of maintaining their public images. I'm curious to see if (1) they even stay together that long (this kind of reeks of a rebound to me) and (2) if the disgust/outrage will persist if they do stay together.

I really feel for the BIPOC fans who have been hurt by all of this, though. One thing Megha (hi @tolerateit <3) mentioned a day or two ago really hit me - for so many Swifties, it's not even really just about Taylor, but about the community they've built and the friends they've made by being fans of hers. Knowing Taylor is dating someone like Matty is bad enough - seeing white Swifties make excuses for her and ostracize BIPOC fans for speaking up is a level of gross and sad that I don't really have words for. That's the part of this that really sucks the most.

#if someone needs me to tag this for blacklist lmk and we can come up with a tag #I wanna keep it out of the main tags lol #asks #nins tag #fave mutuals #aaarondessner

2 notes · View notes

nitewrighter · 2 years

Note

im very conflicted about playing ovw2. i stopped playing ovw1 years ago back when all the controversies started, and actiblizz is a truly shit and vile company full of terrible people. but i still love the characters and the content the fandom creates for it (your blog, as an example). i know ovw2 is f2p now, and while i would not drop any money for any content ingame, but i know that player metrics is still a form of support for the game itself? i genuinely miss ovw1 and playing the game but i really, really do not want to support actiblizz. what were your own thoughts on this, or i guess maybe a bit of advice to help me make a decision for myself? like i said i really loved the gameplay. it was some of the most fun i had. but i am super conflicted about how to feel about playing. so i figured i would get an opinion on this given you have mentioned before playing ovw2 and if it feels comparable to how ovw1 was

The 5v5 and the battle passes are the biggest shifts, that and the fact that 2CP maps are no longer available in regular quickplay modes (they have been available in the arcade though). I'm still trying to figure out the experience system--basically it's a Fortnite-esque system where you work your way up through levels in the battlepass, and with each level you get a cosmetic. This new system is kind of a slog and to be honest I kind of miss the old lootbox system because at least you could look forward to multiple items or at least in-game currency upon leveling up--the new system basically has you like "I can't believe I'm grinding for a damn Sigma voiceline just to get to that Cassidy skin two levels after."

The ability to earn in-game currency is really reduced, but your "legacy currency" from OW1 carries over--but it's static. Like "I'm afraid to spend it" static. You can also get experience bonuses by completing challenges. So this kind of forces you to play flex, tank, and so on, so it is interesting that there's this regularly updating thing that incentivizes you to mix up your gameplay and collaborate with other players more. 5v5 is still... messy. I'm starting to understand the general concept is that this game mode is more about rapidly maneuvering around the map and flanking even when you're on defense, but it's still very messy with regards to slower utility supports like Ana and Zenyatta. They're continuing to tweak the game.

Honestly I think the decision to let go of Overwatch ultimately boils down to what you think will make you happier. I mean, I still play it because I got really attached to the characters and the community it introduced me to, and I've got friends in the game where basically the game is our preferred medium of communication. But ActiBlizz sucks. Big time. But it's also messy because there are people within Blizzard who are trying to fight for better working conditions and a better workplace environment--Blizzard definitely represents some of the worst bro and crunch culture of the gaming industry but it's not really monolithic.

Like, in terms of my creative output, I'm currently working to take my fankids and put them in their own original fiction because like, I love them and I think they deserve better than to be stuck in that property forever. There's a saying in yoga to "let go of that which no longer serves you" and I'm constantly stuck with this question of "how much did I/do I get out of it vs how much did I put into it", and I don't want to fall into a sunk cost fallacy. And that's the tough part because the fandom and community aspect of it brought so much to the table, so it wasn't just my writing, it was my friends' writing and art, and it's every single ask you guys send because I genuinely love working with all the prompts you guys send me.

So honestly I can't answer your question. It's going to come down to you and what you get out of the game and the community. I've seen a lot of people leave the community, but a lot of them were also people who spent a frankly baffling amount of their fandom time fighting for their lives with complete idiots on twitter, yelling at Blizzard for Pharah or whoever their fave was not being the center of every update, and forgetting there's such a thing as a block button and cultivating your fandom experience. Like, a lot of the Overwatch experience is what you put in, so that's why there's this whole spectrum of who's stayed and who's left. To be honest, I am working on expanding my horizons after 5 years of hyperfixating, plus I've seen some decent success with readership for non-fandom stuff, but I also don't want to give up the joy the playing and creating have given me and just try and sink all that passion somewhere else.

Ultimately it's going to come down to you and how much you get out of it. Though honestly you've already gone years without it, I think you're going to be okay.

17 notes · View notes

gromellette · 1 year

Note

what's your thought crime Opinions

how nice of you to ask!

as a disclaimer, this is less about the commonly discussed concepts of mental illness & harmless sexual/romantic fantasies seen under the original post and more about the less than normal kinds of thoughts that can be harder to talk about in a neutral way for a lot of people. proceed with caution, i suppose.

i don't have anything to say about thought crime that hasn't already been said, i think. but i do hold, from my experience, controversial & unpopular opinions surrounding thoughts, desires, attractions, urges, and feelings vs. actions where it relates to violence and sexuality.

i don't immediately reign judgement on people who experience some or all of the above surrounding the likes of incest, pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality, non/dubious consent/rape, mutilation/murder, etc. these things would be undoubtedly unethical and, to most, detestable to act on, but simply experiencing those feelings & thinking those thoughts & having those urges or desires is not something i'm interested in demonizing someone for. human beings are incapable of controlling their thoughts/feelings/attractions. if we weren't, we would never feel anxiety or grief or anger, people with OCD & intrusive thoughts would eliminate them before they appeared, queer people in conservative spaces and/or grappling with internalized homophobia would simply choose to not be queer. we know this isn't how it works, so why would it be any different for the unsavory ones, the socially unacceptable?

this isn't to say it's just chill that some people sit around having fantasies about certain things; i do think destigmatizing needs to also come with unpacking and rehabilitation where appropriate and measures to prevent violent acts, but the cultural obsession with morality is probably my biggest gripe with the conversation surrounding violent thoughts and violence in general; how morality is the highest priority, the means by which we must categorize the world in terms of "good" people and "bad" people, the end all be all to understanding and solving the issue of violence and, therefore, the only thing that really matters when observing these categorically "bad" people². all this, despite the fact that morality is entirely subjective and does nothing to actually prevent or treat violence because one's perception of right and wrong varies widely from person to person depending on endless variables. contrary to popular belief, the world cannot be broken down into such simple parts; good and bad, right and wrong, just and unjust. the world is nuanced, gray, and not altogether easy to understand.

i'm as passionate as i am about this (and about protecting freedom of speech and expression in fictional media where this topic is concerned too, another conversation altogether) because the shame and dehumanizing that happens in response to someone expressing violent thoughts or compulsions is what ultimately leads to real life harm¹. i believe it's important to foster an environment where people can feel comfortable talking about these things because with that comes feeling comfortable asking for help and preventing violence from the start, which is ultimately what we want, right? to listen to, show compassion for, and aid people with "immoral" thoughts (and predators, while we're at it) is to participate in creating a safe community for everyone³.

punishment begets more violence, not less, and it's troubling how popular the opposite sentiment seems to be. i'm frankly tired of seeing people make black and white moral judgements that are not at all black and white (i.e. thinking about something one has never acted on). it's okay to feel a way about things but, as far as i'm concerned, a person's actions are far more important than what goes on inside their head, or what they choose to write, draw, read, or watch for that matter (unless it's legitimate pornography involving real life parties right like obviously that is very bad because it results in and perpetuates real life harm, lets be reasonable here BUT even in these cases, the answer is not to demonize. there could be cases in which a person might very well be incapable of change or remorse (debatable) and in those cases, sure, but i believe the majority of the time such violence can be not only treated, but prevented by recognizing their humanity and doing what we can to foster it. the ultimate goal being, of course, to prevent violence. but i digress, that is another conversation also lol)

¹ James Gilligan has talked extensively on this topic, the correlation between shame & violence, and how treatable and preventable it really is if we could dispel the notion that predators are inhuman, some sort of separate evil species incapable of treatment and understanding and "deserving" of punishment. His book, Preventing Violence, is a great place to start, or this interview if you can't access it (highly recommend, it is a fascinating read). ² See also James Gilligan. Morality is the Problem, where he talks about morality as a means to justify violence on both sides of the coin.

³ i also feel it necessary to make clear that it's not anyone's, and particularly any victim's, responsibility to bear the burden of showing compassion to or otherwise protecting someone who has harmed or wanted to harm others. i just hope to highlight the importance of recognizing and considering the humanity in those individuals because the most effective way of changing someone for the better is allowing them the space to do so, should they be receptive to it. because monsters don't exist, human beings who do unforgivable things do. and, yes, even those human beings need compassion from others.

#yes i enjoy gilligan and look for any opportunity to share his work is that so wrong #our matching icons btw...... love #grom #asks #is this unpopular & controversial or am i yelling at a wall btw #bc in my circles it definitely is but maybe my circles are just... less open minded? understandably so too like #i understand peoples gut reaction to these things and where it comes from and its obviously a very natural response #i just feel we should try to be more pragmatic & less reactionary in our pursuit of preventing harm #idk let me know what you think if you so desire lol #and ty for letting me ramble!

3 notes · View notes

bellasbookclub · 1 year

Text

How it all started: G and M's original "better books for Bella" DM conversation

[July 26th, 2022]

G: you know how Bella lists all her favorite books and authors in Midnight Sun? what books would you recommend Bella base her personality off of instead?

Like, what favorite books would you give Bella to make her more interesting or fit into the story better?

M: G my dear! Bella's booklist is very very classic lit you read in high school or universal children’s books. BUT in her defense she mentions a couple sci-fi authors.

full (700-word) conversation continues under the cut

I think she was sleeping on the pillars of YA lit. I have an affinity for Isobelle Carmody as an Aussie, I think Alyzon Whitestarr would be a VERY Bella book

I think her uninspired takes on Austen and Brontë are pretty on point for Bella. But frankly the ONLY Brontë I personally like is The Tenant of Wildfell Hall and that is NOT a Bella book at all. I think Wuthering and Eyre are on point for Bells, it's the red flags she loves

Honestly I think she would be way more into fantasy, I don't understand why she would embrace immortality and be so excited for it otherwise.

Like, maybe a little bit of my mans JRRT at least as a child. The Hobbit is GREAT for silly immortals. I could see her and Renee reading it. But like L J Covey in To All The Boys I think she should also be hugely into the Romance Genre.

I think P&P checks out as a Classique, and Jane Eyre and Wuthering, kind of set her up to be taken in by Edward's brand of Romance. But some funner ones like Alyzon (I wish) The Hobbit, hell, I'd love for some non-fiction too! Simone de Beauvoir has a truly moving recounting of watching her mother die

I think that would set up Bella's fear of growing old and dying (can't believe they never touched on the fact that Bella's paternal grandparents were so old and Charlie had to take care of them like???)

Also maybe SUPER controversial but I like to think she's a VC Andrews fan. Like Heaven definitely, maybe she wouldn't like what Neiderman has done since

G: M you psychic how did you know

this list is from yesterday

M: Shut uuuup this wavelength is strong and loud!!

G: I was mostly going through thinking of how I would de-genericize Bella’s list, because a big part of it truly reads like Stephenie Meyer just googled "classic books for girls" and ctrl+ved that

M: yeah but classic is classic for a reason. Also I thought Steph did an english course in college and was prolly using that

[Here they go on a tangent about Christian themes and racism in the Chronicles of Narnia and how as kids they both enjoyed the books despite rather than because of said stuff]

G: anyway you just know if Bella had based her entire identity on the du Maurier gothic instead of the Brontë gothic she would be so much sexier and more confident

M: She might have even had an iota of self-esteem!! du Maurier is for bad bitches

G: I think I'm gonna end up having to research Stephenie Meyer's Austen opinions…“Emma Woodhouse is so full of herself" is the biggest red flag like ok Bella we get it, you're ugly

M: Her opinion on Emma is so basic, like tell me you’re not like other girls without telling me you’re not like other girls. Her distaste of Emma reeks of jealousy. Maybe someone wanted to have confidence in herself. Too foreign for her to comprehend

G: EXACTLY

I'm gonna have to research whether that's just an in-universe Bella opinion or if Stephenie Meyer truly believes basic self-esteem is that much of a Sin, because Yikes. also, way to miss the entire very simple point of Emma

[August 1st, 2022]

G: M DID YOU KNOW I FOUND AN OLD STEPHENIE MEYER INTERVIEW WHERE SHE NEGS PERSUASION RIGHT ALONG WITH EMMA

sorry for the all caps I'm just mad. she says it's—get this—"too sad"

ma'am you wrote New Moon

M: THAT IS MY FAVE AUSTEN YOU DO NOT FUCK WITH PERSUASION ON MY WATCH

LIKE???? WHICH PROTAG ALSO HAS NO SELF ESTEEM ?? ANNE ELLIOT !!! She can't do this to me

"Persuasion is just so sad" .... haha ...

[Book-related conversation ends here]

Fun fact: let the record show that G and M also discussed their above defenses of Emma and Persuasion “live” on the podcast, but unfortunately the conversation had to be cut for time.

#bella's book club #book recs for bella

4 notes · View notes

falsegoodnight · 2 years

Note

like, I get it, but at the same time, blocking his biggest update acc is a weird move and is also lowkey shooting himself in the foot??? I think some ppl r blowing it way out of proportion, but I do think a lot of the questioning is valid.

it also just gives rads more ammunition to hate on larries as if we don’t have enough of that but 🤷🏻‍♀️ /gen /nm

I genuinely wanna know ur thoughts on it, though, (and uas you recommend??) bc I rly do think a lot of people on twitter are losing the plot

answer below mainly because it ended up long for some reason?

yeah hld does have a lot of followers and especially since louis gets jack shit when it comes to promo, stuff like this is disappointing but it seems clear to me by the severity of the action that louis thinks the harm they're causing outweighs any of the good – like, don't get me wrong ,the streaming parties they've organized in the past as well as fundraisers for charities and stuff have all been incredible but the whole 'superfollower' thing and how they've clearly taken too much joy in the rumors of them actually having connections to louis/harry just show that they've kind of let the attention... get to their heads??? if anything hopefully this blocking will help them gain some perspective – i don't think anyone behind this ua is a bad person or anything and i think some people definitely ARE taking things way too far.

also louis isn't stupid. he's not the type of person to recklessly block a fan account, knowing that it would instantly be noticed and speculated upon by everyone especially since hld's platform is so big.

at the end of the day, i trust louis and his reasons for doing what he did. the thing is, we don't even know fully why he didn't and we probably never will... i saw that ss from someone saying another ua was sending lies to louis and... ngl we literally have zero reason to believe them. for all we know they sent that dm to themselves lol.

as for the 'rads' thing... let's be real, people are always going to find ways to hate on larries and that's unfortunately not going to change, but we don't have to let it bother us. i honestly don't care if people use this as a way to say louis hates larries or whatever because i don't believe that, and neither do any of us frankly, and that's all that matters. if someone tries to say something to you, just block them and try your best to ignore it. while words can definitely hurt, they're still just words. putting that into perspective always helps when people are being nasty (also people being nasty will always say more about them then you).

ALL THAT BEING SAID, this account has been controversial for a WHILE because of how they've handled things and while some solo fans or antis or other non-larries probably have hated on hld because it's a "larry" ua, that's not all they've had a problem with and in that respect, i also don't really care that they may be celebrating this today. that's also partly because i don't really care about what people outside of my own circle/community are saying/doing in ANY context and let me tell you that's a much more pleasant way to experience this fandom lol.

ua recs... ngl i don't follow ANY uas on twitter and never have so i can't really help you 😣 i've never really been someone that needs the fastest updates or news, like immediately when it happens, and have been just fine getting information from my tl/mutuals whenever i log on so i never felt the need to follow any, sorry </3 i'm sure someone else out there will be much more helpful in answering this question though!! and i hope you find them!

final notes (sorry this ended up so long idk how that happened): i think there's definitely some nuance to this topic but at the end of the day, i trust in louis' judgment and that he made the right decision today. i also think people need to move on from this topic because YES some people have absolutely lost the plot on twitter like 😬 pls calm down!!!

#asks

2 notes · View notes