#just tagging this anti to be safe

[izzythehutt]

I like how the normie consensus about the Kenobi show is that it "fixes" Obi-Wan lying to Luke about his father being dead at Vader's hand as opposed to being Vader himself because "oh Vader told him that and he really believed it" (I don't think this ever needed to be fixed, personally), when from my perspective it makes Ben look like more of a dick because it suggests that he was perfectly capable of killing Darth Vader in the in-between trilogies period and just...didn't for no clear or discernible reason. And in fact pushed off the responsibility onto Vader's own son. Which makes him MORE of a dick.

Look, I can forgive Mustafar. Anakin had just turned, it was an emotional time, and Obi-Wan was not unreasonable to assume nobody could survive that. But a second shot that you walk away from?

They could have made the final fight a little less of an obvious win, or given Obi-Wan a clear and urgent reason to run away before finishing the job (like one of the twins in danger) but instead he just completely overpowers and curbstomps Vader, then dicks off and leaves his former apprentice/murder robot a wheezing mess. If Obi-Wan really does think Vader "killed" Anakin, then he's a shitty Jedi, fullstop. You can have him not be able to let go of Anakin and therefore not have it in him to kill, OR he's completely accepted Vader is just a Sith and a menace and he has to kill. You don't get it both ways.

I enjoyed the dramatic angst of the confrontation as much as the next person, but I am also forced to concede that the entire OT depends on the fact of Luke (and, failing him, Leia) are the only people capable of defeating Vader and the Emperor. The movies just...kind of fundamentally don't work if there's another option, since Yoda and Obi-Wan literally say "there is no other option." This is the Skywalker show.

(In this house we ignore the ST because it's garbage, but I digress)

So what I'm saying is the show is, like most everything in the Disney era, a superfluous and canon-breaking fanfic I'm perfectly capable of enjoying for what it is while fully recognizing it contradicts what the films it's spun off from gave us in the first place.

TL;DR Ben Kenobi never left Tatooine between Ep3 and 4 and that's what I'm sticking with.

#fixes #anti disney star wars #star wars #obi wan kenobi 2022 #anti obi wan kenobi 2022 #obi wan kenobi #darth vader #anakin skywalker #basically can we stop pretending that ANYTHING in disney SW canon as opposed to making it more complicated/convoluted? #even the use of leia in the show which had its heart in the right place kind of just made anh less emotionally satisfying #they could have actually addressed what the plan was for her #with bail and ben #but they didn't #just tagging this anti to be safe #honestly i actually did enjoy kenobi #but i find the fandom's tendency to bend over backwards to fit new canon into the mythology annoying #am i taking crazy pills here? #some of this shit just really doesn't work #the bb leia and anakin parallels REALLY DON'T WORK Shmi and Obi-Wan are not comparable at ALL and also Leia NEVER DOES SEE HIM AGAIN #BECAUSE IN THE OT SHE HAD NEVER MET HIM #I am the first person who would go back and rewrite aspects of Leia's role in the OT if I could tbh #To make her fit into the family drama more organically #but we can't #okay i'll shut up now

[copypastus]

"You never told me where you got it - where you got all my favourite dresses." Rhys arched a dark brow. "You never figured it out?" I shook my head. For a moment, he said nothing, his head dipping to study the dress. "My mother made them." (...) I gazed a reverant hand down my sleeve. "I- I had no idea." His eyes were star bright. "Long ago when I was still a boy, she made them - all your gowns. A trousseau for my future bride." His throat bobbed. "Every piece... Every piece I have ever given you to wear, she made them. For you"

Sometimes you just read something and can't help but think about the implications.

"aww how sweet his mom made all her favourite gowns how wholesome" nonono EVERY. PIECE. Ma'am please he's still a baby boy you're making a lot of assumptions about his future preferences.

#my art #acotar #acotar fanart #rhysand #rhysands's mom #acofas #acofas is enemy mine #anti rhysand #technically #anti sjm #tagging just to be safe #didn't know 'where does feyre get her dresses' was a mystery that needed solving #i just assumed the high lord has a seamstess in his employ #or idk he gets them at fairy h&m which is smth modern ass velaris probably has #rhys tell your partner something's a test/gift from your mom before you spring it on them challenge: impossible #now i just wanna draw my tamsand dreams with tamlin rocking all the feyre dresses and killing it

[stephaniebrownthespoiler]

I think DC should go back to having random characters having beef with each other for no real reason that was honestly so hilarious

I also volunteer that they have Tim Drake have an inexplicable one-sided beef with Jon Kent and I don't have a reason for this except that it'd be funny to me specifically

like let's get some bi4bi hostility up in here yk?

#maybe like #kon isn't bothered about having to share his name so just tim just decided to take it very personally on his behalf #he also does have a history of fighting children so it'd be fine #there is also the friends with damian reasoning but that's boring so #I'm not tagging jon i don't think i want to deal with the consequences of that #tim drake #anti jon kent #<- just to be very very safe #second's comic corner

[sneezypeasy]

Why I Deliberately Avoided the "Colonizer" Argument in my Zutara Thesis - and Why I'll Continue to Avoid it Forever

This is a question that occasionally comes up under my Zutara video essay, because somehow in 2 hours worth of content I still didn't manage to address everything (lol.) But this argument specifically is one I made a point of avoiding entirely, and there are some slightly complicated reasons behind that. I figure I'll write them all out here.

From a surface-level perspective, Zuko's whole arc, his raison d'etre, is to be a de-colonizer. Zuko's redemption arc is kinda all about being a de-colonizer, and his redemption arc is probably like the most talked about plot point of ATLA, so from a basic media literacy standpoint, the whole argument is unsound in the first place, and on that basis alone I find it childish to even entertain as an argument worth engaging with, to be honest.

(At least one person in my comments pointed out that if any ship's "political implications" are problematic in some way, it really ought to be Maiko, as Mai herself is never shown or suggested to be a strong candidate for being a de-colonizing co-ruler alongside Zuko. If anything her attitudes towards lording over servants/underlings would make her… a less than suitable choice for this role, but I digress.)

But the reason I avoided rebutting this particular argument in my video goes deeper than that. From what I've observed of fandom discourse, I find that the colonizer argument is usually an attempt to smear the ship as "problematic" - i.e., this ship is an immoral dynamic, which would make it problematic to depict as canon (and by extension, if you ship it regardless, you're probably problematic yourself.)

And here is where I end up taking a stand that differentiates me from the more authoritarian sectors of fandom.

I'm not here to be the fandom morality police. When it comes to lit crit, I'm really just here to talk about good vs. bad writing. (And when I say "good", I mean structurally sound, thematically cohesive, etc; works that are well-written - I don't mean works that are morally virtuous. More on this in a minute.) So the whole colonizer angle isn't something I'm interested in discussing, for the same reason that I actually avoided discussing Katara "mothering" Aang or the "problematic" aspects of the Kataang ship (such as how he kissed her twice without her consent). My whole entire sections on "Kataang bad" or "Maiko bad" in my 2 hour video was specifically, "how are they written in a way that did a disservice to the story", and "how making them false leads would have created valuable meaning". I deliberately avoided making an argument that consisted purely of, "here's how Kataang/Maiko toxic and Zutara wholesome, hence Zutara superiority, the end".

Why am I not willing to be the fandom morality police? Two reasons:

I don't really have a refined take on these subjects anyway. Unless a piece of literature or art happens to touch on a particular issue that resonates with me personally, the moral value of art is something that doesn't usually spark my interest, so I rarely have much to say on it to begin with. On the whole "colonizer ship" subject specifically, other people who have more passion and knowledge than me on the topic can (and have) put their arguments into words far better than I ever could. I'm more than happy to defer to their take(s), because honestly, they can do these subjects justice in a way I can't. Passing the mic over to someone else is the most responsible thing I can do here, lol. But more importantly:

I reject the conflation of literary merit with moral virtue. It is my opinion that a good story well-told is not always, and does not have to be, a story free from moral vices/questionable themes. In my opinion, there are good problematic stories and bad "pure" stories and literally everything in between. To go one step further, I believe that there are ways that a romance can come off "icky", and then there are ways that it might actually be bad for the story, and meming/shitposting aside, the fact that these two things don't always neatly align is not only a truth I recognise about art but also one of those truths that makes art incredibly interesting to me! So on the one hand, I don't think it is either fair or accurate to conflate literary "goodness" with moral "goodness". On a more serious note, I not only find this type of conflation unfair/inaccurate, I also find it potentially dangerous - and this is why I am really critical of this mindset beyond just disagreeing with it factually. What I see is that people who espouse this rhetoric tend to encourage (or even personally engage in) wilful blindness one way or the other, because ultimately, viewing art through these lens ends up boxing all art into either "morally permissible" or "morally impermissible" categories, and shames anyone enjoying art in the "morally impermissible" box. Unfortunately, I see a lot of people responding to this by A) making excuses for art that they guiltily love despite its problematic elements and/or B) denying the value of any art that they are unable to defend as free from moral wickedness.

Now, I'm not saying that media shouldn't be critiqued on its moral virtue. I actually think morally critiquing art has its place, and assuming it's being done in good faith, it absolutely should be done, and probably even more often than it is now.

Because here's the truth: Sometimes, a story can be really good. Sometimes, you can have a genuinely amazing story with well developed characters and powerful themes that resonate deeply with anyone who reads it. Sometimes, a story can be all of these things - and still be problematic.*

(Or, sometimes a story can be all of those things, and still be written by a problematic author.)

That's why I say, when people conflate moral art with good art, they become blind to the possibility that the art they like being potentially immoral (or vice versa). If only "bad art" is immoral, how can the art that tells the story hitting all the right beats and with perfect rhythm and emotional depth, be ever problematic?

(And how can the art I love, be ever problematic?)

This is why I reject the idea that literary merit = moral virtue (or vice versa) - because I do care about holding art accountable. Even the art that is "good art". Actually, especially the art that is "good art". Especially the art that is well loved and respected and appreciated. The failure to distinguish literary critique from moral critique bothers me on a personal level because I think that conflating the two results in the detriment of both - the latter being the most concerning to me, actually.

So while I respect the inherent value of moral criticism, I'm really not a fan of any argument that presents moral criticism as equivalent to literary criticism, and I will call that out when I see it. And from what I've observed, a lot of the "but Zutara is a colonizer ship" tries to do exactly that, which is why I find it a dishonest and frankly harmful media analysis framework to begin with.

But even when it is done in good faith, moral criticism of art is also just something I personally am neither interested nor good at talking about, and I prefer to talk about the things that I am interested and good at talking about.

(And some people are genuinely good at tackling the moral side of things! I mean, I for one really enjoyed Lindsay Ellis's take on Rent contextualising it within the broader political landscape at the time to show how it's not the progressive queer story it might otherwise appear to be. Moral critique has value, and has its place, and there are definitely circumstances where it can lead to societal progress. Just because I'm not personally interested in addressing it doesn't mean nobody else can do it let alone that nobody else should do it, but also, just because it can and should be done, doesn't mean that it's the only "one true way" to approach lit crit by anyone ever. You know, sometimes... two things… can be true… at once?)

Anyway, if anyone reading this far has recognised that this is basically a variant of the proship vs. antiship debate, you're right, it is. And on that note, I'm just going to leave some links here. I've said about as much as I'm willing/able to say on this subject, but in case anyone is interested in delving deeper into the philosophy behind my convictions, including why I believe leftist authoritarian rhetoric is harmful, and why the whole "but it would be problematic in real life" is an anti-ship argument that doesn't always hold up to scrutiny, I highly recommend these posts/threads:

In general this blog is pretty solid; I agree with almost all of their takes - though they focus more specifically on fanfic/fanart than mainstream media, and I think quite a lot of their arguments are at least somewhat appropriate to extrapolate to mainstream media as well.

I also strongly recommend Bob Altemeyer's book "The Authoritarians" which the author, a verified giga chad, actually made free to download as a pdf, here. His work focuses primarily on right-wing authoritarians, but a lot of his research and conclusions are, you guessed it, applicable to left-wing authoritarians also.

And if you're an anti yourself, welp, you won't find support from me here. This is not an anti-ship safe space, sorrynotsorry 👆

In conclusion, honestly any "but Zutara is problematic" argument is one I'm likely to consider unsound to begin with, let alone the "Zutara is a colonizer ship" argument - but even if it wasn't, it's not something I'm interested in discussing, even if I recognise there are contexts where these discussions have value. I resent the idea that just because I have refined opinions on one aspect of a discussion means I must have (and be willing to preach) refined opinions on all aspects of said discussion. (I don't mean to sound reproachful here - actually the vast majority of the comments I get on my video/tumblr are really sweet and respectful, but I do get a handful of silly comments here and there and I'm at the point where I do feel like this is something worth saying.) Anyway, I'm quite happy to defer to other analysts who have the passion and knowledge to give complicated topics the justice they deserve. All I request is that care is taken not to conflate literary criticism with moral criticism to the detriment of both - and I think it's important to acknowledge when that is indeed happening. And respectfully, don't expect me to give my own take on the matter when other people are already willing and able to put their thoughts into words so much better than me. Peace ✌

*P.S. This works for real life too, by the way. There are people out there who are genuinely not only charming and likeable, but also generous, charitable and warm to the vast majority of the people they know. They may also be amazing at their work, and if they have a job that involves saving lives like firefighting or surgery or w.e, they may even be the reason dozens of people are still alive today. They may honestly do a lot of things you'd have to concede are "good" deeds.

They may be all of these things, and still be someone's abuser. 🙃

Two things can be true at once. It's important never to forget that.

#zutara discourse #the colonizer argument #anti anti zutara #text post #long post #anti maiko #anti mai #tagging just in case #anti purity culture #this is not an anti-ship safe space

[proficgen]

being an anti must be so stressful like, imagine shipping two characters and then the creator reveals they’re actually related?

Like what do you do??? stop shipping them??? fr?????

What if it turns out that the other character is actually toxic, you gonna just drop all the fanfics and stuff like that?? really?? on god?????

#proship safe #proship #proshippers are valid #proshippers please interact #proship tw #<- just for any anti that has that one blocked dw i got you #i don’t want you here either lmao #anti anti safe #anti anti #i am once again over tagging bc i want ppl to interact with me more #anti antis please interact #profic #profiction #profic safe #oh right and the recent (?) one #comship

[five-flavor-soup]

i genuinely, really like aang, but keeping his writing in book 3 and his writing in the comics in mind, i don’t think it’s all that implausible for him to get the sort-of-antagonist role in fics depicting katara-ships other than KA.

reiterating, i like aang: he’s adorable, he’s funny, and he’s nice. but i believe there’s something to be said about how his ‘niceness’ is written and seen as being The Reason he ‘deserves’ a love interest. his thinking is self-centred, and though that’s a believable flaw for a kid who’s, like, twelve, we’re shown that it’s a consistent character trait which is never treated as an issue… even though it is. (and if he’s mature enough to start dating the girl he’s going to marry and have children with, he should also be mature enough to be criticised for his less-than-savoury parts of his personality, no?)

it’s not OOC to write him as being possessive of katara even when they’re not dating, because he canonically is. it’s not OOC to write him as not respecting and/or noticing katara’s boundaries, because he canonically blows past them. the ideas that he might not mature much later on, that he might be wilfully and forcefully oblivious to any discomfort in the KA relationship, that he might continue shoving katara(‘s culture) aside—none of that is necessarily OOC, because aang does not go through significant character development in book 3 + the comics.

in The Promise, there’s that weird moment wherein aang is briefly anti-miscegenation and doesn’t change his mind until katara reminds him supporting that would affect him (him!!! his relationship with katara alone!!) personally. in TLOK, there’s the suggestion that aang never actively pushed for bumi & kya to learn about air nomad culture and there’s the heavy implication that aang never told the air acolytes about bumi & kya’s existence. additionally, tenzin doesn’t even have a hint of water tribe heritage anywhere in his house to honour katara’s side: he’s all air nomad (though?? nuclear family dynamic), in spite of being mixed.

don’t get me wrong, i vastly prefer fic and hc’s in which aang is a katara supporter first and foremost, and that’s also how i prefer to move through a fandom space barring meta and analyses. but i also don’t think making him jealous and petty when she dates someone else is a misinterpretation of the text we’ve been given; canon!aang shows the signs to become that way, and it’s not wrong to read his future self that way nor is it incorrect fandom-ing to highlight these traits

#aang critical #anti aang #and #anti kataang #just to be safe #don’t wanna infringe upon anyone’s space ✌️ #do i adore aang? yes #do i think that KA could’ve been way way WAY better than the babysitting fantasy we got? also yes #in the very first ep he pops out of an egg and imprints onto the first person he sees idk how more clear this should be #for legal reasons that last tag is a joke

[the-badger-mole]

On the Unredeemed

Unredeemed villains are important in fiction. I feel like that needs to be said. There is a trend in recent years (probably since Wicked became a hit) of people wanting to see monsters redeemed. I'm not against that (per-se... glowers in Maleficent), but also, I feel like we do lose something when we lean into the idea that the monster gets to make good.

Fiction can be really useful for teaching us about life. I remember seeing a quote some time ago on Pinterest or something that said something along the lines of "fairytales are important not because they tell us dragons are real, but because they tell us that dragons can be slayed". That has been on my mind a lot recently when I see discussions about characters like Azula and (more recently) Ozai. They are fictional characters with super magic fire powers, but they represent something real- they represent the cycle of abuse in families, and while I understand the impulse to absolve someone as young as Azula, I think it's also important to tell the story where she isn't redeemed.

One reason that most Azula redemption stories bother me is because of the responsibility they tend to place on Zuko as her older brother, despite the fact that she victimized him probably more than anyone in her life (that we get to see. I don't think her soldiers believed her death threat for no reason). There are plenty of stories about the victims of abuse needing to be the bigger person to keep their families together and being villainized when they don't (I think by now we all understand that Terri was not the villain of Soul Food). We need stories about knowing when it's okay to walk away, and that illustrate the idea that "the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb".

In a time when more people are talking openly about going low contact or completely cutting off family members- close family members- I personally think that seeing stories about coming out of the other side of it, of building a new family, healing from the past, and dealing with the residual guilt that comes with "turning your back on family" even when it's the right call, is helpful in the same way that those fairytales about slayable dragons are.

I'm not saying any of this to discourage Azula redemption stories. In fact I would love to see more. Stories that have Azula confronting what she did to the people she should have loved most, and have her considering what to do with the knowledge going forward, instead of just using her past abuse and mental health to gloss over the real harm she did. I want to see her grappling to accept the fact that no one- not her brother, not Iroh, not her friends- owes her forgiveness, and then dealing with all the complex emotions that come with just one of them actually forgiving her. But also, I want to see stories where Zuko gets to let go of his father and sister and go on to be supported in that decision. Because to him, they were dragons, and they were slain.

#the badger mole muses #every villain does not need to be redeemable #zuko #atla #i feel like if i don't tag this #anti azula #someone's going to get mad #it's not #it's just pro having villains be villains #but to be on the safe side #THE YEAR OF CONTENT!!!!

[cosmossystem]

can pro-endo and/or pro-ship blogs interact with this post or follow us or send asks or something? weve been dealing with right-wingers & medicalists in our notes for like a week now and its been a bad time. and also we wanna make more mutuals on this blog <3

#you are invited to spam our notes as much as you want. enjoy #💿 red #🍒 cranberry #pro endo #endo safe #endos please interact #proshippers please interact #profic #proship #endogenic #if this post flops at least i tried ok -red #plural system #pluralgang #traumagenic #actually plural #actually multiple #multiple system #median system #proship please interact #anti anti #plural community #proshipping #anti radqueer #i am literally just tagging everything i can think of #we want to make more mutuals + also if i didnt have to look at n*zi bootlickers every time i opened my notes that would be great #i muted the post but you get the point i think #and yes i will block every rq i come across. but that is par for the course these days #hell even if you feel like sending us anon hate i will probably cherish it #its gotta be better than the rightwing echo chamber. i am going insane

[danny-chase]

So much of what Bruce gets wrong with Dick and Cass has his insistence on treating them as extensions of himself and believing that what's best for them is giving them what he wanted when he was their age. Also adding to his projection is both Cass and Dick articulating that they want what he would have wanted: Cass wants the Batman symbol, she wants to help, and Dick wanted what Bruce wanted as a kid: justice for the murder of his parents, and along the way he realized he wanted to help. Then later when they break from Bruce's desires, he doesn't know how to handle them anymore. Anyways it's just interesting to me how Dick and Cass came to Bruce in very different points in their lives and yet the connection through projection is there for both of them and while that's initially what make the characters bond, eventually it ends up hurting both of their relationships when it's taken too far

#rambles #dick grayson #cassandra cain #momo don't look #anyways i would kill for a well written fic where they discuss this #Bruce not being able to handle Dick and Cass not being their own people #anti bruce wayne #tagging that just to be safe

[clarkegriffins]

so, i think since s4 came out i saw maaaaaaaaaaaaaany posts saying nancy AND steve shouldn't be in a relationship, and i'm not gonna talk about that right now bc it's not my point, what is curious to me is that i never saw a post saying that jonathan shouldn't be in a relationship, and it got me thinking, does the fandom even listen to jonathan? like at all?

so in season 1 we have this scene:

which was supposed to "represent" stancy back then, even tho it's just assumptions since we never got the idea that stancy would ever be like ted and karen, they might had their problems back in season 1 and season 2 but not to the point that we think they would turn into nancy's parents, the show has been showing us how much steve loves nancy and that he would do literally anything for her, even breaking his own heart and letting her go, so no, not ted and karen at all, but i'm getting off topic let's go back to jonathan, this is what he thinks about nancy and steve's relationship, not very positive right? he scares her into thinking she's going to end up like her mom and how unhappy she will become.

and now we have this scene, present day:

now we're talking about his relationship with nancy, and oops, not very optimistic either right? this is basically what jonathan thinks of relationships, that no matter what they are always doomed, and how someone who thinks like that can be ready for a relationship? and i'm not even mentioning his thoughts about bob/joyce, his constant judgment over their relationship even tho bob was good for joyce, jonathan's beliefs about relationships are very tragic, i think not only about relationships, but life too, which leads to my second question: what can jonathan offer nancy? like really? i'm not talking about career or anything i'm talking about partnership, he's been ghosting nancy for a while now

to the point that she's considering he is cheating on her

just because he's too scared of telling her the truth, and i see people like: oh but he's protecting her bc just like he said "she would drop EVERYTHING to be with him" and i'm sorry but him assuming that she would leave her dream college for him is a bit too much for me, and it's crazy how no one talks about that, like nancy wheeler, our ambitious nancy wheeler, would literally drop her dreams just because jonathan is going to a different college? and no one from the fandom thinks it's a bit pretentious for jonathan to assume that? this is just an excuse for not telling her the truth, because if he told her the truth, it would lead him to also say what he thinks about their future together, which, in his opinion, is not a very bright future

and look at this, he also talks about kids and marriage, but for him it would end in a disaster, an unhappy marriage, just like ted and karen, totally different from what we saw in steve's dreams (a family with love, affection, who really enjoy each other's company, seeing the world with them, which, i think, it suits nancy traveling a lot since she wants to be a journalist) but this isn't about him, it's about jonathan, i see many people trying to say "oh but it's the trauma talking ok?" and yeah i could buy that, but i don't think trauma should excuse everything, so like nancy will have to spent her entire life fixing him? changing him? i think if u really want to be with someone you should fight for that, but that doesn't seem to be in jonathan's plans, right?

so again: how is he ready to be in a relationship? i think before anything jonathan should heal, this is what s5 should offer him.

#stranger things #stancy #bc i mentioned them #anti jancy #anti jonathan byers #not really no #i'm tagging just to be safe #sorry if there's any typo here i'm a bit sleepy kjgjkgns #nancy wheeler

[m-ercutios]

idk i kind of think that using the imagery and aesthetics of mental hospitals is in poor taste unless you’ve been personally victimized by a psychiatrist

#like did we not have that discourse about asylums as horror settings #bc this is an extension of that. to me. #too tired rn to rlly get into the nuance here and also i need to think about this more #but posting now anyway bc if i don’t i’ll forget about it #mercutios.txt #disability #anti taylor swift #kind of? tagging that just to play it safe #it’s not just her the new album just has me thinking about this again

[lunarbroadcast]

vox headcanons with a s/o that's going through their period

(aka me rn cause i need comfort aisgdhvf-)

not proof read, probably lots of grammar mistakes, not planning on editing this-

He already has to deal with velvette so he probably knows something about periods

He would let you use his screen as a heating pad. Will purposefully make his screen get warm and lay his head on your lower abdomen to help with cramps if you ask him to.

He doesn't like seeing you in pain so he will do his best to make you as comfortable as possible.

You want a snack? he'll get it for you. You need more pads? already placed an order of multiple types just for you (and for velvette just in case). You want to cuddle? he will gladly cuddle you

He traces soft shapes with his claws on your body just to take your mind off of cramps.

will check up on you through your phone if he's working. Constant calls or him making sure you're doing well while you sleep.

remember, if your cramps feel unnaturally painful please go see a doctor, stay hydrated and take breaks! you're literally bleeding out so take care of yourself :D

#period cramps #proselfship #proship safe #antis dni #selfproship #proship please interact #proship #selfship proship #self ship #proship selfship #vox headcanons #vox #hazbin hotel vox #hazbin vox #vox hazbin hotel #vox hazbin #hazbin hotel #vox x reader #cw periods #<- tagged this just in case :>

[hevanderson]

#quinn fabray #lucy quinn fabray #blaine anderson #kurt hummel #sebastian smythe #do i tag this as k.urt.bastian or #not doing it just to be safe #also lmk if yall think this should be under the anti sebastian smythe tag its negative but in character #fabrevans #sam evans #samcedes #hevans #rachel berry #santana lopez #fapezberry #faberry #pezberry #my post #glee

[lover-of-mine]

I so agree with everything you said. The difference of reactions when you didn't ship their previous relationship vs when you don't ship B/T is very telling (same with the fact that when some people talked about a cheating storyline, the reactions were always "it would be bad for Buck to do this to Tommy" but apparently it would have been okay if Eddie did this to a woman?? okay lmao)

What I don't understand is how people say that it's Buck's most developed LI/relationship. Like? We don't know that much about him. People have created (themselves and via the actor's cameos) lots of headcanons but that doesn't mean that they are canon.

To me, he really still feels like a love interest device for now. Like with the scene of the kiss in the last episode, they could have include some mentions of another date, whether past or a future one, but they didn't. The kiss was just there to be able to have Buck come out to the rest of the family, but it didn't bring anything more about B/T (we don't know if they saw each other since the coffee date/if it was their second kiss or if there was already more).

Literally. Like, look, I will say one thing, if buddie had hooked up at that bachelor party only one person would be cheating and that's Eddie. Buck and Tommy did not have a we're exclusive talk. They actually had a we can figure things out as we go talk. Personally, I don't think that counts as an we are together conversation, but that's my opinion. But either way no one seemed to care about the Eddie side of it. Eddie who is literally in a relationship serious enough he asked her to move in with him the episode before. But sure, that doesn't count because they hate Edy and forget Marisol exists (I do too, but I spent the whole time saying we shouldn't make the bisexual dude help his best friend cheat because I did not forget Eddie would be cheating and that would be bad no matter what). And to say T is the most developed love interest is a straight up lie. Taylor had a whole season as Buck's friend before they got together. She had a personality, flaws, qualities, she even got her very own tragic background episode. Say what you want about anything, and yes they sucked as a couple, but bucktaylor was developed. On screen. To a point where if the show actually wanted to, which they clearly didn't because they used the s4 Taylor development to stir her away from Buck instead of closer, they could've made bucktaylor work, they just had to make her as intense about Buck as she is with the job, and they could've been a very interesting golden retriever boyfriend/black cat girlfriend dynamic (good god I can't believe this fandom is making me defend fucking bucktaylor). Buck and T had one scene alone before they were kissing. Tommy has no established personality. Pretty much everything about him besides the begins episodes part of him (that dont paint him in the best light) we learned second hand. Through interviews. It's not even things that are being said to the audience in the show. I'm pretty sure the only things we learned from the show are the way he's a pilot, he was in the army, he likes wrestling, cars, and basketball. I could be wrong, fandom annoyed me so much I blackout every time I see him at this point. But he's not developed? He's just a guy? Don't get me wrong, he could be developed. There is space for it. But right now, he is there to serve as a device for Buck to find his bisexuality and that's it. They kissed twice. They went on half a date T left in the middle of. They went out for coffee and decided to figure things out as they went. He was at the hospital after the wedding to work as a way for Buck to come out without making him go around telling everyone. He exists around Buck. And that's it. Personally I don't see the endgame material people keep seeing. I don't see the development either. And anyone can headcanon anything, really go off, have fun with your ship, but people seriously need to stop acting like what Lou is saying in cameos counts as canon. Being in the fandom right now is exhausting because people just decided things about T and BT that are not backed by canon and they get real aggressive if you don't agree. I seriously am dying to see what's gonna happen if canon goes against the idealized version of him fanon created. I don't know if it's gonna happen but by god will I be entertained by it if it does.

#911 #anti bucktommy #at this point im just adding this to be safe #i really need a tag for asks #anon 😌

[demeterdefence]

i have a lot of bones to pick this chapter and i will get to that but i'm still really pressed by how rachel depicts kronos apparently grieving having to kill hera in her vision

rachel does this really gross thing where at some point in the narrative, she'll have the male abuser depict some kind of sadness in regards to his female victim, but it is not remorse. it really reads like whitewashing the abuse itself because "can't you see how upset the abuser is that he has to do this :("

apollo got that really disgusting pov chapter talking about his perspective on persephone after raping her and that was bad enough, but then you also see kronos and his relationship with hera being sanitized or even shipped, when hera said verbatim that he abused her and she did not want to sleep with him, she had hoped she could just charm him. the narrative explicitly points out that kronos is a chronic abuser - he kills or severely injures rhea in a fit of rage after using all her powers, he frequently drives away any nymph or consort who approaches him, and he spends who knows how long mentally torturing hera.

there's another essay tucked into that but i just find it so fucking egregious that rachel wants to portray kronos as being upset he has to kill hera because of his own feelings for her, when the fact of the matter is he is choosing to kill her, just like he chose to kill rhea, and swallow his sons, and tear hera in half. depicting an abuser (a serial abuser, in this case) as being upset over an action he's choosing to do for his own benefit is ... a choice, and a disturbing one. why are we centering the abuser in a sympathetic light when he is still ultimately abusing someone???

#anti lo #anti lore olympus #abuse ment / #just to be safe #it just strikes me as so ... backwards isn't strong enough it really disturbs me #esp considering the random ass sex scene in the next chapter and THOSE implications #but lo constantly just ... focuses time and energy on the male perpetuators of violence #and not on like ... their female victims lol #and if focus IS given to them it's handwaved away #demeter being tricked into having sex with zeus??? her frequent abuse from hades? nada #also hera saying ''i love you'' to a monster who is capable of killing her and everyone she loves #whom she is sleeping with in order to stop him from destroying everything #and people saying ''yeah that's a ship right there'' #nothing in this rant is coherent these tags are a mess lmao

[coolfunstrawberry]

Nahhhh someone said that they don't like wolfstar and another person replied with "just say youre straight" like what 💀💀💀💀

#the rest of the replies were all just “whys” and basically being flabbergasted on why one could ever dislike wolfstar #LMAOOOOO #anti wolfstar #just tagging it to be safe pls dont jump me #🙏🙏🙏🙏