#lacked the ability and willingess

[ladymajavader]

Just wanted to add to your excellent discourse (please ignore if your sick of it) that while clearly the show (really C*rina) wanted to give us the it's All Alex's Fault narrative in S1, 1x06 screwed that up for them. I think it was just a way to justify Alex getting involved in Jesse's alien agenda, but because the showrunner wasn't big on backstory, she didn't anticipate that all Alex's actions take on a very different flavor when he's viewed, like Michael, as a traumatized, abused adult.

it sometimes takes longer to regenerate the spoons to express myself, but the topic of Alex and *waves a hand* everything really is one I still have a lot to express about, so here goes.

I think you're right on the money that CAM didn't anticipate fandom's reaction to Alex. It's clear she didn't realize what Malex would mean to queer audiences, or she wouldn't have done what she's done with s2. Full disclosure, I realize there are queer fans who fully enjoyed it. I mean that for a lot of us, Malex was a first story of it's kind - a same sex Epic Destined Soulmates Shit. And it's partly why we've glomped so hard on it and consequently were horrified at how s2 tore that aspect of the story down (especially in the stark contrast to Echo's treatment). But just as importantly, I suspect she was quite (negatively) surprised at the reception of Alex himself.

She molded a lot of the RNM characters with a definite agenda (which I approve of, whatever her motivation), racebending and queering them etc. left, right and center. The issue is, she tacked on the various characteristics and backstories (insofar as she made them) without thinking through and realizing what consequences they would actually have for the characters, as in how they would inform their actions and our perceptions of them. The particular intersection of gay, disabled vet and CA survivor with PTSD, absent Indigenous mother and shitbag homophobic abuser father didn’t have any significant meaning to her, so why should it have to the audiences? It’s pretty clear from her interviews, that the teacher’s pet was Michael (and spoiler alert, not Trevino), the sexy bad boy whom she tried to mold into Dean Winchester formula, but made him explicitly bi and for more whump gave him more storied history of child abuse and queer trauma. Alex was supposed to be a backdrop for him, a make-out partner - it’s clear she never intended to explore his story or his point of view, didn’t even have the backstory on his time in the AF (cue his totally different rank in pilot vs rest of the series) or how he lost his leg (the story we heard in 308 is so criminally under-researched there’s no way they sat on it for 3 years; never mind that CAM openly admitted to not having backstories for characters at all just because). But if she wanted the audiences not to care (that much / more than about her darlings) for Alex, you are right, she screwed up.

106 did a lot of the heavy lifting here by exposing and accidentally hinting at the horrific abuse Alex went through. As you noticed, it made audiences view Alex’s actions through a different lens. We’ve realized for example what must’ve been his thoughts and feelings in 103, when he was confronted by his abuser, the same man who permanently disfigured Michael with impunity, now giving subtle hints how Alex just being seen with him is inappropriate... you get my drift. But! what’s fascinating, is that CAM didn’t. In one of the camsplaining tweets she mentioned that Alex was simply ashamed of Michael in this scene. And honey, you may have intended it this way, but just by giving a hint of this character’s backstory you’ve given us a completely different perspective, not our fault you can’t see it yourself.

106 backstory gave us the core of Alex’s motivations, making him a fascinating character we could start to understand instead of just a tortured gay lover #2 (the one who’s sole fault it is Malex doesn’t work out). Other episodes of s1 also showed us facets of Alex that complemented and filled out that silhouette, like showing us how the grown up abuse survivor confronts his abusers (forgive but not forget for Kyle, karmic retribution and stopping the harm with Jesse), how despite/due to his shitty family situation he’s the one taking care of the emotional needs of his childhood found family of Liz, Maria and Mimi (!), etc. etc. Notice that after s1, this branching out - Alex having storylines separate from Michael that show off his character - is severely curtailed if not stopped completely: all his interactions with Maria are about Michael, the entirety of Forlex is just a foil for Malex and so on. So I have a sneaking suspicion she (really, they) did realize they made Alex too relatable, too interesting, too bloody important to people, and needed to dial it back so this character could fall back into his predestined groove of the scapegoat for everything bad in Malex and in general. Because as we know, if in doubt, it’s All Alex’s Fault, but that’s a rant for a different occasion :)

#thanks for the ask! #rnm my behated #anti rnm writer's room #anti carina #Alex Manes #also I keep thinking about my baby #Ianto Jones #and how he became the audience's favorite/viewpoint eve tho Gwen was meant for this role #and how even the queer show creators didn't anticipate #how millenials in 2006 would react #would they see themselves reflected in the professionally accomplished woman in great stable relationship with cheating on side #or the underappreciated secretary with bloody love life just figuring out he's queer? #the point is #it happens #creators not realizing how the audiences would view the characters they created #even tho it logically follows from what's on screen #but CAM and the writers room she created #lacked the ability and willingess #to adapt and change their own perception of characters #since it's so much easier to view them as two-dimensional cut outs #that can be bent into any shape the Plot requires

[calleo-bricriu]

What do you look for in a partner anyway? The long term type not casual fling.

See, for as much as I might joke that my bar is on the ground (or close to it), when it comes to something like that I have a fairly decent set of standards.

Things like looks, intellect, the usual things someone might list off I'm flexible on because those things don't tell you all that much about who the person is or how they're going to treat you.

I've met brilliant, objectively beautiful people who were and are absolutely horrible, vicious, manipulative, terrible people and if all you're going to look at are physical looks and how intelligent someone is you're setting yourself up to end up in something that isn't going to be all that pleasant once you start to see what's underneath it.

A short list:

- Willingness to communicate, even when angry, upset, or after an argument or disagreement. People get angry, people get upset, couples argue and disagree, misunderstandings happen, it happens, those things are normal, whatever anyone else tells you.

How someone reacts after that and in the future is what tells you a lot about them.

Someone who is willing to talk through what happened without being accusatory or aggressive and who listens to what you have to say, takes what was said, and uses it to work on improving themselves and correcting behaviours that might have led to the conflict in the first place is someone you can usually build a decent relationship with.

- Willingess to apologise, mean it, learn from it, and change their behaviour based on it. Apologies don't mean anything if the same behaviour keeps showing up over and over.

There are times, believe it or not, when something one person doesn't feel is a big deal or a wrong thing to do is the exact opposite of how their partner feels and being able to apologise, even though they didn't mean to hurt their partner is something a lot of people aren't willing to do.

This intersects the first point multiple times.

- The ability to stick to set boundaries. That shouldn't need elaboration; if I tell a partner I don't like something or something makes me uncomfortable, that is not an invitation to push it.

If I want to work on changing a boundary of mine that I feel needs changing, see point one.

- A lack of possessiveness and/or jealousy.

It's normal to get defensive of one's partner if you notice they've been hurt or treated poorly by someone else but, when it moves into possessiveness and jealousy there's a problem.

If I'm with someone, it's because I want to be there. Nobody is going to be able to "steal" me from them because I want to be with them.

You can't steal someone from another person, if you can, you haven't stolen anything, they chose to leave you. All the possessiveness and jealousy in the world won't prevent someone from leaving you if they want to leave you, and neither of those things are expressions of love, they're expressions of fear.

And, if you're decent enough at the whole communication and developing as a person thing, that is something that, with the right person, can be worked through by discussing with them what it is they're afraid of and why as well as working with them to find ways to reassure them in a healthy manner that works for both of you.

- For me, personally, I also look for someone who does not have an expectation of monogamy.

I have no problems with people who do but it's not something I can do and I won't lie to someone and tell them I can then sneak around.

I am not just in one single relationship, as shocking as that may be.

However, with the relationships I am in, everyone involved is aware of everyone else and aware of what everyone else's expectations in their relationship with me are.

And it's different for everyone. I have a couple that I don't need to ask permission or let them know if I'm going to be seeing someone else, casually or otherwise, because the expectation set is that it doesn't bother them in the slightest. My relationship with them is my relationship with them and my relationship with others is not their business.

And there are others that do want to know those things and do want to be asked if they're comfortable with whatever or whoever I'm doing. If they're not comfortable with it, I don't do it.

I have no expectations of monogamy from any of them, what (or who) they do when they're not with me--and occasionally when they are--is not my business or concern because that's what was worked out.

Things change and shift within those relationships over time as that's just a thing that happens but I'm not going to promise someone I'll be their one and only, as it were, when I know perfectly well I won't be able to do that.

I'm not always someone's primary partner and they're not always mine which is perfectly fine because it's not a ranking system or a competition.

That said, I do have a primary partner and it's because we talked about it, that's what they wanted to feel most secure, and it was something I agreed that I could provide to them after checking with the others to make sure nobody had any issues with it.

That's really it and those first four at things anyone should expect out of a healthy relationship anyway.

#hp rp #sinday #relationships