“And that quote, “The only disability in life is a bad attitude,” the reason that that’s bullshit is because it’s just not true.” - Stella Young
[IDs: Screenshots from the late, great, Stella Young’s TED Talk: I’m Not Your Inspiration, Thank You Very Much. Stella is a wheelchair-user sitting up on the stage in front of a massive crowd. In these screenshots, she’s saying, “No amount of smiling at a flight of stairs has ever made it turn into a ramp. Never. (Laughter. Applause.) Smiling at a television screen isn’t going to make closed captions appear for people. No amount of standing in the middle of a bookshop and radiating a positive attitude is going to turn all those books into braille.]
I use this speech and the underlying theories a lot in my PhD, but Stella Young honestly had one of those voices that needs to be heard by everyone, so I figured I’d post my favorite part of the speech here. If anyone remembers that time I threw myself onto the floor For The Vine, you’ll know that I also hate the quote: “The only disability in life is a bad attitude”. Stella just conveyed the message with less pain.
Link to Stella Young’s TED Talk | Link to the transcript
A lovely father-son ted talk in the realm of darkness
Hey! Drink water, be nice to yourself, you're beautiful, go masturbate and smoke. Bye
Claiming that the Christian god is murderous, vengeful, hateful, and supportive of his followers' bigotry is the exact same idea as calling the Hellenic gods rapists, cheaters, and misogynists.
Being a Pagan/non-Christian doesn't give you a free pass to be an asshole toward other people and their religions/deities. You don't get to demand everyone's respect for your faith while you so blatantly disrespect others'.
Ted Talks for aspiring polyglots
I love these all for various reasons so I highly recommend checking them out!
How to learn any language in six months — Chris Lonsdale
The secrets of learning a new language — Lýdia Machová
How to learn any language easily — Matthew Youlden
Why We Struggle Learning Languages — Gabriel Wyner
Learning a language? Speak it like you’re playing a video game — Marianna Pascal
Hacking language learning — Benny Lewis
How to Talk Like a Native Speaker — Marc Green
Is a Goblin a Jew?
Three things about the human mind really do seem to be true:
The human mind is GOOD at connections. We’re basically lazy, we’ll go for what we have usually thought before. And our conscious mind is really just our mental tip of the iceberg meaning we’re often unaware of everything that we’re doing.
Those three things together interact to do some terrible things.
Yes. Goblins, as they appear in Harry Potter, ARE anti-semitic stereotypes. They draw extremely heavily on old racist tropes.
That isn’t necessarily an attack on or critique of Rowling.
Goblins and weak supernatural races often draw on racist stereotypes because that’s been built in to them for a good long while. It’s actually significantly worse if Rowling is to be believed that she didn’t read fantasy. I do not believe she is being truthful about that. Authors do lie for marketing purposes. I think it is part of her campaign to show Harry Potter as something different from run of the mill fantasy. And that idea has worked to her benefit. But she sure does use a lot of standard fantasy elements for someone who has never read fantasy. Her goblins are fairly typical once you get past them being organized into a banking community, instead of living as scavengers. If Rowling is lying about not reading Fantasy and instead adapted the normal trope of goblins into bankers, she has actually slightly improved the stereotype by portraying them as more respectable. If she is being honest, then she has somehow recreated from whole cloth a very anti-semitic stereotype, and connected it with the modern anti-semitic legend that Jews run the banks. That doesn’t say anything good.
The thing is those three basic features of the human mind lead to some great complexity. They make all the connections above. But they are as likely to work the other way.
Remember that the human mind is LAZY. Unless you give it a reason to hunt around and draw more connections than it is has to, it just takes the first off the list and calls it a day.
The Harry Potter books are now a more intimate connection for many than Jews. There really aren’t that many of us. There’s something like 20 million of us globally. We’re about a quarter of one percent of the global population. For reference, the population of just my home state in the US is about double that. So, for many, a goblin is a more present thing in their lives than a Jew. Which means that lazily pulling the first item off a list means they pull Gringotts.
That does not mean that a Goblin isn’t a weapon in an anti-semite’s arsenal. It’s simply that it now works in reverse. It’s no longer that Goblins are a metaphor for Jews. Now it’s that we can look at Goblins, see what they’re like, and then start equating their features to Jewish features so as to get people to draw the conclusion that they should expect a Jew to act like a Goblin. The Goblin is now the prime reference. So if someone or some group is like a Goblin: They’ll be difficult. They don’t care about the same things you do. They’re dangerous. They’ll betray you at the opportune moment. And they aren’t worthy to keep a hold of whatever badge of honor they claim to have a right to. Pointing out similarities between Griphook and Jews will be telling people to expect Jews to act like Griphook. That absolutely is a weapon and it can be a powerful one.
The question is, is it a weapon when it is unguided. With no one to explicitly make the connection between Griphook and me, will people make the connection that they should expect of me behavior like Griphook’s. And I am not so sure.
Again, the fundamental problem is both laziness and being GOOD at connections.
Laziness says no. If a Goblin is a category in and of itself, then a person will simply take a goblin as a Goblin. At this point, some version of Harry Potter has been taken in by over 60% of the US population (the number I could find) and it has sold more than half a billion copies in over 80 languages. So, it really is probably going to be first on the list.
Connections don’t allow for a simple answer. We’re GOOD at connections. Not kinda good. Not ok. We’re really good at it. Yes, some people are better at it than others of us. But we’re all good at it. Give us the opportunity to make a connection easily and we’ll make it.
Which finally leads into the very long trailer for the new Hogwarts Legacy game:
At about 5:25 the trailer leads into a 30 second or so snippet of what it portrays as the fundamental villains of the game. An uneasy alliance between:
Dark Wizards, represented by this guy.
And Goblins, represented by this guy:
This Goblin wants a child that the Dark Wizards were supposed to get for him while he caused a distraction. Having failed to get the child, the Dark Wizard is now upset and he wants to know what is going on. He demands “Who is this child? What are you not telling me?”
There are a few ways to interpret this.
If the primary thing on your list is fantasy and a goblin is a Goblin. Then it is pretty much the standard trope of the villain’s search for the child of prophecy. The Goblin is the same as Queen Bavmorda in Willow.
“Find the child!”
Or any other fantasy story where there is a prophecy about a chosen one and the big bad is desperately trying to destroy the chosen one first, while they’re strong and the Chosen One is still weak.
Said trope does have some history in the Harry Potter franchise:
Unfortunately, If the first thing off the list for a goblin is a Jew, then we’re drawing on another of those terrible legends about Jews: Blood Libel.
Blood Libel was a popular anti-semitic myth from the middle ages that stated that Jews abducted young Christian children for the purposes of sacrifice and using their blood in religious and mystical rituals. It was often used to justify anti-semitic violence. And it is still a weirdly present belief among anti-semites in modern times and still provided occasionally as one of the reasons why violent anti-semitism is reasonable to engage in.
If a goblin is a Jew, having their goal be to abduct a child is problematic. And in this particular case, with the portrayal of the dark wizard challenging the goblin: “Who is this child? What are you not telling me?” It pulls on other anti-semitic myths in relation to the idea of an evil Jewish cabal bent on killing the innocent.
There is a common popular Christian myth that states that Pontius Pilate, the Governor of Judea who was said to have executed Jesus, was not actually responsible for Jesus’ death. He wanted to spare Jesus’ life. But he was weak because his primary responsibility was to the mundane world and the Roman Empire which demanded order. The leadership of the Jews at that time supposedly hated Jesus because he was a threat to their order and was bringing the light of reform and a deep threat to their cabal of power. So they demanded and threatened Pontius Pilate with trouble if he didn’t do what they wanted: kill Jesus. Pontius Pilate didn’t actually want to but he relented because he put his empire before his morality. He was weak. But the ultimate responsibility lies not with the people who carried out the execution, Pontius Pilate and the Romans, but with the people who forced it to happen: the Jews. This is the ultimate sacrifice of the innocent. Jews are the responsible party for killing God. They sacrificed HIM in order to assure their power. And you can kind of see how this is reflected in the idea of Blood Libel. Jews are literally killing Christiandom by eating the basis for its power in order to increase their own.
And, again, this idea is still around.
If a goblin is a Jew, this is showing the Jew as the shadow villain behind the front villain, manipulating the person who is weak but might be decent if they were allowed to be, in order to get them to commit the unholy act that they can’t do on their own. It’s a nasty cluster of ideas that’s great for inciting violence.
The most frightening part is the third essential statement about the mind: most of our decisions and actions are triggered by the unconscious which our conscious mind then retroactively justifies. Our conscious mind is just the tip of the iceberg and the list to pick from lazily and the methodologies for both arranging the list and picking from the list are all kept down in the subconscious mind. We don’t get to consciously choose, even for ourselves, which of these interpretations we’re going to use when it matters.
My wife, a huge fantasy nut and married to a Jew, is probably not going to have her brain spit out the blood libel connection, even having gone to Catholic school, even if someone who is actually a Jew does something actually awful. She lives in a space where that’s really just not the easy conclusion to make. Her world isn’t arranged for that connection to be easy.
An active white supremacist who believes all this stuff about Jews is going to have their brain spit out Blood Libel at just the picture of a Goblin, forget anything else they do. Their world is arranged to make these connections. It’s the easy and obvious connection to make. They don’t need any help.
The fear is for the majority who lie in between. Most people won’t ever think about this. A goblin is going to be a Goblin. A jew is going to be a Jew - if they even know any Jews. This is just going to sit there as a story with no meaning outside of itself
Someone else draws the connection. When someone says or does something to connect Jews and Goblins the being GOOD at connections kicks in. And then we simply don’t know how much anyone is going to extrapolate or what they’re going to extrapolate. At best it will be none of it. “Huh, I don’t see it.” At worst it will be all of it, “Holy shit, Jews ARE Goblins!”
In my experience, life doesn’t like extremes, either way. You have to build to those. Instead we’ll get a little bit of identification. A seed. That can go either way.
So that’s the danger of giving Goblins the full slate of bad Jew mythology. Any bad connection is the doorway for the whole connection to grow.
The danger of getting too up in arms about it is the danger of the self fulfilling prophecy. Most people will simply not think about all of this. By laying it all out, we’re the ones spreading the seed and saying the full danger is there when it’s actually probably pretty low. Because people just don’t care. We’re reenforcing a system that might very well simply fail without us.
I tend to favor information because I find that it isn’t the first gut reaction that is most important. It’s thoughts two and three and so forth that really drive the world. Give the conscious mind information and it can engage consciously and decide whether or not the subconscious choice is the one they actually want to go with.
In most ways, I think, we get confused on the most important topic of conversation.
I think the mistake, and it is common, is to give far too much import to what people say. What does the “author” intend you to hear? Fuck the author. They’re just one person and everything they say is subject to connections and both the audience’s conscious and unconscious mind before anyone even gets to discussing it. That’s not to let authors off the hook, it’s just to paint them as less important.
The more important question is: what do you, as the audeince, hear? What is provoked for you by these messages? Are you ok with that?
That is, admittedly, significantly harder, and we are lazy. I think that’s a tiny part of why we tend to focus so much on authorial intent because if we focus on audience perception it’s just a buttload more work. But I think it’s a much better way to work with dangerous seeds like this. Asking yourself what lessons you’re drawing from what you’re taking in lets you work with them consciously. Asking yourself how this bundle of information might affect your thinking when connected to other bundles is hard but its work that can actually pay off in the moment of need.
So... is it worth it to worry a lot about this?
I don’t know.
I am anxious that the villain for this game plays right into these tropes, I definitely don’t like this configuration, and I sincerely do not like that this is what they thought was a good idea given all the possible choices. It is a poor decision. Period. It’s something someone should have caught and stopped. But I don’t think I buy that it is going to be particulary dangerous going forward. I just think that goblins are going to be Goblins in the majority case and not Jews. Goblins are now the more familiar thing. So I’m not particulary worried about it causing more anti-semitism as I might have been back before Rowling was so successful.
Unfortunately, all that does nothing for the basic idea that the good wizards have the main goal of putting down a Goblin rebellion when the majority of the Harry Potter texts up to now have been pointing out that the Wizards are racist supremacists who are out to opress all the other peoples of the world. It does intrinsically carry some nasty commentary to have the villain be someone fighting for their rights against heroes who are fighting to keep them in their place, and this being morally ok because the villain is evil, so there is a natural right to put that rebellion down. I just think that’s a separate problem at this point from the anti-semitic issue.
Honestly when the second season of Loki will be released I don’t care what will happen, because in my mind Mobius and Loki are in love and Mobius has long hair.
Henry at 9 vs Henry at 19
I was tweeting about this and I figured a post would be a better idea, since more people who actually give a shit about Ted Lasso are on here - basically I’m more and more thinking that “Ted Lasso” did a real disservice to Ted’s characterization by making his son so young.
Because we’re meant to sympathize with Ted being away from his son, stranded to a certain extent in England while his family is in Kansas. And I do, a LOT; the scenes where we see Ted struggling to keep a connection with Henry are heartbreaking, and I 100% teared up during the Christmas ep where Ted’s isolation was made so plain. It is a legitimately sad thing!
But I’m always distracted from this plotline by the fact that... well, by every conceivable standard, Ted’s a shitty absentee father for no real reason, other than “the show would end if Ted went home.” But IRL? I don’t care how many fucking cookies Ted bakes, I would hate him on sight for choosing a (very well-paying, to be sure) job over being present in his son’s life for years at a time.
I know there are tons of parents who have to leave their children behind for better prospects, for money and a home that will give those kids their best chance. But Ted had a very nice job in Wichita, one that would likely take him back even with him quitting the year previous because holy shit he got them to the championships his first year. He has no real reason other than money to stay at Richmond after that first half-season; and from what’s implied in the second season, he doesn’t go home at all once Richmond starts up again, nor does Henry and Michelle come to visit him. That sucks! Ten months of just... not being around for your kid sucks!
Plus, I do find it kind of weird that Ted and Michelle have their first child in their mid-to-late 30s, when it’s implied that they’ve been together since college (or possibly grad school). I was raised in the Midwest — in the outskirts of a mid-sized city, with most of my friends being from the towns surrounding — and not a one of them started having kids later than mid-20s. For a couple who’ve been together that long, fifteen years into the marriage is a bizarre time to decide to try for kids.
Which is why I really wish that they’d gone the more realistic route and had Henry be in his late teens or even early 20s — the same age as a lot of Ted’s students back in Wichita and a good chunk of his players in Richmond. Because then you would’ve been able to give Ted those same worries about being a good father, being absent from his son’s life, but in the context that makes Ted’s move to the UK actually defensible — Henry would be in college, or starting his first adult job (or both!) and generally expected to have less parental involvement in his day-to-day.
Plus, it frankly would be way more interesting. Henry’s character now is just a blank slate; we know he likes Legos and that’s kind of... it. He doesn’t seem to be reacting at all to the divorce or to Ted’s absence; but a 20-year-old son whose parents have split after God knows how long watching them drift apart? That would be a REALLY interesting character, even if we only saw him as often as we see the 9-year-old Henry. He’d have opinions about how Ted is handling his new job, about his baking, about how cool Rebecca is, about how his dad should never try to drive in England, etc. It would be a relationship instead of a prop.
Anyway now I want to write an AU where everything’s the same except 19-year-old Henry is doing his study abroad year in London and trying to get his dad a date because Mom’s already engaged to a very nice lady from Lawrence and Dad really needs to stop losing the divorce this embarrassingly.
So I just finished Bojack Horseman and I’m floored, it’s amazing go watch it if you haven’t already. But I needed to talk about the polarizing Diane Nguyen, she’s my absolute favorite character. And I want to explain why and how her character arc was so well done.
Yes she made bad decisions and yes she could have been better, but that’s the beauty of her. And the trauma she has experienced is a level I myself can heavily relate to and I think a lot of other young women can too, especially those who are Vietnamese like herself, and I can’t say it doesn’t suck that they put a white woman to play someone Vietnamese, because it does.
However, that aside, this character spoke volumes in her way of having to fix those around her while simultaneously struggling to fix and find herself, doing what she believes to be right at all times, hoping to help Bojack no matter what while still holding him accountable for the bad things he does, and there’s something still deeply flawed and beautiful about that.
And my favorite part: she gains weight.
She’s doesn’t lose weight as part of her happy transformation, becoming a better person, getting happy, getting healthy, she gains weight as a side effect of her anti-depressants.
It’s one of the first times I’ve seen someone gain weight in their glow up instead of the other way around. And this isn’t to say losing weight in a healthy way in order to feel confident and one with themselves is a bad thing, but it’s also nice to see the alternative. As someone who gained weight as the result of getting back on their meds and becoming happier, it hits home. But her problems didn’t stop after this transformation, even after the pills she still has her highs, her lows, her downs, her manic episodes of self deprecation and sadness.
Because it’s real.
Thank you for coming to my T.E.D talk.
"Thank you for coming to my TED Talk" I say after spam texting my friend about a fandom after zero prompting from them about said topic, as if the TED Talk was something they willingly chose to attend and not the equivalent of me tying them to a chair with their eyelids taped open and forced them to watch a powerpoint in my dingy damp basement.
The first season of Daredevil is supposed to be set in 2014
Throughout its 3 seasons, it is established that Foggy Nelson is a theater nerd
Seriously, look how good his acting skills are
Karen catches him singing (badly), and I doubt this was an isolated occurrence because Foggy gives no fucks about how much of a dork he is or how non-existent his musical talents are
As a lawyer, Foggy is morally obligated to like all things about American government. It's a fact, look it up
After reviewing these facts, I have determined with 100% certainty that when Hamilton came to Broadway in 2015, Foggy Nelson became its number one fan and his life was never the same
Thank you for coming to my Tiny TedTalk
Link and the Great Fairy
Okay I love how in HW and Botw Link is just absolutely disgusted by the Great Fairy. (And rightfully so).
Like girl hands off the merchandise. Learn about consent please. Both clearly don’t want them close to themselves.
And admittedly, the Great Fairies are inapproriate and creepy as frick.
I've never hated a character more than I hate Feyre
While I liked her well enough in book one in spite of her poor me attitude when she made the conscious choice to hunt for her family, enabling her father to wallow in his own problems. She made the choice to go Under the Mountain to save Tamlin, no one forced her to go back when Tamlin sent her home.
Yes, Rhysand made for the perfect villain in book one, and likely should've stayed in that roll after the things he did. He was cruel and vicious in getting her to agree to his deal to help her, and it was SA and cringeworthy that he dressed her up, painted, and drugged her nightly. However, all is forgotten in book 2 and he becomes just misunderstood and amazing in Feyre's eyes. People say Tamlin and Rhysand are two sides of the same coin, but I believe Feyre is the second side of the Rhysand coin. She plays the victim card when it suits her, and is viciously cruel to those she doesn't like. She used Lucien to anger Tamlin in hopes of what? The sly touches, the meaningful glances, the bedroom scene. She wanted Tamlin to hurt him, listening by the door to see if he would attack his longtime friend. She's awesome.
She also provoked the lashing of one of his guards to gain support by tending to the man's wounds. Yes, he blew up a room around her, but again it was done with intent and purpose on her part. She wanted to push him to the breaking point to isolate him from any friends he might have. This, too, is abusive in nature, but no one ever calls her out on her terrible behavior, and so she goes on believing she's a paragon of virtue.I hate how she treats Lucien. Whether it's ridiculous or weird that Elain happens to be her mate, it gives Feyre power over him. She's the gatekeeper, and he needs to fall in line or else he won't get to see his mate. It's also another way to manipulate him away from Tamlin. As is stated, Tamlin saved him from his family when they were after him, and then he gave him a home at the Spring Court. She destroyed their friendship to leave Tamlin with no one to turn to, leaving him alone and further isolated.
She only cares about herself and Rhysand at this point and it’s disgusting. Illyrian women are maimed and have their wings taken and yet Feyre thinks it’s totally ok and cool to make herself a pair and fly around mocking them. In a camp with people dying in pain around you? So glad she thinks that’s a perfect time for sex. If she hates you well beware cause she’ll make your life hell even if you don’t deserve it.I honestly wish Tamlin would’ve have left Rhysand dead and let Feyre know it was her fault for how she treats people.
She has no forgiveness in her for anyone she doesn't care for. Tamlin saves her, her sister, Azriel, and helps to save Rhys, yet she still wants him to suffer for the rest of his days. She's taken everything from him, and still she's not satisfied. Honestly, she's the antagonist of the story while believing herself to be the hero. She's not nice to Nesta either, she uses her when it’s convenient other than that she couldn’t care less about Nesta but that's a rant for another day....
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Never thought I’d be quoting the pope, but
“We cannot keep squeezing the world like an orange”
Pope Francis - Oct 2020
A person can make up their own pronouns and identities and it is their business and their business alone.
Nobody else needs to understand them.
As long as they're not hurting anyone, people deserve to be who they are and happy with who they can be.
What people don’t get about The Killing Joke is that Joker was wrong!
His whole ‘One Bad Day’ speech was him excusing his own actions by simply shrugging his shoulders and saying ‘What can you expect? I’m just crazy! Nothing to be done for it!’
Except he’s wrong! The whole comic is about Joker trying to prove to Batman how he cannot be held accountable because he’s just being ‘honest’ with himself. That everyone in the world is just one bad day away from being just as crazy as he is.
He does everything in his power to make Jim Gordon have ‘One Bad Day’. The worst day in Gordon’s life. In many other circumstances, Gordon may have snapped and lost his mind.
But he didn’t. He stayed strong and stayed true to himself. If he told Batman to end it, to kill the Joker right then and there, I don’t think any of us could blame him after the hell Joker put him through.
But he didn’t. He told Batman to bring him in, do it by the book. To prove to him that ‘our way works’.
It baffles me that people keep quoting the One Bad Day speech, as if it’s some twisted but inevitable truth of the world, when the whole book was about proving that sentiment wrong.
Joker was lying. He was trying to pass the buck. Make the whole thing not his fault. Never his fault. Cause he had one bad day.
Joker looked into the abyss and the abyss stared back. Joker blinked, but Gordon didn’t. And that infuriates Joker because it means that whatever’s wrong with his head, whatever screaming insanity keeps him awake in his cell at Arkham...
It’s just him. It’s always ever been just him.
When I say toxic monogamy culture, this is what I mean.
The idea that someone mistreating you is love.
The belief that masturbation after getting a partner means you're a ill behaved person.
The idea that you can't ever masturbate and MUST wait until your marrige partner touches you to ever be touched down there at all.
The fact everyone ignores that whole idea of marrige which stems from oppression and ownership.
The idea that you MUST throw away all your sex toys because "you have a partner now and don't need them "
The normalization of jealousy as a indicator of love.
The fact people think having insecurities makes you a bad partner.
The glorification of jealousy that turns into physical abuse as a indicator of true love and care.
The idea that physical abuse = love
The idea that you owned by your partner.
The fact people knowingly cover up their partner abusing their children cause their partner matters the most..
The idea that all attraction to anyone else just disappears when you put a ring on it.
The false belief that your partner should always know what you're thinking and feeling.
The falsehood that healthy communication is a indicator of failing love.
The idea that you should meet your partners every need no matter the cost.
The belief that your partner matters more then your children.
The idea that your children are your competition...
The idea that having a marrige and children is the only life that's worth living.
The idea that your partner no matter what should always matter more then your family and friends.
The normalization that your partner is allowed to dictate who you speak with.
The fantasy that boundaries stop existing when you get married.
The idea that disagreeing or judging your partner is practicality a horrible offense.
The belief that personal therapy is somehow offensive to your partner.
The idea that consent stops mattering when you're committed to one person.
The idea that your partners sexual trauma doesn't matter as much as your sexual desires..
The fact people think r×pe is okay as long as you're married..
The belief that couples counselling is somehow bad..
The fact people get jealous over character crushes..
The idea that partners should have no privacy at all.
The idea that you must talk with your partner before changing your body because their feelings on your body matter more then your own.
The belief that " true love " without work is a thing..
The falsehood that love =/= understanding
The idea that love =/= trust
The fetishization of taking your partner's virginity..
The idea that a piece of paper the government made = love
The belief that a mental ring = happiness forever.
The idea that breeding is the biggest sign of love and if you can't breed then it's not true love.
The idea that you'll never be unhappy at any point on your marrige ever and if you are then you're a bad partner.
The " you share everything and nothing is your own " belief.
The idea that love = giving virginity.
The idea that your children's lives matter less then the whims of your partner..
The belief that you'll know exactly who you are and will be completely whole just because you have a partner.
The idea that you'll never fully love yourself until someone else loves you.
The belief that your value as a partner should indicate how you value yourself.
The belief that self-care is selfishness.
The belief that divorce is bad.
The idea that you'll be whole when you're married.
The fact people think emotionally loving your children more or just as much as your partner is bad.
The falsehood that sex = love.
The idea that alone time is selfish.
your pfp would despise my pfp and it makes me laugh
The school system failed me!
I worked really hard to get A's and B's and kept quiet and listened. I fell through the cracks like a ghost that no one remembers was even there.
Now I know all these people who partied in school did drugs, never went to college and have careers and their own businesses. 🤷
I spent all my time doing paperwork and never finding out what I wanted to do in life.
Back then I never thought I'd even live to be this age...
That's one way to make yourself sad for the new year!
Thank you for coming to my TED talk rant!!
Let's talk about Charlie's New Design
The changes that I've noticed include the following, but are not limited to:
Slightly different hairstyle
Tuxedo shoulder pads being pointier
White undershirt being bigger
Not in the art itself, but it's also been revealed that Charlie's last name has been changed to "Morningstar".
(There could be more changes that I didn't notice, please keep that in mind.)
Most of these changes are very subtle and her overall design hasn't changed that much. Mostly just resizing things and some color pallete swaps. But once again, it's funny how people are so resistant to change. People are once again harassing Vivziepop over a fictional cartoon that doesn't exist.
Now, look, I personally do not like the new design myself. I much prefer the old one. I am very unhappy with the last name change in particular. I can definitely see why people are upset. However, I can put that aside and trust Vivziepop that this design reflects Charlie's personality and backstory much more then the last one.
The issue is, good majority of people are not respecting Vivziepop. A large sum of the people who are not happy with the redesign are once again acting like five years olds and throwing a massive fit over it, harassing Vivziepop over something that's honestly incredibly minor. There is no reason to throw a tantrum over this, and there is absolutely NO REASON to go and harass a living, breathing human being over some color swaps and resizing of a fictional character that does not exist. People often forget that behind that screen, there is a human being on the other side, and forget the weight of their words. It's disheartening.
Like it or not, this was going to happen. It's been THREE YEARS since the pilot came out. As an artist myself, designing characters is unbelievably hard, and even one year can include massive design changes for a character. Certain characters can go through design hell and it can take YEARS to finalize a design for an OC. This applies to Vivziepop too. I mean, just look at Vaggie's old design back in 2016, years before the pilot came out.
In the time in between the pilot and A24 eventually releasing the full series there was going to be a design change. Also, sorry to burst your bubble, but it's likely almost every other character got a redesign as well. That's just the nature of these things, and if you didn't know that, well it's time to open up your eyes.
It's so sad and frustrating to see how butthurt people are over this. To the point of harassing the creator. This show is created for adults, yet a majority of them can't even act like one. It's ridiculous. I even saw someone say they were considering "leaving the fandom," over the changes. Girl, get a grip. This is not that big of a deal.
I am aware that I'm not as big as a fan as other people, that I don't take this show as seriously as a lot of other people do, and that this show doesn't mean as much to me as it does to other people, but that still doesn't change the fact that no matter how much you might be obsessed with something, if something like a design or VA changes, you gotta be respectful of the creator's wishes. Especially if it was out of their control as it often is in the creative industries.
Vivzie does what she views is best for her OCs, and we just need to trust her on this. This is the same with the voice actor change. Everyone just needs to seriously just calm down for one second. These changes won't affect the story that Vivziepop wants to tell. Shouldn't we all care about that over some VA changes that were out of Viv's and A24's control and a minor redesign of the main character? This is a serialized show after all. The story is one of the most important things about it. And we all already know how loveable the characters are from the pilot. Them looking slightly different isn't gonna change that.
The reality is, this whole thing will pass. Once the actual series kicks off, people will move on from this. Most people will accept and get used to the new design(s) and changes. Like it or not, this stuff was going to happen. And I'm sick of seeing the fandom whine and fuss like a baby when the show is made for literal adults.
(Art Credits to Vivziepop and A24)