Okay but I can just see Roo maybe getting jostled around a bit - only for others to pause when they hear the clanging(?) of metal against bone. [The metal pipe in his ribcage has and does give me endless amusement XD]
LMAO
Everyone stops and he's just frozen in place trying not to burst out laughing.
"Wtf was that noise"
"huh? i don't-heheh- i dunno what you're talking about."
"Is there something under your coat."
"................................no"
(gets pushed again)
(clang)
"...maybe"
15 notes
·
View notes
what is your opinion on the situation?
I've been at work all day so I haven't been able to sit down with stuff fully, it also seems like Caiti is planning to release a statement later today with more information I think? So I'd like to get her response there, but based on what I've seen so far I think I fall more on the side of "people made some dumb choices and should learn from them" than anything else.
Consent is messy and it gets messier when people start lying or are drunk. In this case, both Caiti and George were drunk. From what I understand, either Caiti had a 21+ wristband from the vidcon party, or her friend group did and assumed since she was drinking with them, she was also 21+.
Honestly, when it comes to the matter of underage drinking, I don't think it's even remotely fair to place blame on Dream/George for that. The blame there lies with Caiti deciding to drink while under 21, and on her friends, Ghostie and the other person present who were both over 21. Unlike Dream/George, both of them knew Caiti and knew exactly how old she was and were letting her drink. They were also letting her drink with no one sober and no one making sure she got home.
Now, Caiti is 18 and also I'm not a goddamn square, I'm not gonna stand here and be like "oh no drinking at 18 clutch my pearls" but like, if people are going to blame other people for that situation, that very much lies with Caiti's friends who knew they had an underage person drinking with them. I feel like people are weirdly assigning blame to Dream/George for not like, iding every person they hang out with (particularly if she had a 21+ bracelet at vidcon, which would mean she already got IDed). While completely avoiding placing any blame on the people who 100% knew they were taking an 18 year old drinking without a doubt.
Putting that aside, from my understanding George's side is he believed at the time that she was having fun, and the most they did was cuddle on a couch with other people there. He believed at the time that everything was cool, and that she later decided she was uncomfortable with what happened.
Honestly, I don't really think that's an unfair reading. At this same party, her best friend was there and from Ghostie's own words, she also didn't realize Caiti was uncomfortable until several months later when Caiti told her. If her best friend didn't notice she was uncomfortable or see anything wrong, then I find it hard to think anyone else would pick up on it.
There's certainly risks taken here that I wouldn't have taken. I think that George needs to do better with checking for consent and maybe vetting the people you're hanging out with. Although I also understand that doing a full background check on everyone you ever meet is an absurd requirement and if, at the time, they trusted the person that they actually invited, I get how that shit happens. Per consent, given that he was also drunk, I get how it may've appeared to him that he had consent. I do think it's still something to work on, but I'm also perfectly aware that in real life, people are often going off vibes and social cues, and sometimes those don't mash.
I also think that Caiti's friends have been pretty shitty throughout this. They take no responsibility for having let an 18 year old drink and then ditching her. They are absolutely milking drama out of this shit and they have a weird obsession with blaming Dream for shit he had no fault in.
As for Dream, I don't think he did anything wrong here. Full stop. If Caiti's best friend didn't notice that she was uncomfortable or unhappy, it's insanely unreasonable to expect Dream to have managed that. He was also drunk and hanging out with people, and he had no way of knowing Caiti was underage. None of that shit was his fault, and his statement seems very measured and reasonable. People are trying to blame him for things that he had absolutely no part in, and the UK group are absolutely trying to pull that shit.
Overall, sounds like several people involved made dumb choices, I hope they learn and grow. Otherwise all of this honestly sounds like shit that should've been talked out privately and not tossed to the internet for speculation. Human beings are messy and will fuck up sometimes. This feels like a case of miscommunication and people making risky choices that left people with some hurt.
Again, I may change my mind with further evidence presented, but that's how it feels to me.
218 notes
·
View notes
The first mistake I see people make is assuming there are completely "nonviolent" ways to be transphobic. It seems like some people conceptualize transphobia as being either violent (which is always physical in some way) or nonviolent (which is "simple" emotional, verbal, or psychological abuse)
It seems, also, that people presume that when somebody has "noble" intentions for their transphobia - "I'm trying to save you!" for instance - it is suddenly nonviolent. Consider, though, how a transphobe would "save" a trans person. Would they allow that person to exist unadulterated (including being able to transition), or would they prefer to put them through conversion therapy, or revoke their access to bodily autonomy, or force them to have children, or anything that will prevent them from transition or even identifying as trans or otherwise tying them down with the obligations that prevent transition or identifying as trans?
There is no true "nonviolent" way to be transphobic because being transphobic relies on denying one the ability to autonomy and personhood. Fundamentally, even the transphobes who "want to save us" only do so in their own self-interest to save them from the horror of knowing that more people than they are alive and thriving.
262 notes
·
View notes
inspired by this post :)
Regularly says fuck: Kenge, Janja, Kiburi, Tamka, Neema, Nne, Tano, the Skinks
Has sworn off saying fuck, but has said it at some point: Reirei, Mzingo
Has not said fuck before, but can if so desired: Ushari, Sumu, Chungu, Cheezi
Has not said fuck before, and refuses to say it: Jasiri, Madoa, Goigoi, Mwoga
Legally cannot say fuck: Wema, Tunu, Dogo, Kijana, Nduli
77 notes
·
View notes
Obviously I'm very glad that Domi has stepped in to help protect Dante and Johann, and it's great that she's calling Dante by his name. However, I'm vaguely concerned that a member of the de Sade family directly confronting chasseurs (and particularly hateful chasseurs!) could lead to very bad things down the line.
Back at the start of the catacombs arc, Johann pointed out that relations between the church and the vampire establishment are still extremely tense, so it would be prohibitively dangerous for Orlock and his people to get involved in a conflict with them. If you take Johann at his word, it could take as little as one false step to set off the beginnings of another war. And the situation has only gotten worse since the catacombs.
Dominique isn't as politically important as Count Orlock, but she's still a member of a key family of aristocrats. If Gano and Ogier escalate the current situation to violence and Domi has to fight them, there's a chance things could spiral out of control in a big way.
There's also a chance Domi, Dante, and Johann will still be able to calm things down without a fight, of course, but if it does come to blows, I'm afraid an excuse to hurt or be hurt by a vampire aristocrat is the perfect opportunity for Gano. We know the extremists want an opportunity to go to war again, after all. I don't know if Gano shares that desire, since he's working with Ruthven on the side, but he's hateful enough that I sure wouldn't rule it out.
89 notes
·
View notes
my very serious writing advice for people who are trying to write more morally complex characters is to stop caring about their morality and focus instead on their individual motivations
it’s hard to articulate exactly what I mean, but the essence of it is basically: when a character does a murder, not only do I not care about whether they’re justified in doing so, it’s straight-up irrelevant. a character’s moral standing from some nebulous universal standard has no bearing on the plot or their interactions with other characters and has no use in the story for me as a writer. what does matter is why the character thought they were justified and then if it comes up to other characters, what they think about it.
you can obviously think about your characters’ morality but it’s not your job as a writer to interpret your stories for your readers and tell them how to judge your characters. your readers can see the evidence for themselves and draw their own conclusions. your job is just to understand why a character is motivated to act in a certain way and have it make sense
focusing on character motivations is a much more versatile framework than trying to give them specific personality traits or moral alignments, and frankly more useful to understand why a character would do a certain thing instead of just what they do. that way when something fucked up happens and your character starts acting differently, there’s an actual logical reason for it that isn’t you forcing characters to do things because it’s what’s required to make the plot go
when you write your characters with the understanding that people are not static and they act differently under different circumstances, complexity in character and morality follows naturally.
910 notes
·
View notes