critical interpretation

  • Solas: -travels with you as a trusted member of your inner circle for the better part of a year and then vanishes and shows up two years later to reveal his plan to literally destroy the world and oh yeah he's also immortal and a god and ALSO the conflict of the whole game was basically his fault-
  • Reyes: -hides that he's a crime boss for a few weeks/months so he can assassinate a tyrant-
  • Fandom: these are the same

“lets make headcanons that ‘fix’ the sexism of the sixties" 

or lets not in case they get popular and people new to the fandom confuse your headcanon for irl canon, and instead lets openly talk about the sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, and all the other bigotry ingrained into the show because of the time period and environment it was written in, ya know, like adults.

like, stop fucking ignoring the problems and actively address them. Especially in a show that is ABOUT moving beyond and learning from our bigotry and prejudice, actively criticizing it can help future series or movies also learn from the problems and fix them.

anyways vex was perfectly fine with saying she’s chill with staying in whitestone because she has “a keep, a castle, a home” and only started to show hesitation over staying once she realized her brother didn’t want to stay, and that’s when she offered to travel with vax and keyleth instead of staying in whitestone, and that’s when she started begging vax not to talk about it because she realized that would mean parting from her brother and, since they’ve spent their whole lives together, that’s unthinkable for her.

also??? i don’t know where the interpretation that percy’s being awful and trying to force vex into making whitestone her only home and responsibility came from, but that’s the most ooc interpretation of what percy’s relationship with vex is i’ve ever seen??

never forget that the shameless writers want you to buy into their character assassination of mickey milkovich in order to distract you from the fact that they threw away one of their most compelling characters and storylines because fan and critical interpretation of mickey as an important and multi-faceted character far surpassed the writers willingness or ability to tell meaningful stories

lady-mephisto  asked:

'#'she'll take my sister if I don't do what she says' is the most sexist thing in the entire show' m8 where did u get the ability to rewrite the show to remove the multiple scenes where scanlan used magic to sexually harass/assault kima and lyra because those scenes took years off my life that i'd like back now that i know they never happened!

Oh no those scenes still happened. But Vax repeatedly reducing his sister to an object with zero agency in her own fate – a possession he can be denied of as punishment for his actions, no matter what she does and at least once without her knowledge – is still more sexist. 

‘Cause see, Scanlan is deliberately sexist. He’s confronted by his sexism, called out on it in-universe, out-of-universe, and in the subtext. It’s never treated like a positive thing, and a big part of his maturation is rooted in him realizing that the way he treats women is wrong.

Vax’ildan doesn’t think his objectification of women is wrong, because Liam doesn’t know it’s wrong. He thinks it proves how ‘loving’ and ‘self-sacrificing’ he is, how much he’s willing to give up for the sake of his precious helpless sister, who is reduced to a vessel for his manpain. 

And it’s not even like this is Liam’s fault. He’s a forty-year-old white guy born, raised and professionally integrated into a media landscape that caters almost exclusively to this exact narrative mindset, even when it’s trying to be progressive. He’s genuinely trying to be supportive, but he fails, and as a result sexism is coded into (what are supposed to be) Vax’ildan’s virtues. 

And that is why he’s far more sexist than Scanlan’s deliberately negative actions could ever be. 

More Thoughts on Ni

SUBMITTED by rainismyfavouritecolour

When reading about descriptions doesn’t help anymore, I start observing and talking to people. My mother is the only other Ni-dom I know, and I frequently discuss MBTI with her. Today, I picked her brain on how she perceives ‘patterns’ applied to systems, as she called it once. To skip over all the confusing bits, it comes down to the conclusion that it’s not necessarily ‘patterns’ but information accumulation.

What we have in common, her Ni-Te and my Ni-Fe, is that we both 'collect’ information from anywhere for future usage. Not all of it used everywhere, only the bits relevant to a specific situation, but no information screening or discard happens. It all stays in our heads to be used when we need it.

These often seemingly separate pieces of information string together to give a single, most likely conclusion, culminating in the so famously named 'hunch’. The common denominator for us both is that these pieces aren’t put together with any effort, but simply connect with one another. It’s like watching it happen while standing on the outside, out of the corner of your eye. Like collecting puzzle pieces and the last one slotting into place, resulting in a 'finished’ idea/conclusion/etc, even though we may not have been able to see the puzzle collecting until the last one.

A difference I have observed between us, is that she’s much more conscious of when this 'slotting into place’ happens. With me, I can often trace back where these pieces came from and how they connect, even if I cannot say why they must go together. It’s like I’m half in my subconscious while the other half of me looks outward to scan for more clues. My 'hunches’ aren’t much of a surprise because I can usually see the process happening, despite not actively pushing for anything to connect. I also, and this I forgot to compare with her, need to concentrate/pay attention for this process to happen. Some information simply strikes me as significant in some way and is written on a 'mental sticky note’ to refer back to later.

Applied to people, a kind of 3D model made up of perspectives enters my mind. I can clearly see, based on the information I’m given, what a person is likely to be motivated by, what hides behind what they say. A new piece of perspective is added for each person involved, and I can turn the whole model any way I wish, identifying the disconnect in communication, the 'weak spot’, that is likely to present the problem between them. It very much is perspective-shifting, dynamic and ever changing with every new piece of (relevant seeming) information.

When I say, I can trace back where my ‘hunches’ come from or why a piece of information seems significant, I mean that when I say 'I have a feeling X will happen’, I can go back to these specific pieces of information. I can say 'X will happen because this kicked off this chain of events’ etc. I’d describe it as piecing it together by going backwards, using the 'hunch’ as origin and then tracing it to all the clues that lead to it.

I don’t seem to have the kind of innate understanding that past patterns dictate future ones (in behavior) which is a technique my mother seems to use; ask questions to assess someone’s reaction and build Te patterns from there to predict future behaviors. I can merely say what may be in character for some people, but am not particularly great at predicting how people will act in the long term. I’m better at planning for myself in long term and must be deliberate; the future isn’t clear, only the end goal, if I have one, and it may modify based on what will happen between now and then, to accommodate for any changes.

On a side note, I once voiced something to my sister that I also told my mother today, and which I suspect may have to do with Ti, since neither can relate; my close family are all Fi/Te-users. When talking to people, I can tell when their thoughts disconnect, like a system that forgets to run smoothly and experiences a hiccup. In a nutshell, inconsistency in people’s stream of thinking. I do seek consistency of thought and quickly notice disconnects everywhere, so I am considering having typed myself wrong as INFJ. But, I’m interested in whether you can relate to this, Ti user and non-Ti user alike.

(Because of my own self doubt in typing, do consider this critically. In addition, your interpretation/experience of Ni or any other function may differ a lot from mine. There are quite a few stereotypes for INFJs, such as being human lie detectors and so on, that I can’t relate to. I still have a lot to learn and may be misunderstanding what I observe.)

one thing I don’t get about people trying to make sense of the whole “what is peridot’s height and why does it keep changing” thing is when people say something like “maybe peridot chose to be small?” or “the gems can shape shift so she’s probably shape shifting to be smaller!” b/c there was literally an entire episode centered around peridot not being able to shape shift so those explanations literally make no sense

anonymous asked:

Can you people let the CL fans at least have that scene for themselves without making everything about Bellamy. I don't ship CL, but some of you seriously need to check the way you openly interpret some of the very important scenes between these two girls. That love scene was very much real.

Me people? Who are you talking to?  Did I not just fucking say the love scene was real? I think I damn well said it was real and they were wrong. Did I not? 

 I have major problems with this ask. Because it comes from the premise that somehow, when we engage with a show, we have to consider other people’s feelings before we allow ourselves our own. No. You never have to consider other fan’s feelings. Yours come first. Whatever they are. And that includes if I disagree with them. 

“Openly interpret.” I’m going to have to tell all my followers and random stalkers that they are allowed to openly interpret anything they read or watch any way that makes sense to them. Even if they’re wrong. I don’t intend to be the thought police. Do you, Nonny? Because that’s what you’re doing. 

You don’t get to tell other fans that they’re not allowed their feelings or interpretations, but you get to have your own. They don’t get to tell CL fans that they shouldn’t ship CL, and you don’t get to tell “me people” that we have to put CL fans and CL above our own interpretations. Nope. 

I think that CL was great for representation of WLW relationships, in that Clarke is a main character and it was treated as part of the whole story and not a very special episode. And also in that it is a mass market show that accepts LGBT people and relationships as normal. That is great.

Do I think CL was great WLW representation in that it is a positive depiction of a relationship. Oh no. Not at all. The power dynamic is completely out of whack and Clarke Griffin is actually in total mental breakdown, and fears for her people’s lives at L’s hands on a daily basis. This is not healthy. 

Both the negative and positive aspects of CL representation exist AT THE SAME TIME. It is a problematic ship. Does that mean that people shouldn’t ship them? Not at all. Does it mean that people have to treat CL as if it were some beautiful delicate relationship that can never be criticized? No it does not.

You don’t get to tell other people how they are allowed to interpret things.That nonny asked me. And I told her that CL was real and her theory is wrong, because that interpretation does not match canon. NOT because some people love the ship and it deserves to be idealized. No. 

If you’re telling me I’m not allowed to interpret CL scenes in the way they affect Clarke’s mental status and her political necessities you don’t have to follow me at all. Because I’m going to do it anyway. That’s how I see it, not as an epic love story. That’s a CL interpretation, not mine. 


End of story.

Don’t like? Don’t read. And don’t tell someone else what feelings and thoughts they are “allowed” to have because that implies that YOUR view of the world is more important than theirs.

And last time I checked, the universe did not revolve around you. Or CL. Or me for that matter. Basically, myob. 

anonymous asked:

Did you seriously say "islamaphobia is not real"?? Since you look v white from ur profile pic, I'm assuming you haven't experienced it as it's very racialized. What type of radical feminist are you, if you can't acknowledge the discrimination and prejudices Muslims collectively face in the Western world? You say there's the need for religious reform, then dismiss progressive interpretations and criticize reformers like Muslim feminists. What gives?

Hey hun,
I’m not sure what race has to do with this? There are Muslims of all races. And I’m middle-eastern so it’s irrelevant either way. I was raised Muslim my whole life and have worn the hijab for years in the deep south in America, so if anyone’s experienced this so-called “Islamophobia” it would be me. But I still don’t think it’s a real thing. Not in the sense that Muslims don’t experience prejudice and often racism (as much as most foreigners here do), but in the sense that it isn’t really a separate category of prejudice- it’s just xenophobia by another name, but categorizing it like that makes it seem like its the biggest problem facing Muslims in the world, which it isn’t. Besides, the way the word is used now paints any criticism of the religion, even ideological, as “islamophobic”- basically a whinier way of saying “don’t say mean things to us because we’re oppressed.”

And I absolutely believe in religious reform- but that doesn’t mean I support idiotic Muslim “feminists” like Linda Sarsour who don’t really want reform as much as they want to feel better about practicing their religion with its frankly disgusting sentiments regarding women. I believe in a reform that completely turns the religion on its head, that completely separates church and state- not in some half-baked co-opting of feminist buzzwords and a softening of essential feminist politic to make an ugly faith look prettier (and this goes for almost every religion there is, but my experience is specifically with Islam, so that’s what I speak about).

There’s really something that can be said about these anons catching a case because they don’t think I’m nice enough, for whatever reason, when replying to people. Maybe they need to be critical about their own interpretations of my answers and voice before they come into our inbox talking about how I’m saying “nah” and “idk” too bitchy.


@humanstomachines said: Honestly this bitch should have gotten the Professor viper/cobra treatment and had been killed by his own child (whether is be Ray or Reiji they can flip a coin to decided)

I really thought that Leo was going to either disappear or die in the end. The closer we got to the Zarc duels, the more I thought that, because I figured it would take a lot for Leo to even come close to redemption. I figured it would take a long time, and as we were getting close to the end, that it would probably be easier to just kill him off.

But no, he doesn’t have to redeem himself at all. Just express regret. Because saying sorry fixes everything, right?

The counterparts staying fused? I can dig it. Shun never again seeing Ruri and Yuto as they were? Tragic, but purposeful. Leo the War Criminal getting off scott free? Realistic, but without a clear message behind it. War criminals getting away shouldn’t be presented as a matter of forgiveness. 


The Necklace-MacGuffin Idiot Ball: the prologue D (4/20)

chessanator  asked:

I just wanted to say: I love how you're a fan of something (YanSim in this case) but also great at engaging with criticism of it in a constructive and principled way. We need more people like you on the internet!

Thanks! I’ve been in fandoms for a while, and it’s incredible how simple criticism is interpreted as “you killed my entire family and now you laugh in my face”