false labelling

Please stop hating on hetero pairing just because they don’t match up with your ship or because both parties involved appear to be heterosexual. One or both of the characters in the pairing could be bi or pan so calling it homophobia just because it’s a m/f pairing is wrong and for a lot of people who preach acceptance for all types of love except for hetero, hypocritical. Trust me, the latter isn’t that rare of a bird on tumblr. And if the pairing is straight then so what? Are you telling me that by having a straight m/f pairing, they are automatically an insult to every other type of romantic/platonic ship? That’s just ridiculous. If you don’t like the ship, okay, but don’t label it falsely and spread hate because you want to discourage/shame others from shipping it. How about spreading positivity towards something you do ship? After all you attract more flies with honey than vinegar.

“Why does it matter if they were black?”

Sorry but I need to rant about this now. 

While watching the youtube video 10 Shocking Suicide Mysteries uploaded by Alltime10, some of the ‘mysteries’ mentioned were actual racially motivated murders. Not suicides. Sandra Bland and Lennon Lacy were both mentioned. 

The problem was not so much that they were labeled falsely as suicides (even though anyone with common sense knows that these deaths were not suicides). The major problem was in the comments. 

Here are just a few of them: 

“Why does it matter if they were black?”

“if a white guy ever does anything to a black guy its automaticly racist” (they couldn’t even spell automatically)

“a black guy died, it must be racism!“

This is absolutely sickening. To put it bluntly, it matters that they were black because black lives matter. Simple as that. 

It matters because the colored people of this nation are being treated as lesser people. It matters because racist cops are not a stereotype anymore but a statistic. It matters because 14.3% or 46,282,080 people that make up the United States are black and are segregated to this day. Treated unfairly and unjust because of their skin. It matters because each and every person that makes up that 14.3% of America matter.

This movement is not to segregate further and say black lives matter more than any other, it’s to demand the same respect and equality that they deserve as fellow Americans and fellow human beings. 

10

shout out to 4c hair

shout out to hair like clouds

shout out to fairy knots and zig-zaggy curls

shout out to big afros and twas

shout out to intricate protective styles and simple ones

shout out to twists outs and braid outs

shout out to hair that is falsely labeled “bad” or “unruly”

shout out to hair that, with the right love and care will grow and grow and grow

Regarding the Media

Well since this is a topic that has been so serious and had exploded recently, I guess I would also like to put my two cents here since I just can’t seem to get it out of my head and has been bothering me for quite some time.

I’m not much of a PewDiePie fan but I recently stumbled upon countless articles discrediting him. So, I decided to do some investigating and I decided to watch the videos that was put in a compilation by Wall Street Journal (the original videos by Pewdiepie). Although I don’t like his use of Nazi imagery and his lack of sensitivity over certain serious matters, I would have to say that what Wall Street Journal had done would be the scummiest thing ever. I don’t blame WSJ entirely since they do have credibility but I am most angry about are the certain journalists (I honestly don’t know if I can even call them with such a righteous title), who are celebrating their success over personally attacking someone and trying to spread and false label against him.

I’m looking at their Twitter right now and I just can’t believe how shit they are. For people who are supposedly writing articles and having opinions that are basically those in favor of minority groups, their attack against Pewdiepie is just awful and their celebration of such an attack just makes it worse.

So yeah, if you managed to read this Ben Fritz, Rolfe Winkler, and Jack Nicas. I bet you’re very proud of yourselves in trying to ruin a decent person’s life.

The Christian Right of the late 80’s, early 90’s has nothing on the modern regressive left. Neither does Victorian England for that matter. The uncontested disinformation that is spread without irony is something that only a decade ago we could have only imagined in North Korea. The truth no longer supercedes the narrative, reality is shaped to the cause. Now we’ve crossed over into falsely labeling people “fascists” and “nazis” as an excuse to commit violence against them for exercising free speech and burn things down and behave like animals. They have never once been right either, none of the poeple they’ve physically harmed are nazis, nazis as they envision them in their cognitive dissonant fever dream do not exist. You cannot imagine how mentally deficient these people look when they bring up nazis or the KKK. The left is plague, a blight on our society, and they need to be stopped by any means. It is the most dangerous and violent criminal organization out there today and their only goal is to suppress your free speech and create a totalitarian society.

2

A warning to herbal supplement users: Those store-brand ginkgo biloba tablets you bought may contain mustard, wheat, radish and other substances decidedly non-herbal in nature, but they’re not likely to contain any actual ginkgo biloba.

That’s according to an investigation by the New York State attorney general’s office into store-brand supplements at four national retailers — GNC, Target, Walgreens and Wal-Mart. All four have received cease-and-desist letters demanding that they stop selling a number of their dietary supplements, few of which were found to contain the herbs shown on their labels and many of which included potential allergens not identified in the ingredients list.

“Contamination, substitution and falsely labeling herbal products constitute deceptive business practices and, more importantly, present considerable health risks for consumers,” said the letters, first reported today by the New York Times.

The tests were conducted using a process called DNA barcoding, which identifies individual ingredients through a kind of “genetic fingerprinting.” The investigators tested 24 products claiming to be seven different types of herb — echinacea, garlic, gingko biloba, ginseng, saw palmetto, St. John’s wort and valerian root. All but five of the products contained DNA that was either unrecognizable or from a plant other than what the product claimed to be.

Additionally, five of the 24 contained wheat and two contained beans without identifying them on the labels — both substances are known to cause allergic reactions in some people.

Of the four retailers, Wal-Mart was the worst offender: None of its six supplements that were tested was found to contain purely the ingredient advertised. Target’s supplements were the least misleading of the lot — though that isn’t saying much, since tests on six of the brand’s products resulted in only one unqualified positive. Two of Target’s other supplements contained DNA from other plants alongside their purported ingredients, while the remaining three tested negative.

Harvard Medical School assistant professor Pieter Cohen, who is an expert on supplement safety, told the New York Times that the test results were so extreme he found them hard to accept. He suggested that the manufacturing process may have destroyed some of the ingredients’ DNA, rendering the DNA barcode test ineffective.

On the other hand, he said, “if this data is accurate, then it is an unbelievably devastating indictment of the industry.”

This investigation is just the latest in a series of blows against the dietary supplement industry. Supplements are not considered food or drugs, so they have long been only loosely regulated. Federal guidelines require companies to ensure that their products are safe and accurately labeled, but the FDA has little power to enforce that rule.

A 2012 paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association warned that this lack of regulation of the supplement industry could lead to “adverse events.” In the past five years, tainted supplements have been associated with kidney failure, hepatitis and other problems.

Also in 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services released a report saying that supplements’ claims about their structure and function often lack scientific support. HHS recommended that the FDA seek “explicit statutory authority to review substantiation for structure/function claims” — essentially, it should subject the health claims made by supplement manufacturers to the same kind of scrutiny that drugs must undergo.

The New York attorney general’s letters also cited a 2013 Canadian study of 44 common supplements, in which one-third of herbal supplements that were tested contained no trace of the plant advertised on the bottle.

The Canadian study “alerted the dietary supplement industry to the fact that it is not providing the public with authentic products without substitution, contamination or fillers. It is disappointing that over a year later the attorney general’s researcher reached similar conclusions,” the letters chastised, sounding like a frustrated parent.

In response to the findings, Walgreens told the New York Times that it would remove the offending products from its shelves nationwide, while spokesmen for Wal-Mart and GNC both said that the companies would respond “appropriately.” Target did not respond to requests for comment.

The study was prompted by a Times article that raised questions about the supplements.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/02/03/gnc-target-wal-mart-walgreens-accused-of-selling-fake-herbals/

Letting labels define us

So, people say this about people who are stigmatized in some way or another:

  • “She has a disability, but she doesn’t let her label define her!”
  • “He happens to be gay, but he doesn’t let that label define him!”

And… it tends to be in the context of an article or video that’s literally about how their difference and the way it’s labelled has a profound impact on their life.

It rings false, because if labels didn’t matter, the article or video wouldn’t be about them. It matters that some people are disabled or gay or whatever other thing people are afraid to name in a straightforward way.

It’s important to send the message that we’re all more than one thing, and that no label or category completely defines who we are. It’s also important to acknowledge that differences don’t stop mattering when they are stigmatized. We need to be able to refer to important aspects of who we are without evasion or euphemism.

I’m an actual  curvy girl, with a good bust, small waist and big hips, basically an idea hourglass-figure (I’m not saying this in a boasting way, but it is what it is and it’s actually relevant.) In most stores, I’m a 3 or 4 MAX. 

It annoys me though, that fat people, who are way into size 18 and beyond, use the word “curvy” as an identifier when they’re clearly not. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that, but if they’re as proud of their bodies as they say they are, why not actually refer to themselves as fat instead of hiding behind a false label of"curvy" while making people think its full of fat women trying to pass as something they’re not. 

Again, I have nothing against those that are overweight, but it’s annoying because they’re vastly different things body types and it just perpetrates this idea that curvy=fat. 

3

160616 Mr_吴亦凡工作室 Kris Wu Studio: Statement

Hylands Law Firm

Legal Statement

Beijing Hylands Law Firm has been entrusted by Mr Kris Wu (Chinese name Wu Yi Fan)’s managing company Sparkle Roll Media, in response to false content that has surfaced on the internet targeted at Sparkle Roll Media artiste Kris Wu’s personal relations, with malicious intent, to create negative media hype. (subsequently referred to as “issue”)

Our statement is as follows:

In the happenings of the issue at hand, large scale editing of audio, images and other content had taken place to create false, fabricated and misleading content, (subsequently referred to as “false news”). Several media, individual media outlets and marketing accounts, without awaiting confirmation of the authenticity of the news, and without confirming the news with Mr Kris Wu, proceeded to release the next round of edited, organised content, accelerating the spread of the news with vulgar, exaggerated, misleading and false labels. At the same time, a high amount of coordination, matching topic highlights and higher than average cooperation was present in the the vast majority of false news and marketing accounts’ content.

These individual media outlets’ actions of posting fabricated, falsified, edited and misleading fake news without obtaining permission, even going to the extent of creating media hype with malicious intent, have crossed the boundaries of freedom of speech, violated internet laws for examination of published content, and also severely violated China laws, for slander and defamation, constituting to infringement of Kris Wu’s legal rights, and will have to take criminal liability as such.

Our law firm, upon client’s request, has begun to obtain evidence for the law-breaking and false news, and will further investigate the coordination, organisation and business motives related to this issue.

At the same time, our law firm has been entrusted by our client to address the following public Wechat and marketing accounts: [List of account names], and related verified and non verified accounts, and file a civil lawsuit after confirmation of their identities and motives. Also, we have reached the authorities in charge of internet content, release of news and police, and will proceed with reporting procedures to protect our client’s rights.

We would also like to take the opportunity to remind related media and individual media outlets to comply with our country’s administrative laws and regulations with regards to obligations related to the examination of content and criteria of media releases, and to carefully verify related facts, in order to compose, edit and publish news more professionally.

anonymous asked:

i think ppl say that levixeren relationship would be abusive is because large age gaps are inherently abusive because of the power dynamic and advantages of an older person.

There is a difference between potentially and inherently abusive.

Ereri isn’t inherently abusive. While Levi is a superior of Eren and an older person, doesn’t necessarily mean he will take advantage of him. And the manga pretty much proves that. 

The very thing Levi truly believes in is free will. Throughout the manga Levi is shown giving Eren free will. Every time Eren is dealt with a situation that requires his participation, Levi gives him the freedom to choose whatever method he prefers. 

Levi sees and treats Eren as an equal. Never below him nor takes advantage of him in any way. 

The problematic aspects such as the age gap like you mentioned is potentially abusive. But like I said, he is not shown forcing Eren to do anything he doesn’t want to.  

What I meant with the post was that people love to view Levi disrespecting, hurting, and basically treating Eren like garbage as if that portrayal is canon. When it’s not. Then the same people that do that go ahead and ship Levi with another character (with their own portrayal) like he is a pure angel. 

You can’t possibly tell me that Levi would be that way with Eren and then at a drop of a hat become another way. It does not work like that because Levi isn’t like that with Eren to begin with nor an abusive person. 

10

Meet Connor Franta! Connor has been on Youtube since 2011, and came out in December 2014 in a moving and emotional video simply titled “Coming Out”. Connor’s audience is mostly adolescent girls, and he curates content that is humorous and artistic. Since coming out, Connor has expressed more of his true nature, which he acknowledges has changed now that he no longer feels restricted by a false label. His videos have taken a creative flair, he tends to share more of his music interests and personal photography, and he’s published a memoir of his life so far entitled “A Work In Progress”. 

Connor’s coming out was met with a mix of “I knew you were gay” and “Why do you have to be gay?” Connor addressed the former in a video published just one week after coming out, a collaboration with South African Youtuber Caspar Lee. Connor says “you didn’t KNOW I was gay because I didn’t tell you” which makes an important point: It is never your prerogative to assume someone’s sexuality. Let them tell you in their own time, but never assume or question without express invitation.

The commenters also offered a lot of comments telling him he was less of a man, less important, less unique or creative, because he came out as gay. The above comments illustrate that. I’m especially interested in the comment suggesting he’s better off being true to himself, but the right, “real woman” could turn him back into a man if he lets her. These comments seem to stem from individual infatuation from ‘fans’, or perhaps just hateful commentary from people with nothing better to say. Aside from the comments listed above, the general response to Connor’s video was overwhelming support and love from a dedicated audience.

Which comment in the list above is most shocking or uncomfortable to you?


EDIT: @connorfranta responded to this post with some concerns about the terminology I used. In the first draft, I refer to those making these comments as “Connor Franta’s Audience”, which Connor has asked me to change. He’s right; Connor’s audience was loving and supportive to his coming out. They were respectful, kind, and overall amazing. I should know; I’m friends with many of them. I misrepresented them by using a blanket term. I’ve edited this post to reflect that the commenters shown above are not representative of Connor’s main audience, but of the cruel and rare people online who try to tear down people for being true to themselves. My apologies to Connor for the error, and I’m going to more carefully review my words as this project goes forwards.

LISTEN TO ME.

AFTER YEARS OF BEING PUBLICLY RIDICULED AND MOCKED BY THE MEDIA, AFTER BEING ACCUSED TO BE A “SERIAL DATER”, AFTER BEING FALSELY LABELED AS OBSESSIVE AND BOY-CRAZED, AFTER ESSENTIALLY GIVING UP ON DATING, TAYLOR SWIFT FINALLY FEELS COMFORTABLE ENOUGH  AND SAFE ENOUGH TO NOT ONLY ENTER A RELATIONSHIP, BUT POST A PHOTO OF HER AND HER BOYFRIEND. THE FIRST TIME SHE’S EVER DONE THAT IN A RELATIONSHIP.

TAYLOR I AM SO HAPPY FOR YOU. I LOVE YOU, I LOVE CALVIN AND I’M SO EMO RIGHT NOW I NEED TO SIT DOWN OR DIE OR GET SEDATED I GTG

Maybe its just me, but I like to imagine Solavellan being the pairing where, Solas’ entire world view is changed because he loved someone he can never be with. There’s that point where he can’t act selfishly under the guise of altruism because he needs to  act altruistically under the false label of selfishness. I mean he understands this, and in the end he makes the choice that making a world worth saving, fixing the problems he started, that would be better for Lavellan than any kiss, caress or promise. She’s been marked by his faults, he’s a failing god, it’s not meant to last, even if they can come to terms with each other and accept wholeheartedly. They’re the lovers doomed to live all their lives apart, save when they dream of something, some life easier than the separate paths they're on. 

Alright let’s bust out some proper punctuation and discuss Korra’s characterization throughout the series.

There’s been a lot of talk recently criticizing Korra in Books 1 and 2, kind of ignoring her in Book 3 because she doesn’t exactly get a lot to do, and praising her Book 4 journey. This discussion has brought to the forefront something that I’ve been noticing for a long time, like.. years, and really want to talk about. The point at hand is that people say Korra’s personality in Books 1 and 2 was “false bravado.” Attaching this label to her– specifically the “false” part, really rubs me the wrong way because it’s a giant red flag to me that there’s a large amount of misunderstanding of, like, the absolute fundamental basics of what made Korra tick in Books 1 and 2. It’s not the specific arguments I can (and will) provide as to why Korra’s bravado wasn’t “false” in Books 1 and 2, but rather the fact that people can even read her as such in the first place that tells me that there are some very different angles being taken here.

Note that I don’t really believe in the existence of opinions– you either believe something or you don’t. In the end the universe works in fundamental truths and if what one person believes is correct, it means that if someone believes the “opposite” they’re incorrect. Hiding behind the concept of opinions is what results in the existence of racism, sexism, etc, because it’s “just their opinion.” But if you operate on beliefs instead of opinions, well sure I fully believe that they believe in their racist/sexist/etc thoughts, that doesn’t make them correct. How this related to viewing a narrative like a TV show is that our “opinions” are far too influenced by forces from outside the text and shape the way we view our media. In the case of Korra, clearly there’s a lot of conflicting discourse on the show and pretty much everyone is on one bandwagon or another, without having watched the show in months (or years in the case of certain seasons) and thus they have a very skewed perception of the things they’re arguing. I’m guilty of this, having gone through a lot of ups and downs with the earlier seasons and jumping on anti-Mako, anti-Makorra, and anti-Book 2 bandwagons primarily. Since then I’ve had a lot of “oh shit I’m completely wrong about this” moments, and have viewed I think every season, ship, character, etc, both positively and negatively (independent of whether they were being portrayed positively or negatively in the show at the time) and now that the dust has been settled for a few months I like to think that I have a pretty objective view of the series as a whole free from the baseless opinions I’ve gone through during the show’s run. That all being said, let’s get back to Korra specifically, who, likewise, I think I have a very strong understanding of free from the confines of bandwagon opinions.

So the specific argument at hand is that there’s this idea that in Books 1 and 2, Korra was constantly repressing her insecurities through false confidence, which led to her to being humiliated and ridiculed. Korra was forced to deal with this all-encompassing deep vulnerability under her surface by external forces before having triumphant moments. Meanwhile in Book 4 Korra accepted, embraced, and internalized her vulnerability and was healthier for it.

Here is my analysis of her character, which should debunk all of that:

The idea that Korra had insecurities is a surprise to no one, but there’s a lot to be said for how people viewed them, and whether or not she was “repressing” them (here’s a hint: she really wasn’t). Obviously she was scared of Amon, of losing her bending, and that made her feel like she “wouldn’t be the Avatar anymore.” Not because of the divine connection between her bending and identity as the Avatar, but because she clearly loves bending in the less magical form of being athletic and fighting– for purposes of fun and enjoyment (as evidenced by caring so much about probending), while the White Lotus and Tenzin are trying to force her to view her bending as a duty, placing importance on the “spiritual side” and all that. This coupled with Korra embracing the superficial idea of being the Avatar results in her clearly conflating her love for bending and sport with her “I’m the Avatar you gotta deal with it” side. Korra really loves herself. She and everyone else knows she’s a terrific bender, and with the fact that she has the title of the Avatar she truly does think that she’s the shit. This is like the basic premise of who Korra was at the beginning of the series, it’s what everyone was told in early press and who was present from the start of episode 1. I think most people have forgotten that like this is who her character was originally. Keep that in mind for later on.

Anyway back to insecurities. 1x04 is the best example of this. Korra is clearly scared of Amon and, yes, “repressing” it and in trying to prove to herself she’s not scared she challenges him. He ambushes her and in a really scary scene in the dark where she’s tied up he says he’s saving her for last, then he’ll destroy her, etc. She breaks down to Tenzin saying “I was so terrified, I felt so helpless. […] You … you were right … I’ve been scared this whole time. I’ve never felt like this before and … and Tenzin, I don’t know what to do!” and Tenzin tells her “Admitting your fears is the first and most difficult step in overcoming them.”

Four episodes in and Korra has already “learned the lesson” to admit and confront her fears. Whether you think it’s good writing or not (the much-cited “rushed” probably being the word you want to jump to) the fact is that this was a concrete moment of character development and Korra doesn’t repress her insecurities ever again in the show. In 1x06 she confidently goes after Amon, in 1x07 she doesn’t second guess herself when accusing Hiroshi of being an Equalist, in 1x08 she’s open with the Krew about her insecurities instead of denying them like in 1x04, and so on and so forth.

What Korra learns in Book 1 is the importance and seriousness of her role as the Avatar. I mean, it’s really pretty simple and obvious that this was the learning character arc she goes through. At the beginning, like I said, she’s confident and loves bending, but has no experience as the Avatar and only flaunts it as a title. Through episodes like 1x08 when she helps and defends the non-benders under Tarrlok’s curfew, Korra learns to take her role as the Avatar seriously. She also keeps the fundamental confidence and bravado at the core of her personality. These things aren’t mutually exclusive, she can learn to take her role as the Avatar seriously and stay cocky and confident, which she does. In 1x12 she “hits her lowest point” after Katara can’t restore her bending. She tells Mako that she’s “not the Avatar anymore” because her love of bending and being the Avatar have always been so closely tied. It’s unfortunate that she’s so crushed by losing her bending and it may seem like she “hasn’t learned anything” but no, that’s wrong, and this doesn’t erase her character development. She’s allowed to be really sad about losing her bending, especially since she now has a newfound respect for the gravity of her role as the Avatar, and then it was taken away. And the best healer in the world can’t fix it. That’s pretty unfair and I doubt you would like to be told “okay but character development!!!!” at a time like that.

Then comes one of the most controversial moments in Avatar history. Aang “magically” shows up and “gives her” her bending back “without her earning it.” There is so much wrong with this viewpoint but first let me address the point 2015 critics are making that Korra was forced first to hit her lowest point before being allowed character development. You can’t at the same time argue this and that the story went out of it’s way to give her a happy ending without “earning it.” Korra never deserved to lose her bending in the first place so she already by default deserves to get it back. She– she, not Aang, not anything else, manages to save herself again when she connect to her past lives, because she finally for the first time actually needs them. No one else could possible understand her situation, and in everything she’s been through up until that point, she never actually really got so low that she truly needed them enough to manage to connect to them. But now when it’s her very identity that has been stolen, that’s when she needs them. And S Y M B O L I CA L L Y Aang “gives her” her bending back, when really he already only exists inside her brain and she’s giving herself her bending back! And even, ok I subscribe fully to death of the author, but even if Bryke said “no he’s giving her bending back” what would be the problem with that?! Why would you want Aang to be an asshole piece of shit and not give her bending back? But I really don’t think it’s like that, her bending becomes restored through connecting to her past lives which spiritually is way stronger than Amon’s bloodbending and overcomes his block. She deserves to be victorious and happy and it happens. She learned to admit her fears in 1x04, to take her role as the Avatar seriously in 1x08, and throughout that has been a good person actively fighting for good. Sounds pretty deserving to me. Most important is the fact that her character development has been outside of her personality, which was never a problem to begin with.

Before I move on to Book 2, I’ll just point out that Korra was never humiliated or ridiculed in Book 1 (or 2)– people take her pretty damn seriously. The only thing I can think of is Tarrlok getting under her skin with the “half-baked” comment stuff, but that was his intention as a weasley character. There’s pretty much never a point where Korra is humiliated in Books 1, 2, or 3, and I really don’t understand this argument at all. Her bravado especially never gets her into a humiliating situation, like there’s just no basis for this. Her telling Mako they’re meant to be together and kissing him is harmless teen drama. 1x04 is the closest thing but it’s a serious moment of character development. Every other time she goes into something head-on “without thinking” she’s either successful or it gets her into trouble but she and her choices are treated seriously.

Anyway the start of Book 2 holds probably the most evidence for my reading of Korra’s character as being correct. Everyone loves to go on about how she “learned nothing” because she’s misusing the Avatar state, she’s not airbending “properly,” not respecting her elders (eye-roll), etc. But as I explained in describing her Book 1 journey, that’s just who she is and there’s literally nothing bad about it. She still learned to take her role as the Avatar seriously, that doesn’t mean she can’t also use the Avatar state as a “booster rocket” for fun. That specific example was more used for comedic effect with racing the air kids though, so I’ll move on.

What does Korra learn in Book 2? It’s pretty much all internal: she learns that Aang, the past Avatars, and Raava don’t define her. Korra’s very proactive about her insecurities in Book 2. When things start getting messy she actively eliminates people in her life holding her back (Tenzin and Tonraq). When Unalaq tricks her she doesn’t feel insecure about it, she immediately keeps marching on to fix her mistakes. I think this is what frustrates people so much about Book 2 specifically, and what I love about it so much. Korra is still this hot-headed, confident, brash and at times rude person, which won her the moniker of “bitch” from so many. She makes mistakes, and she doesn’t punish herself for it! Like people just cannot stand to see her economically fix her mistakes without the “character development” they think she needs, that being a complete change to her personality. Of course she still displays natural remorse, fear, and sadness at her mistakes and losses but like she just… fixes everything and her character development is about even more self love and power.

Korra obviously goes through a lot of really difficult personal drama in Book 2, which results in some harsh words being exchanged, but just like how in Book 1 her development was never about losing her bravado, in Book 2 her development isn’t about losing her harshness. It’s presented very matter-of-factly, she’s an angry person when going through difficult shit, but she and the other parties just apologize and move on. And again her actual character development is practically unrelated and turns out to be about portraying her positively.

Korra in Books 1 and 2 was one of the most revolutionary and feminist characters I’ve ever seen, and actually, with the associated risks of making such an absolute statement I’m just gonna say it: Book 1&2 Korra was the most revolutionary and feminist character ever, period. Never before or after have I seen any character come even close to the amount of narrative importance and success she had, without compromising her rough edges to conform to patriarchal standards for female characters. She was realistic, complex, important, heroic, and victorious, all while being gender-non-conforming, making mistakes, and having meaningful and important relationships with other characters, the plot, and world. It was an absolute dream, despite how much people hated her.

Moving on to Books 3 and 4, the above paragraph no longer applies. Well ok, in Book 3 it does for the most part, so let’s just talk about the Book 3 finale and Book 4.

In the Book 3 finale Korra sacrifices herself out of pure compassion to save the airbenders. She is tortured and poisoned, and ends up in a wheelchair, physically incapacitated and with PTSD. She has clearly lost her fire, understandably.

Ok well, as hard as it is to watch, they’re going to have her triumphantly regain her character from before the Book 3 finale, validating her compassionate sacrifice and proving she can overcome even this, right?

WRONG.

What happens in Book 4 is that the writers pull a 180 on their treatment of Korra and she’s constantly knocked down, beaten up, and defeated. And her old self is for the first time portrayed negatively. And she’s sidelined by the plot and barely does anything.

From the Book 3 finale to the Book 4 finale, we have Korra going from the old her who sacrificed herself out of compassion to save innocent lives, to the new her who learned from her experiences that compassion to an ethnic-cleansing dictator is the most important thing. Like… that’s what happened, plain and simple.

Beyond that fuckery, Korra’s Book 4 journey of “recovering” is a story that has been told countless times, including in lok itself might I add! Korra has already had nightmares about her enemies (1x04), which she overcame without losing her confidence or changing who she was, has already recovered from physical trauma (1x09/10), which she overcame without losing her confidence or changing who she was, and has already overcome spiritual trauma (1x12, 2x14) without losing her confidence or changing who she was. She has also lost her confidence many times throughout the show and regained it, and has gone through a lot of character development which was outlined in the first 10 million words of this post. But she was always triumphant in maintaining her spirited personality and self love.

That’s not the case in her Book 4 “recovery” arc. The one time that was their main intention they fucked it up by having her character development come with a side of shitting on her old self, delivered by Toph “You really are the worst Avatar ever” Beifong, Kuvira the ethnic-cleansing empirical dictator but she deserves compassion!!! Uniter, and Zaheer our friendly neighborhood terrorist/torturer/poisoner/would-be murderer. Damn I mean Korra’s Book 4 character arc is just a giant mess. At best it’s okay, at worst it’s highly problematic shit, but at no point is it better than her Book 1 and 2 arcs.

If you connected to Korra in Book 4, that’s your business. But there’s really no argument against the fact that Korra was changed from her old self, who was hated by a lot of problematic people for a lot of problematic reasons, into a character acceptable to these very people. For all the reasons I described before, Korra in Books 1 and 2 was a highly revolutionary character, and an intrinsic part of that was that people hated her for being portrayed positively in her fiery, confident, brash personality instead of punished for it.

Again, I fully believe there are people who legitimately enjoyed Book 4 and connected to Korra’s character in it. Hopefully everything I’ve said here sheds some light on what I and others found objectible. As for the good parts, I would just like to implore you to view Books 1 and 2 with an unbiased, open mind (which I concede from experience is highly difficult in tumblr’s fandom atmosphere), and I think you’d find that everything you connected to in Book 4 was already done about ten to a hundred times better in Books 1 and 2, and then some.

What would it take to be fooled by virtual reality?

So… yeah. My latest philosophy paper got a perfect score. It actually got read aloud in class. It’s video-game related, so you guys might be interested.

But I gotta warn you. It gets pretentious at points. Check it out down below if you’re curious, you want to feel smart, or are just bored.

Keep reading

Unpopular Opinion

I guess I’m probably in the minority here, but I wasn’t bothered by Aaron’s ultimatum to Robert today. I’m seeing criticism that Aaron was trying to force a false label on Robert and/or drag him out of the closet before he’s ready.

Those criticisms may very well be right, but I saw something different when I watched that scene. I think Aaron knows that Robert isn’t ready to publicly admit his feelings, but he wanted to make the point that he refuses to be in a secret relationship, even if he is Robert’s first choice.

Aaron may have come across too aggressively to some, but he has never been one to sugarcoat things for Robert. Plus, I think he was a bit hurt that after all they have been through, Robert still thinks throwing money at him will solve their problems.

Robert is scared of being alone, but I really think he needs to be for a while after his marriage ends. He needs to sort his head out before he can be in a healthy relationship with anyone, and Aaron deserves nothing less than a partner that is emotionally sound.

Reminder

To check the profile of any dragon named “FirstGen,” “GenOne” or “FirstGenOne” before buying them. Users are naming their 2nd Generation+ dragons variants of First Generation and tossing them in the Auction House.

No one is obligated to return the funds you might spend on one of these falsely labeled dragons, so be careful you don’t buy one by mistake!