how has no one noticed how similar this thinking is to racism

On Minako and Yuuri


I know a lot of people are trying to dissect Viktor and Yuuri and the dynamics of their coaching relationship. (It’s really hard though since there are literally no boundaries between them as student/coach, fiancés/lovers.)

But anyways: let’s talk about the single most underrated teacher/student relationship in the series.

The easy route to go with these characters is to parallel them with Yurio/Lilia. Both Lilia and Minako are celebrated dancers (they probably knew each other or of each other) and both are extraordinarily influential in their students’ skating styles. Yurio’s FS isn’t possible without Lilia’s ballet-boot-camp. We joke about how Yuuri’s dance mastery—and subsequent banquet shenanigans—is all because of Minako? 

What sets him apart as a skater?

His ridiculously high PCS scores? That’s Minako’s lasting influence—she trained Yuuri as a dancer, probably made sure he was as skilled in it as he possibly could be, and as a skater he made up the score gap with his artistry. Even notoriously hard to impress Yurio is intrigued by Yuuri’s step sequences—the figure skating component more “dance-like” than anything else.

But let’s go to the Scene that Keeps on Giving

1) We get Viktor and Minako in a room together. Please people, keep imagining them talking with each other. They are in many ways, very, very similar and very, very much in awe of Yuuri. If Viktor is an unending source of romantic love, Minako is basically his second mother, and an unending source of familial love. They are both Yuuri’s eccentric teachers.  They both are prodigies in their given fields.

(That pretty statue we see in Minako’s studio? That’s a Prix Benois and it’s the highest dance-award you can get. On that note… 

Hell: if Minako is in her 50s, she was most probably, in-universe, The First Asian Woman to Win All her Prizes. She was probably, in-universe, The First Asian Woman to Dance Principle in X, Y, Z Ballet Company Abroad.

I know homophobia is handwaved in the Yuri on Ice universe, and to a lesser extent, racism. But Phichit and Otabek are always pointed out as trailblazers. When you see them crying or proud because they’ve done something for their country that no one else has? Minako’s been there, done that, and still hasn’t aged.


But going back to Viktor and Minako… Just think of all that underlying tension. Minako is all “Take advantage, Yuuri” to Yuuri’s face but you can bet she’s somewhat leery of Viktor. Because she’s heard the stories. If Yuuri’s idol-worship is keeping him from realizing how creepy Viktor’s arrival is… I’m imagining the good people of Hasetsu are all… “So this Viktor guy just shows up naked, unannounced, and he says he’s teaching Yuuri.” 





“Hand me another drink ji-san. He kept staring at my boy’s ass for all two hours of our ballet class.”)

Minako would probably be the first person to cut Viktor if he doesn’t make good on his coaching Yuuri promise.

2) The scene is used to establish that Yuuri is a genius of hard work.

(This distinction probably only means anything to Minako and Viktor, who most likely both worked their asses off but had the sheer talent to boost them up to living legend status.)

but: Here’s Where This Becomes The Most Enlightening Scene Ever


To unpack this:

Minako is low-key telling Viktor: “Yes, Yuuri gets anxious. It’s not just a competition thing. He’s been anxious his entire life. This is his coping mechanism.” 

And then: *bam* “I usually go along with him.”

Can we just?

Imagine baby Yuuri, who probably has used up all his spoons for the day, and then there’s his teacher Minako, who notices and goes all “Okay, what do you need? You need to skate? Ok. Let’s tell your parents, I’ll go with you, and I’ll stay with you.”

No questions asked, she’s just there.

Like—she’s either dancing with him or just watching him ice skate for however long it’ll take the anxiety attack to go away. 

The fuck.

For the entirety of his childhood, Yuuri has had this one woman support system of “You need to skate/dance right now? Kay, let me just find my coat, off we go Yuuri!” Can you imagine? How many hours? How many times a week? And she’d just go with him. 

Minako is the ideal teacher: She saw what Yuuri needed and gave it to him.

Bonus: She wasn’t at the GPF where Yuuri failed. She didn’t fly into Russia for the Rostelecom Cup where he was alone for the second half. You can imagine that before Viktor arrived, Minako was the person most likely to help Yuuri during an anxiety attack. 

prejudice in fantasy lit and the use of metaphor

reallybigshadowhunterstvfan said:

what can you say about making Simon a shadowhunter, Mrs Clare? it seemed odd to me that after a whole series of battling for equality between species/races, the downworlder had to become a shadowhunter. not only he basically ceased being a minority, he also became a part of a privileged community, and it just didn’t sit well with me.

Just for the record — I’m not Mrs. Clare; there is no Mr. Clare. I am married, but my pen name is not my husband’s property. :-) 

I think this is a very interesting question that brings up a ton of issues, but there are some aspects of it I’d love to clarify — for instance, I am puzzled at calling Simon “the Downworlder.” Is he more a Downworlder than Magnus? Things like that actually are really important when discussing stories — if he were the only Downworlder in the story, that would be one discussion, but he isn’t, and therefore his story does not speak for the experience of all Downworlders or even a small fraction. 

I am sorry you were surprised negatively by Simon’s story in TMI. Simon never wanted to be a vampire — he always hated it, and unlike Raphael and Lily, he never joined the community of vampires but instead spent all his time with Shadowhunters. Being a Daylighter had already changed him from being any kind of regular Downworlder, as did bearing the Mark of Cain: both made him even less “the Downworlder” and more of an anomaly. It also separated him from the other Downworlders, who treated him with distrust. In my experience, very few readers expected Simon to remain a vampire, given that it was something he never wanted or got used to, and that it was not his dream. More on that in a bit.

As to the question, to me the suggestion that Shadowhunters are “the privileged” and Dowworlders are as a block “the marginalized” — instead of being a complicated metaphor in which they sometimes but not always stand in for people who have had their rights curtailed —  overly simplifies the situation. It is an argument seems to ignore the fact that in fact, humans exist along axes of privilege and marginalization: that people can be privileged in one way and marginalized in another and that when Simon becomes first a Downworlder and then a mundane and then a Shadowhunter, he is not moving clearly from marginalization to privilege, but rather exchanging some types of privilege for others (he remains white as a Downworlder, and is a Daylighter), and exchanging some types of marginalization for others (the marginalization of being a Downworlder for the marginalization of being a mundane-born Shadowhunter and a Jew in a world where Shadowhunters are meant to have one religion). 

Because the argument disclaims spectrums of privilege and marginalization, it also suggests that the world of the Shadowhunter Chronicles is one in which there are no gay or POC or trans people in existence; one in which there is no racism, homophobia, ableism, cis privilege, or bigotry against the neuroatypical. But that is both problematic erasure, and also not true of these books. Downworlders don’t stand in for people of color or LGBTQ+ people because people of color and LGBTQ+ people are in the books; they have not been subsumed into metaphor. (I know the showrunners said there was no homophobia in the Shadowhunter world, only warlock-phobia, but that’s the show, not the books, and it has a different world and world-building. I notice this is a question I get since the show came out, and I sometimes wonder if it’s a question of confusion between the two different universes? It’s easy for that to happen.)

Fantasy prejudice metaphors are complex and confusing and they rarely work as a one to one comparison (in other words, there is a difference between saying that this fantasy situation is reminiscent of this real world thing and saying this fantasy situation is exactly the same as this real world thing. For instance, one of the really interesting things about True Blood is that it made many deliberate parallels between “vampire rights” and GLBT+ rights — referring to vampires “coming out of the coffin” and “God Hates Fangs” on church signs. However, its vampires were also often violent predators who killed and ate people. The argument that Simon “basically ceased being a minority” (while, somehow, remaining Jewish) is similar to making an argument that True Blood was saying that gay people kill and eat their neighbors; I’m fairly sure in fact, they weren’t. They were reaching for a resonance — the echo of a real world situation that would give a layer of relatability and meaning to their points about difference. But they were not creating a literal “these things are the same” comparison or they wouldn’t have had vampires chewing off people’s heads.

So: are Downworlders discriminated against? Yes, sometimes, by Shadowhunters, who are a small specific group. Do they “stand in” for a specific minority group? No, they cannot, because they are accessible as a metaphor to any marginalized group or groups whose rights have been abridged. Also: the world at large does not discriminate against Downworlders because they do not know they exist, nor do they privilege Shadowhunters because they don’t know they exist either. It would be one thing if this was a high fantasy and Shadowhunters and Downworlders were all there was, but these books are set in our world, and the characters experience real-world bigotry, racism, homophobia etc. because of it.

Alec sighed. “Sorry to wreck your vision of our happy family. I know you want to think Dad’s fine with me being gay, but he’s not.” 

“But if you don’t tell  me when people say things like that to you, or do things to hurt you, then how can I help you?” Simon could feel Isabelle’s agitation vibrating through her body. “How can I—” 

“Iz,” Alec said tiredly. “It’s not like it’s one big bad thing. It’s a lot of little invisible things. When Magnus and I were traveling, and I’d call from the road, Dad never asked how he was. When I get up to talk in Clave meetings, no one listens, and I don’t know if that’s because I’m young or if it’s because of something else. I saw Mom talking to a friend about her grandchildren and the second I walked into the room they shut up. Irina Cartwright told me it was a pity no one would ever inherit my blue eyes now.” He shrugged and looked toward Magnus, who took a hand off the wheel for a moment to place it on Alec’s. “It’s not like a stab wound you can protect me from. It’s a million little paper cuts every day.”


“He hurt you. It was a long time ago, and I know he tried to make up for it, but—” Bat shrugged. “Maybe I’m not so forgiving.” 

Maia exhaled. “Maybe I’m not either,” she said. “The town I grew up in, all these spoiled thin rich white girls, they made me feel like crap because I didn’t look like them. When I was six, my mom tried to throw me a Barbie-themed birthday party. They make a black Barbie, you know, but they don’t make any of the stuff that goes with her—party supplies and cake toppers and all that. So we had a party for me with a blonde doll as the theme, and all these blonde girls came, and they all giggled at me behind their hands.”


If we carry the theory through (Shadowhunters are THE privileged, Downworlders are THE marginalized) that means that Alec, as a gay Shadowhunter, is more privileged than Simon, a straight vampire. That Ty, who would be locked in a mental institution if the Clave discovered his autism, is privileged beyond white, rich, immortal and powerful Malcolm Fade. It’s saying that when Cristina encounters a wealthy, white, straight, misogynist male werewolf in Lady Midnight who tries to force sexual attention on her, she, a Latina woman, is the one who is the privileged character because she is a Shadowhunter and he is a Downworlder (though Sterling has arguably, given that he lives outside the supernatural world, never experienced a whit of prejudice because of it.) So I’m sure you can see where the problem lies.

It also erases Simon’s Judaism entirely. Stating without caveat that Simon has become “part of a privileged community” means ignoring the fact that Simon is Jewish; that he decides in Tales that he will continue to practice, and that he was the only Jewish protag written by two Jewish authors that I’m aware of having been on the bestseller lists last year. He didn’t think about being a vampire as he was preparing to transform — he never wanted to be one or consented to be one, nor was he part of the community, as Raphael constantly pointed out — though he does later think of having previously been a Downworlder when interacting with vampires and Shadowhunter prejudices. He thought of the important thing to him: his Judaism, which he both couldn’t and wouldn’t give up. To me it is personally painful to think that for any reader, Simon’s status as a vampire is more significant than his status as a practicing Jew.

I think sometimes it is possible to invest yourself so heavily in a metaphor that you forget the real world that surrounds the metaphor and the flexibility of metaphors in general. The Shadowhunter/Downworlder situation could stand in for the systemically privileged and marginalized of our world: sometimes it does. However it also can stand in for the way totalitarian governments abuse their own people: there are echoes in Shadowhunter history and current events of the Cambodian genocide, of Stalinist violence against intellectuals and resistors. There are also echoes of police brutality — what Shadowhunters have is the privilege of the Law, specifically: the Law is what allows them to enact bigotry in the name of justice, and when they abuse their jobs, it has resonances of the way police can abuse their jobs and use the privilege conferred on them by their authority to murder and abuse the helpless and marginalized. There are also echoes of the way soldiers carry out immoral orders given by superiors: the Shadowhunters are taught to be obedient to the Clave, and one of the ways we know who our Team Good is in any TSC series that they question that obedience. All of these are echoes and resonances: they are not saying that the Shadowhunters are the police, or the US military, or the Khmer Rouge; the resonances provide context and hopefully add a sense of realism to a situation that is fantastical in its nature.

 (It’s also a wise idea not to so totally buy what the Shadowhunters are selling about themselves. They think they’re special and better and awesome, but the books constantly question and problematize that. Shadowhunters also pay a high high price for their runes and their sense of superiority: they die young and often and experience brutal constant violence and the pressures of a repressive society that allows for little divergence from an idealized norm.)

There are reasons that the Downworlders were never constructed to be a specific marginalized group and their situation was never meant to be limited in its relatability to one situation— for instance, it’s very hard to not look askance at the argument that Downworlders are meant to be specific “race” when you can become a Downworlder and then stop being one: when you can, as Simon does, change what kind of magical creature you are, because there is absolutely no correlation between that and what race or ethnicity means in our world. 

 So yes, Simon becomes a Shadowhunter: however, what I don’t see acknowledged here is not just his ethnicity and religion, but the fact that he becomes a Shadowhunter partly because he is aware of the prejudice of Shadowhunters, and fights against the bigotry they show not just to Downworlders but also to their own. He is part of Magnus and Alec’s Shadowhunter-Downworlder Alliance. He continues to work for change from within the system, arguably something almost no one else could do, because there are almost no other Downworlders who have become Shadowhunters. It is odd to me to consider Simon as simply ascending to a height of blithe privilege when he is fact much more like someone who has become a police officer in order to root out corruption and racism in the police, and brings his own knowledge of marginalization (which he still experiences) with him.

That is why Simon in Tales from the Shadowhunter Academy is constantly fighting and bending the rules in the name of his evolving social conscience, though I understand if you haven’t read TfTSA. One of the things about having had a flood of new readers enter fandom because of the TV show is that I’ve seen a lot of arguments based on the idea that TMI is the entire story of Downworlders and Shadowhunters, or the entire story of these characters. I see people talking about characters getting a happy or sad ending in TMI even when those characters go on to feature heavily in the sequel books and could by no reasonable account be considered to have any ending, happy or sad — unless you thought TMI were the only Shadowhunters books that existed rather than a chunk of a larger ongoing mythology. In no sense has Simon’s story ended: you have no idea if he will remain a Shadowhunter or not. Perhaps if you consider the fact that TMI is not a story that has ended for Simon, but rather one that continues, the fact that he has now been two magical species and might well move on to become another will sit less poorly with you? After all, this is not “after a whole series of battling for equality between species/races” this is “in the middle of a whole series of battling for equality between species/races.” Usually the middle of a story isn’t the place it’s best to draw all your conclusions from. :-) 

There were lies you were told about WWII, Hitler being evil wasn't one of them

I remember a while back there was this immensely popular post with a gif of Hitler flattering his wife, that had tons and tons of notes from all these people gushing about how they had no idea Hitler was human too. When I criticized it, this older blogger claimed all these tumblr teens were taught in school to “dehumanize” Hitler, and now they were learning more than the simplistic narrative they were taught in school. It was, according to them, mind-broadening and important. The dehumanization of Hitler they claimed is a huge problem, and a bigger problem was young people thinking too simplistically about this complex person.

But this is the thing:

It’s true you are taught a simplistic and misleading narrative about World War II and the Nazis in school. But the problem isn’t that you’re taught to think badly of Hitler and Nazis, who committed mass murder, torture, enslavement, and other human rights abuses. The problem is you are taught that the US was the good guy and the Nazis were the antithesis to everything the US represented and now represents. You’re taught that the US came in and saved everyone in the name of freedom and democracy and crushed those Nazi fascists! And everyone lived happily ever after.

When in reality, the US invented eugenics which inspired the Nazis’ Aryan racial ideals in the first place. The Nazis modeled their treatment of Jews, Romani and other minorities after how the US treated Black people. Not only that, but the US refused the entry of many European Jews fleeing the Holocaust into this country. The US refused to help the Jews and other minorities targeted by Nazis. The US ignored pleas begging them to destroy gas chambers when they were so close within striking distance in Europe that they hit one accidentally.

What happened was after Pearl Harbor put the US at risk, they got involved and then they made up a story about why they were the good guys and why the Germans were the bad guys, about how they were now all about saving the world and the poor Jews. And the truth about antisemitism in the US (there were literal signs saying NO JEWS and shit, which you never learn about in school), about eugenics in the US, about the US’s deadly passivity for much of WWII, is actively erased, glossed over or explained away. And meanwhile, irony of ironies, the US sent thousands of Japanese Americans to internment camps–which of course were not the same as Nazi Germany’s extermination and concentration camps, but weren’t exactly the kind of thing someone who was ideologically opposed to Nazis would do. (You’re taught about the internment of Japanese Americans in school, but you aren’t encouraged to think about it as compromising the US’s alleged position as ideologically opposing Nazi Germany).

The US has used WWII to its advantage to create a particular narrative. It’s arguably a big reason antisemitism in the US changed and Jews started to achieve much greater access to whiteness. Associating Jews with whiteness dissociates Nazis from American racism and eugenics, despite how much mental gymnastics you have to do to ignore the fact white supremacy was at the core of Nazi ideology (people continually allege Jews were white in Nazi Germany despite the fact Nazis killed them, literally, to purify the white race). It takes the conversation away from the end result of white supremacy: genocide and brutality. Think about how important that would have been in the 1930s and 40s when the US was even more overtly racist than it is now. How would the US look: a nation where PoC, and Black people especially, were constantly exposed to violence and oppression? When what allowed the concentration camps in Nazi Germany to exist was a change to their constitution that allowed the deprivation of human rights in particular spaces, and all Roosevelt had to do was write an executive order depriving Japanese Americans of rights just as easily. Criticisms of white supremacy and human rights violations in Nazi Germany open up the same criticisms toward the US. I’m not the first to have that idea. Harper Lee tackles it in To Kill a Mockingbird.

Tumblr SJ who complain the Holocaust gets “too much attention” compared to other social injustices also seem to miss this point–they suggest it’s ~Jewish privilege~ or white privilege that explains why everyone cares more about the Holocaust, ignoring the fact that the mainstream narrative in the US about the Holocaust and WWII also often erases the long history of antisemitism in Europe and the history of it in the US. The narrative suggests Nazis arbitrarily decided on Jews as a scapegoat and ignores the racialization of Jews in Europe. There’s also an implication that with the end of the Holocaust came the end of antisemitism. Many aspects of the mainstream narrative around the Holocaust is hurtful to Jews. Ignoring the role of white supremacy in the Holocaust does no marginalized people any favors: as well as making it too easy to let the US off the hook for creating eugenics in the first place, it also erases Romani, who were targeted in the genocide, and are still definitely not racialized as white to this day.

The US is a racist empire (and I say empire because we currently live on colonized land and also exert worldwide control) and while I don’t like comparing Nazi Germany to anything, we’re not the opposite of Nazi Germany by any means–we certainly were not in the 1940s when we fought them. I don’t think the US is the same or even similar to Nazi Germany (as I said, I don’t like making lazy comparisons like that), but I think both the US and Nazi Germany have two terrible things in common: white supremacy and a government that has the power to deprive citizens of their basic rights at a moment’s notice.

That’s the story you’re not taught in school. That’s the mind blowing epiphany that actually matters.

Hitler being human is a fact of course. But he was a horrible, horrible human being, probably one of the worst in history. And making excuses for him being primarily responsible for wiping out one third of population of a people (Jews; edit: see here), 90% of the population of another (Romani), as well as countless other atrocities doesn’t make you interesting, edgy or counter-culture. It makes you downright despicable.

Sadly, it seems tumblr’s teens find the idea of Hitler flirting with his wife more interesting and mind-blowing than the idea that everything they were taught about the US’s role in WWII is slanted to mislead them.

This isn’t a call-out post for a specific person. I’ll just call her X. Fan X made a post to complain about mean anti-reylo fans, saying how reylo shippers were being unfairly accused of racism (among other things). She cross-tagged her post with the finnrey tag. (Anyone who’s spent time in the finnrey tag has seen similar posts, yeah?) I sent X a PM, politely asking her to remove the tag. Some people had already commented on the post, asking for the tag to be removed, but it was still there, and I figured a PM might get her attention faster. I mentioned in passing that her post was off-track as well as badly tagged, and thought that would be the end of it. 

Instead it evolved into a conversation where X wanted to prove that she’s a fan of Finn, and she has NEVER EVER seen anything racist said about him on her dashboard from her fellow reylo fans. 

So before I dove back into the conversation, I did a keyword search on her tumblr. One of her most recent reblogs at that moment was a post that talks about how Finn is a beta male and inferior to Rey, and Rey had to save him 100 times, and so forth. (Some of y’all know the post I’m talking about. And no, I’m not exaggerating on the wording of it, that’s literally what it said… along with a bunch of light-and-dark and Romeo-and-Juliet imagery about reylo.)

X hadn’t noticed it. She missed the blatant racism and erasure of Finn as a lead in the post. She liked the pretty wording about how epic reylo is going to be, and that was enough to make the racism not ‘visible’ to her.

That’s what I think of when I see someone say that they’ve never seen anyone being racist in [insert ship or character or movie/show name here] fandom: a fan who will reblog a blatantly racist post that comes across their dashboard, and then have the ignorant bliss to say that they’ve never seen any racism in their section of fandom. 

anonymous asked:

C-could you please not reblog art where the characters are white washed? You recently reblogged one where Lance is borderline but Hunk is pretty pasty. Thank you.

Sigh. This isn’t what I wanted to write about tonight. That said, maybe it’s time.

I think I’ve made it clear that this is an anti-discourse blog. That includes race discourse. I think it’s a side of fandom that has done MUCH more harm than good, and I would like it to go away entirely. I understand why it exists, and I would never tell someone else how to use their time, but I will not agree and I will not engage.

I think I know which art piece you’re talking about. The artist was using a rather pastel color palette. It looked like the paladins were sitting in a bright patch of sunlight, relaxing and hanging out together in a lovely room. And that’s all. Yes, Hunk and Lance’s skin tones were lighter than they are in the show. But so was everything. It was clearly an artistic choice and I have no problem with it.

I’m sorry it bothered you. But I’m not going to delete the post. Neither do I intend to keep an eagle eye out in the future to avoid “white-washed” fandom art and avoid reblogging it. I’m sorry if that’s an issue for you. Feel free to unfollow me. I’m not going to train myself to look for problems.

I think the entire mentality in recent years of fandom in general and the Voltron fandom in particular to hunt down “problematic” fan creators and punish them is not only awful and damaging and unhealthy, but also dangerous in a way. Most of the things fans are complaining about their fellow fans doing wrong, or even the show itself, are very minor. By searching so hard for things to be offended about, by finding them and reinforcing them with likeminded fans and working yourself up into a frenzy over them, you are TRAINING yourself to be offended. You are teaching your brain to be pleased and satisfied when you find things that upset you, because the rush of energy and anger feels good. And that just makes you find more and more and more.

This is not a good road to go down. It leads to misery. It leads to depression. It leads to believing that the world is awful and only getting worse, and no matter how much you fight it you can never make a difference, because there’s always going to be some other “problematic” thing to get worked up over. And it’s just going to keep getting worse and worse.

It’s the same way I feel about the “microaggression” thing you hear about in the larger American culture. Racism is bad, and I hate it. But someone asking where you’re from? Not racism. Most of those things I see listed as microagressions are tactless and a little rude, but they aren’t crimes. By teaching ourselves that they are, we’re only making things worse and worse for ourselves and for each other. Morgan Freeman said it best. The best way to cure racism is not to seek it out and decry it, but to find commonalities and learn to love each other instead. You’ll never change a racist by yelling “RACIST!” at them over and over until they shut up. That just makes them hide away in likeminded communities and discuss how awful you are and how abused they are and how they’re right in every bad thing they’ve ever thought about you. You change a racist by showing them that we’re all the same, and our differences are things to be enjoyed and celebrated and shared, not sequestered and hoarded and gloated over like gems.

This is something you learn in therapy for mental illnesses like PTSD and depression, by the way. It’s similar to the counseling I got. Part of the problem with PTSD is hypervigilance, the way your brain is constantly on the look out for things that threaten you. The more you notice, the more tense and alert you become, and then you see more. It’s the same thing with the whole fandom callout culture. I worry a lot about kids who come into the internet fandom bright-eyed and happy, eager to share and discuss the things they love, only to be beaten down by these eagle-eyed folks who see problems everywhere they look that need to be attacked. And these kids are learning to fall in with the crowd, because not to do so is literally dangerous to their mental and emotional health.

We need to train ourselves in the opposite direction. We need to learn to accept each other with a few little bumps and bobbles here and there. If you have criticism to offer, do so, but in a constructive way. And if the creator doesn’t agree, accept that. Accept that their work is just not your cup of tea, and move on with your day. You will be much happier and healthier for it, I promise.

One of my fandom friends was basically hounded out of the Voltron fandom with hate messages she got for one of her fics. The reason? Lance wasn’t Latino enough. Because he was singing showtunes with Blue instead of more “Latin” songs, I think was the crux of the complaints. Mind, this was before he was even revealed to be Cuban, so it was based entirely on fanon. This friend of mine is biracial and grew up in a mixed Latino family. Her godson is a gay Latino, and she based the characterization of Lance on him, because he loves showtunes and his relationship with his partner reminds her of Lance and Keith. The persecution of this friend of mine based on her artistic choices in a cute little ficlet about Lance and Blue having fun together still upsets me and breaks my heart. I want it to end.

I’m sorry if this little essay offended anyone. As I said, feel free to unfollow me if my stance makes you uncomfortable. I hold no grudges. But this is something I feel quite strongly about, and I’m not going to change. And congrats if you read this whole thing! It was quite a piece.

Bumbleby and the Evolution of “Beauty and the Beast”

I’m just going to go ahead and get these disclaimers out of the way: 

  • Yes, I know that Yang Xiao Long is primarily inspired by the fairy tale of Goldilocks. 
  • Yes, I know that Rooster Teeth isn’t out to recreate every single fairy tale or myth or historical figure’s story that inspires the individual characters of RWBY
  • And yes, RWBY is a show that is about far more than just romance or any one relationship. 

Is everyone good on that? Yes? Awesome, then let’s get this show on the road!

Keep reading

Voltron bonds and what they could mean for Season 3

There’s a common theme that comes up a lot in Voltron, and that’s bonding.

You have bonding between the Paladins, the Lions and their pilots, and of course, the combination of those two: the bond that forms Voltron.

So I had a few thoughts about how this bonding would come into play in the new season (or should come into play, depending on if the writers decide to care or not), and what it would mean for the controversial Who Will Pilot The Black Lion™­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ debate.

This is long, but there are pictures, so strap in.

Keep reading

aspen-arts  asked:

Toffee and Rasticore for the characters thing. ^^


and I’ll break their ass down: It’s gonna be long b


How I feel about this character

A deeply, fundamentally flawed and broken/fucked up man. Still, I feel immense sympathy for him and everything he’s gone through; I sympathise with him FAR more than mewmans. I also owe him a lot for his character helping me broaden my understanding and sympathy of/towards those who have suffered similar tragedies irl. 

I love how many different things he can be and how many different sides there are to his personality. He’s so adaptable and so much can be done with him without straying into (imo) OOC territory. You have the ghost of a destroyed child existing behind the ruthless and borderline-sadistic general; the lizard lawyer; (imo the genderfuck flamin’ gay guy); and a dude you can easily drop into (as I have seen many people do) a slice-of-life setting and have him be the problematic fave sarcastic dickbag we all know and love. 

He’s my boy. A sad boy, an asshole, and this somehow perfect balance of antagonist and victim. I love him and I want him to get what he deserves– Happiness, crew. Happiness.

½ part 2 is in “Unpopular opinion about this character.”

  • All the people I ship romantically with this character

1. Rasticore. 
2. Rasticore
3. ????Rasticore?
4. Literally no one else mkay

  • My non-romantic OTP for this character

Uh…. Also Rasticore? It really depends on the AU. Outside of my Mewman Princess AU, I don’t really see Toff as having, ya know, friends? 

(For the record, in MPAU, MP!Toffee develops a tolerance for Marco, a kind of mutual understanding with Star, and the closest thing she gets to a friend is probably Janna’s weird ass.) 

  • My unpopular opinion about this character

Him being nice to Ludo or the Butterflies, being gentle or soft, domestic, too fluffy, or just being like a parent or something squicks me. It just does. I’m SUCH AN ASSHOLE because there’re only a few characterizations of him I remotely accept (@colorwizard and @canis-exmachina are the big two who I fux with when I write my Toffee headcanons and characterization tbh.) 

That said, I guess the unpopular opinion in general is this (taken from a chatlog because CW (bold) and I (not bold) were talking about him):


“star survived toffee” toffee survived two genocides. Not attempts. Actual genocides.

He also survived the wand getting cleaved, getting hit with a dark magic spell… 

He doesn’t know how to properly express (most shit) so it channels into apathy and frustration. 

It’s characters like him that need sympathy the most (well ok not NEED, he’s fictional, but you get it). It just tore me to shreds to see the bad guy get zero sympathy in the S3 premiere simply because he knew what he was doing when the one who was manipulated and made an explicit victim was babied. They kinda both need sympathy… And, having been there in that position where I’ve been jaded and mean and cold, sometimes a little sympathy goes a very long way. Being terrible isn’t good, but internalizing it is really unhealthy too, like you said it doesn’t make you healthier, it just seems to perpetuate the idea that only nice people deserve kindness. I could scream for hours over that one though omg.!

Ex machina death is not what toffee deserved!

especially. by. the. character. that. is. only. perpetuating. this. whole. sympathy. thing. Star is a great character in a vacuum but omg it’s just a kick in the nuts to have her be the one to finish the job. They fucked up the dynamic between her and Toffee SO BADLY. Like it doesn’t even matter if he’s coming back later, that last scene was fucked right up. 

yeh I mean I wanted svtfoe to kinda show more sympathy/empathy towards monsters who didn’t stick with the mewman status quo, especially with the REALLY heavy parallels, imo, between monsters and what happened to Native Americans… :/

YES I have been screaming that since the beginning, it pissed me off so much that Buff Frog is now a good guy because he just sits there and takes it, while Toff and Rast go and fuckin DO SOMETHING about their situation and end up evil

also that thing with Moon’s mom and everyone losing it made me think of this one Onion headline, “the equivalent of 3 white people were killed in (country) today.”!
Like…. It’s called a massacre. One mewman life doesn’t level it out, and while I understand why moon behaved the way she did, toffee’s action wasn’t EVIL.!

my fucking god yes, like no im sorry one white person doesnt mean you can now justify continuing to commit genocide and systematic oppression, racism, etc.. Last time I checked the history books, people who took out tyrants were ummmmmm heros!

The thing to me is he didn’t even take them out. He just TOOK AWAY THEIR OP.!
Like have you noticed that magic, which should have no preferences or anything, and beings like Glossaryck, who should really have no preferences, favor mewmans for some unknown reason?!
Why does toffee corrupt the magic while star purifies it?!
And I just feel so horrible for him that something that took years of his life, his dedication, the sacrifice of his flesh and blood body for fuck’s sake, was undone in a couple minutes

There will be people on tumblr who are like ugh toffee’s finally dead god riddance like NO HE IS IMPORTANT AND I REALLY FEEL FOR HIM AND SO SHOULD YOU WTF ARE YOU SAYING RN!

Like how much he was prepared to lose and give up just to make things begin to approach FAIR; because NO ONE should have that kind of power over another group of people. NO ONE should have magic. He doesn’t want it for himself, and I think that’s really, really important. He doesn’t want magic. He wants it, whatever its biased-ass existance is, fucking gone.!
And that’s where what mewmans did differs from what invading europeans did, in part. A lot of natives were killed by diseases europeans brought in, although a lot of the death was a choice, a lot of it wasn’t, also. But with the mewmans, it’s heavily implied that ALL OF IT was a choice. And that is terrifying!
Also ALSO if this analogy is as canon as I think it might be, as Star explained in that re- enactment ep, mewmans arrived on a ship. They had to have come from somewhere. They already had a fucking homeland and probably multiple kingdoms/countries. What the fuck did they need more for?!
I’m giving myself heartache. Toffee deserves to have won not because he’s *my favorite* but because historically speaking he was doing the RIGHT THING!
And tbh a mewman queen who took pity on monsters WILL NOT DRIVE THAT POINT HOME as hard as someone like him could!

Like it just. pisses me off. Eclipsa has nothing to do with that message.!
It’s almost like pushing out an actual people’s rebellion in favor of white savior shit…?!

yeah I really thought Nefcy would be the one to change all that but even the crew have been saying “oh yeah toffee just got what was coming to him” like EXCUSE ME. MAYBE SOME CHARACTERS HAVE LOST MORE THAN JUST THEIR MOTHER AND/OR DAUGHTER. I know that’s a lot to lose but it’s not the upper limit!

YEAH UM. HE DID NOT DESERVE WHAT HE GOT?? He did fucking god’s work getting rid of magic. Mewmans should shut the fuck up and learn what it means to not be overpowered bastards who can step all over anyone without it.
Like they’re only really nice to either magic-adjacent beings or those who recognize them as superior and it’s… yikes!

yeah that’s one thing I started thinking about recently was how their definition of monster is sooooo bullshit, like flying decapitated horses are okay, demons are okay, but no, lizard men, frog men and bird men are monsters.

Even within their own kingdom it looks like a classist nightmare (river’s parties, anyone?)! Yeah that’s something I’m gonna mention in CHO 9, why Toffee doesn’t identify as a monster, because it’s a mewman-created term. 
It’s using his oppressor’s language to define his existence and he’s having none of it! Cause like what the fuck even is a monster? He’s septarian.!

he’s such a badass, even if he’s pretty messed up in the head. People better be reading CHO and considering all of this, it’s insanely important that we keep talking about it. And I had never considered river’s parties but YES the whole kingdom is absolutely just a classist nightmare, that Diaz Family Vacation episode was kinda like woah hold onnnnn, Star is way up in that castle and everyone else literally lives in mud down on the ground ummm

feudalism, man
But even though they might be in similar class situations, mewmans are fed nightmare fuel about monsters. Maybe it’s in part to circumvent collaboration? I’m going dark again but like
Divide and conquer, man

they’re good

Or maybe it was in the beginning but now even the higher ups believe the lies their ancestors started (ex. Moon)

yeah they’ve got this down to a science, it’s just maddening that it’s probably been close to a thousand years, if not more, that this shit has been happening and nobody’s been able to rise above the propaganda or even question it. It sounds like eclipsa got pretty close but obviously didn’t make any lasting changes

and eclipsa making changes now won’t even make me happy because of the whole savior complex thing!
cause they’ll still owe the mewmans their liberation in some capacity, even if it was a mewman outlier

exactly, ugh we need toffee back in the scene, this is just a damn mess!

bring back my freedom fighter, equalizer son so we can have an actual good time
like I like eclipsa’s character but I??? don’t GET her???!
And people even have the audacity to want her to be harmless
oh it was all a misunderstanding! She’s not against mewni she just likes exotic d! fuck right off!

yeah, I think a lot of people don’t take the show’s messages very seriously at all, simply don’t make the connections or choose to ignore them altogether. ”

  • One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon.

110% of my headcanons and fic. I’m not kidding. 

Make! Tofficore! Canon!

I wish they’d say what happened to septarsis, or have used Toffee’s character as a freedom fighter and liberator, just one who happened to be radical and violent, but used that to demonstrate that sometimes that kind of behavior comes from a place that’s beyond worth understanding. 

This is super long so I’m answering Rast in Colorwizard’s ask k bb? :) <3

anonymous asked:

No but why is the book problematic? What's wrong with them? I only read the first 2 and they seem okay to me. Its a little... Off... In some parts, but other that it seems okay.

ok im not really sure if this is the same anon that told me to go fuck myself if it is then i wish you love and happiness (also if it is then why are you judging me for not reading the books if you’ve only read 2) and if it isnt then i’ll gladly explain nonnie, btw im gonna talk about the books and casserole clam

Let’s start with the LGBT/queer part of the books/problems:

  • Alec is biphobic. He makes fun of Magnus for having been with men and women.
  • ALEC WAS SUPPOSED TO DIE IN HER FIRST DRAFT i see she loves malec so much she was gonna have her only male gay character die FOR LOVE GUYS
  • Casserole said how she “headcanons” Raphel as asexual, which first of all was kinda weird?? bc she changed his sexuality and then said “its a hc” like she is the literal author??? everything she says has to be canon???, and second of all it’s rude towards the ace/aro part of the fandom bc not having any rep is terrible and having someone give you that rep and then take it away from you is the wrost thing ever
  • Alec’s sexuality is HIS ONLY STORYLINE, he is the token gay character. 
  • Apparently there’s a lesbian couple in the books that is sent to an island or something
  • Magnus is canonically bisexual but then she “headcanoned” him as pansexual bc for her they are kinda the same, what she is doing only shows how little knowledge she has over queer stuff and how little respect she has for her characters’ sexualities.
  • Simon and Izzy, a straight, white (in the books) couple get a happy ending, and Magnus and Alec, a same sex, biracial couple don’t. Now, because the straights are gonna hate me for this, i’m not saying straight white couples don’t deserve happy endings i’m just saying that if she is such an ally then why didn’t she give BOTH couples a happy ending?
  • Malec was denied proper development in her books, to my knowledge not even the most important parts of Alec’s ONLY storyline (the token gay) where in his POV, their entire relationship was in the background (she like sends them away for half a book i think), it wasn’t even put in the main saga of the books even tho alec IS a main character.
  • After the show became such a popular thing she was like “oh i’m gonna write more malec” what did she do? she decided to write smut, which only proves that she fetishizes gay sex, reminder that this is a STRAIGHT woman that is writting about two male characters doing something sexual only bc she wants a t t e n t i o n.
  • she prides herself for being an ally but in reality she is a straight person that has internalized homophobia and DOES NOT ACCEPT IT AND TRY TO CHANGE IT

Now let’s go to the racist part of the books:

Its very clear, and even in the show, how much social differences downworlders and shadowhunters have, it’s not subtle how much she was trying to make racism a thing in the books. Shadowhunters have so much internalized racism towards downworlders i don’t even think they notice it, and it’s even obvious in the show how much they seriously don’t think downworlers are equal, and yes i’m talking about EVERY CHARACTER, but im not here to talk about the show, anyways… you know how i said Izzy and Simon get a happy ending? well that’s bc Simon is turned into so many things but hey hey surprise he ends up becoming a shadowhunter and being happy with the love of his life bc now he is not filthy and digusting like the downworlders now he derserves respect and love. You see, it’s not that it is a bad thing to talk about social differences in YA novels because you can eassily educate people (if you are well educated yourself), BUT cc did such a bad job with it she souldn’t have tried, why not leave simon as a vampire but have him be respected by everyone? why not have sh realize they are racist and that they should change? why not at the end of her books have laws be changed so downworlders can be equal? LOL NO WHY DO THAT WHEN I CAN CHANGE SIMON AND MAKE HIM PURE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE

Anyways let’s move to the incest part:

Now imo this is the most controvercial issue in her books, CC has an incest fetish, it’s disgusting and so so so wrong…

Someone asked her something about TVD and she was like “lol why don’t you ship the ones that are brothers”, she wrote a fic about ron and ginny , her entire story is like an incest fest, Clary and Jace find out they are brothers but do they stop being weird and sexual with each other? nope they keep doing it BUT ITS OK BECAUSE ITS LOVE AND THEY ARE NOT ACTUAL BROTHER AND SISTER if that is someone’s actual excuse to see Clace as something romantic then please ask them what is wrong with them, even if they aren’t brother and sister they THOUGHT they were and while they THOUGHT they were they were still all over each other BUT ITS LOVE SO ITS OK, also isn’t there a part where sebastian tries to rape his actual sister (clary)? ha the rape part wasn’t disgusting enough??? ADD SOME INCEST, isnt that how clare’s brain works?

Can we also talk about how Alec has a crush on Jace even tho they are B R O T H E R S… maybe not blood related but they are still brothers and it’s just so fucking wrong. Tbh im surprised she didn’t try to have Izzy be attracted to Alec.

I read a post yesterday about someone that said how the incest stroyline was such a huge part of the books and that they hoped the writers did a good job with it… WHAT KIND OF PSYCHOTIC THINKING IS THIS there is no good way to treat incest what the fuck is wrong with cc stans????????? its all so wrong


Ok so now… my issues with book!malec: 

it’s so…bad???

For what i have read this relationship is really toxic, Magnus and Alec start their relationship when Alec is 17, which is not only illegal but oh so wrong, they don’t communicate at all (i think Alec almost takes Magnus’ inmortality away and doesn’t even give a fuck if Magnus is ok with it), Alec is such a biphobic asshole toward Magnus…

Straight people like to complain so much about Show!Malec but this is literally one of the very very very very few same sex relationships that is healthy AND THEY HAVENT EVEN STARTED THEIR OFFICIAL RELATIONSHIP give me a break

I really want to point out how hard it is to create a queer character/relationship and not fuck it all up if you are straight and know nothing about queer romance, she tried and failed. It was awful and gross and please NEVER let her write queer romance ever again.

(Her cishet stans talk about how much Alec/malec’s stroyline matter so much to them, dude IM QUEER IT ALSO MATTERS TO ME BUT HER POTRAYAL OF IT WAS TERRIBLE SHUT UP)

Ok so now let’s jump to the anti cc boat:

  • She enjoys toxic relationships (she made a character go back to her abuser).
  • Enjoys incest.
  • Is such a petty woman isn’t she like 40 wtf
  • almost got a girl kicked out of college
  • slut shamed izzy, which was extremely rude because emeraude and the writers have done a great job they dont derserve this shit
  • made her stans attack a fan
  • something is gay? time to sexualize it but dont worry she is such a great ally she is great her representation is 10/10 total knowledge of the LGBT+ community
  • so manny more terrible things tbh

And i know some of you are gonna be like BTU HSE CRATED TEH SADHOW HUNTERS WORLD lmao no she didnt she plagiarized everything, there is like a chart someone made where they compare everything in TMI with Dark- hunters and my dude it’s pretty fucking similar. And she didnt exactly create her characters, she took the personalities from HP characeters and put them in her books, oh yeah that reminds me people are actually saying tmi is better than harry potter??? no it isnt???? leave hp alone

Did i forget anything please tell me i’m here to add things to this list.

Also if you cc stans are gonna come crap on my blog or this post, im gonna ignore you so don’t waste your precious time please.

Edit: I forgot how Izzy and Clary literally hate each other for no reason other than the girl on girl hate trope, which is childdish and gross

 I made a post basically just voicing my confusion over why Chloe is so deeply hated. It wasn’t really meant to be persuasive, it just was some thoughts I’d gathered after months of going through the #Chloe Bourgeois and #Bee Miraculous tags. I was primarily confused and a little tired that fans seemed to have been making Chloe out to be even worse than she actually is and why they seemed to think the possibilities of a redemption arc were limited or inherently mishandled. It just seemed unreasonable.

Therefore I made a post that was more of a rant than I intended it to be, simply because I can come off as angry when I’m really just bewildered. It’s a more a “BUT WHY????” feeling rather than a “ WTF HOW DARE!?!?” feeling and that’s kind of hard to express when in text.

I’m absolutely delighted amazing miraculers took the rambling and added such great responses. This is why I care so much about character arcs. ML is entertainment but everyone is watching from a different perspective and makes personal connections based on their experiences. If we don’t, it’s probably because there’s nothing in the story for us to hold onto.

The discussion also solidified why I’m so excited for Queen Bee and why I didn’t understand the fandom’s stubborn distain for Chloe: Their stories aren’t the ones I relate to. I’m glad I see that side, but I relate to redemption.

Continue with my long response under the cut.

Keep reading

What is: Privilege

Privilege is a short hand for a concept known better these days as Dominant Class Privilege.

It is the antithesis of Stigma, the obverse of it.

As such, it is not a visible privilege, and not something granted by some governmental authority.

It is not being born to a wealthy family or the lap of luxury in the common sense that we speak about normally when we talk about someone coming from privilege in most uses.

The sort of privilege we are talking about is very loosely related to those things, yet it is not those things that is being talked about.

It is a form of entitlement and immunity to stigma, yet cannot by earned by actions that you take – it is conferred entirely by your existence, and based solely on the ways in which you are alike to others who have, to some degree or other, social power as a result of being the dominant class of persons in that cultural milieu.

This kind of privilege we are talking about is more formally known as Dominant Class Privilege, and is an unearned thing.

You do not have to do anything to get it, and you receive it whether you want it or not. You benefit from it, by your membership, and it is unseen and unrecognized by you when you have it, unless it is exposed to you in some way, or you lose access to it.

A good example of this is the grocery store analogy.

You go to the same grocery store for five years. Although they change the end caps from time to time, the things you want and that you know how to get are always there, and you can find odds and ends and you can expect that the manager is going to be a person who’s skin is pale, and is a man.

Over that same five years, a large ethnic population moves into the area, and they start shopping there, and the grocery store makes room on the shelves for the things they want. But the process of doing so means they move things around dramatically, and suddenly that 10 minute shopping trip you were taking takes 45 minutes, because now they’ve moved everything around in the store and it is harder for you to find the things you like, you want, and if you are like the overwhelming majority of people (which you will claim not to be, even though odds are you are), you will develop a subtle sense of resentment about it. They have a sense of strangeness about the store that they may or may not notice, but ultimately, many of them will go and find another store.

Now, a lot of people right now are saying, “no, I don’t do that” and yet, most of them do.

That sense of strangeness is what happens when your privilege vanishes — is blocked .

Privilege is not sexism, not racism, not Cissexism or Ciscentrism.

Privilege is not discrimination, in and of itself.

It can accompany it, and it can underlie it, and discrimination is derived from it in part, but it is very subtle, very nuanced, and is not about those who are in a position of powerlessness and more about those who are in a position of power.

People speak of “dog whistles”: words and statements that are seemingly innocuous, but are intentionally phrased so as to suggest something other than the seeming innocence. A good example of a more blatant dog whistle is the Bathroom Meme “They will allow men into the
women’s restroom!”

On the surface, this is fairly innocuous. Men go into the women’s room
surprisingly often (I walked in on a guy waiting for his daughter yesterday at the grocery store and he was far more embarrassed than I was). But the idea that was dog whistled there is that letting men go into bathrooms is dangerous for women. And I *did* indeed feel some concern
about having a man in the bathroom there — because as a part of society, I am expected to see men as predatory culturally, and therefore I should fear this man helping his daughter learn how to use the toilet. Not because of what he was doing, but because of what he was and therefore what he represented.

Privilege is like that. It’s subtle, it exists under the awareness level. It is, to an oppressed person, a screaming siren, and to those with privilege — that unearned Dominant Privilege — it is a silent agreement, a tacit understanding, and unspoken agreement that they are not even aware of having made.

System of Privilege

Privilege has three aspects that are fundamentally present:

  • Innocence: I am not looked to as the cause of problems in a social group.
  • Worthiness: I am presumed worthy of a social group’s trust and wealth.
  • Competence: I am expected to be skillful, successful, and autonomous.

All of those are things we all think about ourselves in general. Indeed, all three of those are things that LGBT+ people are fighting to achieve in the social group that is the culture of the United States.

Two really good examples of privilege as it’s been used by gay men against trans people recently include :

I don’t have privilege.

This one is an assertion of innocence. When one says this, one is
saying that they are not the cause of the problem, when, in fact, it is rather useful at pointing out that they are, in fact, a part of the problem.

I can’t be oppressing you if I’m pro trans.

This one deals in the worthiness of the individual. When something like this is said, it is staking a claim to being worthy of that trust and wealth
(and, in this case, that wealth is a metaphorical sort, such as information, esteem, knowledge, etc. linking it as well to the question of their own competence). It denies the unearned privilege the writer has not on the basis of the unearned privilege, but on the basis of their unrelated
stance. This is similar to the argument “well, I have gay friends and they think you shouldn’t get married too”, or the “I know a lot of trans people and they like that movie.”

In both cases, the individual is asserting their privilege — you should listen to them because they are more worthy than you are and they support it by citing people that they know in the oppressed class as
evidence that they aren’t part of oppression.

These are, for the most part, trans specific examples of privilege in action, stripped of something important to understand, and that’s context. We’ll get to that in a few moments.

These are examples, as well, of the defensive posture that is taken when people are confronted with their privilege. This is a universal constant — people with privilege that is unseen and unrecognized always deny their privilege.

This is why calling people out on their privilege is important. This is why people do it, as well — it isn’t to say that you are somehow a bad person, it is to tell you to stop thinking of yourself as infallible in comparison to them.,

Loss Of Privilege
That unearned privilege is very hard to lose. To lose it, you have to suddenly be stripped of your status. You have to affected by some form of stigma that reduces your ability to do this.

Closeted gay folks are often perceived as heterosexual, and as a result are seen to gain the unearned privileges of heterosexual privilege.

They do not actually have it, however.  Nor can they — they are not members of that dominant class, and so cannot fundamentally have that privilege, though they can sorta “steal” from it by minimizing the degree of stigma through a bargain they engage in that requires them to sacrifice some aspect of themselves.

The same applies to light skinned people of color, and pretty much in any context where the term “passing” is applied — passing itself is a term of art that describes the effect of privilege and stigma and is part of the bargain that is made, much like even the most extreme of feminists must wear heels, hose, and makeup if she is going to succeed in the Fortune 500 companies as an Executive.

When they come out, they lose that perceived unearned privilege.

One of the most glaring experiences of a trans woman, however, happens frequently enough that’s it’s also a trope — a sort of fully expected and normal experience that’s very, very common.

That is the apparent loss of male privilege.

The most subtle form of it is often described as how when they were perceived as men they would be in a meeting and if they spoke, people stopped and listened to them. They gave their attention, and often would even stop what they were doing to allow the person to speak. Then they encounter a similar situation as a woman, and are ignored.

Their ideas — even if it is the same idea they may have expressed when perceived as a man —are suddenly less valuable, and have less merit and are lacking in worthiness.

This is the effect of privilege when it is used: it puts someone in their place.

It is, in and of itself, a form of oppression, and people are typically utterly unaware that they are doing so. Even a very supportive and dedicated person working on behalf of a particular oppressed group will do this and not realize it until they have it pointed out to them.

Privilege is Ciscentric

One of the interesting quirks to the notion of Trans people actually having privilege is that it isn’t possible. They can benefit from it, but they cannot actually have it.

It resides only so long as they are not known to be trans – which removes them from the group of men in the US culture at present, even if they are trans men. That knowledge changing things is why they don’t have that privilege.

The closest comparative, and one I draw on from personal experience, is the way that light skinned Black people are sometimes conferred temporary benefit to white Privilege. That exchange happens as an error on the part of the broader, dominant culture, and so when it is lost (through the discovery) the penalty for such is often extremely severe, up to and including accusation of “theft”, through fraud, and the infamous trans double bind of “fooling”.


The most common way of demonstrating someone’s privilege in simple and reducible form is via a checklist. This is derived from the short form of the paper cited earlier.

Privilege checklists are often interpreted as being “individual specific”, and as having a uniformity to them. That is, when people see a privilege checklist, they often expect all of those things to apply to them.

This is an incorrect reading and a lack of understanding.

Identifying Privilege

Here is a five step test to see if privilege is in play:

  1. Membership: I am a member of a social group that is dominant through no action of my own, nor through being mistaken for a member of that social group.
  2. Stigma: I do not have stigma attached to me along that axis of oppression
  3. Innocence: I am not looked to as the cause of problems in a social group.
  4. Worthiness: I am presumed worthy of a social group’s trust and wealth.
  5. Competence: I am expected to be skillful, successful, and autonomous.

Being mistaken for something does not make one actually that thing.

Privilege is not lost: it is denied, it is taken, it is blocked. One cannot lose it, one is simply denied access to it, and that denial can only happen when one is removed from ones cultural milieu (thus changing who gets what privilege) or by not actually being a member of that social group that is privileged.

Privilege is not something one has over; privilege is always something one can do that someone else cannot without facing stigma for it. Privilege is not absolute, and it underlies the foundations of understanding intersectionality.

Benefiting from privilege is not the same thing as possessing that privilege.

This is why trans women cannot have male privilege, why bi people cannot have straight privilege, and why cis people (both men and women) do.

This is how privilege works; it is the antithesis of stigma. To understand privilege, you must understand stigma.

anonymous asked:

How can I go about making a character of color, particularly an Asian male influenced by African-American culture like rap, slang (not the n word, of course!) And clothing style, is this something that is acceptable?

Asians influenced by African-American culture

Isn’t this the entire Korean/Japanese Hip-Hop community? Just kidding (but seriously). I think one of the appeals of African-American culture such as rap is that its relatively low powered. Anyone can rap, all you need is a beat and a story to tell. There is a right way and a wrong way to do this that borders on cultural appropriation vs. cultural appreciation. One thing that I’ve noticed that is happening with African-American culture is that when it’s “time to be Black”(i.e. care about injustices against Black people), all the people who are using African-American culture for their own personal gain are nowhere to be found. Where were Taylor Swift, Miley Cyrus, and Iggy when everything was happening in Ferguson during the summer? I digress, but it’s something to think about.

As for your character, the way to do this appropriately without appropriating or fetishizing Black culture is to have your character not only participate in Black culture, but to be aware of his experiences as an Asian man that are vastly different than being a Black man. This can be balanced by highlighting the similarities as well. When it’s “time to be Black”, your character should be fighting against the injustices that his Black male counterparts have to face. There might not ever be an opportunity to do this within the narrative of the story, but it’s important to know that his participation in Black culture is more than just superficial or edgy.

One of the things to learn from the Asian Hip Hop community is that while they might have borrowed some aesthetics, slang and musical styles from Black hip-hop culture, they are distinctly Asian values, beliefs, and sensibilities. There are things that Black rappers rap about that Asian people have no experience with and vice versa. I’m not sure to what extent your character is steeped in Black culture or the reasoning behind it, but there are going to be some aspects of his expression of Black culture that are uniquely Asian, mainly other Asian characters reactions to him. There might be some people in his community that understand his expression of Black culture and their might be some that do not. You can create a well rounded picture by showing both aspects and how it affects your character.     

~ Mod Najela

Seconding everything Najela has said! And please be careful as you create this character not to make a person who solely mimics Black people (or if they do, that it’s clear that this is not appropriate/accepted behavior). Najela’s point that assimilation is NOT the same as appropriation/fetishization and how to avoid that cannot be overstated enough! 

There’s also sometimes a pervasive anti-Black sentiment within many Asian/Asian-American communities (e.g., blackface in kpop, lateral racism, etc) that you should be aware of. There are definitely instances where Asians/Asian-Americans who are into Black culture or hip-hop culture participate in lateral racism or microaggressions towards Black people. 

Sometimes, Asian-Americans get asked why they “act so black” or “act so white,” when in reality, they’ve simply assimilated into the culture of their neighborhood and immediate surroundings. Because Asian-Americans are always considered the “perpetual foreigner,” regardless of how long they’ve been here, whenever they assimilate into a culture that doesn’t read as stereotypically Asian, they’re often accused of acting like another race.

There are plenty of prominent Asian American males who are into/participate in hip-hop culture, including comedian/rapper Timothy DeLaGhetto, chef/author Eddie Huang, rapper Dumbfoundead, and the dance crew Jabbawockeez. 

Good luck writing your character, Anon!

~mod Stella

In depth post on Josh & Autism

Josh from Banana is autistic and I am going to explain to you how and why in a long ass in depth post because I fucking love autistic headcanons and Josh is my autistic gay son

To start off though, maybe check out this post. I made it originally to calm down because I was close to a panic attack, and it’s very vague and short and doesn’t go into much detail, but it’s a good place to start.

Keep reading


As you can see, we got two asks covering this worrisome spoiler (because – character assassination by tossing two years of development right out of the fucking window, anyone?) of Regina asking Sydney to “kill the one standing in the way of her happiness”, both expressing similar, valid concern. So we’re going to reply both at the same time, if you don’t mind. (A lot ;) So, waffle ahoy. ;)

Dear Anons,

These are both excellent questions and capture the full extent of our growing distaste with OUaT. I mean serious distaste. So thank you for making us feel a little less alone in our 70s inspired cocktail induced bubble of righteous anger and disgust. Cheers.

(First, disclaimer: Something I’m personally noticing a lot is this label used for Regina. You see, I’m really not sure that calling Regina white-washed is respectful. I understand your point though, and it’s all love and positivity here. (Also, imagine me laughing at my own jokes, so apologies in advance.) Because what you meant, I’m guessing, is that Regina is white-written how about that? So, can we start saying that on this blog, perhaps? When mixed-race actresses have to fight to have their characters reflect their actual ethnicity, the white writers can just push a dominant narrative anyhow because they don’t understand much about ethnicity or culture or cultural nuances. Adam and Eddy can’t write their way out of a paper bag, so capturing the nuances of positioning Regina as an actual descendent of the mixed-ethnicities of Puerto Rico, as well as Italy? On top of the fact that simply by hiring a WoC they believe to have achieved enough of a ‘representation’ without actually writing any of it into her character? Oh, now I’m laughing so hard I’m going to hurl. Laugh or cry, those are often our choices given to us by OUaT writing as of late, eh?)

Anyhow. It’s sort of interesting how the unpacking begins with a basic point about plot holes, that is: where on earth has Sidney been and why would he help Regina when she put him there, after all those years of loyalty? Then you start thinking why, when Regina has supposedly come so far, largely with Henry and Emma’s help and to some degree Mary Margaret’s help as well, why oh why would they sink her into this nasty, sexist, racist ‘triangle’? Then you start to realize, as our second Anon has realized, that they’ve pitted the only PoC on the show against one another in a sexist and heteronormative arc that I’m sure the white supremacists among fandom will argue is equality because hey, non-white people can be mean too! That’s equality, no?

{sounds of crickets. Can we insert a picture of a cricket to go with the sounds of crickets? Or Archie Hopper, at least?}

But basically, indeed. OUaT is a racist, sexist, heteronormative narrative, yes, don’t pull your punches, Anon. Our first and worst clue was Tamara’s death at the hands of the white man whose sympathetic rendering was accomplished first when parts of the audience who couldn’t stand his abusiveness left and secondly when the writers constantly made his man-pain all about the women who have wronged him. But let’s revisit the list, shall we? Ok, so, what if we started to really unpack the ways that racism operates in conjunction with sexism on OUaT? I think we’d get even further as a fandom. So…

SpittleMan: Invades Regina’s space, tries to use alcohol to ply her at all hours of the day, gives her heart away literally five seconds after she asks him (illogically, just because the writers made her) to babysit it, all after spit at first sight (which they don’t remember anyway, but hey, he 'saved’ her life, didn’t he?) So, why is all of this so beautiful and romantic? Because white supremacy and heteronormativity say that the white man has instant and total access to WoC at all times, at his whim, when he likes. His mistakes and his fumblings and his stupidity are really just signifiers of his total superiority anyway, so along come the SpittleMan-GorgeousQueen shippers (we are no longer honoring their ‘ship’ name because it’s an insult to thinking human beings) who pretty much reinforce this superiority.

RapeyHook: ABC types allowed his ‘fans’ to be called ‘hookers’, the sexist undertones so obvious there that we won’t even bother unpacking it. We’ll just hand out barf bags. Now, he has admitted to using booze to get his way with women which, in the United States of Freeeeee Ameeeerica, is often considered to be non-consensual sex which is also known as sexual assault. Again, he is the white male whose free and unhindered access to the women around him is a given. Come on, don’t question it! He knows you want it! Just say yes, already! As for what the hell that has to do with racism? Let’s insert some class analysis in here, since the racist system that Disney has upheld, is largely about ensuring that people stay in their place. Think there isn’t a class system in the freeeeeeeeeee Americaaaas? Think again! When poor African American communities started to create wealth and community for themselves, at every turn, the system turned on them. Blame the Beetles for destroying Motown, or, hey, blame the Prison Industrial Complex.

Poverty operates with whiteness to create a divide-and-conquer mentality, which OUaT is reinforcing, by hitching Emma’s horse repeatedly to Killy Willy rather than to Regina, with whom she might (ironically) share some genuine solidarity. Now, Regina’s rather incredible apology for doing what she did to Emma’s life was graced with forgiveness in a now infamous and deleted (or discarded, whatev) hug, which the actresses saw as incredibly important – but which the white dudes controlling the writers’ room and editing booth and probably the gaming systems in their basement dens, felt the need to erase from the face of the planet. Do we even need to ask why?

Rumps: Now, sympathy has sure grown for this guy, but let us not forget the origins of his story and let us not allow Killy Willy to take advantage of the lapses of memory that the writers of OUaT tend to encourage. Ok, now list all of what Rumps has done. Mull it over. Feeling a little ill? Especially at that scene when he physically abused his current wife? I sure am.

Charming: A good guy. A good guy so when he manhandled Regina, it was for her own benefit. Charming isn’t generally a sexist dude, but the little arc that showed him and Daniel (zombified and dead Daniel) choking Regina out?


At day’s end, what they do to Regina is a drawn out teaching about the intersections of race, gender and sexuality. What they do by throwing Emma into her world adds class to the mix as well. So what’s sort of weird right now (well, for us here anyway) is that we can imagine a good quick set of fixes for all of this. Not fixes that erase the problems but twists that quickly reveal the underlying problems to a now shrinking audience. I saw a petition online recently, calling for other Oncers (Wtf is a Oncer anyway? That sounds like a cult, btw.) or drones or whatever you want to call yourself if you swallow every single word that Adam types on his wittle Twatter and follow ‘canon’ strictly because you’re just so much smarter than people who want something better with their Sunday glass (or bottle) of wine than rape culture and racism, anyway, to actually write to ABC to ‘Save OUaT’. Well, how about some fixes that might ‘Save OuAT’ for reals?

Aside from banishing 9000 year old rapist named Killy Willy (because if there’s no Emma-skirt to chase, he has no other purpose anyway), and sending Spittle Man off with his attractive little family (because, well – what other purpose does he have?) and forcing Rumps to face his bad habits somehow, the narrative could turn all of these racist, sexist triangles on their heads. Regina and Emma could choose solidarity as co-parents and moms, and the writers could show Henry with Regina from time to time, eating dinner, arguing about socks on the floor, etc, and all of this swirling awfulness could become a kind of PSA about the power of mothering. Sort of like the end message of Kill Bill. Bill dies, and in doing so, apologizes for what he did to The Bride who becomes named again, according to her own name, not defined by marriage, and the closing line is about a mother lion being with her cub again or something like that, and all being right in the jungle and so on.

Anyway, the point is – Regina, Emma, co-parents, Henry. It’s a much more powerful narrative than we might realize at the moment because we’re all so distracted by Kills and Spits, but honestly, that little family ties up ALL of these narrative issues and plot holes and even addresses the classism, racism, and sexism and all other isms that have generally existed in the show until this point. And puh'lease future anons, don’t talk to us about redemption arcs for 9000 year old rapists, because by the by, we do not share Jane Espenson’s optimism that male violence can be cured through heteronormativity and the fawning of a good woman.

So yes, we agree with both you, dear Anons. Sending all of the show’s limited numbers of PoC off into a tub of oatmeal to wrestle for white viewers’ spectatorship is gross and obscene, and completely and utterly – irredeemable. 

External image
We're all Just Human.

It’s so exhausting talking about racism in a world of people who have just accepted that racism and the things that happen because of it are acceptable and permissible.

It’s really exhausting that people consider black face to be not racist, and me calling it out AS racist.

It’s really exhausting that I’m expected to tip toe around racism and that every time I address it i’m told to speak politely and properly and to never get angry about it when I’m being disrespected to my face.

I am a very polite and well mannered person. Anyone who’s actually met me in real life knows this. i’m someone who was taught to be silent and to be subdued and to never speak out of turn. As an adult I’ve learned that I was raised that way because my parents were raised that way and their parents were raised that way and their parents were taught to act that way by their slave masters.

Whenever I call out racism I always feel like people are going to just get it, you know because it’s so obvious to me. I was raised feeling that I would never be able to get anything in this world because of my race. My white boyfriend was raised to view the world as his oyster and that he could be whatever he wanted to be. This impacts how he navigates the world and how he extends himself physically. On the flip side, I have to force myself to view the world in a similar fashion and encourage myself to navigate the world without the inferiority complex that I’ve been taught from day one. All of these things are so obvious to me now and it’s upsetting to know that so many people (including people of color) do not see how racism has shaped our culture.

I want people to wake up, but I don’t actually think they ever will.

It’s quite bizarre to me how people equate me discussing racism to hating white people when i don’t’ actually hate anyone on the basis of their race. I just see, all too often that when white people are racist it’s often defended and supported. And when I make a comment about the observation that white people are often able to be racist with no repercussion, I am seen as the racist. Somehow.

And all of this makes me feel like I shouldn’t discuss racism or I shouldn’t acknowledge it. But I realize that’s the intended impact. I’m called a racist for discussing racism because if racism were something that was perpetuated mainly by white people we’d have to view this country differently. So they want me to stay quiet because staying quiet allows them to never see what racism is or how it impacts people of color and especially how it impacts them.

When I talk about racism I refer to current events and when I’ve noticed white people talking about racism they’re referring to posts like this that can be ignore, blocked or deleted from their feed.

I can’t ignore block or delete my race. And i’m tired of being made to feel that I am ‘angry" because I’m upset with how I’m viewed in this world as a black woman. You think i’m angry because I have an opinion. It doesn’t matter how polite I am to you, I will always be angry. I will always be racist because I talk about the racism white men have perpetuated and you will be so much more progressive than I am because you 'don’t see race’. Of course your race affords you the right ot not see race because in this country, you are viewed as the default. We’re all just “people”, but flesh toned crayons look like you and most of our characters in film and other media look like you. But we’re all just “humans”, but people who look like me are always supporting you or behind you. But we’re all just “humans” and you “don’t see race”, which I’ve noticed you only say to me or other brown people.

Whatever, i’m exhausted. i’ll let you continue to believe i’m irrational and angry and you’re justified and right because that’s what you need to believe.

Re: Western Influences in Chinese Settings

@emperor-of-nerds asked:

Where can the lines be drawn around a real life ‘culture’ as an influence when it comes to writing a fantasy setting? Ultimately, if you break a culture down into smaller and smaller components you’ll just end up with more cultures. I’ll use European examples because I’m European and I don’t want to make any mistakes here, but say if you were writing an Italian-coded setting, surely conflating the cultures of the Plain of Lombardy and the Mezzogiorno is a clear lack of research? They exist in extremely different historical, geographical and socioeconomic contexts, except it’s all still ‘Italian’. Or how about using the histories of San Marino or the Vatican as a primary influence for an Italian-coded setting, even though they’re distinctly not part of ‘Italy’ as we know it today?

The reason I’m asking is because when it comes to non-Western influenced settings, where is the line between what 'cultures’ can work together without it being appropriation/cherry-picking/blending of any sort? For example I imagine using Fujian’s historical same-sex unions as the norm for a Qing-based setting would be worse in terms of appropriation than conflating, say, Tibetan and Bhutanese social mores, on account of the relative size of the populations and the differences between the cultures. Or clearer still, why is it okay to take both Assamese and Malayali influences for an 'India’-based setting but distinctly not okay to mindlessly blend Vietnam and South China who are geographically and culturally closer? And I’d presume that taking parts of Hmong culture and applying it to a largely Han Chinese-coded setting should be completely insensitive, and yet both could be considered part of a 'Chinese’-coded setting.

I feel like I sound argumentative, sorry, but honestly I’m just not sure. As an Irish person I understand that often seemingly similar cultures have centuries of oppression, wars, racism and even genocide behind them, but where none exist where can the lines be drawn? And is it even okay to make an 'Indian’ or 'Chinese’ coded setting given the cultural diversity of the regions?

Ultimately, if you break a culture down into smaller and smaller components you’ll just end up with more cultures.

Yes. Exactly. That’s the whole point.

If you actually did any research on India and China (heck, most major groups in Asia), you’ll notice they were at one point empires. This means they have gone off and taken over absolutely gigantic swaths of land and “unified” them all under the same general administration. Some empires fractured off into smaller, distinct countries, while others remained under the same umbrella in the modern day.

This does not mean by any stretch of the imagination that the existing cultures disappeared. It means they got integrated into a larger society whose borders were artificially set up as people got land-take-over-happy. It means that if you visit their region, their culture will be different from their neighbours because, yeah, it’s a genuinely different group. This is not ever something to ignore.

I’ll use European examples because I’m European and I don’t want to make any mistakes here, but say if you were writing an Italian-coded setting, surely conflating the cultures of the Plain of Lombardy and the Mezzogiorno is a clear lack of research?

Again, exactly, that is the whole point.

You are working under the assumption that “Chinese” is a single group when, by your own example here you prove you understand countries have cultural variation within them.

We are telling you, basically, to treat China with the same respect you would Italy. You say, right here, you understand that if you were writing in the Plain of Lombardy region of Italy, you’d treat it differently from the Mezzogiorno region of Italy.

Now how about offering that same respect to Asia? Of taking Beijing as a different entity than Hong Kong, of respecting Tibet and treating it differently from Inner Mongolia. And even then, treat the different regions within those provinces as if they are different regions— because they are.

Would you write Brooklyn, NY, and Queens, NY, the same? No? Then why are you looking at a giant empire that has taken over hundreds of regions and native peoples and saying “but I can’t possibly have these regions be different!”

Because that’s how you’re coming across. You are coming across as completely, utterly flippant to diversity, with your steadfast refusal to consider that maybe there is more than one way for a society to be Chinese. You have a single, rigid, absolutely insufficient box for what “Chinese” is, and you are trying to fit everything within that box. You are running on stereotypes for what you think China is and completely ignoring what we are telling you.

Stop being obsessed with making it “look right” and have it be actually right. “Looking right” for non-European cultures relies on overly broad, flat caricatures that never have and never will reflect the variety of the real life place. In my Asian fantasy I legitimately go city by city and have different cultures crop up in each (I even go for cultural variation between classes), yet, hey, because I’m taking it off actual India then it is Indian. I don’t worry about whether it’s “Indian enough” because everybody within India is Indian, and each subculture is just as Indian as the next. There will be variety! There will be difference! There will also be sameness, because they are unified in certain aspects of their culture! This is all part of worldbuilding.

Get out of your little box and stop being scared that, maybe, you’ll have a lot more representation to account for. Stop trying to fit China in a single checklist, and stop trying to cater to Western readers. If you really want to understand, then realize you are ignorant, shut up, and listen to the people you are representing. We are, absolutely completely literally, telling you “there is a ton of variety to choose from within China that is all Chinese you can take from to make your world better and more respectful so you can have a real fantasy society that looks like China while properly representing China”. We are telling you that you can write “Chinese cultures” with variety. We are actually point blank telling you that you have to write these cultures with variety, because China itself has variety.

Just listen already.

–Mods Lesya and Jess

@viridieanfey replied to your response to “The overwhelming call for the redemption of Kylo Ren…”

I’m not touching the above topic because I’ll be here all night, but I am interested in something related to it: can anyone name one queer coded, “effeminate” or androgynous non-white Villain in a major franchise in the last 10 years? I swear I’m asking this genuinely and not trying to be a contrary asshole. Point me to them because I devour that character archetype.

I worship at the altar of villains, but only specific villains. I love Loki, but I don’t give a shit about the Red Skull or Baron Nemo. I’m not really concerned with Emperor Palpatine, or most of the star wars villains except Kylo. I’m really not even that much of a fan of Darth Vader or Anakin. I loved Heath Ledger’s joker but I didn’t give a shit about whathisface with the mask or Leto’s Joker. It’s a very specific framing of characteristics, very much related to my own identity as a queer/genderqueer person. And I’ve noticed non-white actors almost fucking NEVER get the opportunity to play those roles. Something that’s unfair to those actors and is a problem.

Like…how much of the villain worship is white boy preference and how much is queer people embracing the closest semblance of representation in most mainstream films: the demonized queer-coded man, usually played by a white actor. (It may well be a little of both.) How much also is non neurotypical and autistic people embracing the usually one character that’s close to what they’re like? Like how many shows/films have the “weird” white guy compared to how many shows have the token “weird” PoC guy? Maybe I’m watching the wrong shows, maybe I’m not paying enough attention. I leave the analysis of that up to people who can view it objectively. (Given, with how much fandom embellishes even background characters, we totally could’ve made Finn autistic and written a thousand fics about it by now. I do acknowledge that.)

(I wonder if not having these kinds of villains has to do with white hollywood needing to make their black and non-white villains hypermasculine in order to demonize the masculinity of PoC, resulting in very few androgynous/queer-coded portrayals of non-white characters?)

Off the top of my head, the only black or non-white villains I can think of from a major franchise, at all, are Khan from the Original Star Trek movies, Cottonmouth and Diamondback from Luke Cage, Doctor Facilier from Princess and the Frog, Nobu from Daredevil, Top Dollar from the comic book version of The Crow, Matthew Patel from Scott Pilgrim vs the World, Omar the leader of the 10 Rings in Iron Man, and Laurent from Twilight. (Given this is coming from someone who has not watched a lot of movies at all.) The only one of those who fits the “feminine coded sympathetic evil bastard” trope is Cottonmouth and maybe Khan. And only just barely.

There is an issue in fandom, but the well from which to draw that type of character is shallow. I mean I’m sure fandom could create that kind of character from anything, but even trying to find non-white background character villains is like…squint and pause the screen and look in the very back. (Maybe I’m wrong and I’ve just put the blinders on for anything but white boy villains, I don’t actually know. I’m not that self-aware.)

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a long-haired, androgynous, witch-looking, “sad boy” type villain in long flowing clothes, played by anyone other than a white man. I want to say I would love them as much, but internalized racism even when you think you’ve unlearned it is still a thing. I want to say I would, but I’m not certain. I know there might be some in comics, but really my knowledge of characters outside the most popular ones is severely limited.

Tl;dr: fandom is racist, however casting directors are super fucking racist and don’t really seem to be interested in allowing non-white actors to be shunned for their unspoken queerness rather than skin color so maybe that’s a contributing factor to the above???

I feel like “long-haired, androgynous, witch-looking, ‘sad boy’ type” is white guy coding to start with, sort of burying a preference for whiteness under an aesthetic that conjures a pretty specific image. 

Taken on its own, the descriptor could describe Prince or Michael Jackson. It could describe Dizzee (Jaden Smith) from The Get Down, who is actually canon queer, not just queer coded. Chiwetel Ejiofor has fit all of the above from Kinky Boots to Doctor Strange, and still he gets a small fraction of the attention that Tom Hiddleston gets, for playing similar roles. Hiddleston could have easily played The Operative in Serenity, Ejiofor would have been an amazing Loki. 

You won’t find me denying that there is a serious lack of varied roles for actors of color. Few ever get the opportunity to play meaty villain roles, that’s true. But I feel like when there is a villain of color, they’re rejected over aesthetics, and that comes down to race.

The Hades/Eisuke CG Edit

I’m not someone who likes to beat a dead horse or generally get involved in drama, but I felt the need to express my POV on the CG edit of Hades into Eisuke.  I am not going to discuss Mr. Ichinomiya because there have already been extremely well-written posts by @drawthecurtainstarttheplay here, @zaizenakiyoshi here, and @chiapeto here that already say what I would say on the issue. Also let it be said here that I have not played either Eisuke (don’t plan to) or Hades (he’s on my list), but this is not going to be a specific commentary on their characters.

For those of you who don’t know, I am a Latina – specifically, Mexican-American.  This may surprise you if you’ve read my fics where I describe myself as having green eyes and butterscotch blonde hair. Well, while the eye color is natural the butterscotch blonde comes from a bottle - my real hair color is jet black.  My genetics have also bestowed me with a very curvy body with significant boobage, hips, tummy, thighs, and butt that do not go away no matter how much weight I lose.  I also have brown skin a shade between Cerb and Hades. (see pic below for reference).

Keep reading