i think it's a british term

anonymous asked:

Everybody keeps calling them unhealty. (What does it mean?) ive seen so many couples coodepedent, verbally abusing, staying in a relasionship not to be alone, they are not in love but they care about each other, they cheat and forgive. The lie and forgive. I mean its not surealism. But in terms of the soap itself every couple n character in there are messed up, toxic and abusive arent they?

Well to be honest I think Aaron and Robert do have a very unhealthy relationship if we’re judging them as real people, but you are right that this is soap and that it’s a bit different in that medium. Soap is all about the drama so you do get these huge storylines which wouldn’t happen in real life and make things messy. I mean just to start with, they covered up a death together, which isn’t exactly a solid starting point for any relationship! Most couples don’t actually have to deal with a hurdle like that! And then the writers decided to turn Robert full-on villain and then redeem him again. In real life if someone has been a ‘villain’ it’s not so easy to just start again with them and put aside what they’ve done, but because it’s soap, he gets shot, changes, and had a redemption storyline. As a viewer of soap, we accept this. But like I said, if they were real people it wouldn’t be that simple. Soaps take everything and ramp it up to the most dramatic it can possibly be. I think most of us watching understand that, and it’s why we don’t permanently hate every character in the show! Because most of them have done something terrible at one point. I mean Aaron, who is a fan favourite (and my absolute favourite and son), has done some dreadful things in his past. Just off the top of my head I can think of the warehouse robbery with Ross where he knocked out a completely innocent man that worked there so they wouldn’t get caught. And the fact he attacked Kasim is also HUGE. Or it would be in real life. But again, it’s British soap. We accept it. Realistically most soap characters should probably be in prison by now. 

This is why, although I entirely understand people who hate Robert, I don’t subscribe to that way of thinking myself. If he was real, then yes. But he’s a (sometimes) soap villain in the midst of an attempted redemption arc. Viewing him as you would a real person just doesn’t work. It doesn’t work for most soap characters. That’s why British soap is so unique and why I like it so much. It takes you to extremes, but at the same time tries to deal with the emotional fall-out in a semi-realistic way. It’s fascinating as a medium. 

This is part of why I still like them as a couple. Because yes, if you take them as they are and look at them like they are real people, it’s sooooo toxic. And the history there is enough to make you want to get them away from each other. Aaron has a terrible temper and so many unresolved issues, Robert is a master manipulator with a frankly shocking history. They don’t communicate properly (most of the time, although it’s looking better recently) and the stakes are always super high. BUT when you look at it within the context of British soap, it’s true that it’s hard to find any character, let alone a couple, which doesn’t have similar problems. Look at Cain and Moria, for example, which is a big fan favourite. If they were real people, I doubt they’d be rooted for as a couple, but viewers understand that it is soap and so they have a lot of support. There are people out there who like Debbie and Ross together (I hate it, personally. I’m all about Debbie and Rebecca), but Ross has literally shot a man in cold blood. It was a pre-meditated hit for cash. In real life would you want anyone to date him? Noooooo. You would want him in prison. But in soap, again, it’s different. (The same goes for the other big British soaps as well. I can think of so many examples of couples which would be regarded as toxic and even abusive if read in a real-world context.)

Rooting for relationships in soap is different from most mediums, because it’s more about the chemistry and emotional connection than anything healthy. Because it can get so ridiculous and fantastical (one day they’ll write a comedy ep, next it’s a whodunnit), it’s more about that connection between characters and who works well on screen together. It’s about who compels you and you want to see sharing scenes. This is why I think Robron are so popular. It’s not (as many would say) because people believe they are healthy and the perfect blueprint for a happy couple. It’s because they provide huge drama while somehow managing to maintain that connection and a very realistic sense of loving each other. That’s hard to achieve in soap, but somehow they’ve done it. Through all the dramatic storylines there’s been this constant, believable affection between the characters. It’s like they’re tied to each other. So despite the weirdness around them, you put them in a scene together where it’s just the two of them, and suddenly you have realism, because it feels like watching a real couple. I’ve honestly not seen anything like it in soap before and I have no idea how they’ve managed to create something like that in the medium of British soap. 

Part of the appeal of Robron for me is that they are two very damaged people. They both have BPD (imo, as someone who has that myself). They are capable or bringing out the absolute best and the hellish worst in each other. You never know if they’ll make it or not either, even though you want them to, because the mixture of their personalities could make them perfect together or a toxic mess. As a team they are unstoppable. Apart they are broken. And these are two huge Emmerdale characters with history (especially Robert). They’ve not been written for each other. It doesn’t feel forced. They just click. Those two established personalities provide some of the best interaction and chemistry in soap. Emmerdale struck so lucky there. I genuinely think it was an accident as well. They accidentally stumbled upon gold with their characters and actors, and they don’t even know what to do with it sometimes (hence the strange writing decisions which happen from time to time). Because they’re trying to fit a couple worthy of Wuthering Heights or some other huge, messy, dramatic, gothic romance, into a soap format. 

When I say they’re unhealthy I mean that if they were real, I would encourage them to stay away from each other. But because they exist in soap, I see past it. I agree with those who say the relationship is toxic by non-soap standards. They are absolutely right. But this is soap. This is the medium they exist in (which is often unfortunate). I think we have to accept that things will be extra dramatic and extra terrible but also extra brilliant as the storyline requires. If you want to see healthy couples in realistic domestic situations, then I’d say British soap isn’t the best place to look for that. (Unfortunately).  


Cultural Appropriation is a real, important, and harmful thing, but god damn if it’s not one of the most recklessly abused terms in the social justice lexicon.

Transcription under the cut for accessibility

Keep reading

bagelanjeli  asked:

I find it interesting that you keep saying that Asians in Asia don't see themselves as poc. While you may feel that way, I think it's valid to note that Britain (white people) occupied and conquered what was then India (today India, Pakistan, Bhutan, etc.) There is a big difference between the fair indians and the darker indians. To be light skinned is considered beautful. Therefore, that region of Asia does see itself as poc for they were treated as second class to the gori British.

Hey, I appreciate you writing in! I’ll explain my thinking behind the term here.

I too grew up in a former British colony, so while I did have a concept of whiteness and therefore do not see myself as “white”- I want to emphasise that the term “person of colour” does have different political and cultural implications than “non-European” or perhaps “non-white”. Simply, I do not see myself as “white” because of British colonialism, but I does not mean I see myself as a “person of colour”. I see myself as Han Chinese, East Asian or Asian. “ In general, I believe the term should not be used carelessly outside the US due to different ideas of whiteness between the US and Europe, as well as other countries in the Americas, where race isn’t perceived the exact same way. I don’t believe it should be used at all in the non-Western context.

1. Person of colour is a term that specifically originated in the context of the United States’ system of colourist racism, of Jim Crow, of slavery, where the idea of “white” became a vehicle to confer privilege. I say “vehicle” because whiteness has always been a social construct. in much earlier parts of US history, several light-skinned European ethnic groups were not allowed to access whiteness, like Irish people. Today, they are seen as white. Although the term has been used carelessly by many people on tumblr, “person of colour” is first and foremost a racialised identity taken on to organise against white supremacy- in Western contexts.

2. I don’t believe it should be applied to non-Western contexts firstly, because the history of Asian colourist discrimination has actually long-predated European colonial rule. Further, it doesn’t quite just exist as a marker of racial otherness, but as a class division. Fair skin has been prized in China, Japan and Korea for thousands of years due to classism. I believe it is the case with India too- from what I know, it was very much tied to the ancient Indian caste system or other class/regional divisions. That is not to say British rule in India didn’t make it worse (it certainly did) or that Western beauty standards don’t help to reinforce this preference today, but it would be inaccurate for us to ascribe this obsession for light skin all to recent European imperialism. Recognising its ancient roots is crucial: as a light-skinned East Asian, nobody has ever tried to sell me skin-whitening cream, unlike my other Han Chinese friends who were darker-skinned. 

3. As “person of colour” is an organising tool against white supremacy, I do not believe it has much relevance in non-Western contexts because we are no longer under European colonial rule. This is not to say its legacy doesn’t still affect us, but that the fault lines and tensions that matter are very often not going to centre so much around whiteness anymore in day-to-day life. I feel white privilege can be discussed there without us defining ourselves as “persons of colour”. 

  • Primarily, I am against the term because it posits a false illusion of solidarity that erases local oppressor-oppressed dynamics, and centering on whiteness very often becomes a tool of deflection for their own crimes (like in Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, when he took ownership of land from white farmers ostensibly to correct the inequality in land ownership suffered by black Zimbabweans. Sounds fair, considering how colonial rule historically stripped people of their land. But the problem is rather than actually giving it to experienced black Zimbabwean farmers or training people to use the land, he mostly gave it to his cronies. Who didn’t utilise the land properly, causing food shortages that eventually hurt thousands of black Zimbabweans and made people worse off.) On another level, I don’t wish to centre around whiteness all the time because I think the fixation on it at the expense of other fault lines is in of itself a perpetuation of Eurocentric/whitecentric history and narratives.
  • To me, the attendant notions of solidarity underpinning the idea of POC have very little relevance when outside the Western world, our oppressive structures and systems of privileges are very often run by other non-Europeans. Whiteness is the “default” in the US, but in mainland China? It’s being Han Chinese. Han Chinese supremacy is the reason for continued racism and Sinicisation of non-Han minorities like Uighur Muslims and Tibetan. And this racism has a history in Chinese imperialism that long-predates European colonialism. To call all of us “POC” flattens the power structure and posits false solidarity between oppressor and victim- it allows the oppressor to wrongly occupy the space as the victim: as if the Han Chinese general is the same as the non-Han people he has captured for human sacrifices to the gods during the Shang Dynasty. You can have groups of people in the Middle-East and North Africa like Kurds, Amazigh who are very often marginalised by Arab supremacy- such as when Saddam Hussein enacted a genocide against Iraqi Kurds in the 1980s, using chemical weapons. The Nigerian government’s slow response to the Boko Haram crisis despite angry protests by Nigerians? The government not caring when people in Northern Nigeria, which is much more impoverished- die. For my own family history, some of the deepest grievances stem from how the Japanese mistreated my grandparents during WW2.

4. Lastly, the term “POC” outside the Western context tends to flatten the power structure between non-Europeans who live in the West or otherwise have a Western background vis a vis people from our ancestral countries. 

  • White privilege can reinforce Western privilege but they are not totally synonymous: Because even people not considered white do benefit from citizenship in a Western country or a Westernised background. When it comes to global economic inequality, we are closer to the centre of the empire, to the position of those who benefit, not the exploited. People like myself benefit from speaking English, from appearing “more European” and generally Westernised. It’s the reason my friend, who is of Indian ancestry, was treated very differently by the immigration officer when his British accent became obvious- compared to Indians from India who were on the same flight as him. There would for example, be a huge power differential between an Arab-American soldier and the other Arab people in say, Iraq. I cannot in good faith say my experiences are the same as the Chinese workers who work long hours in factories, many of whom start working at 16. At 16? I wasn’t done with schooling. It was taken for granted I would get a university education, and so on. 

5. So, the term “person of colour” is meaningless to me in the non-Western context context, and I personally find it actively harmful when people lump us as “POC cultures” because it purports to create an illusion of solidarity that obscures the massive amount of racism and oppression Asians are enacting against each other till today. Further, I see it as a projection of Western race politics on a non-Western context, which is decentering from local dynamics.

In conclusion, I very much see myself as “non-white” in Asia due to growing up in a former European colony. But I do not see myself as a “person of colour” there. I see myself somewhat as a person of colour in Europe, because it is a Western context where light-skinned Europeans are the majority. Still, not entirely- because it is quite an American term and European racism has a lot of ethnicity dimensions. I tend to see myself as a SEAsian Chinese, most specifically.

anonymous asked:

a thing about race in America, it literally makes no fucking sense why people are grouped this way, especially if you look at the history of who could and could not legally be considered white in this country, it's so weird lol. but at the same time race plays a huge part in American culture, particularly in regards toward racial injustice, so it's kinda a big deal because it impacts people's lives in many ways, but at the same time it doesn't make sense

It’s just wild, like you literally do not see it happen anywhere else on earth. Like okay, when we do a census we have to say if we’re British Irish/Caribbean/Chinese/Japanese/Black British etc etc, but in the day to day, we don’t say “I’m African British” or “I’m Asian British” - we’re just British. We still embrace our heritages and whatever culture comes with that, be it Indian, Chinese, Japanese, whatever part of Africa you may have links to, its embraced but people don’t refer to themselves the way you guys say “African American” or “Asian American” etc.

And from what I know of the rest of Europe and places like Australia and New Zealand, it’s not really a thing there either. I don’t know about Canada but I don’t think it’s a big thing there either. It’s a very American thing to do, and it feels like a really bizarre thing to do when you think about it. It makes the population feel divided even when you talk about it. Like white people just get to be American, but you gotta specify that black people are African American etc?

idk, I guess it’s just a difference between America and the rest of the world, I personally would feel like i was being almost symbolically segregated from others if it became the norm to refer to white people as British, and all other ethnicities got put under the umbrella of “British African” or “British Asian”. Especially because my background is Irish, Caribbean and Indian like,,,,where the fuck am i supposed to go under ur weird umbrella terms.

It’s just a day like any other for Jacob Kowalski. As to say, a perfectly brilliant thing.

Jacob has a routine, for mornings: get up, get dressed (in positively smarter clothes, in his positively more colorful, less crumbling room), walks the three blocks of buzzing New York life to the door of his bakery, and prepare for the first clients of the day. Jacob has spent the small hours of the morning - light but a grey thought along the roofs across the street, one of those suspended moments which lately, for no reason, make him hold his breath in anticipation - making pastries and waffles, donuts and pies, cleaning the shiny coffee machines and making sure his young and carafree clerk didn’t make any mess the night before. He loves every minute of it. He loves every minute of it, and of the following chores too - serving people and busy business men and dainty ladies and kids with a mess of cents and hungry eyes. He talks, laughs, bid good morning and good day, mysteriously forgets to ask the right price from the hungry-eyed kids. And that is it. Jacob finds himself slipping towards afternnon without even realizing it. An absolutely normal day, no surprises, no thrills.

Except for the unexpected clients waiting by his door, of course. 

No, it’s not the blonde lady wandering around his shop like a light-stepped hawk and coming in through the door in a cloud of rushing velvet and rose perfume at exactly seven past nine a.m., seven days a week - the blonde lady who seems to forget every single time what her order is meant to be and who blinded him with the most heart-stopping smile of the world the first time he remembered it for her, and who once touched his arm sendind tendrils of electricty all the way to his core, and who despite dripping warmth like coalesced sunlight sometimes, sometimes watches him with the most desperate eyes-

Err. Anyway, no, it’s not his - the - blonde lady. The figure waiting by his door is a man, a pale, smartly-dressed man with thick black eyebrows and a cane, and has been staring absently at Jacob’s shop window for the best part of ten minutes.

Now, Jacob Kowalski may be a curious man - as his Nana never, ever tired of reminding him - but he knows when to stay quiet and mind his business, and from the mortally focused way he’s staring at the gilded letters of his name the gentleman seems more than able to dig holes in people’s skulls with a single glance. Still. Still, jacob Kowalski has also been in the war - and there’s something sickengly familiar in the minute shaking running through the gentleman’s body, and something that has nothing to do with New York’s Autumn winds. So he finds himself dropping the rag he was lucidare with on the counter, slid around its corner, and going to open the door - keeping his movements slow, cautious, untreathening. Jacob pushes his door open. The gentleman starts, shoulders tensing, a shot of alarm flashing across his face. Jacob stops. Nice and slow, suggests a voice in his mind, British accent like peppermint sprinkles on a cake. Let him come. On his own terms.

“Would you mind a cuppa coffee, mister?” he asks, nice and slow. “Maybe something sweet, too.”

Keep reading

Dear people attempting to write Eggsys accent in fanfiction who don’t know what they are doing/linguistic rules:

Drop G’s - walking becomes walkin’, begging becomes beggin’, ect

Use Ain’t and Innit liberally - Bit much Innit?, he ain’t joking

Possessive pronouns - my car becomes me car

Slang - rank, sick, mental (note: Eggsy is British, those of you not British doing his accent, the rule of thumb is ‘it’s better not to use slang than to get it wrong’. Imagine how out of place Crickey O'Riley sounds for Harry - it just doesn’t sit right.)

Swearing - (particularly more British swears) Arse, bollocks, bloody, twat, dickhead, (and 'common’ swears) Fuck, shit.

Pet names - Love, Bruv (I would assume he would use things like Bae, dear, sweetheart, but things like Darling and honey would not fit his sociolect unless he was parodying)

Skipping words - no explanation really needed, you can tell where it sounds right. Have you seen my dog?, seen my dog?

So, if you go with these basic ideas, you can write a rather Cockney accent for Eggsy without going OTT. (Please bear in mind we don’t even know of Eggsys really cockney - they never specify if he was born under the bells.)

So, of you follow these, you get something like this:

Hey Roxy, do you want to go and watch that new James Bond movie? I have heard its got some attractive girls in it.
Becomes this
Alright (slang) bruv (pet name) wanna go see that new James Bond film (British slang term)? (lack of words) Heard its got some well fit (tense change) chicks (pet name/slang) in it.

Good God Harry, that was extremely violent, you just hit his head in with my pool que! Don’t you think that was a bit much?
Fuckin Christ (swearing/slang) Harry, that was well (tense change) violent, you bashed (slang) his head in with me (possessive) pool stick (slang - particularly a informal word)! Bit much Innit?

Basically, drop end Gs, skip words and mash then together, use any slang/names you have faith in.

Lots of love, a British country to city person currently studying accent, sociolect, dialect and ideolect.

thefandomwench  asked:

I'm enjoying the way UJ says 'bloody heck' instead of bloody hell. Here in England bloody is considered a swear word (a mild one though, like shit) whereas hell really isn't. QUICK WE MUST CENSOR HELL BUT LEAVE IN AN ACTUAL OFFENSIVE TERM DUE TO POOR RESEARCH ABOUT THE UK! Not that I mind, I was just a little taken aback when I heard him xD I think it's hilarious

The responses from the UK players have been hilarious so far, and even I have to agree he sounds more Australian than British 😂😂😂

@ everyone in my inbox talking about the reasons why umbrella terms like “African American” and “Asian American” are used in America: I understand why, I get the history, i wasn’t disregarding that, I was just stating that from the perspective of someone who isn’t American, it seems like a strange thing to still be doing now. But that’s cultural differences is all!

anonymous asked:

Hi there! I've been following you for several months and I really enjoy your posts. However, there's one topic about which I feel a bit uncomfortable: the potentially non-white Tolkien characters. As far as I know (and as a casual fan I may be wrong), the professor wanted to create an Anglo-Saxon myth. I really doubt he had in his mind an Asian Fingon or a black Luthien when writing about them. Is it a good idea to disregard the author's envisioning for the sake of racial awareness?

So Tolkien wanted to create an Anglo-Saxon myth.

I think it’s really interesting to ask ourselves what that means. 

Does it mean “a story set in England?”

Obviously not; Middle-earth is a precursor to our Earth, but the Silmarillion is explicitly set on a continent that has since sunk beneath the waves. The Elves as a people originate from an inland sea some 2,000 miles east of the Atlantic - if we’re determined to map Middle-earth to our Earth, that’d be the Caspian Sea. The Men just come from ‘the East’ - Tolkien didn’t say how far East. (There are three races of Elves - does it really seem likely that they are meant to  correspond to ‘blonde white people’, ‘silver-haired white people’ and ‘black-haired white people’, when black hair is actually not particularly common to white people? far more likely, Elven racial categories are different than our own, and picking any human to play an Elf is casting the Elf ‘wrongly’, racially.)

So, okay, ‘Anglo-Saxon myth” doesn’t mean ‘takes place in England’. How about “draws on English mythology?” Nope, that can’t be it either. Most of the content of Children of Húrin is a retelling of a myth arc in the Kalevala, a Finnish myth. The Dwarves are named from Norse mythology. Tolkien said Gondor had Byzantine influences. Clearly he was willing to draw on cultural traditions and historical influences from well outside Britain. 

Maybe he meant something like “possessing an essentially British character”? If so, the fandom has definitely failed to preserve the specifically British character of Tolkien’s work. The movies were filmed in New Zealand! What a travesty! Peter Jackson isn’t a Brit! Viggo Mortensen isn’t a Brit!

For some reason, people who are concerned with Tolkien’s intent to create an Anglo-Saxon mythology are always a lot less concerned about this than they are about race. And I think that’s something worth analyzing. If a Black person born and raised in Great Britain seems to you to be less worthy a representative of an essential British Character than a Danish American actor or a New Zealand movie director, then I feel like the objection isn’t really about Britishness, it’s about race. Unless you feel like whiteness is an essential element of Britishness (and in that case I’ll disagree with you) then there’s no reason non-white characters are threatening to the Britishness of Tolkien’s work.

And more than that, when Tolkien took the Finnish Kalevala and retold its story in Middle-earth, was he disregarding the envisioning of the Finnish saga authors? I don’t think so. It’s not disregarding the intent of an author to reshape his story for a new world and new time. Tolkien, who knew more about myths and their history than anyone, knew this very well. “Creating a myth” means “creating something that can be changed and reinterpreted and retold”. And so I think that anyone telling Tolkien’s story with characters of color is being exactly as disrespectful to the original as Tolkien was being disrespectful to his source myths - which is to say, not at all. No truly meaningful story is weakened by retelling and reinterpretation.

You asked “Is it a good idea to disregard the author’s envisioning for the sake of racial awareness?”. I’d ask “is whiteness the most important part of the author’s envisioning, as you understand it? is it impossible to understand a myth in terms of its British influences while doubting that whiteness is an essential part of that? why are we so damn sure that a race of nonhuman beings who awoke in the Middle-east are definitely assuredly meant to be white anyway? and would Tolkien have really thought it was disrespecting a myth to retell it in a different setting?”

Because I don’t think so.

anonymous asked:

Wow wow wow, just a moment (it's me that one British person who made the bus pass joke). A fellow Autistic person? Hah small world hay? Still I was told it was like 1 in a 100 or somethin'.

1 in 100 is still quite a lot of people when you think in terms of the entire world. Plus, we’re on the internet. A lot of autistic people prefer to socialize on the internet because they’re better at writing their thoughts than speaking them. So you’re SUPER likely to meet autistic people on the internet. ouo

anonymous asked:

Hermaphrodite is an outdated and offensive term. Intersex is the term. Also Hijra are different than that, it's a more complicated term.

Comments like this always crack me up. OMG the caption from a photograph from 1860 is outdated! Who would have thunk it. I don’t think it’s proper to whitewash the attitudes of the past in order to protect the sensibilities of the present. Also I’d think it was pretty obvious that I don’t write the captions myself, so please don’t direct your criticisms to me, but to the institution that provided the copy, in this case The British Library. I’m sure they’d love to hear from you and begin a pedantic debate. That said, we here at Centuriespast constantly strive to provide our guests with the most pleasant of journeys through culture and time, so if you’re unsatisfied in any way please see the docent at the front desk for a full refund of your entry fee. We’ll hold it for you under the noble name of Anonymous.

I find it annoying when people say they wish they had a British accent (not naming names but I’m pretty sure you all know who I mean).

It’s just irritating because they seem oblivious to the fact that they’re encompassing different countries’ accents and their dialects into one term, and most of the time they mean to say an English accent but think that it means the same thing as a British accent.

I know England has it’s own regional accents (I’m from the midlands, but mine isn’t nearly as strong as others’!) but I just wanted to share my thoughts.

Rant over, thanks for reading!

RC9GN Episode Titles' References (Under READ MORE)

I SAID I’D DO IT DO YOU THINK I’M PLAYING ?! I HAVE ALL 53 EPISODES UNDER THE CUT. (52 and 53 have the same episode name tho) I wished I spent more effort on my homework like how I spent for this TwT.


Keep reading

anonymous asked:

ok here's the thing I just really don't get this whole fetishizing Asians concept? it just isn't making sense to me. I truly DO love Asian culture and in terms of looks, I find Asian features really attractive! if you put 2 decent looking men in front of me and one of them was Asian, I would pick the Asian person. YES, I understand personality and all that is important, but we are talking about preferences in looks here. EVERYONE has a preference in looks, its impossible not too.

everyone has something they find attractive: “i love people with british accents”, or “i think middle eastern girls have really nice cheekbones.” idk. for me its Asian. of course this is a generalization, no one is going to go into absolute specific detail on everything they like in a person. and obviously i understand that not EVERY single Asian person is what I think they might be. they are people and ALL have their own personalities, but at initial meeting, I’ll most likely be drawn to them.

i’ll be drawn to them because im intrigued by them. and this doesn’t apply to only those I think are “hot”, this is applies to anyone because I always wanna talk to them, I always wanna get to know about them and their way of life because I genuinely find it INTERESTING. because of this, I tend to automatically get excited when I meet Asian people, but is that so wrong?

its not like its BAD is it? its like saying I like action movies; yea sure i’m grouping them and they aren’t ALL actually my preference but im just saying in general I like the genre (ive looked through the korea/notkorea blog and Idk if the previous statement will sound offensive bc apparently you guys don’t like analogies of any kind).

also in korea theyre constantly talking about ideal type and what they like in terms of looks, how is that any different? (is that only idols? I doubt it since its such a hot topic) please don’t say that I shouldn’t say anything based on just variety shows, dramas, etc. bc the thing is those are all PART of Korean culture so what am I supposed to do if not get an impression from it? im not trying to attack anything im just explaining my views on the situation and I want to understand you.

my point is that I just don’t get how what I feel is wrong. everyone, literally every human being has a preference. yea sometimes on tumblr posts, for humor or exaggeration purposes, people might say something that is a total and complete overgeneralization but it doesn’t make sense to hate us for that. we are smart enough to know that looks AREN’T everything. I just feel like this whole thing is blown out of proportion, especially since we aren’t saying anything bad….just sometimes too good?

My answer is below the cut

Keep reading