catboyg4mzee:

astralshipper:

hi i just want everyone to know that i will never ever EVER be angry with anyone for not replying to my texts even though you’re visibly online and reblogging/posting. i understand that holding a conversation takes a lot more energy and effort than scrolling and posting and that’s 100% okay. take care of yourself first. the whole idea that you HAVE to reply to someone when you’re online is toxic and makes mentally ill people feel as though they are bad friends just because they can’t always reply within minutes. 

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT FINALLY SOMEBODY SAID IT

@ some of your (esp younger) anons who feel bad about their childhoods slipping away: nostalgia is a liar a lot of times! When i was 18 i went thru a nostalgic phase and wanted to be a kid again. But now that im more of an adult, i miss being 18! The grass is always greener on the other side and youve gotta remember to try to find new things to be happy about in the now. Odds are you’ll feel nostalgic in the future about the fun ur having now

rnorningstars:

rnorningstars:

there’s this specific brand of lazy media criticism seen on tumblr and twitter that I like to call “checklist criticism”. it is called like this because it consists on checking for the presence of superficial signifiers of a Bad Trope™ (as if going through a static checklist) in a given piece of media and declaring said piece of media to be, therefore, bad, without taking into account factors such as context, nuances, the handling, the framing, and, most importantly, what makes this bad trope bad in first place, and if the harm it usually causes is still being perpetrated in this particularly story given the aforementioned contextual variables.

an example of checklist criticism that happens a lot is the common “[x] this tv show has a female character [x] who dies before the show is over, therefore = Woman In The Refrigerator™, show bad!” Okay but, how did she died? What were the circumstances around her death? What purpose did it serve in the larger story? Did she die just to advance someone else’s story or she died fulfilling her own arc? Did she had any agency in the way she went or was she a passive victim of circumstance? Was her death dignified or unnecessarily violent? Are there any other important female characters that make it to the end? The Woman In The Refrigerator™ trope is not bad because women dying in fiction is inherently bad – if no female character were ever allowed to die, even in war or crime or post-apocalypt fiction, there’d be very low stakes for female characters, and low stakes mean very little reason to care about them. The WITR trope is bad because it’s about treating female characters as more expendable than male ones, banalizing violence against women in fiction, and cutting short female representation from pieces of fiction – which, most of the time, is already low. A female character whose death has an actual point in her own storyline, who’s afforded the same weight and dignity as male character’s deaths, and in a story where there’s no shortage of other female characters that survive the end of the story, is not a Fridged Woman, she’s just a female character who dies.

Another example

– and here I’m taking an example from my own identity, so I don’t get accused of stepping on anyone’s feet – would be something like “this book has a [x] latina character, she’s [x] loud and spontaneous, she likes to [x] flirt and sleep around. Spicy Latina™! Book racist!” Okay, is she a caricature of a loud and spontaneous latina or is she a fully realized human being with a fully rounded personality, including dreams and wishes and opinions and vulnerabilities and agency, who just happens to be spontaneous, like so many people across multiple ethnicities happen to be? Is being flirty and spontaneous her only character traits or does she have more (that may go against other stereotypes about latinas)? Is her flirtness and sexuality framed in a fetishistic way that favors a (white) male gaze or it is framed in a nuanced way that prioritizes her pov and her agency and her pleasure and her happiness? Did the author really give her those traits because they’re a lazy fuck that couldn’t think of other traits to give his latina character other than spontaneous and flirty or do those characters traits have an actual point in the context of this particular story? Again: keep in mind why bad tropes are bad in first place.

We live in a time where reductive criticisms are an easy source of clout over actually thoughtful and deep analysis that don’t easily lend themselves to the type of short and snappy hot takes for twitok format and I’m exhausted.                      

Like, this lack of understanding of what makes certain bad tropes bad is how we ended up with a plethora of male writers patting themselves in the back for creating a ~deconstruction of the Manic Pixie Dream Girl trope~ by writing stories where the male protagonist has to learn that the girl they assigned as their personal MPDG is not interested in fixing him, while still making it all about their male protagonists POV and their story and their arc. The MPDG is not bad because women being quirky is bad or because people helping their partners grow is bad. The MPDG is bad because it’s about women being narrative tools with no inner life helping the growth of the male protagonist, and if you write a story where she still has no personhood and is still pretty much defined by your male protag’s view of her you’re not changing anything just because the dude has to learn by the end that his view of her was wrong and she never wanted to save him. you still wrote a story about a flat female character that helps the pov male protag learn a lesson, only this time it was a different lesson, you just changed the window dressing.   

dilfgirl:

dilfgirl:

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: it’s more important to know and understand fully why something is harmful than it is to drop everything deemed problematic. It’s performative and does nothing. People wonder why nobody has critical thinking skills and this is part of it because no one knows how to simousltansly critique and consume media. You need to use discernment.

This is ultimately why propaganda is going to work on you. Because you never learned how to think for yourself and the actual ideology behind things. You simply rely on group think and the bare minimum explanations to tell you what’s good and bad.

teashoesandhair:

teashoesandhair:

If I could impart any wisdom at all from 10 years of working in TV and Film, it would be that literally none of your faves are who you think they are. You don’t know a single celebrity beyond the facade and the performance they put out into the world. Even those candid interviews are crafted and designed to maintain a certain image for the benefit of their career. And none of this is to say that your fave is secretly a complete arsehole, but this weird obsession that so many people have with acting like they personally know and therefore love certain celebrities is incredibly weird to me, not to mention dangerous. So many people, particularly young people, have these bizarrely obsessive online presences dedicated around their favourite celebrities, where they spend hours and hours just tweeting about that person and getting into harassment campaigns on their behalf, and it’s like… your fave literally has no idea who you are. Your fave once sent someone a shitty email because they tried to charge £900 of room service to a production credit card and the production said no. Your fave once tried to make someone else pick up their dog’s shit and nearly set a hotel room on fire. Your fave once trashed their luxury penthouse apartment that they stayed in for free with dirty nappies and rusty nails and refused to pay to have it cleaned. Your fave is just a finite sack of meat, blood and bone. You really, really don’t need to idolise them. You love a persona, not a person, and exalting that just isn’t worth so much of your time and energy.

A few people have added comments and tags on this to the effect of ‘OP clearly made this post just to dunk on those few celebrities that wronged her’ so I would just like to make it clear that sometimes celebrities are different in a good way!! I once worked with a celeb whose entire public image was that they were a super serious filmmaker, very sedate and aloof and untouchable, and all of their Twitter stans love them because they’re so SOLEMN and ARTISTIC, but in real life they kept giving me M&Ms and drew me a really awful picture of a dog on the back of an old envelope and talked almost constantly about astronauts… the point of this post isn’t ‘celebrities are shite’, just ‘you literally have no idea what they’re like when they’re not being paid to be there.’

shining-latios:

shining-latios:

grown fucking weirdos MY age will really come onto this site, be as abrasive as possible to kids in fandoms of series made… for kids, then somehow make themselves out to be the victims

if you’re an adult and wanna participate in a fandom made for people outside of your age group you NEED to have some level of respect for the people in the age demographic that the show was literally designed for because the source material will always be made for them first, not you. how is this such a hard concept for people whose brains are finished fucking developing and have no excuse for this horrible behavior to grasp

killjoyjay:

y’all do know the age in your bio thing is for adults right. minors should not be sharing actual ages online. if you must write something just say you are a minor (or if you want to be more specific try <14 or 15<). i cant stress enough that the internet is not as safe as you think it is, and the less personal details minors hand out, the better

timemachineyeah:

Gen Z is awesome and generational fighting is bad, but I do sometimes talk to Gen Z folks and I’m like… oh… you cannot comprehend before the internet.

Like activists have been screaming variations on “educate yourself!” for as long as I’ve been alive and probably longer, but like… actually doing so? Used to be harder?

And anger at previous generations for not being good enough is nothing new. I remember being a kid and being horrified to learn how recent desegregation had been and that my parents and grandparents had been alive for it. Asking if they protested or anything and my mom being like “I was a child” and my grandma being like “well, no, I wasn’t into politics” but I was a child when I asked so that didn’t feel like much of an excuse from my mother at the time and my grandmother’s excuse certainly didn’t hold water and I remember vowing not to be like that.

So kids today looking at adults and our constant past failures and being like “How could you not have known better? Why didn’t you DO better?” are part of a long tradition of kids being horrified by their history, nothing new, and also completely justified and correct. That moral outrage is good.

But I was talking to a kid recently about the military and he was talking about how he’d never be so stupid to join that imperialist oppressive terrorist organization and I was like, “Wait, do you think everyone who has ever joined the military was stupid or evil?” and he was like, well maybe not in World War 2, but otherwise? Yeah.

And I was like, what about a lack of education? A lack of money? The exploitation of the lower classes? And he was like, well, yeah, but that’s not an excuse, because you can always educate yourself before making those choices.

And I was like, how? Are you supposed to educate yourself?

And he was like, well, duh, research? Look it up!

And I was like, and how do you do that?

And he was like, start with google! It’s not that hard!

And I was like, my friend. My kid. Google wasn’t around when my father joined the military.

Then go to the library! The library in the small rural military town my father grew up in? Yeah, uh, it wasn’t exactly going to be overflowing with anti-military resources.

Well then he should have searched harder!

How? How was he supposed to know to do that? Even if he, entirely independently figured out he should do that, how was he supposed to find that information?

He was a kid. He was poor. He was the first person in his family to aspire to college. And then by the time he knew what he signed up for it was literally a criminal offense for him to try to leave. Because that’s the contract you sign.

(Now, listen, my father is also not my favorite person and we agree on very little, so this example may be a bit tarnished by those facts, but the material reality of the exploitative nature of military recruitment remains the same.)

And this is one of a few examples I’ve come across recently of members of Gen Z just not understanding how hard it was to learn new ideas before the internet. I’m not blaming anyone or even claiming it’s disproportionate or bad. But the same kids that ten years ago I was marveling at on vacation because they didn’t understand the TV in the hotel room couldn’t just play more Mickey Mouse Clubhouse on demand – because they’d never encountered linear prescheduled TV, are growing into kids who cannot comprehend the difficulty of forming a new worldview or making life choices when you cannot google it. When you have maybe one secondhand source or you have to guess based on lived experience and what you’ve heard. Information, media, they have always been instant.

Society should’ve been better, people should’ve known better, it shouldn’t have taken so long, and we should be better now. That’s all true.

But controlling information is vital to controlling people, and information used to be a lot more controlled. By physical law and necessity! No conspiracy required! There’s limited space on a newspaper page! There’s limited room in a library! If you tried to print Wikipedia it would take 2920 bound volumes. That’s just Wikipedia. You could not keep the internet’s equivalent of resources in any small town in any physical form. It wasn’t there. We did not have it. When we had a question? We could not just look it up.

Kids today are fortunate to have dozens of firsthand accounts of virtually everything important happening at all times. In their pockets.

(They are also cursed by this, as we all are, because it’s overwhelming and can be incredibly bleak.)

If anything, today the opposite problem occurs – too much information and not enough time or context to organize it in a way that makes sense. Learning to filter out the garbage without filtering so much you insulate yourself from diverse ideas, figuring out who’s reliable, that’s where the real problem is now.

But I do think it has created, through no fault of anyone, this incapacity among the young to truly understand a life when you cannot access the relevant information. At all. Where you just have to guess and hope and do your best. Where educating yourself was not an option.

Where the first time you heard the word lesbian, it was from another third grader, and she learned it from a church pastor, and it wasn’t in the school library’s dictionary so you just had to trust her on what it meant.

I am not joking, I did not know the actual definition of the word “fuck” until I was in high school. Not for lack of trying! I was a word nerd, and I loved research! It literally was not in our dictionaries, and I knew I’d get in trouble if I asked. All I knew was it was a “bad word”, but what it meant or why it was bad? No clue.

If history felt incomprehensibly cruel and stupid while I was a kid who knew full well the feeling of not being able to get the whole story, I cannot imagine how cartoonishly evil it must look from the perspective of someone who’s always been able to get a solid answer to any question in seconds for as long as they’ve been alive. To Gen Z, we must all look like monsters.

I’m glad they know the things we did not. I hope one day they are able to realize how it was possible for us not to know. How it would not have been possible for them to know either, if they had lived in those times. I do not need their forgiveness. But I hope they at least understand. Information is so powerful. Understanding that is so important to building the future. Underestimating that is dangerous.

We were peasants in a world before the printing press. We didn’t know. I’m so sorry. For so many of us we couldn’t have known. I cannot offer any other solace other than this – my sixty year old mother is reading books on anti-racism and posting about them to Facebook, where she’s sharing what’s she’s learning with her friends. Ignorance doesn’t have to last forever.

queerautism:

furbearingbrick:

rslashrats:

i understand the sentiment with the whole “people prefer dogs over cats because cats have boundaries” thing but dogs have boundaries too. i feel like people need to stop acting like dogs don’t also have boundaries

Fun fact! The main reason chihuahuas have a reputation for being “mean” is that people deliberately tease them and ignore warning signals they’d otherwise heed if it were a medium- to large- breed. Goading your pet into a growling fit for a “funny” video isn’t cute!

People often treat small dogs’ warning signals as funny, and punish big dogs’, because they think a big dog growling is dangerous. No, it’s telling you it was something to stop, just like small dogs are. If you take that away, either by punishing or disregarding it as funny and continuing, what you get is a dog who feels the need to escalate closer to biting without warning next time.