It wasn't direct, but it was very thinly veiled in your response to your post, which I was initially very receptive and polite about (despite the shady nature of it to my prior posts). I've followed your account for years and have always enjoyed reading your meta, even if I don't agree 100% of the time with 100% of your takes, so I'm disheartened at the turn of things.
I know you didn't "ask me" to share anything, but it felt as though my character was being called into question by the insinuations in your response, so that feels like a call to speak about my own potential experiences to defend myself, not because you said anything, but in defense of myself to my followers who may have the patience to read such a long-winded back-and-forth. But, I think that was an irresponsible thing to do to a stranger because you don't know what I could have been through in real life and how such insinuations such as those you drew could impact a person.
It was clear to me that your post was directed at the several posts I made yesterday surrounding Ursa, The Search, and Katara's hypothetical reactions in a Zutara AU. I didn't entirely agree about your takes, but felt a discussion could be had, and it made sense for me to respond, since it was pretty clearly re: my Ursa posts from the same day or day before. I wasn't just hopping on the post for the hell of a debate, and never had any bad intentions, and definitely never imagined it to go South when I replied somewhat disagreeing. I felt the need to comment as my points felt "called out" and it was being somewhat "subtweeted" towards my post being "comfortable judging an abuse victim" (paraphrasing). There was a clear insinuation there about people making criticisms of Ursa character's choices as a parent and a lack of respect towards REAL abuse victims, which of course, putting two-and-two together, anyone would find offensive.
It's disingenuous to say you said "nothing to me" when this is what you wrote in response to my post:
“And I think discussions about what an abused person should have or could have done, even in a fantasy setting, are short-sighted and border on victim blaming.”
“It is very easy, and incredibly callous to say what someone should have done when you are not in their position. Just like it would be if we were to say that Zuko should have done x to prevent himself from being abused.”
“It is shifting blame away from the actual abuser and onto a victim for not being able to stop it from happening.”
“Moreover, it shows a lack of understanding of what that kind of trauma can do to someone, psychologically.”
“I'm not interested in pointing fingers at her for what she ‘could have,’ done.”
Each of these statements might avoid accusatory pronouns like "you", but the message is the same. I'm discussing what I think Ursa could have done, so of course it's calling me "short-sighted" and "bordering on victim blaming". These are criticisms of my intellect and integrity while responding to the points I was making.
I don't think I need to go on for each and every statement and dissect it.
And, you're doing it again here, saying I am victim blaming for saying that Ursa was being a bad parent in choosing to forget her children for all of time and never even hold out or wait or attempt to contact them.
"I said that calling her a bad mother for what she didn't do is victim blaming, because it is."
You absolutely can call someone a bad parent for something they did not do. It's called neglect in many cases. That's not what happened in Ursa's case, but I think it is silly to say that Ursa can't be criticized for what she didn't do, lest it be "victim blaming".
You're also addressing my previous, independent posts that I made initially here, confirming that I was correct in that your post was a response to mine, which makes it very clear why I would answer. The response post to mine had a judgmental tone about it towards people that criticize Ursa's character, which I was doing, and thinking about the day before. It was making personal, blanket statements about real people who critique the writing of Ursa's character in the comics, and I wanted to respond for the reasons I mentioned above.
"I also said nothing about the harm Zuko has done."
I was using an analogy to compare the two cases.
"I was comparing blaming Ursa for not being able to see her children after she was literally forced out of their lives to blaming Zuko for not fighting back against Ozai. Because even if Zuko had fought back, there is no guarantee he could have prevented Ozai from hurting him. Even if Ursa had not forgotten her children, there is no guarantee she could ever see them again, and indeed, we are shown that she believed she would never see them again or be able to help them. She did not "throw her memories to the wind," she is shown sobbing and heart broken and believing she has no other choice."
I don't think that's a fair comparison. One is a direct consequence in the spur of the moment act of violence. The other is Ursa making a decision to never remember her children's faces, laughs, smiles, first words, first steps, or ever get to know what happens to them or hold out hope for them. That's pretty crappy and selfish. I understand how a level of terrible abuse could lead someone down a path to make a selfish decision, but I still think it's horrible and selfish and cruel of a thing to do.
That's not blaming Ursa for her abuse and it's insulting to continue to say so to me over a character analysis disagreement/judgement/critique/whatever you wanna call it. It is a direct insult to me to say that I am victim blaming over domestic violence because I think that a character, who's a DV victim, made a selfish choice. Ursa can both be a sympathetic character who's a victim, and a complex person who also made bad, selfish, cruel choices and acted as a bad mother in moments of trauma. I don't think me having that opinion translates to me "victim blaming" those who have suffered DV. Again, I find that very insulting.
"You seem to be misconstruing the idea of forgiving someone for actual harm done vs blaming them for, again, thought crimes or an inability to act in an abusive situation. And your language has gone well beyond thinking about narrative possibilities and into personal moral judgments, not based on harm caused, as is the case with Azula or Zuko burning Kyoshi Island, but on Ursa's inability to stop an abusive person from doing harm. And that is victim blaming."
I'm not misconstruing anything. A lack of action can equate to guilt in many cases. Not equating the severity, but there's a reason you can go to jail for not calling 911 when you witness someone drowning. If you see someone begging for help on the side of the road and think, "someone else will help them", that bystander effect is selfish, your inaction is selfish and certain people have higher degrees of duty than others. A public servant should feel more of a duty to help a citizen in peril than your average joe. A mother has a duty to at least try to check in on her children. She didn't, to our knowledge. I think she's kinda crappy for that.
I think Ursa not trying to do anything to contact her children or even check in on them is bad, yes. I also think her direct action: choosing to forget her children for all of time and giving up on them forever and not getting to know if they live or die— was bad and selfish, yeah. You can absolutely disagree with that take, lots of people do. My problem lies with the insinuation that I'm morally inferior because of my disagreement and that I have the mindset of blaming real life domestic violence victims for their abuse because of it.
Yes, people judge fictional characters. I have seen you do it on your account many, many times over the years. I'm judging Ursa on something I think is immoral. Yes. That's not a "wrong" thing to do.
Not once have I been insensitive to the horrific abuse Ursa suffered, belittled it, blamed her for not getting out and taking the kids with her before it happened, or said it's her fault Zuko was burned or anything of the sort. My language has been nothing but respectful and considerate, thinking of the real life victims who might stumble across my words.
But this is stretching the paper thin to say that criticizing any action (or sin of omission in action, in my view) by a DV victim is victim blaming them for their abuse.
"You don't have to agree with me or read or comment on my posts, but please do not come here and attack me because I don't agree with you."
I did not attack you. Your response was the one indirectly criticizing my integrity on a personal level beyond discussing characterizations. Your original post was clearly a subtweet at mine. I responded with a polite disagreement because I knew it was indirectly addressing my posts. Then, your post took indirect shots at my personal integrity. This is flipping the script entirely.
blakekathryn
romaincrisis
