moon knight enthusiast

atlanta | she/her | 20 | https://atlantaharris.carrd.co

[faustzen]

Heyo, I've maybe? returned! I'm not sure if I've ever actually introduced myself, so I guess I'll do that now. (. ❛ ᴗ ❛.)

My art tag on here is #squid’s art

I'm Atlanta! I'm 20 and my pronouns are she/her. Here's some links!

🌼🌼🌼

Twitter: @squidisticc

Instagram: @/squidzen @squidistic

TikTok: @squidisticc

Carrd: https://atlantaharris.carrd.co/

Commissions: https://sodascommissions.carrd.co/

🌼🌼🌼

I'll add to this when necessary!

[lockdaisy]

Appreciation for Leon’s Character Design in Resident Evil 4 Remake:

I just wanted to discuss Leon’s character design in RE4 Remake, because WOW, holy moly

Now first, I’d like to admit that it took some time for me to get used to his new design in this game. Leon was THE first video game character I ever found sexy, so his OG RE4 appearance was and still is absolutely beloved to me, and thus any differences between his design in this game and his design in the OG RE4 were jarring enough that I found his new design off-putting initially

But now that I’ve gotten used to it, I can confidently say that it stands right alongside OG RE4 as THE iconic Leon character design, imo

And I just wanted to talk a little bit more in depth about why I love it so much, because it is CLEAR that Capcom put a lot of thought and care into his new design

(Putting under a read more so that I don't clutter up the tag with my borderline incoherent ramblings)

• First, on a more general note, I’d like to say that I deeply appreciate the fact that, even in 1998 with the OG RE2, Capcom designed Leon with the intent of making him a pretty boy. It was a HUGELY unconventional and brave decision on Capcom’s part since it was and still is exceedingly rare for a video game, especially a horror video game, that has a western male protagonist and that is attempting to appeal to broader international sensibilities to make that male protagonist a pretty boy. The overwhelming majority of the time, in order to conform to broader international expectations of masculinity, if a video game has a western male protagonist, they will make him either completely average-looking or a gruff and grizzled hyper-masculine man

Now, am I saying that there's something wrong with enjoying or preferring average-looking or gruff and grizzled hyper-masculine male characters? Absolutely not. After all, I myself have my fair share of them that I enjoy, e.g. James Sunderland and Gordon Freeman. And am I saying that video game companies design western male characters with the intent of making them ugly? Absolutely not. Most of them just designed them with the intent of making them handsome in a way that conformed to traditional international standards of masculinity

In actuality, all I'm trying to say is, video games very rarely make western male protagonists pretty boys due to a fear of enraging international audiences who have very rigid notions of masculinity. A fear that is very warranted, in fact, considering how vitriolic male gamers get whenever video games have the ~audacity~ to make western male protagonists pretty boys. For example, back when MGS2 first released and Raiden was the protagonist, many male fans went into an apoplectic frenzy of hate, and they justified doing so by saying the 2001 equivalent of "forcing me to play as a pretty boy is ruining civilization and infecting me with effeminate wokeness." So, because of that, many video game companies absolutely refuse to make western male protagonists pretty boys

And honestly, it makes Leon's character design as a pretty boy even more unique and bold. So much so, even, to the extent that, back in 2005, when I was eight years old and first began playing the OG Resident Evil 4 on my GameCube (it was my first Resident Evil game, by the way), I was downright gobsmacked when I first saw Leon, because he was the first western male protagonist in a video game that I saw that was pretty. And I was not the only one feeling this way, because this unique design definitely sent shockwaves throughout the gaming community at the time, as his pretty looks made him stand out among the crowd of gruff and grizzled manly men and turned him into one of the few male video game sex symbols out there. (And thankfully, Leon was cool enough in RE4 that male fans embraced him and his pretty boy status. Funnily enough, they did the same for Raiden once MGRR came out too)

And Leon is most definitely a pretty boy in this game, as even Krauser himself explicitly acknowledges

• Next, I love how they blended Leon's RE2 Remake and OG RE4 designs. Capcom faced the unenviable task of not only maturing Leon's RE2R face (which was and still is controversial among the fandom), but having to do so in a way that bridged the gap between RE2R Leon and RE4R Leon while operating under the looming shadow of the universally beloved OG RE4 design. They knew that, with Leon's status as a sex symbol, they were under especially heightened scrutiny to get this right, and that they would be subject to particularly severe backlash if they botched it. Thankfully, they somehow managed to strike the right balance in this game and matured his face in a way that not only made him very closely resemble the iconic OG RE4 design, but remain recognizable as someone who had once been RE2R Leon as well. Overall, I am supremely satisfied with the results, as they modified away a lot of the issues I had with his RE2R face while still maintaining visual continuity and making him very pretty like his OG RE4 design. Both OG RE4 and RE4R Leons are pretty, and I'm so happy

• Also, I love love love the fact that they made RE4 Remake Leon very visibly traumatized. Everything about his appearance screams depression and PTSD: his cheeks carry hints of gauntness, his gaze is haunted, and the bags beneath his eyes are so deep that they're literally bruised purple. Yeah, while he got a lot more muscular, all of it is just pure rangy muscle, which suggests that even though he exercises a lot, he likely struggles to eat enough, which is why his face is more gaunt than it should be. Also, his haunted gaze just very obviously shows that he's seen things that no human being should ever have to witness. And his painfully exhausted eyes show that he's overwhelmingly sleep deprived because either he is overworked to the point that he never gets any rest or he himself struggles to sleep because of nightmares, or both. In fact, his sleep exhaustion is so severe that there is literally purple discoloration down to his literal cheekbones. This man hasn't seen a bed in years

Yeah, there are a lot of video game characters that are traumatized. However, for the vast majority of them, their trauma doesn't manifest in their appearance in any way. They'll still have bright eyes, full cheeks, and flawless faces. But Leon??? Oh, his trauma is visible from miles away. You can visibly tell that Raccoon City turned his world upside down, that the U.S. government enslaved him by threatening to kill Sherry if he didn't agree to work for them, and that he was forced to re-traumatize himself over and over again by constantly going into missions where he faces off against life-threatening bioterrorist monsters, and that it all took an enormous toll on his physical, emotional, and mental health

• In addition, I adore how his design makes it believable that he's an experienced badass special agent. His default facial expression is calm and stoic, his gaze is visibly jaded, and his entire unfazed mien shows that he is cool and collected. It is automatically believable that he is a seasoned special agent who has encountered these kinds of threats numerous times before. He's seen it all before, and he knows he'll see it all again

• Lastly, on an ending note, I love how Capcom managed to make him look visibly traumatized and seasoned while still keeping his prettiness. It is very difficult to give a character the kinds of visual flaws that usually denote trauma (gaunt cheeks, eye bags, etc) while still keeping them pretty, but Capcom knocked it right out of the park. He's not only visibly traumatized and experienced, but he's also very pretty. In fact, rather than making it so that he's pretty despite his visible trauma and experience, they made it so that his visible trauma and experience actually enhances his prettiness. Those gaunt cheeks and exhausted eyes give him a tragic beauty that cannot be matched

And it makes Leon's character design even more unique since he's not only a pretty boy, which is already very rare for western male protagonists in the video game world, but he's a visibly traumatized pretty boy, which is even rarer

I just..... gaaaaaaah, I love his design, I love his design sooooooo muuuuuuuuuch

[were--ralph]

cant stop thinking about this video

[were--ralph]

For context this was in response to someone saying their cybertruck was heavy duty

[sexygaywizard]

[things-about-cars-in-posts]

oh no no NO no no I am sorry my dear @thebirdtm you are NOT underselling one of the most seminal pieces of television of my entire childhood like that on MY watch.

"How is claiming they drowned a Hilux possibly underselling it" GREAT question.

To start with a little disclaimer, Top Gear's Hilux did not start off, as in the video above, in pristine condition. It started off with nigh-on 300k kms (for you yankees, that's about 8.4 million Boeing 737 wingspans) and a condition to match.

And it's only once careless driving around town yielded zilch in given shits...

(look, I found a local newspaper picturing it being driven around!)

...that they decided to drown it. Now, the underselling part: if you told me that they drowned a pickup the first place my mind would go to would be "driving it through a river a bit too deep for it, perhaps as deep as its height, until it stalls and then tugging it back out. You will concede that's rather different from tying it down on the seashore with the second highest tide in the world...

...and leaving it there until it engulfs the whole truck...

...only for the ropes to snap...

...and for the truck to be lost to the tides for FIVE HOURS.

(and for those wondering, yes, just as promised, well within an hour and the mandatory limits of basic tools and no spare parts, up the mechanic made the thing fire and away the presenter drove it - I must imagine doing a number on his clothes in the process.)

Oh also I would have mentioned the caravan.

Or at least the wrecking ball.

But hey, at least the fire was mentioned.

Still, I feel it's criminal to leave out how they celebrated it surviving all it did: by parking it at the top of a 23 story building for all to see! :)

Wait NO-

Well, that was uncalled for. Given what it survived, it deserved to rest in a museum instead of being unceremoniously cleared out with the other chunks of public housing that buried it.

Or at least, given that buried it wasn't...

...to be tumbled down from the rubble utop which it sat...

...and be fueled up.

"be fueled up", pfft, what for?, I hear you say. And you are right.

Look at that thing, you say.

Let's be serious now, however pretty of a story it would be that's not a truck that will do anything remotely in the ballpark of firing up, let alone running.

And again, you are right.

The battery was disconnected.

Sorted that, tho

"You can't be serious." Oh darling I sure can! "Well the presenters can't then" no no, I assure you, it lived. Go see it for yourself! It's at the National Motor Museum in Beaulieau, England!

I grew up watching Top Gear and it shaped me in many ways. My adoration of old Toyota Hiluxes is one of them.

[kyraneko]

The Toyota Hilux is absolutely the small god of endurance and defiance (and possibly masochism).

[thivell]

yes I'm reposting about a small god truck are you kidding me

[faustzen]

Howdy, y'all. Remember how I used to post The Arcana imagines? Good times. Anyway, I still write fanfic, but never posted it anywhere since that era. Well, I finally did! Big ol' series I'm working on for you Resident Evil fans. :]

Also have some art to accompany it, which I'll be adding more as it progresses.

If you're at all interested, give chapter one a read, and let me know your thoughts if you do!

[the-scarecrowlover]

Matt Mercer - Did He Really “Bury Your Gays” ?

(This essay contains unmarked spoilers to both C1 and C2. If you are not up to date with C2 ep 26/27, definitely don’t read it, but the spoilers for C1 are not as strong. I apologize for typos and grammar mistakes ahead of time. I wrote this in a day.)

Let me preface this by saying that I am fucking terrified of expressing my opinion on Tumblr. Publishing this essay out in the open may very well wreck my chances at ever becoming anyone online. I might get blocked. I might get insulted. Which is sad because as queer person, I should not be afraid to expressed my opinion on queer matters on social media platform that encourages these types of conversations.

But you know what? I’m doing it anyway. I’m doing it because as an activist, I believe that it is my responsibility to address this conversation in full, leaving out no details, and making sure that everyone is on the same page so we may move forward. Therefore, I ask you all to please bare with me while I attempt to propose something to think about, debate, and discuss so we can be agents of change.

I’ve seen a lot of arguments floating around on this sight debating whether what Matt Mercer did to Mollymauk was “wrong”. More specifically, there was been debate on whether it was a “Bury Your Gays” moment. Over the course of this debate, I have noticed the opinions come and go in waves: At first, there was outrage; then there was outrage against those who were outraged; and now that things have settled down, I am seeing more constructive arguments on both sides, which is wonderful to see.

But as a graduate student who has spent their entire academic life learning about rhetoric, semantics, definitions, and the importance of making SOLID arguments to avoid getting trapped in cyclical debates and logical fallacies, I believe that talking about this “Bury Your Gays” issue is a conversation that must be had, no matter how uncomfortable or controversial it may be.

Therefore, this opinion piece will attempt to address - in a semi-formal format - three major questions that I have formulated after doing a significant amount of research on numerous social media platforms:

1) Is it time we amended the definition of “Bury Your Gays” so to better describe events such as those that happened in Critical Role?

2) Should we include a more nuanced interpretation of BYG which does not carry the negative connotation that the current trope harbors?

3) Should it be expected of a white cis-het ally Dungeon Masters like Matt Mercer to treat the characters of his close friends differently because of their gender/sexuality, and most importantly, is giving such characters special treatment helpful or harmful to the cause?

In this essay, I do not propose answers to these specific questions, but instead open up the discussion to you all, my fellow queer D&D players and Critters. Instead, this essay is intended to answer a few frequently asked questions about the debate, bring forth facts about Critical Role and Matt Mercer that new critters may not be aware of, expand on how the first and second campaign are more linked than some may realize, and explore how the conversation can be had with a wider audience.

So without further ado, here it is: Matt Mercer - Did her really “Bury Your Gays”?

Upon learning that people were blaming Matt for “Burying Your Gays” after the killing of Mollymauk in ep 26, C2, my first gut reaction was to be fucking livid: “How dare they blame someone who has proven to be such an incredible and impartial ally to the queer community. How date they insult my king!!1!!”. Needless to say, I was mad… I was irrational. However, after much thought, and after reading the more constructive arguments that have surfaced, I can now see where people are coming from. It in turn, the debate has allowed me to ask myself as a critical thinker why I was so upset in the first place, and how we can find a middle ground where everyone can feel safe and comfortable.

As of late, it seems as though there are posts circulating that are arguing that although Matt did not plan for Molly to die, he did ultimately make the call to kill him, thus meaning that he did indeed partake in the BYG trope. Now, as a long time D&D player, although I know that Matt would have had to make some big leaps to prevent Molly from dying, it was “technically” possible to save him, especially since the Dungeon Master Guide does state that the rules are guidelines and that you can make changes to fit a certain narrative. However, that is a can of worms that I will address later in this essay, so bear with me. Another argument I have seen floating around is that the “definition” of the “Bury Your Gays” trope is when gay people die in ANY form of media, thus making what Matt did 100% BYG.

I am therefore not here to argue whether it falls under the current definition. I believe those are totally valid arguments. I outwardly confirm that given the current definition of the “Bury Your Gays” trope, it is unfortunate but true that Matt’s decision to have Lorenzo Kill Molly in that encounter technically falls under that definition.

However, (and this is a BIG however) I believe that this raises the important questions that were mentioned above, and that we as a queer, D&D playing/loving community, have a moral responsibility to address so that the conversation can move forward in a constructive direction.

Throughout history, laws, definitions, and even religions, have morphed and changed over time to address exceptions to rules that may have not originally been considered upon their conception. They have made amendments to include situations that were not considered, and thus, those definitions have been broadened and/or tightened to make sure that arguments that link certain definitions can be adequately addressed without falling flat due to a flaw in the definition of the law, trope, rule, etc… in the first place.

And yes, even the “Bury Your Gays” trope has already gone through changes, switching from it referring to gay characters only (back when other identities were not commonly known) to including all forms of queer identities. And I believe that we can all agree that it is a good thing.

Now, I’ve seen a lot of posts on here quoting this specific website (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BuryYourGays) which in essence defines the “Bury Your Gays” trope as an instance wher queer people die in fiction. Now, although this is not technically a scholarly article, and falls under the category of an opinion piece, it has some very valid points and I strongly suggest you read if you haven’t.

If you read the article, it does indeed address the gray areas. The article raises the question as to whether it is okay for gay characters to die simply because they were put into a situation where they could die, regardless of whether they are gay or not. It does however, also address that the problem is less about gay characters getting killed off per se, and instead focuses on the fact that they die when the majority of the cast is straight. Again, these are all valid arguments that I don’t disagree with.

However, we are now faced with an interesting dilemma: The article, at no point, addresses what happens when queer characters die in improvised storytelling media platforms like D&D, where the story is in no way written or scripted, but created by a collaboration of individuals, coupled the random narrative element of dice. The trope “Bury Your Gays” predates Critical Role and media like Critical Role. Hell, the trope predates D&D entirely.

Therefore, we are now faced with the aforementioned “interesting dilemma”, where we as a queer community are required to state whether the two instances are equatable: Can we truly claim – with a clear conscious – that it is valid to equate the deliberate killing and erasure of queer characters in scripted media with the circumstantial death of a queer character in an improvised form of media?

We live in a magical time, because this is a question that has never been properly addressed, which means that we as a queer community have the agency and freedom to actually make a decision that will make a difference.

Now, at the end of the day, I am not the spokesperson for every single queer D&D player, nor will I be the last person to post an essay like this. But as someone who follows the philosophy that we must ensure our arguments are ROCK SOLID when having debates with the cis-het community, I believe that it is important that we put a few issues on the table so we are prepared to argue when they come up. Because trust me… the cis-het community will argue with us. They WANT to argue with us; and they will do everything in the power to rip us apart the moment there is a single flaw or hypocrisy in our rhetoric.

As some of you may or may not know, I do not live on Tumblr. I have accounts on many social media platforms, including FB, Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit, and AO3. I actively engage with people who disagree with me on a daily basis. It is practically my day job when I am unemployed during the summer time. So as someone who has seen arguments on the other side up close and personally, I will have you know that people ARE already talking about this, and it is not pretty. These are not direct quotes, but I have created these three sentences to represent the essence of what is being sad about us:

“Well if people are going to pin this “Bury Your Gays” thing on Matt, then the cast better go home and make all their characters gay so that they don’t die lol.”

“Why do snowflakes always cry about their gay characters dying. They want to be treated equally, but demand plot armor for their gay characters.”

“No wonder white straight guys hate you all. No matter what we do, you always find something to rip us apart”.

Sound familiar? Yeah… it’s not pretty. It’s happening, which is why we cannot hide in our little echo chamber and pretend it isn’t happening. We need to be part of this conversation, whether we want to or not, which is why I am bringing it here, in a safe environment where this conversation can be had without having thousands of people yelling at us to hurry up and make a decision.

Because it’s not an easy decision to make.

On one hand, it is entirely valid to say that Matt made the executive decision (albeit a difficult decision) to follow through with Lorenzo’s personality and kill the person in front of him as an example, while at the time, being unaware of the deeper implications of that death. But on the other hand, it is true that had Matt NOT followed through with the killing of the character, people would have screamed at him for pulling his punches, or worse, claimed that he was giving certain characters “special” treatment for certain “reasons”, thus putting us under fire.

However, as we have seen time and time again, Matt does not give any of his players special treatment: not even Marisha, his own wife. And yet, even Marisha has gotten massive amounts of hate because people try to see special treatment where there is none (Because you know, sexism in nerd communities is still a thing). Now, for those of you who play D&D frequently, we all know that a Dungeon Master, before anything else, has the responsibility to treat his players fairly and equally. If Matt established that Lorenzo would have killed someone as an example, regardless of whether it was Molly, or Fjord, or Caleb, or Beau, than it is debatable that it was his responsibility carry through with that established caricature. It was his turn to act: Lorenzo had an Action, a Reaction, Movement, and a Bonus Action, and if he was designed to kill, then killing he would do.

However, a very valid counter argument to these claims is the dilemma of Equity vs Equality. (If you are not familiar with these terms, which are often used in an education context, here is a quick explenation: https://edtrust.org/the-equity-line/equity-and-equality-are-not-equal/)

As a queer person with dyslexia and PTSD, and a child of an immigrant, who is six months away from getting their Master’s in Education, I have studied and read about the differences between equality and equity for years. Therefore, I can confidently say that it is relevant to this conversation: Should Matt have made an exception to the rule to promote Equity, and keep Mollymauk from dying to make up for all the queer characters that we have seen killed in media as a whole? To answer that question, we must first establish whether or not the queer characters in the Critical Role fandom have been put in a high enough position of privilege to warrant being treated the same as their cis-het counterparts, and that such equal treatment will not harm them.

Yeah, it’s tough, and to answer those questions would be another essay in itself. That is why it is a valid argument that also needs exploring, and that will be brought up. I promise.

So now that those issues are out in the open, it is time to explain what Matt could have actually done differently, just so we are on the same page when it comes to D&D. Going under the pretense that Matt wants to follow the rules (and temporarily ignoring the clause in the DMG that states that a DM may change the rules), he still could have done things differently: Starting on Lorenzo’s turn, he had an action, a bonus action, a reaction, and movement. With those tools, Lorenzo could have, for instance, grappled the unconscious Molly and ordered is minions to put him in a cage on their turn. He could have placed his blade against Molly’s throat and asked for negotiation, or worse, asked everyone to drop their weapons and get put into the cage (Which would have been, in my opinion, hundreds of times worse, thus putting Molly, Beau, and the rest of the Mighty Nein in a situation that is arguably far worse and triggering than a TPK: Permanent slavery). Lorenzo could have decided to run away, but we can all agree that would have been out of character. He could have also decided to attack someone else while Molly was unconscious, which is a tool that 5e has implemented to give DMs more battlefield control.

So yeah, there were many other ways in which things could have gone differently within the confines of the rules of D&D, and to claim otherwise would be irresponsible of me. Therefore, with all the facts on the table, we are once again, stuck in this strange, limbo like state where we ask ourselves how we should define this unusual, unique, and unprecedented scenario. I don’t believe anyone would have ever considered something like this happening when the trope of “Bury Your Gays” was first defined.

Now, let us look at the other face of the argument; the one that questions whether it is right to grant queer characters “plot armor”, and whether it is right to change a motives of a well defined villain on the spot to fit an agenda: Is it right of Matt to treat a character differently because of their gender/sexuality, and most importantly, is giving such a character special treatment helpful to the cause?

I think, that at the end of the day, this is the true heart of the debate; where it all boils down to – if you will – and it’s the place where people are going to inevitably disagree.

We have one side of the table that believes that for equity’s sake (which is distinct from equality as I mentioned above), queer characters must be treated with greater care than cis-het characters, so that a precedent can be set that queer narratives are worth protecting, and so the story can carer to a community that consistently lacks representation. On the other side, there is the argument that Matt has already done a lot for the queer community to prove that he is already treating all of his player characters with the utmost respect, meaning more special treatment of queer characters is a redundant source of ridicule, making queer D&D players easy targets, and labeling our queer characters as “victims that need protecting at the cost of narrative realism”.

And you wanna know the truth? I see validity in both arguments. They are both GOOD, solid arguments.

Now,  I myself – as a long time queer D&D player and Dungeon Masters – would NEVER want special treatment from Matt, and I would be both embarrassed and offended if he spared my character because they were queer.

Upon asking my circles of queer people I know who play D&D, they expressed similar concerns. “If you have all your queer characters immune from harm there is no threat and the drama is hollow”. They said that if they were to play queer character only to find out that they were immune to death, it would kill their enjoyment of the character because it would stop being their character, and would instead become more of a power fantasy.

That being said, I can completely understand why others would think differently. People are mad about this because it is important to them, and it would be callous of me to ignore the deep levels of intersectionality that are associated with this debate. However, for that very reason, I do believe that it is very important to recognize that these incidents did not happen in a vacuum. They must be contextualized, and to ignore external factors puts our arguments in peril.

We cannot ignore that Critical Role, (C1 and C2) has had a plethora of queer NPCs and PCs and will continue to follow this trend. Out of the original party of Vox Machina, 5 of the 9 total PCs (Tiberius included, even though he was only around for 26 episodes) were CONFIRMED (by the cast) to be queer to some extent (Vax, Vex, Keyleth, Scanlan, and Tary). One of the guest characters was also confirmed as queer (Zarah). Statistically, that is fucking amazing for mainstream media, especially for a show that is not deliberately targeted at the LGBTQIA+ community. Moreover, for those who do not know, almost every single one of Vox Machina’s members, queer and unconfirmed, died at some point in the show, (some more than once), and two died permanently. BUT, there was one Vox Machina character that did not die, ever. And guess what: He was gay.

Furthermore, four of the MOST important and recurring NPCs (Kima, Gilmore - picture above -, Allura, and J’mon Sa Ord), who not only knew Vox Machina but fought alongside them in multiple episodes, were queer, and two were POCs. An yes. None of these NPCs died. Not one. Sure, a few came close to death, but they didn’t. Furthermore, another queer NPC (Artagan), who was arguably even more important, may very well be present and with us right now in C2 as the Traveler. However, that has yet to be confirmed, so I am not throwing it into my argument.

In sum, C1 of Critical Role (And mostly Matt) gave us strong female heroes and villains, proud gender non-conforming individuals, non-binary individuals in positions of incredible power. It gave us a marriage between two women. It gave us two on screen same sex kisses. It gave us the reunion of a tragic gay couple that had been separated by a bigoted parent. It showed us that bixeual people could love someone of their gender or of a different gender without renouncing their identity as bisexual. Hell, it even explored the more difficult concepts of homophobia and sexual discovery, giving representation to those of us who had a not-so-comfortable home environment.

So to completely discount the massive impact that the first Campaign of Critical Role had on the queer community and queer representation, and completely cutting it out from the conversation when discussing the “Bury your Gays” trope  is…obscene. Especially since the two campaigns take place in the same world, only twenty years apart, and have shown explicit connections that new queer critters may have not even noticed.

Oh yes. Allow me to be sassy for a second here: Remember that book that Pumat Sol was reading in C2? The one that the cast was so happy about? Remember that gay PC that didn’t end up dying that I just mentioned? Remember that gay PC I brought up who was reunited with his long lost love? Yeah, that’s the same PC: Taryon Darrington. He was working on that very same book in the first campaign. In fact it was pretty much his entire life goal. And Matt Mercer, being the amazing DM he truly is, confirmed in the second campaign that his book is not only published, but famous. And that is fucking beautiful.

So perhaps, now that some background information has been laid out, new critters will have a little more perspective as to why we are so adamant about making sure that the first campaign is not ignored when bringing up the whole “BYG” debate.

However, since I am someone who believes in making solid, air tight arguments, I will humor the notion of excluding events of the first campaign . (Even if we have already has some crossover.)

In campaign two, in a MERE 27 episodes, we have been given a non-binary law enforcement agent, a gay couple in political power, female NPC working for the Gentlemen that may or may not have been hitting on Beau, a female dwarf rocking a beautiful beard, a poly/multi implied sex scene, a lesbian implied sex scene (Which faded to black of course), as well as a non-binary elf in a portrait whom may or may not become more important later on. Now I say “mere” because we didn’t have even close to this much confirmed queer representation in the first campaign this early on (and yet, we can all see how it all panned out in the end). So we can only assume, that if C2 follows the current pattern, that the representation will continue, and it will be glorious.

And of course, it goes without saying that C2 gave us two wonderful queer PCs (That have been confirmed so far). And yes, one of them recently died. So, when we put this all into perspective, and when we include both C1 and C2, it is crucial to underline that the death of Mollymauk was only the 2nd of two (presumably) permanent deaths of queer characters in three years of Critical Role history (Though the game itself has been going on for 6 years). Those statistics cannot be ignored.

Now, I have also seen an argument that has claimed that “NPCs don’t count”. However, to not include queer NPCs that Matt created (who have literally hours and hours of screen time and character development) in the same argument that address Matt Mercer’s narrative decisions directly, is omitting valuable facts, and that is not an honest strategy when having a debate. So again, it is a hole in the logic that we must absolutely nip in the bud if we are to win our battles.

Another argument I’ve seen, (that is a little less used but is still worth addressing), is that Matt is a white-cis-het DM that must be kept at a higher standard because of his position of privilege, and that he personally has no stake in the LGBTQIA+ discussion. As you can imagine, I completely agree that Matt needs to be more careful and caring given his position, and he himself has acknowledged this publicly numerous times. However, I must responsibly point out that it is both dangerous a presumptuous to assume that he does “not have a stake” in protecting LGBTQIA+ rights (as I have seen some people claim), especially given his current social circles and his past…

First of all, it’s certainly not baseless to point out that Taliesin, who publicly came out as bisexual, is one of Matt’s closest friends. He has known Taliesin for longer than almost any other Critical Role crew and cast member, and Taliesin even went as far to officiate Matt and Marisha’s marriage. So Matt sure as hell wants to make sure that people like his friend are respected.

Secondly, when the infamous shooting at the Pulse Nightclub took the lives of so many of us, Matt took time before the show to pay homage to those victims, at the expense of losing a quite a few, albeit deplorable followers of the show. Yeah. Critical Role made the decision to lose money because it was the right thing to do. So rarely do we see mainstream media shows do that because it is too “risky”. And don’t get me wrong. In no way am I saying that they should be commended for being decent human beings. I’m simply stating the fact that the ARE decent human beings.

Lastly, for those of you who may not know, Matt Mercer admitted, in front of thousands of people on air, during his “Fireside Q&A”, that he was bullied for being gender non-conforming as a teen, and that although he felt comfortable techincally identifying as heteroexual and that he was “primarily attracted to women”, he had experimented with his sexuality, and had experienced attraction to men. (Yes, the critter community was absolutely shook when we learned this about Matt). It is thus important for people to understand that there are gray areas even in the cis-het community. Furthermore, in the same live Q&A, he expressed the trauma he experienced watching his beloved uncle Ted come to terms to with the fact that he was gay after years of marriage and having kids, and Matt did eventually burst into tears recounting that his uncle did ultimately pass away when his HIV developed into AIDS.

So once again, it is so so so important to never assume someone’s sexuality, gender, and experiences. I have noticed that some rare members in the queer community are sadly guilty of assuming people’s gender and sexuality, and incorrectly assume they are immune to these mistakes because they are queer. But we all make mistakes. I make mistakes, and I will continue to make mistakes. The important thing is that we do not allow our assumptions to make us stubborn and close minded, and most importantly, we must put individuals and situations into perspective before making blanket statements about people.

Now, if you wish to watch the Fireside Q&A, it is on YouTube. The facts I addressed above were mentioned by Matt in response to the reveal of Sam’s PC “Tarry” as gay, and how the PC discovered this after sleeping with a woman. (Before then, he had been closeted and in denial). If you haven’t seen the Q&A, PLEASE watch it. I absolutely cannot do Matt justice. The things he said in that Q&A still bring me to tears to this day because they are so true.

Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCBfJBf-t2Y (The section addressed here starts at 1 hour 20 minutes in, and ends just after 1:28:00. TW: This is very hard to watch. Matt cries. A lot. There are mentions of homophobia, death, the “F” word, and sex.)

Needless to say, the situation is far more complicated than any of us could have ever imagined, and it is why this is a conversation that needs to be had. We as a queer community owe it to each other to not get caught up in cyclical arguments and logical fallacies. Having rock solid arguments and admitting gray areas when they exist is not just Reddit’s job. Tumblr can do it too. It is not weakness to admit that a situation is more complicated than we want to be, nor is it weakness to admit that an argument can have more than one solution. It is always so tempting to find a bad guy to point fingers at (Like the person who runs the unaffiliated YouTube channel Critical Role Highlights, *cough cough*). But those claims need to be warranted, backed up with facts, or we lose credibility among our enemies FAST. Is crucial, is that we include ALL available information when making these arguments, so that it doesn’t come to bight us later on.

SO, before reiterate the questions that prompted this essay in the first place, I would like to give you all the definition of the word “amend”:

verb

past tense: amended; past participle: amended

make minor changes in (a text) in order to make it fairer, more accurate, or more up-to-date.

Therefore, my fellow queer D&D players, now that you have a wider understanding of the situation, I ask you once more:

1) Is it time we amended the definition of “Bury Your Gays” so to better describe events such as those that happened in Critical Role?

2) Should we include a more nuanced interpretation of BYG which does not carry the negative connotation that the current trope harbors?

3) Should it be expected of a white cis-het ally Dungeon Masters like Matt Mercer to treat the characters of their close friends differently because of their gender/sexuality, and most importantly, is giving such characters special treatment helpful or harmful to the cause?

These are not easy questions to answer, and I guarantee that we won’t all agree. Nevertheless, it is absolutely undeniable that these conversations are happening, with or without us. Because remember…Tumblr isn’t the only place where these issues are brought up. Do you want to be left out of the debate? I sure as hell do not.

So regardless of what you believe, or on which point of the spectrum you wish to place yourself on the argument, I know my personal stance on the issue, and you are absolutely allowed to disagree:

I believe that equating the deliberate killing and erasure of queer characters in scripted storytelling media platform  to the  unplanned, circumstantial killing of a queer character in a form of improvised and collaborative storytelling by an openly Ally DM and his close friends is counterproductive to the cause, and is, quite frankly, shooting ourselves in the foot.

Thank you for reading, and if you’ve made this far, well done: You just read a 9 and a half page, single spaced essay. It took me a lot of time and research to write this, so even if you don’t agree with me, please respect my opinion and consider the time and effort it took me to present my thoughts to the public when offering your rebuttal.

And PLEASE offer your opposing views if you have them. There is absolutely no point in posting this if no one pitches in to the conversation. You might bring up something super important that I forgot to mention. Oh, and disagreeing with me isn’t a crime either. My right to free speech is the same right that you have. Trust me, I can take it. I live on the internet.

Now if you don’t mind, I’m gonna go work on some fanfiction that I have been procrastinating on for weeks. (Lol, you think my Tumblr posts are long?) Also I haven’t eaten today. Also I might throw up. Okay love you all bye.

Sincerely,

-The Scarecrowlover

[faustzen]

𝘿𝙤 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙬𝙖𝙡𝙠 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙫𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙮 𝙤𝙛 𝙠𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙨?

𝘿𝙤 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙬𝙖𝙡𝙠 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙙𝙤𝙬 𝙤𝙛 𝙢𝙚𝙣 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙨𝙤𝙡𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙞𝙧 𝙡𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙖 𝙙𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙢?

@threeseven0777

[dispatchesfromtheclasswar]

[biglawbear]

Good for this person. This is exactly what you do. Screw the job.

I had a job that made me work an all nighter, 30 hours straight, over Thanksgiving. I resigned that Monday and it was one of the most satisfying decisions I’ve ever made.

[running-in-the-dark]

Part 3:

[invaderxan]

Please pay attention to all the manipulation tactics this boss uses, because they’re pulling out every trick in the book.

“I’m not your boss, I’m your friend”

“Other people will be hurt by this and it’s your fault and I’m going to tell them all that”

Mocking language

Jobs are important too

“Be a team player”

“We’re your family too”

Talking as if this is a thing you must do

“We all make sacrifices”

Undermining your authority

“You caused all of this, really”

Accusing you of being “unprofessional”

“Look at the money you cost us”

“Just laugh it off and come back to work”

This is like a 101 course in how employers use guilt trips to coerce you into putting up with their bullshit. This is precisely why you should never trust those employers who insist that they’re “like a family.” They are not. It’s just a ruse so that your boss can neg you into putting your job ahead of your actual life.

[walks-the-ages]

This is exactly what you do. Do not take phone calls, get everything in text so you’ve got everything said in writing for proof >=}

[beyond-a-name]

Also notice how they claimed that HR wouldn’t roll over their vacation time, right until they walked? Your bosses can do more than they are reticent to, much more.

[slaughtersafe]

[slaughtersafe]

⚠️Violence &Blood

[faustzen]

“𝙔𝙤𝙪 𝙘𝙖𝙣'𝙩 𝙬𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙪𝙥, 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖 𝙙𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙢

𝙔𝙤𝙪'𝙧𝙚 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩 𝙤𝙛 𝙖 𝙢𝙖𝙘𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙚, 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖 𝙝𝙪𝙢𝙖𝙣 𝙗𝙚𝙞𝙣𝙜

𝙒𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙚 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙢𝙖𝙙𝙚 𝙪𝙥, 𝙡𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙤𝙣 𝙖 𝙨𝙘𝙧𝙚𝙚𝙣

𝙇𝙤𝙬 𝙤𝙣 𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙛-𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙚𝙢, 𝙨𝙤 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙧𝙪𝙣 𝙤𝙣 𝙜𝙖𝙨𝙤𝙡𝙞𝙣𝙚”

Comm for my bbg @threeseven0777 !

[shaneshockey]

!!! LUNAR LABYRINTH IS NOW AVAILABLE FOR PREORDER !!!

Check it out @moon-knight-zine !!!

[oceanichymns]

Very excited to share a preview of the 3 page comic I created for @moon-knight-zine ! Preorders are now open!

Link in comments - go check it out!!

[xenonarrow]

A little preview of the piece I was working on earlier this year for the Moon Knight-themed fanzine Lunar Labyrinth! This is probably one of the most complex pieces I've managed to finish in the last few years, and I'm very proud of how it turned out. I can't wait for people to see it in all its glory!

Preorders will open on the 1st of September, check out @moon-knight-zine for more info!

[guruan]

A little preview of my other piece for the zine 🌝❤️

MOON KNIGHT ZINE PREORDERS OPEN ON SEPTEMBER 1ST!

Sharing another preview at some points in the preorders period hehehe ❤️❤️❤️

Don't forget to follow @moon-knight-zine for updates about preorders and to see more amazing previews by the artists and writers of this zine 👉👈💕💕💕💕

[drempen]

So recently I took part in a Moon Knight zine with @moon-knight-zine , so be sure to preorder a copy on September 1st 🌙

[shaneshockey]

Hello! Here's a preview off my piece for the Lunar Labyrinth zine over @moon-knight-zine. Very excited to have this zine going on sale Friday (I know I'll be buying one for myself!)

[elesketchii]

hate this guy