I've been sitting on this post for a while but I believe it's time I let it out into the wild because the discourse I've been seeing about how "Izzy fans" don't subscribe to canon while "Ed stans" do, and how "Izzy fans" are the worst part of the fandom while "Ed stans" are the good and proper side of fandom is really pushing my buttons again.
I'm getting oh so very tired of the aforementioned self proclaimed "Ed stans" (because we've seen that these people do not like canon Ed) and Izzy antis that act like they are so enamored with canon and that Izzy fans interpretation of the character is just "wrong". I'm even more tired of this continued mischaracterization of Izzy fans as these awful people when the objective evidence points to well...something else entirely.
I realize that these folks will never see my side because they live in each other's echo chambers nodding their heads at the rank takes they come up with, but a line needs to be drawn here in the hopes that at least one of these people will finally see how fucked up this all is:
Let us make the first and most important point clear: Most interpretations (not all, but most) that Izzy fans make of Izzy are either supported by canon or are at worst supported by the writers and the actors.
Izzy being queer is not a "Queer reading" of the character. He is queer, he has been confirmed as queer, he is shown as queer in the show and he is referred to as the "Jilted spouse" by the writer of the show. He is very jealous of Stede. Only the worst faith interpretations can twist his story into one that isn't queer.
Izzy caring about the crew is not "unsupported by canon". Since S1E4 he is shown to care about the death of Ed's men while Ed blows it off as "part of the job". He worries about what they want and how they are treated all through S2 and even comes to the conclusion that they are family. This is not subtext, it is canon.
Izzy being disabled is not a "fanon interpretation" ffs. But hey, the value of reading Izzy's story as one of disabled acceptance is also debated by these folks, go figure. I think it's no secret that the OFMD fandom is deeply ableist. Just recently, we saw Izzy antis step on the opinions of folks who believed that making fun of gastrointestinal issues was in bad taste, despite it being a symptom of disability in many cases. Many felt that since they found it funny, other people had to find it funny too or at the very least shut up about finding it ableist. God forbid people have the permission to voice their opinions. But the fact that so many Ed stans who are oh so enamored with canon continuously try to act like characters fanon disabilities mean that the canonically disabled characters get to be mistreated is just weird to me. Furthermore, the assertion that Izzy "deserved" to be disabled is just so messed up it makes me not want to meet these people in real life. I think the inconsistency is what makes it extra weird. If disability is depicted as a righteous punishment in the show, then why did Lucius deserve to lose a finger? Of course, there is no answer there, because this is all ridiculous.
It is not FANON that Izzy was given a punishment that was cruel. Whether or not he can be called "a victim" or "abused" is a matter of semantics (I'm personally of the opinion that Izzy and Ed were mutually hurting each other in different ways and that the word abuse doesn't phase me either way), but the text shows that various characters find the treatment of Izzy unfair, and that is not a "fanon" reading. They aren't "just pirates" who find that shit okay. S2E1 clearly shows that the rest of the crew, who are PIRATES, found what Izzy was experiencing to be fucked up. I should further state something that has already been said before but I'll say it again for good measure: Izzy fans claiming that Izzy's punishment was cruel does not NEGATE the bad things he did. Very VERY few Izzy fans are saying that Izzy actually did nothing wrong (If not for the memes and to spite those who said Ed did nothing wrong). We are just saying that the punishment he endured was not okay, regardless of what he did. This is not just a conversation about fiction and actually touches on the philosophy of crime and punishment, and I find it disturbing that people who claim to be so progressive regress entirely when discussing this topic. Alas, if I opened this can of worms this post would be even longer than it already is, so let's move on.
Izzy ultimately being willing to let Ed not be a pirate anymore is not up to interpretation. We see him explicitly encourage him to follow his heart at the end of Season 2. Furthermore, Izzy was willing to support Ed's plan to retire in S1. Whether this was due to selfish motives or jealousy may be up to interpretation. However, him letting Ed go in the end is not up to interpretation. He even ended up liking Stede ffs.
Izzy being suicidal, in pain and deeply mentally troubled is NOT fanon. He is shown on screen trying to kill himself. He is shown drinking excessively to numb his pain (whether it is physical or mental may be up to interpretation). He is shown ranting and raving about how he is alone. He is shown exhibiting a lot of disordered behavior in S1 as well.
Now, I've seen some of these folks also claim that Izzy is "neurotropical", conversely saying that other characters are so obviously neurodivergent, and claiming that said interpretation of the characters is canon... Babes, NONE of the characters have been canonically diagnosed with anything. NONE of it is canon. But, to claim that Izzy hands must be neurotropical is honestly insulting to the thousands of neurodivergent folks who empathize with his behavior. But I'll stand by my assertion that no character is confirmed to be neurotropical or otherwise, Izzy included. This being said, this desire to frame Izzy as the straight-white-neurotypical evil evil evil is just so fucking typical of the performative little shits in Tumblr who can't make a single argument without having to pile on as much as possible to help support their points, the opinions of real Izzy fans who are POC, queer, disabled and neurodivergent be damned. Side note, but this very popular assumption that neurodivergent folks are somehow "better" people or "excused from their behavior" is so fucking rank it makes me sick, (Sincerely, someone with BPD and someone who really empathized with Ed and Izzy). But none of this matters because none of this is canon. You can't act like your headcanons are canon while others are messed up for having equivalent headcanons just because it about a character you don't like. You don't see me constantly excusing Izzy's behavior because I read him as neurodivergent, because I don't use neurodivergency as an indication of morality...
Let me also address the very tired take that Izzy fans only like Izzy because he is white and that his fans are all racist and all the racism in the fandom comes from Izzy fans. I sure do wonder then why it's always the Izzy fans who seem to care a lot more about the rest of the diverse crew rather than Gentlebeardies who seem to only care about a dynamic that is 50% white. Shall we talk about the racism thrown at Izzy fans of color or does that also go against the rhetoric that Izzy fans are all white and racist? Shall we ignore that a good chunk of Izzy fans are also Ed fans or will we let that slide? Shall we ignore that Izzy fans constantly beg for Ed stans to not take away the complexities of a POC character or to not have his entire mental stability rely on the behavior of the white men in his lives? Shall we ignore that Izzy fans are irate that Ed's character was not allowed to fully grow on his own and was instead pulled around by the wills and desires of white men? Shall we talk about how Izzy fans are pretty fucking mad that Ed tortured his crew of color, had one Black crewmate killed, and never fully apologized? Shall we ignore that Izzy fans, unlike Gentlebeardies, actually care about the rest of the diverse cast and don't focus on Ed and his white saviour? Are we also going to ignore that the only POC that Gentlebeard fans seem to care about is the tall, thin, light skinned, conventionally attractive one? Nah, might be too much to think about it. And let's not forget Gentlebeardies adoration of Stede, despite being one of the characters to canonically exhibit racist behavior, toward people who are in and outside of his crew. And I'm not talking about the ability to interpret some of Izzy's behavior as racist, some of which I even agree with. I'm talking about indisputable, on paper, explicit racism, (white saviour tropes and the civilization of the "savage" tropes aside, as those are more akin to interpretations of the text). But ALL this aside, I think we've all seen the absolutely awful racist shit that was said to Izzy fans of color. If you want receipts I'm sure I have them somewhere, or perhaps someone else who has them can share.
Let's also talk about excusing all of Ed's behavior because he is "neurodivergent" and a pirate. But then somehow, when Izzy pulls Fangs beard suddenly nobody says "They're pirates" or "he's neurodivergent". (You'll never see me using any of those excuses for Izzy, because I actually acknowlege when he does something wrong, but that's besides the point). When Izzy is sneaky and makes plans behind Ed's back with the help of Spanish Jackie, suddenly he isn't a pirate anymore but Jackie retains that title. Izzy is nasty and mean but "they're just pirates" never crosses the Izzy anti's mind. But suddenly when Ed cuts off his first mate's toe, forces his crew to partake in dangerous raids for no financial gain, throws knives at Izzy, points a gun at his crew, shoots Izzy for speaking his mind, drives them into a storm and forces them to fight to the death, then "He's just a mentally ill pirate uwu". Make it make any sort of sense.
Shall we discuss the assertion that Stede being Gender Nonconforming is canon and thus instrumental to the plot? Aside from the reality that gnc characters are not exempt from being problematic or criticized (just as I have said for neurodivergent individuals) it is important to note that although Stede has a softer personality, that does not automatically make him gnc. For fuck sake, the entire show is about breaking away from toxic masculinity and how it's okay to be a soft man. If we suddenly decided that being soft and dainty and liking colors suddenly constituted as gender nonconforming, then all those french racists at the party would also be gnc. Stede dresses according to the male historic dress of the time. Whether he is gnc is AT BEST up to interpretation, not canon. But it's also these folks who claim that the writers "forced Stede to be more masc" in S2 when he lost the rich clothing. Personally, I have no strong opinions on whether Stede is gnc or not. What I do know is that he is in love with a man, likes fine things, and has the money to afford it. Again, this assertion is mostly made to make Izzy seem like a baddie for bullying him, completely ignoring the much more interesting alternative, which is that Izzy is jelous of Stede and angry that his rich and inexperienced ass is stealing Ed away from the one thing that unites them, which is piracy. Frankly, I find Ed to be a lot more gender non-conforming than Stede in many cases, and the same arguments that are made for Stede can be made for Izzy at least in terms of some of his clothing choices (Tight leather pants and princess sleeves). But you don't see me making that argument either way because I don't use gender nonconformity as an indication of morality...
Another ridiculous and seemingly popular thing to throw at Izzy fans is that we "think he's a main character". I've legit had to ask people why they were commenting on my metas and be told "You seem like someone who thinks Izzy is an MC" as if it were some sort of insult. Truth be told, I as a person have never been a fan of main characters and have always gravitated toward the secondary characters that have less screen time. I'm especially a sucker if such a character turns out to become more important with time. But even if I thought Izzy was a main character, why is this such an important part of the discussion when it boils down to semantics? Why does it matter that I care about him more than Stede and Ed? Was my autistic hyperfixation that I literally can't control somehow "bad" and "wrong"? Do I get that same treatment when I claim that I like Fang and Frenchie and Olu and Jim and Lucius? No, because that argument is only made in regards to Izzy. Furthermore, that same argument has become so pervasive that these Gentlebeard fans who say you should only care about the main characters, who are Stede and Ed, also say that ALL the other characters do not matter and are plot devices, but nobody seems to say that they're being racist for putting Stede (also white) in front of Frenchie, Olu, Jim, Roach, Fang, Ivan, etc... It's clear that these folks only care about one POC in the show, and that happens to be a tall, thin, pale, and conventionally attractive one, as I said before.
Lastly but not leastly, let's not forget how rancid some of Izzy antis are toward real fucking people, and how they will throw all progressiveness aside the moment they need to agree with an Izzy fan. The fandom racism is something I have already mentioned, but I have seen transphobia (Izzy antis assuming the genitals and gender of Izzy fans) and abelism (which I mentioned) as well. They have compared Izzy fans to a "cult" multiple times despite numerous requests to not be so insensitive toward victims of real cults. They call Izzy fans "deranged" and "insane" despite the ableist connotations. They have suicide baited Izzy fans countless times. They use the Canyon as an insult despite the Canyon simply being a term used by Izzy fans to describe the block wall they had to make to protect themselves from triggering anonymous abuse (know your fandom history folks). I myself have been block evaded and treated like absolute garbage. I have had people tell me that I was lying about my trauma. I've had people belittle and doubt my education. I've had people tell me I'm stupid and insult my reasoning skills. I've had people gaslight me and put words in my mouth. If I had to make a judgement on which "side" of this fandom is worse, considering I've also said Izzy critical things (Such as pointing out his awful behavior, and even citing his racism in comparing Ed to a dog) and have never been attacked so harshly by Izzy fans, I can say with confidence that one side is MUCH crueler than the other.
TLDR: Ed Stans/Izzy Antis act like everything they assert is Canon while Izzy fans interpretations are wrong, when the reality is pretty much the opposite. They also act like Izzy fans are terrible people while doing some really problematic things including but not limited to making ableist statements, suicide baiting, being racist toward Izzy fans of color, spouting transphobia and sexual harassment, putting moral weight on disability and neurodivergency and much more.
That's that. Thank you for reading. Can't wait to see what hate I get after this.
EDIT April 15, 2024: I've included the tag for sexual harassment and the details regarding how that was perpetuated. I've also made some corrections for typos.
