#4shtronomy's analysis

[4shtronomy]

Quick analysis of something I've been noticing in the PHM fandom, and I wanted to highlight it for people to see their biases. But I want to reiterate that headcanons are headcanons and fiction as long as you keep it there and acknowledge your biases irl it's fine.

Also, I'll focus on the movie just fyi, but some parts of the book will be talked about.

Rocky and Adrian's relationship, gender and sexuality in fandom analysis

[PT: Rocky and Adrian's relationship, gender and sexuality in fandom analysis]

Gender

[PT: Gender]

So the Eridians seem to be a cosexual species, with no gender as we know it. And the use of he/him pronouns by Grace towards Rocky can be attributed just to our human social biases with patriarchy —Which are the one's I'll be using to make no confusions, and I want to reiterate that pronouns don't equal gender. But apart from the headcanon of after that Rocky and Grace talking about it and either:

1- It's decided that he prefers they/them or another rendition of neo/xenopronouns or combination of some after he researches human gender identity and expression.

2- It's decided that he'll keep he/him to match with Grace.

There have been others, but these are the main ones done when exploring it. The thing is that he in the fandom seems to still be pretty much associated with masculinity/androgyny for the most part, probably coming too from the pronouns used.

The thing is that then when doing Adrian it seems like, subconsciously, people have associated Adrian to have to be associated with androgyny/femininity. That is seen as most dynamics that are done with the pair are very much subversions of the perceived patriarchal expectations of relationships —The man/masculine one being the strong big typical western idea of masculinity, and the feminine one/woman being the smaller, emotional typical western idea of femininity.

These expectations are not only commonly put onto monoallo cishet perisex relationships, but they always are expected in some way in its counterparts. That can be seen with the idea of Sapphic relationships being expected to be masc x fem, Achillean relationships being expected to have a clear bear x twink, etc.

With Rocky and Adrian this can be seen with the general idea the fandom has done. As when these things I will be listing are drawn/narrated they often have an undertone of "how good! We're subverting expectations!". But with that comes also the connotation that one is generally seen as more feminine and the other as more masculine genderwise, and this changes subvert that already supposed idea of gender they have been put on.

This goes for what I've seen the most and therefore see as the majority, this does not go for everything, as fandoms are always very varied, and this one in particular especially in regards of queer themes.

This can be seen with the making Rocky very emotional/fidgety/whipped when he's with Adrian, and the other being much more nonchalant/quiet/serene.

The depictions of Rocky being a lot smaller in comparison and the shape language too. As Rocky is commonly depicted as more round and Adrian as more triangular, which could come from this idea of subverting expectations as feminine people are generally seen as soft/cute/little and masculine ones as sharp/strong/big.

And with this comes the next part:

Sexuality

[PT: Sexuality]

So with what we've seen with gender, we tend to have this idea of femininity and masculinity appointed to both of them, to try to subvert it.

But with that tends to not only come these conclusions of gender —on an, again, genderless species— but also this supposed heteronormativity. As in, we tend to suppose in a relationship, even if not fully calling it a straight relationship, this idea that we need to have these opposite sides of the spectrum of femininity/masculinity clear. That there needs to be this binary within a relationship, even when trying to subvert it.

But we're more often than not seeing it, when turned human (as a lot of fanarts of AU has) as a heterosexual relationship. Again doing the whole gender thing and then putting it together with heteronormativity.

To me this feels like it could come from this idea that for one, we have very much normalized this as the standard, and we've come to associate Rocky with Grace, who's a man. And putting together our heteronormative and binary subconscious ideologies, and fully only having Rocky interact with a man the whole movie can be the reason.

As for one, the movie uses he/him pronouns for him. And socially we have been used to seeing only friendships with your own gender, and any crossover being seen as cheating/intrinsically romantic/sexual, with no platonic option if none are confirmed to only like the same gender.

I'm mostly talking about this, not to say any of these depictions are wrong or bad. But that this comparison with both of them seem to show this bias we all seem to have, and highlighting it and realizing we have it is vital to stop having these assumptions in real life too.

[4shtronomy]

A big important critique for pjo's tv show casting is very overlooked. I don't dislike Leah as Annabeth because I hate black women. I dislike her as Annabeth because when she evidently has to act the scenes were Annabeth gets aggressive/attacks Percy, —like the gut punch in TTC, the Judo flip (if we get HOO), the moments when Percy thinks she'll hit him,...— the racists aren't going to see it as Annabeth acting like in the books. They'll just see the stereotype of an angry aggressive black woman that aligns with their stereotypes.

The same goes for Thalia and Clarisse. Because Annabeth may not be seen as having this toxic behaviours in the books (even if she does do them, they're just overlooked), but Thalia and Clarisse are portrayed as aggressive in nature in the books (even if it's supposed to end up being endearing). But those are the female characters that they cast as black.

And even if it's transcendental right now to have three black women as main characters in a popular series, they reflect the second wave feminism idea of gorlbossery and misandry. And even if their actions should be looked over in canon books in general. They will only be seen by racists — and people who think they aren't but have that ingrained— as black.

They don't see Annabeth, Thalia or Clarisse. They see 3 black women being aggressive.

With Annabeth it gets worse. Because in the tv show she's more aggressive, she is monotonous, almost emotionless, a stalker. That isn't only exaggerating even more the girl boss idea, and destroying her character to appeal the old percabeth fans that see her as in the new books —Where she got turned one dimensional to be the epitome of this girl boss ideal—. But it creates an even worse base character to make black —It's fine to have characters that follow stereotypes as long as other characters within that minority group in your story diverge from that.— where it's not only the "aggressive black women" but also emotionless.

This is important not only because young black girls deserve good representation, but also because this racist individuals won't be silent. They always end up attacking the actor. Which Leah doesn't deserve. She didn't write the character. She has no reason to have to listen to racist comments.

And this is not like with The Hunger games, where everyone hated on Rue because they couldn't see her as innocent because she was black, because their racism was contradicted so they hated on the black actress. They will have their racism "proven right" and also hate on Leah because she's black.

When a lot of people didn't like the casting it was not only a problem of we not liking race swapping or racists. But the implications of those changes being done and what consequences it could lead to.

For more on the second wave feminism of RR in this post I made.

If I forgot anything add to it! I'm writing this while in class so it's very possible.

[4shtronomy]

Rick Riordan's depiction of "feminism" and it's impact to the fandom

i feel like a lot of the fandom is polarized by two things. There are the mainstream fans that like most of Rick's literary decision and call him Uncle Rick, I'm going to expand on this later, but bcs of that they tend to see any valid criticism of his female characters as misogyny. And then there's the one's criticizing ig. I want to try to expand on the why's the how and the what can we do with it. So I'm going to try to contextualize this as well as I can.

The time it was written's feminist ideology

The Percy Jackson books where written in the 2000's. Where the feminist ideology at the time was for one very white cis heteronomative and classist even. Most of the movements at the time where not only very centered around white dishes women, but it also ignored any type of intersectionality that were seeing today.

But even ignoring all of that. My main focus for what I'm trying to say is what the feminist women became at the time. Which was a woman who was a "girl boss" and most of the time hated men. Which culminated into this misandrist ideology romantization. That made a lot of women and young girls feel like men were like that bcs they aren't capable of better. Not because the system sets it up like that, which makes the barrier of men having to get rid partly of our capitalist ideology of need of power to actually not be misogynistic. Which could also get summarized by the fact that that wave of feminism was looking for individual empowerment and carcerall feminism, instead of trying to dismantle the system that creates the problem.

It was understandable for the political climate of the time. But RR's writting really reflects that. And if it was just the first series it would be one thing. But he got stuck with that and hasn't stopped doing it. Which makes that his female characters don't actually get character development in any way on that matter.

More on the girlboss in this YT video by Quality culture.

His characterization of women

im going to try to talk about some of his main female characters from PJO and HOO and as short as I can but still tackling the main issues:

SALLY JACKSON:

She is a good mother. That can't be denied. But in a way, he creates this narrative in which she can't do no wrong. So when she makes questionable choices it is never adressed. My best and biggest offender is this:

When she's with Gabe to protect Percy she is abused by him and thinks that with that he won't touch Percy, which her trauma should have been adressed more in future books because spouse abuse is no joke. But we should also take into account that their house had the floor full of bottles/cand of beer. That is by no means a good environment for a child. And the fact that its never acknowledge how she was neglectful in that part, even with her being abused and the situation, it would have made so much sense if that created mixed feelings for Percy. Hell. It would have made it much more interesting. Children of abuse tend to latch on to their "good" parent (I surely did). But when they grow up and mature they tend to see it from an outsider perspective. And that conflicting feeling would have been very good to show Sally as the flawed character she is and a way to validate abused children's emotions and thoughts.

More on a mothers role and it's social standards in this YT video by oliSUNvia.

ANNABETH CHASE:

She could've been a very good character. Her abandonment issues and pride are some very nuanced problems to tackle. And whould've been a good example for kids struggling with them. But they get ignored. Annabeth got girlboossed so much in canon that her pride is never actually fully tackled in way where she notably grows from it.

In the latter books she still always thinks she's right. Other characters talk about her like she's some kind of perfect person that is never wrong. And with that her actions get worse and worse with each book. When Annabeth is over jealous in the OG series and can't cope with it healthily it makes sense. But when she is the same in HOO with wanting to keep Percy on his toes talking about Rachel it just feels like she didn't grow in that time. When she hits Percy bcs she has emotions, and is a teenager, and is unable to express them healthily. It makes sense. A lot of girls live through a stage where they feel like they have to hit and punch and shout to be heard. But that isn't good for her or Percy. And when it gets to the point where Percy anticipates more that she will hit him than be affectionate when they're together? Then there's no actual development in her anger issues either.

RACHEL ELIZABETH DARE:

She isn't just reduces as a catalyst to move forward percabeth by the end of PJO. But she is never actually completely fleshed out. We never know her feelings about her class/power position and how it affect the environment. We never fully get the whole mortal with sight experience. The fact that she was thought crazy? The fact that she HERSELF thought she was going crazy. The whole Percy and her romantically arc. How Annabethe treated her and called her mortal —used like a slur btw—.The whole Oracle thing. There's nothing actually. We are just told that she and Annabeth make up OFF SCREEN. But there's never even one Rachel POV.

We basically stop seeing her after she becomes the virgin Oracle. And that's because that was mostly used as a way to leave the reigns to percabeth. To stop the perachel fans. She was there to create the tension to make Annabeth kiss Percy and create tension just to make her impossible to date to stop that ship.

THALIA GRACE + CLARISSE LA RUE:

im doing them together bcs they both fall into the stereotype of girl boss that has anger problems that never get a dressed in a meaningful way and are good bcs they aren't girly. (This is the main point and bcs it's one that a lot of people agree with if you want to expand on it I'm sure there's good posts here on Tumblr or you can make me an ask if you want but this is alr long af)

Thalia (and Reyna) are also put in the hunters of Artemis bcs it's inconceivable to RR to have a girl single and not make her aroace. She literally made a point to point out that Reyna and Thalia are only friends just to discourage the fans of the ship.

More on this in the books in this post by rosabell14.

More on this socially in this YT video by Tara Mookne.

More on the ace spec in this YT video by Rowan Ellis.

PIPER MCLEAN + APHRODITE:

She's basically the staple of not like other girls. She's constantly compared with the other Aphrodite kids and how she's better bcs she isn't feminine/superficial (bcs they are treated as one). There's a whole problem with making the whole Aphrodite cabin made as superficial only bcs they're kids of the beauty goddess.

Bcs Aphrodite also got reduced here. She's also a war goddess. The love goddess, and not only romantic which was all RR made of her. She's from the sea. She's prideful. Powerful. Vengeful. But that's never touched.

More on the pick me in this YT video by Jaidyn Zehner.

HAZEL LEVESQUE:

Let me tackle her. Because making one of your only black characters the mom friend. A stereotype that black women/girls have had to endure because of racism and white people adultifying them is insane. Her relationship with blackness and her hair never being really adressed, when she lived in the 40s which was under the Jim crow laws. With segregation. With BIWOC having to relax/straighten their hair just to be able to go to places.

She's not a girl boss. But she gets romanticized. She does no wrong. And she also never actually tackles the dichotomy of her past experience with her race and society and her new life in a basically new world for her.

More of this in this post by bayetea.

The fandom's parasocial relationship with Rick Riordan:

To understand my next point we need to talk about this. Most of this fandom calls him Uncle Rick, see him as a beacon of good writing and representation. We as a fandom have created a parasocial relationship with him via his writing. Bcs the POV he makes are relatable. Bcs his —internalized as it seems— racist, sexist, homophobic opinions that are reflected in his writing aren't noticible at first glance and need some level of critical analysis.

But he's not our friend. We don't know him. He's not a perfect person and not a perfect writer by any means. But by creating this parasocial relationship with him —which he intensifies with how he interacts with us, bcs it's a marketing strategy. You can't lose money when your fans idealize you and defend you immensely.— we've entered a point where if anyone criticizes him a lot of people feel like they're attacking him, and as his "friends" we can't let that happen.

We shouldn't do that the same way we know it's bad when it happens with celebrities.

That does not mean we shouldn't respect him as a human being. But we can criticize his writing. What he does for a living of which we are the costumer.

More on parasocial relationships in this YT video by Shanspeare.

The mainstream opinion:

It has become a personal attack. It's not seen as literary analysis and critical thinking. It's reached a point where it's seen as an attack to him —and bcs of the parasocial relationship— an attack to the fans.

It's also important to denote how this part of the fandom has gotten so into their canon idea —which is actually a rethought of canon. But bcs it's been so popularized it's seen as actual canon.— that anyone with other opinions is treated as "stupid". Fandom is to enjoy the media in any way the fans want. We should not be so canon purists, because it has made the fandom toxic to anyone who wanders even a little out of line.

The critics of this misandrist feminism:

Even if it is important to criticize this kind of ideology, it's also important to note that all the characters are victims of such biases. So just hating the female characters of the PJO series because they don't like the character without understanding the origin of this and all characters with much more other controversial characterizations, —Racism, ableism, homophobia, classes, bad understanding of Hellenistic paganism and more.— loses a lot of information that doesn't just make you have more deep and thought out characters but also gives you more understanding of this political/ethical issues.

Anyone want to add their grain of salt in this is more than welcome!! I'm sure I've missed some parts. Especially on the his characterization part, because I had to try to do it as short and concise as possible bcs this is long af.

[4shtronomy]

Rachel being reduced to a way to spice up percabeth

I love Rachel and a lot of people have also noticed how even in fandom she still gets reduced to the girl that was in between the main ship.

This is not only real apparent by the blatant hate of Perachel and Rachel herself in the fandom. But also by the blatant favouritism of Annabeth in their "beef" —if you can even call it that—.

It's not only really obvious because of the justifications the toxic stand make of Annabeth's behaviour —and it is understandable for a teenager to feel jealous and be unable to process it healthily, but when her actions are treated as normal and justified and she never grows/apologizes, then there's a problem— but there's a whole new layer I'm going to talk about.

Her tag in Tumblr is flooded with the Annabeth Chase tag. And I'm not exageratting. At least half of them have her in it. Which is weird for two characters that aren't really friends. And what do most of those post talk about? The love triangle —angle— between percabeth and Perachel. And almost all of them are in favour of Percabeth and just make fun of it.

And that's fine. It is a funny situation in BOTL, even more if you think about Nico and Calypso. But her tag is not flooded with their tag names. Like at all. And I know that their "beef" was a major plotline in comparison. But it's WEIRD.

Percy's tag is also very prevalent. But that does make sense. They are friends. They did have crushes on each other. Rachel thanks to Percy discovered her sight and realised that she wasn't insane. Percy found a place with her of companionship —Romantic and platonic at the time— and normalcy with her.

But Annabeth's tag doesn't. At least it doesn't in any way that doesn't feel degrading of: herself (by shit talking her in some way), her character (by making her act more like Annabeth in that feminist RR way —girbossery and misandry—) or her MUTUAL feelings for Percy (by diminishing it as nothing.

It feels as though there are four main ways to see Rachel:

THE MAINSTREAM FANS: mostly a catalyst to speed up Percabeth. No actual personality. Is used as a way to move the romantic narrative and becomes a virgin because of it/to stop even the possibility of Perachel.

THE PERACHEL FANS: Also see her as a love interest. But tend to also love her character. But has actual depth and personality. Not much to say, just like the character's and ship's potential and channels that. Tend to get rid of the virgin oracle schtick.

THE PLATONIC PERACHEL FANS: The same as point 2 but just in a platonic way. The virgin oracle schtick changes between fans.

THE RACHEL FANS BUT PERACHEL AVOIDERS: Tend to love Rachel and like some ship other than Perachel. That is a lot of the time because they also like Percabeth. Other times it's because they hated the whole rivalry and like Rachel/Annabeth (those also tend to do the girlbossification and misandrist views RR shows amplified).

I myself realised this bcs I don't like Annabeth and it keeps bugging me. But i do feel like its an actual concern that a female character gets so reduced to the mainstream fans opinion. Obviously all this main opinions aren't able to encompass all the possible opinions of a fandom. Even less of something as nuanced as the general idea of a character in people's minds.

But I feel like it's important to still remember that this keeps happening.

I also would like to make sure to point out that I myself do not ship Perachel romantically, but as always DLDR is my philosophy. And even if im not into the ship i can appreciate the critical analysis and opinions of those who do.

Because to actually learn is to listen to everyone's opinions and critically analise them to make your own.

—Ash (me, my first quote I'm actually very proud of!!)

UWould love for anyone that has any points they want to add to this to reblogg it with their opinion bcs critical analysis of fandom and canon are super important to not have biases!

[4shtronomy]

What's wrong with ICE simplified:

Summary of only what I remember from the top of my head. A quick way to see a lot of what's wrong with it since it took me 10 min to remember just this.

ICE has been working since long before it has been notices now in the Trump administration.

ICE is not reinforcing the laws. Being one the US without papers isn't illegal. It's a civil offense. Completely different things.

No one is "illegal" in already stolen land. That land is actually the Native American's land. The government should have at least half of it's people be the actual people from the land. And that's underestimating it by a lot. Research Native American history. I'm a white European, listen to actual natives.

ICE is taking people without warrants and trials.

It was never about people not paying taxes, working, freeloading, etc. They're taking children from schools. Workers on the job.

They're taking people with papers. It's about not being white. It's about not being rich.

This people are being not only deported. There's a big chunk of them that end up in places like what we've been calling "alligator Alcatraz". It's not only inhumane, modern day slavery worse than normal prisons and basically concentration camps.

It's also been reported by ICE itself that they've "lost" millions of those people. They say they lost all their documentation, information and the people themselves.

People are going missing. In this "prisons" and in the streets. They go in normal cars following people.

They spray toxic chemicals onto people in peaceful protests.

For peace we need to abolish ICE. Not defund it or reform it. A system that's based on discrimination, oppression and fascist ideologies can't ever be solved without dismantling it completely and creating a whole other system.

[4shtronomy]

I'm so curious, so I mean absolutely no disrespect or anything by this, but can I ask why you dislike Solangelo? Myself I am... very much not a fan of any of the main ships in HOO and I 100% think that Solangelo is bad representation, but I'm curious why you dislike it?

Atm this ship is on thin ice with me... like its very much bad representation, and I almost never hear anything individual about these two. I feel like I'm hanging onto it for the vibes (I should mention that I've never been like, Solangelo crazy), but idk I want to hear some peoples thoughts on it

no worries I love asks🥹! Thx for asking! Okay so when the book came out I didn't read it, but some people I followed did and liked the ship, so at first I only saw the fanon idea of the ship. At the time I really liked it! But after actually reading it I found some major offenders for me:

1- Will dismissal of Nico's opinion of things

I really hate how when Nico said that he was being ostracized in camp and he felt out of place, Will told him that that wasn't true. Which is stupid AF? Like that is Nico's lived experience with how he was treated. He knows it better than you. This is the most prominent example of it

2- Their relationship patient-doctor

I feel like Will often treats Nico less like his boyfriend and more like his patient. And it really icks me yk? Like the dynamic of doctor -patient shouldn't be part of a relationship. Bcs it makes it super easy for the doctor to dictate what the other can or can't do. The fact that when they got together no one else was available to be Nico's doctor is another big can of worms about the way of function that CHB goes.

3- Will's bisexual disaster moments

There's more than one occasion in which Will outwardly expresses his attraction to others (tends to be women) in front of Nico, even actively flirting, and when Nico tells him that he's uncomfortable with that or to please stop it's dismissed as him being a bisexual disaster. Which not only makes him pretty assholey for completely ignoring his partners discomfort, but it's also a very bad stereotype of bisexual people.

4- Will's hate for his underworld powers

There's also a big chunk of mentions/moments where Will uses (and here we circle back to point 2) his doctor position to tell Nico to use less his underworld powers. He actively dislike them, which could be understandable if he was uncomfortable with everyone with powers (he isn't) or if he didn't actively pursue someone that has those powers. It feels controlling. Like Nico is a project for him to fix and create the perfect boyfriend.

5- the ship reducing Nico as just his boyfriend

Nico is a very fucking comes character, even if we never get his POV we already know a whole lot of traumatizing shit he lived through. Him getting together with someone that's his opposite and at that point without any real personality/character, and right after the reveal that he had a crush with Percy feels like RR trying to:

1- dissuade people from shipping percico bcs he doesn't like it

2- appease the fans with the trope of opposites attract

3- use it as a way to not make Nico process his trauma and just "fix him"

After they got together Nico got almost completely reduced to the gay guy that's in an opposites attract relationship. After that point his guilt for Bianca is almost gone out of nowhere, he suddenly just doesn't care at all about Percy (which i think is bull, if you like someone for that much time and that someone tries to be your friend for the whole of it. When you get over that crush the normal thing to do is be friends/ly at least? There's a reason you cared about them?). I think that last one was also a way to try to stop percico shippers? At least it feels like it, bcs for the whole series their lives keep crossing paths but suddenly when the ship got more popular it stops? It just feels like a way to maintain the way the fandom is so into percabeth and are basically canon purists. His questions about Maria di Angelo are almost no existant? It's insane. His time being basically homeless after TTC is never talked about? It's insane.

That's basically all I can remember now from the top of my head! But yeah jshsjs. Again. Tysm for asking this and if anyone has any more questions ask right away!!

[4shtronomy]

«Peter Parker is more from the "hood" than miles morales»

I saw this take somewhere (if you find the og post, link it please, I lost it I'm sorry) and I wanted to expand in it.

I'm going to focus on Peter Parker from the comics in Marvel-616 and Miles Morales in the Spider verse trilogy —as I am much more well versed in comic Peter but not comic Miles. And this is from memory so some things may be a little off.

First we should define what we mean by the "hood". My knowledge is that it's a way to call the part of the city where the low income families lives. Which correlates with more crime and racial minorities. This is because with how the US economy was molded to disfavour the black community when slavery "stopped", black people have no to little generational wealth and are disproportionately more likely to get less paying jobs or not get promotions (from racism). And low income translates —even more in the US— to not having healthcare, bad insurance, homelessness, poverty, and more. Which are the main reasons for crime.

Then we have to look at Peter's general situation. He lives in Queens. Which right now is not as bad as when it was written. But we have to analyse this with when it was made in mind. And with how the narrative tells it, he lives in a pretty poor neighbourhood in Queens.

We also know that he has 2 guardians until Uncle Ben dies. Which after that we know May has problems with money. As we can see in the issue where he trespasses into the Baxter Building to try to get with the F4 because they almost can't pay the bills.

His money tends to come from freelance work with the Buggle or as a high school teacher. And as we've seen it's never been stable.

There's also a recurring theme with Peter where he gets storylines around having to do things from lack of money and resources.

The times where he's living the best life is when he's with MJ or Felicia, who have money, living with Johnny Storm or when Doc Ock controls his body. And that is because being Spider-Man is supposed to be seen as this good figure, but also this nuisance to Peter. If he wasn't a vigilante he would have a stable income. It's supposed to reflect this more realistic idea of being a vigilante and its consequences.

Then we get to Miles. He lives in Brooklyn, in a pretty good zone as we can see. His dad is/will be the chief of police. His mom is a nurse. He has Jordans. Collectibles. He goes to a private school.

When someone insinuates they don't have money his parents get offended.

He obviously knows people from the hood. His uncle is obviously from there. He has to know at least partly the community. But narratively we see the difference to highlight it. It's a way for us to see why he became the prowler and Miles Spider-Man.

He is by all means stable in life. But that's also fine. It's what the narrative wants.

His storyline is about Spider-Man letting him be free. It represents in a way his freedom in the first movie. It's also about him learning responsibility. But he doesn't start like Peter does. He starts when he sees his worlds Peter die and wants to make right. And with that storyline in ITSV we get to see him get confident in himself. That's what it is mostly about.

Then in ATSV it's about all the multi verses, the spider society and it's way if work. And then his character storyline goes mostly into the whole Gwen debacle, secret identity and the possibility of his dad dying and being told to not save him.

His good financial situation also serves as a parallel for when we see the world with prowler Miles. Because then we see what would've happened if he wasn't an anomaly. The other world's Miles loses his father. And consequently a big source of income. Which gets reflected on the way we see his apartment in each universe.

They both live through traumatic events. But they do have clearly different economic situations to give depth to each of their storylines. Which is perfectly fine. That's how narrative and storytelling works.

For anyone wanting really thorough analysis on Spider-Man, specifically Marvel-616 got to traincat. She's the GOAT for me in that department!!

[4shtronomy]

The strangers things fandom and disabilities

[PT: The strangers things fandom and disabilities]

Intro

[PT: Intro]

So I've seen this thing in fandom spaces where most injuries/disabling experiences a character canonically lives through are mostly ignored or are only an issue temporarily. As in they need a time of recovery but then they are perfectly fine.

This also goes for the industry. Very much avoided at all costs, and most of the time when they do happen they also are temporary or they die soon after that.

But with this I want to focus on fandom, as it's also very common to have headcanons of the characters, and it's been much more common seeing autistic and adhd characters in fics. But any other kind of disability/neurodivergency is often sidelined. And with how popular lgbtqia+ headcanons (they are sadly more often than not only in the homosexuality part of the community, and aspec, trans, intersex, polyamorous,... Hdc are much less common. I don't want to ignore that.), the lack of disabled representation in fandom spaces is jarring.

There's also a complete lack of POC rep, but today I'll focus on disability. Which stranger things shows very clearly.

I also want to preface that this goes mostly with my experience with it, and that as I never could really fully watch S5 with how bad it was, any fics I've read are written continuing at most after s4. They may also be a bit jumbled up regarding where I'm talking about what, as it's a very broad topic and some parts will fit for context reasons.

Neurodivergencies/mental health/disorders

[PT: Neurodivergencies/mental health/disorders]

So the neurodivergency spectrum is very wide, and can and does include a lot of things. But pop psicology has made it seem like it's only/mostly adhd and autism.

This can really be shown with what divergencies are commonly portraid. I've seen Mike with adhd/autistic, autistic Will, autistic Robin, Steve with adhd/autistic,...

But I've seen very little variation from it. Just some examples that could work:

With all the characters I want to really make it clear. They would all, almost definitely, have PTSD or C-PTSD, and some issues with anxiety and/or depression.

Will had the whole possession thing, he could've had some brain injury, epilepsy, non-epileptic seizures, psychosis, etc.

Steve had a lot of head hits, that could end in concussions and be the origin of a migraine disorder or brain injury.

Mike's whole issues with Will, attachment as a whole, his anger issues, the whole suicide thing in S1, impulsivity, it could be seen/thought as BPD.

Robin's issues that are often headcanoned as autism could also be seen as OCD or anxiety.

Chrissy's whole ED plot is often ignored.

El/Jane should definitely have some developmental delays, and with her powers she should have some kind of issue addressed for her health other than nose bleeds and the occasional headache. She could end up getting a brain injury from it, get seizures, chronic migraines,... With the whole going into others heads it could lead to disassociating and even DID.

Hopper's issues with addiction regarding alcoholism.

These are just some examples I just came up with. And there are many more interpretations or possibilities for all these characters. But most of them are almost never explored. Or done very lightly in the background.

Physical disabilities

[PT: Physical disabilities]

Going into the physical disabilities, we should start with the obvious and then we go to the more overlooked ones:

DUSTIN [PT: Dustin:]

He has cleidocranial dysplasia (CCD), and it is never really address apart from talking about the bullying or that scene in s3. It's important to not only see someone's issues with disability being about the bullying itself and done. But that, especially in visible physical conditions, often leads to low self esteem, and to overcome that the character has to have a journey of accepting and being comfortable with their own condition and how that makes them look. It's not just fixed easily. And it's it's own journey of self discovery and love.

MAX [PT: Max]

At the end of s4 she gets in a coma. She has bled through her eyes. She has broken all of her limbs. At the very least, she would need temporarily a wheelchair and glasses. And that's being very generous.

When one is in a coma, their body loses muscle mass, that pluss the all limbs broken thing, she would in a realistic event —especially adding the whole possession thing that moved out of place so many parts of her body— end up quadriplegic or paralysed partially at least. As that extreme body disfigurement she had while possessed definitely had to fuck up some of her nerve connections and tendons. So she would probably be a wheelchair user. If not, at least she would probably end up needing knee braces/crutches/a cane/or other options to stabilize herself for long periods of time.

As for the eye bleeding she would get eye damage. With no other option. She would almost definitely end up blind/with partial blindness. She in a realistic world would probably need for independence a guide dog or a white cane.

ANYONE WHO GOT POSSESED [PT: Anyone who got possesed]

It would definitely lead to some kind of psychosis/schizospec/disassociating disorder of some kind.

And with that being said, the whole upside down entity inside your body? Specifically the ones that had that kind of slug inside of them? It would definitely have some lasting damage on their gut and intestines. It would weaken their immunologic system.

PEOPLE AT THE STARCOURT BATTLE [PT: People at the starcourt battle]

With that big ass explosion there's literally no way that no one ended up being Hard of hearing or with some hearing loss.

WILL [PT: Will]

Him specifically? With the possession stuff withe the cold with visions and the burning him to stop it, and almost hypothermia as it seemed in S1? He would very probably have a thermodysregulation disorder.

And these are just some ideas I've had just now. Not even thinking about it that much. There's much more possible options and possibilities. But they would not all end up abled bodied. They would all end up with lasting effects of the events. No one would be saved of having at least some scars and someone would most probably would have ended up with a very bad cut in the upside down with no treatment, ending up in amputation at one point probably.

Joining it with the fandom representation and the why

[PT: Joining it with the fandom representation and the why]

So in fandom these lasting effects/disabilities are often not done. And as we've seen in the past points it's not for a lack of opportunity. So why do most fics after s4 for example show Max with a full recovery? Why are disabilities not headcanoned a lot? Why are most demonized neurodivergencies/disorders not headcanoned for the most part?

Ableism.

That's it. The demonization and villanization of people with these conditions makes it so that people see others that have it and automatically think of them as bad/insane people. And when one does fanfiction, most tend to project themselves into it, and people don't want to associate their fav characters to things they deem "bad".

Like how most people forget about Jonathan's whole plot of being a pervert in S1 taking photos, because he's a good guy and generally liked. So that is often put into the perspective of "he was trying to protect her" or "he was just very in love!", which still wouldn't justify taking photos of someone without permission. Especially if that someone is naked.

But this stigma stops us from doing it. And people who have this conditions tend to also be in some way afraid to have this headcanons in fear of backlash.

And with with disabilities, there's this issue of society always thinking about disabled people as a them vs us. When it's actually an everyone at some point will join it except for some people that die young. And disabilities are seen as this unforseen thing that happens to others.

It's also commonly seen as this tragedy that someone cannot learn to live with. Almost every abled bodied person who has an interaction with a disabled person for the first time things/says something along the lines "I would rather kill myself/die" or "I would not be able to do this". But only after one does get disabled one can understand that you (not always, but very commonly) just have to learn to live like this. And it becomes at some point so much your normal, that if you became disabled after in life, your abled bodied life beforehand ends up looking very far away and sometimes you can even forget how living your life without it was.

But a lot of the times stories go for a big climax. Be it a very happy ending/getting what they wanted, or a tragedy (which is almost always with someone leaving the life of another by abandoning them or by death). And disabilities, with how they're still so stigmatized, if they aren't the more known ones, they will almost never appear.

It often creates (wrongfully) this idea that if the characters don't die but end up disabled and have that issue, it'll be anticlimactic. It won't be as much of a happy/sad ending.

Conclusion

[PT: Conclusion]

So, what could be done to stop this? Because with normalizing things being shown in media, can help people get educated on their existence/destigmatize them.

The best approach is to analize this biases that we have. And then look critically at our pieces and see why have we not written it? Is it important to the plot? To the character arc? If not maybe consider creating these lasting effects when characters have situations with a lot of action commonly. Consider if that character may have a disorder/mental illness/neurodivergency. Or what having one would change the story into.

Fanfiction is a passion based hobby. And everyone can and should only write what they want, no one is forced to do anything. But at least checking your own biases beforehand, even if you then don't add it, can help destigmatize these things in your head that we have absorbed subconsciously.

And it can also lead to new interesting plotlines and character driven subplots that without them wouldn't happen. How do the other characters react? What if that disability impacts their capabilities on the main plot to solve/fix. What obstacles would they have and what if that could make them have to take another route that could change everything.

Having these ideas as a possibility can lead to things one would've never thought of if not for them.

But also, it's very important to note that just putting a sticker on someone as in they have/are that and done, doesn't work. Because as everything else (race, sexuality, gender, sex, class,...) it affects a lot of everyday things. And it's like having a character be labeled something by the creator after the show has gone. Okay, cool about that. But it just seems tokenizing and trying to reach a minority minimum. They should be (as it is in real life) relevant in a lot of situations.