#does not mean

[keresofdeath]

I like that Bear leaning into the wish is less of an overt evil—though don't mistake this sentiment for support—and more of an extension of him being a coward and a pushover as opposed to an act of malice.

Despite that, it's not made any less awful.

I also won't say that it isn't malicious. More like it's not inspired by malice. I feel like it would be too easy to make Bear entirely awful and unsympathetic—and he really can be; it is so deeply, deeply cruel what he does.

And it's still his passivity that's responsible for all of that. His unwillingness to face what he's done after the fact. He wants the wish fulfillment more than he wants Nikki herself. He doesn't want to have to think about it. Let him live in this fantasy where Nikki Freeman wants him. He's upset at her for making him think about it. For reminding him. He pushes his passivity onto her. Though he never gave her the chance, he wants her to "act normal".

The malice isn't purposeful, even though it's deliberate—if that makes sense. It's not like he's doing this because he "hates" her, or because he wants to hurt her, but he also doesn't respect her enough to see her as a person, and is mad when she peeks through. He doesn't like the idea that the real Nikki doesn't love him. When she wants to die, he takes that as an insult to his character: Is it so bad to love me? He doesn't want her to have the choice, because he knows what choice she'd make. He couldn't have her in any other way, so even if it's a lie, even if she's hurting, even if it's awful and violating...

And then it's over. And then she's free. Fuck.

And I am so glad he dies and she gets to live! I am so glad she makes the wish before he can take it all back and subject her to more of this horror. The way it hung on the precipice with some of those final shots. How the gun is in her mouth, almost there.

[doctoraxiom]

The theory of being able to use the terns tme and tma seems sound- but I feel like in practice it ends up being used to exclude people instead of to include people.

There are very few people both cis and trans who are completely "trans-misogyny exempt" because transmisogyny affects even the bro-iest cis highschool bully you can think of.

That means you have to draw the line SOMEWHERE for what counts as truly "affected" by transmisogyny- like "you have to have been assaulted" or "you have to have been bullied" or "you have to have undergone familial abuse." If you just pick one of those, you end up excluding people who have endured the others. If you define it as having experienced all of those, you end up excluding people who had significant amounts of one of them.

The upshot of this is you get people who have endured an insane internet ostracization campaign, having to claim they are TME to engage with the discussion just because they have a supportive family.

These terms have virtue when used to INCLUDE people, not when used to EXCLUDE. We try to be conscious of the ways each of us are affected by transmisogyny, and the ways in which we've been thankfully exempted from it. That way we can learn from and understand each other and ultimately help each other out through the dark times.

[striving-artist]

Y'all need to take some classes on de-escalating conflicts.

And I need to send some stuff to an editor.

These thoughts are related.

[sgt-toasted-bug]

My mom sent me this and just... What?

Wall-E doesn't understand social norms, nor does he understand boundaries or the actual way romance works because he's a robot who's been alone all his life with only films to go off of. If you raised a human child apart from literally everybody and only showed them how human interaction actually works through outdated films missing the fundamentals of human reaction and boundaries, do you think they'd be normal?

He has lived a solitary lifestyle his entire life, not once has he interacted with a single living creature beyond a bug and a plant for an undefined amount of time.

EVE is the first being who can actually react and respond to him the way people would interact with each other. And of course she'll reject his advances because he doesn't understand what she's trying to do. Wall-E is just desperate for interaction, having been surrounded by it without actually accessing it for years.

Shaming Wall-E for bringing a robot with him on a few romantic-like scenarios when he doesn't comprehend what he's doing is wrong doesn't make any sense. He could be taught this was wrong, but he wasn't, because no one was there to teach him. He can't be expected to just know things when there is no one there to teach him.

Do you expect a child to colour in the lines on the first try? Or someone to ride a bike perfectly on the first go, after only ever seeing professionals do it in a heavily edited and romanticized manner with none of the criteria, technique, and boundaries of the sport actually shown?

Wall-E is a robot who only has film to go off of, and anyone should be able to recognize how manipulated and deceiving the media can be. He only knows what he's seen, which doesn't show him how things really work. You can't persecute someone for a crime they didn't even know they were committing. Before you call him a "gross creep" take into consideration the learning differences between us and him. We have experience and education he's never had access to.

If I've said anything wrong or offensive please let me know.

[packcoventhing]

I love how diverse ships in this fandom are and I love being able to enjoy them all either within our own rewrite context or other people's contexts <33

[epickiya722]

"Best friend" 🙄

[ikuneko]

Just because people aren’t laughing out loud doesn’t mean they aren’t having a good time, and just because they aren’t visibly shedding tears doesn’t mean they aren’t sad.

Demon Slayer