#tw fetishisation

[pale-alien-lily]

i HATE people who fetishise autism

[firewall000]

About the whole tiredsn0w situation…

I have recently been made aware of this whole situation in which tiredsn0ws essentially getting harassed. As a close friends of hers, I feel obligated to say something, however  I won't reveal my identity for my own sanity.

Most of the matter I will be commenting on stems from @sneakysnekbetch ‘s blog.

CW for mentions/discussions of bullying, fetishisation, sexualisation, racism, pedophilia etc.

I didn’t scroll as far on the blog, so the screenshot order will be what is newest.

First of all, sn0w has acknowledged that the drawing may come off as sexual but is not drawn to be. I can see how it’s uncomfortable but at the end of the day, the artist didn’t intend for it to be weird. You can find it weird, but wouldn’t you say the person who made the work knows more about it than you? Rhetorical. 

Second of all, to address the third and fourth image added in the first screenshot: it is so incredibly important to note that SCP-049 has BPD in this canon. He is heavily inspired by someone with BPD who Snow knows herself. The fixation/dependency/obsession that comes with having an FP is not weird just because it is platonic or familial-adjacent. Same for the last image. One of the tags was quite literally, ‘don’t tag as ship’, meaning it isn’t romantic:

Saying you ‘need someone’ is not an inherently sexual thing.

(Referring to third image, as its been cut off)

The problem with all your claims is that you leave out a shit ton of context and exaggerate what you do present.

What is depicted in the screenshot is not a tantrum, but a personal opinion that was phrased in a rather long way. Someone being non-sharing or not wanting to interact with ships is perfectly fine. I myself block SCP-049 x OC/SCP-035 shippers because it makes me uncomfortable. Likewise, this is just someone stating a boundary. Oh no! This person doesn’t like to see ships! Because of personal discomfort! 

Not to mention that Sn0ws discomfort with SCP-049 x SCP-035 stems from the fact it creates personal distress with her and, in canon, is considered abusive (See: That’s not love, Isabel.)

This isn’t bullying. Unless you provide contextually relevant details, it won’t be bullying.

Obviously, even if it isn’t bullying, it is still perfectly valid to feel upset from getting comments that aren’t 100% supportive of something you create. I’ve been there myself, but to call it bullying is wrong.  

Instead, that entire response just seems constructive.

Again, this doesn’t seem butthurt, rather just clarifying? You just love to blow things out of proportion, Snek.

Also, it is SO ironic how you talk about ‘’Multiple canons’, yet you’re the person who complains about SCP-049 acting a certain way in one canon?

We also see SCP-049 being extremely paranoid and obsessive with his ideals in the article. you  know what else? We also only see a bit of his character in the article. There are many ways to flesh out SCP-049s character and lore. Not everything has to be article-accurate. Especially because the entire deal with the SCP: Foundation is that there is no true canon. Go figure.

Overall, I agree with anon.

I agree that the first and latter image are odd, but those are incredibly old and also have been deleted for a good reason. The BBC one… yeah, extremely uncomfortable and weird. Again, deleted for a good fucking reason. Do I think an apology would have done better? Yeah. But still, deleted for good reason.

The second drawing, however… is just not sexual at all? Seriously, so many of your arguments boil down to, “I THINK IT IS SEXUAL EVEN THOUGH IT ISN’T!” and it is so embarrassing. So much of SCP-6118s character revolves around mental illness (that the author also has), so why are you so upset that mental illness is depicted realistically and, by proxy, uncomfortably? Get over it.

I will reiterate my point— the artist knows their own work better than yourself. But you don’t seem to understand that concept, as shown here:

(full art for context)

Again, that art is not sexual at all. It is someone in restraints. A soldier, no less. Restraints are so commonly used in non-sexual ways in literally so much media. You’d know if you stepped outside of spaces that portray such things as sexual.. Same with objectification. It is almost like soldiers are seen as living weapons rather than humans. You know, almost like they are being objectified. 

It is almost like Sn0ws writing is literal psychological horror and focuses on the consequences of abuse, mental illness and the like. 

Seriously, this one in particular is a you problem. It is no one’s fault but your own if the first thing you think of is sexual stuff. Actually embarrassing. 

You can so absolutely find a song choice weird, but again, Sn0w said she explained her intent with the drawing SEVERAL times. Not to mention that it is so incredibly common to interpret songs that are romantic or sexual in a completely different/platonic way. Trying to explain to someone what THEY meant when THEY made THEIR work is so cringe. 

For context, this is the drawing:

Stressing on the phrasing of ‘lyric(s)’. A lyric. Some lines. Not the entire song.

’Most of the work form her friends is just smut’, yeah, here is tiredsn0ws opinion on said work:

It is almost like a ton changes in a whole year and that there is a reason Sn0w distances herself from her old work and chose to rewrite it. Not to mention that sn0w has said the opposite about infantilisation of SCP-6118: 

She has expressed cringe and discomfort for most of her old works.

Key word: teenage. One makes and does things that are incredibly weird and uncomfortable and regrets them later on during teenhood. Sn0w has drastically changed since her old works. Here is a full overview of her thoughts regarding her old works:

Also, pointer: SCP-6118 is asexual and aromantic, not gay. Tiredsn0ws version of SCP-049 is asexual and aromantic. Tiredsn0w herself is asexual and aromantic. Aromanticism is very present in her new work. To add onto my point about SCP-6118 being SCP-049s FP (taken from rev. 10 from the scp sandbox) and their relationship being not-romantic:

Actually, none of her characters dynamics are written to be romantic:

I just had to save this one for last. Do you know how absolutely fucked up it is to compare someone to a literal fucking pedophile? A groomer? Snek, you literally forced Sn0w to reveal extremely personal and traumatic details just for her to prove she isn’t, but you don’t care about that and instead keep persisting, and for what? I will not share screenshots out of respect for sn0w, but you know very well. You should be ashamed of yourself.

In conclusion, most of this boils down to people not understanding aromanticism and personality disorders in writing and making up their own interpretations of what someone meant with their work while also invading their privacy.  There is a severe lack in understanding of actual story and thought process. Her work is not intended for a general audience and instead for  people with mental illness and those willing to sympathize with the grimmer aspects of it.  

And also, to Snek:  your arguments are not constructive, they are contextually spotty and so chronically online it makes my head hurt. Your weird usage of condescending titles (i.e. babygirl, bro, etc) aren’t cool or a good ‘got-cha’, it is incredibly uncomfortable and cringe to see. Do some internal insight on why you perceive so many things as fetishistic or sexual, because at this point, it is literally just a you problem.  Do better.

Also, a note about something tiredsn0w (and I, minimally) have noticed:

Micro aggressions are not okay, Snek. And neither are ignorance and performative actions. 

And lastly— leave tiredsn0w alone. I block people who I think are weird also. The block button is right there, it’s free and it is available for a reason. If I can do it, so can you. 

As per my personal opinion, I think that if someone has expressed distaste for their old work and wishes to disconnect themselves from it, then that is okay and should not be held over their head. The artist knows their work better than others. Even when intent is explained, it goes in on one ear and out on the other. 

[gutz-for-garterz]

How do I tell people I'm an autistic goth without the fetishizers coming to fetishise me

'Need me an autistic gf' 'Goth mommy'

[anodetolocksmiths]

Issues With Carry On/Eleanor & Park

[EDIT: upon rereading this, I’ve edited it due to grammar mistakes and phrasing. I don’t think these edits will be included in people’s reblogs, however, so keep that in mind!]

So, I’ve been a fan of Carry On for about 3 years now. These books and characters have changed my life immensely and I’m forever grateful for that. However, we, as a fandom, can’t ignore Rainbow Rowell’s harmful behaviour and portrayals of specific marginalised groups. She hasn’t acknowledged nor apologised for these things and, as a result, I’ve lost respect for her as a writer.

Before I start, I’d like to emphasise that you should be listening to the opinions of BIPOC on most of the points discussed below. I’m white, so my views don’t matter compared to theirs. I’ve linked many articles and videos below, almost all of which were created by BIPOC, sharing their opinions on the subject of Eleanor & Park. This isn’t meant to speak above BIPOC, rather share the issues in these books and bring more attention to them.

Problems with Carry On:

Baz is Egyptian yet portrayed as extremely pale. I understand that vampires are often depicted as pale and “dead-looking”. This is fiction, though. Vampires don’t exist. There aren’t any rules of what vampires should look like. Therefore, they could have any skin colour and Rainbow Rowell chose to make Baz look white. On both book covers for Carry On and Wayward Son, his skin is paler than Simon’s! This is whitewashing.

UPDATE: I no longer agree with the original point about Simon. This part will remain on reblogs but I have removed it from this original version. This post was made a very long time ago, and I have since corrected myself. While I personally felt weird about Rowell’s hesitation to label Simon, as someone who is bisexual, I realise that Simon’s lack of labelling can be representative of people who don’t want a label or haven’t figured themselves out yet. My feelings do not matter compared to the bigger picture. That being said, my points about Rowell’s racism still stand and if anything is wrong, please correct me. Thank you.

Problems with Eleanor & Park:

Eleanor & Park is an extremely racist book. Park’s character (who is Korean) is fetishised and his brother is portrayed as more attractive than Park because he “looks more white”. Eleanor says something racist about Park’s eyes, which is provided below. Rainbow was called out for this racism (rightfully so), turned off the comments on her instagram and simply ignored everyone until people stopped talking about it. Now they’re making a movie adaptation. Here are some specific quotes:

“Park’s eyes got wide. Well, sort of wide. Sometimes she wondered if the shape of his eyes affected how he saw things.”

“Only Park’s DNA had missed the memo. Maybe the Korean genes scrambled everything. That didn’t explain Josh’s hugeness though. Josh looked like the Korean genes had skipped him altogether. His hair was brown and his eyes were just barely almondy — almond-flavoured.”

Park’s mother is also referred to as dainty, being described as “doll-like”. This perpetuates the stereotype that Asian women are submissive and weak, almost child-like, whilst fetishising them and reducing them to their appearance. This is also comparing Park’s mother to an inanimate object.

Furthermore, the only Black characters in Eleanor & Park are stereotypical and far from positive representation. They are two teenage girls who are portrayed as aggressive and sassy. These are really harmful stereotypes of Black women which need to be addressed but, of course, Rainbow hasn’t done that. Moreover, the girls’ dialogue was heavily written with AAVE. There is nothing inherently wrong with Black characters using AAVE, but it was used heavily and further contributed to the stereotypes of Black people.

Subjects like these in books must be challenged. In Eleanor & Park, no one defies Eleanor’s fetishisation of Asian people. It’s accepted.

If I’ve missed anything out or made a mistake somewhere, please let me know so I can edit this! It’s important for me to get this right, as these are sensitive subjects, most of which I haven’t experienced. If something IS inaccurate, please know that it was an accident and correct me immediately. Thank you!

Links

Ellen Oh’s statement on Eleanor & Park: https://elloellenoh.tumblr.com/post/83411304305/whats-your-opinion-on-eleanor-park

Ellen Oh’s Twitter thread on the depiction of Asian stereotypes within literature (of which Eleanor & Park is included): https://mobile.twitter.com/ElloEllenOh/status/1378728312051273732

An article explaining some problematic aspects of the book, with tweets: https://bookstacked.com/book-to-film/eleanor-and-park-racist-movie/

A review by parkourdeer, an Asian-American on LiveJournal, explaining their thoughts on the novel: https://nyoomimnida.livejournal.com/683.html

Read With Sarah’s review of Eleanor & Park: https://youtu.be/Q8KHxuu5nqA

Nish B discussing Eleanor & Park and how white authors write POC: https://youtu.be/UvO4RQjef78

[quillsink]

so when are we gonna talk about how much the men in friends (specifically joey and also chandler) fetishise lesbians and it’s brushed off as a joke or is this fandom not ready for this conversation yet

[natequarter]

Tw police brutality, racisim, fetishization.

Ngl Kylin makes me pretty uncomfortable. Shipping a cop with a brown native lesbian woman is pretty messed up. But also the attitude that alot of kylin shippers have about lin? Like, yall (not you) are fetishizing police brutality by wanting her to beat you on the street.

oh yeah these are some very good points, why do you want to ship a minority which has historically bee nattacked by cops with a cop?? not even getting into why lin is even a cop when she's an asian woman in the first place?

and yeah why would you want to be beat up by a cop? and people who want to be beaten up so to speak by kya are even worse since there's a long history of saying 'step on me' and such to darkskinned women

plus there's people who make kya a darkskinned woman lin's caretaker or hypersexualise kya/treat kya as some smooth-talking suave sexual being. this is a kid's show. she's a brown native woman. stop it