And you know what? I don't want to avoid or shut down non-graphic discussions of the stuff that upsets me, because sometimes it goddamned important. The mere discussion of self-harm, particularly the injury of the wrists, makes me viscerally ill and makes it harder for me to breathe. But if someone is contemplating it, I want to know so that I can help. I can't help if I don't know.
Okay, but do you have this same reaction when people are just passively tagging relatively innocuous things on their own, or when people politely ask for those relatively innocuous things to be tagged?
If someone sent an anonymous message to a bad metal cover art blog asking them politely to tag skulls and the blog owner responded simply with "why are you even here" and didn't do it would you still find the request irritating?
Shit, I know I would've. Because for me the fact that people were asking rudely was entirely secondary to the fact that they were asking at all. (Because most of them weren't even asking rudely)
So I'll just reiterate that you don't know what those people are dealing with.
And you haven't necessarily raised any unreasonable concerns but it has been very very helpful to me to always consider what I don't know about a person
Like I recently learned a close IRL friend had major problems with psychosis and it felt *awful* because pretty much every annoying tendency I'd attributed to bitchiness suddenly made perfect sense
And it didn't justify some of their more unreasonable moments, but damn, it did give me a lot more perspective
This being said, I really don't have a strong stake in what people tag things with on their own blog. It might be odd to tag "skulls," but ultimately that is their business, not mine. However, asking someone whose entire blog revolves around bones and dead things to tag "skulls" is a touch ridiculous, although I feel like there are more politic ways to phrase one's response than "why are you even here."
I feel that part of the problem is that anonymity makes understanding the person asking the question and their point of view very difficult. I get that such a question may be awkward, but the fact of the matter is that being able to put a face to a request makes it seem more genuine.
^ Again: Talking to people candidly and directly is important in these situations. Putting another layer between you and who you are addressing does not help.
*shrug* again, you don't know exactly what anyone's deal is
A lot of people on Tumblr are just discovering their mental illnesses after years of feeling vaguely different or ostracized and having their feelings invalidated, and by assuming they're being unreasonable you're kind of putting them back there, y'know?
At any rate worst case scenario these are just kids acting childish in an attempt at progressivism
You're pretty much describing me here, and I don't agree with you.
I had already, and it doesn't change much to be honest? Usually when people see someone at risk they have the decency (or at least the self awareness) to not ask to tag things.
There are exceptions and it's reasonable to not be happy about it but... well, they are exceptions.
That post was really more an explanation of why I don't block tags or, y'know, flee the forum when someone talks about harming themselves. Just a handy bit of information.
Really it's mainly that when I started digging into why this bothered me I realized how trivial it was
I mean, the benefits of this kind of thing are entirely nebulous but I have on several occasions made a complete ass of myself by underestimating what others were going through. So now I just elect to hold my tongue on this particular kind of thing. It's not like I'd be addressing anything on more than a superficial level anyway.
Gumball is a blue cat drawn in a deliberately flat art style. This show is a love letter to many, many different styles of animation, and the main characters themselves resemble graphic design in their flatness. This of course is contrasted beautifully with the live action backgrounds. This is probably the only case I will mention where the design decisions are less character based and more art direction based, but these decisions are ultimately what made this show so unique to begin with.
This reminds me that I should really watch that show.
This is a nifty post. (Incidentally, this is part of what I like about Hunter x Hunter that I feel is often overlooked, but I digress.)
So I barely read it (will get to it tomorrow), but would you mind putting it succinctly, please?
The diversity of styles employed with respect to appearance so that even without elaborate costuming, hairstyles or colours, you can tell every one of the characters apart despite the fact that they all look like they belong in the same show overall, or in some cases actually look related when they're supposed to.
I really wanted to make a post that's just "destroy the idea that barack obama doesn't know what he's doing" repeated four times, but I dunno if it works without being able to reblog it from marcorubio
so i might post something that rags on sao viciously
should I post this on top
"Now before I continue with this, note that I am attacking SAO itself and not its fans. If SAO got you through a tough time (and I can see how that could happen) then...great! I don't want to take that away from you! If you identify as an SAO fan, then I won't hold that against you. If you have friends who are SAO fans, then it's good that you met other human beings through media. These things alone make SAO worthy of existence. Bad taste is not a moral wrong: hell, even I like some things I'm willing to admit are utter shit. Basically, I don't intend to attack you or your friends for liking this thing and hold nothing against you."
Although on principle if you care about it so much, I'd put as much in your own words, barring times where someone simply speaks the words you wanted so well? Which this might be, I guess, it just doesn't read as one.
Part of it rubs me the wrong way, but that may be for reasons peculiar to me.
Namely: "it's ok, even i like some things that are shit"
If i think "Doctor Who is usually kind of naff, but i enjoy it", and you say, "actually Doctor Who is shit, but it's ok to like things that are shit", then fair enough, your opinion, i won't care.
But if i think "Steven Universe is extremely moving and cleverly written" and you say, "actually Steven Universe is shit, but it's ok to like things that are shit", the statement feels condescending and rude.
That's fair, and was, like, the one issue I had with the post. Although I really feel like it is partially due to Tumblry phrasing rather than something wrong with the idea itself.
Like to me it really all boils down to "me criticizing media, even if you happen to enjoy it, is not a judgment on you" as I see it. Sometimes this involves media that I wouldn't call good (The Asterisk War), or not (HxH). Which is why I wouldn't use that phrasing, except if I'm being thoughtless or something.
i feel if "what you like does not determine your value as a person" is all you intend to convey, you should just say that
and even then, i still might feel condescended to, assuming i had not at the time been worrying that my value as a person might, in fact, be determined by my likes & dislikes
The thing about lots of fans is that so many of them are so invested in whatever they're a fan of that they conflate attacks on it with attacks on them. I know how you might feel, but I can't think of any better way to put it.
People who interpret these things as attacks on them won't be swayed by your disclaimer. You need to start over from step one and integrate the "you're still allowed to like this thing" into the post as a whole or not include it at all, otherwise it *will* come off as condescending.
"You are a person who really likes human faeces, really wallows in the stuff, you love it so much you can't even tell it's shit, you're somehow under the delusion that it's something of substance and quality! But if that's how you choose to spend your time, i'm not going to rag on you for it. Not everyone has my impeccable taste."
Why can't we take attacks on our aesthetic sensibilities as attacks on ourselves, anyway? Why is that always taken to be some kind of fallacy? The part of me that assesses a work of fiction as "intelligent and moving" is one of the few parts of me i don't actively dislike, and apparently i'm not allowed to be indignant when someone implies that part of me is delusional?
i mean, i'm not going to feel insulted if you just don't enjoy something that i like, but saying it's "shit" is a different matter altogether.
Also like if you're going to call something that i hugely admire "shit" (i don't admire SAO, but hypothetically), why should i give a damn whether you think it's "OK" for me to like it? i don't need your permission.
That's its own kind of condescending, because if not everyone who likes it feels that way, the speaker is presenting themselves as somehow more enlightened than all the other plebs who take it at face value.
Why can't we take attacks on our aesthetic sensibilities as attacks on ourselves, anyway? Why is that always taken to be some kind of fallacy?
i'm seriously wondering about this now
like
You are a person and this thing that you admire is shit. --> You are a person who admires shit.
QED, wasn't hard.
But in every online discussion where this has come up, that interpretation has always been treated like some kind of big blunder, and now that i think about it i'm not really sure why.
Comments
If someone sent an anonymous message to a bad metal cover art blog asking them politely to tag skulls and the blog owner responded simply with "why are you even here" and didn't do it would you still find the request irritating?
Shit, I know I would've. Because for me the fact that people were asking rudely was entirely secondary to the fact that they were asking at all. (Because most of them weren't even asking rudely)
So I'll just reiterate that you don't know what those people are dealing with.
Like I recently learned a close IRL friend had major problems with psychosis and it felt *awful* because pretty much every annoying tendency I'd attributed to bitchiness suddenly made perfect sense
And it didn't justify some of their more unreasonable moments, but damn, it did give me a lot more perspective
I'll back out now since you asked.
There are exceptions and it's reasonable to not be happy about it but... well, they are exceptions.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
I mean, the benefits of this kind of thing are entirely nebulous but I have on several occasions made a complete ass of myself by underestimating what others were going through. So now I just elect to hold my tongue on this particular kind of thing. It's not like I'd be addressing anything on more than a superficial level anyway.
Namely: "it's ok, even i like some things that are shit"
If i think "Doctor Who is usually kind of naff, but i enjoy it", and you say, "actually Doctor Who is shit, but it's ok to like things that are shit", then fair enough, your opinion, i won't care.
But if i think "Steven Universe is extremely moving and cleverly written" and you say, "actually Steven Universe is shit, but it's ok to like things that are shit", the statement feels condescending and rude.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
(*rolls off into the distance, Limp Bizkit blaring*)
i feel if "what you like does not determine your value as a person" is all you intend to convey, you should just say that
and even then, i still might feel condescended to, assuming i had not at the time been worrying that my value as a person might, in fact, be determined by my likes & dislikes
There are ways of being more tactful about it than "it's ok to like shit."
Also yeah, what Kex said. The people you're referring to won't take kindly to that part of the disclaimer, rendering it pointless.
Why can't we take attacks on our aesthetic sensibilities as attacks on ourselves, anyway? Why is that always taken to be some kind of fallacy? The part of me that assesses a work of fiction as "intelligent and moving" is one of the few parts of me i don't actively dislike, and apparently i'm not allowed to be indignant when someone implies that part of me is delusional?
i mean, i'm not going to feel insulted if you just don't enjoy something that i like, but saying it's "shit" is a different matter altogether.
like
You are a person and this thing that you admire is shit. --> You are a person who admires shit.
QED, wasn't hard.
But in every online discussion where this has come up, that interpretation has always been treated like some kind of big blunder, and now that i think about it i'm not really sure why.