So I’ve Been Thinking About Rational Vs. Irrational Character Decisions.

“This triangular dynamic among bully, victim, and audience is what I mean by the deep structure of bullying. It deserves to be analyzed in the textbooks. Actually, it deserves to be set in giant neon letters everywhere: Bullying creates a moral drama in which the manner of the victim’s reaction to an act of aggression can be used as retrospective justification for the original act of aggression itself. Not only does this drama appear at the very origins of bullying in early childhood; it is precisely the aspect that endures in adult life. I call it the “you two cut it out” fallacy. Anyone who frequents social media forums will recognize the pattern. Aggressor attacks. Target tries to rise above and do nothing. No one intervenes. Aggressor ramps up attack. Target tries to rise above and do nothing. No one intervenes. Aggressor further ramps up attack. This can happen a dozen, fifty times, until finally, the target answers back. Then, and only then, a dozen voices immediately sound, crying “Fight! Fight! Look at those two idiots going at it!” or “Can’t you two just calm down and learn to see the other’s point of view?” The clever bully knows that this will happen—and that he will forfeit no points for being the aggressor. He also knows that if he tempers his aggression to just the right pitch, the victim’s response can itself be represented as the problem.”

—

The Bully’s Pulpit            On the elementary structure of domination

David Graeber

(via argyrocratie)

I'm on the record as saying that I never care when white characters get recast as POC (like with Namor and MJ in the MCU); however, there is one distinct exception to that. I believe Charles Xavier has to be white. Hear me out.

I'm approaching this with the characterization of Charles Xavier in the comics (not the Fox films, as it has been so long since I've seen them) and my own interpretation of the politics surrounding his character. I would love to hear some alternate perspectives, provided that it is all polite discussion ofc.

As I alluded to in an older post I see Charles Xavier as a very liberal character. He is always for assimilation and has a tendency to prescribe the "model minority" mindset. He uses his most attractive and human passing mutants as the face of his team. Never in the comics did he publicly identify himself as a mutant- Cassandra Nova was the one controlling his body when he publicly came out as a mutant. Charles' wealth and his whiteness prevents him from seeing the reality of the mutant situation, it is the reason why him and Erik are always at odds. Erik, as a Holocaust survivor, understands the patterns of discrimination and bigotry. He understands that no matter how much the submit to the mold of "well behaved mutants" they will never be treated the same.

Charles, in my mind, encapsulates the liberal fixation on both the aesthetics of bigotry and the individual. Bigotry is bad when people yell slurs and commit hate crimes. Slurs are yelled by individuals, and hate crimes are solitary events perpetuated by individual bigots. Erik was always a character who attacked the system. He wanted to dismantle the systems responsible for the oppression of mutants. Charles is someone who has benefitted from that system, even as a mutant, and on some innate level is afraid of changing that fact. I think being white and wealthy contributes greatly to the philosophy of Charles Xavier. The politics of mutants and the X-Men universe has always been something of great interest to me and this is just the way I see it. But, what do you guys think?

“some people don’t deserve redemption” redemption isn’t something that’s deserved, it’s something someone does. it’s making the choice to change the way you live your life, to be better, to do good things instead of bad things and try to make up for the bad things. and everyone can and should do that, at any time, no matter what they’ve done. we can’t change the past, but we can choose what kind of person to be now and in the future. we have the responsibility to do so. it is so completely not about “deserving.”

How to Finish

I drew this poster for Jon Acuff and his FINISH book tour. Big thanks to Jon for this collaboration, his book has some great ideas about how to complete creative and life goals.

Greetings TFA fandom. We support characters having agency over their actions and not being boringly "perfect" in this house.

a redemption arc is not a sacrifice.

a redemption arc is not some grand act of selflessness.

a redemption arc is not meaningless pain and suffering.

a redemption arc is simply facing the consequences of your actions, fixing your mistakes and doing better, regardless of whether you will be forgiven or accepted. that's it.

At-will employment is inherently ableist garbage.

I've seen my partner go through 3 different jobs that all found various ways to fire them or pressure them to quit because the "accommodations" given helped nobody but the company.

When you give companies the power to terminate employment at their own discretion, they will use it at every opportunity they can, especially towards people who are deemed "difficult" (i.e., disabled).

They will always find a way around discrimination laws.

New zine that's free for anyone to print and distribute! Read the whole thing at newlevant.com/COVIDzine or in the rest of this post.

being in your early 20s is crazy bc there’s people who are literally married and people who’ve never even dated and people who are trapped in their childhood bedrooms waiting to get out and people who are trying to live out romanticized dream lives and people who are completely on their own and people with multi tiered support systems and we’re all supposedly peers and none of us think we’re doing it right at all