I Knew Tony Stans Were Delusional, But This Is Too Much. Most Of These Characters Actively Dislike Tony.

Whenever I run into people--people who are apparently well-intentioned and trying to be kind and moral--who honestly think that there was no widespread antisemitism before the Nazis, all I can think of is this:

The Wikipedia page for "Timeline of Antisemitism" is so long that they had to give the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries their own subpages for reasons of length, and the 20th century subpage is not inclusive for the Holocaust, which has its own timeline subpage.

But so many people think that antisemitism was invented by the Nazis, and solved by the Allies. And I just want to shake them and educate them.

Seeing people who hate Snape say things like “Snape cared about no one but himself” as if Severus Snape wasn’t his own biggest hater is so amusing to me.

After Some Time (...and a break or two)

Ugh… okay, its here. The big one. Let me preface this by saying I wont be doing a count by count story of what happened, it’s too many hour and headaches that I don’t need to be fair. But I said I’d get to it… and boy howdy has it been swirling in my head since.

The Slazo Situation Revisited

 So small backstory for those who haven’t boarded this crazy train of bullshit and migraines, this story is about a fairly large commentary youtuber by the name of Slazo (Or Micheal) who was caught in a controversy when his ‘Ex-Girlfriend’ exposed him in a Twitlonger for being a manipulative, sexual harasser. DM’s and screenshots of chat logs were shown and it made Slazo look pretty scummy. A few days later Slazo releases his defence video outlining the parts that were true and a lot of points that were fabricated to make him look evil in the eyes of the internet, with added proof and conveniently missing parts of his exes proof that would have exonerated him on the spot in the eyes of the internet courtroom. For opinions sake, yes I do think Slazo is innocent of the more damning accusations that were put against him, no I do not think he was 100% innocent. Of what he was guilty of? maybe being a pretty shitty boyfriend…. though at the age of 15-16… its slap on the back of the head material… not cancellation worthy.

Slazo was pretty much cleared of it all and everybody went on with their day… heck it shouldn’t even be called the Slazo situation, because while his name was brought up a lot, he wasn’t really all that key to what happened next… 

Commentary youtubers from all corners of the internet had an opinion on what Slazo had done and how guilty he was (again, I will not be doing a play by play of every accusation) which boiled down to two camps

1. “Slazo is guilty and here is why… Oh and have a bunch of off-cuff situations I witnessed where Slazo was really creepy that I only just now remember and want to bring up.”

2. “Lotta commentary youtubers being liars, snakes or hypocrites up in here.”

Which in turn brought two youtubers under the microscope themselves, ImAlexx and Hyojin.

Alex first as it’s easier and is the least weird of the two. Alex jumped on the Slazo hate bandwagon pretty quickly and started accusing Slazo of a bunch of things that couldn’t easily be proven, while also completely backing up the story that Chey (the ex) has given in her Twitlonger, despite the fact it had been blown open with so many holes that not even a brain dead goldfish could find logic in it. Alex would later admit he had a part in writing the Twitlonger, as did many other prominent commentary youtubers and friends,outing the Twitlonger as more of a team effort rather than just Chey writing it herself.

After this Alex was accused of a bunch of stuff himself including being a social climber to get more popular since he was a pretty good friend to Slazo before all of this happened, as well as a snake since he supported Chey and the Twitlonger until it was criticised as untrue…. and Alex said the same to cover for himself.

To this day there hasn’t been a clear end point to this, Alex has tried to brush away from it all and has taken the bumps of being called controversial, hoping for it to all die down eventually. (While writing this Alex appeared on the Happy Hour Podcast to give a rundown of the situation to the hosts who admitted they knew nothing of the situation. What’s worse Alex seems to have glazed over many of his own wrongdoings that only escalated the drama further.) Opinion? To be honest, I don’t know… Alex obviously tried to ride the controversy to boost himself, that much is sure, yet when it came back to bite him he tried to hide and wait for it to blow over. It’s sad, It IS snakeworthy and since a proper apology hasn’t been issued… it’s not a good look for him at all.

Hyojin to me was the worst of the two to me. While she didn’t say as much publicly, it was was was happening behind the scenes that just frustrated me.

(Be aware, if you like Hyojin and think she can do no wrong, DO NOT READ PAST THIS POINT. A lot of hot-takes will be thrown out there and a lot of criticism will be put out there too. I WILL be talking about the aftermath at length which is where the support poured in for Hyojin. I will being ripping that apart just as much, if not more for the bullshit that it was.)

Hyojin sucks, and I mean she really sucks. A lot of what was thrown out about Slazo in the Twitlonger allegedly was orchestrated and was the idea of Hyojin herself, taking what Chey was saying and embellishing it with the rest of their friend group. It’s alleged however and won’t be part of the criticism thrown at her.

While the incident was being investigated, Hyojin was too, including her colourful hot takes on Slazo and how creepy he was. Hyojin would never publicly call out Slazo since at the time, anybody who did was getting rinsed by the internet very quickly. So instead she hid on her discord and talked in DM’s about destroying Slazo’s career so he would never recover and deleting messages that challenged how Chey publicly omitted any evidence that made Slazo look like less of a monster. Shady.

During the internet investigations, it was discovered that Hyojin had an old art Twitter where her fictional character was drawn fucking her friends in several positions. The problem was, several of these friends were underage and despite her defence that none of these friends minded…. it was still there for public viewing as was still wrong. One instance even had another youtuber by the name of Kavos in one of these pictures even though he was never asked, nor gave his permission. The irony of all this being that much of what Hyojin criticised Slazo for, she was guilty of herself. Creepy.

Here’s where it gets controversial… probably more for me. Dog dropping rumours aside. (trust me, it was stupid)

Hyojin was getting major flak for everything that was found out about her and it seemed to get too much for her, which is understandable. Her response to all of this was a tweet telling everyone she was going to kill herself. The public response actually became something that confused me, because in the blink of an eye everyone retracted their criticisms and gave out well wishes instead. To make the trend even more sympathetic the youtubers involved in writing the Twitlonger started urging people to give her space and lay off on the nasty comments.

I for one, did not care. Heartless of me? Maybe. But it was all backed up by reasoning. Here was a girl ready to throw the life of a person under the bus for being a slightly shitty boyfriend and lying to make it sound worse. Helping to write up a statement that grossly exaggerated things to such a degree that Slazo was the most hated person on the internet and was blasted by everyone left, right and centre. After he proved to everyone he wasn’t like that, the attention turned on Chey and the friends that helped her and when their dirty laundry was put out there and they were being criticised…. now it was unacceptable? Now it was too much?

YOU TRIED TO OUT A GUY FOR BEING A SEX PEST! Shit that will follow him for life. But people calling out racist remarks you made? the underage porn you had drawn? The toxic behaviour you exhibited to anyone who questioned you?

….yeah that was too much and the line had to be drawn right?

But hey, it’s okay, you can just back to twitter the second the drama blows over and everything is all good now right?

Now this is where I direct it to the people who think that Hyojin is infallible, that she can do no wrong. She messed up bad, real bad. If anything she’s the true villain behind all of this and it’s shocking the lengths people were going to just to defend her. If every racist, abuser or sex pest threatened their life to be let off, this world would be screwed, but the second a darling Tumblr artist with links to popular youtubers does it, it’s a crime to list the irony that she attempted to cancel a guy with far worse repercussions that would lead to life long damage.

The worst part of all of this was that an apology would have cleared all of this. They knew they were wrong but an apology was impossible for them, so instead it’s made bigger, uglier and dirty laundry is shown. If anything, I’m happy it got to where it did since it showed the ugly side of Hyojin for everyone to see. So my opinion of Hyojin?

Fuck Hyojin.

Me when I defend Snape so much and remember that Snaters brush me off as just “some Snape apologist” even though I actually have so many criticisms of his awful actions, love his deep-rooted flaws and complexities, love to analyse how much his horrible childhood shaped him out to be for the rest of his life and how it turned him into what he hated most (a bully), and usually the only times I defend him are when his haters misconstrue what he did and make up fanon claims about him, not because I can’t handle when they say anything bad about a character I love, but because I simply can’t handle when people misunderstand his character (for better or for worse):

the kissing booth is abusive and terrible; an angry rant

Okay. So basically, Noah is first introduced to us as this character like three times the size of Elle, and this character that his brother (Elle's best friend, Lee) thinks should not date Elle, raising a red flag. Lee wants what's best for Elle. And it's clear that Noah isn't that. But if we put that aside and we fast-forward to school, Tuppen sexually assaults her because she is wearing a skirt that is deemed too short in the eyes of the school. Then Lee tries and fails to protect her, and Noah goes psycho, beating Tuppen to a pulp. And of course, like always, the victim gets detention, so when Noah and Elle are waiting outside, he victim blames her, by saying, "Wearing a skirt like that is asking for it." I already didn't like Noah, but now I hate him. Telling somebody who was sexually assaulted that it was their fault because they were 'asking for it' by wearing clothes they were? That's a new level of low, and we're only about twenty minutes in! If that. Anyway, Elle goes on a date with Tuppen, and Noah is jealous. He stands her up (predictable) then explains that Noah has been meddling in her social life, and is the reason she has no prior dating experience, so she doesn't know what a healthy relationship is: the only people she's engaged in an even slightly romantic act with is a sexual assaulter and abusive, toxic man. But if we put all that aside, Elle is angry. So she calls Noah, and these are the words exchanged during the call:

Elle: You do realize that you're not my dad, right?

Noah: Look, you still got a lot to learn, kiddo.

Elle: Kiddo? Oh, my God. Oh, if you were here, I would beat you with my shoe.

Noah: Tuppen is a player.

Elle: So are you

Noah: And that's why I know he's wrong for you. You're gonna thank me one day.

Elle: Okay. Well, today is not that day. It is not your job to monitor my dating life. Do you understand me? The days of you controlling my life are over!

Noah: We'll see about that.

So Noah, creepy as he is, insists on continuing to manipulate and meddle with her life. He is trying to control her life. At that point, even he is warning her. Tuppen was a sexual assaulter, aka a piece of scum. And Noah? He compares himself to Tuppen. That should say something. Numerous red flags are up, but Elle is closing her eyes. Although that's not on her. She's the victim here, in this situation. I may not like Elle, but this stuff should not be happening. Anyway, let's put all that aside, yeah, and move on.

Elle and Lee suggest their idea for the fundraiser, a Kissing Booth (shocker) and of course, they need all the 'hot guys.' Convenient, because Love Interest Number 1 is a 'hot guy' when he's a toxic, abusive douchebag. Okay. I actually don't understand this point - are girls the main aim for this booth? (majority of people are straight in this world, but of course we have the gay tokens for diversity who have zero affect on the plot in the second movie) Because they aren't preoccupied with hot girls. Also, why are the girls presented as the objects to be kissed? No boys there? Doesn't matter, I guess. It's just an abusive relationship, in a plot that barely took two seconds to think out where like every character is an asshole. But I'm not judging that. After school, Noah tries to get Elle to come home with him on his motorbike. Of course, Elle refuses, yet he persists when she says no, because of course, Noah's reputation as a player. And I'm not surprised, you go Elle. He drops every girl. But, I mean, Elle is 'not like other girls.' Elle runs home, and she asks people to do the booth. Surprise, surprise, they say no to kinda selling themselves...and not getting anything from it except maybe herpes.  

Okay. So, after that party I don't feel like talking about, because you know they used the same scene for every high school romcom, and the OMG's, aka the rip off mean girls, invite her over to get her intoxicated, and Elle is totally drunk. Elle asks Noah for the booth, girls he's making out with is mad, Elle gets rejected. There are a few partying scenes, and then Elle strips her clothes off leaving her underwear and dances. Lee, for some reason just watches her (see what I meant about assholes) and then Noah with all his chivalry takes her up into her room, dresses her in his clothes and then she wakes up presumably thinking they slept together, which of course, they didn't - but I wouldn't be surprised with Noah taking advantage of her intoxicated state and r*ping her, because when you're drunk, you can never consent. But the fact she suspected he might have r*ped her means she knows some degree of his toxicity, yet she is somehow still blind to it. Anyways, they had an 'accidental groping' session, and Elle is out and about again. Anyway, Elle lies about Noah liking one of the OMG's so they'll do the booth, and now she's got to convince Noah to do it, because the OMG'S (which he most definitely does not like) are waiting for him at the booth, and he's the main attraction for whoever's at the booth. Noah tries to order Elle around again, and she asks him about the booth again. (Clearly, neither of them can take a hint) and he refuses. 

It's time for the booth now. I'm going to skip out on the beginning, but the OMG's push Elle out onto the stage and Noah comes up and kisses her, and thats something else I don't like: no matter who it was, if it was her boyfriend of a year of someone in her Physics Class, it was clearly not consensual. But the kiss happened, and since it was Noah, Elle enjoyed it, but Noah let her down, telling her it was 'just a kiss' manipulating her feelings, and now she's in this great dilemma, because Lee had been warning her all along with that friendship rule he insisted on. But let's skip a few minutes, after she tells Lee repeating what Noah said, where we're at the bit where Noah confesses his love with the classic fanfiction response, (I mean, this is WattPad, so...) 'You aren't like other girls, you didn't "fall at my feet" I love you you're so sweet!' Etc, etc.  

So, to show his love for her, he takes her to a hookup spot where he takes all of his conquests. Perfect. That fanfiction thing is probably something he tells every girl, because Elle is clearly like the rest of the girls he's engaged in activities with.

Beach party. Warren tries to get a drunk Elle to skinny dip, and Noah jumps in, after an insult, punches Warren in the face and Elle runs off. When Elle is walking home, Noah screams and yells at her to "Just get in the car, Elle. Just get in the car, Elle. GET IN THE CAR, ELLE!" And with much violence, he punches his car in anger and frustration and toxicity and abuse (more controlling, great) Elle is scared (because it was clear that directed to her, Noah was yelling at her and he wanted to hit her) and she gets in. They go to the Hollywood sign (which they cannot go to, because I'm pretty sure you need to pay to go, like, as a tourist, but they filmed it in Africa so I'm sure they know jack shit about how the US works) and etc etc. 

They start a relationship made up of sex and hiding. Sex and hiding includes a lot of these things, and not what a relationship should contain. What I don't like is that they think it's this huge secret that needs to be kept, it's not like they'll be discriminated against. 

Lee is their only worry.

When Elle gets hurt and Noah is there, Lee immediately assumes he hit her. Why? Because he's lived with his brother...his whole life. He knows Noah like she back of his hand. He knows Noah is abusive. So when Elle's hurt, the only logical thing is to assume Noah did it. And what does that tell us if Noah's own brother assumes he abused her? And Noah's only response to being accused of violence is to...get violent. (Thank you, Cynical Reviews! You should watch him on YouTube. He's great. Especially his review of The Kissing Booth.) 

After this, Lee finds out about their relationship, blah blah blah who cares. Except for the fact Lee is still angry: at Noah, not because Elle lied, but because he is sure how this is going to go, because he's experienced it from the sidelines - random girls he's barely known getting abused and having their hearts broken. And he doesn't want the next casualty to be Elle. Of course, like, no one supports them, because they know what happens every time Noah brings a girl home - or something of the sort.

Elle tells Lee to support them, she gets back with Noah and Noah...leaves.

A set up for a sequel which whenever I have time, will be analysed, because it is seriously abusive and toxic. None of these things were done out of 'love.' Love is a word used too carelessly in film. This, at the closest, is lust. And it is unhealthy, controlling, toxic and abusive.

So there's my argument!

did dream underpay and rush the animators of his "mask" music video?

short answer: no, quite the opposite actually

long answer: after seeing that post make its rounds yesterday, i posted on reddit detailing my attempt to get in contact with the production lead, phyre, to have her fact-check the screenshots from that post. we talked, she answered all my questions and pretty much debunked the claim that they're only being given "$250 total" for their work. case closed.

and then dream himself came swinging from behind with a proverbial metal folding chair :P

he left an essay in the comments of my post, complete with citations! for those of you unfamiliar with reddit, here is his post + the screenshots of his discord convos that he linked

the narrative that dream is taking advantage of his young fans and exploiting them for cheap/free labor is false, and in fact, he paid them 3x the final amount. once the original deadline was missed, he didn't rush them further and gave them extra time. this can all be corroborated by phyre herself on twitter.

the true batman v superman is batman and superman falling for the human counterparts and shenanigans ensue

I would like to submit two ideas because I think I'm poking something but not going in fully, so I would very much like your opinions and additions about it (of course, as long as they remain in good faith *side eyes possible antis viewing my post*).

Marauders and surface-level rebellion

I've finally put to words something that really bothered me with the Marauders, though I don't know the name for it.

It started when I read a reblog that said:

I remember Brennan saying “laws are just structured threats made by the ruling socioeconomic class” during an episode of D20 and we truly just had to stan immediately

This is something dear privileged white woman Rowling didn't realize/understand well, since she held a high socioeconomical status even during her """poverty""" stage. It's known that, despite seeming to be defending ideas of fighting against fascism and "pureblood" supremacy in favor of acceptance of the other, her books reek of colonialism/imperalism. The story of the Marauders, a gang of privileged boys like her, is an in-world replica of that problem where Rowling betrays yet again her actual mindset.

The Marauders adopt the "bad boys who break rules" to get style, while completely losing/staining the moral sense in it.

Let's take piracy.

Some people pirate stuff because they consider that the stuff they'd like to get comes from unethical companies that abuse their employees or use modern slavery, or people who spread harm against certain minorities (like Rowling against trans people and thus the LGBT+ community), so while they may want to access the content, they don't want to give them money and might even encourage pirating their stuff to make them lose money.

Some pirate stuff because otherwise it's lost due to unfortunate "terms of use" -- see video games companies like Ubisoft (deletes gaming account after a while), Nintendo (does not bring back old games), etc.

Others pirate stuff because they just don't have the money but they still want to try the stuff that might make them happy and forget that they're poor -- reasoning that the company isn't losing any money anyway, or not much, since they wouldn't have been able to pay for it in any case.

Others pirate stuff because they consider the price ridiculously high or they consider it shouldn't be something to pay for at all. (Like education stuff -- isn't education supposed to be free for all, so that it can actually uphold everyone's fundamental and unconditional ( = not conditioned by wealth...) right to have an education? Oh and before anyone asks: I've DEFINITELY bought the ~15 expensive books that's roughly worth 500€ in total and that my uni asked I buy to study and get my degree...)

Rowling's Marauders is a group that would pirate stuff just because they'd think it would give them an edge, because they'd think it would make them cool to be seen as "talented" hackers who "defy" companies. Companies... that their own friends and families would own, and as such, would find that kind of behavior funny and entertaining (while they would trash other people around for considering it).

Another example. In society, in history, it's been proven time and again that breaking rules -- going against the law -- is an eventuality that's important for everyone to consider, if they want to defend their rights. Anti-racism, feminism, LGBT Pride, etc, advanced because people broke rules. In USA states where abortion is currently being banned, women and minors (+ their close ones) must now consider breaking the rules to get an abortion. (Privileged people don't give a fuck about those people, and if they suddenly decide that (moral) rules don't apply to them and they will get an abortion, they will just take a plane ticket to a country where abortion is legal, fiddling with legal stuff if necessary thanks to the lawyers their fortunes can afford and the lobbies that they're instituting.)

Revolutions happened because people broke rules too. I particularly like the 1793 Constitution in France Because it asserts that the people have the right to break rules and riot if the power in place threatens their fundamental rights:

Article 35. - Quand le gouvernement viole les droits du peuple, l'insurrection est, pour le peuple et pour chaque portion du peuple, le plus sacré des droits et le plus indispensable des devoirs. Article 35. - When the government violates the people's rights, insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of rights and the most essential of duties.

(Of course the power in place would state and enforce and make use of propaganda to say that it's completely illegal and illegetimate and that those who riot for legitimate rights are terrorists!)

Breaking rules is at the core of anti-fascism, anti-dictatorship, anti-totalitarianism. Breaking rules is essential when those rules are abusive. Too often, those who put those rules in place really are only setting their rules of the game to establish their power over the others. Or as the reblog says: "laws are just structured threats made by the ruling socioeconomic class".

Rowling's Marauders break rules because they are the socioeconomical class in power. As such, no one can do anything about it, no one will really tell them down for it. They get excused and justified and romanticized by their peers, just like billionaires & politicians are excused by their peers and notably mainstream media (which is owned... by other billionaires). They break rules -- not because they think it's necessary and the morally right thing to do despite the dangers it puts them in -- but because it makes them feel powerful, important, invincible, which for them is very fun. As Snape says: James and his cronies broke rules because they thought themselves above them:

“Your father didn’t set much store by rules either,” Snape went on, pressing his advantage, his thin face full of malice. “Rules were for lesser mortals, not Quidditch Cup-winners. [...]”

They break rules because they're allowed to.

Which is why, in reality, the Marauders aren't really breaking rules or defying anything or opposing an actual big threat. They're a bunch of jocks who are having fun in the playground that's been attributed to them thanks to their status and family heritage (others wouldn't get the same indulgence because they don't get that privilege).

They break rules because they want to look cool, to be the "bad boys". The message has been compleyely botched. Especially with Lily actually finding this hot.

Because Rowling finds this hot:

[...] I shook hands with a woman who leaned forward and whispered conspiratorially, 'Sirius Black is sexy, right?' And yes, of course she was right, as the Immeritus club know. The best-looking, most rebellious, most dangerous of the four marauders... and to answer one burning question on the discussion boards, his eyes are grey.

(Anyone has an eyes washing station?)

Another quote:

"Sirius was too busy being a big rebel to get married."

(Nevermind the eyes washing, anyone's got some bleach instead?)

Stanning James Potter for being the leader of a gang that prides itself on breaking rules and always getting away with it -- it feels like stanning Elon Musk for being "innovative" and "a daring entrepreneur" despite being a manchild who exploits workers and modern-world slavery to play with his billions while always getting away with it.

They're not being "rebels" -- they're being bullies and flexing the fact they can get away with it thanks to abundance of privilege. Those are the tastes of a posh British white woman. She wanted the facade -- not the substance (that is, if she ever understood it).

You might say that they did oppose a big threat, the Death Eaters, but again, it's botched because:

they target a lonely, unpopular boy who's best friends with a Muggleborn Gryffindor, rather than baby Death Eaters like Mulciber, Lucius, Rosier, Avery, Regulus, etc.

The leader sexually harasses the Muggleborn Gryffindor because he's sexually jealous of the unpopular boy who dared not take the insult about his chosen House and shut up. Lily is treated as an object, they don't listen to her, and they barely speak about her later. (Lots to say to show that, which I won't do here because this is not the main subject.)

When the Marauders do join the Order, they do it... because they primarily want to adopt a rock-n-roll style and play the "bad boys" again. Or at least that's the message that's given to the reader:

They seemed to be in their late teens. The one who had been driving had long black hair; his insolent good looks reminded Fisher unpleasantly of his daughter's guitar-playing, layabout boyfriend. The second boy also had black hair, though his was short and stuck up in all directions; he wore glasses and a broad grin. Both were dressed in T-shirts emblazoned with a large golden bird; the emblem, no doubt, of some deafening, tuneless rock band.

(God, the Prequel is so cringy.)

They don't choose Dumbledore as the Secret Keeper, they don't tell him they changed to Pettigrew -- even though he literally was their war leader -- James uses the Cape to fuck around even though he was supposed to be hiding with Lily and then Harry (until Dumbledore takes the Cape from him)... and eventually, their group exploded, with James killed off, Sirius thrown to Azkaban, Peter (the traitor) hiding as a rat and Lupin going off to find jobs to survive.

Why did that happen? Because they thought of playing their part in the Order like going on a teenage adventure rather than engaging in a resistance organization. It was, first and foremost, about playing "the bad boys" and having fun.

(Harry half-inherits this. While he doesn't break rules just to look cool, and actually has several moments where he does break rules because it's the right thing to do -- like under Umbridge or, of course, when Voldemort takes power -- he does often get pampered when he breaks them in his earlier years. By Dumbledore, but also McGonagall, however much Rowling tries to sell her as a "strict but fair" teacher. Or by Slughorn, now that I think about it. That's something that enraged Snape, as it brought up memories of Harry's father -- Snape's own bully -- getting the same treatment.)

It's not a coincidence that Rowling not only failed to properly convey through the Marauders the true value of breaking rules, but also lusted over them for adopting that "bad boys" trope. It speaks to her own privilege -- she who never had to put herself in danger and go against the law in a risky attempt to protect herself or other less privileged people.

(Here's a useful read to expand on those worldbuilding issues.)

2. Dark Magic, obscurantism and conservatism

For context: Opinion: The Dark Magic/Light Magic Dichotomy is Nonsense (by pet_genius).

The idea of "Dark Magic" as something that's repeatedly told to be "evil" magic and where you cross the line of the forbidden, while hardly putting in question that notion that was (for some reason) enforced by wizard society, is another blatant example of Rowling betraying her mindset of privileged British white woman.

Rowling couldn't put herself in the minds of a society of "outcasts (witches & wizards) deeply enough to consider they would not see any magic as "Dark" at all (being a ""Muggle"" concept), or that Dark magic is only magic that requires something unvaluable to be traded off -- like one's soul or health or life or sanity. Instead, she has Dark Magic defined as "evil" magic, even though her own books show that you can do evil stuff with normal magic, and that you can do morally good stuff with Dark magic. This thing happened because Rowling could not think past her own little world and instead she poured a conservatist mentality (+ typical "Muggle", anti-witch prejudice) into the HP (wizard society) worldbuilding without considering that there could, in fact, be fundamental differences between the two worlds that include thinking of magic differently. (This has a lot to do with Rowling's wizard world being a pro-imperalism fest.)

"Dark Magic" feels like a lazy, badly-executed plot device to tell the reader who's a good guy and who is not. Because of course, that's how things work in real-life, huh… (Did she ever hear of "don't tell, show"?) It's used as an excuse to define who's evil (teen Severus) or not (James), who's worthy or not -- not how their magic was used. Which is a BIG problem:

“I’m just trying to show you they’re not as wonderful as everyone seems to think they are.” The intensity of his gaze made her blush. “They don’t use Dark Magic, though.” / “Scourgify!” Pink soap bubbles streamed from Snape’s mouth at once; the froth was covering his lips, making him gag, choking him —

Even worse, Rowling doesn't follow her own in-world moral framework. Dark magic is acceptable for some people (Rowling's partial self-inserts: Dumbledore, Harry, Hermione to Marietta...) but not for those that Rowling hates (Snape, who ironically represents the closest thing to rebelling by unapologetically obsessing over the Dark Arts). Again, this is at best unadressed in-world hypocrisy, at worst an expression of in-world and out-universe privilege (I get to do this and stay a good guy, but you don't).

There could have easily been rightful criticism of whatever could be defined as "Dark Magic". What if Dark magic was just something defined as "Dark" usually because the power in place doesn't want the people to touch it? Is abortion or contraception or a sex-altering or a goverment-threatening spell, Dark Magic? Is foreign or ethnicity-specific or female-centered or queer-centered magic, "Dark"? How about showing why (Muggle-raised but also neurodivergent) Severus thought Dark magic was so great, showing his point of view, while also establishing where the true limits are? If Lily can't be the one who sees past the "fear-mongering anti-intellectualism/propaganda", how about Harry being the one who does, thanks to him relating to Snape on a personal level? How about making Hermione go from someone who condems Dark Magic, to someone who entirely changes her point of view and understands that this is all bullshit -- effectively showing the dangers of only following what the books say, without putting them into question or thinking by yourself? How about a nuanced view of Dark magic as something that requires a significant sacrifice, which is conceivable for something they see as equally or even more important [Lily's life for Harry; Snape's soul integrity for Dumbledore]? How about making the Death Eaters, people who deviate that legitimate interest, rather than just evil guys who thrive in Dark magic for its supposed added evilness? How about showing that Dark magic was just a notion invented by Muggles to throw "witches" (real or not) to the burning stakes -- later taken by the witches and wizards in power to define, in the magical community, what was okay or definitely forbidden because it's the trademark of those who represent a threat to the magical community (understand: people who riot or strike or protest against the ruling socioeconomical class' politics)?

But there was none of that.

"Dark" magic in HP merely seems to be a weird concept that at best accidentally takes the form of an in-world obscurantism, at worst is just the trademark of someone who cannot imagine a "hunted, ostracized" community with a different culture and mindset than her own. Aggravating is the fact that she used "Dark magic" as a plot device to magically cast some people as good and others as never bad – again, probably reflecting her own questionable mentality.

The fact Rowlnig invented the notion of Dark Magic and had her world consider it seriously as an evil thing instead of being open-minded seems to be less telling of her wishes to show a wizard society that can be as prejudiced as the muggle one, and more of her own bizarre world where you must be evil if you are knowledgeable in or interested in certain "taboo" things (RIP neurodivergents).

Rowling glorifies the Trio and the Marauders for breaking rules. Yet when it comes to actually breaking expectations and norms, notably in the wizarding society -- like the use of another magical species as slaves, or the blatant anti-Muggle prejudice held by everyone including "good guys" (or anti-centaur while we're at it), or stupid anti-knowledge prejudice like "Dark magic is evil" -- there is none of that. At best, it's surface-level opposition that comes out as white savior syndrome. At worst, the protagonists make it their noble code to enforce those norms, and "sinful" characters (Snape, for one) are punished for not conforming. Too often, those sinful characters are punished by the "good guys" with the very thing that they apparently oppose so fervently.

Without ever adressing the fact that those characters were ("morally") allowed to do that because it was just, in the end, a matter of who gets the privilege to do that, and who does not.

There.

Do you have anything to say to develop on those ideas? I feel like I'm reaching my knowledge limit and I'd like to see if those ideas can be expanded.

idk why anyone hates them they are so pookie. just look at their faces i wanna squish them :3

(also don't interact if you only like one of them and hate the other. they are a package deal.... to me. they are so Smart yet lowkey so emotionally unintelligent and comphet...... to me. i love them.)

compilation post of commentary youtubers talking about dream, no drummyaches edition !

note, i might not exactly like 100% of the things said in these videos BUT they ultimately redeemed dream to a very large audience

starting with i think is the most viewed video right now, Will Dream's Response Actually Fix Anything? by Lessons in Meme Culture. it's 2:40 minutes long and the point is simply to open conversation about him being able to successfully redeem himself, but it has a lovely comment section if you want to scroll through that

Dream Just Responded To Everything by AugustTheDuck, had already spoken about Dream pretty positively, lovely guy, lovely summary [ touches earpiece the main studio is telling me august actually was a dream hater but turned around recently, so noting that down ]

Dream's Response was Perfect, But... by EntLaiser, who previously made a video actually speaking negatively of Dream, completely changed his opinion and talked about how meme culture is being used to justify mass harassment, along with being nice to Dream stans and defending them

Pyrocynical made a video. its bad. don't watch it. he gets cooked in the comments though so that's okay. Acheeto also made a video but i don't like the guy so i'm not linking that either, but it was a good video

Dream Finally Responded To The Allegations by sensitive soci3ty. i really like this video but i especially like the comments that bring up a lot of great points, it was refreshing scrolling through them

LIES! by Omni. Omni is really big on the commentary community so his input is valued, this video is long and goes through a lot of unrelated stuff because it's a news segment, but i linked to the timestamp he talks about Dream. it is long, it is thorough, he READS THE DESCRIPTION which i haven't seen anyone do, pretty good

Dream Might Actually Be Innocent by Saverino. this guy is like, the perfect representation of "i only consumed Dream content through social media for years", the most passive onlooker in the world. and his video is awesome, he took a lot of notes, he resumed Dream's video pretty well, and i feel the way he thinks of Dream is how people will look at dream from now on

Dream Finally Responded by Dolan Dark. it's a slob but it's fucking Dolan Dark and he says he believes he's innocent so who cares W for us

other creators we already know and knew they believed Dream, Hot Sauce Beats did a live reaction and so did Nate Alyn if you'd like to go and support them

Dream's Response Was Actually Good by Saamuel. dream hater admitting he was wrong. all is good in the world

Dream Finally Responded To The Allegations by Optimus. don't watch this video lol. he says a bunch of stupid shit, his comments call him out for it, but i am linking it because this guy is huge on the community, a lot of people were waiting on this video on twitter, and he's very clear on saying the allegations are fake, along with shaming twitter antis for their behaviour

Dream's Response Wasn't Good Enough by luhrix specifically talks about the reaction from antis on twitter to the video and how unreasonable some expectations are when it comes to responding to allegations

Does Dream's Response Make Him Innocent? by Blissolic who VERY BRAVELY calls out coyglone ( the guy behind the dreamwastalen account ) for being a piece of shit