Authors Of So-called "bad" Characters Do Not Owe You Continuous Justification, Apologies, Explanation

Authors of so-called "bad" characters do not owe you continuous justification, apologies, explanation or written-in denouncing of the character's actions and views. They simply do not.

They likewise do not have to very specifically limit their writing or tailor their writing in order to satisfy your demands of denouncing, "fixing" or understanding of the character's actions and views as "bad."

They don't have to include the specific plot of the character changing or facing consequences or grovelling for forgiveness. They don't have to include paragraphs of author notes saying they don't, in reality, condone the character's actions or views.

They. Just. Don't.

Stop demanding it. Someone can write about horrific serial killer on a murder spree and they don't have to specifically always write the killer getting their comeuppance. They can just actually write about a serial killer killing people. And no, it doesn't mean they enjoy, support or fantasise about said things.

If you can watch movies and read books and understand that it doesn't mean you support aspects of it, then why demand that people who are, in reality, doing no different to what the writers and directors of the movie you just watched have done, apologise or denounce or limit themselves to certain permittable criteria? You yourself don't go watch a murder mystery and announce to the whole movie theatre that you buying this ticket and watching this movie doesn't equate to supporting murder.

Why should authors?

(The answer: they don't. And they never will.)

Hello you! Don't know you but I just wanted to thank you for what you said about the behaviour of fans about male celebritries' gf, you totally said what I also think with the appropriate words. Thank you for that, I really enjoyed reading this ♥

You're welcome, and its something I've held a viewpoint on for a long time now. Any time an attractive Hollywood man gets a partner there's this ridiculous witch hunt against them and this obnoxious trend of 'I'll prove they're unworthy.' Its honestly painful to see sometimes, and its frankly just embarrassing after a while.

If you're truly a fan of someone and if you truly want to see them happy and enjoying their own lives you wouldn't be trying to destroy their relationships because it interrupts your ability to fantasize about them.

Actually I do think if you tag a ship in the relationships tag but its only vaguely, minimally implied or is only present for half a line you do deserve to have your WIPs disappear forever without possibility of recovery.

Art of whatever intensity and skill level has value. Scrappy little doodles, basic linearts, blocky colored in sketches, half-finished works, ect.

Art does not have to make you bleed effort to have value in its most intrinsic form. If you created it, it has value. If you enjoyed making it, it has value. If you made it for someone else, it has value. If it was worthwhile as practise or for passing the time, it has value.

The opposing view, especially in fandom spaces, is so toxic. Yes, it may not be aesthetic. No it might not get hundreds of thousands of notes. But inherently neither of those things matter. Like, at all.

I can't tell you how many comments I, as an author, have received along the lines of 'I wish I could make fanart for this but I'm not good at drawing' or something similar, and I equally can't tell you how fucking little your skill level, art style or effort matters to me when you're taking the time to create something based off my creation because you found that much enjoyment or inspiration from it.

Do the shitty little doodle in your phone's notes app. Take that half-nubbed pencil you've had for five years and doodle on that stained napkin. Buy that crappy set of $5 acrylic paints and go nuts on a piece of wood or some printer paper.

All of it matters. All of it will be enjoyed by, at the absolute minimum, at least one person. All of it has a place. Kill the idea that only "professional" art has value.

Blog Rules

General Interactions

While this blog does not have an overall DNI, it is important to note that I, the creator, do not condone asks, replies, reblogs, comments, and all other interactions with racist, homophobic, violent or other negative intentions. All such interactions will be to the best of my ability removed, blocked and reported. Discussions about these in a fandom capacity are encouraged, however, wherein the intent is to draw light to the prevalence of them in fandom space or to challenge them.

Anonymous asks are enabled but will be disabled if frequently abused. Hiding behind anonymous protections for the purposes of harassment, threats, cowardice and escaping consequences of your own statements will not be tolerated and will result in the anonymous feature being revoked.

Asks, replies or discussion prompts sent in with the sole aim of being aggressive, targeting someone, harassing someone, inciting a dogpile on someone and so forth will, as above, be removed, refused, blocked and reported. This is up to the sole discretion of I, the creator.

Limitations and Restrictions

While this blog is open to people of all ages, please note that discussions revolving around topics such as sex, sexuality, LGBT+ themes, violence, death, gore and other topics will be present.

This will not include roleplaying of, creative writing of or discussions made with intent to arouse or generate sexual response. The above topics are discussed only in an analytical, critical-thinking manner.

As such, all users consuming the content of this blog are encouraged to self-reflect and self-evaluate and determine of their own volition if they are mentally sound and aware enough to be present. Users are encouraged to consult the blog's tag navigation list and pre-emptively block any tags and topics that they are not ready for or that will trigger them.

I am not responsible for you failing to curate your online space, failing to take measures to protect yourself from exposure to unwanted content or failing to take autonomy for your own actions.

I will give you the resources to do all of the above; warning statements, clear-cut tagging systems, ect. The rest is on you.

I've been on a Harringrove fic spree lately so;

Billy Hargrove exists without Max Mayfield and Billy Hargrove deserves to exist without Max Mayfield.

Billy deserves to live, to recover, to heal without it being tied to Max. Billy deserves to discover who he is outside of a victim, outside of Neil Hargrove's shadow and abuse, outside of the violence and fear and anger without it being tied to Max.

Billy has value that is not solely deadbolted to being Max's brother. To protecting Max. To doting on her in a way that, in some of your fics and posts, borders on unhealthy, obsessive, and everything Billy should be moving in the opposite direction of.

'Billy redeems himself by being Max's brother' is a trope I am sick to the back teeth of coming across in fanfiction, especially when its just thinly veiled character bashing designed to continuously put Billy down while elevating Max.

Victims do not have to throw themselves into benefitting someone else in order to be deserving of healing, closure, growth and recovery. Victims do not have to 'redeem' themselves by becoming someone else's guard dog. A guard dog that, frankly, Max doesn't actually need.

Billy was already the barrier between her and Neil, anyway. Billy already spent years of his life being the shield between her and Neil. His abuse was, on some level, tied to Max. He deserves to be set free of that for his recovery.