"There Is No Such Thing As Black And White, Good Vs. Evil Situations In Real Life! Real Life Is Always

"There is no such thing as black and white, good vs. evil situations in real life! Real life is always nuanced, and there's always some gray area to every situation."

"This is why I believe it is strictly immoral to write good vs. evil narratives, as these type of stories are all objectively harmful, promote black and white thinking, and lack any redeeming qualities."

Turns out maybe the one who lacked nuance was the one writing the blog about nuance in stories the whole time.

you know i think i’ve come to the conclusion that the answer to “but what if a cis woman is traumatized by men/male presenting people/whatever?” irt safe spaces is this: if you can’t be in the same room with someone you assume to be male or a man without feeling triggered, it probably means you have a lot more solo therapy and healing to do before relying on group therapy or other communal healing.

because how do you decide who gets to stay and who gets kicked out based on a cis woman’s trauma response? is it based on appearance? should intersex women with facial hair not be allowed because beards are triggering? should butches and studs not be allowed because masculinity is triggering? should talk broad shouldered trans women who don’t want to voice train not be allowed because low voices are triggering? is it based on identity? should a pre transition trans man who came out two days ago not be allowed because he’s a man? is a nonbinary person with a full beard and deep voice allowed because they are not a man?

because if you base your entire set of rules for who’s not allowed in the safe space on what makes cis women uncomfortable or triggers them, you’ve just made that space unsafe for trans people. and you need to decide if you’re ready to own that.

I love soulmates but also this-

i don't fundamentally disagree with the notion of, like, not praising people for doing the absolute bare minimum. however, i am very much opposed to its common usage as an excuse to treat people poorly under the presumption that they probably deserve it, then deflect any criticism for doing so. ie. making a rude comment about a cishet person under the assumption that they're bigoted, being informed that said cishet person is actually an ally, and then angrily responding "so, what, am i supposed to reward them for the bare minimum???" no, buddy, you're supposed to not be mean to people just because you incorrectly assume that they would be mean to you if given the chance. showing ppl basic human decency is not a "reward", it's like. more of a basic right.

tfw "popular" fanon becomes so embedded in a fandom & discussions within fandom spaces that people just start treating it as the default and all interactions with others are coloured by this interpretation. have you considered that I actually don't subscribe to this take, which is nowhere in the source material? wait nvm, clearly not.