Showing posts with label 2023. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2023. Show all posts

Monday, March 9, 2026

"My Adventures with Superman is ...a whole lotta wholesome nothing burger, mediocre (for now, hopefully)" *2023*

99% of this is originally posted from 2023:


"I was curious at first. But now it's here, and it was:n't it.

It's the lite version of Invincible x New 52 Superman comics (which is where some of the inspiration for the show came from)

rich text editor image

Wasn't dogshit, let's get that out the way, it's only 2 episodes so far.

It means well, the execution/ order of events of the origin /how the show so far is written, are the biggest agitations for me.

EP1-2

  • Decent animation…✅
  • Jack Quaid works in some scenes, but others, he doesn't. But he's not a bad choice for Clark specifically, he's decent. I need to hear him as Superman when in rage, or a very dire situation with a rival.
  • LOIS-Chan, an aged up Luz Noceda + Genki Anime caricature = Lois parody/ She's underwhelming, bland
rich text editor image
  • Music is very underwhelming 90% of the time

Yet the music during the Jor-El scene EP2 was cool✅ Sounded creepy as fuck

  • The dialogue feels off✅ too current gen
  • How he got the suit is too rushed
  • Ma & Pa Kent✅ Ma Kent being chunky was a RANDOM design choice, but it's been done in the lore before and it reminds me of Inko (aka best mom), heavy built mums are cute sometimes. Realistic. I like that Martha is involved in Clark's discoveries also.
  • Clark doesn't have a grip on his powers, knows how dangerous he is, but goes to the city anyway. Odd.
  • Lois & Clark just have the hots immediately because, "purdy". They're cute, but it's shallow. Better to have an actual relationship first before jumping straight to that, forming respect, takes too long, too old fashioned but it works.
  • Jimmy, "James" is black for some reason. A conspiracy nerd, and that's his entire character. so far.
  • Perry White, is black, for some reason. Zero energy, just a lump of jadedness. Fine, whatever.
  • The comedy is well paced, sometimes, other times it's cringe. Sometimes very fasted paced, very modernized.

Snarky "lawl" humor, characters talking a lot but not really saying shit. Again, dialogue is very modern, thus very centered around being ironic, or overtly clever in some way, and it's forced.

Like a boomer trying to write "young people talk."
  • The villain is severely underwhelming, an alternate take on Livewire. Not impressed so far, she's not interesting at all.
  • Very little background characters on some settings, just empty husks of a city at times, DCAMU had the same issue, but the characters are just static cutouts. Budget limits. Looks odd in a city, but then in EP2 there's people around during Leslie's meetup sequence.
rich text editor image
  • The plot itself is standard, doesn't really kick off anything interesting, just The Animated Series Episode 2-3 again but more rushed. Except these kids have something to prove Scooby Doo adventures with the Lois-Chan squad
Not a fan of "slice of boring" anime. Unless it's unique like Usagi-Drop

The best praises I can give this show's first 2 episodes are:

SOME of the animation is ok, most of the character designs are dogshit, the sfx are sometimes good, then it's lacking in some scenes.

The Kryptonian Technology having an ancient vibe to it is cool, and I like that Jor-El isn't immediately speaking English. Makes him seem otherwordly.

As does the mysterious Bio-Boost (Superman Blue) effect this particular Superman has when his eyes glow and he activates some kind of augmentation power.

  • Can't wait to see what that's about.

Jor-El looking rugged is actually something i really, really liked.

rich text editor image

My biggest issue, is the handling of the introduction to Clark and the show's decisions regarding what exactly Episode 1 was and did in execution.

Again, The Superman Blue aesthetic with his electricity aura moment piqued my interest the most, cause it's different, but ofc they don't develop that in EP1 to reel you in.

rich text editor image

No explanation on his Blue aura, which is a new thing for Supe animation.

Have Clark ask what the fuck that was, pan the camera on Jor-El's face, cut to the next scene for dramatic effect, have the remaining events play out and then by the end of the episode show Clark learning what it is.
Boom.

And that alone would've been better, can't argue it wouldn't be interesting. Cause it's not a complete info dump, or instant gratification, cause it's not instant.

But it happens gradually in the same episode, not blue balled for another episode, and it's NEW lore, most importantly.

It's not something we've never seen before, at least in this medium.

  • Superman Blue hasn't been a thing in mainstream animation, not even in TAS. This is prolly just a visual coincidence or a easter egg, this likely isn't Superman Blue, cause Superman Blue is a mutation.

But exploring it, would've been enough to mix the formula beyond Office shit.

  • Cause another thing that i noticed, where are the other Planet employees, maybe i need to watch the episodes again, but Metropolis, feels a bit....empty.

Otheriwse very weird decision to withhold a more interesting element in the introduction to the series compared to Lois-Chan, James & Clark getting into trouble, which is less interesting.

That electricity superpower is something you do in the middle of the episode (SETUP) so that the rest of the episode is spent exploring and building up to what it could be then end on a cliff hanger after a reveal. (PAYOFF)

But most of the episode was spent on the mediocre slice of life plot beats, so the content that's actually interesting is left for the end, or a glimpse of it.

The point is to have an intrigue to begin with, and the Lois squad solving Scooby mysteries isn't it.

Part 1 Episode 1 felt like it jumped the gun, in a rush to go nowhere, because we're on adventures with a Clark we don't know.

He wasn't established first, he was introduced as a child, but not established.

  • AMERICAN ALIEN left a similar impression, i was skeptical at first.

But #1 impressed me. Spent more time with the Kent family than expected, Jon wasn't the biggest fan of Clark, they let it play out, and it was resolved through organic means. Jon grew to like Clark through a fun little sequence, after choosing to accept Clark for what he is, and not basing how he sees the boy off of paranoia:

rich text editor image

After reading that strip: If most of Episode 1 was spent setting up the Kent family/Clark like that before the time skip: It would be a better story/ stronger introduction to the character. And his parents to boot.

In just two episodes I notice the show's writing is in a rush to get somewhere, hence why 3 minutes into the show before we even get to know Clark he already bumps into Lois.

And in the process it overlooks the importance of slowing down and absorbing what was already presented to the audience. Just 2 min ago.

  • Non-linear storytelling is can be good, but it doesn't work for every story. Most times when you introduce something, it helps that element to commit and explore it before moving to something else. Cause that scene in Episode 2 with young Clark, should've been tied in Episode 1.
  • There's no downside to developing something thoroughly, but there is flaw, and a severe lapse in judgement to jump from one thing to the next.

The Intro scene of Episode 1 is perfect✅

Very much like RED SON movie, intro scenes with Young Clarks are majestic, well shot, good direction, good animation. Excellence.

rich text editor imagerich text editor image

Regarding "Lois-Chan",

rich text editor image

So far, Lois is essentially not "Lois Lane" in execution.

They're trying to "create" Lois Lane, present her coming up from intern status, fine.

And yet the result is literally not Lois, just a genki anime girl named Lois, that looks more like an aged up Luz Noceda.

Hereby dubbed "Lois-Chan"

And it pisses me off that people are thirsting cause Lois is a "tomboy" now, when she's been a Tomboy since the 40s.

This one has a haircut, and now magically she's a tomboy.

Dear Normies, please be seen and not heard.

Cause you same people will forget this show exists 72 hours after the finale.

People don't like my criticisms sometimes, that's fair, I talk a lot.

And yet I'll be the one still mentioning the show 2-10 years from now while everyone is hyping something else, forgotten it completely.
So who really gave a shit & who didn't?
Rhetorical. But think about it.

Part of the appeal of Lois is she's a tough city-girl tomboy that wears skirts and girly shit, whatever she wants.

The subversion is that she's not fitting the stereotype, independent, self-made, is the entire point.

But what people are going gaga for, is this version is basically being 2 stereotypes at once.

If yer attaching to the fact that she's an anime stock character, fine, but don't be one of those people that says this is the "better/best" version when the most you've likely seen of Lois is whatever you watched.

Lois-Chan & Clark,

One hand I like that Lois likes Clark, than Superman. She fucks up with her lies, and apologizes later after throwing a tantrum in James' ear about it. But she says sorry.✅

  • What I don't like is the over-emphasis of the attraction like this is a CW show.
  • Meaning, Its not subtle at all, less about her drive and agency & instead it just turns her into a Genki Senpai NPC, Haruhi clone, zero imagination was put here. And she has zero presence, this is not Lois Lane, this is Haruhi Suzumiya reincarnated.
  • (Again) a stock anime character.

For an alternate take, they waste no time, and they're almost immediately DTF, very rushed.

Not digging that decision, especially 3min into the show and we don't even have a grasp on Clark's roots and neither does Clark.

Very sloppy prioritization.

The new series Clois is the hallmark of modern storytelling in some ways, instant gratification: Rushed, they get along, they're wholesome and cute & yet have zero chemistry.

They instantly fall for each other and it's kawaii fodder that everyone's eating up because dopamine fest.

Which is where the "So wholesome", "wholesome this", "wholesome that" comes from.

Same exact feedback from multiple people, why? One trick pony.

Not earned. It's already established that they like each other within the first few seconds they see each other. Wow! Okay, that was quick.

They have zero chemistry, they just blush whenever they hear each other's name, and act cute. And that's all it takes. Superman's always been a Shonen Protagonist but this show in a good & cringe way , makes it official

She can't even send a text to the guy without trippin, mind you, she does NOT know this guy, she met him like what 48 hours ago.

He's just "beautiful", very surface level stuff. Very superficial, you're hot, so now you matter to me. One-dimensional

Too easy, Not earned. Not exclusive bad writing to modern writers but very very modern anyway.

Literally just happens, and i'm not exaggerating: He goes to a store, and she literally, LITERALLY just shows up. Before we even get to know the guy in isolation.

TAS, Smallville, L&C = Banter, back-and-forth, cheeky looks, competition and a rivalry, time to build the dynamic = Chemistry

The show's writing is overall rushed, safe, it's not setting groundwork it's just going full speed. Too eager to take off, with no foundation or hook.

It almost immediately has Clark & Lois ready to take each other's pants off with one look, they knew each other for what 2 or 3 days? And he's on the couch validating her and singing her praises- like they have history. (EPISODE 2 btw)
Of course she doesn't compliment him back. It's just him kissing her ass.

Which is a Red flag that you don't know how to write a relationship, a man just validating a woman in bulk isn't chemistry, feeding her ego isn't romance.

  • Just because they look cute doesn't mean it's selling anything.
  • A relationship is about 2 people, not just one being put on a pedestal.

And then before they could go anywhere with the scene, before she could reciprocate, take whatever it is they have somewhere, ofc James barges in.

Red Flag #2 that you likely don't know how to write a relationship: Interruptions

Because you don't know how to wrap up the scene properly or commit to it.

DekuxOchako anyone?

And it's fine if you don't know, there are things i'm still learning through fucking up & research.

But if it's new territory, look at better examples, like some 40s movies, look at the chemistry of those couples, the back and forth. The time the relationship is given to breathe, look at recent decent examples of smaller couples:

  1. Aang & Katara
  2. Marcie & Bubblegum
  3. Robin & Starfire 2003
  4. Makoto & Batou
  5. Eve & Mark (Comics version)
  6. Ashi & Jack
  7. Clark & Lois (Superman & Lois)

Clois so far, juvenile. forced. locked eyes once, now we're on the "you like him/her don't you?" phase of the game, literal middle school tier shit, and they met like way less than 48 hour span?

Maybe form an actual relationship first to warrant all this.
And i love wholesome, but i'm not a sucker for it. I don't take bait.
Not calling 2 episodes of a show the best version of something just because the characters blush every 2 minutes and stress over sending a simple text, it's cute, and it's fun. And it is, but at the same time, what is the mfing rush?

Otherwise, because Lois & Jimmy are stock current gen blobs, they're the epitome of typical. Lois was not written woke, that's a surprise, but she's not interesting.

She speaks her, she has drive, she's a leader type. Sounds like Lois, but it also sounds like Haruhi Suzumiya, which who she more accurately resembles, reserves a room for their little group and everything.
A Genki stereotype who just serves to have big eyes, bounce around, blush every time Clark is mentioned like this is a tween show because "quirky".
And that's all people care about beyond Clark being a "wholesome" hunk. And he is.
rich text editor image

She's quirky but she doesn't have the cut throat Lane charm, so she's not even entertaining, she's just short and cute.

  • But she's not a pet waifu (which is what most ppl are stuck on)

She's a woman. So I'm gonna need more than just cute and googoo eyes for Clarky boy. And hopefully we'll get that in later episodes.

  • In this regard, it felt like a teenager/ or fanfic writer in general wrote this version of the relationship, as it is in EP1-2, it's so rushed. With all the emphasis on the poorly paced romantic overtones, "Let's prove ourselves & get that story" this show reads like a CW script that got animated.

Raceswapping "Oh Noooo-",

Not wasting too much time with this, all imma say is, if the point of continuously recoloring white characters is representation, you're a tool.

Not impressing this poc with a DLC recolor of white characters, you're annoying me by doing that.

Why does that annoy you?
Glad you asked,
Maybe air another Static show, or a show for Rocket, Vixen, John Stewart, ICON, Mr.Terrific, N52 Solstice? (Indian girl), Cassandra Cain,
But instead you do the safe thing, and recolor cause all you'll get in reponse is detractors that complain but watch it anyway. Or nitpickers that complain and won't give it a chance.
Translation: ZERO Risk. Instead of making pet blacks, usually side characters or knockoffs.
Take a risk, and give the existing blacks, people of color a chance to reach broader audiences of all colors.
rich text editor image

Give Cassie Cain her own show, animated for god's sake, animated please (2026 edit: rated-R, don't be a coward DC animation)

Try that. Make it good. And then I'll bite.

rich text editor image


Clark's decision to leave, or the writers decision regarding Clark.

I'm confused as to how/why he's this old but still hasn't gotten a grip on some of his powers, let alone strength, one of his firsts.

The point of his time in Smallville to Metropolis is learning how to control it then feeling comfortable to leave after. Otherwise why have him discover his powers that early at all, with all that time passed and he's done what exactly?

  • This is why establishment first is key
And yes, I know we'll get context later- but that's the point. To get people invested "NOW", you don't rely on belated context later to try to be clever or something.
This is SUPERMAN, not Dr.Fate, Batman or Swamp Thing.
It's okay to be more direct.

Storytelling wise, makes zero sense to do that.

Otherwise think about what this is saying about Clark:

  • It's dangerous to leave the nest and still be this sloppy, and Clark would know that. A loose cannon like him with no grip on his potential, can kill someone.

But this Kent looks reckless and stupid to be a willful loose cannon.

(But this is what happens when the writers want a wholesome clumsy cutesy Clark Kent for the "uwu kawaii" audience, without thinking about ramifications) How it makes him look.

  • Otherwise him being clumsy was the act he puts on intentionally to misdirect people. An act, meaning he was in control.
  • Here, he's actually clumsy and he's destroying almost everything in his apartment lmfao. He's an actual danger, what happens if his Heat vision just spasms? We haven't seen that yet.

Very unwise decision on the writers part.

Revealing Omniman as a Hero, setup.
Then end with a twist slaughter as established in Episode 1, payoff, good.
The double twist that he's actually an agent is saved for later, good. Why?
Because he was established with the basic information first, so the 2nd twist is the double payoff. And we see his trying to mold Mark as hints, which is more set up.
Him being evil wasn't saved for episode 2-3, the HOOK was given to reel you in and it worked.

The hook for episode 1 was Clark glowing...ook, now here's the issue. If we knew what the hell it was prior, or he did. Or it was established that he couldn't control it earlier then it happens later again, maybe it would've had some more weight.

It's just random. I believe more set up was/is needed going forward.

rich text editor image

Now just because you personally don't like something doesn't mean it's bad, but the punchline, i don't dislike it.

It's not bad. It's just sloppy. under-written, bland and very rushed.

  • 2 Episodes in, a lot happened and it doesn't feel like anything.

And the most people keep saying over and over again is "Wholesome", there's been hundreds of wholesome anime that nobody gives a shit about anymore.

So that means nothing.

Wholesome for the sake of wholesome doesn't mean it's good. Stop repeating the same thing everyone else is saying, and actually have something to say that's not emotionally-centric or related to what gives you the butterflies.
Cause if a show is reliant on your feelings, instead of what it's actually doing right in execution, that's how a show becomes irrelevant in seconds when people stop typing the hashtag. Feelings are fickle.

Cause frfr, fuck me and what I think for a second:

If YOUR script is just plain surface-level shit that you can see in any Office Anime, but the content that would set it apart (The Alien lore), the good stuff is what you choose to hold back for some reason.

What exactly are you doing different or that's not beyond the formula? And why would you hold that back?

And if the entire point is the office shenanigans, why would you limit your show to what anyone could see by going to watch Servant x Service? Which is basically what this is lol.

It's been done and it's just underwhelming.

I get the point that him finding out is the arc, but if him finding out is just third party to the scooby gang mysteries, it's not really a main story development than it is a side story, isn't it?

Cause notice how that's the arc, title card rolls, then 3min later timeskip, and we're meeting Lois instead of establishing further Clark's motivations that we just got 2min ago-

Now we got Taskforce X, Amanda Waller, all of this but we don't have a full grasp on Superman's origin or what that blue shit is, which are the BASICS.
Jumping the gun across the board. What is the rush my guy?...

Again, plays like a CW show that's paranoid of cancelation at any second, so it's just firing on all cylinders to justify it's place. Except regarding the information that would make the show interesting. Cause again, Episode was prime territory to set up the lore, and establish Clark instead of nuggets per episode.

Clark gets the origin rundown in Episode 2, narrating it as it happens, which is distracting, he sees the ship launch. We get that, but nothing more than that. It's cut off again.

Then he just...gets the suit for some reason, he didn't request it, it just happens.

And Jor-El doesn't speak English, so why does he get the suit?

Martha patches it up, he gets a phone ring, then he almost immediately goes to save Jimmy and Lois.

Just quick quick quick, gotta go fast. Zero time to absorb any of what just happened.
Again, Speedster level pacing. Rushed, sloppy.

What's the rush.

Episode 1 gave me the impression, that they wanted to emphasize Krypton's lore.

Episode 2 has a very good scene with young Clark being spooked by the craft and runs to his parents, and i will assume he never went back to it in what.. 10 years?

They finally give us the rundown later in Episode 2, finally, yet it was literally the shit we've seen before already.

Not impressed. At all. Run of the mill anime with a super-powered person in it.

And ironically, I talk about instant gratification, but it sounds like I want the info dump of Krypton & other things at once. Have your cake and eat it took Eh ?

No, cause i already pitched how to do it and make it work.

It's not what you do, it's how you do it. That's why the Episode 2-3 of this (below) show wasn't a pacing nightmare:

rich text editor image

Cause it's not revealing everything at once.

After i watched "My adventures", i went to the original 90s series as an experiment (watched the episodes 2-3) We get to see the parents find him, some of his school life, using his powers, save a little girl, meet Lana,him finding out about his past flies for the first time, he moves to the city he meets Lois, meets Jimmy, meets Perry, and now we see Lex, Corben, a fight scene, Supes causes a Plane sabotage because he was also a SuperRookie at the time.

That's just Episode 2 btw, one Episode.

  • With everything I just dumped, you'd think The older series was rushed & sloppy with how i described it, but it was better in writing because of how it structured the events.

Slower paaace, it wasn't in a rush.

  • The origin wasn't chopped up and scattered, it was founded first like a cement flooring, then everything else was built on that. Thus better pacing. The current events wasn't hijacked by the past, and the past wasn't hijacked by the present.
  • One was established so focus could go into the timeskip events without disjointed transitions.

So much is done is less time.

Just poor decisions all around.

Not bad, mediocre. Sloppy.

Clark is a vacuum because we got see him as a kid, but before we could learn ANYTHING to get to know him, timeskip. Which defeats the point of establishment.

rich text editor image

So now all the info we get of his background is going to chopped up, diced, and edited all over the course of multiple episodes.

Main issue with this show so far, is a very sloppy script trying to do everything at once, at a breakneck pace and holding back on the potentially new lore/ content we should be getting exploration for.

  • It's not enough that Clark is adorable & Lois is "uwu kawaii waifu"

And i'm not speaking for myself, people, time and time again hype something up defend it religiously, then forget it 3 days after it's done.

Look at My Hero, after Season 6 ended, who was talking about it? No one.

rich text editor image

On a positive note, I am excited to see what they'll do (for better and for worse) with the rest of Superman's rogues gallery, and who they'll choose to use. Or if this series will spawn a TV-verse

Imagine Blue Beetle or Shazam in this style.

I would 1000% want that. Especially Captain Marvel/Shazam

Otherwise, this is the dumbed down version of TAS with some not so charming modernization, because as I watched TAS EP2-3, the similarities with MADWS is very apparent.

  • Homework notes were taken, and that's good, it's just they didn't copy the shit that worked in the original lmfao.

And the modernization isn't the entire issue, it's the writing decisions, as i've explained in full.

The modern animation is a testament of modernization, but that part is the better aspects of the show, ironically. As are the SFX, some of it, but those are aesthetic observations.

Everything to do with the actual show being good or bad, writing wise? It's basic so far.

rich text editor image

All in all, the potential is still there. Not impressed so far, but it's only 2 episodes.

We'll see where it goes, not tryna see this fail or be a bum take where the most people can harp on about is it's "wholesome" 24/7

Hopefully, like Invincible, it makes a tone shift and pops off. And Jake Wyatt, the writer, can probably change some writing decisions along the way, everyone does it sometimes.

Personally,

I'd love if they give us Helspont in this take, seeing the heavy inspirations of New 52 Superman in the show, i'd appreciate if they introduced a beastly Helspont to the normies.

He's someone that legit gave Supes a concussion with a bitch slap, into the moon, i shit you not.
Read that Annual if you don't believe me lmfao.



2026 edit: 100% Called it.

Wyatt & Comp. were a plot driven storytelling team. Even in Season 2, it remained rushed, poorly executed, memey, wholesome and absolutely mediocre; too focused on plot, barely any time to cook with trauma, or character elements. Too much in a rush to go absolutely nowhere; plot contrivances out the as, which is more likely to happen in plot driven storytelling vs character driven.

(ATLA Book 3 Finale had two of the worst contrivances in the entire show despite it's character driven storytelling, which is to make it clear that both plot & character driven stories can have contrivances. However, those two were some of the worst offenders. Unlike My Adventures with Lois-Chan, ATLA had a track record of very few contrivances, 99% of the show wasn't asspulls & convenience, very organic for the most part. So the finale's asspulls could be forgiven. After Three Seasons of quality, it could afford those contrivances.)

My Adventures however was too focused on tropes, moments & gimmicks to cook with the story, themes, subtext, source material (or IMPROVE said material aka Kara is a BORE-EL, and they had one of the best chances in her history to set a new precedent for the character and they whiffed it anyway, which I knew they would.) & neglected to cook with the characters to make the best journey possible-- with an ANIME SUPERMAN no less., how often do we get a shot like this? Two seasons in, no excuses.


What a waste. Saw it coming.




Watch Superman The animated Series' first two episodes, just the first two & maybe Season 2 Episode 22 as a bonus .

It's not the information given that's the issue entirely, because again, at the time It was only two episodes of a brand new series but even then I saw the signs.

For TAS: just pay attention to the pacing and how it's written. Notice how it's not in a rush to get anywhere, why? Because back then, that young Superman story was telling an actual story & not sprinting through a story to get to the plot. Called it.


You don't need to watch 50 episodes or read 200 chapters/issues to know what you're getting into. Writing is like food, you don't need to finish the whole plate to know it's spoiled or a culinary delight. A smell, an inspection, maybe one or two careful bites, a taste test: that's all that's needed.


Two words: EXECUTION & Priorities. As the writer: what are your priorities? cute moments to meme? Just having fun in the studio at the cost of the outcome? Making animated fanfic vs a 3-Dimensional Superman story, an airtight story, (not perfect, but well written), a competent journey for the characters.



I saw it even back then 2023, Jake Wyatt's priorities were misaligned, I saw it in plain sight. That has nothing to do with him being a bad writer or good writer, it means his talents needed better leadership vs his talents being the lead, which is clearly what shouldn't have happened.

It meant well, that's obvious. But it was a mess and still is a whole lotta wholesome nothing burger.


I guarantee you if Joe Kelly (Superman vs The elite & Action Comics #775), David Slack (Teen Titans 03') or Aaron Ehasz (ATLA): if one of them were the head writer but Wyatt & his team were the subordinates: not fired but instead worked under the oversight of a more honed-in writer & other co-writers they trusted and have worked with. The show would've been an easy recommendation at the time then, and even now going forward.




It's not always what you do, it's how you do it. Execution and priorities.

Thursday, March 5, 2026

/re ""Toxic masculinity" has no coherent meaning-" | It's a Red Herring, not an extended hand

OP: "No one who uses the term "toxic masculinity" has any coherent underlying thought which is consistent with the way that anyone else uses it. The concept holds as much water as "original sin" on a logical level, and we can see this from the way that it is applied anywhere and everywhere that anyone wants to malign men.


Even at the most charitable interpretation, swigging the silly, gender-studies kool-aid about masculinity being purely "performed", it is still slurring a class of people by labeling their identity to be (at least partially) "toxic". Try that with any other class of people, and the bigotry is obvious. Yes, this applies to nonsense like "toxic femininity" just the same. It also applies to anyone who wants to label any aspect of blackness, latinity, Jewishness, or Asianness as "toxic" as well.


Anyone who uses these terms is engaged in irrational, incoherent bigotry. You might not have a problem with bigotry toward men as a class, but that doesn't make it bigotry any less." - "Toxic masculinity" has no coherent meaning and amounts only to a bigoted slur used against men."


https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/18g1cqh/toxic_masculinity_has_no_coherent_meaning_and/?sort=new






   Ideally it's about "patriarchal" norms reinforcing toxic behaviors in boys, which affects male decline later in life.

The issue: these are the same academics that label men as committing "avoidance" by not going to therapy; when in reality the therapy model is outdated, rigid, inflexible; and female lensed.

Sitting in a position & dumping about one's issues is easier for most women to commit to. Most men actually require DOING something about their problems, hands-on; most boys are the same way in school.

  • The point of putting the ball in men's court is to distract from the fact that the industry is incompetent & is a business, not a charity. They do not care.
  • Men should just express themselves like women, so the model of therapy nor society has to evolve to help everyone via a true egalitarian standard.

🚨"Toxic masculinity" the address aims to critique "societal pressures" that amplify bad traits in men, which in practice is literally about the system of parenting than it is masculinity. The term exposes itself.

Which includes out of control boys raised by single-mothers that DO NOT say "don't cry" but instead enable emotion indulgence by a woman's standards; without a stable, healthy male presence or mentorship.

  • This conversation rarely explores that despite how more prominent single mothers are now compared to the 1950s.
  • This isn't moving the goalpost to say it's worse with single mothers, this is establishing what always was reality: that this isn't about patriarchy or masculinity; it's about parenting and the ultimate wildcard of human nature--

 "Testosterone" the element ppl rarely bring up.



Otherwise, the inherent flaw of the label is the frequency of the behavior is irrelevant because the sole fact of the matter is:

  • bigotry
  • prejudice
  • violence
  • domination
  • misandry
  • misogyny
  • stoicism
  • repression

Aren't male exclusive flaws, and academia can't disprove that.

  • Repression of expression posed as strength, or control of emotions being stigmatized as "repression" through a female academic lens.
  • Telling boys not to cry is not going to create a Jack the ripper; not teaching boys the golden rule, how to respect people, how to respect women without omitting his own agency & confusing being a boytoy with serving a womans needs as a man./Teaching boundaries, professionalism,/ integrity, empathy: Not installing that is what creates an anomaly. 
  • Slapping a little boy in the face or throwing him because he cried is how you create a future destroyer, just telling him not to cry, or teaching "time & place" is not toxic masculinity.

🚨If we want really have that conversation: Instead of pressing why men tell boys not to cry (misleading, I've heard women in their 50s comment on how emotional men are now), instead ask why men AND women thus society doesn't take male pain or men being violated as a seriously as they do women. And then you gaslight yourselves as to why men read the room & keep it to themselves because they know the collective does not care.

Why is it we then focus on men's reaction to biological bias, instead of addressing the bias itself? NOBODY wants to have that conversation.

🚨On the basis of suicide: Blatant societal neglect that empowerment is very brutally gendered by aiming it at women specifically/ Women are tired, mankeeping, & vindicated constantly, no accountability.

Justified in opting out because men are burdens who don't reciprocate & women reciprocate everything that's done for them at all times, 365 days a year, 24/7 (likely story)

In the next breath boys & men are "falling behind"

TL;DR men are just always screwing up, America specifically does not honor men, the closest it gets is superhero movies & even that fell off----that cultural, smothering abuse, bombarded for 40 years+ will initiate more thoughts in a boy that his existence doesn't matter, that there's no hope, no support, no empowerment for him & there's no positive INCENTIVE in opening up to society.

And society doesn't care to make any effort to try to help on men's terms, not because he was told not to cry but because society proudly, boldly, doesn't give a shit And it's always his fault.

That will erect more suicides than telling a boy to how, when, & why to regulate himself.

"Men & boys are falling behind": a misrepresentation.

  • They're just not living their lives like women according to society's modern rigid parameters of success--- like going to college. Men not having degrees is men "falling behind". A lot of Men have more trade certifications, licenses instead of degrees, are women falling behind?
  • Despite males still building every city that cradles your every need. Are women falling behind by that standard because men are still carrying civilization by a brutally huge margin?
  • And not because women are being kept from something, they're not victims here, women CHOOSE not to help in hard skill fields--- Are women therefore falling behind or Or is it that women don't live their lives like men do & spoiler alert: there's nothing wrong with that.
  • So why is it we ignore what women aren't doing to focus on what men aren't doing, spin that as males falling behind--Then tie it to masculinity & patriarchy or men resisting or clinging to how things were?
  • When what's happening is men are only relevant mainly when it's a problem, mainly when men are painted to have scorned women in some way: never to empower, uplift or support.


Masculinity gets confused as a concept when we obfuscate it to mean control or a threat than service, creation, and provision. Hence your country existing at all, matriarchy didn't build Japan, America, China or Russia or India into the beasts they are today.

Patriarchy is what gets results, patriarchy builds because masculinity drives advancement; femininity drives smaller scale progress. But what are you advancing? Devolution or prosperity?

What direction are you progressing toward? Actual equality or the selective version where women benefit primarily? Are you progressing the country for everyone? or destabilizing it with good intentions? That's the caveat



🚨Much of Academia will kindly ignore that concern of what unchecked matriarchal movements do to society- ignoring that on purpose or unintentionally. Either way, that's the level of dishonesty and incompetence that we consider to be the "experts", at least in this topic whenever men are concerned, most of the time.


In fact, the "strong female character" archetype is usually, actively masculinized. Often very hostile, very bigoted, stoic, toxic, domineering, neglectful, insensitive (including to other women)--- all the things that make men a threat are sold as virtue to women.


Point being: Toxic masculinity is a red herring to gaslight men into believing certain bad human behavior is patriarchal, when in reality: "toxic masculinity" is "dysfunctional parenting", "maladaptive dysfunction" regardless of the person misbehaving.

So "toxic masculinity" works better in concept than theory by virtue of women doing the exact same things.

When women put babies in ovens, garbage cans, drownings; mutilating partners, calculated false allegations, keying, vehicular manslaughter, r*pe, drugging, harming themselves to frame people, putting glass in partners food (because women possess testosterone as well just a lesser volume); is that toxic femininity? or is that bad behavior exhibited by a woman at the time?  

One more time:

When women do the exact same thing, is that “toxic femininity” ? or women committing “toxic masculinity” aka a No Scotsman fallacy, bottlenecking the definition of the term.

Meaning if it isn’t toxic femininity, even when Women commit the same thing- we STILL have to keep the term gendered to men at all costs to keep the negative association with males. 

So it’s not women being human, it’s women being like men. See how this works? Do you see how that's engineered? Exception, the victim, deserves better and deserves everything. Thy name is woman.


 This is how you assassinate the morale of an entire group, an entire generation & hide behind “academia” so you won’t be questioned.


Almost as if that’s a zeitgeist requirement to uphold a “rigid” norm to keep majority of negative human traits "male" in overtone to gaslight people to think evil human traits are in essence: just maleness. Because that's exactly how it's spun.

So women doing wrong is just women being like men. 

Which is actually pretty evil, as far as lies go. 

Is it on purpose on part of academia? The doubling down is, but the initial fallacy? I’d like to think it isn’t. Because the term isn’t new. So it’s flawed, disingenuous, rigid and antiquated & disrespectful.

That’s targeted propaganda, not legitimate study. It's always one way.



TL;DR Dysfunction is human, not feminine or masculine. Values and parenting plants the seed of builders or destroyers. How the values are delivered is where the dichotomy comes into play or just personality. For there are tough moms and softer spoken fathers.

Testosterone in isolation- is drive, not a threat- if you parent properly.

The key to raising a little boy is what you choose to install into that mini-nuclear reactor before it goes off during puberty: Will it be a means of clean energy or a goddamn warhead.

  • Stop trying to tame boys to sit still like girls do, stop trying to get them to vent & dump like women do; or make what women what women want to do into just doing everything men do from Stem to Railyard work.

If there's too many men, make quotas for women. If there's too many women, then that's progress. Progress is whatever your betters say it is, and that's the inherent problem with it.

  • Men ARE NOT WOMEN. Because of that is why you have most of advanced civilization (stop taking that for granted because you think you can afford it).
  • Stop trying to masculinize women to be the modern man their grandmothers wanted to date but most men on planet earth (not even overseas) doesn't want to deal with that and stop feminizing men to be a burden women didn't ask for & then women then ask "what happened to men?" AFTER you redefined masculinity five thousand times.
  • Redefining masculinity stems from phobia, not understanding or even humanization.

🚨There's no version of masculinity. The end. But there's a version of parenting the same exact element: Testosterone vessel that is the male.

If you're a violator, that's not a bad or toxic masculinity because not that is not masculinity in any form. Period. Just like getting a sunburn isn't the sun being a "Toxic Sun" the Sun is the Sun regardless of how you interact with it.

  • For boys specifically, testosterone amplify values or a void.

The label is a red herring because it doesn't capture the full picture, let alone nuance. Fallacious & moot: The traits listed are not unique to men, and at worst? The label is antiquated. By definition: Obsolete.

And ironically, was not created by a woman but gratefully opted by modernity outlets to do what they've always done--- not help the situation.


Categorical judgment that fails to establish a Functional understanding.

Sunday, January 26, 2025

Elizabeth Comstock (I hold this character in very high regard)



  • The way the story smoothly transitioned her into central character focus, after making her retrieval the actual goal/game objective of the first act of the story, then a carefree NPC, then things got more interesting, she started showing more sides to her than just "uwu waifu mode".

    She was dynamic. Very slick.

She's a better developed Eleanor, tho Eleanor was also a cool character who pulled strings too.

Actually, deadass?

A lot of the Bioshock ladies one way or another was (co-/independently) lowkey running shit or making moves.



Sofia Lamb,



 Bridget Tenebaum



Julie Langford



 R.Lutece



Eleanor Lamb,



 Daisy "mfing" Fitzroy



Fuck that "girlboss" shit.



These ladies were beyond that, they were professionals, experts in their individual fields. From Biology, Quantum Physics, to social psychology, to just knowing how to lead.

They were qualified, not strong FEMALE characters, just solid CHARACTERS. Without the derivative labels. Love that shit when it’s done right.

And it's apparent in all three games, so it's not a fluke, the writers knew what the fuck they were doing. (But if it got a TV show now post 2020? That whole subtle well executed consistency would be turned into some dumb shit on behalf of women, when it helps the political zeitgeist quotas more than how women & girls look to society.)


And some of em are npc's, not even that deep, most prolly forgot some were in the game, but they were cool.



Usually you got characters just doing shit perfect nowadays because they:

  • Believed in themselves
  • Or somebody told them how special they were all along

Vs these Bioshock characters have ***credentials***, Hollywood needed more of that energy in the writers room. Still do.

In a poetic sense, Elizabeth, with all that power+knowledge, was like the accumulation of all of those characters before & technically after her, for both better and for worse.

  • Cause she, our dear Elizabeth, did some questionable shit to get what she wanted sometimes.
  • Just like Daisy is no stranger to bloodshed, nor Sofia.
    They're flawed, that's why they're believable.
    They're not perfect little angles who represent some feminist overtone, while the men look like idiots.



Example: There's a recording in the "Sofia Lamb - Ryan vs Lamb: Religious Rights" Pauper's Drop level in Bioshock 2 where Ryan & Sofia are having a live debate. Ryan basically states you can have religious rights but keep it to yourself, because in Rapture a man's (that includes womb-man) obligation is to himself, not tribalist convictions overriding a persons rightful state of self-affirmation.

Her comeback was basically how is his persecution of religion or disdain justified: when his "Great Chain" as a symbol (the same one on Jack's wrist) is no less a symbol of faith than the cross itself.



Ryan was technically correct, Sofia made a confident false equivalence, because faith in some messiah is not the same as having a grounded belief in your tangible work and what you earn with your own hands is the basis of your existential fortitude vs something you can't see. Which is all Ryan sought for people with Rapture in concept, you are your own master, period.

And yet Sofia got more applause from the audience because of how she cleverly used appeal to emotion to contradict his statements, which is easier for people to accept because not only is she a woman (& that by default lowers people's defenses whether it be comfort or underestimation just as a biological rule) but she also weaponizes maternal approach to give people a sense of false security vs Ryan's cold, harsh inflection as a seasoned older man with very little capacity for empathy or even feigning compassion.

Sofia is a genius; i 100% believe she could somehow get all those splicers to work for her under the pretense of "family" & "we" collectivism/even socialist-esque mindset, the very thing Ryan did not want in Rapture: the symbol of capitalism.



See- Sofia not even on her best day, could ever hope to make a Rapture of her own. But she can corrupt & take it over, just like socialism doesn't found a U.S.A but it can definitely destroy empires after the hard work is done on part of capitalism. 

The parallels in this respect is eerie in how similar it is, and I can't unsee it when I replay Bioshock 2 these days, because it works so well without making one side the entire problem.

Tl;Dr She undermined the man in his own damn city, & you can hear it in his voice in various recordings that he recognizes that she is a problem. It wasn't cringe because she's not some 14 yr old mary sue, she's a seasoned psychologist that was SOUGHT OUT specifically by Ryan's council because of how good she is in her field, and Ryan only saw how dangerous she was after she was in the city & made it clear she wasn't going to fall in line with Ryan's core beliefs.

She knows what to say, how to say it, and why she says it because she knows how to play people like instruments.

She defied an secular egotist, but she herself is a raging condescending narcissist; the reason why she works is because she's no better than Andrew Ryan & in many ways, leagues worse than he ever was.


In short, Bioshock 1-3 as an ecosystem of characters works because: 

Everyone, one way or another, has issues.




Welcome to BIOSHOCK, enjoy your stay.

Thus, the beginning and end of Bioshock, Anna Dewitt. (Hopefully Bioshock 4 doesn't fuck up what was &/is still a open and shut & done /complete story.)

This character is pretty decent.

It's a crime she's not more appreciated on "female character" game lists. Likely too much good writing and not enough midriff, fanservice, waifu mode, D.I.D, & skintight clothes for the peons to project onto.



Infinite didn't vibe with me at first, I actually did NOT like it when finished (Still have my complaints, entirely with the enemy designs & lack of boss diversity) but "Burial At Sea" was just a trigger moment where I really looked back at what I just played & how overqualified Elizabeth is but still grounded:






Full circle, I'm a sucker for well executed time loops (because it's quantum shenanigans Bioshock 1-3 technically isn't a paradox) or perpetual cycles that don't make me roll my eyes.

Probably played BAS: Part 2 more times than I did the first game.

And as of 2025, I have played both Infinite & BAS combined more than the first 2 games and technically the 2nd game is my favorite, protector trials and everything.

And while Bioshock Infinite is not a better game than Bioshock 2, Bioshock 2 is not packing the story that Bioshock Infinite has, Bioshock 2 doesn't have Elizabeth, the quantum lore, the twins, the parallels.

Technically you playing the games over and over again is a canon event in the story itself in meta.

The difference between a girl and woman is "blood", jfc RIP to the homegirl, she was about that life to the end.
Won't spoil who died tho, if you know, then you know.

Play the game.

Since Levine (original Bioshock writer) is NOT on the project of the 4th game (And for a very understandable, even respectable reason to boot) but for some reason the 4th is being made anyway, this is screaming studio mandate than it is an organic "necessity" for the story.

Which is just MATRIX4-GREED all over again: Sure the first 3 was a complete story, but WHAT IF? We made a 4th one for no fucking reason at all?



It's a complete story, not sure where they want to take it beyond that.

All they gotta do is just fit it in after Bioshock 2 chronologically & follow Eleanor maybe or something, or what the heck is Jack up to?

Both are questions we actually don't need answers to tbh, but I sincerely hope Bioshock 4 doesn't fuck up the loop or the point of the original games frfr.



If anything they should use the 4th to fill up the 10 years between Bioshock 1 & 2 after Jack left with those Little Sisters, during Sofia's rise to power, after Delta's self-execution. That's one of few ways they could 'not' mess this up.


- 2023

Thursday, September 5, 2024

"Deku becomes Uraraka's servant" (Servitude mentality. Macrocreep comic on youtube, for some reason. Youtube, you good with this?)


https://youtu.be/3rcfmqlEKXY





See people get demonetized for cussing in the first 10 seconds (Cuss: “Damn”), striked for less, lose their channels for nothing — — but this garbage gets to be on the platform.

Ridiculous, this generation is an embarrassment. Memes have been one of the best things to come from it, but fuuuuck at what cost.

And for no reason, and it’s not their fault, they were set up to be like this.

Parenting is not a joke people.

When you don’t let your child know they matter or are loved when they’re small- then they remain small, conflicted, bitter, infantile, and insecure in their own minds for the rest of their life & will project that insecurity one way or another.

America had another shooting not that long ago, another reason why parenting is not a joke, and people were harmed in that event.

Macrophilia is another result of human incompetence, societal decline and thus civilizational failure, hence why it emulates all 3 simultaneously.

It’s why the fetish is so spiteful, petty, very childish & childlike and always involves boys, girls or entire cities getting bullied or destroyed:

Societal collapse visualized and that goes right over the heads of the people pumping this crap out. Hence Propaganda doing it’s job puppeteering the weak willed, the victimized, the impressionable, the casualty, the unsuspecting, someone who deserved a better upbringing, so much better.

And as insecurity does, misery needs company.

Now they got comic dubs, trying so hard to normalize this crap, so so hard. And the fact that it got 1Mil doesn’t really bother me, only because it doesn’t say anything about the macrocreepism vs the fact that they used popular characters, Deku & Ochako and how odd the title is.

Hell they got my ass to click on it, sheet.

“Uraraka’s Servant” (hello? huh? What timeline is this? )

Remember, these two are underage btw. Minors, another thing Macrocreeps give zero shits about, they’re very PDF coded, verrrrry very predatory in the “content”.

Not all of em are good with peeedo stuff (miraculously), but since the latter to most worship citywide genocides where kids/babies are killed anyway, not much of an upgrade is it? No matter what you do, yer on some radioactive anti-human shit, misanthropy.

On average, Macrocreeps need to push their issues on every platform they can aka these insecure people (that need hugs from their parents, NOT A PLATFORM) need the world to pay attention because that’s what their parents/environment likely didn’t do or didn’t do properly, you don’t have a healthy environment and still get this this bad, for this long, & no character arc.

And then when the parents got it right or halfway, then society comes along & unravels most of that anyway, because children tend to regress a little, when we all leave the nest and get a taste of independence, we’ve all done it, we’ve all sampled something just because we could. It’s normal.

But bouncing back and not making it a habit is where the adulting kicks in.

And again, it’s less about macrocreeps this time and moreso it amazes me that YOUTUBE allows these adorable goofballs to dump their baggage here on the platform.

But the slightest thing to a joke 10 years later can get striked because of a TOS change, a warning for the “n word” in a boondocks clip.

But THIS gets left alone tho. And i’ve seen some genocide shit get left alone on YT

“Mant”

HUH?! The fact that it exists on current YT, same Youtube that axed a bunch of channels, silences channels, shadowbans. The same Ad-Friendly youtube.

And that some of it is reuploaded when I assume because it got rightfully taken down (because some ppl need their genocide porn available for everyone not on a forum board but on a platform children use, THANKS pal, you’re my hero. ❤)

why is the n word as a joke not allowed when said by a black character, but GENOCIDE is A-ok.

But “what about the children” right youtube? I’ve even seen Fetishy Ai Ads on my shit.

Like what the fuck even if YouTube now.

Make up your minds Youtube, do you give a shit or not. Decide.

Comment: “Shouldn’t uraraka feel bad “
re: EXACTLY THEY ARE FRIENDSSSS

Guys, you have to understand how most of these people operate. Moral recession is an inevitable outcome for most macrophiles, even the gentle shit is infantile.

Ochako is not going to feel empathy or compassion, because the author possesses neither one of those traits when they’re in auto-pilot. They’re projecting trauma & propaganda installed into them from their culture, not humanity.

Because if they were projecting humanity or a genuine story, they wouldn’t be a macrocreep to begin with and would just make a fan comic or fic expanding the MHA lore creatively/ no fetishism strings attached —

legitimately like a normal person.

They’re in auto-pilot projecting deep seeded misandrist/misogynist propaganda and emotional issues.

keyword: AUTO-pilot

the propaganda is speaking through them, whatever pain/confusion/trauma/socio-upset/or faulty imprint they internalized- that’s what’s being communicated. That’s what’s doing the talking.

The artist doesn’t give a single shit about character accuracy. I promise you. They’re likely not fans, they’re just borrowing the characters because the characters showed up in a passing thought, or they are casual viewier, and now they’re going to make their dayfeverdream everyone’s business.

Many hate themselves for being insecure/ & possibly male (because naturally, what other signals are boys supposed to take when their society constantly tells them there’s something wrong with them) and so they make macabre & art that ridicules them for being weak.

They’re creating their own diss, *ba dum tish

And the characters have to represent that self-hatred or superiority complex/narcissism/weakness/pain/ propaganda.

This is 100% projection, as macropcreepism is in a nutshell, not expression, projection, overcompensation.

This isn’t about the characters, people. Never has been.

This is about them 100%, OP repeating the same narrative, the same propaganda.

How do I know? Cause I guaran-fucking TEE you they’ve made other comics with different characters but the exact same “ANT bully” bullshit scenario, but without the character arc that Lucas got by the end of the movie.

Because insecurity of the fetishism category, never evolves, it never grows up, it only sheds it’s skin for a new polished one but says the exact same shit aka Suspended development.

The proof is in the pudding, and these guys have gotten so bold, so comfortable they’re making the case for me exposing themselves, even on Youtube, YOUTUBE.

I don’t even have to do anything. and thankfully, I’m not the only one pushing back, thank fuckin’ Christ. We’re not totally a lost cause as a species.

This isn’t about Deku or Uraraka, this is about a damaged/battered human being needing the world to pay attention to them for being damaged, because again — — that’s what their parents /environment didn’t do properly: pay attention in the first place.

The human brain is not complicated.

This is why empathy and compassion is a necessity in a child’s life in the home AND SOCIETY, it’s not a woman thing. You get this crap when something is missing in a person, not always broken, but missing, twisted, warped, charred.


It’s the fact that this was likely a grownass adult projecting insecurities, and that manifested as a minor sexually abusing another minor. It’s the ‘human being’ skill issue for me.


Parenting is not a joke, neither is community, not the word “community” these online cults & fandoms use, but actual community that raises children

Society (You, Me, anyone holding the other accountable) is part of the parenting process too. It doesn’t stop when you turn 18.

If it does for many of us, that explains a lot as to why people act like they have no goddamn sense.

It’s the fact that this was likely a grownass adult projecting insecurities, and that manifested as a minor sexually abusing another minor.


 And if they’re both aged up, nothing changes actually. Still it’s the ‘need to be oppressed to feel safe’ NPC syndrome for me, it’s the ‘needs mommy’s attention even if it’s negative & toxic’ regression for me, It’s the ‘human being’ empathy skill issue, then makes it everyone’s business on YouTube of all places for me.