bitch, you sunk my battleship!

A Jumanji can be dangerous and high-stakes (to the characters), but it doesn't need to have a metaphor or lesson, it can easily just be a "Would this be fucked up or what?" situation (e.g. a lotta Goosebumps stories). If there IS a lesson/metaphor, it will be on a smaller scale like psychological issues (e.g. Magnus Archives), family/relationship issues (e.g. Zathura), or about a specific topic (e.g. Magic School Bus). Large-scale social issues may be present (after all, Everything Is Political), but they take a definite backseat.

saw

the cabin in the woods

labrynth (1986)

and

Star Trek: Strange New Worlds

snw season three is coming out this week and i can’t help but think about how tied to engineering uhura’s storyline has been and how important her love of engineering is - that through hemmar and their mutual love for engineering she was able to work through her trauma and heal. and how her song about finding herself was sung in the engineering bay.

Uhotty shippers, come and get your food.

but i always accepted that nothing was really gonna come out of uhotty because they weren’t a popular pair and most fans think their relationship is random. at most we’ve gotten a few crumbs in the comics (and they are very cute crumbs but crumbs nonetheless).

and then snw s3 comes, uhotty have some cute moments but uhura gets with ortegas’ brother. i decided i was fine settling for platonic uhotty. at least they have screen time together.

the following events ensued:

1. predictable lively discussion on the preparation of Wienerschnitzel, in which natives and wurstaboos are pro-puff and everybody else is like *confused dog head tilt* why wouldn’t you want the crust to stay ~attached to the thing you put it on? as with other fried foods?

2. thirty “Bad Schnitzel is my band name” jokes

3. thirty “Bad Schnitzel is my stripper name” jokes

4. one “ah yes, Bad Schnitzel! a lovely spa town” joke

5. this absolute masterpiece:

because at the very least, whether or not they actually experience transmisogyny/are regularly transmisogynized, within the framework, only actually matters if they were assigned male. so a person's experience of being affected by transmisogyny only allows them to be categorized as TMA if they were born with a certain body that led them to be raised as a boy.

if you want TME/TMA to not be about people's AGAB and their genitals, if you actually want it to just be a framework of people's relationship to transmisogyny, then it has to be about people's relationship to transmisogyny. you cannot both claim it has nothing to do with people's bodies and genitals and AGAB and talk big game about not associating trans people with their AGAB and transfeminist materialism blah blah blah and also have highly AGAB-based rules about how people are make sense of their relationship to transmisogyny.

Let’s play the biggest game of kick the can on the internet.