#kindness first

You do more good when you're kind and explain things clearly than when you just scream. You won't get through to anyone that way. The community mass blocks you and that's it, you're gone, you're never going to get accurate information out there to the people who might need it. Your links go to waste, your words are lost, no one will take you seriously.

You've managed to do nothing in your short time. Impressive.

You're left screaming only to people who already agree with you and see your hate as something acceptable.

I’ve noticed recently that other people seem to think they can also write and post the same idea, and it’s just not okay. If someone has shared an idea they have, if someone has said they are writing the idea, then it’s theirs, it belongs to them. Don’t go write it and post it without permission. Just don’t do it.

Do you have any idea how much it hurts to see someone else getting praise for your idea? And it’s sad really, because one of my favorite parts of writing was sharing what I’m working on, teasing people about the ideas in my mind. It gave me a lot of motivation to actually get it written and shared.

But now I don’t want to share, because I don’t want my ideas getting shat on by someone who doesn’t see all the details of the idea in my mind, and if they get it posted first because I have a life and a job and kids and a husband and a house to clean and so on and so forth, it’s super frustrating.

Hi Anon,

I think those are also plausible interpretations. I don’t actually see why she couldn’t have been doing both things though. She’s canny, wary, having lived in a world in constant war. Of course she is checking to see if Dean and Ketch are friends or foes. They did rescue her but for all she knows they may have rescued her only to use her to for something else, as you point out. She’s a leader and a tactician and she need to suss out this new information.

But when a clear point is made in the dialogue about what precisely the nature of their relationship in Dean’s world was, and Dean explicitly tells her and the audience that they were sibling-types and that his Charlie likes girls, why assume that it has no significance? It’s Occam’s razor for me. If it takes more effort for me to see how a conversation would have no implications about sexuality than it is to say that it might, well, why do the harder thing? Especially since dialogue can perform multiple kinds of work at once: doing some exposition, surfacing some themes, building a character. Your reading sits fine with those that think the writers were making a point about sexuality.

But even if it didn’t…that’s ok. There will always be a multiplicity of interpretations of this and any text. You might find it “weird” but that’s allowed, right? We can all come across various interpretations we find weird and just shrug and go “not my thing.” I hope we can all be generous that way, letting other people think what they think and express those thoughts on their personal blogs without feeling the need to prove that they are WRONG. A non-anonymous engagement with arguments, interpretation, and evidence is fine and many people enjoy that. But there’s no cause to try to make people feel bad or stupid for reading something a particular way.