cake...?

hi cake i miss you too

im still sleepy lowkey

hi i was sleeping

. . . [music] The darkness of the screen of the TV slowly reveals a stage as the music progresses into an exiting, yet suspenseful melody. A host stands in the middle, microphone in hand. ANNOUNCER: Welcome to THE MORALLY RIGHT SHOW! Where context is cancelled, comfort is king, and our motto is “Feelings are facts!” The host grins too widely, almost an unhinged expression on his face. HOST: Tonight’s contestants are KATHERINE — a self-proclaimed critical thinker — and ANONYMOUS — professional virtue signaler and internet philosopher! The audience cheers, they scream “a-no-ny-mous” repeatedly. HOST: Ho-ho, the people are cheering for you, Anonymous! You sure are the stage’s favourite, huh? After all, you’ve won this show countless times before! Anonymous smiles and bows. HOST: Alright, we’ll start this shortly after a commercial break of our amazing sponsors! ANNOUNCER: Tonight’s episode is brought to you by Surface Inclusivity™, the deodorant that hides the smell of hypocrisy! The host looks back at the camera. HOST: Today’s theme is — Fandom headcanons, specifically the all beloved transgender and race-bending ones! REMINDER: Do NOT call race-bending “blackwashing”, blackwashing isn’t real and it is very disrespectful to call it that because it has a completely different meaning and reasons than whitewashing, even if the acts are all the same and cause just as much harm! Remember, intentions are more important than actions. HOST: Question one! When an Asian character is rewritten as white, it’s called— KATHERINE: Whitewashing, obviously. HOST: CORRECT! But when a white character is rewritten as Asian, it’s— KATHERINE: Also race alteration. The buzzer plays loudly, ringing in people’s ears. The host gasps dramatically, hand over his lips and eyes wide. HOST: Ouch… wrong! ANONYMOUS? ANONYMOUS: It called progress, because inclusivity means NEVER asking questions! A wild applause and roars emit from the crowd. HOST: Magnificent reasoning! Ten points to Anonymous! Next up: If you’re uncomfortable with cultural distortion, are you— KATHERINE: Concerned about proper representation— HOST: Careful there! KATHERINE: —or a hater? No-no, I said— Anonymous interrupts. ANONYMOUS: A hater, obviously. Real progressives never feel discomfort. Cheers and whistles, the audience chants “COM-FORT IS MORAL!” HOST: Exactly! Comfort equals virtue! Next question, third one: Someone changes an entire culture’s symbolism because “it comforts them.” This is— Katherine sighs, already tired of this, even though the show has just begun! KATHERINE: Lazy self-indulgence. The buzzer shrieks. ANONYMOUS: No, it’s sacred self-expression! Feelings are the new facts. HOST: Question Four! Katherine writes: “A headcanon must be connected to canon.” So, contestants, what really defines a headcanon? KATHERINE: A theory consistent with the source material, neither confirmed nor denied— Buzzer. ANONYMOUS: Whatever I feel like! If I imagine Dazai as a bisexual cyborg dentist, it’s canon in my heart. The audience gasps, but not a second later they erupt with cheers. HOST: Correct! Remember folks, emotion creates reality! HOST: Question Five! Katherine says: “Disagreeing isn’t prejudice.” So what is disagreement really? KATHERINE: It’s an essential part of the discussion— The buzzer cuts her off, loud and merciless. ANONYMOUS: Hate speech, obviously. We don’t argue — we affirm! HOST: Ten points to Anonymous for moral consistency! Question six! When Katherine says that changing a character’s race or gender without context erases cultural identity, she’s being— KATHERINE: Respectful of cultural nuance. Buzzer. ANONYMOUS: A bigot! Because representation means repainting everything until it’s aesthetic neutrality! HOST: Beautiful answer! Such empathy, such EMPTINESS of thought! Question seven! Katherine explains she’s a cisgender woman who’s experienced dysphoria. Should she be allowed to speak on that? KATHERINE: Yes, personal experience still counts even if— The buzzer shrieks. HOST: Oh! Oh, no! ANONYMOUS? ANONYMOUS: No! Only certain people may have certain feelings! We assign authenticity by label, not by life! HOST: SPLENDID! Question Eight, worth half a million! When comfort decides what’s right— KATHERINE: We stop thinking critically… Buzzer. ANONYMOUS: —we ascend to enlightenment! Comfort is virtue, feelings are truth! The audience chants “COM-FORT IS MORAL!” once again. HOST: Incredible! Anonymous is truly unstoppable! The final round… Think Without Thinking lightning quiz! Fiction without limits is..? ANONYMOUS: Freedom! HOST: Canon? ANONYMOUS: Oppression! HOST: Evidence? ANONYMOUS: Violence! HOST: Nuances are? ANONYMOUS: Transphobic! HOST: PERFECT SCORE! The crowd erupts, confetti cannons shoot on the winner, making a cheerful scene, albeit Anonymous is far too used to being the winner to truly appreciate the moment. Congratulations, Anonymous — winner of THE MORALLY RIGHT SHOW! Katherine, you’ve earned the CRITICAL THINKING PENALTY BOX, where we send all those who read the source material. ANNOUNCER: Join us next week for Reality Is Optional, sponsored by FeelGood Industries! . . . LMAO 🤣 That’s exactly how you sound to me right now, you know. I suggest you reread my essay and consider every paragraph and argument before writing me anything, okay? You’re completely missing my points, solely trying to find a reason to put me in the wrong and call me various names instead of thinking with your pretty little head and considering my views. Are you so blind-sighted by anger, bias, or even ignorance that you’ve completely missed what I’m trying to explain? I AM indeed accepting of any race and transgender people, I only mock actions that people make non-dependently on identity, ones that cause harm to others in the sake of comforting themselves. Don’t you hear how selfish it is? Do you believe if I make a black character Asian like myself only to feel comforted by the fact they’re the same race, the same skin colour as me to be right? I’ll remind you that many of people who blackwash never think about the culture of the character, only the skin colour and the aesthetic appeal of it. Same way goes to transgender self-indulgent projections; as if only when you’re transgender you can feel gender dysphoria, as if only if you’re transgender you feel lonely and out of place. You’re limiting the vast emotions of what a human being can feel based on sex, on a label, and that again, is prejudice. I’m aware that the topic of headcanons regarding mental illnesses/disorders hasn’t been brought up but I’d like to say that even they are disrespectful more often than not. I’m neurodivergent, and seeing people call characters hyperactive, autistic, neurodivergent simply because of stereotypes, misinformation or the wish to make self-indulgent projections is vile to me. It is disgusting. Criticism of a concept is not criticism of a community, and I use mockery to show the absurdity of a concept, because to me it is something worth laughing at. People will not reconsider their ideas or beliefs unless they’re judged for it, often seeking arguments to justify what they deem ‘right’ because it brings comfort. But comfort doesn’t equate with morally right. If you write something that doesn’t make logical sense, that claims me to be a hypocrite and a transphobe without further arguments to prove your claims, you’ll receive another satirical story of similar content, and I assure you, I have many ideas. Just think a little more, okay? What can counter my arguments? What makes me wrong and makes you right in certain aspects? Which arguments of mine don’t make logical sense to you and why? What makes you believe that such ‘headcanons’ are harmless? And I have questions of my own for you: Why are my transgender friends against trans ‘headcanons’? Why does it make them feel discomfort as much as I do? Have a nice day/night, mwah! I’d love to read your next message. <3

s-sure..!

sure :/

hi cakey i love you too sleep soon, ok?

I am indeed a cisgender female, but that doesn’t mean I hadn’t had an unpleasant experience with my gender. You, stranger, know nothing of me or my experiences and cannot decide what I can and cannot speak of. The fact I label myself cis doesn’t mean I cannot speak for trans ‘headcanons’, since that would dismiss my opinion based on my label rather than its content (which is prejudice) and it is considered sexist, because you’re deciding whether or not to take my opinion on account based on my gender. My experience of having used to be trans is deeply personal and I don’t wish to share it with just anybody, so I will not delve too deeply into it, but I am very much familiar with gender dysphoria. Only last year did I start learning how to appreciate myself the way I am and not feel revolted by my sex, even now I feel slight discomfort at the thought of being feminine. I’m learning to embrace myself, and so far I am happy. (No, I’m not pushing other trans people to do the same: if they feel content with their gender, then so be it.) Before ever speaking of headcanons please consider looking up the definition of it. Many people mistake headcanons to be adding whatever they wish to add to a canon character, but that’s not what it is. Headcanon by definition is a theory neither confirmed or denied by the author, but it HAS to be connected to the canon and make sense. Headcanons are a great thing, they can help you understand a character better, to study one’s personality and nature while reflecting to the canon. One of the greatest trans headcanons must be to a Project Sekai character, Mizuki. It hasn’t been confirmed directly (from what I know so far), but it is heavily hinted at through her character story, and I myself headcanon her as trans. There’s also a headcanon of Dazai from Bungō Stray Dogs having scars under his bandages, and that is based on his suicidal tendencies and countless attempts to commit. These examples of headcanons that I’ve provided have actual reasons to be and are connected to the canon. Now, what you call a ‘headcanon’ of characters, like trans ‘headcanons’ based on nothing from canon, or those that change the race of a character, are disconnected from canon and disregard the character’s established identity, while also being fundamentally dismissive of the author’s creative vision. Many defend those ‘headcanons’ to be fictional and that they don’t harm anybody. If we say that fiction exists entirely without limits, then anyone could assign any trait to any character simply because they ‘feel like it.’ But that’s not interpretation — that’s replacement. Imagine walking up to someone and declaring they’re trans, or of another ethnicity, simply because you ‘see them that way.’ You wouldn’t be describing them, you’d be overwriting them. Fictional characters, although not real, are still creative constructs with intentional design. To treat them as blank templates strips away what makes them distinct, just as ignoring real identity reduces a person to your projection. Interpretation should build from canon, not erase it. There’s also a difference between self projection and self insertion that I’d like to point out. Self projection is when you reflect with a certain character and believe to resonate with them, whereas insertion is the act of communicating with the character through a fictional story of own, like an AU or a fanfiction (adding yourself or your OC to the original story). I am not against projection, it is what makes a story matter because we reflect and empathise with it. But there’s a difference between seeing yourself within a character and repainting a character to be like you. When you erase a character’s trait, their identity, when you overwrite what’s been clearly established in the original text, it becomes self-indulgent projection, and of that I am against. When you argue saying that “blackwashing isn’t real, whitewashing is”I’d like to say that I have never stated whitewashing being ethical or right, I’m against it as much as I am against blackwashing. When race changes are applied without narrative reason or cultural context, it stops being representation and becomes aesthetic substitution. Instead of changing one’s skin colour, their race and cultural identity, it would be better to make a new character who’s meant to represent that race. Replacing one ethnicity with another doesn’t solve underrepresentation, it implies that cultural identity is interchangeable, but in actuality, it shapes who the character is. By blackwashing a Japanese or Slavic (or other underrepresented groups) character, you erase their unique cultural background. True representation doesn’t come from repainting existing characters, but from creating new ones whose backgrounds, struggles, and culture are authentically tied to their identity. If one truly values representation, they would respect the diversity of all cultures, including the ones already represented. It is also worth pointing out that in the modern era of media race and gender are often treated as aesthetics instead of representing reality of how it’s like to be one and how one’s life is shaped. Instead of inclusiveness it becomes accessorising. I’d like to mention that reinterpretations can have meaning when done intentionally (mostly in AUs), for example when one adapts myths (like those of Ancient Greece, Chinese Mythology, etc.) or making changes to a character’s cultural background because it holds relevance in the story (like having grown up in another ethnic group despite not being of the same race). If you argue that a certain character looks better as another race, it is outright racist, because it is the character’s race and skin colour that bothers you. Same thing applies to transgender ‘headcanons’, if you believe a certain character is better as a trans person, it is sexist, since it is the character’s gender that bothers you. Those who argue saying that such self-indulgences make you feel validated; the fact it brings comfort doesn’t mean that it’s right. Validation is emotional, not evidential. You can feel comforted by a story/character without it being completely accurate. When comfort becomes a standard for what’s ‘right’, it’s easy to stop thinking critically — we start taking emotional ease for moral correctness. Resonating with a character shouldn’t depend solely on gender and race. Sure, identity shapes a character, but it doesn’t confine the ways we can relate to them. To truly understand a character you should see them for who they are, and not for what they are. You’ve gone as far as calling my beliefs close-minded, simply because I dissent and don’t align with your opinions. Disagreement isn’t prejudice, nor is it hateful; equating them is intellectually dishonest because you replace reason with moral. Calling others ‘shameful’ or ‘strange’ for disagreeing isn’t virtue, it’s arrogance. I’ve been told by you that questioning or mocking certain headcanons is ‘borderline transphobic.’ But criticism of an idea is not an attack on an identity. There’s a clear difference between disliking trans people and disagreeing with how certain interpretations disregard canon. If you label every critique of trans-related topic as transphobic, then we’ve lost the ability to think freely, and a honest conversation becomes impossible. If ‘getting better’ means agreeing unconditionally and without thinking, then I’d rather stay the way I am.

HEHEHEHEH <3

i dont hate trans people, many of my friends are trans, but i am in fact heavily against trans 'headcanons' (that are actually self projections and are not based from canon in any way). i dont care what people assume about me, i will express my dislike towards these as i like because people in the bsd area obviously understand that im mocking 'headcanons', which again, are actually self projections that disrespect the canon and author's intent.

HEHE THANK YOUU <3

i didnt notice i didnt reply omg. THANK YOUU!!

THANK YOU SO MUCH 💗💗💗🥹

hello handsome ALSO WHY IMM im so friendly..!!!!!