Maggie Gets Antagonistic: Things That Should Be Legal

     Alright, listen up, fucks.  This is an opinion piece through-and-through, no writing stuff, except as far as anything and everything is related to writing.  It feels like the world is in shambles and I just have to talk about some shitty aspects of the law that DON'T have anything to do with our idiot-in-chief, or I am going to EXPLODE.

     ...  I'm sorry I called you a fuck, you're a beautiful person inside and out and I shouldn't have taken my aggression out on you like that.  That's on me, my bad.

     I mean, the heading says "Maggie Gets Antagonistic" for a reason, but it wasn't fair of me to hop out with that one without explaining what that means first.  Basically, I sometimes need to vent about stuff.  Sometimes very aggressively, such that even my friends would think I was mad at them, when in reality I'm just mad about the situation.

     I also think it's really funny when I'm reading an informative article with about as much professionalism as President Cheeto-Man, which is why I like Cracked.com and Chuck Wendig so much.  But I also feel bad when I do things like greet people with "Listen up, fucks," and I wouldn't want anyone to think I was trying to hurt them.  So when I decide I need to discard my professional candy coating and inject venom from my veins into yours, I'm gonna get antagonistic, and label my articles as such.

      Anyway.  It seems pretty ridiculous to me that we still criminalize

1.  Marijuana

     Okay okay okay okay alright alright alright alright alright alright I know way to be cliché, Coates, great job, why don't you write about how blue the sky is and how the grass is, it'd be the same amount of original, blah blah blah.

      "Also you already did this one," you add, and I sigh deeply because yes, I did.  A few weeks ago, in case you didn't catch it, I posted a rebuttal to my cousin's facebook post asking about marijuana.

     Those points still stand:  people have a right to dignity of risk, substances are safer and attract less crime when they're legal and can be taxed, tracked, inspected, and controlled, and legalization allows us to study its effects both positive and negative, to the benefit of science and mankind.

     Also, it's not as deadly or addictive as tobacco, it might help improve memory (when used in moderation), it has numerous medical applications that go well beyond pain control, and it's less dangerous to the public than alcohol consumption.  And if you don't believe me, remember that most people don't get into fist fights when they're high.  Most people don't even have the energy or motivation to do things like drive, I mean, when was the last time you heard about someone getting a DUI for pot?  When was the last time you heard about someone getting killed because they or someone else was high?

     It's just ridiculous that we allow these provably deadly substances to circulate, substances dangerous to the health not only of those that partake but those around them, and we draw the line when it comes to silly greens.

     The Federal Government allows arsenic to be used as a pesticide on tobacco, which then retains the poison in concentrations generally between 90 and 780 parts per billion, but sometimes reaching upwards of 2,000 ppb, with an average of 200-400 ppb in the US, our largest manufacturer putting out product with around 250 ppb, which, just fyi, means that at minimum we allow for arsenic levels 9 times higher than the federal maximum for arsenic contamination in drinking water, which is set at 10 ppb by the EPA.

Me, ranting about this same topic on Facebook

     If you think people deserve the dignity of risk inherent in a society in which alcohol and tobacco are legalized, but don't believe in allowing people the same dignity when it comes to something as innocuous as cannabis, you need to get off your high horse and stay out of the way.

     If you protest marijuana but don't have any problems with tobacco or alcohol, you're a hypocrite.  You don't care about safety or health or the good of society, you just care about enforcing your traditionalist values on people who have no interest in a traditionalist lifestyle, and I would be grateful if you stopped.

2.  Polygamy

     Who the hell is it hurting to let someone marry multiple partners?

     The only reasoning behind the law against bigamy is "God said so," which, first of all, isn't true, there's plenty of polygamy in the Bible, and second of all, is super Judeo-Christain-centric, because there are a bunch of religions--Islam, Pagan religions, *heavy sigh* traditional mormonism--that allow for or even encourage multiple partners.  We're not exactly separating church and state here, are we?

     And legally, what the fuck does a marriage do that can't be shared between three people instead of just two?  Joint filing, ability to visit in the hospital, ability to make important decisions for one another's care, automatic joint custody of any children conceived during the union--all the things that same-sex couples have been talking about for years, poly tribes are still being denied.

     If four people live together as, let's say, man and man and wife and wife, and they have a child, the birther automatically has full custody of the child.  If she's married to one of the others, they then also have parental rights, and one of the fathers can put his name on the birth certificate.  If they're savvy (which many people aren't), they'll have the person signing the birth certificate be a different person than the one she's married to.

     These four people provide a very loving home for the child, and it grows up very happily with two moms and two dads that love it to death.  But one day, three of the parents get into an accident; the remaining parental is married to none of them, and isn't allowed to make the tough decisions, maybe not even allowed to visit--the important decisions all go to the grandparents, who never cared for their children's lifestyle.

     And because the remaining parental isn't legally anyone's next of kin, if the four of them hadn't written up a legal document leaving care of the child to one another, and the remaining parent was never made a legal guardian, care of the child reverts back to the grandparents.

     It might be a little confusing, since the child legally had three families that could claim it, but the mother's family will usually win out.  And let's say the mother's family doesn't care for any of their daughter's decisions.  They can take the child back home with them and cut the remaining parental out of the picture completely, denying visits, hiding information, even calling the police if they feel like it, and the remaining parent likely has no legal recourse.  None that anyone will listen to--legally speaking, they were just a roommate, a live-in babysitter.

     And with there being no legal ties, our remaining member of the quad inherits nothing; they could even end up tossed out of their own home if their name isn't on the lease or the mortgage.

     And most people don't think far enough ahead to realize they need to do any paperwork, or list anyone on the birth certificate, or draw up legal documents--my oldest brother was even too daft to list himself on his son's birth certificate, so whenever his relationship with his girlfriend got rocky, everyone would cling to the sides of the boat and pray no one fell over, because if she took my nephew and ran, the law would absolutely 100% be on her side.  Unless he took a paternity test, of course, and while we're certain my nephew is his son, had the test come up negative he would've been out any chance at ever seeing his boy again, even though he raised him, clothed him, fed him; despite all he sacrificed to make sure he could provide for his family.

     Family is more than blood, and marriage is the way that we tell the government, "This person is my family and needs to be treated as such."  Some people believe in it, some people don't, some people go back and forth, but it can protect your ass when things go wrong, and the thing about life is, you never know what direction it's going to go wrong in.

     Polyamorous people deserve to be able to protect themselves against that just as much as monogamous folk do.

     The only halfway cogent argument I've heard against polygamy is that it's "oppressive to women," which is untrue.  Yeah, yeah, I see where you're coming from, in most countries where polygamy is legal it's only polygyny, and the women are sold into it more than they enter into it, but this isn't Saudi Arabia.  We can sing and dance and take off our shirts in public if we feel like it and no one can stop us!
   
      Why the fuck would we assume that in a USA where you can marry multiple people, men would suddenly be able to force women into marriage?  Do you think that's what men are already doing, but just to one woman at a time?

     Women aren't property, and legalizing polygamy won't make them property.  If anything, when you have polyamorous lesbian covens popping up all over the place, and marriages where the men outnumber the women, it'll be hard to see these women entering into an equal and consenting union as anything but their own.  Not to mention the gay harems that want nothing to do with any part of poly but andry.

     Damn it, if three people want to be able to share their lives together without worrying about paperwork or future calamities they should be able to go down to city hall like all the monogamuggles!


3.  Pretending to be married

     This.

     THIS.

     THIS PILE OF ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT if a cop wants to they could arrest u for calling ur boyfriend ur husband cAN U EVEN BELIEVE I mEaN rEaLlY

     Now listen here, cumslut, if I and my boyfriend and a third prospective mate ever decide to tie the knot and we perform a little backyard ceremony to become wife and husband and spouse in the eyes of our God that is our business and ours alone, and if we introduce ourselves as such to people the government has no right, NO RIGHT, to tell us we're committing a crime, I mean for fUCKS SAKE, was it a crime for me to call my brother's girlfriend my sister-in-law before they were actually married?  Was I violating the law that says you're not allowed to "impersonate a married couple?"

     This is the shit that shut down that Sister Wives show, because they were a polygamous gaggle that lived together and called themselves a married family unit and tHE LAW GOT PISSED AND RAN THEM THE FUCK OUTTA UTAH now u tell me, how the goddamn hell do you run someone outta UTAH for POLYGYNY it's the holy land of the mormons for crying out loud I mean JESUS.

     Look at me.  Look me in the eyes.  I mean it, look me in the eyes and tell me who it's hurting for me to call someone my spouse.  It's not like they're claiming it on their taxes, if somebody wants to call their partner their spouse they shouldn't have to get a peace of paper from the government to do it, that's like saying no one can call me Maggie unless I get my name legally changed from Meghan, it's R I D I C U L O U S and I feel so.  much.  hate.  

     i'M ON FIRE INSIDE

     IT IS BURNING ME ALIVE

     I WILL KILL A DUDE

     It's not illegal for me to say I'm gonna kill a dude, but it's illegal for me to use a word to refer to someone with whom I've not signed a legal document wELL FUCK YOU AMERICA, FUCK YOU VERY VERY MUCH, this is the kinda shit the government is supposed to protect against, not a problem it's supposed to cause fucking Republicans always trying to peek into my bedroom window, wELL GUESS WHAT

     SIT ON IT AND SPIN

     was it illegal for my parents to call themselves divorced when they were only legally separated

     was it illegal for my parents to call themselves separated before the paperwork went through

     is it against the law for my friend to call a kid his adopted son because he's neither his son nor adopted but just a kid he took under his wing

     is it against the law for me to call my boyfriend's parents my in-laws

     I just.  There's just,  Why.  There is so much Why.  Why is this even, who decided this was a good idea, why would it matter, I mean back in the olden days families had a little ceremony and the couple fucked three times and that was that, married in the eyes of the lord and everyone was happy, and I just

     HHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHA    N    G  E   RRRRRRRRRRRR

     Okay.  Alright,  Okay okay alright alright alright, let me just.  Breathe a second.

     Okay.

     There's no reason this should be an issue.  There's no reason for this law.  It's a stupid law, and everyone should be able to live their life without fear of suddenly being brought up on charges for something as innocuous as behaving like a married couple.

    Fuck these laws.  Fuck them hard in the ass without lube and don't let them finish, they are stupid and I am tired and I hope they die goodnight have a wonderful day, I love you you're beautiful never change Maggie out

*drops mic*

http://pmj.bmj.com/content/79/933/391
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj60pjp0sHUAhXBdT4KHXijDVsQFggsMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpmj.bmj.com%2Fcontent%2F79%2F933%2F391&usg=AFQjCNGghttp4miFE4dqDZ0lyC-6xxouyw&sig2=v6sV3fWggjwZ2kM-GP0Gew
https://books.google.com/books?id=ffatDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA227&lpg=PA227&dq=arsenic+in+tobacco+ppb&source=bl&ots=H0S82j2LCX&sig=Q9ve7YQnQE9Smu7PouGK0j-6gZg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwidtfbx9bnUAhXBdT4KHSmVB14Q6AEIKzAB#v=onepage&q=arsenic%20in%20tobacco%20ppb&f=false
http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/water/drinking/arsenic-in-private-well-water-faqs.html

9 Suggestions For Remodeling The ReaderX Fic

     A while back I posted an essay in defense of reader insert fanfiction in which I stated at least twice that many, if not most, reader inserts are not well-written (but that everyone needed to calm their tits anyway).
   
     Other than reader insert writers practicing more, reading up on writing techniques, and improving their skills bit by bit (or more experienced writers jumping into the tidepool), there's not much that can solve the most prevalent issue with self inserts, which is, as I stated, lackluster technical skills in writing and story-telling.  With practice and with time, those things will come, but for now I do have a few suggestions that could improve the quality of ReaderX fics by restructuring some of the conventions of the genre.

     So now, for your consideration, I suggest to you:

1.  Do away with (y/n), (f/c), etc.

     Y/N, Your Name, F/C, Favorite Color, E/C, Eye Color, H/C, Hair color, F/F, Favorite Food, the list goes on; this vague parenthetical command is meant to draw the reader deeper into the narrative by allowing them to insert their own name, appearance, and various favorite things.

     The goal is noble, but the result is more distancing; having to read the clinical projection cues time after time only serves to remind us that we're reading a story, not experiencing it first-hand.  That's why Pokemon has you input your name before the game and then inserts it into the coding, rather than leaving a blank space or a (y/n) in the game text.

     In place of the parentheticals, a short description works better.  Because these stories are written in the second person, we're already experiencing the story as ourselves; it's okay to say, "You give them your name," or something like that.

     Doesn't, "You told them your name and they repeated it joyfully, thrusting their glasses in the air" flow better than, "'My name is (y/n).'  '(y/n)!' they shouted joyfully, thrusting their glasses in the air"?

     If something is going on that your character's name is said so often that it's necessary for it to be included in quotations rather than just in narration, an easy out is to have one of the other characters give "you" a nickname--either something cutesy/related to the fanwork, or something that has to do with the plot of your AU.  I'd be hard-pressed to find a place where a (y/n) is ever strictly necessary.

     There are a lot of places where the details are entirely superfluous anyway--because the author is already projecting their own tastes when they do things like design costumes, it seems silly to bring the audience out of the spell for the sake of a color.  Still, "She handed you a dress in your favorite color, much to your delight" is more seamless than "She handed you a (f/c) dress, much to your delight," and as I've discussed before, making sure your audience stays trapped in the reality of your story is The Most Important Thing, ESPECIALLY for a reader insert story.

2.  Fewer protagonists in default white

     As a white girl, I see myself reflected much more prevalently than any other race in pretty much every form of media.  The tides are turning of course, and many of us creative types are doing our damnedest to see more representation find its way into the public eye, but it's been hard work trying to break the back of this institution.

     But ReaderX fics are all about making sure that the audience is as absorbed as possible in the reality before them, right?  That's why we have the (y/n) (f/c) convention in the first place.  So it's extremely jarring to me when the author, who will be hard-pressed to describe concretely something as relatively inconsequential as an eye color or favorite type of burger, describes the POV character's skin color--invariably something along the lines of, "your peaches-and-cream complexion" or "the contrast between your white hand and his gray one."

     The white default is a setting that a lot of people haven't yet unlearned; we're taught from a young age that white skin is "normal," and the rest of the spectrum is "other," so when we go to read fiction a lot of people just assume that their characters are, of course, white!  And writers will do the same thing, which leads to entire series of books where the only characters who get a description of skin color are the ones that aren't white, because they are Not The Default.

     This is harmful for a lot of reasons, not least of all because it alienates people who aren't white and reinforces the idea that they are Not Normal.  In a reader insert story, it also reads as a statement from the author to any non-white person reading it that it wasn't meant for them to enjoy.  I know most people don't mean for it to come across that way, you just did what so many people do and went along with what you think of as the default skin tone, the same way we think of 5'4 as a default height for a woman or pizza as a default meal for Americans, but it can still hurt.

     If you had blue eyes and every ReaderX story you read had brown-eyed protagonists, you might feel excluded, right?  Like you were being ignored or worse, singled out--like you didn't belong in that fic, that "space."

     The best thing to do with a ReaderX fic in regards to skin color is just--don't mention it.  Unless race is super important (or you're some kind of alien creature with a canon skin color), leave it completely out of the equation.  Don't default to white; default to blank slate, the same way you did with the eye and hair colors.

3.  Give the character a stronger background/personality

     A lot of characters are these mostly blank slates with a tiny bit of personality and a smidgen of backstory.  Blank slate is great and all, especially with reader inserts, but part of the fun of imaging that you're in a different world is imagining yourself as having lived a different life.  In a lot of stories this is already a prerequisite--most of us don't live in the city that the story takes place in (if any of us do), and sometimes we're placed on entirely different planets, or in universes in which magic is real, etc.

     Don't be afraid to let the character have a bit of history.  Any detail you include in a story is going to make it so someone isn't going to be able to project themselves fully into that character without some cognitive dissonance, so you might as well make them interesting and less cardboard while you're at it.

     Giving a character a strong personality is also a risky business in this situation; you don't want it so strong that it's overpowering, because then people are going to be constantly saying, "I would never do that!"  Then again, the reason you read a ReaderX is because you'd never do what you're reading about doing.

     So go ahead and give us a strong, interesting personality.  Just make sure the character the audience is playing isn't too obnoxious; this is one of those times that a protagonist pretty much has to be likeable.  Otherwise the audience will feel like they're being insulted and will piss off.

4.  Less blushing please

     One thing that really gets my goat is how much blushing goes on in these stories; you'd think everyone had rosacea!  One blush for every three chapters should be the max, I'd say.  Some people may blush a lot in real life, but reading about it gets old. Especially when it's in almost every ReaderX.  

     Blushing is boring.  Blushing is the status quo.  It's time we break free of that.  And this is more than just about the blushing.  This is about a specific type of personality that we've seen a thousand million times, and maybe it's just person taste, but as a reader insert reader I am sick to death of blushing and stumbling over myself every other sentence.  I've been that person IRL; I don't need to read about being that way.

     Let your characters be confident, charmed and charming in return; let them be flustered when flustered is appropriate, sure, but don't make the protagonist go all stupid every time they accidentally touch the main love interest.  Most of us in real life hold our lives together pretty well, no matter how punchdrunk we are around our special someone, and don't let ourselves fall to pieces just because they know our name.

     We're not the stereotype that Disney created, and I think it's time that reader inserts explored a fuller range of emotion.

5.  More realistic flaws

      ReaderXes suffer from a lot of the same problems as OC fanfiction, because every reader insert is an OC on top of being a more-or-less blank slate.  One of those problems is the Mary Sue issue; no flaws.  Or, if there are flaws, only those which don't impact the plot.
 
     Problems are never their fault, they may stumble around cutely, but they're not going to do something like embarrass their date because they have no table manners, or become possessive or something of the like.  Try to give your characters flaws that will influence and even drive the plot; we're not perfect.  The protagonist doesn't have to be perfect, either.

     Alternatively, we see characters that are just walking Flaw-Bombs waiting to go off.  They're obnoxious, they make unnecessary drama, and no one should like them, yet for some reason everyone does.  Make sure your other characters are responding accordingly to the stimuli provided them, no matter how pretty your protagonist is.

6.  Fewer miscommunication plots

     Rule of thumb; if your plot can be resolved in under two minutes if your characters just sat and talked, it's not enough of a plot to warrant a serious story.  Miscommunication is great for comedy, but in serious plots it gets frustrating.

     The whole "This isn't what it looks like!" storyline, for example:  if a character can say, "Tom, he's my cousin," and the whole thing is resolved?  Not worth more than five hundred words as conflicts go.  If a character says "Tom, he's my cousin," but she's lying, on the other hand, or it's not the whole story, then that warrants a fuller investigation.

     Also, if your character is so jealous they can't even wait around for someone to explain themselves after being caught in a compromising position, they clearly don't trust their partner, which is a red flag as far as the health of the relationship goes.  In fact, if they're walking out on them without an explanation, they clearly don't respect their partner, and to me that's a "break the camel's back" kind of straw.

     Be careful with your melodrama.

7.  More male POV characters

     Or better yet; more characters with no specified gender.

     There may not be as many men/boys who read reader inserts as there are girls, but that may also just be a confirmation bias; how do you know they wouldn't like it if they aren't given a chance?  Plus, there are many girls who wouldn't mind adopting a male persona over the course of your story, and a lot of people who don't fit into the gender binary who would like to see themselves reflected in the story.

     More stories written with a broader audience focus would be beneficial; anyone can write a story from a male perspective now and again, and you can easily write a story in the second person without using gendered pronouns for the POV character.

     Give it a shot; let's make the protagonists a little more diversely applicable.

8.  More female love interests

     Male love interests are the default in ReaderX land, but there are a lot of people interested in the female characters of a given work, whether boys who like girls, girls who like girls, nonbinary folks who like girls, etc.

    Even outside the context of romance there's a dearth of female characters.  I'd like to see more involvement of the female characters in these types of works, not just as love interests but as friends, colleagues, even siblings.  Don't turn them into strawman bitches "getting in the way" of your self ship or ignore them altogether; give them a chance to get in the mix, too.

     I guess the title of number eight should really be More strong female characters, not just as love interests.

     And as a side note, friends in general are always good!  Too many ReaderX protagonists are lone wolves who have no one to talk to except the person they love; people need friends outside of a romantic relationship.  Whether it's a character or characters in the cast or an OC, let the insert have some companionship.

9.  More choose-your-own-adventure type stories

     These needn't be the complex type you see on the shelves of your local library, but I'm a sucker for a  ReaderX that sets me up with a storyline, then veers off into different paths that I can choose from.  Do I want to pursue this character, or this character?  (I'll probably choose one, then go back and read the other bc I'm a fiction ho, shhh ;) )

      This semblance of interaction makes the audience feel like a part of the story, and wraps them up further in the protagonist's skin; it gives us agency, and we all love to feel like our choices matter.  After all, if our choices matter it serves to reason that we matter, right?

   

     So there you have it folks; my take on how to improve the ReaderX genre as it stands.  Do you have any opinions on the ReaderX genre?  Do you have any suggestions I might be missing?  Or am I the only self-indulgent asshole with a writing blog?  Leave a comment below, so that I might one day embark a journey to become self-aware.  ;)

On Repo! The Genetic Opera: Why "Genetic Emancipation" Falls Flat; a Critique of the Cure Narrative

SPOILERS FOR REPO! THE GENETIC OPERA AHEAD


     Let me be blunt:

     Repo! The Genetic Opera is my shit.

     I waited three years to see it after watching "Let The Monster Rise" on Youtube, and I'm honestly considering the DVD now that's off Netflix (a true travesty).  The musical score is amazing, every song furthers the narrative, the actors' voices are transcendent (give me Anthony Stewart Head in everything please, I need his voice in every soundtrack from here until the end of time), the scenery is perfectly eerie, the way the story is told is fascinating and engaging, the characters are delightfully complex and twisted, and I just can't praise this movie enough.  Someone hire me to talk this movie up to people, I'll do it and I'll do it with soul.

[warning again, spoilers from hereon in]

     Repo! deals with themes of family and genetics, which are very important to me--Shilo(the protagonist)'s rebellion against her genetic code drives the narrative and the stakes; she inherited a genetic disease from her mother which causes her to be pale and sickly, her hair falling out and her blood pressure low.  Her father wants her to stay locked inside her room--she is, after all, all that he has left of his dead wife, and the only thing left that he loves.

     None of this sits well with Shilo, who poses the question in her song "Infected,"

          "How much of it's genetics, how much of it is fate, how much of it depends on the choices that we make?  He says I have her eyes, do I also inherit his shame?  Is heredity the culprit, can I stop it, or am I a slave?"

     This is the thesis question to the entire musical--the question of what your genetics really mean.

     As a person with poor genetics myself, dealing with fibro (chronic pain) and Tourette's (a neurological movement disorder) on top of other sundry concerns, this question is one I often ask in my own works, and its exploration is in some ways an exploration of self.  How much choice do we have?  How much of our family's shame do we inherit?  Are we destined to make the same mistakes as our predecessors?

     Repo!  The Genetic Opera does a wonderful job of exploring these themes, and I could break the movie down to talk about each piece individually (I might do that one day), but for now I'll skip to what's got me agitated--the end.



     Spoilers again, if you didn't read, or ignored, the first two (one must cover all their bases, mustt one not?); at the end of Repo! Shilo has discovered that her father is the Repo Man, Rotti Largo, owner of Geneco, has called for the Repo Man to kill Blind Mag, Shilo's God Mother (who took her own life instead), and Rotti has put out a call to destroy Nathan, who wants to kill Rotti for stealing Shilo from him.  Rotti offers Shilo the chance to inherit Geneco (he's dying and his children are human garbage fires), but she can only cash in on the inheritance if she kills her father.

     Rotti then reveals that Shilo was never sick to begin with, but that her father poisoned all her "medicine."  He insists that she fight through the pain when she starts to redline, and she passes out.  When she wakes up, she's cured.

     She decides she can't kill her father, she's not a murderer like him, and Rotti shoots him instead.  Rotti then dies as well, and Shilo comes to the conclusion that no one is a slave to their genetic code and we all have the power to choose what we are, in the aptly named song "Genetic Emancipation."

     She then walks out of the opera house and vanishes into the night, the thesis properly answered before the Graverobber jumps in for the last stasima to hammer home a moralization about grudges gone too far.

     This is great, wonderful, beautiful, perfect.  I love it, I admire it, I ADORE it.

     Except--for Shilo's illness.

     The reveal that she was never sick is super dramatic and says so much about the depths of Nathan's twisted need to keep what he loved locked away from the world for only him to see.  From that perspective, it's a great choice, a very dramatic, unexpected, welcomed twist.

     But it means that Shilo is totally free of her "genetic" burdens--in fact, she never had a genetic burden, just an abusive father.  It's a cure narrative--subverted and wound around a nail, but a cure narrative nonetheless.  Worse, it's an easy cure narrative--she didn't do anything to earn or fight for it, she just denied herself medical treatment, passed out, and woke up better.

    It really weakens the message of the film.  It's supposed to empower and tell us that we, too, can be free of our genetic worries, that our lives are in our hands and we can do anything and shed our blood ties like water from a rainslicker.

     But Shilo's ties are gone--she has no kin left to shame her, just their memory, and she doesn't have to worry about being sick anymore.  She didn't even cut any of her own ties, they were all cut for her.  Despite her insistence that everyone has a choice, Shilo never did--all those decisions were made for her.  On top of being cured, it wasn't even done with any agency.  Had she figured it out for herself, or devised a cure on her lonesome, or even with help, had she done something, anything to cure herself of her disease, I would probably be a million times less upset, but like many narratives based around disabled people and teenage girls, she was deprived of her choice and agency in the matter.

     So for someone who still has to deal with the viruses in my genetic code every single day of my life, who relies on my medication just to make it through the day, someone who can maybe run away from my family if I want to but can never cast off the broken strands of my DNA, the ending rings hollow.  It feels like Shilo has no leg to stand on.  Her "Genetic Emancipation" is closer to a Phenotypal Emancipation, a Poison Emancipation, a Parental Emancipation--her triumph isn't over her veins except in the sense that she's eradicated what's lurking therein, and, again, she didn't even work for it.  She only had to sit and not take her meds.

     .....  Which, now that I think about it, is a really fucked up thing to leave as an example of the "right" thing to do.  If Shilo had still been sick, she would have died.  Not even figuratively, ignoring her medication like that could have straight up killed her, or at the very least caused some serious damage by the time they got her to a hospital.

Take your meds, kids.

     It also intimates that those of us living with these disorders are somehow lazy or cowardly--being cured is so simple, you don't need medication, you just need to get back to your roots and you'll be better in no time!  Just take the magical one-time-treatment cure-all and everything will be fine, you'll be all better!  What, you're still sick?  How can that be!?  Well, you're just not hoping hard enough, if Shilo can be cured after passing out for two seconds, why can't you?

     With her illness looming over her and a continued need to procure and take her meds, the ending would have been a little more of a downer, sure, but it would have been more powerful for a girl still struggling with her condition to announce herself emancipated--bound to her genetic code, maybe, but not a slave to it, able to make her own decisions even with her limitations.

     I would have loved to see a sick Shilo tell everyone that they were free, because sure, it would be a different kind of free for her, but it would be an authentic free, and for those of us who live with chronic illnesses and other disabilities, freedom is of a different sort; I want to hear it said that we do have limitations, but we can still go chasing flies.

     It would also be important to show that for Shilo, her biggest obstacle is her father rather than her disease, which is sometimes the case with real disabled people--it would all be much more manageable without overprotective or under-sympathetic family members getting in the way.

     I have limitations, but I can still catch flies, and stand on the balcony, and every once in a while, when I'm feeling good, I can go to that opera, damn it.  Assuming that the only happy ending for Shilo is the one where she's no longer sick is an assumption and assertion that the disabled and the chronically ill can never be happy.

     Illness makes life hard, but not impossible--if she had something that was medically manageable, there's no reason she couldn't have had a happy ending anyhow.  It's not even like the ending was terribly optimistic, either--a sheltered teenage girl walks off into the night in a crime-infested city in a post-apocalyptic world with no friends or family left alive.  Her best bet is already with the Graverobber, and seeing as he has great connections, no qualms about getting what he wants from dangerous places, and a crush on our heroine, I'm sure he would have been happy to supply her with the medication she needs.  Though perhaps at a price....

     BOOM!  Sequel.  Eat your heart out, Darren Smith and Terrance Zdunich.


 

     Look, I love, love, love this movie, to the stars and back!  But it has its flaws.  On its own, this ending would even be clever and cheerful, but stacked together with other cure narratives (of which there are thousands), it sends a pretty harmful message to the very people it's ostensibly speaking to.

  

     And maybe that's the problem--this story, written about a girl with a genetic blood disorder questioning what it means to be bitch-slapped by your genetic code, wasn't really written for us, the people who actually live with this very conundrum every day.  It was written for the people who worry that they'll become alcoholics like their dad, or make the same mistakes their mother did, or die at age fifty because that seems to be the family curse.  And that's fine!

     

     It's just ... sad.