Ontology talk:9k/RD/Q30,54: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Latest revision as of 08:34, 29 June 2026

Main entries

assertion real thing is fictional
/ assertion that real thing appearing in fiction is instead fictional
assertion description of an identity is not real
/ assertion that traits fitting a real-world demographic identity are not real / identity erasure (fiction and media criticism)

Erasing ethnicities

medicine cat? medicine men don't even exist
/ Warrior cats is so unbelievable, I mean, medicine men don't even exist -> the motif of somebody failing to even recognize that a fantasy book is based on an older form of society and proceeding to bash real-world people-groups for bad worldbuilding. it's like there are at least two levels of racism. one is where you know Native Americans exist and you don't like them, or you put "interesting" people-groups on some kind of pedestal like more than being people they resemble some kind of reality TV show that you can attach fake rules and interpretations to. one is where you don't even know they exist and act like they're totally made up. this distinction seems to exist for all demographic identities.
Race coding is culturally fabricated
(furry fandom) / Furries don't have to think about race / Furries never have to think about race (furry-fans; furry fandom) / When you read furry media, or create it, there's no need to think about race -> I think this is really stupid precisely because, if we take kid-friendly shows for an example, Kimba the White Lion can be a story all about an abstract civilization and then blatantly have blackface in the manga and one people group in Africa oppressing other people groups played as a joke. this proposition is using furry characters as an excuse to be "color-blind".
surely no Black people are reading this -> today I was collecting together motifs related to The Matrix and you know what I realized. 'fake-out protagonist' just barely qualifies as gross enough to go on the 'denying things exist' page. because your readers do exist and yet, in the case of the 'fake protagonist', you not only try to say they don't but you actively make the weirdly malicious decision to deceive them.
fake-out token protagonist / disposable Black protagonist (character from a minority demographic relative to the country of the author who wrote the work, that becomes a character used in marketing but if advertised as the protagonist never becomes the protagonist) -> the motif of shows, movies, and so forth baiting the audience with a Media Representation character who will seemingly become a central character or protagonist but then doesn't.
she looked like chocolate / he looked like chocolate / they looked like chocolate -> the motif of a work of fiction feeling like it has to describe dark skin tones in the language of "familiar" objects because they are inherently unfamiliar.
when you spot this, it doesn't take very much explanation to intuitively see that it's a problem. but it's actually somewhat harder to explain how in a sense of material causes somebody would know not to have done this. it's very intuitive for people to believe that unfamiliar things need to be described visually. it naturally flows out of the concept that books exist for people to read them and learn about experiences they haven't had, to have new experiences. and certainly it's dumb for people to think something as simple as not having racial segregation qualifies as a "new experience" for everybody — I'm not saying it isn't. at the same time, the roots of this trope aren't what you'd think they are. written narratives can easily fall into a trap of suddenly throwing in words or phrases the writer is familiar with but people have never heard, or that would give you an intuitive image if you'd ever seen them before but would mean nothing if you hadn't, like, I don't know, referring to a structure having a bastion literally rather than figuratively. or a book might say something like "the house had a kotatsu" without explaining what it is (not a great example because it's something people interact with so the two people who don't know what it is would probably figure it out in a few paragraphs, but you get what I mean). there are a lot of books out there where without having access to image search you wouldn't know what they're talking about. so there's a dilemma when writing texts, sometimes this is even a problem in non-fiction works with jargon terms in them, where you have to carefully think about whether to explain potentially unfamiliar terms through things like redundant descriptors of how they behave, or whether you should just assume that if something is irrelevant to the story or main point that people can look them up on image search or simply skip over them. there will naturally be a way that people write when they are from a particular region and know what various foods and pieces of architecture and so forth look like and don't realize people won't know what they are, versus a way that people write when all these things are new to them. this can make it hard to write books because it will be like, who is going to read this, will it be the people who know what the things are or the people who don't? would it feel weirder to describe things people might know about or to leave people who ought to learn about new things without context?
I think that's basically what's going on with "she looked like chocolate". people have something of an illusion that books are equally written toward everybody when that's not really possible because of the "bastion/kotatsu" problem, although usually it doesn't go all the way to reading as a microaggression like this does. and then they get jarred awake when they see a "white bread fantasy" type writer blatantly write things toward only White people and ignore that anyone else could be reading them. the actual process of fixing this is... complicated. like, in my mind, it's not so hard if you could somehow teach everyone Marxism. because whether they get past the very basics to the class analysis or scientific thinking parts, you could teach them to think of all populations including their own from the outside and look at each one as self-contained, and think of every population as having its own history and goals and day-to-day village and town and city existences. when you get to thinking of all people and populations as material objects there's far less incentive to treat any population as "the other" or to leave anything inaccurate versus trying to have a basic understanding of how that population views and describes itself. so to me, when you get people to think of populations through the lens of material-history it inherently becomes easier for a White majority subpopulation to recognize the existence of all the other minority subpopulations and actually write things realizing that those also contain writers and it would be better to describe them closer to the way they'd describe themselves, with the exception of "kotatsu problems" where a few extra clues will be thrown in. the only problem is that nobody likes (meta-)Marxism and everyone seems to genuinely like Idealism and telling people to automatically know things they couldn't have known. I don't know why; meta-Marxism means BlackPantherism and whatever Marxisms Frantz Fanon and W.E.B. DuBois were aligned with and Stalin's Marxism and possibly some anarchism of the future are equally as good as long as they're viable in the first place. I will catalogue all the "Black Marxisms" if I only knew what they were.

Erasing gender

you think The Matrix is trans??
/ The Matrix was wild! ...it's trans? / cis people relating to The Matrix but claiming it is not about transgender identity / cis people claiming The Matrix is about becoming a Tory but isn't about gender identity (red pill; redpilled) -> on one hand this is gross. on the other hand, viewed from a larger context it's just really, really weird. like, can somebody be charcoal-pilled, or orange-pilled? could you go around claiming The Matrix is about becoming a Trotskyist or an anarchist but isn't about being trans? Trotskyists totally feel like the way they see the world is the real model of the world, just like Tories do. do Tories even think about that.
Spongebob is sexless
/ Spongebob is asexual (ecology definition, not queer theory definition) / I don't know, that's just Kirby -> there is a very complicated distinction between the way people talk about gender when they have no idea what it is at all, and how they talk about it when they actually know what a transgender person is instead of not knowing. saying that Kirby is "sex unknown" or "gender unknown" is more likely to mean "I genuinely haven't thought about it, I don't know anything on the subject and I don't know where to start" than "I think Kirby could actually be neither male nor female". "neither male nor female" is a really hard concept for normal people to understand if they've never heard of it before. it's easy to create a fictional trope accidentally just by combining concepts but that doesn't equate to an understanding that such a thing is real. (just look at the difference between A/B/O and understanding what transgender people are, and you'll understand it almost exactly.) likewise, people can come to understand that animals in nature can have unusual sex configurations, having both gametes or reproducing asexually, but they tend to be bad at internalizing what that means, and to remain at a totally baseline lack of understanding of what gender is.
Only sexless aliens are non-binary
(sexless monsters; hermaphroditic monsters; hermaphroditic aliens; fantasy, science fiction)
greeting nonbinary Representation with misgendering
/ misgendering Frisk (Undertale) / misgendering Kris (Deltarune) -> I swear this one is in every other YouTube comments section. I think that really says something about how effective Media Representation actually is or isn't.

Erasing sexual orientation

what if men could date men??
/ what if men could be in relationships with men?? / what if women could date women?? / slash (motif of homosexuality being a fictional construct) / I know I wrote a gay fanfic, but there's no way I could be a lesbian (generic) -> the fictional motif of insinuating a lack of understanding that homosexuality is real by claiming that it is an invented fictional concept.

Erasing the concept of history

Real life doesn't contain battles
/ (9k)

Miscellaneous

assertion real place is fantastical
/ assertion real place is fantasy worldbuilding / assertion real place is elaborate TV show script / England is made up (Get Fuzzy) (9k) / Hawaii is real? (Get Fuzzy) / surprises: Malibu is not a made-up place [1] / (TV Tropes) [2]

Wavebuilder combinations

pronounced P: pronounced Wave-builder: forms result [Item]

: Race coding is culturally fabricated
along with [Item]: white-bread fantasy
forming from [Item]: white-bread fantasy; furry fandom; Race coding is culturally fabricated

pronounced P: pronounced Wave-builder: forms result [Item]

: greeting nonbinary representation with misgendering
along with [Item]: Kris (Deltarune)
forming from [Item]: Kris (Deltarune); signifier mad libs; greeting nonbinary representation with misgendering

Fields or ideologies

Fy / fiction
Fy / fantasy genre
Fy / fan fiction tropes
(D)Fy / fandom controversies
ES / postmodern philosophy
ES / anticommunism
PT / The Manosphere
PT / microaggressions

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 {{HueCSS}}<ol class="hue clean">
-{{li|start=y|I=S0/Fy|Q=30,54|Q2=3054|h4 = assertion real thing is fictional }} / assertion that real thing appearing in fiction is instead fictional / England is made up ({{book|Get Fuzzy}}) [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EskimosArentReal#folder2]
+{{li|start=y|I=S0/Fy|Q=30,54|Q2=3054|h4 = assertion real thing is fictional }} / assertion that real thing appearing in fiction is instead fictional
 {{li|I=S0/PT|Q=30,60|Q2=3060|h4 = assertion description of an identity is not real }} / assertion that traits fitting a real-world demographic identity are not real / identity erasure (fiction and media criticism)
@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 </li></ol>
-== Cases ==
+== Erasing ethnicities ==
 <ol class="hue clean">
-{{li|start=y|I=S1/Fy|class=field_fantasy field_LGBT|Q=30,61|Q2=3061|h4 = what if men could date men?? }} / what if men could be in relationships with men?? / what if women could date women?? / slash (motif of homosexuality being a fictional construct) / I know I wrote a gay fanfic, but there's no way I could be a lesbian (generic)  ->  the fictional motif of insinuating a lack of understanding that homosexuality is real by claiming that it is an invented fictional concept.
+{{li|start=y|I=S1/PT|Q=30,63|Q2=3063|h4 = [[Ontology:MedicineCatsUnreal|medicine cat? medicine men don't even exist]] }} / Warrior cats is so unbelievable, I mean, medicine men don't even exist  ->  the motif of somebody failing to even recognize that a fantasy book is based on an older form of society and proceeding to bash real-world people-groups for bad worldbuilding. it's like there are at least two levels of racism. one is where you know Native Americans exist and you don't like them, or you put "interesting" people-groups on some kind of pedestal like more than being people they resemble some kind of reality TV show that you can attach fake rules and interpretations to. one is where you don't even know they exist and act like they're totally made up. this distinction seems to exist for all demographic identities.
+{{li|I=F2/Fy|Q=30,66|Q2=3066|h4 = Race coding is culturally fabricated }} (furry fandom) / Furries don't have to think about race / Furries never have to think about race (furry-fans; furry fandom) / When you read furry media, or create it, there's no need to think about race  ->  I think this is really stupid precisely because, if we take kid-friendly shows for an example, {{book|Kimba the White Lion}} can be a story [[E:white-bread fantasy|all about an abstract civilization]] and then blatantly have blackface in the manga and one people group in Africa oppressing other people groups played as a joke. this proposition is using furry characters as an excuse to be "color-blind".
+{{li|I=S1/PT|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}surely no Black people are reading this  ->  today I was collecting together motifs related to {{film|The Matrix}} and you know what I realized. 'fake-out protagonist' just barely qualifies as gross enough to go on the 'denying things exist' page. because your readers do exist and yet, in the case of the 'fake protagonist', you not only try to say they don't but you actively make the weirdly malicious decision to deceive them.
+{{li|I=S1/Fy|tradition=|Q=618|Q2=618}}fake-out token protagonist / disposable Black protagonist (character from a minority demographic relative to the country of the author who wrote the work, that becomes a character used in marketing but if advertised as the protagonist never becomes the protagonist)  ->  the motif of shows, movies, and so forth baiting the audience with a Media Representation character who will seemingly become a central character or protagonist but then doesn't.
+{{li|I=S1/DFy|tradition=Fy|Q=618|Q2=618}}she looked like chocolate / he looked like chocolate / they looked like chocolate  ->  the motif of a work of fiction feeling like it has to describe dark skin tones in the language of "familiar" objects because they are inherently unfamiliar.<br />
+when you spot this, it doesn't take very much explanation to intuitively see that it's a problem. but it's actually somewhat harder to explain {{em|how}} in a sense of material causes somebody would know not to have done this. it's very intuitive for people to believe that unfamiliar things need to be described visually. it naturally flows out of the concept that books exist for people to read them and learn about experiences they haven't had, to have new experiences. and certainly it's dumb for people to think something as simple as not having racial segregation qualifies as [[E:white bread fantasy|a "new experience" for everybody]] — I'm not saying it isn't. at the same time, the roots of this trope aren't what you'd think they are. written narratives can easily fall into a trap of suddenly throwing in words or phrases the writer is familiar with but people have never heard, or that would give you an intuitive image if you'd ever seen them before but would mean nothing if you hadn't, like, I don't know, referring to a structure having a <i>bastion</i> literally rather than figuratively. or a book might say something like "the house had a kotatsu" without explaining what it is (not a great example because it's something people interact with so the two people who don't know what it is would probably figure it out in a few paragraphs, but you get what I mean). there are a lot of books out there where without having access to image search you wouldn't know what they're talking about. so there's a dilemma when writing texts, sometimes this is even a problem in non-fiction works with jargon terms in them, where you have to carefully think about whether to explain potentially unfamiliar terms through things like redundant descriptors of how they behave, or whether you should just assume that if something is irrelevant to the story or main point that people can look them up on image search or simply skip over them. there will naturally be a way that people write when they are from a particular region and know what various foods and pieces of architecture and so forth look like and don't realize people won't know what they are, versus a way that people write when all these things are new to them. this can make it hard to write books because it will be like, who is going to read this, will it be the people who know what the things are or the people who don't? would it feel weirder to describe things people might know about or to leave people who ought to learn about new things without context?<br />
+I think that's basically what's going on with "she looked like chocolate". people have something of an illusion that books are equally written toward everybody when that's not really possible because of the "bastion/kotatsu" problem, although usually it doesn't go all the way to reading as a microaggression like this does. and then they get jarred awake when they see a "white bread fantasy" type writer blatantly write things toward only White people and ignore that anyone else could be reading them. the actual process of fixing this is... complicated. like, in my mind, it's not so hard if you could somehow teach everyone Marxism. because whether they get past the very basics to the class analysis or scientific thinking parts, you could teach them to think of all populations including their own from the outside and look at each one as self-contained, and think of every population as having its own history and goals and day-to-day village and town and city existences. when you get to thinking of all people and populations as material objects there's far less incentive to treat any population as "the other" or to leave anything inaccurate versus trying to have a basic understanding of how that population views and describes itself. so to me, when you get people to think of populations through the lens of material-history it inherently becomes easier for a White majority subpopulation to recognize the existence of all the other minority subpopulations and actually write things realizing that those also contain writers and it would be better to describe them closer to the way they'd describe themselves, with the exception of "kotatsu problems" where a few extra clues will be thrown in. the only problem is that nobody likes (meta-)Marxism and everyone seems to genuinely like Idealism and telling people to automatically know things they couldn't have known. I don't know why; meta-Marxism means BlackPantherism and whatever Marxisms Frantz Fanon and W.E.B. DuBois were aligned with and Stalin's Marxism and possibly some anarchism of the future are equally as good as long as they're viable in the first place. I will catalogue all the "Black Marxisms" if I only knew what they were.
+</li></ol>
+== Erasing gender ==
+<ol class="hue clean">
-{{li|I=S1/PT|Q=30,64|Q2=3064|h4 = you think <cite>The Matrix</cite> is trans?? }} / <cite>The Matrix</cite> was wild! ...it's trans? / cis people relating to <cite>The Matrix</cite> but claiming it is not about transgender identity / cis people claiming <cite>The Matrix</cite> is about becoming a Tory but isn't about gender identity (red pill; redpilled)  ->  on one hand this is gross. on the other hand, viewed from a larger context it's just really, really weird. like, can somebody be [[E:anarchism|charcoal]]-pilled, or [[E:Trotskyism|orange]]-pilled? could you go around claiming <cite>The Matrix</cite> is about becoming a Trotskyist or an anarchist but isn't about being trans? Trotskyists totally feel like the way they see the world is the real model of the world, just like Tories do. do Tories even think about that.
+{{li|start=y|I=S1/PT|Q=30,64|Q2=3064|h4 = you think <cite>The Matrix</cite> is trans?? }} / <cite>The Matrix</cite> was wild! ...it's trans? / cis people relating to <cite>The Matrix</cite> but claiming it is not about transgender identity / cis people claiming <cite>The Matrix</cite> is about becoming a Tory but isn't about gender identity (red pill; redpilled)  ->  on one hand this is gross. on the other hand, viewed from a larger context it's just really, really weird. like, can somebody be [[E:anarchism|charcoal]]-pilled, or [[E:Trotskyism|orange]]-pilled? could you go around claiming <cite>The Matrix</cite> is about becoming a Trotskyist or an anarchist but isn't about being trans? Trotskyists totally feel like the way they see the world is the real model of the world, just like Tories do. do Tories even think about that.
 {{li|I=S1/Fy|Q=30,62|Q2=3062|h4 = Spongebob is sexless }} / Spongebob is asexual (ecology definition, not queer theory definition) / I don't know, that's just Kirby  ->  there is a very complicated distinction between the way people talk about gender when they have no idea what it is at all, and how they talk about it when they actually know what a transgender person is instead of not knowing. saying that Kirby is "sex unknown" or "gender unknown" is more likely to mean "I genuinely haven't thought about it, I don't know anything on the subject and I don't know where to start" than "I think Kirby could actually be neither male nor female". "neither male nor female" is a really hard concept for normal people to understand if they've never heard of it before. it's easy to create a fictional trope accidentally just by combining concepts but that doesn't equate to an understanding that such a thing is real. (just look at the difference between A/B/O and understanding what transgender people are, and you'll understand it almost exactly.) likewise, people can come to understand that animals in nature can have unusual sex configurations, having both gametes or reproducing asexually, but they tend to be bad at internalizing what that means, and to remain at a totally baseline lack of understanding of what gender is.
@@ Line 20: / Line 35: @@
 {{li|I=S2/Fy|Q=30,65|Q2=3065|h4 = Only sexless aliens are non-binary }} (sexless monsters; hermaphroditic monsters; hermaphroditic aliens; fantasy, science fiction)
-{{li|I=F2/Fy|class=field_horror|Q=30,88|Q2=3088|h4 = [[Ontology:Q3088|greeting nonbinary Representation with misgendering]] }} / misgendering Frisk (Undertale) / misgendering Kris (Deltarune)  ->  I swear this one is in every other YouTube comments section. I think that really says something about how effective Media Representation actually is or isn't. Kris + signifier mad libs = this.
+{{li|I=S1/Fy|class=field_horror|Q=30,88|Q2=3088|h4 = [[Ontology:Q3088|greeting nonbinary Representation with misgendering]] }} / misgendering Frisk (Undertale) / misgendering Kris (Deltarune)  ->  I swear this one is in every other YouTube comments section. I think that really says something about how effective Media Representation actually is or isn't.
+</li></ol>
-{{li|I=S1/PT|Q=30,63|Q2=3063|h4 = [[Ontology:MedicineCatsUnreal|medicine cat? medicine men don't even exist]] }} / Warrior cats is so unbelievable, I mean, medicine men don't even exist  ->  the motif of somebody failing to even recognize that a fantasy book is based on an older form of society and proceeding to bash real-world people-groups for bad worldbuilding. it's like there are at least two levels of racism. one is where you know Native Americans exist and you don't like them, or you put "interesting" people-groups on some kind of pedestal like more than being people they resemble some kind of reality TV show that you can attach fake rules and interpretations to. one is where you don't even know they exist and act like they're totally made up. this distinction seems to exist for all demographic identities.
+== Erasing sexual orientation ==
+<ol class="hue clean">
+{{li|start=y|I=S1/Fy|class=field_fantasy field_LGBT|Q=30,61|Q2=3061|h4 = what if men could date men?? }} / what if men could be in relationships with men?? / what if women could date women?? / slash (motif of homosexuality being a fictional construct) / I know I wrote a gay fanfic, but there's no way I could be a lesbian (generic)  ->  the fictional motif of insinuating a lack of understanding that homosexuality is real by claiming that it is an invented fictional concept.
+</li></ol>
+== Erasing the concept of history ==
+<ol class="hue clean">
-{{li|I=F2/ES|Q=30,56|Q2=3056|h4 = Real life doesn't contain battles }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q30,56|9k]])
+{{li|start=y|I=F2/ES|Q=30,56|Q2=3056|h4 = Real life doesn't contain battles }} / ([[User:RD/9k/Q30,56|9k]])
 </li></ol>
-== Edge cases ==
+== Miscellaneous ==
 <ol class="hue clean">
-{{li|start=y|I=F2/Fy|Q=30,66|Q2=3066|h4 = Race coding is culturally fabricated }} (furry fandom) / Furries don't have to think about race / Furries never have to think about race (furry-fans; furry fandom) / When you read furry media, or create it, there's no need to think about race  ->  I think this is really stupid precisely because, if we take kid-friendly shows for an example, {{book|Kimba}} can be a story [[E:white-bread fantasy|all about an abstract civilization]] and then blatantly have blackface in the manga and one people group in Africa oppressing other people groups played as a joke. this proposition is using furry characters as an excuse to be "color-blind".
+{{li|start=y|I=S0/Fy|Q=618|Q2=618|h4 = assertion real place is fantastical }} / assertion real place is fantasy worldbuilding / assertion real place is elaborate TV show script / England is made up ({{book|Get Fuzzy}}) ([[EC:9k/RD/Q55,20|9k]]) / Hawaii is real? ({{book|Get Fuzzy}}) / surprises: Malibu is not a made-up place [https://condenaststore.com/featured/surprises-roz-chast.html] / (TV Tropes) [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EskimosArentReal#folder2]
 </li></ol>
@@ Line 44: / Line 69: @@
 <dl class="wikitable hue data_wavebuild three">
 {{WaveBuild| white-bread fantasy | furry fandom | Race coding is culturally fabricated }}
+{{WaveBuild| Kris (Deltarune) | signifier mad libs | greeting nonbinary representation with misgendering }}
 <!--{{E:Q618/IV|?}} --
 --></dl>

Latest revision as of 08:34, 29 June 2026

Main entries

assertion real thing is fictional

assertion description of an identity is not real

Erasing ethnicities

medicine cat? medicine men don't even exist

Race coding is culturally fabricated

Erasing gender

you think The Matrix is trans??

Spongebob is sexless

Only sexless aliens are non-binary

greeting nonbinary Representation with misgendering

Erasing sexual orientation

what if men could date men??

Erasing the concept of history

Real life doesn't contain battles

Miscellaneous

assertion real place is fantastical

Related

Wavebuilder combinations

Fields or ideologies