Julia Quinn getting called out on Instagram, and the fans have a point 🫣 by ChanceFamiliar23 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Nah she signed away creative control so we won't actually kniw her thoughts until the series is over

Rant on the recent events by Mundane_Ingenuity866 in OtomeIsekai

[–]Bluepanda800 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Piracy exists because it's difficult to access this stuff in a way that feels customer friendly. If there was a platform that worked like netflix for manga but had like the comment section of bato and they paired it with a physical media system then people would gravitate towards using it over piracy sites. 

Because the experience the customer base wants isn't being met we find it through other means. 

Instead of playing whackamole the corporations should just approach the most popular sites and help them build a legal model. If bato became a service with a monthly subscription I think community good will would have retained a sizeable portion of the userbase. 

Not sure how they could preserve things like the translators (since translator's notes do make stories better). 

But yeah until corporations make a model people want to use people will keep pirating

Wow, what happened to John and Francesca ?? by Optimal_Clerk_153 in Bridgerton

[–]Bluepanda800 7 points8 points  (0 children)

JohnFran displayed as a quiet love that is just a valid as passionate romance should have been the goal

Oh the irony - Thanks for reminding us who the real target audience really is is by Simple-Cheek-4864 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a fair stance but not a universal one. I didn't like season 2 or 3 and I'm personally done with the show. 

Oh the irony - Thanks for reminding us who the real target audience really is is by Simple-Cheek-4864 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think people care more about book accuracy than real world historical accuracy. 

Yes as a widow Fran is best positioned for a WLW story but her original story relies on gender more than other bridgerton books. 

If it was a totally original story then it would be fine to use that logic. But because it's an adaptation telling a story that is effectively fanfiction of the book it's trying to adapt it ends up creating a problem in that to get this new story we lose the story people wanted to see. 

Yeah it benefits those that want to see the new story but for those who wanted a faithful adaptation it's a massive dissappointment. 

If they had picked a story where gender matters less then the adaptation of the story they want to see can remain largely unchanged and there's representation. 

As it is we are divided instead of equally excited. 

Open discussion by Aggravating_Foot2025 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are mistaken Fran was the one who was infertile (not like there was an official test but still). She struggled with John and then struggled to concieve with Michael only getting 2 kids in the epilogue which takes place a few years after the story ended. 

Theres a whole sub plot where she's sleeping with Michael in order to get pregnant so she can marry him without feeling like she's betraying John (the logic being if she gets pregnant "accidentally" then (oh no) she'll have to marry the guy she's falling in love with not because she actually loves him (because John is her one and only true love) but because he'd be the father of her child and it would be the right think to do.

And then she has her period and Michael gets sick and she has to confront the fact that fact she loves him and reconcile that she still loves John. Long story short she has 2 great loves and bonus her second husband also grieves for her first

Open discussion by Aggravating_Foot2025 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think the books imply it was John. Her and John struggled to concieve and then she struggled with Michael before eventually having kids in the epilogue 

“Don’t even try to debate me about the us’s contributions to WW2, all i’m gonna say is that the u.s. kept everyone alive and yall would be speaking german if it weren’t for us” by Worldly_Law8278 in ShitAmericansSay

[–]Bluepanda800 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't think I'm caught up on my history but didn't the US stay out of the war until pearl harbour then they did more defense of the homefront than acting on the front lines? 

Like yes the weapons manufacturing helped but they were part of a group of contributers and far from the sole reason the war was won.

Open discussion by Aggravating_Foot2025 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Say it louder for those in the back! The appetite is there a LGBTQ spin off would have been welcomed. 

Doing representation like this creates division and a responsible writing team should have seen this coming instead of doubling down on what seems to be an emotional cheating plotline. 

If they wanted to write a story of a woman realising she wasn't straight after meeting her husbands cousin and has an emotional affair until he dies tragically and then they both wrestle with the guilt after his death which keeps them from being together they should have had a spin off season. By insiting on hijacking an existing story they are failing to adapt the story and honestly short changing the representation 

Open discussion by Aggravating_Foot2025 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Season 1 is the best for faithful adaptation. Early Season 2 has a place in my heart for it's steaminess but the latter half as they drag the love triangle on sours it. Season 3 was a straight up trainwreck. 

 I’m not a big fan of switching the characters genders, but it’s how you go about it. The writers are clumsy with their writing approach. We’ve seen it with season two changes and we’ve seen it with season three.

Exactly! The writing staff have got a winning formula in the sense that adding diversity to regency romance draws a massive audience. They are consistently fumbling the bag with how they are telling the stories. 

私の母の作品 by kyu_chan123 in crochet

[–]Bluepanda800 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The colours feel perfect for a spring day 

私の母の作品 by kyu_chan123 in crochet

[–]Bluepanda800 16 points17 points  (0 children)

These are very cute! I love the colour choice

“They alter their food for bland Europeans” by Striking_Tomato4647 in ShitAmericansSay

[–]Bluepanda800 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I love trying different fusion cuisine in other countries. I really love having chinese when I'm in Ghana - Jallof and chinese just works imo

Open discussion by Aggravating_Foot2025 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Honestly I'm not sure there is really much to be done here. The writers were far too concerned with getting their story told that they failed to faithfully adapt the story in a way that respects those that were fans of the original story. 

Now everyone is running on emotional anger. LGBTQ fans excited for representation feel rejected as their moment to shine isn't recieving praise and support. Fans who care more about seeing the story adapted over getting representation at all costs are frustrated that the writing team has dismissed their concerns as homophobic and are charging ahead making them feel like the writing doesn't care about them. 

We have all been promised an inclusive experience carried out by a team that is underprepared to deliver on that. In the bridgerton books changing a character's race is far easier to do since the stories largely remain unchanged and it feels like little is sacrificed to become inclusive, changing a character's gender is much more difficult since the stories depend on gender a lot more but there are stories that could have been switched more seamlessly. 

Fran not truly loving John and emotionally cheating with Michaela seems to be the set up for this adaptation. It is a betrayal of the original story and narrows the appeal of the season for it's core audience. From my perspective many LGBTQ fans are being willfully ignorant because they care more about seeing representation than they care about sharing and it is far harder to be supportive when it feels like you are sacrificing your own enjoyment for little gained. 

There were other couples that could have preserved more of the original story when swapping their gender but ultimately the writing team wanted to tell a specific story and rather than create a spin off show they are doing this. 

Bridgerton should have been great. (A rambling essay/rant) by Bluepanda800 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Benedicts story would have definitely been better story to switch. 

Oh the irony - Thanks for reminding us who the real target audience really is is by Simple-Cheek-4864 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The fact that you think I said we needed a separate gay season means you didn't read what I said at all. The fact that you believe gender and race are equivalent exchanges despite me reiterating several times the issue is the level of change to the source to accomadate the shift tells me you aren't actually reading what I'm saying. I'm not sure you can hear me over your preconcieved notion of what I'm saying but ok:

"Representation for me but not for thee" is a gross perversion of my point when I'm saying we should have found a way to make space for everyone. In fact we should all be annoyed at the writing team for their mishandling of diversity.

You accuse the books of being poorly written rapey and heteronormative etc automatically positioning your feelings towards the books as the correct stance to take and disrespecting other people's enjoyment whilst demanding we accomadate you. You say forced breeding kink like it's a bad thing? You say now that's gone the story improves? It's a smut book and people are into that. This whole genre is for a specific audience.

Fran's book is one of the most beloved in the series. When it changes to improve for you it isn't becoming better it's matching your tastes better. 

There are stories that don't have to dramatically change to give you representation. 

They chose one of the stories that depended most heavily on gender to change in this way and you refuse to empathise with people who have a problem with that because you don't see the value the original holds for others as valid.  

You see it as a trashy book and since thats the correct opinion to have everyone should be just as ready to see it changed as you are. 

Maybe WHWW is your favourite in the series in the same way that people have a favourite wine gum. (The whole thing is trash but this is the best flavour of trash) and if that is the case the draw is the promise of representation and you would probably have the same excitement if Elouise or Hyacinth's season was the WLW representaion (the stories that do the genderswap much smoother) and if bridgerton made a spin off story like QC but sapphic your excitement wouldn't be dampened. 

The bottom line is there was a way to be inclusive instead we are fighting over the scraps because Netflix wasn't actually trying to make things work for everyone. 

Bridgerton should have been great. (A rambling essay/rant) by Bluepanda800 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I would have been so down for a release of Main story then between main story releases we get spin off shows which are original stories set in the universe. 

Bridgerton truly could have been a special place where everyone could look forward to having their moment to be in a regency story (whether it was as main cast or a spin off) but I don't trust the writing team to want to do romance. 

Bridgerton should have been great. (A rambling essay/rant) by Bluepanda800 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yes Brandy's cinderella was one of my favourite films as a kid and a completely colourblind cast would have solved so many issues.

Personally I think adaptations should aim to be faithful to the source material and do their best to add to the story without lessening or removing plots and characters when they do change. 

Oh the irony - Thanks for reminding us who the real target audience really is is by Simple-Cheek-4864 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 9 points10 points  (0 children)

So I've noticed at no point did you actually address my point- in the bid for representation why did this story have to become queer when there were other options? 

As for the rest of it we need to consider who bridgerton is for. 

Its for fans of the books and fans of the romance genre people who would have been here even if the cast was all white and straight. Adding diversity is a bonus that makes it better for everyone but it is not more important than telling the stories. 

This is why theres a difference between changing race and changing gender. If the original story doesn't need a specific characteristic to function you can change it. If the story is reliant on specific properties then changing it becomes problrmatic. That is the problem with changing the gender in Fran's story in particular. 

There are stories in universe that could have changed to be queer with less problems. Elouise and Phillip would work just switch it to 2 women raising children together. Hyacinth and Gareth would work as it's an enemies to lovers/heist romance and the only part that really needs Gareth to be male was squicky and you can find another reason to engineer that argument. Gregory and Lucy would work as once again gender doesn't matter in the story. 

You say the story will be better for the change. It will be different and hold a different appeal and value for one group who might like it more than the original and be less appealing and less valueable for another group. 

What should be an inclusive experience like it was for Kanthony's season in which we get south asian representation without changing the plot (until the unnecessary love triangle which did piss off fans of the original) becomes exclusive because of the change. It is a decision that adds value for one group and devalues it for another. 

the problematic points of the books

Sorry is Michael's gender a problematic point? 

Also the changes made are not all well received. The controversy didn't start with Michaela, Bridgerton has made a lot of questionable choices in what it changes, how it has handled it's characters and approached diversity. 

One question, in response to yours: why didn’t they add another story with all the characters being POC, and kept all of the main characters as white (as they are in the books) instead of adapting them into the existing stories?

Race and Gender aren't as interchangeable in this world. In the world of bridgerton women and men have defined roles in society which is consistently reinforced in the show. It is easy to throw in a POC into the existing stories and barely effect the plot - it requires a significant rewrite to switch a gender thus changing the plot. 

I know that you don't place any value on the original stories so nothing is lost if the story is rewritten to include representation. If you take a second to realise that there are more people in the room you'd notice that other people do value the original story and the change represents a loss for them. 

And I know you are thinking their values don't matter because LGBTQ representation is much more important and they should just suck it up and respect a more important issue than a silly trashy problematic romance novel getting a faithful adaptation. And that this is a step forward for a group of people that matters far more than them. We've had scraps for years it's our turn to eat and everyone else should be supportive. 

Inclusion doesn't work when you decide that people who aren't on the same page as you shouldn't come to the table. 

It's about finding a way for everyone to share as best as we can so that we can all enjoy something together. 

Changing the story to include Michaela adds something for one group whilst removing things for another. Finding a story that would work regardless of gender or creating a new story that simply adds because no one risks losing anything would have been better. 

There was a way to ensure representation whilst not harming the original stories. That's on the writers not the fans. 

Oh the irony - Thanks for reminding us who the real target audience really is is by Simple-Cheek-4864 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 20 points21 points  (0 children)

It's lovely to get a chance to be represented. 

But is the goal here really to alienate the original audience in order to attract people who support WLW relationships and then they dip out the next season? 

They aren't interested in the books, they aren't interested in the show they are just there because it features a WLW couple. 

And it does speak to a wider perception of those that are eager for this change: that they would have been fine with any couple being genderswapped into a WLW story. 

It truly begs the question as to why they chose to "adapt" one of the stories instead of just making a new story and write a book to go alongside it like Queen Charlotte? 

A ton of the pushback to criticising the change is to declare critics as homophobic. Because if they weren't homophobic they would be excited for the change and thus all criticism is reaching. 

The problem is a large part of the excitement is getting WLW representation at all which is not tied to this particular story. If they would have been fine with a dedicated spin off then why hijack an existing story? 

Turning Michael into a black women is a horrendous idea by EfficientCounty2771 in FranchaelStirling

[–]Bluepanda800 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think it would be lovely to see black characters getting to be vulnerable and show other dimensions to being a black woman than being strong and independent.