So Na'vi connect their queues for emotional bonds and through the bond you feel what the other feels, right. Well, what if in Fire and Ash we got a scene where Kiri gets so frustrated that Eywa won't hear her, and frustrated that she can't connect to the Spirit Tree, that she storms off and after awhile Jake goes to comfort her and he connects his queue with hers and thinks back to the time he was a paraplegic on earth. Cause I feel they could relate with the overwhelming feeling of 'Why can't I just do this!'

I'm not paraplegic but I've already gone through kidney failure at 18 and lucky enough to get a kidney transplant. Anyone who goes through such a dramatic life change, especially involuntary ones like fucked genetics or unpredictable traumas, will go through that frustrated depression. I know Jake never wanted people to take pity on him, but that attitude is something you build up. He also said in A1, he was sick and tired of doctors telling him what he can and can't do. So I'm sure in the beginning of having to literally rearrange his entire life and how he functioned he probably got to the point where he felt unheard and like he was fundamentally failing at the one thing 'normal' people can do.

It'd just be kind of sweet if we heard how Jake felt about that time or how he looks back on those kinds of things and how it could bring him closer to his kids. (Hell, maybe this exact same scenario could play out with him and Lo'ak so Lo'ak could see, literally, through his dad's eyes with the point of "I was reckless too. I also thought I was damn near untouchable, and it cost me. I don't want it to cost you.")

Ive seen fair critiques of the movie, such as the white savior trope (which the 1st movie did fall heavy on) and that comes from critiques and fans alike. And, James Cameron has made insane and dehumanizing comments (one that comes to mind was his quote of. "If the Lakota knew the future, maybe they would've fought harder". I have no idea if he's done any amends for that and I will not be defending him). But I've seen a segment of a Native American podcast talking about how they feel of the movies and they were pretty fair in judgment. And it made me ask the question "Is it better to keep the topic of Na'vi as it's own fictional idea. Rather than advocate 'Well they were inspired by this group of people' or, is the latter more offensive?

I can see the argument for appropriation because it does bastardize a lot of real native context. But if you were to take the Na'vi and their premise out of context to that fictional world, it sounds way worse than it is. Because there is a lot of made up aspects of the Na'vi that isn't centered around the cultures there based on. Like, if I were to describe this in this way:

"The main character is put into the skin of one of the natives and learns to live like them". You'd think I was describing some insane body horror. But if I kept it in the context of:

"The main character is put in a machine that can transfer his consciousness via a mental link into a lab grown body meant to replicate the natives and learns their ways of life." That's still a crazy premise, but unlike the first one, it's a lot less horrifying and a lot more "How does that work?"

What I mean is, a lot of aspects in these movies are somewhat based in reality, but it is not something that could make sense/work in reality. Just like the premise of the Na'vi is inspired by real cultures, but it is NOTHING like the real cultures and will never be. So if we can separate the science and logic of it as "this only exists in the movies context" should we advocate more for saying,

"This film is not representation to any culture. It's just a fantasy that takes some surface level notes" ? Or does that fall under Appropriation?

So I've been in this debate for about 3 days now on two separate fandoms. It started with Jake Sully and the debate of "Is he a bad father? Is he just a flawed father? Or is he downright abusive?" And today I was in a debate about Ozai. Him being the abuser wasn't the debate, that was just the correct answer. But it was the way I described abuse in general, that turned into a debate. and now I'm trying to understand. What is the best way to distinguish between a abuser who knows he's harming his family but doesn't give a damn. And someone who could be (these are not sarcastic quotations) "unintentionally abusive". Does abuse have to be intentional to label a character as abusive?

I've been in mentally and emotionally abusive situations with family, but I do acknowledge that my experience could be wildly different from someone else, and it may make me a little blinded to how I see abuse in media.

Jake Sully is my favorite character. Gods I could rant about that big, beautiful, blue bastard for months. Now his parenting is a big debate, and the fans and critics both focus on his treatment of his youngest son, Lo'ak. In the movies he is hard on Lo'ak, but I can't really say it's "too harsh" for what this little Jake Jr. keeps doing throughout his screen time. The first mistake he gets reprimanded for is abandoning his post as a spotter alongside his brother, Neteyam. They helped hijack a train, Lo'ak wanted a taste of the action and so he swoops down on his Ikran to other Na'vi handing out guns. Neteyam follows to protect his brother and Jake sees them doing this. His initial reaction is a...I guess you could call it a 'calm annoyance' because he doesn't have much of a physical response (none that i caught at least). It's like he's just thinking "Oh these two boys.." but a aircraft starts raining bullets which causes Neteyam and Lo'ak to nearly get blown to hell within the chaos. When Jake gets the boys home, that's when he starts laying into them both. But what he says to Lo'ak specifically is "Do you realize you almost got your brother killed." And I do see how this moment is a clear parallel to the moment in Fire and Ash (after Neteyam's actual death) when Lo'ak speaks out in a council and causes a big disruption. Jake says to Lo'ak "If you hadn't disobeyed orders, then your brother—" and while he doesn't outright say it, it is implied. Especially because Lo'ak starts to cry and shouts "That wasn't my fault!" So, the silent blame definitely translated with no words needed. And people bring that up as Jake being emotionally abusive to his son. I interpreted as a stressed out (and do keep in mind, It's Canon that Jake has PTSD and survivors guilt) grieving parent who definitely crossed a line. But is it fair to call this emotional abuse?

Some people use the argument of "he treats his sons like soldiers" and in any other setting, I can see how that's a flaw. But within the context of Na'vi culture, These boys both went through 'Ikamaiyu'. It's a write of passage that deems a young Na'vi to be a warrior. So if the context exists where the characters went through such a tradition and there is a war going on that they're apart of, is it fair to criticize treating them like soldiers? Some argue "He's a father first" and others point to the position Jake put the kids in as already giving them somewhat special treatment. (Cause spotters are away from the actual battlefield, and one of Jake's orders was to only watch for enemies and call them in.) When they're with the wind Traders, Jake is harnessing his Ikran and makes some very short comments to Lo'ak like "Yeah, like that's happening" (in response to Lo'ak asking to ride with him as a spotter). And he asks Lo'ak where's his communication collar is before giving a even more frustrated response of "That's the first rule and you can't even remember that". But, Lo'ak has shown to disobey orders in past instances and how he's forgetful and clumsy with important orders that I feel the reprimand still fits the 'crime'. If you have a habit of disobeying, going off on your own, and forgetting really important shit, eventually you need to face the consequences of being deemed 'irresponsible'. Am I wrong on that? Have I missed anything?

I'm not even a Lo'ak 'hater'. I like him as a character, I do understand where he's coming from and why he does reckless shit. Keep in mind, Jake became Toruk Makto solely from a "Fuck it, we all might die anyway" mentality and a guess on if the creature could even physically look up (it can't. But Jake didn't know that for certain). And his mom, Neytiri is the first and only Na'vi to ride a Thanator. Lo'ak is the child of legends and I imagine he grew up hearing about all the bold and significant things his parents did in the war, so of course he has this idea in his mind "I have to be like them" or "I have to show everyone I can match that legacy". He has the same moral compass as his father and believes you should do the right thing, no matter the consequences. But you can also see where that stresses Jake the fuck out, because recklessness is how you die in war. Jake himself probably acknowledges how grateful he should be that he's still breathing, after all the reckless shit he also pulled. And explanation doesn't equal abuse. It can make others understand how this became a habit/issue. But Lo'ak can't keep disobeying without some sort of reprimand.

So is it fair to acknowledge Lo'ak's mental and emotional distress over how his father treats him, while ignoring the trauma Jake has? Cause neither character can turn that off. Lo'ak is going to feel like his dad doesn't respect him or understand why he does the insane shit he does. I would agree that's valid because thats how irl teenagers would process this treatment. But Jake can't just turn off his trauma of the things he experienced in the war, the way those memories and flashbacks affects him. And when your eldest son literally dies in your arms, that PTSD is gonna be dialed to MAX. Level. So, how can a character put "being a father" first above everything else, when his mind has a genuine condition that makes it harder for him to process his own emotions and therefore can make them lash out in a wrong way? Is it fair to call him Emotionally abusive or to straight up label him a abusive father, when the actions and words aren't fully in his control? Do we even have to give him that label? Or is he a good/perfect example of unintentional abuse towards family members?

For me, it's Jake/Quaritch. And I'm not even a big Enemies to Lovers fan, but there's just something about these two. Is it fucked that Quaritch is responsible for what happened to Neteyam? Yeah. Do these two got a weird respect for one another that's now created a interesting dynamic to watch? Hell yeah! But that entire scene with them stuck in the woods with the kids had me thinking "Oh the endless opportunities to make this a fanfiction plot". Like come on Cameron, we couldn't get just ONE scene of them bathing in a creek together? There'd be fanart for DAYS🤣.

I also got a weird crack ship with Neteyam/Roxto. Did these two barely interact? Yeah. But to be fair, Neteyam and Aonung get into one fist fight and have a collective of what, three scenes together? And they've been popping off on AO3. Both ships are good, but I just feel like Rotxo’s such a blank slate that something needs to be done with him. I like his design, his voice is interesting (cause it sounds like he has a weird little chirp in his voice), and I feel like it's just wasted potential to not do anything with him.

What about this film series makes you feel it's misogynistic? I'd argue that it actually represents Balance between both genders quite well.

In all three films we see women and men doing the same jobs, neither are putting the other down in ways such as "Oh, you have to prove yourself more because your a girl" or "you can't do that as well as me". There's none of that. Not with Neytiri every time she joined a hunt, not when we see T'sueye's group of hunters, not even amongst the Metkayina. Hell, the second film opens with Neytiri hunting while pregnant. If this film series wanted to put misogynistic values in the world, I don't see how that would be 'allowed'. Yet, it is.

We see both men and women treated equally when they're in the same positions of power. People respect Varang as the terrifying sadistic Tsahìk she is, people respect Mo'at for the great Tsahìk she is (also, she was the one who got the Omatikaya clan to accept Jake). And their genders are never mentioned to diminish them or make them 'special' (in a way of "Oh Varang is a woman AND she's powerful. No. It's only established as Varang is a powerful and sadistic leader) There is only one moment where Neytiri is pissed and she makes the comment "Toruk Makto knows best" but that wasn't because Jake was trying to pull the "I'm your husband and I make the decisions", it was her who tried to twist the situation into that after they disagreed. Jake even defended himself by saying "It's not like that" because it wasn't. They were arguing over whether or not they should kill Spider, of course they're not gonna agree immediately. Cause Jake (in that moment) knew killing Spider wouldn't solve their problem and you don't just kill people as a solution, anyway. So that comment wasn't her reinforcing some gender norms, she was hurt and angry and she took it out on Jake. People say stupid/radical/hurtful things in arguments sometimes, especially when they themselves are hurting.

And as someone who has now watched many videos of Na'vi Lore, and watched the movies multiple times I don't even think the Navi have gender norms or gendered hierarchy. Yeah a Olo'eyktan and Tsahìk are typically male and female, but Grace said in the first movie that the Olo'eyktan and Tsahìk are typically a mated pair. It seems like heterosexuality is as prominent in Pandora as it is on earth, so by design a mated pair is gonna be male and female (I also haven't come across anything that says a Tsahìk has to be female and vice versa. So maybe there is a male Tsahìk and/or female Olo'eyktan out there, or that's something that will be explored in the next films/other media)

Even Quaritch's team doesn't mention/enforce gender norms. There are two women in his team that we see and through Canon and deleted scenes I have yet to see him say something misogynistic (which is surprising. You'd think a somewhat one dimensional villain would have a dash of misogyny). He doesn't make low ball insults at Grace when she challenges him, the worst he calls her is a 'tree–hugger'. Even when General Ardmore tries to get Varang removed, Quaritch says "Don't be a dimwit General. Take the win". If they wanted to throw misogyny into that insult he could've said Bitch, Twat, etc. But he doesn't.

And I've seen some people have complaints about Jake saying "Toruk Makto and his woman will fly with you" and other things like "mate" or "husband". In Na'vi context, That's not enforcing gender norms. That's similar to Neytiri saying "Ma'Jake". It's a term of endearment. It's not putting either husband or wife down or diminishing their capabilities. They're just simply acknowledging their mate by the title of their relationship. I don't see how that's misogynistic when the context given isn't really tied to gender norms.

I think the issue is, our own world is so overly fucked and complicated because we have gendered oppression deeply woven into many things. That our own minds now try to enforce it even in places where it doesn't exist. We think "Oh that works that way because of oppression" but really it has nothing to do with oppression, nor was that established as a reason to begin with.

Na'vi culture is heavily based on many POC culture. The Omatikaya has many references to African/Native hair. The Metkayina are modeled from Pacific Islanders, etc.

So let's say I'm writing about Neytiri doing a wash day on Jake's hair (that's what that's referred to, right? When your taking care of Locs in Jake's style, you have to spend a whole day untwisting it and washing it, right?). What does that texture feel like? Is it dense? Is it very coarse?

I've never written about Locs or POC braids so I don't know how/what to describe about it other than "Neytiri untwisted Jake's thick hair" which can suffice for one or two pages. But it just gets repetitive if that's also my descriptors for Lo'ak's hair or Tuk's. Plus, Tsireya's hair is visually different than the Sully family's. Other than 'tight' or 'tightly braided on the top' what's a better way to describe her style? Cause I imagine the texture of her curls may be different from Neytiri's texture of hair. Etc. I just want to know if there's better variety cause little details do/can matter in writing.

Am I still angry at shit in the world? Yeah. I'm not saying I've gone so numb that I know have no empathy for what's happening to people. Or that I'm gonna go around in the world treating every single person I meet as being someone who's not worth acknowledging. I know that some complete rando I meet has to be treated neutrally as "this is a good person I might like". I'm not numb towards everyone. I know who to direct my annoyance and "I'm done" attitude at.

And my feelings of "Your nothing but a creature that is wasting oxygen" is at these types of people.

1. People who have no intelligence as to how to god damn fucking research shit. And then get in your face for doing something you should be taught in god damn 3rd grade English/creative writing to do. And that is: Fucking fact checking before running your god damn mouth on a situation.

It's not that hard people. It really fucking isn't. If you hear "Man arrested for ___" and you want to know more details? Well then you exit your ass out of whatever social media your using, go to Google. Look at AT LEAST 3 to 4 news reports and find the truths yourself. "But I don't have that kind of time to read 3 different news sites" Then don't comment on the situation! You don't have to run your mouth on everything you see online. If you see some kind of news related issue going on/drama/anything political going on but you know you don't have all the answers to the situation and you ALSO know you can't take the time to research. Just move on. Scroll. Or wait until you do have the time to research more into a situation. This is shit you should be taught already.

2. MAGAPHILES. Am I calling all Republicans MAGAPHILES? No. Shockingly, I have met IRL humans who are Republicans but they have the basic human god damn decency to treat me like a basic human being. (I cannot answer why they're Republicans. They're a little dumb? They don't get too involved with the news? That's my only guess. Also, me calling them dumb is not me devaluing them to the same extent. I'm one of those who will tase someone if they kick my dog, but I will also scream "Do you have your brain screwed on backwards?!" When I see my dog eating the shit our chickens drop) They don't care about my gender identity or who I kiss in public. MAGAPHILES are the only morons who have such a pathetic life they feel the need to dictate my life. There is a difference. MAGAPHILES also often commit the issue I stated in 1. They don't fact check anything, they're too busy having Epstien's friend's dick perpetually stuck in their mouths. And until one of them can learn to have a actual intelligent conversation with me that doesn't involve The Bible, "Well its unnatural" or degrade me for simply being born in 05, I ain't changing any of my words. Y'all ain't got brains. End of it. Done. That's all I have to say to you creatures.

3. I want all rage baiters to have a 12 inch barbwire dildo shoved up the end where the sun don't shine. I'm fucking done with you limp dick morons as well. Your all attention seeking twat waffles. You don't say anything worth respecting nor acknowledging. You think getting a rise out of people is funny simply because Y'alls lives are so god damn bleak and boring you have nothing left to live for, it seems. Are Y'alls mothers beige moms? Is that why you waste your existence pissing people off? That must be it.

4. White people thinking they can "tell" if your native American or not. I'm so god damn motherfucking sorry my Irish dead beats red hair came through more than the black hair. I'm so god damn sorry that other white presenting natives look too white for your stereotypical racist idea of what natives should look like. But that ignorance is your own god damn fault for not knowing history. Because for a time, things were amicable with white people and some native tribes. So much so, we married each other in amicable ways. But when one part of your history has roots of amicable marriage and then that gets buried with the more violent ways we were 'integrated' amongst white people (you know that part of history. Where the white colonizers started stealing, raping and buying our women.), the babies kinda tend to turn out a little more white. I'm sorry. We can't just up the toner when we're in the womb to ensure you can tell by our skin color, where we "belong". We know where we come from. We know who we belong to. We don't need some faceless white boy telling us these things in a Youtube comment thread.

Let me tell you this, If you have 000.00% knowledge as to how the majority of Native people feel about the blood quantum system to even start with, can't even tell me where you get registered as a native citizen, and you also can't provide any knowledge about native history. You don't get to make colorist comments towards me or other "white presenting" natives. Eat. My. Shit.