RWBY Thread III: Time To Say Goodbye

[kokuenDG]

so gotta few things that need to be said real quick.
We get a lot of reports from this thread. A lot of it is just a series of people yelling at each other over arguments that have been rehashed hundreds of times since the end of the recent Volume. And I get that the last Volume - and RWBY in general, really - has some controversial moments that people will want to discuss, argue about, debate, etc.

That's fine. We're not going to stop people from doing that, because that's literally what the point of the thread is. However, there's just a point where it gets to be a bit too much, and arguments about whether or not Ironwood was morally justified in his actions in the recent Volume, or if RWBY and her team were in the right for withholding information from Ironwood out of distrust, or whatever flavor of argument of the day descend into insulting other posters, expressing a demeaning attitude towards other's opinions, and just being overall unpleasant. That tends to happen a lot in this thread. We want it to stop happening in this thread.

So! As of now the thread is in a higher state of moderation. What that means is that any future infractions will result in a weeklong boot from the thread, and repeated offenders will likely be permanently removed. So please, everyone endeavor to actually respect the other's arguments, and even if you strongly disagree with them please stay civil and mindful when it comes to responding to others.

In addition, users should refrain from talking about off-site users in the thread. Bear in mind that this does not mean that you cannot continue to post tumblr posts, for example, that add onto the discussion in the thread, with the caveat that it's related to RWBY of course. But any objections to offsite users in the thread should be handled via PM, or they'll be treated as thread violations and infracted as such.

 

[thesevenwielder]

Well, moving on from this heated discussion that appears to be at an impasse anyway, looking at Blake's current behavior compared to hers in the earlier volumes, I think she learned all the wrong lessons from her father.

Spoiler: for the newest episode

In the earlier volumes Blake was outspoken against racism and mistreatment of faunus in general, and her establishing scene is her calling out Weiss's family for their mistreatment of faunus. But now, when that Atlas woman not so subtly insulted Blake because of her ears, Blake just stands there and takes it.

In general, the message about racism the show seems to promote is actually kind of disturbing. No matter what harm is done to you because of your race, you should just sit there and take it, and any kind of retaliation is bad. In the Adam trailer, Gira is portrayed as the good guy for doing nothing, even though the lynch-mob was literally shooting at him even though he was doing nothing and was holding his hands up, and Adam is the bad guy for defending them.

 

[Psyga315]

Well, moving on from this heated discussion that appears to be at an impasse anyway, looking at Blake's current behavior compared to hers in the earlier volumes, I think she learned all the wrong lessons from her father.

Spoiler: for the newest episode

In the earlier volumes Blake was outspoken against racism and mistreatment of faunus in general, and her establishing scene is her calling out Weiss's family for their mistreatment of faunus. But now, when that Atlas woman not so subtly insulted Blake because of her ears, Blake just stands there and takes it.

In general, the message about racism the show seems to promote is actually kind of disturbing. No matter what harm is done to you because of your race, you should just sit there and take it, and any kind of retaliation is bad. In the Adam trailer, Gira is portrayed as the good guy for doing nothing, even though the lynch-mob was literally shooting at him even though he was doing nothing and was holding his hands up, and Adam is the bad guy for defending them.

Click to shrink...

It's even worse when you begin pointing out who represents what allegory.

 

[Tython82]

Well, moving on from this heated discussion that appears to be at an impasse anyway, looking at Blake's current behavior compared to hers in the earlier volumes, I think she learned all the wrong lessons from her father.

Spoiler: for the newest episode

In the earlier volumes Blake was outspoken against racism and mistreatment of faunus in general, and her establishing scene is her calling out Weiss's family for their mistreatment of faunus. But now, when that Atlas woman not so subtly insulted Blake because of her ears, Blake just stands there and takes it.

In general, the message about racism the show seems to promote is actually kind of disturbing. No matter what harm is done to you because of your race, you should just sit there and take it, and any kind of retaliation is bad. In the Adam trailer, Gira is portrayed as the good guy for doing nothing, even though the lynch-mob was literally shooting at him even though he was doing nothing and was holding his hands up, and Adam is the bad guy for defending them.

Click to shrink...

Spoiler: Just in case

I always took that scene a she was trying to bait Blake into an argument or some sort of reaction that she could then turn on her and prove her point.

 

[VolantRedX]

Well, moving on from this heated discussion that appears to be at an impasse anyway, looking at Blake's current behavior compared to hers in the earlier volumes, I think she learned all the wrong lessons from her father.

Spoiler: for the newest episode

In the earlier volumes Blake was outspoken against racism and mistreatment of faunus in general, and her establishing scene is her calling out Weiss's family for their mistreatment of faunus. But now, when that Atlas woman not so subtly insulted Blake because of her ears, Blake just stands there and takes it.

In general, the message about racism the show seems to promote is actually kind of disturbing. No matter what harm is done to you because of your race, you should just sit there and take it, and any kind of retaliation is bad. In the Adam trailer, Gira is portrayed as the good guy for doing nothing, even though the lynch-mob was literally shooting at him even though he was doing nothing and was holding his hands up, and Adam is the bad guy for defending them.

Click to shrink...

Spoiler

Yeah Blake was so outspoken she bravely did absolutely fuck all in defense of Velvet when she was being attack for being a Faunus. Here she seemed more surprised than anything. It's likely she basically hadn't even thought about it in a long time.

 

[Mook]

Spoiler

Yeah Blake was so outspoken she bravely did absolutely fuck all in defense of Velvet when she was being attack for being a Faunus. Here she seemed more surprised than anything. It's likely she basically hadn't even thought about it in a long time.

Click to shrink...

Spoiler

If anything this simply shows why Blake felt the need to hide what she was in the first place. Which Ilia's backstory also did.

Also everything from the visuals, voice acting, symbolism and interaction with the heroes is used to show that Cordovin is an absolute shitheel and buffoon. Her being a racist is used to show that racists are stupid assholes, because she is such a stupid asshole. This is like the exact opposite of condoning racism.

 

[VolantRedX]

Spoiler

If anything this simply shows why Blake felt the need to hide what she was in the first place. Which Ilia's backstory also did.

Also everything from the visuals, voice acting, symbolism and interaction with the heroes is used to show that Cordovin is an absolute shitheel and buffoon. Her being a racist is used to show that racists are stupid assholes, because she is such a stupid asshole. This is like the exact opposite of condoning racism.

Click to shrink...

Spoiler

I don't think the argument is that RTis condoning racism so much as they seem to endorse sitting there and quietly taking it.

 

[Zam]

Spoiler

Yeah Blake was so outspoken she bravely did absolutely fuck all in defense of Velvet when she was being attack for being a Faunus. Here she seemed more surprised than anything. It's likely she basically hadn't even thought about it in a long time.

Click to shrink...

Given she was currently in hiding her not acting made sense.

Spoiler

I don't think the argument is that RTis condoning racism so much as they seem to endorse sitting there and quietly taking it.

Click to shrink...

This though is a problem I agree with as they seem to have inadvertently fallen into the "The oppressed minority has to always be the patient understand, self sacrificing one to teach their oppressors they are wrong and anyone who fights back is bad" It isn't 100% like that but it is, broadly speaking, the kidn of narrative they've created which is yuck.

Also why I like Sienna "The Hero Queen" Khan so much and will stan that her methods were working (As they were established to be by Blake and literally no one has ever said otherwise) and forever blame Adam for screwing everything up.

Seriously I want Sienna back.

 

[devilkingx2]

In general, the message about racism the show seems to promote is actually kind of disturbing. No matter what harm is done to you because of your race, you should just sit there and take it, and any kind of retaliation is bad. In the Adam trailer, Gira is portrayed as the good guy for doing nothing, even though the lynch-mob was literally shooting at him even though he was doing nothing and was holding his hands up, and Adam is the bad guy for defending them.

Click to shrink...

No, that was insane and blind fans who somehow came to the conclusion that adam is the bad guy for killing racists that shoot faunus on sight for no reason.

Ghira is potrayed badly in the short because he looks like a moron for criticizing the person who saved his life, no wonder adam wanted him dead. Adam and Sienna looked like great people.

Well, moving on from this heated discussion that appears to be at an impasse anyway, looking at Blake's current behavior compared to hers in the earlier volumes, I think she learned all the wrong lessons from her father.

Click to shrink...

Blake is a gigantic coward remember?

 

[VolantRedX]

No, that was insane and blind fans who somehow came to the conclusion that adam is the bad guy for killing racists that shoot faunus on sight for no reason.

Ghira is potrayed badly in the short because he looks like a moron for criticizing the person who saved his life, no wonder adam wanted him dead. Adam and Sienna looked like great people.

Click to shrink...

I mean the idea doesn't seem to be that Adam was in the wrong for killing the guy, but that it was the start of his descent. It started with justifiable acts of self-defense, into killing people in his way, to killing people for fun.

 

[devilkingx2]

This though is a problem I agree with as they seem to have inadvertently fallen into the "The oppressed minority has to always be the patient understand, self sacrificing one to teach their oppressors they are wrong and anyone who fights back is bad" It isn't 100% like that but it is, broadly speaking, the kidn of narrative they've created which is yuck.

Click to shrink...

At no point do they portray ghira as competent or effective for the record so i doubt that's the narrative they're going for

It seems to be more like "racism is complex, violent revolution isn't the answer, but turning the other cheek so you can get two black eyes won't solve anything either"

The debate with the white fang isn't whether or not the faunus have it bad, because they obviously have problems. the debate is whether or not the problems are so bad that they should conquer the human world, execute their leaders and subjugate their people.

Also why I like Sienna "The Hero Queen" Khan so much and will stan that her methods were working (As they were established to be by Blake and literally no one has ever said otherwise) and forever blame Adam for screwing everything up.

Click to shrink...

Reminder: Sienna is basically the same as adam. She wanted to kill hazel on sight for just wanting to talk, she wanted adam locked up for being on good terms with humans, she was mad at adam for escalating the war before they were ready, not because she cares about lost human life or anything.

She's literally just adam but less cool, weaker and more mentally stable

I mean the idea doesn't seem to be that Adam was in the wrong for killing the guy, but that it was the start of his descent. It started with justifiable acts of self-defense, into killing people in his way, to killing people for fun.

Click to shrink...

Yeah I definitely got the vibe that Adam did not start out as a bad person, but lost sight of the goal and the enemy until he thought all humans were the enemy and conquest was the goal. But in the short he's no different than ilia, blake or sienna.

 

[Zam]

At no point do they portray ghira as competent or effective for the record so i doubt that's the narrative they're going for

It seems to be more like "racism is complex, violent revolution isn't the answer, but turning the other cheek so you can get two black eyes won't solve anything either"

The debate with the white fang isn't whether or not the faunus have it bad, because they obviously have problems. the debate is whether or not the problems are so bad that they should conquer the human world, execute their leaders and subjugate their people.

Click to shrink...

The thing is I am unsure they intended for him to come off as making poor decisions moralistically speaking at least, so it is hard to say.

The thing is they don't seemed to have settled on any kind of middle ground or method, Ghira's method involved Faunus fighting Faunus on the side of police in a nation where discrimination is legalized. Yes Adam is wrong and awful but the imagery is still pretty off-putting.

The thing is Sienna never planned or approved of that so I'd have liked it if her methods got to stay around over what we got in the above.

Reminder: Sienna is basically the same as adam. She wanted to kill hazel on sight for just wanting to talk, she wanted adam locked up for being on good terms with humans, she was mad at adam for escalating the war before they were ready, not because she cares about lost human life or anything.

She's literally just adam but less cool, weaker and more mentally stable

Click to shrink...

I see no evidence to support this claim, at all.
The WF is a para military organization, an outsider knowing the location of their main base is kind of a big deal and he's associated with the people who helped cause the Fall of Beacon, and despite her threats she didn't actually act on them and instead ordered them sent away for wasting her time, so it was probably just to be intimidating. She wasn't mad at Adam for being on good terms with humans, she was angry at him cutting deals with humans they didn't know who came and went as they pleased and she showed no intention of wanting to escalate the war, she just pointed out that Adam was starting a war they'd lose which is dumb strategically speaking. And given Sienna didn't needlessly slaughter people for fun like Adam I see no evidence she didn't care, just that she was willing to kill when it was called for compared to Adam who just gets off on pointless murder.

I completely disagree with such intensity it genuinely hurt me to read that statement.

 

[Sworl]

So you admit it was a leading question, which is also why I didn't answer it. Though given Weiss's initial response to Jaune she certainly seemed to find his behaviour bad and not to be encouraged, hence :That's too close!" discomfort, saying he shouldn't be encouraged and asking Pyrrha for help. Regardless, sure RT didn't intend for Jaune to come across like a creep, that doesn't mean his actions aren't creep and or are good, intent ends where execution begins in my book.

Click to shrink...

Yes? This is not a court of law. A leading question - 'a question that prompts or encourages the answer wanted' - is good thing if it can bring up the issue you want addressed. You've mostly been ignoring or only partially addressing the points I've raised.
Case in point you did not answer the second part of what I asked you here

'Canonically' - that is based both upon what Rooster Teeth has said about what their characterizations are intended to be and how they are treated in-universe by those characters that know and care about them - are either Jaune or Yang in any way unsympathetic creeps and/or sexual harassers?'

Click to shrink...

Do you think that the other characters treat (or perceive) Jaune or Yang as unsympathetic creeps?

She didn't encourage him as has already been established.
There is a difference between
"We wanted this to be funny" and "These words meant this" hence why the Yang & Jaune situation are different to me.

Click to shrink...

What? No, she quite demonstrably did encourage him.
That might not (supposedly) have been her intention, but as you've said yourself -

intent ends where execution begins in my book.

Click to shrink...

Then why do you keep making giant posts trying to change my mind?

Click to shrink...

Interpolating media is both a Doylist and Watsonian matter so I fail to see why that is a problem.

Click to shrink...

These two interrelate to each other.
I'm not trying to convince you to feel or think differently about a specific character, I'm trying to make a point about how I think your analysis isn't very balanced/rational; not because you are using both Watsonian and Doylist reasoning to interpret the characters, but rather because you are not using them evenly.

To summarize:
You take serious issue with the business of Jaune (a character you don't like) behaving badly for purely Watsonian reasons.
But for characters (that you like) such as Yang, Blake, Ruby and others who stood idly and indifferently by while this 'terrible' thing was happening to their friend (and in Yangs case actively encouraged it), you have no disdain what so ever for purely Doylist reasons.
Can you see how this might be a somewhat biased and irrational way to appraise the situation and maybe just a bit of a double standard?


Now just to take a step back from the narrative analysis for a moment and focus on what you claim to be your objection - Jaune being a creep or sexual harasser or whatever.

Well first of all I should say that I don't know enough about this topic to give a truly informed opinion on the issues involved and honestly, though this may sound insensitive, I can't really muster much concern over a failed attempt at comedy involving fictitious characters in a PG-13 web series that happened literally years ago.

Still if you are intent on directly relating stuff that happened on RWBY to serious and sensitive real life problems; then while Jaune is mostly to blame, I don't think that you asserting that all those characters close to Weiss suffering from Onlooker Syndrome weren't negatively contributing to the problem with their indifference, is helpful or honest. As I've mentioned -

Not alone does it make little sense, but it devalues the sincerity of ones stated convictions/criticisms.
Jaune does something which you say is bad that Yang mirthfully encourages and for this reason you say that Jaune is terrible because [Watsonian Reasoning], but Yang is completely undeserving of any criticism because [Doylist Excuse]?

It is a poor faith argument, it turns reason into a popularity contest and worse it suggests that any moral outrage involved is at best 1% outrage and 99% 'I don't like this character'.
It is always easy to criticize a character we detest, but such criticism is most sincere when we are also willing to apply it to a character we like, when he/she acts out of line in the very manner we profess to abhor.

Click to shrink...

Any kind of professed moral outrage is at best insincere and at worst kind of scummy, when it becomes clear it only matters to you in so far as it applies to characters that you already disdained.

 

[Zam]

@Sworl I am done with this debate, the entire premise off your position pretty much seems to be instead of responding to the criticism of Jaune as a character or the writing around him, to be changing the subject to try and get a 'gotcha' situation where in you pick a character you know the person (me) likes and try to drag them down to his level even though the actions are not equivalent or the same in the first place. If you can't defend Jaune's actions or writing without this kind of trickery (As well as ignoring the VA's, accusing me of being emotional while ignoring your own emotions, claiming objectivity is a thing, and asking leading questions ETC) then you just can't defend them, so please kindly stop harassing me with this.

 

[thesevenwielder]

At no point do they portray ghira as competent or effective for the record so i doubt that's the narrative they're going for

It seems to be more like "racism is complex, violent revolution isn't the answer, but turning the other cheek so you can get two black eyes won't solve anything either"

The debate with the white fang isn't whether or not the faunus have it bad, because they obviously have problems. the debate is whether or not the problems are so bad that they should conquer the human world, execute their leaders and subjugate their people.

Click to shrink...

Are you serious? Blake's big speech to Menagerie in volume 5 is "We need to always turn the other cheek and it is up to the faunus to show that we are not all bad. And convinces them to go risk their lives for a country that has active lynch mobs and "no faunus allowed" signs. Because somehow it is the responsibility of minoritiesfaunus to convince white peoplehumans to not be racist.

 

[Psyga315]

Are you serious? Blake's big speech to Menagerie in volume 5 is "We need to always turn the other cheek and it is up to the faunus to show that we are not all bad. And convinces them to go risk their lives for a country that has active lynch mobs and "no faunus allowed" signs. Because somehow it is the responsibility of minoritiesfaunus to convince white peoplehumans to not be racist.

Click to shrink...

And she convinced them by setting her house on fire in an unrelated incident and then blaming everyone for it.

 

[VolantRedX]

And she convinced them by setting her house on fire in an unrelated incident and then blaming everyone for it.

Click to shrink...

What is with team RWBY and setting houses on fire?

 

[devilkingx2]

I see no evidence to support this claim, at all.
The WF is a para military organization, an outsider knowing the location of their main base is kind of a big deal and he's associated with the people who helped cause the Fall of Beacon, and despite her threats she didn't actually act on them and instead ordered them sent away for wasting her time, so it was probably just to be intimidating. She wasn't mad at Adam for being on good terms with humans, she was angry at him cutting deals with humans they didn't know who came and went as they pleased and she showed no intention of wanting to escalate the war, she just pointed out that Adam was starting a war they'd lose which is dumb strategically speaking. And given Sienna didn't needlessly slaughter people for fun like Adam I see no evidence she didn't care, just that she was willing to kill when it was called for compared to Adam who just gets off on pointless murder.

Click to shrink...

So, rewatching the scene there is LITERALLY no possible defense of sienna.

She does not once mention all the dead innocent people or needless destruction, she cares about a target on the white fang's back and the difficulty of communication

She mentions why she doesn't trust the humans before hazel shows up, and then when he does and wants to clear the air all she cares about is the fact that he's a human, which she mentions multiple times and almost doesn't care that he's clearly calm and peaceful and diplomatic and unarmed.

Literal Sienna Khan quote: "humanity should fear the faunus"

 

[devilkingx2]

And she convinced them by setting her house on fire in an unrelated incident and then blaming everyone for it.

Click to shrink...

God I love that scene. This one part of volume 5 was 10/10 for me.

It's such an ingenius pragmatic strategy.

Need support? False flag operation whilst your incompetent enemies attack and fail to accomplish anything

Are you serious? Blake's big speech to Menagerie in volume 5 is "We need to always turn the other cheek and it is up to the faunus to show that we are not all bad. And convinces them to go risk their lives for a country that has active lynch mobs and "no faunus allowed" signs. Because somehow it is the responsibility of minoritiesfaunus to convince white peoplehumans to not be racist.

Click to shrink...

Yeah and that BS didn't work until she was able to convince them that the white fang would
A) make them look bad
And B) also be their problem and not just a human/racist problem.

It's not like they all kindly and altruistically decided to fight for what's right/the freedoms of their enemies at their own expense

 

[Zam]

What is with team RWBY and setting houses on fire?

Click to shrink...

So far only Ruby hasn't burnt something up XD

So, rewatching the scene there is LITERALLY no possible defense of sienna.

She does not once mention all the dead innocent people or needless destruction, she cares about a target on the white fang's back and the difficulty of communication

She mentions why she doesn't trust the humans before hazel shows up, and then when he does and wants to clear the air all she cares about is the fact that he's a human, which she mentions multiple times and almost doesn't care that he's clearly calm and peaceful and diplomatic and unarmed.

Literal Sienna Khan quote: "humanity should fear the faunus"

Click to shrink...

In your opinion.

Given they seem to have been discussing this for awhile or possibly more than once and Adam clearly doesn't feel bad about dead people she may have just opted to focus on the more immediate practical issues, and or as a general, opted to focus on the more immediate practical issues over moralistic ones.

Again, tied to the people who come and go as they please and helped cause the Fall of Beacon and is currently an unwelcome intruder in her secret base. Also I note you ignore her refusal to attack Haven Academy and that she doesn't pointlessly murder people on missions the way Adam wanted to before she sopped him.

Literally not a quote.

"I'm starting to doubt either of you fully comprehend what it is that I want. I want humanity to fear the Faunus, to know that we demand respect! I do not want to start a war with the humans that we cannot win!"

Also taking it out of context of the entire conversation and her own established views and policies.

"I was one of the first to suggest violence where violence was necessary. Peace bred complacency and acceptance of our place in the world. I will not allow humanity to push us down without pushing them back."

Also here is Ghira's view on his successor cos that is fun:
"So I stepped down, and Sienna Khan was appointed as my successor. It's true that I do not fully condone many of her methods. What I do condone is what Sienna fights for: the idea that the Faunus and humans are, and should be, equal."

 

[VolantRedX]

So far only Ruby hasn't burnt something up XD


In your opinion.

Given they seem to have been discussing this for awhile or possibly more than once and Adam clearly doesn't feel bad about dead people she may have just opted to focus on the more immediate practical issues, and or as a general, opted to focus on the more immediate practical issues over moralistic ones.

Again, tied to the people who come and go as they please and helped cause the Fall of Beacon and is currently an unwelcome intruder in her secret base. Also I note you ignore her refusal to attack Haven Academy and that she doesn't pointlessly murder people on missions the way Adam wanted to before she sopped him.

Literally not a quote.

"I'm starting to doubt either of you fully comprehend what it is that I want. I want humanity to fear the Faunus, to know that we demand respect! I do not want to start a war with the humans that we cannot win!"

Also taking it out of context of the entire conversation and her own established views and policies.

"I was one of the first to suggest violence where violence was necessary. Peace bred complacency and acceptance of our place in the world. I will not allow humanity to push us down without pushing them back."

Also here is Ghira's view on his successor cos that is fun:
"So I stepped down, and Sienna Khan was appointed as my successor. It's true that I do not fully condone many of her methods. What I do condone is what Sienna fights for: the idea that the Faunus and humans are, and should be, equal."

Click to shrink...

I personally feel that the condemnation of Sienna isn't her personally or if she's effective but that her methods attract a certain sort of person. Adam wasn't some lone actor. He had massive support, to the point he could stage a coup, because once use accept the use of murder and violence to achieve your ends you end up with an organization full of violent murderers.

 

[Zam]

I personally feel that the condemnation of Sienna isn't her personally or if she's effective but that her methods attract a certain sort of person. Adam wasn't some lone actor. He had massive support, to the point he could stage a coup, because once use accept the use of murder and violence to achieve your ends you end up with an organization full of violent murderers.

Click to shrink...

I can follow that rationale, but by the same token Ghira's methodology means people like Jac and the lynch mobs can get away with more cos they don't fear reprisal or consequences for their actions. Plus Adam was present before Sienna was in charge of the White Fang as well and still committing crimes with Grimm masks. Plus, while Adam claims to have lots of support he still had to lie about what went down with Sienna to try and get the rest of the WF on board and didn't have (at least openly) lots of people behind him, and given his ego and deluded attitude I can see him self inflating his support numbers to justify his actions, especially when he still needed to create a martyr to even try and get what he wanted.

 

[thesevenwielder]

Sure, I can follow that rationale, but by the same token Ghira's methodology means people like Jac and the lynch mobs can get away with more cos they don't fear reprisal or consequences for their actions. Plus Adam was present before Sienna was in charge of the White Fang as well and still committing crimes with Grimm masks. Plus, while Adam claims to have lots of support he still had to lie about what went down with Sienna to try and get the rest of the WF on board and didn't have (at least openly) lots of people behind him, and given his ego and deluded attitude I can see him self inflating his support numbers to justify his actions, especially when he still needed to create a martyr to even try and get what he wanted.

Click to shrink...

You do realize the bolded part also applies to Blake burning her house down and blaming the White Fang.

What is with team RWBY and setting houses on fire?

Click to shrink...

 

[Daniel Estacado]

Now Ruby and Yang need to start burning down houses.

 

[Zam]

Now Ruby and Yang need to start burning down houses.

Click to shrink...

Well Yang lit up the dance floor of a crime club, does that count? XD

 

[VolantRedX]

You do realize the bolded part also applies to Blake burning her house down and blaming the White Fang.

Click to shrink...

I mean I don't think Blake was literally saying that the White Fang burned her house down. She was saying they attacked her family and started the fight that caused her to burn the house down. Blake was using a metaphor to equate how the White Fang only destroy and will rip the Faunus apart.