What's the WC controversy that you find the most ridiculous?

Scourge’s collar color.

That Brambleclaw is abusive and writing or liking him means you’re supporting an abuser / condoning Squirrelflight’s abuse. Often said by fans of WCYT whose only source is THAT video. Brambleclaw isn’t abusive, he isn’t “worse” than Squirrelflight. But bc THAT creator kept comparing BrambleSquirrel to her own personal situation (which I feel awful she went through and am not invalidating it), no one can really critique it without it becoming way too sensitive of a topic. But no, being mad that ur wife lied to u about ur kids parentage is not abusive nor “anti-adoption”, it’s a normal response to having ur life flipped over.

On a funnier note, I remember when Rowanclaw being “trans” was the end of the world for some people lmao. And how Berrynose’s name was controversial and showed that Warriors had gone “soft” for not naming him Berrytail.

Literally all of the controversy around Moonpaw (aside from her being an incest baby) I feel like people are just making up reasons to be mad at her

That if Squirrelflight isn't your all time favorite character then you're misogynic despite your favorite character being a woman

1. Feather controversy as if wearing feathers is racist/culturally appropriated now. Same with medicine cats as a term or with certain names.

2. That somehow liking Bramblestar and not liking Squirrelflight makes you an "abuse apologist"

It depends on which part of the fandom you're interacting with. There was one time on Reddit that someone commented on a 4 month old comment of mine and the person went on the attack saying that I was victim -blaming Squirrelflight while also calling me misogynic and an abuse lover. I've also seen confessions on Tumblr as well from other people about how rabid Squirrelstans are.

Back in the day, people used to hate Firestar for allowing non-Clan cats to join ThunderClan, especially if they didn’t change their name. They said he was ruining ThunderClan and its warrior bloodline, making everyone a weak kittypet. I don’t know if people still think that, but it was a common thing to hate Firestar for 10+ years ago.

I will say on the flip side I’ve been threatened with being doxxed and told that my personal experience with domestic abuse doesn’t count (repeatedly) when I’ve said I don’t like Brambleclaw, usually I’m also told I only feel that way because of Moonkitti (my opinion existed long before her video) or because I love Squirrelstar (I don’t). It isnt behaviour that is exclusive to either “side”. I’m terribly sorry that this happened to you to, it is totally unacceptable what happened to you and in my personal experience it is a horrid minority like you speculate (although it doesn’t make what happened to you any better, I’m truly sorry for that), and I feel like you feel the same about the experiences I’ve had with certain Bramble stans in the past.

I’ve seen it a surprising amount of times, to the point that some creators had their videos flooded with hate comments simply because they were Brambleclaw and Squirrelflight videos/art/amvs made before any of the drama started. I say this as someone who doesn’t have either Brambleclaw or Squirrelflight as a top character I like, but the vitriol was disgusting towards anyone who even had one inkling of defense for Brambleclaw, or who wasn’t fond of how Squirrelflight was acting. It was badddddd. Bad enough that many folks I knew who did make content stopped all-together simply because they would get rallied against by the WCYT echo chambers.

Agreed with everything you’ve said but wanted to touch on these points as I think they all bring up the same problem: media literacy. There’s a very weird idea I’ve seen in the past 10 years or so where for some reason people demand that the morals and lessons of a story, who is “good” and “bad”, is explicitly laid out, and that anything else is condoning evil somehow. And I hate it. It’s especially bad with children’s media - yes, children are less capable of critical thinking, but that doesn’t mean you remove the opportunities for them to train those skills by spoon feeding them lessons.

I joined the fandom in 2008 as a child and the reason I enjoyed these books is because they let me actually THINK for once. Longtail’s redemption, Bluestar’s madness and giving up her kits, Bright/Swift choosing to fight the dogs, Firehearts grief over Tigerstars death, Leopardstar and Stonefur, GraySilver risking their Clans for love, Graypool choosing to keep Misty/Stone in the dark about parentage, Yellowfang killing her son, Crookedstar conceding to Brokenstar to keep the peace… I could go on. The first arc is filled with these morally gray situations and made the story so compelling.

It’s why I love DOTC so much, because it brought back that nuance that has been missing. It’s why I liked Berryheart and Curlfeather so much this arc as well, and why I think Splashtail sucks as a villain. But once again certain parts of the fandom are mad that those mothers are not explicitly said to be good or bad. Good/Bad dichotomy creates static characters. Look at the backlash Brackenfur got in Graystripes SE - because he has been nothing but a “good” guy, he’s not ever allowed to make a mistake or he’s OOC.

I think the introduction of the Dark Forest also made things worse, as it’s seen as a place where “bad” cats go, thus bringing “good”/“bad” morality into canon. But the thing is, it’s never explicitly stated what gets you into the DF. I’d like to head canon that StarClan basically tries to figure out if a cat did things for the good of the Clan (which is ok by StarClan books, like MudClaw, Skystar, and Quick Water), vs for selfish reasons (Tigerstar, Mapleshade). And that StarClan can get things wrong like with Juniperclaw and Ashfur. This is why cats who have time to atone whilst alive, like Leopardstar and Blackstar, go to StarClan, as they have proved their best intentions.

“The authors didn’t make it explicit in the text” yes, that’s the point, for you to have to think for yourself. And it’s okay to reach different conclusions and discuss them in a healthy open minded way. That’s what a fandom should be about, not finding increasingly niche groups of people who only agree with you - that’s an echo chamber.

Anyways sorry for the rant lol

I'm glad that BrambleSquirrel discourse has significantly died down from its peak five years ago, but it's a shame it got as bad as it did at all. Even if it wasn't entirely preventable, at the end of the day, hardly anyone took measures to reduce the impact of the whole thing.

Never trust the virtuous types, people. You get BrambleSquirrel discourse that way.

Some people judge others for liking a character or storyline, and then justify themselves by claiming it's for virtuous reasons.

I think you’re looking for the word “righteous”, not virtuous. There’s nothing wrong with being virtuous (which means to uphold qualities/standards/ethics you find important). Being righteous means justifying your actions because it’s for the “right” cause, when those actions would be wrong if it was the “wrong” cause. Like thinking it’s okay to misgender someone bc they’re racist - imo two wrongs don’t make a right. And I agree with you that righteousness is not a good quality.