Ok I want to say something about episode 10 and Stede’s ‘selfishness’ (and why Stede left - spoiler alert: it’s trauma). I put selfishness in quotes because I completely understand how and why he is interpreted that way, but I don’t think that selfish is quite the right way to describe it in this instance: I’m not saying that Stede isn’t selfish at all, I just don’t think it’s an accurate explanation of his actions in the moment.
Stede has been taught by years and years of bad experience that he is the problem. He doesn’t fit in with the other pirates, which is expected because of the class divide/his privilege. But he also doesn’t fit in at all with his own class either. As a kid, he was relentlessly bullied for being different. All we ever hear from his father is criticism. He never fits in with his family(pre-running away): in the dinner table scene, his only comment is immediately met with an awkward silence before they move on, completely ignoring him (this scene hit hard because I’ve had people react that way to me way too often and it fucking hurts). Stede also says in ep 5 “I was never really good at these things,” when talking about the party - the typical way of interaction for his class, and it is VERY clear throughout that episode that he is not ‘one of them’ by the way he is treated by them. There is not a single time in his old life where he is accepted for who he is.
Now let me tell you from experience, years and years of being lonely and unwanted, never fitting in, no matter how hard you try, does not do good things to your mental state. I feel like this especially applies to autistic people (and I definitely read Stede as autistic btw), as often it’s not even like we can change anything and magically be liked. You learn that YOU are the problem, it’s always YOUR fault. This, my friends, leads to a shit ton of crippling self hate.
So really, it’s no wonder that what Chauncey says really gets to him. His view of himself is so skewed by his past trauma that he cannot see himself as anything other than the monster Chauncey makes him out to be. Stede absolutely loves Ed. He cares about him so much, and wants Ed to be happy, so he does what he thinks is right - he leaves. He thinks so terribly of himself that he is convinced that his mere existence is ruining Ed’s life. Therefore, he thinks that the only way to ensure Ed’s happiness is if he is not there. (It’s heartbreaking to be honest. This poor man needs a hug so bad)
Stede leaves because he genuinely believes that Ed is better off without him. This was not a selfish decision: Stede isn’t putting himself above Ed, it’s actually the other way around. We know that Stede doesn’t want to return to his old life. He was utterly miserable all the time and he was so lonely. The only time that he is truly accepted by others without judgement is once he’s met Ed. Why would he want to give that up, especially after a lifetime of bullying? He doesn’t. But because he cares so much about Ed’s happiness, he does what he is convinced is the best thing - he leaves. The issue isn’t that he doesn’t care about Ed’s needs, it’s that he cares, but he’s so traumatised that he is wrong about what those needs are.
63 notes
·
View notes
Hi, I saw on one of your ao3 comments that you think Homers' Achilles is on the spectrum. This is a really interesting idea to me, but I don't know that much about autism - could you elaborate on why you think that? (Also, I think all of your fics are amazing ☺️)
Autism as a word and diagnosis did not exist in ancient Greece, and I have no idea if there would have been a similar concept about it (doubt it) or if more likely people with certain autistic traits would have been considered to have a certain type of personality. So for me to say that Homer deliberately wrote Achilles as "autistic" is a little tongue in cheek.
That said, reading the Iliad I did have a moment of "Ohhhh, dude's autistic I get it." Some people might look at my reasoning and say, "well, that could be a whole other thing with these other reasons," and that's fair. This is just how it came across to me and why.
Sense of justice/fairness. This is one of the more obscure autistic traits (that often gets misunderstood and shit upon by people), but it's how the book begins, so I'll start here. Autistic people are more likely to learn and follow rules to a T. This gets rolled into the trait of "rigid thinking" and has been related to autistic people's preference for solid routines. To think about where you lie with this trait, one example is the "walk" signal at a crosswalk. Some people jaywalk when the road is very clear and no one is around. Some people jaywalk when the road ISN'T clear because they don't give a fuck. And some people will wait for that light to turn white no matter what because that's what you are supposed to do and there are rules (although culture/country of origin will also affect how much relevance traffic lights have in your life).
This is a rule, but it has little do to with justice. So to figure out where you stand in terms of justice sensitivity, another metric is how angry you feel when you watch someone cut in line and not get punished for it. Some of us will sigh and move on with our life because dicks are everywhere, whatever, and some people will have a harder time letting go because this person broke a rule in an obviously unfair way, and they should be punished for that.
This trait does not mean that autistic people have a better sense of what justice is or what rules/laws are "just." That is all very subjective. But this trait does result in a stronger negative reaction to seeing those rules/laws violated.
Such as rage.
Achilles fits the bill here in both in terms of rigid thinking and his sense of justice. His reputation in the Greek tradition is as someone who was very educated. In fact, he is the most educated with regards to law and religion than the rest of the Achaeans thanks to his time with Chiron. More than that, he actually cared about what he was taught and was considered kind of a stick-in-the-mud in terms of believing that the armies should follow the rules and customs of their people at all times and that violating their own laws was bad, even if you really, really wanted to bang a hot chick.
When Agamemnon decides to take Briseis, he is breaking a Rule. The common interpretation of what happens here is that he has violated Achilles' pride and honor in doing so, and Achilles loses his shit. That's valid. To me it read a little differently. I mean, for one, Achilles is 100% correct in the first book. Agamemnon pissed off the gods in a way he shouldn't have bringing plague on everyone, and how does he solve this? By agreeing to do the thing Achilles told him to do to solve it and then immediately violating their customs to steal from Achilles, bringing down a plague of "Achilles is not going to help you anymore."
Achilles cries to his mom that he wants the gods to fuck over the Greeks to prove Achilles right, which is deeply immature, but also really makes sense to me. Like, Agamemnon did this shitty, illegal, rules-breaking thing, and he needs to feel the consequences of that action. Achilles isn't a god who can bring down a plague, but his mommy is, so get fucked, Agamemnon. It's Zeus time.
During the time Achilles is out of the fighting, he is routinely called hard-hearted, stubborn, and other words to indicate he will not be swayed, which again speaks to his rigidity of understanding how things should be done.
The Way Achilles Talks About His Emotions. Achilles very clearly states what he is feeling throughout the book, and he often restates it. We get it, bro. You're mad. And then sad. Really, really sad. While this is almost definitely for the audience to understand his feelings and just how deep they run, Homer also could have just told us outright what he was thinking without having Achilles say it out loud repeatedly. It also felt to me that Achilles talks about his feelings far more often and bluntly than other characters do, but again this could be because the story revolves around his 'rage.'
Regardless, even if it was purely for audience benefit, this is a behavior I have noticed with my adult ND friends, which is basically after a childhood feeling confused by what other people around them are doing or why they are reacting to things in a certain way, they have a strategy of very bluntly expressing themselves and where they are at in this situation. It can be far easier than trying to follow the subtleties of NT culture and just get whatever issue it is out in the open. Saying to someone "I am angry at you" can come off as overly aggressive and blunt depending on context, but it cuts to the heart of the matter. We can compare this with Odysseus, who does not express any very deep emotions at all in the Iliad (other than the fact that Thersites should shut the fuck up, anyway), presumably because that's nobody else's business.
The Embassy. Achilles' point to Odysseus that this entire war was started over a man stealing a woman is so correct and so ignored. He looks at this situation and says: Paris stole Helen, and Agamemnon rallied all the Achaeans to come make war with Troy. Agamemnon steals Briseis, and I'm meant to... keep fighting for him? In what way does this make sense?
Everyone around him sees it from a completely different perspective, basically that Achilles got angry over a girl. To Achilles this is not what it is about at all. And I'm with him on this. If stealing a woman is a sin egregious enough for thousands of Greeks to spend 10 years attempting to sack a city, then it is the same amount of egregious for Agamemnon to take Briseis and he's lucky Achilles didn't kill him immediately and sack Argos. He's getting off easy, which Achilles tells him.
Reading Odysseus lay out his argument followed by Achilles cutting him down with that bit of logic was like, yeah, I'm with Achilles, I don't even think he's being stubborn I just think he's right.
In the embassy chapter, Achilles also has his famous line about despising men who say one thing but mean another. Being very truthful and having difficulty noticing lies is another common trait of autism, and it would make sense for Achilles to find the dishonesty of his colleagues deeply annoying.
Old British scholars called him a sociopath. This might seem like a weird one, but I'm adding it into evidence. When I read the Iliad, I see Achilles as a very emotional person. Given that half the book is about his grief over Patroclus, I find calling him incapable of caring about others incredibly bizarre. But in addition to determining that these scholars who wrote these batshit essays have never once in their life had a friend, much less a friend that they loved, this kind of fits with how a certain type of old-fashioned scholar understands autism. I've actually been at neuroscience talks with crusty old assholes who talk about how autistics and orphans are incapable of empathy, and then use evidence that really just says to me they express empathy in a different way. (Yes, orphans. For real. A real talk I went to in like 2015. Did you know that orphans don't have feelings and don't care about the feelings of others. /s) Add to the old British tradition of their feral private school kids (which I believe they call public school? idk those assholes in blazers, you know the ones) literally caning each other for being smaller, weaker, or just different, and this to me is solid evidence that Achilles is neurodivergent and unwittingly awoke the bloodlust in these old (dead) bastards.
Speech Patterns. Not being able to read Ancient Greek, I can't actually say much about this one, but multiple scholars have commented that the way Achilles speaks in the Iliad is different to all the others. He has a unique way of speaking. Again, this is not necessarily an autistic trait, but it is common for autistic people to have different speech patterns than NT people, so it's more just a "hmmm, maybe" than actual evidence.
I feel like I'm forgetting other little things, but I'd have to fully reread the Iliad with this in mind to jog my memory, and maybe one day I will. TLDR; Achilles has a very rigid way of thinking and an uncommon way of expressing his emotions.
And as always, autism is a spectrum. Anything I've written about here isn't necessarily true of any autistic person out in the world.
14 notes
·
View notes
Data is such an autistic trans man. I'm not even joking. He's "got all the working parts" but his assigned gender is android. He wants, he craves and desires to be a human man.
This quote
"If being human is not simply a matter of being born flesh and blood, if it's simply a way of thinking, acting, and feeling, then I am hopeful that one day I will discover my own humanity." -Data
He fucking says that. Replace that with manhood and it's just straight up trans. Being a human man is a social construct. He literally says that and I'm sitting here like sobbing. Fuck
the fact that he's constantly infantilized and misgendered all the time really shows this.
One time he even went "If my brother is an "It" what does that make me?" Legit he went HEY my pronouns are He/Him. I love this man. My son. Ugh
31 notes
·
View notes
what do you, the mun, think of Nurgle?
I think Nurgle is incredibly manipulative - arguably the most of The Four, despite Tzeentch being right there. Why? Because more than Khorne, or Tzeentch, or even Slaanesh, Nurgle offers a relief from something almost all mortals fear in some way - death. Pain, too. Most people don't like the idea of being struck down by a horrible virus or some terminal illness.
Or hell, even a chronic condition.
That doesn't mean I don't think Nurgle's kindness isn't genuine - I fully believe it is, especially compared to the other Gods - but that its also made very clear that it will do anything it has to do to force you to accept its 'gifts'. Nurgle will wear you down and sicken you and put you through hell until you say yes. Its only when you are damned that Nurgle begins to dote on you.
Nurgle's other main selling point in that regard is a sense of belonging, of family and a lack of judgement. They're generally familial to some degree, no matter what type of Daemon they are (though Plaguebringers do tend to be very dour). Nurgle tolerates mistakes, and will even pick you back up occasionally if things go wrong.
Nurgle also tells you that you don't need to change. You can be happy as you are. You don't need to strive for an uncertain future, you can wallow in the here and now even if you shouldn't. Apathy, ultimately. That is incredibly tempting prospect for a lot of people.
And, relating to Tzeentch specifically, not many people I know like random chaos. We like certainty and routine a lot more. I've seen it said that Nurgle doesn't like change at all but that isn't true; Nurgle embraces the cycle of life and death fully. Things die, things live. An endless, but certain, cycle. Tzeentch wants to smash the cycle and its followers often strive for better, for more.
3 notes
·
View notes