#the complexity of a genuine cause being taken over by self importance and cruelty and what is owed to whom in the bloody aftermath | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

cancerjupiter · 4 years

Text

🔥 fire venus 🔥

venus in aries

ex: lily james, rihanna, marilyn monroe, lady gaga, tyler the creator, mariah carey, audrey hepburn, rdj, freud, gigi hadid, chris martin, melanie martinez

they are driven to impress others, show them new things and new experiences. they need to excel in their chosen field and feel in charge, directing the action. however, in relationships, they’re also attracted to strong-willed people - which often leads to conflicts. if they like you, they’re very direct and spontaneous. their greatest charm is their straightforwardness in social interactions, often combined with daring humor. if things go badly, however, their mood can change to combatively defensive and oversensitive. they’re not known for subtlety, and often like violent sports. fighting is natural for them, and they admire others who fight for causes. they highly value independence and always want to be number one, no matter what. they are not very patient and are terrified of boredom.

express affection directly, impulsively, enthusiastically; in love with the honeymoon phase of relationships.

assertive and demanding, which can add difficulty to intimacy.

values independence above all, in self and others

aries venus can be fiercely proud of their romantic attachments and loved ones. they can be very emotional, but rarely would you describe them as deeply feeling. they’re not very romantically sentimental or sympathetic; they prefer to be direct and blunt. the men are self-centered and not very giving; the women aren’t very patient or stereotypically feminine. the women don’t like overly gentle or patient men, preferring them to be aggressive and “compete” with her; they’re a true contradiction and quite complex. both like “quickies” and can be almost insatiable sexually, although quite selfish.

they can be selfish in relationships since they push their own ideas about how it should go, instead of talking about it with their partner. relationships start with a BOOM but fizzle easily since aries is not known for its longevity. they’re always looking for excitement, daily. they like to be enthusiastic and positive and let no one walk over them, even if they’re not overly assertive.

venus in leo

ex: fiona apple, madonna, mj, nicole kidman, tom cruise, amy winehouse, jlaw, whitney houston, niall horan, jason momoa, dua lipa, asap rocky, hitchcock

these people do nothing halfway. when committed, they can show remarkable loyalty. the problem is that they can go to such extremes of misplaced and impractical loyalty, that it outdoes common sense of objectivity. their reactions, while warmhearted, are well calculated and not at all spontaneous. as Grant Lewi points out, “No one with Venus in Leo has ever been talked into anything”. they want to make sure the right effect and use their affections to get what they want.

they possess sharply contrasting qualities: sincerity and generosity combined with a superior attitude towards others, and showing jealousy over others’ success. they have a huge, vulnerable ego and the merest “slight” is taken as a major offense: try leaving them on read too often or not showing up to their party. they’re very proud of their relationships and need to feel respected and admired by all. their greatest gift is probably their ability to vitalize others through their faith in them, conveying a warmth of encouragement to anyone who needs it.

express affection warmly, dramatically, playfully, and enthusiastically.

the need to be the center of attention or dominant force of a partner's life can encumber deeper intimacy.

can be extremely generous and loyal.

leo venus is rather in love with dramatic love. they crave grandeur and excitement, often staging affectionate displays or romantic situations. they have tremendous pride over their relationship and their own wonderful generous qualities (yes; they know how good they can be). although they’re easily offended by real or imagined insults, they’re quite insensitive to others’ feelings unless it’s related to the leo venus, somehow. a constant need for praise is their most tiresome feature, and they have an enormous weakness for flattery, one way they can be emotionally manipulated. at worst, they’re so self-centered they can’t relate on a simple, sincere human level and use others for self-aggrandizement. and if so, they can end up lonely, petty, and indignant.

they want to do a lot for their beloved, and make sure they enjoy every moment spent with the leo venus, and certainly don’t mind if other people notice their magnificent generosity. their own sense of identity is sometimes so tied up with their primary relationship, that they often go into crisis if things end, badly or not. they like physical demonstrations of affections, but are not very receptive on a true feeling level. they stimulate these displays of “love” in you, especially if in need of affection, but they can also drop you like a stone if they find someone who can praise them better and you’re not delivering.

their responses to love and affection are lavish, open-hearted and almost childish. the urge to spread sunshine throughout their partner’s life is genuine. flattery will get you everywhere with them, but make sure to keep this up if you intend to maintain a relationship. they can also be very sexual and give as good as they take.

venus in sagittarius

ex: joan baez, david bowie, nicki minaj, billie eilish, kendall jenner, jake gyllenhaal, jimi hendrix, jane fonda, mac miller

their reactions to life are rather happy-go-lucky and philosophical, explaining how resilient they are when confronted by the cruelty of life. some call it shallowness or avoidance of true feelings. take your pick, but it’s hard to stay mad when they disappoint. they’re often fickle and hard to please, but that’s due their chronic lack of satisfaction. they have a hard time dealing with routine, tedious reality, and facing the practical limits of life. they don’t enjoy living in the moment.

for them, there’s always room for improvement, and their philosophy of life is optimistic, always thinking a better reality exists just over the hill. they love surprises and you can expect anything from them. a need for space and freedom is essential for them: both mentally (learning, discussion, debate) and physically (activities, sports, traveling). they are also brutally honest about others’ hypocrisy or negligence, although they react to their own truth with a shrug because of their inflated self-image.

expresses affection freely, enthusiastically, generously and idealistically. motivated by an inner trust and faith in love.

tolerant and open-minded attitude toward love with a need for alignment of ideas; values honesty but may be insensitive to feelings.

sag venus wants to be hard, or at least noticed, in any social situation. and in a close relationship, the sharing of ideas and philosophical harmony is necessary for it to last. but for it to last even one evening, there has to be a common sense of humor or type of entertainment, since they can’t stand boredom and are naturally humorous people. they like exploring their relationship and often ask their partner some probing questions and enjoy teasing statements. honesty is, again, valued above all else, but they can be extremely insensitive and dismissive of others’ feelings and needs because of it. their casual remarks do real damage and reveal an irresponsible, and self-centered attitude towards love and sex.

they’re tremendously enthusiastic and unprejudiced about love and sex, and their sexuality is often not straight. they’re fun, but you can never flatter or praise them. you’ve got to earn their respect and usually glow with self-confidence to intrigue them. this venus placement is found in many who are impulsive and generous with affections; they are demonstrative, but also rather impersonal in their relationship approach, although quite charming. being a fun “pal” comes easier than being a truly intense lover; and the fact they grant their partner vast amounts of freedom reveals they like to maintain a level of personal distance, without restraint or heavy expectations.

these people see no reason why emotions shouldn’t be followed, and usually discount the importance of material things if their partner can’t offer them (unless there’s heavy Taurus on the chart).

#astrology #venus signs #fire venus #aries venus #leo venus #sagittarius venus #venus in aries #venus in leo #venus in sagittarius

713 notes · View notes

mc-critical · 3 years

Note

So I honestly thought of this ask from the Dilruba ask you got that spoke about Safiye’s idolization of Hürrem and Nurbanu. It makes me think, I felt like in observing Safiye’s character, she exhibited a phenomenon in which you’ve spoke of before, in which she reached a point of her life where she completely internalized and became the toxicity in her enviornment. I feel like she put Hürrem and Nurbanu on such a pedestal (especially with Nurbanu having treated her so terribly) is because she adapted a Social darwanist mindset of sorts which caused her to firmly believe that those who were/are “strong/worthy” were those who succeeded within the system by any means necessary, even if that meant killing and harming even those closest to them. It felt to me almost as if she came to “understand” Nurbanu’s stance towards her or even sympathized with it albeit in a strange, traumatized way? Or when she wanted to pass down her ring to Kösem after she suceeded in killing Iskender, it was almost like she wanted to congratulate Kösem on being able to kill her son. It’s interesting, like her entire moral compass was completely warped having been in the harem for so long and in unlike any way I can recall seeing on other sultanas in either franchise. I don’t remember Mahi/Hürrem coming to idolize Hafsa later in their lives but this could also be because the SOW time period was still relatively fresh in their time and Hafsa may not have wielded or exhibited as much power as Nurbanu may have as a valide sultan. What do you think?

Yes, Safiye as a character is the embodiment of these destrustive philosophies to the extreme. The toxic system leaves no one untouched and she is indeed one of the characters in the SOW and in the franchise overall that is the most affected by it.

Unlike Hürrem and Nurbanu, where we get a solid exploration of what exactly made them this way, with Safiye we have the philosophy set at the very start, her introduction sets many things clear. We know that she loves power. We know that she wants to keep that power until the end of time. Her role as an antagonist is revealed immediately in her unwillingness to give up her power. One may find her a little less multi-faceted, precisely because her motivations were more vague than the rest- we don't get anything outright with her, we don't get much insight. We're left to figure things out by ourselves. That doesn't make her a cardboard cut out however, given that we have very vague reasoning, but with enough context to see what's behind it. I find her "backstory" counterpart very interesting in that she could only be used to drive a contrast between MC E139 Safiye and MCK Safiye, be presented as the former shadow of Safiye's self, what she has previously been. With only a single scene we technically have her foundation, but what is retroactively set-up (her worship of Hürrem aside) is completely turned on its head. MC E139 Safiye is perceptive that one day you have to step out of power, but that's the primary dilemma of MCK Safiye, the very thing she refuses to do. It's hinted that she has had many, too many years of power in the harem and it's not only something she has become used to, it's much more than that: it's as if she's had this power her whole life. The prospect of her losing it has become truly unthinkable, out of reach. She has gained an self-image of greatness that would always "sustain" the castle and preserve its life force. She's accustomed to endless, limitless power. She has set her own network of people. She loves every aspect of this power: both the simple and the complex stuff, from her long morning routine to her orchestrating things from the inside. Her power as a concept alone is her whole being and I don't think she ever separated herself from her royal demeanor. She is always power and majesty and splendor everywhere, from her dresses, to her mannerisms, to her constant addressing of herself as "we", taken from European courts.

I agree that she values power as something for herself and something that is hers by right, not for the advantages or disadvantages it may bring. Safiye doesn't care about that: as long as she's there and in power, it would all be fine, it would be enough. Safiye has her own distorted understanding of applying power: she speaks constantly about the dynasty and the country (just like many sultanas), but she leaves them aside completely when she's threatened. And she doesn't view what she does as morally right, she's always ready to play dirty in order to maintain her own accomplishments and to outplay everyone else. She actually resorts to dirtier and dirtier tricks the more she loses her power. I did mention when paralleling and contrasting her with Kösem in another ask of yours that Safiye, unlike Kösem, doesn't focus her efforts on reaching out to the people, she is a lone wolf when it comes to power and she is projecting indisputable superiority on everyone she's in front of. The closest relationship she has is with Bülbül and even that is merely an addition to Safiye and the result of him being the person always next to her and fills all her whims much more than it is all genuine affection. The Darwinian philosophy is what she lives by; and the notion that she gave the ring to Kösem because of her starting to respect another person's own power except for her own, admitting that someone has outplayed her, doing it only because someone has outplayed her, is really important. Her arc was about finally accepting defeat after deluding herself for so long that no one could truly eclipse her, but then again, has she gotten completely over her toxic environment? Hardly. Because once again, by giving the ring, she symbolically continues the SOW cycle that has, in the show, many toxic aspects especially when it comes to power. Safiye could respect people only when they keep up for longer than she anticipates, have been tied up to her in a more "unconventional" way and have a (previously and contemporarily) good position on the hierarchy. She did accept Kösem as a rival at the end of the day, in part probably because she started off as someone loyal to Safiye and evolved way past that, but didn't accept Handan, because she couldn't face it that someone like her, someone she perceived as weaker, can now rule over her. I saw Safiye as someone finding disobedience from a person previously loyal to her more challanging than a permanent, irreparable change of the hierarchy she is strongly dissatisfied with. Her elitism is so strong that she doesn't go past it even when there is a change in position. She doesn't get over that biased, stereotypical thinking.

She worships this Darwinist philosophy in Hürrem, that she's the strongest survivor, that she has prevailed over her opponents, without having the chance to know the bigger picture and has heard only the banter of someone who is still biased to her after all (Mihrimah). She shares this philosophy with S02B post-E59 and S04 Hürrem in even scarier extremes and that's what she has set as an example for herself. It's true that she takes this mindset from this cult to Hürrem, too. This very disrupting cult of hers. But then again, I never saw her sympathizing with Nurbanu, per say? She's perfectly able to acknowledge Nurbanu's cruelty and correct me if I'm wrong, but the only praise I recall for her is her being the most beautiful (but the cruelest) sultana she's ever known? Which in no way indicates sympathy. But I wouldn't brush off at all Safiye viewing fer experiences with Nurbanu as the twist of fate, in which she has prevailed after all, but could acknowledge the ones before her. (but not after her, Kösem aside.) Safiye isn't that kind of person that would show in any way that she has experienced trauma, but she could've brushed said trauma even deeper within than other characters, to the point that her direction even would never ever indirectly hint at it, keeping her usual regality in check.

[Hürrem did say she set Valide as her own example in her last words to her in E61, but I get how it could be missed when she also lamented their previous, not so good experiences and told her about Nigar and Ibrahim, which put an end to Valide's life. Mahidevran, on the other hand, never mentioned Valide post-S03 outside of saying that they would bury Fatma in Ayşe Hafsa's mosque (was it?). They both mourned her death, but interestingly enough, both of them have "violated" her memory in some way by wanting her chambers. Mahidevran wanted the chambers to set her own model in the castle during her harem ruling period, while Hürrem wanted it to show she could one-up everyone, for them to respect her the way she thought she deserved. There truly wasn't this worship to such extent as in MCK, also because it presented the beginning of the SOW rather than the peak of it. There wasn't much to blindly praise there, hence the effect wouldn't be as strong.]

#magnificent century #muhteşem yüzyıl #muhtesem yuzyil #magnificent century: kösem #muhteşem yüzyıl kösem #muhtesem yuzyil kosem #safiye sultan #ask #stuffandthangs

28 notes · View notes

hamliet · 5 years

Text

Messy, Perfect Redemption: Dazai

My least favorite trope in fiction is probably redemption via death. It just seldom works for the best possible story and more often than not comes across as an author wanting to take the easy way out with having now made the audience like the character, but not having to deal with the repercussions with their relationships with other characters and actual work of changing. Which honestly is also fair. Writing is hard.

But one of the things I love about Bungou Stray Dogs is how the entire story is basically Dazai’s redemption arc in all its disastrous messy glory. Redemption is hard, becoming a better person is exhausting and it doesn’t happen overnight. Despite an often cavalier attitude towards everyone around him, Dazai never loses sight of Odasaku’s last words to him.

"Listen. You told me that you might find a reason to live if you lived in a world of violence and bloodshed. You won't find it. You must know that already. Whether you're on the side who kills people or the side who saves people, nothing beyond what you would expect will appear. Nothing in this world can fill that lonely hole you have. You will wander the darkness for eternity. (...) Be on the side that saves people. If both sides are the same, become a good man. Save the weak, and protect the orphans. Neither good nor evil means much to you, I know... but that'd make you at least a little bit better. (...) Of course I know. I know better than anyone. Because... I am your friend."

Leaving the mafia and deciding to save people from now on is a good step, but it’s a process, as we see. It’s choosing every day to save orphans, to protect the weak, and even after making the overall choice to become a better man, there are still plenty of struggles along the way. It’s what makes Dazai such a compelling, powerful and ultimately hopeful character for me.

I know Atsushi is often seen as representing Dazai’s second chance after Akutagawa, his redemption in a sense, and that’s not wrong at all. Atsushi is definitely a major, even the main, part of it, but in my opinion it’s not the whole of it. Dazai’s mentoring of Atsushi is a double-edged sword: on the one hand, it absolutely is a part of his redemption. He’s genuinely trying to do his best with Atsushi, and I do think he cares for him--clearly, he cares enough to let himself be captured by the mafia, even.

On the other hand, ignoring a kid you hurt for a kid you didn't is not redemption in and of itself when you could still do something about it. It’s not like Akutagawa has given up on Dazai in any way; he’s pretty desperate for Dazai’s acknowledgement even now.

If saving one requires you to abandon the other, are you really a better person for it ? Like, if you wanna save orphans, you kinda have to include the one who's literally begging you to save him and who is only in this bad place because of you.

If joining the agency would have redeemed Dazai, we wouldn’t have a story, though again I’m not minimizing the importance of this or the resonance of Dazai’s mentoring of Atsushi. But in joining the agency, Dazai left someone behind--more than one someones, actually. Dazai’s redemption is a process that will require him to face the harm he caused in the mafia and as much as possible, fix it. And he can’t fully redeem himself until he integrates with his shadow. Unlike Atsushi whose shadow is directly personified in Akutagawa, though, Dazai’s is in several other people (we could also consider Odasaku and Atsushi part of the anima), including Akutagawa, Chuuya, Dostoyevsky, and Mori.

Even the next time Dazai saves an orphan (Kyouka), we find out that a lot of the cruel ways Akutagawa trained her came from how Dazai trained him.

It’s a consequence coming back to Dazai that his mentee decides to save a child trapped in the mafia whom everyone wants to give up on, a child whose been through the same training he forced Akutagawa into (which I should remind you includes a canonical mock execution). The difficulties of saving Kyouka are probably exactly why Dazai took so long to make baby steps towards Akutagawa. But to his credit, while he’s not exactly compassionate with Kyouka while she’s imprisoned, Dazai does save her. If mentoring a kid on the verge of turning into a criminal is the first step to reconciling with his mafia self, then Dazai’s helping save Kyouka is the next one.

However, he doesn’t fully understand the cruelties of he did to Akutagawa, as shown in how he mocks him after his capture by repeating Akutagawa’s worst fears to him:

I know Dazai’s playing a long game with setting up Atsushi and Akutagawa’s partnership in shin soukoku, but the ends don’t always justify the means and that’s a lesson often shown to us in BSD (it’s in part the reason Dazai left the mafia; he couldn’t buy that Oda’s death was justifiable because it got rid of Mimic and got the Port Mafia their black ticket). This type of triggering really isn’t okay. Like I said here, Dazai is in part the cause of Atsushi and Akutagawa’s struggles to get along, and he should be part of reconciling that schism as well.

I know while some people are annoyed that fans call a person two years older than someone else their father figure, but the manga itself draws this comparison and codes Dazai/Atsushi and Dazai/Akutaqawa as a mentor/mentee relationship which is 99% of the time coded as parental in literature (and it definitely is here). Akutagawa literally draws the comparison himself between his relationship with Dazai and Atsushi’s with his abusive orphanage headmaster. Yes, Akutagawa’s making some logical jumps here (refusing to acknowledge that Dazai is just as much Atsushi’s mentor as his), but the manga wants us to make this comparison.

As Atsushi wasn’t able to reconcile his frustration and hurt towards the orphanage headmaster, he’ll probably do so through Akutagawa and through Dazai, because Atsushi’s view of Dazai is basically that he’s already redeemed and fantastic and justified in his choices--again, I know Atsushi complains about his irresponsibility sometimes, but it’s mostly played as a joke and isn’t a serious critique of just how he treated Akutagawa, despite Atsushi hating Akutagawa for how he treated Kyouka (take that train of thought a little further, Atsushi).

But onto Dazai’s other relationships. It’s telling that Dazai is at his most unrestrained and violent in the mafia when he partners with Chuuya, who despite being very restrained thanks to him being capable of uninhibited destruction that would lead to his own death without said restraint, knows who Dazai is and what he’s capable of from the very beginning (he’s so much as seen Dazai murder the orphans who comprise the Sheep even after promising Chuuya he wouldn't). Kunikida is Chuuya’s foil in that he works most closely with Dazai in the agency and is perpetually ready to strangle him, but Kunikida is also incredibly principled and restrained--yet he is significantly the only member of the agency who, prior to the Guild Arc, did not know Dazai used to be in the mafia.

Kunikida’s ideals including saving everyone if possible. Both Chuuya and Kunikida represent these two extremes of what Dazai is capable of--and yet notably both of them care about saving children and are in many ways more compassionate people than Dazai.

The one time we see Chuuya talk about killing a kid is with Q, who notably is introduced to us as another child with the soukoku partnership team-up.

Q, a child with half-dark hair and half-white hair (gee I wonder what that symbolizes) is a child made to curse the world and hate ever being born. Chuuya and Dazai team up to save him but contemplate killing him.

Dazai’s choice not to kill Q is stated to be to save himself, which is probably is, but it’s also symbolic of how Dazai’s saving other people is saving himself (and also ties back to another quote Odasaku liked to repeat from Natsume: “everyone exists to save themselves”).

But Chuuya’s motivation, as I wrote before, is because he’s grieved over the loss of his comrades. Chuuya really cares about people, including Dazai, and the fact that Dazai is actually going to far as to model Atsushi and Akutagawa’s team-up on his team-up with Chuuya pretty strongly implies Dazai doesn’t hate Chuuya as much as he says he does. To be able to truly leave the mafia, he has to make peace with those relationships there. It’s part of being honest with himself: like Atsushi, acknowledging the darker shadows, and like Akutagawa, acknowledging the better parts of him too.

At present, Dostoyevsky proves a perfect foil for Dazai, as @linkspooky has written here. They’re the same in a lot of ways, but Dostoyevsky has allowed nihilism and a god complex to completely consume him and is not trying to be human, whereas Dazai still tries to save people and was devastated by Oda’s death. Dostoyevsky’s ability, whatever it was, works by touching someone like Dazai’s, but since Dazai’s No Longer Human negates another’s abilities, Dazai is the only person on which Fyodor’s ability will not work, making them the perfect counters for each other. Dostoyevsky is what Dazai could be if his feelings of alienation from human society (a prominent theme in the real life Dostoyevsky’s works) were taken to their utmost extreme, and so it’d be fitting for him to ultimately defeat Fyodor through the relationships he does have (including Atsushi and Akutagawa).

To return to Odasaku, Odasaku is also kind of a warning to Dazai as much as he is a man Dazai wants to become like. When Odasaku lost the orphans under his care, he fell into complete despair and knowingly embarked on a suicide mission to do what Mori wanted him to. Still, Dazai tried to save him. He wasn’t able to save his life, but Odasaku’s death saved Dazai. Yet it’s potentially concerning that Mori used Odasaku’s human connections to engineer his downfall, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Mori uses Dazai’s to try to engineer his downfall later on (like, way, way on).

The difference is that Dazai is a good foil to Mori, too, in understanding what makes people tick and always thinking several moves ahead. Mori groomed Dazai from the age of like fourteen (or younger) to be his successor in the mafia, manipulating his suicidal tendencies and hopelessness to get what Mori wanted from him. It’s telling that the earliest we have of Dazai is him with Mori, in that Mori instead of caring for a suicidal patient decided to take him along to murder the mafia’s boss and induct him into the mafia thereby. The thing about Jungian stories is that there are often some Oedipal tendencies to them--like, for example, a character needs to overcome/break away from completely/kill their father. I can see Dazai at some point having to overcome Mori and his influence to cement his arc, but that’s highly speculative (yet fits with Mori’s build up as a villain), so we’ll see.

#bsd meta #bungou stray dogs #soukoku #dazai osamu #shin soukoku #akutagawa ryunosuke #nakajima atsushi #oda sakunosuke #mori ougai #fyodor dostoyevsky #izumi kyouka #nakahara chuuya #bsd theory

605 notes · View notes

newamsterdame · 6 years

Note

Hey, I saw the other anon question and read the link, and I think ppl say that mitsuki is abusive bc of what she said, I mean, Endeavor was an physical and mentally abuser, but more on the physical part which lead to mental, but mitsuki is more mental “you were kidnaped bc you’re weak!” And sometimes physical (but thats more motherly style). I think that’s what the fandom thinks/is trying to say.. idk, what are your thoughts on this?

my thought is that i think fandom is wrong.

a very simplistic definition of abuse is “to treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly.” abuse entails systemic mistreatment, for the purpose of exerting and maintaining control over the victim. it, while tragically pervasive, has a specific definition, and expanding that or conflating every instance of meanness with it is damaging to the work done by defining the concept itself.

emotional abuse, more specifically, can be defined as “any act including confinement, isolation, verbal assault, humiliation, intimidation, infantilization, or any other treatment which may diminish the sense of identity, dignity, and self-worth.” the purpose of the act is important here– it is meant to break the victim down and effectively keep them under the abuser’s control and domination.

so what was mitsuki’s purpose in telling bakugou that because he was weak and got kidnapped, he was causing everyone all sorts of trouble?

here’s where you need to stay with me for a moment. it’s a bit of a gag that mitsuki is exactly like katsuki– her appearance, her mannerisms, her language. but while it’s amusing, it’s also a brilliant piece of characterization. mitsuki is nearly exactly like katsuki. she understands her son, and her own role his emotional issues. and in the brief appearance she makes in the series, she does something very, very important.

mitsuki is rough-mannered, easily-agitated, and explosive, just like her son. but she also has moments of incredible insight, and knows that, following kamino ward, she cannot help her son. he’s been kidnapped, his hero has been destroyed and he thinks it’s his fault. and mitsuki is not equipped to see him through those issues, because she simply isn’t in a position to do so.

so she turns him over to two people– one teacher who went on national television to defend bakugou’s character, and the other who lost everything in defending bakugou. one person who believes in him wholeheartedly, and another whom he believes in just as much.

mitsuki communicates much like bakugou does– through insults, yelling, and physicality. but she can also slow down, change gears, and be more deliberate and thoughtful in her approach. she can also be genuinely sweet and affectionate– the way she deals with masaru and katsuki, in different ways, shows this. so while mitsuki is much like her son, she’s also more mature than him, and better able to deal with her own emotions. she isn’t dealing with the complexes and insecurities that bakugou is struggling with.

so yeah, she says getting kidnapped was because he was weak, and calls him a useless brat. those things, taken in isolation, could be hurtful and damaging. but bakugou isn’t scared of mitsuki– he isn’t cowed by her, or under her control. he gives as good as he gets– she calls him a brat, he calls her a hag. masaru stands to the side as an ineffective moderator. but mitsuki and katsuki are pretty even, in their interactions. this isn’t a display of a gross power disparity.

my read is that she says those things to bakugou the way she does because that is how they both communicate. she says it’s bakugou’s fault that he got kidnapped, not because she necessarily thinks so, but because that’s what bakugou is currently dealing with. he thinks it’s his fault that he was kidnapped and all might was destroyed as a result. mitsuki is telling bakugou she understands, and more importantly she’s cluing both the teachers and the audience in on what will be bakugou’s biggest emotional trial going forward.

she may be crass and blunt in her approach, but she’s trying to help her son.

essentially, she tells aizawa and all might– “here is my son. he’s been praised too much in his life, to the point where it’s made his psyche weak and volatile, and i may be a part of that. i can’t help him deal with what’s happened to him. i’m asking you to help him where i can’t.”

most pivotally here for the “abuse” debate– she relinquishes control. she gives her son over to people who are better equipped to help him through his struggles. if she were being abusive, her insults and physical jabs would be for the purpose of tearing katsuki down and maintaining control over him. but she’s doing precisely the opposite here– she’s reaching out to him in the way he understands (maybe also the way she’s best able to communicate), and then putting him in the best position she can for him to heal and become stronger, to develop as a person and a hero.

that’s not abuse. that’s actually really good, selfless parenting. you may disagree with her manner and approach, but bakugou would never have been able to move forward at this point in canon without this intervention from his parents, especially mitsuki. he’s a well-loved kid. that was never his problem. mitsuki understands that, and also provides a mirror for what bakugou could be in the future– same personality, better ability to understand himself and others. i hope he gets there someday.

#bnha meta #quality reply blog #abuse mention ///#bakugou katsuki #bakugou mitsuki #boku no hero academia #animanga

1K notes · View notes