#^ And no he's not a psychopath! He /can/ form meaningful connections with others and get attached to a select few people

[doumadono]

DOUMA - PSYCHOLOGICAL PORTRAIT

MASTERLIST

Douma is a complex character with multiple psychological issues. As a demon, he has lived for over a century, giving him a unique perspective on life and the world. He is highly intelligent and possesses a charismatic and approachable air, which allows him to manipulate and control others easily. He is also a skilled cult leader, able to sway his followers to do his bidding without question.

However, beneath his charming façade lies a psychopathic individual who enjoys the suffering of others. He ruthlessly murders and devours his followers and young women, believing that he is saving them from their suffering by letting them "live" inside his body. This suggests that he has a distorted view of reality and a lack of empathy for others, two key characteristics of psychopathy.

Furthermore, Douma possesses a superiority complex towards humans, viewing them as inferior beings. He finds them pathetic and stupid, which may be a result of his prolonged exposure to humans throughout his life. Psychopaths may have a grandiose sense of self-importance and believe that they are superior to others. They may view themselves as special and deserving of admiration and respect. This can manifest in behaviors such as talking down to others, belittling them, and taking credit for their accomplishments. Psychopaths may perceive other people as inferior and lacking in intelligence or other desirable traits. They may see themselves as more intelligent, charming, and manipulative than others, which can contribute to their sense of superiority.

Despite his innate apathy, Douma possesses an extremely keen intellect, which may be why he looks down on humans and believes that they are pathetic and stupid. Psychopaths can have keen intellects, and some may even possess above-average intelligence. However, their cognitive abilities are often focused on manipulative and self-serving purposes rather than empathy, altruism, or other prosocial behaviors.

He is also masochistic and has a high pain tolerance, comparable to congenital analgesia. For a psychopath, this behavior may stem from a lack of emotional sensitivity, as they may have difficulty experiencing emotions that would typically prevent someone from seeking out or enjoying pain. This behavior can also be a way for a psychopath to feel a sense of control or power over themselves and others, as they may not experience the same fear or anxiety that someone without their condition would feel in such a situation. In the case of Douma, his masochistic pain tolerance is tied to his apathy and psychopathic tendencies, as he seems to find pleasure in self-harm and other forms of physical discomfort.

Another thing is narcissism. Narcissism is a personality trait that is often associated with psychopathy. Psychopathy is a disorder characterized by a lack of empathy and a disregard for the rights and feelings of others. Narcissism make it difficult for individuals with psychopathy to form meaningful relationships with others. They may be unable to understand or empathize with the needs and feelings of others, which can lead to a lack of intimacy and connection in their relationships. This can further exacerbate their feelings of isolation and detachment from others. One good example of Douma's narcissism is seen in the scene where he speaks to Akaza as if they were close friends, despite the fact that Akaza had previously made it clear that he wanted no contact with Douma and despite the fact that Douma hit him twice. Douma's narcissistic tendencies lead him to believe that he is so charming and charismatic that he can win anyone over, regardless of their initial feelings towards him.

One final aspect of Douma's psychology is his love of beauty and aesthetics. He sees himself as a connoisseur of beauty, and he takes pleasure in creating works of art out of his victims' suffering. This suggests that Douma may see his sadistic tendencies as a form of artistry. Psychopaths may be drawn to beauty as a means of manipulation or control. They may use their appreciation of beauty to charm and impress others, giving them a false sense of trust and security. Additionally, psychopaths may use their own physical appearance as a means of exerting power over others. They may view their own attractiveness as a tool to be used in achieving their own desires, rather than as something to be valued in and of itself.

Overall, Douma's psychological profile suggests that he is a highly dangerous and unstable individual. His sadism, narcissism, and manipulative nature all contribute to his ability to cause harm to others, and his lack of empathy makes him particularly dangerous. His character serves as an example of the ways in which individuals with certain psychological traits can become a threat to those around them.

requested by @crystalwolfblog

#douma #doma #kny doma #kny douma #kimetsu no yaiba #demon slayer #kimetsu no yaiba douma #douma headcanons #upper moon two

[metvmorqhoses]

Although I wasn’t expecting a completely faithful adaptation, since it is just that—an adaptation. I was expecting at least a coherent narrative that followed what season 1 gave us. Even though s1 diverged from the books particularly in terms of characterization it wasn’t something I was upset about since Ben and Jesse’s versions still had substance and incredible chemistry. This season hurt because the bad writing had Ben doing his best to salvage Darkling in his acting choices alone, all while Jesse’s Alina was completely stripped of nuance. It was such a strange choice the way the writers handled their relationship since bad writing aside, their scenes were still intriguing just based off their on screen chemistry alone. Which is why it was such a disappointment that instead of utilizing that, along with book canon to create a complex and enthralling mutual connection we instead got…this lol A big thing was always how despite their fundamental differences, they understood each other. I could see Ben’s Darkling trying to emphasize that part but when you have Alina absolutely not having it, it just comes off as pathetic on his part, which is what the writers wanted I suppose. I would say the ending is hopeful that this isn’t the end for them and a way for Alina to bring Darkling back but if the writing is anything like this season then that might just be wishful thinking.

Not being fond of the books, I didn't particularly care about plot faithfulness either. The real, terrible problem is that the dynamics and the characters' être weren't respected in the slightest, everything meaningful stripped of nuance and complexity for no apparent reason if not a huge dumb woke flex.

The crux of this disaster resides in the fact the writers seem to have completely forgotten (and I too was absolutely astonished by this, because in season one it absolutely wasn't the case) that actual human beings don't feel in black and white and half a dimension, at least not the ones without psychopathologies? And I swear that everyone but the Darkling and maybe one or two Crows this season acted like unfeeling robots or caricatures of themselves with a plot task to complete.

You know, as not fond of the concept as I am (since I don't really think the Darkling to be the villain of the story or so guilty of everything he is angrily accused of by the supposed "heroes"), they could have totally pulled off the darkest and most twisted interpretation of him imaginable and still respect his character and dynamic with Alina, since love, core understanding, admiration, hatred, violation and betrayal are not mutually exclusive and can actually be felt at the same time.

One splendid example of it is The Great. I don't know if you are familiar with the show, but it is the epitome of enemies to lovers to enemies to lovers and the things the two protagonists do to each other are way worse than anything the Darkling has ever done to Alina, but the deep connection between them is never denied, cannot be denied, no matter the terrible actions they inflict upon each other.

Alina could have been convinced the Darkling didn't deserve to live (no matter how fairly or unfairly), she could have decided to kill him and still recognize their unique connection, the nameless thing she feels, the deep affinities they share, maybe even be scared of it all, maybe even wishing none of it was there, but without outright denying what they fed us for the entirety of season one just out of a minor deception, appearing nothing but a petulant, close-minded child. Not only this made Aleksander appear as a delusional, desperate, weak stalker, but it made Alina honestly appear a dumb idiot without a single brain cell, if not an outright psychopath.

Not feeling any form of emotion or compassion for someone you had romantic feelings for (feelings she was even forgetting her great love Mal for, just saying) just ten minutes prior is not badass behaviour, is just not normal. Hell, not showing any emotion or compassion for a human being who is trying to show you an abyss of sorrow (that you are destined to share by the way) is not normal, not even in terms of old-fashioned villain/hero dynamics. Usually the hero is the one to have pity for the villain, the one with the moral high ground. Here not only this isn't the case when the two are balances of each other, connected cosmically and previous lovers, but basic human decency is also completely dismissed and Aleksander is the only one to show any.

I am as astonished as you by all this. I hope this whole season was in truth Alina's slow descent into madness, her power corrupting her from the start. I hope this is the reason they chose to feed us this soulless drivel, it's honestly the only way they could redeem the series at all, but who knows at this point.

#darklina #the darkling #alina starkov #shadow and bone #shadow and bone s2 #anon #asks/replies #one and one thousand stories lis told #the grisha trilogy

[gcthvile]

Jesse Thompson

Name: Jesse Thompson

Age: 25

Date of Birth: September 15th

Appearance: Jesse is of average height with curly dark hair. His eyes are dark, almost black and often appear distant and detached. He dresses haphazardly, often wearing mismatched clothes that are worn and frayed. His overall appearance gives off a disheveled and unstable vibe.

Jesse's troubled childhood and traumatic experiences have contributed to his unstable mental state. He grew up in an abusive household and faced neglect and emotional turmoil. These early experiences shaped his perspective and led to his current state of mind.

Jesse's mental instability manifests in his delusional mind. He struggles to see the consequences of his actions and often believes he is not in the wrong. He is prone to erratic behavior, mood swings, and intense paranoia. His delusions lead him to believe that he is being targeted or watched by unseen forces. Jesse is motivated by his desire to prove to himself and others that he is not entirely defined by his mental illnesses. He longs for acceptance and understanding.

Despite his mental issues, Jesse possesses a sharp intellect and can be quite resourceful when focused. He has a strong sense of empathy and can connect with others who have experienced similar struggle, but his mental instability is also a significant weakness. His delusions and lack of self-awareness often lead him into dangerous situations. He struggles with trust and forming meaningful relationships due to his belief that others are out to harm him.

Jesse's main fault lies in his inability to recognize and take responsibility for his actions. He is often blinded by his delusions and fails to see the harm he may cause to others. Has a unique ability to see patterns and connections that others might overlook. This allows him to uncover hidden details and make unexpected connections in various situations.

Jesse often talks to himself, engaging in conversations with imaginary people. He also has a habit of collecting random objects that he believes hold significant meaning, finds solace in music and often listens to melancholic tunes. He enjoys spending time in nature, finding it calming and therapeutic.

His personal views are heavily influenced by his delusions. He often sees himself as a victim and believes that the world is conspiring against him. He struggles with trust and has a cynical view of authority figures.

Additional fact: Jesse's tone of voice is quiet, often speaking in hushed whispers or in a guarded manner. He rarely reveals his true thoughts and intentions, keeping his inner turmoil hidden from others.

Hope y'all like my lil psychopath <3

@msrochelleromanofffelton @hanlueluver @blueboirick @meiramel @jackiequick

#oc post #oc rp #oc introduction #oc rpg

[pet-genius]

The Death Eaters as a Cult - Part 1

This is a very lightly edited old Reddit post, that I'll publish in parts because the whole thing is like 7000 words. Analyzing Voldemort, the DE and their dynamics, Dumbledore and Harry in comparison, and individual Death Eaters. Hope you like it!

Some say Voldemort is a cartoon villain, or wizard Hitler. I think he is very realistic, and that the focus on his political aspirations ignores interesting aspects of him. I cannot prove that JKR had cults in mind when she wrote Voldemort and his followers, but this is how I read them. It’s nearly impossible to define a cult, so, for the purpose hereof, I’m going with “a group dedicated to the worship of a person”. Many cult leaders in real life present themselves merely as “god’s voice” or “the messiah”, but Voldemort specifically didn’t bother to hide behind a power higher than himself.

Tom Riddle comes from humble beginnings, like many cult leaders - he’s raised in an orphanage. He already has delusions of grandeur, only in this case they’re not delusions, because he really is magic, which makes it all the more dangerous. Look how he reacted to discovering he was a wizard, and how Harry did.

Immediately following the revelation that Lily and James did not die in a car crash, and that Harry is famous, and that he survived an attempt at his life by the worst wizard in history:

Hagrid looked at Harry with warmth and respect blazing in his eyes, but Harry, instead of feeling pleased and proud, felt quite sure there had been a horrible mistake. A wizard? Him? How could he possibly be? He’d spent his life being clouted by Dudley, and bullied by Aunt Petunia and Uncle Vernon; if he was really a wizard, why hadn’t they been turned into warty toads every time they’d tried to lock him in his cupboard? If he’d once defeated the greatest sorcerer in the world, how come Dudley had always been able to kick him around like a football?

“Hagrid,” he said quietly, “I think you must have made a mistake. I don’t think I can be a wizard.”

Heart-breaking. Harry doesn’t believe he can be special, he blames himself for the way he’s treated.

This is Tom Riddle:

“I know that you are not mad. Hogwarts is not a school for mad people. It is a school of magic.”

There was silence. Riddle had frozen, his face expressionless, but his eyes were flickering back and forth between each of Dumbledore’s, as though trying to catch one of them lying. “Magic?” he repeated in a whisper.

“That’s right,” said Dumbledore.

“It’s... it’s magic, what I can do?”

“What is it that you can do?”

“All sorts,” breathed Riddle. A flush of excitement was rising up his neck into his hollow cheeks; he looked fevered. “I can make things move without touching them. I can make animals do what I want them to do, without training them. I can make bad things happen to people who annoy me. I can make them hurt if I want to.”

His legs were trembling. He stumbled forward and sat down on the bed again, staring at his hands, his head bowed as though in prayer.

“I knew I was different,” he whispered to his own quivering fingers. “I knew I was special. Always, I knew there was something.”

His megalomania and violent nature are already apparent, as is his preternatural control of his magic. It also hints at rudimentary legilimency.

Dumbledore spells out that young Tom Riddle equated magic with immortality and liked to collect trophies, and that Tom Riddle liked being special, as he resents the name Tom for being too common; he already lives behind a mask and only shows his true face in shock. This, and not Dumbledore’s magical prowess, is what always scared Tom. Voldemort knew Dumbledore knew what he was. That was the only tactical advantage Dumbledore had.

It’s also one of JKR’s strokes of brilliance: Dumbledore saw Tom for what Tom was, and others never did until it was too late, not because he was that clever, but because he knew from experience. Dumbledore had allowed himself to fall for a charismatic but heartless man before, and it took Ariana dying to slap him awake. Dumbledore knows good people can be led astray: It happened to him. It has nothing to do with intelligence or “goodness”. Gellert was able to give Albus exactly what Albus lacked, stuck at home taking care of Ariana: the promise of freedom and a bright future, and the companionship of an equal. Albus fell for it, despite warning signs that should have been obvious.

Later, we know Tom is chosen by a wand of yew and phoenix feather. Both yew and phoenix are associated with immortality; yew trees are very long-lived. Compare this to Harry’s wand, holly and phoenix feather: both these characters will experience death and rebirth, except Tom Riddle’s wand tree is yew, and Harry’s is holly.

From Wikipedia: “The Christian church commonly found it expedient to take over existing pre-Christian sacred sites for churches. It has also been suggested that yews were planted at religious sites as their long life was suggestive of eternity, or because, being toxic when ingested, they were seen as trees of death.” Also from Wikipedia: “Christians have identified a wealth of symbolism in the holly tree’s form. The sharpness of the leaves help to recall the crown of thorns worn by Jesus; the red berries serve as a reminder of the drops of blood that were shed for salvation; and the shape of the leaves, which resemble flames, can serve to reveal God's burning love for His people.”

The two orphans’ wildly different views of death are also apparent in their wand trees. Voldemort will murder to attain his goals; Harry will sacrifice himself. That the phoenix feather came from Fawkes is also meaningful - Dumbledore taught both magic in some capacity, but he never could defeat Voldemort, because they’re too alike. One of Harry’s advantages in this battle is the integrity of his soul, which cannot be compromised.

Next, Tom Riddle is sorted into Slytherin. For a child who is already prone to megalomania, the house values bring out the worst in him, and under Slughorn, he grows into a manipulative, cunning, ruthless young man. I’m not blaming Horace for Tom being a psychopath, but some of the particular ways his psychopathy manifested in seem to have been directly due to Slughorn’s influence. Slughorn is a blood-supremacist, who was convinced Tom must come from fine stock. Slughorn tests drinks for poison using house elves; Tom Riddle tests the effectiveness of his Horcrux’s protection on Kreacher. Slughorn emphasizes the importance of connections and outright praises Tom for knowing more than he needs to, and encourages an attitude of “it’s only wrong if you get caught.” But Slughorn, prejudiced and cunning as he is, is not violent - he is academically curious about Horcruxes, but he finds them repugnant. Tom’s heart is not so faint - at the point of asking Slughorn about Horcruxes, the diary is already a horcrux, and Tom has already murdered his father. This is how Dumbledore describes Tom’s original gang, who were the proto-Death Eaters:

As he moved up the school, he gathered about him a group of dedicated friends; I call them that, for want of a better term, although as I have already indicated, Riddle undoubtedly felt no affection for any of them. This group had a kind of dark glamour within the castle. They were a motley collection; a mixture of the weak seeking protection, the ambitious seeking some shared glory, and the thuggish gravitating toward a leader who could show them more refined forms of cruelty. In other words, they were the forerunners of the Death Eaters, and indeed some of them became the first Death Eaters after leaving Hogwarts. Rigidly controlled by Riddle, they were never detected in open wrongdoing, although their seven years at Hogwarts were marked by a number of nasty incidents to which they were never satisfactorily linked, the most serious of which was, of course, the opening of the Chamber of Secrets, which resulted in the death of a girl. As you know, Hagrid was wrongly accused of that crime.

Dumbledore explains what motivated people to join Tom: some were afraid, some ambitious, some cruel. He controlled his so-called friends, and already started framing others for his own crimes (Hagrid’s framing was followed by Morfin’s and Hokey the house elf’s).

This is followed by Tom’s attempt to become a teacher (Dumbledore spells out his motivations: He is attached to the school, he wants to study its magic, and he already wants to build himself an army). He is denied, oddly chooses to work for Borgin and Burkes, a choice fueled by the desire to trace down more items to make into Horcruxes. Through the memory of the meeting with Heptzibah Smith, we see that Tom was definitely charming when he needed to be, and knew how to make people feel good. He did not use magic to trick her into showing him her precious locket and cup: he used muggle manipulation - flattery, making an old and forlorn lady feel valuable, perhaps even flirting with her (she’s certainly flirting with him). He was pleasant enough that Ms. Smith eagerly looked forward to his visits - but as she showed him her treasures, he was caught off guard by hearing about his mother and how she sold the locket, and she saw him for what he was, although she quickly fell into denial. Sadly, she was murdered two days later.

Why rely on Horcruxes to gain immortality? Tom must have known about Nicholas Flamel and the Philosopher’s Stone, and the Horcruxes require someone else to perform the resurrection ritual. Either making the Stone is so hard that it would deter Tom (unlikely), or he already expected to rely on followers who would find him and revive him - he certainly seems to have expected his followers to have searched for him earlier. Maybe Horcruxes were appealing because they require murder. In any case, this is followed by the memory of Tom asking Dumbledore for the DADA job again, a decade later. Tom has spent a decade gathering followers, and he has already changed his name to Lord Voldemort. This is reminiscent of real life cult leader David Koresh, and the leaders of the Children of God, Aum Shinrikyo, etc. The meeting between Voldemort and Albus is interesting, because it’s clear that Dumbledore had tried to teach Tom about the power of love:

“The old argument,” he said softly. “But nothing I have seen in the world has supported your famous pronouncements that love is more powerful than my kind of magic, Dumbledore.”

“Perhaps you have been looking in the wrong places,” suggested Dumbledore.

This did not help. Tom never learned - how could he? At 16, he was already a murderer - who could love him now for who he was? He could never be truly loved, and he could never truly love another, and he underestimated the power of love for his entire life, leading to his downfall - twice (were that it was so simple in real life).

Voldemort is trying to obfuscate the nature of the relationship, like all cults - they never admit this is what they are.

“I am glad to hear that you consider them friends,” said Dumbledore. “I was under the impression that they are more in the order of servants.”

“You are mistaken,” said Voldemort.

But LV can’t lie to Dumbledore, who changes the subject. He denies him the DADA job again, and the curse is placed on the job. LV’s ascent is due to begin in a few years. Hagrid tells the story:

Anyway, this — this wizard, about twenty years ago now, started lookin’ fer followers. Got ’em, too — some were afraid, some just wanted a bit o’ his power, ’cause he was gettin’ himself power, all right. Dark days, Harry. Didn’t know who ter trust, didn’t dare get friendly with strange wizards or witches...

Voldemort isn’t just interested in immortality. He wants complete control. He wants everyone fearing him - even fearing his name. He has people isolated and distrustful, fearing for their lives.

But we know his reign of terror was dreadful - what I’m interested in is the way he treated his own followers. We know little about how he treated them in the first war, but we do have what Sirius had to say about Regulus’s fate:

From what I found out after he died, he got in so far, then panicked about what he was being asked to do and tried to back out. Well, you don’t just hand in your resignation to Voldemort. It’s a lifetime of service or death.

We know the real story of Regulus’s disappearance, and it’s different. Kreacher tells us that Regulus died in the Horcrux cave - but more telling is that Regulus forbade Kreacher from telling his parents what had happened to him. Why did he feel the need to do that? This suggests that Regulus knew LV destroyed traitors’ families, which is a tactic used in cults and other abusive dynamics. We know LV would leverage Draco’s welfare against Lucius for his failure in the Department of Mysteries, too. We know also that instead of going to Dumbledore, or to his own brother, Regulus chose death – unless he was really dumb, and I don’t think he was, he must have been manipulated into believing that was his only option, or his world made no sense after his faith had shattered. So many people never readjust to life outside the cult.

Voldemort “dies” about two years after that, having successfully recruited about 400 followers (“the death eaters outnumbered us the Order 20:1” - Lupin). We can’t say if all these people were genuine Death Eaters or people who had been Imperiused or otherwise coerced, or allies like Narcissa, but that coercion is used to recruit shows that Voldemort did not take his own followers’ ambitions and wishes into account. People who use outright coercion don't suddenly draw the line at manipulation.

#death eaters #cult #death eater meta #voldemort #voldemort meta #harry potter #meta

[thefandomlesbian]

okay I DEFINITELY want to see you rank your favorite BAU characters

oh boy oh boy oh boy i’m TOAST--

1.) Emily Prentiss: This woman was my gay awakening and I’m still madly in love with her. All of my original works when I was in middle school featured a character who was basically Emily Prentiss under a different name, and she still is easily in my second favorite fictional character of all time. 

2.) Spencer Reid: Spencer was the first character I ever saw on screen who loved learning as much as I did and made me realize there’s no shame in being intelligent or in craving knowledge. I’ve been compared to Spencer since my family first started watching the show when I was a kid, and we share a name, so that’s that.

3.) Aaron Hotchner: I projected all of my insecurities onto Hotch when I was a kid. When I watched his relationship with Haley fall apart on screen, I felt that in my very bones. I cried with him upon her death and raised Jack with him and even though I was long out of the fandom when TG was fired, I was still devastated to hear that he was being forced to leave. His ship with Reid was the first gay ship I ever connected to, and together, they were the first characters to ever teach me that people are gay and it’s okay. The one thing I do dislike about Hotch is how he’s implied to be wickedly intelligent, but it never gets, like, followed through with? The implication that he graduated law school at nineteen or twenty asserts that this man graduated high school when he was sixteen or younger, that he sped through undergrad and was able to get accepted into one of the most prestigious law schools in the country and graduated early and was an incredibly successful lawyer and prosecutor. He worked personal security, SWAT, he did a stent in Seattle, before he became leader of the BAU at twenty-seven years old. Hotch is, in all likelihood, a child prodigy of his own right, and it never gets mentioned because Spencer’s academic accomplishments are more impressive (and I could take this space to do a whole character study on why I think Hotch stopped his pursuit of academia, but I won’t waste my own time, lol). 

4.) Elle Greenaway/Alex Blake: I love both of these ladies so I had to include them. Elle was done dirty by the canon and I adored her work in season one and the unique sensitivity she brought to the field when the BAU was still, as one unsub described it, “a boy’s club.” Alex took a little longer to grow on me (mostly because I was super bitter about Emily being gone that I didn’t want to like her), but the relationship she nurtured with Spencer was like no other, and her submitting her resignation to him instead of her direct superior gets me in the feels every time I watch it. 

5.) Erin Strauss: Strauss is another character done wrong by the canon, and I’m so furious and bitter for her still. I loved watching her grow from a stern politician into someone who genuinely cared about the BAU as part of her family and would do anything to protect them. It was true character development that she went from trying to come for Hotch’s job in season two to deliberately fabricating paperwork to try to catch the Replicator in season eight, the latter which she did without informing anyone because she knew it could put them in danger. Watching her grow close to the team, watching Alex forgive her for her transgressions and become bonded with Rossi and Hotch, I really thought we were going to have an awesome thing going in later seasons, and I was devastated when I saw that it was all poorly written build up just so the writers could snatch the rug out from under us when they killed her off. She gave her life to protect the BAU and I’m going to work to redeem her character in my pieces. (This is an Erin Strauss AND Haley Hotchner defense blog, leave my ladies alone.) 

6.) Dave Rossi: I sometimes take issue with Rossi’s character because he can be so damn arrogant and in early seasons seems to think he’s God’s gift to profiling, but I’m so fond of him for his nurturing relationship with the other characters. He doesn’t believe himself to have any family (of course we find out later he has a daughter, but besides that) so he takes it upon himself to make himself the father of the team. We see this dynamic with Emily and Spencer the most, with Morgan to some degree, with Ashley Seaver a lot (one of the only things I loved about Seaver’s presence in S6), and even with Jack’s little league team. Rossi who will do anything and everything for his team because those are his kids, dammit. 

7.) Penelope Garcia: Penelope is my little ray of sunshine! I love sweet and special headcanons about her and how she keeps up with the team and brings joy to their lives. We share a love for cats, and her origin story always makes me chuckle, especially the opening scene where she says, “I am a psychopath,” and Hotch says, “No, you’re not.” Her relationship with Morgan brings me joy, though I’m still frustrated with the canon for not following through on that and making it “just talk.” I also disliked how canon handled her relationship with Kevin. I love Penelope as a character, but there were some moments that I thought were not written very well for her which is why she isn’t higher up on the list.

8.) Jason Gideon: I know it’s popular to drag Gideon in this fandom, but I like him a lot, and I think his downfall played into the team very well in the end when it led to Rossi’s joining the team. He had some of my favorite moments, especially when he chose to save the school children rather than apprehend Frank (I like to imagine what the other characters would have done in his shoes if Frank had fixated on them instead) and when he saved Billie Copeland while everyone else was prepared to throw in the towel. I like his dynamic with the team and how they (other than Spencer) lose faith in him from the pilot and then gain it back slowly. I enjoy how he interacts with Spencer and teaches him things on screen. I do take issue with his allowing Spencer to view him as a father figure when he knows that that is what Spencer desperately needs and I think Gideon, as compassionate as he is, can be unintentionally manipulative and quite harmful. Still, I think he’s a very intriguing character and I regret we didn’t get more of him. 

9.) JJ: It’s not that I dislike JJ actively (though if you had asked me ten years ago, I probably would’ve said I did). I find JJ’s character incredibly difficult to relate to because, much like I mentioned with Penelope above, she is a victim of bad writing. Unlike Penelope, JJ’s bad writing is damn near ubiquitous from the time Henry is born until the end of the show. She can’t be in a scene with a victim or a family member without bringing up her family, and every time she shows her actual personality, it gets followed up with, “I’m also a mom!” I don’t relate to women whose entire lives revolve around their children, so finding any common ground with me and JJ is extraordinarily difficult. More than that, I abhor her relationship with Will and how Will was allowed to treat her so incredibly poorly and not only does the fandom worship him and never call him out--the writers acted like JJ was in the wrong. It drives me absolutely insane that Will and Haley treated their partners in the exact same way, their character arcs line up almost perfectly, but Will winds up happily married to JJ with two kids and Haley gets to bleed out on the floor of her own home while her husband clutches her dead body and weeps. This storyline is just part of the misogyny in the Criminal Minds canon, and though I like JJ, I have a hard time seeing past all of it to form a good bond with her. Fanon JJ > Canon JJ. 

10.) Derek Morgan: Derek is a character who I think had a lot of wasted potential. He’s the expert on obsessional crimes--never mentioned again. He’s the expert on explosives--mentioned two or three times. Chicago PD? We never get any information as to how he went from PD to FBI. Derek is such a wildly intelligent man, we know that, but much like Hotch, his intelligent gets forgotten in exchange for Spencer to exposit at random, except his is even more pronounced than Hotch’s. After the first few seasons, the writers just treated him like the brawn of the BAU with no other expertise or presence, and I hate that for him--it was such a criminal injustice against his character. Unlike JJ, I do love Derek (my feelings for JJ are generally neutral leaning toward positive--I adore Derek Morgan) but the writers did him so dirty. I don’t like his relationship with Savannah at all. As a CSA survivor, his whole CSA storyline generally bugs the hell out of me because it only gets mentioned when the writers want to go boohoo Derek has trust issues or have an excuse to say “hurrdurr buff guy hates pedophiles” and he’s never shown having any meaningful struggle with his trauma (can be said of most of the trauma in the show) or having any character development (he’s often criticized for not trusting the team as much as he should but he never grows from it). Derek is a character I’m very protective of, but as much as I love his relationships with Spencer, Penelope, and Emily, I just can’t defend the ways the writers let him down so grievously. 

#emily prentiss #aaron hotchner #spencer reid #derek morgan #dave rossi #penelope garcia #jennifer jareau #alex blake #erin strauss #elle greenaway #jason gideon #criminal Minds

[theshapeofhorror]

Reasons why I have conflicting feelings about Halloween 2 - The elementary school scene

Halloween 2 in general has some scenes / plotlines / writing directions that I really do not care for, but the one that stands out to me the most apart from what they did with Laurie Strode as a character and the sibling plotline is the elementary school / Samhain scene.

I honestly think this scene is an absolute trainwreck and does neither the character of Michael nor the subtle writing of the first movie any justice, and I also feel like the crazy direction they went in with the thorn trilogy (Halloween 4 -6) originated here. (To be clear, I don’t actually hate those movies. Halloween 4 and 6 I actually consider to be good / decent entries of the franchise! I do believe though that the overall direction they took with Michael as a character wasn’t the best one, and that 2018 did well in “rebooting” him.)

One of the best aspects of Halloween (1978) is that Michael Myers as a character is left very vague and ambiguous. The viewer can form their own opinion about whether they want to read him as a psychopathic but human serial / spree killer, a supernatural force of evil or something in between - all three options could be argued for based on evidence from the movie. Yes, we have Loomis who tells us that Michael is ‘simply evil’, that he has no conscience and so on, but it’s still up to us if we want to believe that or not because the movie also gives us enough reason to question the validity of Loomis’ words. 

We don’t have to take Michael as an inhuman force of evil at face value; it’s just an option presented to us. 

And that brings me to my main issue with this garbage fire of a scene.

It’s Michael himself who engages with the idea of him being supernatural here. It’s Michael breaking into the school and putting the knife through the child’s drawing (also, is that supposed to be his own drawing or is it just a random family portrait he found in the classroom? So many questions..) and writing Samhain on the blackboard, putting these two things into correlation with each other. We can’t really take this reading of him being connected to Samhain as an option because it’s Michael himself who hints at / confirms (however you want to read this scene) this connection.

Now I do want to say that for a while I was trying really hard to convince myself that this scene is way smarter than it actually is. Imagine Michael knew about Loomis’ interest in the occult that we learn about in this movie. It would fit with his characterisation if he then played with Loomis’ fear of him being “driven by a force” as he states in this movie, if he wrote Samhain on that blackboard exactly because he knew Loomis already believed in that. Alternatively he could have done this whole breaking and entering thing to keep Loomis busy while he goes after Laurie. Even if that was the intention behind that scene, it’s still stupid - and also only works because Loomis then ends up running into nurse Chambers and the marshall, which Michael couldn’t know would happen.

I don’t think it would fit Michael’s characterisation all that well if the movie wants me to believe he did that as a distraction - Michael honestly hasn’t given a visible fuck about Loomis or the police being around, neither in Halloween 1978 nor in this one. In one scene we even see him walking straight on to the hospital on the sidewalk while a police car passes him by. In Halloween he knew all along Loomis was looking for him in Haddonfield and still decided to stay and start killing there when he could have gone anyhwere else. Yes, he does slash the car tires outside the hospital and cuts the phone lines, but those are all measures to keep Laurie from leaving the hospital.

If we are supposed to take this scene at face value, telling us about Michael’s connection to Samhain, it’s honestly just... useless? It fills no narrative purpose. We already link Michael to the supernatural! We see the ending of Halloween 1978 play out again at the start of this movie and follow Michael via POV scene as he stands up and walks away completely unhindered by his wounds after getting shot ‘in the heart’ as Loomis says! There were already subtle hints about Michael being linked to October 31st, simply because both times he started killing happened to be on that date. The only new thing this scene tells us specifically is that Michael’s supernatural side is linked to the idea of Samhain, not to some other unspecified force of evil.

And here’s where it gets really confusing to me and why I have to say that no matter what way we were supposed to read the elementary school scene, it ends up being stupid and narratively useless anyway: Loomis himself directly questions / contradicts this connection less than ten minutes later into the movie.

Before nurse Chambers can tell Loomis about the connection between Laurie and Michael Loomis launches into a rant about “the spirit of Samhain” and the nature of evil:

“Samhain isn’t evil spirits. It isn’t goblins, ghosts or witches. It’s the unconscious mind. We’re all afraid of the dark inside ourselves.”

I have to admit, I really don’t understand where the movie is going with this. We know for a fact there’s more to Michael than him being ‘just human’; humans don’t stand up after getting shot in the heart. We see him sustain even more injuries that he walks away from later in this movie as well. At this point it’s absolutely out of the question that Michael is supposed to be simply human. We can’t read it that way anymore because the movie won’t let us. 

It also puts a huge question mark behind Loomis as a character. He spent two movies telling everyone willing to listen that he knew all along Michael wasn’t human in the least and now that he’s confronted by “evidence” from Michael himself he instead chooses to focus on “the evil in all of us” instead of the supernatural? 

So all in all the elementary / Samhain school scene ends up feeling out of character for Michael to me, it throws the supernatural side to Michael in our face without any of the subtlety that makes this element of the character so intriguing in the first movie, it makes me question where they were going with Loomis in this and most of all, it is narratively useless. 

That is the biggest problem I have with this movie in general: there are several other plot points that end up wasting screentime while being useless / not impacting any of the characters in a meaningful way at all (the sibling plot, the little romance subplot between Laurie and Jimmy, the people of Haddonfield forming a mob around the Myers’ house). However I end up hating the Samhain / elementary school scene / plotline the most out of all of these simply because the sibling plotline has little enough impact to ignore it for the most part and the other two don’t end up interacting with Michael at all, who is honestly the saving grace of this movie.

#halloween #john carpenter's halloween #halloween 2 #halloween 1981 #dick warlock #laurie strode #dr. loomis #john carpenter #rick rosenthal #horror #horror movie #slasher #slasher movie #michael myers #the shape #halloween 2 (1981)

[stevenuniversallyreviews]

Episode 138: Kevin Party

“Did you guys break up? Can seven-year-olds even do that?”

Remember Doug Out?

The 125th episode of Steven Universe is a small but very fun story about Steven Universe and Connie Maheswaran, two best friends who work as a team to solve a mystery. Steven is already a teenager, and if Connie isn’t thirteen yet she’s awful close (she’s twelve and three quarters on Steven’s midsummer birthday, and school has been in session since Mindful Education), but this feels like a pair of children on an adventure. They’re chaperoned by Connie’s dad, they wear silly disguises and use sillier aliases, and they outright say that their goal is to “ruin some teen’s night.”

Doug Out ends in a cliffhanger, which leads directly to Steven’s abduction, which leads directly to Steven’s journey to and escape from Homeworld, which leads directly to the Breakup Arc, which ends here. That’s fourteen consecutive episodes telling one long story, which happens to be the same number of episodes between Catch and Release kicks off Peridot’s conversion and Hit the Diamond ends our barn adventure. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Act II and Act III of Steven Universe have similar sweeping midpoint storylines: both see a radical change occur, and while our middle act’s is more obvious (two new Gems join our crew and Steven saves the dang planet), Act III has the more important development for Steven himself. Because at the beginning of its sweep, Steven and Connie are kids, and at the end, they’re teenagers.

Granted, I see anyone under the age of 25 as a “kid,” but Kevin Party is a distinctly adolescent episode. The Breakup Arc as a whole covers new ground that a typical kid’s show wouldn’t, and even the one episode without much angst for Steven is about a bunch of teens starting a band. But it’s a whole new step to set an episode at a high school party, complete with drinking (age-appropriate drinks, I’m sure) and no adult supervision. 

After five episodes watching Steven either stressing about Connie or working his way through his guilt, it’s wonderful and devastating that when we finally see her again, she's having a blast. Her new look is one thing, but her effortless mingling with strangers is my favorite thing about Kevin Party. This isn’t a new aspect of her personality. She’s probably been like this for a while. But it’s the first time we’re seeing it, because it’s the first time Steven is seeing it.

In Bubble Buddies, Connie started out so shy that she feared dying without making a single friend, while Steven was so gregarious that he couldn’t help befriending everyone he met. Now he’s the awkward one, reduced to asking the likes of Kevin for advice, and she’s bloomed out of that social anxiety. And it’s not just a matter of her friendship with Steven changing her, even though that’s a major inciting incident: after he helps her come out of her shell, she’s able to practice interacting with peers on a regular basis in a scenario that’s way more helpful in understanding normal human interactions than anything in Steven’s life, because Connie goes to school.

There’s an unstated and uncomfortable truth that Connie needs Steven to have access to his magical world, creating an uneven power dynamic that’s easy to ignore because it fits into the general role of how a main character and side character work on a show like this. But Kevin Party‘s biggest reveal is that just because she needs him if she wants to have cosmic adventures, she doesn’t need him to have a fulfilling life, and she doesn’t need his friendship to be happy.

Thank. Goodness.

Codependency isn’t something to aspire to, and while Steven isn’t intentionally possessive of Connie (yet), their fight boils down to him treating her like a sidekick, someone who gets to do magic stuff with him under his terms. We don’t get to see what she was up to during the Breakup Arc, but I’m so glad her laughter here isn’t performative. She has enough self-worth to not define herself by the boy she likes or the adventures they share, and even if she’s upset that they’re in a fight, we know from our first look at her that she’d be okay if they never ended up reconciling. And that makes her choice to reconcile so much stronger than just shoving them back together because they’ve been apart long enough and the status quo demands it. She doesn’t need Steven in her life, but she wants him in her life, and that’s the difference between an episode about Connie remaining a sidekick in Steven’s mind and an episode about Connie establishing herself as an equal.

Steven and Connie’s affection has always bounced between platonic and romantic, and I love that even now we keep it ambiguous. Steven wears the shirt Connie got him in Steven’s Birthday, which is a gesture of friendship but occurs in an episode that dances around their mutual crush (complete with actual dancing). The moment of seeing each other again is shot like running into an ex, with time slowing down to let the absolute horror set in as the rest of the party fades, but Steven still refers to her only as his best friend. Kevin makes some of the subtext text through his confusion over the status of their relationship, but even if they’re teens now, these two are still young enough that don’t know how to express their deeper feelings.

Sadie Killer gets our guard down just long enough that Kevin Party’s new surge of drama hits like a truck: this is the original show’s most direct predecessor to the tone of Steven Universe Future’s latter half, where the anguish of watching Steven flounder in his relationship with Connie comes to a head. He makes the same mistake here that he’ll make in Together Forever: he’s so desperate for advice that he doesn’t question its source. Which is doubly frustrating because Greg Universe, who has told several stories on-screen about navigating a new relationship, is just a phone call away! I’m not saying I wish Steven actually called him, because all teens make mistakes and there’s any number of reasons he wouldn’t want to ask his dad in the moment, but it speaks to Steven’s inability to think straight when it comes to Connie.

In his final appearance, Kevin shows the closest thing he’s got to depth by helping Steven the only way he knows how. And unlike Beach City Drift, where he makes up a tragic backstory just to be a troll, it’s clear that the mysterious Sabine did a number on Delmarva’s biggest jerk. But I’ve got no patience for the notion that this episode is anything near redemptive for a guy whose idea of being helpful involves emotionally manipulating a vulnerable fourteen-year-old boy into emotionally manipulating a vulnerable thirteen-year-old girl.

Here more than ever, Kevin contrasts Steven’s self-destructive selflessness by being a black hole of self-importance. He only cares about Steven inasmuch as Steven can help him be more popular, not even bothering to ask for his name until it serves his needs. He’s so oblivious to his surroundings that he confuses Lion for a dog (saying that he’s allergic to dogs is a somewhat funny joke, but talking up Connie’s new life by saying she has a dog now is hilarious), and goes out of his way to antagonize his guests. To Steven, other people exist to be helped, which has noble roots but is catastrophic for his self-image. To Kevin, other people exist to admire Kevin.

“Psychopath” is a strong word, and I don’t wanna exaggerate Kevin’s villainy because that takes away from what makes him so insidious: unlike the Final Boss feel of the Diamonds, there’s an abundance of regular people who do the same awful stuff that Kevin does, and acting like he’s some extreme case detracts from the mundanity of everyday evils. Moreover, I remain unqualified to be an armchair psychologist, and the Hare Psychopathy Checklist has plenty of valid criticism, so take any diagnosis using it (or really any psych profile that involves a checklist you can do from home) with a grain of salt. But with all that said, I’ll just leave a link to it right here and let y’all do what you will with it.

The Big Talk gets five and a half episodes of buildup, and it doesn’t disappoint. It’s so perfect that Connie’s reaction to negging is to do what she always does when she sees someone behaving badly: she gets mad and calls it out. Steven’s typical approach to unkind behavior is to double down on his friendliness, but Connie will always put her foot down and demand kindness, whether you’re her best friend or a galactic tyrant. New hair aside, Connie isn’t the one that changes over the course of the Breakup Arc: it begins with her making it clear that she’s hurt while Steven ignores her, and it ends with her making it clear that she’s hurt while Steven listens.

I love that Connie requires no prompting to explain why she didn’t text Steven back, because Full Disclosure shows that she understands how much it hurts to try and connect with a friend who won’t respond. I love that she did go back to talk with him in person while he was on vacation (meaning all of this could’ve been worked through way sooner) because adolescence is suffering and we needed one last little twist of the knife in this arc. And I love that Steven is wise enough to just admit what he did instead of try and defend himself, because their whole fight hinged on his refusal to acknowledge the gravity of his actions, both to Connie and to himself. He doesn’t say the word “sorry” until the very end of his admission, because he means it and wants to provide context for the apology rather than just say “I’m sorry” a bunch.

And it’s so perfect that they don’t end up forming Stevonnie during their reconciliation, and not just because that would’ve given Kevin a win. They make up, but it still takes time to let the lingering pain go away, and it makes Stevonnie’s reappearance in our next episode way more meaningful. After one last display of their fundamental contrast—Steven expresses sympathy for Kevin’s situation with Sabine, while Connie shrugs it off because having a backstory doesn’t mean it’s okay to be a toxic douche—they leave the world of teen parties behind, at least for now. They’ll go back to more adventures right away, traveling to space in Lars of the Stars and Jungle Moon, but they’ll never truly be the same.

Thank goodness.

I’ve never been to this…how do you say…school?

I love that Stevonnie’s disdain for Kevin is here for us even when Stevonnie doesn’t show up in the episode.

We’re the one, we’re the ONE! TWO! THREE! FOUR!

It’s not just the catharsis factor that gets this in my Top 25. Kevin Party is incredible at capturing the dread I associate with this type of teen party as someone who often felt like Steven as a kid (three traits that don’t work well with teen parties, even if like me you were a fairly social teenager: clinical depression, teetotalism due to the double whammy of that depression and family history of addiction, and having a bad ear that makes it impossible to hear people talk when the music gets loud enough). Beyond the personal connection, we also get one last look at the show’s greatest villain, and an episode that respects Connie so much more than a normal cartoon would. This is how you end an arc, folks.

Top Twenty-Five

Steven and the Stevens

Hit the Diamond

Mirror Gem

Lion 3: Straight to Video

Alone Together

Last One Out of Beach City

The Return

Jailbreak

The Answer

Mindful Education

Sworn to the Sword

Rose’s Scabbard

Earthlings

Mr. Greg

Coach Steven

Giant Woman

Beach City Drift

Winter Forecast

Bismuth

Back to the Kindergarten

Steven’s Dream

Kevin Party

When It Rains

The Good Lars

Lars’s Head

Love ‘em

Laser Light Cannon

Bubble Buddies

Tiger Millionaire

Lion 2: The Movie

Rose’s Room

An Indirect Kiss

Ocean Gem

Space Race

Garnet’s Universe

Warp Tour

The Test

Future Vision

On the Run

Maximum Capacity

Marble Madness

Political Power

Full Disclosure

Joy Ride

Keeping It Together

We Need to Talk

Chille Tid

Cry for Help

Keystone Motel

Catch and Release

Back to the Barn

Steven’s Birthday

It Could’ve Been Great

Message Received

Log Date 7 15 2

Same Old World

The New Lars

Monster Reunion

Alone at Sea

Crack the Whip

Beta

Back to the Moon

Kindergarten Kid

Buddy’s Book

Gem Harvest

Three Gems and a Baby

That Will Be All

The New Crystal Gems

Storm in the Room

Room for Ruby

Lion 4: Alternate Ending

Doug Out

Are You My Dad?

I Am My Mom

Stuck Together

The Trial

Off Colors

Gemcation

Raising the Barn

Sadie Killer

Like ‘em

Gem Glow

Frybo

Arcade Mania

So Many Birthdays

Lars and the Cool Kids

Onion Trade

Steven the Sword Fighter

Beach Party

Monster Buddies

Keep Beach City Weird

Watermelon Steven

The Message

Open Book

Story for Steven

Shirt Club

Love Letters

Reformed

Rising Tides, Crashing Tides

Onion Friend

Historical Friction

Friend Ship

Nightmare Hospital

Too Far

Barn Mates

Steven Floats

Drop Beat Dad

Too Short to Ride

Restaurant Wars

Kiki’s Pizza Delivery Service

Greg the Babysitter

Gem Hunt

Steven vs. Amethyst

Bubbled

Adventures in Light Distortion

Gem Heist

The Zoo

Rocknaldo

Dewey Wins

Enh

Cheeseburger Backpack

Together Breakfast

Cat Fingers

Serious Steven

Steven’s Lion

Joking Victim

Secret Team

Say Uncle

Super Watermelon Island

Gem Drill

Know Your Fusion

Future Boy Zoltron

Tiger Philanthropist

No Thanks!

     6. Horror Club      5. Fusion Cuisine      4. House Guest      3. Onion Gang      2. Sadie’s Song      1. Island Adventure

#kevin party #steven universe #su #steven universally #review

[arlingtonpark]

SNK 115 Review

nickyoung_confused.gif edition

Point in favor of Levi being alive: Note how he was found. He was lying on the banks of the river perpendicular to the shore. Remember, the last panel in the last chapter seemed to indicate he was going to land in the river. This implies he survived the explosion and was able to swim to shore. That means Hange was lying about him dying instantaneously from the blast, and from there we can infer she’s also lying about his current condition.

Point against Levi being alive: note how Isayama draws his eyes. They’re blackened out, like they’ve been removed completely. This is exactly the same way he drew Zeke’s eyes when he was dead.

My best guess is that Levi survived the explosion and was able to make it ashore, but lost consciousness shortly before Hange found him. If he isn’t dead now, he will be soon. I’m not holding my breath.

But if Levi IS alive right now, he definitely should be. Drowning is traditionally not helpful treatment for the severely wounded.

Last chapter was about Zeke’s origins, but in hindsight, it plays a lot like the first part of a two part special. 114 and 115 are basically a double length chapter as far as I’m concerned. Together, they tell Zeke’s story.

And it’s very enlightening about Zeke’s character.

Perhaps the most interesting new element to Zeke’s character is his loneliness. Zeke…is lonely. It’s a lonely place at the top (of Mount Psychopath). His father never loved him and he knew it. He loved and trusted Mr. Xaver more than his own flesh and blood. After biting Mr. Xaver’s head off, Zeke calls him father, as he should.

The relationship between these two people is quite something. They gave each other the loving relationship they weren’t able to have on their own, and together, with full faith and conviction, they concocted a truly despicable plan. They’re bound together in sickness and in health.

Suicide and euthanasia are touchy subjects, so I won’t go into them here, but I will say this:

Euthanasia without consent. Is. Murder.

They call this the “euthanasia plan” but that’s just good branding. Their plan is to murder the Eldian race. It doesn’t matter if this is an act of mercy, as the word euthanasia implies, if it is done without the approval of the subject, it’s murder. The Eldian people, of course, cannot consent to this because there is no one body or individual with that authority.

The only two people who could conceivably make that call are Historia, the reigning Eldian monarch, or Eren, as bearer of the Founding Titan. Zeke is just some rando who took it upon himself to genocide a whole swathe of the population. He clearly has grandiose delusions.

This plan also reveals a very odd facet of Zeke’s thinking. He seems to view the Eldian people as a singular entity. And I mean, yeah, they are all connected to each other through the Founding Titan, but it still says a lot about Zeke that he describes his goal as a “euthanasia” (a thing that is done to individuals) instead of as a “genocide” (a thing that is done to groups and what his plan actually is). He seems to have taken it to heart that the Eldians are just an extension of the Founding Titan.

This truly is a deranged plan. The way of thinking that underlies the euthanasia plan is basically a kind of anti-hedonism. Anti-hedonism would be the idea that painful events are inherently bad and that there is no such thing as an inherently good event. No such thing as an inherently good event.

Zeke doesn’t believe in inherently good events.  

There are only things that cause us pain, like having a shitty dad, and things that serve to diminish that pain, like playing catch, but those events are not good in themselves. Thus, the only intrinsically valuable things to gain from living are things that have intrinsically negative value, so we’re all better off dead.

If that sounds stupid, that’s because it is. This is a really fucking stupid idea. Believing in this means believing that pain now for the sake of happiness in the future is nonsensical.

Because happiness has no value in itself, but pain does have value in itself (negative value, that is) the concept of sacrifice does not compute. This is probably why Zeke couldn’t understand the sacrifice the Survey Corps made at Shighanshina, or for that matter why Levi was willing to sacrifice his fellow soldiers.

Enduring pain for the sake of happiness makes no sense when pain is inherently meaningful and happiness isn’t.

But the idea that there is never any reason to make sacrifices is ridiculous.

And another thing: why doesn’t Zeke bring his plan to its natural conclusion? If death is preferable to living, then why not use the power of the Founding Titan to just kill all the Eldians up front? 

It would be easy. He could alter Eldian biology so that oxygen was poisonous to them. 

Why not? If non-existence is the best state of being, why not just kill them all?

But that’s the biggest indictment of Zeke’s plan. The logic behind Zeke’s plan leads you to one unavoidably dumb conclusion:

Murder is cool.

Killing people is cool because life is suffering. Zeke is what you get when you take edgelord teen philosophy to its logical extreme.

Except that’s obviously not true. Happiness/pleasure/fulfillment/what have you are clearly inherently worthwhile, and so long as that is true, living will always be preferable to death. The reason why is because of opportunity cost.

Opportunity cost refers to the benefits you miss out on by choosing to do one thing over another. If you die, then you miss out on the happiness you would have enjoyed had you lived. If the opportunity cost of dying is greater than the cost of living, then living is preferable to death.

But in the end, all this talk of preferring death over life is beside the point because that’s not even what Zeke’s plan involves. Zeke’s plan is not to literally euthanize all Eldians, it is to sterilize them so their race dies out in 100-aught years.

That’s genocide.

The enforced sterilization of a whole people is genocide. Not just colloquially, but even legally. The crime of genocide was first defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which entered into force in 1951.

Article 2(d) is very clear:

“[G]enocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: […] Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.”

The idea that destroying a whole group of people is immoral is based on the notion that life is inherently worth protecting. But of course, Zeke doesn’t believe in this. See: all the bodies he leaves in his wake.

Yes, Zeke’s logic is that life has more pain than pleasure, but this logic only works if you also assume the positive aspects of life have no intrinsic value. The euthanasia plan is just as much a product of Zeke’s psychopathy as it is a product of his ideology.

It’s not that Zeke is a psychopath because he thinks death > living, it’s that he thinks death > living because he’s a psychopath.

Speaking of dumb things Zeke believes, I looooove the meeting between him and Eren.

Eren feeds Zeke this obviously dumb line poo-pooing the Eldians for making them kill innocent people by existing and Zeke is in tears because yes, finally, someone gets it!

Eldians never should have been born; because they were, I have to kill innocent people in furtherance of my ideology that Eldians never should have been born.

...

Wait.

Eren’s statement makes no sense at all, but Zeke “11/10 intelligence” Jeager has his head so far up his ass he doesn’t even see it. Dude is so overjoyed that someone is finally stupid enough to see things his way he starts crying.

And I’m crying too. Because of how sad this is.

Eren obviously doesn’t believe what he’s saying. Zeke just wants someone in his life who understands him and he thinks he’s finally found that someone. But he truly is alone. I might actually feel bad for him when it all falls apart for him.

Eren is almost certainly playing him. Eren fights for freedom. I think the kind of freedom he supports is shallow, but ultimately freedom to Eren entails living, so there is no way he’s actually on board with this plan.

Eren siding with Zeke essentially makes him a proponent of the King Fritz School of sinful atonement, and unless a substantial flashback is in the offing, there’s no way such a drastic change in his character would happen off screen.

Another interesting new element is Zeke’s view of the titans. He seems to believe that titans aren’t the problem, it’s the people who abuse them. It’s a take on the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” line you see sometimes. It’s not the tool, but the people who use it.

But it also seems Zeke has no faith in people (what a surprise) and that the only way forward is to deprive them of those tools completely. He sees humans in puerile terms, as hopelessly immature. And as far as the story is concerned, he’s right.

Yelena makes the point that power invites temptation for abuse. Having titans at your disposal gives you power over others and people have abused that power throughout history.

But Yelena is a hypocrite. She was known for abusing people she took captive. And now, having won power over Pixis and his men, she has decided to impose a caste system on them.

Paradisians must now wear armbands that denote when they swore allegiance to Zeren. And because the time of your swearing determines your station, these armbands are also a status symbol. They indicate your status in the new social order. For the people who surrendered last, it is a form of public humiliation. It’s cruelty.

It’s also what the Marleyans did to the Eldians, and Yelena thinks this was a good policy. Reminding the lower classes of their place is a good thing to her.

I think the point of this anecdote is to show how hopeless humanity is. I don’t know where the story is going with this. My sense is that Isayama is going for an absurdist moral to the story.

Such a moral would look something like this: life is a grueling struggle that you will ultimately lose. But you should keep struggling because that is the only way to rebel against the cruelty of the world.

Isayama did say in an interview that certain philosophies have influenced him, and Albert Camus’ absurdism is one of the more well-known philosophies.

During their meeting, Eren mentioned how Grish killed children. And Eren killed children too, so let’s delve back into this in light of what Eren said.

It’s awful whenever anyone dies, but not all killings are immoral. There are exceptions, and those exceptions depend on your ethical framework.

The one that SNK appeals to the most is a form of consequentialism. Consequentialism, to put it simply, is the idea that actions are moral if they make the world a better place. By what measure depends on the specific kind of consequentialist theory you believe in. And ONLY the consequences matter. Nothing else.

There is nothing wrong with having a consequentialist worldview. If those children had to die to save those people, then killing them was not wrong, provided Grisha didn’t act with any malice.

But there are other ways to judge. One of them is by applying the Principle of Double Effect.

The double effect principle states that actions are not immoral even if a bad result comes of it if the bad result is a side effect of the action. (In the past, “double effect” referred to what we now call a side effect)

The principle of double effect is often misunderstood, so I want to be clear here: it is not the idea that it is ok to do a bad thing if it will lead to a good outcome. The bad result must be incidental to the action, not a direct result of it.

The exact criteria varies, but it usually goes something like this:

The action must be inherently good or at least morally neutral.

The person committing the act must merely permit the bad result to occur. It cannot be intended.

The bad result must not be a direct result of the action. It can only be incidental.

The good result must adequately compensate for the bad result.

If these criteria are met, the Principle states the action was a moral one.

For example, when confronting the Female Titan during the expedition, Erwin kept many soldiers in the dark about his true plans, and many died because they didn’t know what they’d be dealing with. Was that wrong?

No, it wasn’t. Many soldiers died, yes, and Erwin certainly foresaw that would happen, but that was incidental to his decision. Erwin Smith bears no burden for their deaths.

Now think about what Grish did.

He killed children because they were royalty and he wanted to eliminate the possibility that the Founding Titan could be reclaimed by them.

By the criteria of double effect, this is clearly immoral. Grish intended for them to die. He wanted it to happen. And their deaths were not incidental to Grish’s decision to kill them. 

Needless to say, people die when they are killed. 

Grish killed them for a good cause, but committing a bad act in pursuit of a good goal is impermissible under double effect.

Now what about Eren?

Eren wanted to launch an attack on the Marleyan government and he did it from the basement of a building. He did it by transforming into a titan while in the basement. He knew there were people in the building and he foresaw they would die if he transformed. He did it anyway. During the attack, people in the crowd were also killed. Was that wrong?

Yes, it obviously is.

Killing people and provoking the world’s militaries was the entire point of the attack.

Eren wanted them to die.

And it’s not like these people were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Never forget that Eren used the people in the building as shields first. By threatening to transform and kill them if provoked.

Eren intended for them to be in a position to die if he transformed, which he was planning to do anyway all along. They died when he transformed because Eren wanted it to be that way.

Honestly, I’m not even sure Eren’s actions were ok even from a consequentialist perspective. Yeah, his plan may make the world better off, but there’s something to be said about necessity.

Did those children really have to die to make this plan work? Why is it necessary to gather a coalition of the world’s militaries at Paradis? That’s the only part of Zeren’s plan that remains to be revealed.

I don’t like how the series implies a choice between Grish being right and Zeke being wrong and Grish being wrong and Zeke being right.

Grish’s actions are controversial. At. Best.

This series tries to push the line that people need to do bad things to bring about a good ending. I still have flashbacks to Armin’s “Erwin is a bad person for doing what needs to be done” speech in the Female Titan Arc. It’s dumb and it makes no sense.

You can’t be a bad person for doing the right thing. You just can’t. It’s impossible. I don’t have to explain why, do I?

No?

Okay, good.

So in other news.

Congratulations everyone! If you had “Zeke dies but comes back in a reference mashup of Star Wars and Jesus’ Resurrection,” come on down to collect your winnings! Now I wonder if Luke emerged naked from the taun taun 🤔

Seriously wtf?

What’s great about this chapter is how well it does subtle comedy.

Zeke emerges from that titan and the rain stops. The clouds part and a naked Zeke is bathed in rays of light as he emerges from his titan incubator. :D

Zeke is asked what happened and he straight up has no idea. Hard cut to him looking on in bewilderment as a girl molds his body out of dirt. :DD

Eren says he wants Gabi to help him flush out the Marleyans who’ve infiltrated the walls. Pieck is standing right behind him. XDDD

It’s disturbing how Eren apparently can’t be bothered to learn Gabi’s name. To him, she’s just the brat who killed Sasha.

Sasha is dead and Eren was her friend. He has every right to be upset. To be upset at Gabi. But that’s no license to disrespect her person by refusing to learn her name. Mr. Braun has shown that.

Eren has only ever called Gabi “that girl who killed Sasha.” That sends a clear signal. That signal is that this is all she is to him. It’s dehumanizing and it’s why I hope that through it all, Eren will not be elevated by the story by being made into the ultimate hero of it.

He is just such an asshole.

#shingeki no kyojin #attack on titan #snk 115 #spoilers

[stormwithskiiin-a]

lays real comf............................. let me tell u abt larxene and Psychopathy

Psychopathy - a mental disorder in which an individual manifests amoral and antisocial behavior, lack of ability to love or establish meaningful personal relationships, extreme egocentricity, failure to learn from experience, etc. Sadism - the tendency to derive pleasure, especially sexual gratification, from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others.

In order for an individual to be diagnosed with psychopathy, they must earn a score of thirty or above on the PCL-R checklist. There are twenty symptoms on the list and any given requisite can be valued at a maximum mark of two. The list is as follows:

1. Glib and superficial charm  -  Superficial charm (or insincere charm or glib charm) is the tendency to be smooth, engaging, charming, slick and verbally facile. In her first encounter with Sora, Larxene starts off sweet (a little sickly sweet), even helpful. It is rather short lived, and her cruel nature is revealed to Sora and CO. She can also be seen being overly kind to Axel throughout all of their interactions with Axel throughout COM, but we know it was mainly an attempt to get him on her side. There is even a scene where she is engaging with a conversation with Namine in which most of it she was rude and cold. However, as the scene ends, we can see Larxene trying to sweeten the deal for her by explaining how she doesn’t have to just be “Kairi’s shadow”. Larxene doesn’t care about Namine’s insecurities and doubts in regards to Kairi and her place in Sora’s heart, she just wanted to get her to stop dragging her feet by giving her an incentive. Rating: 2/2

2. Grandiose (exaggeratedly high) estimation of self - refers to an unrealistic sense of superiority, a sustained view of oneself as better than others that causes those affected to view others with disdain or as inferior, as well as to a sense of uniqueness: the belief that few others have anything in common with oneself. Larxene very much has a superiority complex. She thinks she is above everyone and takes great pleasure in insulting and degrading other people to prove just how above them she is. She doesn’t take kindly to being talked down to and how angry it makes her can easily be seen in any interaction she has with Vexen. And when Vexen’s replica shows a single sign in failing, Larxene is very quick to wave it over his head to remind him how low he actually is. She also talks down to Sora every interaction they have and is awfully confident that she can beat him in COM, not even showing any reserves about going 1v3 against Sora, Donald, and Goofy. Larxene was notably quick to remind Repliku that he is ‘a stupid little toy’ when he tries to resist having his memories tampered with. In KHIII, Larxene finds it hilarious that Demyx had been replaced by a replica and tells him that he is “dumb as a brick”. Rating: 2/2

3. Need for stimulation -  They (psychopaths) require intense stimulation in order to feel anything, to become excited, or to have fun. Psychopathic boredom is described as a continual restless and dysphoric feeling, acted out through aggressive and hypomanic activity. They experience boredom as a sense of restlessness and emptiness that is ever-present. Right after being introduced to the other Nobodies, Larxene immediately approaches the first person she doesn’t deem as a “rough old man” and tries initiating a conversation with him. She also commentates how quiet the castle is and that it seems dull. She quickly moves onto the next person and complains that they aren’t doing anything and states she is bored. When waiting in the COM manga, Larxene can be seen reading instead of remaining idle like the rest of the members of the castle. Rating: 2/2

4. Pathological lying -  (also called pseudologia fantastica and mythomania) is a behavior of habitual or compulsive lying. It is when an individual consistently lies for no personal gain. Some lies seem to be told in order to make the pathological liar appear the hero, or to gain acceptance or sympathy . Really we don’t know how much Larxene lies over meaningless things like a pathological liar does, but we can clearly see her lying to Sora in COM. Her guiding Sora along the path to Namine is, however, for personal gain and doesn’t particularly fall under a pathological lie. All lies told by Larxene directly relate to getting what she wants, which makes this particular symptom difficult to attach to her. She also is not interested in appearing to be a hero or gain anyone’s sympathy. However, the consistent pattern of lies she tells does indicate the capability to compulsively lie without remorse. Rating: 1/2

5. Cunning and manipulativeness -  having or showing skill in achieving one's ends by deceit or evasion, the skill in achieving one's ends by deceit, the action of handling or controlling someone or something in a clever or unscrupulous way. Larxene is a traitor to the Organization and she manages to stay hidden from Xemnas’ radar for quite some time. She attempts to manipulate Axel into joining her and Marluxia in attempting to overthrow the Organization, but ultimately failed. And even though who exactly formed how much of the plan to have Namine rearrange Sora’s memories, Larxene did participate in formulating it. She also coaxes Sora into remembering the fake memories and even pushes him to become fiercely attached to the good luck charm by threatening to smash it. She can also be seen trying to twist reality so Namine will be more keen to go along with their plan by pointing out that Namine has a chance at being a person who actually exists. Rating: 2/2

6. Lack of remorse or guilt -  is the lack of the distressing emotion experienced by a person who regrets actions which they deem to be shameful, hurtful, or violent. This means that people with low remorse or guilt can do practically anything, and then act as if nothing as happened. Throughout COM, Larxene is depicted hurting children in various different ways and then laughing about it. At one point, she even states that “more pain for you means more fun for me” with a wide smile on her face. When she approaches Repliku to have his memories forcibly taken away and reconstructed, she isn’t bothered by his screams of protest. Larxene is also seen not concerned about Namine’s welfare and using her as only means to an end. When Vexen is killed, Larxene is happy about it and doesn’t seem to have any remorse or pity for him. Rating: 2/2

7. Shallow affect (superficial emotional responsiveness) - this happens when one shows or have little or no emotions. Response to different emotions such as fear, anger, sadness, joy disgust, trust, anticipation, surprise to mention a few is very low. While this symptom could easily be attributed to Larxene’s literal lack of heart, we can go even deeper here. In KHUX after meeting Lauriam, her Somebody approaches the building which her Chirithy has connected to the missing girl, Strelitzia. When she tells her Chirithy she is looking for clues, they reply to her “You don’t normally care about other people” which only serves to anger her. This shows a lack of emotional response even in her childhood. Rating: 2/2

8. Callousness and lack of empathy -  unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them. Again, we can stress how she reacts to Sora’s pain and confusion with glee, how she reacts to Namine’s guilt with a degree of confusion but mainly she disregards it, her lack of reaction to Repliku’s protests, and her joy in response to Vexen’s death. Rating: 2/2

9. Parasitic lifestyle -  an intentional, manipulative, selfish, and exploitative financial dependence on others as reflected in a lack of motivation, low self-discipline, and inability to begin or complete responsibilities. Being a Nobody with a home provided, Larxene doesn’t really have much need for finances. Her motivation level and ability to take on hard tasks is actually a bit above average as seen by her ambition to overthrow the Organization which is really the only thing she has. Low self-discipline can be seen a few times with her inability to control her temper against Namine when she tries to protect Sora. Another example is her actually expressing her displeasure to see Xemnas in KHIII, who was her Superior and is still ranked above her in KHIII. When she is on her way to confront Sora the first time, Axel makes a point of telling her not to rough him up too much. Though she dismisses his worries, it does hint at she has lost control before. Rating: 1/2

10. Poor behavioral controls - refer to violent, damaging or reactionary behavior that is not controlled, such as expressions of irritability, annoyance, impatience, threats, aggression and verbal abuse, inadequate control of anger and temper, and acting hastily, even when the consequences may be harmful to them personally. Larxene’s anger is one of her defining character traits. Her temper gets the better of her most scenarios. We go back to her slapping Namine so hard she flies across the room in COM especially. She can be seen irritable the second Axel inferences that she actually lost to Sora when she claimed she “threw the battle” and becomes extremely defensive. When explaining to Sora that Namine had been rearranging his memories, she grows impatient and resorts to verbal abuse (”You’re such an idiot”) when he insists on protecting her otherwise. And though Sora was still willing to put his own life on the line for Namine after the truth had been revealed, Larxene rushes to the conclusion that the only option available was to kill Sora even though it’s debatable the situation was still salvageable. She also is quick to be angry at Sora for forgetting about her in KHIII and yells at him for insisting that Elsa was going to turn to light before forcing him away from her. Rating 2/2

11. Sexual promiscuity - the practice of having sex frequently with different partners or being indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners. The term can carry a moral judgment if the social ideal for sexual activity is monogamous relationships. Since this is still a children’s game, no sexually explicit content is in canon. However, in the COM manga we can see that Larxene is reading a novel by Marquis De Sade, who is infamously known for his lewd books about sexual sadism. And while it isn’t an implication of a sexual relationship, Larxene is very quick to put her hands on Axel every chance she gets even if he seems uncomfortable. At the end of her life in KHIII, she confirms she had only rejoined the Organization for another person who we can reasonably conclude to be Marluxia and we can also conclude that she was flirtatious with Axel while potentially being involved with Marluxia. Rating: 2/2

12. Early behavior problems -  symptomatic expression of emotional or interpersonal maladjustment especially in children (as by nail-biting, enuresis, negativism, or by overt hostile or antisocial acts). Due to KHUX’s animation and story telling pace, we don’t get to see much of Larxene’s Somebody’s mannerisms and body language or how she interacts with most people. However, as mentioned before, even her own Chirithy notes her tendency not to care about other people. (I will be making a separate post elaborating on how I view Elrena very soon) Rating: 1/2

13. Lack of realistic long-term goals -  means someone believes they can achieve great things in a short amount of time. Does not plan ahead and is deluded by predestined certainties. Larxene can be seen trying to rush the process of corrupting Sora in a few instances. One is insisting she go down there and jog his memory herself. Another is pushing Vexen to rush work on Repliku. She never mentions her reasoning for betraying the Organization, the closest we get is that she was bored by life in the castle. When joining the real Organization in KHIII, her only reason is to be “along for the ride” despite the fact she doesn’t wish to become a husk for Xehanort. Rating: 2/2

14. Impulsivity -  is a tendency to act on a whim, displaying behavior characterized by little or no forethought, reflection, or consideration of the consequences. The fact that Larxene agreed to serve under Xehanort despite disagreeing with his goals just to be close to Marluxia is a case in point of this. She also displays some impulsive behavior in 358/2 Days when she abruptly comes up with the idea for Roxas to not be allowed to use his keyblade during their mission together. She also lets it slip to Roxas that, if he were to fail, they had a backup option already. Rating: 2/2

15. Irresponsibility -  lack of a proper sense of responsibility, Though Larxene does take on the big responsibility of betraying the Organization, but she doesn’t show a particular zeal for the assignments said Organization gives her when she plays the part of a loyal member. In 358/2 Days, she complains to Roxas about her responsibility to train him. She’s also quick to forget that Sora no longer remembered her in KHIII and gets offended when he doesn’t recognize her. Rating: 1/2

16. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions -  taking ownership of one’s own behavior and the consequences of that behavior. When Axel betrays Larxene and Marluxia in COM, she immediately pins the entire downfall on their plan on Axel instead of recognizing her own shortcomings in the matter. In the manga, it shows Larxene eating and drinking with Marluxia when she very well could have been watching the security cameras they have set up around Castle Oblivion to ensure Namine stayed safely in captivity. In COM, as she is dying, she refuses to accept her own defeat and stumbles around trying to regain the upper hand in a situation which was obviously hopeless for her. Rating: 2/2

17. Many short-term marital relationships - A lack of commitment to a long-term relationship reflected in inconsistent, undependable, and unreliable commitments in life, including marital. Larxene has never been confirmed to have been married, nor do I believe she has been. This could potentially could be written off she has no opportunity to be so while within the Organization. However, as noted before, she very well has the capability of being flirtatious and disloyal. Rating: 1/2

18. Juvenile delinquency -  the habitual committing of criminal acts or offenses by a young person, especially one below the age at which ordinary criminal prosecution is possible. Larxene’s Somebody is depicted as entering a building without the consent of whoever owns it (if anyone does own it) to investigate a lead in a missing person’s case. Again, I will also be making a more in depth post about Elrena and how psychopathy influenced her childhood. Rating: 1/2

19. Revocation of conditional release -  the disciplinary action which follows a failure to follow through with the terms of being freed. I.E. a revoking of parole While Larxene was never seen imprisoned or breaking the terms of a parole, she can be seen tossing around the idea of betraying the real Organization after being let back into their ranks following her previous acts of treason. Rating: 2/2

20. Criminal versatility -  is the characteristic of someone who is untroubled by any question of legitimacy of a prohibition at all.  Larxene is someone who has committed a few crimes in canon, mainly assaulting others which she does repeatedly. She also is seen having little regard for the Organization’s authority, which lead to her committing treason against it. Rating: 2/2

Total score: 34 Larxene does score a bit more than enough to be diagnosed as a psychopath going by this criteria and the instances we see in canon.

#♔⁛ ( ᵐʸ ˢᵉᶜʳᵉᵗ ) HEADCANONS #[ i started this post the Day After i started this blog ewsjkd ] #[ sm research went into this yall dont Know ] #[ even in my first larx blog when i was Young i said i strongly believe she's a psychopath ] #[ and i STAND BY IT LIKE 7 YEARS LATER FIRM LY ] #[ in this house we are dedicated to reminding everyone that larxene is a Bad Person ] #[ im warning u this is like a college thesis level of Long ] #mental illness tw #[ ig ? ] #abuse tw #general grossness tw #[ ID K WHAT TO TAG THIS AS ] #LARXENE IS A HORRIBLE PERSON TW #[ fun disclaimer im not a psychologist im a 21 yr old with an internet connection ] #[ time to go play some dbd then come back ready to write agai n ] #[ but rn my brain is crying ]

[crystalelemental]

@suitsongirls

Okay, I actually went back and looked at my old opinions on Bravely Default from ancient Facebook posts dug up from around 2014.  Because apparently I just love being mad.

Tiz and Anges were always garbage, but apparently the demo somehow duped me into thinking Agnes was the main protag.  Which she should’ve been, the game is pretty centered on her and Edea, but no, Tiz has to be here as “kid whose family died and he’s kinda upset about it.”  Ringabel was okay in that he had legitimate comedic moments, but Edea kinda carried the party in terms of emotional investment, but only until the end of chapter 4.  Prior, Edea is someone who defected from the villains’ side, and works for you now, so she’s literally the only emotional center for the party as the only one with serious connections to them during that time, and the only one with meaningful interactions that weren’t stupid.  There’s one point where you meet the thief, who talks about how his kingdom was really impacted by the villain’s takeover and the figurehead they put in charge who is a prick, and how he had lost both his parents and needed to steal to survive in the desert, and Tiz, being our protagonist who is very empathetic, is basically like “NO, STEALING IS BAD ALWAYS AND YOU ARE A BAD MAN” and then you kill him.  Basically, your party’s actual protagonist is a self-righteous sociopath with no ability to empathize with others’ hardships because he had a bad thing happen to him once too.

Apparently the fairy being evil was so transparent I caught the hints in chapter 1.  The reveal isn’t until chapter 8, so apparently a lot of this was me being angry about killing the antagonists, who I generally thought were way more interesting, instead of killing the dipshit fairy.  I liked the class system, but so many of the antagonists are decent people caught in bad circumstances that I was left really pissed that we didn’t just recruit them and switch out party members as static class options.  Apparently Mephilia and Barbarossa were the two I loved the most, which made Chapter 7 harder because they’re not only both happy, but they’re pals on high seas adventures.  Now that I remember this, I’m still angry...

In chapter 5 I thought it was interesting to re-face the antagonists but get a bit of a different perspective.  By chapter 6 I was already furious that it meant I had to do this over again, time and time again, with no indication of how long I would have to keep doing the same goddamn thing.  Apparently I looked it up and found out the answer was two more times after this chapter.  And then I didn’t comment on the game for a few months, probably because I stopped playing.

I was a bit off about everyone just being surprised about the evil fairy after everyone was told about it.  I missed an important detail.  Tiz learns it from Ringabel, and tries to tell Anges, who literally sticks her fingers in her ears and shouts that she doesn’t want to hear this and you just gloss over it, until you do what the fairy wants and is revealed as evil, at which point they all express surprise.  Holy shit that’s so much worse than I remember.

The last thing to really mention is Victor and Victoria.  So, Victor is...I forget, some kinda science guy.  Victoria is like a little murder machine.  Except, Victoria is like that because of a major plague that wiped out a lot of the king’s homeland, and he felt pity for what happened and tried to save her, but couldn’t fully save her.  So Victor goes around with her, trying to find a cure for what happened and help heal her, and acts as her frontal lobe until then.  Like, he actively tried to dissaude her from doing anything awful, and feels remorse for not being able to help her.  So of course, you kill them super hard.

Basically, the way the game presents things, the creators are lacking in any sense of empathy or understanding for circumstances either.  Their stance is that, regardless of circumstances, if you do a bad thing you should be punished, probably with death.  Many of these characters shouldn’t take any blame for the situations they’re placed in, some have culpability but had incredibly understandable circumstances for the decisions they made, and some are just straight-up cases of mental health concerns brought about through trauma.  All of those are lumped in as just as evil as the guy who monopolized water in the desert and lets thousands die so he can make a profit, the alchemist who unleashed a super-deadly poison as a war crime against a resistance group and killed thousands of allies and enemies alike, and a literal serial rapist.  To the people who made this game, the guy who stole provisions to survive is just as bad as those three.  And that’s not only stupid, it’s disgusting.

And to make it all as bad as possible, the one villain we’re meant to truly empathize with, the king, is just so unfathomably fucking stupid and unable to run a kingdom, that he puts sociopaths in charge of other kingdoms and does nothing to oversee their actions, building worldwide animosity and refusing any form of infrastructure, all while massacring priests to the crystals people like for reasons he refuses to tell anyone about because “Oooh, woe is me, for no one would believe such a tale!”  You’re not Homura, dude.  You didn’t even fucking try.  You just jumped straight to the massacre and putting psychopaths in charge of other kingdoms.  Literally all of this is his fault, and we’re supposed to feel bad?  Fuck you.  It’s your fault all of this happened.

#bravely default

[britesparc]

Weekend Top Ten #499

Top Ten Everything Ever

Four hundred and ninety-nine. That’s how many weeks I’ve been doing this four. Four hundred and ninety-nine.

Next week is the big five-oh-oh and I’m doing something typically stupid, but I wanted to make it a real celebration. That means for the next three weeks you’re going to get some rather meaningful and special Tops Ten; lists that have been long in the making, or that are just bonkers-level awkward for me to do. Like this one.

I mean, I’ve ranked films, games, fictional guns, and robots that made me cry. How much longer can I do this for? How many more weeks am I going to put myself through this?

Give me a barrel with bottom unscrap’d.

There’s nowhere to go but up, ladies and germs, and so I present to you the list to end all lists. The most definitive list possible. A list of everything. A list of my favourite things in all of time and space. A list of the official best things ever.

I mean, what more is there to say? This covers everything. I’ve tried to avoid it being really specific to one film or one person. And, of course, it doesn’t include people I know in real life, or events that have happened to me. These are, in their own way, big, sweeping things; film series, franchises, bands, stories that have in their own way changed my life. Just the greatest things I’ve come across in my nearly 40 years on this planet.

And you can’t say fairer than that.

The Transformers comic: this should be obvious to anyone who knows me well, but there’s no greater influence in my life, in terms of storytelling or entertainment, than Transformers. And of all the variants branching off from the Prime Timeline (pun very much intended), it’s the comic that’s greatest. Whether it’s the melodrama of Simon Furman or the intricate plotting of James Roberts, I’ve been addicted to the Transformers comic for the vast majority of my life. It has fundamentally shaped how I consume fiction and the sorts of things I’m into. It’s also really changed how I write, and, in fact, the original Marvel run is at least partly responsible for the fact that I write at all. I drew Transformers comics as a kid. I planned out elaborate multi-issue arcs before I was a teenager. I wrote detailed synopses and snatches of scripts for Transformers movies that would never be made. And I robbed, wholesale, motifs and lines of dialogue for the original books and comics I was working on too. It changed my life. It’s not hyperbole to say Transformers is the single biggest piece of fiction I’ve ever touched. Till all are one indeed.

The films of Steven Spielberg, 1975-1982: Spielberg is my favourite filmmaker, but it felt a bit weird to just say “Steven!” as one of the entries here. So instead I’ve decided to hone in on his early career, despite the fact that knocks out one of the biggest influences of my life, Jurassic Park. But everything I love about Spielberg is in these movies. His skill with a camera, his love of light, his great eye for casting, his way with actors; I mean, Close Encounters, which I probably first saw aged about twelve, is just a microcosm of all my interests in my teens: aliens, government conspiracies, determined men going on a crazed quest, and above all a pervasive sense of hope and optimism. Spielberg’s craft is exemplary, but that’s also true of many of his peers. His flair for action scenes and love of spectacle is entertaining, but there are many directors of whom you could say the same. What I love about him – what keeps bringing me back to him – is his warmth and optimism, his belief in the best of us. Even in his darkest movies, in Schindler’s List and A.I. and Munich (which has one of the bleakest endings of his career), there’s still joy and warmth and something worthwhile and wholesome to fight for. And whilst Raiders is a thrill-ride and E.T. an emotional tour-de-force, all of his preoccupations are encapsulated in Jaws, a tense horror film, a buddy-comedy, an entertaining rollercoaster, an acting masterclass. But it’s still Jurassic Park that made me want to make a movie.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe: so when I was a kid I was reading Transformers and Ghostbusters and other Marvel-published adaptations, but not really any actual Marvel comics. However, as a result, I became very loosely familiar with who Iron Man and Doctor Strange were (and Spidey of course) through references and back-up strips, and that time Death’s Head fought Tony’s nephew Arno Stark. No, when I started reading “proper” comics – mainstream superhero stuff – it was DC. I loved Batman, so I bought Batman, and that was a gateway to the rest of the DCU. However, despite the successes of the various DC movie adaptations, it’s the MCU that really, really got its hooks into me. For one, they’re really good adaptations, well-cast, with some great set-pieces. But the interconnected stuff is what really sings. Not just the characters popping up in each others’ movies, or even the overall arc leading up the crossover events; no, it was the actual shared-ness of it, the way the destruction of SHIELD had an impact, or the Sokovia Accords, or Asgard, Skrulls, magic… everything has an impact, an effect. And sure, it’s incredibly good fun to follow the breadcrumbs and try to work out where things are heading. As we enter a new phase – literally and figuratively – I just can’t wait to find out what’s next.

Grant Morrison’s Batman: talking about interconnectivity, no one does it better – or weirder – than Morrison. His Batman arc – and I’m referring to the character not the title, as it spans multiple series and even, arguably, includes work he did on JLA years earlier – is a web of connected theories, images, themes, events, and references. What does the Zur-En-Arrh graffiti in Gotham mean, not just in the here-and-now, but also as a long-standing reference to decades of Batman’s past? The anticipation of uncovering the next breadcrumb, the excitement of deciphering the next reference; it was long-form storytelling as a form of existential theatre, and it was sublime. But he also did two things that have utterly changed my view of the character. On the meta level, he presented a Batman where everything was canon; the grim thirties Shadow-inspired vigilante, the goofy fifties space adventures, the hairy-chested love-god of the seventies… it all happened to one man over a span of about 15-20 years. Fair enough; that’s cool storytelling. But his idea that Batman was not a miserable, psychopathic loner, that he was not insane or struggling to cope or still traumatised by his parents’ death, that Bruce Wayne was a nice guy with friends and family, who’d used his pain as a weapon, who’d gotten past his rage and grief and turned all the negative stuff outwards. Batman was what was built from all that, and Batman allowed Bruce to grow. And what did he do? He found other lost children and saved their lives, allowing Dick Grayson to take over. Batman is a force for good, in a similar way to Superman in Morrison’s All-Star book, making people better by association. And his confrontation with Darkseid in Final Crisis is extraordinary; brilliant as-is, as a piece of comicbook badassery on the page, but the metatextual resonance it’s given – Batman as a good man versus the font of all evil, David versus Goliath, Theseus and the Minotaur – is brilliant. How it ties in to Morrison’s wider Bat-epic, the whole Black Glove stuff and the devil and time travel and the myth of Batman’s creation and all of it… and just the simple thing of Batman’s last act being shooting the embodiment of evil, saving a human life, and then saying “Gotcha,” before dying, is perfect. Perfect.

The Secret of Monkey Island and Monkey Island 2: LeChuck’s Revenge: when I was little, I played Spectrum and C64 games at my cousins’ house. Then I got an Amiga – I think maybe I was ten? – and I started playing Amiga games. And it was fun and all, but then I read a review in Amiga Action, and my life changed. It was something called an “adventure game”, and it let you walk around chatting to people and interacting with the world, with great big colourful graphics and characters whose mouths moved when they spoke. And then I played it. My love of the medium and its possibilities was cemented then; and, fittingly, it was through the wordy, hilarious dialogue and comedy antics of a wannabe pirate who may, or may not, be selling these fine leather jackets. It’s not overstating things that my gaming tastes were defined by this game and its technically superior sequel. The quirky set-pieces, the weird puzzles, the playing with form (like when you “die” in Monkey 2), and the smart use of Lucasfilm in-jokery. The first game’s “How to Get Ahead in Navigating” gag/puzzle will live with me forever, as will the second game’s bonkers, nightmarish, beautifully constructed ending. As good as they were, none of the subsequent games could hold a candle to it, especially as the whole aesthetic changed into something much more cartoony. But these two? They’re my Big Whoop.

Star Wars: I imagine I know a lot of people in real life who would be surprised – nay, astounded – that I would list my ten favourite Things of all time, and yet Star Wars would not manage to break the Top Five. That’s because that as much as I love Star Wars – and I do, I really do – it didn’t hit me, didn’t speak to me, apart from one brief and weird moment in my late teens. It was games that made me fall in love, I think; games and toys. And, I have to confess, it was the prequels; the intricate digital visions of gleaming cities and impossibly acrobatic Jedi. I love the goofiness and ultra-seriousness of Lucas’ vision, sadly muddled now by the earthy chaos of the sequels. Star Wars is cool; for a while, it defined my idea of cool in cinema. An exciting sci-fi reimagining of ancient and endless myths, a confusing smorgasbord of weird stories and arcane philosophy. Plus spaceships and rapscallions and laser swords. So yes: whilst it was never my faith, so to speak, it’s still one of the coolest and most original pieces of fiction in my lifetime, and to this day there are very few things at all that I find more exciting and evocative than the thought of a Jedi pirouetting through the air with their ‘saber lit.

Middle-Earth, in print and film: one of my most vivid memories of childhood is my mum reading me The Hobbit (and also Macbeth, funnily enough). Then I bought myself my own copy, read it as a kid, read it again as a teenager, wrote (aged about 12 or 13) a sequel in which Gollum comes back to reclaim the ring. I remain to this day baffled that my teacher did not think to tell me that there actually was a sequel to The Hobbit. Eventually I did hear about it, watched the Ralph Bakshi version, and – when I read in Empire that it was gonna be a film and Sean Connery, of all people, was gonna be Gandalf – I thought it best to take the plunge. And I adored it. whilst there’s something about the lyrical simplicity of The Hobbit that I prefer, the depth and scope of The Lord of the Rings – and Tolkien’s subsequent, more disparate writing – that moves me on a profound level. It’s not just the epic nature of the work – the story itself, with its grandiose tales of heroism and adventure – but the sheer balls of the man to make such a thing, to craft wholesale an entire mythological ecosystem. And then the films! I can’t believe they managed to do that; it was pure lightning in a bottle, and we know that because they didn’t quite manage to do it a second time with the Hobbit movies. But all those glorious moments: “Fly, you fools”, “For Frodo”, “I can carry you”, “Go away and never come back” – bloody hell.

Empire magazine: it feels a bit weird, for some reason, citing a magazine as a Favourite Thing. It’s a magazine, a periodical, a journal; it tells you the news and recommends films. it’s not supposed to be part of the culture, part of the fabric of one’s being. But whilst you could debate whether criticism itself is culture, Empire definitely has a culture. It’s a club, nay, a family; something that has been entrenched in recent years through its podcasts and live shows. But for me it began as an education. I started reading it, really, to find out more about Jurassic Park (there we are again, the secret eleventh part of this list). But it went on, showing me more films and filmmakers, introducing me to esoteric industry concepts, broadening my horizons. I always liked film, but Empire made me love film. It reflected my tastes but then it enriched them, codified them, offered me new flavours. It was the first magazine to put Lord of the Rings on the cover; it celebrates Spielberg and the MCU; it had articles about The Greasy Strangler, for goodness’ sake. So much of what I love about film I learned from Empire over the last (nearly) thirty years, and so much of what I love about Empire now is because of what I learned. Bangily-bang.

Traveller’s Tales’ LEGO games: the games that did not make this list, I don’t know. Halo; man, I love Halo. Or what about classics like Lemmings, Worms, or SWOS? What about Mass Effect, Deus Ex, or Fable? What about Mario Kart, what about Civilization? They all deserved a place, really. But there’s something esoteric, timeless even, about the heights of the LEGO games. I remember playing a demo – on the first Xbox, I think – of the first LEGO Star Wars, and being blown away by the fact that, well, it was good. When the games started coming out on the 360 – Star Wars II, Batman, Indiana Jones – I was in the gloriously fortunate position of getting a lot of them for free at CITV, and I devoured them. The simple mechanics, the generous, forgiving gameplay, the satisfying tactile feel of smashing objects and collecting studs. There was something just so rewarding about playing them. And the fan-service! Giving you all those beloved characters, all those worlds, all those genuinely funny in-jokes, references, and cut-scenes. Plus they’re great to play with kids. Time went on, some games were better than others; I feel they reached their peak with the first LEGO Marvel Super-Heroes game, presenting us with an open world New York to play in and a collection of comic book characters that fitted the gameplay perfectly. Subsequent games have either put new restrictions on play, or given us more complicated stories and mechanics, or – really – just over-egged the pudding slightly. I’m really, really optimistic and excited for The Skywalker Saga, long overdue, and promising something of an overhaul. it began, really, with Star Wars; and I feel with Star Wars they’ll have their greatest hour.

Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds: fun fact: finding the tenth spot on these lists is very hard. How about a brand I love, like Xbox, or the BBC, or even Disney? Or another writer or director – what about Aaron Sorkin? Or a TV show – Doctor Who, perhaps, or Star Trek? Or how about, oh I dunno, Shakespeare? I like him. But I’ve not talked about music, so let’s do that; we’ll go out on a number. I’m not a musical person; I didn’t grow up frequenting record shops or listening to mix tapes in my room. I liked songs, but mostly I came to music through film. That was even true with Nick Cave, who I first heard in an episode of The X-Files, and read about in the X-Files magazine. But he remains one of the few artists, The Bad Seeds one of the few bands, that I continue to seek out and listen to regularly (rather than just saying “Alexa, play nineties rock”). I love the different styles, from the distorted noise of the early, post-Birthday Party years through the sombre melodies of Nocturama. I love Cave’s lyricism; his evocation of myth, his use of imagery. I love how he manages to get phrases like “morally culpable” into a song. I love the humour as well as the tragedy, the references to things both real and mythological, the sadness and eloquence of it all. I love how so many of his songs are about sex but are also really moving and meaningful; how much of the music is infused with pain and sorrow but is also uplifting. The horrible evocations of Cave’s own abuse in Do You Love Me, through to the references to his son’s death in Girl in Amber. I love Cave’s voice. I don’t know if this has come through in this list, but something I really like is stuff that makes me cry but isn’t necessarily sad. I cry when I read Sandman, when he wins the Oldest Game by challenging the end of everything by becoming “hope”; I cry when Donna tells Josh, “if you were in the hospital I wouldn’t stop for red lights”; I cry when Steve Rogers jumps on that dummy grenade. I think it’s hope and heroism and love. And that’s something that I get constantly, mainlined, intravenous, from Nick Cave. As Morgan Freeman says in Seven, “The world is a fine place and worth fighting for – I agree with the second part.”

God, there’s so much stuff not listed here. So many things I love that I feel are core; no Pixar, no West Wing, no other filmmakers cited, really, apart from Spielberg. But ten’s not a big number, and I contain multitudes.

Thanks for reading.

#top ten #everything #499 #nine years #lists #my life

[gemtv00]

Serial Killers

Countess Erszebet Bathory was a breathtakingly beautiful, unusually well-educated woman, married to a descendant of Vlad Dracula of Bram Stoker fame. In 1611, she was tried - though, being a noblewoman, not convicted - in Hungary for slaughtering 612 young girls. The true figure may have been 40-100, though the Countess recorded in her diary more than 610 girls and 50 bodies were found in her estate when it was raided.

The Countess was notorious as an inhuman sadist long before her hygienic fixation. She once ordered the mouth of a talkative servant sewn. It is rumoured that in her childhood she witnessed a gypsy being sewn into a horse's stomach and left to die.

The girls were not killed outright. They were kept in a dungeon and repeatedly pierced, prodded, pricked, and cut. The Countess may have bitten chunks of flesh off their bodies while alive. She is said to have bathed and showered in their blood in the mistaken belief that she could thus slow down the aging process.

Her servants were executed, their bodies burnt and their ashes scattered. Being royalty, she was merely confined to her bedroom until she died in 1614. For a hundred years after her death, by royal decree, mentioning her name in Hungary was a crime.

Cases like Barothy's give the lie to the assumption that serial killers are a modern - or even post-modern - phenomenon, a cultural-societal construct, a by-product of urban alienation, Althusserian interpellation, and media glamorization. Serial killers are, indeed, largely made, not born. But they are spawned by every culture and society, molded by the idiosyncrasies of every period as well as by their personal circumstances and genetic makeup.

Still, every crop of serial killers mirrors and reifies the pathologies of the milieu, the depravity of the Zeitgeist, and the malignancies of the Leitkultur. The choice of weapons, the identity and range of the victims, the methodology of murder, the disposal of the bodies, the geography, the sexual perversions and paraphilias - are all informed and inspired by the slayer's environment, upbringing, community, socialization, education, peer group, sexual orientation, religious convictions, and personal narrative. Movies like "Born Killers", "Man Bites Dog", "Copycat", and the Hannibal Lecter series captured this truth.

Serial killers are the quiddity and quintessence of malignant narcissism.

Yet, to some degree, we all are narcissists. Primary narcissism is a universal and inescapable developmental phase. Narcissistic traits are common and often culturally condoned. To this extent, serial killers are merely our reflection through a glass darkly. More here gemtv serial

In their book "Personality Disorders in Modern Life", Theodore Millon and Roger Davis attribute pathological narcissism to "a society that stresses individualism and self-gratification at the expense of community ... In an individualistic culture, the narcissist is 'God's gift to the world'. In a collectivist society, the narcissist is 'God's gift to the collective'".

Lasch described the narcissistic landscape thus (in "The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an age of Diminishing Expectations", 1979):

"The new narcissist is haunted not by guilt but by anxiety. He seeks not to inflict his own certainties on others but to find a meaning in life. Liberated from the superstitions of the past, he doubts even the reality of his own existence ... His sexual attitudes are permissive rather than puritanical, even though his emancipation from ancient taboos brings him no sexual peace.

Fiercely competitive in his demand for approval and acclaim, he distrusts competition because he associates it unconsciously with an unbridled urge to destroy ... He (harbours) deeply antisocial impulses. He praises respect for rules and regulations in the secret belief that they do not apply to himself. Acquisitive in the sense that his cravings have no limits, he ... demands immediate gratification and lives in a state of restless, perpetually unsatisfied desire."

The narcissist's pronounced lack of empathy, off-handed exploitativeness, grandiose fantasies and uncompromising sense of entitlement make him treat all people as though they were objects (he "objectifies" people). The narcissist regards others as either useful conduits for and sources of narcissistic supply (attention, adulation, etc.) - or as extensions of himself.

Similarly, serial killers often mutilate their victims and abscond with trophies - usually, body parts. Some of them have been known to eat the organs they have ripped - an act of merging with the dead and assimilating them through digestion. They treat their victims as some children do their rag dolls.

Killing the victim - often capturing him or her on film before the murder - is a form of exerting unmitigated, absolute, and irreversible control over it. The serial killer aspires to "freeze time" in the still perfection that he has choreographed. The victim is motionless and defenseless. The killer attains long sought "object permanence". The victim is unlikely to run on the serial assassin, or vanish as earlier objects in the killer's life (e.g., his parents) have done.

In malignant narcissism, the true self of the narcissist is replaced by a false construct, imbued with omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence. The narcissist's thinking is magical and infantile. He feels immune to the consequences of his own actions. Yet, this very source of apparently superhuman fortitude is also the narcissist's Achilles heel.

The narcissist's personality is chaotic. His defense mechanisms are primitive. The whole edifice is precariously balanced on pillars of denial, splitting, projection, rationalization, and projective identification. Narcissistic injuries - life crises, such as abandonment, divorce, financial difficulties, incarceration, public opprobrium - can bring the whole thing tumbling down. The narcissist cannot afford to be rejected, spurned, insulted, hurt, resisted, criticized, or disagreed with.

Likewise, the serial killer is trying desperately to avoid a painful relationship with his object of desire. He is terrified of being abandoned or humiliated, exposed for what he is and then discarded. Many killers often have sex - the ultimate form of intimacy - with the corpses of their victims. Objectification and mutilation allow for unchallenged possession.

Devoid of the ability to empathize, permeated by haughty feelings of superiority and uniqueness, the narcissist cannot put himself in someone else's shoes, or even imagine what it means. The very experience of being human is alien to the narcissist whose invented False Self is always to the fore, cutting him off from the rich panoply of human emotions.

Thus, the narcissist believes that all people are narcissists. Many serial killers believe that killing is the way of the world. Everyone would kill if they could or were given the chance to do so. Such killers are convinced that they are more honest and open about their desires and, thus, morally superior. They hold others in contempt for being conforming hypocrites, cowed into submission by an overweening establishment or society.

The narcissist seeks to adapt society in general - and meaningful others in particular - to his needs. He regards himself as the epitome of perfection, a yardstick against which he measures everyone, a benchmark of excellence to be emulated. He acts the guru, the sage, the "psychotherapist", the "expert", the objective observer of human affairs. He diagnoses the "faults" and "pathologies" of people around him and "helps" them "improve", "change", "evolve", and "succeed" - i.e., conform to the narcissist's vision and wishes.

Serial killers also "improve" their victims - slain, intimate objects - by "purifying" them, removing "imperfections", depersonalizing and dehumanizing them. This type of killer saves its victims from degeneration and degradation, from evil and from sin, in short: from a fate worse than death.

The killer's megalomania manifests at this stage. He claims to possess, or have access to, higher knowledge and morality. The killer is a special being and the victim is "chosen" and should be grateful for it. The killer often finds the victim's ingratitude irritating, though sadly predictable.

In his seminal work, "Aberrations of Sexual Life" (originally: "Psychopathia Sexualis"), quoted in the book "Jack the Ripper" by Donald Rumbelow, Kraft-Ebbing offers this observation:

"The perverse urge in murders for pleasure does not solely aim at causing the victim pain and - most acute injury of all - death, but that the real meaning of the action consists in, to a certain extent, imitating, though perverted into a monstrous and ghastly form, the act of defloration. It is for this reason that an essential component ... is the employment of a sharp cutting weapon; the victim has to be pierced, slit, even chopped up ... The chief wounds are inflicted in the stomach region and, in many cases, the fatal cuts run from the vagina into the abdomen. In boys an artificial vagina is even made ... One can connect a fetishistic element too with this process of hacking ... inasmuch as parts of the body are removed and ... made into a collection."

Yet, the sexuality of the serial, psychopathic, killer is self-directed. His victims are props, extensions, aides, objects, and symbols. He interacts with them ritually and, either before or after the act, transforms his diseased inner dialog into a self-consistent extraneous catechism. The narcissist is equally auto-erotic. In the sexual act, he merely masturbates with other - living - people's bodies.

The narcissist's life is a giant repetition complex. In a doomed attempt to resolve early conflicts with significant others, the narcissist resorts to a restricted repertoire of coping strategies, defense mechanisms, and behaviors. He seeks to recreate his past in each and every new relationship and interaction. Inevitably, the narcissist is invariably confronted with the same outcomes. This recurrence only reinforces the narcissist's rigid reactive patterns and deep-set beliefs. It is a vicious, intractable, cycle.

Correspondingly, in some cases of serial killers, the murder ritual seemed to have recreated earlier conflicts with meaningful objects, such as parents, authority figures, or peers. The outcome of the replay is different to the original, though. This time, the killer dominates the situation.

The killings allow him to inflict abuse and trauma on others rather than be abused and traumatized. He outwits and taunts figures of authority - the police, for instance. As far as the killer is concerned, he is merely "getting back" at society for what it did to him. It is a form of poetic justice, a balancing of the books, and, therefore, a "good" thing. The murder is cathartic and allows the killer to release hitherto repressed and pathologically transformed aggression - in the form of hate, rage, and envy.

But repeated acts of escalating gore fail to alleviate the killer's overwhelming anxiety and depression. He seeks to vindicate his negative introjects and sadistic superego by being caught and punished. The serial killer tightens the proverbial noose around his neck by interacting with law enforcement agencies and the media and thus providing them with clues as to his identity and whereabouts. When apprehended, most serial assassins experience a great sense of relief.

Serial killers are not the only objectifiers - people who treat others as objects. To some extent, leaders of all sorts - political, military, or corporate - do the same. In a range of demanding professions - surgeons, medical doctors, judges, law enforcement agents - objectification efficiently fends off attendant horror and anxiety.

Yet, serial killers are different. They represent a dual failure - of their own development as full-fledged, productive individuals - and of the culture and society they grow in. In a pathologically narcissistic civilization - social anomies proliferate. Such societies breed malignant objectifiers - people devoid of empathy - also known as "narcissists".

[timsim26]

Resident Evil 7 Review

Resident Evil 7:Biohazard may be what the AAA survival horror genre has needed for a long time. Something that takes risks, learns from previous mistakes, uses popular horror tropes and allows the absolutely stunning presentation the opportunity to utterly terrify every player. Every moment of Resident Evil 7 gave me some form of anxiety, terror or complete panic and this is a testament to how amazing this game is at establishing an atmosphere and tone that so many other horror games miss. Capcom have done a terrific job listening to feedback and creating a game that appeals to long term fans of the series, but also brings in new fans that can appreciate the experience as a standalone.

Resident Evil 7 focuses on a brand new character to the series, in the brand new location of Louisiana. The swamp land already gives off an eerie feeling and Ethan, our lead, is entering into the complete unknown, chasing a mysterious video that confirms his missing wife, Mia is alive after disappearing years ago. A strict instruction from Mia is to stay away, however Ethan must look into things in order to understand what is going on. The story is very promising and maintains its intrigue and many surprises as it twists and turns. Depending on difficulty, the game will take you anywhere from 10-15 hours, maintaining a fantastic pace that always presents a threat to your survival. You have moments of safety within the game, but even then the tension of each threatening situation will have you scrounging for resources. You are presented with a fairly typical setup, however the main antagonists of the game are unique and fascinating. Ethan is drawn to an old mansion in which he is captured by the Baker family who are seemingly invincible and downright disturbing. This is an instant problem for Ethan as he attempts to escape and explore the Baker house in search of Mia.

The level design of the old house and the surrounding area is where the gameplay and environmental story telling shine. Resident Evil 7 is full of interesting environments, that are packed with fascinating details and clues as to what is happening in the story and how our location came to be. Each drawer, desk, cupboard and locked door present new clues and valuable resources. What I continued to find with the game is the fact that the developers spent a lot of time ensuring everything made complete sense. Doors connect to rooms that feel natural, the backyard and surrounding houses link in ways that are well organise and make traversal feel familar. The level design feels a lot like Dark Souls and Bloodborne as you are open to explore, but must follow a natural critical path to unlock shortcuts and equipment that help you traverse to other areas, or return to where you started. As you progress you can return to areas with new equipment to unlock doors, find items and even just check out an area that is now clear of enemies. The progression feels natural and interesting as every area presents new challenges and gear that you can pick up. This gear is crucial to your success, as Resident Evil 7 does not hold your hand at all. You are expected to use your brain, both fighting enemies and making your way through the old estate.

While the main antagonists of the game are seemingly invincible, Ethan can still fight back and the gear you locate through exploration really helps you feel more powerful the further you get. It is a natural progression from being completely unarmed to a weapon wielding psychopath. In traditional Resident Evil fashion, you can only hold so many items, utilising your space in a backpack carefully. When the backpack is full you can no longer pick up items. You are forced to backtrack to a rare safe zone and deposit your items in a chest, or use your items to make more room. Every weapon takes up a certain amount of space, forcing you to make some challenging choices. Do you load up on health, bullets, stimulants or keep a hold of important mission items. It is completely possible you don’t bring the right mission item to a critical point and are made to backtrack to collect it. The game ensures you are thinking ahead about what you need to survive. I absolutely loved the inventory management systems in place. They never felt too fiddly or complicated and created a real tension when using your equipment knowing that you could run out of health at any moment and be forced to become a pinpoint sniper taking down enemies with your limited supply of rounds.

Combat takes place against molded like creatures who feel added in to make the game in order for the experience to take a little longer. The combat against the Baker family is much more meaningful and memorable and these moments are what players will remember after reaching the conclusion. The molded are explained later in the game, however during the combat scenarios they feel a little repetitive and clumsy. They can easily swarm you if you are not aware of your surroundings and can often take a huge number of bullets to take down. The shooting feels fantastic and responsive, each shot landing gives great feedback and the weapons are fun to fire. Pistols, shotguns, knives, a grenade launcher and flamethrower are the tools of the trade for Ethan and each are useful in the right situation. Combat is never the overwhelming focus of the game however, as Resident Evil 7 pushes forward storytelling and exploration first.

As you make your way through the story and take down the Baker family in some of the most memorable and entertaining boss fights of the current generation, you begin to see exactly where the game is heading and how well it has been put together. The game gives you so much to think about and consistently looks and sounds absolutely incredible. The first person point of view, is the major change to the series and it would not have worked at all if Capcom didn’t nail the presentation. There are many times, in which Resident Evil 7 looks utterly incredible. The detail in the character designs and the feel of the old house is fantastic. The weapons look great and the environment surrounding the house looks very well polished and realistic. This calibre is matched by the quality of the sound design. Every good horror game has to have great sound design and this is not exception. Creaks of wood, consistent bumps in the night and the incredible change in volume when an enemy bursts out of nowhere to frighten you, is phenomenal. The attention to detail really enhances the overall experience.

Resident Evil 7 steers the franchise back to where it needs to be. Scary, tense, full of fantastic puzzles that make you think and a narrative that is intriguing, a little ridiculous, but ultimately interesting. All of these and the brilliant characters combine to make an experience that is a must play for fans of horror and first person experiences.

9/10

Reviewed on Xbox One.

#video game #xbox one #review #gaming #game #games #horror #resident evil 7 #the baker family

[ofboomerangs-blog]

you've mentioned before that digger is a sociopath, can you explain?

ehhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeehhhhehheheehehehehe okay, I am not sure if this is just general interest or if you don’t believe me lol but alrighty.      first off to explain my thoughts and ideas to you, I need to explain what a sociopath is and to do that I ALSO have to explain a psychopath, becuase the terms are often used interchangeably or incorrectly which is both wrong, and so to understand my ideas of digger you need to know my understanding of these disorders....sooo look under the cut if you want

PSYCHOPATH VS SOCIOPATH??

DISCLAIMER:

this is NOT a self-diagnosis checklist, if you think you are suffering from a mental disorder/illness go see a professional

i am not a registered psychologist/psychiatrist/general practitioner, I do study psychology, however I am NOT a professional, this is not a professional opinion, this is what I have learnt in my studies, however again if you think you are suffering from a mental disorder/illness go see a professional

if anything I feel this is merely information to look at for perhaps writing or analysing a fictional character, not a real life person, okay?

ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY DISORDER

antisocial: adjective 1.contrary to the laws and customs of society, in a way that causes annoyance and disapproval in others.

so basically in psychology terms someone who is antisocial is not just an introvert, or hates parties, or has social anxiety, it is someone who is usually disruptive to society, breaks laws, or acts in harmful or negative ways. (abuse, violence, petty crimes, vandalism, manipulation, intimidation)

psychopathy and sociopathy both are in association to antisocial personality disorders, which as the name suggests, revolve around antisocial behaviour. people with psychopathy/sociopathy suffer from antisocial personality disorder HOWEVER just because you suffer from antisocial personality disorder does not automatically make you either a psychopath or sociopath (if that makes sense).

the dsm-5 (diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders) gives the following criteria for antisocial personality disorder:

“ The essential features of a personality disorder are impairments in personality (self and interpersonal) functioning and the presence of pathological personality traits. To diagnose antisocial personality disorder, the following criteria must be met:

A. Significant impairments in personality functioning manifest by:                          1. Impairments in self functioning (a or b):                            a.Identity: Ego-centrism; self-esteem derived from personal gain, power, or                                          pleasure.                            b.Self-direction: Goal-setting based on personal gratification; absence of prosocial                                                        internal standards associated with failure to conform to lawful or                                                             culturally normative ethical behavior.

                                                              AND

                         2. Impairments in interpersonal functioning (a or b):                            a.Empathy: Lack of concern for feelings, needs, or suffering of others; lack of                                                        remorse after hurting or mistreating another.                            b.Intimacy: Incapacity for mutually intimate relationships, as exploitation is a                                                        primary means of relating to others, including by deceit and coercion; use                                             of dominance or intimidation to control others.

B. Pathological personality traits in the following domains:                          1. Antagonism, characterized by:                                         a.Manipulativeness: Frequent use of subterfuge to influence or                                                                    control others; use of seduction, charm, glibness, or ingratiation to                                                         achieve on’s ends.                                      b.Deceitfulness: Dishonesty and fraudulence; misrepresentation of self;                                                       embellishment or fabrication when relating events.                                      c. Callousness: Lack of concern for feelings or problems of others; lack of                                                      guilt or remorse about the negative or harmful effects of                                                                            one„s actions on others; aggression; sadism.                                      d. Hostility: Persistent or frequent angry feelings; anger or irritability in                                                     response to minor slights and insults; mean, nasty, or vengeful behavior.                       2. Disinhibition, characterized by:                                      a. Irresponsibility: Disregard for – and failure to honor – financial and other                                                   obligations or commitments; lack of respect for – and lack of follow                                                         through on – agreements and promises.                                      b. Impulsivity: Acting on the spur of the moment in response to immediate                                               stimuli; acting on a momentary basis without a plan or consideration of                                                        outcomes; difficulty establishing and following plans.                                      c.Risk taking: Engagement in dangerous, risky, and potentially self-damaging                                          activities, unnecessarily and without regard for consequences; boredom                                                 proneness and thoughtless initiation of activities to counter boredom; lack                                          of concern for one„s limitations and denial of the reality of personal dangerC. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟spersonality trait expression are relatively stable across time andconsistent across situations.D. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟spersonality trait expression are not better understood asnormative for the individual‟s developmental stage or socioculturalenvironment.E. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual‟spersonality trait expression are not solely due to the directphysiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse,medication) or a general medical condition (e.g., severe headtrauma).F. The individual is at least age 18 years.

TRAITS OF A PSYCHOPATH

psychopaths are born not made: this basically means there is a genetic difference between ‘normal’ people and psychopaths.don’t care about other people and how their actions may affect others, they will manipulate and use people with caring how this affects the other person.little to no empathy for others. they could kills your best friend and not care, they may understand what you’re feeling, but they can not actually feel those emotions themselves.good at planning and playing the part. psychopaths may not be able to fit into society in their own mind, may not feel anything for the people around them however to most people they are just like everyone else, because they know how to pretend, to put on the facade. they can mimic emotions, they can understand emotions enough to pretend they feel that way even if they don’t actually feel like that. they are good at planning so they are hard to catch, they are meticulous in their plans so as to not get caught. 

TRAITS OF A SOCIOPATH

sociopaths are made not born. most people who suffer from sociopathy have suffered from psychological trauma be that from childhood abuse or trauma which makes it hard for them to function properly on society as a normal person.much more likely to form meaningful relationships with others, meaningful genuine, emotional relationships. HOWEVER forming relationships is still difficult and really only connect with like minded people, or people who show a bit more of an interest in them.impulsive and don’t plan ahead. they don’t think before they do things, their actions are not usually planned out, they don’t think about the consequences before they do things and a lot of the time their actions are a result of spontaneous anger or passion etc. its a lot emotionally fuelled. 

QUICK RECAP

psychopaths tend to be born with the disorder, which can be related to biological/mental differences, for example in brain scans of normal brains vs the brain of a psychopath. sociopaths tend to have suffered psychological trauma during childhood or early teens. both show conduct disorder before the age of 15

psychopaths find it difficult and sometimes even impossible to form meaningful relationships with others, they can pretend, or play a part, however these relationships are usually for some sort of gain on there part. sociopaths have difficulty with relationships, however they still can form them more easily with like minded people.

psychopaths plan ahead, they way up the consequences in order to ensure they do not get themselves in danger, they don’t care about their people’s safety very much though. sociopaths are impulsive and act without thinking, usually influences by strong emotions like anger.

if you don’t give a shit about the digger part of this and just wanted to know the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath then you can stop reading now lol its all digger from here on out

digger is for sure someone who suffers from antisocial personality disorder, he pretty much falls under all the points. 

he is manipulative, deceitful, callous, hostile, irresponsible, impulsive, takes risks, and all these things are consistent over time, they are not normal for his culture and they are not a result of other psychology disorder or a medical condition oh...and he is over 18.

how is he a sociopath over a psychopath?

he suffered trauma as a child, he did have conduct disorder. he has formed meaningful relationships, genuine ones, he doesn’t really imitate or fake feelings, he is a lot more emotional than perhaps a psychopath truly is. he is extremely impulsive, he doesn’t really plan ahead. while he LACKS empathy and remorse it isn’t to a point where he doesn’t feel it all together, he has shown remorse for certain things, he has shown guilt. (guys this is supposed to be the main part of the answer and I give this shit response....idk how much you know about digger and I don’t want to go on a tangent or sound patronising about him lol???)

#mental illness tw #and crap #lol this be my attempt at answering this question #ah #ask me questions if I confused you #or if you want to know #more bcos #this is very rushed #and not every indepth #but like its long af ya know #sooo #answered.x #out of boomerangs.x #anon.x #character shit #Anonymous

[thisisatester]

Common Application (Personal Statement):

The common app I wrote for Stanford was very personal so I’m choosing not to share it… BUT, I’m going to include the common app I sent to a bunch of ivies and other schools –

Some students have a background, identity, interest, or talent that is so meaningful they believe their application would be incomplete without it. If this sounds like you, then please share your story.

Every Sunday morning, I pull up last week’s This American Life podcast on my phone, lace up my running shoes, and begin my trek up Lone Mountain – a heap of dirt, gravel, and rock, sitting isolated amidst suburban wasteland. Reaching the top, I stare out at a lackluster view of Las Vegas’ silhouette, barely distinguishable through the dust and smog shifting with the desert breeze. I look down at the 600ft drop briefly, turn around, and begin my trip back home – only to repeat the same journey next Sunday.

There is no breathtaking view or unique wildlife to draw me to my hike: it is the piercing cold air and aggressive terrain that instead excites my core. My Sunday morning hike is a series of struggles: my lungs clambering for oxygen, heart tirelessly pumping blood, and muscles straining to keep up with my pace, but I embrace the struggle. I find my own form of truth and contentment along the uphill journey.

It’s my belief that just barely finding the will to take the next step, and then suddenly discovering yourself unable to resist taking another, is among the most unique and surreal experiences a person can have. While my body teeters at the edge of complete collapse, I feel the most alive. The feeling must be akin to what drove Amelia Earhart to new skies aboard the Friendship, or Philippe Petit to the top of the twin towers. It is the challenges – the pain, sweat, and long nights – that inspire those who push the envelope to never slow down. This love for challenges accompanied Earhart to her death, led Petit to bullfighting and carpentry in lieu of fading in his old age, and I to early morning hikes instead of sleeping in.

“Each atom of that stone,

each mineral flake of that night filled mountain,

in itself forms a world.

The struggle itself toward heights is enough to fill a man’s heart.

One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

~Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus

Like Albert Camus, I imagine Sisyphus – condemned to roll a rock up a mountain, only to have it roll back down every time he reaches the top – happy. It is the challenges, struggles, and tribulations that energize Sisyphus and my spirit, not the prospects of reaching the top of the hill.

Sisyphus found happiness and the meaning of life in pushing that rock. The meaning of life is simply living it. I live through my hikes, experiencing what life has to offer through getting up each morning and seeking out new challenges. It is where I am happiest, listening to Ira Glass tell me new stories of people I’ve never met, and their own quests for happiness, while I venture out on my own. My hikes remind me that the simple opportunity to take small steps, to look adversity in the eye and to conquer it little by little, is what I value.

I believe that life is a perpetual climb, but that does not make me feel hopeless. I am content in knowing that I am like Sisyphus, constantly climbing. In this intrinsically meaningless desert I will create and learn, continue to push this boulder of existence, of life, not because I will reach the top and be done, but because it is in living and understanding suffering in the hardest of times, in my daily struggle to comprehend just how absurd everything is, that I experience the most full and beautiful of life that our human condition can offer. The absurdity of our condition inspires me to make my own meaning of it all – to study life, history, and our place in it.

That is why I trudge on – learning, growing, and creating, focusing on the next step and never the last.

Short Takes:

Favorite books, authors, films, and/or artists

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov (Book) – objective beauty, a love letter to the English Language 2. Bossypants by Tina Fey (Book) – my woman crush

Seven Psychopaths (Film) – what a trip!

Quentin Tarantino (Filmmaker) – artist, genius, mastermind…

Aaron Draplin (Graphic Designer) – a passionate eccentric

Newspapers, magazines, websites

Smashing Magazine – just great

PBS Idea Channel – is it how fast he talks or …?

reddit.com – lol

Most significant challenge society faces

I’ve seen my parents crash at the end of the week from being overworked. Society encourages this. America is overwhelmingly prone to depression and exhaustion, and that’s because we’ve put work over family, friends, and happiness, which is extremely unhealthy. We need to go back to finding a balance.

Last two summers

– burnt at the beach

– learned how to skate

– experienced summer!

Historical moment or event

The time Teddy Roosevelt got shot in the chest. The whole story sounds ridiculous – almost to the point that I don’t believe it. I’d want to experience it all – the shock, panic, and confusion – and when he still delivered his speech despite the bullet hole in his suit.

What five words best describe you?

Stressed and messy but fun

Intellectual Vitality (Idea or experience important to intellectual development):

My closet could be its own exhibit, boasting pieces dating back decades even centuries. Each new addition is evidence of a vibrant past, history substantialized through WWII patriotism in utilitarian-chic padded shoulders or 70’s liberation in soft cascading fringe.

When I started to make my own clothes, I saw how fashion also bridged the gap between my analytical and creative sides. Designs in my journal played with elements of geometry. I documented the way natural-fibers fared better than synthetic-fibers in heat and used chemistry to explain why organza curled at the mercy of a flame. Despite my analytical approach I let my imagination wander, embracing spontaneity and gripping my pencil loosely as ideas flowed onto paper. Like the corpus callosum I studied in biology, fashion connected both sides of me. It’s movement, design, and architecture all in one. It shows the world who I am and what inspires me.

My family thinks I’m shallow for loving clothing, but actually, my clothes have sparked my curiosity in history, culture, and design. Fashion is what holds everything together, with its ability to communicate ideas and movements, and to carry history in its threads. Learning the meaning behind each fabric, shape, or button, is exciting to me. More importantly, creating my own clothes has given me a love for combining all of what I know to create something exciting and brand new, energizing my love for learning and showing me that my education culminates in all of my pursuits.

Roommate Essay (Note to future roommate):

I’d text but I misplaced my phone… yes, again.

I left you a breakfast sandwich straight from The CoHo – for dealing with my mom’s insistence on taking a bajillion photos with her daughter’s “roomie” when she visited. Still getting to know you so I guessed your order, but who doesn’t love breakfast sandwiches? It might still be hot!

Anyways, have you heard of Cath in College? When I first watched her videos showing all the fun she has with friends at Stanford, I fell in love, promising I’d do the same. I love making videos – and as my roommate you just landed a lead role! Before you run to Ms. Nunan’s office for a roommate change – hear me out. Everyone knows Stanford is a great school and blahblahblah, but they never see what makes it so special. They don’t hear our conversations, hike the dish, or bike across campus at midnight. They see our team on the field but don’t stand in a crowd cheering alongside us. I know our room will be the room for pizza and video games, hangouts, or movie nights – let’s share our Stanford with the world.

It’s only been a few weeks but I can tell the next year with you will be a lot of fun (I say we seek out whatever upperclassmen paired us together, personally thanking them with my homemade cookies.)

I hope you love the idea as much as I do.  (Also, if you see my phone, let me know.)

– Ty

What matters to you, and why?

It hurt that she didn’t remember me.

I could tell you every detail about my grandmother – from the peculiar way she dices mangoes to the smell of jasmine on her clothes. As her memory of me faded, my feeble attempts to reconnect fell flat. I shut her out completely: silence prevented the wound from festering.

As a young girl, my grandma turned to art when she first came to America. When I could first hold a pencil, she bought me a journal with a note on the back.

“When I couldn’t find the words, I’d draw”

Sitting in front of her, silent, I couldn’t find the words. Every page in my journal became a vessel for my most precious memories with my grandma: us walking the boardwalk or her chasing me down a park slide. When I showed her the drawings, I saw her brows furrow in recollection as she traced the graphite lines. For a moment, she was mine again. Art communicated what words couldn’t.

The choice between acrylic and oil highlights versatility, stippling graphite teaches me patience, and splashing watercolor pigment across paper makes me embrace my mistakes, but that is not why art matters to me. It matters because when I draw for my grandma, I am reminded that art can break barriers. When she whispers my name and shakes my arm, I prove that art is a language we can all speak.

[healthandfitnessrecipes-blog]

How YOU Can Undermine the ‘Evil Cabal’

https://healthandfitnessrecipes.com/?p=6587

Dylan Charles, Editor Waking Times

Over the years, the description of the tyrants and psychopaths that so often occupy positions of power in our world has evolved, and today it is fashionable to refer to this nebulous group by using the term ‘Evil Cabal.’

Language is perhaps the most important device we have for creating reality, and just as George Orwell knew, the more linguistically vague, simplistic, ambiguous and nondescript the language, the more room there is to shape perception. This is called Newspeak, and in the case of the ‘Evil Cabal,’ the term fails to fully describe our complex world, but succeeds tremendously in maintaining the prison of fear that actually inhibits freedom.

In a catch-all phrase like ‘Evil Cabal,’ there really is little substance in the language to inspire meaningful action or reaction. In fact, the opposite is true. By generalizing the widespread depravity in the world with such a vague yet loaded term, the result can only be fear and inaction.

But, just for rhetorical purposes, let’s suppose for a moment that the world’s troubles can indeed be wholly attributed to a singular, top-down, all-knowing, all-controlling evil cabal that has its wicked tentacles inserted into every facet of our lives. Let’s imagine that every bit of the injustice and calamity we see is intentionally orchestrated and narrated by an untouchable group of all-mighty criminals.

If this is in fact the case, one very serious question emerges: What exactly are YOU going to do about it? 

My thoughts on this are expressed below, and are derived from two decades of peering deeply into the abyss of conspiracy fact and alternative history. I’ve learned in time that such intense and singular focus on conspiracy and international wickedness is corrosive to the soul, inviting acrimony and triggering impotency into what should be the blessed, joyful gift of a life well lived.

How YOU Can Undermine the Evil Cabal

Firstly, understand that systems of political and economic control are actually more heavily dependent on the acquiescence, cooperation, and participation of many millions of people. They are much less dependent on brute force, even though the perception is that brute force controls everything. This notion is accurately presented by Larken Rose in his short animated presentation, The Tiny Dot. The acquiescent masses vastly outnumber any evildoers.

It is imperative to also understand that the world is heavily influenced by the management of public perception, and that holding onto a chiefly negative and fearful worldview severely limits your potential to create and experience the world in which you actually wish to see materialize.

Furthermore, you must recognize that taking it upon yourself to assemble and collate every possible fact and insight into every conspiracy and every nasty event is self-destructive. That is, by becoming a library of terrible truths, you are willfully  imposing upon yourself a subtle but powerful form of mental slavery.

The tendency to want to convince and awaken every person you meet to your point-of-view is ultimately caustic to personal relationships and can quickly lead to isolation. Take notice of the fact that individual isolation is exceptionally beneficial to any controlling power in our world, and therefore, it is imperative to connect with others and allow them to express their own personal truths without sparking your judgement and condemnation.

So many of us today adhere to a destructive worldview, and to counter this, it is critical to set an example for others in your life by living in such a way as to inspire a love for freedom, independence and individuality. This is done, first and foremost, by giving freedom to others. Allow people the privilege to walk their own path and think their own thoughts.

Moreover, to undermine a cabal that primarily rules by psychological control, it is essential to recognize that all humans have a tendency to want to control things, and that as human beings we all share similar shadow traits. The desire to control others, and even to control nature, is evident at every level of society, meaning we are all inherently capable of extraordinary evil and cruelty. It is your duty and priority to recognize this and to manage this tendency within yourself and only yourself.

Also, remember that energy goes where attention flows. If you are totally consumed with the wicked deeds of the evil cabal, as so many otherwise righteous people are, you are inadvertently giving away your personal power and energy, thus contributing to their ability to control people with fear.

When you are engaged in an endless and all too often speculative discussion about the evil deeds of others, you are engaged in a form of worship that puts one in a state of continually imagining the uninhibited power of some other mysterious and unnameable other. This makes their power much more real than it may actually be. Stop worshiping psychopaths and evil people by giving them so much of your attention, because exposing corruption alone is not enough to create a better world. In order to see positive change we have to shift our attention to those ideas and people who are contributing to the healing of the earth and its people.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="http://cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Additionally, recognize that in today’s media landscape, even those who may seem to have your best interest at heart often profit wildly from perpetuating fear and despair. We live in a viral information culture where buzzwords, distortions, and over-simplifications get clicks and earn advertising dollars. There is an enormous profit motive in keeping people teetering on the margin of despondency and hope. We’ve built an entire economy out of fear, and it’s up to you to break this cycle and smash this paradigm. You can do so by checking in with your heart and asking if the information you’re consuming is inspired by fear or by love.

Finally, use the freedom you still have. Use it right now to become the person you are supposed to be. Follow your heart and find your place, wherever it may be. If you are interested in politics or otherwise directly confronting injustice and corruption in the system, throw yourself wholly into this effort, with heart. However, if your calling is beneficial in any other way, do not diminish the positive effect that you can have on the world by simply being a force of good, big or small. If all you have to offer at this moment is a smile, use it generously.

Ultimately, there are many ways to resist evil, and as George Herbert wrote, ‘the best revenge is living well.’ Heal yourself and become an agent of joy. Whether there is, or is not, a round-table evil cabal of untouchables is ultimately irrelevant to how you live your life right now. Get on with the business of living well.

Final Thoughts

I wrote this piece as an indirect response to an email I recently received from a reader. I’m noting it here because in my position I see this sentiment quite frequently, and I feel that it needs to be called out. Here is the note in full:

Hi there. I really don’t appreciate your website getting VERY POLITICAL. I am going to quit reading it now and will recommend the same thing to all of the people I know. Obviously, there is a lot of info you don’t know and you are wasting your time playing into the hands of the Evil Cabal. I have no time for little minds. Very Sincerely, L

Clearly this person, L, cares about the world we live in and the future we create together, yet, based on my own personal experience, personal growth, and ever-evolving understanding of the world, I feel like this mindset needs to be acknowledged as counter-productive and harmful to one’s well-being and mental stability, while ultimately contributing to the oppressiveness in our world today.

It does need to be said, though, that there are undoubtedly evil people, institutions, corporations, and diabolical plans at play in our world, so again, I ask you, what exactly are you going to do about it?

Read more articles by Dylan Charles.

About the Author

Dylan Charles is the editor of Waking Times and co-host of Redesigning Reality, both dedicated to ideas of personal transformation, societal awakening, and planetary renewal. His personal journey is deeply inspired by shamanic plant medicines and the arts of Kung Fu, Qi Gong and Yoga. After seven years of living in Costa Rica, he now lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains, where he practices Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and enjoys spending time with family. He has written hundreds of articles, reaching and inspiring millions of people around the world.

This article (How YOU Can Undermine the ‘Evil Cabal’) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to DylanCharles and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

Like Waking Times on Facebook, Follow Waking Times on Twitter

Credits: Original Content Source