#i understand this a very surface level analysis of trauma

[leadpoisoningprincess]

thinking about henry collins and how his character is so deeply changed by his traumatic experiences... in the first episode, the very first dialogue we hear on the ships is henry collins giving billy orren orders with a smile and pat on the back. and when he's about to go down in the diving suit and explaining what his signals will mean, his voice and tone is confident and eloquent and commanding and he enunciates each word like he's used to giving orders. but afterwards, when we see him talking to dr stanley, and later after carnivale when he talks to goodsir, he mumbles and stutters and drifts off mid-sentence, can't make eye contact, constantly fidgets... his speech becomes almost childlike. and then it all ends with him drinking the coca wine and entering a euphoric silly state where he's barely aware of his surroundings and has no sense of self-preservation. idk he's just changed so much by his experiences and it's shown so well

#i understand this a very surface level analysis of trauma #im just thinkin tonite #op #henry collins #i understand u girl. we are drinking peruvian together

[earthstellar]

TF Earthspark S1 Episode 21: What it Means to Be Believed -- An Analysis Post

Putting this analysis behind a spoiler cut, as these episodes came out today!

The conversation between Hashtag and Starscream here immediately reminded me of the times I've spoken with abuse victims.

Hashtag: Is this how Megatron treated you?

Starscream: ...You believe me?

Hashtag: I believe he hurt you.

Starscream: You don't know me! You couldn't possibly understand what I've been through!

Hashtag: Then tell me. When bad things happen, it isn't always our fault. There was this Mandroid guy, and he hacked my systems! And I...

So, let's talk about this exchange.

Starscream starts out aggressively just before this conversation, attempting to order Hashtag around.

She declines, and immediately identifies that Starscream's behaviour has likely been informed by prior abuse.

She highlights this in the moment and gets Starscream to notice his verbally aggressive approach by making him realise that he is behaving how Megatron used to treat him-- She does this by using questioning, not by using accusatory language.

This is REALLY IMPORTANT, and is a good approach. When someone is behaving poorly or offensively, encourage them to reflect in the moment by posing a question. It prevents any sense of being challenged, as they are now set up to challenge themselves. "Is my behaviour actually negative? Am I being hurtful?"

This approach is successful, and stops Starscream outright.

It shocks him, to be given the leeway of genuine understanding. This catches him off guard so severely, that we actually get a totally honest reply from him. "You believe me?"

Which is a really significant moment, because Starscream is constantly subject to being, essentially, assumed evil. The other bots often see his negative behaviour and lashing out in a very surface-level kind of way; They don't further investigate or try to think about why, exactly, Starscream is like this.

We don't know how he used to be, before the war or during the war, in this continuity quite yet. But it is heavily implied that a lot of his current behaviour is informed by trauma, and some of that trauma very clearly stems from his prior relationship with Megatron.

Starscream is genuinely surprised that anyone is willing to look past that surface level and actually think: Why is he like this? Where is this behaviour coming from?

Hashtag rightly identifies that what Starscream is saying and how he is saying it is very reminiscent of commanding language; She knows Megatron was his superior officer during the war. She knows Starscream has a poor relationship with Megatron. She knows that as a lower ranked Decepticon, he likely was subject to at least some mistreatment, and that mistreatment is echoed in his "taking command" approach here.

Because to Starscream, "taking command" means being aggressive and controlling. It means using intimidation and belittlement to stay on top.

And Hashtag rightly assumes that this is likely because this is how Megatron did it.

This is how Megatron treated him.

Of course, Starscream responds defensively, as anyone might expect.

It hurts to become aware that you are mirroring harmful behaviour, that you are acting out your hurt on others in a way that hurt was inflicted upon you, and Starscream understandably retorts by claiming that of course, Hashtag doesn't know him-- Or, it is implied, his past.

He is trying to protect himself or instil a sense of control over the conversation by creating distance, while also trying to work up some defensive anger in himself-- How presumptuous of her, to assume!

Except, she's right. And he knows that.

So instead of throwing a fit, he listens when she continues.

Hashtag does two very correct things here:

First, she lets Starscream know that she encourages him to talk about it. She's willing to listen.

Second, she offers some support by starting to talk about her own experience of being abused-- When Mandroid took away her self-agency and assumed control of her.

This is a good and fairly common way that abuse victims tend to offer support to one another; It's often encouraged in certain types of group therapy or support sessions for people to share similar experiences, or experiences that evoked similar feelings, when it's appropriate and beneficial for those present (including the speaker) to do so.

She is attempting to reinforce to Starscream that even though she might not know his pain, she knows her own-- By sharing that trauma with him and being vulnerable herself, that might provide a connection point for them both and could possibly encourage Starscream to open up a bit to her.

This is roughly where the conversation is interrupted, so we don't get to hear Starscream's response.

But I think Hashtag intuitively had a very good approach here: She identified a traumatised person lashing out in a way that was familiar to them but harmful to others, in a way that is indicative of potential prior abuse, and made an effort to provide a safe opportunity for Starscream to talk it out without any fear of repercussions.

She made sure Starscream knows that she is listening and paying attention to him.

She made sure Starscream knows that she believes him, that he does have someone willing to hear his side of the story and genuinely take him at his word.

And that is immensely important; It is common for abuse victims and traumatised people to attempt to self-isolate or lash out, and she saw through Starscream's behaviour here for what it was: An abused person lashing out, trying to close off, behaving in hurtful ways that reflect the hurtful ways they were treated as a defence mechanism.

Starscream needs someone like Hashtag, who won't judge him based on preconceived notions of who he was as a Decepticon, who is willing to listen and give him an opportunity, who is willing to counter his withdrawal by providing honesty and letting him know that she wants to keep the conversation open and give him the space to speak freely about his hurt.

I also especially like that she makes a point of mentioning that we are not at fault for how we are hurt by others. We're not always in control of how we feel, or how we express our feelings.

She doesn't blame Starscream for lashing out. She gets it.

Alleviating Shame: It Is Not Your Fault

Hashtag had her autonomy violated in a very serious way, and although it's not the same thing, Starscream as part of a militarised faction and command structure lost a lot of his autonomy to his service under Megatron-- You don't get to walk away if you're second in command, assuming he held that same position in this continuity for most if not all of the war.

Hashtag is forced to deal with what Mandroid did to her, and Starscream is forced to deal with how Megatron treated him.

Neither of them had any say in what happened to them, or what was done to them, or how it hurts afterwards.

Hashtag knows she has support from her family, but who does Starscream really have? The other fliers, sure, but to what degree? How much support does Starscream really get from anyone, ever?

By letting him know she's been hurt too, even though she didn't get to finish her sentence, she's let him know that he's not entirely alone.

By making the point that nobody can be responsible for what others do to them, Starscream is told outright-- possibly for the first time--that the way Megatron treated him is not his fault.

Internalised Blame: Guilt and Failure Under Megatron's Command

Starscream may very well blame himself, to some degree; We don't know exactly how he's internalised anything, but we do know that Starscream was reasonably high ranking, and was in that command structure for most of the war.

In most militarised ranking structures, it is often the case that officers are considered responsible for errors, mistakes, losses etc. that may fall under a branch of their command which are many times realistically somewhat beyond their ability to control.

This can be a significant source of internalised blame for a lot of former military officers or even military personnel in general; "We lost X soldiers/civilians/etc. and it was my fault" is not an uncommon sentiment, even when realistically it is no single individual's fault and certain circumstances or occurrences are beyond anyone's control.

Megatron likely came down hard on Starscream for any losses, whether it was territory, soldiers, or anything else. He likely came down hard on Starscream for just about anything, after a certain point.

It's entirely possible that Starscream started to internalise these situations as personal blame, as both a result of serving in a war where officers are held ultimately accountable, and as a result of Megatron's treatment of him in general.

He may not have been able to separate "challenges experienced as a commander" and "personal failings" after a while.

And any further/prolonged abuse from Megatron would have only compounded that trend of internalising anything and everything as blame, failure, his own fault-- Not as an officer, but as a person-- Even if it explicitly could not have been.

Emulating Harmful Behaviours: Identify, Understand, Address

This would go some way to partially explaining why Starscream starts to exhibit this aggressive, commanding behaviour; He ends up likely unintentionally emulating Megatron's harmful leadership style, because he sees Megatron as being successful and powerful and in control, while he feels as though he is the opposite in every way.

Abuse has a tendency to make people feel less-than. It can remove people's sense of agency and confidence. It can make people think that their personal traits or inherent elements of their self are suddenly no good, that they could have done something or should have done something, if they were "better".

This is one way that abused people can sometimes start copying or reflecting harmful behaviours from their abusers; They don't know what else they can do. They may be disconnected from themselves to the degree that adopting these behaviours seems like the only "right" option, because it's the only thing that makes people back off, that makes them have that sense of strength or control that their abuser has stripped from them.

I say this a lot in some of my posts, but it's important to remember that while a behaviour may not be OK, we do need to understand.

It's important to recognise this type of repeating back prior experienced abuse, and to not dismiss people who may be hurt when they are lashing out or copying abusive behaviour-- It's important when safe and appropriate to do so to identify this is happening, to make an effort to understand it, and help the person do the same. That's when addressing internalised abusive behaviours can start.

This can take a lot of work, therapy, support, etc. to start identifying, let alone start addressing it-- But it's very possible for abuse victims to restore their sense of self and regain confidence in their capability and identity.

When abused people reflect back prior abusive behaviours that they have experienced, this does not make them a bad person. It means they have been abused, and they may need help to realise they are doing this, and may need help to identify why in a safe way, and may need help to start actually processing trauma in a healthier way for themselves and others.

Hashtag has opened a door for Starscream in more than one way, in this episode.

She's giving him a chance to do this.

She's helping him identify his harmful behaviours, she's acknowledging that he feels bad, that he was made to feel less-than, in ways that she might not have experienced herself-- But she's experienced similar feelings if not the same exact situations, and she's willing to share her own trauma with him. Hopefully he feels he can share with her, too.

I've spoken with plenty of abuse victims, and it's common to hear "You weren't there, you don't know!" or similar retorts when attempting to encourage conversation around some sensitive or traumatising memories or experiences.

It's not always appropriate to provide one's own traumatic experiences in response, but in cases where it is safe and appropriate to do so, I have rolled up my own sleeves and shown my own scars. I have talked about my own traumas as a way of showing support and as a way of showing someone that even if their individual experiences were unique, the feelings they experienced were not, and those feelings can provide a common ground and help provide a point around which to help build rapport. It can also help provide perspective, external to themselves, which can be ultimately positive.

It can also be a show of good faith: I'm not going to judge you. I believe you. I have been hurt, too. Our situations are different, but the way we were made to feel at times was similar.

When appropriate, this can be a pretty effective way to help someone open up about things that are potentially very hard to talk about, or to discuss feelings that are very complex or "tangled" in a way that takes some work to sort out in a healthier, safer way.

Hashtag offered her own traumatic experience to Starscream here, as a way of hopefully meeting Starscream halfway.

And hopefully, it was at least to some degree successful.

So I think Hashtag did a great job in this scene, and I hope we see Starscream take this opportunity that has been afforded to him to give the Malto Bots a chance...

...And to give himself a chance, as well.

----

This is entirely unedited as I continue to watch the episode, as I just got home from work, but I hope it was interesting to someone! :)

#tfe spoilers #earthspark spoilers #spoilers #tfe starscream #tfe hashtag #long post #analysis post #maccadam #maccadams #tw abuse #tw abuse mention #starscream

[the-music-maniac]

I haven't watched that much of One Piece yet, so feel free to disagree with me on this analysis, but there's one thing about people's general interpretation of Sanji as a character that drives me a little nuts. And I'm saying this because even though I'm not very far along, I got spoiled for his backstory (because I refused to stop reading fanfiction even though when I first started I was like, on episode 3).

So before you continue, there are spoilers for Sanji's past.

I think people tend to ignore that the differences between Sanji's demeanor towards men vs towards women likely partially stem from severe trauma. I don't believe his actions are entirely intrinsic, its not like he was born acting like this - nor is it an unchanging immutable fact of his character, despite what a lot of people seem to believe.

And for some context on what prompted this - I'm a sanzo/zosan shipper, so I tend to crawl through the depths of the internet looking for fun little videos and fanarts, and one consistent protest I see with this ship is "Sanji DESPISES men and WORSHIPS women, there's literally no way he could EVER be attracted to men or want to date a man he HATES them."

Which bothers me outside of any arguments about Sanji's sexuality or even about any ships - which I will get to in a second - because that interpretation of Sanji assumes his actions are just there for no reason. Sanji hates men, therefore he hates all men with no exceptions, and he will always hate men. Sanji loves all women, therefore he will always worship every single woman he meets. I dunno, I think it's just a very surface level understanding of who he is, and relies on setting a rule for no reason and just sticking to it, as if it's just a mere quirk of his character with no backing to it.

Sanji's first interaction with any people, was in the form of his biological family, as is the case with most of us. Specifically, his father and brothers, who abused him and didn't even treat him like a person, and his mother and sister, who were the only people that treated him with kindness and saw his humanity. Tbh, he reminds me of the way women who have experienced trauma from men act - a general dislike/disdain and distrust for them (for good reason). And I don't doubt Sanji's overall elevation of women was only hammered home by the fact that his first ever father figure - arguably the first man who's treated him with kindness - teaching him the lesson to always respect women. His very illogical need to never fight women probably partially comes from the events in his life, and because it's not just a two dimensional arbitrary rule established for his character - there can be exceptions and growth.

We already know this, because despite Sanji's general disdain of men as a whole, he is capable of caring/loving men that he personally knows. He loves Zeff, and he loves his nakama - some of whom are MEN. Like, it's right there??? In the same way a woman who has experienced violence at the hands of a man probably still has family and friends or even a significant other that they love and care about that are men.

Like if you're using his demeanor towards the different genders as an "aha got you" argument for why Sanji couldn't possibly be queer, its not as strong of an argument as you think it is.

And if we're operating under the assumption that Sanji partially acts like this because of trauma, it brings up quite a few interesting arguments about his sexuality and potential romantic partners.

Which segways into sanzo/zosan, since admittedly I got into this entire debacle because I was looking into fanart (non-shippers feel free to click away now if you wish, I get that not everyone likes the ship, which is valid).

I don't think Sanji's actions means he couldn't be bisexual. Cause I'm bisexual, and you know what would make me very very keen to ignore all my attraction to one specific gender? If I had multiple instances of that gender hurt me severely. In fact I'm not so certain I don't experience that, because while I haven't had anything super bad happen to me, I hear about things in the news, about friends and family who have been harmed, interacted with men who have talked down to me, and I definitely went through a phase in my younger years where i just refused to consider men as a possibility for a romantic partner, because I was just so so angry. And I'm not saying Sanji doesn't like women in truth, because he absolutely does. He's both attracted to them and likes them. But that doesn't eliminate the possibility that he might also be attracted to men, or other non-binary genders. In fact the more he doth protest, and puts on a show when he sees a pretty woman, the more I'm sure he's in denial. Internalized homophobia can also be a bitch. Contrary to making me think Sanji is absolutely straight, the way he acts in the show actually puts me the opposite way.

I've heard Sanji also has an interesting relationship with gender and may be genderqueer but I don't know as many details about that yet, so I'll skip it for now. But regardless, I look at Sanji and go "I don't think this is a traditionally cishet character."

Of course, this is by far not the only interpretation you can have of Sanji. It could be that he's traumatized and also heterosexual. That's absolutely fine. But my overall point here is that I don't think what we see in canon negates the possibility that Sanji can be queer.

As to why I like Zosan in relation to this:

1. First, a relatively minor thing, I enjoy the sheer amount of bickering/fighting. People hold that up as a reason to not like the ship and I'm like, my dude that's one of the only reasons why I'm here. My love language is annoying the people you love and occasionally having homoerotic battles. duh.

2. Zoro is one of the aforementioned men that Sanji cares about, one of the exceptions to his "men are horrible" thing. Like they argue and fight a lot, sure, but you're not convincing me that they don't love each other. In whatever capacity - platonic or romantic - is up to your interpretation. Sanji loves all of his nakama, that's not really something I see as up for debate.

3. I honestly believe that until Sanji gets a less extreme viewpoint of the different genders - he won't be able to be in a healthy romantic relationship with a woman. For one thing, I know Sanji has self worth issues for days. For another thing, his hero worship for women as a whole - his refusal to fight women, even when they're actively trying to harm him - I don't see that translating well to a relationship. Moreover, I can see it being exhausting for the woman he ends up with, to always be treated like she's made of glass or agreed with, regardless of what she says.

Essentially, he wouldn't really treat that relationship as a partnership between equals, and I think when that happens, you run the risk of the individuals hurting each other, even on accident. Of course, we can also see this as a facet of his character with exceptions and possibility for personal growth. Maybe if he gets with a girl he'll grow and learn and still end up in a good relationship. You could also just interpret his demeanor as over the top flirting that he'll reign back in for an actual serious relationship. Sky's the limit when it comes to fandom interpretations.

But because of this, regardless, I just don't see any potential between the female characters I've met and Sanji. What I do see potential in, is Zoro. Here is actually a character Sanji not only trusts to watch his back, is on equal footing with, but is also unafraid to speak his mind and fight with. He doesn't walk on eggshells or worship the ground Zoro walks on, he has no qualms about defending himself if Zoro crosses a line. That is what a relationship can be built on.

4. Zoro has a contrasting way of interacting with women that I find super interesting. He comes off as the kind of character that doesn't actually care about the gender of the person he's fighting or interacting with - he cares about their ability. Which kinda explains his reactions when he hears Kuina's thoughts about being a girl - and I think Tashigi as well if I'm remembering correctly. There could be a clash of beliefs there that might be quite interesting. I know Zoro and Sanji do fight about how they talk to women, but I meant like something not just played off for laughs. Maybe there is something like that later in the show, who knows, I'm still early on.

5. Again the entire reason why I like enemies to lovers is the need for personal growth. I heard someone say that Zoro would be fine with being in love with a boy if it wasn't Sanji, and Sanji would be fine with being in love with Zoro if he wasn't a boy, and man do I think that's accurate. And here's the crux of the matter - in order for them to get together, they need to get over their hang-ups. Sanji needs to unpack the ten million tons of trauma he keeps repressed under his curly noggin, and Zoro needs to figure out why Sanji rubs him the wrong way. That shit is INTERESTING. People forget that the reason why this trope is so popular is BECAUSE it's a fixer upper - there's work to do. Nothing is perfect. It may even be a little toxic. That's the appeal.

Anyways this is getting TOO LONG. Thanks for reading!

#sanji blackleg; trauma; and his relationship to men and women: an essay #one piece #sanji blackleg #analysis #roronoa zoro #sanzo #zosan #sanji x zoro #zoro x sanji #bisexual sanji blackleg #potentially genderqueer sanji blackleg #zoro and sanji's differing interactions with women are just quite interesting #i headcanon zoro as gay cause that man has never shown interest in a woman from what I've seen so far

[the-blorbo-project]

Blorbos at Conference!

Long time, no update, but this project is moving forward! This weekend, we're at a conference hosted by the Society for Cinema and Media Studies, or SCMS, presenting as part of a panel devoted to fan studies.

Why do panels matter?

First and foremost, it's a way to get research before a bunch of other researchers while it's still in progress. This helps catch poorly formed ideas, surface new good ideas, and share what's coming up with the fan studies research communities. It's also good for our humble PhD student CVs!

The Findings

Of course, the most interesting part is what, actually, we're presenting, AKA the findings! They're a work in progress, and the hardest part is the coding (talked about here). Therefore, I'm focusing on what I could do deep analysis on relatively quickly. (note: these images don't have image IDs because I summarize them below, but they're graphic representations of what I talk about in the text).

The majority of survey respondents were young: about 39% were 18-22 and 32% were 23-27. A further 17% were 28-32, about 8% were 33-37, and then it got progressively smaller from there. Shoutout to all 3 respondents who were 63 and over! So glad you're here.

In terms of social media usage, most people used tumblr - unsurprising, since that's where we got our most traction for the survey. Discord was the second most likely. Part of a later analysis will be seeing if these terms are more likely to be used by different age groups or on different platforms, which is cool.

Almost everyone surveyed had heard of these terms. Blorbo was the most-used and meow meow was least used, but very, very few respondents had not heard of these terms at all. This may be in part due to how we used them in our survey recruitment, since we did want to find people who knew what these terms were so that they could define them for us.

These numbers slope slightly down because something broke when we imported them into NVivo (a coding software) and frankly I don't understand it well even when it actually works, let alone when it breaks.

Here's a little visual of the terms you suggested for characters. Unfortunately, NVivo crashes every time I try to exclude words from this word bubble (like "term"), so it's not as clear as I'd like it to be, but there are some interesting ones. Particularly interesting are the cluster of gendered terms; husbando and waifu, malewife, sexyman, boy, girl, etc. I want to do some analysis of this because it parallels some preliminary coding results. Y'all also really find your blorbos scrunkly/skrunkly/scrungly, huh?

I also want to figure out how to tell the visualizer that "glup" and "shitto" go together, because "shitto" all by its lonesome over there is cracking me up.

Qualitative Findings

Like I said, the coding is...so far from done. That's mostly due to some Ao3-author levels of life disruption from both of us. BUT! I can tentatively say a couple of things:

There are notably clear definitions about these terms. We weren't sure if there even really was a definition of "blorbo", but it clearly refers to a very specific kind of one-true-character. By contrast, comfort characters are associated with experiencing positive emotions, and meow meows are more likely to be evil or morally grey (but you love them though).

Unsurprisingly, your characters make you happy. We're distinguishing between general positive emotions, attachment, relatability, and one-true-character belovedness. Also sexiness, but that (surprisingly) hasn't come up that much.

There are a couple of ways in which darker themes come up. Villains remain beloved, but a recurring theme is also using tragedy or trauma in fiction as catharsis.

Finally, there's a lot of playful and tactile language. "Rotating him in my mind" really is that common.

Additionally, I'm really interested in the role of gender. Many of you referred to your blorbos/meow meows as your guys, with some of you clarifying that it was "my little guy (gender neutral)". Others noted that most characters you'd seen people describe as blorbos or meow meows were men/masc. This did not come up for comfort characters. Analysis of the characters you consider exemplars of each definition will help flesh out this analysis.

Still to Come

SO much. Who are these characters? Is a specific character exclusively a meow meow, or are they also a common comfort character? What types of positive emotion are associated with each type? Are these character types or do they speak to a fan's individual (or a fandom's communal) relationship with a character?

Additionally - we didn't ask about neurodivergence, but many of y'all referenced it. I'm looking forward to exploring that as well.

That's all for now! I present this live in about two hours. If you're somehow following this account AND at SCMS, please come by!

#mod sarah #blorbos #blorbo from my shows #research on tumblr

[bl-inded]

The most heartbreaking part about the MohkDay break up, is that once again Mohk is all alone. And this time, he didn't make that choice. He wanted to stay, he wanted Day to be by his side. And he was still left alone

After Rung especially, we know that our boy has severe abandonment issues. And even though we can't be certain her death was preventable by him picking up the call, he blames himself for it. The fact that Day and Mohk have only ever spoken about Rung in surface-level conversations (hell I don't think they really ever spoke about Mohk a lot at all), it hurts sooo much more that Day broke up with him after Mohk laid his heart out in front of the whole family.

I saw a bunch of people talking about how Day refuses to do any emotional labour, and I see where they're coming from. But, i gotta disagree. He did not break up with Mohk because of his trauma. He broke up with Mohk because Mohk was willfully destroying his life to stay with Day. I don't want to say his heart was in the right place, but it was in the right area code at least. I genuinely believe that the "you also pity me" was an excuse because he didn't want to hold Mohk back. I want to believe that he didn't have the time to understand the implications of what Mohk meant when he talked about Rung and he regretted it later.

(I will live in that lie till I'm told otherwise)

But Mohk has never been a fighter for himself. He'll fight in a heartbeat for what Day or Porjai need. He'll put himself in harm's way to protect those he love. But the moment he has to fight for himself, he'll back out. I don't know if this is a post-ep1 flashback thing, but that is what the show has established for us. And so as gut wrenching as his "if that's what you want" is, it's very in character for him.

But just to be clear, now that I've been a rational adult about this analysis of this show and characters. FUCK ALL OF THIS. Like straight up wtf? Who asked for an ep11 conflict huh? Who? P'Aof?? I love you, but WHYYY. My absolute green flag of a man does not deserve this nonsense after everything he's done. So FIX THIS RIGHT NOW.

#last twilight #Istg I thought Night will go out after Mohk #but that's just my desperate need for someone to comfort him I guess #if Porjai doesn't tear Day a new one imma fuckin lose it #you know damn well my girl ain't gonna just sit and let this fly #problem is mohk probably won't tell her the full story and withdraw completely again #i'm so mad #i usually try not to think about the show as a structure but this is such a shoehorned ep11 conflict #if they wanted to to do the mohk doesnt take care of himself storyline they should have started it at least in ep8 #sigh #gmmtv #thai bl #bl rants #jimmysea #p'aof #mohkday #mohk #day #last twlight the series #thai bl meta

[avercado5]

Thoughts on Hux's sexuality

Please don't come for me this has been in my drafts for 6 months :]

So obviously, it's a big thing in this fandom to think Hux is gay. Which, I can see how people might see him as queer coded (and in some surface ways he is). Despite his homophobic vibes he's probably not homophobic since homophobia doesn't really exist in Star Wars as far as I know. But I was actually sitting back and thinking about it, and given his childhood abuse and backstory, I honestly seriously doubt he's gay.

Hux has spent his entire life being physically and psychologically abused by other men, be it his father, his fathers friends, Snoke (if you can call that nasty guy a man), or Kylo Ren. There is no Canon media of Hux being abused by non-men. Given the PTSD he has to have from these experiences, there is no way he would easily trust another person enough to be in a relationship with them, let alone a man (and we already know from Canon that hux is not a trusting person). Is it possible that he'd end up in a M/M relationship? Of course. Likely? I don't think so. If he did, it would be very likely it would be toxic or unhealthy.

Men are a threat to Armitage. They want to ursurp him. They want to hurt him. They want to use him for their own ends and then discard him. In a patriarchal organization like the First Order (albeit less so than the empire), men are the primary threat to his own stability.

So based on this analysis Armitage is either somewhere on the aroace spectrum (from trauma), OR he is on some level attracted to the opposite gender.

Why would the last thing make sense? That depends on a few things.

First, if Armitage had positive contact with his mother on Arkanis (as most of us like to assume, because um yes Armitage's mom we love her), he would crave nurturing presence of females after he was separated from her and, even as he grew older and more emotionally detached, there are primal human urges that he cannot erase. He was five when he left Arkanis. He could have known his mother long enough to understand that. Likewise, his protector and mentor, at least for a time, was Rae Sloane, a woman. Rae Sloane, at least for some time, protected and mentored Hux. As Hux grew up, the people who helped him tended to be women, and the people who abused him were men.

This is not to bash any ships with Hux or anything, just my own thoughts on the subject. Obviously this is all just speculation, but it's also explanatory to why a lot of pairings with Hux end up so abusive or out of character. His backstory and personality and struggles make writing a good ship with him immensely difficult, no matter what gender he's shipped with.

#armitage hux #star wars #general hux #the first order #general hux meta #armitage hux meta #meta #gingerpilot is an example of a ship that could work but probably wont because of huxs trust issues #i personally do not think there is any character in canon who could be with hux #you have to fundamentally change characters to make it work #i still enjoy a lot of the ships anyway though but theyre not realistic #brendol hux #young armitage hux #hux meta

[sobeksewerrat]

Mini-Drew-Analysis for His Birthday!!

Since yesterday was my lovely Drewy-bear's birthday, I decided to write a bullshit little blurb talking about how I interpret his character, and how much (I think) people misinterpret his aggression during the drakeup.

I won't include anything about the music club, since it has been a while since I rewatched the series as a whole and memories of them interacting with Drew are kinda rusty and that deserves its own essay.

Like the Milly/Ep.3 post, I *might* briefly mention a lot of my own trauma or experiences and compare them to Drew's behaviours, so apologies in advance if that bothers you.

Now, firstly, I would like to establish his major relationships in the show since most of his characterization comes from said relationships.

ZOEY:

Droey is arguably Drew's second-most-important relationship, despite the lack of screentime (which I am really salty about).

Now, whilst I love the aroace and gay Drew headacanons, I think we can all agree that he did love Zoey to some extent. The photo in Zoey's room and the fact that he is willing to fulfil her ever wish are proof enough in my eyes.

Drew's love-language is gift-giving (same, Drew, same). It was been confirmed that his parents get him everything they want since HIS FIRST APPEARANCE.

"Well, they bought it for me last night!"

I'm mostly theorising here, but going off of this alone: Drew's parents have been (and still are) very absent in his life.

They couldn't give him enough attention nor affection when he was a kid so they just opted to shove lavish gifts and money in his face to show him their [persumed] love for him.

So, Drew grew up with the virtue that love is mainly expressed through money and expensive gifts ingrained into his head since he was a young child.

He only buys gifts for people he deeply loves and cares about, it's not just a way of flexing or getting people to like him (more on that in the Jake part).

Drew loved Zoey, from the bottom of his heart, so he bought her everything she asked for and took her on dates to the mall regularly to show her how deep his affection for her is.

That's why he was so concerned and "suspicious" when she stopped asking for so many gifts.

He wasn't worried that she was "cheating", he was worried that she didn't loved him anymore, that she was going to leave him.

Moreover, Drew is a very distrustful person by nature, and those he trusts, he trusts deeply.

Those are the only people he allows himself to be emotional around or express his interests and hobbies to, but even then he still has an invisible wall surrounding him.

He lets them be close enough to understand him on a surface level, but not close enough to see his true colours and vulnerabilities (same, Drew, same ×2. Also, Milly parallel!!).

Zoey was naturally one of those few people he trusted, and she broke that trust.

That's why he was so hurt after Zoey left him. He trusted her, he was willing to go to the ends of the earth for her, he loved her.

But she cheated on him. She took advantage of him. She broke his trust.

And even without all of the above, anybody would get scarred and hurt by their partner cheating on them, manipulating them, and using them for money (trust me, I am speaking from personal experience here).

Well, Zoey betrayed him...at least his other friends are still-

HENRIAM:

WRONG. THEY HURT HIM TOO.

Let me elaborate.

We don't get enough screentime to see Drenriam interact so I can't write about them separately (FUXK YOU JAKE AND THE NUSIC FREKA DFOR HOGFINF ALL THE SCREENTOME).

But, we know Drew cares about them. And they know it too.

"Come on, you know you love us" (Henry, Ep5)

And Drew doesn't respond. He just blushes, rolls his eyes and stays silent, which I think is confirmation enough.

"buT hE iS mEAn tO tHeM!1!1" I hear a Drew-anti cry from afar while clutching their limited-edition Jailey keychains.

My guy, my gal, my enby pal, do you even HAVE friends?!?

You're only nice for the first month or so and THAT'S IT, you've gone past the expiry date of nice and become mean and brutally insult each other lightheartedly and call each other "Freak" affectionately. Sometimes it takes even less than that.

Again, they were two of the only few people he trusted.

And they also broke that trust by hiding Zoey's cheating from him. They even think about her gold-digging as JOKE (flashback to ep2 opening scene).

"They were blackmailed!!"

I don't even think I have the patience to elaborate on why that is a stupid fucking excuse. Zoey had no dirt on Jake, no?

They could have told him to tell Drew, or they could have just told him but tell him not to tell Zoey they were the ones who told on her or whatever.

I think the only reason Drew stuck with them during the finale was because he was truly alone. He had nobody else, so he stuck with the last shred of his life before Jake left, even if he hated them now (still can't wait for the Drake-up 2.0, where Drew breaks off his friendship with Henriam and falls into deep, deep depression<44).

(WAIT FUCK THEN DRIAM WONT BE CANON SH-)

Lia(and why Dria /p will never happen imo):

Yeah no it won't happen. Lia distanced herself from Zoey,and she will definitely start hanging out with Jake and the others and completely ditch the Dromies.

Yknow just completely cut off Drew from any form of emotional support system let him SUFFER

JAKE:

Oh the dreaded part-

Here we go ig.

Jake sucks. He was a horrible friend. That is the thesis, that is the topic sentence, that is what I will start with.

Let me just document every major shitty thing Jake did that I can remember atm.

1. He blackmailed Zoey and hid the fact that she was cheating on Drew from him, which breaks his trust (I elaborated on this more in my ep.3 analysis!!)

2. He lied to Drew about being grounded to ditch him for club practice, I am not even gonna try to explain why that is super shitty anybody with 2 braincells and 2 milligrams of basic human decency (which Jake apparently lacks) should be able to realize this on their own. Especially since Drew clearly has trust and attachment issues (his clearly possessive nature of Jake, being that he is one of the closest people to home). Actually, he also lied to him at the end of ep1 wtmf

3. Trying to give his laptop away to Sean. It isn't even about how rude it is to give away an expensive gift, it is about how oblivious Jake is to Drew's feelings. He doesn't even CARE about what Drew feels at all.

Drew feels like Jake is his closest friend, like he's the only person who truly understands him, when this shows that it is quite the opposite in fact.

Jake doesn't understand that it is more than just an expensive gift given by a spoiled kid with too much money to spend. It is a symbol of how much Drew loves him (platonically or otherwise). All of the gifts he buys for him are.

Drew is emotionally-constipated. We (sadly) don't get to see how they met exactly (only one picture to elude to it). But, I think I have an idea.

Drew sees Jake, a loner who's bullied by everyone and sitting all alone. He feels bad and wants to talk to him. He doesn't know how to approach him, so he tries the only way he knows.

All of his other friends and classmates would always seem impressed and fawn over him whenever his parents would buy him something new, so maybe it would work this time?

So he approaches Jake, and offers to let him play with his new switch, because that is the only possible way (in his head) to talk to him.

It is not like Jake doesn't value Drew, but this shows how little he actually knows; that him trying to fit in has caused him to completely misunderstand Drew. Idk man I don't really like Jake so I don't like analysing him please any jake kinnie try to explain.

Now, Jake has been spending a lot of time with the music club, and that has been triggering Drew's attachment issues. What was so great about those freaks anyway??

That whole scene in ep.9 was just his attachment and validation issues on full display, an essay on jagged--dust-jacket-analysis explains way better than I ever could, so check it out!!

When Jake yells at him and leaves in ep.10 and implies that there is something Zoey is hiding it...it breaks him, for all the reasons I stated before.

After Henriam explain everything, it just confuses and hurts him more.

But why would Jake hide this from him? Wasn't he his best friend? Why is he apologising to those freaks, but not him?!

It must be that Hailey girl, she is the one fucking with his head.

He'll confront her. He'll expose her for the fraud she is, and then Jake wi-

(Look please bear with me on this part ik the drake up is a meme now but please let us try to treat it seriously for once)

"Back off, Drew"

Jake chose the freaks. Jake is defending them.

"The club is what I care about- MY FRIENDS!"

His friends?? What was he??

This...this was all for Daisy wasn't it?

What passion was he talking about?!

He never told them anything!!

Why would he hide Zoey's cheating from him!?

Wasn't he his best friend?!

Was he lying to them this whole time..?

"You're right. Drew, Henry, Liam, I'm sorry,"

He is sorry. Drew didn't bother listening to the rest. It was basically confirming what he'd already concluded.

Jake lied to him.

They all did.

"I'm sorry"

Those words were meaningless.

Sorry, sorry, sorry, that's what they all said!

Accepting this apology would make him seem weak.

Allowing Jake to abandon him would make him weak.

Breaking down crying would make him weak.

Apologising, when he'd done absolutely nothing wrong in his own eyes, would make him weak.

And if there is one thing Drew hated more than anything else, it is appearing weak.

Appearing vulnerable, letting people take advantage of him like all of his friends and his girlfriend did.

"I'm done with you,"

Drew walked away without making eye contact with anybody. He didn't even look to see if Henry and Liam were following him, and he frankly didn't care.

They were all assholes anyways.

They all used him.

Nobody mattered to him anymore. He was fine before meeting them, he'd definitely be fine without them, right?

Drew was leaving them all behind, he'd cut them out.

He would be better off without them.

Conclusion/Closing Thoughts:

I must admit, this did turn fanfic-y midway and it is not the most well-put together, I was really rushing to finish this.

A lot of what I am describing here is my subjective opinion and what I percieve ad Drew's P.O.V, not the objective facts.

Another confession I must make is that most of what is here is just me projecting a few months of therapy sessions onto Drew. My therapist dissected a lot of internal issues with me naturally, and they served to help me understand myself better and realize how much of my own issues applied on Drew aswell.

As I progress with my therapy and learn more about my own baggage, I might be able to remove the biased lens that I am seeing Drew through and might write a more well-constructed and objective analysis of him in the near future.

For now, however, this is all I have. Hope you liked it!! Happy late-birthday to Drewy Bear, and have a great day/night everybody!!!

#the music freaks #tmf #sobek rants #tmf drew #drew tmf #kin posting #(<rechnically) #freakblr #rosyblr #freakblr/rosyblr #tw repeating words #tw cheating

[tyrannuspitch]

i understand that not everyone knows this, but i would really like the loki fandom to be a little more aware that psychiatry is institutionally biased against people with npd, and this bias is particularly magnified in social media and pop psych for sensationalist, commercial reasons. even the npd diagnostic criteria are Not Great (especially the short version - there is an expanded version!), and even if they were perfect, the understanding of the disorder you get just by reading a checklist is not a whole, rounded picture.

npd is (at least very, very often) a trauma disorder. people with npd having very low self-worth and self-destructive tendencies is incredibly common. npd is not "abuser disorder" or "evil disorder", it's just another mental illness, and honestly, any disorder can be framed in a demonising way if you try. (depressed people are scary because they're obsessed with death! adhd people are scary because they have no control of their emotions or impulses! etc.) i have yet to see a "debunking" of loki being "a narcissist" that gets past this popular, biased surface level.

here and here are two posts explaining how stigma can distort common descriptions of npd symptoms, and here is an unofficial suggested revision of the npd diagnostic criteria written by someone with the disorder to focus on the patient's experiences, and not on how others view them.

loki cannot "too good" to have npd, because having npd does not make you a bad person. reading loki as having npd is not inherently demonising or victim-blaming. and if a specific person's npd loki reading really is doing that, then the fundamental problem is not that they're biased against loki, a fictional character - it's that they're biased against a very vulnerable, stigmatised and real group of mentally ill people.

now that we've dealt with all that - DOES loki have npd?

personally, i go back and forth on whether i think he fully qualifies for the disorder, but as i interpret him, he absolutely does show many traits of npd, such as the following:

perfectionism and fluctuating, fragile self-esteem. he has to be best, because if he isn't the best that would mean he's the absolute worst, worthless, monstrous, unlovable, etc. even when he is succeeding in his goals then maybe he's somehow the best and the worst at once, and almost anything could bring him crashing down again.

constant comparison of himself to others, leading to insecurity, jealousy, bitterness, paranoia...

basing his feelings of safety/security on his connections to people he sees as powerful and/or admirable, and basing his self-esteem on their approval, to the point where he becomes dependent or defines himself by them.

desperately, sometimes destructively, acting out for attention - whether showing off (begging for approval) or picking fights (demanding it.)

experiencing loneliness, shame and guilt easily and extremely intensely, making him hypersensitive to criticism and the possibility of rejection or abandonment - which can provoke a fight/flight/freeze/fawn response.

defensive/paranoid distortion in his analysis of others' feelings - focusing intently on what they think of him (do you love me, hate me, want to hurt me?) while less aware of their own feelings (eg, he can be fairly insensitive to thor's own capacity to be hurt). (in loki, as in many real people, this seems to have originated as a defence mechanism against being manipulated, and from having to walk on eggshells in a toxic family where *everyone* has more social power than him.)

a deep-rooted fear of being manipulated or controlled, which leads to a very strong need to feel in control of himself.

a deep-rooted fear of emotional vulnerability which makes him very reluctant to express his emotions, and when he does, it's often either a calculated tactical decision (so he can tell himself he's still in control), or the result of an emotional breakdown because he just can't keep up the mask any longer.

a paranoid view of the world in which everyone always wants to control him, and controlling power imbalances are an inherent feature of all relationships ("freedom is life's great lie"...), leading him to try to "defensively" manipulate and control others. (this is the ugliest symptom on this list, but it's also arguably the least textbook npd - something this literal and pronounced might be better characterised as ptsd's "distorted understanding of own trauma"/"change of fundamental beliefs" symptoms.)

obviously everyone has a right to their own reading and headcanon, and of course you can reject any reading at all based on simply Not Vibing with it. this isn't the Mandatory NPD Loki post, just me trying to encourage you to consider the possibility. there's a lot here! it's a very plausible reading!

(and honestly, why stop there? you might also note that thor, who grew up in the same toxic household, display a fair number of these symptoms too...)

[this post is meant to be informative and to give people a little insight into an alternative perspective on npd to the dominant pop psych one. i'm happy to answer questions, but if you want to "debate" me or approach this as "discourse", please don't.]

#space viking tag #meta #ch: loki #lens: modern psychiatry #npd #npd headcanon #npd loki #mcu loki #ableism #long post #highlights #lots of tags bc this is an Effortpost but it's still kind of choppy sorry. too many thoughts

[nyantodamax145]

I JUST FINISHED THE STULTIFERA NAVIS STORY AND I HAVE THOUGHTS.

Let me preface this by saying that I am also part of the demographic of “EN Sucks at Reading”. Well, I can *read*, but I kind of suck at interpreting characters sometimes so bear with me and share your thoughts because I’m very bad at literary analysis and can only understand surface level themes without anyone to guide me but I’m trying my best

I

LOVED IT

And not JUST because my husband played a pivotal role in the event okay

Spoilers under the cut!

I haven’t played through Under Tides yet so I’m missing a teeny bit of context, but oh my god

Laurentina “waking up” and recovering her memories? Alphonso and Garcia doomed to sixty years alone aboard the Stultifera Navis and sailing her towards her slow decay? High Inquisitor Dario’s sacrifice and the light of his lantern refusing the burn out, JORDI being WAY MORE TALENTED THAN HE GIVES HIMSELF CREDIT FOR, STRAIGHT UP REPAIRING A LIGHTHOUSE AND A BOAT BASED ON OLD BLUEPRINTS AND FINDING THE STULTIFERA NAVIS AND SAVING ALL THREE HUNTERS AND IRENE AAAAA

Wait ok let me try to gather my thoughts cause there’s specific things I want to talk about.

Thiago being unwilling to let the Inquisition into his town because he still held a grudge against them ultimately led to his death. He wanted to puppet the Church of the Deep who had infiltrated Gran Faro into pushing the Inquisition out of the town, but was selfish; he wanted to have his cake and eat it too; he wanted to preserve Gran Faro and its legacy, but in the process he let the Seaborn fester and take over the whole place silently, while the Inquisition couldn’t do anything to help because he was simply a stubborn old man. It’s doubly ironic because as Carmen reveals, his Aegir wife was also a part of the Church of the Deep. I would like the theorize that his wife was the one who perpetrated the spread of the Nethersea Brand in Gran Faro, but that’s just headcanon.

Laurentina and Amaia. They’re connected to each other through the Seaborn Cells in their body, and the experiments Specter was put through, and in many ways you could consider Amaia “Specter’s” creator in a sense. Laurentina and Specter really are two different people, and we can see the moment Specter disappears and Laurentina wakes up. But even after Amaia “becomes one” with the Seaborn, Laurentina still calls the abomination by the name of “Amaia”, and I wonder if it’s due to a lingering sense of connection, if only in the sense that they are mortal enemies. It’s kind of like Laurentina knows that Amaia is still in there. Which, well she is, she became part of We Many.

I seem to have missed a critical piece of information regarding Skadi that was covered in Under Tides, so I’ll be skipping over that. Once the Under Tides record restoration comes around I know what I’ll be up to.

JORDI! MY GOD YOU DID SO WELL! Can you imagine piecing together incredibly complex technology only through luck, instinct, and some tattered, centuries old blueprints?! He says he’s an ordinary person but what kind of ordinary person can do all that?! He’s at the very least got incredible skill to interpret old blueprints, and make something as old as that lighthouse to work! Like AAAAAAA I’M PROUD OF YOU ALSO YOU NEED MANY BLANKETS AND SNUGGLES YOU HAVE SO MUCH TRAUMA.

Irene reporting to Dario’s lantern at the very end made me cry ok. She wanted her Maestro to know that she gave it her all, and although the conclusion wasn’t satisfactory she still accomplished a lot. It hurts to know that she had to find out through the very things she was fighting, the things she saw as abominations of sin. It’s like the refused to believe it until she saw Saint Carmen’s face and accepted it.

And the fact that the Stultifera was circling above an Aegir City the whole time… so close, yet so far. The Abyssal Hunters both succeeded and failed, and while they found “home”, they couldn’t return.

There’s… a lot. And I’m no good at literary analysis. I just point out things that I like…

It’s 11 pm, I’m tired, and I’m trying to process everything I just read.

#bad literary analysis #Nyan plays arknights #Arknights #Arknights Stultifera Navis #stultifera navis #nyan talks #man why did I ever take AP English if I’m no good at this #I mean I wasn’t good at AP English either #maybe someone smarter than me will help me figure some shoot out #long post

[lastoneout]

Ya know ngl when they announced they were removing Sokka's learn how to respect women arc I kinda had a sinking feeling that they were going to remove the blatant sexist comments and replace them with like actual misogynistic writing and then pat themselves on the back for doing women a solid bcs they're too media illiterate to understand that like non-sexist writing has less to do with what people are saying and more to do with how you present your female characters and their role in the story...

...and like I am truly sad to see that I was right.

Edit: like them removing Katara's anger and not having her struggle between the maturity she believes is expected of her and wanting to be the kid she is might seem cool if you only have a surface level understanding of these issues, like yeah you made her nicer bcs we don't want to fall into the angry poc trope and parentification of kids is bad, but that doesn't actually help bcs you took out the incredibly complex driving force of her characterization to make her more palatable and the original show made it very clear that her parentification was a result of growing up during a war and being asked to do things no child should have to do and how that's tragic and shitty, but now the story just doesn't have anything interesting to say about kids growing up too fast due to trauma and war.

And sure you took out Sokka saying sexist stuff, and sure him not saying sexist stuff seems good, but that ignores the fact that the show constantly makes it clear how WRONG he is by punishing him for those remarks and having the other characters point out what an ass he's being and his arc was about overcoming those sexist beliefs!! And changing the Kyoshi Island plot from "Sokka learns to respect women" to "Suki helps Sokka realize that he is actually a strong warrior who shouldn't feel insecure uwu" makes the episode actually sexist!! (And plus "sometimes good people believe bad things but that doesn't mean they can't change for the better" is a way better and more interesting message than "good people just don't believe bad things at all ever".)

This is the problem with like surface level media analysis and shallow ideas about progressive writing, you jump to conclusions about parts of the story because your concept of morality is 100% black and white and then you replace those "issues" with writing that actually does these subjects way way worse bcs you didn't actually understand why something might be sexist or whatever, you just heard a guy say "I think women are better at cooking than fighting" and freaked out bcs oh not that's bad!! Tbh it's everything wrong with online "progressive" spaces, surface level knee jerk reactions, black and white thinking, and no theory or deeper understanding of why the bad things are actually bad.

Thanks I fucking hate it.

#natla salt #natla crit

[stillfruit]

It takes me a long time to understand some things if they're not too obvious so I had a difficult time watching true detective a few years ago. Do you have any tips to rewatch it and maybe understand a little more? 👉👈

omg of course, i love to hear that you would want to rewatch true detective (applies to s1 only i haven't watched beyond that)!!

to base this a little, please don't worry over understanding and not understanding something too much. everyone thinks, experiences and processes media differently, and our understandings of what counts as 'understanding media' also differ (understanding in different contexts can mean an analytical understanding of the core themes identified through a specific framework, or an emotional reaction and a feeling of connection to the thing that's difficul to articulate, and so on and so forth). there's no universal objective level of 'understanding' and what you deem is enough for you is enough! being comfortable and confident enough to interpret things yourself while remaining receptive of other perspectives (including the perspectives of the story and its author) is what's most important in 'understanding' things. also secondly, not everything is for everyone and sometimes something just doesn't click because of that.

i'm not sure what aspects specifically you would want to understand more, but here are few things on how i approach the story:

there are overall themes i find interesting in true detective such as (toxic) masculinity (it's about men who are bad in specifc and systemic ways), narratives (internal as in how you construct yourself, like marty consistently justifying cheating on maggie; and external and institutional, like religion), power and autonomy (police and people with money have the power to do what they want), and existentialism (rust lacks overall meaning of why he is alive). they serve as lenses through which you interpret the story - kind of like picking an academic framework (theory) and looking at the data (story) through that.

there are many things that happen in the story and because s1 was so big back in 2014 there are numerous thinkpieces and video essays about it, all of them picking various aspects they see as central. because true detective is what it is (surface level edgy dudebro nihilist police man annihilates everyone around him by being so nihilist and cool show), some are very bad. i'm not that interested in the kind of analysis that looks super closely at the intertextual aspects of the story, for instance, or "the philosophy" of it (if that means looking at what rust says, taking that at face value, and connecting the story to existentialist philosophy based on that). just reflect on what interests you and see how the story looks and feels when examined through those perspectives.

a lot of the time i like looking at things through and by focusing on characters, and i think this is especially crucial when it comes to true detective (which is a heavily character driven story. sure it of course matters that they are police and that they are in louisiana and that there are murders etc but those things are not what the story is about). looking at a character contextualizes that character (what they say and do and represent) and rust is an excellent example of this. he talks in a cynical and pessimistic manner, looks down upon others, is very capable in terms of violence, is alienated and alienates other people, is obsessive, has issues with substance abuse, and his house is the definition of that one r/malelivingspace meme.

however, when you look at what he has been through and how he behaves (as well as how the narrative treats him) these things are contextualized not as 'behaviour you should look up to and which is good and correct from the perspective of the story, or at the very least is very cool and/or edgy, because he's the protagonist' (media analysis 101) but behavior of someone who struggles with ptsd, trauma and his own feelings of empathy in a world that has been very unkind to him since his childhood. when rust is saying things like 'time is a flat circle nothing can change' he's coping and trying to make himself believe it because he's incapable of processing, realizing, or externalizing any of the trauma he's been through or any of the care he feels in a healthy manner (which is quite explicit in, for example, how he empathizes so intensely with people who are dead). he's brilliant at rationalizing everything and it's terrible for him. the ways in which marty constantly lies to himself are quite explicit and rust is one of the people pointing them out, but rust is coping by creating his own narrative of his self and the reality all the same.

(better articulations of his character specifically are to be found eg here, here, and here)

so, maybe if i were to articulate the core thing for understanding true detective (or really any media) it would be looking at what happens on screen in the story in terms of actions and speech and then reflecting on how that relates to what's 'actually' going on, what kinds of things are being left unsaid, and why. there are various explicit examples of the theme of narratives and unreliable narrators as well that tell you that this is what's important (such as the interrogation narration of the ledoux confrontation and showing on screen what actually happened).

something i do when i watch or read media (that is engaging enough in a good or a bad sense to warrant this) is writing about it on my personal notes app (now obsidian so i can organize everything) in the same way i would talk about it to someone else. i also save interesting writings etc there so i remember and find them later, and write my own thoughts on those things there as well, having my own private discussion with them (which. is a lonely thing to do but shh).

few blogs who have written super interesting things about true detective which i highly recommend you check out (because seeing the perspectives of others is inherently one of the most enriching experiences and helps you understand so much) include @inkandcayenne and @sketiana. iirc there are some good video essays on youtube as well but i can't name any because it's been too many years since i watched any.

a central thing that makes true detective so meaningful to me personally is exactly the fact that many of the themes i care about in it are not super explicit or vocalized in obvious ways (saying 'i want to die because i'm sad' doesn't hit but describing death as a warm and welcoming substance does). i hope you have fun looking into where you find emotion and meaning <3

sorry this went a bit off track tldr have fun and be yourself, lmk how you feel about the story afterwards if you want!

#and to be clear another key is to enjoy stories for what they are and knowing you can find 'problematic media' compelling #true detective represents the kind of story that examines its themes largely through showing something and saying 'that's bad' and #the effectiveness of that as a tool for writing actually transformative narratives instead of contributions to the original things #you say you criticize is questionable. proven by everyone who watched s1 and went wow he's just like me fr the world needs bad men indeed #all of which is to say i fully understand why everyone doesn't like it or finds it boring. i got +5k words of notes out of it though #crystal ball #true detective

[lovingoverwatchguys]

Random tangent: ‘Soldier 76′ is just as much of an image as ‘Strike Commander Morrison’ was

I think people often do Jack a huge disservice when they ‘analyze’ him by taking his image at face value. Often, to understand his thoughts, you can’t take his word for it, and have to look at what he’s feeling beneath.

Let me explain a bit. (Under a read more because I don’t want to clog up any tags with super long posts)

Why would you be able to take his word? Jack has never been able to express himself fully in his entire adult life. He had to put on the image of ‘Strike Commander Morrison’, the beacon of positivity and strict commander, for decades. Because Jack has a massive martyr complex, and he sacrificed being an authentic person because he thought that was what the world needed. The world wanted ‘Strike Commander’; he thought it couldn’t care less about ‘Jack’.

Most people seem to be aware of that, yet they still take ‘Soldier: 76′ at face value as how he actually feels, and it baffles me. No, it’s a (literal and theoretical) mask, just a different one.

Look at how he acts in the Bastet story; he’s willing to crack jokes and have fun with Ana, smiling and saying silly things, to the point that even Ana says he’s “like a child sometimes.”

But that makes sense when you think of his relationship with Ana - as his closest friend, she got to see beneath the mask of ‘Strike Commander Morrison’, and she still can see under this one, too. (Honestly, I think Ana would see right through Jack anyway; he’s not as good at hiding his emotions as he thinks he is)

In fact, image seems to be a theme in Bastet in general - note the way that Ana puts on a new mask to become a protector. It’s the same thing Jack did. He wants to help people, and he thinks this is the best way to do it. Just like before - the world needs ‘Soldier: 76′, and he thinks it couldn’t care less about ‘Jack’.

‘Soldier: 76′ is not a person. He’s a name. An image. (Also, they are so cute. I love them. A cool girl and her gay best friend.)

And to be honest, I think some of the other characters can see through him, to an extent. This interaction has always caught my eye:

What Jack says might sound condescending at first glance, but when you think about the fact that Jack's whole deal is "fighting so other people don't have to"...it makes me think he's concerned for her and doesn't like that she has to fight here. 

I think Mei picks up on that, and that’s why her response is a bit teasing. Tracer does the same with the ‘Okay, dad!’ interaction. The two of them can tell he’s more of a pushover than he lets on, no matter how desperately he tries to hide it.

But I also argue that Soldier: 76 isn’t just an image done out of necessity. I don’t think even Jack himself is aware of this, but it seems very convenient that by donning an aggressive face that shuts other people out, he doesn’t have to let others close to him. 

Some people don’t seem to consider the immense amount of trauma both the fall of Overwatch and the Swiss Base explosion would cause for him. He was surrounded by constant public degradation for months to years. He saw everything he worked for get undone largely because of negative public opinion and betrayal, and was then in a serious disaster that likely had many casualties.

After something like that happens, I doubt he feels safe letting almost anyone close at all. This mask doubly functions to protect him from getting hurt in such a horrible way again. And devoting all of his thoughts and emotion to this moral crusade means he doesn’t have to face all of the real emotional issues he has. It is, as the kids say, a cope.

None of this is to say Jack isn’t bitter or angry. And I’m sure as hell not saying he’s emotionally healthy. He needs more therapy than almost anyone else in the cast.

But so many people only give Jack a surface-level analysis, and I think that’s lame. Ironically, taking the image at face value would in-universe just prove his bad worldview. Life imitates art.

#soldier 76 #overwatch #character interpretation

[springboggle]

I wish English majors on this site understood their degree doesn't make them smarter than everyone else and many English majors are also illiterate dumbasses. The thing no one wants to admit is that:

a) People only really engage with media beyond surface level when they really want to, which is the real reason why everyone seems like they can't read for shit, and

b) Again, I've had my college educated family members say and do things that are incorrect/very silly when I'd ask questions about the world or when watching a show as a kid (and they still do this, it's like watching a show with a fucking dementia patient) which is partially related to a, but it's also a fact that the average person, college educated or not, is too busy and burnt out to really give a shit about the why or how anything, from media, to actually engaging with their children, to learning how systemic issues work and how to survive under them etc.

Like, the best you're gonna get is fandom analysis and people making incorrect character quote blogs in the grand scheme of things because they have enough energy to care, though yes, it does suck that the people that have energy to do this often suck at actually understanding the text they're reading/watching, especially if the work has any messaging about real change or trauma beyond healing narratives.

#ramblings

[dead-boys-club]

Tell me you didt pay attention to Hajime's character without telling me 🙄 "money trauma"? He was in gangs and running theft just for money and then kept doing it he was greedy and wtf is money trauma?

..that post has gotten a lot more attention than I expected and I didn't realize it was that controversial, lol.

So, I'm respectful of opinions - if you believe that's how he was, fine. However, you won't come onto my page and treat me as though I can't do character analysis nor will you act like money trauma isn't very real. I try not to write surface level characters on this page, I don't like it - I literally made an entire post about why Rindou doesn't have matching hair with Ran anymore.

If you want to write and see Koko as some horrendously obnoxious, greedy little shit - by all means, no one is stopping you. However, if you /read/ the manga or pay attention to the character book, he simply wasn't. Due to what happened with Akane and failing to help, that would be considered money related trauma; it would cause him to feel like he needed so much money at all times. Granted, he had a gift in making money, running business, etc. that's.. literally why gangs wanted him so much. He isn't a fighter, he's a financial aid. They leeched off of him to keep things going. This, also leads to money related trauma among other things like feeling like that's all you're good for. If you read his character sheet, his dislikes even list 'money'.

Koko does not have some greedy complex to be wealthy because that's who he is. He has a complex of not being able to have the money when something goes wrong or he actually needs it. Among the complex of not being wanted if it weren't for his money and business related abilities. I fully believe had he been able to get the money in time for Akane, he wouldn't be this way at all 🤷🏻‍♀️ but he failed and that stuck with him.

And, the reason I understand this so well is because I have the same trauma. I have a fuck ton in my account and yet going to the dollar tree bothers me. Why? Because I feel like it something happens and I can't fix it, well - I failed. It's almost like having a control problem when it comes to life. If I can't control certain things in my life, then I'm failing. Don't /ever/ come on my page and question any type of trauma.

♡ If anyone else wants a controversial character breakdown, my inbox is open.

#tokyo revengers #hajime kokonoi

[hologramcowboy]

In one of your recent posts you claimed "He goes for the predictable clichès because he never explored the depth of his character" and I have to VERY respectfully, because I am a fan of your blog, disagree. There have been panel, interview and meet and greet moments that showed he knows and studied Dean a lot more than he lets on.Why he chooses to only focus on the shallow parts on this promo tour, I can only speculate. (1/2)

I think there's been a confusion, what I was referring to is doing the work that his craft requires: script analysis, character analysis, character through line, etc. Jensen does 't know how to do any of that, he does get impressions about his character but they are all surface based on what he gets told. Whereas, he should be creating his own character. My point was about the technical side of things. Dean became increasingly clichè precisely because Jensen failed to do the required work to refine and level up his character. That being said, I completely understand where you are coming from, I too have listened to him talking about Dean but just wanted to clarify that's the not the same thing as actually adding in layers to a performance through refined work and behavioral psychology. For the most part, Jensen has projected unto this character, so much so he even stated Dean is him.

As an actor, he is playing it safe by trying to recreate what people like Dean for because he thinks that's the only way he will get cast. He is wrong, I cannot stress this enough and I repeat it almost daily on my blog, Jensen needs to get a branding coach as well as an acting coach.

He seems to be on a very toxic path and his clinging to Dean might be due to the trauma of being a lead and then being downgraded, especially if he looks for approval from the outside world instead of finding it internally. It's something an actor could experience. He is clearly unfulfilled in his personal life so perhaps at a value level he thinks people will connect with him more over Dean, which could mean insecurity and lack of self value. But I have to be honest, I get the sense he is trying to milk Dean's brand solely to bait people into supporting his prequel and also that something happened that was meaningful to him and it related to his playing Dean and he clings to that because it's perhaps his only left connection to that particular experience. What that might be I could not tell you, it's just a perception of mine and I could be completely wrong.

What I can say for sure, acting wise, which also links to behavioral psychology:

Playing a traumatized character over and over again, especially if personal experiences are used for inner work but even if not, can cause deep trauma to an Actor's mind. This is why it's important to have a coach and to have a therapist.

When you recognize yourself in a character, it's because, on some level you share the same traumas and unresolved emotional dynamics. Ever watch a scene and burst into tears? That means you have a similar unresolved dynamic in your subconscious mind. Same goes for different emotions that might pop up. That's what acting is for, at the core, to allow people to experience catharsis. By seeing others experiencing dynamics on screen, your mind processes your own stuff.

So, the only realistic question we can ask ourselves is: Which aspects of Dean does Jensen most powerfully resonate with? It could be consciously or unconsciously but, either way, that would tell us a lot on the WHY. Dean's core emotions must also be shared by Jensen on some level, though obviously the context will differ.

Sending you Love 💕💕💕

#jensen critical

[power-chords]

Do you really think Vincent kept the locket by the end of heat2?? I thought he would hold hands with his dead frenemy a little and then give it back to the stepdaughter. It's one of her last token of her mom after all. And that heat3 mention... is that really... are you just saying that or do you think it has chances of actually getting made??? ○_○ thank you!!

I can do you one better and prove that Hanna keeps it, with Mann’s almost painfully heavy-handed I Was An American English Major narrative design and imagery :)

CC: courtesy tags for @elicash and @pearl-bastard, my partners in Mann Meta Crime, my CREW...

To preface, recall that the locket was a gift from Gabriela to her mother, and it contains a photo of herself as a child and of McCauley. So the sentimental vector of the locket’s original purpose is directed outward; it is given to a parental figure and protector. As if to reassure us that it’s not the only object reminder of Gabriela’s love for her mother, we’re told that a photo she keeps at home is how she preserves and honors Elisa’s memory:

Whereas the locket is a much more fraught and even sinister token. It is a chain* that connects her to a past trauma, a current threat, a childhood surrounded by the peripheral shadow of criminality. Most critically of all, it is how Wardell learns that Elisa has a daughter. Its very existence reaffirms an enduring danger that Gabriela has not yet fully escaped. The novel is excessively, almost unnecessarily explicit in how it tells us this:

THANKS, MICHAEL! Louder for the readers in the back! Remember Drucker’s speech to Charlene in Heat? About how he knows all she wants for her child is to be spared the corrupting, damning encroachment of that shadow — for Dominick to have the chance to choose his life? Surely Elisa would have wanted the same for her daughter.

So when Gabriela pulls free and breaks the locket chain that is in Wardell's grasp, when she flees in the car and Chris waves her off — live your life and remember — this is our final, triumphant confirmation that she is safe at last. She gets to live the Michael Mann [extremely postwar second generation immigrant lol] conception of the American Dream: to pursue her education, to have full command of her own destiny, “free choice.” She gets to move on. Whereas Hanna, as we know, is incapable of doing that; he remains agonizingly, compulsively self-imprisoned in a nightmare city of death, in his own grief and guilt and predatory instinct, haunted by the killing of his cosmic soulmate, himself haunting the infernal city streets because in killing McCauley he has also spiritually killed himself. I cannot resist an excuse for a Dickens reference: he will wear the chain he forged in life.

Everywhere in the book and in the film, Hanna is shaded with references to death and fire (Justine: "That glow you feel? It isn't x-ray vision. It's self-incineration. Understand?") In the movie, he stalks around like a pale, waxen zombie in dark, misshapen suits that make him look like the seedy director of a funeral home. Chris refers to him as a carrion bird at one point in the novel, which I love. His speed addiction is like a pharmaceutical resuscitation attempt, yearning for that electrical jolt. And he becomes a violently wrathful grim reaper with a badge in his pursuit of Wardell, torturing and terrorizing every perp he can get his hands on. The cars on fire when he pursues Wardell at the end, Mann even going so far as to compare the black strip of highway in the dark to the River Styx... my oh my! We’re in symbolism with a 2x4 territory now. He prowls and hunts in hell, in the night, in a dream… because Los Angeles is the quintessential dream city within the American cultural mythology, meta-textually chained to its association with the Hollywood film industry. 

This leads us to a Level 2 analysis, a little subtler but also definitively there, below the surface, which is that the locket is also a dream totem. Chris Nolan, Michael Mann’s spiritual protégé, is well versed in such oneiric concepts and made a whole movie about them:

(The above is via Roger Caillois, French literary critic and sociologist, from his publication The Dream and Human Societies, published in 1966, when Mann was in London getting his Masters in film.)

But that’s a much longer tangent for another time, and I am saving all my juicy dream research for the zine ;) happy to mail you a copy when it’s finished!

*Aside from the iconic gray suit, one of Mann’s recurrent costuming motifs/symbolic currencies is jewelry and timepieces, jewelry as a kind of high-value emotional manacle or anchor, and timepieces because they are the most obvious and immediate representation of his characters’ obsessive fixation with time. What to do with it, having it stolen from them, running out and whether enough of it remains. If you continue proceeding through his filmography, you will notice that as Mann’s visual language develops it gets that much more insistently consistent: Frank in Thief (1981) wears a signet ring on his pinky, but Neil McCauley from Heat (1995) wears ONLY a watch and no jewelry. The same goes for Vincent from Collateral (2004), and Nicholas in Blackhat (2015). By contrast, his protagonists who lack a criminal background almost always have at least a ring, some solid precious chain link that situates them within a broader social or familial structure — these men have attachments, duties, obligations. 

P.S. PHEW! Last but not least, Mann inked a three-book deal with HarperCollins, so you’re getting a Heat 3 AND a Heat 4, LMAO

#heat #heat (1995) #heat 2 #vincent hanna #neil mccauley #chris shiherlis #michael mann #al pacino #robert de niro #val kilmer #bux watches every michael mann movie #bux reads the only michael mann book