#vs 'we never cared about the circumstances - we cared about YOU. so what if times have changed?' | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

poisonheiress · 4 months

Text

Someone needs to say it: The "Heaven is actually bad" plot line that Hazbin is based around is useless when you spend more then 2 minutes thinking about Vivzie's Hell and her characters.

Besides it being much too early for this idea, the revelation that Heaven or at least the beings running it aren't good people has little to no impact when the people who are being harmed by this are all horrible people. Stay with me here. None of these people are people who were unfairly brought into hell and we are never ever introduced to someone who was either. Why should we care that Heaven is "evil" and blocking redemption when all the sinners in hell we see are the worst of the worst who would have never gotten in even if it was fair.

For the "Heaven is bad" plot line to actually work, you need people who were just one sin away from Heaven, who would've gotten into Heaven if circumstance hadn't forced them down a path that stole it from them. You need characters who aren't comedic villains but land in the middle of morally grey. Those who deserved to be in Heaven but because Heaven refused to consider their circumstances, they were tossed to burn with people much worse than them. Those are the people who should be your main cast cause those are the people who would actually be impacted by Heaven being bad/ Heaven lying.

Angel dust, for all his trauma, was still part of the mafia and likely had killed people before (showing to almost take joy in it). Husk became an overlord and gambled souls, so he had to have had blood on his hands before hell. Alastor is a serial killer, and the list goes on and on. Sure, these characters are (somewhat) interesting, but they don't make for good characters to have when the key plot line is that Heaven is a scam. Even if that fact is true, none of them were ever going to get there in the first place and this is something we also se in every single background sinner shown in Hell too. They were never close to getting there, so why would they or we care that Heaven is bad when all sinners are shown to be horrific people who are at best in the dark grey area of morality.

If you look at it from the "angel's are unfairly killing sinners" route, it still doesn't work. If the angels are killing them, what makes it different then the sinner on sinner violence that hell is full off? Why is them dying by angels this bad thing when they are just as likely if not 10x times more likely to get knifed in the back by other sinners in hell the other 364 days, especially when everyone here apparently is just as horrible as the next person. You cannot condemn the angels for killing demons and then make a joke of out sinners killing each other and never show sinners who doesn't want to kill people. Life either matters or it doesn't and when the main cast doesn't even show a care for life (outside of Charlie's who's entire flaw is her naivety), why should the audience.

On top of that, Vivzie's whole overpopulation aspect and the Heaven plot line would connect better if she actually had people like those I mentioned above, people who stole to survive but got tossed out cause stealing is technically wrong, people who killed another to protect someone else but were still sent to hell because even though they saved that person's life that person wasn't supposed to be saved, people who passively engaged in sins but never really did anything harmful under them. This would add into how Hell is so overpopulated and highlight why its so important that Heaven is evil/ why Charlie's plan isn't just a naive pathetic fever dream.

In the end, Vivzie should have never made Heaven the central plot of this show nor tried to assign this blatant good vs evil to that conflict. Neither her characters nor her writing choices are able to respond to this conflict in a way that will end or even tell the story in a satisfactory manner.

#anti hazbin hotel #hazbin hotel critical #vivziepop critical #spindlehorse critical #spindlehorse criticism #also I am not just talking out my ass for this #I had/have this same problem in one of my original works #where I had to make the relationship between Heaven and God and cambion a lot more complex then just oh this side bad this side good #and thats what you have to do as a fucking writer is ask the hard question and be ready to scrap characters and ideas to answer them #When you deal with human characters nothing is black vs white and the minute you claim it is #you have failed

878 notes · View notes

queenvhagar · 2 months

Text

It's interesting that Rhaenyra is consistently framed as being "not like other girls" in such an extreme attempt at feminism that it veers way over to other side in that all the other girls in the story, especially those who act differently than she would or who act in opposition to her wishes, are somehow not as good as her or even evil.

As the show loves to show us, Rhaenyra's not like other girls. She loves being a bit of a rebel. She defies the rules of the world and doesn't care what anyone's opinion of her is. She embraces her sexuality. She's bold and says what's on her mind. Now, these are fine things for her as a character, for sure. The problem comes when looking at how the other girls are depicted and how the show expects you to feel about them vs Rhaenyra.

Alicent accepts her position in life as the daughter of a second son and marries for her family against her wishes. But it goes against what Rhaenyra wants, so she's evil. She should have just been more like Rhaenyra! Defied her father, said no to Viserys, went against the patriarchy... except Alicent does not have the privilege that Rhaenyra has as a dragon riding Targaryen princess, the king's beloved daughter and heir to the throne. What power did she have to resist the wishes of her lord father and the king? She acted like any girl of her time would, given the circumstances of her powerlessness, and yet somehow the show wants you to believe that's a character flaw.

Laena is second to Rhaenyra, something the show made painfully obvious when depicting her marriage with Daemon (which sucks especially because there was no indication that this was the case in the books; rather, her and Daemon were happily married and both were extremely close to Rhaenyra the entire time). Her death is changed from its original and unique tragedy to prop up Rhaenyra's eventual fate and its "epic" quality, so when it eventually happens we can view it as a true "dragonrider's death." Then, on the night of her funeral, her husbands finally gets with his first choice Rhaenyra. Laena who? She is made to look less in comparison to Rhaenyra.

Baela and Rhaena, despite having huge roles in the Dance and the aftermath, are largely sidelined by the writers. Baela's a fierce dragonrider like her mother... yet the only scene allowing her to show any aspect of that is left on the cutting room floor. Rhaena wants a dragon and is the only one of her family who isn't a dragonrider... yet the writers have yet to give her any personality beyond that or explore this aspect of her character with any depth. The twins' adult versions barely have any screen time or lines. Even when they are betrothed, seemingly without their prior knowledge, they can only smile by the side.

Helaena is a dragonrider, a dragon dreamer, a mother, a daughter. Forced to use her Targaryen royal womb to make heirs. But the writers aren't interested in exploring any aspect of her character in depth or showing her relationships with her family.

One woman is the exception, as she does share some qualities with Rhaenyra in that she's also not like other girls and the audience should root for her too... it's Rhaenys! She's got a dragon! She'll put it in the Greens' faces (never mind hundreds of innocents killed - so cool!). She'll call someone out for toiling their life in the service of men (even though she's done no differently with her own life!). And because girls support girls no matter what, of course she's Team Black all the way (even though her daughter died a continent away because of Daemon and her son was clearly killed because of Rhaenyra). Rhaenys will hitch onto the Black train despite everything that's happened, and in supporting Rhaenyra she'll take away Baela's claim to Driftmark and instead link both her granddaughters to the people who are the reason both of her children are dead...

#hotd critical #hotd analysis #anti rhaenyra targaryen #anti team black

158 notes · View notes

uriekukistan · 27 days

Text

alright i've been seeing so much megumi hate recently, and especially after the new chapter (not on here, mostly twitter youtube and tiktok), so as president of the megumi defense squad, here is my dissertation defending him against the bum allegations.

i've seen a lot of people comparing megumi's situation to yuuji in shibuya, and saying that megumi should be able to "just get up and keep fighting," so i'm going to tell you why this is not a fair comparison, and give some context on yuuji's "recovery" from shibuya that i feel people are missing when they say this. this is quite lengthy, sorry in advance

i. fundamental differences in the ways in which yuuji & megumi view saving people

yuuji wants to save everyone. he wants to save as many people as he can because of what his grandfather said to him on his deathbed. this is what kickstarted the events of jjk. if yuuji hadn't felt this way, he never would have eaten that finger to say some guy he met an hour ago, which is another point. yuuji cares for people easily. he threw his life on the line to save megumi immediately after meeting him. he mourned junpei, who he spent all of a few hours with in total like he had known him for years.

this is very different from megumi, who both does not get attached to people easily, and does not care to save everyone. he only cares to save people he deems worthy, and as far as we know, this list consists of only tsumiki and yuuji. its even unclear if he feels this way about nobara or gojo, despite them also being relatively important in his life. as you can see, when he thinks about saving people by his conscience, the only two characters shown are tsumiki and yuuji.

this is why he sometimes gets some criticism for not doing a half-assed job as a sorcerer, but i think its important to remember that he does not actually want to be a sorcerer, only doing it out of necessity to keep tsumiki from the zen'in clan. the times where we do see him taking things seriously are when yuuji and/or tsumiki's lives are what's at stake.

so in shibuya, after watching his own hands slaughter innocent people, and watching nanami and nobara die, yuuji is able to keep going because there are still more people who need to be saved, and he wants to save everyone. in contrast, megumi has watched his own hands kill one of the two people that he cares about saving, and severely maim the other one, so what is there to keep fighting for, given the way he views the world?

and i think it's also important to note that megumi has not been aware of his surroundings since sukuna v yorozu, so saying that he should get up now to save yuuji is not reasonable because he doesn't even know yuuji is there.

ii. the environment yuuji was in in shibuya vs the environment megumi is in right now

now none of that is to say that yuuji did not also break down and want to give up in shibuya, because he absolutely did (actually, im not sure if this is canon or just my theory, but the reason he did not switch back with sukuna at the detention center was because he wanted to give up), but the circumstances were way different

within minutes of watching nanami and nobara die, todo & nitta were there to encourage him and get him back on his feet (most of that was due to todo, but nitta was also telling yuuji not to lose hope).

meanwhile, megumi has been alone for over a month now, save the few seconds in 251 where i'm pretty sure he didn't even know yuuji was there, with nothing but his own misery to keep him company. sukuna took over his body and killed tsumiki with megumi's technique on november 16th. the shinjuku showdown takes place on december 24th. that's over a month stewing in guilt and mourning with no one to support him at all. that makes it a lot more difficult to bounce back quickly like that.

iii. more context on yuuji

even after todo's little pep talk that gave him the strength to get up and finish mahito off, yuuji didn't just "bounce back" and stand up to keep fighting in the way people think he did. in the days following the shibuya incident, he was really directionless, probably a bit reckless, because he genuinely didn't know what to do with himself, and didn't know if he even deserved to be alive. in my personal interpretation of yuuji immediately post-shibuya, if it weren't for choso, he would have likely lost his life, as he just showed a lack of self-regard in those days following. just one example:

it's not until megumi shows up again that yuuji finds a direction to go, and even then, he's operating with the mindset that once everything is over, megumi and tsumiki are safe, and gojo is unsealed, he will die and stop causing trouble for everyone.

so again, i think the megumi/yuuji comparison as a way to hate on megumi is not fair, both because there are important differences in the way they think and their situations, and because yuuji's reaction post shibuya isn't quite as resolved and strong as people make it out to be. this is not to say that yuuji is not strong! he absolutely is, just to point out that he, like megumi, was/is also lacking the will to live, and there's nothing wrong with that! wanting to give up is a completely reasonable reaction to being in this situation as an ADULT, let alone at 15 years old.

if you've made it this far, thank you for listening to me ramble 🙏 pls let me know any of your thoughts as well, i'd love to chat about this!

#jjk spoilers #jjk leaks #jujutsu kaisen #jjk #megumi fushiguro #yuji itadori

116 notes · View notes

bird-inacage · 7 months

Text

Only Friends Finale: Ray & Sand vs Boeing

Admittedly it's taken me a few days to unpack the resolution to the Boeing conflict (aka final boss arc), how Ray and Sand went about this, and how they came out of it unscathed as a couple. There’s a fair bit to cover here so hang in there folks - this is a long one.

Sand's Uncertainty: Questioning the Present or Tributing the Past?

I can see why people had grievances about Sand not being more assertive, why he allowed Boeing to kiss him, why he wasn't definitive when Ray accused him of still having feelings for Boeing if he did not.

The scene in which Sand apologises to Ray briefly touches on this but doesn’t really convey the extent of it. By Sand's own admission, it is hugely difficult to be confronted by someone you used to love, especially a first love. Sand had planned his hopes, dreams and future with Boeing very much in the picture. Boeing's sudden return brought that all back and the lack of closure that came with it. Sand’s hesitancy to act is not due to a resurgence of his feelings from back then, but rather the nostalgia and sentimentality attached to this chapter of his life. Boeing very knowingly plays on this too.

During the pool scene, Sand hasn't made this distinction yet, and is generally lacking clarity on what exactly he feels for Boeing. So when Ray suggests they kiss to find out, Sand does question himself. The 'what if' from his past makes him wonder; an open-ended question he never got an answer to. 'What if Boeing came back to me?' But indulging in such a curiosity is never going to be satisfactory because the circumstances are no longer the same. Time has moved on and Sand along with it.

I believe Sand was also keen to pass Ray's test. He later refers to the kiss as Ray 'challenging' him to do it. We've seen him rise to Ray's goading before, only he's never quite as assured in his execution as he thinks he is. The most obvious example being when Ray suggests they have sex first and initiate a friendship second. Sand agrees with a sense of misplaced confidence that Ray will be hung up on him, when he's promptly the one to catch feelings. As much as Sand tries to be objective, he's consistently tripped up by emotion. Boeing's return is no different. His downfall is that he cares too much.

The way Sand behaves when Boeing kisses him is extremely telling. It feels like an attempt at muscle memory, retracing something he can't quite recall anymore. He looks lost, detached, slightly thrown and overpowered in Boeing's presence. This may be residual patterns of behaviour caused by Boeing controlling the end to their relationship. This is in stark contrast to how Sand kisses Ray, which is passionate, needy, mutually engaged and eager.

Sand's inability to push back against Boeing's advances is because his judgement is coloured by their history, their shared past, the feelings he used to have for Boeing. Not by the present. In an ask I received last week, I mention that Sand's apparent leniency is out of politeness, a final act of kindness even. It's his way of saying 'I don't like what you did to me but I'm trying to be civil because I owe it to who we once were to each other.' Sand's attributing that last bit of leniency to the Boeing he used to love, not the Boeing in the here and now.

Sand doesn't like to hold grudges. If someone apologises to him sincerely, he can let it go. When Ray does this back in Episode 1, he immediately forgives him. Since Sand has now moved on, it doesn't serve any purpose to harbour animosity with Boeing or to go out of his way to actively hate him. It's a lot of wasted energy to be resentful and Sand has far better things to do. So when Boeing makes his reappearance, Sand's initial reaction is not anger. Therefore I do believe his sentiment to "let bygones be bygones", which may explain why he was willing to let a few indiscretions slide. What he didn't anticipate is that Boeing would try to manipulate him, and cause a wedge in his newfound happiness with Ray as a result. Having his final act of decency thrown back in his face was rightly the last straw for Sand, and irrefutable confirmation that he doesn't owe Boeing anything. Sand wants to continue looking forward, not back.

Ray's Ultimatum

As much as I praise Ray for being noticeably more level-headed and mature in this episode, he still falls prey to being over-zealous; boxing Sand into an highly uncomfortable and sexually charged battle between himself and Boeing. Ray initially expects Sand to take responsibility, even if Boeing is the instigator. Largely because Ray presumes what Sand is feeling. "You still love him," he claims, though Sand is yet to confirm or deny. And that is the exact genesis for Ray's concern, because he can't fathom why Sand is puzzling over what this means to him and why he can't provide an immediate answer.

The fact that Ray thinks Sand's kiss with Boeing proves he's "second string" is absurdly untrue. Anyone with eyes can see Sand is miles more passionate and responsive with Ray. "Anyone can see he wants you back," Ray echoes (ironically), which is later debunked by Mew. It just goes to show how blindsided you can be when you're in the situation itself. Ray is misinterpreting this as a 'me vs Boeing' issue but it's really not about that at all. Sand isn't trying to compare the two. Neither is he planning to make a choice between them, because that wasn't even on his radar. What Sand is unsure of is how he feels about Boeing, irrespective of Ray. He never managed to reconcile his feelings for Boeing after his betrayal.

I don't think Ray is wrong for demanding that Sand determine this. However, the man probably had emotional whiplash from seeing his ex and boyfriend in the same room together, let alone watching them aggressively make out, all in one night. Sand was hoping to deal with this on his own terms, without Ray complicating the equation. Whilst Ray proceeds to do exactly that, hastily jumping the gun in order to provoke the answers out of Sand by force.

Essentially they wanted the same result but didn't discuss it. So it’s no surprise when their separate approaches don't sit right with one another. Sand appears far too permissive and ambiguous by Ray's standards, and Ray appears far too irrational and defiant by Sand's. This is partly due to Ray feeling compelled to intervene as Sand was struggling to be decisive, but Ray is also hugely impatient by nature.

Once Mew tells Ray that Boeing is intentionally trying to rock the boat, Ray recognises this is no longer Sand's burden to resolve alone. His concerns rested on the belief that Boeing genuinely wanted Sand back, and attempts to display guilt or regret may have tugged on Sand's heartstrings, causing him to waver. But since there's no truth to this, there's no basis for Sand giving him another chance. Sand's past with Boeing is very much 'dead and buried', with Boeing being the one who put the nails in the coffin.

Mutual Respect or Ownership?

By the time Ray and Sand have their final confrontation with Boeing, they are both on level footing. They have aligned their intentions. When Ray says "he's my boyfriend", what he's saying is 'his problems are my problems'. Similarly when Boeing quips "that's up to him", Ray retorts with "that's up to me too". This is what they've learnt from their earlier run-in with Boeing. As a couple, they will stand as a united front going forward.

Ray defending Sand on his behalf does not belittle him in any way. Sand allows him to do it. You see the air of pride he has in watching Ray fight for him. Besides, Ray is merely saying what Sand is already thinking, he's just allowing him the satisfaction of hitting back at Boeing for trying to demean his position at Sand's new boyfriend. What little leniency Sand may have reserved for Boeing is now gone because he actively tried to exploit Sand's good will and patience.

This is further supported when Sand states himself as being owned by Ray (only because Boeing started the analogy of referring to him as a dog). Sand is purely making a point about his loyalty. His loyalty will be steadfast based on the sincerity of the recipient. Ray has proven himself worthy of Sand's loyalty, and that's why he's happy to let Ray take control or be more dominant at times. You can only do this with someone you truly trust.

Though declarations of ownership such as 'you're mine', 'you belong to me' can sound like there is an inherent power play, but actually the language of 'owning' someone is a more possessive way of saying 'I take responsibility for this person and their wellbeing'. If I own them and they belong to me, I will be responsible for their everything.

As Sand has generally taken the care-taker role in their relationship, Ray's way of returning this sentiment is often through this love language, "I'll handle it." "They're gonna have to deal with me." The least Ray feels he can do is to defend his boyfriend's best interests and honour if the situation ever calls for it. Sand no longer has to deal with things on his own.

#only friends #only friends the series #ofts #only friends meta #ray x sand #sand x ray #raysan #sanray #khaofirst #firstkhao #first kanaphan #khaotung thanawat #we love to see growth #i had so many thoughts to cover in this one #this is why i love them #their conflicts are very layered and complex

219 notes · View notes

bfpnola · 1 year

Text

Abolition For Beginners (2023 Edition)

In honor of Tyre Nichols and all others we have lost to policing and imprisonment. In honor of Black History Month. In honor of Better Future Program's mission to educate and serve marginalized youth globally... Let's break down abolition, again. (As usual on Tumblr, tap for better quality.)

Image description below. Written by @reaux07. Proofread by the volunteers and supporters of @bfpnola.

Image Description:

[ID: All of the following slides use a wrinkled, black fabric as their background with black text (bolded red added for emphasis) on top of white boxes with rounded corners. “@bfpnola” is written in the top right corner and the sources for the slide are in the bottom left corner.

Title Slide (No. 1):

Written in red text, “UPDATED FROM 2021 EDITION.” The outlines of the word “ABOLITION” is written line by line 8 times in light grey with the year “2023” written on top in bold, white lettering. Below, written in red within a white bubble and red arrow, it reads “FOR BEGINNERS*.” Across from the bubble, “@BFPNOLA” is in red. Below, in red again, the asterisk mentioned before leads to the following note: “This post is heavily text-based so if you do not learn best by reading, feel free to utilize our Abolition Study Guide in our bio under "Social Justice Resources" instead!” Lastly, white stars and outlines of grey circles can be seen in each corner of the slide.

Slide No. 2 reads:

Abolition is an anti-capitalist, intersectional framework that aims to not only destroy the cages created by various “industrial complexes,” but to create inclusive, effective alternatives for addressing harm. As defined by Dr. Jennie Wang-Hall, an “industrial complex (IC) is a system that creates profit through embedding into social inequities and providing an ineffective product that keeps consumers under-resourced and returning for more.”

The most common examples of such systems? Prison and policing, psychiatry, foster care/family policing, the military, and even the Family (as an institution, not kinship altogether).

Despite common misconceptions, abolition is not just a negation of what currently exists, but an active evolution of what community-based support can and has looked like. Abolition is about the radical working-class imagination, about Black and Indigenous imagination.

If individualistic, reactive, punishment-based strategies are maintained, true accountability and rehabilitation will never exist. Instead, we can choose to be proactive, analyze the circumstances that perpetuate violence, and address harm at the root! Of course, no one is saying that harm will completely cease to exist, but to paraphrase butch anarchist Lee Shevek, wouldn’t it be a profound improvement to expand our capacity to respond to harm and challenge our abusers, rather than being restricted to system-granted authority? Especially when such systems deliberately ignore the suffering of marginalized communities (e.g. people of color, queer and trans folks, women and femmes, Mad and disabled folks, and so on) to begin with?

Sources: @Dr.JennieWH, @ButchAnarchy, Stella Akua Mensah, Erin Miles Cloud, @WokeScientist

Slide No. 3 reads:

Before we continue any further, let’s destroy the myth that cops actually stop violence. First off, we can’t depend on crime stats at face value because this begs the question of who exactly gets to define what counts as a “crime” and why (e.g. drug possession and sleeping in public vs. tax evasion of the wealthy and wage theft). Continuing, crime rates often only reflect violations that have actually been reported, chosen to be shown, and deemed out of line. By this logic, crime rates are simply reflections of cops’ perceptions, not of the material and emotional realities of the proletariat (i.e. the working-class).

As for perpetuating violence, “US law enforcement killed at least 1,183 people in 2022, making it the deadliest year on record for police violence.” (And those are just the deaths that were reported. In our home state of Louisiana, turns out the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office, as of January 12, 2023, has been unlawfully destroying records of officer misconduct for at least 10 years.) Many (69%) of these murders were cases in which no offense was alleged, were mental health or welfare checks, or involved traffic violations and other nonviolent offenses.

This is, of course, without even touching on the involuntary servitude (i.e. enslavement) and maltreatment ongoing in American prisons. How many more deaths must occur before the general public says enough is enough? Or is this acceptable since these are working-class, disabled, Mad, non-white, queer, and trans lives being lost?

Sources: @InterruptCrim, The Guardian, Mapping Police Violence, @VeriteNewsNola

Slide No. 4 reads:

So we agree police are harmful. Why abolition instead of reform? Historically, reforms have either provided further funding to the prison, foster care, and psychiatric industrial complexes and/or just reinforced harmful ideologies surrounding policing as a whole. And trust us, these systems already have more than enough money. In the fiscal year of 2021, at least $277,153,670,501 were spent on federal law enforcement and prisons as well as on police and prisons by state and local governments. Can you even conceptualize a number that large? We could end all American medical debt with that much money. We could even provide clean water and waste disposal to everyone on Earth!

Continuing, reforms like body cameras are pitched as making officers more accountable, that if “done right” policing will actually keep people safe, and that those who do not use excessive force are suddenly no longer guilty of perpetuating centuries worth of systemic oppression. In reality, body cameras require further funding and increase surveillance!

Similarly, civilian oversight boards and the push to “jail killer cops” reinforce the belief that cases of murder, assault, falsifying information, and so on are exceptional occurrences rather than intrinsic to the very nature of policing itself. This is where the phrase “All Cops Are Bastards” comes into play, stating that while the individual character of some officers may be morally permissible, all cops are part of a “bastardized,” or corrupt, system.

Sources: Security Policy Reform Institute, Matt Korostoff, @CriticalResistance

Slide No. 5 reads:

Even laws don’t prevent police violence, e.g. the murder of Eric Garner despite the NYPD passing a policy against chokeholds, or the murder of Daunte Wright despite the passing of the George Floyd Law Enforcement Trust and Integrity Act and a separate Justice in Policing Act of 2020.

Alternatively, we can advocate against the expansion of policing “responsibilities,” i.e. not allowing officers to address Mad individuals in vulnerable states, the housing crisis, or people who use drugs (PWUD). We can reroute funding into non-coercive, peer-led initiatives for harm reduction, de-escalation, first aid, and self-defense. And maybe most importantly, we can reaffirm that EXTENSIVE power can, in fact, be found amongst everyday folks like you and me!

Abolition is not a one-and-done sort of deal but rather a progression of steps toward an infinite future of improvements. The act of building parallel infrastructures and modes of governance while the previous ones still exist is known as dual power. Abolition must begin as dual power. We can start today!

And in building such, these steps cannot: legitimize or expand oppressive systems we aim to dismantle, create divisions between “deserving” and “underserving” people, preserve existing power relations, or utilize exclusionary, one-size-fits-all, standardized treatments.

Sources: @ProjectLets, @HarmReductionCoalition, CrimethInc., Survived & Punished NY

Slide No. 6 reads:

One of the main questions brought up, though, is what abolitionists plan to do in the case of homicide, rape, domestic violence, and other harms. While this is entirely valid, this question seems to imply that 1) police are already effectively responding to such harms rather than perpetuating and/or ignoring them and 2) that there is one collective abolitionist response.

For one, the majority of sexual assault, for example, goes unreported and less than 0.5% of perpetrators are incarcerated. (And this assumes that through the reporting process and incarceration, survivors will somehow find healing, perpetrators will find understanding, and that sexual assault does not continue within prisons.) Meanwhile, let’s use our hometown as one example of many, a complaint of sexual violence is filed against a New Orleans Police Department officer every 10 days and nearly 1 in 5 NOPD officers have been reported for sexual and/or intimate partner violence.

And secondly, we have a plethora of organizations like Critical Resistance and cultures like that of the Diné (Navajo) to learn from and build upon. We don’t have to be stuck within this false dilemma fallacy, that there is only policing or total chaos. Don’t you see that that is the state’s way of constricting communal power?

Sources: @RAINN, @CopWatchNola, @WokeScientist

Slide No. 7 reads:

To expand this conversation, abolition heavily aligns with the political ideal of “anarchism.” Anarchism supports the absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual. And despite its negative connotations, anarchy also reflects an evolution of community-based care rather than just a deconstruction of what currently exists.

A simplified version of its 6 agreed-upon principles are:

Autonomy and Horizontality: define yourself on your own terms, we stand on an equal footing

Mutual Aid: bonds of solidarity form a stronger social glue than fear, support your community

Voluntary Association: associate or don't associate with whomever you wish

Direct Action: accomplish goals directly rather than depending on representatives or authorities

Revolution: overthrow those in power who enforce coercive hierarchies (ex. white supremacy)

Self-Liberation: you must be at the forefront of your own liberation, freedom must be taken

While being an abolitionist does not require alignment with anarchism, it is worth considering how the state plays such an enduring role in various social harms. Concurrently, whenever you treat other living beings with consideration and respect, come to reasonable compromise rather than coercion, and decide to share or delegate tasks, you are already living by anarchist principles.

Sources: Peter Gelderloos, David Graeber

Slide No. 8 reads:

So, how can you get involved? How do we continue the efforts already being made by activists worldwide? After such an overload of information and even more to learn, we understand how political frameworks like abolition can seem daunting, but they don't have to be! Here are some general next steps:

Read the "8toAbolition" steps.

Look into "podmapping" so you know whom to run to when you have been harmed or perpetuate harm.

See if there are any pre-existing mutual aid networks in your community, and if not, start one with your neighbors or peers!

Begin to research issues affecting communities other than your own. Abolition is intrinsically tied to all of us as we are all surveilled. For example, do you understand how prison and policing further ableism, transphobia, or the sex trade? What about policing internationally (see our allies in: the Kingdom of Hawai'i, Palestine, Artsakh, Kashmir...)?

Research the differences between capitalism, socialism, and communism. Abolition and anti-capitalism are foundational to one another as well.

Look into the other industrial complexes we named in the beginning (psychiatry, foster care, the military, the Family...).

Volunteer (remotely or in-person) with organizations like Better Future Program (@bfpnola) to both educate yourself and directly serve your community!

And if you're looking for further reading/listening, BFP offers over 3,000 FREE social justice, mental health, and academic resources in our Linktr.ee, including study guides for beginners. While we can't promise that the struggle for liberation will always be easy, BFP will always do its best to support you in whatever way we know how.

End ID.]

731 notes · View notes

featherstorm2004 · 6 months

Text

All For One and the power of context

I tend to drift alongside the BNHA fandom as a somewhat casual enjoyer so I haven't really made much posts about the series even if I do like it. Mostly because the things I want to say have already been stated by someone else so, I never felt a need but with these latest chapters I wanted to mention what I believe is Horikoshi"s biggest strength "context".

What I mean by that is his ability to turn seemingly boring or one note characters into some of the most fascinating by showing how these characters upbringings and living situations made them who they are today. And I believe we can all agree this is shown most strongly with the villains, are most recent example being All For One who has made the transformation from a pure evil one note villain to a complex human being within just a few chapters, even if All For One himself would refuse to admit to such humanity.

This can also be seen with other examples such as Mr Compress, Dabi and Toga with the later being the most demonised by the fandom until recent chapters. But for now I wish to focus on All For One as I find his situation to be the most fascinating because unlike the other villains who desperately want to be seen as human and accepted by the world around them, All For One seems almost afraid to admit his humanity and the cruelty of his circumstances.

Ever since All For One was introduced we have been lead to believe by the narrative and All For One himself that he is simply pure evil, that there is no complex reasoning behind what he dose or why he dose it he was simply "born arrogant". But I don't believe that and I don't think Horikoshi wants you to believe that either, it has been displayed to us multiple times in the series that there is no such thing as people who are born evil. I would argue that nature vs nurture is one of the key themes of BNHA.

One key example of this is Endeavour and Dabi, where in the early arcs of the series we are led to believe Endeavour to be this pure evil abusive monster who tormented his family and whilst he was most certainly an abusive prick, Endeavour can't be simplified so quickly with his atonement arc being a clear sign of that. And then there's Dabi who was hated for not caring about his family or friends because of the way he tried to deflect and hide any emotions that weren't pure anger or disgust, then his complete backstory that wasn't from Endeavour's point of view we see almost immediately after the fire he rushes back home to apologies to his family.

The reason I bring these things up is because it displays seamlessly how the lack of context to Dabi and Endeavour's stories led to them to be demonised and simplified into pure evil characters when that is far from the truth.

And I believe a similar phenomenon has begun to scour with All For One, as with the most recent chapters, where we have been allowed to peel back to mask the demon lord just a little bit to see the real man behind the mask of evil. Now dose this mean I am implying that All For One is simply misunderstood or that he can be redeemed? God no but that's not the point, that''s never been the point.

We aren't meant to like All For One or think that he deserves forgiveness but we are supposed to understand him, to deconstruct the layers of the number one villain and understand how he has gotten to this point. To understand that he was a child born in what was essentially an apocalypse with no parents, no name and no one willing to help him because of his quirk, where him and his brother where hunted by hate groups and the government for simply being born different, where he had to not only find a way for himself to survive but also his sickly twin who couldn't help him much due to his illness.

It is this very important context that allows us to understand how a man like All For One came to be. But we must also understand two very important things and that 1) All For One is a liar and 2) he is very childish. At first I thought it was strange how juvenile he acted during these recent arcs and even stranger when he started de-ageing but now I understand why, because the truth of the situation is that All For One never truly grew up from his days as a young child reading comic books with his brother.

In many ways all of this conflict, pain and destruction is merely an extension of that, he is quite literally a child playing at being the big bad in his favourite story. It also explains why he doesn't understand why his brother wants to stay away from him because it's just a game why are you getting worked up over me breaking a few toys? This also would explain all his tantrums first with All Might and now Hawks because they're ruining his game and his story.

Now that's not to say that I think All For One doesn't understand all the pain he's caused or that what he's doing is wrong. But like early Shigaraki he's distance himself to it, it's a similar phenomenon where people in a video game are more willing to do more messed up stuff like murder or bulling a character because they are distanced from it to a point they feel comfortable acting that way just to see what happens.

That's also why I believe All For One clings to his demon persona so much, because if he is truly a demon if he was simply born evil with no ability to feel love or empathy then that also means that he doesn't have to take accountability for his actions because that was simply how he is.

But it's not just about accountability.

I also think the demon persona is a form of self defence for All For One, a way for him to take back control from a world that denied it to him. Like most victims of trauma he is trying to create a way for him to have agency in a situation he originally had no control in, this can be seen in many children who place themselves in the positions of the hero's in the stories they are exposed to, so they too can feel that sense of power and control in they're own lives.

So, that's simply what All For One did only instead of mimicking the hero he decided to mimic the villain. And I think his reasons for doing so are fascinating, at first he relays to the audience and All Might that it's simply a power thing or his desire to rule the world but it's not that simple.

The real reason is surprisingly more human, All For One wants to be loved, to be relied on and trusted. Essentially, All For One desires a family, a community to call his own after being denied one his entire life and this explains a lot about his earlier actions, hell in one of the first vision's Deku receives about All For One he refers to his minions as his "dear friends" and when he is fighting with All Might one of his biggest grievance is how All Might forced his "dear friends" to go under ground.

He even refers to Aoyama as his nephew and gets him and his family to call him uncle, this man is obsessed with the idea of family. Which in turn explains his absolute rage and hatred to all the barriers of One For All as in his eyes they stole the only family he's had since birth, the only person who loved him unconditionally, until he went too far. It's probably the reason All For One chose to fixate on Tenko so much despite having an army of children who could be his successors as not only did he get his revenge by stealing a family member of one of All For One's holders but he also gets to have a child who appears close enough to him and his brother that he could pretend he is actually family.

However, I don't think All For One can admit this to himself, that he is in fact a human being. A human that desires to be loved and love in return because if he dose admit that to himself then he would shatter and he'd have to face all the emotions and consequences that he's been running from for over a century. It would essentially be an ego death for him as everything he's convinced himself he is and what he was taught to be by the world who fears him would suddenly be a lie and he can't handle that.

So, he lies to himself and to the world desperately trying to convince everyone that he is in fact the demon lord, and not a child who desperately clings to fiction. It's tragic in a way as ultimately I believe Yoichi was correct, if given the right care and upbringing All for one could have been the kindest ability in the world, but alas they were not so lucky.

As, for where his story is going I honestly have no idea, he may be killed, he may De-age into nothingness. But I think it's important to remember this context whenever we discus the story of BNHA with all it's flaws it is ultimately about broken people desperately finding a place in the world.

But that's just my opinion.

#boku no hero academia #bnha 407 #bnha #bnha spoilers #mha #my hero academia #all for one #afo #shigaraki yoichi #bnha meta #character analysis #bnha chapter 408

101 notes · View notes

declawedwildcat · 10 months

Text

Thinking again about how the "Proximity" hangout from Night in the Woods and the "Happiness" moment from Our Life at their core boil down to the same themes approached from opposite angles

The question of what if we're only friends because it was convenient at the time? being answered by No, you are special to me; If we hadn't been pushed together by fate I would have sought you out myself, and every day I will put in the work to make sure you stay in my life even when it's no longer the easiest option

vs. answering it with Yes, that's probably true; circumstances brought us together where we might never have cared about each other normally, but our circumstances are all we have, so the only thing we can do is appreciate it without dwelling on what could have been otherwise

#night in the woods #NITW #Our Life #our life beginnings & always #OLBA

191 notes · View notes

bestworstcase · 21 days

Note

Hello, long time lurker and fan of your analyses here. There is one thing that I've been thinking over in relation to how people in the fandom react to Salem, that I'm puzzled with.

I followed one blog because of their posting about a game, and the villain of the game have extraordinarily similar circumstances to Salem, and that got me reflecting...

Both of them had tragic circumstances (or at least, implied), both of them were "corrupted" by "dark creatures" and considered "evil" because of it, both were betrayed by loved ones and both had their faith in the gods shattered and rejected them and deride divinity, but I see that there is much more analyses, understanding and sympathy for the guy than for her.

He wasn't portrayed to be very sympathetic in the game (in fact, he wasn't that present, showing up mostly at middle-end) and most of his characther was informed by a movie and a dlc, and yet...

Why would that be? It is because gamers are more prone to sympathyze with villains? It's because Salem's a woman, or that people are more willing to see depth in video games than in animation? It is lack of media literacy?

Thank you for your time!

it’s gender. mostly

(*without knowing the other story it’s difficult to say how much narrative framing contributes to the disparity, but framing can have a significant influence; by this i don’t mean whether the character is portrayed sympathetically per se but more, whose perspective do we see? what details are given focus?

salem as a character has been kept extremely opaque—the lost fable is narrated from ozpin’s perspective so we don’t really know why she does anything, we only know why ozpin believes she did everything; to understand her v1/v3 soliloquies we need context given in v6 and arguably v9 before it’s possible to start piecing together what she’s really talking about / what she really means, etc—and that’s something rwby does on purpose, because it’s Making A Point about the power that storytellers have over their audiences, and truth being more difficult to come by than asking for just one side of the story.

which has the effect of making salem a difficult character. the thematic point the story is making with her character is that it is really, really easy to fall for dehumanizing propaganda if that’s the only source of information you have. to see beneath the surface with her you really need to pay close attention to what she says and does and be very skeptical of what other characters say about her, including the authoritative spirit of knowledge [i.e. you need to pick up on ruby only asking specifically for ozpin’s side of the story AND that it’s never stated by anyone that jinn’s answers are objective factual truth AND that the lamp probably works like the staff in that she answers the exact wording of the questions put to her]. because the narrative we’re getting about her is heavily steeped in in-universe propaganda designed to convince people that she’s an unreasonable, deceitful, supremely manipulative and malevolent, inhuman monster.)

<- but with that being said. fandom is always much more critical of female characters than male ones, and it tends to be much more difficult to persuade a fandom to dedicate this level of interest and energy to a female character than a male one. you can see this in action even within just the rwby fandom: compare the fan reception of raven vs taiyang, for example, with leaving her child in the care of two loving parents because she felt unable to take good enough care of yang being styled as the worst most horrid unforgivable thing a mother could do whereas letting his five year old "pick up the pieces" is often… flat out ignored in favor of headcanon that he’s the best dad ever.

or just the fact that the vast majority of the fandom regards the lost fable fight as "salem murdered her kids, ozma died trying to protect them" even though that is explicitly contradicted by what’s shown on screen with both ozma and salem being equally aggressive and oz having no idea what happened to those girls from the instant the fight began because he wasn’t thinking about them; they BOTH killed their kids in their fury at each other. but the fanon is that salem murdered her children on purpose in a vengeful rage and ozma was a good dad—in its most extreme form this becomes the Dadpin Nonsense.

(there is also an extremely funny talking point in dadpin circles to the tune of "if ozlem were gender-swapped no one would question that salem was abusive!" as if a) tauradonna shippers who scream and cry about blake being abusive don’t exist and b) dadpin people wouldn’t eat ozpin alive if he was a woman)

it’s complicated by the reality that salem does do a lot of very horrible things—terroristic attacks, enabling a serial killer by using him as her attack dog, her abusive treatment of cinder, everything she does to lionheart, sacking atlas, razing vale—and her moments of restraint or mercy are very easy to miss (she actively disguises her own release of her hostages in 8.9 for example) and again you have to be very attentive to detail to pick up on the fact that she cares about cinder. so it isn’t like she has an obvious "good side" juxtaposing all the atrocities, which means except for those who make a conscious decision to try to figure out what’s going on in her head while keeping an open mind, no one is going to see anything but the atrocities.

and again, fandom in general is a lot more willing to do that with male characters than female ones.

i think the clearest sign that It’s The Misogyny is the sheer amount of extremely widespread, extremely entrenched fanon there is about salem that is straight up contradicted by the text. her supposed "disdain" for humanity, for example; people act like it’s outrageous and nonsensical to suggest that salem thinks highly of humankind in the abstract (despite her indifference to individual people) even though… in both of her soliloquies she speaks quite highly of mankind… or her supposed "obsession" with magic, never mind that she barely uses "real" magic herself (most of what she does is Grimm Stuff, and she uses dust to make her grimm battlewhale fly) and never mind that she keeps flat out warning cinder that magic "comes with a cost." etc. this is a kind of flanderization driven by people disregarding what she says/does and mentally inserting generic villain tropes to fill in the gaps of story they miss by doing that, and then these ideas become memetically repeated often enough that they become the accepted lens through which everything she does is refracted.

(and that is how you get nonsense takes like "salem calls emerald’s semblance a semblance because she’s furious that this pitiful imitation of REAL MAGIC somehow fooled her, not because 'semblance' is what that kind of magic is called." this is why salem’s the only adult character who’s read as condescending and disdainful when she refers to the 17-19 year olds as children, even though all the older adults and some of the teenagers themselves do that. etc. there’s a preconceived notion that salem is disdainful of humanity and the text is bent to fit that reading even to the point of creating the absurd double standard that it’s… wrong for salem to use the same language used by every other character in the story?)

this kind of sexism is covert and usually subconscious; it emerges out of disinterest and an unexamined reflex to read female characters as less competent / less moral / less complex / less trustworthy / less rational etc. than their male counterparts, often with a side helping of blaming bad things male characters do on female characters instead. (eg see team rwby being blamed for things ironwood does in v7-8 by certain circles, or the constant "everything oz does is justified because salem evil" drumbeat).

watch how fast this fandom turns on summer rose once she turns out to be neither a martyred paragon nor a slave.

31 notes · View notes

teardropvampire · 7 months

Text

To give my thoughts on the fandom discussion of the handling of DID Mikoto/John's writing after the Double mv, I think my main frustration is just the somewhat black and white attitude many people have being viewing things with. In all honesty, I think the writing is complex situation that's a lot more then just 'good rep vs bad rep'. Instead, it almost could be better viewed through what the writing choices are attempting to explore/say about the character vs what ended up coming across to viewers? Its especially hard when we're only partially through the series, meaning a lot of your current opinion has to come from how strong your faith is in the series providing satisfying narrative conclusions to all the threads we've been presented with so far. But even then, I think its both fine to be uncomfortable with his portrayal or be satisfied with it - and that mixed reaction is generally what I've seen so far, particularly from viewers who are systems themselves. Its important for us singlets that we take into account the opinions of systems who are willing to comment on the character while also using our own critical thinking. Things seem to have been a lot better so far in that regard, which is great to see.

As for me personally? I have to say that I trust in the series to deliver nuanced and respectful writing. When you take a look at the series from a wider perspective, Mikoto and John's circumstances do tie into Milgram's exploration of societal issues in a way that I'd expect to be handled with care and empathy going forward. I feel the presentation of such flawed characters and the conflicts that can arise in our voting as a result of it can be applied to not just here but all the characters in at least some way. John isn't, and was never meant to be portrayed as purely antagonistic or monotonous, and I'm glad that idea has gotten more focus in this trial. This complex presentation of the cast's actions, as confronting as it often may be, have always been to help us understand and connect with the prisoners, rather than demonize them as foreign entities. This is particularly notable in Mikoto's case because of the divisive nature of mental health as a subject matter, but is definitely not the only occurrence of it in the series. However, Mikoto's case is definitely not perfect from a writing perspective and its important to be critiqued when necessary! Regardless of good intentions, trying to write a disability as complicated as DID will inevitably contain both steps forward and backwards. Although my opinion towards the handling of Mikoto's DID in this trial lean towards positive, It's completely justified to be uncomfortable with it and we should respect those who feel that way. But yeah, it's just slightly frustrating that I've seen people acting as if you need to decide between 'this is good rep, defend the series with your life' and 'this is bad rep, drop the series entirely'. Of course, learning to observe your own bias and look beyond restrained dichotomies of judgement has always been one of the series' main intent, so it's interesting in how it's shown itself again this time around. It'll be extremely interesting to see how both Mikoto and John are going to develop as characters going forward!

#im not a system so please feel free to correct me on any mistakes i may have made here!!#i really hope this doesnt sound too preachy im really just rambling here tldr uhhh listen to systems please #anyways its been so fascinating to see the discussion for this case and its great to see the level of respect people have shown so far #mikotos never been a favourite of mine but this trial's had me way more interested in him so they've gotta be doing something right #milgram #mikoto kayano

93 notes · View notes

yujeong · 8 months

Text

Hello. I'm back with my Macau bullshit. This time: the difference between his relationship with Pete and his relationship with Porsche (because if I don't scream about Pete and Porsche and the parallels between them, I can't function as a human being apparently.) Ok so, first things first. I am aware that I may be comparing apples and oranges here. Besides the fact that they're both bodyguards of the main family and very close to Kinn, there's not really anything else tying them together in regards to their relationship with Macau. But here's the thing. That's what I care about. What circumstances make Macau act like the devilish little gremlin that he is VS the compliant and polite son of the minor family. And my boys are perfect for the job. (The post will be split into 2 parts because I guess I had a LOT to say about Porsche and Macau so, Pete and Macau will be explored in another one)

Ok. I think I speak for all of us when I say that we did NOT get enough Macau in the show. He had like, what, 5 scenes total? HOWEVER, the scenes we got were spectacular for a gazillion reasons but I'll choose to focus on a specific aspect of them for this post: Most, if not all of his scenes, were either from Porsche's or Pete's POV. And that's giving us a lot. Let's start with Porsche. He - and the audience, remember, most of this show is through Porsche's POV so that's important - meets Macau like he actually is; a typical teenager. He's moody, rude and doesn't want to deal with Porsche's bullshit. (Although, one could argue he was extra antsy because they were at the main family's house, which I choose to believe due to how the minor family is treated by their relatives.) Their first scene, accompanied by the scene in which he goes to Gun and calls Porsche out in front of everyone is Macau being sincere. It actually is him, and it's tragic as well as amazing how he's never himself again in front of Porsche for the rest of the show. Because the next time we see Macau with Porsche, it's in ep 7, when Vegas has his plans with Porsche to execute and Macau has to follow along. BUT, Porsche gets to have a glimpse of the real Macau in this exchange:

(Vegas' smile is KILLING me OMG, he loves his brother SO MUCH, I'M CHEWING GLASS AS WE SPEAK-) Porsche never gets to see Macau's actual face in this (maybe a glimpse from above but with difficulty) but his voice betrays his happiness at seeing his brother and from the answer he gives. Aaaall of that fades away when the bodyguards sit down. Macau turns quiet and polite, keeping appearances because they have guests, and we have him welcoming all of them, and Porsche, like this:

The show knows we the audience - and Porsche - remember what has happened between the two, so Macau saying "Hello" to Porsche carries significance here. GOD, I wish I could make gifs because, after that, after the camera stops focusing on Macau's face, you get him blurred in the background and the boy is SO uncomfortable by what's happening. His eyes dart left and right, mostly at Pete and Arm's direction - he fucking HEARS Arm's comment about "no surprise that the heirs of this family turn out like this" and he SIGHS and looks downward and he STARES at Vegas' direction when he spews his bullshit about how the minor family treats their bodyguards. My boy is PRESENT in the discussion and he hates every second of it. Isn't it spectacular then, how the next scene between him and Porsche, is the one in which Macau apologizes? I love the fact that he calls him Phi. It's so good, because in my eyes Porsche doesn't even deserve it. He never apologized for what he did to Macau. He did, to Vegas, but not to Macau himself. So, the respect Macau shows to him is so fake I could cry from laughter.

He finds him trying to get on Vegas' motorcycle and touches him and urges him to ride it. "I know you like motorcycles," he says, like that's a normal thing to know and not something Vegas told him to say because VEGAS is the one who knows.

I'm dying over here, truly. Macau is amazing and it hurts as much as it's funny, because Macau must be feeling so bad here imo. He's not an idiot, he knows Porsche was in the wrong and Vegas knows as well because LOOK AT HIS FUCKING FACE AS MACAU SAID THE THING:

This isn't a strict face, one that's like "that fucking kid, finally he learned how to apologize". This is a "the things I do for my plans to work" kind of face. Vegas used Macau here. And I'm convinced that he hated every second of witnessing this scene in front of him.

Also, I love how Macau is touchy with Porsche. Macau does show affection through touch, just like his brother does. It's evident by the hospital scene with Pete and the scene above with Vegas when they talked + the scene in ep 2, in which he stretched his arm in Vegas' direction. But, just like Vegas, he uses that in his advantage to get what he wants here. What Vegas wants from him to get, which is, Porsche's trust. And, if any audience member actually believed for even a second that Macau was sincere here, then comes this to show them that NOPE, the boy doesn't believe his words in the slightest:

It's easier to see in motion but Macau's shy grin as he sees Vegas in front of him, shows you everything you need to know about the sincerity of his words. And even if THAT wasn't enough, you have Vegas confirming your suspicions with his words:

Oh, Vegas, you scheming bastard. You wanted your plan to work so badly, you used even Macau for it. I wonder if that kept you up at night. This whole scene was so...Vegas coded? It felt like Macau adapted Vegas' methods of seduction with Porsche here, didn't it? Actual Macau would never do any of that and it's incredible how Porsche only saw that version of Macau after ep 2. It makes you wonder; what did Porsche see and hear from Macau during that one-month period before the show finale, a period of time in which Vegas was fighting for his life + Porsche had just gained Vegas' right as the heir of the minor family? How was Macau's behavior then? I really wish we got to know, because Macau showing his true self to Porsche again due to circumstance is very appealing to me. Porsche&Macau in general is a relationship dynamic I haven't seen people talk about at all, which is strange due to their canonical scenes. Oh well. Another excuse to write essay long posts on Tumblr, I guess.

#Damn I thought I could contain all my thoughts about these wonderful babies in one post but I guess not #I keep screaming about Pete&Macau but Porsche&Macau is also very interesting to me #Especially in juxtaposition with Pete&Macau #That boy and his adventures with the main family bodyguards #What a concept truly #kinnporche the series #macau theerapanyakul #porsche kittisawasd #pete phongsakorn saengtham #vegas theerapanyakul #kinnporsche meta

78 notes · View notes

mettywiththenotes · 6 months

Text

I don't think people are really taking into account the baby Bakugou flashback. Because a couple of chapters ago we had the baby AFO flashback and I think it tells us a lot more about the people in this battle in that comparison

AFO was born into this world with no one to take care of him. His mother died in labour, no father there to help and his brother was born weak and fragile. Whereas Bakugou was born with love, both his parents alive and already in a position to take care of him

That's not me saying "AFO was born with no one to take care of him so of course he's the villain in this battle" and "Bakugou was born with love so of course he's the hero in this battle"

But throughout their lives, we're shown how one character has changed and the other hasn't. The circumstances of birth don't necessarily matter for how a person turns out

AFO was born without anyone to take care of him, and while Yoichi did care for him and tried to convince him to stop, hoping that he could become a kind person who wields a powerful quirk, AFO didn't change. His love for Yoichi was always something twisted, possessive. He never learnt to be better and frankly didn't want to. Of course part of that is due to the world he lived in at the time, a world that punished him for having powers, but even as society got better about quirks, he still didn't change. Even after he died and came back to life again, he still continued to do horrible things

Bakugou was born with love and care, but he was a bully. He hurt Izuku and pushed him away and told him to jump off a roof and couldn't stand to see Izuku progress despite it all, undeterred from his dreams with a new advantage. But the point is Bakugou did change. He took a good look at himself and decided he didn't want to be like that anymore. He recognized his own weaknesses and decided to get better, that meaning that he couldn't be the kind of person who always looked down on people anymore if he wanted to be an actual hero. We see evidence of this throughout the rest of bnha, with how he motivates Izuku as a rival and helps him train with One For All, how he pushes Izuku aside to sacrifice himself, but especially and most importantly so when he finally apologizes to Izuku. The courage he had to face the victim of his bullying and say he's sorry and explain why he did the things he did but emphasize it was wrong is something Early Bakugou would not have had or resolved to do

And though there's the connection with Izuku, there is also very noticeable development with how he treats others, shown in the A vs B joint training and the class band and many more. Even as he delivers the blow to AFO in the last page of 409, he does not take the credit for himself. "This is OUR story. I could have never done this on my own.", also something Early Bakugou would not have said, which shows how far he has come

The dedication he has to look at himself and actively improve how he looks at being a hero and a person to others is what makes him an admirable person

Point of this post being that whether they were loved from birth is not a necessary factor to look at in their roles, even when you compare both flashbacks. As you grow older, naturally, you change. Maybe you used to do bad things, unforgivable things. Maybe you were just trying to survive in your environment, or maybe you were wrestling with your own emotions regardless of your circumstances. Whether you acknowledge it or not, we as people are supposed to change at some point in our lives

AFO has not changed. Has had an incredibly long life enough to have that choice to stop doing bad things and hasn't. He is the villain of this battle. Not because of birth, not because of circumstances, but because he chooses to be

Bakugou has changed. He's 17 years old and has already reflected enough to know there's no excuse for his behaviour back then, has set himself and apologized roughly a year after being aware of that fact. He is the hero of this battle. Not because of birth, not because of circumstances, not just because he is the only one who can physically fight right now, but because he chooses to be. He chooses to be better than he was before

In conclusion, I believe showing AFO's birth and Bakugou's birth one after the other is an intentional contrast and what follows in their lives shows the differences in their characters to this point

#i hope this makes sense #point being don't look at someones circumstances of birth and think 'oh yeah nah they're fucked they're gonna end up bad'#or 'oh yeah thats gonna be a sweet angel from birth to death'#we all do shit and make mistakes and do bad things and grow and learn #going forward and realising these things were bad and that you shouldn't do them again is how we become better #example being bakugou #and neglecting to realize our actions is how we stay stuck and more often than not end up being the bad guy who gets pummeled #example being afo #bnha #bnha 409 #bnha manga spoilers #bnha spoilers #all for one #bakugou katsuki #mettys posts #metty posts #*backflips into the abyss*

63 notes · View notes

arliedraws · 26 days

Note

Hello, I wanted to know your opinion on...If Dumbledore had known regulus death circumstances....would he have reconsidered his Sirius trust issues? Because I don't understand ....why he would do that to him....Harry is really a weapon to him...and still got attached to....he says so when he explains after Sirius died...can you believe this man....Harry just went through such a harrowing experience...and he says to that boy...sorry for getting attached to you...I can't...it just burns in my memory and crawls back up unexpectedly...to leave me more in melancholy. Sorry for ranting...I just thought you might have good insights into it.

PS: loving all your art btw...keep it coming.

Aw, thank you!!

Hmm. Let me piece together what I think you’re asking about.

1.) If Dumbledore had known about Regulus’s death and attempt to destroy a Horcrux, would it have changed how he saw Sirius? Would he have trusted Sirius?

The first thing to consider is that Dumbledore, like anyone who would have known both brothers, would have seen the Black brothers as two completely different people. Dumbledore’s thoughts about Regulus would not have influenced his opinions of Sirius. By the time Sirius had left Hogwarts, there is little evidence to suggest Sirius and Regulus ever saw each other again—they were done with each other. The second, I don’t think Dumbledore distrusted Sirius so much as he saw him as a liability. Sirius did everything Dumbledore asked of him and never gave Dumbledore a reason not to trust his loyalty.

2.) Here is my full disclosure: I really like Dumbledore as a character. I love that he is the other side of the good/evil coin—like Voldemort, he demands loyalty, he cannot fathom that someone would betray him, and he preys on the most vulnerable people to do what he believes is right. When I was in grad school and learning about teaching climate change literacy, I read an article that suggested that a movement of activism is most likely to succeed when the leader of the movement has great ambition and also an emotional detachment from those people that they lead. You must inspire loyalty but have the strength to carry on when your fighters are wounded or die. This is a callous, terrible way to live—but does this not sound like Dumbledore?

Dumbledore is cruel in his ability to overlook deaths caused by the Movement. For Dumbledore, when an Order member dies, he rarely needs to do more than mourn and say, “At least they died doing something noble.” Besides, Dumbledore does not fear death—this is what he sees is his advantage over Voldemort who, as we know, fears death above all things.

Suffering, however, upsets him. Why doesn’t he ever check in on Harry? Because he would have to admit that Harry was suffering. Why not tell Harry the truth? Because he cannot bear to see Harry bear that weight, and he would rather shelter Harry from the truth to spare him this suffering (and haha doesn’t he wait until he’s dead to ‘tell’ Harry that Harry must sacrifice himself?) . Dumbledore avoids seeing pain when he can because he is empathetic but cannot afford to be (at least, so he believes). Dumbledore loves Harry very much. He fights between being the leader he believes the world needs and his natural inclination to care about people.

I love when people have such personal, visceral feelings about liking and disliking characters, but your local literature teacher here really hates to designate a character as a “bad person” vs. “good person.” Dumbledore is neither. In the series, he demonstrates great kindness and great cruelty. That is the ENTIRE point of Deathly Hallows. Any single person is capable of being terrible.

We often consider Dumbledore’s cruelty because of how he treats our favorite characters, but also consider the things he did because he felt a sense of empathy—he saved Sirius even though it would have suited his cause to let the Dementors Kiss him; he even saves Buckbeak too (does he make children do it? hahaha yeah, so still a complicated thing). When we look at this action, neither Sirius nor Buckbeak’s survival serve Dumbledore—they are both, essentially, useless to him. Yet he cares for the people around them and hates to see the people who love them suffer.

Is this a Dumbledore defense post? Abso-fucking-not. He doesn’t need defending. The thing that makes him interesting is that he GENUINELY cares about people but forces himself not to. Isn’t that fucking delicious? It’s so twisted and awful and fascinating. Dumbledore fears love as much as he lauds it—love can make you lose your way; love can distract you. He loved Grindelwald. It was love that drove Harry and Sirius apart. Love is what killed James and Lily Potter. Love killed his sister. He recognizes the power of love because it is LOVE that has always been his downfall. Yikes!

Anyway, this got much longer than I anticipated. Thank you for the ask—it made me really think about why I appreciate Dumbledore as a character!

#albus dumbledore #hp meta #asks #i love complicated characters

20 notes · View notes

writingquestionsanswered · 5 months

Note

I don't know how to write the beginning but also without a beginning, I don't know how to write the plot points I already have blocked out so I never start writing, what would you recommend?

Can't Write, Unsure of Story's Beginning

Well, there are two ways we can not know how to write our story's beginning, so I want to cover both.

The first way is when we literally have no idea what needs to happen at the beginning. In that case, I would question where your other plot points are coming from, because your plot points should be stemming from the story's conflict, and the circumstances that ignite the conflict are the beginning of the story. In other words, if your story doesn't have beginning plot points, it doesn't have later ones, either. It just has a bunch of random things you decided to have happen. In that case, spend some time on my Plot & Story Structure master list to learn about conflict, plot-driven vs character-driven stories, story structure, etc.

The second way is when we know what needs to happen... we know our conflict/s, we know our inciting incident, we know what has to lead up to the inciting incident, we just can't figure the best way to showcase those things. I call this "finding a way into your story," because knowing what has to happen isn't the same as knowing the exact situation within which said thing will happen. For example, The Hunger Games inciting incident is when Katniss volunteers to replace her sister at the Reaping, and what has to lead up to that is some world building, setting up Katniss's internal conflict (being responsible for her mom and sister but wishing she could escape her dystopian world) and some laying out of the stakes (if something happens to her, her mom and sister won't survive.) There are a million ways this story could have actually started... it could have started with her already in the woods hunting with Gale. It could have started with her in town witnessing some peace keepers attacking a citizen. It could have started with her watching them set up for the Reaping. Suzanne Collins chose to have the reader wake up with Katniss and start a normal day with her, to illustrate the stakes (her mom and sister, and needing to take care of them) firsthand, to lay out the basic world building through Katinss's eyes as she walks through her district, and to explore her internal conflict while enjoying a little freedom while hunting with Gale. My posts Figuring Out Where to Start a Story and Deciding How to Open Your Story have some tips to help you out. :)

Happy writing!

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

I’ve been writing seriously for over 30 years and love to share what I’ve learned. Have a writing question? My inbox is always open!

LEARN MORE about WQA

SEE MY ask policies

VISIT MY Master List of Top Posts

COFFEE & FEEDBACK COMMISSIONS ko-fi.com/wqa

#wqaadvice

37 notes · View notes

davekat-sucks · 4 months

Note

Bro vs Eridan in terms of being an awful person is tricky considering Bro was being possessed by Cal and Eridan was a 13 year who had to do Feferi dirty work his entire life so her Lusus wouldn't destroy everything. I genuinely think Bro had no choice in anything he did considering his note to Dave was something Caliborn came up with. Eridans case is a bit more complex given the circumstances of his planet, none of those things he did were ok to do but either feed the monster or have everything destroyed. He's the whole reason the trolls were alive in the first place. Considering he had to risk his life everyday for everyone else, him attempting to join Jack isn't out of the ordinary for dangerous stuff he encounters. Yea he's douchey and destroying the matriorb was dick move, but everyone on the meteor lost their minds and had or attempted to kill someone. Tavros tried and Kanaya sawed 2 people in half.

I am also on the side that Bro was possessed or mind controlled to some degree. But the fandom sees things like his strife battle with Dave as more serious because the other ones are played for laughs. Forgetting John would strike is father with a hammer and Rose threatened to commit suicide in front of her Mom. Jade's case is sadder when you remember that when Jade played with the double pistols, Tavros had used Bec to redirect the bullet to kill Grandpa English. She indirectly killed her guardian and wouldn't realize it until later on in the game. Bro's last act would be attempting to fight Jack Noir before dying. So does that mean people think Jack Noir is a HERO for killing the abuser? They forget that DAVESPRITE was present too when they both went after Jack. Bro had no reason to do anything to someone that's a brother from a different timeline. And yet, he was able to let Davesprite run away to safety and fought Jack on his own before dying.

But nobody in this nu-fandom remembers this or thinks hard about that last moment. They only care about his past actions and think it is played for straight abuse. It only applies to him and cannot be applied to other characters unless it's part of a gender arc for a character to transition. It's true Eridan would hunt lusus to help feed Feferi's. Even he admits it can be tiring to figure out when it is the proper time to hunt or not. Hinting that they can't overfeed or underfeed Gl'bgolyb. But you also can't deny he was also doing it to get closer to Feferi and be in a closer relationship with her. Which is why people label him as an incel and people flanderize that to the extreme which gave us Cronus. Then there's the line about him saying he killed marine life accidental.

If it's not sarcasm or poor flirting, it could also mean Eridan had unintentionally killed a lusus and gave it to Feferi to help feed another lusus to try and justify what he is doing is good. And overtime, he gradually accepted it and continued. Getting close to his crush Feferi would also tie in too. You know what they say about psychopaths, first sign is them killing animals. Sure the animals were parents for a troll, but they are still ANIMALS. Kanaya, Karkat, and Terezi accepted that Eridan was a piece of shit and want him to stay dead. Even if he was the reason said trolls are still around, they would never want to bring him back because of his horrid actions on the meteor. As we see when Karkat ended their friendship and Terezi talking with Vriska on who to revive back, Eridan doesn't deserve to be revived. And no mention of Equius, as being the Void player..

Nepeta may have felt Eridan had died, but it's unknown if she knew about Eridan wanting to join Jack. She wasn't even present with Aradia and others in the Vriskagram after becoming a ghost to meet up with him. Though we have yet to see Terezi and Vriska act on that promise on reviving said trolls. The reason they haven't because Terezi found out that Gamzee was trapped in the same fridge as her corpsed friends and didn't want to see him. Maybe the dead trolls will come back for Homestuck Beyond Canon, but that's just wishful thinking with how dead Nepeta jokes are still around and they only brought ghost Eridan in Epilogues for a 'redemption arc.

Eridan got what he deserved and died for his actions. But does he deserve to get brought back? How long should the punishment of his death last? To the cast and narrative, he can never be brought back to relevancy. The other reason the fandom likes Eridan recently is because of Pesterquest putting through the gender arc. Saying his seahorse dad was abusive that didn't acknowledge his gender, despite it's never shown in the webcomic he was this. And because of that, people instantly love him and ignore his past actions and stance on hemospectrum. All for the sake of making the March Eridan meme less transphobic. Nu-fans don't give a shit that he was racist, killed animals and Feferi, destroyed the Matriorb, and had killed Kanaya. All it matters is his label. Yes he is a racist asshole, but he's a NON-BINARY racist asshole. Both Bro and Eridan had done horrible things in the past. But one got more heat over the other. As one got love and attention because of a non-canon moment in a side game, despite people had hated him for those past actions. It's sort of insane about the priorities we have going on in this fandom.

#homestuck #homestuck fandom #bro strider #Eridan Ampora #Davesprite #Feferi Peixies #Kanaya Maryam #Vriska Serket #Nepeta Leijon #Dave Strider #Pesterquest #Karkat Vantas

23 notes · View notes

ikamigami · 5 months

Note

I've read a couple of your posts about todays LAES episode, and I'm genuinely curious, what lead you to believe that Sun is suicidal? I'm not asking because I disagree, I'm asking because I'm frankly just a casual viewer, and want to know what I missed.

Sorry if this is a stupid question.

It's okay. It's not a stupid question. You can ask about anything. ^^

So Sun said in episode "Original Moon returns": "sometimes I wish I was dead".. and later added that he should stop thinking about it and he went to clean the Daycare to distract himself from these thoughts.. which heavily implies that Sun seriously thinks about dying - in the way that he thinks that would be better solution for his issues.. cause he added "Moon got reset and I have to deal with everything".. which again implies that this is serious and Sun thinks that death is a solution.. which heavily implies that he's suicidal...

Another thing is Sun's behaviour after that.. He decided to be conduit for star's power when he found out that there's a risk that person who will use star's power will most probably die.. which shows us Sun being suicidal more in action.. But Sun here is passively suicidal because he doesn't harm himself directly but he tries to find ways to be harmed/killed by outside circumstances like sacrificing himself for example...

Another time when Sun showed more visible signs that he's suicidal is when he told computer without hesitation to shoot him.. It was in "Sun and Moon vs Mimic" episode.. In this episode Mimic was pretending to be Sun and Moon didn't know who the real Sun is.. He came up with idea of threatening both of Sun's with computer shooting deathly laser at them.. to which real Sun told to computer to shoot him... Moon said then that he should check up on Sun because he was concerned by Sun's comment.. but then nothing happened... Moon never asked Sun about that...

Then there were a few hints in both lore and gaming episodes that Sun is suicidal like some odd comments in games: "it's good to be dead", "I'm trying to see if I'll crush when I jump off this", "there's nothing wrong with saying 'death'" (and he said that after he said this "if we don't do trendy things we'll die" which concerned Earth.. but not to the point that she would ask him more about it).. and also odd behaviour: he tried to drown himself in Minecraft game, he tried to crush his car in Fears to fathom game.. In lore episodes: he tried to crush his car twice, he jumped off the roof of high building without hesitation, he was eating food even though it hurts him when he eats human food, in "Ruin Monty Gator visits Daycare Attendant" episode Sun didn't care that Ruin Monty was choking him and that he could get killed by them.. In "Save Pollux or Castor in Minecraft" episode Sun went through a lava knowing very well that it'll kill him.. Also many times it seemed that Sun just let others beat him to death in games - he wasn't protecting himself and blocking any attacks (he also let Earth kill him in "Sun and Earth trapped in 2D Minecraft" episode)...

Another thing is that Sun seems more distant from his family.. he was absent in both episodes "Earth is tiny" and "Lunar is giant" despite the rest of the family being shown in both of these episodes.. In "Day in a life of Solar" episode and "Earth is trapped as a toy" episode no one knew where Sun is and what he's doing.. He wasn't picking up the phone calls..

In "Day in the life of Monty Gator" Sun's voice sounded like if his throat was hurt.. He told Monty it's because of screaming.. But it never happened before despite Sun screaming almost daily.. Most probably he harmed his throat.. we don't know how though.. Monty seemed concerned about Sun in that episode but nothing came out of that...

Another thing is that Sun seems to be not aware of what is happening around him.. He doesn't know what day it is (he forgot about Christmas and didn't buy anything for his family), he has poor sleep schedule - in "Moon is threatened by Gemini" episode it seemed that Sun dozed off.. Also Sun seems to sleep for short amount of time at random moments..

Another thing is that the only way of coping for Sun is either excessive cleaning or watching YT or playing games.. which is only good for awhile but it's not a solution to Sun's problems.. You can't deal with your issues by trying to escape them..

Another thing is that Sun is constantly lying that he's fine.. He tries to immediately redirect any conversation regarding his mental issues to other topics i.e. today's laes episode in which Sun only focus on external problems like Eclipse and Bloodmoon even though during therapy he should focus more on what's happening in his mind and on his own feelings...

Also the fact that Sun was very adamant about learning Earth and Moon how to drive - the only thing he feels that he's good at beside cleaning - seems like a way for Sun to pass his own knowledge which may imply that someone is ready to end their own life..

These are things that I remembered.. I hope that this answer satisfy you, anon 🙇‍♀️

And I'm sorry if there are any spelling errors cause English isn't my native language...

Ofc you can ask more questions if you want to ^^

#ask #anon ask #ask answered #sun and moon show #sams #sams sun #sun and moon show sun #fnaf sb #fnaf sun #tw suicide

40 notes · View notes