#AND THE FACT THAT SOME OF THE NARRATIVE EVEN SUPPORTS A READING OF THEM AS ANIMALS PLEASE. YOU CANT COMMENT ON ANTI INDIGENOUS RACISM

[starryjkoo]

do you ever feel like you're being gaslit when armys (and some jkkrs that try to appeal to armys) talk about how "it only seems like the fandom doesn't support jkk's bond the way jkkrs do, because shippers are in a sub-fandom and an echo chamber"?

a few of armys correct a solo whose main objective was to separate jk from bts via his solo career (wanting him to be out while everyone else is enlisted), establish that jk doesn’t have anyone in the group to lean on/trust (“he’s alone in the military” lies), portray jk’s friends (especially his idol ones) as better/closer to him than bts, and overall make jk out to be a company puppet, and deem that “defending jkk’s bond”....

these people do not care about jkk outside of upholding the “bts love eo” narrative. it’s clear when while talking about jkk enlisting together, they’re always mentioning bts, jkk being family/brothers, and even used taejoon enlisting the day to prove bts' bond.

they’ve asked tkkrs for help to "debunk" rumors and have engaged with jm/jk/jkk antis too much for me to genuinely believe they care about jkk (as a duo or individuals).

people are not allowed to write jimin and jk’s names in the same sentence, use pictures of them (even as a meme), call out tkkr friendly “OT7s” who were following and/or engaging with vile antis (and then gets portrayed by other OT7s as being reported for mentioning taekook), point out the fact that 'are you sure' is jkk’s show only and that th was a guest, and SO MUCH MORE.

i’m not going to forget that there were more people happy about th and nj simply enlisting on the same day than jkk enlisting TOGETHER as companions, or how OT7s were crying about "how could they separate them" for every other duo, when they (1) haven't shown love for nor mentioned jkk being together as companions (2) ignore that the THEY in question that is "separating members" is jkk themselves, and (3) are only able to "respect"/mention jkk’s bond through overly sexual jokes and weird ass OT7ifying.

jkkrs showing genuine times that armys (non shipping, OT7 obsessed, non toxic) have downplayed, ignored, or even for some reason hated on jkk’s bond is “focusing on shipping too much”, when these people have legitimately said jkk were doing contractual fanservice and are being used by the company for money….

the difference with tkkrs running around claiming “everyone hates tk” is that not only is that statement false, but it’s a direct cover up response to them being called out for lying and being vile. meanwhile jkkrs are just calling out armys that interact with jm and jk antis, tkkrs, and shipping content while saying that they (armys) don’t like shippers/shipping content, or are spreading misinformation and narratives that were started by tkkrs.

lies and misconceptions about jkk’s bond are still prevent in this fandom and are used most times because (1) they're downplaying jk’s bond with jm to prove he’s “in love”/closer with another member (i’d name certain ones, but atp, take your pick) (2) they're upset/jealous over how their ship doesn't act like jkk (3) they're homophobic (4) they're a solo or anti (5) they're a jealous y/n (6) they’re a fan that is obsessed with parenting/managing their bias.

they claim it’s jkkrs complaining about something that armys have “never seen or even heard about” or something taken “completely out of context”. but armys haven’t heard about ‘are you sure’ (outside of jeju episodes ofc)? armys haven’t heard about companion enlistment? armys haven’t heard about gcf, especially gcft? armys haven’t watched jk’s lives? armys haven’t read jkk’s weverse posts? armys haven’t listened to ANY of the members speak about jkk together? armys haven’t watched 90% of bts’ content? armys haven’t been to/watched any bts concerts?

maybe armys shouldn’t be speaking at all then….

“taken out of context”

and yet when it’s put into context and they find that they don’t have an legit argument for why 90% of this fandom ignores jkk’s bond, hypes up jk and jm with LITERALLY ANYONE but each other, and interacts with vile antis, they get mad at jkkrs for being “shippers” and start ranting about bts loving each other and being brothers, and if they are tkkr friendly, they start dragging jkk’s bond using tk hanging out in solo era.

“the fandom supported ays, my tl looked like the jkk tag”

their tl had people micro analyzing every little thing to demonize jimin and jk and degrade their bond completely? 💀💀

jokes aside…

did they miss people boycotting it, calling the us episodes boring, being silent until th was announced as a guest for jeju, talking more about the phone calls with taegi than the two hours of new jkk content, and claiming hybe chose the wrong members for the show?

have they missed armys wanting other members to do ‘are you sure’ while jm and jk were enlisted or dismissing the fact that jk said he wants the two of them (jkk only) to do this for a long time, and him repeatedly saying th was a guest and was the LAST one?

also claiming that the ONLY issue is tkkrs and not other shippers or armys is genuinely insane!

cause i remember armys and vmns harassing jkkrs over vmn hugging during sj’s military discharge and claiming that jkkrs were jealous because they (jkkers) without mentioning any other members or down playing other bonds, found it cute that jkk were standing next to each other despite being with each other for months at the time.

cause i remember how armys and nmkkrs were getting upset at jkkrs for calling out a weird edit one of them made about jk hating on jm for being with nj and stealing him from jimin, or even how the whole “jk is a minimoni anti” joke that was started by a jkkr because of the way jk acts about jm mentioning/complimenting nj (because jk likes jm), but it got stolen and twisted, and now mentioning it actually being about jm not nj, or even suggesting “jk wants them both” gets you attacked.

cause i remember armys constantly down playing jkk’s bond by using  the “jh is #1 to jm” joke nj made to tease jk at the 2022 festa dinner, even though BOTH jh and jm corrected it and "explained themselves" TO JK….

cause i remember armys and nmkkrs hyping up jk changing the colors for nj in gcfh as the “most romantic/gayest love confession”, but ignoring that he did a similar thing (and honestly more blatantly imo) for jm in the SAME VIDEO, or that gcfsp or GCFT exist. and attacking jkkers who, without attacking nj or nmkk’s bond, pointed that out.

cause i remember armys making jk watching jm content for over an hour about bts, and jk "missing bts" and being an “army" too

cause i remember armys making hundreds of weird overly sexual jokes about the members in the military, yet harassing jkkrs for simply being happy that jkk weren’t going to be alone.

cause i remember armys speculating every time a member breathed in 2023 that jm would enlist next alone or with a member (never jk though...), but were silent about jkk’s enlistment.

why are there little to no jkk moments in armys’ threads?

why are armys complaining about jkk being together in so much bts content?

why are some army translators making sure to explain what dongsaeng means (or not fully explain that it just means close younger person) when jimin says it, but not for other members to jk/other younger members? or not doing the same for hyung?

why are there translators that are not korean going around spreading mistranslations and misinformation that follows tkkrs' cult shipping narratives and leads to vile jm/jkk hate trains, that are still allowed within the fandom and used by armys to "debunk" jkk's bond?

no one is saying you have to think jimin and jk are fucking lol

just acknowledge that they’re close and don’t hate each other ✌️

I always feel like this fandom is trying to gaslight me about something lmao

I was actually just thinking about how ARMY’s increasingly weird attitude toward Jikook is probably symptomatic of their increasingly weird attitude toward a lot of things in CH2 (& Jikook leveling up during all of this mess lol). It’s like these days you’re more likely to find a bad take from this fandom than a good one so I’m not exactly surprised it’s the same with Jikook. I think the increased parasocial entitlement might have a lot to do with it too?

I don’t think that Twitter is representative of the entire fandom or anything. There’s a lot of normal fans out there who just aren’t as chronically online or engaged in main fandom spaces. The average ARMY imo absolutely does love (or at least is normal about) Jikook. But in the main fandom spaces? … yeah.

Actually going to just put my response under the cut because it’s stupidly long lol

As far as the gaslighting, to give a serious answer on that, well some people might just have a different fandom experience. If they really aren’t seeing any of the things you mentioned though, I’d argue they’re probably the ones in a bubble. And that’s okay! This is supposed to be a fun hobby we do in our free time. Blocking out negativity to focus solely on the fun stuff is understandable (and sane). But it does get frustrating when those fans try to dismiss or downplay actual issues within the fandom.

Some of them are just bothered by ARMY criticism because in their minds it’s like you’re either 100% in agreement with them or you’re siding with solos and validating their narratives (which isn’t true). And to those people I think it’s sad that they care more about fandom politics and feeling superior to other groups (ARMY ego) than wanting to genuinely foster a better fan community (or even about BTS).

ARMYs just have this very defensive knee-jerk reaction to any discourse and automatically take the opposite stance of whichever “enemy” group instead of critically examining a situation outside of the context of fanwars. I think that’s why even some OT7 jkkrs will instantly shut you down instead of hearing you out when it comes to fandom issues (it's also why there's so much increased company stanning in CH2).

And real fast, lately nothing has frustrated me more or been more demonstrative of our fandom losing their minds than the gross entitlement and expectation for JK to go live — the constant “jokes”, the obsessive fixation, the insanely dramatic takes… not to mention the massive lack of empathy and common sense. I’m not trying to be rude here but I’ve been very confused about the recent hyper fixation on lives from this fandom in general, especially with JK. It feels like the fandom somehow became even more entitled, insecure, and parasocial? Missing and hoping for lives is one thing, but the people acting insane about it?

It made me wonder if some of our fandom flaws could possibly be rooted in ARMYs becoming increasingly parasocial? (& how a lot of ARMYs actually operate like solos, just with an OT7 font) I’m going to lump all the “savior complex” ARMYs into that parasocial category as well because there’s been a lot of that in CH2.

ANYWAYS, I was just bringing all of this up because imo a lot of the weirdness towards Jikook tends to stem from those types of fans who unfortunately also tend to have the largest fandom presence. So an increase in parasocial behavior means an increase in weirdness towards Jikook

lies and misconceptions about jkk’s bond are still prevent in this fandom and are used most times because (1) they're downplaying jk’s bond with jm to prove he’s “in love”/closer with another member (i’d name certain ones, but atp, take your pick) (2) they're upset/jealous over how their ship doesn't act like jkk (3) they're homophobic (4) they're a solo or anti (5) they're a jealous y/n (6) they’re a fan that is obsessed with parenting/managing their bias.

quoting this here because exactly all of this is what I mean about overly parasocial fans being the ones to take issue with Jikook because that's most of this list imo. I’ve already talked about it a bunch but there are so many fans who project onto their bias to live out their own infatuations and fantasies and whatnot. Whether they're a serious shipper or not they can still get jealous/resentful when another "rival" ship is getting more "moments" (I definitely don’t mean normal shippers of other duos, just overly parasocial/biased ones).

Then you have ofc the toxically intense OT7 ARMYs who are more wound up than usual because of CH2. They especially hate the idea that two members (that they don’t bias or ship) could be closer than others. It conflicts with their specific idealized fanfic coded found family OT7 head canons. Coincidentally I feel like these are often the same ARMYs who repeat the same tired jokes from five million years ago and want to box the members into these stereotypical dynamics from like 2017.

A lot of people clearly had expectations for how the members would interact post-military, like expecting certain members to visibly be all over each other or obviously JK going live every night. I think some people got weird when that didn't happen. They also definitely have control issues and a lot want the members to act in a very specific, familiar way just for their own comfort and reassurance (like matching the fandom established dynamics).

A small, recent example for me would be when Jin interacted with JM instead of JK at his concert. Because people were expecting Jinkook and not Jinmin, there was an insane amount of hit tweets making up scenarios about JK being "jealous" and "trying to play it cool" (because he also didn’t act as hyped as they wanted, so they came up with a narrative for that too) and wanting Jin’s attention 🥴 and these tweets were circulated more than anything about Jikook (or even Jinmin tbh). On top of that, there were some ARMYs (Y/N’s) who actually got annoyed at Jikooker’s and were complaining about their posts about JK waiting on JM. They were angrier about Jikooker’s making tweets about things that actually happened than at the people making up entirely fictional weird scenarios (& not to say that some jkkrs didn't deserve to be called out, but you can tell what these people are actually mad about).

Also real fast, I’m not claiming that Jikook for sure are the closest duo or anything (although I think they have the strongest argument for that), or that they aren’t also incredibly close with the other members or that BTS aren’t a family — but Jikook clearly do have something a bit /different/ about them that aggravates these types of overly parasocial fans (haven’t mentioned them yet but also of course solos are included). At the moment they also just have the most amount of “content” and the fans who are all wound up and needy for their parasocial fix are being kind of noticeably resentful on that (outside of jkkrs, only genuine OT7 poly fans who don’t take it seriously are fun about Jikook lately)

IMO ARMYs have been less and less willing to talk about Jikook the more moments they get, which kind of backs up my opinion that a lot of the erasure stems from various types of jealousy/insecurity (or dislike of Jikookers lol). And yeah absolutely for some it’s homophobia as well. It’s all fun and games until the “married” jokes start looking too real. Regardless of the nature of Jikook’s relationship, when you compare the way they act to what has fans saying “married” for other duos you can see why some of them start to grow uncomfortable.

I have to include this too because I stumbled across it the other day and it’s just the perfect example of how Jikooker’s are being targeted by the fandom lately because of weird jealousy. This is like peak Y/N insecurity lol, another Y/N quoted this with a whole rant too (censoring because I don't want drama).

(first of all, doing math over this lmao? 😭 and they didn't even do it correctly 😭)

Out of all the awful, terrible things that shippers and solos have done and said about JK lately THIS is what OP is taking issue with? They're clearly just feeling pressed over the insinuation that JK went live partially because Jimin was busy, rather than purely because he wanted to spend time with fans (AKA them specifically lmao). Like, they really took that personally 😭

I understand it would be rude if that Jikooker was implying JK didn't genuinely want to spend time with ARMYs too, but I don’t think that’s what they were saying at all. Also the idea that having a lot of free time was probably one of the catalysts for his lives really isn’t an insane take. It’s something some people should actually consider instead of crashing out because he’s busy right now. No one should have been measuring his love for fans through the amount of time spent on lives anyways...

I just thought this was funny because there's been a lot of increased hostility towards Jikookers lately (not genuine criticism) and I genuinely feel like one of the reasons is because so many Y/N's have been seriously pressed lately. This is not that OP's first time weirdly crashing out about Jikook/Jikooker's in the past month. Anyways, do you guys remember when JK said he wasn’t reading the weverse comments because he was busy watching Jimin content? 🥴

Sorry for this whole random tangent. I pretty much agree with everything you said and can remember most of the examples you’re dropping tbh and I don’t have a ton to add to most of it other than just repeating exactly a thousand times lmao.

the difference with tkkrs running around claiming “everyone hates tk” is that not only is that statement false, but it’s a direct cover up response to them being called out for lying and being vile. meanwhile jkkrs are just calling out armys that interact with jm and jk antis, tkkrs, and shipping content while saying that they (armys) don’t like shippers/shipping content, or are spreading misinformation and narratives that were started by tkkrs.

Ugh 1000%. That’s such a common deflection tactic. They literally just start screaming about not being able to say tkk when they were actually being called out for following and interacting with antis, or pushing ACTUAL harmful shipper narratives. And the whole “I’m not a shipper” thing, omg I am tired of this, if you read fic you ARE a shipper 🫵 there’s such a big amount of tkkrs in this fandom that hide behind being hehe jokesters and “poly-BTS” while following and interacting with actual vile shippers. Most of them also believe and spread a lot of toxic shipping narratives on top of that. They just hide behind the “it’s just a joke” “ARMYs are no fun” kind of narratives and then victimize themselves about tkk being a banned word even though the whole fandom was literally just talking about having read some cringe tkk AU.

they claim it’s jkkrs complaining about something that armys have “never seen or even heard about” or something taken “completely out of context”. “the fandom supported ays, my tl looked like the jkk tag”

Just to talk about this with AYS specifically for a minute, I’ve mentioned this before but it was pretty telling which AYS moments ARMYs would choose to hype and circulate versus which ones went ignored. When Jikook mentioned other members, bickered or did something they could frame as “sibling behavior”? You’d see those from every big OT7 account. JK saying that AYS were the best trips of his life?? Not a single big account posted that lmao 😭 and that’s quite the statement and a really sweet and sentimental moment summing up how much those trips meant to him. A lot of the sweet moments, like JK saying he wanted to return to Japan because it was the location of their first trip, got ignored. So yeah it does feel deliberate sometimes.

They would post some of the cute or wild stuff occasionally, but more often than not it was something they could frame as sibling behavior or even some of the roughhousing clips (don't get me wrong, I love those moments) antis were taking out of context. Go figure. Oh yeah, and of course whenever they could use a clip for a Y/N moment. Even some of the more hardcore OT7 Jikookers pointed this out, so yeah I don’t think I was being overly biased with that observation (ofc there were some smaller accounts being genuine and posting those clips, so shoutout to those normal ARMYs who actually love all of BTS lol. You keep the fandom tolerable)

And yeah, all the weird narratives around AYS that came from some ARMYs including all the people being weird about Jeju and guest discourse, or wanting other members to do the second season of AYS. Wanting other members to do their own travel show, okay, but AYS is specifically Jikook’s show with a name literally derived from their unique experience…? It’s like you didn’t see anyone saying that Jin should continue Suchwita, so what is it about AYS that made everyone think it was an OT7 thing? Just odd.

Also let’s talk about how ARMYs abandoned the iheart awards, both for JM and Jikook. A lot of fanbases barely even posted about them (the difference when it was about the AMAs 😬). There was also no uproar when we lost both awards despite winning all of our categories last year.

also claiming that the ONLY issue is tkkrs and not other shippers or armys is genuinely insane!

Oh for sure, already mentioned this a bit up top but it’s 100% a thing for any fan who is overly parasocial about their ship or bias, and definitely for any serious shipper that involves JM or JK. I remember most of the things you listed including how they’ve decided the whole JK minimoni anti thing was solely about JK being jealous over NJ instead of it being about both of them (or god forbid just JM). I thought ARMYs were BTS poly lovers, so why choose to focus only on his “crush” for one of them and not both? Hmm…

cause i remember armys and nmkkrs hyping up jk changing the colors for nj in gcfh as the “most romantic/gayest love confession”, but ignoring that he did a similar thing (and honestly more blatantly imo) for jm in the SAME VIDEO, or that gcfsp or GCFT exist. and attacking jkkers who, without attacking nj or nmkk’s bond, pointed that out.

okay but the fact that every time someone posts that clip it gets an insane amount of engagement and yet like you said he did a VERY similar thing with JM in the SAME video 😭? Yes, jikookers should let nmkkrs enjoy their moments and of course it’s fine for people to ship other duos but these are often OT7 “non shipper” accounts hyping this up while ignoring anything to do with Jikook and GCF. And if they really think that's the most romantic confession ever, seriously, what is their opinion on all the various Jikook GCF things? 😭

This is what I mean about ARMYs and the standards they have for other ships and what qualifies as omg married behavior. If you contrast the majority of those moments with Jikook they don't seem quite as significant or loud. A lot of people obviously don’t like that because it conflicts with their preferred narratives. So they literally have to erase Jikook moments or downplay them so they can prop up other duos and dynamics or specific ARMY narratives (JK having the biggest crush on NJ & "biasing" him, vmn being the designated best friends, etc).

Also nothing wrong with those narratives of course! (like vmin were just being besties a few hours ago) but sometimes ARMYs are so adamant about them that they have to downplay or erase Jikook moments just to continue upholding those narratives to the extreme, and that’s the issue. They allow no growth or nuance for the members and their dynamics either. Like yes, vmin besties but they might also have members in the group they’re closer with these days and that’s totally okay too.

cause i remember armys making jk watching jm content for over an hour about bts, and jk "missing bts" and being an “army" too

Yeah, to me that's one of the most blatant examples of ARMYs OT7ifying Jikook moments out of some weird jealousy or something because that was a whole ass JM marathon and yet the dominant narrative in ARMY spaces is still that JK was binging BTS content. Kind of crazy honestly.

no one is saying you have to think jimin and jk are fucking lol just acknowledge that they’re close and don’t hate each other ✌️

They can’t do that because acknowledging even Jikook’s unique friendship makes their own ship/favorite duo feel less exclusive and their moments less significant or it contradictions some of the most popular ARMY narratives (bc to some ARMYs these guys are not allowed to grow and change, they’re permanently stuck in like 2017 with the exact same dynamics, personalities, and quirks) so…

It really says a lot that Jikook's friendship just as is without attaching any shipping narratives is still too much for some people that they have to make excuses for it to downplay their entire bond.

(and again don’t get me wrong, Jikook have wonderful, lovely meaningful bonds with other members with many great moments to hype, appreciate, ship, and coo over. The issue arises when those fans are too parasocial and must think that THEIR bias or ship is the MOST special and then to do that, they have to ignore or downplay Jikook. I don't care what other people ship, but why does every other ship that involves JM or JK have to have some weird opinion on Jikook? 😭)

And my obligatory I know all of this is not that serious and there are plenty of normal ARMYs who love Jikook 😭 I am not losing sleep over this nor should anyone else and nothing has ever stopped Jikook from doing their thing. I am annoying though and it bugs me so I WILL yap and complain about it when someone gives me an opening to complain lol. Normalize calling out the fandom more often so we can actually try to work on issues and root out toxicity. I absolutely do not think things are going to change atp though sadly. I'm just glad the majority of this has no real life impact.

[bookishdiplodocus]

The Neurodivergent Writer’s Guide to Fun and Productivity

(Even when life beats you down)

Look, I’m a mom, I have ADHD, I’m a spoonie. To say that I don’t have heaps of energy to spare and I struggle with consistency is an understatement. For years, I tried to write consistently, but I couldn’t manage to keep up with habits I built and deadlines I set.

So fuck neurodivergent guides on building habits, fuck “eat the frog first”, fuck “it’s all in the grind”, and fuck “you just need time management”—here is how I manage to write often and a lot.

Focus on having fun, not on the outcome

This was the groundwork I had to lay before I could even start my streak. At an online writing conference, someone said: “If you push yourself and meet your goals, and you publish your book, but you haven’t enjoyed the process… What’s the point?” and hoo boy, that question hit me like a truck.

I was so caught up in the narrative of “You’ve got to show up for what’s important” and “Push through if you really want to get it done”. For a few years, I used to read all these productivity books about grinding your way to success, and along the way I started using the same language as they did. And I notice a lot of you do so, too.

But your brain doesn’t like to grind. No-one’s brain does, and especially no neurodivergent brain. If having to write gives you stress or if you put pressure on yourself for not writing (enough), your brain’s going to say: “Huh. Writing gives us stress, we’re going to try to avoid it in the future.”

So before I could even try to write regularly, I needed to teach my brain once again that writing is fun. I switched from countable goals like words or time to non-countable goals like “fun” and “flow”.

Rewire my brain: writing is fun and I’m good at it

I used everything I knew about neuroscience, psychology, and social sciences. These are some of the things I did before and during a writing session. Usually not all at once, and after a while I didn’t need these strategies anymore, although I sometimes go back to them when necessary.

I journalled all the negative thoughts I had around writing and try to reason them away, using arguments I knew in my heart were true. (The last part is the crux.) Imagine being supportive to a writer friend with crippling insecurities, only the friend is you.

Not setting any goals didn’t work for me—I still nurtured unwanted expectations. So I did set goals, but made them non-countable, like “have fun”, “get in the flow”, or “write”. Did I write? Yes. Success! Your brain doesn’t actually care about how high the goal is, it cares about meeting whatever goal you set.

I didn’t even track how many words I wrote. Not relevant.

I set an alarm for a short time (like 10 minutes) and forbade myself to exceed that time. The idea was that if I write until I run out of mojo, my brain learns that writing drains the mojo. If I write for 10 minutes and have fun, my brain learns that writing is fun and wants to do it again.

Reinforce the fact that writing makes you happy by rewarding your brain immediately afterwards. You know what works best for you: a walk, a golden sticker, chocolate, cuddle your dog, whatever makes you happy.

I conditioned myself to associate writing with specific stimuli: that album, that smell, that tea, that place. Any stimulus can work, so pick one you like. I consciously chose several stimuli so I could switch them up, and the conditioning stays active as long as I don’t muddle it with other associations.

Use a ritual to signal to your brain that Writing Time is about to begin to get into the zone easier and faster. I guess this is a kind of conditioning as well? Meditation, music, lighting a candle… Pick your stimulus and stick with it.

Specifically for rewiring my brain, I started a new WIP that had no emotional connotations attached to it, nor any pressure to get finished or, heaven forbid, meet quality norms. I don’t think these techniques above would have worked as well if I had applied them on writing my novel.

It wasn’t until I could confidently say I enjoyed writing again, that I could start building up a consistent habit. No more pushing myself.

I lowered my definition for success

When I say that nowadays I write every day, that’s literally it. I don’t set out to write 1,000 or 500 or 10 words every day (tried it, failed to keep up with it every time)—the only marker for success when it comes to my streak is to write at least one word, even on the days when my brain goes “naaahhh”. On those days, it suffices to send myself a text with a few keywords or a snippet. It’s not “success on a technicality (derogatory)”, because most of those snippets and ideas get used in actual stories later. And if they don’t, they don’t. It’s still writing. No writing is ever wasted.

A side note on high expectations, imposter syndrome, and perfectionism

Obviously, “Setting a ridiculously low goal” isn’t something I invented. I actually got it from those productivity books, only I never got it to work. I used to tell myself: “It’s okay if I don’t write for an hour, because my goal is to write for 20 minutes and if I happen to keep going for, say, an hour, that’s a bonus.” Right? So I set the goal for 20 minutes, wrote for 35 minutes, and instead of feeling like I exceeded my goal, I felt disappointed because apparently I was still hoping for the bonus scenario to happen. I didn’t know how to set a goal so low and believe it.

I think the trick to making it work this time lies more in the groundwork of training my brain to enjoy writing again than in the fact that my daily goal is ridiculously low. I believe I’m a writer, because I prove it to myself every day. Every success I hit reinforces the idea that I’m a writer. It’s an extra ward against imposter syndrome.

Knowing that I can still come up with a few lines of dialogue on the Really Bad Days—days when I struggle to brush my teeth, the day when I had a panic attack in the supermarket, or the day my kid got hit by a car—teaches me that I can write on the mere Bad-ish Days.

The more I do it, the more I do it

The irony is that setting a ridiculously low goal almost immediately led to writing more and more often. The most difficult step is to start a new habit. After just a few weeks, I noticed that I needed less time and energy to get into the zone. I no longer needed all the strategies I listed above.

Another perk I noticed, was an increased writing speed. After just a few months of writing every day, my average speed went from 600 words per hour to 1,500 wph, regularly exceeding 2,000 wph without any loss of quality.

Talking about quality: I could see myself becoming a better writer with every passing month. Writing better dialogue, interiority, chemistry, humour, descriptions, whatever: they all improved noticeably, and I wasn’t a bad writer to begin with.

The increased speed means I get more done with the same amount of energy spent. I used to write around 2,000-5,000 words per month, some months none at all. Nowadays I effortlessly write 30,000 words per month. I didn’t set out to write more, it’s just a nice perk.

Look, I’m not saying you should write every day if it doesn’t work for you. My point is: the more often you write, the easier it will be.

No pressure

Yes, I’m still working on my novel, but I’m not racing through it. I produce two or three chapters per month, and the rest of my time goes to short stories my brain keeps projecting on the inside of my eyelids when I’m trying to sleep. I might as well write them down, right?

These short stories started out as self-indulgence, and even now that I take them more seriously, they are still just for me. I don’t intend to ever publish them, no-one will ever read them, they can suck if they suck. The unintended consequence was that my short stories are some of my best writing, because there’s no pressure, it’s pure fun.

Does it make sense to spend, say, 90% of my output on stories no-one else will ever read? Wouldn’t it be better to spend all that creative energy and time on my novel? Well, yes. If you find the magic trick, let me know, because I haven’t found it yet. The short stories don’t cannibalize on the novel, because they require different mindsets. If I stopped writing the short stories, I wouldn’t produce more chapters. (I tried. Maybe in the future? Fingers crossed.)

Don’t wait for inspiration to hit

There’s a quote by Picasso: “Inspiration hits, but it has to find you working.” I strongly agree. Writing is not some mystical, muse-y gift, it’s a skill and inspiration does exist, but usually it’s brought on by doing the work. So just get started and inspiration will come to you.

Accountability and community

Having social factors in your toolbox is invaluable. I have an offline writing friend I take long walks with, I host a monthly writing club on Discord, and I have another group on Discord that holds me accountable every day. They all motivate me in different ways and it’s such a nice thing to share my successes with people who truly understand how hard it can be.

The productivity books taught me that if you want to make a big change in your life or attitude, surrounding yourself with people who already embody your ideal or your goal huuuugely helps. The fact that I have these productive people around me who also prioritize writing, makes it easier for me to stick to my own priorities.

Your toolbox

The idea is to have several techniques at your disposal to help you stay consistent. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket by focussing on just one technique. Keep all of them close, and if one stops working or doesn’t inspire you today, pivot and pick another one.

After a while, most “tools” run in the background once they are established. Things like surrounding myself with my writing friends, keeping up with my daily streak, and listening to the album I conditioned myself with don’t require any energy, and they still remain hugely beneficial.

Do you have any other techniques? I’d love to hear about them!

I hope this was useful. Happy writing!

[dr-litcrit]

The Betrayal of Nick Blaine: How The Handmaid’s Tale Undermined Its Own Storytelling

INTRODUCTION

As a university professor with a PhD in literature, I’ve dedicated my career to analyzing narrative structure, character arcs, and thematic coherence. And I can say this with full confidence: what the writers did to Nick Blaine in Season 6 of The Handmaid’s Tale was not bold, subversive, or daring — it was a narrative betrayal.

And just to be clear: I’m not a shipper. I didn’t love Nick because of his romance with June. I appreciated him as a deeply layered character — one whose quiet resistance stood in stark contrast to the more performative defiance of others. Not every act of heroism is loud. Nick’s resistance began long before June entered his life, and for several seasons, the writers honored that. Until they didn’t.

Nick represented something rare on television: a portrayal of a man caught inside a brutal system, not loud or showy, but quietly working to survive while retaining his humanity and fighting back in the ways available to him. His arc was thoughtful, subtle, and realistic — and it offered a necessary counterpoint to the broader, more visible forms of rebellion in the series. That narrative was coherent, moving, and consistent — until Season 6 shattered it for the sake of shock value.

A HISTORY OF RESISTANCE — CAREFULLY BUILT

Nick’s arc was never centered on power. In fact, he resisted it. He smuggled contraband to Jezebels, joined the Eyes in order to report predatory Commanders (after Waterford’s first Handmaid died by suicide), and helped take down Commander Guthrie, one of the architects of the Handmaid system. These weren’t incidental moments — they were intentional signs of internal rebellion that the show carefully planted over multiple seasons. This reading of Nick is also explicitly supported by writer Kira Snyder, who explained:

“Part of the fun of that episode was to kind of peel back the mystery of this young man and see where he came from, how he got recruited, and how his idealism was turned against him, how it was curdled by the corrupt system of Gilead. How he keeps trying to find something to believe in, some way to make things work, make things good. Which is what we see with his becoming an Eye; he doesn’t have a lot of ways to strike back at the Commander, but through his role as part of the secret police informer network he has ability to try to keep a check on the man.” (The Art and Making of The Handmaid’s Tale, p. 73)

After meeting June, Nick continued to act strategically. He was the one who secretly smuggled the Jezebels letters out of Gilead and delivered them to Luke in Canada — an act that directly led to Canada refusing to sign a diplomatic agreement with Gilead. And crucially, Nick did this without June asking him to or even knowing about it. At the time, June was in a terrible mental state, so desperate that she tried to burn the letters in the sink. Nick hid the Jezebels letters in his apartment before Eden moved in — making it all the more risky once she arrived and began snooping through his things.

His promotions weren’t rewards but consequences. Serena arranged his marriage to Eden out of jealousy. His rise to Commander wasn’t a reward for loyalty — it was a consequence of his decision to pull a gun on Fred to help June and Nicole escape, as even Joseph Fiennes has confirmed in interviews. Even his marriage to Rose served a clear purpose: to get closer to Hannah’s captors, the Mackenzies, and position himself in a place where he could act.

Importantly, the Marthas in Season 4 speak to Nick like an equal, not like someone they fear. One even asks him, “Is this business as usual?” — a small but significant clue that Nick had been working with the Martha network for a long time. This wasn’t a sudden shift. His ties to the resistance were consistent and deliberate. In the same season, we also see Nick handing June a file he compiled himself — a dossier on Hannah, including a recent photo taken by “friendlies.” This not only shows Nick’s continued efforts to help June behind the scenes but also hints at his possible collaboration with the Colorado resistance. In Season 6, other Commanders derisively call him a “boy scout,” suggesting his reputation for moral rigidity and reluctance to embrace their cruelty. These were not throwaway lines; they were narrative breadcrumbs.

Even visual cues deepened his characterization. In his apartment, we glimpse Love in the Time of Cholera by Gabriel García Márquez — a novel about endurance, love, and defiance. As Bruce Miller notes in The Art and Making of The Handmaid’s Tale:

“We were very careful about what books he reads, what books he has, and where we got them.” (p. 34)

These creative decisions weren’t arbitrary — they were part of a deliberate effort to paint Nick as a man of quiet conscience.

In fact, some of the clearest evidence of Nick’s resistance came from scenes that were never aired but remain preserved in official scripts. A deleted scene from Season 3 shows Nick having secured a position alongside Commander Mackenzie at the front — a calculated move that placed him close to Hannah’s captors and demonstrated his embedded strategy — not complicity. Another cut scene during the rise of Gilead shows a young Nick visibly horrified by the violence, acting only out of fear and instinct. In a later aired moment, Nick returns a salute from Gilead soldiers — and the script notes explicitly describe him as “hating all the choices that led him here.”

These were not the actions of a man embracing Gilead’s ideology. They were the marks of someone surviving within a regime while trying, however imperfectly, to resist it from within.

And yet, all of this was abruptly discarded in Season 6. The Mackenzies disappeared. His resistance ties were erased. His marriage to Rose was stripped of meaning. And most egregiously, the carefully built narrative of moral tension was replaced with a lazy recharacterization of Nick as a complicit actor — despite years of evidence to the contrary. The show contradicted not only its own canon but its own creators, who had once framed Nick as someone trying to do the right thing under impossible circumstances.

WHAT THE CREATORS & ACTOR SAY

Before Season 6, both the creators of The Handmaid’s Tale and actor Max Minghella consistently described Nick as a fundamentally decent man — a character carefully constructed to be morally complex, but not complicit in Gilead’s ideology.

Max Minghella, who portrayed Nick, made his view of the character clear as early as 2018:

“I trust Nick. I stand by him … at the root of Nick, he’s a good person. Whether he always does the right thing is a different question.” (Glamour, 2018)

Minghella recognized Nick as morally conflicted but ultimately decent — a man navigating impossible choices in an impossible world. His performance was built on the understanding that Nick was not a villain, but a man trapped by circumstances beyond his control, revealing himself through small gestures and quiet decisions.

In 2022, at the end of Season 5, showrunner Bruce Miller reinforced this characterization:

“I know what we’re setting up for Nick, which is exactly what you think it is. He’s the guy who we think he is. And even if he tries not to be the guy he thinks he is, it’s either going to be very uncomfortable for him like he is with Rose, or it’s going to fail and he’s going to end up not being able to stop himself from punching Lawrence. I think the nice thing is he follows his heart, and the scary thing is he follows his heart.” (Deadline, June 2022)

This statement from Miller is especially revealing in light of what ultimately unfolded in Season 6. His words confirm that as of the end of Season 5, Nick was intended to remain exactly as the audience understood him: a man driven by emotion, not ideology; someone uncomfortable when forced to conform; someone who couldn’t suppress his decency even when doing so put him at risk.

However, after Season 6, Miller’s commentary took on a different tone, attempting to reframe Nick’s arc:

“Nick isn’t choosing Gilead as a sudden endorsement of its beliefs and practices, but rather a belief that there’s no beating this regime; it’s better to protect yourself by moving with it rather than against it.” “Nick was trying to stay out of trouble … thinking about how to keep himself safe for his family.” (TV Insider, 2025)

These post-finale remarks sought to justify Nick’s sudden portrayal as complicit in Gilead’s horrors, but they stand in stark contrast to Miller’s earlier statements. What happened in Season 6 was not the culmination of a long-planned character journey; it was a last-minute pivot that abandoned Nick’s carefully built arc. Miller, for his part, keeps defending Nick in post-finale commentary, yet given that he wrote the final episode himself — the script that framed Nick’s death as reaping what he sowed after a life of dishonesty and violence — these remarks read less as a sincere clarification of the character’s arc and more as post-hoc damage control in response to fan backlash.

Even Minghella was surprised by the shift in Nick’s moral framing, as he revealed in an interview with ELLE in 2025:

“Transparently, I was surprised … I thought it was a really bold and interesting choice to bring that story into this more nihilistic viewpoint.” “Maybe I hadn’t been playing this character correctly the whole time… there was probably a darker side to him that I didn’t realize was there.”

When even the actor playing Nick for six seasons no longer recognizes the character he’s portraying, it highlights how drastic and jarring the shift in writing was. Nick’s final arc wasn’t the result of a gradual, coherent evolution — it was a sudden, dissonant rewrite that undermined everything the audience, and even the show’s own team, had come to understand about him.

Where once the creators framed Nick as a survivor and quiet resistor, they later attempted to retroactively paint him as complicit. This contradiction is not just a failure of internal consistency — it’s a betrayal of the character they themselves had worked so carefully to build.

A SHIFT BEHIND THE SCENES — AND ONSCREEN

The betrayal of Nick’s arc didn’t happen in a vacuum. It was the result of major shifts behind the scenes that dramatically altered the show’s direction and tone, particularly in Season 6.

After Season 4, there were significant changes in the writers’ room, and after Season 5, Bruce Miller — who had been the showrunner and primary architect of the series’ complex moral landscape — stepped down as showrunner to focus on developing The Testaments adaptation. What followed was a tonal and narrative shift that was most starkly reflected in the treatment of Nick’s character.

In Season 5, the writers appeared to be setting up Commander Lawrence as the morally compromised figure whose choices would catch up with him. Lawrence, after all, had designed Gilead. He was one of its architects — a man who wielded enormous power and made decisions that cost thousands of lives, including the bombing of Chicago and the systemic torture of women. He was unwilling to help June find Hannah, even when she begged him, and he stood by as Gilead shot down American planes attempting to raid Hannah’s school. He didn’t intervene to stop this act of brutality, just as he never truly opposed the suggestions of other Commanders to have June killed when she became too much of a threat. But reportedly, Bradley Whitford — who plays Lawrence — pushed back against having his character face the full consequences of those choices.

So what did the writers do instead? They redirected that arc onto Nick. Rather than grappling with the moral failings of Gilead’s true architects, the show chose to scapegoat the one male character who had consistently resisted, quietly and at great personal risk, from the inside.

The result was a jarring pivot in Season 6, where Nick was denied the nuance and complexity afforded to characters like Serena, Lydia, Lawrence, and even Naomi Putnam. Naomi, a character who had benefitted enormously from Gilead’s brutal hierarchy and who had always relished her privileged position, was suddenly handed a redemption arc without narrative justification. Her decision to give Charlotte to Janine came out of nowhere, contradicting everything we had seen of her character before.

Meanwhile, Nick — who had quietly resisted for years, who had risked his life for June, Nicole, and the resistance — was given no such grace. His entire arc was collapsed into a simplistic and inconsistent portrayal of complicity, as if all his sacrifices and small acts of rebellion had never happened.

The complexity that had once made The Handmaid’s Tale so compelling was flattened in favor of a reductive, black-and-white view of its characters — one that betrayed both Nick and the show’s own core themes.

THE GASLIGHTING OF FANS

To make matters worse, in the wake of justified fan backlash over the abrupt and illogical rewriting of Nick’s character, the public statements from the show’s creators, writers, directors, and even lead actor felt like gaslighting. Rather than acknowledging the inconsistency or taking responsibility for the narrative pivot, they shifted blame onto the audience — particularly the female fans who had thoughtfully engaged with Nick’s arc for years.

The writers claimed that viewers misunderstood Nick because “we don’t see 95% of the things Nick does in Gilead.” This was offered as an explanation for why fans were supposedly confused — suggesting that any contradictions in Nick’s character came not from inconsistent storytelling, but from unseen off-screen actions. Yahlin Chang even added that Nick “has done some bad things that weren’t shown, so it’s convenient to forget.” But how can viewers be faulted for forgetting something they were never shown? How can fans be blamed for not accounting for actions that supposedly happened off-screen, when the writers themselves failed to depict or meaningfully hint at them? Rather than admitting to the abrupt, unearned shift in Nick’s arc, these kinds of statements simply deflect responsibility onto the audience, as if the failure lies in our perception rather than in the storytelling itself.

The writers also implied that fans had misjudged Nick because they saw him primarily through June’s eyes, and that her love for him clouded both her perception and, by extension, that of the audience. This framing felt deeply patronizing. It reduced thoughtful, critical engagement with the character to the idea that fans (especially women) were simply too emotionally attached to see the truth. The creative team further argued that Nick had plenty of chances to leave Gilead but chose not to, reinforcing their revisionist narrative. What makes this claim especially disingenuous is that the show itself repeatedly demonstrated how difficult, if not impossible, it was to leave Gilead. Even Lawrence — a man with immense power — tried to leave in Season 3 and couldn’t. To suggest that Nick could have simply walked away contradicts the very world-building the writers established.

And then Eric Tuchman went on to claim:

“Even though Nick is a wonderful savior and protector for June and Max Minghella is an incredibly charismatic actor with wonderful chemistry with Elisabeth Moss, Nick has a life beyond June in Gilead. We’ve known since Season 1 he was an Eye, as well as a driver. The Swiss didn’t want to talk to Nick because he was a war criminal and couldn’t be trusted. Serena told June, ‘Didn’t Nick tell you what he did? To help create Gilead?’ — and it was something ominous. June chose not to ask any further questions. We know that he bombed Chicago and a lot of innocent people were killed — June and Janine were there. Yes, he was following orders, but Nick has always been a fully willing participant in Gilead. He’s always embraced Gilead. The only times he ever helped the resistance were because of his connection to June. She has been his beacon to do the right thing. Nick’s betrayal was proof he wasn’t really part of the resistance.” (Cast Q&A, @handmaidsonhulu on Threads, 2025)

But these statements are deeply misleading. They ignore what the actual canon of the show established and contradict the very material the writers originally produced. The Swiss refused to talk to Nick not because of war crimes, but because of optics and politics — as shown in official deleted scenes and the scripts archived at the Writers Guild. In those cut scenes, Nick is portrayed during the rise of Gilead not as a war criminal, but as a minor guard, visibly horrified, described as “looking sick” at the violence unfolding around him. When a comrade is killed, Nick fires back “out of instinct” — hardly the mark of a man shaping or embracing the regime.

Another scene — one that did air — shows Nick returning a salute from Gilead troops. In the official script, this moment is described with a crucial note: Nick is “hating all the choices that led him here.” His internal conflict is explicitly spelled out, revealing that even in this small gesture of outward compliance, he is burdened by regret and trapped by circumstances. This wasn’t a man embracing Gilead’s ideology. It was a man caught in a web he couldn’t easily escape, trying to survive while carrying the weight of every decision that brought him to that point.

Bruce Miller himself confirmed that Serena’s ominous comment to June about Nick’s role in creating Gilead was a lie, meant to hurt her emotionally. And we know from canon that Nick objected to bombing Chicago, but didn’t have the power to stop it.

Director Daina Reid added fuel to the fire, directly targeting women in the fandom. In her Eyes on Gilead podcast interview, she said she “doesn’t understand these women who still defend Nick.” She went even further, claiming that viewers “invent scenes” to justify Nick’s actions — as if fans who had paid close attention to his arc were simply imagining things to excuse him. In doing so, she dismissed female fans specifically — implying that their continued support for Nick was irrational or misguided, and reducing thoughtful engagement with the character to naive emotionalism. This wasn’t just dismissive; it was a troubling attack on a loyal, thoughtful fanbase that had engaged deeply with the show’s themes of resistance, complicity, and survival.

Even Elisabeth Moss, who plays June, contributed to this gaslighting. In interviews, she misremembered key parts of the story — for instance, forgetting that Eden suspected Nick’s lack of sexual interest in her and feared he might be a gender traitor. This was a significant part of Eden’s arc, yet Moss appeared unaware of it, undermining her credibility when discussing Nick and June’s relationship. Moss also insisted in interviews that June “absolutely did not want Nick to die,” while simultaneously suggesting that June could never forgive Nick for his so-called betrayal — despite the fact that if Nick hadn’t made that difficult choice in the moment, he would have died on the spot. The logic simply doesn’t hold: how can June not want him dead but also not forgive him for the very act that saved his life?

If we’re now expected to view Nick as a villain based on things we never saw, it’s not the audience inventing scenes — it’s the creators retroactively rewriting them. That’s not a failure of interpretation on the part of the fans; it’s a failure of storytelling on the part of the writers.

Adding to the irony, Elisabeth Moss recently explained in interviews that in respecting the book, they wanted to preserve a sense of open-endedness — to “keep a lot of loose ends” as the novel itself ends on a cliffhanger. Yet in doing so, they chose to alter one of the most crucial threads from the book: Nick’s arc. If they were willing to deviate so drastically as to completely rewrite one of the novel’s most important characters, why stop there? Why not give Hannah back to June, as so many viewers had hoped? It’s baffling that the showrunners still don’t seem to understand that fans resent unnecessary deviations from the source material — when has that ever served a story well? Nick was a vital symbol, as Atwood herself emphasized repeatedly in interviews and public talks, including the historical notes and symposiums tied to the books. She also described the love story as an essential part of the novel, yet now the showrunners tell us it was never truly about romantic love at all.

Adding to this contradiction, Bruce Miller himself asserted:

“I think the series has been good in large part because I chose to follow the story and tonal spirit of the novel as much as possible.” (Deadline, 2025)

If preserving the spirit of the book was truly the goal, they would have honored Nick’s role as Atwood envisioned it: a symbol of survival, moral conflict, and quiet rebellion.

What’s most telling is how drastically the messaging from the creative team has shifted. The Nick who was once described by Bruce Miller as a good man — someone who listens to his heart and ultimately does the right thing — has, after Season 6, been reframed as a willing and eager participant in Gilead’s horrors. And when this portrayal drew backlash, the narrative shifted again: suddenly, Nick was said to be a man trapped between impossible choices, aligning with Gilead out of necessity rather than conviction. This contradiction stripped Nick’s character of its coherence and damaged the moral framework the show had worked so hard to establish.

ATWOOD’S VISION, THE BOOKS, AND THE DANGER OF THIS REWRITE

Resistance from within is a hallmark of dystopian literature. From 1984 to The Hunger Games, these narratives often explore how individuals embedded in oppressive systems work quietly, strategically, and at great personal risk to undermine them. These characters are complex, morally ambiguous, and realistic — because real-world resistance is rarely loud or simple. The Handmaid’s Tale, as originally written by Margaret Atwood, understood this nuance, and Nick Blaine was designed to embody it.

Atwood herself envisioned Nick as a figure of internal dissent — a man trapped by circumstances, but capable of moral clarity and quiet rebellion. In The Testaments, set fifteen years after the events of The Handmaid’s Tale, Nick is still alive, still inside Gilead, and still working as part of the underground resistance. We see him reunite with Nicole, the daughter he risked everything to save, and we see that his arc was meant to reflect the endurance of hope and the power of resistance that survives even in the darkest places.

The show, for five seasons, respected this vision. Nick stayed in Gilead because that was his purpose — to help destroy it from within. His positioning near Hannah’s captors reinforced his role as an inside man. The writers kept him in Gilead because he was meant to be there, playing the long game. Until Tuchman and Chang decided they knew better than Atwood and discarded this crucial thread.

Atwood has been outspoken in her view that dystopian systems like Gilead harm everyone — men and women alike. As she has said:

“Patriarchy hurts men too. Totalitarianism hurts everyone — men and women alike.” (CBC, 2017)

And on feminism:

“Feminism is not about demonizing men. It’s about working with men so that everyone has the same rights.” (New York Times, 2018)

The show’s final season abandoned this fundamental ethos. Instead of portraying the complexities of complicity and resistance across genders, it simplified its moral world: all Commanders were framed as irredeemable, while even characters like Naomi Putnam — who had thrived under Gilead’s brutality — were suddenly offered redemption with no coherent justification. This flattening of moral nuance betrayed the depth and realism that had defined the show’s earlier seasons.

By erasing Nick’s internal resistance arc, the show not only disrespected Atwood’s source material but also weakened its own critique of authoritarianism. The danger of this rewrite isn’t just that it harmed a character — it’s that it undermined the very lessons dystopian literature is meant to teach us. It replaced complex truths about power, survival, and quiet resistance with simplistic, black-and-white moral judgments that serve neither feminism nor thoughtful storytelling.

Nick’s character was supposed to remind us that even those caught inside the machinery of oppression can still fight back in their own way. Erasing that lesson robbed the audience of hope — the most vital tool dystopian fiction can offer.

NICK’S ATTRACTIVENESS AND THE MISOGYNY BEHIND THE CRITICISM

One of the most troubling aspects of the backlash against Nick’s character — and against the fans who continue to care for him — is the way his physical attractiveness has been weaponized as a reason to dismiss thoughtful engagement with his arc. Critics, including members of the show’s creative team, have implied that fans (especially women) only care about Nick because of his looks — as if audiences are too shallow or simple to appreciate deeper qualities.

Disturbingly, this attitude wasn’t just reflected in off-screen commentary. It became embedded in the writing of the final season itself. After five seasons in which no character ever explicitly commented on Nick’s appearance, Season 6 abruptly shifted focus, framing his physical attractiveness as the defining reason June loved him. For the first time, June says that she would have noticed Nick even if he were bagging groceries or driving for Uber because he was very handsome. Moira joins in, comparing Nick’s looks to Rihanna’s and rating his hotness as if she were judging a celebrity. Even Lawrence remarks that June was “swept away” by Nick’s “smothering looks.”

This was no accident. The writers deliberately chose to center Nick’s attractiveness in a way they had never done before — as if to validate their own revisionist narrative that June’s love for Nick was shallow, and that fans’ attachment to him was based only on surface-level traits. In doing so, they reduced what had been a deeply layered, emotionally rich relationship to a matter of lust and superficiality — diminishing not only Nick’s character, but June’s as well.

As brilliantly articulated in the Above the Garage podcast’s cathartic essay on Nick:

“Nick’s physical attractiveness has nothing to do with the reason we love his character. Women are not as simple and shallow as you’re making them out to be. No matter how someone may try to shame you, it is not antifeminist to believe in, and care about, romantic love. Our protagonist herself has said, many times, that it is for love that she lives. Love is empowering, and we thought that was a message the show understood.”

What Nick represents is not some idealized, flawless hero. No one who values Nick as a character denies his flaws or excuses his moments of complicity. What Nick offers is a vision of the human capacity for joy, tenderness, and compassion in the bleakest circumstances. His quiet support of June, his ability to love and be loved amid horror, reflects the reality that even in war, oppression, and captivity, people have found ways to fall in love, to marry, to create art, to dream of a better world. Nick’s story was an opportunity to show how resistance can be sustained not just through defiance, but through humanity and connection.

The suggestion that shipping Nick and June, or simply caring about Nick as a character, is somehow naive or antifeminist, fundamentally misunderstands the complexity of these relationships. As the essay points out, the show could have leaned into Nick and June’s profound connection — a connection that empowered June, supported her agency, and could have stood as one of television’s greatest romances, without undermining the power of her friendships or her other relationships. Life is not either/or. Women can value deep friendships and romantic love. The audience can appreciate both without one diminishing the other.

Finally, it’s important to call out the hypocrisy in how romantic love is treated. As the essay puts it:

“You know who else thought romantic love was naive and silly? Our old friend, Fred Waterford. May he rest in peace.”

Dismissing viewers who value love and connection as naive is not progressive — it echoes the mindset of the very villains the story sought to critique. It is not antifeminist to care about love, or to see beauty and strength in a character who represents its survival under tyranny. And it is certainly not a weakness or character flaw to find meaning in these narratives.

THE DANGEROUS MISLABELING: NICK AS A “NAZI”

Among the most concerning narrative choices in Season 6 was the deployment of the term “Nazi” by characters such as June’s mother, Holly, and Luke in reference to Nick — a label that invokes complex historical and ethical implications. This label was not used in earlier seasons, despite Nick’s long-standing position within Gilead’s structures. It was introduced only in Season 6, coinciding with the writers’ abrupt pivot toward framing Nick as complicit and irredeemable.

The comparison is not only morally and historically inaccurate — it is dangerous. Nick is not portrayed as an architect of genocide, nor as a willing enforcer of Gilead’s ideology. As the show itself spent five seasons establishing, Nick is a survivor — a man who joined the Eyes not to impose tyranny, but to report on and take down predatory Commanders after witnessing the suicide of Waterford’s first Handmaid. He smuggled contraband, helped the resistance, facilitated June’s and Nicole’s escape, and positioned himself near Hannah’s captors in hopes of aiding in her rescue. These are not the actions of a true believer in the system; they are the actions of a man trapped within it, trying to undermine it where he can.

Calling Nick a Nazi collapses the moral complexity that The Handmaid’s Tale once prided itself on. It flattens the nuances of complicity, survival, and resistance into simplistic, black-and-white thinking that does a disservice not only to Nick’s character but to the audience’s understanding of history. Gilead is a fictional regime meant to reflect elements of real-world authoritarianism, but equating every man in a uniform with a Nazi trivializes both the horrors of the Holocaust and the lived realities of people trapped within oppressive systems who did not have the power to change them, but found small, courageous ways to resist.

It’s also worth noting that the writers making these choices surely have not lived under totalitarian regimes themselves — which cannot be said about many of the show’s viewers. For those who have experienced or have family histories marked by real-world authoritarian rule, these labels are not just inaccurate; they are deeply offensive and reflect a dangerous misunderstanding of what life under such regimes actually entails.

It seems no coincidence that the writers chose to have multiple characters label Nick a “Nazi” — a term that has, regrettably, become fashionable in today’s social media and cultural discourse. On platforms where complexity is often sacrificed for immediacy, “Nazi” has become a catch-all slur, casually applied to signal absolute villainy, regardless of historical accuracy or ethical appropriateness. The emotional weight and instant recognizability of the term make it an appealing — if irresponsible — tool for simplifying moral judgments. This is likely why the showrunners resorted to using it: not because it accurately reflected Nick’s actions or beliefs, but because it aligned with a broader trend of flattening complex characters into easily digestible archetypes. This lazy labeling serves neither history, feminism, nor good storytelling. It reduces complex questions about survival, complicity, and moral ambiguity to cheap, inflammatory rhetoric — the opposite of what dystopian fiction is meant to encourage us to grapple with.

WHY THIS MATTERS

Nick didn’t need a heroic ending. But he deserved a consistent one. His arc represented a type of resistance that is rarely shown on screen: strategic, quiet, and deeply human. Nick’s story gave voice to the reality that not all acts of rebellion are loud, and not all heroes stand on podiums. His form of dissent — subtle, calculated, often invisible — was no less important than June’s louder, more visible defiance. In fact, it reflected the kind of resistance that most people caught inside authoritarian regimes actually engage in: the quiet, careful acts that chip away at power without drawing lethal attention.

More than that, Nick was the show’s most realistic character. He was an ordinary man swept up by the rise of Gilead — lured into the Sons of Jacob not out of malice or ideology, but because of the brutal socio-economic conditions that preceded Gilead’s rise. Like many who find themselves caught in the machinery of authoritarian systems, Nick became increasingly trapped as the years passed. But crucially, Nick almost immediately saw Gilead for what it was. He recognized the horror. And despite the danger, he chose to resist in the ways available to him — quietly, strategically, and at great personal cost.

We needed that Nick. His arc was supposed to remind us that even those inside the system, even those who have made mistakes, can choose to act with compassion, courage, and moral clarity. His story offered a rare and vital kind of hope: that decency can survive in the darkest of places, and that ordinary people can make extraordinary choices even when the odds are against them.

In the difficult times we live in, as extremism and authoritarianism rise in the real world, Nick’s story could have served as a reminder of the importance of quiet resistance — of the fact that the fight against oppression doesn’t always look like a revolution, but can begin with small, courageous acts.

By collapsing his arc into a simplistic tale of complicity, the writers not only betrayed Nick as a character but stripped the audience of that hope. What happened to him wasn’t just a sad ending. It was bad writing. And it was a missed opportunity — a failure to honor both the character they had built and the powerful tradition of resistance that dystopian fiction exists to celebrate.

[todayisdeadinside]

The “Louis is homophobic” narrative is so outrageously dumb that it feels like it was manufactured in a top-secret lab that specializes in bad takes and Twitter misinformation. Like, are y’all okay? Blink twice if it has rotted your critical thinking skills.

Let’s start with the infamous “I am in fact straight ” tweet thread debacle .Yes. That one. The cursed hieroglyphic carved into the stone tablet of Larrie discourse. Do we know Louis even wrote that? No. Do we know he wasn’t pressured to tweet it? Absolutely not. That thing reads like it was drafted by an intern who smells like Axe body spray and internalized homophobia. And even if he did write it, who among us hasn’t tweeted something mid-spiral, mid-slander, or mid-pr-management-disaster? I once tweeted “I love cardio” after crying on a treadmill run. We’ve all been there.

But here’s the thing: Louis’s actual, observable behavior? Screams “deeply queer coded closeted boy who’s been suppressed for over a decade” let’s start rom the very beginning, in 1D interviews, he straight up REFUSED to entertain the weird, gross questions about male fans and them potentially being attracted to the boys bait questions. He danced around it and looked at the interviewer like they needed therapy. A homophobe doesn’t do that. A person who’s been taught to fear queerness would not dance around a bigoted opportunity served on a silver platter by British tabloid goons.

Now, let’s talk about Only the Brave. That song is so queer-coded it needs to pay rent in West Hollywood. The lyrics sound like they were stolen from a poet who stares longingly at their best friend across a candlelit pub. You think some homophobe just wakes up and writes “it’s a church of burnt romances” over sad,slow guitar strums like that’s a normal Saturday morning? Honey. That song is aching. It’s cinematic. It’s closeted gay in a war film meets Catholic guilt meets forbidden glances across a church pew. Straight men don’t write like that unless they’re trying to land a GLAAD award or overcompensating for owning five pairs of cargo shorts. Let’s also not ignore COACOAC and all along.

AND DON’T GET ME STARTED ON THE GAY BARS. This man isn’t “accidentally” stumbling into queer spaces like he tripped over a curb and landed on the dance floor at Heaven. He’s comfortable there. He brings his long-term “girlfriend” there for her birthday. He’s not just vibing—he’s thriving. He’s at home. He probably knows the bartender by name. Homophobes do not take their “girlfriend” to one of the most queer friendly known places (Amsterdam) and then write about missing their lover while they’re there 🤨. And then do damage control when people figure out the line HE pointed out to make it clear it was not about his “girlfriend”. Be serious.

Also, let us not forget that this man promoted Polari. Polari. Do antis know how deep cut that is? That’s not “I saw a rainbow once and felt warm.” That’s “I researched underground queer British slang from the 1900s and wore it proudly on my literal chest.” It’s like if a straight dude casually wore a T-shirt that said “Stonewall was a riot” and then went right back to watching football. That’s not a casual choice. That’s a coded statement wrapped in giggles and subtext.

Oh and antis love to erase how Louis helped shape Harry into the fearless, gender-fluid person he is today. “Painted nails make Harry beautiful.” HE SAID THAT. Welllll before it was male fashion. That was during the era of tight skinny jeans and judgment, not Gucci gowns and Vogue covers. He was supporting Harry’s expression when people were still saying “that’s a bit much, innit?” And then there’s the “I’ve never seen you in a dress before mmmmmm” moment. The delivery? Iconic. The eyes? Full of love. The vibe? Boyfriend.

When Harry waved the pride flag for the first time and Louis was literally BEAMING at him like he’d just watched his baby take its first steps? Yeah, that wasn’t the reaction of a man who hates queerness. That was a man who was proud. That was personal. That was “I see you, and I love you” with a Donny accent and a huge smile.

Also, the way antis act like Louis would be totally fine with queer fans in person, but then immediately log onto Twitter like the Wicked Witch of Westboro Baptist Church is so laughably illogical I’m getting a six-pack from the mental gymnastics. Homophobia isn’t platform-dependent! You can’t be like “he’s a proud dad at concerts but a bigot in 280 characters or less.” That’s not how people work. That’s how satire works.

And please—please—tell me how a homophobic man would stand in front of thousands of queer fans waving pride flags and say “I feel so fucking confident, so fucking protected.” He didn’t say “appreciated.” He didn’t say “respected.” He said protected. As in, “I feel safer here than anywhere else.” If you think a homophobe says that sincerely, you need to open a book and then maybe touch grass.

But maybe I’m just a troglodyte, sitting in my little internet cave, clutching my gaydar and refusing to accept twitter takes as gospel. But what I do know is that Louis is about as homophobic as that guy who claps as he watches a drag queen get engaged. He’s queer-coded, emotionally intelligent, and more comfortable in queer environments than most straight girls at bottomless brunch.

Let’s be real. They don’t actually think he’s homophobic. They just don’t see him. They don’t listen to him. They refuse to understand him. And instead of owning up to their bias, they make it weird.

holy shit anon i am kissing you on the mouth this is beautiful and SO correct. also, hilarious. i laughed unreasonably hard at the jokes and puns. whoever you are, please get into a writing field. youll thrive there.

[fiamat12]

Re: Sohoe - Friend or Foe?

Before you read, please note this post is to focus on a launch not on the character of the Sohoes. I believe all of them in the end have helped L w/ his legal obligations.

Many of us around these parts believe that there was a Part 1 and a Part 2 to the legal obligations w/ a negotiation period in between. The Lukola FBI looked back through Charmaine's ("C"'s) TT & IG activity to see if her current TTs could signal an end to obligations. What we found is that it lines up perfectly w/ our analysis - more specifically our timelines and what we think her role has been...

Let's start from the top w/ C's famous TTs:

1) TTs are similar now (possible end of Round 2) as to what we saw at the end of Round 1 (Aug/ Sept. of '24).

• This tracks. The overall repost sentiments are similar - bad friends and staying silent. She even reposted a TT from the same user, Iman Samone 😉 (see posts below)***

• The reposts after A's Sorrento dump indicated Round 1 could be done, as do the reposts now for Round 2. There was a particular repost on Aug. 25th that pointed to her being on L’s side and showing empathy for him. ⬇️

2) Scanning her timeline, she didn’t do this kind of post in Oct. as it was quite possibly renegotiation time, and she may have been asked to help w/ A's image rehab by then, so she wasn’t able to repost freely.

Now onto C's IG comments in regards to A:

1) She didn't seem to comment on an IG post of A’s prior to May 2024.

• It's curious, but not necessarily accurate since A constantly archives/ deletes posts. However, any difference would probably be minimal as A doesn't have that many posts.

• It could support the fact that she wasn't L's gf or an important part of his life as L's best mates who are active on sm would likely have been more consistently interactive w/ her.

2) From May-July of last year, it was sporadic.

• She’d comment on an occasional post like a new friend would - no dance videos but a few modeling ones, and mostly travel related posts like NY & LA (she is a flight attendant, after all).

• Technically, A should've been a known gf of her boyfriend's close childhood friend. Instead, it read like A was new to the group, because she was (!!) - except to R & S, maybe.

3) In August/Sept., there were no comments.

• Even on A's Italy dump, despite C being there, there were no comments, just a like. The lack of comments continued until Sept. 21st.

• This supports probable knowledge of an Antluke faux break-up, L "reuniting" w/ N and a cool down period

• The Sohoes' silence seemed two fold:

- Their job was done and they didn't serve the narrative anymore. (R's allusion to a drinking problem gave them a nice exit, stage right).

- They were being watched. As @jmuz09 stated: "I feel like this was that period where they were conscious they were being watched, and they all tried to act normal, like nothing happened in Sorrento"

4) From Oct 25, 2024 - March 6, 2025, C commented on every post of A's.

• This perfectly aligns w/ a timeline of image rehab and round 2 obligations and the friends & family support to "get this done".

• She hasn’t commented since March... perhaps the others chipped in for the last push - R did the dance video, JV, her boyfriend T and some musical theater friends did the marathon brunch, and L's sis, MD & S commented on A's last post..

Conclusion:

When all is said & done, I think we had a friend of Lukola helping out when she could... this post is analyzing sm activity but lest we forgot the in- person appearances C made w/ A (scroll back to Nov. if you must) and pics of her that she included on her own IG to likely help her image. More importantly, C has kept liking L's posts (21 out of 25 over the past year), commented "you were ROBBED" on his SMA post and has also regularly liked N's posts. 😊

Posts w/ C's TTs ⬇️⬇️⬇️

[alittlebitofloveliness]

Darry Curtis was always gay- the musical just makes it more obvious.

I know it was never Hinton’s INTENTION for any of her characters to be perceived as queer, she claims she didn’t write them that way, and that’s fine. In fact, I think reading The Outsiders as a group of straight men who have the bonds they do is actually a really great critique of toxic masculinity, in that we would see the contrast between their interactions one on one or alone with the group, compared to their macho, hyper masculine personas they showcase in public. HOWEVER, I think it’s incredibly hard to read it that way because Hinton accidentally and completely unintentionally made Darry Curtis one of the gayest characters in modern literature. It’s not far fetched. It’s not a stretch. I’m saying that if you have even a surface level understanding of subtext that it is obvious. Darry’s queerness is as open  in the novel as he is in his life- that is, it’s never said explicitly, but it’s VERY easy to see the signs. In fact, the way it’s threaded into the narrative but very talked around leads me to believe that even though Darry wasn’t out, it might have been an open secret within the gang- or at the very least they probably had some suspicions. 

For one, in the book Darry is never mentioned even once to have had a girlfriend, or even to have gone on dates, but we know he was popular and well liked. You can’t convince me that a handsome, popular football player, whose peers liked him enough to vote him Boy of The Year, didn’t have more than a few girls interested in him, but Pony’s narration never even alludes to Darry having been interested in one. For all he talks up Darry’s achievements, the scholarship he won, the future he could have had and everything he gave up, women/a girlfriend were never a part of it- which, given the time period and Darry’s reliance on hyper masculine social scripts, seems highly uncharacteristic unless there was a plausible explanation for his complete disinterest (ie. being gay). Now, examine this hyper masculinity a little further, and you can see it for what it is, a) a defence mechanism (because it separates him from stereotypes of what a gay men are like, so if he’s ‘manly’ enough no one will ever suspect or discover what he is) and b) the unfortunate complete opposite of that. Just like how hyper femininity characteristic to femme lesbians is off putting to men, the same is true to some degree about hyper masculine men being somewhat off putting to women. Not to the same degree, and probably not as obviously, but Darry’s  over the top masculinity might be the one thing effective in keeping (some) women away for reasons they can’t quite put their finger on. Point is, Darry was never a ladies man, to a degree that is very not heterosexual, especially for the time period.

So, now that we’ve established Darry’s complete disinterest in dating women,  his hypermasculine personality and it’s possible implications, let’s turn to other textual support for his queerness: his relationships with other male characters. I’m not talking about the gang- his interactions with all of them are very friendly/familial-  but he has a bond with Tim Shepard that is clear on the page but left largely unexplained (their weird eye contact and high mutual respect, the fact Tim was at their house once with no explanation), and his homoerotic run in/fight with Paul at the rumble. Both these relationships have plausible deniability- they’re not explicitly gay, but they’re also not NOT gay. Again, Hinton didn’t intentionally make Darry gay, but he very much is, and as far as closeted gay characters go, he’s a fairly well written one, because the subtext is very much THERE if you know what you’re looking for, but the queerness of his interactions is shrouded in this very real this COULD mean nothing characteristic of a lot of closeted queer interactions. 

Having said all this, I think the musical making Darry and Paul’s fight (somehow) even more charged and homoerotic than it is in the book was a wise choice, because a lot of the rest of the subtext was changed/missing from the musical adaptation. I’ve seen the ritfr analysis looking at the lyrics as they relate to Darry’s queerness, and I do think they follow the veiled/subtextual theme, but I don’t think they’re as explicitly gay as they’re touted to be. However, I do think the musical does a good job of highlighting Darry’s queerness given the medium they’re working with, and the actors do an amazing job portraying it without saying it outright, making it more obvious than it is on the page- but Darry was canonically gay in the book too, and let’s not pretend otherwise.

(Lmk if you want to see my analysis of the other Curtis’ queerness as it related to the book + musical).

[chondrichthyes-x-mantodea]

Bit of a rant on "baby trapping"

on here again to ask yall something. What the fuck is baby trapping, and when has it ever happened via force on a man?

Every single time, I bring up something like rape and forced reproduction and how it is a target ON WOMEN, People always have to bring up poor poor male victims. When I talk about how false accusations are a very rare occurrence, people tell me "no I've seen it." "No, I knew a guy. ".... as if they most likely didn't just write the possibility off. And the same thing goes with this "baby trapping" shit. "Oh, women will purposefully get pregnant and trap a man with a baby!!!!" Literally when? Because last time I checked men do that to WOMEN. There's literally a name for the act of secretly removing a condom during sex (stealthing). Not to mention the social dynamic of fathers vs mothers.

But I saw a post on threads today of a man saying that "a woman lying about being on contraception to """get herself pregnant""" should be a crime"

.... so first, let's take note of the irony. "Get herself pregnant" even in the case of their own victim fantasy, they prove that they see this act as one-sided. Sorry but thats funny as shit to me. Wahhhhhh women are abusing men *words it as something that only effects her*. Even in this world where they're supposedly hurting more from baby trapping, they are only connected via association and ownership of said woman.

Second, if this was a real issue, you'd be advocating for male birth control. But you aren't lmfao. Recently I read a study that showed around 80% of an increase in young women developing cancer. Of course, the male doctor chalked this up to delayed childbirth and weight, but I know the truth. It's hormonal birth control, I'm certain. Screaming and crying about how women lie about being on a pill that is most likely causing exponential growth in cancer risk while you have condoms is the most male thing I've ever heard of. And really, why would she need to be on birth control? To fulfill your breeding kink (because all men have one) of needing to ejaculate in a woman? Because you see that as some form of domination? And I'm supposed to feel pity for you in this fantasy of men being forced into fatherhood? If you're that worried, wear the condom that has 0 health issues connected to it. But of course, the comments were full of men screaming about how women would sabotage the condoms.... be fr. I can't even word that part right now. Men think in such a convoluted way, they make such a maze out of simple concepts by picking and choosing which situation benefits them most. Loophole galore in their logic. But it makes sense, the whole world is a male narrative, their delusion is fact.

And finally, this is all not taking into account the way we socially handle parenthood. Its actually taking this topic and throwing it out the fucking window. 80 percent of single parents are women. Upon looking at child support statistics, they really REALLY want you to believe mothers don't pay child support as much as fathers.... but who is fucking staying with the kid 80 percent of the time? This is what I mean by male narrative always trying to make themselves the victims. Custodial fathers recieve less payment, but they make up all of 20 percent of single parents. I guess women just don't know how to abandon children the right way. And even so, men are the ones constantly crying about how child support is inhumane. Women are not making money off child support, the cost of raising a child is much higher mentally and financially.

The whole child support and single parent dilemma don't even account for social perception. Mothers are chained to children by the fucking ankle. From birth, women are raised to be big sopping emotional messes when it comes to babies. Mothers have to revolve their whole identity around emotionally catering children. Most fathers do in this culture is stand there and watch a woman care for "his offspring." If you think a woman would risk pregnancy (in this day and age with our politics and health care) and raise a child to get some fucking money, you're delusional. I feel like most of this argument stems from mens lack of understanding of how laborious parenthood actually is. A woman would not be benefitting from this. Her identity, her social life, her finance, her ability to get a job..... that's not a benefit on her. Especially when men aren't pressured to be there for a woman. Tell me, is it common practice for a man to go to OBGYN appointments with his partner? Is it encouraged? No. WHAT IS THERE TO BENEFIT FROM. On the other hand, men have always trapped women with children. Women are taught to care for their kids, and we are paid less. But no, something that happened to a man once is actually worse than when it happened to women when they couldn't even own a bank account.

TLDR: I think men are coming to terms with responsibility and parts of reproduction where they are susceptible and inferior. This is the same shit as the men pissing themselves over not having a say on abortion.... KEEP YOUR CUM IN YOUR BODY. It is not oppressive for you to not be able to cum inside a woman and fufill a fetish without worry. How tone deaf to think thats an issue for YOU while abortion is outlawed. If you are relying on her and need her to be your little sex toy, compromising her health for your ability to squirt inside her and go, then you deserve to be "baby trapped" (aka. Have to pay 200 dollars a month while she raises a whole child).

[livingdxadwriter]

Just A Little Taste

Frank (Adam Barrett) x f!reader

Summary: you’re the only one left, and Frank is more the happy to keep you around. Alternative ending where Frank kills everyone else and doesn’t explode

Warnings: explicit sexual content, minors dni, p in v, unprotected sex, creampie, fingering, multiple orgasms, dacryphilia, blood kink (he’s a vampire tf did you expect), degradation, he’s mean to her and she likes it, rough sex (he breaks a table), choking, suffocation kink, implied consent (I think? she consents to it later), explicit language (take a shot every time he says fuck), no use of y/n or physical descriptions, blood, violence, it’s a horror movie idk what to tell you. Read at own caution

I call him Frank throughout the fic, it’s just easier for narrative because he was only ever called Adam like once. It’s also implied in the movie he doesn’t go by Adam anymore so.

WC: 4.8k I’m sorry

A/N: DONT YOU DARE LOOK AT ME. I had to I’m sorry okay??? Not only did I want to fuck this prick the whole movie im actually obsessed with Dan Stevens now so there’s that. But I totally thought about fucking this man the whole movie so I wrote it. To the 5 people that will read this you’re welcome (I’ll see you in hell😘)

For reference I based some characterization bits on this fic by @f1nalboys since I think they wrote Frank perfectly! And I think they rubbed off a little on mine lol

What the fuck did you get yourself into?

Your head was throbbing, your racing heart drumming in your ears. You felt like you were spinning. On your hands and knees on the floor, you were covered in so much blood and guts you felt like tearing your skin off. You didn’t even think it was your own blood. They were all dead. 

This wasn’t what you signed up for.

You were crawling, you didn’t know where you were trying to go, it wasn’t like you could outrun her, or him. You looked behind you to find them in their mayhem. Truly Joey and Abigail were trying, you watched them from a corner—bruised and bloody—as they tried to fight him, maybe kill him. Then you would be next for not helping. But it didn’t look like it mattered. Joey wasn’t moving from where she was impaled, blood gushing from her neck. You couldn’t help the tears that fell from your eyes. You choked out a sob as you tried to force yourself up on your feet. But who were you fucking kidding? You were fucked either way. Abigail would catch you and feed off you slowly before ending your torment. Or Frank would. And truly, you almost wanted Abigail to get you instead. 

“Ah. There you are. Thought I forgot about you?” His sinister words filled your ears and another sob ripped from your throat as you pathetically tried to crawl away, your legs too unstable to even support your weight.

“No.. no.. no.” the shaky words slipped from your throat as more tears spilled from your eyes, a feeling of utter terror and dread settling in your stomach. You actually cried when he effortlessly grabbed one of your ankles and dragged you towards him. “Please!”

“Aw, are you crying?” He mocked you, tilting his head at you, tongue swiping over razor sharp teeth. Blood covered his mouth and chin, down his neck and his eyes were sadistic as he looked over your distressed form. He almost looked in thought, like he wasn’t quite sure what to do with you yet. 

“Just kill me. There's no one else..” You sobbed, looking to the side to find Abigail’s body completely lifeless, limp, black blood pooling around her. You swallowed, your jaw locking tight as you looked up at him in defeat. You just made peace with the fact that this was it. “You won. Just fucking end it.” 

Frank clicked his tongue, amusement mixing with the malice in his expressions and he shook his head. “I like you, y’know. You have such a dirty fuckin’ mouth for such a pretty face. Thought about how to shut you up all night, and I think I figured it out.”

You sucked in a sharp breath, eyes screwed shut when he reached down to grab you. You fully expected him to sink his fangs into your throat and tear it right out, suck you dry until your heart stopped pumping. But he didn’t. You let out a pathetic sound when he grabbed the back of your hair and forced you up on your feet. He forced your head back, giving you no other option but to look at him. 

Frank knew his heart had stopped beating the second fangs grazed his lips, but right now as he watched your face twist with desperation and anticipation of his next move, your soft lips quivering and your big eyes staring back at him, he swore he felt blood pumping in his veins. This thought of your life being completely in his hands, that ultimately you were the only one left, it gave him an indescribable feeling he craved to explore more. He always did enjoy exerting his power over those around him, but this was so different. He felt it even before he turned. 

Something about you was so intoxicating and alluring to him. The second he met you, he knew he wouldn’t let this be the last time he saw you. As much as that defeated the purpose of the no-name, unknown crew thing he had established. The little looks you shot him throughout the night, like he intrigued you, amused you. He caught each and every one. But it wasn’t until you got all up in his face to curse and shout at him about what had gone down with Abigail that he realized that if he died tonight without getting a taste of you he would be real fucking pissed in hell. 

He didn’t want to kill you. No. He wanted to ruin you. Fuck you into nothing. Fuck you until you were useless, nothing more just an outlet for his pleasure. 

“I don’t want to kill you. I wanna keep you, actually. I wouldn’t waste a pretty lil’ thing like you.” His blood stained lips curled up into a sinister smirk that had your stomach turning in ways that would make any sane human being sick. You kept your mouth shut as he leaned down to find your ear, his grip on your hair tightening. “I can think of a couple things you would be so good for.”

“You're going to hypnotize me? Turn me into your personal fuck puppet?” You scoffed through gritted teeth, the idea making your stomach twist and your jaw lock. He laughed, the sound so somber in your ear it made you swallow. He ultimately shook his head, tisking softly at you.

“Jesus, what kind of a fuckin’ animal do you think I am? You have two options here,” he ran his tongue over his lips, blue eyes sharp on yours as his grip loosened. “You can go. You know where the door is. I’ll even give you a head start. But, if I catch you, I’ll fuck you until you pass out.”

Your mouth fell open, shock filling your eyes at his vulgar words. An unsettling heat settled deep within you as the implications of his words sank in. You should not be considering your options. Get the fuck out. It’s that simple. But your mind lingered. He could almost sense your hesitation. This made him smile.

“Don’t act like you weren’t giving me fuck me eyes all night. Clinging to me like a bitch in heat. I bet you would have let me fuck you on the nearest surface of this place if I had tried.” The words he spat flustered you in deep embarrassment. You hated that he wasn’t wrong. You gravitated towards him, caught glimpses of him when you thought he wasn’t looking, you wrapped up his bleeding leg, you refused to leave his side when everyone else chose to split up. But what truly sunk into him was the fact that you refused to fight him, too. You ran with Joey but you didn’t fight him and you didn’t help them, against your better judgment. And you couldn’t deny that.

“So pick one.” He released your hair, taking a step back. You released the breath you were holding and you stared at him, blinking softly, searching for any deceit in his eyes. Maybe he was toying with you. Giving you a false sense of security. He tilted his head at you, amusement and malicious glee circling in his blue eyes as the smirk never left his expression. 

You often listened to your instincts, to your gut. And your gut was telling you to get the fuck out of this place. You swallowed a sob as you ran down a long hallway, your heart pounding in your chest as your feet took you somewhere. But you hesitated, a deep sense of doubt sinking in your head. Something else joined. A feeling you couldn’t quite comprehend but it was strong, and you didn’t want to go out that door. Not really. 

You stopped running. You didn’t know why you stopped. You looked behind you, almost expecting to find him there. A heavy feeling sat in your chest, an eerie sense of anticipation. You could leave right now, pretend none of this ever happened, only a nightmare to hide in the back of your subconscious. But somehow, you didn’t move. Frank didn’t have to spare you, you knew you wouldn’t be able to fight him off on your own even if you tried—you didn’t want to. He was in complete control and he chose you. You weren’t oblivious. 

The smirk on his face only grew wider when he caught you at the end of the hallway, sinister eyes pinning you in place as he approached you. But you weren’t hypnotized, you just didn’t want to run. 

“Well, aren't you full of surprises?” He grabbed your jaw, squeezing your cheeks between his fingers. You didn’t try to fight him.  Your eyes flickered with defiance and curiosity. “Did you even try to run?”

“You were giving me fuck me eyes, too.” You dared to shoot back, and you didn’t miss the way his eyebrows shot up with pleasant surprise. He blew out a chuckle. 

“Yeah, I was.” 

His mouth was on yours as he held your face in place, his tongue slipping into your mouth without shame, razor sharp teeth nicking your lip. You gasped at the stinging sensation, the metallic taste mixing with his mouth. He almost growled at the taste. 

His mouth stayed on yours, not giving you even a second to breathe as he backed you to the nearest wall. You ignored the blood drying on his cool skin and the stickiness of his clothes as you ran your hands up his face until they landed on his disheveled hair. Truth was, the filthiness of it all, how fucked up it all was, it all added to your arousal. You weren’t a saint afterall, and this thrill excited you like nothing ever before. You didn’t know just what he was capable of, that excited you.

“Your stupid heart is beating so fuckin’ fast. Do you want it that bad?” His words were mocking, in a breathy laugh as his lips moved down your jaw. You opened your mouth to reply when he dragged his tongue over your skin to taste the blood staining it. Your eyes rolled softly, your brain shutting off for just a second.

“God, yes.” You breathed out as his hands grabbed at your tits through your shirt. A smirk fell on his lips again as he effortlessly tore the material right in half. You groaned at this, though ultimately your clothes were ruined anyway, but he could have asked, you would have taken it off. “You could’ve taken it off, you know?”

He laughed, shrugging as he dragged his tongue over your collarbone, the ends of his teeth grazing your skin ever so slightly, “I’m not your fuckin’ Prince Charming.”

“Nope, you’re just an asshole.” You bit your lip softly, trying to level your voice as not to sound so out of breath, so desperate, but when he carelessly unzipped your jeans, tugging them down your thighs just enough for him and unceremoniously shoved his hand into your panties, how the fuck could you stay calm?

“Oh, yeah, I’m a fuckin’ asshole,” he lifted his head to watch your mouth fall open and your eyes grow big when his middle finger slipped between your folds and rubbed your wetness on your clit. The sweet moan he pulled from you made him grin with delight. “But I’m a great fuck. Wanna find out sweetheart?”

The only response you gave him was a pathetic moan when he slipped two long fingers into your hole, and he couldn’t help but mock the way your lips parted open in pleasure.

“Oh, I think you do. You’re soaking my fingers and for what? You just wanted this pussy filled and you didn’t care about nothin’ else huh?” He took in the way your eyebrows furrowed and twisted as he slipped his fingers in and out, listened to your soft gasps each time he curled his fingers the right way. And he did it, again, and again. “You should’ve said somethin’. Fuck.. I would’ve.. I would’ve fucked you with my tongue in the bathroom, or bent you over the pool table and filled you with my cock.”

Your walls squeezed his fingers and a sob ripped from your throat at his words. You were begging his name softly, one of your hands flying to wrap around his wrist as he fucked you with his fingers, your release creeping up on you faster than it ever has before.

“Yeah, you’d like that. You just wanted me to take you like a whore, hm?” He slipped and crooked his fingers perfectly, his palm rutting against your clit with each expert flick of his wrist. Your chest was heaving, eyes screwed shut as pathetic sounds fell freely from your lips. But what truly caught his attention was the vein that popped on your neck close to your pulse point, pulsing as blood pumped through your veins. He narrowed his eyes as he focused on it, he could almost hear each thump of your heart, pumping faster the closer you got. It was so human. Something he no longer was. “What's that? You close or somethin’?”

“Uh-huh!” His thumb was on your clit as the sound left your mouth, his fingers pumping and scissoring your cunt wide open until a sob ripped from your throat, your mind going completely blank as your release coated his fingers. You could feel yourself slip down the wall, your legs a shaking mess that couldn’t hold you up any longer, his fingers still deep inside your weeping cunt. But he didn’t stop, he pressed his body against yours, free hand on your hip, forcing your body upright. You sputtered, your nails digging into his wrist as he forced his fingers as far as they could go, drawing out on your pleasure to the point of tears. “Frank, h-hang on.”

The way you sobbed his name made him smirk, his sadistic eyes now on yours. “Aw, is it too much?” He mocked you, his fingers curling just to torture you. You whined, your eyes pleading for mercy. He didn’t have much to give, but he also didn’t have much self control, either. “Ah, you’re right, we can do better than this. Now, should I stuff your dirty mouth, or your soakin’ pussy?”

You pulled your lips into a pout, your eyes big as you stared up at him, as soft gasp pulled from your lips when his fingers left you. You swallowed, the thought of choking on his cock temping your mind, but fuck, you just wanted him to take you, right now.

“I just.. I want you inside me.”

“‘Course you fuckin’ do.” He pulled you off the wall, his grip tight on one arm to keep you standing as he searched around the small walkway. His eyes landed on a table in the corner filled with photo portraits. He was dragging you to it, his free arm knocking over everything on the table before he effortlessly hoisted you onto it. 

He kissed you again as he tore your jeans off your legs all the way, along with your panties, tossing them somewhere behind him to be forgotten. Your shaky hands focused on his clothes next, shoving his jacket off his shoulders and reaching down to unbuckle his belt. His hands joined yours, since you were taking too fucking long fumbling around with his zipper. He shoved his jeans down his thighs just enough, not bothering to take them off all the way. Parting from his lips, you attempted to pull his bloodied shirt over his head, desperately craving to feel his skin. He didn’t deny you, his shirt getting tossed along with his jacket somewhere. 

You didn’t stop him when he pushed you on your back, body flat on the surface and your legs dangled over his torso. Your slick cunt was on full display for him, and he very much appreciated the visual of his doing. He leaned down the slightest bit, forcing your knees to damn near touch your chest as he freed his cock from his boxers. He exhaled sharply, his neck craning to the side as he held back the deep urge to just shove his cock inside you. 

His eyes met yours for a second, a shit eating grin on his face before he looked down to watch as his cock slowly sank into you, disappearing inch by inch within your tight walls. Your jaw fell open, a silent cry leaving you at the sting of his cock. A curse left your lips, eyes screwed shut as you dug your nails into the wooden table beneath you. 

“So fuckin’ tight. Fuck.” He grunted, the sound settling deep within his chest. His pace was grueling from the start, the second he was inside you he was drilling into you. He watched your face with big eyes, lips slightly parted as he reveled in your pain. ”I wanted it so bad. Thought about splitting this pussy wide fuckin’ open all night. Fuck.” 

Sobs spilled from your lips, a string of uh-uh-uh’s filling the empty house. You tried to crawl up the table, give yourself some room from his rough hips at first, but he didn’t particularly appreciate you trying to run away from him. He used his body weight to keep you pinned to the table as he leaned over your body further, his chain now dangling over your face as if to mock you further. 

“Aw, is my cock too much? You can’t take it? You asked for it,” he spat the word accompanied by a particularly sharp thrust that made you cry out. “Please Frank, it hurts.” He mocked your voice, his face above yours. He brought a hand to squeeze your cheeks between his fingers as you nodded tearfully. But you couldn't bring yourself to even try to tell him to stop, let alone try to run away this time, ultimately the pain coursing through you dissolving into blissful pleasure. “Good. I hope it fuckin’ hurts. That’s what a slut like you deserves.” 

With each spiteful word he spat, the intensity of his actions increased. But god did it feel absolutely delicious to be railed this way. You had never felt this way before. So intensely consumed by pleasure and pain that you cried. Tears fell from your eyes just as freely as sobs of pleasure fell from your lips. Frank was more than happy to hear them all. He fucking reveled in it. His lips pulled into a mocking pout at the sight of your tears, but the sight only made his cock twitch. He leaned down to your face, tongue sticking out to lick your tears.

You were shocked, eyes wide and mouth open, but you were more shocked at yourself, at the fact that you liked it. You were covered in blood, not even your blood, he was covered in blood, everyone else was dead and yet here you were, taking his cock like that was your only concern in this world. And the worst part was, you didn’t even mind it all that much. “Ugh, fuck. This is so fucked up.” The words left your lips in a haze, an unconscious thought as your back lifted off the table, a burning heat settling deep within you. You didn’t expect him to hear you. But how could he not? He laughed, his forehead pressed to your wet cheek.

“But you don’t want me to stop, do you?” He pulled back to look at your face, head tilted at you as his hand fell to your neck and his fingers gripped your throat, but he didn’t quite squeeze. He grinned at the way your eyes rolled back as you shook your head as best as his grip allowed you to. “So much for not wanting my hand on your throat.” 

He mocked you once again, laughing at the irony. He remembered your words from much earlier in the night--I swear if you put your hand on my throat next I will cut it off. A twisted smile formed on his lips at the thought, his fingers tightening around your throat. He wondered if you still had your switchblade on you. Would you stab him if he squeezed too hard? He would probably enjoy it if you did. 

You weren’t sure when the air started to leave your lungs, or when the room started to spin. You were dizzy, blood rushing to your face as his fingers dug into your neck. You weren’t sure what you felt more, the bruising around your throat or his cock bruising your cervix. Either way, the feeling was unbearable, overwhelming. You could feel consciousness start to leave you, your chest heaving with panic. Would he keep fucking you even if you passed out? You guessed it wouldn’t matter too much to him if you did. All you were hoping for is that you didn’t pass out before your release. Your pulse slowed, he could see it. It amused him to watch the way your heartbeat slowed, your face untwisting as you slowly slipped. His fingers released your throat, a loud gasp leaving your lips as your head spinned. 

“Fuuck—God—Fu—” breathy incoherent words spilled from your lips, your thoughts blurred as you came. The thought of someone pushing your limits to such extreme, it pumped adrenaline through your veins, rushed dopamine through your fucked up brain. You clung to him, nails dragging down his back as you turned into a shaking, sobbing mess. 

“The fuck was that? Shit, did you just come?” Frank asked, a laugh of disbelief leaving him as he looked down to see his cock glistening with your release as he slipped in and out of you with ease.

“Mhm!” You nodded, only a high pitched noise leaving you, too incoherent and cock-drunk to even form a thought. You expected him to slow down at some point, for his relentless movements to falter, but somehow the thought of you falling apart without even so much as a warning got him going even more.

“Who the fuck said you could do that, hm?” He spat, a grunt leaving him as he rutted his hips against you. The sting of his cock so deep you swore you could feel him in your cervix. You whined, attempting to ground yourself with a grip on the table. You could hear the frail wood creak under you. 

“Frank—” You warned him, attempting to sit up to take some weight off the table, but it didn’t make much of a difference, the small table finally breaking under Frank’s harsh movements. You expected to hit your head on the ground, and you braced yourself for it, but you only felt the impact on your back. 

One of Frank’s hands held the back of your head, cradling it almost, the other was braced on the floor as he tried to take as much of the impact as possible. You heard him laugh next to your ear and you groaned, cursing at him under your breath.

“Motherfucker, I’m not a goddamn ragdoll.” You groaned, wincing softly as you lifted your back off the broken wooden chunks beneath you.

“Shit, my bad. I’ve never fucked while being a vampire, alright? I don’t know how this shit works.” He shrugged, unbothered as his cock still sat hot and heavy inside you. He looked at you, eyes playful as his lips curved into a grin. “You okay?”

“Uh yeah, think so.”

“Good. Up you go then.” You didn’t have time to ask him what he meant, before your brain could process it, he was moving you both around. He sat on the back of his knees as he sat you on his lap. Not that you would do much up there, but he figured it’d be less painful than the hard cool floor. 

He wrapped one arm around your waist, holding you against his chest. He grabbed your face with his other hand, pulling you to meet his eager mouth as he snapped up his hips. He swallowed the sound he enticed from your throat as your body bounced in his grip. You threw your arms over his shoulders, holding on to him for dear life as he split you open with his cock—again. You couldn’t believe you already wanted to come again, shameless sobs spilling from your throat as your chest heaved, heart pounding so loud you swore you could hear it. Were vampire pheromones a thing? Not that you could actually think of anything right now, not with how good he was making you feel. 

“Oh, I know what that means. You wanna come again, huh?” He grabbed your face, squeezing your cheeks between his fingers how he liked to do. You were nodding, eyes big and watery with tears. He found it so amusing how easily he could make you go from all talk and attitude to pathetic and fucked out. And deep down, you liked it, too. It was often exhausting to pretend all the time. “Oh, I know, baby. I want you to come all over my cock again.”

And it wasn’t a request, he slipped his hand between your bodies and your head fell on his shoulder, gasping softly when pressed his thumb to your swollen clit. You didn’t have to think too hard, the painful stretch of his cock was enough, but the second he played with your clit you were done for. You were sobbing as your third orgasm hit you, tears spilling from your eyes once again.

“Aw, well aren’t you a good girl? C’mere, look at me,” his hand left your sensitive clit to lace around your hair forcing your head up. His eyes were on yours, tongue licking over his razor sharp teeth as he fucked you through your high, now chasing his own. “You want me to fill you up? That’s what you wanted, right? Just wanted me to take you and use you like some whore? Well you better fuckin’ take it like one.”

His name fell from your lips quietly, almost pleading as he forced your head to the side, exposing your neck to him, your ripped up shirt long forgotten in the mindless dance of clothes. You knew what devious thought was in his head, and like you read his mind, he sunk his teeth into your flesh. A strained whine left your throat, your fingers digging into his back as he savored your blood. He groaned, riveting in the feeling of your cunt clenching around his cock as he fed. And it was that sweet taste of your blood that made him fall apart. A deep grunt settled in his chest as he spilled inside you, only releasing your shoulder when he felt his release seep out of your cunt.

A shaky gasp left your lips when he let go, a feeling of relief sitting on your chest when he didn’t suck you dry. You had fully expected him to feed until your body was lifeless. Ultimately he had already fucked whatever this was out of his system. But he didn’t. He gave you no time to comment on this, without a word he kissed you, your blood still coating his mouth. 

“Ugh, Jesus,” you grimaced, blood now coating your lips. He smirked at you, lips parted to flash you his teeth as he took in the way your face twisted in disgust. Still tangled up in each other, still clinging to him on his lap, you watched as swiped his finger over the streak of blood dripping from your shoulder. And your eyes never left him as he savored the taste of you, his chest rising and falling with delight. A strange feeling sank in your chest as your senses returned to you, and you suddenly felt painfully self-aware. “Are you going to finish feeding off me now that you got what you wanted?”

“You truly are a dumb little girl, huh?” He mocked you, laughing softly, a second laugh erupting from his chest at the way you narrowed your eyes at him with a glare. “If I had wanted to kill you I would have. You’re not the only pussy in this city y’know.”

“You are such an asshole.” You rolled your eyes, the intimacy and the slight bit of vulnerability in the moment slipping from you, and you aimed to get up, suddenly feeling a little embarrassed and flustered. But he didn’t allow you to. He kept his arm on your torso and he gripped your face between his fingers, forcing you to look at him.

“And you’re a fuckin’ brat. Now that we have established that, I think we can come to an understanding. We’re the only ones left for a reason, so let’s take advantage of that, yeah? If you let me, I’ll take care of you.” 

You wouldn’t mind that. You wouldn’t mind that at all. You were an adrenaline junkie afterall, and what could be more adrenaline inducing than fucking a new-turned vampire?

“I think we could figure something out.”

[merwgue]

You thought I forgot? @naravelia

The Tamlin Mandela Effect: How Fandom’s Misremembering of Key Events is Turning into a Haters’ Anthem

There’s a peculiar phenomenon in the A Court of Thorns and Roses (ACOTAR) fandom that echoes something you might find more commonly in conspiracy theories or internet forums. It’s the Mandela Effect, named after an odd cognitive twist where people collectively misremember or distort facts—like a whole generation swearing that Nelson Mandela died in the 1980s, despite him actually living until 2013. But we’re not here to talk about Mandela (no, this is not that essay). We’re here to talk about how Tamlin, our misunderstood High Lord of the Spring Court, has been subjected to this exact effect. And it’s spiraling into disastrous consequences for his reputation in the fandom.

If you’ve spent more than five minutes on any ACOTAR discussion board, you’ve probably seen it. Tamlin haters, pitchforks in hand, rattle off the same tired arguments, claiming that he’s the worst villain in the series. “He sold Feyre’s sisters to Hybern!” they say, even though that literally didn’t happen. “He sexually assaulted Feyre Under the Mountain!” they continue, though that scene plays out very differently if you actually read it. It’s becoming a Herculean task to correct these misconceptions every single time someone drags Tamlin through the mud, but here we are, doing the Lord’s work.

Let’s dig into the mess, piece by piece, shall we?

The Non-Existent Sale of Feyre’s Sisters to Hybern: The Misinformation Continues

Here’s a hill people are dying on that is as fictitious as it is frustrating. There is this collective belief that Tamlin, in all his "evilness," sold Feyre’s sisters to Hybern in some dramatic betrayal. Let’s be real: if Tamlin were a sleazy car salesman in another life, he wouldn’t have any buyers. Because he didn’t “sell” anyone.

Let’s revisit the facts. Tamlin teamed up with Hybern in A Court of Mist and Fury out of desperation to get Feyre back. Was it the smartest move? No. Did he expect things to go smoothly without Hybern’s penchant for destruction taking the reins? Probably. But nowhere in the text does it indicate that Tamlin knowingly offered up Feyre’s sisters on a silver platter.

In fact, Tamlin seemed to have absolutely no idea that Elain and Nesta would be dragged into the mess. The King of Hybern double-crossed everyone, Tamlin included. Feyre’s sisters being thrown into the Cauldron was Hybern’s decision—not some malicious masterstroke from Tamlin’s end. This narrative where Tamlin is painted as the orchestrator of their suffering is wildly inaccurate. It’s like saying a passenger in a car crash is guilty of the accident. Was he complicit by being in the metaphorical car with Hybern? Sure. But did he plan for it to happen? Absolutely not.

And yet, despite this being pretty clear in the text, people still treat it as canon that Tamlin personally wrapped Feyre’s sisters up in pretty bows and delivered them to Hybern like Christmas gifts. The Mandela Effect strikes again.

The “Tamlin Assaulted Feyre Under the Mountain” Lie That Refuses to Die

This one is probably the most egregious example of people twisting canon to fit their own narrative. Now, look, I get it—Under the Mountain was a dark time for everyone. Emotions were high, trauma was rampant, and it was one hell of a mess. But this claim that Tamlin sexually assaulted Feyre during her time there? That’s not just a stretch—it’s an Olympic-level leap of inaccuracy.

Here’s what actually happened: Amarantha had Tamlin under her thumb. He was powerless, trying to bide his time and keep himself (and others) alive. Was he the best emotional support system for Feyre during this period? Absolutely not. Did he make questionable decisions? Yes. But at no point did Tamlin assault Feyre or take advantage of her.

The argument stems from a scene where Feyre, reeling from her third trial, is given a brief moment of respite with Tamlin. They have a charged, emotionally heightened interaction. It’s not comfortable, but it’s also not what people are accusing it of being. Tamlin is desperate, Feyre is desperate, and they’re both stuck in a situation with absolutely no control. If anything, it’s a moment that reflects the trauma of being trapped Under the Mountain—not a moment of assault. The fact that this narrative continues to be twisted into something more sinister is a disservice to both characters and to the complexity of trauma and survival.

Moreover, Feyre doesn’t feel violated by Tamlin in this moment. She doesn’t reflect on it later as assault. If Feyre, who narrates the entire series, doesn’t see it as such, why are we putting words in her mouth? The Mandela Effect here is just baffling—people are conflating Tamlin’s flaws with things that never actually happened. It’s like misremembering the plot of Titanic and insisting that Jack could have survived if only he’d kicked Rose off the door sooner. Except, you know, worse.

The Constant Gaslighting Narrative: Feyre’s Love for Rhysand Suddenly Erased All Else?

Perhaps the most absurd consequence of the Tamlin hate train is this retroactive gaslighting of Feyre’s own character. By the time we get to A Court of Frost and Starlight, Feyre casually drops that she’s loved Rhysand since Under the Mountain. Excuse me, what? Let’s go back to the text, shall we?

In ACOTAR, Feyre is doing everything in her power to save Tamlin—not Rhysand. In fact, Feyre hates Rhysand for most of that book (and rightly so). She is willing to sacrifice herself for Tamlin, to endure Amarantha’s torment because of the deep love she feels for him. The entire climax of the book hinges on Feyre’s determination to free Tamlin, not Rhysand.

But suddenly, we’re supposed to believe that she’s been in love with Rhysand this whole time? Yeah, no. That’s like claiming you’ve loved pizza your entire life but spent your formative years swearing you couldn’t stand the taste of cheese. It doesn’t add up. The revisionism here is frustrating because it attempts to erase Feyre’s complex feelings for Tamlin, reducing them to some passing crush while elevating her relationship with Rhysand to an almost predestined love story. It’s not only inaccurate; it’s unfair to the nuance of Feyre’s journey.

And for those who claim that Tamlin was manipulating Feyre from the start: let’s not pretend Rhysand wasn’t manipulative as well. Rhysand, for all his brooding High Lord charm, was hardly honest with Feyre at first. He didn’t tell her about the mate bond until after she’d fled the Spring Court, allowing her to suffer through an emotional tailspin in the meantime. If we’re going to talk about manipulation, let’s talk about it on both sides of the equation.

Tamlin’s Villain Arc: When Did Fandom Decide He’s the Devil Incarnate?

Let’s get one thing clear: Tamlin is not perfect. He has anger issues, control issues, and makes some boneheaded decisions. But turning him into the ultimate villain of the series is not just a misstep—it’s a full-blown mischaracterization.

Tamlin’s actions in A Court of Mist and Fury—his attempts to lock Feyre in the Spring Court, his alliance with Hybern—are not the actions of a villain, but of someone who is deeply flawed and unable to cope with the trauma he’s experienced. He is desperate to hold on to the one thing he thinks he can still control: Feyre. Is it right? Absolutely not. Is it a classic case of toxic masculinity and overprotection? Yes. But that doesn’t make him an evil character—it makes him a tragic one.

The fandom has somehow turned Tamlin into a one-dimensional antagonist, ignoring the deep trauma he’s endured and the complicated reasons behind his actions. People seem to forget that Tamlin genuinely cared for Feyre—enough to let her go at the end of ACOTAR. That’s not something a villain would do. Villains don’t sacrifice their happiness for the well-being of others, but Tamlin did. He wanted Feyre to be happy, even if it wasn’t with him.

But thanks to the Mandela Effect of the fandom, Tamlin’s complexity has been erased, replaced with a caricature of a monster. Every time someone falsely claims that Tamlin sold Feyre’s sisters, or assaulted her, or that he’s some irredeemable villain, it becomes harder and harder to pull the conversation back to reality. The narrative has been hijacked by misinformation and misremembering, and the truth is becoming increasingly difficult to find.

The Lord’s Work: Fighting Misinformation One Comment at a Time

At this point, defending Tamlin’s character feels like doing the Lord’s work. The sheer volume of misinformation being spread about him is staggering. And every time someone presents an accurate, well-reasoned argument about what really happened in the series, they’re met with a wall of denial from those who have bought into the Mandela Effect narrative.

It’s exhausting, and yet it’s necessary. Because if we don't keep correcting these misconceptions, the narrative only gets more distorted. The truth gets buried under layers of fan-driven exaggeration, selective memory, and willful ignorance. It’s as if every time someone tries to present a factual argument, they're drowned out by a chorus of “But Tamlin sold Feyre’s sisters!” or “He assaulted her!”—as though saying it louder makes it more true.

Yet, here we are, repeating ourselves like broken records, diligently doing the work to remind people of the actual storyline. Is it thankless? Sure. Is it worth it? Absolutely. Because when the truth is at stake, when a character as complex and tragic as Tamlin is being reduced to an easy-to-hate villain, it’s our responsibility to keep the conversation grounded in fact.

Why Do People Cling to These Misconceptions?

Here’s where it gets a bit more philosophical. Why, despite the evidence in the text, do so many fans persist in demonizing Tamlin and clinging to false narratives? The answer, I think, lies in the very nature of fandoms themselves.

Fandoms are not just about the source material—they’re about how people feel about the source material. And feelings, as we all know, are not bound by logic or facts. For many readers, Tamlin represents a particular archetype of toxic masculinity—one that they’re all too familiar with in the real world. When they see Tamlin’s controlling behavior, his anger, and his mistakes, it triggers a visceral reaction. He becomes, in their minds, the embodiment of every harmful, controlling man they’ve encountered or heard about.

Rhysand, by contrast, is portrayed as the perfect “feminist” male hero—someone who respects Feyre’s autonomy, who lifts her up instead of controlling her. It’s easy to see why readers gravitate toward Rhysand and against Tamlin, even when the actual story is far more nuanced.

The problem, of course, is that Tamlin isn’t just an archetype. He’s a fully fleshed-out character with his own trauma, motivations, and flaws. But once a fandom has decided that a character is “bad,” it’s incredibly hard to change that perception, even with cold, hard facts.

The Real Tragedy: A Missed Opportunity for Redemption

What makes this whole Mandela Effect situation even more tragic is that it closes the door on one of the most interesting possibilities in the ACOTAR series: Tamlin’s redemption.

Tamlin is a character who has made mistakes, yes—but so has every major character in the series. Feyre herself is no saint; Rhysand’s hands aren’t exactly clean either. Yet these characters are given the chance to grow, to learn from their mistakes, and to become better versions of themselves. Tamlin, on the other hand, is left to wallow in his misery, largely abandoned by both the narrative and the fandom.

Imagine if the fandom allowed Tamlin the same grace they allow other characters. Imagine if, instead of reducing him to a one-note villain, they embraced the possibility of redemption. Tamlin’s arc could be one of the most powerful in the series—a story about a broken man learning to rebuild himself, about a leader who learns to lead with compassion instead of fear. But as long as the Mandela Effect continues to distort his actions and his character, that possibility remains out of reach.

Conclusion: The Battle Continues

In the end, fighting the Mandela Effect surrounding Tamlin is an uphill battle. It’s frustrating, it’s repetitive, and at times it feels hopeless. But it’s also necessary. Because Tamlin, for all his flaws, deserves better than the treatment he’s received from large swaths of the fandom.

He didn’t sell Feyre’s sisters. He didn’t assault her Under the Mountain. He’s not the devil incarnate. He’s a deeply flawed, deeply human (or, well, fae) character who made mistakes but also showed moments of love, sacrifice, and growth.

So here we are, doing the Lord’s work, repeating the same truths over and over again, hoping that someday the message will finally stick. Because Tamlin’s story is not one of villainy—it’s one of tragedy. And it’s time the fandom started treating it that way.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Notes: Self-Editing

Take a Break Before Editing

One of the most effective self-editing techniques is to distance yourself from your writing before diving into the editing process. After completing your draft, give yourself some time away from the text – a few hours, a day, or even longer if possible. This break provides a fresh perspective, allowing you to approach your work with a more critical eye.

Read Aloud

Engage your auditory senses by reading your work aloud. This not only helps identify grammatical errors and awkward phrasing but also allows you to assess the overall flow and rhythm of your writing. Awkward sentences are more apparent when heard.

Focus on One Element at a Time

To avoid feeling overwhelmed during the self-editing process, concentrate on specific elements in each round. Start by checking for grammatical errors and punctuation, then move on to sentence structure, coherence, and finally, style. This systematic approach ensures a thorough examination of your writing.

Add Dimensions

After you are finished with your first draft, flip to the beginning and start anew. As you write and edit more of your story, you may add different aspects to a character that might need to be mentioned in a section you already edited. You might add a part of the plot that should be alluded to earlier in your book.

Fill in the Gaps

Re-reading your first draft might reveal plot holes that will be addressed via revisions. It may expose logical inconsistencies that must be buttressed with enhanced detail. If you, as the author, know a lot of details about a character’s backstory, make sure your reader does as well.

Mend Character Arcs

Audiences want engaging plots, but they also want detailed characters who undergo change during the events of a story. Use a second draft to make sure that your main character and key supporting characters follow consistent character arcs that take them on a journey over the course of the story. If your story is told through first person point of view (POV), this will be even more important as it will also affect the story’s narration.

Track the Pacing of your Story

Find ways to space out your story points so that every section of your novel is equally compelling and nothing feels shoehorned in.

Clean up Cosmetic Errors

When some first time writers think of the editing process, they mainly think of corrections to grammar, spelling, syntax, and punctuation. These elements are certainly important but such edits tend to come toward the end of the process. Obviously no book will go out for hard copy publication without proofreading for typos and grammatical errors, but in the early rounds of revising, direct most of your energy toward story and character. If you consider yourself a good writer who simply isn’t strong on elements like spelling, grammar, and punctuation, consider hiring an outside proofreader to help you with this part of the writing process.

Inject Variety

The best novels and short stories contain ample variety, no matter how long or short the entire manuscript may be. Look for ways to inject variety into your sentence structure, your narrative events, your dialogue, and your descriptive language. You never want a reader to feel like s/he’s already read a carbon copy of a certain scene from a few chapters back.

Check for Consistency

Consistency is key to maintaining a professional and polished tone in your writing. Ensure that your language, formatting, and style choices remain consistent throughout your piece. Inconsistencies can distract the reader and diminish the overall impact of your work.

Eliminate Redundancies

Effective communication is concise and to the point. During the self-editing phase, be vigilant in identifying and eliminating redundancies. Repetitive phrases and unnecessary words can dilute your message and hinder clarity.

Verify Facts and Information

If your writing incorporates facts, figures, or data, double-check the accuracy of your information. Providing accurate and up-to-date information enhances your credibility as a writer. Cross-referencing your sources during the self-editing process ensures the reliability of your content.

Consider Your Audience

Keep your target audience in mind during the self-editing process. Ensure that your language, tone, and examples are tailored to resonate with your intended readership. This step is crucial for creating a connection with your audience and enhancing the overall impact of your writing.

Utilise Editing Tools

Take advantage of the various editing tools available to writers. Spell and grammar checkers, and style guides can serve as valuable companions during the self-editing journey. However, remember that these tools are aids, not substitutes, for your critical evaluation.

Seek Feedback

Engage with others to gain fresh perspectives on your writing. Peer reviews or feedback from mentors can offer valuable insights that you might have overlooked. Embrace constructive criticism and use it to refine your work further.

Be Ruthless with Revisions

Effective self-editing requires a degree of ruthlessness. Don’t be afraid to cut or rewrite sections that do not contribute to the overall strength of your piece. Trim excess words, tighten sentences, and ensure that every element serves a purpose.

Sources: 1 2 3 4 ⚜ More: Writing Notes & References ⚜ On Editing

[lune-moon-nuit]

A post to read and share absolutely

The media are lying about the Freedom Flotilla and Rima Hassan.

Let’s set the record straight against the echo chambers of genocide apologists saturating television and radio. For over 30 hours now, Netanyahu and the genocidal Israeli government have been forcibly detaining MEP Rima Hassan and three French nationals. They were illegally arrested despite the United Nations demanding a safe and secure passage for the Freedom Flotilla on its way to Gaza. This ship's mission was to break the blockade that is starving the people of Gaza.

The genocidal Israeli government is now imposing an intolerable and illegal condition for the release of Rima Hassan and the French citizens: they are being pressured to sign a document stating that they entered Israeli territory illegally. Rightfully, Rima Hassan and the French nationals have refused to sign this false document.

It is false because they did not enter Israeli territory illegally. They were illegally intercepted in international waters as they approached Palestinian territory and its maritime zone, which is itself illegally controlled and occupied by the Israeli state.

Mainstream media are repeating Netanyahu’s propaganda talking points word for word. They refer to the Flotilla as a “cruise,” they call it a “PR stunt” in an attempt to downplay the immense courage behind the Freedom Flotilla. Some even go as far as to claim that Rima Hassan does not wish to be expatriated and is refusing repatriation. None of this is true. They are lying live on air. They are carrying out the same mass disinformation campaign that has been ongoing for more than 20 months in an effort to erase the reality of the genocide. They are complicit.

And Emmanuel Macron is complicit too. Why hasn’t he condemned this illegal arrest even once? Why is he allowing French citizens to be illegally detained by a genocidal government?

The answer is quite clear: Just last week, he approved the delivery of fourteen tons of French-made assault rifle components to an Israeli arms manufacturer.

In short: French ammunition is killing Palestinians while France allows its own citizens to languish in Israeli detention centers—facilities that have already been condemned by the UN for multiple human rights violations.

Rima Hassan and the French citizens must be released immediately and unconditionally.

As a French citizen, I can testify that the majority of the French population supports Palestine and condemns Israel. The results of the surprise legislative elections imposed by Macron a year ago confirm this. Those elections were won by a coalition of left-wing parties, including La France Insoumise—of which Rima Hassan is a member—as well as the Greens.

Unfortunately, Macron, dishonest and driven by a fragile ego, never accepted this defeat. He appointed only right-wing politicians with far-right mindsets as ministers. He would rather let someone like Hitler stay in power than allow a single victorious left-wing MP from the last elections to become a minister.

Moreover, since Macron’s first election in 2017, all the major corporations and media outlets have been privatized and are now controlled by right-wing, far-right, and particularly Zionist billionaires and millionaires (like Vincent Bolloré or Bernard Arnault to name just two). As a result, French mainstream media have increasingly—and alarmingly—turned into pure propaganda machines serving the bourgeois, promoting racist, Zionist, and especially Islamophobic narratives.

They do not hesitate to scapegoat Muslims—especially veiled Muslim women—in order to distract public attention and blame them for all of France’s problems, problems which are in fact caused by the same capitalist bourgeois elites who continue to impoverish the working class to enrich themselves further. They have clearly taken a page from the playbook of Trumpism (and Hitler's nazism).

Since October 7th, their Zionist propaganda has been relentless. Macron even allowed Netanyahu to spew his propaganda during the week of June 6, 2024—daring to exploit the memory of France’s occupation and D-Day to weaponize Holocaust trauma and justify his ongoing genocide by portraying himself as a victim. I have never felt so insulted as a French citizen as I did that day.

Macron has allowed Zionist propaganda to dominate all private and mainstream media outlets. Peaceful, non-violent pro-Palestinian protesters denouncing the genocide are violently arrested by police forces, whose brutality continues to go unchecked. Netanyahu is allowed to fly through French airspace even though he is under international arrest warrant, and France is legally required to arrest him. Instead, they sell him weapons.

I don’t even have the words to fully express the disgust and humiliation this man makes us, the French people, endure. If you believe this government represents its people, I swear to you—it does not.

We are trying to fight every single day, even though we are beaten down, growing poorer, losing more and more of our social protections, getting arrested for protesting. Racism and homophobia are becoming normalized because of their propaganda.

Of course, Rima Hassan has been their enemy from the start. As a Franco-Palestinian MEP, she possesses an intimate and complete understanding of the Israeli genocide and the Zionist propaganda that has existed since 1948. Coming from a Palestinian family of survivors and resisters, it is obvious why she would threaten an entire system built on bourgeois Zionist interests.

They have always tried to silence her, to discredit her. But what they didn’t anticipate was that, by joining the Freedom Flotilla, Rima would expose the contradictions in Israel’s and Zionism’s false narratives and propaganda.

Israel and Zionists claimed that it was Hamas who was blocking the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza. But when humanitarian aid comes by sailboat, they themselves prevent its arrival and arrest those involved—without any legal or valid justification, and in international waters.

Since yesterday, thousands of people have been protesting across France, especially in Paris. Some have set up tents in Place de la République, declaring that they will not leave until the blockade is lifted and Rima, along with the others, is fully and unconditionally released.

They are exposing the cognitive dissonance between Zionist propaganda and Israel’s actual actions. This will help awaken those who hadn’t yet paid close enough attention to realize the gravity and urgency of what is unfolding.

The reason why the bourgeoisie, the media, and right- and far-right political figures participating in the Zionist propaganda system harbor such intense hatred toward Rima Hassan right now is not only because, alongside the Freedom Flotilla team—including Greta Thunberg—she has once again brought the spotlight back onto Gaza, but also because Rima, like Palestine itself, is becoming a symbol. A symbol not only of the movement to end the genocide perpetrated by Israel, but of the broader fight to dismantle the colonial, far-right, racist, and capitalist system these people represent.

If Israel loses, they lose as well.

At every rally I’ve attended over the past 19 months, at every uprising against any form of oppression, every time the state has chosen to serve the destruction of the planet, to kill our children, to violate the rights of migrants, of women, of minorities—anywhere in the world—whether I was there in person or witnessing it through images: I saw keffiyehs.

And this is only the beginning.

They know they’ve already lost. This unleashed, frenzied violence we see everywhere marks the end of a system. They can feel it—and they are afraid.

When words no longer suffice, when their ideas no longer hold, all they have left is barbarity.

They have lost.

Every new victim, every mutilated and emaciated body only lengthens the already endless list of their crimes.

It’s over.

They have lost everything—starting with their souls.

Free Palestine, free world. We are all children of Gaza.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Hello there! I've been subscribed to your blog for a long time; I remember loving your writing and theories! And even though I haven't played for 2 years, last week twst nostalgia suddenly hit me and I've started rewatching main story of the game :D (Though I haven't read it all still...). It made me think about something, and I'd like to see your opinion on the matter if that's alright. If something similar was already asked and I missed that, please feel free to ignore my message.

So, hypothetically speaking, if a NRC student gets bullied and asks Azul for help to deal with bullies, is there a chance that, considering his backstory, he might be a liiiitle bit more lenient and prone to name the price for his services lesser than he usually sets? Or do you believe it depends too much on what kind of relationship he and the person asking him for help have? (For example, Azul will be lenient only if he and that person are good acquaintances, or have some kind of pre-established rapport at least maybe?). What kind of other factors could contribute in this as well? I hope my question is understandable and coherent enough, I am not a native English speaker >< Have a lovely day!

Ayyy, welcome back ^^

As for your question… I don’t think Azul would be more lenient with a client that is a victim of bullying. There’s several reasons I feel this way:

1. It sets a bad precedent. If Azul is “soft” with one client, there’s a chance word will spread and other clients will start demanding he lower the costs for them too. People will come in with all the wrong expectations. It’s the whole “give them an inch and they’ll walk a mile” thing. This would make future deals unnecessarily annoying.

2. It messes with his carefully cultivated image. He’s supposed to be impartial with each and every single one of his clients. What does it say about him if he breaks this clause? Azul will come off as unprofessional, biased, and even weak. Like what if someone hears about the deal he cut with the bullying victim because he pities them? Azul wants to come off as tough, not sentimental. And if he comes off as sentimental, what’s stopping others from digging deeper into him and trying to locate other insecurities and weak points?

3. Azul has already demonstrated that he gives no mercy to those similar to him. He believes that his past self is weak and pathetic, hence why he tries so desperately to erase his past. Azul has also developed into a bully and an opportunist himself in modern day. This leads me to think that if he were to come across someone similar to his past self, he’d think them easily exploitable instead of someone he should support. We see this implied in his dynamic with Yuuta Mito, the Yuu for the Episode of Octavinelle manga. Although not explicitly pointed out in the narrative, we do see many parallels between Yuuta and past!Azul: they’re overweight, have a parent that runs a restaurant, and love eating good food. Even if Azul isn’t familiar with the particulars of Yuuta’s background, the fact remains that 1) he can relate to Yuuta based on physique alone and 2) Yuuta would have experienced similar bullying by mobs (and arguably Ace, Riddle, etc.) that game!Yuu does; these are both very similar to Azul’s own experiences. But what happens? Azul still doesn’t cut Yuuta any slack and is willing to make him go homeless anyway.

4. Even without his childhood trauma, he does not seem to spare others. In his book 7, we see a potential scenario in which Azul was never bullied as a child. Despite this happier background, Azul still chooses to bully land dwellers (land dwellers that, mind you, did/said nothing to provoke him or to warrant this treatment).

5 Azul is primarily concerned with accumulating things of value for himself. Greed is a huge aspect of his character (especially if we’re talking pre-OB era Azul); having all his contracts sanded is, after all, what triggers his OB. I think he’d be much less concerned with the circumstances of others.

If it sounds like I’m overthinking this, it’s because I am 😂 and because Azul, too, overthinks + considers the future in decisions he makes in the present. For example, he refuses to sign any contracts until he has read it over multiple times and understands all of its terms and conditions, such as the NDA in book 6. He also refuses to accept extremely valuable clothes because he worries he will be put in a position where he owes someone else an immense debt (in Tapis Rouge/Red Carpet Cadets). Overthinking IS Azul’s modus operandi.

If we want to consider other factors, personal familiarity with the client is definitely one—but I don’t mean it as in, “he’d be more lenient with a friend”. I mean it like, “he would cut a kinder deal with a repeat customer”. You know, to thank them for their business and to incentivize them to keep coming back.

Other factors to consider (although by no means is this an exhaustive list) might be:

Number of bullies that need to be “dealt with” (more bullies -> higher payment demanded)

Severity of bullying (just some name calling would be less effort to fix; this would not be so if the bullying was much more intense)

Form of bullying (verbal, physical, cyber, etc.; this would impact just how much effort, and what kind of it, Azul has to apply to solve the issue)

Identity of the bullies (if it’s an Octavinelle student or a freshman, they may be easier for Azul to intimidate; if the bullies are wealthy/powerful or of high status, like a dorm leader, they would be harder to deal with)

Client’s requests (what do they actually want, in terms of “dealing” with the bullies?)

Client’s desperation (Azul could milk this to get more payment out of them)

[liedownquisition]

Hi, Hello, and welcome to:

Snowbirds Don't Fly is Kind of Good, Actually, and You Should Read it and Rethink Your Biases About The Story It's Telling You

By yours truly.

OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER: now like a lot of people who read older comics, I do have my beefs with dear ol' Denny, but there are a handful of things that your criticism starts to teeter into more than a little bit of a red flag. I'm going to discuss why that is, alongside why I think more people need to learn the core message of this arc.

I HIGHLY encourage people to read Green Lantern/Green Arrow #85-86, which depending on where you read might just be listed as part of the Green Lantern (1960) series because it is in fact technically part of that.

And when you do so I want you to actually read what's being said in the comic, in particular I want you to read Roy's lines. Because it is so, so important to acknowledge that, as a whole, this particular arc SIDES WITH HIM. Which is, honestly incredible.

Like, guys, I'm not going to say you're wrong when you say this is an anti-drugs PSA. I'm saying that if you read this comic and saw it only as an avenue for the "War on Drugs" then I'm not sure you really processed some of the messages in this comic. Because most War on Drugs propaganda is NOT interested in empathizing with the addicts in question, and encourages isolating them ("Just say no, and stop hanging out with people like that" being a familiar refrain from school assemblies over the years.)

Listen, I'm American, I've been having anti-drug PSAs preached at me my whole life. War on Drugs all around me. Grew up in somewhat poorer neighborhoods, literally was told to my face by multiple people that they were surprised how well I turned out because they thought that despite everything I was going to grow up to become a "drug whore." I'm not fucking joking about that one. I had family members say that to me, even.

Anyways, just, keep that in mind. I grew up around dealers and addicts and I have a lot of feelings about their portrayals in media. This whole thing was originally going to be part of a different media but it's probably best to split it up this way anyways.

TW: Slurs, drugs (obviously)

SO, without further ado,

Dennis O'Neil, in addition to comics, has a background in Journalism and some investment in social activism. He actively stated that he thought that he could use this in his comics, especially because, at the time, Green Lantern comics were potentially getting cancelled so he had a bit more freedom to do whatever he wanted. Basically, if it flopped in a probably-cancelled comic anyways, nobody had anything to lose. Think something along the lines of that Flinstones Comic by Mark Russel and Steve Pugh.

Ignore the goddamned cover, it's sensationalist and meant to get your attention, and it does the job. READ the WORDS. The above image is straight off the first page of the book. O'Neil takes off running with the utmost of compassion for the addicts in question, emphasizing their humanity, their mistreatment, and their suffering.

Now, lets be realistic with ourselves: Not every addict is so nobly tragic* as are depicted in Adams & O'Neil's story, but if you've heard people talk about addicts, both then and now, you'd know that it really does mean a lot that they come into this from an empathetic angle. *Yes I'm aware that I called them "nobly tragic" despite actively betraying Ollie & Hal and helping to drug them & leaving them to get caught by the cops while drugged up. Though they do express some hesitation at different parts along the way. The fact of the matter is people often ascribe a certain "nobility" to "victims" that they have enough distance from - whether by them being fictional or by not knowing them personally or changing their narratives after people's deaths to support themselves. in real life it's not uncommon for victims to be unpleasant to be around, they can also be perfectly pleasant people. They're human, and humans cover the whole range of personality and experience. Even if they are not "noble" & even if you do not have that distance, they deserve dignity.

Now, while our first introduction to the addicts (who we don't immediately know are that) they are trying to mug Ollie for money for dope (the dope part is implied). The second time we're introduced to one, however...

We are immediately thrust into the struggle of: quitting. Not using, but how difficult it is to quit. That's the worst part. This won't be the last time we discuss this.

Now, this is an arc where we see Green Arrow, who's typically the more liberal voice voice to Hal's politically neutral straight man, but I have to admit that as a Flawed Ollie enjoyer, I like to see him make a mistake, and he makes a LOT of them here. He is, in particular, harsher with the kids than he should be, and he holds a very very common position of seeing addicts simultaneously as "victims" of their dealers, while also refusing to sympathize with them.

The world is hard for everyone, why can't they Just Say No?

Up to this point, we're looking at pretty standard War on Drugs-style propaganda. But near the end of the story in #85 and for the bulk of #86, this is where I'm going to flat out say that the most important voice in this entire comic, is Roy's.

Roy doesn't at any point hesitate to stand up for himself (verbally) and call his generally well-meaning guardian out for his bling hypocrisy and ignorance. We see that neglect and loneliness led him here, but lets go back a bit and look at the reasons from a few of the other addicts:

Discrimination, cruelty, a need for an "escape." Any even mildly sympathetic media will have addicts explain that's their motivation, and I worry sometimes that people hear this and don't process it, because it's only one part of the circumstances that lead them there. the War On Drugs not only took the people who needed the "escape" the most and shoved at them a bad "solution" then imprisoned and profited off them.

From here we go back into Green Arrow's flawed logic:

He's a good, flawed man. He's like many parents who bring up their kids a certain way, a way they think is right perhaps because it's not unlike how THEY were brought up and absolutely missing the ways that they're harming them. Ollie will eventually see the error of his ways and regret these mistakes, but they're very common and very mundane flaws for him to have.

Alright, I'll admit I included this page mostly because that composition makes me giddy. Like, holy SHIT that's gorgeous. And now we are once again introduced to the idea of the struggle we were shown at the beginning: Quitting Cold Turkey.

It's extremely painful. It's dangerous. It could potentially even kill you as sure as the dope does. This is not something for everyone, and definitely not something to handle alone, which Hal himself expresses some uncertainties over, before inquiring what led Roy to this.

Is he wrong? Are the things he's saying any less true now than they were back then?

Even now there is plenty of pro-war propaganda (Just the other day I overheard someone talking about how their grandfather was in a war "Not World War 2, but one of the other Good Ones."). Even know there's lots of explicit and implicit racism that is treated as if it's justified and really MEANS anything about our humanity (Immigration/border control/ect). Even now we have people who believe that wealth is a measure of a man's worth to society or that it makes them inherently better (... I mean, I don't think I have to explain this one).

Hell, this doesn't even touch on gender (Whether discussing strictly feminism or if it's a trans issue) or sexuality or ableism (Whether physical or mental). Do you know how many people I've heard tell me they won't go to a therapist because they don't want to be reliant on a drug that might get prescribed to them? (ignoring the distinction between different branches of the psych field here, they never know the difference)

These are all things that get parroted to kids. We've seen the rising resurgence of gender essentialism, we've SEEN the rise of neo-nazi-ism, and TERFdom, and all these extremist views and movements and they ALL originate in the exact same place.

"What does that have to do with drugs?"

It's the same story. They're dismissed, they're disdained, they're not treated as equal living and learnign human beings. They are TOLD but they are not EDUCATED and they aren't treated with the kind of respect that leads them to think that they can even believe adults when they ARE being taught.

That neglect will be filled, whether by ideological groups preying on the vulnerable or by drugs or something else.

And here we meet our villain. We see society tossing the children away... and a man profiting off their despair. A CEO of a pharmaceutical company, even. Though, that's not really revealed until a few pages later.

... I'm so obsessed with this page you guys have no idea.

Our villain could have been a foreigner, a slumlord, a stereotypical drug kingpin, but it's not. It's a man with an abundance of wealth and a pristine reputation. A man so well known that he's on TV.

Denny O'Niel may or may not have known about the deliberate efforts to put drugs into black communities and prosecute them for them, but he clearly did see that the root of the issue was NOT someone among them, but something that someone else who could exploit them was bringing down to them.

Bringing this back to the dismissal of the youth and Roy's voice being the single-most important one in the story. Roy explicitly states that he only made it because he had support. Kicking a habit when you're on your own isn't impossible, but it's sure as hell not that far off. And, as I've mentioned, going "cold turkey" can also be deadly.

Now, yes, we have managed to create pharmaceuticals that can be useful for getting people off the harder drugs, and sometimes you can even find it for fairly "cheap"... but in our current day and age I don't think I should have to explain how predatory "Big Pharma" (and the health insurance industry) tends to be for those who have a need.

Like many things these days, even something like a rehab center is an industry - largely for profit, and the ones that aren't are often religiously and ideologically motivated. Even THOSE have issues that many result in incredibly dehumanizing conditions. (I was trying to find an article I read a while back including a few interviews from people discussing the conditions and treatment they faced while in rehab to link here, but I can't seem to find it. Must've gotten lost in all my other links and bookmarks.)

Despite there being places online you can look for how to spot a bad rehab center, the fact that these places will continue to exist with bad treatment methods and a complete lack of regulation and many people fall prey to them especially because they don't know to look for this stuff remains. Even still, and this particular one might be a bit outdated, It's not fully understood how best to treat addiction, especially since the one thing we do know of for absolute certain is that it has to be judged on a case-by-case basis. Though there have been good outcomes recently using MORE.

Social stigma and discrimination Including in media and news journalism plays a huge role in perpetuating these systems. And most people have this mentality of thinking it can be "cured", rather than being a chronic disorder with a management system. Here's another page discussing addiction treatments. Have I made my point yet?

My point is that this comic only reads as war on drugs propaganda if you're only listening to Ollie, who is FREQUENTLY being challenged on this throughout the entire arc by every person around him. Ollie in this is someone who has heard and fully bought into the propaganda, despite being a good person who typically tries to help those in need, He Is Not Immune To Propaganda.

There is a reason that this comic starts with a statement emphasizing that the story is about humans being mistreated, and ends with Roy calling Ollie out.

Ollie comes away from this with a changed perspective. It's not outright stated at this point but it's strongly implied because of how proud he is at the end there, and the ways he tries to repair his relationship with Roy down the line without (mostly) being too overbearing.

I would definitely say the worst part of this comic is that the solution our "hero" (Roy) uses is going cold turkey, which is a miserable, godawful, and dangerous experience. I will allow some forgiveness because it's likely that better addiction treatments weren't well understood back then.

So, in conclusion, Denny O'Neil is not without faults, but if you're issue with his works are "He wrote one of the most human-focused anti-drug propaganda pieces of his time, if not also compared to a lot of our time as well" or "He incorporated a lot of social justice topics into his comics" then I genuinely think you need to reevaluate yourself. Maybe he's a little heavy-handed with it, but have you SEEN people's reading comprehension even TODAY?

Sometimes a heavy hand reminding you that other people are human too, and you need to face the "ugliness" of our society and how it treats them and how YOU treat and think about them is the kind of kick in the ass people need.

I'm not even mad that they used Roy, because nobody is above addiction - not even a hero. It doesn't ruin him, because addicts aren't ruined. It's interesting and dynamic. If later writers take this history and write dehumanizing storyline that frame Roy as the villain of his own addiction, that's their biases, not the original story.

Anyways, ending this on my favorite moment that's not fully relevant but not irrelevant, from Justice League of America (2006) #7:

[meanbossart]

Hellow

I was catching up with the latest chapters of ANE before reading The Spice™️ and I was reminded of how well you build and describe the environment surrounding your characters. Which prompts me to ask:

1 Do you have any drawings/sketches of landscapes and places from ANE that you can/would like to share?

2 Any advice for someone (me) that isn’t really good at putting their characters in places? I always end up with either a ‘too crowded’ or a ‘too barren’ of a setting.

Thank you for reading and hopefully answering my questions byee:3

Hello!!

Thank you! I have no idea what I'm doing so I'm glad I'm able to paint a good enough picture 😅

I do have two VERY simple sketches of the house of blood/the compound that I made to compare against my boyfriend's mental picture of it, basically to see how well I had been able to describe it since it's by far the most challenging area to put down into text.

(everything is very boxy and not exactly the ideal proportion, but again, this was a very simple sketch I made to "aid" the descriptions rather than for it to stand on its own at all) Here you see the "apple core" of the hive with the drow settlement and all the precarious platforms that interconnect and spring out of it. The cabins you see are sometimes two stories high so the area us actually quite big! Which is how Do'zynge is able to walk across the support-beams on the underside of said platforms even though he's rather large for a drider. The catwalk pictured can be moved up and down to connect people to different floors a little faster.

Here's a similar sketch based off of an specific scene, this one focuses more on the walkways built into the walls. I'm not sure why I huddled the doors together so much, they should definitely be more spaced out.

Also, while I used the same shorthand for everything, the spawn living spaces are all wood and stone - from the doors to the floor and railings. While the drow settlement (where Dalyria is too) is mostly metal and well structured tents.

For your second question, that's rough because I am also never quite satisfied with my descriptions 😂but I think that's a part of it; you need to make peace with the fact that you will NOT be able to paint a perfect picture, and think of the whole process as less of a job that you must do alone, but rather a collaboration between you and the reader's own creativity! You have to be willing to put some of the onus on them to imagine what it is you're trying to transcribe, instead feeling under the obligation of giving them exact descriptions for every little thing.

I try to use words that evoke a specific style and mood - say that the room is ornamental, warm, say that it's all golden and red and six sentences from now mention that the couch your character sat in is velvety. Reveal things as they come into relevance instead of interrupting the pace for two entire paragraphs to describe the room your characters just walked into - when appropriate, consider what they would even pay attention to at all and maybe limit yourself to it. Set a rough base for your environment at the start of a scene and then sprinkle descriptors in throughout the prose, and always consider if you truly NEED to get into the specifics of something or if the reader can be left to their own imaginative devices.

Also, unless necessary or some sort of plot device, I find that trying to establish where things are in a room (doors, furniture, stairs) in a map-like manner is a waste of time. Just say "behind him", "to her left", "right ahead", I don't think being overly specific benefits anybody - your reader picturing this set of stairs facing the west rather than the east is unlikely to be consequential to your narrative.

That being said, don't shy away from pointing "unnecessary" things out when they help set a mood, or help in characterization. Way early in ANE there's a scene where DU drow walks into the room where him, Astarion, and Shadowheart have been staying and are now about to leave, he takes note of the fact that one of them made the bed - he doesn't say who, besides that it wasn't himself, but I put that there to hopefully establish from early on that one character's priorities had started to change. In the compound, Dalyria is described as collecting useless things she found in the underground and displaying them around the office - this, on top of her new look, outfit, and company should paint a picture. Irennor's living situation should say all there is to know about him, and the way DU drow dismantles his belongings after only what is immediately valuable instead of considering the historical significance of anything says something about him, too. That's my favorite way of setting scenes, by finding out how to say something about the people in it.

[hrizantemy]

I just realised something... When Reese's cup was trying to find ways to save Feyre, he first went to Hellion and asked him to search his libraries. At first thought makes sense, until you remember that Thesan is the best healer in Prythian. Did they ever ask the dawn court to help? If so, why not? Why go to librarians over doctors? Some of the best doctors no less. I want to say that he's being stupid, but I think that calling either him or feyre stupid/naive takes away from their characters.

Excusing Rhysand's horrible behaviour because 'he suffered for his friends and family and city' doesn't make him a good ruler. It makes him a good friend (even though the IC's interpersonal relationships are hella toxic, but you can still love someone or be toxic, despite that) but, he still rules over the Hewn city and Illyria too. Managing a part of your territory but not all isn't how an effective ruler works. In fact, history shows that sometimes the worst people can be the best rulers, and vice versa. The argument also doesn't really hold up when looking at his words and actions. Good people don't decide that an entire community of people are bad, and thus deserve to be treated well. He can't be morally grey because then he isn't a good a person.

Using Feyre's age as an excuse for the things she does doesn't support any argument in her defence. 'Feyre is young and doesn't know the intricacies of governing, so obviously she can't take an active role improving the Hewn City and Illyria'. Well, then she isn't as perfect for the position as her stans make her out to be. Using the same excuse for why her destroying the spring court and facing no punishment is okay meets the same issues. It doesn't make her this strong, capable woman getting her lick back. She isn't cunning or powerful. She's a liability. If she's so young and naive that she'll pull stunts like that with no care for the repercussions, then she isn't someone who can be trusted with information of any kind, because if she takes it badly or doesn't like it, she'll throw a fit, because she doesn't know better.

I'm not sure if you've read marvel comics or seen the animated series, but it feels like Rhys is trying to be somewhat like Dr Doom. He's the genius ruler of a country called Latveria, and his whole shtick is that he somehow saw the future. But in that future, humanity always ended up destroying themselves or being destroyed by someone else if he wasn't ruling it, thus began his constant campaign to rule the world. He's a terrible person, without question, and absolutely a dictator. Free speech, and right to protest aren't a thing there (but they also don't exist in the night court, so meh). However, while it does depend largely on the writer of any given story, his people don't starve. For the most part, they have a decent quality of life. What makes doom interesting where Rhysand is more annoying is that nobody pretends he's a good person, or a benevolent ruler. His people don't starve, which is more than can be said for other countries in the MCU or even other courts in Prythian. But he's still an awful person, and the stories lean into that. They don't argue that 'oh, his people don't starve, and he loves them, so cut him some slack' the way people make similar arguments for Rhys. That's part of what makes Rhys less interesting and more insufferable.

Rhysand: The Propaganda Prince Who Thinks He’s a God

Rhysand is marketed—both in-universe and by the fandom—as the ideal ruler, the dream man, the morally grey prince who sacrificed everything for his people. But the cracks in this narrative are more than superficial—they’re structural. And what becomes increasingly frustrating isn’t just Rhysand’s behavior itself, but the way the story bends to make him always right, always justified, always the victim or savior, never the villain.

Let’s talk more about the Hellion vs. Thesan issue, because this is the perfect microcosm of the problem. Feyre is pregnant and dying. Rhysand’s first reaction is to go to Hellion—yes, a High Lord of great magical knowledge, but not a healer. Not a physician. He chose dusty books over living experts. He chose a man whose court is about power and indulgence over the one dedicated to healing and medicine.

And that’s where it gets real: Rhysand doesn’t want help. He wants control. Thesan might offer real solutions, but they would come with accountability, with oversight, with humility. Rhys wants the solution, but only if it’s his solution. He only asks for help when it reinforces his superiority.

Compare that to characters like Lucien, who gets villainized for surviving abuse, not groveling for forgiveness fast enough, and existing with a moral compass that doesn’t align with the IC. Lucien doesn’t rule anyone, doesn’t hold immense power, and yet gets more criticism from fans and characters alike than Rhys ever does.

Even Tamlin, who is undeniably flawed, was allowed to be challenged by the narrative. His arc showed consequences. He fell. He was wrong. Rhysand? Rhys can lie to Feyre’s face, hide life-threatening information from her, isolate her from her sisters, make military decisions that result in cultural genocide (yes, I’m talking about Illyria), and still be treated like the golden boy.

The bar is so low it’s underground, but only for him.

Let’s also talk about Nesta, who arguably has the most realistic and meaningful arc in the series. She’s messy, she’s angry, she lashes out—but she grows. She’s punished, yes, but she’s allowed to be a person. Rhysand, in contrast, is never punished. He punishes others. He decides Nesta should be “rehabilitated” but nobody ever questions how he governs. How he’s ruled Illyria for five hundred years and allowed the abuse of females to flourish. How he’s let Keir terrorize Hewn City and now wants Feyre to smile through political dinners with him like that’s justice.

If we go outside ACOTAR, your comparison to Dr. Doom is still spot-on. But let’s take it a step further.

• Magneto from X-Men is a character who commits atrocities, but we understand his motivations. The story doesn’t pretend he’s a saint. His pain is valid, but his actions have consequences.

• Zuko from Avatar: The Last Airbender struggles with loyalty, honor, and the pull of power. He is not protected by the narrative—he has to earn his redemption.

• Daenerys Targaryen (until the final season, which we don’t claim) was portrayed as a liberator with terrifying potential. The tension lay in whether her power would corrupt her. She had followers who loved her, but not unconditionally—and when she crossed lines, people reacted.

Rhysand, in contrast, is surrounded by yes-men (and women), and the narrative refuses to let him fail. There’s no tension. No fear. No possibility that he might not be right. And that makes him boring.

Let’s also talk about how the fandom treats Rhys compared to characters of color or female characters. Emerie gets masculinized. Lucien gets demonized. Nesta gets dragged through the mud. But Rhysand can literally erase memories, manipulate information, and allow oppression to continue for centuries, and it’s okay because he’s hot and “suffered.”

Rhysand is not a morally grey character. He is a tyrant coated in glitter. The problem isn’t that he’s manipulative, or controlling, or negligent. It’s that the story won’t call it what it is.

Final Thought: The most damning thing about Rhysand isn’t his actions—it’s the lack of narrative accountability. If the series owned him as a flawed, self-serving ruler who hides behind the mask of benevolence? He’d be fascinating. If characters questioned him, if Feyre ever called him out, if the IC had fractures that weren’t hand-waved away? That would be compelling. But instead, we get endless adoration. Unquestioning loyalty. And any challenge—like Nesta’s rage—is framed as a threat, not a justified reaction.

So no—he’s not like Doom. Doom at least admits he’s ruling with an iron fist. Rhysand thinks he’s wearing a crown of flowers, but it’s forged from the bones of everyone he left behind.

Feyre Archeron: The Girlboss That Never Grew

Feyre’s entire arc is built on this idea that she’s “just a girl who learned to fight.” That she was poor and powerless and clawed her way to the top, and that makes her worth rooting for. And in A Court of Thorns and Roses, sure—she was scrappy, resourceful, and deeply flawed in a way that felt honest. She made bad choices. She was traumatized. She had no good options.

But as the series progressed, she didn’t grow from those flaws—she was rewarded for them.

Take her decision to destroy the Spring Court in ACOWAR—a political sabotage campaign that ultimately weakened a key ally right before a war. The story frames it as cunning. Payback. Her “strong woman moment.” But there are no repercussions. No fallout. She’s not criticized. She doesn’t even second-guess it.

Feyre acts like a spy in a court she once called home, tears it down, and never once reflects on how that might affect innocent fae, Tamlin’s people, or the broader war effort. Instead, the narrative coddles her. She’s “doing what she has to do.” She’s “young and learning.” But that excuse is paper-thin when she’s simultaneously praised for being “the most powerful High Lady in history.” If she’s powerful enough to go to war and command armies, she’s old enough to face consequences.

You nailed it earlier when you said that using her age as an excuse only highlights that she shouldn’t be in power. If she’s so inexperienced that she can’t govern, can’t lead, can’t understand the stakes of her actions—then she is a liability, not a leader.

And then there’s her treatment of Illyria and Hewn City. Feyre claims to care about justice. Freedom. Autonomy. She came from nothing and supposedly understands pain and oppression. And yet she does nothing when it comes to the Night Court’s darkest corners. Illyrian females are still mutilated. Hewn City still thrives on cruelty. But Feyre just… attends a party, wears a sheer dress, and calls it diplomacy.

The reality? Feyre only wants to be a ruler when it’s convenient, glamorous, or affirming. She wants to paint. She wants to build a family. She wants to be loved. And that’s valid—those are human desires. But the story insists she’s also this revolutionary political force. That she’s brave, clever, unstoppable.

She’s not.

She’s reactive. Impulsive. Emotionally volatile. She lashes out when she feels powerless and sulks when things go wrong. She refuses to listen to people she disagrees with. She has no political foresight and no cultural awareness. And that would all be fine—if the story treated it like a flaw. But it doesn’t. It excuses her, worships her, lets her off the hook again.

Compare her to characters with real narrative tension.

• Zoya Nazyalensky from Grishaverse becomes powerful because she learns. She’s arrogant, yes, but her flaws are explored and challenged. She has to reframe her thinking, unlearn prejudice, adapt.

• Katniss Everdeen is deeply flawed, traumatized, often confused and angry—but she’s aware of it. And we are aware of it. The narrative doesn’t coddle her. She doesn’t want power and is broken by being forced into it.

And let’s talk about class and privilege, because Feyre fans love to bring up her poverty in book one like it gives her moral high ground forever. Feyre hasn’t been poor since chapter ten of book one (not even). She lives in a mansion, gets the finest clothes, can paint all day, and be worshipped as a goddess. She doesn’t interact with the common people. She doesn’t serve her court. She doesn’t lift a finger to fix the systemic issues her rule presides over. She’s effectively a queen in a castle, pretending she’s still the underdog.

It’s not that Feyre is a bad person—it’s that the story won’t allow her to be anything but a good person. There’s no room for self-doubt. No space for humility. No accountability. The things she does that hurt others are either brushed off or reframed as noble sacrifices. And that flattens her. She could’ve been raw and real, someone who learns in public, who wrestles with power and trauma. Instead, she’s locked in a narrative where she always has to be right.

Final Thought:

Feyre is a character who could have been a woman learning to lead. But she’s written as a woman who is already perfect at it—and that’s where her story dies. Growth is impossible when the world already revolves around you. The more the narrative tells us she’s powerful, wise, and beloved, the more we feel the hollow echo of what she could’ve been if she’d been allowed to fail.

She’s not a ruler. She’s a character in a fantasy built to flatter her, not challenge her. And that’s why so many of us feel tired—not because she’s flawed, but because we were never allowed to see her flaws matter.

[watermelonlicker]

I am back!!!!  Sorry for the little hiatus—been feeling uninspired and honestly didn’t know what to say. I’ve just been staring at this PR mess like… what’s even left to analyze? It’s so boring and predictable that even dragging it feels repetitive. (But if you catch me theorizing about Louis’ shoelaces next week, just mind your business. A girl needs some material.)

That said, coming back to this space after a break really reminded me why I even care to keep talking: this isn’t just about stunts or press cycles. It’s about watching someone you admire, someone whose work and heart you believe in, get pushed into things that feel so far removed from who they are. It’s hard not to want to speak on it. Even if it’s the same cycle. Even if no one’s listening.

Anyway. Right now, it feels like we’re in a cause-and-effect era—or maybe more accurately, a domino effect. Louis is in Costa Rica, working on the album (as he should be). Zara’s not. And this stunt hasn’t really been pushed by anyone but his sisters since early April. So we’ve moved past the “early stages” and into something more… passive-aggressive.

The GP still isn’t buying it. And I still think that’s intentional on Louis’ part. It’s so clear he’s not trying to sell this. He’s not even renting it. If anything, he’s leaving the front door unlocked and hoping people walk out on their own. The comment on Zara’s post read like it was required. Like a box someone made him tick off before they let him get back to the studio. 

And look—Louis sees everything. He always has. So he knows the response is lukewarm at best. I genuinely think that gives him some peace. Because for him, it’s not about making people believe it—it’s about doing the bare minimum to keep up appearances. The bare minimum to stay safe. But even that? It’s exhausting. And it shows.

He’s out living his life, surrounded by friends, working on music, interacting with fans, generally having a good time. None of that involves Zara. That says more than any public comment ever could. But when he gets too comfortable, when the disinterest becomes too visible, they push the narrative again. It’s a pattern. Every time he distances himself, there’s a new push to balance it out. And that’s what makes it feel so manufactured.

So here’s the rhythm:

Stunt is lightly pushed (following, liking posts, “romantic date,” Stereophonics appearance)

→ Quiet period (a few days or weeks of nothing)

→ Stronger push (his arm visible on her insta story, kissing pics, staged checkout moment)

→ Quiet again (he’s ignoring it, focusing on music, tweeting about the album and unrelated things)

→ Another push (the Instagram comment, maybe a “reunion” of the “loved up couple” soon)

→ And then… rinse and repeat.

 It’s all PR muscle memory at this point.

It’s also emotional manipulation, let’s be honest. The kind that’s subtle enough to deny but pointed enough to control the narrative. That’s why people say Larries are delusional—because it’s all crafted to create just enough ambiguity. Just enough to gaslight. Just enough to write off anyone who sees the cracks as “obsessive.” But those cracks are there. The discomfort is mutual. It’s visible in the photos, in the body language, in the awkward silence between “pushes.”

the longer this goes on, the more damage it does to both of them. Zara is benefitting more—this keeps her name in circulation, even if it’s messy. Louis doesn’t need this. He never did. He has the music, the fans, the presence. This isn’t helping him—it’s tethering him to something that feels small and dishonest.

So yeah. It’s still unnecessary. Still painful to watch. Still predictable. Still bland. Still boring.

And still… happening.

But I’m here again. And I’ll keep being here.

Because watching is one thing. Caring is another. So keep watching. Keep questioning. keep loving. keep supporting. Always.

Even when it’s frustrating. Even when it hurts a little. Even when it’s quiet.

(Also, what I’m more interested in is the fact that RBB is back.)

—LFA ❤️

LONG FORM YOU ARE ALWAYS THERE WHEN I NEED YOU THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS ONCE AGAIN EVERYTHING YOU’RE SAYING IS ON POINT