#Abuse does not make you a complex character or villain

[fluffyotters]

People often Misunderstand Dabi's hatred for his dad. It's not because he's abusive

The thing a lot of people confuse is that while Dabi/Touya hated Endeavor, he didn't hate him because he was (physically) abusive to others! Touya does hate Endeavor not because dad was abusive but because he stopped paying attention to him at all and thought he was replaced! Touya hates him because of how much he loves and loved him. He wanted to be like him and to be admired by his dad forever and when he took that away clumsily trying to stop Touya from hurting himself by ignoring him that was even worse. Dabi himself would encourage people to hate on Endeavor for any reason because he wants to make his dad suffer but he does not care about abuse which is what a lot of Dabi apologia and people who fan him (inaccurately) has that he hates his abusive father because he was abuisve. DABI/TOUYA DOES NOT for that reason. Enji was a terrible parent in the past as is known with Shouto and treating his wife Rei and ignoring his non quirk kids Fuyumi and Natsuo, but he was not a terrible parent to Touya until he started ignoring him. In fact while one can assume his training methods can be difficult and Shouto hated them for sure (he was a young kid what the heck) and it's possible that they got harder, but Touya is the kid who will set himself ablaze of his own choice in training so that pain would be nothing to him.

The one person Dabi truly loves and hates is Enji. He wanted his love and attention and if he can't have that he will destroy his father as well as everything he loves including his family until there is nothing left to distract him from him. Using Enji's abuse was only ammo for him! He fully admits Endeavor abused his family because it means nothing to Dabi/Touya. He confesses to kiling more than 30 people (probably because he doesn't know the exact number and lost count after that because it probably is more than 30) because it means nothing to him. This was solely a film to bring down his father Endeavor's reputation at the worst possible time with a double whammy one-two punch of not only ruining his dad's reputation but everyone's view of heroes at the same time with Hawks killing Twice (edited to seem in cold blood). Being a hero is what his dad loved so much, more than him that Dabi made sure to completely destroy the trust people had in all heroes and to make the people dad saved turn against and hate him. See if Touya actually cared about the "abuse" he could have ended Endeavor's reputation and career at any moment. And secretly holding that over his head without him knowing was a trhill for a little while. But all he had to do was well, make such a video before and show a dna test and he could have made everyone very aware that he Endeavor's dead son was alive and that his dad was contrary to his saving the public, horrible to his family. And with it being multiple figures and the clear evidence of him and Shouto being damaged, his wife having been hospitalized, and his children having difficutly with him it would have had actual ramifications. He could have pulled Shouto out. He could have reconected with Natsuo. But he doesn't. Because he doesn't care about that or them except as ammo to hurt his dad. Had things gone differently he would have never said a thing. He worshipped the ground his dad walked on. And as he makes clear with Shouto he doesn't care about Natsuo almost dying when the villain he sent almost killed him despite them having had a past good relationship. All Dabi thought was imagine what Endeavor would think if he died. And Touya had wanted to be back in Shouto's place. Not anymore now, but how dare Shouto have everything he wanted and not appreciate it. Shouto wanted to save hsi brother, Touya wanted nothing more than to destroy him, dad, or both whether to kill Shouto and/or die with him to hurt his dad, or kill his dad directly. And nothing justifies what Dabi does. One could at least understand him wanting to kill his dad, even if that is extreme, Shouto did too and S1-3 it would have been understandable. However, killing lots of random people villains and civillains that have absolutely nothing to do with them is not at all proportional or understandable. And he has zero guilt or remorse and he burns them with fire, an extremely painful excruciating death. They probably don't live long witb how hot his fire is if they don't have a heat resistant skin or quirk (and such people actually gave him trouble fighting) but otherwise it's still a very horrible way to die. He views them all as mere practice kindling and trash to be taken care of and entertainment. People were nothing more than tools in his quest to hurt Endeavor. He loves these random people more than him being their hero? Then let them burn. He doesn't genuinely care whether hero society is corrupt or not. After all, he has no problem with killing solely to spite his dad. He doesn't care about the villains and downtrodden and they were only ever a vehicle to help him enact his eventual revenge in the meanwhile. And readily willing and acting to kill his own family. There was no reason to go after Natsuo and Rei, or Shouto but even allowing extreme leniency understanding that trying to kill his dad and the brother who replaced him is understandable, there is no reason to go after Natsuo and Fuyumi and Rei. Other than that is solely to hurt his dad which is not remotely justifiable.

He got Twice killed and while he says he didn't want Twice to die, if only because he would have helped with his revenge, he very readily had the video made which is extremely convenient. Stupidly reckless of Dabi to let Hawks that close if he actually wanted Twice to survive but on the other hand, he very well could have been saying what Hawks and the others expected to hear. Dabi somehow obtains Twice's blood for Toga later and it just raises even more questions of how and when did he get that? Did he ask for it and just store it for later? (Which weird if he wasn't actually planning this beforehand). I don't see how he would have got enough to be actually in a container for Toga to use that would still be viable if it hadn't been planned for. And he just sat on it until she was emotionally vulnerable and sad and goes here use this. This wasn't about helping her grieve this was getting her even more murder serious and to stop messing about with the heroes. But there is only a small amount of time where they knew that Toga could further copy powers before Twice died so Dabi having it on hand is extremely suspicious since Toga had no idea he had it. And after him helping her and seeming a friend (which he truthfully denies and says only is for his own benefit) h gives her a way to have Twice back and honor him.

Dabi is a very manipulative and cruel And the third most evil in the series after AFO and Overhaul just ahead of Muscular because Touya is smarter, didn't get caught repeatedly and while Muscular is cruel and sadistic and takes great delight in it, Touya is readily willing to hurt and kill his own family and the people he supposedly cares about for the sole singular focused purpose of punishing Endeavor. Dabi is living purely off the extreme rage and focused obsession to make his dad pay that even as his body wounds should have killed him he's still living just to make it happen. Even AFO backed off from even remotely trying to use him as a replacement from the sheer passionate singular depths of Dabi's rage made him unable to be controlled unlike Shigaraki generic molded hatred which passionate but focused on nothing but destroying making it easier for him to take over. And Dabi chose to be like this to deliberately murder and kill people and use them as mere tools. He chooses to continue it over and over living solely out of hatred and spite. This was not created by Endeavor, this is on Touya. People try to blame Enji for creating Dabi which is not true. Did he mess Touya up? Absolutely. Emotional neglect hurts. He would be obsessed with his dad in any form naturally and he would be guilty of that. But Enji is not responsible for Dabi murdering people and becoming a genuine villain. He is not responsbile for Touya going if he won't see me I'll destroy everything he loves. And not responsible for Touya trying to murder his family. He played a role by giving anf taking away love and not getting his clearly agitated unstable son help and absolutely could have done better and is seeking atonment but it is on Toyua all the deeds he had done. And before people say the abuse messed him up, most people do not become serial killers and mass murderers from abuse. (It can contribute but also many were never mistreated or abused at all that do). All it points is that tragedy happens to everyone and that then the personal choice and how to react comes in. Especially since this was emotional neglect not physical abuse. There is a big difference and yes emotional can hurt just as much it wouldn't have turned him into full blown evil like that if he hadn't chosen to be. There were so many ways he could have done a screw you dad look at me without going I'm going to burn you and everything you love to the ground and kill a lot of people along the way. Like I saw a hilarious post about Dabi instead of going okay murder, becoming an All Might Fan and buying all the All Might merchandise such that its everywhere and Endeavor absolutely could not have missed it. And that is the type of petty energy that unironically would have probably worked at getting his dad back to get him to look at him and interact again. (or he could have ignored it as Enji could be disciplined but it would definitely be drving him bonkers so win-win). But even from a young age Touya was obsessive about his dad that he tries to kill Shouto as a baby from the thought of being replaced.

I love Dabi as a villain but it is difficult to see so many blame Enji and abuse for Dabi's choices as if he had no agency in it. And while Dabi would definitely for the public blame Endeavor too, he wanted nothing more for than him to notice and once to always see him and now to make him the only thing Endeavor has by hurting him destroying everything he loves including ultimately himself. Because Dabi love/loved him. And could really care less if he or Enji hurt them as long as it's only him and his dad.

[saffitaffi]

“What if the evil tyrant who likes to kill puppies for fun actually just needed to fall in love with a sweet naive child who redeems them through the power of love and they were actually good the whole ti-“

What if they weren’t, though? What if their life twisted them to the point that they can only love through violence?

What if the narrative doomed them to ever play their role, a role that has already been chosen by forces higher than them?

What if the sweet, gentle character didn’t love them ‘despite their flaws’, or even at all?

Why should they? Especially if it’s a case of kidnapping. ESPECIALLY if they hurt them. Or their friends. Or take away their agency.

What if that strange contradiction of love and hatred in their heart tore them apart and gave them their justified end?

What if they CAN’T be fixed?

What if they don’t WANT to be fixed?

What if we stopped glamorizing abusive relationships and started actually exploring them?

[sammydem0n64]

Constantly thinking about a conversation me and a buddy had about how people in the modern era always end up making or Headcanoning villains as homophobic or just general bigots...

[stardustizuku]

Unfortunately I came across a very strange and misinformed video about Black Butler.

It’s not good. Don’t watch it. Unless you wanna ruin your day, in which case have fun.

Despite it all, I watched it. What left me wondering, however, was how off the mark the person who made the video was on, well, everything.

From their insistence that the Book of Circus Arc theme or point is non existent, to reading Ciel’s character so badly they genuinely thought the Green Witch Arc did nothing for his character development.

While baffled, it also made me think on how someone could read Black Butler so badly.

Sure, you can say that there’s no real way to read or interpret something “in the wrong way” but interpreting The Hunger Games as a pure battle-royale action story would make you believe it’s bad.

“Why are we focusing so much on how the capitol preps them?” Or “Why isn’t Katniss winning everything?” Or “I wanna know more about the rebellion” All questions that miss the actual point of the story - which is criticizing (not solving or ignoring) the way that media distracts us from violence via spectacle.

The same thing applies here. While there is no “right” way to consume media, there’s things that the author makes clear they wanna focus when creating a story. Things that, if you understand, make the story you’re reading actually make sense.

And in Black Butler there’s three things that you have to understand to properly get what Yana is saying.

Sebastian is the protagonist

Ciel and Sebastian’s relationship IS the story.

And that relationship is, fundamentally, a positive one.

A quicker version of it would be:

Black Butler is a love story from the POV of Sebastian, and you have to ship it to get it

- but that’s not entirely true.

You can still look at it as a complex but ultimately positive rship and get in broad strokes of what it’s conveying. It doesn’t have to be romantic. Although, it helps much more than a platonic framing.

(That said, interpreting their rship as father and son, still isn’t the best way to go about it. Mostly because by its very nature of “soul consuming” their relationship is extremely sexually charged. And hey, if you’re into that I don’t judge. However, if you’re desperately trying to interpret their rship as NOT romantic to the point you fall back on heteronormative patriarchal ideals of nuclear familiar as framing device, I don’t think this interpretation bodes with you)

Now, having all that ground work:

Why do I say these are the key components to understand BB?

Okay so, first,

1. Sebastian is the Main Character. The protagonist.

There’s a lot of people who wanna argue against it, claiming he’s either the villain or the antagonist. Both wrong.

He does not function as an antagonist. Even if, and an emphasis on if, you consider Ciel to the protagonist, Sebastian isn’t a narrative antagonist.

If you wanna go back to Creative Writing 101, be my guest. An antagonist is directly defined by the protagonist. It’s the opposing force. If the protagonist wants A, the antagonist wants to stop them from getting A.

Sebastian’s catchphrase is “Yes, my Lord”. He never opposes Ciel, in fact quite the contrary. By the mere fact they’ve created contract, it means that they’ve both agreed in the inevitable outcome.

People want to frame Sebastian as the villain, because Ciel having his soul taken by a demon, would be a BAD END in the context of their moral compass. They see Ciel as a frail victim of abuse, who’s being tricked by Sebastian, who wants Ciel’s soul.

Which is an. Interpretation. A bad one. But still one.

The narrative (and whether the narrative fits your personal moral compass and lack of critical thinking is irrelevant) treats Ciel as an agent in his own destiny. The abuse he suffered was the moment in which he had no control. It’s only after he meets Sebastian that he can rid of both his guilt and his despair, and do what he wants.

In this case though, it’s revenge.

The famous “Asthma” scene shows this. If Ciel is taken back to his past, he becomes helpless. Swarmed with pain and memories that make it so that he can’t even react. Sebastian is his saving grace. If Ciel didn’t have him, and the power he wields to rebuilt what’s broken, he would crumble once more.

If Ciel has a panic attack, because of all the pain he has, Sebastian picks him up and says “you are not a helpless child anymore, you are not a victim anymore, you have the power to do anything. So, what do you wanna do?”

Ciel’s answer is to kill them.

A proper analogy would be to say that, if Sebastian offers a gun, Ciel pulls the trigger. They are both at fault. Sebastian, strictly speaking, is not here to directly cause Ciel’s downfall, but as a tool Ciel uses to plunge into the abyss.

If, again if, you were to frame Ciel as a protagonist, Sebastian falls closer to the “Voice of reason” character. Not a literal voice of reason, but a literary one. If you have a protagonist and an antagonist exchanging ideals, the Voice of Reason serves to engage with the protagonist on their own ideals.

That said, Ciel isn’t the protagonist. The story quickly falls apart if you interpret it as such.

Things such as Ciel’s character arc being…shall I say odd?

It’s not that his character arc isn’t there, but it’s never lineal. His goals stay the same, the only thing that happens is that we start to peel back the “why”s of his goals. Throughout the series it’s never about Ciel understanding himself better, he knows who he is, he knows what he wants, he knows why he wants it. He doesn’t ever need to uncover these, but simply remember them. Because it’s always about the audience understanding Ciel.

He knows he wants revenge.

In the Circus Arc: He knows that he needs Sebastian because without him, the pain of the abuse he suffered would be too much to bear. But WE are introduced to it.

In the Book of Atlantis: He knows that with this new lease he does not want happiness and peace, he wants revenge. The one being told this is the audience.

In Green Witch Arc: He knows that their revenge isn’t for his family, the real Ciel or guilt. It’s because he wants it. He’s angry, he’s upset, and this is entirely for him. The one being told this is the audience.

Except. Not really. The one either discovering or remembering these key moments - is always Sebastian.

Sebastian is the one who reassures him that he now holds the power of a demon to override the pain. Sebastian is the one who remembers that to override that pain, Ciel wants revenge. And Sebastian is the one who discovers that that revenge isn’t built out of grief or guilt, but for himself.

We are witnessing it all, through the eyes of Sebastian.

This is why we have an extremely vague idea of who Ciel is, Sebastian does not have the whole picture.

If you haven’t been reading this manga with your eyes closed, you’ll realize we have a better grasp at Sebastian’s character than that of Ciel. We get a lot of insight on how he thinks and what he values through light hearted dialogue he has with the servants. You even see the character development in these little interactions.

Think about how when he first arrived to the mansion he magically created food with no regards to taste, but when he meets Bard he states that food is created to see whoever will eat it, smile.

That is character development, more than you will be able to see from Ciel.

Because Ciel’s character, while not static, doesn’t go from point A to point B. Mostly, cause it doesn’t need to. He went through that when he lost the real Ciel and got Sebastian. Everything we are watching is the falling out.

Now, given the fact that I’ve told you that it makes more sense for Sebastian to be the protagonist/main character, and that he 100% isn’t either a villain or antagonist in ANY of the interpretations you can get:

Do you believe me?

If you don’t, you’ll probably believe Yana herself.

This is from the first Volume, where Yana herself describes the process of making Black Butler. The primary idea behind the creation of BB was a butler as a “hero”.

If you go back to the introductory chapter, you notice that Ciel is barely mentioned. He’s simply the one to give Sebastian impossible tasks and standards that Sebastian must find how to overcome.

Ciel is properly introduced until the NEXT chapter. The second chapter has this formula too, introducing Lizzie as a problem to overcome. Although, to Sebastian the best way to “get rid of the problem” is simply to indulge her.

The issue here being that the problem isn’t as simple as a business meeting but something directly tied to Ciel and Ciel’s past. Each time that Sebastian has to solve a problem, it chips away at Ciel. While with Lizzie he shows a persona, once he’s alone with Sebastian he acknowledges the toll it took on him. It serves to build Ciel as Sebastian’s master, and how some problems aren’t as simple as discarding a tablecloth.

The third and the fourth, are a unified narrative, with a similar premise to the first chapter. Ciel gets kidnapped and Sebastian must find a way to retrieve him without raising suspicions.

If the first chapter is to set up what Sebastian must do as a butler, the third and the fourth serve to set up what he must do as a demon.

The entirety of the volume, and up to Book of Circus Arc, is about how Sebastian tries to follow the increasingly absurd orders that Ciel has - it is not about Ciel trying to solve them.

That’s how they work, we follow Sebastian for the most part, because he’s the one having to come up with the solutions.

If anything, in early Kuro, where the emphasis was more on a slice of life conflict, Ciel is the antagonist. He’s the one creating problems for Sebastian to solve.

What’s more, in the second volume, the very first chapter is one from Sebastian’s POV. So far, we hadn’t gotten an entire chapter from Ciel’s POV. In fact, I would find it hard to point to a single chapter where Ciel is the POV throughout. The reveal of real Ciel and the flashback is the closest contender.

But once we move past early Kuro, and into Book of Circus, this set up changes.

It’s fairly easy to assume that Ciel is the main character, because from this point on the conflict of the plot sorta surrounded him. We spend a lot of time with him and with his story. The enemies start being people directly tied to Ciel and Ciel’s trauma. Rarely, if at all, we get to see Sebastian before he met Ciel.The framing device for the story, is Ciel.

This is where point 2 gets intertwined.

2.- Sebastian and Ciel’s relationship IS the story.

The story begins at the point where Sebastian and Ciel met. Who Ciel was before he met Sebastian, informs why he’s the way he is when he does. You have to know all he went through to understand why he’s a brat, why he lashes out. However Sebastian’s past doesn’t matter…because Sebastian himself doesn’t care much for who he was, before he was “Sebastian”. That’s also part of the narrative.

Unlike Ciel, he doesn’t seem opposed to revealing information from before the contract. He talks about how pets from where he is from are gross, he talks about how he knows how to dance because of other places he’s been to, and alludes to the life he's lived before.

Just that, to him, they're footnotes.

He makes allusions to a very bland, uninteresting life, up to the point he meets Ciel.

That’s why we don’t know more about his past.

As for why we focus on Ciel’s story…okay maybe we need Creative Writing lessons 102

I studied Dramaturgy for about 3 to 4 years. And something you notice is how play-writing is the quintessential story telling. It’s making it work with the bare bones of a story.

Some other mediums have more finesse, more depth, or more spectacle - all amazing things that work for whatever they’re created for. But understanding a play, how and why it works, helps understand the fundamentals of any derivative story telling medium.

Particularly, conflict.

Conflict is dialogue and dialogue can take many forms. A story, in its essence, is a dialogue between two opposing ideas.

Take Batman, for example, who embodies the ideas of justice and order. On his own, he’s not a well rounded character.

If you ONLY present him, in a vaccum with nothing else, you don’t have a character. You have a list of characteristics that you’re supposed to know.

You only know who he is when you have dialogue with another character.

I say Dialogue, but it doesn’t necessarily mean spoken language at one another. Dialogue can mean fist fighting, playing tabletop games, talking to other people about the other, or even just a competition. The idea is to simply to compare and contrast both ideas.

If you want an example on how tabletop games serve as dialogue, watch the video “Well, Someone Had to Explain the Liar’s Dice Scene” by Lord Ravecraft

Another example, were we to retake Batman, you have him fight Joker. Who’s the embodiment of chaos and randomness.

In the following picture, you get far more information than the one previously shown. While the Joke fights with daggers and fake guns, Batman only uses his fists. He doesn’t use the tricks that Joker does. His serious demeanor, contrasted with Joker’s glee at the dangerous situation. The fact that Batman has a deathly grip on Joker’s shirt, while the Joker doesn’t, which shows a desperation to catch him.

You are being shown, through a dialogue, who Batman is.

It’s so much easier and much more effective to explore a character through another character.

This is the reason why Shonen has a tendency to make incredibly good gay ships. If you want to explore Naruto’s personality, and his feelings of inferiority, you HAVE to have him interact with Sasuke.

If you wanna understand Hinata’s passion for volleyball, you have him enjoy himself the most with the only other crazy motherfucker who’s as obsessed with volleyball - Kageyama.

And I think that originally, Yana had this problem.

Sebastian was the protagonist, but she had little room to develop him as a character in the confines of the manor, dealing with random enemies.

She likely tried to create Grell as someone of the same stature as Sebastian. Someone who could be this other person to engage dialogue with and show or allude to his past a bit more.

The problem being that Sebastian didn’t care for his past. Or really, engaging with anyone. He sees everyone as below him, but when confronted with Grell who isn’t below him, he doesn’t wanna talk to her.

So you’re stuck in conundrum.

How do you have dialogue with a character, that as a character trait, doesn’t really wanna have dialogue?

Well, Grell also solves the problem. Because only the moment she gets him to start any semblance of a dialogue - is questioning why he’s serving Ciel.

And this is the moment when it’s perfectly cemented that the focus of the story is their relationship.

Why is Sebastian here? Why does he stay? What did he see in Ciel that made him want this extremely convoluted contract?

THATS the dialogue.

THATS the conversation we’re having in Black Butler.

We need to know Ciel because understanding who he is, let’s us know WHY /Sebastian/ is here.

Then slowly, with the introduction with the Undertaker, we find out Sebastian’s conflict.

Which is…

He’s scared of losing Ciel. It becomes apparent with the constant imagery of the Undertaker taking away Ciel and at some point even obtaining r!Ciel’s body, that he’s worried it might happen.

But he can only be worried that Ciel might be taken away if he wants to stay near Ciel.

And that’s his character arc.

Realizing that he actually likes Ciel, cares for him and the role he plays a butler that he doesn’t want this to end.

In the first chapters, he doesn’t feel a need to protect Ciel anymore than what’s strictly necessary. Just don’t die, that’s about as deep as his involvement in chapter 4 gets.

But by the Green Witch Arc, he feels a need to protect Ciel from ANY harm.

This is why I also said

3.- Their relationship is fundamentally a positive one.

In broad strokes, Sebastian to Ciel is the person who allows him to survive. He’s not worried about giving up his soul since he’s already dead. While Ciel to Sebastian, is someone who’s making him have fun. He’s slowly becoming more and more attached to Ciel and the life he has with Ciel.

Their relationship is not that of just a predator and prey, but also of master and pet.

In the terms that Black Butler itself would call: Sebastian is a wild wolf acting like a collared dog.

Ciel is aware that the wild beast will eat him at the end of the day, but if he clings hard to leash for now, he might just be able to have Sebastian maul his abusers.

Sebastian as a dog, currently finds that he enjoys being a chained dog.

(This is demonstrated in the Green Witch arc where he quite literally says, he doesn’t wanna be a wild beast and prefers to be a butler)

And much like the actual DOG Sebastian, Ciel constantly interprets his attempts to get close and protect him, as an act of aggression.

This push and pull of Ciel’s perception of Sebastian and Sebastian’s true motives is what feeds the story.

And the briefs interludes were that isn’t the case (what other people call the “plot”, but I would refer to as the connective tissue) such as Sullivan and Wolfram, the other servant’s past, the grim reapers and the like, serve as a parallel to Ciel and Sebastian relationship. Either to signify how they care for each other, highlight their weaknesses or fears, or explore how they feel.

It’s no surprise that Sullivan and Wolfram are parallels to Ciel and Sebastian. A sheltered sickly child who seeks the protection of a cold hearted machine that only knew how to kill, but who eventually found he cared for her genuinely.

Undertaker and Claudia’s relationship being heavily paralleled with them, even though we aren’t 109% sure what they had but heavily implied it was a romantic attraction from the undead supernatural creature and a Phantomhive.

Everything is a parallel.

That’s why, like the approach of the terrible original video, is flawed.

Trying to interpret Black Butler as action scene after action scene, with mystery after mystery with the only connective tissue being the mystery of who burned down the mansion - is missing the trees for the forest.

That’s not the point.

And if you’re too much of a prude to engage with gothic horror in its gothic horror game, I see little point as to why you even bother to engage with it at all.

A lot of people, including the person who create the video, simply refuse to acknowledge Black Butler IS the story of Sebastian and Ciel as a close and positive relationship, romantically and sexually charged. The reason for it being that they’re “put off” by it.

Part of me wonders how much that is genuinely true, and how much is just performative outrage. It’s like ignoring the fact that Cersei and Jami are in an incestous relationship and try to frame it as “platonic love”, because the idea of it is THAT off putting.

But regardless of that, if you don’t like the fact that it’s as canon as canon can get, I would reccomend you don’t engage with the story at all.

As I’ve explained, the entirety of the series is about them. If you refuse to see Sebastian and Ciel as, at the very least, a duo that cares deeply for the other - you aren’t reading Black Butler.

I have no idea what you’re reading.Perhaps your own biases and subconscious stigma with British aesthetic. At that point, watch the fucking British Royalty Gossip Magazine. You’d find more substance there.

Just don’t be like the person in the video, please? Don’t play dumb. Don’t ignore the fact that Yana is a Shotacon, don’t ignore the fact Sebastian is a hero, don’t ignore the fact that the entirety of the story is based on Sebastian and Ciel’s dynamic.

Because if you do, you are ashamed. You are ashamed of what this story is about. You don’t wanna engage with the text, you want to engage with yourself. You wanna project into Ciel whatever traumas and experiences you have, for the sake a vanity project, where you come out as the morally superior.

You don’t wanna talk about Black Butler, you wanna talk about how good YOU are. How you “don’t sin” by watching it “without all the gross unholy stuff”.

Which is the exact opposite of what BB is about.

So, if you don’t want to, save us all the humiliation fetish and leave.

[autisticrosewilson]

It's not that I hate fanon or that I think fanon is inherently less intelligent or morally wrong, but a LOT of fanon is based in racism, misogyny, and classism that I feel like a lot of you accept without question.

WHY is Duke (Daredevil, son of a god, has never once allowed himself to be defined by anyone's actions but his own) relegated to a background role, only characterized by reacting to the whims of other bats?

Why is Babs - Birds of Prey leader and backbone of the hero society, tells Bruce to fuck off and die 4 times a day and is constantly ruining her relationships by being biased and unhinged - Gotham bound, the mature responsible mom of the group who never argues with Bruce and never gets in trouble?

Why is Dick, both a tactical genius and master manipulator, a himbo only appreciated for his sex appeal? Especially when he is both Romani (group of people demonized and condemned as hypersexual by their nature alone) and an SA victim.

WHY is Damian "feral" and "uncivilized" despite being raised as a literal prince? Half of you treat him like a sociopath with no hope of redemption for an unfunny three second joke and the other half of you go full throttle into Bruce's white savior bullshit so that Damian can be "redeemed". Y'know when you're not villainizing Talia and acting like Dick is his other parent, actually.

WHY is Stephanie - extremely intelligent detective who can't stand Bruce and has a living mother she loves - lumped in as another member of the Batfam, a blonde ditz who only cares about prank wars and emotionally supporting Tim?

WHY is Cass - intelligent, a grown adult, suicidal perfectionist - emotionally intelligent, primarily existing to support the characters around her, immediately accepting of everyone she meets regardless of her own morals?

Why is Bruce the golden standard? Enough so that though everyone in the fandom could agree that he's an emotionally unstable wreck, being considered "the most like him" is seen as a compliment and not the HIGHEST insult? Everyone would agree if I said that Bruce purposely self sabotages his relationship half the time and the other half he simply does things without caring about the emotional impact it will have on people because he has to be the smartest in the room, but if I said that makes him a shit partner and emotionally abusive parent the fandom would bend over backwards to argue with me.

Why is Tim "the best Robin" when Dick Grayson invented the mantle, it is impossible for someone to embody the spirit of Robin better than him because he made it and he created what being Robin means. Maybe Tim is the best in Bruce's eyes, but what Robin means and who has the right to give it over was a significant thing they argued about. Tim the high school drop out, and yet also somehow the smartest? Tim "the most like Bruce" except no he's not, that's Cass. Poor neglected, abused, victimized little Timmy (the rich boy at the elite boarding school with loving albeit busy parents and almost every instance of him being victimized by another character has either been racist bullshit - The Al Ghuls and Rose Wilson- or a complete 180 for the character that made no sense when examined through the lens of prior characterization - Jason for instance.)

Almost every fanon trope that gets passed around like gospel seems to deliberately push POC characters and women into the background and strip them of interesting complex traits and stories, usually for the purpose of fitting them all into bite sized incorrect quote character types and uncomplicated narrative roles that are not only completely divergent from canon, but primarily exist to prop up the two rich white boys.

Also the insistence that Bruce, a 20 year old at the time, should actually be excused for how much he mentally and emotionally fucked Dick up because really they're more like siblings! While deciding that Dick at the same age was actually the perfect candidate to be Damian's new parent/guardian...have you lost the fucking plot you don't even make sense to yourselves.

Okay I lied at the beginning, I do hate fanon. You guys are so uncritical about the media you consume it is BEYOND just letting people enjoy things and have fun. I guess it's one thing if you KNOW this stuff isn't canon and UNDERSTAND why these tropes are problematic and you engage with it as such, it's fine read and write what you want, but just spreading the same nonsense around and parading it around as "better than canon" (version of the character so bland and boring you've somehow made the old white men at DC look like geniuses in the art of representation) is just infuriating.

[stardust-falling]

Shen Jiu is an abuser. Shen Jiu abused Luo Binghe and (depending on how you interpret certain parts of the novel) most likely others. He was a profoundly unpleasant person to be around by his own doing, not just some poor misunderstood baby.

Just because he didn’t murder Liu Qingge or sexually abuse NYY doesn’t mean that he was innocent of everything. Especially not his abuse of LBH which is a fundamental part of SVSSS’s story— about cycles of abuse and how someone’s life experiences can shape them in different ways.

Learning about Shen Jiu’s backstory humanizes him. It explains his actions and how he got to where he was.

It does not, and should not excuse him.

Humans can be both abuser and victim. That’s how the cycle of abuse fundamentally works.

I love Shen Jiu. He’s one of my favorite characters of all time. He’s still an abuser.

You can feel sorry for him, but don’t make him innocent. He knew what he was doing. He did it intentionally. He wanted to spite LQG, he wanted to hurt LBH, to destroy his cultivation and even his life.

Shen Jiu is a brilliant portrayal of a truth people are afraid of— that sometimes survivors are not inspirational. Sometimes they’re mean. Sometimes they’re bad people. Sometimes they carry the worst parts of their abusers with them because that was what they feared, and if others feared them then they would have the control they so desperately needed.

Shen Jiu is not a one dimensional villain who is evil for the sake of it. He’s a human character with complex reasons for being the way he is, and a traumatic upbringing he didn’t choose or have any control over.

He’s still an abuser.

[spop-romanticizes-abuse]

okay so first off. what does being "full on adults" have to do with disliking a character? like?? are we not allowed to dislike or criticize fiction once we cross the age of eighteen?

secondly, i love how they imply that we hate catra because of some sexist reason, but then lists mostly women among the characters who were immediately forgiven and faced no criticism from the viewers. so maybe it's not people "hating on complex female characters" maybe we just dislike poorly written ones.

and who said people don't hold hordak, scorpia, entrapta, etc accountable for their actions? we do, it's just that catra played a more important role in the story as the main villain and adora's love interest so obviously she's under more scrutiny.

we also see her commit more heinous crimes on screen, unlike scorpia and lonnie who were just following orders and hordak whose crimes were all lipservice. it's a lot easier to like a character who only committed heinous crimes off-screen. again, not justifying hordak's behavior, i just think the writers failed to make him an actual threat.

also i don't know how the nimona comics were but in the movie, ballister and ambrosius did have a relatively healthier relationship than catra and adora. mainly because ambrosius never hurt ballister on purpose and he genuinely felt guilty for his actions. even when he turned on nimona, he did it to protect ballister. he wasn't just using all forms of abuse on his boyfriend just for the fun of it, and excusing it by saying that he had a shitty childhood.

"(...) in terms of Catra, we saw the beginning of her redemption arc but she still worked towards it. She still took time to reflect, give genuine apologies to the Best Friends Squad, and turn around for the better."

i'm sorry? when did she apologize to the best friends squad? because i only remember her giving a half-assed apology to adora. glimmer and bow never got an apology from catra. glimmer especially deserved an apology because catra's actions led to her mother's death. also, i've already talked about how catra didn't actually change for the better and kept repeating her toxic habits, so i trust i don't have to say it again.

i do agree that in azula's case, the hate was more undeserved, mainly because none of her actions were justified by the narrative. and like op said, azula didn't have someone to offer her proper guidance.

(although i have to remind you, ursa never called azula a monster. she disapproved of azula's behavior but the monster part was just how azula perceived it. but i guess you know more about these shows than me, right?)

and that's where catra's actions can't be justified because she got multiple ways out, people in her life were constantly giving her chances, and she still chose to do evil. catra had all the resources she needed to become a better person, she was given opportunity after opportunity from the very first episode, and she still chose to participate in the war and chose to abuse and hurt people.

[sepublic]

Unlocking the Sad Backstory

I find it interesting how a lot of arcs in TOH have this general pattern of…

Character hurts others -> Character is unhappy, reconsiders their harm -> Character begins to do better -> Character’s sad backstory that re-contextualizes them is unlocked

And it applies even to characters that aren’t exactly villains or even antagonists, but for whom hurting someone nevertheless is a major premise! So to look at examples;

Amity is Willow and Luz’s bully, but we see how she’s unfairly manipulated by Lilith and is ashamed because of it. Luz reaching out to her makes Amity reconsider, she undoes the binding oath she placed on Luz. Then we see Amity’s siblings and how both parties are toxic to one another, and then we get a flashback confirming her parents are abusive. In regards to Willow specifically, Amity acknowledges she’s done harm to Willow in burning her memories, and works to fix them with Luz before we get this context.

Emira and Edric are also toxic to Amity, but in their next appearance they’re remorseful about what they’ve done to Amity, they’re working to make it up to their baby sister. And while they’re not present in the aforementioned flashback, their parents being confirmed as abusive tells you everything you need to know about them.

Lilith has a petty rivalry with Eda, but we see how much she cares and keeps breaking the law to look the other way, too. Then we see how she’s pressured by the Emperor’s Coven, and even threatened by Belos, before she captures Eda. We learn of her curse, but again; We see Lilith next and it’s reiterated that she believes this will cure Eda, we remember wanting to be kinder happened after cursing Eda. We see Lilith attempt to free Eda, and then we get the backstory about how the curse was mostly an accident. We get more info later on how Gwen’s neglect contributed to Lilith’s inferiority complex.

Hunter is the Golden Guard, he threatens to boil Luz, Eda, and King to death and wants the Selkidomus dead, but won’t even do it himself. He kidnaps Palismen to feed to Belos. But then later we see how he’s unhappy over his situation, how he feels like his uncle won’t let him help. Hunter begins to show consideration towards Flapjack and later Luz when he reveals his name, and then we get context as to how physically abusive Belos is, and where that scar came from. Flapjack returns and Hunter spares him.

Alador is either a controlling abuser to Amity, or a neglectful one. But he does hold his wife accountable when she tries to betray their daughter by going back on her end of the deal, and later shows genuine love for Amity when Alador isn’t more concerned about the family’s socioeconomic status. Amity admits how unhappy she is, Alador realizes he truly is hurting his daughter, and promises to talk with his wife over this. We later see him try, and then we see that Alador is also abused, and it’s implied his neglect comes from overworking himself in exchange for his children being spared the same.

Boscha is a bully, through and through. She torments everyone for purely petty reasons. But she also admits to feeling similar pressure as Willow, and then confesses to being lonely without Amity, Skara, Amelia, or Cat. Amity acknowledges that Boscha is lonely, but points out that Boscha needs to respect her for who she is. Boscha listens, and helps stop Kikimora. In the credits we see fully that she really was a miserable, scared child being manipulated by a grown adult.

The Collector is aiding Belos’ genocide, and (seemingly) knowingly. But they’re also fretful over the nature of their ‘friendship’ and are left betrayed and hurt. They meet King, and after being freed by him, we see how they try to be a good friend to King and are slowly listening to him bit by bit, which is why King vouches for rehabilitation over imprisonment. The Collector is already against harm to a certain point, defying what the Archivists mandate. And then we learn that they were unjustly imprisoned by the Titan, and didn’t even know about death in their childish, simplistic view of the world, seeing people as only broken and unmoving yet capable of being fixed at any time, if all the parts are there.

Gwen makes Eda feel ashamed of her curse, she neglects Lilith. But she does care for at least one daughter, and is horrified when she realizes the harm her antivaxxer actions have done. Gwen makes things up not only to Eda, but Lilith especially in taking her back home, even as Gwen explains during her reconciliation that she honestly saw Lilith as self-sufficient. And then a few episodes later, we find out her husband was mauled and left disabled by the curse, unable to continue his life’s work. And we get even more context for Gwen’s obsession in curing her daughter of the condition that gave her so much guilt.

Camila made Luz feel unwanted at home, going along with the camp, and her outburst later on was the wrong call; But she’s not punished for it, that’s not necessary. Instead she apologizes, we see Camila worry about the camp taking away Luz’s passion by salvaging her daughter’s weirdness for her, we see her be accommodating to Luz and her friends when she returns, having reflected in that time, and offering support. And then we learn that Camila was just like Luz, she fit in to survive, and she lost Manny, someone she needed to stand up for herself.

Bump is introduced as a principal willing to dissect Luz, but he also appreciates Willow’s magic and vouches for her to her parents. We see that he’s actually open-minded and cares about his students, he lets Eda enroll Luz on the fair grounds that Eda clear her own messes; Bump insists on following the coven system and places students into the detention track, but when those kids save the day, Bump owns up to a mistake he clearly didn’t like anyhow and changes things. And then we see his past, and how he’s been improving things this whole time, challenging Faust and looking out for Eda!

Even Steve technically qualifies; He’s a covenscout, he’s a jerk who knocks over someone else’s books to express his cop enthusiasm. But Steve forgives Skara for punching him in the face because he kidnapped her, and then admits to Hunter that what they’ve done is wrong, and he’s now reconsidering. Afterwards Steve has his introspective interactions with King, and then we see his face; Implying (and eventually confirmed by Dana) that he is the older brother that Mattholomule spoke of, who gave him the map to the Looking Glass Ruins that Adrian, in the previous episode, admitted he couldn’t find; Because Steve gave away the map to make his kid brother happy.

Likewise, I want to discuss two characters who don’t exactly fit this sequence, and don’t mature or get better, not of their own volition for one:

Kikimora is Belos’ assistant, she’s complicit in his executions. She tries to murder Hunter out of nothing but jealousy, helps bring Raine to Terra, goes after everyone at the Knee, etc. But then we see Kikimora is miserable because of her unsympathetic mother, who is probably abusive; She has no consideration that her daughter is obligated to their dictator, who demonstrated on live television that he’ll execute even his own high-ranking officials if they don’t go along with him, and Kikimora was there in-person. And is now expected to help with a major event involving other high-ranking officials and the dictator himself.

So we get Kikimora hurting people, being unhappy, and having a sad backstory; But we don’t have Kikimora reconsider the harm she’s doing. She accepts Luz’s help for her own sake, and instead of empathizing with Luz as a result, Kikimora betrays her when she sees a potential promotion. Kikimora is let down, we see later that she’s been demoted to the Crate Coven.

But then she attempts to bring Hunter to Belos, and it’s revealed later that she knows what happens to Grimwalkers like him, and has known about the genocide and still went along out of obsessive devotion. Despite this, Kikimora does not warrant Belos’ callousness, it’s not triumphant it’s just cruel because he was going to kill her just for being a demon, villain or saint it didn’t matter. So Kikimora is given her revenge when she helps free the Collector, who splatters Belos, an injury that leads to his eventual death, and stops the draining spell, saving Kikimora’s own life in the process!

At which point, you think she’d learn, right? But instead Kikimora does the exact same thing as Belos, which Luz calls out, despite having had her pedestal shattered because Kikimora doesn’t care about the harm to others, only herself. And so she can only temporarily be an ally, before going back to being an antagonist; The system is fine if she’s in charge, she doesn’t learn anything from what happened. And Kikimora is captured by rebelling students, and forced into community service four years later.

There’s also Belos, whom… Okay do I even need to explain??? We learn that he is upset by his brother’s death and misses him, too. And he does feel guilt about murdering Caleb and even the Grimwalkers, they weren’t purely replaceable in his eyes! But he never reconsiders his harm, he keeps repeating it, he never changes. Belos doesn’t even acknowledge that he’s doing witches and demons wrong. And while we do get his backstory, it’s clear from his priorities, the details, and Masha and the Titan’s own takeaways that he fully chose his misery, and that his backstory is not so sad with this in mind.

I wonder if the takeaway is that these characters can’t truly get better because in the end, they won’t acknowledge the harm they’ve done; They won’t admit it, they won’t do anything about it. And so they can only be counted on to care about making themselves feel better, but that’s it. And so on a pragmatic level, co-existence has to be forced.

Because with Kikimora, she’s made to do community service, and with prisons being abolished for hospitals, she’s likely on house arrest because the alternative is execution and no state should have that power. And with Belos, he proved himself too dangerous, he was well past his lifespan and dying anyway, and they were not going to sacrifice even a single, unwilling Palisman to keep Belos alive.

As for all the other characters, for whom things do work out with? I find it interesting how Sad Backstory is something for the protagonists and viewers to unlock. Maybe the idea is that the protagonists aren’t prepped to forgive a character simply over what happened in the past, just what’s happening now, and what they’re trying to do about it. You can still empathize when they’re sad, even without a backstory for context because look at Luz during Covention!

But as a whole it makes sense for the takeaways of those around them, because why should I care that you were sad, if you’re still being a jerk anyway? Now I know your sad backstory, but you’ve known it the whole time you were hurting me, so what difference does it make about you if you’re not changing; Do you just expect me to keep forgiving you out of pity?

It could be a consideration for what characters around them might realistically feel. The sad backstory, the re-contextualizing for why they’re like that, is the cherry on top to their arc; Yes this person sucks, but maybe they aren’t having a great time either. They give people a reason to be sympathetic. And then those people get to really appreciate their side of the story when they don’t have to worry about still being hurt.

Maybe it’s also a message to the audience, because with other characters showing that you still need to be careful in extending a hand, and given the toxic and abusive relationships we see, maybe this could be the context for that? An abuser’s sad backstory is the last thing on your mind; Your first thought should be that they’re hurting you.

But if they’re looking for help and actually want to improve, then you can offer it, and if they accept, then you can let yourself be caught up over their tragic past, instead of making excuses for them from the get-go because of that, RIP Hunter. When it comes to Willow, she was allowed to be angry well after learning Amity’s Sad Backstory, when she felt Amity wasn’t pulling her weight in making up for everything.

By contrast we have Eda not really giving a damn whether the curse was an accident, because Lilith still took knowingly took Luz hostage and threatened her, captured Eda. So her present actions are being unaddressed even if Lilith thinks her past one is. And when King vouches for Lilith, Eda refrains from taking vengeance; Lilith saving the family and taking the curse, past and present actions made up for, culminates in forgiveness.

It’s not enough that Lilith felt bad about it, she needed to tangibly do something about it, something genuine that doesn’t miss the point (unlike a certain emperor), and so to a no-nonsense adult like Eda, that’s when she can be forgiven. That’s when her sad backstory resonates, just as for the audience, that’s when we learn it so we can even appreciate it at all.

Some of this may just be basic storytelling conventions, like of course you’re going to get the character first and their characterizing actions, and then their backstory. But then again you could just as easily mix things up. Or it could just be an extension of this show’s larger fascination with re-contextualizing previous scenes and details. I just think it’s an interesting pattern to dwell over, and I wonder if it was intentional, how much was intentional, etc. Because with a show wanting to help kids understand abuse, to avoid it and/or realize it’s happening to them, to get help and heal, and finally figure out if they should forgive their abusers, if they want to… All of this could work in that regard.

[merwgue]

Tamlin is one of the most misunderstood and controversial characters in the ACOTAR series, and while some of his actions—like locking Feyre up—were inherently wrong and abusive, they stem from deep-rooted trauma and manipulation, making his story much more complex than people give him credit for.

1. Trauma from Amarantha – 50 Years of Hell Tamlin spent 50 years under Amarantha’s rule, being groomed and manipulated. He was powerless to save his court and the other courts from suffering, and that burden fell squarely on his shoulders. For half a century, Tamlin lived under the constant pressure of being the one to break the curse, with everyone’s freedom hanging on him. He was traumatized, broken, and desperate, having endured endless torment. This trauma shaped his every decision when it came to Feyre, and while his actions—like locking her up—were wrong, they were driven by deep-seated fear and an overwhelming need to protect her, which he saw as his only chance at redemption.

Tamlin’s fear wasn’t just about control; it was about trying to keep Feyre safe after having lost control over everything else for decades. But, of course, that doesn’t excuse his abusive behavior. It was wrong, but it’s important to understand where that behavior came from—trauma, manipulation, and the belief that if he failed to protect her, he would fail once again.

2. Reactive Abuse in ACOWAR – Feyre Deliberately Provoking Tamlin In A Court of Wings and Ruin, Feyre plays a dangerous game of provoking Tamlin to make him react in ways that paint him as the villain. This is reactive abuse. She comes back to the Spring Court with the intention of tearing it down from the inside, manipulating Tamlin’s emotions and pushing him to his breaking point. She does things deliberately to make him angry and hurt him, knowing he will react out of frustration and heartbreak.

While Tamlin’s actions in earlier books were abusive, Feyre’s calculated manipulations in ACOWAR cannot be ignored. She deliberately enrages him, knowing exactly what buttons to push, and when he reacts, he’s painted as the bad guy. But let’s not forget: Tamlin was already mentally broken and reeling from losing Feyre, and she intentionally took advantage of that vulnerability.

3. Feyre Destroying His Court – Overkill Feyre’s decision to destroy Tamlin’s entire court is a massive overreaction. Yes, they broke up, and yes, Tamlin made mistakes, but wiping out his entire kingdom because of a failed relationship? It’s spiteful and malicious. Feyre didn’t just want to hurt him emotionally—she wanted to ruin his entire life, his legacy, and everything he had worked to protect. And for what? A breakup? The level of destruction she brings to the Spring Court is wildly disproportionate to Tamlin’s mistakes. She knowingly and willfully destroyed the home and people he loved, leaving him with nothing but ruin.

4. Tamlin Saving Rhysand’s Life in ACOWAR – And Still Getting Trashed Tamlin’s good deeds get completely overlooked in favor of villainizing him. In ACOWAR, he literally saved Rhysand’s life during the battle. Rhys was on the brink of death, and despite everything, Tamlin stepped in to rescue him. Tamlin put aside his grievances and his heartbreak to do the right thing, proving that despite his flaws, he still cared enough to save someone who had wronged him.

But instead of gratitude or any kind of recognition, Rhysand continues to trash Tamlin in ACOFAS and ACOSF. He makes snide comments, mocks him, and even invades Tamlin’s court just to taunt him. It’s infuriating when you consider that Rhys wouldn’t even be alive without Tamlin’s help. How can someone who owes his life to Tamlin continue to treat him like dirt? It’s an example of how skewed the narrative is in Rhysand’s favor.

5. Rhysand’s Hypocrisy – His Own Crimes Ignored Let’s not forget that Rhysand literally murdered Tamlin’s family. Yes, Rhysand’s family suffered a great loss, but they initiated the blood feud by attacking first. Tamlin’s family was killed in retaliation for Rhysand’s father and brothers attacking them, and yet, all the sympathy is directed at Rhysand’s loss. Tamlin’s pain and trauma from losing his entire family is brushed aside, while Rhysand’s grief is front and center, as if only his loss matters.

Rhysand is glorified, and his family’s death is framed as this great tragedy, but Tamlin’s loss? Barely a footnote. It’s a double standard, especially when you consider that Rhysand’s family brought the conflict on themselves. Tamlin’s trauma from losing his family is completely ignored in favor of building up Rhysand as the hero.

6. Rhysand Telling Tamlin to Kill Himself – Beyond Cruel Rhysand’s treatment of Tamlin post-ACOWAR is downright despicable. Tamlin is left broken, suffering from depression, having lost his court, Feyre, and his family. Instead of showing any empathy, Rhysand invades his court and tells him to kill himself. This is someone who is already at his lowest, and instead of being left in peace, Rhysand shows up just to make his suffering worse. It’s not just toxic—it’s cruel beyond measure. For someone who has supposedly suffered so much himself, Rhysand shows an astonishing lack of empathy for someone else in pain.

7. Tamlin as a Victim of Trauma – Deserving of Understanding In the end, Tamlin is a victim of years of trauma, manipulation, and immense pressure. His actions were wrong, but they were driven by fear and desperation, not malice. Tamlin suffered from Amarantha’s grooming, lost his entire family because of Rhysand’s blood feud, and had his court destroyed by Feyre’s revenge. He is not a one-dimensional villain; he’s a deeply flawed character who was broken by his circumstances.

While Tamlin’s mistakes should be acknowledged, it’s unfair to completely vilify him while Rhysand gets away with far worse. Tamlin’s trauma, pain, and losses are real, and they deserve to be treated with the same understanding and empathy that Rhysand’s story receives. At the very least, Tamlin deserves recognition for the good he has done—saving Rhysand, fighting for his court, and suffering through immense trauma without any support. Tamlin deserved better from both the narrative and the characters around him.

(This took me an hour to write I better see NO ONE discrediting me🤣)

[bonefall]

You can ignore this but I was just curious. What are your thoughts on redemption? I know modern day it means "character gets absolved of all wrongdoing and sin, and everyone forgives them yay!" But I'm talking more like, redemption as "Character acknowledges their actions and worldview was shitty, has apologized to all harmed parties, some forgive and some don't, but regardless character works on their issues and strives to become better"

I know characters are writing tools, so the message here would, in short, be "No matter what you can still work to be a better person". So I suppose I'm asking to what extent you agree. Sorry if this ask is everywhere I'm very sick at the moment.

I speak harshly of redemption arcs because I am actually an aficionado. I love them. I can't get enough of them, honestly. They're like eggs to me, I like 'em in all sorts of ways, devilled, omeletted, scrambled, but rotten ones are so bad you've gotta get rid of them immediately.

What often ends up setting me off about how redemption arcs are approached (and discussed) is the pervasive fact that people are more interested in sorrowful abusers than messy victims. They'll turn out to gush about how wonderful it is that Clear Sky cries about how sad murdering women made him, while not even recognizing Star Flower is self-destructing or Thunder is deflecting and misplacing.

It's like... even in fandom you will never get away from it. Your abuser is compelling and complex (meaning "was mean and sad at the same time"), and you're whiny and annoying ("ugh why is this traumatized person doing irrational things?! Don't they ever learn?!")

So when I write and when I talk, victims are always forefront in my mind. I'm really tired of stories that center Good Intentions or "but they loved you"

But anyway, digressing,

I agree. It really is never too late to work to be a better person. It's not even about apologizing, or making up for it, because sometimes you can't. "Sorry" will never undo what happened, and "sorry" doesn't even promise that real change is behind it.

So to me, a good redemption is just about exploring change.

Not suffering, I don't entirely like the idea that pain fixes pain, because it really doesn't. Reflection does. Genuinely understanding what was wrong and why you did it does. In spite of how cathartic it is to see someone get karma, I do hope that 99% of all people could be rehabilitated.

It's why I'm not fond of the phrasing where people want to deny redemption arcs because "they don't deserve it.' The WORLD deserves it. The people they will HELP deserve it. The person they will be deserves it. The question really is-- WOULD they change?

And the answer for powerful people is usually no. Power feels good. Gets you what you immediately want, makes it easy to surround yourself with yesmen who reinforce your excuses.

I think most people want to see others get better, but it's cathartic to me when some characters don't. Redemption arcs are wonderful things, but shouldn't be seen as the IDEAL ending for every villain, y'know?

[breathlesswordsbloodyknees]

Narrative Doom

Introduction

I've been playing around in and exploring this space where Sauron as Halbrand was genuinely seeking redemption, trying not to manipulate events but merely nudge them.

In my view, at this point he's in survivalist bed-rotting mode post-goo-form when he meets Galadriel. (I think he's more of an opportunist than a schemer in this era. Not that he doesn't have those schemes, but I think he's pushing those bad bad urges down. I have a web of scenes that I consider in this view for some other day)

I’m building much of this piece on these previous work: (link) (link) (link)

It's led me down some interesting philosophical rabbitholes, and I'd like to share.

Now, important to note, Sauron is a Maia—not a 'human' by any means. He's an ancient spiritual being who doesn’t feel the way us teeny tiny mortals do.

But on a broader scale: Tolkien’s work, like fiction as a whole, reflects and explores the human experience, so we’re riding that train.

All this with the framework of not absolving him for anything that came before or comes after. I plan on expanding into his evil alongside Morgoth and his actions in Season 2 at a later date.

But right now, we’re just exploring this blip of a moment where I consider Sauron could be genuine in repentance.

This is more an analysis of Sauron, but I feel like it has a lot to explore for Haladriel fans. There's some critique of Galadriel's choices here, but I want to make it clear: I'm not assigning blame. More just digging into the complexities.

And, well, I don't think this ship would be as compelling if it didn't have complexities.

Spoilers:

All of TROP S1

Vague themes/lines in TROP S2, mostly from S2E1.

The Good Place spoilers for overall theme and a few season 4 lines, but nothing outright about the plot.

Trigger Warning:

Be warned, I’m going to delve into some dark themes in a very personal way. Including but not limited to abuse cycles, personal trauma, harmful behaviors, and empathy within all of that.

I won’t lie, this work was hard for me. Painful to untangle. I would encourage you to have empathy and compassion for yourself, as well as me, while you read. I tried to put warnings before I go into these themes. Please take care of yourself.

---

To start

Sauron’s narrative, at its simplest, is a cautionary tale: If you let your ambition and drive for power go too far, you turn to evil. Higher values over sinful pleasures. Pride goeth before the fall.

But on a deeper level, being solely a cautionary tale, an overarching villain, a lesson to learn, what does that mean for the complexities of Sauron in The Rings of Power?

Charlie Vickers puts so many layers and so much emotion into his character. Yet he keeps it to a lot of imperceptible movements that, I found out last night, get almost completely lost in low resolution. I can see that being a part of some of the stricter interpretations of Vickers' Sauron. But there’s a vulnerability there that touches on some deeply raw thoughts.

—

So the relentless question in fandom: Does he mean any of it with Galadriel or is he just the Great Deceiver?

I'd like to ask, how much of it is just some deeply relatable ‘human’ behavior? Deflection, defensiveness. Half-truths, twisted truths, fibs.

Because as he says on the raft, he did tell her the truth, that he had done great evil in service of Morgoth. He never lied to her.

(An aside: I personally don’t give the “my ancestor” thing much weight as a true lie, I mean it’s his backstory and he had more reason for it than the Darkling did imho)

But really, who doesn’t try to hide and smooth over the worst ugly evil nasty bits of themselves and their past? We want to shine in the eyes of others—it's a fundamental desire to most.

—

On the other side, touching on influence and ambition:

Aren’t we all trying to sway events and leave an impact in whatever way we’re capable? Don’t we all attempt to sculpt the world like clay? Isn’t that really all we can do in this world?

And don't we often tell ourselves that we’re doing it for a better outcome? Even actions deemed ‘good’ and ‘heroic’ create ripples that have negative impacts, if only just for the orc babies.

I’ve been thinking a lot about orc babies.

—

Galadriel, from their first conversation on the raft in S1E2, backs him into a corner. She’s relentless in her quest for revenge against him and he’s whoops—sitting right there, doing the side eye meme. He’s gotta be self-preservational. And that rings true to me more than outright deceit. (At this point)

But I think over the course of the season, playing as Halbrand, “Lost King of the Southlands”, he’s trying. Trying to be “the hero she seeks”. Trying in the only way he knows how, which is…well, not great, he really toes the line. But he’s trying to ‘choose good every day and choose it again tomorrow’, while he’s on the path she set him on. So it’s a step by step journey towards the light, but the path is ever slippery.

And inevitably, as we know, he fails.

—

TW

So what does that mean for those of us who feel like we’re trapped in the narrative, hurtling toward a doomed end through harmful behaviors we can’t escape? Tied onto the train tracks, staring down what feels like an inevitable fate.

When all you’ve known for ages is subjugation and torment and abuse, what do you become? (Which makes Mairon even more painful, with his origin of beauty and light. Like a whisper of I was once admirable too)

I keep coming back to the image of grooves, well worn. And well, under the influence of an abuser and beyond, I too have done evil.

Holding the good you’ve aspired to and the evil you’ve done in one space; it’s a sharp, heavy feeling like holding coals, like touching a hot pan, something to run and hide from. And looking at my deeply ingrained behaviors from childhood, along with trauma that’s happened throughout my life...I see those grooves echoing in jagged bloody ways that feel comforting, even natural.

For a long while, it’s been the only way I knew how to self-soothe, these behaviors that can cause harm to myself and others. So I’ve been twisting around the question: Can we ever truly be free of the evil we’ve done? If it’s all we’ve ever known, baked and beaten into our bone marrow?

In Sauron’s case, the answer is no. His story unfolds the way it was written. The bad guys perish, the good guys win.

(though there’s the “they meet in Valinor” after canon theory, hope ever shines through)

—

That all brings me into The Good Place and that show’s moral thesis.

Spoilers for The Good Place:

More or less, the show states “people improve when they get external love and support. How can we hold it against them when they don't?” and “What matters isn't if people are good or bad. What matters is if they're trying to be better today than they were yesterday.” (S4E8)

Scanlons’ What We Owe to Each Other and the rabbithole of contractualism that I haven’t fully delved into.

I resonate deeply with what The Good Place says. All with the understanding that you have to put on your own air mask before you help others, don’t set yourself on fire to keep other people warm.

But I do believe we should help each other in what ways we can, rather than writing people off entirely.

So, I struggle with Galadriel’s moments of “shutting the door” being considered wholly empowering. Light prevailing, resisting the allure of darkness and the draw of power. It is indeed all those things, especially for her journey. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t blame her.

But there’s an itching here for me and I have to scratch it.

—

In S1E8, if we’re assuming he’s genuine, he put it all out there in the raft illusion. It was his biggest, his all, his hope. A leap of faith. Real vulnerability with an internal truth that was like holding coals.

He did what was ‘right’. He reached for support, for understanding, for community, What We Owe to Each Other.

(though we can’t ignore the scene before that where he’s wearing Finrod’s face. But I haven’t followed that thread yet).

He made a play for a better future.

And she—light and goodness and holiness in her hair, denied him.

“You are Morgoth’s friend”, “There is no such future.” Boiling him down to his worst parts, reinforcing his worst fears.

Is that all we ever can be?

---

TW

When do we write off people like Sauron, with all his history of wrongdoing? People like my abusers or even myself? When does the potential for redemption become irrevocably lost?

How much empathy should we show, and what are we obligated to offer? What do we owe to each other? All of this while carefully balancing the line of not condoning or becoming an apologist, along with taking care of yourself first.

It’s mind-boggling.

---

The answers are out there: self-compassion, self-forgiveness. Change comes from within. Balance. But it's the same way people say go outside, exercise more, drink more water to fix depression. When you're in the throes of darkness, those words feel hollow, trite. And that glossy sunlit path is more than treacherous when you walk it, especially alone.

So again, I say, I scream: Should we not still help each other?

It's not just internal and external separately, we need both. I have to believe that. Internal change and external support.

—

Conclusion

In the end, I'm really only left with more questions. This barely scratches the surface of what I've been brewing on, I could go round and round for days. I mean, that’s what I’ve been doing this week.

Regardless, all the typical takeaways feel hollow. Choose light, choose hope, every single step, no matter how hard.

It’s never quite that simple, on a very visceral level. And for some of us, like Sauron, it never materializes.

It all just eats and scratches and twists inside me. Ultimately though, I think Caitlin Seida said it best about hope and redemption and the struggle in her poem, Hope is Not A Bird, Emily, It’s a Sewer Rat. Which I greatly hope you’ll read and find what I have in it. (link)

So I guess we keep being scrabbly little sewer rats, hoping to claw our way out of the dank dark cave. And y’know, it may not mean much, but I’ll be here, down in the muck. Right there with you.

Maybe that’s all we owe to each other.

Follow-up

[bestworstcase]

& in fact one of the things that makes salem compelling as a character is this juxtaposition between her personal cruelty and the rightness of her cause; it bears repeating that she chose to live in exile rather than fight back for thousands of years while ozma dedicated himself to the cause of destroying her, and that her war follows on the heels of ozma forging a global alliance and then, as ozpin, abruptly locking down the relics in apparent preparation to summon the brothers back to remnant. if salem’s true goal is to avert the final judgment—get rid of the gods—then it is clear from the historical timeline and the events immediately preceding her commitment to war that she really did not want to go to war.

but with the information she has and the experiences she’s had there really is no other way to achieve her goal – every other possibility requires her to take it on faith that ozma is willing the break from his task now, against all signs to the contrary. he is still openly promoting worship of the brothers and urging everyone to live as if the final judgment will come tomorrow while zealously guarding the relics needed to summon them – no reasonable person would conclude from ozpin’s public actions that he is, in any way, wavering from his task, and so it is wholly irrational to expect salem to just intuit that somehow. and if ozpin is, as he seems to be, more committed than ever and on the brink of summoning the brothers, war is in fact her only recourse.

what makes salem a villain in this story is the abusiveness toward her associates; her individual cruelty, far more than the war of last resort, because the cruelty has no justification. and i think rwby is interested in the tension here, between how long salem refused to fight back and how cruel she is on a personal level. the tenderness with which she speaks of humanity versus her violent resistance to letting herself care about any one specific person.

i think it’s easy to write the cruelty off as a simple matter of salem… not caring, not having any interest in caring – in extremes this is how we get the "spoiled bitch" reading – but the same could be said of ozma; he’s nicer about it but no less willing to use people as disposable tools. why does he lie? why does he manipulate? why does he get violent when his secrets are about to be exposed? you don’t treat people you care about that way.

so ozma has his reasons – the trauma and the cognitive dissonance and the self-hatred and learned helplessness that motivates his submission to the divine mandate, the palliative fairytales, the retreat into dissociation to cope with being forced to exist as a parasite, and so on – and so too does salem, it’s just that hers are made more opaque. what drives this woman who speaks so lovingly of human virtue to treat individual humans like garbage? some of it is sheer alienation – she hasn’t been allowed to participate in civilization in thousands of years, of course she is antisocial – and the trauma of ozma’s betrayal, the deeper trauma of collective punishment, the fear of being hurt again, the resignation to being seen as a monster no matter what she actually does…

which i expect will begin to rise to the surface over the last few volumes. but the point is i do think her villain -> hero arc will turn almost entirely on ending and atoning for the personal cruelty as opposed to the war, and in fact i imagine there may end up being a stretch of the story wherein salem has moved clearly into the ‘good’ camp (as in: made things right between herself and her remaining associates, cinder in particular, and her true end is known to the audience) and still actively in conflict with the vacuo coalition because Her Cause is just. and that’s the kind of complexity rwby is interested in.

[funhouse-mirror-barbie]

Nuanced and Multifaceted Conflict vs. “Good v. Evil” in fiction

So. This is another thing I’ve wanted to talk about for a while. I promise I won’t always be focusing on Helluva Boss in my critiques, and I actually have quite a few other series I want to talk about.

There’s a big chance that I’ll be saying everything other people have already said, but I can’t help but WANT to talk about this specific character in regard to the story’s conflict. I think that it’s important to recognize when a character is written to be a complex person, and when a character is written to be an enemy to be defeated, and how not following through with your set-up can affect your story.

And HB does that A LOT in my opinion.

So. Let’s get into it. This time I’ll be talking about complex conflict between characters vs. black and white conflict, and I’ll also be touching on story set-ups and audience expectations.

I want to talk about a character who could have really made some of the internal character conflicts have so much more depth and intrigue. I want to talk about Stella Goetia

*as a side note this post is MUCH longer than I intended but I really wanted to get into a lot of the background and reasons for how Stella’s character development has actually completely changed what HB’d story conflict could have looked like. I’ll try and sum up everything in the end in a TLDR for y’all

So. Most of the reviews of her character I see talk about how she’s been “ruined” by the writing team revealing that she’s always been very abusive towards Stolas

I have to start off by saying I actually don’t think that Stella or her portrayal was “ruined” by the writing direction her character has been taken in.

In fact, this critique bothers me, because it doesn’t really get to what I think the actual root of why people are disappointed in Stella’s characterization, and the type of conflict that now exists between her and Stolas.

The main reason I believe people are unsatisfied with Stella is because they believed that her character was being set up for a complex and nuanced conflict between her and Stolas, and then that turned out not to be the case.

A quick disclaimer- I do think it’s possible to subvert audience expectations about story and characters in a satisfying way. But it has to be done in a way that respects the audiences intelligence and willingness to think about the story.

If your plot-twist, unreliable narrator, subversion, or what-have-you is done well, the audience should be able to either figure out what’s going based on the little information you’ve given them, and if they don’t, the change or subversion should still make sense and CLICK in hindsight.

Otherwise, your subversion will end up feeling cheap or confusing. Or worse, like a lie.

And this is one of the MAIN issues I think people have with Stella.

As the audience, we were NOT given enough information on her or her character before it’s revealed that she’s just “evil” and always has been, apparently since she was a literal child.

Again, I don’t think it’s an inherently bad decision to have a flat or pure evil villain. I’m fine with Stella being one, even if it’s less interesting to me personally.

But it’s definitely very different from what was initially implied and set-up, and the audience can pick up on that.

Before S2E1 “The Circus” we see Stella a total of 3 times in person, with one time being a flashback.

I’m going to go over those times to analyze if anything set-up in Stella’s appearances points towards her being. Well, totally and irredeemably awful and abusive I guess.

The very first time we see Stella is in the same bed with Stolas—Octavia calls for her parents, both Stolas AND Stella. Stella grumbles and refuses to get up and tells Stolas to go. This doesn’t immediately strike me as a sign of her being a terrible person. That exact scenario is present in a lot of family comedies, kids’ movies, and sitcoms.

Nothing about this screams that Stella is a terrible parent or an abusive partner to me. It just tells me she’s tired and doesn’t want to get up, which again, is not uncommon.

The next time we see her, she’s yelling at Stolas, and she throws a servant at him in anger.

Now, there’s no excuse for this, her behavior here is not okay, regardless of her feelings. But we understand why she’s acting the way she is--she’s furious with Stolas for cheating on her. At this point with the information we have, it’s also very reasonable to believe her feelings have been hurt.

Later Octavia talks about how her parents didn’t used to hate each other, and the way Stolas’ tries to explain their failing marriage to her comes across like his relationship with Stella is one that’s always had difficulties that they have tried and failed to overcome.

None of this information is enough to really convey or hint that Stella is and has always been abusive or evil. It shows that Stella and Stolas have a very rough relationship, and that Stella most likely has anger management difficulties, but you have to do lot of extra work to come to the conclusion that Stella is completely at fault here.

The next time we see her though, things have clearly escalated, because it’s revealed that she’s one that hired Striker to assassinate Stolas.

Now. Usually. Yeah. That would be a HUGE red flag. And I mean. It still obviously is.

But, and I never thought I’d use this uno reverse card, this is one of the few times where the explanation of “But it’s hell, what did you expect???” actually makes sense to me.

Because yeah, it is hell. It’s the end of episode 5 when we learn this, and our protagonists have killed and assassinated multiple people. Taking a hit out on people really doesn’t seem to be that uncommon of a thing in hell.

Even the next scene after the reveal that Stella is the one who hired Striker makes light of how serious this is, by showing that Stella was basically yelling her assassination plot right to Stolas’ face.

This is played for laughs! I genuinely am not sure if the writers intended for this to be foreshadowing of Stella’s abuse or not because if so, they turned her attempting to kill her husband into a joke!

If you cannot keep your themes or tone consistent, how is the audience supposed to follow your story?

There is subtle storytelling, and then there’s tacking information and character points later on in your writing. And this can have two causes.

Either your audience has to do the work of story-telling for you and make up their own reasons for what’s happening to make the story coherent OR they will be disappointed and dissatisfied by the final product.

I think that’s the main reason why S2E1 of Helluva Boss felt so jarring story-wise, and why Stella, to me at least, suddenly felt like a brand new character.

Like I haven’t been this confused by a character being suddenly evil since Hans from Frozen.

(like seriously why the hell did they put this scene in if not to just trick the audience. This isn’t giving us any plot info it’s only giving us contradictory info on his character. Like I talked about before, Hans’ heel-face-turn doesn’t feel like a twist. It feels like a lie.)

Okay so, how does any of this actually affect anything? Who cares if Stella is evil, that doesn’t automatically make the story bad!

Well. Yeah, of course not. Ironically, having the main conflict your story being a battle between “Good v. Bad” characters is neither good nor bad. It’s just a story decision. And ultimately at the end of the day, the writers of Helluva Boss can choose to tell their story however they’d like.

But, depending on how this is executed, good v evil stories can be a lot less interesting than morally grey or complicated conflicts and characters.

I am more interested in the version of the story where Stella and Stolas are imperfect and messy people. I am more interested in the story where Stolas has an affair to escape being in an arranged marriage, and Stella overreacts by arranging a hit on her husband (unless calling out a hit is normal in hell, but we can’t know b/c there is no baseline for what is considered normal in hell)

I am so much more interested in the story where Stolas and Stella are both depicted as being in the wrong, as being incredibly hurt by each other’s actions, and as not knowing how to repair their broken relationship for the sake of their daughter.

That story feels very real to me. It’s one I want to engage and invest in.

I want to see if these characters can grow to accept their mistakes and learn and change for the sake of Octavia and having to co-exist with each other, or if they’ll slip back into mutual destruction and toxicity.

But that’s not the story we’ll get to see, because it seems like the writers are more interested in keeping Stolas from having to grow as a character. And because of that, Stella has been turned into an evil obstacle that must be defeated, instead of a nuanced and real person.

I also feel like I have to say. I know I would be MUCH less frustrated by this if I hadn’t seen an HB crew member talking about how their show is similar to Bojack Horseman.

Because. It’s just not. I’m sorry, I’m not saying that to be mean, or condescending, or rude, but the way characters are written in Helluva Boss is almost completely black and white at this point.

Regardless of the writer’s intent, the vast majority of the choices they have made in Season 2 come off as explanations to excuse the protagonist’s mistakes, and give them a “get out of being potentially in the wrong” free card.

Compared to the writing decisions in Bojack, which almost always has characters confront their wrongdoings, for better or worse, HB honestly feels like it’s the Anti-Bojack.

It would take a TON of character development and time to make HB’s characters as interesting, fleshed-out, and as real as Bojack’s are, and at this point that’s I don’t think it will ever happen.

Again. Having black and white conflict is FINE. It is a choice in story telling that can be done very effectively. But if you are making a black and white story where one side is always terrible and evil, and one side can do no wrong, you can’t act like you’ve written something that is deeper and more emotionally complex and grey than that.

And the first time the writers gave Stella more than 3 sentences to string together, they made it very clear that any chance of her being a more complex and engaging character was being tossed out the window.

————

TLDR:

The main reason people are upset about Stella being shown as abusive in S2E1 of HB is probably because the initial depictions of her didn’t give us enough information on her character to tell that she was just evil/a terrible person.

The way the story was written in S1 to set up the possibility of a very interesting and complex conflict between Stella and Stolas, and when it was revealed that she’s just. The worst. There were people that were disappointed by this, because they expected more.

Audiences actually aren’t idiots, and when you subtly foreshadow something and then completely change things, that can be frustrating.

It’s MORE than okay to write a straightforward good v evil story, but it depending on the way it’s written and executed, it may not be as interesting to mature audiences as a more morally grey story would be.

If you can’t write characters confronting their flaws and being in the wrong, please don’t compare your writing to Bojack, I mean. C’mon.

[spopsalt]

How to show abusers Helluva Boss vs Hazbin Hotel vs Rick and Morty

So, I've been meaning to make this post for a while, but an anon said they'd like to see the post, so I was finally motivated to make it!

Ok first up, let's do Helluva Boss, I was wondering wheter to use Stolas or Stella for this one, since both of them are horrible portrayals of abusers, but there is a similar portrayal on how Stolas is portrated with Hazbin Hotel, so I chose to use Stella.

Yep. This is an actual line from the show. Depth? What's that!? Stella is just made to be a Saturday one-dimensional cereal box villain. Who only exists so people can feel bad for poor Stolas. The thing is she had potential to be an interesting and complex character but nope! She just exists to make you feel bad for the poor baby Stolas ohhhh noooo she's mean. They acts like this isn't hell and even is supposed to be nice.

Hazbin Hotel

So Lucifer is Charlie's dad, and this image is the best way I can describe his portrayal. He was emotionally neglectful of Charlie's (Fuck you to anyone who says neglecting isn't abuse it's a form of abuse) and he does not get held accountable. He doesn't even apologize for neglecting his daughter for years on end. He also makes it very clear that he does not support her dream in the slightest and allows angels to kill his own people because he considers then beyond saving, and he does this despite knowing that his daughter hates it. All he does is say "Oh wait I support your dream now" then he gets portrayed as some amazing person. He clearly still sees Charlie as a child he literally says "I'll shelter and adore you more than anything" while hugging her. And he only called her when he was bored. He didnt even improve after his shitty half-assed rushed "redemption" being dismissive after she was feeling extremely upset about the amount of casualties in a war instead of trying to understand her. What an amazing father.

Rick and Morty

Rick Sanchez is a really amazing portrayal in my opinion. The gif I'm showing above shows his trauma with someone named Rick Prime. Showing that abusers are normally the way they are due to something horrible happening to them in their past, and while it makes a lot of what he did make sense, he's still held accountable because he's still a VERY horrible person. He constantly emotionally abused his grandson (Morty) there were even times where the abuse got physically (4 times if I'm correct) and has done awful things to keep him codependent. He's very codependent on Morty and relies on him for various things, like keeping him emotionally stable when thats a ridiculous and unfair thing to depend on someone for, especially your 14 year old grandson. But Rick isnt shown as being in the right for this and is called out mainly by Morty and some of the other family members when he's being a piece of shit. But he's shown to feel guilt for the shitty things he done at times and hates himself because of it. He's also shown mutiple times that he does truly lover and care about Morty mutiple times throughout the series, being very protective over him and even willing to die for him on one occasion. It still shows him as being human without glorifying him or demonizing him. Like it or not, abusers are still people. They aren't good people, but they are people nonetheless. And I love how Rick and Morty shows that. They have 2 neglectful parents here but I'm only covering one abuser per show so maybe I'll cover them in another post.

[factsilike]

I've seen so many takes about this so here's mine;

Stella is an abuser, a horrible wife and an equally horrible mother. That's all she is. She is not complex, she is not meant to be sympathised with, her role in the story is to be an antagonist to the main characters, because that's the way she was written. And it's not bad writing, like people claim it is.

If you don't like that and want that to change, well that's literally what fanfiction is for! Write your own fix it, your own version of her character where she's morally grey or complex or whatever, but don't jump to saying that she is badly written or that Vizie is a bad writer for no reason. Because all that seems to show is that she is not written the way you wanted her to be written, or a story you wanted to see. Write your own, then!

Because you can say that she was forced into this marriage as well or that she was cheated on so she has a right to feel aggrieved about that, and you would be right. Sure, as a child she could be sullen and miserable about this marriage and no one could blame her, but as an adult you become responsible for your actions, and you cannot continue to be bitter and take out your anger out on your partner for no reason. Because that quickly turns into abuse. Her poisonous nature had no base in the early stages of their relationship. Neither are we shown any care from her for her only daughter.

And from what we saw of her childhood picture, she seemed to be deeply unpleasant as a child anyway, so it's probably in her nature. I'd give her a pass as a child, but she didn't shed that behaviour as she grew up, or work on it to become better, so.

And of course Stolas was forced into this marriage as well, yet he, as is shown multiple times in the show, tries to make it work, was never actively malicious to her as she is and endured her abuse silently for so long, at least a decade or two. Honestly I think he does not get enough credit for that, because that takes some strength and resilience. And how utterly depressed he is all the time, because that is the result of those twenty long miserable years. He also clearly adores his daughter, who cannot for some reason see that which really frustrates me, but that is another post.

And as for the cheating-

If you watch carefully you'll notice that Stella wasn't really bothered by Stolas bedding someone else, so much as that someone else was an imp. She was more angered by that fact, that her husband had an affair with an imp, the lowest of the low classes in hell, because clearly she was classist, just like Stolas' father. She felt that it was a huge blow to her ego and reputation that her husband would rather be with an imp than her. So I would say that again, her anger was not really justified on that end.

Sometimes antagonists are meant to be just that. We are not given any reasons to sympathise with them, so we seem to make up reasons, because of course that horrible character must have good reason to be that horrible, right? It makes no sense otherwise!

This post is a result of me being really tired of people going with surface level analysis about villains and antagonists, like "she's Complex!!" or "He's soooo misunderstood and I'm the only one who truly understands him 😤" and "he's sooo tragic 🥺" like please. Look a little deeper and past what you want to see, I beg you.

[irrealisms]

svsss and sexual violence pt. 5: we live in a society

standard disclaimer at the beginning: i am not saying that this is the Only thing svsss is about, or that other readings are invalid; i am not intending to character-bash most of the characters here (while i will freely admit to thinking e.g. old palace master or qiu jianluo are pretty one-dimensionally shitty, lots--probably most--of the characters in this series who i mention as perpetrating SA are characters who do have depths & who i in fact like a lot! despite this meta, or perhaps because of it, my second-favorite character is luo binghe, and i am in fact a bingqiu shipper!); and, obviously, huge fucking CW for sexual abuse and adjacent topics. this section is about 1.5k words.

TABLE OF CONTENTS pt 1: shen yuan's realization of himself as a target pt 2: gender and homophobia pt 3: non-bingqiu sexual violence pt 4: shen qingqiu's body pt 5: we live in a society (you are here)

something that's universal across all three of mxtx's books is that society allows for & often approves of abuse, that invisibilized abuse of people with less power from people with more power is the bedrock society stands on; that even when society claims to disapprove of abuse, this is a smokescreen at best for attacking what (and who) it actually disapproves of. svsss...is not an exception to this. a lot of the incidents i'm about to discuss are ones i've already mentioned earlier in the series, but here i'm less interested in the specific incidents and more interested in the ways that society implicitly approves. a lot of these are sexual abuse but some of these are in fact nonsexual abuse because "society dgaf about abuse" applies fairly equally to all types of abuse in svsss.

the first and obvious example here is Shen Jiu. society, both in the universe of PIDW/SVSSS and in the ~frame story of the audience reaction to PIDW, objects to a 14-year-old slave breaking the engagement vows he made to a girl from the family that owns him so harshly they would throw him in prison/torture him (within the universe of the story) or demand for him to be castrated (in the comments section of said story). no one objects to the fact that slavery exists, or that Shen Jiu was abused; while it is ambiguous whether he was sexually abused (although I think there's strong evidence for it, as discussed in parts 3 + 4), society would not care if he had been; within PIDW universe, that's Qiu Jianluo's right, to do what he wants with his property, and within the universe where PIDW exists as a novel it would be hated as a storytelling decision the way all of Airplane's attempts at making Shen Jiu sympathetic were hated (because PIDW fandom didn't want complex villains with tragic backstories, they wanted someone they could uncomplicatedly hate).

the second example is also Shen Jiu, but the other way around--while he didn't sexually abuse Luo Binghe, nor was his abuse of LBH presented as particularly sexualized in any way (and if you've read this meta you know i am not shy about seeing technically nonsexual violence as sexualized/referencing sexual abuse in this book :P), it's another good example of how society allows for abuse? SQQ was in a position of power over LBH, so... he just gets to do whatever he wants to LBH. LBH can get revenge as an adult with a lot more power, can leverage that power & the ways SJ is vulnerable, can make it so that torturing and abusing him back is also allowed by society's rules--but when he is a kid without that power? society doesn't care! this is obviously less true on a "what did PIDW fandom care about" level than the other examples, but it's still true enough in-PIDW-universe that imho it counts!

the third example is the water prison. once again, Luo Binghe does not rape Shen Qingqiu in the water prison (although there was some very sexualized violence, shading into sexual assault). but-- SQQ was put in the water prison to be tortured at LBH's whims. if LBH had wanted to rape SQQ in there? he could have. with the material support of society. if Gongyi Xiao had been right that LBH raped SQQ there, GYX would still be disobeying his master to show SQQ kindness and break him out, and he would still end up just as killed for it. in the eyes of society, trying to help a prisoner escape the person who is raping them is worse than raping a prisoner. (identifying obviously identical problems with the prison system in the real world is left as an exercise to the reader.)

the fourth example is the old palace master. i talked about him some in part 3, but two things i want to highlight: - given that he was able to groom and abuse at least two generations, he's been doing this for a long time, and either no one noticed (even though it is obvious enough that sqq notices within a few lines of talking to him, implying that no one cared enough to look) or people did notice and, for whatever reason (some of which are even very sympathetic--certainly if i were his disciple and was mostly getting away with Not Being Abused i wouldn't want to come to his attention! but some of which are, uh, much less sympathetic) they let him, the same way people must have known about shen jiu's treatment of luo binghe and let him. because he's a powerful man, because it's his disciples and he has the authority, because, because, because. either way, this.... does not speak to a society that cares about sexual abuse. - when society learns about su xiyan's history, they blame her. they blame her for getting with tianlang-jun, they blame her for not aborting luo binghe, they assume she left her sect because she was ashamed and not because her sect hurt her. tianlang-jun is demonized (heh) even though his relationship with her was entirely consensual, because society hates him; old palace master is assumed to be innocent of any wrongdoing, because society likes him. do things eventually get figured out? yes. but the immediate reaction here is ... well, it's relevant.

last example here is moshang. again, not sexual/sexualized abuse! but through shang qinghua we get a piece of insight into demon society, rather than just human society, and what we get is... very very normalized physical abuse. shang qinghua is often going around with bruises from mobei-jun, to the point where shen qingqiu notices and is used to it. compare these two quotes, the first spoken by SQH to mobei-jun and the second from SQQ's narration:

“No one likes getting beat up every day, and no one would actually be all cheery after getting beat up every day! I’m not actually a dog! Even with a dog, if you kicked it twice a day, given enough time, it’d learn not to bother with you anymore!”

&

There was no telling what Shang Qinghua had done to piss off Mobei-Jun this time, but the corner of his lip was swelling as he gave Shen Qingqiu a pathetic smile. Shen Qingqiu couldn’t bear to look, so he shifted his gaze back to the file.

and.... the thing is, mobei-jun doesn't want to hurt sqh? when sqh gives him advice on how to woo men, he takes it; he pats sqh on the head instead of beating him, he gets sqh a cart when he's injured, he offers to let sqh hit him back. but the frequent beating is just...how demon society works, esp around the sort of power dynamic that sqh and mbj have. it's normal. and, given the demons we see, i don't actually think this is a fundamental difference of demon psychology. the demons we see who are person-y enough to Have Society are, broadly speaking...basically human? i think this is just... demon society is fine with it, because society is fine with all sorts of abuse as long as it's normal. and as we've seen in this post, it's not like human society is, uh, different in this regard.

the last thing i have to say isn't really a direct example. it's a little aside from shen yuan's internal monologue when talking to tianlang-jun about the plan to merge the realms:

The last part even sounded like rape culture logic: if you violate a person often enough, they’ll cooperate eventually; so do it first and think about the rest later.

which-- honestly i wouldn't have even thought to make that connection! but it was made for me by the book! and this is in a paragraph talking about how tianlang-jun thinks like this because he was mistreated and trapped under bai lu mountain, that he's bitter and resentful because of it, and it draws a neat little bow with our first example--shen jiu. the way that this is one way that rape & abuse culture perpetuate: someone is mistreated. they learn that this is how the world is; they pass it on. the cycle of abuse (and the breaking or attempted breaking of it) is another theme mxtx returns to over and over, in all three books, and you see that highlighted here. there's probably more to say here about TLJ's overall arc but i've worked on this meta for a long time and it is getting Really Quite Late.

if you've read all the meta (or even just this one): thanks for sticking with me through this! i really hope it was interesting & you got something out of it. i wrote. SO much in one day.