#BECAUSE she is flawed

[kasienda]

Why I love Marinette Dupain Cheng

So, I just watched the London Special and I have feelings!!

I want to preface this by saying that I very much didn't resonate with the second half of season five for a lot of different reasons, but that the special really worked for me, gave me what I needed to get to a place to be excited about the potential of season six.

Marinette is a 14 year old superhero who is fundamentally a good person. She tries to do right by others, and when she realizes that she's done harm she genuinely tries to fix it. Now, her character is often portrayed as someone with ADHD. She is subject to tunnel vision, hyperfixating, anxiety spirals, and not always being great at taking other perspectives into account. She's never been good at anticipating how her actions and choices might hurt someone else.

And I LOVE that about her!!!

You know who else is not great about taking other people's perspectives? Fourteen year olds!! Developmentally, they're LEARNING THIS AT THIS AGE!! They're also LEARNING to make decisions and accept responsibility. And they are NOT good at it!! Take it from someone who works with fifteen years olds DAILY!! Even the most "good" well behaved teenager does and says thoughtless harmful things that hurt others sometimes in excruciating ways. And you ask them, "What were you thinking?" after it's blown up in their face and the answer is ALWAYS, "I don't know" OR "I wasn't thinking."

Developmentally, middle school is about fitting in. It is not easy for kids at this age to stand up for what is right, to make decisions that are healthy, to communicate in healthy ways. Marinette's whole character is about learning to do that! And to showcase that you have to show her making mistakes, sometimes even big ones, and learning to take responsibility for those choices.

Marinette salt hurts me so much because the salt seems to paint her at this malicious manipulative girl who wants to control Adrien and the world on whole. That she's malicious in the choices that she's made.

Meanwhile, the narrative is not framing her as in the right when she makes these choices. Kagami told her she disagreed in almost the first scene. Nathalie told her it was time to tell the truth. Throughout the whole special, it's obvious how much the choice she made is weighing on her, how much she's wondering if this was right. She seems to know on some level that it isn't.

THAT IS SO RELATABLE!!!

Have you ever lied to a friend or to your parents? And then, realized huh, I probably shouldn't have done that, but now you're in too deep and don't know how to take it back? Have you ever NOT told someone about a hard truth about themselves or about you because you didn't want to hurt their feelings, and then have to watch as they get hurt or rejected again and again because they just don't realize what the problem is??? Or confronted with someone around you who has lost a lot and just not sure at all what to do in the face of all that? And then to be given the choice to maybe ease the hurt of that loss with a lie? You think you WOULDN'T at least CONSIDER doing that for someone you love??

Do I think it will bite her in the butt? YES!! AND I AM HERE TO SEE IT!

Nathalie tells Marinette they should tell the truth. And Marinette's like, "but you'll go to jail." And Nathalie nods, accepting this. "But then Adrien will be alone." And Nathalie responds with "he'll have you."

DO YOU KNOW HOW TERRIFYING THAT WOULD BE TO HER??

If she does tell the truth, Adrien DOES lose Nathalie. That would hurt him too. Adrien DOES have to deal with the backlash of being Hawkmoth's son both inside his own head and with the world at large. And maybe in the long term, that would be the better choice. But how many of us choose what's better in the long term??? (THE ANSWER HERE IS ALMOST ZERO! I DON'T CARE HOW OLD YOU ARE!)

Bunnyx tells her there will consequences good and bad to every decision she makes. And what matters is how she faces the consequences. How she tries to take responsibility for them in the future.

Marinette is not trying to hurt Adrien here. She's not trying to manipulate or control him. It also doesn't mean she thinks what Gabriel did was right or that she condones his actions. It certainly doesn't mean she's okay with abuse. Everyone saying that she is has the benefit of the global perspective of knowing everything in the show! Marinette does NOT have that perspective.

Does that mean she isn't causing harm? No! She IS probably causing harm here. As so many of us do unintentionally, or sometimes even knowing that we're doing it because doing something else feels impossible to face in that moment.

And when the truth comes out, and I do think Gabriel's identity will come out (I'm less confident about the senti reveal, but that's more because they're literally not allowed to say the words), Adrien is going to have a LOT to work through. But the thing about Adrien, that all of his defenders seem to misunderstand, is that HE IS FORGIVING! If she explains it all to him, he will be angry and maybe hurt, but he is also going to be the first to understand. He's been the one right there next to her with a front row seat to all the pressures she had to face often completely on her own. I think she will be way more angry and hard on herself than he will be on her. That's kinda who his character is. He's NOT VENGEFUL.

This whole show from the beginning has been about characters making mistakes, sometimes learning from them, and being forgiven for them!! And it's the FORGIVENESS AND UNDERSTANDING given to each other after the fact that has brought the characters together time and time again. Watch origins and look at the class dynamic. Then watch guilt trip. The class has come together in a way they absolutely were not in the beginning! Because they have gotten to know each other and forgave each other. Watch Alya apologize to Marinette for telling Nino about still being the fox, and watch Marinette smile and say she knows what it feels like to need to share your secret with your best friend! Watch Ladybug ask Chat Noir if he understands the weight of a secret, and have him dryly agree that he is familiar with the feeling.

They are all flawed characters who make mistakes, who do things that hurt each other even when they're are trying SO HARD to do the opposite, and that's why I love them!!

I like characters making mistakes! I like there to be conflict in my stories.

And what I love about miraculous is that so far, the resolution to conflicts has always been one of listening to each other, and coming to a place of understanding and forgiveness.

[perplexingly]

My favourite Merrill banter

[lgbtlunaverse]

There's a version of the "don't go grocery shopping while hungry" rule specifically for writers where you should never under any circumstances be allowed to touch your draft within 3 hours of reading a really good story. Because sometimes when you read something great your head goes "fuck this is so much better than my stuff I should make that more like THIS instead!" Look at me. That's the devil talking and you should close the document NOW.

[dappy-dappernette]

I keep on hearing people go all "The voice of the Smitten is such a creep. All he wants in the princess is someone to control and keep as a pretty object. He'd drop the princess if she wasn't the perfect petite maiden like in the damsel route." and I will not stand for the Smitten slander.

Like- He's been in love with her as a burning corpse ghost lady:

A terrifying ghost woman who wants to bring fear and chaos to the world:

And even a murderous blade monster woman who would kill you and enjoy every second of it:

Like, he ALWAYS loves the princess no matter what she looks like or how she acts, he loves her for being herself no matter what or who she is. That's the point of his character and I'm tired of people slandering my boy.

[swiggity-swexual-i-am-asexual]

As per usual, it’s DP crossover with (probably) DC, although you could probably adjust it for other fandoms

ANYWAYS

A little kid and his mother are trick or treating in another city, perhaps at some kind of event rather than knocking on doors, and the kid is dressed as Phantom. It’s very adorable, with his little ghost-shaped bucket and clearly homemade and already stained costume—listen, white only works if you can just fly over street grime or phase it out of your clothes—and his slightly I’ll fitting wig. The kid is SO happy to be out and about dressed as his favorite, and maybe even showed it off to Phantom back in Amity Park before his family left.

The hero, insert whoever you wish here, is probably in civvies and just enjoying the event. The kid, meanwhile, is so glad when people ask who he is so he can explain, and so- the hero gets to hear ALL ABOUT the local town hero who is probably pretty small time despite the kid’s clearly exaggerated stories. The hero certainly never heard of him, but the kid’s mom confirms that Phantom really was the town hero, despite some mixed reviews of the poor guy.

“Did you manage to show him your costume?” the hero asks.

“Yeah! We went down to the cemetery to leave flowers and I got to show him my costume.”

Wait. Cemetery? Maybe it was part of theme, because Phantom had to be named that for a reason, but… it sounded like…

The kid ignores the suddenly VERY still hero and instead turns to his mom. “Momma, do you think we should bring him candy? He doesn’t get to trick or treat like we do, and I can work super hard to get him a bunch!”

The kid’s mom just smiles. “We could, but maybe we should bring him something homemade. I bet he’d like something more filling, teen boys like him have a hollow leg.”

The kid wrinkles his nose. “Like Vernie with the pizza bagels?”

“Like your cousin, yes. We can make some cinnamon rolls and take them to his memorial, maybe bring some of the apples from your grandpa’s garden…”

The hero is pretty much forgotten as the two-part family wanders off, not quite intentionally forgetting the hero is there so much as the hero somewhat accidentally ended the conversation when they just froze and didn’t ask anything further.

Not that the hero didn’t want to. But they’d learn something very serious.

One—there was a small town hero they’d never heard of. Two—that hero was apparently a teen. Third—most pressingly, the teen hero was both beloved enough to have kids dressing up as him and dead enough to have a grave.

This… might require some phone calls.

[anghraine]

It's always been intriguing to me that, even when Elizabeth hates Darcy and thinks he's genuinely a monstrous, predatory human being, she does not ever perceive him as sexually predatory. In fact, literally no one in the novel suggests or believes he is sexually dangerous at any point. There's not the slightest hint of that as a factor in the rumors surrounding him, even though eighteenth-century fiction writers very often linked masculine villainy to a possibility of sexual predation in the subtext or just text*. Austen herself does this over and over when it comes to the true villains of her novels.

Even as a supposed villain, though, Darcy is broadly understood to be predatory and callous towards men who are weaker than him in status, power, and personality—with no real hint of sexual threat about it at all (certainly none towards women). Darcy's "villainy" is overwhelmingly about abusing his socioeconomic power over other men, like Wickham and Bingley. This can have secondhand effects on women's lives, but as collateral damage. Nobody thinks he's targeting women.

In addition, Elizabeth's interpretations of Darcy in the first half of the book tend to involve associating him with relatively prestigious women by contrast to the men in his life (he's seen as extremely dissimilar from his male friends and, as a villain, from his father). So Elizabeth understands Darcy-as-villain not in terms of the popular, often very sexualized images of masculine villainy at the time, but in terms of rich women she personally despises like Caroline Bingley and Lady Catherine de Bourgh (and even Georgiana Darcy; Elizabeth assumes a lot about Georgiana in service of her hatred of Darcy before ever meeting her).

The only people in Elizabeth's own community who side with Darcy at this time are, interestingly, both women, and likely the highest-status unmarried women in her community: Charlotte Lucas and Jane Bennet. Both have some temperamental affinities with Darcy, and while it's not clear if he recognizes this, he quietly approves of them without even knowing they've been sticking up for him behind the scenes.

This concept of Darcy-as-villain is not just Elizabeth's, either. Darcy is never seen by anyone as a sexual threat no matter how "bad" he's supposed to be. No one is concerned about any danger he might pose to their daughters or sisters. Kitty is afraid of him, but because she's easily intimidated rather than any sense of actual peril. Even another man, Mr Bennet, seems genuinely surprised to discover late in the novel that Darcy experiences attraction to anything other than his own ego.

I was thinking about this because of how often the concept of Darcy as an anti-hero before Elizabeth "fixes him" seems caught up in a hypermasculine, sexually dangerous, bad boy image of him that even people who actively hate him in the novel never subscribe to or remotely imply. Wickham doesn't suggest anything of the kind, Elizabeth doesn't, the various gossips of Meryton don't, Mr Bennet and the Gardiners don't, nobody does. If anything, he's perceived as cold and sexless.

Wickham in particular defines Darcy's villainy in opposition to the patriarchal ideal his father represented. Wickham's version of their history works to link Darcy to Lady Anne, Lady Catherine (primarily), and Georgiana rather than any kind of masculine sexuality. This version of Darcy is a villain who colludes with unsympathetic high-status women to harm men of less power than themselves, but villain!Darcy poses no direct threat to women of any kind.

It's always seemed to me that there's a very strong tendency among fans and academics to frame Darcy as this ultra-gendered figure with some kind of sexual menace going on, textually or subtextually. He's so often understood entirely in terms of masculinity and sexual desire, with his flaws closely tied to both (whether those flaws are his real ones, exaggerated, or entirely manufactured). Yet that doesn't seem to be his vibe to other characters in the story. There's a level at which he does not register to other characters as highly masculine in his affiliations, highly sexual, or in general as at all unsafe** to be around, even when they think he's a monster. And I kind of feel like this makes the revelations of his actual decency all along and his full-on heroism later easier to accept in the end.

------------

*The incompetently awful villain(?) in Sanditon, for instance, imagines himself another Lovelace (a reference to the famous rapist-villain of Samuel Richardson's Clarissa). Evelina's sheltered education and lack of protectors makes her vulnerable to sexual exploitation in Frances Burney's Evelina, though she ultimately manages to avoid it. There's frequently an element of sexual predation in Gothic novels even of very different kinds (e.g. Ann Radcliffe's The Mysteries of Udolpho and Matthew Lewis's The Monk both lean into this, in their wildly dissimilar styles). William Godwin's novel Caleb Williams, a book mostly about the destructive evils of class hierarchies and landowning classes specifically, depicts the mutual obsession of the genteel villain Falkland and working class hero Caleb in notoriously homoerotic terms (Godwin himself added a preface in 1832 saying, "Falkland was my Bluebeard, who had perpetrated atrocious crimes ... Caleb Williams was the wife"). This list could go on for a very long time.

**Darcy is also not usually perceived by other characters as a particularly sexual, highly masculine person in a safe way, either, even once his true character is known. Elizabeth emphasizes the resilience of Darcy's love for her more than the passionate intensity they both evidently feel; in the later book, she does sometimes makes assumptions about his true feelings or intentions based on his gender, but these assumptions are pretty much invariably shown to be wrong. In general the cast is completely oblivious to the attraction he does feel; even Charlotte, who wonders about something in that quarter, ends up doubting her own suspicions and wonders if he's just very absent-minded.

The novel emphasizes that he is physically attractive, but it goes to pains to distinguish this from Wickham's sex appeal or the charisma of a Bingley or Fitzwilliam. Mr Bennet (as mentioned above) seems to have assumed Darcy is functionally asexual, insofar as he has a concept of that. Most of the fandom-beloved moments in which Darcy is framed as highly sexual, or where he himself is sexualized for the audience, are very significantly changed in adaptation or just invented altogether for the adaptations they appear in. Darcy watching Elizabeth after his bath in the 1995 is invented for that version, him snapping at Elizabeth in their debates out of UST is a persistent change from his smiling banter with her in the book, the fencing to purge his feelings is invented, the pond swim/wet shirt is invented. In the 2005 P&P, the instant reaction to Elizabeth is invented, the hand flex of repressed passion is invented, the Netherfield Ball dance as anything but an exercise in mutual frustration is invented, the near-kiss after the proposal in invented, etc. And in those as well, he's never presented as sexually predatory, not even as a "villain."

[superkitty21]

Anne Rice will write the most loving, nuanced, sympathetic portrayal of a complex messy character and you'll find out she hated them. Like what the hell.

[conejita-canelita]

“Make more morally-grey female characters!!!” You guys couldn’t even handle Penelope Featherington.

[cringefailvox]

charlie's low empathy/high sympathy desperation to help people without ever really understanding WHY they feel the way they do + vaggie's complex about needing to be useful to the people she loves or else she's worthless = charlie completely mistaking vaggie's self-sacrifical behavior for an expression of love and not the trauma response that it is, because all she's grasping are the literal words out of vaggie's mouth and not the alarming nuances of terrified self-hatred lurking underneath

[durge-marzio]

Ohhh, I'm rereading Mystra's entry in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide... and this detail:

This means Gale was punished for trying to restore and preserve what he thought was a lost piece of Mystra's magic. Gale being Mystra's ex-lover put aside. He as her follower, she his goddess, was punished for attempting to do the one foundational rule of her faith.

I'm seething and so sad at the same time.

Edit: I used the word punish loosely, as in, toxic/abusive people will take any small mistake or action and twist it into something they can take advantage of. This post was also largely from the stand point of a toxic deity rather than a toxic partner, but both takes are valid here. Especially with the, “you didn’t stay compliant so now I’m giving you the silent treatment” part of it—from a god and a partner perspective.

[bunnieswithknives]

I feel bad for neglecting Hazel so much, I do have many thoughts about her.. and also a mermaid au that im probably not going to do anything with

[elfcollector]

Did you think you mattered, Hawke? Did you think anything you ever did mattered? [...] You're a failure, and your family died knowing it.

[teleportationmagic]

"You weakened me!" By Ambessa is not a declaration of apathy! It is not her blaming Mel! It is when Mel finally learns that her mother isn't apathetic to her, that she isn't disinterested in her fate or disappointing in her, but instead she loved her too much and too deeply. That Mel threatened Ambessa with ruination, because the only way Ambessa has ever known to survive is by embracing brutality and sacrificing a peaceful death, while all Mel has ever wanted is peace. That a peaceful death would have literally meant the death of her child, back when she was still pregnant with one of them!

And Mel's disapproval of her meant that Ambessa could feel herself tumbling into a path of peace. Into a better path, maybe, but a path that for Ambessa has only ever meant death. If she could be more hardhearted, maybe she could have kept both - her family's survival, and her daughter - but alas. Her sending Mel away is not a failure on Mel's part, but in fact a failure on Ambessa's - because she could not withstand the arrows of her disapproval, now she needs to come to Piltover to collect her before whatever older enemies she has catch up with them both. She comes to Piltover to correct that mistake, to show Mel a harder heart, and yet! It's doeesn't work! Because Mel still demands of her vulnerability and she cannot help giving it to her!

Is there no greater expression of love, for her? To even contemplate opening herself up to that which is deadly, for the sake of the life and soul of her daughter? Is there nothing so undoing?

[causalityparadoxes]

Mrs Flood being Susan would be really funny tho. Because you have Susan Triad: this perfect, lovely peoples person who wants to help everyone, dangled as Susan. She has dreams! Could be fobwatched! The Doctor's wonderful lovely perfect granddaughter returned!

But Susan wasn't a perfect person. So instead it's the woman who can be sharp, blunt, and even a little bit mean. But who is also mischievous and fun when she wants to be. Someone who's just a bit odd. All of which, imo, can be very Susan.

Someone who has clearly lived a life. Sitting at the sidelines being enigmatic as hell. Her grandfather's granddaughter. Just think It'd be such a good twist

[onebizarrekai]

basement gang activity…

[miaiminnis]

give me something pretty to wear beneath my bloodstained clothes

darling, the devil knows my name 🥀🗝️🦩🗡️💃