#GUESS WHO'S ALSO A VICTIM AND EXPLICITLY WAS THE ONE BEING ABUSED IN THE LONG TERM OF THEIR RELATIONSHIP

[urproblematicfav-arsonk]

I'm gonna have a mental breakdown why am I getting lapis and jasper discourse tiktoks in 2024. WHY ARE WE STILL VICTIM BLAMING JASPER IN 2024

[codenamesazanka]

My prediction on what was Scissors-kun's deal ended up being pretty correct: he was indeed abused - horrifically so, being tied up and locked away - and then abandoned by his family during the war because of his quirk. Except Horikoshi actually exceeded my expectations and revealed that it wasn't because of behavioral issues (not that it would've justified it! Never. but I was imagining a parallel to Toga), it was only because his quirk was a random mutation, and also his family sewn his mouth shut.

Because thing is. The set up for something like this was here all along. I predicted it based on things that were already happening in the story. Continued fear of 'abnormal' quirks; horrific domestic violence enacted due to this; Heroes never catching wind of this because this was from a family that weren't consider 'Villains', so this was Scissors-kun's normal. And this normal broke and the dark secret got revealed only because something extraordinary happened - the country collapsed. Scissors-kun family left him, so he was able to escape.

But... none of this is apparently going to be addressed. The happy ending is Scissors-kun being found and helped, instead of any widespread, far-reaching, systemic change that would prevent shit like this. No, 'but it's obviously going to be addressed off-screen' doesn't count. The story brought up on-page and explicitly that quirk discrimination is a thing, that abusive quirk counseling/treatment is a thing, that abuse and abandonment of children is a thing. I expect the solutions to be on-page and explicit as well, and not just 'if I reach out when it's not my business, then...!'

(Also. it is their fucking business. They're government employees. Their job is to save people and guarantee the welfare of all citizens. it is very much their business.)

I'm not upset that Scissors-kun isn't Shigaraki; never really expected that in the first place. Shigaraki died. Deku fucking failed. I've come to terms with it. I'm not upset that Shigaraki wasn't saved, but this kid was; not even in the meta-, story-, character-sense, because, fine, he's replacement goldfish Tenko, but I'll take the 'we'll do better next time', it's a good thing this kid gets saved, it's what Shigaraki would've wanted, it's what the League fought to destroy for. It's even good that The Old Lady has become a better person.

What baffles me is that this save occurs pretty much because of nothing except the purported 'What Deku Showed The World That Day (When He Killed A Man)'. This save isn't because Heroes and civilians have more awareness of victims. This save isn't because society is promising to stop quirk discrimination. This save isn't because Ochako learns of Toga's abusive parents and so sets out to tackle this issue of quirk-related domestic violence. This save isn't because Deku has lead a new movement to stop bystander inaction. (Moreover, about 'bystander inaction' - Scissors-kun lists 5 other people outside his immediate family of Dad/Mom/Sis who knew about him... and did nothing. His uncle, his aunt, his grandparents, his great-grandfather - if they didn't directly help sew Scissors-kun mouth shut, they still turned a blind eye and never alerted authorities. (Tenko explicitly states this as one of the factors that led to him lashing out, but I guess the story forgot about it long ago, so. Even with the memories sharing of Chapter 417 and 418, Deku never sees this.))

As I said above, none of the issues that lead to Scissors-kun being in the circumstances he was in has been addressed.

This save isn't because any random civilian has decided to help - because any rando can and should help! This isn't even because Old Lady came to the guilt-ridden conclusion herself to do better.

This save is because Old Lady, carrying the burden of guilt, watched Deku kill the kid she didn't save all those years ago (tho she doesn't know it) and is apparently inspired by this act of "I can't help but do something" to finally take action (as helpfully narrated by Hawks). It's not because civilians have done any deep thinking about the rot that permeates their culture; it's because Deku was a hard-working murderer on TV. There were dozens of other people on the street. Real change should've been a whole crowd of people seeing Scissors-kun and wanting to help - someone giving him a blanket or offering him shoes while another calls for an ambulance???

But whatever. I just want to state this: the first thing that truly saved Scissors-kun was Shigaraki's destruction. Without it, his family would've stayed in that house and kept him locked up. It's really only because of Shigaraki's destruction that Scissors-kun even got the opportunity to find freedom and get his hand held.

[bisolationist]

The fact that she deleted your response. Mocking people who suffered homophobic attacks is not homophobic as long as they are bisexual according to this people. :d

Shrug, not surprised she blocked me. As I said before, homophobia against bisexuals never gets treated seriously - and bisexuals merely pointing it out are reacted to with hostility, rather than the people offering straight up rape apologia. Nobody seems to mind that's how bisexual rape victims are treated, no one's gonna come in and say any of that was homophobic. So like... yeah what's new.

Anyway this is why the word biphobia is necessary.

So she's now saying the "core" of homophobia is lack of OSA, not SSA itself, and that bi women only face "Real Homophobia" while in same-sex relationships. Implicitly, the high rates of domestic violence and sexual assault against bi women therefore lie outside the "core" of homophobia, I guess, and are merely Peripheral homophobia? Not "Real" homophobia?

What marks these sort of material abuses as outside the core? Just that it happens to bisexuals more - both in rates and total numbers - and thus cannot be considered to be core since it might imply bisexuals are also at the core of homophobia? That they happen more *because* of the mixture of SSA and other-sex relationships implying being in a same-sex relationships is not the only way to experience homophobia? Are we supposed to pretend the higher rates are not because of homophobia - even in other-sex partnered women? Are we supposed to treat these as less severe - just 'homophobia lite'? Or is it merely being treated as ideologically irrelevant to understanding the 'core' of homophobia?

She later talks about how bisexuals face no increased material brutality, as if IPV, sexual assault, and the variety of material challenges which bisexuals face at elevated rates are not real brutality I guess. If it does not happen due to bisexuality explicitly (and many times it does) it still happens due to bisexuality in practice. The proven rates of rape and abuse against bisexuals continues to be treated as an inconvenience to bury, so they can pretend the het men abusing the bi women they're with see them as "redeemed" instead of targets for homophobia.

So yeah overall, it just seems like a transparent attempt to devalue homophobia against bisexuals + that ultimately she agrees with her rape-apologist anon in that homophobia should be defined so that it includes bisexuals as incidental/peripheral rather than at the core.

[galemalio]

3 Examples of Racial Bias in Animation Storytelling

It’s not hard to grasp that a white person, while not explicitly or consciously racist in the sense we might usually imagine, is still inherently racially biased because they benefit from and grow up used to white supremacy.” - Scottishwobbly, Tumblr

This is nothing new. This is something POC (People of Color) have been talking about in separate fandoms. Nevertheless, it needs to be acknowledged by those unaware.

This article is not made to say that some of the animations that I will use as examples are bad. But in the hopes that we, as consumers and creators, will do better in the future in handling characters that are POC. 

Most often, racial bias in storytelling is when the narrative treats white or light skin toned characters better than darker skin toned characters. The darker skin toned characters are often POC-coded or actual POC.

White creators often do not notice their racial bias in their storytelling as they benefit from and grow up with white privileges and white supremacy. This can also apply to light-skinned POC who have light skin priviliges. 

Some of us don’t often see it but real people who relate to the characters of color do. Especially when it reflects from their experiences with racial bias, microaggressions, colorism and flat out racism.

So when they speak up, it’s important to listen to them to unlearn the racial bias we may have in ourselves. 

I will be emphasizing “the narrative” for I am criticizing how the story treats its dark-skinned characters and not because I am criticizing the characters themselves.

This article is critiqued by @visibilityofcolor​ as a sensitivity reader once and then additions were made before publishing. If you’re looking for a Black sensitivity reader, you can contact her. 

This article is a 14-minute read at average speed so buckle up. Unless you want to skip to your show mentioned below. External Tumblr Resources will be put in the reblog.

Here are three examples that I was made aware of. 

Example #1: The Narrative Treats the Light-Skinned Character at the Expense of the Dark-Skinned Character

Steven Universe was one of the animations that pushed lgbt+ representation in cartoon media. However, there are narratives here and there that showed racial bias. 

SU creator Rebecca Sugar was raised with "Jewish sensibilities" and both siblings observe the lighting of Hanukkah candles with their parents through Skype.[1] Rebecca Sugar also talked about being non-binary.[2] 

But as a white person, she (and the rest of the SU crew) is not aware of the inherently biased values from growing up and benefiting from white privilege. 

One example is the human zoo. There are people that have spoken up about this such as @jellyfax​​ of Tumblr who pointed out that the Crewniverse mishandled a loaded topic and reinforced a white colonist propaganda where the captive humans of mostly black/brown people are naive, docile and childlike in order to subjugate the people that they colonized. .

What I’m here is how a character of color from the main cast is more obligated to the lighter-skinned character. 

In the episode, Friend Ship, one fan had spoken out about how Garnet, who had been validly angry at Pearl, was compelled by a dangerous situation to forgive Pearl. Garnet is a Black-coded character. While Pearl is a light-skinned character.  

Garnet was mad at Pearl for tricking her into always fusing with her. Then they were trapped in a chamber that was going to crush them. In this situation, they have to fuse in order to save themselves but Garnet refuses to because she was still angry at her. 

In the end, they were forced to talk it out, for Garnet to understand Pearl’s reason for wanting to fuse with her and everything worked out well.

The narrative focused so much on Pearl’s self-worth issues at the expense of Garnet’s right to be angry. 

Yes, it showed that Pearl is trying her best to make up for it but Garnet should have been allowed to work at her own anger at her own pace instead of being obligated to consider Pearl’s feelings over her own. 

I wouldn’t have noticed it until someone had mentioned it. Because it was never my experience. 

But it’s there, continuing the message that it’s okay to put the emotional labor on Black people and disregard their own feelings for the sake of the non-Black people who have hurt them -particularly light-skinned women. 

White Fragility and Being Silenced White Woman Tears

Again, racial bias in animation storytelling is often not intentional because white creators do not experience it due to white privilege. 

Without meaning to, that scene alone shows Garnet as the Angry Black woman trope that is ungrateful and rude to Pearl who then ends up in tears. Without meaning to, Pearl with her light skin, became the tearful white girl trope that had to be sympathized over.

The Angry Black Woman trope is a combination of the worst negative stereotypes of a Black woman: overly aggressive, domineering, emasculating, loud, disagreeable and uppity.[13] 

The Tearful white girl trope comes from the combination of the stereotypes of white women being morally upstanding and delicate and therefore should be protected.[13] 

Which, unfortunately, many white women have taken advantage of.

These two tropes are harmful to WOC (Women of Color) because they experience the "weary weaponizing of white women's tears". This tactic employed by many white women incites sympathy and avoids accountability for their actions, turning the tables to their accuser and forcing their accuser to understand them instead.

(Image by Виктория Бородинова from Pixabay)

In "Weapon of lass destruction: The tears of a white woman", Author Shay described that white tears turns a white woman into the priority of whatever space she's in. "It doesn't matter if you're right, once her tears are activated, you cease to exist." [11] 

White woman tears have gotten Black people beaten and lynched such as Emmett Till. Carolyn Bryant who had accused 14 year old Emmett Till of sexually harassing her in 1955, admitted she lied about those claims years later in 2007.[15]

In Awesomely Luvvie's "About the Weary Weaponizing of White Women Tears", she states that the innocent white woman is a caricature many subconsciously embrace because it hides them from consequences. [10]

In The Guardian’s article, "How White Women Use Strategic Tears to Silence Women of Colour", Ruby Hamad shares her experience:

"Often, when I have attempted to speak to or confront a white woman about something she has said or done that has impacted me adversely, I am met with tearful denials and indignant accusations that I am hurting her. My confidence diminished and second-guessing myself, I either flare up in frustration at not being heard (which only seems to prove her point) or I back down immediately, apologising and consoling the very person causing me harm."[4]

This is not to say that all crying white women are insincere. But as activist Rachel Cargle said:

“I refuse to listen to white women cry about something. When women have come up to me crying, I say, ‘Let me know when you feel a little better, then maybe we can talk.’”[3]

One of the most quoted words in “White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism.” is this:

“It is white people’s responsibility to be less fragile; people of color don’t need to twist themselves into knots trying to navigate us as painlessly as possible.”[3]  

When white women cry in defense, instead of taking accountability, People of Color are then gaslighted into thinking they’re the bad guy. This is emotional abuse and a manipulation tactic. 

People of Color shouldn’t have to bend backwards to accommodate discomfited white or light-skinned people who have hurt them. 

How She-Ra and the Princesses of Power (SPOP) Did It Right

Despite SPOP having good lgbtq+ representations, there are other biases in the show. Such as Mara, a WOC whose only purpose was to sacrifice herself for the white protagonist. There was also the insensitive joke in their stream regarding Bow’s sibling that perpetuated an Anti-Black stereotype which Noelle Stevenson has apologized for.[14]

But the scene I have encountered where the Black character was validly angry and his feelings were treated well by the narrative, came from SPOP.

Bow, a black character, was validly angry at Glimmer, a lighter skinned character. Glimmer made a lot of bad decisions, one of them was using Adora and their friends as bait, without their knowledge, to lure out and capture Catra.  

Glimmer tearfully apologized in Season 5, Episode 4. Adora readily forgave her. But Bow didn't. 

They faced dangers along the way but the story didn't put them in a dangerous situation where Bow has to forgive Glimmer in order to get out of it. 

This was Glimmer's words of apology:

"Look, I know you're still mad at me. Maybe you'll be mad at me for a really long time. I deserved it. And maybe... maybe we'll never be friends like we used to be. But I'm not going to stop trying to make it better. I made a mistake with the heart of Etheria. I should've listened to you and I'm sorry. You get to be mad. For as long as you need to be. But I'm not going anywhere. And when you're ready, I'll be here."

In short, Bow was allowed to take the time to be mad and not just get over it for someone else’s sake. The story validates his feelings and he was allowed to take his own pace. That is emotional respect the story gave to him.

Example #2: The Narrative Gives Better Endings or Portrayals to Colonizers than Their Victims

Avatar: The Last Airbender has handled dark themes well such as genocide, war, PTSD, disability and redemption with great worldbuilding.

However, I never noticed the racial bias in ATLA until people spoke up of the double standards in ATLA’s treatment of light-skinned colonizers compared to their dark-skinned victims-turned-villains.

The characters in question -Iroh, Azula, Jet and Hama- are all flawed and well-rounded in a believable way. But how the narrative treats them is unequal.

General Iroh is an ex-colonizer who gets to redeem himself and not answer for his past war crimes, living a peaceful life as a tea shop owner. The only reason Iroh changed was when he was personally affected by the negativity of their military subjugation -his son’s death. It wasn’t the harm of the Fire nation ravaging Earth kingdom villages or cities and affecting millions of people that opened his eyes.

Azula, the tyrannical daughter, had closure of her mother's rejection when she was a child and was able to escape imprisonment.

Jet and Hama, victims of colonization who have done bad things, did not get similar conclusions to their stories OR compensation for what they have gone through from the Fire Nation's colonization. 

Jet was given a second chance but was arrested for trying to expose Zuko and Iroh being firebenders -firebenders who were their enemies for conquering their villages. Then he died from the injuries of the person who had brainwashed and mind-controlled him. 

Hama was imprisoned for life. 

Compared to the sins of the light-skinned colonizers, the narrative didn’t give Jet and Hama the development where they could heal from their trauma, receive compensation for what happened to them and really have a chance in life. 

The dark-skinned victims of colonization just became a lesson to the viewers how they shouldn’t hold grudges for being colonized. The end. They have received consequences for their actions but there is no continuation to their stories after that. 

It almost seems like the narrative is saying that because they have harmed colonizers who have no part in their trauma (and in Jet’s case, some Earth kingdom villagers), they are therefore unworthy to be given an actual chance in life. 

While Azula and Iroh, who have actively participated in conquering, colonizing and attacking the Earth Kingdom itself, were.   

Someone once said that if indigenous people have control over Hama’s story, it would have been done differently. But the ATLA crew are white, non-indigenous people who prioritized redeeming colonizers instead.

The narrative has also affected how the ATLA fandom thinks. If most fans are asked who they would want to be redeemed, the popular option would be Azula over Jet or Hama.

Once again, I don’t think the ATLA crew noticed it due to their racial bias. But still, the harm is done and the racially biased message is continued: 

The colonizers and their descendants don’t have to make amends for the colonizers’ crimes. Or if they do, only lightly since it’s in the past (no matter how recent that past is). 

The colonized who rebel will tend to hurt innocent people and then get a grisly end for getting in way over their heads.  

I would venture as far as to say that the narrative may have the  added subconscious desire to quiet their white anxiety on the vengeance of the colonized. As I have learned when writing about Vodou stereotypes and how they have stemmed from the history of white anxiety of Black vengeance, of Black fetishization and of dissolution of the white race through intermarriages.

In @visibilityofcolor’s blog, someone asked:

 “So I saw some of the really heated debates on here and on twitter about how if Iroh and Azula can be portrayed sympathetically despite their actions then characters like Jet and Hama should've been given a chance too. Do you think that the writers understood the implications of only redeeming characters from the colonizer/fascist nation but not giving the characters who suffered because of their fascism a second chance too?”

To which VisibilityOfColor replied:

“No, because at the end of the day, the writers are white. When it comes to stuff like this, it’s no surprise when we see white writers redeem problematic characters before they actually redeem victims of those racist problematic characters. For instance, Dave Filioni, who worked on both avatar and star wars rebels, did the same thing when redeeming agent kallus who was an soldiers in the imperial army and took credit for a genocide. where as victims of the empire were still painted in negative lights. i really don’t think they understand.

They have this ‘be the better person’ view on things, which is what a lot of white people tend to emulate when it comes to people of color standing up to their oppressors. and unfortunately, these are ideas passed on to children, esp minorities. that they should forgive people and communities who hurt them and ‘be the better person’. this is why white ppl don’t need to write narratives for people of color.”

Example #3: The Narrative Favors the Light Skinned Character Than Dark Skinned Character in Similar Situations

I would like to reiterate that racial bias in storytelling is often not intentional. I am not saying the creators and the people who support them are bad people. No.

However, I encourage that once a racial bias is made known in our work, it is our responsibility to change them to stop the perpetuation of its harmful message.

Hazbin Hotel is a popular cartoon with whimsical designs and its concept opens the conversation about redemption. The creator, Vivziepop may not have noticed the racial bias in her cartoon as a white Latina [5] that grew up with and benefits from white privileges, along with the Hazbin crew. 

In the Youtbe video, "Hazbin Hotel - How Art took over Writing", Staxlotl states:

“I understand that there was a lot of time and effort put into this pilot, almost three years worth of effort. But I think most of that time was spent into the art and visuals when it should’ve gone into polishing the writing in the characters.”[6]

Once again, I’m not here to critique the characters but how the narrative treats its dark-skinned characters.

The story treats Charlie, the white-skinned, “Disney-esque” protagonist princess differently from how it treats Vaggie, the dark-skinned, more outspoken and protective Latina girlfriend of Charlie who supports the princess’ cause. 

In its pilot episode, both girls experience humiliation. While Charlie is portrayed by the story as someone the viewers have to feel sorry for...

...Vaggie is portrayed in her humiliation as the butt of the joke for the viewers.

While they both didn’t like what Angel Dust did, Charlie was sympathized over in the narrative as a moment... 

...while Vaggie’s angry but valid callouts were dismissed and ignored as part of the comedy.

While Charlie was someone that needs to be protected in the narrative... 

...Vaggie is left to fend for herself. 

Again, I don’t think the creators noticed the racial bias of their cartoon. However, this racial bias is reflected in the harmful perceptions that dark-skinned women, particularly Black women and Black girls, are more mature, tougher and need less protection at a young age.[7] 

This adultification bias perceives them as challenging authority when they express strong or contrary views and are then given harsher discipline than white girls who misbehave.[8] And this continues when they grow up.

In a 2017 study, Black women and girls aged 12-60 years old confirmed they are treated harsher by their white peers and are accused of being aggressive when they would defend themselves or explain their point of view to authority figures.[8] 

This bias also coincides with the Spicy Latina trope of a brown-skinned, hot-blooded, quick-tempered and passionate woman.

Everyday Feminism described this trope as "Although objects of desire for many, the spicy Latina may have too much personality to handle. So much so that she is often viewed as domineering or emasculating." [16]

Sounds familiar? (Look at Angry Black Woman trope above.)

Why is it that a light-skinned character, Charlie, is allowed to be vulnerable and be sympathized while the dark-skinned Latina character, Vaggie, is mocked, dismissed and expected to tough it out?

Severina Ware had to remind the world in her article that relates to the bias against dark skinned characters:

“Black women are not offered the protection and gentleness of our white counterparts. We are not given permission to be soft and delicate. We are required to exhibit strength and fortitude not only because our lives depend on it, but because so many others depend on us. Black women should not be charged with the responsibility of saving everyone when nobody is here to save us.”[12] 

As @cullenvhenan​ of Tumblr has said in her post:

“if you're a white creator and your brown/black characters are always sassy, reckless, aggressive or cold and your white characters are always soft, demure, shy and introverted you should think about maybe why you did that”

(Image above from Iowa Law Reviews’ “Aggressive Encounters & White Fragility: Deconstructing the Trope of the Angry Black Woman”)

Detecting Your Own Racial Bias

It would be hard. No matter how much you edit and create, you may miss it because it was never your experience. 

So how do we prevent our racial bias from creeping into our creations?

Listen to POC and their feedback.

As @charishjb from Instagram has shared, here is one of the things that we can do (tumblr link here) [9]:

Consider POC voices. Listen to their experiences. Hire sensitivity POC readers. Put multiple POC voices in positions of leadership in creative projects.

Then we can stop the racial bias that perpetuates again and again in the media. I hope for that future.

[anolyso]

Utena thoughts...about 2 weeks later

I've been putting it off for way too long and so most of my thoughts stopped being fresh. On top of watching way too many analysis vids post-watch, but still I do at least want to put my 2cents of Revolutionary Girl Utena out there for the world.

Utena is perhaps one of the most famous "magical girl"/shoujo action shows out there for not only it's transgressive themes of relationship abuse and low-key pretty much being the poster girl for like actual feminist perspective on/in anime...but also just doing it all in both a heavily allegorical and understated, yet super over-the-top stylish fashion

But that's it's reputation preceding itself, is Utena worth while all these years? The answer is Yes, but it also really shows it's age and budget in pacing and repetition, tho as an appreciator for "behind the scenes" compromises in art, it's more showcasing Ikuhara's talent in working around both taboo and long-form budget constraints with just well-thought out and iconic imagery that - while episodic and formulaic - is just very good at filling the 39 eps with feasts for the eyes.

Utena broadly is about tomboy Utena with memories long ago after her parents died being "saved" by a princely figure like a princess...except she's so enthralled by the nostalgia that instead she becomes a full on Prince herself and receives a dueling ring to fight in the Ohtori Acadamy secret duels for "engagement" to Rose Bride Himemiya Anthy.

Utena is divided between 4 arcs, only the first and last being Manga adapted from hearsay:

1: Student Council Saga

2: Black Rose Saga

3: Akio Ohtori Saga

4: Apocalypse

From back to forth I'd say that Akio + Apoc is more just escalation into the finale while Black Rose being anime original comes off as a glorified side-character study which while complementing the secondary cast, feels like one of those Anime movies that has to say "but if you don't watch this part, it's pretty much optional for the main plot" despite it also actually introducing the most important antagonist within it's margins.

More importantly, it's the Student Council (arc and the actual people) that lay the foundation but also a large part of the show's focus which ironically puts Utena in the background until like almost the finale and some in-between developments, so it's less "Utena (and Anthy Himemiya)'s story" until the very end, but more like a showcase of how fucked up the system at large is (pin in that).

By the Council themselves is:

Kyouichi Saionji: The biggest jobber, like actually introduced as the most despicable loser ep 1 and proceeds to be a complete arrogant joke for the rest of the show. Honestly in another shojo "love" story, they'd find some way to redeem him but semi-compellingly they turn him into like an Aqua-lad type pathetic brat with an inferiority complex to the actual Student head

Miki Kaoru: the naive "nice, non-threatening soft boy" that also just never actually listens to the girls around him. Probably adds more complexity to the whole patriarchal idea on analytic reflection since yeah, the whole "nice guy finishes last" plays up better when the kid comes off as that "ally" energy of wanting to save Himemiya from being the Rose Bride but also low-key won't actually not just do the duels and win her cuz he's that sorta wishy-washy hypocrite. Arguably the least hateable guy in the cast (minus mascot Chu-Chu)

Juri Arisugawa: TRAGIC LESBIAN TRIANGLE LOVE. Probably the biggest point to of both "not-explicitly homosexual" but also really freaking obvious since her entire story is her girlfriend stealing her "boy crush" when actually she was crushing on her and being pretty much frustrated throughout her story as pining most of it. It's quaint by today's standards but also like damn girl, get over her she was like the worst back stabbing bitch (literally if Black Rose counts)

Nanami Kiryuu: SPEAKING OF QUEEN BITCH, it's been a long time since I've watched a High School girl bully and honestly it's kinda refreshing. If Miki is "soft-boy uwu" Nanami is a brat that gets her come-uppance often, featured prominently as an anime only with the MOST filler/comedic episodes but also not low-key, being the most out-spoken actual brother complex ironically spins perhaps the biggest twist and ironic relationships of "I love my brother but not-like-that but also like-that" by the end. Mostly comedic relief but I find her inclusion to actually add a lot more to juxtapose...

Touga Kiryuu: Big Student Council Prez himself, the first arc antagonist and also a strong foil to Saionji and later a stepping stone for Akio. Touga is THE image of a Princely Playboy Heart-Throb that in any other Shoujo romance would have the main girl win him over from all those "other girls" despite him being apathetic if not outright manipulative of them. Good thing Utena is better than that and really puts a spotlight on just not-actually-ok his power hunger for "the power to bring the world revolution" that leads him to heavily objectify Anthy, arguably even more than Misogynist Trophy Girlfriend beater Saionji, since he doesn't even see her as more than a means to an end despite professing and looking the Prince part but lacking all the actual virtues.

The Student council matters more since they're characters and subsequent tragic flaws are the ACTUAL meat of the show and on second rumination actual shows more how fucked up the system/gender dynamic/power hierarchy is since - while it blatantly fucks over Juri who can't just outright say who she likes - also show almost it's own sub-text of Masculine failings: Saionji desperately clinging to being TOXIC MASCULINE™ and completely falling short underneath Touga; Miki's "nice boy" act belying him trying to replace his low-key nostalgia for his sister (also a bitch, but apparently was more like Nanami in the manga); and best yet Touga being the quintessential "Prince in all but actual behavior" by emulating a cutthroat and Machiavellian world view but coming up empty because well, he's just an illusion of a prince...but that leads in way more to the big finale piece where I'll reintroduce the actual story's main trio

Utena Tenjou: Tomboy Prince with brain empty except for lesbian thoughts. Honestly probably what every western "STRONG INDEPENDENT WOMAN" archetype wishes they were since while having very tomboyish personality in athletics, blunt speaking and also VERY oblivious to the actual plot for REAL DRAMATIC IRONY, but also never actually demeaning her being feminine partially due to her love of an childhood prince and how she maintains her relationship with both her friend Wakaba and later Anthy. Honestly mostly a plot device after S1 until she gets ACTUAL development by the very end and instead kinda bumbles her way into undoing the entire REVOLUTION OF THE WORLD. I kinda wish she felt either more cognizant or at least felt like she was developing/properly rebuking the rest of the cast's power obsessions but I guess that's for the movie.

Anthy Himemiya: Actual Trophy Wife with a dark secret (darker than ski- wait no that's terrible scratch that). Set-up very much as an immediate princess in distress while also being the most femme Yamato Nadeshiko, Anthy being the Rose Bride as a literal prize who acts and behaves as whom she's "engaged" with desires while otherwise being quiet, wry, mysterious and noticably submissive, by the end it actually plays up into THE BIG REVEALS of just how abused she's been into a hopeless acceptance...like y'know actual abuse victims.

Akio Ohtori: Grade A Antagonist, probably the most insidious I've seen a villain in a while, Akio is notable for, back in 1997, being perhaps the big go-to of actual deconstructing the facade of a whole shoujo genre's "hots for a teacher/sexy man putting the moves" and highlighting how actually exploitative and abusive a person like that really is. Being Himemiya's brother (somewhat justified in the manga by both being a weird Sailor Moon-esque reincarnation of gods/godesses of Dios), despite how much of his motives are runing the background and how the entire back story is  uh...brought up in like barely in the last arc with little lead up (some scenes feel like they'd be a full melodrama season and they just have like 1 scene in the final arc episodes) he manages to one-up Touga (in the plot as well) by instead of "just" objectifying girls, not-just-flat out saying Utena looks best as a princess, but y'know the fact that he is implicitly yet constantly exploiting and victim-blaming Anthy for her own suffering for "the power of Dios/Revolution of the world" turns it on its head

I've spent all this time on characters but in truth a lot of the meat of the show relies again on the Council Members fleshing out the issues of system leading to outright divorcing "being a Prince" (heroic altruistic virtues) and "being a man" (considering like all but maybe the comedic relief have some deliberately misogynistic behavior) and beyond just the plot (or rather character) synopsis, the talent goes far more in how it's framed, the symbolic/allegorical shots, the repetition adding a good episode formula flow to character showcases, probably the most "tasteful" allusion to uh...*ahem* sexual abuse that so many other edgier/prentious shows fumble. Both in how intimidating yet understated it's foreshadowing is until they hard-reveal it despite never explicitly naming it even tho it sends Nanami into hysterics

Really it's both a massive blessing and reason for it's cult beloved status for it's aesthetics but also it's burden, for being a full 39 episodic season by season character development study of everyone BUT the main trio except for snippets and the very end that makes it greatly appreciable as a legitimate work of art.

What I wanted more to say however (long overdue) is that a large part of following is, visibly at least, western feminist critiques and yes while it almost seems like Utena fits the "deconstructing patriarchy" story like a glove...it's weird how almost none of them actually can give a good historical account of actual Japanese female/gender/sexuality norms nor Anime contemporaries actually were. Like Tenchi Muyo and Berserk came out the same year (Cardcaptor Sakura the next) and despite how you can "feel" the influence in lots of modern shows like SHAFT's signature visual imagery cuts or many WESETERN shows having straight scene references to Utena....almost no one has a similar feel to Utena until like Princess Tutu comes out.

Really tho probably should've watched Utena and then Tutu because while it's undeniable that Utena is a major pillar of shoujo re-codification - what with everyone before Utena was saying they thought it'd be like a Rose of Versaille or Lady Knight rip-off...whose laughing now? - it's almost like there's a missing link between it and it's major western fanbase (probably with what few anime did get overseas, this one probably rose to the top), or how very noticeable there IS an influence on it's genre in Japan

Almost none of the big analyst fans actually know A) it's not "a deconstruction of Magical Girls" since despite Ikuhara working on Sailor Moon just before this, almost none of the tropes line up and instead more with Shoujo genre as a whole. or  one of the major inspirations was Takarazuka theater.

And this is not to dismiss how inspirational it is to it's western fandom, but while I am notably cynical towards placing things on pedestals, there's probably something about cultivating the whole pop-culture feminist reading commune with people making weird time-loop theories while kinda most of it is just filling in a mad-lib mostly thanks to Ikuhara just keeping things on the vague and letting the audience take away their own perspective.

Again, most of the show is completely sub-textual or visually/symbolically depicted and never stated nor properly defines it's weird key words (End of the World, Revolutionize the World, Power of Dios, Rose Bride, all things said constantly but never really said what they "mean". But that's also perhaps its charm, in it's allegory and very Death of the Author approach, it has definitely allowed it's fan theorizing and appreciation to flourish so there's something there for that.

Ultimately I'd say Utena the TV series is great more so for what it isn't...or rather I should say it's great for not just subverting Shoujo tropes and archetypes for the Japanese audience but also that despite dealing with some very serious and heavy subjects in obtuse and perhaps understated ways for the time, people have allowed it to be put on it's pedestal because they can easily fit it in themselves.

Honestly though, not that a more "straight forward" approach wouldn't detract from Utena but I will say that the movie, Adolescence of Utena, is very much the best encapsulation of what Utena strives to be (for another big blog post) and while the TV series has plenty of time and flexes it's directorial muscles with budget constraints and season pacing UNrestrained, the movie will trim a lot of the fat

[ultyso]

(Censoring words solely because I’m not sure the word itself can be used on tumblr.)

T/W Mentions of p*dos

T/W Mentions of gr**ming

Tldr: As a CSA Survivor, voicing concerns of things I have heard people talk about on these topics in online spaces that does more damage than good to victims, survivors, and minors. I am only one voice, so please listen to all csa survivors, victims, and minors about this topic.

I don’t speak for everyone who is a CSA Survivor. We all have different experiences and feelings, some things may be less triggering or concerning for some more than others. Other CSA Survivors feel free to talk about your own feelings, experiences, and things you wished others knew as well since every CSA Survivor’s voice should be heard, not just my own.

These are my thoughts and some of the grievances I’ve had, the invalidation of my trauma, the things that have triggered back the trauma I thought I was able to heal so long ago, and I’m tired of it.

P*dophilia is not a term where you can just throw it around at anyone and everything. Be mindful where and how you use it. Do not let the severity of this word go down. It is not a joke. It is not some fun trendy buzzword. It is not a topic just for fictional media. It is a serious issue that harms so many children in the world.

Do not invalidate the trauma of victims by focusing on just fictional characters. Reporting fictional content as CP is not as helpful as you think. Investigators are on the look out to help save real children. Putting thousands of fanart/fanfics of fictional characters at the top of their feed lets p*dos hide easier and thus causes real children to still be trapped in their situation. If the fanart/fanfics is of real minors though, action should be taken.

You need to be a protector for real children. Learn the warning signs. Learn the prevention. Learn how to act if a real child has been harmed so you can help them. If you just treat it as a joke and use the word willy nilly on things that it does not actually pertain to it is immensely performative, makes it harder for investigators to find true perpetrators, and thus only hurts more kids than helps.

Clothing ≠ p*dophilia

Jfashion such as lolita and fairy kei is not p*dophilic or p*do-baiting. I don’t know why this has become the trend to call it that.

When you say this it sounds like victim blaming. “Well it’s what they wore.” Which is terrible. If you think wearing “childish” clothing is inherently sexual YOU are very much the problem.

Clothing is not what grabs p*dos attention. Clothing doesn’t do anything. It is a self expression for the wearer and that is it. For p*dos, it is the child themself they’re grossly invested in, not the clothes.

If you look at the origin of jfashion styles such as lolita, one part of the meaning is the resistance of sexualizing a person’s body. It also has nothing to do with the book so, stop equating them as the same.

Watching kid tv shows or movies, playing kid friendly video games, owning plushies or other kid toys ≠ p*dophilia

If you see an adult who is into movies/shows, toys, games made for kids chances are it could possibly be a CSA Survivor and this is their coping mechanism as a way to heal. To reclaim what was taken from them. Giving back to that inner child that never got the chance to live it. Even if they are not a CSA survivor, it could be an adult finally getting that doll they’ve wanted since they were little but could never get. Giving back to their inner child in that way. For me personally, KH is part of this for me. It has been my coping mechanism/safe haven since I was little. It is something I know I can always go back to that doesn’t bring harm to me. It’s an escapism from trauma and anxiety.

Height differences ≠ p*dophilia

An adult who is shorter than their significant other who is also an adult is not p*dophilia. A short adult is not “minor-coded.” They are just a short adult. A taller adult liking a shorter adult does NOT mean they like children. Joke or not this is inappropriate. Some adults just are not able to grow taller then others, so it feels like you are infantilizing a whole group of adult short people just because of their height. Not only that, but for survivors this can make them second guess their appropriate and safe relationships they have even more, which for some CSA Survivors it is already so hard to trust to begin with, this then can make them further associate even more things and people with their trauma that never needed to be and can cause further ptsd reactions.

A minor dating a minor one month/year younger/year older than them ≠ p*dophilia

This undermines the severity of what p*dophilia is. P*dophilia is an adult person who sexually fantasizes about, exhibits inappropriate and sexual behavior towards, has urges towards, and/or arousal towards minors. They are a sex offender/m*lestor as well if they act on those urges on a child. Thus becoming CSA.

This part is ONLY talking about minor + minor relationship: As cited from DSM-5 (wiki that has excerpt) “A person must be at least 16 years and at least 5 years older than the prepubescent child, for the attraction to be diagnosed as p*dophilia.” A 15 year old dating a 16 year old is not p*dophilia. If a 15 year old did inappropriate and non-consensual things to another minor the same age as, slightly younger than themself, or older than themself, that 15 year old would be more towards being called a juvenile/adolescent sex offender. Don’t use these terms willy nilly either, they are severe words too. Do not use them lightly for fun internet jargon.

In regards to fandom spaces. Just because someone on the internet labels themselves as something specific, does not mean this person can’t be a p*dophile based off of whatever the label is. You must always be careful with whom you interact with. They very well could be under the guise of feigning innocence and pointing fingers away from themself. Some may pretend to be one or the other and self-proclaim themself as the “good” adult. And HEAVILY emphasize this all the time. Which for me often raises a warning flag. Especially if they are in heavy contact with minors on a daily basis. Be always careful with anyone you interact with online no matter what they label themself as. You do not know who is behind the screen, so exercise extreme caution with the information you give to anyone, even if an account labels themselves as the same age as you. It could be someone pretending to be the same. Having a father who is a p*dophile, I can say, these gross people want to blend in. They’re going to feign innocence. They want to be in your line of trust. They may say things like “you don’t have to worry about me. I’m not that group of people” or “don’t trust them, trust me.” Be aware of the signs of gr**ming. This is a first tell tale sign that someone could be harmful. Some examples of warnings signs an be found here.

LGBTQIA+ ≠ p*dophilia

While there may be people who happen to be LGBTQIA+ that are a p*do, that does NOT mean everyone who is LGBTQIA+ is one. The community makes it explicitly clear that MAPS/p*dophiles are NEVER welcome in the community. It is harmful to associate them with the community too.

P*dophiles can be anywhere. In my my own experience, mine was my own father. They are in the most obvious spot and invisible to other’s eyes. They will if not often, be someone who has gained yours and other’s trust and preys heavily off of it. Such as a family member, a teacher, a doctor, a family friend, etc… They hide under this guise because what is the first thing anyone says? “Oh it couldn’t possibly be them. I know them. They’re good.”

I get wanting to know all the facts before putting a label such as p*dophile on someone. I get that some people do fake saying they were abused. I get it. When there’s a huge amount of evidence of someone being nefarious with children though, you can’t keep hiding from that truth and you need to stop supporting that person. Continuing to support those perpetrators just tells other scummy P*dos that as long as they’re well-liked enough, they too can get away with it. This only harms more children then helps.

Please put “T/W”s if you mention p*dophilia. CSA Survivors have different triggers and seeing the topic brought up willy nilly in spaces without it can be very harmful and may cause ptsd. Please be respectful to us all. Do not make a joke out of all of our suffering.

I’ve made a linktree of information on warnings signs, what to do, hotlines for victims, and more. Take action to protect real kids not just the fictional ones. That is all I ask: https://linktr.ee/CSA_Prevention_and_Help

[subwalls]

Tales from the SMP Presents: The Pit

Another Tales, another Kingdom Hearts comparison post! “The Other Side” is a mix between the soundtrack The Other Promise and the cinematic “Another Side, Another Story” (both of which come from Kingdom Hearts, of course), which evokes a very specific KH character that... yeah. So let’s get into it.

Karl gets stabbed by the king’s new general and finds himself back in the Inbetween. A cool new logo pops up as we enter the Inbetween, which actually is a... very typical example of a Kingdom Hearts world logo / intro card / name card? I honestly don’t know what it’s called, it doesn’t have a name, it’s just a thing that happens every time the character enters a new world.

Castle Oblivion is just one (1) example, but if you just look up “Kingdom Hearts worlds” and scroll a bit, you’ll see what I’m talking about, haha. This doesn’t really change anything, it’s just another little wink and nod to the Kingdom Hearts series.

... Except, of course, the fact that there’s a title placard for this world implies the existence of other worlds. Which we eventually find out is, in fact, true. Fun! There’s a number of associations I could make based off the aesthetic of the logo (the castle reminds me of Radiant Garden, etc) but honestly they’re not worth much without more information.

So, the Inbetween is vividly aware of Karl’s straying from “the path”. It makes a huge attempt to still be pleasant and “nice” and whatever, but we can tell quite obviously that there’s an undercurrent of threat under all those pretty quartz blocks and smiles :]

Speaking of the :] smile, the reveal of Quackity’s previous lore stream actually doesn’t push me to think that it’s directly related to him in any way. It’s not impossible that c!Quackity achieved such heights as... becoming? The Inbetween? Because he’s got reason to be invested in Karl’s powers and keeping him in line. But it’s a reach or long-term thing at best, honestly, so I’m shelving the Quackity-smile association until further evidence appears.

(I could go bonkers and say that this is the culmination of c!Quackity’s ascension after ripping Information out of Dream or even XD, but that’s well into AU territory, so it’s all just shrug emojis for now.)

Which, of course, leads to the question of who that smile actually is associated with, and I think as clear an answer as we’re going to get is... The Inbetween itself. Clearly.

There’s a lot of meaning I could take from that; is it associated with Dream or XD then? Or maybe is it tapping into Karl’s memories of c!Dream doing the :) thing and it’s appropriating that for itself? Why? To intimidate Karl into obeying it?

Mayhaps. Mayhaps!

Anyway, Karl goes up to the tree, and as he approaches, the video feed distorts as the game abruptly switches to a higher-level shader like BSL or something.

Now, I haven’t confirmed it, but the way the audio shifts makes me think it suddenly started playing backwards, too. It’s just the way it sounds; it’s got that... sucking effect that’s pretty typical of musical tracks played backwards.

Karl swims down to the hidden room, which is very dark now. There is a book that tells him to go up the ladder for a surprise.

Also, by the way, I’m back on my wither rose pot association brainrot, because I can’t help but notice that there isn’t one here. There was one in the previous Inbetween segment, but it’s gone now. Now there’s a new book with the :] smiley, which of course should set the audience on edge, since we just saw the first book use it in a... mildly threatening manner.

We know that in Dream SMP it’s a pretty common thing to use redstone as blood. Other characters have used it in bits, some more seriously than others, and I think that’s what this room is trying to emulate.

If I had to guess, I’d... hm.

A part of me wants to say that the blood is probably from the different versions of Karl wandering around. Nobody’s going to notice if a few abruptly take a swerve to bleed themselves out in a room or something, right? But that carries a lot of implications, namely that of control so perfect it borders on possession. So either the Inbetween can control Karls, or it has some other agent capable of dragging something into this chamber to bleed it all over the room.

Neither of those options are particularly nice, I’ll admit!

There’s no Kingdom Hearts associations here, by the way. Due to being so closely tied with Disney, KH is deathly allergic to portraying blood in any way lmao. Not so many messages carved into the walls.

Or painted onto the walls with blood, if that’s what that is. Color correction gets a bit odd with shaders, so I’m not saying anything for certain; the closed books don’t look enchantment-purple, for example.

What does catch my eye are the torches, which will later be the flickering lights that guide Karl to the portal. The fact that they are here makes me think that this was definitely the scene of either a battle or some other conflict between the two sides to this story (haha, get it, Another Side, Another Story, because that’s a Thing in KH—), or at least proves that an influence from The Other Side was here at some point in time.

Karl quickly gets the fuck out of there, and when he swims back to the surface the shaders/music switch back to normal.

Oh, and for all you people who like to point fingers at anything vaguely false and scream “that’s gAsLiGhTiNg!!!1!!111″ about it, here’s an actual attempt at gaslighting. Note the language used here: “Your mind seems to be playing tricks on you :]”. It’s explicitly trying to convince him not to trust his own senses and mind. It’s saying, let me think for you. And that is a very dangerous thing.

Wither rose pot exists again, yay. Definitely a Inbetween voice, this book.

More wither rose book, this time in the, uh, grand entrance hall? The lobby? Yeah.

This book basically goes on a spiel about how the Inbetween is so great for Karl (a declaration, by the way, rather than a hope) and says that he is doubting himself or being less like himself, which is odd, because what he’s really doing is doubting the Inbetween and the path it has laid out for him. In a way, by questioning the Inbetween, Karl is being truer to himself than anything else.

The malicious way this place frames its words becomes more and more obvious with each passing page; it again reminds him that it’s a place to be “feel at ease”, which is super sketch that it has to tell him outright rather than actually being that place. It continues attempting to gaslight him, telling him that his imagination is getting away from him and that he can’t trust himself or anything else but this “path”.

I’ll get back to the “path” thing in a minute, but I really want to drive home that this is the truest instance of gaslighting we’ve ever had on the Dream SMP. Nothing has ever so clearly declared that it must be trusted over the victim’s own senses, practically infantilizing the victim’s concerns and trying to make them think that their worries are just flights of fancy. Please, please keep this in mind any time you want to accuse a character of gaslighting in the future; not all psychological abuse is a form of gaslighting. Sometimes it’s just... abuse. It’s not any more or less worse than gaslighting, it’s just different.

Anyway, about the “path” that the Inbetween is so obsessed with. No idea what the fuck that’s talking about.

In Kingdom Hearts, the only paths that are really of import are is a specific character’s “road to dawn” (redemption without fully yielding his edginess, essentially) or the “paths” that characters take to traverse between different worlds. I really don’t think the Inbetween has anything to do with either of them, but I’ll leave the options there if you want to peruse the possibilities.

What’s more likely, I think, is that this is a vaguely more subtle version of control/possession. The “path” is just “whatever the Inbetween wants you to do”.

Our next book is from the other side, and is plastered nonchalantly but boldly against the wall with no flower pot or anything.

Karl picks it up, puts it in his inventory (which probably indicates that he’s keeping this particular route close to his heart, rather than whatever the Inbetween is trying to make him do), and then the video stutters and he teleports back to the main entrance.

There’s a new book. It’s spooky as fuck, and hilariously hypocritical.

The tone shift is immediate, of course, aided by the abrupt change in background music since he got teleported back here. (I can’t quite nail it down; I assume it’s a slowed KH track like the others, but it doesn’t quite ring any bells for me.) The way the Inbetween speaks through these books has changed too, though; it addresses him by name without any attempt to cover up its intentions with flowery softness.

It does a cool fun thing where it says that it knows more than Karl, and knows what’s right, and then goes on to say that those visions shouldn’t dictate his opinion on the inbetween. (I’m keeping an eye on that lowercase, by the way. Not sure if it’s a typo or intentional, since it’s still one word, but.) As though he should trust the Inbetween’s opinions of itself rather than his own brain? A’ight. Sure, Jan.

Again it tries to tell him that it’s safe here. The lying is getting more transparent now.

He puts this book back, the previous book back, and runs after a double of himself until the shaders and music glitch again.

Fun thing about shaders is that they make dark areas... much, much darker. Especially since we saw that Karl’s got night vision (the effect, for cinematic purposes) on.

The music has a few notes that again sound as though they’re being played backwards.

The book on the tree in this courtyard does not come with its own little wither rose pot, and neither does it seem to come from the Inbetween, since it’s telling him some awful things about these other versions of himself.

It confirms a few things about the mystery other selves, namely that they’re definitely condemned to walk the castle forever, but it doesn’t really tell us why this happens or why the Inbetween (probably) wants this to happen. What’s the end goal?

We’re probably a bit early in the story to figure that out, but they’re questions worth keeping in mind as this storyline progresses.

Karl gets teleported back to the main lobby, which looks very dark and spooky, though in the transition we do see a glimpse of that portal. There are torches around the wither pot book pedestal, and the audio really kicks into high gear with the creepy notes and the visuals get stretched and glitch quite a bit as he opens the book.

Funnily enough, the audio kind of reminded me of some pokemon encounter music, but I think that’s just because I’ve got those notes wired into my brain from years of playing those games. Anyway! The book tells him this is not a warning, and that they’re gonna fucking come for him to make sure he sticks with their path.

“We”.

Who is “we”? Is the Inbetween a collective? Is the Inbetween just part of a different whole? Maybe it counts all the different Karls as a part of it.

Either way, it’s creepy and threatening. Karl starts running; the screen glitches and tells him to follow the torches, which at first I was kind of leery about trusting, but the next series of words helped clear up exactly what side those words are on.

Also, you’ll notice that some other text kinda skitters across the screen before the English, like it’s getting translated. I think it’s Galactic, which is something different from the thing that Ranboo uses for Ender? I think Ranboo uses the Alien language thing or something? I’m not 100% sure on that, feel free to correct me and I’ll fix this portion.

It certainly implies that the speaker isn’t communicating in the server equivalent of “common”, however. Not sure if they’re translating into English or if Karl inherently understands it and it’s translated into English for the audience’s convenience, but either way, the other speaker might be linked to something completely different.

Karl runs on with encouragement and creepy music until he finally arrives at the portal, which is not barred off like it was last time. Thanks, whoever’s responsible for that!

The music dies for this final book.

The Inbetween’s last-ditch attempt to make him stay. It calls him silly a couple of times, and smiles at the end with a :]

Problem is, we and Karl already know that staying with the Inbetween will keep him from his friends. And the voice tells him to leave for his friends.

Karl looks around at this place that calls itself his sanctuary, and makes his decision.

He arrives at The Other Side.

The music appears to be drawn from parts of either The Other Promise or Roxas’ Theme, both of which are heavily tied to the character known as Roxas. The version that Karl uses is slower and lower, the same as with the Dearly Beloved track he uses for his Inbetween segments.

Honestly, I’m not as certain on this as I could be, because I couldn’t find the exact variation on Youtube and there are parts that could just be Emotional rather than Roxas-related, I’m not sure. I’ll probably come back and fix this if it’s untrue.

EDIT: Yeah, uh, it’s Ven’s theme, not Roxas’, but the world itself is still heavily associated with Roxas in naming themes.

For now, I’m going off the assumption that the decision to make both the name and the theme of this world relevant to Roxas is purposeful, which means I’m... going to attempt to explain who Roxas is and what his story is.

Oh boy.

To grossly oversimplify the situation, Roxas is a “part” of Sora who develops his own sense of identity, is betrayed, gets coerced into murdering his best friend, gets kidnapped, gets memory wiped, and then—when he gets his memory back and realizes he super hates his captors—is convinced by those same captors to give up his existence because he “isn’t a real person” and if he lives then Sora will never wake up. So he “dies” and becomes a part of Sora again until later.

(Sora, by the way, is asleep due to the events in Castle Oblivion, which you might recognize as That Place I Keep Associating The Inbetween With.)

He’s also a fan favorite lmao. Take from that as you will, and, I don’t know, flip through his wiki page or something. Can’t guarantee it’s all understandable though.

My point to bringing Roxas up is that his arc... kind of parallels Karl’s. He did his job working for superiors he didn’t really understand in a white castle, with the higher-ups trying to control him, until he realized he was losing his friend/s to them. At that point, he defects. I think this is the point that Karl has reached, in his own storyline. He’s pulled away from the thing that’s made itself known to him, and now he’s wandering down something that hopefully isn’t as awful as the beast he’s just left behind.

Roxas also doesn’t get his happy ending for a long, long time.

Let’s hope Karl is different.

Off the top of my head, I can tell you that the mood this world creates is very reminiscent of some areas that the Kingdom Hearts games explore in 0.2 (yes, zero point two, that is the number of that game. This fucking series, man), specifically Castle Town, in which the player character has to smack a bunch of clock gears to make time go backwards in order to proceed, which is fun. But no exact inspirations come to mind the same way that Castle Oblivion did for the Inbetween.

Until we get a better look at the interiors, I’m going to gently claim that this build is more original and doesn’t take inspiration quite as directly from a Kingdom Hearts source, so there might not be an exact parallel. There isn’t a black castle in Kingdom Hearts that I can think of, honestly.

Also, I will say that I’m going to take this episode as confirmation that the wither roses are associated with the Inbetween and appear next to books that come from / are related to the Inbetween, especially since The Other Side associates itself with a completely different flower: the white tulip.

Anyway, The Other Side tells him he’s home, and that they’ll explore more soon.

This... eerily parallels the Inbetween, which told him that he’s safe, and has lots to explore.

I can’t say that I immediately trust The Other Side, but neither can I say that I inherently distrusted it the same way I did with the Inbetween. We’re going to have to wait and see how this place behaves in future episodes to get a good grasp of it. Who built these places? Are they alive, and writing the books, or is there a mastermind behind them? We still don’t have a lot of the answers, but that’s okay.

For now, I’m content to know that Karl is away from the more obvious perils of the Inbetween.

It could still be a trap, but for now, it’s a refuge.

[apsarrow]

i am interested in the dabi redemption essay 👁👁

Okay, so I wanna preface this with this is all just my opinion based on my own experiences and interpretation of his character, just, so, you know people don't come after me for having opinions.

I am putting it under a read-more because it's very long!

Essentially my interpretation of his character is that he is someone who has been abused and neglected a lot as a kid. He was told he would be a great pro-hero, he had it drilled into him so much that he took it became his sole goal in life which is very much understandable because kids are easily influenced. As far as I can tell, he was never presented with any other hobbies and so, never developed any other interests. Having his goal crushed at a such a young age - which is understandable because he was hurting himself, it's not a realistic goal but a kid that young is not gonna understand without having it explained properly, which it wasn't - would be a very traumatic experience and would result in a lack of identity. I think To(u)ya (sp???) was a teenager when this happened so the development of his own identity is pretty crucial at that stage of development and a lack of any sort of identity can be pretty harmful. Also, this is a very long analysis of his early childhood but I promise it's relevant so just hold on, please.

Anyways, as I see it, he really just wanted to prove himself to his dad and his dad never explained why it wasn't possible in a way that he would understand. I believe his parents encouraged him to make friends but really they should have encouraged to take part in other hobbies and activities way earlier whilst he was doing all his training, regardless of any injury or non-injury. It's simply not healthy to present a young child with one purpose, encourage them to pursue it and ignore any other parts of life, and then expect them to just be immediately able to adjust to not being able to pursue the one purpose they were given.

So, when something that traumatising happens, kids will have many different reactions, and you can see it in all the Todoroki children. Some will repress it and have to deal with it later in life (Shoto), some will try to fix it and make things better (Fuyumi), some will be rightfully upset about it (Natsuo), and some will be outright angry and will lash out at others. All are equally valid responses to a traumatic experiences but that does not make it okay to hurt other innocent people. So, this is where the redemption comes into it. Touya has hurt (and murdered) many innocent people as a way of coping with these traumatic experiences. He turned on the world and told the world it wasn't good enough (which it's not, hero society is a shitshow but that's a whole other essay) and he made everything the world's problem. Frankly, I don't blame him for doing this because he was never given the type of support that would allow him to develop healthy coping mechanisms. It's still not okay to do this but it's not really his fault because from my perspective, he's just kinda figuring it out on his own. This is something that happens a lot in real life. People are abused, they are not supported by people around them or are in fact completely isolated as a result of the abuse, they lash out and hurt people. Often, people will realise later in life that this is not good for them and they will seek out therapy and try to develop healthier behaviours.

Now, when you're surrounded by other victims who view the world the same way that you do, it can be hard to recognise your own faults because your actions are constantly being validated. I know I said earlier his response was valid so now it's time for some clarity - his feelings are valid, not his actions but the LOV essentially validate his actions because they're doing the exact same thing. They are victims of abuse or neglect in various forms and they are lashing out at the world and they are finding small successes which kind of reinforces this idea that this is the right path to take and it's all okay. If your shitty actions are being validated constantly, you're never gonna reach that point where you realise you're actually hurting a lot of people and that's not okay and you're never going to try to get help or improve on anything.

So, like I said before, this is something that happens in real life. People do get abused in real life and some people have this reaction. Sure, they're not gonna go out and murder people but they will hurt friends and family. This is a thing that happens. And I think redemption for Touya would be most meaningful to those people who have been abused and do relate strongly to his character. The message would be that it is not your fault that you were abused, you are not inherently a bad person for lashing out you but you cannot keep hurting others. Touya realising this might even encourage people who do have this mindset to seek help and improve their own lives. And I also think that, if done properly with a scene where Touya explicitly does not forgive his dad yet still becomes a better person, it would be a good example of how you do not have to forgive your abuser for the pain that they have caused you but again, you absolutely cannot hurt innocent people just because you are in pain.

Ultimately, I think it would be an incredibly uplifting story about overcoming abuse and neglect, and the ways in which you can be a better person despite your past.

BUT, I also think it would have to be incredibly well-written because as it stands, Touya is not in a place to do this right now. As far as I can see, he still does not have any other hobbies or interests. His purpose simply shifted from being a hero to hurting the person that hurt him. He needs hobbies and interests and a goal that doesn't revolve around hurting others before he can start to make any sort of steps towards redemption. And if I'm being totally honest, I don't think it's going to happen. I'd like to see it but I don't think there's enough time left in the story (obviously I don't know how long is actually left of the story, I'm mostly just guessing here) for all the steps that need to be taken in order for him to be fully redeemed without it seeming rushed or badly written. And I think, unfortunately (for me more than anything because I really wanted to see this), his main purpose seems to be to push Endeavor's redemption arc further.

[fancyfade]

Well I got super impatient and decided to post a day early. If you do click on and read CW: Child abuse. The tone isn’t like depressing the whole way through, I’m not interested in pointless grief, but it starts pretty heavy

For the preview have this bit I am glad I got an excuse to use finally (wrote it before this fanfic had to find a place to work it in I think it works really well here)

Father and all his people always found the most stifling, condescending, worst possible way to think about Damian. They wanted to protect him, but only half the time – only if they could imagine him as a sad, tiny child, helpless and afraid. They didn't know what to do with the other half – they didn't know what to do with him when he was fighting or behaving unacceptably or being always too too much. They couldn't decide whether they see him as a victim or a villain, and while neither would be ideal, he'd prefer the latter. A villain has power and agency, and he can't help but thinking of a victim as someone who's been stripped of both.

keep reading

Writing decisions (These will be LONG AS FUCK)

So there are two major moments from the 2009 B&R run I wanted in my fic at least that happen in the same plotline. I'm breaking it into two moments in different plotlines for the below reasons:

The first moment is when Damian both explicitly rejects Talia's offer to go back to being an assassin and chooses to stay being Robin

and then after the dumb slade part of that plot, there's the second moment, where he asks Talia to love him as he is, not as she wants him to be.

I feel the important things here are Damian explicitly rejecting being a supervillain and then Damian wishing he could be treated different by one of his parents (his primary caregiver up until he was 10 years old here in my verse, but in new earth canon she did not meet him until he was 9). Since Morrison, obviously Talia was the one Damian would both reject for supervillainry and ask for parental approval of, but I'm obviously having Ra's represent the more supervillainy side of things here.

This is also important why Damian knows that the letter was a lie before this plot could happen, because when he rejects Ra's he's doing it 100 percent with the knowledge that his dad didn't want him (from his POV) and he doesn't have another patriarchal figure of approval. He's just rejecting Ra's because Ra's is cruel to him and wrong, not because he has a better option waiting.

The other important moment in canon (Damian expressing dissatisfaction with how he is treated by Talia) will obviously have to change significantly in my fic but I do want him to have some type of interaction with her where he explains how he wants ot be treated

For canon basis of Damian and Ra's' interactions:

We have pretty scant Damian and Ra's interactions in canon mostly what I can think of are sort of Resurrection of Ra's Al Ghul, the flashbacks in Teen Titans Rebirth (first six issues), and the weird Shadow/Batman comic.

The consistent theme seems to be that Damian exists for Ra's, not as a person. In RRAG Ra's refers to Damian as “it” and is surprised/offended that he does not immediately acquiesce to being a backup body, in Teen Titan's flashbacks Damian's oath is “I am yours” - that he belongs to his grandfather – and ra's calls him the greatest weapon in his arsenal or smthing, and in shadow/batman ra's continuously tries to impress upon damian that damian only exists because ra's allows him to/ at ra's' mercy.

(Yes the “ You're recalcitrant. Emotional.” dialogue is straight from Batman Bad Blood Talia, but when Talia is being villain balled she often comes across as woman-scorned version of Ra's so I don't feel bad stealing it and giving him that dialogue)

Anyway so needless to say its toxic as hell.

Ra's is also portrayed as generally using his family for his own means/ being very controlling/possessive – like in Batman Chronicles #8 he thinks (in his internal monologue) that he will never allow Talia to be free and that he needs her especially to continue his lineage and not be alone. He also kidnaps her when she leaves him in the early 2ks plot after tower of babel.

Miscellaneous decisions not based on those interactions:

the guard was based off of the dude who Ravi called the hand of ra's in robin: son of batman. I assumed they might have slightly different dynamics with Tali and Damian than the other leaguers because they call Talia by her first name, which seemed to not be what the other leaguers did. I'll be real they don't flesh out the league members who don't have names a ton, I had to do a lot of guessing.

I feel like even though Damian's upbringing in the League of Shadows was abusive as hell, he'd still miss where he grew up, especially the parts that were just like... day to day stuff and not fighting (Granted he still did obviously miss some of the way they did fighting interactions too).

I actually googled some geography to try to describe the place the Cradle was in because in the comics I don't think they gave us a location (besides that the last city they were at was Baghdad) and then the scenery did not give us much detail. I wanted to be able to describe the scenery a bit and not just say “um, it looked like a desert” (it looked... vaguely deserty in the comics?) especially since it would be significant to Damian. And I didn't want to just go with whatever preconceived notions I had.

I had Ra's make the fetus that may eventually become heretic here because I feel like if we're going with the RRAG backup body theme that might be a reasonable justification for Ra's cloning him (it was so unclear what Talia's motives for making Heretic were in the comic)

anyway SUPER Long but i'm really proud of this scene and Damian's confrontation with Ra's so I hope you all enjoyed it

[phoenixyfriend]

For Karin's backstory, do you usually go for anime one? I prefer datebook backstory, even though it's not detailed. Because manga showed one panel of Karin being experimented on with her arms showing bite marks. So I always believed that healing bites ability is result of Oro experiments. It makes more sense to me. Also, I am uncomfortable of anime backstory. And grass village confuses me. Didn't they still exist after the fourth war? I guess in fic, we could just say it no longer exists.

I love this question.

Okay, so the short version is that I usually do a mix of the two. I’m going to do a quick rundown on the differences between the two backstories for anyone who isn’t familiar. This means we’ll be touching on some very questionable subjects, because the anime went to some very concerning lengths. It’s going to be under a cut, because... yeah. Long.

The only solid canon, as in from the manga, that we have for pre-Orochimaru Karin is the Chuunin Exams flashback, wherein she is in a Kusa (Grass) headband, and is saved from a bear by Sasuke, which kicks off her crush on him.

The first backstory we received from Karin was in the databooks; this backstory came out prior to the Exams flashback in the manga. It stated that Karin was living in an unspecified village, sensed an army coming to destroy it, and tried to warn the rest of the town. Nobody believed her, so she ran to hide (I think in some nearby foothills/forest?), and everyone else was killed. Orochimaru then came by, tried to recruit her, and then let Sasuke convince her. Sasuke didn’t really have to do much beyond saying he was Oro’s student in order to get Karin to come along.

Now, given that Kusagakure still exists post-timeskip, at least in the Blood Prison movie, the village that was destroyed wasn’t Kusa. Either Karin was in a different village, or Karin’s backstory doesn’t include the village destruction element. I tend to go with ‘a different village,’ but I’ll get to that later.

The anime gives us a different backstory, one that takes Karin’s Kusa headband from the Exams as fact.

IMPORTANT TO NOTE: Karin’s backstory is not presented as a backstory, but rather an alternate timeline from her Eternal Tsukuyomi dream. I don’t know what the animators were thinking, deciding to use this hell as her dream of a ‘perfect world,’ but at this point the dream is treated as her default anime background so like??? Sure. Sure. We’ll use it, but we’ll also judge Studio Pierrot for it, because there’s “I don’t like this character” and then there’s “I’m going to have this character’s dream of a perfect world include over a decade of violating her health and bodily autonomy on a level of systemic abuse that is truly horrific, edging on fucking csa” because fuck you I guess? I’m still mad. I’d have been okay with the backstory as backstory because it fits her personality, but why the hell was it presented as her Eternal Tsukuyomi dream???

Listen LISTEN Eternal Tsukuyomi is supposed to be a perfect world for each individual You DREAM WHAT MAKES YOU HAPPIEST and they gave her a decade of physical and medical abuse, bordering on extended csa, only to die at sixteen because they'd 'used her up.’ like???

When I say SP had a grudge against Karin...

Anyway. Anime backstory:

Karin’s mother (unnamed) came to Kusagakure following the destruction of Uzushiogakure, and was granted refugee status in exchange for working at the hospital, having a similar ‘bite me and you’ll heal’ power as Karin does in canon. We don’t know who Karin’s father was; he may have been a Kusa citizen, or an Uzushio man who died prior to Karin’s mother’s arrival in Kusa.

Karin’s mother dies at some point during Karin’s childhood, having been used as a chakra healing battery to the point of dying of chakra exhaustion. At this point in the anime, Kusa orders that Karin must take over her mother’s duties as a healer, because such a technique is too useful to just leave alone. The bites start out on her forearms, eventually going all over her body, including areas that, despite the intent not being sexual in nature, do qualify as child sexual abuse.

She is bitten on the chest and thighs, by people she barely knows, with minimal consent on her part. She is a minor. This is csa and I hate that people forget this, or choose to exclude it to more easily vilify her.*

(Manga canon also has her with bites on her chest, at sixteen, most of which we can assume are not Sasuke since he seems to not know that biting her chest is provides better healing when she tells him to do it. Again: underage, coercion, chest bites, violation of bodily autonomy. It’s long-term csa in every canon. It may not be explicitly stated, but this is the most explicitly shown example canon has of this particular kind of trauma.)

Now, again, this is her Eternal Tsukuyomi (for some fucking reason), and not her technical backstory, and in that context she just... never gets out. She keeps getting used and abused, the bites eventually even covering her face, and then she dies before hitting twenty.

...so how do we reconcile this?

Elements we have:

Kusagakure headband during the Chuunin Exams (manga canon)

Saved by Sasuke, causing her crush; implies she was very poorly treated by the people around her prior to their meeting (manga canon)

No visible bite marks on her arms during the Chuunin Exams, but with the caveat that the marks are also not visible during Boruto, so it’s possible that Kishi, and in turn SP, just didn’t feel like drawing the scars. (manga canon)

Karin’s healing abilities were present at some point prior to Sasuke recruiting her to hunt down Itachi, but it’s unclear if it is a Kekkei Genkai or something nurtured by Otogakure. (manga canon)

Kabuto’s abilities during the Fourth War include Karin’s ‘rejuvenation’ and ‘life force,’ which implies that it may be a Kekkei Genkai but leaves it frustratingly ambiguous.

Experienced a village destruction, followed by Orochimaru taking her on, due to a Cassandra Truth incident, using Sasuke to convince her to join Oto (databook)

Her mother came to Kusa at some point post-Uzushio destruction; iirc Uzushio fell when Kushina was a teenager, so Karin’s mother either spent a decade or so wandering around prior to deciding Kusa was better than nothing (possibly when she got pregnant), or lived in Kusa for a period of time prior to becoming pregnant. (anime)

Karin was forced, via coercion, to use her healing abilities while in Kusagakure following her mother’s death (anime)

Kusa still exists post-timeskip (anime)

Here’s what I usually go with:

I do think Karin was a Kusa genin. The databook and anime both state that she joined Orochimaru after Sasuke, so she’d have no reason to wear the headband during the Exams other than actually being a genin of Kusagakure.

I err towards the biting being a Kekkei Genkai, which means that it fits with the anime’s suggestion of Kusagakure having used her as a chakra healing battery prior to her arrival in Oto. THIS IS OPTIONAL in other people’s readings, because it’s not manga canon and it’s obviously an incredibly hard subject to work with.

So, Kusa kid, dead mom, chakra healing battery, genin at the Chuunin Exams, then... Otogakure. In order to work in the databook’s element of the destroyed village, we either have to wipe Kusa off the map, or it’s another village.

I’ve generally gone with stating that Karin was on a long-term mission as a healer in a larger civilian village, or possibly the country’s capitol (though that’s less likely). Kusa was obviously willing to send her away temporarily, as with the Exams, so if the price was right, they’d probably send her out on out-of-village missions as well. Would she have a team? Maybe.

Given her poor treatment in this scenario, and the implied distrust/abuse of refugees in the anime, it’s possible that any teammates she had either didn’t trust her as a person, or didn’t think her skills were as good as she claimed. Possibly they assumed that they’d be able to fight off a smaller attacking force, and that Karin was exaggerating or mistaken when insisting that they evacuate. In any case, whoever was with her, if anyone was, also died in this attack.

The army was very likely sent by Orochimaru, and it’s plausible that Karin was actually the main target. I imagine that a spy would have gotten word to Oro about a redhead with extreme healing abilities, and Orochimaru going “Gotta catch ‘em all, Ooh! An Uzumaki!” and deciding that the healing abilities played well enough into the immortality plan to be worth sending an army (and then going in person, with Sasuke) for.

Given how canon played out, she was worth it.

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

* Okay the reason I harp on the CSA thing in particular: there was a significant period of time where two headcanons were prevalent: that Sasuke was sexually abused by Orochimaru in his time as Oro’s student, and that Karin was a wannabe rapist.

The Sasuke thing was based on a manga cover and one of the anime openings, but had no actual textual basis beyond Orochimaru being a queercoded villain, which is a whole different problem. The Karin thing was based on a fan’s mistranslation of a single panel, along with later arguments failing to take slang into account and often had by people who don’t actually speak Japanese.

Ultimately, I’m furious that a large portion of the fandom painted a canon CSA victim as a wannabe rapist while pushing that same backstory element onto a different character which they often put as her hypothetical victim, oftentimes just to get her out of the way for shipping purposes. This is a long-standing grudge.

[justice4sasuke]

Sorry to be sending you more opinions but there was something you said a little while ago that I just couldn’t get out of my head so here we go; you said, “you don’t have to forgive your abuser, but you can if you want.” And I agree with that sentiment 100%. I’ve been in the position of needing to decide which option to go with in the past, or should I say I haven’t actually decided yet because there can be SO much nuance involved in making that call. Sometimes it’s very simple, sometimes it’s anything but. And there’s no moral right or wrong answer, it’s about picking which option is healthier for you personally. Neither option makes you weak or strong, righteous or in the wrong (1/3)

Now that being said, I am painfully conscious of the fact that the narrative of, “forgiving your abuser makes you a good/kind/better person or whatever,” is pushed the absolute hardest in children’s and YA media, more than any other circle of media. It’s incredible how much and how often this is the only option presented to kids. I see this in shounen manga especially. And there’s a really famous example of an American children’s cartoon that does this which I could name but I won’t. I recognize that shounen does this a lot because WSJ has a sort of on the down low comic’s code thing going on (2/3)

And if Sasuke were real, I’d have no problem with him making the decision to forgive Itachi. And I’m not going to pretend that it doesn’t make sense character or story wise for him to do so. Hell, if I were in his position I might even make the same choice (then again I might not. I can only compare my experiences to his, but I can’t know them). Anyways I get it. But I also know, deep deep down in my traumatized bones, that a major reason why Kishimoto makes this decision FOR Sasuke as a character, is because it’s part of his crusade against the concept of “~hAtReD~” as it presents itself in victims. The only person who gives Sasuke permission to be hurt and angry EVER is Itachi (if I’m remembering the climax of this arc correctly), and I think that’s super important. And it makes perfect sense that Sasuke’s decision in response is to actually forgive him. But I also KNOW that he’s not allowed to choose otherwise. This is a big hand of the author moment imo (2/3) (p.s. you can wait however long you want to respond to this I don’t mind and I don’t want to overwhelm you especially when this could be more relevant later)

I’m always a proponent of recognizing WHY authors make the decisions they do, but I’m not sure it matters much when it comes to Sasuke’s decision to forgive Itachi. 

First I’ll say I find it very hard to parse what Kishimoto actually thinks or feels about anything. This could be because I do not know or speak Japanese or because I don’t seek out content that involves Kishimoto talking about his work. But then again I don’t go looking for author interviews a lot, but I’ve still managed to absorb some information that makes me feel like I know a bit more about the authors. Oda the author of One Piece does multiple Question Corners in each volume of the manga when it comes out that really gives you a feel for who he is as an artist and person and what he thinks. Araki the author of Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure has ever-changing interests and those interests bleed through in his work (a moment where that occurred to me that I found particularly amusing was at the end of one of the part 4 volumes Araki says he got a cat encyclopedia and that or the next volume then has a lot of drawings of cats and explanations about their behavior so you’re like well Araki I can tell). Or even a series I don’t even like because it’s miserable like Attack on Titan I’ve absorbed enough through cultural osmosis to know the author has said enough war crime apologist shit that the fascist wet dream that he portrays is intentional. 

But Kishimoto...I don’t know what he thinks if I’m honest. Does he really resent people with natural talent for things? Does he think everything bad is just hatred and we need to forgive to get over it? Does he think the state is more important than any person or group of people? You could make these assertions based on his writing maybe but Kishimoto’s writing is so flimsy and so many things change throughout the course of Naruto’s story I would just as soon believe every statement he makes about worldview is an accident. In fact Naruto’s blandness and unrelenting stereotypical shounen characteristic of never giving up could lead me to believe there is no heart in his writing whatsoever. Or hell, the end! Where all the main kid characters end up together as much as possible when you follow a two boys one girl rule and are bound by heteronormativity. None of the pairings had an ounce of heart behind them and some of them were fucking /jokes/ (Shikmaru and Temari maybe had a drop of heart to it based on things that happened in part 1 only). I don’t feel I can say Kishimoto’s opinions come through on anything he writes if he’s going to be so careless with what he does. (Yes, I know there is an argument for him being wrung dry by the manga making machine at the end, but that goes along with my point: does Kishimoto intend anything he writes).

All of that up there is leading into a point, but let me get part two out first. I don’t know if I fully agree with your take because forgiving Itachi isn’t what makes Sasuke “good” in the eyes of the narrative. Sasuke forgiving Itachi is important in terms of how we talk about their relationship but in the eyes of the narrative it is a foregone conclusion. There is some anger and resentment still after Sasuke learns the truth about Itachi, but there’s also still a ton of love and hero-worship there. By the time Itachi says “you should choose your own path” and “no matter what you do from now on I’ll always love you”, Sasuke’s forgiveness has already been granted and after that Sasuke’s journey is more about trying to reconcile his world view. And after Sasuke resurrects the hokages and gets the love story of the ages learns about the founding of Konoha, in true Kishimoto fashion, it seems like Sasuke is going to be a “good” guy now only to have him doing things that seem “evil” during the war and then after Kaguya is defeated he lays out his revolution plan which the manga views as “evil”. Kishimoto puts so little emphasis on forgiveness and explicitly keeps Sasuke in the “wrong” until the end of the manga so I don’t think anyone is expected or intended to see forgiveness as the way to be better. I think we kind of reverse engineer the forgiveness topic by bringing up the point of Sasuke possibly not forgiving Itachi when that’s not even a question in the manga. 

This brings us back to Kishimoto’s thoughts and intentions because is the fact that forgiveness or not is not even considered an author conscious decision, that forgiveness is the right choice? Or was forgiveness just the obvious choice because how Sasuke’s character was built out? I don’t think any of us can say because like I said above I think Kishimoto’s actual feelings and goals with his work are hard to pin down. 

Also I know this whole blog is about extrapolating and looking outside the framing, but one of the manga’s biggest faults it how is railroads you into what you’re “supposed” to feel and you only don’t feel that way if you give what you’re reading a second thought. And we’re not being railroaded into “Sasuke forgives Itachi so he’s better now”. We’re railroaded into “Sasuke needs to learn more about ninja world” which railroads into “Sasuke is going to help in the war but uh oh is he still bad guy??”. Like once again forgiveness isn’t even a topic of thought in this manga.

I guess I spent over an hour thinking and writing this to say I think the notion that Sasuke is being made to forgive Itachi is so out of the realm of intention or what the point of Itachi and Sasuke’s relationship is I’m going to Death of the Author it and say I think Sasuke chooses to forgive Itachi and that’s his choice. Thinking about whether Sasuke HAD to forgive Itachi because the author wanted it that way is missing the point. But that’s not to say we can’t discuss the implications of choosing forgiveness towards abusers in media, just that I think that is entirely outside the realm of the author’s thinking (with my above caveat that I have no idea what Kishimoto feels about anything). And I think these conversations aren’t really coming out because of the manga, but because of how we are thinking about the manga which is already outside Kishimoto’s intention. I mean I think Sasuke is right so obviously I’m outside Kishimoto’s intention based on his framing. 

Side note in regards to rules at WSJ I hear about shit people aren’t allowed to do there and no doubt there are rules but I’m very 🤔 about what are they really because Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure got very violent even in its shounen jump days and this isn’t about /abuse/ exactly but One Piece did have a character that couldn’t forgive their oppressors and wasn’t demonized for it and was treated with understanding. So I’m wondering what exactly these rules are supposed to be.

[hotforhandman]

Are the Villains “right”?

Okay, so I was scrolling through the bnha spoilers tag whilst procrastinating work and I’m really not living for the vibes there. My biggest issues fall into two main camps: “this arc is going to be the end of the League”, and “Villain stans are hypocrites with no reading comprehension for condemning the Heroes’ behaviour”, and I believe both of these statements can be addressed simultaneously, whilst also giving me a convenient excuse to not write. So without further ado,

Part 1: Themes

Right from the very beginning of the series, literally the first line, one thing is made blatantly clear: This series is not going to be about good guys and bad guys. “All men are not created equal” is not a line that implicates an inherent divide between good and evil, unless you’re an actual eugenicist. And pretty much every important character is designed to criticise a different aspect of the established system.

Izuku: The Quirkless are worthless. Not explicitly, but... everyone knows it. 

Bakugou: If you have a good Quirk, you are praised and treated as special, and as a consequence you’re never expected to learn and grow as a person. 

Shoto: Dedicating your entire life to becoming strong to the detriment of your own health is the best way to climb to the top. 

All Might: You don’t have to worry about anything. A Hero will save you. 

Shinsou: If you have a Villain’s Quirk, you’re going to be a Villain, no matter the quality of your personality. 

Kirishima: If you’re not flashy, there’s no point even trying.

Hawks: Similar to Shoto, if you show natural promise then it’s acceptable to groom you as a weapon. 

I’m sure there are others that I’ve missed. Each of these characters’ individual developments have been focused around them overcoming these ingrained ideas and growing and succeeding despite them - with the exception, perhaps, of Hawks. So if several of the major Hero characters are designed to illustrate and criticise the established system, what about the villains? I guess if the Heroes are stories about people succeeding despite what the world tells them, then the Villains are stories about what happens when they don’t. 

Spinner: Mutants are second-class citizens and should be treated as such. 

Toga: If your Quirk is considered to be bad or gross, then you should be punished for wanting to use it. 

Twice: The world won’t make space for your special needs. 

Magne: If you don’t fit the mould of what people want you to be, you won’t be respected.

And Shigaraki: It’s not our responsibility to help you. If you weren’t saved, that must mean you’re not worth saving. 

The one thing that both the Heroes and the Villains have in common is that they are tools to show the audience the flaws in BNHA’s society. It’s canon that Quirks appeared suddenly, and though by the time BNHA is set in, society has tried to adapt to fit it and is making some progress towards being functional, it’s clear that it has a long, long way to go, because it’s failing so many people. (Draw some parallels to real life, hm?). BNHA’s overarching themes of individual worth not being more important than collective good and how rules and structure created in good will can result in a lot of pain and abuse are, first and foremost, exemplified in the characters themselves. I like to tell people who find Shigaraki’s motivations vague and uncompelling that Shigaraki doesn’t need to have a point, he is the point, and this is exactly the reason why. 

I also believe that this is primarily why for Horikoshi to end the League here would be, frankly, terrible writing. We have engaged with the LOV more than pretty much any other Shonen villain group I can think of, almost any villain group at all. We’ve seen them develop as much as we’ve seen the heroes develop, especially in Shigaraki’s case, and to have Shigaraki only be their ‘first-year villain’ or whatever would be disrespectful, wasteful, and thematically inappropriate. To have a more classic, pre-developed villain whose villainy seems to stem from some inherent evil characteristic like AfO or Overhaul would ultimately defeat the story of how the worst villains are created by flaws in the system, not born. 

Part 2: Fan Response

Sometimes I can’t believe I still have to reiterate this to people, but it is possible to stan a character whilst simultaneously recognising that they are flawed, often critically so. When did we move from adoring villains to saying if you like this character you must be an inherently bad person because of this list of bad things they did? 

The thing is that the vast majority of ‘opinions’ on fan blogs are... poorly thought out and shallow, to put it lightly. When it’s 2am and I’m answering an ask about my opinions on x plot point, it’s not gonna be well thought out and thoroughly researched. I’m probably a bit tipsy, kind of tired, and just typing out whatever my initial response is. And really, if I reblog a bit of art with the caption ‘Shigaraki did nothing wrong’, do you really think I’m being serious? A lot of what we say is hyperbolic and meant to either be funny or to evoke an emotion, not because we actually believe it. 

That being said, the League in particular, I believe, resonates with a lot of people in the current political climate. A group of outcasts with characteristics considered undesirable by the wider population coming together and genuinely caring about one another whilst they aim to completely eradicate the system that hurt them? As an angry, marginalised leftist in a society that seems increasingly determined to wipe my chances at a good life out without blinking an eye, hell yeah that resonates with me. Being able to crumble the cripplingly complex and morally vile system I live in to dust and starting over is one hell of an appealing power fantasy. Does that mean I think murder is okay? Obviously not. It’s a fantasy. If there’s one place where I can live out those fantasies without consequences, it’s here. In fiction. And so it seems really stupid to me to be confronted with the idea that if I like a fictional violent radical I’m accused of condoning murder and kidnapping. 

Part 3: Are the Heroes right?

So a lot of the posts I saw that aggravated me were framed like 'how can the villain stans think Miruko and Gran Torino's behaviour is worse than Shigaraki's?', but like... who was saying that?

I feel like certain people's views of the heroes versus villains debate falls under the same fallacies as a lot of political arguments- that is to say, if I'm criticising one side, I must be defending the other. Which is... just blatantly untrue. When we say that the heroes' consistent dehumanisation of a man who is, first and foremost, a victim of significant grooming and abuse throughout his life, is gross and cruel, and that this attitude is mirrored in an awful lot of the hero-villain interactions implying a certain level of empathetic alienation and lack of accountability, we're not saying they shouldn't be trying to take Shigaraki down. Of course they should, he's going to decimate hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. But, like, does that mean they're exempt from all criticism? Should we be excusing the cruel and dismissive attitudes of the heroes and ignoring the behaviours of their side that lead to further 'villainisation' of marginalised people just because they're responsible for saving lives? No. Because once again, one of the key themes of BNHA is that neither side is perfect, and neither side is right.

Mass murder is wrong. So is systemic cruelty towards the oppressed. You don't have to approve of one to criticise the other. So next time you see one of those posts and jump to the conclusion that villain stans have no reading comprehension, pls remember these points.

Anyway, that's my little rant. Sorry.

Tl;dr, villain stans aren't stupid or glorifying murder, we're just capable of criticising more than one type of bad behaviour.

[lemongogo]

hey im the anon abt gyutaro/ume and i dont remember what happens to demons after they die ?? did i miss smth ? regardless i wanna ask what do you think their fate should be ? cause on one hand i think they're just victims of a cruel world who took the first way out they could find but on the other hand it doesnt rlly justify all the slaughter, and i also think abt the demon slayers who also suffered horrible fates and used it to fuel their determination to save other people from that pain

hi !! i don’t think kny ever explicitly mentions what happens to demons after they die (as in we never have concrete evidence of where they go or how their lives after are spent), but i think the general consensus is that the demons go to hell. 

in some cases, the family can decide to go with them (ex: rui and i think akaza? if i remember correctly?) but their fate is pretty much sealed from that point forward i believe. 

heres a pic of gyuutarou and ume, actually, in chapter 97 !!

but yeah !! thats something i think about a lot tbh. as you mentioned, many of the demons we’ve seen have either been groomed into demonhood (rui, ume, susamaru, etc.) or had their pain and suffering exploited (akaza, gyuutarou) for the sake of advancing other demons’ plans (muzan, douma, etc). so i agree ! a lot of these characters are unfortunate victims in themselves and its impossible to view their stories without incorporating the struggles they’ve had to face as both humans AND demons. especially considering that lots of these individuals experience muzan’s abuse regardless of their status relative to him (such as with the upper and lower moons). i think this is best explained through akaza’s relationship with muzan,

(ch. 67)

(ch.156)

and further explored though tanjiro’s observation of rui’s death. he notes that being a demon, for most, is an existence punctuated by extreme grief and despair, and that’s equally supported, i think, by the humanization of these demons following death. that their original conscious is restored (albeit with knowledge of everything they’ve done) and are oftentimes plagued by the guilt of what’s happened.

(ch.43)

what he says here is probably what sums it up for me. that while it’s important to condemn these demons and hold them accountable for the truly awful things they’ve done, it’s also important to consider the suffering they've experienced through existence alone. its so !! complex !! and thats what i love about kny. i love how .. you have some demons who are entirely despicable and bask in the carnage they create, but you also have some for whom demonhood was simply what appeared to be the only answer towards living a healthier life or righting the wrongs that’ve been done to them (usually with false promises and manipulation unbeknownst to them). and .. its so hard to figure out where to.. draw that line. or view these characters at least. because you sympathize with their pain, but you also realize that their actions have caused endless pain for many hundreds of people. tanjiro losing his entire family, giyuu losing his. shinobu watching her sister die before her very eyes, and kanao the same. the ubuyashiki family’s curse or the slaughter of himejima’s children. you look at characters like sanemi, shinobu, or giyuu and understand that you cannot invalidate their view of demons either. while kanae and tanjiro may find hope and humanity in demons, they exist as monsters who feast on pain to everyone else. its important not to discredit their perspective when making a personal choice to observe the demons’ hardships yknow. shinobu’s anger is just as warranted as tanjiro’s optimism and that neither are wrong for how they personally feel demons should be handled after death. 

im like. AAAAAAAA theres so much to it , its really hard for me to condense into a few sentences AHAHA im so sry for making u read this if u still are. but . i guess i’m not too sure. i think maybe, had i experienced the same pain as those above, it would be easy for me to say the demons deserve to go to the worst hell imaginable regardless of what they’ve gone through because that history isn’t accessible to everyone like it has been the audience (or that they’ve seemingly made the conscious decision to cause harm w/o understanding the ways in which demonhood obscures their original conscious/morality). but at the same time, you have those like tanjiro whose world view is shaped by positive encounters with demons like nezuko, tamayo, yushirou, etc. where it seems very evident that . theres more to it than what meets the eye. 

one of my friends ive talked to about this had a rly good perspective on it thats kinda stuck with me since !! she said she likes to view their conclusion as some . separation of identity?? if that makes sense?? that the demon side of them goes to hell while their human form goes to heaven (or division into whichever afterlife). and !! i think thats a really neat interpretation because there’s obvious descrepancy between demon personas and human personas. that the demon personas are like. exaggerations of their flaws, almost (akaza becoming hellbent on battle spirits and physical victories when hajuki’s fury & determination was fueled by love in a sense) while their human personas are the truest sense of self. and depending on which influence there is (muzan vs the appearance of loved ones), their identity changes accordingly. so ! idk ! thats one nice way of looking at it. holding their demon personas accountable while also recognizing that many of these characters deserve some form of healing after many hundreds of years of abuse. its hard because ofc i don’t want to negate the harms they’ve caused but its also? not cut and dry given the environment they were placed in and the fact that muzan’s blood essentially removes their humanity against their will you know. so in this way at least you have both forms of self receiving the proper conclusion. 

whwhwhw so im. !!!!!!!!!!!! ah !! i can’t say i have a definite answer but i think the one above is smth thats comforting to me. i think the story settles with sending them to hell once they’ve regained their past self but also .. “softens” it by providing them company by their loved ones who are willing to go w them?? so thats rly cool to look at too. because it holds them accountable for all that’s happened but also.. recognizes that they’re not wholly responsible for it either and that .. even in hell they’re able to keep their connections and human emotions/experiences . its tragic yet oddly. fitting, i think, of the kny narrative. while i like the aforementioned interpretation, i also really.. appreciate the way its set up in canon too. like yeah i want the best for them but also. it fits in with the tragic nature of demonhood and what it meant for them all. oddly enough. 

u make a good point too !! about demon slayers experiencing the same hardships but using their pain to help others. i think a lot of it is plainly chalked up to luck in terms of.. what they were exposed to following tragedy. how shinobu and kanae were saved by himejima, tanjiro saved by giyuu, kanao picked up by shinobu and kanae, sanemi given the guidance of kagaya while akaza was killed by muzan during his lowest moment, ume and gyuutarou were cornered by douma, rui misled by muzan, etc. i think circumstance is definitely a large factor in determining the paths that were taken. such as sanemi’s anger being validated and heard by ubuyashiki vs, say, akaza’s same anger being intentionally exploited for muzan’s gain.

aaa anyways. theres a lot 2 be said about this. like. SO much on my mind and obviously the extent of muzan’s abuse goes far deeper than what’s briefly mentioned here but.  i love talking about the complexities of kny . and how i view the demons vs the corps and how each of them have grown into their respective stories . AA but ill end it here THNK U >> also so sry for making u read thru all of this i get so excited i could talk abt kny all day long if i had the chance AAA 

[phoenixglacier]

Today’s song analysis: Because Of You by Kelly Clarkson

(If you’re new to this place, hi. I don’t really focus on the song much. Sorry.)

I can’t remember how old I was exactly when I first heard this song. Primary school? I didn’t have the CD or anything, so I guess somehow I managed to grasp the entire song from listening to it playing overhead in the shopping centre.

(Quick note: If Kelly Clarkson herself has said anything about what this song means to her, I have no knowledge of it. I’m here sharing the story I got from this song personally, with no other source except listening to it.)

So. In terms of storyline, it’s pretty straightforward:

The Speaker is addressing their Parent. Their Parent was in an unhealthy, probably abusive relationship with another person. As a result of growing up with this happening to their Parent, the Speaker is unable to let down their walls and trust anyone else in their life now, and it’s highly disruptive to their ability to live.

I originally thought, as a child, that it was a straightforward song blaming the parent for getting into an abusive relationship at all. In a way, the Speaker blames the Parent for not taking care of themself better, because it had an automatic impact on the Speaker even as a bystander in the scene.

But that’s not all, is it?

I realise when I listen to it as a young adult: It’s not about the situation. The Speaker isn’t actually so naïve so as to blame their parent for something they aren’t at fault for. Instead, the Speaker blames them for not protecting them.

And here, I don’t mean ‘protecting them’ as in protecting them from attacks themself, I mean protecting them from the knowledge that was going on. The Speaker says “I was too young”. Allowing their child to witness the abuse at all was where the Parent failed. It’s not the fact that the Parent was in a scary-looking relationship — it’s the fact that the Parent showed them, again and again, how painful and terrible it was.

Imagine it like having a child see movie characters shoot each other, versus the extended dying scene where they see the character’s body die slowly with a pg-13 slapped on it. These scenes are pg-13 for a reason. /j

The Speaker says it explicitly: “I watched you die”

I’m not sure whether this is very clear, so let me interject with a slightly personal example.

So, a family unit that I’m very close to is going through a difficult time right now, a long-coming explosion that’s finally been catalysed by COVID-19. I’m close to the children, as well one of the parents. There’s no need to explain what the full situation is: currently the parent is trying their best to appease their partner for the sake of their children. It is, I think, a common statement for a person to say that they’ll stay in a marriage just for their children. 

Listen up: You are a parent. You have a responsibility to a child, who honestly should be the first and foremost thing in your mind, because you’re responsible for this human being in its entirety. 

So I don’t think that the motive itself is wrong, but it’s worth it for anyone who says that to take the time to step back and consider that statement. You want the best for your children, correct? Then think about your options, and whether staying in a damaging relationship is really ‘the best’ for your children.

It might be. But it’s not automatic. It just isn’t.

This isn’t the place for a whole spiel on my opinions of divorce, but let me start with this: If your children know that their parents are constantly hurting each other, are constantly walking on eggshells, and are constantly seeing their loved ones cry, then they’re already affected. This piles up, and if your children don’t learn that people can’t be trusted and distance themselves from others completely, then they’re going to learn that this is how a normal relationship works and grow up to be the next victim or abuser.

This parent in my story is trying their best not to involve the children, which makes me relieved that they at least know to try.

I always think open communication is good with children. Children don’t need to be sheltered from every little bad thought in the world, and it helps for children to have an accurate understanding of the world, and gives you better ground on getting your child to see your side of things (when my parents give me advice with an explanation, it definitely increases my chances of listening). But that doesn’t mean ‘treat your children as adults’ or even worse, ‘treat your children as your personal therapist’. Yes, children are fragile. Even adults are fragile. And you, as a parent, have the responsibility to make sure you don’t traumatise them.

Here’s another analogy: You know your child will fall down, physically, many times in their life, and sometimes it will be painful and potentially even leave lasting damage. You might be the type who lets your child fall down while they explore, because you don’t want to coddle them when they inevitably grow up and you can’t watch them twenty-four seven anymore. That’s fine. But if they’re a tiny infant and their clearly too fragile to take a fall — DON’T LET THEM FALL. You hold on tight to them because you know that while they’re gonna have to be exposed to falls one day, they’re literally not physically ready to handle that yet. If your infant falls, they might get severe head trauma or spinal cord injury or anything, and then you’ve just messed up at the very start of your parenting. And then when they’re a little bigger, and they can toddle around, do you let them fall off the top of the monkey bars? NO. Because no matter how old, some falls are just going to be too supremely bad, and you don’t want your child to end up in the hospital with broken bones if you can help it.

This is the same concept. Your children have a mental trajectory, just like they have a physical one. In the same way, it varies considerably from one child to the next. There’s no need to go around talking about how some children are ‘way more mature than others’ because, yeah, that happens. That still means it’s a continuum. To be honest, a child can be doing great discussing social movements with their friends and then not be able to take the emotional toll of coming home to a warzone every day. Adults are like this too. I promise you that thousands of people who watch Avengers totally won’t be able to take the emotional stress of an actual alien invasion. 

As a child, I was aware that my parents had very little money. It’s a little hard to grab an adjective, but I’d say I felt ‘negative’ that I couldn’t buy things like my friends could and my parents were rarely at home, as far as I was concerned. But I never fought with my parents on these money-related issues, because I understood the reasoning behind why I couldn’t have what I wanted. But I was also very secure, because my parents made it clear to me that they had it all under control. At stores, I could negotiate purchases with my parents, because I knew I couldn’t comprehend how much we could realistically spend, and I knew that my parents wouldn’t give into me if it would make our lives harder overall. They never gave me the opportunity to even consider that they might not be able to send me to university. This means I grew up pretty secure in terms of money, despite having significantly less than my peers at the time — not that I could spend a lot, but that I didn’t have to worry about it, as a child.

My parents were being honest about their expectations for how our situation would go. In a lot of situations, like unhealthy relationships, forget honesty when you can’t even see the future yourself. But you still need to shield your child a little. They’re still learning about life, love, relationships, confrontation, aggression, problem-solving, self-respect, self-protection, and more. What my parents taught me about money and spending carries on until today — I have zero concept of money apart from whether I have it, buy things only on impulse, but buy absolutely nothing. For the past several years, my parents have dragged me out on shopping trips trying to get me to buy new clothes, because I would never buy myself them until my old clothes wore out beyond repair. This is my money model, and it’s not the worst but it’s also not the best, and I have it because it’s the model I grew up with in my formative years.

So back to the song. The Speaker says they will be stronger. But this isn’t going to work. They’ve learned the desire to be loved from their Parent, so they can’t really close off their heart from danger completely, yet they can never truly open it up. Furthermore, they only have this one model of a relationship, so they’re left only with this vague idea of being ‘stronger’. And lastly, they have trauma from sharing the experience of what their parent went through. Oh, and one more thing, “I will not cry, because I know that’s weakness in your eyes.” Yeah.

[incarnateirony]

Hey dude! Do you have any recommendations for LGBTQ+ movies in the romance genre that have like a happy ending. I really don't care how old they are. I'm feeling the Gay™ hence I need the Gay™. You feel me?

HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII NONNIE

First sorry for taking so long, not only did I have to timeline this :) but :) my computer :) froze :) after writing like :) 2 pages :) and I had to do it again :)

So anyway let it be said, the LGBT dialogue is one of osmosis and shared growth and awareness. Some of these films will be very poorly dated, but as you (thankfully) mentioned that them being old wasn’t a *problem*, expect a lot of old stuff. Because one of the most important things to have under your belt when talking about the LGBT media representation battle is the actual journey from A to B – be that incrementalization, subtextual inclusion, text-breeching features, outright evocative and groundbreaking films at the time (which is what MOST of this list will be) and an improvement in our dialogue; let us never forget that while tr*nss*xual is considered a slur and transgender is proper, tr*nss*xual was at one point the politically correct way to speak it – things like that breach in our growing understanding of the spectrum of human sexuality. 

I *WILL* disclaimer these aren’t all romance, so if you explicitly want romance, google them and take a look if it sounds to appeal, but I’m taking this as a general cinema history plug considering what a confused mess fandom conversation about LGBT history in film or modern text as applicable, accepted or not.

Wonder Bar (1936) (I wouldn’t really call this queer cinema, but if you have the time to watch it too, I think it was the first explicit mention of homosexual engagement even if it was fleetingly brief. You might even call it Last Call style. A blink and you’ll miss it plug that was still decades ahead of its time)

Sylvia Scarlet (1936) (Again, I wouldn’t call this queer cinema, but a lot of the community takes it as the first potential trans representation on TV due to the lead literally swapping gender presentation, even if the presentation is… not what we would modernly call representation IMO)

Un Chant d'Amour (1950) (Worth it for the sheer fact that it pissed off fundies so bad they took it all the way to the US supreme court to get it declared obscene.)

The Children’s Hour (1961) (also known as the 1961 lesson to “don’t be a gossipy, outting bitch”)

Victim (1961) (The first english film to use the word “homosexual” and to focus explicitly on gay sexuality. People might look on it disdainfully from modern lenses, but it really helped progress british understanding of homosexuality)

Scorpio Rising (1964) (Lmao this one deadass got taken to court when it pissed people off and California had to rule that it didn’t count as obscene bc it had social value, worth it for the history if nothing else)

Theorem (1968) (Because who doesn’t wanna watch a 60s flick about a bisexual angel, modern issues and associations be damned)

The Killing of Sister George (1968) (by the makers of What Ever Happened To Baby Jane)

Midnight Cowboy (1969) (…have I had sassy contagonists in RP make a Dean joke off of this more than once, maybe)

Fellini-Satyricon (1969) (AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA THIS)

The Boys in the Band (1970) (This… this… this made a lot of fuss. Just remember leather)

Pink Narcissus (1971) (a labor of love shot on someone’s personal camera)

Death in Venice (1971) (This is basically a T&S prequel but whatever, based on a much older book)

Cabaret (1972) 

Pink Flamingos (1972) (SHIT’S WILD)

The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant (1972) (The title doesn’t lie, be warned)

The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) [god I hope you’ve at least seen this]

Fox and His Friends (1975) (some really hard lessons that are still viable today, that just because someone acknowledges your sexuality doesn’t mean they give a shit about you as a person, and that some will even abuse the knowledge for gain)

The Terence Davies Trilogy (1983) (REALLY interesting history look it up, it’s sort of one of those “drawn from own experience” story short sets)

The Times of Harvey Milk (1984) (Documentary)

Desert Hearts (1985) (Pretty much the first film to put lesbianism into a good light as a true focus based on a novel from the sixties)

Parting Glances (1986) (the only film its creator got out before his death from the aids epidemic)

Law of Desire (1987) (two men and a trans woman in a love triangle, kinda ahead of its time)

Maurice (1987) (This one’s really interesting, cuz it was based on a book made about 15 years before it, but the book itself had been written half a century earlier and wasn’t published until after the guy died, he just thought it’d never get published Cuz Gay, so basically it’s based on a story written in like, the 20s finally getting screen time. It has a bittersweet but positive-leaning-ish ending without disregarding the cost that can come with it and even addresses class issues at the same time 100% DO RECOMMEND)

Tongues Untied (1989) (a documentary to give voices to LGBT black men) 

Longtime Companion (1990) (This one’s title alone is history, based on a NYT phrasing for how they talked about people’s partners dying, eg longtime companion, during the AIDS epidemic)

Paris Is Burning (1990) (Drag culture and related sexual and gender identity exploration as it intersected with class issues and other privileges explored in a documentary)

The Crying Game (1992)( I should correct this that I guess it’s more, 1992 considered, “SURPRISE, DIL HAS A DILL!” – I guess I really didn’t do that summary justice by modern language and dialogue as much as how people in the 90s were talking about that and that’s a my bad. LIKE. SEE, EVEN I CAN FUCK UP MY LANGUAGE I’M SORRY CAN I BLAME THE STRAIGHTS T_T) #90skidproblems – I guess I should call it a trans film. And this alone tells me I should go watch it again to recode it in my brain modernly rather than like circa de la 2000 understanding.

The Bird Cage (1996) (So you mix drag culture, otherwise heterosexually connected lovebirds, and then realize the girl comes from an alt-rightish house and the guy comes from a Two Dads Home and does cabaret, how to deal with the issues OF this conflict when it’s between you and your happiness, even if the fight isn’t even your own as much as it is that of the person you love. The answer is PROBABLY NOT to dress in drag and pretend to be straight, but what are you going to do? – while played for laughs we’d consider modernly crude, the fact that they even dared to approach this narrative was pretty loud)

The Celluloid Closet (1996) (Ever heard of the Vito Russo test for LGBT representation? This is based on a book by Vito Russo.)

Happy Together (1997) (Ain’t this shit an ironic name; a mutual narrative, via chinese flick, of hong kong ceding to china and an irrevocably tangled MLM pairing as a giant mirrored metaphor)

Boys Don’t Cry (1999) (one of the most groundbreaking films about trans identity at the time)

Stranger Inside (2001) (As easy as it is to recoil to the idea of “black gays in jail”, the film makers actually went and consulted prisoners and put a great deal of focus into intersectional african american issues that really weren’t around even in straight films at the time)

Transamerica (2005) (While it made a bit of a fuss for not casting an actual trans actor, it was one of the first times a big budget studio really tried to tackle it which really pushed us forward)

Call Me by Your Name (2017) (since I’ve apparently leaned really heavy old cinema throw in a modern one lmaooooo)

Also honorable The Kids Are All Right (2010) mention for the sake of the fucking title alone. 

And to any incarnation of “On the Road” by Kerouac, which

Was originally a book

Released a sanitized de-gayed edition because of the times

Later released the full homo manuscript

had a few film adaptations

Was one of Kripke’s founding inspirations for Supernatural once he left behind “Some reporter guy chases stories” and took the formula of Sal and Dean (and tbh later, Carlo) in a beat generation vibe gone modern as we know it today.

Reading both versions of this can actually help some folks currently understand that when you get confused over some shit (WHY IS CARLO SO UPSET? WHY IS HE ACTING LIKE AN UPSET GIRLFRIEND??? WHY IS HE SO JEALOUS AND SAD WHEN DEAN IS AROUND GIRLS???? WE JUST DONT KNOWWWWWWWWWWWWW) it’s because some big money asshat bleached the content, and sometimes, it takes a while for the full script to come out and again, surprise, it’s been GAY, they just didn’t want to OFFEND anybody. *jazz hands*

Now if you wanna go WAY WAY BACK, during 191X years, a bunch of gender role flicks came out like Charley’s Aunt, Mabel’s Blunder and the Florida Enchantment.

Also where is @thecoffeebrain-blog to yell about the necessity of watching Oz, for the next few hours? But no, seriously, just look into the entire LGBT *HISTORY* of Oz.

Beyond that though I’m gonna stop here cuz hi that’s a lot. I really don’t know how much counts as “happy ending” but if I had to give an LGBT cinema rec list, that’s it as a sum. I don’t really have like, a big portfolio of UWU HAPPY ENDING GAYS because 1. there aren’t a lot of those but 2. to me, it’s not about the ending, it’s about the journey. Be that in flick or through culture and history itself.

If you want more happy ending stuff, you definitely have to look at 2010+, but it’s not like we’re in a rich and fertile landscape yet so honestly just googling that would probably serve you better since I don’t explicitly explore romance genre or happy endings to really have a collection. LGBT life is hard and film often reflects that if we’re making genuine statements about it and really representing it, and we’re just now getting to a point of reliably having the chance at a happy ending. That or maybe someone can add like “Explicit happy endings” lists after this that has more experience in that subgenre.

Also, I can’t emphasize ENOUGH to remember what was progressive then is not what is progressive now, and frankly, what some people think is progressive now they’ll probably look back on what they said and feel really fuckin’ embarrassed. See: “It’s not text because by alt right homophobic dialogue, M/M sex isn’t gay if you do the secret handshake” MGTOW kinda crazy ass dialogue or parallel narratives they inspire that encourage self-closeting and denial based on the pure idea that being gay makes you somehow lesser, so It’s Not That. Like. I am. 99% sure. At least half of the people talking in this fandom. Are going to regret that the internet is forever. And maybe hope hosting servers end in the inevitable nuclear war that will annihilate this planet.

Also, edit: Speaking of mistaken dialogues and words aging poorly, I’d like to apologize from the poor description I rendered “The Crying Game” with, but that really goes to show how deep-seated the issue is we can so casually fuck up identifying a trans narrative as SURPRISE DICK IS GAY when we were all absorbing the content like 20+ years ago and HOW HARD it can be to de-code yourself from that kind of programming because here I am, writing a giant assed rep post and fucking it up because my brain hadn’t soaked that movie since Y2K. Guess what, time for me to go watch the Crying Game again.

[know-the-way]

can we get a “do not despair” post for spellwood too?? feeling pretty sad after part 3 and would really like to hear how they could turn it around

Sure! Strap in - this is gonna take some turns. And if Spellwood/Blackwood ain’t your thing, just leave m8 - it’s not for you.

Right. So.

Honestly, at this point - the only thing keeping anything about this ship afloat in canon is their history. We know they have one, but we don’t know much about it. I had really hoped, since they had cast an actor to play young!Faustus, that meant we’d be getting a backstory. But apparently, all we were getting was a 20 second scene that reveals very little.

However, it does reveal something.

1. The book Faustus had was clearly referencing old world Gods & goddesses and it would seem - his interest/study of the mystical (i.e. eldritch terrors) dated back to when he was a boy. Along with pretty much everything else about him, I would very much like to know WHY he had the desire to study that. Why was he so desperately searching for power at such a young age? And why was he looking for it beyond the religion he was born into, which gave him the gift of magick and promised limitless power to the “worthy” already? In essence - Faustus, WHO HURT YOU. Considering his view of women, I’m gonna guess whoever hurt him was one. Maybe his mother? Maybe both of his parents? Idk, but the little shit definitely got fucked over somewhere in his youth by someone he probably trusted. Said it before and I’ll say it again - he practically screams ‘child abuse victim’ (a la Draco Malfoy, if you need a reference) and I’ll stand by that until I’m proven wrong.

(I was also really struck by the line “that boy knows nothing of true Hell” which Faustus says to Lucifer after Nick beats him in the witch’s cell. What hell has Faustus been through himself in order to say that?)

2. That scene also showed us Zelda & Faustus studied together and were familiar enough with each other to notice a change in attitude (“why are you in such a snit?”) and snipe back & forth from what appears to be a very young age. Which seems to suggest they spent a fair amount of time together at (and possibly before) the Academy. Not a shocking or new revelation really, except it kind of confirms their relationship wasn’t a whirlwind romance and that Faustus asking for Edward’s permission to marry Zelda wasn’t on a whim.

The main questions I have following that scene are if that excerpt he ripped from the book was actually about Hecate and her power. If so, is her power more vast than we even understood by the end of part 3 (i.e. can even she defeat eldritch terrors)? And could the reason Faustus got so upset reading it be that it said only women can call on Hecate, thus thwarting his search for an absolute escape?

Something confirmed about interacting with mystical entities is that they can/will drive you mad. Ambrose says this after Sabrina returns from her quest and finds everyone dead - “Blackwood was driven mad and feral by his insane worship of those eldritch terrors he prays to.”

And if mysticism can drive you mad - and he’s studied/sought these things out since he was a boy - it stands to reason that he’s been slowly feeding and incubating that madness until it finally fucking snapped.

(Side note - an Acheron configuration, which will also drive you mad, is an arcane device from ancient magick, too. So maybe Edward studied these things with Faustus at one point together? Curious.)

We saw him experience a big and sudden shift in part 2 - where his faith in the Church of Night waned with every challenge to his authority by Sabrina. Things had been going along fine the 15 years or so of him being high priest, that maybe he was finally starting to trust his faith in the Lord Satan, until Sabrina showed up and started meddling with the order he’d established. And THEN - in a last ditch effort to take back control and become anti pope, she interferes again and Satan himself doesn’t even seem to care how heretical she’s been.

So back to the eldritch terrors he goes - setting a contingency and pledging his loyalties to them in exchange for protection and power. But they also want an offering (“oh, they like offerings, yes they do”). Proof of loyalty by blood. Solution - poison the coven. Here’s your offering - an entire building’s worth of souls. Bing, bang, boom - “we’ll hide you in this cozy time rift at Loch Ness and siphon every last bit of sanity out of you while you’re there. Oh gosh, they’ve found you and taken our gift egg from you. Well, we can’t have a repeat of that, so while you go pursue it - make sure you get rid of any ties to this reality that you may have. Anything that would hold you back from the glory we’re promising you. Destroy them all, if necessary. The twins can stay ‘cause you’ve raised them to be insane, too, okay off you go!”

But what’s this got to do with Spellwood? Well. The two go hand in hand, the way I see it and here’s where the very small bit of hope for them as a couple (very small) lies.

It’s apparent that, at least somewhere in their history together, Faustus wanted Zelda. She seems to be the only thing about the Spellmans he could ever tolerate and why? Well, perhaps because he cared for her, perhaps they found a common ground in feeling inferior their whole lives (hurt/comfort is kind of their jam), and/or perhaps he just found her attractive (understandable). And if he didn’t have any affection left for her by the time part 2 rolled around, I do not know why he’d continue to pursue her after she cut their physical relationship off. Zelda was going to gain power by marrying the high priest, but there was nothing in it for him beyond... having her as his wife. Which perhaps he truly had wanted since they were young together.

But then he realized it would be more complicated than he thought when Sabrina really amped up her interference with presenting Edward’s manifesto and accusing him of murdering her parents (still never explicitly confirmed, btw) (also still very curious about when he said ‘you haven’t even read mine’ to her at the wedding - makes me wonder if what was in it wasn’t as egregious as the Church of Judas tenants wound up being). And so - he put Zelda under the Caligari spell to keep her from helping her family while he destroyed them once and for all. Except her. ‘Cause he wanted her. Not until he found out she had betrayed him in hiding Leticia did he seek any type of ‘vengeance’ towards her directly. Then, though he was far from sane before, he went well and truly mental after that.

So I see it like this - if he was driven mad and used by the eldritch terrors, he didn’t really have a grasp on reality nor would he have understood what he was doing. He wouldn’t remember any earthly affection he might have for someone because his mind would be corrupted by other worldly things. Thus - a conscience, remorse, and reparation might be possible if they’re able to restore some humanity back to him.

It’s a long shot... by a lot, but in the same way Sabrina told Nick he couldn’t have known what he was doing while under the influence of the Dark Lord’s essence (which we can certainly open a healthy dialogue about taking responsibility for your actions no matter what you’re going through/under the influence of *clears throat*) - so, too, could be the case for Faustus.

If proven as such - and they can additionally confirm some backstory that, at one point, he and Zelda did truly care for each other - it might be possible to salvage the dumpster fire that is their current predicament. If done carefully and with a fuckton of explanation. That’s a lot of built up character history to waste.

(At the very least, just give me an explanation, RAS. I am BEGGING you.)

*slow exhale* Okay, I’m tired. And wow, that’s a whole novel. Okay. Right. Thanks for your question, hope this helped. Bye!