#Liking a character who does bad things does not mean you condone their actions

[ao3commentoftheday]

I am having issues being nice to people in my ao3 comments. Most of the time people are perfectly lovely and I love having interactions with them. It's really important to me that when I'm on my writer tumblr instead of my main and on my ao3, I foster a kind and gentle community. I feel like that starts with me and that is the sort of environment I want to create.

Now, the problem is this fic I wrote. It's for a pretry big fandom and it got a lot of traction (like first page when sorting by hits while there are tens of thousands of fics) and it's been wild. Mostly great... except this one arc I wrote where character A, who is mentally ill and gets triggered into a spiral acts mentally ill, which negatively impacts people around him, including character B (it's a ship fic), who while not responsible is making it worse and making the active choice to stay, because he also has his own issues. The fic explores the aftermath of that as well, but for a few chapters it's just the downward spiral. And while it isn't all condoned, I give character A understanding due to the situation as well as a healing journey, wherein he apologizes and does better and makes up for it.

Sadly for me, character B is the fandom's favorite white boy, who is always the hurt victim in every situation and has no responsibility ever. So me also stating how character B is in part responsible forthe situation ending up getting as bad is a no go and people are very angry at me. On top of that, I based a lot of character A's struggles on my own, which makes it even less pleasant to get detailed comments about how he deserves to be beaten up for his actions and left by all his friends and family to stew in the guilt for the rest of forever all alone, less than fun.

I don't want to have to tell people about my own personal struggles and I am tired of explaining that it is a character arc and a nuanced and complex situation wherein multiple parties are at fault. And I have chronic have to reply even when I know ignoring it is better syndrome. At what point does it become acceptable to just be a fucking bitch to people?

First of all, lemme give you a hug 💗 It's never fun when people misunderstand your message and it's even worse when there's a personal element to it as well.

The way I see it, your comments section belongs to you. It's an extension of your fic and it's a place where every message left gets dropped into your inbox. If there's something you don't want to see in your comments section? Delete it. If there's someone who won't stop misinterpreting you/your characterization or someone who is being an asshat? Block them. Then delete their comment.

I know people get hung up on whether or not they should do that, but I'm here to tell you that if I didn't delete hate and block haters, this blog would have shut down in 2020, if not earlier. You need to take care of yourself, and if that means removing that part of your comments then so be it.

I also prefer to lead with empathy and understanding. I believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt. I work very hard at taking the best interpretation possible of scenarios that people write me about. But that doesn't mean I need to put up with hate or with willful ignorance or with snarky "ironic" dystopian takes on my attempts to be sincere and helpful. Those things all make it harder for me to continue this hobby I love, and therefore I delete and I block and I move on in the direction I'm going.

I definitely understand the desire to be a heinous bitch in response. I've even given into it a few times. But I also remember those times because I'm not proud of myself for losing my temper. I look back on them and wish that I hadn't chosen a good burn over my principles.

Don't share anything that you don't actually want to share with strangers on the internet. Don't keep comments around that make you feel bad. Put an author's note at the bottom of the chapter explaining what you're going for and letting readers know that you don't want comments like the ones you describe here - and delete them if they come in despite that.

Sometimes you just have to clean house, anon, and get rid of some of the cruft.

[sapphiresaphics]

I am SO FUCKING SICK of this being used as an excuse. There’s this NASTY pervasive policing in media by some “fans” who believe that you can’t like or enjoy a character unless they’re completely morally PURE. They believe that any negative thing a character does MUST be met with equal retribution and/or punishment, or else that means the media in question is CONDONING or SUPPORTING the actions of said character.

Caitlyn, along with every other character in Arcane, is a morally grey character. Meaning they do good things and they do bad things and you’re supposed to have the capacity not to forgive the bad but to be able to understand the reasons behind their actions and see things from a perspective that is not purely black and white. Understanding Caitlyn’s actions doesn’t mean you condone/forgive them, but it also doesn’t mean you condemn her for them either.

Caitlyn does some bad things in her position of power, but she’s not a fascist. Fascism is a far right-wing authoritarian belief. But Caitlyn never show signs of being right-wing. She doesn’t believe in the ideology of fascism and she actively works against the system she’s been put in charge of when she can. She doesn’t use the deep dark prisons in Stillwater where Vi was held, she refuses to lock people up without cause, and she has no interest in amassing power. She has one goal: Get Jinx. That’s it. And she uses the power that was GIVEN TO HER BY THE GOVERNMENT to try and enact that goal. And importantly when that goal is met/exhausted, she RETURNS POWER BACK TO THE GOVERNMENT. Which is what a military leader IS SUPPOSED TO DO under Martial Law.

But these moral police “fans” just see that she did bad things and therefore she is bad too. Simple as that. And anyone who tries to bring CONTEXT and NUANCE into a show that heavily relies on CONTEXT and NUANCE gets blamed for approving of “war crimes” and defending “classism.” And no… that’s not how media literacy WORKS you pompous asshole!

It’s extraordinarily frustrating that fascism as a term has no clear definition, because that allows these moral police assholes to label anything they don’t like under the fascism umbrella. It makes trying to discuss Caitlyn and her arc really difficult because they just shut down all discussion with “she committed war crimes” and they never even bother to try and look into the story beyond that extremely surface level reading.

[david-talks-sw]

Debunking more myths in the GFFA: the Jedi and the clones.

I wrote a post debunking the various myths about how "the Jedi condone slavery", a while ago. Something I had omitted (because it's such a big topic) was the following two statements that concern the clone troopers' relations with the Jedi:

"The clones were genetically bred to have accelerated growth, so they're technically child soldiers."

"The clones were slaves of the Jedi."

Both the above statements are inaccurate, let's explore why. 

"The clones were child soldiers"

Let's get the easy one out of the way first, because it's a logic that cuts both ways. If age is our only determination of the maturity of a Star Wars character, then Grogu is not a baby. He is aged 50, and is thus a middle-aged man.

Who cruelly eats the babies of a woman...

... and knowingly tortures animals for his own sadistic pleasure.

Of course, I'm kidding. Grogu's none of the above things.

The narrative frames him as a cute baby who does innocent baby stuff. Him eating the eggs is played off as comedic, as is him lifting with the frog. To this day, some fans still call him "Baby Yoda".

Conversely, despite the clones being 10/14-years-old, their actions, behaviors, way of thinking, sense of humor, morals etc, are all those of an adult.

Like, Ahsoka is technically older than Rex in this scene.

The scene doesn't portray them as peers, though. This isn't written as "a teen and a tween talking". No, Rex looks, acts and behaves like a grown-up and is thus framed as such by the narrative.

You can make the argument "they're child soldiers", but (unless you're doing so in bad faith) you'd also have to argue that "Grogu's an adult".

"The clones were the Jedi's slaves"

Nope. For all intents and purposes, they're in the same boat as the Jedi, who George Lucas stated multiple times had been drafted to fight in the war.

Again: both the Jedi (monk/diplomats untrained for fighting on a battlefield) and clones (literally bred en masse only to fight) are being forced to fight by Palpatine and the Senate.

Though, on paper, the clones were commissioned by Jedi Master Sifo-Dyas, it was actually done by the Sith (who either manipulated or assassinated Sifo-Dyas then stole his identity, depending on the continuity you choose to adhere to). The rest of the Jedi had no idea these clones were being created.

So while the clones are slaves... they're not owned by the Jedi.

They're the army of the Republic, they belong to the Senate. This isn't exactly a scoop, they refer to the clones as something to purchase...

... and manufacture.

As far as the Senate’s concerned, clones are property, like droids. 

Like there's a whole subplot in The Bad Batch about this very point: after the war, the clones are decommissioned and left out to dry because they literally have no rights, they served their purpose.

The only trooper to ever canonically blame the Jedi for the clones' enslavement is Slick, who the narrative frames as having been bribed and manipulated by Asajj Ventress into betraying his comrades.

Also, the only canonical Jedi shown to ever be mean, dismissive or mistreating the clones in any way, is Pong Krell.

And it's eventually revealed he’s in fact a full-on traitor, hence why the story frames him as an antagonistic dick from the moment he's introduced. He doesn’t represent the Jedi in any way.

We know this because the other Jedi we’ve been shown are always prioritizing their clones’ lives over theirs, if given the chance.

Finally, if we wanna get even more specific... as Commander-in-Chief of the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR), the clones belong to Palpatine. 

Palpatine who is a Sith Lord. 

Palpatine who arranged for the creation of the clones and had them all injected with a chip that would activate upon hearing a code-word...

... and forced them to murder their Jedi without hesitation or remorse.

When you bear all that  ⬆️  in mind and when you read this quote by George Lucas...

"The Jedi won't lead droids. Their whole basis is connecting with the life force. They'd just say, 'That's not the way we operate. We don't function with non-life-forms.” So if there is to be a Republic army, it would have to be an army of humans."    - The Star Wars Archives: 1999-2005, 2020  

... narratively-speaking, everything falls into place.

Sidious knows that:

If he orchestrates a war designed to thin the Jedi's numbers, corrupt their values and plunge the galaxy into chaos...

If he wants to draft the Jedi - peace-keeping diplomats who’d never willingly join the fray - to fight in his war...

... then the only way they won't resist the draft and abstain from fighting is if they think joining the conflict will save lives.

So he creates a set of cruel, sadistic villains for them to face, opponents who will target innocent civilians at every turn...

... and instead of lifeless droids, he prepares for the Jedi an army of men... living, mortal people who, despite being well-trained, will be completely out of their league when facing the likes of Dooku...

... Ventress...

... Grievous...

... Savage Opress...

... or the defoliator, a tank that annihilates organic matter.

Thus, in order to save as many clone and civilian lives, the Jedi join the fray despite knowing that doing so will corrupt their values. 

And as the war rages on, a bond of respect is formed between the two groups.

Clearly, the Jedi don't like the fact that the Republic is using the clones to fight a war, but for that matter, they don't like being in a war, in fact they advocated against it.

However, it's happening regardless of their issues with the idea or personal philosophies. Said The Clone Wars writer Henry Gilroy:

"I’d rather not get into the Jedi’s philosophical issues about an army of living beings created to fight, but the Jedi are in a tough spot themselves, being peacekeepers turned warriors trying to save the Republic."

And bear in mind, the Jedi are basically space psychics, the clones are living beings that they can individually feel in the Force... 

... so the Jedi feel every death but need to move on, regardless, only being able to mourn the troopers at the end of every battle.

We see this in the Legends continuity too, by the way.

(that is, when the writers actually try to engage with the narrative)

Also, if you ask the clones, they’re grateful the Jedi have their backs.

When Depa Billaba voices her concerns about how the war is impacting the Jedi's principles, troopers Grey and Styles are quick to make it clear how grateful they all are for the Jedi's involvement:

So the clones aren't the Jedi's slaves. If anything, they're both slaves of the Republic (considering how low the Jedi's status actually is in the hierarchy).

Only I'd argue the clones have it much, much worse. 

The Senate sees the Jedi as "ugh, the holier-than-thou space-monk lapdogs who work for us"... but a Jedi has the option to give up that responsibility. They can leave the Order, no fuss or stigma. 

A clone trooper cannot leave the GAR! If they do, they’re marked for treason and execution. Again, they’re not perceived as “people”.

And it doesn’t help that the Kaminoans, the clones’ very creators, see the troopers as products/units/merchandise. A notion that the Jedi are quick to correct whenever they get the chance.

How The Clone Wars writers describe the clones' relationship with the Jedi.

George Lucas hasn’t spoken much about this subject aside from the quote from further up. But to be fair... the Prequels aren’t about the clones’ dynamic with the Jedi, so it makes sense that he wouldn’t talk on that subject so much.

He did mention that part of The Clone Wars’ perks is that he could:

“Do stories about some of the individual clones and get to know them.”

But that’s as far as it gets. 

So for this part, I'm just gonna let Dave Filoni, showrunner of The Clone Wars and the upcoming series Ahsoka, and TCW writer Henry Gilroy - both of whom worked closely with Lucas - take the wheel. They make themselves pretty clear on how the clone/Jedi dynamic is meant to be viewed. 

Here’s Henry Gilroy:

"In my mind, the Jedi see the clones as individuals, living beings that have the same right to life as any other being, but understand that they have a job to do."

"The clones see the Jedi as their commanding officers on one hand, but also, at least subconsciously, they look to them for clues to social/moral behavior."    

"Some clones may find themselves getting philosophical leadership from the Jedi that helps them answer some of the deeper questions of life."    

"We thought this was a great opportunity to show how the Jedi interact with clones. Specifically, Yoda in a teaching role of the clones, who were socially new, who kind of grew up— who were created to fight, and he really broadened their horizons and helped them realize there was a great big universe out there that was bigger than just fighting and killing."    

And here’s Dave Filoni’s comments:

"I truly believe that the Jedi try to humanize their clones and make them more individual, as Henry says."    

"I think we saw that in Revenge of the Sith, when the Clones were colorful and named under the Jedi Generals, and then in the final shots of the film with Palpatine and Vader near the new Death Star, the ships are grey, the color and life is sucked out. The Stormtroopers are only numbers and identified by black and white armor or uniforms in A New Hope." 

"The soldiers have become disposable to the Emperor."    

"That is something the Jedi would never do."    

"Yoda teaching the clones much like he taught Luke. ‘Cause that was kind of natural for [the Jedi], a natural instinct to take to these clones like they’re students."    

None of the above quotes from two different writers of The Clone Wars, who had many interactions with George Lucas, frame the Jedi and the clones’ relationship in a negative way. 

How much more proof do we need that "the clones were slaves of the Jedi�� isn’t the intended narrative?

My point being that while the clones' ordeal is indeed horrible, the Jedi have nothing to do with it. The narrative of The Clone Wars always frames it as the fault of the Sith, the Senate and the Kaminoans.

If you go by the intended narrative, the Jedi were the clones' teachers and brothers-in-arms. The clones and the Jedi were not just comrades.

They were friends.

[wavesalwayscrash]

sorry for the long ask lol… lots of musings about things

i really, really appreciate the way you write abusers in this comic. it may be a bit of a weird thing to say, but so many write abusers as just one dimensional characters who are bad when they’re… Not. they’re people, who do bad things, with reasonings that could be all sorts of things (which doesnt mean their reasonings are Justified). i feel like the narrative around “abuser one dimensional bad” makes it harder to recognize how complicated actual real life abuse can be. a character can still be bad, in the wrong, and an abuser while genuinely caring and having some semblance of a reason in their head for what they do. in my experience abusers don’t tend to realize they are in the wrong/tend to try to justify it, they’re not always fully consciously acting bad just because/for the sake of causing harm, and theres not always a premeditated plan out of it, either.

this was all sparked by reading some of your asks about the king. about how love can co-exist with abuse (and that doesnt negate the abuse, either, but makes it harder to realize and break out from). it isn’t as black and white as it seems, i like seeing the depths of that more than the portrayal of an abuser being wholly morally black and terrible

i’m super excited to see more of the king, i’m putting him under a microscope. analyzing his actions. he disgusts me but i’m compelled. i want to put him in a microwave just to see what would happen. im especially fascinated by mariner, too, he’ll be a fun beast to dissect (i looove the taixu pmv and how it contrasts him and the king)

and of course - i really appreciate how you write lain’s response to all this! it can be a lot to unpack. i simply feel like i always see more appreciation for the writing of an accurate deconstruction of trauma versus the writing of a good abuser (good in the sense of the writing, not the character). thank you for all the work you put into this wonderful comic! i feel (so far) its an excellent reflection of all the muddy in-between that goes into motivations and actions. there seems to be some semblance of a power corrupts theme going, too, and im super excited to see that develop (whether im proven right or wrong there)

(and because im sending this publicly i don’t condone abuse, i just enjoy dissecting abusers in fiction. enjoyment of a character does not mean i condone those actions in real life)

Hey, I really appreciate this ask. A lot of my writing and my thoughts regarding abusers come from both my own experiences with them as well as interacting with other abuse victims like. everyday (my wife and people in my close friend group). And I agree with everything that you said here. I don't really like the "abuser is one dimensional bad" kind of idea, and in fact kind of works against how hard it is to realize you were abused in the first place. Making abusers Bad All The Time has made me think "well what I went through wasn't that so it couldn't have been abuse" before. Which isn't the case. Abusers can be kind, can be caring, can comfort you when you're upset, can help you out, and can still abuse you. While not the only reason, it's one of the reasons why it's so hard to leave an abusive relationship/realize it was abuse in the first place.

I'm trying not to get super into my own experiences of abuse (I don't wanna just trauma dump on ya lmao), but a lot of the parental stuff in regards to The King is drawn directly from my own experiences (The sexual part is drawn from my wife's (again with permission/encouragement)). I know intimately that a parent can love their child and still treat them like shit. It was only when I started going to therapy and telling people about my experiences that made me realize what I went through Wasn't The Norm and I was in fact abused.

As well, the reason I write abusers like the King and Mariner having reasons for their actions is honestly just a comfort thing for me. I will never know why my abusers treated me the way they did. I will never know the reasons as to why they did what they did, I'll never know what was going on inside of their head. I can guess, but I will never get that kind of closure in my real life. But in this fictional world, I do get to make reasons for their actions. I can give them reasons and justifications and I (the author) get to decide why. and that, at least to me, offers the smallest bit of comfort.

+I'm glad you're enjoying the story <3 Mariner's one of my favorite guys, he's a little freak and I love him soooooooo bad.

[kshahrewar-paradisaea]

Regarding the people who are anti victim support in the Sparkle Care "community"

As you can see this is a brand new account. I've never had Tumblr but I have been shown Sparkle Care through my boyfriend who was and still is deeply passionate about Sparkle Care. I have seen what has happened in recent events and honestly the fact that you people think you're still in the right after pushing someone to overdose is fucking insane and I wonder how many people have scarred physically and psychologically or even worse because of you people. You people are a danger to society. Anti ship or whatever labels you chronically online friendless cretins have made up as of late, you guys are just pro harassment. The only anti you are is anti victim. You're telling me that

1. The art was private

2. Used as BLACKMAIL leaked by

3. Someone who was upset that they were kicked off the Sparkle Care team and said art was using

4. Characters that were a self insert of the creator and

5. A reflection of her REAL LIFE TRAUMA making her a victim and finally

6. Some of the content that was leaked was completely unrelated to the incest art and was supposed to be on Kittycorn's patreon so now she can no longer get any income from it sooooo theft of a small artist

Not a single person I have seen has bashed the person who released private blackmail content in revenge maliciously because a victim a VICTIM is coping with her own character, A SELF INSERT CHARACTER made art you don't like with something that grossed you out.

Media literacy is dead but this is the same group of people that cultivated such a deep culture of anti recovery self enabling freaks that were eating their moms jewelry and people who thought they were god. Just because a subject is depicted does not mean the author is in support. But you guys can't realize that when the source is actively condemning it. You people are no worse than the multiple film directors who sexualized Dolores Haze (ya know, Lolita's real name because pro harassers ((I'm not calling you anti anything)) are so uneducated on the things they talk about you probably haven't heard her real name until now) because they read the cliff notes version of the book and decided it was a love story with a young seductress and not a cautionary tale into the mind of a self justifying and unreliable narrator.

Dark themes belong in media. Purity culture and censorship is the death to the voice of victims. If you are not mature enough to understand that bad things in the real world happen and people will speak on their own experiences in different ways and you have the ability to block them then you are not mature enough to have any social media accounts. Do you guys think horror movies condone murder in real life? Do you think SVU condones sexual violence? Even if a piece of media does endorse dark themes then don't fucking consume it. Boycott that shit but boycotting small artists who have harmed NO real life minors or family members does not involve pushing them to self harm and suicide.

I've seen some people try and justify themselves by saying Kitty corn did it to herself. It is so obvious you realized the gravity of your actions too late and you're deflecting so you don't have to feel guilty because why would you cowardly keyboard warriors feel guilt from across the screen? You're safe in distance and anonymity and you forget that the people you are bullying are just as real as you. Tumblr and more so COVID have done irreparable damage to people's ability to socialize like normal people because you haven't seen a blade of grass or talked to a real person that you didn't immediately make uncomfortable in years good fucking god.

[thewistlingbadger]

idk if this is a 'hot take' but i see way too much of people lusting after Sevika only after erasing her less palatable elements. in headcanons she's admittedly tough and violent but wouldn't hurt anyone unless she had to (i've even seen one where she "only raises her hands in self-defence"). bitch one of the first things we see her do is attempt to square up to a bunch of teenagers for the crime of trying to free their dad! she's willing to kill children with her bare hands. she personally enacts the edicts of a drug kingpin. she taunts vi and jinx during their altercations with the most provocative, soul-destroying shit she can think of. she's the type of fighter who grins manically as she scalds her opponent's cheek. she is not simply someone who nobly sacrifices her own moral purity for 'the greater good' but is otherwise a soft loving Mama Bear™, she gets *nasty* with it! and don't get me wrong, i give enormous moral lenience to most Zaunite characters because the violence of the oppressed is by definition incomparable to the violence of their oppressors. there are myriad explanations and justifications for every single thing they've done. but beyond that, i NEED it to be ok to say that she's a fucking dick sometimes - both interpersonalliy, and on a greater ideological scale - because regardless of how justifiable we find her actions, we should collectively be in a place where we can thirst for Sevika without defanging her as a character. she's compelling and fascinating and attractive BECAUSE she's imbued with agency, which necessitates the capacity for genuinely immoral actions and unlikable behavior! i mean come on! if the white twitter lesbians can so eagerly embrace the moral greyness of their rich fascha femme, we can do it for our butch freedom fighter!! i believe in us!!!

anyway tldr i love Sevika warts and all and everyone do your thing but if you don't love her warts i think you're missing out

Valid valid and valid. Not a single thing you said was incorrect. Sevika is DEVIOUS point blank period. In season 1 she is a minor character so I can understand why she's overlooked a lot but when you actually do look at her she can be VILLAINOUS at times. "It's just a matter of time before you implode and Silco finally gets the hint that you're just about as good for our cause as you were for your family. Jinx." Like DAMN Sevika!! Okay it's like that!! This rudeness that she showed Jinx is a bit fascinating to me because the only other character in this show that is just about as rude as Sevika is in this scene is Mylo. I made a post talking about how she has some similarities to Mylo and someone responded to that by also highlighting that at least Mylo was a teenager beefing with a child, meanwhile Sevika is a whole ass adult beefing with Jinx. I just think that's interesting and funny.

You brought up something that truly is just a plague to all fandoms. Whenever someone says they like a character that has a negative reputation in the source material, everyone starts coming out the woodwork to say it's bad to like that character. People don't seem to understand that just because you like a villain and find their character to be enjoyable doesn't mean you actually condone their actions and would be ok with someone acting like them irl. There are many reasons to like a villainous character and sometimes one of those reasons is BECAUSE they're a villain. Sometimes you like that a character does bad things because it's interesting and entertaining, and liking that doesn't make you a bad person. You should be able to like antagonistic characters for their villainy. Do I understand what they did was bad? Yes. Do I still like them? Yes, and not in spite of it but BECAUSE of it. And you don't have to erase those parts of a character just go openly admit that. You should be able to openly like a character in their full extent. You shouldn't have to ignore certain aspects just for your adoration of a character to be accepted.

Sevika really always has been That Bitch she has no problem telling people how it is directly to their faces. She calls Vander weak in front of everyone. She tells Vi Vander "had his chance" knowing damn well what Vander meant to her. She calls Silco out on his bullshit SEVERAL TIMES in front of him. Sevika isn't restrained as a character at all she's always being her full self. I feel that season two has made Sevika more popular and because her screentime was limited and the writing was different in season two people have allowed her character to become warped. I definitely think that if someone is ok with justifying and excusing the actions of Caitlyn and/or Vi then they should keep that same energy when it comes to Sevika. Sevika is a tough, loyal lady that has a very fun personality and she's also a criminal who has done terrible things for the sake of the cause and most times? Most times she enjoyed doing those things. Most times she went out of her way to revel in instigating. Silco didn't even know Vi was back yet and did that stop Sevika from almost killing Vi? Did that stop her from whispering "who Jinx? She's like his daughter" and looking dead in Vi's eyes just to see her reaction? No. Sevika is a bit messy like that she likes to play with her food lol and honestly I don't blame her lol

[midnight1nk]

After watching the movie it got me thinking,

What's Puzzles modivation?

Why does he want Wpnz for???

He has no interest in fame or perfection anymore.. He has his own "friend" Leggy 2.0, but I have a little theory..

Experience every single possibilites

He said in WOTFI 24 that he and Leggy shall experience every possibilites in life. And maybe... Revenge is one of them.

Smg4 and crew took almost everything away from him. He's fame, his dreams, his first ever friend, etc.

I saw an AU of Puzzles who is hellbent on getting revenge on the Smg4 crew and going insane, losing his mind and sanity chasing that feeling of vengance.

But that begs the question, what does he need Wpnz for?

I have a theory that to accomplish his revenge, he needs someone to break him out, someone like Wpnz.

But this is all speculation! Just wanted to ask what you think of this theory, and maybe sharing your reasons as to what Puzzles is after?

What his new modivations are, what is he after now?

Thanks for reading! ^^

I think you've got a good point! Let's refresh ourselves on what he said months ago, for the people who need it:

"I was so foolish... All this time, I was chasing 5-star ratings and fame. Fame is but a fleeting shadow. What I really needed was a friend. Friends are eternal. Isn't that right, Leggy 2.0? And now we're free to chase NEW dreams, you and I! Perhaps we could express ourselves in painting! Or maybe we'll adopt an adorable little puppy! OR we could assassinate our enemies and anyone who's ever double-crossed us! The world is full of possibilities! We shall experience them all!"

I always found Mr. Puzzles to be a compelling and tragic character. How he ended up in the present day, it makes sense. Plus, it is something we can relate to: the pursuit of perfection, our dreams, people in our lives shutting us down every time we try. Especially for television, those are very high standards to set yourself in. And I would know, as someone who works in the production occupation field.

Without support, like friends, it's an uphill battle. At the end of the day, Puzzles' actions stem from him being lonely for years. And I think that's why he would have a small connection to WPNZ. Think about it: How did he know what happened to WPNZ? Who he is? Or the "Cat got your tongue" line", despite being something Puzzles would say?

While solitary confinement definitely did not help any of his problems, Puzzles IS still in there. But it's exactly what I theorized before; it's not going to stop her from contacting the outside world. Now with double the grudge he has for the Crew. More so on 4, with another reason added to the list: for putting him in jail. So, just as it was shown at the end of WOTFI 2023, Puzzles was watching. I mean, what else do you do when you're strapped to a cot?

Now look, as much as I love to hate on WPNZ, he's also a compelling and tragic character. Assuming that his limbs were bc of his genes (y'know bc of the kids), then he was practically born and forced to be a weapon. It would be no wonder why Hitman Inc. would take an interest in him, and for taking the job such as having a partner grown to trust in, it's a lonely upbringing. Even the movie shows that if you look at it closely.

There's definitely one thing yall should note: not all obsession or manipulation is bad, it's part of being human. We all have it and done it. The difference is that it reaches to be unhealthy and even dangerous. For example, someone doing puppy eyes is a form of manipulation but it's practically harmless when it's like giving a cookie to a kid. And just as we lightheartedly get obsessed with a character, it's an expression that we love them. In characters like Puzzles and WPNZ, what they've done is stemed from loneliness and even if we don't condone it, we get it.

Redemption is possible for these two. Like I said before, change is there for those who have the courage to seek it. There's a difference between "I need to change" and "I want to change", even if nothing is given in return. If the time comes, Puzzles and WPNZ can be redeemed, it doesn't mean everything is going to be forgiven, but based on the end of the movie, they decide on revenge. This is what they think is going to help solve all their problems, to destroy the people who they blame for: the Crew. If they're able to connect from this one thing, then surely they're going to gather up people who are just like them, like Marty.

Marty, throughout the whole time we've known him, was underappreciated and underestimated by his cardboard cutout appearance. And sure, we treat it like a bit, but we've also seen how incredibly capable he truly is. He's smart, cunning, physically strong, and just like our 2 villains, he lost his only friend and creator Mario by betrayal.

This revenge plan is an unhealthy way to go about it but when they have nothing left to lose, we get it. At least, we should recognize that it's the case. That is what I hope for the Team to go along with moving forward, character exploration of loneliness and drive. Perfection and authenticity. They have a common goal but they individually have certain skills that the others don't. Just like the Crew, the more skills they have, the more complete each other into a whole.

Plus, if they can easily go against the government, WPNZ and Marty could get Puzzles out of jail. And concept Ink would totally have her coming out of the wreckage in such a dramatic way, rise from the ashes dirt :)

thanks for the ask!

[nalyra-dreaming]

Thank you for your thoughtful response to my Armand questions. I am always nervous about asking blogs about him because I tend to get my head bitten off for liking him as a character. I think just because you like a fictional character doesn't mean you condone all their actions. To me, this show is about many, many monsters who have had terrible things done to them, fueling their monstrosity. It is about the cyclical nature of abuse and how we can overcome it or be a constant victim to it. And I have always been fascinated by how different people react in similar situations based on their backgrounds. Perhaps that is why I am so fascinated by Armand - he is a survivor who has gone through some truly horrific shit but hasn't come to terms with it so the abuse cycle goes in circles. I don't see him as having these grand evil plans but someone who is flying by the seat of his pants, grasping at anything that will help him keep control of his life and unfortunately making every bad decision he can make and never taking time to breathe and fix is mistakes or try and figure out why he is doing what he is doing. I want to see the show explore that. Explore his abandonment (possibly or possibly not?) by his family, his life as a child sex slave, his life with Marius in a relationship equally filled with love and abuse, his life in a cult, and trying and failing to find someone to love him for who he his in all his gremlin glory. This show, IMO, has done an amazing job showing the extreme complexities of very traumatized people. I just get a little worried that because Armand is not one of the 2 leads, his very interesting story might just be regulated to a case book villain and that would be disappointing to me given how well they have done with the main 3. (IMO. I know a lot of people have valid reasons for not liking the portrayal of Lestat. And while I personally like the character and what they have done, I can't argue that it is its own entity separate from the book character people have heavily invested in over the years.)

Anyway, I like Armand and further more, I love Assad's portrayal. I really hope he gets the opportunity to dive deep into this insane gremlin.

I do think that Armand, while not one of "Loustat" :) is one of the four corner stones this show is built on (as of now), namely Lestat, Louis, Armand and Daniel.

I do think the two main relationships (and the history and ... well, entanglements between them) will remain focus, too.

The thing is, that... Lestat has experience both with Armand and Marius, for example. Marius wanted him to become his pupil - but Lestat never did. Why? I do think it has to do with what he knows about Armand and Marius and the experience he has himself, and there is an interesting tidbit in the last books, where another cult survivor, Allessandra, calls her maker not rescuing her from the cult a "moral failure". in this case it was Rhoshamandes, but this applies to Marius also, and I always felt this like a ripple-effect through the books, unsaid, unspoken - but there.

Because Anne was very good with unspoken things that have effect nonetheless, and even had Lestat spell it out in his recount: "you have to read between the lines".

The characters "live" within their universe. In their universe things have repercussions and effect. Armand and Lestat having a thing together (whatever that'll turn out to be) and Lestat drinking some of Armand's blood will transmit knowledge. In the book Armand does relay his story to Lestat, and in a lot more detail than what we got so far in the Louvre. That will - and arguably does - shape Lestat, in both book and show. As well shape his relationship with Armand and ... Marius.

There is also the aspect of Lestat's and Armand' relationship in the book, where Lestat refuses to become that which Armand thinks he needs, namely his "master" - and finds very clear words on this:

"I've been a rebel always, " I said. "You've been the slave of everything that ever claimed you. " "I was the leader of my coven! " "No. You were the slave of Marius and then of the Children of Darkness. You fell under the spell of one and then the other. What you suffer now is the absence of a spell. I think I shudder that you caused me so to understand it for a little while, to know it as if I were a different being than I am. "

I do hope that the show will manage to show this understanding Lestat has for Armand, and the (at the book age) surprising wisdom of rejecting him as such. And why.

Because this is a theme in the books - and I have a gut feeling they are going to go there.

Assad went and read TVA immediately when he knew who he was actually auditioning for - as with all our cast I cannot wait to see what he does with this, when we will get the "real Armand", too.

Because Armand, too... we have only seen in a tale, in a deliberate setup. The "real Armand" bleeds through the cracks though, and what we got so far is utterly brilliant, even if some of the choices the writers made will have effect and repercussions within the universe that I would have preferred to have differently. Alas, it is what it is :)

I am looking forward to more of our master gremlin coven master :)

[winters-on-the-wing]

hi, it's me again, you said you found neither Regulus and Severus redeemable, then who do you find redeemable?

-🎀

ehhh well that's a tricky question because just because i find someone redeemable doesn't mean i defend their actions or think they're immune to criticism. honestly, anybody can be unredeemable depending on your moral code. but here are the characters who i view as redeemable based on my personal moral code:

minerva mcgonagall. was she sometimes needlessly mean to students? yes. was she extremely strict? absolutely. but at the same time, she was one of the only people who viewed the children as children. dumbledore sees them as living weapons. snape sees them as burdens or reflections of a past long gone. mcgonagall isn't perfect, but she's always trying her best to protect the children from the responsibilities thrust upon them, and she is one of the only significant adult characters who regularly does this. this doesn't necessarily balance out her bad decisions, but i love this thing about her so much that i think that she is redeemable.

molly weasley. i know she gets a lot of hate for how she treats her children, and honestly, i really agree with the hate. she is so scornful and impatient towards anyone who isn't percy, ginny, or harry. she clearly plays favorites and she is part of the reason why the weasley family can barely afford basic essentials. but i see her as redeemable. not in the way that i think all of her children can/should forgive her. but i think she has potential for reform, which to me is the definition of redeemable. she has done a lot of irreversible bad, but i don't think she's done enough irreversible bad to be deemed hopeless. you can see by how she treats her "favorites" that she has the potential to be a good parent, and she does have moments with each of the other children that show her (albeit rare) tenderness towards them. she often executes things poorly, but her heart is usually in the right place, and i think she could be a good person if she tried hard at it.

james potter. as somebody who was bullied heavily as a child, i don't condone bullying whatsoever. but i feel like sometimes people take what james did and multiply it, so he can fit the archetype of a dumb mean bully jock. i also am a bit rocky on what is canon and what isn't canon in terms of what james and the other marauders have done, and it's hard because we don't know very much about them based on the books and movies. but at the same time, for a fandom that is so rooted in fanon, i feel like people just choose characters to latch onto and then assume the worst in all the others, and i don't really find that fair. james is my favorite marauder, and i don't mean to put him at a higher moral ground than the other marauders because all of them have equal blame when looking at the pranks they've done and such. but you can see by how james defends lily from discrimination, how he plays fair and sportsmanlike during quiddich, how people speak so highly of him for his kindness and generosity during and after his life, how it could be interpreted that he did not bully based on prejudices or social status. this means that he either bullied somebody who instigated first, or he bullied somebody who he disliked for reasons such as personality, rather than blood status. this, to me, means that it's a) not an instinct and b) something that he can (and has!!!) grown out of, which doesn't erase the damage he caused in youth, but it at least means that he's creating a better and brighter future for those around him in adulthood, which is valuable in its own right.

[iris-draws]

Verosika in her apology tour fit🔥🔥

Okay WOW that episode was amazing and also a lot so I'm gonna ramble for a bit.

Verosika absolutely slayed and ate (surprising nobody) and I love how sweet she was with everyone and especially stolas. Her talk with blitz was great and I'm glad she got the closure she needed. She truly is a kind soul for throwing a party for all the people who have been hurt by this horrible guy, and everyone there is understanding and comforting, it was so cute to see. Also the fact she was able to forgive blitz was incredible in itself. If I saw how many people he had hurt this badly and also been hurt and embarassed by this guy, I don't think I'd ever be able to forgive him with just him feeling sorry for himself and a half-baked apology.

This episode really showed us what a terrible person blitz really is. And honestly? I don't really sympathize with him anymore. Yes, he has trauma. But he refuses to work or just get better and can't even apologize. Getting a bit personal here but I had a toxic ex who was very similar to blitz, so maybe I'm biased and that makes me hate the character more. Nevertheless, blitz was absolutely terrible this episode and yes you can feel bad for him but I better not see anyone condoning his actions.

There is a party EVERY YEAR specifically for this guy and everyone he's hurt. There were SO MANY PEOPLE there?? He's screwed over and fucked a lot of those people, and he can't even bother to remember them or apologize?? His excuse is "Well it's hell so everyone is shitty" which is a terrible excuse. Just because it's hell doesn't mean you have to be a shitty person. Bro really needs to go to the hazbin hotel and take Charlie's lessons cause he needs to learn "it starts with sorry."

Now for stolas. Omg my baby ATE this episode. I loved seeing him be passive aggressive and sing his heart out (btw, that song is one of the best in the series, MY GOD. it doesn't even sound like stolas it's so different from the rest of the songs but it's SO GOOD. THE VISUALS, THE VOCALS, THE LYRICS AHDJDANKQ SO GOOD OMG) I do think stolas has some issues as well. He needs to understand he DID look down at blitz. He doesn't really understand that he truly is privileged. He treats blitz and his butler imps completely differently. If they're going to be in a relationship they both need to change. Stolas needs to learn his worth (which i think he will start to realize he's better than blitz deserves until he changes with that succubus dude) and blitz needs to get his shit together. But stolas does need to look back on his actions and the things he's said to blitz to give him the impression that he was nothing more than an "impish little plaything" to stolas.

I could ramble for hours about this episode but I'll stop for now lol if you made it this far you get a cookie🍪

[brothermoth]

Some of y'all are grown ass fucking adults who didn't pay attention in English class and make it OUR problem now. No, somebody is not a bad person for liking a villain character. Human morality is not black and white like that, and all you are doing is stripping writers of our chance to make you think for once in your goddamn life. Antagonists play a role more than antagonizing. They're meant to tell you something about yourself, about the world, about relationships.

Just because I think a character is interesting will never ever mean I condone or agree with the things they do. It's fiction, in real life I would despise them, but because they're not real I can toy with them in Google docs like a little puppet. This is not the 1600s anymore where you're terrified to make one wrong move lest you be sent straight to hell do not pass go do not collect 200 dollars.

If you're going to be an avid consumer of media, at least learn how to analyze it. Don't be reactionary xitter users, please?

--this is about red dead redemption I'm sorry--

BUT Micah is a bad person. We all agree. We shan't defend the things he does or believes because despite being unfortunately average opinions of the time, his actions do little but hurt the people around him.

YET he's just some guy, at the end of the day. He's a reflection of Arthur, of who he could potentially have been if his father hadn't been hanged and had kept him around. Arthur has the same potential to be Micah as Micah has to be Arthur. Hell, his brother left and started a family, he could've done so as well. The game is about choice. It's about actively choosing to do the right thing, even if the right thing is a bit questionable sometimes. You cannot in good faith aim your staunch moral opinions toward this game. You miss so much nuance and important conversation that the writers wanted you to have. Arthur isn't some golden retriever good boy, he's done terrible things and acknowledges that. He beat a man with a terminal illness to death over like thirty bucks, and he thought nothing of it until he got sick himself. Arthur had his chances to leave too, but he dug his heels in the same as Micah did, he refused to take that opportunity and resigned himself to being a violent arm of the gang.

Kill the puritan worms in your brains guys. Please. Use the thinking meat, that's what it's there for.

[eyebawll]

BEFORE YOU APPROACH

†☣ ༺ INTRODUCTION ༻ ☣ †

Hi there! I haven't made one of these in a hot minute. I've missed this community, and I've missed writing. To put it simply, I'm a writer and I'm exploring different kinds of art. HOWEVER, I have my own set of rules you must follow if you wish to interact with me!! KEEP READING is the most important part, scroll down for more info!

†☣༺RULES༻☣†

Although I am considered legal in my state, and will be wholly in the next few months, there are slim chances of me writing full NSFW at any point in time. I'm just not that down bad, and I don't really enjoy writing kink or sexual related themes that much publicly. NSFW/NSFL in terms of horror and gore is another thing, though. So, any comments or asks requesting sheer NSFW will not be accepted. Romance/Lime is A-OK!

Don’t steal or edit my writing. Link, repost, don’t lift.

I block freely.

Disagree respectfully or leave—I have no desire for drama or petty discourse.

Dark themes ≠ glorification. I explore horror, not endorse it. Any normal person understands this. I can tend to write some dark tropes (including non-fetish content in the dead dove region), and while we all find them fascinating, it's important to never glamorize or romanticize them, no matter the way it brings us comfort (such as toxic self ships, etc. be mindful!). Certain themes I may write as a way to turn pain into some form of art. I prioritize realism in my works, and certain tropes will not be written with fun or joy in mind. You are allowed to request certain works as long as it is not strictly fetish content, especially in these tropes. They are to be explored with caution and realism. (Forewarning, I go on a bit of a tangent below this point, but it is important).

Much like others, I do not condone or endorse abuse or otherwise disturbing and obviously immoral behavior. While some works can be a way to control pain and turn it into the opposite, you need to approach with caution. Fictional content only.

If you have an issue with any of these, cannot tell the difference between reality and fiction, or you see these tropes as strictly sexual/some kind of joke, please leave! What you consume and interact with is neither my business nor under my control, however, the few people who pose a true threat, please leave.

To draw a clearer line, here are things I will NOT write as the base of a story/Smut for:

Incest/SA/Beastiality/Straight up Non-Con/and any other harsh, similar taboo topics.

The tropes stated above are only writable in terms of backstory or realistic horror if appropriate to the story. I will never write fetish content in relation to these tropes, and I will refuse any requests for such. Tropes like these are realistic but are not to be glorified or romanticized. If fiction involving such is what comforts you, that is your business and your business only—I will not write it. Anything involving these tropes, as stated before, are to be handled with caution and I will only write it in terms of backstory while avoiding any overly explicit details.

Tiny Note

Please note any stories with mentions or brief events of these tropes are handled with care and to never be condoned. Horror is not black and white, and trauma comes in all forms. My works are as a means to cope with and help others cope with said trauma. As a psychology student, I heavily prioritize such in my works, such as: The way one reacts to severe abuse and terror around them, the cause of their actions, the aftermath, etc.

Including the things that many people can't bring themselves to discuss, such as violent mental conditions and practices in response to the terror they've faced, whether or not it's OK.

Any characters I write, such as certain creepypastas, will never be written for in any positive light because of this, as I don't want to "ship" anybody or any character with a character that does vile things many of us agree call for the death penalty. While horror is not black and white, there are just some things worse than death.

The reason for this section being so long is because of the fact many seem to confuse horror with glamorization, romanticization, etc. Which, while some may do such things, it's very few. I understand psychology and I continue to study it, and having gone through things myself, no one likes to talk about the ugly side of things. You could use the argument "just do what you want and block freely", which stands, but some people will throw blind blades at you with hatred for something they bear no knowledge of. There is a difference between pro-shipping and therapeutic art.

Pro-shipping tends to glorify or obsess over abusive and immoral dynamics. Even if some claim it’s harmless, it often downplays the real damage those dynamics represent and can make abusers look “desirable," and it is harmful to real survivors of such abuse, making them appear as the opposite. It makes us look like a joke or a sexual object.

Therapeutic writing, on the other hand, is a tool for healing. It allows survivors to vent, reclaim control, and explore their trauma safely. Yes, it may include dark or even seemingly "romantic" elements—but It’s not for glorification or fantasy. It’s personal, reflective, and often kept private if it reframes pain into something softer or comforting. Certain things are to remain private to prevent any misconception.

Your own coping mechanisms are your business. However, seek help if it becomes an obsession or anything like the first half.

That being said, this is a safe space for those who enjoy the dark and macabre and wish to find a space that safely expresses said macabre.

If you are unsure if a request of yours is appropriate or not, or if you have any questions, feel free to send an ask! I can answer directly or in DMs (specify in said message).

†☣༺DISCLAIMER/BYF༻☣†

I am RELIGIOUS. I am an Ecumenical Christian, which is a form of Non-denominationalism, which focuses on a personal relationship with God. I personally believe in different parts of different denominations, most typically Catholicism and Orthodoxy, with some Protestantism and Charasmatic. While I am deeply religious, I do not make it a huge part of my appearance in most communities. ANY AND ALL RELIGIOUS POSTS WILL HAVE TAGS, and any religious mentions will have warnings. Feel free to ask any questions if you are scared or uncertain--although I support every identity and religion!

Additionally, any comments or interactions criticizing me as a Christian (for my identity, beliefs, or practices) will be ignored and ultimately deleted. Because, respectfully, I do not listen to the words of man on those regards when hostile or demeaning. I am focusing on my own relationship with God, and will go about things on my own journey. Much love.

I am also chronically ill (Fibromyalgia, CFS, among others), and this deeply affects my energy levels.

†☣༺ F A N D O M S & I N T E R E S T S ༻☣†

I'm into many different things, although Creepypasta has been a huge part of my life since 2014. That is my main focused fandom on here aside from some things, such as: The Sims 4, Any horror/survival games (TLOU, TWD, FAITH, etc), and so on.

As for interests in general,

﹒Lost media, ARGs, analog horror, icebergs/deep dives

﹒Psychological horror, religious horror, realism

﹒Writing, character studies, trauma-themed storytelling

﹒Arts of many kinds, gothic aesthetics, the uncanny

﹒True crime, gaming, certain youtubers, fandom-based and original fiction, Psychology, Neuroscience, & Math

Really a whole variety of things won't often see the light of day in my blog unless tied to my stories. I LOVE realistic horror that digs deep into the most disgusting and disturbed in an unbiased way. It's a way of healing for many, including myself.

†☣༺ABOUT ME༻☣†

alias → ruth, also known as eden and abbey

age → 17

identity + pronouns → she/her she/they or any masc pronouns. I'm non-binary (spiritual reasons), I adore my ASAB while also fitting in with the more masculine parts of me. I am under the trans umbrella, and completely comfortable with considering myself trans. On the Bi and Acespec.

timezone → EST

dni → basic criteria, and if you can't seem to stay away from drama. I can block freely at any time for any reason. I don't care who sticks around, just don't be an asshole or the bad kind of weird. Everyone has their own practices, and as long as you're not hurting anyone, I don't care--so my dni isn't very vast. If you have a problem with any of these, also dni.

I'm happy to be back, and I look forward to writing more! See you on the flip side!

[suzumotos]

the crazy thing about being a morishige fan and artist who draws content primarily of him (and mayu), and who prefers to draw a lot of fluff / pleasant art of him and being someone who likes to highlight positive things about him, is that people who literally do not know you are soooo comfortable making the weirdest assumptions about you / your relationship with his character. and at worst you'll get vagued for it, for whatever reason.

god forbid you see good in him. god forbid you see humanity in him. god forbid you see potential for better. and god forbid you like to pay more attention (than maybe most) to the person he was outside of heavenly host. as an aside, i know kedouin is somewhat of a questionable character so maybe his opinion on this can be taken with a grain of salt, but he is the creator of the series and even he himself has basically expressed that morishige, outside of HH, was mostly just A Guy (source BR 3DS booklet). yeah, he's a little weird and fucked up deep down, but he wasn't some overtly edgy crazed up creep who jacked it to irl g0re before ever entering HH and fantasized about hurting people. and kedouin has also said morishige is "by no means a bad person" (source a BoS era interview), whatever that may mean.

anyway. yes. i know c0rpse party is a horror game. yes, i know morishige's character deals with a lot of dark topics and he has a lot of darkness in him that the curse of HH brought to the surface. but the fact that i like to draw nice things for him and talk about his positive traits seems to make certain people arrive at the conclusion that i wish to sanitize his character or that i hate the problematic side of him.

this has never been the case and anyone who's had more than the shallowest, passing interaction with me over the years would know this. i love morishige when he's fucked up, when he's problematic, when he's unsavory and weird and creepy. he's my favorite character since the very beginning of 2014, and been a comfort character of mine for about an equally long time. i've spent so much time and so much brain power trying to analyze every single thing behind his actions, thoughts, feelings, and words. and it was in fact the fucked up stuff that he did that made me interested in him in the first place. i wanted to figure him out.

besides that, i love horror, i've been an avid guro/gore fan since i was an "edgy" little teenager, that stuff has never made me uncomfortable just for being scary or gross. it has never been about "not being able to handle" dark content for him. i literally thought i was edgy at 13 years old for desensitizing myself to irl g0re.. (for the record i do not condone this now).

i do however have preferences for this dark content and i find that edgy art for the sake of being edgy isn't for me, or anything that i personally feel is OOC for him. i'm picky with content for him, and i like to curate the content i consume for him, this does not mean i can't "handle" it. i myself want to draw and write more dark content for him, something with a lot of thought behind it. and something that maybe sends some kind of message about his character that i care about. the times that i have drawn or written something like that have actually been really cathartic.

but at the end of the day morishige at his worst does not make me happy. it does not serve to comfort me, it's tragedy and it's horror. it makes me sad and uncomfortable. again, not uncomfortable because of the intrinsic "edginess" of it or problematicness of him, but uncomfortable in a way that your favorite character / comfort character being put through the horrors of his own mind would make you feel uncomfortable.

hence, i find myself most often focusing on positive and fluffy things. these things make me happy and comfort me. i am just trying to cope with being alive. and at the end of the day, when most of morishige's fan content is dark and edgy, it has always driven me to be the one person who maybe highlights the more positive qualities of him and maybe gives him some happier and nicer content. i just want my blorbo to be happy and healthy.

maybe it's controversial to say but i personally think he deserves good things. i can never bring myself to speak degradingly about him. it often feels like that is the most common tone i see people use of him anyway.

i suppose i just feel differently about him.

[bawmbo]

a word about the pressure fandom (and fandom space in general) (for discussion)

i usually Don't really like bringing "drama" on main or being like . Contriversal at all but i feel like this is a perfect time to discuss fandom spaces and the result it has on people. But using pressure as an example of it

i don't wanna neccisarily say that "fandoms are getting worse!!! raahh!" because . In some sense it Isn't really the case? and in reality the environment of the fandom just changes and there's a new set of problems. but i Feel like there's more nuance to the conversation than that (i feel like i should put that disclaimer because i see a lot of people say "it's always been this way" and i. Don't have a really good chance to measure that with amnesia barriers lol)

but like . Everyone is so. Much??? i notice a trend between each fandom space i've been in where everyone is super hyperreactive and holds grudges over tiny things or lacks care to a degree that actively keeps arms open for like . Grooming and other nasty stuff (proshipping, namely).

that is to say that everything is unbelievably black and white??

for a while, i didn't want to get into pressure because of the resistance against adding deaf mode, but after the apologies, willingness to learn, and changes, we warmed up to it a bit more. We really like the game!!!!

but a more major piece of not wanting to go in was the fandom drama. i specifically see that people really rank on the creators for being "homophobic", for stating - from what i understand - that their shopkeeping "bastard" character (who needs as many assets as possible to survive) would engage in rainbow capitalism. (and mind you, that isn't even added in canon) and thst the creator of sebastian herself selfships with HER OWN OC!!! (CRIMINAL!!! BLASPHEMY!!) and that the dev team didn't want to see ship art of sebastian in their discord server (and the fandom took that as "no kissing the fish ever forever anywhere!") And that is the whole grudge ?

like . i think that there needs to be a discussion had that

a. people Are allowed to set firm boundaries in spaces they own and moderate and it is healthy for both the moderators and community to have these rules set and respected. (such as, adult moderators asserting "please don't send ship art in my discord server" to a majority minor audience.) (though i feel as though they should be able to dictate what they are comfortable sorting through regardless of audience age)

b. writing a character that engages in a bad practice does not mean that the author condones their actions, nor does liking villainous characters mean you are an absolute apologist for their wrongdoings (be it for fiction or in reality)

AND

i want to FIRMLY add the note to point b. does NOT mean that fiction does not affect reality. historically it does. the way that i was groomed (that being, that argument allowed Not Okay behaviors to be normalized to happen to me under the caveat that "it isn't real, so it's ok! i'm just overreacting"). there is an argument to be had about me being a fictive in a system and the reasons why. and there are many cases of this effect both tame and not.

in short: there are ways to write characters appropriately and there are ways to write characters harmfully (stereotypes, romanticization, fetishization, being some examples of harmful writing)

i believe that, like every character, Sebastian Solace has reason to be written the way he is, or be told the way he is. at the same time, i believe that nothing is above (appropriate) critique.

and that is not something that can co-exist nowadays? like. You have to take a hard stance on these things with your full chest like it's life or death or american politics (coming from. A very exhausted american lol)

no . The pressure devs are not homophobic for saying Sebastian Solace would engage in Rainbow Capitalism. They are not genuinely believing that they're married to him or want you dead for wanting to self ship with their own character either . Nor are they in the wrong to be uncomfortable, if they are

yes . You are allowed to be uncomfortable that your blorbo is engaging in an upsetting act to you. You are allowed to be upset that the creator is uncomfortable by what i understand to be a certain show of affection towards the character

no . You are not in your right to pray on someone's entire downfall, send death threats, or yell about how you want real people to be gored for their character accurate character choices or want to self ship as you have .

like . You guys know that you're allowed to dislike media or aspects of things without reason . Right? and that you Curate your own internet experience. and you can dislike aspects of someone without wishing death on them every single time. And that these people are real people who struggle with things too ??

the way the fandom treats the creator and devs with such hatred simply existing is so reprehensible. to make someone hate their own creation so much for things that do Not harm anyone at all is so Horrible?? and i know that i wouldn't do well with that kind of reaction either

i hope that the dev team has the time and space to heal. they did a beautiful job on the game and the amount of time and effort they put into everything about it is unbelieably admirable. they always go above and beyond

i am losing steam towards the end of this, so it migut be ramblt and i hate proof reading and i'm on ~4 hrs of sleep but this has been onnmy mind for so long . Just wanted to get it out there. my partners have heard me yell so much too fbhff. i Like having discussions okay Bye

[blackcat419]

Pros and Antis in HotD and aSoIaF Fandom: the breakdown around grey storytelling

I think I know why TB people struggle so much for understanding why TG is liked by people and it’s because fandom discourse has been so rotted away by “pro shippers” and “anti shippers” discourse that we’ve entered into a puritanical view of consuming media.

They see the media you consume as a direct reflection of the type of person you are and thus the characters you like must be similar to who you are as a person.

To a certain extent I get it, looking at a broad portfolio of media consumption can reveal a bit about a person. For example, I consume a lot of horror media. You can discern that I like being scared and the adrenaline that comes from it. But that’s only in a safe controlled situation where I can turn off the tv or monitor when it gets too much. I don’t like haunted houses, being alone at night, or even the dark.

Media is a safe place to explore different sides of humanity in a controlled setting where the only thing at risk is our own enjoyment. People can find that they like things in media that they wouldn’t like in real life. But this distinction is lost on a lot of fandom puritans. To them, media consumption is a political act. You reaffirm that you are a “good person” by watching the “good shows” and rooting for the “good guys”. To look upon a morally complex character or even the villain with interest and sympathy is thus to condone and support every action that character will be written to take.

But this idea of assuming moral righteousness from the characters you support in media because even harder to understand and justify when applied to stories like HotD and aSoIaF where every character possesses both good and evil. So how does a puritan fan reaffirm their belief that they are morally good in a series such as these? The fan will assign the idea oh moral correctness and superiority to the characters they like. Any bad, morally questionable, or straight up evil act the character commits will be justified as righteous no matter how the story frames those actions to the audience. The same is applied to characters these fans do not like. Every bad, morally questionable, or evil action is amplified to become the main character trait while any good, just, or morally righteous act is off written as either an evil act in disguise or any good to come out of the act should be attributed to another character. Any harm committed again the character is then down played as not that bad or actually deserved.

In HotD and aSoIaF, this fandom Puritanism mainly affects female characters.

In aSoIaF, we have characters such as Dany and Arya being framed as the morally righteous and just while characters such as Catelyn and Sansa are painted as villains. Weirdly this does not apply to actual villainous female characters likes Cersei. This could be because the books and show are very clear that her actions are evil and cruel, puritan fans do not feel insecure liking her as they feel secure that the story and thus other fans know she is a bad person and won’t assume liking her means viewing her as a good person. Characters such as Margery Tyrell and Arianne Martell are viewed with more complexity than other female characters but I bet once they come into conflict with beloved female characters, they will be viewed as villainous.

In HotD we see the same thing happening. Puritan fans see Rhaenyra as the perfect hero with any negative action being just or not her fault while Alicent is painted as more evil than the step mother from Cinderella who, despite all evidence to the contrary, wanted to be queen and this deserves everything that she gets.

This is why so many people have to explain to puritan fans that liking characters like Sansa, Catelyn, Alicent, Aegon, or Aemond does not make one bastardphobic, a rape apologist, or anti feminist. I also think it explains why these fans can’t except that their favorite characters have done wrong and hurt people. They can’t accept criticism or critique of their favorite character because to them it’s not another person’s reading of a fictional character, it’s someone judging them on their morals.

Puritanical fans interlock their identity and sense of self with the characters they like and struggle to separate criticism of those characters as criticism of themselves as a person.

[moremysteries]

"In a way, there are more mysteries than tragedies"

Kofi | Wattpad | AO3 | Writing Master List | Pillowfort | Bluesky

(Profile art by @floofyboi57)

Hi hi! I'm an aroace trans man in a system that loves to write horror mysteries. Though I dabble in other genres depending on what a story needs. My works typically include morally gray characters, strangely cute monsters, and dark content, so make sure you read the content warnings before engaging with them. Some themes you can expect are light in the deepest darkness, heroes being worse than the villain, weirdcore settings, humans as the true evil, religious trauma, finding queer acceptance, and so on. I also litter my works with trans, plural, and aroace themes.

Important notes:

Why did I make a new blog, outside of wanting a fresh start? To be honest, my notifications were so broken that it made the decision easy. I do recognize that, one day, I'll have to accept having an account for a long time just means things will break, but this is not that day!

Taglist and Tags

@aweirdshipp

If you like our work, please consider asking to be added to the taglist! This shows us people are interested in our writing, and can help ensure you're notified about writing updates. Feel free to clarify if you want to be tagged for things like a specific WIP, writing ramblings, snippets, or if you want to be notified when I need beta readers.

#ourwriting, #writingrambles, #writingsnippet, #wipupdates, #essiehobbies

Disclaimer

I will not follow you if you do not properly warn about or tag triggering content. I'd love to be moots with others, but I can not comfortably follow you if you are not properly tagging your posts. I am a strong pusher for properly tagging content so people can curate their own space.

An Optional BYF For Those Who Want It

This is a Litmus Test

Yep, let's talk about the whole "fiction effects reality" thing. When I use this phrase, what I am not saying is that violent media will make you violent, or that all stories should be squeaky clean with the purpose of teaching a moral. It's a recognition of how harmful feeding into stereotypes can be, and how certain framing contributes to the spread of harmful ideas. For example, a work that glorifies violence done by the military via painting the other side of a conflict as "pure evil". And let me be clear, a character glorifying their own actions is not the same as the creator glorifying their actions, nor are stories where everyone is evil or sucks encouraging bad behavior.

The takes, "writing about horrific things does not make you a bad person", and, "a creator framing a character's horrific behavior as justifiable, and others negative reactions towards it as unjustifiable, could be a red flag", in my opinion, can and should coexist. (Ex: B being painted as in the wrong for not seeing a trans individual as crazy, while A is painted as justified for doing so). I am against censorship and harassment, but I am not against thoughtful critiques or discussions about how we present certain ideas within our writing. Discouraging this makes it more difficult to discuss when harm is intended or accidentally done, and can be used to silence minorities when they ask for better representation. It also makes it harder to blow the whistle on bigots. Both the extremes that everyone who writes dark things condones them, and that no one who writes dark things ever condones them are not helpful.

TDLR: Framing is everything, and just because fiction isn't going to turn us into murder hobos, that doesn't mean it can't contribute to the spread of harmful ideas. Being against censorship does not have to mean being against thoughtful discussion or critique.