#There's no context but they definitely are

[silverskyy]

[ID: a social media thread with one person saying "some of yall have never used tumblr and it shows" and the next, johngreenwritesbooks, replying "respectfully, do you know who you're talking to?" /end ID]

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Why does Leona call MC an herbivore, what does herbivore mean to Leona

I have previously spoken about this topic (among other characters’ ways of referring to Yuu) here. You can also read this post, where I discuss herbivores more in-depth. Please give those a read! But to summarize the relevant details for Leona:

“Herbivore” is NOT a nickname he uses exclusively for Yuu. There are multiple instances in which he uses the term to refer to groups of people (typically including humans) or other individuals that are NOT Yuu.

It’s a common misconception within the fandom that “herbivore” is Leona’s special nickname for Yuu simply because of how often the term is used in fandom works to refer to them. This same misconception also happens with Malleus’s use of “child of man”.

Leona does have nicknames for people, but not for Yuu. For example, he calls Malleus "lizard" and Idia "daikon radish sprout".

The meaning of “herbivore” is NOT meant to be taken by its traditional dictionary definition (“a creature that eats only plants”) or even the slang definition (“a man who expresses little to no interest in marriage and/or is not assertive in romantic relationships”). Neither definition makes sense in context.

The most likely definition of herbivore can be inferred by how Leona acts and uses the term. He’s often using “herbivore” when he’s annoyed or talking down to others. From this, we can glean that he’s using the term in a derogatory way to imply he is “above” others in rank or strength. Recall that Leona himself is a lion/carnivore and therefore he is “above” herbivores in the food chain. It’s not meant to be a cute or endearing nickname, it’s a subtle way to insult others and to assert his own dominance over them.

Leona has also been noted to use “omnivore”; he refers to Fellow Honest with this term and has yet to use it for anyone else. The reasoning Leona gives for giving Fellow that label is because of Fellow’s opportunistic behavior. He’ll suck up to whoever he has to in order to get whatever “food” (benefits) he can and get ahead.

Interestingly, Leona has occasionally mentioned carnivores (such as in his voice line about Fellow being an omnivore), but has yet to call anyone specific a carnivore. Maybe this is because he has yet to face anyone he deems to be on “his” level.

[nishihii]

to be fair, i always forget about the lad until i'm in the forbidden woods, but we should talk about the suspicious beggar more

[deathsmallcaps]

I need advice.

I’m a white intern working in a mostly white southern(ish) high school. Students of Color number at under 2%, perhaps even lower. It’s a very white, rural community - I grew up in a fairly mixed, suburban northern community, and part of my family is Black.

Several of my white students say rude things to my Students of Color. I’ve told them to knock it off *as appropriately as I can* but I’m probably one of the few adults that actively discourage that behavior.

I don’t want to let this shit fly under the radar, but I also know that if an adult of authority *who will only be here for a couple more weeks* interferes, and then doesn’t stick around, it could make things worse. Additionally, I know these kids are probably very very very used to this ‘system’ and that making a short-term change could be more harmful than helpful.

I asked one of my senior students after a very racist incident *where she was laughing along with the perpetrator but I told him to stop anyway* that I can move him, or her, so she could be more comfortable (admin either does nothing or slaps wrists, especially for seniors). She said it was fine and that he was always like that.

I must emphasize, I think they were bantering (they talk so much I think they consider each other friends?), but it was also wayyy fucking out of line, especially in a school setting. And the guy says so much out of line shit I’m surprised he isn’t rocking a full set of dentures to replace the teeth he ought to have lost by now.

Another student took me up on my offer to move people, but I ended up moving him, which sucks because he was the victim in this situation. Unfortunately, I have to keep his aggressors in their spots, as they are highly rowdy in all the ways and require a lot more supervision than he did. And the class is really full. These were also all freshmen, so I wouldn’t be surprised if that affected the victim’s reaction.

So I’d really appreciate advice as to whether I should let it be, or continue as is, or step it up even more, from People of Color in largely white, especially rural, communities. Like any advice from current or previous educators, especially Educators of Color would be appreciated, but specifically southern/rural ones would be wonderful. I’m going to talk to my family members about it, but they’ve lived in more Northern settings their entire lives and they may have less … applicable (?) experience to the situation.

Again, I’m an intern, I’m going to only be there until winter break 2024, and I don’t want to fuck things up for these kids in the long run with my northern ally ‘sensibilities’. Thank you!

[bebe-benzenheimer]

actual reminder of what queerbaiting really means: https://www.lexico.com/definition/queerbaiting 2 Harassment, abuse, or targeted provocation of gay people. Origin 1950s (in queerbaiting (sense 2)): from queer + baiting (see bait). http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:839802/FULLTEXT01.pdf History of the word Queerbaiting has other definitions than the ones defined here. In 1981 Lawrence Goldyn wrote his article “Gratuitous Language in Appellate Cases Involving Gay People: ‘Queer Baiting’ from the Bench” on how homosexual individuals were being addressed in US courts. Goldyn uses the word queerbaiting as a description of the verbal abuse and the homophobic and discriminating rhetoric that was used in these cases to justify the punishments.6 Another example that differs significantly from Fathallah’s and the here discussed internet fan communities’ uses of the word is Nadine Hubbs’ usage of it in the article “Bernstein, Homophobia, Historiography” from 2009, where she compares it to red-baiting and uses it to describe the attempt to expose and purge homosexual individuals in the US during the 1950s and 60s. https://www.health.com/mind-body/lgbtq-health/queerbaiting In the 1950s, the US was in the midst of what became known as the Lavender Scare—when queer US citizens who worked in government positions were thought to be untrustworthy and at risk of being fired. As a result, LGBTQ+ people had to hide their sexuality. To identify those who were queer, people would queerbait—aka, pose as allies and members of the LGBTQ+ community and promise to provide a safe space, only to turn in the names of those who had come out to them, Hackford-Peer says. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_at_Work “NUMCS was derided as “red, black and queer” for its leftist politics, racial integration and the large number of gay members.[2] A sign in the union hall proclaimed, “Race-baiting, Red-baiting, and Queer-Baiting is Anti-Union.”[3]“ http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2836&context=lcp “For other delinquent gangs, the practice becomes one of "queer-baiting,” to roll the “queer” for his money, since he fears legal recourse to charge he has been robbed.“

[brujamala-aka-gigi]

"time will tell" ... but what exactly?

i thought about making this reading because we are living at times when we all know that patience is a virtue, we all know that we should work on said virtue, and so on, yet, things move are always seemingly moving in the fastest chaotic way possible. for some of us, embracing uncertainty and the absurd ways of the universe is hard. so hopefully there's something in here that helps you to have a clearer vision on what is meant to come to you with time and experience.

dividers by: @bernardsbendystraws & @cafekitsune pngs by: @florietas

pile number one pile number two

pile number three pile number four

.‧͙˚ *༓ scroll down for the readings ⋆ִ ‧͙⁺˚

masterpost ✶ pac readings ✶ tarot menu

✶ ko-fi page (support and tarot services) ✶

before starting with this reading i just want to say that my heart goes to anyone on the united states that feels disappointed and is going through emotionally stressful situations due to the results of the elections. at times like this is important to find empowerment and safety by taking care of our peers and participating our communities, political organization is just as important as caring for one another. having a right wing president who borders fascism is not a great experience, i have my own alt right president here in south america, but surviving these moments is easier when you find strength alongside the people who share your ideals.

we don't owe tolerance to those who are intolerant, our time is always better spent when we are building the future we want or doing our best to face the adversities of the present. please, do not allow others to take away your humanity and your hopes.

・₊✧⋆ pile number one ⭒˚｡⋆

If someone ever told you that your expectations are unrealistic, they are not wrong, but not entirely right either. I think you're someone who unconsciously tries to be aware of every possible outcome and every single detail, it's quite a hyper vigilant way of approaching things and also a quite anxiety inducing one. I wouldn't say your expectations are unrealistic, but I would definitely say they are realistic in the context of the millions of head scenarios you have going on. Some emotions are being limited by logic and some logics are being limited by emotion. There are plenty of experiences that are coming your way in order to give you the opportunity to be more present in the moment instead of experiencing things mostly in your head. You need time to further develop your judgment, as of now it is something that is in an adolescent state, not because of immature or juvenile thinking, but because you are going through a, hopefully, slightly painful phase of your mental growth. Think of it as existential growing pains. You might have too much information, too much to think about and too much to feel about, it's a very difficult moment for you to maintain a self perceived stable or coherent point of view at all times. Take this time to comprehend what's making you feel paralyzed and unable to move forward mentally, and then you can begin doing something about this conjunction of mental and emotional stress.

・₊✧⋆ pile number two ⭒˚｡⋆

What I get from this combination of cards is that you are becoming more aware of the things that are threatening your higher self. From the Queen and the Page I can see that you are usually almost confident enough in what you bring to the table in terms of material achievements that are easily recognizable, although not always perceived or valued enough by yourself or others. I don't think I want to say there's someone or yourself gaslighting you into belittling yourself, but I do want to mention that it's likely that there's a sketchy energy near you or at least the cards are giving a heads up about negative reactions to you doing your thing and, to say simply, slaying it. What it is safe to say tho is that with time you will learn who is worthy of your generosity and your companion. It's key that you understand that any kind of success you achieve is not only valuable because of what you got from it, the value comes from what you did to get said achievements. With this in mind, don't hesitate to avoid others who drain your energy and misuse your time. Your presence by itself it's already enough for others to benefit at your cost. This is not something meant to give you a reason to be overly distrustful, this is to give you reasons to set boundaries, specially for yourself, in order to make sure whoever or whatever brings you down, it's out of your way. If people see the respect you have for yourself, it's more likely they are not even trying to waste your time.

・₊✧⋆ pile number three ⭒˚｡⋆

.

Being emotionally attached to the person you were in the past is obstructing your path towards further personal and existential growth. I definitely understand that sometimes the only thing that gives us a sense of stability is our own identity, and our power to define ourselves in our own terms. I don’t think you are afraid to grow or to evolve as a person, but I can see that right now you are resisting change by ignoring your intuitive need to expand your limits and find out about all the things, the positive and negative,that you choose to ignore because of old fears and anxieties. It’s very likely you know exactly what to do or what to keep and what to let go off,  you certainly are aware of where to go and how to get there. What's conflicting with your ambitions right now is that you have exhausted yourself by never taking the time to appreciate how far you already are from plenty of situations that have restricted your authentic self. I honestly understand what it's like to make a lot of progress after moving away from tough situations only to realize there is more work to do in order to restore or find an integral state of peace of mind and contempt. In your case, you’re lucky because sooner or later your emotions will lead you to how you can be truthful to yourself and experience life without any of the weight from limiting perceptions that other people have imposed on you. Many things have limited time in our lives, don’t miss out on them.

.

・₊✧⋆ pile number four ⭒˚｡⋆

.

Don't force yourself to be the first to do anything or the best at anything if you're comparing yourself to others. It is not fair to set your expectations about yourself by looking at what is supposably perfect or highly desirable, yet not a true reflection of what you as an individual can accomplish in a way that's genuine to your personal journeys. It's necessary that you embrace your experiences, putting yourself and your own ideals as the guide for what it means to advance and grow. Time will show you how to build a stronger confidence in your core beliefs and how to act upon them with the efficiency and courage you might be needing right now. This will develop as you become more comfortable with allowing yourself to fail, and to learn from said failures by setting structures to support the process of becoming more connected to a higher sense of self worth. You are going through a process in which key communicational aspects are at play;  many of your personal achievements will depend on your ability to share your ideas with others before taking any kind of action, as many things you’ll do will have long lasting effects. This is why I would recommend making sure you can really align your actions, your communication and your goals directly to yourself and the roots of your ideals. Don’t hurry up, it takes time to evolve and you will certainly do so by comprehending how equally confused, disoriented and impulsive we all are, and how that’s nothing anyone can ignore for too long.

.

if you enjoyed this post, maybe you should check out the rest of my account <3 and keep an eye open for ask games and a tarot reading giveaway (but lets not hurry too much about it please im still figuring out the logistics of a tumblr giveaway jajaja)

masterpost ✶ pac readings ✶ ko-fi page ✶

⋆bookings for personal readings are open ཐིཋྀ ˚₊‧⁺

[vaspider]

What do you think of the 4b movement

I think I don't know enough about South Korean culture to give a fully-informed opinion within that context, but I definitely think that any importation of it to the United States is just going to be radical feminism with a coat of 'you can't criticize this because it has a non-white source.'

And I think that this:

United States interest After the 2024 United States Presidential election where Donald Trump won a second term, many women expressed interest in following the 4B movement. Shortly after the election was called the interest in the movement was seen on TikTok where videos mentioning it were viewed hundreds of thousands of times, and Google search's about it spiked by 450%. American women have also commented on the movement calling it the "4 Nos" and "Lysistratra".

profoundly misses the fact that an awful lot of white women voted for Trump. So. Eh.

Radfems gonna radfem, you can put whatever coat of paint on it you want, it's still going to be biological determinism that centers itself around what it isn't rather than what it is.

[asimp4bee]

Does bee give ‘girl dad’ or ‘boy dad’ vibes more? Or does it depend on the version of him? ✨✨✨

I feel like he’d be both but he’d definitely dote on his son more!

Now I know I said before that I don’t like fan kids…but I’m gonna say fck it and give Meabee fan kids in the context of humanformers (cause imagine trying to pop out a half-human baby with cybertronian kibble on them😭)

Not sure about the designs just yet but ehhh that’s all you get for now and yes they are twins!

I just now realized that Elio looks like Kon-El sbshsbfh

[dysphoriaposting]

I have, but it's always in really scary contexts.

My worst memory is on Reddit (funny, I know) in which a boy was bragging to me that his friends and grandfather were fixing him after his parents made him "radical". I was poking cautiously cos I knew parental abuse was common and who knew what that meant, but he just kept saying things about "some people are just wrong and it's good to set them on the right path" or "people let all sorts of monsters into their bathrooms" and 😬

There's definitely conservative rewriting. I saw this a few months ago. I can only imagine how common it is.

Republicans have indoctrinated paternalism to keep the next generation from questioning the flaws, deceptions, and ignorance inherent in conservative politics.

[twilightkitkat]

Thoughts on Origins Victor? My theory is that he accepted his inner animal because when his mutation emerged it gave him an opportunity not to be a victim anymore. (The movie doesn't state this but i think we all know from sub context that Thomas beat him regularly) And he was so brutal and arrogant because being the man meant having to come to terms with the abuse he suffered and so he lost himself in his animalistic side. He wanted Logan being like him too because for him it meant strength and not being vulnerable. But all in all he cared about Logan deeply. He loved him. When he encouraged him to kill him later on he didn't wanna die. And he knew Logan wouldn't have done it. But during that moment he could feel Logan's animal side breaking to the surface stronger than ever before and wanted to encourage his little brother to fully submit to it. So that he would become strong. Because Logan's empathy and morals were weakness in his eyes. A weakness that Logan needed to be freed from in order to overcome his emotial pain.

So what you think?

I think that Victor's childhood trauma definitely played a vital part in shaping who he became. He was used to being seen as less than, to getting beaten, to being constantly reminded that he was beneath everyone. This manifested into an obsession with hierarchy and being the "apex predator" to overcompensate for how he felt as a kid, weak and beneath the feet of those above him. He lived life by the status quo, and so if he wanted to survive he needed to claw his way to the top of it the only way he knew how: violence.

His need for the control he never had in his childhood manifests into a perverted form of sadism. He likes being in power and playing "god" over whether people live or die. He likes seeing how terrified people are of him, because it means he has the power. It comforts him to know how far he's come and that he isn't the same weak little kid he used to be. It's nice to be respected, even if that respect is built on fear and only kept through violence.

Victor is also characterized by a remarkable lack of empathy, which leads me to believe he either was born with or developed ASPD. His lack of empathy isn't what drives him to kill, that's for the reasons stated above, but it makes it easier for him to detach himself from it all. In the Origins movie, he never seems to view his victims as "humans." He views them as means to an end so that he can get to Logan or as victims or tools to display his dominance to those around him. He doesn't feel remorse for his actions because he has difficulties understanding "normal" emotions and he isn't thinking of people as dynamic individuals with lives and hopes and dreams.

This especially affects his relationship with Logan. Logan also struggles with empathy in some cases, but not to the same degree as Victor. Logan sees people as they are—people. He is capable of detaching himself from them to some extent, which is why he was able to stay with Victor throughout the wars and continue fighting, but not entirely. When they start killing civilians outright, not just nameless soldiers who signed up for battle, Logan can't take it anymore. He snaps.

And Victor doesn't understand this. His lack of empathy isn't just for the people he kills, but for Logan, too. It isn't that Victor doesn't care about Logan, but he can't understand him. What does he mean, he feels bad? Doesn't Logan get that those people don't matter, that they're just tools to let them climb up the ranks?

It's why he feels so betrayed when Logan walks away. To him, Logan left him over a squabble about toys. He thinks that leaving because he kills people is a petty reason, and that Logan would leave him over just that. After all they've been through. All Victor's done for him.

Logan, to Victor, is someone he's entitled to. He's the only person who's immortal like him, who has been by his side since the start. Their relationship is unhealthy and a little coercive but Victor cares about Logan in a way he doesn't for anyone else. He loves him. Getting "betrayed" by Logan was what caused Victor to finally crack and go fully to the dark side, even if he was heading there anyway.

Victor thinks that Logan's morality and humanity are weaknesses. Victor gave into his animalistic side because it gave him more power and it made people fear him. It made him a sharp and unpredictable tool, a wild animal with a loose leash at the top of the food chain. Exactly where he wanted to be.

But Victor doesn't understand that Logan doesn't want that. Giving in completely to becoming an animal means denying yourself the ability to be human. To have human luxuries and emotions and comforts. It's denying the other half of himself. And Victor is fine with that, because he views that half as weak and useless, but Logan isn't.

In the end, Logan's soft side is just as much of a strength as it is a weakness. It lets him be both a human and an animal. It lets him form genuine connections and emotional bonds. It gives him strength and a network of support and a greater purpose. Something to fight for.

Victor only sees this when it's too late. He goads Logan into almost killing him because he wants to prove, once and for all, that his ideals are correct. That Logan was an apex predator like him, that he was just as much of animal, that they were one and the same and there was no denying his roots. He wanted to prove that Logan was like him because he wanted to walk the same path as him. (To have someone who understood him. The only "human" luxury he'd allow.)

But Logan turns him down. He sneers at his way of living and leaves. He rejects him once and for all.

And when Victor reunites with him much, much, later, he sees why. Because had Victor ever been as happy as Logan looked right now? Had he ever allowed himself to be content, to not obsess over his standing or power? Had he ever just let himself be human because at least then he could be happy?

Logan looks at Wade like he's his reason for living, his life partner, the thing he's been looking for his entire life. He looks at Wade like he's his home.

When was the last time Victor felt like he had that?

[windvexer]

Linking cards does not mean creating "combo meanings" out of 2 cards. It means drawing a map that shows the roads between 2 cards.

Potentially hot tarot take, but linking tarot cards is not mashing 2 cards together and coming up with "third definition."

I believe that tarot readings are deeply contextual. The question at hand provides context (which is why 'general' readings can be a struggle), and cards link together to create a narrative that is anchored to the question.

"Sun + 8/Cups means wish fulfilled" isn't tarot. That's like, Lenormand.

Tarot is a craft beyond deck structure. Tarot also speaks with its own language (like lenormand or runes) and being able to read tarot requires an understanding of that language beyond memorization of cards.

A major part of the language of tarot is being able to describe how cards relate to each other.

Linking cards together means discovering the flow of information between cards, as they relate to the question at hand.

That flow is not necessarily a combination of meanings.

It is probably better understood as drawing a map that explains how you get from one card to another, and what one card does to another without necessarily transforming the basic nature of either.

"The happiness in the Sun card slows down when it reaches the 8/Cups, which is surrounded by cards that relate to contemplation and meditation. Here, the Sun + 8/Cups link together to show hope shining on ideas that you have not yet decided to carry out."

But that all must be grounded into the context of a question.

Advice spread: "The Sun + 8/Cups show that there is hope, but nothing will happen until you stop contemplating and choose to take action."

Spirit contact spread: "The Sun + 8/Cups show this spirit's strong support for you thinking things through on your own."

Future prediction spread: "The Sun + 8/Cups shows that a joyous event will bring you to a place of contemplation."

If you fail to link the cards, the readings instead might look like:

Advice: "The Sun says to be positive, and the 8/Cups says think about your options."

Spirit contact: "The Sun shows the spirit is happy with your relationship, and the 8/Cups says opportunity is at hand. Maybe it's time for your relationship to grow."

Future prediction: "The Sun shows something really good happening, maybe related to money. After that, you will have a lot of options open up to you."

Even if we examine the future predictions side-by-side, they are not as similar as they seem.

With flow, "the Sun + 8/Cups shows a joyous event will bring you to a place of contemplation." Will bring is the clause that shows how these two cards relate to each other.

Because of how we link the Sun, we have additional knowledge about the 8/Cups.

The Sun card provides context, explanation, or modification of the 8/Cups. Now, we know how the 8/Cups starts, and what events it is related to. The points on a map (Sun, 8/Cups) are now linked together by a road that shows a journey from one to another.

The presence of the 8/Cups provides context, explanation, or modification of the Sun.

Because of the 8/Cups, we are able to predict where the Sun is going. We understand its role in the story (it brings contemplation). The Sun gains lore in the story of the spread; it is not just "a good event," but now also a progenitor and a necessary waypoint in the map of the future.

Without flow, "the Sun shows something really good happening. After that, you will have a lot of options open up to you."

Without flow, neither card modifies the other. The Sun is not understood to be something that causes options to open up. This would be like saying, "first your dishwasher warranty comes through. Then, you get a coupon book with a lot of fast food options." Just because one happens before the other does not mean there is flow between the two things.

Without flow, we do not know where the options described by the 8/Cups come from. We do not know what other events they relate to.

Without flow, we don't know what good things the Sun card relates to. We don't know where things go from there. We don't know if there is any link at all between the Sun and the 8/Cups.

Card linking is more like forging links in a chain that describe how things are related. It is less like melding 2 cards into a 3rd meaning.

There are tarot exercises, which are very useful, that involve melding 2 cards together into a 3rd meaning. This can help stretch the brain and play with concepts of "picture reading" and creatively brainstorming meaning.

But this does not mean that card linking is card melding.

[elodieunderglass]

so i showed jack glass to some teenagers (my kid and their partner) without context and they had some different responses:

- his name is alan

- he may be gay or bi, but definitely isn’t straight

- he is canadian

- he not only cooks, he owns a restaurant

- he likes to read

- he does not know how to parallel park

- he doesn’t fix his own car, but he has a friend who does

- he is generally very nice

not sure why they agree with everyone else on some points while being so different on others, but yeah.

In reference to my guysona (thank you). I am glad that my face is just; you know. Like that. In every universe.

Hey just out of interest, if I had a sibling, who was objectively the one who stole all of the hotness genes on every measurable axis - they’re the hot one, right. You guys agree, correct.

[nauseaspecters]

i don't enjoy the fandom depiction of chuuya being the 'second choice' character trope all his life.

unedited rambling under the cut. i'll structure my text posts better when it's not 4am

he's experienced and underwent through a lot of situationd of abandonment and betrayal, with unreciprocated attachments, definitely.

for the sheep, although they were almost like his family, since they were all he knew for 8 years, they viewed him as a weapon and a tool. stormbringer elaborates and adds complexity to this later but as a basis, it was true that they viewed this young teenager (chuuya) as more of an indispensably strong weapon to protect their survival, yet dispensable as a human if chuuya were to 'fall' to the other side. so much so that they jump to the chance to stab him (literally.) it's true chuuya does experience varying levels of not feeling he is doing enough.

however, to dwindle his character trope down to being "the other woman" type trope or the "constant second choice" is a misunderstanding of not only his character, but the characters around him as well. i see this seen most with dazai, mori, kouyou and the sheep.

in the case regarding dazai: chuuya is often labelled as the second choice to oda, and sometimes people use it as a point to pity chuuya in. however, it should be considered that chuuya and oda, and what they meant to dazai, cannot be compared. their relationships and significance to dazai were not in the same realm, and to think of it as "dazai chose oda over chuuya" ignores all the other factors as to what their relationship is built on. also, dazai choosing to leave the pm is not choosing oda over chuuya, it's hardly even related to chuuya, and especially not some decisive battle. it was dazai who was impacted by his dying friend's wishes and words, and he left for many reasons. ugh i will speak forever so i'll make that a different post. TLDR: chuuya is not the second choice to 'oda'

in the case regarding kouyou: i don't see this as commonly and i'm honestly a sucker for chuuya angst, but i don't think it's also right to think of chuuya as a second choice to kyouka in terms of kouyou's affection/care. firstly, kyouka is a young girl, and kouyou identifies herself in kyouka, with a deeper attachment of obsessive protection and instillment of what kouyou experienced. since kouyou was hurt by trying to reach the 'light', and she sees that same self in kyouka, kouyou shields kyouka in an unhealthy manner and isolates her from what she think will ultimately fail her. chuuya is a boy and from what we know, kouyou most likely does not see chuuya in the same style of projection and reflection. she's set to mentor chuuya in a very professional PM standpoint, and most likely does not form that deeper neurotic attachment that she has to kyouka. yes, chuuya calls her ane-san, but that doesn't mean they're necessarily also the closest. so to say that chuuya is the second choice to kyouka is strange, as it's not even a choice. chuuya is not in the picture for the type of internal bond that kouyou feels towards kyouka.

some additional stuff bdcause im rambling:

there's some weird extreme perceptions of kouyou as either someone that doesn't care about chuuya and a very close older-sister like doting on chuuya (the latter being a popular interpretation). i think kouyou cares to some extent, yeah. i think a lot of the pm that interact more extensively cares about each other to some extent. however, we do need to remember this is in the context of the PM. it's an inherently toxic and unstable environment, rooted in , well, Crime and power dynamics. kouyou was probably not the perfect mentor to chuuya, and nor are they some close healthy protective sibling-type dynamic either. the PM is rooted in abuse and a dark environment, it's unrealistic to think that a relationship we barely see much of is sunshine and rainbows.

ps: also sometimes it's not the matter of being a second choice he is just not a choice. as sad as that may sound.

[ai-the-broccoli]

sudden talk about narumitsu (vs lawlight)

I think, lawlight and narumitsu being like opposites (in a certain sense) is kind of remarkable for its implications for narumitsu honestly. because being the opposite of lawlight in this case also means it is similar to lawlight in a way, and isn't that kind of interesting

like. lawlight was founded on L's persistent disbelief in Light's innocence even when everyone else (including Light himself) believed in it, while narumitsu was founded on Phoenix's persistent belief in Edgeworth's innocence even when everyone else (including Edgeworth himself) didn't believe in it.

now L's distrust of Light's innocence is narratively justified, because we as the audience know that Light is Kira. and Phoenix's trust in Edgeworth's innocence is also narratively justified, because we find out that it turns out Edgeworth was innocent of the murders he was suspected for. so they're both right!

the thing is, however, what if that wasn't the case? like, even though he turned out to be right, Phoenix had no real, substantiated reason whatsoever at first to believe that Edgeworth was innocent (it would've been an accidental killing, like even if one trusted fully that Edgeworth would never murder anyone on purpose due to their knowledge of his character, it still doesn't exempt him from possibly having committed unintentional manslaughter), yet he did, out of his sentimental trust of him based on his childhood experience, and -- very notably -- his desire to always see Edgeworth as that definitely-innocent man he has believed him to be. because that's the way he wants to view Edgeworth, and that's what validates his past experience and his choice to choose this path to follow Edgeworth into law to "save" him, because after all, to Phoenix, he is "the only one who knows the real Edgeworth", and "the only one who can save him". Phoenix's goal to "save him", in the specifically sense that Phoenix conceives of it, is currently specifically a goal that is only applicable and valid if his image of Edgeworth is true to real life, therefore it HAS to be true or this doesn't make sense. there is a certain... is "possessive" the right word? I'm not sure but yeah there's a certain implication there that Phoenix essentially "insists" that Edgeworth be the version of him that fits Phoenix's idealized image of him etc., even when Edgeworth genuinely disagrees. however, well, on the matter of his innocence, Phoenix does turn out to be correct, therefore the narrative essentially validates him on count of this.

on that note,

.... yeah.

so. very interesting contrast imo, because here we have Yotsuba arc Light who genuinely doesn't know he is not innocent, versus Edgeworth in Turnabout Goodbyes where he genuinely doesn't know he is innocent about the elevator murder. but L / Phoenix insists hard on the opposite case being true, because they are not satisfied unless their ideas about who Light / Edgeworth is are correct. and well in context it happens to be true, but still. it's interesting. something like that etc

[iamthezip]

Charles Rowland Exploration

I have a question for the Dead Boy Detective fandom. A fun exploration of character psychology and development.What would Charles Rowland be like if he wasn't "saved"? 

For context, I've read a lot of Alive Boy AUs. I've seen some where both boy save each other from their respective "deaths". I've mostly seen ones where Edwin has lived through the "prank sacrifice" and whatever non-Hell bad came out of it and is around to save Charles in the attic from freeing to death. Lastly, I've seen a few where both boys have survived their ordeals and met each other afterwards. And this is the scenario I've been thinking about. (I'm gonna add here that I've thoroughly enjoyed every Alive Boy fic I've read. My question is because my brain likes to go down rabbit holes, not because I'm criticing or criticizing any fic I've read).In the context of the show, we see Edwin's reaction to his trauma and not being "saved". I feel like his dislike and distrust of the living is in part due to how he died and that no one cared enough to stop it, to save him. Plus, adding in his childhood. We know he has a fear of dolls. We know he's hypervigilant about Hell - aside from Niko's death, Edwin is always the first to mention the need to get away before Death comes. This is often carried over into fics. Alive Boy Edwin usually is written with a PTSD response to his near-death - nightmares, hypervigilance, distrust, withdrawal from social engagement, etc. Sometimes even a fear of having the door unlocked or fear of being tied down/grabbed. 

In the context of the show, we never seen Charles who wasn't "saved". I'm putting quotation marks here because I don't mean saved as in death prevented. In the show, Charles still dies, but I feel like Edwin still saves him in a way. Charles experienced betrayal by everyone meant to care for him and protect him. His father, his friends, his school - covering up his death definitely counts as betrayal even if it happened after the fact. But at the moment of his death, a stranger appears and is kind. A boy who spent 70 years in Hell after being sacrificed by his classmates, and who has every reason to be the worst person ever, decides to be kind - to keep him company, to get him extra blankets and a lantern, to read to him. It doesn't even end there. Charles isn't alone after his death as Edwin was. Charles has Edwin at his side, and he can trust Edwin in a way he couldn't trust others because Edwin was there for him. He didn't take advantage of Charles being weak from cold or unable to smile and talk his way out of trouble. He didn't have anything to gain by helping Charles, and Charles would later learn that hanging around a dying person was a risk to Edwin. So Charles isn't alone after his death and is with someone he feels he can trust. To add to that, Charles has a purpose (protecting Edwin from Hell and solving cases, however long it took them to get to that). This also gives Charles a direction for any anger/rage and also a reason to keep up the smile. "Keep up spirits for all of us" is what Charles tells Crystal. Yes, Charles still has his trauma responses - see the entirety of ep 3-5. Those responses are almost entirely tied to his father's abuse, though. We don't necessary see if he has a trauma response to his death. I know the fandom headcanons things like a fear of water/drowning, being cold when he's weak/injured/drained, etc. But we don't explicitly see the response to his friends and school betraying him very much, aside from a couple reactions mainly in Edwin's "we didn't matter". So the Charles we see in the show is the result of a boy who died after being betrayed again and again but was "saved" by another.

Now, take that away. Take away Edwin and his kindness and the purpose he gave Charles. Take away that safety and that outlet and that reason to keep smiling. What happens then? Would he still try to be always smiling? Would the anger and rage by at the tip of his tongue and his fist always ready to throw? Would he even be willing to try to befriend Edwin when they eventually meet? 

What would Charles Rowland be like if he wasn't "saved"?(Please bare in mind, this whole thing was typed at 2 am cause I couldn't sleep until I got it out of my head.)

[fozmeadows]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: one of the most successful alt-right psyops 4chan ever pulled was sealioning leftists in general and feminist women in particular to such a degree that, in response, we started reacting to every polite, 101-level question about feminism or leftist politics from men with anger and hostility, thereby driving said men directly towards the sympathetic arms of the alt-right, which was the entire fucking point of conditioning us to do that. I cannot emphasise enough that 4channers did this on purpose, as a concerted strategy, to make the left look unhinged, misandrist and unreasonable, and that we, collectively, took the fucking bait.

which is where the role of radfem/terf shit in furthering the same gender essentialism espoused by the alt-right really needs to be acknowledged: because as necessary and overdue as #metoo was on a cultural level, the framing of so many subsequent discussions as Yes All Men is radfem brainrot, not because patriarchy doesn't exist (it does!), but because patriarchy is an institutional and sociocultural problem rather than some inherent, indelible facet of masculinity, and that distinction matters, because you cannot solve the problem of patriarchy by treating it as fundamentally unsolvable.

this doesn't mean excusing misogyny. it doesn't mean absolving shitty men for their shitty actions. it means acknowledging that, at a basic psychological level, the vast majority of people do not react well to an all stick, no carrot approach to self-improvement, and if your response to that reaction is to say, "well, but they shouldn't need a carrot - they should just know to do right anyway, for its own sake, and the fact that they don't is why they deserve the stick," then I'd invite you to consider exactly how many different groups with individual, often radically self-contradictory definitions of right exist in this context, and how many of them, as opposed to you, are distributing carrots.

like, listen: I know that it sucks that people, universally, are not born with an innate, collective knowledge of The Best Way To Run A Society And Treat Each Other, and it additionally sucks that, even if we somehow figured out the perfect answer, some would still take convincing, others would still be on the fence, and a terrible few would still commit to being assholes. but that's what it means to be human, and there's no shortcut to getting around it! the work is the work. men are always going to exist, which means you can't build a better world without them - and if your better world doesn't acknowledge that, then it's not a better world at all; just a silo away from reality.

I couldn't have said it better myself.