#Which is arguably a more interesting way to discuss it

[blatantprinterpropaganda]

so far in the world of thamepo we've seen over and over that silently sacrificing your own happiness for the good of someone you love is ultimately never the way to go (thame tried it for the sake of the other mars members, jun for thame, and inevitably all the sacrifices po made for his ex who then promptly dumped him also feature in there), so my god, i hope that this well-intentioned lie of gam's comes to light at some point asap and she and pepper still get their happy end

[vaniliens]

Long ass opinions / critiques on milgram under the cut before t3 actually hits

Im not even that mad / hateful of mlgrm at all tbh & I think & hope you can tell that from the fact that my main gripe with it isnt really "This project was awful from start to finish it never should've happened" but rather "There were better (& Arguably easier) ways to tell this story & get the point across"

i understand 100% why they thought, on paper, why this would've been a cool project to work on and It Is!! They did their best, i really love how it takes inspiration from the vocaloid community from the abstract symbolism filled MV's, the deco covers, how theres an interconnected story, and the potential of community guesswork & discussion of what this song and/or MV means. I might be a bit biased bc i got into it after being dissapointed in how lacking the virtual singers / vocaloid [community] feels in project sekai besides the commissioned songs but overall i think its really cute, even if its technically just what art as a whole is about 😭 You know, making you engage & think about The Implications. Getting the inspo from the voca synth community allows the project to stand out bc of how its presented. Its unique, its fresh, it keeps you on your toes.

I love how it (tries) to tackle well known & relevant issues in japan (& tbh the rest of the world), like ableism, misogyny, child abuse, call-out culture, homophobia, the entire prison system, etc. and how the victims and perpetrators react to it. Its very interesting. Its very clearly trying to humanize & sympathize even the "worst of the worst", and i appreciate how its one of the main themes in the story even if some of the audience didnt quite catch it. Its showing how simply punishing people who did wrong isnt the answer. Like theres SOOOO much nuance to unpack both in universe with the crimes & prisoners and in a meta sense through the way the story is presented, the way the audience reacts, the discussions, thoughts, developments, etc. Its so cool. They've clearly put a lot of effort into it.

At its core the Milgram Project has always been less about solving the crimes and more about asking the audience "Why do YOU think X happened?" Its basically a bunch of character studies!! You're peering through their hearts, examining their own version of the truth of their crimes, and drawing your own conclusions based on that raw, intrusive data that the system has given you. Aagh.

Unfortunately in my own humble opinion all these elements combined is exactly why it doesn't work as well as it could've And arguably should've for a project all about seeing the good or at least understanding eachother.

It asks "Why did X did it?" but it doesnt give us a platform to actually state Why they did it in any way, only to answer & play into the prisons b&w thinking, and you cant in any way reverse any of their verdicts once its been casted. And thematically it works. I mean its about a warden in a prison full of people who have taken lives, its doing its job to mirror the reality of real life Innocent (No punishment or otherwise legal consenquence) vs Guilty (Punish) verdicts, legally or non officially, as it should. But idk it doesnt really Help us understand why a character comitted their sin. It only introduces downwards spirals, which only makes the characters less willing to provide their actual motive(s) as time goes on. I get that the main thing its criticizing is the legal & prison system but its getting in the way of sympathizing with "Bad" people. Which again IS the point, thats EXACTLY what the prison system does and why its so harmful, it dehumanizes people to hell and boils down their entire personhood to "Guilty" but like???? It doesnt really provide an Out, or anything more Productive to think about. WHICH IS THE POINT & I KNOW THAT BUT IT KINDA FEELS LIKE IN THE END THERES REALLY NOTHING YOU CAN DO WHICH IS PRETTY NIHILISTIC???

Its like "Theres no point in examining why these people are the way they are bc everyones gonna suffer no matter which button you press in the end!! No you cant gain deeper optional insight either bc we're permanently rolling with THIS now." and what doesnt help are the extra contents like the voice dramas & interrogation questions where the characters themselves add more fuel to the fire by threatening eachothers or the wardens lives??? and it leads to people discussing 'Which Verdicts to Vote [to minimize the in universe damage so these fictional definitely-not-representatives-of-real-life-issues-&-its-consequences characters can be safe]' instead of 'Actual Insightful Character Analysis [to help eachother find our own conclusions no matter what it is & to improve ourselves as a person through examining fictional scenarios]' and it leads to COMPLETELY unproductive discussions and flame wars and its so upsetting to see.

Its fucking tearing itself (& the fandom) apart by making ITSELF perpetuate the black & white "Theres a CORRECT answer to this EXTREMELY morally gray & heavily nuanced situation!!!" thinking for the sake of criticizing (More like making a parody of) the prison system. Like wow who would've thought that the system designed so that literally everyone in it is turned into mere "GOOD" VS "BAD" caricatures of themselves would be a good sytem to EXAMINE PEOPLES COMPLICATED LIVES with. Does that make sense. Like isnt it ironic how what we call "Meta voting" is, in the end, more about these fictional characters lives than it is about us, as the actual living breathing audience who are capable of accepting things outside the dichotomy and are able to self reflect before its too late? us, the humans whos lives are more fragile and thus require more care from eachother than mere 2d drawings? Isnt that so ironic

AND I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR I GENUINELY, WITH ALL (or none in this case) OF MY HEART, DON'T AND CAN'T EVEN BLAME ANYONE WHO META VOTES. BECAUSE THE PRISON. THE PROJECT ITSELF. ENCOURAGES IT. AND IN THIS TRIAL AND EVEN THE PREVIOUS ONE WITH KOTOKO'S BEATINGS, PROVES THAT IT HOLDS WATER. MORE THAN ANY CHARACTER ANALYSIS. MORE THAN GENUINELY UNDERSTANDING WHERE THESE CHARACTERS ARE COMING FROM.

And the beautiful thing about it is that theres ALSO a discussion to be made about this, intentional or not, about how our actions weigh more than our thoughts / feelings which is ofc correct. This also ties in it with its theme, of taking people's lives and under what conditions is it considered something "Neutral" (even "Positive / Good") vs "Punishable" and ofc also the punishing & restraining that comes with getting a guilty verdict part, an action that leads to someone else's forced in-action.

Still though, in what way does this really help support the Actual Main Theme, which is understanding eachother / the prisoners, people who youve seen arguably the worst of? Its grappling between wanting to make the audience GENUINELY THINK and self reflect vs a show about people going through hell and you CAN be both but again!! with way milgram is run, because of the active audience participation it needs & encourages & the way it boxes the audience into these 2 choices, it was always going to snowball & sway more to the latter. Its becoming less of a thinkpiece & more just a shocking spectacle where everything is in "Superhell"

"Oh anyone can die in this prison if the audience messes up badly enough" do you think thats a good way to send your message. Just kill off a character whos arc wasnt even finished yet. When their deaths only serve to make things worse and thus more shocking and "High Stakes"? When their deaths are only punishing the audience who wanted to understand everyone in the prison by

1. forever 'Locking' said dead character(s) out of any new developments

2. Possibly make things more muddy & unclear in the trial, as the rest of the characters would be affected by the death(s) and would most likely close themselves off even more to cope with the trauma?

And. Like. Again I cant even get that mad bc can you blame the writers when theyre all forced to write shit on the fly based on OUR unpredictable reactions??? Ex. Did they expect Amane to get a guilty in the 1st trial despite the sympathetic MV which features a child repeatedly being abused?? They also have to choose and try to balance between making the horror of the situation clear while also providing a way for these present horrors to bring out the characters past crime. Its so complicated.

I really really hate how this happened. Please. If milgram had no audience participation and if it was instead just a linear story or 2 this wouldn't have happened.... everything would've been in the writer's control and thus we would've been guaranteed a more fulfilling story even if it lacks the explicit audience complicity to the violence & abuse. See: come on man, THE OFFICIAL PREQUEL NOVELS.

Alternatively, seeing as the trial 3 curtain call is LITERALLY called 'Route: Your [Curtain] Call,' implying that there were other routes we could've went on, it could've been a video game or better yet a visual novel. Then we'd be able to fully explore the characters as much as we want, even if, by resetting the game multiple times to get the routes to FULLY understand these charaters, it lessens the emotional impacts the deaths will have.

I dunno man i just wish it didnt get this complicated I just wish it was presented better....

"So what do you think happened? Was this justified or not?" I dont know man we're busy making sure people dont die so we dont miss out on any new info even though the act of 'making sure people dont die' is making us Waste the opportunities we have to get said new info. WE'RE in storytelling superhell.

[transfinan]

:/ man.

[nicorobinphd]

my favourite part about being multigender to this day is something i realized within a couple weeks of coming out to myself, which is that i get to be a better man than the very misogynistic & violent men i’m related to while also still being a woman. i get to be fucking poetry.

(if you’re confused as to why you’re seeing this, read the tags. there’s a one piece post hidden there.)

(also, like just because i exhibit the paranoia of a terminally online hermit™️ deprived of an habitat enrichment, & because this website is hellish, i want to be clear that i’m not trying to exceptionalize @ the expense of monogender trans people who come to similar realizations, we are doing the same thing in a different genre.)

[wowitsverycool]

people who posture that odile forgiving siffrin and thinking The Time Loop is cute is out of character are a little silly... she is such a creature of practicality that it simply would not make sense for her to hold a grudge. and the 'cute' bit is her weird old lady way of recontextualizing the loops as not only necessary (as she explains later) but also *not worth being ashamed of*.

she is adding levity to the situation *and* building a brick wall of "it doesn't bother me, so stop apologizing about it" to signal to siffrin to stop arguing about how Evil it Makes Them. it expands upon her established character by showing that she is quickly learning to meet siffrin at their level while maintaining that sense of practicality. like "oh you think your yearning makes you awful and disgusting? bro it's not even a big deal. it's cute. i am more interested in discussing literally anything else about what happened."

the alternate perspective she offers is also one that shocks siffrin out of their own perspective (and evidently the perspective of some players lol), which has been the precipice of her character for the entire goddamn game!! think about it! the sus quest, the toilet paper scene, the end of her friendquest where she corrects siffrin on why her mood has improved -- she is constantly challenging what siffrin has accepted and resigned himself to!! all of the main characters embody change in different ways, but odile is arguably the only one who *actively rejects* stagnation in all its forms. so it only makes sense that what siffrin endlessly ruminates on -- the morality of their desire for closeness -- odile flippantly dismisses.

it wouldn't make sense for her to be Angry and Unforgiving because that's what siffrin expects (and, in a way, wants). it would be contrary to both her role in the narrative and her established character. her forgiving siffrin is maybe a bit jarring (as it is supposed to be), but not unnatural. It Just Makes Sense.

also, total forgiveness is neither unrealistic nor unsatisfying. it's just something that is often deemed 'too sappy' to properly depict.

[mychapel-004]

FNAF SPOILERS! SCROLL! TALKING ABOUT THE SPRINGLOCK SCENE!

i’ve seen so many people discussing the springlock scene in both negative and positive ways and i think it brings up really cool points about how matthew played that scene and balanced fan expectations with his own characterisation.

i think the discussions around this movie have rlly exposed the disconnect between fanon and canon in fnaf, especially talking abt the core games in isolation, bc frankly in the game universe (ignoring the books) we get Very Little characterisation for William other than the obvious, but Matthew managed to add so much in the way he talks and his body language.

in the reveal scene, we see afton at arguably his peak. in his first scene, he comes off as somewhat demeaning and judgemental until he recognises mike’s name, at which point he seems to have this nervous energy, rushing to cover it up but stumbling slightly, his reaction to the tables being turned even slightly is massive.

this is a man who committed multiple mrdrs in essentially broad daylight, hid the bodies in the most obvious place, and still got away with it, and then kept the crime scene as a trophy of his actions, and an ongoing prison sentence for his victims. he has been in complete control for decades, and is confident that he can deal with any kind of threat quickly. his confidence in his reveal is palpable

it changes when vanessa shoots him. the whole parallel with vanessa and the animatronics is hugely interesting too- how william refers to the animatronics almost endearingly as “kids” when he wants them to obey, how both vanny and the animatronics have an unearned loyalty to him, almost a pseudo-adoption through what he did to them, taking them from their parents and keeping them under his thumb, forever stuck as naive, forgiving, obedient children. vanessa breaking from that control shakes him, but the mask slips back into place almost immediately.

then, he’s outsmarted by the brother of one of his victims, and the child he planned to end next. his pseudo-children turn on him and he can no longer manipulate his appearance or shed his skin to escape. he explodes on them, and his language is incredibly telling that he is being dishonest.

he calls them small, trying to belittle them into submission, even though they are ten feet tall metal animatronics powered by rage. he is grasping at straws to regain control, and failing miserably.

finally, the springlocks go off. the locks in the movie look more like a ribcage, so the first two likely puncture his lungs. they’re slow, and painful, but he doesn’t scream or beg or sob. he grunts and groans, gritting his teeth and only letting out sounds of pain that sound almost involuntary. there is no way in hell he would visibly let himself show weakness or pain in front of these creatures that he believes he has control over. he isn’t brought to his knees until there are eight metal spikes embedded in his abdomen. he doesn’t let the mask fall for even a second, until he literally PUTS THE ACTUAL MASK ON and finally collapses. even then, he’s fighting for consciousness, twitching and writhing with no control over his body. william afton thrives on control, and his soul will not rest until he gets it back.

it’s why he keeps the pizzeria- he always comes back. he can’t help but return to the scene of the crime, putting on his old costume, continuing his killings. he revels in being a constant threat on the horizon. and now, he knows he is going to die, and he knows the suit will bring him back, and noone will be able to get rid of him then. so he puts the mask back on, and waits.

in terms of the sfx- they’re pretty accurate. with stab wounds, you need to leave the knife in the wound as long as possible for best chance of survival, as it stops the blood from escaping. in terms of the springlocks, there wouldn’t be copious amounts of blood as the locks are keeping the wounds filled- which is good because it means a slower, more painful death.

[avelera]

Thank you for talking about how Viktor wouldn't be mean to Jayce! I do really agree that fandom really tries to boil them down to their basics or preexisting tropes and it really sucks to see people think he'd really insult Jayce or hit him with his cane. Something I started thinking about after I read that post is that so much of the cast are Zaunite and nearly every one of them are sharp-tongued, and so maybe that's why people think Viktor would be mean? But that doesn't really take into account his personality or how he might feel he has to present himself as someone from Zaun living in Piltover.

Yeah the "hitting with the cane" trope definitely feels OOC for him to me. I could maybe see him tapping or hooking Jayce to get his attention but... even then. We rarely see Viktor use his cane or crutch for anything but their intended purpose.

If I may extrapolate out, I find it notable that when he has the cane pre-time skip he leaves it aside when possible, like when standing at the blackboard, and tries to mask his disability. I know for many people with disabilities, they love their aids, and the aids given them freedom of movement and from pain, but I would venture to say that Viktor does not see his crutch or his cane all that favorably.

I think Viktor sees his disability aids as necessary indignities that he'd rather do without if he could. See how quickly he drops his crutch once he tests out being able to run post-experimentation. He probably only goes back and gets it, rather than abandoning it there, because he wants to continue to hide the experiments he's doing.

Combine that with Jayce noting how he saw his leg as a "weakness" and I think there is further evidence that Viktor sees his crutch or cane rather negatively.

Which is a roundabout way of saying, I don't think Viktor would use his crutch or his cane as a hook or a bludgeon against Jayce not only because he's arguably the most pacifistic character in the whole show, but also because I don't think he really likes using it or thinking about it for anything but its intended purpose of assisting his mobility. I think Jayce views Viktor's crutch more favorably than Viktor does, he sees it as a part of Viktor in a positive way, an extension of him.

As for the topic of Zaun, I do agree that I think some fics give Viktor more of a, hmm, "class consciousness" around Zaun than he's shown to have?

For example:

Viktor only ever calls it "the undercity" in S1. Calling it Zaun at all is something that radicals like Silco do, it's even implied that Silco is kind of resurrecting a long-dead name for the area as part of his separatist movement, so it might not even be in wide use beyond Silco's circles, like Viktor may not have even really heard of it as a common term in S1. In addition, if "Zaun" is a politically charged term, I wouldn't be surprised if Viktor would avoid calling it that at all, because he's not a separatist or a radical, he's just from there and he thinks of it as "the undercity". Viktor is not shown as someone from the undercity who really wants to rock the boat in Piltover politically and he's certainly not a separatist, he wants to help the undercity as a disadvantaged community within Piltover.

The only time I think we see Viktor call it "Zaun" is somewhat in the abstract in S2, when he admires Vander's vision for "Zaun as it could have been". To me, it felt like he was discussing Zaun as a distant ideal rather than as the place where he was currently located or a political identity he identified with. He admires that other people who are more political than him had a cohesive vision for something the undercity that Viktor knows could become.

Viktor is actually incredibly apolitical, which is interesting when you consider he was assistant to Heimerdinger, who was head of the Council. He considers Jayce's time as a Councilor a "waste of our time", it never even occurs to him to use that political power to improve lives in the undercity, instead of science. In general Viktor tends to be pretty blind to other discipline besides science when it comes to bettering the world, and is even dismissive of them, which I think is a bit narrow-minded of him to be honest.

Viktor's dismissiveness towards anything that isn't science when it comes to improving lives is certainly a factor in how his and Jayce's relationship becomes strained in S1, he never sees Jayce's work as a Councilor as potentially offering a broader avenue for achieving their goals to help the undercity, not once, which is actually rather baffling and interesting that he has this blindspot (possibly because of my theory that at a certain point in S1, once he knows he's rapidly dying, Viktor is only using "helping the undercity" as a smokescreen to others but mostly himself to cover up his shame for the fact he really just wants to use Hextech to save himself while the undercity has become secondary, but he doesn't want to admit that. That also explains his shame when he sees Sky's notes and realizes he's been trying to save himself to the exclusion of all else, that he's lost sight of his larger goals and dreams.)

Even when Viktor starts the cult in the undercity, it's not a politically motivated enclave, he doesn't describe it as part of a Zaunite movement. It really is just posed as a refuge for those in need, separate entirely I would argue from the Piltover vs. Zaun conflict, unlike Ekko's Firelights who provide shelter AND do community action and freedom fighting. Indeed, Viktor heals Salo, a Councilor, the most privileged of the privileged from Piltover. I'd argue this is an additional sign that he is "colorblind" when it comes to the conflict between the two cities.

Finally, I would argue that Viktor is from a generation that somewhat precedes the class conflicts and brewing civil war between Piltover and the undercity. I think he's from a generation where the cities were still linked enough that they were more like the "good" and the "bad" side of the tracks. He was smart enough to get out and make something of himself in the big city, he has a goal of helping to uplift those he left behind, but he sees them as one city still even if he has sympathy later for a separatist movement. The way he talks about the undercity to me feels less like a separate entity and more a particular disadvantaged community within Piltover.

Anyway, I've gone off on like three crazy wild tangents based on your reply. Thank you so much! I'm glad you enjoyed that post! And I agree, of all the Zaunites, Viktor is actually quite different from the others and that is really interesting to explore!

[carn4g3]

Creepypasta Relationship HCs (2)

Characters - BEN Drowned, Tim Wright (Masky), Brian Thomas (Hoodie), Kagekao

Summary - A few more glimpses into how these creeps are as partners (w/ 50% more possessiveness !)

TWs - Descriptions of yandere behavior, cheating, stalking, possessiveness/jealousy and overall unhealthy relationships, mentions of kidnapping and violence, & very brief mentions of sex and smoking

Word Count - 3.5k (~700 to 900 each)

A/N: Thank you for all the love on the first part <33 I know a few people requested these characters alongside some other new ones in the time it took me to write this. Just know that I'll have ones for any additional characters out sometime soon if you happened to leave a request along those lines :)

Part 1

BEN Drowned

Before I get to anything else, BEN is perpetually in his early 20s in my characterization of him.

He arguably has the most contact with people outside of Slender's influence simply by being an ipad kid. Because of that, he's most likely to form a relationship with someone if they are from the normal world. BEN doesn't necessary hate his colleagues or Slender, but they're all just so fucked up. Someone with even half the emotional baggage of a killer would be much better.

Now, it's pretty obvious that BEN isn't exactly the most palatable to the average human being. He has a million alternate accounts, all of which assume false identities, but he does have a select few that are more personal. On those accounts, he spends his time in various forums or chats where he can discuss his favorite games and other media. You two would probably connect on one of those shared interests, maybe even several, and he would be hooked from there.

BEN isn't the most patient person, but it would take more than a few months of talking before he truly built a connection with you. He'd prefer you reciprocate his feelings after that point, but it wouldn't deter him if you didn't. He's self aware enough to know that he needs to give you time to adjust to the fact that he's not the human man you thought you were talking to and that he crawled out of your very own computer screen. Though, back to his impatience, it's probably not nearly enough time.

The topic of monogamy with BEN would be a variable subject. He's well aware of the litany of ways partners define themselves given the somewhat questionable time he spends online. Ideally, BEN would see himself as unconstrained by a relationship, and, therefore, you should have an open end as well. Though, the less mature part of him sees you as something of a prize that should be reserved for him alone, and that's the side that takes over.

BEN wouldn't allow you to have romantic or sexual relationships with anyone other than himself. Meanwhile, the unspoken rule is that he could... if he wanted to. Does that mean he actually has other partners? No, not at all. It was a miracle you wanted to enter a relationship with him willingly, if you even did. There's no way in hell he's going to replicate that easily.

Despite all of that, he's not very outwardly possessive. He carries himself with a certain arrogance, it shouldn't be a shock that extends to his relationships. If you seem close to someone else, he still thinks you'll choose him in the end. At the same time, he's your most avid stalker. There are cameras damn near everywhere nowadays, and he doesn't even need to break a sweat to access their footage. In the situation that you're cooperative enough that he doesn't need to force you into his living space, he watches where you go. Even if you can't leave his side, he still tracks you one way or another. Nothing happens between you and another person that doesn't go unseen by him, and, if someone is too close, he'll pay them a "friendly" visit.

He shows affection the best through quality time and gift giving. Admittedly, his definition of quality time is almost exclusively reserved for playing games or showing you something on his plethora of devices. On occasion, he can suck it up and do something that you like: going outside is in his skillset... albeit reluctantly. As for gift giving, BEN is surprisingly good at getting things you like even though it seems like he's never listening. You might want to avoid asking how he got the money for such things, though. He won't give you a straight answer anyway.

Physical affection with BEN would be a bit strange. He's not entirely an apparition, but his form isn't totally corporeal either. Objects he's holding can phase through his grip at times without warning, though it's not quite to the point where he can pass through walls. When he lingers close enough to you, it feels almost like there's a faint, electrical buzzing on your skin. He can still touch you despite that, though your hair may start standing after a while. It's only when he lingers near you for too long that there's an issue. The static electricity building between you becomes pretty potent, resulting in an actual electric shock once he does make contact. BEN can be a little sadistic, but he's not particularly interested in hurting you. So, he tends to avoid touching you much or, if he does, it'll be pretty quick.

While BEN has a bit of a reason for falling short on physical affection, he has no good excuse for his lackluster words of affection. He thrives in making lewd comments on your body and that's it. The only way to get him to say he loves you is by saying it yourself. Even then, his response is pretty lacking, but it's not out of a genuine dislike for you. The way his ears turn a light pink, burning most red at their pointy ends, indicates he's at least a little fond of you.

Masky

Quick note because I can see this becoming confusing, I tend to refer to Slender as the Operator when writing for Marble Hornets characters because I think that's what they would call him. It's still the same old Slendy tho :)

Being in this fandom for so long, I can see the development of my frontal lobe in the form of my hcs of this man.

Tim is well into his 40s. He thinks a dating life is far beyond him, and, even if it weren't, he hardly knows what it's like to be a "normal" person anymore after 20 years as a proxy. While I say all that, if he were to find love, it would likely not be among the Operator's ranks. Tim despises the creature and everything it stands for, but he knows he's not strong enough to evade it. He finds respite in the areas outside of its power and is mostly likely to let go of his inhibitions for someone in that mental space.

He is not 100% ready to embrace a relationship, romantic or otherwise. The Operator isn't clueless to Tim's resent; it's why newer proxies like Kate and Toby are much more infatuated with the creature. To keep the less conditioned ones around, it has to extend its control a bit more uniquely. Tim knows that you're at risk of the Operator doing something to you, and he can't handle that. Because of that, his presence in your life isn't consistent. He's trying to prove to himself that he doesn't need you and, to the Operator, that you don't get in the way of his work. Though, Tim has never been the most strong willed. He comes crawling back to you every time.

While most of the others are willing to kidnap the person of their affections, I don't think Tim would quite get to that point. He prefers that you have your own separate life away from him. It makes him feel like you two are a normal couple, but he's certainly not a saint. Mentally stable people do not become proxies of the Operator, so Tim is riddled with some less than ideal possessive and controlling tendencies. He wants you to be dedicated to him and only him. Any other romantic or sexual relationships are completely out of the question for you, in his mind.

Does he quite monitor if you keep up your end of the bargain on that? No. When he disappears for months at a time, he does anything he can to erase you from his mind. Gaining an almost iron will, he won't even stalk you until he gets especially desperate, and that's usually the point when he shows up again.

When he is around, though, he expresses issues with your other relationships quite readily: platonic or even familial. Tim is very deeply insecure in himself. Who wouldn't be after finding out their existence alone has led to the deaths of many? He's buried all of that so deep at this point that even he hardly knows it though, so he calls himself a "traditional" man instead. He prefers your deepest affections to be saved for him, is that so wrong?

Even though his lifestyle is far from anything traditional, he sees himself as the provider. Regardless of your gender, you're the caretaker or the homebody. Like I said earlier, he's fine with you having a separate life-- it's the modern age after all, the least of his worries should be whether or not you work. But, he expects you to see him as a dominant figure that should be listened to, and he will follow through on that.

Anger management? Who the hell is that? Tim's job grates on him, physically and mentally. That's part of the reason he smokes a pack a day, and why he's with you as well. He tends to be at his most vulnerable and volatile when he turns to you, and those emotions are usually hardly a result of your actions. When Tim is angry, though, any little thing can set him off and make that anger entirely your fault. He'll tend to distance himself before things get physical, but verbal arguments are far from uncommon. One of these arguments is usually what prompts him to disappear back to the depths of the woods. But, if he's feeling a little less sorry for himself, he'll come back to you and give a begrudging apology. He does truly feel bad when he snaps at you and wishes it wouldn't happen. At the same time, he has a completely self-pitying and helpless approach to fixing that issue.

Surprisingly, he's big on physical affection. If he's with you, you're likely a little secret of his, so he can only get his time in after completing his daily tasks. He's tired as hell by that point, so he'll just sprawl out wherever you are. In bed? He's right behind you. Watching a movie? Your couch is comfy enough to sleep on. You're busy doing things? He can fall asleep standing if need be. He prefers if you go about initiating certain things like hugs and cuddles, but he can handle initiating a kiss or more.

When it comes to words of affection, on the other hand, just be happy with the few affectionate gestures you can get. It takes a war in his brain to so much as utter the words "sorry," you'd be shit out of luck to hear "I love you" or anything deeper than that. If he's feeling especially sappy, he might leave you a handwritten note. His handwriting is absolutely atrocious, worse than a doctor's script, and takes some analysis to decipher. Once you get it, that will be the closest glimpse at Tim's true feelings towards you.

Hoodie

I would like to think Brian is similarly still in touch with parts of his humanity as Tim is. But, that would be wishful thinking, wouldn't it?

Brian is a stalker first and a lover second. While normal people might unwind by watching TV or even reading a book, Brian takes similar joy in simply watching you from a far. He would find people outside of the Operator's control most interesting to watch, but it wouldn't matter at the end of the day. If you capture his interests, he'll watch-- maybe even take videos.

I imagine his main tasks under the Operator involve intel collection. He's highly skilled in slinking around in the shadows and not being caught, unless of course he wants to instill some unease in the mind of his victim. As a result, it's very unlikely you would notice him lurking. He's not there to unsettle you necessarily, but he might if he finds himself feeling a certain way. You're his most convenient entertainment at the end of the day, so it's not really in his desire to encourage you to get others involved or even move somewhere less convenient.

If you do happen to notice his presence, he's almost a little impressed at your perceptiveness. Not to mention, it makes the second phase of his plan a little easier. Brian may be content to watch endlessly, but he doesn't stop himself from exploring his curiosity to be included in your life. For him, he feels like he's known you forever. For you, he's crafted your interactions across the span of several weeks or even months to get you interested. With the added weight of a secret stalker on your psyche, it only draws you closer to his "welcoming" arms.

Brian isn't quite to the point where he sees himself as a sole provider. Once again, it's more interesting for him if you have at least a few interests beyond him. Like a beach episode in an anime, Brian sees your endeavors outside of your home as a welcomed (but temporary) change in setting. Not nearly enough people acknowledge that the Marble Hornets guys are from Alabama, in my opinion. It's not exactly the most progressive state, and Brian likely holds some toxic masculine values. He thinks of himself as a sort of "man of the house." You should listen to him, and he expects you to dedicate a lot of time to your relationship. In his mind, he dedicates a lot of time to you, even if most of that dedication is unknown to you.

Before he even went forward with inserting himself into your narrative, he was already interfering with the others in your life. He tries to act all stoic, but he is still very possessive at the end of the day. I've explained that some of the other characters find their possessiveness and jealousy rooted in their insecurities. Brian is certainly not immune to those feelings, but I think his issues stem from what I can best describe as an objectification of others. He views you almost like a hobby, something that he puts his free time into. He feels an almost bitter jealousy when others try to catch your attention with less than half of the pristine planning and attention to detail he executed. Just as he can stalk you, he can stalk others. He will make his watchful presence much more malicious and well known to the people he wants out of your life.

His go to forms of affection are acts of service and quality time. Ignoring that he sees stalking you as a form of quality time, he likes taking you on dates. His appearance isn't something too noteworthy to most people, so he can easily ditch the mask (if you even know he has one) and hit the town. He's a big fan of dinner and a movie or a little nature hike if you're interested in more outdoorsy activities like him. If you're more into stay-home dates, he'll happily watch a movie from the comfort of your couch and help you cook a dinner for two.

As for acts of service, he takes pride in the fact that he's a bit of a handyman. It's not like you can exactly get the usual help when you live secretly in the woods as a proxy of an immortal eldritch being. If you so much as breathe a word of issue about something in your home, he's on it. Carrying something heavy? He'll get it for you. It doesn't matter if you can do it yourself, he's going to do it now. Weaponized incompetence fears him. Asking Brian to do a task for you almost always ensures it will get done within the day.

He doesn't honestly care too much for physical affection. As I've already established, he's happy to do damn near anything you ask of him. If you want attention that way, simply ask. In general, he asks for very little in return. Although, when he does get around to asking for more, there's no guarantee he won't push your boundaries a little uncomfortably.

On the topic of communication, he's not very talkative and prefers to listen to you instead. Words of affection are few and far between, but he does have some quirks. It won't take an army for him to tell you he loves you, and he has a sleeve full of endearing nicknames to call you ("love" is his favorite).

Kagekao

Where do I even start with Kage.

He doesn't have any specific preference if you're a worker of Slender just like him or not. If asked why he does anything for the creature, he'll say it's simply because it's the "best" arrangement in this modern age. On the surface, that's a pretty reasonable explanation given that demons aren't exactly common or readily accepted members of society. However, the real reason is that Slender gets what it wants and is a hell lot more powerful than Kage. The demon begrudgingly does what he has to and tries to spend the rest of his time getting the fun he would prefer.

While some of the others might begin their interests by watching from afar, Kage pops into your life right off the bat. He finds entertainment in watching, but it's so much more interesting to have those interactions up close. Especially if you're not as familiar with inhuman entities, Kage takes pleasure in eliciting those responses of perplexion from you.

Living in a world largely populated by what he perceives as "weak humans," he's gained quite the ego. If you're not a demonic entity, he most certainly considers himself superior to you in all ways. Even if you are a demonic entity, he has a very specific criteria for what he considers to be a "real" demon and would still likely see himself as better. On the other hand, his underestimation of you tends to lead to interesting reactions in the case that you can pack a bit of a punch against the demon. (*cough* he's into it *cough*)

Like Tim, a relationship with Kagekao wouldn't ever really get a chance to be defined because he likes to bounce in and out of your life on a dime. Although, he certainly doesn't feel any guilt or even apprehension to pursue his interests in you. He recognizes you could get targeted by some less favorable attention (Slender being the worst), but he's interested in seeing how you'd react.

He is absolutely with other people in addition to you. I can't imagine he has many relationships that are too far past friends with benefits (everyone wants to fuck a demon, this app proves it), but I wouldn't put it past him. For that reason, he tends to turn a blind eye to your escapades. That being said, if your relationship with him borders on something more romantic, he expects you to have no other romantic partners.

Because he's not too consistently involved in your life, Kage isn't the most possessive on the list. On occasion, he'll express his opinions on the other people you spend your time with, but they're usually empty threats. If they really upset him, he'll eliminate them from your life. Does that mean death? Or simply scaring them off? You don't really want to know.

Like many of these guys, Kage isn't big on clear demonstrations of love like physical affection or words. His best show of affection is gift giving. He's not quite a kleptomaniac, but he does have what can only be described as a dragon's hoard of shiny trinkets. If asked, he won't say any of them are particularly special. Though, he does have a lengthy story for how he acquired each one, and he won't just readily give them out... except for you. Especially if he has matching sets of something, he'll tend to gift you one of the halves. You might not necessarily want or even like all the trinkets Kage gifts you, but you'll have to keep and display them. If not, Kage will do a bit of redecorating for you

Gotta let the brain worms speak on this one, he likes to offer you help, but he is not actually helpful. Kage thinks he can do practically anything. He's a demon in a human's world, after all. But can he actually follow through? No. Not at all. He gives up on tasks pretty easily when they stop being interesting. Even in the case that he goes through with completing the whole thing, you might have preferred to just do it yourself.

Don't get me wrong, his affections aren't all bad. He tends to think he's too good for physical affection, but he can be surprisingly sweet and comforting. Additionally, while he won't say it out loud, you might find that one of his gifts has an oddly romantic inscription etched on it. Trust, Kage makes up for his shortcomings.

[cindersnows]

the problem with mitsi (or as i like to call it. mitsogyny)

(context: this was written under a youtube video, which i'm sure most of us have at least seen pop up in our recommendeds, in response to many people taking criticism against the new episode. it has been edited a little to be more cohesive as a somewhat-essay)

ok, i wanted to write out a rant/essay/ramble/whatever sort of summarising the criticism against mitsi's plotline because a lot of the people here seem to be misunderstanding the fundamental issue that people have with it, including some of those people themselves.

first off, an analysis that i think tell both sides of the argument very well which i feel should be read before reading the essay: Mitsi: What Makes A Fridged Character (and why y'all are wrong about it) | an AvA essay by InksandPensblog. i will note: i don't care to discuss whether mitsi was fridged or not and that won't be of much importance in this post. the above link gives some insight into some of the fandom's criticism of mitsi and how she was "fridged", defining common tropes for examples. that's what's relevant to this post.

the main issue with mitsi, in my opinion, is less with the fact that mitsi's a girl and moreso the fact that she's one of the only female-coded character in the series, and that her character's main purpose was to further victim's own development. the other arguably female-coded character in the series is pink, who (like navy) only really exists to explain purple's motivations. i don't have much of an issue with that since they're not meant to be important or sympathised with at all. that's not their job in the story.

with mitsi, i've seen people point out that she has more character to her than just victim's love interest and supporter: she invents rocketcorp, she's smart, she's kind, innocent and helpful. narratively speaking, she shows other creations' relationships with their animators, parallels her innocence with victim's trauma, and introduces victim to the outernet (as most fans call the stick realm).

but most of this things imo are either stretches or invalid arguments. she's not really a 2/3-dimensional character in any way; her main character traits boil down to the fact that she likes to be in service of others with no nuance behind why she likes helping people. she hypes up victim for the villagers, she starts a company with him to share his talents with the world, and she helps him overcome his trauma from alan's torture. all of her main plot beats center around victim: and while technically the sticks are genderless and free to be interpreted however the viewer wants, alan and most of his team see all the main characters as male, and that subconciously affects how they're written. mitsi, the first major female-coded character, spends most of her storyline in service of victim, a character not written as female.

there's also the issue of her being victim's canonical love interest. i feel like this statement from alan is important to keep in mind (don't mind the sound effects and edits, this is the only isolated clip i can find at the moment). in particular:

"i just assume that [the ava/m characters] are just a bunch of bros]. i haven't thought of adding any female stick figures but i think it'd be good. i don't want to introduce any romance though, i don't want that to be a theme."

he seems to have changed his mind on that last part, which is fine, but the notable part for me is that he seems to associate female characters with romance from the getgo. before anyone misinterprets this, i'm not trying to call alan sexist or anything. but there's a common issue with women in stories being reduced to just a romantic partner for the male lead, and mitsi falls under this, with her entire character existing to serve victim. (not to mention people will make things about romance whether you like it or not. that's just basic fandom. search up grapeduo or chodark.) even her death is to put victim on the path of vengeance--- it doesn't need to happen to show the extent of tco and tdl's destruction, because that's already made pretty clear in ava s2 the flashback and the earlier scenes showing various characters escaping burning buildings. when you write a female-coded character whose only purpose is to serve a male character, you're contributing to sexist narratives.

a counter i see many people point out with the idea that she has no character is that she does have character traits, it's just that they're generic ones like "kind" and "innocent". the issue is that she has no flaws to counterpoint this; it's not that she didn't have enough screentime. in ava4 for example, we see tsc's flaws pretty clearly; they can be very mean when they want to, they're petty (albeit for a fair reason), they're a little impulsive. this is shown in 11 minutes (from the moment they come alive to the end of the video).

with mitsi meanwhile… she doesn't seem to have any flaws? she helps victim whenever she can. she's nice to all the villagers. her customers all like her and she's a great leader at rocket corp (to note, specifically as part of a pair with victim. they're a power couple, she's barely given credit for her work alone). she has 13 minutes of screentime, or 10 if you count from her waking up in the outernet. there's plenty of opportunities to show her having flaws; maybe she acts a little selfish during tdl and tco's attack, only wanting to help herself and agent smith, or maybe she overworks herself, or feels awkward at having too much attention (and that could also be why she redirects so much attention to victim, she's shy). you could argue that the episode needs to develop victim and agent smith too, but ava4 shows that's easy to do too: just a few seconds dedicated to showing rgyb fighting over who leaves first shows that they can be selfish and childish. it's very easy to insert a moment like that for mitsi.

it's a little disappointing when the first major female-coded character in ava is completely flawless, with no personality outside of being nice and helpful for others.

also, slightly unrelated, check out this quote from mitsi's plushie website: "her white featureless face seems to ooze mystery and feminine power all at the same time." her main character trait, as a woman, is being feminine. it's irritating as someone who's been raised a woman to see her reduced to just her gender. she feels more plastic than a person, like the concept of what a woman should be (perfect, kind, useful) and not an actual character/person.

i would expect more from the writing in the series seeing as it's not just an independent passion project anymore, and has multiple writers that all could've worked to flesh out mitsi, or at least get a sensitivity reader of sorts to point these issues out. it's extremely disappointing and i can understand why people were upset.

tldr: the problem isn't just that mitsi's a girl, or that she's nice or dating victim, it's that she's written in a misogynistic way.

[newbiespud]

Okay, I lied. One last set of Warframe 1999 spoiler thoughts to get them out of my system:

Bookending the story with Transference into Arthur (once very rudely without permission to start off on the wrong foot, once begrudgingly with permission to bring them home) is just great theming structure. Building thematic parallels into your story isn't hard, it's just so much better when the characters' and their growth reinforce their meaning.

On the surface, the Drifter's "help" to the Hex looks like a mere cheerleading pep talk, but that's not how I took it. Who knows more about fully matured Warframe powers than the Tenno? How can they lend that expertise to the Hex in their desperate moments? Eleanor can wrangle the Infestation within with a little willpower boost; Tenno do it all the time, or else their Warframes would be out of control. "Quincy, remember, your frame has the Seek power and it's busted." Aoi especially just needed a bit of support from someone who's used a fully kitted-out Mag before and mastered her magnetic powers. "Amir, here's something you would have never found out on your own: Your Warframe body has a Parazon, which doubles as a hidden blade AND a data-link!" And, of course, Arthur - if your body can't move, then I can move it for you. It's all the Tenno being an experienced Tenno to help the Hex.

I was definitely in the camp of "wait, I thought Albrecht shot Amir- OH THANK GOODNESS WE STOPPED THAT."

It's so incredibly great that the instant-messenger stuff allows us to discuss and digest a lot of Warframe's weirder lore in an in-character way, on top of all the other ways it's great. Love me a game system that accomplishes multiple goals at once for different player interests.

My absolute favorite thing overall? Thematically, this is a mirror-image of The Sacrifice. Somehow, through sheer empathy if nothing else, the Tenno have the power to share their inner strength with troubled, broken, hopeless beings, take away their pain, and unlock their full potential. The Operator did it with Umbra (and by extension every other fully converted Warframe), and now the Drifter's done something arguably even more impressive - using that power on partially still-living humans, with understanding, consent, and mercy.

Look, I'm arguably a writer by trade. I love analyzing story structure, and I especially love seeing action genres take a stab at being emotional, vulnerable, and empathetic while still being kickass action. That's a delicate balance, but oh boy does it make for a delicious dish for my particular palette.

[blurrilines]

Alright, it’s time I discuss Star Sapphire Bernard and why I think he would legitimately be a good fit for becoming a ring wearer (aka Blurri read a theory book on love and has a lot of feelings about Bernard Dowd and now the Star Sapphires could be written moving forward)

First let’s establish what makes a Star Sapphire chosen by the Star Sapphire Ring (bear in mind I am not a full expert and I understand that the Star Sapphire Corps have changed over time so I’ll try to be as up to date on their lore as possible). Star Sapphires are empowered by Love the way Green Lanterns are empowered by Willpower. They are typically portrayed as women scorned or someone who lost someone they love, and this event is what lead them to obtain their abilities, aka when the ring chose them and They chose to become a Star Sapphire, aka fight fear and hatred and give love.

However, It’s not exclusive to these events taking place the same way wearing a Star Sapphire ring isn’t exclusive to women, it’s just usually the case we see in most stories. This emphasis on choice is where I’m reminded of Bernard.

Bernard Dowd is someone who’s been hurt, both in a very literal, physical sense, as well as an emotional and spiritual one. Starting with the obvious Bernard was in a pain cult, where literal beatings were used to achieve “enlightenment” and so on, though for Bernard it was clearly something he felt he deserved, much like eventually becoming the cults sacrifice, which Tim fortunately intervened in. However, despite being rejected by his parents after coming to terms with not being straight and not having seen Tim in years, not to mention being deep in the cult that convinces him that beating will make the pain in his heart stop, he chooses to reconnect with Tim. And when freed from the cult’s sacrificial alter, he fights by Tim’s side to free not only himself from the cult but the others they indoctrinated.

Later we see this theme continue with Bernard talking about how he wouldn’t reject his parents if they decided to change their tune and treat him like their son again, even if it would be more than understandable for him not to. He chooses to see them as people who can change, and to love them despite the pain they’ve caused him, while still keeping his distance and not caving to their manipulation or demands. Bernard is someone who has been shown, in multiple ways, to already align with the Star Sapphire’s foundations of choosing to give love and fight against hatred - even when it would be the arguably easier option.

There’s also the fact that at this point there are currently no male Star Sapphires in their ranks, only male Lanterns who’ve briefly worn the ring. This would leave Bernard in a unique position as the only known male Star Sapphire, leaving for a new and interesting story to be told for DC. Bernard is also a character criticized at times for “only being a love interest” and being created as a supporting character to Tim, as was the case when he first debuted Pre-Rebirth. Turning that trope on its head by making Bernard a being literally giving super powers from the love he has, for Tim or otherwise, would be dope as hell imo, but that might just be me.

Love is sometimes defined as the choice to extend oneself to nurture another or your own spiritual growth (go read all about love by bell hooks for more on that). It is an action and a decision made the same as activating one’s willpower to achieve their goals. I think with this specification in mind we see how Bernard embodies this choice and how it could lead to him becoming a powerful member of the Star Sapphire Corps.

TLDR; Bernard is a character who is shown to already align with the core of what a Star Sapphire is (choosing love and gaining power from it) and it’d be cool if DC gave him a ring.

[lamentable-comedy]

I made a supercut of every instance of the word partner (or partnership) in Black Sails... mostly as a side effect of wanting to analyze how the word was used in the show. More information/breakdown under the cut.

"Partner", "partners", or "partnership" is said a total of 92 times in the show, not counting 11 times when it's part of a "previously on". Of those 92 instances, 11 are in Season One, 24 are in Season 2, 33 are in Season 3, and 24 are in Season 4. Some form of the word gets said at least once in all but eight episodes (1x01, 1x05, 3x01, 3x04, 3x09, 4x02, 4x03, and 4x05). The episode with most instances is 3x02 with a grand total of 7. In the video, the clips are arranged in chronological order according to when they appear in the show. I used the transcript site to double-check my work so I'm pretty confidant I didn't miss anything.

A lot of the time the relationships that get called partnerships also get referred to with other terms (friendship, alliance, husband/wife), either at different times than they're called partnerships or in conjunction with the term, but "partner" as a term interests me because it is non-specific in a way that allows for it to hold a lot of different meanings, sometimes all at once. Black Sails is clearly very specific about what terms are used for relationships, just as it is specific about what name a character is called by, and often there is significance placed on moments when a relationship is called a partnership. (Miranda and Flint in 2x06, Jack and Anne in 2x10, Flint and Sliver in 3x03, etc.)

SO I've made a full chart with details on each of the 92 instances which you can look at here. It has the episode each instance is from, who says it, and to what partnership they are referring. Generally this is pretty straightforward, though sometimes a character is directly referencing one partnership in a way that implicitly applies the label to another, i.e. when Silver says he's "not the first to have been a partner to [Flint] in this way", he is referring to himself as Flint's partner, but also implicitly stating that Gates and Miranda were each Flint's partner as well. Whenever this happens I've noted it in the chart. I've also noted when characters are speaking hypothetical partnerships that do not (yet) exist, or do not (yet) exist in the form they are currently discussed, and when partnerships are referred to in the past tense.

Highlights of some stuff I found interesting:

Silver and Flint are referred to as partners (or as having a partnership) a total of 7 times, and implicitly labelled as such once. This is more than any other partnership between individuals, and depending on how you count more than any partnership between groups, too (see below). The first time they're ever referred to as partners is by Silver in 3x03

Jack and Anne are just behind them with a total of 6, followed by Eleanor and Rogers with 5

The individual relationships between Jack and Max, and between Max and Anne are each referred to using some form of partner/partnership three times, and Jack, Anne, and Max a group of three are referred to using the term once by Max and once by Jack-- though when Jack uses it (while speaking to Marion Guthrie) he doesn't specify who he's speaking about could arguably also be including Featherstone, and possibly Idelle

The pirate and maroon alliance is referred to using partners/partnership 6 times (7 if you count one instance where Flint is used as synecdoche for the pirates as a group), and there are two instances of partner/partners being used when discussing another person or group joining the alliance (Jack in the first case, and Julius and his men in the second), for a total of 9 times that some form of the alliance is discussed using partners/partnership

Other than Flint, the only person who is ever referred to as Silver's partner is Max

Eleanor says partner (or some variation) more than any other character, for a total of 14 times. Runners up are Max (12) and Vane (9)

4 out of the 9 times Vane uses partner/partnership, he's talking about a partnership between Eleanor and someone, though that someone is not always him. Of the remaining 5 instances, two are in reference to his partnership with Teach and two involve Jack in some way (one with the two of them and Flint, and one in the context of Jack joining the pirate/slave alliance)

Max never uses the word partner to describe any relationships that she is not directly a part of, unless you count one instance of speaking broadly about her own experiences in a way that also includes Eleanor's (when she says the chair "demands you win partners" to get it)

Flint doesn't say any form of the word partner until 3x05, though before that point there are other people who call him their partner or apply the term to relationships he has

Thomas says "partner" a total of 3 times, two referring directly to Flint and one speaking generally but in a conversation about a partnership between him and Flint. Miranda says "partners" twice, both times about herself and Flint

"Partner" is used as a verb exactly once, by Madi

Madi, Mr. Scott, and the Maroon Queen each only say partner(s) once (they're not the only characters who only say it once, but i did think the family pattern was neat)

[whumpinggrounds]

Overused Disability Tropes

Woohoo here we go. I expect this one to be a bit more controversial because I am using specific media as examples. I would really prefer if, when critiquing this post, you avoid defending specific media, and focus instead on what’s actually being said/represented about disabled communities. If you feel I’ve done a really grave injustice, you can come into my askbox/DMs/replies to talk to me about it, but I might not answer.

One more time: I am not interested in getting into a debate about whether something is a good show/movie/book/whatever. I’m not telling you it’s bad, or that you shouldn’t enjoy it! People can like whatever they want; I am only here to critique messaging. Do not yell at me about this.

Newest caveat aside, let’s get into it!

Inspiration Porn

Without a doubt, our biggest category! Term coined in 2012 by badass activist Stella Young, but the trope has been around for literal centuries. There are a few different kinds that I will talk about.

Disabled character/person is automatically noble/good because of their disability. A very early example would be A Christmas Carol’s Tiny Tim, or, arguably, Quasimodo from The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Real life examples include the Jerry Lewis MDA telethon, or children’s hospital ads that exploit sad-eyed kids with visible illness or disability.

Having a disability does not automatically make you a kind/angelic/noble person. This many not seem harmful, and may even seem positive, but in reality, it is condescending, inaccurate, and sets bizarre standards for how disabled people should behave.

This portrayal is often intended to elicit pity from abled audiences, which is also problematic.

In these portrayals, disability is not something to be proud of or identify with, only something to be suffered through.

Disabled character person does something relatively mundane and we all need to celebrate that. This is less common in writing, but happens in the real world when people do things like post pictures of disabled people at the gym captioned “What’s your excuse?”

This is condescending, and implies that anything disabled people are capable of, abled people are automatically capable of.

Makes it seem like it’s an incredible feat for a disabled person to accomplish tasks.

Uses people’s actual lives and actual disabilities as a reminder of “how good abled life is.”

The “Supercrip” stereotype is a specific kind of inspiration porn in which disabled people are shown to be capable of amazing things, “in spite of” their disability.

The Paralympics have been criticized for this, with people saying that advertisements and understandings of the Paralympics frame the athletes as inspiring not because they are talented or accomplished, but because their talents and accomplishments are seen as “so unlikely.”

Other examples include the way we discuss famous figures like Stephen Hawking, Alan Turing, or even Beethoven. Movies like The Theory of Everything and The Imitation Game frame the subjects’ diagnoses, whether actual or posited, as limitations that they had to miraculously break through in order to accomplish what they did. Discussions of Beethoven’s deafness focus on how incredible it was that he was able to overcome it and be a musician despite what is framed as a tragic acquisition of deafness.

The pity/heroism trap is a concise way of defining inspiration porn. If the media you’re creating or consuming inspires these emotions, and only these emotions, around disability, that is a representation that is centered on the feelings and perceptions of abled people. It’s reductive, it’s ableist, and it’s massively overdone.

Disabled Villains

To be clear, disabled people can and should be villains in fiction. The problem comes when disabled people are either objects of pity/saintly heroes, or villains, and there is no complexity to those representations. When there is so little disabled rep out there (less than 3.5% of characters in current media), having a disabled villain contributes to the othering of disability, as well as the idea that disability can make someone evil. There are also a few circumstances in which particular disabilities are used to represent evil, and I’ll talk about how that’s problematic. 

Mentally ill villains are colossally overdone, particularly given that mentally ill people are more likely to be the victims of violence than perpetrators of it.  This is true of all mental illness, including “””scary””” things like personality disorders or disorders on the schizoaffective spectrum. Mental illness is stigmatized enough without media framing mentally ill people as inherently bad or more suspectible to evil. This prejudice is known as sanism.

Explicit fictional examples of this include the Joker, or Kevin Wendell Crumb in Split.

People can also be coded as mentally ill without it being explicitly stated, and that’s also problematic and sanist. In the Marvel movie Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness, Wanda’s appearance and behavior are coded as mentally ill. This is used to make her “creepy.” Horror movies do this a lot - mental illness does not render someone creepy, and should not be used as a tool in this way.

Visible disability or difference to indicate evil is another common, incredibly offensive, and way overdone trope. This is mostly commonly done through facial difference, and the examples are endless. These portrayals equate disability or disfigurement with ugliness, and that ugliness with evil. It renders the disabled villain in question an outcast, undesirable, and uses their disability or difference to dehumanize these characters and separate them from others. This is incredibly prevalent and incredibly painful for people with visible disability or facial difference.

An example of visible disability indicating evil is Darth Vader’s prosthetics and vastly changed physical appearance that happen exactly in time with his switch to the dark side. In contrast, when Luke needs a prosthetic, it is lifelike and does not visually separate him from the rest of humanity/the light.

Dr. Who’s John Lumic is another example of the “Evil Cripple” trope.

Examples of facial difference indicating evil range from just about every James Bond movie, to Scar in the Lion King, Dr. Isabel Maru in Wonder Woman, Taskmaster in Black Widow, Captain Hook in Peter Pan, and even Doofenschmirtz-2 in Phineas and Ferb the Movie. Just because some of the portrayals are silly (looking at you, Phineas and Ferb) doesn’t make the coding of facially scarred villains any less hurtful.  

A slightly different, but related phenomenon I’ll include here is the idea of the disability con. This is when a character fakes a disability for personal gain. This represents disabled people as potential fakers, and advances the idea that disabled people get special privileges that abled people can and should co-opt for their own reasons. 

In The Usual Suspects, criminal mastermind Verbal Clint fakes disability to avoid suspicion and take advantage of others. In Arrested Development, a lawyer fakes blindness in order to gain the sympathy and pity of the jury.

In much more complex examples such as Sharp Objects, a mother with Munchausen by proxy fakes her daughter’s illness in order to receive attention and pity. Portrayals like this make Munchausen or MBP seem more common than it is, and introduce the idea that parents may be lying or coaching their children to lie about necessary medical treatment.

Disability as Morality

Sometimes, the disabled character themselves is a moral lesson, like Auggie in Wonder. Sheerly through existing, Auggie “teaches” his classmates about kindness, the evils of bullying, and not judging a book by its cover. This also fits well under inspiration porn. This is problematic, because the disabled character is defined in terms of how they advance the other characters’ morality and depth.

In the “Disabled for a Day” trope, an otherwise abled character experiences a temporary disability, learns a moral lesson, and is restored to full ability by the end of the episode/book/movie. Once again, disability is used as a plot device, rather than a complex experience, along with more permanent disability being rejected as impossible for heroes or main characters.

Examples include an episode of M*A*S*H where Hawkeye is temporarily blinded, an episode of Law and Order: SVU where Elliott Stabler is temporarily blinded, and an episode of Criminal Minds where Agent Hotchner experiences temporary hearing loss.

Real life examples include sensitivity trainings where participants are asked to wear a blindfold, headphones, or use a wheelchair for a given amount of time. This does not impart the lived experience of disability. It should not be used as a teaching tool. 

Disabled people as inherently pure. This is related to inspiration porn and disabled people as noble, but is different in that it is usually appears in combination with developmental, cognitive, or intellectual disabilities. These characters are framed as sweet, “simple,” and a reminder to other characters to be cheerful, happy, or grateful.

Examples include Forrest Gump, Rain Man, I Am Sam, and What’s Eating Gilbert Grape.

No matter what the stereotypes of a given diagnosis are (yes, I’m thinking of the automatic cheerfulness associated with Down Syndrome), disabled people have personalities. They are capable of being sad, angry, sarcastic, irritable, annoying - any number of things beyond good/sweet/pure. It is reductive to act otherwise.

Disability as Surreal

Less common than some of the others, but still worth thinking about!

Disabled characters are framed as mystical, magical, or other than human, a condition that is either created by or indicated through their disability status. This is especially common with little people.

“Disability superpower” is when a character compensates for, or is uniquely able to have a superpower because of, their disability. Common tropes include the Blind Seer, Blind Weapon Master, Genius Cripple and Super Wheel Chair.

Examples include Pam from Supernatural, Charles Xavier from X-Men, or the grandpa in Spy Kids.

Disability as Undesirable

Last and least favorite category here. Let’s go.

Disabled people as asexual or not sexually desirable. Disabled people can be asexual, obviously. When every portrayal is asexual, that’s a big problem. It frames disabled people as sexually undesirable or implies that it is impossible for people with disabilities to have rewarding, mutually satisfying sexual relationships.

Examples include The Fault in Our Stars or Artie in Glee.

Abandoned due to disability. Hate this trope. Often equates disability with weakness. Don’t want to talk about it. It’s all right there in the title. Don’t do it.

Examples: Quasimodo in Hunchback of Notre Dame, several kittens in the Warrior Cat series, several episodes of Law and Order: SVU, Bojack Horseman, and Vikings.

Discussed in 300 and Wolf of Wall Street.

Ancient cultures and animal nature are often cited as reasoning for this trope/practice. This is not founded in fact. Many ancient civilizations, including Sparta, cared for disabled people. Many animals care for disabled young. These examples should not be used to justify modern human society.

Disabled characters are ostracized for disability. Whether they act “““normal”““ or odd, characters with visible or merely detectable disabilities are treated differently.

Examples include pretty much every piece of media I’ve said so far. This is particularly prevalent for people with visible physical disabilities or neurodivergence. Also particularly prevalent for characters with albinism.

This is not necessarily an inaccurate portrayal - disabled people face a lot of discrimination and ableism. It is, however, very, very common.

Bury your disabled. What it says on the label.

Examples: Animorphs, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, American Horror Story, Criminal Minds, Dr. Who, Star Trek, The Wire.

Mercy killing is a subtrope of the above but disgusting enough that it deserves its own aside. I may make a separate post about this at some point because this post is kind of exhausting and depressing me.

Examples: Me Before You, Killing Eve, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Of Mice and Men, and Million Dollar Baby.

Disability-negating superpowers imply that disability is undesirable by solving it supernaturally instead of actually portraying it, and giving their character powers instead.

Examples include (arguably) Toph from Avatar: the Last Airbender, Captain America: The First Avenger, The Legend of Korra, Dr. Strange, and Daredevil.

Overcoming disability portrays disability as a hindrance and something that can be defeated through technology and/or willpower.

Fictional examples include WALL-E, Kill Bill, The Goonies, The Dark Knight Trilogy, Heidi, The Secret Garden, The Inheritance Cycle, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D, The Big Bang Theory, Dr. Strangelove, Sherlock, The Witcher.

Real life examples include videos of wheelchair users standing from their chair to walk down the aisle at a wedding, or d/Deaf children “hearing” for the first time through cochlear implants.

What Does This Mean for Your Writing?

First of all, congratulations for making it this far!

Now, as I have said again and again, I’m not going to tell you what to write. I’ll ask some questions to hopefully help guide your process.

What tropes might you be playing into when writing disabled characters? Why do you find these tropes compelling, or worth writing about? How prevalent are these tropes? How harmful are they? What messages do they send to actual disabled people?

Just because they are common tropes does not mean they are universally awful. Cool fantasy or futuristic workarounds are not necessarily bad rep. Showing the ugly realities of ableism is not necessarily bad rep. It’s just a very, very common representation of disability, and it’s worth thinking about why it’s so common, and why you’re writing it.

As always, conduct your own research, know your own characters and story, and make your own decisions. If you have questions, concerns, or comments, please hit me up! Add your own information! This is not monolithic whatsoever.

Happy writing!

[violetasteracademic]

Contributing some of the thoughts I've had to the active conversation about the world building laws of mating bonds in SJM's universe!

Here is the very first on page introduction of the *highly* discussed term mate in Sarah J. Maas's world. I think it's quite important to consider both A. The fact that Wyrd, Urd, and The Mother, the creator of Fate and all creation, is the same entity under different names in the three different worlds and B. Prythian is arguably the most popular/read/analyzed series of SJM, but functions as the outlier/rule-breaker when it comes to mates. The chronological development is worth noting:

Our first ever mates in the multiverse are Emrys and Malaki. They are a same sex couple! Mated and husbands. Right off the bat, mates are described as an unbreakable bond, deeper than marriage, that lasted beyond death. Erilea and the world in Throne of Glass, in addition to their gods, is governed by and founded by Wyrd, which is not a word made up by SJM, but the Anglo-Saxon concept of fate:

In Crescent City, we discover a few things. One, that the Fae definition for mates is exactly the same as it is in Throne of Glass. A bond deeper than marriage. However, we also know that the shifters are in fact also the Fae originating from Erilea, and that their mates are their true lovers pre-destined by Urd. Then there are the breeding mates that the Asteri force in the archangels- akin to forcing animals to breed in a zoo.

And of course, the fact that Urd is in fact Wyrd. Who is, in fact, The Mother.

Urd, Wyrd, and the Mother. Fate. Destiny. Not a goddess, but a force that governed worlds. A cauldron of life, brimming with the language of creation.

It is not the Mother's intention to breed. It is the Mother's intention to guide ones fate and destiny. To match true, soul bonded lovers in a connection that lives beyond death. Procreation does not play a role, and there is no particular drive for such things in Throne of Glass or Crescent City. M/M mates set the stage. Crescent City deals with fertility, sterilization, and denounces any living soul being valued or paired for the goal of breeding.

Starfall. Will-o-the-wisps. Souls that stay connected as they journey from one life, one world, to the next.

And then we get to Prythian, where the pattern breaks. And suddenly, mating bonds are not soul bonded pairs. They are not ones true lover. They are, in fact, more in line with what the Asteri have created: breeding animals in a zoo. People who do not love each other are forced to be together. Poor pairs that are not a match on a soul level. A threat of violence if a woman rejects their mate. And even that term, rejection, is one only brought up in Prythian. It brings my attention to another interesting passage in HoFaS:

Consent. Yes, this is talking about consent for the tithe and the giving of power. However, I think it's incredibly noteworthy that the Asteri have a goal of getting around the tricky issue of consent to enact their goals. They have found a way around that on Midgard.

They also are able to force "mates" amongst the archangels without their consent.

How interesting that in Prythian, the one world where the Cauldron lives, the language of creation, the object of the Mother, Urd, Wyrd, and fate has been tampered with by the Asteri, the zoo animal breeding masters, consent is also required for a mating bond.

This does not exist on the other worlds. I believe by the time the Asteri reached Midgard, they figured out a way to circumvent consent not only for taking power, but also, the creation of the Archangels who are brainwashed from a young age to serve the Asteri and give up their consent.

I know a lot of people don't like to have this conversation, because it's a threat to the existing mates on Prythian. Obviously I'm an Elriel, so I don't think that's true. As I believe myself and many others have mentioned before, Elain's mating bond also breaks pattern. She is immediately snapped with her mate the second they lock eyes. This is akin to Rhysand's mother and father, who also had an immediate snap of their mating bond upon first locking eyes.

Rhysand's parents bred the most powerful High Lord in all of Prythian's history. So powerful, that other High Lord's are essentially humans to him.

Nessian and Feysand took time. The female did not experience the bond before she wanted to. They fell in love before accepting the bond. Their souls bonded before their acceptance, and it was a slow, consensual journey into love. This is akin to the other true mates. Ones true lover. A soul matched pair.

These are the genuine written words to differentiate the different kinds of mating bonds. There are different kinds of bonds.

Both the Asteri and the Mother's will live on in the Cauldron. Yes, the mating bonds are affected. But the Mother is not gone from Prythian. She was not erased from the Cauldron. She is governess of worlds. Creatures like Maeve and the Asteri actively interfere with bonds to interfere with the course of fate. These are the stories on the table.

It is wonderful and fascinating and endlessly exciting!

*ps I am still largely on my theory, inbox ask, and SJM scrolling break. I've been mostly living in the writing, poetry, and Agatha All Along tags. But I became violently ill in the middle of the day, then saw there were some great discussions about the mating bonds and Cauldron corrupted theories (I read @wingedblooms and @psychologynerd !) and I've been sitting on my little cluster of thoughts for this forever, so I am in bed doing this 🤣 enjoy! Apologies if I've repeated anything that is already largely out there!

Stay kind out there fam. Please promote positivity in the reblog tags should you feel moved to share!

[krems-chair]

I'm curious, and would love to hear people's thoughts on this.

Did anyone play a human? And did the people playing humans feel overall more satisfied with the game?

Amongst people critical of Veilguard, I guess I'm trying to pinpoint how much of the frustration ties in to what race choice you make.

I know for a fact based on posts I've seen that veteran fans who played as elves had a lot of valid critiques about the lack of a dalish/city elf split as well as a seeming lack of ability to confront Solas in any meaningful way about the multitude of actions he took that severely messed up many lives (God, he is a direct cause via his creation of the lyrium dagger in severing the titans from their dreams, therefore extinguishing an entire people).

But at least there are SOME dialogue choices for elves. The dwarves themselves get less of a chance to address the crimes committed against them than the elves do. And even Harding, whose story is rooted in anger over what happened, always ends up talking to Rook about believing in second chances even if you tell her to focus on her anger. I made a post earlier in my return to tumblr saying that Solas haters deserved better, especially after it was promised that this game would be for everyone and cover the ways in which an Inquisitor's relationship with him could be (generalizing here) good or bad.

Not only did the endings not deliver on that promise, arguably the group that has the biggest reason to at the very least chew him out and get out some of that justified anger at the titans having their dreams stolen and at the very most take him out for it if that fits with their ideal story is denied the chance.

And what about that cool as hell dwarven map we never return to?? I can't be the only one excited to go back who saved the exploration for later only to realize that was it.

And of course, the poor Qunari players, who probably thought "at last! A chance to explore and refine the lore we've gotten so far that absolutely needs to be fixe...oh. look. Face-covering seldom-speaking spawnable villains. Again. Great, a binary choice for Taash in which the Qun option is clearly shaded as more harmful to them than the alternative. Groundbreaking."

I haven't played as a human yet, and I know that race choice aside there's an abundance of issues to work through, but I'm so curious about how people who played a human felt/if it was easier to ignore some of what we lost or didn't get and enjoy the things that were done less poorly.

I'm fueled entirely by curiosity at this point and it's overriding my exhaustion as I prepare to go to sleep long enough to post this, so hopefully I don't look back tomorrow morning and go "wtf was I saying."

TLDR: full deep dives into the critiques of each of the three non-human Rooks are very worth doing and I've seen some great ones, but in a more general sense I'm curious how the human Rooks felt navigating the game.

(This is also, just in case it comes across that way, me trying to yuck anyone's yum. If you liked the game, I am happy for you! But if you didn't like it, I'm interested in discussing why not :) )

[moonyflesh]

MARK HOFFMAN character analysis — (in the eyes of someone who’s rewatching the entire franchise).

— [no timestamps] • SPOILERS !

— (i have a ‘PETER STRAHM character analysis’ posted for those that keep asking!!!)

Mark Hoffman's character is one that is arguably rather divisive and hard to pin down, and I wanted to provide my thoughts on it as I think it may expose some ideas that haven't been discussed before. My thoughts are also from the perspective of looking back, so this is perhaps wrong and not how the directors or writers intended it, but, just the way I interpret the films.

I think the best way to describe Hoffman is as a murky/dirty body of water. This is because he is putting on an exterior face the majority of the time we see him, so we have to be careful how we read him. I think in the timeline, when we first see him around the timeframe John kidnaps him, he is a moral, decent man then. Clearly heavily effected by the death of his sister, and his killing of Seth Baxter, but still noticably removed from the Hoffminator we see in Saw VII.

But at this point lore wise, the first major character defining trait we observe from him is he believes in dispensing justice - just not the same as John, or the law. Seth Baxter for example, or in Saw IV when Hoffman covers for Rigg when Rigg punched Rex, even though Rigg was in the wrong. Hoffman saw Rex as deserving, and viewed what Rigg did as justice served, so he stepped outside the conventional methods of law and took his own actions for what he felt was right.

I don't think Hoffman ever completely bought into John's framework and moral philosophy when it came to rehabilitating suspects. In the flashbacks of John and Hoffman working together in Saw V, Hoffman seems uneasy about all of it, and reluctant. By the time of Saw III lorewise, and based off the body language and the way Costas plays him, (Saw V flashback of III) I feel it is very safe to say Hoffman was always planning to have an exit out of working with John. If Saw V established anything about his character, it's that he is a cold, quiet, calculating man who is also thinking one step ahead.

He is also seen to be critical of others, when he views them as not appreciating life. Such as the "all he had to do" line in Saw III, and him criticizing Rigg in the beginning of Saw IV for questioning his choice of being a cop. This may be an aspect picked up from John, it may be Hoffman's own judgmental side coming out. However, I think there is another very important aspect of Hoffman's character that is pivotal to understanding him, and why he acts the way he does: the sociopathy.

I don't believe this to be a natural part of his character, I think the more brutal elements were simply added as an attempt to add depth to him because his character was arguably all over the place with no real clear motivation. Which, personally I really like. It makes reading into him much more interesting. But, lorewise, I think it is safe to say the killing of Seth Baxter induced this sociopathy like a seed into Hoffman, and taking part in Jigsaw's schemes allowed the seed to grow.

Hoffman is a hard to read character, but the way I see it, he has a clear moral descent, because lorewise, the first time we see him and the last are two opposite moral extremes. Logically speaking, there has to be a descent. This descent, because of the writing, and Costas' acting, is complex to read. But 100% there. I believe it happens in the early days of working with John, but you could make an effective arguement for another specific time.

Regardless, in Saw VI, we observe elements of sociopathy and clear sadism influence his actions.

At this point, the morals and justification attempts Hoffman may have had when working with John earlier are quickly evaporating - Hoffman is clearly primarily acting out of self interest. This is that seed of sociopathy growing, and manifesting in cruel ways, such as listening to the audio of The Pound of Flesh Trap or grinning while pouring extra gasoline onto Erickson. Hoffman has always been more concerned with punishing wrong-doers than rehabilitating them as also seen when he carelessly dumps Timothy Young on the ground. It seems in Saw VI they really wanted to highlight this sadism of Hoffman's, which likely took time to manifest in his character.

As for Saw VII, I'd say it's clear Hoffman clearly has lost any trace of morals he once had. Saw VII was full of great ideas with mixed exectution, and one aspect that really suffered was the strategical intelligence that Hoffman previously displayed - being one step ahead. It was inconsistent in VII, from outsmarting Gibson with the machine gun but sending in dvds??? It could be understood as Hoffman's cockyness, and narcissism. But, Saw VII is a bizzare case to put it lightly, so I won't go too harsh on it. We just have to enjoy it for what it is.

I don't know if I'd describe him as a vigilante the same way as John. I think some may struggle with understanding his motivations because of how murky/neutral Costas plays him. (Which I personally enjoy). While I think there's a effective discussion to be had about how the shift towards vigilante killers in Saw as well as misunderstanding John Kramer's character hurts the later films, I do genuinely enjoy Hoffman's character and the depth it has.

Here’s basically a summary of why I fell in love with Hoffman’s character:

1.) There’s this hard to pinpoint, unclear-descent in morality through his behavior as the movies go on, making him so much more mysterious than Kramer- he doesn’t have nearly as much a reason as John to continue with the role of ‘Jigsaw’.

2.) He’s just a man seeking to dispense justice the way he sees fit— the definition of a ‘vigilante’.

3.) There’s a budding sadism/sociopathy that continues to grow the more he kills- making him less like John and more like Amanda (with the sole purpose of revenge instead of giving someone a second chance; opposite Kramer’s motive).

4.) There’s also an underlying narcissism in him that I think not only I, but a lot of the fandom seems to relate to (whether willingly or not).