#a bad relationship will force a parent to make decisions to protect their child.

[eponastory]

I know you most likely already realized this, but I was just thinking about Aang as a father in LOK, and realized something. If Katara ended up with Zuko and eventually had children together, Zuko would likely end up being a better father than Aang. Aang never even met his parents, and only had instructors as parental figures. They're like parents but mostly just in the way that a school teacher would be. But Zuko understands what good parents and what bad parents look like because he knows what his own parents are like. His memories of Ursa and Iroh would be his guide to what you SHOULD do for a child, and Ozai is an example of what you should NOT do. Zuko doesn't have the pressure of repopulating firebenders because firebenders aren't virtually extinct, so there wouldn't be as much (if any) pressure to pay unfairly extra attention to one child over the other. Zuko knows what it's like to be neglected by a parent that's supposed to love because of something you can't control. Aang clearly doesn't, hence why he neglected Bumi and Kya II in the first place. Zuko also has experience with Azula, and would know to recognize any bad signs of sibling jealousy and/or hatred, and put an end to it because he knows what bad sibling dynamics look like.

I feel like he would also be a better husband to Katara. He's not as naive as Aang when it comes to marriage; Zuko has the experience of growing up with two married parents, and would know what not to do. Katara would relax better because the distribution over who watches the kids would be more fair, as Zuko would give them ALL attention. While Aang made Katara jealous from always being around the Air Acolytes (in the comics), I feel like Zuko would not give polite attention to women who are rude to Katara/flirting with him because in the show, Zuko knows exactly how hurtful it feels for a romantic partner to flirt with/give polite attention to people who are obviously pursuers. Imagine being in an alternate dimension where Zutara was the main endgame couple, and we get to see their parental dynamics in LoK. There would probably be a flashback of Katara getting worked up about one of their children, and Zuko would ease her into calming down because he sees a solution that she didn't.

Aang's issues are more than he doesn't know. He is selfish by nature. Selfish parents aren't good parents. I know this for a fact. It's an endless cycle of 'It's your fault' or 'what about how I feel' every time you try to say something. It's not fun, and it's damaging. I can totally see Aang using this behavior as a way to get what he wants. As far as him being naive... yes. He is very naive and doesn't take anything seriously.

Like the war, for instance. He was only there for the last year of it. He wasn't born into the war like Zuko, Katara, Sokka, Toph, and Suki. They aren't naive. They know what war is like. Toph is the same age as Aang, and she is much more mature than he is. He's got this idea that killing anyone is bad, but he is responsible for a lot of deaths. Honestly, he has a kill count from the Fire Nation attack on the NWT, and a lot of people overlook that for some reason. Actually, the show overlooks it because Aang is the Hero, and it's okay if he killed people. So, when all is said and done, all of the things that he does afterward is overlooked too. It's a huge writing flaw with the show. So how does this translate to him as a parent?

It makes him a hypocrite.

Plain and simple.

He's so focused on reviving the Air Nomads that he has little knowledge on what they actually believed. What we are given is a few Taoist, Hindu, and Buddhist proverbs to go off of. Then, it's completely disregarded (disrespected as well) for 'Love'. This 'Love' is actually deep infatuation fueled by jealousy and possessive behavior. Which is actually frowned upon by the three religions mentioned above. It is a 'poison' to the spirit. And disconnects you from being enlightened (I think that is what the proverbs/scriptures are eluding too, if I'm wrong, please do not hesitate to explain, I'm super interested in cultures and eastern religions) or granted a place in Heaven (or their version of it). Letting go of all earthly possessions is common place in most religions. Aang does not do this. But I digress.

So, while there is the Nature vs Nurture aspect of parenting... where Katara does most of the Nurturing because that is how her character is written post-war and LoK. Notice how is said Written. Written by two misogynistic men who stripped her of a lot of her characteristics from the original run of the show. This is the problem. And it's the same with Aang. I can't take him seriously because he doesn't take any of it seriously. Especially with his children. He's not a serious character. He acts like he's serious, but he never really left the 12 year old boy behind to mature. Probably because in his fictional relationship with Katara, she enables him to keep doing what he always does. Which is to not grow. Relationships grow sour when the two people in them do not grow. It's not really about who grew up with parents at that point because it's the current parents that are the ones that should be to blame.

Now on to Headcanon space...

Zutara is a Headcanon ship. Did it almost happen? Oh yes I believe it did because the writing supports it heavily and Bryke's actions post show also scream 'lairs'. Sorry, but I have a pretty good Bullshit metor and Bryke set it off big time by their immature behavior.

But I digress.

Zuko grew up with a Narcissistic Sociopath as a Father and a Mother who was caught in the middle of a choice she was essentially forced to make. Ursa was also forced to forget her own parents never existed after she married Ozai. This is all canon, by the way. Her life before her marriage was great, but then it was taken away so she had nothing left but her morals and beliefs. However, while she loved both of her children, her influence on Zuko is essentially what made him who he is. Ursa didn't get to influence Azula like she did Zuko. Why? Because of Ozai.

Ozai pit his children against each other. This was apparently a Fire Nation Royal Family tradition because it sounds like Azulon did this with Iroh and Ozai as well. This kind of parenting style is abusive to its core. What Ozai did to Zuko isn't neglect... it's straightforward abuse and control. How do you make a child do what you want? You hurt them, or you take something away from them. Ozai both hurt Zuko and took away his home by banishing him. If Zuko wants to go back home, he has to find and capture the Avatar. It's that simple, but at the same time, it's also near impossible.

Flash forward to Canon Zuko and we see he has one child and he is a very loving father. Actually, he's the best father in the show. His experiences with growing up as the not so favorite child has made his choice to have one child easy. Probably because he and his spouse had a less than perfect relationship. This also may have influenced him to be protective of Izumi (as we can see he's still protective over her even at 90 years old) because of the loveless relationship his parents had. It was enough to damage him deeply when it came to relationships. This is likely also why he had trouble with Mai as well.

Headcanon space now...

Zuko loving Katara is what makes the difference here. Love is giving your partner the freedom to make their own choices and support them. As long as there is good communication, trust, and honesty. Something Maiko does not have, by the way. So it stands to reason that even with Nature Vs Nurture in the way of parenting, both win here. I'll tell you why Zuko's relationship with his parents here have no effect on why he would choose to have more children with Katara.

Because if written well, it's a very good relationship between them. We already know they work well as a team. The show gives us this. We know that Zuko absolutely cares about Katara. The show also gives us that. We also know they become lifelong friends. So why do they make great parents?

Because they rely on each other.

It has nothing to do with how they were raised individually, but everything to do with how they support each other narritively. They trust each other to make good decisions together. They rely on being honest with each other. They also communicate with each other. This by itself is the building blocks for a healthy and stable relationship. With that in mind, parenting is easier. There is no need to be afraid of becoming a bad parent because they hold each other accountable. It's a deep relationship. Having multiple children is easier because it is a loving relationship. There's no conflict besides the silly little arguments over simple things that happen all the time. It's just an overall healthy dynamic.

And that is what appeals to Zutarians.

While it was almost canon, I'm glad it isn't because Bryke would definitely not get it right. They tried to make Korra and Mako happen out of spite because they believe Zutara is toxic. It's not. Their children would turn out absolutely fine because Zuko would not change a thing about Katara. It's in the show. He doesn't try to change her because that's not his job. His job in TSR is to let her find closure. He offers it to her because he cares about her. Bottom line.

Anyway, I probably forgot what you said at this point because I just tend to go on and on, but I tried my best to stay on topic... ADHD is both a blessing and a curse.

[star-anise]

The thing about "parents' rights" and "protect the children [from hearing that other ways of life than ours are possible and okay]" is that it is literally, in the purest sense of the word, patriarchy.

The word literally means "rule by the fathers". We're generally used to hearing it describe how adult women can be dominated by adult men. However, that's not where patriarchy ends; feminists have been less eager to address how within that system, women can exercise power and domination of their own through the traditional gender roles of motherhood. Their maternal rights to power and dominance may have traditionally been lesser than paternal ones, but they were never less than their minor children's. Even single-mother or female-only families can be, in this sense, patriarchal.

Patriarchal families are a complex system that grants parents complete legal and practical control over nearly every aspect of their children's lives. The patriarchal family controls where the child lives, who takes care of them, what rules they have to follow, how they are educated, who they associate with, what healthcare they receive, what religion they practice, and whether they can work or control any money they earn or that is given to or for them.

Normally discussions of patriarchy are a lot more abstract. But right now it's very concrete and real: we are fighting to limit the family's control over children on issues where we can observe that families sometimes tend to make decisions that are bad for the children's welfare or that disrespect their human rights.

Whether a minor child can get an abortion. Whether they can receive gender-affirming care. Whether it's okay to lie or coerce your child to ensure they follow your religion. Whether they deserve to be educated about factual histories or scientific theories that are necessary to understanding the world around them. Whether they deserve to learn accurate, age-appropriate information about consent, setting boundaries, how their bodies and the bodies of other people work, what a normal range of gender and sexual identities look like, what healthy or unhealthy relationships look like, and what sex is, how it works, what its positives and negatives are, and how they might navigate the world, whether or not they ever want to have it.

Hell, on some levels we're still arguing about whether it's okay to hit your kids, or whether children have the right, similar to the rights adults have, not to be assaulted or abused.

Because there are a LOT of people who say: No. Parents should have 100% control over any or all of those issues. If the parent says no, the child is not allowed to do or have any of those things, and nobody else should be allowed to interfere and provide them to the child without their parents' consent.

Pointing this out often results in parents saying, "Oh, so you want just ANYONE to be able to go up and talk sex with kids? You want kids to be able to decide to jump off cliffs with nobody stopping them???" As though parents are the single protective force in the universe, the only thing standing between their child and the ravages of absolute chaos.

On the contrary: most of the time the argument is for children to receive care and guidance from adults who are monitored to ensure they treat children in safe and appropriate ways, who have spent many years studying the best and most rigorously tested of our collective understanding of how to prepare children for happy, healthy lives.

And we are arguing against people who believe that the only important qualification needed to refuse children that kind of care is to be ranked above them in their family hierarchy.

In conclusion...

Fuck the patriarchy. Children have human rights too.

[halyasgirl]

Rayllum's problems are Moonshadow problems

(and Runaan needs to help fix them)

Callum and Rayla have officially reconciled as of season 6, and while many were happy, some still feel that Rayla hasn't properly earned Callum's forgiveness as she's never directly apologized for abandoning him. Personally, I don’t mind that Rayla hasn’t apologized yet. I think it makes sense that she still doesn’t quite understand how harmful it was, because her “leaving to keep a loved one safe” was perfectly consistent with the values she was raised with. Specifically, the values Runaan raised her with, and he's been Rayla's primary role model throughout her life.

Rayla putting her body between an innocent child and someone trying to kill them and refusing to back down no matter the odds? Runaan.

Unhesitatingly going to her almost-certain death in the name of duty? Runaan.

Leaving her loved ones on dubious intel to stalk someone across the world like a vengeful persistence predator? Runaan again.

Rayla does know her leaving hurt Callum, but however bad she feels about leaving, she still thinks she's done the right thing, because Callum's safe. This attitude of leaving to keep others safe while striking out alone to deal with challenges is held up as an expression of selfless sacrifice in Moonshadow culture, and we see it play out for Rayla in her own family. Her parents leave her to protect the future of Xadia in the Dragonguard. Runaan leaves Ethari for his work as an assassin. Bluntly put, Bloodmoon Huntress is a story of Rayla being conditioned with these values, however loving her family is.

Rayla struggles with her resentment and feelings of abandonment when her parents leave, but starts to come around after seeing how Runaan and Ethari (happily married and deeply in love) rationalize this in their relationship. Rayla questions how Runaan could leave Ethari to do the things he does, how Ethari could accept it, and is told that bad things can be justified if you do them for the right reasons. This is clearest to her when Runaan and Ethari discuss this together, unknowingly overheard by Rayla.

Rayla emulates Runaan in her relationship with Callum, but Ethari understands why Runaan does the things he does, because he shares the same (questionable) cultural values, where Callum does not.*

I think the catch will be the entire moonfam grappling with where these values led them. Runaan has been described as the most Moonshadow of the Moonshadow elves, his particular brand of selfless ruthlessness is valued there. But he spent two years in a hell of his own making because he tried and failed to uphold Moonshadow society's impossible values. Was Runaan trekking across country to murder a 10 year old really doing anything to keep his people safe? Was it worth tearing their family apart?

I think seeing her family have to deal with the fallout of their actions may be the breaking point forcing Rayla to reevaluate her treatment of Callum. How do they move forward from this?

*This understanding is also built on the communication and trust Ethari and Runaan have built in their marriage, where Rayla broke her promise, lied to, and abandoned Callum. In Bloodmoon Huntress, Runaan trusts Ethari's judgement and respects his decision when he follows him into a dangerous situation, and they plan and work together to solve the problem. We know from "Ghost" they disagreed on Runaan's last mission and Rayla's role in it, but they discussed and came to an agreement, for better or worse. Runaan doesn't dismiss him and he certainly didn't lie and go behind his back. Rayla's dishonesty is definitely not something she gets from Moonshadow values or Runaan, but before we drag Rayla too much for this, recall that Runaan keeping his promises led him to try and murder a child, and Rayla's lies are usually a misguided attempt to protect others.

[ellewod]

Explain to me how we went from Alicent standing in front of Aegon to protect him from possible dragon fire during his coronation, to oh okay you can kill him Rhanerya so I can be free. Make it make sense?!

i don’t know whether you’d prefer a short or elaborate answer, but i have really been thinking about this.

first impression after the episode and this is still my opinion to this day; character assassination.

they needed alicent to abandon her "rotten" sons, the true threats to rhaenyra’s claim. the writers liked the idea of alicent finally "freeing herself" of these burdens and the "mistakes" of her past — having children, her (justified) resentment towards rhaenyra, being ambitious and ruling in her husband’s stead, fighting for her children’s survival by forcing the crown on her firstborn’s head — in order to finally become the woman who is willing to sacrifice everything for her one true love (rhaenyra). essentially, it’s an insult to everything alicent stood for and it’s insane to me how anyone truly sees this as liberating and romantic. it makes no sense. not in terms of her character nor in terms of rhaenicent’s relationship, but i don’t want to dive deeper here. my opinion: a weakass writing choice to have yet another fanficionesque scene, like the sept one, that’s supposed to be a dramatic moment. whereas for me it’s the final nail in show!alicent’s coffin which is her character depth and development.

besides that, i read some other takes. here’s one i really hate, but i felt was also something the writers wanted the viewers to believe:

alicent "finally" chooses her daughter and granddaughter (girls) over her "rotten" sons. sorry, but no. she has four children. two of them are deeply troubled and have, partly thanks to her parenting, caused much harm. daeron has not. helaena has not. yet, she only "chooses" the daughter. doesn’t even call her granddaughter by name. this take infuriates me because as a parent you don’t get to "choose" which child is more deserving and which one you want to abandon. in the end, aemond tried to fight for their side. aegon has been wronged terribly, partly by alicent herself. daeron did nothing to deserve this "choice". her two sons may be perceived as "rotten", yet they are her sons! making it seem that she is liberating herself by finally abandoning two of her children, after causing them so much harm, and disregarding the fact that this decision is actually destroying everything she fought for in her life. just no. no.

here’s the last one which i don’t think the writers wanted us to believe since no woman has any real ambitions on that show BUT tom glynn-carney said something that might support this:

alicent was portrayed as a "bad" mother from day one (which i appreciate). it makes so much sense and it could’ve been amazing. the coronation scene was brilliant in this sense. while her shielding him with her own body could be interpreted as that deep down she truly loves aegon (which i preferred to think), it could also simply mean that she is ambitious and doesn’t want her son, the rightful heir, to die. alicent knows aegon is easily manipulated (by her) — as opposed to aemond, who’d be next in line. we see her manipulating aegon throughout the show, and she likes the idea of still being in control. she made decisions in her sickly husband’s stead. she wants to keep this position and since she knows her son "has no taste for duty" him becoming king allows her to keep on making decisions. she immediately suggests to rule in aegon’s stead when he is bedridden. but when she realizes that her side will most likely lose the war, she decides to "sacrifice" him to be "free" (save her own ass).

tom said this:

“I think the reason that she hasn’t sold him out sooner is there’s a lot for her in the Red Keep. She’s comfortable, she’s looked after, she’s fed. She’s probably seen that her time there is up and she’s no longer of use, especially as Aemond’s banished her from the Small Council. She knows what’s good for her. She’s also a hyper-intelligent woman and she’s not going to put herself in a position where she’s worse off.”

it’s cold but i actually prefer tom’s take over the idea that alicent selling out her crippled, burnt, broken son to the woman who demanded for her other son to be tortured, and who caused alicent’s grandson to be butchered, is part of her "liberation".

[atla-confessions]

On the victim blaming of Ursa debate.

If a woman is forced to have children and then raise those children she is a victim in that situation. She is a victim in the fact there is no proof she wanted to have Ozai's children.

No offense but Azula's stans consistently labeling criticism of Azula as misogynistic while having no empathy for difficulty and trauma Ursa was experiencing as a abused woman stolen from her family is frankly ridiculous. It is victim blaming when you hold a abuse victim to such a high standard of behavior. Most (if not all) of the things she did wrong would not have occurred without Ozai's abuse.

We see what kinda of parent she is without an abuser (and support instead) with Kiyi. And yes, she is (unsurprisingly) far better without Ozai.

Another issue is that a lot of her sins are extrapolations. For example, she 'viewed Azula as a monster' is not something she ever claims on screen. Azula says it. We don't see how she came to this conclusion. We only see Ursa discipline actual bad behavior. The one time we get to see where Azula is when Zuko is hanging out with Ursa is when we see her playing with Mai and Ty Lee. So bad faith: Ursa constantly favored Zuko and actively did things that made Azula think she saw her as a monster and actually did believe Azula was born a monster. Good faith: Ursa spent more time with Zuko because he didn't have friends, Ursa didn't like the same behavior Ozai cultivated and Ozai manipulated a wedge into their relationship when she responded negatively to these behaviors.

You see how the Ursa victim blaming occurs. They (anti Ursas (usually just Azula stans)) treat Azula's feeling of being unloved as only possibly the result of mistreatment from Ursa as opposed to giving any weight to the manipulative abuser. They look at the scene of Ozai saying he will abuse Zuko and it's her fault and think 'yeah, it is,' because she did something antagonistic to her abuser and he punished the child for it. This is arguably victim blaming.

This directs blame away from Ozai towards Ursa. VICTIM BLAMING! If Ozai hurts Zuko to punish Ursa. That is on Ozai. NOT URSA! Even if she did mess up. This is early on, how is she to know how bad Ozai will get?

And, criticism of Ursa isn't inherently victim blaming. She did make mistakes but so many 'ursa critical' or 'anti ursa' posts just end up victim blaming. From attacking her for things that we never have it confirmed she did to blaming her for things Ozai did. For 'failing' to protect them (like she had any power). Overall, yes. Ursa is heavily victim blamed by fandom.

(Also, I do not judge her for choosing to forget, she could not fight the fire nation, she would only suffer. It might not be the most noble decision but one selfish act (after years of trauma) doesn't make a woman worthy of so much derision.)

X

[iipeleng]

Why Free Will Doesn't Mean What You Think It Does

Many people believe that free will gives us unlimited freedom, but Scripture suggests otherwise: we’re given the freedom to choose between two distinct paths, not infinite options.

Free will, from a biblical standpoint, means choosing between God’s way and the enemy’s way—life or death (Deuteronomy 30:19), blessings or curses (Deuteronomy 11:26), commitment or lukewarm faith (Revelation 3:16). In God’s eyes, there’s no grey area, only two clear directions.

God calls us to live on purpose. Purpose isn’t just about existing; it’s about living with intention and direction according to God’s will.

“We are born looking like our parents, but we die looking like our decisions.”- Pastor Joshua McCauley

Each decision shapes our lives, and with the freedom God gives us, we decide if we follow His path or attempt to make our own way.

Purpose is the reason we exist , we all strive to figure out what our purpose is on this earth and how to fulfill it. all of this must mean something right? I was brought here for something right?

"So, what is my purpose?"

Well, it's not something we create on our own. A purposeful life is a gift from Jesus, one we can’t achieve just through behavior or goals. It’s a life given, not earned. Through Jesus, we receive grace, freeing us from sin’s power and aligning us with God’s purpose.

Proverbs 29:18 tells us, “Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; But happy is he who keeps the law” (NKJV).

In Hebrew, ḥāzôn or “revelation” here means prophetic vision or God’s guidance. Without it, life becomes chaotic, like a river spilling beyond its banks. True happiness (ashrei in Hebrew) is rooted in following God’s direction, bringing peace and purpose that go beyond surface-level happiness. Keeping (shamar in Hebrew) His law is about actively choosing and protecting our relationship with God’s Word. This dedication to God’s guidance brings a stability and joy that temporary pleasures can’t match.

“So Why Doesn’t God Stop Me from Messing Up?”

A common question: “If free will isn’t total freedom, why doesn’t God stop me from making bad choices?” God, like a loving parent, warns us but lets us experience the outcomes of our decisions. Think of it like a parent warning a child not to touch a hot stove; if the child ignores the warning, they’ll get burned. It’s a lesson in trust and obedience.

Psalm 81:11-12 explains it: “But My people would not listen to Me… so I gave them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices.” God respects our choices because forced obedience isn’t real love. He wants us to choose His path willingly, knowing that His guidance is meant to protect, not control.

In the end, God offers two paths: His way, leading to purpose and peace, or the enemy’s path, leading to chaos. True freedom isn’t the power to do whatever we want, but the wisdom to choose the way that brings lasting joy and fulfillment.

[littlefeltsparrow]

You know what? I’m still mad about Papa Archeron getting a portrait while Nesta didn’t.

Nothing stokes my rage like that poor excuse of a parent being glorified in death while his eldest daughter is lambasted for not parenting his children for him. Despite the fact that he was the Archeron sister’s only living parent, the responsibility of parenting more often than not seemed to be placed on Nesta. Strange isn’t it? That the child was deemed more culpable for failing to parent than her LITERAL FATHER who mind you, fucked off to who knows where in the middle of a conflict only to return and be tragically murdered by the big bad villain.

But that’s not all. Papa Archeron dying saves SJM some major brain gymnastics. Because he died suddenly and tragically, he never has to answer for his failures as a parent. He’ll never have to face his daughters and make the effort to fight his wrongs because he conveniently was able to take the easy way out. Because of this, the lion’s share of culpability gets placed on Nesta’s shoulders (and don’t get me wrong, Nesta has failed her sisters before but not to the degree that their father did) where she is then left to suffer the consequences of her Father’s negligence.

Listen, I’m not about to claim that Nesta wasn’t bitchy and ungrateful towards Feyre during ACOTAR and a few more instances throughout the series. Objectively Nesta has been cruel and unkind to her younger sister when it was completely uncalled for. But I take issue with the fact that Nesta is held responsible for things that were ultimately her father’s fault and he.d to a much higher standard than many of the male characters in the series.

Nesta was far from perfect as an older sister, but she still made efforts to mend her relationship with Feyre during ACOTAR and ACOMAF before becoming the main scapegoat of the inner circle. You know what I never see? Rhysand or any members of the IC speaking ill of papa Archeron or expressing any anger whatsoever that he failed his daughters during an extremely vulnerable period of their lives. But you know what I do see? Every IC member judging Nesta so harshly and treating her so callously for her failure to protect and nurture Feyre while they were living in poverty. And yet, who is blamed for Feyre’s illiteracy? Who is blamed for Feyre’s decision to hunt in the woods when their father was RIGHT THERE?

Let’s be real here, Nesta receives more in-text and out of text criticism than Papa Archeron for two reasons. Firstly, Nesta is an actual character while Papa Archeron is a plot device used to explain why the sisters are in such a poor situation. HE DOESN’T EVEN HAVE A FIRST NAME! So how can I possibly engage with his character in a meaningful way when his characterization has as much substance as a pile of cobwebs.

Secondly, Nesta is assumed to be more culpable in the neglect of Feyre’s safety and education because it was expected that she take up all the maternal duties to compensate for her Father’s absence. Even though Papa Archeron was there physically, there is little evidence that he contributed to any community building in their family or made any attempts at mediating conflicts between his daughters. As a father, there isn’t much expectation on him as a parent while for Nesta there is. Nesta’s refusal to be parentified was a subversion of the expectation that she would become a sacrificial parental figure to her sisters (despite only being a few years older than them). As such, Nesta’s refusal was viewed as more offensive and wrong than Papa Archeron because it was a resistance to rigid gendered expectations being forced upon her.

And then we come to the ultimate conclusion of Nesta’s lack of a portrait. Papa Archeron gets to die a hero and have his daughters honour his memory while Nesta has to live with the consequences. Nesta is the one who was there and yet she’s punished tenfold on a much larger scale by a clique of immortal fairies with no sense of proportionality when it comes to wrongdoings.

[ao3feed-brucewayne]

contingency

by destiny919 "Red Robin," Bruce growls. "Report." Tim is still wearing the suit, albeit cowl down, but normally he'd force Bruce to acknowledge him outside of their masks and the night job. Right now, he not only wants Red Robin's armor and gear just in case, he wants Batman to know this is a decision Tim is making as a vigilante protecting the people of Gotham as well as himself and his family, and Bruce's own legacy. Again. Permanently, this time. Words: 3861, Chapters: 1/1, Language: English Fandoms: Batman - All Media Types, Batman (Comics) Rating: Teen And Up Audiences Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply Categories: Gen Characters: Tim Drake, Bruce Wayne, Damian Wayne, Alfred Pennyworth, Jason Todd, Kate Kane Relationships: Tim Drake & Bruce Wayne, Tim Drake & Damian Wayne, Tim Drake & Jason Todd Additional Tags: Alternate Universe - Canon Divergence, Tim Drake is Red Robin, Damian Wayne is Robin, Kate Kate is Batwoman, Batman (2016) #71, Batman's A+ Parenting, Bruce Wayne is a Bad Parent, BAMF Tim Drake, Morally Ambiguous Tim Drake, Good Sibling Tim Drake, Good Sibling Damian Wayne, dick grayson may not actually be dead but he sure is haunting the narrative, jason: that's not fair i had to ACTUALLY DIE to do that, dick: skill issue, Dick Grayson is Ric Grayson, Canon-Typical Violence, Implied/Referenced Child Abuse, CEO Tim Drake, Majority Shareholder Tim Drake, happy birthday timmy this year i got you a power fantasy via https://ift.tt/HGDaMbh

[hyperlexichypatia]

Hi there! Your post about brain age stuck a chord with me; I got significant brain damage in an accident when I was 20, and I've been struggling to take control back from a bunch of well-meaning and overprotective people, ranging from my neurologist to my siblings. So thank you for that. I do have a question for you. I've found a lot of the people who use the brain development age are the people who (idk what word to use for this) self-infantilize themselves. Why do you think people do this, and how can we combat this? I find that it's harder to argue against when they want to be protected, and that they think I need to be protected.

This is a great question. I have some thoughts on why people tend to self-infantilize. If people think of something as desirable for themselves, it's harder to convince them that it's wrong to do to others. Theoretically, even if people infantilize themselves, we should be able to tell them that it's wrong to do to other people without their consent -- but since the root of infantilization is the premise that the subject is incapable of meaningfully consenting to things, that doesn't necessarily work.

So anyway, I have some theories. I think there's significant overlap between this worldview and the medical model of mental difference. This is specific to a U.S. Cultural context; other people can weigh in on how this does/doesn't apply in other places/cultures.

Our society is obsessed with blaming people's external circumstances on their "bad choices." Underpaid? Your fault for not choosing a better job! Abused? Your fault for being so abusable! People will comb through every bit of struggling/oppressed people's history to find something they "did wrong" that would justify whatever bad thing happened to them or was done to them. In particular, there's tremendous emphasis on "bad decisions" in youth (if you skip algebra class, it will go on your Permanent Record and your life will be RUINED!). In this context, it can seem liberatory to counteract that narrative with "My problems aren't the fault of my bad choices; I'm a child much too young to be capable of even making choices."

Similarly/relatedly to the above, in the age of mass incarceration, trying minors as adults, and a general pattern of incarcerating marginalized young people to long prison sentences for relatively petty crimes, pushback to this policy heavily centers the idea that the wrongness of this cruelty is rooted in young people being essentially incapable of making choices and therefore not being truly responsible for their actions.

Young people (meaning both minors and young adults) are relentlessly sexually objectified. Obviously, most people don't become comfortable being sexually objectified just because they turn 18, but some young adults contextualize this as "It's wrong to sexualize me because I'm A Child" rather than "The way people sexually objectify young people is dehumanizing and harmful."

Relatedly, because young people are often disempowered, and it's socially acceptable to treat young people like garbage, young people are often targeted for abusive/exploitative relationships, financial arrangements, and other abusive and exploitative situations, and this targeting often kicks up when young people come of age, because they then may have resources they can legally access and sign away. People victimized by this are encouraged to see the problem as "I am a child and they are a child abuser" rather than "I was/am denied social and economic power and was put in a desperate situation, which they exploited.

People who grew up with unsupportive parents may conceptualize that lack of support as "I'm an immature child, and they've forced me to grow up too soon, but if they recognized that I'm still a child, they would take better care of me."

Basically, short version: I think young adults are encouraged to self-infantalize, even though I think it's contrary to their long-term interests (not that they asked me), because young people are treated like hot garbage, and young adults are encouraged to frame this problem as "I'm being denied the protections that children get," but I think they're mistaken, because children are absolutely not protected in the first place.

[dufferpuffer]

Just read about you okaying one of the anon ask about random ships. Because just like so many people I too like your analysis...

I know that this might be out of your usual circle of favorite characters. Or a little strange ship too...

But I always found it interesting to think about two rebels of rhe family. One from house of black and one from house of Weasley.

Sirius Black and Percy Weasley.

I think the fandom has slept on Percy's potential as a lead character for good story.

Harry dislikes percy right along ron and twins etc but if we see from certain angle he was nit wrong in not trusting dumbles. And he having trust in ministry and authority figures and not wanting to be part of a vigilante group is also not bad thing.

Him having fights with parents is also nothing new, we all at certain age think that we know better than them.

Percy is a gryffindor though. He didn't say no because he was scared to fight. He said no because he didn't like Dumbledore approach. Again understandable as order was full of teens and ya with bright future if not for albus pushing them to fight

Mr and mrs Weasley make it seem like they don't want their children to fight but since they are affected by the war we can't say them no too. But they did everything in front of children in ootp. R + h+ h will be the front warriors because of harry but twins and Charlie and bill do follow their parents' foot steps..

The dynamic bw Sirius and percy I would like to explore but my brain is not much help in it as to what will be the interaction be like.

I mean with Sirius having seen with his own eyes that under Dumbledore regime they are all like sitting ducks, dumbles not helping his own unlawful imprisonment situation, making things difficult for harry.

What if the two join forces.

I too dont like age gap romances but in Wizarding word people live more that 150 years so what is a 14-15 year age difference.

If you are irked about a romantic relationship bw the two than you can share your thought on them platonically joining forces to help each other...

Sirius has a unique situation because he understand what it feels to just move away from your family. That it is not all sunshine and roses. That it is a tough decision. He also has been wronged by order and it's leader by ignorance and indifference, same as percy who like a typical middle child feels left out.

Sirius knows that though ministry is useless, this time he also doesn't wants to bet all his chances of win on Dumbledore like last time...

If you are interested I will like to hear your thoughts 🤔💭

Ok, first of all - I do not mind age gaps. It would be pretty hypocritical if I did, since my partner is 17 years older than me lol I cannot blame Percy for fucking a hot old man when I, too, fuck the hot old men. I find the whole concept of 'age gaps being irksome' demeaning - not to mention rooted in sexism, homophobia and ableism. An adult should be able to love another adult. Period.

That being said - Percy and Sirius... an interesting concept.

Overall I think, while they have ALOT of similarities, they have some aspects that would grind against each-other. That doesn't mean I don't think they can work, I just think they have a hump to get over: - Sirius' judgemental nature and being a playful bully. - Percy's pride and protective nature (being like his mother).

Sirius is an understanding, compassionate guy... but there are things that crawl right up under his skin: - Like 'abandoning' the people you love. He isn't an idiot, he can tell Percy hasn't abandoned his family, but he would think he is wasting his time at the Ministry of all places rather than actually being there physically and emotionally for them. - He also can't stand stiffs. His parents, his brother - even Molly herself, doesn't want the kids to do anything... He is a firecracker. He likes to poke sleeping bears and break some rules. - Percy is proud, to a ridiculous level. He will close his eyes to the truth in order to keep pushing. He has decided on what he will do - and even if everyone he loves says no. He has the childish desire to be a Big Grown Boy which leaves his ego easily bruised... and Sirius would find that naive, and perhaps a little too much like his brother. Percy may be an adult, but he acts like a snotty little brat.

The main dynamic I could imagine them having - Is Sirius being annoying, like a third Twin, someone that pokes fun at Percy's expense for a laugh... but with a burning, caring desire to not let Percy become another Regulus... or another HIMSELF. Facing the pain of having to lose a sibling before he has the chance to reconcile with them - just because he was stubborn.

I think Sirius would want to SAVE him from his own mistakes... and for Percy, having yet another person see his ambition as a mistake would be aggravating. Sirius' earnestness with his concern would harm his pride. And that's an interesting dynamic to work through. Perhaps, forced to abandon his pride - like being fired from the Ministry - would open Percy up to listening to an old dog who has seen the 'truth' of the world...?

Maybe spending more time with Sirius and seeing how the Ministry has treated him - how they continue to treat him - would disillusion him to the Ministry. He believes when his family says Voldemort is back, and he believes Sirius when he says he was innocent... and so he finally has to make himself wake up from his dreams and put his burning passions to a different goal.

Sirius is trapped in his house... but Percy is free. Maybe it starts as just running errands, but turns into a team. The both of them working together - maybe Percy even working within the Ministry, spying for Sirius specifically. Spending all that time alone together, moping about becoming jaded, drinking about their dreams going up in smoke... I mean if you want intimacy or romance that's a perfect launchpad.

I know in the extended text below its alot of negative stuff but I would DEVOUR a good fic about them. I would LOVE that. If you are planning on writing one WRITE IT - and if you aren't... any recs?

Extended thoughts below (900ish words)

Firstly... I love Albus. I stand by him and most of his decisions... though I agree that Sirius is probably not the biggest fan and for good reasons... but I don't think we actually see him disagreeing with Albus much in canon...? I might be forgetting something. Sirius is DEFINITELY keen on the 'child-soldier' thing. He FIGHTS for Harry and the kids to be involved when they are underage. If Percy wants his entire family out of the war, especially his siblings... Sirius wants them in. An interesting conflict.

~~~

I don't think Percy didn't join the Order because it was 'full of teens' - it wasn't. It had 3 teens that visited sometimes - and they were kept in the dark until they were 17. Dumbledore wasn't making child soldiers, aside from Harry - but what choice does he have? "...with bright futures if not for albus pushing them to fight" They won't have ANY future if they don't fight for their lives. By the end of GoF it isn't a question of if, but when: When will Harry be forced by fate to fulfill the prophecy? When will the Burrows' protective charms fail and expose them? When will Hermione fight for her life as a muggleborn? These events are guaranteed. Not hypothetical.

I know this is a tangent, but Albus fought in possibly BOTH Muggle World Wars and three Wizarding wars. He knows the horrors of war. He tried to shelter Harry, to keep him at arms length, unaware of politics, hidden in safe places... but he couldn't do that forever. Especially not when the Ministry was unhelpful, most of the Wizarding World was blinded by propaganda - and he was dying.

Shit I talked about Albus too much again, what was I saying? Oh yeah - I don't think Percy didn't join the order because of that. I think he simply had faith in the Ministry and Pride in himself. His older siblings left the country, leaving him as the eldest. His father stayed in a low-paying job he was constantly putting at risk... and wasn't trying to be promoted. He wanted to turn his families life around. He LOVES his family.

~~~

While Sirius knows how difficult it is to leave family you have a complicated relationship with - he left his family because he rejected them. He numbed himself to their fates the best he could.

Percy left because he loves them. He wants to support his little brothers and sister. He wants to make his Mother proud and earn his fathers respect. He was going to work his ass off in these turbulent times and work his way up to being Minister of Magic.

...Sirius would think that is very cute. He is jaded. "You really think Cornelius Fudge got to his position through 'hard work'' and 'honest effort'...? Oh, you sweet boy... how naive." But I also think it would bamboozle him a little: "You love your family, but you left them? You aren't fighting with them? You're messing about at the ministry instead of being their knight...? You're being a cute little secretary or whatever to the same old bastard that pushed for me not to get a trial??" Sirius is loyal to a fault. He would acknowledge Percy's drive as admirable but think he is putting it all in the wrong place. Sirius could see Percy's heart, his intent, his love - in a way that others don't... but he doesn't relate. Percy's heart is good - but he's off chasing silly dreams. This isn't the time for dreams. This is war.

~~~

Percy was a proud prefect and Head Boy - exactly the sort of rule-enforcing snob Sirius would terrorize for fun. That's not a deal-breaker or anything - but Sirius is more like Fred/George. An interesting dynamic since Percy can't stand bullying.

~~~

Percy has faith in the Ministry, enough to stick with them all the way until the last book - and thus, has little faith in Sirius Black. He isn't going to out him, but he doesn't see him doing much either: 'Sitting drinking in your mothers house... Not exactly trying to clear your name, are you?' He might even feel some embarrassment for how the Ministry failed Sirius, which could come out in all sorts of victim-blamey ways.

~~~

Percy doesn't have many people on his side, but he doesn't feel like he NEEDS them on his side. He is a big tough man all on his own! Sirius might show him compassion and some understanding, but I don't know if Percy would care to listen to him. He is a bit independent man now - and, for awhile, people trying to show him compassion and understanding might make him feel patronized.

~~~

Just the image of Percy sending back his christmas jumper, disowning his family... Sirius would go off his rocker. He knows what family pressure is like - but he also knows what the Weasley dynamic is. He knows what Percy is pushing away from and it is pathetic. They love him in all the ways Sirius' family never did, and for Percy to reject that would hurt Sirius, too. "...You made your mother cry, Perce. And Molly isn't like my mother."

~~~

Also sorry this took awhile I wanted to both give it good thought - and shit got busy, I fostered an injured bird for awhile

[defiantsuggestions]

You hurt me in ways that interweave with my nervous system; my body's fear response is damaged in such a way that anything can trip it and it can go off for days.

(I remember how you used to soothe me as a child. You would hold me and promise me everything was alright and you built a sense of comfort that I've not been able to find elsewhere)

You lied to me. You told me no one but you would ever love me. You told me that any other parent would have killed me and you set me up to distrust anyone I met who wasn't you.

(My favorite times were the ones you spent with me. You used to be so good at the video games we played together. Do you remember how I watched you, wide eyed and innocent, in awe of your skills?)

You threatened to leave me on the side of the road once. You made me beg you to let me back in the car. I was terrified for my life. You don't remember it because for you it was just a fleeting moment of anger that you forgot the next day.

(I woke up one morning and snuck into the cookie jar. I don't remember the cookies, but I do remember you waking me up later, laughing as you asked, "who took the cookies from the cookie jar?" and you played with me and I was so happy to see you and I adored you more than anything)

You get mad and you stop caring. You get mad and suddenly all that matters is how much you want to hurt me. It doesn't matter how good I was, even if I was perfect you would look for ways to hurt me because you wanted me to suffer. You hurt others who I loved in front of me and you expect me not to care.

(You used to tell me stores well into the night. I remember the one about the alligator that rolled up into a bowling ball, and the hamster who got so angry smoke came out of it's ears. I was comforted by the sound of your voice. I hated going to sleep because it meant you stopped talking.)

You admitted to my face that you liked being a parent for the power it gave you. You laughed at my reaction and mockingly commented "you didn't like that, did ya?" You look for power and control in all your relationships. I can see it now, I see it in the few people you've managed not to chase off. You want people to let you hurt them. Pain and terror is the expected price to pay for being close to you. You will accept nothing less.

(You wanted me to be happy. You tried to give me the things I wanted. All my life you've been afraid something bad would happen to me. I've seen you sick to the point you were hallucinating and your biggest fear was that I was being hurt. I've seen you crying and begging non-existent kidnappers to let me go. You couldn't hear me and all we could do was wait for it to pass.)

You didn't want a child. You wanted something you could brag about. You beat me and terrorized me into silent obedience so you could show off how good I behaved. You've bragged to others about getting angry at me, you told them I was afraid of you, and you were proud of it.

(I loved you. You were my world. I wanted to make you happy. You loved me. I know that you loved me. You were my favorite person. You were my parent. You were supposed to protect me. Why were you my biggest threat?)

You made me act like I was your parent. Your emotions and your problems were my responsibility. You acted like that made our relationship special, but really you were forcing me to be your therapist. Being your child meant it was my job to fix your emotions. I was just trying to survive.

(I wanted to protect you. I've seen you vulnerable. I know the world has hurt you. I can see the places in me that look the same as what's in you. I've just made different decisions about them. I don't want to take my suffering out on others. I keep thinking that if I just found the right words to explain you'd stop thinking you had to hurt me to feel better...)

...but that's never worked. Because you wanted to hurt me. Because you think the pain is what I should pay for having good moments with you. You think I should pay in blood and tears for your love and care.

(I just wanted to be happy with you.)

I was around three when you woke me up to laugh with me over cookies. I was three when you made me beg for my life on the side of the road.

(I just wanted you to be happy.)

There was never a point in my life where you weren't abusive, just moments in which you were nice.

(I wish things could have been better.)

You destroyed every part of me you could touch.

(I loved you. I love you.)

And I hate you more than words can say.

[taylortruther]

Taylor writes a lotttt about innocence and feeling like she was forced to grow up faster than she wanted. I also feel like I saw a lot more chatter than I normally do about her being a child star in the wake of TTPD and the asylum line in WAOLOM (which I disagree with slightly, but understand the argument).

Do you think she blames her parents for that at all? She seems soo close to them still. Or more blames herself for her ambition and men like JM/JG/the music industry?

well, first of all, i wouldn't personally make it an either/or thing. it's not like her problems are either her parents' fault or the men's fault. also, she can still be close to her parents, and have issues. i mean, she's human, family relationships are complicated no matter who you are.

taylor has written many songs, at this point, about how she chose her life, and she was uniquely driven. tbh, i think that's true, i think she had this dream and she relentlessly worked towards it with a drive that few children have. her parents obviously supported her, but she wasn't their meal ticket, and they also protected her/kept her inner circle tight, which put her in a much safer position than other child stars who were taken advantage of by everyone in their lives. also, her label being small, her starting off in country... it's different than her being a disney star or something.

anyway, i'm sure there are all sorts of decisions families have to make in these situations that have been questionable or complicated or hard. i don't think taylor is interested in exposing many of those things to us. but as she gets older and writes more songs about how she got to where she is, as she reflects on what drives her, we might hear more about it idk.

but also, the stuff taylor goes through is also just normal? i mean, talk to any of your friends. some of the bad stuff that has happened to them is the result of their parents or other figures not looking out for them. but some of those bad experiences are due to other people, or their own actions. it's not black and white.

[fishysaltine]

(Please read the whole post and maybe my thoughts will form into coherency)

Hopefully I don’t get flack for this and word this correctly:

But I love Wyll’s story, just not his character direction, if that makes sense? (I’m still setting up to romance him tho) he had SUCH good setup for being a really nuanced character among the cast that we have and I think that’s partly due to all of the content he got cut from his story

Can you imagine how much people would crawl over Wyll if he was mother gothel’d? If he totally leaned into Mizora after ten years of isolation? ESPECIALLY AFTER BEING SCORNED BY HIS FATHER?? Bro was 17(?) and impressionable as fuck after a traumatic experience

Also I understand Wyll’s like “my dad had every right to exile me! Mizora covered her tracks!” But you can understand why someone hurt you and be pissed off and doesn’t mean that you have no right to be upset. I’D be upset if my parent left me (a literal child in this situation) in charge of protecting a whole city, then shunned me after I made the only decision that would make sure I could fulfill my city and make them proud! Wyll’s dad literally turned his back on his own son just like that, little to no questions asked, and Wyll has no?? Resentment? AT ALL?? HUH

(Imagine, pray tell, Mizora telling a young, impressionable Wyll that his father must have never truly loved him if he was willing to get rid of him so easily? Wyll hoping that his father would one day forgive him only to lose hope and return to Mizora once more??? You’re telling me that wouldn’t make the lads and ladies swoon?! Especially after learning that Wyll was a total daddy’s boy??)

And the TAV/PC had to go through the slow burn of proving to Wyll that she’s the bitch she is and is only using him? Or push him further into his mindset that Mizora cares for him, even if she hurts him? And Mizora slowly growing more and more desperate to keep her claws in him if you start pulling him away? Until the final thing she does in act 3- it would be so much more powerful and less than a “GOTCHA!”

You don’t even have to make Wyll neutral or evil! He just thinks Mizora has his best interests at heart (when she obvi doesn’t to anyone but him, as if the case with abusive relationships) The first crack would obviously be Karlach, since even Wyll states that Mizora never sent him to hunt tiefling’s, and he literally would’ve killed Karlach if TAV/PC wasn’t there (or the tadpoles) and it would’ve been so heart breaking and interesting for him to be the goodest boy with such a bad person as his “bestie”, all because of the manipulation and abuse she puts him through to keep his expectations and even self esteem low, pushed further by turning him into a DEMON.

(Judging by his dialogue I genuinely wonder if Larian intended for Wyll to have an arc like this, because it would fit a lot better into the general theme of breaking abuse cycles that the game pushes so hard. Especially from the interaction you can have with him at the tiefling party when he *ahem* ISOLATES HIMSELF FROM OTHERS)

A change in how he reacts to his trauma and abuse would’ve set him more apart too, since pretty much everyone except for Shart and Lae’zel aren’t particularly big fans of their abusers (except Gale, but I wouldn’t say he totally embraced Mystra at the time we meet, and if you romance him he throws her to wall p fast). And his abuser isn’t religious at all, it’s more personal since Mizora is literally right in his ear, it’s much more personal ig?

It also would’ve really pushed his thematic parallel to Karlach who H A T ES the devil who forced her into servitude. Can u imagine if she met Wyll, and he’s like “yeah Mizora’s the ONLY ONE looking out for me! ☝️She helps me protect the sword coast! She’s my HOMIE!” She would be so angry and sad for him, because his desperation for connection drove him to connect with a BITCH of a devil

Mizora is just the cookie-cutter narcissist abuser, she isolates her victim and makes (Wyll) rely on only her. It’s honestly more confusing that Wyll isn’t more with her, that he rejects her so vehemently after a decade with essentially only her at his side. I legit don’t understand why Wyll and Mizora weren’t dialed up to 10+ like all the other companions and their abusers are

Anyway these are my sad, slightly disappointed thoughts on Wyll, I just wish he had a lot more content in general but also his own personal journey throughout the game, but maybe it will change when I romance him

[qbebou]

ok not to be like he’s just like me fr…. but chayanne is just like me fr…..

i’m also the oldest child with one younger sibling who needed a lot more care when we were kids and therefore was deprived of certain needs in favor of my brother. i also had a parent that was missing a lot and depended almost solely on my dad. obviously tallulah needs more help than chay, with her asthma and lesser fighting skills, not to mention she had only been playing minecraft for like a month? or two before wilbur found her. and chay knows that! he knows that she needs more help than he does he knows he’ll do anything for her he knows he has to be the strongest to protect her. my brother and i are only a year apart but i was forced to grow up very very quickly bc i was on my own a lot as a kid while my brother was sick. phil doesn’t worry abt chay when he runs off bc he doesn’t need to, chay can take care of himself. hell, he took care of all the eggs when they first left. but at the same time, it’s comforting to know ur parent is looking out for u even when u don’t need it. phil’s not a smothering parent, he’s attentive, but not smothering. but let’s be real he can also be emotionally constipated LMAO but that leads to situations like the argument and frustration between chay and tallulah when dapper was kidnapped. in his defense, he’s never been a parent before and had 2 children thrust upon him to raise on his own. he didn’t have a lot of time to adjust to parenthood like ppl in real life do, he suddenly had 2 children who had their own thoughts and opinions and emotional needs, he didn’t get the time it takes to LEARN abt how to provide that specific care and while some ppl have that innate knowledge there is a lot of learning and navigating when it comes to emotional vulnerability and regulation esp when it comes to children who are figuring it out as well. i feel for chay when he thinks he needs to be the strongest. i feel for chay when he had to make the decision to gather the eggs and leave. i feel for chay when he had to take blame for bad things happening. and i feel for chay when he realized tallulah doesn’t need him as much anymore. my brother and i are both adults now and we had a …… tumultuous relationship as teenagers for reasons that were both our own and caused by problems outside our control. but i still remember exactly how devastating it was the moment i realized that he was fine on his own. that he didn’t need me anymore. and it caused a rift between us; on my end bc i was frustrated and felt tossed aside and on his end bc he NEEDED to be independent to keep growing. i see so much of myself in chay and i desperately wish he and tallulah had a better mediator for their argument, or at least someone who could truly understand why they were so upset. i don’t think phil clocked that tallulah was so upset and adamant abt looking for dapper bc it was just her dapper and ramon surviving on their own. just bc phil didn’t witness it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen and it doesn’t mean that they don’t have a much tighter relationship than they had before purgatory. and when chayanne said everyone was blaming him for the decisions he made phil was quick to tell him that no one was blaming him but also phil doesn’t know that! he doesn’t know if any blame was put on chayanne when it was just the eggs together. chayanne made the decision for the eggs to run and they trusted him bc he’s the oldest and he’s strong and he can be a leader but by running he also put the eggs thru a lot of pain and fear that they may not have gone thru if they stayed with their parents. and even if the eggs didn’t explicitly say that they blamed chayanne im sure he blamed himself for every little thing that went wrong. we’ve already seen him open up a tiny bit abt how he was questioning his decision to leave. but phil told him that chay made the best decision he could have given the information he had at the time which is true! but when ur the oldest and everyone is looking to u, all of the responsibility lies on ur shoulders. chayanne has been carrying SO much weight on his shoulders for so long it breaks my heart.

[a-lemon-tree]

Hello, I'm CT. If your free readings are open, may i ask for one please? It's a slightly different question so in case it's not possible to answer using runes then please change my question to any information regarding my future husband. Thank you!! 💞💞

I'm a bit old and I've been single for over a decade or two due to circumstances. However I do want to have a forever partner and get married to him, and have a life together. I'm also child free i.e. never had any children by choice. And even though I was very broody for just a couple of years, last year I came to the conclusion that I don't want any children and this decision has made me feel very liberated! And I'm glad that i didn't go through any kind of process in the previous years to get a child. I love babies, but that's quite literally the only stage that I love of having a kid, nothing beyond that, lol. So I wanted to know, whether in future will I have a husband for me and will he be happily childfree / childless as well? I don't want to be a step-parent btw, whether of younger or older kids, nor do I want to adopt. I just want me and my husband and a dog or two, and our happy, cozy retired life (maybe babysitting our friends' kids once a while, lol).

Thanks a lot for this opportunity! Would appreciate any insights 💙🙏

Your current singleness is actually protecting you from alternatives that wouldn't work for you (for instance, if you had gotten pregnant before you decided you didn't want kids, or bad relationships).

The runes indicate that you are going to have to wait a good while longer before finding someone. During this time, you're going to learn more about yourself and what you want in life, which means that when the time comes to find somebody, you'll really know what you'll want and why, and will make healthier decisions that will lead to greater happiness than finding somebody right away and having a bad relationship with them.

Although it is a long time in the future, you ARE going to have a "family" (even if it consists of a husband and three dogs lol), and later you will look back on this time as a gift rather than a torment. So try not to be too hard on yourself or force something that isn't meant to be - and remember that even 13-year-olds often think they're "too old" lol Age is relative, and you've got plenty of time ahead of you! Time brings wisdom, and wisdom brings a more genuine and lasting happiness than just getting what you think you want immediately.