#and how that defines them unless they are being actively hurtful to others with their actions and cannot take criticism of their actions

[a-confused-spoon]

TDP s6: Soren, Viren and missing the point (2/2)

(jesus christ did I write a lot for this one...)

SPOILERS FOR THE DRAGON PRINCE S6!

*sigh*

I want to make a little disclaimer here: my feelings towards Viren were always a bit mixed- I loved the writing of him, but I loved to see him suffer more.

I would have been fine with him dying just as well as living, even if I didn’t love how quick his flip was in s4 (particularly ep2), the same way I’m not in love with how the most recent season seems to gloss over the weight of what the man did in book 1, 2 and 3, even in the scenes where he tries to take accountability: it’s not just the use of dark magic, misleading Claudia or the mistreatment Soren; he got 2 rulers killed, forced a fiery-transformation spell on thousands of soldiers who didn’t want to partake in it, was willing to put an egg before his son’s life, sealed the souls of people in coins etc.

Even if his redemption had continued (as in, had he kept breathing), I personally would have preferred for him to not get a happily forever after with his family, but something more of a "open ending" or whatnot.

However

I can't shake this feeling that The Mystery of Aaravos has a tendency of prioritizing very well-built and executed single scenes with intense emotion over overarching thematic consistency and overall character growth (the number of shenanigans that amounts to nothing in said two regards being exhibit A, but of course those two things don't exclude the other), and while it's a MASSIVE improvement over book 4 and 5, book 6 still has its issues.

While indeed apologizing to who he has hurt isn’t nearly enough for his journey to be (nor feel) “complete”, it’s also true that Viren isn’t given the possibility to do much else to begin with, despite being the first (and so far only) villain to do a complete 180 and check all the boxes of the ‘big no-no’ list the story presents us with when it comes to morality and/or ethics.

I want to explain my point of view the best way I possibly can, so stick with me for a minute:

The characters of the series (or, well, those who don’t belong to the cosmos) exist in a historical context led by a narrative of power that chains them to a never-ending cycle of violence; the use of dark magic plays a big role in said cycle, not only as an active part of it from the human side, but also because the very practice is on its own an incentive to use it more and more frequently, which is a very similar relationship people have with power in general.

What the “good guys” of the story do, as a matter of fact, is break the cycle by putting an end to the narrative of power and replacing it with one of love, ‘cause as we learn in book 2, real strength means being able to choose love, vulnerability and forgiveness, even if that’s not what they’ve been taught all their lives. Only then they can break free of the chains of history; additionally, for said history to not repeat itself, dark magic needs to be abandoned, even in tough circumstances (unless Sol Regem pulls up in Katolis, but I digress) given the detrimental effects on the long run- and with Xadia and humanity at peace with one another and ideally living in harmony, it wouldn’t be needed at all.

Therefore, the list of ‘big no-no’ here is: don’t do dark magic, don’t pursuit power as opposed to love, don’t let history define your perception of the world.

All the “bad guys” of the story are either unwilling or unable to do one or more of those things: Karim can’t for the life of him look past history, Claudia isn’t able to give up dark magic (for now, at least not without guidance), Finnegrin had no intention of giving up the power he held over his crew- and Aaravos deliberately chose to find purpose in the immediate anger he felt during Leola’s trial (consequently engaging in the centuries old cycle of violence in all its ugliness), instead of giving in to the love he has for his daughter and pass away alongside her, resulting in Leola being left alone and scared throughout the horrible process (and also the whole world going through some crazy shit).

Then there’s Viren, who used to rely on dark magic (unlike Karim), pursue power (unlike Claudia) and look at things through the lenses of history (unlike Finnegrin), so he was a bad guy in all possible aspects.

Eventually though, he manages to successfully give up dark magic and choose love over power and refuse the chains of history (as shown both in his relationship with Terry and his willingness to serve King Ezran), with no expectations of mercy or forgiveness... and literally nothing comes of it because the other characters don’t give him the possibility to act on any of said changes, aside from doing one thing that gets him killed.

So it’s “we gain nothing if we don’t give the chance to learn and grow” (or whatever Amaya said in s4) until...? It's "it's never too late if you quit" or whatever Rayla says in ep3 unless...?

I’d love to agree on the “it’s too late” argument, but aside it going against the very principle of the story, even the awful things he did that I mentioned don’t really matter by the time s6 ends: Lain and Tiadrin are happly together and got to say goodbye to their daughter, and she herself chose to save Runaan instead; the fiery-transformation turns out to be temporary, no one seems to even remember that Eveneere and Del Bar exist etc. The only thing that still has an effect is Lux Aurea becoming unhabitable, yet the only character who gives some weight to said tragedy is portrayed as an idiotic bitter nobody (aka Karim) who should just look past it and take a chance on the elven-human camp. So exactly how am I supposed to care? *

I already talked extensively about the theme of forgiveness in part 1 of this essay (if I can call it that), but the point is that the story shouldn't pick and choose who gets rewarded and understood when acting according to the moral of the story and who doesn't even get a chance at getting a second chance while trying to do the exact same thing, not when the very thematic premise of said story automatically puts EVERYONE into perspective- because if it's the lies of history that chain them to a narrative of power, misleading them, and those started way before the characters were even born, then the conversation unfortunately but necessarily needs to include the perpetrators of violence too; they too were misled, therefore they too can unlearn what they've been taught (which Viren does) and should get a chance to really live a life spent on being a better person, not because they may “deserve it” or because it might not be "too late", but simply because they have the CAPACITY to do good, if they choose to.

A show that really nails this point (to me) is She-Ra and the Princesses of Power, which frankly I'm not even that big of a fan of... speaking of which, if Viren was always meant to die sacrificing himself without no one's recognition, it probably would have been better for him to pull a Shadow Weaver ftom the beginning.

(I don't mean this as a comparison, it's just a way for me to lay down all the elements that I belive ultimately don't work or don't help)

For those who aren’t familiar (MAJOR SPOILERS), Shadow Weaver in She-Ra is for the most part what a lot of Viren haters think Viren is in The Dragon Prince: a magic user that loves power, traumatizing the children she grows and nothing else. She doesn’t even have a greater good she intensely believes in to explain her actions and behaviors like Viren does- she’s just a massive bitch. And she doesn’t really grow or learn during the series, it’s just that at some point hanging around the good guys becomes more convenient for her... if I’m not mistaken, she doesn’t even do much unless someone comes to her spontaneously, aside gardening. At no point in time she becomes really trust worthy or good, and it’s always looming in the air whether or not she’s even beginning to be, or will ever be for that matter.

This goes on for like, 3 seasons, until at the very end- and I mean the very end (like, last episode very end) she does one good thing, sacrificing herself to save the two girls she abused the most throughout the series, which leads to her death.

What really sells the scene (leaving out the music, the animation, the dialogue, the voice acting- all of it is just *chef’s kiss*), it’s the fact that:

Her final words to Catra, who she abused the most, really feel like they put a period at the end of a sentence; it feels like closure, you feel that both her and Adora can now move on;

It’s a deliberate choice, because she had the option of staying safe and not do it, and still did;

She dies at peace with herself, and seemingly proud of herself for making that good action too;

Her death isn't the conclusion of an arc nor it comes out of nowhere, because of the general uncertainty regarding her character that precedes that moment

I talked about closure and 'moving on' in the first part of this essay when talking about Soren (which I'm now realizing was a lot shorter, lol), so I’ll move on to everything else.

The point of him dying can’t be about being selfless, because Viren always was selfless for what he thought was right: he was willing to swap bodies with Harrow, he went back to fight Avazandum when the Queens of Duren went to face the dragon alone, when Aaravos tells him he might die going in Lux Aurea he went anyways etc. Not to mention how Soren, of all people, asks him to do dark magic, of all things, so that he can… help… people… mh, now where have I heard this before? I’m sorry- wasn’t using dark magic for the sake of protecting humanity literally what got most problems started? The source of so much conflict and pain and death? A practice that wasn’t worth doing due to the detrimental effects on the long run, even when if people were going through tough times? Literally what Viren did and received a lot of shit for when he was a full-on villain? By all means, if you find it poetic, that’s great! In my opinion it’s a bit weird: if the show wants to make a point, then it should stick to it;

Viren's literally a shell of his former self, from the very moment he steps into the castle. Sure, knowing about Claudia’s state and the part he played in it wouldn’t make anyone sleep at night, but to have him so desperate, unseen and unheard once he finally picks a path "of truth" as opposed to one of darkness really wasn’t... the best. Like, my own bias against the “redeemed character dying/character searching redemption dying before getting to the end of it” trope aside, not even while dying he seems to reach some kind of inner peace. And when Soren comes into his cell, even then, when it’s his chance to prove that he is committed to this new life path he’s still unsure and scared- Soren had to insist for Viren to step in and help. As if he didn’t really know what to do with himself;

I didn’t hope Viren could build a better life for himself because the idea felt right to me, but because for two whole seasons and a half that’s the direction his character was taking, and the fact that his journey ultimately doesn’t come to a proper end isn’t even drìirectly on him just pisses me off. So much time spent on showing Viren’s progress for what feels like nothing... if not setting up Claudia to be Aaravos's new daughter and giving Soren even more trauma to deal with :D

I didn't want Viren to receive a mere slap on the wrist of course, but I also didn't want his journey to be... this. It feels incomplete, partial, and we didn't even get the final conversation he has with Soren about sacrificing his own heart instead of his son's before saying goodbye- which may have single handedly fixed most of what I said (in part 1 more than here, but still).

[ edit: I’m adding this part because I’m only now thinking about this, and I believe it’s worth mentioning.

As I said at the beginning, I do take issue with how Viren’s journey only considers the damage he made on an interpersonal level as opposed to what he caused on a macro-scale. Had his progress continued only with what the second act of the show bothered to explore so far, I’d still have many complaints, just of different nature.

Because of what I mentioned here though (*) and, again, after two seasons and a half of giving all the impressions that there was a light at the end of the tunnel for him after all, I think that it would have been nice for said things to at least be acknowledged once he got back to Katolis, instead of just making a vague matter of deserving or not deserving mercy, as this is the very logic that keeps cycles of violence going. I do know that’s what they are referring to of course, but I still think it should have been an actual part of the conversation; I briefly mentioned this in part 1/2: I would’ve loved for Soren to be the one to call him out on it, especially the ‘leaving Claudia behind’ bit, in a “You can fool yourself into thinking that you’ve changed, but you can’t fool me, not anymore” fashion of sorts.

This still doesn’t mean that a redemption was impossible to begin with imo. I think that there might be a common assumption that redeeming a character means having them join the main team, which isn’t always the case, it just happens to be the most recurring one.

Idealistically, what I think could have been an ‘okay’ solution (I am talking only in utopistic terms here, though I don’t think it would’ve been impossible to pull off in the actual show- but it would have been admittedly very difficult considering the number of episodes per season) would have been for 2 episodes to be mostly focused on choosing how to go about it:

The first one having the main team arguing with each other before coming to the agreement of sticking to their principles despite not liking the situation one bit (but you know, had it been an easy choice then the efforts at peace would’ve started a lot sooner than the actual events of the show);

The second where the pentarchy, the Sunfire Queen and the Dragon Queen have a meeting, so that they can all have their say on the matter, given that they too were directly or indirectly affected by the man; the meeting is full of tension, there’s shouting, there’s calling each other ‘traitors’ and ‘hypocrites’- generally it really puts to the test how much of the world really is committed to the cause and how much of it isn’t ready to move on, but ultimately they begrudgingly come to the conclusion that there’s obviously a series of restrictions that need to be imposed on the man, while still not completely preventing him from doing his part if he truly means to prove his change. Things like: he cannot put foot into Xadia without the surveillance of dragons (preferably Phyrrah plus a couple more) and/or maybe the drake tamers of s4 lead by Rayla (who Viren is terrified by, so she’s perfect for the job), and when he’s in the human side of the land he still must be guarded 24/7 by at least 5 trained guards; he must find a spell to try to undo the corruption of Lux Aurea, but he’s not allowed to touch any source of magic without being openly granted the possibility to by Callum (who’s now in a higher position); anything he might suggest will be discussed among the council etc… how much of this changes in the course of time and how much people are willing to trust him can either change or not change, depending on whatever follows (even if this list is just hypothetical).

Also, in light of this very recent interview:

I want to be very clear: all I’m saying in these two posts is limited to the immediate effect of s6, and if the following season (or, hopefully, seasons) manages to handle things in such a way that it’ll make me eat my words, I’ll be unbelievably happy. This show means so much to me, and I’m only critical of it only because I feel like the second act of the story doesn’t do quite justice to all that the first one laid out: TDP used to be a hyper-fixation for me and it was the saving grace that got me out of the depression loop after Voltron’s ending, so anything that can get me back into that level on investment will make me cry happy tears.

This being said

I do wonder what the whole point of Viren’s journey of this season and the prior two was if the character is deemed irredeemable by the creators themselves, especially since Soren doesn’t get closure, Claudia only gets more trauma, and Viren doesn’t even die somewhat proud knowing that he did what he could manage to in the little time he had in Katolis after so long (as I said earlier), so no one gets much out of it if not more angst… which is always welcomed, if done with a valid point.

If said purpose was just so that his passing could influence his children’s arcs and therefore being there in function of other characters, the entire thing in retrospect feels like a bit of a waste of time, given that the same exact outcome could have been achieved without him being around in this last season at all: just have Claudia come back home to figure what to do next instead of seeing her dad again; she even has the Sunfire scepter thingie to do the spell from s3, so no one needs to die of poorly executed surgery. And then she can just, find the pearl and cave to Aaravos’s temptation, as he does claim he can revive him again anyways. That, plus I’m dying to have Claudia and her brother talk again after in s4 ☹.

…so yeah, like, on a scale from a VLD Lotor frustration to an MLB Chloe Bourgeois frustration, I’m sort of in the middle with Viren. But I do like that there’s a lot of conversation on the topic ]

CONCLUSION: Despite everything, s6 is the first season I actually enjoyed since s3, though it is still not quite at the same level to me, and while I have my problems with it and I'm very saddend that the Viren and Soren thing is among those, I'm acutally very happy that a lot of people enjoy it and that the fandom is ecstatic. It just wasn't for me- but I still had a fun time writing this two parter :)

Thanks to anyone who got 'till the end of this, I really appreciate it! <3

[bonefall]

the whole thing with the author defending (?) tom the wife beater is so repulsive, and then you read it again and i don’t think bumble is mentioned ONCE. she scrounges for sympathy with turtle tail, but the other one? the fat, useless, other one? forget her! (this is negative towards the authors, i adore the better bones stuff, esp how bumble is treated. vote bumble :) )

I really cannot get over it... to angrily write out a whole screed on how the strongest punishment is regret and not consequence, compare the sentiment of a reader that "Tom didn't deserve heaven" to his physical abuse of Turtle Tail, and then not even mention his other crimes of kidnapping and torture.

Even in death, Bumble isn't important enough to mention. As the books continue, they even continue to only mention her death as an unfortunate accident, or evidence of why kittypets can't join Clans. Even though she was MURDERED.

I think the statement is a good exercise in the difference between a post advocating rehabilitative justice, and abuse apologia just dressed up as it.

There IS a point to be made about how the idea of a Hell/Prison just makes bad people worse. We often have a desire to punish, because we FEEL better getting catharsis seeing A Bad Guy suffer like they hurt others. But that alone doesn't really fix or address a problem.

For example, it's really common to feel that kind of revulsion at a drug addict who robs a convenience store for money. Does it actually reduce addiction rates, or undo the trauma of the assaulted cashier, or help prevent it from ever happening again to throw the robber in a broken prison where they come out, 7 years later, with no rehabilitation?

The answer is no. It didn't help anyone. 7 years pass and he's still addicted to substances, possibly even worse, because prison just made his life shittier. As a leftist we can recognize that compassion is usually the answer.

(Unless, of course... someone needs to be removed from a position of power or actively prevented from attacking others. Violence is the answer sometimes.)

But the thing is, the author didn't SAY that. What they did was compare the impulse for catharsis, to TOM'S DESIRE TO BEAT HIS WIFE.

NO, those are NOT the same thing. Your desire for comeuppance towards a wifebeater character getting a redemption reward for "saving his child" after a long life of cruelty without consequences, is NOT THE SAME as Tom the Wifebeater inflicting pain and suffering on people out of spite.

She had to phrase it in the worst possible way for this argument to even LOOK like it made sense. "She broke HIS rule of Don't Be Mean To Tom" vs "He broke YOUR rule of Don't Be Mean To Turtle Tail." And "Now he's being taught how to be lovely"

Physical abuse, emotional abuse, and kidnapping are not "being mean" and it's both sick and insightful that she'd call it that

Domestic abuse is not a "failure to be lovely," it's the act of harming your family or partner to control them.

Tom the Wifebeater is a character who was not written with a scrap of nuance. He is not a real person. All they did with him was consistently show how much pleasure hurting people gives him, then say him dying for his biokid absolved everything

So in this series where you establish there are Born Evil Truly Malicious people (ONE EYE IS IN THE SAME BOOK), but then turn around to cry that Tom the Wifebeater can be made lovely off-screen...

You end up saying that domestic abuse isn't in your arbitrary "evil" category.

And that's so fucking fitting for the arc of Clear Sky's "redemption," where the same book ends off on Thunder saying that his abusive, woman-killing dad wasn't so bad all along because he's not like One Eye.

The answer's just that simple. They don't think male abuse is all that terrible because it's the same as an impulse; explicitly not malice. So it doesn't make you "evil," and only "evil" people deserve the Dark Forest.

(Dont question the Dark Forest as a concept or how starclan defines evil though :x dont worry about it :x)

[you-are-my-king-now-cariad]

Discord Thoughts

So basically this is room for me to talk about things in the Discord that inspired/reminded me of certain things, that I wanted to say but the conversation moved on, etc. In other words, I’m just rambling here. But y’all seem to like that, so here. No particular ordering of anything besides the order they came up-and some of them might be from my irl friends, I’m not actually sure.

Alice as Regent/Squire

Staying Close

Root Will Save Him

Willark VS Brelwyn

This might be my Brel Glasses, but it seems like William and Lark are intentionally the opposite of Bree and Sel. We don’t see them much, but we do know a few things: William is unquestionably good and pure, neither of them seem like they’re going to make a move, and Lark is remarkably perceptive about Brel.

1. William and Sel are surprisingly accurate foils. (Is it still a foil when they’re kind of opposites?) One is lawful good (and is proud of that) and the other is chaotic good. One is human, one is demon. One is never going to hurt anyone unless he absolutely has to, the other is… uh, Sel. Obviously both are generally ‘good,’ but Sel is fighting off an internal chaotic evil demon-not exactly going to blame him for being less than angelic. Also considering William has always been a safe space for Bree, particularly when Sel’s actively hunting her, and that they’re friends? It starts to feel intentional. Am I making any sense at all?

2. Both Lark and William are the definition of incredibly adorable gay panic.

Instalove VS Devotion

Okay, this is the first one I’m actually typing out bc I have the most to say about it and it’s probably the least coherent. Thanks @paigeagainstdamachine for making a vague comment that started this whole train-

I’m not saying instalove is ‘bad,’ or that her relationship with Nick is somehow fake because it was fast. Let’s get that out of the way. You can absolutely have a fast romance that is still incredibly real and long-lasting-see my parents, who were dating for 6 months before getting engaged and are still married after ~25 years.

But I will say that as someone currently in high school… I’ve seen this movie a lot. It’s true love with the boy who just moved in next door, until he’s not new and shiny anymore and you start seeing all the shitty parts of his personality. He’s not a bad person, either-just one too many red flags or negatives, but it’s not like he’s abusive or cheating or anything.

This doesn’t have to echo in Legendborn. I do believe that Nick genuinely loves Bree, and that it’s mutual. (At the very least, whatever they have is more than just friendship.) I’m just��� if they’re endgame, they shouldn’t feel so immature. Yes, they’re adorable (especially in LB), but it feels like a high school romance-and it is. It feels like my brother’s senior relationship-they were going to different colleges and both agreed that they probably wouldn’t be able to manage long-distance, so there was a time limit from the beginning. I can’t actually explain why Brick feels so… young? It just does.

Brel, on the other hand? Yeah, ofc it’s also a high school romance, but like… there is so much trust and devotion and it feels natural. They have the kind of relationship where you actually can stay friends when you break up because you just fit together. Then again, I’m just a sucker for well-written edgy demon boys, so I could be a little biased. They fight, but a healthy relationship isn’t defined by ‘we don’t ever fight.’ It’s defined by ‘we can forgive and forget.’ It’s defined by ‘no matter how angry I might be towards you, whatever mistakes you’ve made, I don’t want you to suffer.’ And that’s exactly what Sel and Bree have found.

“We fought…”

“We’ll always fight, I think.”

They fight, and they move on. They forgive. They love the other no matter what. And not to be a Sel apologist, but uhh this is exactly the kind of relationship he’s needed for so long and as much as the “I can fix him” mindset is awful she literally is giving him a reason to be a good person. Both make really big mistakes, and they get mad, say and do things they shouldn’t… but they always, always come back together.

[trashcatsnark]

Ngl, despite how absolutely fluffy my oneshot was and how eventually soft they will be- I cannot help but make Petra (my tav) and Gale's dynamic like 20-30 percent more hostile and bickering than canon, because A) I love hostile bickering couples and B) I think larian really fucking missed out on the dynamic of having the tav/durge custom pc be a rogue and non-magic user and being gale's like opposite Like, they did a great job leaning into the variation in dynamic with him if they're a different kind of spell caster- sorcerer, bard, and fellow wizard, but like in the dev notes about Gale griping everytime you make him sneak, steal, or do any rogueish behavior- it literally states he thinks those things are beneath him. Like it's not even just about his old man knees, he genuinely is like *really petty crime??? that's what you're reducing me to?* and we're shown over and over that Gale can be petty and patronizing why wouldn't he have a few more snide remarks for a rogue pc early on, let Gale be meaner to me.

And then if we could have more flavor text and options to rp a character who isn't really into magic, not actively hostile or mean but instead of a non-spellcaster being played as a complete blank slate wide-eyed over it- a character who just doesn't find much need for it, sees it as impractical, is more of a who needs a healing spell when you have a needle and thread sort of person- with Gale??? Ah, the banter, the bickering, playful ribbing and jabbing insults, snarking to each other about it- "Oh, did you wound not heal well? Ah, if only there had been someway to properly remend the flesh without suture, perhaps as if by magic..."

A part of Gale kind of being hurt because so much of his worth and value is defined by magic, so a part of him feels if someone can't see the value in magic- they can't see value in him, but then they do want him around, they do keep him around, and even let him show them some magic and he thinks he's worn them down, they're starting to see the value of the weave and by extension him. Not quite clocking that it's the other way around. That they're taking an interest and doing his magic lessons because- it's clearly something he's passionate about, he loves, and that gives it more value to them. And the idea that the weave's worth could be seen as secondary to his instead of the reverse is just- insane to him.

And as the romance progresses and he reveals more and more his ideas of how his worth is connected to his utility, his talent, the promises of "I could do more, I can be more, don't you need me to be more" because of course they want more, everyone does, he's not enough- he needs to be more powerful, more talented, more magical, more capable, more useful, and they know now what he can do, what he used to be able to do, and if he makes the right choices- how much more he could. And they let him know in no uncertain terms, they fell for him before they ever did his magic, that the things he conjures and casts are beautiful and they love them but only because they are done by his hand, and he's what gives that magic it's meaning- not the other way around. And if he never conjured stars to the sky again, that's okay- they return every night all on their own and all they wish is to see them with him.

This is so long and rambly, but I just- ugh, the opposites attract angle feels soooo slept on in game and out and I get why but god I wish we had more options to rp a pc who just wasn't super into magic unless it's through the filter of someone they love and their love for it and what that'd do to Gale's everything

[senjuushi]

I’ve got a weirdish one that’s a bit long: how would the guns react to getting a new handler who’s in charge of their care asking them to sign some sort of consent form? Theres parts asking for their permission to touch them or do certain medical procedures or even asking if they need accommodations or what they’re okay with other soldiers doing to them to make sure they’re not being taken advantage of by their comrades, and their handler makes it clear that what they sign off on, or don’t sign off on, will be respected and enforced. What would they say that they’re okay with? Would any of them ask for more? (Maybe Ghost, Kirsch, Fal, F, and Ninety for this one?)

Ghost

When he first goes over the form, Ghost doesn't believe it's real. There's no way anyone would take a gun's answers seriously, and with his answers, he's fully expecting them to be forgotten in a matter of days. He'll fill it out with half-hearted responses in the vague hope that he might be wrong, but of course, he doesn't dare to ask for too much. Things like requesting not to be locked in his room alone for days at a time are the most he dares to request, and even then, he's anticipating it to mean nothing.

Kirsch

He doesn't understand the point of the form at all. As long as you're paying attention to him, Kirsch doesn't care what's done or how he's treated. He ends up being a little manipulative, writing things that he hopes will coax you into touching him and keeping him close, and strategizing what things he's "okay with" in a way to maximize how much attention he gets. It's not honest at all. He doesn't so much as think about what he's really comfortable with, just what he has to say to get what he wants from you.

Fal

This feels like a trap. Fal doesn't know what he can say that won't look like a failure to comply with what's expected of him. Setting boundaries can only give others ammunition to know what would hurt him. He'll fill out the form with what he thinks the "correct" responses are, fully intending for it to never be relevant again. This is surely just another test of his behavior, so all he needs to do is match the invisible standards and move on. It never occurs to him that you could be serious about taking his feelings into account.

F

He doesn't believe that the form is legitimate for a second, and fills it out exactly how you'd expect of his usual persona. F's answers insist that he doesn't care what's done to him— some are almost outright inviting sexual contact and pain. In his mind, he has no other choice for what he can say. Anything else would be admitting far too much, and only putting himself even more at risk. If he trusts you already, the most he might ask for is being allowed to keep his scars covered, and even that feels brave.

Ninety

He doesn't know what to do with it. In Ninety's mind, a dog doesn't have any right to decide on consent like this, and the idea of defining his own boundaries is actively stressful. If you insist, he agrees to nearly everything, with just a small note that he doesn't want to be hit unless he's been really bad, and that he'd be thankful for more time to write his messages before he gets in trouble for being slow. If these directions are actually followed, he's somewhere between confused and painfully grateful.

[chatnoirwithblackhair]

What I wish my dear system understood is, it's completely normal for us to avoid being around people who have certain disorders. It doesn't make us ableist. It doesn't make anybody ableist, in fact, because trauma does not equal discrimination unless the person chooses to engage in hateful behaviors, which is a completely separate topic. Ableism, by definition, "is discrimination and social prejudice against people with physical or mental disabilities. Ableism characterizes people as they are defined by their disabilities and it also classifies disabled people as people who are inferior to non-disabled people."

It is not the same as trauma.

There is a line drawn between being ableist and traumatized. Until you are actively speaking out against certain people and discriminate against them, until you are actively trying to put them down, to hurt them, to speak of them with hate, you are not being hateful by avoiding certain groups of people depending on characteristics they have. That goes for ableism too.

The easiest example of this I can give are women who are avoiding men because of sexual trauma. You wouldn't immediately assume that they are being sexist, you would think they have trauma around them, understand them, and while these women would still have to engage with men from time to time, you'd support them (women) in wanting separation from them (men) in every other way. Then how is it the same with disabled people?

My dear system, we have been around narcissists our entire lives non-stop. We had narcissists who used their disorder as an excuse to hurt us, and we felt too guilty to stand up for ourselves because we thought we would be ableist if we were to tell them to stop. "They just don't know any different," we told ourselves. But the harsh truth is, no matter the amount of empathy, no disorder allows you to hurt others. No matter if you can control it or not, it is not an excuse, ever, and we have always had a right to say we do not want to engage with people with NPD. We are not being hateful towards them. My darling heamdates, we tried to understand them the best we could and find ways to work with them. And we know that if those people decided to abuse us again, we would fall for it immediately. We were always allowed to sat "no." We were always allowed to avoid them.

No person is being ableist if they set a boundary in order to not hurt themselves. We have no kind of prejudice against them other than basic trauma and a desire to not get into yet another relationship/friendship that would retraumatize us. We are allowed to join support groups for those like us. The people who we have been with put us through literal hell, and we can't even admit it due to there being so much that if we're not in denial, we are going to spiral into insanity.

We ourselves barely experience empathy, if at all, and we never gave ourselves the opportunity to hurt others.

And people out there with same experiences, you are allowed to avoid certain groups of people because of your trauma. Or just simply because you're uncomfortable. I know that there are disorders that are stigmatized to the core, and so people are trying to defend them the best they can, but it should not enable abuse. If a person is abusive, they are abusive. If they are abusive because of their disorder, they are abusive because of their disorder. If they have a disorder that makes it hard for them to understand empathy, social cues, etc, they can still listen to a "no," "stop," "I don't like this," "you're hurting me," "you're making me uncomfortable." Therapy exists, and if it's not available, basic human decency works, too. Nobody is saying it's fun for people with certain disorders to be stigmatized because of them and treated like garbage. But it also doesn't give said people the "okay" to treat others like garbage either.

Ableism is not the same as avoidance due to trauma.

The existence of stigma and ableism and people suffering from it is not an excuse to enable abuse.

Your trauma isn't any less valid just because somebody had a mental/physical disability that influenced/cause their behavior.

And whoever decides to tell us, or wheoever's reading it, otherwise, should go to hell.

[mentalisttraceur]

As I grow and heal, I catch more cloudbreaks of not needing to get angry because I'm safe now (the bad thing can't happen to me), or I'm feeling unshakably powerful (I can stop the bad thing once it happens or handle everything it does to me), or seeing far and wide enough (it's not really all bad, or it's actually good).

Working to develop a healthy relationship with my anger has also shown great promise for ability to be more gentle or measured with my anger. Because:

Anger expression doesn't have to always be either held back or a five-second explosive surgery that decisively changes the doer of shitty behavior to do it less. In childhood, under a certain pattern of abuse, fear, stress, and trauma, I had to sharpen and compress but also curb my anger, until that's basically what it always had to be. I could only safely release anger when it would do something effective in the time window I had before it was punished.

Anger expression doesn't have to be saved for the worst transgressions. In my late teens I ended up in a relationship with someone very easily and strongly hurt by me being angry at them. I had more compassion for their hurt than my wants and needs I guess. That's a funny error of empathy - a more hurtable person always "wins", a sufficiently resilient empath only ever gives. So I got very good at both finding ways to not be angry and to not express anger for minor stuff.

As I heal these two things, I am starting to see a view where anger is a normal active part of the toolkit, not a vicious snarling dog only released in extreme situations or when tired, but something always ready to fade in and out fluidly. Anger is interpersonal hardening which you can use to shore up your resolve and tolerance as-needed. Our boundaries, offendabilities, and even just perception of contradiction to our goals and preferences, can define healthy automatic activations of anger and how intense or soft they will be.

Growing a self-worth core tied into this. That axiomatic feeling that I deserve good things. Specifically, that I deserve a certain standard of treatment from others more than they deserve me proactively tolerating worse to spare them bad feelings or outcomes. Without a self-worth core, empathy prevented me from getting/acting mad at people unless I felt their intentions/motives/thinking were sufficiently bad/unacceptable. With a self-worth core, the other person can be well-meaning, understandable, or even just good and right, and yet I can still deserve better from them or from the situation.

A healthy self-worth with healthy internal anger freedom naturally dials up anger to defend and assert yourself in line with your wants, and it doesn't need others to be unacceptably bad, which means the anger doesn't need to escalate to your-existence-as-you-are-is-a-problem levels just to get going, it doesn't need to be bundled with judgement, condemnation, and hard feelings, and it can relax once the behavior changes instead of needing the person to change.

[stories-of-the-nrm]

Humanized Engine Designs

Thanks to @jayde-jots submission here's a master post about how I imagine each of these engines would look like as humans. I'll plan on updating this as more characters are introduced. Unless specifically asked this is just for NRM engines (with the exceptions of Gordon and his scrapped siblings). I know that AI art isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I use it for the sake of giving my readers an idea of what these characters look like. If anyone has their own art they want to share by all means share it, I'd love to see it.

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

General Rules

Every engine with a face can turn into a human, although every engine has a different opinion on how they use that ability. Some of them like Scott absolutely loves it. Other engines like Mallard absolutely hate their human form and only leave their engine if absolutely necessary.

An engine's human form is based on not only the build of their engine, but also their activity levels and how much human food they eat. It's entirely possible for an engine's human form to gain or lose weight if any of those 3 things are changed.

Their human forms never age as their face is based on the engine's general personality. They do however change if enough of the engine's parts are removed. For example if an engine has no wheels, they won't be able to have legs in their human form. Scratched up paint will appear on their human form as well.

If an engine gets hurt as a human they can always heal in their engine. However, their pain tolerance as a human is significantly higher (which makes it an appealing option for any mechanical servicing as it reduces the area of the pain.)

The Flying Scotsman (Scott)

As stated in a previous post, Scott looks very similar to Elvis Presley. His height is a consistent 6' 8". The smallest he's ever been was WWII as that was before he started eating human food and it was his most active period in his service history.

As you can see the one of the left is about 300 lbs but super muscular. This is how he looked from his first instance as a human all the way up until after WWII when he was modified into an A3. The one on the right is how he looks around the time of his overhaul. Decades of eating human food and being inactive caused him to weigh as much as 400 lbs (hence why it's necessary for multiple humans to help him move if he's ill). He's still strong but it's obvious his muscles aren't defined like they used to be.

Gordon (NWR #4)

Gordon for all intents and purposes is Scott's older brother. He was the prototype for the A1 but he's still technically the same class as Scott since he too was modified into an A3. He's also 6' 8" like Scott but weight wise he's actually smaller. Gordon doesn't eat human food nearly to the degree Scott does. Gordon, while his express train line is significantly shorter than Scott's ever was, has remained fully serviceable well into the 2000s.

In Gordon's case, his human form is basically consistent. He never regularly left his engine until after WWII, so his human form has remained the same. A fully serviceable engine is the equivalent of an athlete so despite his age, Gordon is still his original weight of 300 lbs. Even after he was taken off of his express duties, Gordon still pulls regular passenger trains, meaning his weight hasn't changed.

LNER A4 Mallard (Mallard)

Mallard is an interesting engine. Depsite his model actually weighing more than Scott, I actually see his human form as smaller. Mallard's design specifically had these things called "valances" or side skirting which is how he became streamlined to begin with. Since this is something you can actually remove, I would assume that would be enough to make him weigh less than Scott. Like Scott and Gordon, Mallard would be 6' 8".

As you can see, he's quite slim and athletic despite his inactivity. I would say in his peak, Mallard was about 220 lbs. He's known as the fastest steam engine ever and had to consistently travel hundreds of miles over 90 mph and even up to 100 mph. That would keep him in very good shape. Even after his withdrawal and long periods of inactivity Mallard would still weigh at the most 250 lbs. He doesn't eat human food and hasn't had as many major overhauls compared to Scott and Gordon.

GNR A1 Great Northern (Great Northern)

Originally the first of the A1s, Great Northern was built to be the same size as the rest of his class. Therefore like Gordon and Scott he would be 6' 8". In 1945 he was withdrawn to be rebuilt into an LNER Thompson Class A1/1. Because of his rebuild he would actually grow to be about 6' 9".

Given his services in WWII, he would've been 300 lbs like Gordon. He took great pride in his service and only left his engine once to have his picture taken in what he called his dress uniform. He was the highest performing engine of his new class which would keep his weight consistent with his base human weight. Despite efforts to preserve him, a badly worn cylinder resulted in his withdrawal and eventual scrapping in 1962. In the NRM universe, Scott honors his immediate oldest brother by keeping said picture in his wallet. Gordon also honored his successor by wearing his dress uniform when he pulled the Queen's train.

LNER Class A4 Sir Nigel Gresley (Nigel)

The 100th official Gresley Pacific ever built. He's the same height as Mallard as they have the exact same design. His livery changed numerous times, even after WWII and decided to grow out a mustache to honor his creator.

He's one of the only preserved engines still in operation. Therefore unlike Mallard, Nigel is still about 230 lbs. Since it isn't a full workload compared to his early days, he did gain some weight. He only eats human food on special occasions such as his name sake's birthday, and the anniversary of his 1959 excursion where he reached 112 mph (the postwar speed record for a steam engine).

[pichuan]

I'm a conservative. By that, I mean that I want to conserve the rights and privileges of the people around me. Yes, all of them. And by rights, I figure that everyone should be left alone to do as they will so long as they don't hurt anyone.

So, yeah, I like open carry. I think folk should be allowed to carry whatever weapon they want... so long as they don't hurt anyone outside of a life or death situation, such as being mugged or robbed or assaulted in some other dangerous way. That's not to say that I advocate shooting people, but if the situation demands it, fine.

I like open marriage, too. By that I mean that any adult should be able to marry another adult, regardless of race, or sex or anything else, so long as both parties are on board.

I like to think that people are naturally good hearted, but I know that many aren't. There are many people who are toxic not only to themselves but to others as well. But, still, I believe that people should be free to do as they please *so long as they don't hurt others*.

I think that some form of government is necessary, simply to deal with the collective needs of the community. It's difficult to address the trash truck or the cop car or the building that needs attention without some form of representation that has the publicly granted authority to do something about those things when they have problems. So, I like representative democracy. Hire people to represent your interests, broadly, by vote and let them take care of administering things like roads, public buildings (like libraries) and bridges. I also think that that government must be limited in scope and authority unless there is an existential threat that must be dealt with in a unified manner. That is to say, leave the citizens alone as much as possible, but have the means to defend the country against aggressive neighbors.

I also think that education should be there to educate people in things such as reading and writing and math, some general science and history, and civics. Specialty classes such as foreign languages or specific branches of science could be addressed in advanced schools (think high school), and college prep could be addressed as well. I think that politics should be studied so that all citizens are aware of the way that politics works, and teach them critical thinking, not just what to think.

That means that history classes would need to teach as many views as possible about the history being taught. That is to say, let those who lost the war speak of their position, or those who were absorbed into other countries tell of their problems. Let those whose people were enslaved at some time call out those who held them and point out their error. But let us also forgive in the present those whose ancestors wronged ours. Let us learn of your history, whoever you are, and let us celebrate that history along with our own.

Let people do as they please. Let kids have lemonade stands and mow lawns for cash money, much as they did back in the day. Let kids roam and play and leave their electronics behind so that they have the benefit of sun and activity and the socialization that comes with playing with other kids in real life. Let the kids sort out their hierarchy themselves, without adults interfering and demanding one form of inclusion over another. Let kids do what their curiosity leads them to, whether that is art, music, science, auto-repair, plumbing... whatever. Let adults have the same freedom, to do or not, to travel or not, to live as nearly as feasible to their idea of how life should be... just don't hurt anyone in the process.

But how do you enforce this idea of freedom? Do you exile people who harm others? Jail them? Limit their freedom in some way that punishes them for the harm they've caused? And how do you define "harm"? What about the shopkeeper that has dishonest scales, or the representative that takes bribes to vote a given way, or the phishing scam that ultimately leaves it to the scammed to choose to be involved? How do you determine "harm", and how do you combat it?

What about the people who are naturally aggressive and push and cajole people into following them into the realm of authoritative leaders and unjust actions? How do you combat an organized collective that dominates your town, when the basic building blocks of society are "free will" and "do no harm"?

How do we achieve and keep our freedom in a world that requires us to pick between control freaks at every election?

Yep. It's a puzzle that I haven't figured out.

[hedgehogcryptid]

This is my personal rant about the One Piece live action so if you loved it to bits then probably don't read it, but:

I was expecting for it to be bad in the traditional sense of being tacky and over the top, I was prepared for that. And it turned out to be good in that sense, and then disapointed me in so many unexpected ways.

It takes so many themes the story had been building for years and then makes them lose all sense.

That focus on being good? On doing the right thing because it's the right thing? Made me want to tear my hair out. How do you grab the story about the weird little dude who does whatever he wants because he wanted to do it and then suck all the selfishness out of it? Luffy calling himself "a different kind of pirate" when people are afraid of him? It wouldn't be so hard to have him answer to "but you're a pirate" with "yeah, and pirates do what they want, and I don't want to hurt you so why would I?" since when does Luffy do things because they're good? Since when does he actively try to be nice to people? He is nice, mostly, because the things he wants to do happen to come off as nice. He also calls people stupid to their faces and he doesn't bother to show manners unless they don't interfere with what he wants. He will tell you thanks for the food, but he would still steal it beforehand. Bellemere telling Nami she adopted two children because it was the right thing to do? She saw to babies barely surviving and went "this is mine now" righteousness had no part in it!! You don't love people because it's right! You love them because you love them! That's it! That's all! That's everything! And Shanks! Telling Luffy to be good! Being more wise uncle than drunk uncle. None of these things would bother me so much individually, but put all together it turns into a theme and goodness was never a theme in One Piece! It's not the point! "Being a good person" is a value too abstract for the things the story has to say. It's never about being a wholly good/bad person, it's about "you helped me" and "you feed the hungry" and "I want my friends to be happy" and "you are hurting someone I like" and "I don't like what you did to these people" and "your rules are stupid why would I care about them?"

Zoro? Zoro needing Luffy to remind him of his dream?? What the fuck was that? The dude who told Luffy point blank that if he ever became an obstacle Zoro would kill him. That's the same dude who says Luffy's enthusiasm about dreams is "contagious"?

Fucking Garp?? How dare they make Garp into "convolutedly supportive grandpa" when one of his defining features is "family never comes before the job"? "Oh I wanted to make sure you knew who you were" no! Garp wants to bury his head in the sand and refuse to take a side until his hand is forced and by that point he defaults to the people who will kill his grandson!

The people of Kokoyashi believing Nami actually betrayed them? Nojiko, who got tatooed so that it wasn't so weird that her sister had a tatoo of her own, in hopes that she wouldn't feel so bad if the ink was something they had in common, that they shared, that connected them. That Nojiko attacked her sister in front of her mother's grave? Why? What did the plot gain with that? What was the point of Bellemere's absolute refusal to deny her family if we don't later learn that both sisters were fighting for the safety of the other even while pretending not to care? That neither of them ever abandoned the other?

[unlimitedbutchworks]

Hi! I'm getting married (soonish, we haven't set a date yet) to a transfemme who is early in their transition. I met them when they were 18 and j a depressed anxious socially awkward nerd and over the past like ~year I've watched them blossom into themself (it's magical). But as a tme person sometimes i feel like I'm not fit to be the main person supporting them during this journey, bc they don't have any irl tgirl/transfem friends.

Do you have any suggestions? I'm always trying to learn more about transmisogyny. I took them to get an affirming haircut by a woman I met on Lex, I help with makeup. I've been trying to help them make friends bc they still do have like, a diagnosed social phobia lol. I think it'd be good if I WASNT the main support for this stuff in many ways. And they are like 10x as confident now that they present more authentically, but it's a process. And idk. I know them rly well and love them a lot but I worry sometimes that I'm somehow hurting them or doing the wrong thing.

I know I can't do everything for them (codependency lol) but I want to be the best partner I can be. I'm always asking what they want but sometimes it's like, j figuring out as we go bc it's all new. So what would YOU want from a tme partner ig? How do you assume I could be helpful, better, etc?

Feel free not to respond if this is too much. I don't mean to be putting too much on you. I'm just trying to treat my fiance better and better each day (failing sometimes).

hello and congrats!!! first off this is so touching and aaaa. my god. anyway.

it sounds like you’re really on the right track for sure :) friends are extremely important especially for ppl in minority groups that make socializing harder, so trying to help to her get out of her shell and get to know other people is certainly a great idea; both because she deserves having something of a social group, and because like you say, trans friends can be really critical. i can’t speak with authority since I don’t know you & your situation, but it could definitely help with supporting her and whatnot; i value my transfem friends irl a lot and they’re wonderful with buoying my transition. im not sure id say you’re ‘not fit’ for it unless you dont want to be, since there’s a lot of ways to support and be there for someone’s transition. my femme is tme and she has been wonderful with my transition and helping me explore different gender stuff by helping me with womens clothes, sometimes a little makeup, and her support when im mixing things up with my presentation. she’s happy to change and play with her vocab too; when i realized i like being called pretty from time to time now she works it into when she’s teasing me or being sweet, things like that.

as far as other things id want to see in a tme partner, the willingness to look at transmisogyny and learn about it and work it over is pretty important to me; but it sounds like you’re already working on this, so just keep your mind open with a clear heart. if you make a mistake, trust that you can learn from it and move on. id also say to let her be the one to define and speak about her transition and her past as well, and not to get tripped up on gender too much; i had an ex who was a lesbian and hated hearing me talk about my past as a boy. was very unfortunate. so keep an open mind and if you don’t understand something or you’d like to understand more, try not to be too afraid to ask; I can’t speak for her exactly, but I can say i really don’t mind getting asked about gender stuff or transmisogyny since it shows that someone cares and also gives me a chance to make sure we’re on the same page. and also, while this may be a little risqué, so long as she’s not ace or something id think about making sure you touch and love on her body holistically. a lot of trans women don’t get touched like how cis and other women do, so don’t be afraid to get a little handsy if she doesn’t mind it. having our bodies be actively wanted (touching sides, thighs, etc) can be really very wonderful when we’re taught that we’re repulsive in every way that matters.

so tl;dr: getting her more friends is a great idea for a milieu of reasons! don’t walk on eggshells with transmisogyny too much, just keep an open mind and maybe think about biases sometimes but don’t let it get to your beat and beat you up over it. but I think your concern sounds like it might be a sign that you care and are gonna try, and if that’s the case then approach any issues that come up from an angle of love and i think it should buff out. anyone wanna chime in in the replies?

[maxhqs]

if you’re hearing ORDINARY WORLD by DURAN DURAN playing, you have to know MAXIMILIANO RUIZ (HE/HIM; CIS-MALE) is near by! the 45 year old MAYOR has been in denver for, like, THIRTY-FIVE YEARS. they’re known to be quite COMPLACENT, but being OPTIMISTIC seems to balance that out. or maybe it’s the fact that they resemble PEDRO PASCAL. personally, i’d love to know more about them seeing as how they’ve got those FRESHLY PRESSED TAILORED SUITS, CIGARETTES PRESSED AGAINST GLASS ASHTRAYS, ABSURD ORNATE VASES, AND BEDHEAD FASHIONED WITH MOLDING PASTE INTO MESSY-CHIC vibes. and maybe i’ll get my chance if i hang out around the DOWNTOWN DISTRICT long enough!

BIO TRIGGERS: death, drinking, pregnancy scare, mental health, reckless spending.

BASIC INFORMATION

NAME: Maximilano Vicente Ruiz

NICKNAMES: max, maximo, any variation of max you can think of -- he will answer to. 

PRO-NOUNS: he/him

GENDER: cis-male

AGE: 45

D.O.B: December 21

P.O.B: Santo Domingo, Chile

Raised in: Denver, Colorado after age 10

ASTROLOGICAL SIGN: sagittarius sun, the rest is completely lost on him

SEXUAL ORIENTATION: bisexual

RELATIONSHIP STATUS: married to the job (perpetually single)

OCCUPATION: Mayor of Denver

EDUCATION: Master of Public Administration

APPEARANCE

HEIGHT: 5’11 ft

WEIGHT: 170 lbs

BUILD: muscular, lean

HAIR COLOUR: dark brown

EYE COLOUR: brown

WARDROBE STYLE: typically business casual, unless off the clock then it's jeans, a tee, and a flannel

DEFINING FEATURES: politicians smile and a firm handshake

HEALTH

PHYSICAL AILMENTS: n/a

MENTAL AILMENTS: depression and anxiety

DO THEY DRINK: yes

DO THEY SMOKE: yes

RECREATIONAL DRUGS: top secret

ADDICTIONS: nicotine and work

PERSONALITY

POSITIVES: optmistic, charming, confident, intelligent, brave, resourceful

NEGATIVES: complacent, workaholic, defensive, obsessive

LIKES: listening to new music, cooking with friends, eclectic house art, physical touch, buying sneakers but only wearing oxfords.

DISLIKES: disposable vapes, people in his business, songs on repeat, harsh judgements, wrinkled clothing, milk and milk alternatives

ACTIVITIES & SKILLS

SKILLS: cooking, leading, storytelling, negotiating

STRENGTHS: idealistic, curious, energetic

WEAKNESSES: pride, reckless, unstructured

HIDDEN TALENTS: --

LANGUAGES SPOKEN: english and spanish

BRIEF HISTORY

Maximiliano, Maximo, Mil, Maxim, Max – whatever you want to call him, he’s heard it and loves it. Nicknames are cute and he acknowledges them, his family always changed his name on him, you know?

He lived in Santo Domingo only until he was 10, then his family immigrated to the US, finding a home in Denver, Colorado

Colorado become his second home and he eventually went on to University of Denver and graduated with a degree in public administration.

His whole life he felt like he had to be perfect for everyone around him, he never stepped a toe out of line, had literally only had wine with dinner a handful of times, and never intentionally hurt anyone. This weighed on him the most. He saw his Chilean peers get mistreated in so many ways, he just wanted to help them and other immigrant families. He soon realized, though, that he was just a shell of a man who had no clue who he was.

Once his dad died his first year of grad school, he started to change on the inside and slowly crack. Year after year everything started piling on him, the responsibility of his own family, his relationships, and partner's families were all just too much for him. Adding a serious pregnancy scare on top of it all at age 23, was when the glass fully imploded. Within months he became broody and disconnected, until eventually he broke off a serious relationship, dropped out of school, and moved to a different part of town.

Out of school with no degree under his belt, he picked up bartending.

Those dark five years were him literally living life as a bachelor: waking up, going to work, coming home, drinking more, watching a dumb show or going out with friends, coming home, passing out, and repeating.

He did this until a few triggering events shoved him back into public and academic arenas.

At thirty he finally went back to grad school, got his Master's in Public Administration and started running for local offices.

First he started in community initiatives, volunteering his time while he attended city meetings and began networking. It only took a few years before he was appointed to city council. From there he kept working on his image, putting together again the person he was before the Big Break.

Two years ago he was finally appointed mayor -- he finally got what he was gunning for, but somehow all those feelings from his youth were rushing back and he was headed into a spiral.

This time, though, it was quiet and calculated -- he knew where he could go, he could handle a little drinking, he wasn't doing anything wrong. Just blowing a little steam in the form of reckless spending where beautiful women were involved... it was fine. Or that's what he was going to keep telling himself as he watched the women dance.

HEADCANNONS

In his younger years he frequented CLUB 303, but after hitting his thirties he lost the will to party all night long. Now, though, he can be seen slipping inside the doors of the Ambrisia Lounge after a rough day at work -- which is happening more often than not.

Hangovers are familiar to him, stale cigarettes and Dior Sauvage are his signature scents.

Divisively he is not a cat or dog person, but a fish person and has an aquarium that he takes meticulous care of.

more to come.

WORK

coming soon.

LOVE

coming soon.

WANTED CONNECTIONS

MAXIMILIANO RUIZ is looking for A SCRETARY/ASSISTANT. they’d like the faceclaim to possibly be someone along the lines of (35+ M/F/NB) MAGGIE Q, CONRAD RICAMORA , FREEMA AGYEMAN, ZOE SALDANA, STEVEN YEUN but you must reach out to MAXHQS to find out more!

MAXIMILIANO RUIZ is looking for FWB(S). they’d like the faceclaim to possibly be someone along the lines of (25+ M/F/NB), but you must reach out to MAXHQS to find out more!

MAXIMILIANO RUIZ is looking for EXES. they’d like the faceclaims to possibly be someone along the lines of (25+ M/F/NB), but you must reach out to MAXHQS to find out more! (+ give me messy, give me aching -- I'm here for it all. Long term exes, one night stands -- anything where they've be connected for a night or more and gotta work through it now.)

MAXIMILIANO RUIZ is looking for A HALF-SIBLING. they’d like the faceclaim to possibly be someone along the lines of (35+ M/F/NB), but you must reach out to MAXHQS to find out more! (Definitely reach out about this one to discuss, it can be known/unknown, a good/bad relationship, but most likely connected via Max's dad, who is Chilean)

[quietquaking]

i’m copy/pasting a conversation i just had with my partner on mental health to here in the hopes that it might help some people. so, here we go.

*tw*: mild mentions of suicidal thoughts

my partner: i’m sorry i’m not getting better. it’s my fault.

me: there’s no reason to be sorry. and it’s not your fault.

partner: how the fuck is it not my fault

me: ok lemme try and armchair-diagnose you real quick

i’m guessing you think it’s your fault because things aren’t getting better. despite the much larger amounts of mental health representation in media these days, most of it is of people getting better. this can be good to see, but it’s also very discouraging for people still stuck in their traumatic situations, such as yourself. you compare your minimal amount of progress to theirs, and feel like you’re doing something wrong. you may also blame yourself because, quite honestly, you don’t really want to get better. maybe because you think you deserve it, or because your struggle defines your personality and you don’t think you’ll be anybody without it. or, like you said, you see the lack of progress and see what you’re doing to slow it down as well. ok. time to disprove all of those reasons.

for one, the fact that you’re not getting better is entirely expected. this is because you are still stuck in the trauma that is highschool and your household. it is quite literally impossible to get better when you are still actively getting hurt. there is no way to go about it. the main thing to do is survive, so that you have the chance to heal afterwards.

on the topic of part of you not wanting to get better, for if that’s something that applies to you. there’s really no scientific or logical way to dispel this one, so i’ll do what i can, which is offering my own personal experiences as an example. i was in that exact scenario. i came out of eighth grade a depressed, guilty, anxious, suicidal mess. for a variety of reasons. then, i started feeling a little bit better. immediately, i got so guilty and tried to make myself be depressed again. i thought i didn’t deserve the happiness, that it would prove everything i went through was just me being dramatic, and altogether fake. i also thought without my jokes about my sleep deprivation, eating habits, and suicidal wishes, i wouldn’t have a personality. i would turn bland and normal, sink into the masses of other teens who are marginally ok with everything, and disappear. well, it didn’t happen. i was slowly convinced/forced by my friends that i did deserve something better, if not happiness then at least a lack of depression. i let it go, and my issues faded, became less up-front and in my face. they’re still there now, but since i don’t hold them to close to myself, they’re much easier to handle. and, i grew a personality. you’ve seen it for yourself- i’ve grown into a flourishing young person, with lots of hobbies and talents and friends, and i actually enjoy my life, at least sometimes. it can sound impossible, and fake, and it’s easy to respond with “oh sure it worked for you, but it won’t for me”. but that’s not something you can know unless you actually give it a chance. just try. let go of your demons, and let them coexist, rather than clinging to you like an evil little thing ready to suck out all your dopamine.

now the hardest one. your own faults being magnified. you see yourself, the depressed, anxious, worn-out version that is the only one you can find. and you see the things you may be doing wrong, slowing down your own progress, digging your heels into the mountain you built out of self-hate and refusing to move forward. you connect the two, and see yourself as the problem. i won’t lie. you’re not perfect, nobody is. you’re definitely doing some things that don’t help anything, and very possibly make things worse. but that does not mean you are to blame. you are not the one that started the cycle of neglect and blame and abuse in your household. you are not the one that instigated the bullying and harassment from the assholes at school and your brother. if someone else started a fire, and you added a single log, would you blame yourself for the forest burning?

you are not the reason you are hurting. you are not the reason you’re not getting better. you can, of course, improve your own behavior, as everybody can. but you are not the root of the problem, and you have no reason to blame yourself.

(there is more if anyone is interested but i feel like this post is already long enough)

[7isthename]

Tailor-made

I almost always had better results when I listened to myself Sometimes it felt like intuition Sometimes it felt like arrogance

No matter what people thought of me Whenever it was I who made the decision I have been more likely to get my desired result

Now I see this in a clearer way I shall explain with a memory

There was a time that someone borrowed my mechanical pencil They kept breaking the lead tip They realized I use more lead compared to them They shortened it

That memory stayed in my mind I was careful whether I used a mechanical pencil or wooden pencil

Now I am doing a lot of writing and Somehow that memory appeared in my mind As my hand was hurting with how much pressure I applied while writing I used more lead to make sure that I don't use too much pressure while writing

I don't know or maybe I simply don't remember Whether this is something I did with or without thinking

What I know is that their reaction was defining their preferences I didn't need to change myself

Although being able to recognize even my smallest habits brings me joy I have been writing in an uncomfortable way for years I didn't need to internalize such a small thing and make something as small as that but also a big part of my life a problem

Now that got me thinking

Something like this happened with an advice as well I did as advised because I thought as they are more experienced than me what they say is more important Things could turn out the way envisioned however there are too many variables in life and it didn't turn out the way either of us would prefer

My conclusion is that People often give general advices Those general advices stem from their experiences so Even those general advices are a reflection of Their choices Their environment Their luck Their life

So unless someone actively tries to give us tailor-made advice we wont get the advice we need but we will get a peek at what got them where they are

I guess that is why people say take advice from those whose life you want to have.

Also I wanna add something that is related but not exactly part of it.

I once heard/read that our intuition is our experiences that we don't remember. Which is why we need to trust our intuition.

However, as it is also explained in a Ted Talk about luck although it would be a dream to have a gut feeling that always points us to the right direction the reality is far from that. Number -just ilke hips lol- don't lie.

What I am trying to say although we gotta follow our instincts what we need to do more is learn about all the other options and probabilities so that we can achieve our desired results.

That is all :D

How did you read all that?

Was it boring?

Did u have fun?

Did you get everything out of your system?

Did u see the reference?

Anyway, bye!

[steampunktomboy]

Hello! I saw your question about prison and punishment in the prison abolition tag. To put it very simply, prison abolitionists don’t believe in punishment! Understandably, that is a very counterintuitive position that is typically hard to swallow, but we tend to think about it like this: Punishment is an ineffective approach to long-term behavior control.

It helps to understand this position if you think of human activity not in terms of ontologically right actions or wrong actions, but simply behavior. We are animals just like every other species that evolved into being on earth. All animals express behavior. When you see a cat chase after a bug, it’s not doing it because it is a morally correct or incorrect activity, it’s doing it because it’s trying to meet a need (satiating hunger, under-stimulation, etc.).

Similarly, all behavior that humans express is simply an attempt to meet a need. If you take a behaviorism class in university, they’ll tell you that the fundamental needs that all creatures (including us) are trying to meet are either a) to escape something or b) to gain something. Obviously, just because this is true doesn’t mean the behavior, whatever it may be, is harmless. But it is a fact that needs to be considered if we want to build a society that minimizes harm and maximizes support.

The snake oil salesman is trying to meet a need. The bigwig exec embezzling money is trying to meet a need. It may not be correct, but those individuals are perceiving either a threat they need to escape from or a deprivation of a certain element that needs to be satisfied.

This brings us to punishment. It is generally accepted in the behaviorist/learning psychology field that punishment alone is not an effective way to terminate the expression of ‘undesirable’ behavior, whatever that is defined as. Best case scenario, punishment works only as a short-term deterrent and the person will eventually go back to the same behavior. Worst-case scenario, the punishment creates a new sense of threat or deprivation for the individual and they start displaying new undesirable behaviors to try to escape from threat or gain what they need.

So, what do we do about individuals that seem mentally healthy enough, but are committing crimes? Do they need rehabilitation like other types of criminals? Yes. Rehabilitation is a shorthand way of describing the process of discovering what is motivating the individual’s behavior (what needs are they trying to meet?) and trying to meet those needs (or teaching them how to do it themselves) in a way that minimizes harm. The bigwig embezzler may genuinely believe he and his family are not safe from the threat of discomfort unless he continues to take more money from others (this is actually a very common sentiment among the rich, btw). Rehabilitation would involve either satisfying the need, or teaching him that in reality, you can adapt and be perfectly happy and successful even if you can’t send your kids to prep school.

In this rehabilitation model, there is still room for logical consequences to actions. The embezzler would have to return the money. The snake oil salesman would have to close his business. There needs to be something happening to the individual that makes it clear that it takes less time and energy to behave in ways that get their needs met without hurting lots of people.

But crucially, we need to give them the tools to get their needs met. In our current punitive system, the punishments we dole out far outweigh the attempts at rehab. The psychological impact of the prison system creates far more maladaptive behavior than letting inmates work for their GEDs would ever ameliorate. And as a general rule, even in the world of white collar crime, we do little to address what is actually motivating the individual to engage in the behavior. The environment that bore that behavior typically continues to exist after the individual is punished. In prison abolition, our goal is to create a society that allows for ease in restructuring the environment of those that commit crime so that it is much easier for them to meet their needs in a minimally harmful way. Punishment alone will never teach people how to do that.

Already got an ask like this, see my answer there

[irregulardiaryposts]

01:37 16/02/2023

Well... its obvs been a while since i updated huh. reading back on some of those .. some of its nice ig and some of it is quite articulate but looking back on some of it with my perspective now, idk its sad but also a little cringe lol. but thats the point of a diary to keep it cringe and truthful to how im feeling in the moment. well anyway

its 2023 woooo im in my second year of uni and things are pretty okay i guess. im still a litlte lonely dont get me wrong but im sure things will get better. um. ive got an essay due at midnight on the 16th (technically today) and im like a third through it? but the first 1/3 is the easiest part cos its just explaining the concepts. anyway im behind on a lot of uni work. for no reason. at all. like theres no good reason behind it other than i need medicated i guess. maybe i really should get meds im an adult now so im hoping they can. its genuinely really affecting my uni performance i cant get out of bed most days during the winter cos its so so cold. why is the world so so cold. my feet are also so so cold. can you tell im procrastinating :P unis still lonely but also i barely go anyway so what would i know anyway. i got some hobbies i guess. anime has revived my want for a tumblr blog so in november i made a new blog for anime ToT. its fun tho i really do enjoy it its so fun and silly and i can be as insane as i want to over fictional characters. better than twitter by a mile cos well yeah. it has also reignited my want to make art, cos then i can post it and other people who are also insane about the same characters can enjoy it too. even if its kinda bad idgaf. the whole 'oh shit two cakes' meme constantly runs through my head.

ahh anyway i also like playing video games too, or ig the difference is i have the money to buy them and a decent laptop to run them on. so that helps fill the void of community im missing. i really miss people. and im a huge introvert for the most part (unless im drunk but shhhh) but i miss not being in my room 24/7. i guess the theme of this update is i need meds ToT. not that it will necessarily be a perfect solution sometimes theyre not but ig it doesnt hurt to talk to a doctor about it. that depends on if i can actually get an appt ahhhhh. i dont have too much to talk about ig just that im alive and barely staying afloat but not actively suicidal so *thumbs up*. i really do need to write this essay i would dislike to get an extension because then i would just put it off again until next week lol. im such a good procrastinator :D this definitely isnt detrimental to my non-existent work ethic.

maybe i can talk about something thats itching at me from my philosophy course. my essay isnt exactly on this topic but i rlly wanna formulate some thoughts on it lol.

so we're talking about what exists in the world right? things people would easily say exist are things like tables, chairs, frogs, dogs, atoms and molecules. things that are a little harder to figure out if they exist are things like love, morality, goodness, numbers, gender. the lists are not exhaustive but that kind of thing. and there's this concept of Ordinary Objects(OO) and Extraordinary Objects(EO). the first list has almost all OO, which are defined as being highly visible objects right before our eyes (that do not escape our notice). the atoms and molecules make things tricky in philosophy as nothing can ever, ever, be simple in this subject. anyway. EO are objects that are also highly visible objects that do escape our notice. you're thinking how can an object, a physical object, that is so obviously in front of us, escape our notice??? well you're not alone in thinking philosophy just makes up things along with justifications of said things just for shits and giggles, and calls it a day, cos that's exactly what i thought when i heard this the first time. and genuinely so much of philosophy is just postulating and theorising about this thing and that thing but its done with such earnestness and sincerity that i get endeared by these stupid dead guys. ANYWAY. the existence of EO are obviously controversial (of course) and even OO are argued too. but yes what are EO exactly? the example given in the reading was a Trog - an object that is composed of a dog and a tree trunk. no, they are not connected in any way, and no they don't even have to be near each other but they can compose this object called a Trog. this is what you can call an EO. it is highly visible (assuming the dog isn't microscopic and the tree is not invisible) and it is right before our eyes yet we never notice it. well of course, who would? but the question is do EO really exist or is it a baseless theory. well...

another example of an