#and that’s not even touching how they’ve LITERALLY BEEN TO AND ESCAPED HELL GO LOOK FOR HIM THERE

[writeriguess]

Hi hi!!

I was wondering if I could request fem!bullied!reader x Bakugou

Where reader keeps getting bullied online by some of her ex friends and it’s really affected her however she refuses to tell anyone what they’ve been saying about her

Thank you so much!!

Unspoken Wounds

The dull glow of your phone screen illuminated your face in the dark, your fingers frozen over the hateful words littering your notifications. Your ex-friends had made it their mission to tear you down, and for reasons you couldn't quite understand, you couldn't bring yourself to block them.

Maybe it was the twisted part of you that needed to know what they were saying. Maybe you thought you deserved it.

Pathetic. Fake. Attention-seeker. No wonder nobody wants to be around you.

Your stomach twisted, your chest tightening as you blinked back tears. No one knew about this—not your parents, not your teachers, not even your classmates. And especially not him.

"Katsuki would lose his damn mind," you muttered, locking your phone and pressing it against your chest.

Bakugou Katsuki had been your best friend since first year at U.A., and recently… maybe something more. He’d always been overprotective, aggressive when it came to people messing with you. But you couldn’t tell him about this.

You knew exactly how it would go. He’d explode—literally and figuratively. He’d demand names, find out who they were, and then proceed to make them regret ever opening their mouths. He’d probably get suspended.

And you didn’t want to be the reason for that.

So you kept it to yourself.

"Knew somethin' was off," Bakugou grumbled, leaning against your desk as the lunch bell rang. His red eyes bore into you, sharp as ever, arms crossed over his chest. "You’ve been actin’ weird for weeks. The hell’s goin’ on with you?"

You forced a small laugh, keeping your gaze locked on your barely touched bento. "I don’t know what you mean, Katsuki. I’m fine."

His frown deepened. "Bullshit."

Your stomach twisted. You should’ve known he wouldn’t just let it go. This was Bakugou. He could smell lies a mile away, and right now, you reeked of them.

"Just… stressed," you tried, stabbing at a piece of rice with your chopsticks. "School’s been rough."

"You’re a shit liar, you know that?"

You didn’t respond.

Bakugou narrowed his eyes, pushing himself off the desk and dragging a chair right next to yours. He sat down, his knee knocking against yours, his whole presence engulfing you like a fire you couldn’t escape from.

"You’re not eatin’ right," he pointed out, eyeing your bento. "You got dark circles. And when you think nobody’s lookin’, you go all quiet. Like you’re in your damn head too much."

You swallowed hard.

His voice lowered, softer now. "Who the fuck hurt you?"

Your breath hitched.

How did he always do this? How did he always get under your skin so easily?

"No one," you whispered.

Bakugou clenched his jaw. "I swear to god, if you lie to me one more time—"

"Katsuki, please," you cut in, voice barely above a whisper. "I just… I don’t wanna talk about it."

His hands curled into fists. He looked like he was about to explode, like he wanted to shake the truth out of you, but somehow, he held himself back.

"...Fine," he muttered, leaning back in his chair, arms still crossed tightly. "But you ain't gonna stop me from figurin’ it out myself."

Your stomach dropped.

"Wait—"

But the bell rang, and he was already grabbing his bag, shooting you a look that sent chills down your spine.

"This ain't over, dumbass."

You thought you were safe.

You thought that maybe, just maybe, Bakugou had let it go.

But you should’ve known better.

The next day, the moment you stepped into the classroom, you felt it—an intense, suffocating energy pressing down on the air.

And then you saw them.

Your ex-friends.

Standing right outside the classroom door, their faces pale, their bodies stiff. One girl—Aya—looked like she was about to cry. The guy beside her, Kaito, was visibly shaking.

And then there was Bakugou.

Standing in front of them like a damn force of nature, arms crossed, crimson eyes burning with pure, unfiltered rage.

Oh no.

"Katsuki," you blurted, rushing forward, heart hammering in your chest.

His eyes snapped to you.

"These assholes the ones?"

Your breath hitched. "I—"

Aya whimpered. "H-He just—out of nowhere—he—"

"I what?" Bakugou cut in, voice low and dangerous. "Told you pieces of shit that if you ever messed with her again, I'd make you regret it?"

Kaito took a step back, sweat dripping down his forehead. "H-How did you even—"

"You think she wouldn't have proof, dumbass?" Bakugou scoffed, pulling out his phone. "You left a whole damn trail of messages. Screenshots. Even a fuckin’ group chat talkin’ shit. You really thought you were smart?"

Your blood ran cold.

"Katsuki, how—"

"I ain’t dumb," he muttered, shoving his phone back into his pocket. "Figured if you weren’t gonna tell me, I’d find out myself."

Aya let out a strangled noise. "We were just—joking!"

Bakugou’s head tilted, slow and deliberate. "Joking?" he echoed. "You callin’ her pathetic, a burden, saying she should just disappear—you think that’s a fuckin’ joke?"

Aya’s mouth opened and closed, no words coming out.

"You better listen real fuckin’ close," Bakugou said, his voice eerily calm. "If I hear even a whisper about you pulling this shit again—if I see her upset, or catch wind of you talking shit—there won’t be a second warning."

He took a step forward, and they both flinched.

"You got that?"

Aya nodded rapidly. Kaito swallowed thickly and dragged her away, practically running down the hallway.

Silence.

Your whole body was shaking.

"...You weren’t supposed to do that," you mumbled, hugging yourself.

Bakugou turned to you, his expression unreadable.

"You weren’t supposed to just take that," he shot back.

Your throat tightened.

"You think I’d just sit back and let that shit slide?" His voice softened, just a little. "I don’t give a fuck if you didn’t wanna tell me. I see you hurt, I fix it. That’s how this works, dumbass."

You exhaled shakily, looking away. "I just… I didn’t want you to get in trouble."

Bakugou scoffed. "Trouble? I ain’t scared of that shit."

He hesitated, then reached out—grabbing your wrist, his fingers warm and firm.

"...You tell me next time." His grip tightened, just a bit. "Got it?"

You swallowed, blinking away tears.

"...Got it."

[oisinwrites]

No.8 of my own top eight fan theories. Warning: this is about suicide in relation to persecution! (also may contain spoilers for mortal kombat) The Simpsons are in two universes, a brighter one where they do have conflict but always resolve it while learning wholesome lessons and a darker one where they are oppressed by evil TV networks!

Here I am also guessing at what the intentions of Matt Groening and his crew might be as well as examining what’s happening in-story. Since only so much can fit in one episode and different episodes satirise different things, the result is that episodes which satirise networks and corporations are darker, more disturbing and have more neck-strangling, while episodes which stay off those topics are actually wholesome, even when they poke fun at other serious issues, because they are dealt with in a way that’s actually sensitive, while also making it funny.

It’s like in LOST, where in one universe, they are dead and in hell, while in the other, they are all living happily ever after, but this is a less literal version. In the darker universe, the same family are in a living hell with the curse of being famous, being persecuted by so-called “reality” TV and Bart is trying to escape by killing himself, no longer caring whether he ends up in heaven or hell! Whether it’s jumping the Springfield gorge or using the worst kinds of junk food to become obese while putting himself through herculean amounts of physical exertion, the networks and corporations enable his attempts because they’re good for the ratings, making sure his attempts fail but cause the most damage possible to him or anyone stopping him without releasing either of them from living hell! In the brighter universe, it’s not that they don’t have problems, but there is less network persecution, more learning and growing and the only neck-strangling that ever happened was Erin strangling Krusty, but the episode this happened in actually had touching father-daughter drama and that story about dealing with the consequences of your impulse-acts as well as how the special-forces changes people. I just don't know if Erin in the Simpsons was inspired by Sonya in mortal kombat.

What also suggests they are in two different universes is the inconsistencies of the characters. Lisa is known for being a “nerd”, but while her bookishness and perfectionism are typical for a little girl, she should be a “jock” as well. She’s very health-concious and aware of the american obesity problem, so she should be into sports, especially women’s sports, because she’s also a passionate feminist! Her mastery of the saxaphone shows she can get good at anything with time and practice, so why not sports? In fact the contradiction is that this HAS sometimes been the case. In the brighter universe, Lisa tends to see things in black and white, which is developmentally plausible for an eight-year-old, but seeing other sides of issues is part of how her character develops. In the darker universe, they all seem to have fake TV personalities.

They’ve also been on some very unethical game-shows, not just the cruel Japanese “happy smile family wish” show, but even a show where Homer was tricked into thinking he was being sentanced to death by the electric chair! They were also once on a show where they were living like people in victorian times, but their victorian house was picked up and moved. They were being abandoned in the middle of nowhere, but they teamed up with the outcasts who failed the challenges of survivor island, also having been abandoned there and rose up against the evil TV network! There have also been some fourth-wall-breaking moments, suggesting that they are, in fact, TV stars! The social worker talks to Marge about her love of cooking and she replies, “At six’O’clock, we go live!”. This episode began with them all strangling each other! Another fourth-wall-breaking joke was Homer being in the centre of a group hug. He then looked at his watch, saying “There’s still time, lets hug again!”, so they hugged again just before the credits began, but this was a more wholesome episode.

In the universe the darker episodes are set in, the only reason I can see why Homer uses cruel and unusual punishments on Bart is because that’s what the networks want. At least Kagome treating Inuyasha like a dog makes sense, even if that’s patronising, because he is half a dog-demon, but chaining bart to the post next to Santa’s little helper? Also, what prop department did he get a spiked ball-on-chain from? And the neck-stranglings, they all look staged! Maybe it’s an excuse to make people feel uncomfortable by talking about disgusting things being done to children instead of any real issues like the ones Lisa likes to bring up, while also misinforming viewers about domestic violence and even tricking native Americans into promoting what appears at first sight to have proper historical context, but upon closer examination, is really racially insensitive filth and only loosely based on history. It's just hard to say whether movies like Calamity Jane or Movies like the education of little-tree are worse. Pocohantas seems to have been Disney's apology for Peter Pan, which was from an earlier time. There could be someone who needs us to believe their real abuse stories, but it's just as important to be aware of the harm caused by fake reports!

If this is how the darker Simpsons episodes are satirising the networks, it is absolutely spot-on and shows how much Matt Groening really understands! I don’t know if parents in families who appear on television are being told that they need to take discipline to ludicrous extremes to get ratings, but it wouldn't surprise me much. It also seems that they edit footage to make it look like a parent was "smacking" their child, since this can also be seen in videos of mother cats and their kittens, or panda moms and their cubs, but it still looks fake. There is one thing though.

It is historically plausible that Japanese soldiers did discipline children with blows to the head. The modernised Japanese army had lost the bushido of their more honourable samurai predecessors (well, there’s also record of some samurai being rapists, but thats another story.) who’se pride meant they had to protect women and children and they faced their own possible deaths with honour. Now it was about blaming people for being cowards instead of dying. In hand-to-hand combat, this was a good offense, as it could deal significant impact in one single blow, they could do it right where someone is standing and it gave them a cowardly advantage over small children. (yes, there may also have been this hypocrisy about cowardice.) Although it’s uncertain whether army members and veterans are still behaving like this in Japan today, it can’t be entirely ruled out either. It could also be that because there can be collective, generation-lasting trauma as well as individual trauma, the mental image has become firmly rooted in the Japanese public conciousness, so that it is now what giving a child friendly nudgying can be mistaken for in Japan. Also, while this trope in manga and anime is correct in terms of martial arts and combat realism, it may often be incorrect in terms of the situations and reasons behind it. For example, it wasn't done because a child raised by wild pokemon said something inappropriate while looking at Misty's breasts.

This one has not been made fun of in the Simpsons, in spite of many things to do with Japan being referenced in the Simpsons, but come to think of it, that one isn't ridiculous and stupid enough to be funny. Principal Skinner wishes the board of education would let him use a paddle, but he is one of the American army veterans, so this is satire about how having been in the military REALLY changes people. I just don’t know whether he’s going to use the paddle on the school bullies, because they’re the delinquents, or put the bullies in charge with paddles. Other jokes in the Simpsons seem to be suggesting that corporal punishments never really existed, or that reports about them are fake news. Well, these are old cliches, which may have a grain of cultural or historical truth in them, but may have also faded into obscurity so that they BECAME hogwash. It could also be that what's really going behind these reports is something similar to what happens in the classic "to kill a mockingbird" : a black maid pulls one of the white children out of the dining room and doesn't quite give her a smacked bottom par'se, but says "he can have as much gravy as he likes, y'hear?" and then pushes her back into the dining room from behind, so her hand is briefly near, but not right on the little girls bum. it wasn't sexual, but the story is also about the trail of a black man accused of raping a white woman and a white man trying to prove him innocent begins a cross-examination to see if he was really PHYSICALLY CAPABLE of the act.

In one scene, Homer threatens Bart with... a belt? Jackie Chan used chairs and even step-ladders as weapons, so why didn’t he use a belt? When Sub-zero came to kill Liu Kang with his magical freezing powers, why did he splash him with a bucket of water, instead of using his belt? Perhaps the real child abuse here is that Bart is being trained, through classical conditioning, to fear being attacked with useless weapons and what he doesn’t realise is that trembling is what leaves him open and vulnerable enough for even something that's really too slippery and slack to be much use as a weapon to hit the right spot, or perhaps he knows you can't actually do that with a belt and Homer made the mistake of letting him suggest his own punishment because he's not very bright. The thing is, I don't think your belt would be much use against any fighters from street fighter or mortal kombat and they’ve highlighted two particular reasons this wouldn’t work: kids, being kids, are going to trick their way out of it and there is also a risk of your pants falling down, which is much more dangerous to you than whoever you’re attacking! In defence against a belt attack, there are two things to remember: rather than trying to catch it by reaching out or clapping your hands, it’s better to just twist your wrist and never splay out your fingers! If your hand is in the shape of a duck’s foot, then even an empty bottle will hurt your hand, but in the exact second before they have time to let go of their belt, it is actually the force of their blow that enables you to throw them down! I think a child, with their eyes closed, using their finger, could do this, but I don't think it really is belts that are used in domestic abuse scenarios, so this is mis-informative.

Are we being lied to about whether belts are physically capable of being used this way? There were two particular moments in the Simpsons where it showed the childhood story of one of the adult characters, which seemed to suggest that discipline with spanking never really existed. In Homer’s childhood story, his father, Abe, didn’t like him hanging out with hippies and dancing naked in the mud, so he said the most ridiculous thing ever, “put some pants on and then take’em down for a spankin’.” bcause that's what old-school parenting must have been like. Giving mixed messages about public nudity. Then there was Ned’s childhood story, which seemed to suggest that there are two things logic dictates for this to have been historically real: there must have been a time when it was still a brand-spanking-new, experimental practice and it must have been developed by doctors specialising in behaviorism.

There must have been a behaviourist who just sat there, all day long, all year round, spanking the same child, who remains completely fixed in place, until he looked at his watch, gave one more spank and said, “aaand were done. Still feeling any of that anger?” because that must have been part of what happened in the swingin' sixties. Actually, behaviourists invented cruel and unethical methods of ignoring a child and being emotionally detached from them. Butt-smacking is a rude form of slapstick that was developed by cartoonists or at least that's part of the story. It also could have been done to make babies stop crying, which Julius does in "Alices orphan", but that still comes down to butt-humour in cartoons. Example of unrealistic spanking scenes go as far back as classic Bat-man and has continued as recently as the third live-action sonic movie. It does sometimes happen that a sumo wrestler manages to defeat their opponent with a pushing-slap to the buttocks, but other ares are more likely to get slapped due to the low down and behind parts being furthest out of reach its also too well-cushioned for it to serve as a punishment.

But be warned: there are some spanking scenes which are not goofed and are disturbing even for mature audiences! One is in a banned episode of Pingu and while penguins are not normally this aggressive, a larger penguin could use it’s flipper as a paddle on a helpless chick while using its leg to keep it stuck in the belly-slide position without going anywhere. The larger penguin could also move faster. Another is in the 1934 comicolour “Jack Frost”. While mama bears are unlikely to use this on their own cubs, and I'm not exactly sure whether anthropomorphic cartoon bears are meant to fight like humans or like bears you should never turn your rear to a bear and this could be one of their mauling positions! Anyway, it looks like a proper catch followed by a proper hold-down and it's the correct wooden stool that won't fall over so easily. Then there is the illegal pirate version of the nineties Blinky Bill movie. (If you’re Australian, you’ll know Blinky Bill. If not, he’s a cheeky little koala.) In the legitimate version, his mother hoists him and brushes the dirt off his pants while tut-tutting about the state they’re in. In the much fuzzier, picture-jumbled pirate version, it seems to be a baby koala stuck to the hip of a very fat adult koala with fat arms and fat, thickly padded paws, being moved back and forth as if to crush his pelvis. These examples are more disturbing than the nightmare Liu kang is waking up from at the beginning of the nineties mortal kombat movie, because even though Liu's nightmare also has the effect of a helpless child being tormented by an evil figure, it has nothing sexual. Some couples do things like this as a game, but realistically, you have to be leaving your bum exposed, either by mistake or because you enjoy it.

If a child’s buttocks have been touched inappropriately, then yes, we should address this, but I think it would be misleading to call it a practice. Actually, the original Blinky Bill classics by Dorothy Wall are also about spanking, but koalas, which are animals with sticky-out rumps, do sometimes have slap-fights where they often get each other on the rump. It also says somewhere, “Mothers don’t do those things, but she wanted Blinky to think she did.” The truth is, there are multiple possible origins behind this cliche which make it more confusing by coinciding with each other. Sticking to humans, one plausible record I could find of spanking from before the time of Dorothy Wall, Walt Disney or Ub Irewerks was to do with an unusual relationship between Jean Jacque Russeau and Mme De Warens, but this was a passionate embrace, so perhaps spanking was not seen as a punishment back then. Historians believe that his autobiographies, “the confessions” are so heavily dramatised and the chronology is so confused, it’s really a load of rubbish. I think the same can be said about Roald Dahl’s “BOY: Tales of childhood”, but the live-action segments of the Alice comedies are insightful.

Sticks and rulers were probably used to correct posture and attention in class, but in "Alice goes to school", she is jabbed, not truly beaten. It could be that the children didn’t like being jabbed, or they were jabbed when being made to sit in the corner, probably for something they didn’t do, but you see, I was able to explain the problem without making it disgusting! Another goof is highlighted when Bart is in catholic school, run by Irish catholic nuns. A teaching nun says to Bart, “We don’t use the ruler, WE USE THE YARDSTICK!”. This is a slightly disturbing scene which depicts graphic violence towards children, but come to think of it, that would be a much better weapon than a ruler. "If you’re going to be cruel to children, at least be competent enough to do it properly!" seems to be what this scene is saying. I think a ruler could be dangerous if misused, but that would be more to do with poking someones eye. A proper beating would be across the entire body, by someone spreading themselves out, it doesn't matter the rage level if it's focused in a tiny space by someone standing next to just one side of you. To get the same effect as a yard-stick with a ruler, I think the nun would have to charge with so much momentum that it would be more dangerous to the nun herself.

This is actually from one of the more wholesome episodes, where we see things escalating between the Catholics and the Protestants, but they become friends in the end. Whether its set in the brighter universe or the darker universe, is the Simpsons telling us that all this stuff about physical punishments on children is just network trash? Well, as Lisa herself says when Homer can be seen in two places at once, "cartoons don't have to be 100% realistic", but one way to test a myth is by having it satirised in a cartoon. When it comes to whether corporal punishment would ever have been used on children, the overall answer is that this is plausible IF it's to do with the military, but otherwise it's either a bit of a stretch or flat-out ridiculous. The good news, though, is that while this is spot-on, it is quite un-likely for network persecution to lead to suicide. I actually recommend both the nineties Blinky Bill movie and the nineties mortal kombat movie, as they are both better than their re-makes and both have better endings than E.T. ! Mortal kombat might not be as “family friendly” as Blinky Bill, but all the martial-arts action is done correctly and there is no spanking. The most hilariously incompetent martial arts movie is Kill Bill, and the biggest goof is where “the bride” who should be either dead or arrested by now, gives a katana-spanking to someone who only has to flip her over and that’s not even what a samurai sword is designed for. I also recommend the young Indiana Jones chronicles, which is one of the good historical dramas, but doesn’t seem to have anything about corporal punishment. It seems the good historical dramas aren’t about that kind of thing.