#and treating them like don't interact with bad things

[40bodiesinmybasement]

Minority groups have to walk on eggshells because one bad take, or one bad person is enough for the entire community to be labelled as bad.

If you call yourself a progressive or a feminist, but still generalize like this for ANY group- not just people of colour, not just gay people, not just people with disabilities, but also trans people- you're doing exactly what conservatives are doing.

A majority of trans people don't think that 'pink=girl' and 'blue=boy', if that were the case then a majority of trans people would also be like Calvin Garrah or Blair White ( people who are considered to be "good trans" by some conservatives and TERFs, btw ), who used to constantly police people's gender based purely on their appearance, used to target GNC trans people and called them "transtrenders" for not confirming to gender roles.

But a majority of trans people aren't like that, are they? Because trans people aren't a fucking monolith, stop treating them like they are.

And I also remember, in 2018 and such, it's probably still prevailing today, transphobes used to ask GNC trans people what was even the point of them trying to transition if they weren't going to even try to pass. [ "A trans woman who dresses masculine is just a regular straight man", "A trans guy who doesn't even try to hide his tits is just a regular girl", etc. ] There has been a lot of pressure for trans people to confirm to social norms, especially because of transphobia. And when trans people force themselves into boxes of masculinity and femininity so that they can be respected- they're called sexists.

Another thing I'd like to add- a lot of transphobes, TERFs especially, like to point towards trans women who are just beginning to get happy and settled in their bodies and often times perform feminity as proof that trans people want to uphold gender stereotypes.

What they don't understand is, many of these trans women grew up without access to make up or "feminine" clothes- so when they are finally free to do whatever they want, they quickly cling to these things because they consider these things to be extremely important, think that they need these things in order to be women.

This is similar to how cis girls often perform feminity as attempts to connect with their girlhood- because this is what they're told by media defines their worth as women.

But as you get later into your transition, and just *live* and *exist* in your own skin, you realise that these things are extremely unnecessary. Many trans women I've seen, once they're in a place of comfort, don't really give a shit about dressing feminine, having long hair, wearing make up, etc. etc. because they literally have better things to do- because they're at a point where they are fully comfortable in their own bodies.

What I'm trying to express is that claiming all trans people transition in order to fit gender stereotypes is a dishonest and false notion- it's made by people who don't interact with trans people outside of social media, who aren't deeply involved with trans people and have meaningful relationships with them.

When you actually get to know a trans person, when you get to know MULTIPLE trans people in your daily life you realise how little each person has in similar when it comes to their self expression or even how they see their transness.

You can't claim that "trans ideology is" this that and so on when there isn't even a thing such as "trans ideology". There are trans people, and that is all.

This entire debate on transness is rooted in the fact that transphobes do not see trans people as humans, do not consider them to be individuals with their own lived experiences. The anti-trans movement hinges on this. It's a movement based in dehumanisation, baseline.

[youhavethesun]

saw a tiktok on pinterest (because I don’t have tiktok lol) about how annoyed someone was that Rory had given up all her hopes and dreams ‘because of one comment from a man’. and I know this was meant as a joke but honestly I wonder if this is how a lot of people view this plot line. I’ve seen so many people talking about Rory’s ‘downfall’ and how she was so unable to handle criticism/that she fell apart from a single comment etc.. and I just honestly can’t see how people continue to view it this way.

I think there are honestly a lot of factors that influenced Rory’s breakdown after Mitchum’s comment, but first of all I quickly want to say that (I know this is controversial but I genuinely do not care) I don’t think her leaving Yale was a bad thing!!! It was treated as this ultimate sin, (maybe this is for another post idk) but honestly I think Rory made the right decision. I don’t think the right decision was obviously her giving in to the lifestyle Emily wanted for her/joining the dar and so on, but actually taking a break from formal education I think could have been positive, all through season 4 we see how much of a toll college is taking on Rory, and I think taking a year out if she knew she was going back and using that year to rest and learn more about herself could have been really beneficial.

anyway sorry for the tangent, okay so the first thing is that a lot of people seem to view Rory’s conversation with Mitchum as a single interaction which caused her ‘downfall’, and everything was a domino effect from then on, instead of looking at it as the straw that broke the camels back. like I said, Rory was not in a good place at Yale even during s4, she had a terrible breakdown when she was slipping in her grades, and the impact of having to drop a single class was huge for her, she was desperately anxious about disappointing especially her grandfather’s expectations, but she was also at risk of at least somewhat disappointing all her immediate family. In season 2 (in my beloved car scene in teach me tonight) we can see hints of it too! Jess is just chatting casually when he says he didn’t expect her to dream about becoming an overseas correspondent, but this immediately rattles Rory, with direct dialogue being:

“well, it's not a little too rough for me. I hope it's not a little too rough for me, I've been talking about this forever. I mean, I don't even know what I would do if –-“

and this is in response to a comment from a friend.

the prospect of failing at her goal but also very importantly what Rory has ‘talked about forever’ is incredibly frightening. I think it’s so interesting that she doesn’t say ‘I’ve wanted this forever’, but rather implies that the expectations of those who have watched her grow up, who have heard her talk about this for so long, would be shattered because she has shared this with them. so much of Rory as a character is someone who is afraid to disappoint in every way possible, I think that is such a core element of her personality, and as the child prodigy who was (to some extent) raised to achieve what lorelai couldn’t, the pressure she is under not to disappoint is massive.

anyway, back to Mitchum. I think honestly to some degree it could have been anyone to criticise Rory’s capability and she would be considerably affected, seen not just when talking to Jess but even in season 1 after getting lower grades when she transferred to Chilton - Rory immediately questions whether she is even good enough to be at private school, whether she could just be disappointing those around her if she stays.

The fact that it’s Mitchum Huntzberger who says she ‘doesn’t have it’ in my opinion is kind of just the icing on the cake. Whether or not Rory had even taken the internship I think the pressure of it all would have led to a larger breakdown at some point or other, this was really just the final straw for what Rory could take at the time. Imagine one of the most successful people in the world in your chosen field telling you that everything you’ve worked for isn’t enough, that in three short words every expectation you’ve set for yourself (and more importantly every expectation everyone around you has held you accountable to) has been torn apart. Imagine believing you had let down everyone who had sacrificed something for you, who had put their faith in you, and tell me you could just bounce back from that.

Anyway the tiktok was not that serious but my thoughts just kind of spun out from there so if you read all of this I love you <3 and also I love you later season Rory you’re flawed and you’re lovely<33

[bellamysgriffin]

i have thoughts too complex to put into this quick tumblr post but i do think the online leftist community's problem with constant virtue signaling and "will this make me seem/feel like a good person" politics has absolutely gotten in the way of effecting actual change and in some ways is an active impediment to it and one of the ways you can most clearly see it is the ways in which we are currently discussing boycotts

[magicisrealandsoismyally]

Right so defining socialization theory doesn't change shit for me. It's not about transmascs being "socialized female". It is about how people who are in social positions where they are oppressed but not the most oppressed + they do not interact with people more oppressed than them on the regular. It's not being a white AFAB that does this to people. Being south asian does it too. like i just said. And crazy thing, transfems can do this too. I've heard some ableist shit be said and defended by hella queer people before. No one is immune to feeling like they are the most oppressed group on the list.

To address your second point, the main issue with transandrophobia as a movement is that however you feel about the orginal theory, it's been warped by TERFs and MRAs to the point where the tag is basically 4 different belief systems under a trench coat. I understand that this was not a belief under the original transandrophobia belief, but I call it like I see it, and TERFs have done their damage to the movement.

It's not a lie, it's just a different side of the tag you don't interact with (and good on you honestly, watching transmascs argue for sex essentialism is the most confusing thing in the world because it sounds like they are 30 seconds from being detrans movement leaders)

A term can be coined by a POC and also every POC transmasc I know can hate the movement, these are coexisting statements, plenty of movements do not reflect the person who started them 1 to 1. And like I said, TERFs and MRAs have latched on to the tag.

And yes, transmascs get third gendered you are correct but TERFs think y'all can go back to being a woman it's why they're invading the transandrophobia tag because a lot of transandrophobia truthers argue the same sex based oppression shit as TERFs. TERFs don't try to detransition transfems. Cause we can't be men, not real ones, not in their eyes. They don't see y'all as men, or women, but they'll treat you like victimized women for long enough until they can make you into one "again". To be clear, this is very insidious and bad, but it is different treatment. Closeted transmascs do not get third gendered on an individual level, just a systemic one. Closeted transfems get third gendered on all levels. I mean there's a reason the dysphoria fit is formlessly masc. Because masculinity is viewed as the default. Because when a young "girl" wears masculine clothing like sweatpants and a sweatshirt, no one has a problem with that, they might tell him that "she's wasting her looks" but she's not getting physically assaulted for that. But if a young "boy" wears a skirt, people genuinely get violent over that. I've had people threaten to punch me after i wore pink. It's not because they hate pink, it's because femininity in amabs makes use targets.

Masculinity is seen as a default, as a natural state. It's why transmascs have complained about not being able to dress fun without their masculinity challenged, because everything expressive is dubbed too feminine, because to be masculine effort is not required (by cis men, i'm aware trans men have to put in effort, but it isn't effort that is obvious, male contour makeup isn't supposed to be clearly there for example). It's why stories about crossdressing male are stories like mulan, while stories crossdressing female play it off as a joke something to be ridiculed.

@magicisrealandsoismyally

You do understand that this is socialisation theory right? Just in pretty words?

'this group of trans people spent time occupying this social status and that left you with a sense of entitlement and shapes their behaviour as a whole'...

In case there is someone else who considers this an ok thing to say, let me give you an example of a similar statement which you may understand as bad:

'Transandrophobia deniers are some of the most ex-white men people in the world. Now I'm not saying they were men, but the time they spent occupying a social status where others viewed you as a white man shapes the way you act entitled and claim you're the most oppressed group (white man shit)'

Now. That is a horrifying and transmisogynistic thing to say, yes? We all agree? So we should all also agree that the initial statement was also horrifying and predjudiced against trans men (whether you call that transandrophobic or not).

[yourlowkeyidiot3]

Salty rant v2

This is basically me angrily screaming about Ford again (wow what a surprise) to a wall (myself, my rotten brain and my blog) so feel free to skip this

Fuck it I'll bite

Gf fans when you tell them Ford had every right to be mad at Stan for ruining his Project (he saw it as the only chance to prove himself and get accepted in his dream school, and even tho WE know it was an accident, Ford doesn't he thinks it was a purpose sabotage and it really doesn't help that Stan didn't told him which resulted in him making a fool of himself Infront of ppl he wanted to impress and then Stan tried to pass it off as something that didn't matter even tho it mattered so much to Ford, like of course he'd be mad everyone would be mad in his position)

Gf fans when you tell them it's not Ford's fault that Stan got kicked out it's all Filbricks fault (seriously guys, blame the fucking abusive father, not the 17 year old living in an abusive household)

Gf fans when you tell them standing up against an abusive person (especially if they're your parent) is hard to do for yourself let alone for someone else

Gf fans when you tell them Ford wasn't the "golden/favourite child" Filbrick dgaf about him and only wanted to use his intelligence for money and both Ford and Stan were abused just in different ways (seriously find a different dynamic to describe an abusive household than "golden child" and "scapegoat" I say as I put a gun in your head)

Gf fans when you tell them Ford wanting to go to college isn't egotistical

Gf fans when you tell them Ford wanting to make a name for himself doesn't make him egotistical (he literally grew up in an abusive household, and was bullied and treated like an outcast for most of his life, him seeking out validation is a trauma response not egotism)

Gf fans when you tell them if Ford is petty for correcting Stan's grammar then Stan is equally as petty for refusing to hold his hand over a thank you literally seconds ago (of course he had the right to want him to thank him and be mad, but it was the END OF THE WORLD, they are both responsible in that scene)

Gf fans when you tell them Ford isn't ignorant for being manipulated by Bill cuz 1) Bill is a master manipulator who's managed to manipulate and terrorise humanity since forever using lies/flattery/fear 2) despite having a high IQ he has a low EQ and therefore isn't able to tell if someone has ill intentions due to being....an outcast and therefore doesn't have the social skills to be able to tell others true intentions/manipulations which made him an easy victim for Bill (do u guys even know what manipulation means)

Gf fand when you tell them the reason why Ford didn't try to reach out to Stan was because he thought he was doing fine since he had seen an ad of his on tv (he had no way of knowing Stan was still homeless anymore, and you don't usually see homeless people's ads on tv), not because he didn't care

Gf fans when you tell them Ford didn't force Fiddleford to do shit for him, and that he was against the use of the memory gun and wanted him to get rid of it but Fiddleford literally erased his memories of it so he could continue using it. And that therefore Ford isn't to blame for everything that happened with the memory gun just cuz Fiddleford had bad coping mechanisms. (Seriously you all are acting as if he pointed the memory gun on his head and forced him to abandon his family and build him the portal. No!! Fiddleford made those decisions himself he could had left Gravity Falls at any moment and return to his family but no he didn't, he chosed to stay and start a fucking cult. That is on him. Not on Ford)

Gf fans when you tell them the way Ford acted during the time where he was literally being abused, manipulated and isolated by a demon is way more complex and naused than "ego! ego!".. because he was literally being abused and manipulated...

Gf fans when you tell them the reason why Ford called Stan to hide his journals wasn't because he only wanted to use him as a way to fix his mistakes but because he was literally really desperate and feared for the safety of the world and he didn't have anyone else he could trust and that he was hella traumatized due to being literally tortured both physically and phycological and sleep deprived and on the bring of insanity (of fucking course he wasn't gonna act logically and say mean shit he didn't actually mean, he was losing his mind! Stan had also said mean shit to him because he was angry but nobody talks about that)

Gf fans when you tell them Ford being mad at Stan for opening the portal is understandable, because 1) he literally ignored all the warnings that the portal could potentially destroy the whole world and 2) he was literally about to FINALLY killing Bill after 30 years of fighting for his life in the multiverse to try and find a way to

Gf fans when you tell them Ford's trust issues are completely understandable because he was literally betrayed, manipulated and abused by the "person" he trusted the most (Bill). And the other two people he trusted did something that hurt his trust on him (Fiddleford erasing his memories, Stan ruining his project)

Gf fans when you tell them Ford's and Bill's relationship isn't "toxic yaoi/messy divorce!" And that it was incredible abusive and that FORD was a victim ( average gf fan claims they "don't romantize/support the toxic ((call it abusive guys, that's literally what it is)) elements of this ship I just like to explore unhealthy dynamics in fiction:) *proceeds to make 10 posts of "he fucked the triangle!" jokes and gets mad at you if you actually point out the abuse and makes 100 aus where they get back together/stay together*

Gf fans when I tell them that I really don't care about what Alex has said about Ford being "egotistical" or "ignorant" because that's also the same guy who said he didn't intended for Pacifica to come off as a victim of abuse because controlling your child with a bell is total normal parent behaviour guys (/s). (I stopped listening to most of the stuff he said after that, not gonna lie, cuz most of the stuff he says about Ford's "ego" and "ignorance" are flat out victim blaming) ((I mean come on guys, he literally says he based Ford's and Bill's relationship off REAL LIFE toxic relationships he's seen and then he goes and says shit like how it's Ford's own "ego and ignorance" fault that he's ended up in that situation. Don't you guys think that's a bit weird))

[grimbleton5s]

tee bee haytch i’m not even sure i fully grasp why so much of the arcane fanbase fully believe viktor and mel like… hate each other. i don’t think they’re best friends nor do i think they’re on good terms, but hate seems like such a strong word for two characters who the writers literally barely let interact. hate implies seething. a vitriol. lying awake at night angry about the others existence. and i just don’t think it gets that serious for either of them. i know the go to thing to point to in order to explain this belief is that one particular scene from s1 that i won’t even describe or be specific about since it’s obvious which one i mean, but even that doesn’t really feel like proof enough to me to justify the whole ‘they are enemies. they can’t stand each other’ or ‘mel doesn’t like him at all’ angle that people push. truthfully i do not think mel hates viktor. if we are to go by solely what we see in s1, then i do not think she even thinks about him much unless he is in her line of sight. and you could argue that that is in some ways as bad as disliking him, but it’s definitely nowhere as close to the sort of vitriol the fans seem to think exist between them. i think any dislike viktor has towards her doesn’t get anymore personal than the basic dislike he has for all of the councilors. one might argue, no, see, he dislikes her more so than everyone else because of jayce and the scene. you know the scene… but even then i don’t think so. i think he’s less upset with mel because i don’t think he expects much else from what he sees as another rich politician, and more upset with jayce, actually, for letting himself be so easily swayed by a pretty face. i don’t know call me crazy but i think many of y’all are projecting your own hidden dislike of mel for ‘getting in the way of yaoi’ onto the characters. but that is just me.

[northern-passage]

Genuine thought as a fellow trans dude, I’ve seen a lot of (obviously non-serious) questions on other blogs about characters’ genitals such as “how does it look like?” and similar, and I think we all know & understand that such questions are extremely inappropriate to ask and (I hope) no one would actually go around asking these questions irl. Idk, I think we should treat trans characters just like cis ones, without any special “precautions”, so to normalise them and not make cis people treat them like fragile boxes, a thing which happens to a lot of us irl. Hope this doesn’t come off as an attack or anything lol.

no worries, i didn't take this as an attack at all. i actually agree with you, that's why i mentioned feeling conflicted about it and also mentioned that i've changed my stance on how i felt about handling Noel and Clementine in game and in explicit intimate scenes.

however, for me the problem comes from the fact that people... don't ask these kinds of questions about cis characters? i suppose people do get cheeky "who is the biggest 🤪" asks but i would hardly compare the two. to be a bit crude, no one is going to be asking if a cis character has a dick or not, or "what does it look like". of course it's natural for people to be curious, and i honestly encourage the open discussion and am happy to see trans bodies being talked about more in a positive way, but not everyone is going to be comfortable with it due to the inescapable transphobia online and in the community. sending me that kind of ask is like sending out an invitation for a debate or a discussion that i don't necessarily want to have. i also just don't think people should default to asking a random IF author on tumblr dot com to describe what bottom growth looks like.

and with most of these asks typically coming from someone who is anonymous, i have no way of truly knowing what the tone is, what their intentions are or why this is being asked - is it another trans person? or maybe someone who is just genuinely curious? or, more likely in my experience, is it someone who is going to immediately follow up this message with something transphobic after i answer? do i want to roll the dice and find out?

so while i agree with what you're saying, it's important to consider the context and the reality we live in. the IF community is not kind to trans people or trans characters. and as a trans person, my first priority is protecting myself and my mental health. so what i mean when i say "precautions," is that those precautions are for me, because i've had to deal with transphobic harassment here for years now, and i try to mitigate it as much as i can. it's also for my personal comfort - again, to be blunt, i'm simply just not comfortable discussing a trans character's genitals with anonymous strangers on the internet. it makes me feel vulnerable.

also i do want to say i didn't mean for any of that to come across as a dig at other authors - if you're comfortable answering those kinds of questions, that's really only something you can decide for yourself. like i said, this is just coming from my own experiences in IF and for my own personal comfort - i have previously talked a lot about trans stuff and gender and sexuality here, when i'm feeling up to it, but it is something that is very draining for me and can also be very upsetting.

basically: i do agree that it's important not to other trans characters or treat them any differently than cis characters, but i also think there are ways to do it that don't require me answering invasive questions or questions that i don't feel comfortable with as a real life trans person, you know what i mean?

[butts-bouncing-on-the-beltway]

Do you ever read a post where someone is explaining a pokitical thing and from the way they're saying you know with absolute certainty 1) they got their info from a tumblr post and have never actually followed up on how feasible that information actually is to act upon (they may not even have checked if it was CORRECT, but when they do they have clearly not looked into how easy or hard it may be to follow those instructions with a positive outcome), and 2) you know WHICH tumblr post they're quoting because it is basically a copy/paste of it, and 3) it was YOUR goddamn post and the thing they are saying is entirely counter to the point you were making when you said it to the point that you genuinely wonder if they just like. Memory-holed the entire context once they saw that one itty bitty point.

It's like the motherfuckiny dating apps all over again. I do not want people to love my words if they are not actually willing to do the work of understanding them! Didn't your kindergarten ever make you play Telephone to teach you how heresay falls out????

[unproduciblesmackdown]

another day another "applying the concept 'disposability' to 'someone withdraws from a personal relationship, & that wasn't signed off on by the other'" kill me

[synonymsforstupidity]

'Kris being an outcast who likes freaking people out means they must be a Bad Person™️ and thus taking their free will and piloting them like a puppet is actually Good™️ morally speaking'

How about I eat your skin how bout that

[ph-cutie]

I love people Being Mean to me in disco elysium. most people in the game all treat you with a realistic apprehension. they tolerate the things you say not because they like you but because you assumedly have a gun on you. the most unreletengly approving NPC, siileng, is just scared as fuck of you and also wants to make some cash. it pisses redditors off soo bad that npcs like liz and klaasje don't super care about kissing your feet and making your job easier but that's the whole point of Being A FuckUp Cop In a PostSov Neighborhood The Game. I like isobel cause she told me I sound like I was dropped on the head as a kid and that's how the grannies I know talk. I love cindy for forcing me to oink like a pig in the communist quest. Even titus's drawn out slutty beer walk animation (you know what I'm talking about) is growing on me. every interaction with the hardies is genuinely hilarious. also, idk how to word this but I like that the game doesn't fully rely on Bad Words to show who's a villain. the fascists you meet do say slurs, that is evil of them. cuno also says them every 5 minutes but every player ends up loving him. the most soulless and infuriating character is the diplomat in a black tie who only says inoffensive propaganda pamphlet words. you have to think with every character what their background is and why they would say that to *you*, because you are a very loaded presence no matter how you play. whatever

[cy-cyborg]

Disability Tropes: The Perfect Prosthetic

[ID: A screenshot from the movie Nimona, showing Nimona, a small white girl with red hair, grabbing the right prosthetic arm of Ballister, a knight in black armour with black hair and light brown skin. He is holding a broken bottle in his prosthetic hand while Nimona admires his arm. Overlaid on the screenshot is white text that reads "Disability Tropes: The Perfect Prosthetic" /End ID]

In a lot of media, prosthetic limbs are portrayed as these devices that act as a near-perfect replacement for a character who has lost, or was born without a limb. So much so that in a lot of cases, the use of a prosthetic has basically no impact on the character beyond a superficial level or their appearance, or it's portrayed as something that's even better than the old meat-limb it's replacing. This trope shows up most often in Sci-fi, but it shows up in all kinds of stories outside of that, even otherwise very grounded ones!

If a story isn't depicting the loss of a limb as the be-all-end-all worst thing that can happen to a person, they almost always default to a perfect prosthetic, functionally curing the amputation with it. But the reality is that prosthetics are FAR from perfect, and as someone who has used them for their entire life I don't think they ever will be. Limb difference is still and always will be a disability, regardless of the prosthetics available, and this really isn't a bad thing.

Why is this trope so common?

I meant it when I said this is a really, really a common trope, so much so that the majority of the media I've seen with amputees and characters with limb differences that released in the last decade or end up using it. Even stories where becoming an amputee is treated like a fate worse than death, ironically, aren't excluded from this. I have a few theories as to why this has happened: The pessimistic answer is that it's easy. You get to have a disabled character and claim you have disability representation, without really having to do much extra work or research because most of your audience won't notice if you aren't accurate - in fact they kind of expect it. You also, for the most part, dodge the backlash other kinds of disability representation (or really any minority representation) usually get. The more optimistic reason is that, for a long time, amputees and people with limb differences (as well as a lot of other disabled people) were predominantly shown in media as sad, depressed and unable to do anything, very much falling into the "sad disabled person" trope. As a kid, this was really the only way I saw people like me on screen or in books. And so, the limb difference community pushed back against that portrayal and were pretty successful in changing the narrative in the public's eye. A little too successful. A lot of creatives were genuinely trying to do right by our community, listen and do better, but many simply overcorrected and instead ended up creating stories where prosthetics were essentially cures instead of the mobility aids they are. I also think the public's general lack of understanding about disability plays a roll in all this. There are a lot of people who, in my experience, believe that the more visible a disability is, the worse it is. Limb differences and amputations are very visible, but prosthetics, even those that aren't trying to be discreet, make them less so. While using a prosthetic is very, very different to a biological limb, you won't necessarily see how in a casual interaction with, say a co-worker or neighbor, especially because there is a very real stigma applied to people with limb differences to keep those things hidden from the public. There are other reasons too, such as the fact that a lot of creatives don't even consider the connection to real amputees when creating characters with robotic limbs in genres like sci-fi and some fantasy, so they never stop to consider that these tropes could be impacting real people. Amputees are also very frequently used in "inspiration porn" content that uses the angle that disabilities can be "overcome" with a good attitude, downplaying the way those disabilities actually impact us. The prosthetics industry - specifically the component manufacturers, often also push the idea of prosthetics being the only way to return to a "normal" life, both to the wider public and to people with limb differences and amputations (which can add to that sense of shame I mentioned when it doesn't play out that way for them). On top of that, I also think the recent increase in popularity of concepts like trans-humanism contributes to it as well. these movements often talk about robotic or bionic body parts being enhancements and "the way of the future", and I think people get a bit too caught up on what may be potentially possible in the future with the real, current experiences of people with "robotic limbs" aka prosthetics, now. There are also inherently disabling things that come with removing and replacing parts of your body, things that will not just go away with some fancier tech.

So How do you actually avoid the trope?

So, we have some ideas about why it happens, but how do you actually avoid the "perfect prosthetic" trope from appearing in your work? The most important thing is to remember that this is still a disability. The loss of a limb, even with the best prosthetic technology or magical item in the world, will always have some inherently disabling aspects to it - and this is not a bad thing. The key is to not over-do it, lest you risk falling into the old "sad disabled person" trope. So let's go over some of the ways you can show how your character's disability impacts them. You don't have to use all of these recommendations, just choose the ones that would best fit your character, their circumstances and your setting.

The prosthetic itself is just different

Probably the most important thing to address and acknowledge for prosthetic-using characters, is the actual ways in which the prosthetic itself is different from a biological limb, and the drawbacks and changes that come with that. For the sake of simplicity, I'm mainly going to focus on modern prosthetics here, but it's worth considering how to apply this your own, more advanced/fantastical prosthetics too. One major thing that most people writing amputees fail to acknowledge is that prosthetic limbs are not fleshy-limbs with a different coat of paint. They do the same basic thing their meat-counterparts do, but how they do it is often drastically different, which changes how they are used. A really good example of this is in prosthetic feet. There are dozens of joints in a biological foot, but most prosthetic feet have no joints or moving parts at all. Instead of having dozens of artificial joints to mimic the real bone structure of a foot, which are more prone to failure, require power and make the prosthetic much, much heavier for very little gain, prosthetic feet are often constructed from flexible carbon fiber sheets inside a flexible rubber foot-shaped shell. This allows the bend and flex those bones provide, without all the drawbacks that come from trying to directly mimic it. Making the sheets into different shapes makes them more ideal for different activities. E.g. feet made for general use, like walking around the city, are simple and light, shaped to encourage the most energy-efficient steps, while still allowing their users to do things like wear normal shoes. Feet made for rough terrain often have a split down the middle of the foot to allow the carbon fiber sheets to bend better over rocks when there is no ankle, and some newer designs also include a kind of suspension using pressurized air pulled from the prosthetic socket to allow some additional padding. Running feet have large "blades" made of these carbon fiber sheets to absorb more pressure when the foot hits the ground, and redirect the force that creates to propel their user forward as quickly as possible.

[ID: A photo of 4 prosthetic feet. On the left, the foot is covered with a black shoe, the one to it's right consists of a small, carbon fiber blade, split down the middle, in roughly the same shape and size as the previous foot. Next to the right is an even simpler and smaller carbon fiber foot with no split, and finally is a very short foot that is vaguely rectangular in shape. /End ID]

These are some of my own prosthetic feet I've had over the years. The two on the right are designed to be used by someone who is less mobile, and the ones on the left are made for someone who is more active. As my needs changed over the years, I've used different designs and styles, and keep the old ones since my needs do tend to fluctuate.

There are also robotic feet available that are designed as a kind of "all-purpose" foot that use an electronic ankle which more closely mimics a biological foot, but they are not very popular as the mechanism adds a lot of extra weight and it requires a battery and power to work, with many amputees feeling the jointless carbon fiber feet do a better job at meeting their needs. The same goes for arms and hands. "Robotic" hands that mimic a meat hand exist, but they aren't really that popular, even in places like Australia where the prohibitively expensive price tag isn't as much of an issue due to government programs that pay for the device for you. Instead, most arm amputees who use prosthetics that I know prefer simpler devices that do specific tasks, and just swap between them as needed, rather than something that tries to do it all. A big part of this is because the all-purpose hands can be clunky. they often require manual adjustment using the other hand to do simple things like going from holding a deck of cards to putting them down and picking up a glass of water, for example. The few that don't require that, I've been told, are often temperamental and don't actually work for every person with a limb difference.

Altered Proprioception

Loosing a limb is a big deal and this is always going to have an impact on the body in some way that won't be solved with a fancy piece of tech. One such example is how limb loss effects your sense of proprioception. This is your sense of where your body parts are in space. It's how you (mostly) know where your foot is going to land when you're walking, or how you're able to do things like lift up a glass of water without needing to actually watch your hand do it. Your brain does this by creating a mental map of your body, but this map doesn't get adjusted if you loose a limb. If that map doesn't accurately reflect your real body, you're not going to have an accurate sense of proprioception. This might look like a leg amputee being a bit less stable on their feet, or like an arm amputee needing to look at their arm or hand to be able to grab something with it. Those born without their limbs who take to using prosthetics often have a lot of trouble adapting, as their brains aren't used to having that limb in the first place, whereas an amputee's brain can sometimes be tricked into using their outdated body map to help them adjust to the prosthetic (though its impossible to line it up perfectly). Prosthetics that directly integrate with the nervous system, while rare, do exist, and even this direct connection doesn't completely erase this issue for reasons doctors aren't quite sure about. This is something that does become less of a problem with time. Eventually, someone proficient with their prosthetic will learn to compensate, but their sense of proprioception will never be 100% perfect. At the end of the day, no matter how it attaches, a prosthetic is still not a natural part of the body, and that will always cause some issues. It also means if they aren't practicing it all the time, they may have to relearn how to compensate for it.

Extra weight

You also have to remember that a prosthetic is not a natural part of the body, like we already talked about, and so no matter how good it is, your brain will most likely always interpret the weight of the prosthetic as something attached to you, not part of you. This means that, even though prosthetics are actually a lot lighter than biological limbs, they feel so much heavier. This is because, while a meat limb is heavier, a lot of that weight is from muscles which are actively contributing to the limb working, so it doesn't really feel like its that heavy. When you have less of your meat-limb though, you have even less muscle to work with to move this big thing strapped to it, so it feels heavier. The more of the limb you've lost, or just didn't have, the heavier the prosthetic has to be, and the less muscle you have left to move it. It's for this reason that a lot of amputees and people with limb differences get tired faster when using prosthetics. Some of us are fit enough where you almost wouldn't notice the extra effort they need to put in, but once again, just because you can't see it from the outside, doesn't mean it's not an issue.

Avoiding Water

Most prosthetics also aren't waterproof, and so prosthetic users have to be very careful about when and how they come into contact with it. For amputees with electric components, contact with water at all will likely damage the device. This can even include especially heavy rain, something I was told to avoid when I got my electronic knee prosthetic and something I assume would also apply to arm amputees with complex, electronic hands. For those with non-electronic prosthetics, water can be hazardous for different reasons. If the prosthetic has metal components, water may cause them to rust, especially if it's salty water. Other prosthetics have foam covers to give the illusion of a limb with the general shape of muscles and fat, but these covers do not come off, and if they get wet enough that water seeps all the way through, it is very hard to dry it and they may become moldy. Finally, cheaper modern prosthetics may also float. Many are made of very light-weight materials and some have pockets of air trapped inside them. For leg prosthetics in particular, this means a user might, at best, struggle to swim with them on, but at worst, may get flipped upside down and become trapped underwater - something that happened to me as a very young child. On the flip-side, older prosthetics were usually made of heavy materials like wood or steel, and so had the opposite problem, acting like a weight and pulling a person down if they were to wear them in the water. Water-safe prosthetics do exist, I had a pair of prosthetic legs as a teenager that were hollow, and designed especially for me to swim with fins on when swimming in the ocean, and Nadya Vessey, a double leg amputee in New Zealand even got a mermaid-tail prosthetic made especially for use in the water. Most amputees though just swim without any prosthetics at all, and in 99% of cases, this is the easiest and safest way to go.

Prosthetic-Related Pressure Sores and Pain

Many people with limb differences also experience pressure sores from their prosthetics. Modern prosthetics typically attach to the body using a socket made of carbon fiber or fiberglass, held on either by pressure, using a vacuum seal or through a mechanical locking system built into the socket. No matter the specifics though, the socket has to be very tight in order to stay on, and this means that extended periods of use can lead to rub-spots, blisters and pressure sores. Many socket prosthetics also use silicone liners to add extra padding, but this means wounds caused by the pressure can't breathe, and bacteria in sweat has nowhere to go, meaning if the person doesn't rest when one of these wounds occur, it can very easily and quickly turn into a serious infection. In a properly fitting prosthetic, used by someone who has fully adjusted to them, this doesn't happen often, but it is something most amputees and people with limb differences have to at least be mindful of. Some new prosthetics use a different method of attachment, called Osteointegration - where the prosthetic attaches to a clip, surgically implanted into the person's bones. While Osteointegration avoids many of the issues like pressure sores that come from a socket, they have their own issues: mainly that they are incredibly expensive, and as of right now, have a pretty high failure rate due to the implant getting infected. Because the implants are directly connected to the bone, these infections become very serious very quickly. Many people with Osteointegration limbs have to be on very strong medication to keep these infections at bay, and they are generally considered unsuitable for anyone who is going to regularly come into contact with "unclean" environments.

Maintenance

[ID: A screenshot of Winrey, from Full Metal alchemist Brotherhood, a white woman with blond hair handing out the sides of a green hat. She is measuring a piece of metal from a prosthetic she is making while Ed, the prosthetic's owner, gives her a thumbs up in the background. /End ID]

Finally, prosthetics also require maintenance from a specialist called a prosthetist, and they don't last forever. Some parts, like a foot or hand, can be reused over an over, but the sockets of a prosthetic need to be completely remade any time your body changes shape, including if you gain/loose weight, you start experiencing swelling, or you're just a child who is growing. Children in particular need new prosthetics every few months because they grow so fast, and as such, their prosthetics have to be made with this growth in mind. If they go too long without adjustment or an entirely new prosthetic, it can seriously impact the child and their growth but even small adjustments can be costly, depending on where you live. While prosthetics are built to be sturdy and reliable, they need a lot of work to stay that way. The more complex the prosthetic, the more work is needed. Complicated electronic components may need to have regular maintenance done by your prosthetist or even the specific component's manufacturer, and depending on where you live, this might mean having to send your prosthetic limb away for this to be done. While my prosthetist technically has the skills and knowledge to do the maintenance on my electronic knee, for example, the manufacturer forbids anyone not from their company to provide this service, meaning my leg needs to be shipped off to Germany once every few years if I want to keep the warranty. This has the unfortunate side effect of sometimes your limbs getting lost in postage (shout-out to Australia Post, who lost mine twice), meaning it can be months before you get it back or get a replacement. Usually, you'll be given a replacement in the meantime if you need it, but walking on a leg that isn't yours, even when its correctly fitted, always feels a bit weird (maybe that's just me though).

Not every difference is Inherently Negative

We've talked about some of the negatives that come from having a prosthetic, but not every difference is negative or even really that big of a deal. In fact, often times, it's these little moments in the depiction of a disability that go the furthest and make it feel the most genuine. My amputations effect me from the moment I wake up, to the moment I go to bed, but that doesn't mean every single way it impacts me is always inherently bad or negative. For example, back when I was working a normal job and going to university, I would often come home, throw my legs off at the door with the shoes still attached and get into my wheelchair, the same way you might throw your shoes off after work and replace them with comfy socks and other comfy clothing. This is something I've only ever seen on screen once, with Eda from the Owl House (and she wasn't even an amputee yet, her limbs were just detachable)

[ID: an screenshot of Eda from the owl house, a very pale woman, laying on the couch in a bathrobe, her hair in a towel. She has taken her actual legs off, throwing them to the other side of the seat. /End ID]

After that, my day mostly looked the same as most other people working a 9 to 5, I'd make myself dinner, watch some TV or play some games, maybe do some extra work at my desk or chat with friends. The only difference is that it would all be from a wheelchair, mainly because my prosthetics were heavy and it was just easier to use the chair around the house. The fact my afternoon and evening routine was done from a wheelchair wasn't a bad thing, it was just different. Likewise, I also don't sleep or shower with my prosthetics on, for the same reasons most other people wouldn't take a shower or sleep in thigh-high, steel-capped boots. In your own stories, this might look like giving your characters similar alterations to how they go about their day. Let them take their arm or leg off when they're resting or relaxing, show them taking a few minutes longer to get ready because they have to put it back on, show them doing some things without it. Arm amputees in particular tend to get very good at going about their days without their arm prosthetics, and leg amputees often either learn to get around more relaxed spaces like their homes using a different mobility aids like wheelchairs or crutches, or just through hopping if that's something they're physically able to do. Even when everything is going well and working as intended, your limb-different character won't wear their prosthetic 24/7, no matter how much they love it. There doesn't have to be something wrong with it or painful about it to not want it glued to them at all times, just like you can love a pair of big heavy boots but not want them on when you're trying to sleep. For more action-focused stories, being an amputee, also changes things like how you fight. The specifics will vary from person to person, but for example, when I did Hap Ki Do, a Korean Martial art, my instructor heavily modified when I learned what techniques. Beginner-level kicks and most leg attacks were impractical for me, as the force from the kicking motion would usually cause one of my legs to fly off. I also couldn't jump very well, due to some complications with my original amputation that made my stumps too sensitive to withstand the force of landing again. So I ended up learning a lot more upper-body attacks much earlier than it is typically taught. By the time I got my green belt, I was practicing upper-body techniques usually saved for black belts - including weapons training that I could use my secondary mobility aids for, like crutches and my cane in a bad situation. Many holds that rely on creating tension in your target are also less effective on amputees, because either the anatomy that causes those holds to be painful just simply isn't there, or the body part in question can just be removed to escape. Whether we're talking about the negative things, or just neutral differences that come with using prosthetics, you don't want to go too far with any one example. The key is to strike a balance. Of course, the old writing advice of "show don't tell" also applies here. It's one thing to tell us all of this stuff, but unless we actually see it play out, it won't mean much.

How NOT to avoid the trope

Before we move on, let's focus for a moment on some common things I've seen that you SHOULDN'T do as a way to get away from the trope.

The Enhanced Prosthetic

A lot of sci-fi in particular will take prosthetic limbs, make them function exactly the same as a biological limb, but add something extra to it. This does change the way the prosthetic functions and is used, but it usually still ignores the actual disabling parts of having a prosthetic. A really good example of this can be seen in pretty much any futuristic setting, but personally, I think Fizzeroli, from Helluva Boss is the best one to demonstrate what I mean. Fizz is a quadrilateral, above knee/above elbow amputee with highly advanced prosthetics that function, more or less exactly like the limbs he lost, but with the added benefit of being super-stretchy. Fizz is an acrobat and a clown in service, at least initially, to Mammon, one of the Seven Deadly Sins. These prosthetics help him perform and we even do see how they change little things like how he walks and just goes about his day, but the show still treats them like natural arms and legs, but better. 

[ID: A screenshot of Fizzeroli from Helluva Boss, a white-skinned imp with 4 black, prosthetic limbs, dressed in teal a nightgown as he lays in bed, reading from a list /End ID]

We see that he never takes them off, even when sleeping, and when he needs to use them as regular arms and legs, they do everything he needs, perfectly fine - at least when they're working correctly. The only time he ever even takes them off or has any issues with them, is when they break in season 2. The word amputee is never used to describe him, as far as I remember, and the fact he is one never really comes up at all, except for when they break or when the story focuses on how he lost them. Which brings me to my next point.

The Glitchy/Broken Prosthetic

One way I see people try to avoid the perfect prosthetic trope, is to take the prosthetic and break it or otherwise make it unreliable by having it malfunction, but not really changing anything else. This approach is heading in the right direction but still kind of misses the point of the criticism a lot of limb different folks have with the depictions of prosthetics in the media. Yeah, prosthetics do break down and some do require extra maintenance, but if your character's prosthetic is still exactly the same as a biological limb (or even better, in the case of the "enhanced prosthetic") when it's not broken, and the only time their disability is treated like a disability, is when it breaks, you're not really addressing the issue. Real prosthetics, like we discussed, even when functioning at 100%, exactly as the manufacturer intended, don't function the same as a meat-limb. They are fundamentally different, and the glitchy/unreliable prosthetic completely ignores all of that. Once again, Fizz is a really good example of this - the only time his prosthetics are not perfect, is when they break or are malfunctioning (despite the criticism, I do genuinely love Fizz as a character, but he unfortunately does fall into a lot of disability tropes).

[ID: Another screenshot of Fizzeroli, this time in a torn up jester outfit, looking down, panicked, at his prosthetic arms which are fully extended and laying motionless on the ground, with his left arm visibly short-circuiting with electricity around it. /End ID]

Now this isn't to say you can't have your character's prosthetics break down or malfunction at all. just that this shouldn't be the only way you differentiate the prosthetic from a biological limb. You should also be mindful of how or why they're breaking. A typical prosthetic isn't going to break down randomly from normal use unless something is very, very wrong or your character just has a terrible prosthetist (which unfortunately, does happen). You might experience issues if you try to make the prosthetic do something it just wasn't designed to do, or expose it to something it wasn't designed to deal with though (e.g. submerging an electronic prosthetic in water and trying to use it to swim).

Just add Phantom Pain

Another common pitfall I see when people are trying to avoid the perfect prosthetic trope, is to just give the character in question phantom pain - which is a side-effect of amputation where your brain's mental map of the body doesn't acknowledged you lost a limb. Your brain tries to fill in the gaps, since there is no signals coming from that part of the body anymore, and assumes either something must be wrong and so you should be in pain, even when you actually aren't. Alternatively, it can also happen when your brain was so used to feeling pain from that area before, in the case of people who had chronic conditions before they lost their limb, that it just keeps remaking those old signals itself. Like the broken/glitchy prosthetic approach, this also doesn't really address the issue with the perfect prosthetic trope, because it has nothing to do with the prosthetic itself. Phantom pain doesn't come from the prosthetic, nor does it effect how they're used, and so including it doesn't really address the issue of the prosthetic being functionally the same as the original, biological limb. This isn't to say that you shouldn't include phantom limb sensation or pain as something your character experiences, but just keep in mind that, when used on it's own, it doesn't counter the trope. Also, just be sure to do your research, everyone's experience with phantom pain is different and it's not something everyone with a limb difference even experiences.

Why is this trope even a problem?

Alright, so we know what the trope is, we know why it became so prevalent, ways to avoid it and also how not to avoid it. All good information, but why is this trope even bad? Why should you try to avoid it? Outside of just wanting to portray a real disability that effects real people more accurately in your creations, the prevalence of this trope actually contributes to a lot of real-world issues, especially when it's as overused as it currently is. I've talked before about "the jaws effect" - where the depiction of something in the media, especially something that the public is widely uneducated on, influences how people see it in real life. The Jaws effect specifically referred to how the popularity of creature-feature movies featuring sharks, like Jaws, caused the belief that sharks were monstrous killing machines to become much more wide-spread, even going so far as to influence decisions about laws and policy surrounding real-life shark preservation and culling in some parts of the world. But sharks aren't the only thing this has happened to.

Disabled people are so thoroughly misunderstood by wider society, that when tropes like this one become popular, people can and often do start to believe the misinformation they spread - in this case, believing that our prosthetics are a perfect replacement for a biological limb, and that getting a prosthetic means you're not disabled any more. While this can be annoying and cause small scale issues for some of us, like people giving us a hard time for using disability accommodations we very much need, it can also impact us in systemic ways too. If the wrong people believe these tropes, it can and does have a very real impact on the lives of disabled people through things like changes to policies to make it harder for amputees and people with limb differences to access financial assistance for other things outside of our prosthetics we may need assistance with.

Conclusion

Despite the very real harm tropes like this can do when it's overused, I don't think it should go away entirely. Some of my favourite pieces of media even use the perfect prosthetic trope and there are even some kinds of media where I even think it's somewhat unavoidable. Characters with perfect prosthetics in kids media in particular, especially when talking about side characters, can help to correct some of the other stereotypes kids may have seen elsewhere - such as prosthetics being "creepy" or "scary" - in a way that is casual and easy for them to understand. The problem with the trope, in my eyes, is it's excessive overuse. It's the fact that it seems to be the only representation amputees and people with limb differences are getting now. Not every story with a limb-different character can or even should delve into the reality of what using prosthetics is actually like, but we need at least some stories that do, without it being this majorly depressing thing.

[shithowdy]

wishing people would understand (and advertisers would stop giving the impression) that herbal remedies don't actually work like fantasy potions where you have a Symptom and they magically target that Symptom specifically-- they work exactly like pharmaceutical medicines but at a less concentrated scale, and it can interact poorly with them if you are already using them.

ashwagandha doesn't "lower your anxiety", it reduces your cortisol levels, which can in turn lower your blood pressure and interact with other adrenal and BP meds. ginkgo doesn't "help you think", it dilates your blood vessels and is an anti-platelet, which increases cerebral bloodflow but can interact with other circulatory meds. grapefruit seed extract is an incredible antifungal but it will inhibit enzymes that break down many types of medication and lead to blood toxicity of those meds.

i've worked in this industry since before insta/tiktok was a major force in advertising for it and i've watched the swing from people generally being educated about this niche thing they have come in to buy to "i saw on tiktok that this will give me energy"

.... will it? have you had bloodwork done? are you adequately absorbing your nutrition? are you getting sunlight? stop being scammed by symptom-centric buzzwords. anything that promises it will give you energy or help you focus or whatever else hinges entirely on your body chemistry fitting very certain criteria and a lot of people end up disappointed when that cordyceps did nothing for them when it turns out they're low on stomach acid and not synthesizing their B vitamins correctly or something else that is way above my paygrade to determine.

the american healthcare system is a shitshow and people often have no choice but to take their treatments into their own hand, but "natural remedies" want your money just as bad as "big pharma" and it's up to the individual to do their epistemological due diligence when treating themselves. godbless.

[novelistwriter]

The Ghost Kid of Gotham

DP x DC Prompt

When Danny told his parents about him being Phantom, he was strapped down to a table and cut open by them. By the time he was saved it was too late, he became a Full Ghost, with it changing because he died a second time, tears constantly flow from his eyes, chains are around his wrists and ankles, leather straps are around his torso, and his logo is no longer seen, just a ripped off part of his hazmat that shows the scar left behind by being cut open.

He doesn't remember much after being saved, just that he had destroyed a lot of things in his grief, Vlad was the one to tell him, and the Fruitloop was in a bad condition when the Halfa came to him. He's the Ghost King, but the council still runs the Infinite Realms, he's just a figure head with a lot of Power and Influence used, all because he doesn't have his human half anymore, he can't make the Infinite Realms better without it, Clockwork told him that with a sadness in his voice.

One thing that Danny can do to make things better is his new power to remove curses by being close to the affected person/object/location, so Clockwork sent Danny to Gotham just as Batman was starting his career as a Vigilante.

Gotham had been cursed a lot in the past, that's why the city is the way it is, Lady Gotham couldn't undo them all herself, so she asked Clockwork, her old friend, for help, he sent Danny, still known as Phantom.

Phantom and Batman first met when Batman had gotten word of a mysterious entity nearby doing something shady, this was Phantom in the middle of removing a curse.

Batman did his usual 'interrogation' tactics, but he was stunned to see a young boy with tears falling from his face, chains on his wrists and ankles, leather straps on his torso and a part of his outfit with a tear in it, showing a autopsy scar.

Phantom had told him what he was doing, and what he is, the Ghost of a Child. This led to Batman seeing if he could help the Ghost move on, all he was told was "I can't move on, she needs help", when asked who 'she' was, all Phantom said was "Gotham" before disappearing.

What Batman didn't know was that he wasn't the only one who was near Phantom, other citizens of Gotham heard what Phantom said to Batman, they believed that Phantom was the Ghost of a Gothamite child who lingers to help the city, they spread the word about what they heard that night.

Over time, Phantom has interacted with many of the big names in Gotham as they appeared, Joker reminds him of Freakshow, but Phantom doesn't attack him, just seeing if playing Jokers games would get the Joker to rethink his ways, thinking Joker is cursed. Before Harleen became Harley, Phantom sought out the Psychiatrist to remember his sister, having told the woman that she sounds like his sister when she helps people. Before Pamela became Ivy, Phantom sought her out to remember his best friend who loved plants. When Croc began to show himself, Phantom seeks him out to talk to him, one of their talks is overhead by citizens, after that talk overheard by the citizens, they try and treat Waylon better. When Scarecrow emerged, Phantom isn't affected by the Fear Gas, but lingers near Crane to remember Fright Knight. Bane almost reminds Phantom of his father, Phantom had cowered during Banes first attack on Gotham with the him nearby, but what Phantom said will stick with the Gothamites and Bad Guys forever.

"Please Dad! Don't hurt me again! Don't put me back on that table!"

After Phantom had said that, the Ghost had run away, leaving Bane, his crew, and many citizens shocked by what Phantom revealed about himself, a child, who was most likely harmed and killed by his own father.

There are others Phantom interacts with. Riddler reminds Phantom of Clockwork, and Phantom both likes and despises Riddler because of that. Grundy is Phantoms regular, as Phantom is drawn to the Zombie because they are the same, undead beings that still linger. Phantom even tries to help the Talons that he runs into, saying that the "Baby Ghosts need to be cleaned of the rotten Ectoplasm in them to be healthy". Leslie reminds Phantom of Frostbite.

When each Robin takes flight, Gotham goes through a positive change in appearance, during Dicks time, it rained less, during Jason's time, there was less Smog in the sky, showing more of the sky during days and nights, when Tim was Robin, Gotham had cleaner air and clearer skies, by the time Damian became Robin, Gotham is as healthy as it could be without the curses affecting it.

Phantom seeks out reporters, running into Vicki Vale during one of her live reports on a attack, he goes up to her, knowing that Gotham's citizens will be watching this broadcast. What Phantom doesn't know, is that both Gotham and its people have grown attached to the Ghost Boy.

"Gotham is healthy, she doesn't need me to help her anymore, it's time for me to go"

[asstrolo]

astrology observations for sad people

— the signs who I personally believe are really misunderstood by their peers are often capricorns and aquarius because of their saturnian tendencies where they become the mature, bigger person or are aloof of how they're presenting themselves, they always think they know better or people feel very intimidated by their personalities and, because people don't understand them, they alienate them,

— aries and scorpio as they are very intense, over confident people, other's might feel put-off by them, they can be very controlling and have a "I don't care" kind of personality that doesn't usually goes well with others, their ways of always trying to make themselves clear and understood causes the opposite effect, they are often misjudged as villainous or mean,

— geminis are also put in a place of having to know better, not given a chance or space to mess up as they are very intelligent people and show it, others might have big expectations which are often not met since they prefer to do what makes them happy and makes them curious, they tend to over-inflate themselves, or the opposite, and people take their words too seriously or not at all, very polarizing sign.

— a stellium in 4th can be super difficult to deal with, specially if it falls on not easy planets like mars, or saturn, uranus, or pluto. These people are always dragged back to their family issues no matter how much they try to escape, their parents maybe gave them too much responsibilities as little kids or vented to their child without thinking of the consequences, if these people ever decide to have a family they should always consider if they're doing it because they want to or because it is what's expected of them.

— chiron in social signs as gemini, aquarius and libra feel very alienated at all times, having social interactions is a learning experience for them, whether is good or bad, I also notice people usually get obsessed with them? They don't respect these people¡s space or it could be the other way around, to me is a placement where you'll learn to not be socially inept or teach people how to treat you right for some reason?

— saturn IS a complicated planet, it depends on the person's other planets and aspects how they deal with saturn, a person with moon conjuct saturn has a harder time dealing with their emotions than a capricorn moon. Even when the energies are similar, they don't have the same impact.

— now, a person with a capricornian stellium or dominant does deal with the saturn energy much comfortably than a person with sun trine saturn, because they were born with it. I personally believe you accommodate, or your aspects accommodate to you as you grow and evolve as a person.

— a pisces stellium, specially if is on moon or ascendants, is very perceptive to other's opinion on them, not in a superficial way but more on a "does this person thinks i'm being fair or mean?" Let's not forget the sister sign of Pisces is Virgo, so these signs also share the analytical or more neurotic way of seeing the world. A Pisces Rising is very self-aware of how they come off to people or how they are seen, they might not show it or say anything about it, a Pisces mercury might be self-conscious about how they approach others, how their voice sounds or how they come off when talking.

— I do believe leo's have a harder time being appreciated by people, as they devote to other's so easily they could neglect themselves in the process. Is the kind of person who is always looking out for someone to make happy or to make them feel comfortable because is something they want reciprocated. But this is a thing that can happen to fire signs a lot, they can be overbearing or too kind to people that it ends up backfiring on them, they have a very childlike mentally.

— is true what they say, a 12th house stellium in a natal chart makes the person passive and/or too in their own world, they have premonitions in dreams, but I've also seen these individuals have a really hard time with sleep, they have paranormal experiences a lot that some of them are used to it. They can be in some sort of medication, but not all, and not always these people are medicated or doing substances, they have an easier time to have out-of-body experiences, like lucid dreaming or sleep paralysis, these can occur because these people are super sensitive and get easily drained and stressed. Is important they are taking care of their energy at all times, I've met many that have one, two or more 12th house placement where I've found out some other person has been doing some sort of witchcraft on them, or have a big negative energy that this 12th houser sucks accidentally.

— having a mercurial dominant or rising can be super difficult when it comes to feeling, they tend to rationalize everything too much, are easily distracted and indulgent, they are very, very anxious at all times on all situations, even if they show otherwise. they overthink things too much, are the kind to be incredibly self-aware or completely out of touch with themselves.

— the ascendant aspecting negatively the mercury gives the individual speech impediment or a very shy personality, an almost inaudible voice or a raspy one, people with this placement have a harder time getting their thoughts across, or people might misinterpret them.

— keeping the conversation going, mercury negatively aspecting saturn makes a shy and reserved person, someone who, as a kid or a teen, has problems with being heard, or people simply didn't care or asked for this person's opinions, they might had been very codependent on an adult or somebody else to talk or to get to be seen, as they grow older they learn to communicate rather excellently, they might want to treat their shyness or whatever problem they have with unwanted attention or negligence

— neptune in personal houses like the 1st, 7th, 4th or 10th is really tricky. you might ignore gut feelings bout certain individuals, or on the contrary, believe someone is good when they aren't. these people can be their own worst enemies as they are super perceptive of how they come across to others, or how others make them feel.

— neptune in the 1st is common on actors and models and singers, usually on famous people, because they can create a fantasy of how they want people to see them, or act like chameleons around people, this creates a series of identity crisis during their lives.

— neptune in 7th is prone to feel things that really aren't there? they convince themselves somebody hates them or likes them for just one interaction, these individuals are like a sponge in social situations and they take everything somebody tells them to the heart. they also are known to lie a lot to people on behalf of good manners, they like to be liked.

— neptune in 4th house has a really confusing or unclear family situation, they might adopt the role of the parent when they shouldn't, or are treated as a child even as an adult, something in their family, in what they think is normal growing up, isn't. the most likely to stay in a bad situation for many, many years because they don't know any better, or think it's normal.

— neptune in 10th, although it deals with fame and impersonal relationships, to me, is just as fundamental as the houses listed above. they don't see themselves through their own eyes, or feel like they depend on other's perceptions on themselves too much, they are confident, or pretend it really well. these individuals know how to act the part, how to commit to the bit, they never feel that sense of belonging anywhere, because they might show different parts of their personalities to different people

— for me, the hardest moons to have are capricorn, scorpio and virgo.

— capricorn moon is a strictly analytical sign, they don't feel comfortable in the moon as is where the emotions and insecurities shine the most.

— scorpio moon is a very intense sign, as opposite to the Capricorn, they can be super emotional, or completely numb, very extremist and their emotions are black or white, polarizing.

— virgo moon is extremely difficult, they don't like to have to feel things, they like to think and act with precaution and it's hard for them to let their emotions slip, the kind of friend who'd have the most practical advice to all sort of topics, a helpful hand in all situations, but when it comes to them as individuals, they let themselves be too much, their head is always at a thousand percent. From what I've gathered of this moon is that, yes, they are neurotic when it comes to certain things, but completely careless to others, and it's usually to themselves, you won't ever see a Virgo moon misbehave or dress bad, but they can hold a lot of suppressed shame or anger or sadness, like they tie it with a bow in a box and keep it locked.

— lastly, no aspect or moon or sign is bad, they are just more difficult than others, there are people with easy aspects, like sun sextile or trine jupiter, they are prone to idealization and inferiority complexes. it's true that a person that has the harmonious aspects is lazier or gets unmotivated way easier. nothing is really set in stone, you can have a moon conjunct saturn and a cancer mercury in 9th house, your way of expressing yourself is more reserved, but optimistic and even childlike. when it comes to astrology, every single aspect and sign, and house counts to describe a person.

[pikahlua]

Oh? Please, Madam

What Izuku rejects is the opportunity to be Katsuki's SIDEKICK. He doesn't reject being a hero or competing with Katsuki. He rejects working FOR/UNDER Katsuki. Which is hilarious because Katsuki accepts (apparently multiple times) showing up as a guest lecturer to help out Izuku's class. Katsuki tells Izuku that "If everyone is special, no one is special," which has the potential for SO MUCH DOUBLE MEANING. But what there is no ambiguity about to me is he's basically telling Izuku "Hey, notice this. I'm treating you special. You're special to me. NOTICE."

It's also implied that Izuku sees Katsuki more regularly than he sees most others from their class, which is emphasized by the previous chapter when Aizawa complains to him about Katsuki's behavior in public affecting his ranking. Katsuki basically tells Izuku he needs to start thinking about himself more, and he also ends their final interaction with a "See ya [later]." Katsuki is NOT talking about Ochako, but Izuku takes some of his advice as the impetus for going to talk to Ochako (specifically they just wanna talk more after the dinner since the dinner is now over and they didn't get to talk). So what was Katsuki thinking of? I personally read his "See ya later" as "You'll figure it out, just go handle what you gotta right now and you can catch up to me later."

Hilariously, Izuku calls Katsuki out for being the one to say "If you don't start thinking a little more highly of yourself, you won't notice the things you should." Izuku's response is basically, "Look who's talking." Again, the potential for double meaning here is painfully obvious. He could be referring to SO MANY THINGS and we're meant to infer what that is. WE GET TO GUESS. Izuku could be saying "You did stuff just as bad as what you're saying," or "You're STILL not noticing something, Kacchan."

And Izuku taking inspiration from Katsuki's words to go talk to Ochako is meaningful in another way--IT MEANS IZUKU LISTENED TO HIM. Katsuki is having an influence on Izuku in a way to improve who he is just like Izuku did for him in high school. Izuku takes Katsuki's advice seriously. NO ONE HAS EVER GOTTEN HIM TO UNDERSTAND THIS LESSON BEFORE NOW. It ends with Izuku and Ochako deciding to talk more, but what it shows us is the beginning of Izuku considering himself more. If Izuku follows Katsuki's advice long enough, he'll end up back in the competition with Katsuki just like Katsuki expects him to. That is just as easy of a conclusion to make from the theme of "inevitability" that Shouto gives us (and that Izuku also takes to heart).

This ending implies that inevitably Izuku's gonna catch up again, basically. Things will continue to change. So yeah, we get a beginning where he and Ochako meet up to talk, but it's just a beginning. It's one night of chatting. They're seeing if something's there now (which kind of implies that there wasn't much there before), but it's left open-ended. And I think it's left open-ended what happens with Ochako on purpose because anyone can read how that ends up however they like. You just have to decide as a reader what's "inevitable" for Izuku Midoriya from this point on. Me? I've decided Izuku is taking Katsuki's advice to treat people who mean more to him better. Ochako is just the beginning. Izuku has other people in his life he needs to show love to as well (because that's what this is, Izuku is learning to show people that they're important to him, that he loves them, because saving people doesn't do that--he saves EVERYONE). And then maybe he'll start to see how the people who love him treat him special too, like guest SPECIAL (same kanji) LECTURER KATSUKI BAKUGOU.

tl;dr there is a lot left open to interpretation and it's probably on purpose, read the chapter however you like, just like we did with the last chapter.

...and my interpretation which is the correct one is that Katsuki tells Izuku, "Here let me show you how to love people, damnit!" to give him the character development everyone has been begging for him to have for years, to realize that saving people doesn't mean they're special to him if he's known for saving everyone ever, so like, maybe go show them you care in OTHER ways, Izuku, and also I'll be waiting right here for you to come show you love me you jackass (and he does, he does come show him that)