#another character who wnet through hell is nico robin and I kinda wanted to mentioned her up there but it got to long

[madmachaca]

I got this in my inbox, and I think is a worth seeing argument:

It is about a previous post I made about Doflamingo and since it seems it´s causing some confusion, I want to add something (I´m gonna write my answer first, because it´s less confusing that way, and then let y´all read the collaboration I got after the Readmore section. IF WHOEVER SENT IT TO ME DOESN'T WANT IT HERE, TELL ME IN AN ASK AND I WILL DELETE THAT PART)

(*I wanna mention that this I am writing now is not an answer to the person who sent it to me, but something I wanted to add. I appreciated getting that perspective sent, and to that person, I'm gonna say, "Thank you." it was a good read)

As I mentioned in a reblog (which was in spanish) I may have explain myself badly, when I said they went through the same, I meant their shared experinces. Or maybe, I oversimplificted things. Yes, I do acknowledge the two Donquixote brothers grew up in different envioremnts, I am not ignoring how badly Doflamingo was affected, but the point of my original post (and here is where I think it´s the first miscommunication problem) was that I like how the show doesn´t justify him with his past. I like when villians are let to be so. Doflamingo is a twisted man with antisocial behaivor and that (in a work of fiction) it´s entrataining. I don´t want him to be justified, but I like him being explained. understood and justified is not the same thing, I should mention. Explaining a character gives it dept, but explanation is not always done so the audience can empathize, sometimes, it just does that explains.

The other thing is a matter of personal taste. I like doflamingo because I like entrataining villians, but I don´t empathize with him and I still cheered everythime the strawhats ruinned his plans.

Now the other issue with my orignal post, and form here on I will put the topic of the brothers aside and talk in general terms, also I will change the size of the font to indicate a mood switch because this may be controversial: 

The decision to become kind does not depend on your past. It depends on you. 

I stand by this.

BUT,before you all say anything,

 No

I DO NOT THINK is as simple as “ah, get over it and be better to others!” I know it´s way more complicated, and I said it: it requires a lot of will. not to mention it´s painful, but it´s possible with help.

(Reminder that I am not talking about the Donquixote brothers here anymore, but genreall (and I will use you solely for the sake of simplicity):

Your hard past is not your fault. ok? if you suffered, what happened to you it´s not your fault. I wanna make that clear. 

 yet, there comes a moment when it becomes your responsability... by this I mean that using you past as a justification to hurt others is on you.

 and I get not everybody get´s the chance to change. Not everybody will be helped, but know that if somebody is willing to help you, most of the work would be not in them,, but in you. 

I am well aware there are real life examples of people that were never helped and that is, with no sense of irony, tragic and sad.

Sorry for that oversimplied rant there, I just wanted to make myself clear. 

Now, from here on, is what I got in my inbox (read it if you will, I genually think is a point of viewworth of considering)

AGAIN, THIS ANSWER IS NOT DIRECTED TO THE PERSON WHO SENT ME THIS, BUT A CLARYFICATION OF WHAT i SAID AND A THOUGHT I HAD. 

I am just sharing because it´s a point to consider. as the person who sent it said “it´s more complicated that that” 

Thank you for keeping up with the mess of ideas and thoughts that is more brain, and now, this time for real, it´s the post I got sent:

Idk I think it’s more complicated than that. Those kids very much did not go through the same thing or have access to the same resources and that very much does impact their choices. Just the minor differences of one being the older protector to the younger drastically changes how they would experience and move through the world. Two years is a lot at that age and one was more aware more indoctrinated and needed more help and education to fix this.

With the story showing after they parted as children only Rosi received in any meaningful way while Doffy not only didn’t get any of that support but got negative enabling. If anything Law who was stated to be just like Doflamingo as a child shows that really more than being stopped or controlled the child needed to be rescued.

Sure now the character needs to be stopped but still it should be noted the first attempt didn’t work and ended with a death and the second one hasn’t really fixed any of the problems that created the situation nor corrected the man in question as another prison break could unleash him again. Doffy had issues but his brother was completely wrong in believing he was born evil and was never afraid or cried. We see evidence all throughout the flashbacks and present day that was never the real problem with the kid.

Rather it was the negative lessons he internalized that were promoted throughout his life by the people around him and that he later promoted and spread. For example Doffy wasnt born believing owning slaves was good he learned that from other adults and his parents never corrected this before they moved. So as a child he isn’t broken or twisted he is repeating the values taught to him and engaging in behavior he would have previously been praised for.

His negative reaction to the change is actually a common childhood reaction to drastic shifts in their environments and 180s in how they have previously been raised. You see these reactions all the time in real world deprogramming initiatives and kids from those do go on to change and live better lives. Doffy isn’t a god or monster he’s a normal human being. His actions are his own and have consequences that he must live with but they are also shaped by his environment. Not 100% one or the other but a toxic mixture of both.