#because by the end of genocide you have to make the decision to kill them all in the blink of an eye—as youve been doing the entire game—

[down-thedrain]

"this world will live on...!" girl no it wont im sorry

[raymurata]

Bellara's main choice and DAV's implicit (or accidental) stance on book burning

Okay, so. Prefacing this with -- I enjoyed the game. I'd even play it again. That being said, one of its biggest flaws is trying to deliver something so morally sanitized it shies away from giving its characters (aside from Solas) and plotlines (aside from Solas's) real nuance. And in the same breath, they end up sending messages that I doubt they intended to send.

Bellara's main decision is particularly annoying to me.

First, I find her arc to be lacking -- She starts the game grieving her brother and blaming herself for his death despite not being responsible for it, then she finds Cyrian again only to grieve him again, so she's back to the start, only this time she has had the guilt removed from her because Cyrian tells her what she needs to hear, and the blame is placed on a big bad evil. Fair, fine.

But I don't like the cinematography of that scene at all. There was plenty of time for Rook and Bellara to react between Anaris grabbing Cyrian's foot and throwing him at the wall. People in Thedas have survived way worse injuries, too, and Bellara literally has healing at her disposal. Why doesn't she even try? His death is clearly plot-driven but it doesn't take her arc forward all that much? But again, that's fine. Not too bad.

But then the choice I have to make for her is whether or not to keep the archive, why? At no point in the game (please correct me if I'm wrong and missed canon information that contradicts me. That would make me way less angry!!!) do they tell us that it was Bellara using the Archive that summoned Anaris, or that it could summon him at will. As far as my interpretation goes, the Archive is, as its name says, the equivalent to a library curated by a comically self-aggrandizing jerk. At no point do we hear it share any actually dangerous lore either, do we? No blueprints for nuclear weapons...

So why does the game choose this wording:

Now, unless the Archive has powers we are unaware of, what this is saying is basically "burn the ancient elven library (it will be safe)" or "don't burn the ancient elven library (it will be dangerous)" and, for a game that is so irritatingly set on giving you only 2024-morality-board-approved goodTM and unproblematic companions and allies... Why does it tell me that burning books is the safe option, ESPECIALLY given that these books are priceless historical artefacts from a marginalized and subjugated ethinic group who have long lost their history to genocide? Like, wut?? Even if the Archive were in fact a dangerous weapon, the game shows us through the Veil Jumpers' vault that they have trained capable scholars and developed (or are developing, with Bellara spearheading it) safe tools to study and keep these artefacts. How condescending is it to tell them that they won't be able to safekeep this one? How pointless? (and her cutest armor AND best skill are locked behind that choice? outrageous lmao.)

And what pisses me off is that they had everything set up already, they just had to deliver it differently. If they told us explicitly that the archive is Anaris' phylactery and that keeping it would mean allowing Anaris to eventually come back? THEN we'd have a real danger. NOW there is a non-fascist risk to maintaining knowledge.

Or what if the only reason Cyrian is back is because Anaris brought him back? What if Cyrian's life is therefore tied to Anaris', and you had to choose between letting Anaris live (perhaps that results in him getting imprisoned in the Archive, tampering with the information in it and destroying its historical value forever, plus Anaris might one day figure out a way out) or killing Anaris for good even knowing that Cyrian will also die again if you do (but then the Dalish get to keep the archive and all the knowledge in it, and Cyrian's sacrifice is not in vain)? Or maybe... The Archive is a spirit, isn't it? Drive home the fact that being tied to that device was a cruel thing Anaris did to it, and keeping it there is just as cruel, even if it would mean giving the elves access to information. Make the wording "free the archive" really mean something here, and the player really think that the knowledge will be lost. Then maybe have it that, if she frees it, it gives her information freely and with its own interpretation of that knowledge, and THEN it leaves (so it's not forever but there is a reward for being compassionate). And if she keeps the spirit in the device, then it is always rude and it gives her information curated by Anaris' point of view, but it is available to all upcoming generations. It'd be real nice and nuanced to pit her compassion against her drive for knowledge. If this were DAO or DA2, you wouldn't make the choice FOR HER. You'd make the choice yourself because you are the leader, and if you chose to keep the spirit, you'd garner lots of negative points with Bellara (and with Emmrich) because, let's be honest, she is written as inherently more compassionate than driven, and she'd resent you making an oppressing choice even if it is well-meaning and good for her people (just like Alistair resents you killing Isolde even if he understands it was a difficult choice).

I just... So many ways it could have been an actually weighted choice, or that it could have affected your relationship with Bellara (and other companions) as Bioware RPGs were wont to do. They had a good set up, but the landing was absolutely bonkers.

[sokkastyles]

Do you think some parts of the world would have been unhappy in Aang's decision to spare Ozai? That people would be so bitter - this madman gets to live, while their friends and loved ones died? Why is that? Oh - because the Avatar didn't want to compromise his own morals, to kill someone? Tough, it's a war. People die.

The thing I don't like about the way the show frames it is that the narrative doesn't really give Aang a choice, either.

I think people who frame this as Aang respecting Air Nomad culture are trying to give the show too much credit, because the show doesn't act like Aang gets to choose a moral high ground, they act like he has no choice. Aang seems to believe that the only way he can honor his Air Nomad heritage is by not killing, and...what about all the Air Nomads who didn't have that luxury? What about Gyatso, who was faced with the choice of kill or die, and killed, and died?

I think a lot of people would see Aang's choice as a slap in the face. Every person who had to do things they considered against their personal morals to survive. People like Jet who sincerely wished to stop leading a violent life, but couldn't, because that life was chosen for him the moment his parents were murdered. People like Hakoda who felt deeply ashamed of having to leave his own children to go to war. Are these people just inherently less moral or more bloodthirsty than Aang? No, they simply didn't have the power Aang had at his disposal that allowed him to avoid the kind of violent lives that many people, children included, were forced to lead during the war.

That's also why the "Aang reminds Katara/Zuko that they are kids" thing annoys me. What Aang does is remind them that HE has the luxury of thinking of himself as a kid while they don't. The reason Katara hadn't been penguin sledding in so long isn't because she's a buzzkill who hates fun or she "forgot" that she's a kid, it's because she was forced into a role where she had to take care of her family in her mother's absence, and that doesn't go away with the introduction of another kid she has to parent. As for Zuko, that "well you're just a teenager" line is funny and it's easy to think of Zuko as someone who takes himself too seriously (and part of why it's funny is that teenagers in general do view themselves as so much older than younger children), but Zuko was kicked out of his home at thirteen and expected to be fighting a fully-realized adult Avatar. Even when he was Aang's age, he never had the luxury of thinking of himself that way. You can see this also in the way Zuko interacts with adults early in the series, notably Zhao and his crew. He is desperate to be seen as a hardened adult because he has had to act like one to survive.

These people don't act this way because they've lost their morals or sense of fun or because they don't value peace enough. They act this way because this is what they were forced to do to survive. I think people would rightly be offended by the idea that wanting to see Ozai dead for his crimes makes them just as violent as a genocidal tyrant, and they would be right to feel resentful that Ozai gets to live when he was responsible for so much violence. This is also why Zuko tells Ozai that he's lucky that Aang spared his life. Because in the end, Aang has NO moral obligation to spare Ozai whatsoever, not because of his culture or any reason. Pacifism has never meant that you aren't allowed to use necessary force to stop violence from happening. And anyone who uses the argument that Aang has to spare Ozai because of his culture or that this is his only way to honor his people is LYING.

[kudossi]

Tigerclaw and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Senior Warrior Position AU

In a world where deputies can only be named after their first apprentice has been granted their warrior name, Tigerclaw struggles to keep an apprentice alive long enough to earn their name.

or, a comedy-tragedy AU in which having an apprentice isn't enough — you have to see them to their warrior name, and Tigerclaw cannot fucking get any of his goddamn apprentices to live, damn it.

—

It starts out mostly normally, except for the fact that Tigerclaw hasn't gotten any apprentices to their warrior name, and he needs that so he can accomplish his (very noble, of course) kitty genocide goals. And also be the supreme leader of the world or something. Darkpaw died stupidly, he hasn't had a chance since, and now he's got some tiny thing that's afraid of his own shadow.

Well. It'll have to do.

So naturally this man is so protective over Ravenpaw that Ravenpaw barely even leaves his sight. Firepaw and Graypaw think that this is adorable. Look how much Tigerclaw cares about his apprentice!!

Ravenpaw, of course, is fucking terrified and also slowly losing his mind, just in a different way.

—

"Redtail assigned us to go on a patrol to Snakerocks." "OH NO HE DID NOT. WE'RE STAYING IN THE SANDY HOLLOW WHERE IT'S SAFE."

"Nothing matters more to me than making you a warrior, Ravenpaw. Nothing." And the terrible thing is that Ravenpaw is sure he's being sincere.

—

Ravenpaw disappears and Tigerclaw nearly fucking has a conniption because the timing was all RIGHT and he was going to finally get the position AND HE NEVER GOT HIS DAMN NAME FUCK.

"Do you think I could convince the elders that Fireheart was my apprentice?" "Fireheart was Bluestar's apprentice, as approved by StarClan. You're going to have to wait for the next litter to be apprenticed."

So he begs and begs and gets Cinderpaw and then she accidentally falls into the trap he'd set for a better deputy candidate at the Thunderpath. Fuck.

—

Well. Time to resort to drastic measures.

"I was thinking that Darkstripe would have been a good name. Because he had dark stripes." "Again, Tigerclaw, it's admirable that you loved your apprentice so much, but I cannot grant him a name." "Are you sure?" "Honestly, Tigerclaw, I'm not sure he ever would have gotten a name. Missing quite a few feathers from his nest, that one..." Fuck. The worst part was that she wasn't even wrong.

— Swiftpaw and Brightpaw get mauled by the dogs he set up to happen like right after he got the title and they sprang it before and he's like FUCK NOW WHAT DO I DO WITH THESE DAMN DOGS? His world domination plans literally never come to fruition because he cannot keep his apprentices alive/in the clan/his own.

— "Brightheart counts. She HAS to count." "Actually, Cloudtail took over her training…" [demented noises]

—

Turns out that Ravenpaw is alive and no one — no one — in the Harper Collins Extended Universe is happier than Tigerclaw.

"You're alive! …You deserve your warrior name!" "Actually, I've come to peace with my name and my way of life. I have no need for a—" "GET YOUR FUCKING NAME RIGHT NOW RAVENPAW OR SO HELP ME STARCLAN—" "I know you really wanted Ravenpaw to become a warrior," Barley says gently, "but he's made his decision. It's very kind of you to acknowledge that he deserves it, though. You must have been so close as mentor and apprentice." Tigerclaw's eye twitches. "Yes. Close. Very... close." —

He finally, finally retires as an elder after his plans go absolutely nowhere for years on end. And maybe StarClan is still like "Brambleclaw would be chill actually, we can forget that pesky little law" and Tigerclaw is sitting there like "excuse me what the actual fuck?" —

But at this point Tigerclaw is about as dangerous as Ashfur without a freak forest fire. Which is to say about as dangerous as using a leaf as a weapon. Which is, incidentally, how Darkpaw managed to get himself killed in the first place.

—

"Is this the Dark Forest? This has to be the Dark Forest. It doesn't look like Thistleclaw described it, but it must be. This Clan is all an elaborate punishment meted down by StarClan for my sins." "Tigerclaw, sir, I'm just here to help you with your ticks. See? I have the mousebile right here." "…Yes, thank you, Alderpaw." — Graystripe joins him in the elder's den and he's like, "You know, Ravenpaw thought you were up to some… scheme, back in the day. Crazy, right? You've been a model Clanmate as long as I've been alive." [muffled screaming] "Huh, what do you think that is? It sounds almost like someone killed a rabbit, but they know not to come this close to camp…"

[anistarrose]

Really Small Problems starts with King's bread puns, so obviously, it's already crucial to the emotional arc of the finale. But knowing that the Titan was watching that day, do you know what else the Titan must have noticed, and how that makes the finale so much more impactful?

[ID from alt: King talking to a disguised Tibbles, then Luz kissing King on the forehead after they reconcile. End ID.]

In the episode, King gets used as a pawn by Tibbles — who preys off of King's desire to spend time playing with Luz — and as a result, King puts Luz and her friends in a lot of danger. But Luz, while initially angry, realizes that King was being manipulated, not malicious — and at his absolute worst, just an irresponsible kid who really wanted to spend time with his friend — and she reconciles with him, leading to their bond becoming stronger than ever before.

But hey, for no particular reason, remember what the Titan's greatest regret was, again?

[ID from alt: a projection by the Collector, of the Archivists reaching out to the Collector, then a projection of the Titan glaring menacingly. End ID.]

When the Collector was being used as a pawn by the Archivists, who were the ones who really killed all the Titans, King's dad didn't realize the truth until far too late. Rather than talk to the Collector and try to understand, let alone reconcile, Papa Titan lashed out at the Collector for their perceived betrayal — imprisoning the Collector, thereby plunging him into traumatizing isolation, for millions and millions of years. It's the Titan's worst mistake. The Collector didn't deserve anything like that — the Collector was just a misguided little kid. But the Titan had let his rage consume him. And now, slain by the Archivists, the Titan can no longer undo her mistake.

So... fast forward to when the Titan's own kid has finally hatched, and started to grow up. The Titan sees his kid make a friend in Luz, whom the Titan already likes, because she was kind to King and respectful to the Isles. But then — the Titan sees her own kid do something misguided. The Titan sees his own kid put his friends in danger. Only... instead of fallout from Luz's feelings of betrayal, the Titan sees Luz actually reconcile with King. The Titan sees Luz recognize that King didn't want to hurt anyone. In other words, the Titan sees Luz avoid repeating the Titan's mistake.

Of course, dealing with Tibbles is far, far lower-stakes than dealing with genocidal Archivists. But what the Titan sees is Luz proving that she can be levelheaded, and forgiving, and most of all, trustworthy with the challenging decisions that the Titan himself has messed up before. Luz finds her last two glyphs rapid-fire after this episode, after the first two were comparatively slow-going. She still has to work for them, by being attentive to nature and to magic, but that change in pacing isn't a coincidence. The Titan is selective about who can be trusted with glyphs — but Luz earns that trust. By being kind to King, first and foremost — but even more specifically, by extending understanding and forgiveness, instead of blame, to a child who had just wanted to play.

And that all culminates in why the Titan trusts Luz to wield the full power of the Boiling Isles in the finale. It's why the Titan believes Luz is a genuine and kind person, who can defeat Belos by force without ever being or becoming as bad as he is — because Luz does give people second chances, and resolve things non-violently, when people aren't as malicious or set in their ways as Belos is. Because Luz gave a second chance to King, and even gave a second chance to the Collector — thus, doing what the Titan couldn't. The Titan trusts Luz not to give into destructive, punitive options — neither killing, nor imprisonment — unless there is truly no other option, in which case killing Belos isn't punitive or retributive in ideology; it's just self-defense.

So, when the Titan makes some of her final words a bread pun, it tells King and Luz and the viewer so much. That the Titan was watching the whole time — but that the Titan was watching Really Small Problems, specifically. That the Titan watched King mature, and the Titan watched Luz forgive him. The Titan watched and made reference to a story about second chances and reconciliation working — because they do work, most of the time, and the fact that Belos is the rare exception is crucial to the message of the finale.

And in a more meta, ironic way — yet one that I'm sure the writers were aware of — the Titan was even watching what some fans called a "filler" episode. But Titan cared so much about Luz and King's development within. And what a brilliant way to tie the whole show together! What a good tribute to the value of gradual character development! And to rewatching a show with fresh eyes, now metaphorically from the Titan's perspective!

It changes everything. It makes you appreciate Luz and King so, so much. It's such a subtle, beautiful writing choice. And the Titan is such a beautiful character. Really Small Problems is not a skippable episode. It always had good character development, but the way it's utilized and recontextualized by the rest of the narrative is nothing short of brilliant.

[wheelie-sick]

I wanted to ask if I could get your personal opinion on cochlear implants as a deaf person? I'm writing an essay for my ASL class and it's really hard to find opinions about them from the deaf community. I'm very sorry if asking this is rude, you have every right to decline responding to this. Thank you for your time

okay finally getting to this ask

I have a really complicated opinion because on one hand I think the technology is really freeing for a lot of deaf people but on the other they are killing the deaf community.

cochlear implants in and of themselves are neutral technology. in a perfect world there would be no controversy because they would truly be neutral. unfortunately that is not this world. cochlear implants are used to rip deaf people (and in particular, deaf children) away from their community.

all deaf people have a right to the Deaf community, by being deaf they belong to our world.

when a baby is born deaf the first thing an audiologist will suggest is a cochlear implant. they give the suggestion in a way that implies, and sometimes outright states, that a cochlear implant will give the baby a "normal" childhood. they focus on how easy it will be for the people around that baby. no one will have to learn a sign language, no one will have to adapt their life to fit this deaf baby inside of it. the first problem comes in when cochlear implants are not magic devices that allows a person to be just like a hearing person. with a cochlear implant someone will still need a deaf life because cochlear implants are imperfect.

no one with a cochlear implant will ever live the exact same life as a hearing person. when a child grows up with parents who act like a cochlear implant is a perfect fix that child grows up traumatized by a world of people they cannot keep up with. that child grows up feeling like they are the problem for not having the same experience of hearing as everyone around them.

cochlear implant surgeries are serious surgeries which carry risks like meningitis. cochlear implants cannot be given to toddlers with consent. a toddler can't decide whether they want to risk the extensive number of complications because they are 9 months old (the age at which cochlear implants can be given to a child) parents are rarely informed of these risks and when they are they are told over and over again that this will give their child a "normal" life, an "easy" life. I have less of an issue with cochlear implants when it is a teenager or adult making the decision for themself. cochlear implant surgeries are optional, they are not medically necessary. why are we doing risky surgeries on unconsenting toddlers without a medical reason?

with all that said, cultural genocide is the true heart of the issue. audiologists push cochlear implants instead of sign language and connection to the Deaf community. they encourage parents not to raise their child in the community. they discourage Deaf school, they discourage connection with other deaf children, audiologists want an end to the Deaf community and Deaf culture. these children are not being raised bilingual-bicultural they are being denied their rightful place within the Deaf community. they are being damned to a life of isolation, a life of constantly falling behind, a life where they will never truly be accepted because society hates a deaf person with a cochlear implant just as much as they hate a deaf person without.

if that child ever decides later in life that they want connection with the Deaf community? they are behind. they once again cannot quite keep up. oralist childhoods created isolated deaf people, deaf people who have no home in either world.

the Deaf community may welcome second language signers but it is not the same as being a native signer. it is not the same as having the deep rooted connections with the community that are created by growing up within it.

I still respect the decision of deaf teens and adults to get cochlear implants. they are capable of making a choice for themself. deaf teens and adults often already have the social safety net of the Deaf community. I believe bi-bi upbringings for children can be beneficial though I have my own issues with giving any toddler a cochlear implant. I think that bi-bi childhoods are a good compromise and give deaf children access to both worlds. I don't have a problem with deaf children living in both worlds because they still have access to the Deaf community. I wish cochlear implants existed in a world that valued Deaf culture. I wish cochlear implants existed in a world where they were not a tool of cultural genocide. cochlear implants are not the problem, society is.

[signanothername]

Would dust and geno get along because of their mutual care for their scarves, or would they absolutely despise each other?

I like to think it’s both

Like, Geno is so family focused, to know Murder killed his own brother when he watched helplessly from the save screen as his own brother went through genocide runs? Yeah I don’t think he’d appreciate Murder’s choice (kinda hypocritical when you think of Geno’s decision to erase his timeline completely and trying to convince After! Sans to help him with his plans)

Murder on the other hand, never sees it as his own choice, he’s genuinely a well meaning guy who, just like Geno, was pushed into doing the extreme in genuine hope to finally end the genocide runs, not realizing how it evolved to him now making his own loop of them, except the difference between Geno and Murder, is the fact one actually ended up doing such extreme work (Murder), while the other never got his plan come to fruition and instead, found a better life (Geno)

So I like to think Geno would be extremely judgmental towards Murder, not necessarily despising him, but definitely not getting along at first, even thinking that Murder’s scarf (unlike his own) is worn in pride rather than genuine connection, pain and love

Murder on the other hand, is generally a cold shoulder towards Geno, he’s generally not very trusting at first, and seeing Geno’s scarf might reinforce his ideals of having to save his AU from the human, but I can see him opening up towards Geno a bit cause of it too

I think if Geno actually spent some time with Murder, he’d definitely become less judgmental and in fact, see Murder in himself, someone who got desperate and who went to extreme measures (just like he almost did) just to save the ones he loves most, getting lost somewhere on the road, he’d see Murder talk to Papyrus when no one’s truly there and understand how Murder’s deeply affected and isn’t simply someone who thought it’d be funny to kill his brother

Murder would see what he could’ve been in Geno, someone who has his family on the surface, happy and safe, and wonder if he even deserves the same after everything he’s done, it’ll distress him and only serve to make him feel his guilt even more

And I think Geno’s observant enough to recognize guilt when he sees it

For Murder to see Geno understand him after all would probably open a road for an unlikely friendship :)

[zvtara-was-never-canon]

“Aang fans have to reach hard to find any sort of “development” in his story, and to justify why it’s acceptable for him to put the lives of millions of people at risk to maintain feelings of purity despite other Avatars (including an Air Nomad) telling him his decision is selfish”

Thoughts on this take? I found it on “longing for rain” blog.

1 - Zuko had THE perfect opportunity to end the war by killing Ozai during the day of the eclipse, but he didn't do so because "It's Aang's fate" and Zuko has a very rigid idea of what "fate" means and how it should affect one's behavior. Iroh also refused to even try to HELP in the battle because it'd make him be seen as a power-hungry kinslayer (even though he had zero intention of becoming Fire Lord). Both of these things can be seen as selfish, especially since they're all about how it'll affect their OWN image, yet only Aang gets labeled selfish. If everyone is throwing the burden on his shoulders, they can shut the fuck up about how he handles said burden.

2 - One of Aang's reasons to not want to kill Ozai is because HE'S TWELVE AND DOESN'T WANNA MURDER SOMEONE, even someone who deserves it. He never asked for this responsibility. He cannot be blamed for Sozin and every Fire Lord after him being a monster, or for Roku's inability to do anything despite being an adult. He's a child. This is not his mess to fix, and yet...

3 - He's not simply going "Sorry, guys, I don't feel like killing Ozai, guess you're all gonna die." He's trying to find alternative solutions - and when he can't find one, he ACCEPTS killing Ozai (and even almost does it AFTER being taught about energybending), despite...

4 - Him being a pacifist and wanting to stay true to his beliefs. He's not trying to be "pure", as in "I'm better than all of you 'cause I don't want to kill", but as in "I don't wanna be a hypocrite that preaches one thing but does the opposite" - thought I suppose I can understand how someone how tries to get praised by trying to pass off AI bullshit as actual art made by them would have a problem with a main character that vallues being an honest person.

Aang's development is not the same as Zuko's of "I need to completely alter my way of thinking" because AANG WAS NOT THE ONE SUPPORTING GENOCIDE. This doesn't make Zuko a better written, more realistic, or "more developed" character, it means he used to be a monster and now he isn't one anymore.

Aang's entire struggle is constantly having the world trying to beat his innocence and humanity out of him so he is nothing BUT the Avatar, just a super soldier/weapon that lives to sacrifice everything for everyone else's sake, while getting nothing in return because "it's his duty." His character arc is about realizing these "necessary evils" aren't actually necessary at all, and that he CAN save the world without destroying his spirit and identity in the process. He doesn't have to see the "error of his ways" because he was not the one in the wrong for saying "Fuck you, I'm a PERSON, not your sacrificial lamb."

And idiots like this particular dumbass would realize it (or rather, admit it) if they only they didn't have a giant stick up their pretencious ass and could get over the fact that their fanon ship "lost the ship war" TWENTY FUCKING YEARS AGO!

[cosmicjoke]

The alliance betrayed Eren. The whole world wanted Paradis killed and all Eren did was fight back. What else should he have done? It was genocide vs genocide. His friends are hypocrites and horrible characters that wanted to play moral police. Hanji and Levi were horrible mentors. Open your eyes.

If you genuinely believe any of the garbage that you just spewed, then you need mental help.

I shouldn't even take the time to point out to you what's wrong with your "argument", because honestly, anyone this stupid and lacking in self-awareness isn't worth mine or anybody's time.

But I'll just lay out a few, basic facts for your edification.

Eren betrayed his comrades, over and over, starting with his literal incitement of war in Liberio, through his purposeful elimination of any other course of action that Paradis could have taken to secure their future. War only came to Paradis in the first place, you total clown, because Eren and Zeke orchestrated it themselves. I don't know how many times this has to be pointed out to people like you before it gets through that sediment-thick rock you call a skull and into the mush you call a brain. Go read the manga again, or watch the anime, and maybe try paying attention this time past the masturbation session you engage in every time Eren comes on screen.

The Survey Corps' entire mission statement was to dedicate themselves to the salvation of humanity. Not "Paradis", humanity. And Eren betrayed that mission in the most fundamental way possible by committing mass genocide on a global scale. He literally spit on the legacy and sacrifices of every single one of his comrades, including those who had given their lives to protect his, because they believed he was essential to humanity's survival. Instead of honoring that sacrifice by doing everything in his power to save humanity, he did the exact opposite by deciding to wipe humanity out of existence because he was disappointed the world didn't look like the pictures in Armin's books. That's how shallow, pathetic, selfish and childish Eren is.

You call Levi and Hange "terrible mentors", when Eren literally did exactly the opposite of what they both tried to teach him. Levi specifically told Eren to make the choice he could live with, the one he wouldn't regret, and yet, in the end, we see Eren filled with nothing but regret, drowning in self-loathing, because he knows he made the choice which went against what he knew in his heart was right. He spurned Levi's guidance entirely. Eren knew what he did was wrong and not justifiable on any level. What Eren did didn't sit right in any way, shape or form with his own, moral understanding of the world. Nobody made Eren into what he was. Nobody made Eren do what he did. It was a situation entirely of his own making and choosing.

You call the other members of the alliance "horrible characters" because they couldn't and wouldn't stand by and allow literally billions of innocent people to be murdered in cold blood. Remind me to pray to God that no important decisions are ever left to you. The lack of self-awareness in your statement is shocking in its depth. You don't see how, if this is what you truly believe and support, that it's you who's the truly terrible and horrible person here. Frankly, you're a disgusting example of a human being.

By stopping Eren, Levi, Hange and the rest of the alliance were upholding everything the Survey Corps originally stood and fought for. You calling them traitors and hypocrites is repulsive in its stupidity.

And that's all I'll say on the matter. You can now go back to waiting in line with Floch to swallow Eren's cock, since that's clearly what you really want to spend your time doing. Try not to choke.

[smileposting]

what are your feelings on inspekta being both a sympathetic character and a (now former) fascist?

WELL. first of all, i think it's Probably worth noting that even while GGG's representation of the conditions that can give rise to fascism are Uncannily accurate at times (as outlined in this very excellent post by elkian) it is Also a story in which the central message is "maybe talk to your friends instead of conspiracy-posting when you start to feel bad about yourself, dipshit," and therefore its representation of fascism/fascist thought As A Whole is very... how do i say this without sounding disparaging. "saturday morning cartoon"-esque. i think this is pretty apparent in how the worst that the bizzyboys' reign of terror ever gets is banning The Concept Of Art and not, like. genocide. the only Actual fatal threat (the rift) is saved for the very end, and inspekta/hector is talked down before it can actually cause any fatalities -- otherwise, inspekta and the bizzyboys would be very different antagonists that would require the narrative to treat them much more harshly, and this would result in a very different game overall (although not one i would be opposed to playing.)

second of all, i wanna talk more about the idea of GGG being less of a game about taking down a single power-hungry fascist and more an examination of the conditions that can eventually lead to fascism if left unchecked. for just one example, we can see that even before inspekta came into power (or at least, before he started his corruption arc) and even in a world where every god is genuinely kind and just and deserving of their position, it was generally The Norm to not really call them out To Their Face - any displeasure a character voices with a god's (apparent) decision is directed to each other and the godpoke, not to the god themselves, even when that god is perfectly open to visitors and/or feedback. and this is bad because despite the gods no longer being Physically human, they are still just as fallible - they have a tendency to jump to conclusions, they let their devotion to their interests or one another cloud their judgement, they struggle with showing vulnerability (which, ironically, makes them more vulnerable than they would be otherwise.) not only does the grove benefit from regular contact with the gods to make sure that their needs are being met -- it benefits the gods, too, by way of keeping them from getting lost in their own heads and losing touch with their own humanity.

i think it's also worth noting that the bizzyboys are not the only characters we see buying into fascist rhetoric, or at least stuff that benefits fascism in the long run. you could argue that anyone who bought into inspekta's framing of king in the first place also counts, given that to do so would probably Also require one to believe that the gods are infallible. it's also worth noting that a Lot of the more notable supporting characters who fall into this are also doing so out of a profound sense of alienation; saul can't remember the last time he talked to any of his friends and he thinks nobody takes him seriously, pollina's students don't sound like they're being taught much of anything about milldread's history and therefore they have very little to actually connect them to milldread, nobody likes rick brick and he has no interiority to speak of By Design, etc etc. all of these characters, however, are also treated with a fair amount of empathy - ol' bloom turns out to be Correct in believing that saul doesn't have what it takes to kill him and once the issue of the harvest is solved, he's welcomed back with open arms, pollina's students are like 8, and even rick brick's story ends with him beginning to realize that maybe it's okay if a story only appeals to its author and nobody else.

tl;dr: if ggg was even Slightly less cartoony than it actually is, this aspect of inspekta would come across as pretty jarring, but given the aspects of fascism that GGG chooses to focus on and how it treats smaller antagonists, i can't really imagine inspekta's story ending any other way. if i Did have any actual concerns, i'd say maybe it's that the bizzyboys being from the drain + the drain having such a negative connotation can get kinda dicey? something about the idea of fascism being an Evil Foreign Entity and not something that can just as easily start at home doesn’t sit quite right with me. but ofc a lot of emphasis is placed on the bizzyboys' humanity and potential to do good if not for inspekta's own Complexes getting the better of him (and even inspekta's own genuine capacity for leadership before that happened) so that's probably more of a potential bone to pick with fanwork, given how little exploration drain actually Gets in canon.

also i hope this doesn't Need to be said but just to be clear: i'm not trying to like, call out limbolane or Inspekta Himself, just examining what this aspect of his character was trying to Accomplish + how it relates to the game's themes and such. with that said i am very much still a novice when it comes to political analysis of media so if anybody more well-read than me wants to chime in, Please feel free to do so lol.

[caligvlasaqvarivm]

I’m always curious about Kankri being redeemed in any way (maybe because he can become the sufferer). Obviously to do so would be simply punting him to reality and force him to live it, no help from his shoddily-made support structure. But I’m curious how you would go about doing it

Given their role thematically in the story, I'm actually usually not on the train of "fully redeem the dancestors", but I do like giving them some catharsis and reckoning, a place in the fight against LE. One last chance to do something good with their lives/afterlives before the end, and a(n implied) new start as wigglers born into the new universe.

So to that end, in my head, the "turnaround point" for Kankri - the inciting incident that makes him have a mental breakdown that results in him finally taking some accountability for his shitty actions - is having a conversation with Eridan.

In my head, the Dancestor reckoning happens gradually, alongside a series of retcons where the dead trolls are brought back one or two at a time, and deal with their emotional issues a little more with every cast member added back into the party.

The TL;DR series of events is: Terezi asks to bring back Vriska, Vriska asks John to punch out Tavros before she can kill him, Tavros's influence makes Gamzee ask for Equius and Nepeta to be brought back, Equius asks for a redux of Aradiabot, Aradiabot grabs John by the arm and gets him to undo her death and Sollux's fall into depression, Sollux asks for Feferi to be brought back, and then Karkat asks for Eridan.

We know from (Vriska) that the Game Over/Alpha Timeline characters still exist post-Retcon, so those characters would also be continuing their character arcs, just in the afterlife prepping for the LE fight. For example, I think Meenah's reckoning should be delivered by (Karkat) - after having had so long to reflect on his own failures as a leader, he would be perfectly poised to scream at her for hers, which would also serve to make this confrontation a final thesis for Karkat as a whole - what leadership means (caring about your team) - and a conclusion to the Meenah/Karkat dynamic.

So when I say that Kankri needs to talk to Eridan, I mean Eridan and not (Eridan). Full character development, all his teammates are alive, taken full accountability and responsibility for his actions, team good guy Eridan. And as I noted in this essay, Eridan with full character development is actually more annoying than regular Eridan, because he's also the "Devastating: Worst Guy You Know Made An Excellent Point" guy. In bulleted form:

He's still an advocate for murder. Murder is literally what kept his friends alive long enough to play the game, and playing the game itself involves genocide, so he would be the Token Evil Teammate who reminds the team that, hey, murder is an option - and enemies will be considering it. Even at his very best, he's going to struggle with empathy and have an extremely blase view of violence and murder - those were literally just facts of his life through his most formative years.

This also makes him a TOTAL downer, as he's the tempering voice that reminds them that decisions have consequences, and utopia requires sacrifices, and nothing is ever worth fighting for that won't eventually need to be fought for. Like I said, worst guy you know, excellent points. In fact, he's out here volunteering to do the murdering when the situation calls, if nobody else wants to get their fins dirty. He's really good at it.

He's still an idiot who doesn't listen to people. He's perfectly fine at taking orders, but having a conversation with him is still really difficult. I feel like if you make Eridan too smart, mentally flexible, and socially aware, you lose a lot of his Eridan-ness, and I think these characters, fully realized, are more of themselves, not less. I also don't know how you could reasonably expect to fix these traits. He's just Like That.

He drops his fake pro-Empire stuff, because that was basically all just empty posturing in the first place, but...

Now he's a pretentious-ass hipster who judges you for liking Trollor Swift and Troll Marvel. Given that Jake's indiscriminate taste is actually linked to his deficit of Hope (he has little conviction, he's wishy-washy), Eridan coming into full Prince of Hope regalia involves getting even more annoying about his taste in media (shittons of conviction, refusal to budge).

He is also a wizard. He will not shut up about this.

And finally, I think he'd still be out here using slurs. First of all, because it'd be really funny, because he's literally not casteist, but second, because there's two types of "it's equality" - the kind where nobody ever says anything offensive, and the kind where "offensive" stops being a relevant concept because true equality has been achieved. Think of the discourse surrounding the reclamation of slurs IRL, or how the "it's equality" meme gets used - this idea that words can be stripped of power by changing the context of who's saying them, or that objectification/discrimination stop being problems if they're applied evenly across the board, instead of limited to specific groups. I think that this is the exact type of nuanced idea that Homestuck would tackle and its fandom would get incensed about, which is why I think it should stay.

Eridan's role, thus, becomes a sort of "unpleasant truths" kind of character. Violence, both physical and verbal, is unpleasant as hell, and the natural instinct is to avoid it. The problem is, in any true discussion of what society should look like, they're topics that can't be avoided, and are even sometimes necessary not just to recognize, but to utilize (no revolution is bloodless, etc.). Eridan - an extreme personality - is going to represent the uncomfortable extreme of the debate. And by that I mean he's going to be saying slurs and talking about murders and is still going to be unquestionably a force for good.

The reason I'm going so in-depth into this is because Kankri very much represents the opposite: using "polite" language and couching it in the language of courtesy, activism, and liberal ideology, Kankri hides - and worse, spreads - his classist, ableist, misogynistic, puritan beliefs. He enforces the class divide and actively works against his teammates' best interests.

He whines that the lower blood castes should stop complaining about oppression, because others have it worse. He tells the team feminist that misogyny isn't real, then slut shames her. He tells the guy with brain damage that he's making other neurodivergent/TBI people look bad, exacerbates Latula's shame around her inability to smell, and actively guilt trips Cronus into ignoring his epiphany and self-reflection. Kankri is only an activist in that he actively makes everybody worse.

But why does he act like this? Well, it's due to the fact that he was probably culled, and on-sight at that, like Karkat would've been if anyone found out about his mutant blood. Kankri doesn't seem to have a symbol or lusus, either, two thinks Karkat only had because the Signless's followers prepped them for him, so the chances are very high that Kankri was culled since he was hatched. Given the way he discusses culling with Latula, and viciously despises being mothered by Porrim, it's clear he has some really complicated feelings regarding having his agency dismissed. Thus, his work to hamper his team - at least some of which is wilful on his part, as he'll outright cast aspersions on Horuss or Cronus's beliefs for being "imaginary" even as he encourages them to commit to them - is motivated by something quite simple: power, attention, entitlement, and control.

When he goes on his grand lectures, he frequently slips and reveals that he sees himself as a great, unquestionable spiritual leader, often trying to place other characters in subordinate positions to himself - Karkat is his "pupil," and his monologues, I mean, sermons, I mean, diatribes, are spoken as if from a position of authority. He outright tells Meenah that this is what he believes himself to be.

It's a very Seer sort of problem - both that of hubris and that of willful blindness. If you chart out the actual "end goal" of his beliefs, it appears to be a world in which Kankri himself is both the biggest victim and most important voice in the room. He regularly disparages those with actual disadvantages (Damara, Porrim, Mituna) while playing up the false problems of those who don't actually have them (Horuss, Cronus). Those with disadvantages should have their voices amplified - except lowbloods should stop whining and misogyny isn't real. And those with real power should check their privilege - but won't somebody think of the poor highbloods who have ~emotional problems~? Kankri will, and all the highbloods need to do is bend the knee and treat Kankri as their specialest boy.

In short, he's using his intellect, rhetoric, and forceful personality for selfish, emotionally-driven pursuits. The actual substance of his arguments is ephemeral and contradictory because that's the trick - the point is NOT to further equality, but to verbally browbeat his conversation partner into submission. In other words, you can't beat Kankri in a regular debate, because the moment you start trying to actually engage in a debate with him, he wins. The moment you start lunging at his arguments, he's got you in his red-texted labyrinth. The moment you start treating his points like they merit genuine discussion, you're in the pews of Kankri's church, and he's up at the pulpit.

And Eridan is the destroyer of faith. He's also an idiot who doesn't listen to people.

I don't really know exactly how it would play out, but I know in my heart. In the pit of my soul. That Eridan would call Kankri several slurs, (correctly) point out that Kankri's celibacy is stupid because it's clear he has feelings for Cronus and Latula, (correctly) point out that his pro-equality stuff is stupid because he calls violets "Royal-V"s, (incorrectly) accuse Kankri of hitting on him, (correctly) point out that the entire point of a slur is that it hurts and insults the person it's used on, (correctly) call Kankri several more slurs, (correctly) point out that Kankri just wants attention, especially from highbloods, (???) go on an unhinged rant (maybe more) about being a wizard, being a murderer, and being a murderer wizard, (???) insult Kankri's taste in music, and finish it up by (correctly) revealing that Eridan and Karkat are moirails who make out sometimes.

I think Kankri would start crying.

[queen-morgana91]

The fact that certain people dislike Aang because

"He's a pacifist" - he's a monk, guys. Horrifying. Also being a pacifist is a crime it seems. Killing people and starting wars is more cool

"He's childish" - he's 12 🤦‍♂️ he matured a lot during the series and he was forced to grow up quickly like the rest of the gaang. Let alone that most of the time is copyng mechanism, he's dealing with his trauma is his own way

"He didn't kill ozai" - ah yes, still missing the point of the series in 2024. He’s the LAST airbender of a genocided culture. The way this fandom don’t value culture is insane. Which character in this series was ever asked to fore sake their culture? yeah, no one. Aang isn’t wrong for preserving his, stfu

"He had it easy" - the GENOCIDE SURVIVOR had it easy, ok. The lion turtle didn’t give Aang an easy way out. It gave him a choice, after that Aang, the AVATAR aka half spirit, prayed for it. He said he would have killed Ozai if he had no other option and he almost killed him in their fight, but he decided to stay true to himself and to preserve his culture. Aang almost died to take away Ozai's bending, easy my ass. You wanted him to be a cold blooded murderer? watch another series

"He has no development/growth" - sigh. Did we watch the same series? some of you think that you have development if you change personality/beliefs 🤦‍♂️ Aang has a GREAT character development. He makes choices that push him in a way that allows him to move beyond what people, his past lives included, expect of him. He became far more mature and he accepted his role as the Avatar and his responsabilities for the sake of the world. The reason his beliefs never changed is because many characters pressure him to give up his core values which come from a genocided culture. The air nomads, who raised him. If the only way you know of character development/growth is them being forced to change their fundamental beliefs, you don't know what character development means. Aang is the Avatar the world needed and he put an end to the cycles of hatred

"Aang values his culture above other cultures" - lol no he doesn't. Not only Aang is extremely respectful of other cultures (if you talk about the sea prunes again, i swear) but he values his culture because.....again, it was genocided. He never hold it above other cultures, but uses his own to make his own decisions, which is different. Mind you, other characters in the series hold their beliefs above his and dismiss his (Zuko was one of them btw). The adults, like general Fong, literally forced Aang to use violence and the Avatar state. But sure let's ignore it

"He's too perfect/he makes many mistakes" - make up your mind. Not even his haters know wtf they're talking about

"He has a crush on Katara" - how inconceivable. Damn, i'm still traumatized. Also Katara has the audacity to love him back. Horrifying

And then the shipping reasons....yeah i'm not gonna bother here, braindead takes from delusional people

All opinions that i will never ever take seriously, sorry

Free Aang

[sepublic]

            Anyhow Belos’ whole Caleb Betrayed Me schtick is fundamentally unserious because in addition to Luz pointing out he was the one who betrayed Caleb, it’s like.

Caleb: Has a basically-perfect world and new friends that he puts off for years because he wanted to grow up with his brother and so he went back for him. Caleb hoped his brother making an exception for him meant he wasn’t brainwashed, that this could be the starting point to question everything else. He didn’t even drag Philip through the portal kicking and screaming because he respected his autonomy! They both knew that the other knew, so Caleb must’ve brought it up. But after years of failure he moved out like many people do when he knew Philip was old enough to take care of himself, and even good at charming others… Yet Caleb was so happy to think his brother changed his mind for him after all, his first response to a cursed Philip was to lovingly embrace him. He wanted Philip to be there with him, so badly.

Philip:

            And that’s not even getting into how his witch and demon companions were helpful to Philip and he still got them killed, and still insisted on genocide. And when he faced actual consequences for his cruelty, he saw people having sane and reasonable reactions to this as proof they were evil. I think people focus way too much on Caleb when it comes to Philip’s interactions because with the witches and demons he’s shown to have no problem getting people to give him a chance, so it really is his fault when he ruins every relationship he gets. He’s like Hal from Megamind where you could sorta feel sorry for him and understand how his thought process had this takeaway from his situation, but realistically he’s too much of a dick.

            There’s something disgustingly hypocritical about Philip knowing Caleb hung out with a witch before returning to Gravesfield to grow up with him (as the age of his statue confirms), and choosing not to tattle on his brother as they become adults… While still idolizing witch hunting and how his community murdered women and girls who were accused of fraternizing with witchcraft. When so many protagonists in this show are hypocrites in a “It’s okay for you to do/be X, but not for me” way, it only makes sense the antagonist who is the antithesis would feel the opposite.

            It’s the exact same vibes as someone who loves their child deeply but then guns down other people’s children without any remorse. Or the Republican who bans abortion but lets his wife have one. You know what you’re inflicting on others and you still did it because it’s different and yours is different. Because those were women and he’s a guy.

            Caleb was aware that his brother knew, that he saw. He just believed he could work with that to convince Philip to let those harmful ideas go, and I bet he brought it up in private plenty. I guess it never occurred to him that his brother wouldn’t actually be consistent, until they were adults; At that point, Caleb must’ve given up and moved out, since they were both old enough to take care of themselves and make decisions.

            In the end Caleb’s mistake was that Philip would be consistent in his logic, but he wasn’t, not even in the other direction because despite murdering Caleb in the name of witch hunting he still engaged in Grimwalker magic. It’s really as simple as gay republicans: They just naturally, arrogantly, see themselves as the justified exception. Hence Belos triumphantly showing off to Luz how consuming Palismen helps him kill magical beings. The only thing that pissed him off was Luz pointing out it made him non-human, because that’s the part of his hypocrisy he didn’t want.

[nothorses]

apologies if this is incoherent, i am pretty wine drunk rn- i saw you reblog that post with the quote about how "nonviolence only works if your enemy has a conscience, and the united states has none-" and i wholeheartedly i agree!

but afaik (and correct me if im wrong,) you are also staunchly against killing people as praxis, and against saying that our enemies "deserve to die-" which i also agree with.

my genuine question is: how do you reconcile those two ideas? i agree that nonviolent protests are highly ineffective and that our only way forward is through visible and disruptive resistance... but i also try to stop myself from saying things like "someone needs to just kill elon musk already" because... nobody deserves to die.

what lines do you draw irt this whole messy idea of violence and murder?

y'know, I don't think I really have reconciled those ideas, honestly. and the more I think about it, the more I think it's probably normal, and maybe even actively good, to hold these tensions and continue to try to reckon with them... without there necessarily needing to be one single, perfect answer in the end.

When I say nobody deserves to die, ever, I mean it. I also mean it when I say "the adjuster" did nothing wrong, and relish in his folk hero status. I don't think that's indicative of an inherent failing of my moral code or whatever so much as, like, the inherent complexity of reality. And I think it's important to keep asking questions about that tension, and talking about it, and being curious and open to new ideas and the increasingly complex ways in which these tensions manifest.

I think these are great questions, too! Honestly, I don't feel all that bad about joking with my friends over the murder/death of various "evil" pop and political figures. I also tend to avoid doing that here a lot of the time (though I don't always have that kind of discretion tbh). It's kind of a gut thing, personally, and if I examine that further I'm not sure if it's something I do because I know how my friends will interpret that but I'm afraid of being misunderstood by strangers, if I'm just afraid of appearing inconsistent, or if it's based in like, more calculated decisions around the responsibility of "having a platform".

I also think there's a distinction to be made between different kinds of violence. The state considers destruction of private property (esp. capital) to be a kind of violence, and frequently meets that "violence" with brutality and violence enacted upon human bodies and minds. I consider that later form of violence to be much more severe, and much more reprehensible. I do also think that seizing and destroying private property can be violence; I think it's violence when cops steal homeless people's signs and make "homeless quilts" out of them as trophies. So how are we defining violence? What kinds of violence do we accept- if any- and when? Why?

Honestly, I think cruelty is the thing I actually feel opposed to. I don't perceive smashing windows during protests to be "cruelty"; if anything, those acts come across to me like grief and love. But taking or breaking a less powerful person's things just because you can, just because hurting them makes you feel powerful and strong, is cruel. That feels like violence to me in a way the former just doesn't.

But that's super subjective and personal, tbh. I still believe murder isn't going to fix things. I absolutely believe a "violent revolution" is most likely to result in a genocide of the disabled and disenfranchised, then a power vaccuum most likely to be filled by whatever group is most well-positioned, holds the most hard power (weapons & physical strength), and is most eager to use it to seize power over others... and not in the kind of leftist utopia certain people think it will.

But do I think we can achieve progress through wholly nonviolent means? I mean, I guess that depends a lot on how we define "violence", but even then I'm not really sure.

I just keep thinking about this video:

idk.

Thank you for prompting me to think more deeply about it! I'm curious to hear yours & other folks' thoughts, too.

[holy-obsession-batman]

Hear me out: Itachi Uchiha reincarnated as Bruce Wayne. Brutachi, if you will

Broke: Itachi or any isekai-ed shinobi would clash with Batman and disdain his no kill rule.

Woke: Bruce Wayne is someone reincarnated!Itachi could grow into

---

Okay okay so if I quickly round up what matches:

black-haired boy, broody loner, man of self-imposed rules, lying to keep people at arm's length, traumatized quiet thinker who then dedicates his whole life to his ideology, striving for goodness, sacrificing themselves by taking on an heavy burden, meticulous planner, genius who masters a truck-ton of martial arts and then create his own blend...

(Itachi’s memories carrying over is as good a reason as any for Bruce’s OP martial arts level when he didn’t even start training from a really young age.)

---

Of course, beyond those relatively surface stuff, Batman and Itachi appear to be at opposite ends of the morality spectrum: the idealist with the no-killing rule / the shinobi with enough grim pragmatism to resolve himself to kill his whole family, AND who managed to out-Talk no Jutsu Naruto.

Still, there are nuances in these two positions that make them potentially a bit closer. Bruce is an optimist but in a 'hope for the better, prepare for the worst' kinda way. he's Bat 'contingency plan' man. Also he’s not quite a blind idealist, he considered the other position (killing) when training under Ra's, and then chose to reject it.

On the other hand, no killing is what Itachi yearned for originally, but he was forced to let it go as an unrealistic dream in the shinobi war world. Also, his words to Sasuke as Edo Tensei show him questioning his deeds, whether there was another way --the right way. We can't know if this change of heart is because of what he learns as Edo Tensei (that Sasuke learned the truth and wants to destroy Konoha and Naruto Talk no Jutsu finally taking effect), or something he's been thinking about for a long time, but kept silence because it was too late (once the Massacre was done, best to at least protect the clan reputation).

Now, I can agree that if you have a dimension-traveling Itachi meet Batman as is, he would think that the no-kill rule is foolish and unrealistic (even Naruto wasn't that naive!), because all he knows is the shinobi worldview.

However, I'm proposing you consider a Bruce Wayne who recalls the memories of his past life as Itachi Uchiha when he sees his parents get killed -- who have already lived ten years of happy childhood in this world, with a completely different education than the shinobi child soldiering.

This world isn't peaceful -- his parents are the proof -- but it's certainly not as dire as the shinobi world. I don't think that no killing would be the first conclusion he jumps to; rather, that brings back his dream of being the one to bring peace (after climbing to the top by any mean necessary) on the table.

On the other hands, his education as Bruce Wayne put perspective on his past life's choices, as in: genocide is always wrong (nazi Germany example -- you can even sprinkle that with Wayne family Jew origins hc). Also, he has access to so many philosophy books. Itachi would 100% read everything that could help answer his existential questions and form his nindo ideology.

So I think that it's clear in his head from the start that he will do something. The question he grapples with throughout his self-finding journey across the world training under all kind of masters and the League of Assassins, is whether he will embrace his way as Itachi once again -- the 'end justify the means' shinobi ruthlessness -- or walk a different path.

Ra's extended hand is the incarnation of the first choice, and his final decision is to reject it, instead returning to Gotham to become Batman.

The Bat roots in Bruce Wayne’s childhood fear, and Gotham aesthetic—it has absolutely no connection to ‘Itachi’, and it’s on purpose: this is a new start, a different path he’s following

he’s a protector, as he always meant to be

he’s Vengeance, too, so those he protects don’t have to lose themselves for revenge (like Sasuke did)

he won’t let anybody die, because he can.

The Rogues

softness and compassion is his natural tendency, respecting an enemy/not judging people forced by necessity to break law and bend morality is a shinobi thing.

Still the shinobi background makes Batachi very good at compartmentalizing the respect and empathy he may feel for an opponent and the nose breaking he’s doing.

however this world can afford to keep the law breakers alive, so there goes all his soft heart’s impulse control

the concept of the rehabilitation system is like the incarnation of all his hopes, or something of a dream come true.

also he surprises himself feeling some sort of nostalgia of the Akatsuki when faced with the Rogue colorful craziness.

the Joker however, Batachi despises, because he does evil for kicks and challenge the very purpose of the rehabilitation system

The love interests

Now this is something of a hitch in my characterization, cuz nothing says ooc like womanizer!Itachi.

can’t picture Brutachi fooling around with models à la Brucie, because kunoichi infiltration and assassination techniques are a thing he’d be extremely wary of.

Maybe if you portray him a bit on the Battinson end of the Bruce-spectrum? Wearing closed-off goth weirdo on his sleeve

Talia makes senses, still. They meet when Brutachi is training in the League under Ra’s and pondering one existential crisis or three. The League in a way is an incarnation of the shinobi path to Itachi, and so is Talia: she’s strong, sharp, dangerous, a cunning liar but true to her word with a warrior’s sense of honor, and earnestly fights for a greater cause—even if Brutachi comes to realize that it’s a cause he can’t endorse and tainted with Ra’s megalomania.

Even after he rejects the LoA, there’s a nobleness in the way Talia is torn between love for him and the duty her father dictates—a dilemma that resonates with the one he had, once.

as for Selina, I can see Catwoman playfully flirting at Batachi in an attempt to get his guard down—which backfires into raising his guard instead, because of his trained wariness of seduction specialists.

still the BatCat chase puts Batachi at ease, in that the Cat is a pleasant opponent to fight with—her mastery of stealth and balance is shinobi-like, but she doesn’t try for lethal, so it’s a bit like a spar?

on the other hand, as far as Talia felt like a kindred spirit in shinobi philosophy, Selina is the polar opposite. Discipline, duty, sacrifice—none of that. She’s a Free Spirit, refuses to bow to anyone, and that’s it’s own brand of fascinating—along with the heart of gold she hides under her feisty impulsiveness.

grudging fondness and trust builds up.

so in short, Brutalia is kindred spirit and BatCat opposites attract.

Robin

The reason our favorite broody loner chooses to take in Dick Grayson is not that he sees himself so much as he sees Sasuke in him.

(cute and pure and then losing his family to a murder and burning in revenge)

However because he vowed that Batman would do different, different than Itachi, he lets DG in. No lying, no pushing him away, instead be by his side to help him through things, treat him seriously like an equal and most of all let him take part in the action

it so happens that shinobi conditioning skew a tiny bit his perception of acceptable occupation for a child—no qualms with child solider training (bar the conditioning to kill) because it’s useful skills that will better his survival chances, and Robin is the one asking for it, right? (A biiit too much of respect of the child’s agency.)

cue the unclear relationship between Bruce and Dick, in which Bruce is a mentor and a parent and an older sibling all rolled in one.

and then the Boy Wonder influences Bruce, slowly eroding him further away from ‘Itachi’.

Brutachi adopting Jason, when originally he would never has thought himself worthy/good enough/adapted to the caring of a child, is something only possible because the evolution Dick Grayson caused in him.

(and then Jason’s death is a wake up call, but then Tim barges in his life, and so the circle of Batkids go on, I leave it to your imagination…)

Now picture this: Edotensei!Itachi is Batachi who was sucked back into this world. Picture his words to Sasuke (that he should have involved him from the beginning and stuff) with ‘father of six to ten who has made some emotional progress’ Brutachi subtext.

Feeling the angst? Here comes the crack: the Bats send Jason with a dimension traveling device of some kind to retrieve their Batdad.

Jason ‘Daddy Issue’ Todd meets Sasuke ‘Avenger’ Uchiha.

Jason ‘why didn’t you kill the Joker’ Todd meets Sasuke ‘I will kill all those who forced my brother to kill (our clan)’ Uchiha.

They get along like a house on fire.

I will probably do a dedicate prompt on that last part.

(Masterlist)

[iilmunchkiin]

This is in response to the anon's ask about Clover and Martlet's relationship as well as the two sides of the same coin. Explaining this in few words is going to be quite the task as there's so much to talk about when it comes to the Clover and Martlet's relationship, so I'll keep as to the point as possible.

First and foremost from the moment they meet Martlet becomes Clover's morality chain, and depending on their actions prior or after this meeting, will show other aspects of how they see each other. No other monster has this kind of affect on Clover. Likewise Clover's actions will determine how she sees humans, and what stance she should take in regards to Clover.

Clover's actions always spur Martlet into action regardless of the route. It's worth mentioning Martlet is established as being lazy, which she admits herself, but Clover's presence causes her to break out of this completely. Genocide shows her being a lot more proactive when it comes to dealing with Clover, and the other routes shows her making the extra effort to keep Clover safe, simply because this is what she feels is right. Likewise Martlet is shown to be the only monster to have some kind of influence on Clover, considering Clover will always choose her over Flowey.

In Neutral, Martlet is the sole monster that Clover cannot bring themselves to kill/refuses to kill, and all of it is completely unprompted. Likewise Martlet will also refuse to kill Clover despite their misdeeds however big or small. Even if you genuinely try to fight Martlet on Neutral, it will always end with Clover sparing her unprompted. Even on an aborted genocide route, where Clover can quite literally kill every monster they encounter including the likes of Ceroba and Starlo. They cannot bring themselves to kill Martlet, and Martlet despite seeing how dangerous Clover is, still refuses to kill them, which leads to Martlet offering to look after Clover, and Clover always accepting her offer. Plus when Martlet is killed by Flowey, Clover is so enraged they retaliate by trying to kill Flowey, and like with Clover sparing Martlet, it's completely unprompted, the player has no influence in Clover's decision to do this. To top all of this of, do Neutral enough times, and Flowey reveals to you, that Martlet convincing Clover to stay with her is a foregone conclusion without intervention. Essentially no what Clover does in Neutral, no matter who they kill, no matter what lies or manipulative tactics Flowey uses to try and control Clover, it will always end with Martlet offering to look after Clover, and Clover always choosing to stay with Martlet.

The Genocide route, is the only route were Clover and Martlet are both willing to kill the other. Not only that, during this route, Martlet is shown to be the only monster that Clover respects, and is also the only monster they spare unprompted, as well as listen to when they speak. Furthermore she's also the only monster that Clover goes out of their way to find a justifiable reason to kill, they do this for no other monster but her, which even Martlet makes a remark on. Both of them are fighting for literally the same thing, Justice for their kind, for the Injustice that was done to them. Something also very interesting about this fight that was pointed out elsewhere, both Clover and Martlet use yellow themed attacks. Martlet is also the only monster that Clover reveals their name to in Genocide.

Martlet stays by Clover's side accompanying them on three separate occasions on Pacifist with just the two of them. Four if you include the flawed Pacifist ending. The most out of any monster that Clover encounters. During these moments they get to see sides of Clover that the other characters don't really see. Likewise Clover gets to sides to her character that's different from what she usually shows others.

No matter how far gone Clover is, Martlet can always sense the good in them, when other monsters scorn them. Likewise regardless of how Clover sees monsters, as long as they don't go full vengeance they will always ultimately end up seeing Martlet in a positive light, and be drawn to her.

Martlet only tells Clover about the Syringe and the fact the she was planning to kill them using it when she senses the dark aura within them. It's also heavily implied until she came clean to them, Clover was completely oblivious to this fact, which would also imply they trusted her enough to where they didn't suspect her to be a danger to their life. It's also worth mentioning that Martlet is aware of what kind of individual Clover is even if she's not their to witness their actions, and Clover will always trust her to some capacity regardless of how their first encounter goes.

There's other stuff, but these points are some of the major ones.