#between fanon vs canon dynamics

[erinwantstowrite]

people underestimate how close tim and dick are and it is driving me NUTS

you get me oh my god,,, alighterwood and i talk about this ALL the time

like, i do love the dynamics between jason and damian and the rest of the bats!! do not get me wrong, i think they have lots of potential and the writers did us dirty in some cases. it's fun to explore them. however, tim and dick's brother relationship is so impactful to the entire story between them that it's insane no one talks about it more? or practically no one??

tim learned their identities through dick grayson, robin, not batman. he looks up to both of them but robin was his hero. when jason died and tim knew something needed to be done, he went to dick first above all else (technically, he went back to the circus). he trusted that nightwing (his robin) would be able to do something about it. he wasn't aware of just how deep dick and bruce's fight went but he knew who to go to about it. dick brought him back to the manor and tim became robin because of it. he was involved in tim's time as robin, he was the person that tim could go to about his insecurities, he was the one that tim went to about his relationship/family/friendship/life problems. he learned how to be the hero he is because of dick (and bruce, but this is about him and dick).

they were brothers before jason came back, before damian, before tim even met steph, etc. when tim was, in fact, going a little crazy (even if he was RIGHT, that doesn't mean he wasn't losing his mind at least a little bit, Tim Stans) about bruce being alive, dick was WORRIED about him!! because that's his brother!! he didn't threaten to send tim to arkham, he wasn't even the one who planned to give damian robin!! dick picked up the batman mantle because he felt there was no other choice (do not get me started on how gotham does not actually need BATMAN, but his spirit) and with that came the responsibility of looking after BOTH of his brothers. brothers. not children. dick can do a lot of things but he is not infallible. it was a shitty situation and it does not soley reside on his shoulders. tim had a right to feel hurt that no one was listening to him, but... y'all. he dropped out of school, he was kind of going off the deep end with how many other people died in his life around that time (his BEST FRIENDS) so of course dick was like "hey dude..."

tim is the closest to dick in the family, he looks up to dick as if he IS infallible in a lot of ways. that's his BIG BROTHER and also his personal hero. his favorite person. and dick cares about him just as much

can you tell alighterwood and i have such strong feelings about this?

[thecoolerliauditore]

Very Long Post about Flower Husbands, Interpretation and Character vs Content Creator

This is a toxic flower husbands post. Btw.

I'm not sure when or why it happened but somewhere between limlife and the 24th joelshipping discourse cycle, "flower husbands is toxic" became a mainstream opinion on both here and traffictwt, usually sourcing Scott's ingame words and actions as evidence.

This interpretation has existed within the fandom for a fairly long time, although the words "toxic" and "abuse" were often omitted. Here's one example of a popular post that implied FH was less than ideal for Jimmy.

This does not mean the interpretation was widely accepted, however - hell, I even put this under a cut and warning for a reason. For every toxic FH believer that comes crawling out of the woodwork there comes another post defending their legacy.

For the record, despite what some threads on twt I've read seem to imply: There is nothing morally wrong with liking a mcyt ship regardless of what discomforts other people see in it. There is no explicit "wrong" way to interpret the series. There is no canon. It's fandom shit. It's not that serious.

However, I'm unfortunately abnormal about this series and possibly mcyt as a whole. So I'm forced to grapple with the fact that most non-toxic flower husbands posts seem to either self-contradict or come off as purposefully trying to incite some sort of culture war. As such, here's a list of common arguments I see proposed against the toxic flower husbands interpretation and why I personally don't find them convincing:

The CC Side of Things

Alot of anti-toxic flower husbands posts will accuse toxic flower husbands fans of disliking Scott, the content creator IRL guy, and often imply the interpretation is born out of homophobia -- usually through some variation of the phrase that the interpretation villainzes "the only openly gay CC in the series"

I take issue with this. While Scott is the only homosexual CC in the series, Cleo and Martyn have both been here since 3L and are both very openly queer. Gem has also since joined. You could argue that Scott is The Gayest but that's opening a can of worms in terms of queer discourse I don't think I want to go touching anytime soon.

Even if he was the Only Queer CC In the Series, applying different standards of fanon to Scott just because he is gay feels.. wrong to me. In the same way it's often argued that Jimmy does not need to be babied from his friendship dynamic, Scott too is a grown man who can simply choose to not look at fanart/fanfic if it upsets him, which from what I have personally observed, he hasn't shown any sign of feeling "uncomfortable" by more intimidating or villainous portrayals in the past.

Here's an example of him liking my art that did not paint him in a completely morally good light.

Why can't gay people be calculating? Controlling? Abusive? Why are we applying a higher standard of morality to the gay CC when the rest of the fandom is having the time of their life calling Grian a homophobe, a murderer, calling Scar an arsonist, calling Martyn a loser and pathetic, so on and so forth. Is telling a story about an abusive gay relationship any more "problematic" than telling a story about an abusive straight relationship?

I don't want to imply anything about peoples intentions but it feels sometimes, to me, that the "homophobia" card is being played out of some obligation to protect Scott and his brand rather than out of genuine concern for homophobia in the fandom -- because then, I ask, where is that energy for critiquing the homophobic humour prevalent in CC circles?

I've certainly heard Jimmy make jokes about Scott's sexuality in videos before. Where's the breakdowns of the infamous "I am a straight man and would like to be represented as such" incident from Pirates? Where's that energy for referring to shipping as a "bit" or Etho "gagging" at fanart of him and Bdubs?

I'd even go to argue, in terms of homophobic caricatures, Martyn and Iskall are both often more akin to the classic "gay guy in love with you who won't take no for an answer" stereotype than Scott has been. Martyn at least we know is queer, does it simply not matter in his case? Despite the fact that Martyn is very much more villainized than Scott is, to the point where his Limlife win is often portrayed as maniacal and cackling rather than with the solemn acceptance of Scott's LL win or the heartbreak and regret of Grian's 3L win? Please know that I personally Do Not find these portrayals homophobic (although the Iskall side of things has peeved me in the past), I'm just questioning why homophobia in the fandom seems to start and end with one guy only.

In addition: "internalized homophobia" is certainly a thing, but the vast majority of toxic FH fans in my circle at least are very much gay. We're on Tumblr. Fork found in kitchen. I've seen more than one person express that Scott's behaviour in one or several of the seasons was reminiscent of a toxic or abusive ex, or reminded them of some other trauma. It just seems unkind to me to claim "homophobia" and then turn and tell very gay people talking about their very gay experiences that they are somehow The Problem.

Jimmy Likes It, Though

Often in response to toxic flower husbands posts, people will cite the many times Jimmy has said in the past that he actively requests to be bullied, as part of his youtuber persona, since he finds it funny.

I've always found this kind of strange, since unlike the homophobia claims which 99% of the time are unambiguously about the content creators, this is often said in response to people talking about the series as a story with characters first and foremost.

While the area of interpretation differs for all of us, most people do not choose to include behind-the-scenes youtube talk as part of their storyline, since this detail changes Jimmy's character drastically and impacts the tone of the series overall. So what, they were dropped into a death game arena and Jimmy... told everyone they should bully him, cus he thought it'd be funny? Offscreen, with no interactions or monologue in the series itself even alluding to it? It's kind of awkward to work in and there's really no reason to if what you are invested in is viewing the series as essentially an ultra meta theatre performance.

Now, I personally do work in some out-of-series material into my headcanons and interpretation, so let's say that Is a canon part of Jimmy's character -- maybe he knew the group beforehand and this was their established dynamic, or he simply offscreened it all. Now we have to deal with the fact that this is interpretation and the unreliable narrator aspect of the series.

Jimmy (the character) might've asked for this, but under what circumstances? Why does he want this? Is this really healthy behaviour or is it self-destructive? I never see this explored and instead "Jimmy says it's okay" is treated as word of god, which I find to be painful to deal with when it comes to this series (I'll get to this later).

Even if we throw out the character side of things completely, there are perfectly valid issues to have with this dynamic. I've seen people debating the ethics of presenting this type of humour to a young impressionable audience, I've seen people who find it upsetting because it reminds them of their own toxic friendships. CCs have no authority here, Jimmy does not decide where peoples discomfort starts and ends.

I admit this is a far reach, but indulge me and imagine for a second if the roles were switched and the homophobic jokes about Scott were what was leaned in to but Scott claimed he "liked being bullied". Would that be okay too?

People are Allowed to Dislike the Real Guy, it's Okay

There are plently of reasons to dislike CC!Scott that aren't rooted in homophobia, I can assure you.

Let's put it this way: Scott does not have to read this post if he doesn't want to. In fact, he'd have to actively go out of his way to see it in the first place. The fanfic writers are not calling him an abuser in his youtube comments section. This fandom bullshit is not clogging his notifications.

I don't dislike CC!Scott, I don't love him either but I think he's just kind of your average kind of a loser youtuber guy. But even if someone truly did find him to be the most abhorrent human being to walk the earth, talking about it on tumblr should not hurt him. You often see reminders that Jimmy is a grown man who can speak up if he finds things in videos hurtful, and I'd go on to argue that the same logic is never given to Scott who is, also, a grown man who can control his internet usage.

It's all just Minecraft and jokes

The most buzzkill of all rebuttals, in my opinion, is this argument that toxic flower husbands is "taking it too seriously" and that they are just "friends playing Minecraft".

Like when people bring up Jimmy's behind the scenes request, this confuses me because it is brought up 99% of the time to rebut posts that treat the series as a storyline rather than a youtube playthrough. You can't have the grief of Scott losing his husband and Grian's despaired suicide and Pearl's sanity slippage and still acknowledge that it is all "friends playing minecraft".

In fact I'd even argue flower husbands is pretty non-toxic if you look at it Purely from a friends playing Minecraft perspective, but that is never the case. Scott's grief over Jimmy's death is treated with utmost seriousness, but Scott hitting Jimmy for not listening to him or wanting to "whittle him down to nothing" never is. It's this pick-and-choose that drives me insane more than anything else.

In addition to this, while I might be mistaken, it seems like most FH fans are not super accepting of RPF so I wonder what the intent is in the first place.

Furthermore, I do find it odd when it seems like the issue is that abuse specifically is "taking it too seriously" in a series where murder is pretty much the main theme. Adultery is mentioned multiple times in Double Life. Martyn even says the words "toxic relationship" in Double Life regarding himself and Cleo. It's clearly something that is referenced directly in the series and not any darker than what is already commonly accepted in fanon, so I don't understand why it's such a taboo and gets hit with the "no fun allowed" stick more than Scar being a cannibal serial killer.

With the same logic, I could argue that Scott was serious when he said Jimmy was useless, redundant, etc. and joking when he said he was sad his husband died but. I don't do that. Because that'd be insane

But Scott Loved Jimmy

Onto the stuff that's more purely in-universe, the argument is more uncommon now but I used to see alot of claims that flower husbands couldn't have been toxic because Scott "loved" Jimmy, usually citing the positive interactions the two do have throughout Third Life.

I think this is kind of difficult to talk about because, to me, it comes from a genuine misunderstanding of how abusive relationships work and what they look like. I won't lecture the reader on the theory behind abusive relationships and the trauma bonding cycle but I will say that the good does not balance out the bad and sometimes, context is severely lacking.

E.g. the cake. Late in the series Scott bakes a cake for Jimmy and hides it for him to find. This is a moment that I think is fascinating because it showcases both Scott's genuine care for Jimmy and the sadism he gets out of Jimmy's suffering at the same time. Jimmy is actively afraid of the cake, says to Scott that he thinks it's a trap and tries to get Scott to try it instead because Scott was still on green. Scott simply laughs and pushes Jimmy to try it, later mocking Jimmy for being scared at all.

Scott not taking Jimmy's fear seriously in this scene always seems to get cut out, or is paired with the usual insistence that it's okay because it's a "joke", and the cake itself is what is focused on.

Long story short: Abusers can love and care for their victims, abusers can be romantically attracted to their victims, abusers can feel trapped in the cycle just as much as the victim (e.g. the classic "look what you made me do" wifebeater excuse).

"Home?" "Home." and Word of God

In a similar vein, lots of people point to Scott's Third Life ending as proof their relationship had a happily ever after. This is one example of a trend I see within rebuttals where Scott's word is often treated as canonical Word of God.

Word of God, for those unaware, is the concept in storytelling of communicating definitive, unbiased information to the audience. Some iconic examples would be the Star Wars intro scroll, or any of the "once upon a time..." set-ups in fairy tales. Sometimes a character will temporarily possess Word of God and lose it later, such as Katara's intro narration in ATLA.

The subversion of Word of God would be Unreliable Narrator, where the person telling you the information is, in some way, not to be trusted. Some media play entirely on this concept, the Stanley Parable being one iconic example.

My personal interpretation of the traffic series is that every POV is unreliable narrator, with some being worse offenders (e.g. Scar and Martyn). I feel like it does a disservice to other POVs if you simply take one as Word of God, since some characters really do seem different until you see their side of things (some poignant examples would be Last Life Joel, Last Life Scar and Double Life Pearl). However, I must say again, this is not Correct nor is taking one POV as Word of God Wrong. That's just the rules I'm used to operating under.

So first off, operating within my rules: the "home?" "home." scene only appears in Scott's POV and is never acknowledged outside of that one scene. Jimmy clearly remembers the events of Third Life but never says a thing about him and Scott's shared afterlife (more on Jimmy's behaviour post-3L in a bit) and neither does Scott himself. To me this scene has always been either a tragic dying hallucination or an outright lie Scott invented to cope with the events of Third Life. I don't think there's any reason for me to believe the Jimmy in this scene is really Jimmy.

With that being said: taking the scene at face value as something that actually happened and it being a real afterlife Jimmy and Scott were sent to, there are still sinister elements that go entirely unacknowledged. Scott specifies that the flower valley was decorated to his plans, never mentioning Jimmy's, the same valley he previously insinuated he designed specifically so that he'd be "over" Jimmy.

Including Last Life and beyond as part of canon: this is very much not the "happily ever after" for Scott and Jimmy as. Well. They don't stay there and end up getting thrust into another death game where, again, this scene is never spoken about again and Jimmy only acts more and more antagonistic towards Scott as the seasons progress.

Disregarding Last Life and beyond: there is so much ambiguity that it's hard to take it all at face value, are there any other players in this place? Are Scott and Jimmy doomed to die knowing no one and nowhere else? Can Jimmy walk 15 minutes westward and come across the home of the guy who murdered him? Or is this a paradise where all the players can remain? What about Scott, is he going to go back to treating Jimmy the same way he did when they were both alive? How does he deal with the fact that his dead husband is suddenly back?

I do think this last one (taking Scott's POV as word of god + disregarding everything past this point) is the closest you're gonna get to an entirely non-toxic reading of this scene, but even then you'd have to work with the previous episodes of Scott hitting and berating Jimmy continuously.

Finally, one last issue I take with the "Scott's word = Word of God" interpretation is that it is, once again, inconsistent. If Scott ever says anything to contradict his "good husband" persona it's written off as a joke, but him saying that Pearl "cheated on him" is treated as if she really did commit adultery. There's also things that are just ignored, such as Scott saying "You guys (the audience) are obsessed with flower husbands, when really it's just been me and Pearl," in Secret Life -- words that would imply he really did not care that much for Jimmy.

"Nuance."

I see people just saying the word "nuance" or "scott isn't abusive it's more nuanced" like that's an actual sentence with worth really often. I'm sorry this section is harsh but "nuance" is not an argument, abusers can have nuance, real people are always nuanced and real people can be abusers. To imply that abuse cannot be "nuanced" is a little insulting to me.

Please just say "idgaf" and move on this isn't politics we don't need flower husbands centrism

Jimmy is the Abusive One

This one drives me insane but I see it fairly often and I. honestly don't know what to make of it. Sometimes it's coupled with an insistence that you can make anyone in the cast abusive if you try hard enough which... yeah I, I agree. We're agreeing here.

Seemingly most prominent during Limited Life, there's some claims that people are unfair towards Scott and that Jimmy is the real abuser, but I find the examples of his behaviour weak more often than not because they are usually 1. in direct response to something Scott did, 2. using psychic powers to sense characters motives (such as claiming he is guilt tripping people when he apologizes when nothing suggests that is the case) or 3. behaviour that not only is not toxic, but is very much harmless

Examples of the third one include things such as him refusing to say "love you" back to Scott during Limited Life and Secret Life, which he is not obligated to do. Some people insist he "owes" it to Scott somehow for Third Life which I find not only overestimating how much Scott aided Jimmy during Third Life (Jimmy Did die first, after all) but kind of. Dangerous? To say that you can somehow "owe" another person love and affection if they perform enough chores for you.

Another is the claim that Jimmy acts overly flirtatious with other men which hurts Scott which. I feel like needs an essay or two on slutshaming to make my point clear.

What really does me in is that this point is often paired with the insistence that Flower Husbands Would Be perfect if Jimmy just stopped "acting out" and did what Scott wanted him to. I don't really know how to explain why I find that kind of bad.

To me, it seems as if it's almost an admission that the further away from Third Life you get, the more clear it becomes that Jimmy does not have the highest opinion of Scott and in order for the non-toxic interpretation to still apply you need to stretch things, which often comes with the unfortunate side effect of saying some historically not awesome things about people like Jimmy.

Why Only Scott?

This often comes in hand with the first point about homophobia, with claims that Scott is the only one accused of being abusive to Jimmy, when others like Grian and Joel are the same if not worse.

This is another take that's strange to me because.. It's just untrue? I think it might be the shock of the culture shift of toxic fh that's spearheading this, but most of the smallidarity stuff I've seen, for example, come with some level of acknowledgement that Joel is a massive bitch. Sometimes it's through bully x victim AUs or storylines where he learns the error of his ways, but he's a bitch to Jimmy like. Most of the time.

Solidarian is a much lower sample rate ship for a character with a way too high sample rate but Grian characterization ranges from "pure evil watcher who feeds off suffering" to "previous abuse victim with trust issues". Very few times have I seen Grian presented as purely good in interpretations.

MOST of the jausage stuff I've seen is straight up sausage being. Weird.

There was a hilarious confessions blog anon awhile back that tried to claim shipping scarian was somehow morally wrong because Scar(???) abused Grian(???). It happens.

To add to this: very few of Jimmy's other romantic interests were literally calling himself his "husband" while hitting and berating him. The only other "canon" couple I can think of that come close is Jizzie and the way Lizzie will sometimes hit Joel, but that is primarily outside of the life series and their crimes against eachother in the series are always capstoned by almost cartoonish antics of "still love you, tho" (e.g. Joel putting Lizzie's stuff in a chest after she gets killed by a zombie or them choosing to team up Despite it All near the end of Last Life) -- I have more thoughts regarding them but this isn't the toxic jizzie post so I'll leave it at that.

Very, very rarely will I see someone who believes flower husbands is toxic but thinks joel/grian/fwhip/sausage/etc. are Completely fine. I also think it might just be that people talk about Scott more since Flower Husbands is the Iconic Ship and that gets numbers biased into people Only thinking Scott is bad for Jimmy.

It could also be argued that some of the Double Life pairings have the same level of toxic married couple energy that Flower Husbands does, but I'd argue that the soulbounds have enough variety that interpreting them as wholly romantic is difficult to do. There was also less hype overall with some of the most "toxic" pairings in DL, such as Impdubs or Box Boys, which makes it hard to find content for them -- I did a whole little liveblog of it calling Impdubs toxic as fuck. Y'all just didn't see it. Most of DL's toxic relationship themes also come from divorce quartet but admitting that those four have romantic tension in-universe gets you sniped in this economy.

To end: I talk about Scott more than the other guys because. I like him more. I like talking about people I like.

Conclusion (AKA who fucking cares)

I feel the need to restate my intro: no one actually fucking cares.

I've been talking about inconsistency in the "rules" of interpretation throughout this and I stick by my word but I think I'd have to mention that, in order to view this series as a storyline in the first place, you'd have to make some exceptions. I don't listen to the lines about youtube or viewers or when Grian talks about planning the series. I don't think it'd be Wrong to view Scott's POV as Word of God, disregard everything that implies he's a bad husband, not consider anything past "home?" "home." canon, so on. It would not be an interpretation I, some random asshole on tumblr, enjoy personally but if you're having fun you really should not give a shit about me.

However that doesn't mean people can't be rude or just straight up wrong or hypocritical when they claim toxic flower husbands interpretations are "homophobic" despite being antagonistic towards the gay people writing them in the first place (I've seen a ridiculous amount of middle school level namecalling for like no reason??) or claim that the interpretation is for people who "haven't watched their POV" as if a certain takeaway of a minecraft series presents you with some sense of superiority for understanding the cube guy harder than those horrible, horrible HATERS who think Scott killing himself over and over is sad to watch.

Oh and don't mention Pearl's role in all of this the only time I've seen someone try to bring her up I had to read it like five times and I'm still not quite sure I understand

[goodwoodpod]

EPISODE 12: POUNDING HOT CHEETOS

We’re back! Rather than waiting another two years between episodes, GOOD WOOD is bringing you timely coverage of Alexander Ovechkin and Sidney Crosby breaking some Gretzky records—although of course, what we're really here to do is smash these two Soviet fridge-shaped Barbie dolls together and yell NOW KISS. Join us for a rousing discussion of how the Sid/Ovi dynamic has changed over time (in canon and fanon), musings on Canadian vs. Russian constructions of masculinity, and of course, the moment where we all collectively remember that Ovi maybe has a Ph.D.????? That's Dr. Pounding Hot Cheetos All-Time Goal Scorer to you. Happy last week of the regular season, everyone!

Runtime: 1:01 | Recorded 4.11.25

[nobylerdoubt]

Hiii, I love gay Mike truthers, but how do you interpret Finn saying El is Mike's first romantic feelings towards someone?

As a general rule I don't pay much mind to cast interviews, because of a variety of reasons:

The information that cast can give away about the show is very controlled. Especially information that could spoil future seasons.

Cast opinions don't have as great of an impact on the show as the narrative that the show runners, writers, and producers. In good shows, including Stranger Things, the actors do get a good amount of input on their characters. We know Maya and Jamie got a lot of input on Robin and Henry/Vecna/001, so I would assume Finn, Millie, and Noah got input too - however at the end of the day they don't get the final say. For example while it's said that Maya was the one to make the decision or give the input to have Robin be a lesbian - Maya herself has shut this down and said that the Duffers brought that to the table and had probably planned on Robin being a lesbian very early on in the process.

This being said though - I do have my thoughts about this.

For one, as far as casual fans and viewers believe, Mike does have romantic feelings for El, and it would be weird from that audience's perspective for Finn not to say that. I think him trying to talk around or avoid saying Mike has romantic feelings for El would tip people off that that maybe isn't the case.

Secondly - I think from Mike's perspective he thinks he does have romantic feelings for El. His relationship with El is different from his relationship with his friends like Lucas and Dustin, or even Max. With those three he can be more brash and sarcastic, while with both Will and El he softens his edges. He knows what El's been through, and for a long time now he's been someone El can depend on. It's the same with Will, but one of them is a girl, and one is a boy.

Platonic vs Romantic vs Familial feelings can sometimes be hard to differentiate. It's not as cut in stone as we'd like it to be. A great in-show example of this is Robin and Steve - I think most of us accept that they're more than just 'best friends', but obviously at least Robin doesn't have romantic attraction to Steve (I obviously have some more fanon-centric ideas of their relationship, but I'll stop here because this is about as far a canon goes). I think a big art of why we have this dynamic between those two is to show how blurred the lines can be with the true nature of feelings.

So with the idea that Mike has this comphet storyline, two people who he has these protective/tender feelings for, even if they're slightly different. He has no other basis for what romantic attraction feels like, and through logical deduction with input from the heterosexual society that he lives in, he's deduced that these feelings he has for El are romantic feelings. But as he gets older, he starts to call this logic into question.

[sokkastyles]

I have a question, I know we know that shipping does not equal morality. And I get that, and I really like that. However, on my other blog, that should have been my main blog (yes I am that dumb). I have talked about Aang's non-consensual and criticized how Kataang is written, however, if you ship Kataang I won't come for your throat because that's not my style. I know the few misogynists/antis on here and on Twitter, and I don't want to let a few bad apples be my impression of a fandom, that's not fair, So now I'm side-eyeing myself over my past remarks. Likewise, I know shipping is not equal to morality, but I also want to criticize Kataang because of how flawed it is and how wrong that kiss was (and other things). I have no idea what I'm saying because at this point I'm rambling. What do you think?

Well, there is a difference between criticizing a ship and criticizing canon. I don't honestly care what people ship. I use the antikataang tag because I don't want to argue with people who do ship it, but that doesn't mean I won't be critical of what is in the show. I think expecting people not to engage critically with media is absolute nonsense. But there is a difference between engaging critically with the actual media and criticizing people's fanon or headcanons, which is where you get away from critically engaging with canon and move into the area of criticizing other people's opinions, which is how arguments start.

Like, there isn't really any actual concrete argument you can make to criticize zutara, because zutara does not exist in canon. It's all fanon and headcanons and speculation. And criticizing other people's opinions just makes you look like a dick.

You also have to take into account the intention behind something. The thing about the way Katara's relationship with Aang is presented is that we're supposed to root for Aang to get Katara, and every obstacle towards that end is just there to create dramatic tension for the male point of audience identification. That's the real problem with the noncon kiss, and people who are critical of it are right to point it out.

In contrast, when I say shipping isn't morality, I'm talking about people who write, let's say, dubcon zutara fics. Fanfiction as a genre is largely female-centered fantasy. Yes, even those lurid fics you're thinking of. People write and read these fics for completely different reasons and have completely different expectations than when watching a series like ATLA. Trying to say that someone can't criticize the way the show presents Aang kissing Katara after she said she was confused as a mistake to be glossed over (that is forgotten as soon as it happens) because they also happen to like reading darkfic is nonsense. There's also a long history of women's interests being policed that informs my views here, vs the fact that consent has only fairly recently become a conversation in mainstream media. You have only to look at the way the show itself portrays Katara having interests (especially in boys) outside of Aang as dark and dangerous to see this happening in ATLA itself. Or the way the creators got away with saying that zutara shippers are doomed to end up in abusive relationships while painting Aang as a typical Nice Guy stereotype who expects Katara to magically become his girlfriend (and gets angry when she doesn't) and seeing nothing wrong with it.

The thing is that zutara, if we look at the way it's written in canon as a metaphor for a romantic relationship, follows the same tradition of how fanfiction has historically existed as an exploration of romantic and sexual dynamics. Those conversations about consent are actually happening and being explored in fanfiction, even the dark stuff, whereas relationships that are presented as "wholesome" often push us to NOT have those conversations. So when I say shipping isn't morality, what I actually mean is that noncanon shipping and darkfic actually has more of a moral leg to stand on than uncritically engaging with relationships on the grounds that Aang is the hero so his goodness and worthiness to get the girl should just be assumed. Zuko has to work for his right to be in a relationship with Katara because he didn't start out from a place of goodness, and that, on its own, is very female centered because instead of starting out from the perspective of the male hero deserving a relationship by virtue of being the hero, we see the idea that a man has to work to gain a woman's respect and affection.

So it's not so much that I hate KA, but I hate the idea that we should engage in it uncritically. And that would be true even if it really was the most wholesome relationship in the world. The same thing cannot be true of zutara because even the darkest of darkfic are about women centering themselves in the narrative and engaging with power dynamics in ways that are subverting patriarchal norms about relationships by definition.

[zenkindoflove]

I have a new hypothesis about why the ACOTAR fandom is so weird.

And I think it's because there is a difference between the people who enter this fandom as shippers and the people who enter because they like the romance genre*.

I think many life long shippers enjoy romance. Maybe they don't always seek out the genre but they see romance in whatever media they are engaging with and they take those characters and put romance spins on them even if those characters aren't from a romance story. You ship because of a feeling. You see a dynamic or maybe you think about what a dynamic could be and then suddenly you're pulled in. Like falling in love. But you're falling in love with the idea of a couple. How that couple ends up becoming in canon is independent about how thinking about them together makes you feel.

I think romance readers aren't necessarily shippers*. They enjoy reading romance in a romance canon but they don't necessarily ship in the way shippers do with obsession and devotion regardless of what the canon says. They ship because they see that this couple is good together and it does make them feel squishy inside. Similar to a shipper. But they weren't necessarily going to see that until the canon actually played it out. To me that is responding to a romance plot as the author intended.

And maybe that is something different than shipping. I know for myself, I can read and watch romance and feel pulled in by the love I see but I don't "ship" them in the way I have shipped my OTPs with the level of obsession and devotion and need to construct my own head canons and fanon.

And I think that is a big issue when people from different backgrounds try to talk about shipping and the ship war in ACOTAR if they aren't coming from a similar experience. As I discuss a lot on this blog, there is history and culture behind shipping. And shippers have developed a common language to discuss shipping in a way that respects others shipping habits while also maintaining your devotion to your own ship.

It seems like those who are in this fandom because they enjoy canonical depictions of romance only are often confused by people who are taking characters into their own fanons and playing around with them or are devoted to them regardless of what the canon validates or not.

If you are used to shipping generally it seems very weird for people to say things like "I ship this because they're end game" or "I'll stop shipping if they don't end up together". Because shippers tend to not ship because of end game. They would LIKE end game because having canon validation is great. But it is not necessary (I also am tempted to make a whole post defining the differences between canon vs. fanon vs. end game ships because I frequently see the ACOTAR fandom using these terms incorrectly).

I think sometimes we are talking across each other and not to each other because we don't share a common cultural understanding of fandom or approach to shipping.

*obviously people can be both. Maybe the first couple you shipped is because you got into a romance series. But the point is that shipping at its heart comes from a feeling. How thinking about these characters together makes you feel squishy inside. And that can exist with or without canon. Shipping canon couples does come with many rewards, and canon can validate and be positive feedback on your shipping feelings, but you don't ship because they're end game. You would ship them regardless because you saw something special in their dynamic and whether the canon gets it or not isn't going to stop you. I like reading romance but I find romance in any genre because my shipping brain never stops.

[jayceofprogress]

(Can I ask why you write Jayce as cis but you roleplay with trans Viktor’s? Is there any reason you see Viktor as trans but not Jayce?)

(Hello! I'm putting my response under a cut because it got long.)

So first off, you've mentioned that the main Viktors I RP with are both trans, and that's correct, but I need to point out that my RP partners have written and developed their characterizations of Viktor themselves, and I honor that in my RPs with them. It's not quite correct to say I've deliberately chosen to write a cis and trans pairing, it's just so happened to work out that way, kind of like how it does all the time in real life when cis and trans people end up in normal, healthy, loving relationships with each other; the same way cis and cis people do, and trans and trans people do.

I love trans Viktors, I love trans Jayces, I love any and all interpretations and versions of all the Arcane characters and have seen plenty of trans Jayces that I think are excellently written and add a lot to his character. I also know there's been a lot of great discourse around the fact that fanon commonly accepts Viktor as trans more readily than it does Jayce, and how that's related to harmful stereotypes around what trans men do and don't look like, which also intersects with how POC are treated differently when it comes to their transness/gender conformity or non-conformity (Jayce as a Latino man, obviously being relevant). I'll clarify that I personally disagree with the (many, many) fanon versions of Jayvik that paint Jayce as an aggressive, tough, domineering manly man, and Viktor as a wilting, hyper-feminized submissive flower. I think treating them that way absolutely does lend itself to fetishizing, racist, transphobic and colourist rhetoric that totally contradicts both characters and frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense in either canon or fanon storytelling. My version of Jayce, like canon Jayce, is sensitive, romantic, gentle, and an absolute bottom, regardless of whether his partner is cis or trans.

So with that out of the way, onto your actual question: the version of Jayce I personally write and headcanon is cis for a few reasons.

The main one is that a lot of his characterization and the dynamic between him and Viktor is built around a pretty core imbalance of privilege and a misaligned understanding of the necessity of autonomy and self-determination. There are certain lived experiences Viktor has had that Jayce has not: growing up in extreme poverty, growing up physically disabled, growing up socially ostracized—he was excluded from the other children even within the fissures, which meant he experienced multiple layers of marginalization even for a Zaunite. Jayce experienced hardships of his own, but they weren't the same. Jayce is physically strong, able-bodied, conventionally attractive and in a flexible enough position that he's able to finagle a little of his upward mobility into the way he presents himself, getting a good education, and convincing the Kiramman family to sponsor him, which is all indicative of his relative ease in navigating Piltovan social rules.

While Jayce struggled with plenty of different things, in my interpretation he didn't personally struggle with physical disability or gender dysphoria, and that's important because when he later makes certain decisions on Viktor's behalf against his wishes related to his body and his health, it comes from a place of complete ignorance. While he deeply loves and accepts Viktor unconditionally, he fundamentally does not understand him in many ways. He had no way of appreciating Viktor's perspective based on his lived experiences as a disabled (and, in many interpretations, trans) man, because for Jayce, he'd never been in a position where his own bodily autonomy had ever been in question. It's also why, when Jayce later becomes disabled himself, it's such a significant change for him and his worldview. The concept of intent vs. impact is core to Jayce (and Viktor), and personally is one of my favorite things about the pairing.

Finally, I use they/them pronouns and don't identify with either a strictly feminine or masculine gender expression but that doesn’t mean I necessarily want to exclusively write about or from the perspective of characters that share my experiences. And what's gender-affirming to write about for one person might not be for another, and that should be respected too. If it gives you gender euphoria to write from the perspective of a person with the same or a different gender or physical attributes than yours, then you should absolutely do that.

I think the discourse is good and appropriate, but I think it can also sometimes scare people away from writing about what they want to write about because they're so focused on adhering to morality that they lose some of their ability to think critically or to accept nuance. Jayce is not perfect, and I'm not trying to write him to be perfect. Friction creates good, interesting storytelling, and that's what I like so much about Arcane as a source material. I could probably also go into the fact that demonization of cis men can be a little bit of a slippery slope into TERF ideology, but I've already written an absolute novel so I'll stop there.

I'm hoping this was asked in good faith and that I've covered it with this answer, but also, if you'd prefer not to read about a cis version of Jayce, that's cool and I would completely understand if you’d prefer to unfollow or block and to find another version that you vibe with better. ❤️

[elizakai]

you guys i can’t take this anymore i need to release steam from this pot of killer and dust thoughts that’s on the stove

listen. if you don’t know by now. one of my favorite things to do is bridge narratives between fanon ideas, and canon truths hehe

Killer and Dust. The accepted dynamic is basically killer being a pestering little shit and dust being over it.

THATS GREAT ON ITS OWN it’s funny etc

but think about their ACTUAL characters for a moment. they are two sides of the same coin.

⬇️

i don’t want to hear any of that old fandom “they are literally the same” shhhhh. nuh uh dear friend, they commuted the same (general) action💥

their motives and situations are very different however! which is important when it comes to understanding a character

They both played into an opposite role in their world if you ask me.

Killer partners with chara, filling the role of the player. he’s a lot like flowey actually.

(in killers world, while he is still a pawn of this sick game, he gets manipulated after all, he has taken on the ROLE of the player. everyone else are the pawns.)

dust is against the anomaly of dusttale, which is that worlds player.

dust is a pawn. a pawn that is defying the player of the game

(in the same way that killer is still pawned, dust still uses his fellow “pawns” as a means to “win” the game, meaning he’s also playing)

(but again, i’m speaking role wise)

Killer and Dust’s dynamic doesn’t have to just be haha funny, it has some actual merit and potential to their characters.

Killer is constantly looking for new forms of entertainment. something new. he’ll get bored, and if he’s bored he’ll have to look at himself. killer is very much a character representing disassociation avoidance and to an extent, escapism (huh. like someone playing a video game?)

Of COURSE he’s gonna poke at people. it’s INTERESTING. it gets a REACTION. he gets to have that small power trip of being in control, after feeling like he lost control this is something that’s probably addictive to killer.

meanwhile dust…well. killer acts like his own anomaly in a way. he prods at him, toys with him, he’s leering and he takes pleasure in any reaction dust gives. dust probably would resent this feeling without really knowing why. he feels like some toy, and he’d probably be inclined to even interpret a genuine interaction this way.

this honestly makes dusts inclination to shut off or dull down any emotion make more sense. be as unremarkable as possible, and you’ll be left alone, right?

isn’t that…kind of what sans does? he’ll repeat same lines of dialogue and such when he reallyyy doesn’t have to. he’s being uninteresting. (and no he doesn’t need to remember everything magically for that to be possible. in game he will poke fun at past conversations and dialogue so he’s clearly aware enough)

Killer wants a response, so dust doesn’t give one.

killer wants control and feels like this is a challenge, dust feels cornered and defensive

if they had existed in the same world, it would have been killer vs dust in the end either way.

it’s a big old game of cat and mouse until someone snaps. they need to be given the opportunity to understand their similarities

even in an interpretation where they are in a healthier relationship, in whatever capacity, i think these mindsets would be conflict they may have….

to killer , on one hand he may be OFFENDED by his lack of response. he may be EXCITED, it’s a CHALLENGE. he might take dusts resignation as a sign of submission, which would give killer a HIGE power trip.

he might. genuinely just be trying to have fun?

it could be ENTIRELY lighthearted, and it’s still…rather toxic, considering where that mindset branched from

and we know dust won’t be inclined to say anything. he probably doesn’t understand his own feelings to be frank💀 he just feels gross and intimidated and cornered so he shuts off and sees killer as oppressive , and grows resentful regardless of intent, as these feelings only feed into his crippling self hatred anyways

….thats all for tonight-

[stellocchia]

Would you ever considered writing Nightkiller/Killermare? /Gen

I suppose that kinda depends on what you mean by that.

I have written fics that implied they had something in the past (that something being an extremely abusive situation that Killer escaped from). And I am working on a fic now where Killer thinks through what he wants (whether it's better to go back to what he's used to with Nightmare, or choose something better for himself and stay with Color. It's a 'what he thinks he deserves vs what he wants' kind of dilemma) so that one will include some talk of the ship, albeit its more canon adjacent version.

However, I am fully aware that most people wouldn't count that as ship content.

That would more be me writing a fluffy piece between them, or at least one focused mostly on their relationship. And I doubt I ever will do either of those. Their fanon romantic dynamic does not get my creative juices flowing enough to write it. And, while I am interested in exploring more canon-adjacent dynamics for them, whatever the interpretation of it may be, I tend to prefer focusing on abuse recovery rather than abuse. That has always been a thing with me.

It's why most of the angst I write is of people having to live in the aftermath of what happened. It's a bit different in longer fics because I have all the time I need to write plenty of hurt and plenty of comfort, but with one-shots, I tend to focus on what is most important to me.

That was a lot of yapping to say "Who knows", lmao

[maxdibert]

James vs Snape has to be the biggest conflict in the HP fandom right now 😭, it even went past Romione/ Dramione, Wolfstar/ Remadora and even Jily/ Snily, it’s just the characters now

I’ve always found ship wars kind of absurd because, honestly, I don’t think you can compare a fanon pairing to a canon one. I mean, if both pairings are fanon, sure, we can debate, but it doesn’t really make sense to argue about a dynamic we’ve actually seen in canon versus one that’s entirely based on the readers’ imagination. And this is coming from someone who isn’t a fan of Romione, for example—but it still doesn’t make sense to compare Romione to the "what if" that is Dramione.

Then there are ship wars like Wolfstar/Remadora, which, to me, often falls into overwhelming misogyny. While I do think Tonks deserved better than to end up being Lupin’s token love interest, whom he got pregnant and then abandoned, I also think the arguments for why people prefer Wolfstar are steeped in internalized misogyny. Because honestly, as much as you might like the idea of Wolfstar, the truth is that Sirius never gave a damn about Lupin until Lupin was the only friend he had left.

Anyway, beyond that, I don’t think ship wars have much to do with the ongoing conflict between Severus and James fans. That debate, in my opinion, is more about ethics and morality and touches on deeply personal principles for people. It’s the eternal discussion between those of us who defend the victim and those who defend the aggressor—those who argue that no matter how unpleasant the victim might be, the harm they suffered shouldn’t be downplayed, versus those who minimize the abuse for narrative convenience.

The dispute between Severus and James fans has been a constant in the fandom ever since the fifth book came out and introduced the SMW scene. The debate about whether the bullying "was that bad" or not has been ongoing ever since. And I’m afraid it will always be this way because many people don’t want to admit that the character they project their wishes and ideals onto might have been a total jerk. Some people just can’t handle being fans of imperfect characters. But at its core, it’s purely an ethical issue—nothing more.

[year2000electronics]

about yer mario hottakes im rollin in with thoughts on the mario-luigi dynamic.

i've heard so many people go back and forth between them having this 100% perfect brotherly love VS. mario is evil and hates poor baby luigi but i think that maybe it's just they're both complex characters and mario deeply insecure

like that tennis scene where he grinds luigi's foot after luigi wins instead of him. when your whole livelihood revolves around being the kingdom's favorite boy it makes sense you might lash out at being upstaged even if that's fucked up as hell to do to anybody. and while luigi's allowed and expected to outwardly express his fears (at least from diary entries i've seen in the paper mario series and luigi's general "coward" persona), who the hell is listening to mario? he's probably seen how shit people treat luigi for being vulnerable anyway (we play as mario usually witnessing all this and like. bros are real yikes to luigi), so i'd imagine the bottled up bitterness at the world is hard to contain. resentment towards luigi for being emotionally open, resentment towards the denizens of the kingdom for treating his brother like crap when mario probably wouldn't be too different if it wasn't his job to be

i'd imagine the moments he cant contain his cool like that are deep regrets. sure, luigi would forgive him, but can he forgive himself? can mario contain himself long enough to not wig out, especially with everyone watching him 24/7?

idk if this is super off base, i don't go to this school. but imo put mario in therapy, you can't be strong for everyone all the time. you're just some guy

YEAHYEAH i think even if the middle section is YMMV i do agree with the general idea that "the bros' relationship is more complex than 'they love each other' or 'they hate each other'" . like ok. being the most BANAL of canon-compliant here to reel back my own insanity for a second. it is canon that mario gets a bit competitive with luigi/his friends! we see multiple art pieces/cutscenes depicting this

because they are siblings. and im gonna be so real here i latch onto any sort of flaw mario is ALLOWED to have due to his status as Mascot so you can pry "mario gets a bit too competitive" from my cold dead hands

he's also shown to be a bit impatient if he percieves something is taking too much time

(from super mario sunshine)

(from bowser's fury)

(from luigi's mansion 1)

so i definitely see his stubbornness and impulsivity clashing with luigi's careful methodical approach.

ALL THAT TO SAY. i think even if you're just playing by the rules, i think you don't have to JUST go for one extreme or the other. i agree. the rest is purely speculative fanon applying some depth to a character who functionally does not necessarily "need" it.

(but my personal playground space interp of mario and luigi absolutely has this sort of clashing dualism where both bros are really stressed out with the hand that life has given them and they're always thinking "my brother doesn't know how good he has it" but they love each other despite that, and that love makes them not want to talk about how they really feel, and that makes it WORSE, etc etc etc)

[profounddefendorcrusade-blog]

Koffin-K and The Boogiemen's Family Dynamic (Pt. 9)

Larry (like a hopeful kid) thinks that Koffin-K wants to pleasantly surprise them, and what’s important to note is how it never crossed his mind that they’re getting fired

This one is self-explanatory, but Harry saying "finally" hints that they've been craving Koffin-K's love for ages. Plus, he and Larry built the Boogiefloat "during their first days of henchmanery" which suggests they started feeling this way almost right after joining Koffin-K

The way Larry assumes any attention from Koffin-K might be a sign of affection…

Harry only thinks Larry will get in trouble and I think this foreshadows that he wants to be the favorite

He could have just said: "Maybe WE'RE in big trouble"

Koffin-K definitely influenced Harry and Larry and they act childish because they live in an environment where they're allowed to act that way (despite Koffin-K being annoyed/deadpan/maybe mildly punshing them off-screen). We can see Koffin-K's influence if we look at Harry's sprite before vs. after he joined him. He didn't use to be one of the "Boogiemen," that's why there was no need for the current goofy standing & walking sprites

In the flashback, we only see Larry's head. But since he, like Harry, didn't have a real identity before Koffin-K, it's pretty clear we wouldn't have seen his current goofy standing & walking sprites back then either (the only time the two of them don't have this mischevious body language is whenever they're talking)

I imagine Larry's standing sprite used to be like the one in the first picture

Another reason why Harry and Larry got in trouble with Koffin-K (both on-screen and off-screen) might be because they wanted his attention. They kept tumbling down Koffin-K's stairs in perpetuity so that he could hear them from his study (I mentioned this scene before; it isn't in the game, but it fits the three's canon dynamic and was written by the TS!US team) and stole Koffin-K's phone even though they knew they'd get scolded for it. This behavior makes the Boogiemen feel like two immature guys trying to get their dad to notice them

Koffin-K cares for Harry and Larry a lot, but struggles with expressing his emotions. He spent most of his time in his study for years, "avoiding" them. This left Harry and Larry feeling unsure about their place in Koffin-K's life

The way the Boogiemen’s relationship was described in these two comments is in line with how I see them: as two brothers who bicker but love each other in a fraternal way

I decided to read the Villains Fanon wiki, and here are my thoughts about the Koffin Trio:

Harry and Larry were lucky to have gotten themselves a loving (in his own way, when you consider his abandonment issues and personality) father figure, who saw something special in them. Bugerpant wasn't this lucky with Mettacrit

Although Harry and Larry admire Koffin-K, they don't seem to worship/idolize him (I spoke about this in part 6), but they both tried to impress him (so that he would love them, not because he was their ticket to a dream they had)

Just like Koffin-K asked for Harry and Larry's names

When he was homeless, Larry was constantly hungry. Here, he only spent a short time without food, but it still hurt so much that he started to CRY. What's even sadder is how he looks embarassed about needing to eat again

Koffin-K saved him, there's no other way for me to interpret it

Larry even wants Koffin-K to give him treats. This is not only a funny piece of dialogue but it paints Koffin-K as the provider once again

This comment made me think that there’s a parallel between Larry, who’s a Frankenstein’s monster, and the monster from "Frankenstein." The monster wanted Victor’s fatherly love, just like how Larry wanted Koffin-K’s. The only difference between them is that Larry got what he wanted. I no longer doubt that both Larry and Harry have daddy issues. That explains why they kept trying to get Koffin-K's validation even though they thought he didn't appreciate them. They were SO SO grateful for all that he gave them, especially each other

Even though he loves to slack off, Larry wants to be his best for Koffin-K and gets upset when it’s brought up that he might not be doing everything he could to make him happy/show his gratitiude

Back when I compared the Boogiemen to Lancer, I forgot to mention another thing the three have in common, and that's being infantilized

Harry and Larry are childish, child-like and dependent on Koffin-K (there's more to it than being immature/influenced by him though, which I already discussed) but I disagree that they should be compared to toddlers. It really reminds me of how the Deltarune fandom treats Lancer, and it rubs me the wrong way. Harry's street-smart, Larry has moments of insight, and both did their best to fight off Chara in the Ruthless Route, WITHOUT Koffin-K's help. Even though neither predicted that Chara would push Larry off the cliff, they were not helpless babies

Larry is said to be stupid, but he can be insightful, he picked up on Koffin-K's rhyme pretty fast, plays with words in a clever way, is familiar with words like 'real estate company' and 'acronyms,' remembered that he and Harry forgot to do the chores, corrects Koffin-K and says how the festival is already happening, figured out that he and Harry could escape Chara via propeller hats (though he forgot they were out of fuel) and in general can keep up with Harry in regards to both banter and working together

My favorite thing about this guy is how self-aware he is in terms of his flaws, but I also think he isn't giving himself enough credit

[perseidlion]

On Fanon vs Canon

Look, full disclosure: I hate the name Thomas for The Cat King. I think it's a far too human a name for him, and it takes away from his otherworldliness.

Fandom seems to have attached to the pre-release casting announcement where he was briefly called that and well, fandom's gonna fandom. This would just be a me problem except for the fact that people are acting like the name is confirmed in canon.

I've seen posts from a number of people who think it IS canon due to its ubiquity of use in fandom spaces. They just assume they missed something in the credits of the show, or a version of him existed in the comics where he's called Thomas (there isn't, he's original to the show.)

Now look, this might not seem like a big deal, but I think it IS a problem. I know I might seem biased as a Thomas-name hater, but honestly I'd hate the name just as much if it WERE confirmed canon. I don't hate it because it's non-canonical. I hate it because I don't think it's a good name for him.

The problem comes from when fanon and canon bleed together where it's hard to tell the difference. Where fandom has collectively decided they like certain ideas or tropes and that it fits well with the show. This kind of thing is completely harmless as long as everyone keeps in mind that we're just playing around with fanworks. But when there's slippage...

I've seen it happen in a different fandom where people got deep into their own personal interpretations of characters and dynamics. A lot of people agreed with that vibe and started building off each other. It got pretty far from the source material, but these people felt like they had the right of it. It all made such logical sense to them and they'd spent so much time exploring an avenue in fanworks that it felt inevitable that their interpretation WOULD be canon.

And then a new season came out and not only did it NOT match their fanon, it directly contradicted their interpretation and in some cases proved it completely false.

People got VERY angry and started attacking the show for being "badly written" and accused the showrunner and writers of "betraying" them. When nothing in their fanon was promised or confirmed by canon in the first place, and some of the things they felt were inevitable were SO off what we'd seen on the show that it would have made no sense if their thing had happened.

Then these people turned on their fellow fans who pointed out the things they wanted were never inevitable, and in some cases would have made no sense. And then fandom got toxic.

I don't want to see this happen to the DBD fandom. The way to avoid that is to guard against the slippage between fanon and canon.

There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with playing around in the sandbox of the show's world. That's the point of fanworks, and the fun of it. But we need to let go of this desire to be "right" about canon and that our interpretations are only valid if they are confirmed on screen. And we need to pay attention to the difference between what we see on screen and what makes sense/what we'd like to have happen.

Thomas lovers, you loving that name will not be diminished if he's never actually given that name. And my hate of the name will remain even if it's proven canonical. It's fine! It's not a big deal. Canon and off-canon are both extremely valid types of fandom expression.

Just...keep in mind that canon is canon and fanon is fanon. Sometimes fanon is proved right, but it is not inevitable. And the creators of a show don't owe it to us to do something just because fandom has decided they want X thing.

It starts with a name but can lead to other things if we're not careful.

[comshipbracket]

Antis DNI - Block the tag "comship" if this causes discomfort.

Remember, you are voting for the ship you prefer, not the ship you find more problematic

Propaganda for both ships under the cut.

Disclaimer: All ships (other than the now-eliminated NozoCoco) on this bracket are FOLLOWER-SUBMITTED ships, the Mods do not always hold necessary knowledge to be aware of any errors or fanonizing what should be canon material that may arise.

Brujay Propaganda (Pseudo-Incest, Age Gap, Toxic Dynamic)

"This ship has everything a comshipper could want. Adopted father/son pseudo-incest. Age gap. They quite often hate each others guts. Bruce hates Jason because he uses guns and kills people. Jay hates Bruce for letting the Joker kill him and not avenging him. Jay tried to kill Bruce on more than one occasion. Bruce beat the hell out of Jay on even more occasions and did even try to kill him once. Jay has Masssssive daddy issues. Bruce has a delicious guilt complex about Jay's death. There's so much you can do with this ship. Maybe Bruce picked Jason to adopt because Jay was (canonically) a teenage hooker. Maybe Bruce saw teenage Jay running around in those booty shorts of his Robin suit and just couldn't not go after him.

ZADR Propaganda (Toxic Dynamic, Species Difference - Dib is human while Zim is an Irken alien, Age Gap, AdultxMinor - Sort Of)

"These two self-serious goofuses are obsessed with each other. Each validates the other's delusions just by existing. They're nemeses who resent others getting between them. Each may be the only one who really understands the other."

[sinful-lanterns]

Is there beef between Adela and Cabernet? I've seen some things where they both hate each other and im wondering if its canon beef or fannon beef. I would love to know the reason behind the hatred either way, just curious.

I don’t recall Cabernet and Adela ever beefing in canon, but I do believe people like to pair them up with each other in fanon because Cabernet’s event launched right after Adela’s event (and also they are red and blue themed sinners. Red vs blue just fits as rivals imo)

I have both Cabernet and Adela and have played both of their events. I don’t recall any interactions they have with each other in the supervision events, but I think they are an interesting rivalry pairing 👀

Greenest of green flags vs reddest of red flags. Perhaps that’s the dynamic of Adela vs Cabernet methinks 🤔

[my-fool]

i'm crazy about cult logic and the familiar risk. how do you come up with your ideas? (earnest question not rhetorical) do you come up with one core concept first and then build and build on the web of themes, or does it all unfold naturally from any random point? or do you make it up as you go and then tweak after?

how do you reconcile in your head so many different versions of the same character, like ulder and astarion and even wyll to some extent who are so different in both of those fics?

Interesting questions thank you for the opportunity to speak....

Ideas & plot structure

Ideas and plots are one of those things that happen organically for me so it's hard to define where they come from BUT i don't want to leave you with that bland answer so I will speak vaguely upon this topic for a moment

The best advice about having unique ideas comes from neil gaiman's masterclass series where he says that the best ideas are the collision of two distinct concepts (its been 2 years since i watched it so paraphrasing). For me this is usually 1 core idea that I try to interpret through characters that have an existing dynamic. For Cult Logic, I wanted it to feel like a regency novel (hence the marriage troubles and the duel) and the only person he could realistically duel would be Ulder and I couldn't find a reason for them to duel over Astarion so it had to be an oc (emmaline). Everything was plotted out in both directions from that endpoint. As much as i like cult logic I felt like the plot left something to be desired and I wasn't able to explore everything I wanted to with the plot's random time constraint so i wrote the familiar risk almost immediately afterward 😆

The best advice about engaging plots I've received was from pixar writers which was "find out what a character finds most important or relies on and take that away". You'll notice this happens almost constantly in the familiar risk. What Astarion values most is the safety Wyll provides and Astarion loses him twice, once at the midpoint and then again at the end. What Wyll values most is his ability to hide/mask, and that is gradually eroded throughout the entire plot. Not just the tensest moments, but also the most emotional plot beats and the closest moments to a character's heart revolve around those dynamics.

Character writing

For me characters serve the plot, not the other way around, even in fanfiction. Everything serves the plot and even though I've softened with time to value emotional beats and quieter moments, I will always operate to some degree with plotplotplot on the mind.

Therefore their differences in cult logic vs familiar risk suit the story that I wanted to tell and when I started to write them I fell into a familiar risk "feeling". Astarion's endpoint in TFR is kind of a little further along from where he is in CL but for me they exist in that same timeline where he starts off as horrible starved spawn gremlin ~> actual loving person who can put others first. So for me he has unique parts to both fics but he's the same guy in my head.

Wyll is different in both fics to an extent. I think cult logic wyll was very rattled by his father being tortured which is why he falls into the subservience. I was still learning to write Wyll so I wasnt 100% sure on him yet. TFR wyll is tough as nails he's like a noir detective 🕵️‍♂️ frankly he is not super canon compliant anymore (i would argue he is he just takes a different selection of canon traits than those usually favoured in fanon).

Ulder is starkly different between two fics. When i was writing cult logic someone left a comment like:

"I may be wrong but I think Ulder is drowing in so much guilt and Wyll not getting angry at him and always forgiving him does not help so he escalates in hope to get Wyll finally get angry and punish him."

And i was like FUCKKKK.

🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯

And after that I posted the last few chapters of cult logic but it was worming away in my brain like FAWK.

I genuinely felt so gutted for this poor guy. Poor ulder. So i wanted to write something where he could be the good guy.

Structurally also ulder needed to be a good guy a) because wyll goes through so much in TFR and b) so that functionally Astarion has someone to lean on post-canon. If, in TFR, Wyll returned home after the climax to an ulder that was stiff and unforgiving... yeesh !

Hope that all makes sense ! Thank you for the ask and the opportunity to talk :)