#but again all of those fall short in her ultimate trait of seeking justice (which is gryffindor 100%)

[moderndayamymarch]

do y’all think when harry first put the sorting hat on it thought “omg why is tom riddle in here too”

[thedeviljudges]

the devil judge + the seven deadly sins

so, i made a gifset about who i thought falls under the seven deadly sins. and also shameless plug - please go reblog the gifset i made for this. took me ages to do.

but i figured i might as well make a meta post to correlate. so this is that post. it’s not everything i could discuss. i could be here for hours more, truth be told. but i hope it’s enough to chew on.

while i feel like a lot of these are going to be a no-brainer, i still want to talk it through because idk. i can, and i want to, and i feel like it, lmao.

gluttony

the elite are privileged and have an opportunity to indulge so much more than the general public, but in many different ways. this is shown throughout the show in the fact that they can indulge on luxury food, have political power, they can make a phone call or snap their fingers and everyone must follow their orders.

and the thing about gluttony is that there is always more to be had. you take a little and then realize it’s not enough and so you ask for more. case in point: in episode 11 when sunah suggests that yohan could be the new president, the current one gives her an alternative: dictatorship. because it wasn’t just enough for him to be an actor and the presiding president.

you’ll also know they turn in on themselves - the two other guys in the elite group. one who owns the company and the other dude - i really cannot remember their names and what they do, but y’all know who i’m talking about. it was so easy for them, when threatened, to fabricate documents to give to yohan about each other in order to get ahead. gluttony is only shared in the relationships we have until one realizes they can take a little extra of the pie. it’s the selfishness of having all the leftovers. gluttony cannot necessarily exist without someone else’s sacrifice.

lust

i kind of had an ah-ah moment when i was talking this over with @technitango​. i was trying to decide who was going to be lust because lust is portrayed very, very differently in this show than what most of us are used to. we, of course, know sunah who lusts after a life of indulgence and riches because she equates that with respect more than actually wanting it because it’s monetarily worth something.

but then i realized the public is lust because of their need for justice. i won’t say revenge necessarily because they’re doing as they’re told when given the judge show. but we can quickly see how that evaporates into something akin to bloodlust, for criminals and people who normally get away with shit, to have their fair taste at conviction for their misdeeds. we even see it with yohan’s fanboy club - the lust that comes from adoration and dedication.

and even more so, the public is easily swayed and so is the nature of lust. it follows in the vein of needs and wants, and as soon as new information is presented, however may false, so does the wants and desires of what people want sway. how easy was it for them to turn on yohan for a split second on two occasions - on two accounts of bribery.

envy

envy, above all, is about wanting what others have because you do not have it yourself. it may not be exactly what they have, but a form of it. some people don’t necessarily want money - they want what it can by, which is time, health and material goods.

sunah is the perfect example of this. she envies respect and recognition. she talks about bright and shiny objects, and that’s true to her kleptomania tendences, but more than anything, she wants to be seen as an equal because being poor with a vastly different upbringing means she’s looked down upon by those she thinks matters.

which also begs the question why she feels the need to seek validation from people in higher statuses to begin with when she can be the exception and not the rule - form her own understanding and environment to show others that the typical way of the elite is not actually all it’s cracked up to be - to which we see when she has no one to celebrate her victory with. it’s lonely being at the top. you get to your goal you thought you wanted but then what?

more importantly, sunah also envies family, relationships and simply put, human interaction. she wants to be cared for and treasured, and she looks for that in her position of power. because then all eyes are on you. because then that’s what people care about. what she fails to see is that those eyes are just as fruitless and just as wavering. to be a leader means people loving the idea of you but not you as a person.

“people of envious nature are sometimes stimulated to seek to emulate those who have completed some great achievements and in doing so achieve something great for themselves,” according to Understanding Philosophy.

wrath

while i realize that gaon not might entirely fit the wrath trope, he certainly has his moments, and i think he’s lived with a tampered flame since his parent’s death. he just learned to briefly put it out in the form of distractions and a false sense of righteousness and justice. it isn’t until he meets yohan that someone finally gives him the okay to feel the entirety of his emotions, that lets him breath and tells him it’s okay to feel anger and hurt. and while gaon ultimately chooses not to exact revenge, his wrath is what led him to becoming a judge and walking away from his teenage crimality.

gaon transposed his wrath into seeking justice, transformed it into livelihood, and reformed his narrative so that he was no longer angry and a teen with rash emotions. it was simply redirected and never really forgotten. yohan turned that redirection back around onto gaon’s ultimate heartache. fueled with that, it became easier to justify himself and his actions.

the most pivotal moment of turning his back on this mindset is, of course, the minister’s suicide, where he takes a good look at himself and doesn’t like what he sees. at this point, gaon’s upset isn’t necessarily at yohan but at the situation in which they got themselves into. because the thing is, gaon doesn’t absolve himself from what they did. he doesn’t turn a blind eye to that and try to dismiss it. he owns up to what happened and confesses how he feels to yohan and how he has to leave for his own good, and in some indirect way, for yohan’s, too.

with yohan, his ultimately weakness, despite never admitting to it, is family. his wrath comes in the form of anger when the ones he loves are threatened. yohan lives by a moral code of loyalty because that means you won’t be abandoned, and as a child who lived with that verdict since the day he was born, it’s an ever-pressing theme of his.

thing is, wrath comes in two particular forms for yohan. again, one is family and the second is the rose-colored glasses he’s given himself in his revenge story. he’s always had a goal to presumably make right the wrong for taking away isaac, but within that, 10 years is a long time to plot revenge, to the point where it becomes so much easier to lose yourself to that, to become enraged with it and forget the initial goal all along. we see this in his inability to form the bonding moments needed with his niece and his casual throwaway comments over people’s lives - the comment he made to gaon about moving on to the next plan, and the ultimately nail in the coffin of pushing gaon to leaving him.

his fury has also led him to convince himself his own humanity is nothing short of a lie. therefore, it’s easier to justify the means to an end because of his own self-worth and self-deprecation. it’s almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy: he even admitted to gaon’s mentor that he is an abyss. he’s referred to himself as nothing but an animal or a monster - all characteristics of despondency to survive and to justify what he’s doing. sort of like a catch 22, yohan claims he’s an animal/monster and behaves as such, but because he behaves as such, it means he’s an animal/monster.

wrath for gaon and yohan are very different yet the same. they are slow-burning, and that’s a dangerous type. it’s actually interesting when you think about the fire imagery surrounding the two of them because flames are quick to lap at anything in its wake, to destroy within a matter of minutes. and yet for the two of these men, their internal fire eats them from the inside out, painfully, until they’re almost unrecognizable to others and to themselves.

sloth

sloth was a little more difficult to pinpoint because of its characteristics. it was either the minister versus the mentor, both of which i think could work in this role. however, i chose the minister simply because she’s featured more and intertwines heavily with the plot line.

soth is a medieval translation of the Latin term acedia, meaning “without care.”

the ultimate characteristic of sloth is often identified as laziness, and while it’s easy to argue that the minister hasn’t been lazy in her ability to get where she is, she became as much when she started lying to get to her position. isn’t lying known as the easier way out? it absolves you of responsibility, of putting in the hard work, of apologizing and making things right. in the end, she had a goal and found the easiest solution to get there through her lack of responsibility for the roles she more than likely swore an oath to.

but that also translates into the other attributes of sloth: a failure to do the right thing, lack of emotions for people or of the self, and the fact that it “hinders man in his righteous undertakings and thus becomes a terrible source of man’s undoing” according to The Seven Deadly Sins: Society and Evil.

while i think there are a lot of components of sloth that may not necessarily fit the minister, the apathy and carelessness are enough to showcase her aggression, despondency and restlessness when what little efforts she does put in do not go her way. another interesting thing to note is that many of sloth’s traits correspond with symptoms of mental illness, such as depression and anxiety. it’s an interesting thing to note given the way the minister chooses to end her life.

greed

i don’t know that jinjoo would’ve had any provocation to the limelight if it wasn’t for sunah’s direction, but she’s eager to please and wants to be useful. it’s only natural for her to want more because it’s clear she’s a career woman, loves her job and has a heart for serving the people.

but like gluttony, greed is also that little thing that plants itself and can take on a life of its own. you start looking for justifications as to why you can’t have more than what you do, and in jinjoo’s situation, she’s already overlooked through no fault of her own. and it’s not that gaon and yohan are doing it purposefully, which is what makes their neglect heartbreaking, because truthfully, they’re after the same thing jinoo is. sure, it looks different and the foundation of it is different, same with their motives. but they’re all three judges on a residing bench working to exact justice - even if all three of them have their own personal agenda. 

i don’t think jinoo fully aligns with greed, but she does want more for herself, and i think that’s only natural. you can tell she has a heart, and she’s keen not to be overlooked. this isn’t her pain point so much as it is she knows her worth and is more than ready to do what it takes to get where she wants. this, in and of itself, isn’t necessarily a bad trait, but we can see how it leads to being deceived, especially for someone who’s been left in the dark for so long.

she is enticed by the glitz and the glamour of being a head judge, but you can tell she feels some remorse and guilt for those thoughts at times. i think her sense of greed is a battle within herself more than it is extremely outwardly.

pride

soohyun’s pride comes in the form of her imbalance with right and wrong. her sense of righteousness and justice is so far leaning, even more than gaon’s. it can be chalked up to her being a cop, but we’ve seen instances of this outside of her role within that agency. her pride doesn’t let her see beyond saving gaon and getting to the bottom of every mystery that comes her way.

it also comes in the form of impulsiveness and her savior complex, putting elijah in danger, for example, instead of waiting for backup. it’s not necessarily from a belief that she can fix things all on her own, but she sees injustice and immediately jumps in. another case in point is her and gaon watching yohan wreck the minister’s son’s car. she’s ready to go stop him, but gaon pulls her back, most likely because at that point, they hadn’t been observing the situation for very long to get a read on it. also the fact that at that point, neither of them truly knew yohan and his capabilities.

but as to where her characteristics come from, we simply don’t know beyond that of gaon. it’s unfortunate because we don’t have much of her backstory, so there is no real understanding why she so firmly believes in entities of regulation beyond keeping her friend out of jail. she prides herself on her work and what she’s able to accomplish, which is why it’s devastating to her to have to protect gaon by cleaning up his bloody handprint.

aristotle is of the belief that, “pride, then, seems to be a sort of crown of the virtues; for it makes them greater, and it is not found without them. Therefore it is hard to be truly proud; for it is impossible without nobility and goodness of character,” from Nicomachean Ethics.

but pride for soohyun isn’t about honors or rewards. it’s for herself and her capabilities, her ability to protect gaon, and the virtues she’s set as the precedent for herself. because sometimes it’s not even about establishing morals and ethics upon yourself. it’s about feelings/intuition, logic and observation. and no, i don’t mean the feelings she has for gaon. there are things that humans do, both actions and words, that we inherently know are bad without someone telling us as much and without the rules of the world seared into our brains. there are some things we know, for a fact, are wrong to us as individuals.

for soohyun, she knows that gaon’s actions, and even her own, have consequences. from what we’ve seen, i think it can be argued that it’s really about not doing those actions to prevent an outcome - not necessarily from a place of being just and right. that doesn’t mean she doesn’t understand good morals/ethics, but again, we have no background of what her internal guidance actually is.

to put this in layman’s terms, we’ll use gaon wanting to stab the conman in his youth. soohyun knows it’s wrong because it will incriminate gaon and therefore she stops it. gaon’s gone to her because he sees her as a moral compass. but is her own internal navigation rooted in justice the way gaon had to find it in the judicial system, or is hers rooted in her pride of keeping gaon safe? she stops him from doing things that will get him in trouble, but is she stopping him because the action itself is wrong or because the outcome will result in undesirable consequences for the two of them?

and of course, there is a flipped argument to be had there - i’m not arguing that gaon stabbing the conman would be right or justified. but what i am saying is that for her, her worldview is the only right one, and when anyone steps out of that, even gaon, it becomes a bit of an issue: the pride she has for that is palpable.

every character indulges

truthfully, every character has at least one form of these sins rooted in their characterization. some are larger than others, but the breadth of it can be explored even further for each. and that’s what makes them more realistic and not just characters written on a page or following a linear progression of their writing deity.

the seven deadly sins are also notoriously rooted in religion. they’re also a defining feature of aristotle’s works that represent the golden mean, in which each vice is parallel to a virtue.

the devil judge is so layered, but i think at the heart of it, it’s about humanity at its core. sprinked in are the philosophies and contradictions and what it means to look in the mirror, what happens when we’re blind to seeing our true selves and most importantly, how much changes when we’re swayed by our own misgivings. it really asks us to understand nature versus nurture, that people must find a belief in something to keep them going, and how futile our hopes and desires can actually be if we’re not carefully regulating ourselves, nevermind the entities established by society to regulate us, too.

the entirety of the show genuinely begs the question as to who is truly right, who is truly wrong, and if it’s even possible to find the correct answer.

[basicsofislam]

ISLAM 101: ALMS AND CHARITY: VIRTUES OF ZAKAT: Part 2

WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF ZAKAT ON SOCIETY? (Part 2)

Looking from a transactional perspective, it becomes evident that those who knowingly indulge in usury face the threat being doomed to a fate similar to that of Satan’s, vis-a-vis, expulsion from the mercy of God. Insisting on dealing with interest is to come into conflict with the Creator. The result of such an action is evident: Those who are adamant in delusively claiming right over others’ wealth or money will live as if struck by Satan, the very same state in which they will resurrect.

The reason for this punishment is that they iniquitously equate usury with trade, claiming its permissibility; this is a case of an incorrect perspective yielding conclusions that are immensely wide off the mark. By paying close attention to the Qur’anic instruction instead, we can gain a better insight into the very psychology that affords them this misunderstanding. In other words, by asserting that, “Trading is just like usury”, usurers actually dare to suggest that trading and usury are ethical equals. Yet the clear Qur’anic directive, “God has permitted trade and forbidden usury,” unambiguously puts an end to all possible debates. Usury and interest are an assault on property and wealth, whose protection is just as essential as the protection of life and chastity. In fact, all religions highlight, in one way or another, a person’s duty to protect the five essentials of faith, mind, property, life, and progeny. The hadith,  “A believer’s property, blood, and chastity are forbidden to another believer,” amplifies this outlook. In this context, usury is an attack on the property from which we are compelled to protect ourselves, and a sinister means of exploiting the sweat of others. From another perspective, allowing usury to operate means the ultimate blow to production as men will preponderantly prefer to adopt methods that provide them easy earnings in their quest for satiating their natural inclination for wealth. With usury,  this  inclination  is  wastefully  exploited,  instead  of  cultivating  the  world,  and  many promising talents are laid waste on by the embracement of the motto “Invest in interest, and lay back!”

Usury, a practice that destroys qard al-hasan, (i.e lending money to those in need just for the sake of God, a pivotal part of the Islamic spirit) concurrently terminates the social bond, leaving each person to solve financial problems individually rather than seeking a communal help. As a result, nobody is left with a problem-free opportunity to borrow money. Qard al-hasan, a vehemently emphasized facet of Islam, is given eighteen times more reward than sadaqa. This precious practice reinforces the belief that whatever the expected surplus is, it should strictly be expected from God. Together with forbidding participation in sin and enmity, the Qur’an strongly encourages virtue and goodness46 as the principal causes of action, whether it is good or bad, necessarily attracts the same degree of responsibility.

Simply put, the acceptance of usury in public life means siding with the rich and immorally leaving the poor to fight their own desperate battle. This, indeed, represents complete deviation from Divine Mercy and Compassion. Although God grants wealth to the rich, He also provides a sanctuary for the poor through decreeing alms and charity.

And yet, the vices of usury are not limited to what has already been mentioned. Perhaps the ultimate motive should be sought in a more profound domain.  What is important is that the Creator has sternly forbidden usury and has given permission for trading. In reality, the key factor that paves our direction is the simple commands or prohibitions of God, not the entailing beneficial results that surface upon their application. Therefore, the benefits are subordinate to our efforts and striving to achieve the blessing of the Almighty, through abhorring what has been decreed as being abhorrent, and embracing what has been decreed as being worthy of embrace.

Sadaqa, an initiator of blessings and prosperity with all its types, is also the golden key to the copious treasures of Divine Compassion. By virtue of a miraculous style of articulation, the Qur’an illustrates charity as an act that brings the provider closer to God, so to speak; incorporates him or her into Paradise; reinforces the spiritual bond between believers and humankind in general; and takes the provider far away from Satan and hellfire, as opposed to amplifying the numerous harms inherent in interest. Such harms, whenever and wherever they are incurred, become a motive or means for distancing one’s self from the Compassion of the Creator and from the entrance into Paradise; for coming closer to Satan and the hellfire; and for erecting insidious walls between people.

The Qur’anic declaration “God blights usury and makes almsgiving fruitful,” at once destroys the possibility of exploiting others’ earnings through usury, a practice which aims to demolish the very foundation of social justice; one could say that it provides a cure for a disease before it takes hold of the whole body. The realization of this cure is through an uncompromising establishment of the institutions for alms and charity and forever shutting the door on inequitable practices whose menacing effects are extensively renowned. The number of investors whose dreams of riches and luxury have become horrendous nightmares through the manipulations of interest is by no means few. Opposed to these, there are countless souls whose wealth has multiplied in great magnitudes thanks to sadaqa, not to mention the love they have earned from the masses. By now, it should be blatantly evident that usury is a destroyer of social balance and a spoiler of the mutual harmony which is the unbending backbone of human life.

Not coincidentally, this verse relating to usury is among the final revelations of the Qur’an; its prohibition was declared during the concluding days of the Prophet’s (upon whom be peace) life. The Messenger of God, during the Farewell Pilgrimage, put the prohibition of usury into effect,  first by abolishing his uncle Abbas’s interest, thereby setting a perfect example.

Throughout those sermons, addressed somewhat as farewells to his Companions, he abolished blood feuds and then pronounced, “Beware! All previous usury is now under my feet, and the first interest I abolish is that of Abbas ibn Abdul Muttalib.” Absolutely nobody hesitated, including Abbas,  in abandoning their anticipated hoards of interest; moreover, they started agonizing over possible divine penalties for their prior indulgence in usury. A soothing edict, however, was revealed soon after, dispersing the noble Companions’ anxiety:

There is no sin on those who believe and do good, righteous deeds for what they might have partaken (in the past), provided (henceforth) they fear (the end of their previous creeds and misdeeds) and come to faith and do good, righteous deeds, then keep from disobedience to God in reverence for Him and piety and believe (more profoundly), then be more meticulous in obeying God in greater reverence for Him and piety and be devoted to doing good, aware that God is seeing them. (Maida 5:93)

Belief and sincerity have been reiterated three times in the above verse. This reinforces the importance of abstaining from the forbidden for protection from the hellfire, and in turn, the value of refraining from doubtful cases in order to avoid falling into the domain of the forbidden, thereby causing the inner self to decay. The Noble Prophet declared, “Leave what gives you doubt, stick to what is certain.” In another hadith that follows a similar trait, the Messenger has evidently stated that the halal (i.e. permissible) and the haram (i.e. non-permissible) have unequivocally become clear; thus the doubtful must be evaded, a recommended course of action that places emphasis on one’s spiritual life.

An implicit illustration is also to be found through a brilliant depiction of the perennial indolence of usurers and the consequential anxieties of their parasitical lives. Those who lead such a life suffer a similar ending, facing a fitting penalty for their unjust insistence that usury constitutes normal trade. According to the interpretations of Ibn Abbas, an illustrious Companion, usurers will be resurrected in a state of strangulation. The words articulated by the Messenger of God illustrate a symbolic scene he witnessed during the Miraj, or Ascension, and offers us enlightenment: “Then I saw a group whose bellies were like houses and who happened to be on the path which the Pharaoh and his folk were taken to hellfire day and night. Each time they saw Pharaoh and his folk, they would leap forward from repulsion, only to fall down face-first from the weight caused by their stomach, after which the Pharaoh and his folk would start trampling on them. I asked ‘O Jibril? Who are they?’ and he replied ‘They are usurers.’”

In another similar hadith, the Prophet mentions having seen a group comprised of people who would fall down face first every time they attempted to get up; thus he was again informed they were usurers.

This destiny is the final result of obstinately insisting on a satanic path. The Messenger of God clearly pronounced that the curse of God will indiscriminately afflict the indulgers of usury, including the provider, the acceptor, the witness, the proxy, the secretary and whoever takes an active part in such dealing, the doomed outcome of impudently declaring war on God and His Messenger. In fact, the fate of the entire group—the instigators and his or her various supports—is captured perfectly in a very short and powerful chapter near the conclusion of the Qur ’an: “Perish the hands of the Father of Flame! Perish he! No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains! Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of Blazing Flame! His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood – As fuel! A twisted rope of palm-leaf fibre round her (own) neck!” (Tabbat 111:1-5) May God protect us all from such a destiny.

Addressing the giant mass gathered around him eighty days prior to his eternal migration from Earth, the Messenger of God pronounced that God had now perfected the religion and finalized His blessings on the Muslims, stressing that the only way to procure the blessing of God is through Islam, the submission to the will of God.

Thus, the Prophet encapsulated the basic tenets of the Qur’an, the miraculous guide for those in possession of a magnanimous spirit, as magnanimousness is perhaps the most ideal word to describe the precious state of mind of the believers who successfully eschewed usury and adopted zakat. In fact, the Companions who had, at that time, gained utmost maturity after a 23-year period of stringent development unconditionally surrendered to those exquisite tenets. This, in turn, underlines the significance of corrective maturity before the embracement of the principles required to annul immorality. Even though societies may achieve a head-spinning development in technology, for example, or an apparent increase in welfare through solutions to minor economic problems, no matter how happy they seem on the surface, their life-spans will never realize their full potential and they will be utterly helpless, in an imminent shake of social upheaval, as long as they carry on the practice of usury that is so fundamentally contrary to human nature. In effect, systems that move us against the tide of righteousness are no more than “sparks in the pan” and cannot provide long-lasting illumination.

The Qur’an eloquently states, “God invites to the Abode of Peace, and guides whom He wills to a straight path” (Yunus 10:25). As certified by the Qur’an, the prohibition of usury was personally elaborated by the Prophet (upon whom be peace) and then additionally, he commissioned Abu Bakr and Ali to explain the prohibition accordingly to hinder possible misunderstandings. If humanity carries the serious intention of curing itself of the leech-like effects of usury, it inevitably must wake up in the illuminative realm of iman, belief in God, and lend an ear to the commands and prohibitions of the Almighty Creator. Observing morality in financial transactions is a virtue of believers. Thus, in a society of believers, it becomes necessary to establish alternative systems where all exploitable loopholes are firmly covered, and whereby charity-oriented institutions become established, rescuing the poor from the throes of despair.

In a nutshell, zakat and interest are two opposite and dichotomous poles. While zakat is aimed towards acknowledging the rights of the poor and eliminating obstacles that impede these rights, the essential crux of interest entails the rich ignominiously becoming richer, leaving the poor stranded in destitution. Contrary to such a devastating outcome, by preventing the exploitation of the poor, Islam also shows the rich alternative ways to make use of their wealth, free of fear and anxiety. The application of zakat ultimately means the extirpation of usury, endowing the society with genuine, long-lasting bliss.

THE OTHER SOCIAL BENEFITS OF ZAKAT

Indubitably, the benefits of zakat do not end there. Among the other benefits of zakat are that it is social insurance on public life, an aura maintaining tolerance between social groups, a catalyst that puts fire in the economic life and a balancing factor that emphasizes both the importance of worldly earnings and the eternal importance of life in the eternal abode.

Each aspect which has been delineated above, as one may guess, is also a positive step towards building an unshakeable social structure. Moreover, the totality constitutes a prelude to other innumerable benefits that will arise through the utilization of zakat—benefits both seen and unseen, in this world and the next. God, the Exalted, is remote from indulging in any activity void of meaning and distant from negated attributes: “Not for (idle) sport did We create the heavens and the earth and all that is between!” (Anbiya 21:16) 

Therefore if zakat has been decreed by Him, then it unquestionably must contain a copious load of purposes, all of which will unravel in time.

[shenanigumi]

Characterization Essay #2

or, Why Chizuru Doesn’t Deserve Your Hate

I’ve been fortunate enough to avoid any overt Chizuru hate during my time in this fandom, but I’ve seen quite a few people telling her off for ‘getting in the way’ of them and their man, as though she isn’t—you know—integral to the plot. As though she’s somehow ‘less than’, or unworthy of their attention, or otherwise ill-suited to her possible love interests.

Basically, I’ve seen many people treat her as though she’s in the way, rather than the central character through which we see the rest of the world. Today, I hope to show you why I at least think that Chizuru fulfills her purpose as both a protagonist (meta) and a deep character (in-universe). As seems to be usual, I’ll be including sections from my wiki, and those are as objective as I could make them—but again, I can’t vouch for my interpretation.

Now, are you ready for yet another character study?

First of all, I’m not asking you to like Chizuru any more than I’m asking you to like anyone in real life. Some personalities mesh better with ours than others, and hers is no exception. And I’m definitely not saying I don’t have my own issues with how she usually acts, because hell, I’ve made fun of her myself:

The thing is, all my comments are exaggerations rooted in affectionate exasperation, whereas I’ve encountered several instances of alarmingly genuine agreement over the months. People definitely have their own individual preferences as to personality type, but no matter whether you love her or hate her, the point I hope to make today is that Chizuru is a valid and three-dimensional character.

Chizuru is hardworking and kindhearted, and has a strong sense of propriety and justice. Though she is sensitive in the extreme to others’ needs, she can be oblivious with regard to herself. She has a deep-seated desire to make herself useful to those who help her, such as the Shinsengumi and (in his route) Kazama. Because of her largely self-imposed sense of obligation, it can be difficult for her to decline tasks she does not want to do.

Chizuru is naturally very curious, which can make it challenging for her to drop a subject about which she wants to know more, and consequently makes her initial situation very hard for her to manage. She also finds it difficult to suppress or conceal her emotions or intentions, and in spite of her crossdressing, she is neither a good actor nor a good liar. Furthermore, Chizuru is easily flustered, which makes her a prime target for teasing, particularly from Okita. Similarly, while she does not have a quick temper, Chizuru can become indignant and defensive if she is passionate enough about something, even before the situation calls for it.

Despite her status as a demon, Chizuru is physically not very powerful. However, she is strong-willed to the point of occasional obstinacy, and can verge on the self-sacrificial if she believes it necessary. This is most prominent when she demonstrates overprotectiveness of her loved ones or even ideals.

Does that sound like a flat character? Sure, I can pick out a number of significant differences between her and myself, but she has a definite personality of her own—and, refreshingly for an otome heroine, it’s got no small number of flaws that come with it. More than that, it’s how her flaws are portrayed that I like. With characters labeled ‘Mary Sue’, often, their faults are downplayed or spun to be endearing. For Chizuru, they are specifically addressed and oftentimes developed/improved just like any other character’s faults.

More than that, different shortcomings crop up and are eventually resolved during different routes, lending her as multifaceted a personality as Kazama’s. For instance, on Harada’s route, her tendency toward self-deprecation is spotlighted; on Heisuke’s route, it is her stubbornness. Both are directly confronted as part of the plot, working in tandem with Harada’s and Heisuke’s own faults to be resolved so that both characters grow as a result.

Speaking of which, it’s worth noting that game!Chizuru and anime!Chizuru are presented differently, but though the depiction varies between media, these facets are always present in her personality—and that shows significant depth of character. Even within the game itself, each route brings out different aspects of Chizuru’s personality: in the games as a whole, she is an “active” Chizuru, most prominently in Saito’s, Heisuke’s, and Harada’s routes, and is more inclined to take her fate into her own hands. In the anime, she is a “passive” Chizuru, and her more submissive traits are also accentuated in Hijikata’s, Okita’s, and Kazama’s routes in-game. Yet they are all decidedly Chizuru, and all recognizable as such: tell me that isn’t a versatile character!

Now that I’ve hopefully at least established that Chizuru has a personality and is not a Mary Sue, I’ll get into some of her character traits that have been known to rub people the wrong way. And again, I’m not asking you to like them—just looking to explain them. She has excellent reasons for being the way she is.

First thing’s first, you have to keep in mind that Chizuru is very much a product of her time… in a way. Similarly to the entire plot of Hakuōki, and all the other characters, she is a seamless blend of modern concepts and past context. This means that as a young woman, she is naturally put in a passive position, but she is not helpless. From the very beginning, Chizuru makes the best of her situation and takes care of herself in every way she can. Her entire goal is to impose as little of a burden on the Shinsengumi as possible, which can hardly be called attention-seeking. More importantly, her subservience can be traced back to an earnest desire to help and to have something to do with herself, not out of weakness or bowing down to her superiors. She has an acute sense of what is right, but by no means does that make her less of her own person.

And regarding Chizuru’s fighting ability? I’ve heard many complaints about her lack of combat scenes, and believe me, I’ll be the first to yell at Chizuru in the anime or musicals for not drawing her sword, but I’ll also be the first to defend that choice. It would be out-of-character for Chizuru to be interested in violence of any kind; she prefers to assert herself with her words, preferably gently, although she has been known to talk back in the heat of the moment. Besides, it is explained in the games that she has developed a slight (and extremely understandable) phobia of blades due to having been conditioned to avoid them lest others find out about her demonic healing.

Chizuru’s self-defense training was not something she undertook of her own volition, and she has never claimed to be any kind of combat expert. Nor does she need constant support and rescuing; though she gets into tight spots sometimes, it is usually a.) demon-related, and b.) not because she insisted that someone save her. In other words, when she needs help, it isn’t because she’s gone looking for trouble or gotten in over her head by overestimating her abilities. Additionally, she does not get in the way during combat, so much as she is reluctant to initiate it. I will own that the anime and/or musicals could have handled this much better, but they are also different media, with a slightly different point—and in the meantime, mine still stands. Chizuru cannot be expected to be a master of combat; that is not who she is.

I’ve heard it said often among fellow Chizuru supporters that one does not have to be overtly badass or skilled in combat in order to be a strong female character, and I’d just like to underline that here. I’d argue that the guys’ dynamics with Chizuru develop precisely because that’s who she is, and that everything would change if her personality were altered in that way. In short, the game we know and love would cease to be. It is a delicate balance, and if we tweak Chizuru’s personality so that she comes more to the forefront, we defeat the point of the game we all love.

Another aspect of her personality that people may find troublesome, and the one that bothers me the most, is her obliviousness. But even that is forgivable if you look into the context. Chizuru is innocent, not ignorant. As the players/observers, we have been trained to look for signs of romance, because we are playing the route. This makes every blush, glance, and line of dialogue extremely significant. However, in Chizuru’s position as a naïve and somewhat sheltered girl who is not initially looking for love, it’s understandable that suggestive remarks or flirtation would go over her head. After all, she’s there to find her father, right? Why would she read into anything? And let’s not forget that she’s perfectly aware of what goes on in the red-light districts. She simply has no prior experience in sex or romance, and therefore no special sensitivity to most subtle remarks.

Now, back to the ‘not looking for love’ thing: I’d like to point out how absolutely non-romance-centric Hakuōki is. It gives priority to character development, including Chizuru’s, and much of her romance with any one guy depends on her actions (hence why there’s a Romance meter as well as Corruption). What I love most about Chizuru and her dynamics is that not all the guys fall for her at all, let alone instantly. This is not your typical ‘reverse harem’ game, where there’s a distinct possibility of romance with almost everyone no matter whose route you’re on. Everything depends on Chizuru’s choices, which are always colored by Chizuru’s personality, and while they may not necessarily line up with what you or I would do in that situation, Chizuru is who each character ultimately begins to respect.

She is significantly less of a self-insert than many other otome heroines, from what I’ve seen, and actually stands up well to the historically based characters as both a foil and a plot pusher. She interacts well with the environment around her, fitting into the game’s style of worldbuilding, revelations, and gradual pacing. A more ‘assertive’ heroine would naturally have forced them to put her in the spotlight, which would have defeated much of the point of the plot. The point is that she is our window into modified!19th-century-Japan, not its centerpiece, and that while her character development is always central (as she learns how to navigate the world around her and overcome her own internal battles), it is often intertwined with that of history itself. If we changed Chizuru’s personality, it would have changed not only the plot, but the entire message. Thus, because of her passivity and her pacifism and even her at times infuriating obliviousness, Chizuru is exactly the heroine that Hakuōki needs—no more, no less.

In conclusion, not everyone can be expected to like any given person, real or fictional, but you must acknowledge Chizuru as a functional character. I’m not even sure where I stand with her myself, but to me, she is who she is… and that’s the only thing that really matters. My point is simply that Chizuru is as complete and important a character as everyone else in Hakuōki, and that if your hatred of her is based on the fact that she is ‘shallow’ or ‘two-dimensional’ or a Mary Sue, you should consider that maybe she’s just not your type.

(@kurokiorya​ – I hope this explains a few things!!)

[raisingsupergirl]

Forgiving Matt Lauer: What Would Wonder Woman Do?

NaNoWriMo is over, which means I've returned to the real world. And let me tell you, a lot happened in a month while I was away. Color me naïve, but I would have never dreamed Hollywood would have been so full of corruption. I mean, remaking Captain America with a female lead and renaming it Wonder Woman? Who would stoop so low?

Okay, okay. It was a joke. Don't get your panties in a bunch (yeah, it’s going to be THAT kind of post. Sorry). Wonder Woman was an outstanding movie. But I may have seen it differently than a lot of people. At no point did I imagine it as a gender equality story. Yes, the main character is an amazon, a goddess from an island without men. And yes, she's super kick-butt and virtuous and brilliant. But there's so much more to her, and to the film! The story is one of moral justice (which includes but goes far beyond gender), original sin, and free will. It's about the very fabric that ties our race together, and pigeonholing it as a "woman power" film is like buying a $1,000 iPhone X just to check your email. Here's a quote from the movie's climax (spoilers ahead):

Ares: Look at [Dr. Poison] and tell me I’m wrong! She is the perfect example of these humans and unworthy of your sympathy in every way. You know that she deserves [to die]. They all do. Do it!

Diana (Wonder Woman): You’re wrong about them. They’re everything you say but so much more. 

Ares: Lies! They do not deserve your protection!

Diana: It’s not about deserve. It’s about what you believe. And I believe in love. Only love can truly save the world.

Here's one woman standing up for another woman in the face of a man who would seek to condemn them both. Does that sound like a feminist movie to you? Okay… yeah, maybe it does. But plot twist! Diana's epic line about choosing love over condemnation? She stole that from a MAN named Steve Rogers Trevor:

“It's... it's not about deserve. Maybe, maybe we don't. But it's not about that, it's about what you believe. You don't think I get it, after what I've seen out there [in the war]? You don't think I wish I could tell you that it was one bad guy to blame? It's not! We're all to blame!”

Again, things aren't as black-and-white as they seem. Diana didn't exactly steal the line. She used it to inform her own decision. She used it to arrive at her own ultimate truth. A truth that sounds remarkably familiar: 

"…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

 That's from the Bible. Romans 3:23-24, to be exact. And like Trevor and Diana's sentiments, it seems like there are two stages to arriving at a supreme opinion concerning our race: 1) We all make bad choices that contribute to the evil in the world, and 2) despite our inevitable bad decisions, we can always make the good decision to love our neighbors despite their bad decisions. But while this sentiment sounds wonderful on paper, what does it look like in practice? In Wonder Woman, it's easy because Diana has a devil to fight, a source of pure evil and corruption, so killing him doesn't violate her decision to love mankind instead of condemn it. But in the real world, how do we guard against evil men (and women) who manipulate and abuse others, spreading evil instead of love? Can we condemn them for their choices? After all, they're the ones who made the evil choice. Shouldn't they be punished for it?

Gosh, wouldn't it be nice if life were that simple? As I said the other night while having an amazing discussion with some great friends, "There have been smarter people than us trying to get this right for at least 6,000 years. I doubt we'll figure it out tonight." That's not to say the discussion was without merit. It forced all of us to re-examine the beliefs we take for granted. And unless we continue to challenge each other as we get older, we're in serious danger of thinking we do have it all figured out.

And nowhere is this more obvious than in the recent outpouring of sexual harassment stories coming from Hollywood and beyond (I bet you were beginning to wonder when I was going to finally get around to this). Actors, comedians, writers, producers, reporters, executives, politicians, and a whole lot more. For funzies, here's a complete list (yeah… right) of the sexual offenders who have been at least loosely convicted and reprimanded in the past TWO MONTHS:

Harvey Weinstein, Ben Affleck, Roy Price, Chris Savino, Lockhart Steele, John Besh, James Toback, Terry Richardson, Leon Wieseltier, Knight Landesman, Mark Halperin, Ken Baker, Kevin Spacey, Jeremy Piven, Hamilton Fish, Michael Oreskes, Andy Dick, Brett Ratner, Jeff Hoover, Dust Hoffman, David Guillod, Ed Westwick, Jeffrey Tambor, Matthew Weiner, Roy Moore, Louis C.K., Andrew Kreisberg, Eddie Berganza, Gary Goddard, Al Franken, John Conyers, Glenn Thrush, Charlie Rose, John Lasseter, Nick Carter, Matt Lauer, Garrison Keillor, and Russell Simmons.

It's like everyone assumed Anchorman and Man Men were works of pure fiction without any basis in reality, and this mass reckoning of the world's evil chauvinists has come as some bewildering surprise. I don't want to downgrade this revolution to a trendy designer cause, but it's just too easy for the herd mentality to take up pitchforks without actually examining the situation (are your palms getting sweaty yet?).

The men in the list above did bad things. Very bad things. Most of them admitted to their mistakes, and they've begun to make amends for perpetuating the evil in the world. But they aren't evil men, at least, not any more than the rest of us (yeah, things are getting dicey now, so hold on). Not that everyone believes as I do. There are plenty who hold men wholly accountable for their actions, and those people are the ones who put heavy emphasis on free will instead of environmental factors.

Okay, hold up. We're unpacking something a little thicker here, but before you take off, let me assure you that I'm not about to give a lecture. But realizing where your personal beliefs fall on the spectrum of fate versus free will is essential in understanding whether you condemn Matt Lauer or pity him. If you were to ignore environmental factors completely (which, for our purposes, includes inherited genetic traits and the full gamut of developmental, congenital, and acquired variables) and assume a person's actions are wholly under his or her own control, the decision would be simple. A murderer chose to murder, so he should be killed. A rapist chose to rape, so he should be castrated. And Matt Lauer chose to manipulate young, impressionable women, so he should be shamed, hog-tied, and run out of the country. 

But consider, for a moment, his circumstances. Where did he learn how to manipulate women? When did he become dependent on their company (and more)? Why did the victims take years to come out with the truth? In short, how did he arrive at this point in his life? It's likely that the questions I've just raised are setting off every defense mechanism in your brain right now, and that's great. You're thinking about the variables—the events and environments and people involved—instead of dumbing the situation down to a simple "innocent" or "guilty" verdict.

Why? Because we've already established that we're all guilty. We've all contributed to the world's evil, remember? So how can we condemn another person for their actions when they're just a product of their environment? Therefore, the only logical solution is to forgive Matt Lauer and set every criminal in the country free. Or better yet, if we’re all puppets to fate, we’re no different from every other animal on the planet, so we should live our lives conscience-free, including raping, pillaging, and murdering other “animals.” Because, hey, we couldn’t have done anything different anyway.

Dang. That one didn't work either. It's almost like figuring this out can't be done in one blog post. And apparently it can’t be done in one superhero movie either. In Wonder Woman, we were all too blame, but only because Ares (i.e. Satan) manipulated us. Unfortunately, killing Ares (the original environmental factor) didn't fix everything. The damage was already done. Humanity was already corrupted, and it was left to pick up the pieces, one free-willed decision at a time.

We each have to decide where we fall on the fate/free will spectrum, and then never get lazy about our decisions or our judgments. Men make bad decisions. Don't be one of those men (or women) by shooting the messenger. Tell me what you think. Where do you fall on the spectrum, and how did this post (which someone COULD see as an environmental factor...) influence your views on holding men and women accountable for their actions? Oh, and who would win in a fight, Captain America or Wonder Woman?