#but i dislike and disagree with it

[kamomie]

I have such mixed feelings on what just happened, but I'm kinda disappointed in q!bad and q!baghera.....

Like, that was a whole ambush, and q!Bagi was not prepared for that.

[bedforddanes75]

im not american but some of you guys are just fucking stupid ong what do you MEAN youre not gna vote because you disagree with like one part of what youre voting for. like okay me when im fucking thick

[hauntingofhouses]

Very interesting to me that a certain subset of the BES fandom's favourite iterations of Mizu and Akemi are seemingly rooted in the facades they have projected towards the world, and are not accurate representations of their true selves.

And I see this is especially the case with Mizu, where fanon likes to paint her as this dominant, hyper-masculine, smirking Cool GuyTM who's going to give you her strap. And this idea of Mizu is often based on the image of her wearing her glasses, and optionally, with her cloak and big, wide-brimmed kasa.

And what's interesting about this, to me, is that fanon is seemingly falling for her deliberate disguise. Because the glasses (with the optional combination of cloak and hat) represent Mizu's suppression of her true self. She is playing a role.

Take this scene of Mizu in the brothel in Episode 4 for example. Here, not only is Mizu wearing her glasses to symbolise the mask she is wearing, but she is purposely acting like some suave and cocky gentleman, intimidating, calm, in control. Her voice is even deeper than usual, like what we hear in her first scene while facing off with Hachiman the Flesh-Trader in Episode 1.

This act that Mizu puts on is an embodiment of masculine showboating, which is highly effective against weak and insecure men like Hachi, but also against women like those who tried to seduce her at the Shindo House.

And that brings me to how Mizu's mask is actually a direct parallel to Akemi's mask in this very same scene.

Here, Akemi is also putting up an act, playing up her naivety and demure girlishness, using her high-pitched lilted voice, complimenting Mizu and trying to make small talk, all so she can seduce and lure Mizu in to drink the drugged cup of sake.

So what I find so interesting and funny about this scene, characters within it, and the subsequent fandom interpretations of both, is that everyone seems to literally be falling for the mask that Mizu and Akemi are putting up to conceal their identities, guard themselves from the world, and get what they want.

It's also a little frustrating because the fanon seems to twist what actually makes Mizu and Akemi's dynamic so interesting by flattening it completely. Because both here and throughout the story, Mizu and Akemi's entire relationship and treatment of each other is solely built off of masks, assumptions, and misconceptions.

Akemi believes Mizu is a selfish, cocky male samurai who destroyed her ex-fiance's career and life, and who abandoned her to let her get dragged away by her father's guards and forcibly married off to a man she didn't know. on the other hand, Mizu believes Akemi is bratty, naive princess who constantly needs saving and who can't make her own decisions.

These misconceptions are even evident in the framing of their first impressions of each other, both of which unfold in these slow-motion POV shots.

Mizu's first impression of Akemi is that of a beautiful, untouchable princess in a cage. Swirling string music in the background.

Akemi's first impression of Mizu is of a mysterious, stoic "demon" samurai who stole her fiance's scarf. Tense music and the sound of ocean waves in the background.

And then, going back to that scene of them together in Episode 4, both Mizu and Akemi continue to fool each other and hold these assumptions of each other, and they both feed into it, as both are purposely acting within the suppressive roles society binds them to in order to achieve their goals within the means they are allowed (Akemi playing the part of a subservient woman; Mizu playing the part of a dominant man).

But then, for once in both their lives, neither of their usual tactics work.

Akemi is trying to use flattery and seduction on Mizu, but Mizu sees right through it, knowing that Akemi is just trying to manipulate and harm her. Rather than give in to Akemi's tactics, Mizu plays with Akemi's emotions by alluding to Taigen's death, before pinning her down, and then when she starts crying, Mizu just rolls her eyes and tells her to shut up.

On the opposite end, when Mizu tries to use brute force and intimidation, Akemi also sees right through it, not falling for it, and instead says this:

"Under your mask, you're not the killer you pretend to be."

Nonetheless, despite the fact that they see a little bit through each other's masks, they both still hold their presumptions of each other until the very end of the season, with Akemi seeing Mizu as an obnoxious samurai swooping in to save the day, and Mizu seeing Akemi as a damsel in distress.

And what I find a bit irksome is that the fandom also resorts to flattening them to these tropes as well.

Because Mizu is not some cool, smooth-talking samurai with a big dick sword as Akemi (and the fandom) might believe. All of that is the facade she puts up and nothing more. In reality, Mizu is an angry, confused and lonely child, and a masterful artist, who is struggling against her own self-hatred. Master Eiji, her father figure who knows her best, knows this.

And Akemi, on the other hand, is not some girly, sweet, vain and spoiled princess as Mizu might believe. Instead she has never cared for frivolous things like fashion, love or looks, instead favouring poetry and strategy games instead, and has always only cared about her own independence. Seki, her father figure who knows her best, knows this.

But neither is she some authoritative dominatrix, though this is part of her new persona that she is trying to project to get what she wants. Because while Akemi is willful, outspoken, intelligent and authoritative, she can still be naive! She is still often unsure and needs to have her hand held through things, as she is still learning and growing into her full potential. Her new parental/guardian figure, Madame Kaji, knows this as well.

So with all that being said, now that we know that Mizu and Akemi are essentially wearing masks and putting up fronts throughout the show, what would a representation of Mizu's and Akemi's true selves actually look like? Easy. It's in their hair.

This shot on the left is the only time we see Mizu with her hair completely down. In this scene, she's being berated by Mama, and her guard is completely down, she has no weapon, and is no longer wearing any mask, as this is after she showed Mikio "all of herself" and tried to take off the mask of a subservient housewife. Thus, here, she is sad, vulnerable, and feeling small (emphasised further by the framing of the scene). This is a perfect encapsulation of what Mizu is on the inside, underneath all the layers of revenge-obsession and the walls she's put around herself.

In contrast, the only time we Akemi with her hair fully down, she is completely alone in the bath, and this scene takes place after being scorned by her father and left weeping at his feet. But despite all that, Akemi is headstrong, determined, taking the reigns of her life as she makes the choice to run away, but even that choice is reflective of her youthful naivety. She even gets scolded by Seki shortly after this in the next scene, because though she wants to be independent, she still hasn't completely learned to be. Not yet. Regardless, her decisiveness and moment of self-empowerment is emphasised by the framing of the scene, where her face takes up the majority of the shot, and she stares seriously into the middle distance.

To conclude, I wish popular fanon would stop mischaracterising these two, and flattening them into tropes and stereotypes (ie. masculine badass swordsman Mizu and feminine alluring queen but also girly swooning damsel Akemi), all of which just seems... reductive. It also irks me when Akemi is merely upheld as a love interest and romantic device for Mizu and nothing more, when she is literally Mizu's narrative foil (takes far more narrative precedence over romantic interest) and the deuteragonist of this show. She is her own person. That is literally the theme of her entire character and arc.

[ardate]

Every Boromir hater makes my enormous love for him grow stronger. Sorry you couldn't understand him, I get him tho and we're holding hands and the whole of Gondor is laughing at you

[geryone]

Having followers on tumblr is irrelevant but for some reason once people believe you have any kind of following they stop treating you like a person & instead think that it’s normal to say insane things to you and send you weird parasocial messages

[virtues-end]

I remember a while ago you said Penrose was a trans man, but recently you posted a F!Penrose snippet, so I was wondering if F!Penrose is a trans woman :) anyways I love tall strong women 🤭 I also love that we're going to be able to talk to the characters about their gender and stuff! Can't wait to hear Shea's thoughts about being agender, will it change depending on what pronouns they're using (like she/her Shea feels differently to what he/him Shea feels)?

I'm so happy for female Penrose to make her return. 🥰

To answer your question, male Penrose is trans, female Penrose is not. I sort of see it as the two having the same origin point, but diverging along the way. :-)

As for Shea, they've just simply never placed much importance on gender. They've always had a strong sense of self that has existed outside the traditional gender norms and the expectations that come with them. Gender presentation just isn't something they dwell on, nor do they really care much about how others perceive them in that regard.

Anyhow, much like Penrose, Shea is fundamentally the same person across all variations. The story does take their gender into account at certain moments, but these won't be any truly drastic changes—I’m not a fan of characters being wildly different just because their gender has changed. However, I also don’t want to just swap their pronouns and call it a day, you know? I really want those differences to be meaningful in some way, even if they're subtle.

[can-i-get-a-yippee]

If I see one more take about how Eddie doesn’t deserve Buck bc he has trauma, I’m gonna lose my mind.

Isn’t love to see all the worst parts of someone and love them anyway? To sit beside them at their lowest point and give whatever comfort you can, knowing that they would do the same? Isn’t love to acknowledge the good and the bad that makes up each person and accept it wholeheartedly because love isn’t just the good parts?

And healing isn’t linear. It never has been.

Do you give up on someone because they relapse or regress? Do you throw away your relationship and your emotions because they’re no longer the perfectly healed partner you expected?

Like, people can dislike Buddie. I don’t care, but this narrative that you have to be worthy of someone’s love annoys me to no end bc the beauty of love is it’s not supposed to be expected or deserved — when you truly love someone it’s given without conditions.

[briarpatch-kids]

Using a wheelchair vs having a severely reduced quality of life isn't giving up, it's the opposite. You're choosing to take back your life and live it fully.

I think that's the biggest misconception about wheelchairs that pedestrians have.

[pastryjay]

I'm really surprised that a lot of people didn't like how Ghosts ended and consider it to be a sad ending. I loved it.

It was just not practical for the family to stay in Button house. It was falling apart and neither Alison or Mike had the funds to fix it or keep up with the costs of running the place. They made that clear many times throughout the show. The heating bill alone would be astronomical. The charm of living in an expensive, falling apart, old house would not last. Even if they wanted to stay there, the family would get to a point where they would have to move if they wanted to afford food and other basic needs, especially with the new costs of raising a child.

The family haven't permanently left the the Ghosts behind. They could stay at the hotel every year, multiple times a year if they wanted. The place has a sauna, probably other leisure facilities like a gym and a pool now too. Many hotels double up as a leisure club so it wouldn't be weird for them to visit as often as they like. Especially as they would have a lot of money from selling the house.

The ghosts are right too, them being there 24/7 could easily become too much. I know i'd feel unable to relax and feel like i'd have no privacy if I lived with that many people who literally can not leave, ever.

I know it's a comedy show that hinges on being somewhat unrealistic! However, these characters are expected to behave at least somewhat how real people would. Alison and Mike are sensible people and react to situations in the way normal, sensible people would. To me, there is no way they'd be able to stay happy living in that house for the rest of their lives.

[thenameisgul]

Sometimes I think about how anytime Cas has made a decision/choice that Dean didn’t agree with, it came back to bite him in the ass.

Jack is the one decision he made irrespective of dean’s feelings on the subject that turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to Cas.

No wonder dean was freaking jealous of the kid and hated him from the beginning. Dean believed Jack took Cas away from him. In more ways than one 😭

[idkwhatimdoingbutslay]

… I can’t imagine that we actually watched the same show. Like I REALLY AISNSOSNWKMEJDND

hold on I’m gonna need to calm down.

Let me just make a list of why I disagree and at least organize my anger. Long post incoming.

Vander was friends and had a deal with Grayson. The sheriff. Idk what else to even add to that

Caitlyn is more than a cop and Arcane isn’t copaganda. Genuinely don’t know what kind of progress some of these people are looking for. Real allies are a necessity for real progress.

SILCO IS A CLASS TRAITOR. HE FUNNELLED DRUGS INTO THE UNDERCITY AND PUT POOR KIDS IN FACTORIES FOR THAT DRUG FOR PROFIT!!! HE PAID THE ENFORCERS TO LET HIM DO IT WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE

Vi is not as much as an activist as you would like to believe

WHY IS EKKO NEVER EVER BROUGHT UP IN THESE CONVERSATIONS????

Silco was not good for the Undercity

Silco was not a great guy. Ekko had to build an entire separate hidden community for the people he hurt and stepped on for his own benefit

Caitlyn is ignorant and naive. That’s ok. That’s what character development is for.

Loving imperfect characters like Silco and Jinx then hating characters like Vi and Caitlyn is peak media illiteracy to me

FOR THE LAST TIME: VI DIDNT ABANDON POWDER!!!!! Silco literally wanted Vi DEAD for trying to stop him from killing Vander??? How could you possibly say silco was there for jinx when Vi refused to be???? SHE WAS IN PRISON BECAUSE OF HIM???

Silco’s manipulation is working wonders on y’all

Embracing all the outrage without at all looking out for the people harmed by bigotry is not activism

SILCO IS A CLASS TRAITOR x929282929394

Caitlyn was the first person in years to show Vi kindness and care. She listened and stuck by her and took care of her after Vi was locked up for years and beat up by cops (i wonder what led her to be thrown in there?). Cait being a cop stopped being a point of contention once Vi recognized her naivety and genuineness.

NUANCE NUANCE NUANCE. ITS NEVER EVER BLACK AND WHITE

The only way I can see Vi touching ‘class traitor’ in season one was the shimmer raid. Guess who the hell put those kids in there in the first place.

Just hanging out with Caitlyn isn’t being a class traitor if Vander’s allowed to be friends with Grayson.

Critical thinking is very necessary for watching shows like Arcane

What the hell did Silco really do for the Undercity???? What changed over the 7(ish) years he was basically in power of the place? All I’ve heard was he made the air cleaner, which would be great except for, you know, shimmer and the child factory workers

Jinx is unwell and feeding into it like this in a fully serious manor would not help Arcane as a show at all

What do you want Arcane’s message as a full show to be? ‘Screw cops’? That’s a little boring and unproductive isn’t it?

CAN WE TALK ABOUT EKKO AND HIS IMPACT PLEASE???? x9382728283

Caitlyn is trying to make Piltover and Zaun a better place. Is that not allowed? Am I missing something?

Caitlyn and Vi’s arcs have only just started. Season one is basically fully set up except for characters like silco and Jinx. This is far from the end.

Genuinely think Vander would appreciate Vi for being friends (using this term loosely because they are in love) with Caitlyn considering he was the one who was opposed to war and Vi wasn’t.

Silco should NOT be your idea of Undercity independence and respect. He oppressed the Undercity the same way the Council and the Enforcers did. He helped no one but himself, his team (barely) and Jinx.

You’re allowed to like and dislike any character you want but pretending like Silco is better for the Undercity than others is just so ridiculous to me. Everyone is of course completely allowed to like Silco, but we can’t pretend like he’s this stand up guy. If you have to pretend like he was, maybe you don’t like him as much as you think.

“Because Cait’s pretty” is also incredibly incorrect. Go check point #14.

Vi never stopped loving and caring for Powder. Powder’s mental health issues were amplified and utilized by Silco because he couldn’t even heal himself.

If all of your opinions of Caitlyn and Vi start and end with “cops suck” and “class traitor” then you genuinely don’t respect Arcane as a show enough to show you nuance.

The misinterpretation of characters is just so … it’s like you go out of your way to love and/or hate characters no matter how much they show you who you are.

Your closed mindedness is clouding your judgement and making you out to seem like you don’t actually want the Undercity’s triumph, you want Silco and Jinx’s, even if it means ruining the Undercity. And that would be fine because father/daughter evil duo but trying to say you’re all for this duo because you want what’s better for the Undercity when they continue to hurt it is simply not correct and very harmful (to fictional characters in a fictional universe 😭)

Only being able to understand how Silco and Jinx were oppressed and therefore should be able to not just destroy Piltover but also Zaun is not the eat you think it is

Why is Viktor never called a class traitor? I think he's great (I also think Silco and Jinx are wonderfully written) but we hardly saw him in the Undercity/ interact with people from the Undercity plus he killed someone (Sky) from there (accidentally)

EDIT TO ADD ANOTHER POINT: Caitlyn has shown little to NO malicious intent and has no real negative impacts other than Jinx’s attachment issues and insecurities being amplified by her mere existence. Again, this is her story and development. Throughout the season she is exposed to reality and recognizes her and her peers/ families wrongs. I have no idea what you want from this character. Should Piltover just be gotten rid of in the story? Then what? Should Caitlyn have just never gotten involved and continued to embrace her privilege? Should she have left Vi in prison and stay ignorant?

[lanshappycorner]

I'm here to defend Pacciofinn's honor here is my essay and breakdown as to why pacciofinn is actually a banger ship

(*ummm going back after writing this entire thing, this ended up becoming mainly a carpaccio character analysis with some additional yaoi on the side but please by all means read it anyways)

(**Also disclaimer this is my own interpretation of the characters and their relationship. If you don't agree then you're wrong it is what it is 😔 I'm not the author so I can't tell you that I am completely right either even if I am. Additionally, warnings for spoilers in this essay)

I think to understand pacciofinn you'd have to understand Carpaccio as a character because I do think that people do like to paint him as just a Bad Guy or a bully and I'm not going to say he doesn't have his flaws because. He does. He's first presented as an asshole who hurts people weaker than him but his character isn't as simple as just "a bad guy"

To start off with, Carpaccio was born and immediately chosen by the Healing Cane. As such, he's basically been held to a pedestal his entire life, always doing what he wants and always being allowed to do what he wants because of his potential.

In addition, it's important to note that he can't feel pain. He has never felt pain a day in his life and idk how else to tell you this but clearly this has fucked him up greatly although he may not be aware of it

In order to understand Carpaccio, you'd have to understand his relationship with pain. Essentially, Carpaccio does not know what pain is. He knows what it is in theory, he knows that people can feel it and it is allegedly bad and painful, but how could he understand what "painful" is if he never felt pain?

To Carpaccio, pain is nothing more than a weapon. He is aware that others are hurt because of it, but he can't make the connection as to why this pain is so bad that they can't stand it, because he's never felt it himself.

It's likely he underestimates how pain feels, and this creates some sort of mentality in which he views others as inherently weaker than him because pain to him is truly not that bad. Because he can't feel it. He can't empathize

On the topic of empathy. You hesitate to hurt others because you know how it feels to be hurt, you understand the basic feeling of pain—there is basically almost no one on earth that hasn't felt pain because pain is a warning from your body to avoid certain things.

But if someone has never felt pain before, not only will they be reckless with their body, they will be reckless with other's safety. To them, there is no consequence to injury, and they cannot fathom the pain of others to care enough to take it into consideration.

Simply put, Carpaccio has never had to face the conquences of his actions. He's never felt the pain of stabbing himself, and due to the fact that he's chosen by the Healing Cane, he likely does not face any normal consequences for the trouble he causes others either due to his actions

This has in turn greatly stunted his emotional capabilities, however that doesn't mean that he lacks them. Carpaccio knows to respect people that he acknowledges are stronger than him, he knows his place. He's divided the world into the weak and the strong, and the only way he can "empathize" with the world is to empathize with the strong.

He understands the feeling of having power over others, he understands the feeling of superiority, of arrogance and confidence. These are the only emotions he Can connect with because he's never been on the side of the weak, he's never felt threatened or hurt.

Also, you have to keep in mind that this society is heavily focused around the concept of the weak and the strong.

The magicless are weak and should be rid of, the strong are ranked by their lines and strength. It should be no surprise that Carpaccio's apathy to the suffering of the weak is initially a core character trait of his, considering his own situation and the society he lives in.

So, so far we've established Carpaccio's base character before any character development. But the good stuff comes after

During his fight with Finn, he's made it clear that Finn disgusts him because he assumes that Finn got in due to his brother's influence (which is not the case). He hates people who put in effort knowing that they will never succeed, because he cannot understand their struggles.

This goes back to empathy and sympathy. Carpaccio has never had to put much effort into anything to get to where he is, and it's not that he's never put in effort into anything at all, but it's not quite the same. I'm sure that he puts effort into his research, but in general, he's never been "weak" enough to face a situation where he will fail.

Also, he was "chosen". All his life, he's been told that he was "chosen", and that's why he is where he is. In this world, there's a heavy emphasis on being chosen by magic or gods or whatever. To Carpaccio, the strong and the weak are determined by them being chosen. Those who were not chosen have no chance of being strong because they weren't chosen to be strong, it's simple.

It also goes to show his logic. Carpaccio's view of the world is so black and white and simple, that he comes off as almost childish. He doesn't have any grasp on how his actions may affect others, and even if he's told so, he can't...connect the dots.

If he hurts someone, then he hurts them. He can't make the connection as to why it would be bad because he was chosen and they were not. He's strong, so he has the right to disregard them.

Because his worldview is made up of the weak and the strong, he thinks that effort is wasted on the weak, and they should stay where they are. He doesn't understand what it means to feel helpless, he doesn't understand why the weak would want to be strong, and he's happy with the status quo he's created in his mind.

This is also why he directly states that people who never succeed and still try their hardest bother him the most. Why does it bother him? Why is someone trying to overcome the position they were born in bother him the most? We can only assume that it is because he views them as a threat.

Someone that challenges his way of thinking and all of his ideologies is something he despises because it is a hit at his own status as someone who was chosen. There's also the fact that he probably just finds them pathetic, because he knows that they'll never amount up to him, and he doesn't want to risk thinking about if they could.

But also, when it comes to pain, Carpaccio does want to feel it. How could he not? It's the one thing in his life that he's never felt, it's his greatest weapon, and yet he doesn't know what it feels like. He can't imagine what it feels like.

Being able to feel pain is the one thing that he cannot understand, so of course he'd want to know about it. However, he's split the world into the strong and the weak, and he's deemed those who are strong to be the only people capable of giving him the pain he wants.

That is why he doesn't like dealing with people he considers weak--they basically don't exist to him. They can't help him get what he wants, and as far as Carpaccio is aware, they're basically a waste of space. Which is a really fucked up and a detached view of the world tbh but on that topic...

Carpaccio himself says that he sees the world as a haze. There is no one he can connect to, no one he can understand completely, and no one who understands him. What he seeks is pain, but beyond that pain, perhaps he doesn't realize it, is a want for connection.

When Mash finally beats the shit out of him, he's finally able to empathize with the weak for the first time in his life. Or rather, perhaps he's beginning to understand that his worldview was kinda fucked up, and the world is not nearly as black and white as he thought.

When Carpaccio is hurt, for the first time in his life he instinctively knows what "hurt" is. This phrase—"it hurts"—repeats in his mind over and over again, and it's really just proof that he's still human as much as he's come to think of himself as above that.

He's reminded of his own humanity, and along with the pain that he can instinctively recognize, comes feelings of fear. He describes pain to be awful and frightening, and for the first time in his life, he can finally empathize with his peers, with everyone that he's ever hurt, because he now understands feelings of pain.

Carpaccio's apathy stems from a place from lack of empathy, but now that he can empathize, the first thing he thinks about is how much he put Finn through. Carpaccio is barely just learning how to understand other people, and the first thing he realizes is how severely fucked up it was that he did all of that to Finn.

These feelings turn into ones of disbelief—because he can't comprehend how someone can endure something so frightening for someone else's sake. As far as we know, Carpaccio is a very selfish person. He does things for his own interest and his own gain.

To endure things for others is unfathomable, and to endure pain, which he now knows to be awful and frightening, is probably just...baffling. Finn is enduring all these terrible things, and it's not even for himself.

Finn has outmatched Carpaccio in terms of endurance and character, and even Carpaccio himself admits to it at the end of the battle because as arrogant as he was, the moment he felt his first taste of pain, he had instantly lost. Like, he didn't even try to get up

He could not continue to fight, even for his pride, simply because...pain was scary.

So what I feel like a lot of people miss is that Carpaccio is the way he is because of the circumstances that he was born in that led him to have a twisted view of the world, but the moment he's able to feel human, when he's able to feel pain and fear, he becomes a lot more normal than you'd think.

(It's not an excuse for his behavior of course, but it is a huge part of his characterization that I feel like people tend to forget.)

After the battle, you can see he's now on good terms with Max, who he formerly beat up. Although it's not explicit, it's kind of implied that he's changing for the better, because Carpaccio is someone who categorizes the weak and the strong, so he would never become friendly with those he considers "weak".

However, by hanging out with Max who he formerly beat up, it goes to show that his perspective is changing. Perhaps his viewpoints haven't instantly changed, but he's seeing strength in those he considers weak, and he's able to properly start forming connections.

In the Mashle fanbook, in Carpaccio's relationship chart, it's pretty hard to translate but there is a specific note towards Finn that basically is him admitting to being impressed with Finn. Like yes Mash did beat him, but he acknowledges that it was Finn's victory as well. Even in the actual battle, his last thoughts regarding the situation were not of Mash, but of Finn and how Finn beat him.

SO WHAT IM TRYING TO SAY AFTER THIS WHOLE GODDAMN ESSAY IS THAT pacciofinn would not be toxic okay 🥺</33 Carpaccio has changed for the better and he actually views Finn positively !!! He did not come out of that fight as a static character, he's had growth !!

It is unfair to his character to say that he'd treat Finn badly or he'd continue to be an asshole even after everything because the thing is that Carpaccio has finally solved his biggest issue. He's finally able to understand people around him, and his research about pain only goes to show that he is interested in people around him now.

He is interested in knowing people and understanding pain in a way that does not mean hurting them and he just happens to be really emotionally constipated and awkward while he's at it </333 like really have u seen him. get a load of his guy

not a damn thought going through that brain of his does he look like he can express normal love and affection and care in a not weird and cryptic (affectionate) manner to u. the last time we saw him smiling it looked wrong on his face.

it looked so wrong that I swore the entire fandom collectively wiped it from their brains and forgot he knew how to smile hence they write him off as a cold asshole incapable of expressing joy as if he isnt like 16 years old and learning emotions for the first time in his life like a newborn deer but anyways whatever im not salty about that why would you think that

This was supposed to be a pacciofinn defense essay but I feel like 90% of the reason why ppl hate pacciofinn is because they don't get Carpaccio's character. Im so okay with ppl hating the ship but I get so petty when its because they mischaracterize Carpaccio like if you can admit that Carpaccio wouldn't mistreat Finn if they got into a relationship and still dislike the ship then okay youre good idc but to EVERYONE ELSE its on sight

Okok but besides from the character analysis, can we take a moment to think about how. Carpaccio's magic allows him to transfer his pain to others and his whole deal is that he can't feel pain and also he's like confident and the top of the grade or whatever.

And meanwhile Finn is unconfident and barely made the cutoff for Easton and his magic allows him to switch places of stuff he wants but MOST IMPORTANTLY his magic has the ability to heal !!!!! THEY R LIKE...FOILS.....YEAH...SO REAL

It also makes it more thematically better that they ended up going head to head and it was Finn(ft. Mash)'s victory like Finn is just living proof of everything Carpaccio doesn't believe in and now he's forced to believe in it.

I also think it's important to consider that Carpaccio acknowledges it to be Finn's win instead of thinking further abt Mash because here's the thing: Mash is the main character. He's magicless, yes, but he also possesses a large amount of power already.

He is, in all sense of the word, "strong". He doesn't let his status as someone without magic deter him from his goals (and that's what makes him so good but this is not a Mash appreciation essay so I'll have to leave that for next time but I love Mash)

Finn on the other hand, is what really embodies Carpaccio's perception of someone "weak". He's not particularly strong in magic, and he's also not physically strong either. He gets scared easily, and he's not so brash that he can confidently jump into battle like the rest of his friends. He needs help, he can't win on his own. But despite this, he had the courage to stand up to Carpaccio.

And by the end of the manga, Finn has acquired 2 lines. The person Carpaccio had considered "weak" went far beyond his expectations and now they have the same amount of lines. However, Carpaccio's respect for Finn did not begin after he acquired 2 lines, but before that when he still had only 1 line and that is so important to me

I don't know where I'm going with this um sorry but to conclude I think you guys should care abt pacciofinn they r so silly to me theyre just two little guys i want them put into a blender

[utilitycaster]

This is probably something that will be obvious to many but: writing about fictional works but not creating fanfiction/fanon to me tends to fall into four categories, and I think it's really important to get how they intersect before getting weird about other people's posts.

Opinion. Eg: I like relationships based in mutual understanding. This is my opinion. It is correct for me. Might not be correct for you! Note that this is pure opinion, with no argument.

Interpretation: Eg: Beau and Yasha's relationship shows a great deal of understanding in each other's shared experiences, including abusive parents; a shared tendency to believe, at least earlier on, that things will go badly and that they don't deserve better; and difficulty expressing their feelings verbally but letting out frustrations through fighting.

Fact/Evidence: Beau says she is unused to things turning out good, and Yasha believes herself to be, as she says, very unlucky or cursed. Her letter covers that she expresses herself through fighting.

Conclusion: I like Beauyasha.

Argument is Opinion + Interpretation; a valid argument is Opinion + Interpretation + Evidence. Meta can include opinion but ultimately is Interpretation and good meta is Interpretation + Evidence. It's fine to post just an opinion, but if you want to change minds, you need an argument, and if you want to be able to hold your own against a counterargument it better be valid.

You can have the same interpretation and facts and different opinions and therefore different conclusions. Someone else could say "I like messy relationships (opinion) and so Beau and Yasha's shared understanding (interpretation, same as mine) is not interesting to me (conclusion)." You can also have a different interpretation from the same facts, either because you are including a different set of facts on a topic or because there is ambiguity and room for different lenses.

If your goal is to change someone's mind - and to be honest mine usually isn't - you are unlikely to change their opinions. Eg, If someone says "I don't like Beauyasha because I prefer messier relationships" I'm not going to convince them on the grounds of "you shouldn't like messier relationships." I need to either put forward an interpretation that supports a messier relationship, or, more realistically, say "understandable, have a nice day" and move on with my life.

That last bit is important - a lot of people also argue on the basis of "well obviously this interpretation is the only one, so you should draw the same opinions from it." and that's likely to fail; either the person disagreeing with you overall does agree on the interpretation but has different opinions (as in the above example), or they have a different interpretation (eg: Beau and Yasha have attacked each other repeatedly) and that is the basis of their opinion (I don't like that). You need to figure out which is going on and address that should you wish to change their mind. And again, I think you should ask why you want to change their mind.

The last point is that all of the above is valid given the text and reflect different perspectives. But if someone were to say "I don't like Beauyasha because Beau turned into a porcupine and moved to France, and I don't like long-distance relationships" the invalid portion is that this literally did not happen (fact leading to interpretation). If someone can correctly dispute the facts of your interpretation (as they stand at the time, obviously; no one is penalized for not being precognitive) then you are fucked, argument-wise. If I point out that Beau did not turn into a porcupine nor move to France, this person's argument falls apart. They can still dislike the relationship, but if they want to justify it with an argument they better find a new interpretation, and fast.

Before I move into the end I will note that you can also just not vibe with something, and that's purely in the realm of opinion + conclusion, a la "this rubs me the wrong way" or "I find this annoying" or "it's cute" and all of those are valid to hold for yourself, and also inaccessible to anyone else

The conclusions I draw from all of the above are first, making posts that are only your opinion/conclusion is always fine - say what you want - but treating it as an argument is a waste of time, and so anything of the order of "how could you not like xyz (unspoken: because I did)" is pointless because my answer is going to be "easily, and with confidence." Secondly, I think it's valuable to look at posts, even those with arguments, as primarily interpretation rather than opinion. Putting forth a separate interpretation is a disagreement, but it's not a disagreement necessarily directed at you; it's disagreeing with you but the parallel play option is available! You do not need to go out trying to convert all to your same mindset. I think a healthy fandom ecosystem has multiple interpretations and opinions and respectful disagreement; the positive version of "let people like/dislike things" (ie, they can like it or dislike it and if you're normal, your enjoyment is not contingent on theirs). Thirdly, get your facts straight or suffer the consequences. And finally, if you are trying to make an argument for an ongoing work and do so over time, your opinion must be fairly consistent even as the interpretation naturally evolves otherwise it becomes clear that you are arguing in favor of a foregone conclusion (often via moving the goalposts). If you say "I like characters who are willing to make painful and difficult choices, and Blorbo always takes the easy way out, so I don't like them" and Blorbo develops into a character who is able to make painful and difficult choices, if you start critiquing Blorbo now on the basis those choices that's still fair but you better come very correct, and it might be wiser to just say "I don't fuck with Blorbo, if you do that's great but I don't."

[hadesknockedupintheunderworld]

"Nine is homophobic" this and "Classic is homophobic" that

WRONG

They're literally both gay

[sprnklersplashes]

"taylor swift is basically untouchable and no-one can criticise her" is kind of a wild take when you remember the owner of twitter just threatened to rape her and the tweet is still up

[aalghul]

Saying that what fans (and post-flashpoint) make Jason is what Helena already is always gets one of two reactions: I hate Jason and this is true, I love Jason and this is completely wrong. Everyone's losing with that btw.

Helena and Jason are fundamentally different enough that it can't be exactly true. Helena and Jason's backstories don't have much in common either. Helena's involved betrayal, schemes and fights for power. Jason's was a product of Park Row being continually failed by Gotham. Jason also has a history with the Bats specifically, as the second Robin and a son of the family, that Helena doesn't. There is an appeal in that that's not transferrable; Jason's been a Bat and has had his own various roles since his he was created pre-crisis, not just since his resurrection or since he got a softer role post-flashpoint. He doesn't get to just not be a bat character.

In going "fanon Jason is exactly like Helena" you're also ignoring her time on the JLA and BOP, because remember that fanon thinks Jason sits around staring at his wall angrily until his family tell him to stop being a brainless killer OR runs around half-assing missions with his brothers friends because he has none of his own. It's honestly a disservice to her to pretend that brand of fanon Jason could ever be her.

However, Helena is the one who fought to be trusted by the Bats and compromised on killing because of them (whether that be due to the aforementioned struggle to fit in with them, or, at low points, because they know her identity). Jason did not due this pre-flashpoint, and even those abandoned attempts in Countdown didn't begin with the main timeline's version of Bruce. Pre-flashpoint Jason was not asking for anyone's trust or for a seat at the table. That's not even to say that any interpretation of Jason that has him reconciling with the Bats if a rip-off of Helena, it's just that Jason put himself on the outskirts of the family because he has personal issues with them. It's not just them making that decision. The role that Jason now occupies is very much the one that Helena had.

I'm not going to sit here talking about all the similarities and differences, or how they got tangled along the way. I just want to say that people who act like Jason was dealt a good hand by being given Helena's characterization by fanon and post-flashpoint are never going to be able to prove their point because you're focusing on the wrong thing (something that isn't even true). People who refuse to accept that the Jason they're talking about is a whole different character are going to miss out on any of the many interpretations of Jason that aren't just knock-off Helena's. And they're all pissing each other off in the process.