#but i understand why people may disagree

[oifaaa]

Random tangent: I don’t think Jason would internationally hurt people around Bruce to get at Bruce. I feel like at most they’d be collateral damage. Idk I’m relying heavily on my flawed memory of utrh for this tho. His interactions with Dick there was too minimal for me to get a proper read on him.

I feel like this is one of those up to interpretation type deals where I firmly believe he would considering how he reacted to seeing Bludhaven get destroyed - he was way more concerned with using it as an opportunity to hurt Bruce then showing one ounce of care if Dick was alive or not - as well as the interaction he had earlier with oynx - I'm gonna go on my own wee tangent opps so heres the thing I think people misunderstand about Jason he a ends justify the means type guy and people get confused bc of that line he says to Bruce later when he's says smth like "I'm not talking about two face or riddler just joker" but the thing is he was talking about Bruce only having to kill the Joker not himself - Jason has already shown multiple times by that point that he is willing to kill a lot of people if he thinks that they will justify his ends - that includes killing henchmen and lower criminals and its not like he's finding out everything about everyone who gets in his way to see if they deserve to die no Jason is more violent then a lot of people seem to be willing to admit and he's willing to own up to that violence bc to him it's justified and to try and get back to the actual point (sorry anon about that) Jason's means justify the ends thing also means he doesn't mind hurting dick or oynx unnecessarily to antagonise Bruce

[slyandthefamilybook]

I think we need to have a serious re-evaluation of what "leftist" means bc there ain't no fuckin way authcoms are on the same left as me lmao

[bleue-flora]

I didn't say they don't believe in the staged finale, but they think it's a retcon. A retcon is when something is added to the story that contradicts past information, rewriting it, so they think the finale was originally real and c!dream wanted to do all that, and only closer to the prison break, cc!dream decided to change that part of the plot or something

and it's funny because theories about the discs finale being staged started popping up literally right after that stream and a lot of c!inniters were making fun of or even harassing people who were creating such theories, and also, the content creators themselves admitted that it wasn't a retcon and that a limited circle of people knew about it, it was just kept a secret from everyone. I just really think it's pointless to talk to people who thinks everything is about c!tommy and who think that all of c!dream's actions are centered around c!tommy, that, well, they continue to believe that even though it's refuted by the plot and by the content creators and by the people who love and analyze the character.

it's just, ugh, what kind of conversation can you have with someone who believes that c!dream is a one-dimensional character who was only written to be obsessed with c!tommy and be the "perfect villain" for the "perfect victim", who believes that all characters are just an extension of c!tommy because to them c!tommy is all that matters in the plot. it's simple, these people hate dream smp and they don't care about the efforts of content creators to create interesting multifaceted characters, they are only interested in c!tommy. you can't get a sane dialogue from a person whose brain is so washed that he believes in the stupidest conspiracy theory in the world, and with some c!tommy fans the same🤷‍♂️

[context a & b]

Kinda the same thing isn’t it? Eh whatever. Regardless, you make a good point though I’d stray away from derogatory terms when talking about people’s opinions even if they aren’t based on fact. It’s honestly less of a conspiracy theory and more just ignoring the truth. Conspiracy theories are somewhat based on the unknown, in this case all the info we get comes from the same place - so you either believe streams and the cc!s and lore they make or you don’t and if you don’t then that’s not a “theory” that’s just an opinion based on misinformation and the lack of truth. Which you are right is rather unproductive to discuss if we can’t agree on the facts, but also we are on a public platform so I kinda see it as also having the discussion with all the other 400 something notes lol. Anyways, even if it was rather unproductive, I kinda came out learning something new and thinking about something in a new way, so I had fun which is the whole point of being here anyways. :)

Now what is kinda funny to me is this whole retcon, rewrite, discounting lore thing anyways, because for example c!Dream was originally supposed to fight with Pogtopia but because everyone was joining their side, cc!Dream had to switch to balance it out so they can even have a war at all and created the revive book so that it made sense for his character. So one of the moments I see used against c!Dream to show he is heartless and doesn’t care about friendship and stuff, is actually more so an instance of a rewrite… and yet we all take it at face value and base whole arguments on it, because at the end of the day, it is the lore we have. What’s interesting to me, is that part of the fun of the Dream smp is that it’s a mess, something cc!Tommy talked about recently. A mess, I personally like to take and look at things in a way to see if there are ways and angles where things can make more sense. That’s part of the fun of this crazy story telling. It’s why I started writing fanfiction in the first place, to fill in gaps or plot holes in lore. If you want a structured story more so centered around a protagonist’s specific suffering then go read Harry Potter (not to reduce that story to just that of course don’t come after me that’s not the point). But to take out things or not look at certain things in the context of other things that happened because they don’t follow the less messy dream smp timeline you’ve created in your mind, is to defeat the point. What will you decide wasn’t intended next, if Tommy burning down Tubbo’s house isn’t important, if staged finale wasn’t supposed to be a thing, then what about Tommy finding Techno’s house, didn’t cc!Techno say how that wasn’t supposed to happen? What about the revival book experiments, they were from a video not even a stream can I say those are a retcon and unimportant since the timeline doesn’t even make sense and actively contradicts itself? What about Tommy’s beach party, could the ccs just not come so they had to improvise and rewrite it so it’s empty on purpose? Like why are we deciding was is and isn’t lore or important lore? You wouldn’t discount a book or movie or tv show because it doesn’t make sense, you’d either try and understand how to make it sense or rewrite what you think would have been better - but at that point it is fanfiction it is your world now, you can do anything you want there but that doesn’t make it canon. Honestly to look at the dsmp as anything less than its entirety is a disrespect to the Tommy, to Dream, to Technoblade and everybody else c!s and cc!s alike. And that’s why I reblogged in the first place, because I felt like it was disrespectful to Technoblade and that felt very wrong to me. You can slander Dream all you want, but don’t discount or take away from part of Technoblade’s legacy.

[hadesknockedupintheunderworld]

Something about shippers of popular ships/rarepairs or people who back up popular interpretations of a media in general that makes them terribly insecure about their own stances

So insecure, in fact, that they revel in getting to go out of their way to try to dunk on their opposition by "informing" them that they're totally and unequivocally wrong

[cat-of-starlight]

There's been a Limbus Tier List floating around so here's my take :)

Original -> https://twitter.com/Lobo_Ryuu/status/1668559857140793350?s=20

[milfbro]

So I ordered Wide Sargasso Sea to read lets see how that goes

[kuh-boose]

You'd think I'd learn and just start blocking people who disagree on a fandom post, cause it just ends with me being annoyed and feeling stupid for engaging with people who want to cherry pick your argument and ignore anything they dont have a counter for (whether their counters are good or not). Or they act like they haven't argued like they have. Plus I always think I've written a fairly polite rebuttal and then the response makes me wonder if I was ruder than I intended, or I reread and realize I was an rude without meaning to be and I feel like an ass.

I just wanna gush about media ok. Someone slap my hands away from the keyboard when someone argues, me included

[lets-steal-an-archive]

By Bernie Sanders | July 13, 2024

I will do all that I can to see that President Biden is re-elected. Why? Despite my disagreements with him on particular issues, he has been the most effective president in the modern history of our country and is the strongest candidate to defeat Donald Trump — a demagogue and pathological liar. It’s time to learn a lesson from the progressive and centrist forces in France who, despite profound political differences, came together this week to soundly defeat right-wing extremism.

I strongly disagree with Mr. Biden on the question of U.S. support for Israel’s horrific war against the Palestinian people. The United States should not provide Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing extremist government with another nickel as it continues to create one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern history.

I strongly disagree with the president’s belief that the Affordable Care Act, as useful as it has been, will ever address America’s health care crisis. Our health care system is broken, dysfunctional and wildly expensive and needs to be replaced with a “Medicare for all” single-payer system. Health care is a human right.

And those are not my only disagreements with Mr. Biden.

But for over two weeks now, the corporate media has obsessively focused on the June presidential debate and the cognitive capabilities of a man who has, perhaps, the most difficult and stressful job in the world. The media has frantically searched for every living human being who no longer supports the president or any neurologist who wants to appear on TV. Unfortunately, too many Democrats have joined that circular firing squad.

Yes. I know: Mr. Biden is old, is prone to gaffes, walks stiffly and had a disastrous debate with Mr. Trump. But this I also know: A presidential election is not an entertainment contest. It does not begin or end with a 90-minute debate.

Enough! Mr. Biden may not be the ideal candidate, but he will be the candidate and should be the candidate. And with an effective campaign taht speaks to the needs of working families, he will not only defeat Mr. Trump but beat him badly. It’s time for Democrats to stop the bickering and nit-picking.

I understand that some Democrats get nervous about having to explain the president’s gaffes and misspeaking names. But unlike the Republicans, they do not have to explain away a candidate who now has 34 felony convictions and faces charges that could lead to dozens of additional convictions, who has been hit with a $5 million judgment after he was found liable in a sexual abuse case, who has been involved in more than 4,000 lawsuits, who has repeatedly gone bankrupt and who has told thousands of documented lies and falsehoods.

Supporters of Mr. Biden can speak proudly about a good and decent Democratic president with a record of real accomplishment. The Biden administration, as a result of the American Rescue Plan, helped rebuild the economy during the pandemic far faster than economists thought possible. At a time when people were terrified about the future, the president and those of us who supported him in Congress put Americans back to work, provided cash benefits to desperate parents and protected small businesses, hospitals, schools and child care centers.

After decades of talk about our crumbling roads, bridges and water systems, we put more money into rebuilding America’s infrastructure than ever before — which is projected to create millions of well-paying jobs. And we did not stop there. We made the largest-ever investment in climate action to save the planet. We canceled student debt for nearly five million financially strapped Americans. We cut prices for insulin and asthma inhalers, capped out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs and got free vaccines to the American people. We battled to defend women’s rights in the face of moves by Trump-appointed jurists to roll back reproductive freedom and deny women the right to control their own bodies.

So, yes, Mr. Biden has a record to run on. A strong record. But he and his supporters should never suggest that what’s been accomplished is sufficient. To win the election, the president must do more than just defend his excellent record. He needs to propose and fight for a bold agenda that speaks to the needs of the vast majority of our people — the working families of this country, the people who have been left behind for far too long.

At a time when the billionaires have never had it so good and when the United States is experiencing virtually unprecedented income and wealth inequality, over 60 percent of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, real weekly wages for the average worker have not risen in over 50 years, 25 percent of seniors live each year on $15,000 or less, we have a higher rate of childhood poverty than almost any other major country, and housing is becoming more and more unaffordable — among other crises.

This is the wealthiest country in the history of the world. We can do better. We must do better. Joe Biden knows that. Donald Trump does not. Joe Biden wants to tax the rich so that we can fund the needs of working families, the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. Donald Trump wants to cut taxes for the billionaire class. Joe Biden wants to expand Social Security benefits. Donald Trump and his friends want to weaken Social Security. Joe Biden wants to make it easier for workers to form unions and collectively bargain for better wages and benefits. Donald Trump wants to let multinational corporations get away with exploiting workers and ripping off consumers. Joe Biden respects democracy. Donald Trump attacks it.

This election offers a stark choice on issue after issue. If Mr. Biden and his supporters focus on these issues — and refuse to be divided and distracted — the president will rally working families to his side in the industrial Midwest swing states and elsewhere and win the November election. And let me say this as emphatically as I can: For the sake of our kids and future generations, he must win.

Bernie Sanders is the senior senator from Vermont.

[cherrysnax]

okay so there are people who are taking this shit too far: having reading comprehension issues is not a moral failing, not understanding something even when repeated is not a moral failing, the only thing that’s bad about it is acting entitled and rude

[harmoonix]

🪄Dark Hour🖤

- Astrology Observations -

Having Venus in your 4th house can make you automatically to attract people with traditional values even if are not traditional yourself

Libra Risings can have it hard in relationship since their 7th house is ruled by Mars (Aries) which rules over war and conflicts

Cancer Placements can turn out to be manipulative if you do them wrong or if they simply just wake up and say 'lets be toxic today' and im not talking about all cancer placement natives

The dark side of a Venus in the 12th/Pisces Venus is that they tend to idolize their relationships/partners a lot, making a lot of scenarios in their head

Virgo or Cancer Venus may have a 'savior' complex in their love relationship, like trying to save themselves or trying to find someone who can save them

6th house Sun or Moon may have lots of encounters with animals, is like animals feel some kind of "calling' from you

Gemini/Leo/Taurus/ Venus may like to cosplay/playing the role of a character matches a lot with their personality

If you have unevolved Virgo Placements, you may hate when people disagree with you or when ppl come witn a counter-argument for you

Mars in the 8th house can get crazy if they don't get physical touch. Some might crave it and not have it 100% all the time

Moon in the 10th house feels like everyone is watching every single emotion of yours and may react to your sensitivity. You may get called 'over sensitive'

Moon in the 8th/12th house can struggle to talk about their feelings if they are surrounded by people with a toxic energy

Scorpio Moons can also struggle with 'feeling love' especially if they never experienced that properly. Don't press them to show their love for you early in a relationship let them feel safe first

Leo Chiron is a placement where they may nedd attention from others but not that type of "spotlight attention" rather just to be seen and understood by others

The dark side of Taurus Placements is that they tend to be very greedy and I talk here about their finances and money, of course if they are unevolved

Uranus in your 10H can make you change/switch your job more than once or twice, and can indicate having a confusing time with choosing the right job

Moon in your 2H can talk about 'working with love' and putting your heart into everything you do. You get rewards for your kindness

Unevolved 10th house placements can turn really materialistic if they have the chance, looking only for money and that's it

Capricorns are used to expect the worse in some situations since they have been thru multiple such situations in their lives

Uranus in Aquarius generation can be attached to technology 24/7. In love with technology, their phones are their world

Gemini and Virgo Moons are the first indicators of someone having anxiety/stress/panic attacks/overthinking

Pisces Placements but mostly Pisces Suns/Risings can use escapism a lot, trying to create their own reality in their head rather than living in the actual one

Scorpio Venus/Mars natives, some of their hidden fears can be betrayal/getting cheating on. This can possibly be one of the reasons why they can attach fast to people

Saturn/Pluto/Moon in the 8th/12th houses the planets become more dark in these houses, getting

Cardi B has a crazy chart because she has BOTH Jupiter and POF in the 7th house and is still still coming to the man who cheated on her??? (Never mind her Venus in the 8th house explaining everything)

A water sign in your 11th house can indicate you can understand people deeply and attach to them emotionally

Earth signs in the 1st house can indicate you tend to put a lot of pressure on themselves, being hard on themselves, criticizing themselves sometimes quite a lot

Mercury - Moon aspects natives can get therapeutic with other people, they like to talk about deep stuff with others and tend to share a lot from their live experiences

Jupiter in Sagittarius can be a good placement if you want to explore the whole world or just simply travel Jupiter can help you to manifest that

Jupiter - Mercury or Saturn in harsh aspects tend to be close-minded or afraid to open to new things/learning or knowing about them (I'm talking for the aspects generally not the people)

Moon or Venus at 5° or in the 5th house can make you have a baby fever more when you're young, like in your 20s. Wanting to be a young parent (this does not apply to all)

Mars or Neptune in the 11th house tend to attract people easily with their energy/personality. People get interested about you too

North Node aspecting Saturn in harsh aspects is not easy, actually is a very challenging position in your chart

North Node in the 8th or 12th house tends to live intense lives or have intense life situations, even near death situations

✨️🤍 Hope you all have a good Monday 🤍✨️

Harmoonix ✨️✨️✨️

[rayroseu]

You know what's sick as hell about the design of the Briar Senates??? It's that their design mirrors the weapon of the Draconias 😭✨

I know they're getting flak rn bcs they feel like "boomers who's against any progress because they value toxic tradition" but i don't really think they're like... entirely evil lol or the root of every bad thing that happened in Malleus'/Lilia's life (though im side eyeing them as one of the perpetrators still lol)

Tbh, removing them would also cause more harm (just some social issues inside the fae society tbh) than good imo, (I know many ppl say this bcs they think removing the Senates would make it possible for the peace between human and faes, but the thing is, the Senates aren't the only group that thinks this way, almost the entirety of Briar Valley does lol so forcibly removing them now would only come off as "Malleus forcing "human ideals" on the faes just because he has spent 4 years with the humans"(plus is the understanding between humans and faes truly achieved if you try to silence one group(even if that group is kinda disagreeable with anything human related lol), plus realistically the faes would trust their fellow faes first rather than some humans,

so for me, Briar Senates doesn't give off the vibe of toxic old people who drags others down in their toxic practices (while that can be an accurate description i feel like it generalizes too much about their behaviour), rather than that, Briar Senates feels more like thorns, like thorns that surrounds Briar Valley, they're not exactly harmful unless you go against them, but ultimately they're still protection for Briar Valley.

Which makes it fitting that their design has a similarity with the Draconia's weapon, they're the thorns that protects the Draconias, even if it means sheltering them.

And, tbh, if the Senates other job is to ensure Draconias lives, they're kinda doing a "decent job"??? If we can assume through Maleficia's (and Malleus' case), since we didnt hear about her leaving the Senate's side, she managed to survive for so long, unlike Meleanor😭 Also could explain why they're so enraged when Lilia arrived with the news that Meleanor died and why they hated the weak bcs what would weakness could protect JJDSJD Kinda wish their hatred against Lilia wasnt that he was a weak bat fae, but rather they doubled down on the fact he failed protecting Meleanor, imagine if Gen. Lilia wasnt as great in magic as the fae nobles were, yet he still managed to earn a position beside the Princess, all that hard work only to fail at the most crucial time, it wouldve make sense in the Senates' side to say, "Meleanor shouldnt have appointed him" (because "he's weak from the start")

oh additionally, this is just my assumption, bcs I felt like the way the Senates recoiled when Lilia hatched the egg was kinda... random?? so this is my made up reason lol Remember, the Senates were adamant that Maleficia should only be the one to hatch the egg because she's a Draconia, but Lilia did it and he's not a Draconia, What if because Lilia hatched the egg, it also affected the development of Malleus?? Like maybe for instance, it affected Malleus' lifespan, maybe he still lives more than one thousand years but he won't live for another thousand years like a pure Draconia because he's been hatched by Lilia as opposed to who they wanted it to be, which is Maleficia, OF COURSE Lilia hatching the egg is heaps better than Malleus dying before being born, but this is just my auto thoughts regarding the random hate reaction the Senates did when Lilia hatched Malleus lol

Interestingly, the placement of the stone of Draconia against the thorns (of the Senates) can also be hinted at their relationship with them??? In Meleanor's case, her stone is on top of the thorns, which may indicate that she's not under the Senate's commands or that its just telling she just lived distantly from the Senates, most importantly her stone is bigger than the thorns which may tell the fact that the Senates worships her because she's powerful and greater than them, and she's not someone who can be trapped/ordered around within the Senates. But, tragically, in Malleus' case, his stone is under the thorns, like its telling that he's under the Senates protection at all cost and his stone is little compared to Meleanor's because he's still young.

I also have a theory that the Senates are part of Briar Valley's land, like its been canonically said that they're the dead faes of Briarland, which makes think that their death is similar to the death of Conall from Maleficent 2, when Conall was buried, his body literally morphed to the land, which makes me think this is how the Senates used to be buried, when they die, they become one with the land, that's why you can't just remove them, when they are literally the Lands of Briar Valley,,,, get it lol

Though this is making me think that if this is the case then Maleficia's city,,, if the Senate's presence are the strongest there bcs that's where they're nearly buried, does that mean around Black Scale Castle is just lowkey a graveyard.... Is that why Halloween is special for Briar Valley bcs they have close ties/respect for the dead and Halloween is essentially about honoring the dead 😭✨

Off topic, but maybe the thorns part of the Draconia's staff may also tell about their age. Notice how Meleanor's staff has 3 twists which may tell that she's atleast 300~ years old, (if each twists signifies a century), while Malleus' staff only has one twist on its thorns which is accurate considering he's only 178 years old (one century).

If this is true, I'm kinda curious about Maleficia's staff... does that mean hers will be convered in thorns (she needs at least 7 twists (7 centuries~ and more) there on her staff 😭✨)

[edwin-paynes-bowtie]

Do you think there is a way to ethically watch Sandman and Good Omens? What about Dead Boy Detectives?

Andddd this was why I originally turned off anons. I knew this was coming eventually, but I guess I'll respond just this once so everyone knows where I stand.

I don't love that I feel the need to disclose this, but I have personally experienced grooming and sexual assault in the past. So this post is coming from someone who has Been There and understands the importance of supporting victims. I also love all of the efforts NG-related fandoms have been putting into raising money for sexual assault charities. It's wonderful to see people rallying behind the survivors and supporting them so vocally.

- DEAD BOY DETECTIVES: NOT A GAIMAN WORK

I do not think that there is a world where Dead Boy Detectives would be unethical to stream. It has virtually nothing to do with Neil Gaiman, by his own admission, and is the brain-child of Steve Yockey.

Besides the first chapter where Charles and Edwin were introduced (with no development), he didn't even write the comics! Several artists did, including Toby Litt and Mark Buckingham - whose run the show is based on and who the sprites are named after.

Yockey was the sole person to pitch DBDA to Warner Brothers. Gaiman did not do that.

Streaming Dead Boy Detectives primarily supports its writers, cast, and crew - Gaiman, who only wrote 2 scenes, is getting essentially nothing in terms of royalties.

Someone on Twitter did a really good job of unpacking why Dead Boy Detectives shouldn't be lumped in with Gaiman stuff - I'll link it here.

But this leads me to the next section.

- HANDLING GOOD OMENS AND SANDMAN

I think that there are a lot of valid reactions to the way people handle the consumption of Gaiman's shows after what he has done.

Some people are going to be unable to stomach anything he has written, and that is okay. Others whose lives have been massively impacted by his work aren't going to be able to let go since - and I know people like to deny this, but it's true - the art you love more than love itself is going to have a serious material impact on your personality.

Both of these approaches are alright! The only incorrect approach is to harass those who disagree with your personal choices.

It also is, in my opinion, Bad to give Gaiman money. Purchasing his books and buying Good Omens official merch puts cash in his pocket.

Streaming the shows, though, is a little more nuanced to me.

I'm going to use Good Omens as an example here. I personally will not be continuing with Good Omens. It gives me a Yucky Feeling. I may one day change my mind and stream a pirated version, but I don't think so.

However, I don't think Sheen and Tenant's fans are wrong to stream it in support of the actors who have brought their favourite characters to life.

But this leads me into my next point, and the point that will probably get me Canceled.

- THE IMPACT OF SHOWS ON PEOPLE

The way that people handle their favourite shows post-allegations is going to depend on the impact that the show had on their life.

I like Good Omens. It's a fun show. I enjoyed it while watching it, and think (see: thought) positively of it. But it had no real deep impact on my life - it's not part of me. When I look at Good Omens now, I see Gaiman's work above the finished product. It puts a sour taste in my mouth.

But in a hypothetical world, if Dead Boy Detectives were a Gaiman production? I have the self-awareness to know that I probably would still stream it to support the cast and crew. I am attached enough to it that I think I would divorce it entirely from Gaiman (if he were the creator, which he is not.) My point is that other people who are still streaming Sandman and GO probably don't look at it and see Gaiman. They see something that they have absorbed into themselves.

The part that's going to get me canceled is that if George cameos in Sandman, I will stream that one (1) episode to support George Rexstrew (Edwin Payne's actor). This is because Edwin has had a material impact on my life (hilariously, because I am a sexual violence survivor who did not get justice, and Edwin did not get justice for his murder and fights for that.) I feel that Edwin is part of me and my life, because Edwin (and George's work as Edwin) has made me feel less alone.

A lot of people feel that way about Crowley and Aziraphale.

I think that asking people to ditch a show, characters, and performers that have had a deep impact on their lives is unfair to them. Like, yes, Neil Gaiman is a bag of shit! Anyone who defends him is also a bag of shit! But I don't think that it's fair to stop people from supporting works that have had big material impacts on their own lives.

- HOW TO PROCEED

TL;DR

My personal ideal outcome here would be:

Wrap up Good Omens with the 90-minute movie and nothing else.

Wrap up Sandman with season 2, and do not renew.

Revive Dead Boy Detectives WITH THE CAVEAT that Gaiman gets his name removed from it, even if he currently isn't making much money off it. Take the Sandman characters and references from DBDA and let it become its own standalone thing.

Cancel all future Gaiman productions and never hire him to work on television or anything else again.

Let Gaiman's career die entirely and let him fade into obscurity.

Arrest Gaiman, which will never happen but it should.

I think people should:

Stop giving Neil Gaiman money through books or merch.

Make their own decisions about whether or not to officially stream the shows in support of the actors and crew members who have worked hard on it.

Not harass anyone for either their decision to stream the show, not stream the show, or stream a pirated version of the show.

Engage as much as they want with fandom and fanworks, as they are divorced from the source material's creator.

Vocally speak up against Neil Gaiman. Amplify the voices of the survivors, and don't let fear for the future of your show get in the way of that. At the end of the day, real women were put through the most traumatic and horrifying experience of their lives, and that's what matters most.

[miwiheroes]

Season 1 Mike Wheeler Queer-coding

Just some of my favourite pieces of queer-coded Mike evidence that I have found from season 1. Let me know if you have never seen these before because I'd love to add to the conversation <33

My overall conclusion from season 1 is: Mike gets taught that being queer/ not liking girls is dangerous. It means you die/ disappear. Being 'normal' or straight is therefore easier. Take this conclusion in mind as you read this.

Disclaimer: This is just my opinion. If you want to interact with this post because you disagree with me, please be respectful.

(Yes I will be doing all the other seasons at some point but it will take a while because this one took me a WEEK)

1. Ted's Comments

Take these with a grain of salt, because when I watched the show again I was a little unsure of whether these are actually implicitly homophobic or due to other things.

So here Ted says 'see Michael, you see what happens?' after Nancy storms off and goes to her room. This could be in relation to Mike shouting at Nancy earlier and that's why he's scolding him a little, but also Mike was talking about how it isn't Will's fault that he's gone missing. It's also kind of established that adults in the town think that Will is gay (more on that later) and was hatecrimed, so Ted could be referencing that.

It's also notable that Mike thinks his dad is talking about Will's disappearance because he then says 'what happens when what? i'm the only one acting normal here. i'm the only one who cares about will.'

So I think it's pretty clear what he's insinuating here. He didn't want to explicitly say 'see what happens when you're not like everyone else' but you can tell. And why would this be said to Mike in relation to Will's disappearance if not for queer-coding? Even early on in the show, Mike could associate being queer with going missing.

Ted, later on in the season, says 'our son? with a girl?' which tbh i thought could be because he's a nerd and only likes hanging out with his friends.

But now that I'm thinking about it, they also say that kind of stuff about Will in season 3. And people on twitter who were against Will's queer-coding before season 4 figured that a lot of the reason people called him slurs was because of him being shy/ stereotyped/ a nerd/ sensitive. But it was confirmed after season 4 that the slurs were queer-coding aka we were right. So the same could easily be said for Mike in this situation.

2. The 'Talk' tm

We've all seen a lot of people talk about this, but I have a teensy bit more to add onto what others have said already because it's sort of funny.

This scene is different to both Karen and the audience. To Karen, she's basically asking Mike if he's feeling particularly sad about Will being missing because of reasons. But to the audience, and Mike, this is a moment for him to be worried about the fact he's hiding El in his closet.

Karen says: 'with all this that's been going on, with Will, i can't imagine what it's been like for you. i just-- want you to feel like you can talk to me. i never want you to feel like you have to hide anything from me. i'm here for you. okay?'

This feels like something Joyce will say to Will in season 5 LMAO like-

If you aren't queer, you will never understand how obvious this is that it's a gay talk. The word 'hide' is so often used in these situations. What is she insinuating? I understand that the 'i want you to feel like you can talk to me' might just be about Mike's sadness, but the emphasis on 'hide anything' is crazy. Also this is about Will and nothing else because at the beginning she pointedly says, 'with Will'. She's basically insinuating there's something different about Mike's relationship/friendship with Will.

What she could also be insinuating is that she thinks that Will's disappearance had something to do with him being queer, (which is rumoured about). She then applies this same logic to Mike. She may be thinking 'oh if Will didn't feel safe about being queer, I'd better let Mike know he is safe.' -- This could be far-fetched though.

Okay so what is very interesting is that El's in Mike's closet at this time. There are multiple reasons for the directors to put her in there: One, to show a flashback from when she's in the lab, and Two, for her to be in the closet during the queer-coded conversation.

Here's why: RIGHT AFTER KAREN SAYS ALL THE HIDING STUFF, THERE'S A SOUND FROM MIKE'S CLOSET......

Walk with me here folks... To the audience, this is funny because Mike is hiding something. He's hiding El. But. Also the sound came from his closet. He's hiding the fact he's in the closet-- *gunshots*. Double meanings exist i swearr

3. Lucas's Teasing

This whole scene is so interesting to me. I used to ignore it because it's possible Mike and El proof but...

It reinforces the heteronormativity of Mike and could even feed into how he acts in his relationship with her. First of all, Lucas tells Mike that just because he is being nice to a girl he must want to marry her and love her right?

This could be a 'Mike could like El' scene, but no. Mike is literally like, 'Lucas what are you talking about?' HE IS CONFUSED. He's also fed-up, he's not embarrassed. He's not flustered. He's not like 'omg shut up hahaha' he literally bluntly says 'shut up Lucas' in this voice that sounds kind of tired.

What Mike learns here is that being with a girl is kind of expected. He's not allowed to be friends with a girl or care for a girl without people assuming they're a thing.

This leads perfectly onto the next point.....

4. Bullies' Homophobic Comments Exhibit A

Straight after learning that Lucas assumed he had heterosexual feelings for El, Mike learns that being gay is a 'bad thing'.

These comments could just be coding for Will, sure, but there are indications that it could be Mike queer-coding as well.

First of all, 'He's dead, that's what my dad says. Probably killed by some other queer', is a very weighted comment. The fact that Troy's dad said this to him implies that Will's sexuality is like a rumour amongst adults in the town. It's also the show portraying how hate like homophobia can be taught from parents.

Mike's then the one to be like 'just ignore them' and goes to walk away. SPECIFICALLY IT IS HIM THAT IS TRIPPED. I REPEAT!!! HE IS TRIPPED NO ONE ELSE.

This could imply that the bullies were targeting him as well as Will for homophobic bullying, maybe in the past as well, and the 'killed by some other queer' comment could be directed at him. I guess you could say that he was tripped because he was the nearest person, or that he was the one speaking, but the directors chose him to be the one walking there. And SPEAKING. Why??

So: Mike has just learnt from Lucas that being nice to a girl can be seen as attraction and means he has to love her. THEN Mike has just learnt from the bullies that maybe Will died because he was gay, and that being gay gets you hurt (tripped over).

Mike is given a choice between the lesser of two evils: choose to fit into a heteronormative society but get made fun of Lucas, or embrace being gay and get killed/ bullied like Will.

Later on in the season, he finds out Will has died. Let me repeat that. He. Believes. Will. Has. Died. Would this maybe reinforce what the bullies said? That being gay = disappearance. Oh poor MIKE OMGGG

Queer coding all up in this scene lads. (+ a reason for internalised homophobia uwu)

5. Bullies' Homophobic Comments Exhibit B

This scene and the previous scene are inherently linked.

Mike is the one to confront the bullies about Will, defending him, so the bullies instantly resort to homophobia. This means that they may be implying that Mike trying to defend someone who they view as gay is also gay.

In the last scene, I guess you could say that the comments weren't particularly targeted at Mike as well as Will because he wasn't at the forefront of the group (even though he was tripped over). But in this scene he definitely is. They chose to utilise homophobic language about Will because they know it touches a nerve with Mike: This homophobic language doesn't just affect the person they are talking about but also the person they are saying it to.

So here's what they say: 'Besides, what's there to be sad about anyway? Will's in fairyland now, right? Flying around with all the other little fairies, all happy and gay.'

The words that Troy is saying here are obviously more linked to how Will is queer-coded throughout season 1, but the way that the scene is shot, the music, the implications, they're all coding for Mike.

'Will's in fairyland now, right?' is posed as a question. They didn't have to make it a question, but they did. This is basically them saying 'oh we've told you this before, shouldn't you know?'/ implying that Mike would know because he's also gay.

Another line they didn't have to include unless it was queer-coding for Mike is: 'Flying around with all the other little fairies.' They could have just written Troy to say 'Will's in fairyland now. All happy and gay,' or something along those lines etc. The jab at Mike is that other gay people exist, and that Will is being gay 'with them'. The words 'all happy and gay' here doesn't actually imply Will's sexuality by itself, but the act of 'being gay together' or in a gay relationship so to speak.

So if you put the pieces together, they're making a point about Mike and Will's friendship in a sense. Also the fact that Troy at the beginning of this insult says 'What's there to be sad about anyway?', basically means that he's trying to get under Mike's skin by saying 'Why are you sad that Will's happy and being gay with other boys? Are you sad he's not with you?' I know that's like, on the nose, but whatever.

(Also Mike has tears in his eyes during this part showing how the words are also affecting him and not just Will)

Another thing I want to talk about is the music. Obviously this music is foreboding and is trying very hard to make the audience uncomfortable, trying to let you know that something bad is going to happen. When Troy walks away, the music swells and the camera zooms in on Mike's angry expression.

Then, Mike pushes troy over for the homophobic comment. This is interesting why? Because Troy tripped Mike over in the previous scene I talked about. Meaning: the scenes are linked. Troy was being homophobic to both Mike and Will. Mike's had enough, so he retaliates in the same way that Troy had treated him earlier.

I'd also like to add that before El saves Mike, he just stands there as Troy stands up and says 'You're dead Wheeler, you're dead.' He was ready to take whatever Troy was going to throw at him. Which is interesting because in the previous scene I talked about, Troy spoke about how being 'queer' means you'll get killed. ('He's dead. That's what my dad thinks, probably killed by some other queer.') So Troy is going to kill Mike, just like how Will is dead too.

A lot has happened between the previous scene and this one. Mike thought Will had died. Yes, during the assembly scene, he doesn't believe it anymore, but he watched Will's body being dragged out the water just recently. Just like in the scene where he jumps into the quarry, this is yet another instance of Mike not caring if he gets hurt in regards to bullying/ Will.

6. More Lucas Comments

"Screw you Mike! You're blind, blind because you like that a girl's not grossed out by you! But wake up, man. Wake the hell up!" (btw I'm not saying that Lucas is being homophobic here, they're little kids and they've been through a lot)

I mean, come on. This basically implies the classic compulsive heterosexuality concept of Mike choosing which girl to have a crush on because she's the easiest option, since she didn't know him growing up or didn't go to the same school together. Even if this isn't accurate, it is still coding because they wrote Lucas to say that jab at him, it hurts Mike inside, because he knows deep down it's at least a little true.

He looks saddened by this, not angry. Mike usually gets annoyed much quicker than this and whenever he's insulted he looks shocked or has a scowl on his face, but here he just looks... sad. Because he knows that Lucas is touching a nerve. (The top pic btw)

He's completely silent. Until, of course, Lucas starts talking about Will:

'She knows where Will is. And now, she's just letting him die in the Upside Down.'

'Shut up!' -- Mike suddenly shouts either because a) he doesn't like that Lucas is insulting El or something OR b) he hates that Lucas is implying that it is his fault that Will is dying in the upside down because he's being blinded by the fact El isn't grossed out by him.

I think it's B tbh <3 (this scene isn't toooo important for my overall conclusion but it's a little nugget of info i guess)

7. Mike Jumps Into the Quarry

Let's be honest here, before this scene, almost everything seems hopeless for Mike finding Will. Firstly, he physically saw Will's 'body' being dragged out of the same water that he's about to jump into. Then he found out he was still alive but somewhere extremely dangerous and he could be dying there for all he knew. Then his one hope at finding Will (Eleven) is gone and he can't find her ("She's a weapon!... We're no use to Will if we're dead!") and Lucas won't agree to help him find her.

This scene was foreshadowed earlier on, making it a very important scene anyways -- Hopper said that no one would survive the jump and the water 'turns into cement, hits you like a tonne of bricks'. Mike would have died if El didn't save him. And he seemed okay with it.

The camera focuses in on him, and if you listen closely, you can hear his heartbeat. You could say that he's only really doing this to save his friend, but like, why is he so willing and why did they so pointedly zoom in on him?

Here's where we get a little serious: Mike would have committed suicide if El wasn't there at the last second. He would have died in the same place where Will's body was discovered.

Quotes about how being gay gets you killed:

'See Michael? You see what happens?' --Meaning: What happens when you're gay? You disappear.

'He's dead, that's what my dad says. Probably killed by some other queer' -- Meaning: Being gay gets you killed/ means you should die.

'Besides, what's there to be sad about anyway? Will's in fairyland now, right? Flying around with all the other little fairies, all happy and gay.' -- Meaning: Will's dead along with all the other gay people, that's where they should be etc.

'You're dead Wheeler, you're dead.' -- Meaning: Mike you should die too, because you're just like Will, and you should join him in 'fairyland'.

(from this scene) 'Jump [into the Quarry].' -- Meaning: Mike you should die just like I told you earlier and in the same place that Will died. (Honestly I believe the whole town now think that Will is dead and his body was found in the quarry, so Troy would know too and use it against Mike.)

Then, after Mike survives this queer-coded death (which can be paralleled to Will's hypothetical death because it's in the same place), he says to the girl that he cares about and has been presumed to 'like' by his friends: 'You saved me. You saved me.'

(just wanna note that i think that is a very sweet scene and doesn't just have to be all about Mike's queer-coding. it's a bond between the party as friends because Dustin also hugs El. But still.)

You tell me what this scene means then.

8. Mike wasn't Lying (Theory)

Okay so this is more of just a theory than queer-coding, because there is something about this scene that I just find... weird.

I personally think that this scene with both Nancy and Mike talking about their so-called 'crushes' is meant to be so you can see the difference between someone who is lying and someone who is telling the truth. Their reactions to the questions are very different to each other (although it could just be a difference in their characters).

Mike: 'Do you like Jonathan now?'

Nancy: 'What?' *looks to the side, fighting a smile* 'No... no, it's not- It's not like that.' -- She's clearly lying because she's being vague, looking to the side, stuttering over her words etc. However, Mike nods like he believes her. This is key for later.

Nancy: 'Do you like Eleven?'

Mike: 'What? No. Ew. Gross.' *looks her up and down in disgust* -- Telling the truth because he stares at Nancy, doesn't stutter over his words and is very direct.

The fact that these reactions are so different (and we know that Nancy likes Jonathan lets be real) is purposeful in my opinion. It shows that at this point, Mike doesn't like insinuation that he likes her in that way.

Something else that happens later in the episode is also quite interesting to me, which further points to Mike 'telling the truth', which is that Mike thought his and Nancy's conversation was mutually truthful.

Why? Because he was completely confused when Lucas says that her and Jonathan are romantically involved later:

Mike: 'They're gone. Nancy and Jonathan. His car's gone.'

Lucas: 'They're probably just sucking face somewhere.'

Mike: 'What? No. No way.' -- Clearly showing that maybe he thought that Nancy was being truthful, meaning he thought their exchange was mutually truthful.

This seems a bit far-fetched but... something to think about.

Btw, I was going to talk about how the First Kiss between Mike and El is queer-coded, but tbh, it's more like... weird. Because they're 12/11 years old and El literally has no idea what a kiss is and they have this exchange about being brother and sister (ew). Then Mike kind of says 'oh i want to go to the snow ball with you, but not if you're my sister', just gives me vibe that he's just doing what he thinks is normal as a result of what others say. But that's it, not much else to say abt it really (also im tired of writing this post ive been doing it for so long <3)

In conclusion: Mike gets taught that being queer/ not liking girls is dangerous. It means you die/ disappear. Being 'normal' or straight is therefore easier. He internalises this for a while poor child <3

Thanks for reading!!! I love you <33 Let me know if you have anything you want to add or if you have contradictions idk byeeee

[thewertsearch]

lmao, I love how every single outfit in Kanaya's rotation is bloodstained. She didn't need to swap outfits during the fight, but this is Kanaya we're talking about. She needs to slay while she's slaying.

Anyway, that was [S]: Rex Duodecim Angelus! It's easily a 10/10 animation, with fantastic art, amazing attention to detail, and some brilliant character moments. I can definitely understand why people view it as the definitive version of this fight, and one which may as well be canonical. I find it pretty hard to disagree myself.

Next up for the liveblog will be an ask-answering session, and then we'll get back to the comic proper. See you then!

[tls12lessthan3]

one thing i enjoy about orv is how morally grey kim dokja is, especially in the beginning. during the beginning of the novel kim dokja seems to have almost no empathy for the people around him, and his number one priority is progressing the scenarios with himself being a secondary priority and saving others coming later. he does undeniable good, like saving jung heewon and caring for lee gilyoung - and he does some much more questionable things, like selling his food for coins knowing that it will disappear soon and people need the coins to survive.

this part of orv gets ignored a lot and chalked up to kim dokja's self-hatred, which i disagree with. yes he hates himself and yes he's an unreliable narrator who paints his actions in a worse light because of it but sometimes he just does objectively bad things. and it's interesting when he does! particularly in the beginning, he is focused completely on self-preservation and often steps on others in the process. his actions force you to ask questions like how responsible is kim dokja for those deaths on the subway car, or at that first subway station? is he obligated to try and save the people around him? how strong is that obligation? is it right of him to use his future knowledge the way he does, to decide who lives and dies? they're fairly basic questions, and orv doesn't particularly insist on answering them, but i enjoyed thinking about them nonetheless. the fact is kim dokja was often cruel, to strangers and his companions both, if different types. and you lose these questions when you ignore that. and thats not even to discuss the parallels between his exploitation of yoo joonghyuk's story and the way constellations gobble up incarnations while enjoying their pain. even if yoo joonghyuk eventually decides he considers it worth it, kim dokja still subsisted off of a living being's immeasurable pain for years, and that's a fucked up thing!

and to ignore kim dokja's less-than-moral actions also ignores kim dokja's character arc! kim dokja feels guilt at the end of orv for actions he wouldn't have thought twice about at the beginning and that is because he has changed and matured over the course of the novel and pretending he was always that way erases that. and i dont see why you would want to!! his journey towards seeing his companions as human and learning to care about the 'extras' he previously discarded and coming to understand the damage he inflicts with his self-sacrifice is interesting to watch and discuss. i've seen the stark contrast in empathy from early kim dokja to later kim dokja chalked up to sinshong not being quite sure how to write him yet and while i think that may have played a role i also think they did a good job of building and showing these changes through arcs like the demon world arc, the fruit of good and evil arc and the journey to the west arc

i think i lost my point somehwere but in summary kim dokja does some fucked up shit and some of it is basic edgelord apocalypse murder and some of it is genuinely interesting to contemplate and all of it is important to his character

[splinterclan]

i really sympathise with bess in this situation. she's too uncomfortable to be with her kids bc of moorsnow and whorlstar's decision and cedar has no say in the entire situation. i understand why they would be concerned with the apprentices leaving clan territory [vinepaw] but like. wouldn't cedarheart be more effected by that?? his nephew almost drowning?? he would care more than moorsnow would. she may be deputy but this is obviously a family issue bro. moor and whorl aren't terrible people but the kids should get to see their mom without being held as bargaining chips. bess is obviously uncomfortably with clan life and would freak out if she had to be supervised when being with her own kids when she's done absolutely nothing wrong in the first place. its also unfair to the kids, suddenly cutting them off from their mother and leaving them estranged. i dont rly see many others sharing this opinion so im worried im reading this wrong but bess is a good person and uhh i really like her and think she is completely justified and right

There is def more scenes to be shown that will include Bess and more on what she's like - and you can like her all you want!! I don't think of her as a villian and she certainly thinks she's in the right here (and has reasons behind what she does) just as much as Whorl thinks she's in the right. It's a grey-ish situation

I do disagree with Moor/Whorl being unable to care just as much about Vine/the other kits just bc they aren't blood related though. Family is not just who's blood you have and love isn't generated just by being related to someone xD They absolutely love those kits every ounce as much as Cedar does