#but it comes from my heart

[whump3000]

In Loving Memory

…

For the dried sunflowers,

Rotting into the Earth,

They blossom in memory,

Remembering your mirth.

…

To the sunsets we watched,

The summers we shared,

To all the late nights,

Just because you cared.

…

For the sake of the books,

You’ll never again read me,

For all the winters lost,

And Christmases you won’t see.

…

To the end of an era,

The end of your love,

May the leaves fall on your grave,

As you smile from above.

…

[parkore]

made a guy btw

[soaked-doors]

pov the reaper that’s dragging away your boyfriends soul says something so freedomphobic you hit his corpse with the nika stare

[phantasmatoucan]

INVERTED PARALLELS

[iheartfurrympreg]

The Harbinger Of Death

watch out gem and joel

close ups under cut and analysis in tags ->

[astronomodome]

two empty graves

[lotus-pear]

mourning black and the death of ideals

[quailsprout]

prime and protector fanart for @astolat's story, fool's hope on ao3

[vintrage]

fire cannot kill a dragon BITCH

[eveningdawn222]

people who act like batman isn't "judge jury and executioner" because he doesn't kill people are like. genuinely so funny to me because. they're very obviously thinking of "executioner" as like. the stereotypical guy with axe who chops people heads off, and not, yknow, the literal definition of the idiom itself, which is about someone who has the ability to judge and then subsequently punish someone unilaterally. which is quite literally what batman does.

he has the ability to decide what is a "crime" to him, he is the one who decides whether people are guilty of those crimes, and he is the one who executes their punishment. the severity of the punishment doesn't matter - he is unaccountable to anyone else, and indeed is allowed to commit as many crimes as needed to reach his arbitrary ideal of "justice."

the ideal of batman is this: a man who is so fundamentally changed by an act of senseless violence that he takes it upon himself to fight back against the rot and corruption in the world. he does this not through political activism, not through ridding himself of his wealth in favor of a greater good, not through community outreach, but through an individualistic fantasy of being a hero.

and you'll say: charlie, but he does do that !!! he donates his money all the time, he funds social programs, hospitals, orphanages, gets people jobs -

and i will say this: so why don't things get better?

because here's the base of it. gotham, at its core, can't get better. no matter what bruce wayne does, there will always be more crime, more villains, more death, more people for batman to beat up in back alleys. because that's what sells.

reoffending rates don't matter in gotham, prison reform doesn't matter in gotham, what actually causes crime doesn't matter in gotham because that doesn't sell books.

and so here it is; dc has unintentionally created a world where batman can't win, but can't be wrong, and where thousands of nameless, faceless, only-created-to-die civilians must be pushed into the meat grinder that is gotham, to fuel bruce wayne's angst and vindicate his constant, tireless, noble fight against the forces of evil.

and then: a new robin, who is poor and who's parents are dead or gone because of this cycle; who is happy go-lucky and hated by editors and fans for being robin, for not being dick grayson, for being poor.

and this robin is written, unintentionally or not, to be angry at the ways in which batman's (the narrative's) idea of justice is detached from its victims. bruce seems perfectly fine to allow countless unnamed women to be at risk from garzonas in his home country, yet robin is the one who is portrayed as irrational and violent.

this robin is not detached from gotham in the way bruce wayne is: this robin is a product of gotham.

(and here's the thing. you can't punch aids. you can't fight a disease with colorful fights and nifty gadgets. and how would robin dying from aids add to batman's story; it would call into question the systemic changes that haven't been made in gotham. how does a child get aids, in batman's city?)

so robin dies, and then bruce (the narrative) spends the next couple of decades blaming it on him. it is jason's fault; he was reckless, he just ran in, he thought it was all a game. if only bruce had seen what was coming, if only he could have known that jason wasn't rich enough or smart enough or liked enough to be robin.

batman gets a little more violent, a little more self destructive. he hurts people more and almost (!!) kills a couple guys. this is bad because it's self destructive and "not who he is." it is not bad because batman should not be able to just beat people up when he's angry.

and then he gets a shiny new robin - who is all the things jason "wasn't": rich and smart and rational and he doesn't put who batman is into question. batman and robin are partners, and jason is a grave and a cautionary tale, and (crucially here) never right.

the joker kills thousands and it doesn't matter because they were written to be killed.

batman beats up thousands and it doesn't matter because they were written to be criminals.

and then jason comes back, and nothing has changed. there is a batman and a (shiny! rich!) robin and the joker kills thousands. (because it sells)

and jason is angry - he has been left unavenged - his death has meant nothing, just as willis' had, just as catherine's had, just as gloria's had, just as -

thousands. ten of thousands. hundreds of thousands. written to be killed.

but one of them gets to come back.

and he is angry - not only at the joker, but at bruce (the narrative) - because why is the joker still alive (when thousands-)

here is the thing - jason todd is right. not because the death penalty is good, not because criminals deserve to die, not because of everything he says -

but because of what he calls into question. why is the joker alive?

because he sells books.

and dc has written a masterful character, through no fault of their own, because jason knows what is wrong, and he knows who is at fault - batman. (the narrative)

so the argument that bruce can't kill because he's not judge jury and executioner; the argument that jason is a cop or that jason is insane or that jason is in the wrong here; they hold no weight.

batman can't kill the joker because the joker sells comic books.

and jason can't kill the joker because the joker sells comic books.

so he will beg and plead and grovel - he will betray everything that is himself, he will forsake his family and his city and kill himself - just so that bruce (the narrative) will let the joker die.

he was condemned to death by an audience, and after he came back he has spent his whole life looking us in the eyes and screaming, asking, pleading; why is the joker still alive?

why are thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands (the number doesn't matter, see, because they're just a number. not people. not real.) why are we expendable for his story? why did i have to die just for nothing to change?

and the answer is money. and the answer is the batman can never be wrong. and the answer is shitty writing. and the answer is -

nothing jason can ever change.

which is the worst of it all. he is a victim with no power, and no one else in the world can see it. he is raging and crying and screaming at his father and his writers and you - and it doesn't matter. jason doesn't matter. and he knows it.

[nezierf]

well fudge, dangerous for who?

[bloobydabloob]

Holy shit I love your Dirk interpretations, it's so true and I could talk about this shit forever. I feel like another part of his character that people seem to forget (along with Roxy for some reason) is that he's from the future in solitude in an apocalyptic wasteland. I just see that part of his character always removed which is disappointing because I feel like that's a pretty big part, especially regarding his themes around technology, his brother's theme of Time, his own isolation, and how he plays in the vastness of the universe and spacetime.

Art I drew related to the subject because I like to respond to asks with art.

But absolutely. I certainly understand where the lack of discussion over his isolation + upbringing comes from, considering a majority of the fanbase that I have seen builds their ideas based on their own version of postcanon. I’m not entirely sure how that would be fixed, but certainly even in the somewhat recent past I would see a lot more content regarding his upbringing both literally and symbolically. I don’t have much to add regarding the things you’ve mentioned, because they just are what they are. Dirk being confined to a singular room left to him by a father figure he never met, in a future where the only other person left on the planet is someone he cannot pursue a relationship of because of himself, with purely 3 robots to keep him companion, one being an exact replica of his own brain who is *also* trapped inside a pair of glasses, is about as literal as it gets to me.

The contrast to me involving the flooded, organic world in comparison to the little speckle of Dirk’s apartment packed with the dude and his technics is not only a representation of his isolation and entrapment within himself, but also of his lack of control. I think his obsession with & themes of control are a direct product in the case of Dirk specifically *of* this kind of upbringing. His themes of technology are also related to his themes around control. So much of his character is actually revolved around this to me like so much. Dirk is so deeply disconnected from humanity in every way and so much of his character + symbolism is based around that.

It doesn’t even have to be about the symbolism or anything though. It’s just pretty *interesting* in the literal sense that he lives in the middle of the ocean in the future. There’s not only a lot to theorise on to do with his young life there, but on how it might affect him in the way he acts for the rest of his life. The latter part is probably what I see mentioned the most by people talking about Dirk regarding this, I’m surprised I don’t see more discussion on the former too though. I really ought to actually talk more about Homestuck stuff on here. I will do it myself.

Roxy & Dirk’s relationship is largely ignored though because there is a narrative a certain demographic spreads that Dirk resented and blamed Roxy for her interest in him, and thus too many people believe that their relationship was or would continue to be an abusive one. Realistically, I believe it’s important to acknowledge that the way Roxy treated Dirk regarding his homosexuality wasn’t right while still acknowledging the obvious amount of respect and admiration Dirk had for Roxy. I mean we have a huge piece of dialogue from their post trickster mode conversations on the quest beds from Dirk purely stating how he feels about Roxy that people completely ignore somehow. I think this usually happens to characters that are women though. I know everyone says it, but it is true. Jane gets the exact same treatment of boiling her down to solely her negative aspects. The things I see completely mischaracterising both of them are horrific.

I mean how much more explicit can it get that their relationship is obviously very important to Dirk? But I digress. I think the best or I should say “most interesting” interpretations of their relationship usually come from DirkRoxy shippers actually.

I would be interested to hear about Dirk’s relation to his brother’s theme of time though. I don’t have any thoughts on this and I don’t recall ever hearing anyone talk about it before. If you or anyone else would be willing to enlighten me I’d be thrilled.

[short-for-jules]

aw hell naw look at my [doctor] dawwwggg I'm going to [die]

[frenchublog]

silly is boring

[sigh-tofm]

if you’re asexual… (18+)

… price

- understands.

- respects your limits to the fullest. asks ‘is this ok?’ or ‘can i touch you here?’ a lot in the beginning, until you sit him down and explain that you’re not made of glass. he can touch and hold and kiss you like he would any other partner, just not shove his hand down your pants or flip your skirt up to get access to you.

- fills your relationship with domesticity instead. has your tea ready and brewing when you get up in the morning and knows exactly how you like the bed to be made. holds your hand when you’re out shopping and buys the special brand of cookies that you like. doesn’t watch ahead on your shared tv-shows and always cuddles you on the sofa.

- if you’re sex neutral/positive, he loves messy blowjobs and getting to fuck you silly in missionary. he’s a little bit of a dom and also completely whipped for his wife.

… kyle

- understands.

- does not push it. does not even attempt to initiate anything. lets you have all the control. after a couple long conversations where you explain your needs and limits, he’s all set. once he knows how he can best spend time with you, that’s all he needs. it’s actually a little refreshing to have a partner not chomping at the bit to jump his bones (curse of looking like an angel).

- gains a newfound appreciation for the sensual aspect of your relationship. running his fingertips over the stretchmarks on your hips, playing with ice cubes on your bare back, admiring the indents ropes makes across your skin after it’s been left on you a while. there’s no penetration, no orgasms, just two people exploring each other together.

- if you’re sex neutral/positive, kyle loves the lotus position. thinks it’s the peak of sexual intimacy and absolutely adores being face to face so up close.

… johnny

- understands (after a little while).

- has a mini crisis because he thinks this means you’re not attracted to him. you explain that’s not true, you actually find him super hot, but that you just don’t want to sleep with him. that it feels like a chore to you, like doing dishes. not horrible, but maybe a little gross and just something you’d just rather not do.

- embraces the romantic side of your relationship. loves the intimacy, getting to hold and kiss you. drapes over your back like a warm cloak when you chop vegetables at the kitchen counter and just enjoys the closeness. finds a new peace in himself he hasn’t felt for years.

- if you’re sex neutral/positive, he loves it when you ride him or tease him with your hand. still a complete maniac if he really lets lose. loves getting to let lose with you.

… simon

- understands.

- is almost relieved. has always had a complicated relationship to sex. knowing that you don’t want it from him settles some part of him that’s been restless and anxious for years. chaste kisses on the lips and constant handholding become your new normal. is very matter of factly about it if he does ask you for sex.

- finds that he most of all just wants to spend time with you. follows you around like a lost dog, no matter what you do. always comes to run errands with you or sits in the shade outside while you work in the garden. even when you get up to pee at night, he lumbers after you and stays just outside the bathroom door, squinting at the dim light. you’re so used to it that it’s second nature when he catches the bottom of your sleep shirt and lets you guide him back to bed. feels so at peace when you’re close by.

- if you’re sex neutral/positive, simon will sometimes ask if he can eat you out or if you can lay back on the kitchen table so he can fuck you. you tend to oblige.

[aroaceleovaldez]

my hot pjo take is that Jason isn't a second Percy, Jason is a second Annabeth. Jason is just if Annabeth was a guy and also a Big 3 kid.