#congrats if u read all this

[mousemannation]

okay i am the first to admit the janscar agenda compels despite only approaching it from the tennis side but also my sacred tennis space is in a doomed situationship with f1 bc i literally cannot escape it 😭😭😭😭

[grif-hawaiian-rolls]

"Hey baby, bet I could help you with your daddy issues!"

~

"Pft- five," Simmons snorted, leaning on Tucker's shoulders. "Out of ten." "Aw c'mon, really?" He groaned. "Why'd that one get such a low score?" "It just- it sounded more creepy than flirty?" "I think that's just the Donut-effect kicking in, man," "Yeah, well, try again then because no one can undo the Donut effect," "Tell me about it. Okay, okay... hey baby-"

[bidisaster-peanut-romano]

soo hi everyone!! i'm back on my bully essay/meta/something writing!! sort of. i did this.

anyways anyone who's been on this page for some time know how from time to time i have insistently mentioned the parallels between lola and peanut, right?

welp! that was a joke but the time has finally come!! a super-pretentious essay just for the fun of it!! (and also bc i haven't been writing actually argumentative texts in like months perhaps a year, so. yikes, i really need to practice again)

word count: 2.2k WOAH. IM SORRY

i, in my corner, with my monstrous needs. — susan sontag, as consciousness is harnessed to flesh

take this quote both as a title and an anticipation of what is to come. the essay will be distributed analyzing first the dependence of each of them on johnny, to then draw comparisons. i'll make sure to steer as away from headcanons as possible, sticking closely to the source text. obviously, some things' interpretation might be ambiguous, but, you know. your usual occupation hazard.

also, a disclaimer before we start: while they are psychologically complex and there is always a mimetic intention in developing them, these are fictional characters, and, as such, their primary function is to be vessels for different themes, questions and so forth. therefore, i will prioritize meaning and themes over moral implications and similar elements.

i. peanut

for how much i can adore talking about him, the way peanut depends on johnny is very much on the nose; worn on his sleeve, even. in 11:11 minutes of voice lines, he mentions johnny 30 times.

many interpret this as the caricature of a boy crush, but i have reasons to believe it is much less cute than that.

the problem is that, really, more than trying to identify specific situations... peanut seems to rely on johnny for a significant part of what he does. when he does good at dodgeball:

Look at me, Johnny, look at me!

almost like a child calling for his parent's attention to be praised. he calls johnny's name when he's going through hardships, when he's scared or when he's sad.

more than someone he just loves, johnny is a point of reference. whenever there's something going on, whenever he does or has to do something, his first thought goes to johnny; vice versa, what johnny asks of him is his priority.

I gotta tell Johnny! No time. I gotta see Johnny now. Gotta help Johnny. What can I do next to please Johnny? I mean Lola! I mean…

(this also goes in a "negative" direction, envy being the other side of the medal to adoration. especially because, in some way, this reliance on johnny might be felt by him as emasculating, and, being johnny his model of masculinity, adding it to the napoleon complex thing, it's not hard to guess why it can be so unpleasant. we can see this manifest through some of the things he expresses in regards to lola- not as much an interest he has towards her, but the interest he wishes to have from her- which are a bit more different than it might seem at a first glance. but this is a mouseketool we'll need later. still:

Last time I saw her, Lola made eyes at me, not Johnny!

do we really need this part? heh. i'm not sure, but it's always good to point out)

(also, just because, for the purpose of this analysis, it might be useful to specify: while these sentiments are very much implied in peanut's canon quotes, we have no evidence in canon in what measure they are reciprocated by johnny. the fandom has universally agreed that johnny also views peanut as his Best Friend In The World; while in some measure, they must be at least a bit close, i think it is even safe to say, given the caricaturist nature of bully's characterizations, that johnny holds peanut in less consideration that peanut deludes himself into believing. quoting another post of mine, the kids who show some level of obsession towards their leader mention him on average ten or less times (gord mentions derby eight times, parker six times, kirby mentions ted five times). the leaders don't usually make names at all, that much is true; however, peanut mentions johnny 30 times, and, even in front of this proportion, johnny mentions peanut 0 times. just to make that clear)

overall, what undeniably shines through his voice lines is a feeling of general inadequacy, whether about his height, or his strength in front of a bigger adversary. the audios in which he tries to show off range from being disingenuous, to straight up improbable.

crossing what we have until now said, it is not hard to come to the conclusion that he really tries to make up, to fill this empty feeling of inadequacy by taking pride in his role as johnny's second in command.

while i am a big fan of bully's characteristic of having left much content out of the main game, leaving the gamers to dig it up for themselves, i do believe that scrapping some of the stuff that was prepared for peanut is a loss. we have a number of voice lines coming from chapter 3, in which it was heavily implied how important peanut's role as johnny's right hand man was.

for example, much like... all other seconds in command, really, he was to be followed and then fought in the rumble, before you could get to johnny, with the specific duty to cover his back. even his very first scene, the opening cutscene of chapter 3, i believe, is not to be underestimated. most of the other people, as far as i recall, call you when they need it in person; johnny, however, sends peanut. making him, de facto, an extension of himself, almost.

again, you choose the motivation. what is important, from a narrative point of view, is that peanut clings to johnny through these acts of service, almost making it the foundation of his personhood.

basically, he makes it so that, if he can't be of help to johnny, his whole self is fundamentally annihilated, giving himself completely to johnny.

ii. lola

with lola, reading between the lines gets a bit more difficult; first of all, because lola is much less transparent than peanut, her insincerity being a supporting beam of the whole chapter 3. secondly, whether she was done dirty by the creators or not, it is undoubted that being the perspective that of a teenage boy (namely, jimmy, but we certainly, as viewers, are brought to sympathize more with johnny than with lola) with all the prejudices it can bring with itself.

however, it doesn't mean that there isn't anything to work with- quite the contrary, actually. the issue with lola is that there is a certain amount of layers to get through before gaining a satisfying perception of her as a character. still, we're here to try our best, aren't we!

even behind the muddiness of her intentions and the manipulation she shows herself a master at, it is clear from the second we first meet her that what she does is in function of johnny.

to get through this mess with order, we'll start from an easy, measurable numeric information: lola mentions johnny in her audio files 19 times. which, we're assessed, IS a considerable amount.

we have extensively talked about the way her cheating patterns are a strategy not to succumb to the passive role of the girl in the heteronormative, patriarchal prototypical couple (there's a post here breaking down a lot of this stuff, if any of you is interested!!), so, instead of this, i want to focus on what lies beneath that behavior.

ultimately, the whole point is that lola expects and wants johnny to fight for her. whether is it because she feels taken for granted, or just because he can't perceive it if not through grandiose gestures like the rumble- your interpretation will work; she wants to see johnny fighting nail and teeth not to lose her, she wants him to show her that he wants her.

she's all about that attention, and she knows exactly what and how to do to get it. and i think this is especially clear when you compare the moments in which she knows there's no advantage she could go for; when she has understood that jimmy won't fall for her manipulation, when algie and chad leave her unsatisfied, when norton openly accuses her and antagonizes her - she loses her temper, lets go of that sweetened and/or flirtatious voice tone, abandons that specific kind of gesturing. she doesn't care anymore about obtaining something. she was actually angry, and she was actually upset that johnny had disappeared.

in some of her audios, she references johnny with some amount of fondness, as well:

Johnny and I were on the best date ever.

(there is also a voice line in which she says "He told me he likes me because of my personality. Isn't that sweet?"; due to it being a general chatter and not exclusive to one chapter, i assume it is relatively safe to assume she is quoting johnny. however, as i said at the beginning, we're trying to stay as close to canon material as possible, so, do your thing- and i'm open to arguments!!)

a considerable amount of audio files, however (which will lead us to our final point) is about her... calling for help for johnny, or stating, confidently, that he will come save her, or avenge her later.

Someone get Johnny! Johnny's gonna get you for this. Johnny is gonna kill you!

but wait... i have some sense of déjà vu...

You're gonna be sorry when Johnny finds out!

iii. two faces of the same medal

if i had to pick an effective image for a metaphor, i'd say that the thing about lola and peanut is that they are both dogs looking for someone to take their leash; we’re talking here about an exclusive relationship with someone they can rely totally on, someone we’ll call the Other (with a capital o, distinguished from just other. yes it is unnecessarily complicated i’m sorry).

for what my professor would call accidents of history, it happened that both of them found that Other in johnny.

each of them attempts at creating an exclusive relationship with the Other, one foolproof and fundamentally… perfect. perfect in the way that everything works like oiled gears, in the way that every next move is predictable, in the way that any accident will not break the created equilibrium. (even if, in the general sense of the term, lola and johnny's relationship is everything but perfect, it is in the connotation that we have established here. lola is aware that, no matter what she does, johnny will come back around. hell, the very thing that she does is aimed at keeping that balance; specifically, keeping him a bit on the edge, pushing him into a corner where he has to actively make an effort to keep her close.)

they both hide something they are ashamed of, regulating not only their actions and reactions but their very way of existing in the world, in order to keep that gear working, in order to remain in johnny's hand. lola hides that craving for a genuine and stable affection, dissimulating it with the cheating and the fatuous physical demonstrations of closeness; peanut hides his sense of inadequacy and complex of inferiority, by being the tough and reliable second in command.

basically, what they mean to achieve is a sense of security, the safety of not really being the one to lead but, at the same time, finding a purpose, other than a shield from the outside world that they are not willing to concede themselves to. like a... symbiotic relationship?? i was going to say parasitic, but, yknow. the Other does get some advantages, which are, respectively, peanut's acts of service and lola's capacity to boost johnny's pride.

now, of course, johnny is not aware of either of their play. which makes it even better, since, as we already said, both of their approach to the relationship needs some degree of insincerity.

like, i don't deny that johnny might be a good friend, or a loyal one. but he is an oblivious, prideful fuck who can't see past his own nose; he's got a tendency to make it all about himself - which of course goes perfectly with what we said about both peanut and lola making the Other their center, taking up, in a certain way, a passive role in the relationship.

this way, both of them aim at creating with johnny a relationship that is, in a way, codependant and conditional, in which the do ut des (their respective "service" ↔ johnny's guarantee of stability) creates the foundation of the very relationship.

this, of course, brings up the problem of exclusivity; on which, however, i prefer not to delve into too much, as this would bring us to the topic of their antagonism which... isn't really what i wanted to go for, at least not here. (it would risk bringing us a bit too close to my subjective interpretation and too far away from the canon, which i PROMISED i wouldn't do. however, someday i might elaborate on that??? idk , please do lmk if someone's interested around here)

i will, however, show you a diagram (it looks like a triangle- i guess it is, but it is VERY important that it is a pyramid, with a top and a larger foundation) and a quote, to wrap this up bc i think it is already WAY too long and ramble-y lmao. let me know what you think anyway, my ask box is always open <3

it almost feels like a joke to play out a part when you are not the starring role in someone else's heart you know i'd rather walk alone (i'd rather walk alone) than play a supporting role if i can't get the starring role -- starring role, marina and the diamonds

[good-wine-and-cheese]

If you consider all Tenmas to, at some level, be the same Tenma then its almost funny to count up his trauma quotient. The dude has been surrounded by death. He lost his parents when he was young, he lost his wife (even before Tobio in some variants if I'm getting the read of 03 right), Ochanomizu had a brush with death, and then Tobio is a given....he must think he's cursed or some shit

[bleeding-hart]

some sketches

based on @theicarusconstellation's writing

I keep thinking of details I left out and stuff I need to fix but if I let myself do that I'm going to go insane so we're leaving it at this

Also some Sirius because they're a fucking king and we love them (I very strongly hc them as genderqueer and using any pronouns, but specifically he/they/she/it)

The dress was a bit of a failure but hey it looks like fabric at least I think maybe

[punkcherries]

everyone whittled me down and i watched arcane. it was alright

[batsplat]

deeply compelled by this photo

[brainworm-blitz]

happy ace week to all the aces that were actually horrified/devastated to realize they were ace. btw.

I love u.

[24hrfrog]

Random pop in between work but I need to get over this year old salt wound off my chest.

if ur gonna be very obviously “inspired” by another persons design. say it. tag the artist or mention it in ur description. if you dont ur just copying/stealing and potentially tracing, especially in the eyes of the artist you ripped off when they find it. it’s social media sweetheart, everyone can see you.

some designs can be very personal to artists, for example when i make a version of a favorite character of mine EA because I am and I want my favorite character to look like me as well. i put thought and love into their design and even add stuff to have this character literally look like me

It’s embarrassing that people copy the exact facial traits and even clothing design to a tee of another artist’s design and don’t say that they got obviously inspired by that person. And than the said person who got ripped off finds the design with no credit whatsoever and just think “are you fucking serious rn.” it takes someone asking in the comments for this person to come out and say who they took from 💀

and when they don’t change the design they got “inspired” by except for moving one small color into it, that’s not called being inspired that’s called copying. literally from the pattern on the shirt to the accessories on the side thats literally copying— ok i think im good thats all out now

god i hate specific fandoms. (this is not abt top gun lmao)

if i could redact fanart from everyones minds and the internet completely i would in a second to prevent stupid acts like this.

[crazy-fangirl2524]

Every once in a while I remember light fires at night (to push back the void) is taken down and I just want to throw myself off a cliff

[khizuo]

whaaaaat people are being racist about the hugo awards? can't imagine that

[mothergold]

can’t tell if i’m falling out of love for writing fanfic or if i’ve just been super stressed out lately ahaha

[imprvdente]

𝐏𝐄𝐑𝐂𝐘 𝐉𝐀𝐂𝐊𝐒𝐎𝐍 𝐀𝐔

Disclaimer: I haven’t finished reading all the books yet so this won’t have any spoilers! Also, I think this AU works great with crossovers, so you don’t need to know the books to interact with it!

Fish was born in a little town in the South of France. With her parents Daphné and Armand, two professors of Greek Mythology, she had a very happy childhood. And she never really questioned all the odd little things that happened to her. Like how she could breathe underwater, or how she seemed to attract sea animals of all kinds whenever she went for a swim.

Life was good. Until a school trip to New York City, when she was 14. See, her parents did not warn her that she'd be in grave danger there, they didn't know! And sure, they could have told her the truth about her birth, but again, they couldn't imagine what waited for her in New York.

Monsters. Oh, she had read about them in books. She just didn't know monsters were real. So after a week of being hunted down and attacked a satyr (A SATYR???) found her and took her to the only place she'd be safe. A little summer camp near New York, Camp Half-Blood.

There, she learned that apparently, her dad was Poseidon. Which wasn't supposed to happen, because Poseidon had sworn to never have kids again. But after a quick phone call to her parents, things became clearer. Technically, he had only given Daphné and Armand a daughter as a gift, for Poseidon worshipers were getting pretty rare these days. Also, she was supposed to stay in France, away from the Gods, the monsters, and all that jazz. So well, the argument was made that this was an unexpected but acceptable exception, and the Gods didn't smite her just for existing. Great.

Except that now, she can't take the plane back to France (Zeus would pulverize it in mid-air, long story) and has to stay in Camp Half-Blood.

TLDR: Fish had a regular childhood in France, but during a trip to New York City, she found out that she was the daughter of Poseidon. Which makes her a demigod, and also a tasty prey for monsters of all sorts.

[iwanttobebutterflies]

Summary, tags and kudos on a cursory first look, but I will ready anything so kudos is just a prioritization method, I WILL get to less kudos'd fics

By this I mean, what is the most influential on your decision? E.g., for me it is the summary because I rarely pay attention to the title or stats, and only read the tags after I've liked the summary enough to want to give the fic a go.

[pup-pee]

Least fav comic ever

UGHHHHHHHHHHHHH ok so my opinion on comics is rlly bad bc i just dont think ive read ENOUGH

i think the easiest answer would b batman & robin; all stars bc that comic haunts my days

its just bad it sucks i h8 it it makes me angry

& the worst part is that my brother bought me this rlly nice poster that is the cover of it issue #9 BC HE DOESNT KNOW COMICS HE DIDNT KNOW & ITS JUST

the arts nice dont get me wrong but the story will make me hit my head against the wall bc its so unnecessarily unfunny

its like trying 2 b smart but its just not

except when hal gets trapped in the yellow house

thats the only part that matters 2 me bc y not

[harmonicunt]

i rly cant see myself as separate from the primordial soup. every flaw i see in others is a reflection of myself, every joy too. every cruelty, all kindness. so many people see themselves as leaning towards one or another, but thats wrong, isnt it ? we're capable of all, in our own particular ways. youll pin yourself & doom growth if you put yourself in one corner.

narratives about who you are are mostly about who you think you are--and the thinking is only one fractal of it. i think ive been afraid of defining myself by the "doing" part of my existence because for so long i didnt feel like the "doing" was anything important or interesting or fulfilling. i didnt have language to show what it was teaching me, what it really meant--it was all isolation, and boredom, and rage. it was that, and it was more, and now that im still doing many of the same things alongside that which i truly want, which i find self respect in, which i am fulfilled through, i can see how i could've used different language to spin it in a different light, to be less lonely and afraid of myself. as my story evolves and changes each time i tell it, as others' stories of me grow (and i learn to listen to them, and trust them), im open to all the ways i hadn't seen before, and i understand how blind we are to who we are in one particular moment. reflection must come second.

thinking & doing are two pillars of our selves, pillars we learn to build and tear down and build again. i'm trying to figure out where our control over those pillars lie. i know there are more--we are more than what we think and what we do--and i know we can change and reshape them, but the first shaping is amazing to begin with. is the first shaping the one everyone else does when we're young, and we don't know how to do it ourselves? or the one we do when we emerge, when we look at how our pillars been formed for us--a necessary evil, unfortunately,--and we decide that it should be something else, something that belongs to us? some people never make their own, and i think many of them are very unfulfilled. each one is unique. the idea you can control it utterly, shape yourself into anything you want, is partially a false narrative, addressed by the fact that at first we have no control over what shape it takes. then, i think almost everyone finds there is an immutable self they can never put a finger on, no matter how long they circle around it. you repaint, and carve in new grooves, and add height or branches. you circle around a self you won't know until you've found them. we have many methods of circling around to the self, of seeing what fits with the pillar we think we want to create, and then adjusting when we realize that's not quite the look we thought it'd be.

i've employed a few strange ones through my life, one of the most curious that i come back to often being kin & kinning. a sort of pinning that often felt like a chicken/egg situation, even while i was in it i found it fascinating. what i was and what i wanted to be and what i thought i would be (i was kinning when i was 12-16ish, so i wasn't much of anything but a ball of energy and wanting) merged together into these grand pulls to characters who werent necessarily favorites but made me fucking insane because of what of myself i saw in them (sometimes it still happens, but it's gotten weirder and more specific as ive aged, and harder to explain or project to others who dont already know me.)

i dont know where im going with this. can we ever know ourselves if we dont know who we are to others ? if we dont listen to what they say about us? it feels bad when someone doesnt take what youve said about them, compliment or criticism or neutral, seriously. people who ignore compliments or use them to insult themselves, and people who ignore criticism and tell themselves that they are the best at something you have been struggling with them for, convincing themselves that the problems they run into are external and eschewing responsibility. how far can we push our own self actualization before collapsing? how happy can we convince ourselves we are, not knowing the joy on the other side ? what tells us that we're miserable in the shape that's been built for us? why do we all seem to forget from time to time that everyone else has been using the same scale of time that we have been to build theirs? why do we flatten them to the pillar we see in one moment, inconsiderate of what came before ? it's self-centered, and that's seen as very dirty, but we can't be anything but self-centered when we're only in our own heads, right ? generosity, consideration, kindness, respect, so much of that is in the eye of the beholder. what we think of as universally decent can make another think of us as deeply annoying, even rude, culturally or personally. idk. we're all the same and we're all different and it's weird and i could add questions and ponderings to this forever but ill stop here. i love you.