#i am discussing it not from shipping perspective

[sad-trekkie-life]

Random thoughts/analysis on Spock & Bones relationship inspired by The Immunity Syndrome (s2e18).

I love the dynamic of a whole trio because it is different.

With Kirk & Spock it’s an obvious affection and love. They both are open about them liking each other, and it is noticed multiple times by other characters, even by those who do not know them well.

Kirk & Bones — it is also an open and deep friendship, although probably not as deep as with Kirk & Spock. Or rather almost as deep. As Kirk says that he trusts Bones at the same level as Spock. Then come Spock & Bones.

Their relationship is ambiguous to say the least. They both have very different life views and beliefs, but actually are far more alike than they might think. At one moment they say very hurtful things to each other, next second they both argue that they can’t let the other die. McCoy says multiple times that he dislikes Spock, while mostly being the first one to start worrying about him or noticing any change in Spock’s behavior, and having him as a priority when it comes to saving his life or treating him (This Side of Paradise, Amok Time, Mirror, Mirror, Metamorphosis, etc). Because he’s an amazing doctor.

What I also have noticed is a slight jealousy from Bones, when Kirk prefers Spock. There’s an obvious competition, and it is very understandable — you’d feel the same way is someone very close to you has a preference to someone you don’t agree with on monumental issues, which results in Bones making “racist” remarks, although I don’t believe he’s racist, he just uses every opportunity to point out the difference and Spock literally does the same (“You, humans…” Spock, do you realize you’re literally a half human what do you mean “you humans”).

Also, Bones is clearly annoyed when Spock contradicts himself, always pointing out how he’s so logical, so alien and doesn’t feel or have human emotions, while obviously having it all, and literally lies to himself, denying his human half. Bones despite his shortcomings stays true to himself, Spock doesn’t. So Bones chooses to believe.

There’s a clear competition, but it feels… One sided.

Spock likes McCoy and tries to befriend him. He trusts him with even personal worries, he asks advice, and just tries to be near him (The Conscience Of The King, Obsession, A Piece of Action, Journey To Babel, etc etc) even saying openly in Amok Time that he regards McCoy as his close friend, and also mind melds with McCoy even more often then with Kirk. In the end, Spock even gives Bones his katra years later. McCoy actually does not mind it at all, but showing Spock that he actually likes him back or agrees with him, will mean for Bones to betray his core beliefs, to admit that Spock is right. Illogical, but human.

The Immunity Syndrome showcases this dynamic beautifully as well as Spock’s “rejected” feelings.

Bones is willing to sacrifice himself, but reasons it with having pure scientific goals. Spock immediately points it out, and McCoy doesn’t even try to argue this, because it is true. Still, because they both are scientists, the curiosity plays a huge if not the main role in their motivation. So, when Kirk chooses Spock, McCoy experiences conflicting emotions.

First, McCoy is more suitable candidate for the research, and lost the opportunity of a lifetime, just because Spock is physically stronger. Spock admits it, showcasing understanding towards Bones, but McCoy is still obviously hurt by this and aims his annoyance at Spock, as if he “stole” the opportunity from him, instead of blaming Kirk.

Second, Spock is going there to die, while it was Bones who was first willing to sacrifice himself. So when McCoy doesn’t let Spock to open hangar, he says bitterly “You are determined not to let me share it, aren’t you?”. But this gesture of hesitation is also suitable for the person who doesn’t want other person to die. As the last, weak, hopeless attempt to stop the unavoidable.

The way McCoy looks at him, is anger mixed with pain and worry. But he can’t share it. He’s bitter that Spock wouldn’t let him to do this instead, because he lets the other being die. While it should be him, Bones! Vulcans do not feel such emotions, they grief differently, Spock will be fine if McCoy dies, right? Right?

And then Spock makes the situation worse. He suddenly admits that he’s scared. And that he needs comfort. From McCoy. He wouldn’t even show Kirk that he’s scared. But he trusts McCoy to see his weakness.

And McCoy can’t bring himself to do this. A lot is happening there. Spock is literally being more noble then McCoy, sharing something even not every non-Vulcan would admit, and McCoy has to be faced with his own cruelty, that he was so busy with his own feelings, that he didn’t even think how Spock actually feels, choosing to believe Spock is heartless at the moment so Bones would feel right about himself. While he’s a doctor, and he’s the one with a savior complex. Spock doesn’t know if he’s going to die there or not, and so he wants to let Bones know that he actually wants Bones to show warmth to him, he gives Bones a chance to put the facade aside, as he, Spock does it. Spock asks Bones for comfort, while doing something Bones was willing to do - sacrificing himself in the name of science and to save people. And here’s the fact Bones has to face: Spock actually can die.

To show Spock that he cares, is admitting the danger. Not hiding behind scientific motivations. It means that there is a possibility that this is the last time Spock and Bones see each other.

McCoy can’t do this. So he does not. He does not want to believe that Spock won their self-sacrifice competition once again, and that he, Bones, is realizing the sincerity of Spock. It goes against everything he believed in. Spock doesn’t like McCoy, because McCoy doesn’t like Spock… It’s easier to believe this then to let the truth be out that they are the same. He’s mad that Spock is right once again and angrily pushes the button himself.

But there’s guilt and pain. Spock showed his vulnerability. Spock literally admitted his warm feelings towards McCoy. Bones can not do this in return. He does not let himself do this. So he’s there in his pain, alone. Does not want to lose his face as it means admitting the truth. So he only wishes luck to Spock when he leaves, showing he cares not in Spock’s face, keeping his memo. Before this he can’t turn away and watches Spock go, probably for the last time. Maybe he wanted more? Maybe he wished Spock to pressure him more to finally say the truth? Maybe he just wanted Spock to say it even more openly…

When Spock thinks he is dying, the last thing he does is again admitting his feelings towards McCoy. “He should have wished me luck”. The last thing McCoy hears from Spock is that he, McCoy was valuable to him, and Spock is deeply hurt that Bones did not break his shell. And Spock wants McCoy to feel guilty about it. And McCoy does.

He even admits to Jim that he’s sentimental about Spock, doesn’t believe he’s dead. To face the truth means to face his own cruelty once again.

In the end, everything turns out fine and Bones even can feel good about himself because after all, he did not face his own egoism and self deception.

He is angry at Spock that Spock isn’t true to himself. Because he, Bones, isn’t true to himself either. And unfortunately he will continue lying to himself until it’s too late.

[blitz0hn0]

Me pondering: kids are capable of going through and understanding complex problems and their feelings should be taken seriously when it counts.

Me practically: who are all these annoying fucking kids in the milgram fandom and why are they posting the worst takes and most irrelevant bullshit I've ever seen ever???

I think these are valid to coexist.

[aequitaes]

@sicsemper suffer my tag rambles. ✌🏻

The way Haikaveh/Kavetham is written in a way that makes both of them have their individual characters while also being an integral part in each other's lives. Both of them have their own beliefs and ideology. They both have different things they work on, Alhaitham being this avid researcher and Kaveh being this idealistic artist. Their characters don't necessarily revolve around each other all the time, but there is no doubt that they are both very important people to each other. Kaveh is the exception to Alhaitham, and Alhaitham grounds Kaveh. They each complete the other while the other completes them. So even though they're their own people, you can't separate the influence they have on each other.

[st4rssky]

You wanna kiss me so bad..

☆ inspired by this silly post from Ro<3 ☆

“Are you kidding!? The main character is obviously in love with her best friend!” I huffed in frustration, feeling the heat of our argument pulse in the air. I had been going back and forth with Satan for the past fifteen minutes over the book he had so enthusiastically recommended.

He slowly lifted his gaze from the pages of his current read, a sly smile forming on his lips. “I see how it may seem like that to a novice reader like yourself, but I can assure you it’s not like that.”

I scoffed, rolling my eyes with a laugh. “Novice? Just because I don’t have my own personal library doesn’t mean I’m a novice. I know what I read.”

Satan leaned back in his chair, arms crossed, the smugness radiating off him like heat from a flame. “Ah, but sometimes the best stories require a deeper understanding. You have to look beyond the obvious.”

“Look beyond? Seriously?” I shot back. “The girl is practically pining over her best friend in every chapter! It’s like a neon sign.”

He tilted his head, pretending to ponder my words. “Or it’s simply a reflection of a strong platonic bond. Not everything has to be romantic, you know.”

I raised an eyebrow, a smirk tugging at the corners of my mouth. “Sure, if you ignore all the longing looks and the way they keep finding excuses to be alone together.”

“Maybe they’re just really good friends,” he countered, a teasing glint in his eye. “You’re reading it like a rom-com when it could just be a heartfelt exploration of friendship.”

“Yeah, right. Tell that to the thousands of readers shipping them online.” I leaned forward, fueled by my conviction. “You’re just in denial because you like this book too much.”

Satan chuckled, shaking his head. “Or maybe I’m just more discerning. You should try it sometime. Might improve your perspective.”

“Discerning, huh? Sounds like a fancy way to say ‘wrong,’” I retorted, but a smile crept onto my face. The playful banter was what I enjoyed most about our discussions, even if it made me want to throw the book at him.

“God, you are so stubborn!” Satan replied, a smirk tugging at his lips as he chuckled. “It’s okay to be wrong, you know?”

I shot back, folding my arms defiantly over my chest. “You wanna kiss me so bad it makes you look stupid.”

He paused, a flicker of mischief in his eyes. Silently, he closed his book, stood up, and took a few steps toward me. “Oh? I can’t make a fool of myself now, can I?”

Before I could respond, he backed me against the bookshelf, the hard wood pressing against my back. My breath hitched, caught off guard by the sudden intimacy. Satan's fingers brushed gently along my jaw, sending an electric thrill through me.

He held my gaze, his eyes searching mine, before flicking down to my lips. There was a heartbeat of tension, and then he leaned in, kissing me sweetly.

It was soft and lingering, the world around us fading into the background. My initial surprise melted away as I kissed him back, warmth flooding through me. When he finally pulled away, that teasing smile returned.

“So, am I still stupid?” he asked, a playful glint in his eyes.

“HE KISSED ME?? WE WERE FIGHTING AND HE KISSED ME??” I exclaimed, pacing back and forth in front of Asmo’s bed, my heart still racing from the unexpected turn of events.

Asmo giggled lightly, his focus on filing his nails, a playful smile dancing across his lips. “Maybe next time he’ll get you naked~”

I stopped mid-step, turning to face him. “Asmo! Are you kidding? We were literally at each other’s throats one minute, and then—bam! Kiss!”

He tossed the nail file aside, leaning back on his hands, looking thoroughly entertained. “Sounds like a classic move to me. Tension builds, and then... surprise romance!”

“Surprise romance? I was ready to strangle him!” I said, throwing my hands up in exasperation. “And now I’m supposed to just brush it off like it’s no big deal?”

“Why not?” Asmo shrugged, grinning. “Kissing during a fight is like a plot twist! You know you’re dying to see where it goes next.”

My steps faltered lightly, my face flushing. I looked away, huffing under my breath. I hate it when he's right.

@l3viat8an mwah mwah<3

[veilkeeper]

thoughts on the astarion-halsin polymance

i know some people dont like the halsin polymance specifically if the PC's other partner is astarion but. i want to talk about it. because i think maybe a lot of people have come to conclusions without seeing the scenes in question for themselves. so let me give a different perspective.

disclaimers: *i know a lot of people ship/hc this polymance as a triad, but for the purposes of this post i'm talking specifically about the "hinge" dynamic we see in-game thx. **also i got the halsin romance trigger before completing astarion's personal quest, so this post is talking about that perspective, and all quotes are from those conversations. ***i respect people who dont play this route. you're allowed to play this game however you want. the purpose of this post is to discuss the canon, in-game text and how it supports the astarion-halsin polymance as a viable and healthy path for these relationships, with nuance and respect to astarion's personal issues. this is not meant to convert anyone, but it is meant to clarify and provide additional context that i feel is largely missing from a lot of discussions about how the polymance is "bad", unilaterally.

let's start with halsin, because i think he's the easier perspective to tease out here, given that he really leaves nothing to the imagination. he's incredibly earnest and open, and will happily describe his perspective on non-monogamy right out the gate. as he says...

The wolf mates for life, but the bear roams free and partners as its instinct dictates. I need to stay true to my nature, and you to yours.

now, to get ahead of potential backlash here... if you haven't spent a lot of time with halsin, particularly if you've never flirted with him, that line may imply that he's a "player". he is not. given the context of the PCs interactions with him up to this point (and how he treats the relationship after, if you confirm the romance), halsin is deeply devoted, and has really strong feelings for the PC. it's really sweet, i highly recommend romancing him, either as a polymance or solo.

what he's describing here is a perspective of cultural non-monogamy. that he believes his feelings are not diminished by having multiple relationships at the same time, and he expects that if the PC agrees to a relationship with him that they will respect his freedom to pursue others when/if such feelings arise, just as he will respect the PC's freedom to continue and/or pursue other relationships as well. it's a really succinct and frankly unexpectedly respectful negotiation of the terms of a polyam relationship.

and that respect is evident from the get go. if you've never seen this conversation, it basically opens with him saying "hey, i have these feelings about you, i was wondering if you maybe felt the same," and if the PC says that they do, he immediately acknowledges the existing relationship and tells the PC that they can't move forward without consent. and you cant; speaking to halsin again just has him ask the PC if they've spoken to their other partner yet. at every turn, halsin is incredibly respectful of the PCs other partner, he never diminishes that relationship, nor does he expect the PC to ever place him above that relationship. he even says:

Indeed, I am but one of your lovers. You and I should seek happiness, wherever it lies. You are all I want, but I will not hoard you to myself.

he makes it very clear from the get-go that he has no designs on the PC's other relationship and that he is more than happy to take whatever they want to give him.

which leads me to my overarching point: astarion is consenting to this dynamic specifically because the other person in question is halsin.

and we know this for a few reasons. first, because.... mechanically in game, he's the only person you can romance at the same time as astarion. while astarion mentions at various points that he is fine with "arrangements", generally speaking, every other potential romance partner results in a "you have to choose one of us" conversation. the reason astarion gives for why the PC has to choose varies, i believe, but since i don't have the dialogue on hand (i have been faithful as hell in my playthrough) i won't speculate about those conversations.

however, we also know that astarion is consenting to an arrangement with halsin specifically because of this line:

The druid is unique. He has a lot of experience with this type of arrangement. Thus, I'm sure it would be quite a harmless affair.

which is interesting, isn't it? hold onto this one, we'll circle back to it later. and then of course, the other line we need to discuss from astarion here is the famously controversial...

It's not because… you know… we haven't… in a while?

so this is where i get into the potentially controversial take that i have, because it's more nuanced than arguments i've seen on either side of the pro-/anti- polymance debate. but basically i think that astarion is... insecure. shocker, i know. but unlike some takes i've seen, i dont think this means he can't consent to a polyam relationship, i think it means that he has certain Conditions related to it, that he has decided have been met. and i think those conditions are as follows:

the PC's interest in halsin is not borne out of any deficiency of astarion's.

this is why he asks the famous question. he's insecure, and making sure that the PC's interest in halsin is not because astarion is failing to "satisfy" them, that it's not because he isn't enough. astarion has a lot of self-worth issues that he tries really hard to hide, and i think it would be easy for him to think that the PC starting another relationship could be a result of him being... insufficient.

for people who have never been in a polyam relationship, this is a thing. this is an important thing, and making sure all of your partners feel that they're valued and "enough" is an important part of navigating these relationships. astarion does the right thing here, by expressing his insecurity and asking for reassurance. and when the PC gives it to him, the relief is evident and he gives consent to the dynamic immediately. not because he's been coerced, but because he's been reassured.

PC: Gods, I don't want you to think that for a moment. Astarion: I know I was being foolish. But thank you for saying it.

the second condition is:

that he is still a priority

this is pretty self explanatory but since it's sort of the clincher for my whole argument here, i do have to say the quiet part out loud. i dont think what astarion wants or needs is to be the PC's only partner. he talks about "arrangements" on multiple occasions, i dont think he has a problem with sharing. what i do think he wants is to be the PC's primary partner. what he's consenting to, in my view, is hierarchical polyamory, to use the proper term. as in, the PC can fool around with whoever they want, even have feelings for other people, so long as they always come back to astarion. he needs to feel like he is secure and valued above others as he values them above others. he needs to feel like the PC isn't going anywhere.

and that's why he consents to an arrangement with halsin, but no one else. because all of the other romance options, the origin companions, would want to be equal with astarion, they would want non-hierarchical polyamory. halsin, on the other hand, is all about taking what can be given and having a more fluid understanding of relationships. he doesn't care if he's #1, he cares that the PC cares about him, right now. no formal definitions or obligations required.

that's what astarion means when he says "the druid is unique." that's what he means when he says "he has a lot of experience with this type of arrangement." that's what he means when he says it will be a "harmless affair." because he knows halsin is never going to try to take the PC away from him. he knows halsin isn't going to be a threat to him and his status with his partner. and that's why he's comfortable saying yes, even though he says no to every other possible arrangement.

it's not because he was coerced. it's not because he doesn't know how to say no. it's because he feels safe. and that's what we want.

some additional notes while i'm here...

on jealousy: a lot of people hc astarion as the jealous type, as perhaps a little possessive, and i am also one of those people. it makes sense; he's a guy who hasn't had anything in 200 years, and the PC is the first person he's cared about like this. i can definitely see him being a little possessive and prone to jealousy. but stepping outside of the realm of fiction, jealous/possessive feelings are often the result of insecurity and in real relationships should absolutely not be used as a tool to control the behaviour of another partner. and, crucially, jealous/possessive feelings are a thing to be talked about and worked through, not tip-toed around. the presence of those feelings does not automatically mean that a polyamorous relationship is impossible, it just means there's another thing to talk about, and by astarion consenting to the PC having another relationship, he's pretty clearly saying he's willing to talk through those feelings and work on them.

on the ability to consent: i know that astarion doesn't talk about his feelings enough. but i truly dont think that this is a case of astarion saying yes when he means no. astarion can say no, even in high pressure situations he wasn't expecting. he says no to the astral-touched tadpole (rather firmly, i might add), he says no to sleeping with the drow twins, etc. the scene that most people use as proof that astarion cannot consent happens in a much different emotional context, with a lot of direct coercion, and is followed by astarion taking back personal control and dumping the PC. that is not what happens in this scene, when astarion is consenting to a polyamorous relationship. there is no coercion (in fact the PC can explicitly say "i wouldn't even consider it if it bothered you", and astarion expected the conversation, so he would have been able to prepare his thoughts and feelings ahead of time. at no point does he say no or even imply he's not okay with an arrangement with halsin.

on timing: ive seen some people say that they would be more okay with the astarion-halsin polymance if all of this was not be happening right now. i agree with that. ideally, astarion would have more time to adjust to his relationship before it was opened up at all. but because this is a video game, everything is happening during the events of the game. and because this is a video game, the events of the game are high pressure and wild and everything is happening all at once. i don't blame people who elongate the timeline in fan content, or who turn down halsin because they think its "too soon." thats actually very explicitly something halsin says when he initially propositions the player - that he hopes it isn't "too soon." however, astarion still consents (see point above), and relationships barely ever have good timing. one could argue that even the solomance with astarion does not have good timing, when considering astarion's trauma and recovery. so. we make do. and i think it would be... a disservice? to what is (in my opinion) really good polyam writing to just say "actually it's all terrible and icky because there's a lot going on right now" and dismiss it out of hand.

.......................and i think that's everything. thank you for joining me on this very long (oops) deep dive into this. a double thank you for reading all the way through if you don't like the astarion-halsin polymance. i hope i gave you a different perspective, even if i didn't change your mind. love ya <3

[kingjasnah]

idk if this has been discussed but i do wonder if there was a way jasnah could have won over fen. jasnah calls her very emotionally intelligent and she only started responding positively to dalinar in ob once he got truthfully frustrated with her and did some yelling and idk i wonder if jasnah had set aside all her philosophical talk and made a passionate and emotional plea if fen would have been more receptive. but of course jasnah wouldn't do that

short answer: agreed. long answer: ive been wanting to talk about this for weeks. so you're getting kinda a long one.

jasnah is obviously one of my favorite characters and that's almost why i was clapping and cheering during the taravangian takedown--like all of her flaws and everything that makes her compelling was completely cracked open. if jasnah cares about anything at all, it's how she is perceived. we dont know what happened to her when she was a child and we dont know why it seems that she was institutionalized or at least in confinement for a period of her youth but we do know that every single thing she does is a measure to keep her from never going back to the kind of powerlessness she felt back then. i remember shallan commented on her perfect her hair and makeup and clothing was waaay back in book 1/2 and thought how interesting it was for a self professed heretic to still take care to make sure the darkeyed sailors on their ship to the shattered plains never saw her out of makeup. jasnah has been vulnerable in this series, sure, but only to her family. or maybe shallan. or maybe hoid? persumably. every single page she has appeared on in this entire series has reinforced that to her a huge part of the way she does her job (and im considering hiring a spy to follow her sister in law her job too, not just being queen. i mean what she considers her role to be in her family) of statecraft is in the perception that she is perfect. and yeah, that's why it was never going to work with fen

dalinar did have a hard time cracking fen because i think that in the beginning of their interactions they both made fundamental misinterpretations of each other based on where they came from. fen only thought of dalinar as a warmonger who would walk all over her country in the name of conquest, and dalinar straight up did not understand that fen's perspective was so heavily influenced by the thaylen mercantile culture. they still found common ground and yeah it was a frank conversation and an abandoment of diplomat speak that did it. jasnah's made emotional pleas before but i think the crux of her error with fen is that she DID know how important the mercantile culture was but she interpreted it as "fen is going to leave the alliance if she gets a better deal for her country so i need to prove that im her best option" instead of "fen values exchange of commerce but she really values relationships. fen's culture involves building relationships with other merchants so that they can trade with each other and understand each other" (please see the original two rysn interludes). fen didn't need a perfect argument from jasnah but she also didn't need dalinar's approach either. all she needed was for jasnah to TRUST her enough to treat her like an equal partner in their alliance instead of a marker to be moved around a war map.

cause let's be honest. fen is an extremely capable ruler. she's smart and she's been in power for a long time. i do not think for a second that she was genuinely aghast that jasnah sent spies after aesudan or well, the kharbrath murders were pretty bad but im certain that a middle aged to senior member of ruling nobility has seen worse. it's not a bad thing for jasnah to put her people first. i am convinced that fen felt betrayed because jasnah had already set the parameters of their relationship by even engaging in this debate with taravangian. fen saw her logic backfire on herself and went "oh. okay. you are putting YOUR people first because you do not see the thaylen people as having the kind of relationship to you as, for example, vstim had with the shin or with the reshi king. you see us as an argument to be won over, as numbers on a map, as a thought excersize. not onyl withh you walk all over my country in the name of conquest (like dalinar might have) but you'd do it for the sake of what, rhetoric??" in that way, at least taravodium was honest.

but yes. jasnah would never do that. jasnah put on a full face of makeup every morning in her cabin just in case a handful of sailors that she never learned the names of would see her. of course she would never let a queen that she respected see her worry for her kingdom on purpose but it's over now. the mask has cracked, she lost, and she knows that the trap she fell into only closed around her because of her own hubris/the kind of love you have for winning that you'd have to have in order to spend your pre-apocalypse time actively arguing about heresy with every scholar and ardent out there. taravangian's arguments would not have worked on fen if jasnah had never put her in the position to be won over in the first place. i cannot stress enough that jasnah was my first love in this series and watching her finally crack and expose what i have always considered to be the most interesting thing about her was easily one of my favorite moments in the book. insane shit. i can't wait to see how she builds herself back up.

[brsb4hls]

It's clearly a buddy dynamic. Shoulder claps and light teasing. I feel like a lot of the 'baiting' happens in-fandom. F.e. when Loki was afraid the pruning might not work, he was most likely contemplating how to tell Mobius about the threat that's supposed to be coming (the Kangs) and that he will have to handle it alone. It was too much info to put into words. By calling that a 'confession' fandom creates it's own baiting loop. Nothing to confess here, just a rough situation.

Also every interview defines the relationship as a friendship and a buddy dynamic. I don't get how anybody can feel 'baited' when they are told excactly what it is from the very beginning.

(Not to mention the interview part about Loki's bisexuality. "Erm, it will not be as present" is a nice way of saying not present at all, because Disney).

And while Loki is canonically bi there is nothing about Mobius that would suggest queerness. They even built up tension with him and Ravonna in season 1.( that does not mean being queer equals certain traits of course but in media cliched traits would be used for 'coding' and that's not the case here).

What was baity though was claiming they would explore Loki's bisexuality and generfluidness prior to the release of season 1 and not actually following through apart from words on a paper and one throw away line of dialogue.

Loki and Mobius though? Forced Coworkers turned friends. Very clearly.

I am not trying to start some kind of debate. I'm just curious what people think...because I've seen some takes on here that seem really wild (imo).

And I would be very interested in seeing folks reasons for their opinions. So feel free to reply or reblog with, like, some details from the show that led your opinion. (But, again, not trying to have any arguing here).

Also, please feel free to reblog for a bigger sample size. I genuinely want to know what is the most common opinion.

[mrsblukola]

These anons are too much. Ok, you believe that Luke and Antonia are together and you have accepted that. Or that Nic and Jake are together. Great for you! But what does that have to do with us? We don’t believe that and you coming here, to a LUKOLA SHIPPING BLOG, to tell us that we should just accept that is wild! Just as you have every right to believe he is with A, we are also still entitled to our opinions. The vast majority of Lukola shippers stick to their little corner of the internet sharing thoughts and opinions with each other. We aren’t sending hate to L, N, A, or J. And if at the end of the day we are wrong about everything, then so what? It doesn’t directly impact us in any way whatsoever. But we still have the right to ship Nic and Luke, as long as we are respectful about it.

I am starting to think the issue with these anons trying to push L/A and N/J might be that they still really want to believe in N and L too, but they are too afraid to be disappointed if it turns out they are wrong. So they come to Lukola blogs to try to shame everyone for not “seeing” things as they do, but only so that the blogger and their followers can reinforce why we believe they are together. It gives them hope even when what they are saying is the total opposite. If that makes any sense at all. I mean, if they are so certain in their belief about L/A and/or N/J, then they wouldn’t be worried about what we think. Just like those of that believe that Nic and Luke are together aren’t worried about what they think.

And I am not saying we should all believe exactly the same things because then it simply becomes an echo chamber. I appreciate that you don’t block/delete the people that think differently and are voicing their thoughts and opinions in a meaningful way on your blog. Because some will block you immediately if you don’t fall in line with everything they say. It’s good to have an open discussion, especially when we don’t agree. It gives us a whole new perspective. But these anons say the exact same thing over and over and think that by being condescending, they will change people’s minds.

I think Nic and Luke are together, but understanding full and well that I could be wrong, but I am also not going to anyone’s blogs trying to force my opinions as facts onto anyone that believes differently.

I’m so sorry for the rant, but it’s frustrating for these anons to continuously send in these same old tired asks. My kudos to you and Bianca because you guys handle these anons phenomenally, even though I am sure it can get so stressful. 😩🫠

Don’t apologize, I love to read rants and hear what others are thinking.

I agree! Why come into our peaceful space and try to convince of these things? It’s so tiresome. It’s clearly not going to work so just march on back to where you came from. I feel like that too. Also I feel like most of them are likely scared Lukola shippers who are afraid that if we’re wrong they’ll look dumb so by pretending to be another shipper they’ll have that to fall back on and say “see told you so”.

Yeah it’s nice to have different opinions and perspectives that can bounce off each other. Of course♥️ I hope I’ve created a safe space for opinions while also fostering my ideas. I’ve heard of those blogs and it’s not a good place to go. At the end of the day shipping is suppose to be fun and light hearted. It’s all speculative anyway as we don’t know these two irl. I love to read the comments under my posts as everyone has different ideas and thoughts but they all lead to the same result.. Lukola 🥹

“I think Nic and Luke are together, but understanding full and well that I could be wrong, but I am also not going to anyone’s blogs trying to force my opinions as facts onto anyone that believes differently.” 💯 I love this.

Thank you 🙇🏼‍♀️ it does get that way sometimes but I end up deleting a lot of the asks because they’re all the same.

[biancadoes1]

Let me just start by saying that I do think there is more to all this than what we are being shown and I do think Nic and Luke are together. But I am curious your thoughts on this push of the adjacents? Ok, Nic may not necessarily be pushing it, but in my opinion, she is at the bare minimum leaning into the JD storyline. I guess I’m just questioning why now? Do you think it’s simply because they are just not ready to go public and are using these “relationships 🙄” to distract? I’m starting to wonder if these sudden J and A storylines might be because Nic and Luke want us shippers to back off? I mean we have Nic with her “my buddy” and “my dear friend” and Luke with his appearances with A.

But then I start doubting that too for a few reasons. I mean, they are both adults and could just ask fans to stop shipping them if it’s what they really want. Also, to us, we are so entrenched in it that I think alot of us believe that everyone is shipping them but I think it’s actually a small group of folks that are still on the ship in comparison to the Bridgerton/Polin GA. And I think the vast majority of us keep to our quiet little corner of the internet and keep our shipping discussions to like minded blogs, so it almost seems like they would have to be searching for the shipping discussions. Not saying that some people aren’t loud as fuck about it and posting/commenting on all their insta posts, but I am just saying most are shipping respectfully. And the last reason I will mention that I don’t think they care if we continue to ship them is because it’s always this same pattern: Nic/Luke start sharing stuff almost as a warning that something is coming, then we get hit with adjacent pap pictures or something, then we get what seems almost like coordinated posts that could be seen as a hint that everything is fine.

Or they just really are with these people and we have read everything so very wrong. Which I know is always a possibility. But at the same time I find it so hard to believe. Anytime we see Luke with A, he just genuinely doesn’t look like a man happy and in love. But then we see him with Nic and it’s like everything fits together perfectly. And I won’t even mention Nic and J because it just makes absolutely no sense to me.

I’m so sorry to have rambled on for so long. I guess I’m just feeling v confused and don’t have anyone to talk to about it. 🫨🥴 I would just love to hear your thoughts on this if you are willing to share.

Thanks Bianca, for your amazing blog! I know we don’t always make it easy for you, but we are grateful for all you do! 💜

The fact that there’s an established pattern here that a lot of people are aware is proof enough imo.

These things wouldn’t continuously happen like this if they were just out there “living life” in these pictures.

People really struggle with this when they only look on the surface level. These pics work on the GP who don’t actively participate in the deep fandom where these things are discussed which I believe is the goal.

They want people to believe they’re in other relationships currently.

Why?

I don’t know. I would like to think things are coming to a close soon but maybe they have deals they need to settle before then. Certain things need to be played out before that happens.

Maybe they don’t want to come out period, idk but I wish they would make that more known so I can go 🤣 because I’ll be so real I wanted to jet earlier this week because it’s starting to feel just a bit ridiculous and like we’re never going to reach a conclusion.

Regardless, everyone feels how they feel about this situation but from my perspective, they’re showing the public one thing and living out their lives in a completely different way away from prying eyes.

[autistichalsin]

It has come to my attention that some are disappointed with the content I share here. Namely, some are angry that I "push certain views of Halsin" by only reblogging headcanons that agree with my own.

To be clear, I am a Tumblr blog, not a lending library. I am under no obligation to give equal attention to every perspective. I will reblog a headcanon for one of two reasons: 1. I agree with it, 2. I didn't agree with it, but I enjoyed how the author presented it and wanted to share it.

To expect me to reblog posts that do not interest me for either of the above reasons just to give "equal attention" to all interpretations of Halsin is staggeringly entitled. If you want a blog that focuses on every Halsin post equally, make a "the Halsin tag" blog that automatically reblogs every post shared in his tag, or if you can't program, reblog them yourself. I have seen them done for other characters and ships before, and they are always enjoyed by all. I know I would certainly follow and reblog from such a project. But THIS page is not that project. I do NOT love all views of Halsin equally, I don't love all Halsin ships equally, I don't like all Halsin fics equally. I am here to reblog what makes ME happy, and to share the thoughts that make ME happy.

Which brings me to my next point: some are also angry that I write metas only from my own point of view. These metas are a labor of love for me. I enjoy analyzing media, which is why I'm also planning a side project of analyzing some of my favorite TV shows. I am not here to analyze all interpretations of my favorite media, though. I am here to analyze the ones that interest me.

If you would like me to analyze and reach the conclusions you do (such as Halsin being a happy middle aged guy who has no problems of his own, or Halsin being 100% healed from his sexual assault, or Halsin having had no friction at all with his Grove until the day he left with Aradin), I suggest you DM me so we can discuss a commissioner's fee, or perhaps me setting up a Patreon for you to support my work. If you aren't going to be compensating me (which is understandable, these are hard times) then I would ask that you let me enjoy my hobby in peace, and understand that no one is obligated to make content for free that caters specifically to you. Or you could just save us all the trouble and block me so you don't have to see my metas anymore.

But demanding I cater my metas to every viewpoint, that I reblog equally from all points of view, all ships, etc relating to Halsin, is absolutely insane and entitled behavior, and with all the respect these individuals have shown me when making these complaints, I am going to decline at this time. Thanks.

[sneezypeasy]

Why I Deliberately Avoided the "Colonizer" Argument in my Zutara Thesis - and Why I'll Continue to Avoid it Forever

This is a question that occasionally comes up under my Zutara video essay, because somehow in 2 hours worth of content I still didn't manage to address everything (lol.) But this argument specifically is one I made a point of avoiding entirely, and there are some slightly complicated reasons behind that. I figure I'll write them all out here.

From a surface-level perspective, Zuko's whole arc, his raison d'etre, is to be a de-colonizer. Zuko's redemption arc is kinda all about being a de-colonizer, and his redemption arc is probably like the most talked about plot point of ATLA, so from a basic media literacy standpoint, the whole argument is unsound in the first place, and on that basis alone I find it childish to even entertain as an argument worth engaging with, to be honest.

(At least one person in my comments pointed out that if any ship's "political implications" are problematic in some way, it really ought to be Maiko, as Mai herself is never shown or suggested to be a strong candidate for being a de-colonizing co-ruler alongside Zuko. If anything her attitudes towards lording over servants/underlings would make her… a less than suitable choice for this role, but I digress.)

But the reason I avoided rebutting this particular argument in my video goes deeper than that. From what I've observed of fandom discourse, I find that the colonizer argument is usually an attempt to smear the ship as "problematic" - i.e., this ship is an immoral dynamic, which would make it problematic to depict as canon (and by extension, if you ship it regardless, you're probably problematic yourself.)

And here is where I end up taking a stand that differentiates me from the more authoritarian sectors of fandom.

I'm not here to be the fandom morality police. When it comes to lit crit, I'm really just here to talk about good vs. bad writing. (And when I say "good", I mean structurally sound, thematically cohesive, etc; works that are well-written - I don't mean works that are morally virtuous. More on this in a minute.) So the whole colonizer angle isn't something I'm interested in discussing, for the same reason that I actually avoided discussing Katara "mothering" Aang or the "problematic" aspects of the Kataang ship (such as how he kissed her twice without her consent). My whole entire sections on "Kataang bad" or "Maiko bad" in my 2 hour video was specifically, "how are they written in a way that did a disservice to the story", and "how making them false leads would have created valuable meaning". I deliberately avoided making an argument that consisted purely of, "here's how Kataang/Maiko toxic and Zutara wholesome, hence Zutara superiority, the end".

Why am I not willing to be the fandom morality police? Two reasons:

I don't really have a refined take on these subjects anyway. Unless a piece of literature or art happens to touch on a particular issue that resonates with me personally, the moral value of art is something that doesn't usually spark my interest, so I rarely have much to say on it to begin with. On the whole "colonizer ship" subject specifically, other people who have more passion and knowledge than me on the topic can (and have) put their arguments into words far better than I ever could. I'm more than happy to defer to their take(s), because honestly, they can do these subjects justice in a way I can't. Passing the mic over to someone else is the most responsible thing I can do here, lol. But more importantly:

I reject the conflation of literary merit with moral virtue. It is my opinion that a good story well-told is not always, and does not have to be, a story free from moral vices/questionable themes. In my opinion, there are good problematic stories and bad "pure" stories and literally everything in between. To go one step further, I believe that there are ways that a romance can come off "icky", and then there are ways that it might actually be bad for the story, and meming/shitposting aside, the fact that these two things don't always neatly align is not only a truth I recognise about art but also one of those truths that makes art incredibly interesting to me! So on the one hand, I don't think it is either fair or accurate to conflate literary "goodness" with moral "goodness". On a more serious note, I not only find this type of conflation unfair/inaccurate, I also find it potentially dangerous - and this is why I am really critical of this mindset beyond just disagreeing with it factually. What I see is that people who espouse this rhetoric tend to encourage (or even personally engage in) wilful blindness one way or the other, because ultimately, viewing art through these lens ends up boxing all art into either "morally permissible" or "morally impermissible" categories, and shames anyone enjoying art in the "morally impermissible" box. Unfortunately, I see a lot of people responding to this by A) making excuses for art that they guiltily love despite its problematic elements and/or B) denying the value of any art that they are unable to defend as free from moral wickedness.

Now, I'm not saying that media shouldn't be critiqued on its moral virtue. I actually think morally critiquing art has its place, and assuming it's being done in good faith, it absolutely should be done, and probably even more often than it is now.

Because here's the truth: Sometimes, a story can be really good. Sometimes, you can have a genuinely amazing story with well developed characters and powerful themes that resonate deeply with anyone who reads it. Sometimes, a story can be all of these things - and still be problematic.*

(Or, sometimes a story can be all of those things, and still be written by a problematic author.)

That's why I say, when people conflate moral art with good art, they become blind to the possibility that the art they like being potentially immoral (or vice versa). If only "bad art" is immoral, how can the art that tells the story hitting all the right beats and with perfect rhythm and emotional depth, be ever problematic?

(And how can the art I love, be ever problematic?)

This is why I reject the idea that literary merit = moral virtue (or vice versa) - because I do care about holding art accountable. Even the art that is "good art". Actually, especially the art that is "good art". Especially the art that is well loved and respected and appreciated. The failure to distinguish literary critique from moral critique bothers me on a personal level because I think that conflating the two results in the detriment of both - the latter being the most concerning to me, actually.

So while I respect the inherent value of moral criticism, I'm really not a fan of any argument that presents moral criticism as equivalent to literary criticism, and I will call that out when I see it. And from what I've observed, a lot of the "but Zutara is a colonizer ship" tries to do exactly that, which is why I find it a dishonest and frankly harmful media analysis framework to begin with.

But even when it is done in good faith, moral criticism of art is also just something I personally am neither interested nor good at talking about, and I prefer to talk about the things that I am interested and good at talking about.

(And some people are genuinely good at tackling the moral side of things! I mean, I for one really enjoyed Lindsay Ellis's take on Rent contextualising it within the broader political landscape at the time to show how it's not the progressive queer story it might otherwise appear to be. Moral critique has value, and has its place, and there are definitely circumstances where it can lead to societal progress. Just because I'm not personally interested in addressing it doesn't mean nobody else can do it let alone that nobody else should do it, but also, just because it can and should be done, doesn't mean that it's the only "one true way" to approach lit crit by anyone ever. You know, sometimes... two things… can be true… at once?)

Anyway, if anyone reading this far has recognised that this is basically a variant of the proship vs. antiship debate, you're right, it is. And on that note, I'm just going to leave some links here. I've said about as much as I'm willing/able to say on this subject, but in case anyone is interested in delving deeper into the philosophy behind my convictions, including why I believe leftist authoritarian rhetoric is harmful, and why the whole "but it would be problematic in real life" is an anti-ship argument that doesn't always hold up to scrutiny, I highly recommend these posts/threads:

In general this blog is pretty solid; I agree with almost all of their takes - though they focus more specifically on fanfic/fanart than mainstream media, and I think quite a lot of their arguments are at least somewhat appropriate to extrapolate to mainstream media as well.

I also strongly recommend Bob Altemeyer's book "The Authoritarians" which the author, a verified giga chad, actually made free to download as a pdf, here. His work focuses primarily on right-wing authoritarians, but a lot of his research and conclusions are, you guessed it, applicable to left-wing authoritarians also.

And if you're an anti yourself, welp, you won't find support from me here. This is not an anti-ship safe space, sorrynotsorry 👆

In conclusion, honestly any "but Zutara is problematic" argument is one I'm likely to consider unsound to begin with, let alone the "Zutara is a colonizer ship" argument - but even if it wasn't, it's not something I'm interested in discussing, even if I recognise there are contexts where these discussions have value. I resent the idea that just because I have refined opinions on one aspect of a discussion means I must have (and be willing to preach) refined opinions on all aspects of said discussion. (I don't mean to sound reproachful here - actually the vast majority of the comments I get on my video/tumblr are really sweet and respectful, but I do get a handful of silly comments here and there and I'm at the point where I do feel like this is something worth saying.) Anyway, I'm quite happy to defer to other analysts who have the passion and knowledge to give complicated topics the justice they deserve. All I request is that care is taken not to conflate literary criticism with moral criticism to the detriment of both - and I think it's important to acknowledge when that is indeed happening. And respectfully, don't expect me to give my own take on the matter when other people are already willing and able to put their thoughts into words so much better than me. Peace ✌

*P.S. This works for real life too, by the way. There are people out there who are genuinely not only charming and likeable, but also generous, charitable and warm to the vast majority of the people they know. They may also be amazing at their work, and if they have a job that involves saving lives like firefighting or surgery or w.e, they may even be the reason dozens of people are still alive today. They may honestly do a lot of things you'd have to concede are "good" deeds.

They may be all of these things, and still be someone's abuser. 🙃

Two things can be true at once. It's important never to forget that.

[creatingblackcharacters]

Hi! I hope you are doing well.

Yesterday I went to the Rochester Museum and Science Center. They had a section on anti-Black racism that displayed several extremely racist caricatures that had been used in advertising, media, etc. I think the point was to show that these types of ways of depicting Black people is harmful, as it discussed why the different examples were bad. But they also used the N word with no warning, and despite signs saying that the section might be sensitive, I felt very weird about the fact that it was all openly on display in a children's museum. I can't imagine a young Black child being exposed to what was there on a school field trip, but there were plenty of school groups there. And while there was a part of the museum dedicated to teaching about important Black historical figures from the Rochester/West New York area who were involved in fighting against slavery, there wasn't anything about Black history or accomplishments outside of the context of Abolition. It made me extremely uncomfortable, but I'm wondering if I'm overreacting? Like, I imagine the point is to be uncomfortable by the things on display, but it seemed extremely out of place for a children's museum, especially without any exhibits celebrating Black people and lifting them up. I honestly could not tell you if a single Black person had even been involved in the exhibit either. Am I walking away from this the wrong way though? Should I be more focused on what the exhibit was trying to teach?

Well, the museum is doing its job, which is stating the facts. Doug Belton Sr is Black, and he collected and contributed all those pieces! They did put up a warning. And I suppose it's a given that the n word is gonna be throughout, it's the history of antiblack racism in media 😅

It's also the job of the ADULTS who brought the kids to the exhibit to explain beforehand what is about to happen. It's for families, the Family needs to learn about it together! I remember going to the Freedom Center as a kid on a school trip, having to sit in the box that Henry "Box" Brown shipped himself to Philadelphia in, seeing a huge video about the first person perspective of escaping slave catchers, how much effort it'd take to get across the Ohio River, and more. I wouldn't say it all fully registered at that age, but my parents thought it was important for me to see.

That leads into your other issue, which is that it didn't showcase Black historical figures outside of the context of abolition (which was another exhibit, I see). I see your argument, I do, and we absolutely need to make sure our kids understand that our history is NOT limited to that period of enslavement! Maybe you should make that known to the museum as an email or suggestion.

But yeah. Black children are not spared from the cruelties of antiblack racism whether they know about it or not; never have been. Kids had to see those cruel images when they were made, and they have to see antiblack racism in media right now. As sorry as you feel for them- and you should- this is our reality. "This is How They See You". That's why these conversations need to be had!

But I might just be jaded and also an adult. My family was always serious about me being aware of these things, even from elementary school age. This exhibit doesn't even look as bad as I thought 😅 dare I say it, I was expecting far worse... this is tame fr. Other Black people may have different opinions than me, if y'all wanna offer them!

[shadowqueenjude]

I’m mostly staying out of the ship war discourse but I wanted to discuss this because I can offer a different perspective from informed experience.

Here is the thing: Whether Azriel likes it or not, he will always be Illyrian. That is something he will have to learn to accept if he ever wants to move on. This guy clearly has issues moving on and a huge part of that is because he hasn’t made peace with his past.

Believe me, as an Indian, there is stuff I LOATHE about our culture. Every culture has some bad shit; there is no “perfect idyllic unproblematic culture.” Why do you think people are so fascinated by the idea of a utopia?

Clearly Illyrians are looked down upon in many places. “Illyrian brute” was a term heard often. I have personally been a victim to racial discrimination as well: I’ve been called a terrorist, told my family doesn’t love me because they wanted a boy (i have an older brother btw), and had a song written about my body hair which circulated around the entire school. So yeah, there are days where I wish I wasn’t Indian because it would be easier if it wasn’t.

But there are also things I fucking love about my culture. The fashion, the food, the tradition, the languages, the respect we are taught from an early age, the value of family and education. And there is nothing else I would rather be. I am Indian and I’m fucking proud of it.

Illyrians are not completely terrible, and to say that is disrespectful to our Illyrian princess Emerie. Even if Azriel hates every single Illyrian man, he cannot turn a blind eye to the plight of the women of his own people, especially considering he is in a position of power to stop it.

Azriel’s character arc has to involve confronting his past trauma with his family, learning to stop latching onto unavailable women, and accepting and embracing his heritage. Because until he accepts he is Illyrian, until he helps his people, he will never know peace and he will always hate himself for being Illyrian.

[martinblackwoodhater]

Martin Blackwood never really changed.

His attitude changed, sure - he went from "everyone I care about hates me so I must deserve it" to "I am terrible but so are these people and since they've been so mean to me I should take revenge, I'm not as weak as they all think". But his way of thinking stays the same throughout the whole series.

What I dislike about Martin and what stays the same even after his "character development" is that despite claiming to be a carer, he consistently fails to consider things from other people's perspective, and his fans overlook that part. I've always felt like his attempts at caring for people (bringing them tea etc) were somewhat clumsy, and that he never actually knew what they even wanted - i think he said so himself when he was in the Lonely that giving people tea when they seemed down was easier than discussing their problems and actually finding out what's wrong. It shows when he just jumps to sacrifice himself when Peter Lukas took over the Instutute - he was so quick to sacrifice himself and give himself away and he didn't even stop to consider that it might be unnecessary, or that there might be another solution, like discussing with his team. His help is less about actually helping and more about punishing himself and not being useless. Since he hates himself, that kind of help is not only "making up for the space he takes up" in his mind, but it's also kind of like self harm.

It also shows in season 5 when he straight up refuses to listen to Jon's explanations of the apocalypse and the statements in general.

Despite being so set on sacrificing himself for others, berating himself, and generally always trying to fix everything for everyone by himself, Martin has only ever considered his own needs.

It actually makes him feel very real as a character, but unfortunately most of the fandom has dumbed him down to two versions - season 1-3 "cutie shy softie boy with a crush on his boss awwww" and season 4-5 "hot sexy man that wants to take revenge on everyone who has ever wronged him and he is so in love with his monster boyfriend uwu❤️❤️ jon and martin are so cute together ❤️ " no they're not. Maybe Martin was fine with Jon before the apocalypse - admittedly i don't remember the safehouse ep all that well, and that seems to be what got everyone to ship them, but after the end of the wold, when they're travelling through the Fearscape together, they are so very not happy and healthy. There are so many problems. And Martin straight up refusing to listen to anything that Jon has to say about the Eyepocalypse is just the cherry on top.

Towards the end of the story, they use each other more as anchors that help them keep the remaining bits of their humanity. They ground each other, true, and they NEED each other, but their relationship is messy and tainted with the feelings of guilt, loss, and blame. They barely communicate their feelings and intentions. They stick together in order to survive, but the only thing bonding them together is shared trauma. They are broken by what they experienced. They actually don't know each other at all, just the idealized, pre-apocalypse versions of eachother. It makes me quite upset that the vast majority of the fans missed that very important aspect of their relationship.

It was literally spelled out for them by Peter Lukas:

So yeah, maybe they are canon in the sense that they were briefly in a "romantic" relationship. But the fanon version is sooo romanticized and warped and twisted and changed and made to fit into one of those neat "workplace-enemies-to-lovers" boxes like tags on ao3.

To sum up: i don't like Martin as a person, but he's written well and realistically as a character. I despise fanon Martin and Jmart. Jmart is canon, but not in the way most people seem to think.

ily xoxo you're always right this is why you're my favourite mutual (alongside all my other mutuals. you are all my favourites.)

[azaharinflames]

I have a question. I’ve been watching 9-1-1 for a while, but I was never really part of the fandom. I only joined after S7, and I’m wondering—were Budd** fans and journalists always this aggressive about calling their ship "canon" and causing chaos?I’ve never seen a fandom like this before, and it’s honestly shocking. Shipping doesn’t have to be canon to be enjoyable. It’s just a fun way to engage with fiction and creative works. So why are they so obsessed with making it "canon," ignoring all the actual storylines, and twisting everything to fit Budd*?I’ve been in many fandoms, but I’ve never seen anything like this before.

And when I was just GA, not part of the fandom, I never once saw Buck and Eddie’s relationship as romantic.In fact, I couldn’t understand Eddie’s misogynistic attitude and his decision to name Buck as Christopher’s guardian in his will without Buck’s consent. Because of that, he was never a character I particularly liked.

Hi, Nonnie!

Coming from someone who was in the Buddie fandom until Season 7... there was a shift when Tommy came back to the show to be Buck's LI. Before that the Buddie fandom was intense, but it wasn't this bad. Perhaps I didn't interact with the most aggressive Buddies and that's why I didn't see the worst, but it wasn't that bad. There was a lot of: trust me, this is the sign that it's going canon! And then nothing happened. Every single time.

Not going to lie, it wasn't a fun fandom to be a part of. It was tiring, frustrating, and anxiety-inducing. It took all the joy out of watching the series and even rewatching some episodes. I even found myself rewatching and having to force myself to 'see' the signs, because the more I watched, the less I saw. And if you were in the fandom admitting something like that was unheard of.

Once I switched to Bucktommy (they won me over pretty quick ngl), I just realized how damn fun fandom could be. And it was around that time that I started to see an ugly shift in the Buddie fandom. Perhaps because by then I had an outsider perspective I could observe it better, but there was definitely a shift in their behavior once they realized Tommy/Lou was more than a one-episode wonder. Or, more like three. The hiatus between 705 and 706 truly was the time where things started to get truly ugly, and it's only gotten worse since then. The little mutuals I had from my time in the Buddie fandom disappeared rather quicky, because I couldn't bring myself to follow people like them. Even chill people turned toxic in a short amount of time.

Also, I don't particularly like Eddie, either. I don't dislike him necessarily, I am mostly indifferent. He's done some questionable things and he has this annoying thing where he rarely apologizes when he does something wrong. That, together with what you mentioned, makes it so I have a hard time liking him.

My inbox is open for ranting, venting, giving your opinion (unpopular or popular, I'm happy to receive and discuss both), and even confessions! Though if you don't want yours posted, please make sure to say :)

Take care <3

[laughhardrunfastbekindsblog]

Okay, my one and only major complaint about Bad Batch is that I don't think they handled Tech's death properly (I still don't think they should have killed him off at all, but here we are; and even if they intend(ed) to leave things open-ended to maybe bring him back later, the titular characters in the show wouldn't have known that); and with all the reasons I've seen floating out there as to WHY Tech's death was handled the way it was and why the characters reacted the way they did (or didn't), I just want to explain why none of the "reasons" cut it for me. If you're satisfied with how Tech was handled in season 3, I am genuinely happy for you (and lowkey jealous, ngl 😉). I've just been thinking about this a lot and need to spell it out!

Reason #1: "Why do we need to see more of the characters mourning? What we got was enough. We don't need a 2 hour episode that's all about the characters grieving." (Yes, someone actually used "2 hours" in their argument.)

Let's recap what we got: 1) A scene where Echo looks sadly at the Marauder's pilot seat, Wrecker actually sheds some tears (bless him), Omega's in denial, and Hunter tells Omega they're going to retire on Pabu because Tech is gone... followed up almost immediately by the villain dropping off broken goggles as the only proof that Tech was ever on Eriadu; 2) a scene where the audience is shown Tech's goggles but Hunter doesn't interact with them- instead, he looks at Lula, proving that his driving motivation is recovering Omega (which is fine when taken from the perspective that he can't do anything about Tech, whereas he can do something for Omega; but that perspective is ultimately just headcanon because the show never reiterates or follows up on this); 3) Wrecker alluding to Tech (not by name) to try to convince Hunter to be more cautious; 4) Omega name-dropping Tech (wait, does Crosshair even know what happened?... yay for context clues, I guess); 5) Echo name-dropping Tech in relation to data decryption with the team looking down sadly for 5 seconds (I timed it) before Crosshair changes the subject; 6) Phee name-dropping Tech in relation to her not knowing what m-count is; 7) Crosshair referring to Tech's information on Ventress; 8) Omega leaving Tech's goggles in the Archeum with none of her brothers around (hot take: it kinda bothers me that the goggles are given the same treatment as Lula, I totally understand the context/deeper meaning of Omega leaving her childhood behind by leaving Lula, but we're talking about the one relic they have of their fallen and irreplaceable brother being given the same emotional weight as a doll); 9) Phee referring to Tech having a discussion with her about Crosshair while Tech's goggles are in the background (and, noticeably, Crosshair doesn't react at all and just changes the subject back to needing a ship); 10) Crosshair says the squad died with Tech, Wrecker says Tech understood the risks, and that's that.

So, what we got was enough to establish that the characters were sad in the immediate aftermath of Tech's death, that some of them may have stayed sad about it all through season 3, and that the show didn't completely forget that Tech had been a main character at one point.

What we DON'T get is any real reference to what Tech meant to the family as an individual and a brother, any real indication of how the loss of Tech (distinct from the mission to save Omega) influences his family's actions or the story's overall narrative, any actual acknowledgement in the show of Tech's sacrifice having any meaning or the family moving past grief to express any form of gratitude for Tech's presence and influence on their lives, any reference to Tech having a true impact on 4 of his 5 siblings (Omega is the closest we get to witnessing Tech's continued influence on any of his siblings and even seeing that involves squinting/head tilts at times)... in other words, we get a few minutes of sadness, but never any catharsis. We see they miss him, but never does this truly inform the narrative or their decisions in season 3, AND it's left frustratingly vague where the characters are in the grieving process (more on that later).

Besides, no one (that I have come across, at least) was ever asking for a 2 hour episode. At most, Kanan got a 22-minute "eulogy" episode, and most of us aren't even asking for that. I'd have been at least minimally satisfied with a "Mayday moment" for Tech - and that scene lasted a grand total of 20 seconds. What would have been more satisfying would have been the show taking all those superficial name drops and converting at least a few of them into meaningful mentions indicating what Tech means to his brothers and/or how he continues to have an influence on his family and/or how his sacrifice is a motivating factor for them.

Reason #2: "There was no time."

Leaving aside the fact that there was apparently plenty of time and opportunity to make Tech (among others) a red herring...

Let's assume that the showrunners were not only told they only had 1 season left to wrap everything up, but were given highly specific time allotments for each episode to where they weren't allowed to add any scenes (I highly doubt this is what happened, but we're rolling with the "no time" thing here). You know what you do in that scenario when you're talking about something like following up on a main character's death that clearly has left your entire fanbase in an uproar? You MAKE time: you trim down the action scenes, you make the characters walk a little bit faster, you decide whether an extended scene of Echo giving Omega a crossbow that is never going to show up again is actually worth saving (I actually like the scene, by the way; just giving an example), you cut out a few of the extremely vague lines of dialogue Fennec and Asajj indulge in. What you DON'T do is kill off a beloved main character and then rely on convenient time lapses/time skips to just brush over all the fallout apart from a few name drops that do nothing to establish just how important said character was to the other characters in the show.

What's more, they could have EASILY included some true closure with ANY of the Tech name-drops/scenes that were already in the show. Have Hunter look at Tech's goggles before looking beyond them at Lula in 3.02. Have the brothers be present with Omega when she decides to leave Tech's goggles in the Archeum in 3.11. Have any of the brothers say one meaningful line about Tech while they're otherwise silently basking in the sunshine in the end scene on Pabu in 3.15!

Reason #3: "They're soldiers."

Of all the reasons given for why Tech's death was mishandled, I dislike this one the most. What does CF99 being soldiers have to do with the aftermath of Tech's death being reduced to perfunctory allusions? (If you want to get into the argument that soldiers in general have to figure out a way to "move on" and The Clone Wars didn't really spend any time on the clones processing losses after battles, let me just say I don't care for how this topic is covered in The Clone Wars either, and Bad Batch was a golden opportunity for the Star Wars franchise to move past this unfortunate trope.) Fallen soldiers in real life get memorials/funerals too, even if it's months after the battle. Fallen soldiers are honored and remembered by their families and those closest to them. If the show is trying to push the stereotype that soldiers move on from tragic deaths of comrades by being "stoic" and holding it all in and never talking about it, I strongly disagree with the perpetuation of this stereotype; and if the characters as soldiers actually DID grieve Tech in a healthy way, why didn't the show depict it?

Reason #4: "Star Wars writers don't know how to write meaningful scenes/payoff regarding death and characters dealing with death/loss."

The Bad Batch writers proved time and again how brilliant they are at writing emotional storylines with maximum payoff. Case in point: Mayday. Enough said (I'm writing too much on this general topic as it is).

Reason #5: "They got over it."

Maybe I'm reading things wrong, but a rather drastic change in behavior for one character (going from cautious and weighing all risks, to reckless and jumping headfirst into situations without proper backup), and another character including Tech's death as just one reason why he "deserves" to go on a suicide mission, does not read to me as the characters "getting over it." It reads to me as "avoidance behavior" and "continued internal conflict." (Granted, Hunter's more reckless behavior in season 3 likely had as much to do with the Omega situation as it did Tech's death, but the point still stands. And if the point DOESN'T still stand, then I've got even MORE issues with how this plotline was handled, so we'll just keep assuming it does.)

Furthermore, if the characters had truly "gotten over it," there shouldn't have been any hesitation or issue with them discussing and honoring Tech in meaningful ways.

Reason #6: "They DIDN'T get over it."

Right, and we ended the show that way, with no clear resolution to them actually coming to terms with Tech's death and honoring his memory. Great.

Reason #7: "Whatever. It's good Tech stayed dead. Tech's sacrifice meant something."

... Did it? Did it really? I mean, I know I say quite frequently that Tech's sacrifice is what made the happy ending possible for the others (because that's the only thought that got me through a rewatch of season 3). But the show, the narrative itself, certainly doesn't act like it really meant anything. Hunter says in the season 2 finale that they "weren't going to waste Tech's sacrifice" because they were going to retire on Pabu... and that discussion promptly gets forgotten and never brought up again, not even when the squad is trying to stay off the Empire's radar in season 3 after Omega returns. Never is there any discussion that "not wasting Tech's sacrifice" by hiding on Pabu to make sure no one else dies (a very understandable reaction, of course) also goes against the very mission Tech pushed for in the first place: rescuing Crosshair. Never do we hear Omega tell Crosshair, "Tech didn't give up on you, I'm not giving up on you, that's why you ARE going to escape with me." Never is there any talk about "Tech wanted us to live and stay together, so that is what we are going to do." Never is there any acknowledgement at the end of the show that they are all going to live in peace on Pabu because Tech made sure they could live.

The last half of season 4 of Rebels is full of references to Kanan's sacrifice actually meaning something and having direct tangible consequences not only for the family but for Lothal and the Rebellion. For one thing, the show itself literally spells out that the mission to shut down the Imperial factories on Lothal was actually a success because all the fuel reserves were destroyed - Kanan had died, but the mission had succeeded and directly led to the success of the bigger mission to completely free Lothal, and while this is very poor consolation for the loss of Kanan, at least the show openly acknowledged it. Kanan and his influence is also openly credited for Ezra foiling Palpatine's plans with the Jedi Temple and the WBW, Ezra learning to let go and again disrupting Palpatine's plans in the finale, and doing what was needed to ensure Lothal was fully freed.

Imagine how different Rebels would be if Kanan's death had been treated like Tech's: no mention that his role on the mission had any impact whatsoever. No reference to Ezra or any other member of the Ghost crew living up to what Kanan had taught them all - or, at best, there's a perfunctory reference in the epilogue that Ezra decided to keep using the Force the way Kanan had taught him to. No depiction of Ezra or Hera or Sabine or Zeb accepting Kanan's death and letting go of the pain while holding on to the memories. Nothing to show that any of the Ghost crew members act in memory of Kanan or that he is a motivating influence on them. No indication that Kanan's sacrifice drives Ezra to decide to follow up on their initial success with the factories and ultimately completely drive the Empire from Lothal.

Rebels just wouldn't be nearly as fulfilling.

Now, imagine if Tech's death had been treated like Kanan's, and maybe it will become more clear why I have a REALLY hard time agreeing with the argument that the show itself actually depicted Tech's death as "meaning something."