#i can empathise about his trauma

[sparrowstarsandsorrow]

Im not sure what it is yet, but there's something intriguing about his character.

I think it's possible that he's capable of feeling empathy and remorse. I mean, in the 2nd photo, you can see it in his eyes, all over his face, in fact. especially after one of his men got horribly injured, which tells us he had compassion. The more men he lost, the more his pain and suffering turned into anger and spitefulness. Even Tom Berenger himself said that he thinks that his character isn't pure evil. He's only insane because the horrors of war have made him that way.

[sciderman]

I swear I have read your big post regarding Peter Parker's neurodivergence and why it is best to avoid labelling him, but he definitely has a weird brain

Can't find it and feel kinda sad about it cuz I deeply related to it

i know exactly which post you're talking about and i can't find it either! i've raked through my archive, and it's just - nowhere to be seen. i think tumblr eated it (it happens.)

really, tumblr's search functionality is so so useless, i don't know what to tell you. there are plenty of keywords i can search to find it that post, but the search functionality actually just does not work!

undiagnosed audhd-addled peter parker, my darling, my light, my life, my everything.

i think peter parker's such an interesting creature to write, because a lot of people will point to a certain behaviour about him and say "this is an autistic thing, right?" but a lot of those behaviours are actually, in my head, tied to certain traumas in peter's life too.

people say "oh, the food thing, peter's a picky eater because he's autistic" and yes, absolutely. but also it's tied to his trauma with his parents.

peter gets overstimulated, and yes, it's an autism thing, but also he was bitten by a radioactive spider and his senses are dialled to 11.

it's a similar case i've found for myself, too – where a lot of friends i have kind of diagnose me because i have autistic traits, but actually - i'm hesitant to claim the label or pursue diagnosis because, actually, i know where these certain behaviours come from, and they come from certain traumas. there are events i can pinpoint in my life and say "yep. that's where this behaviour comes from."

so - i think there's a lot of overlap between trauma and autistic traits. the brain is very complex! i think the reason for that overlap is maybe as simple as the fact that people with autism and people with trauma are both doing the same thing - developing behaviours to protect themselves or soothe themselves. so - i think it's nice to be able to see a character like peter parker, who may or may not be autistic, but recognise behaviours in him and see yourself in him.

people who go undiagnosed for whatever reason - people who are really good at masking - so good, in fact, that they have no idea they might be on the spectrum - everyone and anyone at all can look at peter parker and recognise themselves. because i think we discredit the thought that every single brain does the same thing! develops certain behaviours in order to survive. every brain has that same software - we've just all been faced with different hardships that we need to overcome, and that's were all the differences come in.

autism is a spectrum, i guess - everyone falls into it to some degree. and i think events in your life probably push you along on it. but i don't know, i didn't study brain science. probably what i'm saying is very stupid and uninformed. of course there's brain chemistry involved. but i know people in my life living with autism and certain events in their life have exacerbated certain behaviours or made coping with it a lot more difficult. so maybe trauma is a catalyst.

[notalittleatall]

Regents power is really neat. He got it from his upbeinging under heartbreaker, which left him traumatised and permanently emotionally damaged. His power lets him reclaim what he’s lost, at least partially. When he controls a person he can feel emotions at full force by taking them from others. He gets to feel joy (not just satisfaction but actual genuine joy), reducing the effect his childhood trauma has on his life, and in the process he traumatises another person horrifically. If he chose he could live almost like a vampire, duplicating his trauma and passes it to others in exchange for temporary relief from his own. If he lived like his father, he could experience life with about 75% the intensity normal people do, rather than the 5% that is his baseline. He could never fully recover what his dad took away from him, but it would help. The other option is he just takes his beating in silence. He accepted the trauma that was given to him and lives with it. He lived the first way while he lived with heartbreaker, but he stopped specifically due to spite. He despises his father with intensity more than anything else he feels, so he chooses to not be like him out of spite. This is essentially where he’s at at the beginning of Worm.

The other thing his power gives him is empathy. By default he’s a sociopath. He’s not completely devoid of empathy but it’s at about the 5% intensity the rest of his feelings are at. But using his power he can experience the purest form of empathy, by literally stepping into another persons shoes and feeling what they feel. He can fully understand a person but the process is destructive. He needs to grossly violate their autonomy and leave them both traumatised and hating him. By using his power he can recover everything he lost and everything Heartbreaker took from him, but he needs to continue the cycle of abuse to do it. It also doesn’t help that he can only fully relate to people who hate him. Until Aisha.

Aisha is the exception to both the rules above. Through her Alec can experience joy without traumatising anyone or continuing the cycle of abuse his dad started. He can empathise with another person without permanently destroying the relationship between them. He forms a unique bond with her, as in literally unique. It is physically impossible for a regular person to empathise with a person like Alec can with Aisha. It’s like that one reddit post about a guy who formed an emotional bond with his girlfriend strong enough that he said he could feel her periods except not fake. Alec can literally feel what Aisha feels. I think that at some point in Worm in the background it came to be that Alec absolutely loves her in a platonic romantic ish way that he is in no way equipped to understand. I always thought it was funny that Alec, introduced as the apathetic sociopath, died in such an objectively noble way. He sacrificed his life on purpose in order to save his best friend/crush from a giant monster. But the thing is Alec wasn’t a sociopath towards Aisha. He could empathise with her 100%. She trusted him enough to let him control her and let him actually recover from his upbringing in a way that wasn’t completely evil. Poor little puppet boy finally grew a human heart, and the moment he shows it beyond a doubt he gets obliterated. It might have been the best outcome. I don’t think he could’ve recovered if Aisha had died there.

[lilithofpenandbook]

I heard someone say that the Malfoys were the best parents, what are your thoughts on this? And could you make a rank from the best parents to the worst?

Hmm, I'd actually say yes. There's a difference between being a good parent and being a good person. Someone could be incredibly accepting of those with impure blood yet be absolutely terrible parents, and vice versa.

When it comes to the Malfoys, yes, Lucius did influence Draco in the wrong way, yes, he did raise Draco to be a Death Eater, and we don't know how Draco would have been treated if he rejected Lucius's ideology. However, there is no indication that Draco was forced into believing what he did. He just was a product of his environment- not forced into believing it but also not wanting to not believe in it. In a way, it was Draco's normal. Additionally, while Draco was forced to be a Death Eater (I believe), it wasn't because he didn't want to be one, it's because Voldemort wanted to use him despite being too young, primarily to punish Lucius (and that to me speaks volumes about Lucius's love for his son- if Voldemort recognised it enough to know it would hurt Lucius then it must have been clear Lucius put Draco before Voldemort deep inside). I also believe Draco, once exposed to the actual reality of his beliefs and what they do to people, regretted believing them and hated it all, and wanted out, and ended up a good person, but that's another topic.

As for the ranking, in no particular order (aside from me remembering them):

The Riddles/ The Gaunts. As parents, I can't talk about Merope or Tom, however as people all I can say is that Tom is a victim of SA by Merope and that action of hers was absolutely horrific. However, I can also empathise with Merope because her father? The worst. Actually, I'm going to put him as the ultimate worst parent, simply because his actions are what led to Merope being so unstable that she seriously thought love potioning a man was a good idea. I am not condoning Merope's actions, however I do understand that she was very unwell and unstable as a result of the abuse she suffered, and if not for that then she probably would not have married Tom 1 and conceived her son under a love potion, which is the canonical reason for Tom being Voldemort, and therefore the reason for almost everything wrong. Almost.

I say almost because regardless of Voldemort, both Tobias Snape and the Black parents would have absolutely sucked and so regardless of Voldemort, both Severus Snape and Sirius Black would have experienced trauma (although not as horrifically as it was due to the war).

Tobias is worse than Walburga and Orion Black in my opinion, as it's heavily implied at least that he physically beat Snape and definitely beat Eileen. He's only above Merope's dad because I do think he wasn't as bad as him, and because part of Snape's childhood struggles is due to poverty. Him wearing ill-fitting old clothes and being bullied and ostracized has less to do with Tobias's treatment and more to the inherit poverty, however Tobias did nothing to help Snape, and was definitely an abusive husband. As a parent, he was neglectful and abrasive at best.

The Black parents are better than him, as parents. Yes, this is separate to their morals- I am judging them based on their treatment of their children. And when it comes to them, firstly there was Regulus, who was favoured and loved by them, even if they didn't raise him correctly. Then there's Sirius. And here's the thing, while I don't deny Walburga at least was abusive, the abusive itself was only confirmed to be abusive, which is horrible, yes, but not as horrible as the previously mentioned parents (wow, the bar is low). And another key element is the fact that Sirius was the one who left, rather than he being kicked out too. So while verbally abusive, I don't believe Walburga and Orion completely neglected Sirius.

However, a very similar set of parents yet miles worse are Petunia and Vernon. One of their kids was incredibly spoilt to the point of being incredibly stupid, the other was completely and fully abused. They beat the Blacks but are still only a little better than Tobias and the Gaunts.

As for Harry's actual parents, James and Lily Potter, they both loved Harry, but they didn't live long enough to decide whether they would be good at actual parenting or if they'd spoil Harry.

And I'm gonna mention the Evans parents too. I don't think they were good parents. Not as bad as a lot of these people, but not good. How else do you raise someone like Petunia, so jealous of her sister she abused a little boy? Yeah, no.

Now, Molly and Arthur Weasley are rather polarising. Some say they're good, some say they were bad. I'm going to say that they weren't perfect, but not bad at all. Yes, Ron wasn't always given the best treatment, yes, Molly favoured certain children, but at the same time she was the mother to seven very strong minded individuals, and still took care of Harry despite their poverty. And I do count them as "poor". Although they aren't as poor as some of the others, they're still not rich at all. The reason they don't struggle is because they save money with the hand me downs and everything. So I'd say that actually, they weren't bad at all. I personally don't like how much Molly yells, however that's probably because of my own issues, not because she's actually being harsh. Her family is loud. She had to be louder.

I'm also gonna mention the Dumbledore parents. The father definitely made a bad decision, however it was to protect his daughter. That doesn't however change how bad that idea was. As for the mother, again, maybe not the best decision at the time to isolate Ariana, especially because it resulted in her boys suffering. However I will cut them some slack because they weren't in any normal situation and that would affect their judgement. So not abusive by any means, but not the best parents either.

Hermione's parents. Where were they and why didn't they seem concerned over their only child? That's all I can say (perhaps they figured her being magical made her invulnerable?)

The last parents I can think of are Andromeda and Ted Tonks. And actually they're probably the best parents in the series. Nymphadora grows up to be a good, happy young woman, and they clearly love her even if they don't agree with her choices. I honestly can't remember anything wrong with them.

That's my "ranking" of the worst to best parents, out of all the people I can remember. Honestly, there's a very high number of bad parents here (the bar is so low that Not Smacking Your Child is enough to give Walburga a higher ranking, dear god).

Oh, actually I forgot!

James Potter's parents. Maybe one of the WORST up there with the Gaunts because how do you raise such a little psychopath? I can see where Sirius gets it but his family is known to be bad, so what was with the Potters? James was well cared for and adored (the words used in the book!) yet he spent 7 years bullying Snape. Just how? What kind of parents were his?

Anyway, I hope you enjoy this! Thanks for the ask!

[violottie]

everyone, i beg you, keep Motaz in your thoughts and prayers. survivors guilt and the trauma he is still going through is horrific. i cant even fathom it but we can empathise with him.

Motaz's frustrations with the world that he is now living in after evacuating Gaza, are warranted, beyond warranted. he has every right to be angry at us after all he and his fellow journalists have suffered and died to show us. and its still happening.

the least we can do is keep protesting, keep boycotting and keep talking about Palestine. we must not stop. for anything.

[hayatheauthor]

How to Develop a Memorable Antagonist

Antagonists are one of the most important characters in your book. Without an antagonist, writers wouldn’t have a story to write in the first place. They bring the action, drama, trauma and many other factors that are often the reason for a book’s success. However, their pivotal role in the book is often why antagonists can come across as poorly-written one-dimensional characters. 

From stereotypical backstories to a lack of humanisation, authors often make simple mistakes that can result in a cliche or boring antagonist. Are you struggling to create a compelling antagonist for your WIP? Here are some tips to help you get started. 

Give Your Antagonist A Clear Motive 

People don’t just wake up one day and decide they want to fundamentally alter society and possibly end the world. Or, maybe they do, but their idealogy starts somewhere. Voldemort wanted to change the wizarding world because he loathed muggles due to his parents, Hannibal’s tragic past triggered his cannibalistic tendencies. 

Every antagonist has a reason for their crimes, and it's important to understand your antagonist’s motives and goals in order to create a compelling villain. Start with your antagonist’s backstory. 

Did they have a tragic childhood? Did they desperately want to achieve a certain goal but failed and were driven insane? Are they following someone? Are they being manipulated? There is an endless list of possible reasons you can choose from in order to create a compelling motive for your antagonist. 

Make Your Antagonist Multi-Dimensional 

Once you have established their initial reasoning it’s time to go into more detail. I would start by taking their dynamic with the other characters into consideration. Why do they despise the protagonist? Do they want to simply remove the obstacles in their way or do they have a personal vendetta? 

It’s also important to consider the other characters. Is there a mentor figure in your book who the antagonist has a personal vendetta against? What about their allies and henchmen? How did they meet them? Did the antagonist start off alone or have they worked with the same group of people since the start? 

Your readers don’t necessarily need to know every single detail of your antagonist’s past, but having a clear understanding of their motives and dynamics can help you create a clear image of the antagonist. For example, they could be particularly spiteful towards the protagonist’s best friend because she is the daughter of the antagonist’s ex-ally. This could make for an easy subplot or come in handy if you need to distract the antagonist in a fight scene. 

Make Your Readers Empathise With Them 

When developing a motive authors should always look for a way to make their readers empathise with the antagonist. Show us why we should feel sorry for them, tell us they could have had a promising future if it weren’t for an unjust moment in their lives. When you make your readers feel conflicted about your antagonist they become more than just a character on the page. 

Your readers begin to question whether their tragic past justifies their actions, some might root for them, others might dislike them more and regard them as apathetic. However, the goal is to make your readers view your antagonist as more than just the person causing issues for your protagonist. 

Give Them Strengths And Weaknesses 

Everyone hates a Mary Sue protagonist, but the same can be said for an antagonist. Think of it this way—if your antagonist is an all-powerful flawless villain who could destroy the world if they wanted to, then why haven’t they already won? Why do they have to fight the protagonist? 

The good vs bad, protagonist vs antagonist dynamic only entices readers if they can’t tell who is going to come on top at the end of it all. This is why it’s essential to give your antagonist appropriate strengths and weaknesses. 

Here’s an example of an antagonist with appropriate strengths and weaknesses: a main antagonist is an all-powerful witch who wants to destroy the protagonist’s home country but she lost most of her power in a fight against the mentor and can’t gain them back without a special artefact. 

This example shows your readers how big of a threat the antagonist is while also providing her with appropriate strengths and shortcomings. This can look a little different depending on the genre you write for. Maybe the antagonist in a romcom wants to get the love interest married off to a side character and has the leverage to do so but the main character is introduced to the love interest’s family to try and sway the antagonist’s plans.  

You don’t need to create a comprehensive list of all of your antagonist’s strengths and weaknesses, but it’s important to have a proper understanding of what puts them in a position to easily combat your protagonist and what stops them from outright winning. 

Showcase Their (Negative) Impact On The Story 

An antagonist can only be labelled as such if they actively do things to hinder or harm the protagonist. Simply saying your antagonist is a bad person isn’t enough, you need to show your readers this too. 

When you start reading Harry Potter it is made clear that Voldemort was an all-powerful wizard who severely damaged the wizarding world during the first war, however, his bad deeds aren’t only reserved for the past. He was also just as evil in the present and was out to harm Harry from the first book itself. 

From small confrontations with the protagonists to entire fights, it’s important to create a range of situations and chapters that can showcase your antagonist’s ‘true colours’. 

Keep Their Personality Consistent 

Just like every other character, it is important to ensure you have a consistent personality type for your antagonist. An antagonist regularly spotted in a suit known for their professional and calculative plans wouldn’t casually joke around with the protagonists during a showdown. The way they contradict the protagonist should also be reflective of their personality. 

You should also take their personal history into consideration and how that could impact their dynamics with certain characters. For example, a character like Tom Riddle who despised both of his parents would likely be spiteful whenever they see the protagonist with their mentor figure and could even target the mentor out of spite. 

The only time an antagonist’s personality should change is during a pivotal point in the book’s plot. Maybe the put-together antagonist shows off their frustrated side when the protagonist outwits them, maybe they let out maniacal laughter when the protagonist asks them about their motives. 

It’s important to treat your antagonists like humans and consider how a person with that personality would realistically react to the situations they are in. 

Avoid Creating A Stereotypical Antagonist 

Nobody likes an overdone cliche. When writing your antagonist try to avoid creating stereotypical villains. Here are a few examples of stereotypical antagonists and how to avoid them: 

The Evil Mastermind: Instead of making the antagonist an all-powerful villain with no weaknesses, give them flaws and limitations that can be exploited by the protagonist. Make the antagonist's motives more complex than just wanting to take over the world, and consider giving them a personal connection to the protagonist or a sympathetic backstory.

The Brainwashed Henchman: Rather than having the antagonist control their minions through brainwashing or mind control, make the henchman have agency and free will. Consider making the henchman conflicted about their role, or have them question the antagonist's motives and methods.

The Vengeful Ex-Lover: Instead of making the antagonist a scorned lover seeking revenge, consider giving them a different motivation for their actions. For example, the antagonist might be seeking revenge for a perceived betrayal, or they might be trying to protect someone they care about.

The Unfeeling Machine: Rather than making the antagonist a cold, calculating machine with no emotions, consider giving them a personal stake in the conflict. The antagonist might be acting out of fear or desperation, or they might be struggling with moral dilemmas related to their actions.

The Crazy Cult Leader: Instead of making the antagonist a stereotypical cult leader with a group of brainwashed followers, consider giving them a more nuanced personality. The antagonist might genuinely believe in their cause and be able to convince others to follow them, or they might be struggling with doubts and conflicts within their own ideology.

Avoid ‘One Man Armies’ 

Let’s be honest, one evil wizard cannot destroy your protagonist’s entire world by themselves. Just like protagonists have mentors, allies, coworkers, friends and sidekicks your antagonists need to have allies too. Voldemort didn’t conquer the entire wizarding world by himself right after graduating from Hogwarts, he instead built his troops and only fought Dumbledore once he was ready. 

When worldbuilding for your novel it’s important to create some semblance of character development for background antagonists as well as the lead antagonists. 

I hope this blog on how to develop a memorable antagonist will help you in your writing journey. Be sure to comment any tips of your own to help your fellow authors prosper, and follow my blog for new blog updates every Monday and Thursday.  

Looking For More Writing Tips And Tricks? 

Are you an author looking for writing tips and tricks to better your manuscript? Or do you want to learn about how to get a literary agent, get published and properly market your book? Consider checking out the rest of Haya’s book blog where I post writing and marketing tools for authors every Monday and Thursday

[youkaigakkou-tl]

What differentiates a God from a Youkai?

The Oogata twins went from Gods to Youkais, right? Yet, Sano is in a Youkai school but without being defined as one. Besides the reveal of his nature and a glimpse of his past, is there a reason for that?

i think, my interpretation of what yohaji is about, and also sort of the stance haruaki takes, is that there's not a huge difference between gods and youkai (and humans, for that matter).

gods can become youkai, humans can become youkai, humans and youkai can have children. all three have lives and experiences that the other two can relate to and empathise with, and all three can communicate with each other if they so desire.

the biggest thing driving the difference between the three is outside perspectives of the individual, and the individual's perspective of the others. gods' disdain and disregard for those they perceive as inferior to themselves, humans' dehumanizing reverence for certain types of "otherness" and fear of other types of "otherness", and youkai's rejection of and defensiveness against the "otherness" that have done them ill in the past

(for that matter, "the difference between gods and youkai is outside perspective" extends beyond the fourth wall too. to a western perspective, perhaps some of the gods that cause storms, disasters, droughts, pestilence, volcano eruptions and so on should be considered "monsters" too. and even just from a japanese perspective, raijin and fuujin are depicted as oni despite also being considered gods, and theres historical (human) figures that have shrines and are worshipped as gods, with aggrandized stories to match)

on the surface level, meiji arc does posit that there are differences between the three, by haruaki saying that he "didnt realise there was that big of a difference between humans and youkai" in regards to the lifespan thing, but you have to consider that kai was bringing that up deliberately in an attempt to hurt hatanaka, so that he could perhaps feel the same pain kai felt. kai brings up the lifespan thing, something he considers an immutable, unchangeable fact of the universe, just as he considered the societal and familial circumstances he lived in to be impossible to change.

but hatanaka marries ibara, and kai lives to be in a world where he's dating a man. the superficial details dont matter in the end. what matters is that there is love in the world and you are surrounded by people who interact with you and who influence you and who you influence.

so yeah basically what im getting at is yohaji is about autism and queerness and depression and trauma and disability. more than its about youkai or gods or folklore, yohaji is about the Human Experience™ thank you for coming to my ted talk

[shizunitis]

Luo Binghe & Tianlang-Jun: Origins. And a Bit of Projection.

Disclaimer: This is basically just a collection of quotes from The Scum Villain's Self-Saving System, Volume 3, accompanied by (adjective) thoughts, and then even more relevant quotes listed at the end. If I could, I’d paste the entirety of Chapter 18.

“As expected, I can’t bring myself to hate humans.” — Vol. 3, Chapter 21: Always Together

I will always be conflicted on the topic of Tianlang-jun, and it annoys me. There is so much I could say about him, and so little I can successfully articulate. He is, to me, more confounding, complex and tragic than Shen Jiu.

He’s pitiful and awe-inspiring, wicked and affable, cunning and wide-eyed in his curiousity. He is a compelling, heartbreaking character. He alternates between emotionless wisdom and mournful apathy. I admire how his knees don’t buckle under the weight of his grief, but how he crumbles at the barest hint of hope. How rage claws at him and, still, he can’t figure out how to make it stick.

I empathise with him. I understand him.

But then, in the distance, Luo Binghe's indifferent voice disturbs the silence, causing me to drop my drink onto the floor and this post onto your screen:

“He’s not my father.”

It’s an interesting exercise, exploring their relationship in reconciliation fics. To see them interact (semi-)honestly, watch them take turns filling up the chasm between them. It’s wonderful. Every fic I’ve read centred around them was a delightful read that I still think about.

However. I cannot see Tianlang-Jun, as I understand him, as Luo Binghe’s father. And not just because of the 3rd Novel’s events.

But because Binghe had hoped for something; he did have that wide-eyed wonder. He did hold one last window open, for the sake of an improbability he couldn’t quite, just yet, dismiss.

It’s what (most) orphaned and/or adopted childred do.

Though Luo Binghe had never said a word about it before, Shen Qingqiu knew that he harbored some fantasies about his birth parents. […] In fact, he’d always secretly fantasized about whether his parents might still be alive, and how well they’d treat him, and how they’d never let him suffer the mildest slight. — Vol. 3, Chapter 17: Tianlang

It is the most human thing; to want to be helped, accepted, invited by those given to you. A family is given to you. Whether you believe it an act of the divine, of nature, of coincidence, it isn’t something you fight for. It’s the first and, arguably, only thing you don’t have to fight for in life.

Depending on a multitude of factors, that can be a blessing or a curse; but where there is room for interpretation, questions left unanswered, most childred—Binghe included—will turn to their imagination, and try to make sense of it. Usually, to comfort themselves, to reassure themselves that surely, if their family could, they would have.

And, yeah. Most likely, if the Palace Master had gotten punted into the Sun like he fucking deserved, they would have. But does it matter?

In the face of a bleak reality, what comfort is a could-have-been?

He liked to call Luo Binghe “that son of mine,” but he didn’t seem to possess any concept of fatherly affection. […] Luo Binghe was in fact…someone who was unloved by even his own parents. — Vol. 3, Chapter 15: Holy Mausoleum

What use are good intentions to an abandoned child? What consolation is it, to say, They gave birth to you, when that child has seen no evidence of their care? Does it dry their tears, that their mother can’t be here, but she surely would have wished to be? That their father would protect them, if only he knew of them?

(And don’t make me tell you about the visceral horror I felt reading the Origins chapter. I’ve yet to make my peace with it. MXTX, Airplane, whoever: you’ve ruined me.)

The washerwoman was and continues to be, to Binghe, his only mother. And I would argue, that’s healthy. Even independent of his other traumas (Abyss, Shizun’s betrayal, Xin Mo’s influence, living on the streets, etc, holy shit Binghe) Luo Binghe will not accept anyone else as his mother.

“Who is this Su Xiyan?” Luo Binghe asked coldly. “My mother was a mere washerwoman.” — Vol. 3, Chapter 18: Origins.

It may seem callous. It probably even is! But it is a healthy line he’d drawn by his own initiative. It’s what helps him, what he feels he needs to do in order to do right by his mother, and his own heart.

And! Tianlang-Jun doesn’t seem to give much of a shit, either!

Won’t, probably, even in the future, once the dust will have settled. He is exhausted, weary with carrying the corpse of his love, the loss of his nephew. Whatever goodwill he shows, it’s a perfunctory sort, because he can’t afford more.

So. Uhh.

Tianlang-Jun is not a character I can love, nor one I can hate. Usually, I can’t help but be inclined to love complex characters. Like them, too—though that’s more of an action-based thing rather than just said character’s personality.

But with Tianlang-Jun, I’m stuck whichever way I turn. If I want to love/like him, I’m drawn back by Binghe’s pain and disappointment. If I try to hate/dislike him, I’m drawn back by his own history and grief.

In conclusion:

I don't know! I'm not really trying to, like, prove anything. I still love the aforementioned TLJ & LBH fics, I still love their dynamic. I started walking and ended up exactly in the same space. This, perhaps, could be considered a Heavenly Demon Family Mobius Strip!

I'm not really trying to say anything. It just… makes me feel conflicted, and angry, and whenever I allow myself to think about it a bit more, sad.

But.

However!

Alas.

Nonetheless, even.

As a reader and—on my better days—a writer, all I can say is:

As promised/threatened: some selected passages, for your reading pleasure:

So, it looked like neither the father nor the cousin had any intention of acknowledging Luo Binghe. — Chapter 15: Holy Mausoleum

He liked to call Luo Binghe “that son of mine,” but he didn’t seem to possess any concept of fatherly affection. — Chapter 15: Holy Mausoleum

Tianlang-Jun lifted his hand, took a look at Luo Binghe’s snow-pale face, and commented indifferently, “He looks like his mother.” “His eyes look like yours,” came a chill voice from the side. — Chapter 15: Holy Mausoleum

The faint hopes and dreams Luo Binghe had held in his heart for many years had been mercilessly pulverized into so much dust. […] [Tianlang-Jun] refused to speak a single word of their relationship and had been utterly ruthless back in the Holy Mausoleum. […] To his parents, Luo Binghe was an unwanted child. — Chapter 18: Origins

“If he was my father, why didn’t he bring it up earlier? Why not tell me?” The most Tianlang-Jun had said was that single line he offered while beating up Luo Binghe, devoid of either praise or criticism: “He looks like his mother.” He looks like his mother. What of it? But that was all. There was nothing more. — Chapter 18: Origins

Luo Binghe was indifferent. “He’s not my father.” […] Luo Binghe shook his head. It was unclear what he was stubbornly clinging to, but he repeated, “He’s not my father.” — Chapter 18: Origins

Luo Binghe raised his smiling face, his eyes shining brightly. “Mother was the kindest person in all the world to me.” — Chapter 19: Shen Jiu

[mrhaitch]

hi mr. haitch!

i was wondering if you could do a character analysis on suguru geto? i have a hard time understanding how his ideology changed, specifically when he takes it to the extreme and wants to eliminate ALL non-sorcerers. i’d also like to hear your thoughts on the dynamic between gojo and geto… their conflicts and how they drifted apart but never permanently resented the other. lastly, if possible, could you touch on how loneliness affected the two and if it had any impact in their actions, both after riko’s death and after their argument when they split paths

thank you so much,

a curious anon

My knowledge of the series is pretty limited so I can only answer with what I've seen and understood, but Geto and Gojo can be looked at as two different reactions to the same trauma: one blames himself and the other blames everyone else.

That's the core to the changes both of them underwent after Riko's death. Gojo was recognised and elevated as the strongest from birth - the linchpin that holds his society together. Despite the swagger and the ego, beneath is a powerful loneliness and detachment. He has been reduced to a function, with no choice other than to fulfill it, and there's a lot of resentment towards Jujutsu society as a result - they took his childhood, his humanity. His whole identity is based on being the strongest, and yet when he found something he wanted to protect - he failed. Since Riko's death we see evidence of constant effort to master his abilities, to better fulfill his role but at the cost of sinking deeper into the expectations of others. Even so, Gojo comes away with a greater appreciation for the vulnerable, especially children.

Geto, however, did not suffer the same societal pressure - everything about him, his place in the story, is a result of choice and agency. He wants to be a sorcerer, wants to get stronger to protect the weak, he wants to work with Gojo to better the world. When we first meet him, he views his abilities as a means to realise his desires, his ambitions, and - fundamentally - his values.

Riko's death, and everything that followed, robbed him of that ability to choose. Her death meant nothing, a new vessel was found, the world didn't end, everyone moved on. Gojo internalised his feelings of failure and forged on - seemingly unmoved. Geto threw everything he had at saving and avenging her and it changed nothing.

I'll pause here and say that I think Geto and Gojo saw different things in Riko: Gojo saw someone weaker than himself forced into fulfilling a role, Geto saw someone exemplary and unique murdered by the powerless. Perhaps (and remember I'm not an expert here) she came to stand for all of Jujutsu society in his mind - someone with an inherent greatness or importance sacrificed for the sake of people who lack the strength to protect themselves. She was the ultimate realisation of his early beliefs (the strong serving the weak) and it proved to be horrible, far removed from what he envisaged.

But let's focus on their reactions: Gojo went further into himself, into his role, aspiring to realise his full strength to protect others. Geto stopped growing - became bitter, twisted, blaming everyone but himself. He thinks himself a liberator, but in truth he is motivated by an endless appetite for revenge - to take his pain and inflict it on everyone else. It's a response common among men who struggle to regulate and manage their anger and personal set-backs, looking to displace their own negative emotions and push them onto someone else: believing it'll lessen their own pain.

All of this is just supposition, though. Fundamentally Geto is a violent racist, with a fascistic worldview built around strength as some kind of valorous ideal - gleefully inflicting pain and suffering on others. We can empathise with his journey, but we don't have to forgive his actions.

[freyjas-musings]

"Elegant, feminine, and utterly wild. Warm and steadfast—unbreakable, his queen.

Sarah J. Maas, Queen of Shadows

The author literally writes stories about characters not needing to fit into any specific box yet somehow some people in this fandom keep building the narrative that

Being a trained warrior automatically implies the character is not soft or feminine? Please spare us the BS .... Nesta is soft and feminine , Feyre is soft and Feminine, Gwyn most certainly is Elegant , graceful and feminine..... them being warriors doesn't exempt them from being elegant or soft or feminine 🙄.

Being a SA survivor doesn't automatically confine you to specific rules.... whether it's sexual preferences , whether to want to be in a relationship, the choice of clothes , choice of career .... stop reducing characters to their trauma , when the author literally writes stories of females who don't let their trauma define them. I am not going dignify the lunatic discourse around consent to be shipped with a counter... its stupid at an elemental level.

That a male character is not allowed a trauma response that's unsavoury. Why? We can all empathise with Nesta acting out or Feyre withdrawing but Azriel we have conveniently reduced to a fuck boy ? The guy has 500 years of unresolved trauma and doesn't understand relationships... all he wants is to be loved and accepted for who he is ... he was tortured and locked away .... what does it make you when you disregard that? HOFAS clearly shows there is so much more to Az that's endearing and adorable.... yet people are hell bent on only letting him be a fuck boy? Same with Lucien..... he is an abuse victim and yes he does make a mistake with Feyre but that could be result of his trauma too ... yet that guy deserves to die alone , can't be trusted and God knows what else ? What are you guys even talking about ... do you even understand how characters are written?

Its almost sad that we belong to a fandom of an author who literally writes stories and characters that have always defied the odds and have refused to be put in set boxes only to fight people who do just that with her characters.

Guess what ..... Aelin was both a queen and an assassin.... Nesta was an absolute queen owning her sexuality while also preferring modest clothing without revealing much skin.... Azriel is both a torturer and someone who believes there is salvation in the mothers embrace .... Gwyn can be whoever she wants and we can all hope to see her however the hell we want without needing to put her in a box only because she is a survivor.

[missvidel]

Reasons why I think Dragonball Z is actually super progressive for its time - part 2.

Krillin and 18 as a couple. I could leave it at that honestly.

He's a short king, and he's bald, so already he isn't traditionally attractive to a lot of women. 18 is tall, blonde, beautiful and badass. She could have anyone she wants, and she wants Krillin.

He's the first human to show her any kindness. She offhandedly kisses him. I'd like to think he makes her laugh, and they seem like the most relatable and realistic couple out of everyone. I think she's genuinely attracted to him because of his physical attributes, something that for its time, was absolutely unheard of.

He's her safe space, someone she can confide in about the trauma she went through in being forced to become an Android. He can empathise, because he's already died more than once, and in traumatic fashion. As long as they're together, it doesn't matter. They have each other.

They seem so true to life, they defy conventional expectations of what a couple looks like.

[crownmemes]

Mindhunter Sentences, Vol. 3

(Sentences from Mindhunter (2017-2019). Adjust phrasing where needed)

"From now on, it's my rules. If I tell you to shut your mouth, you shut your mouth."

"Panic attacks are often brought on by feelings of acute vulnerability."

"When we empathise with a psychopath, we actually negate the self. We deny our own beliefs about decency and humanity, and that can be very dangerous."

"Is all of that fresh-scrubbed earnestness just an act, or are you truly oblivious to the wreckage you leave in your wake?"

"Why do the police want my shoes? Am I a suspect?"

"I've never seen chocolate used for interrogation purposes before."

"I get off work in an hour. If you can wait to eat, I'll show you the best meal in the city."

"You look kind of young for FBI."

"There are no answers to questions you can't even conceive."

"I didn't know the FBI was interested in all of this."

"To find connections, unfortunately, we have to wait for more bodies."

"Sometimes it's comforting to know you've already done the worst thing you could ever do in your life."

"Too much for a first date?"

"If you want excruciating honesty, you have come to the right place!"

"I didn't do anything, so I don't know why you're looking at me like I did."

"Can you see, just for a moment, how it might be perceived when you present a profile without ever having been to a crime scene?"

"Seems to me that everything you know about serial killers has been gleaned from the ones who have been caught."

"It's hard stabbing people!"

"Children do not simply forget trauma. No one simply forgets."

"We don't stare, remember? It's impolite."

"You can't force a square peg into a round hole just because you want it to fit."

"I didn't know you could cook!"

"I've never been great at asking for what I want."

"You look anxious. Take some valium."

"This is his one chance to get the attention he feels he deserves."

"Someone here knew we should have been looking at these guys all along."

"It's nice, being recognised."

"We did our jobs. We have no control over anything else."

[murdererofthumbs]

Seeing reactions after this episode is actually slightly hysterical? It proves that this fandom can be so blind-sighted by characters relations, that they forget what show they are watching. Like, I have always been a self-proclaimed Roman-girl, because I find him compelling and extremely psychologically interesting, and like all of these characters, to a certain extent, I do empathise with him on the level of trauma that he went through. But why the fuck are people surprised that THIS is how he behaved in this episode is beyond me. Oh, suddenly Roman is dead to you because he behaved in the way that was very much consistent with who he is? That’s who all of these people are, like come on, what do we think we are watching here? You didn’t really think he will suddenly become a defender of democracy because it serves a greater good of the country? He was the one to fucking choose Mencken as a president, he cherry-picked him for Logan, because he knew that their views align, that Mencken will be a smart business decision. This whole thing is a transactional procedure - they needed to get someone who will be willing to serve their corrupt interests. Roman doesn’t see a problem in having fascist as a president, because he will never be touched by the consequences of having that kind of man in power. He is very much safe at the top of the mountain, and who the fuck cares what will happen to the peasants at the bottom of the chain? In this way, he imitates Logan the most, because in the end of the day, people are units to him, to all of them really, some of them are just more willing to admit this than others.

Also, like, “uuu, Roman was such a misogynist to Shiv this episode, he just didn’t listen to her at all”. Look, can we stop being delusional here for a second or is it some sort of selective memory situation? Roman is a misogynist. Kendall is a misogynist. Shiv, in fact, has a lot of internalised misogyny going on, and her being a woman never stopped her from pushing other women under the fucking bus, so let’s be real here for a second. And that is not to be said in defence of Roman, frankly nothing what I’m saying here is supposed to justify his behaviour in this or any other episode, but it’s more of like… reality check? I know that Roman’s self-destructive spiral and semi-decent behaviour at the beginning of this season might have clouded certain aspects of who he is, but please, go back to season 3 and count all the instances of him throwing misogynistic and, frequently incestuous jokes and innuendo, at Shiv? How many times he undermines her position on the basis of her being a woman? Or how Kendall, for that matter, uses similar arguments in 03x02? All the siblings use aspects of each other as weapons. Kendall is undermined because he is unstable, because he is a drug-addict, because he has a tendency of flying off on the cloud of mania, and crashing in the heap of depression. Shiv is crossed out because she is a woman, because she frankly has no real experience in the firm (which, although people might be super angry about that, because she is such a “girlboss” apparently, but this is a factual argument), because of her relationship to Tom and tendency to take several sides at the same time (with not much thought put into it). And Roman is frequently undermined because he is a freak and a pervert, because “there is something wrong with him”, because he is the weakest dog that is most easily manipulated, who crumples like a wet tissue if only to receive a bit of affection. They all weaponise their “weak” points against each other, because this dog-eats-dog mindset is focal to who they are as a family, to how they were brought up, to how Logan wanted them to be. So please, let’s not be surprised, when Roman suddenly uses misogyny as an argument against Shiv, because it’s not sudden at all, and it’s always been there.

I think what we have on our hands, is the same situation we had in 03x07 during Kendall’s birthday (and previous episode with Mencken), where some people are so outraged by Roman, and by his ability to shove the knife where it hurts, that they suddenly cross him out completely. Again, all these characters are bad people, there was never any doubt about that. They are compelling because of the complexities of their familial relationships, because of their childhood trauma and the consequences that this trauma has on them as adults. But they are still completely reprehensible as human beings, and I think some viewers forget about that and then get outraged when show about awful people features awful people. And I’m sure, either in next or final episode, something will happen and Roman will become sympathetic again, and he will regain his position as a “poor meow meow”, just as he did in the finale of season 3. Its always a fucking carousel with this character and people get sucked in and have their eye’s covered just to realise that nothing really changed, and nothing will change, because in this show people, at their core, remain the same.

[mazzystar24]

bestie im starting to feel like we aren’t getting buddie after the mess that was tonight’s episode… this just gives anti-eddie people more material to bash us with and it also means a bunch if buddie fans are about to jump ship bc eddie’s a cheater… i’m losing faith in tim minear this feels very character-death-y

Hi anon!

This episode in my eyes just killed whatever 5% of me that still wasn’t fully sure that Marisol would be written off and now I’m 100% that bitch edy is on her way out so small victories

This episode was neither here nor there on the buddie front but it did have the domestic scene obviously and also the potential for Eddie dealing with why he wants a mother for Chris so bad could be a great way to get buddie even if they’re going about it in a very odd and kinda🙃 way

As for it being character death or Eddie being a cheater it may just be because like I wanna go into psychology so I do tend to look at things from all perspectives and like empathise with more things that make others be like..no- but the way I see it grief makes people do fucked up shit, it doesn’t make it okay but it makes it understandable and worth noting, and he hasn’t slept with her yet (and I doubt he will) so right now it’s sorta a grey area between cheating and emotional cheating, like for me I would defend him so hard if people try to bash him for this (unless they do go a complete shit route but again Tim loves these characters sm I doubt he would ever do that) because he’s dealt with so much trauma and shit over the years that it’s understandable to be flawed and do shitty things occasionally and now he runs into this woman who’s the mirror image of his dead wife? No one can say how they’d react in that situation

Again I’m not saying I like this storyline or that cheating is okay if you’re traumatised but what I’m saying is that it’s pretty far from character death like hen cheated on Karen with her ex because they had history and it was complicated and she was in a weird place and people found a way to forgive her and look past that and buck kissed Lucy due to his underlying issues and we got past that and I think that if any circumstance makes emotional cheating understandable it’s seeing someone who’s the split image of your dead wife

Tim minear I still trust you but I am side eyeing you - like if you were driving a car rn and I was in the passenger seat, I wouldn’t hop out and call an Uber but my hand would be inching toward the Jesus handle because you’re scaring me sometimes

Thanks anon🫶

[fortheloveofarchons]

My opinions on Sunday from Honkai: Star Rail

C.W. Contains spoilers after the 2.2 Honkai: Star Rail Trailblazer Quest + theories and lore

.

.

.

I kinda agree with his philosophies and thinking... to some extent...

Okay hear me out!!!

We all know by now that Sunday's whole motive is to protect everyone and ensure that they won't have to suffer anymore (like when he states that he wants everyone to have seven rest days). I can empathise with his character so much, as someone who (as ridiculous and cowardly as it sounds) is afraid to face the harsh realities of life. I mean, even if he's set as a villain, he is as gentle and empathetic as his sister Robin, just that they both express it differently.

Seeing the cutscenes of him and Robin from their past to the present was just so immersive, because Sunday brings up some very demoralizing and harsh situations that he faced back then, and we, the audience, can understand and relate to struggling to cope with his disappointment, frustration, grief, and anger - all while often having little to no power to change things.

From the way Sunday is acting, he seems more like a traumatised parental figure (as we've seen the reason why Robin has to wear excessive neck accessories due to her being shot) who cannot let go and provide his care and safe environment for his loved ones.

Moreover, his ideologies felt surreal as I myself would take that path since I can relate to his trauma and ideals (and also as someone who has a sibling too)

His viewpoint is understandable, but...

Taking away the basic right of an individual's free will for safety is always a controversial issue.

As Himeko once called out Sunday, she states that he's just going to trap everyone in a bird cage through eternal slumber, which robs them their freedom and agency.

Plus, from what Robin said, if Sunday's plan worked, he's going to hurt himself too. Because Sunday will be in charge of everything and everyone, he won't even have time to rest, causing his body and mind to be exhausted to the bone (maybe possible cause his mind and body to corrode cause he needs to rest at one point)

Moreover, Firefly made a good point disapproving Sunday's point that he should not assume just because someone is weak doesn't mean that they should automatically escape to fantasy. It is up to you to be strong so you can fly into the sky, and that not everyone who is weak should be weak.

I remember someone commenting on Youtube stating that Sunday protects Robin so much, that Sunday doesn't even know how to protect himself for facing the outside world. It's kind of ironic considering that Sunday is supposed to be the protective, influential type of characters in Penacony, yet he barely knows how to fly. Robin, however, took the opportunity to spread her philosophies of Harmony and influence others in reality.

In conclusion, Sunday has the right idea, it's just that he has a terrible execution. But I know that there are some people who don't mind, I've been on Instagram to see a lot of people agreeing with his views... yes I'm talking about all those sunday stans cause I've seen a lot from them

(I ain't complaining plz we need more Sunday content!!!)

I mean-- in reality I wouldn't agree; but in this story, I would agree with him. (if we don't consider my simping and bias because that has the most influence)

Honestly, I'm hoping he gets a redemption arc because I really love him (I personally wouldn't mind if Sunday gets the Wanderer treatment from Genshin Impact if it means that Sunday will be playable), and hoping that he is really alive (as stated by the leakers that Sunday has a bunch of specific codes and emotion codes that's exclusive to playable characters).

That said, may we Sunday havers have more Sunday content and playable Sunday in the future!!! I'm gonna write a fic for Sunday so stay tuned!!

Let me know what you guys think of Sunday! Do you think he'll get redeemed? Playable? Alive?

PETITION TO MAKE EVERYDAY SUNDAYYY!!!!!!

[tweedledumandtweedlebum]

I just can't stop thinking about what an EE writer has recently posted online about current storylines. If I remember correctly, he claimed they're working hard to keep the show fresh and relevant - or something along those lines.

Therefore, I should assume they will soon get rid of Ballum (well... they have been in the process of making them irrelevant for quite some time now, actually) because the novelty has worn off and the audience can no longer relate to them or their relationship.

I can't even find the words to express how insulting that statement sounds to me.

They're telling me that the ordeal of an SA survivor - a male survivor at that - getting professional help, learning to accept and live with his trauma - and possibly getting justice, one day - would be of no interest to the audience.

They're telling me that said survivor and his husband (who loves him unconditionally) endeavoring to overcome their intimacy issues and slowly rebuilding their physical connection, despite inevitable triggers and setbacks, would be in no way relevant to viewers.

They're telling me that watching these two husbands raise THEIR(!) motherless daughter and navigate through the troubled waters of teenage life, helping her develop her potential, always supporting her despite their own personal struggles, possibly arguing because of different parenting styles, would not resonate with anybody in the public.

They want me to believe that nobody would relate to a young man struggling with an eating disorder (but willing to do whatever it takes to get better) who is currently in therapy, and who is inevitably faced with issues such as lack of control, anxiety, feelings of shame and guilt.

They are seriously stating that they don't know what to do with a character who's a detective, somebody who could provide endless opportunities to explore the social/economic/cultural roots of a number of common offences (and a sensitive, kind-hearted copper, who would empathise with at least some of the offenders, and thus feel conflicted about his job).

So, I'm confused..., what exactly is considered 'fresh and relevant' in their universe?