#i don't think anyone will try to justify peter to me

[starchaserdreams]

I "love the marauders" but I actually vehemently hate canon Remus "Harry abandoner" Lupin, vehemently hate James "incel but it's okay because he's hot" Potter and vehemently hate Peter "at this point what didn't he do" Pettigrew

So what I'm saying is the part of me that loves Sirius Black runs so so so so deep that even despite all of that I love the marauders.

[v-h-lupin]

Maurauders Era Characters if they were Demigods (with explanations)

ive been listening to Epic and rereading my harry potter writing (really trying to work on my fanfic, im just stretched kinda thin)

edit: here is pt. 2

anyway

this is pt. 1 because I will be doing more, and golden trio era characters too

Remus Lupin:

This boy is the most Son of Athena kid i have ever seen in my entire life look at him He is so smart in so many different ways I just he's so quick witted and brave, and he was so ready to throw himself into battle. strategizing to use his unique attributes even when his superiors (who had political leanings) told him otherwise. But his intellect doesn't mean he has a lack of empathy he's also really crafty but not in the "hot gluing pieces of felt in the basement" type of crafty he's just got such a good mind

James Potter:

Ok ok so hear me out Hermes. Hermes Hermes Hermes. Hermes is the god of so many things-- Jack of all trades, really, and James is just so damn good at everything he does. He's also incredibly fast on a broom. He makes friends wherever he goes (pretty fitting if your father is the god of travellers) and is mischevious without dipping into the villain area (most of the time).

Sirius Black:

Aphrodite. Hands down. Did not have to think when I said this. Everyone at school is fully aware that he is attractive and he can charm almost anyone. he is very charismatic. He can speak French and I BELIEVE Italian... ok it just... makes sense to me... (btw regulus will be in pt. 2)

Peter Pettigrew:

Also Hermes. Let me explain-- Beyond the fact that it would justify him feeling closer to James, we can use the other side of the Hermes coin for this. Hermes is the god of pretty much anything you encounter on the road. Hermes is not evil or anything-- but he does technically protect thieves and liars. Peter and James have parallels that make me believe both of them would be sons of Hermes, but their hearts were different.

Lily Evans:

This one was hard. I was thinking Demeter- then Apollo- then Athena- Hestia isnt an option but like, it might fit if it was-- I'm gonna say Athena because while YES, she does learn healing magic, she's also just incredibly bright in general. She and Remus are both brainchildren ok She's also very witty in her comebacks and stubborn-- im referring to her behavior in general, not just when it comes to james. For example, even though Petunia hated her, she still was so determined to have a good relationship with her sister.

Mary MacDonald:

OO, oo, i want to say Aphrodite, but then I remember that sirius is aphrodite and that would be WEIRD but if sirius was anyone elses kid, mary would be an aphrodite kid, i just, like? look at her. she celebrates her femininity, she's so confident in herself, i love her

other than aphrodite, I might say... Hebe. Seems like a deep reach, but she's the goddess of youth.

Marlene McKinnon:

APOLLO. Apollo. Apollo. Marlene has always wanted to be a healer. She's also a great flyer. I don't know what else to say about it but like- Apollo? yes, yes

[orchideous-nox]

what are some problematic opinions you have??

I really don't think any of my opinions are problematic? Idk, I guess I'll let the people be the judge of that. I want to preface that these are how I feel personally and I would never try to enforce my opinions on others. Ship who you want to ship, love who you want to love. If you disagree with any of my opinions then that's fine but please don't try and convince me to "see your reasoning", these are opinions I'm pretty set on.

I don't particularly multiship, not because I have no sense of fun but because I genuinely can't understand how people ship Barty with Sirius or Narcissa with Lily or Evan with James etc. It makes so sense and no amount of reasoning will ever convince me that anybody other than Evan can stand Barty to a degree that they want to fuck him. He's so annoying and I mean that with all the love in the world as an Evan kin. I think Sirius needs Remus to mellow him out. Lily and Narcissa is just a no from me. Period.

I think sometimes the fandom forgets that relationships can be platonic. Friends exist, not every character needs to fuck all of their best friends because they understand each other so deeply. Yes, they have great chemistry...as friends. Platonically. Do you want to fuck your best friend? .......actually you're on tumblr and a marauders fan so who knows

People are so desperate in this fandom for others to talk about the girls more but then when people do post about them there is like no interaction. From experience, the boys get more hits, more kudos, more notes etc. I write about Rosekiller expecting not much attention, I'm not in it to get popular otherwise I would stick to Jegulus and Wolfstar rather than my precious murder husbands. But whenever I post about the girls the comments are dryyyyy and it's not fun. I love getting comments and replies so I can interact with others and talk about headcanons. It feels like as soon as I post about the girls people forget that they were encouraging more of that content in the first place.

Fanon and canon are blurring and not in a fun way. There are certain headcanons that people take from fanon or even from specific popular fics and start stretching canon to fit the fanon and then get angry when people don't stick to it. Saying a character is canonically a certain way because of implications in the canon can be really harmful.

I don't particularly care for OCs in fics. I read these stories for the characters I like and if an OC has like a massive chunk of a chapter on their own or even whole chapters or whole fics I will likely skip or even DNF because that's just not what I'm here for. Like I don't care.

If a character isn't attractive in this fandom, people don't care. Just because someone doesn't have rippling abs and perfect skin, it doesn't mean you can write them off as being bad. People can be hot and fat, ugly and fat, ugly and skinny, ugly and a good or interesting person!!! As a plus size person, I have spent my whole life looking at media portrayals saying that I am not worth attention until I am skinny, only then can I be attractive, and this fandom can be just as guilty sometimes (I'm looking at you people who make Snape hot to justify liking him, and making Peter have no personality besides being fat).

People are way to eager to interact with content they don't like to tell them they don't like it. Look up what an algorithm is, hun, I'm begging you. (this isn't controversial unless you are one of those people who does that)

Okay, hopefully I've not lost anyone along the way. Like I said, don't try and convince me I'm "wrong" in the comments, these are opinions and cannot be factually incorrect < 3

[astridthevalkyrie]

Re: Your strong feelings against Regina - I won't be hard pressed bc it won't change my opinion (sorry my love for her is too great) but I'm curious to read if you've rambled at all about why you dislike her so strongly?

LOLL i've done a few rambles over the years and i tend to hatepost whenever i rewatch clips but i don't think i've ever done like a full on explanation on why. and yes please feel free to love her! idc how anyone feels about a fictional character.

some stuff i do like about her: lana parilla is obv very talented and pretty, her and jmo have rlly good chemistry, sometimes her one liners are super funny ("the entire charming family and their pirate mascot" is fucking hilarious i wish she said more stuff like that).

but tldr—she did way too many bad things and never properly redeemed herself for them.

in the first two seasons she does, like, incredibly bad stuff LMAO, including but not limited to: ruining snow's life after killing her dad, killing entire villages, casting the curse and the subtle ways she tortures snow in it, abusing henry (who is in therapy because he's told he's "crazy" for saying that he's aging while everyone else stays the same age), sacrificing children to the blind witch, the entire situation with graham (that she never confesses to, emma never finds out), trying to poison emma after emma tells her she's already leaving because she couldn't stand emma being in henry's life at all, separating the mad hatter from his daughter in the curse even though the last time they saw each other the mad hatter helped her and she betrayed him+making him remember his real self for some extra bout of torture, kills a little boy's dad bc the dad didn't want to drop his entire life and move into town so that she could fulfill her sudden dreams of motherhood, then later taunts that boy when he's an adult about how she killed his dad.

and what happened to her with daniel and cora's abuse is definitely really bad, it just doesn't even come close to justifying any of this for me. she didn't need to marry snow's dad. she gets rid of cora and sends her to wonderland before she's married. she stays because she likes the feeling of magic and the idea of being queen (rumple is obviously a huge part of why she turned out the way she did, "hooking" her on a magic which ouat tries to compare to drug use, but the murderous intent was in her before she even met him).

and then her redemption. hooo boy. it starts in season 2, with her just deciding not to actively do harm because she wants henry to love her. not a bad start. then she tries to destroy the well that snow and emma want to come back from (to be fair, she does this to stop cora, but she knows emma and snow dying is a possibility and is very cool with this bc it'll make her henry's only mom). she then is upset that everyone in town isn't automatically cool with her, for some reason gets credit for "saving" snow and emma (from a trap! that she! set!), and when cora does come back, she teams up with her. like. the lady who actually killed daniel and ruined regina's life. that lady. teams up with her. stands by as her mother kills snow's nanny even though they already got what they wanted. and THEN she's angry that snow had the nerve to do to cora what regina's done to dozens of people and kill her.

and then for the rest of the show there's just no point where there's time for regina's redemption because they're always dealing with the next villain. peter pan, then zelana, then the snow queen, so on and so forth. at some point she's just decided to be redeemed and anyone who argues with that point either changes their mind or is portrayed by the narrative as a villain. some of her one liners that a lot of the fandom think are so cool make me beyond angry LMAO like she tells david "i will not be given parenting advice by a man who shipped his daughter off in a box" GIRL??? BECAUSE OF YOU??? the show continuously pushes the blame onto snow and david (but especially snow) for giving emma up as though they had a choice. regina knew about rumple's prophecy. she knew snow and charming's daughter would break the curse. she was not gonna let that baby live if snow and charming hadn't sent her away.

snow and charming and emma's characters are all completely turned into dust for her too. emma is forced to grovel because she brought back a woman from the past that regina wrongfully executed bc it happens to be maid marian. snow and charming do uncharacteristic "evil" things so that they can be like "see! they're all good and bad!" when even ooc snow and charming's worst doesn't compare to regina's best.

[dongslinger--420]

Thoughts on the chicken for days episode?

I used to skip it on all my rewatched of bojack after maybe my third rewatch because I think I got it in my brain that it was an unimportant dumb episode. But then on my last rewatch I made the effort and realised that it's actually better than I remembered. Still dumb lol. But not "bad dumb." It's like the Todd episode before the Actual Todd episode.

And I'll big admit that the joke in this episode where people keep asking Becca the chicken questions and taking her varied buck sounds as legit responses got me xD

Hi! Before I get onto anything else, I'd like to ask you to please not use the word "dumb" on my blog. I really don't like that word and I've mentioned it a couple of times before, but I understand that you probably didn't know, so I'd just ask you to not do it again.

Moving on to my actual answer, I have two things that I'd like to talk about in regards to Chickens:

1. Social commentary

I'm vegan, and so is Raphael Bob-Waksberg, although I'm unaware as to whether the writer of the episode, Peter Knight, is. As a result, this episode functions as a commentary in favour of veganism, and when I first watched the episode, this really struck me, because it was the first time I had seen this in any show.

Yes, this is a world where humans and anthropomorphic animals coexist, and as a result they couldn't make a one-on-one comparison (on that note, I would love to watch an episode that shows how they reached this conclusion in the first place). However, the comparisons that they do make are generally handled very well. Many people do think that eating animals is justified simply because they are of lesser intelligence to humans. Yes, the livestock in this episode are bred to be of lesser intelligence, but the justification is still there. Many organisations (including the RSPCA) refuse to acknowledge the hypocrisy of eating animals while claiming to care for them, using the fact that it is legal as justification. And lastly, it tears into the whole concept of "humane slaughter", by taking the stance that as long as anyone doesn't want to die, no slaughter is humane (in addition, it also talks about how people who work in slaughterhouses are traumatised, which is another reason not to fund them).

All in all, it achieves its purpose just as well as any other social justice issue this show covers, and it's INCREDIBLE to me how Bob-Waksberg and Knight were gutsy enough to cover a social justice topic that is far from the dominant ideology. It frustrates me to no end whenever people say that "this episode was fucked up" because the real life equivalent is just as fucked up! Please unlearn your cognitive dissonance!

2. Character work

It's interesting that you mention Todd in this ask because I consider the episode as being more focused on two other main characters: BoJack and Diane.

BoJack's overall arc this season is heavily connected to Kelsey, because Kelsey reminds him of two people: Herb and Beatrice. The Herb comparisons tend to come later on in episodes like Fish Out Of Water, so I'm going to be focusing on Bea here. Bea's personality is established to us in Brand New Couch, where we see how her abuse and undermining of BoJack has affected him. Chickens functions as a development of this, with BoJack's shitty upbringing meaning that he is naturally drawn to older people who are cold to him. As a result of this, BoJack spends the entirety of this episode trying desperately to impress Kelsey, while she continues to give him the cold shoulder. And here's the kicker: Kelsey genuinely believes he's incredible. Everyone, including us, already knows this, because why else would she have hired him? He never needed to impress her. And as a result, the fact that he spends so much time trying to impress her is deeply tragic and ironic. He doesn't even learn how she feels about him until four episodes later. No opinions change at the end of this episode, because it's the second of three acts in this overall story arc.

Diane's utilitarianism is given much more focus this season than in the previous one. It was briefly touched on in Yesterdayland, but in this episode she is directly forced to face the sad truth that she is a failure in her own eyes. First, she meets Irving, who reminds her deeply of herself when she was younger, and she realises how little she has achieved since she was Irving's age. Next, she gets branded as "the maid" when running away with Todd, thereby causing Irving's opinion of her to lessen as she realises how much she is actually useful for. Finally, the episode ends with the bittersweet notion that actually, Diane didn't do anything. Against her best efforts, Diane was completely powerless to save Becca, and Chicken4Days continues to go even stronger. Nothing is resolved in this arc, with the brief exception that she forms a genuine connection with Todd, as well as earning Irving's approval on her own terms. The issue doesn't go away, and two episodes later she tries again, even harder this time, only to be faced against the entire world, and eventually be forced to give in.

Chickens is a silly buddy storyline that hides a DEEPLY tragic core, in which seeds are spread for two major character arcs for us to uncover.

[raphaellight]

The Zygon Speech

This scene is single handedly responsible for calibrating my personal moral and political compass. It isn't exacly the source of my values, but it encapsulates so many lessons and highlights the wisdom that gets forgotten by so many. And it deserves to be talked over and over again.

"I had to do what I've done" "So was I" "We've been treated like cattles" "So what?" "We've been left to fend for ourselfs" "So does everyone." "It's not fair" - 'Tantruming child' Doctor calls Bonnie later in the scene. Why I don't use tiktok or don't generally follow any influencers emmotionally commenting on political and sociological things. Most of them sound like children to me and for every comment I have the urge to just ask "So what?"

"These things had happen Zygella, their are facts." - I've met dozen of people who, in my experience, felt like have nothing to add but complains about everything. Then you listen to what publicist say in television, and it's once again, mostly complaining or trying to "define facts". Facts are the most stubborn things in the universe, speaking after a certain, devilish cat. In my opinnion approximetly 80% of talking that is made around the facts is just wasted mambling.

"You're not superior to people, who were cruel to you. You're just a bunch of new cruel people" - it doesn't need a comment.

"The only way anyone can live in peace, is if they're prepared to forgive."

"... because like every other tantruming child in history, Bonnie, you don't actually know what you want." - Fascisc, Rasist, Misogynist, you can call me any insult in your book, I will not openly support your movement unless I specifically like your end goal offer, "We fight against (insert any modern problem)" will not cut it.

"When it's all perfect and just and fair, when you have finally got it exactly the way you want it, what are you gonna do with the people like you. The troublemakers. How are you gonna protect your glorious revolution from another?" - NOONE'S vision of the world is gonna satisfy everyone. You believe your vision is worth fighting, there are people who believe opposite vision is worth fighting for. So if your vision of the better world is settled on the idea that everyone is going to think like you, you are delusional and striving towards tyranny.

"Nobody wins for long. The wheel just keeps turning."

"This is not a game, Kate. This is a scale model of war. Every war ever fought right there in front of you. Because it's always the same. When you fire that first shot, no matter, how right you feel you have no idea who's going to die. You don't know who's children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken. How many lives shattered. How much blood will spill until everybody does what they were always going to do from the very beggining, SIT DOWN AND TALK!" - Just Peter Capaldi acting his heart out. No war is justified. That's not to say it's never right to fight in a war, but no war ever fought in the past, present or future, will have any sense, ever.

"You know what thinking is, it's just a fancy word for changing your mind" "I will not change my mind" "Then you will die stupid" - changing your mind is not a failure, never forget that.

"Well here's the unforseeable, I forgive you, after all you've done, I forgive you." - Treating someone like they are your enemy never made them your ally.

"And you know what you do with all that pain. Should I tell you where you put it. You hold it tight. Till it burns your hands. And you say this: Noone else will ever have to live like this, noone else will ever have to feel this pain. Not on my watch." - Another moment of Peter Capaldi being Him when it came to art of acting.

[punch-love]

I actually find it funny that you like writing wade soo much more than writing Peter because your wade is just soooo incredible. And I think it’s because a lot less people can write a character or the characteristics of someone like wade. Like it’s a pretty rare attribute compared to writing Peter. Peter’s characteristics is just easier to write in general I feel (idk unless u think I’m wrong feel free to correct me?) and it’s funny that the harder character to write is the one you find much easier and much more fun lol

Wade is by far the easiest and most enjoyable character I've ever written for, and it does delight me to no end whenever people think my work with him is good.

I think the thing about Wade is that you have to be willing to go there, and also accept that he's not a good person and that everything he does is a reflection of that. Wade is genuinely morally fucked, and you have to embrace that wholeheartedly. I never have to think when I'm writing Wade, I just write. There's very little brain to mouth traction happening to him -- he is a very intelligent character -- but he also lacks shame and fear, and that means you rarely have to think twice when it comes to what he's doing and why. There's a delightful selfishness that seeps in every aspect of what he's doing and how he's doing it. Also, he thinks all of his actions are justifiable and anyone that stops/limits him/critiques him is wrong and/or he's ignoring it regardless. Also, he's an extrovert.

I think of the two of them, I do relate with Wade more. I am extroverted and do cope with trauma through humor and so I think I use him as my voice-box to be funny. I can't actually live life as violently as him, but he's a really fun outlet regardless. His vulnerability that exists effortlessly alongside authenticity is something I really, really love. I like that he's a bad person who does good things, but not at the expense of losing the parts of him that are terrible.

That being said, PETER IS SO HARD TO WRITE. I think the reason so many people find him easy is because they don't actually understand his character/only see him as a foil and/or bottom for Wade! I've actually talked about this with some of my writer friends about how, technically, anyone CAN write Wade (with varying degrees of success) because everyone generally has some agreed upon aspects of his character but so few people understand Peter that he's almost always OOC or badly written in a lot of fan works. I very rarely read a good Peter, because most people do not write Peter they write twink with a Job, or Man who bottoms, or Nerd with little to no personality.

Peter, unlike Wade is always in a state of contraction. He doesn't believe in killing, but he's always repressing violence, he's a good guy at heart but a total asshole in every other regard, he's a wisecracker who isn't actually funny, he's a traumatized man who refuses to acknowledge that trauma, he's in 10000 levels of self-denial that he doesn't actually know what he's thinking or feeling 90% of the time. Peter doesn't know himself, and doesn't want to, so writing him is a constant layer of trying to tell the truth through the perspective of someone who doesn't want to even be in his own brain and lies to himself constantly. Peter is a puzzle that you have to solve blind and backwards. Wade is whatever you think he is, and then you crank it 9 more levels for the fun of it.

All that to say, I love the compliment and while I do disagree with you on who's the harder to WRITE (at least for me, and in my biased opinion, the majority of the fandom) I do think that I write Wade in a way that embraces all of his violence and amorality and complication without trying to justify or romanticize him, and it's always flattering when someone says. "That asshole! I like what you've done with the place." I do too. Writing him is truly its own reward.

[stonegearstudios]

Creating A MegaDungon Part 7

Backstory

The Mutilation of Uranus by Saturn, Giorgio Vasari, 1555

What is the most important narrative in a adventure module? Well, it's not the backstory, not by a long shot. It's whatever narrative the players spin up as they go.

But backstory isn't unimportant, because it justifies the world they adventure through.

The Fall of Phaeton, Peter Paul Rubens, c. 1604-1605 © National Gallery of Art

Now, I've already said before that The Eye has a Greek theme. in its landscape, it's architecture, it's ecology, but that left me a question. Do I bring the Greek Gods into this?

The Primordial Elementals had to war with someone, and I had been loosely referring to the other side as the Nascent Divinities. The Olympic Pantheon makes the most sense.

So I'm not going with them.

Instead, we have the Titans.

Cronos and Rhea by Karl Friedrich Schinkel, 19th Century

I remember thinking before "Ok, the Titans were the predecessors of the Olympians in myth, but did anyone actually worship them, were they a prior religion, or were the created whole cloth to be predecessors?"

I don't know the answer, my degree didn't focus on that, but I'll tell you what, in the history of The Eye, they were real.

These divinities, apart from the primal elements, came from elsewhere to try and claim a newly formed world. The conflict they had writ large across the islands of The Eye.

The fact that there seems to be very little to the stories of the Titans (in easily accessible English at least) is fine. After all, their war with the Elementals was truly ancient and essentially completely forgotten by the surrounding world. Even divinity looses its lustre after a while.

Given that, I've been going through resources, picking out Titans that might be interesting to have in the dungeons story, with the players able to discover fragments of their past.

Prometheus is an obvious choice, as is Kronos, Atlus, but some of the lesser known ones gave me ideas.

Hekate - Often not thought of as being a titan but you can have a lot of fun in an rpg setting with the leftovers from the ruler of witchcraft.

Mnêmosynê - The titan of memory and language, someone had to create the records of this divine conflict, and perhaps some fragments still remain, etched in stone.

Ophiôn - In some tellings apparently a king of the Titans before Kronos, be interesting to try and make that work with the common story but could reinforce that even divinities fade with time.

There are others two, but now I have a new project. The Elementals, they need characters too, but I intend for them to be even more alien than the Titans (despite being the originators of this world), so standard names wouldn't make sense, and I don't have a quick corpus of mythology to draw on.

How should I name the Primordial Elementals then?

[silenceintostone]

hey... i really like ur blog. i was wondering if you have any advice or thoughts on how u reconcile your sexuality with your religion from one christian lesbian to another, if that's also what you'd call yourself.

Hey! I always like hearing that others enjoy my blog, so thank you. I apologize that I wasn’t able to get to answering this last night, and I hope you’re doing alright.

Firstly, yes, I'd characterize myself as a Christian lesbian, so you're right about that. I would like to say that I’m a Presbyterian, so that informs my theological framework. Everything I’ll write is just as I personally understand it, since I don’t have any meaningful formal training in religion. I'll do my best to be as thorough as I can be (so this will be long).

In looking to scripture, it's my understanding that nothing can separate us from the love of God (Romans 8:38-39). Nothing, no thing, which would include our sexuality. Romans 3:23-24 also states that we all fall short of God's expectations for us. None of us are perfect, and none of us are able to meet His asks. We must redeemed through Christ who died for us so that we might not be separated from Him by our sin.

In Christ's sacrifice, we are justified in God through our faith, and not the law (Galatians 2:16, Romans 5:1, Ephesians 2:8, John 8:24, Acts 26:18, etc.). In other words, our salvation comes through our acceptance of Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross for us, and not through any work of our own. Our works, no matter how good, would never be sufficient to earn His perfect love because we are inherently imperfect (although I don't believe in, then, going and sinning for no reason). Still, Jesus Christ has overcome sin, and in that, overcome death, and has offered us a gift of eternal life if we choose to take it, as seen in John 3:16. Although we are saved, the path to Heaven is narrow and the way is hard (Matthew 7:13-14); that is the case for everyone, lesbian and straight alike. Belief is no small feat, and being faithless is often easier.

So, with that being said if we're asking if being gay itself is a sin, then I think we're asking the wrong question. As written in 1 Peter 4:8 (and Romans 13:8-10), I think we should look at our actions and measure our relationships with others by whether or not we are acting in love. As someone who cares about philosophical thoroughness, it's easy to get wrapped up in the complexity of "LOVE" as an ideal. For now, I at least try to treat others as I would wish to be treated (Luke 6:31). I think that advice is pretty simple for anyone to understand. When it comes to sexuality specifically, although I have not always acted this way, I think treating others as ends in and of themselves and not as means is also a good starting point (yeah, Kant mentioned, moving on); and I work myself to do this, although I fall short, as anyone else would. Treating others in a loving way is most certainly available to us as lesbians, just as it would be available to any person of other sexual orientations.

Additionally, sexuality of any type, and therefore marriage, is a temporary condition, as seen in Matthew 22:30. No one, not even heterosexual couples, will be as though they are married in the kingdom of Heaven; and in Heaven, we are to experience something far greater than anything we could hope to comprehend. We are given the chance to enjoy our relationships on earth while we are here, but we must also still acknowledge that our highest purpose is to be with God, and for this purpose we were ultimately created. Our relationship with God should be our foremost consideration, lesbian and straight alike.

Ultimately, this sort of reasoning is what allows me to be "secure" in my sexuality (for lack of better phraseology, as to characterize anything earthly as "secure" would be a mischaracterization, especially given the former paragraph) while also maintaining my faith in Christ and membership in the church. It's my understanding that I can strive to live a Christian life while still being a lesbian, just as much as any straight person might strive to live a Christian life.

It's my hope that you can now at least have a path to feel more comfortable with the idea that homosexuality itself should be no greater a struggle than what any heterosexual people might experience in reconciling sexuality with their own faiths, and continue to pursue your relationship with Jesus Christ and God with confidence in His word and plan for you.

[rauchendesgnu]

Fic authors self rec! When you get this, reply with your favorite five fics that you've written, then pass on to at least five other writers. Let’s spread the self-love 💗 (i don't know if you do these sorts of chain-letter things, or if you'd prefer not to, but for my part i do like to know which of their works a given author is especially hype on, so consider this an opportunity to gush!)

hi there! I'm not really a fan of chain letters, but I do support people gushing about each others' (and their own) art. I hope you don't mind if I open this up to anyone who sees this (to anyone who sees this: if you're feeling like showing off your favourite pieces of writing or art or gifsets or music or sculptures or whatever you do, then please do so! I'd love to see everyone's best ofs! @ialwayscomewhenyoucall @al-in-my-head @chaosheadspace I am herewith asking you specifically to show me your favourite fics :D)

These are in no particular order:

A Gentleman's Guide To Dancing Fandom: The Witcher Pairing: Geraskier Rating: T Words: 8,433 Why is this a fave: Gay Regency Pining™️and dance lessons Other Stuff Worth Mentioning: Regency Era, Witchers still exist, Slow Burn (ish, with only 8k words)

Insane Twink Takes On Military (or how Lambert learned that Geralt's husband is actually terrifying) Fandom: The Witcher Pairing: Geraskier Rating: T Words: 1,068 Why is this a fave: BAMF Jaskier, also intimidation is one of the best skills in DnD and Jaskier rolled a Nat20 in this fic Other Stuff Worth Mentioning: BAMF Jaskier, do I need to say more?

New Perspectives Fandom: The Witcher Pairing: Geraskier Rating: T Words: 4,226 Why is this a fave: vaguely Victorian setting, people respecting boundaries, trans character, supportive husband (and friends) Other Stuff Worth Mentioning: trans Jaskier, Arranged Marriage, Historical Fantasy (ish) AU (don't ask me to define the settings my brain comes up with), transphobia (not from Geralt), dysphoria

For A Moment We Are People Fandom: The Magnus Archives Pairing: LonelyEyes Rating: T Words: 3,075 Why is this a fave: Hurt Elias. Also Peter trying to justify falling in love with a horrible man called Elias Other Stuff Worth Mentioning: Illegal Soft LonelyEyes, Peter finds out he doesn't like Elias in pain if it's someone other than him who does the hurting

Five Times Jon Faces His Dysphoria Alone... Fandom: The Magnus Archives Pairing: JonMartin (Teaholding because I think it sounds cute) Rating: T Words: 4,266 Why is this a fave: the trans. also I projected a bit. maybe. and again, supportive partner and friends Other Stuff Worth Mentioning: trans Jonathan Sims, gender dysphoria, comfort

I know it said five fics, but since everything I write concerning trans characters and being trans is kind of very personal and important to me, I'll have to add another of those fics (and feel free to check out the trans fics that I have not listed here)

Questions Of Identity Fandom: The Magnus Archives Pairing: JonMartin (Teaholding) Rating: T Words: 4,496 Why is this a fave: the trans (again, yes). again, projecting and me being angry at ignorant people. supportive partner and friends (do we spot a theme yet?) Other Stuff Worth Mentioning: trans Martin Blackwood, gender dysphoria, comfort, pre-T Martin

I'll have to add another note (sorry): I haven't done so for my earlier work, but my more recent fics all have content warnings about what kind of dysphoria is discussed. If dysphoria in fics is triggering to you, feel free to check the content warnings and take care of yourself <3

Last thing (I promise): feel free to ask me anything about these fics or any other stuff I write and post. I also love recommendations, if you feel like I might enjoy something you've seen or read :D

[abujenna]

a different kind of martyr

Some 17 years ago, I had to find my patron saint. Most Orthodox don't pick their own; it's generally assigned at birth or close enough it amounts to the same thing. But when I converted as an adult, I got to choose saints for myself, my kids, and (as it turned out) my wife.

You have to feel the sarcasm dripping off that "got to"--I don't do intuition or spiritual experiences, so it was not a welcome opportunity. Maybe if I'd realized that it didn't have to be forever, it would have felt a little less daunting. There's no particular reason you can't have a special connection with more than one saint; and in my case, I had the perfect opportunity to switch if I'd wanted to. Due to a clerical oversight, our baptismal certificates weren't processed until I thought to ask more than a decade later; and in the event, they accidentally assigned my son's patron to both of us on paper. But I'm nothing if not committed, so I have no interest in changing--even if there's no formal documentation, even if he might not be real, even if his story is grossly problematic for Christian unity.

Looking back over my list of reasons, it's nice to see that most of them need no revision, except this one:

Sort of related to the previous connection, he was martyred by Catholic missionaries. I'll say to start out that this doesn't inspire in me a hatred for Catholics. But it does speak to both the "Western" chauvinism that infused colonial efforts and the tendency in "Western" Christianity to discount the authenticity of the "Eastern" faith. (I'm using quotes here, because in this case the Orthodox are coming from the West and Catholics are coming from the East.) I would say this tendency applies just as much to Protestantism, whatever one might say about whether Protestants would have martyred Peter for refusing to convert. I suspect I'm always going to have to deal with my fellow Euro-Americans questioning the legitimacy of my Orthodox faith, and it will be good to have a saint who understands so intimately that struggle.

I think I've come around to a more balanced view of Eastern and Western problems, as I noted six years ago when I had a chance to visit Mission San Gabriel. Russian colonialism wasn't necessarily any better than Spanish; it sent native Alaskans 3000 miles from home to California and provoked a clash of empires that ground them to dust. Likewise, Eastern Christianity has made more than its fair contribution to religious strife. And as an Orthodox Christian born and bred in the West, I get to own both sides.

I still love St. Peter, because he's not to blame for any of this; he was a victim of circumstance, but his simple faith still speaks for itself. He wasn't trying to convert anyone or win points in a war; he just wanted to be heard and seen for who he was. The problem comes when we use his legacy to further our own prejudice.

Perhaps an analogy would help. There's been a long-standing problem with Christians using the "Christ killer" label against Jewish people throughout history. Now, it is true that Jewish people killed Christ, or at least wanted him dead. Not all of them, or even most of them. And Jesus himself and his disciples were also Jewish. But the point is certainly made in Scripture that Jewish people killed him. And if we leave it there, we might feel it's a justifiable claim. But we have to ask why it's framed this way at a time when Christianity was still very much a Jewish movement. He came as the Jewish Messiah, and his own people--those who should have received him--called for his death. That's relevant not because they're Jewish (as one race among others), but because they were his own people. The Christian response should not be to assign blame but to ask, if we are his people, how do we put him to death by our actions? If it comes to assigning labels, then we are the Christ killers.

Now, here's the analogy: if Peter the Aleut was tortured and killed by some Catholics in California, what does that mean? Why is it important that they were Catholics? Any Christian martyr can be killed for their faith by pagans or Muslims or atheists, and die with a great confession of Christ on their lips. But St. Peter died for his faith at the hands of Christians, who didn't need an equal-to-apostle to introduce them to Jesus. And while they may have missed some important points, they already had their own martyrs to show them the way of the cross. St. Peter's great witness was that he died at the hands of Christians--that after the law and the prophets and the gospel and 1500 years of Christian civilization, we could still so easily commit the original sin of fratricide. That in the name of Jesus, who showed us how to lay down life for our brothers, we could take their life instead. That we could travel half-way around the world to carry the gospel, meet Christians coming the other way around, and plant our flag through their heart to claim we got here first.

The meaning of St. Peter's death is not that, as we always knew, those Catholics are evil. It is a mirror to show us how miserably we all fail in our witness to Christ. To show how our cause blinds us to the person before us. To question whether we're really fighting for God's truth or for our own scrap of territory. If his death has meaning, it can only be that we killed him.

[starmora]

I know you have a lot of Gamora asks but I need to share with someone.(If any of this is too much and you don't want to post I'll understand)

I liked parts of vol 3 but the rest of it is tainted for me because I can't let go of how Gamora was treated and I don't think anyone else should either. Gamora's death was too eerily similar to cruel, careless losses of life we've seen for people in real life. The way fans have brushed it off as justifiable has been too eerily similar. The way most of the characters who were supposed to be her family brushed it off was too eerily similar. Gamora's life mattered and only 2 people acted like it did thereby having the entire canon suggest that she was barely important to the family she helped create and the story she she had been a big part of.

You can literally see the hierarchy of whose lives were considered important and whose weren't when looking at the deaths in IW and EG. Loki, Vision, Tony and Natasha all had already completed their arcs either in a separate trilogy(loki)or were Avengers dying in an Avengers centered event. They all didn't die completely alone. They didn't die back in the same exact hell they had escaped from. They all got visual on screen mourning from all the characters who knew them best and/or a show or movie that further explored their lives, importance and/or grief around what happened to them. Then you have Heimdall who didn't die alone and Thor was upset but beyond that not much else. Last you get Gamora who died alone. Was back with her abuser. Reduced back into a tool for her abuser to use. Had her soul forever tied to her abusers actions. Most of her family doesn't appear to have cared she died and in fact pretend she didn't die and instead just can't remember them. Which even then they don't care she can't remember them. And everyone but Peter pretends she never played any importance to the family and didn't contribute to who and what the guardians are. Most of them also didn't even speak to her past self or notice her existence. If all of this isn't enough look at how Gunn treated Yondu's death and then look back at Gamora's.

Now am I really supposed to believe all of that is a coincidence. And even if it is a coincidence that doesn't change the harm. That doesn't change the mcu objectively putting out a broad story that makes it look like Gamora was expendable and we should forget about what came before her death because it's not like most of her family cared anyway. They don't even credit Gamora for the end of Nebula's arc taking on the care of the kids when it was literally Gamora in vol 2 who said there were kids out there who needed saving and they could help them. Like come on now. They could easily have Nebula say it's something Gamora wanted us to do together or I think Gamora would be so happy to see this. They couldn't even acknowledge Gamora had hopes and dreams that will never be fulfilled

Again maybe this wasn't done on purpose but it still paints a certain picture. If people want to say it doesn't matter just look around at how many fans and the general audience are taking it and what they are saying about her and her worth. It would have taken 1 minute to have Drax and Mantis say they miss Gamora too while talking to Peter. The holiday special easily could have had all of them take 2 minutes to discuss Gamora or have Drax say, yeah I miss her too this is hard when Mantis said Peter was still so sad. Even a stranger could have more compassion and empathy for Gamora's death and the new situation she's in than most of her family. Also why can nobody say murder victim, abuse victim, killed when talking to Peter. Why are they trying to downplay what happened. She doesn't have amnesia. She was murdered and then poor past Gamora was denied ever getting to know them by the events of Endgame. By the end of the movie as much as I love these characters I was glad both Gamora and Peter left. You don't try to gaslight a grieving person into thinking the person they loved isn't really dead and wasn't killed when the whole movie is about how Gamora died and her past self never got to live that life. You don't not speak to past Gamora even if just once to say I'm glad you're in the future and found something you love because you deserve it. All of this hurts so much. Especially seeing some fans say she got a good arc and nothing was wrong. Would they honestly choose this over say what Yondu got if someone asked them choose how you get to die and how the aftermath is handled. Then there are other fans trying to act like not even Peter loved her or that she doesn't need love anyway. This whole thing is sickening.

Thank you for sharing. I really do appreciate it, because it’s nice to see I’m not alone in these feelings.

Honestly the more I think about the difference between Gamora’s death and anyone else’s death, the angrier I get. But tbh it’s the worst when I think about Yondu. In every other circumstance you can chalk it up to just being different writers or directors or creative directions, but when you directly compare the difference between yondu and Gamora, Gunn’s favoritism becomes pretty clear imo. I truly don’t know why so many people are seemingly okay with how she’s been treated over the last 5 years. It’s even surprising to me how many apparent fans seem to be okay as long as she’s still technically “alive” and wanna get on people’s cases if they express anything other than extreme approval with how she’s been handled

[bougiebutchbitch]

as The Nonsense continueth -

I also love Megatron in TFP (blatantly abuses Starscream!) and Starscream (is an abusive fuckwad of a boss towards anyone below his rank) and Yondu from GOTG (absolutely emotionally abused Peter as a kid, YMMV on whether 'smacked me around to show me how to fight' counts as physical abuse, but there's definitely an argument to be made there given what we see of their relationship on screen).

And I love and deeply empathise with Ed Teach, who had a self-destructive depression spiral but also abused his crew and especially Izzy during that. And no, the fact he is mentally ill absolves him of jack shit - I say, as a mentally ill traumatisedTM person who has also dealt badly with All Of That in the past, and lost friendships because of it (even if I was never anywhere near as awful as Ed lol).

And, for the record, I do think Izzy falls into the 'shitty abusive boss' category in S1. He's no way near on the same scale as Ed, and most of the time, when he's a cunt to people, it's to try and make them do their jobs - but like. He belittles people a lot, and that's shitty.

Abuse is abuse. It's fine to call it that, even if Your Precious Blorbo is the culprit.

On a scale of individual traumas, even the worst people imaginable can change and grow. Their victims owe them jack shit, but they can change. I love exploring the arc of those worst people imaginable as they develop and make the effort to stop hurting others and alter their worldviews. I love exploring the arc of those survivors as they come to terms with what happened to them and their often complex relationship with the person who hurt them, and move on and heal. I even love, occasionally, poking those Worst People further and further down the hole they're in until they're absolutely reprehensible. I love exploring toxic and mutually unhealthy, or downright abusive relationships, or toxic relationships that become abusive, in which no party is entirely Good or Bad, but the abuser is still very much an abuser and the abuse victim is still a victim who did not fucking 'ask for it' just because they're not a morally pure angel, holy shit, in a way that feels true to my own lived experience.

I just can't see how the stances of 'you don't have to pretend your blorbo is perfect to justify liking them' and 'a mean nasty abuse survivor is still an abuse survivor' are controversial sdlfhjfdjsksdg

Anyway, should you wish to come to my inbox and whine about me liking morally impure characters, here is some better material for you.

anyway I love that House does shit that is 9000000x more Problematique than Izzy (except, arguably, The Murders Of Nameless Enemies, which is pretty much a genre convention) but I never got any hate for liking him lol

I got less hate for being a Joker fan than an Izzy fan, which is fuckin wild (and - oh hey - look at that - it's possible to love a character like Ed who canonically abuses another of my favourite characters!! Maybe.... You don't gotta pretend Ed is a perfect angel in order to love him!! Imagine!!!)

like I know I'm Loud And Annoying(tm), but if you're gonna come at me for liking 'characters who did meanbad things!!1!!111!' and literally all you can point to is Izzy pulling poor Fang's beard when Fang questioned Ed (which was mean!! it was absolutely mean and shitty!!! bad Izzy!!!! bad!) on a show where appendages are amputated and fed to the victim, I promise you there is way better material in my archive lol

[akpenekudjo]

So Nigerians want Obi

Let's talk a little about the just ended Nigerian presidential elections.

Being Ghanaian, our louder neighbours to the east tend to take up a lot of space in our collective consciousness, no matter how hard we try to mind our own business. In spite of our relative closeness, many of us who've never lived there for any length of time know very little about the ins and outs of Africa's most populous country.

It is from this seat of ignorance that I wish to opine on a thing that's caught my attention in the aftermath of Bola Tinubu's win.

It came to the fore of my thinking a few days back when a popular Ghanaian journalist, Manasseh Azure Awuni, tweeted a picture of Bola. It was a close up that emphasized his droopy lips, sleepy eyes and deeply wrinkled face. Take a look at it here.

The sentiment of that tweet was shared by the wider Twitter community, among whom Peter Obi, a younger contestant, seemed to have a lot of support. The general feeling can be summed up as: Africa's challenges are largely the result of poor leadership, and young blood is needed to guide the continent in the future.

Stated as fairly as I can, I find nothing immediately wrong with the diagnosis and proposed remedy. It's a pragmatic observation that some of the continent's leadership struggles are caused by leaders who are somewhat out of touch with what the youthful energies of their countries need to be galvanized for great exploits, so and so.

Fair enough, but there's the hard-to-ignore ageism and somewhat ironic lack of an inclination towards meritocratic solutions that deeply, very deeply, troubles me.

Take the tweet by a celebrated investigative journalist who is credited with exposing corruption at the highest levels of public office in Ghana. He tweets an unflattering picture of the winner of a national election (let's, for now, set aside the irregularities of their process: I'm a firm believer that all high-stakes contests are inherently corrupted) with a caption that reads "The fresh blood and mind to take over from old man Buhari."

Perhaps my reading of this is too critical. There should be, after all, room for humour. But Manasseh seems here to stoop low and criticize the competencies of Bola and Buhari in reference to their age, rather than their past actions and, perhaps, character in previously held offices.

It felt like a cheap shot to take from a prominent media figure, no different from how famous Western media houses despoiled themselves during the Donald Trump presidential campaign and term in office.

But it gets deeper than Manasseh.

Following the conversation on one multinational WhatsApp group showed me hints that my ill-feeling about the nature of the wave of negative sentiment following Tinubu's win was justified.

It came to a head when one of my peers suggested that the death penalty be handed out for corruption, to rid us all of the canker. No be small Rawlings vibes.

Anyone who has witnessed something as petty as SRC elections on any large-enough college campus in Ghana will know that the problem with corruption and poor leadership in the country, Nigeria, and most of the continent has little to do with age.

This was something I learned in my first term in high school, a truth I have validated since at all levels of my education and even in the cutthroat world of tech business, dominated by young change makers.

I don't think we're ready.

[withahappyrefrain]

"Will you two shut up and kiss already?" From your bingo board with TASM!Peter Parker? 🥰

This is also enemies to lovers and features a special guest appearance from everyone's favorite: Miles Morales.

Part of my 3K celebration! Come party with me!

When you told your neighbor you would be there for him, you were expecting "hey I'm at a party and everyone's been drinking, can you pick me up?"

Or at worse, needing to buy condoms.

But that was too simple for Miles Morales. He had to go get bitten by a radioactive spider and develop superpowers.

And of course, that still wasn't enough. You would have been quite content helping him make his costume. Or finding tips and sending them his way.

Nope. Miles had to get involved with the actual Spider-Man. And then he had to involve you. With Spider-Man.

Sure, did he rescue people on the regular and fight for the everyday man? Yes. And was he wonderful with kids? Absolutely.

Spider-Man was a hero.

But Peter Parker was an insufferable dick.

All you were trying to do was help. And he had to go make some jackass comment about you were just Miles' babysitter.

Fuck that.

Specifically, fuck Peter Parker.

And from that day on, you swore to always give Peter Parker a piece of your mind.

"This is your worst idea yet Parker," You spat.

Peter scoffed, "That's really saying something considering you tell me on almost a daily basis."

"You seriously think Kraven won't expect for you to show up at tonight's event?" How could someone so smart be so dumb at the same time?

"He will expect me. But he's not going to expect," Peter pointed to Miles-who was currently fixing his web shooters, "Him."

"No. Absolutely not. You are not sending him in there!"

"Oh, now you don't want to send him in? The other day you were screaming at me about how I don't let him do enough!" Peter stood up from his computer, walking over to you.

Sure, he may have a few-well actually many-inches on you. But you weren't backing down.

And neither was he.

"That was over a hippo-hybrid that had gone lose in Central Park," you justified, "This is over some crazy hunter who I wouldn't be surprised if they're suffering from mad cow disease!"

Now it was Peter's turn to cross his arm. God you hated how his stupid biceps would bulge out whenever he did that. Like could the dude not find a shirt that fit him properly?

Of course not, his fridge was full of takeout containers.

"All he's doing is making sure our favorite little hunter has some stronger drinks than usual so his guard is down and-"

You huffed, "He's sixteen! He can't serve alcohol!"

Peter's brow furrowed in frustration, his hands balling into fists, "Do you do anything else beside kvetching?"

"Do you do anything else besides come up with terrible ideas?"

"Will you two shut up and kiss already?" Your and Peter's attention turned to Miles, who had put down his web shooter to glare at you two.

You and Peter both gawked at his comment, words of disgust and absolutely not sputtering out of your mouths.

"Oh please, don't start with me. I see the way both of you look at each other when the other isn't watching."

"I don't know what you're talking about-" "I absolutely do not-"

Miles turned to Peter, "Cut the bullshit right now. You know that scene in Bambi when he sees that female deer for the first time after going through puberty? That's what you look like every time she walks in the room and it's not because of your brown eyes. You're not fooling anyone with this whole 'I've been hurt before so I'm going to keep everyone out' schtick. First off, I'm your best friend and am ten years younger than you. That's saying a lot. Second, you were never this lively before I brought her around, so clearly she brings out something in you."

Miles turned to you, "I've known you for seven years. This man," He pointed to Peter, "Is one hundred percent your type on paper. I saw the heart eyes you had when he took off his mask for the first time. And I know you don't tolerate bullshit, so if you really hated him as much as you say you do, you wouldn't still be here. It's just easier for you to deny your feelings, right?"

You were speechless. As was Peter.

Miles, on the other hand, was quite content with himself.

"I'm going to leave this room. I will be gone for fifteen minutes, which is plenty of time for you two to sort through this weird, sexual tension you got going on. I'm going to assume that if you don't call my name, you don't want me to come back in."

With that, you friend and neighbor threw up a peace sign as he walked out of the room, leaving you and a silent Peter Parker standing.

You couldn't even enjoy the silence. Both you and Peter were too busy avoiding eye contact with one another after being called out by your mutual friend.

"That was...." Peter began, his voice trailing off.

"Inappropriate?" Despite your brain's desire to sound confident, it came across as a question. Like you wanted confirmation.

"Yeah, t-that's a good way to put it," Peter agreed (for once).

"I mean, what Miles insinuated about us is totally-"

"Ridiculous? Absurd?" You nodded your head at Peter's words, turning to face him.

Wow. He really did have huge eyes. They were pretty, you'll give him that. Shades of chocolate and gold swirled together.

"Absolutely. Us....feeling that way about each other is-"

"Crazy" you both said at the same time.

He stared at you. You stared back at him. You both nodded your heads in agreement.

It was laughable, Miles' insinuation. Truly. You and Peter were just too stunned that he could even come up with that idea to laugh.

"I don't...." Peter shuffled his feet, "I don't know what he expects us to do while he's gone."

"Exactly! The fact he thinks anything could happen is asinine," You commented.

It was silent in Peter's lab. Absolute silence.

At least, that's what you both agree on. As to who kissed who first, neither one of you could agree on. You maintain it was Peter who cupped your face with his hands, pressing his lips against yours.

Peter maintains it was you who threw your arms around his neck, throwing your whole body into that kiss.

Miles knew to wait until you two came out of the lab, rather than to go back in.

[axxnniee]

i wanted to write about it for quite some time already and i actually mentioned this topic before (not that deeply as i'm planning to now) and that made me realise something. still big hp tumblr community believes snape was good. and you have no idea how surprised i was by that (one of the very few good things in hp tiktok is more snape slander comment).

beginning with this shit

the way snape grew up was indeed sad and i do feel sorry for that cause no matter what, no matter fiction or real life, no child should go through so many parents' fights.

but that's not the excuse.

snape is not the only character abused in childhood. the best example is harry and we can see how he turned out. there's also a very important difference between those two.

snape had lily.

i don't like nor really agree on comparing traumas cause everyone goes through those things differently, but we all have to agree that snape had it little better by having this one person that loved him (platonicly) and wanted to help him. this person he could talk to. he had lily, while harry had no one.

snape had his best friend yet turned out to be a death eater while harry who never had anyone in childhood turned out to be an amazing person.

yes, snape had one friend before hogwarts, but not in hogwarts. he was stated to be part of the slytherin boy group aspiring to become death eaters (together with mulciber for example).

snape didn't become a death eater by accident. it was a long process of him changing his views and priorities already at hogwarts. i do believe that the group friend he got himself into might have been partially responsible for changing his views, but it does not justify snape's views.

lily wanted to help him. snape was stated to be getting deeply interested into dark magic already as a teenager and lily noticed it too. she noticed the people he's hanging out with and didn't approve it as she knew what type of people they are. yet she was still there, she cared for him. lily said herself she tried to ignore things he was doing even though others didn't approve it.

yet he called her a mudblood. it isn't a random slur, that's what death eaters called people they mainly wanted to kill. who they believed to be less skilled, unworthy even living. i've seen a lot of people calling lily too sensitive but it wasn't just a word. it was as if he believed her to be worse sort, someone unworthy magic or even living. after all she did for him, after being there for him since before hogwarts.

and i think one of the funniest hypocrisy in hp fandom is how snape's fans bash lily for marrying a bully, yet they forget how back when snape and lily were friends, she confronted him about being friends with mulciber (a literal death eater) who did a nasty thing towards mary macdonald. and snape just said it was a joke.

and i do agree marauders (mainly james and sirius, as this is what we mostly got to see) were bullies towards snape. but snape wasn't any better and even dumbledore himself said this. let's not forget that it was snape who was obsessed with finding out the truth about remus. he wanted them to be expelled. and yes, what sirius did was higly dangerous and stupid, i fully agree, but snape played his part in it too, let's face that. and the damn sectumsempra. a curse for enemies. remus stating it was snape's speciality. we all fucking know he made it for james. both marauders and snape were bullies for each other.

but you know why it's marauders who are more commonly considered better? cause even though we had a very little content of them in canon, at the end of a day they were better people (not counting peter obviously). they joined order of phoenix, stood up against pureblood supremacy, fought against death eaters. james died for his son and wife, all that trying to protect them.

i once saw a good summary. the thing snape and james had in common is that both of them would let james die for lily.

in the same time snape joined death eaters. it was fully his decision. he was a half-blood after all, there wasn't really any pressure for him to join there.

he heard the damn prophecy and gave it to voldemort immediately. and got two families with little babies in danger. and you know what? he didn't give a damn about longbottoms. nor he did for harry and james. all he cared was to save lily. even dumbledore was disgusted by that. he didn't care that lily would be devastated after james and harry's death. he just wanted her. that shows his selfishness. and i think this comes to that line between healthy love and obsession. he didn't care what she wanted, he later said to hide them all cause dumbledore wasn't happy with his previous words.

if longbottoms were targeted instead of potters snape would never resigned from being a death eater and never become a spy. the whole spy persona was just for dumbledore to agree on helping. not that he cared much about changing the views. he regretted being a death eater because he got lily and lily only in trouble, not because of all the bad things he did towards other people.

he didn't change after becoming a spy.

he kept bullying children. he had a great knowledge for potions but all he did on the lessons was writing instructions on the board, without trying to help the students more - while potions are indeed dangerous subject. he kept favoring slytherins by taking away points from gryffindor for all the little things, slytherins never got scolded on the lessons, golden trio would get super long detentions but slytherins only when he really had no choice but to give them. even during the duel between harry and draco in 4th year he was way nicer to draco. he was the only teacher whose newt's class required O (everyone else wanted at least E) and with the way of teaching he made it almost impossible to get to this class. by this he probably ruined some future careers. he bullied neville to the point of being his boggart, all because his parents didn't die, but lily did. he made fun of hermione's physical appearance. screamed at students several times. kept bullying harry only because he looks like his father (cause in fact harry has a lot of lily's personality), which only showed his immaturity.

things he did during the war really don't count. he wouldn't have done them if not for sake of promise to dumbledore. if not for sake of obsession towards lily. jkr herself even stated that if harry wasn't lily's son he would give a fuck about him. let's begin with the fact that he wouldn't have to do anything if he simply didn't tell the prophecy. his fault.

he was the one who told the whole school about remus being werewolf. because he didn't get his order of merlin. due to that, remus again didn't have a job. he was ready to give both sirius and remus to dementors without even knowing the truth and he ignored golden trio trying to explain him that. all for sake of old rivalry, even though remus treated him like a civil. cause despite remus having flaws too, at least he grew up from the teenage rivalry. unlike some others.

oh, and i've seen people saying that he was rude cause he was a spy and he had to. well, no. rationally looking at this, he would make a better spy if he acted nice towards student. i can assure you if students were asked who out of teachers is most likely to be a death eater everyone would pick snape. honestly from his behaviour since beginning of the book it was obvious he did work with voldemort. anyone who thought of this rationally knew that, golden trio literally suspected that since 1st year before the knew he was a death eater. if he acted nice then he would make people surprised by joining voldemort after killing dumbledore. it's not like he was rude for spy's job, he was just overally rude.

as much as i love alan rickman, the movies changed snape's character much. they made him so stoic all the time while in canon he had some severe anger issues problem (even fudge stated that in poa). not to mention how they cut off a lot of moments of him being an absolute asshole.

i hate him with passion, i'm glad he's dead and i'm just crying over the fact what's albus' second name. i see what jkr's intentions were but she should have given snape a redemption in order to make this work. but she didn't. snape had no redemption, he never regretted things he did to people other than lily. he wasn't a grey character, he was just a bad character who later worked on a good side for sake of obsession after dead love and promise he made to an old guy

waiting for snape's fans to come at me again ✌🏻