Okay. As the supreme authority on all things Kevin Day I need you to give the veredict on something: is Kevin into CNC
(I feel like the AFTG fandom doesn't do a lot with consent play, which I get WHY, but it is as a matter of fact a pretty common kink for survivors)
supreme authority huh. ok lets see 🤔!
short answer: yes & i think kevin is probably somewhere in the spectrum between free use (pretending to be impassive but not unwilling) and bordering predator play (active struggle for the sake of being manhandled and forced to submit)
long answer: i was just talking about this with miss nanatsuyu but kevin’s extensive consent issues make the idea of enthusiastic consent feel embarrassing at best and confusing at worse so cnc in any capacity would be right up his alley in my opinion!!! he likes not having to say it outright and as a man canonically declared “as bratty as they come” i believe kevin would find it very hot (& cathartic! in a way) to be rightfully overpowered and told to take it :)
i had half an idea about that the other day (and excuse the poor writing i just put these things down in a hurry for later probing) for kevjean in a play wrestling sense and i think it pretty much sums up how i think kevin would like this dynamic 🏃🏽 it’s a lot about having no way out and, even knowing that he cannot take whatevers in menu for him, being told that he will anyway
all of ryan gosling's comments about "telling ken's story" are really interesting and even funnier now that i've seen the movie. yeah ken is ridiculous but his feelings and sentiments are really similar to ones of seen from boys who are starting to enter that alt-right/incel pipeline. feeling abandoned and useless without a woman and turning that hurt into anger at women!! ken's story did get told and it's a story that i don't think we acknowledge enough
Someone in the DBDA fandom had identified that the dolls — in the Dollhouse, and that make up the spider — are Mary Ann dolls. (It was @snowmenatwork and this was the post).
Which is the same derogatory term used by the boys who sacrificed Edwin.
So, when Edwin died with those words in his ears, and his heart, his Hell became the school, a maze of hallways, and became the spider made of Mary Ann dolls.
The phrase itself manifested into a grotesque, forever-hungry, terrible, grasping personification made to torture Edwin. To endlessly chase, tear him apart, and chew him up. And then to start it all anew.
To ensure, in every time he was caught, that Edwin would believe that who he was was wrong.
Because that’s what he had to believe. That’s what we see in the show. That he was an outsider. That he struggled with who he was. That he struggled, in some way, with affection, both giving and receiving. That there was a wrongness to him/that he was wrong (there isn’t, and he’s not. of course he’s not).
So when he meets Simon, and tells him “If you punish yourself, everywhere becomes Hell.” it’s because he did that for however long the spider made of dolls tortured him.
If Edwin’s story, according to George, is about understanding love in any form, I think that’s why Simon was locked away from Edwin. He wouldn’t have been able to understand, or to articulate. To free himself. To free Simon.
It’s perhaps why his second stint in Hell was different, in the end, because love (Charles) was there too.
It’s why the confession had to happen on those stairs because it wasn’t just for Charles. It was for himself, now, and for the young man sacrificed over 100 years before. An admission that he understood, truly, the ability to love without reservation. And that freed him.
Something about the line between platonic and romantic and what that means for Edwin and Charles.
What even is that line? Like, in general? Especially when it comes to queer relationships? We've all been there or seen it happening, kissing a friend, found family, lovers to exes to friends again. It's common for queer groups to be messy, but also that's not messy, that's just how we roll.
Sometimes it's more about how you perceive things than about how the world is saying that they are.
And Edwin and Charles, the line is so, so high up. The love doesn't change no matter how you're looking at it, but the difference is the knowledge — the way they understand the feelings.
So even though Edwin has been in love for decades (because it was the same feeling), he didn't see it like that. Everything he did for Charles was platonic up until the moment it wasn't. The same goes for Charles: even if he, too, has been in love since the beginning, he didn't consider it and so his acts were platonic. He did actually go to hell for his best mate.
Because what's the difference? If it's that strong, it can only be romantic? Nah, I know most of us don't actually believe that.
That's why I think that them turning romantic doesn't diminish the strenght of the friendship itself. From now on, yeah, they may see themselves as lovers. But they were friends for 30+ years first, and they loved each other like that, and it wasn't less. It was the same.
And I will stay alive for my future self, so they can one day learn to be kind to who I was as a child. And I will teach them to honor who we used to be, so they can remember the comfort of what once was our untempered flesh and gentle soul. Me and myself are each a fresh wound and a rough scab, bearing respectively the gift of green faith and honed will.
This has been in my draft for a while because I was determined to post this only after I knew what I should write underneath it. I’ve read a lot on the concept of healing the wounded inner child since even before my c-ptsd diagnosis. However, I’ve sought as much comfort in my little self as they had in me. Looking back, I was an impressively emotionally-intuitive kid. I remember well how I used to think, the things I would write to my future self; they were wiser and gentler than I could ever hope to be as an adult. Needless to say, the little poem above is inspired by the aforementioned experience. Sure, big me is armed with a more developed pre-frontal cortex and access to invaluable resources (coping mechanisms, therapy, on and offline communities) , but I struggle to rediscover/reinvent my identity. Little me was the biggest vestige of my lost personhood. So yeah, this might be just a huge self-indulgent projection with my favorite character, but thinking that post-S3 Hunter would also be in my shoes is not completely baseless. 16yrs old Hunter is the fresh wound (a lot of things happened before his teen years, but I’m going to interpret the events of Hollow Mind - which happened when Hunter was 16 - as the ultimate boiling point in his trauma timeline, hence the ‘fresh wound') and 20yrs old Hunter is the rough scab. Each version of Hunter could be dealing with a different set of trauma-induced symptoms. I think his loyalty to Belos kept him going as a child. Being doubtless was important to Hunter back then; it held his sense of self together. And maybe when he survived and was rewarded the time and space to grow into his own person and live for himself, there was this lasting emptiness. I feel this sort of emptiness even today. My only reference of what ‘wholeness’ felt like was when I was obedient to my family. I equated self-abandonment as the righteous norm. The symptoms I deal with today are definitely different from when I was Hunter’s age pre-time-skip. Now that Hunter is in a safe space and an adult post-time skip, he might also need to seek that strength from his younger self. Reminding himself of how far he’s come and the parts of him that he'd like to keep from his past. The parts that he knows in his bones are purely his - not instilled by Belos, not inherited from Caleb.
I find it funny that Wild, who has basically a couple years ish of full life experience, comes up with the most insane theories for everything
He assumed that the only other explanation to Four being able to split in Four was. That he was quadruplets who'd been hiding this whole time???
Also apparently he believed that his wolf companion Twilight in botw was a diety (and felt very uhh shocked upon finding out that he was not)
Malon made things worse, telling him about her aliens theory
What's even FUNNIER is that every time Wild expresses any sort of confusion at magic stuff that he's never seen before, everyone else in the chain acts like it's crazy for him to be weirded out by it
Honestly maybe Wild's the only one with his head on straight, rather than everyone else who are just like 'it's magic bro' like no he's right this is weird
I appreciate this because it's very considerate of the fact that he woke up with no memories not too long ago, so he doesn't have much experience to explain the stuff that's 'normal' for the chain. Plus the explanations he comes up with are funny.
:)
.
Art and comic and adorable character by Jojo @linkeduniverse au :D
yeah i'm a small planet twisted wonderland theory truther. i thought it'd be funny if my yuusona Ur discovered she could jump really high, since gravity is so much weaker on smaller planets
So, I was nosing around the gang's tents and I thought that it was honestly so sweet that so many of them have photographs of themselves or of family right?
Little baby Charles with his parents, a young Susan, young Hosea and Bessie, but then I found something interesting in that pile of junk down the cliff just behind Arthur's tent-
Dutch actually writes notes for his famous camp speeches.
And if you've seen the speech that these notes are referring to, Dutch seemed to simplify it a lot when he recited it, almost dumbing it down for the gang entirely?
Writing notes for an important speech isn't the strange part, but the fact he dumbs them down and that these notes are hidden/thrown away out of sight is really strange to me. It makes me think that this is possibly a rough draft or early version of what he wanted the speech to be, sort of implying that Dutch practices and revises his speeches.
Which, if he ultimately dumbs them down for the gang, then what is the point?
The likely answer is that he holds himself to a higher standard because he feels he's above the gang members, in a way. He's the visionary, the leader, the man in charge, the one who reads philosophy books almost exclusively, to say that Dutch didn't think highly of himself would be a lie. And because the gang is 'below' him, he simplifies his speeches for them - despite majority of the gang being well educated and understanding. He doesn't think that the gang is as intellectual as him.
I made a post previously talking about Dutch and his Evelyn Miller philosophies and how he argues with gang members that don't agree or understand. It's especially interesting how Lenny, also an avid reader, disagrees so strongly with Miller's writings when that's what most of Dutch's philosophies are based on.
It solidifies that Dutch was manipulative from the beginning, and probably long before too.