#i like talking about characters' behaviors!!!!!!!

[azzandra]

Aw, man, can't believe it's been two years since I wrote that.

When I reblogged and added my little commentary, I actually hadn't anticipated my comment to be reblogged by more than a couple of mutuals or be seen outside of my followers. I was just sharing a term that popped up in my head as a joke.

If I knew this glib comment I dashed off one morning without much thought was going to breach containment and take on a life of its own, I probably would have added a few disclaimers.

Since then, I've seen some people miss the point about what I was talking about in a few huge ways, so I'll clarify now a few points:

I have nothing against the cockroach wife dude.

I don't know if that story is true or not (there are some weird people out in the world, so I won't dismiss it out of hand, but like. come on) and I sincerely do not care that his spankbank was exclusively taken up by a cockroach woman. The part of his tale that we should take as a parable is where he solely and without being forced by anyone else hinged his entire sexuality around an imaginary construct that then made him incapable of being attracted to real human women. Remember, his story starts with him complaining that he can't get it up with his human girlfriend without picturing her as a huge cockroach. He did that. Nobody forced him to develop this condition. This is a lesson for the rest of us.

people going 'I think they're both pretty!' like that's the centrist silver bullet to this phenomenon.

Listen, yeah. I agree. Both versions are meant to be attractive, just to wildly different demographics. You know who doesn't agree? The guys I'm talking about.

The dudes I am referencing do NOT think both characters are attractive to different people. They think the original is attractive to NOBODY, and everyone else in the world is just PRETENDING that the first one is attractive in any way, and they're convinced everyone else also objectively knows the original art is ugly but there's a conspiracy to subject poor defenseless heterosexual men to pictures of butt-ugly women in order to brainwash them or something.

The guys afflicted with Cockroach Wife Syndrome are on some gamerbro qanon shit where their perception of reality is slanted to a comical degree, but they think their experiences are objective and unbiased, and they're making it everyone else's problem.

people smugly going 'OP has an anime girl in their icon' like that's some sort of gotcha

Yeah, man, I'm not opposed to anime girls. I'm not even opposed to hentai, or blender porn, or masturbation. I think everyone deserves to masturbate if they want to, and the way the world is going, we all probably deserve to masturbate a lot more (porn addiction isn't a real thing, my dudes). I accept that some people are going to jerk it to stuff that I don't find attractive, and maybe consider repulsive, and that's just going to be a fact of life from here unto eternity. We all need to come to terms to that.

But the Cockroach Wife Syndrome sufferers do NOT want to accept it. They want the entire world to have only one porn preference that aligns neatly to their own, and also they want all fictional depictions of women everywhere to adhere precisely to their porn preference.

And like, why would we do what these guys say? Now, me, personally, each time I see one of their yassified sexy edits of an already pretty female character, it always looks like the tackiest shit to me, like they're a toddler who got into mommy's make-up. I want to start a GoFundMe to send them to beautician school. I don't care how much they screech about it, they cannot convince me their aesthetic tastes are something to emulate, so I coined this term for them just so I had a name for their obnoxious behavior.

All that being said, in the time since I wrote this post, I discovered it gained some traction outside of tumblr. "Cockroach Wife Syndrome" was added to Urban Dictionary. There are people slinging around the term on twitter. I personally got jumpscared by running into it in the wild on reddit, which was how I found out people are actually using it. Honestly, I am not that hyped about this being my legacy (and I am so sorry to the OP of this post that I got them stuck with seeing every reply or tag someone ever makes about the cockroach wife guy, like I'm some malevolent storytime cuckoo who dropped disturbing internet tales in their nest). But ultimately, I think this one is actually on the thousands of people who reblogged it and considered that I described a phenomenon that they also observed.

Y'all stay safe out there, and remember to vary your masturbation material once in a while.

i wish i could see this picture for the first time again

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

SPOILER SPOILER

new yuu for the scara manga. Credits to magister_xehanort on reddit. Doesn't she looks cool?!! She kinda gives me kalim vibes since she looks bubbly. What do you think miss raven?

I already gave my (very brief) preliminary thoughts on our new Yuu, Yuuna Oujou (I must stress it is NOT Ojou) in this post. I would be more than happy to expand on those thoughts here though ^^

So firstly, this Yuu is a girl--and a very feminine presenting one at that. This supports the theory that each manga!Yuu will be going in the boy-girl-boy-girl order, or perhaps the opposite gender of the Great Seven member of each book/dorm.

I think it's great that we have a very femme Yuu in official Twst media; it definitely adds to the diversity of the Yuuniverse. I especially appreciate what this implies about the NRC cast: they don't treat a girly girl significantly differently (whether being overly nice, overly mean, or overly awkward around her) than they would a masculine-presenting or nonbinary Yuu.

One thing I LOVE about Yuuna is that she actually has several unique interactions with the NRC cast and the world. Part of why I don't like Yuuken or Yuuka as much is because their level-headed personalities didn't lead to them really changing much about how they interacted with this new environment + people (other than the occasional change, like Yuuka squaring up to fight). I liked Yuuta a lot more because he has way more moments to "be himself" in the world, like using his cooking to convince Leona to let him sleep over in Savanaclaw, being softer around Jack, and having a backbone when Grim tries to hurriedly cram food into his mouth before class. Yuuna goes even FURTHER than that. She has her own nicknames for each character, takes selfies with them, literally plunges into Kalim's Oasis Maker water without a care in the world, plays dress-up with the shiny stuff in Scarabia's storage room, freaks out about the bugs in Ramshackle, and SO much more. Yuuna legitimately feels like a part of this world rather than a passenger in it.

I think we should talk more about how Yuuna dresses! This is known as gyaru, which is a Japanese fashion subculture typically known for its rebellious outfits, tanned skin, big and/or dyed or bleached hair, many accessories, and exaggerated makeup. It is also associated with a particular attitude or behaviors, such as being outgoing, sociable, and energetic. The name gyaru (ギャル) originates from a Japanese transliteration of the English word 'gal'. I believe the style originally developed in the 1970s as a statement of nonconformity to Japanese beauty standards (which emphasizes being pale-skinned, dark-haired, and demure in their appearance). Gyaru was originally considered very inappropriate, and the older generation tend to stereotype it as frivolous and associated with adolescent delinquency. In the west, it was even sometimes mistaken as racist depictions of dark-skinned people. Nowdays, gyaru is more understood as being a way for people to break out of conventional beauty standards set upon them by society.

What Yuuna wears, as one of the anons shares, is a substyle of gyaru called kogal or kogyaru (子ギャル or コギャル). The 子 or コ (ko) in kogyaru means "child", referring to the childishness or youthfulness of those who typically wear this fashion. It is defined by those who wear clothes resembling Japanese high school uniforms with alterations and flairs made to them. (These alterations are usually frowned upon, as Japanese schools are very strict about wearing their uniform properly.) This could include alterations in color, wearing one's uniform differently, wearing loose socks, shortening the skirt, and/or adding accessories to bags. We may also see bleached hair and/or tanned skin. This substyle formed in the late 1980s and early 1990s, but is popular in modern day, as it has been picked up and promoted by Japanese media.

As I mentioned in the original post, Yuuna comes from the countryside and she helps her family out on their rice fields. However, her dream is to become a model in Tokyo (this is what her audition was for).

We don't get to see a lot of her parents, but I don't get the impression that they disapprove of her fashion or life choices. They just short of tell her off for looking at magazines while she's supposed to be doing something else. They allow her to go to a modeling audition too, rather than taking efforts to prevent it or to shame her from going. There's also no bullying alluded to or mentioned; I genuinely don't think Yuuna is supposed to have a tragic background. (None of the other manga!Yuus did, either.) She just has an interest in this fashion, and there doesn't have to be a deep or trauma-related reason for it. Simply her being into the gyaru subculture makes her a foil to Jamil. Gyaru is all about expressing oneself, even if society frowns upon it. Yuuna is able to be "true to herself" in this way, despite coming from a humble background. She is also willing and able to help her family out with their rice fields--but her aspirations lie elsewhere. Jamil isn't able to do the same. His family actively opposes his decisions and put him in a position where he isn't able to freely express himself or pursue anything other than what he was born into. He comes to resent what his family does and how he is forced to comply with it.

It's also interesting that her bubbly personality is also similar to Kalim's. Yuuna is shown to get along with him very well and is super friendly to the other NRC students, just like Kalim is. I wonder if this also plays into why Jamil thinks she can be easily manipulated (since he was also able to easily manipulate Kalim in book 4). He may underestimate them because of their similar personalities.

One last thing I want to note is 🤔 Yuuna continues the pattern of all manga!Yuus having surnames related to death... Her surname, Oujou, sounds like おうじょう or 往生際 (oujougiwa), a word that can mean "rebirth in another world", "a calm and peaceful death, "to breathe one's last", and/or "the moment before death/the brink of death". Ominous...

[crooked-wasteland]

You probably wanna avoid interacting with Chai btw. They’re just a toxic person who condones doxxing and harassment based on ships. Only sending this as a warning in case you weren’t aware of the things they’ve done, a lot of their fans have been bullying critics and downplaying what they’ve done and said. I literally don’t trust any of their mutuals it’s all internet brainrot

Frankly, Anon, I think you and I have fundamentally different ideas of what Toxic is. For example, I think lying about someone simply because you don't like them is toxic.

Chai has always been a vocal advocate of letting people ship whatever they want in fiction for the last 2 years I have been following his social media. It is something so consistent, in fact, that I am entirely comfortable saying that portion of your post is a blatant lie.

Second, if there are fans of Chai, their actions are their own. Once again, Chai has always been very accepting of shipping whatever anyone wants to ship so long as they don't harm real people and animals. If so-called "fans" wish to act out, that isn't Chai's problem. Unlike Medrano, Chai has told his audience to not engage in that sort of behavior. So he has done his due diligence and is not responsible for the actions of others in my opinion.

I am not a friend of Chai, I have barely talked to him in fact. I personally follow him because he does have connections and information I use to form my thoughts on Spindlehorse and Medrano's character. Not based on Chai's opinions, but on the patterns of behavior Chai has been able to bring to light by knowing those who were directly involved with Medrano.

If you genuinely believe these falsehoods and are earnestly looking out for some stranger on the internet, then rest assured I hear you and am able to say with personal certainty that the information you have is simply incorrect.

But on the off chance that I am wrong, I do request you bring me evidence instead of making baseless accusations the next time you have a concern.

[zsakuva]

I'm sure this has been asked, but I had found your stuff recently and absolutely love how the different characters are with each being just as charming as the next. My question is what is the thought/writing process? I am wanting to be better at defining my ocs and characters without falling into the same trope and behaviors the characters have exhibit. Obviously there are different methods for different people, but I'll like to know a little bit of the process for you. Do you have any tips to make the voices distinct and consistent through out a piece of writing?

Thank you!

For me, because I have a proclivity for world-building (meaning I am absolutely obsessed and must know the lore before I do anything), I like to understand the path a character has chosen. Their past experiences and upbringing have a dramatic impact on how they shape their own life, and that informs me of how a character acts, talks, and how they both see and react to the world around them.

I'll use Isaac Rhoades as a brief example (I wrote brief but this is not brief at all, my bad xD).

From the beginning, Isaac was written with a sealed heart and a cold personality. He's an articulate and smart man, a workaholic, but he lives in solitude.

I always ask myself how and why a character is who they are, and what decisions they made/experiences they've had to bring them to this point.

For Isaac, his background paints quite the picture:

Born to loving parents, and his grandfather is a successful private investigator — The early part of his childhood nurtured love and care. His mother in particular showed him what it meant to love unconditionally.

His parents are murdered because of his grandfather's choice — Isaac was taught that even the people you love can hurt you, and that nowhere is a safe space.

Learning under his grandfather — Because of his vast portfolio and cases, Isaac is taught more about the workings of the world, and how to stay cautious. There was no space for fun or games; his only objective was expanding his knowledge in many subjects that his grandfather deemed worthy.

Getting stabbed by the maid — This reinforced the thought of a perpetual threat and the need to stay vigilant. It instilled paranoia in him to trust no one.

University in England and Andrew — Here, he remembers the love of his childhood, but also the threat of losing someone else because of his own decisions, taught by his grandfather.

Learning the reason of his grandfather's decision — Isaac was taught that there is always more to one person, for better or worse, as taught by the maid. Due to this and what he's learnt thus far, Isaac decides to seclude himself so he's never forced to make that kind of choice.

Succeeding his grandfather — Being a private investigator opened his eyes to humanity's extremes: the lengths they would go for their own desires at the detriment of others, and the yearning others had to better the world. His work reminds him of his life experiences, and these beliefs constantly clash.

Isaac is distant and cold at first because his life taught him not to trust anyone—even the unassuming—and he doesn't want to let anyone in; they could either betray him, or he could lose them. And yet, despite that, his mother's teachings managed to peek through when he saw Pickle in the alley, alluding to his true nature. Through Isaac's story, his internal struggle begins to rear: desperately wanting to feel love again, but knowing the cost if he does give in and the inevitable choice he might have to make if he opens his heart again.

Isaac is articulate and smart because of his grandfather's teachings. One can assume he stayed in that house for the rest of his teenage years until he left for university, so the only person he really interacted with was his grandfather. Because of this, he's factual, precise, and seldom makes jokes because mostly every conversation had been connected to work in some form. Small talk is a waste of time, and he doesn't indulge others unless there's a reason for it. He's meticulous with when to speak and when to listen.

Isaac is a workaholic because that is what his life has been shaped to be, also likely influenced by his grandfather. He has money, but continues to work. Why? Perhaps it's because he'd be without purpose otherwise. Or is it because he feels it's his duty to continue in his grandfather's footsteps and find the one thing that matters in the ocean of bullshit?

All of this shapes who Isaac is. It wouldn't make sense for him to have the same disposition as Andrew. Though they are similar in ways (articulation, education, work addiction), they take different forms and stem from the unique experiences they've lived. Where Andrew can engage in small talk (he had a freer childhood, a rebellious and fun twin brother, and more public school education/social interactions), Isaac can't. And though they both carry the weight of their own regrets alone, Andrew chooses to live with what he has, but Isaac chooses to endlessly bear the weight of the world and live up to his grandfather's bravery.

SO. With that being said, a suggestion I can give is to constantly remind yourself who your character is with every decision they make. Is it true to them? Does it make sense for them? But remember, humans are also notoriously contradictive, and one is not the same as another. We experience and react to the same conditions in completely different ways; who you are and what you've been through can determine the outcome.

I hope this has helped in some form of way!

Again I apologise for this monstrous post have fun writing aaaaa-

[byfulcrums]

I hate the third movie so much!!!! Like a lot!!!!!!!

Prepare for a rant (under cut bc it got a bit long, sorry!)

First of all, here's a thing I always complain about when talking about HTTYD 3: the designs, and the characterization

The designs as in, the armor, is cool as hell, I'm not complaining about that I love the armor so much. But I hate how they made Toothless a literal puppy. His head is literally a square!!! They changed his personality too, when he's always been more similar to a cat than a dog

There's also the light fury. I have no words for this. The fact that they only made her Like That because they needed her to be "feminine" says enough about her

It was weirdly sexist for a HTTYD movie, considering how well done the female characters are in this series. They only made this character to be Girl Toothless, and being a girl was her only character trait

Besides that, they gave some of Toothless' mannerisms to her! The more cat-like behavior, at some points, for example. Toothless in the first movie was more graceful, stealthy, moved silently, etc. They gave all of his different, elegant ways of moving to her, because they wanted to push the golden retriever agenda on him (that's a joke btw. Like they did do that but "golden retriever agenda" isn't a thing)

Ruffnut was far too stupid too. She would NEVER in rtte

Now; let's move on to why the ending is shit

First of all! Toothless is not an Alpha. He is king, yes, but king of Berk's dragons specifically. When he defeated Drago's Alpha, he did not suddenly gain telepathy powers; the dragons under the Alpha's control went to Toothless when he won, and it was a willing decision. They listen to him, yes, but not every dragon will, because HE'S NOT OF THE SPECIES THAT HAS LITERAL DRAGON MIND CONTROL POWERS

That being said!! If Toothless isn't an Alpha, then why the hell did all the dragons leave when he did? And why did all the dragons in the Hidden World immediately bow down to him? Maybe they recognize his status as King (of Berk), but that doesn't mean he's the king of them

There's also no way all the dragons wanted to leave. Just no way. I know I wouldn't!

Then, there's the Death Song problem

There are multiple cannibalistic dragon species. If they go to the Hidden World with the rest, they will try to eat everyone else, and if they can't do that, they'll starve. These dragons can't just change their entire biology and start eating fish, plants, boars, or whatever thing you have in mind. They have to eat other dragons, or they'll die. Sending them all to the Hidden World means that either they'll eat all the other dragons and eventually they'll be one of the few species left standing (highly unlikely) or they'll just go extinct (most probable)

Along with that, there's the fact that many dragons are extremely territorial. if stuck in the same place for the rest of their lives, there will be fights, and dragons don't have medicine! They can only heal naturally, there's no outside help. So many will die, far more than necessary

Now, I do like the ending of the dragons leaving. In the books

And sure, dragons die every day; no one can stop that (no matter how sad this makes Hiccup), but putting them all in a big cave will result in losses that are WAY bigger than necessary and than what they're used to

Plus, what about the species that can't fly? The Speed Stingers, for example? The mutation in RTTE was a thing that only happened with that one group. Only they would be able to reach the Hidden World

I understand that they were trying to end the sagas the same way the books did, but it doesn't work in the movies! Also, (I haven't read all the books yet, it's a work in progress, so correct me if I'm wrong, but) as far as I know, in the books the dragons were basically slaves to the Vikings. It makes sense that they would want to leave. In the movies, it's not like that. Berk's dragons are friends, not servants! They have no reason to want to leave!

And even then, I'm like 99% sure that in the books Toothless still didn't leave Hiccup. And even then, apparently leaving (or when to leave, most likely) was left to be each dragon's choice, not something a random telepathy powered Toothless told them to do

The villain also sucks. I didn't like his design, but I'm not gonna complain about that

It makes no sense for just one person to wipe out an entire species! And besides, Grimmel wasn't scary, wasn't interesting, wasn't anything at all. He's as bland as the Light Fury

Also also also. Toothless would never leave Hiccup for a girl. I'm not talking about a "bros before hoes" thing (I hate that phrase) I'm talking as in, Toothless would never leave Hiccup. Ever. No matter the circumstances. ES MÁS, he wouldn't have let the Light Fury get close to him after she attacked Hiccup! He would've defended him! That's his friend. HIS FRIEND. He's his best bud, his soulmate!!!!!

God the Toothless characterization pissed me off sm

I'd say Hiccup was pretty spot on in the sense that if Toothless wanted to leave and could leave without, like, dying, he would let him; he'd be sad about it, but he would let him. There's other things I don't like about the way he was written, of course, but that wasn't too bad. WHAT WAS BAD IS THE FACT THAT TOOTHLESS LEAVING WAS EVEN A POSSIBILITY IN THE FIRST PLACE

And, to add something: doesn't the "oh I built a new tail and now he can leave forever because it's like basically his old tail! It's like it was never missing at all!" thing feel a bit ableist? Idk that's just a hunch, I'm not disabled so I can't talk about it, but. Just leaving that there

Still, even without the ableism, it's still shitty. The tailfin would never hold that long. It'd need repairs. Things like that can't be permanent, and I know Hiccup is a great inventor, but he's not a god, come on. He can't do everything

Toothless can fly on his own now, yes, but if the tailfin breaks (which is a thing that can happen, either because of an accident or simply because of time), there's no one to fix it. In a place like that, he'll be stranded. It's dangerous!

Also they made Snotlout, Hiccup's cousin in the books, be attracted to Hiccup's mom. HIS AUNT

The HTTYD universe's ecosystem must've been so damaged when all the dragons dissappeared.

"but people wanted to hurt them!" people want to hurt wolves to, but we don't send them all to an isolated cave because it would destroy the ecosystem.

In fact, "dragon" is just a collective word for multiple species so they really fucked themselves with that one.

In conclusion, the third movie was stupid.

[zuzuelectricbugaloo]

I don’t get why some fans of Yugo get mad or annoyed at him for disliking his own Sans. He’s been dealing with nonstop fans for years who only focus on the memes surrounding Epic!Sans. Yugo has even expressed regret over making his Sans just a walking meme in the past, and of course, that would take a toll on his mental state and how he feels about the character. When people say he should stop talking about it, they don’t seem to understand that others constantly bring it up to him. It’s his character, and he has every right to vent about it however he wants.

You’re absolutely right, Epic is Yugo’s character, and he has every right to do as he pleases in how he uses said character and feels about it. I don’t condone harassment, and am firmly against attacking a creator simply because you passionately dislike or like a character of theirs.

One of my qualms with Yugo about Epic is how they blamed all of their mistakes and “cringe” of Epictale as a whole and projected it onto Epic and claimed the character’s death and celebration of his end meant that Yugo was absolved of any discomforting behaviors or jokes.

When he still continues to do so, even with characters from Epictale he likes.

Silly and goofy memes, might not be everyone’s preferred taste but there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. Memes are supposed to be silly and fun.

But then Yugo having to be convinced by their fans not to do NSFW commissions involving minors?

No no sorry, that’s not fair. Of course anyone who is broke would be desperate, and they’re just fictional characters, right? Whats the harm? No way does fiction impact reality in anyway.

Doesn’t that reasoning sound familiar?

And anyway, Yugo rejected it in the end. Of course that should be ignored then and any criticism of it is unwarranted.

My mistake. It’s still not fair. At least with Epic dead and gone, Epictale is free from anymore cringe and problematic anime tropes!

Again, I don't mean this as an attack on you or Yugo. It's a criticism, and one where my overall point is that my biggest gripe with Yugo isn't that I love his character and he doesn't. It's that Yugo seemed to absolve himself of all his shortcomings by projecting them onto Epic and therefore is free from error or criticism now.

Disliking that Red/Lara and Mettaton are in love with Papyrus who is seventeen makes you a hater. SEVENTEEN. They are literally centuries of years old, even in the remake. I know in reality, the age of consent varies per state in the USA and especially varies depending on country, with minors able to be married in some with their parents or guardians' consent, but still. It's uncomfortable. It's unnecessary. Papyrus could be shipped with Lara and Mettaton as an adult, as he is in Undertale by the fandom and in other AUs. But now with the context that Lara and Mettaton knew Papyrus since he was a child, it's disconcerting to imagine romance with any of them. Look, it's understandable for a creator to feel a certain way about their work and how it's interpreted. Especially in what they choose to do with their creations, in revamping or remaking things, and how they feel about it and choose to get rid of some things entirely.

For the most part, I enjoy Epictale and have read his brief Neutral!Frisk storyline. Yugo is a talented artist, and I adore Epictale and the characters and the great potential they all have and what can be expanded on it.

The old Epictale bore the same errs as many AUs within the UTMV fandom in its early years. Fantastic AUs with amazing concepts often had something problematic about them and this was sadly normalized. From the past Cream comics portraying SA as romantic or silly, to PJ's Daycare and the like also joking about minors/adults, SA and r*pe, SH, etc. Or it could be problematic with Frans or Fontcest, either in canon within the AU or played around with as concept. Epictale wasn't worst of them, nor was it the outlier in one of its characters joking about or portraying these problematic things.

Here's a big one: Underlust. It's not a masterpiece, and like many AUs, has so much potential. Unfortunately, there's so much that detracted from it that a remake or dismissal of most of its canon is needed if you want to find any enjoyment from it at all.

Same thing with the past Cream comics. At that point, the blog itself caused too much for its creators and they deleted it and made it non-canon entirely. I don't know what happened to the UL creator, but I assume something similar happened.

Sorry, back to Lust. I was not active in the fandom in its early years, I only witnessed glimpses of it and when I wanted to get into something, like Cream, it upset me too much and I left the fandom. In particular with Underlust, it makes me so sad because I was introduced to him through fanon first, where someone had an SA experience and used Lust as an expression of what it was like to go through something like that in his line of work. And it felt cathartic. Comforting. A character who could understand how I felt, who was was unconventional in their self-expression and yet happy and at peace with who they are, would be able to heal and find happiness regardless of what happened to them. But then I found the parts of his canon with Fontcest. And it turned out Lust had nothing like his fanon and it hurt. I could no longer enjoy the AU and ignored it entirely from then on. But Lust, today, is still so dear to me because of what he could be.

Yugo wants to move on from the past and be a better person. I think that's a noble endeavor. Anyone can be a better person and change. That doesn't make it easy, and it certainly doesn't mean that everyone will try.

And for the most part, Yugo seemed to make progress. Epictale in and out of its comics doesn't make any more jokes about sexual harassment as far as I'm aware. There are no harmful slurs used in a joking manner. For the most part, it seems Yugo made good on their word and is trying to move on from his past mistakes. Many creators of UTMV's past seem to do something similar, and I wish them all peace and commend them for trying to move on and be better. However, when Yugo crucifies Epic as the source of all his problems, and uses him as the symbol for burying the past and amending his mistakes, only to then make similar ones (far less severe than the ones he used to do, admittedly, but still concerning nonetheless) instead of using Epic's potential to make him be as Epic as his namesake, it doesn't piss me off, at Yugo or his fans. Fans won't always focus on what a creator originally wanted them to focus on. That's simply the nature of fandom. And memes are one of the most popular enjoyments of fans and is the most unifying act among them. But there would also be fans who love things besides the memes, who will work to enjoy and create what they can gleam from canon and expand on it, in art or fiction, with other characters in the story. So long as fans don't attack the creator, harass them, insult or demand they do more with their preferred character(s), I don't see anything wrong with this. It sounds like a regular community to me. No. It just makes me sad. But as you pointed out, it's Yugo's character and his right to do as he pleases. So, respectfully, Yugo wishes to have nothing to do with Epic anymore; I am all too happy to love him along with the fandom. Because to truly move on from the past, you need to accept accountability. I know Epic used to have problematic characteristics, be it in the noncanon comics or art, but it was a part of his character. I acknowledge that. And I want to move on. Remove the parts of the past that are bad, and instead of ignoring it, use it as a reference of what not to do, as a reference to be better and do better. I want to build on his potential and love him. Because Epic makes me happy, and I know he makes others happy too. Why not heal and work together to create something everyone can enjoy?

[softantlers]

ok so I would like to talk a little about ep 4 with regard to the YJs as a soccer team because I think the trial really reflected those team dynamics in an interesting way

so the freeze Allie out plotline:

- Natalie functions as the moral authority. She thinks that a better strategy is to play like a team and win (the unspoken outcome of that is that they could always lose instead). In a way, this sort of mirrors what you might expect from a judge: their goal is to convince the prosecution and defense to play it fair, let the pieces fall where they may, and what will be will be.

- Taissa is sort of in prosecutor mode. She has diagnosed the Problem of Allie and there's no really coming back from that. The outcome is black and white to her. Allie = Them losing. Therefore, Allie needs to be taken care of. She shows a similar degree of conviction over Coach Ben. Who Burnt Down the Cabin needs to be taken care of and Coach Ben is the candidate that will put the problem to rest.

- Lottie and Shauna are a bit like a jury in both plots. Lottie's "I don't like it" about Allie gets across her gut feeling, which jury members at the end of the day are meant to rely on in addition to the facts. Her gut feeling in the wilderness is also that Ben shouldn't be killed. She does concede that Allie kinda sucks but the "not liking it" part maybe insinuates that she has at least a latent concern for what "freezing her out" would mean for the team.

- Shauna, on the other hand, doesn't really seem to have a high stake about Allie besides the fact that "Jackie won't like it" and in a way Taissa is usurping Jackie's authority. We kinda see early on that Shauna's morality is often informed by other people. Sure, she has her own specific beliefs that flare up but they are heavily repressed and dissociated in season 1. Often, her belief systems are shown better in contrast to who she doesn't agree with (re: Natalie and the jealousy there) at the moment, and not so much her moral code. At the end of the day, she could have warned Allie or told Jackie if she disagreed so much but she remained passive, only bringing it up later when she was frustrated at the party (from the longing looks at Jackie and Jeff) and seemed to need a bone to pick with Tai to release the energy. Her mode of operation is frequently Displacement. Displacing rage and displacing responsibility.

Anyways, you see those moral dynamics among the team heavily foreshadow their behavior in the teen and adult timelines. For example, Taissa doesn't have a lot of moral guilt about killing people to cheat Van's death. This reflects her Solution to Allie. Just solve the problem. I don't care if Ben is guilty because I need him to be guilty. Prosecutor.

On the other hand, Natalie is perhaps the most morally grounded character. Ben deserves a fair trial. Travis deserves justice. These bitchy soccer players in the woods don't deserve to die, even though they often treat her terribly and ungratefully. Natalie is Justice in its most extreme form, to the point where it is honestly self destructive and easy for the others to take advantage of her. She just wants to play like a team and win but the others aren't interested in following the rules she holds herself to.

Lottie can see it both ways ("doesn't feeling right but she does suck") and she can make decisions if she thinks ultimately will serve the group for the better. She would be the swing vote on a jury and I truly think her vote wrt to Ben is because she thinks the fallout of Shauna's rage will be worse for everyone (remember she has an intimate connection with it, having been beaten almost to death) and she raises her hand when Shauna starts to lose it.

And Shauna. God, Shauna. Girl is ungrounded. Ben is her target right now because she has so much rage and she's tired of being looked over and she needs a path to usurp Natalie. I don't think she really cares whether Ben lives or dies. Shauna can shift her moral reasoning at the drop of a hat and it's generally self-serving (the fact that she even forgot that the lie about Adam attacking her was a lie). She fundamentally can't accept responsibility for her actions because that would require accepting the horrible things she's done, not least othering and ultimately being an indirect cause of death for her best friend. That would break her. So she's the least preferred jury member because she wants to be the prosecution. She wants the outcome without knowing the facts. She's not invested in Ben as she really wasn't with Allie but she'll use the fallout to serve her purposes, if she needs a bone to pick or disagrees with the person in charge simply for being in charge. When the judge rules, it doesn't matter. Because the judge isn't her. And she has to be right or she'll fucking die.

[endiness]

/#so it’s HIS fault that this show is bad #and fucking wild that he managed to change so much when he’s not even a producer?? #HE’S JUST TOP BILLING but it’s probably the higher ups saying to listen to the man 😑

I mean, I think Lauren gives the actors a lot of leeway when it comes to their characters and their storylines and the rest of the cast have all talked about how collaborative she is and how willing she is to listen to their thoughts and input and everything. So there is that.

However, in Henry Cavill's case in particular, I think this blind item from Deuxmoi really sets things into context:

Because it sounds like he was mostly getting his way because he was either threatening to or just straight up holding up production over it. Which, even ignoring the BI, Netflix does not seem to've been happy about because according to Redanian Intelligence, which is a very reliable source of BTS information on the show, the network was looking into recasting Geralt as early as S2 wrapping.

"Back in Summer 2021, when The Witcher Season 2 was in post-production and Season 3 hadn’t been renewed yet, we heard from a source that recasting Geralt was a growing possibility at Netflix. The reason for that was that Henry Cavill and the producers allegedly “weren’t seeing eye to eye” regarding content and Geralt’s role in the The Witcher."

Just to note: The thing that Henry Cavill and the producers "weren't seeing eye to eye on" likely would've been Henry Cavill being mad that the show centers around Yennefer, Ciri, and women so much instead of him. (A reminder that Ciri is the main character of the main book series and that the books have always heavily revolved around women.)

Also just to note as obviously the blind item has never officially been confirmed to be true, but a lot of it adds up given everything else we know about Henry Cavill and his actions and behavior and the part about the writer who was fired is true as the writer in question was Beau Demayo.

I wrote a debunking post about him here but to sum that up and briefly get into Demayo's role in everything: According to one of the writers on the show, Demayo was fired for allegedly being emotionally and physically abusive. (On a reddit post about the Deuxmoi BI, someone commented that the writer who was fired was fired for #metoo related reasons. Just to note: The BI and comment came out in December 2022.) Demayo is the one who started the rumor that the writers hate the source material — which he started a week before Henry Cavill announced that he was no longer going to be on the show. And Demayo was also fired from X-Men 97 in 2024 for allegedly being emotionally, physically, and sexually abusive — and the allegations surrounding his firing confirm that he was fired from The Witcher for the same kind of thing. So, yeah, at least that part of the BI has to be true.

Also, Henry Cavill was in contact with Demayo after he fired, too, so. (The pics are from the end of July 2021 and Demayo should've been fired sometime before April 2021, btw.)

Debunking misinformation about Netflix's The Witcher (Part 1)

"Henry Cavill is a massive fan of the books and the games and he quit the show because the writers wouldn't stick to the books and he just cares about the source material so much."

Henry Cavill not only did not know that the books existed when he started pursuing the role of Geralt, but he actually thought that the books were based off of the video games (and he still didn't bother to read them) and he didn't learn that the games were actually based off the books until Lauren told him (even though the first thing in the game credits is that they're based off the books); as of 2021, he as only read the full series once — right before he was cast in 2018; while he has played TW3, he has only played a little of TW2 (and I've never found any evidence that he's played the first game); and he also has not played the DLC for TW3.

Henry Cavill also started heavily pushing the narrative that he's just such a massive fan of the books and how important adhering to the source material is to him during the press for S2 to deflect from how it was due to his acting choices of cutting Geralt's lines and either saying nothing or just grunting instead that Geralt's characterization — who is much more verbose in the books — was book inaccurate in S1:

He also lied about the situation and tried to act like Geralt was never originally written as being verbose and blamed the lack of dialogue on Yennefer and Ciri's prominence, which cannot be true as confirmed by Lauren:

And tried to act like the lines he was cutting weren't that important anyway so it wasn't really a big deal, which also cannot be true as confirmed by Joey:

He also started pushing the narrative that adhering to the source material is so important to him and it's 'tricky' to do that with Lauren's vision, but his definition of "Lauren's vision" is the show being an ensemble piece with Yennefer and Ciri at the forefront (like the books) and the show in general heavily centering around women (like the books):

So the idea of him caring so much about "book accuracy" is, in fact, not accurate to the books at all as his problems were the prominence of women in the show when Ciri is the main character of the main book series, which the show started adapting from S2 onwards (which is when Henry Cavill started to complain about wanting "book accuracy" in the first place), and when women are very prominent, central, key figures in the books and they often drive the plot forwards.

Lastly, S3 was the closest adaption of the books out of all the seasons so far, so the idea that he quit after S3 because the writers just weren't respecting the source material and the show wasn't following the books doesn't make any sense anyway.

"Henry Cavill is the only reason why the show was even close to the source material at all."

I've not only never seen any evidence of this, but if anything, I've seen the exact opposite: Henry Cavill was either directly responsible for or at least contributed in some way to a lot of things that went against the books or didn't happen in them.

As I already pointed out, he cut Geralt's lines in S1 and either said nothing or just grunted instead which is inaccurate to Geralt's characterization in the books. Here's another quote from Joey affirming that:

(Just to note: During the press for S1, he frequently talked about how the games inspired his performance as Geralt — sometimes talking about them even more than the books despite how the show is based off of the books, not the games — and it wasn't until S2 press that he suddenly changed his tune and started talking about how important adhering to the source material ie the books is to him. He also only started advocating for a more book accurate Geralt because he got dunked on by reddit for his book inaccurate performance in S1.)

He didn't want to play Geralt and Jaskier's friendship as directly as in the books and buddy-buddy with each other:

He didn't want to have any kind of conflict in Geralt and Ciri's relationship in S2 — at least on Geralt's side of things:

Nor play Geralt struggling with fatherhood at all — all of which led to the domino effect of Yennefer's betrayal:

Eskel's death (which in itself also led to things like Vesemir trying to create new witchers and Lambert's attitude toward Ciri):

And Voleth Meir being the big bad of the season:

He didn't want Geralt and Triss to even just platonically find comfort in each other in S2 — which is what happens in the books:

He nixed a sex scene between Geralt and Yennefer in S2 because he didn't think it'd be in character of them to have sex after reuniting which, uh, is absolutely in character of them:

While this is an incredibly inconsequential change, given the prevalence of this idea that Henry Cavill is such an ardent defender of the source material ie the books and how much he wanted the show to adhere to them, I do think it's important to note that he pushed for — and got — more signs into the show even though by his own admission that is more of a game thing than a book thing and he got it into the show for the explicit purpose of catering to game stans:

This is also another incredibly inconsequential change, but again, given how prevalent the idea of Henry Cavill pushing for perfect source accuracy is, I do just want to point out that he would wear his armor 24/7 to make it look worn down:

Even though it is canon in the books that Geralt will buy himself brand new clothes, so the idea that Geralt's clothing has to look worn down and can't be brand new is not actually book accurate.

"Lauren wanted to make Roach's death a joke."

Just to address this point specifically, Lauren wanted to make a meta reference about how all of Geralt's horses are named Roach. That in no way, shape, or form means that she wanted to make Roach's death into a joke or even that the scene had to be played comedically. This is what Lauren had to say about the subject and the 'joke' in question (which, js, actually fits the tone of the books more):

And as far as the "Henry Cavill is the only one who cared about the source material and he's the only reason why the show even stuck to the books at all" front goes... Henry Cavill did change the dialogue in this scene to a book quote/reference; however, the quote in question ("Enjoy your last walk across the meadow and through the mist. Be not afraid of her for she is your friend.") is not something that Geralt himself says and the line/scene from the books foreshadows Geralt's ending in them.

So, at least imo — especially taking into account the incredibly high standard the fandom has set for Henry Cavill as the #1 defender of the books — I don't think this change was actually book accurate especially given the narrative significance of that exchange in the books.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Hi Miss Raven!! Idk if u have done this already but I've just seen the Masquerade event (I'm sorta a new player and it seemed interesting) and I would really like to hear ur opinion and analysis on Rollo!!

Welcome to the Twst rabbit hole, new player~!

asfkafdivfeetog8qetapafs YOU'VE AWOKEN THE BEAST NOW... I WILL NEVER SHUT UP aBoUT GLORIOSU MASQUERADE AND ROLLO mY BELOVED... 🤡

So first of all, I think it's important to bring up that when this event was first announced in JP, there was outcry from English speaking Twst fans. Numerous fans, primarily concentrated in the west, claimed it was problematic for Twst to "twinkify" Frollo, a villain that is not fantastical at all, but is sinisterly close to real life bigots that use religion to justify said bigotry. People fear mongered and made claims that Twst would try to sanitize Rollo or would present him in a way that was offensive to the crimes his Disney inspiration committed. And, might I add, all of this was before ANY of the event story was released--this was just upon the announcement. (If you want to read more about the controversy, I explained it in detail + shared my own thoughts about it in this post.) Today, you'll rarely find such claims floating around because the event story came out and spoke for itself. Glorious Masquerade is widely regarded as the BEST written event Twisted Wonderland has ever put out, even including 5 years' worth of content out on the JP server. No other event story has topped it in quality--and that's a sentiment that I personally agree with. I honestly don't know if Twst ever will top GloMasq. That's how strong the writing is.

As for my opinion on Rollo! I consider him one of my favorite characters due to his complex character writing and internal conflict (and honestly, I gotta appreciate his grind as a hater). To repeat what I've said in an older post: [I love how unpleasant and dedicated to his goals he is.] He stands out from the crowd thanks to his very blatant disdain for Malleus and acts in some of the most unhinged, overdramatic ways I can fathom (LIKE THAT STUPID TRAP DOOR PART… OR WHEN HE TRIED TO GO “SIKE” ON MALLEUS AND STRIKE HIM WHEN HIS GUARD IS DOWN). It’s the perfect balance of serious villain while also being so serious he almost comes off as desperate and pathetic. I also relate to his neurotic behavior. and conservative manner of dress. I talk more at length about my thoughts on Rollo here, though even that post doesn't fully encapsulate all I could discuss about him. I could go on and on about the dark implications of his unique magic, or how Rollo and Idia are mirrors of each other and sobering reminder of what can happen to someone that turns their grief into fuel to blame the world for his sorrow, or how the consequences Rollo faced at the end of the event were so fitting for his particular character, or the validation I feel that someone finally calls out Malleus for his potential to be a monster. IN FACT, I HAVE. And I have also gushed about his SSR here!! There's just so much interesting stuff to explore with him and his fucked up psyche.

[stylish-fish]

you know what one thing i hope gets further explored in deltarune is the dark fountains and their effects on the darkners, particularly rulers like king and queen. since we know for a fact that the fountains affected them, but it's not entirely clear how, i have written down some thoughts of my own on it. they are mostly just theories and based on what i'd find the most compelling, especially considering the characters, but i do like the ideas i have for that.

first of all, it's confirmed that the fountains did have something about them that affected the rulers. in the undertale 6th anniversary stream, toby fox said that the fountain "changed [the king's] behavior" at around 3:00:14. also, the music trio says this when you talk to them about queen:

i think that the most popular explanation i've seen for this is that the fountains had some magical properties in them that made king's and queen's personalities worse and since they spent a lot of time close to the fountains, they were easily corrupted by them. while this explanation might have been what toby was implying — we don't know — i don't exactly... feel satisfied with this take. i feel like it takes something away from their characters, so i think i'll need to explain this further.

first of all, the king. what we know about his character is that his kingdom was abandoned by the lightners and therefore he swore vengeance and decided to take matters into his own hands. in fact, this is what it says when you check him:

we see him act accordingly: he's extremely agressive towards the lightners in chapter 1 and more passive, but still spiteful towards them in chapter 2. his change of mood between the chapters is often used as proof for the fountain changing his personality, but i think it could also be credited to the total change of environment for him. in chapter 2, he no longer has any power, authority or means to carry out his revenge he was so used to having before. therefore, he sees no point in trying to act aggressive or threatening anymore. also, i'd like to point out the way his info box is worded: the inciting incident that made his heart become "cracked with hatred" wasn't the knight or the fountain appearing but instead being abandoned by the lightners. it makes it clear that he very much wanted to have revenge on lightners even before the fountain appeared, and it's not just a drive the fountain gave him.

speaking of the king's revenge, the way i see the fountain is directly related to that. i see it more as a concrete means to achieve his revenge: something that changed his behaviour because of what it meant to him, rather than directly affecting him through any magical corrupting properties. we see him idolize the knight, despite of them being 100% likely to be a lightner, and i think that's because the knight created something that matters to him. i see it this way: the king became vengeful as his kingdom was abandoned, but as a darkner, he obviously had no way to affect the light world in any way, despite having the motivation to do so. when the knight appeared and created the fountain, he finally had a chance to change the way things were for real and he was happy to take that chance.

i believe the case is similar for queen, as well. her goal is similar to the king (to cover the whole world in darkness and rule it supreme) but her motivation is completely different. while the king wants to create this kind of a world to punish the lightners, queen wants to do it because she genuinely believes it will be an ideal world for them. the fountain obviously matters to her equally as much as it does for the king: the music trio even implies that the way the fountain's creation changed her was basically making her talk about it to no end. we see her try to achieve this goal throughout chapter 2, mainly through pressuring noelle into becoming the new knight and trying to turn the rest of the lightners into her peons. most of her schemes for that are reasonably goofy, but she can be threatening at times and is still very a much an "any means necessary" character. she shows few scruples about threatening to throw berdly to the acid, mind controlling him or capturing noelle and forcing her to create new fountains. she even says this:

she acknowedges that what she's doing might not be good and it might make her an "evil villain", but she doesn't see it as a problem as she believes it's for the best of everyone. in short, she's a very utilitarian person to the extreme. also, she doesn't seem to really consider other people's perspectives before making decisions, instead being sure that she knows what's best for them. i think she had these traits before the fountain as well, being controlling, overly confident in herself and having an "end justifies the means" approach but having a goal to achieve amplified these traits and made her act on them more. she, much like the king, seems to be calmer in castle town and without her own fountain, but i think that's very much for the same reasons as for the king: she doesn't believe she can or should take over the world anymore, and therefore doesn't feel the need to act aggressive to achieve that.

other than being something concrete to achieve their goals and therefore something that matters to them, the fountain could've also been something that affected them through being a liability. on one hand, you have an incredibly powerful tool that can help you finally achieve what you've always wanted, but on the other hand, it could easily be destroyed by lightners if they wanted to and your entire world would be gone should that happen. we see especially the king act territorial over the fountain, as he correctly believes the lightners have come to seal it. it would make sense for the fear of their fountain being sealed and their world being destroyed to affect them both and make them both want to protect it more fiercely.

finally, i also just think that the fountains being something that altered the king's and queen's personalities is something that takes agency away from them. now, as darkners, they inherently have very little agency as deltarune makes very clear: their fates could be completely altered by a snap of a lightner's fingers. in fact, the fountains being created is something that was outside of their both's control as well: had the knight not done that, neither of them could've never carried out their plans. however, it's important to me that despite this, both of them still have some agency.

the king is a character who very desperately wants to have agency and power. he rejects the power dynamic between lightners and darkners, being a darkner who resists lightners and wants to create a new world where his kind is no longer oppressed by them (he also wants more than that... instead of wanting to actually get rid of the power dynamic he just wants to turn it around, having lightners be below darkners instead. essentially, fixing injustice with a different kind of injustice). queen, on the other hand, is a darkner whose motivation still very much revolves around serving lightners. she wants to make them happy. however, instead of having the lightners make choices for themselves and darkners, she wants to be the one who makes choices for them. she very likely believes she's the only one capable of making such choices and decisions: even in her introduction, she calls kris and susie "foolish children" and herself a "computer (smart)". as a computer, she believes she's intelluctually superior to the lightners, she should control them because it's good for them. in short, it's important for both king's and queen's characters that they make choices, actual choices that matter.

so in conclusion? this is the way i like to see the fountains: as a powerful thing that both king and queen saw as useful for their goals and therefore found extremely important. again, there are a lot of other possible directions this could be taken to, so i'm not entirely against the idea of this turning out to be 100% false, lol. either way, i'm interested to see what toby does with this concept in the next chapters.

[lucidl0ser]

Soooooo.. this might be a lil too dark. But anyways, can I get Taiju, Draken, Sanzu, Izana and the Haitanis with a reader that’s used to lots of yelling. Like, grew up with parents who argued and yelled a lot. Often sleeping at friend’s houses bc she didn’t want to go home. So she very often starts to argue over small things, and thinks even the smallest things are gonna be an argument bc she was raised that way.

I love a little bit of angst at times♡ I hope you enjoy! Sorry I couldn't do all the characters, my attention span has been bad

*********************Taiju, Draken, and Sanzu with traumatized! Reader

*********************

Taiju

○ Taiju is very used to the yelling and arguing from being a gang leader and everything that he did to his siblings. Tho after Hakkai stood up to him, he went to therapy and learned all the yelling was not healthy.

○ He set himself straight and met you. But further into the relationship, he started to notice your behavior. At any simple miscommunication or issue, you'd blow up and start an argument. It's almost like you're trying to assert yourself as right and strong.

○ He knew he had to make some changes when after an argument over the dishes, you chose to go stay at a friend's. He needs to fix these unresolved issues with you fast.

○ Now when an argument starts, instead of yelling back or trying to argue, he takes a deep breath and reminds you he's not the enemy. He isn't going to yell at you for forgetting to take the chicken out of the freezer. It'll take some time, but he wants to help you heal. This is a safe place, he would never hurt you

Draken

○ Draken isn't gonna put up with your arguments. He's not gonna scream and yell at you, if you're not gonna discuss the issue at hand like adults, he's gonna give you space

○ Even if he has to leave his own place so you have somewhere to stay for the night, he'll go crash at Mikey's or something til you can get in a clear head space to talk normally

○ He knows how you were raised and he hates it. He hates arguments and tries to avoid them as much as possible. He's also a gentleman. He'd never yell at a woman or even think about showing himself as superior. That's just dumb

○ He knows it isn't the nicest thing, but he's gotta break your bad habits one way or another

Sanzu

○ Sanzu is a very different case. Man is traumatized as well with the yelling and arguments. He argued with Takeomi just about every day before leaving, so you two don't blend very well

○ He definitely takes the arguments personally, feeling attacked the moment you raise your voice. He definitely doesn't understand at first, thinking you're just attacking him instead of realizing your trauma, so he yells back

○ But the moment you leave to stay with one of your friends, it all clicks. And he makes some big changes

○ Next argument, he just stays silent until you're finished or realize he hasn't said a word. Afterward, he'd just ask simple questions like what you two should have for dinner or if you're gonna watch a movie that night. It's not the best, but it at least distracts you for a bit til he can find you two a good therapist

*********************

[mootmuse]

Legitimately this is exactly how this scene went. And instead of doing the stuff I should be I ended up rambling about that. Here goes:

I managed a rewatch recently and as genuinely funny as it is to talk about, this scene was kind of chilling. Like the way Crozier just Turned as soon as someone who would/could stand up to him walked in. (Or someone who - like Jopson - he associates with feeling good and having his addiction fed.) Like the way he was in one moment like 'oh of course you're right it's dangerous to send the men outside' when Blanky stood up to him, and in the very next moment once Blanky wasn't around to see, coldly ordering Little outside again. And the contrast with how he treated someone (Jopson) who was never in a position to have to tell him 'I don't have any whiskey for you'. Genuinely excellent illustration of how far he'd spiralled to and how bad it'd got.

Like the show doesn't spend any extra time hammering anything into your head, but the way Crozier was at that point lying to the people around him based on whether he could push them around, and how that was all centered around the goal of getting more to drink was very much there.

I also think Little and Crozier's earlier dynamic here is interesting in terms of how people under that kind of stress interact with different personalities. There's more than just this at play but, even without it coming up in terms of words or actions, in the way Little and Jopson both speak and carry themselves it's obvious that one is a much stronger personality than the other, and someone in the mindset Crozier was in then is going to respond to that instinctively.

Also, while I do think rank and class were at play there - if Jopson was the type of person to tell Crozier anything he didn't want to hear just then I think he might have been on thinner ice than Blanky was, because Crozier's so used to him being a servant and perfectly obedient in everything. But Blanky did very much get away with pushing back a little bit, and Blanky is lower in rank and class than Crozier is too. According to Wikipedia historical-Little (and so probably his fictional counterpart) is a first lieutenant, which I assume (knowing nothing about any kind of military) makes him the man on the spot when the Captain wants to give a direct order, so that's probably a big part of why he becomes the target of Crozier's addiction-feeding at that point, but the show I think makes a good case that personality is a part of it as well.

The only thing that gets me is when people act like this is Crozier and Little's ENTIRE dynamic. Like with a lot of Crozier's early show behavior that often gets taken for his entire default personality this side of him came out in specific circumstances for specific reasons, and changing those circumstances changes Crozier's behavior and dynamic with the other characters, like Little. Crozier's not soulbonded besties with Little the way he is with Jopson, but when it comes down to it all these guys are just Adventure Coworkers who signed up to bunk together for a few years. His relationship with Jopson is weirder than his relationship with Little, which reads to me as a very normal one; when it comes down to it Crozier is ultimately just Little's boss (although interestingly the script does note I think at the promoting Jopson scene that at that point Little sees Crozier as an admirable person, so- a boss that Little maybe looks up to).

I'm not getting at anything, I just think it's all pretty interesting, the way the show handled this part of things, and I needed something fun to do.

edward i need you to walk a mile in the freezing cold to bring me more liquor. yes it is so cold you could literally die. chop chop. JOPSONNN YAY how are you my sweetiepie sparkle jumprope queen. i will never let anything happen to you. my perfect baby boy. EDWARD where the FUCK is my whiskey

[ilikekidsshows]

Another thing with the rabid Marinette stans is the virtue signaling. It's incredibly annoying cause it's touted as a "kids show" and people want kids shows to genuinely showcase issues that might happen day to day, even in fantasy situations. And a lot of kids shows are great at it, but ML is not one of them and the MariStans only ever care about those things when it makes Marinette upsette while also ignoring her behavior and their own. Like it's been brought up about how shit their behavior is towards anyone who isn't rapidly downing copium while they also go on about how Marinette doesn't have to forgive her bullies or whatever. Marinette's done so much worse than whatever petty thing Chloe or Sabrina or the rest of those middle school bullies have done, and people always instantly forgive her. Same who people just love to claim Chloe caused the most akumatizations or whatever when Marinette's def caused more and has done worse things that didn't end in akumatizations (re: S5 finale and anything related to it + abusing her hero persona because she's been using it to deal with her petty civilian worries since the beginning cause she can't bring herself to face them head on as Marinette so she has to do it as Ladybug. Volpina anyone? Breaking into Adrien's room because she can't bring herself to talk to him face to face?).

That's not even getting into how they cry about the racism and ableism and whatnot Marinette supposedly faces while writing their Alya bashing fics and ignoring the blatant characitures of multiple Asian characters and complete disregard for disabled characters and the show's unwillingness to have any good, well thought out depictions of any regularly/historically oppressed group of people.

---

Yeah, like, I just saw a post where Marinette stans were claiming that just because the people calling out Marinette’s abuse apologia don’t do it as much for all the other characters keeping Adrien in the dark it's misogyny, when the group of people supposedly not being criticized includes another POC girl and two women. This just in: Marinette is the only female and POC character in Miraculous! No, what it actually means is that Marinette is the only character that registers as a fictional person to her stans, which explains why they hate basically every other character in the show. I mean, either that or they’re just parroting Astruc whining about misogyny whenever someone says they don’t like the main character he, a white man, wrote. How progressive of them.

Like, this has been discussed before, but Marinette stans have such strong opinions about bullying, but only when Marinette is the perceived victim. When Marinette bullies the new girls for liking the same boy, it’s crickets. And when they themselves see a take they don’t agree with, the worst of them don’t waste a second breaking out the cyberbullying tactics. Everyone in this fandom knows “salters” are free game for the worst Marinette stans, and, in fact, I’ve seen some Marinette stans go into pretty neutral blogs’ inboxes with messages like: “you sound like a salter” that sound downright threatening when you’re aware of how the Marinette stans that crawl in people’s inboxes act like.

I think the one thing Marinette has on any of the villains is that, uh, actually, I was gonna say she hasn’t gotten anyone expelled from school, but she did, her targets just had actually done something expulsion-worthy (ignore Marinette doing something expulsion-worthy herself to accomplish this). Also, like, people keep pointing out she hasn’t purposefully done a lot of the stuff she does, although, as I keep saying, when Marinette makes a pattern of humiliating, ignoring and insulting people without meaning to, it makes it actually worse than if she was just being a jerk on purpose, because her victims are constantly made to forgive her for “mistakes” that are just the way she treats other people by now.

Basically, there’s very little any villain in the show has done that Marinette also hasn’t, she just has more or less (more often less) convincing mitigating circumstances for when she does it and the stans cling to and make up these mitigating factors desperately.

But, sure, it’s not the show that’s sexist, racist and ableist with how it depicts its characters, the problem is obviously the fans who have a problem with the writing. It's not like Marinette stans themselves constantly cry bad writing in defense of Marinette and then ignore it when said bad writing includes blatant ignorance of the very topics they hold up as weapons against critics.

[evenmyhivemindisempty]

Ms. Darth! Ms. Darth! Please pick me!

What kind of daddy (sexual) would each of the Holbrook characters be? Any and all Blackguard boys as well, if you are feeling kindly disposed!

Oh jeezy louisey. Okay. *cracks knuckles* let’s get into it.

Steve Murphy: When Steve tries to be a Daddy for Connie, he’s a stern, no-nonsense Daddy that doesn’t want any funny business from her, and grounds her when she tries to inappropriately touch Daddy’s dick! Steve actually thinks this game is very fun. Connie does not. Steve gets into it a little more when it’s with Javi - he’s still stern, but a little more prone to getting flustered, and this Daddy can absolutely be bribed out of giving a spanking with a blowjob instead.

Donald Pierce: Pierce can call himself Daddy, mostly out of the bedroom, but that’s about it. The whole thing just digs right into his trauma pressure points: when he actually tries to lean into being a Daddy during sex he gets way too mean, realizes he’s being way too mean, then gets way too soft and apologetic and abruptly, jarringly nonsexual.

If anyone wants to see what a disaster it is when Pierce tries to force himself to play Daddy, I actually wrote a fic about that! What Little Boys are Made Of

Cap Hatfield: Cap could be an excellent Daddy for a non-sexual impact scene! Go fetch Daddy a branch for a switch, and when you get back, Daddy’ll tan your hide!

Clement Mansell: Clement likes to talk a big talk about being “Daddy”, but at the end of the day he’d be such a shivery, adoring, relatively submissive Daddy that’s just head over heels for their baby. This Daddy is very into getting dicked-down too!

The Corinthian: I… I feel like for some reason Corinthian would channel Dream. Or maybe try to give his partner the “Daddy experience” Corinthian wishes he’d gotten instead of what he did? Aka a warmer, approving, emotionally open Daddy figure. Either way, I actually don’t see either of these scenarios going according to plan.

Eli Klaber: Klaber can be Mommy.

Danny Maguire: I feel like Danny tries to lean into the porn Daddy archetype. A lot of dirty talk about what a nasty little slut his baby is, and then a lot of vigorous fucking that’s mostly just… business as usual. Similar to Pierce, Danny does better when he has a Daddy - not when he is the Daddy.

Ty Shaw: Ty gets… really into the roleplay component, to a degree that is definitely not for everyone! He coos patronizingly about how bad his baby wants this, how naughty they are for seducing Daddy, how they need to be careful and quiet so they don’t wake up Mommy. I bet he’d get really into the idea of being an instructive Daddy too - teaching his baby how to have sex and showing them how good it can feel. I can see him playing around with a punishment aspect too, but he’s not gonna spank anyone - I think he’s more inclined to “punish” his sub by subjecting them to some rough fucking because they were “asking for it”.

Quinn McKenna: Quinn’s a cold, exacting Daddy with very specific expectations! But when his baby does good, he’ll dispense some praise (and maybe some orgasms, for extra good behavior). Also, for some reason I bet he likes being fully clothed while his partner’s totally nude. Or potentially in a slutty cheerleader or schoolgirl/schoolboy outfit? I could see that too. I also have NO idea why, but I think Quinn likes doing some genderplay when he’s Daddy. Emily could be his boy (Emily wasn’t wild about this), and Nebraska can be a schoolgirl (Nebraska is more down).

[fidenciocryptidcreechur]

this rant is specifically because i saw some folks with some rather bad takes on a different platform.

I swear to fucking hell if twst fandom starts genuinely acting like Jamil is a woman hater because he didn't switch up his behavior and still had his overblot crash out with Yuuna I'm gonna lose sanity.

I have seen some joking memes on other platforms (not really here fortunately) but like I have also seen some of these joking takes spiral out of control. It's happened with Trey where folks started thinking Trey doesn't actually care about Riddle or his friends and secretly hates baking, happened with Leona (some still happens but mainly through misconstruing his burnout and depression with laziness but also it carried over when people said he hates men when really he gets aggravated anybody that bothers him which is most of nrc except yuus and his dormmates in general.), also happens with the octotrio (they don't hate each other and i don't know how that weird headcanon came around back then but i am glad it's dead) and with sebek (he has other interests besides malleus and i am so glad people are becoming more aware of this).

NRC has confirmed that the guys do not actually change up their behavior for anyone, they act themselves in every Yuuniverse, and mainly only react according to certain behaviors and personalities. For example, game canon Yuu doesn't have the same interactions as Yuuna, scarabia yuu, and that's because they have two very different types of personalities.

All the overblotters are equal opportunity crashouts, they both do their usual antics regardless. Plus an overblot is literally a magic-made physical manifestation produced from someone being crushed under the pressure of their stress and having a mental breakdown. They aren't exactly going to be accommodating to anyone in any way during this- we see this in all of the overblots and how they will do things they regret or would never do normally. The accumulation of long term stress and resentment over a lifetime isn't gonna be suddenly resolved by someone who has existed on campus for like maximum 6 months so it makes sense that Jamil still goes ahead with the original book 4 events. it cannot be overstated enough that shit was going down regardless and some one who has only been on that campus for maximum 4-6 months and who has likely interacted with the overblotter for less than that total amount of time (simply because they are not and cannot be by the overblotters side 24/7) isn't gonna suddenly undo years of resentment and stress. It's not like he suddenly undid his generational trauma of familial servitude. So while The physical magic manifestation can be attacked, sure, and you can snap the overblotter out of it this way, there was gonna be a blowout regardless.

Love Yuuna, will NOT accept hate for her, but i also will not stand for anyone making trash takes for Jamil who's going through it.

Thankfully I haven't really seen it happening on tumblr (hooray!!) but I have seen it cropping up on a couple other platforms but i am keenly aware of how those jokes can spiral away and how some people will seem to start genuinely taking off with it.

note: i do not particularly care how someone writes their au, their oc/yuusona, or their own writing/jokes- plus that isn't really up to me and it would be a monumentally jackass move to genuinely say or even try to enforce (let people live, don't harass writers you don't like, block and move on, etc). I am mostly talking about the canonical takes and interpretations. Canon is one of those things where one can take inspiration from and that is helpful for writing fiction and for writing the characters but that is ultimately not required for making au's. Can you make better headcanons and is it beneficial to look at canon to help with writing characters? yes, of course. Is it required? no, and often the addition of non-canon details and headcanons- especially ones formed from inspiration from canon- add a lot of life to fics and art. There are some wonderful au's and art in this community which have almost zero connection to the original dynamics or to the story AND THEY ARE AMAZING. This isn't about au's though. It's about some garbage interpretations i saw about the canonical characters and i don't wanna go through round 2 of wild outlandish misinterpretations....

ultimately Not arguing about people's takes, au's and headcanons in this so much as the actual canon and people's take away from it.

Jamil has never been shown to indicate that he's misogynistic or a woman hater and i think it's a garbage take is what i am ultimately saying.

[wisteria-lodge]

Now the last thing I want is to start beef on the internet about Snape, although I suppose that would be very 2005 of me. I like Snape. I like Snape, a lot. I just finished a 160K fanfiction where he's the only viewpoint character, I would hope I'd like him. But I'm kind of interested to see what you'd have to say to my counterpoint to your rebuttal.

You give me a couple examples of funny Snape moments from the first few books. He's absolutely funny the whole way through, I talked about how that was the *fun* of 1-3 Snape. I will say that the later books will have Snape being dry and funny-on-purpose, in a way that 1-3 really don't. Like book 3 will have a moment like:

“Fascinating,” said Snape, without looking at it.

where the humor is in the framing. but later books will constantly have him him make (dry, dark, sarcastic) on-purpose jokes.

"He'd have me!" said Bellatrix passionately. "I, who spent many years in Azkaban for him!" "Yes, indeed, most admirable," said Snape in a bored voice. "Of course, you weren't a lot of use to him in prison, but the gesture was undoubtedly fine —"

“I have already told you,” said Snape smoothly, “that I have no further stocks of Veritaserum. Unless you wish to poison Potter —and I assure you I would have the greatest sympathy with you if you did — I cannot help you.

"Crabbe, loosen your hold a little, if Longbottom suffocates it will mean a lot of tedious paperwork, and I am afraid I shall have to mention it on your reference if ever you apply for a job.”

"Yes, it is easy to see that nearly six years of magical education have not been wasted on you, Potter. Ghosts are transparent."

“You applied first for the Defense Against the Dark Arts post, I believe?” Professor Umbridge asked Snape. “Yes,” said Snape quietly. “But you were unsuccessful?” Snape’s lip curled. “Obviously.”

(... and loads more. Actually it would be really fun to do a deep-dive into how Snape uses humor. The "no part of your body is allowed in Hogsmeade" - that is from book 1-3, and I think it is an on-purpose joke. But is it the only one?)

You also bring up that he brews Wolfsbane, and that's fair. "Not very many wizards are up to brewing it." But I'd say there's still a difference between 'potion teacher able to brew a difficult potion' and 'prodigy savant correcting the textbook so much that the margins look black, and inventing his own spells.' You could have set that up if you wanted, probably in the context of Harry thinking it's unfair that in Snape's class there's nothing but miles of note-taking while he's got a textbook in every other class, which would then be a set-up for when *Slughorn* starts using a textbook. I mean Book 6 is *named* after Snape's potion textbook, I don't think some set-up would be out of the question.

(My main analytical angle to approaching the books is always trying to figure out - what do I think JKR intended, vs what made it onto the page, vs what the fan interpretations are, and why they exist.)

The point that he gets Book 3 levels of emotional in Book 6, after the Worst Memory and killing Dumbledore - that is fair. He totally does, positioning Snape as guy who feels very intensely, which is cool. I think you make a very important point that Snape losing control in Book 6 is framed as *scary.* It certainly is. Which make it very different from Book 3, where it is absolutely framed as funny. A threatening character, defanged. Similar behavior, treated differently by the overall text, which is kinda my thesis here.

I do disagree that the later books push silly school stuff to the side. I think there's actually *more,* because the books are longer, and JKR really seems to like writing... quidditch team shenanigans, Hermione's ill-fated house elf-campaign, the Cormac subplot, the Lavender subplot, Harry's terrible date, the kids becoming prefects and reacting in different ways, like that's good stuff. A lot of that stuff even involves Snape, because he is a funny character - like the example I used up top of him finding ways to sabotage the Gryffindor Quidditch team like spam-booking the pitch. We are even still getting on-the-page scenes that take place during his class. It's just the narrative framing that changes, lots of little tweaks to make him less unreasonable, and less of a bully.

And the main difference between a plot twist and a ret-con is that plot twists are set up. I don't have a problem with either, but that's how it is. Like JKR is good at writing mysteries. If she wanted to, she could have dropped in a detail about James Potter early on that in retrospect seems a little iffy, but doesn't bother you at the time. She does that masterfully with Moody/Barty. If she wanted to set up the twist that Snape was actually extremely brilliant, heck I wrote the thing about making him dislike the textbook, that would have worked just fine.

Also the 'Snape stays out of a sense of duty thing' - I said that books 1-3 seem to give him a different motive for staying (wants the DADA job, which wasn't written as cursed at that point) and that motive changes in Book 4. In Book 1, Snape protecting Harry is presented as repaying a debt he feels he owes to James... which is strange in itself, when the later books are taken into context. But that's why my point is that Severus and James were both developed over the course of the books, and that development necessitated some ret-cons and clever re-framing.

And my last thing, about a sad backstory explaining vs excusing bad behavior, and what the difference is there exactly? You might have read that a million times, but I haven't. I read though your backlog of original posts trying to find the one you were referring to, and couldn't. So maybe link it, if it's around?

Since you’ve talked about Molly and Draco, can you talk about Snape as well? When you said that there was a disconnect with Snape’s character I honestly wasn’t sure if you meant the audience was supposed to like him more or less than they actually do.

This is a complicated one, because Book 1-3 Snape and Book 5-7 Snape are written so differently that I actually want to talk about them as two separate characters. 

Book 1-3 Snape… kind of sucks. Maybe he sucks in a way you find funny (which I completely get. A lot of comedy - especially British comedy - revolves around finding the humor in really *mean* people. Snape is *written* to be funny in a dry, acerbic, Roald Dahl kind of way.) But maybe Snape sucks in a way that’s not fun for you, he’s just upsetting and cruel. Either way, he’s petty, unfair, a bully, completely unreasonable, and doesn’t really appear to have any redeeming qualities. Snape protects Harry in Book 1 only because James Potter saved his life and, according to Dumbledore:  

“Professor Snape couldn’t bear being in your father’s debt. . . . I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father even. Then he could go back to hating your father’s memory in peace. . . .” 

Later on, Snape’s motivation will become “Protect Harry because you couldn’t protect Lily.” But there’s no hint of that here.

I actually think it’s very likely that ‘Snape was in love with Lily’ is a plotline added during Book 4, because 1-3 Snape’s motivation is so completely focused on JAMES. He hates Harry because he looks like James, he hates James because (according to Lupin) he’s “jealous, I think, of James’s talent on the Quidditch field.” Within the context of the series it’s easy to say that Lupin is lying, and with good reason… but in the context of the first three books, I think that’s just meant to be true? Snape, as we know, is a stealth quidditch hooligan the way McGonagall is. Also… James’ characterization shifts around. He’s not a bully in the first three books, he’s Head Boy… and that Head Boy thing doesn’t quite gel with what we hear from Sirius later: 

“No one would have made me a prefect, I spent too much time in detention with James. Lupin was the good boy, he got the badge.”

(I know JKR plans things out in advance, but she absolutely does change things on the fly. Arthur Weasley not getting killed by Nagini is an easy example that we definitely know about. And come on - the entire last book is a Deathly Hallows fetch-quest. Was there really no way to slip in a reference to Beedle the Bard - or a super-powerful semi-mythical wand - anywhere in the first six books?) 

So, in books 1-3, there's no hint that Snape is a potion prodigy, particularly powerful, or even particularly clever. He wrote a logic puzzle and “knows an awful lot about the Dark Arts.” But that’s it. “Potion Master” isn’t an advanced rank, it’s just the posh British boarding school way of saying “teacher.” (Like headmaster = head teacher.) Early Snape is also a lot more *emotional* than he is later on, when his ability to “Master yourself!... control your anger, discipline your mind!” becomes extremely plot relevant. Like, can you picture 5-7 Snape (or Alan Rickman, who plays a distinctly later-books Snape) doing any of this? 

Snape was beside himself. “OUT WITH IT, POTTER!” he bellowed. “WHAT DID YOU DO?”  “Professor Snape!” shrieked Madam Pomfrey. “Control yourself!”  “See here, Snape, be reasonable,” said Fudge. “This door’s been locked, we just saw —”  “THEY HELPED HIM ESCAPE, I KNOW IT!” Snape howled, pointing at Harry and Hermione. His face was twisted; spit was flying from his mouth.  “Calm down, man!” Fudge barked. “You’re talking nonsense!”  “YOU DON’T KNOW POTTER!” shrieked Snape. “HE DID IT, I KNOW HE DID IT —”

In Movie 3, Snape gets a cool protective moment where he shoves the kids behind him during the werewolf attack. In Book 3, Snape is unconscious during the entire werewolf attack because Harry, Ron and Hermione simultaneously decide he’s too dangerous, and too much of a liability to keep around. Here are are some bangers from Book 3 Snape: 

- “Don’t ask me to fathom the way a werewolf’s mind works.”   - “KEEP QUIET, YOU STUPID GIRL!” Snape shouted, looking suddenly quite deranged. “DON’T TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND!” - “Up to the castle?... I don’t think we need to go that far. All I have to do is call the dementors once we get out of the Willow. They’ll be very pleased to see you, Black . . . pleased enough to give you a little Kiss, I daresay. . . .”  - “I’ll drag the werewolf. Perhaps the dementors will have a Kiss for him too —”

If you sort of squint you can maybe say - okay, maybe this is a PTSD response. Like I’m writing a Snape POV fic right now, you can make it work. But it’s not work the books do for you, and it’s not the characterization choice they make in the films. 

BUT. Snape goes through a little bit of a revamp/retcon in Book 4. It’s totally deliberate - he’s Book 1-3 Snape at the beginning, then he basically vanishes from the narrative… the reader kind of forgets about him…  until it comes up during Karkaroff’s trial that Dumbledore ABSOLUTELY trusts him, even though he was a Death Eater. So now when Snape turns up at the climax - he’s a figure of intrigue, and it makes sense that he’s one of the two people Dumbledore brings with him to deal with Barty. Honestly, it’s a pretty cool magic trick. We buy it when - instead of hissing and spitting and hopping around like he does when he confronts Fudge at the end of Book 3 - Book 4 Snape deals with Fudge like this: 

Snape strode forward… pulling up the left sleeve of his robes as he went. He stuck out his forearm and showed it to Fudge, who recoiled.  “There,” said Snape harshly. “There. The Dark Mark. It is not as clear as it was an hour or so ago, when it burned black, but you can still see it. (...) This Mark has been growing clearer all year. Karkaroff’s too. Why do you think Karkaroff fled tonight? We both felt the Mark burn. We both knew he had returned. Karkaroff fears the Dark Lord’s vengeance.”

Calm, collected, focused. This is a character who you’re supposed to take seriously, a character who you are supposed to respect. 

I think it’s very interesting that after Book 4, we don’t see Snape *bully* the students during class again. He’s strict, and he’s a hard grader, and Harry still thinks he’s unfair, but like… the narrative framing is on his side now. 

“Tell me, Potter,” said Snape softly, “can you read?”  Draco Malfoy laughed.  “Yes, I can,” said Harry, his fingers clenched tightly around his wand.  “Read the third line of the instructions for me, Potter.”  Harry squinted at the blackboard(… ) His heart sank. He had not added syrup of hellebore, but had proceeded straight to the fourth line of the instructions after allowing his potion to simmer for seven minutes.  “Did you do everything on the third line, Potter?” “No,” said Harry very quietly.  “I beg your pardon?” “No,” said Harry, more loudly. “I forgot the hellebore...”  “I know you did, Potter, which means that this mess is utterly worthless. Evanesco.” The contents of Harry’s potion vanished; he was left standing foolishly beside an empty cauldron. “Those of you who have managed to read the instructions, fill one flagon with a sample of your potion, label it clearly with your name, and bring it up to my desk for testing.” (...)  “That was really unfair,” said Hermione consolingly, sitting down next to Harry  (...) “Yeah, well,” said Harry, glowering at his plate, “since when has Snape ever been fair to me?”

Like he isn’t nice, but he also isn’t asking Harry questions he can’t possibly know the answers to, threatening to kill someone’s pet, or calling Hermione ugly. He didn’t even take away house points. And - during the next lesson, we are told that the approach Snape took with Harry actually worked?

Determined not to give Snape an excuse to fail him this lesson, Harry read and reread every line of the instructions on the blackboard at least three times before acting on them. His Strengthening Solution was not precisely the clear turquoise shade of Hermione’s but it was at least blue rather than pink, like Neville’s, and he delivered a flask of it to Snape’s desk at the end of the lesson with a feeling of mingled defiance and relief. 

I want to do one more close read, on a excerpt from Book 5: 

Harry realized how much Professor McGonagall cared about beating Slytherin when she abstained from giving them homework in the week leading up to the match. (...)  Nobody could quite believe their ears until she looked directly at Harry and Ron and said grimly, “I’ve become accustomed to seeing the Quidditch Cup in my study, boys, and I really don’t want to have to hand it over to Professor Snape, so use the extra time to practice, won’t you?” Snape was no less obviously partisan: He had booked the Quidditch pitch for Slytherin practice so often that the Gryffindors had difficulty getting on it to play. He was also turning a deaf ear to the many reports of Slytherin attempts to hex Gryffindor players in the corridors. When Alicia Spinnet turned up in the hospital wing with her eyebrows growing so thick and fast that they obscured her vision and obstructed her mouth, Snape insisted that she must have attempted a Hair-Thickening Charm on herself and refused to listen to the fourteen eyewitnesses who insisted that they had seen the Slytherin Keeper, Miles Bletchley, hit her from behind with a jinx.

This has a very similar structure to the sequence when Snape refuses to punish Draco for enlarging Hermione’s teeth. Slytherins and Gryffindors having an altercation, Gryffindor girl gets caught in the crossfire. BUT a few key things have been changed. One - the section is told in second-hand narration, which makes it less emotional than the teeth-scene. Two - the section begins with comparing Snape to McGonagall: she’s being biased/helping out her students too, so it’s only fair if he does it as well. Three - his insult isn’t “Your face has always looked like that,” it’s “You must have messed up a spell,” which is a lot less personal, and a lot less mean. (If anything, Snape is subtly insulting her for casting a cosmetic charm/being too girly… and being a girly-girl is an inherently suspect characteristic in JKR’s world.) Everything about this passage is set up to create a “Snape the Bully” moment… that kind of excuses Snape. 

So, what do we have? There are the people that think Book 1-3 Snape just went too far, and you can soften the narrative framing around him, and you can add in as many tragic backstories as you want, and it doesn’t really matter. THAT is definitely not what JKR wants you to think. She wants to bring you along for the ride, and (as you can tell from the framing) she's started to like Snape a lot.

HOWEVER. I do not think that the fan who likes 5-7 Alan Rickman Snape is… quite seeing the same thing she is. I get the sense that in the text, Snape’s tragic backstory is not meant to *explain* his bad behavior so much as it is meant to *excuse* it. He stays mean and bad-tempered… but he’s allowed to be, both because he is always acting in service to a Good Cause, and because he was abused at home, bullied at school, etc. A big part of why I think JKR likes writing Snape so much (and why she’s so protective of him) is because she finds something cathartic in letting a character be nasty… but for it to be allowed because they’ve suffered, and also because they're in the right. Sadly I think this describes a lot of her current online interactions. 

JKR also loves the idea of *pining.* (It is crazy how long the main characters’ pining/longing/will-they-won’t-they thing in the Cormoran Strike books has lasted.) It’s a very safe kind of romance, and (again, sadly) you can tell from her writing that romance is not generally something that feels safe to her. Snape is sometimes characterized by those who dislike the character as an incel-type who wants to possess Lily, and I just don’t think that’s in the text. If anything it’s the other way around. Snape has some unconsummated, medieval courtly love thing going on, where he has decided to live his life in Lily’s service. 

I wrote about why I think Draco Malfoy (unintentionally) appeals to fans. With Snape…  I actually think a lot of his current (unintentional) appeal comes from the way a softer Snape reframes the narrative into something more complex, and especially the way it reframes Dumbledore. Manipulative/Morally Grey Dumbledore is a *very* popular fan interpretation, and the way you get that is with a sympathetic Severus Snape. 

“You disgust me,” said Dumbledore, and Harry had never heard so much contempt in his voice. Snape seemed to shrink a little. (...)  “Hide them all, then,” he croaked. “Keep her — them — safe. Please.”  “And what will you give me in return, Severus?”  “In — in return?” Snape gaped at Dumbledore, and Harry expected him to protest, but after a long moment he said, “Anything.”

The implications here are really far reaching. Because to me, the main question when it comes to Snape is - why does he STAY at Hogwarts? He clearly hates it, why doesn’t he just leave? If you’re talking about 1-3 Snape, it's because he’s eternally holding out for the Defense Against the Dark Arts job, and he’s just kind of a twisted miserable guy who would probably be equally miserable everywhere. 

But books 5-7 add the context that he’s brilliant, he’s brave, he’s principled, he’s got a sense of humor. He seems close with the Malfoys. He has *options.* So now the (unintended?) implication is… he doesn’t leave because Dumbledore won’t let him. The fact that he keeps applying for the DADA job becomes dark and borderline suicidal when we learn it’s cursed, and that Snape knows it’s cursed. If he takes it, he’ll leave (or die) at the end of the year. That means, every year, he’s tacitly asking Dumbledore “Can I leave?” And Dumbledore is answering “No.” 

That’s such an interesting, juicy character dynamic. Snape is being kept miserable on purpose because… he’s easier to control that way? And if that’s true… then oh boy is it sinister that Dumbledore left Harry with the Dursleys. He knew he was raising Harry “like a pig for slaughter” (as Snape puts it.) And if Harry doesn’t have a support system, if he’s miserable, if Dumbledore can swoop in as his savior… then doesn’t that make him so much easier to control?