#i think it might also be the sense that He Would Not Fucking Make Her Like That. idk

[fieldofheathers-stuff]

The Silco Saga. A Retrospective After Season 2

Part 1.5: A brief intermission on The Flashback Issue™, (un)reliable narrators and Silco committing infanticide

Why the timeline isn’t fucked, actually

A common issue I see people have with Season 2 is that some of Vander’s backstory messes with the timeline established in Season 1. While it is true that Vander in the S1 flashback on the bridge appears to be significantly older than the Vander in Silco’s drowning flashback - implying that the two events took place years apart and not, as Vander’s letter says, one right after the other - I would like to offer an alternative reading on the S1 Day of Ashes scene, which in my opinion can be explained in a way that doesn’t necessarily mess with canon too much.*

Arcane S1 has a very interesting way of using flashback scenes, and POV shots in general: they are always firmly rooted in someone’s POV, but despite being subjective, we the audience are led to believe they are fairly reliable narrators. There’s only one person who’s shown as being consistently unreliable in their POV: Jinx (a choice which narratively makes sense, as she suffers from psychosis). Jinx is also, coincidentally, the person who’s POV we see in the Day of Ashes flashback. Now, this might veer into headcanon territory (which I’m OK with), but nonetheless, hear me out: is it really that far fetched to think that Jinx, being very young and in obvious distress, would misremember this event, and superimpose the face of the father she knows as an older child on that of his younger self? While I don’t mind people coming up with their own HCs on this event, I think that there’s a much simpler way to interpret this “incongruence”, which fits both the general canon narrative as well as a specific trait of Jinx’s POV.

*There’s obviously one reading of this incongruence between the designs of Day-of-Ashes-Vander and Drowning-Vander where this continuity mistake can be attributed to external reasons, such as the writers not having a clear idea of the backstory in S1 and later retconning in S2, which I don’t have a huge problem with either. It happens all the time. However, I find a possible in-story reason for this incongruence much more elegant and appealing.

Silco says ‘Fuck them kids’ (except Jinx)

Another complaint I have heard, which I personally find pretty funny all things considered, is that having Vander and Silco know Vi and Jinx’s mother (and, consequently, Vi and Jinx) before the betrayal “cheapens” their story in S1, and makes Silco’s intent to kill them in Arc 1 seem more unrealistic due to his previous connection with her mom. I find this logic quite baffling.

As I have already pointed out in my previous post on Silco’s relationship with Jinx, the main point of his self-asserted narrative is that he was essentially reborn as a new man after his own attempted murder by Vander, unburdened by the sentiment and affection his older self held for others. This belief Silco holds about himself is perfectly in line with his treatment of Vi and Jinx in the first arc of S1: he doesn’t care about them, and he’s perfectly willing to get rid of them if it serves his end, just as much as he’s perfectly OK with killing Vander, because those are connections that only his older self cared about, not the new, “updated and improved” Silco.

The only reason Jinx is saved from an unfortunate fate is that Silco, in a moment of weakness following an extremely stressful series of events, instinctively identifies with her; thus, he creates an unsolvable conflict between his need to uphold his own rebirth narrative (which is really nothing more than a dysfunctional coping mechanism) and this newly found but extremely powerful self-identification with this child. His adoption of Jinx is his own way of trying to have his cake and eat it too: he can still hold on to his ideology, while also offering some sort of comfort to this suffering child, which is actually himself, thus also reinforcing the idea that he is right.

There’s obviously no such ethical conundrum when it comes to his relationship with Vi in Arc 1. Silco quite clearly sees her only as a projection of Vander, an incarnation of his ideals, a continuation of his legacy best exemplified in her physical prowess as a fighter. And since his goal during Act 1 is to either convince Vander to work with him again, or get rid of him altogether, I don’t see how he shouldn’t apply the same logic to Vi. It doesn’t matter she’s an innocent bystander in his conflict with Vander, or the daughter of a former close friend. Silco, after his “rebirth”, is a man who is willing to see the world only within the black-and-white paradigm of his own narrative. Therefore, killing her is no big deal for him.

This indifference towards Vi then turns to visceral hatred in the following two arcs, as she becomes a double threat: a symbol of Vander and a wedge between him and Jinx, the only relationship he can't stand to lose. So yeah. Fuck them kids.

Flashbacks pt. 2: Kids don’t know shit

I think the general logic of “very young kids in Arcane don’t have reliable memories” can be used to explain why Jinx and Vi don’t seem to remember Silco pre-betrayal. First of all, while I keep harping on the fact that Silco’s narrative of dual identities is total bullshit, it doesn’t mean that pre-betrayal and post-betrayal Silco aren’t two very different people to an outsider’s perspective. The pre-betrayal Silco we see in Vander’s memories is humorous, gentle, soft, thoughtful. We do see some hints of an underlying grittier nature (his very serious tone before he subverts our expectations with the “Bozo 1” joke is a perfect example of him already knowing he can be very intimidating if he wants to), but he appears, to all intents and purposes, as a completely different man than his post-betrayal persona. There’s also the factor of physical disfigurement and change of look between pre- and post-drowning Silco which would seriously impact any ability of the girls to recognize him.

Another important factor to keep in mind is also that It’s made pretty clear in both S1 and S2 that the kids don’t know about Vander’s betrayal of Silco, and therefore probably have no idea why Uncle Sil didn’t show up at the Last Drop after the Day of Ashes. Even if Vi and Jinx were close to him pre-drowning (which we aren’t even sure of, since he doesn’t appear in any flashbacks with them as young children), they probably think he’s dead. It’s pretty obvious throughout S1 that both Vander and Silco have kept the whole drowning affair a secret, the first out of guilt and shame for his actions (which he spends the rest of his life trying, unsuccessfully, to repent from), the second because it would make him appear weak against his rival. Vander, when admonishing Vi about her willningess to use violence when fighting Piltover’s oppression, only vaguely hints at the reason why he thinks this approach is dangerous, mentioning how much Powder means to her and asking her what she would do if she lost her (a clear mirror to his own failure towards Silco, but Vi doesn’t know that). On a lighter note, when Ekko hilariously asks Best Timeline Silco, in S2ep7, “Didn’t you try to kill him?”, he’s clearly referring to Silco killing Vander, while both Silco and Vander interpret it as Vander killing Silco, making it for a very awkward interaction between the two.

(On a side note, I love Silco’s sappy “power to forgive” answer. Oh Best Timeline Silco, you softie. This is what having the Nation of Zaun and being gay married to your best friend does to a MF. )

It also kinda makes sense that Jinx, who eventually has a clearer picture of what happened between Silco and Vander, still doesn’t remember him as a part of her childhood. We are told several times that she has very few childhood memories of her family before the Day of Ash. It also makes sense that Silco wouldn’t mention Felicia or Connol to her. The Silco that knew them, after all, drowned in the Pilt the same day they died.

I think this also hints at the fact that Silco probably wasn’t very involved with the girls as kids, which, again, goes very well with his characterization as someone who cares more about The Revolution™ than about the individual people of Zaun. The flashback with Felicia gives us a hint that this was one of Silco’s characteristics even before the drowning: while Vander toasts about “raising an ankle-biter or two”, Silco only raises his glass “to the Nation of Zaun”. I don’t think these are just meant to be throwaway lines: they perfectly encapsulate their future priorities, with Vander dedicating himself to his mission of nurturing Zaun’s people to the point of giving up the fight, and Silco becoming such a radical that he completely looses sight of the people he’s fighting for. (They are both cringe boyfailures and I love them for that.)

[a-bad-case-of-the-stephs]

i’ve been thinking abt this for a while and i want ur opinion. do you think characterization-wise stephanie would’ve kept her pregnancy if dixon wasn’t so staunchly anti-abortion? im kinda torn… and ik they retconned it entirely in newer reboots, but i would’ve loved to see her taking care of a kid since she’s good with them

Ok first of all thank you so much for asking me abt this. I actually have so many opinions about Steph’s pregnancy “arc” and I love yapping about her so appreciate this ask a ton.

On one hand, it’s really hard to entirely separate Steph from Dixons conservative values. She was created by the guy and she reflects a variety of semi conservative views in Robin 1993.

Some of these things are deeply connected to her character, for instance her punitive and callous attitude towards criminals. Of course, this attitude absolutely changes over time, but it makes a lot of sense for her to have this conservative approach early on in her crime fighting career, it directly reflects her anger towards her abusive dad.

Others are less grounded in things we know about Steph and more so just throwaway lines, like the joke Steph makes about the Clintons.

What I’m trying to say is it’s hard to determine what Steph would do if she wasn’t being written by Dixon, or if Dixon wasn’t as conservative on reproductive care, because some details about her are both entrenched as part of her character and also potentially influenced by Dixons politics.

There’s two main themes that come up during Steph’s pregnancy which I think are very in line with her characterization and support the idea that the choice she makes is (fairly) in character: her sense of responsibility, and her protectiveness over children as a reaction to how she was not protected.

The idea that Stephanie fucked up, that she made a stupid mistake and her pregnancy is the “consequence” (an insanely horrifically gross premise, for the record) is espoused by her throughout the pregnancy arc.

This is pretty in line with her characterization.

Steph places a strong emphasis on the idea of internal strength, it’s something we see her value in others and something she commits to herself.

(Her father is "weak" because he succumbs to his criminal tendencies, her mother is "strong" for overcoming her addiction, other drug addicts are weak for failing to do so and turning to crime, her mom is "weak" for grieving Arthur, Steph is called "brave" for keeping her baby, Steph has to be “the brave one here” because Crystal won’t kick Arthur out, etc etc)

Potentially connected to this mindset is how Stephanie is also kind of prone to taking responsibility, and in some cases, taking blame for things that actually are not her fault.

Easy example of this is how she talks to Tim about how he might have cheated and wanted to leave her while pregnant, she takes the blame and responsibility for his (assumed) actions. It’s her fault for being so “fat and disgusting”. She understands why he might have cheated on her.

When Batman tells her Tims secret identity (something she didn’t seem to realize would hurt him and which Batman presented the urgency of the situation under absolutely false pretenses) she immediately takes the blame for Tim’s anger, directly condemning herself and centering Tim’s feelings even when Tim is clearly angry at Bruce and hardly acknowledges her at all during the confrontation. She continues to blame herself for this later even after being reassured by Tim.

And a huge example, how Steph believes straight up that she has “a lot to make up for” because her dad is the Cluemaster. This is a consistent part of Stephs characterization, seems to somehow blame herself for Arthur’s actions, or at least not being able to stop him. Steph holds herself to an unfair metric, she takes on this unwarranted responsibility and blame.

It makes sense to me that Steph would adopt a similar mindset in the case of her pregnancy. She’s quick to assume this responsibility and deride herself and her actions because that’s what she’s always done.

The second factor that I think is playing a role here is Steph’s desire to protect the innocent, especially children, as a reflection of the way she was never protected as a child.

Steph is, as you pointed out, shown to be good with kids. And, I think it’s absolutely worth mentioning that she sometimes projects her own experiences onto them. Not in like a bad way, in a: ‘no one protected me, I want to protect them’ way. This is a super strong protective instinct.

This protective instinct is what (I believe) causes her to befriend Damian during Batgirl (2009): she sees that he was missing out on a normal childhood, something she could relate to, and we see her try to help him experience one.

It’s also why she chooses to let her baby get adopted instead of keeping it: we see her convinced by Tim’s arguement about how her baby would grow up without two parents and compares that situation to how Steph grew up with her dad in jail. (By the way, this is just propaganda, the issue is Steph would have to forfeit her teen years taking care of a baby if she kept it, which she is not old or mature enough to raise effectively and which would doubtlessly have terrifying consequences for both her and her baby, not that the baby needs two parents, and one of them has to be a man. But that’s besides the point.)

The point is, Steph’s shitty childhood makes her protective over children and strongly moves her to ensure similar situations don’t befall them.

I think she’s doing a very similar thing when it comes to her pregnancy.

The whole conclusion to her story in the Secret Origins 80-Page Giant is her telling her unborn baby about her childhood, and hoping the baby will get a better childhood than she did.

In the same way Steph is dedicated to stopping kids from experiencing what she experienced, she feels like she has a duty to her baby to protect it in specific contrast to her own shitty childhood where she was not protected.

We see this idea explored again in Steph’s hallucination/dream while giving birth. Her nightmare is centered around Steph’s fear that her baby would end up in the hands of Cluemaster. She's terrified by the idea of this innocent child getting abused by the same man she was.

Also, notice Crystals role here. Crystal's enabling of Arthur's abuse and general shittiness is something we see explored a few times. Steph identifies that Crystal is willing to be blind to the obviously shitty behavior of her brother, Steph's Uncle Dave, and compares her inability to see the truth to how Crystal apparently acted with Arthur in the past. There's more examples, but the way Crystal facilities Arthurs abuse (which Crystal was a premiere victim of for the record) and is unwilling to hear out Steph in her nightmare is clearly a reflection of Stephs own childhood. She is projecting her shitty past onto her baby again.

How does this factor into her choice to not get an abortion? As explored, she has this tendency to project herself and her experiences into kids she sees as in similar situations, and try to protect them where she was not protected. I can see this inclining Steph to 1) see the fetus as a baby and innocent life and 2) feel a very strong protective instinct towards it which think would make her unlikely to abort.

So again, we have this projection where Steph sees the baby as A) her responsibility and B) in need of the protection she did not get.

Both of these factors are undoubtably parts of Steph’s character. So, I’m inclined to say Steph’s pregnancy arc is based in her character.

It comes down to how Steph sees her fetus. If she, like she does in Robin 93, immediately conceptualized the fetus as a separate person, an innocent life, I think her feelings of responsibility and her protective instinct for the innocent and young children would make it pretty much impossible her to end up choosing herself and her own wants over the fetus. I don’t think Steph could ever do that, unfortunately.

On the other hand, if Steph didn’t immediately think of the fetus as a baby, (something that would come with Dixon being less conservative on reproductive rights) I could see her getting an abortion. I do think she’d still feel guilty however, like she’d shirked responsibility somehow.

In conclusion, it’s complicated, but Steph’s feelings during her pregnancy are grounded in her characterization. I think if Dixon was less conservative, we might be able to see how these traits come into play and have Steph maybe learn to prioritize herself despite her self sacrificial qualities, and we could manage not have the 15 year old give birth.

(Okay that was the analysis, now I’m lowkey just going to rant about how I personally feel about the pregnancy arc.)

On a personal level, I think someone should have sat Steph down and explained to her the that she has every right to want to abort? Yes. Do I think Crystal should have had a long talk with her about how Stephanie doesn’t owe this fetus anything and she has a right to be 15 and look out for herself for once? God, yes.

I’m honestly just disgusted by the very concept of the “pregnancy arc”. No amount of cute moments with Tim or attempts to make Steph’s convos with her mom heartwarming will override my disgust at the fact that they made the 15 year old pregnant. It’s not "cute" that she had to deal with pregnancy induced nausea and her math homework. It’s genuinely horrific. It’s not "nice" that Tim uses his Alvin Draper disguise to brings her to Lamaze classes. It’s horrifying that Steph has to ask her boyfriend who has to wear a disguise to drive her to birthing classes because her mom is busy working night shifts at the hospital to support them. It’s not "sweet" when Tim reassures Steph she’s beautiful and Steph playfully threatens to hit him with a teddy bear, it’s sickening that she thinks so lowly of herself in the first place. And it’s definitely not anything but genuinely disappointing that Steph’s next appearance in Robin 93 after giving birth is her jogging to lose the weight she gained from her pregnancy. Just wow.

I love that Steph is good with kids and whenever I see those cute ‘Steph keeps the kid’ au drawings I will admit that my heart is warmed . But at the same time, I'm just personally never going to be in favor of Steph being forced to carry a baby at 15 years old as a "consequence" so we can moralize to the audience about teens having premarital sex. It was not done well. I don't know if it could be done well.

I don’t really think her pregnancy should be decanonized either per se, because I think DC should have to own up to their sexist treatment of Steph (and many many other female characters) instead of getting to pretend they were always perfectly feminist. (This happens a lot with her time as Robin a lot but that’s another post). However, I kind of never want to see that baby appear again in any comic.

When it comes to current comics canon, even if the pregnancy has been retconned, I have this sinking feeling that it’s only a matter of time before that baby shows up as a minor character and becomes a vigilante or some shit. This is the dark timeline to me. The evil universe which I lie awake terrified of but I know is distinctly possible. If this happens, this is my "I told you so" moment.

For me, the “good ending” when it comes to Steph’s pregnancy is she should’ve aborted it. Just no baby, no pregnant 15 year old. She could have even participated in NML in this alt universe (which is another another post). I don't know. I think Steph could be a fantastic mom, but I wouldn't want her to have to be one at 15 or 16.

Thank you again sm for the ask, love ranting about Steph. Totally open to hearing other takes on this arc and Stephs character as always.

[dirthamen-enjoyer]

please remember that this is all my personal thoughts and i might be wrong about some of the things. it is critical. this started off as one specific topic about solas and then ended up turning into more of a ramble. i guess? anyways spoilers for veilguard under the keep reading line.

i wish my brain worked properly sometimes because i really want to know why i feel like they didn't write solas cohesively enough. to me, he is the best part of datv. and no, it's not because i romanced him in inquisition. actually, i could never finish his romance because he was such a know-it-all and it would annoy me lol. (it's because i'm a know-it-all and know-it-alls tend to clash. i plan on forcing myself through it one day though.) despite him annoying me, i liked him as a character. i liked his reveal, the moral greyness of him.

i think mainly my problem is how they presented his morals and why he wants to tear down the veil. it feels like they couldn't decide how to focus him. so originally he's tearing down the veil because it was a mistake and wants the world to go back to the way it was so the days of the ancient elves - specifically after the evanuris are gone - could return, at least that's what i got from it.

then at the beginning of veilguard, it suddenly it feels like tearing the veil down is just a byproduct of him needing to move the last of the evanuris to a better prison. huh? in my head i always thought that solas was ready to fight the evanuris when the veil is brought down because he's willing to take the risk of dealing with them just to bring the old world back. maybe that's too headcanon-y? also i never got around to reading the books or comics fully so i might have missed some details.

then at the end it's "i must do this for mythal or her sacrifice would be for nothing" or whatever he said. huh? i don't get why it's suddenly about mythal, even with the regret murals showing how close they were. it should be about him and all he sacrificed, only for it to not go the way he wanted. without even talking about what was revealed in the regrets murals, he sacrificed the world he knew to lock the evanuris (and forgotten ones) away to try and make life better for the common elves, the slaves.

i don't know how well that last paragraph comes off. i'm just saying that it felt like it didn't belong. his whole story is about regrets, yes. makes sense. he regrets the events that happened because of the veil mistakenly happening. he regrets what's in the murals (which i might talk about in another post because :/) but the game acts like him tearing down the veil is just selfish. there's no other nuance there, it's just selfish. huh? there is so much nuance to this position, in my opinion, that i can't even figure out how to write it.

okay so i've officially lost my train of thought about this original topic, which means i don't know what else to put. i'll just say that i feel dumb that i don't understand it while it feels like everyone else does. also i don't understand why i dislike how everything ended for him. it was like someone punched me when lost elf started playing because this ending didn't feel right. and i don't know why. (that one ending... "i am a god!" bffr he would NAWT FUCKING say that.)

also let me just quickly state that i do not think they should have made the evanuris, and elves, originally spirits. it takes away the fantasy in a the fantasy story, is the best way to say it. i know it sounds weird, but... mysteries are good. not everything needs an explanation. we could have had the mystery of "what were the evanuris?" if they kept them as just gods instead of explaining them. just have the reveal be that the gods weren't good to their subjects and are all-powerful. no need to explain all the time.

this has nothing to do with how much i wanted to fight actual gods (i did. i wanted to go up against actual gods other than the archdemons. and we know that reveal :/ ) or even how much more impactful it would have made solas's history.

[silusvesuius]

n*loth not being able to bag anyone over the (human term) age of 25-30 at most is the only logical and real conclusion to me because it can be just explained away as him wanting to prove and control everything and anyone (Cus he's a man!) but being stuck in that demographic because his unbearable and vile personality is a force that nobody can look past once they've outgrown the possible fear and idolization period of anyone but also n*loth in particular.

[agirlinthegalaxy]

It's been rolling around in my brain the last few days for some reason, but I still hate the family backstory reveals for Sophie and Eliot. I've seen some of the meta for it, but quite frankly, it still makes no sense. If it had been something actually thought of and intentional in the original, I think it could have been so fascinating. I mean, Sophie's willing abandonment of Astrid to contrast with Nate's loss of Sam or Eliot's adoption in contrast with Hardison's and Parker's? Could have been excellent! But they came out of nowhere in Redemption and don't work with these characters.

Sophie was still actively using the fucking alias that she met Astrid under! She met with someone from her past on the show! Like. Quite frankly, that one is unequivocally bullshit that they made up and threw in and pretended could fit with the established canon. (And I'm sorry, but the idea of Sophie abandoning Astrid and never telling Nate about her just... So much of Nate's trauma was rooted in the loss of Sam, and I think that introducing this element after he's gone and unable to respond to it taints Sophie and Nate's relationship in a way bc I'm not exactly sure how Nate would've responded to learning about this but I think that it's something he'd have needed to know. I don't know how to fully express my thoughts on that but yeah.)

As for Eliot, I don't like the adoption aspect literally at all. The way that he would interact with his family and the memory of his family would be different, and I think that it's flat out ridiculous to think that he'd have never mentioned it to the team in the original show, especially when dealing with the kid cases. (I also dislike the biracial adoption as its own element because if Eliot was actually raised by Black parents in the... idk what 80s/90s? That just. doesn't feel congruent with how they write Eliot interacting with PoC, not necessarily in a bad way, but babe, he's written like a white southern man raised in a specific kind of culture that does not jell with that. It also makes Eliot look... really bad that he was apparently raised with the knowledge of how fucked up the military was and his parents' history and made the choices that he did.) Like the show may not have explicitly stated it but the implication of that relationship was vastly fucking different throughout the original show.

Just. These were not backstories that were congruent with their depiction and characters in the original show, and they're also just moves that I don't particularly like or find interesting directions for those characters. There's also something to be said about how it was apparently unacceptable for a woman to not have kids or someone not reconciling with their biological family when that was something that the original show handled a lot better. Out of all the directions to take Sophie and Eliot's stories, that's just not really one that I think was a good idea.

[ajdrawshq]

i can almost guarantee ive said it before but. he would thrive in a zero escape game

[angy-grrr]

okay I’m annoying yk that and I know that.

I love to see what non bkdk shippers think will happen with the manga, bc this way I can learn and see things outside of my special interest for the chapters. And I was reading some interpretations of Ochako being weird in 425.

Some people are right here expecting izuku to go and support her. Some people saw him being this sad, yet only could think about him worrying about Ochako’s feelings over her fight, not Izuku’s fight. they think this will lead to a beautiful confession, in which she cries how she couldn’t save himiko, that izuku noticed, and that he’ll call her his hero and they’ll kiss. And I can’t help but feel like this is bc he is the boy. Because he is the boy in that ship, he is the one that supports, not gets supported. When I was reading those little scenarios, I thought they would explain deku would cry with her about his own fight and bond over it, or something like that. But no… they believe deku’s strange reactions come from being worried over Ochako only. and it’s so sad, to see how gender expectations are being pushed like that in something as simple as a “what I want to happen in the manga” scenario. It’s sad how people think this is how it should work, when actually that would make me even sadder -as I said, for the most part I didn’t care about that ship, I accepted it as inevitable, but this isn’t fair. Romance irl is not perfect, but in a story for this to be a resolution when the character who hasn’t talked about his feeling keeps not talking about them and just supports her before confessing…

Even hetero relationships should have some balance, right?

EDIT:

someone brought up bkdk lmao. They explained how the confession from ochako could get answered: happy ending is izuku loving her back, bad ending is him saying he likes katsuki, and medium ending him liking mei. I can’t even lmao.

another person argued deli just has shown a brotherly bond with him (weird) and that he only thought of him at that dinner with the Im too blessed, and the last time he followed him was in season 1. people need to learn how to read, and connect the dots, literally. No matter how you see their relationship in canon as platonic or romantic (or queer platonic), it’s clear their bond is strong and that Izuku depends on katsuki as much as katsuki depends on izuku on emotional levels -izuku losing control over and over and over again with him, AFO explaining he is the closest to midoriya, katsuki going towards him no matter how injured he is, looking for each other and the time stops, etc.

this is just canon. There’s no arguing about it. Idk why intimate bonds between two male characters means they are like brothers. Is it bc if they are not related, there’s no way to not see it as gay?/gen but also /s

[alethiometry]

for my own peace of mind i may need to stop reading r/yellowjackets jfc. in just a single post i have seen people theorize that

javi is still alive bc he found an underground hot spring / javi found civilization and saved the girls

jackie's dream actually happened bc she wouldn't have dreamed of the dead hunter

laura lee survived the plane exploding bc we never saw a body

[wreckedhoney]

"WONDERFUL SHOW TONIGHT, FORREST."

a KILLER FREQUENCY Marie Campbell/Forrest Nash ship playlist on YT

"Good to talk to you again, Forrest. You know, I've really enjoyed our chats tonight." "I guess we've had some moments."

Tracklist under the cut

Is Everybody Going Crazy? - Nothing But Thieves / The Perfect Girl - Mareux / We Don't Have To Dance - Andy Black / Night Issues (Nightcall x Daddy Issues) Mashup/Remix - FuturePastPerson / "Bassically" - Tei Shi / Cold Summer - Mareux / Diet Mountain Dew - Lana Del Rey / Destruction Of Us - Mr.Kitty / Teeth - 5 Seconds of Summer / HUSH - Ari Abdul / DTLA - Mareux / Make You Mine - Madison Beer / FEAR YOU - Kat Von D / Bad Romance - Lady Gaga / Dark All Day - GUNSHIP / Maniac (feat. Conor Mason of Nothing But Thieves) - AWOLNATION

[rockeyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy]

something feels very wrong to me when pomni is drawn as a generic Sexy Woman in fanart. like i never like it for any character but for some reason it especially bothers me with her. it might be that they always draw her looking viscerally uncomfortable with her existence

[smol-tired-binch-blog]

hate how im now at a point where im legit like kicking my legs and grinning like an idiot over fictional characters SEND HELP

[sherlock-is-ace]

.

[punkcherries]

sonic prime so cool ............

[crushpunchh]

nothing serious just thoughts about a DR au that i got embarrassed about putting up here <3

[piningpercussionist]

Kim you a Kamen Rider fan

Uh, no? Don't think so.

Name sounds vaguely familiar... one of the other clowns around here might be acquainted with it.

I didn't really watch too much TV as a young kid? I liked to mess around with my kit or go fuck around in the forests, for the most part. I started watching stuff more in highschool and college.

Some stuff I enjoy, or enjoyed, off the top of my head- Batman: The Animated Series, Are You Afraid of the Dark?, Buffy the Vampire Slayer... There are definitely more things that I watched, but I'm not sure what all I really stand by enjoying... sometimes, you just watch something because it's so weird it fascinates you, ya know?

[angeltism]

god i fucking hate spa.rkle sm . most shit i'm seeing says she's being racist against roman.ians , but . . . considering roman.ians are . white europeans ? and i haven't heard of much oppression towards roman.ians . I kinda doubt it ?? but you know what people whose oppression i've heard plenty of in roman.ia and who sound similar enough they constantly get confused with each other ? roma . who were enslaved for fucking centuries and to this day still face horrendous oppression in roman.ia . is she . is she fucking racist towards the h.sr version of part of my heritage . hoyo can i kick her can i please kick and punch her please please please pleaaaase pl