#i'm not saying these are direct parallels literally

[chirpsythismorning]

best byler proof is rewatching 3x03 and 4x01 back to back!!!! Thank me later!!!

[19catsncounting]

Therapy isn't enough I need the CW to go back and re-film Season 11 to prove that Lucifer could have been saved if Michael didn't abandon him like Dean refused to abandon Sam.

[baphometsss]

I don't wanna sit here and act like I'm a professional or anything, because I'm not, but as someone who has had to do a lot of work to overcome trauma and reconfigure my brain more or less from the ground up, there's a lot I have to say about Solas's mental state

We know that Solas was essentially used and abused by Mythal for millennia. Even if he wasn't under a geas, he was twisted from his purpose by being made to fight, and then created the Wolf's Fang which was used to make the Titans tranquil and started the Blights. He made those choices himself, but it's important to understand that no choice is ever made in a vacuum. She took advantage of his vulnerability when he was given a body after however long as a spirit semi-existing peacefully in the Fade, and moulded him into a weapon.

He is broken, because Mythal broke him. I'm not incapable of seeing why she did what she did because like I said, no one makes choices in a vacuum and I could write about her for a long time too (in a similar way to how I have had to do myself in my own life in understanding why others abused me). He was so traumatised by everything that happened and he was trauma bonded to Mythal pretty much from the minute he gained a body. Trauma bonds are not about love. He definitely interpreted it that way, as most people do, but that's the weapon abusers use to keep the victim under their control. Abuse abuse abuse show a scrap of love and then abuse some more. If I just take it, I'll get the love/attention I need. I will earn it, because love is suffering, and I have to suffer to earn getting my basic needs met from my family/friends. Mythal, as his creator, was the one who he would've attached to in a similar way to spirit Cole/human Cole.

Trauma bonds are pathological. Mythal made him believe that if he did as she asked, and kept supporting her, then eventually he would gain her favour and they would be able to free all the elves, and he'd be able to live according to his true nature, which is one where he doesn't have to fight. (Remember his personal quest in DAI? He actually kills the rebel mages for corrupting his friend--another Wisdom spirit--into Pride.) In reality, she was just using him. She always kept the bone just out of reach for her lapdog. The line from Rook where they say (paraphrasing here) 'you know, I was actually excited about getting your approval... That's how you do it, isn't it? Keeping giving little scraps of approval to keep someone loyal, and then you turn around and betray them' is so telling too.

Where--or from whom--do you think he learned to do this?

It literally reeks of a pathological trauma bond and honestly, with how isolated, 'grim and fatalistic' Solas is, it is not a surprise that he's so broken.

Solas, essentially, is little more than a lap-dog to Mythal. He followed her like a lost puppy, because especially in his early days, that's kind of what he was. You have to remember that most of the insight we get about Mythal is from Solas's perspective, and he is not a reliable person when it comes to her after so long being repeatedly terrorised and twisted and manipulated. There are several instances where he describes being betrayed by her, and mentions some of the things she did, but he never quite holds her fully accountable and ends up directing his rage elsewhere. (The parallel between Mythal/Solas and the rebel mages/Wisdom is important here.)

This awesome post by @mythalism only reinforces this. He is so messed up in that scene, he is broken, he is holding the Wolf's Fang up, trying to give it to her because it symbolises the burden he has carried for thousands of years trying to avenge her death. He never wanted the Fang, like he never wanted a body. Mythal just stands over him, fully aware of what she did to him, and only getting him to stop because Rook petitioned her successfully, and the reunion with the more benevolent Mythal within Morrigan tempered her anger. She was a goddess, with the unequal power dynamic, right to the end.

As a side note, on the potential romance element between Mythal and Solas, I read an excellent breakdown of it on Reddit a while ago about how out of character it would've been for Solas to keep something like that from a romanced Lavellan, especially in Trespasser when he comes clean about his plan/past. I can't find it now because it was pre-Veilguard release, but it made a lot of sense to me. Solas and Lavellan never have a love scene in DAI because Solas didn't want to 'lay with them under false pretences'. Lying about who you are when sleeping with someone is nonconsensual. You can't consent to sleeping with someone if you don't know their true identity, and someone who knowingly lies about who they are to get into your pants is a sexual predator. For someone who led a slave rebellion (no doubt many of them being sex slaves), and a former spirit of Wisdom, Solas would've been well aware of this. In the unsent letter from Solas to Lavellan he says he came so close to breaking and desperately wanted to stay with them as Solas, with the implication being that that is where he planned to sleep with them once he'd come clean. But because he stops, because he's still unable to forgive himself or release himself from his trauma bond with Mythal, he breaks away, and they never have sex.

Bottom line: Solas would've been honest about it. Especially that. As the Inquisitor says, he can't lie about his heart.

And it's why the Solas/Lavellan romance is so powerful because quote, 'you change everything'. Solas thought he knew what love was, that love was loyalty, devotion, worship, etc. It's not just his plans or worldview that Lavellan changes. Lavellan sees him for who he is, without the mantle of Dread Wolf, and because of that he's able to express his true nature to her, even if he's not being totally honest in Inquisition. Lavellan got much closer to the real him than most, as he says, and changed his understanding of love completely. Unfortunately, he has unfinished business, an unresolved trauma bond, and his crushing sense of duty to the past is what keeps him from taking that final step towards letting go of it entirely. Trick also says Solas doesn't think he deserves love, which tbh is kind of a hallmark trait of people who have survived abuse.

And honestly? Call me a simp but I think he really was trying to get the Inquisitor to stop him. He saw himself being unable to let go because he was so broken and burdened by his guilt, and knew he couldn't save himself--was too proud to admit that he couldn't, because how pathetic does it make him look? And how could he stop now without rendering all the damage he'd wrought pointless? Yet here was someone who had changed him right down to his core, who understood him in a way few people ever had, whom he trusted, whom he loved in a way he hadn't loved anyone else before. It took him 'centuries' to build up rapport with the members of his rebellion. The man doesn't not know how to form attachments without trauma, and suddenly he forms a strong one with someone who loves him completely and without condition. It's a jarring change.

Lavellan says that maybe they're being prideful themselves, refusing to see their own folly. But I think in admitting that they might be wrong, that it might be wishful thinking borne from misguided love to a truly terrible person, they've rendered the point moot. It shows self-awareness, which isn't folly.

If anyone can make Solas understand true love, it's Lavellan. Lavellan loved him when he was being his true self. Lavellan loved him after his betrayal was revealed. Lavellan loved him when his guilty conscience and terrible actions almost destroyed the world. Lavellan loved him because they knew the real him, and knew that his heart and spirit were broken, and knew that their love would endure, that their love would heal him.

And that's exactly where they end up. Healing the past, soothing the Blight, and loving one another completely.

[creantzy]

Defying God - a parallel between Fyolai and Stavrovensky

The Demons brainrot is taking over, and you know what happens when I acquire a new interest: my brain WILL find a way to connect it to my other interests, whether I like it or not!! And this is essentially what it's about xD I've come here to present a parallel I found between Fyolai (Fyodor & Nikolai from BSD) and Stavrovensky (Verkhovensky & Stavrogin from "Demons" by Dostoevsky). Before I start I want to clarify a few things:

• I don't think these two pairings are similar, I just love picking up any crumbs of connections I can find between my interests, even if it'd count as reaching.

• This interpretation (in either character's case) is in no way "the only true way of looking at it". It's merely one interpretation out of many and I chose to focus on just a few aspects out of the many others there are to explore in these complex characters. 

• Feel free to add onto or disagree with anything I say! I'm interested in your thoughts :D

WARNING: There will be spoilers for Bungou Stray Dogs and Demons.

The reason Nikolai wants to kill Fyodor is because he feels affection for him. Emotions are a prison to him, and he basically seeks the opposite of what his emotions make him want to do. Thus, in the face of affection, which makes you want to be closer and wish the best for your friend, he does the opposite and decides to kill said friend, going directly against his feelings in an attempt to prove free will. But here I want to focus more on the "You want to defy God in order to lose sight of yourself" part, specifically the bit about God.

One part of my interpretation is that Nikolai associates God with control. If there is a God who controls all, how can there be a free will? He wants to go against Him and His creations (the human mind, morality, etc.) to prove that it's possible. But God is very abstract - the idea of God is influential but varies depending on cultures, etc. For this point, I'll use the example of the biblical God, or, more specifically, some attributes commonly assigned to the idea of God:

• omnipotence (all-powerful)

• omnipresence (all-present)

• omniscience (all-knowing)

What I am leading up to is the fact that these traits can, in one way or another, be applied to Fyodor. Fyodor's character represents everything Nikolai wants to defy. Nikolai hates control; he wants to fight the idea of God and prove the possibility of complete independence. Fyodor (though not in a "direct" way) could be seen as a symbol for God. He knows everything, he is always present (metaphorically and sometimes literally, the way he spawns sometimes I swear-), and he seems to control everything. Only few people actually see him, but he pulls the strings behind the scenes, and his power is felt everywhere. For Nikolai, to kill Fyodor is not just a protest against his feelings of affection, but can also be a symbolic act of defying "God", of killing "God", by killing Fyodor.

This is supposed to be very symbolic and not taken literally. I feel the need to repeat this because I personally dislike the notion of Fyodor as a literal God (and disagree with the idea of him having a God-complex), so this is merely about the God-like traits he possesses, like a "substitute" for the idea of God, and how it interacts with Nikolai's philosophy. (I've also exaggerated some points for the sake of simplification - for example, I don't actually believe Fyodor is in control of absolutely everything, etc.)

Moving onto Demons:

Pyotr Verkhovensky grew up religious and (assuming based on Stepan's description) with a fear of God.

Now he's an atheist and very anti-religious. He plans to overthrow society, and destroying religion + everything it preaches is part of that plan. But interestingly enough, he picks not himself as the official future "ruler", but someone else: Nikolai Stavrogin. He chooses Stavrogin to be the role of the leader in Verkhovensky's ideal society. But not exactly the "leader" in the traditional sense, because he wouldn't necessarily give Stavrogin all the power. He would simply use him as a "pawn" (for lack of a better word) while himself pulling the strings behind said society. With that, Verkhovensky puts someone else above himself, in a God-like position, but he wants to do it while still keeping full control over Stavrogin. By doing so, he would overcome his childhood fear of God because instead of being controlled by God, *he* will control God.

(Same case here, not the literal God, but the character who he assigns God-like traits to.)

I am undecided (with both Nikolai's and Verkhovensky's character) whether this could be read as a solely subconscious intention or if it would make sense as a conscious one as well. Given that both have a different "main" goal (Nikolai focuses on emotions and Verkhovensky on the revolution) I lean more towards thinking it's subconscious (if present at all - like I said, just interpretations!)

It doesn't help that Verkhovensky describes his vision of Stavrogin's leadership as "hidden": Everyone believes in him and his power, but only very few people are said to actually have laid their eyes upon him. When I first read this part, I was honestly reminded of Big Brother from Orwell's 1984, but eventually realised that similar things can be said about God as well.

While these are parallels, they don't come without differences. Nikolai needs Fyodor dead, Verkhovensky needs Stavrogin alive. Nikolai wants to kill Fyodor for a sense of freedom, Verkhovensky wants to keep Stavrogin for a sense of control. Yet both symbolic goals are bound to fail:

Fyodor turns out to be unkillable, and Stavrogin ends up dead.

At the end, "God" stays untouchable.

[the-marshals-wife]

Betelgeuse and Astrid "Death" Parallel

I'm not sure what else to call this observation/rambling, but I've been thinking a lot about the events of Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, and on my most recent viewing, I noticed something super satisfying about this scene. You know, other than the obvious.

We all know Beej is not one to turn down a deal, least of all when it involves his own self-interest. And of course, it's very advantageous for him to rescue the daughter of the woman whose heart he's trying desperately to win. But there's another delicious layer to him being the one to personally dispose of Jeremy Fraizer...

Betelgeuse knows exactly what it's like to be manipulated by love, only to then have your life taken from you.

Delores manipulated him under the guise of love to steal his life (and his soul) to gain immortality, the same way that Jeremy pretended to care for Astrid so that he could ultimately take her life for his own.

It's think pretty accurate to assume that neither Delores nor Jeremy felt anything genuine for their victims. They were a means to an end. But where Betelgeuse had to defend himself on his own, unable to reverse what had been done, Astrid was not alone. While she was preoccupied with running from the afterlife authorities, reuniting with her father, and getting some much-needed family closure, there was someone else looking out for her.

Enter our anti-hero.

We don't get any direct insight into Beej's thoughts on the Jeremy situation, but it probably struck a nerve for him. He would never admit it, but how could it not? We already know he's privy to Rory's manipulation of Lydia and is eager to expose him, but this is not about a toxic, gold-digging relationship. This is literally life and death. It follows that he would be just as if not more upset to learn that a murderous wolf in sheep's clothing was trying to kill Lydia's daughter, especially given the nature of his own death.

(I mean c'mon, he used his one PG-13 ordained f-bomb on the guy. I think it's safe to say he felt pretty strongly about Jeremy's villainy.)

We all know how it plays out in the end, but I think it's rather poetic that Beej is able to avenge his 'would-be stepdaughter' and save her from a devious scheme very similar to the one that he fell prey to.

He couldn't get his own life back from Delores (though arguably he does, at least metaphorically, in the finale), but he was able to give Astrid back hers.

So there you have it. Now that I see the parallels, it's ten times more vindicating that Betelgeuse was the one that got to send that slimeball to hell. And let's be honest: Beej would probably agree.

[fairuzfan]

I don't want to add it to the post (bc I don't want to get into it with assholes) but! I'm literally Japanese-American, and I would say that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are similar to Gaza and Rafah not just in the amount of firepower directed at them but in that they're both CIVILIAN POPULATIONS. it's not about the nuclear weapons (reading comprehension website.jpeg) it's about the inhumanity of the collective punishment in service of US interests. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not individual or unique events -- look at Laos, look at Cambodia, look at Vietnam and Korea and what the States did there!! it doesn't "lessen" the horror or tragedy at all to compare them to Palestine now, especially if that comparison will help to stop it. I need white ppl to shut the fuck up about Japan permanently I stg anyways sorry people are being weird and fuckshit about this.

I think people are stuck on the differences and not willing to look at similarities when it comes to Gaza. Like when we compare its not in an effort to dismiss the differences and "triviliaze" (hate when they say that) but to show "Hey remember when something really bad happened back then? And everyone today is like I can't believe that happened? You can stop something like that from happening today by helping here" which people are allergic to doing for Palestine because they're so caught up in the minutae that they can't see the big picture. I've seen descendants of survivors of Vietnam say this is exactly what happened to them. I've seen Bosnian Genocide survivors say the gaslighting is similar to what they experienced. Holocaust survivors and their descendents! Even Hiroshima in the modern day is drawing parallels! We need to make comparisons to examine similarities and contextualize events in history. Why else learn world history if not to understand the patterns of operation in the modern day? You have beliefs surrounding certain atrocities, things like "I won't let that happen again" or "I would fight that" and that's why people are drawing parallels. To make people take action.

And this isn't limited to just Gaza, people do the same with Sudan and DRCongo. And people who do it for sudan even claim to support Palestine! Even though Gazans are asking people to pay attention to Sudan because they see themselves in their struggle! No one is paying attention to the main idea "stop this before it gets worse"!!!! It's already so bad for all these places and that damage is irreversible in that people live with it for the rest of their lives but yes! We can stop it before a complete erasure happens! It's possible! These comparisons are necessary and important!

[traincat]

hey!

I recently made a post about wanting to understand the concept of Spideytorch more, and was directed to your blog! If it's not too much of an ask, could you break down their relationship for me?

Sure! I can do that. I'm going to refer back to your post just as a jumping off point -- Spideytorch is definitely, 100% a comics-based thing. Prior to the upcoming Fantastic Four MCU film, the film rights for both characters have never been held by the same company, and "crossover" films are very much a product of the MCU, although ironically Andrew Garfield did once say he wanted Michael B Jordan, who played Johnny in the 2015 Fantastic Four film, to play his Peter's love interest.

Thank you for your service, Andrew.

But while it is comics-based, it's a very different scenario than Spideypool, where the comics are very much based on their popularity as a duo in fandom. I'm not a Spideypool fan, just as like a disclaimer, but as someone interested in the symbiotic relationship between fandom and superhero comics, Spideypool is really interesting because their popularity came first -- they got that team up comic because they were already popular in fandom, they didn't become popular in fandom because they had the team up comic. So it's a really interesting look at how fan activity influences the connections comic characters have. That's not the case with Spideytorch.

(I'm not saying one of those things is inherently better than the other, but since you mentioned Spideypool and their team up comic in your post, I thought it made for an interesting comparison.)

Peter and Johnny literally meet in Amazing Spider-Man #1, back in 1963. The two premier teen heroes of the day, they have a lot of early interaction because they played well off each other -- Peter, a broke loner, was often jealous of Johnny's fame and money, whereas Johnny bemoaned his girl problems compared to chick magnet Peter. (Johnny's girlfriend at the time literally asked him why he couldn't be more like Peter.) They're both pretty big personalities, so there was a lot of pigtail pulling in the early days, but even when they argued there was always a sense that they genuinely liked each other deep down. For Peter, who didn't have friends in the business, Johnny was someone he could rely on, and for Johnny -- who just, like, did not have friends at all until he got to college -- Spider-Man was a peer, someone he looked up to and admired.

(ASM #3)

(ASM #8)

(Strange Tales Annual #2 -- this is the first appearance of Johnny and Peter's "usual place," the Statue of Liberty. Iconic.)

(ASM #19)

(ASM #127)

As Johnny and Peter grew up, the frequency of their team ups faded a little, but their lives have always intersected. In some ways, they've run in parallel. They went to college at the same time, got married at the same time. (Peter's marriage was solid until he sold it to the devil; Johnny's faltered after a decade because sometimes you think you marry someone but they're actually a shapeshifting alien from outerspace who was sent to kill your family. Peter is one of the very few people who Johnny told about that in the aftermath.) Peter unmasked to Johnny, told him his identity, one of the very few people he's done that for. When Johnny "died" (he got better), he left Peter his place on the Fantastic Four. And then, when Johnny came back from the dead, the first person he saw on the other side was Peter.

(FF #1)

(ASM #657, titled Torch Song)

(Fantastic Four #601)

They've lived together, fought together, shared their lives with each other. They trust each other, bone deep, despite their squabbles and differences. It's always been a love connection, however you define that love. It's a connection that has existed from 1963 until today, across multiple fictional universes and continuities. For me, the appeal of them has always been not just their chemistry but also their history.

Also they're just a lot of fun.

(FF #17)

(Fantastic Four v5 #14)

I have a long list of important comics for them in chronological order here, if you want to read more: https://traincat.tumblr.com/post/123691883369/so-ive-only-recently-gotten-into-spidertorch

I hope that helps clear up the history a little bit!

[aurorabyler]

the significance of heroes by david bowie to stranger things + byler (finn wolfhard interview)

byler nation. i just found an interview clip of finn that i’ve literally been looking for since season 4 dropped. i remembered watching it but i couldn’t find the video afterwards and i also haven’t seen many people talking about it, so here it is:

transcript (finn wolfhard): “this is my life in songs. a song that reminds me of stranger things — heroes by david bowie. there’s a cover in the first season, but i remember when we were first shooting the first season shawn levy (one of our directors and executive producers) cut together a sizzle reel and put it to heroes, and that was kind of the first glimpse we got into the show. and it really just kind of blew me away and also made that song so important as well to me.”

if any of you are familiar with the way heroes is used in stranger things as well as some of the theories surrounding the specific lyrics that are selected and placed over scenes (especially related to byler) this is quite significant. it’s also significant that it was in fact shawn levy who put together the sizzle reel with heroes — he is known in the byler community to kind of be a byler champion, if you will.

he has directed some of the most significant byler scenes in the whole show — finding will’s fake body in the quarry in season one (WHICH HAS HEROES PLAYING IN THE BACKGROUND), the rain fight in season 3, the byler scenes in dear billy (including the legendary “i didn’t say it — you didn’t have to” scene) among others.

furthermore, heroes is established as a theme/musical motif that is very explicitly related to byler in season one of the show, as the first time it plays mike literally breaks down at the sight of will’s fake body and bikes all the way home. the specific lyrics that play when he goes to hug karen in that same scene are (quite notoriously):

and the guns, shot above our heads

and we kissed, as though nothing could fall

and the shame, the shame was on the other side

it’s interesting that finn notes the song as being one that specifically reminds him of stranger things and that seems to (based on not only shawn but the fact that heroes has been used TWICE in the show over NEAR PARALLEL byler scenes) to have a very big role in the show.

anyways. what i'm saying is that leading up to season five, a lot of people are kind of expecting that the pattern of using heroes will be completed -- they used the cover in seasons 1 and 3, and it only really makes sense to kind of complete that in season 5 as the song has been used as a throughline for a very specific storyline for what will have been the almost ten years since season 1 came out.

lastly i just want to say that i am not implying finn speaking about a song that has personal meaning to him is somehow solely connected to byler. my main interest in this is the shawn levy bit and just the general significance of the song to the show, which has been spoken about in lots of theories ever since the show came out in 2016.

i'll link here some posts about byler theories related to heroes that might give you some more context to its significance:

[itsjustbyler]

If byler isn't endgame, the duffers need to give a lot of explanation about:

"It's not my fault you don't like girls"

Airport reunion and Mike's behavior

Mike's reaction to El kissing him in the end of S3

Mike and Will paired togheter exactly like the other ships while El was alone the whole S3

Will's conversation with Joyce "I'm not gonna fall in love". What's the point of it if when he did fell in love, it's unrequited?

Will being in love with Mike since at least S2 (the script saying that Will was looking at Mike while dancing with that girl)

The directing choice of the Milevn breakup scene in comparison with byler rain fight and the aftermath (Will being devastated, El looking at other guys in magazine, Max saying that Mike is going to be crawling back to her begging for forgiveness in the same episode he actually do it for Will instead)

Why Mike didn't call Will and if he did and that line from Dustin was any indication, why tf he didn't just say it?

"I was worrying to much about El, I feel like I lost you". Why, tho?

Mike's inability to say ily

Why to use Will's feelings to save mlvn relationship?

Why not to just finish this storyline on S4, instead of let Mike clueless that the painting is from Will until the last season and also about his feelings.

Why Mike and El weren't talking that much by the end of S4 while byler was paired together, like the other canon couples.

The parallels.

Why have will reminding Mike of his whole speach before Mike could finally say he loves El and not having Mike doing it on his own?

The "shared looks" thing

Why Will was in LITERALLY ALL MLVN SCENES from s4

This and so much more. I just wanted to ask... WHY???????

[crackedhrglass]

i got this ask on my strawpage and was gonna type it up in my notes app and post it to twitter, but i really couldn't figure out a way to say it concisely, so i'm answering it here bc it's prob gonna be long lol.

do i think stancest is actually canon? simply put, no. despite how often i'm like "STANCEST IS CANON!!" i truly don't think that AH and the writers intended stan & ford's relationship to be seen through an incestuous lens.

their relationship is def the heart of the show, second only to dipper & mabel's own bond. they are the center of each other's worlds, their story & character arcs revolve almost entirely around each other, and their happy ending is literally the two of them sailing off into the sunset to spend "the rest of their days" together (ford says this almost word-for-word in journal 3).

but i still don't think all of that was meant to be taken romantically.

in my opinion, where things start to get a little weird is, surprisingly enough, ford's relationship with bill.

the rest is under a cut bc HOLY SHIT this got longer than i expected.

there's no denying that bill was written to deliberately parallel stan in a number of ways, from his mannerisms, to his conman status, to the fact that he calls ford the same name stan did when they were kids.

he's written in a very intentional way that makes him serve as both stan's parallel and his foil, especially in their respective relationships to ford (bill feeds into ford's ego and encourages him to aspire for greatness alone, stan has always been a direct obstacle & challenge to ford's ego, accidentally ruining his chances at WCT & encouraging him to live out their childhood dream together; bill valued infinite power over his own family and destroyed his dimension as a result, stan valued his family over everything, and saved ford and his dimension as a result).

normally, this wouldn't be that big of a deal to a stancest shipper like myself. but as the book of bill & the accompanying website all but confirmed in big, flashing neon lights, ford & bill have a romantic history and are exes.

having the two people closest to ford be compared to one another is one thing. having ford be drawn to bill because of how similar he is to the brother he secretly misses is one thing.

having ford be romantically involved with said character is what makes me raise an eyebrow lol.

again, do i think ford is literally a brocon who's got repressed sexual/romantic feelings for stan?

no.

i do, however, think he has unresolved Brother Issues that led him to subconsciously find comfort in a romantic partner that reminded him of stan (right down to bill calling him stan's nickname for him) in much the same way a person with "daddy issues" may seek out affection & intimacy from someone who reminds them of their father (or is just "fatherly" in general).

that much, i believe, was actually intentional. it's just too blatant to not be lol. it'd be a completely different story if either

bill & stan were nothing alike (untrue) or

ford & bill's relationship was strictly platonic and didn't have any romantic implications (also untrue)

i've said this before, but this isn't just a case of "oh, ford fell in love with someone who just coincidentally reminds him of his brother." bill's use of the nickname "sixer" during their first encounter was a deliberate attempt at appealing to a part of ford that was repressed, vulnerable, and aching, in order to get ford's guard down and make it easier for ford to trust him, and it worked.

billford is a ship that, to put it bluntly, would not exist without ford's buried feelings for stan, even disregarding shipping/incest/etc. ford's desire to be close to stan even platonically is what allowed bill to needle his way into ford's heart in the first place.

and all of this wouldn't be that weird if, again, bill hadn't continued to feed into ford's longing for stan even after they'd established a romantic relationship, by still calling him "sixer" and trying to permanently sever the relationship he had with stan specifically, once he and ford broke up (the phone call he tried to make while in ford's body that was described in tbob).

to put it another way, imagine if wendy was basically an older, taller mabel, or if any of mabel's crushes were eerily similar to dipper. people in the fandom would def take notice and view it as a little strange. so i don't get how people can look at ford dating someone so blatantly and intentionally similar to stan and think to themselves "ah yes, this is normal. ford is completely Normal and definitely doesn't have any underlying issues whatsoever" lmao

to conclude: no, i don't think ford & stan's relationship is actually canonically romantic, nor do i think ford falling in love with bill was incestuous, necessarily.

but i do think that he had a desperate longing to reconcile with stan buried DEEEEEEP down, and it manifested itself in the form of being attracted to bill, which is probably why he never bothered correcting bill's use of the nickname "sixer" since their very first meeting, or ever expressed that it made him uncomfortable.

[cosmerelists]

If We Had Cosmere-Themed Chess Sets...

Now that I think about it, these might simply exist. B-But anyway, here's how I think a chess set could be constructed thematically from various Cosmere books.

[Spoilers! I wouldn't read these unless you've read the series mentioned in the title]

1. The Stormlight Chess Set

King: Elhokar. He is the king and also, and I say this gently, he doesn't do much or go very far, typically. Just like the king in chess! Queen: Jasnah. Is the queen...albeit at a different time than her brother is the king, but eh. Very powerful. Can move anywhere. Might be the strongest piece on the board. Bishops: Kadash and Pai. I just think they should be Ardents, and I picked my favorite two. Knights: Renarin & Adolin. Renarin because he should be the piece that moves in the most unique way. No one else moves in an L shape! And Adolin? Well...not gonna lie. I just think Adolin should be a horsey piece. Rooks: Dalinar and the Sibling. Dalinar because he needs to be a piece that is strong. That moves in a firm, straight line. That can do that castle move which is about protecting the king. And the Sibling because they are literally a tower. Pawns: Bridge 4. Main purpose was to be sent out to die, although if they make it allll the way across the board they can get a very special powerup and become one of the most powerful pieces on the board.

2. The Mistborn Era 1 Chess Set

King: Kelsier. Yes, the game is supposed to end if the king dies. No, Kelsier-King does not play by the rules. Queen: Vin. I mean, she's a Mistborn, which to me is parallel to being the piece that move in any direction as far as it wants. Very powerful. Bishops: Hammond & Dockson. Stand on either side of the queen and king. One can only move on black squares, and one can only move on white, which symbolizes how Ham & Dockson are on the same side but rarely see eye-to-eye. Knights: TenSoon & Marsh. Knights make hard turns as pieces, and these are characters who are always making hard turns: TenSoon from one side to other, from one body to another (and yes, I gave him the animal piece. Sue me). And Marsh from human to Inquisitor to, uh, Death I guess. Rooks: Demoux & Spook. I can't tell you why rooks read as "true believers in Kelsier" to me, but they do. And I kinda like these two as a pair. Pawns: The Skaa army that Kelsier tries to recruit. Sorry to those men.

3. The Mistborn Era 2 Chess Set

King: Harmony. Can't do much himself, but does direct the other characters. If he gets killed (shattered), the game could be over for Scadrial. Queen: Wax. Harmony's sword. Can zoom all over the place killing other pieces. Bishops: Steris & Marasi, as the resident believers in Survivorism. Knights: Wayne & MeLaan. Yes, I'm realizing that I see kandra as the little horsey pieces, I guess. And the knights can't move straight. And neither Wayne nor MeLaan are straight either. Rooks: Ranette & uh...Marsh again? Am I forgetting someone? Why are there so few characters in Era 2? A-Anyway, Ranette and Marsh definitely make sense because they're both, uh, support characters. Ranette making weapons. Marsh dropping info. And the Rooks are there to support the king! Pawns: All the kandra. Pawns of Harmony, every one. Bleeder is the really angry one determined to make it across the board and get promoted.

4. The Elantris Chess Set

King: Raoden. As a dead guy trapped in Elantris, Raoden doesn't have a lot of moves he can make. But dang is he really good at doing a lot with a little. Queen: Sarene. Sarene, on the other hand, has a LOT more freedom of movement and she uses it. Bishops: Hrathen and Dilaf. Hilarious to have them on the same side as Raoden and Sarene, I know. But listen. They gotta be the church pieces. Knights: Galladon and Karata. Since knights trace out the letter "L" and the Elantrians need to draw symbols in the air to do magic, I thought...wait. I swear this made sense in my head. Rooks: Kiin and Eondel. Kiin because the rooks kinda look like they're wearing a crown and Kiin was due to become king, and Eondel because he's the guy who has the strong private army. Pawns: I think it would be fun if the pawns were people with the Shaod, since they could become really powerful but they aren't currently.

5. The Warbreaker Chess Set

King: Siri. Not only does Siri spend the whole book being shuffled from one room to another (like the king can shuffle one square at a time), but a major plot point is Keep Siri Alive when the other side tries to kill her, so. Queen: Susebron. I do want Siri and Susebron to be king & queen, and it just works better this way. Once he gets his powers figured out, he's an all-powerful sort of guy. Bishops: Lightsong & Blushweaver. They're literal religious figures. Knights: Vasher & Vivenna. Mainly because they're warriors. Rooks: Parlin & Llarimar. I know Llarimar should be a bishop because he has the hat, but I like the Returned gods as bishops. So I made him the rook--and Parlin too (as soon as I remembered he existed. Sorry, Parlin). They're both there to support/protect another character. Pawns: I think they should all be soldiers from the Lifeless army.

[entities-of-posts]

Hi, I have a question not directly tied to the roleplay (though I don't mind if you answer it in that direction): A while ago, you talked about your theory of a potential 16th Fear emerging to balance the emerging Extinction: the Dull. I find that concept compelling, but in that post you also said that each of the powers has an "opposite" due to how people like to categorise things and I'd be curious what you would consider the opposite of each power. (Mostly because I like lists and sorting things xD)

Some do have a pretty clear opposite (Vast/Buried, Lonely/Corruption), but with a lot of the others it's less immediately obvious or simply up to a bit more interpretation. iirc Elias says the Stranger is the antithesis to the Eye, but the Dark and the Spiral similarly foil its central concepts, and I'm not sure what else their opposites would be, really.

Let me just preface this list by saying that this is my own opinion and interpretation, and thus 100% right and correct and indisputable.

I will also say that there are Fears which I would call near opposites, but imperfect mirrors - such as the Stranger and the Eye - and some that just seem to hate each other without being antithesis - such as the Desolation and the Corruption. It’s also worth mentioning that overlap always exist between mirrors, of course; this is why there is a classic duality between the moon and the sun, but no one talks about the duality between the moon and a giraffe, even though they have much less in common.

That said, here is my list:

The Vast - The Buried: the most widely agreed upon. Spaces too large versus too small. The terrible freedom of being adrift in an endless ocean, of freefall, versus being crushed in place with not the space to crawl an inch. You get it. The comparison is so clear and easy that it kickstarts the speculation about all the others.

The Eye - the Dark: extremely straightforward; just as much as the Vast and the Buried, to me. Knowledge versus the lack of it. Stark light versus impenetrable darkness. What sees you versus what you cannot see. Literally symbolized respectively by an open eye and a closed one.

The Corruption - the Lonely: Toxic love versus miserable isolation. An overabundance of company, much too close, under your very skin, a swarm of uninvited guests within your deepest sanctuary who will not leave, versus a life so barren of any company at all that that you might almost start to crave the former. The heat of fever versus the cold of fog.

The Web - the Desolation: careful planning versus reckless destruction. A trap so intricately laid, hundreds of delicate moving pieces and redundancy measures waiting for just the right time… so easily laid to waste by an unthinking, spontaneous act of cruel hunger for rubbles. Man’s quest, since the dawn of time, has been to tame and leash fire. And we still haven’t mastered it.

The Hunt - the End: a wild fight for life versus its cold ending. The journey versus the destination. The two oldest fears. The Chase wants more than anything to never End. The End doesn’t Chase; it just waits. And you’re the one that walks towards it every instant.

The Stranger - the Slaughter: here is the part of the list where people start to look at me oddly, because they’ve often never considered those pairings; but hear me out, and remember that I am inarguably correct. The fear of something Else pretending to be human versus the fear of what truly lies at the core of every human person. The fear of being tricked by an elaborate disguise versus the intimate knowledge of the truth: that those who hurt others aren’t monsters disguised as people. They’re just people. And the urge is in you too. Masks, versus what is revealed when all masks are cast off. And they both have musical motifs which makes for some fun parallels.

The Spiral - the Flesh: the horror of the mind versus the horror of the body. Unreality versus a reality only too physical, only too inescapable. Your brain is lying to you, but your body keeps the score. Follow the patterns, the Spiral says, there is more, they are lying to you, just follow me down - this is all there is, the Flesh whispers, this is the raw and dripping truth, this is all you are and you will never escape it. The Distortion even admits it can’t digest an avatar of the Flesh.

[scoobydoodean]

WAIT WAIT WAIT pleaseeee expand on sam separating his soul himself??? i’ve literally never heard this before (i really wanna agree cause i just can’t work out how cas just did not realize he’d forgotten sam’s soul)

This is just a pet theory I have. I first suggested it here when talking to Shal about Bobby not clocking Sam as soulless. The TL;DR is that Sam has a tendency to create emotional distance to protect himself from grief and other painful emotions. Shal's careful examinations of scripts reveal that it's even in the script direction when Mary dies that "Sam disassociates". In 8.08, Sam is paralleled with Fred, who disassociated to deal with grief (I talk about Sam distancing himself from his emotions in season 8 more largely here). I've been slowly collecting (when I remember) little bits and pieces around this idea that Sam tries to distance himself from his emotions in the tag #i just stopped—named that because of 11.11 when—after being confronted by Lucifer—Sam apologizes for leaving Dean in Purgatory, saying—seeming perplexed by his own actions:

I should've looked for you. When you were in Purgatory, I... I should've turned over every stone. But I didn't. I stopped. And I've never forgiven myself for it.

So this pet theory I have is that in The Cage, to cope with the torture being inflicted on him, Sam simply separated his soul from his body. It was the most extreme possible case of dissociating from his own suffering possible.

6.22 strengthens my belief in this theory because Sam splitting into three pieces is treated as a defense mechanism. It's kind of like an Id/Ego/Superego situation, except that the pieces are soulless Sam, Sam the hunter and family man, and the Sam who remembers hell.

SOULLESS!SAM: Well, your BFF Cas brought the Hell-wall tumbling down and you, pathetic infant that you are, shattered into pieces. (he points at Sam) Piece. (he points at himself) Piece.

SAM: I - I have no idea what you're talking about. SOULLESS!SAM: Why would you? You're jello, pal. Unlike me. SAM: What are you? SOULLESS!SAM: I'm not handicapped. I'm not saddled with a soul. In fact, I used to skipper this meatboat for a while. It was smooth sailing. I was sharp, strong. That is, 'til they crammed your soul back in. Now look at you. Same misty-eyed milksop you always were. That's because souls are weak. They're a liability. Now, nothing personal, but run the numbers. Someone's got to take charge around here, before it's too late. 

Sam and soulless Sam have a power struggle inside Sam's head over who gets control. Soulless Sam is really an enforcer, trying to protect Sam from his worst memories. As we see after Sam kills him:

You think I'm bad? Wait 'til you meet the other one.

Then when Sam finds the other part of himself:

SAM: I have to know what you know. What happened in the cage? TORTURED!SAM: Trust me, you don't wanna know it. SAM: You're right. But I still have to. TORTURED!SAM: Sam, you can't imagine. Stay here, go back, find that bartender, go find Jess, but don't do this. I know you. You're not strong enough. SAM: (exhales) We'll just have to see.

Of course, one could argue that Sam's subconscious creates this scenario with soulless Sam and the Sam who remembers hell because Death told them Sam would crumble and Soulless Sam was scared of the fallout of having his soul reinstalled. But idk. I feel like it goes deeper than that, and tortured Sam and soulless Sam's attempts to protect Sam from the truth feed into that to me.

[mxshifter]

🌿 shifting motivation

"a change of circumstance happens as a result of a change in your state of consciousness"

this post isn't just for a group of people who feel they need motivation but to reaffirm the idea that shifting is as simple or as hard as you make it! (sorry for any typos, i wrote this late at night)

an important thing to mention is the fact that i have a claddagh ring and they have a specific meaning when flipped one way or the other. i'm in a relationship so i have my claddagh upright, remember that!

yesterday i went to sleep without intending to shift but just filled with so much happiness from the really good day i had along with the extreme exhaustion i was feeling from being outside all day. i had a different mindset from the past few months. i felt happy and like i could genuinely do anything! something that was also different was my mind was completely silent which was much appreciated as thoughts flooding through my mind when i was just intending to sleep, had always been a problem. the entire day i had been surrounded with so much life as it had spread to me and my mind.

i went to sleep and woke up, went to go shower, and then i saw my hand. my claddagh ring was reversed. now, i am someone who constantly fidgets with my bracelets and rings, pushing them down and spinning them for sensory stimulation but i HAVE NEVER flipped my claddagh the opposite way solely because i know the meaning behind it. plus the fact that i went to bed with my claddagh upright so it doesn't make any sense that i could've taken off my ring, flipped it in the opposite direction, and then put it back on my finger IN MY SLEEP. based on all of this, i assumed that i shifted to a parallel CR!

also, shifting to parallel CRs and DRs on accident or without intention has ALWAYS been a thing in my journey, from the beginning to now. when i first learned about shifting, i had accidentally shifted as early as 2 weeks after learning about shifting. keep in mind, this was also before i had started to HEAVILYYY consume shifttok content. this is NOT to say consuming that content "makes you unable to shift" but it is to say that, at least for me, it really harmed my mindset because i was just filled with so many other ideas that really killed my spark for a long time.

after i had told my shifter friends about my experience, i was scrolling on tiktok and saw a tarot reading talking about the multitude of ways i have at my disposal to be able to shift, to be open and lean into them, to not limit myself in my mindset/be hard on myself and my abilities, the recognition of how much work i've put in, advising the release of emotional frustration surrounding my journey because it is hindering my progress, that the period of "will i, won't i shift? has come to an end and that the foundation for success is being laid, finally being able to take the reigns of my journey, and to overall not limit myself and taking charge of my journey. this reading really resonated with me especially considering when i saw it i was starting to fall into the same trap i had always fallen into; doubting myself and my experiences.

ALL of this is to say that you can shift no matter what. you can shift if you're laying on your stomach, back, in the starfish pose, upside down, sitting crisscross applesauce, through meditation, through intention, through listening to music, through dreams, LITERALLY ANYTHING!!! if you're doubting yourself or just feel discouraged, just know that you are limitless. you are powerful. you can and will shift!

(leaf divider)

[chirpsythismorning]

Welcome to a series I'm calling:

Yes, that scene did foreshadow Mike's monologue was disingenuous

Because you'd be surprised how many times the show (even prior to s4) has poked fun at Mike's monologue in the most random ways.

The Bingham's Beautiful Performance

First we have Suzie's sister on the floor, bedazzled and sporting a veil all while her brother is filming. This is basically the kids attempting to present a tale of a romance ending in gruesome tragedy.

Our bride here is El. The edition of the veil could be a nod to the loud majority's series long assumption that Mike and El are going to end the show together, preferably getting married.

Unfortunately, this is the closest thing they'll ever get to it, with the acknowledgement of that possibility in and of itself being mocked.

This next shot makes the likelihood that these scenes are connected pretty much indisputable, that being the edition of the record player behind the bride's head.

The only reason they made a point of having Will push the radio out of El's way, was to subtly connect this moment in Surfer boy to the beautiful performance we saw at the Bingham's only a few episodes prior (scenes that are widely known to be filled with foreshadowing for the season's ending).

A few bylers have already talked about these parallels, so this isn't new knowledge per say. But I do know some have dropped it altogether as possible foreshadowing for whatever reason, while most fans outside of the byler fandom insist it only foreshadowed Eddie's death. However, I think there are too many details that equally, if not more connect it to Mike's monologue than to Eddie's death.

Some fans have also noticed how Will was missing in quite a few shots at the Bingham's, which is interesting, but not all that surprising. Especially in this case...

Will. Will is the director

Director Will: GET THAT RADIO OUT OF MY SHOT!

Will directed the monologue when he used his feelings to inspire Mike, with the reminder of it (literally in the moment) directing Mike to confess to El, just like Suzie's brother directed that beautiful performance. Both performances convincingly left its audience thinking that the performers feelings in that moment were believable and...

genuine...

[pikahlua]

I have literal zero horse in this race so good faith question: does "koi" (come) sometimes have the same potentially negative connotation as "come on/come here"? while you occasionally hear adventure-y protagonists say "come on" in an excited "come join me/let's go!" kind of way, the only way I've ever heard it used irl is in annoyance, like "come onnnn [implied hurry up], or a curt "c'mon let's go." as someone with limited Japanese skill and who knows Bakugou usually takes the shortest way to say stuff, the only thing that bothers me about the translation is the excessive ellipses the localization team uses in general—though here it feels like maybe it's meant to soften the negative implication mentioned above? also Bakugou being Bakugou him not saying hurry up or saying let's go actually feels like it's prioritizing Deku as an equal and a natural place to end. like there's no more doubt, it's just a direct statement to come join him/everyone because Deku deserves this.

MY WISH CAME TRUUUEEEE

(I know you're not the same anon though, and you are far more polite about it ❤️)

Gosh you've given me so much to respond to as well. Gonna break it down for you.

1. Potential negative connotations in "koi"?

Technically, yes, the word "koi" in Japanese does have negative connotations! That's because the verb is conjugated into imperative form, which is also known as "command form." Commands in Japanese are considered to be rude. It's about more than just a casual way of speaking--telling someone to do something is considered outright rude. The more polite way to phrase this word would be in request form as "kite."

But it's Katsuki. EVERYTHING he says is in the rudest form possible. That context is super important. It's why all his classmates have to warm up to him for talking like a wannabe yakuza all the time, even to older people. At some point, they all just accept Katsuki talks like this regardless of what he ACTUALLY thinks about the people around him. And to be clear, this applies to more people than just Katsuki. It's one way socially-equal guys talk to each other in Japanese. The casual/rudeness can easily be heard as dude-speak too (I'll address this more in a moment). So the fact that Katsuki is the one saying this otherwise rude word doesn't come across as actually malicious but rather as just familiar and casual and masculine.

To further elaborate, this "koi" Katsuki speaks is meant to show a change between him at the end compared with back in the summer camp arc. The "Stay back, Deku" he says before he disappears in Kurogiri's portal is ALSO spoken in command form as "kunna Deku." ("Kunna" is actually a contraction of "kuruna" btw.) It's command form of the exact same verb "kuru (to come)" but also in NEGATIVE form. The literal translation of what he says there is "Don't come, Deku," compared with at the very end where he says "Come, Deku." Now obviously those phrases just sound WEIRD in English, so of course the translators had to localize them a bit to make them sound like something an English-speaking teenager would actually say, hence we get "Stay back," and "C'mon."

And to round it all off, I'll address the dude-speak part now. Katsuki isn't the only character who says "koi," so we actually can see how consistent the translator was with this word for an entirely different character!

The dudest of the bros, KIRISHIMAAAAAAAA!

And yes, Katsuki reaching out for Izuku and saying the exact same thing Kirishima said is absolutely a parallel, and it's the most-obviously-on-purpose parallel Horikoshi ever drew.

2. Potential neutral connotations in "c'mon"?

Now, one may argue "Wait, it's not a consistent translation! Because 'come on' is not the same as 'c'mon'!"

To which I say, "Your regionalism is showing."

Anon, I'm gonna be real, I have a real hard time believing you have only ever heard "c'mon" spoken in an annoyed or curt way. I absolutely believe that's the way you hear it the most often, but I have a hard time not believing you've heard it in other contexts but your brain just interpreted those moments for you as "come on" despite the speaker using the contraction.

But! Because I truly believe that's what you do in your head without realizing it (our brains are fantastic at quickly correcting other people's mistakes in pronunciation and grammar that don't match our internal models of our fluent languages), I'm not mad at you or anything. I just want to bring it to your attention that either that's the case or else you live in a particular region where no one uses the word "c'mon" in other contexts. But this is such a silly specific thing to hold the translator to (and you clearly don't, so kudos to you). And even if "c'mon" is ONLY spoken in an annoyed fashion, well, @bakuhatsufallinlove says it best:

even if c'mon could sound annoyed......... it's kacchan........... his love language is gremlin fury he's a tsundere....... "C'MON DAMMIT" he yells flustered and embarrassed about how bad he wants to hold hands

It's still in-character for Katsuki to say something affectionate in such a rude manner! We just established this above! If anything, it's consistent for the translator to have contracted the word to "c'mon" because that's what they do to translate Katsuki ALL OVER THE PLACE in the story.

But if it matters to you, no, I do not read the word "c'mon" in an annoyed or curt manner. I read it as fairly neutral if a bit casual.

3. Ellipses

I'm not mad at you or making fun of you when I say this, but I just have to say it.

watch them come back at you and be like "IT WAS THE ELLIPSES I WAS TALKING ABOUT" XD

I JUST HAVE TO SAY I CALLED IT!

Really, I'm serious, I am NOT making fun of you. The reason I suspected this would be some people's major gripe is actually quite fascinating. Younger generations have come to see the ellipses in casual conversation as rude or sarcastic:

For many older adults, using several dots between sentences acts as a natural break or a means to distinguish different ideas. In contrast, younger generations often perceive this habit as puzzling, finding it confusing or even off-putting. "It drives me up a wall," remarked one Gen Z user, echoing a sentiment shared by many who encounter this texting style.

No, I'm not about to say MHA was translated by Baby Boomers. I'm laughing because I too am of a young enough generation to see the ellipses as awkward in a casual text-based conversation. It has a certain "tone" to me. But it's funny because there's something else going on here with MHA entirely.

This isn't casual text-based conversation. This is formal publication.

The ellipses has an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT meaning in formal publication. The ellipses used here in chapter 430 of MHA is about formatting consistency. Somehow, the people who complain about the ellipses in Katsuki's final line fail to see that the ellipses ARE USED FUCKING EVERYWHERE IN MHA. LIKE IT'S A FUCKING INFESTATION OF ELLIPSES.

Do you know how many ellipses are present in the translation of MHA chapter 430? 75, and only 8 of which are actual ellipses considered "spoken" by a character. The rest?

They're bridges connecting sentences spoken across multiple speech bubbles.

Hell, on the same damn page as Katsuki's "C'mon, Deku," ALL MIGHT DOES THE SAME THING!

This is not meant to be read as "You've also... ...earned this power fair and square!!" You're meant to ignore the ellipses. All they tell you is that this is a single sentence broken up into pieces on the page. It's the SAME for Katsuki's line! For the purposes of reading Katsuki's final line, those ellipses are effectively not there. They're bridges for the visual m-dashes or commas that the multiple speech bubbles might represent.

So don't knock the translator for consistently following a standard formatting convention. That's, like, his actual job lol.