#if you know who i am. no you dont <3< /div> Explore tagged Tumblr posts

[deep-space-lines]

okay but like. I just had the weirdest thought about that ‘don’t look I’m naked’ comic. Which is that that’s essentially the same thing Adam and Eve did after they ate the fruit of knowledge of good&evil. So I feel like the theological implications of that could kneecap Gabe if he doesn’t think V1 is a being with free will.

yeah ok. i dunno man. is this anything

((side note. this isn’t necessarily meant to be in-character or story-accurate or take place at any particular point in time, just a way to explore some Thoughts. i was also imagining more that V1’s words aren't actually spoken, more like Gabriel’s more articulate interpretation of whatever garbled mechanical noise V1 is using to communicate. I think an angel could do that.))

and then they fucked nasty the end

[verflares]

collection of some loz origin au stuff i've been chipping away at for awhile now ^_^ with a healthy amount of dunmeshi insp for good measure LOL (the ooccoo isnt relevant she's just here for size comparison purposes)

feat my beloved good friend @linkvcr's hylia design also. because i am obsessed with her and you should be too 🫵

[yeonjune]

Yeonjun about the strain he felt while preparing for his debut solo project ✙ "GGUM" MAKING FILM

[tabooiart]

mr goatman... goat me a man.... make him the goatest that ive ever seen...

[sleeeepy-demon]

Horrible bg3 memes i made with paint

part: one

Part: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15

this are from march. The first 2 were drawn with a mouse lol. My friends are telling me to post them.

[bisclavret]

like many who have suffered at the hands of bbc merlin before me, i recently indulged in a thought experiment in which i outlined my own version of seasons 3-5 that stay thematically and tonally in line with the show (except they're less fucking stupid). but then i quickly realized that focusing on details is pointless: all you need is to solve the one Big Problem the show has, and the rest will follow. the problem in question? ✨morgana✨

i like the first two seasons. s1 achieves what it sets out to do and has fun while doing it, and s2, while flawed, sets up a ton of potential that the following seasons unfortunately squander, beginning with the insidious season 3. you can only distract me with cute knights and goblins and fart jokes for so long before i start seeing through you, evil, evil season of television.

my hypothesis is that if the writers had crafted s3 morgana into anything more sympathetic than a violent half-alive poltergeist that can never be reasoned with because she's suddenly terminally off her rocker, everything would've fallen into place. a sympathetic morgana would've made real, valid arguments against uther (and arthur) that wouldn't just be the ramblings of a woman possessed. her betrayal of arthur would have stemmed from her feeling increasingly morally superior to him because of his complacency in the face of their father's tyranny. under morgause's guidance she would stop believing that arthur is capable of change, and the whole point would be that she might actually be right. arthur would have to actively try and prove her wrong, instead of getting praised for doing the bare minimum because the bar is on the floor.

furthermore, morgana's prophetic dream about arthur and gwen becoming king and queen and her decision to prevent this however she can is a direct parallel to merlin learning about that same prophecy and making it happen by any means necessary. merlin's desires about his and arthur's futures are subtextually fueled by gay love and devotion, so why couldn't morgana's be? why couldn't she properly express her bitterness that arthur gets to be with gwen in a way she can't "took gwen away" from her, instead of suddenly declaring that gwen is nothing more than a servant, after two seasons of demonstrating again and again that she loves, values, and respects gwen more than anyone else in that godforsaken castle?

following this, an angry and emotionally volatile but still sensible morgana asking gwen to stay by her side during the coup of the castle in the s3 finale and gwen going behind her back to help arthur and the knights would've hurt like a bitch. double-sided betrayal! gwen having a real plot! the proper beginnings of a toxic yuri that would shape a generation!

then there's the utter hubris of having morgana shoot arrows at the same civilians she worried herself sick over for 2 seasons — even morgan, her medieval counterpart that was rooted in every sexist trope in existence, doesn't just go around killing senselessly but instead has (often petty!) personal vendettas against gwen, arthur, and the knights. morgana had every right to be sick of the pretensions around chivalry in camelot (she was always quick to mock it, even in s1), and to lash out at the knights and soldiers after years of feeling powerless in a castle full of armed men that blindly followed her oppressor. the show conveniently forgets that morgana was victimized as a woman as well as a sorcerer those first 2 seasons.

but like i said, this is not just about morgana. allowing her to remain a real and multifaceted character even as she betrays everyone in pursuit of her ambitions would've given the rest of the core four more interesting conflict to work with: merlin because he would have to experience real consequences to his actions, arthur because he would watch his sister go against his father (and his knights, and his birthright) and experience some actual internal dilemmas about it, and gwen because she would be forced to choose between morgana and arthur without the pretense that it's an obvious or easy choice for her to make.

even morgause and gaius would come off more interesting as mentors: neither one inherently evil or inherently good, both jaded by events that happened before our protagonists were even born, both heavily influencing morgana and merlin into fulfilling roles that they think are appropriate, but that morgana and merlin may not have chosen for themselves had they not been under their care.

you get the gist. if the show followed its own setup, morgana's mistakes wouldn't lie in cheap and senseless acts of violence but in alienating the people she loves because she is too hurt and jaded to trust them. meanwhile, everybody else would feel guilt over "failing" her and yet they would be too caught up in their own (sometimes flawed!) beliefs of right and wrong to truly see her point of view.

arthur would convince himself it was sorcery that corrupted her. merlin would know that isn't true but he wouldn't be able to argue without confessing everything, which is the defining conflict between him and morgana and it's cheapened when she's just an evil witch caricature and merlin is framed as inherently virtuous in contrast. gwen, too, would become a more active participant in her own life by choosing arthur over morgana and choosing to rule camelot with him instead of just waiting politely to see where things go.

and, of course, uther's downfall and death would be quick, final, and completely earned — when and why did the show even decide he of all people was the sympathetic villain, anyway?

lastly, and perhaps controversially, i think morgana should've learned merlin's true identity by season 4. her being the first of the main characters to find out makes perfect sense considering their shared history and their interconnected and mirrored arcs. even the show seems to agree, considering she does find out a little before arthur. but the narrative itself tried pointing flashing neon arrows towards this way earlier — there is a whole entire episode in s4 where merlin being emrys is repeatedly spelled out for morgana and she still isn't allowed to see it. that episode makes her look like the stupidest person to ever live, which is pretty funny im not gonna lie, but also another frustrating thing in the endless string of frustrating things that make up this show.

morgana learning that merlin has magic would've transformed the source of merlin's anxiety from a crippling fear of being outed someday to the crippling fear of knowing she could out him at any moment. this would make him want to beat her to the punch (perhaps he'd consider killing her for a minute and decide against it because she isn't a cartoonishly insane evil person in my version of events) and maybe he would even feel some tentative excitement at the idea of coming clean, now that it seems inevitable. after all, he always intended to tell arthur eventually! and i think gaius would have to admit outright that he does not want merlin to tell arthur he has magic because he, gaius, simply cannot risk such a gamble. it would be so interesting to see gaius and merlin clash and disagree once it becomes obvious that it's not merlin that isn't ready for the reveal, it's gaius. delicious!

with morgana's knowledge looming, things would inevitably spiral into a magic reveal by the end of season 4. i picture this season as an absolute mess of miscommunication between everyone at camelot, which is, y'know, canon. growing increasingly cunning and vengeful, morgana would use this tension to her advantage, destabilizing the court from the outside while she creates alliances with other sorcerers outside of camelot (instead of living alone in a hovel for no reason — morgana le fay i'm sorry i'm so sorry they gave you agravaine instead of your all-female entourage oh my god).

and here's where the events would change beyond recognition (aka here's where the meta becomes the fanfic i refuse to write). picture it with me: a militia of sorcerers infiltrates camelot and arthur and gwen have to set aside their differences (assuming gwen kissing lancelot and arthur overreacting happens, which it should) for the good of the kingdom as well as for love. picture high priestess morgana in her element, side by side with a bunch of misfit sorcerers that aren't so easily vilified, chopping down camelot's soldiers and knights and assuredly making their way to the newly-minted king.

then, just as it starts to seem that all hope is lost, in swoops merlin (the actual merlin, not his old fart disguise) on dragonback (kilgharrah hates morgana so much i know his sexist ass would stoop to anything to stop her)!!! imagine merlin showing off the extent of his powers in front of everyone and preventing the sorcerers from getting any further, declaring loud and clear that camelot is protected by him, by emrys. imagine that display of power alone being enough to send everyone home.

imagine the loyalties clearly drawn: merlin on arthur's side, morgana on the sorcerers'. imagine arthur, feeling confused and betrayed by everyone at this point, banishing merlin despite everything he's done for him in the angstiest, most emotionally dysregulated scene the show had ever put to screen. imagine merlin starting season 5 free at last but very lonesome, an embittered dragonlord like his father. imagine the absolute mess camelot would become without him, even with gwen — now queen guinevere — there to pick up the slack. imagine arthur actually earning merlin back, finally growing into his role as king as he does so. imagine the reunion.

all this and more could've been not just possible but inevitable if morgana was allowed to remain a complex character that is neither inherently good nor inherently evil: it was undeniably the biased and one-note treatment of morgana's downfall by the writers that set the precedent for literally everything else that happened after merlin chose to poison her. the show wouldn't have even had to jeopardize its tone or the monster-of-the-week vibe, all it would've had to do is admit that even the "good guys" are capable of mistakes and what makes them good is the ability to feel remorse and change for the better. (as opposed to uther, who was miles beyond redemption since way before the pilot and deserved to lose everything and die alone. OBVIOUSLY???)

in a world where morgana remains multifaceted and sympathetic, mordred would get a better arc as well, so if we really wanted to, we could still end on the same tragic note that the show ended on. with so much harm inflicted onto so many innocent people by the pendragons for so long (including mordred and the many druids and sorcerers that raised him), it could realistically end up being a little too late for anything more than one shining glimpse of king arthur and the sorcerer merlin's short-lived golden age before fate catches up to them. glimpsing that reality just to immediately lose it would've been far more satisfying and far more tragic than whatever the writers thought they were doing with all that pointless carrot-dangling.

and finally, an ending in line with morgana's new and improved arc. in this version, rather than bleeding out on the forest floor alone, she would channel the morgan le fay we know from the legends: sobered up by the reality of her brother dying, she would use her high priestess status (and perhaps also her pendragon status) to be granted passage over to avalon alongside arthur on the boat — a one-way ride — just to make sure he gets there safely. this is her penance for the harm she has caused, the same way arthur's penance is to die and leave the true ruler of camelot (gwen) behind to achieve everything he was too slow and indecisive to build while he still had time.

merlin's penance, then, would be to stay behind and watch them cross over without him, waiting and waiting and waiting until they come back or until he can finally join them. which is a bit fucking harsh if i'm honest, so i'd at least make it slightly more faithful to the legends by having him return as an old man and letting him take a long nap under a tree by the shore, his body slowly enveloped by vines like the cobwebbed fisher king in 3x08, never fully sure if he's dreaming or if there really are strange shapes fading in and out of the fog over the lake. still tragic, but nevertheless a little more open-ended and whimsical than [TRUCK NOISES] THE END!

[xxplastic-cubexx]

it doesnt need to be said but its genuinely so funny how at-the-hip charles and erik are in krakoa like they really had the green light- the OBLIGATION- to be as obnoxiously close to each other as possible and abused that right to the fullest extent

[babblingbonnabel]

🎭 | im going crrrrazy!!! Lore lore lore!!

Scar isnt in this arc but i was told to draw him <3

video transcript: "Call me (us) Dylan."

title cards! I'm super normal and cool 😀 to all the people who said 'I have no idea what's going on but this slaps' i love you, please continue to thrive.

[local-lover-boy]

"What's your problem?"

@celestialwrites for the prompt<3

What I'm listening to as I write this

Neuvillette was staring at you from his desk where he was meant to be going over legal documents. He had been staring for a few minutes now. His face remained completely blank, as if he was studying something. Which is in fact what you were trying to do, as you poured over textbooks to work towards your degree. You were quite accustomed to him watching you since he hadn't often spent time around people before you got together but with how hard he's making it to focus you decide to meet his eyes. Neuvillette flinched and made a surprised expression, you surmised that he believed himself to be more slick than he was. Giggling, you tease, "What's your problem?" "I um" he fumbles for a second glancing down, then takes a deep breath and meets your stare again.

"You, actually"

Before you could come back with a quick witted response, he elaborates, "And I mean that in no negative manner. Your presence simply seems more enticing than these cases, which could prove to be a problem." "Is that your round about way of asking me to leave?" Though you said it in an understanding and polite tone Neuvillette seemed as if you had just slapped him across his face. "No!" He said in a voice of panic. "Apologies, I don't mean to raise my voice. But I am honoured to have you as a distraction and I very much don't want you to leave, or ever feel like I don't want you here."

You give him a smile you know always makes him lose his breath. "Good, I didn't want to leave."

A/N: I keep checking all the Neuvi tags every few hours hopeing for new posts and unfortunately I realized that I, in fact, would need to post and contribute

[abnomi]

PSYCHOANALYSIS ON CHARACTER PASTS IN WRECK IT RALPH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!

ok... so you know how some characters were never given a backstory to play off of? (like Turbo for example)

i dont know for certain the psychological impact that not having a past could have on video game characters (or if they would even care), but what i do know is that it is objectively damaging to not have anything that came beforehand to work with.

imagine being tossed into a world, have whatever code implanted into your brain tell you specifically what you need to do, not have any choice in the matter, and then be forced to go from there. whether or not the individual believes they need a past is irrelevant; they lack one, regardless.

the psychological differences between video game characters with a past and those without come into question... are those who have a solidified memory of who they were before more or less susceptible to growth over time? or are they both intrinsically equal? maybe it depends on who it is, what game theyre from. some could thrive off of the idea of not being latched onto a past that was chosen for them, while others could long for at least some semblance of an in-between.

all things considered, it would be significantly more difficult to have a broad understanding of emotions when you aren't granted access to the same grace that those with a "before" may have. without any memories, you'd have to rely on your external surroundings to achieve any kind of development; a noticeable contrast to those who already have at least some internal understanding of themselves that came with their programming.

characters who begin their life with a clean slate may be bound to being more actively involved with the world around them because it's how they have to learn. if they don't, they're going to get stuck in the same mindset for an indiscernible amount of time until some kind of external force pulls them out of it. they don't have knowledge of their initial life; all they have is the current moment.

a big factor that correlates with all of this is the psychology of nature vs nurture. in short, "nature" is the deterministic aspect of genetics (or in this case, code) influencing who one may be, while "nurture" is how one's development is influenced by the role that one's surroundings might play. in humans, we experience both of these; they go hand-in-hand. in the WiR universe, however, it's not always guaranteed that a character will have a chance at having both at once.

those with a past get both nature and nurture, bundled into one package. however, those without are only presented with nurture, tossed into a world and expected to move on from there (maybe with a faint sprinkle of nature, but not anything that goes beyond an implication of what their life was like before spawning in). they have limited options compared to the ones who don't have to start off on a blank slate.

something else to keep in mind is how without the presence of a past, there will be far more variations between the same character across different locations. without any code telling them who they used to be, they will learn about who they are through their environment and go from there. of course, no single character will be the exact same, but code largely determines the mindset of a character and how they process the world around them.

in Turbo's case, i personally think it wouldn't matter a whole lot to him because of its irrelevance to his main concerns, but it undeniably had a strong hold over his behavioral development as an individual; he is very immature. he had no foundation to start off with... well, other than the message that was branded into his mind, dictating every decision that he has ever made: he has to win.

he acted like a child when he first came around because, in a sense, he was one (not literally HAHA, i think of him as in his late 30s). his game was plugged in for about five years before he had the biggest tantrum of his life, and keeping in mind how game characters are technically immortal until the moment they're unplugged (unless they die in another game before then), this really wasn't that much time in the grand scheme of things. it was hardly anything at all.

without a healthy outlet to process his feelings, coupled with an unnerving lack of life experience beforehand, of course he'd lash out a lot! of course he'd be overwhelmed by his own emotions to the point of not knowing what to do with himself!

that doesn't excuse his behavior at all, as he did have opportunities to change for the better or learn from his mistakes, but he chose not to. he was too stubborn for his own good.

maybe part of the reason he's so hellbent on being the best is not only because it's lodged into his code to feel that way, but also because it would feel like betraying what little personality he was coded with to go against it. yes, he's never been too keen on the idea of having anything or anyone tell him what to do, but consider this: he's clinging to his own identity, protecting what small fragments he was given and holding onto them for dear life. he doesnt have a past; he has goals, and losing said goals would be losing himself and the footing he has on his own identity. he's defined by succeeding, and he refuses to let this go. this is more headcanon-territory but it is fun to explore concepts like these!!! bro is internally empty.......

Felix has a past, yes, but it's vague and uncertain. he had a father, but does he even know what the man looked like? who he was beyond a name and an heirloom?

notice how it took thirty years for the handyman to shift his perspective on who Ralph was as a person. this could likely both be a product of the nicelanders and himself all being programmed with the belief that "Ralph is a bad guy," thus internalizing it, combined with the external influence and pressure Felix upheld being the good guy. (EDIT (LOL!!!!!): i know felix doesnt hate ralph but constantly being surrounded by everyones fear of him would have at least made him cautious about interacting with him)

his younger years have no hold on how he makes decisions, especially considering how absent said years are. his code only hints at the idea of a father, alongside the foundational belief that he is good.

his lack of a clear upbringing contributed even more to his sheltered persona, oblivious to the hardships that everyone else might face. combine this with how every NPC he surrounded himself with never dared to criticize him, he was prone to experience stunted empathetic development. he was never a bad guy by any means, but his lack of exposure to difficult situations did not fare well for his psyche.

that isn't to say he hadn't ever been in any difficult situations before. the roadblasters incident absolutely shook him to his core and likely cut deep into him, as he hadn't ever experienced anything similar to it before. without a fleshed-out past, he didn't have a bright idea of what hardships might linger just beneath the surface.

to his credit, he has changed for the better, now having more awareness of how others feel and function outside of himself. he makes sure to treat everyone with equal amounts of dignity, regardless of any preconceived notions he might have. :-]

when it comes to Calhoun, her experiences shape her significantly, directly being the cause of her hypervigilant and instinctual nature. it can't be ignored that she suffers from PTSD due to how her character's life was mapped. this demonstrates that having knowledge of who one was before isn't always necessarily a wholly good thing. not to say that her condition makes her broken in any way! it just brings difficulty into her life that wouldn't have been present otherwise.

there is some goodness that can be brought to the surface from this; just as it isn't completely good, it isn't completely bad, either. on the opposite end of the coin, she knows how to keep herself and others safe. if it weren't for her predetermined past, she'd potentially face more struggles on the battlefield.

not only that, but it helps us, as the audience, empathize with her character, along with Felix. we learn that she isn't simply intense and nothing beyond that; she's just been through a lot. on top of all of this, she is very emotionally mature and understands how to push through horrific situations, especially when necessary. it is her job to do so, after all!

Calhoun's heavy experiences may be part of her character's mold, but they do not define who she is. a past only steers a character in an approximate direction; it does not 100% determine how they grow from there. we directly see evidence of this when she moves forward and marries Felix :-]

and then there's Vanellope :-] she did have a past, but it was ripped away from her. how does she cope with this? by defining herself and becoming her own person, unrestricted by her code. she didn't start off as a princess, she started off as Vanellope.

even when she had the chance to reclaim her status as princess, she didn't, instead choosing to stick with the version of herself that she passionately created. there's a great chance that she wouldn't be the silly little booger we all know and love if it weren't for her time to think about who she was and who she wanted to be; the omission of her past was a significant contributor in how she now presents herself, unconfined to how she is apparently "supposed" to be. she has more room to choose for herself.

she doesn't let anyone else tell her who she is, holding her handcrafted identity with pride. her eccentricity is nowhere near a flaw, making itself known as a strength. her perspective of the world is unique to her and allows her to emotionally connect on a deep level with Ralph.

one doesn't need to be tied to a past to be a person. it doesnt put any more or less weight on anyone's worth, and we see this as clear as day with her character! starting off with nothing, she grew into her own skin and found her sense of self all by herself without the guidance of anyone else. i am so proud of her. i love my baby ok

above all else, having a past isn't a surefire way to predict how one may develop; it is only an aspect of who someone is. an important aspect, yes, but there are many other things to consider in the sea of personalities and experiences...

the biggest difference between having one and lacking one is ultimately how an individual character might go about how they change over time and how long said progression might take. the past is only a starting point; a pre-written map without a marked destination created in order to provide a basic concept of who exactly one was earlier on. being left without one leaves some with a need for more effort to figure life out, and this distinction will affect everyone in many different ways. at the end of the day, though, a map is just a map. the road itself is what matters most 👍

[torahtot]

you can always tell when someone doesn't have maga men in their life and god it makes me angry.. "if you're nice and compassionate you can be the one woman that makes them realize women aren't mean!" my mom bent over backwards for my dad for 25 fucking years he has plenty of other women kissing his ass and it never changed anything. do you really think that before being radicalized they never knew a single kind woman? they were never friends with a nice girl? alt-right men's problem with women isn't just that they've experienced too many mean women and they need to be shown that women can be nice, it's that they think women are inferior and don't deserve rights and don't understand anything so you can do what you want with them. and it takes a lot more than being nice to show someone that you aren't inferior. this isn't a case of being nice even when it's hard for the sake of deradicalization, it's about spending every fucking interaction with someone trying to get them to see you as a human being with value and a functioning intellect while they just laugh and show you that's never going to happen.

i cannot stress this enough: random women are not just going out and Being Mean to men. ur average guy interacts with plenty of women throughout his life- close women amongst their friends and family, casual interactions etc. most people don't start out being shunned by women, they start out being treated as NORMAL. & when they show their disrespect in normal society, it isn't tolerated, but when they go to alt-right spaces (which they're pushed towards online) they're told they're allowed to be as horrible as they want with no consequences because they're entitled to everything. it isn't "women aren't welcoming and the alt-right is so friendly so i'll become alt-right," it's "women don't let me disrespect them and the alt-right tells me fuck them, do whatever you want, you're entitled to it all" and why would you choose the group where you have to be a normal accountable person when there's a group that will reward you for being a shithead who gives no fucks?

the alt-right can afford to be more friendly and welcoming because they can allow bigotry. this can't work the same way for progressive spaces because we can be as kind & welcoming as possible but at the end of the day we have lines where we have to say "this behavior/speech isn't allowed in this space," and for certain people, that just can't win against a space where you can be as nasty as you want. these posts always end with a disclaimer saying "of course being kind doesnt mean you need to tolerate their bigotries" but what they don't realize and what drives me crazy is that women not tolerating bigotry IS the "women are mean" that radicalized them in the first place. they perceive you pushing back on any bigotry or bullshit as you being a meanie and treating them like they're ontologically evil. the 'kindness' they need to be deradicalized is you letting them walk all over you.

idk what the answer is to deradicalizing them and im sure relationships are part of it but you can be as kind as you want and all it will do is destroy you ime. i cant stand to see people (who have never even successfully deradicalized any man by being nice btw they always speak in hypotheticals and not from experience) double down on telling women to do things that will see no results and only hurt them, especially when any woman who has tried can tell you exactly how it went

[bunnyboy-juice]

cute bunnyboys r me!

[beepmeowiskarkat]

kisses

[mwagneto]

why is everyone suddenly jackdoctor posting. like i'm not complaining i've just been indescribably sick over that entire storyline for years so it's funny to see it picking up steam again

[hauntingofhouses]

i know I've mentioned my interpretation of mizu's gender a million times on here but i don't think i ever fully elaborated on it.

so on that note i just wanna ramble about that for a bit. basically, it's my reading of the show that mizu is nonbinary, so let me dig into that.

putting the rest under the cut because it ended up being pretty long lol. also here have a cute mizu pic of her being happy and most at ease with herself, symbolised by her letting her hair down. <3 ok let's proceed.

thus, when i refer to mizu as nonbinary, i am interpreting mizu as a woman, but not ONLY a woman. not strictly a woman. she is also a man. she is also neither of these things, she is something in between, while at the same time she is none of these at all. i've said as much many times, but i just don't want people to think that when i say nonbinary, it inherently means a "third androgynous gender" that essentially turns the gender binary into a gender trinary. not only is that going against what the term nonbinary was crafted for (to go against rigid boxes and categorisation of gender identities), but also, not all nonbinary people fall under that category or definition, and that's definitely not the way i interpret mizu.

okay before i go deeper i'd just like to address some important things. first of all, this post is an analysis of canon, and thus everything i am arguing for is about my own interpretation of the show, and not some baseless projected headcanon i am projecting onto the character. please remember there is a difference between an interpretation (subjective; interpretations will differ from viewer to viewer, but ultimately it is firmly rooted in evidence taken from the source material) VS a headcanon (unrelated and often even contrary to what is presented in canon; opinions wildly differ and they cannot be argued for because there is no canonical evidence to back it up).

ALSO please note that nonbinary is an umbrella term. this means that it applies to a vast range of gender identities. other identities that fall under the nonbinary umbrella include agender, bigender, genderfluid, and so on. however, it's my personal preference to use the term nonbinary as it is, simply because i'm not a fan of microlabels (more power to you if you do like them and find they suit you more though!).

also, before anyone fights me on this, let me clarify further that gender means something different to everyone. it's not your biological sex or physical characteristics. but at the same time, gender is not mere presentation. you can be a trans woman and still present masculine—either because you're closeted and forced to, or because you just want to—and either way, that doesn't take away from your identity as a woman. same goes for trans men. if you're a trans man but you wear skirts and don't bind or don't get top surgery, that doesn't make you any less of a man. because gender non-conformity exists, and does not only apply to cis people! some lesbians are nonbinary and prefer using he/him pronouns while dressing masculinely, but that doesn't mean they're a man, or that they're any less of a lesbian. neither does this mean that they're a cis woman.

the thing about queer identities in general is that, like i said, they mean something different to everyone, because how you identify—regardless of your biological attributes and fashion or pronouns—is an extremely personal experience. so a nonbinary person and a gnc cis woman's experiences might have plenty of overlap, but what distinguishes between the two is up to the individual. there's no set requirements to distinguish you as one or the other, but it's up to you to decide what you identify as, based on what you feel. either way, by simply identifying yourself as anything under the LGBTQ+ umbrella, you are already communicating to the world that you are not what a conservative, cisheteronormative society wants you to be.

which is why i find all this queer infighting on labels to be so ridiculous. because we're all fighting the same fight; the common enemy is a societal structure that divides us into set roles and expectations purely based on our biological parts. that's why biological essentialism in the queer community is a fucking disease. because by arguing that women are inherently weak and fragile and soft and gentle and must be protected from evil ugly men, while men are inherently strong and angry and violent and exploitative of women, these people are advocating for the same fucked up system that marginalises and abuses women as well as effeminate and/or gay men.

anyway. i'm going on a tangent. this was meant to be a blue eye samurai post. so yeah back to that— the point i'm trying to make is that there's no singular way to identify as anything, as everyone's views on gender, especially their own, is specific and personal to the individual.

so with that being said, yes you can definitely interpret mizu as a gnc cis woman and that's a totally valid reading of the text. however, interpreting her as nonbinary or transmasc also doesn't take away from her experiences with misogyny and female oppression, because nonbinary and transmasc folks also experience these things.

me, personally, i view her as nonbinary but not necessarily or not always transmasc because i still believe femininity and womanhood is a very inherent part of who mizu is. for example, from what we've seen, she does not like binding. it does not give her gender euphoria, but is instead very uncomfortable for her both physically and mentally, and represents her suppressing her true self. which is why when she "invites the whole" of herself, she stands completely bare in front of the fire, breasts unbound and hair untied. when she is on the ship heading to a new land in the ending scene, she is no longer hiding her neck and the lack of an adam's apple. we can thus infer that mizu does not have body dysmorphia. she is, in fact, comfortable in her body, and relies on it extremely, because her body is a weapon. instead, what mizu hates about herself is her face—her blue eyes. she hates herself for her hybridised racial identity, hates herself for being a racial Other. hates that she has no home in her homeland. thus it is important to note that these are not queer or feminist themes, but postcolonial ones.*

* and as a tiny aside on this subject, i really do wish more of the fandom discussion would talk about this more. it's just such an essential part to reading her character. like someone who's read homi k bhabha's location of culture and has watched this show, PLEASE talk to me so we can ramble all about how the show is all about home and alienation from community. please. okay anyway—

nevertheless, queer and feminist themes (which are not mutually exclusive by the way!) are still prevalent in her story, though they are not the main issue that she is struggling with. but she does struggle with it to some extent, and we see this especially during her marriage with mikio, where we see her struggle in women's domestic spaces.

on the other hand, though, she finds no trouble or discomfort in being a man or being around other men—even naked ones—and does not seem stifled by living as one, does not seem all that bothered or uncomfortable navigating through men's spaces. contrast this to something like disney's mulan (1998), where we do see mulan struggle in navigating through men's spaces, as she feels uncomfortable being around so many men, always feeling like she doesn't belong and that she's inherently different from them. mizu has no such experiences like this, as her very personality and approach to life is what can be categorised as typically "masculine". she is straightforward and blunt. her first meeting with mikio, she tells him straight to his face that he's old while frowning and raising a brow at him. she approaches problems with her muscles and fists (or swords), rather than with her words or mind. compare this with mulan, who, while well-trained by the end of the movie, still uses her sharp wits rather than brute strength. this is a typically "feminine" approach. it's also the approach akemi relies on throughout the show—through her intelligence and persuasive tongue, she navigates the brothel with ease. mizu, in contrast to someone like mulan and akemi, struggles with womanhood and femininity, and feels detached from it.

thus, in my opinion, mizu is not simply a man, nor is she simply a woman. she is both. man and woman. masculine and feminine. she has to accept both, rather than suppress one or the other. her name means water. fluid.

as a side note, while i do believe mizu is nonbinary, i also primarily use she/her pronouns for her, but this is a personal preference. i find it's easier to use in fanfic (singular they is confusing to write stories with, but again, that's just my feelings on it, and this is coming from someone who uses they/they pronouns). i also lean towards she/her because it's what the creators and all the official promotional copywriting of the show uses. and even though i am a "death to the author" enjoyer, i feel that when interpreting things that are left open-ended, it does help to look at the creators' take on things. also because, in general, being nonbinary simply doesn't necessitate the use of they/them pronouns. nonbinary is not just a third gender. it's about breaking the binary, in any which way, and that's exactly what mizu does, constantly.

also, i'd also like to mention that one of show's head of story even referred to her with the term "nonbinary", rather than simply "androgynous" (see pic below). and it's possible this could be a slip up on his part, in which he believes the terms are interchangeable (they're not btw), but regardless i find it a very interesting word choice, and one that supports my argument.

so anyway yeah that's my incredibly long rambling post.

TL;DR nonbinary mizu rights 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻 congrats if you reached the end of this btw. also ily. unless you're a TERF in which case fuck off. ok i'm done.

[twist-shout-and-shells]

They're gonna do the Inquisitor as dirty in Veilguard as they did Hawke in Inquisition, huh?