#it doesn't erase them being HUGE pieces of shit

[whatdourelfeyessee]

JASON SUDEIKIS WE NEED TO HAVE A TALK ABOUT THE EMOTIOMS YOU ARE MAKNG ME EMOTE

[cascadianights]

I also sometimes create the strawman, the rich straight white cis abled man who has everything going on & nothing wrong.

But it's a trap. That person exists, but he sure as hell isn't the majority. You're probably not going to run into him on the street, or in a Tumblr argument. The experience and power that person holds is immense, and anything said to knock them down is valid - even if it means redirecting the exact vitriole and hate, the same death threats and "you don't even deserve to be alive" shit that's been thrown at us, and calling it "progress."

If you aren't careful all it does is mutate the very valid, long-standing frustrations you hold into a way to disregard other's real struggles & any information you don't want to hear.

It's how TERFs fueled women's anger and frustration at the men who've hurt them, into anger towards all men and anyone approaching or coming from masculinity. It flattens this huge swath of experiences into one line, a man who learned his whole life the negatives of masculinity and nothing else. It doesn't provide healing for the women who were hurt, it pushes them to be more afraid and see every man as a danger regardless of the situation. It doesn't teach men how not to be dangerous, or how to recognize people teaching them to be. It alienates, everyone.

It's the way white people will internally roll their eyes at a light skinned indigenous person talking about their culture, or interrogate them to be sure they have a right to it. It's the way "white privilege" has become shorthand for "immense class power," both erasing the original targeted points the term is trying to make AND alienating the massive poor rural white population who KNOWS your full of shit saying they've had everything handed to them. It's the way states with white liberal city centers are seen as massively progressive (even if it's only 2% more of the pop that are democrats, gathered in 1% of the state) - and states that vote red every time deserve to be "cut off and sunk into the ocean."

It's the disabled people who need to feel Most Oppressed to validate the reality of their suffering, so spend hours trying to prove that mental disability and physical are separate & put their fellow disabled peers through the EXACT shaming/interrogation/judgement/"its not that bad have you just considered trying" treatment our doctors put us through. It's the way the new acceptable thing in disability spaces is to mock autistics (always portrayed as white and very low needs) for being too annoying/loud/present.

It's the way they can differentiate between a Real queer (who they agree with/can pity) versus a Fake queer (who said some shit they didn't want to hear/hasn't had the exact same lived experiences and could Never Understand). It's the way they can argue for hours about which minute aspect of identity that is only visible sometimes grants unimaginable (and Literally Unreal) safety and power, rather than focusing on the fact that none of us should need to be passing at all times to feel some level of safety.

It's a strawman! That only serves as an outlet for anger that tends to splashback on everyone around you! It has its place, and that place is not in almost every single conversation we have about difficult topics! Your morality cannot be based on finding ways to validate redistributing the violence that has been shown to you! Your political stance cannot be "only the people like me who agree with me should live!" Your MOVEMENT OF PROGRESS AND EMPATHY cannot be based on the cop you never learned to quiet in your mind!!!

We will never succeed if we ourselves are cutting our own communities to pieces.

[villanevehaus]

I HATE THIERRY hes such a little bitch but what made me mad is that i literally could not figure out why i hated him so fucking much. like banksy said he didnt break any rules because technically there are no rules. hes a fraud but hes not? hes not an artist but his work is worth millions? like the joke is supposed to be on him but its not so whos it on? who is right? does it even matter? what are your thoughts on why you hate him because i hate him but hes an evil genius - letterboxd anon

i needed several days to stop seeing red and this is of course going to devolve back into rage BUT i hate thierry because to ME his "success" embodies so many things that i despise about Fine Art Culture and ive just realized that i actually dont know where to start with this. okay. hhhhhh. im going to break it into chunks.

thierry documents his whole life on tape bc he feels like he'll never see it the same way again, but then he doesnt do anything with the tapes. he doesnt even label them or organize them or do anything beyond the act of filming them but because he carries this weird perversion about documentation he's afforded access to an artform that inherently is anti-documentation? im not saying that street art should or shouldnt be documented but he was able to document the process behind "temporary work" by following this lie that he was making something that WOULD be seen, and not collect dust in some random tub; a documentary. people (the artists) assumed he was making a documentary about street art because what the Fuck else are you filming all these street artists for, my guy, and then he got a reputation that he was doing this documentary so he was afforded more and more access- for what boiled down to no reason! "i wouldnt take no for an answer" but there wasnt question, thierry!! you werent asking shit because whatever they said might as well be the static of an erased tape!! cobwebs!! dust!!

and then SUDDENLY OH NO theirry actually has to make the documentary he's been lying about for years because banksy is like hey dude can't wait to see this film! he scrambles to make it and it's trash. it's 90 minutes of trash. but thanks to all of this access thierry was afforded he's seen how successful street artists can be (which is an entirely different can of worms for me to talk about. a counter-culture, accessible artform being commodified and turned into High Art for the elites- go to the MoMA and see street art! a private collection of street art pieces! perfect example of this is the banksy that sold at auction for like 1.4mil and then got shredded remotely which RULED! but then now the shredded banksy is 25mil Because its a shredded banksy). so he decides that he wants to be street artist. which is fine! whatever! sure! do whatever the fuck!

but then. he doesn't want to just be a street artist, he wants to be a Successful street artist like all the other street artists he's gotten to know (did you see banksy's show? with celebrities and thousands of attendants and media coverage?) so he needs an exhibition. he needs a debut, and a huge one at that. he pulls all the strings he has available: banksy endorsement! invader endorsement! all gained through that lie of a documentary that banksy is now making himself with thierry's forgotten tapes, by the way!!! his life addiction to filming everything has fallen to the wayside because he's hellbent on being successful.

the ways that thierry talks about art and success as an artist is fucking infuriating bc he's evaluating it solely on Selling and Name and Gimmick. it would be ignorant and stupid of me to say that artists arent influenced by other artists but the fact that all of thierry's works are virtually "Do You Get It"s of other artist's work that he even names?? this is like a warhol this is like a lichtenstein this is like a haring this is like a this is like a this is lik[foams at the mouth and keels over]

yeah he didnt break any rules bc there arent any rules but he played really fucking dirty. he got access to a subculture and its major players through a false cause (documentary), drummed up false interest in his work (the article), false endorsements in his work (banksy, invader), all while his work wasn't even being made because the work itself doesnt matter if you inflate the hype enough

he emperor's-new-clothes'd himself into absolutely everything, right down to the title of artist and filmmaker

[idleglowingpixels]

Don't go posting a "MEGA HOT TAKE" saying ppl that dislike/hate pieces of media, fandoms, ships or characters you enjoy are a red flag for being xenophobic and/or anti-LGBTQ+ then blocking comments/reblogs, that's just sad. If you're gonna have a bad take own up to it.

It's ABSOLUTELY right to be angry or frustrated about ACTUAL xenophobes/anti-LGBTQ+ ppl that do interact in fandom spaces -- they're genuinely awful people and deserve to be called out -- but you personally being mad that someone simply doesn't like medias/ships/characters you enjoy doesn't make them a red flag for being xenophobic or anti-LGBTQ+. That's just nonsense.

Most ppl will avoid interaction with a fandom if they dislike the media you're talking about unless they're critiquing it. There's also ppl who simply have a bad experience interacting with a fandom and are well within their right to dislike whatever it's a fandom for because of that.

Ex. I've been a fan of MLP:FiM since before the show debuted -- I was a huge G3 fan at the time, and finding out that there was a new generation coming out had me excited. But between the unnecessary drama down to the p*dophilia problem, I can safely say I had a bad, dare I say traumatic, experience being as deep in the fandom as I was in my tweens/early teens (I was like 11-12 when I started interacting with the fandom). I have a handful of wonderful friends I've met from the community that I still speak to TO THIS DAY, but that doesn't erase all the insanity that came with being in the fandom space at such a young age. I hardly interact with it outside of liking/reblogging posts because I don't find joy in engaging with other fans like I used to.

TL;DR -- You can dislike a piece of media for how badly written it is, for the poor or lack thereof representation minorities get in said media, for the toxicity contained in a ship or character dynamic, for the tropes or stereotypes used in its characters, I could go on for ages. You can also, in turn, have a bad/negative experience with a fandom and dislike a piece of media as a result of that.

Does that make the entirety of the fandom bad? No! Of course not! But all it takes is ONE person to ruin a fandom, piece of media, ship or character for another person, and that doesn't make Person 2 in the scenario a red flag for being xenophobic or anti-LGBTQ+. Normally I hate posting about fandom discourse but this shit's embarrassing.

[bbananababe]

Sorry this is a whooper of a reply, feel free to ignore! But I think I didn't explain where I was coming from with my question clearly enough.

Firstly, it's a difference in perspective rather than carelessness, and also not the idea I was trying to communicate :) I was looking at it from a narrative point of view about what makes sense in a show, and what we can realistically expect from one like House of the Dragon, not the racial connotations.

My point wasn't that Nettles doesn't matter in the source material or that people are wrong to care about her. My point is that the way the show has been set up so far (whether you agree with how they've done it or not), it makes sense that they might have decided to leave her out.

Combining (erasing would be if they left Sheepstealer and his rider out entirely) story lines of characters is common in huge ensemble shows, and they might choose to have Rhaena earn the trust of a dragon like Nettles did to include that idea. They might have also decided to give Rhaena, as a popular established character, more screen time through doing this. Also since Addam is a poor, unrecognised, dragonseed who now lacks any of the Targaryen features established in the show (just the white really) and claimed his dragon unconventionally, he overlaps with part of what made Nettles distinct. They've additionally made some pretty drastic changes to Rhaenyra which would render a "she's classist and racist and jealous plotline" pretty nonsensical and narratively incongruent, given that she is now having an affair with Mysaria, a common woman of colour, and championing the small folk.

A previous reply linked me some solid posts about racism in the show and Nettles' role in that capacity that made really good points (and don't get me wrong I was also super irritated by how underutilised and passed over Laena's character was in favour of Alicent), but it just makes me more certain that them leaving Nettles out wouldn't be a surprise. It would also have made more sense given season 1 if they'd left Daeron (another fan fav) out, and I think if they'd been able to combine his storyline with one of his brothers they might have. Instead he has the distinction of being the nicest green I guess, now that they've cut Maelor (and Bitterbridge).

If we're considering screentime, audience investment (casual viewers with no prior knowledge will realistically be more excited for Rhaena's success than a new character's) and overlap of roles in the show, Nettles wouldn't impact the show world the same way she impacted the book world- and given what another nice user linked me to read the writers will probably fuck up her portrayal even if they do include her in the next episode, as they've gone in very different directions with Rhaenyra and Daemon than the book.

Rhaenyra in particular is MUCH more of a just, level-headed, good guy and would have to undergo some Dany-season-8 character development from a woman who has treated Mysaria with dignity and respect to a woman who would treat Nettles the way book Rhaenyra did. Show-Rhaenyra would admire Nettles' nerve and intelligence if we're being honest, like she did with Mysaria. And Daemon for his part is pretty much just a huge piece of shit without much white to lighten his 'grey morality'. Him (a white man) abusing/grooming a young (black) girl like Nettles would be gratuitous in a show already full of abuse and grooming, especially when Laena has already faced this in season 1.

So to reiterate, not saying you can't like Nettles and be disappointed they left her out. But the way they've set it up, the show (not book) doesn't strictly need her to tell the story they've been telling, so the outrage and surprise, and insistance that she was vital to the narrative confused me. Not anymore- I can see it's an issue of the show's racism that's bothering people now.

(I do have a question though if you don't mind expanding! When you say it's disrepectful to Rhaena's character, what do you mean? It would be giving her character an active storyline with agency that aligns with what she wants for herself and what's been set up for her, as opposed to her being fully resigned to nannying the children and spending the war off the battlefield in the Vale- which she actively doesn't want. Even claiming that she is 'the future of their house' holds more weight if she claims Sheepstealer, as they would be the only surviving dragon-rider pair. I think it's giving her character more than George did- admittedly at the expense of Nettles- but maybe you have another perspective again?)

This might be an unpopular opinion but I feel like I'm missing something with the Nettles-probably-being-cut outrage.

This is a show adaptation assuming (rightfully so) that most people have not read the long dry source material. In fact I'd wager a majority of people arguing about what's "in the books" are far more familiar with heresay and wiki pages than the actual thing.

So a decision to flesh out the story of Rhaena, a character we know and are invested in makes far more sense than introducing another new book character who serves no particularly unique narrative purpose that I can see? The only part of her roll (which is essentially just claiming and riding a dragon) Rhaena's character can't accomodate is her being another supposed childbride for Daemon- which I think we could all happily live without.

I would actually love to see Rhaena have relevance during the dance, and be able to fight alongside her family. And given the horrifically slow pacing of this season, sitting through another entire episode dedicated to the introduction and build up of yet more new characters would be exhausting. (Ulf and Hugh haven't even landed on Dragonstone yet ffs, and you want another 10 minutes of backstory thrown into episode 7?)

Not hating on Nettles here, just not sure why she seems to be such a fav of so many people when she's pretty easily written out of the story if you slap someone else (like Rhaena I guess) on Sheepstealer's back. Game of thrones wrote out plenty of characters and filled their roles with existing ones. It's an adaptation and I care more about Rhaena's success and struggle because I've already SEEN it.

[bisluthq]

Not trying to defend him at all, but Shawn said he used to feel the need to prove he wasn't gay. He doesn't feel it anymore . The fact that he acknowledged that what he was thinking was wrong proves that he isn't a homophobe. The only reason he brings up the gay thing was because of the way people were saying it . There's a huge difference between people saying "Hey are you comfortable with sharing your sexuality?/Do you think shawn is gay?" And saying things like "Omg shawn is such a bottom and he NEEDS to come out because it's 2020 and we all know he's gay . He's literally in a glass closet./ stop hiding shawn ,just come already / ew he's so weird he should come out already " and then using homophobic slurs .(it's also mostly straight women saying this) Additionally his manager used to see most of these tweets and he only publicly came out last year . I think he upset because people treated being gay like a bad thing . He even said multiple times that he doesn't care how he comes off to people, it's just that he *happens to be het* . There's no right or wrong way to address these things is there ? Because of he ignored it , people would accuse him of queerbaiting . I don't care what his sexuality is, but I genuinely think he was only trying to look out for the people in his life . If I missed out or misinterpreted something, please educate me on it .

So I agree with you that saying shit like “lmao what a bottom” and “get out the glass closet” is very fucked and especially fucked when straight women say it (and I have spoken about the role of straight women in slash shipping before and how much they erase of like actual queer culture).

According to actual gay men, though, the shit he has said isn’t okay.

Tbh this is their baby. If they feel like the 2020 piece was a course correction, fair enough.

If they feel like it’s problematic, I’m gonna let them handle it. I have enough of a problem dealing with the wlw and rumored wlw. I can’t also start devoting time to mlm especially when THEIR community can fucking sort it out if need be.

Like my personal issue is he KEEPS DENYING and talking about it. I compared him to Lou for a reason because batshit Larries have like caused MASSES of damage to him. They ruined a very close friendship and they constantly fuck with Eleanor starting with when they tried to kick her out of uni and continuing to this day. But he denied like properly ONCE and he let it go although I’m sure it continues to frustrate him.

I understand it’s fucking annoying. But it’s not an insult. So why constantly talk about it? Especially when you have a lovely hot girlfriend you claim to be happy with? Idk.

I’m just not a fan of how he has dealt with it idk.

[evening-blossoms]

So um. I'm a total idiot and forgot an entire day of my own challenge. I was gonna keep it that way since nobody had noticed but... that day was something I'd wanted to talk about for a while so...

Welcome to the very late and out-of-schedule day 10 of my SGE Challenge

Characters I would rewrite

Buckle down cause oooooh boy do I have shit to say - and because of this I'll be deviating from what I usually do and write a rant post instead! Given I don't want to make a way too long post, I'll simply go over a brief explanation of why they're in the list and what I'd change.

Kei of Foxwood (tw: drugging mention)

So this fucking asshole here apparently will get a redemption arc uh. I Actually already talked about this in this post I submitted but I will go over it again because it was kinda poorly worded imo (especially because it was written by sleep-deprived me at 3am)

Which is poorly driven given it starts with "Oh No! My beloved Rhian is dead, what shall be of me without my dear?". No. A good redemption arc should start with "Fuck I did something terrible and genuinly regret this and want to work on becoming a better person and fixing the mess I've made." Also, seems like Kei's form of redemption will be death and no, he should live with the consequences of what he's done.

Speaking of which - his redemption will also feel like an insult to the readers because seriously? He's way past redemption point for me now. He already was from QFG when he drugged Dot (which was something quite unecessary and Soman used an Extremely complicated and sensitive topic for the sake of shock value - but that's a whole new rabbit hole I'm not jumping into right now). And in ACOT he follows Rhian's orders which include attacking practically defenseless teenagers

So with that in mind, I'd either have Kei die the piece of shit he is or rewrite his arc from QFG in order to make a good redemption. First, erase that part with Dot and find another way to get to the keys. Again, it was an act that can be considered violence against women written down just for shock value. Given we do not have other scenes with Kei (except for the dungeons one), I'll leave it that for QFG.

In ACOT, start on his very first actual scene - the dinner scene. Have him hesitant on following Rhian's orders there, and perhaps hint it goes a bit deeper than hesitance. Then escalate it to him openly challenging Rhian's orders during that moment before the Blessing. The attack on SGE would be the first moment we see a greater act from him - maybe somehow going behind Rhian's back to stop that attack??? His last scene in the book is during the carriage ride with Sophie - when Kei tells her he's been going behind Rhian's back to stop the attacks he was able to, and knew he had to fix he'd made when he locked Tedros in the dungeons back in QFG. He agrees to help her somehow - but it goes terribly wrong when Japeth survives.

I myself still need to see a bit more how that could be well executed but that's the basic idea - have Kei's actions start from much earlier and have doing the right thing as motivation, not his love for Rhian - if anything, that should be a source of struggle.

Hort of Bloodbrook

This is can be either a rewrite of his own arc or a rewrite of the light he's written in.

He is a Nice Guy tm. Lets not try to pretend he isn't because he is.

He spends the entire first trilogy obssessing over Sophie, and acting entitled to her because he's a guy who's "genuine and truthful" or what so ever. Sure, Sophie might not be a perfect innocent girl and she did treat people who cared for her like shit at times, but that doesn't change the fact she never liked him. And even though she was wrong in parading him around like a "suitor" when trying to win Tedros' attention, she never again makes mention to liking Hort, or wanting to date him, or what so ever, and honestly, good for her! You should never date someone just because they have feelings for you.

Liking someone doesn't make you entitled to having them, and it doesn't make them obligated to like you back. And this what Hort can't understand. And not to mention he acts pretty sexist during the School Years:

"Every time he was free of rivals for Sophie’s attention, they always returned, more meddling than ever. Why couldn’t these toads mind their own business? Or die like Rafal did? True, he’d had Sophie to himself these past six months, but most of that was spent waiting out her I’m-an-Independent-Woman phase..." Quests for Glory, chapter 9: "Who Would Want a Hort?"

And also later during ACOT, in which he treats Nicola pretty badly

“Not bad enough, whatever it is,” Hort’s voice said, hijacking the demon. “He got us into this mess by fawning over Rhian like a lovedrunk girl.”

“Oh, so being a ‘girl’ is an insult now?” Nicola’s voice ripped, the demon suddenly looking animated in agreement. (A Crystal Of Time, chapter 5: Sophie's Choice)

There are other examples but I don't want to digress so this is how Hort is. I'd like to rewrite him into a person who had a immature crush on a girl and bent over backwards to get her attention - all of this a product of his own insecurity - but that grows out of it and in the process, also into a mature person who's confident in himself.

Also, in case someone doesn't understand: the problem isn't a crush. Having crushes is totally normal and ok, and so is not having them! The problem is when your crush over someone becomes nearly obssessive because of your immaturity and inner problems.

And as I was gonna talk about the light Hort's written in: all of this bullshit, and he's written as the nice underdog who we are supposed to root for. Soman keeps romanticizing him and that kind of behavior and that's terrible. So I'd either change Hort's behavior or write him in the light of what it truly is.

Rhian of Foxwood

Honestly? I liked him as a villain. I have no problem with him believing he was doing Good - in fact, I liked it! It's a good contrast to the previous villains, who knew they were Evil, wanted to be this way and took pride in it.

What I would change are just two things: one is that last kiss scene with Sophie during chapter 25 of ACOT, since it was absolute bullshit after all the shit he did to her which I don't feel the need to list - we all know it.

Second thing, I'd have made him a seer! Soman missed a huge potential when he made Rhian a Sader without giving him the seer abilities. That whole "Third Mysterious Pen" deal was unecessary, and it could be replaced by Rhian's visions.

And guys, come on - EVIL SEER IS A DOPE CONCEPT.

Nicola of Woods Beyond

Don't get me wrong, I love Nicola - and this is kind of why she's in this list, actually.

She's an amazing character - bookworm represent! She's also one of the few poc representation this book has, so I like it went to someone as amazing and smart as Nic. 

So for that I think Nicola should have been explored more. She's usually put as background character and only brought up when it's convenient - she's basically plot device. Which sucks because again, she's awesome. I'd have explored her ability to apply what she learns in stories to real-life issues a bit more, and paired her up with Agatha more times! Both are brilliant girls and I feel Agatha was at times dumbed down so Nicola could solve the problems, and honestly, I hate it when a character is dimmed so the other can shine.

So I'd have put them together - Agatha, experienced and quick-thinker, and Nicola, an extremely smart girl who doesn't really have half the experience Agatha has in the Woods. They both learn from each other - it's a deal of teacher (Agatha) learning from the student (Nicola). 

And allow me to push the Nicphie agenda here - I'd totally expand her relation with Sophie - explored their feelings going from mutual hatred to mutual respect to liking each other to very lesbian love. The Best enemies to lovers.

Also, SOMAN WHAT WAS THAT OF CAVING IN THE SCHOOL FOR EVIL AND SADER TELLING THE DEANS TO ACCEPT HER I DEMAND EXPLANATIONS

And lastly I'd remove the Hicola part super unecessary lmao

So that's it! I actually have some more to talk about but I didn't know how to word it properly and I don't want to make a super long post lmao. I might make a part two of this, but separate for the challenge!

I apologize for the disruption in schedule, I legit forgot day 10 lmao. I'll be doing Day 13 tomorrow so hopefully everything will go back to normal!

[kingleeh]

And as for Takeomi....

Listen, there better be more about this man that can make me understand what the fuck he's doing in this story. As of right now, it seems he's a shitty older brother.

But even shitty older brothers would be with their little sibling at the hospital after an incident like that, right? Even shitty older brothers would at least pick him up from fucking jail right? That's the bare minimum, he should be doing that, even if he's not a good brother, so what the fuck?

His neglect is almost at absurd levels at this point. No one cares that little about their little brother unless they really really REALLY don't give a fuck. But we know that Takeomi does give at least a tiny bit of a fuck because we've seen him scold Sanzu, which is something that at least tells us he's... you know... there.

But everything else about him is very distinctively not-there. Besides that scene of Takeomi scolding him for influencing Senju, there is no evidence of him participating in his life at all. Which is weird considering how often we see Takeomi in the manga just... not doing anything!

Sibling relationships are a HUGE part of Tokyo Revengers, and from Takeomi... nothing?

He is around way too much for someone who doesn't do anything, especially considering how close he is to such important characters.

Also, that scene in Chapter 241 is not evidence of a terrible older brother. Especially not to the extent he is seeming to be now. Sure, yelling at Sanzu like that wasn't nice. It hurt him and he was sad. But as Senju said, Takeomi had to take on a father like role for them, and that's what's parents do sometimes. It's not right to put so much pressure on a kid, sure, but like... it's not as heinous as many people are making him out to be? He's doing normal (albeit shitty) parenting.

That's nothing close to the absurd amounts of neglect we're being shown.

So how does Takeomi go from normal-shitty-parenting to not-being-there-after-literal-mutilation.

And even worse, for Sanzu to erase his very existence by saying he's an only child??

It is not a realistic leap. So Takeomi presence as a character doesn't make sense and it's driving me crazy!

I need Sanzus POV so I can understand! In fact I need than Akaashi family spin off so I can understand!

If Takeomi really is the piece of shit brother we see right now, with no context, I will feel personally attacked.

This is the hill I'm dying on, I guess.

All the love and praises to big bro Shinichiro and stuff etc etc.

But how the FUCK are you gonna ask Sanzu to still be Mikey's friend after he just got mutilated by him?

We know Sanzu was gonna stay Mikey's friend anyway, but what if he didn't want to?

What if this child was rightfully scared and resentful toward the person who MUTILATED him, and the one adult who seems to care about him (oh I have some SHIT to say about Takeomi) is like, "sorry he hurt you but you're still gonna be friends with him right?"

Like what the fuck? No one should be asking that of him. Especially not the brother of the kid who did that to him.

Can someone in this damn manga treat Sanzu well? Can someone actually give a shit about him please?

Shinichiro did, I guess, but even then it was the bare minimum. Picking him up from Juvie is the bare minimum. Going to see him at the hospital is the bare minimum, and even then it was just to try and vouch for Mikey.

Someone needs to actually love and care for Haruchiyo because up to this point in the Manga the only person who's shown any signs of giving a shit is Senju.

(And Mucho, but Sanzu was a lil too fucked up by then to appreciate it enough to not murder him I guess)